Re: Further language development Q's

Hey all.

On Friday 17 September 2004 06:41, Thomas R. Wier wrote:

 > From:    Garth Wallace <gwalla@DESPAMMED.COM
<mailto:gwalla@...>>
 >
 > > > 2)   Ayeri is a trigger language, that means fluid-S
 > > > AFAIK.
 > >
 > > I don't think trigger languages are really the same
 > > thing as fluid-S. I think they're separate categories.
 > > But I don't know.
 >
 > I would have to second this.  Fluid-S languages have
 > gradient marking depending on how volitional, animate,
 > etc., the argument is.  Thus, an intransitive like "fall"
 > would normally take O-marking since you don't normally
 > choose to fall, but if you did, you could use A-marking.
 > My understanding is that prototypical trigger languages
 > have no such split-behavior among intransitive
 > predicates.

OK, OK, so I misunderstood the term. But what about one
daughter lang developing from Trigger to Ergative and
another one from Trigger to Accusative? It should be
possible, shouldn't it? The TRG->ERG lang would prefer
patient-focused and thus AIUI passive constructions*, where
the focus becomes undividably sticking to the patient. The
TRG->ACC lang would prefer agent-focused and thus active
constructions, where the focus becomes undividably sticking
to the agent. The first is called "absolutive" IIRC (with
the absolutive being called "subject"?!) and the second is
called "nominative" (with the nominative object being
called "subject"). Would the Ergative lang make more use of
causatives as well? (Causative in Ayeri = someone/-thing
caused someone/-thing to do something) I mean like in the
example I gave, "to invent" -> "being invented", where
"being invented" is "invent.CAU".

Thanks,
   Carsten


*) There is no real passive construction in Ayeri, though:

     I.AGT catch (the ball).PAT
     ------------------------------------------------------
     I.TRG TRG:AGT.catch (the ball).PAT
          => *I* catch the ball.
     ------------------------------------------------------
     I.AGT TRG:PAT.catch (the ball).TRG
          => I catch *the ball*.
          => *The ball* is caught by me.

English and surely other IE langs as well focus the patient
by fronting it and declaring it a subject, thus creating a
"passive construction".
   => Is "subject" a semantic term while "focused agent" is
      a syntactic one?

... all these explanations are IMHO, IIRC, AFAIK and AIUI.

*sigh* Grammar is essentially a mess that makes your brain
hurt when you think too hard about foreign concepts.

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