Optional ergative case marking systems in a typological-semiotic perspective

Animacy and information structure in the system of ergative marking in Umpithamu

“…Specifically, I will show that the system in Umpithamu is governed by a combination of a principle of animacy (inanimate arguments get marked) and a principle of information structure (focused arguments get marked), and thus constitutes a mixed system at the interface between the semantic and the pragmatic organization of the clause. Similar systems of optional ergative marking (henceforth OEM) have been observed in a number of other Australian languages (see, for instance, Schmidt, 1985;McGregor, 1992McGregor, , 2006Pensalfini, 1999;Schultze-Berndt, 2006;Meakins and O'Shannessy, 2010;Gaby, 2010), and in other parts of the world (see McGregor, 2010), but the combination of factors found in Umpithamu is fairly unique, especially the association with the local information structure principle of focus. Some authors have argued that OEM is typical of moribund languages, and that it can be attributed to language attrition and language death (see, for instance, Schmidt, 1985:386-387;Pensalfini, 1999).…”

Differential Agent Marking and animacy

“…9 There are, however, a number of so-called ''optional ergative'' languages (see McGregor, 2010) in my sample where animacy is one, but not the only, feature governing the use of the ergative marker. In these languages, ergative marking is obligatory for inanimates whereas it is optional for animates, i.e.…”

“…Although this type of phenomenon has been claimed for a few languages, I will show that it is, in its ''pure'' form at least, not reliably attested. There are, however, a number of the so-called ''optional ergative'' languages (see McGregor, 2010) where animacy is one, but not the only feature that plays a role in the use or non-use of the ergative marker. In these languages, inanimate Agents are obligatorily marked by the ergative case marker, whereas this ergative marker is only optional for animates (Ø/ERG vs ERG).…”

“…All these languages thus have obligatory ergative marking for inanimates, whereas the principles governing ergative marking for animates vary. The only recurring feature seems to be something along the lines of ''focality'' (see also McGregor (2010McGregor ( :1619 and Malchukov (2008:215)), but the exact definition of this concept varies from language to language. In this section, I have shown that there are no clear attestations of a language with zero marking for all animate Agents and ergative marking for all inanimate Agents (Ø vs ERG).…”

Borrowing contextual inflection: evidence from northern Australia

“….] may be either present or absent from an NP of a specifiable type without affecting the grammatical role borne by that NP'' (McGregor 2010). Often the ergative marker in optional ergative languages takes on discourse functions.…”