3/22/2016 LNGT 0250 Announcements Morphology and Syntax • I’m extending the deadline for Assignment 3 until 8pm tomorrow Wednesday March 23. This should allow you to take advantage of my office hours tomorrow if you have questions. • Reactions to lecture on Menominee? • Answer the questions on the short handout, and give it back to me on Thursday. I’ll use that information in forming your Linguistic Lecture #11 Diversity Project groups. March 22nd, 2016 2 Neatist Vegetarian vs. Humanitarian 3 4 Today’s agenda Restrictions on productivity • Unfinished business: Constraints on the • ‐ee productivity of derivational morphemes. – draw drawee • Morphological typology: How do languages – pay payee differ? – free *freeee • Nominal and verbal categories of inflectional – accompany *accompanyee morphology. 5 6 1 3/22/2016 Spanish diminutive morpheme: ‐illo Restrictions on productivity • mesa mesillo ‘little table’ • private privatize • grupo grupillo ‘little group’ • capital capitalize • gallo *gallillo ‘little rooster’ • corrupt *corruptize • camello *camellillo ‘little camel’ • secure *securize 7 8 Restrictions on productivity Restrictions on productivity • combat combatant fight *fightant • escalate deescalate • brutal brutality brittle *brittality • assassinate *deassassinate • monster monstrous spinster *spinstrous • parent parental mother *motheral • But notice: murderous, thunderous 9 10 Index of synthesis: How many morphemes Morphological typology does your language have per word? • One aspect of morphological variation has to do with synthesis: Some languages choose to How do languages differ in their “stack” morphemes on top of one another morphological structure? within words; others elect to use at most one morpheme per word, and many others will fall somewhere between these two extremes. • Let us start by comparing Yay to Oneida (examples from Whaley 1997:127): 11 12 2 3/22/2016 Index of synthesis: How many morphemes Morphological typology: Index of synthesis does your language have per word? Yay: • On the so‐called index of synthesis for morphological a. mi ran tua Nwa lew typology (Comrie 1989), understood as a continuum, Yay is considered an isolating language, whereas not see CLASS snake CMPLT Oneida would be closer to the synthetic end of the “He did not see the snake.” scale, with English closer to the Yay‐end than to the Oneida: Oneida‐end: b. yo‐nuhs‐a‐tho:lé: 3.NEUT.PAT‐room‐epenthetic‐be.cold.STAT Isolating <‐x‐‐‐‐‐‐‐x‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐x‐‐‐>Synthetic “The room is cold.” Yay English Oneida 13 14 Morphological typology: Index of synthesis Morphological typology: Index of synthesis • Some languages take synthesis to the extreme, • Or Eskimo: marking all grammatical relationships on the verb iglu‐kpi‐yuma‐laak‐tu‐Na with extensive affixation, thereby creating long and house‐build‐intend‐anxious‐reflexive‐I complex words that would correspond to whole sentences in languages like English, as in Tiwa “I’m anxious to build a house.” (example from Whaley 1997:131): • Or Mohawk (from Baker 2001:88): men‐mukhin‐tuwi‐ban Katerihwaiénstha’ dual‐hat‐buy‐PAST “I am a student. [Literally: I habitually “You two bought a hat.” cause myself to have ideas.]” 15 16 Morphological typology: Index of fusion Morphological typology: Index of synthesis One‐to‐one or one‐to‐many? • Or Mohawk again, though rather more • Synthetic languages, in turn, differ in whether ridiculously: morphemes are easily segmentable or not. Consider this paradigm from Michoacan Nahuatl, for example: Washakotya’tawitsheraherkvhta’se’ “He made the thing that one puts on one’s no-kali “my house” no-pelo “my dog” body (i.e., the dress) ugly for her.” no-kali-mes “my houses” mo-pelo “your dog” mo-kali “your house” mo-pelo-mes “your dogs” • We call languages like Tiwa, Eskimo, and Mohawk, polysynthetic languages. i-kali “his house” i-pelo “his dog” 17 18 3 3/22/2016 Morphological typology: Index of fusion Morphological typology: Index of fusion • But now compare with Ancient Greek: • On the so‐called index of fusion for lu‐ō “1sg.Pres.Active.Indicative (I am releasing)” morphological typology, also conceived of as a lu‐ōmai “1sg.Pres.Active.Subjunctive (I should release)” continuum, Michoacan Nahuatl is considered lu‐omai “1sg.Pres.Passive.Indicative (I am being released)” an agglutinative language, whereas Ancient lu‐oimi “1sg.Pres.Active.Optative (I might release)” Greek would be closer to the fusional end of lu‐etai “3sg.Pres.Active.Indicative (He is being released)” the scale: Agglutinative <‐‐‐x‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐x‐‐>Fusional Nahuatl Greek 19 20 Inflectional morphology Inflectional categories • Nominal categories: Number, Person, Gender, • Inflection marks grammatical categories. It and Case. therefore creates different ‘forms’ of the same lexeme. • Verbal categories: Tense/Aspect, Agreement, Voice, and Mood/Modality. • Adjectival and adverbial categories: Comparative and Superlative. 21 22 Number: singular, dual, and plural Person: Inclusive and exclusive ‘we’ • Classical Arabic: • Chechen: txo (inclusive) vs. vai (exclusive). walad ‘boy’ • Malay: kita vs. kami. walad‐aan ‘two boys’ • Tok Pisin: yumipela vs. mipela. Ɂawlaad ‘boys’ kitaab ‘book’ kitaab‐aan ‘two books’ kutub ‘books’ 23 24 4 3/22/2016 Inclusive and exclusive ‘we’ distinction map Gender typology • http://wals.info/feature/30A#2/25.5/148.4 25 26 Gender/Class: Swahili classifiers Case‐marking: Japanese • Some languages mark nouns (and other categories) for case. • Consider Japanese: John‐ga Mary‐ni hon‐o yatta John‐NOM Mary‐DAT book‐ACC gave “John gave Mary a book.” • Each noun inflects for case: subjects appear with nominative case; direct objects appear with accusative case; and indirect objects appear with dative case. 27 28 Case‐marking: Japanese Case‐marking: Greenlandic • Notice, crucially, however, that in intransitive • As it turns out, not all languages behave that clauses (those without an object), the case way. marker on the subject of a Japanese sentence • Let’s consider the case marking system in remains the same (i.e., ‐ga): transitive and intransitive sentences in John‐ga Kobe‐ni itta Greenlandic Eskimo. John‐NOM Kobe‐to went “John went to Kobe.” 29 30 5 3/22/2016 Case‐marking: Greenlandic Case‐marking: Greenlandic a. Juuna‐p atuaga‐q miiqa‐nut nassiuppaa • The subject of an intransitive clause carries the same Juuna‐CM book‐CM child‐CM send case marker as the object of a transitive clause. Such case is typically referred to as “absolutive,” as “Juuna sent a book to the children.” opposed to the “ergative” case marker on the b. atuaga‐q tikissimanngilaq subject of a transitive verb. book‐CM hasn’t come • We call Japanese‐type languages “nominative‐ “A book hasn’t come yet.” accusative” languages, and Greenlandic‐type (CM = case marker) languages “ergative‐absolutive” languages. • What do we notice here? 31 32 Case typology Next class agenda • http://wals.info/feature/49A#2/16.6/148.4 • Categories of verbal inflection. • Allomorphy and morphological analysis. Read Lieber Chapter 9. 33 Abbreviations used in the data References • CLASS = classifier • Baker, M. 2001. The atoms of language. New York: Basic Books. • CMPLT = completive aspect • Whaley, L. 1997. Introduction to typology: The unity and • NEUT = Neuter gender diversity of language. Sage Publications. • PAT = Patient (entity affected) • STAT = Stative • NOM = nominative case • ACC = accusative case 36 6.