Re: Accusative? The saga continues ...

Talpas Tim wrote:
># >
># >I think maybe "transitive/intransitive" would be a good classification.
># >
># Eh, doesn't pretty much all languages have a transitive vs intransitive
># distinction?
>#
>
>Take for example, that A = Agent or Subject of a Transitive, O = Object
>or Object of a Transitive, and S = Subject or Undergoer of an
>Intransitive...
Using "P" rather than "O" would be more standard, at least on this list.

>
>"Ergative/Absolutive" is defined as where O and S are marked the same,
>and A differently.
>
>"Nominative/Accusative" is defined as where A and S are marked the same,
>and O is marked differently.
>
>That leaves one (basic) combination left... Marking A and O similarly
>(Transitive), and S differently (Intransitive)
>
>From what I've seen so far, your language so far seems to conform more
>closely
>to this last type than to either of the first two.
Unless my brain has recently been reprogrammed by Mircosoft, Altaii
maintains an absolute distinction between A and P (whereas S, as far as I
can see, can be identified with either without creating any weirdities).
Basic syntax of a transitive sentence is;

A P (everything else) VERB

whereas intransitive ones are;

S (everything else) VERB

While neither A nor P (nor S) get any case-endings, the syntax makes it
unambiguous what's what.

                                                 Andreas

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

Replies