Arguments of verbal nouns (was Re: How to kick the infinitive habit)
|From:||Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, October 4, 2006, 19:11|
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 14:53:48 -0400, "Mark J. Reed" wrote:
> Somewhat OT, I find it interesting that the English gerund can have
> both subject and object specified using the syntax of possession, e.g.
> "His selling of my car was done without my consent." Note how the
> noun "selling" appears to be both "his" and "my car's" (or at least
> "of my car")... Okaikiar infinitives can have subject and object
> specified exactly as they are in finite verbs.
In Old Albic, arguments of verbal nouns are coded as possessors,
somewhat as in English. BUT...
Old Albic distinguishes between alienable possession (marked with the
genitive case) and inalienable possession (marked with the partitive
case if animate, the locative case if inanimate). The former is used
to mark agents, the latter to mark patients of verbal nouns:
hat ndarol chvanas
bite.VN man-PART dog-GEN
'the biting of a man by a dog', i.e. the dog bites the man.
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf