Antifunctionality in Shawi split ergativity, a processing analysis

Autores

  • Luis Miguel Rojas-Berscia Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, Centre for Language Studies
  • Corentin Bourdeau Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Centre for Language Studies
  • Stefan Grondelaers Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Centre for Language Studies
  • Pieter A. M. Seuren Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26512/rbla.v15i1.50748

Palavras-chave:

Split ergativity, Nominal Hierarchy, historical syntax, Shawi, Amazonian languages

Resumo

In this article, as a follow-up of Rojas-Berscia and Bourdeau (2017), we study morphological ergativity in Shawi (Kawapanan) using a dedicated experimental design. Shawi displays ergative-marking in an opposite direction from Silverstein’s Nominal Hierarchy (NH) (Silverstein 1976). We claim this pattern to be antifunctional, given the lack of internal syntactic cues that explain why ergativity is omitted or completely obligatory in cases where the NH predicts the opposite. To test this hypothesis, we carried out a grammaticality judgment experiment in the field with 47 Shawi participants from four sites. We found a significant overall effect of the Antifunctional Ergativity Constraint Expectation (AECE): sentences that violated this constraint were in general deemed less acceptable. Finally, we provide a tentative hypothesis on the historical origin of this pattern, resorting to discussions on the origins of ergativity in historical syntax (Gildea 2004; Gildea and Queixalós 2010), the reconstruction of Proto-Kawapanan morphosyntax, and antifunctional patterns in language (Seuren and Hamans 2010).

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Métricas

Carregando Métricas ...

Referências

Barraza de García, Yris. 2005. ‘El sistema verbal en la lengua shawi’. Tesis de doctorado, Recife: Universidade Federal de Pernambuco.

Beuchat, H., and P. Rivet. 1909. ‘La famille linguistique Cahuapana’. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 41, 616–34.

Bourdeau, Corentin. 2015. “Ergativity in Shawi”. MA Thesis, Nijmegen: Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.

Butt, Miriam, and Ashwini Deo. n.d. ‘Ergativity in Indo-Aryan’. Accessed 1 May 2018. http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/butt/main/papers/ia-erg.html.

Cameron, Deborah. 1995. Verbal Hygiene. 1st ed. Routledge Linguistics Classic. London: Routledge.

Craats, Ineke van de, and Jeanne Kurvers. 2014. ‘10 jaar LESLLA. Onderzoek en educatie, een gelukkige combinatie’. Les 187, 22–24.

Craats, Ineke van de, Jeanne Kurvers, and Roeland van Hout, eds. 2015. Adult Literacy, Second Language and Cognition. Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Centre for Language Studies.

Dixon, R.M.W. 1972. The Dyirbal Language of North Queensland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

———. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 69. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dradi, María Pía. 1987. La mujer chayahuita: ¿un destino de marginación?; análisis de la condición femenina en una sociedad indígena de la Amazonía. Lima: Instituto Nacional de Planificación.

Fleck, David W. 2010. ‘Ergativity in the Mayoruna Branch of the Panoan Family’. In Ergaitivity in Amazonia, 29–63. Typological Studies in Language 89. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Fuentes, Aldo. 1988. Porque las piedras no mueren. Lima: Centro Amazónico de Antropología y Aplicación Práctica.

Gildea, Spike. 1998. On Reconstructing Grammar: Comparative Cariban Morphosyntax. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

———. 2004. ‘Are There Universal Cognitive Motivations for Ergativity?’ In L’ergativité En Amazonie, edited by Francisco Queixalós, 2:1–37. Brasília, DF: CNRS, IRD & Laboratório de Línguas Indígenas, UnB.

Gildea, Spike, and Francisco Queixalós, eds. 2010. Ergativity in Amazonia. Typological Studies in Language, v. 89. Amsterdam, The Netherlands ; Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Pub. Co.

González Saavedra, María Luisa. 2015. ‘Un Lugar Para Los Shawi En La Historia de Maynas’. Anthropologica 33 (34), 249–266.

Harris, Alice C., and Lyle Campbell. 1995. Historical Syntax in Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Heine, Bernd, and Tania Kuteva. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hervás, Lorenzo. 1787. Saggio Pratico delle Lingue. Cesena: Gregorio Biasini all’Insegna di Pallade.

Hoop, Helen de, and B. Narasimhan. 2009. ‘Ergative-Case Marking in Hindi’. In Differential Subject Marking, edited by Helen de Hoop and Peter de Swart, 63–78. Dordrecht: Springer.

Hoop, Helen de, and Peter de Swart. 2009. ‘Cross-Linguistic Variation in Differential Subject Marking’. In Differential Subject Marking, edited by Helen de Hoop and Peter de Swart, 1–16. Dordrecht: Springer.

Hualde, José Ignacio, and Jon Ortiz de Urbina, eds. 2003. A Grammar of Basque. Mouton Grammar Library 26. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Huettig, Falk, Régine Kolinsky, and Thomas Lachmann. 2018. ‘The Culturally Co-Opted Brain: How Literacy Affects the Human Mind’. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 33 (3): 275–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1425803.

Huettig, Falk, and Ramesh K. Mishra. 2014. ‘How Literacy Acquisition Affects the Illiterate Mind - A Critical Examination of Theories and Evidence: How Literacy Affects the Illiterate Mind’. Language and Linguistics Compass 8 (10): 401–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12092.

Kurvers, Jeanne. 2002. Met ongeletterde ogen. Kennis van taal en schrift van analfabeten [With illiterate eyes. Awareness of language and writing of illiterates]. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Lehmann, Christian. 2002. Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Arbeitspapiere Des Seminars Für Sprachwissenschaft Der Universität Erfurt 9. Erfurt: Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Erfurt.

Lucero, Juan S.J. n.d. Gramática y Catecismo de Muchas Lenguas de Quito, y Principalmente de Los Idiomas Paranapuro y Cocamo.

Matthewson, Lisa. 2004. ‘On the Methodology of Semantic Fieldwork’. International Journal of American Linguistics 70 (4), 369–415. https://doi.org/10.1086/429207.

McGregor, William B. 2009. ‘Typology of Ergativity’. Language and Linguistics Compass 3 (1), 480–508. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00118.x.

Ochoa Siguas, Nancy. 2016. ‘Los Piyapi Yamorai o «gente Del Río de La Sal». Los Últimos Proveedores de Sal Del Paranapuras, Alto Amazonas, Perú’. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’études Andines, no. 45 (1) (April), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.4000/bifea.7819.

Ochoa-Gilonne, Nancy. 2007. ‘Entre plusieurs mondes. Les Chayahuita de l’Amazonie’. PhD Thesis, EHESS.

Ochs, Elinor. 1982. ‘Ergativity and Word Order in Samoan Child Language’. Language 58 (3), 646–71.

Piepers, Joske. 2016. ‘Optional Ergative Case Marking in Hindi’. Bachelor Thesis. Radboud University Nijmegen.

Queixalós, Francisco, and Spike Gildea. 2010. ‘Manifestations of Ergativity in Amazonia’. In Ergativity in Amazonia, edited by Spike Gildea and Francisco Queixalós. Typological Studies in Language 89. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Rijk, Rudolf P. G. de, and Armand de Coene. 2008. Standard Basque: A Progressive Grammar. Current Studies in Linguistics 44. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Rojas-Berscia, Luis Miguel. 2013. “La sintaxis y semántica de las construcciones causativas en el chayahuita de Balsapuerto”. Licentiate Thesis, Lima: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.

Rojas-Berscia, Luis Miguel. 2015. “Mayna, the lost Kawapanan language”. LIAMES 15: 393–407.

Rojas-Berscia, Luis Miguel, y Corentin Bourdeau. 2017. “‘Optional’ or Syntactic Ergativity in Shawi: Distribution and Possible Origins”. Linguistic Discovery 15 (1): 50–65.

Rojas-Berscia, Luis Miguel. 2021. Pre-Historical Language Contact in Peruvian Amazonia: A Dynamic Approach to Shawi (Kawapanan). Vol. 58. Contact Language Library. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/coll.58.

Salvatier, John, Thomas V. Wiecki, y Christopher Fonnesbeck. 2016. “Probabilistic Programming in Python Using PyMC3”. PeerJ Computer Science 2 (abril): e55. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.55.

Seuren, Pieter A. M. 1969. Operators and Nucleus: A Contribution to the Theory of Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

———. 1972. ‘Autonomous Versus Semantic Syntax’. Foundations of Language 8 (2), 237–265.

———. 2009. Language in Cognition [Language From Within, Vol.1]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

———. 2018. Semantic Syntax. Second Revised Edition. Leiden: Brill.

Seuren, Pieter A. M., and Camiel Hamans. 2010. ‘Antifunctionality in Language Change’. Folia Linguistica 44 (1). https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.2010.005.

Silverstein, Michael. 1976. ‘Hierarchy of Features of Ergativity’. In Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages, 112–71. New Jersey: Humanities Press.

———. 2003. ‘Indexical Order and the Dialectics of Sociolinguistic Life’. Language & Communication 23 (3–4), 193–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0271-5309(03)00013-2.

Swadesh, Morris. 1971. The Origin and Diversification of Language. Edited by Joel Sherzer. Chicago: Aldine.

Teruel, Luis S.l. n.d. Gramatica de La Lengua Tabalosa Del Peru. 16??

Valenzuela, Pilar M. 2011. ‘Argument Encoding and Pragmatic Marking of the Transitive Subject in Shiwilu (Kawapanan)’. International Journal of American Linguistics 77 (1), 91–120. https://doi.org/10.1086/657989.

Valenzuela, Pilar M., Meneleo Careajano, Emérita Guerra, Julia Inuma, and Fernando Lachuma. 2013. Diccionario Shiwilu-Castellano Castellano-Shiwilu. Lima: Federación de Comunidades Nativas de Jeberos (FECONAJE).

Woolford, E. 2009. ‘Differential Subject Marking at Argument Structure, Syntax and PF’. In Differential Subject Marking, edited by Helen de Hoop and Peter de Swart, 17–40. Dordrecht: Springer.

Downloads

Publicado

2023-09-16

Como Citar

Rojas-Berscia, L. M., Bourdeau, C., Grondelaers, S., & Seuren, P. A. M. (2023). Antifunctionality in Shawi split ergativity, a processing analysis. Revista Brasileira De Linguística Antropológica, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.26512/rbla.v15i1.50748

Edição

Seção

Artigos

Artigos mais lidos pelo mesmo(s) autor(es)