Although I've already presented a few interesting potential quirks for inverse alignment, let's try and insert the notion of quirky case into the fray.
In languages with case, quirky case is when a subject (or object) takes an unusual case in certain constructions or with certain verbs. This is different from differential subject/object marking, in that it doesn't really convey any extra information - it's a mandatory part of the construction. Examples of quirky case include German 'hilfen' (to help) which takes a dative object, not an accusative one, or Icelandic 'to lack' which takes an accusative subject.
Imagine that a bunch of verbs inverse the meaning of the inverse marker, for whatever reason. This is not all that far from a quirky case analogy for inverse alignment, but it strikes me as a bit uninterestingly obvious. Let's try something else.
How about ... certain verbs require the argument that is the highest in the hierarchy to have certain markers (i.e. case or adpositions or possibly some determiner of some kind). These verbs only mark the default alignment (so a null morpheme implies inverse alignment). Some other verbs require a separate marker on the argument lowest in the hierarchy, but likewise do mark the default alignment.
Adpositions or subordinated verbs affect the relation of arguments to the main verb, so that an argument that is syntactically bound to a subordinated verb (or adposition) automatically is lowered to the bottom of the hierarchy. Such "syntactical boundedness" is also marked morphophonologically by something like Celtic mutations or the like.
No comments:
Post a Comment