Re: Question about case names...

At 01:32 AM 12/13/98 -0500, Sam Bryant wrote:
>Alright. I'm making a three-way distinction in LH:
>-subject of transitive verbs
>-subject of intransitive verbs
>-object of transitive verbs.
>
>I'd like to call these ergative, nominative, accusative respectively. But that
>will probably deeply offend people's sensibilities. I could use agentive,
>nominative, accusative. But under no circumstances will I call one of my cases
>agent, patient, or absolutive.
>What do y'all think?
I've faced the same problem with Meitzanathein (which also has a tripartite
case system), and am now facing a somewhat similar problem with Hwendaaru.
I don't see any real problem with your proposal.  "Ergative" is clearly
appropriate for agents (subjects of transitive verbs), and "accusative" is
clearly appropriate for patients (objects of transitive verbs); the only
real question is what to call the subjects of intransitive verbs.
"Nominative" isn't ideal because it usually refers to both agents and
intransitive subjects; likewise, "absolutive" isn't ideal because it usually
refers to both patients and intransitive subjects.  But there isn't any
other term, AFAIK, that even comes close.  So I'd advise just making an
arbitrary choice between "nominative" and "absolutive" for the intransitive
subject case.  That's what I'm doing.  (In the description of Hwendaaru
which I still hope to have finished sometime in the next few weeks, I'm
using "nominative" for the unmarked "trigger" or topic case, which could
have any case role depending on the form of the verb -- not quite the same
situation as in Meitzanathein or in your LH, but essentially the same
terminological quandry.)

-------------------------------------------------
Tim Smith
timsmith@global2000.net

The human mind is inherently fallible.  It sees patterns where there is only
random clustering, overestimates and underestimates odds depending on
emotional need, ignores obvious facts that contradict already established
conclusions.  Hopes and fears become detailed memories.  And absolutely
correct conclusions are drawn from completely inadequate evidence.
        - Alexander Jablokov, _Deepdrive_ (Avon Books, 1998, p. 269)