7.1029, Disc: trans/intr verb pairs

[The Linguist List]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List:  Vol-7-1029. Mon Jul 15 1996. ISSN: 1068-4875. Lines:  76
 
Subject: 7.1029, Disc: trans/intr verb pairs
 
Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Texas A&M U. <aristar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
            Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at emunix.emich.edu> (On Leave)
            T. Daniel Seely: Eastern Michigan U. <dseely at emunix.emich.edu>
 
Associate Editor:  Ljuba Veselinova <lveselin at emunix.emich.edu>
Assistant Editors: Ron Reck <rreck at emunix.emich.edu>
                   Ann Dizdar <dizdar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
                   Annemarie Valdez <avaldez at emunix.emich.edu>
 
Software development: John H. Remmers <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
 
Editor for this issue: dseely at emunix.emich.edu (T. Daniel Seely)
 
---------------------------------Directory-----------------------------------
1)
Date:  Sat, 13 Jul 1996 19:26:16 EDT
From:  fujii at mackay.cs.umass.edu (Hideo Fujii)
Subject:  Correction/Addition: trans/intr verb pairs
 
---------------------------------Messages------------------------------------
1)
Date:  Sat, 13 Jul 1996 19:26:16 EDT
From:  fujii at mackay.cs.umass.edu (Hideo Fujii)
Subject:  Correction/Addition: trans/intr verb pairs
 
Dear LINGUISTs,
 
After I posted my summary of contributor's responses to my inquiry about
the trans/intr verb pairs, I received several comments :
 
<Correction>
  --on Finish by Norbert Strade <nost at ling.hum.aau.dk>
  Vt: MUUTTA(a) // Vi: MUUTT{A}-u(a)  "-u" is a reflexive (derivational) marker
    which erase {A} in the stem, so *muuttuaa doesn't exist.
    This is my mistake, not of the contributor.  I apologize for this matter.
 
<Addendum>
  --on Korean by Jee-Hong KIM <jhongkim at nongae.ac.kr>
  Vt: PHWUL(ta) // Vi: PHWUL-li(ta)  (to solve [problems] vs becomming fine
     as with CAUSATIVE marker)
  Vi: KOL(ta) // Vi: KOL-li(ta)   (to call someone vs being caught as by a
     PASSIVE marker)
  "Korean does not have unique suffixes to designate a transitive verbs
   from an intransitive."
 
  --on Arabic by Dave Harris <dharris at las-inc.com>
   as a non-concatenative language for verbal derivation with its
   triconsonantal roots such as:
   KaTaB  (to write) vs KaTTaB (CAUSATIVE to make someone to write)
   According to Dave, it's a derivational change.
 
Related to the distinction between inflection and derivation, I attach my
answer to Stavros Macrakis' <macrakis at osf.org> question.  This is my best
so far to say...
>> About your question for OR-u/OR-eru pair as a result of derivation -
>> In essence, the reason is that this pair making construction is not
>> an obligational for every verb unlike it should be in inflectional
>> constructs.  These are also other characteristics such that: i) it changes
>> the (sub-)category; ii) irregularity of pattern is prominent - compared
>> to other conjugational changes.  In Japanese, there are causative/passive
>> morphemes which can be a functional head in the syntax of a sentence [
>> note: i.e. -(sa)seru/-(ra)reru].  These are different kinds from ones
>> for in/transitive pairs.
 
- Hideo Fujii
  Computer Science Dept.
  University of Massachusetts
    at Amherst
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-7-1029.