DOCSLIB.ORG

Classifiers: a Typology of Noun Categorization Edward J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Western Washington University Western CEDAR Modern & Classical Languages Humanities 3-2002 Review of: Classifiers: A Typology of Noun Categorization Edward J. Vajda Western Washington University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://cedar.wwu.edu/mcl_facpubs Part of the Modern Languages Commons Recommended Citation Vajda, Edward J., "Review of: Classifiers: A Typology of Noun Categorization" (2002). Modern & Classical Languages. 35. https://cedar.wwu.edu/mcl_facpubs/35 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Humanities at Western CEDAR. It has been accepted for inclusion in Modern & Classical Languages by an authorized administrator of Western CEDAR. For more information, please contact [email protected]. J. Linguistics38 (2002), I37-172. ? 2002 CambridgeUniversity Press Printedin the United Kingdom REVIEWS J. Linguistics 38 (2002). DOI: Io.IOI7/So022226702211378 ? 2002 Cambridge University Press Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald, Classifiers: a typology of noun categorization devices.Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 2000. Pp. xxvi+ 535. Reviewedby EDWARDJ. VAJDA,Western Washington University This book offers a multifaceted,cross-linguistic survey of all types of grammaticaldevices used to categorizenouns. It representsan ambitious expansion beyond earlier studies dealing with individual aspects of this phenomenon, notably Corbett's (I99I) landmark monograph on noun classes(genders), Dixon's importantessay (I982) distinguishingnoun classes fromclassifiers, and Greenberg's(I972) seminalpaper on numeralclassifiers. Aikhenvald'sClassifiers exceeds them all in the number of languages it examines and in its breadth of typological inquiry. The full gamut of morphologicalpatterns used to classify nouns (or, more accurately,the referentsof nouns)is consideredholistically, with an eye towardcategorizing the categorizationdevices themselvesin terms of a comprehensiveframe- work. The author directsher resultstoward severalaims. One is to fashion a unified and straightforwardsystem of terminologydealing with noun categorizationdevices. Another is to presentnew data on classifiersystems from recentlydescribed languages in a broadertypological dimension and to begin consideringwhat such systems can reveal about human cognition, currentlimitations in knowledgeabout linguisticdiversity notwithstanding. Last but not least, the book is intendedto inspireand guide more linguists into conductingfieldwork on undescribedor under-describedlanguages by providing'a frameworkwithin which fieldworkersand typologistswill be able to work, and whichcan be amendedand adjustedas new data and new insightsemerge' (viii). Over five hundredlanguages were sampled in researchingthis book, a numberthat Aikhenvaldmodestly reminds the readeris 'no morethan about one tenth of all human languages'(5), and doubtlessomits many classifier systems as yet undocumented.Still, the author included every language containingnoun classifierphenomena of any kindthat cameto her attention, by using the most thorough possible 'sample of convenience' (4). Pages 489-508 contain an alphabeticallist of the languagesincluded, giving their geneticaffiliations, along with lists of languagefamilies and linguisticareas in which classifierphenomena have been documented.Maps at the end of individualchapters show the distributionof the variousclassifier phenomena I37 This content downloaded from 140.160.178.168 on Fri, 16 May 2014 14:41:46 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions JOURNAL OF LINGUISTICS discussed.A lengthybibliography (452-470) includes every major publication dealingwith any aspect of noun categorizationdevices. Much of the extant literatureon such prolifictopics as East Asian numeralclassifiers or Bantu noun classes likewiseappears to have been consulted,though only some of these works receiveindividual mention in the discussion.In all these ways, this study is extremelyauthoritative and up-to-date.It is especiallyrich in new data from South America and, to a lesser extent, Australia and the South Pacific, much of it never before considered in a cross-linguistic perspective.A fairportion of the SouthAmerican data was gleanedfrom the author'sown extensivefield work in the BrazilianAmazon. The book containsfifteen chapters and threeappendixes, and closes with the expected indexes of languages,linguistic areas and language families (509-518), authors (19-524) and subjects (525-535). Chapter I, entitled 'Preliminaries'(i-i8), definesthe study'sgoals andjustifies its methodology. It is importantto realizethat the proposedtypological framework assumes that classifierelements and systems in individual languages representa continuumrather than a series of discretetypes. The latter view, were it adopted, would have proven too rigid to accommodate many of the languagesAikhenvald describes, some of whichjuxtapose several classifica- tion devices used for different purposes. Treating classifiersas discrete phenomenawould also be more likely to mislead during investigationsof unknownlanguages. The continuumapproach is also felicitouswhen dealing with individualsystems from a diachronicperspective. Each of the next eight chapters discusses a specific type of noun classificationdevice (the 'focal points' on Aikhenvald'scontinuum) as manifestedcrosslinguistically. Clear illustrations of each of these devicesare provided from at least one language, with occurrences of the same phenomenon in other languages mentioned in passing so that coverage approachesthe encyclopedic.Chapter 2 (i9-80) discussesnoun classes and genders- definedas 'noun categorizationdevices realized outside the noun itself within a head-modifier noun phrase' (I7). These function as grammaticalizedagreement systems and correlate at least partly with semanticfeatures (I9). FollowingDixon (I982), Aikhenvaldnotes that these systemstend to occurin fusionaland agglutinatinglanguages. The remaining discussionconcentrates on aspectsof noun classesnot coveredextensively in Corbett(i99 I), with particularlyrich examples from the languagesof Africa, New Guineaand SouthAmerica. The concisediscussion of terminologyand types of noun class phenomenahere provides a particularlysuperb textbook treatment.The map showing the world distributionof noun class systems (78) shouldhave indicatedKet as an isolatedexample of a Siberianlanguage with noun classes, somethingmentioned in the chapterdiscussion (77). Chapter 3 (8I-97) moves on to noun classifiers,non-concordial noun- categorizationdevices whose presencein the noun phraseis determinedby lexical selection accordingto syntacticproperties of the head noun rather 138 This content downloaded from 140.160.178.168 on Fri, 16 May 2014 14:41:46 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions REVIEWS than inflectionalprocesses (8I). Numeralclassifiers, the other lexicaltype of noun categorizationdevice, are discussedin chapter4 (98-I24). Coverage extends beyond the already described noun categorization systems of Australiato revealthe lesserknown systems of SoutheastAsia, Mesoamerica and South America(Chibchan). Aikhenvald notes that no North American or Papuan languageswith noun classifiershave yet been documented(97). Similarly,the discussionof numeralclassifiers takes the familiarsystems of East Asia only as a startingpoint, then goes on to providea wealth of fresh data about such systems in South America, Western Austronesiaand in isolatedpockets across North America.Aikhenvald notes that these systems appearto be absentfrom Australia and veryrare in Africa(I24). The author stressesthat categorizationssuch as 'very rare' or 'frequent' are tentative, pendingdocumentation of additionallanguages. In the spiritof her book as representativeof researchin progress,Aikhenvald prominently urges readers in a special 'plea' on page xi to communicateany 'counterexamples,new ideasand data to furtherdevelop, refine, and improvethe generalizationsput forwardhere'. Chapter 5 (I25-I48) turns to the topic of classifiers in possessive constructions,a much rarerphenomenon found so far in only a few areas. Aikhenvalddescribes three types, distinguishedby whetherthey define the type of possessionalrelation, or are dictated by the inherentsemantics of eitherthe possessumor the possessor.Relational classifiers, which 'categorize kinds of institutionalized,culturally relevant relationships between the possessorand the possessed'(146), have been found in Amazoniaand parts of the Pacific.Possessed classifiers occur in isolatedinstances in both North and SouthAmerica, as well as CentralAfrica. Possessor classifiers have so far been found only in a few Makuilanguages of NorthwestAmazonia. Eurasian and Australianlanguages appear to lack these devicesaltogether. Chapter6 (I49-17 I) discussesverbal classifiers, verb-internal morphemes that 'categoriz[e]the referentof [their arguments]in terms of its shape, consistency,size, structure,position, and animacy' (149). Examplesrepre- senting Australian, Papuan and especially Native North American and Lowland Amazonian languages illustrate classificatoryuses of noun in- corporation,affixation, and suppletiveroots. No verbalclassifiers of any kind have been found in the languagesof Africa or Eurasia,or in Austronesian (I 7I). Chapter7 (I72-I83) discussesclassifiers found in locativenoun phrases and classificatorydeictic modifiers and/or articles.Deictic classifiersappear to be confinedto Siouan,Yuchi, Eskimoan and Guaicuruan (South America). Locativeclassifiers are even rarer,with the only examplesdocumented so far coming
Recommended publications
  • On Root Modality and Thematic Relations in Tagalog and English*

    On Root Modality and Thematic Relations in Tagalog and English*

    Proceedings of SALT 26: 775–794, 2016 On root modality and thematic relations in Tagalog and English* Maayan Abenina-Adar Nikos Angelopoulos UCLA UCLA Abstract The literature on modality discusses how context and grammar interact to produce different flavors of necessity primarily in connection with functional modals e.g., English auxiliaries. In contrast, the grammatical properties of lexical modals (i.e., thematic verbs) are less understood. In this paper, we use the Tagalog necessity modal kailangan and English need as a case study in the syntax-semantics of lexical modals. Kailangan and need enter two structures, which we call ‘thematic’ and ‘impersonal’. We show that when they establish a thematic dependency with a subject, they express necessity in light of this subject’s priorities, and in the absence of an overt thematic subject, they express necessity in light of priorities endorsed by the speaker. To account for this, we propose a single lexical entry for kailangan / need that uniformly selects for a ‘needer’ argument. In thematic constructions, the needer is the overt subject, and in impersonal constructions, it is an implicit speaker-bound pronoun. Keywords: modality, thematic relations, Tagalog, syntax-semantics interface 1 Introduction In this paper, we observe that English need and its Tagalog counterpart, kailangan, express two different types of necessity depending on the syntactic structure they enter. We show that thematic constructions like (1) express necessities in light of priorities of the thematic subject, i.e., John, whereas impersonal constructions like (2) express necessities in light of priorities of the speaker. (1) John needs there to be food left over.
  • An Analysis of Semantic and Syntactic Negation in Oshiwambo and English

    An Analysis of Semantic and Syntactic Negation in Oshiwambo and English

    JULACE: Journal of University of Namibia Language Centre Volume 4, No. 2, 2019 (ISSN 2026-8297) An analysis of semantic and syntactic negation in Oshiwambo and English Immanuel N. Shatepa1 Namibia University of Science and Technology Abstract Negation in languages has been documented since the 1970s and 1980s. This paper attempts to explain the negation structures in semantic and syntactic structures of Oshiwambo and English languages. These two languages have two complete negation structures and how they function to achieve negation is far from being similar. The focus of the paper was on the analysis of the sentential negation and how negative particles are used in English and Oshiwambo, a Bantu language. It analyzes and compares the use of full negatives, affixes and quasi negative words to achieve negation in English and Oshiwambo language. The Oshiwambo and English texts/contents were purposely sampled and content analysis was performed accordingly. The analysis shows that Bantu languages share a common rule of negation which is the use of a pre- initial prefix while the rules to changing negative imperative to interrogative or declarative are different between English and Oshiwambo. Keywords: pre-initial, negation, marker, imperative, declarative, integrative, syntactic, semantic, Bantu Introduction A number of studies on negation of English and Bantu languages have been conducted by linguists. Studies by Kim and Sag (1995); Neba and Tanda (2005) and Weir (2013) show that negation differs from language to language. They further state highlighted that since every language has its own morphological and semantic components to express negation, one rule fits all simply does not work.
  • Nouns, Adjectives, Verbs, and Adverbs

    Nouns, Adjectives, Verbs, and Adverbs

    Unit 1: The Parts of Speech Noun—a person, place, thing, or idea Name: Person: boy Kate mom Place: house Minnesota ocean Adverbs—describe verbs, adjectives, and other Thing: car desk phone adverbs Idea: freedom prejudice sadness --------------------------------------------------------------- Answers the questions how, when, where, and to Pronoun—a word that takes the place of a noun. what extent Instead of… Kate – she car – it Many words ending in “ly” are adverbs: quickly, smoothly, truly A few other pronouns: he, they, I, you, we, them, who, everyone, anybody, that, many, both, few A few other adverbs: yesterday, ever, rather, quite, earlier --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- Adjective—describes a noun or pronoun Prepositions—show the relationship between a noun or pronoun and another word in the sentence. Answers the questions what kind, which one, how They begin a prepositional phrase, which has a many, and how much noun or pronoun after it, called the object. Articles are a sub category of adjectives and include Think of the box (things you have do to a box). the following three words: a, an, the Some prepositions: over, under, on, from, of, at, old car (what kind) that car (which one) two cars (how many) through, in, next to, against, like --------------------------------------------------------------- Conjunctions—connecting words. --------------------------------------------------------------- Connect ideas and/or sentence parts. Verb—action, condition, or state of being FANBOYS (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so) Action (things you can do)—think, run, jump, climb, eat, grow A few other conjunctions are found at the beginning of a sentence: however, while, since, because Linking (or helping)—am, is, are, was, were --------------------------------------------------------------- Interjections—show emotion.
  • The Term Declension, the Three Basic Qualities of Latin Nouns, That

    The Term Declension, the Three Basic Qualities of Latin Nouns, That

    Chapter 2: First Declension Chapter 2 covers the following: the term declension, the three basic qualities of Latin nouns, that is, case, number and gender, basic sentence structure, subject, verb, direct object and so on, the six cases of Latin nouns and the uses of those cases, the formation of the different cases in Latin, and the way adjectives agree with nouns. At the end of this lesson we’ll review the vocabulary you should memorize in this chapter. Declension. As with conjugation, the term declension has two meanings in Latin. It means, first, the process of joining a case ending onto a noun base. Second, it is a term used to refer to one of the five categories of nouns distinguished by the sound ending the noun base: /a/, /ŏ/ or /ŭ/, a consonant or /ĭ/, /ū/, /ē/. First, let’s look at the three basic characteristics of every Latin noun: case, number and gender. All Latin nouns and adjectives have these three grammatical qualities. First, case: how the noun functions in a sentence, that is, is it the subject, the direct object, the object of a preposition or any of many other uses? Second, number: singular or plural. And third, gender: masculine, feminine or neuter. Every noun in Latin will have one case, one number and one gender, and only one of each of these qualities. In other words, a noun in a sentence cannot be both singular and plural, or masculine and feminine. Whenever asked ─ and I will ask ─ you should be able to give the correct answer for all three qualities.
  • Morphological Classes and Gender in Ɓəna-Yungur

    Morphological Classes and Gender in Ɓəna-Yungur

    Morphological classes and gender in əna-Yungur Mark van de Velde, Dmitry Idiatov To cite this version: Mark van de Velde, Dmitry Idiatov. Morphological classes and gender in əna-Yungur. Shigeki Kaji. Proceedings of the 8th World Congress of African Linguistics, Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, pp.53-65, 2017. halshs-01484016 HAL Id: halshs-01484016 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01484016 Submitted on 6 Mar 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Morphological classes and gender in Ɓə́ná-Yungur Mark Van de Velde1,2 & Dmitry Idiatov1,2 1Llacan (UMR 8135 CNRS – USPC/Inalco), Paris, France 2Research Centre for Nigerian Languages, KWASU, Malete, Nigeria Abstract This paper provides an analysis of the gender system of Ɓə́ná-Yungur (glottocode: bena1260), distinguishing noun classes proper, defined as agreement classes, from morphological classes, defined in terms of number marking on nouns. The gender system is typologically unusual in its symmetry and simplicity. Ɓə́ná-Yungur has three noun classes in the singular and the same three classes in the plural. All logically possible singular-plural pairings are attested, except one.
  • Personal Pronouns, Pronoun-Antecedent Agreement, and Vague Or Unclear Pronoun References

    Personal Pronouns, Pronoun-Antecedent Agreement, and Vague Or Unclear Pronoun References

    Personal Pronouns, Pronoun-Antecedent Agreement, and Vague or Unclear Pronoun References PERSONAL PRONOUNS Personal pronouns are pronouns that are used to refer to specific individuals or things. Personal pronouns can be singular or plural, and can refer to someone in the first, second, or third person. First person is used when the speaker or narrator is identifying himself or herself. Second person is used when the speaker or narrator is directly addressing another person who is present. Third person is used when the speaker or narrator is referring to a person who is not present or to anything other than a person, e.g., a boat, a university, a theory. First-, second-, and third-person personal pronouns can all be singular or plural. Also, all of them can be nominative (the subject of a verb), objective (the object of a verb or preposition), or possessive. Personal pronouns tend to change form as they change number and function. Singular Plural 1st person I, me, my, mine We, us, our, ours 2nd person you, you, your, yours you, you, your, yours she, her, her, hers 3rd person he, him, his, his they, them, their, theirs it, it, its Most academic writing uses third-person personal pronouns exclusively and avoids first- and second-person personal pronouns. MORE . PRONOUN-ANTECEDENT AGREEMENT A personal pronoun takes the place of a noun. An antecedent is the word, phrase, or clause to which a pronoun refers. In all of the following examples, the antecedent is in bold and the pronoun is italicized: The teacher forgot her book.
  • The “Person” Category in the Zamuco Languages. a Diachronic Perspective

    The “Person” Category in the Zamuco Languages. a Diachronic Perspective

    On rare typological features of the Zamucoan languages, in the framework of the Chaco linguistic area Pier Marco Bertinetto Luca Ciucci Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa The Zamucoan family Ayoreo ca. 4500 speakers Old Zamuco (a.k.a. Ancient Zamuco) spoken in the XVIII century, extinct Chamacoco (Ɨbɨtoso, Tomarâho) ca. 1800 speakers The Zamucoan family The first stable contact with Zamucoan populations took place in the early 18th century in the reduction of San Ignacio de Samuco. The Jesuit Ignace Chomé wrote a grammar of Old Zamuco (Arte de la lengua zamuca). The Chamacoco established friendly relationships by the end of the 19th century. The Ayoreos surrended rather late (towards the middle of the last century); there are still a few nomadic small bands in Northern Paraguay. The Zamucoan family Main typological features -Fusional structure -Word order features: - SVO - Genitive+Noun - Noun + Adjective Zamucoan typologically rare features Nominal tripartition Radical tenselessness Nominal aspect Affix order in Chamacoco 3 plural Gender + classifiers 1 person ø-marking in Ayoreo realis Traces of conjunct / disjunct system in Old Zamuco Greater plural and clusivity Para-hypotaxis Nominal tripartition Radical tenselessness Nominal aspect Affix order in Chamacoco 3 plural Gender + classifiers 1 person ø-marking in Ayoreo realis Traces of conjunct / disjunct system in Old Zamuco Greater plural and clusivity Para-hypotaxis Nominal tripartition All Zamucoan languages present a morphological tripartition in their nominals. The base-form (BF) is typically used for predication. The singular-BF is (Ayoreo & Old Zamuco) or used to be (Cham.) the basis for any morphological operation. The full-form (FF) occurs in argumental position.
  • 0 German Noun Class As a Nominal Protection Device Richard Futrell

    0 German Noun Class As a Nominal Protection Device Richard Futrell

    German Noun Class as a Nominal Protection Device Richard Futrell Undergraduate Honors Thesis Stanford University, Department of Linguistics May 2010 ____________________________________ Faculty advisor: Dan Jurafsky ____________________________________ Second reader: Michael Ramscar 0 Gretchen: Wilhelm, where is the turnip? Wilhelm: She has gone to the kitchen. Gretchen: Where is the accomplished and beautiful English maiden? Wilhelm: It has gone to the opera. - Mark Twain, ―The Awful German Language‖ 1. Introduction Grammatical gender, also known as noun class, afflicts about half of the world's languages. Speakers of these languages must mark each noun for its membership in a certain noun class, and must similarly mark elements such as adjectives or verbs that agree with the noun. In over half of these cases, the choice of gender for a noun has no comprehensive systematic relationship to the meaning of the nouns (Corbett 2008), posing a significant obstacle for L2 learners (Harley 1979, Tucker et al. 1968: 312). Some have taken grammatical gender to be superfluous: for instance, Maratsos (1979: 235) calls the existence of such a system ―excellent testimony to the occasional nonsensibleness of the species.‖ A number of researchers have nonetheless defended noun class against the accusation of uselessness, and I will take up that cause in this paper. I will examine the gender system of Standard German with an eye toward detecting function. I claim that noun class serves as a sort of ‗Nominal Protection Device,‘ alleviating the linguistic difficulties inherent in nouns by reducing uncertainty about nouns. Noun class markers help language users predict nouns in a number of ways: they predict the form of the noun, they predict the semantics of the noun, and they predict 1 which discourse referent a pronoun points to in reference tracking (in the sense of Barlow 1992).
  • The Noun Class System Of

    The Noun Class System Of

    UNIVERSITY OF YAOUNDE !! <f:.,;+ e.>, " PA, FACULTY OF LETTERS DEPARTMENT OF 'AFRICIAN AND SOCIAL SCIENCES LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS THE NOUN CLASS SYSTEM OF A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Award of a Post-Graduate Diploma (Maitrise) in Linguistics BY Irene Swiri ASOBO 8. A. Modern Lefters Supervised by Dr. CarL EBOBISSE (Char@ de cours) September 1989 i Dedicated to my parents, bro-them and sisters, with all my love. C. ACKIIOKLEGEMENT I must acknowledge special indebtedness to my supervisor Dr. Cor1 EBOBISSE for his invaluable contribu- tion ot the realisation of this dissertation. His inde- fatigable patience criticisms and unswerving dcvotion were encouraging especially when I was doubting and discouraged. Llithout his potient guidance this work would not have been acheived. My heortfelt'gratitu8e to fioffessor B.S. Chumbow who assisted and advised me during the writing of this work. My special thanks also goes to Dr. Chia Emmanuel otic? 011 my lecturers who were a source of unwmering support to me. Great thankfulness to my parents Prince snii Mrs V.T. ASOBO for the moral and financial ai& they showered on me. I will like to gratefully 3cknowledge Evclyne Monikang for the wonderful and ucfziling encouragomcnt she gnvc me. She was always a pillar to 1em on. Sincere thanks to 311 my classmates whose camoroderie wc?s a11 T neef-ed to spur me on. All. my friends especially Walters Abie who was always ready to help, Po-po who never stopped to say go on and Dora Mbola for being there when I needed her.
  • Names a Person, Place, Thing, Or an Idea. A. Common Noun – Names Any One of a Group of Persons, Places, Things, Or Ideas

    Names a Person, Place, Thing, Or an Idea. A. Common Noun – Names Any One of a Group of Persons, Places, Things, Or Ideas

    Name: __________________________________________ Block: ______ English II: Price 1. Noun – names a person, place, thing, or an idea. a. Common noun – names any one of a group of persons, places, things, or ideas. b. Proper noun – names a particular person, place, thing, or idea. c. Compound noun – consists of two or more words that together name a person, place, thing, or idea. d. Concrete noun – names a person, place, thing that can be perceived by one or more of the senses. e. Abstract noun – names an idea, a feeling, a quality, or a characteristic. f. Collective noun – names a group of people, animals, or things. 2. Pronoun – takes the place of one or more nouns or pronouns. a. Antecedent – the word or word group that a pronoun stands for. b. Personal pronouns – refers to the one(s) speaking (first person), the one(s) spoken to (second person), or the one(s) spoken about (third person). Singular Plural First person I, me, my, mine We, us, our, ours Second person You, your, yours You, your, yours Third person He, him, his, she, her, hers, it, its They, them, their, theirs c. Case Forms of Personal Pronouns – form that a pronoun takes to show its relationship to other words in a sentence. Case Forms of Personal Pronouns Nominative Case Objective Case Possessive Case Singular Plural Singular Plural Singular Plural First Person I We Me Us My, mine Our, ours Second Person You You You You Your, yours Your, yours Third Person He, she, it they Him her it them His, her, hers, its Their, theirs d.
  • 30. Tense Aspect Mood 615

    30. Tense Aspect Mood 615

    30. Tense Aspect Mood 615 Richards, Ivor Armstrong 1936 The Philosophy of Rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rockwell, Patricia 2007 Vocal features of conversational sarcasm: A comparison of methods. Journal of Psycho- linguistic Research 36: 361−369. Rosenblum, Doron 5. March 2004 Smart he is not. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/smart-he-is-not- 1.115908. Searle, John 1979 Expression and Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Seddiq, Mirriam N. A. Why I don’t want to talk to you. http://notguiltynoway.com/2004/09/why-i-dont-want- to-talk-to-you.html. Singh, Onkar 17. December 2002 Parliament attack convicts fight in court. http://www.rediff.com/news/ 2002/dec/17parl2.htm [Accessed 24 July 2013]. Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson 1986/1995 Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. Voegele, Jason N. A. http://www.jvoegele.com/literarysf/cyberpunk.html Voyer, Daniel and Cheryl Techentin 2010 Subjective acoustic features of sarcasm: Lower, slower, and more. Metaphor and Symbol 25: 1−16. Ward, Gregory 1983 A pragmatic analysis of epitomization. Papers in Linguistics 17: 145−161. Ward, Gregory and Betty J. Birner 2006 Information structure. In: B. Aarts and A. McMahon (eds.), Handbook of English Lin- guistics, 291−317. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Rachel Giora, Tel Aviv, (Israel) 30. Tense Aspect Mood 1. Introduction 2. Metaphor: EVENTS ARE (PHYSICAL) OBJECTS 3. Polysemy, construal, profiling, and coercion 4. Interactions of tense, aspect, and mood 5. Conclusion 6. References 1. Introduction In the framework of cognitive linguistics we approach the grammatical categories of tense, aspect, and mood from the perspective of general cognitive strategies.
  • 4.1 Inflection

    4.1 Inflection

    4.1 Inflection Within a lexeme-based theory of morphology, the difference between derivation and inflection is very simple. Derivation gives you new lexemes, and inflection gives you the forms of a lexeme that are determined by syntactic environment (cf. 2.1.2). But what exactly does this mean? Is there really a need for such a distinction? This section explores the answers to these questions, and in the process, goes deeper into the relation between morphology and syntax. 4.1.1 Inflection vs. derivation The first question we can ask about the distinction between inflection and derivation is whether there is any formal basis for distinguishing the two: can we tell them apart because they do different things to words? One generalization that has been made is that derivational affixes tend to occur closer to the root or stem than inflectional affixes. For example, (1) shows that the English third person singular present inflectional suffix -s occurs outside of derivational suffixes like the deadjectival -ize, and the plural ending -s follows derivational affixes including the deverbal -al: (1) a. popular-ize-s commercial-ize-s b. upheav-al-s arriv-al-s Similarly, Japanese derivational suffixes like passive -rare or causative -sase precede inflectional suffixes marking tense and aspect:1 (2) a. tabe-ru tabe-ta eat- IMP eat- PERF INFLECTION 113 ‘eats’ ‘ate’ b. tabe-rare- ru tabe-rare- ta eat - PASS-IMP eat- PASS-PERF ‘is eaten’ ‘was eaten’ c. tabe-sase- ru tabe-sase- ta eat- CAUS-IMP eat- CAUS-PERF ‘makes eat’ ‘made eat’ It is also the case that inflectional morphology does not change the meaning or grammatical category of the word that it applies to.