Re: The Glyphica Arcana
|From:||Jefferson Wilson <jeffwilson63@...>|
|Date:||Friday, December 16, 2005, 0:56|
Jim Henry wrote:
> On 12/15/05, Jefferson Wilson <jeffwilson63@...> wrote:
>>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?
Hmmm, no. In "net catches fish" "net" is still the subject.
> Maybe it should be called
> the "agent" case instead.
Well, strictly speaking, the GA doesn't have case. I use the
term 'distinction' for the markers for subject, verb, object,
descriptor, and subordinator. Secondary markers distinguish past
and future verbs, indirect and direct objects, and the like.
It might be appropriate to change it to "source" instead of
subject, but I don't know if that's clearer, and am reluctant to
change all my documentation at this point.