26.554, Diss: Puma; Language Documentation, Morphology, Syntax, Typology: Sharma: 'Morphosyntax of Puma, a Tibeto-Burman Language of Nepal'

[The LINGUIST List via LINGUIST]

LINGUIST List: Vol-26-554. Mon Jan 26 2015. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 26.554, Diss: Puma; Language Documentation, Morphology, Syntax, Typology: Sharma: 'Morphosyntax of Puma, a Tibeto-Burman Language of Nepal'

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Anthony Aristar, Helen Aristar-Dry, Sara Couture)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Editor for this issue: Danuta  Allen <danuta at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 20:46:17
From: Narayan Sharma [narayan.sharma57 at gmail.com]
Subject: Morphosyntax of Puma, a Tibeto-Burman Language of Nepal

 
Institution: School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 
Program: Department of Linguistics 
Dissertation Status: Completed 
Degree Date: 2014 

Author: Narayan Sharma

Dissertation Title: Morphosyntax of Puma, a Tibeto-Burman Language of Nepal 

Dissertation URL:  http://eprints.soas.ac.uk/18554/

Linguistic Field(s): Language Documentation
                     Morphology
                     Syntax
                     Typology

Subject Language(s): Puma (pum)


Dissertation Director(s):
Peter K. Austin
Irina Nikolaeva
Peter Sells

Dissertation Abstract:

Puma is an endangered Tibeto-Burman language of the Kiranti subgroup spoken by
approximately 4,000 people in eastern Nepal. This dissertation investigates
the phonology and morphosyntax of Puma. Data are presented and analysed from a
cross-linguistic typological perspective where possible. The analysis is based
mainly on annotated texts from a substantial corpus of spoken Puma, and from
informally collected data and direct elicitation to supplement the corpus.
Puma is a polysynthetic and complex pronominalised language where words can
consist of a series of morphemes. Verbal agreement, where verbs agree with
subjects and objects, is very complex, and differs strikingly from the
case-marking system used with independent noun phrases. Case-marking of nouns
and pronouns is split between nominative-accusative and
ergative-absolutive-dative. Intransitive subjects also exhibit characteristics
of a split-S pattern: some intransitive subjects display grammatical
properties similar to those of transitive objects, while others do not. 
In contrast to Dryer’s  (1986, 2007) typology of primary object type and
direct object type languages, Puma is neither a fully primary object nor a
fully direct object language. Transitive verbs can be detransitivised with a
kha- prefix or with zero, which is typologically more common (Bickel et al.
2007). For kha-detransitivisation the affected entity must be human; this is
typologically unusual, but characteristic of the Kiranti subgroup.
The syntactic pivot for both inter-clausal and intra-clausal syntax is
‘subject’, comprising the single argument of intransitive verbs and the
agent-like argument of transitive verbs. Interestingly, the morphology does
not treat these in a consistent way but the syntax does. Verbs fall into
classes that show distinct syntactic behaviours in different constructions.
Compound verbs, which are an areal feature of South Asian languages (Masica
1976), comprise verbal, nominal and lexical types. Different nominalisation
and relativisation strategies exist for S human and non-human, A and P
arguments. 
The dissertation aims to provide a comprehensive description of Puma and
includes hundreds of examples drawn from the corpus, plus Appendices of sample
verb paradigms and texts, and names of contributors.







----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-26-554	
----------------------------------------------------------
Visit LL's Multitree project for over 1000 trees dynamically generated
from scholarly hypotheses about language relationships:
          http://multitree.org/