The syntax of personal agreement in East Caucasian languages

Helmbrecht, Johannes

doi:10.1524/stuf.1996.49.2.127

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 2 publications

(2 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another relevant feature of Lak is that person agreement is obligatory in all, and only in, finite clauses (for detail on person agreement in Lak see Burculadze 1979, Helmbrecht 1996. The most widespread set of person agreement markers is represented in Table 1: SG PL 1 -ra -ru 2 -ra -ru 3 -r(i) -r(i) (The third person marker is -r after vowels and -ri after consonants; the consonant of agreement morpheme undergoes assimilation after /, m, n.) Prototypically, person agreement is triggered by the Patient absohitive NP in the EC 3 :…”

Section: The Ergative Constructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Patient Demotion in Lak

Kazenin¹

1998

Typology of Verbal Categories

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Ergative Constructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Patient Demotion in Lak

Kazenin¹

1998

Typology of Verbal Categories

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Contrary to Standard Avar (based on a Northern Avar dialect), which has no person marking on verbs, Southern Avar dialects are known for having developed some form of person marking. Moreover, the "1st person" form in Southern Avar dialects is of participial origin, like the form that marks assertor's involvement in Akhvakh (Helmbrecht 1996). Note that the fact that Nakh-Daghestanian languages have both "pronominal" (originating from personal pronouns) and "non-pronominal" person markers was already recognized by Troubetzkoy 1929.…”

Section: Similar Developments In Other Languages and The Areal Hypotmentioning

confidence: 90%

The evolution of egophoricity and evidentiality in the Himalayas

Widmer

2017

JHL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The epistemic verbal categories “evidentiality” and “egophoricity” play an important role in the verbal systems of many Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalayas. In the course of the past decades, our synchronic understanding of those grammatical categories has been considerably enhanced by numerous descriptive studies. However, little is still known about the diachronic processes that give rise to evidentiality and egophoricity. The article addresses this gap by discussing evidence from Bunan, a Tibeto-Burman language, for which the development of evidentiality and egophoricity in its past tense system can be reconstructed in detail. It is argued that the evolution of the two categories can be explained by reference to two processes: (i) the reanalysis of a resultative construction as an inferential past tense and (ii) the reanalysis of third person agreement markers as allophoric markers. In addition, it is maintained that the concept of Scalar Quantity Implicature is crucial to account for the evolution of the two categories.

show abstract

“…čʼalnu daw-ri-jatu Ø-učʼ-aj-wa-Ø brother(I) late work-OBL-SPR.ABL I-come-PRS.CVB-PST-3 'Brother came home late from work.' With person markers of Set A, Lak person agreement resembles gender agreement, in that the controller is the argument in the absolutive, regardless of semantic roles (8) (see also [16]) (e.g., Helmbrecht 1996;Kazenin 1998).…”

Section: Personmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender agreement is different

Forker

2018

Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Person and gender are typical agreement features within the clause, and crosslinguistically they are frequently part of one and the same agreement system and even expressed through the same morphological exponents. Some theories even go so far as to claim that person and gender agreement on different targets, e.g., verbs and adjectives, are instances of one and the same agreement phenomenon. This paper discusses gender and person agreement in the Nakh-Daghestanian language Lak. It shows that the two agreement systems are formally and functionally completely separated from each other. Corpus data from Lak does not prove that gender agreement in this language is used to establish reference. Therefore it should rather be treated as concord, that is, similar to modifier agreement within the noun phrase.

show abstract

The syntax of personal agreement in East Caucasian languages

Cited by 7 publications

References 2 publications

On Patient Demotion in Lak

On Patient Demotion in Lak

The evolution of egophoricity and evidentiality in the Himalayas

Gender agreement is different

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About