Features in Anggor Discourse
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Features of Angor Discourse A Dissertation in Linguistics Robert Lee Litteral Presented to the Graduate Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 1980 Supervisor of Dissertation Graduate Group Chairperson 1 To Shirley Karihas 2 Contents Contents 3 Preface 6 Chapter 1 Introduction 7 Abbreviations and Symbols 10 Chapter II Approaches to discourse 11 Introduction 11 Transformational 11 Tagmemics 12 Stratificational 13 Sociolinguistics 13 Systemic 14 Text Semantics 15 Artificial Intelligence 16 The Thread of Discourse 17 The Approach of This Study 19 Chapter III A Sketch of Angor Phonology and Grammar 21 The Angor 21 Phonology 22 Segments 22 Syllable 23 Foot 23 Intonation Contours 24 Morphophonemic Processes 25 Grammar 26 Morphology 26 Verbs 26 Verb Classes 27 Verb Affixes 32 Nouns 38 Other Classes 42 Phrases 44 Noun Phrases 45 Verb Phrases 46 Clauses 47 Clause Functions 47 Predicate types 50 Interclause relations 51 3 Sentences 53 Periphery 55 Nucleus 56 Clause Series 56 Simple Nucleus 56 Complex Nucleus 57 Compound nucleus 57 Terminus 58 Paragraphs 59 Chapter IV Semantics 61 Introduction 61 Reference 61 Object reference 61 Situational Reference 66 Referential Index 68 Semantic Roles 69 Lexical Predicates 73 Inherent Features 74 Transitivity 74 Aspect 77 Noninherent features 78 Aspect 78 Realizations 79 Time Index 79 Rhetorical predicates 81 Logical Predicates 82 Equative Predicates 96 Orientation Predicates 101 Response Predicate 106 Nontext semantics 108 Scripts 108 Plans 109 Inference 109 Chapter V Cohesion 111 Introduction 111 Phonological Cohesion 112 Referential cohesion 113 Reference 113 Agreement 115 Anaphoric reference 118 Cataphoric reference 123 Grammatical Cohesion 129 Conjunctions 129 Parallelism 131 Lexical Cohesion 132 4 Common semantic domain 132 Lexical collocation 135 Lexical cycles 135 Sample Text 136 Chapter VI Staging 139 Introduction 139 Focus 140 Structural Prominence 141 Nominal prominence 141 Discourse nominal prominence 143 Thematization 148 Global thematization 148 Unmarked global thematization 148 Marked global thematization 149 Local thematization 152 Unmarked local thematization 153 Marked local thematization 154 APPENDIX A 155 APPENDIX B 158 Bibliography 160 5 Preface This study has a twofold purpose. The first is to sketch the basic grammar of the Angor language of Papua New Guinea. There are no comprehensive studies of either of the two languages of the Senagi Family to which Angor belongs, a rather distinct group with no known close affinities. The second purpose is to describe Angor discourse by analyzing its semantic, cohesive, and prominence systems. The data for this study ware gathered largely in the village of Bibriari in field trips during the years 1965-69 and 1971-75 while working under the auspices of The Summer Institute of Linguistics. Although many Angors have assisted me in learning their language, Mr. Waf Sahayo and Mr. Sani Amafen deserve special thanks for their patience and faithful assistance. The data consists of both oral and written materials. The oral materials consist of various types of monologues by numerous speakers plus a few conversations that were recorded on magnetic tape and transcribed. Many of the texts were included in a concordance prepared by the Computer Laboratory of the University of Oklahoma under NSF Grant GS-1605. The written materials vary from personal stories by new Angor literates, to news articles, letters, and an educational book written by a high school student. My deep gratitude to the members of my committee: Dell H. Hymes, William Labov, and Joseph E. Grimes. Their encouragement and help has been considerable and they have been very patient with the problems associated with assisting via correspondence. Dr. Hymes’s influence has been more than that of instructor and chairman. His views of language and society have had a profound influence on my intellectual development and have encouraged my interests in the practical problems of language and society. Dr. Grimes’s contribution to this study has been more than theoretical. He introduced me to the fascinating study of discourse and helped me to broaden my horizons by looking beyond the contributions of linguistics. His encouragement and assistance in the practical details of writing have been considerable. For the errors that remain I alone am responsible. I would like to acknowledge the financial assistance of many friends who have contributed to our work among the Angor. Special thanks are due to the staff in the computer department of the Papua New Guinea Branch of the Summer Institute of Linguistics for their valuable assistance in the preparation of this manuscript. To my wife, Shirley, I am deeply grateful for linguistic discussions of Angor, for typing and editorial assistance, and for patience and encouragement. 6 Chapter 1 Introduction The study of discourse has advanced from a situation where it was on the linguistic fringe to where it has assumed not only a significant place in the linguistic field but has also become an interdisciplinary study in itself. Discourse analysis is still in its infancy in that no contemporary linguistic theory is able to provide an adequate model to explain the multifaceted nature of discourse. In such a situation there are several options open to the discourse analyst. One option is to limit one’s analysis to the data that contemporary theory can adequately describe. This, however, is overly restrictive and would not contribute significantly to our knowledge about discourse. Another option is to investigate one aspect of discourse and to develop a limited theory to explain the phenomena observed there. It is legimate to limit one’s scope to a single area when significant contributions to theory can be expected. A third option is to describe a wide range of discourse phenomena using whatever theoretical tools are available in order to test those theories and to provide data on discourse phenomena that a universal theory of discourse should be able to explain. The third option is the one followed in this study of Angor discourse. Due to the embryonic state of discourse theory, this study is of necessity eclectic. However, this should not restrict how it can widen our knowledge of discourse phenomena so that a more comprehensive theory of discourse can emerge. The method of analysis followed in this study is textual. That is, the corpus consists of recorded and transcribed oral texts and written texts in the Angor language of Papua New Guinea ranging from those of new literates to those of a high school student. Most texts were translated with the aid of Angor speaking assistants in order to insure a proper understanding of the text and to obtain essential background information. Many of the texts were displayed on a modified Thurman chart (Grimes 1975) for the purpose of highlighting their semantic and grammatical features. On the basis of the analysis of these texts hypotheses were developed which were tested against other charted and uncharted texts. Most grammatical examples come from texts with a few also coming from elicited data or my basic knowledge of Angor which I have been studying since 1965. Statistical counts for comparative purposes were made of the features of certain texts taken as representative of a genre or style. Chapter II summarizes modern studies of discourse beginning with the work of Harris in the early fifties. Included in this survey are nonlinguistic contributions to text analysis and comprehension. The chapter concludes with a summary of the general view of discourse taken in this study. Chapter III begins with a brief introduction to the Angor people and to their established and possible linguistic affinities. There is a summary of Angor phonology from segments to intonation contours. Vowel and consonant harmony are significant features of Angor phonology. A sketch of the main features of Angor grammar is given in which the problem of describing text sentences in purely grammatical terms is discussed. Of typological interest are the Angor interclause temporal-reference monitoring system and the discourse topic signaling system. These systems are related in that they both utilize verbal mood and person-number-gender affixes. The interclause monitoring system is derived in that it uses separate morphemes for temporal and reference monitoring in contrast with the New Guinea 7 Highlands systems which mostly use single morphemes to monitor temporal-reference relations. Discourse topics are affixed with tense-mood morphemes that agree with the tense-mood of the clause that dominates the topicalized element. They also agree in person, number, and gender with the subject of the dominating clause. Question words may also use discourse topic affixation with tense-mood and subject and object agreement with the verb. Another significant typological feature is the use of double reference monitoring affixation in which two prominent referents in the following clause are signaled cataphorically by subject and object transitive verb affixes. Question words may also signal double topicalization. The reference monitoring system does not monitor surface syntactic information but rather pragmatic information; that is, the referent monitored may be functioning as the syntactic object in some cases. The speaker also has the option of treating an actor as a participant or nonparticipant by his use of reference monitoring. Of theoretical interest is the problem