Voice marking | Proper marker | no | |
Voice marking | Lookalike marker | no | |
Voice marking | Synthetic marker | n/a | |
Voice marking | Analytic marker | n/a | |
Flagging | S-argument flagging | no | Overt NPs are not inflected for the case. Grammatical function information is expressed only in the pronominal agreement (Baker et al. 2005: 144). |
Flagging | P-oblique flagging | n/a | FYI: Only two P-demotion patterns were identified.: incorporation and obligatorily unexpressed P.
FYI: Overt NPs are not inflected for the case; grammatical function information is expressed only in the pronominal agreement (Baker et al. 2005: 144). |
Flagging | P-oblique unflagging | n/a | |
Flagging | P-oblique flagging variation | n/a | |
Indexation | S-argument indexed | yes | Predicates obligatorily take a subject marker (Smeets 2008: 180). |
Indexation | S-argument indexation conditioned | no | Predicates obligatorily take a subject marker (Smeets 2008: 180). |
P-individuation properties | P incorporated: Generic (non-specific) | yes | TYPE I incorporation (Mithun 1984):
Noun incorporation plays an active role in discourse. INC noun can be interpreted as a generic NP with no particular referent (Baker et al. 2005: 145).
Incorporated nominal can be non-referential parts of lexicalized compounds (Baker et al. 2005: 145).
More significant is that IN can express definite nominal arguments that are backgrounded old information. The incorporated nouns in Mapudungun thus can maintain their referentiality (Baker et al. 2005: 144-145). |
P-individuation properties | P incorporated: Indefinite (non-specific) | no | |
P-individuation properties | P incorporated: Referential | yes | TYPE III incorporation (Mithun 1984)
More significant is that IN can express the definite nominal arguments with backgrounded old information. The incorporated nouns in Mapudungun thus can maintain their referentiality (Baker et al. 2005: 145).
Finally, as further evidence of the discourse role of NI in Mapudungun, we observe that incorporated nouns can introduce new discourse referents to which subsequent nominal expressions can refer back (Baker et a. 2005: 146).
Baker (1996: §7.4.3) expands on the idea that INs count as referential in some languages by showing that the phenomenon has a nontrivial interaction with the syntax (Baker et al. 2005: 146). |
P-individuation properties | P oblique: Generic (non-specific) | n/a | |
P-individuation properties | P oblique: Indefinite (non-specific) | n/a | |
P-individuation properties | P oblique: Referential | n/a | |
P-individuation properties | P eliminated: Generic (non-specific) | yes | Based on the personal communication with Fernando Zúñiga (06.07.23). |
P-individuation properties | P eliminated: Indefinite (non-specific) | yes | Mapudungun (Zúñiga 2000: 63)
1.
Ngürü allkütu-le-rke-y.
Fox listen-prog-mir-ind
‘The fox turned out to be listening.’ |
P-individuation properties | P eliminated: Referential | yes | Based on the personal communication with Fernando Zúñiga (06.07.23). |
P-oblique affectedness | Less affected P-oblique | n/a | |
P-constraining properties | Animacy constraints on P-oblique demotion | no | |
P-constraining properties | Person constraints on P-oblique demotion | no | |
P-constraining properties | Number constraints on P-oblique demotion | no | |