Hallo!
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 11:13:23 +0000, R A Brown wrote:
> Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
> > Hallo!
> >
> > [use of "focus" in Austronesian grammar]
>
> I know - what I think is best called the 'subject' - and IMO that the
> use of 'focus' by some in Austronesian linguistics is also unhelpful (as
> is IMO the 'trigger' terminology as well), but we've discussed this many
> times before on this list.
Just what I think about it. It is best called "subject". The whole shebang
is nothing else than an elaborate system of verb voices.
> > But that isn't what Morneau means, either.)
>
> It certainly isn't. He's added a a third use of the term.
Yes. And that's unfortunate.
> [...]
>
> > AND what is especially wrong in Rye's article is to call an intransitive
> > subject an "experiencer". Intransitive subjects can be just about
> > anything, and experiencers are not typically intransitive subjects
> > - the archetypical experiencer is the subject of a verb of perception
> > or emotion; some of these verbs are intransitive, others not.
>
> I agree on all points. There is actually a lot one could criticize on
> the page, but I don't think it's worth wasting time or bandwidth on it.
Except that this error has propagated like bushfire.
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf