PROGRAMA 2014.Pmd
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSIDAD DE SONORA Maestría en Lingüística División de Humanidades y Bellas Artes ” Departamento de Letras y Lingüística Cuerpos académicos “Estudios lingüístico-tipológicos y etnoculturales en lenguas indígenas y minoritarias” Universidad de Sonora (CA-81 ) īz in y “Análisis y documentación en lenguas indígenas” Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia (CA-14 ) aic innehnemiliz ye tlapalihcuiliuhtoc ēnyo pohpolihu In inihyo in int “Su fama y su honra nunca perecerán, su historia en pinturas escrita está Seminario decomplejidad sintáctica 2014 Seminario de complejidad sintáctica 2014 1 PROGRAMA 3 Sala de Usos Múltiples Departamento de Letras y Lingüística Edifício 3Q, 2o. Piso Lunes 10 de noviembre 9:00-9:55 Nominalization, de-subordination and re-finitization T. Givón University of Oregon and White Cloud Ranch, Ignacio, Colorado 10:00-10:25 RECESO 10:30-10:55 Inflecting compounding in Mixe languages Rodrigo Romero Méndez IIFL-Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México 11:00-11:25 Topicalización en lacandón del sur Israel Martínez Corripio Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia 11:30-11:55 RECESO 12:00-12:25 The rise of the nominalizations: The case of the grammaticalization of clause types in Ecuadorian Siona Martine Bruil University of California at Berkeley 5 12:30-12:55 Adverbial clauses in Southeastern Tepehuan (O’dam) Gabriela García Salido Universidad de Sonora-CONACyT 13:00-15:55 COMIDA 16:00-16:55 On being an adjunct. Evidence from Algonquian Fernando Zúñiga University of Bern 17:00-17:25 RECESO 17:30-17:55 Posesión externa en mazahua Armando Mora-Bustos Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Unidad Iztapalapa 18:00-18:25 Lexical and clausal nominalization in Mochica Rita Eloranta Universiteit Leiden 18:30-18:55 The diachrony of grammatical nominalizations in Cahita (Uto-Aztecan) Albert Alvarez Gonzalez Universidad de Sonora 19:00 CENA LIBRE 6 Martes 11 de noviembre 9:00-9:55 On the role of person marking in finiteness and discourse Walter Bisang University of Mainz 10:00-10:25 RECESO 10:30-10:55 Temporal sentences in Yaqui: Topical arguments, coreference and switch-reference Lilián Guerrero IIFL-Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México 11:00-11:25 Destinative construction in Q’anjob’al (Maya): A complex predicate analysis Eladio Mateo Toledo (B’alam) Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superio- res en Antropología Social-Sureste 11:30-11:55 RECESO 12:00-12:25 Los predicados no finitos como construcciones desiderativas, y su restricción aspectual y de persona en el nawat de Pajapan, Veracruz Valentín Peralta Ramírez Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia 12:30-12:55 Clause chaining and nominalization in Tarahumara: A corpus oriented research Zarina Estrada Fernández y Jesús Villalpando Quiñónez Universidad de Sonora y University of Colora- do, Boulder 7 13:00-15:55 COMIDA SECCIÓN DE POSTERS 16:00-16:20 Oraciones adverbiales temporales y correferencia de sujetos Rebeca Gerardo Tavira Maestría en Lingüística Hispánica Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México 16:20-16:40 La alternancia de a y para en construcciones complejas con verbos de movimiento: ¿oraciones finales o de propósito? Paola Gutiérrez y Valeria Benítez Maestría en Lingüística Hispánica y Doctorado en Lingüística-Universidad Nacional Autóno- ma de México 16:40-17:00 Comportamiento del verbo sentir en oraciones complejas: un estudio a partir de corpus Irasema Cruz Domínguez Maestría en Lingüística Hispánica Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México 17:00-17:25 RECESO 17:30-17:55 Entre pedir y el deseo. Gramaticalización del desiderativo en maayat’aan Fidencio Briceño Chel Centro INAH; Yucatán 8 18:00-18:25 The syncretism between antipassive and causative in Mocovi Cristian Juárez y Albert Alvarez Gonzalez Universidad de Sonora 19:00 CENA 9 RESÚMENES 11 Nominalization, de-subordination and re-finitization T. Givón University of Oregon and White Cloud Ranch, Ignacio, Colorado [email protected] Across the Uto-Aztecan family, one finds a sharp distinction between the extreme nominalizing north and the resolutely finite south. The two northern-most sub-families, Numic and Takic, nominalize every subordinate clause in sight. The same seems to be true of Yaqui and Huichol. But further south one finds uniformly finite subordinate clauses in Tepiman (Tepehuan, Pima Bajo) all the way to Nahuatl. The transition zone between the two extre- mes, Guarijío, Trahumara and perhaps Cora, is surprisingly thin. There are good reasons for suggesting that the Uto-Aztecan north is both culturally (hunting-gathering) and linguistically (OV syntax) more conservative, and that the family’s south, due to either natural drift or contact with the Meso-American substratum is more innovative. So the question I would like to pose here is this: How does the drift from nominalized to finite subordinate clauses take place? Especially natural drift that is not induced by contact. The strategy I will pursue here is two-fold: • Try to understand the internal logic of nominalization and related processes. • Try to find evidence, in the middle zone of the family and elsewhere, for the dynamics of change. 13 Inflecting compounding in Mixe languages Rodrigo Romero Méndez Seminario de Lenguas Indígenas, IIFl, UNAM [email protected] Verb-verb compounding in Mixe-Zoque languages has been documented as one of the polysynthetic characteristics of these languages. It has been called nuclear serialization (Bril 2007; Foley & Olson 1985; Foley 1991; Romero 2009; Zavala 2000) in reference to the type of juncture (Foley & van Valin 1984). Thus, verb-verb compounding is a mechanism to create complex predicates, as shown in (1): (1)Nyijkxy muum, jakam pues este... To’okëtejtp. y-nëjkx-y muum jakam pues este to’ok-jëtet-p 3S-go-DEP some.where far.away hmm DISC [3S]sell-walk-INDEP ‘He went far away hmm... He went to sell.’ On the other hand, compounding is also regarded as a morphological process usually restricted to word formation (cf. Lieber & Štekauer 2009), but, as Beck (2011) points out, there is no reason why we should confine, a priori, any formal mechanism to a particular function. According to this author, in Upper Necaxa Totonac compounding is also used to perform inflecting functions (something that Mel’cuk 2006:124 calls quasi-inflection), in addition to being used in word formation. The same situation occurs in Mixe: two roots can create a new lexical item, as in (2a), but compounding is also used to express grammatical meanings, as in (2b). (2) a. Jëts, ¿pën käjpxtä’kp? jëts pëën käjpx-tä’äk-p and who speak-embroider-INDEP ‘And, who was praying?’ 14 b. Pedro të pyujttsoony. Pedro të y-put-tsoon-y Pedro PERF 3S-run-go.away-DEP ‘Pedro started running.’ In both examples in (2), as well as in the example in (1), the last root bears the stress, something that affixes cannot do. In addition, the last root in these examples undergoes apophony (Ro- mero 2009), something unique to verb roots. Furthermore, this pattern is also found in nouns, as shown in (3). Thus, it is a widespread formal mechanism in the language use to convey grammatical meanings usually associated with inflection. (3) tsäkäj-anä’äk cow-lads ‘cattle’ As Beck (2011) points out, it is possible that this situation exists not just Totonac, but in other polysynthetic languages, but it has previously missed. This paper addresses this issue. References Beck, David. 2011. Lexical, quasi-inflectional, and inflectional compounding in Upper Necaxa Totonac. In A. Aikhenvald & P. Muysken (eds.), Multi-verb Constructions: A view from the Americas, 63-106. Leiden: Brill. Bril, Isabelle. 2007. Nexus and juncture types of complex predicates in oceanic languages: Functions and semantics. Language and linguistics 8 (1): 276-310. Foley, William, & Olson, Mike. 1985. Clausehood and verb serialization. In J. Nichols and A. C. Woodbury (eds.), Grammar inside and outside the clause: Some approaches 15 to theory from the field, 17-67. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Foley, William, & Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. 1984. Functional syntax and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Foley, William. 1991. The Yimas language of New Guinea. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Lieber, Rochelle & Pavol Štekauer. 2009. The Oxford handbook of compounding. Oxford, UK: OUP. Mel’cuk, Igor. 2006. Aspects of the theory of morphology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Romero Méndez, Rodrigo. 2009. A reference grammar of Ayutla Mixe. University at Buffalo: Ph.D. Dissertation. Zavala Maldonado, Roberto. 2000. Inversion and other topics in the grammar of Olutec (Mixe), University of Oregon: Ph.D. Dissertation. Topicalización en lacandón del sur Israel Martínez Corripio Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia [email protected] En este trabajo presento algunos rasgos respecto a la topicaliza- ción en lacandón del sur, lengua maya de la rama yucatecana. La topicalización se utiliza para atraer la atención del oyente hacía un participante en el discurso, de tal forma que el constituyente topicalizado regularmente es definido y, preferiblemente, se colo- ca frente al predicado (Aissen 1992: 50). En las lenguas mayas yucatecanas, el marcador de tópico -e’ sirve para indicar límites de cláusulas que incluyen cláusulas relativas, condicionales y su- 16 bordinadas adverbiales (Bohnemeyer 1998; Hofling 2000; Bergqvist 2008). En lacandón del sur, específicamente, el elemento léxico topicalizado puede aparecer antes o después del predicado como se muestra en (1a) y (1b). Por lo tanto, al igual que en otras len- guas yucatecanas, el lacandón del sur distingue al elemento topicalizado por medio de la marca -e’, que la mayoría de las veces tiene correlación con el determinante a. Sin embargo, exis- ten casos en los cuales el topicalizador aparece sin este determi- nante (1c).1 (1)a. peero a baarum-e’ k-u-ka’a=nuk-ik-ø pero DET jaguar-TOP IPF-A3-NUM=contestar-ICTR-B3 ‘pero es el tigre el que vuelve a contestar’ (HombreTigreJCHK014) b. ba’k a-kuch-(i)k-ø a teech-e’ qué A2-cargar-ICTR-B3 DET EF2-TOP ‘entonces ¿qué cargas tú?’ (JNSQC059) c.