The split word orders APV and PAV of Nuosu Yi

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-79
Author(s):  
Suhua Hu
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Linguistic Typology ◽  
Basic Word ◽  
Split Ergativity ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Case Markers ◽  
Syntax Study

Abstract Nuosu Yi is a Tibeto-Burman (henceforth TB) language lacking sufficient core case markers. Depending on the telicity and aspectuality of the predicates, its basic word order splits into APV and rigid PAV. To be specific, the atelic and/or imperfective predicates are APV, while the telic predicates indicated by the resultativity or perfect aspect are PAV. This paper describes the semantics and syntax of the syntactic PAV and APV of Nuosu Yi thoroughly; and compares them to other TB languages in terms of role marking strategies. I propose that the conditions of split word order in Nuosu Yi are on a par with those of the split ergativity encoded by the morphological marking in Tibetan and some other TB languages; namely, the rigid PAV corresponds to the ergative alignment, and the rigid APV corresponds to the accusative alignment. The study will deepen Nuosu Yi’s morpho-syntax study and show the word order diversity to the studies of linguistic typology. Additionally, the study sheds light on the possibility of extending the definition of ergativity and its potential counterpart.

Word Order Universals: Refinements and Clarifications

1988 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lyle Campbell ◽  
Vit Bubenik ◽  
Leslie Saxon
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Supplementary Data ◽  
Basic Word ◽  
Language Sample

Studies of word-order universals have had great impact in modern linguistics, thanks to Greenberg’s (1963) work and to Hawkins’s (1983) refinements. Greenberg’s conclusions were based on a sample of 30 languages “for more detailed information” and 142 languages “for certain limited cooccurrences of basic word order” (Hawkins 1983:xi; cf. Greenberg 1963:74–75). Hawkins expanded the 142 “to some 350 languages”, and for “between one-third and one-half of these supplementary data have been collected of the type that Greenberg listed in his 30-language sample” (Hawkins 1983:xi-xii). Hawkins proposed extensive revisions in Greenberg’s universals based on this expanded sample.

Morphological Means in Russian: Clarification of the Concept

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (9) ◽  
pp. 23-33
Author(s):  
Galina I. Panova ◽  
Tatiana V. Viktorina ◽  
Antonina E. Kuzmina
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Morphological Structure ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
Word Form ◽  
Similar Function ◽  
Word Forms ◽  
The Status ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Linguistic Units ◽  
The Russian Language

The concept of “morphological / grammatical means” is widely used in studies on the Russian language, although there is no generally accepted interpretation. This work analyzes the reflection of this concept in Russian studies and clarifies the status of those linguistic units that are traditionally referred to as morphological means: form-building affixes, alternating sounds (internal inflection), stress, supplementary word stems, auxiliary words, intonation, as well as word order. Our research has shown that these linguistic units have different functional status in the morphological structure of the Russian language. First, these are categorical, or actually morphological, means, represented by formative affixes and auxiliary words. They are carriers of morphological meanings in the structure of abstracted morphological forms – the basic units of inflectional Russian morphology. Secondly, a non-categorical means, syncretic and accidental for morphology, are supplementary stems that contain not only lexical, but also morphological meaning and thus duplicate the expression of morphological information in a word form with a form-building affix. Thirdly, these are linguistic units that are not elements of the morphological structure, but have morphological significance, which is manifested in their ability to differentiate homonymous morphological forms in the structure of word forms (alternating sounds and stress) or utterances (intonation). Word order can also perform a similar function. The study allows us to clarify the definition of the concept under consideration: morphological means are linguistic units that are carriers of morphological meanings and constituents of morphological forms.

Quintilian on Effective Language

2021 ◽  
pp. 141-161
Author(s):  
Jeanne Fahnestock
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Final Section ◽  
Word Choice ◽  
Rhetorical Style ◽  
Figures Of Speech ◽  
Passage Level ◽  
The Third ◽  
Prose Rhythm ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Major Division

Books 8 and 9 of the Institutio take up the third major division of rhetoric, elocutio or effective rhetorical style. Here Quintilian offers an encyclopaedic review of choices and devices at the word, sentence, and passage level, providing examples of their functions and potential abuses. Book 8 covers three of the four virtues of style: correctness, clarity, and ornatus or force. Quintilian favours everyday usage in word choice and warns against the faults of monotony, excess, and offensiveness. He praises visualizing language (enargeia), demurs on sententiae or pithy expressions, and reviews amplifying tactics, such as placing an item in, at the top, or even beyond a rising series, leading to speechlessness. The final section reviews twelve tropes, with special attention to how metaphors are invented. Book 9 opens with a definition of figures of speech as departures from normal usage, and discusses how the form of an expression contributes to its function. It then covers the ‘figures of thought’ such as prosopopoeia and irony, and the syntactic figures or schemes including figures of repetition. The last part treats compositio, involving word order, sound, and rhythm. Using the metrical vocabulary of poetry, Quintilian analyses prosody in terms of the proportion of long to short syllables, creating the pace of a passage, and then discusses prose rhythm in terms of the comma, colon, and period. Overall, Quintilian’s rich and complex treatment of rhetorical style should fuel continuing investigations.

The use of blocking and inhibition training in processing instruction

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nick Henry
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Training Session ◽  
Processing Instruction ◽  
Learner Performance ◽  
Structured Input ◽  
Targeted Instruction ◽  
Processing Strategies ◽  
Sentence Level ◽  
Case Markers ◽  
Slight Advantage

Abstract Previous research has suggested that L2 learners often use non-target processing strategies to understand sentences, but that these strategies can be changed through targeted instruction that directs their attention to different linguistic forms or structures. The present study explores the effects of pretraining ‘blocking’ practice—a novel type of training designed to help learners inhibit the application of a strict word-order based processing strategy—prior to receiving a traditional Structured Input (SI) training focused on OVS word order and accusative case markers in German. The study compares three groups of third-semester German learners who completed three different activities in one training session: (1) SI with blocking practice (+BP), (2) SI preceded by explicit information (+EI), and (3) SI without EI or blocking practice (−EI). The effects of training were measured by sentence-level interpretation and production tasks administered as a pretest, posttest, and four-week delayed posttest. Learner performance was also assessed during training. Results in all assessment measures indicated that EI was most effective, but that blocking practice lent a slight advantage over −EI groups during and after training. These results are discussed in the context of studies on processing instruction and learned attention.

Turkish and the Southwestern Turkic (Oghuz) languages

2020 ◽  
pp. 392-410
Author(s):  
Jaklin Kornfilt
Keyword(s):  
Structural Properties ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Vowel Harmony ◽  
Modern Greek ◽  
Basic Word ◽  
Embedded Clauses ◽  
Modern Standard

The Southwestern (Oghuz) branch of Turkic consists of languages that are largely mutually intelligible, and are similar with respect to their structural properties. Because Turkish is the most prominent member of this branch with respect to number of speakers, and because it is the best-studied language in this group, this chapter describes modern standard Turkish as the representative of that branch and limits itself to describing Turkish. The morphology of Oghuz languages is agglutinative and suffixing; their phonology has vowel harmony for the features of backness and rounding; their basic word order is SOV, but most are quite free in their word order and are wh-in-situ languages; their relative clauses exhibit gaps corresponding to the clause-external head, and most embedded clauses are nominalized. Fully verbal embedded clauses are found, too. The lexicon, while largely Turkic, also has borrowings from Arabic, Persian, French, English, and Modern Greek and Italian.

The Finnish tail construction as a first mention

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-203
Author(s):  
Katri Priiki
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Analysis ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Highly Active ◽  
New Information ◽  
Demonstrative Pronouns ◽  
Preceding Context ◽  
Definition Of

AbstractThis article examines the Finnish tail construction (right dislocation) used as a first mention of a referent and the variation of the demonstrative pronouns tämä ‘this’, tuo ‘that’, and se ‘it’ in the construction. Many previous studies have suggested that tail construction (TC) referents are highly active and thus already mentioned and salient in a conversation. However, in Finnish, the TC may introduce new referents into a conversation, and this article provides an empirical analysis of how and why this is done. First-mention TCs are often evaluations or questions in which the proposition links the utterance to the preceding context. When presenting new information, the TC allows the speaker to present a potentially lengthy lexical definition of a new referent at the end of the utterance, avoiding the additional emphatic meanings or unwanted implications a simply inverted word order might create.

The zoom-on-possessee construction in Kam (Dong): the anatomy of a new construction type

2005 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 307-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
MATTHIAS GERNER
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Body Part ◽  
Guizhou Province ◽  
General Definition ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Noun Incorporation ◽  
New Construction ◽  
Construction Type ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Asian Languages

Kam, a Kadai language spoken in Guizhou province (People's Republic of China), has a family of intransitive possessive constructions with the word order ‘Possessor–Verb–Possessee’. (The basic word order in Kam is SV and AVO.) While two recent papers have featured this unique construction type for an array of other Southeast Asian languages, they fail to acknowledge its distinct semantic value in contrast to the related construction type ‘Possessee–Possessor–Verb’. The former construction type displays a so-called ‘zoom-effect’: the possessor is predicated IN, AT or THROUGH his/her/its possessee; the predication zooms from the possessor on his/her/its possessee. The latter construction, in contrast, views the possessee as an entity separated from its possessor, and the predicate as applying solely to the possessee. After illustrating the ‘zoom-effect’ for a representative sample of Kam constructions, I demonstrate that ‘zoom-effects’ do not merely exist when the possessee–possessor compound has the zero-role (=intransitive subject) as above, but also when it assumes other semantic roles (e.g. patient, force, etc.). A general definition of this construction type, called ‘zoom-on-possessee construction’, is proposed; it enables us to unify and account for an array of hitherto disparate construction types that run in the literature under labels such as ‘proprioceptive state expressions’, ‘body part locative constructions’, ‘dative of affect’, etc. Furthermore, I discuss in some detail whether zoom-on-possessee constructions are better accounted for within a multi-stratal or a mono-stratal framework and, finally, whether the concept of noun-incorporation has any relevance.

Basic word order in classical Arabic and Jordanian Arabic

Lingua ◽  
1985 ◽  
Vol 65 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 107-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Khalid El-Yasin
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Jordanian Arabic ◽  
Basic Word ◽  
Classical Arabic
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document