Parallelism of alignment types between S-A-P, and P-R-T.

    Languages are distinguished along the alignment pattern between (mono-)transitive A or P, and intransitive S(Dixon 1994), so that we have 4 alignment types: The accusative (S aligns w/ A), the ergative (S aligns w/ P), the neutral (they all aligns altogether, e.g, S, A and P are all zero-marked), and the tripartite (S, A, and P are all marked differently; extremely rare) alignment.

     Similarly, the alignment pattern between ditransitive R or T, and monotransitive P is also able to be captured in the same fashion (firstly pointed out by Dryer 1986). So we have indirective (P aligns w/ T, and R is treated specially), Secundative (P aligns w/ R, and T is treated specially), neutral (they all aligns altogether, e.g, P, R and T are all zero-marked), and tripartite (P, R and T are all marked differently; extremely rare).

Referable references

Dryer, Matthew (1986) Primary objects, secondary objects, and antidative. Language 62: 808-45.

Martin Haspelmath (2001) Argument marking in ditransitive alignment types. Linguistic Discovery 3.1, pp1~21