Knowledge base · Part XII — The Simple Clause and Nonverbal Predication
94. Pro-Drop, (Non)configurationality, and the Pronominal-Argument Debate
How does the language handle argument omission and the status of bound affixes versus free noun phrases?
この言語は項の省略と、接辞と自由名詞句の地位をどのように扱うか？
Argument ellipsis and null anaphora, and whether the bound affixes are the true arguments (Jelinek/Baker) — Ainu on the configurationality cline.
candidate topic from the first edition topic:clause/nonconfigurationality-pronominal-argument read this topic as text
Local network
The chapter, its sections, the sources it cites, the chapters it cross-references, the forms it mentions most, and the claims grouped under it with the sources that assert, propose, doubt or reject each.
Sources
| Source | Citations | Without page | Statements |
|---|---|---|---|
| Satō 2025 | 15 | 1 | 3 |
| Nakagawa 2024 | 11 | 1 | |
| Bugaeva 2022 | 10 | 10 | |
| Bugaeva 2012 | 10 | 1 | |
| Shibatani 1990 | 8 | 2 | |
| Nakagawa 2022 | 7 | 4 | 1 |
| Refsing 1986 | 7 | 1 | 6 |
| aynu-corpora Discord 2023–2026 | 5 | 5 | |
| Satō 2023 | 5 | 3 | |
| Bugaeva 2015 | 4 | 2 | |
| Bugaeva 2014 | 3 | 2 | |
| Tamura 1972 | 3 | 3 | |
| Nichols 1986 | 2 | 1 | |
| Bugaeva 2008 | 2 | 1 | |
| Bugaeva 2006 | 2 | 1 | |
| Satō 2008 | 1 | ||
| Ijäs 2023 | 1 | 1 | |
| Foley & Van Valin 1984 | 1 | 1 | |
| Baker 1988 | 1 | 1 | |
| Satō 2016 | 1 | 1 | |
| ILCAA Ainu materials 1976 | 1 | ||
| Kindaichi & Chiri 1936 | 1 | 1 |
Related chapters
- Index of Grammatical Morphemes and Affixes ×10
- Index of Subjects ×9
- Architecture of the Personal-Affix System: The Four Persons and the S/A/O Paradigms ×3
- Basic Constituent Order and Head-Final Syntax ×2
- Pragmatic Word-Order Permutation, Dislocation, and Argument Ellipsis ×2
- Reference Tracking and Argument Continuity ×2
- The hine/akusu Contrast and Switch-Reference-Like Linkage ×2
- The Indefinite/Fourth Person: Forms, Reference, and Agent-Defocusing ×2
- Argument Realization: Affix Indexing and Free NP Order ×2
- Topic and Focus Marking: anak(ne), patek, and ka ×1
- The Structure of the Noun Phrase ×1
- Object (Patient) Noun Incorporation ×1
- Oblique Incorporation and the Syntactic-vs-Lexicalist Debate ×1
- Clause Linkage in Ainu: Typology and Inventory ×1
- First-Person Narration, the Logophoric Fourth Person, and Reported Discourse ×1
- Verbal Number: Suppletive Stems and the Pluractional -pa ×1
- Tripartite, Nominative-Accusative, and the Central Alignment Debate ×1
- Sequential wa and Clause Chaining ×1
- Personal, Reflexive, and Emphatic Pronouns ×1
- Demonstratives, Anaphora, and Definiteness ×1
Forms mentioned
or 4epakasnu 2kani 2ka 2somo 2sam 2ku= 2ku=mina 1anak(ne) 1anak/anakne 1ki 1itanki huraye hine (itanki) ani Ø=i=ko-i-puni 1toma 1sinep 1isam 1pasuy sinep uk 1corpok 1kim 1pis 1[ci a=e-p] [saranip or] oma-re 1saranip or 1kamuy aynu rayke 1koy-yanke 1hunna 1hemanta 1hunak 1a= 1rayke 1ronnu 1wa 1
Claims
A claim is one proposition; under it stand the statements of each source, with the stance that source takes. Claims are grouped by a model from the extracted statements and carry that status until reviewed.
Sections
·
Overview 7 sentences
What are the basic word order and headedness properties of the language?
Obligatory head-marking and the appositional noun phrase 1 claims ·12 sentences· 2 examples
How does the verb mark its arguments, and what is the status of the noun phrase in apposition?
- An overt independent subject noun occurs in the clause as an optional element cross-referencing the third-person subject prefix φ- rather than an obligatory argument.自立主語名詞は、3人称主格接辞 φ- と相互照応する随意要素として文中に現れており、必須の項ではない。asserts sato2023b
- sato2023b asserts checked
- contrasts(differs in framework): Third-person subject noun phrases, which receive zero marking on the verb, can be omitted when context is sufficient.— Satō analyzes overt nouns as appositional adjuncts to a bound prefix, whereas Bugaeva treats third-person subject omission as null-argument ellipsis of an NP.
The free ordering of preverbal noun phrases 20 sentences· 2 examples
How freely can preverbal noun phrases be ordered, and what does this reveal about argument structure?
Null arguments and zero anaphora 6 claims ·12 sentences· 1 examples
Under what conditions are arguments omitted, and what discourse functions do overt noun phrases serve?
- Personal pronouns in subject and object positions are frequently omitted because person and number are obligatorily marked on predicates.述語上に主語および目的語の人称と数が義務的に標示されるため、主語および目的語位置の人称代名詞は頻繁に省略される。asserts bugaeva2006
- bugaeva2006:186 asserts checked
- Objects that are clear from context are normally omitted, including causee objects in transitive causatives.他動詞使役の被使役者目的語を含め、文脈上明らかな目的語は通常省略される。asserts bugaeva2014
- bugaeva2014 asserts checked
- refines(differs in scope): An argument noun phrase that is clear from context does not need to appear in the clause and is not represented by a pronoun.— Bugaeva 2014 focuses on object and causee omission, which instantiates the general argument ellipsis described by Nakagawa 2022.
- First-person, second-person, and indefinite-person subjects in the main clause are normally omitted because they are obligatorily marked on the verb.主節の1人称・2人称・不定人称の主語は、動詞上に義務的に標示されるため通常省略される。asserts bugaeva2015
- bugaeva2015:56 asserts checked
- refines(differs in scope): Personal pronouns in subject and object positions are frequently omitted because person and number are obligatorily marked on predicates.— Bugaeva 2015 restricts the agreement-based subject omission specifically to 1st, 2nd, and indefinite persons in the main clause.
- Third-person subject noun phrases, which receive zero marking on the verb, can be omitted when context is sufficient.動詞上でゼロ標示される3人称主語名詞句は、文脈が十分であれば省略できる。asserts bugaeva2015
- bugaeva2015:56 asserts checked
- refines(differs in scope): An argument noun phrase that is clear from context does not need to appear in the clause and is not represented by a pronoun.— Bugaeva 2015 narrows contextual omission specifically to zero-marked third-person subject noun phrases.
- An argument noun phrase that is clear from context does not need to appear in the clause and is not represented by a pronoun.文脈から明らかな項名詞句は文中に現れる必要がなく、代名詞でも代用されない。asserts nakagawa2022pos
- nakagawa2022pos:14.6 asserts checked
- A clause consisting of the null third-person subject prefix φ- and a verb is grammatically complete on its own without an independent noun.3人称主格接辞 φ- を伴う動詞からなる節は、自立名詞がなくてもそれ自体で文法的に完全である。asserts sato2023b
- sato2023b asserts checked
- supports(differs in level-of-analysis): An overt independent subject noun occurs in the clause as an optional element cross-referencing the third-person subject prefix φ- rather than an obligatory argument.— The completeness of the bare verb clause provides the grammatical basis for treating the overt subject noun as an optional cross-referencing adjunct.
Discontinuous noun phrases 5 sentences· 1 examples
Are discontinuous noun phrases permitted, and if so, under what conditions?
Configurationality diagnostics assessed 9 sentences
How does the language pattern on standard tests for configurationality?
The Pronominal-Argument Hypothesis and the Ainu counter-evidence 21 sentences
Are bound affixes the true arguments, with free noun phrases as adjuncts?
What Ainu does not exhibit 13 sentences
Which properties typical of nonconfigurational languages are absent in this language?
Reference tracking across clauses 15 sentences
How is reference maintained across clauses without overt noun phrases?