{"title":"被夹在中间","authors":"J. Heath","doi":"10.1075/JPCL.00030.HEA","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The relationship between the Songhay and Mande language families has fascinated West Africanists. The typological\n similarities run deep, but the respective lexicons are noncognate. I focus here on a typological rarity, a bidirectional case\n marker (BCM), namely Proto-Songhay *nà and its descendants, and argue that it was most likely borrowed from Mande as part of the\n adoption by Songhay of the equally typologically rare Mande-type S(‑infl)‑O‑V‑X syntax, which reduces to S‑O‑V‑X when there is no\n post-subject inflectional morpheme (predicative marker). Apparently Songhay had little choice but to borrow the morpheme on the\n grounds that it did not previously possess the S(‑infl)‑O‑V‑X construction of which it is a key component, especially since a\n buffer between S and O prevents real-time mis-parsing of two adjacent NPs as possessor-possessum. The medial (‘caught in the\n middle’) position of the morpheme in the S‑BCM‑O sequence favored the borrowing, in spite of its abstract relational function\n which in some theoretical models should block borrowing.","PeriodicalId":43608,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Caught in the middle\",\"authors\":\"J. Heath\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/JPCL.00030.HEA\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The relationship between the Songhay and Mande language families has fascinated West Africanists. The typological\\n similarities run deep, but the respective lexicons are noncognate. I focus here on a typological rarity, a bidirectional case\\n marker (BCM), namely Proto-Songhay *nà and its descendants, and argue that it was most likely borrowed from Mande as part of the\\n adoption by Songhay of the equally typologically rare Mande-type S(‑infl)‑O‑V‑X syntax, which reduces to S‑O‑V‑X when there is no\\n post-subject inflectional morpheme (predicative marker). Apparently Songhay had little choice but to borrow the morpheme on the\\n grounds that it did not previously possess the S(‑infl)‑O‑V‑X construction of which it is a key component, especially since a\\n buffer between S and O prevents real-time mis-parsing of two adjacent NPs as possessor-possessum. The medial (‘caught in the\\n middle’) position of the morpheme in the S‑BCM‑O sequence favored the borrowing, in spite of its abstract relational function\\n which in some theoretical models should block borrowing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43608,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/JPCL.00030.HEA\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/JPCL.00030.HEA","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The relationship between the Songhay and Mande language families has fascinated West Africanists. The typological
similarities run deep, but the respective lexicons are noncognate. I focus here on a typological rarity, a bidirectional case
marker (BCM), namely Proto-Songhay *nà and its descendants, and argue that it was most likely borrowed from Mande as part of the
adoption by Songhay of the equally typologically rare Mande-type S(‑infl)‑O‑V‑X syntax, which reduces to S‑O‑V‑X when there is no
post-subject inflectional morpheme (predicative marker). Apparently Songhay had little choice but to borrow the morpheme on the
grounds that it did not previously possess the S(‑infl)‑O‑V‑X construction of which it is a key component, especially since a
buffer between S and O prevents real-time mis-parsing of two adjacent NPs as possessor-possessum. The medial (‘caught in the
middle’) position of the morpheme in the S‑BCM‑O sequence favored the borrowing, in spite of its abstract relational function
which in some theoretical models should block borrowing.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages (JPCL) aims to provide a forum for the scholarly study of pidgins, creoles, and other contact language varieties, from multi-disciplinary perspectives. The journal places special emphasis on current research devoted to empirical description, theoretical issues, and the broader implications of the study of contact languages for theories of language acquisition and change, and for linguistic theory in general. The editors also encourage contributions that explore the application of linguistic research to language planning, education, and social reform, as well as studies that examine the role of contact languages in the social life and culture, including the literature, of their communities.