Core argument patterns and deep genetic relations
Figures
Figures - uploaded by Marianne Mithun
Author content
All figure content in this area was uploaded by Marianne Mithun
Content may be subject to copyright.
... As predicted by Givón (1994), one of the sources of main clause hierarchical alignment is the overuse of passive constructions, so that they become common even in the case where A retains some topicality (agentive passive / inverse voice), and may even go on to become obligatory in the Inverse quadrant, thereby closely resembling canonical cases of hierarchical alignment. 1 We rely on cases of "obligatory passives" in the literature, as summarized in typological work by Zúñiga (2006) and historical work by Mithun (2007Mithun ( , 2012. The mechanism predicted by Givón could be summarized as passage from a fully productive active-passive alternation, as schematized in Figure 4, to a system like that schematized in Figure 5, in which only the active construction is available in the Direct quadrant and only the passive construction in the Inverse quadrant. ...
... As part of his survey of synchronic Inverse systems in the Kiowa-Tanoan language family, Zúñiga (2006) describes synchronic patterns of obligatory voice in Arizona Tewa and Southern Tiwa. In a paper inspired by the same sort of changes described in Mithun (2007), Mithun (2012) argues that the asymmetrical use of passive constructions in four unrelated languages of northern California also creates a hierarchical pattern of obligatory voice. Without repeating the many examples from these three works, we simply characterize the attested restrictions in voice alternation in terms of the schema given in Figure 5. 2 We leave open the question of whether these cases are better analyzed as the "obligatory passive" that they are called in many analyses (including in Mithun's work), or whether their obligatory status indicates that they are now (at least in these obligatory contexts) now better analyzed as transitive predications, something that is usually criterial in the definition of an inverse construction. ...
... While it is the case that these patterns of usage appear to have spread by contact in both the Pacific Northwest Coast region and in northern California (cf. Mithun 2007Mithun , 2012 3 Note that Arizona Tewa (Tanoan; Zúñiga 2006) also has a pattern in which all Local interactions are coded with the inverse construction, but we do not include it here for three reasons. First, the Arizona Tewa inverse construction is clearly not a synchronic passive (as argued in Klaiman 1991: 209). ...
This paper proposes a diachronic typology for the various patterns that have been referred to as Hierarchical Alignment or Inverse Alignment. Previous typological studies have tried to explain such patterns as grammatical reflections of a universal Referential Hierarchy, in which first person outranks second person outranks third person and humans outrank other animates outrank inanimates. However, our study shows that most of the formal properties of hierarchy-sensitive constructions are essentially predictable from their historical sources. We have identified three sources for hierarchical person marking, three for direction marking, two for obviative case marking, and one for hierarchical constituent ordering. These sources suggest that there is more than one explanation for hierarchical alignment: one is consistent with Givón’s claim that hierarchical patterns are a grammaticalization of generic topicality; another is consistent with DeLancey’s claim that hierarchies reflect the deictic distinction between present (1/2) and distant (3) participants; another is simply a new manifestation of a common asymmetrical pattern, the use of zero marking for third persons. More importantly, the evolution of hierarchical grammatical patterns does not reflect a consistent universal ranking of participants – at least in those cases where we can see (or infer) historical stages in the evolution of these properties, different historical stages appear to reflect different hierarchical rankings of participants, especially first and second person. This leads us to conclude that the diversity of hierarchical patterns is an artifact of grammatical change, and that in general, the presence of hierarchical patterns in synchronic grammars is not somehow conditioned by some more general universal hierarchy.
... Rather, what may have been transferred were their precursors, certain recurring patterns of expression, which subsequently crystallized in each language. (Further details are contained in Mithun 2012.) ...
For most languages of the Americas, there are no written records comparable to those for major languages of Europe. Some North American languages show the same kinds of lexical loans as languages elsewhere. Morphological structure is highly resistant to the influence of contact. This chapter discusses three morphological structures which are particularly characteristic of the North American languages: lexical suffixes, manner and direction; and clitic structures. Grammatical relations are typically coded by morphology, one of the most tightly integrated, systematic domains of grammatical structure, less accessible to the consciousness of speakers than independent words. The Athabaskan‐Eyak‐Tlingit languages are distributed over a large area from the Southwest through Alaska. All of the nearly 40 Athabaskan languages identify core arguments by pronominal prefixes in their verbs. The Athabaskan languages are related as a group to the Eyak language of Alaska.
... • In cases of multilingualism, stylistic discourse preferences are easily borrowed (Matras & Sakel 2007;Mithun 2008;Mithun 2012). ...
Chitimacha is a language isolate formerly spoken in southern Louisiana, and is a part of the Southeast linguistic area. Using documentary materials recorded by Morris Swadesh in the 1930s, this talk examines the language-internal evidence for the diachrony of three features of Chitimacha grammar: positional auxiliary verbs, switch-reference, and agent-patient alignment. Each feature is shown to have a clear, language-internal diachronic pathway, wherein existing lexical and grammatical material were recruited for new functions. However, each of these features is shared by other unrelated languages of the Southeast, suggesting that they were in fact motivated by contact. How then did Chitimacha borrow these structural features without borrowing any lexical or grammatical material? The answer, I suggest, is that multilingual speakers in the Southeast carried over discourse-level patterns of managing information flow from other languages, and that as these discourse patterns became more frequent and routinized, they fundamentally reshaped the structure of Chitimacha grammar.
... • In cases of multilingualism, stylistic discourse preferences are easily borrowed (Mithun 2008;Mithun 2012). ...
Within historical linguistics, language isolates are often viewed as a problem. Their isolate status makes it difficult to peer into their history, and internal reconstruction is generally thought to be of limited utility. Campbell (2013:170–172) briefly discusses how historical linguists might productively gain insights into the diachrony of language isolates, but notes the “frequent sentiment that it is not to be tolerated that there should be languages with no relatives” (p. 170).
Chitimacha (ISO 639-3: ctm) is one such isolate from Louisiana. It was documented extensively by Albert S. Gatschet, John R. Swanton, and Morris Swadesh from 1881–1934 (Gatschet 1881a; Gatschet 1881b; Gatschet 1883; Swanton 1908; Swanton 1920; Swadesh 1939), and its last native speaker passed away in 1939. Very little has been published on the language, and the majority of what has been published reflects the sentiment mentioned by Campbell – attempts to resolve Chitimacha’s isolate status by incorporating it into this or the other language family (Swanton 1919; Swadesh 1946; Swadesh 1947; Haas 1951; Haas 1952; Gursky 1969; Brown, Wichmann & Beck 2014). None of these proposals has been widely accepted (Campbell & Kaufman 1983; Kimball 1992; Kimball 1994; Campbell 1997).
This talk attempts to view Chitimacha’s status not as a problem to be solved, but as a potential treasure trove of insights into the social and linguistic history of both the Chitimacha language and the Southeast U.S. more generally. Because of the limited accessibility of the Chitimacha corpus until recently, and the prevailing interest in language classification, the precise nature of Chitimacha’s participation in the Southeast linguistic area has until now remained largely uncertain. This talk uses language-internal evidence to shed some initial light onto that history and the relationship between Chitimacha and the other languages of the Southeast.
In this talk I examine the language-internal evidence for the diachrony of three major grammatical features of Chitimacha: positional auxiliary verbs, switch-reference, and agent-patient alignment. Using archival data from Morris Swadesh (1939), I show that each of these features has a clear, language-internal diachronic pathway, wherein existing lexical and grammatical material were recruited for these new functions. However, each of these features is shared by other unrelated languages of the Southeast U.S., suggesting that their development in Chitimacha was in fact motivated by contact. How then did Chitimacha borrow these structural features without borrowing any lexical or grammatical material?
Following Mithun (2012), I propose that multilingual speakers in the Southeast carried over discourse-level patterns of managing information flow into Chitimacha, and that as these discourse patterns became more frequent and routinized, they grammaticalized into major features of Chitimacha grammar. It is not grammatical structures themselves that are borrowed, but rather a preference for packaging information in discourse in ways that parallel grammatical structures in the original language.
The existence of these shared structural patterns between Chitimacha and other languages shows that Chitimacha is indeed situated firmly within the Southeast linguistic area. Chitimacha’s isolate status, rather than forming a barrier to our understanding of Southeastern history, in fact provides a unique window into the history of the Southeast, as well as mechanisms of contact-induced grammatical change.
It is now clear that languages not-genetically related can come to share syntactic structures that were not necessarily borrowed directly in their modern forms. Although it can be challenging to spot these structures, striking similarities in certain patterns and in fine details of usage may shed light on this process. Not only may spotting the patterns be a difficult task, but also establishing the source of diffusion of a trait (i.e., who passed it to whom). These points are illustrated here with constructions termed ‘adverbial clauses’. Examples are drawn from Mixtec languages. The analysis focuses on six types of adverbial clauses. In particular, it is explained how several Mixtec adverbial clause-linking strategies may have spread to Huasteca Nahuatl (Uto-Aztecan) and vice versa.
Három magyar modális határozószóra (talán, valószínűleg, vélhetőleg) végzett kérdőíves vizsgálat alapján a dolgozat a modális erő vizsgálatának szükségessége mellett érvel, funkcionális szemszögből való értelmezése mellett. A modális erő kontextusfüggő jelenség, a tokenek szintjén nagy eltérésekkel. Mégis, a séma szintjén lehetőség van tipikus sematikus kontextusok és a kapcsolódó jellegzetes modális erők megállapítására. A cikk empirikus módszertant kínál az ilyen sémák feltárására.
Previous theoretical discussion about inverse systems has largely revolved around the synchronic and diachronic relationship between the inverse and the passive. In contrast, this study argues for the antipassive origins of two inverse constructions in Monsang (Trans-Himalayan), which are used for 3→SAP and 2→1 scenarios. This questions central assumptions from previous accounts about the functional motivation underlying inverse systems, and suggests that strategies of avoiding overt reference may be at play. The diachronic pathway proposed here connects the traditional inverse with other special marking patterns that involve speech act participant objects, in particular the ‘pseudo-inverse’ construction of innovative first person object indexation.
Sahaptin and Nez Perce, the two languages of the Sahaptian family, have both been cited as case studies in the typological literature on hierarchical patterns in main clause grammar. Nez Perce has ergative case marking on only third person singular transitive subjects, plus a minor pattern of indexation of SAP participants via (rarely occurring) second position enclitics. Sahaptin has one of the more complex hierarchical systems ever described, with SAP indexation via enclitics, third person indexation on verbs, differential object marking, an inverse verbal direction prefix, and two distinct ergative suffixes, each restricted to a subset of third person singular transitive subjects (one when objects are SAP, the other when objects are third person). This paper begins by reviewing, evaluating, and occasionally expanding on existing knowledge: we summarize the hierarchical patterns in Sahaptian and characterize each distinct construction. Then we compare relevant Sahaptin morphemes with cognates in Nez Perce, and review their reconstruction to Proto-Sahaptian. The primary contribution of this paper is organizing the morphemes (and their accompanying hierarchical patterns) in both languages into cognate constructions, then reconstructing each to its Proto-Sahaptian origins. We conclude by reviewing and evaluating proposals for Pre-Proto-Sahaptian developments claimed to explain the origins of hierarchical patterns that reconstruct to Proto-Sahaptian. The mechanisms we identify as having created the Sahaptian hierarchical effects are diverse, some motivated and others not, some arising from internal sources, others arguably from contact.
There are three distinct transitive constructions in four Coast Salish languages, Squamish, Halkomelem, Klallam and Lushootseed. In the V-tr construction, both A and P are unmarked for case; in the V-mid construction (often considered antipassive), A is unmarked and P marked; in the V-tr-mid construction (often considered passive), P is unmarked and A marked. Individually, none of these constructions is a hierarchical system, but in combination, asymmetries in their distribution are well on the way to creating a person-based hierarchical system. This paper discusses the diachronic development of each of these constructions, then describes their differential distribution into the four functional domains: local (SAP A → SAP P), direct (SAP → 3P), nonlocal (3A → 3P), and inverse (3A → SAP P). While the distribution is not identical in each of the languages, the trend is clear: the etymologically passive V-tr-mid construction cannot occur in the direct domain and has become the pragmatically unmarked construction in the inverse domain, whereas the etymologically antipassive V-mid construction cannot occur in the inverse domain. While it only occurs in the direct and nonlocal domains, even there it is rare, giving the appearance that its function is still that of an antipassive. In combination, the result is that whenever the two core arguments of a clause are an SAP and a third person, regardless of grammatical role the SAP participant is always an unmarked core argument, whereas the third person is most often marked, leading to a situation where the oblique case in these languages is beginning to resemble the obviative case-marker of inverse languages.
Providing a contemporary and comprehensive look at the topical area of areal linguistics, this book looks systematically at different regions of the world whilst presenting a focussed and informed overview of the theory behind research into areal linguistics and language contact. The topicality of areal linguistics is thoroughly documented by a wealth of case studies from all major regions of the world and, with chapters from scholars with a broad spectrum of language expertise, it offers insights into the mechanisms of external language change. With no book currently like this on the market, The Cambridge Handbook of Areal Linguistics will be welcomed by students and scholars working on the history of language families, documentation and classification, and will help readers to understand the key area of areal linguistics within a broader linguistic context.
L'A. propose de traiter le morpheme 'iin du karuk, langue hoka parlee a Orleans en Californie, comme marqueur des arguments obviatifs dans des configurations ergatives. Les constructions en 'iin ont la particularite de presenter des traits significatifs a la fois de l'obviatif et de l'ergatif. Il cherche a demontrer qu'une hierarchie de la personne intervient dans le marquage obviatif/ergatif des arguments dans les constructions a double argument a la troisieme personne
1. Of course, one perennial focus of such tension is exemplified in linguistics; and even today we have the opposition of structuralist, systemic ('competence'-oriented) theories of language vs. variationist, '-lectal' ('performance'-oriented) theories.
2. Kulturkreislehre formulations (cf. Graebner 1911) come at once to mind, though the notion of integration into a functional and ecological whole is not quite the same here. Similarly, within linguistics, certain aspects of the Wellentheorie associated with J. Schmidt (1871) can be taken as explaining the systematicity of comparative grammar in geographical perspective.
3. Sherzer attempts to characterize Boas' concern as of the former, rather than the latter type (2-3); but I think this is a confusion between the requirements of adequate description and the uses to which such description is to be put, all adequately distinguished in Boas' writings from an early period. Indeed, Boas' concern with 'sui generis' description amounted precisely to the discovery that the very facts of language (and of culture more generally) are facts of what Saussure was to call 'valeur'; their explanation was still to be historical and particularistic.