By Jessica Coon
In languages with aspect-based break up ergativity, one element of the grammar follows an ergative development, whereas one other exhibits a "split." during this ebook, Jessica Coon argues that aspectual cut up ergativity doesn't mark a cut up in how case is assigned, yet really, a break up in sentence constitution. particularly, the contexts within which we discover the looks of a nonergative trend in an in a different way ergative language contain further structure--a disassociation among the syntactic predicate and the stem sporting the lexical verb stem.
The e-book starts off with an research of break up individual marking styles in Chol, a Mayan language of southern Mexico. the following visual appeal of break up ergativity follows clearly from the truth that the innovative and the imperfective morphemes are verbs, whereas the perfective morpheme isn't. the truth that the nonperfective morphemes are verbs, mixed with autonomous homes of Chol grammar, leads to the looks of a split.
This publication extra surveys aspectual splits in various unrelated languages and provides an evidence for the common directionality of cut up ergativity: in splits, ergativity is often retained within the perfective element. Following Laka's (2006) notion for Basque, Coon proposes that the cross-linguistic tendency for imperfective features to development with locative buildings is answerable for the biclausality which explanations the looks of a nonergative development. construction on Demirdache and Uribe-Etxebarria's (2000) prepositional account of spatiotemporal relatives, Coon proposes that the perfective isn't periphrastic--and hence by no means consists of a split--because there's no preposition in usual language that properly captures the relation of the assertion time to the event time denoted via the perfective element.
Read or Download Aspects of Split Ergativity PDF
Best grammar books
Artful Sentences: Syntax as Style
In crafty Sentences: Syntax as Style,Virginia Tufte indicates how ordinary sentence styles and varieties give a contribution to which means and paintings in additional than one thousand amazing sentences from the 20th and twenty-first centuries. The e-book has distinctive curiosity for aspiring writers, scholars of literature and language, and someone who unearths pleasure in analyzing and writing.
Modern Dutch Grammar: A Practical Guide
Glossy Dutch Grammar: a realistic advisor is an leading edge reference advisor to Dutch, combining conventional and function-based grammar in one quantity. With a powerful emphasis on modern utilization, all grammar issues and capabilities are richly illustrated with examples.
The Grammar is split into components. half I covers conventional grammatical different types resembling nouns and verbs. half II is thoroughly prepared round language features and contexts such as:
Giving and looking info Describing approaches and effects Expressing attitudes, psychological states and feelings Registers and magnificence Formal and casual communique, e. g. formative years talk
Main beneficial properties of the Grammar include:
• transparent, succinct and jargon-free reasons
• vast cross-referencing among different sections
• Emphasis on components of specific hassle for rookies of Dutch
This is the proper reference grammar for inexperienced persons of Dutch in any respect degrees, from basic to complicated; no earlier wisdom of grammatical terminology is thought and it presents indices of grammatical phrases and features. This Grammar is complemented by way of a spouse site that includes comparable workouts and actions to augment studying.
Cohesion in English (English Language Series)
Team spirit in English is anxious with a comparatively ignored a part of the linguistic approach: its assets for textual content building, the diversity of meanings which are speciffically linked to concerning what's being spoken or written to its semantic atmosphere. A valuable component to those assets is 'cohesion'.
Je Pratique - Exercices De Grammaire Livre A1
Ce cahier dexercices sadresse à des apprenants de niveau débutant à fake débutants en français. Il présente des activités dentraînement correspondant au niveau A1 du Cadre Européen commun de référence pour les langues.
- Signalling Nouns in English: A Corpus-Based Discourse Approach
- Complex Verb Formation
- Cross-linguistic semantics of tense, aspect and modality
- A Derivational Approach to Syntactic Relations
Extra resources for Aspects of Split Ergativity
Sample text
7. Formal similarities between Set B markers and full pronominal forms are present throughout the Mayan family; see discussion in Kaufman 1990, Woolford 2000, and Preminger 2011. As represented by the boldfaced arguments in (35), I suggest that the first and second person Set B markers have the same status as third person nominals (whether overt as in [35c] or pro-dropped)—all are the internal nominal arguments of the verb. The difference is simply that the Set B markers must cliticize to the verb (as predicted by the fact that they do not meet the CVC minimal word requirement; recall that the glide is epenthetic), while full nominal third person forms, like ji˜ni x`ixik in (35c), do not.
Plural marking is also restricted to human-denoting nominals and sometimes certain animals. Chol makes a distinction between first person plural inclusive (including the speaker and the addressee) and first person plural exclusive (excluding the addressee); the same morpheme, -la, is used for both first person plural inclusive and second person plural forms. 6; see V´azquez Alvarez 2011 for discussion and examples. The Set A morphemes co-index transitive subjects (32a), unergative subjects (32b), subjects of intransitives in the nonperfective aspects (32c), and possessors of nominals (32d).
C. Tyi i-ts’ijb-u i-k’aba`. ’ ˜ d. Tyi aw-il-¨a-yon. ’ (12) NONPERFECTIVE NONROOT TRANSITIVES ˜ k-xujch’-i˜ n tyak’in. IMPF A1-steal-D . ’ a. Mi MAYAN BACKGROUND AND CLAUSE STRUCTURE [ 31 ] ˜ b. Woli i-pi`l-e˜ n majl-el iy-ijnam. PROG A 3-accompany-D . ’8 ˜ c. Chonkol i-ts’ijb-u˜ n i-k’aba`. PROG A 3-write-D . ’ ˜ d. Mi aw-il-a˜ n-on. IMPF A 2-see-D . 9 We might thus think of forms like those in (11)– (12) as “zero-derived” transitives. Indeed, many (perhaps most) of these forms are clearly denominal.