Эргативная и аблютивная конструкция глагола: типологический анализ

Pattern relating to the subject and object of verbs

In linguistic typology, ergative–absolutive alignment is a type of morphosyntactic alignment in which the single argument ("subject") of an intransitive verb behaves like the object of a transitive verb, and differently from the agent ("subject") of a transitive verb. Examples include Basque, Georgian, Mayan, Tibetan, and certain Indo European languages (such as Pashto and the Kurdish languages and many Indo Aryan languages like Hindi–Urdu). It has also been attributed to the Semitic modern Aramaic (also called Neo Aramaic) languages. Ergative languages are classified into 2 groups: those that are morphologically ergative but syntactically behave as accusative (for instance, Basque, Pashto and Urdu) and those that—on top of being ergative morphologically—also show ergativity in syntax. No language has been recorded in which both the morphological and syntactical ergative are present. Languages that belong to the former group are more numerous than those to the latter. Dyirbal is said to be the only representative of syntactic ergativity, yet it displays accusative alignment with certain pronouns. The ergative absolutive alignment is in contrast to nominative–accusative alignment, which is observed in English and most other Indo European languages, where the single argument of an intransitive verb ("She" in the sentence "She walks") behaves grammatically like the agent (subject) of a transitive verb ("She" in the sentence "She finds it") but different from the object of a transitive verb ("her" in the sentence "He likes her"). When ergative–absolutive alignment is coded by grammatical case, the case used for the single argument of an intransitive verb and the object of a transitive verb is the absolutive, and the case used for the agent of a transitive verb is the ergative. In nominative accusative languages, the case for the single argument of an intransitive verb and the agent of a transitive verb is the nominative, while the case for the direct object of a transitive verb is the accusative. Many languages have ergative–absolutive alignment only in some parts of their grammar (e. g., in the case marking of nouns), but nominative accusative alignment in other parts (e. g., in the case marking of pronouns, or in person agreement). This is known as split ergativity.

Ergativity can be found in both morphological and syntactic behavior.

Tedaga, a Nilo Saharan language of Southern Libya and Northern Chad. Majang language, a Nilo Saharan language of Ethiopia. Päri, although recent studies imply a nominative accusative system.

In Hindi (Indo Aryan), ergative alignment occurs only when the verb is in the perfective aspect for transitive verbs (also for intransitive verbs but only when they are volitional). In Pashto, ergative alignment occurs only in the past tense. In Georgian, ergativity only occurs in the perfective. The Philippine languages (e. g., Tagalog) are sometimes considered ergative (Schachter 1976, 1977; Kroeger 1993); however, they have also been considered to have their own unique morphosyntactic alignment. See symmetrical voice. In the Neo Aramaic languages, which are generally classified into 4 groups, only Northeastern (NENA) and Ṭuroyo groups exhibit split ergativity, which is formed in the perfective aspect only, whereas the imperfective aspect is nominative accusative. Some dialects would only mark unaccusative subjects as ergative. Assyrian Neo Aramaic, in particular, has an ergative type of construction of the perfective past verbal base, where foregone actions are verbalized by a passive construction with the patient being conferred as the grammatical subject rather than by an active construction, e. g. baxta qtile ("the woman was killed by him"). The ergative type of inflection with an agentive phrase has been extended by analogy to intransitive verbs, e. g. qim le ("he has risen"). Aramaic has historically been a nominative accusative language.

Sign languages (for example, Nepali Sign Language) should also generally be considered ergative in the patterning of actant incorporation in verbs. In sign languages that have been studied, classifier handshapes are incorporated into verbs, indicating the subject of intransitive verbs when incorporated, and the object of transitive verbs. (If we follow the "semantic phonology" model proposed by William Stokoe (1991) this ergative absolutive patterning also works at the level of the lexicon: thus in Nepali Sign Language the sign for TEA has the motion for the verb DRINK with a manual alphabet handshape च /ca/ (standing for the first letter of the Nepali word TEA चिया /chiya:/) being incorporated as the object.)