|From:||Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, January 30, 2002, 12:16|
En réponse à The Gray Wizard <dbell@...>:
Well, I know all that, but since the person had stated that he didn't know
anything about ergativity, and since my explanatory skills are limited (I wish
I had the ease of most people here to transform complex concepts into obvious
explanations :(( ), I just gave a simple explanation of pure morphological
ergativity. I thought of adding a bit about split-ergativity, to spice up the
sauce, but decided that my explanations probably had confused the poor guy even
more than he was before (you see how much I trust my skills :)) ), so I stopped
there, knowing that someone else on the list would provide for better
Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.
> While this aspect of ergativity ("morphological ergativity") is the
> obvious, ergative languages often exhibit other features that make
> things a
> bit more complicated. For one thing, most ergative languages are not
> "strictly" ergative. That is, many exhibit mixed or split paradigms
> require accusative forms under certain conditions. AFMCL, amman iar
> uses a
> split ergative paradigm along an animacy continuum that causes speech
> pronouns and demonstratives to take nominative/accusative forms.
> often overlooked, aspect of ergativity is "syntactic ergativity"
> clause combinations and the omission of coreferential constituents in
> combinations are subject to ergatively motivated constraints. This is
> a feature of amman iar. I discuss these features with a number of
> at http://www.graywizard.net/Conlinguistics/ergativity.htm
> serious about understanding ergativity I would recommend reading
> text "Ergativity".