Upload
les
View
35
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
TAM/ Negation by Cross-Categorial Case in Uralic. ALT9, Hong Kong, July 21-25, 2011 Anne Tamm anne.tamm @ unifi.it Central European University. The share in the number of speakers. Case ( typically involves dependent Ns ). - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
TAM/Negation by Cross-Categorial Case in Uralic
ALT9, Hong Kong, July 21-25, 2011Anne Tamm
[email protected] European University
EstonianFinnishMordvaMariKomiUdmurtHungarianother FUSami
Source:Larsson 2005, slide 45
The share in the number of speakers
Case (typically involves dependent Ns)
• Blake (2001: 1) defines case as an inflectional “system of marking dependent nouns for the type of relationship they bear to their heads.”
Cross-Categorial Case (CCC)
• case as a TAM/negation marker • Narrower focus in this talk:
– case as part of non-finites – the partitive, the abessive, the spatial cases– Estonian
Blake (2001): Kalaw Lagaw Ya
• the comitative—habituality• the ablative—yesterday past• the locative—immediate past• the dative-allative—incompletivity• the ergative and the accusative—completivity
Nordlinger & Sadler (2004):Pitta Pitta
• objects of non-future tense clauses have an accusative marker –nha
• objects of future-tense clauses have the morpheme –ku as the accusative marker (Nordlinger and Sadler 2004:611)
Aikhenvald (2008): Manambu
Aspect marked on the verb: OBJ/LOC
Wun [de-ke-m] wukemar-e-mI he-LK-OBJ/LOC forget-LK-OBJ/LOC‘I completely forgot him.’ (Aikhenvald 2008:587)
Adelaar and Muysken (2004): Quechua
Accusative infinitive:Rima-y-ta xalayu-ru-n.speak-INF-ACC begin-PRF-3S‘He began to speak.’ (Adelaar and Muysken [2004: 226] in Spencer
[2009: 189])
Recapitulation: nominal marking
• on V (bare stems)• on nominal arguments and verbs, TAM
marking function• on nominal arguments, but in the function of
TAM marking• on nonfinites that have reduced nominal
properties
Number of cases at wals.info
An MDS map based on the WALS by Michael Cysouw
Rich case systems• Uralic languages are typically characterized by rich case systems
with approximately 10 members, and many have case systems of approximately 15 or 20 cases.
• According to the selection of languages in WALS on the map on Case by Iggesen (2008), there are 24 languages with more than 10 cases. – The following languages have more than 10 cases in WALS: Awa Pit,
Basque, Brahui, Chukchi, Epena Pedee, Estonian, Evenki, Finnish, Gooniyandi, Hamtai, Hungarian, Hunzib, Ingush, Kayardild, Ket, Lak, Lezgian, Martuthunira, Mordvin (Erzya), Nez Perce, Nunggubuyu, Pitjantjatjara, Toda, Udmurt.
• Five of those listed are Uralic (Erzya Mordvin, Estonian, Finnish, Hungarian, and Udmurt).
CASE NOUN VERB: ‘to go’1. Nominative s’ik2. Genitive s’ik-len3. Accusative s’ik/s’ik-ez4. Ablative s’ik-les’5. Datives’ik-ly6. Adessive s’ik-len7. Instrumental s’ik-en8. Abessive s’ik-tek myny-tek 9. Inessive s’ik-yn10. Illative s’ik-e11. Elative s’ik-ys’(t)12. Terminative s’ik-oz’13. Egressive s’ik-ys’en14. Prolative s’ik-eti15. Approximative s’ik-lan’
Udmurt: negation--abessive on verbs
Source: Svetlana Edygarova, p.c.
Udmurt: case on n-nominalizations1. Nominative s’ik myn-on (verb+n+case) 2. Genitive s’ik-len myn-on-len (verb+n+len) 3. Accusative s’ik/s’ik-ez myn-on-ez4. Ablative s’ik-les’ myn-on-les’5. Datives’ik-ly myn-on-ly6. Adessive s’ik-len 7. Instrumental s’ik-en myn-on-en8. Abessive s’ik-tek9. Inessive s’ik-yn myn-on-yn10. Illative s’ik-e myn-on-e11. Elative s’ik-ys’(t)12. Terminative s’ik-oz’ myn-on-oz’13. Egressive s’ik-ys’en14. Prolative s’ik-eti15. Approximative s’ik-lan’
Source: Svetlana Edygarova, p.c.
Case on m-nominalizations
1. Nominative s’ik myn-em (verb+m+case)2. Genitive s’ik-len myn-em-len (verb+m+len)3. Accusative s’ik/s’ik-ez myn-em-ez4. Ablative s’ik-les’ myn-em-les’5. Datives’ik-ly myn-em-ly6. Adessive s’ik-len7. Instrumental s’ik-en myn-em-en8. Abessive s’ik-tek9. Inessive s’ik-yn myn-em-yn10. Illative s’ik-e myn-em-e11. Elative s’ik-ys’(t) myn-em-ys’12. Terminative s’ik-oz’ myn-em-oz’13. Egressive s’ik-ys’en14. Prolative s’ik-eti15. Approximative s’ik-lan’
Source: Svetlana Edygarova, p.c.
Finnic aspect--two object casesMari sõi pitsa-t. M ate pizza-PARTITIVE‘Mary was eating the pizza.’
Mari sõi pitsa. M ate pizza.TOTAL‘It was a pizza that Mary ate up.’
FU Source cases ablative, elative, partitive, delative, egressive, exessive
• Egressive (Veps, Udmurt) marking the beginning of a movement or time (e.g., beginning from the house)
• Exessive (Karelian, Ingrian, Livonian, Votic, Estonian, etc ) transition away from a state (from a house)
• Delative (Hungarian) denotes movement from the surface (e.g., from (the top of) the house)
• Ablative (Erzya, Estonian, Finnish, Hungarian, Mansi, Vepsian, Votic, etc) denotes movement away from something (e.g., away from the house)
• Elative (Erzya, Estonian, Finnish, Hungarian, Lule Sámi, Pite Sámi, Votic, etc) denotes "out of something" (e.g., out of the house).
• Partitive (Finnic, Sámi languages) denotes "of, from, out of something" (the identity condition with the source matter).
• Genitive-ablative (Komi) source of information, resource
Some manure, too
Affectedness of the incremental theme and the object case
Incremental theme argument totally affected
Incremental theme argument
partially affected
NO PARTITIVE
PARTITIVE
The whole pizza is in the oven!But Giorgio’s action is incomplete.
Giorgio pani pitsa-t ahju.G[nom] put-past3s pizza-ptv oven.ill‘Giorgio is putting the pizza in the oven.’
Aspect in general
Telic - complete
Atelic – incomplete
NO PARTITIVE PARTITIVE
Hungarian aspectual particles and goal cases
INTO:Réka be-ment az épület-be. R INTO-go-3s.pst def building-INTO‘Réka entered the building.’ (”into-went”)ONTO:Ágnes rá-lépett a sajt-ra.A ONTO-step-3s.pst def cheese-ONTO‘Agnes stepped on cheese.’ (”on-stepped”)
productivepartitiveprtcpl-vat-vat-infinitive
productive...-da-da-t-infinitive
Historicalinstructive-da... Gerundive
Historical, productive-s, inessive-da-desGerundive
Historical, productive-ta, abessive-ma-mataAbessive of the m-infinitive
Artificial, productive-ks, translative-ma-maksTranslative of the m-infinitive
Dialectal, Finnish-Livonian-lt, ablative-ma(-malt)Ablative of the m-infinitive
Dialectal-l(a), adessive-ma-mallaAdessive of the m-infinitive
Coast dialectal-le, allative-ma-malleAllative of the m-infinitive
Historical, productive-st, elative-ma-mastElative of the m-infinitive
Historical, productive-s, inessive-ma-masInessive of the m-infinitive
Historical, productive-, illative-ma-maIllative of the m-infinitive (supine)
Diachronic statusCase NMLZ form
FormName
Estonian cross-categorial case
– illative and elative are linked to situation bounding (and not yet the possibility of the future or the past)
– inessive – the absentive and the progressive (Tommola 2000, De Groot 2000, Metslang 1994)
– abessive – negation (Hamari 2009)– partitive - aspect, epistemic modality and
evidentiality (Tamm 2009, Campbell 1991, Aikhenvald 2004, Erelt, Metslang&Pajusalu 2007)
Ma lähe-n Hong Kongi I[nom] go-1sg HK.illative‘I am going to Hong Kong.’
Goal: noun
Ma lähe-n uju-ma. I[nom] go-1sg swim-m_illative‘I am going swimming, I am going to swim.’ (# I’m gonna swim, I will swim.)
Goal: non-finite
Ma olen Hong Kongi-s. I[nom] be-1sg HK-inessive‘I am in Hong Kong.’
Location: noun
Ma olen uju-mas. I[nom] be-1s swim-m_inessive‘I am off swimming.’(# I am swimming – progressive)
Location: non-finite
Ma tule-n Hong Kongi-st. I[nom] come-1s HK-elative‘I am coming from Hong Kong.’
Source: noun
Ma tule-n uju-mast. I[nom] come-1s swim-m_elative‘I am coming from swimming.’(# Je viens de nager – I have just swum.)
Source: non-finite
Ma ole-n programmi-ta. I[nom] be-1s program-abessive‘I don’t have a/the program, I am without
a/the program, I lack the program.’Ma ole-n registreeri-mata. I[nom] be-1s register-m_abessive‘I have not done my registration.’
Abessive: negation
Abessive negation: modal constraints/presuppositions
#Kivist voodi on tege-mata.stone-ELA bed[NOM] be.3S make-
M_ABE‘The stone bed has not been made.’
#Marmorkuju on söö-mata.marble.statue[NOM] be.3S eat-M_ABE‘The marble statue has not eaten.’
The shared semantics of the partitives
Partitive marking
No partitive marking
NP Incomplete object
Complete object
Telicity Incomplete event
Complete event
Epistemic modality
Incomplete evidence
Complete evidence
Is this just a snowman or Father Frost’s agent of influence?
Allegedly, he has asked Father
Frost to give15
degrees below zero!
ole-va-t be-personal present participle - partitive
Mari ole-vat KGB agent.M be-PART.EVID kgb agent‘Allegedly/reportedly, Mary is a KGB agent.’
Mari on KGB agent.M be.3.s KGB agent‘Mary is a KGB agent.’
Evidentiality
Finnic Verb-Nominalizer-Case:Diachronic composition process
• V [[Verb-NMLZ]-CASE]• V [[Verb-[NMLZ]-CASE]]• V [Verb-[NMLZ-CASE]]• Verb-[NMLZ-CASE]
V (+ nominalizer + nominal marking non-finite or TAM verbal marking)
Nominal C vs CCC• Systems with CCC paradigms are complemented by
rich nominal case paradigms, but the reverse does not hold.
• The correspondences display cross-linguistic regularity although there are variations in the CCC inventories (abessive, translative, inessive).
• Cases in the paradigms are not identical: e.g., the Finnish abessive appears as a CCC but is infrequent as nominal case.
• Some cases (e.g., essive) are associated with various constraints that prevent them from appearing freely with nominalizations.
Nominalization scale• A language may contain CCCs that appear with items that are
located at different parts of the nominalization scale. • The degree of nominalization of the base plays a role in the
structure of CCC hierarchies and grammaticalization: the abessive may combine with the verb stem, while many other cases combine with various nominalizations in Udmurt.
• Since CCCs tend to be related to specific functional domains, they form hierarchies that diverge from the nominal ones (abessive, locatives are higher up on the implicational scale).
• If the degree of nominalization of the base verb is higher in a system containing several possibilities on the nominalization scale, then the cross-categorial and nominal case paradigms tend to be more similar. nom acc/erg gen dat loc abl/inst other (Blake 2001: 156)
CCC, nominalization, TAM+neg• Several generalizations can be established that cover CCCs
and infinitival adpositions (e.g., the Indo-European prepositional infinitives).
• In a case system with several goal markers, the more frequent ‘infinitives’ are based on the illative (Finnic) or translative (Selkup) instead of the earlier attested allative.
• The fact that abessive and translative (purposive) combine more readily with stems connects with the predictions of the frequency hierarchy established for Romance infinitives ([purposive>abessive> …] Schulte (2007)).
CCC, Uralic examples
• CCCs are rarely markers of prototypical predicate categories but have retained much of their nominal core semantics.
• In addition to their idiosyncratic morphosyntactic constraints, CCCs impose semantic and pragmatic constraints on their environment. Those constraints may be strikingly similar cross-linguistically.
• Spatial cases tend to give rise to tense-aspect marking, comitatives to Aktionsart (intensification, habituality), and abessives to negation.
Cross-categorial case
• Typical nominal or originally nominal marking• appearing on other categories• or encoding grammatical information typically
associated with predicates.
Completely=ACC, LOC, ERG He-ERG ate (one complete) pizza-ACC/LOCHe ERG/LOC/ACC-ate the pizzaHe completely-ate the pizza
Verb-NMLZ-CASEV [[Verb-NMLZ]-CASE]V [Verb-[NMLZ-CASE]]Verb-[NMLZ-CASE]
The bibliography can be found at:
Tamm, Anne. 2011.Cross-categorial spatial case in the Finnic non-finite system: focus on the absentive TAM semantics and pragmatics of the Estonian inessive m-formative non-finites. Linguistics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences, 49 (4), 835-944. Proofs: <http://tammacademic.pbworks.com/w/file/41313194/ANNETAMMLinguisticsSubmissiononDate1May2010.pdf>Click HERE for the link to the article.