Muke Tever wrote:
> Intransitivity is not necessarily 'inviolable'. For example "volunteer (for a
> job)" is intransitive, but it still transitivizes then passivizes:
>
> John volunteered for the job.
> John was volunteered for the job [by his wife].
I can't accept this as a mere rule-governed extension of the ordinary "volunteer",
any more than I can swallow *"John was died by his wife". "Mary volunteered
John for the job" (your transitivized but not yet passivized form)
is a piece of irony: transitive "volunteer" in fact means "commandeer".
--
There is / one art || John Cowan <jcowan@...>
no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein