Morphological Templates, Headedness, and Applicatives in Barupu

Donohue, Mark

doi:10.2307/3623450

Cited by 2 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Barupu is the easternmost relative of Skou, spoken south of Sissano lagoon; the details of the language's inflectional system are presented in Donohue (2003c). The domain that is of interest here concerns those verbs that were described as inflecting by infix in Donohue (2003c), and which are exemplified in the third and fourth columns of (132).…”

Section: Barupumentioning

confidence: 98%

“…I'saka is the most distantly related of the languages, while Puare, Barupu and Skou represent first-order branchings within their respective sub-groups. Data on I'saka comes from Donohue and San Roque (2004); Barupu data is drawn from Donohue (2003c) The general theme of predicate complexity, heading towards bipartiteness, is common in languages of this family, but the trend does not continue so robustly beyond its genetic borders. I present data from the three languages cited in Figure 1, as well as from One, a Torricelli language spoken in the plains and mountains to the south of the Piore River group (data from my own fieldnotes and Sikale et al (nd/2005)).…”

Section: Related Patterns In Nearby Languagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Complex predicates and bipartite stems in Skou

Donohue

2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I examine a range of complex predicates, searching for ones that might be called 'bipartite stems' in Skou, a language of New Guinea. First I draw a tentative distinction between serial verb constructions and N+V predicates on the one hand, and 'true' bipartite stems on the other, while pointing out some complications involved in making this division. Following this I examine the range of stems that can possibly be called 'bipartite stems' , and those that certainly can be, concluding that the label is not a useful one in describing Skou, which shows more complexities than a simple '±bipartite' dichotomy can capture. A survey of 'bipartite' phenomena in related and geographically close languages follows, with the conclusion that prosodic factors at least as much as morphological ones, and the possibility of an infixal analysis, rob the label 'bipartite' of much of its useful content when applied outside the domain for which it was originally devised.

show abstract

Section: Barupumentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Related Patterns In Nearby Languagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complex predicates and bipartite stems in Skou

Donohue

2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Barasano (tucana; Jones y Jones, 1991), quechua (andina; Weber, 1989), sahaptín (penutí; Rude, 1997), sélico halkomelén (sélica; Gerdts, 1988), tuscarora (iroquesa; Mithun, 1976), yaqui (yuto-azteca; Félix, 2000y Guerrero y Van Valin, 2004, yute (yuto-azteca; Southern Ute Tribe, 1980), zozil (penutí, maya;Aissen, 1987) Indonesio (malayo-polinesia; Sneddon, 1996 y Purwo, 1997), tagalo (malayo-polinesia; Ramos, 1971), tinrin (malayo-polinesia; Osumi, 1995), tukambesi (malayo-polinesia; Donohue, 2003) Abaza (caucásica; O'Herin, 2001) Chukoto (chucoto; Dunn, 1999) Groenlandés del oeste (aleuto-esquimal; Fortescue, 1984) Ava (transguineanana; Loving y McKaughan, 1973), barupu (macroskou; Donohue, 2003), bukiyipo (torricelli; Conrad, 1991), gadsupo (transguineana; Frantz y McKaughan, 1973) Chicheva (níger-congo, bantú;Baker, 1988), kiñarruanda (níger-congo, bantú; Kimenyi, 1980y Baker, 1988Hyman, 1981), noono (níger-congo, atlántica;Sonkka, 2000), suahilí (níger-congo, bantú;Vitale, 1981) Lango (sudanesa del este; Noonan, 1992), nandi (sudanesa del este; Creider y Creider, 1989) Meitéi (bárica; Bath y Ningomba, 1997 y Chelliah, 1997) 1 Para los criterios de distribución de los ejemplos del corpus, he seguido el trabajo de Rijkhoff y Bakker (1998). Estos autores defienden que el número de ejemplos que representa cada una de las familias lingüísticas ha de ser proporcional a su complejidad genética.…”

Section: Sino-tibetanounclassified

“…Donohue (2003) denomina dinámicas a aquellas construcciones aplicativas que alternan con una expresión de oblicuo o adjunto y no dinámicas, a aquellas otras en las que la alternancia sintáctica no es posible. Por ejemplo, el tukambesi tiene una construcción aplicativa benefactiva dinámica (cfr.…”

Section: Alternancia Con La Codificación De Adjunto Aplicativos Dináunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ditransitividad morfológica: tipología y definición de las construcciones aplicativas

Jiménez

2006

ELUA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumenEste artículo se centra en el estudio tipológico de las propiedades semánticas y sintácticas de los aplicativos benefactivos. Los aplicativos son afijos verbales que permiten codificar un argumento no subcategorizado por el verbo base como un argumento central del predicado. En este trabajo, pretendo demostrar que la aplicación no implica la transitivización del verbo o el aumento de su valencia, sino una regla de reescritura del Paciente. Con el fin de alcanzar una definición general de la aplicación, distinguiré entre dos tipos de aplicativos: los que modifican la valencia semántica del verbo base, por un lado, y los que tan sólo modifican la valencia sintáctica, por otro. En esta clasificación, seguiré algunas de las propuestas desarrolladas en Van Valin y LaPolla (1997) y Van Valin (2005), tales como los conceptos de transitividad semántica y sintáctica y la jerarquía de selección del Paciente.PALABRAS CLAVE: aplicativos, beneficiario, macropapeles, procesos de modificación valencial, transitividad. AbstractThis paper deals with the semantic and syntactic properties of benefactive applicatives from a crosslinguistic perspective. Applicatives are bound morphemes attached to a verb or an auxiliary that are employed to code a non-subcategorized argument as a core argument. In this paper, I will intent to demóns-trate that application is not exactly a transitivizing or increasing valence process, but a rule by which the assignation of the undergoer is rewritten. In particular, I will propose a possible classification of applicatives in two different types: modifiers of the semantic valence, on the one hand, and modifiers of the syntactic valence, on the other. In this classification, I will follow some of the principies developed in Van Valin and LaPolla (1997) and Van Valin (2005), such as the notions of semantic and syntactic transitivity, and the selection of the undergoer.

show abstract

Morphological Templates, Headedness, and Applicatives in Barupu

Cited by 2 publications

References 3 publications

Complex predicates and bipartite stems in Skou

Complex predicates and bipartite stems in Skou

Ditransitividad morfológica: tipología y definición de las construcciones aplicativas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About