Alignment shift as functional markedness reversal

Abstract

In this paper, we propose treating alignment shift as a process of functional markedness reversal in the domain of semantically transitive constructions. We illustrate how this approach allows us to capture similarities between the alignment shifts in Eskimo-Aleut and Western Austronesian languages, despite morphosyntactic differences in their voice systems. Using three diagnostics of functional markedness (semantic transitivity, topic continuity of P, and discourse frequency), we compare antipassive and ergative constructions in Eskimo-Aleut varieties and actor voice (av) and undergoer voice (uv) constructions in Western Austronesian varieties. We argue that ergative alignment is equivalent to a functionally unmarked P-prominent construction (e.g., ergative, uv), whilst accusative alignment is equivalent to a functionally unmarked A-prominent construction (e.g., antipassive, av). On this basis, we claim that both language groups are undergoing a parallel shift from ergative to accusative, since A-prominent constructions are functionally marked in more conservative varieties, but lose their functionally marked character and begin to function as unmarked transitive constructions in more innovative varieties.

Ergativity and object movement across Inuit

“…The remainder of this section further examines the triangulation between ergativity, object movement, and object agreement across Inuit from a potential diachronic perspective. As mentioned in §2.2, the variation in ergativity found in Inuit is often taken to be a syntactic change in progress; under such an approach, the variation in ergative case patterning across Inuit instantiates a gradual loss of ergativity, that is, a shift from ergative to accusative case alignment (Johns 1999, Carrier 2012, Allen 2013, Janic & Hemmings 2021. Because Labrador Inuttut has the most restricted ergative patterning, it may be understood as representing the variety furthest along in this syntactic change; Inuktitut instantiates an intermediate stage, while Kalaallisut is the most linguistically conservative.…”

“…The contrast between Kalaallisut and Labrador Inuttut (and other Eastern Canadian Inuit varieties) has been framed by various authors as diachronic in nature (Johns 1999, Carrier 2012, Allen 2013, Janic & Hemmings 2021. Under this view, the latter may be described as displaying a gradual loss of ergativity and a concomitant shift toward an accusative case system.…”