[Lingtyp] Query: 'Deceased referent' markers

Fri Sep 27 13:53:00 UTC 2024

Dear Denis and David, dear all,

Hungarian has the same convention although I am not sure this is still currently alive. Mentioning deceased person that you were close to include the adjective "szege'ny" 'poor'.

Edith Moravcsik
________________________________
From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of David Gil via Lingtyp <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2024 7:07 AM
To: Denis CREISSELS <denis.creissels at univ-lyon2.fr>
Cc: Epps, Patience L <pattieepps at austin.utexas.edu>; Lingtyp <Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Query: 'Deceased referent' markers

Dear Denis, all,

My maternal grandmother, a monolingual speaker of a low-SES Jewish London dialect of English, had exactly the same usage you describe for the Occitan variety, but with English poor.

I mention her in particular because I don't think I ever heard this usage from other speakers, though my exposure to and familiarity with English dialects is rather limited, so I'd be curious to learn how widely spread this usage is across English dialects.

Best,

David

On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 2:52 PM Denis CREISSELS via Lingtyp <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>> wrote:

Dear all,

In the Occitan variety that was still spoken in my native village when I was a child, the adjective paure ['pawre] ‘poor’, but also ‘unfortunate’, was systematically added to personal names when speaking about a recently deceased person.

Best,

Denis

De : Lingtyp [mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>] De la part de Epps, Patience L via Lingtyp
Envoyé : jeudi 26 septembre 2024 12:15
À : lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Objet : [Lingtyp] Query: 'Deceased referent' markers

Dear all,

I'm writing regarding a phenomenon that appears to be widely attested in Amazonian languages, which my project collaborators and I have been calling a 'deceased referent marker'. We are wondering about the extent to which a comparable phenomenon exists in other languages of the world - from a preliminary survey, it appears to have very few close correlates elsewhere.

The Amazonian-type DRM construction involves using a particular linguistic marker (which can usually be identified as more grammatical than lexical, though it's not always an easy distinction to make) within the noun phrase when making direct reference to a deceased referent. This is reminiscent of what occurs in some European languages (e.g. English the late John, Portuguese o finado João), but tends to be less lexical and is ubiquitous in discourse, rather than being highly optional and/or limited to more formal registers. In some languages, the DRM is a distinct etymon with no other functions; in others, it overlaps with other functions (most frequently that of a nominal past marker). It is always used with humans (primarily proper names and kin terms), while some languages also allow use with non-human referents. In spite of these variations, there seem to be close parallels in how the construction is formulated and how it is used discursively across many Amazonian languages.

An example from Nadëb (Naduhup family, NW Brazil):

ee           makũuh              ỹ              haw'ëëh              doo                        paah

father  DRM                       1sg         raise                      NMLZ                    PST

'It was my late father who raised me (there).'

In defining the Amazonian 'type' of DRM, we are focusing on resources that a) consist of a morphological element (affix or clitic hosted by the noun); or b) if arguably more lexical, have a ‘deceased referent’ function that is relatively distinct from other meanings/morphosyntactic expressions and/or appears ubiquitously in DRM contexts. We are excluding other kinds of linguistic strategies for referring to the deceased, including naming prohibitions, necronyms (passing on the deceased's name to a child), more pragmatically optional periphrastic strategies (e.g. 'my dead relative', 'my relative who died recently', etc.). We are also excluding (though we're interested, for comparative purposes) other types of nominal morphology relating to the deceased, e.g. a marker that occurs with a kin term X to mean ‘one whose X has recently died’ in Kayardild (Australia): kangku-kurirr (father’s.father-DEAD) ‘one whose father’s father has recently died’ (Evans 1995: 197).

We'd be very grateful for information about comparable phenomena in languages outside South America.

All best,

Pattie Epps

_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/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: dapiiiiit at gmail.com<mailto:dapiiiiit at gmail.com>
Mobile Phone (Israel): +972-526117713
Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-082113720302

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20240927/32762ce6/attachment.htm>