<div dir="ltr">Hi David,<div><br></div><div>After posting I thought of that use of ta(a)u.</div><div>It's not quite analogous.</div><div>The Tukang Best dahani _can_ be associated with a lengthened syllable when being used negatively (data:ni), but not when used in it's 'normal' sense.</div><div>In both cases you hear LHL over the three syllables; the marked negative use _can_ be phonologically marked, but doesn't have to be,</div><div>but,</div><div>I do think (straining memory) that when the lengthened syllable is not heard, there's an almost inevitable use of the raised eyebrows/headtilt strategy that I described in my grammar (<a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=0RW0uSfFMzYC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false">https://books.google.com.au/books?id=0RW0uSfFMzYC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false</a>, page 450+).</div><div>Note, if we're going paralinguistic here, that this same eyebrows+headtilt+nose-flare strategy is a valid means of responding both 'yes' and 'no'.</div><div><br></div><div>A: "Do you know/undestand?"</div><div>B: [eyebrows+headtilt+nose-flare]</div><div>A: …?</div><div><br></div><div>Parenthetically, I note that this body language response is used felicitously at night time when there's no chance of the interlocutor seeing the gesture, adding layers of excitement to interaction.</div><div><br></div><div>-Mark</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 1 June 2018 at 06:45, David Gil <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Mark,</p>
<p>An analogous construction exists in many or most varieties of
colloquial Indonesian, however it's associated with a particular
and distinctive intonation contour. Typically the contrast is as
follows:<br>
<br>
tau (know)<br>
taaa[L]u[H] (I don't know)</p>
<p>Unlike in Tukang Besi, in Indonesian verbs are not indexed for
person and number. But whereas the affirmative "tau" can be
associated with any person and number features, the negative
"taaa[L]u[H]" can only be understood as 1st person singular.</p>
<p>In very few cases, this construction extends also to <br>
</p>
<p>mau (want)<br>
maaa[L]u[H] (I don't want)</p>
<p>but for the most part it's limited to "know'.<br>
</p>
<p>A similar if not identical construction occurs in Tagalog with
the word "maniwala" (believe). With a low even tone spread over
the entire utterance, "maniwala ako", which otherwise means "I
believe", ends up with the opposite interpretation "I don't
believe".</p>
<p>However, in both the Indonesian and the Tagalog, negation is
marked suprasegmentally, in what might be called an intonational
idiom. So my question to you, Mark is: when Tukang Besi "Dahani"
is used to mean "I don't know", does it have the same intonation
contour as in the affirmative or a different one?</p><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<p>David<br>
</p></font></span><div><div class="h5">
<br>
<div class="m_2431236137252909737moz-cite-prefix">On 31/05/2018 22:32, Mark Donohue
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">In Tukang Besi, an Austronesian language of
Indonesia, the verb 'know' is dahani; verbs are generally
prefixed to agree with the S,A argument, thus
<div><br>
</div>
<div>ku-dahani 'I know'</div>
<div>'u-dahani 'you know'</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>etc.</div>
<div>In some contexts (imperatives, emphatic generic (TAME-less)
assertion), the prefix can be omitted.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>dahani 'I/you certainly know'</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Now, I've heard this (and only this) verb used, in the
absence of any inflection, with exactly its opposite meaning</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Dahani 'I don't know'</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>in what might be a sarcastic sense. Unlike the antonymic
uses of many adjectives in many languages, including English,
this use of dahani is actually a simple (though emphatic)
negation of the verb's 'normal' meaning.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Mark</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 1 June 2018 at 04:43, David Gil <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Yes, as
Matti points out, negative lexicalization is not quite as
rare as I was implying. Yet at the same time, I suspect
that it might not be as common as Matti is suggesting.
Looking at the examples that he cites in his Handbook
chapter, I suspect that in some cases, the negative
counterpart isn't "just" negative, but is also associated
with some additional meaning components.<br>
<br>
Matti doesn't list "good"/"bad" as being such a pair,
though, citing work by Ulrike Zeshan on sign languages, he
does mention other evaluative concepts such as "not right",
"not possible", "not enough". in English, at least, "bad"
is not the negation of "good", it is the antonym of "good";
there's all kind of stuff in the world which we attach no
evaluative content to, and which hence is neither good nor
bad. (It's true that in English, in many contexts, the
expression "not good" is understood as meaning "bad", which
is interesting in and of itself, but still, it is not
necessarily understood in this way.) While I have no direct
evidence, I would strongly suspect that in languages that
have lexicalized expressions for "not right", "not
possible", and "not enough", the meanings of these
expressions will be the antonyms of "right", "possible" and
"enough", and not their negations.<br>
<br>
Under lexicalized negatives in the domain of tense/aspect,
Matti lists "will not", "did not", "not finished". Well the
one case that I am familiar with that falls into this
category is that of the Malay/Indonesian iamative/perfect
marker "sudah", which has a lexicalized negative counterpart
"belum". However, "belum" isn't just "not sudah"; it also
bears a strong (if not invariant) implicature that at some
point in the future, the state or activity that is not
complete will be completed — in fact, just like the English
expression "not yet". (When people in Indonesia ask you if
you're married, it's considered impolite to answer with a
simple negation "tidak"; you're supposed to say "belum"
precisely because of its implicature that you will, in the
future, get married. By avoiding this implicature, the
simple negation "tidak" is viewed as a threat to the natural
order of things, in which everybody should get married.)<br>
<br>
I suspect that many if not all of the cases characterized by
Matti as "lexicalized negatives" will turn out to be
associated with some additional meaning component beyond
that of "mere" negation.
<div class="m_2431236137252909737HOEnZb">
<div class="m_2431236137252909737h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 31/05/2018 20:06, Miestamo, Matti M P wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Dear David, Zygmunt and others,<br>
<br>
negative lexicalization is not quite as rare as David
seems to imply. There is a cross-linguistic survey of
this phenomenon by Ljuba Veselinova (ongoing work,
detailed and informative presentation slides available
through her website), and Zeshan (2013) has written on
this phenomenon in sign languages. There's also a
short summary in my recent Cambridge Handbook of
Linguistic Typology chapter on negation (preprint
available via the link in the signature below).<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Matti<br>
<br>
--<br>
Matti Miestamo<br>
<a href="http://www.ling.helsinki.fi/%7Ematmies/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.ling.helsinki.fi/~m<wbr>atmies/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Zygmunt Frajzyngier <<a href="mailto:Zygmunt.Frajzyngier@COLORADO.EDU" target="_blank">Zygmunt.Frajzyngier@COLORADO.<wbr>EDU</a>>
kirjoitti 31.5.2018 kello 17.23:<br>
<br>
David, Friends<br>
Related to David’s post, not to the original query.<br>
In any individual language, there may exist a few of
‘Not-X’ items.<br>
In Mina (Central Chadic) there is a noun which
designates ‘non-blacksmith’.<br>
In several Chadic languages there exist negative
existential verb unrelated to the affirmative
existential verb.<br>
Zygmunt<br>
<br>
On 5/31/18, 5:52 AM, "Lingtyp on behalf of David
Gil" <<a href="mailto:lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp-bounces@listserv.ling<wbr>uistlist.org</a>
on behalf of <a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 31/05/2018 13:37, Sebastian Nordhoff wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 05/31/2018 01:18 PM, David Gil wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
A point of logic. "Not X" and "Antonym (X)" are
distinct notions, and<br>
the original query by Ian Joo pertains to the
former, not the latter.<br>
</blockquote>
but is there any (monomorphemic) lexeme which
expresses not-X which is<br>
not the antonym of X?<br>
</blockquote>
But how many (monomorphemic) lexemes expressing
not-X are there at all?<br>
The only ones I can think of are suppletive
negative existentials, e.g.<br>
Tagalog "may" (exist) > "wala" (not exist).
Even suppletive negative<br>
desideratives don't quite fit the bill, e.g.
Tagalog "nais"/"gusto"<br>
(want) > "ayaw", which is commonly glossed as
"not want", but actually<br>
means "want not-X", rather than "not want-X" —
"ayaw" is thus an antonym<br>
but not a strict negation of "nais"/"gusto".<br>
<br>
What is not clear to me about the original query
is whether it is asking<br>
for negations or for antonyms.<br>
<br>
--<br>
David Gil<br>
<br>
Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution<br>
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human
History<br>
<a href="https://maps.google.com/?q=Kahlaische+Strasse+10,+07745+Jena,+Germany&entry=gmail&source=g">Kahlaische Strasse 10, 07745 Jena, Germany</a><br>
<br>
Email: <a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a><br>
Office Phone (Germany): +49-3641686834<br>
Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81281162816<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.<wbr>org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.o<wbr>rg/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.<wbr>org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.o<wbr>rg/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.<wbr>org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.o<wbr>rg/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
-- <br>
David Gil<br>
<br>
Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution<br>
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History<br>
<a href="https://maps.google.com/?q=Kahlaische+Strasse+10,+07745+Jena,+Germany&entry=gmail&source=g">Kahlaische Strasse 10, 07745 Jena, Germany</a><br>
<br>
Email: <a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a><br>
Office Phone (Germany): +49-3641686834<br>
Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81281162816<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.<wbr>org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.o<wbr>rg/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="m_2431236137252909737moz-signature" cols="72">--
David Gil
Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
<a href="https://maps.google.com/?q=Kahlaische+Strasse+10,+07745+Jena,+Germany&entry=gmail&source=g">Kahlaische Strasse 10, 07745 Jena, Germany</a>
Email: <a class="m_2431236137252909737moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a>
Office Phone (Germany): +49-3641686834
Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81281162816
</pre>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>