GRAMMATICIZATION OF TOPIC INTO SUBJECT

This paper offers explicit formulations of the processes underlying the notion of the grammaticization of topics into subjects, which has been widely alluded to in the literature (Li & Thompson 1976, Givon 1979, Plank 1979, Mallinson & Blake 1981). The scope of our investigation covers several typological groups of languages. Because of the need to come to grips with the nature of a grammatical topic, we first look at Japanese. English represents those language in which the topic and subject functions have converged on an agentive nominal (of a transitive clause), whereas the deep ergative language Dyirbal represents those in which the two functions have largely converged on a patient nominal. In other words, English is an instance of those languages in which "the nominative marks a grammaticalized topic," and Dyirbal those in which "the absolutive represents a grammaticalized topic" (Mallinson & Blake 1981: 109). Philippine languages, on the one hand, offer a transition from those languages in whieh a topic is optional (e. g. Japanese) and those in which a topic is made an obligatory constituent of major clause types and has become a subject to a great extent; on the other hand, they bridge a gap between accusative languages and ergative languages. Philippine languages and ergative languages together form a group of languages that offer a challenge for an account on the rise of split syntax.
The present paper thus deals with the following problems: 1) definitions of the grammatical topic and of the grammatical subject, 2) clarification of the notion of topic-prominent vs. subject-prominent languages (Li & Thompson 1976), 3) explication of the status of the Philippine-style topic, and 4) explanation for the rise and nature of split syntax.