Object-initial languages

[Stahlke, Herbert F.W.]

Dear Ngoni,

Lots of languages can do this sort of thing, but still they exhibit a default word order.  This typically shows up in subordinate clauses, where there tends to be less word order variation.  Does Shona allow the same flexibility in relative clauses or adverbial subordinate clauses?  How do other aspects of word order typology manifest themselves in Shona?

Herb Stahlke
Ball State University

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Ngoni Chipere [mailto:n.chipere at READING.AC.UK]
        Sent: Thu 10/24/2002 5:25 AM
        To: FUNKNET at listserv.rice.edu
        Cc:
        Subject: Re: Object-initial languages



        Dear Ron,

        My native language - Shona - has a rich morphology which allows great
        variations in word order. It's quite possible to have

        VOS
        e.g. Anonwa doro Tendai
               He-drinks beer Tendai, i.e. Tendai drinks beer.

        OSV
        e.g. Doro Tendai anonwa
                Beer Tendai he-drinks, i.e. Tendai drinks beer.

        OVS
        e.g. Doro anonwa Tendai
              Beer he-drinks Tendai, again meaning Tendai drinks beer.

        best,

        Ngoni

        *********************************************************
        Dr Ngoni Chipere
        Research Fellow
        School of Education, University of Reading
        Bulmershe Court, Earley, Reading, RG6 1HY, UK
        tel 0118 9875123 ext 4943


        > Dear colleagues,
        > I his recent textbook, Andrew Carnie (2002) Syntax: A Generative
        > Introduction, p. 18-19, says:
        > "Oversimplifying slightly, most languages put the order of elements in
        > a sentence in one of the following word orders: SVO, SOV, VSO. A few
        > languages use VOS. No (or almost no)(6) languages use OSV, OVS."
        > Note (6) reads:
        > "This is a matter of some debate. Derbyshire (1985) has claimed that the
        > language Hixkaryana has object initial order."
        > Obviously, the very definition of the term subject (and object) may
        > depend on theoretical considerations (ergative languages?), and so would
        > the idea of the unmarked or default order.
        > I am interested in functionally-oriented comments on this issue. Are
        > there really no object initial languages?
        > Thanks
        > Roni
        > ====================================
        >                  Dr. Ron Kuzar
        > Address:   Department of English Language and Literature
        >                  University of Haifa
        >                  IL-31905 Haifa, Israel
        > Office:       +972-4-824-9826, fax: +972-4-824-9711
        > Home:       +972-2-6414780, Cellular: +972-5-481-9676
        > Email:        kuzar at research.haifa.ac.il
        > Site:ý          http://research.haifa.ac.il/~kuzar
        > ====================================
        >