Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Syntactic lability vs. ergativity in Indo-Aryan
View through CrossRef
Contemporary IA languages are considered to be purely nominative at the level of syntax. Ergativity is restricted to the morphological domain. However the scrutiny of certain syntactic constructions such as converbal clause chaining or coordinate conjunction reduction shows that they are not necessarily sensitive to the basic grammatical relations (Bickel & Yādava 2000), in other words, the notion of pivot is not fully operational in the IA languages. The aim of the present paper is to demonstrate that apart from the dominating syntactic A/S pivot early NIA shows: (a) instances of converbs not controlled by the A of the main clause and (b) the dropped element in coordinate or certain subordinate constructions is not always an A/S argument. The alleged syntactic lability will be observed diachronically in four dialectal groups, namely Rajasthani, Pahari, Western Hindi and Eastern Hindi.
Title: Syntactic lability vs. ergativity in Indo-Aryan
Description:
Contemporary IA languages are considered to be purely nominative at the level of syntax.
Ergativity is restricted to the morphological domain.
However the scrutiny of certain syntactic constructions such as converbal clause chaining or coordinate conjunction reduction shows that they are not necessarily sensitive to the basic grammatical relations (Bickel & Yādava 2000), in other words, the notion of pivot is not fully operational in the IA languages.
The aim of the present paper is to demonstrate that apart from the dominating syntactic A/S pivot early NIA shows: (a) instances of converbs not controlled by the A of the main clause and (b) the dropped element in coordinate or certain subordinate constructions is not always an A/S argument.
The alleged syntactic lability will be observed diachronically in four dialectal groups, namely Rajasthani, Pahari, Western Hindi and Eastern Hindi.
Related Results
THE SYNTACTIC UNIT (FROM DEFINITION TO MODELLING)
THE SYNTACTIC UNIT (FROM DEFINITION TO MODELLING)
Background. In the article the vital questions of syntax of the present-day Ukrainian language are touched, syntax represents the top stratum of language organization and in itscom...
Ergativity
Ergativity
Ergativity refers to a system of marking grammatical relations in which intransitive subjects pattern together with transitive objects (“absolutive”), and differently from transiti...
Case Markers in Indo-Aryan
Case Markers in Indo-Aryan
Indo-Aryan languages have the longest documented historical record, with the earliest attested texts going back to 1900 bce. Old Indo-Aryan (Vedic, Sanskrit) had an inflectional ca...
Functional Convergence of Indo-Aryan Infinitives and Gerundives in the Middle Indo-Aryan
Functional Convergence of Indo-Aryan Infinitives and Gerundives in the Middle Indo-Aryan
The present study offers a comprehensive diachronic analysis of the functional-semantic and syntactic transformations of Indo-Aryan non-finite verbal forms, specifically the infini...
Indo-Anglian: Connotations and Denotations
Indo-Anglian: Connotations and Denotations
A different name than English literature, ‘Anglo-Indian Literature’, was given to the body of literature in English that emerged on account of the British interaction with India un...
The Nuristani languages
The Nuristani languages
In the context of the problems connected with the early migrations of the Indo-Iranian peoples and the entry of the Indo-Aryans into India, the question of where and when the ances...
Ergativity in Indo-Aryan and beyond
Ergativity in Indo-Aryan and beyond
This chapter gives an overview of the current state of the art of research on ergativity in Indo-Aryan. First, it discusses a number of theoretical and terminological issues concer...
Ergativity in Indo-Aryan
Ergativity in Indo-Aryan
Case and agreement patterns that are present in Old, Middle, and New Indo-Aryan languages have been argued to require the following perspective: since ergative case marking and erg...

