University of California, Washington State University Los Angeles The Western Muskogean languages Chickasaw and Choctaw have a subject/oblique opposition in nominal case-marking and syntactic relations, despite their 'active' system of pronominal agreement. In both languages, case assignment may reflect the operation of productive relation-changing rules. These facts call into question the classification of Choctaw by R. Van Valin and W. Foley (e.g. 1980) as 'role-dominated'. Restrictions on NP density (the number of nominal arguments per clause) may account for some of the syntactic differences between the more familiar 'reference-dominated' languages and languages of the Western Muskogean type.*
[1]
D. Brinton,et al.
Grammar of the Choctaw language
,
1869
.
[2]
Charles J. Fillmore,et al.
THE CASE FOR CASE.
,
1967
.
[3]
Jeffrey Heath,et al.
Some Functional Relationships in Grammar.
,
1975
.
[4]
Ronald W. Langacker,et al.
Passives and Their Meaning.
,
1975
.
[5]
Choctaw 'articles' in discourse
,
1977
.
[6]
Robert D. Van Valin,et al.
On the organization of "subject" properties in universal grammar
,
1977
.
[7]
Van Valin,et al.
Aspects of Lakhota Syntax
,
1977
.
[8]
T. Givón,et al.
On Understanding Grammar
,
1979
.