DOCSLIB.ORG

Inverse Systems in Indigenous Languages of the Americas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Inverse Systems in Indigenous Languages of the Americas 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.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Toward the Reconstruction of Proto-Algonquian-Wakashan. Part 3: the Algonquian-Wakashan 110-Item Wordlist
    Sergei L. Nikolaev Institute of Slavic studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow/Novosibirsk); [email protected] Toward the reconstruction of Proto-Algonquian-Wakashan. Part 3: The Algonquian-Wakashan 110-item wordlist In the third part of my complex study of the historical relations between several language families of North America and the Nivkh language in the Far East, I present an annotated demonstration of the comparative data that was used in the lexicostatistical calculations to determine the branching and approximate glottochronological dating of Proto-Algonquian- Wakashan and its offspring; because of volume considerations, this data could not be in- cluded in the previous two parts of the present work and has to be presented autonomously. Additionally, several new Proto-Algonquian-Wakashan and Proto-Nivkh-Algonquian roots have been set up in this part of study. Lexicostatistical calculations have been conducted for the following languages: the reconstructed Proto-North Wakashan (approximately dated to ca. 800 AD) and modern or historically attested variants of Nootka (Nuuchahnulth), Amur Nivkh, Sakhalin Nivkh, Western Abenaki, Miami-Peoria, Fort Severn Cree, Wiyot, and Yurok. Keywords: Algonquian-Wakashan languages, Nivkh-Algonquian languages, Algic languages, Wakashan languages, Chimakuan-Wakashan languages, Nivkh language, historical phonol- ogy, comparative dictionary, lexicostatistics. The classification and preliminary glottochronological dating of Algonquian-Wakashan currently remain the same as presented in Nikolaev 2015a, Fig. 1 1. That scheme was generated based on the lexicostatistical analysis of 110-item basic word lists2 for one reconstructed (Proto-Northern Wakashan, ca. 800 A.D.) and several modern Algonquian-Wakashan lan- guages, performed with the aid of StarLing software 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Ditransitive Verbs in Language Use
    Chapter 3 Aspects of description: ditransitive verbs in language use This chapter provides a corpus-based description of individual ditransitive verbs in actual language use. First, the two verbs that are typical of ditransitivity in ICE-GB will be analysed: give and tell (see section 3.1). Second, the four habitual ditransitive verbs in ICE-GB (i.e. ask, show, send and offer) will be scrutinised (see section 3.2). Particular emphasis in all the analyses will be placed on the different kinds of routines that are involved in the use of ditransitive verbs. The description of peripheral ditransitive verbs, on the other hand, will centre on the concepts of grammatical institutionalisation and conventionalisation (see section 3.3). At the end of this chapter, the two aspects will be discussed in a wider setting in the assessment of the role of linguistic routine and creativity in the use of ditransitive verbs (see section 3.4). 3.1 Typical ditransitive verbs in ICE-GB In the present study, typical ditransitive verbs are verbs which are frequently attested in ICE-GB in general (i.e. > 700 occurrences) and which are associated with an explicit ditransitive syntax in some 50% of all occurrences or more (cf. Figure 2.4, p. 84). These standards are met by give (see section 3.1.1) and tell (see section 3.1.2). 3.1.1 GIVE In light of recent psycholinguistic and cognitive-linguistic evidence, it is not sur- prising that the most frequent ditransitive verb in ICE-GB is GIVE.1 Experiment- al data have led Ninio (1999), for example, to put forward the hypothesis that children initially acquire constructions through one (or very few) ‘pathbreaking verbs(s)’.
    [Show full text]
  • Language in the USA
    This page intentionally left blank Language in the USA This textbook provides a comprehensive survey of current language issues in the USA. Through a series of specially commissioned chapters by lead- ing scholars, it explores the nature of language variation in the United States and its social, historical, and political significance. Part 1, “American English,” explores the history and distinctiveness of American English, as well as looking at regional and social varieties, African American Vernacular English, and the Dictionary of American Regional English. Part 2, “Other language varieties,” looks at Creole and Native American languages, Spanish, American Sign Language, Asian American varieties, multilingualism, linguistic diversity, and English acquisition. Part 3, “The sociolinguistic situation,” includes chapters on attitudes to language, ideology and prejudice, language and education, adolescent language, slang, Hip Hop Nation Language, the language of cyberspace, doctor–patient communication, language and identity in liter- ature, and how language relates to gender and sexuality. It also explores recent issues such as the Ebonics controversy, the Bilingual Education debate, and the English-Only movement. Clear, accessible, and broad in its coverage, Language in the USA will be welcomed by students across the disciplines of English, Linguistics, Communication Studies, American Studies and Popular Culture, as well as anyone interested more generally in language and related issues. edward finegan is Professor of Linguistics and Law at the Uni- versity of Southern California. He has published articles in a variety of journals, and his previous books include Attitudes toward English Usage (1980), Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Register (co-edited with Douglas Biber, 1994), and Language: Its Structure and Use, 4th edn.
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Challenges for Polysynthetic Languages
    Computational Modeling of Polysynthetic Languages Judith L. Klavans, Ph.D. US Army Research Laboratory 2800 Powder Mill Road Adelphi, Maryland 20783 [email protected] [email protected] Abstract Given advances in computational linguistic analysis of complex languages using Machine Learning as well as standard Finite State Transducers, coupled with recent efforts in language revitalization, the time was right to organize a first workshop to bring together experts in language technology and linguists on the one hand with language practitioners and revitalization experts on the other. This one-day meeting provides a promising forum to discuss new research on polysynthetic languages in combination with the needs of linguistic communities where such languages are written and spoken. Finally, this overview article summarizes the papers to be presented, along with goals and purpose. Motivation Polysynthetic languages are characterized by words that are composed of multiple morphemes, often to the extent that one long word can express the meaning contained in a multi-word sentence in lan- guage like English. To illustrate, consider the following example from Inuktitut, one of the official languages of the Territory of Nunavut in Canada. The morpheme -tusaa- (shown in boldface below) is the root, and all the other morphemes are synthetically combined with it in one unit.1 (1) tusaa-tsia-runna-nngit-tu-alu-u-junga hear-well-be.able-NEG-DOER-very-BE-PART.1.S ‘I can't hear very well.’ Kabardian (Circassian), from the Northwest Caucasus, also shows this phenomenon, with the root -še- shown in boldface below: (2) wə-q’ə-d-ej-z-γe-še-ž’e-f-a-te-q’əm 2SG.OBJ-DIR-LOC-3SG.OBJ-1SG.SUBJ-CAUS-lead-COMPL-POTENTIAL-PAST-PRF-NEG ‘I would not let you bring him right back here.’ Polysynthetic languages are spoken all over the globe and are richly represented among Native North and South American families.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnohistory of the Kootenai Indians
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1983 Ethnohistory of the Kootenai Indians Cynthia J. Manning The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Manning, Cynthia J., "Ethnohistory of the Kootenai Indians" (1983). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 5855. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/5855 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COPYRIGHT ACT OF 1976 Th is is an unpublished m a n u s c r ip t in w h ic h c o p y r ig h t su b ­ s i s t s . Any further r e p r in t in g of it s c o n ten ts must be a ppro ved BY THE AUTHOR. MANSFIELD L ib r a r y Un iv e r s it y of Montana D a te : 1 9 8 3 AN ETHNOHISTORY OF THE KOOTENAI INDIANS By Cynthia J. Manning B.A., University of Pittsburgh, 1978 Presented in partial fu lfillm en t of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA 1983 Approved by: Chair, Board of Examiners Fan, Graduate Sch __________^ ^ c Z 3 ^ ^ 3 Date UMI Number: EP36656 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Origins and Diversity of Aymara How and Why Is Aymara Different in Different Regions?
    Origins and Diversity of Aymara How and Why is Aymara Different in Different Regions? Contents Is Aymara Alone? Aymara and Quechua The Aymara Language Family ‘Southern’ or ‘Altiplano’ Aymara Central Aymara: Jaqaru and Kawki Differences Between Central and Southern Aymara Is There a ‘Correct’ Aymara? The Origins of Aymara: Where and When? Which Civilisations Spoke Aymara? How to Find Out More If you want to print out this text, we recommend our printable versions either in .pdf format : A4 paper size or Letter paper size or in Microsoft Word format : A4 paper size or Letter paper size Back to Contents Origins and Diversity of Aymara www.quechua.org.uk/Sounds Paul Heggarty [of 12 ] – 1 – Back to Contents – Skip to Next: Aymara & Quechua Is Aymara Alone? The language that is normally called ‘Aymara’ is well-known to be spoken in much of the Altiplano , the ‘high plain’ at an altitude of around 4000 m that covers much of western Bolivia and the far south of Peru. Aymara is spoken all around the region of the Bolivian capital La Paz, and further north to Lake Titicaca, the famous archaeological site of Tiwanaku, and into the southernmost regions of Peru, around Huancané, Puno and Moquegua. South of La Paz, Aymara is spoken in the Oruro and Poopó regions and beyond, across the wild and beautiful border areas into northern Chile. What is much less well-known, however, is that this Altiplano Aymara is not alone! A language of the very same family is spoken almost a thousand kilometres further north, in central Peru, in the semi-desert mountains of the province of Yauyos , not far south and inland from Lima.
    [Show full text]
  • Languages: Genetic Relatiónship Or Areal Diffusion?
    Opción, Año 11, No. 18 (1995): 45-73 ?' ISBN 1012-1387 Lexical similarities between Uru-Chipaya and Pano-Takanan languages: Genetic relatiónship or areal diffusion? Alain Fabre Tampere University ofTechnology Finlandia Abstract |; This study traces the geographical distribution of some words in the Pano-Takanan and Uru-Chipaya languige famiües (Perú and Bo- livia). Themethod applied has been fruitfuljy (though notexclusively) used in the fíelds of Uraüc and Indo-European diachronic studies. Out research has been influenced by the studies ¡jby Bereczki (1983), Hajdú (1981), Hajdú & Domokos (1987), Hákkinen (1983) and Joki (1973). This kind of studies are a prerequisite toany attempt toinvestígate into thekindofproblematic relatíonsfiips involverjbetween language groups, showing either that (1) the languages in quéstion, at least in the course ofthe time section under study, were not in! direct contact (or had only sporadic contacts) or that (2) the languages were indeed in contact. The latter possibiüty offers us the opportunity to further examine whether we are deaüng with areal affinity or geneticrelatiónship.When no contact can be shown,there can be no genetic connéction for the period under scrutiny, The next step, phonolpgical and morphological comparison either proving or discarding genetic relatiónship, is not attempted here. We try to disclose layer after layer, as far back in the past as feasable, the former distribution of the ancestors of these languages, thus recon- structing some of the movements of these Jpeoples and/or languages. 1 • ! Recibido: 20 de mayo de 1995 • Aceptado: 4 de octubrede 1995 46 Alain Fabre Opción, Año 11, No. 18 (1995): 45-73 Mainly by inspecting the geographical distribution ofcognate words, we havetriedto disentangle differentchronological stages ofthelanguages, inrelative tíme.
    [Show full text]
  • On Numeral Complexity in Hunter-Gatherer Languages
    On numeral complexity in hunter-gatherer languages PATIENCE EPPS, CLAIRE BOWERN, CYNTHIA A. HANSEN, JANE H. HILL, and JASON ZENTZ Abstract Numerals vary extensively across the world’s languages, ranging from no pre- cise numeral terms to practically infinite limits. Particularly of interest is the category of “small” or low-limit numeral systems; these are often associated with hunter-gatherer groups, but this connection has not yet been demonstrated by a systematic study. Here we present the results of a wide-scale survey of hunter-gatherer numerals. We compare these to agriculturalist languages in the same regions, and consider them against the broader typological backdrop of contemporary numeral systems in the world’s languages. We find that cor- relations with subsistence pattern are relatively weak, but that numeral trends are clearly areal. Keywords: borrowing, hunter-gatherers, linguistic area, number systems, nu- merals 1. Introduction Numerals are intriguing as a linguistic category: they are lexical elements on the one hand, but on the other they are effectively grammatical in that they may involve a generative system to derive higher values, and they interact with grammatical systems of quantification. Numeral systems are particularly note- worthy for their considerable crosslinguistic variation, such that languages may range from having no precise numeral terms at all to having systems whose limits are practically infinite. As Andersen (2005: 26) points out, numerals are thus a “liminal” linguistic category that is subject to cultural elaboration. Recent work has called attention to this variation among numeral systems, particularly with reference to systems having very low limits (for example, see Evans & Levinson 2009, D.
    [Show full text]
  • “Today's Morphology Is Yeatyerday's Syntax”
    MOTHER TONGUE Journal of the Association for the Study of Language in Prehistory • Issue XXI • 2016 From North to North West: How North-West Caucasian Evolved from North Caucasian Viacheslav A. Chirikba Abkhaz State University, Sukhum, Republic of Abkhazia The comparison of (North-)West Caucasian with (North-)East Caucasian languages suggests that early Proto-West Caucasian underwent a fundamental reshaping of its phonological, morphological and syntactic structures, as a result of which it became analytical, with elementary inflection and main grammatical roles being expressed by lexical means, word order and probably also by tones. The subsequent development of compounding and incorporation resulted in a prefixing polypersonal polysynthetic agglutinative language type typical for modern West Caucasian languages. The main evolutionary line from a North Caucasian dialect close to East Caucasian to modern West Caucasian languages was thus from agglutinative to the analytical language-type, due to a near complete loss of inflection, and then to the agglutinative polysynthetic type. Although these changes blurred the genetic relationship between West Caucasian and East Caucasian languages, however, this can be proven by applying standard procedures of comparative-historical linguistics. 1. The West Caucasian languages.1 The West Caucasian (WC), or Abkhazo-Adyghean languages constitute a branch of the North Caucasian (NC) linguistic family, which consists of five languages: Abkhaz and Abaza (the Abkhaz sub-group), Adyghe and Kabardian (the Circassian sub-group), and Ubykh. The traditional habitat of these languages is the Western Caucasus, where they are still spoken, with the exception of the extinct Ubykh. Typologically, the WC languages represent a rather idiosyncratic linguistic type not occurring elsewhere in Eurasia.
    [Show full text]
  • Flexible Valency in Chintang.∗
    Flexible valency in Chintang.∗ Robert Schikowskia , Netra Paudyalb , and Balthasar Bickela a University of Zürich b University of Leipzig 1 e Chintang language Chintang [ˈts̻ ʰiɳʈaŋ]̻ (ISO639.3: ctn) is a Sino-Tibetan language of Nepal. It is named aer the village where it is mainly spoken. e village lies in the hills of Eastern Nepal, bigger cities within day’s reach being Dhankuṭā and Dharān. ere are no official data on the number of speakers, but we estimate there to be around 4,000 - 5,000 speakers. Most speakers are bi- or trilingual, with Nepali (the Indo-Aryan lingua franca of Nepal) as one and Bantawa (a related Sino-Tibetan language) as the other additional language. Monolingual speakers are still to be found mainly among elderly women, whereas a considerable portion of the younger generation is rapidly shiing to Nepali. Genealogically, Chintang belongs to the Kiranti group. e Kiranti languages are generally accepted to belong to the large Sino-Tibetan (or Tibeto-Burman) family, although their position within this family is controversial (cf. e.g. urgood 2003, Ebert 2003). Based on phonological evidence, Chintang belongs to the Eastern subgroup of Kiranti (Bickel et al. 2010). ere are two major dialects (Mulgaũ and Sambugaũ ) named aer the areas where they are spoken. e differences between them concern morphology and the lexicon but, as far as we know, not syntax, and so we will not distinguish between dialects in this chapter. For all examples the source has been marked behind the translation. Wherever possible, we take data from the Chintang Language Corpus (Bickel et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Published in Papers of the Twenty-Third Algonquian Conference, 1992, Edited by William Cowan
    Published in Papers of the Twenty-Third Algonquian Conference, 1992, edited by William Cowan. Ottawa: Carleton University, pp. 119-163 A Comparison of the Obviation Systems of Kutenai and Algonquian Matthew S. Dryer SUNY at Buffalo 1. Introduction In recent years, the term ‘obviation’ has been applied to phenomena in a variety of languages on the basis of perceived similarity to the phenomenon in Algonquian languages to which, I assume, the term was originally applied. An example of a descriptive use of the term occurs in Dayley (1989: 136), who applies the terms ‘obviative’ and ‘proximate’ to two categories of demonstratives in Tümpisa Shoshone, the obviative category being used to introduce new information or to reference given participants which are nontopics, the proximate category for topics. But unlike the obviative and proximate categories of Algonquian languages, the Shoshone categories for which Dayley uses the terms are categories only of a class of words he calls ‘demonstratives’, and are not inflectional categories of nouns or verbs. Similarly, Simpson and Bresnan (1983) use the term ‘obviation’ to refer to a system in Warlpiri in which certain nonfinite verbs occur in forms that indicate that their subjects are nonsubjects in the matrix clause. These phenomena in non-Algonquian languages to which the term ‘obviation’ has been applied may bear some remote resemblance to the Algonquian phenomenon, but I suspect that most Algonquianists examining them would conclude that the resemblance is at best a remote one. The purpose of this paper is to describe an obviation system in Kutenai, a language isolate of southeastern British Columbia and adjacent areas of Idaho and Montana, and to compare it to the obviation system of Algonquian languages.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconstructing Proto-Sahaptian Sounds
    Reconstructing Proto-Sahaptian Sounds Noel Rude Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Sahaptin and the mutually unintelligible Nez Perce comprise the Sahaptian language family. This paper attempts to reconstruct the sound system of the parent language of that family. There is little dialect variation in the available data for Nez Perce, whereas Sahaptin divides into three definable dialect clusters: Columbia River (Umatilla, Tenino, Celilo, etc.); Northwest (Klickitat, Upper Cowlitz, Yakima, etc.); Northeast (Priest Rapids, Walla Walla, Palouse, etc.). Various features distinguish the dialects, e.g., long vowels derived from certain VCV sequences are more common in the Northern dialects and in Nez Perce, the Northeast dialects and Nez Perce are more likely to preserve the glottal stop, and the palatalization of *k is most extensive in the Columbia River dialects. The reconstructions proposed here are, as always, more or less tentative. Unless otherwise indicated the examples labeled Sahaptin (S) are from Umatilla.1 Figure 1. The Sahaptian language family Proto-Sahaptian Nez Perce Sahaptin Columbia River Northern Northwest Northeast 1 For the connection between Sahaptin and Nez Perce, see Aoki (1962), Rigsby (1965), Rigsby and Silverstein (1969), and Rude (1996, 2006). For the relationship with Plateau Penutian, see Aoki (1963), Rude (1987), and Pharis (2006). For a possible relationship within the broader Penutian macro-family, see DeLancey & Golla (1979) and Mithun (1999), also Rude (2000) for a possible connection with Uto-Aztecan. For Sahaptin grammars, see Jacobs (1931), Millstein (ca. 1990a), Rigsby and Rude (1996), Rude (2009), and for published NW Sahaptin texts, see Jacobs (1929, 1934, 1937). Beavert and Hargus (2010) provide a dictionary of Yakima Sahaptin, Millstein (ca.
    [Show full text]