Existential incorporation constructions

Additional facts about noun incorporation (in Inuktitut)

“…That locative/directional incorporating verbs allow incorporated nominals of more complexity (and hence possessor stranding) is a fact not restricted to Inuktitut. As noted in Johns (in press) and Massam (2009), a similar distinction involving location/ direction verbs is also found in Niuean (Massam, 2005). We could account for differences between NI verb types by putting diacritics on the verb entries, stating whether they select Ns or DPs; however, a less stipulative account would be based on differences between verb sets.…”

“…In summary, a closer examination of the facts surrounding possessor stranding in Inuktitut sheds light on an interesting distinction with verb types (Johns, in press;Massam, 2005Massam, , 2009, which may be found in other languages.…”

Noun Incorporation

“…While (25a) shows the verb eke 'run' in the main predicate position (V initial), (25b) shows a motion verb with no manner specification in the main predicate position, 15 accompanied by an oblique marked nominal and its possessor. As pointed out in Massam (2009b), in the Inuit language, motion and location-incorporating verbs, as in (26), also allow more complex nominal structure than other classes of incorporating verbs (Sadock 1980;2002;Johns 2007; (Johns 2009, 188) Recall from section 2 that possessor stranding is normally prohibited in Canadian dialects of Inuktitut. The exception is when there is possessive inflection on the incorporated nominal, such as the -nga marking in (26b).…”

Introduction

“…The most detailed comparative study of existential constructions within Austronesian is Zeitoun et al's (1999) study of existentials, locatives, and possessives in Formosan languages. When this work is taken together with (Chung 1987;den Dikken 2003;Massam 2009;Paul 2001;Tjung 2005;Polinsky 2008), it becomes clear that existentials in some Austronesian languages demand the simplex analysis (e.g., Chamorro, Malagasy), existentials in other Austronesian languages may be ripe for the small clause analysis (e.g., Rotuman), and finally, some languages may have alternative constructions that call for both analyses (e.g., Niuean). The next item on the agenda is to expand the list of syntactic correlates of the simplex vs. small clause structures, and both Sabbagh and Keenan offer preliminary thoughts on this matter.…”