5,466
edits
Minhast/Noun Incorporation: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Type II Noun Incorporation
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
5c) Aydantayattaran → aydann-tayatta-ar-an “He poisoned the well” (lit. “He stored the water with poison). | 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 === | ||
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. | |||
Both sentences have been restated here as Sentences 5a and 5b: | |||
5a) Yadukte kaslub ayuparu → yaduk=de kaslub ayup-ar-u (boy=ERG dog.ABS point.at-PST TRANS) | |||
“The boy pointed at the dog.” | |||
5b) Yaduk ayukkaslubaran → yaduk ayup-kaslub-ar-an (boy.ABS point.at-dog-PST- INTRANS) | |||
“The boy pointed at a/the dog” (lit: “The boy dog-pointed”). | |||
The alteration of the argument structure from a transitive sentence to an intransitive one is pragmatically motivated and changes the nature of the discourse. The incorporation of the PT kaslub, both opens up the Absolutive position for occupation by another argument, in this case, the Agent yaduk. The incorporation of the Patient kaslub also backgrounds it, reducing its salience in the discourse. The Agent yaduk thus becomes more salient, as it has now become the sole core argument of the sentence. The result alters discourse by presenting the Agent as the most important element of the discourse, while that of the Patient has been reduced to a peripheral role. | |||
Patients are not the only arguments that can be subjected to NI. An interesting feature of NI in Minhast is that the semantic nature of a verb may allow certain non-PTs oblique arguments, namely Instrumentals and Locatives, to be incorporated. This is similar to Ainu, another polysynthetic | |||
14 | |||
language of Northeast Asia unrelated to Minhast . Like Minhast, Ainu can target Instrumental | |||
arguments for NI, like sapa (“head”) underlined below in Sentence 5: | |||
13 This is an instance of Case Manipulation NI, i.e. Mithun's Type II classification. | |||
14 There still remain some die-hard advocates who group the two languages with Chutchki and Nivkh under a single | |||
family called Amuran, a reference to the Amur Riverine System. Surface similarities have been ascribed to areal features. | |||
6) Ratki apa a-sapa-e-puni → hung door 1s.A-head-APPL-lift | |||
“I lifted the suspended door with my head.” (J. Runner & Raul Aranovich 2003). | |||
NI of Oblique arguments in transitive clauses does not affect valency, since the Absolutive position remains occupied by the PT. However, the incorporation of Instrumental and Locative arguments modify the meaning of the verb. Speakers are aware that in utilizing this form of NI, they are essentially creating new vocabulary on-the-fly. These new words may be created as one-time entities for the current speech event, or they may be institutionalized and become permanent vocabulary in the lexicon. Examples of Instrumental and Oblique NI are demonstrated in Sentences 6a – 6e: | |||
7a) Yakte dūy kallutaššiakaru → yak=de dūy kallut-haššia-ak-ar-u (1S=ERG salmon.ABS eat- with.chopsticks-3P.INANIM.ABS+1S.ERG-PST-TRANS) – lit: “I eat.with.chopsticks the salmon.” | |||
7b) Yak (dūyaran) kallutaššiekarampi → yak (dūy=aran) kallut-haššia-ek-ar-an-pi (1S.ABS (salmon=DAT) eat.with.chopsticks-1S.ABS-PST-INTRANS-ANTI) | |||
“I eat (some salmon) with chopsticks.” | |||
7c) Yak asunkallutaššiekaran → yak kallut-haššia-ek-ar-an (1S.ABS HAB-eat.with.chopsticks- 1S.ABS-PST-INTRANS) | |||
“I eat/am eating with chopsticks.” | |||
7d) Yak iknatūmanekaran → yak ikna-tūman-ek-ar-an (1S.ABS go-house-1S.ABS-PST- INTRANS) | |||
“I went home.” | |||
7e) Yak ikassuhūrekaran → yak ikassu-hūr-ek-ar-an (1S.ABS rest-mountain-1S.ABS-PST- INTRANS) | |||
“I rested on the mountain.” | |||
The surfacing of the Antipassive in Sentence 7b illustrates that NI of Instrumentals, in this case haššia, does not and cannot decrease valency. Instead, Antipassivation is the only valency-decreasing operation available to reduce the valency of a verb whenever an Instrumental oblique argument is incorporated. | |||
Similarly, the incorporation of a Locative or Goal noun into a positional or locomotive verb does not affect valency, as in Sentence 7d and 7e. | |||
Sentence 7b illustrates that no discussion of Noun Incorporation in Minhast can be made without explaining the interrelation between NI and Antipassivation. Some polysynthetic languages use both NI and Antipassivation to manipulate argument structures. Minhast is among this group of languages. An observation noted among these languages with both NI and Antipassivation is that NI automatically triggers the Antipassive to surface, as demonstrated in Sentences 8a and 8b, taken from Nishga, a North American indigenous tribe of the Pacific Northwest (Mithun, 1984); and Sentences 8c and 8d, taken from Yucatec Mayan (Bricker, 1978): <br/><br/> | |||
8a) səməyé:n-sk -m-hó:n → simijeehisgumhoon to.smoke-ANTIPASS-ADJ-fish 'To smoke fish'<br/> | |||
8b) íc'l-'sk -m-tá:la → lits'ilsgumdaala to. count. up-ANTIPASS-ADJ-money 'to keep track of | |||
money donated at a potlatch'<br/> | |||
8c) t-in-č'ak-∅-ah če'. COMP-I-chop-it-PERF tree “I chopped a tree.”<br/> | |||
8d) č'ak-če'-n-ah-en. Chop-tree-ANTIPASS-PERF-I(ABS) “I wood-chopped” = “I chopped wood.”<br/> | |||
There are other languages that utilize both NI and Antipassivation where NI does not trigger the Antipassive to surface. The Northeast Asian language Chukchi, a branch of the Chukotko-Kamchatkan is such an example (Kozinsky 1976). Sentence 9a shows NI of an Instrumental noun without Antipassivation. However, Sentence 9b the Antipassive affix appears, but NI is absent because the Antipassive has demoted the PT qora to an oblique Instrumental argument. | |||
9a) Kopalhin na-aldt-koqenat. → walrus.blubber they-knife-mincing “They are mincing walrus blubber with a knife. | |||
9b) Ine-lqerir-ə-rkən (qora-ta). → APASS-seek-PRES-/3sS (deer-INSTR) “He is seeking (for deer).” | |||
These two examples demonstrate that NI and Antipassivation are two distinct processes in Chukchi, whereas in Yucatec Mayan they appear to be a unitary process, as they appear simultaneously. | |||
Like Chukchi, Minhast treats NI and Antipassivation as two separate, distinct processes. In Minhast, NI and Antipassivation may complement each other, and other times they may be mutually incompatible. Sentences 10a and 10b are presented below. Sentence 10a shows a situation where both NI of an Instrument and the surfacing of the Antipassive affix -pi- occur in the same sentence: | |||
10a) Yak dūyaran kallutaššiekaranampamā, [PRO] yusnakekaran, wassetta. | |||
→ yak dūy=aran kallut-haššia-ek-ar-an-pi=mā, [PRO] yusnak-ek-ar-an, wa=setta (1S.ABS | |||
salmon=DAT eat.with.chopsticks-1S.ABS-PST-INTRANS-ANTI=SUBORD, [PRO] be.late- 1S.ABS-PST-INTRANS, CONN=even.though) | |||
“I ate (some) salmon with chopsticks, even though I was late.” | |||
As mentioned earlier, incorporation of an Instrumental noun does not decrease valence, so Antipassivation was required to decrease the valency of Sentence 10a. Here, an Instrumental noun, haššia, has already been incorporated into the verb kallut (to eat). Since only one noun can be incorporated into a verb complex at any one time, the only way to reduce the valency of the clause is to apply Antipassivation to demote the semantic Patient dūy (salmon) from core status. The application of | |||
15 The situation with Yucatec Mayan is somewhat more complicated. The language displays split ergativity conditioned by tense: Erg-Abs alignment is observed in the perfect aspect (glossed by Bricker as COMP “completive”), while Nom- Acc alignment is found in the imperfect aspect. This is why the Antipassive does not surface when NI occurs in the imperfect aspect, because Antipassives occur only in the Erg-Abs component of split ergative systems. | |||
the Antipassive marker -pi has demoted dūy from core Absolutive status to a Dative oblique argument marked with the clitic =aran, the typical oblique marker used to mark demoted semantic Patients. Such an operation is required if the speaker wishes to convert yak to Absolutive status for syntactic reasons (e.g. to become the S/O pivot16 to feed into subordinate clauses, as in this case). | |||
In contrast, the situation in Sentence 10b shows NI of a Patient. Here, the NI of the Patient blocks Antipassivation: | |||
10b) Yaduk ayukkaslubaran → yaduk ayup-kaslub-ar-an (boy.ABS point.at-dog-PST- INTRANS) – “The boy pointed at a/the dog” (lit: “The boy dog-pointed”). | |||
Here, the semantic Patient kaslub (dog) has been incorporated into the verb ayup (to point), but here the Antipassive does not surface. Nor can it without rendering the sentence ungrammatical, because Antipassivation reconfigures a sentence's argument structure by demoting or removing Patients. When kaslub was incorporated, there was no Patient available for the Antipassive to target because the Patient had already been removed from core status by NI. | |||
To illustrate the reason why Antipassivation was blocked by NI of a Patient, Sentence 10c presents a theoretical situation resulting from the application of Antipassivation after a Patient has been incorporated: | |||
10c) **Yadukaran [missing ABS] ayukkaslubarampi → yaduk=aran [missing ABS] ayup- kaslub-ar-an-pi (boy.ABS point.at-dog-PST-INTRANS-ANTI) | |||
== Type III Noun Incorporation == | == Type III Noun Incorporation == | ||
== Type IV Noun Incorporation == | == Type IV Noun Incorporation == | ||