<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Christian, have you looked at the prosody of the two constructions? I suspect that when the nominal then the demonstrative are initial it is doing different discourse work than when it comes late.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small">Marianne</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 9:48 AM Randy LaPolla <<a href="mailto:randy.lapolla@gmail.com">randy.lapolla@gmail.com</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 dir="auto">PS: the resumptive pronoun in the examples I just sent was later reanalyzed as a copula, and is now the copula in Mandarin. <div><br></div><div>Randy<br><br><div dir="ltr">Sent from my phone</div><div dir="ltr"><br><blockquote type="cite">On 19 Sep 2021, at 10:59 PM, Christian Lehmann <<a href="mailto:christian.lehmann@uni-erfurt.de" target="_blank">christian.lehmann@uni-erfurt.de</a>> wrote:<br><br></blockquote></div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">
Dear colleagues,<br>
<br>
while working on Cabecar grammar, I have been struggling with a
phenomenon which I do not recall having seen treated in the
literature and which I have dubbed instant resumption. It is a kind
of intraclausal anaphora involving an NP as antecedent and a
demonstrative pronoun as anaphor. A variant of this has been
well-known as left-dislocation. In Cabecar, however, the
construction has these properties:<br>
<ul>
<li>It does not necessarily involve left-dislocation. The
antecedent NP may be anywhere inside the clause, even at its
end.</li>
<li>The resumptive pronoun (the medial demonstrative, glossed
D.MED below) may, in principle, come later in the clause.
However, in 96% of the cases, it follows the antecedent
immediately. It does this even at the end of the clause. I
therefore assume that, at the structural level, this is (putting
it in grammaticalizational terms) no longer anaphora, but
apposition.</li>
<li>The phenomenon is completely independent of the internal
constituency of the antecedent; this may be a nominalized
clause, a determined NP or even a pronoun. And it is independent
of the syntactic function of the resumptive - or the entire
appositional NP - in its clause; it may be just any function
available to an NP.</li>
<li>Instant resumption is always optional, although preferred in
many cases.<br>
</li>
</ul>
Here are two examples; the antecedent is bracketed:<br>
<br>
E1. Rogelio jé m-á̱=ká̱=ju̱
bulía.<br>
[Rogelio] D.MED go-PROG=ASC=AM tomorrow<br>
‘Rogelio(, he) will climb tomorrow.’<br>
E2. jé rä sä yu-ä kië́
Pedro jé= i̠a̠.<br>
D.MED COP [<a href="http://1.PL" target="_blank">1.PL</a> form-NR name Peter] D.MED=DAT<br>
‘that is for the professor named Peter.’<br>
<br>
Unless you have seen this kind of construction before, you may think
that my analysis is mistaken and the demonstrative is simply a
postnominal determiner. Be assured that it is not. The language has
prenominal determiners. And as said before, there are 4% of distant
resumption which would not be possible if the thing were a
determiner.<br>
<br>
Certain phenomena I have seen in other languages come to mind:<br>
<ul>
<li>In Dagbani, the relative clause (described by Wilson 1963 and
1975) is followed by a particle <i>la</i> which Wilson does not
categorize but which looks like a demonstrative.</li>
<li>In Wappo, the relative clause (described by Li & Thompson
1978) is followed by a demonstrative <i>ce</i>, which at that
time I thought was a postnominal determiner.</li>
<li>In some Australian language which I do not recall, the case
suffixes on nouns look like pronouns provided with the same case
suffixes. Compare with this E2 above.</li>
</ul>
Here are my questions to you:<br>
<ul>
<li>Have you seen instant resumption in other languages?</li>
<li>Is there an established concept and term for the phenomenon
which I have overlooked?</li>
<li>Is it a grammaticalized form of left-dislocation, as it
appears to me, or is there some other base for it?</li>
<li>How should we conceive its function at the grammaticalized
stage? To me, it seems that it no longer has any cognitive or
communicative function, but a mere structural function (if I may
say so), viz. identifying a nominal expression as such by
summing it up, and thus demarcating it against the rest of the
clause at least in configurations as E1.<br>
</li>
</ul>
I would be grateful for any help.<br>
Best, Christian<br>
<div>-- <br>
<p style="font-size:90%">Prof. em. Dr. Christian Lehmann<br>
Rudolfstr. 4<br>
99092 Erfurt<br>
<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Deutschland</span></p>
<table style="font-size:80%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Tel.:</td>
<td>+49/361/2113417</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>E-Post:</td>
<td><a href="mailto:christianw_lehmann@arcor.de" target="_blank">christianw_lehmann@arcor.de</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Web:</td>
<td><a href="https://www.christianlehmann.eu" target="_blank">https://www.christianlehmann.eu</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Lingtyp mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a></span><br></div></blockquote></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>