Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorEVANS, N
dc.contributor.authorGaby,
dc.contributor.authorNORDLINGER, R
dc.date.available2014-05-21T21:14:43Z
dc.date.issued2007
dc.identifier.citationEVANS, N., Gaby, & NORDLINGER, R. (2007). Valency mismatches and the coding of reciprocity in Australian languages. Linguistic Typology, 11 (3), pp.541-597. https://doi.org/10.1515/LINGTY.2007.033.
dc.identifier.issn1430-0532
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11343/28176
dc.description
dc.description.abstractReciprocals are characterized by a crossover of thematic roles within a single clause. So, in John and Mary wash each other, each of John and Mary is both washer and washed, both agent and patient. The competing pressures to distinguish and merge the reciprocating argument(s) are resolved by different languages in complex and illuminating ways which often create special argument configurations not found in other clause types. While some languages either encode reciprocals by clearly bivalent, transitive clauses (like Warlpiri or English), or clearly monovalent, intransitive clauses (like Wambaya or Yukulta), other languages adopt a mixed or apparently ambivalent solution.In this paper, based on an extensive sample of Australian languages, we develop a typology of apparent valency/transitivity mismatches in reciprocal constructions including: (a) monovalent clauses with a single ergative NP; (b) mismatches between case marking and the number of arguments encoded on auxiliaries or by pronominal affixes to the verb; (c) the use of ergative marking on secondary predicates and instrumentals with a nominative subject; and (d) complex clause constructions sensitive to valency. Such mismatches, we argue, result from an ‘overlay problem’ by which both divalent and monovalent predicates in the semantic representation of prototypical reciprocal scenes have had a hand in shaping the morphosyntax of reciprocal constructions through grammaticalization.
dc.publisherWalter de Gruyter
dc.subjectLinguistics
dc.titleValency mismatches and the coding of reciprocity in Australian languages
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.identifier.doi10.1515/LINGTY.2007.033
melbourne.peerreviewPeer Reviewed
melbourne.affiliationThe University of Melbourne
melbourne.affiliation.departmentLanguages and Linguistics
melbourne.source.titleLinguistic Typology
melbourne.source.volume11
melbourne.source.issue3
melbourne.source.pages541-597
melbourne.publicationid90447
melbourne.elementsid296752
melbourne.contributor.authorEVANS, NICHOLAS
melbourne.contributor.authorNordlinger, Rachel
melbourne.internal.ingestnoteAbstract bulk upload (2017-07-20)
dc.identifier.eissn1613-415X
melbourne.accessrightsOpen Access


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record