In:Grammatical Relations in Change
Edited by Jan Terje Faarlund
[Studies in Language Companion Series 56] 2001
► pp. 205–221
Ergative to accusative
Comparing evidence from Inuktitut
Published online: 13 July 2001
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.56.09joh
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.56.09joh
This paper examines the case of different dialects of Inuktitut which appear to vary in their distribution and function of the antipassive construction. It is hypothesized that a difference in grammatical restrictions on this construction will coincide with a quantitative difference in occurrence, i.e. some dialects have moved further along the continuum toward a nominative-accusative typology. However, it is shown that counting the number of tokens of the case marker in question does not show any statistical significance, due to the fact that this case marker has functions independent of object marking and that these functions appear to vary in inverse proportion to the degree to which it is used as an accusative marker.
Cited by (10)
Cited by ten other publications
Burukina, Irina & Maria Polinsky
Janic, Katarzyna & Charlotte Hemmings
2021. Alignment shift as functional markedness reversal. Journal of Historical Linguistics 11:2 ► pp. 299 ff.
Janic, Katarzyna & Alena Witzlack-Makarevich
2021. The multifaceted nature of the antipassive construction. In Antipassive [Typological Studies in Language, 130], ► pp. 1 ff.
Kantarovich, Jessica
Carrier, Julien
Spreng, Bettina
Corre, Éric
JOHNS, ALANA
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 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.
