Talk:Unergative verb

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Error : ergatives are truly intransitive[edit]

There is an error in the last sentence. "In other words, ergatives are truly intransitive, unergatives are not." should be : "In other words, unergatives are truly intransitive, ergatives are not."

It is in contradiction with the first sentence of the article and the definiton given in he article on ergative verbs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisblom86 (talkcontribs) 13:26, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

--Chrisblom86 (talk) 13:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Merge discussion[edit]

I agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.32.126.14 (talk) 17:34, 23 October 2007

To merge the unergative entry with unaccusative is not a good idea. Leaving the hope of figuring out a coherent derivation for both types of verbs, descriptively, they can be (at least) two different verb types with different syntactic distribution. A hyperlink that linking the two entries (as it is now) is a better idea (than merge).

Tomatoprincess (talk) 09:29, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Agree to merge. If every intransitive verb is either unaccusative or unergative, with a gray area in the middle, then I believe that the distinction is best presented in a single article. The unaccusative verb article is currently in much better shape than this one, and I don't see what could be added here that isn't already in the other article, or equally relevant to the other article. CapnPrep (talk) 14:48, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Agree to merge. Moreover, it might be a good idea to merge them further into intransitive verb, where we can explain in full detail these different denotations. Then we can also compare them, altogether, to ergative verbs and accusative verbs which are quite similar except that instead of being intransitive, they are ambitransitive (which, incidentally, is also covered in intransitive verb). In short: merge unergative verb and unaccusative verb into intransitive verb. Keith Galveston (talk) 06:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the tag, and left the articles separate.Comhreir (talk) 02:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
I have re-proposed the original, less ambitious merge, for which the consensus above was mostly favorable. I think people were just waiting for someone to do the dirty work, but in the meantime let's keep the discussion open. CapnPrep (talk) 03:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Ok it's been a year and nothing has happened. I'm taking the tag off. Comhreir (talk) 14:49, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Dutch example[edit]

The Dutch example says that the verbs can be passivised, but then the example has a * indicating that it isn't allowed. Which is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.186.93.103 (talk) 15:27, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The * pertain to the English translation of the Dutch example. The Dutch example is well-formed, the English translation is not. --Chrisblom86 (talk) 13:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Another way of looking at "run"[edit]

Can it be that the verb "run" can be either an ergative verb or an unergative verb, depending on its meanings? Like below:

ergative: The computer runs. I run the computer.

unergative: The man runs. (man is the agent)

Keith Galveston (talk) 06:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Better examples are needed. Resign also can be transitive. If I resign an office, then that office is resigned. Rwflammang (talk) 20:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

resign[edit]

Is that for sure that resign is unergative? How about the recently resigned president ?--84.160.57.62 (talk) 09:25, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

This page needs examples from ergative languages[edit]

Unaccusatives are a somewhat marked construction in nominative/accusative languages. Their counterpart in ergative languages are the unergative verbs. This page really needs examples from ergative languages to properly demonstrate the concept. --Curiousdannii (talk) 15:15, 16 October 2017 (UTC)