DOCSLIB.ORG

Paddim8 October 4, 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Lanye PaddiM8 October 4, 2020 1 Contents 2 3 1 Introduction 1.0.1 Abbreviations Abbreviation Meaning 1N, 2N, 3N 1st, 2nd and 3rd person noun/adj. conjugation ABL Ablative ADABL Adablative (away from adjacent) ADE Adessive ADLAT Adlative (to adjacent) BEN Benefactive COM Comitative DEG Degrader DU Dual INABL Inablative (away from inside) INE Inessive INIT Initiative INLAT Inlative INS Instrumental INT Intensifier INTR Intrative INTRABL Intrablative (away from between) INTRLAT Intralative (to between) INV Noun case inverter LAT Lative LESS Less (Gradiency) LOC Locative MORE More (Gradiency) OBV Obviative PART Partitive PAS Passive PERL Perlative POSTABL Postablative (away from behind) POSTLAT Postlative (to behind) POSTE Postessive (behind) PROL Prolative PROX Proximate SEMBL Semblative SUBE Subessive SUBABL Subablative (away from under) SUBLAT Sublative SUPE Superessive SUPERABL Superablative (away from over) SUPERLAT Superlative TEMP Temporal 4 1.1 Example sentences (1) Lanye spekawī elalua kạ̄suku Lanye speka -wī ela-lua kạ̄su-ku Lanye language -3SG three-nine case-INS Lanye is a language with thirty-nine cases (2) vālokan torakīt en sūlkiryakan pelosei vālo -ka -n tora -kīt en sūl- kirya -ka -n pelo Walk -FUT -1SG house -POSTABL and INIT- book -FUT -1SG apple -sei -LOC I will walk away from behind the house and begin to read a book near the apple (3) rạnunị en omoyokavan pelotul Rạnu -nị en omo- yoka -va pelo -t -ul Person -1N.SG and INT- like/dislike -MORE apple -ACC -PL I am a person and I really like apples. (4) vīkakan Lạynẹt tilve vīka -ka -n Layne -t til -ve learn -FUT -1SG Layne -ACC now -MORE I will learn Layne later. 5 (5) emóemilanaseinuksese utónuotve lanatut, emilanaseivase nuot lanatut lana- cusnutu emó- emi- lana -sei -ukse -se utó- nuot -ve INT- desire- hand -LOC -DUB -3SG.V INT- moderate.size -MORE lana -tu -t emi- lana -sei -va -se nuot hand -DU -ACC desire- hand -LOC -POT -3SG.V moderate.size lana -tu -t lana -cus -nu -tu hand -DU -ACC hand -SEMBL -POS.1SG -DU He really might not want to have two huge hands, he probably wants two moderately sized hands similar to my pair of hands. (6) buvivosivan uola utivivon vivotuko bu- vivo -si -va -n uo -la uti- vivo -n vivo cause- eye -COND -POT -1SG.V ∅ -2SG ability- eye -1SG.V vivo -tu -ko -DU -INS I would probably show you that I can see with my two eyes. (7) eviotókocaduvesintia evi- otó- ko -ca du -ve -si -n -ti -a obligation- INT- joy -LESS disgust -MORE -COND -1.V -1.PL -OBV We (incl. person talking to) would feel obligated to feel remorseful. 6 2 Phonology 2.1 Consonants Bilab. Labiod. Alveo. Post Al. Palat. Velar Uvular Glot. Plosive p, b t, d k, g Nasal m n ŋ Fricative f, v s ʃ ʁ h Approx. j Lat. Approx. l 2.2 Vowels i u e o a 2.3 Additional • w • t͡s (c) • t͡ʃ (cy) 2.4 Stress Stress is on the first syllable unless the word contains an acute accent, in that casethe syllable after the syllable with the accent is stressed. 7 2.5 Phonotactics (C)V(C) Onset Nucleus Coda b [b] a [a] b [b] c [t͡s] e [ɛ] c [t͡s] d [d] i [i] d [d] f [f] o [o] f [f] g [g] u [u] g [g] h [h] ai [aj] h [h] k [k] ei [ɛj] k [k] l [l] l [l] m [m] m [m] n [n] n [n] p [p] p [p] r [ʁ] r [ʁ] s [s] s [s] t [t] t [t] v [v] v [v] w [w] w [w] y [j] y [j] 2.6 Diacritics • ō Macron: Long Vowel • ´ Acute accent: Move stress to adjecent syllable (to the right) or to current syl- lable if it is the last one. 8 3 Grammar 3.1 Verb conjugation Many words can be conjugated as a verb, this infact turns it into a verb. For example, the word ‘spela’, meaning ‘game’, can be conjugated as a verb and turned into the verb ‘play’. spelan – I play tea spelaseti – They play twice 1SG 2SG 3SG Positive -(i)n -(i)la -(i)se Negative -nam -lam -sem 3.2 Descriptor & Noun conjugation Descriptors and nouns can be conjugated as a descriptor/noun or as a verb. As shown above, conjugating as a verb turns the word into a verb. Conjugating the word as a descriptor/noun describes the subject being the noun or descriptor. spelani – I’m a game speladoni – I was a game 1SG 2SG 3SG Positive -(i)ni -(i)di -(i)wī Negative -nim -dim -wīm 3.3 Tenses Different suffixes are used for different types of word. If a noun is verbified itshould get the same tense suffix verbs get. speladon I played Past Present Future Verbs -do - -ka Nouns & Descriptors -doi - -kai 9 3.4 Number For verbs a word is put in front to express number. Plural Dual Nouns -(u)l(u) -(u)tu Person -(u)ti -(u)tea Verbs len lea 3.5 Morphology syntax 3.5.1 Affix order Verb tense mood person voice Noun case number verbification (8) kiryasiadosin kirya -sia -do -si -n book -PART -PAST -COND -1SG.V I would have read (part of) the book. 3.6 Comparative Comparative Superlative More -vo -vū Less -co -cū (9) layevū laye -vū good -SUPERLAT Best 10 3.7 Questions The ”yū” particle is used to indicate something is a question. It can be putvirtually anywhere (as its own ”word” or as an affix). It is normally put at the start of a sentence or at the end of a verb. 3.8 Possession Plural is constructed using the same suffixes used for plural person conjugation. 1SG -(i)nu 2SG -(i)du 3SG -(i)wū (10) a. pelonuti pelo -nu -ti apple -POS.1 -PL Our apples. 3.9 Obviative -a is appended to the person suffix. Obivative together with first person plural includes the person one is speaking to, while first person plural without obivative excludes the person one is speaking to. 11 3.10 Cases 3.10.1 General Case Affix Nominative - Accusative -t Dative -da Genitive -si Locative -sei Instrumental -ko Prolative -slu Perlative -syto Semblative -cus Benefactive -dā Partitive -sia Comitative -nua Temporal -nu 3.10.2 Locative cases Essive Ablative Lative -si -ki -lu In -sa -ka -la Super- -su -ku -lul Sub- -sel -kel -lel Behind -sīt -kīt -līt Adjecent/nearby -sur -kur -lur Between -sin -kin -lin Initiative sūl- kūl- lūl- Essive • Essive - ? • Inessive - in, within • Superessive - on • Subessive - under • Postessive - behind • Adessive - adjacent 12 • Intressive - between • Intessive - beginning Ablative • Ablative - from • Inablative - from inside • Superablative - from over • Subablative - from under • Postablative - from behind • Adablative - from adjacent • Intrablative - from between • Intablative - from beginning Lative • Inlative - into • Superlative - onto, to above • Sublative - to under • Postlative - to behind • Adlative - to adjecent • Intrlative - to between • Intlative - to beginning Examples: vivodon rạnun torasīt — In this example, the person is behind the house vivodon torasīt rạnun — In this example, the subject is behind the house Other: The nearest preceding person is the one affected by the locative. 13 3.10.3 Cases described • Accusative -t The accusative case is used to mark the direct object in a sentence. Itisonly necessary if no other case has already marked the word as being the object. • Dative -da Marks the indirect object in a clause where it is not already marked. Neither dative nor accusative show movement. Instead, the (ab)lative cases do this. (11) sivakan uolada siva -ka -n uo -la -da write -FUT -1SG ∅ -2SG -DAT I will write to you. • Locative -sei The locative case that indicates location. This case is used either informally or when other location cases do not fit. Since it is fairly vague, other cases are prefered(if possible) in formal language. (12) torasein rạnusi tora -sei -n rạnu -si house -LOC -1SG person -GEN I’m at the person’s house. • Ablative -st Ablative is used to describe movement away from. But also from an object, concept or event originating from an object, person, location or entity. (13) a. uose setist uo -se seti -st ∅ -3SG 3PL -ABL It is from them. b. sveryestin sverye -st -in sweden -ALB -1SG I’m from Sweden. 14 • Lative -lu Unlike many other languages, lative is separated from accusative/dative and has its own suffix. Lative is used to describe movement to, while also marking the indirect object, rendering the dative case unecessary when used. (14) vālan rạnulu vāla -n rạnu -lu walk -1SG person -LAT I walk to the person. • Prolative -slu Prolative roughly gives the meaning of “via” or “by way of”. For example “by sea” or “over the internet”. (15) internetosluse interneto -slu -se internet -PROL -3SG It goes over the internet. • Perlative -syto Perlative is used to indicate motion through or along something. (16) vālon torasyto vālo -n tora -syto walk -1SG house -PERL I walk through the house. • Semblative -cus Semblative indicates similarity between two things. (17) tora pelocus tora pelo -cus house apple -SEMBL The house is like an apple. • Benefactive -dā The benefactive case can be translated to “for”, “for the benefit of”, andisused in the indirect object. The dative case can sometimes be used instead ofthe benefactive in colloquial language. 15 (18) pelo uodāse pelo uo-dā-se apple ∅-BEN-3SG The apple is for him. • Partitive -sia Partitive case is used to indicate atelicity, meaning an action was done but not completed. In the example below, the partitive case is used to show that the person read a book, but did not finish it yet.
Recommended publications
  • Adpositional Case

    Adpositional Case

    Adpositional Case S.A.M . Lestrade Adpositional Case Sander Lestrade PIONIER Project Case Cross-Linguistically Department of Linguistics Radboud University Nijmegen P.O. Box 9103 6500 HD Nijmegen The Netherlands www.ru.nl/pionier S.Lestrade@ let.ru.nl Adpositional Case M A Thesis Linguistics Department Radboud University Nijmegen May 2006 Sander Lestrade 0100854 First supervisor: Dr. Helen de Hoop Second supervisors: Dr. Ad Foolen and Dr. Joost Zwarts Acknowledgments I would like to thank Lotte Hogeweg and the members of the PIONIER project Case Cross-Linguistically for the nice cooperation and for providing a very stimulating working environment during the past year. Many thanks go to Geertje van Bergen for fruitful discussion and support during the process of writing. I would like to thank Ad Foolen and Joost Zwarts for their willingness to be my second supervisors and their useful comments on an earlier version; special thanks to Joost Zwarts for very useful and crucial discussion. Also, I gratefully acknowledge the Netherlands Organisation of Scientific Research (NWO) for financial support, grant 220-70-003, principal investigator Helen de Hoop (PIONIER-project “Case cross-linguistically”). Most of all, I would like to thank Helen de Hoop for her fantastic supervising without which I probably would not even have started, but certainly not have finished my thesis already. Moreover, I would like to thank her for the great opportunities she offered me to develop my skills in Linguistics. v Contents Acknowledgments v Contents vii Abbreviations
  • Structural Case. Lexical Case and the Verbal Projection

    Structural Case. Lexical Case and the Verbal Projection

    A. DAVISON STRUCTURAL CASE. LEXICAL CASE AND THE VERBAL PROJECTION 1.INTRODUCTION Transitivity is an ambiguous term. It can refer to the argument structure of a predicate, distingishing monovalent verbs with a single argument, from polyvalent verbs which obligatorily or optionally assign theta roles to more than one argument It can also refer to morphological and syntactic properties, such as the choice of case and the selection of auxiliary verbs. Ideally, these surface formal markers of transitivity would align with semantic argument structure, and surface properties of the sentence would fall out automatically from the semantic/lexical properties of the predicate. From the statement of the simple X' notion of a VP projection containing objects, in Chomsky 1981, theoretical ideas have evolved about how verbs project a syntactic phrase in which the arguments are assigned theta-roles, have their case licensed and are in the right configuration to account for binding and other relations. The particular issue of syntactic projection of verbs which I will investigate in this paper is whether all (semantically) transitive verbs in Hindi/Urdu have the same kind of syntactic projection of the verb. In this language, the morphological criteria for transitivity do not all define the same set of sentences, if all the various types of polyvalent verbs are considered . For example, some direct objects and most subjects have nominative case, and can (depending on other conditions in the sentence) trigger verb agreement. Some verb types very clearly define a transitive subject, because it may have ergative case and consistently binds reflexives, but other subjects which bind reflexives must have dative case, and can also behave syntactically as non-subjects.
  • Structural Case in Finnish

    Structural Case in Finnish

    Structural Case in Finnish Paul Kiparsky Stanford University 1 Introduction 1.1 Morphological case and abstract case The fundamental fact that any theory of case must address is that morphological form and syntactic function do not stand in a one-to-one correspondence, yet are systematically related.1 Theories of case differ in whether they define case categories at a single structural level of representation, or at two or more levels of representation. For theories of the first type, the mismatches raise a dilemma when morphological form and syntactic function diverge. Which one should the classification be based on? Generally, such single-level approaches determine the case inventory on the basis of morphology using paradigmatic contrast as the basic criterion, and propose rules or constraints that map the resulting cases to grammatical relations. Multi-level case theories deal with the mismatch between morphological form and syntactic function by distinguishing morphological case on the basis of form and abstract case on the basis of function. Approaches that distinguish between abstract case and morphological case in this way typically envisage an interface called “spellout” that determines the relationship between them. In practice, this outlook has served to legitimize a neglect of inflectional morphol- ogy. The neglect is understandable, for syntacticians’ interest in morphological case is naturally less as a system in its own right than as a diagnostic for ab- stract case and grammatical relations. But it is not entirely benign: compare the abundance of explicit proposals about how abstract cases are assigned with the minimal attention paid to how they are morphologically realized.
  • Agreement, Case and Locality in the Nominal and Verbal Domains

    Agreement, Case and Locality in the Nominal and Verbal Domains

    Agreement, case and locality in the nominal and verbal domains Edited by Ludovico Franco Mihaela Marchis Moreno Matthew Reeve language Open Generative Syntax 4 science press Open Generative Syntax Editors: Elena Anagnostopoulou, Mark Baker, Roberta D’Alessandro, David Pesetsky, Susi Wurmbrand In this series: 1. Bailey, Laura R. & Michelle Sheehan (eds.). Order and structure in syntax I: Word order and syntactic structure. 2. Sheehan, Michelle & Laura R. Bailey (eds.). Order and structure in syntax II: Subjecthood and argument structure. 3. Bacskai-Atkari, Julia. Deletion phenomena in comparative constructions: English comparatives in a cross-linguistic perspective. 4. Franco, Ludovico, Mihaela Marchis Moreno & Matthew Reeve (eds.). Agreement, case and locality in the nominal and verbal domains. ISSN: 2568-7336 Agreement, case and locality in the nominal and verbal domains Edited by Ludovico Franco Mihaela Marchis Moreno Matthew Reeve language science press Franco, Ludovico, Mihaela Marchis Moreno & Matthew Reeve (eds.). 2019. Agreement, case and locality in the nominal and verbal domains (Open Generative Syntax 4). Berlin: Language Science Press. This title can be downloaded at: http://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/215 © 2019, the authors Published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Licence (CC BY 4.0): http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ISBN: 978-3-96110-200-6 (Digital) 978-3-96110-201-3 (Hardcover) ISSN: 2568-7336 DOI:10.5281/zenodo.2640704 Source code available from www.github.com/langsci/215 Collaborative reading:
  • Case in Heritage Polish. a Cross-Generational Approach

    Case in Heritage Polish. a Cross-Generational Approach

    Case in Heritage Polish. A Cross-Generational Approach Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy of The Ohio State University By Izolda Wolski-Moskoff, M.A. Graduate Program in Slavic and East European Languages and Cultures The Ohio State University 2019 Dissertation Committee: Ludmila Isurin, Advisor Leslie Moore Helena Goscilo Copyright by Izolda Wolski-Moskoff 2019 Abstract Nominal case morphology is often considered one of the most reanalyzed elements of heritage grammar (Benmamoun et al., 2013; Montrul, 2016). Several case typologies have been put forward to investigate which cases are more vulnerable in heritage languages. The two considered in this dissertation are based solely on the internal qualities of cases. Benmamoun et al. (2013) have suggested that structural case is better preserved than inherent case, whereas Laskowski (2014) has proposed that strong cases replace weak ones in the language of Polish heritage speakers. Neither of these approaches, however, has compared divergences between the speech of heritage speakers and the language of their parents. By analyzing patterns of case use in the language of two generations of Polish immigrants, this dissertation offers new insights into nominal morphology in the Polish heritage language. It also analyzes whether any of the proposed case typologies are applicable to heritage Polish. To gain a more comprehensive view of nominal case morphology in heritage Polish, the present study focuses not only on the internal characteristics of cases, but also on such external qualities as case markings. Conducted mainly in Chicago, the study investigates the case use and knowledge of twenty-five Polish heritage speakers, twelve first-generation immigrants, and a control group of twelve monolinguals from Poland.
  • Mapping Meaning to Argument Structure: the Case of Samoan Case James N

    Mapping Meaning to Argument Structure: the Case of Samoan Case James N

    Mapping meaning to argument structure: The case of Samoan case James N. Collins University of Hawai`i at M¯anoa February 11, 2020 3.1 Introduction The phenomenon of morphological case marking sits at the intersection of several do- mains of grammar. This paper's focus is the interaction between morphological case marking (or m-case) and lexical semantics. Why do certain m-cases seem to systemati- cally signal a consistent sort of thematic role (e.g., agent, goal, instrument)? In provid- ing an answer to this question, we can shed light on the tension between the structural and semantic factors which determine m-case. The case study central to this paper is m-case patterns on the core arguments of Samoan transitive verbs. Samoan is a Polynesian language spoken in Samoa and Amer- ican Samoa as well as in immigrant communities worldwide. A large number of tran- sitive predicates in Samoan demonstrate an ergative-absolutive case marking pattern. For example, in (1), the agent is marked by ergative e, while the patient is marked by a boundary high tone attaching to the preceding mora (following Yu 2011).1 (1) s¯a fuafua e le m¯al^o le fausia past plan erg the government=abs the construction The government planned the construction. erg-abs On the other hand, a distinct series of transitive predicates, referred to as `middles' in previous work on Polynesian syntax (see e.g., Chung 1978), demonstrates an absolutive- dative case marking pattern. Here, the more agentive argument is marked by the abso- lutive high tone, while the less agentive argument is marked by dative `i.
  • The Formal Syntax of Alignment Change

    The Formal Syntax of Alignment Change

    To appear in Diachronic Syntax: Parameter Theory and Dynamics of Change, Oxford University Press The Formal Syntax of Alignment Change John Whitman and Yuko Yanagida 1 Introduction Syntactic alignment refers to the patterning of morphosyntactic devices in a language (e.g. agreement, case marking, word order) that distinguish internal and external arguments. Such devices are used by linguistic typologists to define the systems known as accusative, ergative, or active alignment. Change in syntactic alignment has been a favorite topic among historical linguists for over thirty years, roughly since Anderson’s (1976) paper and Chung’s (1976) dissertation, both of which examined syntactic changes related to ergativity. Within non-generative approaches to syntactic change, changes in alignment have often been described in terms of reanalyses of a specific construction or morphological marker. For example, it has been claimed that reanalysis of the passive in an accusative system can result in ergative alighment, or that genitive or instrumental case markers can be reanalyzed as ergative markers. A generative (specifically, a minimalist) analysis of alignment change requires a different approach. Rather than focusing on individual constructions or morphemes, it investigates the formal properties of the grammatical system, particularly the feature specifications of functional heads, and the surface manifestations of those specifications that lead language learners to initiate the change. This paper builds on recent work on non-accusative alignment in a minimalist framework to attempt such an investigation. In what follows we first define what we think is an emerging consensus about the formal analysis of non-accusative alignment. We use this synchronic baseline analysis to study the change from a non-nominative subject construction to Tense-conditioned split ergativity in Iranian, and changes in alignment centered around nominalized clauses in premodern Japanese.
  • Case Innovation and Agentive Marking: a Comparative Overview Of

    Case Innovation and Agentive Marking: a Comparative Overview Of

    JSALL 2014; 1(2): 157 – 185 Maxwell P. Phillips Case innovation and agentive marking: A comparative overview of Central Indo-Aryan Abstract: A split-ergative construction had developed during the late MIA period (Bubenik 1998; Peterson 1998) in which subjects of perfective transitive clauses were marked ergative by an oblique form, in contrast with the nominative form for non-ergative subjects. Later in the NIA period, most NIA languages (e.g. Urdu/ Hindi) developed a postpositional clitic that was added to the oblique suffix, while others (e.g. Sindhi) continued to mark ergative subjects with a generic oblique suffix. This paper focuses on one exceptional case: the Dehwali language of Gujarat. Dehwali has an ergative marker that is a fusional suffix (i.e. layer I – Masica 1991: 231) and appears to inflect to agree in number and gender with the subject it marks. I will present two possible scenarios as to the origin of the Dehwali ergative marker: that it may be the remnant of an archaic MIA oblique form, or that it may be a more recent innovation as the result of increased contact with neighbouring varieties. Based on theories of grammaticalisation, I argue that the former hy- pothesis is more likely. These theories show that it is not uncommon for oblique case forms (i.e. ablative; genitive) to carry agentive properties. | downloaded: 30.9.2021 Keywords: ergative marking, diachronic attrition, typology, Indo-Aryan languages DOI 10.1515/jsall-2014-0009 1 Introduction The genesis of the New Indo-Aryan (NIA) case system has been the subject of de- bate since descriptive work began on this language family in the late nineteenth century (e.g.