Daniel Andreasson wrote:

>Hehe. Well, I _did_ read up a bit on Acehnese and Ts'ova Tush
>as well. :)

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.

(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.)

> > > 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?

Marcus Smith
AIM:  Anaakoot
"When you lose a language, it's like
dropping a bomb on a museum."
   -- Kenneth Hale