Abstract

AbstractArgument coding splits such as differential (= split) object marking and split ergative marking have long been known to be universal tendencies, but the generalizations have not been formulated in their full generality before. In particular, ditransitive constructions have rarely been taken into account, and scenario splits have often been treated separately. Here I argue that all these patterns can be understood in terms of the usual association of role rank (highly ranked A and R, low-ranked P and T) and referential prominence (locuphoric person, animacy, definiteness, etc.). At the most general level, the role-reference association universal says that deviations from usual associations of role rank and referential prominence tend to be coded by longer grammatical forms. In other words, A and R tend to be referentially prominent in language use, while P and T are less prominent, and when less usual associations need to be expressed, languages often require special coding by means of additional flags (case-markers and adpositions) or additional verbal voice coding (e.g., inverse or passive markers). I argue that role-reference associations are an instance of the even more general pattern of form-frequency correspondences, and that the resulting coding asymmetries can all be explained by frequency-based predictability and coding efficiency.

Highlights

  • Argument coding splits such as differential (= split) object marking and split ergative marking have long been known to be universal tendencies, but the generalizations have not been formulated in their full generality before

  • (5) The role-reference association universal (Universal 1) Deviations from usual associations of role rank and referential prominence tend to be coded by longer grammatical forms if the coding is asymmetric

  • Scenario splits in ditransitive constructions have become quite famous since the 1990s, but the discussion has almost exclusively centred on person-conditioned special R-coding (Section 7.1), and has almost exclusively taken place in the generative literature

Read more

Summary

Overview

The coding of core arguments depends on their semantic or syntactic role, and on their referential prominence in one way or another, i.e., on animacy, definiteness, person prominence, and so on. Argument coding splits may depend on the referential-prominence properties within a scenario. The present paper provides an overview of such coding splits in core arguments (A, P, T, R) and argues that a wide variety of splits, both in monotransitive and in ditransitive constructions, are best understood as special cases of the high-level generalization in (5). This paper makes the ambitious proposal that by considering all these constructions together, we have the chance of unifying a wide variety of phenomena under a single generalization, the rolereference association universal In addition to this primary goal, I will discuss the explanation of the generalizations, arguing that the role-reference association universal is a special case of a still more general pattern, the form-frequency correspondence universal of Haspelmath (2021). Special coding by longer forms needs to be used only when a construction deviates from these usual associations

Role rank and referential prominence
Usual associations and universals of coding splits
Two types of usual associations
Two types of splits
Single-argument splits in monotransitive constructions
Animacy-conditioned split P flagging
Definiteness-conditioned split P flagging
Nominality-conditioned split P flagging
Givenness-conditioned split P flagging
Person-conditioned split P flagging
Split A flagging
Person-conditioned split A flagging
Nominality-conditioned split A flagging
Animacy-conditioned split A flagging
Focus-conditioned split A flagging
Single-argument splits in ditransitive constructions
Person-conditioned split R-flagging
Nominality-conditioned split R flagging
Definiteness-conditioned split R-flagging
Split T flagging
Nominality-conditioned split T flagging
Definiteness-conditioned split T flagging
Person-conditioned split T coding
Scenario splits in monotransitive constructions
Person-conditioned special P flagging
18 The Yurok pattern thus shows two conditions at the same time
Definiteness-conditioned special A flagging
Animacy-conditioned special P flagging
Scenario splits in ditransitive constructions
Special R coding conditioned by person of T
Special R coding conditioned by nominality of T
Special T coding conditioned by nominality of R
Special R coding conditioned by animacy of T
Relative scenario splits
Argument coding versus verbal voice coding
10 Alternations
10.2 Splitting alternations
11.1 Summary of the generalizations
11.2 Frequency-based coding efficiency
11.3 Ambiguity avoidance
11.4 Biocognitive-representational constraints of a grammar blueprint
12 Concluding remarks
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call