[Lingtyp] Alignment Typology and problems with Ainu

[Randy J. LaPolla]

Dear James,
That there are different patterns found in different constructions is not a problem, and not rare. Even English does not have a consistent alignment pattern in all constructions. This has been known since the work of Van Valin and Foley going back to the late 1970’s. This is a major argument for treating grammatical categories as construction-based rather than global categories in the language. Of course grammaticalization of the morphemes is also construction based (event based), and so that is another factor. Just analyse the language inductively, without assuming any necessary uniformity across constructions. Language is not a single tight logical system, it is human behaviour, and as diverse and messy as the rest of our behaviour. Enjoy the messiness!

All the best,
Randy
——
Professor Randy J. LaPolla（罗仁地), PhD FAHA 
Center for Language Sciences
Institute for Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences
Beijing Normal University at Zhuhai
A302, Muduo Building, #18 Jinfeng Road, Zhuhai City, Guangdong, China

https://randylapolla.info <https://randylapolla.info/>
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6100-6196    

邮编：519087
广东省珠海市唐家湾镇金凤路18号木铎楼A302
北京师范大学珠海校区
人文和社会科学高等研究院
语言科学研究中心 











> On 26 May 2023, at 8:16 AM, James Wheate <jwhe6921 at uni.sydney.edu.au> wrote:
> 
> Hello everyone!
>  
> My name is James Wheate and I am currently an undergraduate student at the University of Sydney.
>  
> I write to you all today as I am facing major problems with a language (Ainu) that I am looking at for one of my classes on Linguistic typology.
>  
> The problem in question is, Ainu is attested to having 3 separate alignment systems  (Bugaeva, 2015) that are determined by pronouns. Alignment in Ainu is shown through verbal affixing alone, with the following distribution:
>  
> 1PL, 4SG/’Indefinite person’ are marked using tripartite alignment:
>  
> 1PL:
> S                  ci-
> A                 -as
> O                 un-
>  
> 4SG:
> S                  a-
> A                 -an
> O                  i-
>  
> 1SG is marked with nom/acc alignment:
>  
> S/A            ku-
> O               -en
>  
> Lastly,  2SG, 2PL, and 3SG have ‘neutral’ alignment (so none at all, more so just indexing) in the following way:
>  
> 2SG:
> S/A/O         e-
>  
> 2PL:
> S/A/O         eci-
>  
> 3SG:
> S/A/O         ∅-
>  
>  
>  
> As far as my understanding goes, not only is the distribution in Ainu very uncommon, but the motivations for these groups and systems to arise seem unclear.
> 
> With these systems it allows me to assume there is a hierarchy as follows:
> 
> 1PL/4SG -> 1SG -> 2SG/2PL/3SG
> 
> As far as I am aware this would be extremely rare and hard to explain.
>  
> Has anyone else encountered anything similar in other languages? Is there perhaps a diachronic explanation that leads to this morphological complexity?
>  
> As an undergraduate I am at my wits end!
>  
> Thank you all very much and as the years progress, I hope I can become more active and knowledgeable on this thread!
>  
> Regards,
>  
> James Wheate.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20230526/cc310016/attachment.htm>