Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
Complexity of NC systems and language contact
Workshop on morphological complexity and noun classification, SOAS, 21 June 2017 Alexander Cobbinah Crossroads
2
Di Garbo’s (2016) criteria for complexity
Number of prefixes Complexity and pervasiveness of assignment rules Number of types of agreeing targets Number manipulable Size manipulable Number expressed by gender morphology Principle of fewer distinctions Principle of one-form-one-meaning Principle of independence
3
Complexity measure B Gubëeher J Kujireray J Banjal B Gujaher
Prefix nr. 1 Paradigm number Assignment rule Targets 0.75 0.5 Number/ gender merge Maniplation size Manipulation number
4
Complexity measure B Gubëeher J Kujireray J Banjal B Gujaher
Prefix nr. 31 15 23 24 Paradigm number Ca 60 29 ? Assignment rule Semantic/formal (part. human) (human) (human/part. animal) Target 3 4 2 Number/ gender merge Partly Yes Manipulation size Manipulation number Yes (6pref/9par) Yes (2pref/6par) (6 pref/6 par) (3pref/7par) Jóola Banjal has many non-alliterative agreement patterns Jóola Banjal and Jóola Kujireray have non-conventionalised augmentatives, Jóola Banjal has non-conventionalised collectives Baïnounk Gujaher has higher degree of animacy Baïnounk Gubëeher has very complex interaction between gender and number morphology
5
Evaluative morphology in Gubëeher
NC Paradigm NC semantics Productivity Example and gloss ko-/ño- diminutive fully productive, contains some non-diminutive items bu-gof/igof ko-gof/ño-gof ‘head’ ‘little head’ da-/din- -ŋ augmentative Fully productive, exclusively augmentative da-gof/din-gof-oŋ ‘big head’ ho- diminutive mass productive for masses ba-rux ho-rux ‘water’ ‘some water’
6
Evaluative morphology in Banjal (Sagna 2008)
NC Paradigm NC semantics Productivity Example and gloss ji-/mu- diminutive fully productive, contains some non-diminutive items e-siho/si-siho ji-siho/mu-siho ‘cat’ ‘little cat’ bu-/u- augmentative/enormous size conventionalised e-ñundu ba-ñundu ‘nose’ ‘big nose’ ga-/u- augmentative/derogatory limited productivity fu-xow ga-xow ‘head’ ‘big head’ fu-/gu- augmentative/ round shape conventionalised, used mostly for class ga- nouns a-ññil fi-ññil ‘child’ ‘fat child’
7
Collective morphology in Gubëeher
NC Paradigm NC semantics Frequency of paradigm Example and gloss a-/a-ŋ/bi- insects 35 bi-meh ‘termites’ bu-/i-/di- fruits 26 di-aba ‘guava fruits’ bu-/i-/ja- animals 12 ja-sulut ‘snakes’ bu-/i-/ba- tubers/ground plants 6 ba-taata ‘sweet potatos’ ran-/ñan-/ja- amphibians 5 ñën-jém ‘frogs’ gu-/ha-/ja- grasses, plant parts, body parts ja-fos jë-ndëb jë-jënd ‘grass’ ‘roots’ ‘hair’
8
Collective morphology in Banjal (Sagna 2008:277)
NC NC Paradigm NC semantics Example and gloss ba- various, productive diminutive collective ba-ñil ‘bunch of children’ si- various, non-productive collective of different varieties si-jaora si-mmano ‘guests from different origin’ ‘varieties of rice’ fa- e-/su-/fa- collective of insects and small things fa-abut ‘colony of ants’ e- fu-/gu-/e- ga-/u-/e- colony of tubers, collective of grasses e-ex e-fos ‘plantation of cassava’ ‘colony of grass’
9
Complexity ranked Bainounk language Gubëeher Jóola language More complex Banjal Why is Kujireray the least complex of these languages? Why is Gujaher less complex or in different ways than Gubëeher? Gujaher Kujireray Less complex
10
The role of contact Hypothesis: Language contact
leads to diminishing complexity?
11
Main contact languages
Other Jóola Mandinka Kreol Other Jóola
12
Hypothesis: Language contact leads to diminishing complexity Frequency effect: Maintain complex structures through frequent reiteration Close knit, concentrated community helps to maintain complexity? Contact with noun class languages has a different effect than that with non-class languages? +NC Borrow NC Semantic parallels Borrow mechanisms (collective) Favouring Banjal and Gubëeher -NC Reduce prefixes Reduce complexity in assignment Opt for semantic assignment
13
Animacy in the Crossroads area
14
Animacy in Baïnounk Gubëeher
Gloss Singular Agreement Plural ‘woman’ u-dikaam u- in-dikaam in- ‘hunter’ u-saw ñan-saw Human agreement u-/in- accomodates many human nouns Gloss Singular Agreement Plural ‘mother’ nuun a- nuun-oŋ a- -ŋ ‘old person’ ji-def ji-def-eŋ ‘girl’ bë-jid ba- bë-jid-ëŋ ba- -ŋ But: prefixless and some other human nouns do not conform to the scheme Animacy agreement subject prefixes on the verb, 3rd person plural only for animates. Frequent elision of inanimate direct objects, which cannot be expressed through affixes.
15
Animacy in Jóola Banjal/Eegimaa (also applies to Kujireray)
Human agreement a-/gu- for many nouns denoting humans, no matter what the shape of the prefixes on the noun (Bassene 2006): Gloss Singular Agreement Plural ‘person’ an a- bug-an gu- ‘king’ a-vvi u-vvi ‘aunt’ jaay si-jaay ‘child’ a-ññil gu-ññil ‘Toubab’ a-lullum e-lullum
16
Animacy in Baïnounk Gujaher
Alpha Mane, July 2014 Gloss Singular noun Agr ‘one’ Plural noun Agr ‘short’ Agr ‘two’ ‘woman’ u-dikaam u-duka (i)n-dikaam (i)n-dox i-nak ‘person’ u-raagof ña’-raagof human agreement Gloss Singular noun Agr ‘one’ Plural noun Agr ‘short’ Agr ‘two’ ‘goat’ feebi a-duka feebi -ëŋ (i)n-dox a-nak-ëŋ/ i- nak ‘bee’ ayom ayom-ëŋ ‘viper’ fudux fudux-ëŋ i-dox optional animal agreement Animacy agreement does only affect a subclass of nouns: those which pluralise by suffixation! Gloss Singular noun Agr ‘one’ Plural noun Agr ‘short’ Agr ‘two’ ‘hen’ gu-yon gu-duka ha-yon ha-dox ha-nak ‘oyster’ gu-yox ha-yox ‘lizard’ bu-latra bu-duka i-latra i-dox i-nak ‘chicken’ bë-kër ba-duka bë-kër-ëŋ ba-dox-ëŋ ba-nak-aŋ alliterative agreement
17
Points for discussion Is community size and type relevant for the effects of language contact on morphological complexity? Which characteristics of a language influence the impact on the complexity of a language it is in contact with? How fine-grained of a measure of complexity is feasible and necessary?
Similar presentations
