1986 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 227-228
Author(s):  
M. L. Berg
Keyword(s):  

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jecky Misieng

There are generally three views of the notion of a phoneme. The structuralist view of the phoneme focuses on this language phenomenon as a phonetic reality. In discovering phonemes of a language, phonologists who hold this view will look for minimal contrasting pairs as a way to determine contrasting sounds of that language. They will also look for allophones or two sounds of the same phoneme which may appear in complementary distribution. This paper will discuss the possible application of the structuralist approach to analyzing the phonemes of a dialect of Bidayuh, one of the Malayo-Polynesian languages spoken in the northern region of Borneo.


Author(s):  
Gregory Forth

Speakers of a Central-Malayo-Polynesian language, the Nage of central Flores possess three terms for ‘person, people’ and ‘human being’: ata, hoga, and kita ata. The paper explores various semantic and social contexts in which the terms are differentially employed. Further discussed are lexical connections and semantic parallels with terms in other Malayo-Polynesian languages and the way these bear on the referents of Austronesian protoforms. Particular attention is given to Blust’s reconstruction of *qa(R)(CtT)a (reflected by Nage ata) as a word hypothetically specifying ‘outsiders, alien people’. With reference to Nage and other languages of Flores, it is shown how, rather than a simple contrast of outsiders and own group, ata and hoga are employed to express a variety of kinds and degrees of association or disassociation between speaker and referent. In this connection further attention is given to: (1) the question of whether Nage terms for humans and compounds formed from these compose a taxonomy comparable to the taxonomic ordering of plants and animals commonly found in folk biological classifications, and (2) the relation between the terms denoting human beings and Nage categories translatable as ‘(non-human) animal’ and ‘spiritual being’.


Language ◽  
1971 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 668 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viktor Krupa
Keyword(s):  

2014 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-212
Author(s):  
DONNA STARKS ◽  
DIANE MASSAM

This paper considers data from Niuean, a Polynesian language with VSO word order and an extensive range of grammatical particles. We focus on three question particles,nakai, kaandkia, examining their possible historical origins. In related languages the preferred means of forming a yes–no question is by intonation alone, while in the Polynesian languages that have yes–no question particles, the forms are lexically distinct from those found in Niuean. We argue that the Niuean unmarked question particlenakaiis derived from the negative, the pragmatically markedkiaconstruction from the polite form of the imperative, and thekaconstruction from a lexical item which signals confirmation. In all three cases, the question particles do not replace their original grammatical or lexical source words but rather co-exist with them in new contexts. The three question particles have all undergone a process of semantic bleaching, increased syntactic bonding, and in some cases, phonetic reduction. While two of the processes have occurred early in Niuean, one is a very recent development.


1977 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Seely

Summary The most widely accepted definition of ‘ergative’ is in terms of a grammatical case, namely, the subject of a transitive verb, wherein that case is opposed to a second case, the ‘absolutive’ (‘nominative’), which includes both the subject of an intransitive verb and the object of a transitive. Languages which have been referred to as ‘ergative’ or as containing ‘ergative constructions’ include Basque, Eskimo, most languages from the Caucasus and from Australia, some Polynesian languages, Burushaski, the Paleosiberian languages, Sumerian, Hittite, some Papuan languages, Tibetan, most members of the Indic branch of Indo-European, and many American Indian languages. Insight into speculation on the nature of the ergative leads to a study of the terminology applied before the coinage of the term ‘ergative’ in 1912 (by Adolf Dirr). The term itself has been given varied definitions. Fillmore pictured the ergative as a causative construction; John Anderson suggested ‘ergative’ as a semantic marker; John Lyons describes an ‘ideal ergative’ which is agentive in nature. The bizarre conjecture surrounding the study of ergative languages has included a long debate as to the active or passive nature of the ergative construction and, secondly, the fantasy that an ergative language was a ‘primitive’ one whose speakers had a ‘Weltanschauung’ opposed to that possessed by speakers of a nominative-accusative language. Rather than either active or passive it has also been postulated that the verb is bidirectional and that verb and nouns in some ergative constructions are in a kind of apposition with each other; in addition, these often occur in sets of relationships which are determined by the semantic nature of the nouns and verb. The term ‘semantic ergative’ is suggested here to describe the presence of the ergative marker due to semantic features as +movement, +voluntary, or + emphasis. Although found most commonly as subject of a transitive verb, this semantic ergative may nevertheless also be found as subject of an intransitive.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document