| Voice marking | Proper marker | no | FYI: Niuean is an obligatory P-coding ('ergative') language. In the absence of overt transitivity marking, such languages may have weak P-ambitransitivity, but not weak A-ambitransitivity (since in such languages, the conversion of A into S modifies its coding characteristics) (Creissels 2021: 524) (KJ).
FYI: The intransitive use of A-ambitransitive verbs triggers a change in the flagging of A converted into the S term of an intransitive clause, which excludes the possibility of weak A-ambitransitivity. See Creissels (2021: 524) (KJ). |
| Voice marking | Lookalike marker | no | |
| Voice marking | Synthetic marker | n/a | |
| Voice marking | Analytic marker | n/a | |
| Flagging | S-argument flagging | yes | Subjects of intransitive sentences occur in the absolutive case, marked with e on common nouns and a on pronouns and proper nouns (Seiter 1980: 28).
Subjects of intransitive sentences occur in the absolutive case (Massam 2001: 28).
An active transitive sentence, the agent (referred to as the A argument) bears ergative case, while the patient or theme (the O argument) bears absolutive case, which is the same case borne by the subject of an intransitive sentence (the S argument) (Massam 2020 :4).
FYI: the use of a flag is described traditionally as a case marker to mark the contrast between the noun phrases representing the two essential participants of a bivalent verb. @In Niuean the function of a case is fulfilled by adpositions: "e, he" standing for ergative and "e, a" standing for absolutive. |
| Flagging | P-oblique flagging | yes | Some verbs of perception or emotion govern middle case marking (Seiter 1980: 32-33).
A few transitive verbs have intransitive alternants governing absolutive marking on their subject and [he] marking (locative) or [ke he] marking (goal) on their object, conveying incompletive meanings (Seiter 1980: 148). |
| Flagging | P-oblique unflagging | no | |
| Flagging | P-oblique flagging variation | yes | A few transitive verbs have intransitive alternants governing absolutive marking on their subject and [he] marking (locative) or [ke he] marking (goal) on their object, conveying incompletive meanings (Seiter 1980: 148).
FYI: locative case (Seiter 1980: 34)
FYI: goal (Seiter 1980: 33) |
| Indexation | S-argument indexed | n/a | The language has isolating or analytic morphology and thus has no inflection, neither for tense nor for agreement (Massam 2022: 12). |
| Indexation | S-argument indexation conditioned | n/a | |
| P-individuation properties | P incorporated: Generic (non-specific) | yes | The similarities between the NP in PNI sentences and the generic null object in sentences is: in both cases the objects are non-referential, low-scoping, generic, highly canonical (Massam 2020: 120).
General PNI involves the generation of an NP object, in which the referential position remains open, resulting in a habitual reading for the sentence (Massam 2001: 154). |
| P-individuation properties | P incorporated: Indefinite (non-specific) | yes | The NP appearing with no extended projections above it (...), is necessarily non-referential, hence non-specific and indefinite (Massam 2001: 173).
Judging from the contexts in which it is found, the Niuean general NI incorporated nominal is also non-specific (thus indefinite) (Massam 2001: 168-169). |
| P-individuation properties | P incorporated: Referential | no | |
| P-individuation properties | P oblique: Generic (non-specific) | no | |
| P-individuation properties | P oblique: Indefinite (non-specific) | no | |
| P-individuation properties | P oblique: Referential | yes | For verbs that govern either type of case marking, most speakers have difficulty expressing a consistent semantic difference between the middle and ergative patterns (Seiter 1980: 83).
Niuean (Austronesian; Massam 2020: 173-174)
1a.
Fakalilifu e ia e tau momotua.
respect erg 3.sg abs pl old
‘He respects the old people.’
1b.
Fakalilifu a ia ke he tau momotua.
respect abs 3.sg goal pl old
‘He respects the old people.’ |
| P-individuation properties | P eliminated: Generic (non-specific) | yes | The similarities between the NP in PNI sentences and the generic null object in sentences such as (15, 17) is clear: in both cases, the objects are non-referential, low-scoping, generic, and highly canonical (Massada 2020: 120).
Semantically, the O is not referential or individuated and is not referred to later in discourse (Massam 2020: 117). @Discussion based on "He is always fishing."
"They were reading": null generic object (Massam 2020: 115-116). FYI: elsewhere: a non-specific null object (Massam 2020: 115).
Cognate verbs: (...) which provides it with a default interpretation tightly bound to the semantics of the verb, which leads to the generic, canonical, and non-specific interpretation of null arguments (laugh, dance, pray, Massam 2020: 121). |
| P-individuation properties | P eliminated: Indefinite (non-specific) | no | |
| P-individuation properties | P eliminated: Referential | no | |
| P-oblique affectedness | Less affected P-oblique | yes | We find examples with some regular transitive verbs (i.e., Seiter 1980 lists ‘eat’, ‘drink’, ‘see’, and ‘hear’), which can take middle objects with the locative case to indicate incompletiveness (...). Seiter (1980) notes that some psychological verbs can alternate, too (Massam 2020: 172-173).
FYI: SIT, SLEEP: But these two verbs (e.g. 'sitting in the canoe', 'He slept on the verandah') may also occur as syntactic transitive, featuring a location as an absolutive direct object. Semantically, the event described in such a sentence is typically viewed as directly affecting the location involved (Seifer 1980: 63). |
| 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 | |