DOCSLIB.ORG

Lexical Categories and Argument Structure a Study with Reference to Sakha

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lexical Categories and Argument Structure a Study with Reference to Sakha Lexical Categories and Argument Structure A study with reference to Sakha Published by LOT phone: +31 30 253 6006 Trans 10 fax: +31 30 253 6000 3512 JK Utrecht e-mail: [email protected] The Netherlands http://wwwlot.let.uu.nl/ Cover illustration: Open air museum in Suottu. A photograph by Evgenia Arbugaeva ISBN 90-76864-00-4 NUR 632 Copyright © 2005 Nadezhda Vinokurova. All rights reserved. Lexical Categories and Argument Structure A study with reference to Sakha (met een samenvatting in het Nederlands) Lexicale Categorieën en Argumentstructuur Een studie met betrekking tot het Sakha Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit Utrecht op gezag van de Rector Magnificus, Prof. Dr. W.H.Gispen, ingevolge het besluit van het College voor Promoties in het openbaar te verdedigen op vrijdag 18 maart 2005 des ochtends te 10.30 uur door Nadezhda Vinokurova geboren op 12 augustus 1974 te Yakutsk Promotor: Prof. Dr. E.J. Reuland ISBN 90-76864-00-4 Contents 0. HISTORICAL PRELUDE 1 0.1. Pānini……………………………………………………………………………1 0.2. Plato and Aristotle……………………………………………………………….1 0.3. The Stoics………………………………………………………………………..2 0.4. Dionysius Thrax…………………………………………………………………3 0.5. Latin grammarians: Varro and Priscian…………………………………………4 0.6. A summary: from Plato to Priscian……………………………………………...5 0.7. Further historical developments…………………………………………………6 1. INTRODUCTION 9 1.1. Lexical categories: Features versus configurations……………………………..9 1.2. Lexical categories: The generative background……………………………….11 1.2.1. Chomsky’s (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax…………………....11 1.2.2. Chomsky’s (1968/70) Remarks on nominalization…………………….12 1.2.3. Lexicalism……………………………………………………………...14 1.2.4. Consequences and implications of the feature formalisms…………….16 1.2.5. Other proposals in current linguistics: Jackendoff 1977; Déchaine 1993; prototype theory…..…………………………………………20 1.3. Lexicon versus Syntax………………………………………………………....24 1.3.1. Regression: Nature versus convention → anomaly versus Analogy → lexicon versus syntax?.............................................................27 1.3.2. Syntactic categorization…………………………………………….28 1.3.2.1. Marantz 1997/2001 and Distributed Morphology……....29 1.3.2.2. Some objections to categorization in DM………………34 1.3.2.3. Borer’s (2000, in press) exo-skeletal (XS) approach...…35 1.3.2.4. Some objections to the XS-model………………………39 1.3.2.4.1. Objections to XS-categorization…………….40 1.3.2.4.2. Special meanings as idioms…………………40 1.3.2.4.3. The derivation/inflection dichotomy………..42 1.3.2.4.4. Overgeneration……………………………...45 1.4. Two alternative approaches to argument structure…………………………….46 1.4.1. DM’s approach to argument structure…………………………...…47 1.4.2. The exo-skeletal approach to argument structure………………..…58 1.4.3. A different conception of argument structure: Theta System……....60 1.5. The extended proposal…………………………………………………………67 1.5.1. Relational nouns……………………………………………………75 1.5.2. A note on concepts in TS, DM and XS: Conceptual coercion and on the necessity of theta features……………………………………………..78 1.6. The proposal in a nutshell……………………………………………………...79 1.6.1. Contrasting the predictions…………………………………………81 1.7. Structure of the dissertation……………………………………………………82 2. DECOMPOSING LEXICAL CATEGORIES IN SAKHA 83 2.1. The inventory of roots and suffixes…………………………………………....84 2.1.1. The evolutionary routes of roots……………………………………85 2.1.1.1. Evidence for bound roots………………………….........87 Contents 2.1.1.2. Evidence from word coining for the psychological salience of bound roots…………………………………………..89 2.1.2. Simplex and complex suffixes……………………...………………91 2.1.2.1. Suffixal promiscuity…………………………………….92 2.1.2.2. Suffixal instability…………………………..…………..94 2.1.2.3. Not all derivation is suffixation…………………………95 2.1.3. Explaining categorial ambiguities of roots in Theta system…….…96 2.2. Against bare roots………………………………………………………..…….98 2.2.1. Against XS-categorization…………………………………….……99 2.2.2. Against DM-categorization……………………………….………..99 2.2.3. Against bare roots in general: Onomatopoeic words in Sakha…....102 2.2.4. Against bare roots in general: Some notes on parsing……………103 2.3. Derivation: Lexicon versus syntax…………………………………………....104 2.3.1. Untenability of the tenet “All derivation in the syntax”…………..106 2.3.2. Predictions for lexical and syntactic derivation……………….…..112 2.3.3. Some notes on morphological marking of derivation…………….114 2.4. Deriving nouns in the lexicon and syntax…………………………………….118 2.4.1. Deriving nouns from nouns……………………………………….118 2.4.2. Deriving nouns from adjectives………………………….………..119 2.4.3. Deriving nouns from verbs……………………………….……….120 2.5. Deriving adjectives in the lexicon and syntax……………………….……….125 2.5.1. Deriving adjectives from nouns…………………………………...125 2.5.2. Deriving adjectives from adjectives…………………………...….125 2.5.3. Deriving adjectives from verbs…………………………….……..126 2.6. Concluding remarks………………………………………………………..…128 3. NOUNS IN SAKHA 131 3.1. Possession………………………………………………………….…………131 3.1.1. Introducing possessives…………………………………..……….132 3.1.1.1. Possession at the nominal level…………………….….132 3.1.1.2. The lack of genitive case in Sakha and the obligatory presence of the dummy noun in possessor predicates………….133 3.1.1.3. Clausal possession: Full NP possessor predicates…….134 3.1.1.4. Clausal possession: -LAAX…………………………...135 3.1.1.5. There is a nominative possessor……………………….137 3.1.1.6. There is a dative possessor…………………………….137 3.1.2. Analyzing possessives…………………………………………….138 3.1.2.1. Analyzing –LAAX…………………………………….139 3.1.2.1.1. Associative –LAAX………………………..141 3.1.2.1.2. Temporal –LAAX………………………….145 3.1.2.2. Raising analysis of possession………………………...146 3.1.2.2.1. Possessives and locatives…………………..151 3.1.2.2.2. Capturing the possessor……………………155 3.1.2.3. Inalienable possession………………………………....160 3.1.2.3.1. Inalienability as a grammatical category…..164 3.1.2.3.2. Absence of relationality with possessive predicates……………………………………………..167 Contents 3.1.2.3.3. Postpositional phrases……………………...170 3.1.2.3.4. Q-ish nouns………………………………...172 3.1.2.4. Adjectival modification and temporary possession…...175 3.1.2.5. Concluding remarks on possession…………………....178 3.2. Nominal compounds: The lexicon/syntax division………………………..….179 3.2.1. Root compounds………………………………………………..…180 3.2.2. Possessive compounds…………………………………………….181 3.2.3. Dvandva compounds……………………………………………...185 3.3. Baker’s (2003) criterion of identity…………………………………………..189 3.4. Nouns as arguments…………………………………………………………..191 3.4.1. Other proposals for nouns as arguments………………………….192 3.4.2. The current proposal: NP-arguments versus DP-arguments…...…195 3.4.2.1. Structural deficiency in Sakha: The missing DP-layer..195 3.4.2.2. Discourse reference and the DP-domain……………....197 3.5. Concluding remarks…………………………………………………………..198 4. ADJECTIVES IN SAKHA 201 4.1. Predication…………………………………………………………………....201 4.1.1. Conjunction………………………………………………...……..202 4.1.2. Agreement………………………………………………………...204 4.1.2.1. Agreement in finite predication……………………….204 4.1.2.2. Agreement in non-finite predication…………………..206 4.1.3. Negation…………………………………………………………..207 4.1.4. Structures for adjectival predication without buol ‘be’ (present tense)……………………………………………………………………..211 4.1.5. Buol ‘be’ introducing a generic operator……………………….…213 4.1.6. Structures for adjectival predication with buol ‘be’ and for nominal predication (present tense)……………………………………………….216 4.2. Tense and the three types of predicates………………………………………218 4.2.1. Overview of tenses in Sakha (in the indicative mood)……………220 4.2.1.1. INFL[-TENSE FEATURE]-PART-VP………………………..220 4.2.1.2. INFL[+TENSE FEATURE]-VP……………………….………223 4.2.1.3. INFL-AUX-PART-VP………………………………...223 4.2.1.4. Alternating forms: INFL-PART-VP or INFL-AUX- PART-VP…………………………………………………..…..224 4.2.1.5. Summary 1: Simplex and compound tenses in Sakha...228 4.2.1.6. Summary 2: On the relationship among I, Part, VP and AP……………...………………………………………229 4.2.2. Deriving tense asymmetry between verbs and adjectives………...231 4.2.3. Deriving allomorphy……………...................................................234 4.2.4. Matrix bare verbs………………….................................................240 4.2.5. A sample derivation for a nominal predicate in the past and future tenses…………………………………………………………………….247 4.2.6. Comparison with Baker 2003…………………………………..…248 4.3. Embedded predication and the obligatoriness of buol ‘be’ with nonfinite nominal predicates……………………………………………………………...…252 4.3.1. Non-finite and finite subordination: Verbal predicates…………...253 Contents 4.3.2. Non-finite and finite subordination: Adjectival predicates……….254 4.3.3. Non-finite and finite subordination: Nominal predicates…………255 4.3.4. Argumenthood and referentiality of embedded clauses…………..255 4.4. Extractions out of predicates: the nominal/adjectival/verbal asymmetry…….257 4.4.1. Verb-based relative clauses……………………………………….258 4.4.1.1. Lack of V-to-I movement inside a relative clause…….260 4.4.1.2. Two differences between Sakha and Turkish RCs…....261 4.4.1.3. The argument/adjunct asymmetry in extraction……….262 4.4.2. Adjective-based relative clauses…………………………………..263 4.4.3. Noun-based relative clauses and concluding remarks……….……264 4.5. Attributive modification………………………………………………………265 4.5.1. The structure of attributive modification………………………….265 4.5.1.1. Kayne’s (1994) account……………………………….266 4.5.1.2. Baker’s (2003) account………………………………..266 4.5.1.3. Thematic account……………………………………...269 4.5.1.3.1. Ruling out verbs as attributive modifiers of nouns………………………………………………….272 4.5.2. The N→A
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Internal Structure of Nouns, Nominals, and Gerunds: an Analysis of Their Relationship and Representation1
    The Internal Structure of Nouns, Nominals, and Gerunds: An Analysis of Their Relationship and Representation1 MARCUS BERGER University of Georgia [email protected] Abstract: Spectrums of lexical categories in languages are well-documented phenomena. Some constructions are “nounier” or “verbier” than others, though they might not fit purely into the cat- egories of nouns or verbs. While these middle-ground constructions are recognized in the literature (see Ross 1973, e.g.), their representation is less studied in modern frameworks. I build on Ab- ney’s (1987) dissertation concerning the DP in English, and place it into a Minimalist framework. In doing so, I propose the insertion of nominal and verbal projections at varying points in the syn- tactic hierarchy to represent selected nominal constructions, based on parallelisms in the hierar- chical structures of nominal and verbal structures. Though the parallelism is not exact, I propose a dP projection to aid in the symmetry, presenting evidence to complete the spectrum on the nomi- nal end. My investigation maintains the universality of nouns and verbs while providing an analy- sis of nominal forms using preexisting categories. 0. Introduction With regard to the grammar of language, it is important to consider every type of construction with a mindset of “everything in its place, and a place for every thing.” That is to say, it is not enough to analyze only constructions that fit neatly into a pre-existing framework. It is necessary to account for the entire grammar of a language. In this paper, I analyze different types of deverbative nominal structures alongside purely nominal structures.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Case Study of Active Latin Teaching and Learning
    University of Kentucky UKnowledge Theses and Dissertations--Education Sciences College of Education 2021 “HOW SWEET THAT I AM THE ONE TO WHISPER THESE THINGS”: A COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY OF ACTIVE LATIN TEACHING AND LEARNING Laura Ann Manning University of Kentucky, [email protected] Author ORCID Identifier: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0697-4546 Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.13023/etd.2021.265 Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Manning, Laura Ann, "“HOW SWEET THAT I AM THE ONE TO WHISPER THESE THINGS”: A COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY OF ACTIVE LATIN TEACHING AND LEARNING" (2021). Theses and Dissertations--Education Sciences. 91. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/edsc_etds/91 This Doctoral Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Education at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations--Education Sciences 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.
    [Show full text]
  • When Dependent Case Is Not Enough
    When dependent case is not enough András Bárány, [email protected] SOAS University of London Michelle Sheehan, [email protected] Anglia Ruskin University 9 May 2019, GLOW 42, University of Oslo Our claims • Even if dependent case exists, we need case-assignment via Agree • CPs can be case competitors, but do not get case-marking • Agreement-based case splits in Romance, Kashmiri and elsewhere suggests a closer link between φ-features and case than in dependent case theory • It is possible to adapt both Agree and dependent case to these patterns but we argue that Agree is often more parsimonious 1 The dependent case approach (1) Dependent case theory Morphologically marked cases (acc/erg/dat) result from a relationship between two DPs rather than from a relationship between a head and a DP. There are many different versions of this general approach, e.g. Anderson (1976), Yip, Maling & Jackendoff (1987), Marantz (1991), Bittner & Hale (1996), McFadden (2004), Baker & Vinokurova (2010), M. C. Baker (2015), Levin & Preminger (2015), Nash (2017). • M. C. Baker (2015) argues that dependent cases are determined at the phase level and as- signed at the transfer to spell-out bárány & sheehan — dep. case — GLOW 42 (2) Dependent case by c-command (M. C. Baker 2015: 48–49, our emphasis) a. If there are two distinct NPs in the same spell out domain such that NP1 c-commands NP2, then value the case feature of NP2 as accusative unless NP1 has already been marked for case. b. If there are two distinct NPs in the same spell out domain such that NP1 c-commands NP2, then value the case feature of NP1 as ergative unless NP2 has already been marked for case.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to the Knowledge of Greek Grammar
    AN * INTRODUCTION TO THE KNOWLEDGE or GREEK GRAMMAR. By SAMUEL B. WYLIE, D. D. IN THE WICE PROVOST AND PROFESSOR of ANCIENT LANGUAGES UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA. *NWTIET 16). <e) - \ 3} f) iſ a t t I pi} f a, J. whet HAM, 144 CHES NUT STREET. 1838. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1838, by SAMUEL B. Wylie, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. ANDov ER, MAss. Gould & Newman, Printers. **'. … Tº Co PR E FA C E. CoNSIDERING the number of Greek Grammars, already in market, some apology may appear necessary for the introduction of a new one. Without formally making a defence, it may be remarked, that subjects of deep interest, need to be viewed in as many different bearings as can readily be obtained. Grammar, whether considered as a branch of philological science, or a system of rules subservient to accuracy in speaking or writing any language, embraces a most interesting field of research, as wide and unlimited, as the progres sive development of the human mind. A work of such magnitude, requires a great variety of laborers, and even the humblest may be of some service. Even erroneous positions may be turned to good account, should they, by their refutation, contribute to the elucida tion of principle. A desire of obtaining a more compendious and systematic view of grammatical principles, and more adapted to his own taste in order and arrangement, induced the author to undertake, and gov erned him in the compilation of this manual.
    [Show full text]
  • The Concept of Intentional Action in the Grammar of Kathmandu Newari
    THE CONCEPT OF INTENTIONAL ACTION IN THE GRAMMAR OF KATHMANDU NEWARI by DAVID J. HARGREAVES A DISSERTATION Presented to the Department of Linguistics and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 1991 ii APPROVED: Dr. Scott DeLancey iii An Abstract of the Dissertation of David J. Hargreaves for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Linguistics to be taken August 1991 Title: THE CONCEPT OF INTENTIONAL ACTION IN THE GRAMMAR OF KATHMANDU NEWARI Approved: Dr. Scott DeLancey This study describes the relationship between the concept of intentional action and the grammatical organization of the clause in Kathmandu Newari, a Tibeto-Burman language spoken primarily in the Kathmandu valley of Nepal. In particular, the study focuses on the conceptual structure of "intentional action" along with the lexical, morphological, and syntactic reflexes of this notion in situated speech. The construal of intentional action consists of two distinct notions: one involving the concept of self-initiated force and the other involving mental representation or awareness. The distribution of finite inflectional forms for verbs results from the interaction of these two notions with a set of evidential/discourse principles which constrain the attribution of intentional action to certain discourse roles in situated interaction. iv VITA NAME OF AUTHOR: David J. Hargreaves PLACE OF BIRTH: Detroit, Michigan DATE OF BIRTH: March 10, 1955 GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE
    [Show full text]
  • 9 Argument Structure and Argument Structure Alternations Gillian Ramchand
    9 Argument structure and argument structure alternations Gillian Ramchand 9.1 Introduction One of the major scientific results of Chomskian syntactic theory is the understanding that the symbolic representations of natural language are structured, by which I mean that symbols are organized in hierarchical constituent data structures, and are not simply linearly ordered strings or lists of memorized items. The semantic ‘arguments’ of predicates are expressed within natural language data structures, and therefore also form part of structured representations. This chapter is devoted to exam- ining the major theoretical results pertaining to the semantics of verbal predicate argument relations and their systematic patterning in lan- guage. However, we will see that even isolating the logical domain of inquiry will involve certain deep questions about the architecture of grammar, and the relationship between listedness and compositional semantics. Historically, the most important results in argument structure have come from those studying the properties of the Lexicon as a module of grammar, for a number of rather natural reasons as we will see. While this chapter will aim to give the reader a clear historical and ideological con- text for the subject matter and will document major influential strands of research, it will primarily concentrate on extracting the generalizations that I judge to be the lasting results of the past fifty years, and then secondarily, draw attention to the (still unresolved) architectural and theoretical issues that are specific to this domain. Section 9.2 gives the perspective on the issues from the vantage point of the Lexicon, i.e. the practical problem of deciding how much and what kind of information is necessary for the listing of verbal lexical entries.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to the Greek of the New Testament by George L. Cary
    P A 817 C3 1881 MAIN AN IMODJJCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT GREEK C AH Y. cc. \ / -J z&tfsrt^***- LI BRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA GIKT Accessions No, &_*&#: Shelf No. t* C332, AN INTRODUCTION TO THE GREEK OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, BY GEO. L. GARY, OF THE MEADVILLE THEOLOGICAL SCHOOL. SECOND EDITION. ANDOVER: WARREN F. DRAPER, MAIN STREET. 1881. COPYRIGHT, 1878. BY GEO. L. CART ELECTROTYPED AND PRINTED AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS, CAMBRIDGE. 63 PREFACE. IT is believed that there are many persons (some of them students in theology) unacquainted with the Greek language, and with neither time nor inclination for the study of classical to read the Greek literature, who would nevertheless be glad aid of New Testament in its original tongue. For the such, is abso- this little work has been prepared. It contains what lutely necessary for the understanding of New Testament Greek, in what is omitting (or occasionally introducing brackets) appli- cable only to classical authors. Not that a familiarity with this book alone will enable one to read offhand the Greek New faith- Testament without further assistance ; but he who has " " fully studied this Introduction will then be in a situation to make use of more elaborate works. Perhaps the most helpful book to the beginner is "Bagster's Analytical Greek Lexicon," too helpful if mental discipline is sought, but not if one's only aim is to economize time and labor. To the advanced student (supposed to be already in possession of some good New Testa- " ment Lexicon), Buttmann's Grammar of the New Testament " " Greek (or Winer's Grammar of the Idiom of the New Tes- tament ") is almost indispensable.
    [Show full text]
  • Sakha and Dolgan, the North Siberian Turkic Languages Brigitte Pakendorf, Eugenie Stapert
    Sakha and Dolgan, the North Siberian Turkic languages Brigitte Pakendorf, Eugenie Stapert To cite this version: Brigitte Pakendorf, Eugenie Stapert. Sakha and Dolgan, the North Siberian Turkic languages. Robbeets, Martine & Alexander Savelyev. The Oxford Guide to the Transeurasian Languages, Oxford University Press, pp.430-445, 2020. hal-02889684 HAL Id: hal-02889684 https://hal.univ-lyon2.fr/hal-02889684 Submitted on 4 Jul 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Chapter 26 Sakha and Dolgan, the North Siberian Turkic languages Brigitte Pakendorf and Eugenie Stapert Abstract This chapter provides a brief structural overview of the North Siberian Turkic languages Sakha (also known as Yakut) and Dolgan. Both languages are spoken in the northeast of the Russian Federation: Sakha in the Republic Sakha (Yakutia) and Dolgan on the Taimyr Peninsula. These languages clearly fit the Turkic linguistic profile with vowel harmony, agglutinative morphology, SOV word order, and preposed relative clauses, but due to contact-induced changes there are considerable differences from other Turkic languages as well. Notable differences are the loss of the Turkic genitive and locative case and the development of a partitive and comparative case, as well as a distinction between an immediate and a remote imperative.
    [Show full text]
  • Ditransitive Constructions Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig (Germany) 23-25 November 2007
    Conference on Ditransitive Constructions Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig (Germany) 23-25 November 2007 Abstracts On “Dimonotransitive” Structures in English Carmen Aguilera Carnerero University of Granada Ditransitive structures have been prototypically defined as those combinations of a ditransitive verb with an indirect object and a direct object. However, although in the prototypical ditransitive construction in English, both objects are present, there is often omission of one of the constituentes, usually the indirect object. The absence of the indirect object has been justified on the basis of the irrelevance of its specification or the possibility of recovering it from the context. The absence of the direct object, on the other hand, is not so common and only occur with a restricted number of verbs (e.g. pay, show or tell).This type of sentences have been called “dimonotransitives” by Nelson, Wallis and Aarts (2002) and the sole presence in the syntactic structure arises some interesting questions we want to clarify in this article, such as: (a) the degree of syntactic and semantic obligatoriness of indirect objects and certain ditransitive verbs (b) the syntactic behaviour of indirect objects in absence of the direct object, in other words, does the Oi take over some of the properties of typical direct objects as Huddleston and Pullum suggest? (c) The semantic and pragmatic interpretations of the missing element. To carry out our analysis, we will adopt a corpus –based approach and especifically we will use the International Corpus of English (ICE) for the most frequent ditransitive verbs (Mukherjee 2005) and the British National Corpus (BNC) for the not so frequent verbs.
    [Show full text]
  • Unity and Diversity in Grammaticalization Scenarios
    Unity and diversity in grammaticalization scenarios Edited by Walter Bisang Andrej Malchukov language Studies in Diversity Linguistics 16 science press Studies in Diversity Linguistics Chief Editor: Martin Haspelmath In this series: 1. Handschuh, Corinna. A typology of marked-S languages. 2. Rießler, Michael. Adjective attribution. 3. Klamer, Marian (ed.). The Alor-Pantar languages: History and typology. 4. Berghäll, Liisa. A grammar of Mauwake (Papua New Guinea). 5. Wilbur, Joshua. A grammar of Pite Saami. 6. Dahl, Östen. Grammaticalization in the North: Noun phrase morphosyntax in Scandinavian vernaculars. 7. Schackow, Diana. A grammar of Yakkha. 8. Liljegren, Henrik. A grammar of Palula. 9. Shimelman, Aviva. A grammar of Yauyos Quechua. 10. Rudin, Catherine & Bryan James Gordon (eds.). Advances in the study of Siouan languages and linguistics. 11. Kluge, Angela. A grammar of Papuan Malay. 12. Kieviet, Paulus. A grammar of Rapa Nui. 13. Michaud, Alexis. Tone in Yongning Na: Lexical tones and morphotonology. 14. Enfield, N. J (ed.). Dependencies in language: On the causal ontology of linguistic systems. 15. Gutman, Ariel. Attributive constructions in North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic. 16. Bisang, Walter & Andrej Malchukov (eds.). Unity and diversity in grammaticalization scenarios. ISSN: 2363-5568 Unity and diversity in grammaticalization scenarios Edited by Walter Bisang Andrej Malchukov language science press Walter Bisang & Andrej Malchukov (eds.). 2017. Unity and diversity in grammaticalization scenarios (Studies in Diversity Linguistics
    [Show full text]
  • How Georgian Is (Not) Like Basque: a Comparative Case Study of Split-S
    Baker, Georgian vs. Basque, 4/5/2017 1 How Georgian is (not) like Basque: a comparative case study of split-S languages James Baker, University of Cambridge CamCoS, 4th May 2017 1 Introduction 1.1 Split-S languages Split-S:1 morphosyntactic alignment where dierent intransitive predicates occur with dierent case/agreement/(word order): (1) Central Pomo (Pomoan, California): a. Pa· qhadé·č’. I.agt ght ‘I ght.’ b. ”to· ló·ya. I.pat fell ‘I fell.’ (Mithun 1991: 518–9) In dierent split-S languages, the split amongst intransitive predicates is sensitive to dierent (predominantly semantic) factors (Mithun 1991, Donohue and Wichmann 2008, Baker in preparation, a.o.), for example: 1Also known as ‘split intransitive’, ‘semantically aligned’, ‘active(-stative)’, ‘agentive-patientive’ etc. etc. I here take ‘uid-S’ as a subset of split-S (cf. Dixon 1994)—see Baker in preparation for discussion. Baker, Georgian vs. Basque, 4/5/2017 2 • [±volition]: Eastern Pomo, Tabassaran, ~Tsova-Tush ... (‘uid-S’ languages); • [±initiation]: Lakhota?, Acehnese?; • [±state]: Galela, Loma, Guaraní? (‘active-stative’ languages2); • more than one factor, e.g. – Central Pomo: [±volition], [±state], [±aected] ...; – Tibetan: [±volition], [±focus]? – ... Here: focus on two relatively similar split-S languages, Basque and Georgian. 1.2 The Split Intransitivity Hierarchy Starting point for analysis is Sorace’s (2000 et seq.) Split Intransitivity Hierarchy (aka Auxiliary Selection Hierarchy) (SIH):3 Change of location come, arrive, leave, fall ... Change of state become, decay, die, be born, grow ... State stay, last, survive, persist, be, sit, be useful ... Uncontrolled process tremble, catch on, skid, cough, rumble, rain ... Controlled process (motional) swim, run, walk ..
    [Show full text]
  • On Future 'Finite' Participles in Azerbaijani
    Asian and African Languages and Linguistics, No.14, 2020 On Future ‘Finite’ Participles in Azerbaijani* YOSHIMURA, Taiki ILCAA Joint Researcher In this article, I will investigate the morpho-syntactic characteristics of the future-tensed participle, the verbal form that includes the future tense suffix in Azerbaijani. It is not clear whether the future participle in the language originally had finiteness; neither is it clear whether it is an inflected word or an independent word, i.e., a word derived from the verb. I argue that a descriptive framework that allows cross-categorial classification between nouns, adjectives, and verbs, and which applies the so-called ‘null’ copula proposed by Kornfilt (1996) for Turkish to Azerbaijani, accounts for both finite and non-finite participles as a single lexeme. Although there are three types of tense in Azerbaijani, i.e., past, present, and future, this article concludes that the future tense is not an inflectional category: the definite past and present tense in the language are obviously inflectional categories, but the future tense happens to be realized as a participle derived from the verbal lexeme. Keywords: participles, derivation, lexeme class, Azerbaijani 1. Problems related to the Azerbaijani future ‘finite’ participle 2. Several assumptions for explaining the Azerbaijani participles 3. Analysis of the future finite tensed form in Azerbaijani 4. Conclusion 1. Problems related to the Azerbaijani future ‘finite’ participle Azerbaijani belongs to the southwest Turkic language group, and in many aspects the grammatical structure of the language is similar to Turkish, belongs to the same language group. As in other Turkic languages, Azerbaijani has agglutinative morphology in which two or more suffixes can be attached to the stem of a word, and typical head-final syntactic YOSHIMURA, Taiki.
    [Show full text]