Ergativity

Dixon, R. M. W.

doi:10.2307/412519

Cited by 711 publications

(345 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

272

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, while some grammatical properties seem to reverse in these languages, others do not, as pointed out in Dixon (1979Dixon ( , 1994. Perhaps the most significant is that the patient phrase can contain an anaphor that is referentially dependent on the agent phrase as in (10), but the agent phrase cannot contain an anaphor that is dependent on the patient (see Bittner (1994:ch.…”

Section: Ergativitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Thematic Roles and Syntactic Structure

Baker¹

1997

Kluwer International Handbooks of Linguistics

367

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Ergativitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Thematic Roles and Syntactic Structure

Baker¹

1997

Kluwer International Handbooks of Linguistics

367

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The AH is usually considered as: 1/2 > 3 > proper noun/kin term > human common noun > animate common noun > inanimate common noun (cf. for instance Dixon 1979;Comrie 1981;Croft 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advances in the study of Siouan languages and linguistics

Rudin¹,

Gordon²

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Beyond honoring a beloved colleague, our aim in this volume is to bring a variety of issues in Siouan linguistics to the attention of the linguistic community. The Siouan language family is a large and important one, with branches geographically distributed over a broad swath of the North American plains and parts of the southeastern United States. This puts it in contact historically with several other families of languages: Algonquian, Iroquoian, Caddoan, UtoAztecan, and Muskogean. Siouan languages are, or were historically, spoken by the members of at least 25 ethnic/political groups. One Siouan language, Lakota, is among the handful of indigenous North American languages with younger speakers today. Siouan languages have occasionally risen to prominence in general linguistics, for instance in the study of reduplication (Shaw 1980); and Omaha and Crow (Apsaalooke) have lent their names to two of the basic categories of kinship systems in anthropology. Nonetheless, the Siouan family has been underrepresented in the descriptive and typological literature, and most of the languages in the family are severely understudied. The majority of work on Siouan languages is unpublished, existing only in the form of conference papers or manuscripts. 2 This volume is a step toward making information on Siouan languages more broadly available and encouraging deeper investigation of the myriad issues they raise.From the perspective of linguistic typology, Siouan languages have many notable features. Many of these features stand to challenge typological generalizations. Here we briefly sketch a few of the most characteristic features of the Siouan family.1 "Siouan" is not to be confused with "Sioux", a controversial term referring to Lakota and Dakota people, rarely to Nakota/Nakoda people too, but never correctly to people of other traditionally Siouan-language-speaking communities. 2 Many of these unpublished works are collected in the electronic Siouan Archive, maintained by John Boyle at the University of California at Riverside. PrefaceAll Siouan languages possess a rich variety of applicative affixes, confirming Polinsky's (2013) observation that applicatives are common in North America and adding another language family to her list of applicative-rich families in the area. Helmbrecht (2006) divides the applicatives into three templatic slots: locative applicatives, benefactive applicatives, and applicative markers; all of the Siouan languages sampled by Helmbrecht possess at least two applicative morphemes.All Siouan languages are strongly head-final, and the consensus among syntacticians working with Siouan languages is that all but the supraclausal projections (and even some of these) are underlyingly head-final in Siouan languages, contra Kayne's (1994) Antisymmetry theory.All Siouan languages have head-internal relative clauses. A series of strong claims regarding the typological implications of head-internal relative clauses (cf. Cole 1987; Murasugi 2000), including purported distinctions between "Japanesetype" a...

show abstract

“…7 Dixon (1979) trata as línguas com alinhamento semântico como um subtipo de línguas ergativas. 8 O termo sufixo temático é usado em outras línguas da família Aruák para sufixos que têm pouco ou nenhum conteúdo semântico.…”

Section: Classificação Dos Verbos Verbos Transitivosunclassified

As classes verbais da língua Paresi (Aruák)

Brandão

2017

Bol. Mus. Para. Emílio Goeldi. Ciênc. hum.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resumo: O objetivo deste artigo é descrever as classes de verbos em Paresi, uma língua Aruák, falada por aproximadamente 3.000 pessoas no estado do Mato Grosso, Brasil. Em Paresi, os verbos são classificados como intransitivos, transitivos e bitransitivos. Em geral, verbos intransitivos em línguas Aruák são subclassificados em intransitivos ativos e intransitivos estativos. A divisão no grupo de intransitivos é morfologicamente marcada, já que sujeitos de intransitivos estativos e objetos de transitivos são marcados da mesma forma, enquanto os sujeitos de transitivos recebem uma forma diferente. A maioria das línguas Aruák exibem alinhamento semântico, isto é, a seleção da marcação de concordância depende do parâmetro de eventividade. Em Paresi, a divisão nos intransitivos é morfologicamente marcada da seguinte forma: a) alguns intransitivos recebem a mesma marca de sujeito do que os transitivos (proclíticos do grupo A); b) outros intransitivos recebem uma marcação diferente (proclíticos do grupo B Abstract:The goal of this paper is to describe the verb classes of Paresi, an Arawak language, spoken by approximately 3,000 people in the State of Mato Grosso, Brazil. In Paresi, verbs can be classified into intransitive, transitive and ditransitive. In general, intransitive verbs in Arawak languages are subclassified into: active intransitives, and stative intransitives. The division in the group of intransitives is syntactically marked, as subjects of stative intransitive and object of transitive are marked by the same form, while subjects of transitives take a different marking. The majority of Arawak languages exhibits semantic alignment, that is, the selection of agreement marking depends on the eventivity parameter. In Paresi, the division in the intransitives is morphologically marked as the following: a) some intransitive verbs take the same subject marking as transitive verbs (set A proclitics); b) other intransitive verbs take a different subject marking (set B proclitics). Semantically, verbs are classified into agentive and non-agentive. The semantic features of [agentivity] and [control] have an essential role in the assignment of verbos to subclasses. The data were collected during field research and the analysis is based on a functional-typological approach.

show abstract

Ergativity

Cited by 711 publications

References 0 publications

Thematic Roles and Syntactic Structure

Thematic Roles and Syntactic Structure

Advances in the study of Siouan languages and linguistics

As classes verbais da língua Paresi (Aruák)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About