Are S, A, and P arguments flagged identically (i.e. are they neutrally aligned)? Flagging covers any kind of argument marking on the argument itself (e.g. by case or adposition marking). The marking can be phonologically free or bound. Reply with 1 if none of the three arguments is overtly flagged (i.e. if all three arguments are zero-marked). In case of differential flagging systems, reply with 1 if any of the subsystems (e.g. a particular tense) shows neutral alignment. Reply with 1 if only nouns or only pronouns shows neutral alignment. Reply with 1 also if some or just one personal pronoun shows neutral alignment. Reply with 1 if a substantial class of nouns shows neutral alignment. Note that although alignment types are occasionally associated with entire languages (e.g. when one says that "Dyirbal is an ergative language"), they in fact apply only to individual constructions. This question asks only about the alignment of flagging, the alignment of indexing or of any other construction is irrelevant for this question.
Imonda (ISO 639-3: imn, Glottolog: imon1245)
Imonda marks animate P arguments with a special ‘goal’ marker glossed as -GL (see example c). However, when one considers inanimate arguments, S, A, and P are unmarked and thus show neutral alignment (cf. c. and d). Imonda is coded as 1 for both GB410 and GB408.
a. aia-l agõ-l-i e-uagl-ual-n father-NOM woman-NOM-CO DU-go-DU-PST ‘His father and his wife went away.’ (Seiler 1985: 180) b. ti ed he-li-f tree PROX CL-lie-PRS ‘The tree lies over there.’ (Seiler 1985: 159) c. aia-l edel-m ue-ne-uõl fe-f father-NOM human-GL CL-eat-PL do-PRS ‘Her father habitually eats humans.’ (Seiler 1985: 165) d. ti he-ual-n three cut-DL-PST ‘He chopped down two trees.’ (Seiler 1985: 81) (Abbreviations: CO coordinator, GL goal)
Yakkha (ISO 639-3: ybh, Glottolog: yakk1236)
In Yakkha all S and P arguments are in the unmarked nominative case, as in (a), (c) and (d). The A argument of the third person is marked with the ergative clitic =ŋa, as in (b), the first and second person A arguments are in the unmarked nominative, as in (e). Yakkha is coded as 1 for GB410, as the flagging of the first and second person pronouns is neutrally aligned. Furthermore, Yakkha is 1 for this question GB409 because of the ergative alignment of flagging with third person arguments.
a. uŋci ‘3NSG’ as an S argument nhaŋa uŋci hani hani ta-ya-ma-ci=hoŋ ka lab-a-ma. and.then 3NSG quickly quickly come-PST-PRF-DU=SEQ 1SG seize-PST-PRF ‘So they came quickly and got me down.’ (Schackow 2015: 537) b. uŋci ‘3NSG’ as an A argument uŋci=ŋa kaniŋ kheps-a=ha. 3NSG=ERG 1PL hear-PST[1.P]=NMLZ.NSG ‘They heard us.’ (Schackow 2015: 330) c. ka ‘1SG’ as an S argument ka maŋcwa=be khe-me-ŋ=na. 1SG water=LOC go-NPST-1SG=NMLZ.SG ‘I go to fetch water.’ (Schackow 2015: 127) d. ka ‘1SG’ as a P argument ka ijaŋ cem-me-ŋ-ga=na? 1SG why cut-NPST-1SG.P-2.A=NMLZ.SG ‘Why do you cut me?’ (Schackow 2015: 111) e. ka ‘1SG’ as an A argument ka chem chept-wa-ŋ=na. 1SG song write-NPST[3.P]-1SG.A=NMLZ.SG ‘I will write a song.’ (Schackow 2015: 121)
Makasae-Makalero (ISO 639-3: mkz, Glottolog: maka1316)
In Makasae-Makalero the core arguments are never overtly flagged, this is true for both pronominal (a-c) and nominal (d) arguments. Thus S, A and P are always flagged identically yielding the neutral alignment. Makasae-Makalero is coded as 1.
a. Ani hai mu’a-li’an. 1SG NSIT ground-fall ‘I already fell down.’ (Huber 2011: 146) b. Ani ei pase. 1SG 2SG beat ‘I beat you.’ (Huber 2011: 218) c. Ei ani pase. 2SG 1SG beat ‘You beat me.’ (Huber 2011: 218) d. Ina-uai ni-mata uaro mother-HON REFL-child wash ‘The mother is washing her child’ (Huber 2011: 391) (Abbreviations: NSIT new situation)
Comrie, Bernard. 2013. Alignment of Case Marking of Full Noun Phrases. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
Haspelmath, Martin. 2005. Argument marking in ditransitive alignment types. Linguistic Discovery 3(1).
Haspelmath, Martin. 2019. Indexing and flagging, and head and dependent marking. Te Reo (The Journal of the Linguistic Society of New Zealand) 62(1). 93–115.
Huber, Juliette. 2011. A grammar of Makalero: A Papuan language of East Timor. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Schackow, Diana. 2015. A grammar of Yakkha. (Studies in Diversity Linguistics 7.) Berlin: Language Science Press.
Seiler, Walter. 1985. Imonda, a Papuan Language. (Pacific Linguistics: Series B, 93.) Canberra: Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.
Other alignment of flagging questions * GB408 Is there any accusative alignment of flagging? * GB409 Is there any ergative alignment of flagging?
General questions about case marking * GB070 Are there morphological cases for non-pronominal core arguments (i.e. S, A or P)? * GB071 Are there morphological cases for phonologically independent personal pronominal core arguments (i.e. S, A or P)? * GB095 Are variations in marking strategies of core participants based on TAM distinctions?
To display the datapoints for a particular language family on the map and on the classification tree, select the family then click "submit".
You may combine this variable with a different variable by selecting on in the list below and clicking "Submit".
| 0 | absent | 525 | |
| 1 | present | 1218 | |
| ? | Not known | 147 |
| Name | Glottocode | Family | Macroarea | Contributor | Value | Source | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Description
Map
Values