Re: Copula

Hi!

R A Brown writes:
> Jeff Rollin wrote:
> [snip]
> > I suspect there are languages that have no passive but have free word
> > order, since the point of a passive is to make an object
> > topic-prominent.
>
> Latin certainly had free word order and could, and quite often did,
> make the object topic-prominent by shifting to the front. Indeed,
> German, which has less free word order, can and does do the same -
> fronting the object before the main verb which must occupy 2nd
> position.
>
> But both languages find a passive useful - particularly, of course,
> where the agent is unimportant or unknown.
>...
I read that Hungarian (which is nom-acc) has more or less lost its
passive voice.  At least all registers but formal Hungarian.
Hungarian uses the active with a dummy 3rd person subject when other
langs would use the passive ('They killed him.' = 'He was killed.').
But Hungarian *had* a passive and who knows -- maybe the current loss
is just a transition to a new formation.

No precise idea about Mandarin or other Modern Chinese langs, but I
think at least Ancient Chinese comes close: IIRC, it has a passive,
but can use the syntactic active to express passive, too
(unfortunately no example off my head in Chinese, but using English, I
read 'Mr. Zhang was beheaded' in Ancient Chinese was something like
'Zhang Mr. behead.' (no offence Mr. Zhang -- another Zhang! :-)).

In contranst, German seems to like the passive so much that a new
'indirect passive' was established to promote the indirect object to
subject position:

active voice:
   Der      Arzt   zieht    mir    den     Zahn.
   'The=NOM doctor extracts me=DAT the=ACC tooth.'

passive voice:
   Der      Zahn  wird    mir    gezogen.
   'The=NOM tooth becomes me=DAT pulled.'

indirect passive voice:
   Ich    kriege den     Zahn  gezogen.
   'I=NOM get    the=ACC tooth pulled.'

**Henrik