[Lexicog] sit vs. sit

[Koontz John E]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2004, John Roberts wrote:
> The Amele (Papuan) language uses the verbs bilec 'to sit', nijec 'to lay',
> and tawec 'to stand' to express notions of location for animate or inanimate
> entities. Animate entities typically 'sit' at a location and inanimate
> entities typically 'lay' or 'stand' at a location, but there is no hard and
> fast restriction. But maybe you could use 'lay' for your Cheyenne inanimate
> entities?

In the Siouan languages the analogs of the 'sit/set, 'lie/lay', 'stand'
verbs are termed positionals.  Is that the term you're looking for, Wayne?
In Siouan languages this threeway distinction (sometimes adding others
like 'walking, in motion', or 'scattered') is applied across the board to
animates and inanimates.  Things 'sit' or are 'set', 'lie' or 'are laid',
etc., depending on their shape.  The general class of verbs are referred
to by Siouanists as positional verbs, though postural seems about as apt
as far as animates, and clearly it is a form of shape gender for
inanimates.  I suppose you could think of the positionals as the
causatives of the posturals, though Siouanists just say positionals.

In the Dhegiha subfamily of Siouan, there is are sets of definite articles
distinguishing the shape gender of animates and inanimates, and, at least
with inanimates the article used accords with the positional verb used.
If you use a sitting (or rounded shape) article, then you 'set' the
object, and so on.

As far as restrictions, animates can also be 'moving', while inanimates
cannot, but can be 'scattered' and animates can usually only be 'lying' if
they are deceased former animates or a few things like snakes.  For most
animates actual 'lying' is positional 'sitting', though there is certainly
a verb 'to lie'.

Gender is not precisely fixed, and for most things the gender can be
ascribed pragmatically to indicate shape or grouping for inanimates and
posture for animates.  It works like English configurational expressions
'the pile of' or 'the row of', etc., 'the sitting', 'the standing', etc.
So a disassembled tipi can 'lie' instead of 'sitting', or a Dhegiha ring
camp is 'round/sitting', while a straggling Caddoan encampment is
'horizontal/lying'.  Also, a single apple is 'round/sitting', a pile is
'vertical/standing', and a group of piles is 'horizontal/lying/in a row',
and so on.  You can also have 'the scatter of apples'.  Gender is
nontheless conventionalized to some degree, and a glass (tumbler) or even
a cup normally is 'vertical/standing' and so gets 'stood' not 'set' or
'laid' when it is placed on something.

To bring this back to lexical considerations, it is a matter of debate and
speculation amongst Dhegihanists, who have to deal with this shape gender
system in the form of a pervasive article system and in various
auxiliaries and assertionals derived from the articles, to what extent
this system should be indicated in a dictionary.  Sadly, no one has
conducted an experiment - a dictionary - advanced enough in form to
provide an insight on this.  One certainly usually indicates sex gender in
European languages where it is more or less arbitrary and controls
morphology, but not, for example, in English, where it is theoretically
assigned naturally, even though the implications of using animates or
inanimates for infants, pets, domestic animals, etc., are serious enough.
Are the Dhegiha languages more like, say, German or more like English in
their lexicographical requirements?  The determining factor is probably
the extent to which arbitrary and/or non-pragmatically manipulatable nouns
exist, but we don't have an answer to that.

In addition, while Dhegihanists are clearly morphologically and
syntactically obliged to deal with this system, one wonders if other
Siouanists aren't sliding by casually, when they ought to be thinking of
it somewhat along the lines of English mass/count oppositions, which have
a syntactic influence that is somewhat more covert than demonstrative or
adjective concord, but nonetheless real and often arbitrary enough to
require lexicographical notice.




Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/