Abstract A subject analysis of oblique subject-like arguments remains controversial even across modern languages where the available data are not finite: while such arguments are considered syntactic subjects in Icelandic, they have more often been analyzed as objects in Lithuanian, for example. This issue has been left relatively neglected for the ancient Indo-European languages outside of Sanskrit (Hock 1990), Gothic (Barðdal & Eythórsson 2012), and Ancient Greek (Danesi 2015). In this article, we address the status of oblique subject-like arguments in Old Irish, whose strict word-order enables us to compare the position (relative to the verb and other arguments) of nominative subject arguments of the canonical type to oblique subject-like arguments. We first establish a baseline for neutral word-order of nominative subjects and accusative objects and then compare their distribution to that of oblique subject-like arguments under two conditions: i) on a subject analysis and ii) on an object analysis. The word-order distribution differs significantly across the two contexts when the oblique arguments are analyzed as syntactic objects, but not when they are analyzed as syntactic subjects. These findings add to the growing evidence that oblique subject-like arguments should be analyzed as syntactic subjects, although their coding properties are non-canonical.

中文翻译：

---

位置作为主体的行为属性

摘要 即使在可用数据不是有限的现代语言中，对类似主语的倾斜论点的主题分析仍然存在争议：虽然这些论点在冰岛语中被认为是句法主题，但它们在立陶宛语中更常被分析为对象。对于梵语（Hock 1990）、哥特语（Barðdal & Eythórsson 2012）和古希腊语（Danesi 2015）以外的古代印欧语言，这个问题相对被忽视了。在本文中，我们讨论了古爱尔兰语中类似倾斜主语的论点的地位，其严格的词序使我们能够将规范类型的主格主语参数的位置（相对于动词和其他参数）与倾斜主语进行比较-喜欢争论。我们首先为主格和宾语的中性词序建立基线，然后在两种条件下将它们的分布与倾斜的类主语参数的分布进行比较：i）在主语分析和 ii）在客体分析。当倾斜参数被分析为句法对象时，两个上下文的词序分布有显着差异，但当它们被分析为句法主语时则不然。这些发现增加了越来越多的证据，即倾斜主语式的论点应该作为句法主语进行分析，尽管它们的编码特性是非规范的。当倾斜参数被分析为句法对象时，两个上下文的词序分布有显着差异，但当它们被分析为句法主语时则不然。这些发现增加了越来越多的证据，即倾斜主语式的论点应该作为句法主语进行分析，尽管它们的编码特性是非规范的。当倾斜参数被分析为句法对象时，两个上下文的词序分布有显着差异，但当它们被分析为句法主语时则不然。这些发现增加了越来越多的证据，即倾斜主语式的论点应该作为句法主语进行分析，尽管它们的编码特性是非规范的。