Re: Description question
|From:||Muke Tever <alrivera@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, October 9, 2001, 11:39|
From: "Matthew Pearson" <Matthew.Pearson@...>
>You could call the _-i_ form the "direct" (or "subject-topic")
>form and the _pi-_ form the "inverse" (or "object-topic" form).
>The term "inverse" is common for constructions which topicalize
>or 'foreground' a direct object without eliminating the subject
>(or 'backgrounding' the subject by rendering it as an oblique
>"by" phrase). The terms "subject-topic" and "object-topic" come
>from the literature on Philippine-style voicing systems, which
>have been discussed rather extensively on this list (you can
>look in the archives under 'trigger systems', or ask Kristian
>Jensen or Barry Garcia to give you the basics...).
>As for what to call _ara_, well... Does it really need a name?
>It can be described fairly succinctly as a "marker of core
>(subject/object) case used for non-topics". If you need a label
>for it, how about "non-topic case-marker"?
Hey, excellent! "Direct" and "inverse" are good, and "non-topic" works well