Direct-inverse language
Encyclopedia : D : DI : DIR : Direct-inverse language
A direct-inverse language is one where morphosyntactic markers vary according to compliance or non-compliance with normal rules governing the neutral order of verb arguments with respect to the position of each on the animacy hierarchy, similar to the way that Indo-European neuters were not originally regarded as possible verbal agents. A more 'unusual' semantic occurrence not matching the expected syntactic role of the arguments as given by their animacy is marked on the verb, giving flexibility to what can act as an agent on a more animate patient. It is expected that word order in these languages is sufficiently free to allow rearranging of the neutral order of the verb arguments.
Most such languages place a direct or inverse marker onto verbs or nouns depending on the relative animacy and order of its arguments. The direct form is used when the subject has higher obviation status (i.e. topicality) or animacy, including person hierarchy, e.g. 1st > 2nd > 3rd, than the object, while the inverse form is used when the reverse is true.
For example, in Ojibwe, an Algonquian language of North America, the person hierarchy is second person > first person > proximate (the third person considered more important or basic in a discussion) > obviative (the third person considered less important or basic in a discussion). Ojibwe has no case distinctions, so in a transitive verb with two participants, the only way to distinguish subject from object is through direct/inverse suffixes. A direct suffix indicates that the action is performed by someone higher on the person hierarchy on someone lower on the person hierarchy (e.g., by the addressee on the speaker, or by a proximate third person on an obviative):
| obizindawaan | |||
| o- | bizindaw | -aa | -n |
| 3- | listen.to | -DIRECT | -3OBVIATIVE |
| "He listens to the other one" | |||
An inverse suffix indicates that the action is performed by someone lower on the person hierarchy on someone higher on the person hierarchy (e.g., by the speaker on the addressee, or by an obviative third person on a proximate):
| obizindawigoon | |||
| o- | bizindaw | -igoo | -n |
| 3- | listen.to | -INVERSE | -3OBVIATIVE |
| "The other one listens to him" | |||
As can be seen, the only difference between these two verbs is the direct/inverse opposition, rather than case markers, morpheme order, or word order (when separate nominals are used).
In such languages, an inverse verb is not necessarily passive, and many direct/inverse language have separate passivity markers, distinct from the direct/inverse markers:
| bizindaawaa | |||
| bizindaw | -aa | ||
| listen.to | -PASSIVE | ||
| "He is listened to" | |||
Direct-inverse systems on verbs coexist with the various morphosyntactic alignments in nouns.
References
- Mithun, Marianne (1999). The Languages of Native North America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Valentine, J. Randolph. 2001. Nishnaabemwin Reference Grammar. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
External links
- [Yi and Bi: Proximate and Obviative in Navajo]
- [TYPOLOGY 5, Argument Structure and its Morphosyntactic Representation: Nominative/Accusative, Ergative/Absolutive, Active/Inactive, Direct/Inverse]
- [Lecture 8: Split Ergative and Inverse Systems]
- [Topic, Focus and Point of View in Blackfoot]
- [Inversion and Obviation in Mesoamerica]
- [Ojibwe Verb Paradigms]
From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Original article here. Support Wikipedia by contributing or donating.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License See Wikipedia Copyrights for details.