obviation in Siouan languages

[REGINA PUSTET]

>>From what I know about Japanese, case marking in that language is so messy (especially when it comes to wa) that using it as a template for describing other languages will inevitably make these look messy too. As far as I remember, there are so many rules to the use of wa that this marker is really hard to pin down functionally. But the specific notion of contrast expressed by double wa does go with what we see in Lakota, I think, so this is a good analogy.
  In case the idea is out there, I would not analyze iNs> a topic marker though. It is simply a marker for what Wally Chafe once referred to as 'focus of contrast'.
   
  Regina
  

Rory M Larson <rlarson at unlnotes.unl.edu> wrote:
    Well, how _do_ we define "topic", or "subject" for that matter?

I've been learning Japanese recently, which makes this distinction
using particles:

wa - topic marker
ga - subject marker
wo - object marker

ga is used to mark either the one that is doing the action or the
one you are trying to identify as the point of the communication.
It normally appears only in the latter case or in embedded clauses.
In most simple sentences, the subject uses the topic marker wa.
However, wa can also replace the object marker wo, and can be used
to mark prepositional phrases as well as nouns.

Both wa and ga can be used contrastively, in ways that would
involve vocal emphasis in English.  For ga, the issue is on
clarifying who it is we are talking about: It was _Sally_ (ga)
that slept (not Harry).  But for wa, alternate topics are taken as
given points of reference for contrasting information: _Sally_ (wa)
is sleeping, while _Harry_ (wa) is watching TV.

It seems to me that "topic" means an uncontroversial point of
reference to which further information can be related.  That point
of reference can be a subject noun, but doesn't have to be.  It
can be an adverb, a prepositional phrase, a full clause, or an
object noun just as easily.

I think all of the examples Regina cites might reasonably match
the Japanese contrastive wa usage:

> 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’

Or: '_Sally_ (wa) is sleeping and _Harry_ (wa) is watching TV'
(The contrasting topics are subject nouns.)

> h^tal-ehaN wophethuN wa-I na iNs^ le aNpetu ki chuwignake waN wa-kayeg^e
yesterday shop 1SG.AG-go and CON this day DEF dress IDF 1SG.AG-sew
‘yesterday I went shopping and today I sewed a dress’

h^tal-ehaN wophethuN wa-I na le aNpetu ki iNs^ chuwignake waN wa-kayeg^e
yesterday shop 1SG.AG-go and this day DEF CON dress IDF 1SG.AG-sew
‘yesterday I went shopping and today I sewed a dress’

Or: '_yesterday_' (wa) I went shopping and _today_ (wa) I sewed a dress'
(The contrasting topics are adverbs of time.)

> Harry Sally wowapi k’u na iNs^ Mary waks^ica cha k’u
H. S. book give and CON M. plate such give
‘Harry gave Sally books and he gave Mary plates’

Or: 'Harry gave _Sally_ (wa) books and he gave _Mary_ (wa) plates'
(The contrasting topics are indirect object nouns.)

The main mechanical difference would be that in Japanese, wa always
follows its topic and is used to mark both in a contrast, while in
Lakhota, iNs^ appears only on the second one in a contrast, and can
either precede or follow its topic.

Would this be a helpful interpretation of iNs^ ?

Rory


       
---------------------------------
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect.  Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/siouan/attachments/20070607/38981fca/attachment.html>