MatrixDoc_Case

Documentation for the Grammar Matrix Customization Case Library

• [ This documentation is under construction. ]

Introduction

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.

Citing the Case Library

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.

Options

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.

Below are two next options, both of which are subtypes of the split ergativity case systems, which are neither nominative-accusative, nor ergative-absolutive.

Split-S

• (The S argument of some intransitive verbs is marked by the same case as the agent of transitives, while for other verbs the S argument is marked by the same case as the patient.)
  A takes a case named the _ (e.g. ergative, agentive)
  O takes a case named the _ (e.g. absolutive, patientive)

• Please select this option if your language uses split-S case system, a subtype of split ergativity case system. As mentioned in the questionnaire...

Fluid-S

• (The S argument of some intransitive verbs is marked by the same case as the agent of transitives, while for other verbs the S argument is marked by the same case as the patient, and for still other verbs the S argument can be marked by either case, depending on pragmatic factors (e.g. whether the S is perceived as being in control of the action.)

  • A takes a case named the _ (e.g. ergative, agentive)
    O takes a case named the _ (e.g. absolutive, patientive)

  Split conditioned on features of the noun phrase arguments
  (Some classes of noun phrases (e.g. pronouns) show a nominative-accusative pattern, while others (e.g. common nouns) show an ergative-absolutive pattern. You will have an opportunity to define these classes 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)

  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)

  Focus-case
  (A number of Austronesian languages, including several Philippine languages, have a system where A and O are marked by cases. An additional case, sometimes called the focus, is mandatory in every clause and has its grammatical role assigned by the morphology of the verb. You will have an opportunity to define this morphology on the Lexicon page.)

  • The focus case is named the _
    A takes a case named the _ (e.g. ergative, relative, narrative)
    O takes a case named the _ (e.g. accusative, objective)

Further information about the options on the Case page is provided in in Drellishak 2009, Section 3.3.

Tips

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.

Motivation

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 allows to model case systems in different languages, concentrating on 9 most common ones. In addition to these pre-defined options, 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 ... please refer to ....

Analyses

The analyses implemented in the case library are described in Drellishak 2009, Section 3.2.

Upcoming Work

• [ This documentation is under construction. When it is more complete, this section should describe any modifications to or enhancements of this library that are either in progress or planned. ]

"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)"

References

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.