Re: passivization/antipassivization

>From: # 1 <salut_vous_autre@...>
>
>I've read about the antipassivization prossess and I'm not sure how it
>works
>:-|
It's actually pretty simple.  Passivization and antipassivization both turn
a transitive verb into an intrasitive verb.  In passivization, the direct
object becomes the sole argument of the verb.  In antipassivization, the
subject becomes the sole argument.  Generally, passivization is found in
accusative languages and antipassivization is found in ergative languages,
although I know at least of a few ergative languages with both.

>Active
>
>S      Io       Do
>I read you this book
>Ag     B        Pa
>
>S  Ag
>Do Pa
>Io B
>C  -
>
>“Basic form”
>_____
>
>Agentive Passive
>
>     S               Io      C
>This book is read to you (by me)
>     Pa              B       Ag
>
>S  Pa
>Do –
>Io B
>C  Ag
>
>Do->S->C
>=Io=
That is correct.

>
>Non-agentive Passive
>
>S                 Do       C
>You are read this book (by me)
>B                 Pa       Ag
>
>
>S  B
>Do Pa
>Io –
>C  Ag
>
>Io->S->C
>=Oi=
Yes, this would be correct, as well.  This isn't, of course, what I was
calling passivization earlier, but I believe your terminology is correct.
In any case, the resulting verb may still be transitive after this process.

And using your notation, an antipassive would be like this:

S             Io             C
I read (to) you (from) this book
Ag           B              Pa

S  Ag
Do C
Io B

This looks like the basic form because English does not have an antipassive,
but if you imagine "this book" to be a compliment grammaticly rather than a
direct object (as read is now intransitive), then this is what an
antipassive looks like.

Athey

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/