accessiblity to relativisation in orungu (b10, gabon)

http://llacan.vjf.cnrs.fr/

Mark Van de Velde & Odette AmbouroueLLACAN, Paris

Accessiblity to relativisation in Orungu (B10, Gabon)

1. Introduction

1.1. Orungu (Bantu B11b)Previous work:Ambouroue (2007)Van de Velde & Ambouroue (2011)

Tonality:Philippson & Puech (Galwa)

(definiteness marking!)

Some articles on the other varieties,

Galwa dictionary by Raponda-Walker

1. Introduction

The Myene documentation project, funded by

will provide us with a text corpus by the end of 2013.

1. Introduction

1.2. The accessibility hierarchy (Keenan & Comrie 1977)SU > DO > IO > OBL > GEN > OCOMP

The hierarchy constraints:1. A language must be able to relativise subjects2. Any RC-forming strategy must apply to a continuous segment of the AH (i.e. as far as relativisation is concerned, a language is free to treat adjacent positions on the AH as the same, but it cannot ‘skip’ positions)3. Strategies that apply at one point of the AH may in principle cease to apply at any lower point

2. Phrasal syntax: some basics

Typological abbreviations for syntactic roles:

S subject (no need to distinguish between S & A)P object in a two participant constructionT object in a three participant construction that

typically expresses the thematic role of ThemeG object in a three participant construction that

typically expresses the thematic role of Goal

2. Phrasal syntax: some basics

Comrie & Keenan:SU > DO > IO > OBL > GEN > OCOMP

Word order suggests dominant secundative alignment in Orungu three participant constructions, hence:S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

3. The structure of Relative clauses

-Relative verbs agree with the relativised NP (NPrel)-They have a high VP and a low TAM-prefix (“formative”). Any non-relative verb form that has these tonal characteristics, is not formally distinguished from its relative counterpart.-Relative verbs take either a VP or a PP, but these are only distinct in class 1.-Only the VP can be used in headless relatives.-When the NPrel is a first or second person pronoun, agreement on the relative verb is of class 9.-In non-subject relatives, the subject follows the verb

3. The structure of Relative clauses

(8) Far pasta.arɛFndi ‘he wrote’b.arɛFndi / warɛFndi ‘who wrote (NPrel of

class 1)’c.warɛKndi ‘they wrote’d.warɛFndi ‘who wrote (NPrel class 2)’ (9) Recent pasta.atɛKnda ‘he wrote’b.aꜜtɛKnda ‘who wrote’ (NPrel of class 1)c.waꜜtɛKnda ‘they wrote’ / ‘who wrote’ (NPrel

cl. 2)

3. The structure of Relative clauses

An alternative strategy for relative clause formation involves a relative form of the verb re ‘be’ and a non-finite form of the lexical verb (infinitive plus perfect (?) clitic pa).

(10) naɣo yere myɛK ɗyena pa |naɣo y-e-re myɛK ɗyena pa| 9.house.dtp ix-pr-be ix-1sg.ppr

inf.see perf

‘the house I saw’

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.1. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

(11) oꜜŋwant aɣolin oɣ aɓa|oꜜŋw-anto a-a-gol-in-i o-ga a-ba|1-woman.dtp i-rp-buy-appl-rp 1-chief.dtp6-mangoes.ntp

‘The woman bought mangoes for the chief.’

(12) oꜜŋwant ꜜaɣolin oɣ aɓa|oꜜŋw-anto a-a-ɣol-in-i o-ga a-ba|1-woman.dtp i-rp-buy-appl-rp.rel 1-chief.dtp6-mango.ntp

‘the woman who bought mangoes for the chief’

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.2. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

(13) myayeni naɣo|mi-a-yen-i nago|1sg-rp-see-rp 9.house.dtp‘I saw the house.’

(14) naɣo yayeno myɛF|nago i-a-yen-o=myɛK|9.house.dtpix-rp.see-pass.rel=1sg.ppr‘the house I saw’

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.3. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

(15) oɣa waɣolino n oꜜŋwant aba|o-ɣa wa-a-ɣol-in-o no oꜜŋw-anto a-ba|1-chief.dtp i.rel-fp-buy-appl-pas by 1-woman 6-mang.ntp

‘the chief for whom the woman bought mangoes’

(16) oɣa wareβizo myɛF oŋwana |o-ɣa u-a-reβ-iz-o=myɛK oŋw-ana| 1-chief.dtp i(pp).rel-fp-show-caus-pas=1sg.ppr1.child

‘the chief I showed the child to’

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.4. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

(17) aɓa maɣolin ꜜoŋwant ꜜoɣa|a-ɓa m-a-ɣol-in-i oꜜŋw-anto o-ɣa|6-mangoes.itp vi-fp-buy-appl-fp 1-woman.dtp1-chief.dtp

‘mangoes that the woman bought for the chief’

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.4. S > P > G > T > Obl > GenDative alternation shows that syntactic role is

important (rather than thematic role).

(18) a. oɣ aβeni yaŋgo ɣo lekɔKli (Theme = P)b. oɣ aβeni lekɔKli yaŋgo (Theme = T)‘the chief gave the school books.’

(19) a. yaŋgo yaβeno n oɣa ɣo lekɔKli b. yaŋgo yaβen oɣa lekɔaːli ‘the books that the chief gave (to) the school.’

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.4. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

Importance of inherent prominence

(20) oŋwaꜜn aɣolizo n oꜜŋwaꜜnt oɣa |oŋw-ana a-a-ɣol-iz-o no oꜜŋw-anto o-ɣa|1-child i.rel-fp-buy-caus-pas by 1-woman 1-chief

‘the child that the woman sold to the chief’

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.4. S > P > G > T > Obl > GenInherent prominence is a characteristic of

participants in a given situation.(21) osaka wakolin oŋwanto oɣa

|o-saka wa-a-kol-in-i oŋw-anto o-ɣa|1-slave.dtp i.rel-prf-buy-appl-prf 1-woman.dtp

1-chief.dtp

‘the slave that the woman bought for the chief’

(22) o-saka wayiŋgin oɣa n oŋwanto|o-saka wa-a-yiŋ-in-o oɣa no oŋw-aːnto|1-slave.dtp i.rel-fp-treat-appl-pas 1-chief.dtpby 1-woma.dtp

‘the slave that the woman treated for the chief’

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.4. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen

(23) a. oɣaŋga ayiŋgi oɣo w oŋwana‘The healer treated the child’s arm.’b. oɣaŋga ayiŋgi oŋwana oɣɔF‘The healer treated the child’s arm.’c. oɣɔF wayiŋgo oŋwana n oɣaŋga‘the arm that the healer treated for/to the child’

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.5. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen(24) oŋwan onoːme azɛFɾiːn onɛFːnʤi ntiːna y itɔKːtɔF n okwaːɾa

‘the boy cut the banana plant for the teacher with a machete’

(25) okwaɾa wazɛFɾini n oŋwaꜜn onome onɛKnʤi ntina y itɔKtɔF

‘the machete with which the boy cut the banana plant for the teacher’(26) okwaɾa wazɛFɾin oŋwaꜜn onome onɛKnʤi n intina y itɔKtɔF

‘the machete with which the boy cut the banana plant for the teacher’(27) okwaɾa wazɛFɾini n oŋwaꜜn onome onɛKnʤi n intina y itɔKtɔF

‘the machete with which the boy cut the banana plant for the teacher’

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.6. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen4.6.1. the connective constructions is used

to express possession External possession: NPrel = P or G

(28) a. cwana y oꜜŋwanto winɔK yaɗyuwi‘The kettle of that woman broke.’b. oꜜŋwanto aꜜɗyuno no ɲcwana‘the woman whose kettle broke’

4. Accessibility to relativisation

4.6. S > P > G > T > Obl > Gen4.6.2. the connective constructions is not

used to express possession

(29) a. ilɔanda y alɛFŋgɛF minɔK matuwuni mbambye‘These pumpkin seeds grew well.’b. alɛaŋgɛF matuwun ilɔanda mbambye‘the pumpkins whose seeds grew well’

5. discussion

To summarise:A hole in the hierarchy!

S > P > G > T[+salient] > T[-salient] > (Obl) > Gen

5. discussion

Tentative historical explanation:- There used to be no restrictions on

accessibility to relativisation (as, e.g., in nearby A70)

- Subject relatives are strongly preferred over other relatives, therefore prior passivisation was preferred over direct relativisation

- Accessibility to passivisation was restricted (either grammatically or in terms of frequency) to positions high on the NP hierarchy

- The preferred strategy (first passivise, then relativise) became obligatory

5. discussion

RESULT:

A minority pattern in line with the typological generalisations of the Accessibility Hierarchy

references

Ambouroue, Odette (2007). Eléments de description de l’orungu, langue bantu du Gabon (B11b). PhD thesis. Universite Libre de Bruxelles.

Keenan, Edward L. and Bernard Comrie. (1977/1987). Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. In: Edward L. Keenan (ed.) Universal Grammar. London: Croom Helm, 3–45, p3-45 (Originally appeared in Linguistic Inquiry 8: 63–99.)