AbessiveCase AblativeCase AbsolutiveCase AccusativeCase AdessiveCase AllativeCase AversiveCase BenefactiveCase ComitativeCase ContablativeCase ContallativeCase ConterminativeCase ContlativeCase DativeCase DelativeCase ElativeCase ErgativeCase EssiveCase GenitiveCase IllativeCase InablativeCase InallativeCase InessiveCase InstrumentalCase InterablativeCase InterallativeCase InteressiveCase InterlativeCase InterminativeCase InterterminativeCase IntertranslativeCase IntranslativeCase LativeCase LocativeCase MalefactiveCase NominativeCase ObliqueCase PartitiveCase PerlativeCase PossessedCase SubablativeCase SuballativeCase SubessiveCase SublativeCase SubterminativeCase SubtranslativeCase SuperablativeCase SuperallativeCase SuperessiveCase SuperlativeCase SuperterminativeCase SupertranslativeCase TerminativeCase TranslativeCase VocativeCase
CaseProperty is the class of properties that concerns the grammatical encoding of a noun's relationship (syntactic or semantic) to some other element in the sentence, such as a verb, noun, pronoun, or adposition [Pei and Gaynor 1954: 35; Crystal 1980: 53-54; Anderson 1985: 179-180; Andrews 1985: 7172; Kuno 1973: 45; Blake 2001].
| Properties | Values | Definition |
|---|
Pertinentive Case is postulated for the description of Etruscan where it had two closely connected functions, namely, indirect object and beneficiary, when used in conjunction with a transitive verb such as *muluvanice* 'gave (as a gift)':
mini aranth ramuthasi vestiricinala muluvanice
I.ACC Aranth.NOM Ramutha.PERT Vestiricinai.PERT gave.PAST.ACTIVE
'Aranth gave me to/for Ramutha Vestiricinai.'
The original function of the pertinative may have been to express the locative of the genitive:
serturiesi
serturie-s-i
Serturie.GEN.LOC
"in the (workshop) of Serturie" (ascribed on a ceramic)
References:
Wallace, Rex E. (2008), Zikh Rasna. A Manual of the Etruscan Language and Inscriptions. Beech Stave Press. Ann Arbor, New York, p.97-99.
Properties too long, need to have a line break
"Aesthetive case" refers to a special form of subjects of transitive accidental event verbs that is formally identical to the dative/locative marker. Aesthetic subject marking is characteristic for West Tibetan dialects, but only rarely found in Lhasa Tibetan. (Zeisler 2004)
From a practical point of view this category is relevant because the only syntactically annotated corpus of Tibetan makes use of this category. (http://www.sfb441.uni-tuebingen.de/b11/b11annotation.html)
References:
Zeisler, Bettina (2004), Relative Tense and Aspectual Values in Tibetan Languages. A Comparative Study. Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 150, Mouton de Gruyter