Fw: Error Condition Re: Re: transitivity, etc,

[R. Rankin]

I think all the MVS languages have this pattern with at
least a few of those "experiencer" verbs.  They're not
just Dakotan, and you can get two stative pronominals.
Membership in the class varies, just as stative-status
does across Siouan.

If you believe that "subject" is part of "UG", then you
have verbs with stative subjects acting transitively on
objects -- both marked w/ pronominals from the
"stative" set.  If you're willing to set aside the
notion that all languages have a use for the notion
"subject", then you can generally deal with this set of
verbs by pointing out that there is a formal
distinction in Siouan between agents and experiencers.
This isn't a new argument.

Bob

----- Original Message -----
From: Koontz John E <John.Koontz at colorado.edu>
To: Siouan List <siouan at lists.colorado.edu>
Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Error Condition Re: Re: transitivity,
etc,


> Rankin responding to Koontz:
> > > > No idea, really, though I think not, as I've
never
> > > run into any verbs with multiple patient
inflection,
> > >
> > > You must mean something other than the
experiencer
> > > "transitives" like 'resemble', 'be proud of', 'be
> > > afraid of', and the like -- of which there are
quite a
> > > number
>
> These particular xamples are Dakotan examples,
though, right? And in
> Dakotan these do inflect doubly, with a possibility
of two pronominal
> prefixes.
>
> > I've been collecting them, and, as you know, they
require a stative
> > subject and stative object in various of the
languages.  The subject
> > is inevitably an experiencer.
>
> I think I might have been obscure/  I definitely
don't mean that I haven't
> encountered this pattern - in fact it's what we've
been talking about, in
> part.  I just mean I don't recollect any examples
where both arguments are
> coded with pronominal prefixes.  One argument is
always third person and
> so either zero-coded (so to speak) or unencoded.
>
> JEK
>