Some preliminary observations about Baṅgāṇī pronominal and nominal declension

This paper presents a description of the case marking systems in Amharic and Tigrinya. The case system is fully retained in the pronominal and determiner systems of both languages. Nominal case markings are, however, observed only in definite objects. The languages are nominative-accusative in their case system as can be seen from the pronouns, the definite article, and pronominal affixes which are attached to the verb to show agreement with subjects and definite objects. There is also interaction between the semantic notion of definiteness and object marking, which takes two forms: an object marker attached to the nominal object and an object marking verbal affix. In both cases, it is only if the object is definite that these object markings appear. This is an instance of split P. The two related object-marking phenomena always coexist in both languages. In this paper, an attempt will be made to give a description of the case marking systems in Tigrinya and Amharic, closely related Ethiopian Semitic languages. Two languages have been considered instead of just one for comparative reasons. Amharic and Tigrinya exhibit a nominative-accusative case system. Nevertheless, it is important to point out that the languages do not have typical nominal case marking except in objects which are definite. The case system is fully retained in the pronominal and determiner (specifically definite article) system. In addition, verbal affixes which show agreement in person, number and gender with subjects and objects help in giving an idea of what the case systems in the languages look like (Amanuel, 1998; Leslau, 1995; Getahun, 1990; and Baye, 1987; among others). As a background, it will be shown why the languages have are said to have a nominative-accusative system starting with the pronominal and determiner (definite article) system of the languages. Following this, an attempt will be made to demonstrate how verbal affixes are used to show agreement with subjects and objects in transitive sentences involving verbs with typical transitivity features (Hopper and Thompson, 1980). This is done in order to demonstrate the interaction between object marking and the semantic notion of definiteness which is one of the major objects of this paper. According to Hopper and Thompson, “Transitivity involves a number of components, only one of which is the presence of an object of the verb. These components are all concerned with the effectiveness with which an action takes place” (1980: 251). In the overall discussion, reference will be made to Hopper and Thompson (1980) since the issues they raised are central to this paper. Hopper and Thompson identified the * My sincere thanks are due to Professor Regina Pustet, my typology instructor, not only for introducing me to the subject matter of typology in the best possible way, but also for her critical comments in the course of writing this paper. My thanks are also due for the editors of CRIL for her their helpful comments.

The Finnish language has a very complicated system for indicating the grammatical relations. What is involved in this case marking system are the nominative, the genitive and the partitive case. In the singular, Finnish has a tripartite system consisting of these three cases, by which two sets of oppositions can be represented at the same time. One of them is the opposition between subjects and objects , and the other is the opposition between definite and indefinite objects. The tripartite system is incomplete, however, since these three cases are not one-to-one correspondence with the grammatical relations they indicate. Moreover, it is not so infrequent that a subject and an object of the same sentence are indicated in the same case, especially in colloquial and dialectal speech. It is indeed true, however, that a subject and an object can be readily distinguished from each other on the basis of discourse information, even if they are not morphologically differentiated. This means that a differential marking of subjects and objects is not necessarily essential to the human languages.

Optional ergative case marking systems in a typological-semiotic perspective

This article starts from the different typologies in agreement described by [Nichols 1986] concerning the relationship between head and dependent(s). She discovered that four types are possible: head-marking, dependent-marking, double marking and zero marking. Although Nichols analyses this relationship within the NP and also within the sentence, in this article we will examine this feature only as far as NP is concerned. Moreover, we will consider a small group of languages, which are all genetically related: the Indo-European family. In fact, despite their common origin and the fact that they all show a dependent-marking type, these languages organize their strategies in agreement in different ways. For instance in Hittite, inanimate nouns (like watar ) agree with an adjective declined in inanimate gender (i.e. suppi ) only if they are subjects of intransitive verbs. If theyare subjects of transitive verbs, the nouns take another ending (- anza ) and agree with an adjective in animate gender (like suppis ). We shall avoid discussing questions concerning the alignment of Hittite: our aim is only to consider that such a syntactical feature plays an important role in agreement between head and dependent in Hittite and in other Anatolian languages, but it doesn’t appear in the other Indo-European languages. On the other hand, Latin doesn’t distinguish masculine from feminine gender morphologically : we can find statistical tendencies, but nominal declensions are pure formal schemes based on phonological criteria. So the first declension offers a large majority of feminine nouns (like rosa ), but it also includes a small number of masculine nouns (like agricola): we shall be able to discern the gender information only in a NP, thanks to information carried by the adjectival/pronominal dependent (for instance bonus agricola ). However, not all adjectives have separate forms for masculine and feminine. Greek has more or less the same structure as Latin, but in the first declension there is a case where a subtype is introduced in order to distinguish the masculine gender morphologically: so we find nominatives in - ā , - ē for feminine, whereas the masculine has - ās , - ēs . These few examples show that these languages take into account different features in order to constitute agreement classes. It is a first step to an analysis of this syntactical feature in other representative languages of the Indo-European family. KEYWORDS: nominal heads, head/dependent relationship, agreement, Hittite, Latin

The paper focuses on the grammatical relations and case marking in Khortha, a language spoken in the Malda District of West Bengal.The study employs a lexico-structural approach to analyze the noun phrases in Khortha.It also examines the impact of language contact on the evolution of the case marking system in Khortha, which has shown intense contact with Hindi and Bangla spoken in the region.The data suggests that Khortha's structural cases follow Syntax of Bangla, while inherent cases borrow strategies from both Hindi and Bangla.The language exhibits ACC-DAT-GEN syncretism, not attested in either Hindi or Bangla.The study highlights an interesting pattern in the use of oblique case markers, where speakers use markers from both Hindi and Bangla, depending on whether the noun phrase is headed by a pronoun or a noun.The research concludes that Khortha's case marking system has evolved as a result of language contact.

It is well-known that hierarchies of person, animacy and definiteness have effects on case marking systems in various languages, where certain classes of subjects and objects are marked, but not others. This paper presents evidence of frequency effects of those hierarchies on case ellipsis in Korean. The two major aims of this paper are the following. First of all, the significance of variable case ellipsis patterns of Korean, as found in the CallFriend Korean corpus (LDC 1996), will be demonstrated when looked at from a functional-typological perspective: variation in case marking between style levels within a single language reflects variation across languages. In a second step, the findings from a comparative study of Korean and other languages are integrated into a coherent theoretical framework – Stochastic Optimality Theory (OT) (Boersma 1998; Boersma and Hayes 2001). It is shown that quantitative patterning found in Korean case ellipsis can be analyzed within the stochastic OT framework in a way analogous to an account of categorical differential case marking effects proposed by Aissen (2003). In this analysis, categorical differential case marking found in various languages is viewed as conventionalization of the same universal pragmatic tendency to mark disharmonic elements, which is also present in the variable case-marking systems of languages like Japanese and Korean.

It is commonly stated that the loss of case marking distinctions between Old and Middle English had profound consequences for the syntax of the language. In particular, linguists have attributed both the loss of the 'impersonal' constructions such as methinks and the introduction of new passives such as he was given a book directly to the loss of case marking distinctions. However the existing analyses generally suffer form empirical inadequacies: insufficient available information concerning the case marking systems (as opposed to the forms) makes it difficult to determine exactly when crucial case marking distinctions disappeared. Dr Allen makes a careful examination of the primary evidence for how the loss of case distinctions proceeded, and of the temporal relationship between changes in morphology and particular syntactic changes. She demonstrates that morphological change had a less direct role in the triggering of syntactic change than is usually assumed, and that some changes traditionally considered to be the result of syntactic reanalysis are better treated in other ways. Some changes to grammatical relations were not the result of syntactic reanalysis, but were caused by changes in verbal semantics, while others which have been treated as syntactic reanalyses in fact involved no change to grammatical relations, but only to the possible case marking associated with subjects. On a topic of central theoretical interest in the history of the English language.

It is well-known that hierarchies of person, animacy, and definiteness have effects on case marking systems in various languages, where certain classes of subjects and objects are marked, but not others. This paper presents evidence of frequency effects of those hierarchies on case ellipsis in Korean. The two major aims of this paper are the following. First of all, the significance of variable case ellipsis patterns of Korean, as found in the CallFriend Korean corpus (LDC (1996)), will be demonstrated when looked at from a functional-typological perspective: variation in case marking between style levels within a single language reflects variation across languages. In a second step, the findings from a comparative study of Korean and other languages are integrated into a coherent theoretical framework – stochastic Optimality Theory (OT) (Boersma (1998), Boersma and Hayes (2001)). It is shown that quantitative patterning found in Korean case ellipsis can be analyzed within the stochastic OT framework in a way analogous to an account of categorical differential case marking effects proposed by Aissen (2003). In this analysis, categorical differential case marking found in various languages is viewed as conventionalization of the same universal pragmatic tendency to mark disharmonic elements, which is also present in the variable case-marking systems of languages like Japanese and Korean.

Makasae language which is called BMk is a language that identifies the three major<br />regencies of Republica Democratica de Timor-Leste RDTL. Nonetheless, the BMk<br />speakers generally are able to speak two or more local languages included three<br />foreign languages such as Indonesian, English, and Portuguese, therefore the<br />potential of extinction is quite large as the young generations on average prefer<br />speaking foreign languages in their every day lives to speaking their own local<br />laguages. In essence, this study represents a real effort in seeing the phenomenon of<br />BMk from linguistic point of view. This study was included qualitative descriptive<br />study, in which the basic clause construction BMk analyzed by two main categories,<br />such as its intransitive and transitive clauses, in order to map the lingual unit that can<br />fill the predicate or PRED slot. Based on the research, it was found that the basic<br />construction of the clause BMk form Subject+Verb (SV) for the zero object clause, and<br />Subject+Object+Verb (SOV) for the object-needed clause. The description of the BMk<br />basic clause structure was divided into three main parts, namely<br />intransitive,ekatransitive clause, and ditransitive clause. This study is also expected to<br />inspire some reseachers who are interested in BMk either micro or macro.<br />Keywords: Basic Clause,Pivot Makasae Language, RDTL

This paper examines what we currently know about the distribution and characteristics of core case marking and related phenomena in South Central Tibeto-Burman (Kuki-Chin) languages. Markers and their functions are surveyed according to subgroup, and an assessment of their diachrony is formulated. The paper also considers two analytical challenges–potential tonal marking of grammatical information in case marking systems, and the simultaneous presence of other elements which may be confused with case marking.

Jiwarli is an Australian Aboriginal language that was formerly spoken in the north-west of Western Australia. It shows a high degree of (suffixing) morphological complexity, has a split-ergative case-marking system, and a switch-reference system in dependent clause linkage. Verbs are also strictly subcategorized for transitivity and there are interactions between clause type and case marking. A prevalent feature of Jiwarli discourse is the non-occurrence of overt arguments in both main and dependent clauses. In narratives, 65–75% of transitive clauses have at least one missing argument (depending on genre), with 20% consisting of just a verb alone. Also, 25% of intransitive clauses lack their single (intransitive subject) argument. Zero arguments in Jiwarli can have either unspecified reference or else be anaphoric. This paper discusses the occurrence of zero arguments and outlines the means by which anaphoric relations are expressed. I will show that there is an interaction between verb transitivity, clause type, switch-reference, and the case-marking system which assists with reference determination in narrative discourse.

Jiwarli is an Australian Aboriginal language that was formerly spoken in the north-west of Western Australia. It shows a high degree of (suffixing) morphological complexity, has a split-ergative case-marking system, and a switch-reference system in dependent clause linkage. Verbs are also strictly subcategorized for transitivity and there are interactions between clause type and case marking. A prevalent feature of Jiwarli discourse is the non-occurrence of overt arguments in both main and dependent clauses. In narratives, 65–75% of transitive clauses have at least one missing argument (depending on genre), with 20% consisting of just a verb alone. Also, 25% of intransitive clauses lack their single (intransitive subject) argument. Zero arguments in Jiwarli can have either unspecified reference or else be anaphoric. This paper discusses the occurrence of zero arguments and outlines the means by which anaphoric relations are expressed. I will show that there is an interaction between verb transitivity, clause type, switch-reference, and the case-marking system which assists with reference determination in narrative discourse.

4 - SEMANTIC CASE AND PRAGMATIC FUNCTION: promotion, accessibility, and the typology of case marking

Case ellipsis at the grammar/pragmatics interface: A formal analysis from a typological perspective

Indo-Aryan languages have the longest documented historical record, with the earliest attested texts going back to 1900 bce. Old Indo-Aryan (Vedic, Sanskrit) had an inflectional case-marking system where nominatives functioned as subjects. Objects could be realized via several different case markers (depending on semantic and structural factors), but not the nominative. This inflectional system was lost over the course of several centuries during Middle Indo-Aryan, resulting in just a nominative–oblique inflectional distinction. The New Indo-Aryan languages innovated case markers and developed new case-marking systems. Like in Old Indo-Aryan, case is systematically used to express semantic differences via differential object marking constructions. However, unlike in Old Indo-Aryan, many of the New Indo-Aryan languages are ergative and all allow for non-nominative subjects, most prominently for experiencer subjects. Objects, on the other hand, can now also be unmarked (nominative), usually participating in differential object marking. The case-marking patterns within New Indo-Aryan and across time have given rise to a number of debates and analyses. The most prominent of these include issues of case alignment and language change, the distribution of ergative vs. accusative vs. nominative case, and discussions of markedness and differential case marking.