Universal #205
Legacy number: 205
| Number | 205 |
| Original | No set of case marking elements express neither subject-object nor concrete relations. |
| Standardized | IF a relational marker (case, adposition) does not express subject-object relations, THEN it will express local relations. IF it does not express local relations, THEN it will express subject-object relations. |
| Keywords | case, adposition, grammatical relations, local relations |
| Domain | inflection, syntax |
| Type | mutual 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: 116 (I) |
Discussion
Notes
Kilby 1981: 120-121: “Given that bound morphemes fit naturally into the expression of subject-object relations, while independent morphemes naturally express concrete relations, this does not appear to leave much room for a system which expresses neither. Isolated individual forms, such as the English possessive postposition ’s, are the only case marking elements which can be expected to fill this gap.”
Comment
Kilby 1981: 120-121: "Given that bound morphemes fit naturally into the expression of subject-object relations, while independent morphemes naturally express concrete relations, this does not appear to leave much room for a system which expresses neither. Isolated individual forms, such as the English possessive postposition 's, are the only case marking elements which can be expected to fill this gap."
Log in to join the discussion.