Re: Ergative and other questions

Quoting Roger Mills <romilly@...>:

> Mark J. Reed/John Cowan wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 02:25:03PM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> > > > So the -ee suffix in English is ergative.
>
> I disagree. The exs. show it is absolutive--
>
>  >Mike employs Susie.       ->    Susie is an employee.
>         Mike has inducted Susie.  ->    Susie is an inductee.
>         Mike has appointed Susie. ->    Susie is an appointee.
>
> Susie is the DO.
> If you paraphrase, you end up with a passive: Susie is employed etc. by
> Mike; ergo, Susie is a patient
>
>        > Susie has retired.      ->      Susie is a retiree.
>         Susie has escaped.      ->      Susie is an escapee.
>         Susie is standing.      ->      Susie is a standee.
>
> Here again, Susie is a patient (or at least subj. of an intr. verb.)
I think you're inventing a new distinction here; "ergative" in this context
means identifying P and S rather than A and S.

                                                     Andreas