Berkeley Linguistics Society
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRTY-NINTH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE BERKELEY LINGUISTICS SOCIETY February 16–17, 2013 General Session and Special Session on Space and Directionality Edited by Matthew Faytak Kelsey Neely Matthew Goss Erin Donnelly Nicholas Baier Jevon Heath John Merrill Berkeley Linguistics Society Berkeley, CA Berkeley Linguistics Society University of California, Berkeley Department of Linguistics 1203 Dwinelle Hall Berkeley, CA 94720-2650 USA All papers copyright © 2016 by the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Inc. All rights reserved. ISSN 0363-2946 LCCN 76-640143 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword vi Notes on the contents of this volume vi GENERAL SESSION AHMED ALQASSAS 2 The Definite Marker in Arabic: Morphological realization of the syntactic head D or a [DEF] fea- ture YI-TING CHEN 16 A Frame-Semantic Approach to Verb-Verb Compound Verbs in Japanese: A Case Study of V-toru OANA A. DAVID 31 An Optimal Construction Morphology Approach to Augment Consonants in Kannada YOUSSEF A. HADDAD 45 Binding as Co-indexing vs. Binding as Movement: Evidence from Personal Datives ELLIOTT HOEY 61 Do sighs matter? Interactional perspectives on sighing SHARON INKELAS,KEITH JOHNSON,CHARLES LEE,EMIL MINAS,GEORGE MULCAIRE, GEK YONG KENG, AND TOMOMI YUASA 75 Testing the Learnability of Writing Systems PETER JENKS 90 Quantifier Float, Focus, and Scope in Thai CHRISTIAN KOOPS AND ARNE LOHMANN 108 Discourse marker sequencing and grammaticalization EKATERINA LYUTIKOVA AND ASYA PERELTSVAIG 123 Elucidating Nominal Structure in Articleless Languages: A Case Study of Tatar MARTINA MARTINOVIC´ 137 The Topic-Comment Structure in Copular Sentences: Evidence from Wolof REBECCA MAYBAUM 152 Language Change as a Social Process: Diffusion Patterns of Lexical Innovations in Twitter BRADLEY MCDONNELL 167 Roadblocks in the Grammaticalization Highway: When Phonology Gets in the Way iii YORAM MEROZ 182 Large-scale Vocabulary Surveys as a Tool for Linguistic Stratigraphy: A California Case Study BEATA MOSKAL 195 The Curious Case of Archi’s father POLLET SAMVELIAN AND PEGAH FAGHIRI 212 Re-thinking Compositionality in Persian Complex Predicates PETER W. SMITH 227 On the Cross-Linguistic Rarity of Endoclisis CONOR SNOEK AND CHRISTOPHER COX 245 Measuring Linguistic Distance in Athapaskan JUSTIN SPENCE 259 The Phylogenetic Status of Pacific Coast Athabaskan: A Computational Assessment TERRENCE SZYMANSKI 273 Automatic Extraction of Linguistic Data from Digitized Documents JOS TELLINGS 287 Clitics and voicing in Dutch SHIAO WEI THAM 302 Possession as Non-Verbal Predication ZHIGUO XIE 317 Exhaustifying Focus Intervention Effects: A Crosslinguistic Study SPECIAL SESSION on SPACE AND DIRECTIONALITY JEFFERSON BARLEW 334 Anchored to what? An anaphoric approach to frames of reference EVE DANZIGER 349 Here and Now: Mapping Space and Time in a Four-Part Frame of Reference Typology BENJAMIN FAGARD,JORDAN ZLATEV,ANETTA KOPECKA,MASSIMO CERRUTI, AND JOHAN BLOMBERG 364 The Expression of Motion Events: A Quantitative Study of Six Typologically Varied Languages DOROTHEA HOFFMANN 380 Mapping Worlds: Frames of Reference in MalakMalak iv CAROLINE IMBERT 396 Morpheme Order Constraints Upside Down: Verticality and Other Directions RICHARD A. SANDOVAL 412 The Forefinger/Thumb Alternation in Arapaho Pointing: Participation Space as a Frame of Refer- ence JOOST ZWARTS 425 Ways of Going ‘Back’: A Case Study in Spatial Direction v Notes on the contents of this volume The thirty-ninth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society consisted of a general session along with: • a special session on Space and Directionality • a parasession on the Languages of Southeast Asia • a parasession on Human Prehistory and Linguistics The parassessions are presented here folded into the general session. The following authors or author pairs also gave talks at the conference that do not appear as pa- pers in this volume: Matthew Adams, Wichaya Bovonwiwat, Will Chang, Virginia Dawson, Mark Donohue and Cathryn Donohue, Yu-Yin Hsu, Elsi Kaiser and David Cheng-Huan Li, Lan Kim, Linda Konnerth, Chieu Nguyen, Tatiana Nikitina, S¸eyda Ozc¸alıs¸kan¨ and Susan Goldin-Meadow, Rui Rothe-Neves and Hellen Valentin, David Sawicki, and Harold Torrence and Khady Tamba. Jurgen¨ Bohnemeyer, Marc Brunelle, and Russell Gray gave invited talks that do not appear as contributions in this volume. Foreword The editors are pleased to present the proceedings of BLS 39, which took place in February 2013. We wish to thank our conference speakers and proceedings contributors for their considerable patience. vi GENERAL SESSION The Definite Marker in Arabic: Morphological realization of the syntactic head D or a [DEF] feature* AHMAD ALQASSAS Indiana University, Bloomington 1 Introduction In Arabic, the definite marker can render a noun phrase (NP) definite and it appears as a proclitic on adjectives that modify a definite NP (a phenomenon known as definiteness agreement). Arabic also has a complex adjectival construction known as Construct State Adjective (CSA) that also exhibits the definiteness agreement property. Moreover, in cardinal number constructions in Standard Arabic, the definite marker appears as a proclitic on both the numeral and the enumerated noun (another case for definiteness agreement). This CSA construction and cardinal number constructions are interesting in that definiteness agreement is optional as opposed to the canonical cases of noun-adjective constructions (with post nominal adjectives) where definiteness agreement is obligatory. This paper argues that, given these facts about definiteness agreement, it is more plausible to treat the definite marker whish appears on nominal heads as the realization of the syntactic D head while the definite marker appearing on adjectival and nominal complements as a [DEF] feature added at PF. This analysis extends and builds on Kramer’s (2010) analysis of definiteness in Amharic. In this section, I introduce the basic analyses of these facts. Then in section two, I review the approaches that have been entertained to explain the * I would like to thank the audience of BLS 39 for their helpful comments on the earlier version of this paper presented during the conference. Thanks are also due to Steven Franks and Yoshi Kitagawa for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper. 2 Ahmad Alqassas realization of the definite markers. In section three, I argue in favor of Kramer’s analysis for analyzing the realization of the definite marker in Arabic and build on it by adding a [DEF] deletion process that can explain the complex patterns for the distribution of the definite marker in the Arabic noun phrase. And in section 4 I conclude. The standard analysis of the Semitic DP (e.g., Fassi Fehri 1993) has the determiner located at its left periphery which selects an NP complement (Abney’s 1987 analysis). The determiner, however, generally shows up as a prefix on the head of the NP. The determiner and the head of the NP are one prosodic word. When the determiner shows up as a prefix on a noun that has a coronal sound word initially, the lateral sound in the determiner [ʔal] assimilates to the coronal sound as in [ʔaʃ-ʃams] ‘the sun’. This word level phonological process has been explain by N-D movement suggesting that the word formation process that merges the determiner with the head of the NP is syntactic incorporation, i.e. the noun moves to the head of the DP and incorporates with the determiner (Benmamoun (1992, 2000b), Fassi-Fehri (1989, 1993, 1999), Mohammad (1988), Ouhalla (1991)). The trees in examples (1) illustrate this. (1) a. DP b. DP D NP D NP ʔal ʔal-ʃams1 N N ʃams t1 Shlonsky (2004) criticizes this incorporation analysis. He points out that incorporating the noun with the determiner should result in the wrong word order, i.e. the noun will left adjoin to the determiner since incorporation is left adjunction. Therefore, we need to introduce another mechanism into the syntax in order to get the right word order under the incorporation analysis. This extra mechanism is to allow heads to right adjoin in incorporation. Following the spirit of the minimalist program, Shlonsky argues against incorporation to explain the merger between the determiner and the head noun of the NP. Instead, he adopts Siloni’s (2001) postsyntactic analysis of this phenomenon. Siloni proposes that the determiner merges with the noun after spell out at the PF side by prosodic licensing. Specifically, Siloni argues that the determiner merges with the noun at the prosodic level when prosodic structure is built. She proposes that prosodically weak words are function words that attach to prosodic words. The determiner attaches to the noun because it is prosodically weak. Siloni basically proposes this 3 The Definite Marker in Arabic to explain why the determiner cannot show up on the construct state heads in Hebrew. Some adjectives precede the head of the DP and others follow it. The prenominal adjectives have been analyzed as heads in an AP that dominates the DP. The heads assign genitive case to the NP (Shlonsky 2004), as in (2) and the illustration in (3). (2) jamiilat-u al-wajh-i beautiful-NOM the-face-GEN ‘beautiful of face’ (3) AP Spec A A DP jamiilat-u D NP al- N wajh-i The post-nominal adjectives have been analyzed as specifiers in Spec-NP and the head of the NP moves higher to a NumP and incorporates with Num0. In the possessive/genitive construction (Construct State Nominal (CSN))1 as in e.g. (4) below, on the contrary, the head noun has been argued to move to the head of the DP because the determiner never appears as a prefix on the head of the NP as in e.g. (4) below where the CSN head noun kitaab-u ‘book-NOM’ cannot carry the determiner. The complementary distribution between the determiner and the head of the genitive construction has been viewed as a competition between these two heads illustrated in e.g. (4) to occupy the same head position of the DP (Ritter 1991, Fassi-Fehri 1993, Borer 1996 and others).