A Non-Coercing Account of Event Structure in Pular
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A Non-Coercing Account of Event Structure in Pular James Barrie Evans Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of PhD University College London September 1998 ProQuest Number: 10609318 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 10609318 Published by ProQuest LLC(2017). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C ode Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 Tulde Gandal an fii Fulde den e Haala ntun 2 A bst rac t In the light of recent theories of event structure and focus interpretation, this thesis proposes an analysis of the semantic and pragmatic values of the main perfective forms of Pular, a dialect of the Fulfulde language of the West Atlantic branch of the Niger-Congo language family. The perfective system of Pular shows considerable complexity, there being three basic forms and several other forms with additional morphological marking. The semantic and pragmatic distinction between these forms has up till now resisted satisfactory analysis. Three basic forms and an additional statively-marked form are considered to constitute the four main forms in the Pular perfective system. An analysis of these forms is proposed in which it is argued that the notion of coercion, found in other proposals on event structure, is inappropriate and its function can be replaced by the use of a richer event structure of events and sub-events. To capture the appropriate interpretation of the perfective forms, a Neo- Davidsonian logical form is used, building on and elaborating ideas of Higginbotham, in which both event structure and verb focus can be portrayed. This type of logical form is justified in terms of the Carlsonian Kind/Object/Stage distinction, and is considered to portray the mental representation of an utterance in conceptual structure, in the sense of Jackendoff s proposals on the architecture of the language faculty. Further, in conjunction with relevance-theoretic principles of utterance interpretation, Rooth’s alternative semantics theory of focus is deployed to show how these logical forms are interpreted and considered felicitous or infelicitous in different contexts. This analysis of the Pular perfective verb system shows how a layered ontology of events and sub-events can be used to analyse a complex perfective system and constitutes an advance on previous studies of aspectual phenomena in Fulfulde. 3 A cknowledgements The names of the individuals I am indebted to after 12 years living among the Ful6e people in the Republic of Guinea and 5 years of study for a PhD extends beyond what can reasonably be written down on one page. In the first place I should acknowledge the Board of Christian Reformed World Missions, who commissioned me in 1985 to undertake the exacting task of translating the Christian scriptures into the Ful6e dialect of Guinea. It was this task which required me to study the dialect in depth and to expend the effort in understanding its recondite features. I would like to express my appreciation for my colleagues in Guinea, who have been a continual source of support. In second place I extend my thanks to the Ful6e community of Lab6 for unfailing hospitality and graciousness. My gratitude goes to Sai'dou Bald6 and Tierno Issa Diallo for accompanying me with patience in the first few years of language learning. My appreciation also to the Ful6e merchants of ‘maakiti Labe’, for their mischievous readiness to quote me yet another language feature I did not know! More recently I am indebted to the Fulbe staff of the University of Conakry, in particular to Abdalla Diallo and Mamadou Saliou Diallo, for sharing with me their rich knowledge of their language and culture. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the staff of the Linguistics Department of University College London: to Neil Smith for advice and encouragement, to Dierdre Wilson for insight, and to Annabel Cormack for insisting that it should make sense! Any shortcomings still remain my own. My appreciation goes to my wife Nancy and to my children Susanna, Miriam and Bryn, for venturing enthusiastically with me to Africa, and for their support during this period of study. Finally, for friends who have inspired and encouraged, and to the one Khalil above all, heartfelt thanks and praise. 4 T a b l e o f Co n t e n t s L ist of T a b l e s ....................................................................................................... 10 L ist of Dia g r a m s ...................................................................................................11 A bbreviations .................................................................................................... 12 1. I ntroduction .................................................................................................. 13 2. B a c k g r o u n d a n d O u t l i n e ........................................................................... 15 2.1 The P ro b le m ....................................................................................... 15 2.2 Conceptual Structure ....................................................................... 19 2.2.1 Coercion .......................................................................... 23 2.3 Modelling Mental Representation ................................................. 26 2.3.1 Types of Logical F o rm ................................................... 29 2.3.2 Logical Form in Relevance Theory ............................... 31 2.3.3 Logical Form and Events ................................................. 35 2.4 Vendlerian Categories ..................................................................... 38 2.5 Focus Interpretation .......................................................................... 42 3. G r a m m a t ic a l O u t l in e of P u l a r ............................................................46 3.1 Phonology ............................................................................................ 49 3.1.1 Consonant Alternation ................................................... 51 3.2 Morphology ......................................................................................... 52 3.2.1 Verb Morphology ............................................................. 52 3.2.1.1 Perfective and Imperfective Suffixes 53 3.2.1.2 Statively-Marked Clauses ............................... 55 3.2.1.3 Infinitive and Verbal Noun Form s ............... 56 3.2.1.4 The Progressive Construction ....................... 57 3.2.1.5 The Anterior Suffix ......................................... 57 3.2.1.6 Verb Extensions .............................................. 59 5 3.2.1.7 Lexically Passive V erbs ................................. 63 3.2.1.8 The ‘Impersonal’ Passive ............................... 63 3.2.2 Pronominal Morphology ................................................. 64 3.2.3 Nominal Morphology ...................................................... 68 3.2.4 Participles............................ 70 3.2.5 Adjectivals ....................................................................... 71 3.3 Syntax ............................................................................................... 72 3.3.1 Phrase Construction ........................................................ 72 3.3.2 Clause Construction ........................................................ 74 3.3.3 Relators ............................................................................... 76 3.3.4 Subject and Object D rop ................................................. 77 3.3.4.1 Subject Drop ................................................... 77 3.3.4.2 Object D rop ...................................................... 78 3.3.5 Focussing and Topicalisation ......................................... 79 3.3.5 Focussing ............................................................. 79 3.3.5 Topicalisation ...................................................... 80 3.3.6 Copular Clauses ................................................................ 80 3.3.7 Subordination ..................................................................... 81 4. T h e P e r f e c t iv e Sy st e m o f P u l a r ....................................................... 84 4.1 Non-Sequential Uses of Perfective-2 ........................................... 85 4.1.1 Focussing .......................................................................... 87 4.1.2 Subordination ..................................................................... 89 4.2 Use of Perfective-3 .......................................................................... 90 4.2.1 Non-Durative Events ...................................................... 94 4.2.2 Durative Events ................................................................ 95 4.2.3 ‘Semelfactive’Events ...................................................... 98 4.2.4 Perfective-3 in Restricted Environments .................. 100 4.3 Use of Perfective-2 in the Denotation of Event Sequences . 103 4.4 Use of Perfective-1 ......................................................................