Print

Print


Hello, everyone, and thanks for writing.

You probably weren't sitting around wondering when I was going to 
contribute something to this thread; but, when you saw my name on 
this post, I'll bet you already expected it to be about ditransitives.

This is a kind of partial answer to Max's question; I believe there 
are natlangs where the second clause can elide two arguments under 
identity with the first clause.

I am afraid I can't remember the URL, or the language, or the author,
or the gloss; but there are languages in which, in some circumstances,
the second of two co-ordinately conjoined ditransitive clauses may 
elide two of the three arguments (ISRT the subject and the IO).

Maybe it would be something like this:
"Tom-NOM gave Gayle-DAT the iris-ACC and [] took [] the fuchsia-ACC."
interpolating elided pivot arguments
"Tom-NOM gave Gayle-DAT the iris-ACC 
and Tom-NOM took Gayle-DAT the fuchsia-ACC."
meaning
"Tom gave Gayle the iris and [Tom] took [from Gayle] the fuchsia."
where the second Tom-NOM and the second Gayle-DAT get elided under 
identity with the same arguments in the same roles and the same cases 
in the immediately preceding co-ordinately conjoined clause.

I'm sure I've seen something like that in some natlang or other in 
the past week or two.  Does someone know any specifics?  I can't 
always have the time or the software to look things up that I can at 
other times.

Thanks.

Tom H.C. in MI

--- In [log in to unmask], # 1 <salut_vous_autre@H...> wrote:
> All the examples of the pivots in various languages using "The man 
threw the 
> ball and fell" or another intransitive verb are interesting, but 
what if the 
> second verb is transitive?
> 
> (Because I'm not very aware of the real meaning of "pivot", if it 
doesn't 
> correspond to what I'm talking about, I'd still like to know if 
some 
> language does this)
> 
> Like, "The man threw the ball and hit" that, in english, would need 
an 
> object for "hit" to be grammatical. But a language could have a 
meaning like 
> "The man threw the ball and [the man] hit [the ball]" or, more 
strangely, 
> because it uses the opposite agent-patient roles, "The man threw 
the ball 
> and [the ball] hit [the man]".
> 
> Are there languages that would have one of the two meaning?
> 
> - Max