Morphosyntactic alignment
morphosyntactic alignment is a term used to describe the way in which the arguments of transitive and intransitive verbs are marked in sentences in some languages. From this view, most languages can be classified as either nominative-accusative or ergative-absolutive (a third type is active-inactive alignment and mixed alignments). of the above types).
An example of a nominative-accusative language is French, while Basque is an ergative-absolutive language. The following two sentences illustrate the alignment of both (see example image):
- (French)
- (1a) il It's up. = '(he) has arrived'
- (2a) il him Voit = '(he) sees it.'
- (euskera)
- (1b) gizona etorri da = 'man has come'
- (2b) gizonak mutilation ikusi = 'Man has seen the boy'
Basic Alignments
Morphosyntactic alignment is one of the most important typological parameters of a language, since almost all other areas of grammar are affected by the alignment type. The alignment serves to interpret the thematic role of each one of the participants in a verbal action (agent, patient, subject, experimenter, etc.).
It is generally accepted that there are three types of basic alignments in the world's languages. To explain the three basic alignments it is common to introduce the following types of participants:
- Active intransitive subject (Sa) or only participant of an interpretable preaching as an agent.
- Inactive intransitive subject (So) or only participant of an interpretable preaching as an experienced, experienced or subject.
- Active transitional subject (A), in a transitional sentence, which is interpretable as an agent.
- Direct inactive object (O), in a transitional sentence, which is interpretable as a subject or patient.
According to this classification of the participants, the following alignments are frequent:
- Nominative-accusative, is the type of alignment in which Sa, So and A are treated in the same way (name) and O is treated differently (accusive). Of the languages with an explicit morphological case, about 55% of the languages have this type of alignment.
- Ergative-absolutive, is the type of alignment where Sa, So and O are treated in the same way (absolutive) and A is treated differently (ergative). Of the languages with an explicit morphological case, 35% have this type of alignment.
- Active-inactive, is the type of alignment where Sa and A have the same type of treatment (active) and So and O have inactive treatment. This type of alignment appears around 5% of the languages with explicit case.
- Tripartite, in which S, A and O receive a different brand each of them, so there are three brands instead of two as in the previous three systems. This type of alignment appears around 5% of the languages with explicit case.
This alignment can be expressed through various procedures, such as adpositions or particles, verbal affixes, order of constituents, intonation or a combination of these procedures.
Examples
Nominative-accusative languages
Nahuatl is an example of a nominative-accusative language that has the possibility of marking both the verb and the agent and the patient of an action, when two participants appear. The intransitive forms of the verb itta 'see' are:
| 1.a singular | 2nd singular | 3.a singular | 1.a plural | 2nd plural | 3.a plural | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| intransitive form | anditta 'see' | ♪itta 'ves' | Øitta 've' | ♪ittah Let's see. | amittah 'You see.' | Øittah 'Come' |
The nominative-accusative alignment of the languages can be appreciated when comparing the previous forms with the transitive forms with two participants: agent (blue) and patient or subject (red):
| 1.a singular | 2nd singular | 3.a singular | 1.a plural | 2nd plural | 3.a plural | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.a singular | ninoitta I see. | ♪nechitta 'You see me.' | Ønechitta 'see me.' | annechittah 'You see me.' | Ønechittah 'come me.' | |
| 2nd singular | andmitzitta I see you. | timoitta 'You see.' | Ømitzitta 'see you.' | ♪mitzittah 'See you.' | Ømitzittah 'Come.' | |
| 3.a singular | andkiitta 'I see it.' | ♪kiitta 'You see it.' | moitta 'sees.' Økiitta 'See it.' | ♪kiittah 'See you.' | ankiittah 'You see it.' | Økiittah 'See it.' |
| 1.a plural | ♪techitta 'You see us.' | Øtechitta 'He sees us.' | titoittah 'See you.' | antechittah 'You see us.' | Øtechittah 'Come to us.' | |
| 2nd plural | namechitta I see you. | Øamechitta 'see you.' | tamechittah 'See you.' | ammoittah 'You see.' | Øamechittah 'Come.' | |
| 3.a plural | andkimitta 'I see them.' | ♪kimitta 'You see them.' | 'Økimitta 'See them.' | ♪kimittah 'See you.' | ankimittah 'You see them.' | moittah 'Come.' Økimittah They see them. |
The morphemes in green indicate that it is a reflexive form.
Ergative-absolutive languages
Basque is a consistently ergative language that marks patient and agent in the conjugated verb form (usually the auxiliary *ukan 'haber' or izan 'to be'). The following table shows the present conjugation of the verb ikusi through the auxiliary verb; all forms have the form:
- ikusten + AUXILIAR
The following table includes both the formal or respect forms in the second person (fr.) and the informal masculine (m. inf.) and feminine (f. in.) forms.
| 1.a singular | 2nd singular | 3.a singular | 1.a plural | 2nd plural | 3.a plural | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.a singular | ikusten nauk (m.in.) ikusten naun (f.in.) | ikusten nauØ 'see me.' | ikusten nauzue 'You see me.' | ikusten nauyou 'come me.' | ||
| 2nd singular | ikusten haut (in.) ikusten zaitut (fr.) | ikusten hauØ (in.) ikusten zaituØ (fr.) | ikusten haugu (in.) ikusten zaitugu (fr.) | ikusten hauyou (in.) ikusten zaituzte (fr.) | ||
| 3.a singular | ikusten dut 'I see it.' | ikusten duk (m.in.) ikusten dun (f.in.) ikusten duZu (fr.) | ikusten duØ 'See it.' | ikusten dugu 'See you.' | ikusten duzue 'You see it.' | ikusten duyou 'See it.' |
| 1.a plural | ikusten gaituk (m.in.) ikusten gaitun (f.in.) ikusten gaituZu (fr.) | ikusten gaituØ 'He sees us.' | ikusten gaituzue 'You see us.' | ikusten gaituzte 'Come to us.' | ||
| 2nd plural | ikusten zaituztet I see you. | ikusten zaituzteØ 'see you.' | ikusten zaituztegu 'See you.' | ikusten zaituzteyou 'Come.' | ||
| 3.a plural | ikusten ditt 'I see them.' | ikusten ditk (m.in.) ikusten ditn (f.in.) ikusten ditZu (fr.) | ikusten ditØ 'See them.' | ikusten ditgu 'See you.' | ikusten ditzue 'You see them.' | ikusten ditzte They see them. |
The ergative character of the language appears clear when the above is compared with the intransitive forms with only one participant (in this case the auxiliary will be izan):
| 1.a singular | 2nd singular | 3.a singular | 1.a plural | 2nd plural | 3.a plural | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| intransitive form | I can. naiz 'I've gone up.' | I can. haiz (inf.) I can. zAra (for.) | I can. da 'has gone up.' | I can. gAra 'We have gone up.' | I can. zareyou 'You have gone up.' | I can. danger 'They've gone up.' |
Mixed languages
Another group of languages are not consistently ergative or consistently accusative, but, depending on certain factors (usually a hierarchy of animacy), use nominative-accusative marking in some cases and ergative-absolutive marking in others. That phenomenon is known as split ergativity. The central Mapuche is an example of that kind of behavior[citation required]. The intransitive forms of the verb 'mirar' are:
| 1.a singular | 2nd singular | 3.a singular | 1.a dual/plural | 2a dual/plural | 3.a dual/plural | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| intransitive form | lelin 'I looked.' | leliymi 'You looked.' | leliand He looked. | leliyu (d) leli♫ (pl) 'Let's look.' | leliymu (d) leliymün (pl) 'You looked.' | leliand They looked. |
The mixed alignment of the languages can be seen in one of the transitive forms with two participants: agent (blue) and patient or subject (red):
| 1.a singular | 2nd singular | 3.a singular | 1.a dual | 2nd dual | 3.a dual | 1.a plural | 2nd plural | 3.a plural | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.a singular | leliwün 'I looked at me.' | lelien 'You looked at me.' | lelieneo 'He looked at me.' | lelimumn 'You looked at me.' | lelieneo 'They looked at me.' | lelimumn 'You looked at me.' | lelieneo 'They looked at me.' | ||
| 2nd singular | lelieyu 'I looked at you.' | leliwimi You looked at yourself. | ♪eymiMeo ♪eandMeo 'He looked at you.' | leliw♫ 'We looked at you.' | ♪eymiMeo ♪eandMeo 'They looked at you.' | leliw♫ 'We looked at you.' | ♪eymiMeo ♪eandMeo 'They looked at you.' | ||
| 3.a singular | lelifin 'I looked at him.' | lelifimy 'You looked at him.' | lelifiand (dir.) lelieandeo(inv.) | lelifiyu 'We looked at him.' | lelifimum 'You looked at him.' | lelifiand (dir.) lelieandeo (inv.) | lelifi♫ 'We looked at him.' | lelifimün 'You looked at him.' | lelifiand (dir.) lelieandeo (inv.) |
| 1.a dual | lelimumyu 'You looked at us.' | lelieyuMeo 'He looked at us.' | leliwiyu 'We look at each other' | lelimumyu 'You looked at us.' | lelieyuMeo 'They looked at us.' | lelimumyu 'You looked at us.' | lelieyuMeo 'They looked at us.' | ||
| 2nd dual | leliw♫ 'I looked at you.' | lelieymuMeo 'He looked at you.' | leliw♫ 'We look at you.' | leliwimu 'You looked at yourselves.' | lelieymuMeo They looked at you. | leliw♫ 'We look at you.' | lelieymuMeo They looked at you. | ||
| 3.a dual | lelifin 'I looked at them.' | lelifimy You looked at them. | lelifiand (dir.) lelieandeo (inv.) | lelifiyu 'We looked at them.' | lelifimum 'You looked at them.' | lelifiand (dir.) lelieandeo (inv.) | lelifi♫ 'We looked at them.' | lelifimün 'You looked at them.' | lelifiand (dir.) lelieandeo (inv.) |
| 1.a plural | lelimum♫ 'You looked at us.' | lelie♫Meo 'He looked at us.' | lelimum♫ 'You looked at us.' | lelie♫Meo 'They looked at us.' | leliwii 'We look at each other' | lelimum♫ 'You looked at us.' | lelie♫Meo 'They looked at us.' | ||
| 2nd plural | leliw♫ 'I looked at you.' | lelieymünMeo 'He looked at you.' | leliw♫ 'We look at you.' | lelieymünMeo They looked at you. | leliw♫ 'We look at you.' | leliwimün 'You looked at yourselves.' | lelieymünMeo They looked at you. | ||
| 3.a plural | lelifin 'I looked at them.' | lelifimy You looked at them. | lelifiand (dir.) lelieandeo (inv.) | lelifiyu 'We looked at them.' | lelifimum 'You looked at them.' | lelifiand (dir.) lelieandeo (inv.) | lelifi♫ 'We looked at them.' | lelifimün 'You looked at them.' | lelifiand (dir.) lelieandeo (inv.) |
The morphemes in green indicate that it is a reflexive form.
Active-inactive languages
This type of alignment is very frequent, for example, among the Arawak languages. For example, it has been very well studied in Lokono and closely related languages, such as Guajiro. Some Otomanguean languages, such as the Amuzgo language and Chocho, also present this type of alignment.
Some authors, such as Dixon, have proposed that active-inactive languages can be interpreted as languages with split ergativity controlled by the meaning of the intransitive verb, which is formally correct but perhaps misleading to consider these languages a particular case of ergative tongue.