Universal #89

Legacy number: 89

 Number  89
 Original  Markers of agreement with direct objects are always formally distinct from markers of agreement with subjects, indirect objects, and adverbial objects. If there are formal similarities they are between non-subject agreement markers.
 Standardized  IF there are any formal similarities in agreement markers, THEN they are between non-subject agreement markers.
 Keywords  agreement, verb, direct object, indirect object, subject, adverbial object
 Domain  inflection, syntax
 Type  no genuine implication; rather: provided that
 Status  achronic
 Quality  absolute?
 Basis  languages in Moravcsik 1974
 Source  Moravcsik 1974: 29

← Back to Universals Archive

Discussion
Counterexamples
Napata Egyptian (specific variety of Egyptian, strongly influenced by another, unknown language, attested c. 600-300 BC in Nubia): identical forms for the markers of agreement with subject, direct object, and indirect object (cf. Peust 1999a). (F. Kammerzell, p.c.)
Notes
The two statements in the Original strike me as contradictory. Should it be like this? Markers of agreement with subjects are always formally distinct from markers of agreement with direct objects, indirect objects, and adverbial objects. If there are formal similarities they are between non-subject agreement markers.
Comment
Frans Plank · 3 Aug 2006
The two statements in the Original strike me as contradictory. Should it be like this?

Markers of agreement with subjects are always formally distinct from markers of agreement with direct objects, indirect objects, and adverbial objects. If there are formal similarities they are between non-subject agreement markers.