Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Core Cases (was Re: Ditransitivity (again!))

From:<jcowan@...>
Date:Tuesday, February 3, 2004, 18:23
H. S. Teoh scripsit:

> The Ebisedian worldview isn't quite that sophisticated. The Ebisedi > believe that *looking* is a matter of something emerging from the eyes, > whereas *seeing* was a matter of _receiving_ sight of something. Consider > the other cases where this "inversion" occurs.
I like this idea.
> P.S. I'm also duly impressed by Lojban's dispensation with the natlang > misfeature that one particular verb argument must always be present (eg. > the nominative or subject).
Mandarin (I don't know about the other Sinitic langs) is also good at this: (in the context: "Where is she?") Hai2 mei2 lai2 still not come
> jhit0' fww't3 ebu'. I see her / she was seen by me.
Is it all one whether you say the above or "ebu' fww't3 jhit0'"?
> When both are present, the distinction between active and passive > is semantically irrelevant, and the Ebisedian neatly (if I may say so > myself) uses the same expression for both.
They aren't quite equivalent, though. "England conquered Wales" is most felicitous when the topic is England, whereas "Wales was conquered by England" is most felicitous when the topic is Wales. Lojban has a particle that allows the construction of topic-comment sentences explicitly: England (topic) conquered Wales. Wales (topic) England conquered. The topic, indeed, need not be an argument at all: la gliban. po'e ko'a zo'u le nu cusku cu xamgu mutce The English of-INALI her (topic) the event-of speaking is good extreme As for her English, (her) speaking (of it) is very good. Ta1 de Ying1wen2, shuo1 de hen3 hao3. (INALI = inalienable possession) -- John Cowan jcowan@reutershealth.com http://www.ccil.org/~cowan http://www.reutershealth.com Thor Heyerdahl recounts his attempt to prove Rudyard Kipling's theory that the mongoose first came to India on a raft from Polynesia. --blurb for _Rikki-Kon-Tiki-Tavi_

Reply

H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@...>