Only transitive verbs can passivize.

[Andrew Patterson]

Now, I know that Basque is an ergative language, although I confess that I don't really know what that means. Everything that has been written here looks like what has traditionally been called "middle voice". Is "ergative" the new term for "middle voice", or am I missing sth here?

[metal56]

Now, I know that Basque is an ergative language, although I confess that I don't really know what that means. Everything that has been written here looks like what has traditionally been called "middle voice". Is "ergative" the new term for "middle voice", or am I missing sth here?

As far as I know, middle voice is when the actor acts upon himself (reflexive) or for his benefit:

But then, we get a warning:

The middle voice is used to express an action done by the subject done in his or her own interest.


Do not think of the middle as the reflexive (as in the sentence "He cut himself"). Wenham (p. 93) says that the middle is more like the active than like the passive — a "sort-of-Active." Classical Greek usually would use the active voice with a reflexive pronoun. In koine Greek, however, the middle sometimes functions as the reflexive.


"He cut himself." (active voice).
"He cut wood [for himself]." (middle voice)

-----

So already we are confused.

---

To make it more confusing one linguist says that it may exist in English in such examles as:

"the ball dropped', because the ball is neither the performer of the action (it didn't drop anything) nor the object (it wasn't dropped by anyone, it just dropped).

Like the subject of the ergative, the subject of the middle voice is;

"diminished (if animate) or promoted (if inamimate) volitionally. That means that it can perform actions upon itself, but is limited in doing so by its very nature. diminished (if animate) or promoted (if inanimate) to a status of incomplete volition, so that it can perform actions on and by itself to a extent that doesn't go beyond its limits. For example, a door can stay closed without anyone having to close it, nor it having to close itself; a person can wander around a place without him/her being pushed and still not specifically wanting too, but driven by his/her own internal forces.

http://www.angelfire.com/ego/pdf/ng/lng ... mv.html#h3

But it is this which brings the middle-voice close to the ergative:

In the shift from active to passive voice, agent and patient are exchanged. In the shift to middle voice, they are merged into one, an experiencer. Note that this also assumes the original verb is transitive, and the new verb is intransitive. The experiencer of the middle voice verb shows the effects of an action or state that is provoked by the experiencer for and by itself.

http://www.angelfire.com/ego/pdf/ng/lng ... mv.html#h2

Mm ...? Ponderous.

[metal56]

Now, I know that Basque is an ergative language, although I confess that I don't really know what that means. Everything that has been written here looks like what has traditionally been called "middle voice". Is "ergative" the new term for "middle voice", or am I missing sth here?

More gems:

In generative syntax, the term "middle" refers to constructions
> like those in the (c) sentences below:
>
> (a) We sell this fruit at the farmer's market.
> (b) This fruit is sold at the farmer's market.
> (c) This fruit sells well at the farmer's market.
>
> (a) We drained these fields quickly.
> (b) These fields were drained quickly.
> (c) These fields drain quickly.



http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi- ... S=&P=21627

[lolwhites]

The post you link to says middle constructions can only be in the present and not refer to events. Am I missing something, given that you can say The fruit sold really well or The fields drained quickly?

[LarryLatham]

...there are quite a few traditionalists who are unwilling to look at things from a wider perspective. Strangely, they seem to be the favourites with students.

It is disconcerting, isn't it? And sad too, because I believe our views are so much more interesting than the traditionalist views, as well as easier to understand and learn. But it's not particularly surprising. Students are subjected to hour after hour after week after month after year of conditioning in the traditionalist view of English grammar. I can imagine students who have struggled and sweated for years to learn whatever they know (whether or not they may be misinformed) about English grammar will not be pleased to hear from the likes of us that all that might be misleading, and now it's necessary for them to learn what they perceive as a different English grammar!

Even though this forum does take up a lot of your time, Larry, I do hope you stick around.

Thanks, M56. I'm not planning to leave anytime soon. I have too much to learn here.

And finally,

Now, I know that Basque is an ergative language, although I confess that I don't really know what that means. Everything that has been written here looks like what has traditionally been called "middle voice". Is "ergative" the new term for "middle voice", or am I missing sth here?

I'm afraid you're way over my head with this, Andy. I'll wait with you to see what our betters have to say.

Larry Latham

[Andrew Patterson]

Metal, I noticed that the two links that you posted for an explanation were concerning a conlang called "Draseléq". Now, the explanations sound convincing, but I was wondering whether the distinctions apply generally, or just to this particular conlang. Don't get me wrong, here; often grammar described in conlang sites can be very informative, I am, for instance, yet to find anything that defines aspect better than Rick Harisson's essay on aspect in invisiblelighthouse, which is squarely aimed at conlangers. The grammar of a conlang is, however, often subtley different from that applied to natural languages, just as for instance what we call the past subjunctive in English, is actually not the same as the classically defined subjunctive, but rather an example of "irrealis."