The Shawnee Alignment System: Applying Paradigm Function Morphology to Lexical-Functional Grammar's M-Structure
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Kentucky UKnowledge Theses and Dissertations--Linguistics Linguistics 2015 THE SHAWNEE ALIGNMENT SYSTEM: APPLYING PARADIGM FUNCTION MORPHOLOGY TO LEXICAL-FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR'S M-STRUCTURE Nathan Hardymon University of Kentucky, [email protected] Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Hardymon, Nathan, "THE SHAWNEE ALIGNMENT SYSTEM: APPLYING PARADIGM FUNCTION MORPHOLOGY TO LEXICAL-FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR'S M-STRUCTURE" (2015). Theses and Dissertations--Linguistics. 8. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/ltt_etds/8 This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Linguistics at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations--Linguistics by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STUDENT AGREEMENT: I represent that my thesis or dissertation and abstract are my original work. Proper attribution has been given to all outside sources. I understand that I am solely responsible for obtaining any needed copyright permissions. I have obtained needed written permission statement(s) from the owner(s) of each third-party copyrighted matter to be included in my work, allowing electronic distribution (if such use is not permitted by the fair use doctrine) which will be submitted to UKnowledge as Additional File. I hereby grant to The University of Kentucky and its agents the irrevocable, non-exclusive, and royalty-free license to archive and make accessible my work in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I agree that the document mentioned above may be made available immediately for worldwide access unless an embargo applies. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of my work. I understand that I am free to register the copyright to my work. REVIEW, APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE The document mentioned above has been reviewed and accepted by the student’s advisor, on behalf of the advisory committee, and by the Director of Graduate Studies (DGS), on behalf of the program; we verify that this is the final, approved version of the student’s thesis including all changes required by the advisory committee. The undersigned agree to abide by the statements above. Nathan Hardymon, Student Dr. Edward Barrett, Major Professor Dr. Gregory Stump, Director of Graduate Studies THE SHAWNEE ALIGNMENT SYSTEM: APPLYING PARADIGM FUNCTION MORPHOLOGY TO LEXICAL-FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR’S M-STRUCTURE ___________________________________________ THESIS ___________________________________________ A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Kentucky By Nathan Russell Hardymon Lexington, Kentucky Director: Dr. Edward Barrett, Associate Professor of Linguistics Director of Graduate Studies: Dr. Greg Stump, Professor of Linguistics Lexington, Kentucky 2015 Copyright © Nathan Russell Hardymon 2015 ABSTRACT OF THESIS THE SHAWNEE ALIGNMENT SYSTEM: APPLYING PARADIGM FUNCTION MORPHOLOGY TO LEXICAL-FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR’S M-STRUCTURE Shawnee is a language whose alignment system is of the type first proposed by Nichols (1992) and Siewierska (1998): hierarchical alignment. This alignment system was proposed to account for languages where distinctions between agent (A) and object (O) are not formally manifested. Such is the case in Shawnee; there are person-marking inflections on the verb for both A and O, but there is not set order. Instead, Shawnee makes reference to an animacy hierarchy and is an inverse system. This thesis explores how hierarchical alignment is accounted for by Lexical Functional Grammar (LFG), and also applies Paradigm Function Morphology to LFG’s m(orphological)-structure as most of the alignment system in Shawnee is realized in the inflectional morphology. Keywords: alignment, inflection, Lexical Functional Grammar, Shawnee, Paradigm Function Morphology THE SHAWNEE ALIGNMENT SYSTEM: APPLYING PARADIGM FUNCTION MORPHOLOGY TO LEXICAL-FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR’S M-STRUCTURE By Nathan Russell Hardymon Dr. Edward Barrett__________________ Director of Thesis Dr. Gregory Stump__________________ Director of Graduate Studies May 27th, 2015_____________________ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my appreciation to Dr. Rusty Barrett, my committee chair, for introducing me to the Shawnee language. Through his course, Native Languages of Kentucky, I found a very interesting language with which to work. His assistance and encouragement with understanding of the grammar of the language has been extremely helpful with this thesis. I would also like to express my gratitude to Dr. Greg Stump. He introduced me to inflectional morphology and without his work on Paradigm Function Morphology, this thesis would not be possible. I have greatly appreciated his ability to explain concepts in a way that is easily understandable. I would also like to express my appreciation to Dr. Fabiola Henri. Her willingness to help me learn Lexical Functional Grammar and to spend hours in her office helping with everything from AVMs in LaTeX to the fundamentals of syntactic theory has been instrumental to this thesis. My thanks also go out to Dr. Andrew Hippisley who introduced me to syntactic theory. I would like to thank him for his encouragement and drive. This thesis would be in a much different state without him. iii I would also like to thank my colleagues at the University of Kentucky. They have all been great sounding boards for this thesis and have provided invaluable feedback. Finally, I would like to thank my wife-to-be, Misty Stone. Your constant support, encouragement, and push have kept me going. Throughout this process, you have helped in more ways than you will ever know. I cannot thank you enough. ! ! ! ! ! ! ! iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................iii# List of Tables ..............................................................................................................................................vii# List of Abbreviations...............................................................................................................................viii# Section 1: Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1# Section 2: Alignment.................................................................................................................................. 2# Section 2.1: Head Marking ...................................................................................................................... 3# Section 2.2: Hierarchical Alignment..................................................................................................... 4# Section 3: Shawnee..................................................................................................................................... 5# Section 3.1: Verb Template ..................................................................................................................... 5# Section 3.2: Stem Formation, Orders and Modes............................................................................. 6# Section 3.3: Conjugation Classes and Paradigms............................................................................. 8# Section 3.4: Animate Intransitive .......................................................................................................... 9# Section 3.5: Transitive Animate............................................................................................................. 9# Section 4: Verbal Inflectional Categories .........................................................................................15# Section 4.1: Person ...................................................................................................................................15# Section 4.2: Number.................................................................................................................................18# Section: 4.3: Direction.............................................................................................................................21# Section 4.4: Obviation .............................................................................................................................23# Section 4.5: Revised Verbal Template...............................................................................................23# Section 5: Lexical-Functional Grammar ...........................................................................................25# Section 6: Inflectional Morphological Theory ................................................................................27# Section 6.1: Paradigm Function Morphology..................................................................................32# v Section 7: Analysis ...................................................................................................................................35# Section 7.1: Syntactic Analysis of the Animate Intransitive and Transitive Animate.......37# Section 7.2: Morphological Analysis of the Animate Intransitive............................................40# Section 7.3: Morphological Analysis of the Transitive