[Lingtyp] languages lacking a verb for 'give'

Fri Jan 28 17:48:19 UTC 2022

Dear Matthew,

Ambrocio Gutiérrez (Teotitlán del Valle) and Ausencia López Cruz (San Pablo
Güilá), Central Valley Zapotec speaker linguists, report the following
constructions in their presentation in 2015 at CILLA:

Ambrocio says this type of sentence is 'optional' (that is, in Teotitlán a
standard ditransitive construction is also available) but that in Güilá
this type of construction is obligatory.

[image: image.png]

Gutiérrez, Ambrocio y Auencia López Cruz. 2015. El comportamiento de los
ojetos de verbos bitransitivos en el Zapoteco de Teotitlán del Valle y en
el Zapoteco de San Pablo Güilá. Paper presented at CILLA VII, Austin, TX

Best,
Hiroto

El jue, 27 ene 2022 a la(s) 12:42, Matthew Dryer (dryer at buffalo.edu)
escribió:

> While I didn’t find Daniel’s argument convincing, I do find the detailed
> cases described by Alex and David to be convincing.
>
>
>
> Matthew
>
>
>
> *From: *Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of
> David Gil <gil at shh.mpg.de>
> *Date: *Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 12:22 PM
> *To: *"lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org" <
> lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Lingtyp] languages lacking a verb for 'give'
>
>
>
> Matthew, Daniel, Russell and all,
>
> I'm with Daniel on this one; in my 2017 paper I discuss precisely this
> issue, namely, how do we define the meanings of the relevant forms, and
> whether one of them has a meaning that can appropriately be characterized
> as "give".
>
> Abstracting away from word order, and assuming minimal morphology, what we
> have is a situation of the abstract form
>
> A X P Y R
>
> where A = Agent, P = Patient, R = Recipient, a translation into our
> contact language along the lines of A gave P to R, and an analytical
> question:  What are the meanings of X and Y (and should one of them be
> assigned the meaning "give")? Typically, both X and Y are poly- or
> macro-functional, and either of the two can occur without the other,
> resulting in constructions whose translational equivalents into our contact
> language do not involve "give". X and Y don't wear their glosses on their
> sleeves, as it were; the answer to our analytical question will depend on
> an in-depth language-specific analysis of the various functions of each of
> the two elements, X and Y.
>
> In Roon (SHWNG, Austronesian), there are two "give" constructions.  For
> the one illustrated in (3) of my 2017 paper, I argue that the basic meaning
> of X (*ve*) is "do", while that of Y (*fa*) is an oblique marker.  For
> the one illustrated in (10), X = Y (both have the form *ve*) and here too
> I argue that both mean "do".  Under an alternative more splitting analysis,
> the second element might be characterized as a "different" *ve*
> associated with an allative function; however, the first *ve* would still
> be vague between a variety of different functions, and, as I argue there,
> is most appropriately analyzed as meaning "do".
>
> The second part of the 2017 paper looks at a number of other languages of
> the region; while the patterns of poly-/macro-functionality differ from one
> language to another, in many of the cases, neither of the two elements, X
> and Y, would seem to warrant the assignation of a meaning "give".
>
> David
>
> (3)    *Musai          vye                      pipi         fa
> Riksoni*
>
>          Musa:pers  <3sg.anim>*ve*   money    obl      Rikson:pers
>
>          'Musa gave money to Rikson.'
>
> (10)  *Musai          vye                       pipi         ve
> Riksoni*
>
>          Musa:pers  <3sg.anim>ve     money    *ve*     Rikson:pers
>
>          'Musa gave money to Rikson.'
>
>
>
> On 27/01/2022 18:16, Russell Barlow wrote:
>
> Daniel,
>
>
>
> I'm not sure I follow. Presumably we'd be relying on the translations of
> the *arguments*, not of the verbs, when figuring out the semantic roles of
> each verbal object. So, in examples of the sort that you, Eline, and I
> (maybe others) have provided, we see something like:
>
>
>
> "boy take apple, give girl"
>
>
>
> ... to mean something like "the boy gives the girl an apple". I share your
> unease about considering the second verb in such cases to be "give" in the
> English sense. But I don't think there's any issue in figuring out which NP
> is semantically the theme and which NP is semantically the recipient. We
> could ignore the glosses of the verbs, and the semantic roles of the
> participants would still be clear:
>
>
>
> verb1 apple, verb2 girl
>
>
>
> Provided we know that "apple" and "girl" are both the objects of the verbs
> they follow, then we could say that the object of verb1 is a Theme, and the
> object of verb2 is a Recipient. I think what Matthew and I are both
> interested in finding is something like:
>
>
>
> boy verb1 apple, girl verb2 apple
>
>
>
> ... something like "the boy proffered the apple; the girl took the apple".
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Russell
>
>
>
> Russell Barlow
> Postdoctoral Researcher
> Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
> Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
> russell_barlow at eva.mpg.de
>
> On 01/27/2022 4:41 PM Daniel Ross <djross3 at gmail.com> <djross3 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Matthew,
>
>
>
> Relying on translation equivalents in this case is not clear. If the verb
> "give" exclusively appears in SVCs (as is claimed for some languages), then
> it's only half of the lexical meaning of English *give*. We could
> translate it as something else, e.g. some active equivalent of 'receive'
> (several verbs like 'supply (the army)' or 'load (the truck)' can be used
> in this way, although they're flexible including ditransitive usage like
> 'give' at least with prepositional arguments).
>
>
>
> Russell, I have the same uncertainty about your question: how do we know
> what a "Theme" argument is, without relying on translation? In many
> languages with SVCs of this type, there is no case marking (in fact, SVCs
> are said by some to function as case markers), so I don't know what other
> evidence there would be aside from the translation of the verb itself,
> which only in the construction as a whole means 'give'.
>
>
>
> I assume that the etymology of the verbs in these constructions is not
> 'give': that is, it's not the case that an original, full lexical verb
> 'give' taking three arguments was reduced to taking two arguments and
> expanded into this construction, but that some other verb grammaticalized
> into that function. There's been a lot written about these kinds of usage,
> but I'm not sure about the best sources to recommend for that specific
> etymological question. I do think it would be relevant to the original
> question, though.
>
>
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 7:03 AM Matthew Dryer <dryer at buffalo.edu> wrote:
>
> Daniel,
>
>
>
> This does not seem to be what my colleague is looking for since the second
> verb still arguably means ‘give’.
>
>
>
> Matthew
>
>
>
> *From: *Daniel Ross <djross3 at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 11:27 PM
> *To: *Matthew Dryer <dryer at buffalo.edu>
> *Cc: *"lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org" <
> lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Lingtyp] languages lacking a verb for 'give'
>
>
>
> Dear Matthew,
>
>
>
> This is a common pattern for languages with serial verb constructions,
> along the lines of "take book give him", etc. There has been a lot written
> about the lack of argument structure in these languages (some claiming that
> three arguments are not possible in some languages), and that SVCs can
> supplement that argument structure (and possibly a small inventory of
> verbs, according to some sources). I'm not as confident in some of the more
> extreme claims about this, but it is clear that this pattern is widespread
> among many of these languages (I know I've seen explicit claims for West
> Africa and creoles, and probably elsewhere). At the same time, it is not
> clear that these languages, strictly speaking, lack a lexical verb "give",
> since one of the verbs in this construction can be translated as such,
> although it is used with another verb (often 'take') to supplement it for
> the full argument structure. Other patterns are found too, and probably
> various other lexical verbs are used in a function like 'give', so it
> becomes a question of lexical translation. (This more generally is related
> to patterns of verbs in SVCs developing into prepositions.)
>
>
>
> I'm sorry I don't immediately have any specific languages/references in
> mind, but let me know if you'd like me to try to find some. I know that
> Sebba 1987 discusses this in some detail, and here's one example:
>
>
>
> ɔde sekaŋ no mãã me
> he-take knife the give-PAST me
> 'S/he gave me the knife' [originally from Christaller 1875: 118]
>
>
>
> Sebba, Mark. 1987. The syntax of serial verbs: an investigation into
> serialisation in Sranan and other languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
> https://doi.org/10.1075/cll.2
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.1075%2Fcll.2&data=04%7C01%7Cuchihara%40g-mail.buffalo.edu%7C1224f325567c40bb7ad108d9e1c4bf04%7C96464a8af8ed40b199e25f6b50a20250%7C0%7C0%7C637789057420971558%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=mBRT6xsLL0sWi95lgTor2N7r90aR2vzV0OTFmik7cjQ%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> (Tangential note: SVCs like this are generally considered * monoclausal*,
> by a variety of metrics, so I wouldn't call this "two analytic clauses",
> although the effect is the same. My dissertation thoroughly reviews the
> issue of monoclausality: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5546425
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.5281%2Fzenodo.5546425&data=04%7C01%7Cuchihara%40g-mail.buffalo.edu%7C1224f325567c40bb7ad108d9e1c4bf04%7C96464a8af8ed40b199e25f6b50a20250%7C0%7C0%7C637789057420971558%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=hNyIagaooguNiGB4Ameadb5yo6gLXHVBT6m%2FbemF1q4%3D&reserved=0>
> -- but I don't discuss this specific question about 'give'.)
>
>
>
> Finally, one extra comment, which is probably not what your colleague is
> after, is that there are some languages where the lexical verb 'give' is
> (at least in some cases) a zero root or null morpheme, i.e. indicated by
> lack of phonological content plus other inflectional morphology. This is
> discussed for some PNG languages here:
>
>
> https://www.academia.edu/40037774/Comrie_B_and_R_Zamponi_2019_Verb_root_ellipsis_In_Morphological_perspectives_papers_in_honour_of_Greville_G_Corbett_ed_by_M_Baerman_O_Bond_and_A_Hippisley_Edinburgh_Edinburgh_University_Press_pp_233_280
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.academia.edu%2F40037774%2FComrie_B_and_R_Zamponi_2019_Verb_root_ellipsis_In_Morphological_perspectives_papers_in_honour_of_Greville_G_Corbett_ed_by_M_Baerman_O_Bond_and_A_Hippisley_Edinburgh_Edinburgh_University_Press_pp_233_280&data=04%7C01%7Cuchihara%40g-mail.buffalo.edu%7C1224f325567c40bb7ad108d9e1c4bf04%7C96464a8af8ed40b199e25f6b50a20250%7C0%7C0%7C637789057420971558%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=7MgQTxOpQ79HpkhwVEmw8fmcRoXAB6CphgNT5uLYD6Y%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 7:43 PM Matthew Dryer <dryer at buffalo.edu> wrote:
>
> I am sending this query on behalf of a colleague.
>
>
>
> He wants to know whether anyone knows of a language that lacks a "give"
> type verb and would express something like "I gave him the book" instead as
> something like "I presented the book (to him) and he took it". That is, is
> there a language that can only express a give-type concept with two more
> analytic clauses?
>
>
>
> Matthew Dryer
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistserv.linguistlist.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flingtyp&data=04%7C01%7Cuchihara%40g-mail.buffalo.edu%7C1224f325567c40bb7ad108d9e1c4bf04%7C96464a8af8ed40b199e25f6b50a20250%7C0%7C0%7C637789057420971558%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=sF15Ez8u3%2B9BTPVhYApKIAj7bKaFAD5YPabNRck4tEc%3D&reserved=0>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistserv.linguistlist.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flingtyp&data=04%7C01%7Cuchihara%40g-mail.buffalo.edu%7C1224f325567c40bb7ad108d9e1c4bf04%7C96464a8af8ed40b199e25f6b50a20250%7C0%7C0%7C637789057420971558%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=sF15Ez8u3%2B9BTPVhYApKIAj7bKaFAD5YPabNRck4tEc%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Lingtyp mailing list
>
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistserv.linguistlist.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flingtyp&data=04%7C01%7Cuchihara%40g-mail.buffalo.edu%7C1224f325567c40bb7ad108d9e1c4bf04%7C96464a8af8ed40b199e25f6b50a20250%7C0%7C0%7C637789057420971558%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=sF15Ez8u3%2B9BTPVhYApKIAj7bKaFAD5YPabNRck4tEc%3D&reserved=0>
>
> --
>
> 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
>
> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistserv.linguistlist.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flingtyp&data=04%7C01%7Cuchihara%40g-mail.buffalo.edu%7C1224f325567c40bb7ad108d9e1c4bf04%7C96464a8af8ed40b199e25f6b50a20250%7C0%7C0%7C637789057420971558%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=sF15Ez8u3%2B9BTPVhYApKIAj7bKaFAD5YPabNRck4tEc%3D&reserved=0
>

-- 
Dr. Hiroto Uchihara
https://sites.google.com/view/hiroto-uchihara/home?authuser=0
Investigador, Titular A (Associate Research Professor)
Seminario de Lenguas Indígenas
Instituto de Investigaciones Filológicas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Circuito Mario de la Cueva
Ciudad Universitaria, 04510, Ciudad de México.
Tel. Seminario:(+52)-(55)-5622-7489
Office: (+52)-(55)-5622-7250, Ext. 49223
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20220128/92150565/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 40831 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20220128/92150565/attachment.png>