DOCSLIB.ORG

Hawaiian Sentence Structures

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

PACIFIC LINGUISTICS Se��eh B - No. 61 HAWAIIAN SENTENCE STRUCTURES by Emily A. Hawkins Department of Linguistics Research School of Pacific Studies THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY Hawkins, E.A. Hawaiian sentence structures. B-61, vi + 114 pages. Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University, 1979. DOI:10.15144/PL-B61.cover ©1979 Pacific Linguistics and/or the author(s). Online edition licensed 2015 CC BY-SA 4.0, with permission of PL. A sealang.net/CRCL initiative. PACIFIC LINGUISTICS is issued through the Lingui�tie Ci4eie 06 Canbe44a and consists of four series: SERIES A - OCCASIONAL PAPERS SERIES B - MONOGRAPHS SE RIES C - BOOKS SERIES V - SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS EDITOR: S.A. Wurm. ASSOCIATE EDITORS: D.C. Laycock, C.L. Voorhoeve, D.T. Tryon, T.E. Dutton. EDITORIAL ADVISERS: B. Bender, University of Hawaii J. Lynch, University of Papua D. Bradley, University of Melbourne New Guinea A. Capell, University of Sydney K.A. McElhanon, University of Texas S. Elbert, University of Hawaii H. McKaughan, University of Hawaii K. Franklin, Summer Institute of P. MUhlhausler, Technische Linguistics Universitat Berlin W.W. Glover, Summer Institute of G.N. O'Grady, University of Linguistics Victoria, B.C. G. Grace, University of Hawaii A.K. Pawley, University of Hawaii M.A.K. Halliday, University of K. Pike, University of Michigan; Sydney Summer Institute of Linguistics A. Healey, Summer Institute of E.C. Polo�, University of Texas Linguistics G. Sankoff, Universit� de Montr�al L. Hercus, Australian National E. Uhlenbeck, University of Leiden University J.W.M. Verhaar, University of N.D. Liern, University of Hawaii Indonesia, Jakarta ALL CORRESPONDENCE concerning PACIFIC LINGUISTICS, including orders and subscriptions, should be addressed to: The Secretary, PACIFIC LINGUISTICS, Department of Linguistics, School of Pacific Studies, The Australian National University , Canberra , A.C.T. 2600. Australia. Copyright (§) E.A. Hawkins. First published 1979. The editors are indebted to the Australian National University for help in the production of this series. This publication was made possible by an initial grant from the Hunter Douglas Fund. National Library of Australia Card Number and ISBN 0 85883 195 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. The Language 1 1.2. Orthography 2 1. 3. Previous Grammatical Studies 2 1.4 . Goals of This Study 3 1. 5. The Model 4 CHAPTER 2 - SIMPLE VERBAL SENTENCE STRUCTURE 11 2.1. The Case Relations of the Simple Verbal Sentence 11 2.2 . Case Marking Prepositions in Hawaiian 12 2.2.1. e 12 2.2.2. e 12 2.2.3 . ma i 13 2.2.4. ma 13 2.2.5. me 13 2.2.6 . na 14 2.2.7. no 14 2.2.8. 15 2.2.9. and Position as Case Markers 15 '" 2.3. Verb Classification 16 2.3.1. Statives 17 2.3.2. Transitives 19 2.3.3. Intradirectives 21 2.3.4. Bi-transitives 22 2.3.5. Other Classes 22 2.3.6. Non-classificatory Cases 23 2.3.7. The Effect of ho 'o on the Case Frame 24 1 11 Page 2.4. Sentence Structure 25 2.4.1. Preposed Agent 26 2.4.2. The Passive Transformation 26 2.4.3. Simple Re-Orderings 27 2.5. Sentence Complements 28 2.5.1. Verbs Taking Complements 28 2.5.2. Negation 29 CHAPTER 3 - CASE IN VERBLESS SENTENCES 33 3.1. Case Markers 33 3.1.1. na 34 3.1.2. no 35 3.2. Order 37 3.2.1. Source'Object 40 3.2.2. Location'Object 40 3.2.3. Agent 'Object 41 3.2.4. Benefactive'Object 42 3.3. Attribution of Case Phrases 43 3.3.1. Case Phrases as Modifiers 43 3.3.2. Attributing Benefactive and Agent 44 3.3.2.1. Possessive Statements with Agent and Benefactive Attributes 47 3.4. Sentences with No Case Marking 48 3.4.1. Verbal and Verbless Characteristics 49 3.5. Negation 50 CHAPTER 4 - COMPLEX CONSTRUCTIONS 53 4.1. General Rules 53 4.1.1. Embedding 53 4.1.2. Topicalisation 55 4.1.2.1. Case Topics 55 4.1.2.2. Non-Case Topics 58 4.1. 3. Complex Embedding 59 4.1. 4. Questions 61 4.2. Specifics 61 4.2.1. Agent 61 4.2.2. Object 67 4.2.3. Benefactive 72 4.2.4. Instrument 77 4.2.5. Locative 81 4.2.5.1. Location in Place 81 iii Page 4.2.5.2. Location in Time 84 4.2.5.3. Time and Place 89 4.2.6. Goal 89 4. 2.7 • Source 91 4.3. The Possessive Forms in Embedded Constructions 92 4.3.1. A and 0 Alternation 93 4.3.2. Nominalisation 94 4.4. A Summary of the Embedding Processes 95 CHAPTER 5 - OVERVIEW 97 5.1. Results of the Analysis 97 5.1.1. New Statements 97 5.1.2. Implications 98 5.2. Assessment 99 5.3. Residual Problems 99 APPENDIX A - THE FEATURES OF THE DETERMINERS 101 APPENDIX B - THE TENSE/ASPECT MARKERS 102 APPENDIX C - ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS STUDY 103 8ib.U.ogJta.phy 104 Hawkins, E.A. Hawaiian sentence structures. B-61, vi + 114 pages. Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University, 1979. DOI:10.15144/PL-B61.cover ©1979 Pacific Linguistics and/or the author(s). Online edition licensed 2015 CC BY-SA 4.0, with permission of PL. A sealang.net/CRCL initiative. CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1. THE LANGUAGE The language described in this work is that of the indigenous people of Hawai 'i. The written sources range in time from 1870 to 1974 . Hawaiian is still the home language of approximately 800 people, and is the first language for about 500, mo st of whom are either Ni' ihau people living on Ni ' ihau and Kaua 'i or senior citizens . There are probab ly another thousand who can communicate in Hawaiian . My oral sources range in age from the twenties to the eighties . Mileka Kanahele , a Ni ' ihau woman who has resided in Honolulu since the 1950s , was my first and mo st important language consultant and I am grateful to her for tolerating my limited knowledge of both the language and elicit ing techniques. The data collected with her are in both standard Hawaiian and in the Ni ' ihau dialect , (primarily differing in phonology .) Since the maj or concern of this work is syntactic , I have shown all examples in standard Hawaiian . The sources for my data are three. My primary oral informants were Mileka, Sarah Nakoa, a retired translator, and Larry Kimura, a young instructor of Hawaiian language at the University of Hawai 'i. Many other native speakers unknowingly aided me by appearing with Larry on Ka teo Hawa� '�, a weekly Hawaiian language radio broadcast . The primary written sources were Paka'a, (Nakuina : 1901) , Ka'ala, (Kapu : 1904), and excerpts from the newspaper Ku 'oko 'a. The student newspaper UluH o� is the most recent written source . Some of the sentences were created by me and then checked with informants. Whenever possible these sentences have been supplemented by sentences from other sources . 1 Hawkins, E.A. Hawaiian sentence structures. B-61, vi + 114 pages. Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University, 1979. DOI:10.15144/PL-B61.1 ©1979 Pacific Linguistics and/or the author(s). Online edition licensed 2015 CC BY-SA 4.0, with permission of PL. A sealang.net/CRCL initiative. 2 1.2. ORTHOGRAPH Y This work adopts the orthography of the Pukui-Elbert Hawaiian-Engli6 h Vicziona�y. One deviation from this system is ki 'of, beLonging to '. There is a definite difference in length between this possessive and the definite determiner ka . ka 'the ' /kA/ ki 'of' /ka:/ Etymo logi cally, the latter form is the comb ination of ka 'the ' and a 'of ' (see §3. 3.2) . 1.3. PREVIOUS GRAMMATICAL STUVIES Much of what I will say is influenced by other grammatical de scrip­ tions. Previous descriptions of Hawaiian can be divided into two eras. The first series of grammars were written in the mid eighteen hundreds . The three outstanding grammars on that era are Lorrin Andrews ' G�amma� 06 zhe Hawaiian Languag e, 1854; W.D. Alexander 's A Sho�z Sy nop6i6 06 zhe M06Z E66enzial Poinz6 in Hawaiian G�amma�, 1864; and Adelbert von Chamisso's On zhe Hawaiian Languag e, 1837. Andrews (p. 43) described Hawaiian in terms of a Latin-based model. Consequently, his noun phrases are de fined by cases, which are themselves defined by the preposition of the phrase. Andrews ' Preposition Traditional Translation of term term Hawaiian term aui kumu ¢ nominative basic case au i pi Ii o/a genitive adhering case aui i k i ko/ka genitive more (adhering) case au i paewa no/na dative uneven case aui alo accusative fac ing case aui moe rna locat ive lying case au i hea e vocat ive calling case au i hu i me ablative joining case au i ' i a e passive case au i hele ma i (source) moving case Andrews ' use of a case framework makes his grammar particularly relevant to this study . It is also useful in that it contains numerous examples in addition to the statements of use and function. W.D. Alexander 's grammar is by far the best existing statement on sentence structure . He described not only simp le sentences, both verbal and verbless, but also complex sentences. H� did not follow a model, as Andrews did, but described sentence formation in logical and traditional terms , which thereby makes his grammar amenable to both 3 structural and semantic theories of language .
Recommended publications
  • Quichua-Spanish Language Contact in Salcedo, Ecuador: Revisiting Media Lengua Syncretic Language Practices

    Quichua-Spanish Language Contact in Salcedo, Ecuador: Revisiting Media Lengua Syncretic Language Practices

    QUICHUA-SPANISH LANGUAGE CONTACT IN SALCEDO, ECUADOR: REVISITING MEDIA LENGUA SYNCRETIC LANGUAGE PRACTICES BY MARCO SHAPPECK DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2011 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Professor Hans Henrich Hock, Director of Research Professor Rajeshwari Vijay Pandharipande, Chair Associate Professor Anna María Escobar Professor José Ignacio Hualde Abstract The purpose of the current thesis is to develop a better understanding of the interaction between Spanish and Quichua in the Salcedo region and provide more information for the processes that might have given rise to Media Lengua, a ‘mixed’ language comprised of a Quichua grammar and Spanish lexicon. Muysken attributes the formation of Media Lengua to relexification, ruling out any influence from other bilingual phenomena. I argue that the only characteristic that distinguishes Media Lengua from other language contact varieties in central Ecuador is the quantity of the overall Spanish borrowings and not the type of processes that might have been employed by Quichua speakers during the genesis of Media Lengua. The results from the Salcedo data that I have collected show how processes such as adlexification, code-mixing, and structural convergence produce Media Lengua-type sentences, evidence that supports an alternative analysis to Muysken’s relexification hypothesis. Overall, this dissertation is developed around four main objectives: (1) to describe the variation of Spanish loanwords within a bilingual community in Salcedo; (2) to analyze some of the prominent and recent structural changes in Quichua and Spanish; (3) to determine whether Spanish loanword use can be explained by the relationship consultants have with particular social categories; and (4) to analyze the consultants’ language ideologies toward syncretic uses of Spanish and Quichua.
  • Puana 'Ia Me Ka 'Oko'a: a Comparative Analysis of Hawaiian

    Puana 'Ia Me Ka 'Oko'a: a Comparative Analysis of Hawaiian

    Vol. 5 (2011), pp. 107-133 http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/ldc/ http://hdl.handle.net/10125/4494 Puana ‘Ia me ka ‘Oko‘a: A Comparative Analysis of Hawaiian Language Pronunciation as Spoken and Sung Joseph Keola Donaghy University of Hawai‘i at Hilo and University of Otago, New Zealand In this paper I argue that the differences between spoken Hawaiian and vocal perfor- mance of western-influenced “traditional” Hawaiian music are representative of the linguistic diversity found within the Hawaiian language. It contains a comparative analysis of Hawaiian Language Pronunciation as Spoken and Sung, using transcriptions of recorded examples by John Kameaaloha Almeida, a native speaker of the Hawaiian language and a prominent composer, singer, and instrumentalist. It will provide a pho- nemic analysis of notable and predictable variations heard in Hawaiian language vocal performances that are not heard in spoken Hawaiian. Further, it will show that rhythmic arrangement of morae over strong beats in the musical measure is largely analogous to accent in spoken Hawaiian, with some predictable exceptions. The paper also documents how, during his vocal performance, Almeida added three non-lexical vocables not heard in spoken Hawaiian. I argue that these characteristics and variation are indicative of the linguistic diversity found within the Hawaiian language and, as such, are worthy of the same attention and scholarly scrutiny as spoken Hawaiian. The second goal of this applied research is to present the results in a manner that is accessible to practitioners of Hawaiian language performance. 1. INTRODUCTION.1 One day during my time as an undergraduate student in the Hawaiian Studies program at the University of Hawai‘i at Hilo, I was listening to a record- ing of Rev.
  • Transparency in Language a Typological Study

    Transparency in Language a Typological Study

    Transparency in language A typological study Published by LOT phone: +31 30 253 6111 Trans 10 3512 JK Utrecht e-mail: [email protected] The Netherlands http://www.lotschool.nl Cover illustration © 2011: Sanne Leufkens – image from the performance ‘Celebration’ ISBN: 978-94-6093-162-8 NUR 616 Copyright © 2015: Sterre Leufkens. All rights reserved. Transparency in language A typological study ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. dr. D.C. van den Boom ten overstaan van een door het college voor promoties ingestelde commissie, in het openbaar te verdedigen in de Agnietenkapel op vrijdag 23 januari 2015, te 10.00 uur door Sterre Cécile Leufkens geboren te Delft Promotiecommissie Promotor: Prof. dr. P.C. Hengeveld Copromotor: Dr. N.S.H. Smith Overige leden: Prof. dr. E.O. Aboh Dr. J. Audring Prof. dr. Ö. Dahl Prof. dr. M.E. Keizer Prof. dr. F.P. Weerman Faculteit der Geesteswetenschappen i Acknowledgments When I speak about my PhD project, it appears to cover a time-span of four years, in which I performed a number of actions that resulted in this book. In fact, the limits of the project are not so clear. It started when I first heard about linguistics, and it will end when we all stop thinking about transparency, which hopefully will not be the case any time soon. Moreover, even though I might have spent most time and effort to ‘complete’ this project, it is definitely not just my work. Many people have contributed directly or indirectly, by thinking about transparency, or thinking about me.
  • Languages of the Middle Andes in Areal-Typological Perspective: Emphasis on Quechuan and Aymaran

    Languages of the Middle Andes in Areal-Typological Perspective: Emphasis on Quechuan and Aymaran

    Languages of the Middle Andes in areal-typological perspective: Emphasis on Quechuan and Aymaran Willem F.H. Adelaar 1. Introduction1 Among the indigenous languages of the Andean region of Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, northern Chile and northern Argentina, Quechuan and Aymaran have traditionally occupied a dominant position. Both Quechuan and Aymaran are language families of several million speakers each. Quechuan consists of a conglomerate of geo- graphically defined varieties, traditionally referred to as Quechua “dialects”, not- withstanding the fact that mutual intelligibility is often lacking. Present-day Ayma- ran consists of two distinct languages that are not normally referred to as “dialects”. The absence of a demonstrable genetic relationship between the Quechuan and Aymaran language families, accompanied by a lack of recognizable external gen- etic connections, suggests a long period of independent development, which may hark back to a period of incipient subsistence agriculture roughly dated between 8000 and 5000 BP (Torero 2002: 123–124), long before the Andean civilization at- tained its highest stages of complexity. Quechuan and Aymaran feature a great amount of detailed structural, phono- logical and lexical similarities and thus exemplify one of the most intriguing and intense cases of language contact to be found in the entire world. Often treated as a product of long-term convergence, the similarities between the Quechuan and Ay- maran families can best be understood as the result of an intense period of social and cultural intertwinement, which must have pre-dated the stage of the proto-lan- guages and was in turn followed by a protracted process of incidental and locally confined diffusion.
  • Author Index

    Author Index

    Cambridge University Press 0521807611 - Case, Second Edition Barry J. Blake Index More information AUTHOR INDEX Abondolo, 101, 105 Cook, 66, 80 Agud, 32, 72, 207 Corbett, 104 Aikhenvald, 191 Croft, 192, 193, 207 Allen, 150 Crowley, 100 Andersen, 163 Cutler, 99, 190 Anderson, J., 62, 71, 80–3, 135, 197, 207 Anderson, S., 109 Delancey, 123, 192 Anttila, 165 Dench, 108–9, 116, 154, 190 Aristotle, 18, 30 Derbyshire, 100, 191 Armagost, 156 Dik, 62, 66, 68, 91–2, 188, 207 Artawa, 89, 124 Dionysius Thrax, 19 Austerlitz, 165 Dixon, 56, 105, 114, 124, 185, 191, 192, Austin, 12, 101, 112, 182–3 193, 194, 207 DuBois, 192 Baker, 187 Durie, 124, 192 Balakrishnan, 158 Blake, 15, 67, 78, 89, 107, 114–15, 124, 127–8, Ebeling, 121, 152 137, 143, 151, 154, 158, 186, 188, 192–3 Evans, 108–9, 116, 154, 190 Bloomfield, 13, 63 Bopp, 37 Filliozat, 64 Bowe, 26 Fillmore, 47, 62–3, 66–8, 74, 80, 82, 91, Branch, 105, 116 188, 197, 207 Breen, 28, 125 Foley, 72, 92, 110, 192, 207 Bresnan, 47, 92, 185, 186, 187 Frachtenberg, 190 Bryan, 102 Franchetto, 124 Burridge, 174 Friberg, 123 Burrow, 117, 181 Gilligan, 99, 190 Caesar, 19, 73, 98 Giridhar, 100 Calboli, 18, 19, 31, 48, 207 Giv´on, 112, 192, 193, 207 Cardona, 64, 65 Goddard, 186 Carroll, 138 Greenberg, 15, 160 Carvalho, de, 31, 40, 186, 192 Groot, de, 30 Catullus, 184 Gruber, 67–9, 205 Chafe, 66, 80, 207 Chaucer, 148 Haegeman, 59, 187, 190 Chidambaranathan, 158 Hale, 96, 107, 168, 194 Chomsky, xiii, 47, 57, 58, 61, 62, 186, 187, 189 Halliday, 66 Cicero, 23, 112 Hansen, 193 Cole, 110 Harris, 124, 126, 147, 192 Coleman, 105 Hawkins, 99, 190 Comrie, 87–8, 104, 140–1, 142, 152, 154, 185, Heath, 155, 159 190, 191, 207 Heine, 162, 165, 193 219 © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 0521807611 - Case, Second Edition Barry J.
  • The Laterwriting of Abraham Fornander, 1870-1887 A

    The Laterwriting of Abraham Fornander, 1870-1887 A

    523 UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'llIBRARY "A TRUSTWORTHY HISTORICAL RECORD": THE LATERWRITING OF ABRAHAM FORNANDER, 1870-1887 A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF EDUCATION IN EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATIONS MAY 2004 By Pamela Haight Thesis Committee: Eileen Tamura, Chairperson Gay Garland Reed Vilsoni Hereniko ABSTRACT Using a post-colonial framework, this thesis examines the later research and writing ofAbraham Fornander. The paper addresses the politics, religion, and society that informed Fornander's research and writing, then focuses more closely on his book, An Account ofthe Polynesian Race and international response to it. Fornander's tenacity in promoting his Western worldview and his efforts to advance his career infused his writings and, in the end, served to overshadow existing indigenous language and culture, hastening deterioration ofboth. Utilizing correspondence, early writing for newspapers, and other archival information, the paper demonstrates his attempts to attain authentic status for himselfand his work. Though inconclusive in terms ofproving Fornander's complicity with colonialism, the thesis presents another viewing ofone man's work and begs a previously hidden discussion. 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Purpose ofthe study 7 Methodology 10 Background to the study 13 Language and Colonization , 15 Representing Others 17 Collecting Cultures 21 19th Century Hawai'i 25 Abraham Fomander 30 Fomander's Newswriting 34 Fomander's Philological Research 50 Response to An Account ofthe Polynesian Race 61 Discussion and implications 75 Postscript 78 Appendix A: Letter from Rollin Daggett to Abraham Fomander 82 Appendix B: Letter from Abraham Fomander to Rollin Daggett.
  • Morphology Building Syntax: Constructive Case in Australian Languages

    Morphology Building Syntax: Constructive Case in Australian Languages

    Morphology Building Syntax Constructive Case in Australian Languages Rachel Nordlinger Stanford University Pro ceedings of the LFG Conference University of California San Diego Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway King Editors CSLI Publications httpwwwcslistanfordedupublications LFG R Nordlinger Morphology Building Syntax Constructive Case in Australia Intro duction A dening characteristic of lfg is that morphological words can carry the same kinds of functional information as syntactic phrases words and phrases are alternative means of enco ding the same syntactic relations Kaplan and Bresnan Bresnan That morphology comp etes with syntax in this way Bresnan is seen most clearly in noncongurational languages where inectional morphology takes on much of the functional load of phrase structure in more congura tional languages like English determining grammatical functions and constituency relations lfg is thus wellsuited to the analysis of noncongurationality and has pioneered muchwork on non congurational languages b oth in Australia and elsewhere Mohanan Bresnan Simpson Kro eger T Mohanan Austin and Bresnan Nordlinger and Bresnan Andrews among many others In this pap er I will b e concerned with the function of case in the dep endentmarking non congurational languages of Australia These Australian languages haveunusually extensive case marking and case concord Intuitively as has b een suggested bymany researchers working with these languages eg Hale Simpson Nash Austin Evans a it is this case marking that enables their
  • The Nature of Specific Language Impairment: Optionality and Principle Conflict

    The Nature of Specific Language Impairment: Optionality and Principle Conflict

    The Nature of Specific Language Impairment: Optionality and Principle Conflict Lee Davies Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University College London August 2001 ProQuest Number: U642667 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 complete 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 U642667 Published by ProQuest LLC(2015). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 *I see nobody on the road,* said Alice. 7only wish I had such eyes,* the King remarked in a fretful tone. * To he able to see Nobody! And at that distance too! Why it*s as much as I can do to see real people, by this light!,... ABSTRACT This thesis focuses upon two related goals. The first is the development of an explanatory account of Specific Language Impairment (SLI) that can effectively capture the variety and complexity of the children’s grammatical deficit. The second is to embed this account within a restrictive theoretical framework. Taking as a starting point the broad characterisation of the children’s deficit, developed by Heather van der Lely in her RDDR (Representational Deficit for Dependant Relations) research program, I refine and extend her position by proposing a number of principled generalisations upon which a theoretical explanation can be based.
  • Reading Between the Lines: a Closer Look at the First Hawaiian Primer (1822)1

    Reading Between the Lines: a Closer Look at the First Hawaiian Primer (1822)1

    Reading between the Lines: A Closer Look at the First Hawaiian Primer (1822)1 Albert J. Schütz ‘Ōlelo Hō‘ulu‘ulu / Summary Na ka puke li‘ili‘i The Alphabet (i kākau ‘ia e ka po‘e mikionali ma ka MH 1822) i waele i ke ala e hulihia a‘e ai ka ‘ike a me ka mo‘omeheu ku‘una o kānaka ma o ia mea he ‘ike palapala. Ua hō‘ike ‘ia mai ma nā palapala like ‘ole o ia au ka mo‘olelo o ke pa‘i a ho‘olaha ‘ia ‘ana o ua puke li‘ili‘i nei a me ke ‘ano i loli iho ai ka no‘ono‘o ‘ana o ka po‘e e a‘o mai ana i kona mau ‘ao‘ao. Akā, a hiki i kēia manawa, ‘a‘ole i wehewehe ‘ia mai ka ‘i‘o o ia puke a me ke ‘ano i ho‘onohonoho ‘ia ai. Nānā ‘ia ma kēia ‘atikala noi‘i ia mau hi‘ohi‘ona ma ka pō‘aiapili pālua, ‘o ia ho‘i ke kālai‘ōlelo a me ka mo‘olelo o ia au. Hō‘ike pū ‘ia ma ‘ane‘i ke ‘ano i akaku‘u iho ai ka pī‘āpā mua loa i pehu wale i nā koneka he iwakālua a koe mai nā koneka ‘ewalu o kēia au. Ma o ka ho‘ohālikelike ‘ana iā The Alphabet me nā puke a‘o kākau na ko ‘Enelani, na ko ‘Amelika ho‘i, ma ka pau ‘ana o ke kenekulia ‘umikumamāwalu, maopopo koke ke kumu i kālele nui ‘ia ai ka ‘ike hakina ‘ōlelo a me nā ana kālele ‘ōlelo (pili he ‘umi o nā māhele ‘umikumamālima o ia puke li‘ili‘i i ia mau kumuhana ‘elua).
  • Effects of Language Contact on Hawaiian: a Brief Review

    Effects of Language Contact on Hawaiian: a Brief Review

    Asian and African Languages and Linguistics, No.14, 2020 Effects of Language Contact on Hawaiian: A Brief Review IWASAKI, Kanae The University of Tokyo This paper discusses the influence of immigrant languages, especially English, on Hawaiian. Shortly after the Hawaiian ‘first contact’ with Western culture, immigrants from all over the world arrived on the Hawaii islands, mainly from the 1850s to the 1910s. This brought two types of changes to Hawaiian: the rise of Pidgin Hawaiian and changes to Indigenous Hawaiian. First, the grammatical characteristics of Pidgin Hawaiian are introduced based on previous research. Second, the influence of contact on Hawaiian’s lexicon, types of written texts, and grammar are addressed. Although lexical influence and the rise of different types of texts written in Hawaiian are relatively salient, the grammatical influence is more difficult to recognize. This paper attempts to investigate it with numerical data related to “directionals” and the “(so-called) nominalizer” in Hawaiian. The results are not clear; thus, it is suggested that a newer approach may be required to more accurately evaluate the influence of language contact. Keywords: Hawaiian, language contact, grammatical description, Pidgin Hawaiian, modern Hawaiian 1. Brief history of language and immigration in Hawaii 2. Types of influence 3. Pidgin Hawaiian 4. Influence on Hawaiian 5. Further questions: evaluation of the influence 1. Brief history of language and immigration in Hawaii There have been several major languages spoken in Hawaii between the 18th century and today, and there is no doubt that currently English has the largest number of speakers, but Hawaii’s Indigenous language is Hawaiian.
  • Compound Case in Bodic Languages

    Compound Case in Bodic Languages

    Case Compounding in the Bodic Languages Michael Noonan University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee 1. introduction Case compounding has received a certain amount of attention in the literature in recent years, in particular the phenomenon known as Suffixaufnahme [e.g. in Plank 1995a] and the various sorts of case compounding in Australian languages, some of which manifest Suffixaufnahme and other types of case compounding. There has been relatively less attention paid to the phenomenon outside of these two areas of research, and this paper is an attempt to rectify the situation somewhat by presenting data from a large family of languages, the Bodic languages, spoken in the areas straddling the spine of the Himala- yas. 1.1 bodic languages: The Bodic languages are a large and ramified branch of the Ti- beto-Burman languages.1 It is a controversial grouping in the sense that there is no con- sensus as to what should be placed within it and indeed whether it is a legitimate ge- netic grouping at all or just an assemblage of Tibeto-Burman languages that have been spoken in the region of the Himalayas long enough for the languages to have influ- enced each other in a variety of ways. A figure illustrating possible relationships among the Bodic languages can be found in Appendix 1. For our purposes, nothing crucial hinges on the assumption that these languages form a genetic grouping. It suffices that structurally these languages share certain fea- tures, among which is a tendency to compound markers of case within a phonological word. 1.2 definition of case compounding: We will define case compounding as the inclu- sion of two or more case markers within a phonological word.
  • GOO-80-02119 392P

    GOO-80-02119 392P

    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 228 863 FL 013 634 AUTHOR Hatfield, Deborah H.; And Others TITLE A Survey of Materials for the Study of theUncommonly Taught Languages: Supplement, 1976-1981. INSTITUTION Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington, D.C. SPONS AGENCY Department of Education, Washington, D.C.Div. of International Education. PUB DATE Jul 82 CONTRACT GOO-79-03415; GOO-80-02119 NOTE 392p.; For related documents, see ED 130 537-538, ED 132 833-835, ED 132 860, and ED 166 949-950. PUB TYPE Reference Materials Bibliographies (131) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC16 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Annotated Bibliographies; Dictionaries; *InStructional Materials; Postsecondary Edtmation; *Second Language Instruction; Textbooks; *Uncommonly Taught Languages ABSTRACT This annotated bibliography is a supplement tothe previous survey published in 1976. It coverslanguages and language groups in the following divisions:(1) Western Europe/Pidgins and Creoles (European-based); (2) Eastern Europeand the Soviet Union; (3) the Middle East and North Africa; (4) SouthAsia;(5) Eastern Asia; (6) Sub-Saharan Africa; (7) SoutheastAsia and the Pacific; and (8) North, Central, and South Anerica. The primaryemphasis of the bibliography is on materials for the use of theadult learner whose native language is English. Under each languageheading, the items are arranged as follows:teaching materials, readers, grammars, and dictionaries. The annotations are descriptive.Whenever possible, each entry contains standardbibliographical information, including notations about reprints and accompanyingtapes/records