Towards a Grammar of Innu-Aimun Particles
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TOWARDS A GRAMMAR OF INNU-AIMUN PARTICLES by c Will Oxford A thesis submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of Linguistics Memorial University of Newfoundland 2007 St.John’s NewfoundlandandLabrador ABSTRACT In Algonquian linguistics, indeclinable particles are traditionally treated as a single class. Although this approach is morphologically accurate, it obscures the fact that particles serve a wide variety of grammatical functions. This thesis examines the particles of Innu-aimun, an Algonquian language spoken in Labrador and Quebec. Based on a detailed grammat- ical analysis, particles are classified into the following more specific part-of-speech cate- gories: adnominal particles (adjectives and quantifiers), prepositions, adverbs, focus parti- cles, question particles, negators, conjunctions, and interjections. The grammatical prop- erties that distinguish each class are described and analyzed. The declinable categories of pronouns, demonstratives, and locative-inflected nouns, which have certain properties in common with particles, are also discussed. While the primary goal of the thesis is to pro- vide a broad and comprehensive description of the grammar of Innu-aimun particles, the analysis is expressed using the framework of generative grammar and theoretical explana- tions are suggested throughout. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Throughout the preparation of this thesis, many people have provided advice, assistance, and support. My biggest thank-you must, of course, go to my co-supervisors Phil Branigan and Marguerite MacKenzie, without whom none of this would be possible. I am also grateful to Jos´eMailhot for generously sharing her time and expertise. For friendship, conversation, and company in the “ab lab,” I thank Jenn Thorburn; for assistance with administrative matters, I am grateful to Laurel Anne Hasler, Colleen Porter, Mike Harding, and Ruby Bishop. My fieldwork in Labrador was made considerably easier thanks to the generous profes- sional assistance and personal hospitality of Leanna Huszar. My thanks also go to Joanne at the North West River library and Tammy and Marty at Goose River Lodges. And of course, this research would not exist without the patience, indulgence, insight, good humour, and enthusiasm of my Innu-aimun teachers: Mary Jane Abraham, Helen Hart, Ann Hurley, Marilyn Martin, Julianna Michel, Basile Penashue, and one other person who wished not to be named. I was also fortunate to work with Rose Gr´egoire, who sadly passed away while this thesis was being written. I hope that the material in this thesis expresses at least a small part of what these people so generously shared with me, and I apologize to them for any errors that it contains. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IV My research was funded by grants from the Northern Scientific Training Program, the Institute for Social and Economic Research, the J. R. Smallwood Foundation for New- foundland and Labrador Studies, and the SSHRC CURA project titled Knowledge and Human Resources for Innu Language Development, led by Marguerite MacKenzie. I am also grateful for financial support in the form of scholarships and fellowships from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Institute for Social and Economic Research, and the School of Graduate Studies, as well as employment from Vit Bubenik, Marguerite MacKenzie, and Derek Nurse. I would like to acknowledge the personal encouragement of Chrissy Vincent, Matthew Sheppard, and, in particular, my parents Jerry and Cathy. Finally, a special thank-you goes to David Pippy for his unfailing support. CONTENTS ABSTRACT ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii LIST OF TABLES ix LIST OF FIGURES xi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xiii 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 AboutInnu-aimun............................... 2 1.1.1 Geneticaffiliation,location,andstatus . ...... 2 1.1.2 Typologicalcharacteristics . .. 6 1.1.3 Wordformation............................ 7 1.1.4 Inflection ............................... 8 1.2 Previousresearchonparticles. .... 12 1.3 Scopeandgoalsofthisthesis . .. 15 1.3.1 Scope ................................. 15 1.3.2 Goals ................................. 16 1.4 Dataandmethodology ............................ 17 1.4.1 TheLabradorInnuTextProject(LITP) . 18 1.4.2 Fieldwork............................... 18 1.4.3 Dictionarydatabases . 21 1.4.4 Presentationofdata. 21 1.5 Conclusion .................................. 22 2 A CLASSIFICATION OF INNU-AIMUN PARTICLES 23 2.1 Thenatureoflinguisticcategories . ..... 23 2.1.1 Whatarepartsofspeech?. 24 v CONTENTS VI 2.1.2 Criteriaforestablishingcategories . ..... 25 2.1.3 Theorganizationofcategories . 27 2.1.4 Cross-linguisticconsiderations . .... 30 2.2 Classificationschemeandthesisoutline . ...... 31 2.3 Distinguishingparticlesandpreverbs . ....... 34 2.3.1 Irrealis preverb tshetshˆı ........................ 38 2.3.2 Completive aspect preverb katshˆ ˆı ................... 40 2.3.3 Preverb/adverb nˆıtaˆ ‘ever’ ...................... 41 2.3.4 Preverb/adverb pet ‘here’....................... 43 2.3.5 Ablative preverb/preposition utˆ .................... 44 2.3.6 Preverb of extent ishpish ....................... 47 2.3.7 Conclusion—distinguishing particles and preverbs . ........ 48 3 PRONOUNS AND DEMONSTRATIVES 50 3.1 Personalpronouns............................... 51 3.2 Indefinitepronouns .............................. 54 3.3 Demonstratives ................................ 56 3.3.1 Degreesofdistance . 56 3.3.2 Morphologyandsyntaxofdemonstratives . ... 60 3.3.3 Locativedemonstratives . 63 3.4 kutak ‘other’.................................. 70 3.5 Conclusion .................................. 74 4 CLEFTING WORDS 76 4.1 Thenatureofcleftsentences . .. 77 4.2 Subject/objectcleftingwords . .... 79 4.2.1 eukuan ‘itisthis/that’......................... 80 4.2.2 namaieu ‘itisnot’........................... 87 4.2.3 tshekuanˆ ‘what is it?’ and tshekuen/auen ‘whoisit?’ . 87 4.2.4 Personalpronounsascleftingwords. ... 89 4.3 Obliquecleftingwords . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 90 4.4 Adnominalandadverbialcleftingwords . ..... 93 4.5 Thegrammarofcleftingwords . 94 4.6 Conclusion ..................................101 5 ADNOMINAL PARTICLES 103 5.1 Adjectives...................................103 5.1.1 Lexicalversusfunctionaladjectives . .104 CONTENTS VII 5.1.2 TheadjectivesofInnu-aimun. 107 5.1.3 Thesyntaxofadjectives . .111 5.2 Quantifiers...................................116 5.2.1 Non-numeralquantifiers . .117 5.2.2 Numeralquantifiers. .121 5.2.3 Incorporated-nounquantifiers . 124 5.3 Conclusion ..................................131 6 PREPOSITIONS 133 6.1 Distinguishing among prepositional and/or locative categories . .133 6.2 Locative-casenominals . 137 6.2.1 Whylocativecase? . .138 6.2.2 ThestructureanddistributionoflocativeNPs . .. ..140 6.2.3 Exclusivelylocativenouns . 147 6.3 Simplelocativeprepositions . .152 6.3.1 Basic properties of simple locative prepositions . ........152 6.3.2 Evidence for constituency and ordering in the locativePP.. .159 6.3.3 Nominalpropertiesoflocativeprepositions . .. ..163 6.4 Incorporated-nounprepositions . .168 6.4.1 Classificatoryprepositions . 168 6.4.2 Compoundprepositions. .175 6.4.3 Conclusion—incorporated-nounprepositions . .. ..177 6.5 Functionalprepositions . 178 6.6 Conclusion ..................................181 7 ADVERBS 183 7.1 Semanticclassificationofadverbs . .183 7.1.1 Circumstantialadverbs . .184 7.1.2 Degreeadverbs ............................195 7.1.3 Modaladverbs ............................196 7.1.4 Conclusion—semanticadverbclasses . 198 7.2 Syntacticpropertiesofadverbs . .199 7.2.1 VPandsentenceadverbs . .200 7.2.2 Degreemodifiers .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..217 7.3 Conclusion ..................................222 8 MINOR CATEGORIES 223 8.1 Focusparticles.................................223 CONTENTS VIII 8.1.1 Restrictivefocusparticles. 227 8.1.2 Additivefocusparticles. 235 8.1.3 Emphaticfocusparticles . .240 8.1.4 Otherfocusparticles . .247 8.1.5 Conclusion—focusparticles . 249 8.2 Questionparticles ............................... 251 8.2.1 Question particle aˆ ..........................251 8.2.2 Question particle maˆ .........................254 8.2.3 Conclusion—questionparticles. 256 8.3 Negators....................................257 8.3.1 Constituentnegation . .257 8.3.2 Sentencenegation. .259 8.3.3 Conclusion—negators . .266 8.4 Conjunctions .................................266 8.4.1 Symmetricalcoordinators. 270 8.4.2 Asymmetricalcoordinators . 278 8.4.3 Complement-clause subordinators (complementizers)........285 8.4.4 Adverbial-clause subordinators (adverbializers) . ..........289 8.4.5 Sentence-initialsubordinators . .292 8.4.6 Conjunctiveadverbs . .294 8.4.7 Conclusion—conjunctions . .295 8.5 Interjections..................................295 8.6 Conclusion ..................................298 9 CONCLUSION 300 9.1 Summaryofthesis...............................300 9.2 Recurringgrammaticalpatterns. .304 9.3 Issuesforfutureresearch . 306 BIBLIOGRAPHY 308 APPENDIX: A GLOSSARY OF INNU-AIMUN PARTICLES AND FUNCTION WORDS 324 LIST OF TABLES 1.1 Contents of volumes 1–4 of the Labrador Innu Text Project ......... 19 1.2 Participantsinfieldwork . 20 1.3 Formatforcitingexamples . 21 2.1 Occurrences of tshetshˆı ............................ 39 2.2 Occurrences of katshˆ ˆı ............................. 41 2.3 Occurrences of nˆıtaˆ .............................. 42 2.4 Occurrences of pet .............................. 44 2.5 Occurrences of utˆ and uet ........................... 46 2.6 Occurrences