1. Kibrik argues that syntactic relations, especially those of subject and object are not universal, but are only one of several possibilities of organizing relational clause structure. The three main dimensions of relational structuring – called grammatical PIVOTS by Kibrik (see comment 2) – are those of semantic roles, information flow, and deictic anchoring. There are three major language types depending on the extent to which these dimensions are grammaticalized: PIVOTLESS languages, with no or little grammaticalization of any of these dimensions; PURE languages strongly grammaticalizing only one of them, especially that of roles; MIXED languages strongly grammaticalizing more than one. According to this classification, A PIVOTLESS language is one that neglects role, flow, and deictic concepts in expressing the argument structure of the proposition, giving a maximally straightforward representation of the event. Riau Indonesian is a possible example. (Kibrik 1997:297).2. It should be emphasised that the term PIVOT here refers to semantic dimensions (whose concepts are prominent and grammaticalised in a language under consideration), and so this term is different from Dixon’s (1979) and Foley & Van Valin’s (1984) pivots. In their frameworks the pivot is an NP that can be called central due to its syntactic properties. (Kibrik 1997: 339, fn. 23)
1. Kibrik argues that syntactic relations, especially those of subject and object are not universal, but are only one of several possibilities of organizing relational clause structure. The three main dimensions of relational structuring – called grammatical PIVOTS by Kibrik (see comment 2) – are those of semantic roles, information flow, and deictic anchoring. There are three major language types depending on the extent to which these dimensions are grammaticalized: PIVOTLESS languages, with no or little grammaticalization of any of these dimensions; PURE languages strongly grammaticalizing only one of them, especially that of roles; MIXED languages strongly grammaticalizing more than one. According to this classification, A PIVOTLESS language is one that neglects role, flow, and deictic concepts in expressing the argument structure of the proposition, giving a maximally straightforward representation of the event. Riau Indonesian is a possible example. (Kibrik 1997:297).2. It should be emphasised that the term PIVOT here refers to semantic dimensions (whose concepts are prominent and grammaticalised in a language under consideration), and so this term is different from Dixon’s (1979) and Foley & Van Valin’s (1984) pivots. In their frameworks the pivot is an NP that can be called central due to its syntactic properties. (Kibrik 1997: 339, fn. 23)