Thanks bunches.
What's "Hierarchical" again?
Is that system in which monotransitive verbs have Inverse and Direct
versions? And some NPs are more animate or more sympathetic, other
NPs less animate or less sympathetic? And in any Direct
montransitive clause it is just assumed that the more
animate/sympathetic NP must be the Agent, while the less
animate/sympathetic NP must be the Patient? And if the clause is
changed only by using the Inverse version of the same verb, that
makes the *less* animate/sympathetic NP the Agent and makes the
*more* animate/sympathetic NP become the Patient?
I especially appreciate the pointer to Siewierska's work.
---Tom
--- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, Chris Bates
<chris.maths_student@N...> wrote:
<...snip...>
> From Person by Anna Siewierska:
>
> Accusative
> A&P 65.4%
> A 29.4%
> P 5.2%
> A or P 0%
>
> Ergative
> A&P 82%
> A 0%
> P 18%
> A or P 0%
>
> Active
> A&P 85%
> A 15%
> P 0%
> A or P 0%
>
> Hierarchical
> A&P 67%
> A 0%
> P 0%
> A or P 33%
>
> This is from a study of languages which showed agreement on verbs.
There
> were 283 languages in the sample. As you can see, for ergative
languages
> which exhibit agreement, the vast majority (82%) in the sample
agreed
> with both the abs and erg arguments, with only a small minority
(18%)
> showing agreement with only the abs argument. Examples of languages
> which agree with the P but not the A are: Karitiana, Kolana, Lak,
> Palikur, and Trumai.