Universal #199
Legacy number: 199
| Number | 199 |
| Original | No set of case marking elements both participate in agreement and are separable from the head noun. |
| Standardized | IF a relational marker (case, adposition) participates in agreement, THEN it will not be separable from the head noun. IF a relational marker (case, adposition) is separable from the head noun, THEN it will not participate in agreement. |
| Keywords | case, adposition, agreement |
| Domain | inflection, syntax |
| Type | implication |
| Status | achronic |
| Quality | absolute |
| Basis | Russian (Slavic, Indo-European), Evenki (Tungus), Japanese (Japanese-Ryukyuan), Tagalog (W. Malayo-Polynesian, Austronesian), Amharic (Semitic, Afro-Asiatic), Estonian, Karelian, Vepsian (all Finnic, Uralic) |
| Source | Kilby 1981: 115 (C) |
Discussion
Counterexamples
"preposition-repetition" in Old and later non-literary Russian, Old Czech, Old Serbian, Lithuanian (Balto-Slavic, IE), postpositions not governing an affixal case in construction with demonstratives in Hungarian (Uralic) (Plank 1995: 63-64, 102, with references)
Notes
Kilby 1981: 118 refers to “efficiency” and “noun-identification” as the two main motivations for the incompatibility of separability and agreement.Does being "separable" mean being an adposition rather than an affix? Or at least a phrase affix rather than a word affix?
Log in to join the discussion.
Does being "separable" mean being an adposition rather than an affix? Or at least a phrase affix rather than a word affix?