[Lingtyp] Terminology query: Obviative constraints

Martin Haspelmath martin_haspelmath at eva.mpg.de
Tue Sep 19 09:27:18 UTC 2023


A "scenario split" is the same as a "coargument-conditioned split" – in 
fact, my 2021 terminology was largely inspired by Witzlack-Makarevich et 
al. (2016). They say:

"The phenomenon comes in two flavors: (i) in some systems, ... arguments 
of a clause compete for a particular agreement slot or for a particular 
case marker. It is normally assumed that in order to provide an account 
for such a system, it is necessary to posit a referential hierarchy (or 
scale) of a certain form (language-specific or universal). Then, one can 
say that only the argument that ranks higher on the hierarchy than other 
arguments of the same clause gets access to a particular agreement slot 
or case marker. Such cases underlie the traditional label “hierarchical 
agreement” or recently “hierarchical indexation” (Rose 2009), as well as 
what we will refer to as “hierarchical case marking”. (ii) In the other 
systems..., *argument marking also depends on the whole constellation of 
the arguments in a clause, or what one might call its “scenario”.* 
However, in contrast to the first type, in such systems it is impossible 
to account for the distribution of markers in terms of a unified 
referential hierarchy because the relevant conditions determining their 
distribution involve several variables at once (e. g., ‘assign 
accusative to the P argument if the A argument is second person singular 
and nowhere else’)." (Witzlack-Makarevich et al. 2016: 534)

So what both of the types they discuss share is that the argument 
marking is scenario-conditioned in some way.

Whether one regards these as "broadly voice-related phenomena" depends 
on one's definition of "voice", and the extent to which one may be 
willing to extend it to "broadly related" phenomena. (For a definition 
of "voice constructions" that relates them to the more basic notion of 
"valency constructions", see my 2022 paper: 
https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/005941.)

Best,

Martin

On 19.09.23 11:14, Juergen Bohnemeyer wrote:
>
> Thanks for reminding me of this paper, Françoise! I had sort of “lost” 
> this one. Meaning I skimmed it a while back, thought it was important, 
> but then couldn’t find it again, apparently because it merged in my 
> memory with another paper 😉
>
> The phenomena Witzlack-Makarevich & coauthors are talking about are 
> distinct from the ones I’m concerned with, because they’re dealing 
> with argument marking, whereas I’m interested in broadly voice-related 
> phenomena. But, these phenomena are clearly related, and ‘co-argument 
> sensitivity’ strikes me a good cover term for both (while at the same 
> time being much less abstract and broad than Martin’s ‘scenarios’).
>
> Still not quite the narrow term I’m looking for though 😉 – Best – Juergen
>
> Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)
> Professor, Department of Linguistics
> University at Buffalo
>
> Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus
> Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260
> Phone: (716) 645 0127
> Fax: (716) 645 3825
> Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu <mailto:jb77 at buffalo.edu>
> Web: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/ 
> <http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/>
>
> Office hours Tu/Th 3:30-4:30pm in 642 Baldy or via Zoom (Meeting ID 
> 585 520 2411; Passcode Hoorheh)
>
> There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In
> (Leonard Cohen)
>
> -- 
>
> *From: *Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf 
> of Françoise Rose <francoise.rose at univ-lyon2.fr>
> *Date: *Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 10:49
> *To: *LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG 
> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Lingtyp] Terminology query: Obviative constraints
>
> Dear Jürgen,
>
> Aren’t you looking for what Alena Witzlack-Makarevich & colleague call 
> “co-arguments conditions” ?
>
> See the following reference:
>
> Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena & Zakharko, Taras & Bierkandt, Lennart & 
> Zúñiga, Fernando & Bickel, Balthasar. 2016. Decomposing hierarchical 
> alignment: co-arguments as conditions on alignment. /Linguistics/ 531–562.
>
> Best,
>
> Françoise
>
> *De :*Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> *De la part 
> de* Martin Haspelmath
> *Envoyé :* lundi 18 septembre 2023 20:39
> *À :* lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> *Objet :* Re: [Lingtyp] Terminology query: Obviative constraints
>
> I wouldn't use "obviation", because outside of North American 
> linguistics, this has come to be used in the sense of "disjoint 
> reference from the subject" (e.g. Szabolcsi, Anna, 2021. Obviation in 
> Hungarian: What is its scope, and is it due to competition? /Glossa: A 
> Journal of General Linguistics/ 6(1): 57. doi: 
> https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1421)
>
> In my 2021 paper on role-reference associations 
> (https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/004047), I referred to the kinds of 
> phenomena that Jürgen talks about as "scenario splits" of argument 
> coding, because they depend on the *scenario* (the 
> referential-prominence value of two arguments).
>
> I wouldn't use the term "alignment" for such phenomena, because this 
> is generally reserved for coexpression patterns (accusative alignment 
> is coexpression of S and A, ergative alignment is coexpression of S 
> and P, etc).
>
> But this discussion is useful because it illustrates how difficult we 
> sometimes find it to talk about interesting phenomena with terms that 
> we all understand right away.
>
> Martin
>
> On 18.09.23 20:26, Juergen Bohnemeyer wrote:
>
>     Fair enough, Christian! Let me try to restate my comment a little
>     more sensibly:
>
>     Both active/passive voice alternations and the kind of phenomena
>     I’m interested in (including inverse voice marking) are governed
>     by constraints on topicality and animacy, and thus more broadly by
>     ‘reference-conditioned alignment constraints’.
>
>     But I was looking specifically for a way to designate only those
>     constraints that occur in obviative alignment systems.
>
>     And those constraints are of a subtly different nature from those
>     that govern active/passive alternations. In active/passive
>     alternations (though surely not in every language-specific
>     construction that has been called by that label), what matters is
>     whether the actor or the undergoer is topical and where each lands
>     on an animacy scale.
>
>     In contrast, in obviative alignment systems, what matters is
>     whether the actor **outranks** the undergoer in animacy and
>     topicality (including definiteness) or vice versa.
>
>     And, again, I’m looking for a way to specifically designate
>     grammatical systems that have constraints of this specific second
>     kind.
>
>     Does that make sense? – Best – Juergen
>
>     Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)
>     Professor, Department of Linguistics
>     University at Buffalo
>
>     Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus
>     Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260
>     Phone: (716) 645 0127
>     Fax: (716) 645 3825
>     Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu <mailto:jb77 at buffalo.edu>
>     Web: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/
>     <http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/>
>
>     Office hours Tu/Th 3:30-4:30pm in 642 Baldy or via Zoom (Meeting
>     ID 585 520 2411; Passcode Hoorheh)
>
>     There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In
>     (Leonard Cohen)
>
>     -- 
>
>     *From: *Christian Lehmann <christian.lehmann at uni-erfurt.de>
>     <mailto:christian.lehmann at uni-erfurt.de>
>     *Date: *Monday, September 18, 2023 at 19:32
>     *To: *Juergen Bohnemeyer <jb77 at buffalo.edu>
>     <mailto:jb77 at buffalo.edu>, LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
>     <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>     <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>     *Subject: *Re: [Lingtyp] Terminology query: Obviative constraints
>
>     I'm afraid I don't understand your qualms. An alternation is not a
>     constraint, and voices and diatheses are no alignment constraints.
>
>         Thanks, Christian! But wouldn’t those terms again also extend
>         to voice alternations, including European-style active/passive
>         alternations? I’m not looking for a cover term, mind you, but
>         rather specifically for a term that narrowly denotes those
>         constraints that specifically concern the /relative/ animacy
>         and topicality (etc.) of core arguments in transitive (and
>         ditransitive) clauses. – Best – Juergen
>
>         Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)
>         Professor, Department of Linguistics
>         University at Buffalo
>
>         Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus
>         Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260
>         Phone: (716) 645 0127
>         Fax: (716) 645 3825
>         Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu <mailto:jb77 at buffalo.edu>
>         Web: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/
>         <http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/>
>
>         Office hours Tu/Th 3:30-4:30pm in 642 Baldy or via Zoom
>         (Meeting ID 585 520 2411; Passcode Hoorheh)
>
>         There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In
>         (Leonard Cohen)
>
>         -- 
>
>         *From: *Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>         <mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf
>         of Christian Lehmann <christian.lehmann at uni-erfurt.de>
>         <mailto:christian.lehmann at uni-erfurt.de>
>         *Date: *Monday, September 18, 2023 at 18:12
>         *To: *LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
>         <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>         <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>         *Subject: *Re: [Lingtyp] Terminology query: Obviative constraints
>
>         Since animacy (better: empathy 🙂) and topicality are both
>         related to reference, the term you are looking for could be
>         something like 'reference-conditioned alignment constraint'.
>         It would cover not only empathy and topicality, but also other
>         referential properties like specificity, which play a role in
>         alignment, too.
>         Best, Christian
>
>         -- 
>
>         Prof. em. Dr. Christian Lehmann
>         Rudolfstr. 4
>         99092 Erfurt
>         Deutschland
>
>         Tel.:
>
>         	
>
>         +49/361/2113417
>
>         E-Post:
>
>         	
>
>         christianw_lehmann at arcor.de
>
>         Web:
>
>         	
>
>         https://www.christianlehmann.eu
>
>     -- 
>
>     Prof. em. Dr. Christian Lehmann
>     Rudolfstr. 4
>     99092 Erfurt
>     Deutschland
>
>     Tel.:
>
>     	
>
>     +49/361/2113417
>
>     E-Post:
>
>     	
>
>     christianw_lehmann at arcor.de
>
>     Web:
>
>     	
>
>     https://www.christianlehmann.eu
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>
>     Lingtyp mailing list
>
>     Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
>     https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
> -- 
> Martin Haspelmath
> Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
> Deutscher Platz 6
> D-04103 Leipzig
> https://www.eva.mpg.de/linguistic-and-cultural-evolution/staff/martin-haspelmath/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp

-- 
Martin Haspelmath
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
Deutscher Platz 6
D-04103 Leipzig
https://www.eva.mpg.de/linguistic-and-cultural-evolution/staff/martin-haspelmath/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20230919/70b9118e/attachment.htm>


More information about the Lingtyp mailing list