{"title":"论奇布羌语中否定标记语wã的起源","authors":"Sara Pacchiarotti","doi":"10.1163/9789004392007_007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Bribri and Cabécar are Chibchan languages spoken in Costa Rica in contiguous territories.1 Both languages display two distinct ergative markers, diachronically unrelated in any obvious way. The canonical, standard ergative marker is tö in Bribri (1) and të in Cabécar (2). A further ergative marker wã seems to be construction-determined and is more restricted in terms of usage. It is found, among others, in the perfect construction, cf. (3) and (4).","PeriodicalId":303494,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructing Syntax","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Origins of the Ergative Marker wã in the Viceitic Languages of the Chibchan Family\",\"authors\":\"Sara Pacchiarotti\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/9789004392007_007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Bribri and Cabécar are Chibchan languages spoken in Costa Rica in contiguous territories.1 Both languages display two distinct ergative markers, diachronically unrelated in any obvious way. The canonical, standard ergative marker is tö in Bribri (1) and të in Cabécar (2). A further ergative marker wã seems to be construction-determined and is more restricted in terms of usage. It is found, among others, in the perfect construction, cf. (3) and (4).\",\"PeriodicalId\":303494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reconstructing Syntax\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reconstructing Syntax\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004392007_007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reconstructing Syntax","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004392007_007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
On the Origins of the Ergative Marker wã in the Viceitic Languages of the Chibchan Family
Bribri and Cabécar are Chibchan languages spoken in Costa Rica in contiguous territories.1 Both languages display two distinct ergative markers, diachronically unrelated in any obvious way. The canonical, standard ergative marker is tö in Bribri (1) and të in Cabécar (2). A further ergative marker wã seems to be construction-determined and is more restricted in terms of usage. It is found, among others, in the perfect construction, cf. (3) and (4).