Universal #578
Legacy number: 578
| Number | 575 |
| Original | There is no language which distinguishes a Dual and a Plural in the exclusive but not in the inclusive form of pronoun. |
| Standardized | IF a dual and a plural are distinguished in the 1st person exclusive form of a pronoun, THEN they are also distinguished in the inclusive. |
| Formula | Du & Pl (exclusive pronoun) ⇒ Du & Pl (inclusive pronoun) |
| Keywords | number, dual, plural, pronoun, inclusive, exclusive |
| Domain | inflection |
| Type | implication |
| Status | achronic |
| Quality | absolute |
| Basis | languages mentioned in Moravcsik 1978b |
| Source | Moravcsik 1978b: 352 |
Discussion
Counterexamples
1. Savo (East Papuan) (Greenberg 1988: 2);2. Yagua (Peba-Yaguan);3. Tübatulabal (Uto-Aztecan) has a dual with 1st person exclusive, but not with 1st person inclusive, at least according to the grammatical description of Voegelin (1935); the accompanying collection of texts, however, tells a different story (caveat credited to M. Cysouw);4. Ngankikurrungkurr (Daly, Australian) (Hoddinott 1988: 94) (credited to M. Cysouw)
Notes
1. Greenberg makes this claim for Dual only, cf. #1876. 2. Cf. a more specific claim by Greenberg: #1410.3. See discussion in Plank 1989: 304-305.
Log in to join the discussion.
2. Cf. a more specific claim by Greenberg: <a class="innerLink" href="browse.php?entry_id=1410"><img src="../img/entry.gif" border="0">.
3. See discussion in Plank 1989: 304-305.