Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Middle Welsh (was Cein)

From:daniel andreasson <daniel.andreasson@...>
Date:Thursday, May 31, 2001, 11:45
First of all, a great big thank you to Keith and Sally
who explained non-finite verbal-nominal clauses in
Middle Welsh in such an excellent way. Thanks a lot!
That really cleared things up in my head.

Sally Caves wrote:

> I'm not exactly sure, though, how it is an "active" language. > Can Daniel be more specific? I may need some reminding about > active languages, but I thought it was one rather like Teonaht,
We had quite a discussion about active languages some months ago while you were offlist. *looking* It was Feb 3rd to Feb 13th. this year. Look for "THEORY: What is an active language?" and "Active case-marking natlangs". Anyway. Since Elliott (and others) asked, the reference for the article is: MANNING, H. PAUL 1995. Fluid intransitivity in Middle Welsh: Gradience, typology and 'unaccusativity'. Lingua (97), 171-194. That shouldn't be hard to find. Any respectably library should have the journal "Lingua". He's a bit hung up on Vendler's "activities, accomplishments" and such, but generally he comes up with some interesting points. I wouldn't have analyzed it that way, but that's what you get when you absolutely have to go by a theory. Summary: Subjects in non-finite verbal-nominal clauses are marked peculiarly from the stand-point of finite clause marking which is nominative-accusative in that it allows variation in the marking of intransitive subjects. In transitive non-finite clauses, *transitive* subjects (A) are marked with the prep. _o_ 'of, from', and transitive objects (O) are marked as simple adnominal genitives. (1) VN A O kymryt [o Arthur] [y daryan eureit] taking of Arthur the shield golden 'Arthur took the golden shield. Subjects of non-finite *intransitive* verbs vary between being marked as either the A of above or the O. (2) VN A ymlad [ohonafi] dros vym baryf fighting of-me for my beard 'I fought for my beard.' (3) VN O kynn diodef [Crist] before suffering Christ 'Before Christ suffered.' _Ymlad_ 'fight' thus marks its subject as A while _diodef_ 'suffer' marks its subject as O. Some other points: Only [+ HUMAN] subjects can be marked as A. If the intransitive subject is [- HUMAN] it is marked as O, regardless of which verb is used. Remember also that this variation between A and O is only applied to intransitive verbs. According to Manning's analysis, the semantics behind the marking is this: (1) If the verb is an Activity, its subject is marked as A. (2) If the verb is an Achievement, its subject can be marked as either A or P (fluid marking). (3) If the verb is Stative, its subject is marked as O. Sample verbs of class 1 (A): ride, walk, run, fight, preach, eat, study, pray, return, sin, mount. Sample verbs of class 2 (A or O): suffer, sleep, sit down, flee, remain. Sample verbs of class 3 (O): be, die, slip, escape, fall down. Manning is able to describe the variation by dividing the verbs into "telics" (events with a clear terminal end-point, like "kick") and "atelics" (no natural end-point, "play"). Other variables he uses are [CONTROL] and as said above [ACTIVITY]. Summing up the results in a table: Marking: Atelic: Telic: A [+control] activities -- A or O [-control] activities [+control] telics O states [-control] telics Or in other words: If the verb is a controlled activity A-marking is used, if it is a state or a non-controlled telic, O-marking is used. If it's a non-controlled activity or a controlled telic, it can be either-or. He finally notes that some of the either-or verbs have a bias towards O-marking and thus doesn't have totally free marking. Did that clear things up a bit? ||| daniel -- <> Mad llamgalf! <> daniel.andreasson@telia.com <> <> Ond llam! <> www.geocities.com/conlangus <>