on the grmlz of nmlz marker - rice universityhj3/pub/lsa2011_pittsburgh.pdf · on the grmlz of nmlz...

1

On the GRMLZ of NMLZ marker On the GRMLZ of NMLZ marker ==ayay in Kavalan and Amis: in Kavalan and Amis:

a contrastive studya contrastive study

Haowen JiangRice University

[email protected]

2

OutlineOutline

1. Introduction2. Shared functions of =ay3. Evidence for the GRMLZ route 4. Contrastive development of =ay5. Conclusion

3

OutlineOutline

1. IntroductionNMLZ; AN Focus; Issue & Aims

2. Shared functions of =ay3. Evidence for the GRMLZ route 4. Contrastive development of =ay5. Conclusion

4

1.1 What is NMLZ?1.1 What is NMLZ?

“Creation of constructions that are associated with a denotation comprised of entity concepts characterized in terms of a state-of-affairs in which the relevant concept has crucial relevance. [Nominalizations] are similar to nouns by virtue of their having an entity-concept denotation.” (Shibatani 2010)

5

NMLZsNMLZs

referring use of arg. NMLZ

restricting use of arg. NMLZ

relational NMLZ

referring use of event NMLZ

6

1.2 Reference vs. Denotation1.2 Reference vs. Denotation

• reference: relationship between an expression and a possible-world referent in a particular context

• denotation: relationship between an expression and a set of referents to which that expression can successfully refer under all circumstances (Lyons 1995)

7

NMLZsNMLZs

referring use of arg. NMLZ

restricting use of arg. NMLZ

relational NMLZ

eventNMLZ

8

1.3 Focus in AN1.3 Focus in AN

• Focus (voice): a set of affixes on the verb that are indicative of the participant role of a syntactically privileged argument (called pivot)

• Focus in Proto-AN (e.g. Ross 2002)Actor Focus (AF): *<um> Patient Focus (PF): *-enLocative Focus (LF): *-anConveyance Focus (CF): *Si-

9

An exampleAn example

(5) Tagalog (Kaufman 2009: 3)

10

1.4 The issue1.4 The issue

• AN: No morphological distinction between a verb and a nominalized expression based on that verb

(6) Atayal (Shibatani 2009: 170)

11

1.4 The issue1.4 The issue

Distinction made by =ay in Kavalan (CKV) and Amis (AMI)

12

AimsAims

• To investigate the various functions of =ay in Kavalan and Amis, whether the morpheme denotes entity concepts or not

• To argue and give evidence for the shared GRMLZ route that both Kavalan and Amis =ay might have taken

• To illustrate the contrastive development that Kavalan and Amis =ay each undergoes

13

OutlineOutline

1. Introduction2. Shared functions of =ay

Entity-denotingNon-entity-denoting

3. Evidence for the GRMLZ route 4. Contrastive development of =ay5. Conclusion

14

2.1 Entity2.1 Entity--denoting denoting

2.1.1 Referring vs. restricting use of arg. NMLZ

15

2.1 Entity2.1 Entity--denoting denoting

2.1.2 Types of elements marked by =ay

16

2.1 Entity2.1 Entity--denotingdenoting

17


18

2.2 N2.2 N--EntityEntity--denoting denoting

2.2.1 Emphatic pragmatic force

19


2.2.2 Anterior/perfective overtone

20


“Default” anterior/perfective interpretation can be overridden by future temporal adverbials.

21

OutlineOutline

1. Introduction2. Shared functions of =ay3. Evidence for the GRMLZ route

E-denoting N-E-denoting3 pieces of evidence

4. Contrastive development of =ay5. Conclusion

22

3.1 Typology 3.1 Typology

From dependent to independent structures

23

3.1 Typology 3.1 Typology

From entity-denoting to stance-taking

24

3.2 Reconstruction3.2 Reconstruction

• Proto-Malayo-Polynesian attributive ligature: *na or *=n/ V___; *=a/ C__ (Reid forthcoming)• In some Philippine languages, reflex of this

PMP ligature is always =a.

25


• In D. Agta, the fusion of the ligature =a and a demonstrative is cliticized to a nominal and a verbal alike

26


• Kavalan and Amis might have undergone a similar development, whereby the fusion of the ligature and a following element gave rise to the NMLZ function of =ay, i.e. from “that V-ing one” to “the one who V-s”.

• Amis still uses the ligature a productively in various attributive constructions while Kavalan preserves it in limited contexts (e.g. sunis=a zau/yau ‘this/that child’).

27

3.3 Bridging contexts3.3 Bridging contexts

28

OutlineOutline

1. Introduction2. Shared functions of =ay3. Evidence for the GRMLZ route4. Contrastive development of =ay

CKV more GRMLZed i.t.o. E-denotingAMI more GRMLZed i.t.o. N-E-denoting

5. Conclusion

29


• In terms of E-denoting functions, Kavalan =ay seems to be more GRMLZed than Amis =ay because the former is permitted to

(i) collocate with more verbal classes (ii) cliticize on constituents of larger unit

30


=ay required in AF verbs and ma-verbs

31


• NAF verbs do not require extra marking save for Focus morphology.

32


• However, Kavalan does allow the presence of =ay with NAF verbs whereas Amis prohibits it.

33


• Kavalan =ay cliticizes on both the verb and the verbal phrase whereas Amis =ay does not have the latter alternative.

34

4.2 N4.2 N--EntityEntity--denotingdenoting

In terms of N-E-denoting functions, Amis =ay seems to be more GRMLZed than Kavalan =ay.

35

4.2 N4.2 N--EntityEntity--denotingdenoting

36

OutlineOutline

1. Introduction2. Shared functions of =ay3. Evidence for the GRMLZ route 4. Contrastive development of =ay5. Conclusion

37

5. Conclusion5. Conclusion

• Although AN languages in general do not require overt NMLZ marking save for Focus morphology, the marker =ay in both Kavalan and Amis is emerging to function like an NMLZ marker, in the referring and restricting use of arg. NMLZ. However, it is not yet a full-fledged NMLZer since not all verbal classes (i.e. Focus types) require it for arg. NMLZ.

38


• The marker =ay illustrates two major types of functions: E-denoting and N-E-denoting. For the E-denoting function, a verb cliticizedby =ay denotes the pivot arg. in the arg. structure of that verb, whose participant role can be actor/agent or patient/undergoer, depending on verb classes. For the N-E-denoting function, the marker =ay adds emphatic or anterior/perfective implications to the predication.

39


• It is argued that the N-E-denoting function is related to, or even the GRMLZ of, the E-denoting function. Supporting pieces of evidence are drawn from typological generalizations, historical reconstructions, and synchronic overlapping of the two types of functions.

40


• Once the link between the two types of functions is established, we might as well think of N-E-denoting =ay as an epis. mod. maker that conveys the speaker’s strong commitment to a proposition.Its emphatic reading is then a natural result of higher degree of speaker’s commitment. And its anterior/perfective reading is most likely arrived at through pragmatic inferences based on presuppositions that are often associated with NMLZs. Thus, we have the advantage of conceptualizing =ay as the nexus of NMLZ and evid./epis., the connection of which is crosslinguistically attested (e.g. Aikhenvald 2004).

41


• While Kavalan =ay is more GRMLZed i.t.o. NMLZ, Amis =ay is more GRMLZed i.t.o. evidentiality/epistemicity. This suggests languages that share the same source and target domain in a GRMLZ process may end up developing different degrees of GRMLZ in different domains.

42

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements

• Scholars: Masayoshi Shibatani, Lawrence A. Reid, F. H. Yap, Hsiuhsu Lin, and Dong-yiLin

• Consultants: Abas, Buya, and Ipay• Institute: Rice Linguistics Department

43Thank y’all!

Thank y’all!Questions

and/or comments?

on the grmlz of nmlz marker - rice universityhj3/pub/lsa2011_pittsburgh.pdf · on the grmlz of nmlz...

Documents