Doctoral theses at NTNU, 2017:345 Signe Rix Berthelin Signe Rix Berthelin The Semantics and Pragmatics oral thesis oral of Uummarmiutun Modals Doct ISBN 978-82-326-2758-5 (printed ver.) ISBN 978-82-326-2759-2 (electronic ver.) ISSN 1503-8181 Doctoral theses at NTNU, 2017:345 NTNU Philosophiae Doctor Philosophiae Faculty of Humanities Faculty Thesis for the Degree of the Degree Thesis for Department of Language and Literature egian University of Science and Technology of Science egian University Norw Signe Rix Berthelin The Semantics and Pragmatics of Uummarmiutun Modals Thesis for the Degree of Philosophiae Doctor Trondheim, January 2017 Norwegian University of Science and Technology Faculty of Humanities Department of Language and Literature NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology Thesis for the Degree of Philosophiae Doctor Faculty of Humanities Department of Language and Literature © Signe Rix Berthelin ISBN 978-82-326-2758-5 (printed ver.) ISBN 978-82-326-2759-2 (electronic ver.) ISSN 1503-8181 Doctoral theses at NTNU, 2017:345 Printed by NTNU Grafisk senter For my grandmothers: Tove Carstensen and Inger Margrethe Rix Acknowledgements First and foremost I want to thank Panigavluk, Mangilaluk and the late for teaching me about Uummarmiutun. I also want to express my gratitude to Mimirlina, Agnagullak and Suvvatchiaq for teaching me about their language. Moreover, they all shared stories and advice, and Mimirlina taught me to sew with sealskin. was a very popular and well-respected teacher. It was an honor to meet her, and I am forever grateful to her for the stories and wisdom of life she shared during our meetings. I am incredibly lucky that Kaja Borthen, Department of Language and Literature, NTNU, has been my supervisor. The thesis has benefitted extensively from her spot-on comments and wise insights. I am grateful for all the things she has done for me since I took my first course in pragmatics as a BA student. Kaja introduced me to the joys and challenges of research and throughout the years, she has not only been a teacher but also an invaluable mentor and support. I have so much more to learn from Kaja, and I am very happy that this thesis is not the end of our collaboration. I am also very fortunate to have received supervision from Alana Johns, University of Toronto, and Kasper Boye, University of Copenhagen, whose input and comments have been invaluable to the quality of the thesis. I enjoy our discussions, and I look forward to learn more from Kasper and Alana in the future. Petar Dimitrov Kehayov and Christoph Unger commented on drafts of the present thesis, and also Maren Berg Grimstad, Viktoria Havas, Cecilie Slinning Knudsen and Dave Kush have kindly offered their expertise. Among those who have offered advice and support throughout the process are also Barbara Memogana and Corporation, Gøril Thomassen Hammerstad and Trude Hjulstad at NTNU and the staff at the Aurora Research Institute. Also a big thank you to Ingrid Lossius Falkum at University of Oslo and Robyn Carston at University College London for our discussions, and for sharing theoretical insights. I also want to thank Assibi Apatewon Amidu at NTNU for teaching me Kiswahili grammar in 2010, which triggered my interest in Linguistics, Ronald Brower at the University of Fairbanks, Alaska, for teaching me North Slope Iñupiaq grammar in 2011 and Tyler Roy Gösta Peterson for the course in semantic fieldwork methods in Leiden in 2010. Any errors and misinterpretations remain entirely my own. I also want to express a warm thanks to my friends in Denmark, Norway and Canada for their support and for reminding me of life outside the office. In particular, I want to thank Runa Nilssen and Linn Herredsvela for all the good times we share. Also warm thanks to my friends at NTNU for being who you are, especially Cecilie Slinning Knudsen, Pia Karoline Farstad Eriksen, Perlaug Marie Kveen, Maren Berg Grimstad, and to my roommate during my second visit in Inuvik Tiff-Annie Kenny. Last but not least, I want to thank my parents Torben Helmut Rix, Elli Marie Berthelin and Mogens Lilledal Hansen for encouraging me to follow my interests and ambitions. And my partner Morten Langfeldt Dahlback for our late night conversations about modality from linguistic and philosophical points of view and for all the good times we have shared and all the good times we will share in the future. The project was made possible through generous financial and logistical support from the Department of Humanities at NTNU, LingPhil, Aurora Research Institute and Inuvik Centennial Library. Table of contents Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Setting the scene 1 1.2 Expressions under investigation 4 1.33 Dissemination of results 6 1.4 Outline of the thesis 7 Chapter 2: Linguistic affiliations and overview of Inuktut grammar 2.1 Introduction 9 2.2 A brief introduction to the Uummarmiutun language situation 11 2.3 Linguistic affiliations 12 2.3.1 The language family 12 2.3.2 Similarities and differences between Inuktut dialects 15 2.4 Grammar 19 2.4.1 Postbases 19 2.4.2 Uummarmiutun verbs 25 2.4.3 Uummarmiutun nouns 30 2.5 Summary 33 Chapter 3: Defining modality 3.1 Introduction 35 3.1.1 Overview of the chapter 35 3.1.2 The phenomenon 36 3.2 Approaching modality 41 3.2.1 Modality and levels of analysis 41 3.2.2 The relation between root and epistemic modality 44 3.3 Conceptions of modality 48 3.3.1 Subjectivity 48 3.3.2 Undetermined factuality 50 3.3.3 Necessity and possibility and the inheritance from modal logic 51 3.3.4 Modality as unrealized force-dynamic potential 62 3.3.5 Conclusions regarding the conception of modality 69 3.4 Modal expressions and their neighbors 71 3.4.1 Definition of a modal expression 71 3.4.2 Extension of the category 73 3.4.2.1 Modality in relation to evidentiality 73 3.4.2.2 Modality in relation to full epistemic certainty and causation 80 3.4.3 Conclusions: Modality and neighboring meanings 84 3.5 Summary 85 Chapter 4: Methodology 4.1 Introduction 87 4.2 Semantic fieldwork methods 89 4.2.1 Challenges in semantic fieldwork 89 4.2.2 Elicitation and elicitation techniques 91 4.2.2.1 Elicitation in semantic fieldwork 91 4.2.2.2 Elicitation techniques 92 4.2.3 Possible concerns with the employed method 105 4.3 Participants, interviews and data processing 109 4.3.1 Participants and interviews 109 4.3.2 Analysing and rendering the data 110 Chapter 5: Uummarmiutun modals data and description 5.1 Introduction 113 5.1.1 Overview of the chapter 113 5.1.2 Expressions under investigation 114 5.1.3 A note on terminology 118 5.2 Uummarmiutun expressions with possible relevance to modality 119 5.2.1 luuniin 119 5.2.2 kiaq 123 5.2.3 guuq 129 5.2.4 ahulu 137 5.2.5 niq 141 5.2.6 yumaaq 153 5.2.7 viaq 158 5.2.8 yumiñaq 168 5.3 In-depth analyses of four Uummarmiutun modals 175 5.3.1 ukau 175 5.3.1.1 Research questions 175 5.3.1.2 Modal force 177 5.3.1.3 Modal type and source 178 5.3.1.4 Conclusions: Meanings covered by ukau 196 5.3.2 hungnaq 197 5.3.2.1 Research questions 197 5.3.2.2 Modal force 199 5.3.2.3 Modal type and evidential restrictions 211 5.3.2.4 Conclusions: Meanings covered by hungnaq 219 5.3.3 huk 220 5.3.3.1 Research questions 220 5.3.3.2 Modal meanings 222 5.3.3.3 Other meanings 235 5.3.3.4 Conclusions: Meanings covered by huk 240 5.3.4 lla 241 5.3.4.1 Research questions 241 5.3.4.2 Modal type and source 243 5.3.4.3 Modal force 253 5.3.4.4 Conclusions: Meanings covered by lla 254 5.4 Summary 255 Chapter 6: Capturing the Semantics and Pragmatics of Modal Expressions 6.1 Introduction 263 6.2 Relevance theory 266 6.2.1 Why relevance theory? 266 6.2.2 The relevance-theoretic account of communication and utterance interpretation 267 6.2.3 Relevance-theoretic concepts and distinctions 272 6.2.3.1 The semantics-pragmatics distinction 272 6.2.3.2 Explicatures and implicatures 273 6.2.3.3 Propositions communicated vs. propositions expressed 280 6.3 Relevance-theoretic modal semantics and pragmatics 282 6.3.1. A brief overview of relevance-theoretic takes on modal meaning 282 6.3.2 Modality and the conceptual-procedural distinction 284 6.3.3 Papafragou (2000) 289 6.3.3.1 The model 289 6.3.3.2 Modal domains and ways of using propositions 291 6.3.3.3 (2000) modal semantics and pragmatics 296 6.4 Towards the formation of a lexical semantics for modal expressions 302 6.4.1 Challenges 302 6.4.2 Modal force 303 6.4.3 The root-epistemic distinction 312 6.4.3.1 Reflecting the distinction 312 6.4.3.2 Other restrictions on the modal domain 319 6.4.4 Lexical semantic structure of root-epistemic overlapping modals 320 6.4.4.1 The polyfunctionality of modals 320 6.4.4.2 Polysemy 324 6.4.4.3. Root-epistemic overlap as split polysemy 329 6.5 Summary 334 Chapter 7: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Uummarmiutun modals 7.1 Introduction 339 7.2 ukau 339 7.3 hungnaq 345 7.4 huk 348 7.5 lla 353 7.6 Conclusions 357 Chapter 8: A sketch of the semantic and pragmatic properties of epistemic expressions in Uummarmiutun and beyond 8.1 Introduction 361 8.2 Epistemic force and epistemic justification 363 8.3 Epistemic vigilance 369 8.4 The semantics and pragmatics of epistemic expressions 373 8.5 Summary 379 Chapter 9: Summary 9.1 The contribution 383 9.2 The conception of modality and modal expressions 384 9.3 Descriptive results 385 9.4 A model for modal semantics and pragmatics 388 9.5 The semantics and pragmatics of Uummarmiutun modals 392 9.6 Methodological insights 396 Bibliography 399 List of abbreviations 1 first person INTR intransitive 2 second person LOC locative