Mark van de velde odette ambouroue llacan paris
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 24

Accessiblity to relativisation in Orungu (B10, Gabon) PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 51 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Mark Van de Velde & Odette Ambouroue LLACAN, Paris. Accessiblity to relativisation in Orungu (B10, Gabon). 1. Introduction. 1.1. Orungu (Bantu B11b) Previous work: Ambouroue (2007) Van de Velde & Ambouroue (2011) Tonality: Philippson & Puech ( Galwa ) (definiteness marking!)

Download Presentation

Accessiblity to relativisation in Orungu (B10, Gabon)

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Mark van de velde odette ambouroue llacan paris

Mark Van de Velde & Odette Ambouroue

LLACAN, Paris

Accessiblity to relativisation in Orungu (B10, Gabon)


1 introduction

1. Introduction

1.1. Orungu (Bantu B11b)

Previous work:

Ambouroue (2007)

Van de Velde & Ambouroue (2011)

Tonality:

Philippson & Puech (Galwa)

(definiteness marking!)

Some articles on the other varieties,

Galwa dictionary by

Raponda-Walker


1 introduction1

1. Introduction

The Myene documentation project, funded by

will provide us with a text corpus by the end of 2013.


1 introduction2

1. Introduction

1.2. The accessibility hierarchy

(Keenan & Comrie 1977)

SU > DO > IO > OBL > GEN > OCOMP

The hierarchy constraints:

1. A language must be able to relativise subjects

2. Any RC-forming strategy must apply to a continuous segment of the AH (i.e. as far as relativisation is concerned, a language is free to treat adjacent positions on the AH as the same, but it cannot ‘skip’ positions)

3. Strategies that apply at one point of the AH may in principle cease to apply at any lower point


2 phrasal syntax some basics

2. Phrasal syntax: some basics

Typological abbreviations for syntactic roles:

S subject (no need to distinguish between S & A)

P object in a two participant construction

T object in a three participant construction that typically expresses the thematic role of Theme

G object in a three participant construction that typically expresses the thematic role of Goal


2 phrasal syntax some basics1

2. Phrasal syntax: some basics

Comrie & Keenan:

SU > DO > IO > OBL > GEN > OCOMP

Word order suggests dominant secundative alignment in Orungu three participant constructions, hence:

S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen


3 the structure of relative clauses

3. The structure of Relative clauses

Relative verbs agree with the relativised NP (NPrel)

They have a high VP and a low TAM-prefix (“formative”). Any non-relative verb form that has these tonal characteristics, is not formally distinguished from its relative counterpart.

Relative verbs take either a VP or a PP, but these are only distinct in class 1.

Only the VP can be used in headless relatives.

When the NPrel is a first or second person pronoun, agreement on the relative verb is of class 9.

In non-subject relatives, the subject follows the verb


3 the structure of relative clauses1

3. The structure of Relative clauses

(8) Far past

a.àrɛ̀ndí ‘he wrote’

b.árɛ̀ndì / wárɛ̀ndì ‘who wrote (NPrel of class 1)’

c.wárɛ́ndì ‘they wrote’

d.wárɛ̀ndì ‘who wrote (NPrel class 2)’

(9) Recent past

a.àtɛ́ndà ‘he wrote’

b.áꜜtɛ́ndà ‘who wrote’ (NPrel of class 1)

c.wáꜜtɛ́ndà ‘they wrote’/ ‘who wrote’ (NPrel cl. 2)


3 the structure of relative clauses2

3. The structure of Relative clauses

An alternative strategy for relative clause formation involves a relative form of the verb re ‘be’ and a non-finite form of the lexical verb (infinitive plus perfect (?) clitic pâ).

(10)náɣò yérè myɛ́ ɗyènà pâ

|náɣòy-é-rèmyɛ́ɗyènàpâ|

9.house.dtpix-pr-beix-1sg.pprinf.seeperf

‘the house I saw’


4 accessibility to relativisation

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.1.S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

(11)óꜜŋwánt àɣòlín óɣ àɓá

|óꜜŋw-ántòà-à-gòl-in-íó-gàà-bá|

1-woman.dtpi-rp-buy-appl-rp1-chief.dtp6-mangoes.ntp

‘The woman bought mangoes for the chief.’

(12)óꜜŋwánt ꜜáɣòlìn óɣ àɓá

|óꜜŋw-ántòá-à-ɣòl-in-ì ó-gàà-bá|

1-woman.dtpi-rp-buy-appl-rp.rel1-chief.dtp6-mango.ntp

‘the woman who bought mangoes for the chief’


4 accessibility to relativisation1

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.2. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

(13)myáyèní nàɣò

|mí-à-yèn-ínágò|

1sg-rp-see-rp9.house.dtp

‘I saw the house.’

(14)náɣò yáyènó myɛ̀

|nágòí-à-yèn-ò=myɛ́|

9.house.dtpix-rp.see-pass.rel=1sg.ppr

‘the house I saw’


4 accessibility to relativisation2

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.3. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

(15)óɣà wáɣòlìnò n óꜜŋwánt àbá

|ó-ɣàwá-à-ɣòl-ìn-ònóóꜜŋw-ántòà-bá|

1-chief.dtpi.rel-fp-buy-appl-pasby1-woman6-mang.ntp

‘the chief for whom the woman bought mangoes’

(16)óɣà wárèβízó myɛ̀ òŋwánà

|ó-ɣàú-à-rèβ-iz-ò=myɛ́òŋw-ánà|

1-chief.dtpi(pp).rel-fp-show-caus-pas=1sg.ppr1.child

‘the chief I showed the child to’


4 accessibility to relativisation3

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.4. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

(17)àɓá máɣólín ꜜóŋwánt ꜜóɣà

|à-ɓám-á-ɣól-ín-ìóꜜŋw-ántòó-ɣà|

6-mangoes.itpvi-fp-buy-appl-fp1-woman.dtp1-chief.dtp

‘mangoes that the woman bought for the chief’


4 accessibility to relativisation4

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.4. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

Dative alternation shows that syntactic role is important (rather than thematic role).

(18)a.óɣ àβèní yáŋgó ɣó lèkɔ́lì (Theme = P)

b.óɣ àβèní lèkɔ́lì yàŋgò (Theme = T)

‘the chief gave the school books.’

(19)a.yáŋgò yáβènò n óɣà ɣó lèkɔ́lì

b.yáŋgò yáβèn óɣà lékɔ̂ːlì

‘the books that the chief gave (to) the school.’


4 accessibility to relativisation5

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.4. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

Importance of inherent prominence

(20)òŋwáꜜn áɣòlìzò n óꜜŋwáꜜnt óɣà

|òŋw-ánàá-à-ɣòl-ìz-ònóóꜜŋw-ántòó-ɣà|

1-childi.rel-fp-buy-caus-pasby1-woman1-chief

‘the child that the woman sold to the chief’


4 accessibility to relativisation6

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.4. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

Inherent prominence is a characteristic of participants in a given situation.

(21)òsákà wákólín óŋwántò óɣà

|ò-sákàwá-à-kól-ín-ìóŋw-ántòó-ɣà|

1-slave.dtpi.rel-prf-buy-appl-prf1-woman.dtp1-chief.dtp

‘the slave that the woman bought for the chief’

(22)ò-sákà wáyìŋgìn óɣà n óŋwántò

|ò-sákàwá-à-yìŋ-ìn-òóɣànóóŋw-áːntò|

1-slave.dtpi.rel-fp-treat-appl-pas1-chief.dtpby1-woma.dtp

‘the slave that the woman treated for the chief’


4 accessibility to relativisation7

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.4. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

(23)a.òɣáŋgà àyìŋgí óɣò w óŋwànà

‘The healer treated the child’s arm.’

b.òɣáŋgà àyìŋgí óŋwànà óɣɔ̀

‘The healer treated the child’s arm.’

c.óɣɔ̀ wáyìŋgò òŋwánà n óɣàŋgà

‘the arm that the healer treated for/to the child’


4 accessibility to relativisation8

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.5. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

(24)òŋwán ónòːmè àzɛ̀ɾíːn ónɛ̀ːnʤì ntíːnà y ítɔ́ːtɔ̀ n òkwáːɾá

‘the boy cut the banana plant for the teacher with a machete’

(25)òkwáɾà wázɛ̀ɾìnì n òŋwáꜜn ónòmè ònɛ́nʤì ntínà y ítɔ́tɔ̀

‘the machete with which the boy cut the banana plant for the teacher’

(26)òkwáɾà wázɛ̀ɾìn òŋwáꜜn ónòmè ònɛ́nʤì n ìntínà y ítɔ́tɔ̀

‘the machete with which the boy cut the banana plant for the teacher’

(27)òkwáɾà wázɛ̀ɾìnì n òŋwáꜜn ónòmè ònɛ́nʤì n ìntínà y ítɔ́tɔ̀

‘the machete with which the boy cut the banana plant for the teacher’


4 accessibility to relativisation9

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.6. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

4.6.1. the connective constructions is used to express possession

External possession: NPrel = P or G

(28)a.cwánà y óꜜŋwántò wínɔ́ yáɗyúwì

‘The kettle of that woman broke.’

b.óꜜŋwántò áꜜɗyúnò nó ɲcwànà

‘the woman whose kettle broke’


4 accessibility to relativisation10

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.6. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

4.6.2. the connective constructions is not used to express possession

(29)a.ìlɔ̂ndà y álɛ̀ŋgɛ̀ mínɔ́ mátúwûnì mbámbye

‘These pumpkin seeds grew well.’

b.àlɛ̂ŋgɛ̀ mátúwûn ìlɔ̂ndà mbámbyê

‘the pumpkins whose seeds grew well’


5 discussion

5. discussion

To summarise:

A hole in the hierarchy!

S > P > G > T[+salient]> T[-salient] > (Obl) > Gen


5 discussion1

5. discussion

Tentative historical explanation:

There used to be no restrictions on accessibility to relativisation (as, e.g., in nearby A70)

Subject relatives are strongly preferred over other relatives, therefore prior passivisation was preferred over direct relativisation

Accessibility to passivisation was restricted (either grammatically or in terms of frequency) to positions high on the NP hierarchy

The preferred strategy (first passivise, then relativise) became obligatory


5 discussion2

5. discussion

RESULT:

A minority pattern in line with the typological generalisations of the Accessibility Hierarchy


References

references

Ambouroué, Odette (2007). Eléments de description de l’orungu, langue bantu du Gabon (B11b). PhD thesis. Université Libre de Bruxelles.

Keenan, Edward L. and Bernard Comrie. (1977/1987). Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. In: Edward L. Keenan (ed.) Universal Grammar. London: Croom Helm, 3–45, p3-45 (Originally appeared in Linguistic Inquiry 8: 63–99.)


  • Login