Basic classes - ARGUMENTS

Question 1

what is S?

Answer 1

S = Subject-like
Only core argument of a monovalent predicate

Often coincides with a syntactic Subject.
> But not always.
> NOT a syntactic Subject.

Question 2

What is A?

Answer 2

A = Agent-like
The most agent-like argument of a divalent predicate.

Most frequently express agentive participants.
> When there is one.
> But not always.

Question 3

What is O?

Answer 3

O = Patient-like
(also called P)
The most patient-like argument
of a divalent predicate.

Most frequently express patientive participants.
> When there is one.
 # Patient semantic role.
 # Syntactic Object.

Question 4

what are Universal syntactic-semantic primitives

Answer 4

S = only argument of monovalent predicate
A = most agent-like argument of divalent predicate
O = most patient-like argument of divalent predicate
> Sometimes called P

Misleading labels
 S is NOT a syntactic Subject.
 A is NOT a semantic Agent.
 O is NOT a syntactic Object.
 (Nor a semantic Patient (P).)

Semantic-syntactic primitives are ‘nothing’.
 Which makes them useful in typology!

Question 5

Universal primitives are NOT core syntactic relations

Answer 5

Subject and Object are ‘grammatical relations’.
> On the basis of syntactic properties (‘deep’).

E.g. Subjects control gapping.
- The man saw the child and Ø laughed.

 NOT formal marking (morphology, word order etc.).
 S are often Subjects but not always.

Question 6

Universal primitives NOT Semantic roles

Answer 6

A and P allude to semantic roles.
> Agent is a common label for ‘who does the action’.
> As are often Agents, but many As are not.

Paul (A-Patient) predeceased John (O-patient) by two years.

Question 7

What is alignment?

Answer 7

Two of these arguments (SAO) align with eachother
> contrasting with the third one
> diff langs do it in different ways

asking: Which of the primitives align?

Question 8

In ENGLISH S is encoded like A (nominitive-accusative)

Answer 8

Word order
- S and A both precede the verb
> children sleep a lot/children like lollies
> ?lollies like children

Pronouns
- S and A encoded by the same set
> he arrived / he saw him
> *him saw he

Question 9

not all langs align S with A. FIVE logical possibilities/ FOUR actual possibilities

Answer 9

1. [S] [A, O] Accusative focus NOT PLAUSIBLE
2. [A] [S] [O] Tripartite
3. [A, S, O] Neutral
4. [A, S] [O] Nominative-Accusative
5. [A] [S, O] Ergative-Absolutive

Question 10

tripartite alignment

[A] [S] [O]

Answer 10

S, A and O all encoded differently.
[A] [S] [O]
> Exceptional.
> Attested in Burmese (Sino-Tibetan, Myanmar)
> Uneconomical?

Question 11

neutral alignment

[A, S, O]

Answer 11

S, A and O all encoded in the same way

> Rare but attested.

• EG Thai (Kra-Dai, Thailand) has no formal marking of arguments.
  - relies entirely on context.

> Problem for effective communication?
Alignment of two of the arguments is a lot more common

Question 12

accusative alignment

[A, S] [O]

Answer 12

S is encoded like A
> S + A = nominative case
> O alone = accusative case

Nom/acc alignment - like ENGLISH “accusative languages”

> DOMINANT ALIGNMENT

• C. 75% of world langs
• all langs have some form of accusative alignment

Question 13

Ergative alignment

[A] [S,O]

Answer 13

S is encoded like O
> S + O = absolutive case
> A alone = ergative case.

erg/abs alignment

> SIGNIFICANT MINORITY
- 25% of the world languages
 Australia, South America
 E.g. Dyirbal (PN, Dyirbalic, Australia)
 The historical example (Dixon 1972).
 South-East Asia
 Papua New-Guinea

rarely fully ergative - lots of LIMITATIONS

Question 14

DEEP ERGATIVITY

Answer 14

How arguments behave syntactically in clause chaining.
> I.e. proper ergative syntactic subjects.
> The notion of syntactic ‘pivot’

In English the syntactic pivot is S/A.
The man saw the child and Ø laughed.
> Gapped argument A combines with S.
> If A is omitted , it is the same as S in previous clause.
>It’s a nominative S/A pivot

Deeply ergative languages have an S/O pivot.
> As if we could say in English
The man saw the child and Ø laughed
> When it is the child who laughed.

RARE
handful of langs in australia
some cases disputed
>Lezgian (north caucasian)

Question 15

Split ergativity

Answer 15

Some elements in the language align ergatively.
> others accusatively

(Warlpiri, PN, Ngumpin-Yapa, Aust.)

• Independent pronouns and nouns align ergatively.
• Person suffixes align accusatively

Question 16

Optional ergativity

Answer 16

(Dalabon, nPN, Australia)
>Usually with pragmatic functions.
> I.e. information structure.