Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: 'Yemls Cases - Comments?

From:Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>
Date:Thursday, February 20, 2003, 11:31
En réponse à Jeff Jones <jeffsjones@...>:

> > Good. Your reply counts as an expert comment, then! >
LOL. I didn't mean it quite that way, but thanks anyway :)) .
> > More or less. Each case is "officially" named after the prefix that puts > it > into the subject position. Extrahistorically, the prefixes were just > mnemonics for Agent, Patient, and Complement, respectively, but I ended > up > using the identically written syllables for the orthographic forms > (pronounced [gV] or [gO], [bE], and [t_S_hE]).
Nice! :)) . It's true that using the Latin alphabet as a syllabary can bring funny things :)) .
> > I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that the presence of the > trigger > affix depends on the class of the trigger argument (my subject) rather > than > on the class of the verb (my head word) as I have it? >
Exactly. But the underlying argument is the same: you don't give a special mark when the behaviour of something is its default one. So in Itakian you needn't explicitly mark the function of an actor trigger if the trigger is of class 1 or 2, because the human classes are by default active. In the same way, in 'Yemls an action verb needed be marked for the A-voice, because by default it expect its first argument to be the agent.
> > Good question. I've considered a lot of things, including additional > prefixes, but what I have been using is a rule requiring the 2nd > argument > to be present if the 3rd argument is present. This rule doesn't apply > if > the 2nd argument is undefined. Also, there are probably some > situations > where it's clear which of the 2 cases is meant. >
True. But you may still want to keep a 2nd argument there, even a dummy one. This is a very natlangy thing to do :)) .
> > Let's see. For actions, the A-case argument is the agent who is > directly > involved in the action. For other words, the A-case argument is an > indirect > agent or cause.
Looks good to me :) . The P-case argument is what's affected by the action,
> undergoes a change of state, perceives or receives something, or is > simply > an intransitive subject.
It looks like you've taken a bit of split-S in your system too :)) . So P also indicates for instance the subject of a verb like "to see". The C-case argument "clarifies" an action.
> It's > used as the object of perception, a required complement for > relationship > words, or as a 2nd "object". >
Your system really looks like a Split-S or Fluid-S system.
> Does that help? I suppose I could come up with examples (using mostly > English words) if not. >
That helps quite a lot indeed. Thank you for the explanation! :) Christophe. Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.