Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Nakiltipkaspimak goes active!

From:daniel andreasson <daniel.andreasson@...>
Date:Saturday, November 11, 2000, 17:43
Marcus Smith wrote:

> I've wanted to read about Acehnese ever since you told me about it. > I found an article that discusses Acehnese case marking in the context > of a universal theory of case, so I'll have to read it carefully.
Durie is the man on Acehnese. Who's written the article you've found? Just so I can stay clear of it. Don't want to read something with the name "universal" and "theory" in the title... ;-)
> (But can you imagine a single theory that derives accusative, ergative,
and
> active languages! It was developed by Ken Hale, who IMNSHO is the most > brilliant linguist alive today. I wanted to study with him for graduate > school, but he retired the year before I started applying.)
Yeah, I can actually. I think Dixon has a nice discussion of it in "Ergativity". I don't know if you can call that a theory in the sense you're used to, but still.
> > > > What I have discovered is thus that if a full NP is freestanding, > > > > it is a controlled action. But if it is incorporated it means > > > > that it is a non-controlled action.
> > > Is this for all sentences or just intransitives?
> > Just intransitives. But if you incorporate a transitive object, > > that object is always non-controlled by definition, incorporated > > or not, since it is always P.
> So, in a transitive sentence, is the object required to incorporate? Or
is
> it optional? And if it does have to incorporate, what do you do with the > indirect object?
Hmm. Originally, incorporation of an object or not had to do with the definiteness of the object. I have _no_ idea what happens to indirect objects in transitive clauses. I'll have to think more about this. Glad you pointed this out, I had completely forgotten about the indirect objects. :-) daniel -- <> KATTAWIKNIK PIMAKTASAL <> daniel.andreasson@telia.com <> <> KATSAYUKNIK PIMAK <> Daniel Andreasson <>