Formal Approaches to South Asian Languages (E-Journal)
Not a member yet
116 research outputs found
Sort by
The Hindi correlative as an overtly pronounced index
Full text linkOne of the main defining features of the Hindi correlative construction is the necessity of a demonstrative correlate in the main clause. While previous research has done much to distinguish the correlative from other relativizing structures, such as the postnominal relative clause, it is still unclear what the relationship between the demonstrative and correlative clause is. In order to understand how the correlative clause enters the syntax, it is important to look at the internal structure and the semantic contribution of the demonstrative. In this paper, I will show that the correlative is an overtly pronounced index of the demonstrative, and therefore an argument of the demonstrative rather than adjoined to it. The semantic contribution of the demonstrative itself remain the same.
Clitic blocking as a side-effect of 1st/2nd person licensing: The case of -suu in Punjabi
Full text linkThe 3rd person object clitic –suu in Punjabi is blocked with 1st/2nd subjects, but not 3rd subjects. Presenting these novel facts, this paper explains blocking effects on -suu as a side-effect of the person licensing requirements of 1st/2nd subjects. I propose that –suu is licensed at FP, to which it moves via the Part/T head. In a derivation with 1st/2nd subjects, this movement is impeded due to mismatching person features on the licensing Part head. Conversely, in a structure with 3rd subjects, there is no 1st/2nd person feature bearing PartP to obstruct the clitic’s movement.
Nepali Le as a Marker of Categorical Subjecthood
Full text linkThe purpose of this paper is to investigate an account of ergative-nominative alternations in non- perfective clauses in Nepali. As observed in many Indo-Aryan languages, the ergative case marker is obligatory in perfective tenses. The variable presence of ergative marking in the non-perfective domain of Nepali has been articulated as an expression of emphasis, subject animacy, or individual- level predication. I argue that that =le marks the subject of a categorical proposition in the sense of Kuroda (1972). I explore the felicity of =le in particular discourse contexts depending upon whether the response is presented thetically or categorically. I also note that =le may only be found in quantifier phrases with strong construal, which provides support for the notion that =le marks categorical subjects.
A temporal semantics for Malayalam Conjunctive Participle Constructions
Full text linkThis paper asks how the semantics of Conjunctive Participle Constructions are obtained in Malayalam. After providing an overview of the syntactic and pragmatic factors governing the use of this construction, the paper points out the similarity of this Malayalam construction to the English absolutive construction. It suggests that an account like Stump (1985) might be able to account for the Malayalam data. The main conclusion of the paper is that Malayalam Conjunctive Participle Constructions are semantically underspecified for tense and aspect and also probably structurally small.
Perception of Breathy Phonation in Gujarati
Full text linkThe correlates of breathiness are similar across consonants and vowels, raising a question about whether breathy consonant/breathy vowel contrasts are confusable in languages with both, e.g. Gujarati. We investigate the perception of phonemically breathy Cs and Vs in Gujarati via three tasks: free-sort, AX discrimination, and picture-matching identification. Results from six native listeners indicate that breathiness is indeed confusable: participants reliably identify the presence of breathiness if the acoustic correlates thereof are strong enough, but cannot reliably assign it to the appropriate segment (consonant or vowel), rendering it difficult to distinguish C?V from CV? .