[Lingtyp] Question about nominalized verbs
Keren Ruditsky
krudit at uw.edu
Fri Aug 18 19:34:47 UTC 2023
Thank you to everyone for all the responses!
I really appreciate it.
Best,
Keren
________________________________
From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of lingtyp-request at listserv.linguistlist.org <lingtyp-request at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 8:00 AM
To: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Subject: Lingtyp Digest, Vol 107, Issue 11
Send Lingtyp mailing list submissions to
lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d0jzGww2$
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
lingtyp-request at listserv.linguistlist.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
lingtyp-owner at listserv.linguistlist.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Lingtyp digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Question about nominalized verbs (Ellison Luk)
2. Re: Question about nominalized verbs (Peter Austin)
3. Re: Looking for Visual Stimuli Kits for Fieldwork (Fran?oise Rose)
4. Re: What is the opposite of syncretism? (Cat Butz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 16:28:56 +0200
From: Ellison Luk <ellisonluk at gmail.com>
To: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Question about nominalized verbs
Message-ID:
<CANC+=0F17v=NseQmQMrjpjbZz5XKyBQfFKKUtctmhW1k8PgFAg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi Keren and everyone,
A number of Australian languages exhibit non-standard case marking in
'nominalised' clauses, as Peter Austin's 2017 paper "Argument coding and
clause linkage in Australian Aboriginal languages" illustrates. He
particularly singles out strategies with the dative and possessive
categories, which seem to parallel the Arabic example. See also Dench's
2006 AJL paper "Case Marking Strategies in Subordinate Clauses in Pilbara
Languages?Some Diachronic Speculations". However, some things to note about
the Australian languages:
- Elision of nominal arguments is very common in all Australian languages,
so dependent clauses with fully specified arguments are generally rare, and
generally unnaturalistic.
- Deviant case marking for dependent clauses often involves one case
marking pattern on all arguments, rather than one argument being singled
out for special treatment. There are probably a few exceptions though, like
Warlpiri (ex 1).
- In languages with 'complementising case marking' - where nominal case
markers take on clause linkage functions (Dench & Evans 1988, various
chapters in Austin 1988) - the arguments of a dependent clause may take on
the same case marker as the one marking the verb, in an apparent
'agreement' relationship. Djambarrpuyngu does this (ex 2), but subjects can
also be marked with a possessive oblique.
- Some languages also follow Juergen Boehnemeyer's observation, in that
dependent clauses must be detransitivised (usually with an antipassive
derivation), and so, transitive dependent clauses simply don't exist.
In all, I don't think there are many examples in Australian languages
directly akin to what you observe in Arabic (I've mostly seen cases where
all arguments get the same dependent clause-specific case marking, or none
of them do), but I hope this provides some context to your study.
(1) Warlpiri (Pama-Nyungan (Western) > Ngumpin-Yapa; Simpson 1983: 497)
*ngarrka-patu-rlu ka-lu-jana puluku turnu-ma-ni,*
man-PL-ERG PRES-3pl-3pl bullock-ABS muster-NPST
*karnta-patu-ku miyi purra-nja-puru.*
woman-PL-DAT food-ABS cook-INF-CIRC
?The men are mustering cattle while the women are cooking the food.?
* dependent clause verb is marked with the 'infinitive-circumstantial' (an
adverbial clause marker)
* dependent clause subject takes dative case marking
* dependent clause object takes absolutive case marking, as in main clauses
(2) Djambarrpuy?u (Pama-Nyungan (Western) > Yol?u; Wilkinson 1991: 634)
*ngayi mirithi+na+n ngaramurr+yi+n nhanu+kal gaa+nhara+y mutika+y*
3sg INTENS+3rd+SEQ angry+INCH+3rd 3sg+OBL bear("drive")(tr)+4th+ERG car+ERG
?S/he got very angry by his/her driving the car.?
* dependent clause is marked by the '4th+ERG' inflection; '4th' refers to a
non-past-irrealis category that is also specialised for clause linkage;
'ergative' is a complementising case marker that marks clauses of means,
causes, circumstances, and reasons.
* dependent clause subject takes possessive 'oblique'.
* dependent clause object takes instrumental 'ergative'.
References
Austin, P.K. 1988. *Complex sentence constructions in Australian languages.*
Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Austin, P.K. 2017. "Argument coding and clause linkage in Australian
Aboriginal languages." Manuscript.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.peterkaustin.com/docs/Austin_2017_Argument.pdf__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d9u9Bv6m$
Dench, A. & Evans, N. 1988. "Multiple case?marking in Australian
languages." *Australian Journal of Linguistics* 8(1): 1-47*.*
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://doi.org/10.1080/07268608808599390__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d_5dhwgx$
Simpson, J. 1983. "Aspects of Warlpiri morphology and syntax." PhD
Dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Wilkinson, M., 1991. "Djambarrpuy?u: A Yol?u variety of Northern
Australia." PhD Dissertation. University of Sydney.
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 at 16:21, ?shild N?ss <ashildn at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Keren,
>
> I expect Masha's publications will give you plenty of other examples, but
> ?iwoo (Austronesian, Oceanic, Solomon Islands) looks a lot like Arabic
> here, with the A argument of the nominalised verb marked by a possessive
> form and the O unmarked, as a verbal argument would be:
>
> nyi-w?-nubo-na nogo-i sii
> NMLZ-CAUS-die-NMLZ POSS:TOOL-3AUG fish
> 'their killing fish'
>
> Best,
>
> ?shild
>
> ?shild N?ss
>
> Professor of Linguistics, University of Oslo
>
> Telefon/Phone: (+47) 22844093
> Kontor/Office: HW531
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 5:48?PM Keren Ruditsky <krudit at uw.edu> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> * Dear everyone, I am working on a master's thesis and I was wondering
>> about any cases of languages which have nominalized verbs taking two
>> arguments where the argument syntactically closer to the nominalized verb
>> is marked like the argument of a noun, and the one syntactically further is
>> marked like the argument of a verb. One example of such a language might be
>> Standard Arabic where, as shown below, the subject of a nominalized verb
>> zayd-in ?Zayd-GEN? is marked with genitive case (which is the case used to
>> mark a nominal possessor) while the object camr-an ?Amr-ACC? is marked
>> with accusative case (which is the case used for typical verbal objects).
>> ntiqaad-u zayd-in camr-an criticizing-NOM
>> Zayd-GEN Amr-ACC ?Zayd?s criticizing Amr? (Fassi Fehri 1993: 223f)
>> Fassi Fehri, Abdelkader. 1993. Issues in the structure of Arabic clauses
>> and *
>> *words. Dordrecht: Kluwer*
>>
>> *Thank you,*
>> *Keren*
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lingtyp mailing list
>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d0jzGww2$
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d0jzGww2$
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20230817/2da6c6cb/attachment-0001.htm__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d8-MBPEN$ >
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 15:46:01 +0000
From: Peter Austin <pa2 at soas.ac.uk>
To: Ellison Luk <ellisonluk at gmail.com>,
"lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org"
<lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Question about nominalized verbs
Message-ID:
<PA4PR01MB7760D7CFBE66F7B5FBA79B89CB1AA at PA4PR01MB7760.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
There is further elaboration of the generalisations Ellison gave that are set out in my forthcoming paper, the draft of which is available on my website:
Austin, Peter K. 2022. Argument coding and clause linkage in Australian Aboriginal languages. To appear in Projecting voices: Studies in language and linguistics in honour of Jane Simpson. Asia-Pacific Linguistics. https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.peterkaustin.com/docs/Austin_2022_clauselinkage.pdf__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d2t9_Djv$
________________________________
From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of Ellison Luk <ellisonluk at gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 3:28:56 PM
To: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Question about nominalized verbs
Hi Keren and everyone,
A number of Australian languages exhibit non-standard case marking in 'nominalised' clauses, as Peter Austin's 2017 paper "Argument coding and clause linkage in Australian Aboriginal languages" illustrates. He particularly singles out strategies with the dative and possessive categories, which seem to parallel the Arabic example. See also Dench's 2006 AJL paper "Case Marking Strategies in Subordinate Clauses in Pilbara Languages?Some Diachronic Speculations". However, some things to note about the Australian languages:
- Elision of nominal arguments is very common in all Australian languages, so dependent clauses with fully specified arguments are generally rare, and generally unnaturalistic.
- Deviant case marking for dependent clauses often involves one case marking pattern on all arguments, rather than one argument being singled out for special treatment. There are probably a few exceptions though, like Warlpiri (ex 1).
- In languages with 'complementising case marking' - where nominal case markers take on clause linkage functions (Dench & Evans 1988, various chapters in Austin 1988) - the arguments of a dependent clause may take on the same case marker as the one marking the verb, in an apparent 'agreement' relationship. Djambarrpuyngu does this (ex 2), but subjects can also be marked with a possessive oblique.
- Some languages also follow Juergen Boehnemeyer's observation, in that dependent clauses must be detransitivised (usually with an antipassive derivation), and so, transitive dependent clauses simply don't exist.
In all, I don't think there are many examples in Australian languages directly akin to what you observe in Arabic (I've mostly seen cases where all arguments get the same dependent clause-specific case marking, or none of them do), but I hope this provides some context to your study.
(1) Warlpiri (Pama-Nyungan (Western) > Ngumpin-Yapa; Simpson 1983: 497)
ngarrka-patu-rlu ka-lu-jana puluku turnu-ma-ni,
man-PL-ERG PRES-3pl-3pl bullock-ABS muster-NPST
karnta-patu-ku miyi purra-nja-puru.
woman-PL-DAT food-ABS cook-INF-CIRC
?The men are mustering cattle while the women are cooking the food.?
* dependent clause verb is marked with the 'infinitive-circumstantial' (an adverbial clause marker)
* dependent clause subject takes dative case marking
* dependent clause object takes absolutive case marking, as in main clauses
(2) Djambarrpuy?u (Pama-Nyungan (Western) > Yol?u; Wilkinson 1991: 634)
ngayi mirithi+na+n ngaramurr+yi+n nhanu+kal gaa+nhara+y mutika+y
3sg INTENS+3rd+SEQ angry+INCH+3rd 3sg+OBL bear("drive")(tr)+4th+ERG car+ERG
?S/he got very angry by his/her driving the car.?
* dependent clause is marked by the '4th+ERG' inflection; '4th' refers to a non-past-irrealis category that is also specialised for clause linkage; 'ergative' is a complementising case marker that marks clauses of means, causes, circumstances, and reasons.
* dependent clause subject takes possessive 'oblique'.
* dependent clause object takes instrumental 'ergative'.
References
Austin, P.K. 1988. Complex sentence constructions in Australian languages. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Austin, P.K. 2017. "Argument coding and clause linkage in Australian Aboriginal languages." Manuscript. https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.peterkaustin.com/docs/Austin_2017_Argument.pdf__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d9u9Bv6m$
Dench, A. & Evans, N. 1988. "Multiple case?marking in Australian languages." Australian Journal of Linguistics 8(1): 1-47. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://doi.org/10.1080/07268608808599390__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d_5dhwgx$
Simpson, J. 1983. "Aspects of Warlpiri morphology and syntax." PhD Dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Wilkinson, M., 1991. "Djambarrpuy?u: A Yol?u variety of Northern Australia." PhD Dissertation. University of Sydney.
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 at 16:21, ?shild N?ss <ashildn at gmail.com<mailto:ashildn at gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Keren,
I expect Masha's publications will give you plenty of other examples, but ?iwoo (Austronesian, Oceanic, Solomon Islands) looks a lot like Arabic here, with the A argument of the nominalised verb marked by a possessive form and the O unmarked, as a verbal argument would be:
nyi-w?-nubo-na nogo-i sii
NMLZ-CAUS-die-NMLZ POSS:TOOL-3AUG fish
'their killing fish'
Best,
?shild
?shild N?ss
Professor of Linguistics, University of Oslo
Telefon/Phone: (+47) 22844093
Kontor/Office: HW531
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 5:48?PM Keren Ruditsky <krudit at uw.edu<mailto:krudit at uw.edu>> wrote:
Dear everyone,
I am working on a master's thesis and I was wondering about any cases of languages which have nominalized verbs taking two arguments where the argument syntactically closer to the nominalized verb is marked like the argument of a noun, and the one syntactically further is marked like the argument of a verb.
One example of such a language might be Standard Arabic where, as shown below, the subject of a nominalized verb zayd-in ?Zayd-GEN? is marked with genitive case (which is the case used to mark a nominal possessor) while the object camr-an ?Amr-ACC? is marked with accusative case (which is the case used for typical verbal objects).
ntiqaad-u zayd-in camr-an
criticizing-NOM Zayd-GEN Amr-ACC
?Zayd?s criticizing Amr? (Fassi Fehri 1993: 223f)
Fassi Fehri, Abdelkader. 1993. Issues in the structure of Arabic clauses and
words. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Thank you,
Keren
_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d0jzGww2$
_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d0jzGww2$
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20230817/fe524144/attachment-0001.htm__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8dx-mQNiU$ >
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2023 06:24:53 +0000
From: Fran?oise Rose <francoise.rose at univ-lyon2.fr>
To: David Erschler <erschler at gmail.com>,
"lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org"
<lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Looking for Visual Stimuli Kits for Fieldwork
Message-ID: <4b8f59117f674884bb6d4417d6d4ca94 at univ-lyon2.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear David and all,
The following website is a good resource for stimuli and other types of questionnaire:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://tulquest.huma-num.fr/en__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d0Wr_EjI$
Best,
Fran?oise
De : Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> De la part de David Erschler
Envoy? : mardi 15 ao?t 2023 10:23
? : lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
Objet : [Lingtyp] Looking for Visual Stimuli Kits for Fieldwork
Dear colleagues,
I am looking for visual stimuli kits for fieldwork (to try and minimize the interference of translation).
So far I have found
Benjamin Bruening?s Scope Elicitation Kit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://udel.edu/*bruening/scopeproject/materials.html?__;fg!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d3MzXta1$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://t.co/Oa2zpInAMh__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8dyzbqv42$ > MPI Nijmegen Elicitation Manuals https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://udel.edu/*bruening/scopeproject/scopeproject.html__;fg!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d7rWiafa$ Kidd et al.?s Stimuli to elicit transitive sentences https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://osf.io/9jh4k__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8dwCkC2Nz$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://t.co/0OsTKfy0TZ__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d7x_HQFN$ >
I wonder if there are more out there.
Thank you very much,
With best wishes,
David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20230818/f2325223/attachment-0001.htm__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d6v5tm5W$ >
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2023 11:46:16 +0200
From: Cat Butz <Cat.Butz at hhu.de>
To: LINGTYP LINGTYP <LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] What is the opposite of syncretism?
Message-ID: <66cce0a24b80d00964ad1d9a0817bfa8 at hhu.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Thanks again to everyone who contributed! If one thing has become clear,
it's that there is no generally established term for this in linguistics
right now, so probably so far there hasn't been much of a need for it.
For all intents and purposes, I think that "affix suppletion" or should
get the job done in being understandable for everyone.
Have a nice weekend, everyone.
---
Cat Butz (she)
HHU D?sseldorf
General Linguistics
Am 2023-08-17 07:54, schrieb Martin Haspelmath:
> I'd say that the "opposite" of syncretism is suppletion:
>
> syncretism: expression of inflectional meanings A, B, C by a single
> form F in different situations
>
> suppletion: expression of a single inflectional meaning M by forms A,
> B, C in different situations
>
> It seems that this is what Cat Butz described for Dalkalaen ("plural
> being marked differently in all four persons"): different suppletive
> plural markers depending on the context.
>
> But the term "suppletion" is most commonly used for roots (e.g.
> _go/wen(-t)_, _one/firs(-t)_), and many people would prefer
> "allomorphy" (though this latter term is also used for phonological
> variants of the same form rather than different forms).
>
> In a different sense of "opposite", one could say that the opposite of
> syncretism (= grammatical coexpression) is simply "non-syncretism" (=
> grammatical disexpression, or disgrammification), cf. Alexandre
> Fran?ois's earlier comment.
>
> In any event, "syncretism" is a weird term ? it was originally
> limited to diachronic change in inflectional paradigms, and while it
> is deeply entrenched in discussions of inflection, it's prtobably best
> not to use it more generally.
>
> Best,
>
> Martin
> Cat Butz wrote:
>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I'm presenting a pronoun paradigm of Dalkalaen this week at the
>> Affixes symposium in Turku. It exhibits both some very weird
>> syncretism (same marking of 1EX and 2nd person) and the opposite of
>> that (e.g. plural being marked differently in all four persons).
>> What do we call that? Just differential marking?
>
> Alexandre Fran?ois wrote:
>
>> In the domain of the lexicon, I've been calling the former
>> configuration ?colexification? (similar to syncretism); and the
>> opposite, ?dislexification? (cf. the contrast _con-junct _/_
>> dis-junct_, etc).
>> Martin Haspelmath has recently [1] proposed to extend this sort of
>> contrast to grammatical morphemes, using ?cogrammification?
>> (including cases of _morphological syncretism_), and
>> ?coexpression? in general. For the opposite, one could propose
>> ?disgrammification? and ?disexpression?, but I don't see
>> those terms in Martin's handout [2]. Otherwise, the standard terms,
>> I guess, are simply ?formal distinction? or ?formal
>> contrast?. (Maybe other people on the list will think of different
>> terms.)
>
> --
> Martin Haspelmath
> Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
> Deutscher Platz 6
> D-04103 Leipzig
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eva.mpg.de/linguistic-and-cultural-evolution/staff/martin-haspelmath/__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d2YBkPCv$
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://twitter.com/haspelmath/status/1688937593403060224__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d42XUmbf$
> [2] https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://zenodo.org/record/8223665__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d7bcO-ZF$
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d0jzGww2$
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp__;!!K-Hz7m0Vt54!l0RogKzHfUzqmLh0QKwQHrdOvfrGKaN79b0nU1I1KxLXtSLeJ7DydAaQjLi66syz-98KemjoM5grn7t5uvzcSMVYDfB8d0jzGww2$
------------------------------
End of Lingtyp Digest, Vol 107, Issue 11
****************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20230818/e266e71c/attachment.htm>
More information about the Lingtyp
mailing list