New Plural person and associativity (in Inuktitut) · 2018. 9. 21. · Introduction Mainproposal: Associative plurals and participant plural pronouns are both built from two subcomponents:

Plural person and associativity (in Inuktitut)

Michelle Yuan, MIT ([email protected])

Manitoba Workshop on Person, Sept. 23, 2017

Introduction

Broad question: How is plural person represented in the grammar?

• There is an intuition in much literature that plural person

encodes associativity, which is distinct from plurality

(Jespersen, 1924; Sonnaert, 2017, et seq.)

This talk: A novel argument for associativity in plural person, based

on evidence from Inuktitut1

• In Inuktitut, 1st/2nd person plural pronouns display

morphological and structural parallels with associative plurals

1Inuktitut (Eskimo-Aleut) is a group of Inuit dialects spoken around Nunavut,

Canada. The data presented here were elicited in 2016 and 2017 in Iqaluit, NU,

and mainly represent the varieties spoken on Baffin Island.

1

Introduction

Main proposal: Associative plurals and participant plural pronouns

are both built from two subcomponents: a singular individual and

an associative morpheme

• Following Vassilieva and Larson (2005), this morpheme is

represented here as ‘∆’

• ∆ is an unsaturated element whose reference may be filled in

contextually or linguistically

(1) a. Taiviti-kkut (Taiviti-ASSOC) = Taiviti + ∆

b. uvagut (1P) = 1S + ∆

2

Introduction

I then extend this proposal to Adnominal Pronoun

Constructions,2 i.e. we linguists constructions

• Inuktitut APCs contain an overt associative morpheme (∆)

• Not sure why . . . but a possible connection to plural person in

various Romance languages?

2Terminology from Höhn (2017)

3

Roadmap

Main content:

2. Associative plurals in Inuktitut

3. Plural Pronoun Constructions

4. “Extended” associatives

Speculations and half-formed thoughts:

5. Adnominal Pronoun Constructions in Inuktitut

6. Plural person in Romance

4

Associative plurals in Inuktitut

Associative plurals denote a group containing a salient/named

individual (often a proper name/kinship term)

(2) teyze-im-leraunt-1S-PL

‘my aunt and her associates’

(Turkish, Görgülü 2011)

(3) MereMary

maaand

‘Mary and co.’

(Maori, Vassilieva 2005)

• See Corbett and Mithun (1996), Moravcsik (2003), Vassilieva

(2005), Nakanishi and Ritter (2008), Forbes (2013, a.o.). . .

5


Associative plurals in Inuktitut:

(4) a. Taiviti-kkutTaiviti-ASSOC.PL

‘David and co.’

b. ataata-kkutfather-ASSOC.PL

‘father and co.’

Number morphology (in dialects that have not neutralized DU/PL)

indicates the number of individuals denoted:

(5) Taiviti-kkukDavid-ASSOC.DU

‘David and one other person’

Thus, associative plurals have three subparts: (i) an individual, (ii)

an associative morpheme (-kku), (iii) and number morphology

(-k/-t)6


Foreshadowing the rest of the talk. . .

• The associative morpheme is ‘∆’; thus, suitable paraphrase of

Taiviti-kkut = ‘David and others’

• Evidence for this analysis comes from Plural Pronoun

Constructions

• . . . This, in turn, provides support for an associative-based

analysis of plural person

7

Plural Pronoun Constructions

Plural Pronoun Constructions (PPCs): A plural pronoun isinterpreted as singular in the presence of a comitative phrase (e.g.Dyla, 1988; Ionin and Matushansky, 2003; Vassilieva and Larson,2005)

(6) a. Mywe

swith

PetejPeter-INSTR

pojdëmgo-FUT

domojhome

‘I + Peter will go home.’

b. Vyyou.PL

swith

PetejPeter-INSTR

pojdëtego-FUT

domojhome

‘You(sg) + Peter will go home.’

c. Onithey

swith

PetejPeter-INSTR

pojdutgo-FUT

domojhome

‘He + Peter will go home.’ (Russian, V&L 2005)

8


Inuktitut also has PPCs

• The “comitative” equivalent is a nominal marked with =lu ‘also’

(7) a. [ Kelsey=luKelsey=also

(uvagut)(1P)

] niqi-liuq-tugutfood-make-INTR.1P

‘I + Kelsey are cooking.’ (not: ‘we + Kelsey’)

b. [ Kelsey=luKelsey=also

(ilitsi)(2P)

] niqi-liuq-tusifood-make-INTR.2P

‘You(sg) + Kelsey are cooking.’ (not: ‘you(pl) + Kelsey’)

Unlike Russian, Inuktitut lacks 3rd person pronouns; 3P

demonstratives cannot participate in PPCs

9


Crucially, any analysis of plural pronouns must explain how they

can be interpreted as singular in PPCs

• Vassilieva and Larson (2005): Plural pronouns are

decomposable into a singular pronoun and an unsaturated

element, ∆

• While ∆ is often saturated contextually, in PPCs they are

saturated by the comitative argument

(8) a. We = I + ∆

b. We with Peter = I + ∆ (where ∆=Peter)

(9) a. You(pl) = You(sg) + ∆

b. You(pl) with Peter = You(sg) + ∆ (where ∆=Peter)

10


V&L (cont’d): In many languages, this decomposition ismorphologically transparent

(10) Vietnamese (Nguen 1996)

a. tao ‘1S’ vs. chúng tao ‘1P’

b. mày ‘2S vs. chúng mày ‘2P’

c. nó ‘3S’ vs. chúng nó ‘3P’

11


Semi-transparency in Inuktitut 1P

• The 1P form uvagut is historically 1S + *-kut (Fortescue et al.,

1994; Corbett and Mithun, 1996)

• Crucially, *-kut→ associative morpheme -kkut3

(11) uvanga ‘1S’ vs. uvagut ‘1P’

In contrast, the 2P form ilitsi is opaque

• However, its ability to participate in PPCs suggests that it

nonetheless has the same underlying composition as 1P

(12) igvit ‘2S’ vs. ilitsi ‘2P’

3Another language that has an overt associative morpheme in its plural pronouns

is Japanese (Nakanishi and Ritter, 2008). 12


Like associative plurals, number morphology is separate from theassociative portion of the pronoun, and indicates the total numberof individuals in the group

(13) a. Taiviti-kku-k ‘David and one other person’

b. Taiviti-kku-t ‘David and co.’

(14) a. uva-gu-k ‘1D’

b. uva-gu-t ‘1P’

• Morphological evidence showing that the ‘plurality’ of plural

person is really associativity

13

Extended associatives

Inuktitut also exhibits a structural parallel between its associative

plurals and plural pronouns

• Inuktitut also has so-called extended associatives4

• Structurally identical to PPCs, except the plural noun is an

associative plural, rather than a plural pronoun

(15) Eva-kkutEva-ASSOC.PL

[ pani-nga=ludaughter-POSS.3S=also

]

‘Eva + her daughter’

4According to Vassilieva (2005), these are very rare cross-linguistically; many

languages that have associative plurals (and even ones that have both associative

plurals and PPCs) lack extended associatives.

14


Like in PPCs (in Inuktitut and cross-linguistically), the singularinterpretation of the plural nominal is lost in the absence of acomitative

(16) Mywe

iand

PetjaPeter.NOM

znajemknow.PL

nemeckijGerman

‘We + Peter know German. (not: ‘I + Peter’) (Russian, V&L 2005)

(17) a. KelseyKelsey

ammaand

uvagut1P

‘We + Kelsey’ (not: ‘I + Kelsey’)

b. ?JacobJacob

ammaand

Kelsey-kkutKelsey-ASSOC.PL

‘Kelsey and co. and Jacob’ (not: ‘Kelsey + Jacob’) (Inuktitut)

15


Like PPCs (in Inuktitut and cross-linguistically), the plural nominalmust be higher along a person-animacy hierarchy than thecomitative phrase

(18) Russian (1 > 2 > 3)

a. mywe

swith

toboj/nimyou/him

‘me with you/him’ (1 > 2, 1 > 3)

b. vyyou(pl)

swith

nim/*mnojhim/*me

‘you with him,’ *‘you with me’ (2 > 3, *2 > 1)

c. *onithey

swith

toboj/mnojyou/me

*‘he with you,’ *‘he with me’ (*3 > 2, *3 > 1)

16


In Inuktitut, the hierarchy is not about person, but seems to becoarser: pronoun > proper name > non-P.N. human

(19) a. [ John=luJohn=also

//

*igvi=lu2S=also

] uvagut1P

‘I + John,’ *‘I + you’ (pronoun > P.N, *1 > 2)

b. *[ uvanga=lu1S=also

] ilitsi2P

*‘you(sg) + I’ (*2 > 1)

(20) Eva-kkutEva-ASSOC.PL

[ pani-nga=ludaughter-POSS.3S=also

//

*uvanga=lu1S=also

//

*John=luJohn=also

]

‘Eva + her daughters,’ *‘Eva + me’ *‘Eva + John’

(P.N. > non-P.N., *P.N.>pronoun, *P.N.>P.N.)

17


Interim conclusion: A unified analysis of associative plurals and

plural pronouns

(1) a. Taiviti-kkut (Taiviti-ASSOC) = Taiviti + ∆

b. uvagut (1P) = 1S + ∆

. . . Plural pronouns encode associativity

18

Adnominal pronoun constructions

Adnominal pronoun constructions are generally thought to

involve a pronominal D0 and an NP complement (e.g. Postal, 1966;

Elbourne, 2005; Höhn, 2017)

• Three types of APCs in Inuktitut (we are interested in (21c)):5

(21) a. uvagut1P

ilisaiji-u-jugutteacher-be-PTCP.1P.S

‘we teachers’ (lit. ‘we who are teachers’)

b. uvagut ilisaijiit

1P teachers.PL

‘we teachers’

c. ilisaiji-tigut

teacher-1P

‘we teachers’

5An interesting point of cross-dialectal variation: West Greenlandic only has the

constructions in (a-b) (Fortescue, 1984); the construction in (c) appears to be

unattested (Yining Nie, p.c.).19


The morpheme encoding plural person is identical to the verbalobject agreement morpheme6

(22) a. taku-qqau-jaatigutsee-REC.PST-3S.S/1P.O‘She saw us.’

b. ilisaiji-tigutteacher-1P

‘we teachers’

6In Yuan (in prep.), I argue that this is because object agreement morphology in

Inuktitut is pronominal clitic doubling, not canonical φ-agreement. If both

adnominal plural person morphology and object agreement morphology are

pronominal D0s, this morphological identity is expected.

20


We might expect this pattern to extend straightforwardly to

2P—however, the 2P APC requires an overt morpheme -gut

• Recall that -gut seems to be the associative plural morpheme

(cf. Taiviti-kkut ‘David and co.,’ uvagut 1P)

(23) a. taku-qqau-jaasisee-REC.PST-3S.S/2P.O‘She saw you(pl).’

b. ilisaiji-si-gutteacher-2P-ASSOC

‘you(pl) teachers’

For simplicity, I assume that the 1P construction always contains a

separate associative morpheme, but it is deleted as haplology, i.e.

ilisaiji-tigut-gut→ ilisaiji-tigut21


An open question: Assuming a uniform semantics for the

associative morpheme in all its occurrences, this is ∆. What is it

contributing?

• Recall that plural person already contains a ∆

(24) Kelsey=lu ilitsi = 2S +∆ (where ∆=Kelsey)

‘you(sg) + Kelsey’

(25) a. ilisaiji-si-gutteacher-2P-ASSOC

‘you (pl) teachers’

b. [ [ [ teachers ] 2S+∆ ] ∆ ] ?

22

Plural person in Romance

A cross-linguistic parallel? Various Romance languages form plural

person with a piece meaning ‘others’

(26) a. Spanish: nosotros ‘we’ / vosotros ‘you(pl)’

b. Catalan: nosaltres ‘we’ / vosaltres ‘you(pl)’

c. Galician: nosoutros ‘we’ / vosoutros ‘you(pl)’

d. Quebec French: nous (autres) ‘we’ / vous (autres) ‘you(pl)’ /

eux/elles (autres) ‘they’

23

Plural pronoun in Romance

While there has been research on the historical development of

these forms, there has been almost no research on what exactly

‘others’ contributes linguistically, if anything7

• And while we might have been tempted to treat this as an

idiosyncratic/trivial fact about Romance...

The fact that Inuktitut (genetically unrelated) requires a comparable

morpheme (albeit limited to APCs) is probably not a coincidence

7Though see Tremblay 2014 on Quebec French

24

Conclusion

The ‘plural’ component of plural person is associativity

• Evidence from Inuktitut: Associative plurals and plural

pronouns share a common morphosyntax

• Both types of nouns are composed of a singular referent and

an associative morpheme, ∆, which may be saturated

contextually or by an overt phrase in the syntax

• Evidence from Plural Pronoun Constructions and extended

associatives

25

Conclusion

The associative morpheme is also obligatorily present in

Adnominal Pronoun Constructions

• It is unclear what exactly this morpheme is doing

• Nonetheless, its presence in Inuktitut sheds some light on the

morphological appearance of plural person in Romance

languages

26

Thanks to...

• Ragilee Attagootak, Susan Idlout, Jeanine Nowdluk, Jasmine

Oolayou, Jonah Oolayou, Shirley Kunuk, and Susan Tigullaraq

for sharing their language with me

• Rajesh Bhatt, Sabine Iatridou, Alana Johns, David Pesetsky,

Norvin Richards, Roger Schwarzschild, and audiences at MIT’s

Syntax Square and the Inuktitut Language and Linguistics

Workshop for helpful discussion and comments

• I am partially supported by a SSHRC doctoral fellowship and

an NSF dissertation improvement grant

27

References

Corbett, Grenville, and Marianne Mithun. 1996. Associative forms in a typology of number systems: Evidence from Yup’ik.

Journal of Linguistics 32:1–17.

Dyla, Stefan. 1988. Quasi-comitative coordination in Polish. Linguistics 26:383–414.

Elbourne, Paul. 2005. Situations and individuals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Forbes, Clarissa. 2013. Associative plurality in the Gitksan nominal domain. In Proceedings of the 2013 Canadian Linguistics

Association. University of Victoria.

Fortescue, Michael. 1984. West Greenlandic. London: Croom Helm.

Fortescue, Michael, Steven Jacobson, and Lawrence Kaplan. 1994. Comparative Eskimo dictionary: With Aleut cognates,

volume 9. Fairbanks, AK: Alaska Native Language Center.

Görgülü, Emrah. 2011. Plural marking in Turkish: Additive or associative? Working Papers of the Linguistics Circle of the

University of Victoria 21:70–80.

Höhn, Georg F. K. 2017. Non-possessive person in the nominal domain. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Cambridge,

Cambridge, UK.

Ionin, Tania, and Ora Matushansky. 2003. DPs with a twist: A unified analysis of Russian comitatives. In Formal approaches

to Slavic linguistics 11: The Amherst meeting, ed. Wayles Browne, Ji-Yung Kim, Barbara H. Partee, and Robert A.

Rothstein, 255–274. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.

Jespersen, Otto. 1924. The philosophy of grammar. London: Allen and Unwin.

Moravcsik, Edith. 2003. A semantic analysis of associative plurals. Studies in Language 27:469–503.

Nakanishi, Kimiko, and Elizabeth Ritter. 2008. Plurality in languages without a count-mass distinction. Paper presented at

the Mass/Count Workshop, University of Toronto.

Postal, Paul. 1966. On so-called ’pronouns’ in English. Monograph series in language and linguistics 19:177–206.

Sonnaert, Jolijn. 2017. Limitations on person lexicalisation. Paper presented at the Manitoba Workshop on Person.

Tremblay, Mireille. 2014. Les pronoms de français: Pluralité et individuation. In Proceedings of the 2014 Canadian

Linguistics Association.

Vassilieva, Masha. 2005. Associative and pronominal plurality. Doctoral Dissertation, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook,

NY.

Vassilieva, Masha, and Richard Larson. 2005. The semantics of the Plural Pronoun Construction. Natural Language

Semantics 13:101–124. 28

Documents

New Plural person and associativity (in Inuktitut) · 2018. 9. 21. · Introduction Mainproposal: Associative plurals and participant plural pronouns are both built from two subcomponents: