Universal #12
Legacy number: 13
| Number | 13 |
| Original | If direct objects may control agreement (or take case marking) without doing so obligatorily, it will be the more definite and/or the more animate direct objects which are agreed with (or case marked) obligatorily. |
| Standardized | IF direct objects may control verb agreement (or take case marking) without doing so obligatorily, THEN it will be the more definite and/or the more animate direct objects which are agreed with (or case marked) obligatorily. |
| Keywords | agreement, case, direct object, definite, animate |
| Domain | inflection, syntax |
| Type | no genuine implication; rather: provided that |
| Status | achronic |
| Quality | absolute? |
| Basis | unspecified |
| Source | Plank 1991c: 535, Croft 1988: 161 |
Discussion
Notes
1. Even though direct contraposition does not work, the claim at issue may be of an essentially implicational nature:
IF less definite and/or less animate direct objects control verb agreement (or are optionally case-marked), THEN more definite and/or more animate direct objects also control verb agreement (or are also case-marked).
2. Cf. ##46, 488, 1284.
IF less definite and/or less animate direct objects control verb agreement (or are optionally case-marked), THEN more definite and/or more animate direct objects also control verb agreement (or are also case-marked).
2. Cf. ##46, 488, 1284.
Log in to join the discussion.
2. Cf. <a class="innerLink" href="browse.php?entry_id=46"><img src="../img/entry.gif" border="0">, <a class="innerLink" href="browse.php?entry_id=488"><img src="../img/entry.gif" border="0">, <a class="innerLink" href="browse.php?entry_id=1284"><img src="../img/entry.gif" border="0">.