Transitive case

The transitive case is a grammatical case used in a small number of languages to mark either argument of a transitive verb, but not used with intransitive verbs. Such a situation, which is quite rare among the world's languages, has also been called a double-oblique clause structure.

Rushani, an Iranian dialect, has this case in the past tense. That is, in the past tense,^[1] the agent and object of a transitive verb are marked with the same case ending, while the subject of an intransitive verb is not marked. In the present tense, the object of the transitive verb is marked, the other two roles are not – that is, a typical nominative–accusative alignment.^[2]

Intransitive: no case marking

az-um	pa	Xaraɣ	sut
I(ABS)-1sg	to	Xorog	went

'I went to Xorog'

Transitive, past tense: double case marking

mu	tā	wunt
me(OBL)	you(OBL)	saw

'I saw you'

(double oblique: literally 'me saw thee')

Transitive, present tense: accusative case marking

az	tā	wun-um
I(ABS)	you(OBL)	see-1sg

'I see you'

(nominative–accusative)

According to Payne, it's clear what happened here: Rushani once had a split-ergative alignment, as is common in the area, where the object was marked (oblique) in the present tense, but the agent was marked in the past. The case forms of the object were then leveled, and with the marking applied to the past tense as well. However, this resulted in a complication, the typologically unusual situation where the agent and object are treated the same, and different from the intransitive subject. Given its rarity, one might expect such a system to be unstable, and indeed it appears to be changing. Payne reports that younger speakers change the past-tense construction to one of the following, either using the absolutive (= nominative) inflection for the agent:

az-um	tā	wunt
I(ABS)-1sg	you(OBL)	saw

'I saw you'

(nominative–accusative)

or secondarily marking the object as an object, using the preposition az (literally 'from'):

mu	az	taw	wunt
I(OBL)	ACC	you(OBL)	saw

'I saw you'

(effectively, accusative and double-accusative)

References

↑ or perhaps perfective aspect
↑ J.R. Payne, 'Language Universals and Language Types', in Collinge, ed. 1990. An Encyclopedia of Language. Routledge. From Payne, 1980.

Morphosyntactic alignment	Absolutive Accusative Direct Ergative Intransitive Nominative Oblique Partitive Pegative

Location, time, direction	Ablative Addirective Adelative Adessive Allative Antessive Apudessive Approximative Delative Distantitive Distributive (–temporal) Egressive Elative Illative Inelative Inessive Initiative Intrative Lative Locative Medial Perlative Pertingent Postdirective Postelative Postessive Prolative Prosecutive Proximative Separative Subdirective Subelative Subessive Sublative Superdirective Superelative Superessive Superlative Temporal Terminative

Possession, companion, instrument	Abessive Associative Caritive Comitative Dative Genitive Instrumental (–comitative) Ornative Possessed Possessive Privative Sociative

State, manner	Adverbial Comparative Equative Essive (–formal, –modal) Exessive Formal Identical Instructive Modal Multiplicative Orientative Revertive Semblative Translative

Cause, purpose	Aversive Benefactive Causal (–final) Evitative Final

Other	Dubitive Postpositional Prepositional Vocative

Declensions

Czech Archaic Dutch English (Middle English, Old English) Finnish German (Old High German) Gothic Irish Latin Latvian Lithuanian Serbo-Croatian Slovak

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 10/18/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.

Transitive case

References

See also