What might "S/A-V-O" and "A/S-V-O" mean?

Question

In looking through Google Books's preview of A Grammar of Lao by N. J. Enfield, I came across these two terms, which I'm assuming are equivalent to one another (possibly one is even a typo) and some kind of variant of "SVO", representing the word order subject-object verb:

S/A-V-O

By unmarked I mean that the speakers report an impression that the S/A-V-O pattern is somehow basic in status. A consultant will likely supply the S/A-V-O pattern when asked to compose sentences of the variety The farmer killed the duckling, ...
A/S-V-O

With this in mind, consider the Lao A/S-V-O constituent order pattern, perhaps the closest to a pragmatically unmarked pattern:

Departures from the A/S-V-O pattern are common. Movement, for example, may see a subject argument in a post-final position ...

I stand corrected btw., that was most unfortunate. – Cerberus Oct 19 '13 at 07:53 — Cerberus, Oct 19 '13 at 07:53

score 3 · Accepted Answer · answered Oct 18 '13 at 22:14

3

The Abbreviations list of that book is viewable (if you search for "abbreviations"), and says "A = agent-like argument of transitive clause" and "S = single argument of intransitive clause".

answered Oct 18 '13 at 22:14

TKR

10,893
26
60

Now why didn't I think of that? (-: – hippietrail Oct 18 '13 at 22:21
2

But what's the difference between S/A and A/S? Is it just scribal variation, or is there a significance in the ordering? – jlawler Oct 19 '13 at 00:09

What might "S/A-V-O" and "A/S-V-O" mean?

1 Answers1

Linked