This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

From that definition, to me looks like 'accusative verbs' are the same as 'common ambitransitive' verbs (I've seen the term 'agentive ambitransitive' too). Is that right? Xavier 02:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a parallel proposal to Talk:Ergative verb#Merge with Unaccusative verb. There has already been some discussion about merging on Talk:Unergative verb. However, I am proposing either two parallel merges, or a four-way merge into a single Accusative and ergative verbs article. Please discuss this at the link given above. CodeCat (talk) 00:26, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, what became of this merge proposal? This article is an 8-year-old stub which has obviously been forgotten. As it stands, it is incomprehensible and serves no purpose whatsoever. If nobody is planning to do anything with it, perhaps it should be deleted? --Doric Loon (talk) 09:40, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just a few days ago another user opposed merging at Talk:Ergative verb. CodeCat (talk) 16:22, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have expanded the article to add clarification of the concepts, using information from the related articles on ambitransitive verbs, unergative verbs etc, which do have citations, but it still needs its own individual citations. Kanjuzi (talk) 12:13, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked here and there for citations and find very few. The phrase 'accusative verb' is much less commonly used than 'unaccusative verb', surprisingly, and perhaps it is not a recognised technical term of linguistics. Does this phrase come in any dictionary of linguistics, I wonder? Obviously an accusative verb is one that takes the accusative case (just as, in German grammars, a dative verb is one that takes the dative case), but is there any work that defines it as a verb like 'eat' that normally takes a direct object but can optionally have its object deleted? If accusative verb is not the technical term for this, what is? Kanjuzi (talk) 14:07, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The definition as well as the example 'break' seems to suggest at least a partial overlap with ergative verb, which is a bit surprising.--94.155.68.202 (talk) 02:41, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have never heard this term, and since no citations are given, I am a little sceptical. We can have an article on this topic if EITHER "accusative verb" is a widely-used and generally acknowledged category, which I really don't think it is, OR if it is a technical category in the terminology of a narrower school of linguistics, which I suppose is possible. In the latter case, though, we urgently need the names and credentials of the linguists who are using the category, and serious discussion of the place it has in their theories. If these can't be found, I would be tempted to open a deletion debate. It is not OK to have this article just because somebody remebers their schoolteacher using the word. We all have our personal shorthands for things, but those are not encyclopedic. --Doric Loon (talk) 21:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Doric Loon: Agree 100%. If the term actually exists outside of Wikipedia, with the meaning presented here, it is definitely below the margin of detectability when using standard search methods. So we need not bother whether it is in use in some limited circles or not. It is not common usage among specialists, and therefore does not meet the WP:Notability criterion. I will boldly merge it to Ambitransitive verb#Agentive and patientive. If later on someone comes up with a valid source proving the notability, or at least the mere existence of this term, we can ask them: "Where have you been for the last 10 years?" –Austronesier (talk) 15:14, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]