Re: Inverse marking (was: Kijeb text uploaded)
From: | Patrick Littell <puchitao@...> |
Date: | Saturday, April 22, 2006, 3:30 |
On 4/21/06, Eldin Raigmore <eldin_raigmore@...> wrote:
> >[snip]
> >AFA I understand from Blake's book this is typical of
> >Algonquinian languages. The question is if it is *so*
> >typically Algonquinian that it is unrealistic in a
> >non-Algonquinian language?
>
> I believe there are Meso-American and South-American languages, thousands
> of miles away from Canada, that have these systems, too.
>
Yup. (see below)
> >BTW would it be unrealistic for the direct voice to
> >be unmarked?
>
> Not at all; IMO that woud be _realistic_. The Direct Voice expresses the
> expected situation (the more animate participant is the Agent, the less
> animate participant is the Patient); the Inverse Voice expresses the
> _unexpected_ situation, so it should be "marked".
> >
Indeed. It would definitely be unusual for the indirect voice to be
the unmarked one. I'd shy away from saying it would be *impossible*,
but an unmarked indirect wouldn't be something I'd expect to find.
>
> >I envisage Kijeb as something of a mixture, with both
> >Hierarchical word order and verb marking, as well as nom/acc
> >marking for animates, as well as Split-S/Fluid-S, and the
> >daughter languages (perhaps not all of them) developing
> >split ergative marking. Perhaps it is altogether
> >unrealistic, or at least highly redundant, to have it all in
> >the same bag!
>
Inverse/Hierarchical and Split/Fluid-S, at least, are perfectly
compatible. Spike Gildea (1998) reconstructs an Inverse/Split-S
system for the Cariban family, similar IIRC to the one that survives
in Hixkaryana. (For those looking for word-order correlations,
Hixkaryana is OVS regardless of direct/inverse. Not unusual for a
Cariban language.) (Oh, and to be clear, what Gildea terms Inverse
might be what others term Hierarchical.)
The combination has always struck me as a priori pretty reasonable.
You have a set of agent-marking affixes if the agent is the highest in
the hierarchy, and a set of patient-marking affixes if the patient is
highest. Intransitive verb? If it's an agent, use the agent affixes;
if it's a patient, use the patient ones.
I don't recall if any of Proto-Cariban's daughters evolved into a
split ergative system, but I recall that some of them have ergative
alignment. (I can't seem to find Gildea's book tonight.) I see no
reason that it would be "unnatural" for an Inverse/Split-S agreement
system to evolve into a split-ergative agreement system. Maybe it
hasn't actually happened before, but it's not a crazy/out-there idea.
-- Pat