here - 5th International Conference on Bantu Languages

Recommendations

Info

Demonstratives in Mozambican Ngoni Heidrun Kröger SIL Moçambique heidrun_kroeger@sil.org This paper presents data on the demonstratives of a hitherto unstudied Bantu language, Mozambican Ngoni (N.10). Ngoni has a person-oriented demonstrative system (Diessel 1999) with two additional factors that are morphologically distinguished: physical contact and visibility. Hence, the distinction is fivefold: near the speaker with physical contact / general near the speaker / near the hearer / far from both, but within view / general far. Apart from these forms t<strong>here</strong> is also a separate identificational proximal demonstrative, as well as emphatic forms. These forms are shortly introduced according to their semantic features, their morphological make-up and their position in the noun phrase. It is shown that while the main position of the demonstrative is phrase-finally, but remarkably, demonstratives can occur pre- and post-nominally as well, and may appear up to three times within the same noun phrase. As for the usage in discourse, two of the five basic demonstratives, the general distal and the medial are used endophorically in texts to indicate definiteness; the distal in the case of anaphoric reference, the medial in the case of associative anaphora, establishing relative clauses and other situations of definiteness in the immediate discourse. Diessel, Holger. 1999. Demonstratives. Form, Function and Grammaticalization. [Typological Studies in Language 42]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. GS
Domain‐sensitivity in High Tone Spreading in two Xitsonga dialects Seunghun Lee (ZAS , Central Connecticut State Univ.) juliolee@gmail.com and Elisabeth Selkirk (University of Massachussetts Amherst ) selkirk@linguist.umass.edu Domain-related restrictions on H Tone Spread (HTS) in a dialect of Xitsonga that is spoken in Mozambique are described and analyzed in Kisseberth 1994 (Xitsonga I), and reanalyzed in Selkirk 2011, who argues for a modular treatment of these domain‐related restrictions involving (a) a constraint‐based analysis of the formation of prosodic structure and (b) a constraint‐based analysis of the relation between prosodic structure and tone. Recent investigation by this paper’s authors of a variety of Xitsonga spoken in Limpopo province, South Africa (= Xitsonga II) provides support for this modular treatment. Xitsonga II and Xitsonga I arguably display the same organization of sentences into phonological phrases () and intonational phrases (). But, as will be seen in this paper, their grammars differ in the manner in which the right edge of restricts HTS, as specifiable in a theory of domain‐sensitivity in the constraints on HTS. In both varieties of Xitsonga, lexically headed syntactic phrases match up with surface phonological phrases () due to the S‐P constituency correspondence constraint Match(LexP,), except if the phrase contains of only a single prosodic word (), suggesting the ranking in Xitsonga of BinMin(,) >> Match LexP (Selkirk 2011), cf. (1ab) vs. (2ab) below. Moreover, the markedness constraint Strong Start (Selkirk 2011, Elfner 2012) forces the nonisomorphic prosodic grouping of verb and first object in (4), explainable if Match LexP >> Strong Start. Assuming this grammar of prosodic structure formation, in combination with a simple domain‐sensitive phonology w<strong>here</strong> HTS will be blocked when outranked by certain constraints on the tone‐prosodic structure relation, provides a satisfying analysis of the distribution of HTS in Xitsonga I, as illustrated in the representations in (1‐3): (1) a. CP[ V/TP[ V[ va H ‐a‐tisa]V NP[ N[xi‐hontlovila ]N ]NP ]V/TP ]CP b. ( ( ( v‐aH‐ ‐tisa) (xi‐hontlovii ‐Hla )) ) ‘They are bringing a giant’ (2) a. CP[V/TP[ V[vaH ‐a‐susa]V NP[ N[n‐guluve [taH NP[ N[vonaH ]N ]NP]NP ]V/TP ]C b. ( ((vaH‐ ‐a‐susa ‐H) ( (n‐guluve) (!taH vo!naH) ) ) ‘They are removing their pig (= a/the pig of theirs).’ (3) a. CP[V/TP[vaH ‐a‐xavela]V νP[NP[N[ xi‐phukuphuku] NP[N[ fole ]N]NP]νP]V/TP]CP b. ( (( ( vaH‐‐xavela) (xi‐phukuphu ‐H ku)) (foole) ) ) ‘Theyarebuyingtobaccoforafool’ Embodying ‐domain‐edge sensitivity in constraints like NonFinality(H, ..) (Kisseberth 1994) and CrispEdgeR/L(H,..) (Ito & Mester 1999) permits a simple account of language‐particular differences in HTS of the sort attested in Xitsonga I and II. CrispEdgeL(H, ) prevents a multiply‐linked H from spanning a left ‐edge in (2) in both varieties. As for NonFinality, in both t<strong>here</strong> is no effect at the ‐level, as seen for Xitsonga I in the verb in (2). In Xitsonga I, NonFinality(H,) can block H from spreading to the last syllable of both the ‐final in (1) and the ‐medial in (3). In Xitsonga II, though, t<strong>here</strong> is no NonFinality on the medial in (3); instead H spreads up to the very edge of . Nonfinality(H,) will ensure that H spreads to only the penult in structures like (1), but it’s the ‐edge sensitive CrispEdgeR(H,) that must be responsible for the blocking of HTS thru the medial right ‐edge in (3) in Xitsonga II. GS
Page 5 and 6:
Remarks on the nasal classes in Mun
Page 7 and 8:
En ce qui concerne le couple 9/10,
Page 9 and 10:
Pourtant, la segmentation morphéma
Page 11:
Nasal Noun Class Prefixes in Bantu:
Page 16 and 17:
Toward an understanding of TAM in M
Page 18:
Persistence and Remoteness in the B
Page 22 and 23:
WS3 Pakendorf, B., K. Bostoen and C
Page 24 and 25:
New Bayesian Bantu phylogeny Rebecc
Page 26 and 27: Remarques sur l’introduction du
Page 28 and 29: The origin and genetic affiliation
Page 30: Tracking the Bantu migrations in ti
Page 34 and 35: WS4 Lexical and grammatical tone in
Page 39 and 40: Martine Adda-Decker 1 , Martial Emb
Page 41 and 42: Prosodic Phrasing in Copperbelt Bem
Page 43 and 44: of Bakola. Unpublished Ms. Nurse, D
Page 45 and 46: Lehrer, A. 1985. The Influence of S
Page 47 and 48: Negation and cartography in Tiriki
Page 49 and 50: Khumalo, J.S.M. (1981) Zulu tonolog
Page 51 and 52: Nasal prefix evolution in Kikongo b
Page 53 and 54: Lost, retained or reintroduced:nasa
Page 55 and 56: Reciprocal/antipassive polysemy in
Page 57 and 58: Les consonnes implosives dans les l
Page 59 and 60: On embedded questions in Tumbuka La
Page 61 and 62: Abstract of proposed paper for Bant
Page 63 and 64: Automatic detection of copulatives
Page 65 and 66: Nominal licensing and nominal morph
Page 67 and 68: Bàsàa object left-dislocation, to
Page 69 and 70: The Causative-Instrumental Syncreti
Page 71 and 72: The Mental Representation of Setswa
Page 73 and 74: Tone in Two Elomwe Dialects in Zamb
Page 75: Ntihirageza, Jeanine. 1993. Kirundi
Page 79 and 80: Tonal Processes in the Setswana Ver
Page 81 and 82: Tons lexicaux et tons intonatifs en
Page 83 and 84: LA TRANSITIVITÉ EN ATSI, UN DIALEC
Page 85 and 86: The impact of sociolinguistic facto
Page 87 and 88: Swahili coordinated infinitives Kri
Page 89 and 90: Functions of Rhetorical Questions i
Page 91 and 92: Schadeberg, Thilo C. 1995. Spiranti
Page 93 and 94: Titre : BantU, bantI, bantA : les v
Page 95 and 96: Upstep in Mbugwe (F34) Vera Wilhelm
Page 97 and 98: Asymmetries and Locality in Zulu ri
Page 100 and 101: PS Anatomie et physiologie humaine
Page 102 and 103: High tone spreading in four Sotho-T
Page 104 and 105: Modifications des courbes tonales e
Page 106 and 107: Informational Prominence in Kol Bon
Page 108 and 109: Bantu grammatical description from
Page 110 and 111: Typologie de la réduplication dans
Page 112 and 113: L’applicatif en kikongo véhicula
Page 114 and 115: Noun Phrase Structure in Shimwela J
Page 116 and 117: Dialectal Variations in Limbum. Lim
Page 118 and 119: Labial /f/ can be glotalized in Nor
Page 123: A typology of Bantu subject inversi
show all

here - 5th International Conference on Bantu Languages

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?