how basic is the notion of alternative? a diachronic typology ......disjunction days - berlin, 2-3...

Howbasicisthenotionofalternative?

Adiachronictypologyofdisjunction

CaterinaMauri – [email protected]

DisjunctionDays- Berlin,2-3June2016

Examinationofthecross-linguisticcodingofdisjunction

Identificationoftherecurrentsourcesofgrammaticalizationthat leadtothedevelopmentofdisjunctiveconstructions

Aimsandsample


Synchrony

Diachrony

Data hasbeencollectedbymeansofdescriptivegrammarsandquestionnaires fromaconveniencesampleof130languages.DATA

!

Parameters ofanalysis

1. PRESENCE vs.ABSENCE ofovertmarkersspecificallyencodingtherelationofalternative(syndesis vs.asyndesis):isthereadisjunctiveconnective?


ü Forcross-linguistic variation:

2. SEMANTIC DOMAIN oftheattestedmarkers:maytheconnectivebeusedinallthecontextswherewewouldhaveEnglishor?Morefunctions?Lessfunctions?Whatfunctions(basedongrammars…)?

ü Fordiachronic variation:

LEXICAL SOURCE forthedisjunctive construction– not enough informationingrammars onthecontexts oflanguage change

Background:thedebate ondisjunction

Chierchia et al. 2001:the interpretation of disjunction is governed by the same rules underlying thedistribution of negative polarity items, such as any (i.e. or is interpretedinclusively in downward entailing contexts)→ the principles governing the correct interpretation of a disjunctive relationare innate and arepart of the UG.



Chierchia et al. 2001:the interpretation of disjunction is governed by the same rules underlying thedistribution of negative polarity items, such as any (i.e. or is interpretedinclusively in downward entailing contexts)→ the principles governing the correct interpretation of a disjunctive relationare innate and arepart of the UG.


Crain(2008:151):“children draw upon a priori knowledge of the meaning of 'or'. Thisconclusion is reinforced by the observation that all languages adopt thesame meaning of 'or' in certain structures.”


Crain (2008: 151):The ability to recognize the inclusive value of or is a “linguistic property that(a) emerges in child language without decisive evidence from experience, and(b) is common to all human languages”, and it is therefore “a likely candidatefor innate specification.”


“[…] why do children adopt the logical meaning of disjunction, inclusive-or,given that the majority of their experience directs them towards a differentmeaning of disjunction, namely an exclusive-or reading? […] children'sknowledge that disjunction is inclusive-or comes from universal grammar.”(Crain 2008: 2-3)


➭ TWO ASSUMPTIONS:✓ Theexclusivevs.inclusive distinctionisrelevanttonaturallanguages✓ Thenotionofinclusive-orisinnateanduniversal.





Whatmaycross-linguisticvariationtellus?




We have someexpectations…

ü All languages have adisjunctive connective

ü Theinclusivevs.exclusive distinction is relevantforspeakersandwill therefore have linguisticreflections intheworld’s languages

Whatmaycross-linguisticvariationtellus?

Aglance attheworld’s languages

Payne(1985:40)“On the whole […] it is rare to find anything unusual in disjunction. Themajority of languages appear to possess at least one unequivocal strategy andthis is invariably permitted at sentential and at phrasal levels.”


Aglance attheworld’s languages

Payne(1985:40)“On the whole […] it is rare to find anything unusual in disjunction. Themajority of languages appear to possess at least one unequivocal strategy andthis is invariably permitted at sentential and at phrasal levels.”


Actually,thepictureseemsmorecomplicatedthanthat…

Somesignificant quotesa) Kibrik (2004:547-48)onKuskokwimAthabaskan(Athabaskan,Alaska):

“there does not seem to exist any native way to express disjunction.[…] one of theUKA consultants said, after my repeated attempts to get him to translate a sentencesuch as Do you want tea or coffee?: “They did not offer you a choice in the old days””


b) Press(1975:145,167)onChemehuevi(Uto-Aztecan,USA- California):

“I have been unable to obtain any obvious alternative questions in Chemehuevi (oralternative statements for that matter). In order to ask something like "Is he here orthere? " in Chemehuevi, one simply asks two Yes-No questions in succession” [...]“Disjunctive coordination is even more restricted in Chemehuevi. The followingexamples illustrate available ways to get around thee lack of any syntactic ormorphological "or" […]”

Somesignificant quotesc) Kimball(1985:450)onKoasati (Muskogean,USA- Georgia):

“Certain conjunctive ideas, such as 'but,"because,' and ' if ' are handled by means ofthe verbal suffixes in the Consequence slot […]. On the other hand the idea of 'or' ismost generally indicated by putting the verbs between which there is a choicetogether in apposition.”


d) Post(2008:790)onGalo (Tibeto-Burman,India):

“Disjunctive coordination of declarative clauses is not well-coded by Galo grammar,and generally requires a paraphrastic construction involving a linking clause with asense like ‘if that is not the case, then’”.

Somesignificant quotesOhori(2004:56-59):ANDandOR,thetwobasiclogicalconnectivesinformallogic,cansometimesbeunderdifferentiatedinnaturallanguages:

3) UpriverHalkomelem(Salish,Ohori2004:57,Galloway1993:363)Thedeclarativeconstructionseemstoallowaconjunctive reading ina),andtheinterrogativeconstructionadisjunctive reading inb).

a) Lə́ ləməĺstəxwəs tə Bill tə sq’əḿəĺ xwəlέm tə Jim qə Bob.3 throw.3 DEM Bill DEM paddle to DEM Jim and Bob‘Billthrewthepaddle toJimandBob.’

b) Lí lέm k’wə Bill qə Bob?Q go DEM Bill or Bob‘DidBillorBobgo?’


Languages without OR


1 “apposition”,“not well coded”“nonativewaytoexpressdisjunction”…

…meanslanguageswithoutOR!



1

…Howcananalternativebetweenstates ofaffairs,properties orentities

beconveyedWITHOUT

adisjunctive connective?

“apposition”,“not well coded”“nonativewaytoexpressdisjunction”…

…meanslanguageswithoutOR!

Plan


11. Languages without OR

2. Languages with different ORs

3. Diachronic sources out of which ORsdevelop

4. Semantic domains relevant to disjunction



134)Wari’,Chapacura-Wanam (EverettandKern1997:162)

a. mo tapa’ta’ hwam ca, mo taCOND realis.future kill1sg:realis.future fish 3sg.M COND realis.futurepa’ta’ carawa cakill1sg:realis.futureanimal3sg.M‘Hewillfish orhewillhunt.’(lit.‘ifhe(says)“Iwillkillfish”,ifhe(says)“Iwillkillanimals”.’)

b.'am ’e’ ca’am mi’ pin caperhaps live 3sg.M perhaps give complete3sg.M‘Eitherhewillliveorhewilldie.’(lit.‘perhaps hewilllive,perhapshewilldie’)



135)Wari’,Chapacura-Wanam (EverettandKern1997:162)

a. mo tapa’ta’ hwam ca, mo taCOND realis.future kill1sg:realis.future fish 3sg.M COND realis.futurepa’ta’ carawa cakill1sg:realis.futureanimal3sg.M‘Hewillfish orhewillhunt.’(lit.‘ifhe(says)“Iwillkillfish”,ifhe(says)“Iwillkillanimals”.’)

b.'am ’e’ ca’am mi’ pin caperhaps live 3sg.M perhaps give complete3sg.M‘Eitherhewillliveorhewilldie.’(lit.‘perhaps hewilllive,perhapshewilldie’)

6)Hup(Vaupés Japurá,Epps2005:683)

wĭhcím’-íy=cud ʔûhníy, yaʔambǒʔg’əḉ-´əý=cud ʔûhníyhawkclaw-DYNM=INFR maybe dog bite-DYNM=INFRmaybe‘Eitherthehawkclawed(it),orthedogbit(it),apparently.’



17)Aranda (Australian,Pama-Nyungan;Wilkins1989:385-86)

‘Theparticle(a)peke 'maybe,might; if;or'hasawiderangeofrelatedused.Commontoallitsusesisthesensethatthespeakerissayingthatsomeproposition ispossiblythecase.Itthereforecommonly translatesas'might'or'maybe'[…]peke 'maybe'canalsobeusedtosignaldisjunction betweenco-ordinatedelements.’

Kere nyente peke-rle kwele re atwe-ke peke are-ke pekeanimalone maybe-FOC QUOT 3sgAkill-pc maybe,see-pc maybekwele; arrangkwe.QUOT nothing‘Perhapstherewassupposedly oneanimalthathekilledorsaw;no,nothing atall.



18)Galo(Post2008:312)

Disjunctivecoordination […]isbest-attestedinuncertain and/orinterrogativemoods.ThetwoNPsjakàa=go ‘black=IND’‘blackone’andjapúu=go ‘white=IND’‘whiteone’areeachmarkedbyConjecturalparticlebəree.

aəə́jakâagòbərèjapúugóbərè?aəə́[jakàa=go]NP bəree [japúu=go]NP bəreeHDST.SLEVblack=IND CJEC white=IND CJEC‘Overthere,(isit)ablackoneorawhiteone(Ican’tmakeitout)?’ (MN,22:155)

Theirreality ofdisjunction


11Absenceofa

disjunctivemarkerIMPLIES Presenceof

someirrealismarker



11Absenceofa

disjunctivemarkerIMPLIES Presenceof

someirrealismarker

ü A proposition is said to be REALIS when it asserts that a SoA is an ‘actualized andcertain fact of reality’ (Elliot 2000: 66-67).

ü A proposition is said to be IRREALIS when ‘it implies that a SoA belongs to therealm of the imagined or hypothetical, and as such it constitutes a potential orpossible event but it is not an observable fact of reality’ (Elliot 2000: 66-67).

Irrealis propositions belong to the domains of imagination, possibility, wish,interrogation, necessity, obligation and so on, in which a given SoA is presented as nothaving taken place, or where the speaker is not sure about its occurrence



19)a) Perhapsthehawkclawedit,maybe thedogbitit(apparently).

(irrealis coded,alternativeinferred)

b) Thehawkclaweditorthedogbitit(apparently).(alternativecoded,irrealis implied)

c) Perhaps thehawkclaweditormaybethedogbitit(apparently).(alternativecoded,irrealis coded)

d) Thehawkclawedit,thedogbitit(apparently).(irrealis andalternativenotcoded)à possibleinterpretations:sequenceofactions,simultaneity,opposition,??alternative??

Ø Ifneitheradisjunctiveconnectivenorsomeirrealis markingoccurs(12d),itisdifficulttoinferanalternativereading!



1ü Intheabsenceofanorconnective,theirrealis,potentialstatusof

alternativesmustbeovertlysignalled

à Twoalternativesareconceptualizedasequivalent,mutuallyreplaceablepossibilities

àUntil a choice is made or the speaker comes to know which hypothesis isrealized, either alternative could be the non-occurring one and thereforeboth are conceptualized as irrealis.

ü WeareintherealmofEPISTEMICMODALITYà Zimmermann2001,Geurts2005

Languages withOR


1 …what happens inlanguages

WITHmorethan one overt disjunctive

connective ?

Different ORs


10)Marathi,Indo-Iranian,Indo-European (Pandharipande 1997:162–163)

a. madhū āītSyā śuśruṣesāṭhī suṭṭī gheīl kĩwā /*kīMadhu mother:GEN looking.after.for leavetake:FUT:3sg ALTNstilā hɔspiṭalmadhe ṭthewīl3sg.ACC hospital:in keep:FUT:3sg‘Madhu willleavetotakecareofhismotherorkeepherinthehospital.’

b.tobādzārāt gelā kī/*kĩwā gharī gelā?3sgmarket.LOC go:PST:3sg.MALTNc home:LOC go:PST:3sg.M‘Didhegotothemarketordidhegohome?’

Different ORs, different aims


2There are languages showing different strategies depending onthe AIM of the speaker in establishing the alternative relation(see Mauri 2008b: 155-161)

Simple alternative:an alternative relation may be established in order to present two states of affairs,properties or entities as equivalent and replaceable possibilities, without the needfor any choice

Choice-aimed alternative:an alternative relation may be established in order to elicit a choice betweenequivalent and replaceable possibilities, typically in interrogative sentences



111)Polish(Agnieszka Latos,p.c.)

a.Zazwyczaj piszę lub czytam aż do późnausuallywrite.PRS.1sgALTNs read.PRS.1sguntil tolate‘UsuallyIwriteorIreaduntillate.’SIMPLEALTERNATIVE

b. Idziemy jutro doszkoły czy zostajemy w domu?go.PRS.1pltomorrowtoschool ALTNc stay.PRS.1plat home‘Dowegotoschool tomorrowordowestayathome?’CHOICE-AIMEDALTERNATIVE



1Dik (1968:276)➤ similardistinctionintermsofmanner.He argues that the manner in which the alternative is presented determines abasic distinction that languages seem to encode: namely, the alternativerelation can be ‘either A or B’ or ‘either A or B, which one?’.

Haspelmath (2008:25-27)➤ standard and interrogative disjunction for the simple and the choice-aimed alternative, respectively (see discussion on terminology in Mauri2008a).

Different ORs, different sets


1Certain languages show specific connectives depending on theEXHAUSTIVITY of the set3

Ø In non-exhaustive sets, the distinction between conjunction anddisjunction is inmany cases neutralized!

Ø Non-exhaustiveconnectivesleadtoanexemplificationfunction

Haspelmath (2007: 24): ‘representative conjunction’.According to him, in these cases “the conjuncts are taken as representativeexamples of a potentially larger class”.

Stassen (2000: 5): ‘enumerative coordinators’. The label ‘non-exhaustive’ iswell established in the literature on East Asian languages (Chino2001,Zhang 2008).



112)Japanese(Barotto 2016)

a.Exhaustive alternative(ka)

Kōho-wa Ohashi-ka Taniguchi to omotteiru.Candidate-TOP Ohashi-KA Taniguchi QT think:STA“(we)arethinking aboutOhashi orTaniguchiasacadidate.”

b.Non-exhaustivealternative(ya +nado) - EXEMPLIFICATION

Papurika-o pīman-ya asuparagasu nado ni kaeru to,paprika-ACC bellpepper-YA asparagus NADO DAT change if,samazamana arenji-ga kanō.varied arrangement-NOM possible“ifyoureplacepaprikawiththingslikeasparagusorbellpepper,avarietyofarrangementsispossible.”à *-ka



113)Japanese(Chino2001:41)

a.Non-exhaustiveconjunction(ya +nado) - EXEMPLIFICATION

Watashi noheya ni wa,[konpyūtā ya sutereo ga] oite arimasu.IDET roominTOP computerandstereoSBJ place-SUSP be-POL.NPST‘Inmyroomthereisacomputer,astereoAND OTHER SIMILAR THINGS.’à *-to

b.Non-exhaustivealternatives(-tari)- EXEMPLIFICATION

Nichiyōbi wa taitei tomodachi to tenisu [oshi-tari eiga omi ni it-tari]SundayTOP usuallyfriend withtennisOBJ do-tari filmOBJ seetogo-tarishimasudo.POL.NPST‘OnSundaysIusuallyplaytenniswithmyfriendsorgotoseemovies,OR SOMETHINGSIMILAR.’ à *-ka



114)Italian(NUNCCorpus)

c'e' il vantaggio che ti puoi customizzare lathere.is DEF advantagethatCLIT can.2SG customize DEF

macchina come vuoi, inrelazione alle tue esigenzemachineas want.2SG in relationto.DEF your.PL need.PL

(grafica, piuttosto che sviluppo, piuttosto che giochi…)graphicspiuttosto che development piuttosto che games

‘[talkingaboutdesktop]thereistheadvantagethatyoumaycustomizethemachine(pc)asyouprefer,depending onyourneeds(graphics,development,videogamesORSIMILAR THINGS…’)NON-EXHAUSTIVESETOFALTERNATIVES

Synchronic analysis


1

Summing up…

I. There are languageswithout an overt OR

II. In languages lacking an overt OR, the use of irrealis markers is obligatory, inorder to convey alternative, and this confirms the close connection betweendisjunction and the non-factuality domain

III. We findmany languages havingmore than one OR

IV. The distribution of different ORs is not accounted for by the distinctionbetween inclusive vs. exclusive, but rather by the need for a choice (directand indirect interrogative) and the (non-)exhaustivity of the set.

Diachronic analysis


1

Someoftheconnectives attested arevery recent,orontheirwaytogrammaticalization…

Diachronic analysis


1 Where dothey comefrom?


Diachronic analysis


1

Asetofrecurrentsourcesfordisjunctivemarkerscanbeidentified:

(1) dubitative/hypothetical>alternative(2) negatedhypothesis>alternative(3) negation>alternative(4) polarquestion>choice-aimedalternative(5) freechoiceverbs>alternative(6) distalmeaning‘that/other’>alternative

Where dothey comefrom?


Dubitative/hypothetical >disjunctive


1

15) Kuuk Thaayorre (Pama-Nyungan,Gaby2006:323-324)Thedubitativeparticleisregularlyused toconveyalternativeandison thewaytoacquiring thefunctionalpropertiesofconnectives.

a)yup=okun ngay yan Waar.Paant-aksoon=DUB 1sg.NOM go:NPST place.name-DAT‘maybe later I’ll goouttoWaar-Paant’

b)ngul=okun kunk=okun pul watp=okun pulthen=DUB alive= DUB 3du.NOM dead= DUB 3du.NOM‘(Idon’t knowwhether)theytwoarealiveordead.’

c)nhunt wanthanngun nhiinan, Cairns=okun, Melbourne=okun2sg. NOM where.LOC sit:GO:NPST Cairns= DUB Melbourne= DUB‘whereareyougoing tolive,CairnsorMelbourne?’

Negatedhypothesis >disjunction


116)Hakha Lai,Tibeto-Burman (Peterson andVanBik 2004:339)-làw-leè <negation -làw andtheancient conditional suffix -leè.

Atpresent,Hakha Laiuses anewform fortheconditional construction, andthis quitecomplicated wayofexpressing analternativerelationis on thewaytogrammaticalization as adisjunctive connective.

làwthlawpaa falaám ˀa-kal-làw-leè haàkhaà-ˀaˀ ˀa-ˀùmfarmer Falam 3sg.SBJ-go-NEG-COND Hakha-LOC 3sg.SBJ-exist‘Thefarmer goes toFalam orhestays inHakha.’(lit.‘Thefarmer, if hedoesn’t gotoFalam,hestays inHakha’)

Negatedhypothesis >disjunction


117)Cavineña (Tacanan,Guillaume2004:114)

‘Disjunction inCavineña is normally realised bythewordjadyaamajuatsu ‘or’which comesfromthelexicalisation ofthesamesubjecttemporalclausejadya=ama ju-atsu ‘thus=NEGbe-SS’(lit.beingnotthus).Itmaybeshortened tojadyamajuatsu, jadyamaatsu orevenamaatsu.’

Tuekedya =pa ekanaS tere-ya kwejipa=eke jadyaamajuatsu e-tiki=ekethen =REP 3PL finish-IMPFV strong.wind=PERL or NPF-fire=PERL‘(When theworldwas new,our ancestors)would die(lit.finish) fromthestrongwinds orfromthefire.’

Negation >disjunction


118)Galo(Post2008:312-13,789)

‘máa‘DSJ’ishomophonous withtheCopulanegator/Negative interjectionmáa‘NEG’,andprobablyderivesfromthelatterhistorically’(2008:312).‘InthemainaNegativepolarityparticle,andbasicallyhomophonous withtheNegativepolaritypredicatesuffix -máa(§4659H12.2)andtheNegativeinterjectionmáa~máʔ‘no’, indisjunctive functionmáamarksapolar(closed)alternationbetweentwocoordinated interrogativeclauses(2008:789).Thetwofunctionsaresynchronicallydistinct(2008:312).

rəkênjâarədɨɨmá(…)rənêkjaarə̀d~ɨ̀.[rə́-kèn-jàa-rə́ dɨɨ]=máa [rə́-nèk-jàa-rə́ dɨɨ]live/exist-good/east-more-IRRWOND=DISJ live/exist-bad-more-IRRWOND‘Will(lifeinthefuture)bebetteror(…)willitbeworse?’

Negation >disjunction


1(19)Nakanai,(Austronesian, EasternMalayo-Polynesian,Oceanic,Johnston1980:239)

‘Thedisjunct coordinator is(ou)ka 'or'(literally'no').Itindicatestheoptionofanegativeconditionalpresuposition PossiblyX;NO,thenY.Initsconnectivefunction, itmostoftenappearsshortened toka andisdeveloping thefunctionalanddistributionalcharacterofaconjunction.’

a)Egite la ilali ouka.they NM food no'They had nofood.'

b)Eme masaga ale nabatu, ka (eme masaga) alenabauan?You.sg like that number.two or you.sg like that number.one‘Doyoulikethesecondorthefirstone?’

c)Egite vei-a ge va-ubibi le amutou, ka ouka?they say-3ps IRR REC-shoot ABL you.pl or no‘Didtheyintendtofightagainstyou,ornot?’

Polar question >disjunction


1(20)Polishtheinterrogativemarkerczy wasoriginally theinstrumentalformofCommonSlavic*ch’to ‘what’>Cz.Pol.czy,Bel.ci

a. Czy pan dużo podróżuje?Q you much travel‘Doyoutravelalot?’

b. Idziemy jutro doszkoły czy zostajemy w domu?go.PRS.1pltomorrow toschool ALTNc stay.PRS.1plat home‘Dowegotoschool tomorrowordowestayathome?’

Polar question >disjunction


121)Golin (Trans-NewGuinea,Chimbu,Evans2005:127,48)

Insingle-clausepolarquestionssuchas(c),asecondclauseisabsent,though probablyimplied.

a.Dibe kare-ne-ra-bin mo bisnis erene-ra- binmo gaanboatsee-eat-IRR-IPL DISJ business (TP) doeat-IRR-1PL DISJchildsule di-ra-n-g-w-aschool(TP) be-IRR-3-AS-3-DIST‘(We)arewastingourtimebuyingcarsormakingbusinessor(sending) ourkidstoschool…’

b. u-ra-n-mo u-k-ra-n?come-IRR-2-PQ come-NEG-IRR-2‘Areyougoing tocomeornot?’

c. i nibil pa-n-mo?2SG sickness be-2-PQ‘Doyouhaveadisease?’

choice-aimed alternative > polar question marker(Heine & Kuteva 2002: 226-227)

Other sources


1ü Freechoice verbsLat.vel ‘want’>‘simple or’,Fr.soit…soit ‘beit’>‘either …or’

ü Distal ‘that/other’Dan.Nor.Swe.eller ‘or’<Proto-Germanic*alja-,*aljis- ‘other’(FalkandTorp1910:187);I.E.*au- ‘other,that’>Lat.aut(*auti)‘or’,autem ‘but’>It.Sp.Cat.o,Fr.Port.ou;


Semantic domains ofthediachronic sources


1 Potentiality,irrealis OR

Maybe X,maybe Ydubitative,hypotheticals

X?Y?polar questions



1 Mutualreplaceability

X,noYXno,Ynegation

IfnotX,YX,ifnot,Ynegatedhypothesis

OR


X?Y?polar questions


Potentiality,irrealis




Otherness,separateness

X,noYXno,Ynegation

IfnotX,YX,ifnot,Ynegatedhypothesis

X,otherYdistal/other

OR


X?Y?polar questions


Semantic components ofthenotion ofalternative




Ingredients forALTERNATIVITY?


Conclusions:inside,beside, beyond disjunction


What may cross-linguistic variation tell us?




1. Is alternative itself a basic notion that languages always expressovertly?





NO



1

DisjunctionStrategies employedwhen anORconnective is lacking






NO

2. The exclusive vs. inclusive dichotomy does not account for theattested variation. Are there other semantic distinctions to which theexpression of alternative is sensitive?





NO


YES



1

Strategies employedwhen anORconnective is lacking

Semantic distinctions encodedbyORconnectives

Disjunction

Choice

Exhaustivity






NO


YES

3. Is there aclosed setofrecurrent diachronic sources fordisjunction?





NO


YES

3. Is there aclosed setofrecurrent diachronic sources fordisjunction?YES



1

Strategies employedwhen anORconnective is lacking

Diachronic sourcesforORconnectives

Semantic distinctions encodedbyORconnectives

Mutualreplaceability


Choice

Exhaustivity

DisjunctionPotentiality,irrealis



1

Mutualreplaceability


Choice

Exhaustivity

Disjunction

Functionaldimensionstowhichspeakersaresensitiveinverbalizingthenotion ofalternative


Prospects forfutureresearch

Ø Towards aconverging,integrated evidence


ü Corpus-based evidenceDothefunctional domains identifiedplayarole inconstrainingtheuseofdisjunction indiscourse?



ü Corpus-based evidenceDothefunctional domains identifiedplayarole inconstrainingtheuseofdisjunction indiscourse?

ü PsycholinguisticevidenceDothefunctional domains identifiedplayarole intheprocessingandacquisition ofdisjunction?



Thank you!

Abbreviations


A=agent;ABL=ablative;ACC=accusative;ALTNc=choice-aimed

disjunction;ALTNs=simplealternative;AS=assertion;CJEC=conjectural;COND=condictional;DAT=dative;DEM=demonstrative;DISJ=disjunctivemarker;du=dual;DIST=distal;DUB=dubitative;DYNM=dynamic;FOC=focus;

FUT=future;GEN=genitive;HDST=hyperdistal;IND=individuator;INT=interrogative;INFR=inferential

evidential;IRR=irrealis;LOC=locative;M=masculine;NEG=negative;NM=nounmarker;NOM=nominative;NPF=(dummy) nounprefix;NPST=nonpast;pc=pastcompletive;PERL=perlative;

PERMISS=permissive;PL=plural;POL=polite;PRS=present;PST=past;TOP=topic;Q=question;QUOT=quotative;REC=reciprocal;REP=reportative;SBJ=subject;SG=singular;SLEV=sametopographiclevel;WOND=wonder;

References


Asher,RonaldE.andT.C.Kumari (1997).Malayalam.London-NewYork:RoutledgeBarotto,Alessandra.Categorizationandexemplification:thecaseofJapanese.PhDThesis,Bergamo.Chierchia,G.,Crain,S.,Guasti,M.T.,Gualmini.A.,&Meroni,L.(2001).Theacquisitionofdisjunction:Evidenceforagrammaticalviewofscalarimplicatures.Proceedingsofthe25thBoston UniversityConferenceonLanguageDevelopment(pp.157-168).Somerville,MA:Cascadilla Press.Crain,Stephen(2008).Theinterpretationofdisjunctioninuniversalgrammar.LanguageandSpeech51/1-2:151-169.Dik,Simon(1997).TheTheory ofFunctional Grammar.PartI:thestructure oftheclause.ed.Kees Hengeveld.Berlin andNewYork:Mouton deGruyter.(2ndrevised version).Elliot,JenniferR.(2000).Realis andirrealis:formsandconceptsofthegrammaticalisationofreality.LinguisticTypology 4-1,55–90.Epps,Patience.(2005).AGrammarofHup.PhDThesis.UniversityofVirginia.

References


Evans,Nicholasetal.(2005).MaterialsonGolin:grammar,textsanddictionary.DepartmentofLinguisticsandAppliedLinguistics.TheUniversityofMelbourne.Everett,DanandBarbaraKern (1997).Warì.Descriptive Grammars.London:Routledge.Gaby,Rose.(2006).AGrammarofKuuk Thaayorre.PhDThesis,Univeristy ofMelbourne.Geurts,Bart.(2004).Entertainingalternatives:Disjunctionsasmodals:Ms.UniversityofNijmegen.http://www.kun.nl/phil/tfl/bart/.Grice,H.P.,1975,Logicandconversation.InSyntaxandsemantics 3:Speechacts,P.Cole(Ed).AcademicPress,NewYork,pp.41-58.Guilaume,Antoine.(2004).AGrammarofCavineña,anAmazonianLanguageofNorthernBolivia.PhDThesis.RCLT,LaTrobeUniversity.Haspelmath,Martin(2008).Coordination.InTimothyShopen,(ed.),Languagetypology andlinguistic description,pp.1-51.Cambridge:CUP,2ndedition.

References


Heine,B.&Kuteva,T.(2002).WorldLexiconofGrammaticalization.Cambridge:CUP.Horn,L.(1996).Presuppositionandimplicature.InS.Lappin (Ed.),Handbookofcontemporarysemantictheory,pp.299-319.Oxford:Backwell.Johnston,RaymondLeslie.(1980)Nakanai ofNewBritain:ThegrammarofanOceaniclanguage. PacificLinguistics:SeriesB-70.Kibrik,AndrejA.(2004).CoordinationinUpperKuskokwimAthabaskan.InMartinHaspelmath,(ed.),Coordinatingconstrunctions,pp.537–554.Amsterdam;Philadelphia:JohnBenjamins.Kinball,GeoffreyDavid.1985.AdescriptivegrammarofKoasati.TulaneUniversity.Mauri,Caterina (2008a).Theirreality ofalternatives:towardsatypologyofdisjunction.StudiesinLanguage 32/1:22- 55.Mauri,Caterina (2008b)Coordination RelationsintheLanguages ofEuropeandBeyond.Berlin,NewYork:MoutondeGruyter.

References


Ohori,Toshio (2004).Coordination inMentalese.InMartinHaspelmath,(ed.),Coordinating constructions,pp.41–66.Amsterdam:JohnBenjamins.Pandharipande,Rajeshwari.(1997).Marathi.London,NewYork:Routledge.Payne,John.(1985).Complexphrasesandcomplexsentences.InTimothyShopen (ed),ComplexConstructions,vol.IIofLanguageTypologyandsyntacticdescription,pp.3-41.Cambridge:CUP.Peterson,DavidA.andKennethVanBik.(2004).Coordination inHakha Lai(Tibeto-Burman).InMartinHaspelmath,(ed.),Coordinating construnctions,pp.333–354.Amsterdam;Philadelphia:JohnBenjamins.Post,Mark.(2008).AGrammarofGalo.PhDThesis.RCLT,LaTrobeUniversity.Press,MargaretLauritsen.(1975).AGrammarofChemehuevi.Phd Thesis.UniversityofClaifornia,LA.Saeed,JohnIbrahim(1993)Somalireference grammar (Secondrevisededition).Kensington:DunwoodyPress.

References


Siemund,Interrogativeconstructions.In:M.Haspelmath andE.Koenigetal.,Editors,LanguageTypologyandLanguageUniversals—AnInternationalHandbook vol.2,WalterdeGruyter,Berlin(2001),pp.1010–1028.Sohn,Ho-Min (1994).Korean.London,NewYork:Routledge.Wilkins,DavidP.(1989).Mparntwe Arrernte (Aranda):StudiesintheStructureandSemanticsofGrammar. PhDThesis.AustralianNationalUniversity.Zimmermann,ThomasE.(2001).Freechoicedisjunctionandepistemicpossibility.NaturalLanguageSemantics8,255–290.

how basic is the notion of alternative? a diachronic typology ......disjunction days - berlin, 2-3...

Documents