Krzysztof Stronski (Adam Mickiewicz University Poznan)

Place: HF 400, HF-bygget

        Time: Monday May 10., 14.15-16.00

Title: Ergativity in Indo-Aryan – Competetive Explanations

The aim of my presentation is to discuss different models of the development of ergativity in IA . Besides the well-known and established scholarly opinions, less known viewpoints are also dealt with. It has usually been argued that ergativity could have derived either from the passive or the originally PIE ergative construction. In addition to these two basic approaches to ergativity in IA, other perspectives are also taken into consideration here, namely a theory based on the pragmatic properties of OIA, and the hypothesis of possible borrowing from the substratum languages. The existing scenarios of the emergence of ergativity in IA, including their later mutations, are confronted with the hypothesis of the possible active typology of PIE. The split-ergative system existing in OIA could arise from active typology as a secondary development. There are several features of OIA verbal and nominal systems which can be considered an active residue. Some of these features seem to have been preserved in NIA as well. As regards the assumed language substrata, they had different impacts on OIA. Languages of ergative typology such as Burushaski and Tibetan are said to have limited influence on Aryan stock, while languages with perceptible active features, i.e. Munda or nominative languages, i.e. Dravidian ones, could trigger the gradual nominativization of split-ergative patterns leading to the complete loss of ergativity in East IA. There is however at least one areal feature which cannot be neglected in the context of the possible substratum, namely considerably strong tendency to maintain or even to reinforce ergativity in the IA dialects spoken in the Himalayan region (Pahari) and its loss in the dialects of the plains. What I would like to propose here is that the ergative pattern in NIA has been inherited from the MIA, which in turn is probably a continuation of the earlier OIA pattern, although due to language contact it has been either completely ousted by the nominative/accusative pattern or reinforced.