Advances in Role and Reference Grammar

OF NOMINATIVES AND DATIVES 489

Djirbal Global Reference Maintenance in Linked Clauses (Switch Reference):

reference clause-functions
of NPs

formal features of inflection
relations

clause-functions

of NPs clause^1 clause^2

coref. A —A normal normal; NP^1 deleted, or
plain normal + -rjura; NP' deleted
coref. S/O —A plain normal; NP^1 deleted
coref. A —S/O plain plain + -rjura; (NP^1 deleted)
coref. S/O — S/O plain plain; NP' deleted
noncoref. NP —NP NO CLAUSAL CONJUNCTION WITH DELETION
Table 2

deletion of the coreferent nominal in the second of the linked clauses. For
switch reference purposes, underlying "S" function and underlying "O"
function are counted as "same," while underlying "A" function is counted
as "switch," the latter even if the coreference relationship between the
clauses preserves this "A" function! Thus, for coreferent NPs functionally
S/O — S/O, the two clauses in plain inflection are linked simply by dele­
tion of the second occurrence of the NPj leaving at most its class-marker.
For coreferent NPs functionally A — S/O, the two clauses in plain inflection
are linked by such deletion and the verbal inflection is replaced with a suffix
-rjura. For coreferent NPs functionally S/O — A, the two clauses are linked
by deletion, and the second clause is thrown into normal form, with a spe­
cial derivational voice suffix of antipassive, which then takes intransitive
inflectional desinences. For coreferent NPs functionally A — A, the two
clauses are linked by deletion, but a double transformation must take place:
either the second clause is thrown into normal form, with antipassive, plus
-rjura as a second change in the verb form; or, both clauses are thrown into
normal form, with antipassive. In the first such alternative, there is pro­
duced a derived coreference relationship A — S, then treated as such with
-rjura; in the second such alternative, there is produced a derived corefer­
ence relationship S — S, which is then in canonical form. The point to be
emphasized here is the role of the normal form of inflection as a more
severe deformation of the clause structure than any other transformational
change, starting with the second, linked clause, and, in the least valued
coreference type, occurring in both clauses.

Following upon this switch-reference type of loose linkage, for relative
clauses and higher up on our linkage hierarchy, including possessive con­
structions (the genitive is the same marker as the relative clause suffix on