Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Greenberg's universals for SVO languages & Caos Pidginruff-sketch

From:Marcus Smith <smithma@...>
Date:Sunday, September 10, 2000, 18:25
I must have been smoking something when I wrote:

>Chickasaw has the very interesting feature in that the agreement is >required to >delete when the two subjects corefer, but the pronoun is optional. So you
can
>have "He wants go" or "He wants he go" but never "He wants he goes". To
those
>who care: yes, that is a nominative pronoun accompanying a non-agreeing, >non-finite verb -- a nice counter-example to part of current case theory.
I was mixing "experience" complements with other ones. "He wants go" is perfect, normal. "He wants he go" meaning (X wants X go) is bad, but the same structure is good for (X wants X be healthy). In this latter one, agreement is optional. "He wants he go" meaning (X wants Y go) requires agreement, so "He wants he goes", but "go" carries a "potential" modal suffix. Still, in all of these examples, the embedded verb is non-finite, so they are still counter-examples to much case theory. Just didn't want to be deceiving the public. =============================== Marcus Smith AIM: Anaakoot "When you lose a language, it's like dropping a bomb on a museum." -- Kenneth Hale ===============================