Non-configurational language
However, the first to publish a description of non-configurationality was Chomsky himself in his 1981 lectures on Government and Binding, in which he referred to an unpublished paper by Hale.
Languages that have been described as non-configurational include Mohawk,[6] Warlpiri,[7] Nahuatl,[6] O'odham (Papago),[8] Jingulu,[9] and Jiwarli.
[9] Using non-configurationality as a model, Maria Vilkuna coined and Katalin Kiss developed the concept of discourse-configurationality to describe languages where constituent order is primarily determined by pragmatic factors.
[12] It displays the three main characteristics of non-configurationality, namely free word order, extensive use of null anaphora, and discontinuous expressions.
According to Hale, the relatively unconstrained manner in which words are ordered within the sentence is due to the way in which the projection principle acts in non-configurational languages.
Eloise Jelinek challenges Hale, providing a re-analysis of Walpiri and certain other non-configurational languages, proposes a different parameter.
[4] However Jelinek proposes configurationally parameters that are in agreement with the projection principle, with specific reference to Warlpiri data.
Subsequently, Jelinek explains the free word order and apparent discontinuous expressions of non-configurational languages.
Following this, the function of nominals in non-configurational languages is, similar to adjoined clauses, to add more information to the verbal argument or the predicate.
To take an example of an English parallel, adverbs are modifiers and can appear on either side of the VP, Baker applies this familiar concept to a new domain, showing that in Mohawk (a polysynthetic language), like English the VP has an obligatory position but NPs can be adjuncts with respect to this element.
In considering polysynthesis through the framework of non-configurationality, Mark Baker is able to provide basis for the unique syntax seen in polysynthetic languages.
Mark Baker's approach to polysythesis creates some debate among linguists as it heavily relies on generative grammar, which causes some languages which would traditionally be considered to be polysynthetic to be excluded.
[15] From the perspective of syntactic theory, the existence of non-configurational languages bears on the question of whether grammatical functions like subject and object are independent of structure.
In other words, all languages are non-configurational for DGs, even English, which all phrase structure grammars take for granted as having a finite VP constituent.
The point is illustrated with the following examples: Phrase structure grammars almost unanimously assume that the finite VP in bold in the first sentence is a constituent.
