Re: Be and Have in Hebrew, and ACC case

Joachim Pense wrote:
>
> Peter T. Daniels:
>
> > Rachel Jones wrote:
> >>
> >> No, they are not both - passive tranformations preserve semantic roles
> >> whilst reversing syntatic roles. No matter how a sentence expresses "I
> >> have the book," "I" and "the book" have the same semantic roles, but not
> >> always the same syntactic roles. In Hebrew, the appearance of et depends
> >> on syntax, not semantics.
> >
> > Invoking "transformations" is an awfully archaic approach to generative
> > grammar.
> >
>
> For me as a non-linguist "transformation" seems to be a practical way of
> denoting the concept "change the form, keep the content". Like in "put this
> sentence into the passive voice".

It was Chomsky's usage from 1957 till about 1970. Passives are no longer
understood as being derived from some more basic active form of a
sentence.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@xxxxxxx
.

Quantcast