[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Is it possible to summarize the mechanisms for answering questions about verbs; in other words, marking the verb's places? QUESTION 1: What is the action? MECHANISM: Tense marker, or non-tense- specific verb marker. QUESTION 2: Who or what acts? MECHANISM: Position before verb. QUESTION 3: Who or what is acted upon? MECHANISM: Position after verb, plus marker separating verb from object phrase (such as noun phrase marker). QUESTION 4: What is the target of the action? MECHANISM: Indirect object marker. QUESTION 5: Where is action performed? MECHANISM: Verb-as-preposition. So far, so good. Now I get fuzzy: QUESTION 6: Why is action performed? MECHANISM: Functional that marks a phrase that describes the purpose? QUESTION 7: When is action performed? MECHANISM: Time modifier? Tense marker? QUESTION 8: How is action performed? MECHANISM: Verb modifier? Could these latter three all be handled with verbs-as-prepositions, like #5? On a related note, I thought this morning that maybe some verbs have a second indirect object: the source or origin. S returns D to I1 from I2. Any verb represents a transaction...a change of state. This change of state has an agent (or Subject); a focus (or Direct object); a patient (or Indirect object); and perhaps an origin? The origin is usually the same as the subject, but not always. 'I think a thought to myself from me.' We tend to think of 'think' as a 2-place, or intransitive, verb. It's easy to leave out all the places except the subject, 'I'. 'I tell the truth to you from me.' We think of 'tell' as a 3-placer, figuring that the origin 'me' is always the same as the subject 'I'. 'I pass the salt to Ma from Pa.' Shouldn't 'pass' be considered a 4-place verb? How about 'return'? If so, do we need one more marker for the origin role? --Krawn