Universal #310
Legacy number: 310
| Number | 309 |
| Original | In the overwhelming majority of languages the citation form belongs to the syntactical form of the nominative*. |
| Standardized | The citation form of the noun tends to be the nominative case form. |
| Keywords | noun, case, nominative, markedness |
| Domain | inflection, syntax |
| Type | unconditional |
| Status | achronic |
| Quality | statistical |
| Basis | languages surveyed in Kozinsky 1981 |
| Source | Kozinsky 1981 |
Discussion
Counterexamples
In systems with “marked nominative”, it is the unmarked accusative case that is used in citation forms; see #6.
Notes
1. Cf. #1109. 2. A sequence of a stem and all related synsemantic and semisynsemantic morphemes can function in a clause as follows: subject of transitive verb (S), subject of intransitive verb of state (SIntrS), or action (SIntrA), direct object (O). The sequence is determined as a syntactic form (SF) in a matrix of the 4 above mentioned constituents, where “+” means that it is possible, and “-” that it is impossible to express a certain part of a sentence with this sequence.SF indefinitive: +S+SIntrA+SIntrS+O ex. Russian: stol (table), kenguru (kangaroo);SF subjective: +S+SIntrA+SIntrS-O ex. Russian: reka (river), otec (father);SF accusative: -S-SIntrA-SIntrS+O ex. Russian: rek-u, otc-a;SF absolutive: -S+SIntrA+SIntrS+OSF transitive: +S-SIntrA-SIntrS+OSF intransitive: -S+SIntrA+SIntrS-OSF active: +S+SIntrA-SIntrS-OSF stative: -S-SIntrA+SIntrS+O.Moreover, while SF of indefinitive, subjective, absolutive, intransitive, and stative have some features in common, it is nice to have a common term for all of them: SF nominative ±S±SIntrA +SIntrS±O.
Log in to join the discussion.
2. A sequence of a stem and all related synsemantic and semisynsemantic morphemes can function in a clause as follows: subject of transitive verb (S), subject of intransitive verb of state (SIntrS), or action (SIntrA), direct object (O). The sequence is determined as a syntactic form (SF) in a matrix of the 4 above mentioned constituents, where "+" means that it is possible, and "-" that it is impossible to express a certain part of a sentence with this sequence.
<table class="textTable">
<tr>
<td>SF indefinitive:</td> <td>+S+SIntrA+SIntrS+O</td>
<td>ex. Russian: stol (table), kenguru (kangaroo);</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SF subjective:</td> <td>+S+SIntrA+SIntrS-O</td>
<td>ex. Russian: reka (river), otec (father);</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SF accusative:</td>
<td>-S-SIntrA-SIntrS+O</td>
<td>ex. Russian: rek-u, otc-a;</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SF absolutive:</td>
<td>-S+SIntrA+SIntrS+O</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SF transitive:</td>
<td>+S-SIntrA-SIntrS+O</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SF intransitive:</td>
<td>-S+SIntrA+SIntrS-O</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SF active:</td>
<td>+S+SIntrA-SIntrS-O</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SF stative:</td>
<td>-S-SIntrA+SIntrS+O.</td>
</tr>
</table>
Moreover, while SF of indefinitive, subjective, absolutive, intransitive, and stative have some features in common, it is nice to have a common term for all of them:
SF nominative ±S±SIntrA +SIntrS±O.