The development of subject case marking in Omotic Mao

Q2 Arts and Humanities
M. Ahland
{"title":"The development of subject case marking in Omotic Mao","authors":"M. Ahland","doi":"10.32473/sal.v48i2.118036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Mao subgroup of the Omotic family shows various degrees of development of morphological subject case marking which results from largely internal, but very similar historical pathways across the group. These different patterns find their source in an older prenominal demonstrative + NP + bound postnominal form construction; in this construction the bound postnominal form of this construction is itself related to (and often reduced from) the corresponding prenominal demonstrative.  Evidence of such a construction is found in each of the four Mao languages but in only three of the languages has the construction become clearly associated with marking grammatical subjects. The pathway toward subject case marking appears to have begun with the demonstrative construction becoming associated with topical referents in discourse. In three of the four Mao languages, the prenominal demonstrative then became associated with definiteness (a typologically common development from topic-marking devices); in those same three languages the frequent co-association between topics and grammatical subjects led to the postnominal form developing subject case marking status. The prenominal definite marker (the erstwhile demonstrative) eventually became emancipated from the postnominal case marker to various degrees across the Mao group. The degree to which subject-development and emancipation between the prenominal and postnominal portions of this demonstrative construction has become established in each of the languages has led to the diverse patterns across the subgroup.","PeriodicalId":35170,"journal":{"name":"Studies in African Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in African Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32473/sal.v48i2.118036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Mao subgroup of the Omotic family shows various degrees of development of morphological subject case marking which results from largely internal, but very similar historical pathways across the group. These different patterns find their source in an older prenominal demonstrative + NP + bound postnominal form construction; in this construction the bound postnominal form of this construction is itself related to (and often reduced from) the corresponding prenominal demonstrative.  Evidence of such a construction is found in each of the four Mao languages but in only three of the languages has the construction become clearly associated with marking grammatical subjects. The pathway toward subject case marking appears to have begun with the demonstrative construction becoming associated with topical referents in discourse. In three of the four Mao languages, the prenominal demonstrative then became associated with definiteness (a typologically common development from topic-marking devices); in those same three languages the frequent co-association between topics and grammatical subjects led to the postnominal form developing subject case marking status. The prenominal definite marker (the erstwhile demonstrative) eventually became emancipated from the postnominal case marker to various degrees across the Mao group. The degree to which subject-development and emancipation between the prenominal and postnominal portions of this demonstrative construction has become established in each of the languages has led to the diverse patterns across the subgroup.
略语中主语格标注的发展
毛氏亚群的形态主格标记表现出不同程度的发展,这主要是由于内部的,但在整个群体中非常相似的历史途径。这些不同的模式源于一个古老的名词前指示+ NP +限定后名词形式结构;在这个结构中,这个结构的限定后名形式本身与相应的前名指示代词相关(并且经常从其派生)。在四种毛语中都发现了这种结构的证据,但只有三种语言中这种结构与标记语法主语明显相关。主语格标记的途径似乎是从指示结构与话语中的主题指称物相关联开始的。在四种毛语中的三种中,名前指示语随后与确定性联系在一起(这是主题标记手段在类型学上的共同发展);在这三种语言中,主题和语法主语之间的频繁关联导致后名形式发展为主语格标记状态。名词前定标记(以前的指示)最终在不同程度上从名词后格标记中解放出来。这种指示结构的前名和后名部分之间的主体发展和解放在每种语言中得到确立的程度,导致了整个亚群的不同模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Studies in African Linguistics
Studies in African Linguistics Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信