While case is the most widely known feature of morphosyntactic alignment (as much as that is known), it is by far not the only one. Word order, verb agreement, and syntactic pivot also get discussed in reference to morphosyntactic alignment, and so do the syntactic roles and (particularly marked) grammatical voices, though not to their full extent. This may seem like morphosyntactic alignment is in fact mostly covered, but there are yet broad gaps that go unmentioned (both the gaps themselves and what lies within them), and what is discussed, is often limited to more common or otherwise popular alignments, and very rarely are the stranger, less-grounded in known, established reality, alignments given any attention at all beyond the very surface, which is a bane to more experimental conlangers, or people who just want to know everything about a particular subject.
As the author here has certainly spent at least several hours thinking on this topic, hopefully this comparatively small segment complete with explanations and examples will be comprehensible as well as of use to others, who have presumably not thought about this topic nearly as much, and perhaps it will finally cease haunting him, without even the decency to at least pay rent.
Disclaimer: The Kaethonry is not a linguist—It is merely an enthusiast. As such, some terminology used or usage of already well-established terminology or explanations of either may be idiosyncratic or even "rough", but hopefully not incorrect or too difficult to understand.
I think your translator may be malfunctioning.
Morphosyntactic alignment describes how a language may treat the following:
And, sometimes, even:
There are five "basic" (primary) morphosyntactic alignments used to varying extent among Terra's natural languages, deemed as such due to their relative straightforwardness in explanation rather than how common or even how practical they may be. There are a few beyond this that are known to exist in natural languages, and yet others that can be conceptualised despite no attestation in any form except for maybe in some obscure constructed language.
Although it is not the focus of this page, there also (secondary) morphosyntactic alignments which describe how a language treats the two arguments of a monotransitive verb in comparison to how it treats the three arguments of a ditransitive verb.
Verb: A word that indicates what is happening in relation to any participant or participants. (Or, as you might know from primary school: An "action" word—Though, it's perhaps really a bit more complicated than that, but what isn't?)
Argument: The participant(s) which can be slotted into a particular position of a verb. (Ex. "The cat and the dog sleep" has one argument, despite having two participants, as they are both doing the one thing that the verb "[to] sleep" indicates. However, "The dog chases the cat" has two arguments—The dog who is chasing, and the cat who is being chased.)
Intransitive: A verb which has only one argument. (Ex. "The cat and the dog sleep", which cannot be "*The cat sleeps the dog" or anything similar.)
Transitive: A verb which has multiple arguments. "Monotransitive", for verbs with two arguments (ex. "The dog chases the cat"), having the one extra argument required to graduate beyond intransitivity, here assumed to be the default for transitive verbs, and "ditransitive" for verbs with three arguments (ex. "I gave the cat a fish"), and "tritransitive" if you feel like being spicy (ex. [ERROR: PREDICATE NOT FOUND]).
Ambitransitive: A verb that can have multiple arguments or only one, without doing anything special to it. (Ex. "The cat eats the fish" can just be "The cat eats", or "The dog breaks the window", which can become "The window breaks".)
Valency: A verb's valency is how many arguments the verb can take. Intransitive=Monovalent, Monotransitive=Divalent (or bivalent), Ditransitive=Trivalent, Tritransitive=Quadrivalent (or tetravalent), &c.
To help demonstrate the various aspects of the various morphosyntactic alignments, the dialect of Examplese known as Poftan (meaning "simple [type of] language") will here be employed, in addition to English or „English” examples. Its lexicon will be meted out as one progresses through this page as needed, or it can be found on its dedicated page.
This is the purely theoretical base which underlies each and every of the other aspects of morphosyntactic alignment. As such, this aspect has no tangible or independent features, manifesting only through the others.
S = Sole argument of an intransitive verb
A = Agent-like argument of a transitive verb
P = Patient-like argument of a transitive verb
D = Agent-like sole argument of an intransitive verb ("Doer")
E = Patient-like sole argument of an intransitive verb ("Experiencer")
X = Oblique (non-core) argument
S = Subject = The sole argument of an intransitive verb, and whichever argument of a transitive verb is identified with it
O = Object = The argument(s) of a transitive verb which is not identified with the intransitive argument
Note: "P" is often automatically conflated with "O", but this is not necessarily the best practice for each language.
Nominative–Accusative: S=A→S≠P→O | The prototypically more agent-like argument of a transitive verb is treated the same as the the subject of an intransitive verb, making it the subject of a transitive verb and leaving the prototypically more patient-like argument as the object of the verb.
Ergative–Absolutive: S=P→S≠A→O | The prototypically more patient-like argument of a transitive verb is treated the same as the subject of an intransitive verb, making it the subject of a transitive verb and leaving the prototypically more agent-like argument as the object of the verb.
Tripartite: S→S≠A→Oa≠P→Op | Neither the prototypically more agent-like argument of a transitive verb nor the prototypically more patient-like argument are treated the same as the subject of an intransitive verb, leaving them both with equal claim to being the object of the verb—However, they cannot simply both be declared the object, at least not without any further specification, as they are still distinguished from eachother.
Transitive–Intransitive: S→S≠A=P→O | Neither the prototypically more agent-like argument nor the prototypically more patient-like argument of a transitive verb are treated the same as the subject of an intransitive verb—Instead, they are treated the same as eachother, leaving them both as objects of the verb.
Direct (Neutral): S=A=P→S | Both the prototypically more agent-like and the prototypically more patient-like arguments of a transitive verb are treated the same as the subject, and, naturally, the same as eachother. None of these are an object of the verb.
One of the ways that morphosyntactic alignment can reveal itself is by where it places an argument in relation to the verb. Some-to-many languages will place the verb before or after all three types of arguments concerned here, but for the sake of this, the verb will be placed between arguments when it is maximally useful in order to better show off a given alignment. For these examples, it will also be assumed that the subject wants to be in front of the verb.
køna ↔ person
myræ ↔ cat
siku ↔ mouse
vrun ↔ sleep
yan ↔ eat
e ↔ and
Verbs will be static, unchanging in form (no "sleep" vs. "sleeps"), and no articles (the, a/an) will be used in Poftan.
SV + AVP → SV(O)
The prototypical agent (cat) of a transitive verb (eat) is placed before the verb, as is the subject (person) of an intransitive verb (sleep), while the prototypical patient (mouse) is placed after the verb.
English: The person sleeps and the cat eats the mouse.
Poftan: Køna vrun e myræ yan siku.
SV + PVA → SV(O)
The prototypical patient (mouse) of a transitive verb (eat) is placed before the verb, as is the subject (person) of an intransitive verb (sleep), while the prototypical agent (cat) is placed after the verb.
„English”: The person sleeps and the mouse eats the cat.
Poftan: Køna vrun e siku yan myræ.
Note that, despite how it may look, the cat is still the one eating and the mouse is still the one being eaten. Nothing abnormal happening here!
SV + VAP → [S{V]OaOp} (Nom–Acc leaning) | SV + VPA → [S{V]OpOa} (Erg-Abs leaning)
The prototypical agent (cat) and the prototypical patient (mouse) are both placed after the transitive verb (eat), contrasting with the subject (person) of the intransitive verb (sleep), which is placed before the verb. The order of the agent and the patient is consistent, allowing them to be distinguished on the basis of word order. This example will have the agent go first, for the slight increase in familiarity compared to having the patient go first.
„English”: The person sleeps and eats the cat the mouse.
Poftan: Køna vrun e yan myræ siku
Be careful to not confuse this for having an omitted subject in the latter verb! The person is not involved in the eating in any way—Not that I'm sure what "The person eats the cat the mouse" would mean, besides maybe using "eat" to mean "feed", I suppose. Regardless, the person is not feeding anyone nor eating anything, as they are safely sound asleep and are on schedule to experience sleep paralysis in about 4-6 minutes.
SV + VAPPA → [S{V]OO}
The prototypical agent (cat) and the prototypical patient (mouse) are both placed after the transitive verb (eat), contrasting with the subject (person) of the intransitive verb (sleep), which is placed before the verb. The order of the agent and the patient is irrelevent and arbitrary, as they are not distinguished from one another, instead obligatorily using context for any possible differentiation. For the sake of balance, the patient will go first, but syntactically it makes no difference either way.
„English”: The person sleeps and eats the mouse the cat
Poftan: Køna vrun e yan siku myræ.
Again, take care to not mistake this for having an omitted subject; the person still has approximately two or three minutes away until their appointment. Also note that yan siku myræ and yan myræ siku both mean the same thing—That both the cat and the mouse are participants of the eating, without any specification as to who is taking which role. Fortunately in this case, it can generally be assumed that the mouse is being eaten by the cat and not the other way around.
SV + APPAV → S(S)V
The prototypical agent (cat) and the prototypical patient (mouse) are both placed before the transitive verb (eat), as is the subject (person) of the intransitive verb (sleep). The order of the agent and the patient is irrelevent and arbitrary, as they are not distinguished from one another, instead obligatorily using context for any possible differentiation.
„English”: The person sleeps and the cat the mouse eats.
Poftan: Køna vrun e myræ siku yan.
As with Transitive–Intransitive alignment, there is no differentiation in meaning between myræ siku yan and siku myræ yan.
[TBA]
-r (pronouns), -d (nouns) ↔ -(e)m [Accusative (Patient) Marker]
-p ↔ -(e)k [Ergative (Agent) Marker]
-n ↔ -(e)m [Duative (Transitive Participant) Marker]
Note: -(em) is being reused because it works well enough for English, but for Poftan, it works better for all the markers to be unique, as it does not have a default.
The transitive agent (cat, he) and the intransitive subject (person, they) are unmarked in the nominative case, while the transitive patient (mouse, her) is marked with the accusative case.
English: They sleep and he eats her.
„English”: The person sleeps and the cat eats the mousem.
Poftan: Køna vrun e myræ yan sikud.
The transitive patient (mouse, she) and the intransitive subject (person, they) are unmarked in the absolutive case, while the transitive agent (cat, hik) is marked with the ergative case.
„English”: They sleep and hik eats she.
„English”: The person sleeps and the cattek eats the mouse.
Poftan: Køna vrun e myræp yan siku.
The intransitive subject (person, they) is unmarked in the intransitive case, while the transitive agent (cat, hik) is marked with the ergative case and the transitive patient (mouse, her) is marked with the accusative case.
„English”: They sleep and hik eats her.
„English”: The person sleeps and the cattek eats the mousem.
Poftan: Køna vrun e myræp yan sikud.
The intransitive subject (person, they) is unmarked in the intransitive case, while the transitive agent (cat, him) and transitive patient (mouse, her) are marked with the transitive case.
„English”: They sleep and him eats her.
„English”: The person sleeps and the cattem eats the mousem.
Poftan: Køna vrun e myræn yan sikun
The intransitive subject (person, they), transitive agent (cat, he), and transitive patient (mouse, she) are all unmarked in the direct case.
„English”: They sleep and he eats she
English: The person sleeps and the cat eats the mouse.
Poftan: Køna vrun e myræ yan siku.
TBA
ko ↔ I [First Person Singular Pronoun]
kor ↔ me
nisjt ↔ bite
-at ↔ [First Person Agent Verb Marker]
-ir ↔ [Third Person Agent Verb Marker]
-om ↔ [First Person Patient Verb Marker]
-un ↔ [Third Person Patient Verb Marker]
The verb agrees with the intransitive subject (I) or transitive agent (cat), ignoring the transitive patient (me).
English: I sleep and the cat bites me. The cat yowls.
Poftan: Ko vrunat e myræ nisjtir kor. Myræ wærir.
„English”: I sleep and the cat bite me. The cat yowls.
Poftan: Ko vrunom e myræ nisjtom kor. Myræ wærun.
„English”:
Poftan: Ko vrunyh e myræ nisjtirom kor. Myræ wærøs.
„English”:
Poftan:
„English”:
Poftan:
English: The cat yowls and licks the person. The cat eats the mouse and the mouse dies. The person wakes up and yawns. The person sees the cat and hits the cat. The cat bites the person and the person throws the cat. The person hits themself.
Poftan: Myræ wær e friv køna. Myræ yan siku e siku þan. Køna abvrun e haf. Køna kes myræ e pik myræ. Myræ nisjt køna e køna brag myræ. Køna pik fai.
„English”: The cat yowls and the cat licks the person. The cat eats the mouse and dies. The person wakes up and yawns. The person sees the cat and the person hits. The cat bites the person and the person throws the cat. The person hits themself.
Poftan: Myræ wær e myræ friv køna. Myræ yan siku e þan. Køna abvrun e haf. Køna kes myræ e køna pik. Myræ nisjt køna e køna brag myræ. Køna pik fai.
„English”: The cat yowls and the cat licks the person. The cat eats the mouse and the mouse dies. The person wakes up and yawns. The person sees the cat and hits. The cat bites the person and the person throws the cat. The person hits themself.
Poftan: Myræ wær e myræ friv køna. Myræ yan siku e siku þan. Køna abvrun e haf. Køna kes myræ e pik. Myræ nisjt køna e køna brag myræ. Køna pik fai.
„English”: The cat yowls and the cat licks the person. The cat eats the mouse and the mouse dies. The person wakes up and yawns. The person sees the cat and hits. The cat bites the person and throws. The person hits.
Poftan: Myræ wær e myræ friv køna. Myræ yan siku e siku þan. Køna abvrun e haf. Køna kes myræ e pik. Myræ nisjt køna e brag. Køna pik.
„English”: The cat yowls and licks the person. The cat eats the mouse and dies. The person wakes up and yawns. The person sees the cat and hits. The cat bites the person and throws. The person hits.
Poftan: Myræ wær e friv køna. Myræ yan siku e þan. Køna abvrun e haf. Køna kes myræ e pik. Myræ nisjt køna e brag. Køna pik.
„English”:
Poftan:
„English”:
Poftan:
„English”:
Poftan:
„English”:
Poftan:
„English”:
Poftan:
„English”:
Poftan:
„English”:
Poftan:
„English”:
Poftan:
„English”:
Poftan:
„English”:
Poftan:
This is a paragraph! Here's how you make a link: Neocities.
Here's how you can make bold and italic text.
Here's how you can add an image:
Here's how to make a list:
To learn more HTML/CSS, check out these tutorials!