Ana səhifə

Ox ford st udiesin typolog y and linguist ic theory


Yüklə 5.01 Mb.
səhifə1/45
tarix10.06.2016
ölçüsü5.01 Mb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   45

Co-Compounds and Natural Coordination


OX FORD ST UDIE S I N TYPOLOG Y AND LINGUIST IC THEORY

seri es ed itor s: Ronnie Cann, University of Edinburgh, William Croft, Uni-

versity of Manchester, Scott DeLancey, University of Oregon, Martin Haspelmath,

Max Planck Institute Leipzig, Nicholas Evans, University of Melbourne, Anna

Siewierska, University of Lancaster


published

ClassiWers: A Typology of Noun Categorization Devices

by Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald

Pronouns


by D. N. S. Bhat

Subordination

by Sonia Cristofaro

The Paradigmatic Structure of Person Marking

by Michael Cysouw

IndeWnite Pronouns

by Martin Haspelmath

Anaphora


by Yan Huang

Copulas


by Regina Pustet

The Noun Phrase

by Jan RijkhoV

Intransitive Predication

by Leon Stassen

Co-Compounds and Natural Coordination

Bernhard Walchli
published in association with the series

The World Atlas of Language Structures

edited by Matthew Dryer, Bernard Comrie, David Gil, and Martin Haspelmath

In Pr e p a r a t i o n

Reciprocals

by Nicholas Evans

Applicative Constructions

by David Peterson

Double Object Constructions

by Maria Polinsky


¨

Co-Compounds

and Natural

Coordination

B E R N H A R D WA LC HL I

1
¨



3

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford ox2 6dp

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.

If furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,

and education by publishing worldwide in

Oxford New York

Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi

Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi

New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto

With oYces in

Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece

Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore

South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam

Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain

other countries

Published in the United States

by Oxford University Press Inc., New York

ß Bernhard Walchli 2005

The moral rights of the author have been asserted

Database right Oxford University Press (maker)

First published 2005

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,

stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,

without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press,

or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate

reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction

outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department,

Oxford University Press, at the address above

You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover

and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Data available

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Walchli, Bernhard.

Co-compounds and natural coordination/Bernhard Walchli

p. cm.


Includes bibliographical references and indexes.

ISBN 0–19–927621–8 (alk. paper)

1. Grammar, Comparitive and general–Coordinate constructions. 2. Grammar, Comparitive

and general–Compound words. 3. Markedness (Linguistics) 4. Semantics. 1. Title.

P293.W35 2005

415–dc22


2004030581

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Typeset by SPI Publisher Services, Pondicherry, India.

Printed in Great Britain on acid-free paper by Biddles Ltd., King’s Lynn

ISBN 0–19–927621–8 978–0–19–927621–9

1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2


¨

¨

¨

Contents


Preface and Acknowledgements

List of Figures

List of Maps

List of Tables

Conventions


1 Introduction

1.1 Basics of co-compounds

1.1.1 The form of co-compounds

1.1.2 The meaning of co-compounds

1.1.3 The use of co-compounds

1.1.4 DiVerences and similarities with phrase-like tight

coordination

1.1.5 Are co-compounds a form of parallelism?

1.2 Co-compounds in the linguistic literature

1.3 Theoretical background, method, and material

1.3.1 Why this is not a classical typological study?

(i) Universal ‘semantic’ domains and ‘language-speciWc’

classes

(ii) Discrete and continuous typological variables



(iii) The problem of sampling for features that are

highly biased areally

(iv) Explanations in typology

(v) Summary

1.3.2 Meaning in language

(i) Meaning in natural languages is not systematically

taxonomic

(ii) Partial cover meanings

(iii) The form-related-ergo-meaning-related

approach and its limits

(iv) Semantic relativity and the level of cross-linguistic

semantic comparison (morpheme vs. utterance)

(v) Contextual semantic sharpening

xii


xiii

xiv


xv

10


23
26

27
x



1

1

2

5

8

15

17

22

22

24

25

25

26

28

29

30

32

vi


Contents
1.3.3 The linguistic material considered in this study

1.3.4 Summary

1.4 Organization of the following chapters

2 The Marking Patterns of Natural Coordination

2.1 DiVerent kinds of markedness

2.2 Relational marking in natural coordination

2.3 Non-relational marking in natural coordination

2.3.1 Distinctive non-relational single marking

2.3.2 Distinctive non-relational double marking

2.3.3 Distinctive non-relational zero marking

2.3.4 Iconicity of the distinctive non-relational marking

strategies

2.4 The syntax of single non-relational marking in coordination

2.4.1 Group inXection

2.4.2 Is coordination with single non-relational marking

syntactically asymmetric?

2.4.3 Phonological-syntactic non-isomorphism

2.5 Conclusions

3 Tight Coordination

3.1 The Wrst dimension: the length of the coordination

3.2 The second dimension: the marking patterns of coordination

3.3 The third dimension: the semantic correlates of tight

coordination

3.3.1 Group vs. separate coordination

3.3.2 Intersective vs. non-intersective coordination

3.3.3 Overlapping vs. non-overlapping coordination

3.3.4 Contrast

3.3.5 Non-exhaustive vs. exhaustive listing coordination

3.3.6 Disjunction

3.3.7 Explicative disjunction

3.3.8 Repair and pseudo-repair

3.3.9 Enumeration

3.3.10 Pseudo-coordination

3.3.11 Conclusions

3.4 Conclusions

4 Co-compounds as a Lexical Class Type

4.1 The traditional morphological (and indirectly syntactic)

approach to compounding

34

55


64

74



78

81


85

86

87


33

35

38

38

45

48

49

51

54

57

58

60

60

67

67

69

74

76

77

81

83

84

85

90

90

Contents
4.2 Are (co-)compounds really words?

4.2.1 What is word? Laying out the problem

4.2.2 Deconstructing the notion of word

4.2.3 Criteria for the ‘wordhood’ of compounds

(with special reference to co-compounds)

(i) Semantic criteria for compounds

(ii) Conventionalized prosodic patterns

(iii) Compounding forms and clippings

(iv) Bound stems

(v) Word slots

(vi) Continuity

(vii) Fixed order

(viii) Conclusion

4.3 An alternative approach to co-compounds: lexical classes

4.3.1 The middle as a typical example for a lexical class type

4.3.2 More examples of lexical class types

4.3.3 Co-compounds as a lexical class type

4.3.4 Reconsidering lexicalization and the lexicon

4.3.5 DiVerences and similarities of lexical and

grammatical classes

4.4 The form of co-compounds and the problem of formal

non-distinctiveness

4.4.1 Distinguishing co-compounds and sub-compounds

4.4.2 Distinguishing co-compounds and serial verbs

4.4.3 Distinguishing co-compounds and coordination

4.5 Meronomic structure

4.6 Conclusions

5 A Semantic ClassiWcation of Co-compounds

5.1 The basis of the semantic classiWcation

5.2 The various semantic types of co-compounds

5.2.1 Additive co-compounds

5.2.2 Generalizing co-compounds

5.2.3 Collective co-compounds

5.2.4 Synonymic co-compounds

5.2.5 Ornamental co-compounds

5.2.6 Imitative co-compounds

5.2.7 Figurative co-compounds

5.2.8 Alternative and approximate co-compounds

vii


100

101


101

103


104

117


121

130


131
92

92

93

97

97

98

99

105

107

110

113

114

122

124

126

135

136

137

137

139

141

143

146

147

149

151

viii

Contents
5.2.9 Scalar co-compounds

5.2.10 Basic and non-basic co-compounds



5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6


Contextual semantic sharpening in co-compounds

Compounds that are closely related to co-compounds

5.4.1 Appositional compounds

5.4.2 Intermediate-denoting compounds

5.4.3 Comparative (or Wgurative-appositional) compounds

5.4.4 Ideophones and ideophone compounds

5.4.5 Reduplication

5.4.6 Echo-words

5.4.7 AYrmative–negative compounds

5.4.8 Conclusions

Contextual motivation of co-compounds

5.5.1 Additive contextual co-compounds

5.5.2 Emphasis

5.5.3 Generalizing context

5.5.4 Contrast (in adversative sequences)

5.5.5 Non-referential contexts and restricted evidence

(i) Negation

(ii) Question

(iii) Irrealis, potentialis, conditional, and future

5.5.6 Distributivity

5.5.7 Pictorial contexts

5.5.8 Conclusions

Conclusions

158


161
166

167


170

171


174

176


178

180


181

182


183

6 The Areal Distribution of Co-compounds in the Languages



of Eurasia

6.1 Patterns of areal coherence

6.2 Consideration of parallel texts

6.3 More evidence for a continuous diminishment of

co-compounds from east to west throughout Eurasia

6.3.1 Turkic, Mongolian, and Tungus

6.3.2 The languages of the Caucasus

6.3.3 Indo-European

6.3.4 Uralic

6.3.5 Dravidian

6.3.6 Sino-Tibetan

6.3.7 Austroasiatic

6.3.8 Austronesian

186


203

206


207

208


210

211
152



154

161

162

163

164

170

173

175

175

176

178

186

187

198

198

201

Contents
6.3.9 Language isolates

6.3.10 Synthesis

6.4 Language internal diversity: the example of Mordvin

6.5 Diversity in co-compounding in Eurasia

6.6 The independence of co-compounds from other

typological features

6.6.1 Head and dependent marking

6.6.2 Isolating morphological type and monosyllabic words

6.6.3 Sub-compounds

6.6.4 The type of ordinary coordination

6.6.5 Dyad constructions and family group classiWers

6.6.6 Loanwords

6.6.7 Conclusions

6.7 Conclusions

6.A Appendix: Beyond Eurasia

7 Some Considerations about the Diachronic Evolution of

Co-compounds

7.1 The evolution of markers, patterns, and constructions

vs. the evolution of classes

7.2 The diachronic relationship between co-compounds

and coordination

7.2.1 The condensation hypothesis

7.2.2 The introduction of new ‘heavy forms’

7.2.3 Conclusions

7.3 Co-compounds as a lexical class evolve gradually

7.4 The role of textual markedness for the acceptability of

co-compounds

7.5 Co-compounds in folk poetry and desemantization

7.6 Conclusions

8 Conclusions
Appendix A: Languages and their Linguistic AYliation

Appendix B: Map of Languages

References

Index of Persons

Index of Languages

Index of Subjects


ix
212

214

229



231

235


235

236


243

243


245

251

257

270
274


286


288

311


317

323
218



225

229

230

231

232

237

245

250

252

264

281

Preface and Acknowledgements

The aim of this study is both descriptive and theoretical. Descriptively, it is

a contribution to the cross-linguistic investigation of co-compounds and

related phenomena within the functional domain of natural coordination.

But its scope goes beyond that of cross-linguistic description. This was

unavoidable because some time-honored traditional concepts in linguis-

tics—notably the strict division between word and phrase, the listeme

model of the lexicon, the view of coordination as a syntactic phrase, lexical

semantics as a static rather than a context-dependent dynamic Weld—are not

descriptively adequate for the phenomena under consideration. Thus, as

concerns linguistic theory, the study does not present a coherent model of

language structure or competence, nor does it follow any given theoretical

framework. Rather, it challenges widely accepted approaches and attempts to

provide some solutions that are descriptively more adequate.

This book is a revised version of my doctoral dissertation, defended at

the University of Stockholm in May 2003. I consider it a distinct privilege

that this dissertation was supervised by Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm and

Osten Dahl, both of whom spent countless hours with me, working

through and discussing long and diYcult drafts. Without their innumerable

suggestions and challenges, this work would never have become a book.

I would like to thank also the opponent for the defense, Andrew Spencer,

for his thoughtful and valuable comments. The origin of my research,

long before I started thinking about co-compounds, lies in a study trip

to the Republic of Mordovia in Autumn 1996 and I remain grateful to

Rajsa N. Buzakova who devoted so much of her time to teaching me Erza

Mordvin.

My dissertation project was supported by the Swiss National Science

Foundation during 1999. Between March 2000 and September 2004 I have

been working at the Linguistics Department of the University of Bern, and

I would like to thank Iwar Werlen for always encouraging me to carry on with

my research. Some of the subjects discussed in this book were presented in

public on several occasions in Stockholm and Bern, at the ALT III Conference

in Amsterdam in September 1999, at a workshop organized by W. Bisang and

M. Haspelmath at the Fachtagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft fu r Sprachwis-

senschaft in Leipzig in February/March 2001, at the Department of Linguistics

of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig in
¨

´

¨

Preface and Acknowledgements


October 2003, and at the Departments of Linguistics in Kiel in November

2000 and Bremen in November 2003.

I would like to thank the following persons for having served as informants

or for providing important material from their languages of expertise: Brita

Bergman (Swedish Sign Language), Barbara Buri (Mandarin), O sten Dahl

(Swedish), Enkhtuvshin Dorjgotov (Khalkha Mongolian), Volker Gast (Tzot-

zil), Natalja Gluxova and Z. Uc aev (Mari), Pe tur Helgason (Icelandic), Alan

R. King (Basque), Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm (Russian), Birgit Schlyter Nils-

son (Uzbek), Yaron Matras (Romani), Nawzad Shokri (Bahdinani Kurdish),

Jennifer Spenader (English), and Ljuba Veselinova (Bulgarian).

I am grateful to the following persons for their helpful suggestions: Jan

Anward, Roland Bielmeier, Vladan Bos kovic , Barbara Buri, Michael Cysouw,

Karen Ebert, Martin Gaenszle, John Haiman, Kristine Hildebrandt, Pa ivi

Juvonen, Jussi Karlgren, Rene´ Lanszweert, Eva Lindstro m, Jan Peter Locher,

Wiltrud Mihatsch, Ulrike Mosel, Nicole Nau, Anatolij P. Nepokupnyj, Lukas

Neukom, Mikael Parkvall, Frans Plank, Birgit Schlyter Nilsson, Eva Schultze-

Berndt, Leon Stassen, Pirkko Suihkonen, Robert Wa lchli, Ursula Wegmu ller,

Bjorn Wiemer, and Fernando Zu n iga.

Special thanks go to Nicholas Evans, Martin Haspelmath, Irina Nikolaeva,

Thomas Stolz, and an anonymous reviewer who provided me with valuable

comments while I was revising the dissertation for publication. Furthermore,

I would like to thank John Davey, Stuart Fowkes, and Kim Allen at Oxford

University Press for their assistance. I am extremely grateful to Donald

Fillinger for having made a tremendous eVort to improve the draft text.

It remains for me to thank my parents and my sister, who always encour-

aged me to go my way, and especially my wife, Inga, for their support. I don’t

know how I would have done it without you!
Bernhard Walchli

Bern, August 24, 2004


xi

¨

ˇ ´

ˇ ´

¨

¨

¨ ¨

´ ˜¨

¨

Figures


1.1 DiVerent semantic maps to represent the meanings of the

same linguistic class in an idealized way by partial cover meanings

3.1 Some nominal coordination patterns in Turkish

3.2 DiVerent semantic kinds of coordination

5.1 Basic and non-basic types of co-compounds

5.2 DiVerent types of reduplication

6.1 Frequency of co-compounds in the UDHR

6.2 Frequency of co-compounds in the UDHR (continued)

6.3 Token frequency of co-compounds in diVerent

translations of Mark

6.4 Semantic proWles of co-compounds in diVerent

translations of Mark

6.5 Frequency of co-compounds in Turkic languages

6.6 Co-compounds in three Mordvin texts

6.7 The semantic types of co-compounds in three Mordvin texts

6.8 The semantic proWles of co-compounds in three Mordvin texts

6.9 The word class proWles of co-compounds in three Mordvin texts

6.10 The proWle of additive co-compounds in three Mordvin texts

192


195
29

70

77

156

166

189

190

199

220

221

222

223

223


Maps

6.1 Frequency of co-compounds in the languages of Eurasia

6.2 Co-compounds in the most lexicalized expression for ‘parents’

Appendix B: Map of languages
216

217

286

Tables

1.1. The iconic relationship between diVerent kinds of coordination

1.2. Examples for superordinate, basic, and subordinate concepts in Mari

2.1. DiVerent kinds of markedness

2.2. Double marking in natural coordination and elsewhere



in coordination

2.3. Iconicity in non-relational marking strategies for natural

coordination

2.4. Group inXection in coordination (for case) in some languages

with group inXection in subordination in the group Adj N (for case)

4.1. The functions of noun incorporation

4.2. Some concepts above the basic level of conceptualization

in the text of the UDHR in several co-compounding languages

4.3. Local (un)markedness of the plural of ‘foot’ in some

unrelated languages

4.4. Some body parts in English, Mari, Czech, and Bahasa Indonesia

5.1. The various semantic types of co-compounds

6.1. Languages considered in the two parallel texts ranked

according to their frequency of co-compounds

6.2. ‘Head’ in several Tibeto-Burman languages

6.3. The levels of co-compounding represented on Map 6.1

6.4. Sub-compounds and co-compounds

6.5. ‘Also’/‘with’-coordinators and co-compounds

6.6. Relational marking type in ordinary nominal coordination

and co-compounds

6.7. Deranked vs. non-deranked verbal coordination and

co-compounds

7.1. The evolution of dvandva compounds from Vedic to Sanskrit

7.2. Syllable structure in Old and Middle Chinese

53

57

119



233

233
13



27

42

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   45


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©kagiz.org 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət