Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter (A) September 28, 2019

Towards a typology of spatial deictic expressions

A conflation of interrogative and declarative spatial morphology

  • Julia Nintemann EMAIL logo and Maja Robbers

Abstract

In response to the typology of spatial interrogatives (Stolz et al. 2017b), the morphologically corresponding spatial deictic declaratives pursuant to the three basic relations placegoalsource are brought into focus for a comparison of both related paradigms. A canonical model (Corbett 2005) is applied to assess paradigms of spatial deictic forms. Logical outcomes considering all possible distributions of (a)syncretic patterns are discussed. To prepare our data for statistical evaluations, both parallels and differences between the two related paradigms are surveyed. Our corpus data is presented to outline what a typology of spatial deictic paradigms should encompass.

Acknowledgments

Our preliminary report of present research findings will be followed by a quantitative analysis of our corpus data in the course of the ongoing DFG project Where – Whither – Whence: Spatial interrogatives and their adverbial demonstrative equivalents in Europe and far beyond (Grant number: STO 186/19-1) which is currently being conducted at the University of Bremen. We want to express our gratitude to Alan R. King for his very kind support with Nawat and other languages of our upcoming sample. Gary Holton deserves a word of thanks for his clarifying comments on Tanacross and Athabascan languages in general. We would also like to thank Jeffrey Heath for kindly answering our questions about Tamasheq and other languages of his expertise, and Steven Roger Fischer for providing us with information on Rapanui and Proto-Oceanic. Special thanks also goes to our two anonymous reviewers who pointed out some flaws and helped us to considerably improve our study’s quality. We are very grateful to our supervisor Thomas Stolz who always provided us with his guidance, which is not limited to this project. Nataliya Levkovych and Aina Urdze deserve to be mentioned for the numerous hours of work they put into this project, especially in its first phase. Last but not least we would like to thank Nicole Hober for her versatile support and Cornelia Stroh for her technical assistance. Although we received a lot of help and support, the sole responsibility for the form and content of this article lies with us.

Abbreviations

1, 2, 3

first, second, third person

3ii

third person pronoun type II (Abui)

a

actor argument (Abui)

abl

ablative

all

allative

cnt

continuative verb stem (Abui)

cpl

completive verb stem or completive aspectual marker (Abui)

D1/2/3

distance level 1/2/3

dat

dative

det

determiner

dir

directional

dist

distal

du

dual

dur

durative

e

exclusive reference of first person plural pronouns (Abui)

exist

existential particle

fa

factive

FoR

Frame of Reference

fs

female singular

G

goal

imp

imperative

int

interrogative

intr

intransitive-stem-forming suffix (Warrongo)

ipfv

imperfective

irr

irrealis

lnk

sequence linker (Abui)

loc

locative

m

masculine

med

medial

mp

mediopassive

ms

non-female singular

neg

negation

nf

nonfuture

nom

nominative

NP

nominal phrase

obj

object

P

place

pfv

perfective

pl

plural

poss

possessive

pret

preterite

prox

proximal

prs

present tense

pst

past tense

rec

bound pronoun realizing U argument identified as recipient or goal (Abui)

red

reduplication

S

source

sbj

subject

SDD

spatial deictic declarative

sg

singular

SI

spatial Interrogative

SR

spatial relation

stat

stative

tr

transitive

References

Baerman, Matthew, Dunstan Brown & Greville G. Corbett. 2005. The syntax-morphology interface. A study of syncretism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486234Search in Google Scholar

Blust, Robert. 1973. Additions to “Proto-Austronesian addenda” and “Proto-Oceanic addenda with cognates in non-Oceanic Austronesian languages-II”. Working Papers in Linguistics 5(3). 33–61.Search in Google Scholar

Cairns, Barbara. 1991. Spatial deixis: The use of spatial co-ordinates in spoken language. Working Papers 38. 19–28.Search in Google Scholar

Campbell, Lyle. 1985. The Pipil language of El Salvador. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110881998Search in Google Scholar

Clark, Ross. 1976. Aspects of Proto-Polynesian syntax. Auckland, N.Z: Linguistic Society of New Zealand.Search in Google Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. 2005. The canonical approach to typology. In Zygmunt Frajzyngier, Adam Hodges & David S. Rood (eds.), Linguistic diversity and language theories, 25–50. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.72.03corSearch in Google Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. 2007. Deponency, syncretism, and what lies between. In Matthew Baerman, Greville C. Corbett, Dunstan Brown & Andrew Hippisley (eds.), Deponency and morphological mismatches, 21–44. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.5871/bacad/9780197264102.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Creissels, Denis. 2006. Encoding the distinction between location, source and direction: A typological study. In Maya Hickman & Stephane Robert (eds.), Space in languages, 19–28. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.66.03creSearch in Google Scholar

DeLancey, Scott. 2001. Lectures on functional syntax. LSA Summer Institute, UC Santa Barbara.Search in Google Scholar

DeLancey, Scott. 2003. Location and direction in Klamath. In Erin Shay & Uwe Seibert (eds.), Motion, direction and location in languages. 59–90. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.56.08delSearch in Google Scholar

Diehl, Lon. 1975. Space case: Some principles and their applications concerning linear order in natural languages. Working Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of North Dakota Session 19. 93–150.10.31356/silwp.vol19.01Search in Google Scholar

Diessel, Holger. 1999. Demonstratives: Form, function and grammaticalization. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.42Search in Google Scholar

Dixon, R. M. W. 1980. The languages of Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Eastwood, John. 1994. Oxford guide to English grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Feldman, Harry. 1986. A grammar of Awtuw. Canberra: Australian National University.Search in Google Scholar

Gruber, Jeffrey. 1976. Lexical structures in syntax and semantics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 2006. Against markedness (and what to replace it with). Journal of Linguistics 42(1). 25–70.10.1017/S0022226705003683Search in Google Scholar

Heath, Jeffrey. 2017. A grammar of Bunoge (Dogon, Mali). Jena: MPI-SHH.Search in Google Scholar

Helbig, Gerhard & Joachim Buscha. 2017. Deutsche Grammatik: Ein Handbuch für den Ausländerunterricht. München: Klett-Langenscheidt.Search in Google Scholar

Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 1997. Deiktikon, Artikel, Nominalphrase: Zur Emergenz syntaktischer Struktur. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.10.1515/9783110929621Search in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Jackendoff, Ray, 1983. Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kratochvíl, František. 2007. A grammar of Abui, a Papuan language of Alor. Leiden University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Leer, Jeff. 1989. Directional systems in Athapaskan and Na-dene. In Eung-Do Cook & Keren D. Rice (eds.), Athapaskan linguistics: Current perspectives on a language family, 575–622. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110852394-016Search in Google Scholar

Lestrade, Sander. 2010. The space of case. Nijmegen: Radboud Universiteit.Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen C. 1996. Frames of reference and Molyneux’s Question: Crosslinguistic evidence. In Paul Bloom, Mary A. Peterson, Lynn Nadel & Merrill F. Garrett (eds.), Language and space, 109–169. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, Stephen C. 2003. Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511613609Search in Google Scholar

Luraghi, Silvia. 1991. Paradigm size, possible syncretism, and the use of adpositions with cases in flective languages. In Frans Plank (ed.), Paradigms: The economy of inflection, 57–74. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110889109.57Search in Google Scholar

Pantcheva, Marina. 2009. Directional expressions cross-linguistically: Nanosyntax and lexicalization. Nordlyd 36(1). 7–39.10.7557/12.214Search in Google Scholar

Pantcheva, Marina. 2010. The syntactic structure of locations, goals, and sources. Linguistics 48(5). 1043–1081.10.1515/ling.2010.034Search in Google Scholar

Pantcheva, Marina. 2011. Decomposing path. The nanosyntax of directional expressions. University of Tromsø dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1978. A grammar of contemporary English. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Reuse, Willem J. de 2006. A practical grammar of the San Carlos Apache language. München & Newcastle: LINCOM.Search in Google Scholar

Robbers, Maja & Nicole Hober. 2018. Verb-framed spatial deixis in Mesoamerican languages and the increasing complexity of source constructions via Spanish de. STUF/Language Typology and Universals 71(3). 397–423.10.1515/stuf-2018-0016Search in Google Scholar

Shimelman, Aviva. 2017. A grammar of Yauyos Quechua. Berlin: Language Science Press.Search in Google Scholar

Staden, Miriam van. 2000. Tidore: A linguistic description of a language of the North Moluccas. Leiden University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Stolz, Thomas. 1992. Lokalkasussysteme. Aspekte einer strukturellen Dynamik. Weinberg: Egert.Search in Google Scholar

Stolz, Thomas. 2018. Deiktische Antworten auf räumliche Fragen. In Angelika Wöllstein, Peter Gallmann, Mechthild Habermann & Manfred Krifka (eds.), Grammatiktheorie und Empirie in der germanistischen Linguistik, 309–330. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110490992-011Search in Google Scholar

Stolz, Thomas, Sander Lestrade & Christel Stolz. 2014. The crosslinguistics of zero-marking of spatial relations. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1524/9783050065304Search in Google Scholar

Stolz, Thomas, Nataliya Levkovych & Aina Urdze. 2017a. Spatial interrogatives: Typology and dynamics (with special focus on the development from Latin to Romance). In Silvia Luraghi, Tatiana Nikitina & Chiara Zanchi (eds.), Space in diachrony, 207–240. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.188.08stoSearch in Google Scholar

Stolz, Thomas, Nataliya Levkovych, Aina Urdze, Julia Nintemann & Maja Robbers. 2017b. Spatial interrogatives in Europe and beyond: Where, Whither, Whence. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110539516Search in Google Scholar

Talmy, Leonard. 1978. Figure and ground in complex sentences. In Joseph H. Greenberg, Charles A. Ferguson & Edith A. Moravcsik (eds.), Universals of human language. Vol 4:Syntax, 625–649. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Tsunoda, Tasaku. 2011. A grammar of Warrongo. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110238778Search in Google Scholar

Vorbichler, Anton. 1965. Die Phonologie und Morphologie des Balese (Ituri-Urwald, Kongo). Gluckstadt: Augustin.Search in Google Scholar

Wälchli, Bernhard & Fernando Zúñiga. 2006. Source-Goal (in)difference and the typology of motion events in the clause. STUF/Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 59(3). 284–303.10.1524/stuf.2006.59.3.284Search in Google Scholar

Warburton, Irene, Prosper Kpotufe & Roland Glover. 1968. Ewe basic course: Revised version. Bloomington, IN: African Studies Program, Indiana University.Search in Google Scholar

Zifonun, Gisela, Ludger Hoffmann & Bruno Strecker. 1997. Grammatik der deutschen Sprache. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110872163Search in Google Scholar

Corpora

COSMAS I/II (Corpus Search, Management and Analysis System), http://www.ids-mannheim.de/cosmas2/, © 1991-2016 Institut für Deutsche Sprache, Mannheim. (accessed 11-5-2017)

Dictionaries

Die aktuelle deutsche Rechtschreibung. 2006. Köln: NGV.

Grimm, Jacob & Wilhelm Grimm. 1999 [1877]. Deutsches Wörterbuch. Vol. 10. München: dtv.

Hornby, A. S. 2005. Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary of current English, 7th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thian Hock, William G. 2006. A Baba Malay dictionary: The first comprehensive compendium of straits Chinese terms and expressions. Tokyo: Tuttle Publishing.

Sources

[NBTN] Ne Bibliaj Tik Nawat. © 2013, Jan Morrow.

[NBRE] Nicobarese Bible. © 2014. Bible Society of India.

Published Online: 2019-09-28
Published in Print: 2019-09-25

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 19.3.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/stuf-2019-0014/html
Scroll to top button