Explore: Ergative Constructions

typology, split ergativity is a feature of certain languages where some constructions use ergative syntax and morphology, but other constructions show another

the ergative case identifies the agent (the intentful performer of an action) of a verb. In Kalaallisut (Greenlandic) for example, the ergative case

called Neo-Aramaic) languages. Ergative languages are classified into two groups: those that are morphologically ergative but syntactically behave as accusative

Sorani Kurdish have a split-ergative system. Transitive verbs show nominative/accusative marking in the present tense, and ergative marking in the past tense

adoption from Spanish vaso); basóàk ('the forest', ergative case) vs. básoàk ('the glass', ergative case) vs. básoak ('the forests' or 'the glasses', absolutive

doi:10.1086/371454. S2CID 161828505. Müller, Hans-Peter (1995). "Ergative Constructions In Early Semitic Languages". Journal of Near Eastern Studies. 54

(following R. M. W. Dixon's usage), or "ergative", following Lyons's influential textbook from 1968. However, the term "ergative verb" has also been used for unaccusative

behavioral constructions or at least not in all of them. Languages with deep ergativity (with ergative alignment in behavioral constructions) appear to

we have come". This is problematic for the ergative theory because the -mV participle, labelled the ergative marker, is a passive marker in most of the

alignment of these constructions is ergative. Since this alignment is confined to the past tenses, it is further described as split-ergative. The most obvious