GB134 - grambank/grambank GitHub Wiki

Is the order of constituents the same in main and subordinate clauses?

Summary

This feature focuses on whether the basic word order(s) of main clauses are possible in subordinate clauses. A ‘yes’ response for this feature indicates that subjects, verbs, and objects occur in the same order in subordinate clauses as in main clauses. For example, the order between ‘woman’, ‘man’, and ‘chases’ is the same in the simple clause the woman chases the man as in the subordinate clause of I think that the woman chases the man in English, and this feature asks if it is the same in target languages. In languages with flexible word order it is sufficient for a 1 if all pragmatically unmarked main clause orders are possible in subordinate clauses, even if there are additional word order alternatives in subordinate clauses that are not available in main clauses. Subordinate clauses involving reported speech (e.g. He said that the woman chases the man.) should be disregarded.

Procedure

  1. Find the order of core arguments in the language in main clauses, either in the text of the grammar or in simple clause examples involving full NP core arguments.
  2. Find the order of core arguments in subordinate clauses, either in the text of the grammar or in examples involving subordinate clauses.
  3. If exactly the same basic word orders that are possible in pragmatically unmarked main clauses are also possible in subordinate clauses, code 1.
  4. If all of the basic word orders that are possible in pragmatically unmarked main clauses are possible in subordinate clauses, but some additional word orders are also possible in subordinate clauses, code 1.
  5. If the grammar states generally that the language has free or flexible word order and examples appear to show the same word order pattern(s) in subordinate clauses as in main clauses, code 1 and include a comment to indicate that coding was based on examples.
  6. If the grammar states generally that the language has free or flexible word order and there is insufficient information about subordinate clauses, code ? and provide a comment about the unavailable evidence.

Examples

Balantak (ISO 639-3: blz, Glottolog: bala1315)

Relative clauses are the only clear type of subordination in Balantak. According to van den Berg and Busenitz (2012: 221), "Verb morphology and word order are the same [for relative clauses] as for main clauses." This can be seen in the examples below.

Main Clause

utus-ku      balaki'-na   ning-intoni-mo   lima-ngku  ka' …
sibling-1SG  big-3SG      AV.REAL-hold-PFV hand-1SG   and
‘My older brother shook my hand and …’ (Van den Berg & Busenitz 2012: 219)

Relative Clause

mian    [men  mang-asok     rombia'] …
person  REL   AV.IRR-plant  sago.tree
‘People who plant sago trees …’ (Van den Berg & Busenitz 2012: 222)

Balantak is coded 1.

English (ISO 639-3: eng, Glottolog: stan1293)

In English the core constituent order in pragmatically unmarked main clauses is SVO, as in The boy ate the cake.

The same order is possible in gapped relative clauses, regardless of which constituent is relativized. This is shown in the NPs: The dog that ate the cake and The cake that the dog ate.

This is sufficient to trigger a 1, regardless of the fact that wh-movement in some English subordinate clauses introduces additional orders (as in The friend whom I called). English would be coded 1.

Batak Karo (ISO 639-3: btx, Glottolog: bata1293)

In Batak Karo the unmarked order for intransitive clauses is S-V, but in subordinate clauses the opposite order (V-S) is preferred (Woollams 1996: 277). This is demonstrated in the following example, where ‘the hunter went’ occurs first as a main clause, and then as a subordinate clause.

(a) é    maka  lawes  perburu  é     nadingken  raja
    and  so    go     hunter   that  ACT.leave  chief
    ‘And so the hunter went, leaving the chief.’ (Woollams 1996: 277)

(b) kenca  perburu  é     lawes  rēh   Simbelang Pinggel
    after  hunter   that  go     come  Simbelang Pinggel
    ‘After the hunter went, along came Simbelang Pinggel.’ (Woollams 1996: 277)

Batak Karo is coded 0.

German (ISO 639-3: deu, Glottolog: stan1295)

German is an example of a language that changes its word order in subordinate clauses in that the main verb invariably comes at the end in subordinate clauses while in main clauses it may appear as the second constituent. German would be coded 0.

Further reading

Dryer, Matthew S. 1992. Adverbial subordinators and word order asymmetries. In John A. Hawkins & Anna Siewerska (eds), Performance principles of word order, 50–67. European Science Foundation: EUROTYP Working Papers.

References

van den Berg, René & Robert L. Busenitz. 2012. A grammar of Balantak, a language of Eastern Sulawesi. (SIL e-Books, 40.) SIL International.

Woollams, Geoff. 1996. A grammar of Karo Batak, Sumatra. (Pacific Linguistics: Series C, 130.) Canberra: Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.

Related Features

Patron

Hannah J. Haynie