Re: inverse constructions

Nik Taylor wrote:

> Old French and Vulgar Latin had only nominative and oblique.  And, of
> course, English has only genitive and non-genitive (is there another
> name for that case?)
Interesting!

But the way I'm looking at English, it really has ways
of marking the equivalent of direct and indirect objects,
by position or preposition. So in that sense, and I assume
all Romance langs are the same, they have the 3 "core" cases
(plus a genitive) well-covered. Whereas:

My conlang has no means of providing a "dative" or "direct object",
and only distinguishes subject/object by putting the verb in-between,
and genitive by *not* putting a verb between noun phrases. To say
"I told you about it" requires a serial verb construction.