In:The Diachronic Typology of Non-Canonical Subjects
Edited by Ilja A. Seržant and Leonid Kulikov
[Studies in Language Companion Series 140] 2013
► pp. 231–256
Diachrony of experiencer subject marking
Evidence from East Caucasian
Published online: 29 November 2013
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.140.11gan
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.140.11gan
Daghestanian languages of the Caucasus show consistent use of the dative and locative cases to mark subject arguments with certain verbs, most notably the experiencers of the verbs ‘see’, ‘hear’, ‘know’, ‘want’, ‘forget’, ‘find’ and some others. Although this pattern is very stable and can probably be reconstructed for Proto-Daghestanian, variation in experiencer marking reveals that diachronic changes happened to non-canonical subjects at a later stage of evolution. The paper looks into two related issues concerning the diachrony of experiencer subjects in Daghestanian languages: the relative diachronic stability of non-canonical case marking and non-canonical agreement, and the loss of non-canonical subjects in Udi and Dargwa.
Cited by (6)
Cited by six other publications
Forker, Diana
2019. Grammatical relations in Sanzhi Dargwa. In Argument Selectors [Typological Studies in Language, 123], ► pp. 69 ff.
Ganenkov, Dmitry
2015. Infinitival complementation from Caucasian Albanian to Modern Udi. Journal of Historical Linguistics 5:1 ► pp. 110 ff.
Seržant, Ilja A.
2015. Categorization and semantics of subject-like obliques. In Subjects in Constructions – Canonical and Non-Canonical [Constructional Approaches to Language, 16], ► pp. 175 ff.
Seržant, Ilja A.
2016. The nominative case in Baltic in a typological perspective. In Argument Realization in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 3], ► pp. 137 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
