Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Linguistics

An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences

Editor-in-Chief: Gast, Volker


IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 1.066

CiteScore 2018: 0.97

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.384
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 1.409

Online
ISSN
1613-396X
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 56, Issue 4

Issues

Whence subject-verb agreement? Investigating the role of topicality, accessibility, and frequency in Vera’a texts

Stefan Schnell
  • Corresponding author
  • ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language & School of Languages and Linguistics, The University of Melbourne, Babel (Building 139), Parkville 3010 VIC, Australia
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2018-06-14 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2018-0010

Abstract

While the grammaticalization of subject agreement appears to be a diachronic near-universal, there has been little agreement on usage-based motivations for this crosslinguistic tendency. Three usage-based approaches – Givón’s NP detachment under topicalization, Ariel’s accessibility theory, and a set of accounts in terms of frequency-driven morphologization – are examined here in the light of corpus data from the Oceanic language Vera’a. The high frequency of overt pronouns in 1st and 2nd person subjects, as well as formal reduction in some 1st-person pronouns, observed in the corpus seem suggestive of grammaticalization of subject agreement in speech-act participants (SAPs). Yet, the remaining variation between pronominal and zero forms and the distribution of reduced forms do not appear to reflect functional factors in the way of topicalization or accessibility. Overall, frequency-driven accounts appear to fare better in explaining the Vera’a facts, in particular the distribution of 1st person zero subjects and the formal reduction of 1st person subject pronouns. The overall high levels of subject pronouns, however, are not fully accounted for by any of the three approaches; I suggest that, in addition to genre effects, the deictic and shifting nature of reference to speech-act participants may be a relevant factor.

Keywords: agreement; grammaticalization; frequency effects; Oceanic languages; Vera’a

References

  • Ariel, Mira. 1990. Accessing noun phrase antecedents. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar

  • Ariel, Mira. 2000. The development of person agreement markers: From pronouns to higher accessibility markers. In Michael Barlow & Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Usage-based models of language, 197–260. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar

  • Bickel, Balthasar, Bernard Comrie & Martin Haspelmath. 2015. The Leipzig Glossing Rules. Leipzig: Max-Planck-Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. https://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/resources/glossing-rules.php (accessed 23 September 2017)).

  • Bickel, Balthasar & Johanna Nichols. 2007. Inflectional morphology. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, vol. III: Grammatical categories and the lexicon, 2nd edn, 169–279. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Boye, Kasper & Peter Harder. 2012. A usage-based theory of grammatical status and grammaticalization. Language 88(1). 1–44.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Brown, Dunstan & Marina Chumakina. 2012. What there might be and what there is: An introduction to Canonical Typology. In Dunstan Brown, Marina Chumakina & Greville Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax, 1–18. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Bybee, Joan. 2001. Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Bybee, Joan. 2006. From usage to grammar. The mind’s response to repetition. Language 82(4). 711–733.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bybee, Joan, William Pagliuca & Revere D Perkins. 1990. On the asymmetries in the affixation of grammatical material. In William Croft, Keith Denning & Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Studies in typology and diachrony: Papers presented to Joseph H. Greenberg on his 75th birthday, 1–42. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Bybee, Joan & Sandra Thompson. 2007[1997]. Three frequency effects in syntax. In Joan Bybee (ed.), Frequency of use and the organization of language, 269–278. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Clancy, Patricia M. 1980. Referential choice in English and Japanese discourse. In Wallace Chafe (ed.), The Pear stories. Cognitive, cultural, and linguistic aspects of narrative production, 127–202. Norwood, NJ: ABLEX Publishing.Google Scholar

  • Corbett, Greville G. 2003a. Agreement: Canonical instances and the extent of the phenomenon. In Geert Booij, Janet DeCesaris, Angela Ralli & Sergio Scalise (eds.), Topics in morphology: Selected papers from the Third Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (Barcelona, Sep 20 –22, 2001), 109–128. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.Google Scholar

  • Corbett, Greville G. 2003b. Agreement: The range of the phenomenon and the principles of the Surrey Database of Agreement. Transactions of the Philological Society 1001(2). 155–202.Google Scholar

  • Croft, William. 2003. Typology and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The paradigmatic structure of person marking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Dahl, Östen. 2004. Growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Dalrymple, Mary & Irina Nikolaeva. 2011. Objects and information structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Du Bois, John W. 1987. The discourse basis of ergativity. Language 63. 805–855. DOI: .CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • François, Alexandre. 2005. A typological overview of Mwotlap, an Oceanic language of Vanuatu. Linguistic Typology 9. 115–146.Google Scholar

  • François, Alexandre. 2009. Verbal aspect and personal pronouns: The history of aorist markers in north Vanuatu. In Alexander Adelaar & Andrew Pawley (eds.), Austronesian historical linguistics and culture history: A festschrift for Robert Blust, 179–196. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar

  • Fuß, Eric. 2005. The rise of agreement. A formal approach to the syntax and grammaticalization of verbal inflection. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Givón, Talmy. 1976. Topic, pronoun, and grammatical agreement. In Charles N Li (ed.), Subject and topic, 149–188. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

  • Haig, Geoff & Stefan Schnell (eds.). 2016. MultiCAST: Multilanguage Corpora of Annotataed Spoken Texts. Cologne: Language Archive Cologne. https://lac.uni-koeln.de/de/multicast/ (accessed 23 September 2017).).

  • Haig, Geoffrey & Stefan Schnell. 2014. Annotation using GRAID (Grammatical Relations and Animacy in Discourse). Guidelines for annotators. Version 7.0. https://lac.uni-koeln.de/de/node/11341/00-0000-0000-0000-1FA2-E/(accessed 23 September 2017).

  • Haiman, John. 1985. Natural syntax: Iconicity and erosion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Haspelmath, Martin. 2013. Argument indexing: A conceptual framework for the syntactic status of bound person forms. In Dik Bakker & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), Language across boundaries: Studies in memory of Anna Siewierska, 197–226. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

  • Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2014. Asymmetries in the prosodic phrasing of function words: Another look at the suffixing preference. Language 90(4). 927–960.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hinds, John. 1983. Topic continuity in Japanese. In Talmy Givón (ed.), Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study, 43–93. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Huang, Yan. 1994. The syntax and pragmatics of anaphora: A study with special reference to Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Huang, Yan. 2000. Anaphora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Hyslop, Catriona. 2001. The Lolovoli dialect of the North-East Ambae language, Vanuatu. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar

  • Jauncey, Dorothy G. 2011. Tamambo, the language of west Malo, Vanuatu. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar

  • Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form. Topic, focus and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Lehmann, Christian. 1995. Thoughts on grammaticalization. Munich & Newcastle: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar

  • Lynch, John, Malcolm Ross & Terry Crowley (eds.). 2011[2002]. The Oceanic languages. Richmond & Surrey: Curzon.Google Scholar

  • Margetts, Anna. 1999. Valence and transitivity in Saliba, an Oceanic language of Papua New Guinea. Nijmegen: MPI Series in Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar

  • Meyerhoff, Miriam. 2000. The emergence of creole subject-verb agreement and the licensing of null subjects. Language Variation and Change 12. 203–230.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Neeleman, Ad & Kriszta Szendröi. 2007. Radical pro drop and the morphology of pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 38(4). 671–714.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Olson, Cliff. 1992. Gumawana (Amphlett Islands, Papua New Guinea): Grammar sketch and texts. Papers in Austronesian linguistics 2. 251–430.Google Scholar

  • Ross, Malcolm D. 2004. The morphosyntactic typology of Oceanic languages. Language and Linguistics 5(2). 491–541.Google Scholar

  • Schiborr, Nils. 2016. English. In Geoffrey Haig & Stefan Schnell (eds.), MultiCAST: Multilanguage corpora of annotated spoken texts, Cologne: Language Archive Cologne. https://lac.uni-koeln.de/de/multicast/ (accessed 23 September 2017).

  • Schnell, Stefan. 2016. Vera’a. In Geoffrey Haig & Stefan Schnell (eds.), MultiCAST: Multilanguage corpora of annotated spoken texts, Cologne: Language Archive Cologne. https://lac.uni-koeln.de/de/multicast/ (accessed 23 September 2017).

  • Schnell, Stefan & Danielle Barth. in prep. Pronominal subjects in Vera’a.Google Scholar

  • Siewierska, Anna. 1999. From anaphoric pronoun to grammatical agreement marker: Why objects don’t make it?. Folia Linguistica 33(2). 225–251.Google Scholar

  • Siewierska, Anna. 2004a. Person. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Siewierska, Anna. 2004b. On the discourse basis of agreement. In Tuija Virtanen (ed.), Approaches to cognition through text and discourse, 33–48. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

  • Siewierska, Anna. 2013. Verbal Person Marking. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online, Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/102 (accessed 25 February 2015).

About the article

Published Online: 2018-06-14

Published in Print: 2018-06-26


Citation Information: Linguistics, Volume 56, Issue 4, Pages 735–780, ISSN (Online) 1613-396X, ISSN (Print) 0024-3949, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2018-0010.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in