% pubman genre = article
@article{item_3258879,
title = {{Indexing and flagging, and head and dependent marking}},
author = {Haspelmath, Martin},
language = {eng},
issn = {0494-8440},
doi = {10.17617/2.3168042},
publisher = {Linguistic Society of New Zealand},
year = {2019},
date = {2019},
abstract = {{This paper compares the concept pair indexing/flagging with the well-known concept pair head/dependent marking that is widely used in typology. It shows that a general concept of flagging (comprising case and adpositional marking) is needed, and it sketches the advantages of the indexing concept over the older idea of {\textquotedblleft}person agreement{\textquotedblright}. It then points out that the notions of head and dependent are hard to define (apart from the two basic domains of clauses and nominals), and that the head/dependent marking typology does not take the function of syntactic relation markers into account. On a functional view, both flags and indexes can be seen as role-identifiers, as opposed to concordants (attributive agreement markers). After discussing three further issues with the head/dependent marking typology, involving construct markers, concordants, and cross-indexes, I conclude that the concept pair indexing/flagging is more suitable for typological purposes than head/dependent marking.}},
contents = {1 Comparative concepts for cross-linguistic grammatical comparison 2 Some examples of argument marking by flagging and indexing 3 Flags: Case-markers and/or adpositions 4 Indexing: Bound person markers 5 Head and dependent marking 6 Indexing/flagging does not require the abstract categories {\textquotedblleft}head{\textquotedblright} and {\textquotedblleft}dependent{\textquotedblright} 7 The function of syntactic relation markers 8 Indexing does not include construct markers 9 Flagging does not include concordants 10 The notion of indexing solves a serious problem with head marking 11 Conclusion},
journal = {{Te Reo}},
volume = {62},
number = {1},
pages = {93--115},
}