OPTIONAL ERGATIVITY WITH UNERGATIVES IN PUNJABI

旁遮普語中非作格動詞選擇性的作格現象

10.6519/TJL.2017.15(2).1

Pritha Chandra；Gurmeet Kaur；Usha Udaar

unergatives ； transitivity ； light verbs ； dependent case ； feature inheritance ； 非作格 ； 及物性 ； 輕動詞 ； 依附格 ； 特徵繼承

Taiwan Journal of Linguistics

15卷2期（2017 / 07 / 01）

1 - 35

英文

In this paper, we describe and analyze the previously undocumented ergative case patterns with unergatives in the Indo-Aryan language Punjabi. More specifically, we discuss unergative verbs in the language that optionally mark their subjects with an ergative case. We demonstrate that the lack of ergative marking is not associated with the intransitivity of the verbs since they obligatorily select implicit internal arguments, and are selected by transitive light verbs. We attempt a dependent case analysis (Coon 2010, 2013; Coon and Preminger 2012, 2013) of the Punjabi ergative, with optional feature inheritance between two v heads. The ergative is withheld in cases with no feature inheritance, forcing the external argument out of the vP domain containing the object. This paper ends with some preliminary observations on the mechanisms of optionality in the grammar.

本文描述及分析印度亞利安語系旁遮普語中前人未曾注意到的的作格現象。旁遮普語的非作格動詞可選擇性地將主語標記為作格。本文證明，不帶作格標記與動詞的不及物性無關，因為他們強制選擇隱含的內部論元，並且被及物輕動詞所選擇。本文藉由「依附格」的概念(Coon 2010,2013; Coon and Preminger 2012, 2013)來分析旁遮普語中的作格。在兩個動詞中心語之間可有選擇性的特徵繼承，在不發生特徵繼承的情形下，作格獲得了保留，因而強迫外部論元必須移出帶有賓語的動詞短語範疇。本文最後對於語法中的可選性機制整理出一些初步的觀察。

1. Butt, Miriam and Ashwini Deo. 2001. Ergativity in Indo-Aryan. In Online KURDICA Newsletter for Kurdish Language and Studies: 5. (http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/butt/)
2. Roberts, Ian. 2008. Smuggling, Affectness and Argument Structure Alternation. University of Cambridge: Manuscript.
3. Mahajan, Anoop. 1987. Agreement and Agreement Phrases. Unpublished Generals Paper, MIT.
4. Baker, Mark and Ü mit Atlamaz. 2014. On the relationship of case and agreement in split ergative Kurmanji and beyond. Rutgers University: Manuscript..
5. Marantz, Alec. 2006. Argument structure and morphology: Noun phrases that name events. Hand-out, New York University.
6. Coon, Jessica and Omer Preminger. 2012. Taking Ergativity out of Split Ergativity: A Unified Account of Aspect and Person Splits. (ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/001556 )
7. Abels, Klaus(2003).Successive Cyclicity, Anti-locality, and Adposition Stranding.University of Connecticut.
8. Amritavalli, Raghavachari(1979).The representation of transitivity in the lexicon.Linguistic Analysis,5,71-92.
9. Baker, Mark(2014).On dependent ergative case (in Shipibo) and its derivation by phase.Linguistic Inquiry,45,341-380.
10. Baker, Mark,Vinokurova, Nadya(2010).Two modalities of case assignment in Sakha.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory,28,593-642.
11. Baltin, Mark(ed.),Collins, Chris(ed.)(2001).The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory.Oxford:Blackwell.
12. Belletti, A.(ed.)(2004).The Cartography of Syntactic Structures: Vol. 3. Structures and beyond.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
13. Bhatia, Tej K.(1993).Punjabi: A Cognitive-Descriptive Grammar. Routledge Descriptive Grammar Series.London:Routledge.
14. Bhatt, Rajesh(2005).Long distance agreement in Hindi-Urdu.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory,23,757-807.
15. Bhatt, Rajesh(2007).Ergativity in the modern Indo-Aryan languages.MIT Ergativity Seminar
16. Bittner, Maria,Hale, Kenneth(1996).The structural determination of case and agreement.Linguistic Inquiry,27(1),1-68.
17. Bobaljik, Jonathan(1993).On ergativity and ergative unergatives.Papers on Case and Agreement II, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics
18. Boeckx, C.(ed.)(2006).Minimalist Essays.Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
19. Borer, Hagit(1994).The projection of arguments.UMass Occasional Papers in Linguistics 17: Functional Projections,Amherst, MA:
20. Borer, Hagit(2005).Structuring Sense Volume II, The Structure of Events.New York:Oxford University Press.
21. Bybee, Joan,Perkins, Revere,Pagliuca, William(1994).The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World.University of Chicago Press.
22. Coon, Jessica(2013).Aspects of Split Ergativity.New York:Oxford University Press.
23. Coon, Jessica(2010).Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
24. Coon, Jessica,Preminger, Omer(2013).Severing Differential Subject Marking from Ergativity.Handout from talk presented at the 2013 Societas Linguistica Europaea,Split, Croatia:
25. Dayal, V.(ed.),Mahajan, A.(ed.)(2004).Clause Structure in South Asian Languages.Dordrecht:Kluwer.
26. de Urbina, Jon Ortiz(1989).Some Parameters in the Grammar of Basque.Dordrecht:Foris Publications.
27. Demirdache, Hamida,Uribe-Etxebarria, Myriam(2000).The primitives of temporal relations.Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik,Cambridge, MA:
28. Deo, Ashwini,Sharma, Devyani(2006).Typological variation in the ergative morphology of Indo-Aryan languages.Linguistic Typology,10(3),369-418.
29. Diesing, Molly(1992).Indefinites.Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
30. Dixon, Robert(1994).Ergativity.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
31. Dixon, Robert(1979).Ergativity.Language,55,59-138.
32. Dowty, David(1991).The matic Roles and Argument Selection.Language,67,547-619.
33. Dowty, David(1979).Word Meaning and Montague Grammar.Dordrecht:Reidel.
34. Ertischik-Shir, N.(ed.),Rapoport, T.(ed.)(2005).The Syntax of Aspect.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
35. Forker, Diana(2010).The biabsolutive construction in Nakh-Dagestanian: A new type of object incorporation?.8th Meeting of the Association of Linguistic Typology
36. Hale, Kenneth,Keyser, Samuel Jay(1993).On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations.The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger,Cambridge, MA:
37. Haspelmath, M.(ed.)(2001).Language Typology and Language Universals: An International Handbook.Berlin:Walter de Gruyter.
38. Heck, Fabrian(ed.),Müller, Gereon(ed.),Trommer, Jochen(ed.)(2008).Varieties of Competition.
39. Hinzen, Wolfram(2014).On the rationality of case.Language Sciences,46,133-151.
40. Kachru, Yamuna(1987).Ergativity, subjecthood and topicality in Hindi-Urdu.Lingua: International Review of General Linguistics,71,1-4.
41. Kachru, Yamuna,Pandharipande, Rajeshwari(1978).On ergativity in selected South Asian languages.South Asian Languages Analysis,1,193-210.
42. Kazenin, Konstantin I(1998).On patient demotion in Lak.Typology of verbal categories: papers presented to Vladimir Nedjalkov on the occasion of his 70th birthday,Tübingen:
43. Keine, Stefan,Nisar, Trupti,Bhatt, Rajesh(2014).Complete and defective agreement in Kutchi.Linguistic Variation,14(2),243-288.
44. Kenstowicz, M.(ed.)(2001).Ken Hale: A Life in Language.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
45. Kibrik, Aleksandr E.(ed.)(1999).Elementy caxurskogo jazyka v tipologishseskom osvjeshchenii.Nasledie.
46. Kleanthes, Grohmann(2003).Prolific Domains: On the Anti-Locality of Movement Dependencies.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing.
47. Laka, Itziar(2006).Deriving split ergativity in the progressive: The case of Basque.Ergativity: Emerging Issues,Dordrecht:
48. Laka, Itziar(1993).Unergatives that assign ergative, unaccusative that assigns accusative.Papers on Case and Agreement I: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics
49. Landau, Idan(2010).The explicit syntax of implicit arguments.Linguistic Inquiry,41,357-388.
50. Legate, Julie(2005).Split absolutive.Ergativity: Emerging Issues,Dordrecht:
51. Legate, Julie(2008).Morphological and abstract case.Linguistic Inquiry,39(1),55-101.
52. Lehmann, Winfred P.(ed.)(1978).Syntactic Typology: Studies in the Phenomenology of Language.Austin:University of Texas Press.
53. Longobardi, Giuseppe(2000).Postverbal subjects and the mapping hypothesis.Linguistic Inquiry,31(4),691-702.
54. Mahajan, Anoop(1997).Universal grammar and the typology of ergative languages.Studies on Universal Grammar and Typological Variation,Amsterdam:
55. Mahajan, Anoop(2012).Ergatives, antipassives and the overt light v in Hindi.Lingua,122,204-214.
56. Mahajan, Anoop(1990).Cambridge,Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
57. Marantz, Alec(1991).Case and licensing.Proceedings of the 8th Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL 8),Ithaca, NY:
58. McGregor, William(2009).Typology of ergativity.Language and Linguistics Compass,3,480-508.
59. Mithun, Marianne(1991).Active/Agentive case marking and its motivations.Language,67,510-546.
60. Mohanan, Tara(1994).Stanford,Stanford University.
61. Pesetsky, Davis,Torrego, Esther(2007).The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features.Phrasal and Clausal Architecture: Syntactic Derivation and Interpretation,Amsterdam:
62. Platts, John, Thomspson(1967).A Grammar of the Hindustani or Urdu Language.Delhi:Munshiram Manoharlal.
63. Preminger, Omer(2012).The absence of an implicit object in unergatives: New and old evidence from Basque.Lingua,122(3),278-288.
64. Sag, Ivan A.(ed.),Szabolcsi, Anna(ed.)(1992).Lexical Matters.Stanford:CSLI.
65. Subbarao, Karamuri. V.(2012).South Asian Languages: A Syntactic Typology.Cambridge:Cambridge University Pressn.
66. Tenny, Carol(1994).Aspectual Roles and the Syntax-Semantics Interface.Dordrecht:Kluwer Academic Publishers.
67. Tenny, Carol(1987).Cambridge,Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
68. Ura, Hiroyuki(1996).Cambridge,Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
69. Uribe-Etxebarria, Myriam(1989).On Noun incorporation in Basque and some of its consequences in the phrase structure.University of Connecticut.
70. van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen(ed.)(2009).Alternatives to cartography.Walter de Gruyter.
71. Verkuyl, Henk. J.(1972).On the Compositional Nature of the Aspects.Dordrecht:Reidel.
72. Verkuyl, Henk. J.(1996).A Theory of Aspectuality: The Interaction between Temporal and Atemporal Structure.Cambridge University Press.
73. Verkuyl, Henk. J.(1989).Aspectual classes and aspectual composition.Linguistics and Philosophy,12(1),39-94.