Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Acc/Erg/Etc sans Cases

From:Arthaey Angosii <arthaey@...>
Date:Wednesday, March 26, 2003, 21:02
Emaelivpeith Christophe Grandsire:
>Cases are not necessary to categorise a language as >accusative/ergative/active/whatever.
I didn't know that! Now I can figure out what Asha'ille is. :)
>"he kicked the woman and ran away".
Y'know, you guys are too violent for me. The last CONLANG sentence I translated, I had to invent a word for "to hit". Now "to kick." Hrmph! ;) Anyhow: Gghechivpaerdhi ar ne cahnen t'lámasaev. /XE_X"XEtSIv,erDI Ar n@ kAnEn t@"lAm@sev/ kick-PST-UNS he OBJ: woman and-flee The second verb is understood to take the same suffixes as the most recent verb with explicit suffixes. Therefore, |lámasaev| is understood to reallly mean |lámasaevpaerdhi|, but you won't need to say any more suffixes until you wish to change the ones declared by |gghechivpaerdhi|. If I wanted to say instead "he kicked the woman and _she_ ran away", it would be: Gghechivpaerdhi ar ne cahnen t'lámasaev ah. kick-PST-UNS he OBJ: woman and-flee she But things get complicated by the new way person conjugation works... I'll get a post out on it.
>The unexpressed subject of the >intransitive verb is taken to be the subject of the transitive verb. The >language is thus syntactically accusative, since it maps subjects of >intransitive verbs with *subjects* of intransitive verbs.
So Asha'ille is syntactically accusative, right? It doesn't care whether the verbs involved are transitive or intransitive, though -- whatever the subject, object, tense, etc of the preceding verb, the same information is copied onto the following verb(s). -- AA Bia Sharidim ("New Words") ============ |gghechiv| /XE_X"XEtSIv/ "to kick". from |ghachiv| "to slap, hit" |lámasaev| /"lAm@sev/ "to flee, run away" esp. with the intention of escaping from (deserved) punishment. from |mmasaev| "to walk" |-aerdhi| /"erDI/ conjugation for a general, unspecified person