[Lingtyp] Name this category

Sat Jan 25 12:03:28 UTC 2020

A slight clarification (pertaining to Françoise's and Martin's e-mails): In Telugu, allocutive markers index only formality, not gender. It is in Tamil that they index both formality and the gender of the addressee.

Siva

> On 23 Jan 2020, at 2:58 am, Françoise Rose <Francoise.Rose at UNIV-LYON2.FR> wrote:
> 
> Hi Scott, Micha, and LingTypers,
> what Micha describes for Bagvalal is extremely common cross-linguistically. This is why in my typology of loci for categorical gender-indexicality I have distinguished a locus that I call “discourse markers” (with all the disadvantages of such a vague label), functionally distinct from the other loci such as phonology, morphology (generally about person/gender) and lexicon (for more details, see Rose, Françoise. 2015. “On Male and Female Speech and More. A Typology of Categorical Gender Indexicality in Indigenous South American Languages.” International Journal of American Linguistics 81 (4): 495–537. Send me a personal e-mail for a copy). But this is taking us away from Scott’s original question.
> What is different about Basque, and apparently Telugu and Bodo, is that beside the gender-indexical function of the morphemes in questions, their “primary” function is not much discussed and is not given a label (hence Scott’s question). This is probably why descriptivists focus on their gender-indexical quality rather than on their relationship to register. This is not a phenomenon that I have observed in South America (see the paper mentioned above). Maybe people working on registers have consensual labels for the different variables. I don’t know about that.
> Best,
> Françoise
>  
> De : Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> De la part de Michael Daniel
> Envoyé : mercredi 22 janvier 2020 08:15
> À : lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> Objet : Re: [Lingtyp] Name this category
>  
> Hi.
>  
> In Bagvalal, East Caucasian, some particles are indexical of the gender of the addressee. These particles apparently revolve on interactional categories involving the addressee (interrogation, shared knowledge, imperative) but are not (necessarily) referential in the sense indicated by Francoise. As the Basque allocutive, they are on the addressee's side, and not on the speaker's side as in Scott's examples, As far as I understand, this also happens in other East Caucasian languages languages of the Andic branch. See (Kibrik 2001: 174 - Bagvalinskij jazyk: grammatika, teksty, slovari) - a very short but very informative one-page discussion.
>  
> Michael Daniel
>  
> ср, 22 янв. 2020 г. в 03:30, Siva Kalyan <sivakalyan.princeton at gmail.com <mailto:sivakalyan.princeton at gmail.com>>:
> I would add that allocutive particles in Dravidian languages could be seen as a somewhat open class, which periodically absorbs nouns: e.g. Telugu -ayyā < ayya 'lord', and Tamil =sār < English "sir".
>  
> Siva
>  
> On 22 Jan 2020, at 11:23 am, Siva Kalyan <sivakalyan.princeton at gmail.com <mailto:sivakalyan.princeton at gmail.com>> wrote:
>  
> Some Dravidian languages also have allocutive markers (though I've never seen them described as such). Telugu has at least =rā (informal) and -aṇḍi (respectful); Tamil has at least the following:
> =ḍā (informal masculine)
> =ḍī (informal feminine)
> =pā (intimate masculine)
> =mā (intimate feminine)
> =kā (intimate elder sister)
> -ṅga(ḷ) (respectful)
> The "intimate" allocutive particles (my terminology) are historically contractions of kin terms (appā 'father', ammā 'mother', akkā 'elder sister'—other kin terms may also contract in this way, but I've only ever heard it with these three, the last one very rarely). Also, =mā and =pā don't exactly line up with female and male addressee, as =mā can also be used by a female speaker to a male addressee; also, =ḍā can be used when speaking to a child regardless of gender.
>  
> Siva
>  
> On 22 Jan 2020, at 8:35 am, Vladimir Panov <panovmeister at gmail.com <mailto:panovmeister at gmail.com>> wrote:
>  
> Dear Scott,
> 
> Françoise is right about the allocutive. There is a paper by Anton Antonov i which this category is treated typologically:
>  
> Antonov, Anton. 2015. Verbal allocutivity in a crosslinguistic perspective. Linguistic Typology 19(1). 55–85.
>  
> Best,
> Vladimir
>  
> вт, 21 янв. 2020 г. в 12:18, Scott Delancey <delancey at uoregon.edu <mailto:delancey at uoregon.edu>>:
> Bodo (Tibeto-Burman, NE India) has a set of particles, two used by men and two by women, which indicate that the conversation is friendly and informal. Reminiscent of Thai krap and khaa, but with the opposite sense. Does anyone know if anyone has encountered such a category and given it a label? I need to decide what to call these, and would just as soon not make up a term if someone has already done it.
>  
> Scott DeLancey
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>_______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20200125/f3dd13b2/attachment.htm>