Micron Document
`:top
In `F33f`_`[linguistic typology`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Linguistic_typology]`_`f, `!active–stative alignment`! (also `!split intransitive alignment`! or `!semantic alignment`!) is a type of `F33f`_`[morphosyntactic alignment`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Morphosyntactic_alignment]`_`f in which the sole `F33f`_`[argument`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Verb_argument]`_`f ("subject") of an `F33f`_`[intransitive`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Intransitive_verb]`_`f clause (often symbolized as `*S`*) is sometimes marked in the same way as an `F33f`_`[agent`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Agent_(grammar)]`_`f of a `F33f`_`[transitive verb`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Transitive_verb]`_`f (that is, like a `F33f`_`[subject`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Subject_(grammar)]`_`f such as "I" or "she" in `F33f`_`[English`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=English_language]`_`f) but other times in the same way as a direct object (such as "me" or "her" in English). Languages with active–stative alignment are often called `*active languages`*.

The `F33f`_`[case`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Grammatical_case]`_`f or `F33f`_`[agreement`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Grammatical_agreement]`_`f of the intransitive argument (`*S`*) depends on semantic or lexical criteria particular to each language. The criteria tend to be based on the degree of `F33f`_`[volition`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Volition_(linguistics)]`_`f, or control over the verbal action exercised by the participant.

For example, if one tripped and fell, an active–stative language might require one to say the equivalent of "fell me." To say "I fell" would mean that the person had done it on purpose, such as taking a fall in boxing. Another possibility is empathy; for example, if someone's dog were run over by a car, one might say the equivalent of "died her." To say "she died" would imply that the person was not affected emotionally.

If the core arguments of a transitive clause are termed `*A`* (`F33f`_`[agent`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Agent_(grammar)]`_`f of a transitive verb) and `*P`* (`F33f`_`[patient`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Patient_(grammar)]`_`f of a transitive verb), active–stative languages can be described as languages that align intransitive `*S`* as `*S = P/O∗∗`* ("fell me") or `*S = A`* ("I fell"), depending on the criteria described above.

Active–stative languages contrast with `F33f`_`[accusative languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Accusative_language]`_`f such as English that generally align `*S`* as `*S = A`*, and with `F33f`_`[ergative languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Ergative_language]`_`f that generally align `*S`* as `*S = P/O`*. From this we can deduce that there are two types of `*S`* in Active languages. On the other hand, in Ergative languages some types of `*O/P`* can be `*O/P=A`*, and in this respect, we have to consider that there are also two types of `*O`* in Ergative languages. Active languages can be said to be a phenomenon at the intersection of these complex issues.

>>Contents

• `F0af`_`[Types`#types]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[Argument marking`#argument-marking]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[Terminology`#terminology]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[Occurrence`#occurrence]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[South American languages`#south-american-languages]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[Central America/Mesoamerican languages`#central-america-mesoamerican-languages]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[North American languages`#north-american-languages]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[South and Southeast Asia`#south-and-southeast-asia]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[Caucasus`#caucasus]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[Siberia`#siberia]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[Reconstructed proto-languages`#reconstructed-proto-languages]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[See also`#see-also]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[References`#references]`_`f
• `F0af`_`[Further reading`#further-reading]`_`f

-─

>>Types

For most such languages, the case of the intransitive argument is lexically fixed for each verb, regardless of the actual degree of volition of the subject, but often corresponding to the most typical situation. For example, the argument of `*swim`* may always be treated like the transitive subject (`F33f`_`[agent`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Agent_(grammar)]`_`f-like), and the argument of `*sleep`* like the transitive direct object (`F33f`_`[patient`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Patient_(grammar)]`_`f-like). In `F33f`_`[Dakota`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Dakota_language]`_`f, arguments of active verbs such as `*to run`* are marked like transitive agents, as in accusative languages, and arguments of inactive verbs such as `*to stand`* are marked like transitive objects, as in ergative languages. In such language, if the subject of a verb like `*run`* or `*swallow`* is defined as agentive, it will be always marked so even if the action of swallowing is involuntary. This subtype is sometimes known as `!split-S`!.

In other languages, the marking of the intransitive argument is decided by the speaker, based on semantic considerations. For any given intransitive verb, the speaker may choose whether to mark the argument as agentive or patientive. In some of these languages, agentive marking encodes a degree of `F33f`_`[volition`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Volition_(linguistics)]`_`f or control over the action, with the `F33f`_`[patientive`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Patient_(grammar)]`_`f used as the default case; in others, patientive marking encodes a lack of volition or control, suffering from or being otherwise affected by the action, or sympathy on the part of the speaker, with the agentive used as the default case. These two subtypes (`*patientive-default`* and `*agentive-default`*) are sometimes known as `!fluid-S`!.

>>Argument marking

If the language has `F33f`_`[morphological`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Morphology_(linguistics)]`_`f `F33f`_`[case`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Grammatical_case]`_`f, the arguments of a `F33f`_`[transitive verb`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Transitive_verb]`_`f are marked by using the agentive case for the subject and the patientive case for the object. The argument of an `F33f`_`[intransitive verb`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Intransitive_verb]`_`f may be marked as either.`:cite-ref-1[`F5bf`_`[1`#cite-note-1]`_`f]

Languages lacking case `F33f`_`[inflections`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Inflection]`_`f may indicate case by different `F33f`_`[word orders`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Word_order]`_`f, `F33f`_`[verb agreement`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Agreement_(linguistics)]`_`f, using `F33f`_`[adpositions`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Adposition]`_`f, etc. For example, the patientive argument might precede the `F33f`_`[verb`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Verb]`_`f, and the agentive argument might follow the verb.

Cross-linguistically, the agentive argument tends to be marked, and the patientive argument tends to be unmarked. That is, if one case is indicated by zero-inflection, it is often the patientive.

Additionally, active languages differ from ergative languages in how split case marking intersects with Silverstein's (1976) nominal hierarchy:

pronouns (1st>2nd>3rd person) > proper nouns > common nouns (human > animate > inanimate)

Specifically, ergative languages with split case marking are more likely to use ergative rather than accusative marking for NPs lower down the hierarchy (to the right), whereas active languages are more likely to use active marking for NPs higher up the hierarchy (to the left), like first and second person pronouns.`:cite-ref-2[`F5bf`_`[2`#cite-note-2]`_`f] Dixon states that "In active languages, if active marking applies to an NP type a, it applies to every NP type to the left of a on the nominal hierarchy."

>>Terminology

Active languages are a relatively new field of study. Active `F33f`_`[morphosyntactic alignment`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Morphosyntactic_alignment]`_`f used to be not recognized as such, and it was treated mostly as an interesting deviation from the standard alternatives (nominative–accusative and ergative–absolutive). Also, active languages are few and often show complications and special cases ("pure" active alignment is an ideal).`:cite-ref-3[`F5bf`_`[3`#cite-note-3]`_`f]

Thus, the terminology used is rather flexible. The morphosyntactic alignment of active languages is also termed `*active–stative alignment`* or `*semantic alignment`*. The terms `F33f`_`[agentive case`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Agent_(grammar)]`_`f and `F33f`_`[patientive case`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Patient_(grammar)]`_`f used above are sometimes replaced by the terms `*active`* and `*inactive`*.

>>Occurrence

(†) = extinct language

>>>South American languages

• `F33f`_`[Northern Jê languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Jê_languages]`_`f (split-S in finite clauses, central and north-eastern Brazil), including:

• `F33f`_`[Apinayé`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Apinayé_language]`_`f (Oliveira 2003)
• `F33f`_`[Timbira language`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Timbira_language]`_`f continuum (Castro Alves 2010)

• `F33f`_`[Tupi–Guarani languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Tupi–Guarani_languages]`_`f (Brazil, Bolivia, French Guiana, Paraguay, Peru), including:

• †`F33f`_`[Old Tupi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Tupi_language]`_`f and †Tupinambá (fluid-S)
• `F33f`_`[Sirionó`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Sirionó_language]`_`f (eastern Bolivia)
• `F33f`_`[Kamayurá`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Kamayurá_language]`_`f (split-S, Brazil)
• `F33f`_`[Guaraní`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Guaraní_language]`_`f (split-S, with a few verbs allowing fluid-S marking,`:cite-ref-4[`F5bf`_`[4`#cite-note-4]`_`f] Paraguay)

• Many `F33f`_`[Arawakan languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Arawakan_languages]`_`f, including:

• `F33f`_`[Waurá`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Waurá_language]`_`f (split-S, spoken in Brazil)
• `F33f`_`[Baniwa`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Baniwa_of_Içana]`_`f do Içana (fluid-S; upper Rio Negro, Brazil)
• Lokono

>>>Central America/Mesoamerican languages

• In Mexico: `F33f`_`[Chocho`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Chocho_language]`_`f and `F33f`_`[Amuzgo`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Amuzgo]`_`f are active languages of the split-S type, with some verbs showing fluid-S alignment; Chol (Mayan) is Split-S
• In Panama & Colombia: `F33f`_`[Chibchan`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Chibchan_languages]`_`f language Ikan (split-S)

>>>North American languages

• In the south and south-east US

• `F33f`_`[Gulf languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Gulf_languages]`_`f

• `F33f`_`[Muskogee`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Muscogee_language]`_`f (also known as Creek)
• `F33f`_`[Hichiti`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Hichiti_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Koasati`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Koasati_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Choctaw`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Choctaw_language]`_`f (fluid-S on verbs and accusative marking on nouns)
• A subgroup of Muskogean languages such as `F33f`_`[Chickasaw`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Chickasaw_language]`_`f (In South Central Oklahoma)

• `F33f`_`[Euchee`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Yuchi]`_`f (Yuchi) (in northeastern Oklahoma, historically in Tennessee)
• `F33f`_`[Tunica`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Tunica_language]`_`f (†) (or Tonica) a `F33f`_`[language isolate`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Language_isolate]`_`f

• In the central US

• `F33f`_`[Siouan languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Siouan_languages]`_`f (including `F33f`_`[Proto-Siouan`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Proto-Siouan]`_`f)

• `F33f`_`[Omaha`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Omaha_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Biloxi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Biloxi_language]`_`f (†)
• `F33f`_`[Ofo`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Ofo_language]`_`f (†)
• `F33f`_`[Osage`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Osage_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Winnebago`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Winnebago_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Crow`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Crow_language]`_`f (fluid-S)
• `F33f`_`[Ioway`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Ioway_language]`_`f (split-S)
• `F33f`_`[Hidatsa`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Hidatsa_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Dakota`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Dakota_language]`_`f (split-S)
• `F33f`_`[Ponca`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Ponca_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Tutelo`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Tutelo_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Assiniboine`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Assiniboine_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Mandan`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Mandan_language]`_`f (split-S)
• `F33f`_`[Lakhota`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Lakota_language]`_`f (split-S)

• In the Great Plains (east of the Rocky Mountains in the United States and Canada)

• `F33f`_`[Caddoan languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Caddoan_languages]`_`f

• `F33f`_`[Caddo`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Caddo_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Wichita`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Wichita_language]`_`f (ergative, accusative and S-split mixed type) (†)
• `F33f`_`[Kitsai`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Kitsai_language]`_`f (also known as Kichai) (†)
• `F33f`_`[Arikara`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Arikara_language]`_`f (Split-S; also known as Ree)
• `F33f`_`[Pawnee`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Pawnee_language]`_`f

• In Eastern North America

• Iroquoian languages

• `F33f`_`[Mohawk`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Mohawk_language]`_`f (Ontario, Quebec and northern New York)
• `F33f`_`[Seneca`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Seneca_language]`_`f (Split-S; Western New York and the Six Nations Reserve, Ontario)
• `F33f`_`[Huron`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Huron_language]`_`f (called also as Wyandot, spoken in northeastern Oklahoma, Quebec)
• `F33f`_`[Oneida`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Oneida_language]`_`f (spoken in Six Nations Reserve, Ontario; central New York and around Green Bay, Wisconsin)
• `F33f`_`[Onondaga`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Onondaga_language]`_`f (Split-S type, spoken in Six Nations Reserve, Ontario, and western New York)
• `F33f`_`[Susquehannock`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Susquehannock_language]`_`f (†)
• `F33f`_`[Cayuga`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Cayuga_language]`_`f (spoken on Six Nations of the Grand River First Nation, Ontario, by around 100 people)
• `F33f`_`[Tuscarora`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Tuscarora_language]`_`f (southern Ontario, Tuscarora Reservation in northwestern New York, and eastern North Carolina)
• `F33f`_`[Nottoway`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Nottoway_language]`_`f (Virginia) (†)
• `F33f`_`[Cherokee`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Cherokee_language]`_`f (Oklahoma, North Carolina)

• Western North America (in Canada, Alaska, Southern Rocky Mountains, Pacific shore of the US including California)

• `F33f`_`[Na-dene languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Na-Dene_languages]`_`f

• `F33f`_`[Haida`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Haida_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Tlingit`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Tlingit_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Eyak`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Eyak_language]`_`f († since 2008)
• `F33f`_`[Slave`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Slavey_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Chiracahua Apache`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Chiricahua_Apache_language]`_`f

• `F33f`_`[Pomoan languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Pomoan_languages]`_`f

• `F33f`_`[Eastern Pomo`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Eastern_Pomo_language]`_`f (fluid-S, Northern California)
• `F33f`_`[Central Pomo`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Central_Pomo_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Northern Pomo`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Northern_Pomo_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Southeastern Pomo`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Southeastern_Pomo_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Kashaya`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Kashaya_language]`_`f

>>>South and Southeast Asia

• Austronesian languages

• `F33f`_`[Acehnese`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Acehnese_language]`_`f (spoken in `F33f`_`[Aceh`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Aceh]`_`f, Indonesia and `F33f`_`[Perak`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Perak]`_`f, Malaysia) is of fluid-S type
• `F33f`_`[Kuanua`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Kuanua]`_`f (spoken by the `F33f`_`[Tolai`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Tolai_people]`_`f on the island of `F33f`_`[New Britain`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=New_Britain]`_`f) is of a split-S type
• many active languages of Central branch of this family are spoken in Eastern Indonesia

• `F33f`_`[Papuan languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Papuan_languages]`_`f: `F33f`_`[Yawa`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Yawa_languages]`_`f (Split-S)
• `F33f`_`[Tibeto-Burman languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Tibeto-Burman_languages]`_`f: spoken Tibetan (fluid-S)

>>>Caucasus

• `F33f`_`[Georgian`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Georgian_language]`_`f (spoken in the Caucasian nation of `F33f`_`[Georgia`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Georgia_(country)]`_`f): generally considered a `F33f`_`[split ergative language`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Split_ergativity]`_`f,`:cite-ref-5[`F5bf`_`[5`#cite-note-5]`_`f] but `F33f`_`[Alice Harris`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Alice_Harris_(linguist)]`_`f has claimed that it shows active alignment in some verb paradigms (namely, that the ergative marker appears to apply to active-intransitive verbs; also stative experiencers take a different case marking and agreement pattern). However, even that is complicated by the existence of apparently-inactive intransitive verbs taking such marking, such as the verb meaning 'to boil'. Other `F33f`_`[Kartvelian languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Kartvelian_languages]`_`f such `F33f`_`[Laz`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Laz_language]`_`f, `F33f`_`[Svan`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Svan_language]`_`f, and `F33f`_`[Old Georgian`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Old_Georgian]`_`f show similar systems, while the position of `F33f`_`[Mingrelian`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Mingrelian_language]`_`f is more controversial.
• `F33f`_`[Northeast Caucasian languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Northeast_Caucasian_languages]`_`f: `F33f`_`[Tsova-Tush`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Bats_language]`_`f: according to Holisky (1987), there are 31 intransitive verbs for which the argument is always marked as patientive and refer to uncontrollable states ("be hungry", "tremble", etc.), and 78 intransitive verbs with an agentive argument ("walk", "talk", "think"). They form a split-S subset of the verbs. The rest of the verbs form a fluid-S system; for instance, a single verb root can be interpreted as "slip" when it is used with a patientive argument and as "slide" with an agentive argument.
• `F33f`_`[Tabasaran`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Tabasaran_language]`_`f

>>>Siberia

• `F33f`_`[Ket`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Ket_language]`_`f, a `F33f`_`[Yeniseian`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Yeniseian_languages]`_`f language (split-S)
• `F33f`_`[Yukaghir languages`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Yukaghir_languages]`_`f (fluid-S, based on `F33f`_`[focus`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Focus_(linguistics)]`_`f and discourse-pragmatic factors)`:cite-ref-6[`F5bf`_`[6`#cite-note-6]`_`f]

>>>Reconstructed proto-languages

According to Castro Alves (2010), a split-S alignment can be safely reconstructed for Proto-Northern Jê finite clauses. Clauses headed by a non-finite verb, on the contrary, would have been aligned `F33f`_`[ergatively`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Ergative–absolutive_language]`_`f in this reconstructed language.

The reconstructed `F33f`_`[Pre-Proto-Indo-European`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Pre-Proto-Indo-European]`_`f language,`:cite-ref-7[`F5bf`_`[7`#cite-note-7]`_`f] not to be confused with the `F33f`_`[Proto-Indo-European language`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Proto-Indo-European_language]`_`f, its direct descendant, shows many features known to correlate with active alignment like the animate vs. inanimate distinction, related to the distinction between active and inactive or stative verb arguments. Even in its descendant languages, there are traces of a morphological split between volitional and nonvolitional verbs, such as a pattern in verbs of perception and cognition where the argument takes an oblique case (called `F33f`_`[quirky subject`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Quirky_subject]`_`f), a relic of which can be seen in `F33f`_`[Middle English`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Middle_English_language]`_`f `*methinks`* or in the distinction between `*see`* vs. `*look`* or `*hear`* vs. `*listen`*. Other possible relics from a structure, in descendant languages of Indo-European, include conceptualization of possession and extensive use of particles.

>>See also

• `F33f`_`[Ambitransitive verb`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Ambitransitive_verb]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Case`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Grammatical_case]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Diathesis alternation`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Diathesis_alternation]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Ergative-absolutive language`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Ergative-absolutive_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Labile verb`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Labile_verb]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Morphosyntactic alignment`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Morphosyntactic_alignment]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Nominative-absolutive language`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Marked_nominative]`_`f (Marked nominative alignment)
• `F33f`_`[Nominative-accusative language`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Nominative-accusative_language]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Unaccusative verb`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Unaccusative_verb]`_`f
• `F33f`_`[Unergative verb`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Unergative_verb]`_`f

>>References

`:cite-note-1`!1.`! `F0af`_`[↑`#cite-ref-1]`_`f Legate, J. A. (2008). Morphological and abstract case. `*Linguistic Inquiry, 39`*(1), 55-101. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1162/ling.2008.39.1.55
`:cite-note-2`!2.`! `F0af`_`[↑`#cite-ref-2]`_`f `:citerefyanagidawhitman2009`aYanagida, Yuko; Whitman, John (2009). "Alignment and Word Order in Old Japanese". `*Journal of East Asian Linguistics`*. `!18`! (2): 101–144. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1007/s10831-009-9043-2. `F33f`_`[JSTOR`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=JSTOR_(identifier)]`_`f 40345246. `F33f`_`[S2CID`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=S2CID_(identifier)]`_`f 121032669.
`:cite-note-3`!3.`! `F0af`_`[↑`#cite-ref-3]`_`f Nichols, J. (1993). Ergativity and linguistic geography. `*Australian Journal of Linguistics, 13`*(1), 39-89. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1080/07268609308599489
`:cite-note-4`!4.`! `F0af`_`[↑`#cite-ref-4]`_`f `:citerefmithun1991`aMithun, Marianne (1991). "Active/agentive Case Marking and Its Motivations". `*Language`*. `!67`! (3): 510–546. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1353/lan.1991.0015. `F33f`_`[S2CID`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=S2CID_(identifier)]`_`f 144965886.
`:cite-note-5`!5.`! `F0af`_`[↑`#cite-ref-5]`_`f Nash, L. (2017). The structural source of split ergativity and ergative case in georgian. In L. D. Travis, D. Massam & J. Coon (Eds.), (1st ed., ) Oxford University Press. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198739371.013.8
`:cite-note-6`!6.`! `F0af`_`[↑`#cite-ref-6]`_`f `:citerefzamaraevabender`aZamaraeva, Olga; Bender, Emily M. "Focus Case outside of Austronesian: An Analysis of Yukaghir" (PDF). `*acsu.buffalo.edu`*. Retrieved 4 January 2025.
`:cite-note-7`!7.`! `F0af`_`[↑`#cite-ref-7]`_`f `:citereflehmann2002`aLehmann, Winfred P. (2002). `*Pre-Indo-European/Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph 41`*. Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Study of Man.

• `:citerefandr-asson`aAndréasson, Daniel. `*Active languages`* (PDF) (BA thesis). Stockholm University. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-03-02.
• `:citerefbauer2000`aBauer, Brigitte (2000). `*Archaic Syntax in Indo- European: The Spread of Transitivity in Latin and French`*. Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs. Vol. 125. de Gruyter. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1515/9783110825992. `F33f`_`[ISBN`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=ISBN_(identifier)]`_`f 978-3-11-016723-8.
• `:citerefblake1994`aBlake, Barry J. (1994). "Survey of Case Marking". `*Case`*. Cambridge University Press. pp. 118–160. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1017/CBO9781139164894.007. `F33f`_`[ISBN`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=ISBN_(identifier)]`_`f 978-0-521-80761-6.
• `:citerefbenveniste1971`aBenveniste, Emile (1971). `*Origines de la Formations des Noms en Indoeuropéen`*. Paris: Adrien- Maissonneuve. pp. 171–172.
• `:citerefcunha-de-oliveira2003`aCunha de Oliveira, Christiane (2003). "Lexical categories and descriptives in Apinajé". `*International Journal of American Linguistics`*. `!69`!: 243–274. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1086/381336. `F33f`_`[S2CID`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=S2CID_(identifier)]`_`f 224805397.
• `:citerefde-castro-alves2010`ade Castro Alves, Flávia (2010). "Evolution of Alignment in Timbira". `*International Journal of American Linguistics`*. `!76`! (4): 439–475. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1086/658054. `F33f`_`[S2CID`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=S2CID_(identifier)]`_`f 224806935.
• `:citerefdixon1979`aDixon, R. M. W. (1979). "Ergativity". `*Language`*. `!55`! (1): 59–138. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.2307/412519. `F33f`_`[JSTOR`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=JSTOR_(identifier)]`_`f 412519.
• `:citerefdixon1994`aDixon, R. M. W. (1994). `*Ergativity`*. Cambridge University Press. `F33f`_`[ISBN`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=ISBN_(identifier)]`_`f 0-521-44898-0.
• `:citerefdonohuewichmann2005`aDonohue, Mark; Wichmann, Søren, eds. (2005). `*The Typology of Semantic Alignment`*. Oxford: Oxford University Press. `F33f`_`[ISBN`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=ISBN_(identifier)]`_`f 9780199238385.
• `:citerefgamkrelidzeivanov1995`aGamkrelidze, Thomas V.; Ivanov, Vjačeslav V. (1995) [1984]. "Proto-Indo European as a Language of the Active Type". `*Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans`*. Translated by Nichols, Johanna. Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 233–276. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1515/9783110815030.1.233.
• `:citerefgamkrelidzeivanov1995`aGamkrelidze, Thomas V.; Ivanov, Vjačeslav V. (1995) [1984]. "The grammatical syntagmatics of Proto-Indo European in typological perspective". `*Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans`*. Translated by Nichols, Johanna. Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 277–324. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1515/9783110815030.1.277.
• `:citerefgante2007`aGante, Christiane (2007). `*Objektkasus im Indogermanischen`* (Magisterarbeit thesis). Universität Hamburg.

• `:citerefgante2008`aGante, Christiane (2008). `*Objektkasus im Indogermanischen`*. Grin Verlag. `F33f`_`[ISBN`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=ISBN_(identifier)]`_`f 978-3-640-18143-8.

• `:citerefhaas1946`aHaas, Mary R. (1946). "A grammatical Sketch of Tunica". In Hoijer, Harry (ed.). `*Linguistic Structures of Native America`*. New York: Viking. pp. 337–366.
• `:citerefharris1981`aHarris, Alice (1981). `*Georgian syntax: a study in relational grammar`*. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics. Cambridge University Press. `F33f`_`[ISBN`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=ISBN_(identifier)]`_`f 978-0-521-10971-0.
• `:citerefharris1985`aHarris, Alice C. (1985). `*Diachronic syntax: the Kartvelian case`*. Orlando: Academic Press. `F33f`_`[ISBN`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=ISBN_(identifier)]`_`f 978-0-12-613518-3.
• `:citerefhoijer1946`aHoijer, Harry (1946). "Charicahua Apache". In Hoijer, Harry; Osgood, Cornelius (eds.). `*Linguistic Structures of Native America`*. New York: Viking. pp. 55–84. `F33f`_`[LCCN`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=LCCN_(identifier)]`_`f 46007600.
• `:citerefholisky1987`aHolisky, Dee Ann (1987). "The case of the intransitive subject in Tsova-Tush (Batsbi)". `*`F33f`_`[Lingua`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Lingua_(journal)]`_`f`*. `!71`! (1–4): 103–32. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1016/0024-3841(87)90069-6.
• `:citerefiliev2007`aIliev, Ivan G. (2007). `*Case and Vocativeness`* (in Russian and English). Plovdiv: Pygmalion. `F33f`_`[ISBN`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=ISBN_(identifier)]`_`f 978-954-9402-19-3.
• `:citerefivanova2008`aIvanova, Natalia (2008). `*Impersonal Constructions as a Residue of an Active Language`* (Magisterarbeit). University of Hamburg.
• `:citerefklimov1973`aKlimov, Georgij A. (1973). `*Očerk obščej teorii ergativnosti`* Очерк общей теории эргативности [`*Outline of a general theory of ergativity`*]. Moscow: Nauka.
• `:citerefklimov1974`aKlimov, Georgij A. (1974). "On the Character of Languages of Active Typology". `*Linguistics`*. `!12`! (131): 11–25. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.1515/ling.1974.12.131.11. `F33f`_`[S2CID`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=S2CID_(identifier)]`_`f 144143087.
• `:citerefklimov1977`aKlimov, Georgij A. (1977). `*Tipologija Jazykov Aktivnogo Stroja`* Типология Языков Активного Строя [`*Typology of Active Languages`*]. Moscow: Nauka.
• `:citerefklimov1983`aKlimov, Georgij A. (1983). `*Principy kontensivnoj tipologii`* Принципы контенсивной типологии [`*On Contentive Typology`*]. Moscow: Nauka.
• `:citereflangemann2004`aLangemann, Katrin (2004). `*Morphologie und Syntax der Nominativ- und Akkusativkasus im Indogermanischen`* (Magisterarbeit). Universität Hamburg.
• `:citereflehmann2002`aLehmann, Winfred P. (2002). `*Pre-Indo-European`*. Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph. Vol. 41. `F33f`_`[ISBN`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=ISBN_(identifier)]`_`f 978-0-941694-82-7. `F33f`_`[LCCN`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=LCCN_(identifier)]`_`f 2002102266.
• `:citereflehmann1995`aLehmann, Winfred P. (1995). `*Residues of Pre-Indo-European Active Structure and their Implications for the Relationships among the Dialects`*. Innsbruck.`B100`F9d9{{cite book}}`f`b: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• `:citereflehmann1993`aLehmann, Winfred P. (1993). `*Theoretical Bases of Indo-European Linguistics`*. London: Routledge.
• `:citerefmithun1991`aMithun, Marianne (1991). "Active/agentive case marking and its motivation". `*Language`*. `!67`! (3): 510–546. `F33f`_`[doi`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=Doi_(identifier)]`_`f:10.2307/415036. `F33f`_`[JSTOR`:/page/wikibook/entry.mu`zim=wikipedia_en_all_nopic_2025-08.zim|entry_path=JSTOR_(identifier)]`_`f 415036.
• `:citerefseki1990`aSeki, Lucy (1990). "Kamaiurá (Tupí-Guaraní) as an active–stative language". In Payne, Doris L. (ed.). `*Amazonian linguistics: Studies in lowland South American languages`*. Austin: University of Texas Press. pp. 367–391.
• Suda, Junichi (2025). “`*The`* `*Late-Klimov Model`* for Typological Classification of Active, Ergative, and Nominative Languages ― Re-evaluation of `*the Five Macroroles Model`*, et al.”. `*Typological Studies`* 7: 83–109.

>>Further reading

• Bentley, D. (2011) `*Split intransitivity in Italian`*. De Gruyter Mouton.

`c`F0af`_`[↑ Back to top`#top]`_`f`a