The few and the plenty: nominal and verbal number in Chini

Joseph Brooks | University of California, Santa Barbara

Austronesian and Papuan Languages and Linguistics Conference #8 | SOAS | 14 May 2016

2

Presentation outline• Main points• Language background• Singular and plural in typology• Pronominal number• Nominal number• Paucal and plural?• Verbal number• A note on the role of the speaker & methodology• Conclusion, acknowledgments & references

3

Main points• Number and typology

• The number category ‘singular’ and the related singular-plural opposition are grammatically irrelevant for nominal and verbal number in Chini.

• The grammatical opposition is based on the semantic opposition of few/a minimal quantity vs. many/a maximal quantity.

• These two categories are both relative (and not absolute) and compare to the typological concepts ‘paucal’ and ‘plural’.

• Data and methodology• Elicitation provides an initial interesting glimpse into the nominal and verbal number

systems, but discourse data is crucial in order to really understand the fundamental grammatical functions of both.

4

Chini linguistic profile• (Lower Sepik-)Ramu language with ~60 speakers• Spoken in two villages, Andamang and Akrukay• Relatively synthetic, agglutinative with significant fusional morphology• Major nominal categories

• Optional and obligatory number• Diminutive, augmentative

• Major verbal categories• 7-8 realis/irrealis distinctions throughout verbal morphology (5 max in one form)• Imperfective aspect• Various deontic modal categories• Verbal number

• Strongly V-final• Variety of clause combining constructions including clause chaining

5

Chini in areal perspective

Blue = RamuGreen = Trans-New Guinea

6

The data• Based on seven months of fieldwork in Andamang in 2012 & 2014• 13 speakers represented, male & female, both dialects• Includes:• 2 hours of annotated narrative (N) • 4 hours of annotated conversation (C)• examples from unrecorded connected speech (CS)• example utterances offered by speakers (O)• elicited (E) and text-based elicited (TB-E)

• archived with ELAR

7

Singular vs. plural in typology• Singular vs. plural as the most common opposition (Corbett 2000;

Dixon 2012)• Singular vs. plural assumed as basic (Corbett 2000; Durie 1986)• this assumption extended to specific areas of grammar where number is

marked in a given language (pronominal, nominal, verbal)

• Elaboration of the basic singular-plural opposition involves introducing absolute and/or relative number categories (Dixon 2012)• At least 3 languages where part of the grammar lacks a singular

category, distinguishing ‘one or two’ vs ‘three or more’ (Comrie 1981)

8

Pronominal number• Pronouns distinguish three (more or less) absolute number values:

singular, dual, and plural:

Singular Dual PluralFirst person ku aŋgɨ aniSecond person nu ŋgu niThird person anɨ maŋuni ni

9

Loci and formal expression of nominal number marking• The noun phrase PC/PL expression

• Based on nominal lexemes• (~10% of) lexical nouns Lexically-conditioned allomorphy(incl. suffixation, reduplication)• Demonstratives -ɨ, -a / -i• Adjectives -kɨ / -iyi• Noun phrase linker =aŋgɨ / =ŋgi

• Based on verbal lexemes• Irrealis relative clauses -ɨ / -i• Demonstratives -ɨ, -a / -i• Noun phrase linker =aŋgɨ / =ŋgi

10

Eliciting nominal number• Eliciting count and paired nouns suggests something interesting is going on:

wut-mɨ nugu na nuguman-PC one leg.PCone‘one man‘ (E) ‘one (human) leg‘ (E)

wut-mɨ ŋuni na-ri ŋuniman-PC two leg-PL two‘two men‘ (E) ‘two (human) legs‘ (E)

wut-i ŋuni noyi -man-PL three‘three men‘ (E)

11

Number marking on mass nouns• Mass nouns can be marked for number (compare: mra ‘meat from a few

sources‘)(1) va mr-iyi ara-grɨ !

coconut meat-PL scrape-OPT‘Scrape out the meat from many/all/a maximal amount of coconuts.‘ (E)

• Plural used for mass nouns to convey the meaning ‘a maximal amount of x‘

• Unlike count nouns, no set of values to which the use of the paucal form for mass nouns corresponds

12

Number marking on irrealis relative clauses• Irrealis relative clauses with positive polarity obligatorily marked for the number

of participants wrt the head• Paucal -ɨ can refer to a range of values, plural -i used only when the head

represents the entirety of its group:

(2) ɨvkɨrgŋɨ ayigŋɨ-mɨ-chi-n-ɨ=aŋgɨpaper write-IPFV-INCOMPL-REL.IRR-PC=LNK.PC‘scholar/s (PC)‘ (O)

(3) ɨvkɨrgŋɨ ayigŋɨ-mɨ-chi-n-i=ŋgipaper write-IPFV-INCOMPL-REL.IRR-PL=LNK.PL‘all the scholars, scholars (as a collective group)‘ (O)

13

Paucal and plural as relative categories• Dixon (2012): • singular, dual, trial etc. as absolute values• paucal as relative (the exact value fluctuates depending on scale/number of

entities involved)• plural as relative in systems with a paucal, absolute in systems with only

absolute values

“Paucal and plural have reference with respect to the other. The actual reference of these terms depends on the size of the population under review.“ (48).

14

Paucal vs. plural in Chini• The interpretation of the values for paucal and plural nominal number

depends on nominal semantics (count vs paired vs mass) and construction type (lexical nouns vs relative clauses)

• The relativity of paucal and plural categories has already been described - what is new for our typological understanding of number is that here, no absolute number category is involved.

15

Loci and formal expression of verbal number marking• The verb phrase PC/PL expression• Realis forms (10% of verbal lexemes = 30+ verbs) Lex.-cond. allomorphy

(suffixation, root suppletion)

• Small number of irrealis forms Lex.-cond. allomorphy• (unknown number of) optative forms Lex.-cond.

allomorphy• (all) verbal adjectives -kɨ / -iyi• (a few high-frequency) adverbs -kɨ / -iyi

16

Basics of patterning and function of verbal number• Certain verbs are marked for a two-way number opposition to quantify

aspects of events; the pluractional form expresses multiple occurrences of an action (Corbett 2000; Mithun 1988; Newman 1990)

(4) ani rɨ-ga. (Intransitive clause)1PL head.downriver-R.PL‘We headed downriver.‘ (E)

(5) ku mɨ=ni-ga. (Transitive clause)1SG.NOM it=get-R.PL‘I got it/them (my clothes from the clothesline).‘ (O)

• Patterns according to the influence of the action of the verb on the absolutive argument (see Aikhenvald & Dixon 2011; Frajzyngier 1985)

17

Verbs with verbal number• Verbs of translational motion, affecting the S participant:

• get up, run, sit, arrive/emerge, be sitting, fall (a tree), stand, swim, go upriver, go downriver, go, descend, surface

• special translocative forms: cross, die, come loose, (one-way marking: surround, recede)

• Verbs of object manipulation, affecting the O participant:• catch with hook, hang up, break, carry (child) on back/shoulders, put inside, get/retrieve,

make a hole in, seize, plant (crops)

• special translocative forms: grab after/throw out, toss/kick, split apart, reveal/disclose

18

Verbal number in Chini at first glance: ‘Paucactional‘ (my term) vs. ‘pluractional‘• Elicitating verbal number suggests an opposition similar to that of nouns.• Verbal number marking often corresponds to participant number, where SG and DU absolutives

pattern together and contrast with PL: (6) anɨ chi-yi. Paucactional

3SG get.up-R.PC‘S/he got up.‘ (O)

(7) maŋuni chi-yi. Paucactional3DU get.up-R.PC‘Those two got up.‘ (O)

(8) ni cpmɨchi-ga. Pluractional3PL get.up.PL-R.PL‘They got up.‘ (E)

19

The verbal number opposition: participants and events• How does verbal number deal with actions in twos and/or affecting two participants?

• Contexts where pluractional verb co-occur with grammatically paucal nominals?

• Contexts where paucactional verbs co-occur with grammatically plural nominals or plural (3+) pronominal participants?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• What about when a mass nominal is the affected participant?

• Do pluractional verb forms ever co-occur with singular participants?

20

Paucactional verbs with dual pronouns• Dual pronominal participants that represent two members of a larger group

tend to co-occur with paucactional verbs:

(9) maŋuni ŋɨ=am-ɨŋɨ=nmɨ av-kɨ=kɨ 3DU POSS.REFL=mother-PC=DISTR descend-R.PC=SAME.R

Aragrɨndɨm mɨ=mberi.Aragrɨndɨm it=stand.IRR‘Those two mothers of his having come down from their respective

villages, they‘ll put them (the yams) in Aragrɨndɨm.‘ (C)

21

Pluractional verbs with dual pronouns• Dual pronominals that represent coupled participants (parents, couples) almost

always co-occur with pluractional verbs; the action of the verb is construed as having a maximal number of iterations relative to the participant population:

(10) maŋuni nɨ=agɨ-ga=kɨ 3DU RETURN=head.upriver-R.PL=SAME.R

achi-kɨ-anɨ iŋk-i.upriver-PROX-ADESS be.located.PL-IRR‘Those two (=our parents) went back upriver and are still there.‘ (C)

22

Paucactional verbs with paired count nouns• Paired count nouns tend to co-occur with paucactional verb forms:

(11) ŋgu=na-ri pi-r-kɨ-a-y-i ?2SG.POSS=leg-PL bad-VBZ-PC-R-R-Q.IRR‘Are your legs bad/do you have bad legs?‘ (O)

23

Pluractional verbs with paired count nouns• But when a participant in a transitive clause is affected in a way

construed as permanently/strongly affecting the participant, a pluractional verb may be used:

(12) ramɨ ŋg-ri ni mɨ=ni-ga.pig testicle-PL 3PL TOP.OBJ=get-R.PL‘They removed each of the pig‘s testicles.‘ (CS)

24

Role of verbal semantics: a verbal correlate of na/nari ‘leg, legs‘• Chini has at least one verb with semantics that generally indicates a maximal quantity of

two: amkɨ/ambɨga ‘give piggy-back ride to; carry a human (i.e. child) on one‘s shoulders/back‘.

(13) anɨ twamɨŋgani nugu amkɨ.3SG child.PC one carry.on.shoulders.R.PC‘He carried him/her (one child) on his shoulders.‘ (TB-E)

(14) anɨ twamɨŋgani ŋuni ambɨga.3SG child.PC two carry.on.shoulders.R.PL’He carried two children (i.e., both of his) on his shoulders.’ (TB-E)

25

Paucactional verbs with plural (3+) pronouns• Plural pronouns co-occur with paucactional verbs when the

participants are represented as a unit and/or when that verb‘s clause is not the focal event within a larger clause chain:

(15) ni nkugwu=ndaka,2/3PL swim.R.PC=MED.R

kɨyi am-i=kɨ awamɨ=ami bro bro.thing eat-IRR=SAME.R awamɨ.fish=SIM IDEO

‘Once they‘d swum around they‘d eat just like the awamɨ fish going “bro bro!“‘ (C)

26

Paucactional verbs with plural (3+) pronouns(16) ni chi-yi=ndaka,

2/3PL get.up-R.PC=MED.R

ni ŋgɨ=amu=ndaka,2/3PL 3SG.DAT=grab.R=MED.R

nɨ=twavɨ agɨ-yi=kɨ3SG=with head.upriver-R.PC=SAME.R

nɨ=twavɨ anmɨ am-a...3SG=with alchohol drink-R‘They (her three brothers) got up and grabbed him and took him upriver and drank

alcohol with him...‘ (C)

27

Paucactional verbs with plural nouns• If multiple participants are affected by a single or few iterations of the action of

the verb, the paucactional form is used:

(17) maŋuni bmurupa arɨ-aŋ-ri ni=ndaka...3DU morning dog-man-PL get.R.PC=MED.R‘In the morning the two of them got the dogs and...‘ (N)

(18) ŋɨ=mɨŋɨ ni=ndaka, aŋgwa-ri ni=ndaka...POSS.REFL=bow get.R.PC=MED.R arrow-PL get.R.PC=MED.R‘Once he got his bow and he got his arrows...‘ (N)

28

Verbal number: relative values lead to imprecise quantification• Because the verbal number opposition involves relative values, exact (absolute)

quantification of the occurrences of the event may be imprecise/irrelevant:

(19) av-ar-kɨ ki-ndɨ !in.vain-DIM-PC cry-PROH‘Stop crying for no good reason!‘ (Noken krai nating!) (O)

(20) av-ar-iyi ki-ndɨ !in.vain-DIM-PL cry-PROH‘Don‘t keep always crying for no reason!‘ (Noken krai nating nating!) (O)

29

Summing up verbal number: pluractional vs. paucactional• Mis-matches between actual or grammatical participant number and

verbal number reveal a system roughly based on Corbett‘s (2000) concepts of participant number and event number

• The actual number of iterations of the action of the paucactional or pluractional verb vary, but do so in ways consistent for the proposed contrast, which closely mirrors the paucal/plural contrast of nominal number

• Semantically singular (and dual) entities are often involved but ‘singular‘ and ‘dual‘ as grammatical categories are not relevant for the opposition

30

A note on the speaker, optionality, and methodology• The use of verbal number constructions is sensitive to how the

speaker opts to convey their message, rather than to a strict reflection of subjective real-world events. • (And a lot gets lost in translation...)

• How paucactional and pluractional forms are used is most apparent in narrative but especially conversational data• Using elicited data for these constructions in Chini is suggestive of how the

system works but does not come close to showcasing its richness.

31

Pluractional optative nira ‘get‘(21) nu ku=irk-ŋɨ mbwakiki-ndɨ,

2SG 1SG.POSS=language-PC answer-PROH

nu av-ar-kɨ ku=irk-ŋɨ ni-ra,2SG in.vain-DIM-PC 1SG.POSS=language-PC get-OPT.PL

anɨ ku-apm-i-ch-i ?3SG cross-IPFV-IRR-INCOMPL-Q.IRR‘Don‘t you answer back to me, just get all I‘m saying to you! Did he go

back across the river or not?‘ (C: 28:39)

32

Paucactional optative niŋɨ ‘get‘(22) ku=irk-ŋɨ ikɨ ni-ŋɨ=tɨ

1SG.POSS=language-PC just get-OPT.PC=SAME.IRR

ŋgu chi=tɨ ŋa-kɨ myagɨ amu!2DU ascend.OPT=SAME.IRR uphill-PROX betelnut

grab.OPT‘Just listen to what I‘m saying and you two go up and get the

betel nut!‘ (C: 29:02)

33

Conclusions• Both nominal and verbal number are characterized by a relative and not absolute

contrast: paucal vs. plural. In the two major grammatical domains where number is encoded (nominal + verbal), there is neither a singular category nor any absolute category whatsoever.

• Different constructions show interesting semantic variations on the basic contrast.

• Different data types provide different insights into the system, and connected speech, conversation in particular, is crucial.

• Our assumption about singular vs. plural as basic is essentially a universal -ist/-izing one, and should be reassessed. It’s the most common number distinction, but it’s not fundamental.

34

Acknowledgments• The Andamang community, especially: Anton Mana, Joseph Mana,

Frank Mana, Dorothy Paul, Paul Guku, and Emma Airɨmarɨ• for their hospitality, friend and kinship, and everything they have shared

with me about themselves

• The Endangered Languages Documentation Programme • for their generous support of my fieldwork

35

References• Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Dixon, Robert W. 2011. Language at large: essays on syntax and semantics. Leiden:

Koninklijke Brill.• Comrie, Bernard. 1981. Ergativity and grammatical relations in Kalaw Lagaw Ya (Saibai dialect). Australian Journal of

Linguistics 1. 1-42.• Corbett, Greville. 2000. Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.• Dixon, Robert W. 2012. Basic Linguistic Theory: Volume 3: Further grammatical topics. Oxford University Press.• Durie, Mark. 1986. The grammaticalization of number as a verbal category. In: Niepokuj, Mary & Mary Van Clay,

Vassiliki Nikiforidou, and Deborah Fedr (eds.), Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, February 15-17. Berkeley Linguistics Society, University of California. 355-70.

• Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1985. Ergativity, number, and agreement. In: Niepokuj, Mary & Mary Van Clay, Vassiliki Nikiforidou, and Deborah Fedr (eds.), Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, February 16-18. Berkeley Linguistics Society, University of California. 96-106.

• Mithun, Marianne. 1988. Lexical categories and the evolution of number marking. Theoretical morphology. Hammond, Michael & Michael Noonan (eds.). New York: Academic Press. 211-234.

• Newman, Paul. 1990. Nominal and verbal plurality in Chadic. Publications in African Languages and Linguistics 12. Dordrecht: Foris.