Print

Print


Peter Bleackley wrote at 2004-01-13 12:40:22 (+0000)
 > Does anything like this exist in real life? It's a kind of
 > extension of ergativity.
 > There exists one case which expresses the subject of an
 > intransitive sentence, the object of an transitive sentence, and
 > the indirect object of a ditransitive sentence. Another case
 > expresses the subject of a transitive sentence or the object of a
 > ditransitive sentence. A third case expresses the subject of a
 > ditransitive sentence.
 >

Well, I don't know for sure that such a thing doesn't exist - but it's
not listed in the diagrams of types of ditransitive clause here:
http://linguistics.buffalo.edu/people/faculty/dryer/dryer/clausetypes.pdf

It seems that the subject of a ditransitive clause is pretty much
always treated the same as the subject of a monotransitive, and not
united with either of the objects of a ditransitive.  The first case
mentioned (linking S, P and R) does occur (the example given is Quebec
Inuktitut).

I'm trying to imagine how such a system could develop, but nothing
comes to mind.