0&%1$(%1$%1$.$ · 2020. 7. 28. · so t(%".1"d%&’(8o 0.&e$%&e" mo 6d.&-%&e")("#$%&’(go ‘’(%&%;"(%)("#$%&’(lo =y&%"(%&$,)("#$%&’(ho e()&%)’\(jo t()a".&e"a)e".>* io

Negation as a nominal property in PitjantjatjaraSasha Wilmoth ALW 2020

Photo taken near Pukatja/Ernabella,APY Lands

Standard negation“The basic means that languages have for negating declarative verbal main clauses” Miestamo, 2007553.

Most Pama-Nyungan languages use pre-verbal negators, such as Gugu Yalanji:1 ngayu jungkalu kari dumbarri-nyI billycan NEG break-PST‘I didn’t break the billycan’ Patz 2002197

Pitjantjatjara is an example of ‘A/Fin/Neg-LV’ Miestamo 2005• There is a difference between affirmative and negative clauses (other than the presence of the negator).

• ‘The lexical verb loses its finiteness, and usually a new finite element (auxiliary) is introduced … to bear the finite verbal categories.’ (p. 73

• The lexical verb is negated.

Standard negation(2a)tjinguṟu tjana ninti-ri-ngku-nytja wiya skuula-ngkamaybe they knowledgeable-IN C H AUG NM LZ NEG school-LO C‘Maybe they’re not learning at school.’SW2019042508PitjKunpuKanyini)

(b)tjinguṟu tjana ninti-ri-nga-nyi skuula-ngkamaybe they knowledgeable-IN C H AUG PRS school-LO C‘Maybe they’re learning at school.’

The lexical verb must be nominalised before being negated.No finite verb is necessary.

wiya1. Interjection2. Privative3. Ascriptive negation4. Constituent negation5. Existential negation6. On its own7. In derived verbs8. Standard negation9. Negative imperatives


‘No!’

3ka palu-nya tjana u-nga-nyi wama,and.D S 3SG ACC 3PL .ERG give-AUG PRS alcohol“nyiiku nyuntu tjiki-nt-itja mukuri-nyi piṟuku?”here.you.go 2SG .N OM drink-NM LZIN T like-PRS again

ka palu “wiya, palya”and.D S 3SG .N OM no good

‘And they’re giving him alcohol, like “Here,do you want to drink again?” and he’s like“No, it’s okay”.’SW2019040102FamilyProblem)


‘Lacking X’

4 ka palu ngaṟa-ngi, maḻpa wiya kutju inka-nyi.and.D S 3SG .N OM stand-PST.IP FV friend NEG alone play-PRS‘And he was standing there, playing alone without any friends.’SW2019041802PinguJealous)

1. Interjection2. Privative3. Ascriptive negation4. Constituent negation5. Existential negation6. On its own7. In derived verbs8. Standard negation9. Negative imperatives

‘Not X’

5 ngayu-ku tjukurpa mulamula wiya, ngalypangalypa1SG G EN story true.RD P NEG pretend.RD P‘My story is not true, it’s make believe.’SW2019052805TjitjikuTjukurpa)

wiya


‘No X’

6uwa tjitji panya wanka-ri-nguyes child ANAPH awake-IN CH PSTmunu palu-ṟu paka-ṟa nya-ngu kita wiyaand.SS 3SG ERG get.up-C VB see-PST guitar NEG

‘That kid woke up and didn’t see the guitar’ (lit. ‘saw no guitar’)SW2019032803GuitarStory)

wiya


‘There is no X’

7pay panya wiya ngaṟa-nyi ka email-pa-ngka wangka-nyipay ANAPH NEG exist-PRS and.D S email-EPLO C talk-PRS‘My pay didn’t come through, I’m talking (to them) on email.’(lit. ‘None of that pay exists.’)SW2019060201Conversation)


As argument: ‘nothing/no one’

8ka palu paka-ṟa wiya nya-ngu.and.D S 3SG .ERG get.up-C VB nothing see-PST‘And she got up and saw nothing.’SW2019033108

As predicate: ‘nonexistent’

9munu mangka palu-mpa=nta wiyaand.SS hair 3SG G EN=and.then nonexistent‘And then his hair was gone.’SW2019041105LeafStory)

wiya


In Pitjantjatjara, you can derive intransitive verbs from nominals with the inchoative -ri, or causative verbs by zero-derivation.

Nominal Inchoative Causativeninti ninti-ri-nga-nyi ninti-ni‘knowledgeable’ ‘learn’ ‘teach’

The same applies to wiya:wiya wiya-ri-nga-nyi wiya-ṉi

‘come to an end’ ‘finish (trans.)’‘pass away’ ‘kill’‘disappear’ ‘make disappear’‘stop doing X’

wiya


10ka nyaḻpi tjuṯa punka-ṟa wiya-ri-ngu, waḻpa puḻka-ngkaand.D S leaf PL fall-C VB NEGINCHPST wind big-LO C‘And all the leaves fell (until there were none left), because of a strong wind.’SW209061002LeafStory)

11tjana tjinguṟu wiya-lku ngana-mpa wangka3PL .ERG maybe NEGFUT 1PLG EN language‘Maybe they’ll lose our language.’SW2019042508PitjKunpuKanyini)

Wiya is a nominal much like any other nominal in the language. Only one other language where the negator is a nominal: Nadëb (Nadahup; Brazil. Weir, 1994, cited in Miestamo, 2005.

wiya


12tjinguṟu tjana ninti-ri-ngku-nytja wiya skuula-ngkamaybe they knowledgeable-IN C H AUG NM LZ NEG school-LO C‘Maybe they’re not learning (Pitjantjatjara) at school.’ SW2019042508PitjKunpuKanyini)

You can add a finite verb:13mai ngalku-ntja wiya nyina-ngi tjala-ngkafood eat-NM LZ NEG sit-PST.IP FV jail-LO C‘(He) was not eating food in jail.’SW2019041101FamilyProblemB

But this is not the default way to negate a clause.Only a quarter of the examples in my corpus have a finite matrix verb, and in most cases the verb is adding extra semantics.

wiya


Two types of nominalisation

Action nominalisation refers to the action itself.14… munu kuli-ntja tjana-mpa kampa kutjupa-na-nyiand.SS think-AC .NM Z 3PLG EN side another-AUG PRS

‘Various things are coming in) changing their thinking to a different way.’SW209053101TjukurpaPt1

Agentive nominalisation refers to the agent of the action.15ngaṉkurpa kaṯa-lpai-ngku ngaṉkurpa kaṯa-ṉibeard cut-AG .NM ZERG beard cut-PRS‘The barber [beard cutter] is cutting the beard.’SW20191004PJ28

wiya


The agentive nominalisation can be negated too.

16tjana Pitjantjatjara ninti-ri-ngku-pai wiya3PL .N OM /ERG Pitjantjatjara knowledgeable-IN C H AUG AG .NM Z NEG‘They don’t learn Pitjantjatjara’ (lit. ‘They are not learners of Pitjantjatjara.)SW2019042508PitjKunpuKanyini)

Tense is unspecified in standard negation (with both types of nominalisation).

17palu-ṟu mungartji/kuwari/mungawinki ngalku-ntja wiya3SG ERG yesterday/now/tomorrow eat-AC .NM Z N EG‘She did not eat yesterday/is not eating now/will not eat tomorrow’

wiya


Mood is unspecified too. The standard negation construction with the action nominalisation is also used for negative imperatives.

18“please, patja-nta wiya!”please bite-AC .NM Z NEG‘Please don’t bite!’SW2019042706ChaplinLion)

The verb wanti ‘leave it’ can be used as a finite main verb in negative imperatives (cf. Dyirbal, Dixon 1972, but this only occurs in a small minority of examples in my corpus.

Standard negationWhen the lexical verb is transitive, the subject is ergative — the nominalised verb is still contributing its verbal argument structure.

19 kutjupa-ngku tjinguṟu ninti-ntja wiyasomeone-ERG maybe teach-AC .NM Z NEG‘Maybe nobody teaches (them Pitjantjatjara).’SW2019042508PitjKunpuKanyini)

Maybe nytja-wiya is just acquiring the properties of a main clause verbal marker now due to insubordination?

Standard negationNot really: the same applies even when there is an intransitive matrix verb.

20Ka panya mina-ngku puyi-ntja wiya ngaṟa-ngiand.D S ANAPH water-ERG rainvAC .NM Z NEG stand-PST.IP FVyiya maṉkurpa nguwanpa.year three almost

‘And there was no rain for about three years’Tjukurpa Palya, Luke 425

Standard negationEven in the standard negation construction, wiya can be reverbalised like any other nominal!

Here we have the adverbial purkaṟangku modifying the converb kuliṟa, which forms a clause chain with palya-. This gets nominalised in order to be negated, and then reverbalised in order to receive TAM marking. The whole sentence has an ergative subject, because ‘think’ and ‘do’ are transitive, even though the matrix verb wiyari- is intransitive.

21Ka=ya kutjupa tjuṯa-ngku purkaṟa-ngku kuli-ṟa palya-ntja wiya-ri-ngku-ku and.D S3PL .ERG another PLERG careful-ERG ADV think-C VB do-AC .NM Z NEGINCHAUGFUT‘And some people will be reckless’ (they will not think and act carefully)Tjukurpa Palya, 2 Timothy 34

A typological perspectiveThe previous example (and the system as a whole) is incredibly similar to Tuparí (Tupían; Brazil):

22Kat koro’omkapbi’a ’ote.kat ko-ro-’om-ka-a-pbi’a ’otethat eat-NM LZN EG VB LZTH DU R 1PL .EXC L‘We (EXC L don’t eat that.’ Singerman 2018433

Standard negation is also very similar in Mparntwe Arrernte:23Me-l-atye kake are-tye-kenhe lyeteMother-ERG 1K IN .PO SS e.brother(O see-NM LZN EG today‘My mother can’t visit my brother today’ Wilkins 1989236

(palya-ntja-wiya-ri-ngku-ku)do-NM LZN EG VB LZTH FU T

A typological perspectiveSimilar constructions can be found dotted around the continent/world:• Kala Lagaw Ya/Kalaw Kawaw Ya (Ford & Ober 1991• Kayardild (Evans 1995• Arawakan languages (Michael 2014, 2015• Arizonan Tewa (Kroskrity 1984, 2010

We need further typological research into the relationship between standard negation and other constructions, as well as the selectional and categorialcharacteristics of negators.

This will shed light on the similar diachronic pathway that these languages have followed: PR IVAT IV E EXTEN S IO N Michael 2015.

Summary1. All negation in Pitjantjatjara is achieved with wiya, which only modifies nominals.

2. Standard negation = nominalised verb + wiya, with no finite element.3. Wiya is synchronically a nominal.4. The right combination of ingredients leads to an equivalence between nominal negation and standard negation in a number of unrelated languages.

Thank youAṉangu tjuṯa Pukatjala, especially Sandra Lewis

ARC Centre of Excellence for the Dynamics of Language CoEDL

University of Melbourne

Brandao, A. P. 2014. Standard and Non-Standard Negation in Paresi. In L. Michael & T. Granadillo Eds.), Negation in Arawak languages (pp. 169183. Brill.

Dixon, R. M. W. 1972. The Dyirbal language of North Queensland. Cambridge University Press.Evans, N. D. 1995. A grammar of Kayardild: With historical-comparative notes on Tangkic Vol. 15.

Walter de Gruyter.Ford, K., & Ober, D. 2004. A sketch of Kalaw Kawaw Ya. In S. Romaine (Ed.), Language in Australia 1.

paperback ed, pp. 118142. Cambridge Univ. Press.Goddard, C. 1985. A grammar of Yankunytjatjara. IAD Press.Kroskrity, P. V. 1984. Negation and subordination in Arizona Tewa: Discourse pragmatics influencing

syntax. International Journal of American Linguistics, 501, 94104.Kroskrity, P. V. 2010. Getting negatives in Arizona Tewa. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the

International Pragmatics Association (IPrA, 201, 91107.Miestamo, M. 2005. Standard negation: The negation of declarative verbal main clauses in a

typological perspective. Mouton de Gruyter.Miestamo, M. 2007. Negation – An Overview of Typological Research. Language and Linguistics

Compass, 15, 552570. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749818X.2007.00026.xMichael, L. 2014. A typological and comparative perspective on negation in Arawak languages. In L.

Michael & T. Granadillo (Eds.), Negation in Arawak languages (pp. 241300. Brill.Michael, L. 2015. Reconstruction and historical development of the Proto-Arawakan privative* ma.

Workshop on the Diachronic Syntax of South American Languages, Lyon.Patz, E. 2002. A grammar of the Kuku Yalanji language of north Queensland. Research School of

Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.Phillips, J. 2015. Privation to Negation: A new formal treatment for an underreeported

grammaticalisation pathway. Formal Diachronic Semantics 3, Universitet i Oslo.Singerman, A. R. 2018. Negation as an exclusively nominal category. Language, 942, 432467.

https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2018.0022Weir, H. 1994. Nadëb. In P. Kahrel & R. van den Berg (Eds.), Typological studies in negation (pp. 291

323. John Benjamins Pub. Co. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10509435

References

Documents

0&%1$(%1$%1$.$ · 2020. 7. 28. · so t(%".1"d%&’(8o 0.&e$%&e" mo 6*d.&-%&e")("#$%&’(go ‘’(*%&%;"(%)("#$%&’(lo =y&*%"(%&$,)("#$%&’(ho e()&%*)’\(jo t()a".&e"a)e".>* io

0&%1$(%1$%1$.$ · 2020. 7. 28. · so t(%".1"d%&’(8o 0.&e$%&e" mo 6d.&-%&e")("#$%&’(go ‘’(%&%;"(%)("#$%&’(lo =y&%"(%&$,)("#$%&’(ho e()&%)’\(jo t()a".&e"a)e".>* io