Another interpretation is favored by Lambert 1980: 84f., who connects sebetam with sebeta in Etana Morgan tablet i 10 (see commentary below) and other instances in which "the accusative
sebettam" is "used to qualify a noun in another case."
867) does he indicate accusative
plurals in -is or -es, respectively.
Instead, we need a construction requiring a double accusative
. When comparing one of the few other cases in Vedic prose of ajigamisati a solution is ready at hand: In AB 3.24.13 we learn what to do with cows acquired away from home:
'N/S/E/W of' of dative, in charters mainly proper to south Wessex though also a patch of Worcs and Warks, more than accusative
, normal elsewhere.
when the friends milk the udder of Prsni" (a.ii) XNOM milks Zsubstance ACC: (RV 9.34.3c) duhanti sakmana payah "They obtain milk [by milking] with strength." The transitive constructions a.i and a.ii can be combined, yielding double accusative
The first possibility is the accusative
of the first person singular pronoun mi in Etruscan, variously spelled as mini, mine, min, mene, men and, once, mi (the last variant explained as an instance of haplography by Rix, La scrittura, 229).
>nat (nominative, accusative
) / of personal pronoun
Terescenko's interpretations appears somewhat questionable also in the following cases of Tundra Nenets: with a nominative object (7) and with an accusative
object (8) ([TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] 1973 178).
In Lowe 2013a I argue that what connects these three forms is the fact that their dependent accusatives
all have the thematic role of "experiencer" in relation to the noun.
For Pashto relative clauses we have the same hypotheses that we had for the mono-clausal constructions namely that -features agreement between T and the relevant nominal results in assigning nominative Case to that nominal while -features agreement between or Voice and the relevant nominal results in assigning accusative
Case to that nominal.
Whenever an object is marked with the definite article, it must be preceded by et, traditionally analyzed as a dummy accusative
case marker (Berman 1978 and others).
Morphologically in the present and future tenses ao conjoined subjects show nominative Cases while in the past tense they show accusative
Weord/wyrd has accusative
-e as if feminine over most of the country; nominatives Gloucs S467 wyrp, Sussex S50(iv) uuyrth show that the -e is an inflectional ending.
Pashto unergatives like other Pashto constructions are characterized by split- ergativity with reference to tense; thus the subject nominal shows the nominative Case1 in the present and the future tenses and the accusative
Case in the past tense which requires the assignment of the two Cases by two different functional heads.
(According to Callaway (1918: 47) it is "the Nominative of the Appositive Present Participle with an Accusative