The role of case in A-bar extraction asymmetries: Evidence from Mayan
The role of case in A-bar extraction asymmetries: Evidence from Mayan
复制标题
案例在 A-bar 提取不对称中的作用：来自玛雅的证据
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Omer Preminger
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Coon;P. M. Pedro;Omer Preminger
许多形态作格语言在提取核心论元时表现出不对称性：绝对论元（及物性宾语和不及物性主语）可以自由提取，而作格论元（及物性主语）不能。这福尔斯“句法作格性”（syntax ergativity）（参见狄克逊，1972，1994; Manning，1996; Polinsky（B））。这些提取不对称在玛雅语系的许多语言中都有发现，为了提取传递性主语（用于焦点，问题或相对化），必须使用一种称为“主体焦点”（AF）的特殊结构。这些AF结构在句法和语义上都被描述为及物的，因为它们包含两个非斜向的DP论元，但在形态上是不及物的，因为动词只出现一个一致标记，并采取不及物的状态后缀（Aissen 1999; Stiebels 2006）。在本文中，我们提出了一个建议（一）为什么一些形态作格语言表现出提取不对称，而其他人没有;和（二）如何AF建设Q 'anjob'al规避这个问题。我们采用最近的帐户，认为作格语言的变化轨迹的绝对格分配（阿尔德里奇2004年，2008年a; Legate 2002年，2008年），并提出这种变化是存在于玛雅家庭。主要基于Q 'anjob'al和Chol的比较数据，我们认为，无法提取作格论证并不反映作格主语本身的属性的问题，而是反映了绝对格分配在小句中的局部属性。我们展示了AF词素-on如何通过将格分配给内部参数来规避Q 'anjob'al中的这个问题。
Many morphologically ergative languages display asymmetries in the extraction of core arguments: while absolutive arguments (transitive objects and intransitive subjects) extract freely, ergative arguments (transitive subjects) cannot. This falls under the label “syntactic ergativity” (see, e.g. Dixon 1972, 1994; Manning 1996; Polinsky to appear(b)). These extraction asymmetries are found in many languages of the Mayan family, where in order to extract transitive subjects (for focus, questions, or relativization), a special construction known as the “Agent Focus” (AF) must be used. These AF constructions have been described as syntactically and semantically transitive because they contain two non-oblique DP arguments, but morphologically intransitive because the verb appears with only a single agreement marker and takes an intransitive status suffix (Aissen 1999; Stiebels 2006). In this paper we offer a proposal for (i) why some morphologically ergative languages exhibit extraction asymmetries, while others do not; and (ii) how the AF construction in Q’anjob’al circumvents this problem. We adopt recent accounts which argue that ergative languages vary in the locus of absolutive case assignment (Aldridge 2004, 2008a; Legate 2002, 2008), and propose that this variation is present within the Mayan family. Based primarily on comparative data from Q’anjob’al and Chol, we argue that the inability to extract ergative arguments does not reflect a problem with properties of the ergative subject itself, but rather reflects locality properties of absolutive case assignment in the clause. We show how the AF morpheme -on circumvents this problem in Q’anjob’al by assigning case to internal arguments.