Building verbs in Chuj: Consequences for the nature of roots

Abstract

This paper offers an in-depth look at roots and verb stem morphology in Chuj (Mayan) in order to address a larger question: when it comes to the formation of verb stems, what information is contributed by the root, and what is contributed by the functional heads? I show first that roots in Chuj are not acategorical in the strict sense (cf. Borer 2005), but must be grouped into classes based on their stem-forming possibilities. Root class does not map directly to surface lexical category, but does determine which functional heads (i.e. valence morphology) may merge with the root. Second, I show that while the introduction of the external argument, along with clausal licensing and agreement generally, are all governed by higher functional heads, the presence or absence of aninternalargument is dictated by the root. Specifically, I show that transitive roots in Chuj always combine with an internal argument, whether it be (i) a full DP, (ii) a bare pseudo-incorporated NP, or (iii) an implicit object in an antipassive. In the spirit of work such as Levinson (2007, 2014), I connect this to the semantic type of the root; root class reflects semantic type, and semantic type affects the root’s combinatorial properties. This work also contributes to the discussion of how valence morphology operates. In line with works such as Alexiadou, Anagnostopoulou & Schäfer (2006), I argue that valence morphology applies directly to roots, rather than to some ‘inherent valence’ of a verb.

The roots of measurement

“…There is reason to believe, though, that gradable adjectives might require both event-and state-type arguments (e.g., Wellwood 2015; 2016). There is not enough space here toconsiderwhetherpositionalsrequireaneventualityargument,thoughIexpectso.Ifwetakethisroute, thenpositionalrootsbecomeevenclosersemanticallytoverbroots,asproposedbyCoon(2019).Inthis case, positionals would just be defective verb roots, taking both an individual and eventuality argument, as Coon (2019) proposes, but relating it to a degree, not a truth value.…”

Directionality in cross-categorial derivations

“…Since morphological arguments such as the presence vs. absence of overt nominalizers or verbalizers are not always decisive (sections 2.3-2.4 and coming up in 3.2), researchers have turned to the semantic content of roots and the context of their interpretation (for example, the adjectival and verbal heads in (44a) would be semantically vacuous in the "baking fat" interpretation). Moreover, if semantic primitives such as boundedness, mass/count, or event/ thing/state can be properties of roots, for example (e.g., Harley 2005;Anagnostopoulou & Samioti 2014), or if roots can be "nominal" or "adjectival" (Levinson 2014;Coon 2019;Henderson 2019), it follows that at least some apparently cross-categorial derivation could really be de-radical derivation (section 2.2). But even if not, it's been proposed that some component of lexical meaning may survive only certain cycles in the derivation.…”

Classifiers, partitions, and measurements: Exploring the syntax and semantics of sortal classifiers

“…Numeral classifiers in Ch'ol are also derived from positional roots (discussed in detail in Arcos López 2009; see also Haviland 1981 on Tsotsil). Positional roots in Mayan languages form a distinct class, distinguishable in part by their semantic content (position, shape, surface quality, or physical state), but also by the special morphology used to form stems (England 1983;2001;Haviland 1994;Henderson 2016;Coon 2019). In Ch'ol, for example, positional roots form intransitive stative predicates with the suffix -Vl (the vowel is harmonic with the root vowel).…”