1 / 26

Andrej A. Kibrik (aakibrik@gmail)

Andrej A. Kibrik (aakibrik@gmail.com). Qualitative morphological complexity: The case of Athabaskan. Growth and Decline of Morphological Complexity April 27, 2012, Leipzig. Athabaskan. About 40 languages in western North America. Most examples: Upper Kuskokwim (Central Alaska).

maxine
Download Presentation

Andrej A. Kibrik (aakibrik@gmail)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Andrej A. Kibrik(aakibrik@gmail.com) Qualitative morphological complexity: The case of Athabaskan Growth and Decline of Morphological Complexity April 27, 2012, Leipzig

  2. Athabaskan • About 40 languages in western North America

  3. Most examples: Upper Kuskokwim (Central Alaska)

  4. Welcome to Nikolai

  5. Crash introduction • Quantitative complexity • Long words • Many categories • Qualitative complexity • Almost exclusive prefixation (unusual) • Derivation and inflection are intermingled • One grammeme is conveyed by several devices • Complex morphophonemics: s+l > j • ...............................

  6. “Standard average Athabaskan” verb template • Between 10 and 20 positions/zones • Lexical and derivational • Mixed/equivocal • Inflectional

  7. Qualitative complexity in Athabaskan • Entangled morphological structure • Many-to-many correspondences between meanings and forms • Extreme anti-agglutination • Case studies: • Vacillating perfective • Travesty inceptive • Chameleonic root

  8. 1. Vacillating perfective: *N- > e-

  9. gh-..-trak ‘cried’ PF shows up in the presence of a pre-root pronoun PF “displaced” by the pre-root pronoun PF present in the absence of a pre-root pronoun

  10. gh-..-di-yish ‘breathed’ PF suddenly shows up

  11. Vacillating perfective: conclusions • Intricate behaviour of the perfective morpheme • Absent in the z-perfective conjugation • Absent in the low transitivity verbs • These two features can possibly be explained by semantic transitivity in the vein of Hopper and Thompson (1980), but not fully • Displaced by some personal pronouns, but not all • Can be explained by formal structure, but not fully • Homophonous to other, entirely different, morphemes in the same part of the verb word • Low predictability on the basis of either semantic or formal factors

  12. 2. Travesty inceptive • Conjunct derivational prefixes: “qualifiers” (Kari 1989) • Surprisingly monotonous in structure: mostly n- and d- • Some other qualifiers, but incomparably rarer

  13. Koyukon (Jette and Jones 2000)

  14. Navajo (Young, Morgan, and Midgette 1992: 851-853)

  15. Inceptive • ghi-s-mał ‘I am swimming’ Prog-1Sg-swim[Prog] • ta-zi-s-manh ‘I am starting to swim’ Inc-Conjug-1Sg-swim[Pf] • ti-ghi-s-mał ‘I will swim’ Inc-Prog-1Sg-swim[Prog] • di-ti-ni-ghi-ł-dey’ ‘I will write’ dQual-Inc-nQual-Prog-[1Sg-]TI-write

  16. Navajo inceptive • d-é-saał ‘I am going to dash’ Inc-1Sg-TI:fly[Pf] • (Young and Morgan 1987: 309) • di-ni-sh-dááh ‘I am getting stuck’ dQual-nQual-1Sg-TI:walk[Impf] • di-dí-née-sh-dááł ‘I will get stuck’ dQual-Inc-nQual:Prog-1Sg-TI:walk[Prog] • (Young and Morgan 1987: 323-325)

  17. Travesty inceptive: conclusions • Already very high polysemy of qualifiers in general Athabaskan • Significant increase in polysemy in Navajo: the highly productive and semantically transparent inceptive prefix merges, violating the principles of historical phonology, with the vast range of other, etymologically unrelated, prefixes • Impossible to define the qualifier positions in semantic/functional terms • These are positions for various conjunct derivational prefixes • In an extreme, we face the “d-position” and the “n-position” • It IS complexity: opacity of form, entropy

  18. 3. Chameleonic root

  19. Suffixation treatment (Axelrod)

  20. If you think this is not chameleonic enough • One Koyukon verb root (Jette and Jones 2000: 17)

  21. Chameleonic root: conclusions • Diachronically: • suffixation, dependent on “mode” and lexical aspect • Synchronically: • suffixes can only be partly discerned • extreme allomorphy of verb root • allomorphy is irregular • Many-to-many correspondences between meanings and forms • One meaning (e.g. imperfective) is conveyed by many suffixes • One suffix corresponds to several mode-aspect combinations

  22. What all this is good for? • Awe and pity • General theory of morphological complexity • Typology of morphological complexity

  23. Theory: Kinds of simplicity vs. complexity • Quantitative simplicity vs. complexity • Number of relevant phenomena (e.g. Nichols 2009) • Qualitative simplicity vs. complexity • Transparency vs. entaglement of structure • Roughly, one-to-one vs. many-to-many correspondence between meanings and forms • Structural order vs. entropy • Agglutination vs. non-agglutination

  24. Qualitative complexity resulting from diachronic processes intricate distribution  

  25. Typology of languages:disposition to complexity • Various languages have various degrees of tolerance to complexity • Some languages do not wait too long to restructure and simplify structure, when too much complexity accrues • But some other languages seem to “like” complexity, and even increase it in the domains that are already very complex • This may be a typological parameter

  26. Athabaskan • In terms of quantitative complexity, Athabaskan is not the champion (Nichols 2009) • In terms of qualitative complexity, I suspect that Athabaskan is a candidate for championship • This may be related to peculiar social/cultural factors • Note the Athabaskan resistance even to lexical borrowing • Athabaskan cultures tend to bring language contact to a minimum • This kind of linguistic communities can be expected to accumulate complexity

More Related