Ergative–absolutive alignment

In <a href="/facts/Linguistic_typology/B72Bumgm">linguistic typology</a>, ergative–absolutive alignment is a type of <a href="/facts/Morphosyntactic_alignment/Ly8YuLY2">morphosyntactic alignment</a> in which the <a href="/facts/Subject_(grammar)/h5M1cQJ2">subject</a> of an <a href="/facts/Intransitive_verb/W4TRD0n5">intransitive verb</a> behaves like the <a href="/facts/Object_(grammar)/wybTVzna">object</a> of a <a href="/facts/Transitive_verb/3TtAs9FH">transitive verb</a>, and differently from the subject of a transitive verb. Examples include <a href="/facts/Basque_language/rEMpH97p">Basque</a>, <a href="/facts/Georgian_language/DoKtMLfq">Georgian</a>, <a href="/facts/Mayan_languages/5J0QpcLa">Mayan</a>, <a href="/facts/Standard_Tibetan/SVRgs3bM">Tibetan</a>, <a href="/facts/Sumerian_language/LM6x88vp">Sumerian</a>, and certain <a href="/facts/Indo-European_languages/L34TfgSr">Indo-European languages</a> (such as <a href="/facts/Pashto/hc2ndCqx">Pashto</a> and the <a href="/facts/Kurdish_languages/6LSckYAz">Kurdish languages</a> and many <a href="/facts/Indo-Aryan_languages/hm2N7fYp">Indo-Aryan languages</a> like <a href="/facts/Hindustani_language/rPnbEyYP">Hindustani</a>). It has also been attributed to the <a href="/facts/Semitic_languages/WCYrz4Qm">Semitic</a> <a href="/facts/Modern_Aramaic/tTUddtXu">modern Aramaic</a> (also called Neo-Aramaic) languages. Ergative languages are classified into two groups: those that are morphologically ergative but syntactically behave as <a href="/facts/Nominative%E2%80%93accusative_alignment/9lQVLE2s">accusative</a> (for instance, Basque, Pashto and <a href="/facts/Urdu/oLrhuXc6">Urdu</a>) and those that, on top of being ergative morphologically, also show ergativity in syntax. Languages that belong to the former group are more numerous than those to the latter.
The ergative-absolutive alignment is in contrast to <a href="/facts/Nominative%E2%80%93accusative_alignment/9lQVLE2s">nominative–accusative alignment</a>, which is observed in <a href="/facts/English_language/tpkxGt7b">English</a> and most other Indo-European languages, where the single argument of an intransitive verb ("She" in the sentence "She walks") behaves grammatically like the agent (<a href="/facts/Subject_(grammar)/h5M1cQJ2">subject</a>) of a transitive verb ("She" in the sentence "She finds it") but different from the object of a transitive verb ("her" in the sentence "He likes her"). When ergative–absolutive alignment is coded by <a href="/facts/Grammatical_case/5caTQalU">grammatical case</a>, the case used for the single argument of an intransitive verb and the object of a transitive verb is the <a href="/facts/Absolutive_case/6CsXEAom">absolutive</a>, and the case used for the agent of a transitive verb is the <a href="/facts/Ergative_case/Duj9SL9D">ergative</a>. In nominative-accusative languages, the case for the single argument of an intransitive verb and the agent of a transitive verb is the <a href="/facts/Nominative_case/wXX3Vn4x">nominative</a>, while the case for the direct object of a transitive verb is the <a href="/facts/Accusative_case/HA1Q81qd">accusative</a>.
Many languages have ergative–absolutive alignment only in some parts of their grammar (e.g., in the case marking of nouns), but nominative-accusative alignment in other parts (e.g., in the case marking of pronouns, or in <a href="/facts/Person_agreement/MxF9ErBV">person agreement</a>). This is known as <a href="/facts/Split_ergativity/0Ls1TotU">split ergativity</a>.

Ergative–absolutive alignment open-in-new

Ergative–absolutive alignment