Mensagens: 14
Idioma: English
nornen (Mostrar o perfil) 16 de outubro de 2015 17:51:53
sudanglo (Mostrar o perfil) 17 de outubro de 2015 12:39:44
As a side effect, this derivation may cause a change of valency, but not necessarily:Yes, demonstrated. But this does not establish that sciiĝi can take a direct object (ie like ekscii). That needs a separate proof.
The reply to your argument would be - may cause a change in valency and in this case does.
More supportive of the validity of sciiĝi ion would be a list of iĝi verbs that do take a direct object to demonstrate that this is normal.
Actually, is the term valency directly relevant here? Aren't we simply concerned with whether an iĝi verb can be transitive?
Matthieu (Mostrar o perfil) 17 de outubro de 2015 14:25:27
nornen:They are not transitivizers or intransitivizers.All verbs formed with ig are transitive, all verbs formed with iĝ are intransitive.
PMEG does say that Zamenhof sometimes used sciiĝi as a transitive verb, but this is clearly a weird use that shouldn't be imitated today.
Tempodivalse (Mostrar o perfil) 17 de outubro de 2015 14:34:07
Zamenhof might have been influenced by Russian, where you would say узнать всё, where всё is an accusative. But I would translate this verb as ekscii, transitive, not sciiĝi.