Codifica argomentale e ruoli semantici. Ergativo/accusativo vs. attivo

In the present paper, we show that ergative and accusative systems are equivalent with transitive verbs: A ≠ O. They differ, instead, with intransitives: ergative (S = O) vs. accusative (S = A). Both systems, as opposed to active systems, are intended to establish a direct relation between verbal category (i.e., one- vs. two-argument verb) and argument marking. Nevertheless, there is evidence of the active type in both ergative and accusative systems. Here we discuss this and other facts to account for the linking mechanisms of morphosyntax with semantics. We suggest that the principle underlying these mechanisms corresponds to a universal cognitive principle. Moreover, we propose an explanation for the instability of the argument marking systems, across languages: we interpret this as a consequence of the discrepancy between discrete features (i.e., number of core arguments, superficial syntactic roles) and graded features (i.e., semantic roles).