enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Ergative–absolutive alignment - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergative–absolutive...

    The ergative-absolutive alignment is in contrast to nominative–accusative alignment, which is observed in English and most other Indo-European languages, where the single argument of an intransitive verb ("She" in the sentence "She walks") behaves grammatically like the agent of a transitive verb ("She" in the sentence "She finds it") but ...

  3. Split ergativity - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_ergativity

    In intransitive clauses, the subject can either be represented by a set A-person marker, or a set B-person marker, depending on aspect. In perfective aspect, Chol has ergative–absolutive alignment: the subject of the intransitive verb is expressed by a suffixed person marker, thus in the same way as the object of transitive verbs.

  4. Morphosyntactic alignment - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphosyntactic_alignment

    In an ergative–absolutive system, S and O are one group and contrast with A. The English language represents a typical nominative–accusative system (accusative for short). The name derived from the nominative and accusative cases. Basque is an ergative–absolutive system (or simply ergative). The name stemmed from the ergative and ...

  5. Active–stative alignment - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active–stative_alignment

    In linguistic typology, active–stative alignment (also split intransitive alignment or semantic alignment) is a type of morphosyntactic alignment in which the sole argument ("subject") of an intransitive clause (often symbolized as S) is sometimes marked in the same way as an agent of a transitive verb (that is, like a subject such as "I" or "she" in English) but other times in the same way ...

  6. Tripartite alignment - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripartite_alignment

    In linguistic typology, tripartite alignment is a type of morphosyntactic alignment in which the main argument ('subject') of an intransitive verb, the agent argument ('subject') of a transitive verb, and the patient argument ('direct object') of a transitive verb are each treated distinctly in the grammatical system of a language. [1]

  7. Georgian grammar - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgian_grammar

    The division is usually based on semantic criteria regarding the nature of the subject and the verb; for example, if the subject identifies an agent (an active or intentional performer of the action of the verb), then it might be marked with one case (e.g. the ergative), while if the subject identifies an experiencer of the event or one who ...

  8. Voice (grammar) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_(grammar)

    The antipassive voice deletes or demotes the object of transitive verbs, and promotes the actor to an intransitive subject. This voice is very common among ergative–absolutive languages (which may feature passive voices as well), but also occurs among nominative–accusative languages .

  9. Absolutive case - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolutive_case

    In languages with ergative–absolutive alignment, the absolutive is the case used to mark both the subject of an intransitive verb and the object of a transitive verb in addition to being used for the citation form of a noun. It contrasts with the marked ergative case, which marks the subject of a transitive verb.