Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T09:13:47.060Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An interpretation of Split Ergativity and Related Patterns

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Scott DeLancey
Scott DeLancey*
Affiliation:
University of Colorado
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Nominative/absolutive case and verb agreement are, in many languages, indicators of a category which is here called VIEWPOINT: the perspective from which the speaker describes the event. The order of NP constituents in a sentence encodes ATTENTION FLOW, which is the order in which the speaker expects the hearer to attend to them. Split ergative case-marking patterns are shown to reflect conflicts between the most natural viewpoint and attention-flow assignments. It is argued that the characterization and grammatical marking of an event as first-hand or inferred knowledge for a speaker, and as intentional or inadvertent for an actor, can be described in terms of whether the entire event or only its terminal phase is directly accessible to the conscious mind of the speaker and the actor, respectively; and that these categories can also be described in terms of attention flow and viewpoint.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 57 , Issue 3 , September 1981 , pp. 626 - 657
Copyright
Copyright © 1981 by the Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abadie, Peggy. 1974. Nepali as an ergative language. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 1. 156–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, John M. 1971. The grammar of case: Towards a localistic theory. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, John M. 1977. On case grammar: Prolegomena to a theory of grammatical relations. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Anderson, John M. 1979. On being without a subject. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Bandhu, Churamani. 1973. Clause patterns in Nepali. In Hale, A., 2:1–80.Google Scholar
Bauman, James. 1975. Pronouns and pronominal morphology in Tibeto-Burman. Berkeley: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1946. Les relations de personne dans le verbe. BSLP 43. 1–12. [English translation in Benveniste 1971:195–204.]Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1956. La nature des pronoms. For Roman Jakobson, ed. by Halle, Morris et al., 34–7. The Hague: Mouton. [English translation in Benveniste 1971:217–22.]Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1971. Problems in general linguistics. Coral Gables: University of Miami Press.Google Scholar
Boeder, Wilfried. 1967. Über die Versionen des georgischen Verbs. Folia Linguistica 2. 32–152.Google Scholar
Caughley, Ross. 1978. Participant rank and verbal cross-reference in Chepang. In Grimes, 163–78.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976a. Review of Klimov 1973. Lingua 39. 511–60.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976b. Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1978a. Ergativity. Syntactic typology, ed. by Lehmann, Winfred P., 329–94. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1978b. Agreement, animacy, and voice. Paper presented at the LSA Winter Meeting.Google Scholar
Creamer, Mary H. 1974. Ranking in Navajo nouns. Navajo Language Review 1. 29–38.Google Scholar
Das Gupta, K. 1971. An introduction to the Nocte language. Shillong: North East Frontier Agency.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1978. Empathy and Jinghpaw agreement. Paper presented at the LSA Winter Meeting.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1979. Aspect, transitivity, and viewpoint. Paper presented at the Symposium on Tense/Aspect: Between Semantics and Pragmatics, UCLA.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1980. Deictic categories in the Tibeto-Burman verb. Indiana University dissertation.Google Scholar
Dešeriev, Junus D. 1953. Bacbijskij jazyk. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Diehl, Lon. 1975. Space case: Some principles and their implications concerning linear order in natural languages. Working Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of North Dakota Session 19. 93–150.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W. 1976 (ed.) Grammatical categories in Australian languages. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W. 1979. Ergativity, Lg. 55.59–138.Google Scholar
Eckman, Fred. 1974. Agentive and agentless passives. Stanford Working Papers on Language Universals 14. 59–74.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles. 1966. Deictic categories in the semantics of ‘come’. Foundations of Language 2. 219–26.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles. 1968. The case for case. Universals in linguistic theory, ed. by Bach, Emmon & Harms, Robert, 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles. 1975. The Santa Cruz lectures on deixis. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles. 1977a. The case for case re-opened. Syntax and semantics, 8: Grammatical relations, ed. by Cole, Peter & Sadock, Jerrold, 59–81. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles. 1977b. Topics in lexical semantics. Current issues in linguistic theory, ed. by Cole, Roger, 76–138. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Foley, William, and Valin, Robert Van. 1977. On the organization of ‘subject’ properties in universal grammar. Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Meeting, Berkeley Linguistics Society, 293–320.Google Scholar
Gair, James. 1970. Colloquial Sinhalese clause structures. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gair, James. 1976. Is Sinhala a subject language? (or, How restricted is your PNP?) In Verma 1976a, 39–64.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1976. Topic, pronoun, and grammatical agreement. In Li, 149–88.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1979a. On understanding grammar. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1979b (ed.) Syntax and semantics, 12: Discourse and syntax. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Grimes, Joseph. 1978 (ed.) Papers on discourse. Arlington, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Gruber, Jeffrey. 1967. Look and see. Lg. 43.937–47.Google Scholar
Gruber, Jeffrey. 1976. Lexical structures in syntax and semantics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Hale, Austin. 1973 (ed.) Clause, sentence and discourse patterns in selected languages of Nepal. Norman, OK: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Hale, Austin, and Watters, David. 1973. A survey of clause patterns. In Hale, A., 2:175–249.Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth. 1973. A note on subject–object inversion in Navajo. Issues in linguistics, ed. by Kachru, Braj B. et al., 300–309. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Hawkinson, Annie K., and Hyman, Larry M. 1974. Hierarchies of natural topic in Shona. Studies in African Linguistics 5. 147–71.Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1976. Substantival hierarchies: Addendum to Silverstein. In Dixon. 172–90.Google Scholar
Henderson, Eugenie J. A. 1965. Tiddim Chin: A descriptive analysis of two texts. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1966. What Algonquian is really like. IJAL 32. 59–73.Google Scholar
Hoehlig, Monika. 1978. Speaker orientation in Syuwa (Kagate). In Grimes, 19–24.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul. 1979. Aspect and foregrounding in discourse. In Givón 1979b:213–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul, and Thompson, Sandra. 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Lg. 56.251–99.Google Scholar
Jin, Peng, et al. 1958. Jiarong yu Suomo hua-de yuyin he xingtai. [The phonology and morphology of the Jyarung language (Suo-mo dialect): Part 2, morphology.] Yuyan Yanjiu 3. 71–108.Google Scholar
Kato, Kazuo. 1979. Empathy and passive resistance. LI 10. 149–52.Google Scholar
Kepping, Ksenia Borisovna. 1980. Elements of ergativity and nominativity in Tangut. Ergativity: Towards a theory of grammatical relations, ed. by Plank, Frans, 263–78. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Klimov, Georgij A. 1973. Očerk obščej teorii ergativnosti. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Klimov, Georgij A. 1974. On the character of languages of active typology. Linguistics 131. 11–25.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumu, and Kaburaki, Etsuko. 1977. Empathy and syntax. LI 8. 627–72.Google Scholar
Kuryłowicz, Jerzy. 1964. The inflectional categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N. 1976 (ed.) Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Li, Charles N., and Thompson, Sandra A. 1976. Subject and topic: A new typology of language. In Li, 457–89.Google Scholar
McLendon, Sally. 1978. Ergativity, case, and transitivity in Eastern Porno. IJAL 44. 1–9.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian. 1977. Starting points. Lg. 53.152–68.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian. MS. Point-sharing. To appear in Communicative competence: Acquisition and intervention, ed. by Richard L. Schiefelbusch & J. Pickar. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Maran, LaRaw. 1978. Aspect and agreement particles in Jinghpaw. Paper presented at the 11th International Conference on Sino-Tibetan Languages and Linguistics, University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Maran, LaRaw. 1979. Localization and representational structures in Jinghpaw: A view of the epistemological and semantic foundations. Paper presented at the Symposium on Tense/Aspect: Between Semantics and Pragmatics, UCLA.Google Scholar
Maratsos, Michael. 1978. New models in linguistics and language acquisition. Linguistic theory and psychological reality, ed. by Halle, Morris et al., 246–63. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mistry, P. J. 1976. Subject in Gujarati: An examination of verb-agreement phenomena. In Verma 1976a:240–69.Google Scholar
Piaget, Jean. 1946. Le développement de la notion de temps chez l'enfant. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Rogers, Jean H. 1975. Prediction of transitive-animate verbs in an Ojibwa dialect. IJAL 41. 114–39.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1917. Review of Het passieve karakter van het Verbum Transitivum van het Verbum Actionis in Talen van Noord-Amerika, by Uhlenbeck, C. C. IJAL 1. 82–6.Google Scholar
Saville-Troike, Muriel, and McCreedy, Lynn A. 1979. Topic-prominence in Navajo. Paper presented at the LSA Winter Meeting.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Arthur. 1976. On the universality of subjects: The Ilocano case. In Li, 519–44.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Dixon, 112–71.Google Scholar
Slobin, Dan, and Aksu, Ayhan. 1979. Tense, aspect, modality, and more in the use of a Turkish particle. Paper presented at the Symposium on Tense/Aspect: Between Semantics and Pragmatics, UCLA.Google Scholar
Stern, Theodore. 1963. A provisional sketch of Sizang Chin. Asia Major n.s. 10.222–78.Google Scholar
Taylor, Allan R. 1969. A grammar of Blackfoot. Berkeley: University of California dissertation.Google Scholar
Tesnière, Lucien. 1959. Éléments de syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, Nikolai S. 1939. Les rapports entre le déterminé, le déterminant et le défini. Mélanges de linguistique offerts à Charles Bally, 75–82. Geneva: Georg.Google Scholar
Uhlenbeck, C. C. 1938. A concise Blackfoot grammar. (Verhandelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afdeeling Letterkunde, n.s. 41.) Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Verma, Manindra K. 1976a (ed.) The notion of subject in South Asian languages. (South Asian studies, 2.) Madison: University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Verma, Manindra K. 1976b. The notion of subject and the data from Nepali. In Verma 1976a:270–86.Google Scholar
Waiters, David. 1973. Clause patterns in Kham. In Hale, A., 1:39–202.Google Scholar
Waiters, David. 1975. The evolution of a Tibeto-Burman pronominal verb morphology. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 2. 45–80.Google Scholar
Whistler, Kenneth W. 1980. Inverse person-marking in Nootkan. MS, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Witherspoon, Gary. 1977. Language and art in the Navajo universe. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zubin, David A. 1979. Discourse function of morphology: The focus system of German. In Givón. 1979b:469–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar