Henrik wrote:
> Accusative case marking:
>
> Peter[A] runs.
> Peter[A] freezes.
>
> Here, A is called nominative case and B is called accusative case.
> So `he', in both intransitive sentences, is marked with nominative
> case (like the subject of the transitive sentence above).
>
> Ergative case marking:
>
> Peter[B] runs.
> Peter[B] freezes.
>
> Here, A is called absolutive case and B is called ergative
> case. So `he' is marked with absolutive case (like the object
> of the transitive sentence).
Shouldn't this be:
A = ergative
B = absolutive
?
Luca
> Active case marking:
>
> Peter[A] runs.
> Peter[B] freezes.
>
> Here, A is called agentive case and B is called patientive case.
> In the first sentence, Peter is clearly the agent, while in the
> second, he is not. There are different views on what is
> considered and agent.
>
> Additionally, for these languages, the case marking in clauses is
> typically not even fixed in transitive sentences.
>
> Also note that many language are not clearly one or the other. E.g.
> from two accusative langages:
>
> German: Peter[nom] schlägt Paul[acc].
> Peter[nom] hits Paul[acc].
>
> but: Mich[acc] friert. (old fassioned)
> I[nom] am cold.
>
> and: Mir[dative] ist kalt.
> I[nom] am cold.
>
>
> Icelandic:
> Mig[accusative] thyrsta.
> I[nominative] am thirsty.
>
> In the archives, there surely are many discussions about every detail
> of this.
>
> **Henrik