Documentation

Linglib.Fragments.Mayan.Yukatek.VerbClasses

Yukatek Maya Verb Classes and Status System #

@cite{bohnemeyer-2004} @cite{lucy-1994}

Yukatek Maya has a typologically rare split-intransitive pattern of argument marking controlled by overt aspect-mood marking. The system comprises five verb stem classes distinguished by their status inflection patterns (allomorphy of aspect-mood suffixes).

Verb Stem Classes #

ClassEvent typeExamples
activeprocesswalk, sing, dance, sneeze
inactivestate changedie, burst, enter, exit
inchoativestate change (stative root + -tal)blacken, shrink, sink
positionalstate change (spatial config.)sit, stand, hang, be round
transitive activetransitivehit, chip, eat

Status Categories #

Status marking encodes both viewpoint aspect and modal assertiveness (@cite{bohnemeyer-2004} Table 2):

The split in argument marking is associated with the aspectual value: perfective status → S marked like U (ergative); imperfective status → S marked like A (accusative).

The five verb stem classes of Yukatek Maya, distinguished by status inflection patterns (@cite{bohnemeyer-2004} Table 3; @cite{lucy-1994}).

Instances For
    @[implicit_reducible]
    Equations
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For

      Event type encoded by each verb stem class. Active stems encode processes; all others encode state changes.

      @cite{bohnemeyer-2004} §5: degree achievement verbs regularly appear in the inactive and inchoative classes despite being atelic. Their event structure encodes state change — the process/state-change distinction, not telicity, motivates class membership.

      Equations
      Instances For

        The four status categories of Yukatek Maya, encoding viewpoint aspect and modal assertiveness (@cite{bohnemeyer-2004} Table 2).

        Instances For
          @[implicit_reducible]
          Equations
          Equations
          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
          Instances For

            Which marker set cross-references the sole argument (S) of an intransitive verb, given the status category.

            @cite{bohnemeyer-2004} Table 2:

            • Perfective status (completive/subjunctive): S = U → set-B (ergative)
            • Imperfective status (incompletive): S = A → set-A (accusative)
            • Imperative: not discussed in the split analysis (Table 2 omits it)
            Equations
            Instances For

              The split: perfective → set-B (ergative), imperfective → set-A (accusative).

              A Yukatek verb entry for the split intransitivity analysis. Records stem class and causation type of the intransitive base.

              Instances For
                Equations
                Instances For
                  Equations
                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                  Instances For

                    Map Yukatek verb stem classes to R&H event structure templates. This connects the language-specific classification to the theory-level decomposition in EventStructure.lean.

                    • Active → activity [x ACT]
                    • Inactive/inchoative → achievement [BECOME [x ⟨STATE⟩]]
                    • Positional → achievement (externally-caused spatial config.)
                    • Transitive active → accomplishment [[x ACT] CAUSE [BECOME [y ⟨STATE⟩]]]
                    Equations
                    Instances For

                      The stem class → template mapping preserves event type: VerbStemClass.eventType agrees with Template.eventTypetoTemplate.

                      Bohnemeyer's 5-way stem classes refining Lucy's positional class: inchoative and positional both reduce to the same Lucy class.

                      toSalienceClass is surjective: every Lucy class is in the image of Bohnemeyer's 5-way refinement.

                      The fibre of toSalienceClass over .positional is exactly {.inchoative, .positional} — these are the two Bohnemeyer classes that collapse under @cite{lucy-1994}'s 4-way cut. The other three fibres are singletons (active ↦ agent, inactive ↦ patient, transitiveActive ↦ agentPatient).

                      Yukatek split-ergative system, parameterized by status category. Perfective status (completive/subjunctive) triggers ergative alignment; imperfective status (incompletive) triggers accusative alignment. Imperative is treated as ergative (completive-like default).

                      This instantiates the same Core.SplitErgativity type used by Hindi and Georgian, enabling cross-linguistic comparison.

                      Equations
                      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                      Instances For

                        Yukatek and Hindi share the same split conditioning: perfective → ergative, imperfective → accusative. This is @cite{bohnemeyer-2004}'s core insight that a single linking-by-viewpoint mechanism underlies both systems.