Abstract
Even though recently appeared reference grammars of lesser-known languages usually do pay attention to issues to do with wordhood, studies of the theoretical and typological import of wordhood-related questions in indigenous languages of the Americas are not numerous. This publication aims to address the challenges posed by individual phenomena found in the Americas to the received views of wordhood.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
We grant that in many languages—not in the least American languages—the determination of the order of grammatical words, especially at the clausal level, is a matter of pragmatics rather than syntax. But the important point here is that the positional rules are not morphological in nature.
In the claims, C refers to any layer in the prosodic hierarchy, the superscripts serve to distinguish different layers from each other.
The first two relate to the very architecture of the prosodic hierarchy, and questioning these implies questioning the whole enterprise. We will discuss these types of more fundamental criticisms below.
Nespor & Vogel use a generative model of syntax, but conclude that deep syntax, and in particular the postulation of empty categories, yields the wrong predictions, and so should be left out of consideration as far as their prosodic model is concerned.
Some constructions with -achtig are lexicalized combinations and as such are analyzed as a single prosodic word, like reusachtig [røyzáxtəɣ] ‘enormous’ (lit. giant-like), where there is a single stressed syllable, following the main stress rule, and prevocalic voicing of the voiceless fricative /s/ to [z] before the suffix takes place. A similar pattern holds for some lexicalized compounds (see Booij 1999:116).
They focus on function words because their problematic morphological status is one of the main targets of the paper, but the function word constraints are to a large degree word constraints (except maybe constraint 4).
It can furthermore be argued that criteria like non-interruptability and extractability are contained in the criteria of host selectivity and positional freedom in the sense that elements with very strict host specifications are not expected to be interruptible and elements with rigid placement possibilities are not easily extracted from their original place.
We are certainly not the first to compare the behaviour of V2 in Germanic in terms of parameters of wordhood. For instance, Wackernagel (1892) argued that finite verbs in proto-Indo-European were in fact clitics. Anderson (2005) argues that second-position clitics and V2 are both the result of an alignment operation positioning elements in the leftmost available syntactic position of an inflectional domain. Our position is not so much theoretical or diachronic, but rather descriptive.
There is another variant te, after words ending in /a/, but this seems not to be a general morphophonological rule of the language, and rather idiosyncratic to this particular particle. Moreover, the particles are stressed independently and show no prosodic dependency.
This does of course not entail that this issue has not been discussed in the theoretical literature for instance with respect to clitics (see e.g. Spencer and Luís 2012 for an overview), approaches based on co-phonologies and prosodically dominant versus recessive affixes (see e.g. Inkelas 1998) as well as in the literature on affixoids (Booij, p.c.—see also Stevens 2005; Booij 2010). Nevertheless, American languages have often been underrepresented in the more theoretical debates.
Abbreviations
- a :
-
subject of transitive verb
- abs :
-
absolutive
- abst :
-
absential
- acc :
-
accusative
- av :
-
affix vowel
- comp :
-
complementizer
- compl :
-
completive
- dat :
-
dative
- dir :
-
direct
- du :
-
dual
- emph :
-
emphatic
- erg :
-
ergative
- evid :
-
evidential
- foc :
-
focus
- gen :
-
genitive
- g-word:
-
grammatical word
- ind :
-
indicative
- intr :
-
intransitive
- irr :
-
irrealis
- loc :
-
locative
- m :
-
masculine
- n :
-
neuter
- neg :
-
negative
- nom :
-
nominative
- ns :
-
nominal suffix
- pfv :
-
perfective
- pl :
-
plural
- poss :
-
possessed
- prf :
-
perfect
- prog :
-
progressive
- prs :
-
present
- pst :
-
past
- p-word:
-
phonological word
- rel :
-
relativizer
- sg :
-
singular
- ta :
-
transitive animate
- thm :
-
theme
- top :
-
topic
- tr :
-
transitivizer
- tv :
-
theme vowel
- ver :
-
veracity
References
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2002). A grammar of Tariana. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Anderson, S. R. (2005). Aspects of the theory of clitics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bickel, B., Hildebrandt, K., & Schiering, R. (2009). The distribution of phonological word domains: a probabilistic typology. In J. Grijzenhout & B. Kabak (Eds.), Phonological domains: universals and deviations (pp. 47–75). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Booij, G. (1983). Principles and parameters in prosodic phonology. Linguistics, 21, 249–280.
Booij, G. (1999). The phonology of Dutch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Booij, G. (2009). Lexical integrity as a formal universal: a constructionist view. In S. Scalise, E. Magni, & A. Bisetto (Eds.), Universals of language today (pp. 83–100). Dordrecht: Springer.
Booij, G. (2010). Construction morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brown, D., Chumakina, M., & Corbett, G. (Eds.) (2012). Canonical morphology and syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Corbett, G. (2005). The canonical approach in typology. In Z. Frajzyngier, A. Hodges, & D. S. Rood (Eds.), Studies in language companion series: Vol. 72. Linguistic diversity and language theories (pp. 25–49). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Corbett, G. (2006). Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
da Cruz, A. (2011). Fonologia e gramática do Nheengatú: a língua geral falada pelos povos Baré, Warakena e Baniwa. Utrecht: LOT.
Dixon, R. M. W. (1977). Some phonological rules in Yidiny. Linguistic Inquiry, 8(1), 1–34.
Dixon, R. M. W. (2002). The Jarawara language of Southern Amazonia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dixon, R. M. W. & Aikhenvald, A. Y. (Eds.) (2002). Word: a cross-linguistic typology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dryer, M. (2013). Coding of nominal plurality. In M. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (Eds.), World atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available online at: http://wals.info/chapter/33. Accessed on 2013-11-21.
Elbert, S. H., & Pukui, M. K. (1979). Hawaiian grammar. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Faller, M. (2002). Semantics and pragmatics of evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.
Guillaume, A. (2008). A grammar of Cavineña. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hall, T. A. (1999). The phonological word: a review. In T. A. Hall & U. Kleinhenz (Eds.), Studies on the phonological word (pp. 1–22). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hall, T. A., Hildebrandt, K. A., & Bickel, B. (2008). Introduction: theory and typology of the word. Linguistics, 46(2), 183–192.
Haspelmath, M. (2011). The indeterminacy of word segmentation and the nature of morphology and syntax. Folia Linguistica, 45(1), 31–80.
Haude, K. (2006). A grammar of Movima. PhD dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen.
Inkelas, S. (1989). Prosodic constituency in the lexicon. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.
Inkelas, S. (1998). The theoretical status of morphologically conditioned phonology: a case study from dominance. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of morphology. 1997.
Kim, Y. (2008). Topics in the phonology and morphology of San Francisco del Mar Huave. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Magalhães, M. M. S. (2007). Sobre a morfologia e a sintaxe da língua Guajá (família Tupí-Guaraní). PhD dissertation, Universidade de Brasilia.
Matthews, P. H. (1991). Morphology (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McCarthy, J., & Prince, A. (1993). Generalized alignment. In Yearbook of morphology (pp. 79–153).
Mithun, M. (2003). Pronouns and agreement: the information status of pronominal affixes. Transactions of the Philological Society, 101(2), 235–278.
Nespor, M., & Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
Pearce, E. (2012). Number within the DP: a view from Oceanic. In L. Brugé, A. Cardinaletti, G. Giusti, N. Munaro, & C. Poletto (Eds.), Functional heads: the cartography of syntactic structures (Vol. 7, pp. 81–91). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Peperkamp, S. (1997). Prosodic words. Amsterdam: Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics.
Prince, A., & Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality theory: constraint interaction in generative grammar. Unpublished manuscript, available at http://roa.rutgers.edu/files/537-0802/537-0802-PRINCE-0-0.PDF.
Rankin, R., Boyle, J., Graczyk, R., & Koontz, J. (2002). Synchronic and diachronic perspective on ‘word’ in Siouan. In R. M. W. Dixon & A. Y. Aikhenvald (Eds.), Word: a cross-linguistic typology (pp. 180–204). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rice, K. (2011). Principles of affix ordering: an overview. Word Structure, 4(2), 169–200.
Schiering, R., Bickel, B., & Hildebrandt, K. A. (2010). The prosodic word is not universal, but emergent. Journal of Linguistics, 46, 657–709.
Selkirk, E. O. (1984). Phonology and syntax: the relation between sound and structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Selkirk, E. O. (1995). The prosodic structure of function words. In J. Beckman, L. Walsh Dickey, & S. Urbanczyk (Eds.), University of Massachusetts occasional papers: Vol. 18. Papers in optimality theory (pp. 439–469). Amherst, MA: GLSA.
Spencer, A., & Luís, A. (2012). The canonical clitic. In D. Brown, M. Chumakina, & G. G. Corbett (Eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax (pp. 123–150). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stevens, C. M. (2005). Revisiting the affixoid debate: on the grammaticalization of the word. In T. Leuschner, T. Mortelmans, & S. De Groodt (Eds.), Grammatikalisierung im Deutschen (pp. 71–83). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Stump, G. T. (2001). Inflectional morphology: a theory of paradigm structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thomas, D. D. (1962). On defining the ‘word’ in Vietnamese. Văn-Hóa Nguyệt-San, 11, 519–523.
Tuttle, S. (2008). Phonetics and word definition in Ahtna Athabaskan. Linguistics, 46(2), 439–470.
van Gijn, R. (2006). A grammar of Yurakaré. PhD dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen.
Villafañe, L. (2004). Gramática Yuki. PhD dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen.
Wackernagel, J. (1892). Über ein Gesetz der indogermanischen Wortstellung. Indogermanische Forschungen, 1, 333–436.
Wolfart, H. C. (1996). Sketch of Cree, an Algonquian language. In I. Goddard (Ed.), Handbook of North American Indians: Vol. 17. Languages (pp. 390–439). Washington: Smithsonian Institution.
Woodbury, A. (2002). The word in Cup’ik. In R. M. W. Dixon & A. Y. Aikhenvald (Eds.), Word: a cross-linguistic typology (pp. 79–99). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zwicky, A. M. (1977). On clitics. Bloomington: IULC.
Zwicky, A. M. (1985). Clitics and particles. Language, 61(2), 283–305.
Zwicky, A. M., & Pullum, G. K. (1983). Cliticization vs. inflection: English n’t. Language, 59(3), 502–513.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Geert Booij for valuable comments on this paper. All remaining errors are ours.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
van Gijn, R., Zúñiga, F. Word and the Americanist perspective. Morphology 24, 135–160 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-014-9242-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-014-9242-z