Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: not un-/anti-passive

From:Henrik Theiling <theiling@...>
Date:Tuesday, June 24, 2008, 13:45

Eldin Raigmore writes:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:38:41 +0300, JR <fuscian@...> wrote: >>On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 8:24 PM, Eldin Raigmore <eldin_raigmore@...> >>wrote: >>>In applicative languages, one of the reasons to promote an oblique >>>argument to direct (or primary) object, is so that passivization can be >>>applied to the result, and thus the oblique argument can wind up as >>>subject.... > >>Indeed. I came across another reason yesterday while looking through my >>grammar of Yimas, a Papuan language with six applicatives (in addition to >>possessor raising to dative). According to the author, when something can be >>expressed with an applicative or without one, the former is much more >>likely, just because it's more polysynthetic. The closer you can get to a >>one word sentence, the better! > > Interesting!
And exactly the idea in my Qþyn|gài. :-) **Henrik