15.291, Sum: Hale Reference

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-15-291. Mon Jan 26 2004. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 15.291, Sum: Hale Reference

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U.<aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry, Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>

Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org):
	Sheila Collberg, U. of Arizona
	Terence Langendoen, U. of Arizona

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Steve Moran <steve at linguistlist.org>
 ==========================================================================
To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.
=================================Directory=================================

1)
Date:  Fri, 23 Jan 2004 10:21:53 -0500 (EST)
From:  Donna Lardiere <lardiere at georgetown.edu>
Subject:  Re: Q's 15.44 Hale reference

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

Date:  Fri, 23 Jan 2004 10:21:53 -0500 (EST)
From:  Donna Lardiere <lardiere at georgetown.edu>
Subject:  Re: Q's 15.44 Hale reference


In (Linguist 15.44) I asked whether anyone could identify the
languages described in a Hale(1996, p. 729) commentary on Epstein,
Flynn & Martohardjono (1996) quoted below.

(1) ''Add the suffix -sh to animate nouns to form the dual and plural,
add the same suffix to inanimates to form the singular and dual.''

Many thanks to Martha McGinnis, Douglas Dee and especially Thomas
Hanke, who identified it as Jemez (Kiowa-Tanoan family). Hanke pointed
me to the following source in Corbett's (2000) _Number_:

p. 159f, footnote 28: ''The related language Jemez has a comparable
but interestingly different system of number marking of nouns (Kenneth
Hale 1956-57 and p.c.), as the table shows. In Jemez the inverse
marker marks the dual, together with either plural or singular
(depending on the noun, in the main animates follow the first pattern
and inanimates the second). ''

Douglas Dee also referred me to Mithun (1999, p. 81) _The Languages of
Native North America_ for a description of Jemez.

(2) ''In cardinality DPs, with numerals from 3 through 10, use the
feminine for a masculine noun, and vice versa, and use the plural form
of the noun; with numerals from 11 through 19, use the singular
accusative for the noun, and for the teen subpart of the numeral, use
feminine for a feminine, and for the unit subpart of the numeral, use
feminine for masculine and vice versa.''

Thanks to Stefan Dienst and again to Thomas Hanke who suggested Modern
Standard Arabic and classical Arabic, respectively. Hanke referred me
to the following source, from Hetzron (ed.): _The Semitic Languages_:
p. 154: ''while many numerals (3-10, 13-19, 23-29, etc.) exhibit a
kind of reverse agreement (polarity), taking a feminine ending with
masculine counted nouns [...] and vice versa [...]''  and p.198, for
classical Arabic: ''after the numbers from 11 to 19 in the accusative
singular: [...] There is no distinction in gender in the tens,
hundreds, and thousands.''

Thanks very much!
Donna Lardiere

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-15-291