Valency

> "This is her" is an example of treating the verb
> "to be" as though it were *transitive* (that is,
> it is something that you can do *to* something
> else: like "see" - I can not only see, but I can
> also "see my screen" (thus "see" is transitive)-
> as opposed to "go" - while I can go, I can't "go"
> something else ("go" is intransitive).

Depends on how you analyze the English usage - I prefer the
explanation that the oblique (object) pronoun forms "her, him" etc
have been reanalyzed to cover compliments and "independent" positions
as well, formerly covered by the subject forms "she, he". "Who's
there? - Me." is an example of a pronoun in independent position;
see the same phenomenon in French: "L'état? - C'est moi" ("c'est je"
has long ceased to be even correct in French).

> Verb transitivity is *language specific*. So you
> cannot count on a verb that is in/transitive in
> English being in/transitive in another language.

Very true :) You can especially not count on words that are only of
the *same meaning* working the same; cognates, however, are slightly
more reliable.

> Transitivity tells you whether a verb takes
> direct objects or not. As verbs in declined
> languages can take indirect objects or no objects
> at all, it is better to use the concept of
> "valences".

"Valencies?" (maybe both are used) :)

Thanks for your post, Deep Stream; enlightened discussion on language
differences and universal language concepts such as valency are useful
here. Hope nobody gets lost in the technicalities though :)

Óskar