Switch-reference

In linguistics, switch-reference (SR) describes any clause-level morpheme that signals whether certain prominent arguments in 'adjacent' clauses are coreferential.

[3][4] Any system that does not have all these properties are categorically not switch reference: A commonly used definition of canonical switch reference is that "switch-reference is an inflectional category of the verb, which indicates whether or not its subject is identical with the subject of some other verb.

For instance, many clauses, including those with impersonal or weather verbs, have no subject at all but can both bear and trigger switch-reference.

[9][10] For instance, in the configuration [A[B][C]], for which B and C are subordinate clauses to A, any switch-reference-marking on C refers to A, not B. Switch-reference is accounted for by many different explanations.

Van Gijn (2016) provides a sentence in Central Pomo where the same subject marker -hi is used despite the subjects being distinct (see thematic coherence): [3] ʔɑ́1Amkʰe2Akʰčé-ʔelbridge-thedó-č-himake-SML-IDENTmí-lithat-withma2PATʔdí-m-ʔkʰetake.PL-across-FUTʔɑ́ mkʰe kʰčé-ʔel dó-č-hi mí-li ma ʔdí-m-ʔkʰe1A 2A bridge-the make-SML-IDENT that-with 2PAT take.PL-across-FUT'I will build the bridge for you and on that you'll take them (across)'Stirling (1993) proposed that switch-reference is about the congruence of "eventualities".

She notes six pivots for SR systems: Same subject markers indicate identity while different subject markers do non-identity, where identity is about agreement between “aspects of eventualities” and non-identity is disagreement in at least one of those parameters.

As well, switch-reference may exist clause-internally due to the coordination of low verbal projections.

Under Keine’s proposal, if two VPs are conjoined, then there is only one vP and one external argument (i.e. one subject).

Morphological differences and semantic properties are just consequences of the tree geometry of the coordination structure.

Ija1SGho-co-mincome-DS-1SGsabfoodja-g-aeat-2SG-PASTIja ho-co-min sab ja-g-a1SG come-DS-1SG food eat-2SG-PAST'I came and you ate the food' Arregi & Hanink (2021) propose that the embedded C head agrees with the subject of the embedded clause, as well as the subject of the higher clause in referential index.

[26] Switch-reference tends to occur in geographical clusters spread over distinct language families.

[27] Particularly in North America, the Uto-Aztecan language family is thought to have been a source of major influence.

[28] Many indigenous languages in Western South America use switch-reference systems such as Quechuan, Uru, and Chipaya in the Andes, and Tacanan, Panoan, Barbacoan, Tucanoan, and Jivarona in the Amazon area.

[28] Panoan languages are unique in the way they allow different coreference pivots such as transitive and intransitive subjects, as well as objects.

These native languages that feature switch-reference can be found in regions stretching from the south and south-west of the U.S. to the north-west of Mexico.

These include the Yuman–Cochimí, Muskogean, Maiduan, Pomoan, Yokutsan, Plateau Penutian, Yukian, Kiowa-Tanoan, Siouan, and the Numic and Takic (subgroups of Uto-Aztecan) language families, and the Seri, Tonkawa, Washo, and Zuni isolates.

[31] While languages in Papua New Guinea are rich with personal pronouns, verbs still require switch-reference and agreement markers for participant tracking.

[32] Switch-reference systems are also present in languages of Vanuatu, parts of Africa, and potentially eastern Siberia.