Body parts in Murrinh-Patha: incorporation, grammar and metaphor

Walsh, Michael J. K.

doi:10.1515/9783110822137.327

Cited by 58 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 22 gives a representative paradigm for Ndjebbana (after McKay 1984); but similar Systems are found in Anindilyakwa (Leeding 1996), Nunggubuyu (Roberts 1996), Murrinhpatha (Walsh 1996), and Burarra (Glasgow 1984). In a Variation on this theme, while oblique pronouns distinguish gender in the 3rd person singular in Burarra, nominative pronouns do not, thereby granting the dual an exclusive gender privilege.…”

Section: Unaccountably Deviant Duals and Trialsmentioning

confidence: 62%

The Implications Register

1997

Linguistic Typology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gender distinction in non-singular numbers is widely believed to imply gender distinction in the Singular, especially that of corresponding genders and in one and the same word inflectingfor these two categories. The bestknown claim to this effect are the universals Nos. 37 and 45 in Greenberg (1963). There arefew universals without exceptions, and the Singular preferencefor genders, though sometimes claimed to be absolute, is after all no exception. However, considering the reputation ofthis universal and similar ones capitalizing on markedness, it is perhaps surprising that instances of genders in non-singular numbers which lack a counterpart in the Singular, äs documented in this paper, are äs numerous äs they are. Offen there are in fact goodfunctional or diachronic reasonsfor genders toprefer non-singular numbers, and one therefore begins to wonder how strong the reasons really arefor the regulär, or at any rate predominant, gender preference to be on the Singular.

show abstract

Section: Unaccountably Deviant Duals and Trialsmentioning

confidence: 62%

The Implications Register

1997

Linguistic Typology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Noun incorporation in Murrinhpatha is possible only with body parts (Walsh 1996;Forshaw 2011). Incorporated body parts are distinct bound forms that are often reduced or even suppletive when compared with the corresponding full nominals.…”

Section: Incorporated Body Partsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From body part to applicative: Encoding ‘source’ in Murrinhpatha

Nordlinger

2019

Linguistic Typology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Murrinhpatha (non-Pama-Nyungan, Australia) is typologically unusual in having a single applicative construction with the semantics of source/malefactive, but never benefactive. In this paper I discuss the development of this applicative from an incorporated body part meaning ‘hand’. I show that the applicative developed from a reanalysis of the external possession construction; and that the applicative morphology developed from the incorporated body part, rather than from a verbal or adpositional source. This contributes to our understanding of the typology of applicative constructions and also highlights the value in exploring the complex verbal constructions of polysynthetic languages to inform our understanding of grammaticalisation possibilities.

show abstract

“…In other cases, however, the situation may not be so clear cut, and the incorporated nominal appears to function more as a verbal modifi er, delimiting or restricting the semantic scope of the verbal predicate. Such uses of incorporation are discussed by Harvey (1996) for Warray, and Walsh (1996) for Murrinh-Patha. Forshaw (2011) refers to this as "range incorporation".…”

Section: Generic Incorporation (29a) An-barnadjamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(Walsh 1996: 349) Forshaw (2011) argues that body part incorporation in Murrinh-Patha falls along a continuum with productive argument incorporation at one end, lexicalised incorporation at the other, and range incorporation falling somewhere in between. In (34), for example, the incorporated nominal is not an argument of the verbal predicate, nor is it fully lexicalised since it can contrast with other incorporated nominals in this position such as -rdarri 'back' (see Walsh 1996: 349 and Forshaw 2011 for discussion). The semantics of noun incorporation and possible paths of grammaticalisation is one area in which further research is needed, and Australian languages may make an interesting contribution.²² Another such area involves the semantic, grammatical and discourse conditions which trigger productive incorporation, given that it is (mostly) optional; see for example Mithun (1986) and McKay (2007).…”

Section: Generic Incorporation (29a) An-barnadjamentioning

confidence: 99%