THEORY: Re : THEORY: Connolly: Interpreting ergative sentences
|From:||From Http://Members.Aol.Com/Lassailly/Tunuframe.Html <lassailly@...>|
|Date:||Friday, July 16, 1999, 23:27|
Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 16/07/99 21:19:39 , Lars a =E9crit :
> So please, caution! And take due note of what has been discovered
> about *living* ergative languages. You can't hope to understand the
> dead ones without them.
sumerians did not have camels ;-)
otherwise an interesting summing up of that question.
except - if i may - i still can't get why the
base would be "distributed", which already
implies an active, distributing agent and is still
an IE "passivization" reflex (except if the -ed affix
were meant to refer to the perfect aspect).
the base should be - i humbly think - "to distribute" :
*the camels distribute.
*the fabric tears.
the soup cooks.
and sumerian has transitive verbs too.