Re: Ergative and other questions
From: | Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> |
Date: | Tuesday, November 18, 2003, 0:15 |
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