Switch-reference

In linguistics, switch-reference ( ) describes any clause-level morpheme that signals whether certain prominent arguments in 'adjacent' clauses are coreferential. In most cases, it marks whether the subject of the verb in one clause is coreferent with that of the previous clause, or of a subordinate clause to the matrix (main) clause that is dominating it.

In linguistics, switch-reference ( ) describes any clause-level morpheme that signals whether certain prominent arguments in 'adjacent' clauses are coreferential. In most cases, it marks whether the subject of the verb in one clause is coreferent with that of the previous clause, or of a subordinate clause to the matrix (main) clause that is dominating it. ==Meanings of switch-reference== The basic distinction made by a switch-reference system is whether the following clause has the same subject (SS) or a different subject (DS). That is known as canonical switch-reference. For purposes of switch-reference, subject is defined as it is for languages with a nominative–accusative alignment: a subject is the sole argument of an intransitive clause or the agent of a transitive one. It holds even in languages with a high degree of ergativity. The Washo language of California and Nevada exhibits a switch-reference system. When the subject of one verb is the same as the subject of the following verb, the verb takes no switch-reference marker. However, if the subject of one verb differs from the subject of the following verb, the verb takes the "different subject" marker, -š: as displayed below The Seri language of northwestern Mexico also has a switch-reference system which is similar in most ways to those of other languages except for one very salient fact: the relevant argument in a passive clause is not the superficial subject of the passive verb but rather the always unexpressed underlying subject. In clauses with subject raising, it is the raised subject that is relevant. ==Distribution of switch-reference== Switch reference is found in hundreds of languages in North America, South America, Australia, New Guinea (particularly in the Trans-New Guinea phylum, but not in many Papuan language families of northern New Guinea ). Typologies exist for North America, Australia, and New Guinea. The distribution of these systems has been determined via surveys and typological studies. Switch-reference tends to occur in geographical clusters spread over distinct language families. This system is suspected to spread through language contact, or areal diffusion, which accounts for the fact that the morphological marking varies from one language to the next. For example, Kiowa is the only language in the Kiowa-Tanoan family that uses switch reference, which can be explained by the migration history of the Kiowa tribe and their close contact with the Crow and Comanche tribes, both of which use switch-reference in their language. Particularly in North America, the Uto-Aztecan language family is thought to have been a source of major influence. ==Notes== ==References== Arregi, K. & Hanink, E. A. (2021). Switch reference as index agreement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 40, 651-702. Austin, P. (1981). Switch-Reference in Australia. Language, 57(2), 309-334. Déchaine, R.-M. & Wiltschko, M. (2002). Decomposing pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry, 33(3), 409-442. de Sousa, H. (2016). Some non-canonical switch reference systems and the fundamental functions of switch reference. In R. van Gijn & J. Hammond (Eds.), Switch Reference 2.0 (pp. 55-92). John Benjamins. de Vries, L. (2017). Greater Awyu Languages of West Papua in Typological Perspective. In A. Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Typology (pp. 942-996). Cambridge University Press. Farrell, P., Stephen, A. M., & Perlmutter, D. M. (1991). Notions of subjecthood and switch-reference: Evidence from Seri. Linguistic Inquiry, 22(3), 431-456. Finer, D. (1985). The syntax of switch-reference. Linguistic Inquiry, 16(1), 35-55. Foley, W. A. (2018). The morphosyntactic typology of Papuan languages. In B. Palmer (Ed.), The Languages and Linguistics of the New Guinea Area: A Comprehensive Guide (pp. 895-938). De Gruyter Mouton. Haiman, J. & Munro, P. (1983). Introduction. In J. Haiman & P. Munro (Eds.), Switch Reference and Universal Grammar (pp. ix-xv). John Benjamins. Jacobsen, W. H. (1983). Typological and Genetic Notes on Switch-Reference in North American Indian Languages. In J. Haiman & P. Munro (Eds.), Switch Reference and Universal Grammar (pp. 151-183). John Benjamins. Keine, S. (2013). Deconstructing switch-reference. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 31, 767-826. Mithun, M. (1999). The Languages of Native North America. Cambridge University Press. McKenzie, A. (2015). A Survey of Switch-Reference in North America. International Journal of American Linguistics, 81(3), 409-448. Marlett, S. A. (2020). Switch-reference and subject raising in Seri. In E.-D. Cook & D. Gerdts (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 16: the syntax of Native American Languages (pp. 247-268). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004373129 Roberts, John (1997). Switch-Reference in Papua New Guinea, 101–241. Number 3 in Papers in Papuan Linguistics. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Australian National University. Stirling, L. (1985). Switch-Reference and Logophoricity in Discourse Representation Theory. Edinburgh University Press. van Gijn, R. (2016). Switch reference: an overview. In R. van Gijn & J. Hammond (Eds.), Switch Reference 2.0 (pp. 1-53). John Benjamins. Watkins, L. J. (1993). The Discourse Functions of Kiowa Switch-Reference. International Journal of American Linguistics, 59(2), 137-164.

Text derived from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1364774867 under CC BY-SA 4.0; modifications have been made.