Re: Active, Was: Help with grammar terms

> Date:         Fri, 14 Jan 2000 13:37:02 -0500
> From: Vasiliy Chernov <bc_@...>
> But mostly it dealt with Hettan. I don't remember all details, but it was
> argued that Hettan neuter nouns are similar to inactive, and epicene nouns
> (corresponding to masc. and fem. in other IE tongues), to active.
>
> It was maintained that Hettan neutra must be replaced in certain contexts
> with derivatives having the suffix -ant- (resembling the active participle
> suffix), and that the gender of main actants affects the choice of the
> verb's conjugation.
>
> The situation in Hettan was compared with what the author cited as *active*,
> and it was claimed that they are basically similar.
I have read about the first part of this, that neuters tend to be
replaced in subject position by an 'active' derivative. However, as I
saw it described, this is a development internal to Hittite (i.e., not
found in early sources, and increasing in frequency with time).

There are two 'conjugations' in Hittite, which some say correspond to
'primary' and 'secondary' endings in other IE languages --- and those
are again correlated, depending on language, with 'stative' and
'non-stative', or 'imperfective' and 'perfective' aspects. Some (most?)
verbs can use both conjugations, but I think that changed during the
recorded history of the language as well.

Anyway, although I don't remember what the conjugations in Hittite are
taken to mean exactly, it is not surprising if inanimate subjects
would tend to be used only with one of them only.

As ever, the question of primacy can be debated endlessly: People who
want the stadial theory to be true (that languages develop from active
to ergative to accusative type) will have to argue that (late) Hittite
shows the original state; other people will come to other conclusions,
depending on how they fit their theories.

Lars Mathiesen (U of Copenhagen CS Dep) <thorinn@...> (Humour NOT marked)