Knowledge base · source
Satō 2025
Satō Tomomi 佐藤知己 (2025). Basic Sentence Structures in Ainu. Studia Orientalia 126, 353–376.
prior-analysis hokkaido text held locally OCR pdftotext-pieces: 16 leaves, 0 with a printed page
27chapters citing
47citing sentences
6examples
35statements extracted
35claims with a stance
Claims this source takes a position on
Grouped by topic. The stance is this source's; the other sources that assert, propose, doubt or reject the same claim are listed after it.
Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order 3
- アイヌ語において独立した名詞句（NP）は随意的な要素であり、本質的な要素ではない。
- アイヌ語の3価動詞において、人称標示による照応を受けない主題名詞句は核（NUC）の外側にあるコア（CORE）の項として統語的に機能する。
- アイヌ語において文法関係（主語や目的語）を表す独立名詞句は義務的な要素ではなく、述語にとって義務的なのは人称接辞である。
Basic Constituent Order and Head-Final Syntax 3
- アイヌ語の文の基本構造は主として動詞の結合価と、主要部標示言語の類型論的性質に基づく5つの構造によって決定される。
- アイヌ語の文は独立した名詞句と述語から構成されることもあれば、名詞句を伴わず人称標示された述語のみで現れることもある。
- アイヌ語の基本文は動詞のタイプ（1項動詞、2項動詞、3項動詞、繋辞動詞）に応じて決定される。
The Copula ne and Predicate-Nominal Clauses 2
- コピュラ動詞 ne は他動詞主語（A系列）の人称標識を取るが、目的語（O系列）の標識を取ることはない。
- 繋辞動詞neは動詞上の人称一致を伴わずに2人称の独立代名詞を補語として取ることが稀にある。
The Desiderative rusuy 1
- アイヌ語において、目的語接頭辞を含む他動詞とrusuyが一語に結合した形（*a-e-rusuyなど）を形成することはできない。
Deverbal and Denominal Noun Derivation (Lexical Nominalizer Morphology) 1
- アイヌ語の1項動詞（自動詞）は、形態的な変更を伴わずにそのまま名詞へと品詞転換（ゼロ転成）することができる。
The eci= Portmanteau (1A→2O) and Second-Person Plural Syncretism 1
- 接頭辞 eci- は、動作主である1人称主語と被動者である2人称目的語の両方を表す、不可分なかばん形式である。
The History of Ainu Language Description and Previous Research 2
- 村崎（1967）はアイヌ語の動詞を自動詞（V0）、他動詞（V1）、および複他動詞（V2）に分類している。
- 村崎（1967）は要素の削除・置換・移動に基づく変形規則によって動詞と名詞の語形変化を処理している。
Personal, Reflexive, and Emphatic Pronouns 1
- eani「あなた」は独立人称代名詞である。
Light Verbs, Pro-Verbs, and the Auxiliary-Verb Construction 3
- アイヌ語の助動詞は本動詞とは異なり、定義上人称標識を取らない。
- 助動詞rusuy「〜したい」は自動詞を形態論的に抱合して一語を形成することができる。
- アイヌ語の助動詞構文は一種の疑似抱合（pseudo-incorporation）として分析することができる。
Object (Patient) Noun Incorporation 2
- アイヌ語の名詞抱合では、名詞が節の核（NUC）の内部で動詞に直接結合することが可能である。
- konkane-u-w-oma-re-anのように、人称接辞、派生接辞、名詞抱合を合わせることで、3項動詞が取りうる3つの項すべてを動詞内部に形態論的に標示できる。
Subject Incorporation and Possessor-Stranding 2
- アイヌ語において他動詞主語は動詞に抱合されうる。
- 他動詞主語の抱合は動詞を自動詞化し、元の動作対象（目的語）を主語位置へと昇格させる。
Object Indexing: Monotransitive and Ditransitive Clauses 1
- 3価動詞において直接目的語と間接目的語を顕在的な人称接辞で同時に標示することはできない。
Architecture of the Personal-Affix System: The Four Persons and the S/A/O Paradigms 4
- 動詞上の人称接辞は最大で2つの項（主語と目的語）までしか標示できない。
- アイヌ語の名詞と動詞は人称変化をする。
- アイヌ語においては文法関係が人称接辞によって表示される。
- アイヌ語の文構造において、項は中核（CORE）内の人称接辞によって満たされており、独立した名詞句は随意的な要素として中核の外側に配置される。
The Personal-Affix Template: Position Classes and Affix Ordering 2
- アイヌ語の動詞に生起可能な人称接辞は最大2つ（主語と目的語が1つずつ）までに制限されている。
- 他動詞とrusuy「〜したい」の迂言的構文において、主語人称標識は助動詞ではなく目的語人称標識を含む本動詞側に付加される。
Transitivity, Valence Classes, and Ambitransitivity 3
- 2項動詞（他動詞）は名詞へ転換できないため、rusuy「〜したい」に形態論的に抱合されて緊密な一語を形成することができない。
- アイヌ語における動詞の結合価はマクロロール結合価から独立して存在し、人称接辞の照応がなくとも主題項の照応解釈を保証する。
- 助動詞rusuyのマクロロール結合価は0であるが、統語的結合価は2である。
A Typological Profile of Hokkaido Ainu 3
- アイヌ語は類型論的に主として主要部標示型の言語に分類される。
- アイヌ語の文法構造を記述するにあたって、主要部移動のプロセスは本質的ではない。
- アイヌ語では動詞の可能な項（主語と目的語）が動詞の人称接辞によって標示され、節の主要部である述語上に義務的に項が標示される。
Verbal Subclasses: A Valence-Based Word-Class Taxonomy 1
- アイヌ語には無項動詞（atransitive）という動詞のタイプが存在する。
Statements extracted from this source
Each statement is what the source commits to at one place, in normalised wording, with its type, stance and scope; the page number comes from the page footer of the OCR dump. Status tells how far a statement has been checked.
Object (Patient) Noun Incorporation 2
- Noun incorporation in Ainu allows nouns to combine directly with verbs inside the clausal nucleus.アイヌ語の名詞抱合では、名詞が節の核（NUC）の内部で動詞に直接結合することが可能である。
- All three arguments of a three-place verb can be morphologically marked inside the verb when combining personal affixes, derivational affixes, and noun incorporation, as in konkane-u-w-oma-re-an.konkane-u-w-oma-re-anのように、人称接辞、派生接辞、名詞抱合を合わせることで、3項動詞が取りうる3つの項すべてを動詞内部に形態論的に標示できる。
The eci= Portmanteau (1A→2O) and Second-Person Plural Syncretism 1
- The prefix eci- is an inseparable portmanteau morpheme indicating both a first-person actor subject and a second-person undergoer object.接頭辞 eci- は、動作主である1人称主語と被動者である2人称目的語の両方を表す、不可分なかばん形式である。
The Personal-Affix Template: Position Classes and Affix Ordering 2
- Personal affixes on Ainu verbs are limited to a maximum of two, namely one subjective and one objective.アイヌ語の動詞に生起する人称接辞は、主格と目的格の最大2つまでに制限されている。
- In the periphrastic construction with a transitive verb and rusuy 'to want', the subjective person marker attaches to the lexical verb bearing the objective marker rather than to the auxiliary verb.他動詞とrusuy「〜したい」の迂言的構文において、主語人称標識は助動詞ではなく目的語人称標識を含む本動詞側に付加される。
Object Indexing: Monotransitive and Ditransitive Clauses 1
- In three-place verbs, direct and indirect objects cannot be marked by overt person affixes simultaneously.3価動詞において、直接目的語と間接目的語を顕在的な人称接辞で同時に標示することはできない。
Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order 3
- In Ainu three-place verbs, a non-cross-referenced theme noun phrase functions syntactically as a core argument outside the nucleus.アイヌ語の3価動詞において、人称標示による照応を受けない主題名詞句は核（NUC）の外側にあるコア（CORE）の項として統語的に機能する。
- Independent noun phrases are optional and not essential clausal elements in Ainu.アイヌ語において独立した名詞句（NP）は随意的な要素であり、本質的な要素ではない。
- Independent noun phrases expressing grammatical relations (subject and object) are not obligatory elements in Ainu, whereas personal affixes are obligatory on predicates.アイヌ語において文法関係（主語や目的語）を表す独立名詞句は義務的な要素ではなく、述語にとって義務的なのは人称接辞である。
Transitivity, Valence Classes, and Ambitransitivity 3
- Verbal valency in Ainu exists independently of macrorole valency and licenses anaphoric reference to a theme argument even without a cross-referencing personal affix.アイヌ語における動詞の結合価はマクロロール結合価から独立して存在し、人称接辞の照応がなくとも主題項の照応解釈を保証する。
- The macrorole valency of the auxiliary verb rusuy is 0, but its syntactic valency is 2.助動詞rusuyのマクロロール結合価は0であるが、統語的結合価は2である。
- Two-place (transitive) verbs cannot be converted to nouns and therefore cannot be morphologically incorporated into rusuy 'to want' as a single word.2項動詞（他動詞）は名詞に転換できないため、rusuy「〜したい」に形態論的に抱合されて緊密な一語を形成することはできない。
A Typological Profile of Hokkaido Ainu 3
- In Ainu, the possible arguments (subject and object) of a verb are marked with personal affixes on the verb, which obligatorily marks arguments on the predicate as the clausal head.アイヌ語では動詞の可能な項（主語と目的語）が動詞の人称接辞によって標示され、節の主要部である述語上に義務的に項が標示される。
- Ainu belongs typologically to the head-marking language type.アイヌ語は類型論的に主要部標示型に属する言語である。
- The syntactic process of head movement is not essential in describing the grammatical structure of Ainu.アイヌ語の文法構造を記述するにあたって、主要部移動のプロセスは本質的ではない。
Architecture of the Personal-Affix System: The Four Persons and the S/A/O Paradigms 4
- In Ainu clause structure, arguments are satisfied by personal affixes within the core, while independent noun phrases occur outside the core as optional elements.アイヌ語の文構造において、項は中核（CORE）内の人称接辞によって満たされており、独立した名詞句は随意的な要素として中核の外側に配置される。
- Ainu nouns and verbs inflect for person.アイヌ語の名詞と動詞は人称変化をする。
- In Ainu, grammatical relations are indicated by personal affixes.アイヌ語においては文法関係が人称接辞によって表示される。
- Personal affixes in Ainu can only mark up to two arguments on a verb.アイヌ語の人称接辞は動詞内で最大2つの項しか標示できない。
The History of Ainu Language Description and Previous Research 2
- Murasaki (1967) classifies Ainu verbs into intransitive (V0), transitive (V1), and ditransitive (V2).村崎（1967）はアイヌ語の動詞を自動詞（V0）、他動詞（V1）、および複他動詞（V2）に分類している。
- Murasaki (1967) accounts for the inflection of Ainu verbs and nouns by transformational rules of deletion, replacement, and movement.村崎（1967）は要素の削除・置換・移動に基づく変形規則によって動詞と名詞の語形変化を処理している。
Personal, Reflexive, and Emphatic Pronouns 1
- The form eani 'you' is an independent personal pronoun.eani「あなた」は独立人称代名詞である。
Basic Constituent Order and Head-Final Syntax 3
- The basic structure of Ainu sentences is determined primarily by verbal valency and five structures based on typological properties of head-marking languages.アイヌ語の文の基本構造は主として動詞の結合価と、主要部標示言語の類型論的性質に基づく5つの構造によって決定される。
- An Ainu sentence may appear as independent noun phrase(s) and a predicate, as well as a predicate marked for person without an independent noun phrase.アイヌ語の文は独立した名詞句と述語から構成されることもあれば、名詞句を伴わず人称標示された述語のみで現れることもある。
- Ainu basic sentences are determined according to the type of verb: a one-place, a two-place, a three-place, or a copula verb.アイヌ語の基本文は動詞のタイプ（1項動詞、2項動詞、3項動詞、繋辞動詞）に応じて決定される。
Verbal Subclasses: A Valence-Based Word-Class Taxonomy 1
- There exists an atransitive (zero-place) verb type in Ainu.アイヌ語には無項動詞（atransitive）という動詞のタイプが存在する。
Subject Incorporation and Possessor-Stranding 2
- Transitive subjects can be marked on verbs via noun incorporation in Ainu.アイヌ語では名詞抱合によって他動詞主語をも動詞上に標示することができる。
- Incorporation of the transitive subject converts a transitive verb into an intransitive verb, promoting the patient to subject position.他動詞主語の抱合は他動詞を自動詞へと変換し、受動者は主語位置へと昇格する。
The Copula ne and Predicate-Nominal Clauses 2
- The copula verb ne 'to be' can take a transitive subject marker but cannot take an object marker.繋辞動詞ne「〜である」は他動詞主語標識を取りうるが、目的語標識を取ることはできない。
- The copula verb ne can take a second-person independent pronoun as a complement without a corresponding second-person marker on the verb, though this pattern is rare.繋辞動詞neは動詞上の人称一致を伴わずに2人称の独立代名詞を補語として取ることが稀にある。
Light Verbs, Pro-Verbs, and the Auxiliary-Verb Construction 3
- Auxiliary verbs in Ainu, unlike full verbs, do not take person marking.アイヌ語の助動詞は本動詞とは異なり、定義上人称標識を取らない。
- The auxiliary verb rusuy 'to want' can morphologically incorporate an intransitive verb to form a single word.助動詞rusuy「〜したい」は自動詞を形態論的に抱合して一語を形成することができる。
- Auxiliary verb constructions in Ainu can be analyzed as a type of pseudo-incorporation.アイヌ語の助動詞構文は一種の疑似抱合（pseudo-incorporation）として分析することができる。
Deverbal and Denominal Noun Derivation (Lexical Nominalizer Morphology) 1
- In Ainu, one-place (intransitive) verbs can be converted into nouns.アイヌ語において、1項動詞（自動詞）は名詞へと転換することができる。
The Desiderative rusuy 1
- A single word combining a transitive verb with an object prefix and rusuy (such as *a-e-rusuy) is ungrammatical in Ainu.アイヌ語において、目的語接頭辞を含む他動詞とrusuyが一語に結合した形（*a-e-rusuyなど）を形成することはできない。
Chapters citing this source
Examples cited from this source
ku=inkar
1SG.A=look.around
‘I look around.’
cep a=koyki
fish 4.A=catch
‘We catch fish.’
ekasi ku=kore na
old.man 1SG.A=give FIN
‘I'll give it to the old man.’
ku=inkar
1SG.S=look.around
‘I look around.’
cep a=koyki
fish 4.A=catch
‘We catch fish.’
tan-pe topen-pe ne na ekasi ku=kore na
DEM-NMLZ sweet-NMLZ COP FIN old.man 1SG.A=give FIN
‘This is a sweet. I'll give it to the old man.’
Sentences of the first edition citing this source
- Hokkaido Ainu shows the head-marking correlates and lacks all the dependent-marking ones across both clause and noun phrase ; . 361 A Typological Profile of Hokkaido Ainu
- Japanese and Korean, Ainu's closest geographical neighbours, pair SOV order with elaborate nominal case systems; Ainu makes the same constituent order work without case, relying entirely on verbal person-indexing and semantics for argument tracking ; . 361 A Typological Profile of Hokkaido Ainu
- Modifiers precede their nominal heads; subordinate clauses precede the matrix verb; postpositional phrases — built on relational nouns and postpositions — follow the head noun with the adpositional element in final position ; ; . 361 A Typological Profile of Hokkaido Ainu
- The ceiling is two indexes per verb — one A index and one O index — and a third argument is never indexed ; . 361 Verbal Subclasses: A Valence-Based Word-Class Taxonomy
- Satō describes the pattern as head-marking in the sense of : the verb, the head of its clause, bears the central information about which participants fill its valence frame, and a transitive verb may host both a subject index and an object index . 361 Architecture of the Personal-Affix System: The Four Persons and the S/A/O Paradigms
- Whether the blank reflects a zero affix or the absence of any third-person exponent is disputed: Satō argues that a zero third-person affix is required by the cap of two indexes per verb and by the ungrammaticality of three-index combinations, against an analysis that recognises no third-person affix at all ; ; ‹contested›. 369 Architecture of the Personal-Affix System: The Four Persons and the S/A/O Paradigms
- With verbs such as kore ‘give’ the object index falls on the human recipient while the theme stays a bare noun phrase, a secundative pattern that Satō takes as further evidence for a zero third-person affix; Nakagawa describes the same three-place verbs through valence, with two bare object phrases and neither obligatorily indexed when both are third person ; ; ; ‹contested›. 368–371 Architecture of the Personal-Affix System: The Four Persons and the S/A/O Paradigms
- This is consistent with the head-marking account of the Ainu verb given by Satō and with the typological framework of . 361 First- and Second-Person Singular Affixes (ku=/en=, e=/e=)
- It indexes a first-person singular participant in the O role: the patient of a monotransitive verb or, with three-place verbs such as kore 'give' and epakasnu 'teach', the human recipient rather than the theme ; ; ; . 368–371 First- and Second-Person Singular Affixes (ku=/en=, e=/e=)
- A finite verb carries at most one subject index and one object index; a third argument — such as the theme in a ditransitive clause — is never additionally person-indexed and surfaces as a bare noun phrase ; . 369–371 Object Indexing: Monotransitive and Ditransitive Clauses
- Nakagawa treats third person as lacking an affix; Satō argues that a zero third-person affix must be posited to sustain the two-index cap — the ungrammaticality of sequences such as *Ø=en=e=kore 'one makes me give you' follows if both subject and object slots are already occupied by zero, blocking a third index ; ; ‹contested›. 369 Object Indexing: Monotransitive and Ditransitive Clauses
- Satō analyses this as a secundative pattern, treating the recipient as the selected undergoer of the indexing slot; Nakagawa frames the same verbs as three-place predicates with two bare object phrases that may occur in varying word order, and neither obligatorily indexed when both are third person ; ; ; ‹contested›. 368–371 The Personal-Affix Template: Position Classes and Affix Ordering
- Satō uses this two-index restriction to argue that a zero third-person index must be posited in the paradigm, so that the cap is stateable uniformly, in disagreement with Nakagawa's earlier position that third person has no affix ; ; ‹contested›. 369 The Personal-Affix Template: Position Classes and Affix Ordering
- The framing correctly reflects the head-marking character of the system: the verb carries the obligatory participant indexes while the independent pronouns are optional ; . 361 The Personal-Affix Template: Position Classes and Affix Ordering
- The zero-marking of third-person transitive arguments in her examples is factually accurate but theoretically neutral: it is compatible with Nakagawa's position that there is no third-person affix and with Satō's posit of a zero index required by the two-index ceiling ; ; ‹contested›. 369 The Personal-Affix Template: Position Classes and Affix Ordering
- Analytically this is the head-marking architecture of , used also by Satō . 361 The Split-Intransitive (Active–Stative) Core
- That dispute affects the model of the zero row but produces no active/stative split among the overt S forms ; ; ‹contested›. 369 The Split-Intransitive (Active–Stative) Core
- Satō's 2025 characterisation places Ainu with head-marking languages in the sense of and develops the argument-indexing system without assigning an alignment label ‹speculative›. 361, 373–374 Tripartite, Nominative-Accusative, and the Central Alignment Debate
- Satō argues for a zero third-person affix, required to account for the cap of two personal indexes per verb and the ungrammaticality of three-index combinations in causative and ditransitive configurations ; . 369 Tripartite, Nominative-Accusative, and the Central Alignment Debate
- Satō frames the profile through Nichols's head-marking / dependent-marking distinction: the verb, as clausal head, bears obligatory person-indexing suffixes and prefixes that already satisfy all argument slots; overt NPs are accordingly optional, and when present they are appositional to those indexes rather than positional carriers of grammatical role . 359–361 Basic Constituent Order and Head-Final Syntax
- The surface resemblance to Japanese — both verb-final, both postpositional — therefore conceals a fundamental typological difference: Japanese is dependent-marking, with case particles on the NP encoding grammatical relations; Ainu is head-marking, with person markers on the verb doing that work ; . 359–360 Basic Constituent Order and Head-Final Syntax
- The zero-marking of third-person arguments — the bare verb stem simultaneously serves as the third-person and citation form — means that when both A and O are third persons, no index disambiguates the roles, and interpretation falls entirely to common sense or to the 〈location〉-noun class of one of the NPs . 369 Basic Constituent Order and Head-Final Syntax
- The third person bears no overt affix in the standard Saru–Chitose paradigm; a possessive construction already concedes that third-person indexing is zero-marked (nukopoli, 2024-12-25, asserted, consistent with ). 369 Basic Constituent Order and Head-Final Syntax
- develops the contrast with dependent-marking languages such as Japanese, where the argument NP bears obligatory case particles. 359–361 Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order
- states the principle directly: "grammatical relations (subject and object) … are not obligatory elements in Ainu; rather it is the personal affixes that are obligatory for the predicates." formulates the same point as pro-drop with obligatory indexing: the language drops its overt NPs freely because the index already encodes the referent. 359–360 Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order
- , working within Role and Reference Grammar, places the person index as the PRO inside the clausal CORE — the actual argument — and positions the co-referential NP outside the CORE as an optional, non-obligatory element. 363–365 Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order
- Its reference remains unambiguous: "verbal valency guarantees the interpretation of anaphoric reference without any personal affix" . 368–369 Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order
- argues that recognising a possessive prefix a= (fourth person) already commits the analyst to a zero third-person affix in the slot that a= contrasts with. 369 Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order
- provides the master inventory of how a core argument can be realised in a head-marking Ainu clause. 371, 373–374 Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order
- draws a theoretical conclusion from this inventory: because argument fulfilment is "sometimes by syntactic means and sometimes by morphological means," the syntax/morphology boundary "is blurred in Ainu," a consequence of its head-marking character. 371 Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order
- further uses the attested A-incorporation pattern (ku=koy-yanke 'the waves wash me ashore') to argue against Baker's () syntactic head-movement theory of incorporation: since the person index already anchors the argument inside the verb, incorporation need not be derived by NP movement. 366–367 Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order
- , working in Role and Reference Grammar, gives a third structural description: the person index is the PRO inside the clausal CORE, and the co-referential NP sits outside the CORE — architecturally close to the pronominal-argument analysis but without endorsing the PAH label or a nonconfigurational classification. 363–365 Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order
- What fixes grammatical roles is the verb's obligatory person-index system: bound argument-marking affixes appear on every finite predicate, and an overt NP is structurally optional — an elaboration on a participant already indexed, not a required structural position ; . 359–361 Pro-Drop, (Non)configurationality, and the Pronominal-Argument Debate
- Satō, following the head-marking framework of , describes the verb as the clausal head that bears the central information about which participants fill its valence frame . 361 Pro-Drop, (Non)configurationality, and the Pronominal-Argument Debate
- In Role and Reference Grammar terms, Satō places the person prefix (PRO) inside the CORE as the actual argument, with any co-occurring NP outside the CORE as an optional, non-obligatory adjunct . 363–365 Pro-Drop, (Non)configurationality, and the Pronominal-Argument Debate
- This is the Lakhota-type structure: "the same logical structure gives rise to morphologically different structures" depending on how many overt NPs are supplied . 365 Pro-Drop, (Non)configurationality, and the Pronominal-Argument Debate
- Personal pronouns, being informationally redundant with the person index, are used only for emphasis or contrast and are rarer in Ainu than their Japanese counterparts ; . 360 Pro-Drop, (Non)configurationality, and the Pronominal-Argument Debate
- The community observation that the bare verb form with no person affix is the third-person form and the citation form of the verb — with the zero-marking implicitly conceding a zero third-person affix — is consistent with Satō's formal argument that such a zero is required by the two-affix cap on finite verbs (nukopoli, aynu-corpora Discord, 2024-12-25, asserted; ) ‹contested›. 369 Pro-Drop, (Non)configurationality, and the Pronominal-Argument Debate
- Satō, framing the same observation under head-marking, writes that "grammatical relations (subject and object) … are not obligatory elements in Ainu; rather it is the personal affixes that are obligatory for the predicates" . 359–360 Pro-Drop, (Non)configurationality, and the Pronominal-Argument Debate
- Ditransitives extend the same pattern: the language's two-affix cap means a third argument cannot be indexed, so it is expressed as a bare NP whose reference is guaranteed by verbal valency rather than by its own person marking . 368–369 Pro-Drop, (Non)configurationality, and the Pronominal-Argument Debate
- The standard diagnostics for nonconfigurationality, as applied to Ainu in and , pattern as follows: no page Pro-Drop, (Non)configurationality, and the Pronominal-Argument Debate
- Satō's analysis, using Role and Reference Grammar, reaches a structurally PAH-like result — person affixes fill the argument positions inside the CORE, NPs sit outside it as optional adjuncts — but within a framework that does not endorse the PAH label, and it explicitly rejects the head-movement analysis of as unable to handle the attested subject incorporation in Ainu (koy-yanke 'the waves wash [me] ashore', where the A argument is incorporated into the verb) ; . 366–367 Pro-Drop, (Non)configurationality, and the Pronominal-Argument Debate
- The bound person indices do not encode same-subject versus different-subject across clause junctions, and the clause-linking particles carry no built-in reference-change signal; participant continuity is inferred from index identity and from discourse structure, not marked by a dedicated morpheme ; . 359–371 Reference Tracking and Argument Continuity
- The theme of kore 'give' is zero in the following pair of sentences; its reference to the sweet just mentioned is resolved by the verb's own argument-structure requirement : 368–369 Reference Tracking and Argument Continuity
- When an NP does appear alongside a person index, it stands in an appositional relation to that index: the index constitutes the argument; the NP specifies or highlights it ; . 363–365 Reference Tracking and Argument Continuity
- Ainu has no morphological switch-reference system ; . 371 Reference Tracking and Argument Continuity
- The head-marking analysis of Ainu (see ; ) predicts precisely the observed pattern: because roles are encoded on the predicate, overt NPs are free to appear, be omitted, or be placed wherever information structure directs them. 359–365 Pragmatic Word-Order Permutation, Dislocation, and Argument Ellipsis