| Budget Amount *help |
¥1,900,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,900,000)
Fiscal Year 2002: ¥600,000 (Direct Cost: ¥600,000)
Fiscal Year 2001: ¥500,000 (Direct Cost: ¥500,000)
Fiscal Year 2000: ¥800,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000)
|
|---|
| Research Abstract |
Among languages it is common that the agent, the effector and the experiencer are all marked in the nominative case. Similarly, in many languages the patient, the theme and the locative are all marked in the accusative case. To explain these facts it may be useful to introduce the concept 'semantic macrorole'. This concept comprises two macroroles : the actor and the undergoer. The agent and some other thematic roles can be subsumed under the actor, while the patient and some other thematic roles can be subsumed under the undergoer.
In the Finnish language it is peculiar that the same set of cases, I.e.the nominative, the genitive and the partitive, is available to indicate both the subject and the object. Apparently the actor and the undergoer are not helpful to explain the case marking of core arguments in the Finnish language. However, the difference in the case marking between the Finnish language and many other languages is not so large as it looks. In the Finnish language both the object that is not a typical undergoer participant and the subject that is not a typical actor participant serve as a theme argument, just like the post-verbal argument of the existential sentence and the possessive construction. To indicate these arguments both the nominative and the partitive are available. The nominative is primarily the case for a typical actor indeed, but it can also be assigned to a theme argument. In the same way, although the partitive is primarily the case for a typical undergoer, it can also be assigned to a theme argument. The genitive, by contrast, is available only for a typical undergoer participant, except when it is assigned to the subject of a non-finite predicate.
|
