Pub Date : 2021-05-26DOI: 10.1515/lingty-2021-2078
D. Killian
Abstract Although there has been growing interest in the study of demonstratives, a number of demonstrative categories remain largely unexplored. This article addresses one gap, presenting a preliminary typological overview of predicative demonstratives, a type of demonstrative used primarily in non-verbal predication constructions. The morphosyntax of predicative demonstratives is first briefly examined, followed by a typological characterization based primarily on semantic and morphosyntactic grounds. Predicative demonstratives focus on the immediately surrounding spatial, temporal, or textual environment of the speech act, showing restrictions on occurring in negated clauses or questions. In terms of lexical categorization, predicative demonstratives most commonly find themselves in a small closed word class of non-verbal predicators. Four types of predicative demonstratives are proposed here: Presentatives, identifiers, localizers, and the rare copular demonstratives.
{"title":"Towards a typology of predicative demonstratives","authors":"D. Killian","doi":"10.1515/lingty-2021-2078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2021-2078","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Although there has been growing interest in the study of demonstratives, a number of demonstrative categories remain largely unexplored. This article addresses one gap, presenting a preliminary typological overview of predicative demonstratives, a type of demonstrative used primarily in non-verbal predication constructions. The morphosyntax of predicative demonstratives is first briefly examined, followed by a typological characterization based primarily on semantic and morphosyntactic grounds. Predicative demonstratives focus on the immediately surrounding spatial, temporal, or textual environment of the speech act, showing restrictions on occurring in negated clauses or questions. In terms of lexical categorization, predicative demonstratives most commonly find themselves in a small closed word class of non-verbal predicators. Four types of predicative demonstratives are proposed here: Presentatives, identifiers, localizers, and the rare copular demonstratives.","PeriodicalId":45834,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Typology","volume":"26 1","pages":"1 - 41"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67024325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-24DOI: 10.1515/lingty-2021-2076
Jeff Good
{"title":"Jenneke van der Wal and Larry M. Hyman: The conjoint/disjoint alternation in Bantu","authors":"Jeff Good","doi":"10.1515/lingty-2021-2076","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2021-2076","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45834,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Typology","volume":"27 1","pages":"195 - 207"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/lingty-2021-2076","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49669238","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Decades of works dedicated to the description of (previously) lesser-known Sinitic languages have effectively dispelled the common myth that these languages share a single “universal Chinese grammar”. Yet, the underlying cause of their grammatical variation is still a matter for debate. This paper focuses on typological variation across Sinitic varieties. Through comparing the typological profiles of various Sinitic languages with those of their Altaic and Mainland Southeast Asian (MSEA) neighbors, we discuss to what extent the variation within the Sinitic branch can be attributed to areal diffusion. Taking into account over 360 language varieties of seven different genetic affiliations (Sinitic, Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Hmong-Mien, Tai-Kadai, Austroasiatic) and 30 linguistic features, we conduct a typological survey with the aid of the phylogenetic program NeighborNet. Our results suggest that convergence towards their non-Sinitic neighbors has likely played a pivotal role in the typological diversity of Sinitic languages. Based primarily on their degree of Altaic/MSEA influence, the Sinitic varieties in our database are classified into four areal groups, namely 1) Northern, 2) Transitional, 3) Central Southeastern, 4) Far Southern. This classification scheme reflects the intricate interplay between areal convergence, regional innovations, and retention of archaic features.
{"title":"Sinitic as a typological sandwich: revisiting the notions of Altaicization and Taicization","authors":"Pui Yiu si˥tʰou⇃ Szeto pʰuy˧ jiu⇃, Chingduang juʔ˥raʔ˥joŋ˧ Yurayong tɕʰiŋ˧duəŋ˧","doi":"10.1515/LINGTY-2021-2074","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/LINGTY-2021-2074","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Decades of works dedicated to the description of (previously) lesser-known Sinitic languages have effectively dispelled the common myth that these languages share a single “universal Chinese grammar”. Yet, the underlying cause of their grammatical variation is still a matter for debate. This paper focuses on typological variation across Sinitic varieties. Through comparing the typological profiles of various Sinitic languages with those of their Altaic and Mainland Southeast Asian (MSEA) neighbors, we discuss to what extent the variation within the Sinitic branch can be attributed to areal diffusion. Taking into account over 360 language varieties of seven different genetic affiliations (Sinitic, Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Hmong-Mien, Tai-Kadai, Austroasiatic) and 30 linguistic features, we conduct a typological survey with the aid of the phylogenetic program NeighborNet. Our results suggest that convergence towards their non-Sinitic neighbors has likely played a pivotal role in the typological diversity of Sinitic languages. Based primarily on their degree of Altaic/MSEA influence, the Sinitic varieties in our database are classified into four areal groups, namely 1) Northern, 2) Transitional, 3) Central Southeastern, 4) Far Southern. This classification scheme reflects the intricate interplay between areal convergence, regional innovations, and retention of archaic features.","PeriodicalId":45834,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Typology","volume":"25 1","pages":"551 - 599"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/LINGTY-2021-2074","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49371051","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-15DOI: 10.1515/LINGTY-2021-2072
Caterina Mauri, A. Sansó
Abstract This paper provides a diachronic typology of what we call ‘heterogeneous plurals’, an overarching term comprising associative plurals (expressions meaning X[person] & company) and similative plurals (expressions meaning X and similar entities). Based on a 110-language sample, we identify the most recurrent sources of these two types of plurals by means of various types of evidence (homophony/identity, internal reconstruction, comparison with cognate languages). The two types of plurals develop out of different source types: while the sources of associative plurals include elements that work as set constructors (plural anaphoric elements, plural possessives, names meaning ‘group’), those of similative plurals comprise elements with vague reference such as interrogative/indefinite items or uncertainty markers. There are also a few source types that may develop into both associative and similative plurals, such as connectives (‘and/with’) and universal quantifiers (‘every/all’). The differences in the diachronic pathways leading to the two types of plurals are explained in terms of the different referential properties of the nominal bases from which they are formed (proper names/kin terms vs. common nouns), but also taking into account the typical discourse contexts in which the two types of plurals are employed.
{"title":"Heterogeneous sets: a diachronic typology of associative and similative plurals","authors":"Caterina Mauri, A. Sansó","doi":"10.1515/LINGTY-2021-2072","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/LINGTY-2021-2072","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper provides a diachronic typology of what we call ‘heterogeneous plurals’, an overarching term comprising associative plurals (expressions meaning X[person] & company) and similative plurals (expressions meaning X and similar entities). Based on a 110-language sample, we identify the most recurrent sources of these two types of plurals by means of various types of evidence (homophony/identity, internal reconstruction, comparison with cognate languages). The two types of plurals develop out of different source types: while the sources of associative plurals include elements that work as set constructors (plural anaphoric elements, plural possessives, names meaning ‘group’), those of similative plurals comprise elements with vague reference such as interrogative/indefinite items or uncertainty markers. There are also a few source types that may develop into both associative and similative plurals, such as connectives (‘and/with’) and universal quantifiers (‘every/all’). The differences in the diachronic pathways leading to the two types of plurals are explained in terms of the different referential properties of the nominal bases from which they are formed (proper names/kin terms vs. common nouns), but also taking into account the typical discourse contexts in which the two types of plurals are employed.","PeriodicalId":45834,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Typology","volume":"27 1","pages":"1 - 40"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/LINGTY-2021-2072","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46143371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-02DOI: 10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2071
Nitipong Pichetpan níʔtipʰoŋ pʰíʔtɕʰêːtpʰan, Mark W. Post mɑɹk pʰəʊst
Abstract This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the little-known “bare classifier phrase” construction in Modern Standard Thai. It describes the syntax, semantics and discourse functions of Thai bare classifier phrases, and further proposes a diachronic account of their origin in reduction of post-posed numeral ‘one’. Following this synchronic and diachronic description, this article attempts to locate Thai within a working typology of bare classifier constructions in mainland Asian languages, and further argues for the importance of bare classifier constructions to the theory of classifiers more generally. Following Bisang (1999) and others, it argues that bare classifier constructions reveal the core function of classifiers in Asian languages to be individuation – a referential function. It therefore cautions against some recent proposals to merge classifiers and gender markers within a single categorical space defined on the semantic basis of nominal classification, and in favour of continuing to treat classifiers as a discrete linguistic category – in mainland Asian languages, at least.
{"title":"Bare classifier phrases in Thai and other mainland Asian languages: implications for classifier theory and typology","authors":"Nitipong Pichetpan níʔtipʰoŋ pʰíʔtɕʰêːtpʰan, Mark W. Post mɑɹk pʰəʊst","doi":"10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2071","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2071","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the little-known “bare classifier phrase” construction in Modern Standard Thai. It describes the syntax, semantics and discourse functions of Thai bare classifier phrases, and further proposes a diachronic account of their origin in reduction of post-posed numeral ‘one’. Following this synchronic and diachronic description, this article attempts to locate Thai within a working typology of bare classifier constructions in mainland Asian languages, and further argues for the importance of bare classifier constructions to the theory of classifiers more generally. Following Bisang (1999) and others, it argues that bare classifier constructions reveal the core function of classifiers in Asian languages to be individuation – a referential function. It therefore cautions against some recent proposals to merge classifiers and gender markers within a single categorical space defined on the semantic basis of nominal classification, and in favour of continuing to treat classifiers as a discrete linguistic category – in mainland Asian languages, at least.","PeriodicalId":45834,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Typology","volume":"25 1","pages":"461 - 506"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2071","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46999226","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-21DOI: 10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2070
Ellen Smith-Dennis
Abstract This paper analyses the preverbal morpheme te, used in both apprehensive ‘precautioning’ sentences and in one of two prohibitive constructions in Papapana (papa1265, Austronesian, Oceanic; Papua New Guinea). I aim to establish whether there is a diachronic relationship between the two functions of te, and in which direction, how and why semantic change may have occurred. This requires consideration of the synchronic differences between Papapana prohibitives, comparisons with apprehensive and prohibitive constructions in other Oceanic languages, and an investigation of other languages where apprehensive and prohibitive morphemes are formally similar/identical. I argue that the two functions of te are diachronically related, but not polysemous, and that the prohibitive meaning developed from the apprehensive meaning via insubordination. This supports Pakendorf, Brigitte & Ewa Schalley’s proposed pathway of development from possibility to prohibition, via apprehension and warning. However, I argue that their pathway does not, as claimed, run counter to the proposed grammaticalisation path of deontic to epistemic modality, because prohibitives are arguably not deontic. This paper contributes to the growing body of research on apprehensives, demonstrates that the pathway from apprehension to prohibition is perhaps not as rare as Pakendorf and Schalley thought, and contributes to research on language change and modality.
{"title":"Don’t feel obligated, lest it be undesirable: the relationship between prohibitives and apprehensives in Papapana and beyond","authors":"Ellen Smith-Dennis","doi":"10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2070","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2070","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper analyses the preverbal morpheme te, used in both apprehensive ‘precautioning’ sentences and in one of two prohibitive constructions in Papapana (papa1265, Austronesian, Oceanic; Papua New Guinea). I aim to establish whether there is a diachronic relationship between the two functions of te, and in which direction, how and why semantic change may have occurred. This requires consideration of the synchronic differences between Papapana prohibitives, comparisons with apprehensive and prohibitive constructions in other Oceanic languages, and an investigation of other languages where apprehensive and prohibitive morphemes are formally similar/identical. I argue that the two functions of te are diachronically related, but not polysemous, and that the prohibitive meaning developed from the apprehensive meaning via insubordination. This supports Pakendorf, Brigitte & Ewa Schalley’s proposed pathway of development from possibility to prohibition, via apprehension and warning. However, I argue that their pathway does not, as claimed, run counter to the proposed grammaticalisation path of deontic to epistemic modality, because prohibitives are arguably not deontic. This paper contributes to the growing body of research on apprehensives, demonstrates that the pathway from apprehension to prohibition is perhaps not as rare as Pakendorf and Schalley thought, and contributes to research on language change and modality.","PeriodicalId":45834,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Typology","volume":"25 1","pages":"413 - 459"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2070","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49401693","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-23DOI: 10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2069
P. Arkadiev
{"title":"Typological hierarchies in synchrony and diachrony. (Typological Studies in Language 121.) Amsterdam","authors":"P. Arkadiev","doi":"10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2069","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2069","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45834,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Typology","volume":"25 1","pages":"631 - 640"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/LINGTY-2020-2069","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49179133","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：