We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Different Subjects, Different Marking | SpringerLink
Skip to main content

Different Subjects, Different Marking

  • Chapter
Differential Subject Marking

Part of the book series: Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory ((SNLT,volume 72))

In Tukang Besi the selection of subject is marked on the verb with the use of different agreement markers, while case marking is constant, thus leading to a system in which, depending on the diathesis employed, subject marking on the verb follows completely different paradigms. Some minor sentence types, and differently-marked subordinate sentence types, are also examined, and I explore the implications for the separation of argument structure and grammatical functional structure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Aissen, J. (1999). Markedness and subject choice in Optimality Theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17, 4, 673-711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, A. (1985). The major functions of the noun phrase. Language Typology and syntactic description: Volume I, clause structure. Ed. by T. Shopen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 62-154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arka, I W. and J. Kosmas (2005). Passive without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai. Voice in Western Austronesian languages. Ed. by I W. Arka and M. Ross. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arka, I W. and C.D. Manning (1998). Voice and Grammatical Relations in Indonesian: A New Perspective. Ed. by M. Butt and T.H. King. On-line LFG proceedings. Available at http://www-csli.stanford.edu/publications/LFG3/lfg98-toc.html.

  • Bell, S.J. (1976). Cebuano Subjects in Two Frameworks. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S.J. (1983). Advancements and Ascensions in Cebuano. Studies in relational grammar 1. Ed. by D.M. Perlmutter. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 143-218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, R. van den, (1989). A Grammar of the Muna Language. KITLV, Verhandelingen 139. Dordrecht/Providence: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bresnan, J. and J. Kanerva (1989). Locative inversion in Chichewa: a case study of factorisation in grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 21: 1-50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bresnan, J. and S.A. Mchombo (1987). Topic, pronoun, and agreement in Chichewa. Language 63, 4, 741-782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comrie, B. (1978). Ergativity. Syntactic Typology: Studies in the Phenomenology of Language. Ed. by W.P. Lehmann. Sussex: The Harvester Press, 329-394.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Guzman, V.P. (1978). Syntactic Derivation of Tagalog Verbs. Oceanic linguistics special publications No. 16. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donohue, M. (1999). A Grammar of Tukang Besi. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donohue, M. (2002). Voice in Tukang Besi and the Austronesian voice system. The History and Typology of Western Austronesian Voice Systems. Ed. by F. Wouk and M. Ross. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics 518, 81-99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donohue, M. (2004). Voice oppositions without voice morphology. Proceedings of AFLA 11, ZAS, Berlin 2004. Ed. by P. Law. University of Newcastle. ZAS Papers in Linguistics Nr. 34 - October 2004: 73-88. Berlin: Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie und Universalienforschung, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donohue, M. (2005a). The Palu’e passive: from pragmatic construction to grammatical device. The Many Faces of Austronesian Voice Systems: Some New Empirical Studies. Ed. by I W. Arka and M. Ross. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 59-85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donohue, M. (2005b). Structure is not syntax: passive functions in Tukang Besi. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association. Ed. by J. Heinz and D. Ntelitheos. University of California at Los Angeles Working Papers in Linguistics 12, 73-89. Available online at http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/faciliti/wpl/issues/wpl12/wpl12.htm

  • England, N. (1983). A Grammar of Mam, a Mayan Language. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, Y. (2000a). Pivots and the theory of grammatical functions. Proceedings of the LFG00 conference, University of California at Berkeley. Ed. by M. Butt and T.H. King. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 123-139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, Y. (2000b). Philippine subjects in a monostratal framework. The Proceedings of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association VI. Ed. by C. Smallwood and C. Kitto. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, 133-136. A more complete version of this (sadly truncated) paper is available at http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/∼msyfalk/PhilippineSubjects.pdf.

  • Foley, W.A. and R.D. Van Valin (1977). On the viability of the notion of subject in universal grammar. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society 3. Ed. by K. Whistler et al., 293-320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foley, W.A. and R.D. Van Valin (1984). Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerdts, D.B. (1988). Object and Absolutive in Halkomelem Salish. New York: Garland Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, E.L. (1976). Towards a universal definition of Subject. Subject and Topic. Ed. by C.N. Li. New York: Academic Press, 303-333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiparsky, P. (1997). The rise of positional licensing. Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change. Ed. by A. van Kemenade and N. Vincent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroeger, P. (1993). Phrase Structure and Grammatical Relations in Tagalog. Stanford: CSLI publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning, C. (1996). Ergativity: Argument Structure and Grammatical Relations. Stanford: CSLI Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFarland, C.D. (1976). A Provisional Classification of Tagalog Verbs. Study of languages and cultures of Asia and Africa monograph series No.8. Tokyo: Toyo Shuppan and Tokyo Gaikokugo Daigaku: Institute for the study of languages and cultures of Asia and Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noonan, M. (1992). A Grammar of Lango. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noonan, M. and E. Bavin-Woock. (1978). The passive analog in Lango. Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society, 128-139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plank, F. (1984). Objects: Towards a Theory of Grammatical Relations. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schachter, P. (1976). The Subject in Philippine languages: Topic, Actor, Actor-Topic or None of the above. Subject and Topic. Ed. by C.N. Li. New York: Academic Press, 491-518.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schachter, P. (1977). Reference-related and role-related properties of subjects. Syntax and Semantics 8: Grammatical Relations. Ed. by P. Cole and J.M. Sadock. New York: Academic Press, 279-305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sells, P. (2000). Raising and the Order of Clausal Constituents in the Philippine Languages. Formal Issues in Austronesian Linguistics. Ed. by I. Paul, V. Phillips and L. Travis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 117-143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sells, P. (2001). Form and function in the typology of grammatical voice systems. Optimality-Theoretic Syntax. Ed. by G. Legendre, J. Grimshaw and S. Vikner. Cambridge: MIT Press, 355-391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Valin, R.D. and R.J. LaPolla (1997). Syntax: Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wunderlich, D. (1997). Cause and the structure of verbs. Linguistic Inquiry 28: 27-68.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Donohue, M. (2009). Different Subjects, Different Marking. In: de Hoop, H., de Swart, P. (eds) Differential Subject Marking. Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, vol 72. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6497-5_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics