En réponse à Daniel Andreasson Vpc-Work <daniel.andreasson@...>:
>
> No, those would be "tripartite". A and S and P are all marked
> differently.
I didn't know this name! D'you know an example of tripartite language?
Unless I misinterpreted you, and you meant languages
> which mark P and A alike and S differently.
Nope, although that'd be neat :)) .
>
> And I think you should have had some examples in your long
> (even for you, Christophe! ;) but good mail.
I was expecting somebody like you to do it for me ;))))) .
Let me add some.
>
See? ;))))
> + NOMINATIVE-ACCUSATIVE:
>
> I:NOM see the fox:ACC
> A P
>
> I:NOM sleep.
> S/A
>
> + ERGATIVE-ABSOLUTIVE:
>
> I:ERG see the fox:ABS
> A P
>
> I:ABS sleep.
> S/P
>
> + ACTIVE:
>
> I:AGT see the fox:PAT
> A P
>
> I:PAT sleep.
> S/P
>
> I:AGT run.
> S/A
>
That's only for Split-S?
+ FLUID-S:
I:AGT see the fox:PAT
A P
I:AGT run (willingly).
S/A
I:PAT run (I can't control my legs!!!! ;))) ).
S/P
Do I understand the concept correctly?
And for trigger languages and languages based on animacy:
+ TRIGGER:
I:TRG see:AGT the fox:PAT ("as for me, I see the fox")
I:AGT see:PAT the fox:TRG ("as for the fox, it is seen by me")
+ ANIMACY:
I see the fox (NO MARKING)
The fox sees:INV me. (INVERSE MARKING)
>
> Georgian is actually even active. (In Series II, classes 2 and 3 to
> be precise. :)
>
Split-S or Fluid-S? ;))))
Christophe.
http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr
Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.