20.197, Qs: Enclitics vs Proclitics

[LINGUIST Network]

LINGUIST List: Vol-20-197. Wed Jan 21 2009. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 20.197, Qs: Enclitics vs Proclitics

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Eastern Michigan U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>
 
Reviews: Randall Eggert, U of Utah  
       <reviews at linguistlist.org> 

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

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

Editor for this issue: Dan Parker <dan at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  

We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually
best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is
then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was
instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we
would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.

In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it
is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have
taken the trouble to respond to the query.

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.

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

1)
Date: 19-Jan-2009
From: Fay Wouk < f.wouk at auckland.ac.nz >
Subject: Enclitics vs Proclitics

 

	
-------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 20:05:40
From: Fay Wouk [f.wouk at auckland.ac.nz]
Subject: Enclitics vs Proclitics

E-mail this message to a friend:
http://linguistlist.org/issues/emailmessage/verification.cfm?iss=20-197.html&submissionid=202587&topicid=8&msgnumber=1
  


How does one determine whether a form is cliticized to the preceding or the
following word? I am working with Sasak, an Austronesian language that
makes regular use of reduced forms of pronouns. They encliticize to verbs,
but can also precede the verb, in which they could be analyzed as
procliticized to the verb, or as encliticized to the preceding auxiliary,
negative particle, adverb or conjunction. In the dialect I am currently
working with, sometimes they are clearly procliticized to the verb, as
there is no preceding element. In other cases they are clearly encliticized
to the preceding element, as shown by the presence of a ligature (e.g. mele
(want) + ku (1sg) becomes melengku). In other cases, where there is a
preceding element but no ligature, on what basis can one decide? Is it
better to look for phonological evidence, and if so, of what type, or is
there some other type of evidence that would be useful?

Please reply directly to me (f.wouk at auckland.ac.nz) and I will post a
summary to the list. 

Thanks,
Fay 

Linguistic Field(s): Syntax






-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-20-197