[Thesis].University of Nijmegen;2000.
Abstract
This thesis is an investigation of the semantic and syntactic properties of simple
and complex verbs in Jaminjung and Ngaliwurru, two closely related varieties of an
Australian language (henceforth simply ‘Jaminjung’). This language exhibits a typologically
unusual characteristic: it has two distinct parts of speech in the function of verbs.
One of them, termed ‘(generic) verbs’ here, is a closed class with around 30 members,
which obligatorily inflect for person and tense/aspect/mood. These may constitute
predicates on their own in a finite clause. ‘Coverbs’, on the other hand, constitute
an open class; they are inherently predicative, but do not inflect. Coverbs may function
as the sole predicate only in non-finite dependent clauses. In finite clauses, they
only occur as part of a complex verb, together with a generic verb.
An interesting consequence of this ‘division of labour’ between coverbs and generic
verbs is that the verbs categorise events. Since a verb from the closed class is obligatory
in every finite clause (either as a simple verb or as part of a complex verb), all
event expressions are sorted into one of a small number of categories by the choice
of generic verb. This type of overt categorisation is comparable to that found in
the domain of entity expressions in languages with nominal classification.
Two major, interrelated questions are addressed in this study. The first question
concerns the conceptual basis for the categorisation of events by generic verbs. The
second question concerns the syntactic and semantic conditions on complex verb formation,
or, put differently, the contribution of verb and coverb, respectively, to the interpretation
of a complex verb.
Chapter 1 contains background information on the language and its situation. Jaminjung
is spoken today only by around 100, mainly older, people, and no longer acquired by
children. Written documentation is very scarce, and this thesis is based mainly on
the fieldwork of the author.
The theoretical and methodological basis for the investigation are also laid out in
the first chapter. It assumes a construction-based model of grammar, that is, grammatical
structures are regarded as schematic complex signs. For the semantic analysis, monosemy
is assumed as a heuristic principle. Polysemy is recognised where necessary, but where
it is possible, more specific interpretations are derived from contextual information
or general pragmatic principles.
Chapter 2 describes the essential grammatical features of Jaminjung insofar as they
are necessary for the understanding of the examples and the argumentation. In this
chapter it is also demonstrated that coverbs constitute a major lexical category whose
members differ not only from generic verbs, but also from nominals in their morpho-syntactic
properties.
Chapter 3 deals with simple and complex predicate constructions. Simple verbs consist
of a generic verb functioning as a predicate on its own. A comparison of the text
frequency of the different constructions reveals that in 40% of all finite clauses
the predicate is a simple verb, despite the small number of verbs that are available
in this function. Canonical complex verbs are defined as the combination of one or
sometimes two unmarked coverb(s) and a verb, in a single intonation unit. It is argued
that complex verbs are both part of the lexicon (in that they are, in their majority
at least, conventionalised expressions), and part of the grammar (in that they are
semantically compositional and instantiations of a productive construction). Closely
related to the canonical complex verb construction is the progressive construction,
where the coverb is marked as ‘continuous’. Canonical complex verbs are also distinguished
from constructions where the (marked) coverb functions as a secondary predicate, or
where an (unmarked) coverb functions as a ‘semi-independent’ predicate in an intonation
unit on its own. In a final subchapter, strategies of integrating loans from Kriol
– an English-based creole spoken in Northern Australia – are discussed. A frequent
strategy is to employ Kriol verbs as coverbs; these forms, just like Jaminjung coverbs,
are combined with one of the generic verbs in a canonical complex verb construction.
Simple and complex verbs both encode unitary events, defined as conceptual units that
correspond to units of packaging in speech. In the case of complex verbs, the event
may comprise subevents. However, the complex verb construction itself does not allow
any conclusions about the semantic relationship between its constituents. In the remaining
chapters, the meaning of verbs and coverbs, and their semantic relationship in canonical
complex verbs, is investigated more closely.
Chapter 4 is devoted to the argument structure of generic verbs, coverbs and complex
verbs. According to the construction-based model that is employed, argument expressions
(in Jaminjung both case-marked noun phrases and pronominal prefixes on the verb) are
not directly predicted from the valency of the predicate, but are considered as constructions
in their own right. In this approach, valency is defined in semantic terms as the
number and type of semantic participants. Central participants can be operationally
defined, for Jaminjung, as those participants which are encoded obligatorily and/or
as core arguments (personal prefixes or absolutive noun phrases) in all uses of a
given predicate. This criterion is particularly relevant in determining the valency
of coverbs, since they usually do not enter argument structure constructions on their
own, but only in combination with a verb.
The semantic participants of predicates are linked to independently existing argument
structure constructions on the basis of the compatibility of the participant’s role
with the constructional meaning. This approach allows for a unified solution of a
number of problems in the syntactic analysis of Jaminjung. These include the complex
interaction of pronominal prefixes and case-marked noun phrases, the use of the same
‘ergative’ case to mark agents and instruments, and the representation of ‘agents’
not only by ergative-marked noun phrases, but also by noun phrases bearing a contrastive
agent marker different from the ergative, and by unmarked (absolutive) noun phrases.
In particular, the construction grammar approach allows for a simple and elegant representation
of argument sharing in complex predicates: this can be described as the linking of
one participant of a verb and a coverb, respectively, to a single morpho-syntactic
argument expression. Thus, for example, the single participant of a monovalent coverb
can receive very different expressions depending on whether it aligns with the single
participant of a monovalent verb, the first participant of a bivalent verb, or the
second participant of a bivalent or trivalent verb. In the account developed here,
it is not necessary to postulate polysemy for the coverb in cases like these. Rather,
the differences in argument structure result from the different contributions of the
generic verb and the argument structure construction itself to the complex expression.
In Chapter 5, the meaning and use of each of the generic verbs are examined in some
detail in order to adduce evidence for the claim that the choice of a verb amounts
to an act of categorisation, and that the verbs do not classify coverbs, but events.
In other words, the categorising function of generic verbs is not restricted to their
use in complex verbs. As simple verbs they describe an event of a specific general
type, but may receive a more specific interpretation in context. As part of a complex
verb they categorise the event encoded jointly by coverb and verb. Evidence for this
view comes, first, from the fact that most coverbs combine with more than one verb,
that is, the coverbs are not associated with a single ‘classifying’ verb (!). Second,
even loans which are integrated into Jaminjung as coverbs are combined with verbs
productively. Third, the generic verbs can generally be shown to have the same meaning
both as simple verbs and as part of most complex verbs. This finding contrasts with
the widely accepted view that in languages of this type, verbs, when part of complex
verbs, are semantically empty and are mere carriers of verbal inflections, comparable
to auxiliaries. This is not to say that verbs are never polysemous. Their secondary
senses, if any, can however be related to their basic sense by regular semantic shifts
due to processes such as metaphor, metonymy, and semantic bleaching (i.e. loss of
semantic components).
The main semantic components of the generic verbs – which are at the same time the
features that are relevant for event categorisation in Jaminjung – include the number
of salient participants in an event (reflected in the valency of the verb that is
used), and the components of location, change of location and locomotion, contact
and affectedness, transfer of an entity to, or away from, a third participant, and
‘internal cause’, and (to some extent) telicity. There are also verbs available to
express ingestion, visual perception, and creation. For locomotion events, further
distinctions pertain to the direction of motion and the involvement of a concomitant
participant. For events of contact and affectedness, mere contact is distinguished
from impact, and impact events are further subdivided according to the shape and trajectory
of the agent/instrument making the impact (e.g. ‘with a pointed end’, ‘with an edge’,
‘with the foot’). Some types of affectedness by non-physical means as well as change
of state, non-visual perception, and memory are covered by secondary senses of a number
of verbs. The use of the verbs is, however, not motivated through their meaning alone,
but also through the paradigmatic oppositions to other verbs that they enter into,
and the application of general pragmatic principles. The resulting system of categorisation,
while based on components which are often described as corresponding to ‘basic’ events,
is quite language-specific.
Chapter 6 deals with the meaning of the coverbs, and accounts for their use in complex
verbs. Coverbs are divided into formal classes on the grounds of their possibility
to combine with the same set of verbs. It is argued that coverbs belonging to the
same formal class also form a semantically coherent set, and that these classes largely
correspond to predicate classes found in other languages. In the case of the coverbs,
too, the principle of monosemy is applied, such that the meaning of a coverb is taken
to correspond to only those components that are present in all of its combinations
with verbs. The unification of meaning components of coverbs and verbs in canonical
complex verbs is then investigated for coverbs from each class. It turns out that
the semantic relationships encountered in complex verbs can be of various types. The
verb may be semantically included in the coverb, it may show partial semantic overlap
with the coverb, or coverb and verb may not overlap at all semantically. In the latter
case, the coverb is interpreted as expressing a phase of the event described by the
verb, a manner in which it is performed, or a resulting event (where the causing event
is expressed by the verb). With motion verbs, the reading can also simply be one of
‘associated motion’, i.e. motion simultaneous with, or followed by, another event.
However, these differences should be seen as differences in semantic interpretation
only; formally, all complex verbs instantiate a single type of complex verb construction.
In Chapter 7, the findings of the previous chapters are summarised and placed in an
areal and typological context. First, Jaminjung is compared to other Northern Australian
languages with similar types of complex predicates. Comparative evidence is adduced
for a diachronic scenario where larger verb systems get reduced to a small class of
verbs which eventually gets extended again through complete lexicalisation of (previously)
complex predicates.
Second, the nature of coverbs, generic verbs, and complex verbs is examined from a
cross-linguistic perspective. It is argued that coverb-verb combinations of the type
found in Jaminjung and a number of other Northern Australian languages, although they
bear many functional similarities with other types of complex predicates such as serial
verbs, particle verbs or light verb constructions, should be considered a distinct
type of complex predicate. Finally, it is pointed out that Jaminjung only ‘codifies’
in its lexicon and grammar a tendency that can be observed in many other languages,
and perhaps even universally. In spoken, spontaneous discourse speakers tend to rely
on a rather small class of semantically general high-frequency verbs, which may or
may not be combined with other — often non-finite — elements. What is distinctive
about Jaminjung and other Northern Australian languages is that the semantically most
generic verbs with the highest frequency form a distinct part of speech and moreover
participate in a system of overt event categorisation.
Bibliographic metadata
Table of contents:
CONTENTS
Abbreviations and conventions xiii
Maps 1
1 Introduction 3
1.1 Overview 3
1.2 Jaminjung and Ngaliwurru and their speakers 7
1.2.1 Language names and genetic affiliation 7
1.2.2 Geographical location 10
1.2.3 Social organisation 11
1.2.4 Contact history 12
1.2.5 Present-day speech community 14
1.3 Fieldwork and data 16
1.3.1 Previous research on the language 16
1.3.2 Fieldwork setting 17
1.3.3 Contributors 18
1.3.4 Kinds of data, and methods of data collection 20
1.4 Theoretical framework 24
1.4.1 The construction-based approach to grammar 24
1.4.1.1 Defining constructions 25
1.4.1.2 The construction grammar approach to argument structure 27
1.4.1.3 The relationship between grammar and lexicon 30
1.4.2 The representation of meaning 32
1.4.2.1 The nature of lexical meaning 32
1.4.2.2 Monosemy vs. Polysemy 34
1.4.2.3 The contribution of pragmatics to interpretation 35
1.4.3 The notion of ‘event’ 38
Essential grammatical features of Jaminjung and Ngaliwurru 41
2.1 Phonology 42
2.1.1 Phoneme inventory 42
2.1.2 Phonotactic constraints 43
2.1.3 Morpho-phonological alternations 44
2.1.4 Stress 44
2.2 Nominals 45
2.2.1 The noun phrase 45
2.2.2 Nominal subclasses 48
2.2.2.1 Free pronouns 48
2.2.2.2 Nouns 48
2.2.2.3 Adjectival nominals 49
2.2.2.4 Adverbial nominals 50
2.2.2.5 Demonstratives 51
2.2.3 Nominal morphology 52
2.2.3.1 Reduplication 52
2.2.3.2 Derivational suffixes 53
2.2.3.2.1 ngarna ‘ASSOCiative’ 53
2.2.3.2.2 gina ‘Function’ (= POSS) 54
2.2.3.2.3 mawu ‘HABITAT’ 54
2.2.3.2.4 nguji ‘ETC’ 55
2.2.3.3 Case suffixes 55
2.2.3.3.1 Absolutive (unmarked nominal) 58
2.2.3.3.2 ni ~ di ‘ERGative/INSTRumental’ 58
2.2.3.3.3 gu ~ wu ‘DATive’ 59
2.2.3.3.4 ngulung ‘PURPosive’ 59
2.2.3.3.5 garni ~ warni ‘MOTIVative’ 60
2.2.3.3.6 nyunga ‘ORIGIN’ (Jam.) 60
2.2.3.3.7 ngunyi (Jam.) / giyag (Ngali) ‘ABLative’ 62
2.2.3.3.8 bina ‘ALLative’ 62
2.2.3.3.9 gi ~ g (Jam.) / gi ~ ni (Ngali) ‘LOCative’ 63
2.2.3.2.10 mindij ‘TIME’ 64
2.2.3.3.11 mij ‘COMITative’ 64
2.2.3.3.12 gina ‘POSSessive/function’ 64
2.2.3.3.13 julu ~ yulu ‘GENitive’ 65
2.2.3.4 Proprietive and privative suffixes 65
2.2.3.4.1 burru ~ wurru ‘PROPRietive’ 66
2.2.3.4.2 marnany (Jam.) / miyardi (Ngali) ‘PRIVative’ 66
2.2.4 Form and function of free personal pronouns 67
2.2.4.1 Pronominal forms 67
2.2.4.2 Functions of the absolutive pronominal stems 68
2.2.4.2.1 The absolutive stem as absolutive noun phrase 68
2.2.4.2.2 The absolutive stem as basis for ergative & ablative agent marking 68
2.2.4.2.3 Adversative use of absolutive pronouns 69
2.2.4.2.4 Evidential use of absolutive dual inclusive pronoun 70
2.2.4.3 Functions of the oblique pronominal stems 70
2.2.4.3.1 Oblique pronominals representing an indirectly affected participant 71
2.2.4.3.2 Oblique pronominals cross-referencing the predication base in ascriptive
verbless clauses 72
2.2.4.3.3 Oblique pronominal clitics as part of the bound pronominal paradigm in Jaminjung 72
2.2.4.4 Functions of possessive pronominal stems 73
2.3 Coverbs 73
2.3.1 The coverb as a distinct lexical category 75
2.3.1.1 Coverb and adverbs 76
2.3.1.2 Properties distinguishing coverbs from nominals 77
2.3.1.3 Coverbal pro-forms 80
2.3.2 Coverb morphology 81
2.3.2.1 Reduplication 81
2.3.2.2 mayan ‘CONTinuous’ 83
2.3.2.3 Nominalisation 85
2.3.2.3.1 bari ~ wari ‘QUALity nominaliser’ 85
2.3.2.3.2 ngarna ‘ASSOCiative’ 85
2.3.2.3.3 gina ‘Function nominaliser’ (= ‘POSS’) 86
2.3.2.4 Verbless negatives with marnany (Jam.) / miyardi (Ngali) ‘PRIVative’ 86
2.4 Generic verbs 87
2.4.1 Generic verb morphology 88
2.4.1.1 REFLexive/reciprocal derivation 89
2.4.1.2 Bound pronominals 89
2.4.1.2.1 Intransitive bound pronominals 90
2.4.1.2.2 Transitive bound pronominals 91
2.4.1.3 Tense, aspect and mood 96
2.4.1.3.1 Mood 96
2.4.1.3.1.1 b(V)- ~ w(V)- Potential/FUTure 96
2.4.1.3.1.2 ya- IRRealis 98
2.4.1.3.1.3 ba- IMPerative 99
2.4.1.3.2 Tense and aspect 99
2.4.1.3.2.1 PRESent 99
2.4.1.3.2.2 PaST perfective 100
2.4.1.3.2.3 Past IMPerFective 100
2.4.2 Generic verb stems 101
2.4.2.1 Etymological remarks 101
2.4.2.2 Dialectal differences 103
2.4.2.3 Stem allomorphy 103
2.4.2.4 Overview of verb stems 105
2.5 Particles, clitics, and interjections 108
2.5.1 Particles 108
2.5.2 Clitics 109
2.5.3 Interjections 111
2.6 The clause 112
2.6.1 The nature of the ‘clause’ 113
2.6.2 Verbal clauses 113
2.6.3 Verbless clauses 115
2.6.4 Finite subordinate clauses 116
2.6.5 Non-finite subordinate clauses 116
2.6.5.1 Dative-marked purposive clause 117
2.6.5.2 Allative-marked purposive clause 118
2.6.5.3 Allative-marked secondary predicates 118
2.6.5.4 Origin-marked resultative clauses 119
2.6.5.5 Ablative-marked clauses 120
2.6.5.5 Temporal-marked clauses 121
2.7 Summary 121
3 Simple and complex predicates 123
3.1 Simple verbs as main predicates 123
3.2 Canonical complex verbs 124
3.2.1 Prosody 125
3.2.2 Word order 126
3.2.3 Morphological marking and negation 130
3.2.4 Argument structure 132
3.2.5 Summary 134
3.3 Complex verb constructions with marked coverbs 135
3.3.1 The progressive construction 135
3.3.2 Other verbs combined with continuous-marked coverbs 138
3.3.3 Cotemporal-marked coverbs as secondary predicates 140
3.4 Coverbs as semi-independent predicates 142
3.4.1 Coverbs with imperative illocutionary force 143
3.4.2 Coverbs as semi-independent predicates in narrative sequence 143
3.4.3 Unmarked coverbs as secondary predicates 145
3.4.4 Phase coverbs as semi-independent predicates 147
3.5 The integration of Kriol loans in complex verbs 149
3.5.1 Kriol verbs borrowed as coverbs 149
3.5.2 Jaminjung coverbs with Kriol verbs 150
3.6 Summary 151
4 Argument structure of simple and complex verbs 153
4.1 A construction-based approach to Jaminjung argument structure 156
4.1.1 Problems of identifying core arguments 156
4.1.2 Representing double-marking 160
4.1.3 Central participants of verbs and coverbs 163
4.2 Main argument structure constructions 171
4.2.1 Some case-marking constructions 171
4.2.1.1 Ergative-marked noun phrases 171
4.2.1.2 Ablative-marking of agents 175
4.2.1.3 Absolutive noun phrases 177
4.2.1.4 Dative-marked noun phrases 181
4.2.2 Bound pronominal constructions 183
4.2.2.1 Transitive bound pronominals 183
4.2.2.1.1 Functions of Actor marking 183
4.2.2.1.2 Functions of Undergoer marking 185
4.2.2.1.3 ‘Dummy’ Undergoer prefix with monovalent complex verbs 188
4.2.2.2 Intransitive bound pronominals 191
4.2.3 Other constructions 192
4.2.3.1 The part-whole construction 192
4.2.3.2 The quotation construction 194
4.2.3.3 Coverbs as propositional ‘arguments’ 197
4.2.4 Summary 199
4.3 Patterns of argument sharing in complex verbs 200
4.3.1 Argument sharing with monovalent verbs 200
4.3.1.1 Monovalent coverbs 200
4.3.1.2 Bivalent coverbs with yu ‘BE’ and ijga ‘GO’ as auxiliary verbs 203
4.3.2 Argument sharing with bivalent verbs 204
4.3.2.1 Monovalent coverbs aligning with A 205
4.3.2.2 Monovalent coverbs aligning with U 207
4.3.2.3 Bivalent coverbs 210
4.3.2.4 Argument sharing of bivalent verbs with more than one coverb 211
4.3.2.5 Argument sharing of bivalent verbs with trivalent coverbs 212
4.3.3 Argument sharing with trivalent verbs 213
4.3.3.1 Monovalent coverbs 213
4.3.3.2 Bivalent coverbs 214
4.3.3.3 Trivalent coverbs 216
4.4 Summary 217
5 Semantics and use of the generic verbs 221
5.1 Introduction 221
5.1.1 The classificatory function of generic verbs 222
5.1.2 Organisation of the chapter 228
5.2.1 yu ‘BE’ 232
5.2.1.1 Existence, location and position 232
5.2.1.2 Auxiliary function 235
5.2.2 muwa ‘HAVE’ 237
5.2.3 irdba ‘FALL’ 240
5.2.3.1 Change of locative relation 241
5.2.3.2 Metaphorical uses: birth, death, sickness 247
5.2.4 arra ‘PUT’ 248
5.2.4.1 Caused change of locative relation 249
5.2.4.2 Transformation and conventional naming 252
5.2.4.3 Transfer of a message 254
5.2.4.4 Induced change of configuration 255
5.2.4.5 Other uses 258
5.2.4.6 arra ‘PUT’: Summary 259
5.2.5 Verbs of location, possession, and change of locative relation: Summary 261
5.3 Verbs of locomotion 263
5.3.1 General properties of verbs of locomotion 264
5.3.1.1 Definition of ‘locomotion’ 264
5.3.1.2 Argument structure of locomotion verbs 264
5.3.1.3 Locomotion verbs with coverbs of manner and path 266
5.3.1.4 Locomotion verbs in complex verbs of associated motion 267
5.3.2 ijga ‘GO’ 270
5.3.2.1 General locomotion 270
5.3.2.2 Change of state 273
5.3.2.3 Auxiliary function 274
5.3.2.4 ijga ‘GO’: Summary 276
5.3.3 ruma ‘COME’ 278
5.3.4 uga ‘TAKE’ 281
5.3.4.1 Accompanied locomotion 281
5.3.4.2 Habitual/prolonged spatial contiguity 283
5.3.4.3 Remembering and Hearing 285
5.3.4.4 Applying force with the body weight 288
5.3.4.5 Other uses 291
5.3.4.6 uga ‘TAKE’: Summary 291
5.3.5 anJama ‘BRING’ 292
5.3.6 unga ‘LEAVE’ 293
5.3.7 arrga ‘APPROACH’ 296
5.3.8 wardagarra ‘FOLLOW’ 298
5.3.9 Verbs of locomotion: Summary 299
5.4 Verbs of contact/force 305
5.4.1 mili / angu ‘GET/HANDLE’ 306
5.4.1.1 Affectedness and contact 307
5.4.1.1.1 Range of uses 307
5.4.1.1.2 mili / angu ‘GET/HANDLE’ and arra ‘PUT’ as functional antonyms 312
5.4.1.2 Perception by the lower senses 315
5.4.1.3 Non-physical interaction 316
5.4.1.4 Attempted or failed contact 318
5.4.1.5 Other uses 320
5.4.1.6 mili / angu ‘GET/HANDLE’: Summary 321
5.4.2 ma ‘HIT’ 322
5.4.2.1 Affectedness by impact 323
5.4.2.2 Complete affectedness 328
5.4.2.3 Emerging 332
5.4.2.4 ma ‘HIT’: Summary 333
5.4.3 ina(ngga) ‘CHOP’ 334
5.4.4 inama ‘KICK/STEP’ 338
5.4.5 ijja / yaluga ‘POKE’ 341
5.4.6 wa ‘BITE’ 344
5.4.7 wardgiya ‘THROW’ 347
5.4.8 Verbs of contact/force: Summary 352
5.5 Verbs of heating/ burning 356
5.5.1 irna ‘BURN’ 356
5.5.2 irriga ‘COOK’ 358
5.6 The polyfunctional verb yu(nggu) ‘SAY/DO’ 363
5.6.1 Uses of yu(nggu) ‘SAY/DO’ 364
5.6.1.1 Speech and sound emission 364
5.6.1.1.1 Speech Framing 364
5.6.1.1.2 Sound emission and speech acts 365
5.6.1.2 Motion 366
5.6.1.2.1 Internal motion 366
5.6.1.2.2 Locomotion 366
5.6.1.3 Bodily and emotional condition 367
5.6.1.4 ‘Throwing’ 368
5.6.1.5 Performance 369
5.6.1.6 Inchoative 370
5.6.2 yu(nggu) ‘SAY/DO’: Polysemy or monosemy? 371
5.6.2.1 The relationship of verb meaning and constructional meaning: a monosemous
account 372
5.6.2.2 The delimitation of verb meaning: pragmatics or polysemy? 378
5.7 Verbs of caused change of possession 385
5.7.1 ngarna ‘GIVE’ 385
5.7.1.1 Transfer of possession 385
5.7.1.2 Transfer of information 387
5.7.1.3 Reciprocal telling 388
5.7.1.4 Directed action 389
5.7.1.5 ngarna ‘GIVE’: Summary 392
5.7.2 yungga ‘TAKE AWAY’ 393
5.8 Other major verbs 394
5.8.1 ngawu ‘see’ 395
5.8.1.1 Visual perception and direction of gaze 395
5.8.1.2 Aggressive behaviour 398
5.8.2 minda ‘eat’ 399
5.8.3 (ma)linyma ‘make’ 403
5.8.3.1 Creation/transformation 403
5.8.3.2 Causation 405
5.9 Marginal verbs 408
5.9.1 garra ‘excrete’ 409
5.9.2 yangma ‘fear’ 410
5.9.3 malangawu ‘hear’ 411
5.9.4 warrwa ‘swear at’ 412
5.9.5 yima ‘tell a lie’ 412
5.9.6 inijba ‘do by magic’ 413
5.9.7 ngardgani ‘be sick’ 414
5.9.8 manka ‘be angry’ 414
5.9.9 yangi ‘be†’ 415
5.10 Semantics and use of the generic verbs: some generalisations 416
5.10.1 Verb semantics: Summary 416
5.10.2 Distinctions forming the basis for the categorisation 420
5.10.3 Patterns of polysemy 429
5.10.4 Frequency 430
5.10.5 The role of pragmatics in the use of the verbs 434
Coverb Classes 437
6.1 Coverbs of spatial configuration 440
6.1.1 Coverbs of configuration with respect to a location (positionals) 441
6.1.2 Coverbs of posture 453
6.1.3 Coverbs of direction of gaze 455
6.1.4 Coverbs of ‘holding’ 459
6.2 Coverbs of property and state 463
6.3 Coverbs of continuous activity 468
6.4 Coverbs of speech and sound emission, internal motion, and physical or emotional
condition 475
6.4.1 Coverbs of speech act and sound emission 475
6.4.2 Coverbs of internal motion 477
6.4.3 Coverbs of bodily or emotional condition 479
6.5 Coverbs of motion 483
6.5.1 Coverbs of manner of motion 483
6.5.2 Coverbs of hunting 487
6.5.3 Coverbs of direction of motion 488
6.5.4 Coverbs of emerging 493
6.6 Coverbs of ballistic motion and stopping 494
6.7 Coverbs of change of state 499
6.8 Coverbs of cooking and burning 504
6.8.1 Coverbs of manner of heating 505
6.8.2 Coverbs of heat and light emission 508
6.9 Coverbs of contact and effect 509
6.9.1 Coverbs of impact and change of state 510
6.9.2 Coverbs of touch and manipulation 514
6.9.3 Coverbs of hitting 520
6.9.4 Coverbs of biting 521
6.10 Coverbs of ingestion 523
6.11 Coverbs of indirect effect and recognition 524
6.12 Coverbs of induced change of configuration 527
6.13 Coverbs of induced change of location 527
6.14 Coverbs of induced ballistic motion 530
6.15 Coverbs of transfer 531
6.15.1 Coverbs of ‘giving’ 532
6.15.2 Coverbs of transfer of a message 532
6.16 Coverbs of hearing and memory 533
6.17 Coverbs of social interaction and perception by the lower senses 534
6.18 Coverbs of non-physical aggression 536
6.19 Phase coverbs 537
6.20 Adverbial coverbs 541
6.21 Summary 543
7 Jaminjung simple and complex predicates in a cross-linguistic perspective 555
7.1 Complex verbs in Northern Australia 558
7.1.1 Complex verbs as an areal feature 558
7.1.2 Tightness of nexus 562
7.1.3 Size of word classes 565
7.1.4 Grammaticalisation of closed-class verbs 566
7.2 Coverbs, generic verbs and complex verbs in a cross-linguistic perspective 570
7.2.1 Coverbs 570
7.2.2 Generic verbs 572
7.2.3 Complex verbs 575
Appendix: Texts 581
I Parachute Jumping 582
II Healing a broken leg 585
III Jalarriny - A Centipede Bite 589
IV A massacre at Ngayimalang 595
V Emu and Brolga 600
References 605
Abstract:
This thesis is an investigation of the semantic and syntactic properties of simple
and complex verbs in Jaminjung and Ngaliwurru, two closely related varieties of an
Australian language (henceforth simply ‘Jaminjung’). This language exhibits a typologically
unusual characteristic: it has two distinct parts of speech in the function of verbs.
One of them, termed ‘(generic) verbs’ here, is a closed class with around 30 members,
which obligatorily inflect for person and tense/aspect/mood. These may constitute
predicates on their own in a finite clause. ‘Coverbs’, on the other hand, constitute
an open class; they are inherently predicative, but do not inflect. Coverbs may function
as the sole predicate only in non-finite dependent clauses. In finite clauses, they
only occur as part of a complex verb, together with a generic verb.
An interesting consequence of this ‘division of labour’ between coverbs and generic
verbs is that the verbs categorise events. Since a verb from the closed class is obligatory
in every finite clause (either as a simple verb or as part of a complex verb), all
event expressions are sorted into one of a small number of categories by the choice
of generic verb. This type of overt categorisation is comparable to that found in
the domain of entity expressions in languages with nominal classification.
Two major, interrelated questions are addressed in this study. The first question
concerns the conceptual basis for the categorisation of events by generic verbs. The
second question concerns the syntactic and semantic conditions on complex verb formation,
or, put differently, the contribution of verb and coverb, respectively, to the interpretation
of a complex verb.
Chapter 1 contains background information on the language and its situation. Jaminjung
is spoken today only by around 100, mainly older, people, and no longer acquired by
children. Written documentation is very scarce, and this thesis is based mainly on
the fieldwork of the author.
The theoretical and methodological basis for the investigation are also laid out in
the first chapter. It assumes a construction-based model of grammar, that is, grammatical
structures are regarded as schematic complex signs. For the semantic analysis, monosemy
is assumed as a heuristic principle. Polysemy is recognised where necessary, but where
it is possible, more specific interpretations are derived from contextual information
or general pragmatic principles.
Chapter 2 describes the essential grammatical features of Jaminjung insofar as they
are necessary for the understanding of the examples and the argumentation. In this
chapter it is also demonstrated that coverbs constitute a major lexical category whose
members differ not only from generic verbs, but also from nominals in their morpho-syntactic
properties.
Chapter 3 deals with simple and complex predicate constructions. Simple verbs consist
of a generic verb functioning as a predicate on its own. A comparison of the text
frequency of the different constructions reveals that in 40% of all finite clauses
the predicate is a simple verb, despite the small number of verbs that are available
in this function. Canonical complex verbs are defined as the combination of one or
sometimes two unmarked coverb(s) and a verb, in a single intonation unit. It is argued
that complex verbs are both part of the lexicon (in that they are, in their majority
at least, conventionalised expressions), and part of the grammar (in that they are
semantically compositional and instantiations of a productive construction). Closely
related to the canonical complex verb construction is the progressive construction,
where the coverb is marked as ‘continuous’. Canonical complex verbs are also distinguished
from constructions where the (marked) coverb functions as a secondary predicate, or
where an (unmarked) coverb functions as a ‘semi-independent’ predicate in an intonation
unit on its own. In a final subchapter, strategies of integrating loans from Kriol
– an English-based creole spoken in Northern Australia – are discussed. A frequent
strategy is to employ Kriol verbs as coverbs; these forms, just like Jaminjung coverbs,
are combined with one of the generic verbs in a canonical complex verb construction.
Simple and complex verbs both encode unitary events, defined as conceptual units that
correspond to units of packaging in speech. In the case of complex verbs, the event
may comprise subevents. However, the complex verb construction itself does not allow
any conclusions about the semantic relationship between its constituents. In the remaining
chapters, the meaning of verbs and coverbs, and their semantic relationship in canonical
complex verbs, is investigated more closely.
Chapter 4 is devoted to the argument structure of generic verbs, coverbs and complex
verbs. According to the construction-based model that is employed, argument expressions
(in Jaminjung both case-marked noun phrases and pronominal prefixes on the verb) are
not directly predicted from the valency of the predicate, but are considered as constructions
in their own right. In this approach, valency is defined in semantic terms as the
number and type of semantic participants. Central participants can be operationally
defined, for Jaminjung, as those participants which are encoded obligatorily and/or
as core arguments (personal prefixes or absolutive noun phrases) in all uses of a
given predicate. This criterion is particularly relevant in determining the valency
of coverbs, since they usually do not enter argument structure constructions on their
own, but only in combination with a verb.
The semantic participants of predicates are linked to independently existing argument
structure constructions on the basis of the compatibility of the participant’s role
with the constructional meaning. This approach allows for a unified solution of a
number of problems in the syntactic analysis of Jaminjung. These include the complex
interaction of pronominal prefixes and case-marked noun phrases, the use of the same
‘ergative’ case to mark agents and instruments, and the representation of ‘agents’
not only by ergative-marked noun phrases, but also by noun phrases bearing a contrastive
agent marker different from the ergative, and by unmarked (absolutive) noun phrases.
In particular, the construction grammar approach allows for a simple and elegant representation
of argument sharing in complex predicates: this can be described as the linking of
one participant of a verb and a coverb, respectively, to a single morpho-syntactic
argument expression. Thus, for example, the single participant of a monovalent coverb
can receive very different expressions depending on whether it aligns with the single
participant of a monovalent verb, the first participant of a bivalent verb, or the
second participant of a bivalent or trivalent verb. In the account developed here,
it is not necessary to postulate polysemy for the coverb in cases like these. Rather,
the differences in argument structure result from the different contributions of the
generic verb and the argument structure construction itself to the complex expression.
In Chapter 5, the meaning and use of each of the generic verbs are examined in some
detail in order to adduce evidence for the claim that the choice of a verb amounts
to an act of categorisation, and that the verbs do not classify coverbs, but events.
In other words, the categorising function of generic verbs is not restricted to their
use in complex verbs. As simple verbs they describe an event of a specific general
type, but may receive a more specific interpretation in context. As part of a complex
verb they categorise the event encoded jointly by coverb and verb. Evidence for this
view comes, first, from the fact that most coverbs combine with more than one verb,
that is, the coverbs are not associated with a single ‘classifying’ verb (!). Second,
even loans which are integrated into Jaminjung as coverbs are combined with verbs
productively. Third, the generic verbs can generally be shown to have the same meaning
both as simple verbs and as part of most complex verbs. This finding contrasts with
the widely accepted view that in languages of this type, verbs, when part of complex
verbs, are semantically empty and are mere carriers of verbal inflections, comparable
to auxiliaries. This is not to say that verbs are never polysemous. Their secondary
senses, if any, can however be related to their basic sense by regular semantic shifts
due to processes such as metaphor, metonymy, and semantic bleaching (i.e. loss of
semantic components).
The main semantic components of the generic verbs – which are at the same time the
features that are relevant for event categorisation in Jaminjung – include the number
of salient participants in an event (reflected in the valency of the verb that is
used), and the components of location, change of location and locomotion, contact
and affectedness, transfer of an entity to, or away from, a third participant, and
‘internal cause’, and (to some extent) telicity. There are also verbs available to
express ingestion, visual perception, and creation. For locomotion events, further
distinctions pertain to the direction of motion and the involvement of a concomitant
participant. For events of contact and affectedness, mere contact is distinguished
from impact, and impact events are further subdivided according to the shape and trajectory
of the agent/instrument making the impact (e.g. ‘with a pointed end’, ‘with an edge’,
‘with the foot’). Some types of affectedness by non-physical means as well as change
of state, non-visual perception, and memory are covered by secondary senses of a number
of verbs. The use of the verbs is, however, not motivated through their meaning alone,
but also through the paradigmatic oppositions to other verbs that they enter into,
and the application of general pragmatic principles. The resulting system of categorisation,
while based on components which are often described as corresponding to ‘basic’ events,
is quite language-specific.
Chapter 6 deals with the meaning of the coverbs, and accounts for their use in complex
verbs. Coverbs are divided into formal classes on the grounds of their possibility
to combine with the same set of verbs. It is argued that coverbs belonging to the
same formal class also form a semantically coherent set, and that these classes largely
correspond to predicate classes found in other languages. In the case of the coverbs,
too, the principle of monosemy is applied, such that the meaning of a coverb is taken
to correspond to only those components that are present in all of its combinations
with verbs. The unification of meaning components of coverbs and verbs in canonical
complex verbs is then investigated for coverbs from each class. It turns out that
the semantic relationships encountered in complex verbs can be of various types. The
verb may be semantically included in the coverb, it may show partial semantic overlap
with the coverb, or coverb and verb may not overlap at all semantically. In the latter
case, the coverb is interpreted as expressing a phase of the event described by the
verb, a manner in which it is performed, or a resulting event (where the causing event
is expressed by the verb). With motion verbs, the reading can also simply be one of
‘associated motion’, i.e. motion simultaneous with, or followed by, another event.
However, these differences should be seen as differences in semantic interpretation
only; formally, all complex verbs instantiate a single type of complex verb construction.
In Chapter 7, the findings of the previous chapters are summarised and placed in an
areal and typological context. First, Jaminjung is compared to other Northern Australian
languages with similar types of complex predicates. Comparative evidence is adduced
for a diachronic scenario where larger verb systems get reduced to a small class of
verbs which eventually gets extended again through complete lexicalisation of (previously)
complex predicates.
Second, the nature of coverbs, generic verbs, and complex verbs is examined from a
cross-linguistic perspective. It is argued that coverb-verb combinations of the type
found in Jaminjung and a number of other Northern Australian languages, although they
bear many functional similarities with other types of complex predicates such as serial
verbs, particle verbs or light verb constructions, should be considered a distinct
type of complex predicate. Finally, it is pointed out that Jaminjung only ‘codifies’
in its lexicon and grammar a tendency that can be observed in many other languages,
and perhaps even universally. In spoken, spontaneous discourse speakers tend to rely
on a rather small class of semantically general high-frequency verbs, which may or
may not be combined with other — often non-finite — elements. What is distinctive
about Jaminjung and other Northern Australian languages is that the semantically most
generic verbs with the highest frequency form a distinct part of speech and moreover
participate in a system of overt event categorisation.
SUPPLEMENTARY-1.PDF (pdf)