[Lingtyp] questions about adverbs

Thu Jun 18 12:43:47 UTC 2020

Dear all,

Very interesting! This also looks incredibly similar to something which
I've described for Tangsa-Nocte (Northern Naga) varieties within
Tibeto-Burman.

I also was hesitant to call them intensifiers for the same reasons
mentioned. In the case of Tangsa-Noctem there is also a metrically
constricted reduplication of the modifier itself, but otherwise looks very
much like this same sort of thing. They are not commutable (although some
terms do share modifier shapes, e.g. *black, hard, rough* all have the most
common of the modifiers shared between them, and they are also generally
only found in more "basic" descriptive terms. An older write up of mine on
this is here
<https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/155280/4/Konneth-EtAl-2018-NEIL8.pdf#page=59>,
which is limited only to the colour terms, but they occur for a much wider
range of meanings than just that.

Quite happy to see these examples, thank you for sharing.

Kellen

On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 14:19, Henrik Liljegren <henrik at ling.su.se> wrote:

> Dear Majigeen and all,
>
> What you describe is strikingly similar to what I have found in Indo-Aryan
> Palula (Pakistan). I refer to them as co-lexicalised intensifiers (I quote
> from my own grammar below, p. 184):
>
>
>
> “There is a number of more or less standard compounds with an
> adjective/adverb and a matching intensifying element, not much different
> from the effect other
>
> degree adverbs have on the modified constituent. Such an intensifier is
> either uniquely occurring with a particular adjective/adverb, or occurs
> only with a limited
>
> set of adjectives/adverbs. It seems those elements are mostly made up of a
> single closed syllable, as can be seen in Table 8.9.
>
>
>
> Table 8.9: Examples of co-lexicalised intensifiers
>
> *phaṣ paṇáaru *‘white as a sheet’                *tap **c̣h**iṇ *‘pitch
> dark’
>
> *kham kiṣíṇu *‘pitch black’                             *bak práal *‘shining
> bright’
>
> *čáu lhóilu *‘bright red’                                   *ḍanɡ khilayí
> *‘all alone’
>
> *tak zeṛ *‘bright yellow’                                   *čap mhoóru *‘extremely
> sweet’
>
> *pak kaantíiru *‘mad as a hat’                       *šam šidáalu *
> ‘ice-cold’
>
> *pak bíidri *‘completely clear’                        *šam níilu *‘deep
> green/blue’
>
>
>
> Strikingly similar compounds have been observed in several other languages
> in the region, some of them even involving similar or identical forms as
> those found in Palula: e.g., in Dameli (Perder 2013: 163) and Khowar (Elena
> Bashir, pc, and own field notes).”
>
>
>
> Liljegren, Henrik. *A Grammar of Palula*. Studies in Diversity
> Linguistics 8. Berlin: Language Science Press, 2016.
>
>
>
> The region I refer to above is the mountainous Hindu Kush-Karakorum of
> northern Pakistan and surrounding areas in adjacent countries (Afghanistan
> and India), but the phenomenon miɡht very well be more widespread in South
> and West Asia.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Henrik
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> *On Behalf Of
> *Majigeen Aminata
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 16, 2020 11:56 PM
> *To:* lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> *Subject:* [Lingtyp] questions about adverbs
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> I am currently working on what are called “adverbs” (see words un bold) in
> wolof literature. Wolof, spoken in Senegal (West Africa) has specific words
> that only work with some colors: *white*, *black*, *red* and each
> word-adverb match only with its color, they are not commutable.
>
> weex* tàll*: extremely white (it can't be whiter)
>
> ñuul *kukk*: extremely black (it can't be more black)
>
> xonq *coyy*: extremely red (it can't be more red)
>
> Others words adverbs go with state verbs and are specific to them as well.
> They are not commutable.
>
> baax *lool*: extremely nice (it can't be nicer)
>
> bees* tàq:* really new (nobody has ever used it)
>
> dëg*ër këcc*: extremely hard (it can't be harder)
>
> diis* gann*: really heavy (very difficult to carry)
>
> fatt* taraj*: extremely blocked (it can't be more blocked)
>
> fess *dell*: extremely full (it can't be fuller)
>
> forox* toll*: really acidic (it can't be more acidic)
>
> gàtt *ndugur*: really short (he can't be shorter)
>
> jeex* tàkk*: completely finished, ...
>
> In Wolof they are called intensifiers but this term does not convince me
> because it can be confusing. They do not intensify the verbs. These words
> mean that the state or action of the verb is at its end of completude.
>
> They are not onomatopoeias, Wolof also has them and they are different.
>
> tàkk *jëppet:* catch fire abruptly on the way up (jëppet expresses the
> way of catching fire suddenly on the way up
> njool *tàlli*: to be straight
> tàlli *ñare*: to be stiffly straight,
>
> Thanks and regards.
>
> Aminata
>
> Bonjour,
>
> Je suis entrain de travailler sur ce qu’on appelle *adverbes* dans la
> littérature. Le wolof a par exemple des mots spécifiques qui ne marchent
> qu’avec certaines couleurs :  blanc, noir, rouge et chaque mot-adverbe ne
> marche qu’avec sa couleur, ils ne sont pas interchangeables.
>
> *weex tàll *:                   extrêmement blanc (on ne pas être plus
> blanc)
>
> *ñuul kukk* :                extrêmement noir (on ne pas être plus noir)
>
> *xonq coyy* :                 extrêmement
>
> D’autres vont avec des verbes d’états et leur sont spécifiques aussi. Ils
> ne sont pas interchangeables.
>
> *baax lool* :                   extrêmement gentil (on ne pas être plus
> gentil)
>
> *bees tàq* :                    vraiment nouveau (personne ne l’a jamais
> utilisé)
>
> *dëgër këcc* :                extrêmement dur (on ne pas être plus dur)
>
> *diis gann*:                   vraiment lourd (tres difficile de le
> soulever)
>
> *fatt taraj* :                   extrêmement bouché (on ne pas être plus
> bouché)
>
> *fess dell*:                      extrêmement plein (on ne pas être plus
> plein)
>
> *forox toll:*                   vraiment acide (on ne pas être plus acide)
>
> *gàtt ndugur*:               vraiment court (on ne pas être plus court)
>
> *jeex tàkk*:                   tout à fait terminé, etc…
>
> En wolof on les appelle des intensifieurs ou intensificateurs mais ce
> terme ne me convainc pas car il peut porter à confusion. Ils n’intensifient
> pas. Ces mots veulent dirent que l’état ou l’action du verbe est à son
> extrémité.
>
> Ce ne sont pas des onomatopées. Le wolof a aussi des onomatopées
> différentes de ces mots. Je voudrais savoir s’il existe des langues qui
> fonctionnent comme ça et quelle est la terminologie employée pour ce genre
> de construction Est-ce quelqu’un peut aussi me recommander de la
> documentation nouvelle sur la définition des notions de verbes, adverbes,
> adjectifs… dans les langues africaines ?
>
> Merci
>
> Aminata
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200618/607e54d7/attachment.htm>