Grammatical relations in active systems: The case of Guaraní

Functions of Language

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 133-167

  Velázquez Castillo, Maura ^a  

^a Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 20444448257     PISSN: 0929998X     EISSN: 15699765     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1075/fol.9.2.03vel     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Baker, M. (1988) Incorporation: A theory of grammatical relation changing. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
2. Bybee, J. (1985) Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. (Typological Studies in Language, 9.) Amsterdam: Benjamins.
3. Comrie, B. (1976) Review of G. A. Klimov's outline of a general theory of ergativity [Ocerk obscej teorii ergativnosti]. Lingua 38: 252-260.
4. Dahlstrom, A. (1983) Agent-patient languages and split case marking. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 9: 37-46.
5. Davis, A. and J.-P. Koenig (2000) Linking as constraints on word classes in a hierarchical lexicon. Language 76. 1: 56-91.
6. Dowty, D. (1979) Word meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.
7. Durie, M. (1987) Grammatical relations in Acehnese. Studies in Language 11. 2: 365-99.
8. Durie, M. (1997) Grammatical structures in verb serialization. In A. Alsina, J. Bresnan and P. Sells (eds.). Complex predicates (CSLI, 64.) Stanford: CSLI. 289-354.
9. Goldberg, A. (1995) A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
10. Keenan, E. L. (1976) Towards a universal definition of subject. In C. N. Li (ed.) Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press. 303-333.
11. Kishimoto, H. (1996) Split intransitivity in Japanese and the unaccusative hypothesis. Language 72. 2: 248-286.
12. Klimov, G. A. (1979) On the position of the ergative type in typological classification. In F. Plank (ed.) Ergativity: Towards a theory of grammatical relations. London: Academic Press. 327-332.
13. Klimov, G. A. (1973) Ocerk obscej teorii ergativnosti. Moscow: Izd-vo'Nauka'.
14. Langacker, R. W. (1987a) Foundations of cognitive grammar: Vol. I. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
15. Langacker, R. W. (1987b) Grammatical ramifications of the setting/participant distinction. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 13: 383-394.
16. Langacker, R. W. (1991a) Foundations of cognitive trammar: Vol. II: Descriptive applications. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
17. Langacker, R. W. (1991b) Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
18. McGregor, W. B. (2002) Ergative and accusative patterning in Warrwa. In K. Davidse and B. Lamiroy (eds.) The Nominative/Accusative (Case and Grammatical Relations across Languages, 5.) Amsterdam: Benjamins. 285-317.
19. Mithun, M. (1991) Active/agentive case marking and its motivations. Language 67. 3: 510-546.
20. Mithun, M. and W. Chafe (1999) What are S, A, and O? Studies in Language 23. 3: 569-596.
21. Seki, L. (1990) Kamaiurá as an active-stative language. In D. Payne (ed.) Amazonian linguistics: Studies in Lowland South American languages. Austin: University of Texas Press. 367-391.
22. Van Valin, R. D. (1990) Semantic parameters of split intransitivity. Language 66. 2: 221-260.
23. Velázquez-Castillo, M. (1991) The semantics of Guaraní agreement markers. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 17: 324-335.
24. Velázquez-Castillo, M. (1996) The grammar of possession: Inalienability, incorporation and possessor ascension in Guaraní (Studies in Language Companion Series, 33.) Amsterdam: Benjamins.
25. Vendler, Z. (1967) Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.