Features

The gloss of a pronominal index is composed as follows:

• If L1 has more than one paradigm of pronominal indexes, and especially if the host bears indexes for more than one actant in different syntactic functions, the syntactic function of the referent is indicated; s. #2.
• The pronominal categories of the index, like person, number, class or gender, are indicated.
• Only if the pronominal index inflects for case is its case indicated.

Syntactic functions of pronominal indexes

If the language possesses only one paradigm of pronominal indexes, the syntactic function cross-referenced need not be indicated by the gloss. This is especially the case if it is the subject in an accusative system or the absolutive in an ergative system. It is the task of the grammar, not of the gloss, to clarify the details.

If the verb cross-references more than one actant by pronominal indexes – no matter whether in separate morphological slots or merged into a portmanteau morph –, the syntactic functions thus cross-referenced are part of the gloss as shown by .

The syntactic-function component of a gloss – as in 'SBJ.1.SG' – has two readings:

1. It identifies the (pro-)nominal constituent thus cross-referenced by its syntactic function. Syntactic functions in a clause are born by free nominal expressions (a.k.a. NPs), headed by lexical items or free pro-forms. They are not born by (bound) pronominal indexes which cross-reference a clause component. Instead, such a pronominal index bears a phoric relation to a clause component which does bear the syntactic function in question. Consequently, what is annotated with the pronominal index is the syntactic function of the component that it indexes.

   E.g. ‘SBJ.1.SG’ does not mean ‘this element is a first person singular pronoun in subject function’. Instead, it means ‘the subject of the clause is of first person singular’. And it means this no matter whether there is actually in the clause such a nominal constituent. If there is none, it is interpreted as ‘the zero subject of the clause is of first person singular’.

2. The syntactic-function component of the gloss is the name of the morphological slot occupied by the index. This is why it constitutes the first part of the gloss. This avoids, at the same time, confusion with the category of case.

   In this property, the syntactic function label in a gloss appears to constitute an exception to the rule that the gloss does not indicate the class of the item in question. However, we are dealing here, ex hypothesi, with more than one paradigm of pronominal indexes. Unless the gloss were introduced by something like SBJ and OBJ, a first person plural morph in the subject slot would receive the same gloss as a first person plural morph in the object slot; i.e. the gloss would insinuate that these are allomorphs of the same morpheme. On the contrary, the label of the syntactic function helps distinguish between different morphemes.

In both of its readings, the syntactic function assigned to a pronominal index differs from the category of case. Since pronominal indexes are generally bound formatives, they normally don't have a case. This distinguishes them from pronouns, as ti in .

Rule 11. If L1 pronominal indexes cross-reference more than one syntactic function, the gloss of a pronominal index starts with a label identifying the syntactic function referenced.

Cumulative cross-reference

Special provision must be made for a paradigm of pronominal indexes which cross-reference two actants of the verb. The prefix in is a case in point.

In principle, this situation is analogous to one declension suffix showing both number and case. However, when actor and undergoer cross-reference is cumulated in one morph, sticking to Rule 24 would lead to obscurity. Instead, information on the two actants should be separated by '&' or by '>'. The ‘greater than’ sign has two advantages here: it is iconic, and it dispenses with the use of function labels such as ‘SBJ, OBJ, A, U’ (simply ‘2>1’ in ). It has the disadvantage that the same symbol is used for discontinuous and infixed material (Rules 18 and 19), which may lead to conflicts.

This case must be kept distinct from a portmanteau morph, viz. when two crossreference categories that generally each have their own morphological slot merge into one morph occasionally.

Rule 25. As a special case of Rule 24, components of one L1 pronominal index morph that have distinct reference are separated by the ampersand (‘&’) or, where no conflict with Rules 18 and 19 arises, by the greater-than sign (‘>’) for actor and undergoer cross-reference.