The s- and 3- Pref ixes i n Be l la Coola

P h i l i p if. Davis Ross Saunders

Rice Universi ty Simon Fraser gn ivers i ty

0. Introduct ion. Like t h e other Salislian languages, Della Coola possesses

ar. a f f i x 2- t h a t precedes stems, and E e l l a Coola a l s o possesses a second, c lose-

l y r e l a t e d p r e f i x , %-, t i la t i s not par-Sal ishan. h r purpose i n t h i s Faper i s

t o charac te r ize tile senan t ics and g r m a r of these tlio forms. 1

Any la . iyage w i l l bs organized t o enable the expression and c o m n i c a t i o n

of a NARRATED XELT; sor - t !~ ing happens o r something i s , and t h a t perceptio;l or

r eco l lec t ion i s conveyed by a spzaker t o a l i ~ t e n e r . ~ The implementation of

t h i s comw.icat ion i s comonly c a l l e d a "speech ac t " ( c f . , e .g . Sear le 1363),

an: l i k e a l l h i s t o r i c a l occurrences it must e x i s t i i i th in a matrix of other oc-

currences, some of which will a l s o be speech a c t s . .A11 languages a r e addi t ion-

a l l y organized t o express t h i s contsxtual izat ior , as veil, i n t h a t they possess

tile formal n e a ~ s / p a t t e r r i s t o comunica te a v a r i e t y of re la t ionsh ips between the

speech a c t and. t h e experience,/k~owledgz shared by t h e speaker and l i s t e n e r . I t

i s t h i s aspect of neaning t h a t makes the ?IXWJ\TCD EF:.T relevant t o t h e l i s t e n -

:r ( szns ib le ) by r e l a t i n g its t s m s and/or a s s e r t i o n (tile r~ho le ) t o what lie a l -

ready knows of tliz worli; ( h i s p r i o r knowledge of ocntrrences-speeclls a c t s and

ot l iers) . The app l ica t ion of language resources t o tliisenc! has commonly been

l abe l l ed " p r a p a t i c s " ( c f . e . 5 Lyons 1977.114-13). I t i s t h e expression of

these two broad lor;,ai;is of meaning t h a t in7oses upon t h e grammar of a language

i t s p r i ~ a r y ? a t t e n s . '

The i d s n t i f i c a t i o n o i t e r n s and r e l a t i o n s within 3 NtCWTED EVET and t ! ~ e i r

s t ruc tu r ing r e s u l t s i n a PRQPOSITIOXI, t h a t may be thought of i n tiie m a r e r of

F i l L ~ o r e (19bS, 1971 1377) a ~ a Chafe (1170) a s cons i s t ing of an 3BJT and a

: ~ ~ ~ , , b s r of P.~.?TIcIP.~XTS.' This semantic organizat ion must then receive fo rna l

exyression; f o r example, EVDT may be cons i s ten t ly placed a t some f ixed poiiit

i n a sequence, while F.RTICIP.VvTS occupy o ther po in t s . O r WEST may be accom-

panied by an a d d i t i o n a l , norp!iological device ( e . q . t o s igna l Fi l lmore 's ?f[odal-

i t y ] ) , a s t h e PMTICIP.X\TS m2y be accompanied by i n f l e c t i o n (e .g. Case) t o d i s -

t ingu i sh a;.ong t h e P.@TICIPA\TS a s well a s d i s t i n p i s l i i n g the PARTICIPAYTS a s a

group from t h e RIFAT. In s h o r t , the formal apparata of sequznce and morphological

marking g ive an ind ica t ion of tiie presence of the semantic d i s t i n c t i o n s . But,

because the formal resources of a language a r e l imi ted , i t f requen t ly ha?pens

t h a t a s i n g l e nark nust serve mul t ip le 5mct ions and s i g n a l , say, not only

semantic information pertaining t o t h e N.kRR4TEL) WEhT, but a l s o information a s

t o t h e context i n which t h a t NP:T i s comunicated. .4 s i n p l e i l l u s t r a t i o n of

t h i s i n Ilella Coola i s the -a t l zas t -dua l funct ion of u t t e rance i n i t i a l posi-

t i o n :

(1) jib-0 t i - w a t - t x [ r u n - i t -dog- ] ,T:lc dog i s running'

( t i - . . . - t x a r e d e i c t i c markers tha t a r e discussed below.) I n i t i a l pos i t ion , - - occupied here by hh-0 ' r u n 8 , marks t h a t sexan t ic mate r ia l a s the 42T, but

t h a t same pos i t lon 3150 marks tile mate r ia l occupying it a s i n some sense "neii"

in t h e context i n which (1) i s u t t e r e d . Thus (1) answers tlle quzst ion ' \ \%at ' s

the clog doing?' but not 'IVho ( o r ' i t3a t . ) i s running?' A n answer t o t h e l a t t e r

ripestion n igh t be

( 2 ) t i - \<a? t i - i i h - t x ' I t ' s a dog t h a t ' s running'

T1;e choice betl.!een (1) and ( 2 ) p r t a i n s not t o d i f f e r e n t ?LV.RATW EiF?.TS (The

sane thing has happened regardless of :?ow i t i s organize6 f o r c o n w . i c a t i o n . ) ,

but t o what knok7leige i s assumed t o bs sharad by the speaker and l i s t e n e r , as

r e f l e c t d by the contextual izat ion accomplisi~ed by one o r t h e o ther quest ion;

and t h i s i s a matter cf t:i? matrix cf occurrences t h a t contain t h e u t t e raxce .

I n i t i a l pos i t ion encodes WEYT as well as information t h a t l i e s ou t s ide tilz ex-

perience of the l i s t e n e r .

1 . 0 - s - . I t i s the semantic and g r a ~ z t i c a l pa t t e rns of the PIIOPOSITIO?; ad-

umbratec! above t h a t a r e relevant t o ar, ~ ~ i d e r s t w d i n g of t h e productive funct ion-

ing of ?- i n Bel la Coola; an2 i t i s -?on Llla: productive usage t h a t lie will

focus i n t h i s paper. TI12 productive semantic and g r a m t i c a l pa t t e rn t h a t 2- evinces has a l s o provided the source f o r innmerab le l e x i c a l i z a t i o n s . : h e r e

t h e source of l ex ica l items i s s t i l l productive ue may expect t o discover a

continuun of degrees of l e x i c a l i z a t i o n i n :he same manner tliat noun compoanding

in English y ie lds f o m s with varying degrzes of semantic opaci ty, formal bond-

edness, e t c . ( c f . Downins 1377). :ie achowledge the exis tence of the l e x i c a l -

ized ?- i n i t i a l lexemes and a s c a l e of l e x i c a l i z a t i o n analogous t o t11e Ehzlish

noun compounds, but l i e concentrate he re upon t h e system t h a t has produced t h i s

r e s u l t .

To understand the semantics of 2- we must fur ther d e t a i l the semantic and

f o n a l s t r u c t u r e of the PROPOSITION. We have noted t h a t ut terance i n i t i a l

posi t ion s igna ls t h e EVENT of a PROPOSITION. Independently of t h i s , the morph-

ological prefix 2- ( a l s o E-, g- , &-, E- and s- depending upon gender,

number and de ix is . Cf. Davis and Saunders 197Sb) s igna ls the par t icu la r iza t ion

of the sznantic content of the following root (or stem). Thus, wat i n - (3 ) wat-@ ti-Ailan-tx

means ,be-dog* and i d e n t i f i e s the par t icu la r ized PAHTICIPANT of ti-iilan-t:

' t h e one (who i s ) running' as exhibit ing those propert ies t h a t enable one t o

cooperatively a s s e r t y& of the P.ARTICIPA\T a s a reasonable iden t i f ica t ion of

i t . In cont ras t t o ( 3 ) , ti-iua: i n ( 2 ) asserts-because of its utterance i n i -

t i a l posi t ion-that ' t h e one (who i s ) runningn i s a par t icu la r dog. The

cieictic p re f ix marks a PARTICULAR, whereas i t s absence marks a WFIAIN. The

PARTICIP.P.TS in a PROPOSITION w i l l then be a l l , necessari ly, d e i c t i c a l l y pre

f ixed. The ElEC may or nay not be.

In Bella Coola, as i n other languages, F.ARTICI?R~S within a PROPOSITION

w i l l typ ica l ly f u l f i l l some ROLE. The s p s c i f i c character of ROLES w i l l , of

course, vary across languages; and within a language it i s the E V E X t h a t

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y deternines the ROLES of the co-occurring P.kQTICIP&?T(S).

Tnus, i n (1) above the ROLE of t i - \+ .a t - tx may be t h a t of LYECUTOR, while in

(4 ) k-k-@ t i -wat - tx [ f a l l - h e -dog: ] 'The clog i s f a l l l n g '

the ROLE i s l e s s EXECSTOP.-like and may be, ra ther , tha t of EXPERINCER. m f l S

a r e not r e s t r i c t ? ? t o occurrznca with one PARTICIPAYT per PROWSITION; more may

appear, and they w i l l :11so f u l f i l l Et'EvT-identified ROLES:

(5) t x - i s t i - j n s t a - t x t i - 4 l s x U - t x [cu t -he / i t -person- -rope- ) ,The person i s cu t t ing the rope'

(6 ) nap-is t i - j m s t a - t x t i - s t a l t m - t x X- t i -41sx"- tx5 [give-he/him -person- -chief- Prep- -rope- ]

The person is giving the chief the ropes

We see i n (5 ) t h a t As, a s & i n ( l ) , nay be perceived a s EXECUTOR, while

@ ' ropes appears t o be something l i k e the ROLE f u l f i l l e d by & i n ( 4 ) ,

i . e . FXPERIEVCER. \$'here two ROLE-PARTICIPAVS a r e present , the EVETI nay ex-

dist inguishes the two ROLES, and it is t h i s marking t h a t prcmpts one t o label

Bella Coola a s VSO. In (6) we f ind a t h i r d PARTICIPAtT (stal tmx ' c h i e f ' )

manifesting a ROLE t h a t i s characterizeciby t h e receipt of the rope. I f we

construct a sca le of possible ROLES such t h a t the most moti le one is located

a t the l e f t extreme and the l e a s t moti le , most passive ROLE i s a t the r i g h t ,

then for sentence (S), the ROLE of & 'person* f a l l s t o the l e f t r e l a t i v e

t o the ROLE of jlsxV *ropeB:

motile passive

EXECUTOR EXPERIEiCER

and the "passive" ROLE of , c u t , is EPERILVCER regardless of whether i t i s

inamimate (e .g . $l& * r o p e 8 ) or animate (e.g. w& . d o g a ) . The addit ion of a

t h i r d ROLE forces a fur ther segmentation of the r i g h t port ion of the sca le ,

so tha t Lie have for (6):

motile passive

EXECLTOR EXPERIENC% II: IPL'-?!ETT

The d i s t i n c t i o n of an I?IPLE3EJT ROLE i s a l so possible f o r ( 5 ) :

( 7 ) t x - i s t i - i m s t a - t x t i -41sx"-tx x - t i - t i z a - t x [ a ~ l i e / i t -person- -rope- -kn i fe - ] 'The person cut the rope with the kn i fe '

Sentence ( 7 ) i s exactly p a r a l l e l t o ( 6 ) . The EVEh? of ( 4 ) - E ' f a l l ' -then

d i f f e r s from the E?v'FATT of (1) -& *m' - in t h a t & "intersects" t h i s

sca le fur ther t o the l e f t than and s e l e c t s a more rnotile ROLE. (Cf.

Davis ns . b . f o r discussion of s imilar pat terning i n Faplish, the continua in -

volved and the i l l -definedness of ROLES \.;lxdn divorced :ram t h e context of

t h e i r use . )

The language r e m i t s overts expression of more than two ROLES, but when

suc!~ i s the case, Della Coola betrays an inequali ty between the f i r s t two and

the remainder. Note f i r s t t h a t t h e language encodes i n f o n a t i o n [person and

number) only for the f i r s t two, a id the t h i r d requires a marking in addit ion

t o i t s riglitmost sequential posi t ioning, v iz . the Preposition x-. This para l -

l e l treatment of the f i r s t two ROLF-5 in the above exanples ( i n opposition t o

the renainder) extends t o t h e i r expression under contextual conditions conduc-

ive t o the use of pronouns. The UEmOR and F-YPERII3CER a r e then given zero

expression, while the t h i r d requires an overt forn (Cf. Davis and Saunders 1975a press the person and number of each, e .g . i n ( 5 ) . Linear sequence then

and 1976a); f o r (7) we may then f ind

(8) t x - i s x- t x [ a t - h e / i t P r e p - i t ] %lie c u t it with it'

The formal opposi t ion of t h e f i r s t two ROLES t o t h e remaining one(s) i s more

than a simple g r a m a t i c a l d i f fe rence ; the re i s a semantic content s igna l l ed by

t h e grammatical u n i t y of EXECUTOR and ZYPERIEUCER, and t h i s becomes more ap-

parent with t h e observat ion t h a t Bel la Coola has both a Passive and an Anti-

passive cons t ruc t ion . In t h e Passive expression, the E,XECLTOR i s f o m a l l y

t r e a t e d i n t h e same way as the I:\iPLE,E\T i n ( 6 ) and ( 7 ) ; f o r example,

(9) nap-im t i - s t a l t n u - t x x - t i - { n s t a - t x x - t i -41sxw- tx [give-Pass he -ch ie f - Prep- -person- Prep- -rope- ] ,The ch ie f was given t h e rope by t h e personb

(10) t x - i n t i - 4 1 s x w - t x x - t i - k t a - t x x - t i - t 4 2 a - t x [cut-Pass it -ropz- Prep- -person- Prep- -kn i fe - ] ,The rope was cu t by the person with the kn i fe '

The p e r i p h e r a l i t y of tlie LWCUTOR (mi! the I'IPLDml' a s well) i s i n p a r t e v i -

dent i n i t s poss ib le omissicn without tlie pronoun e f f e c t t h a t i s produced by

t h i s same t a c t i c i n ( 3 ) . The presence of the so -ca l l ed Ai t i -pass ive construc-

t i o n continues t h e s i m i l a r f o m a l t r ea tnen t of 5XECUTOR and E)BERIE?;CER i n t h a t

tile .Anti-passive extends the p o s s i b i l i t y of j?eripheral expression t o t!ie 3

(11) t:<-a-@ t i - i n s t a - t x x - t i - 4 1 s x w - t x x - t i - t 4 2 a - t x [cut-&-he -person- Prep- -rope- Prep- -kn i fe - ] ,The person c u t s thz rope with t h e 'knife'

The shared senan t ic content hir . teJ a t by the comon formal properties of the

EXFCUTOR and EXPERIEXiER i n (6) and (T), and now c o n f i n e d by the s y m e t r i c a l

presence of Passive and Anti-passiv- , i s cons t i tu ted by the placement of foca l

a t t e n t i o n within the PROPOSITIOS, i . e . upon the 3ECUTOR and 3PERIz;CER i n

(6) and ( 7 ) , while t h e o ther RCLES do not ca r ry it the re . (Cf. 3avis ns. a

i o r f u r t h e r d i scuss ion of the cognit ive bases of language and t h e i r pa t t e rn ing

i n 1,mguages of d iverse t D e s . 1

The above observat ions and conclusion suggest t h a t we d i s t ingu ish semanti-

c a l l y between t h e NUCLEUS of a PROFDSITIO!: -containing t h e ElrECT and one, a t

nos t two, PAR'rICIPAT-ROLE(S) t h a t i i i l l bear f o c a l a t tent ion-and a PERIPHERY

containing the remainder of tlie PROPOSITIOS. ( A s i ~ i l a r proposal i s made f o r

English in t la l l iday 1970. Cf. a l s o Davis n s . b . ) The semantic pe r iphera l i ty

-absence of f o c a l a t t e n t i o n - i s e x p l i c i t l y ind ica ted by c e r t a i n u t t e rances

containing -.ad-, a der iva t iona l s u f f i x t h a t is added t o t h e R.'EVT of a PRO- - POSITIOS. AS in ( 3 ) , (10) and ( l l ) , wherein LUCLEAR ROLES were r a n o v d from

foca l a t t e n t i o n , so may PERIPHERAL ROLES be included: f o r e x a ~ p l e ,

(11) nap-amk-is t i - i n s t a - t x t i - 4 1 s x Y - t x ? u * - t i - s t a l t m - t x [give- - h e / i t -person- -rope- Prep- -ch ie f - ] 'The person gave tlie rope t o the c h i e f *

(13) tx-amk-is t i - i m s t a - t x t i - t i + a - t x ?a+- t i -41sxw- tx [cu t - - h e / i t -person- -kn i fe - 6Prep- -rgpe- ] ,The person used a knife t o cu t the ropex

.A sir .ple tiv,o-RflLE u t t e rance such as ( 5 ) a l s o has an a l t e r n a t i v e expression

with -d-, but h i t h tile E(FER1Li'CER continuing t o occupy a spot i n t h e :;U- p

CLEUS a.id wit!iout, thereby, c e d i ~ g foca l a t t e n t i o n t o the I?IFLE.'S\'T:

(13) tx-amk-is t i - i n s t a - t x t i -6, lsxw-tx [cut- - h e / i t -person- -rope- ] .The man cut the rope among othzr th ings '

I t i s sentences on t h e model of (1.1) t!iat place the meaning of - a d - i n t o -

r l l i d f . S-ntence (14) i s a p l ~ r o p i a t z t o a context i n :ii.ich ?lie jj-rson 1,-ho

i s the f'iECIUT09 cu t items among which ha?jwnei? t o be the rope; but cu t t ing

the rage iias not c e n t r a l t o !iis ac t ion . I t iias secondar).-P"RI1ERX-to

the pr lnary -!UCLFx -performance. The i l i s t inc t ion betrieen \UCLEXR and I)ERI!'liW.U i s a l s o c l e a r l y j)resent in these p a i r s :

r 15) ( a ) kav-ic t i - sn*k- tx [ d e e r - I - f i s h - ]

' I ' l l de l ive r the f i s h ,

( h ) kaw-ank-ic t i - S W K - t x [de l ive r - - I / i t - f i s h - ] ' I > l l de l ive r the f i s h on my way3

! 16) ( a ) ? u l l - i s t i - n a p - t x [ s t e a l - i i e / i t - th ing- ] 'lie s t o l e t h e thing '

( b ) % l X - m i - i s t i - n a p - t x [ s t e a l - - h e l i t - th ing- ] #lie walked off h-ith the th ing '

'1-J ( a ) l i s - t i s iia-ansta-c [push-helthen -person- ] 'tie pished the peopleb

(b) l i s - a d - t i s wa- lns ta - tx [push- -he/'then -person- ] $lie pushed t h e people a s i d e 8

In ( l5b j the de l ive r ing i s inc iden ta l t o t h e primary purpose of the t r i p , where

as i n 115a) i t i s the only reason; i i i (16b) the person a.ho s t o l e t h e object may

have taken it inadver ten t ly while s t e a l i n g something e l s e , o r even i f while

v i s i t i n g he examines t h e ob jec t and leaves having fo rgo t ten t o rep lace it,

(16b) w i l l be appropriate . In (17b) t h e pe r iphera l i ty i s over t ly present

i n t h e - a s i d e r ; t h e EXECUTOR i s no t i n t e r e s t e d i n pushing people a s an end

i n i t s e l f , bu t i n c l e a r i n g a path. He i s secondari ly and i n c i d e n t a l l y push-

ing people. I n (14)-(17) we see t h a t -aml;- indeed s igna l s PERIPHERAL and com-

bines t h a t semantic property b t t h t h e ROLE t h a t grammatically, irmnediately

fol lows t h e EXECLiTOR. But comparison of (14)-(17) with ( 1 2 ) and (15) a l s o

shows t h a t -&- i s not uniquely associated with some s p e c i f i c ROLE, ccmbin-

ing a s it does with EXPERIENCER-in (14) -(17) -and I?.PLMENT -in (12) - ( 1 3 ) .

We a l s o see t h a t -a&- i s op t iona l ly present when t h e EXPERIERCER ROLE occupies

the NUCLEUS, bu t t h a t when the I:,PLE.IEN i s accorded a pos i t ion within t h e

NUCLEUS, -&- i s ob l iga to ry . Compare (15) with (18):

(1s) * t x - i s t i - h s t a - t x t i - t & - t x

PERIPIIERUIn' i s a property inherent i n t h e IbIPLEE\rT ROLE, I?.PLBENT being

always PERIPFERV, t o t h e EVE;T, t h e "happening" t h a t involves the P.4RTICIPAWS

as f i l l i n g RCILES; b u t , i n appropriate circumstances, DIPLBIEIT nay assume W-

CLEAR s t a t u s i , i th respec t t o t h e PROPOSITION.

Each EL3T i n t n e language w i l l e s t a b l i s h its ROLES and a l s o which ones

w i l l be \UCLEfiX f o r it and which ones, PERIPHERAL. Those ROLES a r e then kno1.m

f o r each RIG,"; t o be e i t h e r WCLFAR o r PERIP~IERJU, and knowing t h a t i n p a r t s a

semantic s t r u c t u r e t o t h e PROPOSITIOiJ as a whole, a sche;na f o r which might ap-

pear as follu*.s ( c f . Saunders and Davis 1978):

(13) PROPOSITIFN

N 1UCLWS PERIFI ERY

A ~'E?:F IXXUTOR E);PFff ILVCER

I IblPLDIFW

(a) t x - ROLE ROLE ROLE

EXECUTOR ROLE

MPERINCER ROLE

Other configurat ions a r e poss ib le depending upon t h e E1IENT; i n con t ras t with

t x ' a i t ' , t he WLV n u y d ' s i n g o acquires but one inherent ly WCLEAR ROLE- - t h e FXECUTOR-and two PFRIPIIERAL ones-the EXP2RIEVCER and EQLBlEW:

(20) n u y d - 0 t i - ? i m l k - t x ?u+- t i - s t a l txx- tx x - t i - s y u t - n u - t x [sing-he -man- Prep- -ch ie f - Prep- song-your- ] 'The man i s s inging the chief your song'

Once t h e pa t t e rn t h a t r e l a t e s ROLES t o each BZW a s inherent ly \UCLEiLP o r

PERIPHERAL-(13a), (19b) , (19c) , etc.-becomes one of t h e PROPOSITION as we l l ,

it can be (and i s ) exploi ted by placing PERIPIERAL ROLES i n t o t h e XUCLEUS of

the PROPOSITIO?l, e.g. (12) and ( 1 3 ) , o r NUCLM ones i n t o tlie PERIPHERY, e.g.

( ) ( l ) . I t i s the inherent EVUfl-determined \UCL?fiITY-PERIPIERALIR of

ROLES and t h e PROPOSITI0.W kUCLFNIIY-PERIPEIEWLITY t h a t t h e former engen-

de rs which produce the semantic in te rp lay t h a t i d e n t i f i e s both as d i s t i n c t a s -

pects of the PROPOSITION. We consider tlie above examples t o aqply i l l u s t r a t e

the presence of the ?,!!CLEAR-PERIPEERAL d i s t i n c t i o n i n Bel la Coola. (The seman-

t i c organizat ion of the PROWSITION and t h e s t r u c t u r i n g of the sentence t h a t

i t implies i s f u r t h e r discuss2d i n Saunders and Davis In prep. English shows

a d i s t i n c t i o n s imi la r t o the EI'ENT-determined WCLEARITY o r FERIPHERUITY of

ROLES i n allowing each m T / V e r b i n the language t o s e l e c t p ro to - typ ica l ly a

ROLE or ROLES and t o occur op t iona l ly with an add i t iona l one, the d i s t i n c t i o n

between the p ro to - typ ica l ROLL(S) and t h e o thers being formally r e c o p i z e d i n

various ways. Cf. Davis n s . b. f o r discussion.)

1 . 1 I t i s within t h e frame of s m a n t i c d i s t i n c t i o n s enconpassed by the opposi-

t i o n of ENCLES t o PERIPIERY t h a t 2- funct ions, and we begin by considering

i t s occurrence i n the expression of P.1RTICIPA',TS, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the Bel la

Coola equivalent of r e l a t i v e c lauses . The f o n a t i o n of a PARTIC1P.T requ i res

t h a t it be made PARTICULAR, and t h i s senan t ic content i s s igna l l ed by the de ic -

t i c p re f ix ( c f . above). The p r e f i x does no t , however, f u r t h e r iden t i fy t h e

PARTICULAR by f ix ing it i n space-time; t h i s i s the semantic province of the

d e i c t i c s i i f f ixes , t h a t iden t i fy t h j PARTICLIIAR i n terms of the speaker t s wit-

nessing of it r e l a t i v e t o t h e space and time of t h e conversation. ( i f . Davis

and Saunders 1375b f o r d e t a i l s . ) I f such s p e c i f i c a t i o n i s omitted, i t i s the re -

by claimed t h a t the PARTICLiWR i s unwitnessed by the speaker; thus ,

(21) t i - ? imlk- tx

( 2 2 ) t i - ? i n l k - 0

In (21), the P.QTICULAR (ti-) man (w) is said to be visually witnessed by

the speaker at the time of the conversation and within a certain distance of it

(-g) ; in (22), the PARTICULAR (ti-) man is claimed to be unseen at any time by the speaker (-el . The identification of a PARTICULAR by relating it via the speaker's experience to the spatio-temporal locus of the conversation

is but one way of achieving the precise specification of the PARTICULAR. A

PARTICULAR is also sufficiently identified if its ROLE in some PROPOSITION is

provided. For example,

(23) ti-7imlk ti-:ap-tx I -man -go- I ,the man who IS going'

Thus, -2, -0- and ti-iap-tx all function in paradigmatic fashion in the iden-

tificatior. of the PAJlTICUW1 that the deictic prefix asserts to exist. In (25), the P.1PTICULAR is identified as the one fulfilling the EYECUTOR ROLE of the

FIF-\T in the PRCPOSITION that follows the PARTICULkR ti-7imlk. Ithen other

identifying PROPOSITIOYS with differing P.OLES are employed, any of the ROLES

nay serve to spcify the PARTICULAR. The PROF'OSITION expressed in (6), for

example, contains E)(C-CUOR, FXERIZNCER and I?lPLBIE\T; and a P.4RTICULAR may

be identified by its filling any of the three:

( 2 3 ) ti-imsta ti-nap-t ti-staltmx-tx x-ti-41sx"-tx 7

[ -person -give-he/him -chief- Prep- -rope- ] ,the person who gave the chief the ropea

( 2 5 ) ti-staltmx ti-nap-is ti-imsta-tx X-ti-41sxv-tx [ -chief -give-he/hin -person- Prep- -rope- ] -the chief whom the person gave the ropem

(26) ti-hlsx" ti-s-nap-is ti-{msta-tx ti-staltmx-tx -rope - -give-heihirn -person- -chief- ]

.the rope that the person gave the chiefo

It is in (26) that we begin to see the function of 5-; here it is asso- ciatd iiith w inherently PERIPI!FR4L ROLE, the I.WLE.EVT. Sentence (7) pro-

vid?s a parallel to (26):

( 2 7 ) ti-tQa ti-s-tx-is ti-imsta-tx ti-41sxu-tx [ -knife - -cut-hejit -person- -rope- ] .the lalife the person cut the rope with.

Dccnsionally, F,BTS that occur with a single NUCLFX? ROLE (i.e. that are

~r.umatically Intransitive) will appear with a PERIPIIERAL ROLE as in (26):

(2s) nuyam+-0 ti-jmsta-tx x-ti-syut-nu-tx [sing-he -person- Prep- -song-your- ] -The person is singing your song'

The involvement of syut 'song' in the EVENT of nuyamk 'sing' is sufficient to identify it by its participation in that PROPOSITION:

(29) ti-syut ti-s-nuy&-s ti-jnsta-LK 8

[ -song - -sing-he -person- ] ,the song the person is singing'

'hen the PARTICIPATS that occupy identifying PERIPJERAL ROLES have those ROLES

recast into the PROPOSITIONAL NUCLEUS, as in (12) and (13), those ROLES may

still serve to identify some PARTICLE&? PARTICIPAV, but the inclination is not

to employ 2-; thus, -

(30) ti-41sxw ti-nap-&-is ti-kta-tx [ -rope -give- -he/him -person- ] ,the rope that t!le person gave-

but 7

(51) ' ti-41sxv ti-s-nap-&-is ti-insta-tx

The last is said to "sound a little funny." 1Vhen the reverse happens (viz.,

a %CLEAR ROLE is perceived as PROPOSITIOWY PERIPiiERAL), as when the EVEFT-

WCLE-\R WERIEL'CER of (5) appears in the PROPOSITIO?IAL PERIPtIER'i of (11) , that no\' PPERIFEERAL ROLE may still serve to specify some PARTICULV.:

(32) ti-41sxw ti-s-tx-a-s ti-imsta-tx [ -rope - -cut-AP-he -person- ] .the rope the person cut'

The presence of the identifying ROLE in the PERIPIEW of the PROWSITION again

elicits the 2- prefix on the NEW. Th? above phrases suggest that 5- is not associated with a single ROLE,

but that it is appropriate to ROLES that happen to appear without focal atten-

tion, i.e. in the PERIPI1EP.Y of a PROPOSITION. The presence of e.xpressions

wherein the identified PARTICtiLlR is omitted as in

(33) ti-s-tx-a-s ti-lmsta-tx -the thing/one the person is cuttings

(54) (a) ti-s-tx-a-c-tx *the thing/one Ism cutting'

(b) ti-s-tx-a-nu-tx -the thing/one you're cutting*

(c) ti-s-tx-a-s-tx ,the thing/one he-s cuttings

(35) ti-s-nuyd-s-tx 'the thing he's singing-

may give the impression that there should exist ill the language forms such

(36) s t x a

Thz impression i s s t rengthened when (34) and (35) a r e cmpared with (38):

(38) ( a ) t i -41sxw-c- tx 'my rope'

(b) t i -41sxw-nu- tx 'your rope'

( c ) t i - 4 1 s x w - s - t x ' h i s rope '

This conc lus ion i sapparen t ly shared by speakers of t h e language who recognize

(36) a s a nonce expression fo r 'anything they could c u t ' and (37) as - a thing

sung' . Once l e x i c a l i z e d , t h e forms can then appear as a s m a n t i c uni t -a

lexeme-and not as an expression of a PROWSITION; and in t h e same way t h a t

t i - t m s t a - t x = t h e mana i s expressed, we can f ind

(33) t i - s t x a - t x ' the th ing t h a t ' s c u t r

(40) t i - s n u y m - t x * t h e thing t h a t ' s s>mgs

I t i s t h e removal of i n f l e c t i o n t h a t s igna l s the s h i f t from i d e n t i f i c a t i o n by

PROPOSITIONAL ROLE t o i d e n t i f i c a t i o n by ?IRE, i . e . from (34) t o (33) and from

(35) t o (40) . The ROLES i n t h e nonce circumstances of (34) and (35) a r e

r e i f i e d t o c r e a t e a new independent category o r KbL\I';. I t i s a s in English when t h e modifying s t r u c t u r e of Adject ive and Xoun in t h e ;God &y becomes by - compounding a new category, the gdod &; a sub-type constructed f o r an occa-

s ion i s removed from t h e i m e d i a t e circumstances of i t s c rea t ion t o become an

independent D(X.WIS of percept ion ( c f . Davis ns . b. f o r f u r t h e r d i scuss ion) .

Another t a c t i c t h a t Bel la Coola may employ i n the construct ion of new

I0,lAINS is the add i t i cn of t h e de r iva t iona l s u f f i x -5 t o t h e forms of the

t l i i rd person s ingu la r of (34) and (35) . Beca~ise t h e PERIPtERAL ROLE i s f r e -

quent ly t h e I:lPLElIE\T, -5 may give t h e impression t h a t i t forms ' ins t rumentsB,

but t h a t is secondary t o (and dzr ives from) i t s marking of PFJIPfIERAL ROLE

PARTICIPPATS, Thus, from .tie shears i t * we may f ind jp-ta . s h e a r s a ; but

we a l s o f ind from 7 i l u s a p - @ ,t!e passes/gets by . , the f o m s? i lusayxs ta ' p lace

where people meet' o r ' passageb . From .Ile speaks . , we f ind s + h t a

' v o i c e s ; and from 7nt-0 'He s i t s up/downa, s ? n t s t a , r e s t i n g p l a c e ' , e t c .

I t i s important t o emphasize t h a t t h e c rea t ion of new lexemes is but one

aspect-and a minor one f o r t h e grammar of Bel la Coola- of s - p ra f ixa t ion . -

I t i s a l s o important t o note t h a t 5- does not denote ROLE, but only PERIPHERAL;

and t h i s i s one d i f fe rence between 5- and -a-. The l a t t e r s p e c i f i c a l l y des ig -

na tes ROLES as PERIPIIERU.. The presence of ROLE i n t h e above examples of

r e l a t i v e clauses with 5- i s e f fec ted by t h e d e i c t i c 2 - - - i t s e l f pref ixed t o

t h e expression of a PROWSITION-that denotes a P.4RTICULAR P.4RTICIP.W; - s -

simply adds the semantic content of PERIPtIF3AL t o t h a t , and the t o t a l then

implies a PERIPIIERAL ROLE. The s u f f i x -&- f u r t h e r d i f f e r s from 2- i n t h a t

the former denotes a PERIPIIERU. ROLE t h a t i s a l s o a c a r r i e r of foca l a t t e n t i o n

within the PROPOSITION, while 5- , as we have seen above i n (31) , must denote

t h a t t h e n a t e r i a l t o which i t i s r e levan t remains i n the PERIPHERY of the PRO-

POSITION.

That s- narks PERIPHERAL semantic content should make i t appropriate t o

the expression of t h e " c i r a i s t a n t i a l " PROPOSITIOX4L mater ial of time and

space; and indeed t h i s i s so. Time and space a r e norphological ly p l u r a l in

Bel la Coola ( c f . Davis and Saunders 1375a), so t h a t we f ind these expressions

(Space i s considered below with g - . ) : (41) t a - s -?a+i -nu- tXU

j - -be located-you- ] , t h e t i n e you were he res

( 4 2 ) t a - s -?a+i -nu -whi le you were he re*

The absence of d e i c t i c s u f f i x i n (42) ind ica tes a f a i l i r e t o iden t i fy thc t i n e

( t h e boundaries) an2 t h e r e s u l t i s a span of time.

1 .2 I t i s frames such as

(43) (ti-!msta) ti-.

t h a t express t h e PARTICIPANT and the ROLE i n our examples t o t h i s point , but

t h e lan-page does not cons t ra in the expression of PERIPtERV t o t h i s COP-text.

In u t t e rances such as

(44) ?a tnap- i+ t i - h t a - t x s - i a p - s [bow-we/him -person- -go-he]

we f ind 2- i n a d i f f e r e n t fo rna l context , but with the s m e funct ion. Sentence

(44) i s c lose t o working a s a n o n r e s t r i c t i v e r e l a t i v e clause. The content of

s - l a p - s does not i d e n t i f y t h e man i n (44) as it would i f it occurred i n (43);

here, it provides t h e information t h a t , i n addi t ion t o knowing the man, x e a l s o

know t h a t he is going: 'We know t h e man and t h a t Ile is going' ( c f . Davis and

Saunders 1978). kt t h a t increment of knowledge, t h e expression of which i n

(44) i s prefixed by 2-, i s not the foca l point of the ut terance; it i s an add-

on, PERIPHBRAL renark. Sentence (45) i s usually glossed a s *We 'know ( t h a t )

they a r e going. and thus conveys the impression-a f a l s e one. Cf. Davis and

Saunders In prep.- that so-cal led "enbedding" may be present here. This u t -

terance i s , r a t h e r , t h e exact p a r a l l e l of (44); only here the , th ing known' i s

expressed by its absence, thus , i t b ; and a more l i t e r a l gloss of (45) would be

'1Ve know it, t h e y - r e going'.

Sequences such a s s - $ a p - s , because they a r e mrked a s s igna l l ing PEQI-

PHEW information, imply some NUCLEUS with respect t o which they hold t h a t

s t a t u s ; but t h i s Zoes not mean t h a t such phrases cannot be u t te red without the

precedicg NUCLELIS, and we do firid t h a t such phrases as

(46) s -$ap-s

a r e possible a s complete ut terances. Sentence (46) i s appropriate t o a con-

t e x t in which some asser t ion , Sap-@ t i - s ta l tmu- tx 'The chief i s goingb o r t h e

l i k e , has occurred; ( 3 6 ) indicates an understanding of t h a t ut terance (or other

context) and e l i c i t s a confirmation. Thus, . I s he r e a l l y going?' o r 'Ife's go-

ing, eh?' a r e s u i t a b l e glosses. Senter.ces l i k e (46) require an informational

s e t t i n g t h a t both speaker arid l i s t e n e r a r e aware o f , and i f it i s not present

a d i r e c t yes-no quest ion, e.g. $ap-@-a - 1 s he going?,, i s necessary. Or again

i f someone sees a la rge f i s h and r e l a t z s h i s experience with

(47) 4iU-0- t u ta-sn+k ta-l&- i c ?ala?awa [big-i t- indeed - f i s h - s e e - I / i t across t h e s t r e e t ] 'The f i s h t h a t I saw across the s t r e e t was indeed b ig8

h i s l i s t e n e r may respond with

(45) s - + i n - s 'Kas it a s big a s you say?' *So i t 's b ig , huh?,

I t i s the e x p l i c i t l y PER1PHE.W information marked by 2- tha t e l i c i t s an answer.

\fention of a P.WTICIPitUT, e.g. ti-sml.1~-tx , t h e f i s h . ; o r an flm, e.g.

s! ;e3s going'; o r a PROPOSITION not marked a s PERIPI1ERAL w i l l not produce t!lis

e f f e c t . For example, a response t o (47) night be

(43) +iV-s [ b i g - i t ]

This a l t e r n a t i v e t o (48) does not requi re confirnat ion; it simply denotes

acceptance of t h e pr ior assert ion: 'That big:' I f the u t te rance of a PROMISI-

TIOS marked as PERIPIiEPAL (2-) implies a hWCLEUS, then absence of the l a t t e r

i s perceived a s a request t o produce it ( I n Grice 's [1375] t e r n s , t h i s is a

b la tan t f lou t ing of t h e maxim of quant i ty . ) ; and i n t h i s context , the answer-

ing LUCLEUS i s the same PROPOSITIOS, unmarked for PERIPIEXXI?Y (witllout s-). This usage has a corollary, namely, t h a t the rnaterial prefixed by 2- in (46)

and (48) is not s trongly asserted, but ra ther mentioned and assumed t o be i n

t h e experience of t h e l i s t e n e r . In general, the greater the semantic depend-

ency of a PROWSITION, t h e grea te r its lack of assert iveness and thz grea te r

i t s f u ~ c t i o n of mentioning. The occurrence of ?-prefixed PROFOSITIOYS appear

t o have in t h i s regard something i n comon with the so-cal led "anti- topics"

(except t h a t here it i s a PRCPOSITION ra ther thm. t h e usual PARTICIPAVT. Cf.

~ i v 6 n 1375.197, Chafe 1976.53 and Davis rns. a . ) i n being addit ions, increments

?resent t o prevent misunderstanding o r as a ids t o b e t t e r seeing the relevance

of the LUCLEXR PKOPOSITIO?J; and a s such, and 1iiti1 focal a t ten t ion placed s l s e -

where upon the NUCLEAR port ion, t h e i r assert iveness i s correspondingly dinin-

ished.

1 .3 it l a s t usage of 2- ccnbines propert ies from i t s occurrences described i n

sect ions 1.1 and 1.2. Consider these sentences:

(50) ya-0 ta -7 in lk- t!: t i-s-?a2ukuala-0 [good-lie -man- - -Indian doctor-he] *The man was good as an Indian doctor '

(51) ya-0 t i -7 imlk- tx ti-s-Ls-:us t i- 4"x"nt inu t [good-he -man- - -fix/nake-Caus h e / i t -car 1 *The man i s good as f ix ing c a r s '

These d i f f e r from the itlentifying-by-ROLE forms of (?6) , (27), ( 2 9 ) , e t c . i n

several ways. F i r s t , t h e paradigmatic re la t ionsh ip of -g, d e i c t i c suf f ix ,

and identifying r e l a t i v e clause is absent. In (SOj, fo r exanple, the s u f f i x

- t S - i d e n t i f i e s .mans as one observed by thz speaker i n DISTAL space-time

( c f . Davis and Saunders 137513); an2 tile following e- phrase does not and

cannot have the semantic function of constraining the PPlRTICULAR t o some

unique one. Secondly, the agreement of d e i c t l c prefixes observed i n construc

t ions wherein a subsequel~t phrase does iden t i fy a preceding PARTICIPAW by

WLE, e.g. g- ...ti- i n (23), i s not required here. Thirdly, PARTICIPAWS i n

such phrases as (24) may tl~emselves be d e i c t i c a l l y identif ied: thus t i - s ta l tmx- tx

and t i-qlsxu-tx. Wrt here t ha t identification i s not possible, and the fo l -

lowing variations of (50) and (51) are not acceptable:

(52) *ya-0 t i-7imlk-tx t i - s -7abkuala-0- tx

(53) *ya-0 t i-7imlk-tx t i - s -ks- tus t i -4u~%t imut - tx

;Uhile phrases l i ke t i - s -7akkuala-0 -as an Indian doctorr , t i - s - W m - 0

'as a hunter ' , e tc . c lear ly d i f f e r from the re la t ive clause forms of section

1.1, they have in c m o n the presence of a de i c t i c prefix and the concomitant

specification of a ROLE. The parallelism of utterances such as (50) with the

forms of section 1.2 i s a lso instructive:

(54) (a) ya-0 t i -7 in lk- tx t i - s - ? a W W a l a - 0

(b) ya-0 t i -7 in lk- tx s - ?ahkWala - s

F o m l ike s - ?akkYa la - s i n (54 b) a.nd elsewhere add PERIPHERAL PROWSITIONAL

information, while those exemplified in (54 a) add P E R I P W ROLE information

and d i f f e r f r m forms l i ke t i - s - n u y e - s - t x in tha t the l a t t e r provide ROLE in-

formation that i s FERIPIIERJL t o the FXOPOSITION contained in the phrasz i t s e l f ,

i . e . t o ntiyadc-s. The PERIPHERALITY of (54 a] i s l ike tha t of (54 b) ; both s ig-

nal information P F R I W J t o =precedes, i .e . -ti-7imlk-tx. Sentence

(54 a) night be glossed in English as 'The man i s good when hevs an India? doc-

tor [performs h i s duties as one]'. I t identif ies an aspect of ti-7imlk-tx ' the

man', but not h i s essence; it does not therefore identify him a s square?!. as

the re la t ive clause w i l l .

The specification by 5- of a PAHTICIPANT's guisa has served as a second

source of lexicalizations. Thus, we have these pairs among many:

(55) (a) g - i s [ s l i ce -he i i t ] -HaSs s l ic ing it'

(b) .spring salmon sliced in to f i l l e t s '

(56) (a) mas -0 [female-it] . I t ' s female'

(b) sxns .effeminate person'

(57) (a) Xs-8 [fat-he] -Iless f a t '

-I

Only the constructions of 1.1 and 1.3 a r e sources of lexicalizations; and 1

since it is only those two tha t specify P.RTICIPANTS' ROLES, t h i s seems rea-

sonable. I t i s t h i s lexicalized 5- that i s occasionally i n works on Salishan .. !

(Kuipers 1367.282 and 1974.162) labelled a "ncnninalizer"; but there i s in ; + ' . . v -

Bella Coola no good basis for assert ing a grannnatical dichotany of Noun vs.

Verb, and the semantic P.4RTICIPANT-EEW opposition i s not contained in the

lexical items thanselves, but signalled by the grammar. Thus, t o c a l l 2- a

"nominalizer" i s only t o recognize the h is tor ica l source of certain 5 - i n i t i a l

lexmes as those constructions that serve to express ROLES.

2.0 &-. IVIlile the 5- prefix of the previous section i s pa?-Salishan, there

exists in Bella Coola a second prefix g-, tha t appears t o have no d i rec t cor-

re la te in the other Salishan languages. .?\blauted f o m are not unusual in

Bella Coola (Cf. - ~s above.); and a f a i r l y frequent alternation i s g - 9. Ife thus find fo r the Medio-passive morpheme both -m- and -@-; for the

Perfective par t ic le both & and &; fo r the Inferential h b i t a t i v e par t ic le both

ck and ci;i, etc. The temptation i s therefore strong t o see 5- and s>- as a - continuation of t h i s pattern. Tlle temptation i s increased by the similar se-

mantic content of the two and the s imi lar i ty of the i r grammatical contexts.

The 5- and g- prefixes d i f f e r from the other ablaut pa i rs above in tha t 2- and s i - liavr becm.e contrasting f o r m , whereas the others ranain allanorphic vari- - ants, a lbe i t g r m a t i c a l l y conditioned ones. Assming 5- to be the h is tor ica l

origin of 21- (we note also tha t the zero foms of z, 6 and & are the more

frequent and less constrained.), the re la t ive youth of 2- i s reflected not on-

l y by i t s appearance in one Salishan langdage, but also by the cmparatively

fewer lrxicalizations tha t have a g- construction as t he i r source.

2.1 The 2- prefix functions as does 5- inexpressing the Bella Coola equivalent

of re la t ive clauses and in those where the identifying ROLE i s in the PERIPHERY.

Whereas 2- corresponds t o thosa PERIPI{ERZL ROLES that a re otherwise expressed

by the Preposition 5 - , g- corresponds to those expressed by s- and x-. (Cf. footnote 5.) Thus, for

(58) nuyd-$4 ci-mas-cx ?u2-ti-?imlk-tx [sing-she -wanan- Prep- -man- ] *The ~mnan i s singing t o the man'

(b) sXs * f a t , grease'

we have

(59) ti-7imlk t i - s i - n u y d - s c i -mas-cx , t he man the woman i s singing t o v

and

(60) t i - s i - n u y d - s - t x . t h e one s h e ' s s inging to '

The Freposition %- occurs i n analogous fashion:

:61) iap-0 ci-xnas-cx ?a+-t i-7imlk-tx [go-she -wonan- Prep- -man- ] -The woman is going with the man'

c67) t i - ? k l k t i - s i - l a p - s c i -mas-cx [ -nan - -go-she -woman- ] - t h e man t h e woman is going with '

(63) t i - s i - s a p - s - t x . the one s h e - s going with'

Became (64) is possible

(65) $ap-@ c i -mas-cx ?u+-t i-7imlk-tx 'The woman is going t o t h e manr

both ,163) and (63) a r e aqbiguous and have second glosses of . the man the woman

i s going t o s and , t h e one s h e a s going t o ' , respectively. .And because 2- i s ,

am0r.g other things, an expression of semantic C4USE ( c f . Davis and Saunders

13-05), ( 6 2 ) i s a t h i r d way ambiguous: ' t h e man because of / for whom she is go-

ing & . In the sm.e manner t h a t

.bS) t i - s -n ix-a-nu- tx ( - -saw-.A?-you- ]

plcsses a s , t h e thing you're sawing' o r ' t h e thing you're sawing wi th ' ,

; b G ) t i - s i - n i x - a - n u - t x

glcss-s as . the one yousre sawing f o r ' . The Preposition z- i s fur ther con-

-~or.:y used i n the designation of spaces:

7 ) 7apsu+-i+ ?a+-niiXalk [live-we Prep-Sell?. Coola] .I;.e l i v e i n Fe l la Coola'

. k C ?s 5- was comonly involved i n t h e expression of the temporal circumstance

of 3 hULCW PROPOSITIOX, so i s g- the common expression of s p a t i a l circun-

c t :--.:.;2:

S ) ta-su+ ta-si-7apsu+-i.i-tXu [ -house - -live-we- ] a t h e house we l ived i n s

:6'3) t a -c imi l t t a - s i - l~anm-c- tXY [ -val ley - -hunt-I- J . t h e va l ley t h a t I hunted i n '

(.\slin space-l ike t ime-is d e i c t i c a l l y p lura l . )

The lex ica l iza t ions from t h i s range of usages r e f l e c t place,

( 7 0 ) (a) si7apsu2. -where one s e t t l e s .

(b) ta-si?apsu+-t:CY - t h e place of set t lements

(TI) (a ) si?a+ps ,where one e a t s '

(b) ta-si7a2ps-t.Yu ' t h e place one e a t s '

o r they r e f l e c t CAUSE ( 'purpose ') ,

(71) (a) siYian+ . the thing one i s s t i n g brcause of/abouts

(b) ti-si+Xan+-tx # t h e reason one is s t ingy '

( 7 3 ) {a) siJilan ' thing one always has t o m f o r v

(b) t i - s i l i h - t x - t h e thing one has t o run for .

( 74 ) (a) s iya 9

, reason for being good'

(b) t i - s i y a - t x 't!le thing one has t o be good f o r '

In (-3) and (74), s m a n t i c CAUSE i s r - c o g i z e d in t h e -has t o * or 'got t o -

component of the English gloss. Counter t o t h i s primary usage, names for most

of the nonths show t h e e- pref ix , th? implication being t h a t t h e pref ix may

mark t i l e a s well a s place:1n

r : ; , (a ) s ikYlx *3larch I~ihen it ge ts l i a n ) '

(b) si?is?am++ -June [when we ea t s ~ r i n g salmon]

(c ) s i ? i s ; l i l 'August [wl~en we eat dog salmon-

(d) si?isways+ 'September [when we ea t cohoel-

(e) siqulxuayx 'November [when they ga ther ] '

( f ) si7mt *December [when it sits downJV

e tc .

But s ince t h e Preposition %-, c lose ly associated with 2-, may denote ' a t .

a place or ' a t ' a t i ne , appearance of such forms i s not t o be completely un- suspected. The younger s- continues i t s encroadment into the smant ic do-

.win of ?-.

2.2 As the prefix 5- appears outside contexts that simultaneously signal

a ROLE, so may &- occur. Consider

(76) 7aTi-naw wa-Jmsta-c ~ i - ~ u l - s b e located-they -person- -cane-he] *The people are here i s why he came*

(77) 7aTnap-ic si- lap-nu [know-I/it -go-you] ' I know why you're going'

In both, the 2-pref ixednat i r ia l isclear ly analogous to the forms of (44) and

(45), and the observations made there a r e valid here as well. We also note

tha t i n the same va;: tha t the 2-pref ixed PROPOSITIOX may s t d as an utterance,

as in (46) and (48), so here g - i n i t i a l PROPOSITIONS are possible, under the

same circumstances of discourse and with the same e l ic i ta t ion of confirmation:

(78) s i - l ap - s * I s tha t the reason h e b s going?.

(79) s i -4 s - s [ -be i l l - h e ] , I s t ha t why he ' s sick?.

(80) ~ i - ~ i j a y x - s [ -get caught-lie] .So t h i s i s the place he got caught, huh?,

There appear t o exis t no forms on the model of the 5- phrases of section 1.3,

and. any lexicalizations with 2- i n i t i a l m s t then resul t from the construc-

t ions of 2.1

3. Conclusion. Tie g- prefix-as the 2- one -denotes ( i ) PERIPIIERALITY to

the EVFhT t o which it i s affixed ( i f the whole i s then in turn deic t ica l ly pre-

fixed t o identify a PERIPHERAL ROLE) or ( i i ) PERIPNERALITY t o the material tha t

precedes it, i . e . the prdceding NUCLFAP portion of the PROPOSITION; and the pre-

f i x functions i n the l a t t e r case t o signal tha t the ent i re PROPOSITION that fo l -

lows it ( t o which it i s affixed) i s PERIPtiER4L t o the preceding NUCLEUS. In

both cases it appears tha t the NLiCLFM-PERIPtIERAL distinction that i s relevant

t o 5- and g- i s the PZOPOSITIONAL one, and not the ROLE-inherent, EVFNT-

determined one. R e PERIPHERY of the PROPOSITION, that 2- and e- express,

seems t o be canplementarily divided between them. If there i s any pattern t o

the division, it i s tha t 2-, associated with the more PROXIIIAL Preposition 5- , i s less FERIPFIERAL and more t ight ly bound t o the L'CLEUS than g- with i t s

association with the nore DISTAL Prepositions z- and 7uf-. There i s good reason then-both formal and semantic-to conclude tha t 5-

and g- in contemporary Bella Coola derive h is tor ica l ly from the same source,

and it i s only by understanding the i r grarmnatical and sanantic patterning tha t

one can understand the multitude of lexemes those patterns have spawned.

Notes

'gella Coola is a Salishan language spoken on the central coast of Brit ish

Colmbia, Canada. We wish to thank here those who have helped us t o an under-

standing of t he i r language, especially Charles Snow and Margaret Siwallace. We

also acknowledge the financial support of t h i s work provided by the Linguistics

Division of the Br i t i sh Columbia Provincial bkisem; the blelville a?d Elizabeth

Jacobs Research Fund of the I1hatcom ?8iseum Foundation, Bellingham, iiashington;

and the Canada Council (Grant 410-770?25).

'upper case notation i s enployed throught t h i s paper t o identify semantic

oppositibns; a term writ ten with only the f i r s t l e t t e r in upper case i s a

g r m a t i c a l one.

3~hese , obviously, do not exhaust the conmunicative capacity of lanyage,

and it i s , a t leas t pa r t i a l l y , the process of analysis and understaxding of lan-

p a s e tha t requires tha t k~nan e'xperience be segmented and a t t r ibutzd t o t h i s

or that portion of it.

40ur focus here i s on the structuring of E1TWSand PARTICIP.L\TS, and we

se t aside other components, e.g. Fillmore's (1968.24 e t passim) \I[odality].

5 Bella Coola possesses four Prepositions, tha t have been described in the

following manner:

STATIVX ACTIVE

?ROXI!.LAL x w i x e

D1ST.X ? ak ?u+

Common ,olossas for 5- are *byt and *with. ; for M-, ,fromn ; fo r s-, ' a t '

and .withb ; and fo r h&-, ' t o * and . , m t i l n . Cf. 3avis and Saunders 1375a and

1978.

' hce t h i s acknowledged PERIPHERU, el3nent i s made NUCLEAR, it nay then also

occur as the only WCLEV. WLE, i . e . i n a Passive construction:

tx-ark-im ti-t4,a-tx .The knife was used t o cut with'

plural , respectively, & it i s the EXECUTOR ROLE that the phrase signals a s the

identifying ROLE, i .e . the one who did it as opposed to the one it was done t o

or done with. Cf. Davis and Saunders 1978 for further remarks.

he thi rd singular inflection -2 on forms expressing an EL'EPR that se lec ts

one h'UCLp& ROLE ( i . e . Intransit ives) appears i n place of -eunder circumstances

that are commonly called "embedded". Cf. Davis and Saunders In prep.

q ~ c ~ l w r a i t h (1948.612. Vol. 2 ) c i t e s t h i s form with the gloss -Supernatural

good lucke . l%lc~lwraith (1948.610-11. Vol. 2) c i t e s names for ten of the months con-

structed in t h i s fashion.

7 ~ n phrases tha t identify some ROLE ard contain a form exprzssing an EVm

that se lec ts two NUCLEAR ROLES ( i . e . a Transitive Predicate), the inflection on

that form has the shapes -t 'he/hin' and -tan .he/tIiems when the XXUTOR i s

th i rd person s i n g ~ l a r and the EXPERIl3CW i s th i rd person singular and th i rd

References

Chafe, Wallace L. 1970. Meaning and the Structure of Language. Chicago: The

University of Chicago Press.

- 1376. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness , subjects, topics, and

point of view. In Subject and Topic, ed. by Charles N. Li.

Nevi York: Academic Press.

Davis, Phil ip #. M s . a. Ai Essay on Language.

-. ?Is. b. Understanding English: Prolegomena t o a Grarmrar.

Davis, Phil ip W. and Ross Saunders. 1975a. Bella Coola deic t ic usage. In

Studies in Caltural Anthropology (-Rice University Studies,

Vol. 61, So. 2 ) , ed. by Frederick C. Gamst. Houston: William

Marsh Rice University.

- 1975b. ne l la Coola nominal deixis. Lg. 51.845-58.

- 1976a. Pronminal coreference in Bslla Coola. Paper presented t o the

x'Jth Conference or. Anerican Inlian Languages, h'ashington, D.C.

----. 1376b. The syntax of CWSE and EFFFLT. Glossa 10.155-74.

. 1975. Bella Coola syntax. 111 Linguistic Studies of Native Canada, ed.

by Eung-Do Cook and Jonathan Kaye. Vaqcouver: University of

Br i t i sh Columbia Press.

- 1379. COhTROL aqd 3R'FLOWN in 3el la Coola. Paper presented t o the

X V I I I ~ ~ Conference on American Indian Languages, Cincinnati,

Ohio.

- -. In p r q . Complex sentmces in Bella Coola. Paper t o be presented t o the

nth Conference on American Indian Languages, Los Angeles,

California.

Downing, Pamela. 1377. On the creation and use of Fnglish compound nouns. Lg.

53.810- 1 2 .

Fillmore, Charles J . 1365. The case fo r case. In Universals in Linguistic

Theory, ed. by Fnmon Bach and Robert T. Iiarms. New York:

Ilolt, Pinehart and Winston, Inc.

-. 1371. Some problems for case g r m a r . In Linguistics: Developments of

the Sixties-Viewpoints fo r tile Swenties (->lonograph Series

on Languages and Linguistics, 24 ) , ed. by Richard J. OvBrien,

S. J. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.

Fillmore, Charles J. 1377. The case fo r case reopened. In Syntax and Senantics,

Vol. 8: Gramatical Relations, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerrold

bl. Sadock. New York: Acadanic Press.

~ i v o n , Talmy. 1975. Focus and the scope of assertion: some Bantu widence.

Studies in African Linguistics 6.185-205.

Grice, H. P. 1375. Logic and conversation. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3 ,

ed, by P. Cole and J. L. 3brgan. New York: Academic Press.

lialliday, 3. A. K. 1370. Language structure and language function. In New

tlorizons in Linguistics, ed. by John Lyons. Hamndsworth: Penguin.

Kuipers, Aert Ii. 1967. The Squamish Language. The Hague: fbuton and Co.

----. 1374. The Shuswap Language. The Hague: :.louton.

Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. New York: Canbridge University Press.

PlcIlwraith, T. F. 1948. The Bella Coola Indians. Toronto: University of

Toronto Press. 2 vols.

Saunders ROSS and Philip W. Davis. 1973. The COXROL system of Bella Coola.

Paper presented t o the Thirteenth International Conference

on Salishan Languages, Victoria, Brit ish Colmbia.

----. In prep. A Grammar of 3e l la Coola. Victoria, Brit ish Columbia: Brit ish

Columbia Provincial ?luseun.

Searle, John P.. 1369. Speed, Acts: an Essay in the Philosophy of Language.

Carfibridge: Canbridge University Press.