Nankôre: Difference between revisions

Line 1,577:

=====The Copula - Intransitive Paradigm =====

The paradigm for the copula with intransitive verbs is not as elaborate as its transitive counterpart, nevertheless it still displays a great deal of complexity. The intransitive paradigm is used for stative verbs, NP arguments that are semantic Patients, and also for NP arguments whose thematic roles are clearly that of Agents. There is no overt marking on either the main verb or the copula indicating that the NP is an Agent or Patient. Instead, there are intransitive verbs that take only Agents as their core argument, e.g. ''temen'' "to walk downstream" [Agent] vs ''oacir'' "to be carried downriver" [Patient]. The semantic properties of the main verb, rather than morphology, indicate the proper meaning.

The paradigm for the copula with intransitive verbs is not as elaborate as its transitive counterpart, nevertheless it still displays a great deal of complexity. The intransitive paradigm is used for stative verbs, NP arguments that are semantic Patients, and also for NP arguments whose thematic roles are clearly that of Agents.

<!--

There is no overt marking on either the main verb or the copula indicating that the NP is an Agent or Patient. Instead, there are intransitive verbs that take only Agents as their core argument, e.g. ''temen'' "to walk downstream" [Agent] vs ''oacir'' "to be carried downriver" [Patient]. The semantic properties of the main verb, rather than morphology, indicate the proper meaning.

-->

The intransitive paradigm of the copula is listed in the table below:

{| class="bluetable lightbluebg mw-collapsible"

@@ Line 1,577: / Line 1,577: @@
 =====The Copula - Intransitive Paradigm =====
-The paradigm for the copula with intransitive verbs is not as elaborate as its transitive counterpart, nevertheless it still displays a great deal of complexity.  The intransitive paradigm is used for stative verbs, NP arguments that are semantic Patients, and also for NP arguments whose thematic roles are clearly that of Agents. There is no overt marking on either the main verb or the copula indicating that the NP is an Agent or Patient. Instead, there are intransitive verbs that take only Agents as their core argument, e.g. ''temen'' "to walk downstream" [Agent] vs ''oacir'' "to be carried downriver" [Patient].  The semantic properties of the main verb, rather than morphology, indicate the proper meaning.
+The paradigm for the copula with intransitive verbs is not as elaborate as its transitive counterpart, nevertheless it still displays a great deal of complexity.  The intransitive paradigm is used for stative verbs, NP arguments that are semantic Patients, and also for NP arguments whose thematic roles are clearly that of Agents.
+<!--
+There is no overt marking on either the main verb or the copula indicating that the NP is an Agent or Patient. Instead, there are intransitive verbs that take only Agents as their core argument, e.g. ''temen'' "to walk downstream" [Agent] vs ''oacir'' "to be carried downriver" [Patient].  The semantic properties of the main verb, rather than morphology, indicate the proper meaning.
+-->
 The intransitive paradigm of the copula is listed in the table below:
 {| class="bluetable lightbluebg mw-collapsible"