Transactions of the Philological Society · 2003 · 171 citations · 13 references
SemanticsSyntactic StructureCorpus LinguisticsApplied LinguisticsSyntaxAgreement MarkersLinguistic TypologyInterobserver AgreementDiscourse AnalysisConversation AnalysisGrammarLanguage StudiesNeutral AlignmentInteractional LinguisticsSocial IdentityInterpersonal CommunicationPerson AgreementFormal SyntaxMajor Monotransitive AlignmentsArtsLinguistics
The paper explores two issues arising from the extension of the notion of alignment from the domain of monotransitive to ditransitive clauses. The first is, To what extent should other than purely formal patterns of identification be taken into account in determining the ditransitive counterparts of the respective monotransitive alignments, i.e., accusative, ergative, active, etc.? The second issue is, How should conflicts between the formal criteria used in the determination of the alignment of person agreement be resolved? It is argued that only under a purely formal interpretation of alignment is it possible to discern ditransitive counterparts of all the major monotransitive alignments, and that once the notion of neutral alignment is distinguished from absence of agreement, form/order conflicts involving agreement markers can be consistently resolved in favour of phonological form.
13
Grammatical categories in Australian languages
Lingua · 1978 · 936 citations
Studies in Relational Grammar 1
Steve Johnson, David M. Perlmutter · Language · 1984 · 803 citations
Primary Objects, Secondary Objects, and Antidative
Matthew S. Dryer · Language · 1986 · 702 citations
Active/agentive case marking and its motivations
Marianne Mithun · Language · 1991 · 595 citations
Object asymmetries in comparative Bantu syntax
Joan Bresnan, Lioba Moshi · Linguistic Inquiry · 1990 · 542 citations