9.1664, Disc: Re: 9.1634, Disc: Morphosyntax

[LINGUIST Network]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-9-1664. Mon Nov 23 1998. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 9.1664, Disc: Re: 9.1634, Disc: Morphosyntax

Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Wayne State U.<aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>
            Andrew Carnie: U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Reviews: Andrew Carnie: U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Associate Editors:  Martin Jacobsen <marty at linguistlist.org>
                    Brett Churchill <brett at linguistlist.org>
                    Ljuba Veselinova <ljuba at linguistlist.org>

Assistant Editors:  Scott Fults <scott at linguistlist.org>
		    Jody Huellmantel <jody at linguistlist.org>
		    Karen Milligan <karen at linguistlist.org>

Software development: John H. Remmers <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
                      Chris Brown <chris at linguistlist.org>

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/


Editor for this issue: Brett Churchill <brett at linguistlist.org>

=================================Directory=================================

1)
Date:  Wed, 18 Nov 1998 14:24:16 -0500 (EST)
From:  Paul Llido <llidop at gusun.georgetown.edu>
Subject:  Re: 9.1634, Disc: Morphosyntax

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

Date:  Wed, 18 Nov 1998 14:24:16 -0500 (EST)
From:  Paul Llido <llidop at gusun.georgetown.edu>
Subject:  Re: 9.1634, Disc: Morphosyntax


To Robert B., Jose C. and all,

This discussion could be very interesting indeed. The terms, "nomen",
"verbum", "adverbum", etc. definitely were a legacy of latin grammarians.
Their use in English as primitives needs to be defined distributionally.
In Latin, the "nomen" morpheme class follows a very clear paradigmatic
pattern and distribution for the different declension classes. But the
same is not so clear in English. [Casa, -ae, -ae, -am, -a] is
morphologically distributionally locked in Latin for "nomen" but the same
is not the case in English [house-houses (nouns),
house-house-house-houses-house-housing (verbs)]. They look like they
belong to only one morphological and distributional class where marking by
a definitizer makes it a substantive and marking by a personalizer
(pronoun)  makes it an action word. I would proffer the idea given the
evidence that they indeed are just one morphological-distributional class
and not two as in [house-houses-housed-housing].

The case would even be more acute in Malayo-Polynesian or Austronesian
because reference grammars have been using the terms "noun", "verb".
In Cebuano, the roots can be converted into a substantive, a modifier, an
action word and the different classes of  action words by affixation. In
this language which is agglutinative, one can even find one word sentences
comprising of a root with its machinery of affixes.

[owan] 'rain'
[ga-owan] 'it is raining'
[ang gi-owan-hang yuta] 'the rained-upon land'
[mo-owan] 'it will rain'
etc.

The glosses are rough translations of the word and their syntactic or
morphological patterns do not mirror the complexity of the morphology of
Cebuano.

Paul LLido

***********************************************************************
****************************************************    Paul C. LLIDO *
*******************************   e-mail: llidop at gusun.georgetown.edu *
****   Georgetown University (Graduate School - Dept. of Linguistics) *
***********************************************************************

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-9-1664