Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Open Linguistics

Editor-in-Chief: Ehrhart, Sabine

1 Issue per year


Covered by:
Elsevier - SCOPUS
Clarivate Analytics - Emerging Sources Citation Index
ERIH PLUS

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2300-9969
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Complexity in Egophoric Marking: From Agents to Attitude Holders

Henrik Bergqvist / Dominique Knuchel
Published Online: 2017-10-28 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2017-0018

Abstract

The present paper considers attested variation found in egophoric marking systems in order to discuss the role of such variation for the defining features of egophoric marking viz. a speech-act participant's epistemic authority subject to his/her involvement in an event. Austin Hale's (1980) pioneering description of egophoric marking in Kathmandu Newar (called "conjunct/disjunct" by Hale) has largely shaped our conception of what such systems look like, but in recent years, research on comparable systems has revealed that egophoric marking systems vary with respect to every purportedly defining feature of such systems. The one remaining variable that appears constant is the epistemic authority of the speech-act participants. When attempting to analyze and compare egophoric marking, one should consider all relevant cross-linguistic variation in order to determine what features are defeasible, and which ones are not. In this paper we explore the range of participant-roles that can be associated with egophoric marking focusing on "secondary" egophoric markers that map onto undergoers, affected participants, and the attitudes of the speech-act participants. It will become clear that these less prototypical instances of egophoric marking bridge such systems to a seemingly unrelated grammatical constructions, known as "ethical datives".

Keywords: egophoric marking; semantic roles; epistemic authority

References

  • Abraham,Werner. 1973. The ethic dative in German. In Kiefer, Ferenc and Nicolas Ruwet (eds.), Generative grammar in Europe, 1-19. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar

  • Ameka, Felix K. 2004. Grammar and cultural practices: The grammaticalization of triadic communication in West African languages. Journal of West African Languages 30:2. 5-28.Google Scholar

  • Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Al-Zahre, Nisrine, Nora Boneh. 2010. Coreferential dative constructions in Syrian Arabic and Modern Hebrew. Brill’s Annual ofGoogle Scholar

  • Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics 2. 248-282.Google Scholar

  • Bergqvist, Henrik. 2012. Epistemic marking in Ika (Arwako). Studies in Language (News from the field) 36 (1). 151-178.Google Scholar

  • Bergqvist, Henrik. 2016. Complex epistemic perspective in Kogi (Arwako). International Journal of American Linguistics 82:1. 1-34.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bergqvist, Henrik. 2017. The role of ‘perspective’ in epistemic marking. Lingua 186-187. 5-20.Google Scholar

  • Bergqvist, Henrik. in press. The role of sentence type in Ika (Arwako) egophoric marking.In Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe and Lila San Roque (eds.), Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Bickel, Balthasar. 2008. Verb Agreement and Epistemic Marking: a Typological Journey from the Himalayas to the Caucasus. In: Huber, Brigitte, Marianne Volkart, Paul Widmer (eds.), Chomolangma, Demawend und Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, 1-14. Halle: IITBS.Google Scholar

  • Bickel, Balthasar, Johanna Nichols. 2007. Inflectional Morphology. In Shopen, Timothy (ed.) Language Typology and Syntactic Description, vol. 3: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, 169-240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Bosse, Solveig, Benjamin Bruening and Masahiro Yamada. 2012. Affected Experiencers. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 30 (4). 1185-1230CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Camilleri, Maris and Louisa Sadler. 2012. On the Analysis of Non-Selected Datives in Maltese. In Butt, Miriam, Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG12 Conference, 118-138. CSLI Publications. http://csli-publications.stanford.edu.Google Scholar

  • Caplow, Nancy J. 2000. The epistemic marking system of émigré Dokpa Tibetan. Unpublished ms. Santa Barbara: University of California.Google Scholar

  • Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Creissels, Denis. 2008. Person variations in Akhvakh verb morphology: Functional motivation and origin of an uncommon pattern. STUF 61. 309-25.Google Scholar

  • Curnow, Timothy J. 1997. A grammar of Awa Pit (Cuaiquer): An indigenous language of south-western Colombia. Canberra: Australian National University dissertation. -. 2002. Conjunct/disjunct marking in Awa Pit. Linguistics 40. 611-27.Google Scholar

  • Dahl, Östen. 2000. Egophoricity in Discourse and Syntax. Functions of Language 7. 33-77.Google Scholar

  • DeLancey, Scott. 1990. Ergativity and the cognitive model of event structure in Lhasa Tibetan. Cognitive Linguistics 1. 289-321. -. 2003. Lhasa Tibetan. In: LaPolla, Randy J., Graham Thurgood (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 270-88. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Dickinson, Connie. 2000. Mirativity in Tsafiki. Studies in Language 24. 379-421.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Fischer, Klaus. 1997. German-English Verb Valency: A Contrastive Analysis. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Floyd, Simeon. in press. Egophoricity and argument structure in Cha’palaa. In Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe, Lila San Roque (eds.), Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe, Lila San Roque (eds.). in press. Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Fried, Mirjam. 2011. The notion of affectedness in expressing interpersonal functions. In Grygiel, Marcin, Laura A. Janda (eds.), Slavic linguistics in a cognitive framework, 121-143. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar

  • Fried, Robert Wayne. 2010. A Grammar of Bao’an Tu: A Mongolic Language of Northwest China. PhD thesis. The University of Buffalo, State University of New York.Google Scholar

  • Fried, Robert Wayne. in press. Egophoricity in Magghuer: Insights from pragmatic uses of the subjective/objective distinction. In Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe, Lila San Roque (eds.), Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar

  • Gonzales Castaño, Geny, Martine Bruil. 2016. On the existence of egophoricity in Nam Trik. Paper presented at the Symposium on Evidentiality, Egophoricity and Engagement, 17.-18. March 2016, Stockholm University.Google Scholar

  • Hale, Austin. 1980. Person Markers: Finite Conjunct and Disjunct Verb Froms in Newari. Papers in South-East Asian Linguistics 7. 95-106.Google Scholar

  • Haddad, Youssef A. 2013. Pronouns and intersubjectivity in Lebanese Arabic gossip. Journal of Pragmatics 49. 57-77.Google Scholar

  • Halevy, Rivka. 2008. The grammaticalization ‘chains’ of the subject coreferential dative in Semitic and elsewhere. In Breban, Tine, Lieselotte Brems, Kristin Davidse, Tanja Mortelmans (eds.), Proceedings of “NRG 4 New reflections on Grammaticalization 4”. University of Leuven 16-19 July 2008. http://wwwling.arts.kuleuven.be/nrg4/Google Scholar

  • Haller, Felix, Chungda Haller. 2007. Einführung in das Zentraltibetische: Auf Basis des Dialektes von Shigatse/westliches Zentraltibet (Tsang). (Introduction to Central Tibetan: On the basis of the dialect of Shigatse/western central Tibet (Tsang)). Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar

  • Hargreaves, David. 1991. The concept of intentional action in the grammar of Kathmandu Newari. Eugene: University of Oregon dissertation. -. 2005. Agency and intentional action in Kathmandu Newar. Himalayan Linguistics 5. 1-48.Google Scholar

  • Janhunen, Juha, Marja Peltomaa, Erika Sandman, Xiawu Dongzhou. 2008. Wutun. (Languages of the World/Materials 466). München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar

  • Jakobson, Roman. 1990 [1957]. Shifters and verbal categories. In Waugh, Linda R., Monique Monville-Burston (eds.), On language, 386-392. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

  • Jespersen, Otto. 1922. Language; its nature, development, and origin. London: Geroge Allen & Unwin Ltd.Google Scholar

  • Lehmann, Christian. 2005. Participant roles, thematic roles and syntactic functions. In: Tsunoda, Tasaku, Taro Kageyama (eds.), Voice and Grammatical Relations: Festschrift for Masayoshi Shibatani, 153-174. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Loughnane, Robyn. 2009. A Grammar of Oksapmin. PhD thesis. Melbourne: University of Melbourne.Google Scholar

  • Lum, Jonathon. 2016. A conjunct-disjunct analysis of Dhivehi verbal morphology. Paper presented at the Symposium on Evidentiality, Egophoricity and Engagement, 17.-18. March 2016, Stockholm University.Google Scholar

  • Molochieva, Zarina. 2011. Tense, aspect, and mood in Chechen. PhD thesis. Leipzig: Universität Leipzig.Google Scholar

  • Molochieva, Zarina. 2012. Source and status of information in Chechen. Presentation at the SLE 2012 in Stockholm: Workshop on “Complex perspective in epistemic marking: the origins, motivations and definitions of intersubjective perspectives ingrammar.”Google Scholar

  • Norcliffe, Elisabeth. in press. Egophoricity and evidentiality in Guambiano (Namtrik). In Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe, Lila San Roque (eds.), Egophoricity. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar

  • Post, Mark W. 2007. A Grammar of Galo. PhD thesis. Melbourne: La Trobe University. -. 2013. Person-sensitive TAME marking in Galo: Historical origins and functional motivation. In Tim Thornes, Erik Andvik, Gwendolyn Hyslop, Joana Janson (eds.), Functional-Historical Approaches to Explanation: In honor of Scott DeLancey, 107-130. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Rákosi, György. 2008. Some remarks on Hungarian ethical datives. In Andor, Jószef, Béla Hollósy, Tibor Laczkó, Péter Palyvás (eds.), When grammar minds language and literature: Festchrift for Prof. Béla Korponay on the occasion of his 80th birthday, 413-422. University of Debrece.Google Scholar

  • Rojas Curieux, Tulia, Beatriz Vasquez de Ruiz, Geny Gonzales Castaño, Esteban Díaz Montenegro. 2009. Léxico de la lengua Nam Trik de Totoró. Popoayán: SignaArtes Gráficas.Google Scholar

  • Sandman, Erika. in press. Egophoricity in Wutun. In Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe, Lila San Roque (eds.), Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • San Roque, Lila. 2008. An introduction to Duna grammar. Canberra: Australian National University dissertation.Google Scholar

  • San Roque, Lila, Simeon Floyd, Elisabeth Norcliffe. in press. Egophoricity: An introduction. In Floyd, Simeon, Elisabeth Norcliffe, Lila San Roque (eds.), Egophoricity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Schmid, Josef. 2006. Die “freien” Dative. (The “free” datives). In Ágel, Vilmos, Ludwig M. Eichinger, Hans Werner Eroms, Peter Hellwig, Hans Jürgen Heringer, Henning Lobin (eds.), Dependency and Valency: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Vol. 2, 951-962. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Siewierska, Anna. 2013. Verbal Person Marking. In Dryer, Matthew S., Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/102 (28.09.2016).Google Scholar

  • Slater, Keith. 2003. Mangghuer. In Janhunen, Juha (ed.), The Mongolic languages, 307-324. London, New York: Routledge. Google Scholar

  • Van Valin, Robert D., Randy J. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, Meaning, and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Wegener, Heide. 1989. Eine Modalpartikel besonderer Art: Der Dativus Ethicus. (A modal particle of a special kind: The ethical dative). In Weydt, Harald (ed.), Sprechen mit Partikeln, 56-73. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Widmer Manuel. forthcoming. A grammar of Bunan. (Mouton Grammar Library).Google Scholar

  • Zúñiga, Fernando, Seppo Kittilä (eds.). 2010. Benefactives and Malefactives: Typological perspectives and case studies. (Typological Studies in Language 92). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Åkerman, Vesa. 2012. Inflection of finite verbs in Mongghul. SIL Electronic Working Papers 2012-003. https://www.sil.org/resources/publications/entry/49117 (16.01.2017)Google Scholar

About the article

Received: 2017-01-30

Accepted: 2017-06-27

Published Online: 2017-10-28

Published in Print: 2017-10-26


Citation Information: Open Linguistics, Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 359–377, ISSN (Online) 2300-9969, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2017-0018.

Export Citation

© 2017. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. BY-NC-ND 4.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in