Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Compound cases (was Re: Re: Ergative or Vocative?)

From:Eric Christopherson <raccoon@...>
Date:Saturday, October 9, 1999, 0:26
----- Original Message -----
From: Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...>
To: Multiple recipients of list CONLANG <CONLANG@...>
Sent: Friday, October 8, 1999 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: Compound cases (was Re: Re: Ergative or Vocative?)

> Eric Christopherson wrote: > > That's an interesting idea to make the oblique different only in some
> > As for ergative, I mark it with <-w> after the gender marker (so <-aw>
> > animate and <-uw> for inanimate, although I've considered using
> > ONLY for objects, so ergative wouldn't be necessary.) > > Makes sense. Many languages avoid having inanimate in the agent role. > Even English has that tendency, one would be more likely to say "I got > hit by a bus" than "A bus hit me", the second sounds awkward and > unnatural, tho grammatical, because it makes bus, an inanimate object, > the subject. > > And, -uw would, I'd think, be hard to distinguish from -u (assuming, of > course, that {u} = /u/ and {w} = /w/)
If I did use <-uw>, it would either be manifested as [u:] or [uw@].