On some endangered Sinitic languages spoken in Northwestern China

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alain Peyraube

This paper will examine one of the most characteristic syntactic properties of languages, namely the case system for the following three Sinitic languages spoken in Northwestern China: Línxià (or Hézhōu), Tāngwāng, Gāngōu, which have been sometimes viewed as ‘mixed languages’. An answer to the following main questions will be tentatively suggested in the conclusion: do we really have case suffixes in these languages (cases are a morphological notion) or simply thematic roles expressed by postpositions (thematic roles are a semantic notion)? Do we really have a Qinghai-Gansu linguistic area (Sprachbund), as has been suggested? Can these Sinitic languages be characterized as being mixed languages?

Virittäjä ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 124 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jussi Ylikoski

Artikkelissa tarkastellaan suomen kielen sijataivutuksen ja adverbinjohdon rajaseutua. Suomen kieliopin kuvauksissa on tapana esittää 15 sijaa, joiden runsautta pidetään suomen kielen erityispiirteenä. Artikkelissa siirrytään perinteisen sijaparadigman marginaalin eli jopa niin sanottujen marginaalisten sijojen (abessiivin, instruktiivin ja komitatiivin) ulkopuolelle. Tarkastelun kohteena on vanhastaankin sijataivutuksen yhteydessä huomiota saanut väyliä ja välineitä ilmaiseva prolatiivi, mutta keskiössä ovat erityisesti isin-päätteiset temporaaliset ja (i)ttAin-päätteiset distributiiviset muodosteet, kuten iltaisin ja maanantaisin tai alueittain ja lajeittain. Tutkimusaineistona ovat laajat kirjoitettua nykysuomea edustavat korpukset. Kyllin laajoissa tutkimusaineistoissa sekä isin-temporaali että (i)ttAin-distributiivi paljastuvat verrattain produktiivisiksi muodostetyypeiksi: temporaalimuotojen (esim. kesäöisin, sapattisin) rinnalla etenkin distributiivimuodot ovat erittäin monikäyttöisiä (kyläkunnittain, nuorkauppakamareittain, tyylipiirteittäin). Erityistä huomiota saavat muodosteiden syntaktiset ominaisuudet, joiden valossa temporaali ja distributiivi – ja myös prolatiivi – poikkeavat tavanomaisista adverbeista, jollaisina niitä perinteisesti on pidetty. Mahdollisia ovat muun muassa relatiivilauseet (kirjeitse, jossa – –, maanantaisin, jotka – –), genetiiviattribuutit (elokuun lauantaisin, Suomen kunnittain) ja eräät taipumattomat määritteet (joka maanantaisin, koko kyläkunnittain). Uusi havainto on myös temporaali- ja distributiivimuotojen kyky saada instruktiivimuotoisia adjektiiviattribuutteja: lausekkeet satunnaisin viikonloppuisin ja tietyin aihealueittain muistuttavat marginaalisuudessaankin sijamuotoja ja etenkin komitatiivia (omin ~ omine lupineen). Artikkelissa esitetään, että sijajärjestelmämme kuvauksen rajapintaa voisi laajentaa eräänlaisilla kääpiösijoilla samaan tapaan kuin eräitä aurinkokuntamme jäseniä voidaan luonnehtia kääpiöplaneetoiksi, vaikka ne eivät varsinaiseen planeetan määritelmään sopisikaan.   On Finnish dwarf cases: prolative, temporal and distributive The article discusses the borderland between nominal case inflection and adverb derivation in Finnish. Finnish grammars customarily present a case system of fifteen cases. The present article takes a step outside of the most marginal cases (abessive, instructive and comitative) within the traditional paradigm. In addition to observations on the so-called prolative, which has at times been considered a borderline case, the main focus of the study is on two kinds of formations traditionally regarded as denominal adverbs. The previously under-described formations ending in -isin have a repetitive temporal meaning (e.g., iltaisin ‘in the evenings’) and those ending in -(i)ttain/-(i)ttäin are distributive forms (e.g., maittain ‘by country’). Based on data drawn from large corpora of modern written Finnish, the temporal form -isin and particularly the distributive forms -(i)ttain/-(i)ttäin appear to be rather productive morphological categories. Special attention is given to the syntactic properties of these formations, as the data shows that not only do the case-like prolative forms differ from ordinary adverbs, but the temporal and distributive forms do so too. The author argues that the formations in question are not fully denominal forms, rather they reveal many features characteristic of nouns: they may be accompanied by postmodifying relative clauses as well as genitive and adjectival modifiers. In the absence of the full agreement typical of Finnish adjectival modifiers, the associated adjectives occur in the instructive case (e.g., satunnais-in viikonloppu-isin [random-pl.instr weekend-temp] ‘on random weekends’ and tiety-in aihealue-ittain [certain-pl.instr thematic.area-distr] ‘by certain thematic areas’), which in turn makes the temporal and distributive forms resemble those of the comitative case. The article shows that the inflection–derivation interface of the Finnish noun is far from clear-cut. On the basis of the findings presented in this study, the author asserts that our understanding of the Finnish case system could be advanced by introducing the concept of the “dwarf case”, analogous with that of dwarf planets, which are members of the Solar System and share many features with planets despite not being true planets themselves.


Author(s):  
M. Teresa Espinal ◽  
Jaume Mateu

Idioms, conceived as fixed multi-word expressions that conceptually encode non-compositional meaning, are linguistic units that raise a number of questions relevant in the study of language and mind (e.g., whether they are stored in the lexicon or in memory, whether they have internal or external syntax similar to other expressions of the language, whether their conventional use is parallel to their non-compositional meaning, whether they are processed in similar ways to regular compositional expressions of the language, etc.). Idioms show some similarities and differences with other sorts of formulaic expressions, the main types of idioms that have been characterized in the linguistic literature, and the dimensions on which idiomaticity lies. Syntactically, idioms manifest a set of syntactic properties, as well as a number of constraints that account for their internal and external structure. Semantically, idioms present an interesting behavior with respect to a set of semantic properties that account for their meaning (i.e., conventionality, compositionality, and transparency, as well as aspectuality, referentiality, thematic roles, etc.). The study of idioms has been approached from lexicographic and computational, as well as from psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic perspectives.


2006 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 275-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Lefebvre ◽  
Virginie Loranger

The formfu(variantu) fulfills several functions. It is a preposition selecting NPs and clauses, tensed or infinitival. It is a mood marker occurring either between the subject and the verb, or before the subject. It is a complementiser selected by predicates of thewant-class; as such it is in a paradigmatic relationship with other complementisers in the language. Finally, in some contexts,fuappears to function as a case marker, rather than as a preposition, as it may be associated with several thematic roles. The first objective of the paper is to provide a detailed inventory of all the functions offuand a detailed description of its properties for each of its functions. This will be done mainly on the basis of published sources. The proposal thatfucan head various syntactic projections (P, Force, Fin, Mood, Kase) will be shown to account for its multifunctional character. The second objective of the paper is to discuss the origin of the properties offu. First, we consider the grammaticalisation scenario proposed in the literature. In this scenario, the prepositionfuwould have been reanalysed as a complementiser. We argue that this scenario is not an optimal one. Second, we consider a relexification scenario along the lines of Lefebvre (1998b). Although the form of the lexical item in question is derived from Englishfor, as has been noted by several authors, most of its other properties cannot be derived from this lexical item. A comparison of the properties offuwith those of corresponding lexical items in one of the substratum languages of Saramaccan, Fongbe (e.g. Smith 1987), yields a different conclusion: while the form of the Saramaccan lexical entry is derived from English, the bulk of its semantic and syntactic properties are derived from those of corresponding substratum language lexical entries. The properties of the creole lexical entry thus appear to follow from the re lexification account of creole genesis. In this case, however, two substratum lexical entries (nú, preposition and complementiser, andní, mood marker and complementiser) appear to have been relexified on the basis of a single superstratum formfor, yielding the creole lexical entryfucumulating all the functions of the two substratum entries. Some details distinguish the creole lexical entry from the two substratum ones. It will be shown that the make up offuhas also involved some reorganisation of the original lexicon, and some innovation.


Author(s):  
Nikolaos Lavidas

Greek demonstrates both a change from inner (Aktionsart) into outer (grammatical) aspect as well as a change from demonstratives into definite articles, as does English. Even though aspect and definiteness are connected with Case, we argue that the tendencies in Greek with regard to the Case system differ in several aspects from the development of the Case system in English. We consider changes in the Case system of Greek in relation to syntactic properties of the clause, and in particular the realization of +/-interpretable features in inner and outer aspect. We argue that the change that takes place in the history of Greek involves a transitional stage in Ancient Greek where the relevant features can appear on the Trans[itivity] head (outer aspect) or the (inner) Asp[ect] head. The completion of the change in Post-Koine Greek involves the loss of the interpretable feature on Asp; thus Case remains (uninterpretable) on the higher Trans head.


2011 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-40
Author(s):  
Robert Bielecki

Does the Genitive Operate in the Hungarian Case System?: II. The Ø-/nak-/nek-GenitiveThe present paper should be regarded as a direct continuation of the articleDoes the Genitive Operate in the Hungarian Case System? I. The é-Genitive. The core of the adopted approach represents the standpoint that present-day Hungarian cannot be conceived as a language exempt from any case syncretism. The possibility of distinguishing different case categories relevant for this language by referring only to the form of their markers (endings) is illusory. What is more, it creates a space where some phenomena remain imperceptible. The postulated attributive genitive category can be distinguished not only on the basis of its syntactic properties. The manifestations of this case also differ substantially from the manifestations of other recognized cases. It is difficult to regard the attributive genitive in Hungarian as syncretic with nominative or dative in the sense known in general linguistics, because the appropriate markers turn out to be insufficient in semifying (marking grammatically) the required meaning. They must be complemented by other markers attached to the head of the attributive syntagm (a diák/Økönyv/e, a diák/naka könyv/e‘the student's book’). The properties of the distribution of the Hungarian attributive genitive with its two main manifestations (the endingless one:a diák könyve, and with ending:a diáknak a könyve) can be regarded as a contribution to the general theory of syntax; the genitive attributes of different grades are marked there substantially (a diák/Ø(III) könyv/e(II) cím/é/nek(I) a fordítás/a‘the translation of the title (I) of the book (II) of the student (III)’) and not only by their linear order as in many Indo-European and Finno-Ugric languages. When the word fulfilling the attributive function belongs to the category of personal pronoun, concord can be identified between it and its head in person and number (azénkönyv/em‘my book, the book of mine’). The factual elision of personal pronouns resulting from their redundancy in this context gives no grounds to state that morphemes like -emina könyv/emdo not fulfil any syntagmatic function. Such an utterance constitutes a discrepancy with the analogous behaviour of personal pronouns in relation to finite verbal forms (olvas/ok‘I read’ →olvas/ok‘(I) read’) where no-one speaks of the irrelevancy of the personal endings in reference to their syntagmatic function. The necessity of distinguishing of socalled "marks" (here "possessor marks") is being questioned here; those morphemes are not deprived of fulfilling the syntagmatic function ascribed traditionally to the case endings in the case of nominal flexion. They are regarded here as parts of the discontinuative (genitive) case markers. The specific features of the Hungarian genitive include its sharp division into two subcategories: (i) theé-genitive and (ii) theØ-/nak-/nek-genitive. Their complementary distribution, together with other discussed properties, additionally corroborates the relevance of distinguishing for them a common upper morphosyntactic category called the genitive case. And finally, Hungarian turns out to be a language where the accumulation of multiple case meanings, all being manifested substantially within the boundaries of one word, can be attested (a diák/om/é/é/t‘the one of the one of my student’).


2010 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Bielecki

Does the Genitive Operate in the Hungarian Case System?: I. The é-Genitive After three centuries of discussion concerning the genitive case in Hungarian, the authors of the latest academic grammars - in contrast to many of their predecessors - no longer distinguish this casal category. Different cases in Hungarian should, according to them, be distinguished only on the basis of their forms (endings). Such an extreme unilateral approach to this category seems to have simplified at first sight the description of the Hungarian language, erasing from it any case syncretism. From the point of the view defended in the present paper, however, talking about linguistic entities without taking into account their meaning is illusory; even in the case of meaningless speech segments such as phonemes it is the meaning of the segments in which they occur that constitutes the ultimate instance allowing them to be distinguished at all. The same applies to case. The moderate approach to the category of case adopted here, taking simultaneously into account its (i) morphological, (ii) semantic and (iii) syntactic properties, leads irrevocably to the restoration of the genitive in the description of the Hungarian language. As a specific feature of this language one should consider the sharp distinction between two subclasses of the genitive case: (i) the non-attributive (é-genitive) and (ii) the attributive genitive (Ø-/nak-/nek-genitive). Only the first of these (the é-genitive) will be discussed in detail. The second (the Ø-/nak-/nek-genitive) will be the subject of a continuation of the present paper. Recognition of the é-genitive seems to have been blocked by those of its properties which seem to be quite incongruous with those of other Hungarian cases. It is claimed, for example, that the marker -é - unlike the markers of other cases - seems not to express any syntagmatic function. This function is expressed by the case marker attached after the morpheme -é (A diákét (láttam) '(I saw) The student's one'). In the view of the author, however, the lack of syntagmatic function in the case of the morpheme -é is not so obvious. On the other hand, such "discrediting" properties for a case marker candidate, as the property of not occupying the final morphotactical position (diákét), can be viewed as entirely irrelevant for the category of case. The adopted approach seems to make possible a description of this fragment of the Hungarian case system from a more homogenous perspective, showing the interplay of different casal meanings within the boundaries of one word.


2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (12) ◽  
pp. 4450-4463
Author(s):  
Rikke Vang Christensen

Purpose The aim of the study was to explore the potential of performance on a Danish sentence repetition (SR) task—including specific morphological and syntactic properties—to identify difficulties in children with developmental language disorder (DLD) relative to typically developing (TD) children. Furthermore, the potential of the task as a clinical marker for Danish DLD was explored. Method SR performance of children with DLD aged 5;10–14;1 (years;months; n = 27) and TD children aged 5;3–13;4 ( n = 87) was investigated. Results Compared to TD same-age peers, children with DLD were less likely to repeat the sentences accurately but more likely to make ungrammatical errors with respect to verb inflection and use of determiners and personal pronouns. Younger children with DLD also produced more word order errors that their TD peers. Furthermore, older children with DLD performed less accurately than younger TD peers, indicating that the SR task taps into morphosyntactic areas of particular difficulty for Danish children with DLD. The classification accuracy associated with SR performance showed high levels of sensitivity and specificity (> 90%) and likelihood ratios indicating good identification potential for clinical and future research purposes. Conclusion SR performance has a strong potential for identifying children with DLD, also in Danish, and with a carefully designed SR task, performance has potential for revealing morphosyntactic difficulties. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.10314437


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document