Voice in indonesian discourse and its implications for theories of the development of ergativity

Studies in Language

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 361-410

  Wouk, Fay ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84989404183     PISSN: 03784177     EISSN: 15699978     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1075/sl.20.2.05wou     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Anderson, Stephen R. 1977. “On mechanisms by which languages become ergative”. In: Li, Charles (ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change, 317-64. Austin: University of Texas Press.
2. Benveniste, Emile. 1952. “La construction passive du parfait transitif\Bulletin de la Societee de Linguistique de Paris 48:52-62.
3. Cardona, George. 1970. “The Indo-Iranian construction mana (mama) krtam”. Language 46:1-12.
4. Clark, Ross. 1976. Aspects of Proto-Polynesian syntax. Auckland: Linguistics Society of New Zealand Te Reo Monographs.
5. Clark, Ross. 1981. Review of Chung 1978. Language 57:198-204.
6. Chung, Sandra. 1977. Review of Clark 1976. Journal of the Polynesian Society 86: 537-540.
7. Chung, Sandra. 1978. Case marking and grammatical relations in Polynesian. Austin: University of Texas Press.
8. Cooreman, Anne; Fox, Barbara; and Givon, Talmy. 1984. “The Discourse Definition of Ergativity”. Studies in Language 8:1-34.
9. Corston, Simon. 1993. “Ergativity in Roviana”, University of Auckland MA Thesis.
10. Cumming, Susanna. 1988. Syntactic Function and Constituent Order Change in Malay. UCLA doctoral dissertation. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.
11. Cumming, Susanna & Wouk, Fay. 1987. “Is there “discourse ergativity” in Austronesian languages?” In: Dixon, R.M.W. (ed.), Studies in Ergativity, 271-296. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
12. Dardjowidjojo, Soenjono. 1978. Sentence patterns of Indonesian. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii.
13. Dixon, R.M.W. 1979. “Ergativity”. Language 55:59-138.
14. Dixon, R.M.W. 1980. The languages of Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Dixon, R.M.W. 1987. Introduction. In: Dixon, R.M.W. (ed.), Studies in ergativity, 1-16. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
16. Du Bois, John. 1980. “Beyond definiteness: the trace of identity in discourse”. In: Chafe, Wallace (ed.), The pear stories: Cognitive, cultural and linguistic aspects of narrative production, 203-274. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
17. Du Bois, John. 1987. “Absolute zero: Paradigm adaptivity in Sacapultec Maya”. In: Dixon, R.M.W. (ed.), Studies in ergativity, 203-222. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
18. Dyen, Isidore. 1965. A lexico-statistical classification of the Austronesian languages. Baltimore: Waverly Press.
19. Estival, Dominique; and Myhill, John. 1988. “Formal and functional aspects of the development from passive to ergative systems”. In: Shibatani, M. (ed.), Passive and voice, 441-491. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
20. Foley, William; and Van Valin, Robert. 1985. “Information packaging in the clause”. In: Shopen, Timothy (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Volume 1: Clause structure, 282-364. Cambridge: Cambridge Univeristy Press.
21. Fox, Barbara. 1982. “The focus systems in Old Javanese, Tagalog, Chamorro and Proto-Malayo-Polynesian”. Unpublished ms.
22. Givon, Talmy. 1979. On understanding grammar. New York: Academic Press.
23. Givon, Talmy. 1983. “Introduction”. In: Givon, Talmy (ed), Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study, 1-42. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
24. Hale, Kenneth L. 1970. “The passive and ergative in language change: the Australian case”. In: Wurm, S.A.; and Laycock, D. C. (eds.), Pacific studies in honour of Arthur Capell, 757-81. Canberra: ANU
25. Hohepa, Patrick. 1969. “The accusative-to-ergative drift in Polynesian languages”. Journal of the Polynesian Society 78: 295-329.
26. Hopper, Paul. 1979a. “Some discourse sources of ergativity”. Hawaii Working Papers in Linguistics 11: 137-153.
27. Hopper, Paul. 1979b. “Aspect and foregrounding in discourse”. In: Givon, Talmy (ed.), Discourse and Syntax, 213-224. New York: Academic Press. [Syntax and Semantics 12]
28. Hopper, Paul. 1982. “Aspect between discourse and grammar”. In: Hopper, Paul (ed.), Tense-aspect: Between semantics & pragmatics, 3-18. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
29. Hopper, Paul. 1986. “How ergative is Malay?”. In: McGinn, Richard (ed.), Studies in Austronesian linguistics, 441-454. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Center for International Studies, Center for Southeast Asian Studies.
30. Hopper, Paul; and Thompson, Sandra. 1980. “Transitivity in grammar and discourse”. Language 56: 251-299.
31. Keenan, Edward. 1976. “Towards a universal definition of ‘subject’”. In: Li, Charles (ed.), Subject and topic, 303-334. New York: Academic Press.
32. Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 1991. “Semantic change and heterosemy in gram-maticalization”. Language 67: 474-509.
33. Myhill, John. 1984. “Diachronic explanation for typological ‘inconsistency’: The Mayan languages”. Papers in Linguistics 17, 283-300.
34. Nichols, Johanna. 1984. “The grammatical marking of theme in literary Russian”. In: Brecht, Richard; and Flier, Michael S. (eds.), Issues in Russian morphosyntax, 170-186. Columbus: Slavica Publishers.
35. Payne, Thomas. 1982. “Role and reference related subject properties and ergativity in Yup’ik Eskimo and Tagalog”. Studies in Language 6:1:75-106.
36. Pawley, Andrew. 1973. “Some problems in Proto-Oceanic grammar”. Oceanic Linguistics 12:103-188.
37. Rafferty, Ellen. 1982. Discourse structures of the Chinese Indonesian of Malang. Jakarta: Badan Penyelenggara Seri Nusa.
38. Rafferty, Ellen. 1985. “Changing discourse strategies in Malay texts of the 1920’s”. Paper Presented at the Fourth Eastern Conference on Austronesian Languages, Ann Arbor.
39. Schiffrin, Deborah. 1987. Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40. Starosta, Stanley; Pawley, Andrew; and Reid, Lawrence. 1982. “The evolution of focus in Austronesian”. In: Halim, A; Carrington, L; and Wurm, S.A. (eds.), Papers from the Third International Conference on AustronesianLinguistics, vol. 2: Tracking the travellers, 145-170. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
41. Teuw, A. 1961. A critical survey of studies in Malay and Bahasa Indonesia. ‘s-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff.
42. Thompson, Sandra A. 1987. “The passive in English: A discourse perspective”. In: Channon, Roger: and Shockey, Linda (eds.), In honor of Ilse Lehiste: Ilse Lehiste puhendusteos, 497-511. Dordrecht: Foris (Netherlands Phonetic Archives 6).
43. Tomlin, Russell. 1987. “On the interaction of syntactic subject, thematic information, and agent in English”. In: Wirth, Jessica (ed.), Beyond the sentence: Discourse and sentential form, 61-82. Ann Arbor: Karoma.
44. Verhaar, John W.M. 1983. “Ergativity, accusativity, and hierarchy”. Sophia Linguistica 11:1-23.
45. Verhaar, John W.M. 1984. “The categorial system in Contemporary Indonesian: Verbs”. In: Purwo, Bambang Kaswanti (ed.), Towards a description of contemporary Indonesian: preliminary studies, part 7, 27-64. Jakarta: Badan Penyelenggara Seri NUSA.
46. Verhaar, John W.M. 1988. “Syntactic ergativity in Contemporary Indonesian”. In: McGinn, Richard (ed.), Studies in Austronesian linguistics, 347-384. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Center for International Studies, Center for Southeast Asian Studies.
47. Wolff, John U. 1980. Beginning Indonesian. Ithaca: Cornell University, Southeast Asia Program.
48. Wouk, Fay. 1986a. “Transitivity in Batak and Tagalog”. Studies in Language 10: 391-424.
49. Wouk, Fay. 1986b. “Transitivity in Proto-Malayo-Polynesian and Proto-Austronesian”. In: Geraghty, P; Carrington, L; and S.A. Wurm, S.A. (eds.), FOCAL I: Papers from the Fourth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 133-158. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
50. Wouk, Fay. 1989. The impact of discourse on grammar: Verb morphology in Spoken Jakarta Indonesian. UCLA doctoral dissertation. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.