Re: CHAT: Prepositions governing nominative, (X)... case [was Re: CHAT: Back on the list; Anti-conlanging bigots]
|From:||Andreas Johansson <and_yo@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 22:24|
Thomas Weir wrote:
>Quoting Andreas Johansson <and_yo@...>:
> > Anton Sherwood wrote:
> > >"Thomas R. Wier" wrote:
> > > > one day we were discussing how GB handles case marking, and the
> > > > question arose whether there are any languages whose adpositions
> > > > assign nominative case. I mentioned that I knew off the top of my
> > > > head of no natural languages which marked case in that way, though
> > > > I did know of a constructed language [Esperanto] that did this. . .
> > >um . . . remind me?
> > Hmm, as some people on this list may be aware, Tairezazh and Steianzh
> > violate this rule by having prepositions followed by the nominative*.
> > Now, in Kalini Sapak the accusative is the most basic case (used as the
> > lexical form, as vocative etc). So, does this mean that it be unnatural
> > have adpositions govern accusative?
>Generally speaking, no, but it really depends on the number
>of distinct cases in the language and what kinds of other uses they
>might have and how they uses interact with one another. Is the
>accusative morphologically marked by <null>, while the nominative
>takes some special ending? Such a system is not unheard of, though
>it is far rarer than special marking for the accusative and no marking
>for the nominative.
Well, Kalini have Semitoid base system, where the second vowel of a noun
kazal "woman (ACC)"
kazul "woman (NOM)"
kazil "woman's" (pronounced [kaZil])
So arguably the nominative is no less or more marked than the accusative,
but hitherto, the nominative is only used for subjects and the genitive for
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp