Re: Ergative and other questions

John Cowan wrote:

> Roger Mills scripsit:
>
> > despite the variant /-ej/ pronunciation, divorcee and fiancee at least
are
> > patients (She has been divorced by.., she has been affianced by....
(But as
> > for negligee and bargee [unknown to me], deponent saith not.)
>
> "Bargee" is one who poles a barge for a living; by extension, one who
> swears creatively and colorfully.
Hmmph.  Clearly a wrong use of the -ee.  Sounds like something Walt Whitman
might have invented. O Camerados of the vast Plains!! O Bargees of the
mighty Mississippi!! (He would have like "barista" too, n'est-ce pas?)
>
> > BTW, does the -ee /-ij/ suffix also derive from French? I'd suspect so.
It
> > seems to occur mainly with Fr/Latinate forms.
>
> It's the feminine French participial ending; it probably first arrived in
> English from Law-French.  Even now, legal language is full of -or/-ee
pairs:
> grantor/grantee, bailor/bailee, testator/legatee (more or less),
> promisor/ee, obligor/ee, payor/ee, mortgagor/ee, transferor/ee,
employer/ee,
> drawer/ee, indorser/ee, etc. etc.
>
I know _mortgagor_ is pronounced with g = [dZ], thus joining _gaol_ as one
of the most counter-intuitive of all Engl. spellings.  How about
obligor/obligee?  [g] or [dZ]?(Never mind, I'll look it up.) However, these
reinforce my theory: -or/-er is agentive (ergative), -ee is patient
(absolutive), no? Clearly, since it descends from the Latin
Perf.Pass.participle. In the meantime, I swear (or affirm) that I will
eschew all Franco-Anglo legalismos.

Reply