Minhast/Noun Incorporation: Difference between revisions

m
Fixed typo
m (Fixed typo)
 
(23 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Construction}}
= Introduction =
= Introduction =
= Types of Noun Incorporation =
= Types of Noun Incorporation =
Line 5: Line 7:
# Type I - Lexical Compounding: the creation of new lexical items by compounding a noun root and verb root;
# Type I - Lexical Compounding: the creation of new lexical items by compounding a noun root and verb root;
# Type II - Case Manipulation: a noun (usually a Patient, although Instrumental and Locative nouns may be involved) is incorporated into the verb complex. This is a valence operation: if the incorporated noun was originally a core argument, another argument can occupy the position vacated by the IN and assume core status. Alternatively, depending on the semantic nature of the verb, Oblique8 nouns that are Instruments, Locatives, or Goals may also be incorporated;9
# Type II - Case Manipulation: a noun (usually a Patient, although Instrumental and Locative nouns may be involved) is incorporated into the verb complex. This is a valence operation: if the incorporated noun was originally a core argument, another argument can occupy the position vacated by the IN and assume core status. Alternatively, depending on the semantic nature of the verb, Oblique8 nouns that are Instruments, Locatives, or Goals may also be incorporated;9
# Type III - Manipulation of Discourse: NI is used to background10 information in sections of the discourse so that other arguments are brought to the foreground. It allows speech participants to focus on the important entities within a particular passage of the discourse;
# Type III - Manipulation of Discourse: NI is used to background information in sections of the discourse so that other arguments are brought to the foreground. It allows speech participants to focus on the important entities within a particular passage of the discourse;
# Type IV - Classificatory NI: Mithun describes this type of NI wherein a “...relatively general N(oun) stem is incorporated to narrow the scope of the V(erb)...but the compound noun stem can be accompanied by a more specific external NP which identifies the argument implied by the IN.”
# Type IV - Classificatory NI: Mithun describes this type of NI wherein a “...relatively general N(oun) stem is incorporated to narrow the scope of the V(erb)...but the compound noun stem can be accompanied by a more specific external NP which identifies the argument implied by the IN.”


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:


5a) aydann- “To store water in a cistern, reservoir, or catch-basin” (derived from ayaya- “putsomething into a container” + dannua “water”)
5a) ''aydann''- “To store water in a cistern, reservoir, or catch-basin” (derived from ''ayaya'' - “put something into a container” + ''dannua'' “water”)<br/>
5b) uzdann- → uzzat-dannua “To draw water from a well” (derived from uzzat- “to pull
5b) ''uzdann- → uzzat-dannua'' “To draw water from a well” (derived from ''uzzat''- “to pull
something out of a container or other enclosing object, e.g. an envelope” + dannua “water” Compounding NI is a derivational process. If the compound yields a new verb, it has the full
something out of a container or other enclosing object, e.g. an envelope” + dannua “water”  
status and capabilities of a verb not derived from compounding, including NI:
 
5c) Aydantayattaran → aydann-tayatta-ar-an “He poisoned the well” (lit. “He stored the water with poison).
Compounding NI is a derivational process. If the compound yields a new verb, it has the fullstatus and capabilities of a verb not derived from compounding, including NI:<br/>
5c) ''Aydantayattaran → aydann-tayatta-ar-an'' “He poisoned the well” (lit. “He stored the water with poison).


=== Type II Noun Incorporation ===
=== Type II Noun Incorporation - Case Manipulation ===
As Mithun identified in Case Manipulation NI, an important function of IN IN Minhast is to alter the argument structure of a clause. The prototypical function of NI is to decrease the valency of a verb; the transitivity of a clause is decreased by removing one of the core arguments, namely the PT, and absorbing it into the verb. This opens up the Absolutive position to be occupied by another argument, either an oblique argument, or the Ergative argument.
As Mithun identified in Case Manipulation NI, an important function of IN IN Minhast is to alter the argument structure of a clause. The prototypical function of NI is to decrease the valency of a verb; the transitivity of a clause is decreased by removing one of the core arguments, namely the PT, and absorbing it into the verb. This opens up the Absolutive position to be occupied by another argument, either an oblique argument, or the Ergative argument.
Returning back to Sentence 1a and 1b, the argument structure has been altered13 from a transitive clause in Sentence 1a to an intransitive one via the application of NI previously observed in Sentence 1b.
Returning back to Sentence 1a and 1b, the argument structure has been altered13 from a transitive clause in Sentence 1a to an intransitive one via the application of NI previously observed in Sentence 1b.
Line 95: Line 98:
The use of Case Manipulation accounts for the majority of NI in Minhast. This is not surprising, since Minhast, as a syntactically ergative language, utilizes various grammatical devices to maintain and manipulate the S/O pivot to cross-reference the Absolutive argument across clauses.
The use of Case Manipulation accounts for the majority of NI in Minhast. This is not surprising, since Minhast, as a syntactically ergative language, utilizes various grammatical devices to maintain and manipulate the S/O pivot to cross-reference the Absolutive argument across clauses.


=== Type III Noun Incorporation ===
=== Type III Noun Incorporation - Discourse Manipulation ===
Another important difference in Minhast between Antipassivation and Noun Incorporation is found in discourse manipulation in extended speech or narratives. Antipassivation is often used to remove an element from discourse entirely, marking the demoted NP as truly incidental and ultimately unimportant to the narrative. On the other hand, Minhast uses NI to retain the demoted argument in the
Another important difference in Minhast between Antipassivation and Noun Incorporation is found in discourse manipulation in extended speech or narratives. Antipassivation is often used to remove an element from discourse entirely, marking the demoted NP as truly incidental and ultimately unimportant to the narrative. On the other hand, Minhast uses NI to retain the demoted argument in the
18
18
Line 187: Line 190:
Notice that if the Controller is placed into the Absolutive position by Antipassivation (Sentences 14d, 14h, 14l) the nominalization must be deleted, since Minhast does not tolerate two separate Absolutive arguments and nominalizations must always have an Absolutive argument to relativize on. The IN of the complement clause in which the Controllee is embedded in may be retained by incorporation into the Control verb, but without nominalization, there is no way to qualify the NI. That must be determined by context.
Notice that if the Controller is placed into the Absolutive position by Antipassivation (Sentences 14d, 14h, 14l) the nominalization must be deleted, since Minhast does not tolerate two separate Absolutive arguments and nominalizations must always have an Absolutive argument to relativize on. The IN of the complement clause in which the Controllee is embedded in may be retained by incorporation into the Control verb, but without nominalization, there is no way to qualify the NI. That must be determined by context.


=== Type IV Noun Incorporation ===
=== Type IV Noun Incorporation - Classificatory Functions ===


Some languages have expanded the range of functions that NI can perform beyond valence operations and discourse pragmatics. These languages take NI to an advanced level, whereby a generalized noun is incorporated to classify or categorize the Patient, which has more specific meaning. Again, Mohawk is an exemplary language that exploits this form of NI pervasively, called Classificatory NI (Mithun's Type IV category). The following passage from Mithun (1984) illustrates this NI function type:
Some languages have expanded the range of functions that NI can perform beyond valence operations and discourse pragmatics. These languages take NI to an advanced level, whereby a generalized noun is incorporated to classify or categorize the Patient, which has more specific meaning. Again, Mohawk is an exemplary language that exploits this form of NI pervasively, called Classificatory NI (Mithun's Type IV category). The following passage from Mithun (1984) illustrates this NI function type:
Line 260: Line 263:
| translation = Canonballs explode next to it the deerskin.
| translation = Canonballs explode next to it the deerskin.
}}
}}
=== Purpose ===
==== Extension of Adpositional Relations  ====
==== Foreshadowing ====
===== Animacy Restrictions =====


= Truncation/Weak Suppletion =
= Truncation/Weak Suppletion =
Line 286: Line 284:




Similarly, Minhast INs exhibit weak suppletion, and it occurs extensively,  particularly with nouns longer than two syllables, e.g. ''sussagarānī'' > ''-suggan-''  ("big toe").
Similarly, Minhast INs exhibit weak suppletion, and it occurs extensively,  particularly with nouns longer than two syllables, e.g. ''sussagarānī'' > ''-suggan-''  ("big toe"). The contrast can be seen in the following two examples, the first where the noun occurs in its full form as the dependent argument in a possessive NP, and the second wherein the noun appears in truncated form after noun incorporation:


{{Gloss
{{Gloss
|phrase =  Sussagarānītirektiki kahušnišattekaran.
|phrase =  <u>Sussagarānī</u>tirektiki kahušnišattekaran.
| IPA =
| IPA =
| morphemes = sussagarānī-tirek=de=ki kah-ušn-šatt-ek-ar-an
| morphemes = sussagarānī-tirek=de=ki kah-ušn-šatt-ek-ar-an
| gloss = big.toe-3SN.INAN.POSSM+1S.POSSR=ERG=LOC INV.VOL-hit-RFLX-1S.NOM-PST-TRNS
| gloss = big.toe-3SN.INAN.POSSM+1S.POSSR=ERG=LOC INV.VOL-hit-RFLX-1S.NOM-PST-TRNS
| translation = I banged myself against my big toe.
| translation = I stubbed my big toe.
}}
}}


{{Gloss
{{Gloss
|phrase = Kahušnisuggašnattekaran.
|phrase = Kahušni<u>sugga</u>š<u>n</u>attekaran.
| IPA =
| IPA =
| morphemes = kah-ušn-suggan-šatt-ek-ar-an
| morphemes = kah-ušn-sussagarānī-šatt-ek-ar-an
| gloss = INV.VOL-hit-toe-RFLX-1S.NOM-PST-TRNS
| gloss = INV.VOL-hit-toe-RFLX-1S.NOM-PST-TRNS
| translation = I stubbed my big toe.
| translation = I stubbed my big toe.
Line 308: Line 306:
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 of Oblique Arguments==
= Noun Incorporation of Oblique Arguments=
n many languages which exhibit noun incorporation, the type of noun that can be incorporated into the verb is often restricted.  Some languages incorporate body parts only, others are restricted to inalienable nouns or some other semantic category.  Other languages that exhibit extensive noun incorporation, of which Mohawk and its relatives in the Iroquoian language family are the most studied, while having much fewer semantic restrictions, still limit the syntactic or thematic role of the noun that can be incorporated: these are that of the Patient argument, and in some cases the Instrument argument.  Other arguments serving in a different thematic/theta role are barred from incorporation.  Other noun incorporating languages, such as Chukchi, appear to have no restrictions on the theta role of the incorporated noun (IN); but when these oblique nouns are incorporated, the only way to recover their thematic role is by context alone.
In many languages which exhibit noun incorporation, the type of noun that can be incorporated into the verb is often restricted.  Some languages incorporate body parts only, others are restricted to inalienable nouns or some other semantic category.  Other languages that exhibit extensive noun incorporation, of which Mohawk and its relatives in the Iroquoian language family are the most studied, while having much fewer semantic restrictions, still limit the syntactic or thematic role of the noun that can be incorporated: these are that of the Patient argument, and in some cases the Instrument argument.  Other arguments serving in a different thematic/theta role are barred from incorporation.  Other noun incorporating languages, such as Chukchi, appear to have no restrictions on the theta role of the incorporated noun (IN); but when these oblique nouns are incorporated, the only way to recover their thematic role is by context alone.


Minhast is one of those languages that can incorporate oblique arguments.  However, the oblique arguments that can be incorporated are constrained by the semantic characteristics of the verb.  Some transitive verbs which require a third argument, which is always an oblique noun, can optionally incorporate the oblique noun.  The verb wasaskiyu is such an example:
Minhast is one of those languages that can incorporate oblique arguments.  However, the oblique arguments that can be incorporated are constrained by the semantic characteristics of the verb.  Some transitive verbs which require a third argument, which is always an oblique noun, can optionally incorporate the oblique noun.  The verb wasaskiyu is such an example:
Line 490: Line 488:
| IPA =
| IPA =
| morphemes = purrak saxt-raħk-tahal-ruppamak-ek-ar-an
| morphemes = purrak saxt-raħk-tahal-ruppamak-ek-ar-an
| gloss = pigment=ABL INCH-be.green-APPL.ABL-face-1S.NOM-PST-INTR
| gloss = pigment=ABS INCH-APPL.ABL-be.green-face-1S.NOM-PST-INTR
| translation = My face became green from the dye (lit. "Because of the pigment, I became green-faced.")
| translation = My face became green from the dye (lit. "Because of the pigment, I became green-faced.")
}}
}}
Line 505: Line 503:
}}
}}


=== Valency and Agreement Marking Irregularities ===
= 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:


Line 516: Line 514:
}}
}}


Oftentimes, agreement marking occurs under certain restrictions, and/or exhibit irregularities in gender-number concord.  When agreement marking does appear, they tend to occur with collective or mass nouns, such as the inherently collective ''iyuššit'', and only with certain verbs, particularly ones indicating movement, and even then ''iyuššit'' triggers agreement marking in a small fraction among these verbs. An example where agreement marking is lacking with the very same collective noun follows in the next example.  Note that the verb ''-adu-'' ("be many"), unlike ''-wakkay-'', is not a motion verb.  The lack of an overt agreement marker with ''-adu-'' points towards a zero-valent interpretation:
= Polypersonal Marking =
The primary purpose of the polypersonal markers in the Minhast verb are to reference the core arguments of its clause, whether they appear overtly, or are omitted through pro-drop.  However, polypersonal marking can target the IN under certain restrictions.  When agreement marking does appear, they tend to occur with collective or mass nouns, such as the inherently collective ''iyuššit''.  Moreover, this type of incorporation occurs with certain verbs only, particularly ones indicating movement, and even then ''iyuššit'' triggers agreement marking in a small fraction among these verbs.
 
{{Gloss
|phrase = Nayyakiyuššitiyaran.
| IPA =
| morphemes = nayyaki-iyuššit-i-ar-an
| gloss = gather.together-storm.cloud-3.ANIM.P-PST-INTR
| translation = Storm clouds gathered.
}}
 
Oftentimes irregularities in gender-number concord may appear. An example where agreement marking is lacking with the very same collective noun follows in the next example.  Note that the verb ''-adu-'' ("be many"), unlike ''-nayyaki-'', is not a motion verb.  The lack of an overt agreement marker with ''-adu-'' points towards a zero-valent interpretation:


{{Gloss
{{Gloss
Line 536: Line 545:
}}
}}


Interestingly, ''-puht-'' can license agreement with other nouns, such as ''kayyūn'' "tree", when a collective meaning is intended:


{{Gloss
|phrase = Yaššapuħtakayyummaharan.
| IPA =
| morphemes = yašša-puħt-kayyūn-mah-ar-an
| gloss = there.DIST-stand.upright-tree-3S.NEUT-PST-INTR
| translation = The trees stood there.
}}


Diachronic factors may explain the irregularities involving agreement marking for a subset of incorporated nouns interacting with a subset of verbs.  The Proto-Nahenic ancestor originally had an extensive hierarchical noun class system, remnants of which remain in Minhast's relative Nahónda as evidenced by even more irregularities in the latter, and in its other relative Nankôre, whose elaborate nominal hierarchy may be a preservation of the protolanguage's original noun class system or an extensive elaboration of it. The irregular agreement marking triggered by ''-iyuššit-'' among a subset of a select class of verbs suggests that the noun once fell within a noun class of a particular animacy level.  When the protolanguage split, the original noun class system were restructured in the daughter languages; further reductions and loss, particularly in both Minhast and Nahónda, left a residue in the form of the irregular agreement marking seen today.
Diachronic factors may explain the irregularities involving agreement marking for a subset of incorporated nouns interacting with a subset of verbs.  The Proto-Nahenic ancestor originally had an extensive hierarchical noun class system, remnants of which remain in Minhast's relative Nahónda as evidenced by even more irregularities in the latter, and in its other relative Nankôre, whose elaborate nominal hierarchy may be a preservation of the protolanguage's original noun class system or an extensive elaboration of it. The irregular agreement marking triggered by ''-iyuššit-'' among a subset of a select class of verbs suggests that the noun once fell within a noun class of a particular animacy level.  When the protolanguage split, the original noun class system were restructured in the daughter languages; further reductions and loss, particularly in both Minhast and Nahónda, left a residue in the form of the irregular agreement marking seen today.
5,466

edits