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.