Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T22:15:00.393Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On The Syntax of Obviation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2026

Judith Aissen
Judith Aissen*
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Cruz
*
Stevenson College, University of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA 95064
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article explores the idea that obviation systems like those found in the Algonquian languages are a less parochial solution to syntactic organization than is generally thought. Some simple constraints on obviation provide interesting analyses of key facts in Algonquian. Once certain language-particular differences are recognized, a number of syntactic problems in two unrelated languages, Tzotzil (Mayan) and Chamorro (Western Austronesian), yield easily to solutions based on obviation, despite the absence of obviative-based morphology in either language. Hierarchy alignment constraints play a central role in the analysis. The account is articulated within optimality theory, which provides an appropriate framework for representing the fact that these languages must select from their resources for expressing transitive propositions the optimal mode of expression for each such proposition.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 73 , Issue 4 , December 1997 , pp. 705 - 750
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 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

Aissen, Judith. 1987. Tzotzil clause structure. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aissen, Judith. 1992. Topic and focus in Mayan. Language 68. 43–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aissen, Judith. 1997. Voice and the person hierarchy. Paper presented at the Hopkins Optimality Theory Workshop/University of Maryland Mayfest 1997, Baltimore.Google Scholar
Arnold, Jennifer. 1994. Inverse voice marking in Mapudungun. Berkeley Linguistics Society 20. 28–41.Google Scholar
Ayres, Glen. 1980. A note on Mayan reflexives. Journal of Mayan Linguistics 2. 53–59.Google Scholar
Ayres, Glen. 1996. Anaphora in Ixil. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America.Google Scholar
Berinstein, Ava. 1985. Evidence for multiattachment in K'ekchi Mayan. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1958. Eastern Ojibwe. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1962. The Menomini language. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Campana, Mark. 1992. A movement theory of ergativity. Montreal: McGill University dissertation.Google Scholar
Chung, Sandra. 1981. Transitivity and surface filters in Chamorro. Studies in Pacific languages and cultures, in honour of Bruce Biggs, ed. by Hollyman, J. and Pawley, A., 311–32. Auckland: Linguistic Society of New Zealand.Google Scholar
Chung, Sandra. 1984. Identifiability and null objects in Chamorro. Berkeley Linguistics Society 10. 116–30.Google Scholar
Chung, Sandra. 1989. On the notion ‘null anaphor’ in Chamorro. The null subject parameter, ed. by Jaeggli, Osvaldo and Safir, Kenneth, 143–84. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Chung, Sandra. to appear. The design of agreement: Evidence from Chamorro. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cooreman, Ann. 1987. Transitivity and discourse continuity in Chamorro narratives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craig, Colette. 1977. The structure of Jacaltec. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William. 1990. Typology and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dahlstrom, Amy. 1991. Plains Cree morphosyntax. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Dahlstrom, Amy. 1995. Morphology and syntax of the Fox (Mesquakie) language. Chicago: University of Chicago, ms.Google Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1981. An interpretation of split ergativity. Language 57. 626–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryer, Matthew. 1992. A comparison of the obviation systems of Kutenai and Algonquian. Papers of the twenty-third Algonquian conference, ed. by Cowan, William, 119–63. Ottawa: Carleton University.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew. 1994. The discourse function of the Kutenai inverse. In Givón 1994, 65–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew. 1997. Obviation across clause boundaries in Kutenai. Buffalo: State University of New York ms.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrell, Patrick. 1990. Null objects in Brazilian Portuguese. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8. 325–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frantz, Donald. 1966. Person indexing in Blackfoot. International Journal of American Linguistics 32. 50–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardiner, Dwight. 1993. Structural asymmetries and preverbal positions in Shuswap. Vancouver, British Columbia: Simon Fraser University dissertation.Google Scholar
Garvin, Paul. 1958. A descriptive technique for the treatment of meaning. Language 34. 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy (ed.) 1983. Topic continuity in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy. (ed.) 1994. Voice and inversion. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goddard, Ives. 1984. The obviative in Fox narrative discourse. Papers of the Fifteenth Algonquian Conference, ed. by Cowan, William, 273–286. Ottawa: Carleton University.Google Scholar
Goddard, Ives. 1990. Aspects of the topic structure of Fox narratives: Proximate shifts and the use of overt and inflectional NPs. International Journal of American Linguistics 56. 317–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goddard, Ives. 1995. Notes on Fox (Mesquakie) Inflection: Minor modes and incompletely described morphemes, Papers of the twenty-sixth Algonquian conference, ed. by Pentland, David H., 124–50. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba.Google Scholar
Grafstein, Ann. 1981. Obviation in Ojibwa. Linguistique Amérindienne 2, Études Algonquiennes, ed. by Drapeau, Lynn, 83–134. Montreal: Montreal Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar
Grafstein, Ann. 1989. Disjoint reference in a ‘free word order’ language. Theoretical perspectives on Native American languages, ed. by Gerdts, Donna and Michelson, Karin, 163–75. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane. 1997. Projections, heads, and optimality. Linguistic Inquiry 28. 373–422.Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth. 1973. A note on subject-object inversion in Navajo. Issues in linguistics: Papers in honor of Henry and Renée Kahane, ed. by Kachru, Braj, Lees, Robert B., Malkiel, Yakov, Pietrangeli, Angelina, and Saporta, Sol, 300–309. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth., Jeanne, Laverne; and Platero, Paul. 1977. Three cases of overgeneration. Formal syntax, ed. by Culicover, Peter, Wasow, Thomas, and Akmajian, Adrian, 379–416. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Haviland, John. 1981. Sk'op sotz'leb: el Tzozil de San Lorenzo Zinacantán. Mexico City: UNAM.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles. 1948. Potawatomi II: Derivation, personal prefixes, and nouns. International Journal of American Linguistics 14:63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hockett, Charles. 1966. What Algonquian is really like. International Journal of American Linguistics 32. 59–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, C.-T.J. 1984. On the determination and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 15. 531–74.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T.J. 1989. Pro-drop in Chinese: a generalized control theory. The null subject parameter, ed. by Jaeggli, Osvaldo and Safir, Kenneth, 185–214. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobsen, William Jr., 1983. Typological and genetic notes on switch-reference systems in North American Indian languages. Switch-reference and universal grammar, ed. by Haiman, John and Munro, Pamela, 151–83. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Klaiman, M. H. 1991. Grammatical voice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Klaiman, M. H. 1992. Inverse languages. Lingua 88. 227–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klaiman, M. H. 1993. The relationship of inverse voice and head-marking in Arizona Tewa and other Tanoan languages. Studies in Language 17. 343–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuno, Susumu. 1976. Subject, theme, and the speaker's empathy: A reexamination of relativization phenomena. Subject and topic, ed. by Li, Charles, 417–44. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumu. 1987. Functional syntax. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumu., and Kaburaki, E. 1977. Empathy and syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 8. 627–72.Google Scholar
Laughlin, Robert. 1975. The great Tzotzil dictionary of San Lorenzo Zinacantán. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laughlin, Robert. 1977. Of cabbages and kings. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
Legendre, Géraldine, Raymond, William; and Smolensky, Paul. 1993. An optimality-theoretic typology of case and grammatical voice systems. Berkeley Linguistics Society 19. 464–78.Google Scholar
LeSourd, Philip. 1976. Verb agreement in Fox. Harvard Studies in Syntax and Semantics 2, ed. by Hankamer, Jorge and Aissen, Judith, 445–528.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian. 1982. Basic syntactic processes. Language development, vol. 1. Syntax and semantics, ed. by Kuczaj, S., 73–136, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian., and Bates, Elizabeth. 1989. The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mandler, Jean. 1992. How to build a baby: 2. Conceptual primitives. Psychological Review 99. 587–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mondloch, James. 1981. Voice in Quiche-Maya. Albany: State University of New York dissertation.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1986. Head-marking and dependent-marking grammar. Language 62. 56–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, Doris. 1994. The Tupí-Guaraní inverse. Voice: form and function, ed. by Fox, Barbara and Hopper, Paul, 313–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David. 1982. Syntactic representation, syntactic levels, and the notion of subject. The nature of syntactic representation, ed. by Jacobson, Polly and Pullum, Geoffrey, 283–340. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perlmutter, David. 1993. Templatic syntax. Paper presented at the sixth biennial conference on grammatical relations, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, B.C.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, David., and Rhodes, Richard. 1988. Syntactic-thematic alignments in Ojibwe. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America. New Orleans.Google Scholar
Platero, Paul. 1982. Missing noun phrases and grammatical relations in Navajo. International Journal of American Linguistics 48. 286–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pléh, Csaba. 1989. The development of sentence interpretation in Hungarian. In MacWhinney and Bates, 158–84.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan and Smolensky, Paul. 1993. Optimality: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Rutgers University and University of Colorado, ms.Google Scholar
Raposo, Eduardo. 1986. On the null object in European Portuguese. Studies in Romance Linguistics, ed. by Jaeggli, Osvaldo and Silva-Corvalan, Carmen. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Rhodes, Richard. 1990. Obviation, inversion, and topic rank in Ojibwa. Berkeley Linguistics Society 16(2). 101–15.Google Scholar
Rhodes, Richard. 1993. The possessor constraint. Paper presented at the twenty-fifth Algonquian conference Montreal.Google Scholar
Rhodes, Richard. 1994. Agency, inversion, and thematic alignment in Ojibwe. Berkeley Linguistics Society 20. 431–46.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Hierarchy of features and ergativity. Grammatical categories in Australian languages, ed. by Dixon, R.M.W., 112–71. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Thompson, Chad. 1989. Voice and obviation in Athabaskan and other languages. Eugene: University of Oregon dissertation.Google Scholar
Thompson, Chad. 1994. Passive and inverse constructions. In Givón 1994, 47–63.Google Scholar
Tomlin, Russell. 1985. Interaction of subject, theme, and agent. Beyond the sentence: Discourse and sentential form, ed. by Wirth, Jessica, 61–80. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers.Google Scholar
Trechsel, Frank. 1995. Grammatical relations and clause structure in Jakaltek. Paper delivered at the summer meeting of the Society for the Study of Indigenous Languages of the Americas, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Whistler, Kenneth. 1985. Focus, perspective, and inverse person marking in Nootkan. Grammar inside and outside the clause, ed. by Nichols, Johanna and Woodbury, Anthony, 227–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wolfart, H. Christoph. 1973. Plains Cree: A grammatical study. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. N.S., vol. 63, part 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolford, Ellen. 1991. VP-internal subjects in VSO and nonconfigurational languages. Linguistic Inquiry 22. 503–540.Google Scholar