Split-Ergative Morphology in Hindi/Urdu, Pashto & Balochi Languages

Abstract

This research is designed to produce detailed descriptions of the morphological ergativity in three South Asian languages. The chosen sample includes Hindi/Urdu, Pashto and Balochi, as morphologically enough to achieve the goals and generalizations of the research. The study presents the range of variation in case and agreement marking in these South Asian descendants of the common Indo-Iranian language, in which the distinct systems of ergative case marking and agreement is to be compared, both within the nominal and verbal domain. While these individual languages are common examples of morphological ergativity, the range of variation among these languages has not been examined comparatively. The goals of this research are twofold. After a comprehensive overview, we present a detailed typology of ergative marking and agreement in the predetermined languages, demonstrating their common split ergative behavior. This process is manifested in two distinct strategies of markedness: Differential Case Marking (DCM) [including Differential Subject Marking (DSM), as well as Differential Object Marking (DOM); Aissen 1999] in the nominal domain, and marked agreement in the verbal domain; which is considered within a comparative account.<br><br>It will be seen that the ergative marking and agreement patterns are not uniform across these languages. The overt morphological expression of case marking occurs of varying degrees in their nominal paradigms, while in the verbal paradigm the ways in which agreement morphology cross references arguments illustrates the common default agreement with the nominative argument in all three systems.<br><br>The study proceeds as follows. First the range of variation in case and subject (St) marking in the sample will be presented, together with an overview of morphological ergativity. Following this, the typological splits, indicating the strategies of markedness and the variation in case marking splits (DCM), including both differential subject marking (DSM) and differential object marking (DOM), will be examined through the study. The effect of differential object marking (DOM) on verb agreement is considered next; and finally, a summary of the typology of variation in the domain of the study will be presented. Noteworthy is that the acheived comparative patterns can be considered as representatives of languages in the Indo-Iranian family.