Upload
dominic-lambert
View
223
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Andrej A. Kibrik(Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences)
Basics of referential systems: Sorting things out
DAARC2009 ConferenceGoa, India, 2009
2
Familiar facts: ‘he plays/played’
Zero Japanese Ø asonda
Free pronoun English he played
Free pronoun ~ zero
Mandarin tā~Ø zà wánshuă ne
Bound pronoun
Spoken French
i-žu (graphic il joue)
Agreement Latin lūd-it
Free pronoun plus agreement
English (present)
he play-s
Free pronoun ~ zero plus agreement
Russian on~Ø igra-et
3
Relevant questions What performs the discourse act of reference in each
case? What kinds of referential devices are found across
languages? What typological parameters are necessary and
sufficient to account for the observed diversity? How can one put languages’ referential systems on
equal footing? Is agreement really different from reference? How many times can one referent be referred to in
one clause? (in particular, when there is a full NP and a reduced (pronominal) device in the same clause)
What shall we do about differences between various clause participant positions?
4
How can one approach these questions?
There are many contradictory and partial accounts of referential phenomena (cf. notions such as “argument type parameter”, “pro-drop”, etc.), and there is a need for a general, integrated account
This observed mosaic picture calls for organization and systematization
One should always bear in mind that all referential devices only exist for actual reference in discourse, performed in real time
5
Plan of talk
This paper is a part of a typological study based on the material of 200 languages
I outline three main parameters of this typology
Then I provide characterization of some of the world’s major languages in terms of this typology
This is useful for cross-linguistic comparison, but it is also essential for understanding individual languages: one can appreciate the peculiarities of a given system only through knowing its position in a typological space
6
Parameter 1: Basic types of referential devices
Full vs. reduced Three basic types of reduced
referential devices (refs) Free pronouns Bound pronouns Zero refs
This talk: mostly third person reference
Overt refs
7
Zero refs Yidiny (Australia; Dixon 1977: 514) Ø gali:ɲ/ Ø wawa:liɲu/ bama ŋabi ɲinaɲunda/
go.past look.going.past person.abs many.abs sit.dat.subord
<...>
Ø Ø wawa:liɲu/look.going.past
bama:l Ø wawa:l/person.erg see.past
‘They went, went and saw lots of people sitting there <…> They went up and looked at them. The people saw them.’
8
Free pronouns
Lyélé (Burkina Faso; Showalter 1986: 211) e zɛ�y e k’ e kwè e la
he arisehe again he take heleave
e vò e pyà gɔ libi jaa-esho
he go he search bushpeople place ‘He went back and looked for the place where
the bush people lived’
9
Bound (affixal) pronouns
Abkhaz (South-Western Caucasus) i-rə-l-tejt’
it-them-she-gave‘She gave it to them’
10
Three basic refs
Bound pronouns are by far the most frequent ref cross-linguistically
Free pronouns are the least frequent ref
Some languages are firmly committed to one type of ref, while other are less consistent
11
WALS composer: Dryer and Siewierska
Consistent languages: free, bound, zero
Gur Abkhaz Yidiny
12
Parameter 2: Tenacious vs. recessive pronouns
Abkhaz (South-Western Caucasus) i-rə-l-tejt’
it-them-she-gave‘She gave it to them’
i-č’kº’əncºa d-rə-pxyan
his-sons he-them-called‘He called his sons’
13
Tenacious vs. recessive pronouns
Recessive pronouns: a complementary distribution with coreferential NPs in the same clause Example: English
Tenacious pronouns: cooccur with coreferential NPs in the same clause Example: Abkhaz
Recessiveness correlates with freeness Tenacity correlates with boundness However…
14
Free tenacious pronouns
Spanish “clitic doubling” Comajoan 2006:73
y la chica pues le da-ø le quita-øand the girl then 3sg.dathit-pres.3sg 3sg.datseize-
pres.3sg
al chico al niño el sombreroto.the boy to.the boy the hat
‘And the girl then takes the hat from the boy …’
15
Free tenacious pronouns
Bilua (a Papuan language of Solomon islands; Obata 2003:115, 30)
Omadeu taku sike tamania ke=beta e=ke.one time five brother&sister 3pl.nom=cont stay-hist‘Once upon a time, there were five brothers and sisters living.
Sai vo=a ziolothere 3sg.m.nom=lig devil
ke=papue=v=e jari topi.3pl.nom=sit=3sg.m.acc=rmp copra.house on.top‘There, they sat the devil on the copra house.’
16
Bound recessive pronouns
Upper Kuskokwim (Alaska)
yi-ne-łŒanh3.acc-pref-(3.nom)look‘S/he is looking at it/him/her’
gugaŒ ne-łŒanhbaby pref-(3.nom)look‘S/he is looking at the baby’
17
Both free tenacious and bound recessive pronouns
South Efate (Austronesian, Vanuatu; Thieberger 2006: 269, 113-114)
Ra=pitlak tesa nmatu iskei.3du.real.nom=have child girl one‘They had a daughter.’
I=skot-i-r to.3sg.real.nom=be.with-trans-3pl.acc stay ‘She stayed with them.’
Ale, ntuam i=na i=to <…>then devil 3sg.real.nom=want 3sg.real.nom=stay‘Then the devil stayed <…>’
18
Boundness and tenacity The parameters “free vs. bound” and
“recessive vs. tenacious” are in fact independent
Frequency cline: bound tenacious
V free recessive
V free tenacious
V bound recessive
19
Tenacity and argumenthood
i-č’kº’əncºa d-rə-pxyan
his-sons he-them-called‘He called his sons’
Kibrik 1988 Mithun 2003 Siewierska
2004 Corbett 2006 Distributed
argumenthood
20
Parameter 3: Sensitivities
Consistent languages Zero reference - Yidiny Free recessive pronouns - Lyélé Bound tenacious pronouns – Abkhaz
Inconsistencies/sensitivities: Clause participant position Construction type Referent’s level of activation Referent’s definiteness, specificity, etc.
various degrees of consistency in a language’s commitment to a certain referential device – some languages use a variety of devices whose heterogeneity may be very high
21
Sensitivity A: Clause participant position
Latin Subject: bound tenacious pronouns Object: free recessive pronouns
Gela (Oceanic Austronesian, Solomon Islands, Crowley 2002) Subject: free tenacious Object: bound tenacious
…most other combinations attested as well…
22
Latin “agreement”
Bound tenacious pronouns (just as in Abkhaz), but only in the subject position
Quintus Horatius Flaccus, Satires, Book 1, Chapter 5c = Cicirrus, s = Sarmentus
rogaba-t denique cur umquamfugisse-t,ask.impf-3sg finally why sometime flee.plpf.conj-3sg
cui satis una farr-is libra fore-t,who.dat enough one grain-gen.sg poundbe.impf.conj-3sg
‘Finally he (Cicirrus) asked why he (Sormentus) had ever fled,
he to whom one pound of grain would have been enough ’
23
Abkhaz vs. Latin
How are the Abkhaz and the Latin patterns different?
Both use bound pronouns The only difference is in sensitivity:
Abkhaz: all pronouns are bound and tenacious pronouns are insensitive
Latin: pronouns are bound and tenacious only in the subject pronouns there is an important sensitivity along the lines of clause participant position
24
Sensitivity B: Referent’s level of activation
In Mandarin, zero and free pronoun tā occur with comparable frequency
Interpreting available analyses (Hedberg 1996, Li and Thompson 1979, Giora 1996, Chu 1998, Pu 2001, inter alia) it appears that zero is used at the highest level of referent activation, while the third person pronouns at a somewhat lowered level.
25
What all this is good for?
For profiling individual languages’ referential systems
After profiles of a significant number of languages is available, for the construction of a fully-fledged typology of referential systems
For an individual language, details of its referential system must be assessed against the background of the basic characterization
26
Profiles of several of the world’s major languages
Language Primary ref Presence and kind of sensitivity
English FRP –
Spanish BTP; FTP Clause participant position: subject; object
French BTP; BRP Referential properties: definite; indefinite
Russian BTP;FRP+BTP;FRP
Clause participant position and degree of activation: maximally activated subject; activated subject; object
Japanese Zero –
Mandarin Zero; FRP Degree of activation: higher; lower
27
Focus on English
Primary ref: free pronoun Free pronouns are recessive Are agreement markers refs?
No They are cross-linguistically highly exotic They very rarely appear as the sole bearers of
referents’ properties in a clause They must be recognized as truly automatic,
non-referential agreement affixes
Sensitivities
28
Clause participant position + construction type
English: High degree of propensity to free
pronouns However, free pronouns yield to zero
reference in some special contexts, in particular:
subject position of non-first coordinate clauses
29
English zero subject
Al Gore is truth. Think about it. He says what needs to be said without fear, without posturing. He leads. (paragraph) He succeeds in the worlds of politics, business, and diplomacy. He reads and Ø writes history. He has access to the smartest people on the planet.
30
Focus on Hindi
A highly complex system All major types of refs are found: free pronouns,
bound pronouns (agreement), and zero Primary ref: free pronouns Secondary ref: bound pronouns (agreement)
operating on the ergative basis Bound pronouns are tenacious: they cooccur
with additional referential devices, either free pronouns or full NPs
Sensitivity: free pronouns yield to zero under certain discourse circumstances
31
Hindi free pronouns and agreement (= bound pronouns?)
vah jaa rahaahai3Sg(Nom) go be.Prog.3SgM‘He is going’
us-ne kitaab paRhii3Sg-Erg book(NomF)read.Perf.3SgF‘She read the book’
(Prasad 2003: 75-76)
32
Hindi zero reference
fanTuush-ne aadmiyoN-kaa gussaa saaman-par utaaraaFantush-Erg men-of anger furniture-on took.down‘Fantush took out his anger with the men on the furniture’
Ø vahaaN kii sab kursiyaaN toR daaliiNthere of all chairs(NomF) break.Inf put.Perf.3PlF
‘He broke all the chairs there’
(Prasad 2003: 92)
33
Hindi sensitivity
Prasad (2003: 101) formulates the basis for the choice of zero over a third person pronoun in terms of Centering Theory, and her formulation can be reinterpreted as follows:
Zero is used under highest referent activation, third person pronoun is used under intermediate activation
34
On a sad note
In this domain – one of the worst misnomers in linguistics,
picked up by linguists of various theoretical views with a surprising ease
Pro-drop
35
Which languages are pro-drop?
Those that use zero reference, such as Yidiny or Japanese
Those that use insensitive bound pronouns, such as Abkhaz
Those that use bound pronouns, sensitive to clause participant position, such as Latin
Those that use sensitive free pronouns, such as Mandarin or Russian
In other words, all unEnglish languages
36
The parameter of Englishness
Siewierska and Bakker 2005 A sample of 428 languages 96.2% of languages are “pro-drop”
This “parameter” completely fails to account for the diversity of unEnglish languages
Plea: DROP PRO-DROP!
37
Conclusion: framework for a description of a language’s referential system
Preferred type of ref: zero vs. free pronoun vs. bound pronoun
Pronouns: recessive vs. tenacious Sensitivities:
Whether the language is consistent or not
What bases for sensitivities are attested What options are used depending on
sensitivities