5,466
edits
Minhast/Noun Incorporation: Difference between revisions
m
→Type I Noun Incorporation
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Not all languages that employ NI exhibit all four types. For example, in the indigenous Brazilian language Karajá, NI is mostly restricted inalienably possessed nouns, particularly body parts, and does not alter valence, which by nature involves Type II case manipulation (Ribeiro 2001). Chukchi freely employs Type II NI to alter argument structure, Type III is attested per Mithun, but Type IV NI is absent (Modena & Muro). Nevertheless, languages that employ all four types of NI are found in disparate languages, including Mohawk, Caddo, and Gunwinggu. Minhast also falls within this group. | Not all languages that employ NI exhibit all four types. For example, in the indigenous Brazilian language Karajá, NI is mostly restricted inalienably possessed nouns, particularly body parts, and does not alter valence, which by nature involves Type II case manipulation (Ribeiro 2001). Chukchi freely employs Type II NI to alter argument structure, Type III is attested per Mithun, but Type IV NI is absent (Modena & Muro). Nevertheless, languages that employ all four types of NI are found in disparate languages, including Mohawk, Caddo, and Gunwinggu. Minhast also falls within this group. | ||
=== Type I Noun Incorporation === | === Type I Noun Incorporation - Lexical Compound Formation === | ||
Minhast utilizes Type I NI to create lexical compounds but only if a particular activity, state, or event occurs frequently to warrant institutionalizing into the lexicon. Usually, one or both elements of the compound are shortened, as in the following examples: | Minhast utilizes Type I NI to create lexical compounds but only if a particular activity, state, or event occurs frequently to warrant institutionalizing into the lexicon. Usually, one or both elements of the compound are shortened, as in the following examples: | ||