[Lingtyp] query: instrument voice

[David Gil]

Thanks, Jess.  For this to qualify as instrument voice, it would have to 
be clear that the instrument is more like a subject than an object; 
otherwise — cf. Matthew Dryer's comment and my response — it would be 
more appropriately characterized as an applicative. Can you confirm this?

Also, as you describe it below, the semantics seems substantially 
broader than that of a pure instrument, though to be honest, there is 
also semantic leakage in so-called instrumental voice constructions in 
Taiwan and the Philippines, and perhaps also, though to a lesser extent, 
in some of the constructions in the New Guinea languages that I 
mentioned below.

David


On 22/02/2022 04:05, Jess Tauber wrote:
> In Yahgan, a nearly extinct genetic isolate from Tierra del Fuego, 
> there is a 'circumstantial' voice prefix I write as T-, with various 
> forms depending on following phonological contexts (that is, it is 
> ch(i:) before /y/, /k/, /g/, /l/, tu: before labial stops or nasal, ts 
> before other alveolar segments, etc., which can ambivalently mark the 
> inclusion of an instrument, another non-core animate participant in 
> the action, locations in space or time, and so forth.
>
> Jess Tauber
>
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 8:42 PM Matthew Dryer <dryer at buffalo.edu> wrote:
>
>     David,
>
>     Why would you not say that the instrumental construction in Meyah,
>     Sougb, and Hatam is an applicative, since the A rather than the
>     instrument controls subject agreement?
>
>     Matthew
>
>     *From: *Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on
>     behalf of David Gil <gil at shh.mpg.de>
>     *Date: *Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:40 PM
>     *To: *"lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org"
>     <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>     *Subject: *[Lingtyp] query: instrument voice
>
>     Dear all,
>
>     In the Austronesian languages of Taiwan, Philippines and
>     Madagascar, there is a verbal affix that is said to mark
>     "instrument voice"; loosely speaking, it marks the topic or
>     subject of the clause as bearing the semantic role of instrument.
>
>     Is anybody familiar with similar instrument-voice constructions
>     from other parts of the world?
>
>     The reason I ask is that a similar construction is present also in
>     some languages of the Bird's Head and Cenderawasih Bay regions of
>     New Guinea, eg. Biak, Roon, Wamesa and Wooi (Austronesian), and
>     Hatam, Sougb, Meyah and Moskona (non-Austronesian). What's curious
>     about this construction is that, unlike the well-known
>     Austronesian cases, it is the only morphologically-marked voice in
>     each of the languages in question; there is no "ordinary"
>     morphological passive construction.  My feeling is that this
>     construction is quite uncommon cross-linguistically, but I would
>     like to get a feel for the extent to which this is indeed true.
>
>     Thanks,
>
>     David
>
>     -- 
>
>     David Gil
>
>       
>
>     Senior Scientist (Associate)
>
>     Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
>
>     Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
>
>     Deutscher Platz 6, Leipzig, 04103, Germany
>
>       
>
>     Email:gil at shh.mpg.de
>
>     Mobile Phone (Israel): +972-526117713
>
>     Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81344082091
>
>       
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Lingtyp mailing list
>     Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>     http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
-- 
David Gil

Senior Scientist (Associate)
Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
Deutscher Platz 6, Leipzig, 04103, Germany

Email:gil at shh.mpg.de
Mobile Phone (Israel): +972-526117713
Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81344082091
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20220222/2bdb0acc/attachment.htm>