Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton May 1, 2015

The Berber “state” distinction: Dependent marking after all? A commentary on Mettouchi & Frajzyngier (2013)

Peter Arkadiev EMAIL logo
From the journal Linguistic Typology

Abstract

Critically reviewing the recent analysis of the distinction between the so-called “absolute” and “annexed” “states” in Kabyle (Berber) by Mettouchi & Frajzyngier (2013) (M&F), it is shown that it does not fare better than the existing treatments in its account of the empirical facts, mainly due to the assumption of monosemy. It is further argued that M&F’s rejection of “case” as a valid notion for the description of the Kabyle data rests on simplistic and ill-informed views on the nature of case, and that adoption of a case analysis allows one to compare the Berber data to a wide range of languages with similar peculiarities in the distribution of dependent marking. Finally, M&F’s claim that their analysis of Kabyle has pointed out a “previously unrecognized typological category” is refuted, showing that it stems from an unwarranted mixing of language-particular descriptive categories and crosslinguistic comparative concepts.

Acknowledgements

I thank Eitan Grossman and Martin Haspelmath for their moral support, Corinna Handschuh for her very useful comments on the last version of the article and for sharing her database with me, and Frans Plank and three anonymous LT reviewers – especially one of them – for their useful suggestions. This work has been supported by the Russian Science Foundation, grant # 14-18-03270. All faults are mine.

Abbreviations

1/2/3=1st/2nd/3rd person; a=agent; abs=absolutive; acc=accusative; all=allative; conn=connective particle; dat=dative; def=definite; df=default agreement; erg=ergative; expe=expected; f=feminine; gen=genitive; inf=infinitive; ins=instrumental; loc=locative; m=masculine; neg=negation; nom=nominative; obl=oblique case; pa=active participle; pfv=perfective; pl=plural; poss=possessor; pp=passive participle; prs=present tense; pst=past tense; quot=quotative; rls=realis; sbd=subordinator; sg=singular.

References

Achab, Karim.2003. Alternation of state in Berber. In JacquelineLecarme (ed.), Research in Afroasiatic grammar II, 119. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.241.02achSearch in Google Scholar

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Yu. 1990. On Berber cases in the light of Afroasiatic languages. In Hans G.Mukarovsky (ed.), Proceedings of the 5th International Hamito-Semitic Congress, Vol. 1: Hamito-Semitic, Berber, Chadic, 113122. Wien: Afro-Pub.Search in Google Scholar

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Yu. 1995. Split ergativity in Berber languages. St. Petersburg Journal of African Studies4. 3968.Search in Google Scholar

Arkadiev, Peter.2005. Funkcional’no-semantičeskaja tipologija dvuxpadežnyx sistem. [A functional-semantic typology of two-case systems.] Voprosy jazykoznanija2005(4). 101120.Search in Google Scholar

Arkadiev, Peter.2009a. Differential argument marking in two-term case systems and its implications for the general theory of case marking. In deHoop & deSwart (eds.) 2009, 151171.Search in Google Scholar

Arkadiev, Peter.2009b. Poor (two-term) case systems: Limits of neutralization. In Malchukov & Spencer (eds.) 2009, 686699.Search in Google Scholar

Arkadiev, Peter.2013. Marking of subjects and objects in Lithuanian non-finite clauses: A typological and diachronic perspective. Linguistic Typology17. 397437.10.1515/lity-2013-0020Search in Google Scholar

Bader, Yousef & MichaelKenstowicz.1987. Syllables and case in Kabylie Berber. Lingua73. 279299.10.1016/0024-3841(87)90022-2Search in Google Scholar

Basset, André. 1950. Sur l’anticipation en berbère. In Mélanges offerts à William Marçais, 1727. Paris: Maisonneuve. Reprinted in André Basset, Articles de dialectologie berbère, 90100. Paris: Klincksieck, 1959.Search in Google Scholar

Bendjaballah, Sabrina & MartinHaiden.2005. The grammar of prepositions in Berber (Taqbaylit). http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/000261Search in Google Scholar

Bentley, John R.2001. A descriptive grammar of Early Old Japanese prose. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789047401155Search in Google Scholar

Bickel, Balthasar & JohannaNichols.2007. Inflectional morphology. In TimothyShopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (2nd edn.), Vol. 3: Grammatical categories and the lexicon, 169–240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511618437.003Search in Google Scholar

Blake, Barry J.2001. Case. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Bresnan, Joan & Sam A.Mchombo.1987. Topic, pronoun, and agreement in Chicheŵa. Language63. 741782.Search in Google Scholar

Brown, Lea.2001. A grammar of Nias Selatan. Sydney: University of Sydney doctoral dissertation. http://hdl.handle.net/2123/12669Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan L. & ÖstenDahl. 1989. The creation of tense and aspect systems in the languages of the world. Studies in Language13. 51103.10.1075/sl.13.1.03bybSearch in Google Scholar

Corbett, Greville G.2008. Determining morphosyntactic feature values: The case of case. In Greville G.Corbett & MichaelNoonan (eds.), Case and grammatical relations: Studies in honor of Bernard Comrie, 134. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.81.01detSearch in Google Scholar

Creissels, Denis.2009. Construct forms of nouns in African languages. In PeterK. Austin, OliverBond, MonikCharette, DavidNathan & PeterSells (eds.), Proceedings of Conference on Language Documentation & Linguistic Theory 2, 7382. London: SOAS. http://www.hrelp.org/publications/ldlt2/papers/ldlt2_08.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

Croft, William.2001. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Dahl, Östen. 1985. Tense and aspect systems. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Dahl, Östen. 1987. Case grammar and prototypes. In RenéDirven & GünterRadden (eds.), Concepts of case, 147–161. Tübingen: Narr.Search in Google Scholar

de Hoop, Helen & Peterde Swart (eds.). 2009. Differential subject marking. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-6497-5Search in Google Scholar

de Hoop, Helen & AndrejMalchukov.2008. Case marking strategies. Linguistic Inquiry39. 565587.10.1162/ling.2008.39.4.565Search in Google Scholar

Evans, Vyvyan & MelanieGreen.2006. Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Galand, Lionel.1964. L’énoncé verbal en berbère: Étude des fonctions. Cahiers Ferdinand de Saussure21. 3353.Search in Google Scholar

Galand, Lionel.1979. Relations du verbe et du nom dans l’énoncé berbère. In CatherineParis (ed.), Relations prédicat-actant(s) dans les langues de types divers, Vol. 1, 131146. Paris: SELAF.Search in Google Scholar

Grossman, Eitan.2015. No case before the verb, obligatory case after the verb in Coptic. In EitanGrossman, MartinHaspelmath & TonioSebastian Richter (eds.), Egyptian-Coptic linguistics in typological perspective, 203–225. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Search in Google Scholar

Guerrero, Lilián. 2004. The syntax-semantic interface in Yaqui complex sentences: A Role and Reference Grammar analysis. Buffalo: State University of New York at Buffalo doctoral dissertation. https://www.academia.edu/634713/Search in Google Scholar

Guerssel, Mohand.1987. The status of lexical category preposition in Berber: Implications for the nature of the construct state. In MohandGuerssel & KenHale (eds.), Studies in Berber syntax (MIT Lexicon Project Working Papers 14), 159190. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Search in Google Scholar

Guerssel, Mohand.1992. On the case system of Berber. Canadian Journal of Linguistics37. 175195.10.1017/S0008413100021940Search in Google Scholar

Gutova, Jenia.2011. Ismnaggar tn Ṛbbi ɣ yan lmakan (‘God made them meet each other in one place’): Causative constructions in Berber. Manuscript. https://www.academia.edu/1443976/Search in Google Scholar

Haig, Geoffrey L.J.2008. Alignment change in Iranian languages: A Construction Grammar approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110198614Search in Google Scholar

Handschuh, Corinna.2014. A typology of marked-S languages. Berlin: Language Science Press. http://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/1810.26530/OAPEN_533871Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin.2003. The geometry of grammatical meaning: Semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In MichaelTomasello (ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, Vol. 2, 211242. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin.2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language86. 663687.10.1353/lan.2010.0021Search in Google Scholar

Heath, Jeffrey.2005. A grammar of Tamashek (Tuareg of Mali). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110909586Search in Google Scholar

Huson, Daniel H. & DavidBryant. 2006. Application of phylogenetic networks in evolutionary studies. Molecular Biology and Evolution23. 254267.10.1093/molbev/msj030Search in Google Scholar

König, Christa. 2006. Marked nominative in Africa. Studies in Language30. 655732.10.1075/sl.30.4.02konSearch in Google Scholar

König, Christa. 2008. Case in Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

König, Christa. 2009. Marked nominatives. In Malchukov & Spencer (eds.) 2009, 535548.Search in Google Scholar

Korn, Agnes.2009. The ergative system in Balochi from a typological perspective. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies1(1), 4379.Search in Google Scholar

Kruspe, Nicole.2004. A grammar of Semelai. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511550713Search in Google Scholar

Lander, Yury.2009. Varieties of genitive. In Malchukov & Spencer (eds.) 2009, 581593.Search in Google Scholar

Lavine, James E.2006. Is there a passive evidential strategy in Lithuanian?Chicago Linguistic Society42(2). 4155.Search in Google Scholar

Lestrade, Sander.2006. Adpositional case. Nijmegen: Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen MA thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Malchukov, Andrej & Helende Hoop.2011. Tense, aspect, and mood based differential case marking. Lingua121. 3547.Search in Google Scholar

Malchukov, Andrej & Peterde Swart.2009. Differential case marking and actancy variations. In Malchukov & Spencer (eds.) 2009, 339356.Search in Google Scholar

Malchukov, Andrej & AndrewSpencer (eds.). 2009. The Oxford handbook of case. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199206476.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Mettouchi, Amina.2005. Discourse-configurationality and the encoding of semantic macroroles in Taqbaylit Berber: Noun phrases, personal affixes and clitics. In AlessandroMengozzi (ed.), Studi afroasiatici: XI Incontro Italiano di Linguistica Camitosemitica, 8396. Milano: FrancoAngeli.Search in Google Scholar

Mettouchi, Amina.2006. “Sujet” postverbal et état d’annexion en kabyle (berbère). Faits de Langues27. 113130.10.1163/19589514-027-01-900000010Search in Google Scholar

Mettouchi, Amina.2008. Case marking, syntactic domains and information structure in Kabyle (Berber). In ZygmuntFrajzyngier & ErinShay (eds), Interaction of syntax and morphology: Case studies in Afroasiatic, 7–40. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.75.02metSearch in Google Scholar

Mettouchi, Amina & ZygmuntFrajzyngier.2013. A previously unrecognized typological category: The state distinction in Kabyle (Berber). Linguistic Typology17. 130.10.1515/lity-2013-0001Search in Google Scholar

Næss, Åshild & EvenHovdhaugen. 2011. A grammar of Vaeakau-Taumako. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110238273Search in Google Scholar

Nolda, Andreas.2004. Topics detached to the left: On ‘left dislocation’, ‘hanging topic’, and related constructions in German. In BenjaminShaer, WernerFrey & ClaudiaMaienborn (eds.), Proceedings of the Dislocated Elements Workshop (ZAS Papers in Linguistics 35), 423–448. Berlin: Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft. http://www.zas.gwz-berlin.de/fileadmin/material/ZASPiL_Volltexte/zp35/zaspil35-nolda.pdf10.21248/zaspil.35.2004.236Search in Google Scholar

Palancar, Enrique.2009. Varieties of ergative. In Malchukov & Spencer (eds.) 2009, 562571.Search in Google Scholar

Sasse, Hans-Jürgen. 1984. Case in Cushitic, Semitic and Berber. In JamesBynon (ed.). Current progress in Afro-Asiatic linguistics: Papers of the Third International Hamito-Semitic Congress, London, 1978, 111–126. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.28.08sasSearch in Google Scholar

Stilo, Donald.2009. Case in Iranian: From reduction and loss to innovation and renewal. In Malchukov & Spencer (eds.) 2009, 700715.Search in Google Scholar

Syromjatnikov, Nikolaj A.1972. Drevnejaponskij jazyk. [Old Japanese.] Moskva: Nauka.Search in Google Scholar

Syromjatnikov, Nikolaj A.1983. Klassičeskij japonskij jazyk. [Classical Japanese.] Moskva: Nauka.Search in Google Scholar

Timberlake, Alan.1982. The impersonal passive in Lithuanian. Berkeley Linguistics Society8. 508524.10.3765/bls.v8i0.2067Search in Google Scholar

Wiemer, Björn. 2006. Relations between Actor-demoting devices in Lithuanian. In WernerAbraham & LarisaLeisiö (eds.), Passivization and typology: Form and function, 274–309. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.68.16wieSearch in Google Scholar

Received: 2013-10-7
Revised: 2014-12-23
Published Online: 2015-5-1
Published in Print: 2015-5-1

©2015 by De Gruyter Mouton

Downloaded on 31.1.2023 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/lingty-2015-0003/html
Scroll Up Arrow