Nominalization of Verbs: Case names for logical subjects and objects

[Quetzalcoatl]

Hey people, please take a look at the following micro-conlang:

bala - destruction
bali - destroy
tako - city
nabibak - soldiers

-n = accusative marker
-ti = genitive/ possessive
-ma = mistery case 1
-ki = mistery case 2

Nabibak bali takon. = The soldiers destroy the city.
Tako nabibakti = the soldiers' city
bala nabibakma takoki = the destruction of the city by the soldiers


This micro-conlang has 5 cases:
1. An unmarked nominative case.
2. An accusative case
3. A genitive case
4. A case for marking the logical subject of a nominalized verb
5. A case for marking the logical object of a nominalized verb

How would you call the cases 4+5? I am really clueless... i am thinking of calling them simply "nominative II" and "accusative II"

[Creyeditor]

Nominalizations sometimes have an ergative-absolutive pattern so you could use these maybe?

[Quetzalcoatl]

Nominalizations sometimes have an ergative-absolutive pattern so you could use these maybe?

I just realized my own native language German does that. Just compare the following sentences:


N = nominative
A = accusative
G = genitive (used like an absolutive case here)
E = durch + Akkusativ (used like the ergative case here)

1a. Die Katze (N) schläft.. => der Schlaf der Katze (G)
1b. Die Kinder (N) lachen. => das Lachen der Kinder (G)
1c. Die Kranken (N )leiden. => das Leid der Kranken (G)
2a. Die Soldaten (N )zerstören die Stadt (A). = die Zerstörung der Stadt (G) (durch die Soldaten) (E)
2b. Der Mechaniker (N) repariert das Auto (A). = die Reparatur des Autos (G) (durch den Mechaniker) (E)
2c. Der Arzt (N) untersucht das Kind (A). = die Untersuchung des Kindes (G) (durch den Arzt) (E)

[eldin raigmore]

In my opinion you can name them whatever you want as long as it hints at what the reader needs to know.

IRL in many natlangs, the subjects and objects of verbal nouns, especially gerunds, are marked with a genitive or possessive case. This probably applies to other nominalized verbs as well.
English is an example, at least for gerunds.

I don’t know of a natlangish example analogous to what you have, but if one turns up I won’t be surprised.

….

Ultimately, what your grammar actually does is more important than what you call it.
The names you suggested are good ones. I can’t think of better ones. Maybe someone else can.

[Omzinesý]

What case does the subject of a nominalized intransitive verb have?
"people's dancing"

I do find terms important when you are describing a language the reader does not know very well.
I think I would call them "Secondary Ergative" and "Secondary Absolutive" or "Secondary Nominative" and "Secondary Accusative", depending how they behave with intransitive verbs.

[eldin raigmore]

What case does the subject of a nominalized intransitive verb have?
"people's dancing"

I do find terms important when you are describing a language the reader does not know very well.
I think I would call them "Secondary Ergative" and "Secondary Absolutive" or "Secondary Nominative" and "Secondary Accusative", depending how they behave with intransitive verbs.

It is important to define your terms; and make sure your readers can find the definitions.
If whatever you’re naming functions much like something that occurs in several natlangs with a well-known theory-neutral name, it is helpful to use that name, since your readers won’t have to go look it up so often.
But even then, describing how it works is more important than choosing the best label.
…
I agree with your suggestions.

[Lambuzhao]

Hey people, please take a look at the following micro-conlang:

bala - destruction
bali - destroy
tako - city
nabibak - soldiers

-n = accusative marker
-ti = genitive/ possessive
-ma = mistery case 1
-ki = mistery case 2

Nabibak bali takon. = The soldiers destroy the city.
Tako nabibakti = the soldiers' city
bala nabibakma takoki = the destruction of the city by the soldiers


This micro-conlang has 5 cases:
1. An unmarked nominative case.
2. An accusative case
3. A genitive case
4. A case for marking the logical subject of a nominalized verb
5. A case for marking the logical object of a nominalized verb

How would you call the cases 4+5? I am really clueless... i am thinking of calling them simply "nominative II" and "accusative II"

Dear Quetzalcoatl- Welcome to CBB from a member who is way out of touch with current state of things, but wlecome nonetheless.

This has next to nothing to do with you micro-lang, but I just had to ask:

Do you know any Coptic?
ⲦⲀⲔⲞ [ta.ko] "destroy"
ⲂⲀⲔⲒ [ba.ki] "city"
ⲃⲁⲗ⸗. [bal] loosen/untie/negate/destroy/melt/unstring (sinews) [form that takes pronominal suffixes]
ⲂⲰⲖ [bo:l] loosen/untie/negate/destroy/melt/unstring (sinews)




Piggybacking on Eldin's post, it might be a double genitive with #4 + #5

i.e.
"the soldiers' destruction of the city" => soldier.PL.GEN destruction GEN DEF.SG city
"their destruction of the city" => 3PL.GEN destruction GEN DEF.SG city

Piggybacking off Ominzesý's post - Check how Mayan langs do this in this article
https://www.lingref.com/cpp/wccfl/32/paper3174.pdf
** SPOILER: Looks like #4 would be Ergative case, and #5 would Absolutive case


Very interesting, though… whichever path you choose

PS: Just gotta love Ancient langs, whose single vocab words like ⲂⲰⲖ have accrued a gazillion different meanings over time, and are definite signposts for conlangers to create semantic nets for own parsimoniously tyro vocab lists