The referential hierarchy: Reviewing the evidence in diachronic perspective

Typological hierarchies are usually accounted for on synchronic grounds. If the distribution of some construction, as described by some hierarchy, is associated with some particular factor, then that factor is assumed to be responsible for the distribution, independently of the actual diachronic processes that gave rise to the construction in individual languages. These processes, however, may pose several challenges for current explanations of typological hierarchies. This is illustrated in the paper with regard to the diachronic development of several patterns described by the so-called referential hierarchy (also known as the animacy or topicality hierarchy), including split alignment in case marking, hierarchical alignment, and the presence of singular vs. plural distinctions for different NP types. The available diachronic evidence shows that individual patterns originate from mechanisms different than those that can be postulated on synchronic grounds, that the various instances of a particular pattern need not always originate from the same mechanism, and that different patterns pertaining to the same grammatical domain are also a result of different mechanisms. This suggests that, contrary to the traditional view, the patterns described by the referential hierarchy do not reflect any general principle. Rather, the hierarchy is best regarded as a descriptive schema that is general enough to capture the outputs of several independent diachronic processes