Gram - SEAS

6. 4 Argument-structure marking 165
paradigmatization. Rather, it involves the disintegration and dispersal of forms as
welI as their assembly into regular paradigms. Grammaticalization again tends to
undermine the picture of stability, of clear categorial boundaries, and of structured
groups of forms, showing these to be at the most temporary way-stations between
different kinds of dispersal, emergence, and fragmentation. This is in fact to be
expected, given the approach to grammaticalization developed in this book: that
it emerges out of processes of reanalysis in the syntagmatic domain of language,
constrained by speaker-hearer negotiation. We now turn to functional-semantic
hierarchies that guide the development of markers of subject and object argument
structure.
6.4 Argument-structure marking: functional-semantic
hierarchies and morphological generalization
We have discussed some examples of unidirectionality of segmental form
as "compacting" occurs .. We have also seen how grammaticalization can proceed
along other dimensions too, such as generalization of paradigms. In the case of the
development of Old Icelandic sik we also saw spread along a functional-semantic
hierarchy in the syntagmatic domain (reflexive, reciprocal, passive, etc.). We illus­
trate this kind of phenomenon in more detail from object marking in Persian (also
known as Iranian), and then go on to suggest how evidence from such generaliza­
tions can be used to develop research questions concerning languages for which
we have only synchronic data, such as Sacapultec.
6.4. 1 Object marking in Persian
The development of object marking in Persian nicely exemplifies both
the unidirectional cline which comprises lexical word > postposition > suffix
and generalization along two other dimensions: the animacy hierarchy and the
definiteness hierarchy. According to the animacy hierarchy, human nouns are more
likely to be included in linguistic rules than animates in general (e.g., animals),
and animates are more likely to be included than inanimates: 4
human > animate > inanimate > abstract
(For the relation of this hierarchy to personal pronouns, proper nouns, common
nouns, and other nominal types as well as to case marking and thematic rela­
tions, see Greenberg 1974; Silverstein 1976; Dixon 1979: 85.) According to the
definiteness hierarchy, definite (referential) nouns are more likely to be included
in linguistic rules than indefinite nouns. Given a three-way distinction between