home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!dove!cam!koontz
- From: koontz@cam.nist.gov (John E. Koontz X5180)
- Newsgroups: sci.lang
- Subject: Re: Subject and Object confusion
- Message-ID: <9996@fs3.cam.nist.gov>
- Date: 25 Jan 93 18:34:31 GMT
- References: <adamsd.725590369@crash.cts.com> <4490003@hpcc01.corp.hp.com> <1993Jan21.052233.17711@trl.oz.au> <1993Jan24.101810.46688@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
- Sender: news@cam.nist.gov
- Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD
- Lines: 26
-
- In article <1993Jan24.101810.46688@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>, miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
- |> We will have to consult John Koontz on whether this happens elsewhere
- |> in Siouan (John, where are you?)
-
- I believe that in Dakotan sentences taken out of context are interpreted
- as Agt. Pat. Verb automatically. Dakotan is very strict about "SOV" order,
- but has no morphological means for distinguishing agent and patient (of two
- third person nouns).
-
- In Dhegiha the case of the associated (foregoing) noun is determined
- by the article, for the most part, though there can be ambiguities
- when the subject is obviative, or inanimate. Dhegiha tends to be SOV
- (Agt. Pat. Verb) in context-free transitive clauses, but in text
- variations like OVS and SVO or VSO are fairly common. I don't know
- what the controlling factors are.
-
- I don't know the situation in Ioway-Otoe.
-
- That rounds out Mississippi Valley, which is the only branch I can claim
- much familiarity with.
-
- ----
- John E. Koontz (koontz@bldr.nist.gov)
-
- Disclaimer: Views and recommendations, express or implied, are my own, and
- do not reflect the opinion or policy of my employers.
-