A DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF FOUR METAREPRESENTATION MARKERS OF INDUS KOHISTANI by Beate Lubberger Staatl. anerkannte Kinderkrankenschwester, Kinderkrankenpflegeschule Universitätsklinikum Freiburg 1979 Staatl. anerkannte Hebamme, Hebammenlehranstalt Universitätsklinikum Freiburg 1985 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of North Dakota in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Grand Forks, North Dakota August 2014 © 2014 Beate Lubberger ii This thesis, submitted by Beate Lubberger in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts from the University of North Dakota, has been read by the Faculty Advisory Committee under whom the work has been done and is hereby approved. ___________________________________________________________________ Dr. Regina Blass, Chair ___________________________________________________________________ Dr. Joan Baart ___________________________________________________________________ Dr. Adam Baker This thesis meets the standards for appearance, conforms to the style and format requirements of the School of Graduate Studies of the University of North Dakota, and is hereby approved. _______________________________________________ Wayne Swisher Dean of the School of Graduate Studies _______________________________________________ Date iii PERMISSION Title A description and analysis of four metarepresentation markers of Indus Kohistani Department Linguistics Degree Master of Arts In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a graduate degree from the University of North Dakota, I agree that the library of this University shall make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for extensive copying for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor who supervised my thesis work or, in his absence, by the chairperson of the department or the dean of the School of Graduate Studies. It is understood that any copying or publication or other use of this thesis or part thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the University of North Dakota in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my thesis. ________________________________________ Beate Lubberger ________________________________________ July 23, 2014 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS x ABBREVIATIONS xi ABSTRACT xiv CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Purpose 1 1.2 Indus Kohistani: the people 2 1.3 Indus Kohistani: the language 3 1.4 Previous research 5 1.5 Data and transcription 6 1.6 Main typological features of Indus Kohistani grammar 8 1.7 Overview of the thesis 9 2 RELEVANCE THEORY 11 2.1 Communication is inferential: the basics of Relevance Theory 11 2.2 Representation and metarepresentation 13 2.3 The conceptual-procedural distinction 17 2.4 Argumentation and persuasion 18 3 THE INDUS KOHISTANI “REPORTED” MARKER LEE 22 3.1 Definition of the marker lee 22 3.2 “Reported” markers in the wider geographical context 23 3.3 Syntactic and phonological properties of the marker lee 25 v 3.4 Uses of the marker lee 26 3.4.1 Marking of secondhand information 26 3.4.2 Marking of thirdhand information 27 3.4.3 The marker lee in utterances that are not speech complements 28 3.4.4 The marker lee in questions 30 3.4.5 The marker lee and person 33 3.4.6 The marker lee and tense 34 3.4.7 The marker lee replacing the speech verb of a matrix clause 35 3.5 The marker lee in narratives 38 3.5.1 The marker lee in narratives about someone’s experiences 38 3.5.2 The marker lee in folk tales and other narratives that are not someone’s personal experiences 42 3.6 The “reported” marker lee: an interpretive use marker 46 3.6.1 Evidentials in the literature 46 3.6.2 Evidentials and Relevance Theory 48 3.6.3 Procedural indicators: triggers of the argumentative module 59 3.6.4 The Indus Kohistani marker lee: activator of the argumentative module 60 3.7 Summary: The Indus Kohistani marker lee 65 4 THE INDUS KOHISTANI MARKER KAREE 67 4.1 The converb kareé and the metarepresentation marker karee 68 4.1.1 The converb kareé 68 4.1.2 The metarepresentation marker karee 69 4.2 Sentential complementation in Indus Kohistani 70 4.2.1 Form of reported speech and thought in Indus Kohistani 71 4.2.2 Sentence-like complementation strategies 71 4.3 Uses of the marker karee 75 4.3.1 Indus Kohistani karee as marker of reported speech 75 vi 4.3.2 The complementizer karee 80 4.3.3 The marker karee in purpose and reason clauses 86 4.3.4 Further uses of the marker karee 92 4.4 Literature review 93 4.4.1 What is grammaticalization? 94 4.4.2 Grammaticalization of quotation markers 95 4.4.3 Grammaticalized SAY verbs on the Indian Subcontinent 96 4.4.4 Güldemann’s survey of quotative indexes in African languages 98 4.5 Indus Kohistani karee: a metarepresentation marker 101 4.5.1 karee as marker of metarepresentations of attributed and self-attributed speech 102 4.5.2 karee as marker of metarepresentations of attributed and self-attributed thoughts 105 4.5.3 Other functions of grammaticalized quotation markers 119 4.6 Summary: the metarepresentation marker karee 120 5 THE INDUS KOHISTANI MARKER ČE 122 5.1 The marker če: origin, definition, properties 123 5.1.1 Origin 123 5.1.2 Definition 124 5.1.3 Properties 124 5.2 Uses of the marker če 124 5.2.1 The complementizer če 125 5.2.2 The marker če in purpose and reason clauses 136 5.2.3 The marker če in relative clauses 138 5.2.4 če in clauses that answer a question asked in the main clause 143 5.2.5 če in clauses that describe a quality mentioned in the main clause 144 5.2.6 če in conditional clauses 146 5.2.7 Other uses of the marker če 147 vii 5.3 Analysis of the marker če 149 5.3.1 The marker če replaces karee 149 5.3.2 če: a metarepresentation marker where it replaces karee 150 5.3.3 Other uses of če 154 5.4 Summary: the marker če 154 6 THE INDUS KOHISTANI MARKER LOO 156 6.1 Definition of loo 156 6.2 Syntactic properties of loo 157 6.3 Uses of the marker loo 158 6.3.1 loo as marker of utterances that a speaker wants her addressee to convey to a third person 158 6.3.2 The marker loo as third person imperative marker 170 6.4 loo: a metarepresentation marker of desirable utterances 185 6.4.1 Metarepresentations in Relevance Theory 186 6.4.2 The marker loo as metarepresentation marker of desirable utterances 187 6.4.3 Desirable utterances embedded in “tell X…” clauses, and others that are marked with just loo 189 6.4.4 Third person imperative utterances marked by loo 192 6.4.5 Indus Kohistani third person imperative: a special case of desirable utterances 193 6.5 Summary: the marker loo 197 7 CONCLUSION 198 7.1 Summary 198 7.2 Further research 200 APPENDIX 202 REFERENCES 215 viii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Occurrences of lee in The Earthquake narrative 41 APPENDIX: 1. Past tense forms of kar- ‘do’ 212 2. Past tense forms of til- ‘move’ 212 3. Subjunctive paradigm 213 4. Conditional verb form 213 5. Indus Kohistani constituent order correlation 214 ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis came together because of the inspiration, help and encouragement of many people. Regina Blass, thank you for making Relevance Theory a fascinating subject. Thank you for your guidance and encouragement along the way. Joan Baart and Adam Baker, thank you for your time and effort in reviewing my work, for your support and comments. David Weber, thank you for introducing me to Relevance Theory in the first place. Without the constant encouragement and support of Joan Baart I would never have dared to undertake this course of study. Thank you again for introducing me to linguistics, for setting me up on the path of language analysis and for the time you spent helping me. My special thanks go to my language consultant, her husband and extended family. You not only taught me your language, you adopted me into your family and shared your life with me. Thank you for the many insights into your language and to life in Kohistan, and for your patience with me when I asked the same questions over and over again. I also want to thank my colleagues at BCH who graciously gave me time to study and write. Thank you, Baji Kaneez, for taking on a doubled work load so often. There are other people I want to thank: my co-workers and neighbors who did not grow tired in giving me encouragement, my sending organization who allowed me to spend part of my working time in linguistics, my family and friends who helped me with the logistics while working and studying abroad, and many other people who supported me in many ways: thank you! x ABBREVIATIONS 1 first person 2 second person 3 third person ABL ablative ADJ adjective ADS adjectival derivative suffix CAUS causative COMP complementizer COND conditional CONT continuous CVB converb DAT dative DEM demonstrative DEVM development marker DIM diminutive DIST distal DM discourse marker DOM differential object marking DUM desirable utterance marker ECHO echo formation ERG ergative EXCL exclusive F feminine xi FUT future GEN genitive IMP imperative INCH inchoative INCL inclusive INDEF indefinitive INF infinitive IPFV imperfective M masculine MI middle verb MRM metarepresentation marker N noun NEG negation, negative NMLZ nominalizer/nominalization OBL oblique ORD ordinal PASS passive PFV perfective PFV1 simple perfective PFV2 marked perfective PL plural POT potential POSS possessive PROX proximal/proximate PRS present PST past Q question marker xii REDUPL reduplication REFL reflexive REP reported SBJV subjunctive SG singular SUB subordinator VOC vocative xiii ABSTRACT This thesis describes and analyzes four markers of Indus Kohistani, a language spoken in Northern Pakistan that has received little attention so far.