DOCSLIB.ORG

On Representations in Morphology Case, Agreement and Inversion in Georgian Author(S): Stephen R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
On Representations in Morphology Case, Agreement and Inversion in Georgian Author(S): Stephen R On Representations in Morphology Case, Agreement and Inversion in Georgian Author(s): Stephen R. Anderson Source: Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Jul., 1984), pp. 157-218 Published by: Springer Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4047487 Accessed: 26/10/2009 15:57 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=springer. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Natural Language & Linguistic Theory. http://www.jstor.org STEPHEN R. ANDERSON ON REPRESENTATIONS IN MORPHOLOGY CASE, AGREEMENT AND INVERSION IN GEORGIAN* 0. INTRODUCTION As a fundamentalbuilding block of linguisticstructure, the morphemeis supposedto be the locus of the phonologicalexpression of meaningand of grammatical categories. Traditionally, morpheme-based theories con- strued these categories as being in a more or less one-to-one relationwith discrete substringsof phonological structureor FORMATIVES. If this were an adequateview, it would reduce the 'morphologicalrepresentation' of a word to the sequence of formativescomposing it, where each formativeis (uniquely)associated with some semantic materialor grammaticalcate- gories as its content. Especially in the treatmentof inflection,though, the range of classical puzzles concerningthe natureof 'morphemes'refuses to dissolve; and closer analysissuggests a rather different picture from the usual 'beads on a string' view of morphologicalstructure. The observations of Aronoff (1976) concerning 'morphemes'with no isolable meaning already recall the literature of the 1940's and 1950's (e.g., Hockett 1947 and the controversiesprovoked by this paper). The currentdevelopment of morphologicaltheories not based on morphemes can be traced to Matthews' (1972) discussion of these traditionalprob- lems, and his proposals for a WORD AND PARADIGM view of inflectional structure. Such a view substitutesan inventory of rules modifying word * This paper represents a revision of material presented under the same title to the Workshopon LexicalPhonology and Morphologyat StanfordUniversity, 1 March,1983; to the GLOW Colloquium at York, England on 30 March, 1983, and to the Caucasian Colloquiumat the Universityof Hull in July, 1983. I have benefitedfrom comments provided on these and related issues by MichaelHammond and Alan Timberlake.Special thanksare due to Alice Harris and George Hewitt, as well as Frank Heny and several anonymous referees for this journal,for extensive and detailed commentson an earlierversion of this paper. Informationon Georgian comes from the sources listed in the referencesbelow, as well as fromwork with Tamara 'Japaridze at UCLA and classeswith YolandaMarchev at the Universityof Zurich. Naturally,none of the above should be held in agreementwith my views, or responsiblefor my errorsor failure to take their advice. The present paper was preparedwhile the authorwas supportedby a post-Doctoralfellowship from the American Council of LearnedSocieties; supportfrom the Committeeon Research at UCLA is also acknowledged. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2 (1984) 157-218. 0167-806X/84/0022-0157 $06.20 ? 1984 by D. Reidel PublishingCompany 158 STEPHEN R. ANDERSON structure(by affixation,internal change, etc.) for the usual inventory of morphemes. These rules depend on a representationof the inflectional structureof forms which is not directlyderivable from the constituentsof phonological form, however, and whose natureremains to be elucidated. These questions of representation arise particularly clearly in the inflectional theory of Anderson (1977, 1982, 1984a), where a notion of MORPHOSYNTACTIC REPRESENTATION forms the interface between syn- tactic and phonological structure. This kind of representationcan be expected to have its own properties which are worthy of closer in- vestigation. The representations in question can be traced to the proposals of Chomsky (1965), who presents the terminal elements of P-Markersas complex symbols or internally unstructuredcomplexes of features. In addition to features of subcategorization(and selection), some of these features represent inflectional properties (e.g., case, agreement, tense, etc.), and it is assumed that rules of grammarwhich are not part of the syntax per se establish a correspondencebetween these complex symbols and actual sequences of phonologicallyrealized formatives. Recent work in morphologydevelops this picture further,showing that these symbols have a significantinternal structure which forms the basis of a system of morphologicaloperations mapping them onto phonological form. These operations are the morphologicalrules which establish correspondences between morphosyntacticand phonologicalform, and which thus replace (at least in the domain of inflection) a list or lexicon of 'meaningful' grammaticalmorphemes. This paper explores the propertiesof such morphosyntacticrepresen- tations,the rules that create and modifythem, and the role they play in the grammar,on the basis of an analysis of case marking and agreement in Georgian. The interest of Georgian for such purposes lies in the fact that the inflectionalmorphology of this language is substantiallymore complex than that of more familiarlanguages, and thus provides a better test of the expressive power of a proposed morphological theory. Nonetheless, despite the inherentinterest of the Georgianfacts, the goal of the paper is not simply to provide an analysisof Georgian, but to clarify the natureof morphosyntacticrepresentations. The structureof the paperis as follows. In section 1, we sketch the basic propertiesof verbal agreementand case markingin Georgian, limitingthe discussionto sentences whose verbs appearin one of the two fundamental tense/aspect series. We then review the evidence for associatingparticular grammaticalpositions with particularagreement and case markingmor- CASE, AGREEMENT AND INVERSION IN GEORGIAN 159 phology, establishingthe role of the notions of subject, direct object and indirect object in Georgian. Section 2 discusses the INVERSION con- structionwhich is found in the thirdtense/aspect series, and also in the first and second series for a specific set of verbs; the relation of this con- structionto those discussedin section 1 is treated.An analysisof inversion proposedby Harris(1981, 1982, 1983) is presented;the explanatoryscope of this analysis is explored, and arguments are presented against the syntactic relation-changingprocess on which it depends. An alternative, purelymorphological account suggested (but not arguedfor) by Anderson (1982) is then introduced. The discussion in sections 1 and 2 recapitulatesfacts about Georgian from the literature,as well as Harris'analysis. This duplicationof material available elsewhere seems necessary for the benefit of the majority of readers, who will not be familiar with either the facts or their prior analysis;indulgence is begged of those readerswho are better prepared.It is particularlyimportant to stressfrom the outset the crucial relianceof the present paper on Harris' work: her insights into the structure of the Georgian verbal system are relied on heavily here, and the analysis eventually arrived at bears close similaritiesto hers (though with some essentialdifferences). Indeed, the presentpaper can be regardedboth as a critical response to Harris' work and as an application of the theory of inflectionexplored here. Section 3 then goes on to explore the morphology of Georgian agreement in greater detail, on the basis of a discussion of the mor- phosyntacticrepresentations that should be assigned to the various verb classes in the language. It is concluded that when these representationsare adequately explicated, no independent rule of Inversion (even a mor- phological one) is required,though a morphologicalrestructuring opera- tion analogous to the relationalrule of 'Unaccusative'plays a role in the account. A comprehensiveset of agreement and case markingrules are proposed which explicitly accommodate a wide range of apparently complex phenomena in a simple and natural way. One result of this analysis is the elimination of arbitrarylexical markers for the various conjugation classes in the language. Section 4 then provides conclusions and a summaryof results. 1. BASIC MORPHOLOGICAL AND SYNTACTIC CATEGORIES IN GEORGIAN Georgian is well-known for the complexity of its inflectional apparatus, 160 STEPHEN R. ANDERSON and especiallyfor the dependenceof the case-markingsystem on the tense of the verb. There are roughly a dozen
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Disentangling Word Stress and Phrasal Prosody: Evidence from Georgian
    Disentangling word stress and phrasal prosody: evidence from Georgian Lena Borise Abstract This paper investigates the interaction of word stress and phrasal prosody in Georgian (Kartvelian). Based on novel experimental evidence, I show that the two prosodic phenomena, word stress and phrasal prosodic targets, differ both in their location and acoustic means that their expression relies on. By establishing this, I illustrate the workings of the two separate prosodic modules, which have been lumped together in the literature, leading to contradictory descriptions of Georgian prosody. The results provide evidence in favor of fixed initial stress, cued by greater duration of the stressed syllable, as compared to subsequent ones. They also attest to the presence of a phrasal intonational F0 target on the penultimate syllable. Furthermore, I show that hexasyllabic words, in contrast to shorter ones, exhibit durational ‘rhythmicity’, with longer and shorter syllables alternating; this independent process, accordingly, obscures the prominence of word stress in such words. These results help account for the facts related to word stress, phrasal intonation, and their interplay in Georgian, the object of numerous debates in the literature. They also demonstrate that the effects of word-level and phrase-level prosody can be successfully teased apart, even in a language in which their interaction is rather complex. Key words: Georgian, word stress, phrase accent, F0 targets, phrasal prosody *** Introduction There are numerous languages in which word stress facts, and particularly the interaction of word stress with phrasal intonation and/or information structure, have not been settled and raise a number of questions. Does a language have word stress? What acoustic parameter 1 (syllable/vowel duration, F0, intensity) does its realization chiefly rely upon? How does its realization interact with the expression of phrasal intonation? Such questions abound in languages understudied from the point of view of their phonological and prosodic properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Zerohack Zer0pwn Youranonnews Yevgeniy Anikin Yes Men
    Zerohack Zer0Pwn YourAnonNews Yevgeniy Anikin Yes Men YamaTough Xtreme x-Leader xenu xen0nymous www.oem.com.mx www.nytimes.com/pages/world/asia/index.html www.informador.com.mx www.futuregov.asia www.cronica.com.mx www.asiapacificsecuritymagazine.com Worm Wolfy Withdrawal* WillyFoReal Wikileaks IRC 88.80.16.13/9999 IRC Channel WikiLeaks WiiSpellWhy whitekidney Wells Fargo weed WallRoad w0rmware Vulnerability Vladislav Khorokhorin Visa Inc. Virus Virgin Islands "Viewpointe Archive Services, LLC" Versability Verizon Venezuela Vegas Vatican City USB US Trust US Bankcorp Uruguay Uran0n unusedcrayon United Kingdom UnicormCr3w unfittoprint unelected.org UndisclosedAnon Ukraine UGNazi ua_musti_1905 U.S. Bankcorp TYLER Turkey trosec113 Trojan Horse Trojan Trivette TriCk Tribalzer0 Transnistria transaction Traitor traffic court Tradecraft Trade Secrets "Total System Services, Inc." Topiary Top Secret Tom Stracener TibitXimer Thumb Drive Thomson Reuters TheWikiBoat thepeoplescause the_infecti0n The Unknowns The UnderTaker The Syrian electronic army The Jokerhack Thailand ThaCosmo th3j35t3r testeux1 TEST Telecomix TehWongZ Teddy Bigglesworth TeaMp0isoN TeamHav0k Team Ghost Shell Team Digi7al tdl4 taxes TARP tango down Tampa Tammy Shapiro Taiwan Tabu T0x1c t0wN T.A.R.P. Syrian Electronic Army syndiv Symantec Corporation Switzerland Swingers Club SWIFT Sweden Swan SwaggSec Swagg Security "SunGard Data Systems, Inc." Stuxnet Stringer Streamroller Stole* Sterlok SteelAnne st0rm SQLi Spyware Spying Spydevilz Spy Camera Sposed Spook Spoofing Splendide
    [Show full text]
  • Expression of the Perfect Semantics in Georgian Verbs1
    Journal of Literature and Art Studies, December 2019, Vol. 9, No. 12, 1266-1268 doi: 10.17265/2159-5836/2019.12.006 D DAVID PUBLISHING Expression of the Perfect Semantics in Georgian Verbs1 Nino Bagration-Davitashvili Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia In Georgian the verbal form comprises the names expressing the subjective-objective references of certain quantity, which shows the representing signs to express the category of the subjective and objective person. However, sometimes the subjective person is expressed by the sign of the objective person or vice versa, which is called inversion in Georgian language. There are many options about the reason of inversion. Bipersonal static verbs are considered as the oldest verbs as believed by many scientists. These are the verbs of feeling and owning; they are inverse, bipersonal and hold the dative construction. We think that inversion cannot be only explained with the static character. There are the verbs, which are not static but are inverse. We believe that it must be one and the same aspect in every case: perfect semantics. In Indo-European languages, the verbs of the perfect semantics have been converted from the class of the lexical words into the grammar perfect. When the Georgian language encountered the need to express the perfect forms respective to Indo-European languages, thus, the third series has been generated and it used the form as the model, belonging to the verbs of bipersonal non-transitional “perfect semantics” in present. This form has been supplemented by preverb and has become dynamic and gradually acquired various semantic nuances characterizing the perfect tense: resultativity, will, evidentiality, interrogative and negative, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Syntactic Operations and Spellout of Nominals
    http://elr.sciedupress.com English Linguistics Research Vol. 5, No. 4; 2016 Post-syntactic Operations and Spellout of Nominals Leila Lomashvili1, Ph.D 1 Assistant Professor of Linguistics, Department of English & Humanities, Shawnee State University, Portsmouth, OH 45662, USA Correspondence: Leila Lomashvili, Ph.D, Assistant Professor of Linguistics, Department of English & Humanities, Shawnee State University, Portsmouth, OH 45662, USA Received: November 26, 2015 Accepted: December 18, 2016 Online Published: December 20, 2016 doi:10.5430/elr.v5n4p65 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/elr.v5n4p65 Abstract The paper investigates the derivational mechanism of complex nominal expressions in Georgian, a language of Kartvelian (South Caucasian) family. It argues that these structures are derived through syntactic Head-to-head movement as well as post-syntactic operations like Fusion and Merger Under Adjacency which apply after syntactic computation of these structures is completed. By applying three basic word building mechanisms along with the morpheme specific information to be either prefix or suffix, the paper accounts for an array of Mirror Principle violating morpheme orders in the final form of these expressions. Keywords: Head-to-Head Movement, Merger Under Adjacency, Fusion, PF 1. Introduction Nominalizations in various languages may sometimes include a substantial verbal functional layer which may not be limited to Tense, Voice, Aspect, little v0 head, and etc. This is what is present in Georgian nominals and the derivation of these nominals in the light of Distributed Morphology (DM, Halle and Marantz 1993, 1994) is the main topic of this paper. In the syntactico-centric approach like DM where word-building is considered to be the output of syntactic computation, the Mirror Principle (Baker 1985) is expected to hold quite generally assuming the morpheme order to follow the hierarchy of syntactic projections by and large.
    [Show full text]
  • Methodology of Translation Alignment of Georgian Text of Plato's
    International Journal of Language and Linguistics Vol. 4, No. 4, December 2017 Methodology of Translation Alignment of Georgian Text of Plato’s “Theaetetus” Maia Shukhoshvili Classical Philology Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University Tbilisi, 0128, Georgia Abstract The paper considers the process, methodology and results of translation alignment from Ancient Greek to Georgian (Plato’s “Theaetetus”). As a translator I discuss methodology and strategy of translation of Plato from Ancient Greek to Georgian. The methodology and model of alignment is discussed in the paper. The conclusions are introduced. Keywords: Translation, Greek, Georgian, Alignment, Plato. 1. Introduction To begin the alignment of translation isn’t easy. One must decide, that he/she really wants to do it. It needs a lot of time and a lot of things to considerate in this process. As a translator of Plato’s trilogy: “Sophist”, “Statesman”, “Theaetetus” from Ancient Greek in Georgian I decided to try to align my translation with source texts and started from the “Theaetetus”. 2. Translation Strategy First of all, I want to mention that when translating ancient Greek text into Georgian, you must have clear methodology and way of translation. As far as Plato’s dialogues are not only philosophy but also literary works it becomes twice difficult to choose the way of translation. In the process of defining translation strategies I decided that my translation will be very close to original text even in some cases it doesn’t sound nice in Georgian. Therefore my way of translation is very close to the methodology which we call as “word-for-word translation”in which the source language word order is preserved, but it also includes elements of semantical and literal translation, as the words are translated not singly by their most common meanings, but considering the context.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey of Materials Development Needs in the Less Commonly Taught Languages
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 366 203 FL 021 796 AUTHOR Stansfield, Charles W.; Galloway, Ann TITLE Survey of Materials Development Needs in the Less Commonly Taught Languages. Final Report. INSTITUTION Center for Applied Linguistics, Washing!:on, DC. National Foreign Language Resource Center. SPONS AGENCY Office of International Education (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE Dec 93 NOTE 739p. PUB TYPE Reports Research/Technical (143) EDRS PRICE MF04/PC30 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS College Second Language Programs; Foreign Countries; Higher Education; *Instructional Materials; *Material Development; Questionnaires; Second Language Instruction; *Uncommonly Taught Languages ABSTRACT A project surveyed the instructional materials development needs of the less commonly taught languages (LCTLs) language teaching community. The national survey in 1992 covered 82 languages and surveyed approximately 1,000 language course instructors and program directors at national resource centers and universities in the United States receiving graduate fellowships under the Foreign Language and Area Studies program. The questionnaire solicited information on language courses taught at each institution and the instructional materials used for these courses. The results of these queries comprise the bulk ofthis report. Each language was assigned to one of eight world areas: East Asia (e.g., Chinese, Japanese); Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union (e.g., Albanian, Greek); Latin America and Caribbean America and the Caribbean (e.g., Haitian Creole, Portuguese); Middle East and North Africa (e.g., Arabic, Hebrew); Northern Europe and Catalonia (e.g., Catalan, Danish); South Asia (e.g., Bengali, Hindi/Urdu); Southeast Asia and Pacific Islands (e.g., Burmese, Tagalog); and Sub-Saharan Africa (e.g., Acholi, Yoruba). Each world area report is introduced by a review briefly describing the status of languages in the world area.
    [Show full text]
  • A Consumer's Guide to Contemporary
    A CONSUMER’S GUIDE TO CONTEMPORARY MORPHOLOGICAL THEORIES Tom Stewart Truman State University 1. Preface When a linguist goes in search of “the best” theory in some domain, it is important for him or her to ask “best for what purpose?” Individuals will of course prefer to work with an approach that makes sense to them, one that complements—or at least does not contradict—other assumptions they hold with respect to grammatical theory. This is not to say, however, that “it’s all relative,” that theory choice is solely an aesthetic selection from among notational variants. The relative quality of a theory can be evaluated on empirical grounds, based on the particular predictions that the theory’s assumptions entail. In this study, intended as a consumer’s guide, so to speak, I give characterizations of various morphological theories currently used by different linguists. For the reasons stated above, in the theory characterizations to follow, I have chosen to begin each section with a table by which one may readily compare and contrast some of the guiding assumptions in each theory. Criticism of each framework, both theoretical and empirical in nature, will be presented where available, and replies or adjustments in the literature will follow. A bibliography of leading publications for each framework concludes the respective section. 2. How to Interpret a Table The first continuum, morpheme-based versus word/lexeme-based, concerns the basic units assumed to organize morphological activity. In a strongly morpheme-based Tom Stewart. A Consumer’s Guide to Contemporary Morphological Theories. OSUWPL Volume 58, Fall 2008, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • 27 the Terminology Work in Georgia
    ΕΛΕΤΟ – 12o Συνέδριο «Ελληνική Γλώσσα και Ορολογία» Αθήνα, 7–9 Νοεμβρίου 2019 27 The terminology work in Georgia Lia Karosanidze Abstract It should be noted that, unfortunately, in the recent period the Georgian terminology suffers from the amateurish, layman approaches and lack of the standardized stated terminology created on the academic level. On the one side the flow of the foreign words rushed into the language and replaced Georgian terminology and, besides that, in order to express one meaning, one notion, we have some variations which often are absolutely different. Of course such a process has bad influence on the language preservation and development. Despite the chaos that exists, the terminological department of the Georgian Institute of Linguistics have managed to continue the scientific traditions and go on to the new stage of the terminological work. The tradition of terminological work in Georgia has a long history and I hope that the nation which started the process of term creation soon after the spread of Christianity (in the 5th -6th centuries) will overcome the modern difficulties, too. It is well known that creation of terminology is one of the hard problems related to this branch of linguistics but its implementation for common use is the second and the most important one. We suppose that there are two main things to know in this context: 1. Historical experience in this branch of linguistics we have in our country; 2. Modern European experience. Regarding the history of Georgian terminology we can easily notice that two directions have always been existing in the terminology work in Georgia, in particular-private and common terminology work; in other words, the terminology work in Georgia as well as in other countries used to be historically either uncontrolled or controlled.
    [Show full text]
  • Georgian Language
    M. Nikolaishvili N. Bagration-Davitashvili Georgian Language (Intensive Course) Tbilisi 2012 1 УДК 809.463.1 N67 The present work represents the English version of M.Nikolaishvili’s book «Грузинский Язык» («Georgian Language») published in 1999. which is recognised by the Ministry of Education of Georgia as a sound basic course text book of the Georgian Language for the non-Georgian students. The course includes all topics needed for everyday relations and also gives an idea of the basic grammatical peculiarities of the Georgian language. The book can be used as a self study course as well. Editor Doctor of Philological Sciences, Professor E. Babunashvili, K. Gelashvili Reviewers: Doctor of Philological Sciences, Professor F. Uturgaidze, Professor T. Injia Proof Reader: Lydia West. Technical Editor: P. Korkia All rights reserved. © M. Nikolaishvili, N. Bagration-Davitashvili ISBN 978-9941-0-4539-4 BY THE AUTHOR The present book represents a basic course of the Georgian language, with a preface stating the general characteristics of the grammar of this language. The book begins with the study of writing and reading. Then follow texts, that encompass all the main topics of the language spoken in everyday life and are intended for an exact knowledge of the spoken Georgian language. There are ten topics in the book and each of them is divided into sections short texts, composed of the most frequently used words, grammatical explanations, the need of which may arise from the text. The explanations concern other forms of individual words marked with an asterisk. Ibidem are exercises, lexical groups connected with a topic, and at the end, a text that includes represented dialogues on certain subjects.
    [Show full text]
  • Societas Linguistica Europaea 2010 Vilnius University 2-5 September
    Societas Linguistica Europaea 2010 Vilnius University 2-5 September 2010 Book of abstracts (A-K) Position-dependent alternation between monophthongs and diphthongs in the dialects of Southern Italy. Abete, Giovanni (Friedrich-Schiller-Universität, Jena / Università di Napoli “Federico II”) Some dialects of Southern Italy are characterized by a phenomenon of phonetic alternation between monophthongs and diphthongs. This alternation depends mainly on the position of the word in the prosodic structure (Rohlfs 1966: § 12). For example, in the dialect of Pozzuoli (close to Naples) the word for ‘fishes’ can be rendered as [p ɤɪʃʃ ] before some prosodic boundaries, while it will be rendered as [pi ʃʃ ] in internal position. Strictly related to this issue is the lengthening of vowels at different prosodic boundaries, a well documented process in a wide range of languages (e.g. Wightman et al. 1992). The interplay between prosodic position, vowel lengthening and monophthongal/diphthongal outcome will be analysed here by an acoustic and statistical approach. Four dialects of Southern Italy will be considered: Pozzuoli and Torre Annunziata in Campania, Belvedere Marittimo in Calabria, Trani in Apulia. The data were collected from casual conversations with fishermen of these communities (around 20 hours of recordings of 24 speakers). A pre-defined list of lexical items in the corpus was manually segmented and labelled. The labelling procedure focused on the position of each token in the prosodic structure, and especially on the presence/absence of Intonational Phrase ( IP ) boundaries and Intermediate Phrase ( ip ) boundaries (Beckman & Pierrehumbert 1986). Several acoustic analyses were performed on the labelled vocalic segments. The characterization of formant dynamics followed Simpson (1998): the segment was divided into notional 20 ms.
    [Show full text]
  • Problems of Polysynthesis
    9Z Separate from Problems of Polysynthesis Edited by Nicholas Evans and Hans-Jürgen Sasse ISBN 3-05-003732-6 Studia typologica 4 Sprachtypolo gie und Universalienforschung B eihe ft e Language Typology and Universals Supplements Akademie Verlag Berlin 2A02 Syntax and mo{ph,ology of polysynthesis in the Georgian verb' Wrxrzus» BoeDER l. Georgian is one of the almost sixty autochthonous Caucasian languages, and it is the one with the highest number of speakers (3.5 to 3.8 million, depending on whom you count as speakers of Georgian) and with the oldest literary tradition. It should therefore offer us the unique opportunity to study a history of 1,500 years of polysynthesis. But as far as personal verb-marking is concerned, Georgian has been stable over this time, and its related langua- ges,Laz, Mingrelian and Svan, seem to allow the conclusion that Georgian person-marking largely mirrors the system of the South Caucasian or Kartvelian protolanguage. Changes refer to the loss or extension of third person plural object sufflxes and to third person subject suffixes, but not to the subject and object prefixes which I will discuss here. This stabil§ of prefixation over thousands of years is no less remarkable a phenomenon than the better- known "natural" preference for suffixation in other domains of Georgian morphology. The purpose of this paper is to provide a better understanding of verbal agreement in a polysynthetic language like Georgian. After a short outline of verbal morphology (§ 2), I will describe some constraints on the combination of subject and object markers (§ 3), which lead to a reinterpretation of the dummy head noun tav- 'head' which is often described as a reflexive pronoun (§ 4).
    [Show full text]
  • Case Shift and Verb Concord in Georgian
    Deseret Language and Linguistic Society Symposium Volume 5 Issue 1 Article 12 4-6-1979 Case Shift and Verb Concord in Georgian Kim Braithwaite Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/dlls BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Braithwaite, Kim (1979) "Case Shift and Verb Concord in Georgian," Deseret Language and Linguistic Society Symposium: Vol. 5 : Iss. 1 , Article 12. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/dlls/vol5/iss1/12 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Deseret Language and Linguistic Society Symposium by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. 78 CASE SHIFT AND VERB CONCORD IN GEORGIAN Kim Braithwaite Ever since the first grammatical studies of the Georgian verb system, with its features of ergativity and po1ypersona1ism, linguists have been puzzled by what I term "case shift" in Georgian transitive verb structures. Within the full conjugation of a single transitive verb, the subject and object pronouns "shift cases" depending on the paradigmatic subset or "tense series." In the six paradigms of Series I, which includes the present, the subject is nominative and the object is dative. In Series II, with its two paradigms including the aorist, subject shifts to ergative and object shifts to nominative. In Series III, whose paradigms include the perfect, the shift is to dative subject and nominative object--seem­ ingly the reverse of Series I. If there is an indirect (oblique) object, it is dative in both Series I and II but goes into a postpositiona1 con­ struct in Series III.
    [Show full text]