Ergative Case

Noun phrase marked with case marker ‘ ’, ney, expresses the role of an actor

or agent that fills the ‘subject’ argument in the list of grammatical functions. The ergative case appears for verbs in a perfective form having valency greater than one. An example is shown in sentence (109) for transitive verb ‘xareed-naa’ (to buy).

(109) _{ی aب a a}

laRkey=ney ketaab xareed-ee

boy-sg.masc=erg book.nom buy-perf.sg.fem

A boy bought a book.

The example contains one ergative and one nominative argument in the sentence. The verb-noun agreement is with highest nominative argument of in the argument structure of the verb according to thematic hierarchy shown in (94). In this example, subject NP is ergative and object NP is the nominative. Therefore, the verb agreement is with object ‘ketaab’ (the book).

As a general rule, the ergative case marker ‘ney’ is not used with intransitive

verbs but there are few exceptions to this rule for intransitive (monovalent) verbs like ‘thook-naa’ (to spit) and ‘moot-naa’, (to piss) for which case marker ‘ney’ is required

and nominative form is not acceptable. The acceptable and unacceptable usage of ergative case for intransitive verbs is shown in (110).

(110) (a) _{ا aہو}

woh geraa

He=nom fall.perf

He fell

(b) _{ا a aسا *}

*aes ney geraa

He=erg fall.perf

He fell (c) _aہو

woh saoyaa

He=nom sleep.perf

He slept

(d) _{a aسا *}

*aes ney saoyaa

He=erg sleep.perf

He slept (e) _ارڈa

mozafar daraa

Mozafar=nom scare.perf

Mozafar scared

(f) _{ارڈa a} *

*mozafar ney daraa

Mozafar=erg scare.perf

Mozafar scared

(g) _{a a}

Zafar ney thookaa

Zafar=erg spit.perf

Zafar spitted.

(h) _{a *}

*Zafar thookaa

Zafar=nom spit.perf

(i) _{a aی}

bakree ney mootaa

Goat=erg.fem piss.perf

Goat pissed

(j) _{aا * / aی *}

*bakree mootee / *bakraa mootaa

Goat=nom piss.perf

Goat pissed

Some intransitive verbs listed in (111) are usually used without ergative case but they are also known to be acceptable in ergative case for deliberate and purposeful actions (Abdul-Haq 1991; Mohanan 1994; Butt and King 2002). A brief survey is carried out to check contemporary Urdu usage in Lahore and Islamabad and the sentences shown in (111) are presented to few people. It is found that the ergative form is scarcely acceptable in a volitional sense for transitive verbs and to show volitional effect it is better to use a participle adverbial conjunctive, ‘jaan boojh kar’

(deliberately).

It is not a general rule that using ergative subjects with intransitive verbs expresses a volitional effect, and only few intransitive verbs may require ergative subject in perfective tenses to show volitional effect. It is therefore suggested that we can use a general rule that intransitive verbs of Urdu require nominative subjects. If there are intransitive verbs that could be used with ergative subjects, they may be specifically marked for the ergative requirement in the lexicon.

(111) (a) _aہو

woh nahaayaa

He=nom bathe.perf

He bathed

(b) _{a aسا *}

* aes ney nahaayaa

He=erg bathe.perf

He bathed (deliberately).

(c) _aہو

woh khaansaa

He=nom cough.perf

He coughed

(d) _{a aسا ?}

? aes ney khaansaa

He=erg cough.perf

He coughed (deliberately).

(e) _a

Zafar chheenkaa

Zafar=nom sneeze.perf

Zafar sneezed

(f) _{a a ?}

? Zafar ney chheenkaa

Zafar=erg sneeze.perf

Zafar sneezed (deliberately).

(g) _a

mozafar cheeKhaa

Mozafar=nom scream.perf

Mozafar screamed

(h) _{a a} ?

? mozafar ney cheeKhaa

Mozafar=erg scream.perf

Mozafar screamed (deliberately). (i) _aہو

woh chelaayaa

He=nom shout.perf

He shouted

(j) _{a aسا ?}

? aes ney chelaayaa

He=erg shout.perf

(112)

(a) یڑ a a a

Zafar ney sheeshee taoRee

Zafar=erg bottle=nom break.perf

Zafar broke the (glass) bottle.

(b) _{یڑ a a ٭}

* Zafar sheeshee taoRee

Zafar=nom bottle=nom break.perf

Zafar broke the (glass) bottle. (c) _{aمآa a}

mozafar ney aam khaayaa

Mozafar=erg mango=nom eat.perf

Mozafar ate the mango.

(d) _{aمآa ٭}

* mozafar aam khaayaa

Mozafar=nom mango=nom eat.perf

Mozafar ate the mango.

(e) _{aت a a}

mayN ney baat samjhee

I=erg communication=nom

comprehend.perf

I comprehended the communication

(f) _{aت a ٭}

* mayN baat samjhaa

I=nom communication=nom

comprehend.perf

I comprehended the communication

(g) _{a a a}

mayN ney paRhnaa seekhaa

I=erg read=nom learn.perf

I learned reading

(h) _{a a ٭}

*mayN paRhnaa seekhaa

I=nom read=nom learn.perf

I learned reading

Transitive and ditransitive verbs (or for the verbs having valency greater than one, this includes tetravalent verbs) when appear in perfective form require subjects marked with case marker ‘ney’, i.e., ergative subjects. Sentences shown in (112)

employ transitive verbs in perfective form, the sentences with nominative subject are not acceptable, while sentences with an ergative subject are acceptable. However, few exceptions exist for divalent verbs, which require nominative subjects even in perfective forms, the examples are shown in (113).

(113) (a) _{ﻻaب aہو}

woh ketaab laayaa

He=nom book=nom bring.perf

He bring the book

(b) _{ﻻaب a aسا ٭}

*aes ney ketaab laayee

He=nom book=nom bring.perf

He bring the book (c) _{a aید aہو}

woh shaadee sey sharmaayaa

He=nom marriage=inst embarrass.perf

He embarrassed from the marriage

(d) _{a aید a aسا ?}

? aes ney shaadee sey sharmaayaa

He=erg marriage=inst embarrass.perf

He embarrassed from the marriage

(114) ney (K CASE) = ergative

(K N-SEM N-CONCEPT) =c animate ((SUBJ K) V-FORM) =c perfect ((SUBJ K) V-VAL) ~= 1

[

]

[

]

PRED SUBJ, OBJ PRED N-CONCEPT N-SEM SUBJ CASE PRED N-CONCEPT N-SEM OBJ CASE TENSE V-FORM V-VAL 2 ' ' ' ' ' ' ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ ⎡ ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎣ ⎦⎥ ⎢ _{⎡ ⎤} ⎥ ⎢ _{⎢ ⎥} ⎥ ⎢ _{⎢ ⎥} ⎥ ⎢ _{⎢ ⎥} ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ xareednaa laRkaa animate erg ketaab thing nom past perfect

Figure 7.6: F-Structure of ‘laRkey=ney ketaab xareedee’

Functional schema for the LFG based lexical entry of ‘ney’ has been shown in

(114), which marks an ‘ergative case’. The entry expresses in the first equation that the CASE attribute of mother NP has a value ‘ergative’. In second equation, which is a constraint equation, it is described that mother NP’s semantic attribute must have a value ‘animate’, this is to verify that ergative case can be assigned only to animate nouns and inanimate nouns are not marked with ergative case. In third equation, a constraint is applied to verb form to be ‘perfect’. The notation (SUBJ K) is for inside- out functional uncertainty, which is used to refer to a f-structure by traversing inside- out through the hierarchy of f-structures until the required f-structure having attribute SUBJ is found. The next constraint equation checks verb valency for ergative case should not be one, therefore the verb valency attribute ‘V-VAL’ can take values 2, 3 or 4 for Urdu verbs. The last equation expresses that noun marked with ergative case fills the subject argument of the verb.

Sometimes, apparently ‘inanimate’ nouns are assigned ergative case to mark them as agents, which could be assigned only to ‘animate’ nouns. These nouns are not intrinsically animated but there is some external force or power, which imparts them ‘animate’ attribute. The use of ergative case for such externally ‘animated’ nouns is shown in (115) and (116), and it is assumed that these nouns have semantic feature value as ‘animate’, which allows them to be used in ergative case.

(115) _{دa aر ﻻa aیڑ a ر}

rayl gaaRee=ney mojhey laahaor pohanch-aa dee-aa

train-sg.masc=erg me.pron Lahore.nom help reach-caus1.perf.sg.mas completely

The train caused me reach Lahore. (116) _{دaا aن a ز}

zzalzzaley=ney makaan ger-aa dee-aa

earthquake-sg.masc=erg house.nom cause fall-caus1.perf.sg.mas completely

In document DEVELOPMENT OF ALGORITHMS AND  COMPUTATIONAL GRAMMAR FOR URDU (Page 122-126)