Re: Object Properties List? (was: Copula)

---In conlang@yahoogroups.com, Jeffrey Jones <jsjonesmiami@...> wrote:
>[snip]
>Do you mean Direct Objects in dative languages and Primary Objects
>in dechticaeciative (sp?) languages?
>If not, I had understood that Direct Objects corresponded to
>Secondary Objects and Indirect Objects to Primary Objects.
I meant the most prominent Object, where an Object is any non-Subject
direct argument, or any non-Subject core argument, or any non-Subject term,
or any non-Subject grammatical relation.

If you don't go with what Kroeger says in "Analyzing Syntax", then:
Yes.  I mean the most prominent Object, where an Object is any direct
argument, or core argument, or term, or grammatical relation, that isn't a
Subject.  In Primative languages this would be the Primary Object, and in
Directive languages this would be the Direct Object.  (Apparently that division
applies even to languages that don't have a third grammatical relation.  But if
it does, in Primative languages it's the Secondary Object (making them
Dechticaetiative), and in Directive languages it's the Indirect Object (making
them Dative). And, yes, what's the Primary Object in a basic ditransitive
clause of a Dechticaetiative language is generally the same semantic role as
the Indirect Object in a basic ditransitive clause of a Dative language, and
what's the Direct Object in a basic ditransitive clause of a Dative language is
generally the same semantic role as the Secondary Object in a basic
ditransitive clause of a Dechticaetiative langueage.)

OTOH, if you _do_ go with what Kroeger says in "Analyzing Syntax",
then "Indirect Object" is not an admissible term in syntax, because it's really a
semantic role instead of a grammatical relation.  _All_ languages that have
Objects have a Primary Object; any language which has Object grammatical
relations other than the Primary one, all of the other Objects are Secondary.
In Directive languages it happens that the Primary Object is the Direct Object;
in some other languages, there is still a Primary Object, but it's not quite the
same as the Direct Object.  Dative languages' basic ditransitive clauses have a
Subject, a Direct Object, and a Secondary Object; Dechticaetiative languages'
basic ditransitive clauses have a Subject, a Primary Object, and a Secondary
Object.

Note that there are languages with tritransitive clauses.  These have a
Subject, a Primary Object, and two Secondary Objects of different kinds.

====================================================
But either way, I meant the most "prominent" Object.
====================================================

[snip]

>>ObConLang:
>[snip]
>As you probably know, Naisek assigns the ergative, dative, and
>absolutive cases according the type of role with agents taking the
>ergative, recipients and perceivers taking the dative, and patients
>taking the absolutive. The subject is whichever case the verb agrees
>with: if the verb allows an ergative argument, it agrees with the
>ergative; else if the verb allows a dative argument, it agrees with
>the dative; else it agrees with the absolutive.
>
>The passives delete the ergative and/or dative argument from the
>argument structure, changing the verb's agreement. The causative
>adds an ergative argument, which becomes the subject.
Thanks!

I doubt I would have remembered that if you hadn't reminded me.