Two types of alignment change in nominalizations
Two types of alignment change in nominalizations
复制标题
名词化中两种类型的对齐变化
DOI：
10.1075/dia.19044.ald
复制
发表时间：
2021
期刊：
影响因子：
0.7
通讯作者：
Aldridge Edith and Yuko Yanagida
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
竹沢幸一;本間伸輔;田川拓海;石田尊;松岡幹就;島田雅晴;Aldridge Edith and Yuko Yanagida
本文考察了两个对齐变化的例子，这两个例子都是由于对一个名词化的 嵌入式小句类型，外部论元标记属格，内部论元聚焦。我们表明 在南岛语族语言的早期发展中，当宾语被标记时， 摘要分裂结构中的关系分句被重新分析为及物性根分句。与此相反，旧的所有格 日语名物化分句作为外部论元的标记，被扩展为所有主语的标记。这发生在adnominal之后。 子句作为根子句重新分析。日语为了将属格重新分析为主格，又经历了一个步骤： 本文通过对南岛语和日语中的非人称心理及物构式作为不及物构式的再分析，说明了名词化的再分析是可行的 无论是作格还是双格，这取决于重新分析所涉及的句法条件。
This paper investigates two instances of alignment change, both of which resulted from reanalysis of a nominalized embedded clause type, in which the external argument was marked with genitive case and the internal argument was focused. We show that a subject marked with genitive case in the early development of Austronesian languages became ergative-marked when object relative clauses in cleft constructions were reanalyzed as transitive root clauses. In contrast to this, the genitive case in Old Japanese nominalized clauses, marking an external argument, was extended to mark all subjects. This occurred after adnominal clauses were reanalyzed as root clauses. Japanese underwent one more step in order for genitive to be reanalyzed as nominative: the reanalysis of impersonal psych transitive constructions as intransitives.With these two case studies of Austronesian and Japanese, we show that reanalysis of nominalization goes in either direction, ergative or accusative, depending on the syntactic conditions involved in the reanalysis.