Re: arguments

Skrivet gant Henrik Theiling:

>Hi!
>
># 1 <salut_vous_autre@...> writes:
>
>
>>This is a question about the arguments with which a verb may agree:
>>
>>A verb may agree with the subject, the object, or both depending of the
>>language, but would it be possible to have a language that agrees with some
>>of the other arguments?
>>
>>
>
>Yes, usually with the indirect object (often 'dative' case).  I'd
>think some Caucasian langs do this and probably some others, too.
>
>
>
Basque does it
thus in "izozki bat ekarri dizut" I have brought you an ice-cream the
auxilliary verb can be analized as such
di- : agreement with the absolutive (singular)
zu- agreement with the dative
-t agreement with the ergative.

Sumerian has also locative verbal infixes.


>To get back to old stories: doesn't spoken French do this?  I'm not
>too good in French, so you should check yourself:
>
>   Toi, tu ne me le dit pas, l'histoire.
>
>
>
Well, it ounds pretty much written for me. For instance the negative
"ne" is rarely used in colloquial French. Besides, "le" is masculine,
while histoire is feminine
A correct form would be:
toi, tu m'la dis pas, l'histoire

It might be analyzed as an agreement with the dative, and it certainly
goes in that direction.

>The 'verb' would be 'tu-ne-me-le-dit', which agrees with subject,
>object, and codes the indirect object, too.  But probably this is not
>possible when trying to topicalize 'a moi':
>
>   *A moi, tu ne me le dit pas, l'histoire.
>
>
>
sounds grammatucal to me, once you change it to "a moi, tu m'la dis pas
l'histoire" even if I don't remember it being used.

Reply