Direct–inverse alignment

The definition of a direct–inverse language is a matter under research in linguistic typology, but it is widely understood to involve different grammar for <a href="/facts/Transitive_verb/3TtAs9FH">transitive predications</a> according to the relative positions of their "subject" and their "object" on a person hierarchy, which, in turn, is some combination of <a href="/facts/Salience_(communication)/Suj2Iq2n">saliency</a> and <a href="/facts/Animacy/mr4xbcdG">animacy</a> specific to a given language. The direct construction is the <a href="/facts/Markedness/vofcEvg6">unmarked</a> one. The direct construction is used when the <a href="/facts/Subject_(grammar)/h5M1cQJ2">subject</a> of the transitive clause outranks the <a href="/facts/Object_(grammar)/wybTVzna">object</a> in the person hierarchy, and the inverse is used when the object outranks the subject.
The existence of direct–inverse morphosyntax is usually accompanied by <a href="/facts/Obviative/EFQ95p56">proximate–obviative</a> morphosyntax. The direct–inverse dimension subsumes the proximate–obviative dimension. Across languages, obviation almost always involves the third person (although second-person obviation is reported for some <a href="/facts/Nilo-Saharan_languages/jVN5pesl">Nilo-Saharan languages</a>), and the direct–inverse alternation is usually presented as being a way of marking the proximate–obviative distinction between two (or more) third-person arguments of a sentence. However, there are at least two languages with inverse systems, the <a href="/facts/Mesoamerican_languages/GptXcAah">Mesoamerican languages</a> <a href="/facts/Mixe-Zoquean_languages/WouQV2tK">Zoque</a> and <a href="/facts/Huastec_language/TNJK6hGF">Huastec</a>, in which inverse morphosyntax is never used when both subject and object are third person but only when one of the arguments is third person, and the other is a speech act participant (SAP), the first or second person.

Direct–inverse alignment open-in-new

Direct–inverse alignment