On Fri, 6 Apr 2007 15:33:04 -0700, David J. Peterson <dedalvs@...>
wrote:
>Jeff wrote:
><<
>HA = Higher Argument - the person higher on the person hierarchy
>LA = Lower Argument - the person lower on the person hierarchy
>A3 = Argument 3 - the 3rd argument
>Align = Alignment - direct, inverse, or reciprocal
>Voice = Voice - active, passive, or reflexive
>Deriv = Derivationals
>Mood = Mood
>PA/RT = Primary Aspect/Relative Tense
>SA = Secondary Aspect
> >>
>
>So...focusing on the alignment and voice sections...you have an
>inverse system in addition to passive morphology? So let's say
>you have a 1st person argument and a 3rd person argument
>with a...hmm. Okay, let's stick with that.
>
>Direct + Active: I affect him.
>Inverse + Active: He affects me.
>Reciprocal + Active: I affect him and he affects me. (We affect each
>other.)
>
>This is pretty standard. The next six are what confuse me a bit.
>Assuming that the second argument is left in in a passive verb
>(otherwise the alignment morphology wouldn't play any role
>at all)...
I didn't explain this very well; the second argument _isn't_ left in the passive
or reflexive verb and neither is the alignment. I probably should have broken it
down as
LA-Align-A3-PA/RT-SA-Root-Deriv-Mood-HA
and
A3-PA/RT-SA-Root-Deriv-Mood-HA/LA-Voice
with the former for active and the latter for passive and reflexive. (I'm not
sure if the suffixed person counts as the higher argument or the lower one;
probably the lower)
>Direct + Passive: I'm affected by him.
>Inverse + Passive: He's affected by me.
>Reciprocal + Passive: I'm affected by him and he's affected by me.
>(We're affected by each other.)
>
>And then...
>
>Direct + Reflexive: I affect myself (and he...?).
>Inverse + Reflexive: He affects himself (and I...?).
>Reciprocal + Reflexive: I affect myself and he affects himself (and
>we...?).
This reciprocal + reflexive actually looks useful.
>Assuming that for the last six you only have one argument, what
>would the inverse and reciprocals mean?
If I were using inverse + passive it could be antipassive, but I didn't need that.
>Also, how does the contrafactual /u/ become an [E]?
By means of a typo! It should look like
koresumastun
[kO.XE.su'mas.tun]
k-ore- su-mat-s -u -n
1S-Rcp-Ret-see-RC-Ctf-2S
"We would have looked at each other"
>
>Looks cool so far!
Thanks!
>
>-David
>**********************************************************
*********
>"A male love inevivi i'ala'i oku i ue pokulu'ume o heki a."
>"No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."
>
>-Jim Morrison
>
>
http://dedalvs.free.fr/