TY - JOUR
T1 - How universal is agent-first? Evidence from symmetrical voice languages
AU - Riesberg, Sonja
AU - Malcher, Kurt
AU - Himmelmann, Nikolaus P
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - Agents have been claimed to be universally more prominent than verbal arguments with other
thematic roles. Perhaps the strongest claim in this regard is that agents have a privileged role in
language processing, specifically that there is a universal bias for the first unmarked argument in
an utterance to be interpreted as an agent. Symmetrical voice languages such as many western
Austronesian languages challenge claims about agent prominence in various ways. Inter alia, most
of these languages allow for both �agent-first� and �undergoer-first� orders in basic transitive constructions.
We argue, however, that they still provide evidence for a universal �agent-first� principle.
Inasmuch as these languages allow for word-order variation beyond the basic set of default
patterns, such variation will always result in an agent-first order. Variation options in which undergoers
are in first position are not attested. The fact that not all transitive constructions are
agent-first is due to the fact that there are competing ordering biases, such as the principles dictating
that word order follows constituency or the person hierarchy, as also illustrated with Austronesian
data.
AB - Agents have been claimed to be universally more prominent than verbal arguments with other
thematic roles. Perhaps the strongest claim in this regard is that agents have a privileged role in
language processing, specifically that there is a universal bias for the first unmarked argument in
an utterance to be interpreted as an agent. Symmetrical voice languages such as many western
Austronesian languages challenge claims about agent prominence in various ways. Inter alia, most
of these languages allow for both �agent-first� and �undergoer-first� orders in basic transitive constructions.
We argue, however, that they still provide evidence for a universal �agent-first� principle.
Inasmuch as these languages allow for word-order variation beyond the basic set of default
patterns, such variation will always result in an agent-first order. Variation options in which undergoers
are in first position are not attested. The fact that not all transitive constructions are
agent-first is due to the fact that there are competing ordering biases, such as the principles dictating
that word order follows constituency or the person hierarchy, as also illustrated with Austronesian
data.
U2 - 10.1353/lan.2019.0055
DO - 10.1353/lan.2019.0055
M3 - Article
VL - 95
SP - 523
EP - 561
JO - Language (Washington)
JF - Language (Washington)
IS - 3
ER -