Print

Print


At 11:03 17.7.2003 -0400, John Cowan wrote:

>Randy LaPolla has argued convincingly (at least he convinced me :-) )
>that in Chinese the whole concept of "S, A, and P" makes no sense, that
>Chinese is neither accusative nor ergative nor active, and that case roles
>are assigned on a purely pragmatic basis.

Can you explain that in a little more detail, or give me the reference?

/BP 8^)
--
B.Philip Jonsson mailto:[log in to unmask] (delete X)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~__
                A h-ammen ledin i phith!                \ \
     __  ____ ____    _____________ ____ __   __ __     / /
     \ \/___ \\__ \  /___  _____/\ \\__ \\ \  \ \\ \   / /
     / /   / /  /  \    / /Melroch\ \_/ // /  / // /  / /
    / /___/ /_ / /\ \  / /Gaestan ~\_  // /__/ // /__/ /
   /_________//_/  \_\/ /Eowine __  / / \___/\_\\___/\_\
Gwaedhvenn Angeliniel\ \______/ /a/ /_h-adar Merthol naun
  ~~~~~~~~~Kuinondil~~~\________/~~\__/~~~Noolendur~~~~~~
|| Lenda lenda pellalenda pellatellenda kuivie aiya! ||
"A coincidence, as we say in Middle-Earth" (JRR Tolkien)