On the Origins and Elimination of Ergativity in Indo-Aryan Languages

Ergativity is a term used in traditional descriptive and typological linguistics to refer to a system of nominal case-marking where the subject of an intransitive verb has the same morphological marker as a direct object, and a different morphological marker from the subject of a transitive verb. La...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique
Main Author: Bubenik, Vit
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Cambridge University Press (CUP) 1989
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008413100024294
https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0008413100024294
id crcambridgeupr:10.1017/s0008413100024294
record_format openpolar
spelling crcambridgeupr:10.1017/s0008413100024294 2024-04-07T07:51:50+00:00 On the Origins and Elimination of Ergativity in Indo-Aryan Languages Bubenik, Vit 1989 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008413100024294 https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0008413100024294 en eng Cambridge University Press (CUP) https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique volume 34, issue 4, page 377-398 ISSN 0008-4131 1710-1115 Linguistics and Language Language and Linguistics journal-article 1989 crcambridgeupr https://doi.org/10.1017/s0008413100024294 2024-03-08T00:35:52Z Ergativity is a term used in traditional descriptive and typological linguistics to refer to a system of nominal case-marking where the subject of an intransitive verb has the same morphological marker as a direct object, and a different morphological marker from the subject of a transitive verb. Languages in which this system is found are divided into two main types, A and B (following Trask 1979:388). In Type A the ergative construction is used equally in all tenses and aspects. Furthermore, if there is verbal agreement, the verb agrees with the direct object in person and number in exactly the same way it agrees with the subject of an intransitive verb. The verb agrees with the transitive subject in a different way. Well-known representatives of this type are Basque, Australian ergative languages, certain North American languages, Tibeto-Burman and Chukchee. In type B there is most often a tense/aspect split, in which case the ergative construction is confined to the perfective aspect (or the past tense), and the nominative-accusative configuration is used elsewhere. Furthermore, if there is verbal agreement, the verb may agree with the direct object in number and gender but not in person. Article in Journal/Newspaper Chukchee Cambridge University Press Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 34 4 377 398
institution Open Polar
collection Cambridge University Press
op_collection_id crcambridgeupr
language English
topic Linguistics and Language
Language and Linguistics
spellingShingle Linguistics and Language
Language and Linguistics
Bubenik, Vit
On the Origins and Elimination of Ergativity in Indo-Aryan Languages
topic_facet Linguistics and Language
Language and Linguistics
description Ergativity is a term used in traditional descriptive and typological linguistics to refer to a system of nominal case-marking where the subject of an intransitive verb has the same morphological marker as a direct object, and a different morphological marker from the subject of a transitive verb. Languages in which this system is found are divided into two main types, A and B (following Trask 1979:388). In Type A the ergative construction is used equally in all tenses and aspects. Furthermore, if there is verbal agreement, the verb agrees with the direct object in person and number in exactly the same way it agrees with the subject of an intransitive verb. The verb agrees with the transitive subject in a different way. Well-known representatives of this type are Basque, Australian ergative languages, certain North American languages, Tibeto-Burman and Chukchee. In type B there is most often a tense/aspect split, in which case the ergative construction is confined to the perfective aspect (or the past tense), and the nominative-accusative configuration is used elsewhere. Furthermore, if there is verbal agreement, the verb may agree with the direct object in number and gender but not in person.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Bubenik, Vit
author_facet Bubenik, Vit
author_sort Bubenik, Vit
title On the Origins and Elimination of Ergativity in Indo-Aryan Languages
title_short On the Origins and Elimination of Ergativity in Indo-Aryan Languages
title_full On the Origins and Elimination of Ergativity in Indo-Aryan Languages
title_fullStr On the Origins and Elimination of Ergativity in Indo-Aryan Languages
title_full_unstemmed On the Origins and Elimination of Ergativity in Indo-Aryan Languages
title_sort on the origins and elimination of ergativity in indo-aryan languages
publisher Cambridge University Press (CUP)
publishDate 1989
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008413100024294
https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0008413100024294
genre Chukchee
genre_facet Chukchee
op_source Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique
volume 34, issue 4, page 377-398
ISSN 0008-4131 1710-1115
op_rights https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1017/s0008413100024294
container_title Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique
container_volume 34
container_issue 4
container_start_page 377
op_container_end_page 398
_version_ 1795666919244693504