HELP: UNDERSTANDING RECORDS

SYNTACTIC RELATION

Examples are defined according to the types of syntactic relation that prominent internal possessors participate in. This is found on the top line of the each record.

AGREEMENT IN THE CLAUSAL DOMAIN

The domain for agreement is a clause. The target is typically a lexical verb or auxiliary, the controller is a prominent internal possessor. The phrase hosting the possessor may have a range of grammatical functions (see HOST FUNCTION). The features involved in the agreement relation are also listed.

AGREEMENT IN THE NOMINAL DOMAIN

The domain for agreement is a nominal phrase (NP or DP). The target is typically a modifier or determiner, the controller is a prominent internal possessor. The features involved in the agreement relation are also listed.

SWITCH-REFERENCE

A prominent internal possessors participates in the switch-reference system, as if it were the head of their phrase that hosts it. Same-subject (SS) marking is licensed when the subject of one clause and the internal possessor of the subject of another clause are co-referential. The possessor phrase may be in either the superordinate or subordinate clause (see SWITCH REFERENCE TYPE).

SWITCH-REFERENCE AND AGREEMENT

A prominent internal possessors simultaneously participates in the switch-reference system AND agreement.

AGREEMENT FEATURES

Four different types of agreement features are for each agreement type (AGREEMENT IN CLAUSAL DOMAIN and AGREEMENT IN NOMINAL DOMAIN).

PERSON
NUMBER
GENDER
RESPECT

EXAMPLE

Each example has the same structure:

The language name, followed by the genus in brackets, e.g. Bajjika (Indic)
Text line
Interlinear gloss
Translation
Source, including the page number where appropriate. All sources are listed in the references.

Brackets within the text line identify a subordinate clause. Long examples can be viewed using the horizontal scroll bar.

Notes about the example, including any relevant information about the context of its use are provided at the end of the

TYPE

Each examples is categorised according to the subtypes of syntactic relation that prominent internal possessors participate in. These can be further divided into AGREEMENT TYPE and SWITCH-REFERENCE TYPE.

SUBJECT AGREEMENT

The agreement pattern observed on the target is the same as with agreement with subjects.

NON-NOMINATIVE SUBJECT AGREEMENT

The agreement pattern observed on the target is the same as with agreement with non-nominative subjects (i.e. subjects that occur in some case other than nominative such as dative subjects).

OBJECT AGREEMENT

The agreement pattern observed on the target is the same as with agreement with objects.

OBLIQUE AGREEMENT

The agreement pattern observed on the target is the same as with agreement with oblique controllers, that are neither subjects nor objects.

OBJECT/OBLIQUE AGREEMENT

The agreement pattern observed on the target is the same as with agreement with objects and oblique controllers.

DOUBLE AGREEMENT

In double agreement, two controllers of agreement determine the properties of the same target simultaneous. The primary controller is typically the subject, while the secondary controller may be some other grammatical function, such as an object or oblique.

POSSESSOR AGREEMENT

Possessor agreement is observed only in the nominal domain. It is agreement pattern observed on the targets within the noun phrase when the possessor is the controller.

SUBORDINATE SWITCH-REFERENCE

In subordinate switch-reference, the phrase containing the prominent internal possessor is in a subordinate/embedded clause.

SUPERORDINATE SWITCH-REFERENCE

In superordinate switch-reference, the phrase containing the prominent internal possessor is in a superordinate/matrix clause.

HOST FUNCTION

The host function defines the grammatical function of the phrase that contains the prominent internal possessor:

Intransitive subject
Transitive subject
Primary object
Secondary object
Oblique
Complement of copula

POSSESSOR EXPRESSION

Internal possessors can be expressed using a range of means. The possessor may be a free word, or a bound element:

Noun
Free pronoun
Clitic
Affix

Sometimes free and bound elements are used together to indicate possession:

Noun + clitic
Free pronoun + clitic
Noun + affix
Free pronoun + affix

In some examples the possessor is not overtly expressed, and reference to the possessor is indicated only through the presence of agreement, or through same-subject marking:

Agreement only
Switch-reference only

POSSESSIVE RELATION

We characterise the relation between the possessor and possessed into four different categories.

PART-WHOLE

Part-whole relations include those relation where the possessed entity is clearly identifiable as a part of the possessor. Typical examples are body parts.

KINSHIP

Kinship relations those that are identifiable through consanguineal (e.g. my mother) or affinal (e.g. my husband) ties.

OWNERSHIP/CONTROL

In ownership relations, the possessed entity belongs to the possessor in so much that the possessor is the legal owner (e.g. my book, my lawnmower). In control relations, the possessor has control or authority over the possessed entity, even if they do not actually legally own it (e.g. my servant).

OTHER

All other types of possessive relation fall into this category (e.g. my feelings, my idea).

POSSESSOR AND PHRASE FEATURES

Properties of the possessor and the possessor phrase as a whole are provided in the following order:

Person (1 = first person, 2 - second person, 3 = third person)
Number (SG = singular, DU = dual, PL = plural, etc.)
Gender (M = masculine, F = feminine, N = neuter, etc.)
Respect (LOW = low honorific, MID = mid honorific, HIGH = high honorific, RESPECT = utmost respect honorific)
Case (NOM = nominative, ERG = ergative, ABS = absolutive, ACC = accusative, DAT = dative, GEN = genitive, OTHER = all other cases)
Animacy (HUM = human, ANIM = animate, INAN = inanimate)

Note that values for GENDER, RESPECT and CASE are only shown if relevant for the specific example.

PROMINENCE CONDITIONS

Internal possessors are able to control agreement or switch reference under certain conditions. We refer to these as prominence conditions. Unless a suitable prominence condition is met, the possessor cannot participate in these syntactic relations. The following labels give a broad, indicative characterisation of the conditions that are we have been able to identify in the dataset. These are not definitional, but descriptive indicators of what types of factors are responsible for facilitating possessor prominence.

DISCOURSE CONDITION

Discourse conditions on possessor prominence occur when internal possessors only control agreement and/or switch-reference under certain discourse conditions that cannot be clearly categorised in terms of topicality or focus.

FOCUS

In some languages, internal possessors must be in focus in order to control agreement. This is most clearly observed in contrastive focus constructions. For discussion of the role of focus in Maithili, see Yadava et al (2019).

LEXICAL CONDITION

Lexical conditions on possessor prominence are observed when prominent possessors are restricted to constructions by virtue of lexical properties of the predicate.

PIVOT RELATION

Conditions on pivot relations between the co-referential expressions in a superordinate and subordinate clauses restrict when a possessor may act as a pivot for switch-reference. For instance, SR marking might be conditional on the possessor being a dependent of the subject of the subordinate clause, but ungrammatical if the possessor is a dependent of the subject of the superordinate clause. For discussion of pivot relation conditions in Bashkir, see Say (2019).

REFERENTIAL FEATURES

A possessor having certain values for referential features is an important condition on its ability to control agreement and/or switch reference in many languages, including person, animacy and honorific grade. Referential features often play an important role in determining the potential for being a prominent possessor, as in Maithili (Yadav et al. 2019).

STRUCTURAL CONDITION

Structural conditions on possessor prominence are observed where possessors that can control agreement or switch reference are in a syntactically prominent position, that differs from the position of internal possessors that do not act as controllers. For discussion of possible structural conditions on possessor prominence see Nikolaeva and Bárány (2019) on Tundra Nenets, and Yadava et al. (2019) on Maithili.

TOPICALITY

When topicality is a condition on possessor prominence, the possessor is a primary or secondary topic, or discourse topic. For discussion of the role of topicality and possessor prominence in Tundra Nenets, see Nikolaeva and Bárány (2019).

VALENCE CONDITION

A valence condition of possessor prominence is observed when clauses containing internal possessors share some properties of those with regular applied arguments. For discussion of possible valence conditions on possessor prominence see Aissen (2007) on Tzotzil, and Ritchie (2019) on Chimane.

UNCLEAR

In many cases, we are at the early stages of understanding what conditions possessor prominence, and the examples we found cannot be broadly characterised using any of the types outlined above.

GRAMMATICALITY

Most of the examples in the database are grammatical ones, but some are not. Non-grammatical examples can be excluded from searches by ticking the checkbox immediately above the collapsible filter menu. Examples are characterised int he following way:

Grammatical
Ungrammatical
Odd

Notes on the reason for the ungrammaticality or infelicitous nature of an example are usually provided to help explain the significance of the example.