different between particle vs ergativity

English

Etymology

From Middle French particule, and its source, Latin particula (“small part, particle”), diminutive of pars (“part, piece”).

Pronunciation

• (Received Pronunciation) IPA^(key): /?p??t?k(?)l/
• (General American) IPA^(key): /?p??t?k?l/
• Rhymes: -??(?)t?k?l

Noun

particle (plural particles)

1. A very small piece of matter, a fragment; especially, the smallest possible part of something. [from 14th c.]
2. (physics) Any of various physical objects making up the constituent parts of an atom; an elementary particle or subatomic particle. [from 19th c.]
   • 2011, Brian Cox & Jeff Forshaw, The Quantum Universe, Allen Lane 2011, p. 55:

     What, he asked himself, does quantum theory have to say about the familiar properties of particles such as position?
3. (linguistics) A word that has a particular grammatical function but does not obviously belong to any particular part of speech, such as the word to in English infinitives or O as a vocative particle.

   • In English there is no grammatical device to differentiate predicational judgments from nonpredicational descriptions. This distinction does cast a shadow on the grammatical sphere to some extent, but recognition of it must generally be made in semantic terms. It is maintained here that in Japanese, on the other hand, the distinction is grammatically realized through the use of the two particles wa and ga.

   • Traditional grammar typically recognises a number of further categories: for example, in his Reference Book of Terms in Traditional Grammar for Language Students, Simpson (1982) posits two additional word-level categories which he refers to as Particle, and Conjunction. Particles include the italicised words in (58) below:

     (58)

     (a) He put his hat on

     (b) If you pull too hard, the handle will come off

     (c) He was leaning too far over the side, and fell out

     (d) He went up to see the manager

4. (linguistics) A part of speech which cannot be inflected: an adverb, preposition, conjunction or interjection.
   • 1844, E. A. Andrews: First Lessions in Latin; or Introduction to Andrews and Stoddard's Latin Grammar. (6th edition, Boston), p.91 (at books.google)

     322. The parts of speech which are neither declined nor conjugated, are called by the general name of particles. 323. They are adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, and interjections.

   • 1894 (2008), B. L. Gildersleeve & G. Lodge: Gildersleeve's Latin Grammar (reprint of the 3rd edition by Dover, 2008), p.9. (at books.google)

     The Parts of Speech are the Noun (Substantive and Adjective), the Pronoun, the Verb, and the Particles (Adverb, Preposition, and Conjunction)[.]

5. (Christianity) In the Roman Catholic church, a crumb of consecrated bread; also the smaller breads used in the communion of the laity.

Synonyms

• see Thesaurus:particle
• p-word

Hyponyms

Derived terms

• charged-particle
• multiparticle

Related terms

Translations

References

• particle on Wikipedia.Wikipedia

Anagrams

• crepital, preictal, prelatic

English

Etymology

From ergative +? -ity.

Pronunciation

• (UK) IPA^(key): /??(?)???t?v.?.ti/

Noun

ergativity (uncountable)

1. (linguistics) The property of a grammar's (or, by extension, a language's) being ergative; the attribute of possessing a grammatical pattern such that the object of a transitive verb is treated the same way as the subject of an intransitive one, while the subject of the transitive verb is treated differently.
   • 1991, Ronald W. Langacker, Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Descriptive Application, Volume 2, Stanford University Press, page 386,

     We can speak of ergative/absolutive organization whenever intransitive subjects pattern with transitive objects (to the exclusion of transitive subjects). So defined, ergativity is independent of case marking and has many linguistic manifestations, some being observable in any given language. At the same time, ergativity competes with accusativity even in languages where it represents the predominant pattern.

   • 1994, R. M. W. Dixon, Ergativity, Cambridge University Press, page 1,

     Ergativity is thus complementary to the familiar grammatical pattern of accusativity, in which one case (nominative) marks both intransitive and transitive subject, with another case (accusative) being employed for transitive object.

   • 2000, Javier Rivas, Ergativity and Transitive Gradients in the Accusative and Infinitive Construction, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Imprenta Universitaría, page 153,

     Apart from the types of split ergativity-accusativity dealt with in the previous section, there are languages which show degrees of ergativity in their morphology and also —although less frequently— in their syntax, […] . Actually, Dixon (1994: 172) claims that syntactic ergativity is much stranger cross-linguistically than some degree of morphological ergativity. […] There are many languages in the world which show some degree of ergativity.

Usage notes

• Writers distinguish between morphological and syntactic ergativity, based on how it is manifested. (In studied languages, syntactic ergativity has not been observed to exist in the absence of the morphological sort.) For more details, see Ergativity#Realization of ergativity on Wikipedia.Wikipedia

Coordinate terms

• accusativity

Translations

See also

• absolutive case
• accusativity
• ergative case

Further reading

• Ergative–absolutive language on Wikipedia.Wikipedia
• Nominative–accusative language on Wikipedia.Wikipedia
• Morphosyntactic alignment on Wikipedia.Wikipedia