Perception verb complements in Akatek, a Mayan language

110 4. AKATEK, A `TYPICAL' MAYAN LANGUAGE
(1976)). In Dyirbal, even the nominative-accusatively aligned pronominals
follow this split of intransitive subject and transitive object vs.
transitive subject. Thus, Dyirbal is a language with a syntactically
ergative notion of `subject'. In line with Anderson's observation, ndings
by Craig (1976b) indicate that the Mayan language Jakaltek is
only super cially ergative due to the fact that no syntactic rule needs
to refer to a speci c case.
Based on the assumption that ergative NPs in transitive constructions
are subjects, Larsen & Norman (1979) identify split casemarking,
prohibitions against the extraction of transitive subjects, 12
and the fact that Mayan languages have antipassive constructions 13 as
correlates of ergativity inMayan grammar. As opposed to many ergative
languages, however, Mayan languages also have passives. 14 Evidence
from extraction processes indicates that Mayan languages are
at least partially syntactically ergative (Larsen, 1990; van Valin,
1981). van Valin (1981) claims that Jakaltek has no uni ed notion of
subject while the syntactic organization of the language cannot be unequivocally
identi ed as ergative or as accusative. However, as Larsen
(1990) shows, these observations do not hold for all languages in the
family, e.g. in languages like Quiche and Jakaltek a process like clefting
is only syntactically ergative for third person arguments while clauses
with rst and second person arguments exhibit syntactic nominativity.
In sum, there is no agreement as to the status of subjects or objects
in Mayan languages. A systematic approach toward a universal
de nition of subjects has been suggested in Keenan (1975). He establishes
a Subject Properties List (SPL) for identifying basic subjects
in languages evolving around the central notions of autonomy, case
marking and semantic roles of subjects. However, it turns out that
cross-linguistically, there is no minimally de ning list of properties an
NP needs to exhibit in a given language in order to be identi able as
subject. As a result, an NP in a language has subject status to the
extent its properties conform to the SPL. The problem with Keenan's
approach for the present purpose is that, again, it focuses on identifying
a subject NP. If the nominal representing the subject in Akatek
is analyzed as an appositional adjunct, then most of the established
12As opposed to absolutive nominals, at least in the Kanjobalan, Quichean,
and Mamean languages, the ergative nominal cannot be questioned, relativized or
clefted.
13For an account ofantipassive voices in Akatek refer to chapter 5, section
3.1.6.
14Details regarding passive constructions in Akatek are presented in chapter 5,
section 3.1.5.