Inorganic -e and double n in the Caligula Brut: implications for case marking

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 387-405
Author(s):  
SEIJI SHINKAWA

This article investigates variant forms of the demonstrative ‘that’ and the adjective in the Caligula Manuscript of Laȝamon's Brut and concludes that they to a large extent maintain the traditional category distinction between the accusative and the dative by the use of the suffixes -ne and -Vn (where V stands for any vowel) respectively. There are, however, factors that potentially compromise the status of these terminations as case markers: phonetic reduction (which has often been invoked), capricious addition or deletion of final e, occasional doubling or simplification of nasals, and simply unexpected choices of forms in the paradigm. These seem to be consistent with the sort of mistakes that scribes might occasionally make when faced with an original that has a different orthographical and morphological system from their own, and they are not as disruptive of the case-marking system as at first sight they might appear. For one thing, they occur rather rarely and are generally outnumbered by historically expected forms; for another, the resultant unexpected case forms, usually with the stem vowel preferred by the historical forms in the case of the demonstrative, are predominantly accompanied by a historically motivated case form of their head noun. The status of accusative -ne and dative -Vn, in fact, appears to be stable enough to lead to the development of a system or subsystem of indicating case regardless of gender considerations in their respective case contexts. These suffixes can therefore be treated validly as independent case markers, although in concrete cases the possibility always exists that there is an optional final e, an unhistorical double or single n, or an unexpected choice of inflectional forms.

Linguistics ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenneke van der Wal ◽  
Jacky Maniacky

AbstractIn several Bantu languages in the regions where Kikongo and Lingala are spoken, we encounter sentences where the word ‘person’ can appear after the subject of a canonical SVO sentence, resulting in a focused interpretation of the subject. Synchronically, we analyze this as a monoclausal focus construction with moto ‘person’ as a focus marker. Diachronically, we argue, the construction derives from a biclausal cleft, where moto functioned as the head noun of the relative clause. This is a crosslinguistically rare but plausible development. The different languages studied in this paper show variation in the properties indicative of the status of the ‘moto construction’, which reflects the different stages of grammaticalization. Finally, we show how contact-induced grammaticalization is a likely factor in the development of moto as a focus marker.


Author(s):  
William B. McGregor

This chapter overviews some of the patterns of emergence and development of ergative case markers in the world’s languages. What shines through most clearly is diversity: the range of possible source morphemes, constructions, and developmental pathways is much broader than might be expected. Rarely, it is possible to identify lexical sources for ergative case markers. More common sources are other case markers (notably instrumental, genitive, oblique, and ablative), and indexical items (such as demonstratives and pronominals); other possible sources include directional elements and focus markers. Ergative case markers can also be the sources of further grammatical developments, and can develop into markers of other grammatical categories, including other cases and verbal categories such as tense and aspect. Some observations are also included on the emergence and development of ergative case marking in language contact situations.


2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-198
Author(s):  
Albert Gatt

Abstract Maltese noun phrases exhibit ‘definiteness agreement’ between head noun and modifier. However, the status of this phenomenon as a case of true morphosyntactic agreement has been disputed, given its apparent optionality. The present paper presents a corpus-based study of the distribution of adjectives with and without definite marking, and then tests the pragmatic licensing claim through a production study. Speakers were found to be more likely to use definite adjectives in referential noun phrases when the adjectives had a specifically contrastive function. This result is discussed in the context of both theoretical and psycholinguistic work on the pragmatics of referentiality.


Author(s):  
Hideki Kishimoto

Japanese is a language where the grammatical status of arguments and adjuncts is marked exclusively by postnominal case markers, and various argument realization patterns can be assessed by their case marking. Since Japanese is categorized as a language of the nominative-accusative type typologically, the unmarked case-marking frame obtained for transitive predicates of the non-stative (or eventive) type is ‘nominative-accusative’. Nevertheless, transitive predicates falling into the stative class often have other case-marking alignments, such as ‘nominative-nominative’ and ‘dative-nominative’. Consequently, Japanese provides much more varying argument realization patterns than those expected from its typological character as a nominative-accusative language. In point of fact, argument marking can actually be much more elastic and variable, the variations being motivated by several linguistic factors. Arguments often have the option of receiving either syntactic or semantic case, with no difference in the logical or cognitive meaning (as in plural agent and source agent alternations) or depending on the meanings their predicate carry (as in locative alternation). The type of case marking that is not normally available in main clauses can sometimes be obtained in embedded contexts (i.e., in exceptional case marking and small-clause constructions). In complex predicates, including causative and indirect passive predicates, arguments are case-marked differently from their base clauses by virtue of suffixation, and their case patterns follow the mono-clausal case array, despite the fact that they have multi-clausal structures. Various case marking options are also made available for arguments by grammatical operations. Some processes instantiate a change on the grammatical relations and case marking of arguments with no affixation or embedding. Japanese has the grammatical process of subjectivization, creating extra (non-thematic) major subjects, many of which are identified as instances of ‘possessor raising’ (or argument ascension). There is another type of grammatical process, which reduces the number of arguments by virtue of incorporating a noun into the predicate, as found in the light verb constructions with suru ‘do’ and the complex adjective constructions formed on the negative adjective nai ‘non-existent.’


1997 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 313-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Rodrigues Aristar

Silverstein (1976) showed that the grammatical cases take varying kinds of case-marking according to the hierarchical value of the nominal being marked. This paper demonstrates that such hierarchical marking occurs in non-grammatical cases as well. Moreover, these cases typically take nominals of a specific hierarchical value as arguments. Analysis of the data according to classic marking theory reveals that departures from the typical pattern often take extra morphological marking. Since the new forms appear in atypical contexts, they are prone to being pragmatically reinterpreted. And the combination of marking and reinterpretation will produce new cases in the language.


Author(s):  
Yo Sato ◽  
Wai Lok Tam

This paper presents an HPSG formalisation of how the ellipsis of case-marking affects the focus of the clause in Japanese. We restrict our attention to the nominative and accusative markers ga and o, and in view of the fact that the ellipsis effects on focushood vary between 1) ga and o and 2) different argument structures of the head verb, develop an essentially lexicalist account that combines both aspects, in which the implicit focus argument position is specified in the predicate. We argue that if a constituent is an implicit focus it does not, while if one is not it does, require a case-marker to be focused.


Author(s):  
Theodore Levin ◽  
Maria Polinsky

This is an overview of the major morphological properties of Austronesian languages. We present and analyze data that may bear on the commonly discussed lexical-category neutrality of Austronesian and suggest that Austronesian languages do differentiate between core lexical categories. We address the difference between roots and stems showing that Austronesian roots are more abstract than roots traditionally discussed in morphology. Austronesian derivation and inflexion rely on suffixation and prefixation; some infixation is also attested. Austronesian languages make extensive use of reduplication. In the verbal system, main morphological exponents mark voice distinctions as well as causatives and applicatives. In the nominal domain, the main morphological exponents include case markers, classifiers, and possession markers. Overall, verbal morphology is richer in Austronesian languages than nominal morphology. We also present a short overview of empirically and theoretically challenging issues in Austronesian morphology: the status of infixes and circumfixes, the difference between affixes and clitics, and the morphosyntactic characterization of voice morphology.


Author(s):  
Martin Maiden ◽  
Adina Dragomirescu ◽  
Gabriela Pană Dindelegan ◽  
Oana Uță Bărbulescu ◽  
Rodica Zafiu

What are the principal characteristics of the inflexional marking of number, gender, and case in Romanian nouns and adjectives? What role do ideas of ‘animacy’ and ‘mass’ play in the system? What are the patterns of desinential number marking? What are the origins and the nature of the so-called Romanian neuter (or genus alternans)? How is case marking expressed? How have patterns of root allomorphy been created, and then levelled? What is the status of morphological invariance? What are the origins and nature of the inflexional marking of the vocative?


2007 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Tamm

This paper discusses telicity and perfectivity in Estonian. Neither of these categories corresponds exactly to the Estonian object case alternation, which is argued to reflect predicate or clause aspectual properties and not the NP-related properties of objects. The aim of this account is to accommodate the systematic compatibility of verb classes with certain clausal aspectual object case marking patterns. The paper proposes a way of understanding the interaction between verbal and clausal aspect in terms of boundedness and formalizes it in the framework of Lexical Functional Grammar (LFG). The features of verbs and case markers determine the clausal aspect from different constituents at the syntactic level of constituent structure. The information is unified at another syntactic level, functional structure.


2007 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 605-645 ◽  
Author(s):  
POLLET SAMVELIAN

This paper discusses the status of the Ezafe particle -(y)e in Persian and provides an affixal analysis of the Ezafe, formalized within Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG). The Ezafe, a feature of certain Western Iranian languages, is realized as an enclitic and links the head noun to its modifiers and to the possessor NP. The latter follow the head and are linked to one another by the Ezafe. On the basis of crucial empirical facts that have never been discussed in previous studies, I argue that the Ezafe is best regarded as an affix attaching to nominal heads (nouns, adjectives and some prepositions), as well as to nominal intermediate projections, and marking them as expecting a modifier or a direct nominal complement. Viewed as such, the Ezafe construction is an instance of the head-marked pattern of morphological marking of grammatical relations. This analysis differs from all previous accounts of the Ezafe (i.e. as case-marker, syntactic or phonological linker) and entails that the Ezafe, which originated in the Old Iranian relative particle -hya, has undergone a process of reanalysis-grammaticalization, to end up as a part of nominal morphology.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document