Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2002 Inverse systems in indigenous languages of the Americas Zúñiga, Fernando Abstract: In einigen Sprachen koennen semantisch transitive Saetze entweder direkt oder invers sein, wobei die Wahl mit der relativen Belebtheit und/oder den deiktischen Eigenschaften der Argumente zu tun hat. Seit den 70ger Jahren haben sich mehrere Studien mit den (hauptsaechlich morphologischen) Verzwicktheiten so genannter Inverssprachen beschaeftigt, um bestehende Theorien von Aliniierung und Genus Verbi, aber auch allgemeine Grammatikmodelle, zu verfeinern. Dabei werden oft interessante Aspekte vernachlaessigt oder nur als nebensaechlich behandelt. Im Gegensatz zu den meisten bisherigen Publikationen zum Thema schlaegt diese Studie vor, dass Richtung, d.h. die Opposition zwischen direkt und invers, eine deiktische Kategorie ist, die morphologische Reflexe, syntaktische Korrelate oder auch beides haben kann. Die Studie formuliert eine Theorie der Richtung, bringt letztere mit Aliniierung und Diathese in Verbindung und argumentiert, dass es aufschlussreicher ist, invers und passiv als Kat- egorien zu verstehen, die verschiedenen Domaenen der Sprachbeschreibung angehoeren, und sie nicht so zu konzipieren, als wuerden sie einander konkurrenzieren. Anhand der Analyse mehrerer indigenen Sprachen Nord- und Suedamerikas (Algonquian, Kutenai, Sahaptian, Kiowa-Tanoan und Mapudungun) wird gezeigt, dass ein solches Modell die alte Frage, wie Inversion wirklich ist, auf sowohl komplexere als auch befriedigendere Weise beantwortet. Some languages display a variety of structural organization in which semantically transitive clauses fall into two types depending on the relative animacy and/or deictic properties of the arguments: direct and inverse. Since the 1970s, a number of studies have addressed the (mainly morphological) intricacies of so-called inverse languages in order to refine existing theories of alignment and voice, and also general theories of grammar. There are, however, many interesting related issues that are usually neglected or given less prominent a place in the discussion than they deserve. Unlike most previous publications on the subject, the present study proposes that direction, i.e. the opposition between direct and inverse, is a deictic category that can show either morphological reflexes, syntactic correlates, or both of these features. It articulates a theory of direction, relates the latter to alignment and voice, and argues that it is most illuminating not to regard inverses and passives as being in competition with one another but rather as belonging to two different realms of language description. A number of indigenous languages of the Americas (Algonquian, Kutenai, Sahaptian, Kiowa-Tanoan, and Mapudungun) are analyzed in order to show that such a framework yields more complex, but also more satisfactory, answers to the old question of what inverse is really like. Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-163111 Dissertation Published Version Originally published at: Zúñiga, Fernando. Inverse systems in indigenous languages of the Americas. 2002, University of Zurich, Faculty of Arts. 2 Inverse systems in indigenous languages of the Americas Thesis presented to the Faculty of Arts of the University of Zurich for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Fernando Zúñiga of Wittenbach SG Accepted on the recommendation of Prof. Dr. Karen H. Ebert and Prof. Dr. Balthasar Bickel 2002 Contents Foreword v Abbreviations vii Introduction 1 I. Alignment and direction 5 1. Alignment and alignment types 7 2. On polynomy and types 11 2.1 Splits 11 2.2 Features and types 17 3. Hierarchical alignment 21 3.1 Indexability hierarchies 21 3.2 Alignment and direction 23 Summary 29 II. A theory of direction 31 1. Grammatical categories involved 31 1.1 Direction as a category of its own 32 1.2 Direction as constructions related to voice type 34 1.3 Direction as functions related to voice type 38 1.4 The framework used in this study 42 2. Functional aspects of direction 49 2.1 Direction focality 49 2.2 Direction domains 59 3. Formal aspects of direction 65 3.1 Locus of marking 65 3.2 Relationship to alignment 66 3.3 Alignment, voice, and direction 70 Summary 72 III. Algonquian languages 75 1. Plains Cree 76 1.1 Essentials of Plains Cree 76 1.2 The Plains Cree verb 78 1.3 Obviation and direction in Plains Cree discourse 87 1.4 Plains Cree hierarchies 90 1.5 Preliminary summary of Plains Cree 91 ii Inverse systems 2. Miami-Illinois 93 2.1 Essentials of Miami-Illinois 93 2.2 The Miami-Illinois verb 94 2.3 Miami-Illinois hierarchies 98 2.4 Preliminary summary of Miami-Illinois 99 3. Central Ojibwa 100 3.1 Essentials of Central Ojibwa 100 3.2 More on Central Ojibwa morphosyntax 107 3.3 Preliminary summary of Central Ojibwa 116 4. Toward Algonquian grammatical relations 116 4.1 More Algonquian paradigms 117 4.2 Peeking over the clause boundary 122 5. Summary of Algonquian languages 133 IV. Kutenai 137 1. Kutenai direction 137 1.1 Essentials of Kutenai verb morphology 138 1.2 Kutenai non-local direction 140 1.3 Obviative subject -s 143 1.4 A frustrated search for core direction in Kutenai 146 2. Summary 150 V. Sahaptian languages 153 1. Sahaptin 154 1.1 Essentials of Umatilla Sahaptin 154 1.2 Interaction of nominal and verbal marking 157 1.3 Other Sahaptin constructions 162 1.4 Conclusion 164 2. Nez Perce 165 2.1 Essentials of Nez Perce 166 2.2 Interaction of nominal and verbal marking 170 2.3 A note on etymology and directionals 173 2.4 A brief note on Nez Perce syntax 175 2.5 Conclusion 176 3. Summary of Sahaptian languages 177 VI. Kiowa-Tanoan languages 183 1. Klaiman’s (1991, 1992) view of Tanoan 184 1.1 Arizona Tewa 184 1.2 Picurís 188 1.3 Southern Tiwa 189 1.4 Jemez 191 1.5 Further Tanoan constructions 191 2. A second opinion on Tanoan 193 Contents iii 3. Tanoan direction systems 197 3.1 Functional aspects of Tanoan direction 197 3.2 Formal aspects of Tanoan direction 198 4. Watkins & McKenzie’s (1984) view of Kiowa 200 4.1 Kiowa nominal number 200 4.2 Essentials of Kiowa verb morphology 201 4.3 Further remarks on animacy and detransitivity 205 4.4 Switch-reference 207 5. A second opinion on Kiowa 209 5.1 A second look at the transitive paradigms 210 5.2 A closer look at intransitives 212 5.3 Direction in Kiowa 217 6. Summary of Kiowa-Tanoan languages 219 VII. Mapudungun 221 1. Mapudungun verb morphology and clause structure 222 1.1 Finite verb forms 222 1.2 Nonfinite verb forms 228 1.3 A brief note on objecthood 230 2. Analyses of Mapudungun 232 2.1 The middle analysis 232 2.2 The person focality analysis 237 2.3 The direct object analysis 240 2.4 The topicality analysis 243 2.5 Summary of analyses of Mapudungun 248 3. Direction in Mapudungun 249 3.1 Formal aspects 250 3.2 Functional aspects 251 VIII. Conclusions 253 1. Summary of the languages discussed 253 1.1 Functional aspects 253 1.2 Formal aspects 255 1.3 Two continua 258 1.4 The morphosyntax of direction 266 2. Lessons and prospects 269 Appendix 1: Algonquian paradigms 271 Appendix 2: Analysis of Kiowa personal prefixes 281 Appendix 3: Optimality-theoretic syntax of inverses 283 References 295 Foreword And a man should not abandon his work, even if he cannot achieve it in full perfection; because in all work there may be imperfection, even as in all fire there is smoke. — Bhagavad Gītā 18.48 Some dissertations are the kind of book you read once and then put aside because they have nothing more to tell you. Others are works you return to time and again because you keep finding new details or rediscovering old insights. A number of dissertations in descriptive linguistics are invaluable reference works since they are the first, the best, or even the only, grammar of a language. I believe the present book to belong to none of these categories. That this logbook is a doctoral dissertation in theoretical linguistics written at the beginning of the third millennium justifies the citations, footnotes, and other textual and metatextual paraphernalia that floods the pages you are about to read. It also accounts for the fact that most of the book is not written in English but in Dissertationese, even though I have tried to reduce the latter component during continuous revisions. Finally, it might explain why only a limited number of professional linguists are likely to come up with a realistic hypothesis as to what the study is about after reading the title and the table of contents. Many people have helped me during the process―far too many for me not to forget somebody, I am afraid. I am especially indebted to several persons who helped me with some data, gave me valuable advice, corrected some of my mistakes, or simply discussed ideas with me: Balthasar Bickel, Matthew Dryer, Karen Ebert, Michele Loporcaro, Noel Rude, Richard Rhodes, and Martin Salzmann. Although they do not necessarily agree with what I have written, most of what is useful in these pages I owe to them in one way or another. Since cross-linguistic research would not be possible without descriptive studies, I gladly acknowledge a debt of gratitude to all authors of descriptive grammars. I am particularly grateful to Clarita Antinao, Arturo Lincopi, and Leonel Lienlaf, People of the Land who helped me with their language, and to Vicente Ruiz, that most remarkable wingka who introduced them to me. Annette Brechbühl- Taylor went to great pains to help me make the book more readable.