PDF Hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
PDF hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen The following full text is a publisher's version. For additional information about this publication click this link. http://hdl.handle.net/2066/131882 Please be advised that this information was generated on 2021-09-26 and may be subject to change. Argument Marking Patterns in South American Languages Published by LOT phone: +31 30 253 5775 Trans 10 e-mail: [email protected] 3512 JK Utrecht http://www.lotschool.nl The Netherlands Cover illustration: Mashco Piro arrows, Manu River 2011. Photo by Glenn H. Shepard ISBN: 978-94-6093-000-3 NUR: 616 Copyright c 2014 Joshua Birchall. All rights reserved. Argument Marking Patterns in South American Languages een wetenschappelijke proeve op het gebied van de Letteren Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. mr. S.C.J.J. Kortmann, volgens besluit van het College van Decanen in het openbaar te verdedigen op vrijdag 2 mei 2014 klokke 10.30 uur door Joshua Thomas Rigo Birchall geboren 20 februari 1985 te Rockford, Verenigde Staten Promotor : Prof. dr. P. C. Muysken Co-promotores: Dr. E. I. Crevels Dr.H.G.A.vanderVoort Manuscriptcommissie: Prof. dr. Helen de Hoop Prof. dr. Spike Gildea (University of Oregon) Prof. dr. Robert Van Valin Jr. (Heinrich Heine University at D¨usseldorf) Contents Acknowledgements.............................. ix Abbreviations................................. xi 1 Introduction 1 1.1Objectivesandmotivation..................... 2 1.2TheSouthAmericancontext................... 5 1.2.1 Phylogeneticdiversityandlinguisticclassification.... 5 1.2.2 Majorregions........................ 7 1.2.3 Thecurrentstateofaffairs................ 12 1.3Languagesample.......................... 13 1.4Organizationofthethesis..................... 17 2 Methodology 19 2.1Basiccomparativeconcepts.................... 19 2.1.1 Argumentsandsemanticroles............... 22 2.1.2 Transitivity and argument roles .............. 24 2.1.3 Grammaticalrelations................... 27 2.1.4 Distinguishingpronounsandverbalindexation..... 30 2.1.5 Applying the comparative concepts: a summary .... 35 2.2Structuralquestionnaire...................... 36 2.2.1 Databases in typological research ............. 36 2.2.2 Basicorganizationofthestructuralquestionnaire.... 37 2.2.3 Codingexample...................... 38 3 Verbal argument marking: Simple patterns 41 3.1Definitionsandimportantconcepts................ 41 3.2Featuresandparameters...................... 43 3.2.1 Personmarking....................... 44 3.2.2 Numbermarking...................... 49 3.2.3 Gendermarking...................... 51 vi 3.3Simplemarkingpatterns...................... 54 3.3.1 Positionofmarking.................... 54 3.3.2 Alignmentofpersonmarkers............... 57 3.3.3 Indexationinditransitiveconstructions......... 62 3.3.4 Fusionofarguments.................... 63 3.3.5 Fusionoffeatures...................... 65 3.3.6 Optionalityofmarkers................... 65 3.4Conclusions............................. 69 4 Verbal argument marking: Complex patterns 71 4.1Hierarchicalmarking........................ 72 4.1.1 Structural variation in hierarchical marking patterns . 74 4.1.2 Hierarchical marking in local scenarios .......... 76 4.1.3 Hierarchical marking in non-local scenarios ....... 77 4.1.4 Furthercasesofhierarchicalmarkingpatterns...... 78 4.1.5 Summaryofhierarchicalmarkingpatterns........ 82 4.2Splitintransitivity......................... 84 4.2.1 Semanticconsiderations.................. 85 4.2.2 Marker-basedsplit..................... 88 4.2.3 Position-basedsplit.................... 90 4.2.4 Fluid intransitivity ..................... 92 4.2.5 Summaryofsplitintransitivemarkingpatterns..... 95 4.3Casestudy:ComplexmarkingpatterninHixkaryana...... 96 4.4Conclusions............................. 101 5 Diachrony in verbal argument marking: A Tupian case study 103 5.1TheTupianlanguages:anoverview................ 104 5.1.1 OntheclassificationofTupianlanguages........ 104 5.1.2 Tupianlanguagesample.................. 107 5.1.3 Verbalpersonmarkingpatterns.............. 108 5.2Onthedevelopmentofverbalpersonmarkers.......... 115 5.2.1 Previousclaims....................... 115 5.2.2 On the development of different argument marking patterns117 5.2.3 Comparisonofmarkersets................ 120 5.3Discussion.............................. 123 5.4Conclusions............................. 125 6 Case marking patterns 127 6.1Definitionsandimportantconcepts................ 128 6.1.1 Case marking of argument and adjuncts ......... 129 6.1.2 Casemarkingandinformationstructure......... 130 6.2Casemarkingpatterns....................... 132 6.2.1 Intransitiveandtransitivecasemarkingpatterns.... 132 6.2.2 Ditransitivecasemarkingpatterns............ 136 6.2.3 Casealignmentinpronouns................ 141 vii 6.2.4 Differentialobjectmarking................ 144 6.2.5 Summaryofcasemarkingpatterns............ 147 6.3 Oblique case marking ....................... 149 6.4Conclusions............................. 152 7 Valency changing strategies 153 7.1Definitionsandimportantconcepts................ 154 7.2Valencyincreasingstrategies................... 156 7.2.1 Causatives......................... 156 7.2.2 Applicatives......................... 162 7.2.3 Summaryofvalencyincreasingstrategies........ 166 7.3Valencydecreasingstrategies................... 169 7.3.1 Passivesandanticausatives................ 169 7.3.2 Antipassives......................... 176 7.3.3 Reflexives.......................... 180 7.3.4 Reciprocals......................... 183 7.3.5 Summaryofvalencydecreasingstrategies........ 185 7.4Conclusions............................. 188 8 Geographic patterns 189 8.1Definitionsandimportantconcepts................ 190 8.1.1 Identifyingpotentiallinguisticareas........... 191 8.1.2 Thesizeandscopeofpotentiallinguisticareas..... 193 8.1.3 Establishingareality.................... 195 8.2Geographicpatternsinargumentmarking............ 197 8.2.1 Geographic patterns in head and dependent marking . 199 8.2.2 Geographicpatternsinverbalmarking.......... 200 8.2.3 Geographicpatternsincasemarking........... 206 8.2.4 Geographic patterns in valency changing strategies . 209 8.2.5 Geographicpatternsinconstituentorder........ 211 8.3Summaryanddiscussion...................... 213 8.4Conclusions............................. 217 9 Conclusions 221 9.1Typologicalissues......................... 222 9.2Geographicpatterns........................ 224 9.3 Future research ........................... 226 A Maps 229 B Structural questionnaire 235 C Questionnaire codings 241 Bibliography................................. 251 viii Samenvatting in het Nederlands 281 Curriculum Vitae 285 Acknowledgements Nobody writes a dissertation alone. While my name may be the one on the cover, this work is the product of many things: an idea, a place in time, a place in space, and most importantly, a group of outstanding people have been there for me along the way to offer their thoughts, help and encouragement. I’d like to take these opening pages to thank them and recognize all of their hard work. First I’d like to thank my promotor, Pieter Muysken. He has been a constant source of ideas and support throughout these last four years. The topic of the thesis itself, argument marking in South American languages, was his own creation. He planted a seed in my mind—an idea—and helped it grow. He watered the seed by sharing the funds from his KNAW professorship and ERC grant to ensure that I had the time and resources to do the job right. He pruned my ideas as they grew, always with a soft touch, making sure that I wasn’t just producing an intellectual thicket. If it weren’t for Pieter, this project would have never happened. Many thanks are also owed to my co-promotors Mily Crevels and Hein van der Voort. They were always willing to share their wealth of experience and insight with me when I needed it most. Hein was there for me from the moment I arrived in the Netherlands, he helped me keep my thoughts straight and made sure I kept going down the right track. Mily really came through for me when it counted. She tirelessly read through multiple versions of all of my chapters and it was her keen attention to detail that helped my ideas stay afloat. She always seemed to know what I needed, whether it was a little shove forward, some reining in, or just a friendly chat over some coffee. This research is a testament to the time it was written in. Such an ambitous project would not have been possible just a decade ago. I am so grateful for the careful and difficult work put in by all of the field linguists who produced the grammars that I used in this study. Without them, and the patient and intelligent indigenous teachers they have collaborated with, we’d still be in the dark ages of language research in South America. Many have surely endured hardship in the name of science, leaving behind their families for extended x periods, battling exotic illnesses and traveling far outside of their comfort zones. I’d especially like to thank the scholars who took the time to discuss their languages of study with me: La´ercio Bacelar, Ana Paula Brand˜ao, Matt Coler, Aline da Cruz, Swintha Danielsen, Connie Dickinson, Sebastian Drude, Pattie Epps, Sidi Facundes, Helder Ferreira, Paul Frank, Vilacy Galucio, Rik van Gijn, Lucia Golluscio, Hebe Gonzales, Antoine Guillaume, Katharina Haude, Simon van de Kerke, Suzi Lima, S´ergio Meira, Denny Moore, Simon Overall, Gessiane Pican¸co, Fran¸coise Rose,