Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: The Glyphica Arcana: Distinction

From:Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>
Date:Saturday, December 17, 2005, 16:10

Jefferson Wilson wrote:

> [...] > > Take the following two sentences: > > "I look at the flower." > > "I see the flower." > > In the GA the glyphs for "look at" and "see" are identical in > these sentences (base meaning: relating to the perception of > light). However, in the first case "I" uses the subject > distinction, while in the second case "I" uses the indirect > object distinction. The verb could even be interpreted as "show" > with the second sentence being translated, "The world shows me > the flower."
Interesting - it is basically the same as in my conlang Old Albic: Teráma ma am lastal. see-PRES-3SG:P-1SG:A 1SG:AGT 3SG:I:OBJ flower:OBJ `I look at the flower.' Teráma man am lastal. see-PRES-3SG:P-1SG:A 1SG-DAT 3SG:I:OBJ flower:OBJ `I see the flower.' This works the same with all verbs of perception: subject in agentive case indicates deliberate observation, subject in dative indicates more-or-less cursory perception. This mechanism is part of a more general system marking degrees of volition by the case of the subject. A subject acting volitionally is marked with the agentive case, one acting accidentally is marked with the dative case, one made to act by an external force is marked with the instrumental case and the verb doesn't agree with it. The latter is the only degree of volition possible with an inanimate subject (as in the sentence `The stone smashed the window'). This degree-of-volition marking applies only to verbs denoting, rather broadly, actions; stative verbs have subjects in the objective case. (Old Albic is a fluid-S language.) Greetings, Jörg.