Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Ergativity and verb forms

From:Arthaey Angosii <arthaey@...>
Date:Saturday, June 19, 2004, 18:03
Emaelivpeith Racsko Tamas
> However in my example, the phrase "previously mentioned one" meant a > different thing.
It's your second type of "previously mentioned" that I meant.
> In languages which uses affixes on verbs that agree > with verbal complements (e.g. they incorporate the person of the direct > object into the verb), you do not have to specify the complements > itself, if it is obvious from the context. E.g. Hungarian "Ismerem > Janost. Kedvelem." 'I know John. I know [him].' The equivalent of > '[him]' is omitted in Hungarian, because verb form "kedvelem" > incorporates a reference to a known 3rd person direct object. I do not > know if this kind of "previously mentioned one" had a technical term. > In Hungarian it is considered rather as a special conjugation called > "definite" (i.e. it refers to a definite direct object), the same is > called in Basque usually as conjugation "nor-nork" 'whom-who' (and "nor- > nori" 'who-to whom' or "nor-nori-nork" 'whom-to whom-who').
In Asha'ille, you can (and normally do) drop previously mentioned information, sometimes using pronouns and sometimes using nothing at all. For example: Arevnilordhi ne emeirjho. arev -ni -l- -ordhi ne emeirjho give self OBJ: someone OBJ: flower I give someone a flower. Any verbs that follow, which do not specify via conjugational endings or explicit subjects/objects, will be understood to carry the last information so given: Direv n'o. direv ne no take OBJ: it I take it from someone. Or even more simply: Direv. The verbs don't have to be in adjacent sentences. There just can't be any verbs with specified information on them, else the last verb will take *its* information instead. For example: "Arevnilordhi ne emeirjho. Jhor'no t'fin. Sshak muahaha! Direv. Daedh arev." means "I gave someone a flower. It was[1] white. I said[2], 'Muahaha!" I took the flower from (that same) someone. I gave it to them again." [1] The construction "jhor'A t'B" means "A is B" or A=B, but has no actual verb in it expressing the equivalence relationship. Is there a term for this? I just looked up "copula," which turns out to have to be a verb, so that can't be it. [2] "Sshak" introduces a direct quote. It's no more a verb than English's "quote end-quote" phrase. -- AA