Chapter published in:
Argument Selectors: A new perspective on grammatical relationsEdited by Alena Witzlack-Makarevich and Balthasar Bickel
[Typological Studies in Language 123] 2019
► pp. 213–256
Grammatical relations in Movima
Alignment beyond semantic roles
Katharina Haude | CNRS (SeDyL)
Movima (isolate, Bolivia) has two transitive constructions: direct/ergative and inverse/accusative. The most straightforward argument selector is relativization. Relativization selects the P of the direct and the A of the inverse construction, which, in each case, is the argument whose referent ranks lower on scales of person, animacy, and topicality. In terms of constituency, this is the “external” argument, and it aligns with S. Certain oblique-marked arguments can be relativized as well, so relativization is a test to distinguish oblique arguments from adjuncts. Other constructions that privilege the external argument are demonstrative fronting and argument incorporation – although the latter is restricted to the direct construction and therefore also to the P argument. Two constructions select an argument on the basis of its semantic role: possessor ascension privileges P, and imperatives, which participate in the direct/inverse alternation, privilege A. Other cross-linguistically typical argument selectors do not seem to show a preference for a particular argument or semantic role: reflexives, coordination, embedding, and quantifier floating.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The basic clause and its components
- 2.1The direct-inverse system
- 2.2Formal properties of argument encoding
- 2.3Obliques: Adjuncts or oblique arguments?
- 2.4Argument encoding in embedded clauses
- 3.Argument selectors privileging the external argument
- 3.1Headed relative clauses, detransitivization, and negation
- 3.2Verbal RPs
- 3.3Pronoun fronting
- 3.4Wh-questions
- 3.5Oblique arguments? Evidence from relativization
- 3.5.1Relativization of non-core arguments
- 3.5.2Relativization of applied arguments
- 3.6Fronted demonstratives
- 3.7Argument incorporation
- 4.Argument selection based on semantic role
- 4.1Possessor ascension
- 4.2Imperatives
- 5.“Neutral” constructions
- 5.1Reflexives
- 5.2Coordination
- 5.3Embedding
- 5.4Floating quantifiers
- 6.Conclusion
- Symbols and abbreviations in glosses
-
Notes -
References
Published online: 05 March 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.123.07hau
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.123.07hau
References
Aissen, Judith
Bickel, Balthasar
Citko, Barbara
DeLancey, Scott
Dixon, Robert M.W. & Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
Foley, William
Haspelmath, Martin
Haude, Katharina & Zúñiga, Fernando
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.
Kaufman, Daniel
Keenan, Edward
Schachter, Paul
Shibatani, Masayoshi
Silverstein, Michael
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
Haude, Katharina
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.