En réponse à Daniel Andreasson Vpc-Work <[log in to unmask]>: > > You'd think I would, wouldn't you? But unfortunately I don't. :P I'm beginning to wonder what you've done at school ;)))) . > > Hahaha! :D You crack me up! :D > ;))) > > :D *visualizing Christophe scurrying off in someone's general > direction* > Well, it *could* be a useful distinction (especially for sleepwalkers - or would it be "sleeprunners"? ;)))) ). > > Do I understand the concept correctly? > > Yup. Although, the choice between AGT and PAT doesn't need > to be based on control, it can be based on active/stative > instead (as in Guaraní). Hence the term "active". > I know. I just gave an example graphical enough to be understood easily. And a little humour always helps with teaching ;))) . > > Or better yet, an actual Guaraní (fluid-S!) example: > > karú (AGT) 'to have lunch or supper, or dine' --> active > karú (PAT) 'to be a glutton' --> stative > Strangely enough, I would have thought that the meanings would be opposite. I'd feel that being a glutton demands more activity than simply having lunch or dinner ;))) . I like when languages make distinctions in a way that just looks wrong to me ;)))) . > > Well, I feel compelled to say just "active", but I'm sure Tom > Wier will tell me that it really is split-S, so that's what > I'm going for then. ;) > LOL. What's the problem here? I'd think fluid-S and split-S languages are easy to separate ;))) . Christophe. http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.