Accusative Case Agreement

Ellen Woolford. 2006. Divergences between the case agreement. In Cedric Boeckx (note.M.), Agreement Systems, 299-316. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: doi.org/10.1075/la.92.13woo From these results, we can therefore tentatively conclude that there is a cognitive bias of any kind against the (untested) combination of ACC-ERG. Given the relative rarity of the ERG/agreement case in relation to the ACC agreement/case, a cognitive preference for the match in the case/agreement may be sufficient to explain this deficiency. However, note that appropriate ERG-ERG alignment is also rare in typological terms. Future studies should therefore compare both ERG-ERG (rare but confirmed) and ERG-ERG (unstified) with (ERG-ACC attested and more frequent). If it is only the rarity of the ERG orientation plus a preference for matching, we should observe the same bias towards ERG-ACC in implicit learning compared to the ERG-ERG. This would indicate a place where the relative frequency is not directly correlated with a distortion of learning, but is nevertheless due to the scarcity of ERG relative to VAC (whatever to explain).

However, if there is a more specific prohibition of the UNconfirmed VAC-ERG combination, as has often been suggested in generating approaches, we would expect this to be evident if the two non-matching combinations are compared. If ACC-ERG is biased against ERG-ACC, then the stakes are higher than just a preference for the game. We accept these challenges in the work in progress. In linguistic typology, nominal and accusative orientation is a kind of morphosytic orientation in which subjects of intransituating verbs are treated as subjects of transiting verbs and differ from objects from verbs transiting through basic structures. The morphosytic orientation can be encoded by case marking, verb and/or word order. The alignment of the name battery has a wide global distribution and is the most common orientation system among the world`s languages (including English). Nominal and accusatory languages are commonly referred to as nominal and accusatory languages. As a result, previous research has shown a bias towards the harmony of word order in adults and children in the learning of artificial languages.

Here, we ask whether a similar bias in matching cases and matches can be proven experimentally. If it can be experimentally proven that there is a distortion of acquisition in relation to ERG-ERG, this can be seen as evidence that the discrepancy we are observing is not only fortuitous. Future work will then be able to verify the learning capacity of the ACC-ERG`s Unconfirmed orientation at the confirmed ACC orientation to determine whether the ERGA is biased only because of disagreement or additional factors.