Re: Further language development Q's

Hey!

El Tedashan 19 Sep.an 2004 21:19 enin, Th. Wier meshená:

 > So, you may want to consider keeping
 > vestiges of the trigger system around.  (Ask me about
 > Mingrelian sometime, which is a really neat example of
 > vestiges like this.)

You are asked herewith. Am I a questionee now? :-P

 > As you
 > probably know, many morphologically ergative languages,
 > like Basque, have accusative syntax, and so one cannot
 > properly speaking call the absolutive case a subject
 > unless you show syntactic criteria that it behaves as
 > such.

I didn't know that. I guess I should have a look at that
Basque grammar I've once found. The reason I haven't dared
to have a look at it is that I was frightened by the
terminology. And the twisted worldview.
What I have learnt here is that languages always show traces
of both systems, accusative and ergative. And now I try to
have a look at what Javier BF wrote about Basque and
transitivity. That's also one thing I haven't fully
understood yet, I mean why transitivity is important for
Basque verbs. I know what the terms (in/di)transitive mean.

 > > I mean like in the
 > > example I gave, "to invent" -> "being invented", where
 > > "being invented" is "invent.CAU".
 >
 > This sounds more like a passive to me than a causative.

Yeah, actually you're right. Nevertheless I don't see why I
should not form stative passives with the causative. IMO,
something is "caused to be done" after all.

Carsten

--
Eri silveváng aibannama padangin.
Nivaie evaenain eri ming silvoieváng caparei.
- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, Le Petit Prince
  -> http://www.beckerscarsten.de/?conlang=ayeri

Reply