5,466
edits
Minhast/Noun Incorporation: Difference between revisions
m
Reformatting
m (Re-org to sub-topics) |
m (Reformatting) |
||
| Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
The pattern of truncation is unpredictable; syllable loss may occur in initial, medial, or final positions, although noun roots with more than two syllables tend to lose either their medial or final syllables and retain the initial syllable, but exceptions abound, such as ''allāga'' > ''-lgagg-'' (conch) . | The pattern of truncation is unpredictable; syllable loss may occur in initial, medial, or final positions, although noun roots with more than two syllables tend to lose either their medial or final syllables and retain the initial syllable, but exceptions abound, such as ''allāga'' > ''-lgagg-'' (conch) . | ||
= Noun Incorporation in Intransitive Verbs = | |||
Although noun incorporation in Minhast is prototypically associated with transitive verbs, intransitive verbs may also incorporate nouns. | Although noun incorporation in Minhast is prototypically associated with transitive verbs, intransitive verbs may also incorporate nouns. | ||
= Incorporation of Experiencers = | |||
Verbs that take as their core NP with the Experiencer thematic relation often incorporate oblique nominals, whose theta role of Source or Cause, to background them, thereby focusing on Experiencer. The following two examples, the first with no incorporation, and the second with incorporation of the oblique nominal ''tipr'' ("meat") are semantically equivalent. The difference between the non-incorporated and incorporated versions is one of discourse purpose. | Verbs that take as their core NP with the Experiencer thematic relation often incorporate oblique nominals, whose theta role of Source or Cause, to background them, thereby focusing on Experiencer. The following two examples, the first with no incorporation, and the second with incorporation of the oblique nominal ''tipr'' ("meat") are semantically equivalent. The difference between the non-incorporated and incorporated versions is one of discourse purpose. | ||
| Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
}} | }} | ||
= Incorporation of Body Parts = | |||
Body parts are often incorporated in attributive verbs. The pronominal affix represents both the subject of the clause (i.e. the syntactic pivot), as well as the possessor of the incorporated body part: | Body parts are often incorporated in attributive verbs. The pronominal affix represents both the subject of the clause (i.e. the syntactic pivot), as well as the possessor of the incorporated body part: | ||
| Line 121: | Line 121: | ||
}} | }} | ||
== Interaction of Applicatives == | |||
Interestingly, [[Minhast#Preverb_5_Applicative_Affixes|applicatives]] can be added to incorporating stative verbs to promote the oblique nominal whose thematic relation is that of Cause or Source. The Ablative Applicative ''-raħk-'' is usually selected for this operation. When the applicative is applied, the oblique nominal argument ''purrak'' is promoted to Absolutive status, thereby increasing the valency; nevertheless, the verb remains intransitive: | Interestingly, [[Minhast#Preverb_5_Applicative_Affixes|applicatives]] can be added to incorporating stative verbs to promote the oblique nominal whose thematic relation is that of Cause or Source. The Ablative Applicative ''-raħk-'' is usually selected for this operation. When the applicative is applied, the oblique nominal argument ''purrak'' is promoted to Absolutive status, thereby increasing the valency; nevertheless, the verb remains intransitive: | ||
| Line 132: | Line 132: | ||
}} | }} | ||
= Incorporation of Natural Phenomenon and Meteorological Events = | |||
Some natural phenomenon, like meteorological events, can undergo noun incorporation, as is the case with ''yam'' "sea", in this example: | Some natural phenomenon, like meteorological events, can undergo noun incorporation, as is the case with ''yam'' "sea", in this example: | ||
| Line 143: | Line 143: | ||
}} | }} | ||
== Valency and Agreement Marking Irregularities == | |||
It remains debatable as to whether stative verbs with incorporated meteorological nouns are monovalent or zero-valent. The following example lends support to a monovalent interpretation: an overt non-null pronominal agreement marker ''-i-'' indicates that an underlying third person inanimate plural absolutive argument exists and has undergone pro-drop: | It remains debatable as to whether stative verbs with incorporated meteorological nouns are monovalent or zero-valent. The following example lends support to a monovalent interpretation: an overt non-null pronominal agreement marker ''-i-'' indicates that an underlying third person inanimate plural absolutive argument exists and has undergone pro-drop: | ||