FS 2016 Class 2: Inflectional morphology - UZHbaec8995-26c8-48c2-8399... · Inflectional morphology Hasan öküz-ü aldi Hasan ox-ACC bought ‘Hasan bought the ox.’ The farmer

Linguistic typology

FS 2016

Class 2: Inflectional morphology

Formulate research question

Decide what and how to

measure

Collect data

Summarize data Analyze

data

Interpret results

1

2

3

4

5

6

Report results

7

Comparability and variables

The research cycle

Derivation Inflection

Provides new

lexemes

Provides forms

of lexemes

Lexicon Morphosyntax

Inflectional morphology

Derivation Inflection

Provides new

lexemes

Provides forms

of lexemes

Lexicon Morphosyntax


1. Nature of meaning

2. Change of category

3. Regularity of meaning

4. Productivity

5. Position in the template

6. Obligatoriness

7. Relevance to syntax





4. Productivity


6. Obligatoriness



Relevance to syntax

Inflection is relevant to syntax, derivation is not.

Agreement: Some systematic covariation between a semantic or formal

property of one element and a formal property of another. Steele (1978: 610).

the system works

controller target

feature: number

value: singular

domain

Corbett 2008:5


Domain


Controller


Prototypically nominal, but some (partial) exceptions are possible; - clausal controllers [That he came] was surprising - No controllers piov-e ‘(it is) raining.' - Modifiers as controllers Corbett 2006: 37-39

Controller


Upper Sorbian moj-eho muž-ow-a sotr-a my-M.SG.GEN husband-POSS-F.SG.NOM sister(F)-SG.NOM ’my husband’s sister' Basáa (slightly simplified, A and B are different classes) mín-laŋgá mí dí-nuní míní /*tíní A-black A.CONN PL-bird(B) A.this/*B.this ‘these black birds' Corbett 2006: 37-39

Target


Common targets: Adjectives (and other modifiers) Verbs Adpositions Mai Brat [MAYBRAT], Dol (1999: 88), cited in Bakker (2013) t-ai m-kah ara 1SG-hit 3SG.N-with stick(N).SG ‘I hit with a stick.’

Target


Some less common targets: Adverbs (Archi) buwa-mu b-ez dita<b>u ��walli a<b>u mother(II)-ERG III-1SG.DAT early(III) bread(III)[ABS] made<IV> ‘Mother made bread for me early.' Complementizers (Flemish) k=peinzen dan=k (ik) morgen goan 1SG=think COMP=1SG (I) tomorrow go ’I think that I’ll go tomorrow.’ From Corbett 2006

Features & feature values


Number Person Gender Honorificity Definiteness? Case?

Kiwai [Kiwaian], Foley (1986: 130-131)

nimo-to-go nau nori n-omidia-duru-do we-dual-emph one sweet.potato 1-take(sg)-pres-dual.a ‘We two took one sweet potato.’

nigo-ibi-go go-otoboa-bi-ru-mo

you-trial-emph 2/3past-step-trial-past-pl.a ‘You three stepped.’







Swahili [Niger-Kordofanian, Bantu], Marten (2006: 306) vi-tabu vi-le vi-zuri cl.8-book cl.8-dem cl.8-beautiful ‘those beautiful books’










Dutch [Indo-European, Germanic] een mooi meisje het mooi-e meisje indef beautiful girl.dim[n] def beautiful-agr girl.dim[n] ‘a beautiful girl’ ’the beautiful girl'




Hungarian [Uralic] az-t a könyv-et kér-ed András egy könyv-et kér that-acc the book-acc want-def.3sg Andrew a book-acc want.indef.3sg ‘Do you want that book?’ ‘Andrew wants a book.’



Number Person Gender Honorificity Definiteness Case?

Russian [Indo-European, Slavic], Corbett (2006: 133) v nov-om avtomobil-e in new-m.loc car[m]-loc ‘in a new car’

Canonical agreement (in the sense of Corbett 2006): Based on a list of

principles and criteria mentioned in the literature


C-14 (domains): asymmetric > symmetric «If two items match for the same external reason, this is not canonical agreement. If one stands in a particular form because of the properties of the first, then this is potentially canonical agreement» (p. 19)

Agreement: what to count?


Baure [Arawak], Danielsen (2007: 176)

pi-am-ri wapoeri-ye pi-kowyoco ti monc i 2sg-take-3sg.f river-loc 2sg-bathe dem.f child

‘Take her to the river and bathe the child.’

Controller must be present - YES Controller may be present - YES “Controller” is in complementary distribution with person marker - YES

Relevance to syntax

Inflection is relevant to syntax, derivation is not.

Government (in a broad sense): the relation between a head and its

dependents.

Haspelmath & Sims 2010


Blake Case is a system of marking dependent nouns for the type of relationship they bear to their heads.

Included are: • Those dependents that are determined by the verb • Genitives (with N as their head) • Dependents of adpositions • Modifiers of the verb



Ingredients of a case-marking construction 1. Governor (or head) 2. Governee (or dependent) 3. Relationship between 1 and 2 4. Marker of that relationship,

morphosyntactically associated with the Governee (dependent)

Head

[Dependent

Relationship

Marker]


Typical heads or governors Verbs Adpositions Nouns

Verb

[Complement

Relationship

Marker]

Ich sehe dich [acc] Ich folge dir [dat]



Adposition

[Complement

Relationship

Marker]

mit, nach, bei, seit, von, zu, aus, ausser, gegenüber + Dativ



Noun

[Complement

Relationship

Marker]

Der Hund des Mannes




Head

[Dependent

Relationship

Marker]


Verb (e.g. ‘to hit’)

Someone who hits AGENT

Someone who is hit PATIENT

the agent and patient are arguments of the verb ‘to hit’

Devadatt-ena pac-ya-te odana-h Devadatta-INST cook-PASS-3SG rice-NOM ‘The rice has been cooked by Devadatta.’

Devadatta odana-m paca-ti Devadatta.NOM rice-ACC cook-3SG ‘Devadatta cooks the rice.’

From Blake (2008:19) The history of the research on case. Oxford Handbook of Case, Malchukov & Spencer (eds)


Semantic roles versus case: Sanskrit



Agent

Patient

Nominative

Accusative

Instrumental





Agent

Patient

Nominative

Accusative

Instrumental


Semantic role ≠ Syntactic role


Huánuco Quechua (Peru) Juan aywa-n Juan.NOM go-3 ‘Juan goes.’ Juan Pedro-ta maqa-n Juan.NOM Pedro-ACC hit-3 ‘Juan hits Pedro.’

Yup’ik (Alaska) Doris-aq ayallruuq Doris-ABS traveled ‘Doris traveled.’ Tom-am Doris-aq cingallrua Tom-ERG Doris-ABS greet ‘Tom greets Doris.’

Structural diversity

walk

hit

give

Agent (who walks)

Agent (who hits)

Patient (who is hit)

Agent (who gives)

Patient (which is given)

Recipient

In the library

At noon

With a stick


Core vs. periphery



(sëë) tütü-y

I sit.down-1sg.s

‘I sat down.’

(mëë) mi-bëjta-y (sëë)

you 2sg.o-see-1sg.s I

‘I saw you.’

Grammatical relations vs. case: Yurakaré


Hasan öküz-ü aldi Hasan ox-ACC bought ‘Hasan bought the ox.’

The farmer killed the duckling

lladdodd y ddraig y dyn

killed the dragon the man

‘The dragon killed the man.’

nahita ny mpianatra ny vehivavy

saw the student the woman

‘The woman saw the student

toto yahosiye kamara

man it-grabbed-him jaguar

‘The jaguar grabbed the man.’

Turks: SOV

Engels: SVO

Welsh: VSO

Malagasy: VOS

Hixkaryana: OVS

anana nota apa

pineapple I fetch

‘I fetch the pineapple.’

Apurinã: OSV




Head

[Dependent

Relationship

Marker]


Nouns or noun phrases.

Dependents/governees

Case on non-nouns

Ancient Greek Ho aneksetastos bios the.NOM.SG unexamined.NOM.SG life.NOM.SG ou biōtos anthrōpō not livable. NOM.SG man.DAT.SG ‘The unexamined life is not livable for man.'


Nouns or noun phrases.

Dependents/governees

Case on non-nouns

Yurakaré matata sibbe =chi big house=DIR ‘to the big house’ sibbe matata=chi house big=DIR ‘to the big house’


Marker

Typology of markers based on parameters (see in two weeks) Affixing (prefix, infix, suffix, circumfix) Cliticization Mutations of the stem (consonant, vowel mutation) Prosodic marking (tone, accent) Free marker


na:ge:ndra vis'ala:kSiyannu maduveya:danu. Nagendra Vishalakshi-acc marry-pst-3sm 'Nagendra married Vishalakshi.'

Kannada

na:raNappa maravannu kaDiyatodagida. Naranappa tree-acc cut-inf-begin-pst-3sm 'Naranappa began to cut the tree.'

Human

Definite

Conditions on marking


Case vs. adpositions

Looking for case markers in your grammar

Russian

ot=druga [addrugə] from=friend:gen.sg ‘from the/a friend’

s=drugom [zdrugəm]

with=friend:ins.sg ‘with the/a friend’

Bickel & Nichols (2007): 174

Lai Chin (Tibeto-Burman)

Tsew Máŋ niʔ ʔa-ka-thoʔŋ

Tsew Máŋ ERG 3SG.A-1SG.P-hit

ω ω ω ω

‘Tsew Mang hit me.’

Bickel & Nichols (2007), p. 173



Agreement versus case marking (Corbett 2006: 8)

Agreement Government

Feature specification of target/governee is determined by

Feature specification of controller

Presence of governor

controller/governor has the relevant feature specification

does not have the relevant feature specification

element which is normally nominal

Controller governee

Features involved direct features indirect feature

multiple targets/governees are

same as each other different from each other

Relevance to syntax

Predetermination

Consecutio temporum (predetermination)

I want to buy a car

He said that he wanted to buy a car


Spanish mood

se que Barcelona ha ganado know.1sg.pres.ind that Barcelona have.3sg.pres.ind won ‘I know that Barcelona have won.’ espero que Barcelona haya ganado hope.1sg.pres.ind that Barcelona have.3sg.pres.sbjnc won ‘I hope that Barcelona have won.’


Predetermination

Spanish mood

se que Barcelona ha ganado know.1sg.pres.ind that Barcelona have.3sg.pres.ind won ‘I know that Barcelona have won.’ espero que Barcelona haya ganado hope.1sg.pres.ind that Barcelona have.3sg.pres.sbjnc won ‘I hope that Barcelona have won.’


Predetermination

Yurakaré Switch reference

ti-bejta-ø-ja ti-la-mala-ø samu 1sg-see-3=ss 1sg-mal-go.sg-3 jaguar ‘When the jaguar saw me, it ran away from me.’ se be jta-y=ti ti-la-mala-ø samu I see-1sg.s=ds 1sg-mal-go.sg-3 jaguar ‘When I saw the jaguar, it ran away from me.’


Predetermination

Case markers do not usually combine with other case markers on one and the same host. Nevertheless, there are cases where this does happen. Consider the following example from the Australian language Kayardild (Evans 2003: 203, cited in Kibort 2010: 91). Kayardild [Tangkic] dan-kinaba-nguni dangka-naba-nguni mirra-nguni wangal-nguni this-abl-instr man-abl-instr good-instr boomerang-instr ‘with the man’s good boomerang’ Can you explain the double case markers in the above example?


Exercises

Can you think of an argument why English words like to and from etc. are prepositions rather than case markers?


Exercises




4. Productivity


6. Obligatoriness



Criteria for the distinction between derivation and inflection


Inflectional feature values

Derivational meanings

-

+

Semantic content




One characteristic that one often encounters in derivational affixes, is that they

change the lexical class category of the base they attach to. Inflectional affixes

do not do this.




The interpretation of inflectional markers is regular, that of derivational markers

often is not



4. Productivity

Inflection is productive, derivation is semi-productive



5. Position in template

derivation is closer to the root than inflection



6. Monomorphemic replacability

Derivational constructions can be replaced by monomorphemic forms inflected

forms can’t

Patriot-ism is good for a nation

Oil is good for a nation

Lee always arrives at noon

*Lee always come at noon



Try to determine highest-order domains

inflectional morphology: morphology that is regularly responsive to the syntactic environment.

Agreement: systematic covariation between a semantic or formal property of one element and a formal property of another.

Case: a system of marking dependent nouns for the type of relationship they

bear to their heads

Predetermination: the restriction of choice in values of obligatorily

expressed categories in complex sentences.

Inherent versus contextual inflection

Inherent inflection: inflection that is relevant to the syntax, but which conveys

some independent information as well (e.g. tense, aspect, number on nouns,

some peripheral case markers)

Contextual inflection: required by the syntactic context (government and

agreement)



Try to determine highest-order domains

inflectional morphology: morphology that is regularly responsive to the syntactic environment.

Agreement: systematic covariation between a semantic or formal property of one element and a formal property of another.

Case: a system of marking dependent nouns for the type of relationship they

bear to their heads

Predetermination: the restriction of choice in values of obligatorily

expressed categories in complex sentences.

Contextual Inherent


Syntactic Morphological

What counts as a case or agreement marker? Prototypical (potential) characteristics of morphological and syntactic units


What counts as a case or agreement marker? Prototypical (potential) characteristics of morphological and syntactic units

Syntactic unit Morphological unit

Can be agr target + -

Can control agr + -

Can govern another element + -

Can be governed (take case) + -

Host selectivity - +

Prosodically dependent - +

Fixed position - +

...

Documents

FS 2016 Class 2: Inflectional morphology - UZHbaec8995-26c8-48c2-8399... · Inflectional morphology Hasan öküz-ü aldi Hasan ox-ACC bought ‘Hasan bought the ox.’ The farmer