tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 12 15:02:30 2010
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: suffixes -lu'wI'
- From: Brent Kesler <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: suffixes -lu'wI'
- Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 15:00:55 -0800
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ecom7Ab8kU7KtDGcwbtzk164LFIaTOeYa2ZEn6XMO9s=; b=aWLEqsQs/I/Y6ZuHDV/LcB42RZhHkYrkrSTXlNp5B//CeUnE0ne7X/wbgKrGguDZ8M qfgI2JWGfzusYT3kN4cWcEiXJE7H0mpeD3b6SZdBOXWcv12zGfJ5BP91+D0GQJXEHEnK Ot3HEajbSzVskWhkWagrs/UIUihei80dqcXxQ=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=rJP3OWhJicS/n9hAUAggMBKL5u6qqGbAL4Rr7oSrODktxB4RLTZE0hWcR4GQzqlm0/ rPRn8fCSmQ30H3+1ySOIsLrLfZO/cSp/DHEbOMiFAMtwZ2zADciqfTgrIUoL+sCnrVti UwClzW2USnjCCRIAb1zRygzhJFh/JF8n0sJKQ=
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <20100212073051.a41e5a76f06d90ef255b5a241771595e.37ca61262d.wbe@email.secureserver.net> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Brent Kesler
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> cha' DarSeqwIj tIghaj!
I decided to go looking for a definition of the passive. I found one
at the World Atlas of Language Structures Online:
http://wals.info/feature/107
A construction has been classified as passive if it displays the
following five properties:
- 1. it contrasts with another constuction, the active ;
- 2. the subject of the active corresponds to a non-obligatory
oblique phrase of the passive or is not overtly expressed;
- 3. the subject of the passive, if there is one, corresponds to the
direct object of the active;
- 4. the construction is pragmatically restricted relative to the active;
- 5. the construction displays some special morphological marking of the verb.
I also found this interesting tidbit:
"The three examples of passive clauses given so far are *personal
passives*, i.e. passives with an overt lexical subject. Personal
passives are typically seen as involving a process of agent demotion
(from subject to oblique role or total suppression) and a process of
patient promotion (from direct object to subject). There are also
passive clauses which involve only agent demotion. These are called
*impersonal passives*."
It goes on to give an example of the impersonal passive from
Lithuanian that looks a lot like {HuSDaq ba'lu''a'}:
a. vaikaÄ miegÃjo sodÃ
children.nom slept.3pl garden.loc
âThe children slept in the garden.â
b. vaikÅÌ bÃvo mieÌgama sodÃ
children.gen be sleep.pres.part.n garden.loc
âThe children slept in the garden.â (Lit. By the children was being
slept in the garden.)
Perhaps we could say that {-lu'} demotes the agent but does not
promote the patient, or only promotes the patient of a pronomial
prefix. That's why a sentence like {Daqawlu'} feels like a passive,
but a word like *{leghlu'wI'} doesn't work. As for {naDev puqpu'
lutu'lu'}, well, maybe the patient is promoted for {lu-} but not for
{puqpu'}.
QubmeH Sojvam yISop!
bI'reng
![[KLI Member]](/pics/KLImemberbutton.gif "[KLI Member]"){kind=small}