5,464
edits
Minhast/Noun Incorporation: Difference between revisions
m
Fixed typo
m (Fixed typo) |
|||
| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 7: | 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 | # 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.” | ||
| Line 488: | 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 | | 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 515: | Line 515: | ||
= Polypersonal Marking = | = 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. | |||
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 ''- | {{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 537: | 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. | ||