Interestingly, however, your two examples do show change of topic. Can you think of an example where it doesn't?
Bruce
REGINA PUSTET <pustetrm at yahoo.com> wrote: In my data, i(N)s^ is used mainly as a marker for strong contrast, as in
Sally is^tiNme na Harry iNs^ TV waNyaNke
S. sleep and H. CON TV watch
Sally is sleeping and Harry is watching TV
or
Sally is^tiNme na iNs^ Harry TV waNyaNke
S. sleep and CON H. TV watch
Sally is sleeping and Harry is watching TV
This can, but doesnt have to, be accompanied by topic change, introduction of a different argument, and similar notions.
Regina
shokooh Ingham <shokoohbanou at yahoo.co.uk> wrote: It would be a great help if they were, as I always find this difficult in Lakota. The is^ eya complex often seems to signify a change of topic or subject, but it is very hard to tie down
Bruce
ROOD DAVID S <rood at spot.Colorado.EDU> wrote:
Lungstrum's dissertation claims that chanke and yukhan are switch
reference markers, defining "reference" as any major change of scene,
characters, point of view, or some other discontinuity. I wasn't
convinced.
David
David S. Rood
Dept. of Linguistics
Univ. of Colorado
295 UCB
Boulder, CO 80309-0295
USA
rood at colorado.edu
On Fri, 1 Jun 2007, willemdereuse at unt.edu wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> I have always thought that the chankhe/yunkhan alternation of conjunctions in
> Lakota texts, first discussed by Chafe (I think) and then by Dahlstrom had
> something to do with obviation. It is definitely not switch-reference. Does
> Richard Lungstrum's diss. say anything about this? I am sorry to say I have
> not yet gotten hold of a copy of Richard's diss.
>
> Willem de Reuse Quoting "Rankin, Robert L" :
>
>> As Rory points out, Dhegiha languages have something very similar
>> distinguishing primary from non-primary actors. Ardis's dissertation was
>> at least partly on this distinction in Omaha.
>>
>> I have toyed with the idea of trying to redefine the "switch-reference"
>> distinction in those Siouan languages that have it as an obviation
>> distinction. Such redefinition clearly works in Muskogean, where it is the
>> only way to tie "S-R" and argument marking particles together without a
>> hopelessly complex appeal to homophony, but I haven't really gotten down to
>> the business of trying to demonstrate it in Siouan. Clearly the more
>> inclusive concept of "referent tracking" operates in Siouan grammars,
>> though it differs from language to language. If I had to guess, I'd say it
>> is historically primary in Algonquian but secondary in Siouan.
>>
>> What were the papers you're referring to on Algonquian?
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: owner-siouan at lists.colorado.edu on behalf of Marino
>> Sent: Thu 5/31/2007 12:20 AM
>> To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
>> Subject: obviation in Siouan languages
>>
>>
>>
>> There were two excellent papers on obviation in Cree at the CLA
>> meetings. One of the presenters asked me if there is obviation in any of
>> the Siouan languages. I have a vague memory that this has come up before,
>> but I can't find time to troll through the archives. Any suggestions?
>>
>> Best
>> Mary Marino
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today.
---------------------------------
You snooze, you lose. Get messages ASAP with AutoCheck
in the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20070607/4f74f137/attachment.html>