The Full Wiki

Ergative verb: Wikis


Note: Many of our articles have direct quotes from sources you can cite, within the Wikipedia article! This article doesn't yet, but we're working on it! See more info or our list of citable articles.


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In linguistics, an ergative verb is a verb that can be either transitive or intransitive, and whose subject when intransitive corresponds to its direct object when transitive.


In English

In English, most verbs can be used intransitively, but ordinarily this does not change the role of the subject; consider, for example, "He ate the soup" (transitive) and "He ate" (intransitive), where the only difference is that the latter does not specify what was eaten. By contrast, with an ergative verb the role of the subject changes; consider "it broke the window" (transitive) and "the window broke" (intransitive).

Ergative verbs can be divided into several categories:

  • Verbs suggesting a change of state — break, burst, form, heal, melt, tear, transform
  • Verbs of cooking — bake, boil, cook, fry
  • Verbs of movement — move, shake, sweep, turn, walk
  • Verbs involving vehicles — drive, fly, reverse, run, sail

Some of these can be used intransitively in either sense: "I'm cooking the pasta" is fairly synonymous with both "The pasta is cooking" (as an ergative verb) and "I'm cooking", although it obviously gives more information than either.

Unlike a passive verb, a nominalization, an infinitive, or a gerund, which would allow the agent to be deleted but would also allow it to be included, the intransitive version of an ergative verb requires the agent to be deleted:

  • "The window was broken" or "The window was broken by the burglar."
  • "[…] to break the window […]" or "[…] for the burglar to break the window […]"
  • "[…] the breaking of the window […]" or "[…] the breaking of the window by the burglar […]"
  • "The window broke" but not *"The window broke by the burglar."

Indeed, the intransitive form of an ergative verb almost suggests that there is no agent. With some non-ergative verbs, this can be achieved using the reflexive voice:

  • "He solved the problem."
  • "The problem was solved" or "The problem was solved by him."
  • "The problem solved itself" but not *"The problem solved itself by him."

In this case, however, the use of the reflexive voice strongly indicates the lack of an agent; where "John broke the window, or maybe Jack did — at any rate, the window broke" is understandable, if slightly unidiomatic, *"John solved the problem, or maybe Jack did — at any rate, the problem solved itself" is completely self-contradictory. Nonetheless, some grammarians would consider both "The window broke" and "The problem solved itself" to be examples of a distinct voice, the middle voice.

A particularly odd English ergative verb is "graduate": "he graduated from school" and "school graduated him" mean the same thing, although the latter usage has passed out of vogue. With the latter usage, the verb is transitive, but with the former, the verb is intransitive.

The significance of the ergative verb is that it enables a writer or speaker not only to suppress the identity of the outside agent responsible for the particular process, but also to represent the affected party as in some way causing the action by which it is affected. It can be used by journalists sympathetic to a particular causative agent and wishing to avoid assigning blame, as in "Eight factories have closed this year."

In French

English is not the only language with ergative verbs; indeed, they are a feature of many languages. French is another language that has them:

  • "Il tourne la tête." ("He turns his head.")
  • "Sa tête tourne." ("His head turns.")

Some ergative verbs can also be used reflexively — that is, the approaches of both English break and English solve are available, depending on the situation:

  • "J'ouvre la porte." ("I open the door.")
  • "La porte s'ouvre." ("The door opens itself", i.e. "The door opens.")
  • "Le parc ouvre." ("The park opens.")

Further, verbs analogous to English cook have even more possibities, even allowing a causative construction to substitute for the transitive form of the verb:

  • "Je cuis les pâtes." ("I cook the pasta.")
  • "Je cuis." ("I cook", i.e. either "I cook [something]" or e.g. "It's so hot in here, I'm practically roasting.")
  • "Je fais cuire les pâtes." (lit., "I make cook the pasta", i.e. "I make the pasta cook", i.e. "I cook the pasta.")
  • "Les pâtes cuisent." ("The pasta cooks.")

In Dutch

In Dutch, ergative verbs are used in a way similar to English, but they stand out as more distinct particularly in the perfect tenses.

In the present, the usage in both languages is similar, for example:

  • "Jan breekt zijn glas." ("John breaks his glass.")
  • "Het glas breekt." ("The glass breaks.")

However, there are cases where the two languages deviate. For example, the verb zinken (to sink) can not be used transitively, nor the verb openen (to open) intransitively:

  • "Het schip zonk." ("The ship sank.")
  • Not *"De marine zonk het schip." (Unlike "The navy sank the ship.")


  • "Jan opent de deur." ("John opens the door.")
  • Not *"De deur opent." (Unlike "The door opens.")

In this last case, one could say: "De deur gaat open." (lit. The door goes open").

The major difference between Dutch and English is that the perfect tenses of ergatives take zijn (to be) as their auxiliary rather than hebben (to have).

  • present: "Het glas breekt." ("The glass breaks.")
  • perfect: "Het glas is gebroken." ("The glass has broken.")

This also marks them as distinct from unergative verbs, that do take hebben (to have) in Dutch and show a limited transitivity to an impersonal passive voice.

Note that in English the glass is broken is usually interpreted as a copula plus an adjective, rather than as an ergative perfect. Such a copular construction is not always possible in English, for instance not for the verb gebeuren (to happen):

Het is gebeurd. ("It has happened.)

This verb is quintessentially ergative, as ergative verbs usually denote processes that happen by themselves without a clear 'doer' (actor). However, most verbs of motion (to go, to come etc.) are ergatives in Dutch as well.

The fact that ergatives take zijn implies that in the perfect tenses the ergative and the passive are identical in Dutch. Compare:

imperfect perfect
active Jan breekt het glas. Jan heeft het glas gebroken.
passive Het glas wordt door Jan gebroken. Het glas is (door Jan) gebroken.
ergative Het glas breekt. Het glas is gebroken.

Notice that leaving out the actor "door Jan" automatically makes the perfect passive sentence an ergative one. By contrast, in German—that otherwise has very similar ergative verbs—the passive perfect would take worden and be distinct even when "von Jan" is omitted.

  • active: Jan hat das Glas gebrochen.
  • passive: Das Glas ist (von Jan) gebrochen worden.
  • ergative: Das Glas ist gebrochen.

Perfect ergative innocence

Ergatives are verbs of innocence, because they imply the absence of an actor who could possibly be blamed. This association is quite strong in Dutch and speakers tend to treat verbs like forgetting and losing as ergatives in the perfect tenses even though they typically have a direct object and are really transitive verbs. It is not unusual to hear sentences like:

Ik ben mijn boek vergeten. - I forgot my book (and it just 'happened to me: there is no actor).
Ik ben mijn geld verloren. - I lost my money (poor me).

Something similar happens with compound verbs like gewaarworden: to become aware of something. It is a separable compound of worden (become), which is a typical 'process'-verb. It is usually considered a copula, rather than an ergative, but these two group of verbs are related. For example, copulas usually take to be in the perfect as well. A verb like blijven is used both as a copula and as an ergative and all its compounds (nablijven, bijblijven, aanblijven etc.) are ergatives.

Gewaarworden can take both a direct object and a (reflexive) indirect one:

Ik werd me dat gewaar - I became aware of that.

The perfect usually takes to be regardless of the objects:

Ik ben me dat niet gewaargeworden. - (roughly) I did not catch on to that.

In Hebrew

Hebrew does have a few ergative verbs, due in part to calques from other languages; nonetheless, it has fewer ergative verbs than English, in part because it has a fairly productive causative construction and partly-distinct mediopassive constructions. For example, the verbs [ʃaˈvaʁ] (active) and [niʃˈbaʁ] (its mediopassive counterpart) both mean to break, but the former is transitive (as in "He broke the window") and the latter is intransitive (as in "The window broke"). Similarly, the verbs [laaˈvoʁ] (active) and [ləhaˈviʁ] (its causative counterpart) both mean to pass, but the former is intransitive (as in "He passed by Susan") and the latter is transitive (as in "He passed the salt to Susan")

See also


External links


Got something to say? Make a comment.
Your name
Your email address