7.1029, Disc: trans/intr verb pairs
The Linguist List
linguist at tam2000.tamu.edu
Mon Jul 15 13:47:34 UTC 1996
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
More information about the LINGUIST
mailing list