Re: CONLANG Digest - 21 Feb 2004 to 22 Feb 2004 (#2004-52)

Staving Steg Belsky:
>On Monday, February 23, 2004, at 03:18  PM, Andreas Johansson wrote:
>>PS If I've got it right, all ergative languages are really
>>split-ergative, but
>>plenty of accusative languages have only the faintest traces of
>>ergativity
>>(like the -ee suffix in English). If so, it would seem to suggest that
>>accusativity, for some reason, is the "default" for human language,
>>yes? What
>>about active, tripartite, clairvoyant and MRL languages - do they too
>>more or
>>less universally contain bits of accusativity?
>
>
>Could you (or anyone else) remind me (and i'm sure someone else out
>there has forgotten too :P) what are tripartite, clairvoyant, and MRL
>(Monster Raving Looney?) type languages?

Tripartite - a separate case for each of transitive subject, intransitive
subject, and object.
Clairvoyant - Not sure, but I þink it meaneþ no case marking at all.
MRL - Noun agreeþ with hwether verb is transitive or intransitive, but
isnot marked for subject or object.

(Slight accusative bias in ðe terminology, but I þink folk can live ðerewið).

Pete