1 / 35

S emantic roles and cross- categorial case in Uralic

S emantic roles and cross- categorial case in Uralic. Anne Tamm anne.tamm AT unifi.it University of Florence Research Institute of Linguistics , Hungarian Academy of Sciences , Budapest. International Workshop on Semantic Roles Pavia, 19-20 May 2010 - Aula Scarpa.

krikor
Télécharger la présentation

S emantic roles and cross- categorial case in Uralic

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Semanticroles and cross-categorialcase in Uralic Anne Tamm anne.tamm AT unifi.it University of Florence Research Institute of Linguistics ,HungarianAcademyofSciences, Budapest International WorkshoponSemanticRoles Pavia, 19-20 May 2010 - Aula Scarpa

  2. Questions and puzzles • Doverbsinstantiatesemanticroles? • What is therelationshipbetweensemanticroles and grammaticalcategoriessuchasaspect, evidentiality, ormodality?

  3. Reasoningfor YES • Semanticrole is a relationbetweenapredicate and an argument. • The relationship is encodedby a formwithsemantic and categoriallyspecifiedcontent. • The encodingmay be donebycase. • The categorythat ”has” casemay be a predicate. • ManyUraliccategoriesarebetweennouns and verbs. • Thesemostlyinfinitivalcaseformsarearguments of predicatesthatareitselfpredicates. • Soverbscaninstantiate a semanticrole, buthow?

  4. Verb of motion - Goal Ma lähe-n Pavia-sse/Tallinna. I[nom] go-1sg P-illative T.illative ‘I am going to Pavia/Tallinn.’

  5. Verb of motion - Goal Ma lähe-n uju-ma. I[nom] go-1sg swim-m_illative ‘I am going swimming, I am going to swim.’ (# I’mgonnaswim.)

  6. Copula - Location Ma olenPavia-s. I[nom] be-1sg P-inessive ‘I am in Pavia.’

  7. Copula - Location Ma olenuju-mas. I[nom] be-1s swim-m_inessive ‘I am off swimming.’ (# I am swimming – progressive)

  8. Verb of motion - Source Ma tule-n Pavia-st. I[nom] come-1s P-elative ‘I am coming from Pavia.’

  9. Verb of motion - Source Ma tule-n uju-mast. I[nom] come-1s swim-m_elative ‘I am coming from swimming.’ (# Jeviens de nager – I havejustswum.)

  10. Oneexampleaboutother relations Ma ole-n pileti-ta. I[nom] be-1sticket-abessive ‘I don’thave a/theticket, I am without a/the ticket.’

  11. Other relations, abessive, ‘without’ Ma ole-n uju-mata. I[nom] be-1s swim-m_abessive ‘I have not swum.’

  12. The roadmaptothesolution • The Uraliclanguages • The role of case • Cross-categorialcase • Non-finitesasarguments and aspredicates • The transfer of themeaningofsemanticroles of non-finitesasarguments > TAM categories

  13. Richcasesystems > poorcasesystems • Uraliclanguagesaretypicallycharacterizedbyrichcasesystemswithapproximately 10 members, and manyhavecasesystems of approximately 15 or 20 cases. • In WALS, thereare 24 languageswith more than 10 cases. • The followinglanguageshave more than 10 casesin WALS: Awa Pit, Basque, Brahui, Chukchi, EpenaPedee, Estonian, Evenki, Finnish, Gooniyandi, Hamtai, Hungarian, Hunzib, Ingush, Kayardild, Ket, Lak, Lezgian, Martuthunira, Mordvin (Erzya), Nez Perce, Nunggubuyu, Pitjantjatjara, Toda, Udmurt. • Fiveof thoselistedareUralic (Erzya Mordvin, Estonian, Finnish, Hungarian, and Udmurt).

  14. Case-marked non-finite verb forms • Languageswith many non-finite forms tend to have rich case systems. • The regularity can only partly be attributed to areal linguistic contacts, since it is observable, for instance, in the geographically distant Caucasian and Australian languages. There is no reason to assume a generalization with the strength of a language universal. • Non-finite forms frequently originate from case-marked non-finite verb forms, which are complements originally but develop further into base predicates of larger predicate complexes. • Thesecomplexes develop case-related semantics and modal meanings.

  15. Uraliccase is cross-categorial • Attachestonouns, and inlanguageswithadjective-nounagreement, toadjectives • Attachestoverbs • Attachestoverbswith a nominalizingsuffix • Attachestoverbswith a nominalizingsuffix, forminginfinitives and in-betweenforms

  16. Cross-categorialcaseillustrations • Verbstems (Udmurt V+abessive) • Nominalizations (Udmurt cases V+m+case, V+n+case) • Parts of non-finites (Finnic, thecaseformantsare part of a morpheme of a non-finiteverb) • Selkupinfinitive marker: V+translative

  17. Attachestonouns: an example of the Udmurt casesystem 1. Nominative s’ik 2. Genitives’ik-len 3. Accusatives’ik/s’ik-ez 4. Ablative s’ik-les’ 5. Dative s’ik-ly 6. Adessives’ik-len 7. Instrumentals’ik-en 8. Abessives’ik-tek 9. Inessives’ik-yn 10. Illative s’ik-e 11. Elative s’ik-ys’(t) 12. Terminative s’ik-oz’ 13. Egressives’ik-ys’en 14. Prolatives’ik-eti 15. Approximatives’ik-lan’ Source: SvetlanaEdygarova, p.c.

  18. Udmurt: caseonbarestems 1. Nominative s’ik 2. Genitives’ik-len 3. Accusatives’ik/s’ik-ez 4. Ablative s’ik-les’ 5. Dative s’ik-ly 6. Adessives’ik-len 7. Instrumentals’ik-en 8. Abessives’ik-tekmyny-tek 9. Inessives’ik-yn 10. Illative s’ik-e 11. Elative s’ik-ys’(t) 12. Terminative s’ik-oz’ 13. Egressives’ik-ys’en 14. Prolatives’ik-eti 15. Approximatives’ik-lan’ Source: SvetlanaEdygarova, p.c.

  19. Udmurt:caseonn-nominalizations 1. Nominative s’ikmyn-on(verb+n+case) 2. Genitives’ik-lenmyn-on-len(verb+n+len) 3. Accusatives’ik/s’ik-ez myn-on-ez 4. Ablatives’ik-les’ myn-on-les’ 5. Dative s’ik-ly myn-on-ly 6. Adessives’ik-len 7. Instrumentals’ik-enmyn-on-en 8. Abessives’ik-tek 9. Inessives’ik-ynmyn-on-yn 10. Illatives’ik-emyn-on-e 11. Elative s’ik-ys’(t) 12. Terminatives’ik-oz’myn-on-oz’ 13. Egressives’ik-ys’en 14. Prolatives’ik-eti 15. Approximatives’ik-lan’ Source: SvetlanaEdygarova, p.c.

  20. Udmurt: caseon-m-nominalizations 1. Nominative s’ikmyn-em(verb+m+case) 2. Genitives’ik-lenmyn-em-len (verb+m+len) 3. Accusatives’ik/s’ik-ez myn-em-ez 4. Ablatives’ik-les’ myn-em-les’ 5. Dative s’ik-ly myn-em-ly 6. Adessives’ik-len 7. Instrumentals’ik-enmyn-em-en 8. Abessives’ik-tek 9. Inessives’ik-ynmyn-em-yn 10. Illatives’ik-emyn-em-e 11. Elatives’ik-ys’(t)myn-em-ys’ 12. Terminatives’ik-oz’myn-em-oz’ 13. Egressives’ik-ys’en 14. Prolatives’ik-eti 15. Approximatives’ik-lan’ Source: SvetlanaEdygarova, p.c.

  21. The Estonian case system • Nominative book raamat • Genitive of a book raamatu • Partitive (of) a book raamatu-t • Illative into the book raamatu-sse • Inessive in a book raamatu-s • Elative from (inside) a book raamatu-st • Allative onto a book raamatu-le • Adessive on a book raamatu-l • Ablative from the book raamatu-lt • Translative in(to), as a book raamatu-ks • Terminative until a book raamatu-ni • Essive as a book raamatu-na • Abessive without a book raamatu-ta • Comitative with a book raamatu-ga

  22. Name Form Related form Case Diachronic status Illative of the m-infinitive (supine) -ma -ma -, illative Historical, productive Inessive of the m-infinitive -mas -ma -s, inessive Historical, productive Elative of the m-infinitive -mast -ma -st, elative Historical, productive Allative of the m-infinitive -malle -ma -le, allative Coast dialectal Adessive of the m-infinitive -malla -ma -l(a), adessive Dialectal Ablative of the m-infinitive (-malt) -ma -lt, ablative Dialectal, Finnish-Livonian Translative of the m-infinitive -maks -ma -ks, translative Artificial, productive Abessive of the m-infinitive -mata -ma -ta, abessive Historical, productive Gerundive -des -da -s, inessive Historical, productive Gerundive ... -da instructive Historical -t-infinitive -da -da ... productive -vat-infinitive -vat prtcpl partitive productive

  23. Theseformsarenotnouns • Uju-ma, uju-mas, uju-mastinstantiate a differentcategoryfromnoun • Theyarebetweenverbs and nouns, infinitivesandnominalizations (actionnouns) • Theycannot be modifiedby an adjective, showingcaseagreement • Theycannot be pluralized • Butthereareslightchangesintheencoding of theargumentNPs

  24. Suspendedaffixationwithnouns Taläkskojumütsi-ta ja salli-ta. Shewenthomehat-abe and shawl-abe ‘Shewenthomewithout a hat and a shawl.’ Taläkskojumütsi-Ø ja salli-ta. Shewenthomehat-Ø and shawl-abe ‘Shewenthomewithout a hat and a shawl.’

  25. Suspendedaffixationnotpossiblewiththem-non-finites Taläkskojujooksmata ja kiirustamata. Shewenthomerun-m_abe and hurry-m_abe ‘Shewenthomewithoutrunning and hurrying.’ *Taläkskojujooksma-Ø ja kiirustamata. Shewenthomerun-m-Ø and hurry-m_abe ‘Shewenthomewithoutrunning and hurrying.’

  26. Nominalproperties • HavingthesamedistributionwithcertainNPs ‘markedwiththesamecase’ and instantiatingthesamesemanticroles • illative: goal, inessive: location, elative: source • partitive: theme/patient • The semanticroleprovidesthesemanticbasisforthe shift inthecategorial status of thecase marker

  27. The transfer of incrementalthemesemanticsto TAM categories: partitive • ‘part-of’ N • > event-objectisomorphism • > aspect marking partitive • > epistemicmodality • > evidentiality

  28. Incrementalthemes Mari sõipitsat. Mari ate pizza.partitive ‘Mary waseatingthe pizza.’ Marisõipitsa. Mari ate pizza.tot ‘Mary ate a pizza.’

  29. Affectedness of theincrementalthemeand theobjectcase

  30. Aspectingeneral

  31. The participlebecomes an object - auditoryevidence is partial Mari kuulis teda Mary heard him/her.part koju tulevat. homecome-pers.pres.ptcp.partitive ‘Mary heard him/her come home.’

  32. Visual evidence is notpartial Mari nägi Jürit Mary sawJ.part kojutule-mas. homecome-m_inessive ‘Mary saw Georgecominghome.’

  33. Evidentiality: indirecthearsaypartial Mari tule-vat. M.nom come.pers.pres.participle.part ‘Allegedly/reportedly,Mary will come.’ Marituleb. M.nom come.3.sg ‘Mary will come.’

  34. Evidentiality, epistemicmodalityand theincrementality of evidence

  35. Conclusion: semanticroles and cross-categorialcase • Whennon-finitesarecase-marked, theycaninstantiatesemanticroles. • Thisbringsaboutthebroadening of themeaningofthecase and therise of grammaticalmeanings. • The transfer of themeaningofcross-categorialcasefrom an argumenttothepredicateorutterancedomainretainselements of themeaningofthesemanticrole. • I presentedtheparallelsintheSource, Location, Goal, and IncrementalThemeroles of casemarkednouns and non-finites. • I showedhowthesemantics of theincrementalthemeroletransferstothecategoriesofaspect, epistemicmodality and evidentiality

More Related