Antipassivization in Basque revisited
Official URL
Abstract
In this paper, we explore three phenomena that have been considered to be antipassives
in Basque linguistics. First, we briefly review “ergative displacement”
(Laka 1988), related to antipassives as mentioned by Heath (1976). This is not
a bona fide instance of the antipassive, since the ergative displacement affects
only the agreement pattern (the A argument appears indexed as S in finite
verb forms) while the case frame and syntactic status of A and P are as in the
default transitive construction; besides, there is no demotion or suppression
of the P argument. Second, we review two biclausal constructions, namely the
ari-progressive (Hualde & Ortiz de Urbina 1987; Laka 2006) and participial
clauses (Ortiz de Urbina & Uribe-Etxebarria 1991). Although regarded as antipassives
by Postal (1977) and Coyos (2002), respectively, their biclausality, long
argued by some Basque linguists, is incompatible with the antipassive, which
is monoclausal by definition. Finally, de Rijk (2003) labels as antipassives some
intransitive constructions that alternate with transitive ones. This is the closest to
true antipassives that can be found in Basque, but these constructions are lexically
constrained and idiosyncratic, and unlike canonical antipassives attested in other languages of the world.
in Basque linguistics. First, we briefly review “ergative displacement”
(Laka 1988), related to antipassives as mentioned by Heath (1976). This is not
a bona fide instance of the antipassive, since the ergative displacement affects
only the agreement pattern (the A argument appears indexed as S in finite
verb forms) while the case frame and syntactic status of A and P are as in the
default transitive construction; besides, there is no demotion or suppression
of the P argument. Second, we review two biclausal constructions, namely the
ari-progressive (Hualde & Ortiz de Urbina 1987; Laka 2006) and participial
clauses (Ortiz de Urbina & Uribe-Etxebarria 1991). Although regarded as antipassives
by Postal (1977) and Coyos (2002), respectively, their biclausality, long
argued by some Basque linguists, is incompatible with the antipassive, which
is monoclausal by definition. Finally, de Rijk (2003) labels as antipassives some
intransitive constructions that alternate with transitive ones. This is the closest to
true antipassives that can be found in Basque, but these constructions are lexically
constrained and idiosyncratic, and unlike canonical antipassives attested in other languages of the world.
Date Issued
2021
Publication Type
Book Section
Subject(s)
Language(s)
en
Author(s)
Fernández, Beatriz |
Editor(s)
Janic, Katarzyna | |
Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena |
Additional Credits
Publisher
John Benjamins
ISBN
9789027260260
Access(Rights)
metadata.only