qiihoskeh | Noimi Notes: Actant Morphosyntax Part 3 (Reply)

as before

Notes On A New Language Project

ZActa.TXT, Part 3 -- qiihoskeh
2005.Apr.20 -- file started
2005.Aug.07 -- current
This version of Noimi has ditransitive verboids.

SYNTAX

NOTE:   Only things relevent to actant marking should be included here.

A clause consists of a verb component and any number of coverb components.

In general, a component consists of a head word and some number of argument
phrases, such that:
    The minimum number of phrases = the number of 3E# actants.
    The maximum number of phrases = the number of 3rd person contextual (but
        not situational) actants + the minimum number of phrases.

An argument phrase consists of 1 or more noun components of the same gender;
these are normally adjacent to each other.

The head words of verb components, coverb components, and noun components are
called verbs, coverbs, and nouns, respectively.

A verb has no coreferential actants and may have from 0 to 3 argument phrases;
a coverb component or a noun component has at least 1 coreferential actant and
may have from 0 to 2 argument phrases.

  Questions:
   1. How are coverb components distinguished from noun components?
      * Possibly, there are additional markers for distinguishing coverbs,
        such as circumstantial, etc. and maybe one for parenthetical nouns
        also. These might be particles rather than affixes. There might be
        the following as well: a contrastive particle, for the A-not-B and
        not-A-but-B constructions, and a comparative particle; the phrase
        after the particle would "compete with" and have the same agreement
        as the preceding phrase.
   2. Why are there no coverb components with no coreferential actants?
      * Possibly, adjunct clauses are used for this.
   3. How are adjunct clauses handled?
      * Possibly, the proposed additional coverb markers are used on verbs.

Proximate       = More Topical
Obviate         = Less Topical
Phrases with 3rd person "possessors" (3P-, COA-, 3E2-) are obviate.

If a verb has a 3rd person contextual (but not situational) actant and there's
a corresponding argument phrase _after_ the verb, the phrase is probably an
_afterthought_.

If a verb has a 3rd person contextual (but not situational) actant and there's
a corresponding argument phrase _before_ the verb, the phrase is relatively
_topical_ (compared to later phrases). Note, however, that it's less topical
than if the phrase were absent.

If a verb has a 3E# actant and the corresponding argument phrase comes _after_
the verb, the phrase is _focused_. If phrase comes _before_ the verb, none of
the above apply.

If a coverb or noun has a 3rd person contextual actant, no corresponding
argument phrase can appear.

If a coverb or noun has a 3E# actant, the corresponding argument phrase comes
_after_ the head word, but is not topicalized, an afterthought, or focused.

Identity

The syntax for identity clauses, where both subject and predicate are
definite, hasn't been determined yet. Predicates composed of multiple
components are a bit shaky too, even when indefinite: does the head of
each component take a 3rd person actant? Possibly, split the clauses
into 2 parts:
        There's a big yellow dog; the dog that ran is it.
          (instead of: The dog that ran is a big yellow dog.)
        There's the big yellow dog; the dog that ran is it.
          (instead of: The dog that ran is the big yellow dog.)
However, now this requires that each component of the subject take the
3rd person actant!

STEM FORMATION AND DERIVATION

Incorporation

NOTE:   Only things relevent to actant marking should be included here.

Only nominoids can be incorporated. The nominoids must be fairly simple. A
common nominoid is indefinite when incorporated. The short form of a proper
nominoid can be incorporated: this is especially useful with the various words
for alienable "possession". Only one argument may be incorporated in a given
word-form, but that can be any argument of a non-intransitive word (verboids
only?), limited only by gender-agreement requirements.

General Derivation

NOTE:   Only things relevent to actant marking should be included here.

*********** new marker order used up to this point ***********

There will be generic derivational morphemes which act like Ani- and Ina-,
except that they derive nominoids.

There will be ways of deriving proper nominoids (personal and other) from both
verboids and nominoids.

        Note: perhaps geographical words (e.g. river, island, mountain) can
        take a 2nd argument for the name; the name word, in some cases, could
        then be incorporated.

Compound Verboids

    General Rules:

    (a) The compound is constructed using one component as a base, and its
        arguments become the base's arguments.
    (b) When adding a component, one of its arguments is shared with one of
        the base's arguments. Assuming the component is _prefixed_ to the
        base, the shared argument is the base's A1 and the component's A2
        (but A1 if the component is intransitive). These arguments must be
        gender-compatible. If the component is intransitive, the shared
        argument is the compound's A1, if not, but the base is intransitive,
        the shared argument is the compound's A2, and if neither, the shared
        argument is the compound's A3; this last kind is possible only if
        neither base nor component is ditransitive. The compound can become a
        new base.
    (c) The semantics of the compound depends on the specific combination of
        component subclasses.

Note:   With the new rules, the components don't have to be verboids! This
        means that the compounds also don't have to be verboids! In this case,
        the gender of the compound is that of the A1 argument.

Here are some common types of compounds. These are derived from 2 verboids in
each case.

    1.  Locational Transitives + Actional Transitives
        Ditransitive (R1:S ?/I, R3:I/A, R2:A)
        compound R2     = actional R2
        compound R3     = actional R1 and locational R2
        compound R1     = locational R1

        Note:   the locational part loses the ability to invert.

        Example:        He CARRIED the child TO the doctor.

    2.  Locational Transitives + Activity Intransitives
        Transitive (R1:S ?/I, R2:A)
        compound R2     = quality/state R2 and activity R1
        compound R1     = quality/state R1

        Example:        She WALKED TO the store.

    3.  Quality or State Intransitives + Actional Transitives
        Transitive (R1:S ?/I/A, R2:A)
        compound R2     = actional R2
        compound R1     = actional R1 and quality/state R1

        Examples:       He KICKED it TO PIECES.
                        They PAINTED the barn RED.

    4.  Quality or State Intransitives + Perceptual Transitives
        Transitive (R1:S ?/I/A, R2:A)
        compound R2     = perceptual R2
        compound R1     = perceptual R1 and quality/state R1

        Example:        It LOOKS BIG TO me.

        Possibly any evidential or attitudinal?
        Possibly any Intransitives?

*********** new marker order after this point ***********

    Notes:

/       (1) Multiple verbals can be combined, provided that the arguments of
/       the components align with each other and that the resulting argument
/       structure is valid.

        (2) This method of compounding can be used for some of the aspectual
        inflections, such as entry to a state, exit from a state, change via
        a state, and change toward a quality. The morphemes for these would
        follow the open class morphemes.

Possibly, compounding a relationship and an intransitive nominoid can be used
to allow "possessive" affixes to be added to the nominoid (e.g. pet dog).

        I need to figure out how this would be distinguished from
        incorporation.

Verbal compounding might be used for incorporation by using an Un# actant.