Repetitive Reduplication in Yurok and Karuk: Semantic Effects of Contact
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Repetitive Reduplication in Yurok and Karuk: Semantic Effects of Contact LISA CONATHAN & ESTHER WOOD University of California, Berkeley INTRODUCTION In this paper we discuss the morphology and semantics of verbal redupli cation in three languages: Yurok, Karuk and Meskwaki (Fox).1 These lan guages all have two distinct ways of deriving verbs with meanings that fall under the rubric of event plurality or 'pluractionality.' It is quite com mon cross-linguistically for pluractionality to be expressed by reduplica tion. In Yurok and Meskwaki, all the pluractional constructions are or can be reconstructed as prefixing reduplication - a monosyllabic type and a disyllabic type. In Karuk there is both a reduplicative pluractional and a pluractional derivational suffix -va. Garrett (2001) argues, on the basis of comparative morphology and semantics, that Yurok Repetitive reduplication is cognate with Algon quian disyllabic reduplication, which appears in Meskwaki as disyllabic reduplication, and possibly in Plains Cree as heavy syllable reduplication. (These contrast with monosyllabic reduplication and light syllable redu plication, respectively.) In this paper we question the comparison between Yurok and Algonquian, and propose instead that the meaning of Yurok disyllabic reduplication is due to contact with neighbouring Karuk. The Yurok construction is more similar in its semantics to Karuk reduplication than to reduplication constructions in Algonquian languages. We further argue that the reconstruction of two Proto-Algic verbal reduplication constructions that are the precursors to two distinct con structions in both Yurok and Meskwaki, as proposed in Garrett (2001), is not supported by the evidence available to us. 1. This work is partly supported by NSF grant BCS 0004081 to the University of Cali fornia, Berkeley. We are grateful to Aileen Figueroa of the Yurok Tribe for teaching us about her language; to Andrew Garrett for comments and suggestions for this work; and to Lucy Thomason for access to and essential explanation and discussion of the Meskwaki data. Glosses and translations of Meskwaki texts are provided by Lucy Thomason and ref erences are to manuscripts held by the National Anthropological Archives. Papers of the 34th Algonquian Conference, ed. H.C. Wolfart (Winnipeg: University of Manitoba, 2003), pp. 19-34. 20 LISA CONATHAN & ESTHER WOOD Yurok and Karuk are neighbouring languages in Northwestern Cali fornia. Yurok is distantly related to Meskwaki and other Algonquian lan guages, and also to nearby Wiyot. Karuk has no close genetic relatives, but belongs to the Northern Hokan part of the proposed Hokan stock. Potential relatives of Karuk include Chimariko, Shasta, Achumawi, Atsugewi, Washo and the Yuman languages. In describing the semantics of pluractional reduplication, we will refer to the typology of pluractionality proposed by Cusic (1981): (1) a. Event-internal repetition: a single event on a single occasion consists of repeated internal phases, e.g., bite > nibble, fly > flutter b. Event-external repetition, single occasion: an event or period of action is repeated on a single occasion, e.g., keep biting, fly back and forth c. Event-external repetition, multiple occasions: repetition on separate occasions, regularly or habitually, e.g., bite regularly, fly frequently An event-internal pluractional construes repeated action as a single event made up of several phases. Often the phases are of a different type than the overall event - for example, an event of nibbling is composed of sev eral diminutive bites that occur in succession. Event-external repetition consists of a series of events of a particular type, either on a single occa sion or on multiple occasions, in which case there is often a frequentative or habitual meaning. Event-internal repetition most often applies to 'single phase' semelfactive and achievement predicates to indicate con tinuous repetition of action (e.g., a verb meaning 'bite' might come to mean 'nibble'), and to activities to indicate "internal expansion" of action, i.e., prolongation or multiplication of internal phases (e.g., a verb mean ing 'fly' might come to mean 'flutter'). Event-external categories tend to pluralise bounded events or bounded periods of activity (cf. Cusic 1981:239). In terms of this typology, we will show that in both Yurok and Karuk, reduplication expresses event-internal repetition (type a), contrast ing with another category in each language expressing event-external rep etition (types b and c). In Meskwaki, the functions of reduplication are much harder to characterise in terms of Cusic's typology, but disyllabic reduplication clearly does not fit the profile of event-internal repetition REPETITIVE REDUPLICATION IN YUROK AND KARUK 21 and does not support the reconstruction of an event-internal meaning for disyllabic reduplication in Proto-Algic. The remainder of the paper is organised as follows: we give an account of the Yurok categories of event-internal and event-external plu ractionality, based on Garrett (2001), Wood & Garrett (2001), Wood (2001). We then show with data from published sources and unpublished Meskwaki texts that the meaning of Meskwaki disyllabic reduplication differs from that in Yurok. We describe pluractionality in Karuk, based on Blight's 1957 grammar and lexicon and Macaulay (1993). Karuk, like Yurok, distinguishes event-internal and event-external pluractionality. Additionally, new data from Chimariko (also Northern Hokan) shows that there is likely a similar event-internal pluractional construction in that language. YUROK Repetitive reduplication in Yurok, while often monosyllabic due to vowel syncope, is reconstructed by Garrett as disyllabic (*CVCV-).3 The REPETITIVE indicates event-internal repetition. Its primary function is to pluralise events and in some cases also their internal arguments (cf. Gar rett 2001, Wood 2001). The repetitive is restricted to a relatively small class of verbs. The majority of these are semelfactives, with which it indi cates repetition of the action in a limited period of time, as in (2). More rarely it is found with some statives, indicating multiple entities with a prominent shape or spatial configuration (3), and with a few verbs it can indicate limited distribution in space (within the boundaries of a patient or theme argument, as in (4). 2. Chimariko data are from the notes of George Grekoff, located in the Survey of Cali fornia and Other Indian Languages at the University of California, Berkeley. Grekoff s material is a comprehensive collection of 19th- and 20th-century fieldwork on Chimariko, most prominently that of Dixon and Harrington. 3. The orthography used for Yurok is largely that of Robins (1958) but with the follow ing changes adopted by the Yurok Project at Berkeley: [J] is written as <r>, [i] as <hl>, ftf] as <ch>, labialised consonants are <Cw>, glottalised consonants are <C>, and long vowels are <W>. LISA CONATHAN & ESTHER WOOD 22 menomenoot 'to keep pulling' menoot 'to pull' (2) tekwtekws 'to cut >1 thing tekws 'to cut' (or 1 thing >1 time)' hlkerhlkeroh(s-) 'to thump repeatedly' hlkeroh(s-) 'to thump' 'to be tall (>1 thing)' 'to be tall, high' noono 'op (3) no'op 'to lean (>1 thing)' 'to lean' waawa 'apah wa 'apah 'to lie (of boats)' ket 'ey ' to park, to moor' ket 'ket 'ey 'to be stuck together in (4) tekun- 'to be stuck tektekun- several places' together' 'to split in several places' pegon- 'to split (tr.)' pegpegon In addition to Repetitive reduplication, Yurok has a pluractional which marks event-external repetition. Robins, in his 1958 grammar, calls this the intensive. The basic form of the Intensive is an infix -eg-. Garrett convinc ingly argues that this evolved from monosyllabic reduplication (Pre-Yurok *Ce- < Proto-Algic *Caa). The details of the historical relationship between the -eg- infix and monosyllabic reduplication are given in Garrett (2001). The Intensive indicates event-external repetition, either on a single occasion or on multiple occasions (types b and c in Cusic's typology). Multiple-occasion repetition has a habitual or frequentative meaning, e.g., (5) BASE INTENSIVE chyuuk 'wen- 'to sit' chyeguuk 'wen- 'to sit often' hookwch- 'to gamble' hegookwch- 'to gamble regularly' kemol- 'to steal' kegemol- 'to be a thief laay- 'to pass' legaay- 'to pass regularly' (Robins 1958:82) The Intensive can also denote repetition on a single occasion, meaning 'do X repeatedly' or 'keep doing X'. This meaning is common with activ ity base verbs: 4. The form of the Intensive is usually -eg- (or -rg-, if it precedes -r- in the first syllable of the root), positioned after the first consonant or consonant cluster of the root. However, if the initial syllable of the root contains -e- followed by a velar, ablaut of the vowel occurs in place of the infix as follows: before /g, k/ the vowel becomes -ii-. Before /kw, w/ the vowel becomes -uu-. 5. It is not the historical development of Yurok morphology that we disagree with here, but only the details of the semantic comparison between Yurok and Algonquian, and the resulting Proto-Algic reconstruction. REPETITIVE REDUPLICATION IN YUROK AND KARUK 23 (6) BASE INTENSIVE chrwrhs- 'point' chuuwrh(s-) 'point repeatedly' swrrk'ws 'the wind gusts' swrgrrk'ws 'the wind gusts repeatedly' (Wood & Garrett 2001:115) In a few cases the Intensive can indicate plurality of an agent (see exam ple 8b). Minimal pairs (in elicited examples 7, 8) illustrate the difference between the event-internal repetition of the