<div dir="ltr">continuing with examples of languages where plural pronouns (optionally) take plural noun) suffixes:<div>Nepali</div><div>hami "we" also hami-hʌru "we" (we+PL)</div><div>
(note: 1st singular is mʌ "I"; *mʌ-hʌru is not possible) </div><div><br></div><div>compare use of the same suffix added to singular pronouns to form plural, e.g.:</div><div>timi "you" (singular, informal) > timi-hʌru "you" (all) (plural,informal)</div><div>in these latter instances the suffix
-hʌru is not optional</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 2:56 PM Edith A Moravcsik <<a href="mailto:edith@uwm.edu">edith@uwm.edu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US">
<div class="gmail-m_-5142534737079458504WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">Thank you, Bernhard, for your very enlightening message rich both in data and in insight!</span><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">Here are some facts about the accusative forms of Hungarian personal pronouns that pertain to the following three of Bernhard’s hypotheses:<br>
<br>
<span style="color:black">2. Reinforced and reinforcing morphemes are not the same allomorph.<u></u><u></u></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt;color:black">5. Short forms are reinforced more frequently than longer forms.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt;color:black">6. Transparently marked forms are less frequently reinforced than opaquely marked forms.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">Here is the paradigm of the accusatives of Hungarian personal pronouns:<br>
<br>
Sing 1 <i>engem, engem-et</i><br>
2 <i>téged, téged-et</i><br>
3 </span><i><span style="font-size:14pt">ő</span></i><i><span style="font-size:14pt">t,
</span></i><i><span style="font-size:14pt">ő-</span></i><i><span style="font-size:14pt">t-et</span></i><span style="font-size:14pt"><br>
Plu 1 <i>mink-et</i><br>
2 <i>titek-et</i><br>
3 </span><i><span style="font-size:14pt">ő</span></i><i><span style="font-size:14pt">k-et</span></i><span style="font-size:14pt"><br>
<br>
<b>Regarding point 2</b> (The reinforced and the reinforcing morphemes are not the same allomorph): This does not hold for the singular third person accusative form. The nominal accusative suffix is -t (with a vowel preceding it) and it occurs twice in
</span><i><span style="font-size:14pt">ő-</span></i><i><span style="font-size:14pt">t-et</span></i><span style="font-size:14pt">.<br>
<br>
The same identical reinforcement occurs in demonstratives:<br>
<br>
<i>ez-t, ez-t-et</i> ‘this (accusative)’<br>
<i>az-t, az-t-at</i> ‘that (accusative)’<br>
<br>
The doubly-marked forms both for the third person singular pronoun and the demonstratives are highly colloquial; perhaps also dialectal. Jokingly, sometimes people also usu the triply-marked
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"> <i>ez-t-et-et</i> and <i>az-t-at-at</i> (but I have never heard
</span><i><span style="font-size:14pt">ő-</span></i><i><span style="font-size:14pt">t-et-et</span></i><span style="font-size:14pt">).<br>
<br>
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:14pt">Regarding point 5</span></b><span style="font-size:14pt">
<span style="color:black">(Short forms are reinforced more frequently than longer forms):
</span>Both the third person singular pronoun and the demonstratives are short and thus they support this point.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:14pt">Regarding point 6</span></b><span style="font-size:14pt"> (<span style="color:black">Transparently marked forms are less frequently reinforced than opaquely marked forms):
</span>The singular first and second person pronominal accusatives are non-transparent (they are monomorphemic:
<i>engem, téged</i>) and thus the fact that they are reinforced is in line with this point.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">Another relevant fact is that loanwords are sometimes reinforced - presumably because they are non-transparent in the borrowing language. I cannot think of an inflectional example but non-inflectional ones
are “pizza pie” and “gelato icecream”.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Edith Moravcsik</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Lingtyp <<a href="mailto:lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Bernhard Wälchli<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, November 16, 2019 3:33 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Ponrawee Prasertsom <<a href="mailto:ponrawee.pra@gmail.com" target="_blank">ponrawee.pra@gmail.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Lingtyp] Plural markers on (already) plural pronouns<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Dear all,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Bill Croft treats the phenomena in question in his seminal book “Explaining Language Change” (2000: 134) under the heading of “cryptanalysis”
(§5.5): “In cryptanalysis, the listener analyses a covert semantic/functional property of a syntactic unit as not grammatically marked, and inserts {obviously it is meant when turning into a speaker again, BW} an overt marker expressing its semantic value.”
Some of the examples discussed on this list are given in Bill’s subsection §5.5.3 “Pleonastic double marking / reinforcement”.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">I am actually not certain whether this is the only possible interpretation. The overt marker could be inserted because the speaker considers
the semantic property not <i>sufficiently</i> marked. I do not think all speakers using reinforcement are unable to analyze the non-reinforced expression (despite frequent claims by purists that using pleonasms is stupid). A more general mechanism that can
account for reinforcement - although not the sublte differences in politeness in Turkish - is Lüdtke’s model of quantitative language change. (Croft 2000: 159 discusses it as the “periphrasis-fusion-erosion” cycle.) According to Lüdtke, speech has to be redundant
since it occurs in a noisy environment, and this entails in the long run three types of changes for saying the same thing which trigger each other: fewer phonemes (Croft’s term “erosion”), more morphemes (Croft’s “periphrasis”) and fewer morpheme boundaries
(Croft’s “fusion”) for conveying the same message. So, aren’t the phenomena under discussion here just instances of this? As in the well-known development of French demonstratives from Latin:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-size:12pt;color:black">ista N > (ecce)ista N > (c)este N > cette N > cette N(-ci)</span><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-size:12pt;color:black">hoc > (ecce)hoc > (ç)o > ço > ce > ce(la) > cela > ça</span><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">However, probably there is more to it if we take phonology into account. It seems to me that it happens very rarely that a structure Y-x
(with -x being the marker) is reinforced pleonastically with a phonologically identical marker: Y-x-x. This seems to be due to avoidance of subsequent identical sequences (there is also a diachronic process doing away with them: haplology, funnily except in
the term itself). Indeed, in no example mentioned so far, the new reinforced structure is Y-x-x (with x being the same allomorph).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Against such phonological considerations one might argue that the reinforcing element is usually (has to be ??) more transparent than
the earlier exponent of the semantic category (otherwise the reinforced marker is not “crypto-”). However, more transparent exponents also tend to be more productive, and it is more likely that reinforcement is done by a productive strategy than by a non-productive
strategy. After all, if the point of reinforcement is more clarity for the listener, it might be strange to use non-transparent markers for that purpose. Another interesting question is: why is it just morphologically marked categories that tend to be reinforced?
(This might be relevant for the issue of typological markedness.) Does anybody have an example where a singular personal pronoun is reinforced by a singular marker? (There are certainly many cases of dual pronouns being reinforced by ‘two’ and the like). Note
also that reinforcement may entail more complexity as when gender is introduced in pronouns: Spanish nos-otros/nos-otras ‘we’, Lithuanian ju-du ‘you(dual)-two[M]’, ju-dvi ‘you(dual)-two[F]’.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">So here are some claims (I’d love to see counter-examples)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">1. Reinforcing morphemes are more transparent and productive than reinforced morphemes.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">2. Reinforced and reinforcing morphemes are not the same allomorph.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">3. Reinforcing (except purely phonetic reinforcing e.g. by stress) occurs at the periphery (by affixes, adjacent words, not by infixes,
ablaut etc.).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">4. Typologically unmarked categories are not reinforced. (This does not hold. For instance, Indo-European present
<i>-i</i> is a counter example, so no counter-examples for this, please)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">4b. Much weaker: singular personal pronouns are not reinforced by singular.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">4c. Typologically unmarked categories are reinforced less often than typologically marked categories [possibly a tautology when considered
from a pan-chronic perspective]<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">(Note that 4b can be accounted for by frequency, whereas 4 cannot.)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Hence 4d: Typologically unmarked categories are not reinforced in uses where they are relatively more frequent than their marked counterpart.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">5. Short forms are reinforced more frequently than longer forms.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">6. Transparently marked forms are less frequently reinforced than opaquely marked forms.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">7. Reinforcement is more likely to happen in phrases consisting of one word than in phrases consisting of several words (thus
<i>we typologists</i> is less prone to be reinforced than <i>we</i>).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Lüdtke, Helmut (1980).
</span><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Kommunikationstheoretische Grundlagen des Sprachwandels.</span><span lang="DE" style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> ‘Sprachwandel als universales Phänomen’, 1-19; ‘Auf dem Weg zu einer Theorie des Sprachwandels’,
182-252. </span><span lang="SV" style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Berlin: de Gruyter.</span><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="SV" style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> </span><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="SV" style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Best,</span><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="SV" style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Bernhard W.</span><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">
<hr size="2" width="98%" align="center">
</span></div>
<div id="gmail-m_-5142534737079458504divRplyFwdMsg">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black">From:</span></b><span style="color:black"> Lingtyp <<a href="mailto:lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>> on behalf of Ponrawee Prasertsom <<a href="mailto:ponrawee.pra@gmail.com" target="_blank">ponrawee.pra@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, November 15, 2019 5:01 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Lingtyp] Plural markers on (already) plural pronouns</span><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Dear all, <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">I have been looking at a number of Tai languages and found that in some of these languages, plural pronouns can optionally take a plural marker normally used on common nouns. For instance, in Shan
(Southwestern Tai), the third person plural pronoun <i>khau</i> can optionally take the plural marker
<i>cɯ(nai)</i>, viz. <i>khau cɯ(nai)--</i>at least according to Cushing 1871.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Assuming this analysis is correct (if it's not please kindly inform me), I'm wondering how rare this is for pronouns? A quick lookup revealed that a similar phenomenon called "double plural marking"
is found in some languages, but seems to be restricted to common nouns only. Does anyone know of any other instances like this for pronouns in other languages?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Sources: Cushing, Josiah Nelson. Grammar of the Shan Language. Rangoon: American Mission Press, 1871.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Best regards,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">-- <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black;letter-spacing:0.15pt">Ponrawee Prasertsom</span><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Graduate Student<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Department of Linguistics<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black;letter-spacing:0.15pt">Faculty of Arts, </span><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Chulalongkorn University<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Bangkok, Thailand<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div>Dr Michael W Morgan<br>mwm || *U*C> || mike || माईक || માઈક || মাঈক || மாஈக || مایک ||мика || 戊流岸マイク <br>sign language linguist / linguistic typologist / Deaf education consultant<br>"Have language, will travel"<br>=====================================<br>"People who are always looking down at the bottom line will always fail to see the stars" <br><br></div></div></div>