This article opens a volume of detailed descriptions of grammatical relations in thirteen languages. It begins by outlining new developments in the research on grammatical relations in the recent years. It then introduces the framework for studying and describing grammatical relations developed in Bickel (2010b) and Witzlack-Makarevich (2011). This framework served as a guideline to the contributors of the present volume in preparing individual accounts. I first present the various properties of arguments, which are understood as compound categories made up of both generalized semantic roles S, A, P, T, and G, as well as of their lexical and referential specifications. I then proceed to various conditions on grammatical relations and, finally, introduce the concept of argument selectors and illustrate their common types with examples from the languages of the present volume, as well as from other languages.
This chapter analyses grammatical roles in Sanzhi Dargwa, a Nakh-Daghestanian language spoken in central Daghestan (Russian Federation). It also provides an overview on argumenthood and valency patterns. Sanzhi Dargwa combines head marking and dependent marking. It has a rich case inventory and two independently operating agreement systems: gender/number agreement and person agreement. Sanzhi has ergative alignment at the morphological level, namely in the gender/number agreement and the case marking. Outside the realm of morphology there are almost no indications for ergativity. Instead, accusative alignment, neutral alignment and no alignment are found. Person agreement and reflexivization/reciprocalization are neutral. In contrast, relativization largely depends on a suitable context and does not make use of grammatical roles at all.
This study investigates the relevance of the generalized semantic roles S, A, P, T, and G and whether there are constructions that treat subsets of these identically, defining Grammatical relations in Mon, (Austroasiatic). After establishing the notion of transitivity in Mon, the study looks at syntactic constructions that are cross-linguistically found to be relevant the selection of Grammatical Relations, including word order, case marking, control, reflexivization, among others. The results show that Mon exhibits identical treatment of S and A (‘Subject’) in most constructions, less prominently of P and T (‘Direct Object’), as well as a subset {P, G} in at least one construction. Grammatical Relations are found to be relevant for the description and analysis of Mon.
In typological work on grammatical relations, languages of the Philippines have long presented challenges. The challenges are due in part to differences across the languages, and in part to the nature of the data underlying analyses. Here the system is described for one Philippine language, Hiligaynon. Basic clause structures are described, then alternations involving causatives, applicatives, reflexives, middles, and reciprocals. Choices among these constructions are examined in context, revealing effects of referent properties (animacy, identifiability, specificity), and information flow through discourse (topicality, topic shifts, focus). Argument structure constraints on individual syntactic constructions are then detailed: imperatives, quantifier float, conjunction reduction, nominalization, content questions, relativization, secondary predication, and complementation. Examination of alternations in context allows us to refine existing typological generalizations and build new ones.
This article presents the grammatical relations (GRs) of Standard Basque (isolate, Spain and France) as explored in terms of argument selection as instantiated by different constructions (i.e., the coding and behavioral properties usually discussed in the literature on alignment). The language emerges as showing comparatively simple dependent-marking patterns with quite intricate head-marking patterns (especially regarding morphological marking). These patterns combine accusative “deep syntax” with neutral “surface syntax” on the one hand, as well as coding patterns usually framed in terms of split ergativity (tam- and person-based) and split intransitivity (lexically based) on the other.
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.
Grammatical relations in Balinese show good empirical evidence for the classification of syntactic dependents into core arguments, obliques and adjuncts. One of the core arguments is selected as Pivot, a well-defined syntactic notion with certain exclusive selectors, such as control and relativisation. The selectors distinguishing core arguments from obliques and adjuncts include phrasal flagging, fixed structural positioning, and possibility of quantifier float, depictive predicates, and argument elision in imperatives. Pivot selection and valence-changing operations, such as applicativisation, provide ample evidence for a symmetrical voice system, and clausal arguments which do not constitute a distinct grammatical relation. These properties, particularly that of passive-like voice alternation without demoting the actor argument to an oblique, pose a challenge in linguistic typology and linguistic theory.
In this paper, after establishing on a strictly language-internal basis the distinction between four possible syntactic positions for arguments in Mandinka predicative constructions, and analyzing alignment relationships in the coding properties of arguments, I discuss alignment in the syntactic operations and constructions likely to be relevant to the definition of grammatical relations. Most of them confirm the S = A ≠ P alignment apparent in the coding properties of arguments. However, Mandinka also has several constructions or operations with no differentiation between S, A and P, a few others in which A and P behave differently and S is aligned with P, and one with a tripartite treatment of S, A and P.
This chapter describes grammatical relations in the North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic. Telkepe Neo-Aramaic has nominative-accusative alignment. The core arguments that can be clearly distinguished are subject, direct object of a transitive verb, dative object of a ditransitive verb and theme of a ditransitive verb. Core grammatical relations are predominantly encoded on the verb and there is no case-marking, while word order is conditioned not by syntactic roles but by information structure. Up to three arguments may be indexed on the verb, but only subjects are always indexed on the verb. In certain constructions, specific semantic roles may be indexed: one suffix may index a goal, affectee or human source, while another indexes location or metaphorically expresses ability. Telkepe exhibits a type of differential object marking, conditioned by definiteness and topicality and manifested in two separate ways: indexing on the verb and (less consistently) flagging of the object with a dative preposition. Telkepe shows an unusual inversion in the syntactic roles of the indexes on verbs. The suffix set which indexes the subject in Present Base forms indexes the object in Past Base forms, while the suffix set which indexes the object in Present Base forms indexes the subject in Past Base forms.
This paper describes a number of argument selectors for grammatical relations in Kubeo, an Eastern Tukanoan language spoken in the Vaupes River area in Northwestern Amazonia. The main selectors discussed in this paper are: verbal agreement, case marking, constituent ordering, causative, applicative, non-finite clauses, passive, noun incorporation and anaphoric constructions. The overwhelming grammatical pattern selects S, A, and Aditr for similar treatment in contrast to the remaining argument types; some constructions suggest a distinction between two types of S arguments, which we analyze as Sa versus Sp. The language presents the phenomenon of differential object marking, as well as analytical challenges related to non-canonical passivization and the way that animacy, referentiality and argument hierarchies correlate in the organization of grammatical relations.
This paper describes a number of selectors for grammatical relations in Yaqui. The main selectors discussed in the paper include case marking, word order, suppletion, passive and valency-increasing mechanisms, control and anaphoric constructions. The study reveals two crucial aspects: Yaqui is a good example of a language where grammatical relations can be characterized as a construction-specific category, and the distinction between core and non-core arguments is essential to determine the selected argument in particular constructions.
This article provides an analysis of the grammatical relations in Yakkha (Tibeto-Burman, Kiranti; Eastern Nepal). The study is based on the typological-theoretical framework established in Bickel (2011a) and Witzlack-Makarevich (2011). Yakkha does not have a dominant grammatical relation. It is rather a prime example for how diverse alignment patterns can be in a single language. The alignment patterns established by some argument selectors are role-based (i.e. accusative, ergative, etc.), while other argument selectors, particularly the verbal person marking, prefer reference-based selection principles. The verbal person marking is the core around which all morphosyntactic processes revolve. An intransitive and a transitive inflectional paradigms can be distinguished. Combined with different case marking options, several verb frames can be identified. Yakkha also has a number of operations affecting valency and transitivity. This article discusses the causative, the benefactive, the reflexive, the reciprocal, the middle, as well as the unmarked passive and antipassive. Yakkha also has a number of biclausal argument selectors: Whereas converbal clauses and participant nominalization show accusative alignment, relativization shows ergative alignment.
This chapter describes grammatical relations in Katla, a Niger-Congo language of Sudan. Katla exhibits a close match between semantic and syntactic valency, and monovalent, bivalent and trivalent verbs can be distinguished by their ability to occur with one, two or three unmarked arguments respectively. Katla shows evidence for the existence of a subject category (including S, A and ADITR, whereby ‘DITR’ as subscript arguments) and of a primary object category (including P and G arguments; but excluding T arguments). Evidence for these categories comes from argument indexing, constituent order and valency-changing morphology. Other potential argument selectors are also discussed, but they provide inconclusive evidence. The chapter concludes with a brief comparison to the closest relative, Tima, showing considerable differences between the two languages.
This article opens a volume of detailed descriptions of grammatical relations in thirteen languages. It begins by outlining new developments in the research on grammatical relations in the recent years. It then introduces the framework for studying and describing grammatical relations developed in Bickel (2010b) and Witzlack-Makarevich (2011). This framework served as a guideline to the contributors of the present volume in preparing individual accounts. I first present the various properties of arguments, which are understood as compound categories made up of both generalized semantic roles S, A, P, T, and G, as well as of their lexical and referential specifications. I then proceed to various conditions on grammatical relations and, finally, introduce the concept of argument selectors and illustrate their common types with examples from the languages of the present volume, as well as from other languages.
This chapter analyses grammatical roles in Sanzhi Dargwa, a Nakh-Daghestanian language spoken in central Daghestan (Russian Federation). It also provides an overview on argumenthood and valency patterns. Sanzhi Dargwa combines head marking and dependent marking. It has a rich case inventory and two independently operating agreement systems: gender/number agreement and person agreement. Sanzhi has ergative alignment at the morphological level, namely in the gender/number agreement and the case marking. Outside the realm of morphology there are almost no indications for ergativity. Instead, accusative alignment, neutral alignment and no alignment are found. Person agreement and reflexivization/reciprocalization are neutral. In contrast, relativization largely depends on a suitable context and does not make use of grammatical roles at all.
This study investigates the relevance of the generalized semantic roles S, A, P, T, and G and whether there are constructions that treat subsets of these identically, defining Grammatical relations in Mon, (Austroasiatic). After establishing the notion of transitivity in Mon, the study looks at syntactic constructions that are cross-linguistically found to be relevant the selection of Grammatical Relations, including word order, case marking, control, reflexivization, among others. The results show that Mon exhibits identical treatment of S and A (‘Subject’) in most constructions, less prominently of P and T (‘Direct Object’), as well as a subset {P, G} in at least one construction. Grammatical Relations are found to be relevant for the description and analysis of Mon.
In typological work on grammatical relations, languages of the Philippines have long presented challenges. The challenges are due in part to differences across the languages, and in part to the nature of the data underlying analyses. Here the system is described for one Philippine language, Hiligaynon. Basic clause structures are described, then alternations involving causatives, applicatives, reflexives, middles, and reciprocals. Choices among these constructions are examined in context, revealing effects of referent properties (animacy, identifiability, specificity), and information flow through discourse (topicality, topic shifts, focus). Argument structure constraints on individual syntactic constructions are then detailed: imperatives, quantifier float, conjunction reduction, nominalization, content questions, relativization, secondary predication, and complementation. Examination of alternations in context allows us to refine existing typological generalizations and build new ones.
This article presents the grammatical relations (GRs) of Standard Basque (isolate, Spain and France) as explored in terms of argument selection as instantiated by different constructions (i.e., the coding and behavioral properties usually discussed in the literature on alignment). The language emerges as showing comparatively simple dependent-marking patterns with quite intricate head-marking patterns (especially regarding morphological marking). These patterns combine accusative “deep syntax” with neutral “surface syntax” on the one hand, as well as coding patterns usually framed in terms of split ergativity (tam- and person-based) and split intransitivity (lexically based) on the other.
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.
Grammatical relations in Balinese show good empirical evidence for the classification of syntactic dependents into core arguments, obliques and adjuncts. One of the core arguments is selected as Pivot, a well-defined syntactic notion with certain exclusive selectors, such as control and relativisation. The selectors distinguishing core arguments from obliques and adjuncts include phrasal flagging, fixed structural positioning, and possibility of quantifier float, depictive predicates, and argument elision in imperatives. Pivot selection and valence-changing operations, such as applicativisation, provide ample evidence for a symmetrical voice system, and clausal arguments which do not constitute a distinct grammatical relation. These properties, particularly that of passive-like voice alternation without demoting the actor argument to an oblique, pose a challenge in linguistic typology and linguistic theory.
In this paper, after establishing on a strictly language-internal basis the distinction between four possible syntactic positions for arguments in Mandinka predicative constructions, and analyzing alignment relationships in the coding properties of arguments, I discuss alignment in the syntactic operations and constructions likely to be relevant to the definition of grammatical relations. Most of them confirm the S = A ≠ P alignment apparent in the coding properties of arguments. However, Mandinka also has several constructions or operations with no differentiation between S, A and P, a few others in which A and P behave differently and S is aligned with P, and one with a tripartite treatment of S, A and P.
This chapter describes grammatical relations in the North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic. Telkepe Neo-Aramaic has nominative-accusative alignment. The core arguments that can be clearly distinguished are subject, direct object of a transitive verb, dative object of a ditransitive verb and theme of a ditransitive verb. Core grammatical relations are predominantly encoded on the verb and there is no case-marking, while word order is conditioned not by syntactic roles but by information structure. Up to three arguments may be indexed on the verb, but only subjects are always indexed on the verb. In certain constructions, specific semantic roles may be indexed: one suffix may index a goal, affectee or human source, while another indexes location or metaphorically expresses ability. Telkepe exhibits a type of differential object marking, conditioned by definiteness and topicality and manifested in two separate ways: indexing on the verb and (less consistently) flagging of the object with a dative preposition. Telkepe shows an unusual inversion in the syntactic roles of the indexes on verbs. The suffix set which indexes the subject in Present Base forms indexes the object in Past Base forms, while the suffix set which indexes the object in Present Base forms indexes the subject in Past Base forms.
This paper describes a number of argument selectors for grammatical relations in Kubeo, an Eastern Tukanoan language spoken in the Vaupes River area in Northwestern Amazonia. The main selectors discussed in this paper are: verbal agreement, case marking, constituent ordering, causative, applicative, non-finite clauses, passive, noun incorporation and anaphoric constructions. The overwhelming grammatical pattern selects S, A, and Aditr for similar treatment in contrast to the remaining argument types; some constructions suggest a distinction between two types of S arguments, which we analyze as Sa versus Sp. The language presents the phenomenon of differential object marking, as well as analytical challenges related to non-canonical passivization and the way that animacy, referentiality and argument hierarchies correlate in the organization of grammatical relations.
This paper describes a number of selectors for grammatical relations in Yaqui. The main selectors discussed in the paper include case marking, word order, suppletion, passive and valency-increasing mechanisms, control and anaphoric constructions. The study reveals two crucial aspects: Yaqui is a good example of a language where grammatical relations can be characterized as a construction-specific category, and the distinction between core and non-core arguments is essential to determine the selected argument in particular constructions.
This article provides an analysis of the grammatical relations in Yakkha (Tibeto-Burman, Kiranti; Eastern Nepal). The study is based on the typological-theoretical framework established in Bickel (2011a) and Witzlack-Makarevich (2011). Yakkha does not have a dominant grammatical relation. It is rather a prime example for how diverse alignment patterns can be in a single language. The alignment patterns established by some argument selectors are role-based (i.e. accusative, ergative, etc.), while other argument selectors, particularly the verbal person marking, prefer reference-based selection principles. The verbal person marking is the core around which all morphosyntactic processes revolve. An intransitive and a transitive inflectional paradigms can be distinguished. Combined with different case marking options, several verb frames can be identified. Yakkha also has a number of operations affecting valency and transitivity. This article discusses the causative, the benefactive, the reflexive, the reciprocal, the middle, as well as the unmarked passive and antipassive. Yakkha also has a number of biclausal argument selectors: Whereas converbal clauses and participant nominalization show accusative alignment, relativization shows ergative alignment.
This chapter describes grammatical relations in Katla, a Niger-Congo language of Sudan. Katla exhibits a close match between semantic and syntactic valency, and monovalent, bivalent and trivalent verbs can be distinguished by their ability to occur with one, two or three unmarked arguments respectively. Katla shows evidence for the existence of a subject category (including S, A and ADITR, whereby ‘DITR’ as subscript arguments) and of a primary object category (including P and G arguments; but excluding T arguments). Evidence for these categories comes from argument indexing, constituent order and valency-changing morphology. Other potential argument selectors are also discussed, but they provide inconclusive evidence. The chapter concludes with a brief comparison to the closest relative, Tima, showing considerable differences between the two languages.