Basque to Georgian: a dative person is not automatically a recipient
Read the Basque predicate before assigning the person a role
Goenaga distinguishes several functions of a Basque dative phrase. With a transfer verb, it can identify a recipient; with a psychological predicate, it can identify an experiencer. His example Amonari izugarri gustatzen zaio kafea describes grandmother’s strong liking for coffee. It does not say that somebody hands her coffee.
This distinction is especially useful in a Georgian translation of a recommendation accompanying a present. The surrounding gift situation may make receiving salient, but a Basque liking sentence still describes a preference. The dative suffix supplies grammatical evidence only when interpreted with the predicate that licenses it.
Georgian subject roles can have different case forms
The Georgian Universal Dependencies overview lists nominative, ergative and dative as possible subject cases. It also lists nominative or dative direct objects and dative indirect objects. Consequently, the presence of a Georgian dative form does not, by itself, identify a recipient any more than the Basque dative does.
The overview relates case marking and participant agreement to Georgian tense-aspect-mood series and conjugation patterns. A translator therefore needs the target predicate and construction, rather than a permanent table equating a Basque case with one Georgian role. The page is an evolving annotation overview, not a complete lesson authorizing every possible sentence pattern.
A Basque auxiliary can distinguish the liker from what is liked
Laka’s niri zu gustatzen zatzaizkit identifies me as the experiencer and singular you as the person liked. Her plural-you variant changes the auxiliary to zatzaizkidate. These examples show why a familiar-looking person marker should not be treated as an ordinary subject ending detached from the whole construction.
For a Georgian personal message, establish the direction of the judgement before selecting the target verb’s participant markers. A sentence saying the writer likes the addressee must not become one saying the addressee likes the writer. Both versions mention the same people, so checking names alone would not reveal that reversal.
Shared participant agreement does not mean identical paradigms
Laka’s auxiliary analysis distinguishes absolutive, dative and ergative agreement, including three-participant transfer constructions. Georgian UD likewise documents verbs cross-referencing subjects and direct or indirect objects. That similarity helps explain why neither language always needs separate pronouns to express its participants. It does not establish that their person slots or case patterns match.
A Basque message can move from liking a gift to receiving it and then thanking the giver. Follow each predicate separately: the person with a preference, the recipient and the acting person are semantic roles established by different constructions. Keep their identities stable while allowing the Georgian grammar to organize each event in its own way.
Goenaga’s distinction between an experiencer and a beneficiary also prevents a subtle addition. Something can please somebody without having been done for that person’s benefit. A Georgian version should preserve the source judgement rather than turn it into a claim about the giver’s purpose merely because the same person appears in a dative construction.
Language references