The Semantics of Kʷak̓ ʷala Object Case By Katherine Ann Sardinha A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Line H. Mikkelsen, Chair Professor Amy Rose Deal Professor William F. Hanks Fall 2017 The Semantics of Kʷak̓ ʷala Object Case Copyright 2017 By Katherine Ann Sardinha Abstract The Semantics of Kʷak̓ ʷala Object Case By Katherine Ann Sardinha Doctor of Philosophy in Linguistics University of California, Berkeley Professor Line H. Mikkelsen, Chair In this dissertation, I investigate factors underlying the distribution of object case in Kʷak̓ ʷala, an endangered Northern Wakashan language of British Columbia, Canada. Kʷak̓ ʷala has two types of objects, instrumental (=s) and accusative (=x̌ ). To account for their distribution, I develop a semantic theory of object case that is grounded in event structure. The first central claim of this theory is that instrumental case marks internal arguments which participate in initiating subevents (Co-initiators), while accusative case marks internal arguments which participate in non-initiating subevents (Non-initiators). Concomitantly, any internal argument which participates in both the initiating and non-initiating subevents of an event can undergo instrumental/accusative case alternation. The second central claim of this theory is that instrumental case adds semantic value, while accusative case is a meaningless default. Supporting evidence for these claims comes from field data. On the one hand, object case realization is constrained by verb meaning, as shown by the existence of correlations between particular semantic verb classes and particular case frames. On the other hand, evidence that case realization is determined by event structure comes from data showing that modifying event structure affects case realization. Three types of event structure modification which license case alternation include the Direct Manipulation Alternation, the Caused Motion Alternation, and semantic incorporation with the affixal verb -(g)ila ‘make’. The event-structural basis of object case is also revealed in the vicinity of weak verbs (Ritter & Rosen 1996) where the semantic value of object case is communicated independently of lexical entailments. This analysis allows us to see how Kʷak̓ ʷala’s object case system manifests a wider cross- linguistic tendency for languages to grammaticalize a link between object-encoding and event structure. I illustrate this by showing that Kʷak̓ ʷala’s object case system is semantically the mirror image of the object case system in Finnish, in which the final bound of events is grammaticalized as an interpretable accusative case (Leino 1982, Heinämäki 1984, 1994, Kratzer 2004). Taking an even wider view, Kʷak̓ ʷala fits squarely within the event-structural typology proposed in Ritter & Rosen (2000), where languages are divided according to whether they grammaticalize the initial or final bound of events. Kʷak̓ ʷala’s object case system thereby fits into existing cross-linguistic patterns while also expanding our notions of what a possible case system looks like. 1 Table of Contents Abstract 1 Table of Contents i List of Tables v List of Figures vi Abbreviations vii Acknowledgements x Prologue: Language and Territory xii Reading Notes xiii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 The puzzle . 1 1.2 Background on objects . 4 1.3 Previous work on object case . 11 1.3.1 Semantic factors in case distribution . 11 1.3.2 Case alternation, or lack thereof . 13 1.4 Preview of a semantic theory of object case . 17 1.5 Chapter overview . 19 2 Kʷak̓ ʷala Orientation and Methodology 21 2.1 Introduction . 21 2.2 Sources . 22 2.2.1 Early scholarship (1890s — 1940s) . 22 2.2.2 Middle scholarship (1970s — 1990s) . 23 2.2.3 Recent scholarship (2000s to present) . 23 2.2.4 Community documentation . 24 2.3 Basic grammatical features . 25 2.4 Methodology . 30 2.4.1 Translation task . 31 2.4.2 Description task . 32 2.4.3 Question-answer task . 33 2.4.4 Storyboard task . 33 2.4.5 Semi-elicited narrative . 35 2.4.6 Story-builder . 37 i 2.4.7 Concept-cued narrative . 39 2.4.8 Free narration . 40 2.4.9 Judgment task . 41 2.4.10 Preference judgment task . 42 2.4.11 Contradiction judgment task . 43 2.4.12 Combined translation-judgment task . 44 2.5 Data . 45 2.5.1 Kʷak̓ ʷala sentences . 46 2.5.2 English translations . 46 2.5.3 Context descriptions . 47 2.5.4 Grammaticality ratings . 47 2.5.5 Felicity ratings . 48 2.5.6 Metalinguistic commentary . 48 2.6 Variation . 48 3 The Semantic Basis of Object Case 50 3.1 Introduction . 50 3.2 Evidence from verb classes . 51 3.2.1 Verbs with strict-accusative relations . 51 3.2.2 Verbs with strict-instrumental relations . 57 3.2.3 Verbs with alternating instrumental-accusative relations . 58 3.2.4 Side-by-side comparisons . 63 3.3 Evidence from case marking asymmetries in verb pairs . 65 3.3.1 Perspectivally-opposed verb pairs . 65 3.3.2 Reverse-action verb pairs . 68 3.3.3 Semantic basis of verb-pair case frames . 70 3.4 Evidence from interpretation with weak verbs . 71 3.4.1 Weak verbs as diagnostics . 71 3.4.2 Evidence from the dummy root ʔəx̌ - . 75 3.4.3 Evidence from w̓ igila . 85 3.5 Conclusion . 86 4. A Semantic Theory of Object Case 89 4.1 Introduction . 89 4.2 Claim-I: Case, event roles, and subevental structure . 90 4.2.1 Theoretical concepts . 90 4.2.2 Semantic correspondences . 93 4.2.3 Identifying event roles . 94 4.2.4 Accounting for case alternation . 102 4.2.5 What Claim-I explains . 108 4.3 Claim-II: Interpretable and uninterpretable case . 110 4.4 The role of syntactic features . 115 4.5 Conclusion . 117 4.5.1 Chapter summary . 117 4.5.2 Revisiting Boas’ puzzle . 119 ii 5. Case Alternation and Event Structure Modification 121 5.1 Introduction . 121 5.2 Direct Manipulation Alternation . 122 5.2.1 Licensing the Direct Manipulation Alternation by lexical entailments . 123 5.2.2 Licensing the Direct Manipulation Alternation by context . 127 5.3 Caused Motion Alternation . 130 5.3.1 Licensing the Caused Motion Alternation by lexical entailments . 131 5.3.2 Licensing the Caused Motion Alternation by modification with Path-denoting PPs . 132 5.4 Semantic incorporation with -(g)ila . 142 5.4.1 Licensing case alternation through incorporation . 142 5.4.2 Case alternation and the semantics of Performance Verbs . 148 5.5 Conclusion . 150 6 Kʷak̓ ʷala’s Object Case System in Cross-linguistic Perspective 152 6.1 Introduction . ..