On 12/15/05, Jefferson Wilson <jeffwilson63@...> wrote:
> Jim Henry wrote:
> > On 12/15/05, Jefferson Wilson <jeffwilson63@...> wrote:
> >>Jim Henry wrote:
> > Cecil eats noodles.
> > Cecil = agent,
> > noodles = patient
> >
> > Cecil sleeps.
> > Cecil = experiencer
>
> If the intent of the sentence is to show that Cecil is
> experiencing sleep, then the name "Cecil" would be marked as an
> indirect object with "sleep" as a verb. (At one point I called
_Indirect_ object! Interesting. A number of languages
use the same case for at least some objects
of transitive verbs and subjects of intransitive verbs,
but I don't know if there are any natlangs that
use the indirect object case for subjects
of intransitive verbs. Neat.
> this 'indirect voice.' That is, a verb and indirect object making
> a complete sentence.) However, if the intent of the sentence is
> to show that Cecil is performing the activity of sleep, "Cecil"
> would be marked as subject. "Cecil" might also be marked as a
> direct object, indicating that "sleep" is being imposed.
> ("Taking the medication, Cecil sleeps.")
So the "subject" is always some entity taking
deliberate action? Maybe it should be called
the "agent" case instead.
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/gzb/gzb.htm
...Mind the gmail Reply-to: field