the university of chicago the phonology and ... - SIL International
the university of chicago the phonology and ... - SIL International
the university of chicago the phonology and ... - SIL International
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Thus, according to Kam<strong>and</strong>a’s hypo<strong>the</strong>sis, <strong>the</strong> proto-language containing <strong>the</strong><br />
above speech varieties had a plural prefix which was generalized to include most if not<br />
all nouns. Then, in B<strong>and</strong>a (including Mono), <strong>the</strong> prefix ceased to apply to inanimate<br />
forms, leaving traces <strong>of</strong> its presence in certain present-day inanimate nouns in Mono.<br />
Given this hypo<strong>the</strong>sis, one question that remains is <strong>the</strong> presence <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> initial = in <strong>the</strong><br />
adverbs, such as in (9c) above.<br />
Compound nouns. Compounding is a common <strong>and</strong> productive process in Mono<br />
(cf. Kam<strong>and</strong>a, pp. 304ff). Words <strong>and</strong> particles in normal grammatical constructions can<br />
become fused toge<strong>the</strong>r to create new words, examples <strong>of</strong> which will be shown below.<br />
Cloarec-Heiss (p. 140) notes that <strong>the</strong> degree to which compounding occurs correlates<br />
with <strong>the</strong> frequency <strong>of</strong> use <strong>of</strong> a construction. 2 This appears to be <strong>the</strong> case in Mono.<br />
There are different parameters on which we can judge <strong>the</strong> degree <strong>of</strong> compounding<br />
(cf. Cloarec-Heiss, pp. 133ff). First is <strong>the</strong> notion <strong>of</strong> semantic restriction (SR). In a<br />
compounded form, <strong>the</strong> sense <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> word is <strong>of</strong>ten limited compared to <strong>the</strong> original<br />
grammatical construction. For example, <strong>the</strong> compound >K= >K= >K= >K= ‘blindness’ is more restricted<br />
semantically than <strong>the</strong> construction it comes from: K>K K>K == == == == ‘black eye’. Semantic<br />
restriction can occur without a reduction in <strong>the</strong> form <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> construction. For example, <strong>the</strong><br />
noun phrase ((H( ((H( ((H( ((H( =( =( =( =( ‘lit: dry leaf’ has <strong>the</strong> restricted meaning ‘notebook, book’, but no<br />
formal reduction is attested *(H(=( (H(=( (H(=(. (H(=(<br />
Second is <strong>the</strong> notion <strong>of</strong> formal reduction (FR). A compound may be reduced in<br />
structure from <strong>the</strong> original form. The associative noun phrase A(A( A(A( A(A( A(A( ‘fruit (seed + tree)’<br />
may be reduced to A( A(, A( A( in which <strong>the</strong> first vowel <strong>of</strong> each noun is deleted. The loss <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
first vowel in this case is not unexpected, since both <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se nouns are <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> word form<br />
V1CV1. As we saw in Section 6.1, such nouns can be interpreted as having an underlying<br />
2 In fact, Cloarec-Heiss claims that <strong>the</strong> degree <strong>of</strong> compounding is a function <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> frequency <strong>of</strong> use<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> construction, but it is not certain that <strong>the</strong> causality is in this direction.<br />
98
Change language