Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Tree-Geometric Relational Hierarchies and Nuumiipuutímt (Nez Perce) Case

  • Chapter
ERGATIVITY

Part of the book series: Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory ((SNLT,volume 65))

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Abraham, Werner. 1996. ‘The aspect-case typology correlation: Perfectivity triggering split ergativity.’ Folia Linguistica 30, 5-34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aissen, Judith. 1999. ‘Markedness and subject choice in optimality theory.’ Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17, 673-711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aissen, Judith. 2004. ‘Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy.’ Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21, 435-483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aoki, Haruo. 1979. Nez Perce Texts. University of California Publications in Linguistics, vol 90. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bach, Emmon. 1986. ‘The algebra of events.’ Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 5-16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, Mark. 1988. Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bittner, Maria and Kenneth L. Hale 1996b ‘Ergativity: Towards a theory of a heterogeneous class’. Linguistic Inquiry 27, 531-604.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bittner, Maria and Kenneth L. Hale. 1996a. ‘The structural determination of case and agreement.’ Linguistic Inquiry 27, 1-68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bobaljik, Jonathan. 1993. ‘On ergativity and ergative unergatives.’ MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 19, 45-88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bok-Bennema, Reineke. 1991. Case and Agreement in Inuit. Dordrecht:Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campana, Mark. 1992. A Movement Theory of Ergativity. Ph.D. dissertation, McGill University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, Gregory. 2000. Weak indefinites. MS, University of Rochester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program For Linguistic Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam. 2001. ‘Derivation by phase’. In Michael Kenstowicz, ed., Ken Hale: A Life in Language. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLancy, Scott. 1981 ‘An interpretation of split erativity and related patterns.’ Language 57, 626-657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diesing, Molly and Eloise Jelinek. 1995. ‘Distributing arguments.’ Natural Language Semantics 3, 123-167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diesing, Molly. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge:MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, R. M. W. 1979. ‘Ergativity.’ Language 55, 59-138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, R. M. W. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du Bois, John W. 1987. ‘The discourse basis of ergativity.’ Language 63, 805-855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hale, Kenneth L. and Samuel Jay Keyser. 1992. ‘Lexical categories and the projection of argument structure’. In L. A. Lakarra and J. Ortize de Urbina, eds., Syntactic Theory and Basque Syntax, 147-173 (Supplements of the Anuario del Seminario de Filología Vasca 28).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, Kenneth L. and Samuel Jay Keyser. 1993. ‘On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations.’ In Kenneth L. Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, eds., The View from Building 20: Essays in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, Kenneth L. and Samuel Jay Keyser. 2002. Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, Irene. 1982. The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. Ph.D. dissertation., U. of Massachusetts, Amherst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, P. J. and S.A. Thompson. 1980. ‘Transitivity in grammar and discourse.’ Language 56, 251-299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jelinek, Eloise and Andrew Carnie. 2003. ‘Argument hierarchies and the mapping principle.’ In Andrew Carnie, Heidi Harley and MaryAnn Willie, eds., Formal Approaches to Function in Grammar, pp. 265-296. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jelinek, Eloise. 1993 ‘Ergative splits and argument type.’ MIT Working Papers 18, 15-42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johns, Alana. 1992. ‘Deriving ergativity.’ Linguistic Inquiry 23,57-87

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamp, J.A.W. 1981. ‘A theory of truth and semantic representation.’ In J. Groenendyck, T. Janssen and M. Stokhof, eds., Formal Methods in the study of Langauge, pp. 277-321. Amsterdam: Mathematical Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, Beth. 1983. On the Nature of Ergativity. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, Juliette and Diane Massam. 1995. ‘Surface ergativity: Case/theta relations re-examined.’ In S. Berman et al., eds., Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 15, 286-301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan, Anoop. 1997 ‘Universal grammar and the typology of ergative languages.’ In Alexiadou and Hall, eds., Studies on Universal Grammar and Typological Variation. Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massam, Diane. 2001. ‘Pseudo noun incorporation in Niuean.’ Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 19, 153-197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNally, Louise. 1998. ‘Existential sentences without existential quantification.’ Linguistics and Philosophy 21, 253-392h.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murasugi, Kumiko. 1992. Crossing and Nested paths: NP Movement in Ergative and Accusative Languages. Ph. D. dissertation, MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash, Léa. 1995. Portée argumentale et marquage casuel dans les langues SOV et dans les langues ergatives: l’exemple du géorgien. Ph.D. Dissertation, Université Paris 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlmutter, David and Paul Postal. 1983. ‘Toward a universal characterization of passivization.’ In David Perlmutter, ed., Studies in Relational Grammar 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlmutter, David and Paul Postal. 1984. ‘The 1-advancement exclusiveness law.’ In David Perlmutter and Carol G. Rosen, eds., Studies in Relational Grammar 2. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, Colin. 1993. ‘Conditions on ergativity in Yimas.’ MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 18, 173-212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritter, Elizabeth and Sarah Rosen. 1998. ‘Delimiting events in syntax.’ In W. Geuder and M. Butt, eds., The Projection of Arguments, 135-164. Stanford: CSLI publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rude, Noel. 1982. ‘Promotion and the topicality of Nez Perce objects.’ In M. Macaulay et al., eds., Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, pp. 463- 483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rude, Noel. 1985. Studies in Nez Perce Grammar and Discourse. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Oregon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rude, Noel. 1986a. ‘Topicality, transitivity and the direct object in Nez Perce.’ International Journal of American Linguistics 52, 124-153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rude, Noel. 1986b. ‘Discourse-pragmatic context for genitive promotion in Nez Perce.’ Studies in Language 10, 109-136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rude, Noel. 1988. ‘Ergative, passive and antipassive in Nez Perce.’ In M. Shibatani, ed., Passive and Voice. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverstein, Michael. 1976. ‘Hierarchy of features and ergativity.’ In R. M. W. Dixon, ed., Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages; Humanities, Atlantic Highlands, pp. 112-171. Reprinted in Pieter Muysken and Henk van Riemsdijk, eds., Features and Projections. Dordrecht:Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenson, Nancy. 1989. ‘Irish autonomous impersonals.’ Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7, 379-406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ura, Hiroyuki. 2001. ‘Case.’ In Mark Baltin and Chris Collins, eds., The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolford, Ellen. 1997. ‘Four-way case systems: Ergative, nominative, objective and accusative.’ Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15, 181-227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yip, Moira, Joan Maling and Ray Jackendoff. 1987. ‘Case in tiers.’ Language 63, 217-250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. ANDREW CARNIE
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. PHILLIP CASH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Toronto, ON, Canada

    ALANA JOHNS

  2. University of Toronto, ON, Canada

    DIANE MASSAM

  3. University of Toronto, ON, Canada

    JUVENAL NDAYIRAGIJE

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

CARNIE, A., CASH, P. (2006). Tree-Geometric Relational Hierarchies and Nuumiipuutímt (Nez Perce) Case. In: JOHNS, A., MASSAM, D., NDAYIRAGIJE, J. (eds) ERGATIVITY. Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, vol 65. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4188-8_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation