Overview

Explaining subjects and their properties is an important challenge in contemporary linguistics. For formalist approaches to linguistics, the clustering of properties that subjects display necessitates some special representational properties unique to subjects. Without such representational uniqueness, the properties of subjects that set them apart from other elements of the clause are mysterious. However, this only pushes the need for explanation back one level: such special representation itself calls out for explanation. For functionalist approaches, similar issues are raised, as it is not clear what the functional properties of subjects are that set them apart.From a typological perspective, the mystery of subjects is even deeper, as different language types appear to deploy subject properties in different (but systematic) ways. As a result of the discoveries of ergative languages, Philippine-type languages, active languages, and the like, interesting questions have been raised about the properties of subjects, the representation of subjects, and even the cross-linguistic validity of “subject” as an element of linguistic description.

The concept of “subject” is one with a long history in linguistics. As with most other such concepts, contemporary linguistics did not invent the subject. Instead, it has taken a traditional concept and attempted to provide it with theoretical content. Problems have arisen because the concept “subject” originates in traditional studies of classical Indo-European languages such as Greek and Latin, languages which are closely related genetically, areally, and typologically.