Abstract In Bantu languages such as Chichewa or Herero, locatives can function as subjects and show noun class agreement (in class 16, 17 or 18) with predicates and modifiers. In contrast, (preverbal) locatives in Sotho-Tswana and Nguni have been analysed as prepositional adjuncts, which cannot agree. Our paper compares locatives in Kinyarwanda (JD61) with locatives in these other Bantu languages and demonstrates that the Kinyarwanda locative system is essentially of the Chichewa/Herero type. We show that Kinyarwanda locatives are nominal in nature, can act as subjects, and agree with predicates and modifiers. However, even though Kinyarwanda has four locative noun classes (16, 17, 18 and 25), there is only one locative agreement marker (class 16 ha-), which indiscriminately appears with all locatives, regardless of their noun class. We explain this fact by arguing that noun class features in Kinyarwanda do not participate in locative agreement; instead, the invariant class 16 marker expresses agreement with a generic feature [location] associated with all locatives. We offer a syntactic analysis of this peculiar aspect of Kinyarwanda locative agreement, and we propose a parameter that accounts for the relevant difference between Kinyarwanda and Chichewa/Herero-type Bantu languages.

中文翻译：

---

与Kinyarwanda中的地点达成一致：比较分析

摘要在诸如Chichewa或Herero之类的班图语中，定位词可以充当主语，并显示带有谓词和修饰语的名词类协议（在类16、17或18中）。相反，Sotho-Tswana和Nguni中的（谚语）定位词已被分析为介词附加语，这是不一致的。我们将Kinyarwanda（JD61）中的定位词与其他班图语中的定位词进行了比较，并证明Kinyarwanda定位系统本质上是Chichewa / Herero类型。我们表明，Kinyarwanda定位词本质上是名词性的，可以充当主语，并且与谓词和修饰语一致。但是，即使Kinyarwanda有四个位置名词类别（16、17、18和25），也只有一个位置一致标记（16 ha-类别），无论它们的名词类别如何，它都随便出现在所有位置上。我们通过争辩说Kinyarwanda中的名词类特征不参与位置一致，从而解释了这一事实。相反，不变类16标记表示与与所有位置相关联的通用特征[位置]一致。我们对Kinyarwanda定位协议这一特殊方面进行了句法分析，并提出了一个参数说明了Kinyarwanda和Chichewa / Herero型Bantu语言之间的相关差异。