-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
MatrixDoc_Case
- [ This documentation is under construction. ]
This document explains how to fill out the Case page of the Grammar Matrix Customization questionnaire and presents background information on the Case library of the Grammar Matrix Customization System (Bender et al., 2002; Bender and Flickinger, 2005; Bender et al., 2010). General instructions on using the questionnaire can be found here.
The standard reference for the Tense, Aspect, and Mood Library and its implementations is Drellishak 2009. The full reference and .bib entry can be found here.
The case library allows the user to specify the range of case values used in the grammar (if any), and the general type of the language's system for marking core cases. On the Lexicon page, each verb type can have an argument structure specified. The options available there depend partly on the answers to the questions on the Case page, but there is always the option of defining a verb class that does not use one of the preset case patterns provided on the basis of the selection for core case marking.
Grammar Matrix customization system provides you with several pre-defined case system options, discussed in more detail below. Using Dixon's terminology (Dixon 1994), adapted by Drellishak for the development of Case library, cases are discussed in terms of the roles of the arguments as S (intransitive subject), A (transitive agent), and O (transitive patient or object).
-
None
Please select this option if your language does not use case system. Instead of expressing it morphosyntactically, such languages determine the roles of verbal arguments by word order, intonation, or pragmatically. An example of a language that does not use a case system is ...Nominative-accusative
Please select this option if your language uses nominative-accusative (also referred to as accusative) case system. In such case systems S and A are marked with the same case, while O is marked with a different case. In the menu provided to you in Grammar Matrix Customization system, please specify the name of the case taken by S and A (e.g. nominative, subjective), and the name of the case taken by O (e.g. accusative, objective). An example of a language with nominative-accusative case system is Spanish.
Ergative-absolutive
Please select this option if your language uses ergative-absolutive (also referred to as ergative) case system. In such case systems S and O are marked with the same case, while A is marked with a different case. In the menu provided to you in Grammar Matrix Customization system, please specify the name of the case taken by A (e.g. ergative, relative, or narrative), and the name of the case taken by S and O (e.g. absolutive, nominative). An example of a language with ergative-absolutive case system is Australian language Dyirbal.
Tripartite
Please select this option if your language uses tripartite case system. In such case systems all three roles, i.e. S, O, A, are all marked with different cases. In the menu provided to you in Grammar Matrix Customization system, please specify the name of the case taken by S (e.g. nominative, subjective), the name of the case taken by A (e.g. ergative, agentive), and the name of the case taken by O (e.g. absolutive, patientive). An example of a language with tripartite case system is Wangkumara.
Next four options are the subtypes of the split ergativity case systems, which are neither nominative-accusative, nor ergative-absolutive. These case systems can be dependent on several factors: (1). Semantic nature of the main verb (split-S and fluid-S systems), (2). Semantic nature of the core NPs (Split conditioned on features of the noun phrase arguments), (3). Tense, aspect, or mood of the clause (Split conditioned on features of the verb), and (4). Grammatical status of the clause (is this the one not covered??!!) (Dixon 1994:70)
-
Split-S
Please select this option if your language uses split-S case system. In such case systems there are two types of intransitive verbs: verbs with A-like marking on their arguments and verbs with O-like markings on their single arguments. In the menu provided to you in Grammar Matrix Customization system, please specify the name of the case taken by A (e.g. ergative, agentive), and the name of the case taken by O (e.g. absolutive, patientive). An example of a language with split-S case system is Mandan.
Fluid-S
Please select this option if your language uses fluid-S case system. In such case systems, in addition to the two types of verbs used in the split-S languages, there are also intransitive verbs with A- or O-like markings on their single arguments, depending on the pragmatics. For example, if the subject controls the action, then A-like marking is used on the argument. If the subject does not control the action, then O-like marking is used on the argument. In the menu provided to you in Grammar Matrix Customization system, please specify the name of the case taken by A (e.g. ergative, agentive), and the name of the case taken by O (e.g. absolutive, patientive). An example of a language with fluid-S case system is North Caucasian language Bats.
Split conditioned on features of the noun phrase arguments
Please select this option if your language uses Split conditioned on features of the noun phrase arguments case system, in which use of case marking is determined by the nature of nominal arguments. In such case systems some NPs (e.g. pronouns) have nominative-accusative marking pattern, while other NPs (e.g. common nouns) have ergative-absolutive marking pattern. In the menu provided to you in Grammar Matrix Customization system, please specify the name of the case taken by S and A (e.g., nominative, subjective), the name of the case taken by O (e.g. accusative, objective), the name of the case taken by A (e.g. ergative, relative, narrative), and the name of the case taken by S and O (e.g. absolutive, nominative). An example of a language with split conditioned on features of the noun phrase arguments case system is Dyirbal.
"The third and fourth types of split are similar, both types being conditioned on clausal features. "
-
Split conditioned on features of the verb
(Depending on some feature of the verb (e.g. tense or aspect), the core arguments are sometimes marked in a nominative-accusative pattern and other times in an ergative-absolutive pattern. You will have an opportunity to define these features on the Lexicon page.)- S and A take a case named the (e.g. nominative, subjective)
O takes a case named the _ (e.g. accusative, objective)
A takes a case named the _ (e.g. ergative, relative, narrative)
S and O take a case named the _ (e.g. absolutive, nominative)
- S and A take a case named the (e.g. nominative, subjective)
3rd type: "The third type is conditioned on the tense, aspect, or mood of the clause. In many Iranian languages, for example, clauses in the past tense are marked in an ergative-absolutive pattern, while clauses in other tenses take nominative-accusative marking (Dixon 1994:100). Gujarati [guj] (Indo-Iranian) also has the third type of split, with the nominative-accusative pattern in the imperfective aspect and the ergative-absolutive pattern in the perfective:"
4th type: "The fourth type of split is conditioned on the grammatical status of the clause; for example, whether it is a main or subordinate clause. An example of a language like this is Päri [lkr] (Nilo-Saharan), in which “S is generally treated like O but in purposive clauses..., S is instead treated like A.”
-
Focus-case
Please select this option if your language uses focus-case system, in which an additional case exists (sometimes referred to as focus), the grammatical role of which is determined by the morphology of the verb. An example of a language with focus-case system is Tagalog. Presence of one argument (single argument for intransitive verbs and with focus-marking is obligatory for every clause in Tagalog. In the menu provided to you in Grammar Matrix Customization system, please specify the name of the focus case in your language, the name of the case taken by A (e.g. ergative, relative, narrative), and the name of the case taken by O (e.g. accusative, objective).
If the predefined options above are not enough...
Additional Cases
If your language has any additional cases not covered above that occur in simple intransitive or transitive clauses (e.g. if you language has verbs whose O is marked by the dative), define those cases here:
Further information about the options on the Case page is provided in in Drellishak 2009, Section 3.3.
To describe quirky case, define the appropriate range of case values on the Case page, including extra cases if necessary (see additional cases at the bottom of the page). Then on the Lexicon page, select an argument structure without any case presets. Constrain the CASE value of each argument through the add a feature iterator.
While some language do not have case system, other languages that do use cases rely on them heavily, often using them in most of the sentences.
Case library or Grammar Matrix Customization system covers case systems that are most commonly used across languages. Grammar Matrix provides the user with nine pre-defined options describing case systems. Because some languages will have case systems that do not fall under the nine pre-defined options described above, Grammar Matrix Customization system also allows user to define case values themselves instead of just relying on the pre-defined analyses. For more information on the analyses of case systems described above please refer to the Analyses section below.
If you define a case system used in your language, your starter grammar will include the feature [ CASE case ], with possible values based on the choices you make on the number customization page. Similar to Pollard and Sag (1994), CASE is a feature of the syntactic HEAD. The cases of both arguments (subject and object) are specified on the verb lexical types. For case-marking adpositions CASE feature is also specified on the HEAD of adpositional phrases.
Grammar Matrix provides several case-marking strategies in the Lexicon section: marking of whole NPs via case-marking adpositions, or marking morphologically on nouns, determiners, or both. Case-marking adpositions are implemented through lexical items taking nominal complements and specifying a particular case marking on this complement, as well as on the adpositional phrase. In this strategy verbs take adpositional phrases as their arguments, instead of noun phrases. Morphological marking is implemented through lexical rules. These rules take a lexical item as an input, apply spelling change, constrain CASE feature to have a particular value.
for the 4 split ergativity case systems, "In order to support split case-marking, the Matrix customization system must be able to create grammars in which multiple kinds of marking, commonly the ergative and accusative patterns, co-exist."
Below is a snippet of code related to case from choices file for a language with nominative-accusative case system:
section=case
case-marking=nom-acc
nom-acc-nom-case-name=nominative
nom-acc-acc-case-name=accusative
This differs from code in choices file for a language that does not use a case system:
section=case
case-marking=none
For the detailed analyses of each of the case-marking systems covered by Grammar Matrix Customization system please refer to Drellishak 2009, Section 3.2.
- covers only up to 2 arguments: "Blake’s definition includes an extremely broad range of phenomena, including the marking of possessives, vocatives, locatives, adverbial adjuncts, and adpositional complements. Implementing all of these phenomena would require an enormous expansion of the customization system. In order to narrow the range of case phenomena to a dissertation-sized project, it was necessary to choose a subset of the full range of case phenomena. The Matrix case library presented here, therefore, covers only case-marking of up to two mandatory arguments of verbs."
- does not cover more complex argument-marking cases: "Of course, when languages are studied in sufficient depth, we find even more complexity in the patterns of argument-marking case. For example, there are nominative accusative languages, such as English and German, in which the nominative case marks the subject only of finite verbs. Adding support to the customization system for such fine interactions between case-marking and verb form (or between case and any other part of the grammar)"
Drellishak, Scott. 2009. Widespread but Not Universal: Improving the Typological Coverage of the Grammar Matrix. PhD thesis, University of Washington.
bibtex:
@phdthesis{Drellishak:09,
author = {Scott Drellishak},
year = {2009},
title = {Widespread but Not Universal: Improving the Typological
Coverage of the {G}rammar {M}atrix},
school = {University of Washington}
}
Dixon, 1994.
Home | Forum | Discussions | Events