5 Why are stative‐active languages rare in Eurasia? A typological perspective on split‐subject marking

Johanna Nichols

80 citations0/0 files stored

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation Linguistics and Cultural Studies Categorization, perception, and language

Abstract

Abstract This chapter presents a lexical typological study of argument encoding for selected verb glosses across selected languages of Eurasia, the Pacific, and the Americas. Plotting the percentages of A- vs. O-coded Ss for the sample yields a continuum where ergative and accusative languages cluster towards opposite extremes and languages normally classified as semantically aligned fall in between.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 80 citations exist upstream.

References

1991Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection 2002World Lexicon of Grammaticalization 2001Radical Construction Grammar 1957Verbs and Times 2014Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar 1978Impersonal Passives and the Unaccusative Hypothesis 2005Language Contact and Grammatical Change 1992Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time

Cited by

2017The Acquisition of Murrinhpatha (Northern Australia)2017The ‘Word’ in Polysynthetic Languages 2012Reconstructing constructional semantics 2017Polysynthetic Structures of Lowland Amazonia 2013Symmetric and asymmetric alternations in direct object encoding 2017Sub-Types of Polysynthesis 2017The Acquisition of Polysynthetic Verb Forms in Chintang

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.