Case and Complementation in Nepali: Towards an HPSG Analysis Elisabeth Norcliffe Stanford University enorcliffe@stanford.edu June 1 2006 1 Introduction The morphosyntactic case systems of Indo-Aryan languages variously exhibit a number of interesting properties (aspect-split ergative morphological alignment, dative ‘sub- ject‘ marking, differential object marking, to name but a few). While several represen- tative branches of the family have been the subject of a good deal of linguistic inquiry in this regard, the case distribution patterns of Nepali have received rather less atten- tion. Wallace (1985) has provided the most comprehensive descriptive and analytic account of case (and subjecthood) in the standard Kathmandu dialect of Nepali, and it is his data that are largely cited when referencing case phenomena of the language. My own consultation sessions, however, with a (20 year old) native speaker of the standard Kathmandu dialect, have revealed a number of differences with regard to case pattern- ing possibilities and to the reliability of some of the general subjecthood diagnostics that Wallace offers. It is unclear whether the differences between Wallace’s data and my own are due to language shift over the past twenty years, or merely dialectal differ- ence, and so I will not venture to draw any conclusions relating to potential diachronic developments in the Nepali case system between then and now. Rather, the purpose of this paper is twofold. First, on a descriptive level, I provide a general sketch of the Nepali case system in simple clauses, and in verbal complement constructions, as it is exhibited in the dialect of my consultant. This both expands on, and, in certain significant respects contradicts several of Wallace’s claims. Second, on an analytic level, I seek to provide an HPSG account of Nepali case distribution, in both simple clauses and in verbal complement constructions. The analysis developed here presents a simple solution to the case patterns, taking as its point of departure the notion that case generalisations are sensitive to the domain of argument-structure in Nepali. This general approach affords a unified analysis of several case related phenomena in the language, including the treatment of null complements, so-called ‘dative subjects’ and case transmission facts in raising and control constructions. 1