Re: GROUPLANG: Pronouns

On Mon, 19 Oct 1998, Nik Taylor wrote:

> Well, I was going to suggest a triple system like that, but I don't
> really like it very much.  I see no reason to have a seperate
> intransitive case, since it never needs to disambiguated from transitive
> cases.  Anyways, the case system as proposed seems too "computer-like",
> so to speak.
There is a natlang distinction between and "active" and "passive"
intransitive, though it is somewhat rare. When the moon rises,
is it raised or does it rise? (I hope that is a good example,
but I can't remember a cited one.)

I think computers will have enough trouble with this lang, BTW.