5,486
edits
Minhast: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Syntax
m (→Deictics) |
(→Syntax) |
||
| Line 2,105: | Line 2,105: | ||
Although both the Preposed and Postposed-Wa structures bind adjuncts to clauses, an important determiner for the speaker in selecting which structure to use is the issue of scope. The Preposed-Wa structure has narrow scope, and governs only its adjunct and the clause immediately following it, whereas the Postposed-Wa structure has wide scope, governing not just its adjunct and the clause immediately preceding it; its scope governs all the clauses of a sentence. This difference is why the majority of evidential and modal particles are sentence-final; evidentials and modals are in the majority of cases used to cover the speaker's beliefs and attitudes and trustworthiness of the source, which applies to whole statements, but rarely for just individual segments of a given statement. Another important difference is that the Preposed-Wa structure can be preceded by a verb marked with =mā or other subordinating clitic. This means that the number of Preposed-Wa structures can occur for each and every clause in a sentence. Such is not the case with Postposed-Wa structures; only one Postposed-Wa structure can occur for a given sentence. | Although both the Preposed and Postposed-Wa structures bind adjuncts to clauses, an important determiner for the speaker in selecting which structure to use is the issue of scope. The Preposed-Wa structure has narrow scope, and governs only its adjunct and the clause immediately following it, whereas the Postposed-Wa structure has wide scope, governing not just its adjunct and the clause immediately preceding it; its scope governs all the clauses of a sentence. This difference is why the majority of evidential and modal particles are sentence-final; evidentials and modals are in the majority of cases used to cover the speaker's beliefs and attitudes and trustworthiness of the source, which applies to whole statements, but rarely for just individual segments of a given statement. Another important difference is that the Preposed-Wa structure can be preceded by a verb marked with =mā or other subordinating clitic. This means that the number of Preposed-Wa structures can occur for each and every clause in a sentence. Such is not the case with Postposed-Wa structures; only one Postposed-Wa structure can occur for a given sentence. | ||
=== Word Order === | |||
Minhast as a whole tends to package the obligatory elements of clauses and sentences into a cohesive unit. Specifically, core NPs and the verbs they serve as arguments tend to be adjacent to each other. OBL arguments tend to be placed before the core NPs, so that unmarked word order is XSOV (where X stands for the OBL argument). This observation can be verified statistically by reviewing of the corpus of texts and spoken speech, and this observation holds for almost 60%, close to one standard deviation of all text and recorded speech sampled. XOSV order is the second most common arrangement found, accounting for close to 30% of all observations. Since the Ergative argument in transient clauses are highly salient, the XOSV order defocusses the Ergative (Agent) argument and emphasizes the Absolutive (Patient) argument. SOXV and SXOV orders are regarded as unusual, and OSXV and OXSV orders tend to make native speakers cringe, although they will concede that those arrangements are grammatical. These arrangements account for the remaining 10% of observations. | |||
What is almost inviolable is the position of the verb, which prominently occurs in clause-final position. The main reason for this restriction is most likely because the verb, being extremely suffix-laden, includes clause-linking and coordinating affixes which occur in the Postverbal Clitics slot of the Minhast verb template. Thus, the verb serves as to mark clause boundaries and coordinate compound and complex sentences, hence the predominance of the verb's clause-final position. Nevertheless, verbs do occur in non-final position under the following circumstances: | |||
# In simple sentences: the sentence ''Rassibararu Anyarde suharak >> rassibar-ar-u anyar=de suharak'' " (reach.for-PAST-TRANS [proper.noun]=ERG book) "Anyar reached for the book" is well-formed, even though the verb occurs in sentence-initial position. Here, the reaching for the book (rassibar) is being raised to a high saliency level. | |||
# When the sentence (always either an independent sentence, or the final clause in a clause chain) is joined to a sentence-final adjunct by a Postposed-Wa Construction. The following sentence, containing a sequential clause followed by the final clause of the sentence is well-formed: ''Sayyumperan iknitaharammā, kalluttaharaš wabbāk?'' >> ''sayyumpe=aran ikn-tah-ar-an=mā, kallut-tah-ar-an=š wa=bāk'' ([proper.noun=DAT go-2S.ABS-PAST-INTRANS=SUB eat-2S-PAST-INTRANS=IRREAL CONN=what) "You went to Sayyumpe['s house] and ate what???". Please refer to the related section on Postposed-''Wa'' constructions above. | |||
# When followed by antitopics, often derogatory in nature, or interjections, e.g. ''Ussar tūmantirektaran hāran, kuhakna! >> ussar tūman-tirek=de=aran hā-ra-an'' ([proper.noun] house-3S.NEUT.ABS+1S.ERG=ERG=DAT come-PAST-TRANS, idiot) "Ussar came to my house, the fool!". Again, this can occur only if the clause is an independent sentence or the final clause in a clause chain. | |||
== Vocabulary == | == Vocabulary == | ||