Print

Print


On May 18, 2014, at 11:58 PM, kechpaja <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On Sun, 18 May 2014 17:00:29 +1000
> Siva Kalyan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
>> This may seem less mysterious if we understand the “partitive” in these languages as actually being a “partitive accusative” (or “partitive core”?), and there being no partitive for any of the other cases.  
> 
> 
> That makes sense, especially in light of the fact that the Finnish partitive is used to mark atelic direct objects (in contrast to the accusative, which marks telic direct objects). 

Maybe, except that the noun phrase in question is marked with both the accusative *and* partitive cases. The demonstrative isn’t marked with partitive. If it were purely a semantic issue, I’d expect the whole thing to be marked with partitive—unless there is no such distinction in the demonstratives.

David Peterson
LCS Member Since 2007
[log in to unmask]
www.conlang.org