The properties of certain classes of indirect verbs and passives of state in modern Georgian
The University of Chicago
Indirect constructions in Georgian have been discussed with respect to several types of verbs in the literature. When a particular construction is identified as “indirect“ (or “inverse“), the investigator generally invokes a line of argumentation which relies upon comparison with a putatively similar predicate or predicate type in an Indo-European language. Our personal feeling is that for the purposes of linguistic analysis it is more productive to view the so-called “indirect“ verbs as basic – rather than as derived – structural types within Georgian grammar. However, in the present paper we would like to avoid becoming enmeshed in that dispute by starting from a different analytical perspective. Specifically, we will attempt to delimit a class of verbs based on a formal definition and examine the characteristics of the members of that class. It will turn out that the majority of the verbs involved have been clssified as “indirect“ by one investigator or another, but we would prefer to view that as a secondary, though certainly interesting result. The more important result is the significance of this sort of analysis for classification within the Georgian verbal system. In particular, it supports posting a class that includes two types of verbs which other investigators have generally partitioned into two distinct classes.
ISBN 9783895869198. 24pp. Languages of the World 21. 2000.