In this paper we present a two-dimensional implicational map of parts of speech. We show that this map constitutes an improvement with respect to the one-dimensional parts of speech hierarchy originally proposed in Hengeveld (1992) in terms of typological adequacy. In addition, our map is an innovation in relation to traditional semantic maps since it is implicational in nature and since the typological implications it contains are hierarchically ordered with respect to one another. Finally, our proposal shows that the analytical primitives underlying map models need not be exclusively semantic in nature, but may also include other dimensions, in this case pragmatic ones.

Syntactic argumentation and parts of speech in Chamorro and in syntactic theory Chung's article critiques an analysis of lexical categories (word classes) in Chamorro by Topping (1973). Topping argues that there are only two lexical categories, which he describes as Class I and Class II. Chung restates Topping's criteria for defining these two word classes as follows: (1) a. Class I words form predicates of passive clauses with the infix-in-or the prefix ma-; Class II words do not. b. Class II words serve as predicates of clauses whose subject is a weak pronoun (yo'-type pronoun); Class I words do not. Chung notes that these lexical categories correspond roughly to "transitive verbs" (Class I) and "everything else" (Class II). Chung argues against this analysis of the lexical categories of Chamorro, and instead argues for a division into Noun, Verb and Adjective. 1 Chung's criteria for the traditional three-way division are given in (2): (2) a. Nouns can undergo incorporation into the verbs gai 'have' and tai 'not have' when in the role of the possessed item; Verbs and Adjectives cannot. b. Nouns can be combined with the stressed prefix mí-to form Adjectives with the meaning 'having lots of [Noun]'; Verbs and Adjectives cannot.

No abstract

This paper discusses alignment patterns in three-participant constructions in Blackfoot (Western Algonquian; Canada, USA). We demonstrate the effects of referential hierarchies relating to animacy, person and specificity. Blackfoot verbs stem are subcategorized for transitivity and the animacy of S (for intransitives) and P(atient), R(ecipient), T(heme), or B(eneficiary) (for (di)transitives), showing cross-reference with at most two participants. Non-specific participants are never cross-referenced, resulting in the possibility of constructions with three or even four participants, only one of which is cross-referenced on the verb. Even when all participants in a three-participant construction are specific, only two can be cross-referenced on the verb: the A and what is generally called the 'primary object' in Algonquian studies (T, R or B depending on the specific stem in question). Any remaining participants are not cross-referenced on the verb, irrespective of their specificity status. Whether T, R or B is chosen to be the primary object is lexically determined by the verbal stem, and more in particular by the so-called 'final', a derivational morpheme which closes every verb stem in Blackfoot. While Algonquian languages are often thought to display only secundative alignment, in line with the overwhelming importance of animacy in their grammars, we show that some stems require indirective alignment, while others allow for both configurations. Cross-referencing of A and B occurs as a result of applicativization with a benefactive final, which downgrades any potentially present T and/or R participants to non-cross-referenced objects. Finally, Blackfoot allows for a form of marking additional participants by a preverbal element called a 'relative root', which licenses a participant without influencing cross-referencing patterns and without indicating the specificity or animacy of the licensed participant.

No abstract