Chol Agreement and Case Fragment @cite{coon-2013a} #
@cite{imanishi-2020}
Agreement morphology and case assignment for Chol (Cholan, Mayan), a low absolutive language with aspect-based split ergativity.
The System #
Chol has two agreement paradigms:
- Set A (ERG/GEN): prefixes cross-referencing the transitive agent
- Set B (ABS): suffixes cross-referencing the absolutive argument
Morpheme order: Asp-SET_A-V-SET_B (low absolutive order, contrasting with Kaqchikel's Asp-SET_B-SET_A-V).
Case Licensing (@cite{coon-2013a}; @cite{imanishi-2020}, §2.4.3) #
- ERG: inherent from transitive v
- ABS (transitive): structural from Voice (low absolutive)
- ABS (intransitive): structural from Infl
Accusative Side (Non-Perfective) #
In non-perfective aspect, the aspectual predicate choñkol embeds a nominalized clause. The RON does NOT hold: the external argument may be generated inside the nominalized clause. Result: S/A = GEN (from D), O = ABS (from Voice).
Argument positions in a Chol clause.
- agent : ArgPosition
- patient : ArgPosition
- intranS : ArgPosition
Instances For
Equations
- Fragments.Mayan.Chol.instBEqArgPosition.beq x✝ y✝ = (x✝.ctorIdx == y✝.ctorIdx)
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Case assignment in perfective (ergative) clauses. Standard ergative alignment: A = ERG, S = P = ABS.
Equations
Instances For
Case assignment in non-perfective (accusative) clauses. Since the RON does not hold, the subject appears inside the nominalized clause as the highest DP and receives GEN from D. The object receives ABS from Voice (low absolutive).
Equations
Instances For
Ergative alignment in perfective: A distinguished from S/P.
Accusative alignment in non-perfective: S = A (GEN), O distinct (ABS).
Extended ergative: all subjects get GEN (= set A) in non-perfective.
Chol's absolutive morphemes appear in low position (at the end of the verb stem, post-stem). Observable from morpheme order: ASP-ERG-ROOT-(DERIV)-SUFFIX-ABS.
Instances For
Extraction possibilities in Chol transitive clauses. Unlike Q'anjob'al, Chol allows both A and P arguments to extract freely. There are no extraction asymmetries — Chol lacks syntactic ergativity.
The resulting ambiguity (when both arguments are 3rd person) is a
natural consequence of the absence of extraction restrictions:
Maxki₁ tyi y-il-ä (___₁) jiñi wiñik (___₁)?
'Who saw the man?' / 'Who did the man see?'
- intranS : ExtractionTarget
- patient : ExtractionTarget
- agent : ExtractionTarget
Instances For
Equations
- Fragments.Mayan.Chol.instBEqExtractionTarget.beq x✝ y✝ = (x✝.ctorIdx == y✝.ctorIdx)
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
All core arguments extract freely in Chol.
Chol's extraction profile: no special morphology for any extraction.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
In Chol non-finite embedded clauses (aspectless), absolutive objects ARE available. This follows from Chol being LOW-ABS: v⁰ assigns case to the object without needing Infl⁰.
Mejl [i-k'el-oñ] 'She can see me.' (ABS object ✓)
Choñkol [k-mek'-ety] 'I am hugging you.' (ABS object ✓)
Instances For
Absolutive intransitive subjects are NOT available in Chol non-finite clauses: they must be marked with the ergative/possessive prefix instead.
Choñkol [k-ts'äm-el] 'I am bathing.' (ERG prefix, not ABS)
*Choñkol [ts'äm-i-yoñ] intended: 'I am bathing.' (ABS ✗)