Download pronouns and agreement: the information status

- disk/sr
3d- 18/5p- 15:22
101-2/05-rnitrrun
lcJ3drufrrpsfrps
Tronsactioi of lhe PhilologicatSociety\olnme l0l:2 (2003)235-278
PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT: THE INFORMATION
STATUSOF PRONOMINALAFFIXESI
By Mlnur.rNe Mlrntnt
(lniversity of California, Santa Barbara
AssrRAcr
Pronominal a.ffixesare often assumedto representan intermediatestageof diachronicdevelopmentbetwqenindependent
pronouns like English ie and redundant inflectional markers
like English -s. The path of developmentwould involve
changesin distribution, form arrd function. Recently it has
beenproposedthat pronominal affxes are functionally closer
to the redundant subject agteementmarkers of English and
Germanthan to independentpronouns,becausethey cannot
distinguish referentiality or definiteness.An examination of
the use of pronominal affixes in connected speechin two
unrelated polysynthetic languages,Central Alaskan Yup'ik
Eskimo and Navajo, indicates that the affixes are actually
essentiallyequivalentin referentiality and definitenessto the
independentpronouns of Englishand German.Referenceand
in Yup'ik and Navajo in the same
areestablished
definiteness
ways as in English and other languages,plus one more.
Alternative constructionsare used for non-referentialmentions.In somecases,thesesystemsactuallyshowfiner distinctions of referentiality and definitenessthan those of English
and other Europeanlanguages.
I I would like to thank Greville Corbett, Nick Evans,Bernard Comrie and other
participants at the Agreement Workshop, held in conjuntio! with^ the the autumr
i002 meeting of thJ Linguistics Associalion of Great Bdtain, for their helpful
comments and discussion. I am especially grateful as well to the speakers who
eenerouslv contributed thcir time and expertis€ in documenting their languag€s;
-Eli*b"ttt
Ali, et.nu Charles, George Charles and John Charlos for Central Alaskan
Ilro y Ida Soul6 for Nivajo. Consultation with the Surrey lVlorphology
and
Yup'ik
Grouo and partiiipation in the Agreement Workshop were made possible by funding
f.o- ihe ESRC: fsnc (urt noooz38228-This support is gratefully acknowledged
O The PhilologicalSociety2003 Publishedbv BlackwellPublishinq
- . -- 9"600Galsingt; Road,O;ford OX4 2DQ and 350Main Str€€t,Malden'MA 02148,USA'
n tq3
101-2/05-mithun.3d
- 15:22
- disk/sr
- 18/5/3
lc:/3dpfrrpslrrps
236
rRANsAcrroNsoF TIiE pHrLoLocrcALsocrETyl0l. 2003
1. INTRoDUcrroN
A frequently cited type of grammatical change is the evolution of
independent anaphoric pronouns into pronominal clitics or
affixes, and then into redundant verbal inflectional endings. These
diachronic stages are reflected synchronically in the kinds of
markers that occur cross-linguistically,as below.
(1) Independent anaphoric pronouns: German and English
Er beobachtetsie.
Er beobachtet.
He
watches them.
He watches.
(2) Pronominal suffixes:Central Alaskan Yup'ik
Nayura-bi.
Nayurtu-q.
watch-3.sr:13
.pt
watch-3.se
'He watchesttem.'
'He watches.'
(3) Redundantverbalinflection:Germanand English
Er beobacht-et.
He watch-es,
Such markers are sometimesdiscussedtogether as agreement,but
they differ in sometimes subtle and interesting ways, many
discussedby Corbett (2003, this volume). The diachronic path
linking them would involve changesin distribution, form and
function.
Perhaps the easiestdifference to see among them is distributional. Independent pronouns occur in complementary distribution with lexical nominals(apart from appositiveconstructions).
A nuclear clause in English or Gerrnan may contain a pronoun
aloneor a lexicalnominal, but not both in the samegrammatical
role.
(4) Independentpronouns:Germanand English
a. Er beobachtet.
Mein Vater beobachtet.
Er beobachtetdie Kinfls1.
Not: *Mein Vater er beobachtet.
xEr beobachtetsie die Kinder.
* 15:22-disk/sr
3d- 18/5/3
101-2/0emithun
lcl3drufiAsfrrps
MITHUAN - PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT
237
(4) b. He watches.
My father watches
He watchesthe childrenNot: *My fatherhe watches'
*He watchesthemthe chililren.
Pronominal affixes,by contrast,are obligatory in everyclause'They
may occur alonein the clausejust like independentpronouns'or
they may be accompaniedby coreferentiallexical nominals' They
typicallyreprssentall core arguments.
(5) Ptonominalsuffxes:CentralAlaskanYup'ik
Nalurtu-q^
walc&-3.sc.ess
'He watches.'
nayurtu-q'
Aata-ka
walcft-3.sc-,lrs
x;
her-L,scl
fat
'My fatherwatches.'
Nayura-i.
watch-3.scl3.PL
'He watchesthem.'
naYura-i.
Cuignilnguu-t
botter-PL watch-3.sc/3.Pr
'He watchesthe otters.'
Not: *Aataka nayurtu+CuignilnguutnayuraRedundantverbal inflectional affixesare obligatory in everyclause,
like pronominal affixes,but they neveroccur on their own' They are
lexicalnominalor pronoun'
by an independent
alwaysaccompanied
(6) Redundantverbalinflection:Germanand English
a. Er beobacht-et.
Mein Vater beobacht-et.
Not: *Beobacht-et.
b. He watch-es.
My father watch-es'
Not: *Watch-es.
* 15:22
- disk/st
101-2/os-mithun.3d
- 18/5/3
lc:FdruIrrpsrrrps
101,2003
socrETY
oF rlrE PHILoLoGICAL
218 TRANsAcrroNs
by Siewierska(1999),markersat the first two stages,
As discussed
that is, independentpronouns and pronominal affixes,are the most
cornmon crosslinguistically, but the diachronic transition from
stageto stageis not necessarilyabrupt, and systemsat intermediate
stagesdo occur. Siewierskanotes, for example,that Palauan
pronominal prefixes are in complementary distribution with
independentpronouns,but they co-occutwith lexicalNPs.
The evolution from independentpronoun to redundantinflection
involves changesin form and function as well. Formally, markers
and there is often a loss of
losetheir phonologicalindependence,
aswell. On the functionalside'it has been
phonologicalsubstance
observedthat the processultimately resultsin a lossof referentiality'
remarks,'The endpointof the historicalevolutionof
As Siewierska
agreementmarkers from anaphoric person pronouns is the loss of
referentiality on the part of the person marker and the obligatory
presenceof the nominal argumentwith which it agrees'(1999:225)'
This scenarioraisesquestionsabout the lelallvs fiming of the
various shifts.Do they occur in sequenceor do they overlap?In
particular, doesthe loss in referentiality occur before or after the
markershavebecomeformally dependentand obligatory?Viewed
synchronically,are pronominal affixesreferential?In an intriguing
paper, Evans (1999)proposesthat argumentaffixesin polysynlh"ti" lu.rgoag"t, especiallythose representingdirect objects, lack
important criterial features of pronouns: referentiality and definiteness.He attributesthe semanticdifferenceto the obligatoriness
of the affixes.
Being obligatory, they will no longer be able to encodesuch
contrastsas referentialvs non-referential,definite vs indefinite
and so on. As a result,bound object afrxes in at leastsome
polysynthetic languagespattern more like subject agreement
than like freeptonouns,in
morphologyin Europeanlanguages
that they specifypersonand numberinformation while remaining non-cornmittalabout referenceand discoursestatus.(Evans
1999:255)
Evans'sargumentsare basedon material lrom Bininj Gun-wok, a
dialect chain of northern Australia, but he maintains that they
extendto other polysyntheticlanguagesas well, citing languages
- disrysr
101-2/oFmithun.3d
- 1E/58- 15:22
lcpdruIrrpsflrps
MITHUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMBNT
239
from the Eskimo-Aleut, Iroquoian, Salishan, Uto-Aztecan and
South Caucasianfamilies, among others.
In what follows. the notions of referentiality and definiteness
will first be examinedmore closely,then the functions of pronominal affixess/ill be investigatedin two unrelated polysynthetic
languages:CentralAlaskanYup'ik, an Eskimo-Aleutlanguageof
southwesternAlaska, and Navajo, an Athabaskan languageof the
American Southwest.It will be seenthat the pronominal affixesin
both of theselanguagesare referentialand definite in all but one of
their uses,a usetypical of the independentpronounsof Germanand
Englishas well. Non-referentialmentionsare generallymadewith
alternativeconstructions.
Termsusedfor the markersat various stagesalong the diachronic
path vary considerably.As discussedby Siewierska(1999) and
others, the hypothesiseddiachronic evolution results in a cline
so authorsdiffer in
that doesnot lend itself to easysegmentation,
the number of types of marker they distinguish and the terms they
usefor each.Somereferto al1markersalongthe clineas'agreement
markers'; others use that term only for pronominal affixes and
redundantinflection; still othersuseit only for redundantinflection.
The schemaadopted here is the tripartite division proposed by
and implicit in the work of Evans.FoliowingSiewierska
Siewierska
and Evans, markers at the three stageswill be referred to as (i)
independentpronouns, (ii) pronominal affxes and (iii) redundant
markers.
grammaticalagreement
2. RBTSRENTTAI-IrY AND DEFINTTENESS
The notion of referenceis rarely given a succinctdefiaition in the
literature on semantics.The concepttendsinsteadto be introduced
by example.Lyons (1977:174)statesthat'the term "reference"has
and
to do with the relationshipwhich holdsbetweenan expression
what that expression stands for on particular occasions of its
utterance'.He providesthe illustrationbelow.
When a sentencelike 'Napoleonis a Corsican'is uttered to
make a statement,we will say that the speakerrefers to a
certain individual (Napoleon) by means of the referring
- disk/sr
- 15:22
101-2/os-mithun.3d
- 1E/5/3
[:pdrurrnsrrrps
socIErY101,2003
oF THEPHILoLoGICAL
240 rRANsAcrIoNs
expression.If the referenceis successful,the referring expression will correctly identify for the hearer the individual in
question:the referent.(Lyons 1977:t77)
the notion ofreferencethroughclause
Chafe(1994)approaches
function.Onecanthink of a clauseasverbalisingthe ideaof an
eventof starc.
Each of these event or state ideas contains within it other'
included ideasthat can be said to be participan s in the events
or states.Theseparticipants are typically the ideas of people,
objects, or abstractions,for which the term refercnts is
appropriate. . . . With a few exceptionssuch as raining a,nd
bi'eingcold (of the weather), things do not happen and states
do not exist without the inclusion of referentswho perform
them, are affected by them, or participate in them in other
ways. . . . It is important to keep in mind, however,that in
this usageevents,states,and referentsare all ideas that exist
in the minds of speakersand listeners.Whether or not they
have correlatesin the "real world" is irrelevant. I can (and
do) think of the featsof ScarlettO'Hara as naturally as those
of Marilyn Monroe. That only one of these teferents ever
existed in "reality" makes no difference to my thought or
speech.(Chafe 1994: 67).
Both Lyons and Chafe distinguish several kinds of referents:
specific individuals (individual referents), groups of individuals
(group referents)and typical instancesof a class(genericreferents)'
But not all linguistic expressionsevoke the idea of a particular
NPs,
individual,groupor class.Examplesof Englishnon-referential
used when there is no referent at all, either particular or generic,
includethosecitedby Chafein (7).
(7) SomeEnglishnon-referentialNPs (Chafe1994:103-4)
a. NPs that specifymore fully the nature of an event
He lovestellingjokes.
b. Indefnite pronouns
whateverthe casemaYbe
c. Non-specificmentionsin irrealis contexts
I think I'll buy a newsPaPer.
- disk/sr
101-2105-mithun.3d
- 15:22
- 18/5f3
lcl3drufirpsfrrps
MITHUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMBNT
nA l
(7) d. Negativepronouns
No oneever went to Seattleon their way to somewhereelse.
e. Contentquestionwords
Who told you that?
f. Non-referentiali/
It is raining.
The term 'definiteness'generallyrefersto the grammaticalencoding of identitrability. Chafe (199a: 93) defines the property of
identifiablity very simply: 'An identifiablereferentis onethe speaker
assumesthe listener will be able to identify'. Identifiable referents
to bealreadyshared
Theyare:i. assumed
sharethreecharacteristics.
by the listener; ii. verbalisedin a sufficiently identifying way; iii.
contextuallysalient.By (i), an identffiablereferentis assumedby the
speakerto be alreadypart of the hearet'sknowledge.This knowledgemight be direct, asin I'vefed thedag,whereboth speakerand
listenerare alreadyfamiliar with the family pet. It might comefrom
asin Chafe's
prior discourse.Or it might be derivedby association,
gals
Volkswagen,
and they
were
in
a
These
exampleof the horn in
kepthonkin'thehorn.Criterion(ii) reflectsthe fact that a speakeris
obligated to categorisea sharedreferent in a way that allows the
for identilistenerto identify it. The linguisticresourcesnecessary
pronoun
alonemay
in
some
cases
a
the
situation:
ficationvary with
be sufficient,in others a demonstrativemay be appropriate, and in
still othersa commonnoun, a modified noun or a proper name, may
Criterion(iii), contextualsalience,'hasto do with the
be necessary.
degreeto which a referent "stands out" from other referentsthat
might be categorisedin the sameway. It may be establishedby the
discourse,by the environment within which a conversation takes
place,by the socialgroup to which the partipants in a conversation
of humanexperiencr'(Chafe1994:100).
belong,orby commonness
identifiability
aredistinctbut related'Thefeature
Referentialityand
of identifiability is irrelevant for two kinds of NP: thosewith generic
referentsand thosewith no referentat all (Chafe1994:101-5).
3. CSNTRAI- At-,c.sKAN YUP'K
Central Alaskan Yup'ik is a languageof the Eskimo-Aleut family
Alaska. Yup'ik verbsconsistof an initial
spokenin southwestern
18/58- 15:22-disk/sr
101-2/0$mithun.3dlc:/3druflrpsilrps
socIErY101,2003
oF THEPHILOLOGICAL
242 rRANsAcrroNs
root, optionally followed by one or more derivational or modifying
suffixes,plus an obligatory inflectional ending.The endingcontains
a mood suffix that usually distinguishestransitivity, and a pronominal suffx identifying the core arguments of the clause' In
the examplescited here, the first line representsthe utterance ln
the community orthography; the second, a segmentation into
morphemes;the third, morpheme-by-morphemeglossing;and the
fourth, a free translation.
(8) Yup'ik verb structure
Nayuruararput.
nayur-uar-ar-Put
1.pr/3.pr
purpose'rRANsIsrrvE.INDIcarnn'
serious.
e-without.
observ
'We watchedthem for sometime.'
The pronominal suffixes do not distinguish gender, but they do
distinguishfour persons(frst, second,third and corefetentialthird),
three numbers (singular, dual and plural), and two grammatical
roles. (The coreferentialthird-personcatogory,abbreviatedn, is
used for participants that are coreferential with the subject of
that clauseor a higher one.)There are no independentpronouns
comparableto the unstressedpronouns of English or German.
forms meaning,for example,'I
(Independentemphatic./contrastive
myself' exist, but they are not equivalent to English or German
unstressedpronouns. They are used only in pragmatically marked
contexts.) Verbs with their pronominal suffixes can' and often
as
in themselves,
do, constitutecomplete,grammaticalsentences
above.
3.1. Referentialityin Yup'ik
In languageswith independentpronounslike Englishor German,
the referenceof the pronounscan be establishedin a number of
ways. Similar strategiescan be seenbehind the use of the Yup'ik
pronominal suffxes. The passagebelow comes from a family
conversationabout a hunting trip. The pronominal suffixesare
underscored.
- 18/5/3
101-z/otmithun.3d
- 15:22-disk/sr
lc:/3drufrreslrres
MITHUAN - PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT
(9) Yup'ik otter an€cdote(ElenaCharles,speakerp.c.)
a. Ayaginarpiuq,
AyaginarPi-u-q
do-rNrn.tNorc-3.sc
name
'Ayaginarsaid,
b. "Tang!"-gguq"Cuignilnguut!
cuignilngur-t
tang-ggq
:
iootrl QUoTATI\,"E otter-PL
"Look! Otters!
tang
c. Atak-gguq
tang
atak:ggug
:
well.then r:EAr.sIYlook
What do you say
d. arulaiqarluta
arula-ir-qarJu-ta
be.in.motion-xwi-brueft-sulonorN,lrrvs-1.pr
we stop brieflY
"
e. naluqaqurlaput.
nayur-qaqur-la-put
obser ve-intermit tently' oP'tATrvE-l.Pt13.PL
and watchthemfor a while?"
f. Angerluku,
anger-1u-ku
4/'S}'El-SUBORDINATIVE-R/3.SG
I answeredhim,
g. "Kiik patagmekpisqelluku."
kiiki patagmekpi-sqe-lu-ku
hurry at.once do-ask-suronlrNATlvE-BR/3.sc
"Hurry, ask him to do it!"
h. Arulaiqerluta
arula-ir-qerteJu-ta
be.in motion-NpcATrvE-/4st-suBoRDrNATnE-l,PL
We stoppedquicklY
i nayuruararput.
nayur-uar-ar-Put
purpose'rn.nrorc-n1.prl3.pr
obser ve-without.serious.
and we watchedthem for sometime.
243
- 15:22
101-2/osmithun.3d
- disk/sr
- 18/5/3
lc:Fdprfrpsrras
2M
TRANsAcrIoNsoF rm Ps[oLocIcAL socIErY l0l, 2003
j. rliit
pugellrani
puge-ller-ani
coN'rsMPonenl'r-3'sc
associate-3.ptJu; sur/ace-pesr.
When one of them surfaced,
egrnian
k. nutegariini
egmian
n uteg-arte-a-ani
shoot-suddenly-coNsEQUENTIAL-3R
-x:13.w r ight.away
he shot it right away
l. nallarrluku.
nallarle-lu-ku
I it-sunonoruerrw-pJ3.sc
and he hit it.'
ilang-at
In languageswith independentpronouns, the referenceof firstpronounsis established
by the speechevent:firstand second-person
personpronouns are directly interpretedasrepresentingthe speaker
(with perhaps others) and second-personpronouns as the hearer
(with perhapsothers).The samedirect interpretation can be seenof
pronominal suffixes.An example
Yup'ik first- and second-person
(h-i)
'We
stoppedquickly and we watched
above:
appearsin lines
themfor sometime'.
The referenceof independentthird-person pronouns in English
and other languagescan be establishedby a lexical nominal in prior
discourse.The samestrategyca:rbe seenin line (e): 'Otters! What do
you say we stop and watch them for a while?'. The nominal
antecedentneed not be in the immediatelyprecedingsentence.
The next referenceto the otters was a pronominal suffix several
lines later: 'Hurry! Ask him to do it! We stopped quickly and
watchedthem for sometime' (i).
Reference can also be established through inference and/or
extralinguisticcontext.When Mrs. Charlessaid, 'Hurry! Ask him
to do it!' (g) the referent of the pronominal suffx 'him' was the
personoperatingthe motor on the boat. The referencewas not
establishedby a lexical antecedent,but it was easily inferred from
the situation without further explanation: this was the only person
in a position to carry out the suggestion.
So far the principles for establishing the referenceof Yup'ik
pronominal suffixesare similar to those for establishingthe
- 1E/58- 15:22
101-2/05-mithun.3d
- disk/sr
lc:/3drurrrpsIras
MTTHUAN- pRoNouNs AND AGREEMENT
245
referenceof English or German independeutpronouns. A referent
may be designatedby a pronominal suffx so long as it can be
associatedwith an idea of a particular individual, a group of
individuals or a typical member of a class.But it is obvious from
the ottor anecdotethat Yup'ik pronominal suffixes differ in an
important way from English and German pronouns.They may
co-occurwith a coreferentiallexical nominal in the sameclause,and
the reference.We saw this
it can be this nominal that establishes
structure in the opening sentenceof the anecdotewith the name
Ayaginarand later with the nominal iliit 'one of them'.
(9) Yup'ik otter anecdote(ElenaCharles,speakerp.c.)
a. Ayaginar piuq,
Ayaginarpi-u-q
do-wrn.rNotc-3.sc
name
'Ayaginarsaid,
j. niir
pugellrani
puge-ller-ani
ilang-at
associate-3.ptisc sar/oce-rasr.coNTEMPonanw-3.sc
'When oneof them surfaced,' . . '
In English and German, referencecan be establishedwithin the
clausefor somepronouns:Mary alwaystakesher dog with het. Tlte
only restriction in theselanguagesis against the establishmentof
pronominal referencefor core argumentsby material within the
clause:Mary she takes her ilog with her. Ytrp'ik simply lacks this
in all of the same
canbe established
restriction.In Yup'ik, reference
context,
by
extralinguistic
places as in English and German,
inference,the speechact itself and linguistic context beyond the
clause,and within the clauseas well. This phenomenonwill be
furtherin section4.
discussed
All of the pronominal suffxesin the otter anecdoteare referential.
But asEvans(1999)points out, pronominal affixesin languageslike
Yup'ik must be presentin everyclause.Speakersof Yup'ik, like
speakersof other languages,do make non-referentialmentions.
Evansconcludesthat pronominalaffxes,particularlythoserepresenting direct objects,mustbeincapableof distinguishingreferentiality.A
closerlook at the way Yup'ik speakersusetheir language,however,
shows that pronominal suffxes are as referential and definite as
- 15:22
101-2/0fFmithun.3d
- disk/sr
- 18/5/3
lc:/3drufrrps[rps
socIErY101,2003
oF THEPHILoLocIcAL
246 rRANsAcrroNs
Englishpronouns.Non-referentialmentionsaregenerallymadewith
alternativeconstructionsthat avoid the useof pronominalsuffixes.
3.2. Yup'ikgenericreference
At the edgeof referentialityis genericreference.Genericmentions
are usually classified as referential by semanticists,but generic
referenceis in a sensemore abstract than other reference,in that
it evokesa typical member of a class,rather than an identifiable
individualin the rea.lworld. Evans(1999:265)notesthat in English
'third personpersonalpronounsdo
and other Europeanlanguages,
generic
interpretation
not allow a
[as in (l0a)]; to obtain this a bare
plural must be usedinsteadof a pronoun', as in (10b).
(10) Specificand genericreference(Evans1999:265)
a. Shescoldsthem.
b. Shescoldspeople.
Evansreports that in Bininj Gun-wok, both can be encodedwith a
bound objectprefix.
(11) Bininj Gun-wok(Gun-djeihmi)pluralobjects(Evans1999:265)
alege daluk gaban-du-ng.
FEM.DEMwoman 3l3.pt--scold-r.loN.pA'sr
'That womanscoldspeople.'or 'That womanis scoldingthem.'
In many languages,certain pronouns have a conventionalised
genericuse,like Englishyoz and they.Evanscites the exampleThey
ln
alwaystry to get you to pay more thanyoa want to (1999:-257).
Yup'ik, pronominal suffixesare never given genericreadingson
their own. Pronominal suffxes are used only when the referent
A Yup'ik constructiontranslatedwith
they evoke is established.
(12).
her husbandreturnedfrom a hunt
When
genericreferenceis in
Mrs. Charlesgreetedhim with this remark,
empty-handed,
(12) Yup'ik genericreference(ElenaCharles,speakerp.c.)
Canrituq.
ca-nrite-u-q
do. som et hing -t*o-INTR.TNDIc-3. sG
'It's a1lright.
- disk/sr
101-2/o5mithun.3d
-'18/s/3- 15:22
lc:pdru/rresrras
MITHUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT
247
piterrlainayuitut.
Yuut
pi-te-rrlainar-yu-ite-u-t
yuk-t
pef son-"Lthing-catch-conI tantIy-HA!-NEG-INTR.TNDIC-3.PL
Peopledon't alwayscatchgame.'
The noun yuut 'people' establisheda referent that was then picked
up in the pronominalsuffix-l'they'on the verb.This verb,with its
third-person-pluralpronominal suffx, could not be usedwithout an
identifiablereferent.It couldconstituteaperfectlyacceptablesentence
alone,but thepronominal suffx could only beinterpretedasreferring
to some referent establishedby previous discourseor the extralinguisticcontext:Piterrldinayuitut'Theydon't alwayscatchgame'.
3.3. Yup'ik quaffiing noms
Another type of potentially non-referential expressionin English
involves nouns that qualify the nature of an event, as in Chafe's
exampleHe lovestellingiokes. Such entities are not referred to by
pronominalsuffixesin the Yup'ik counterpartsto theseexpressions'
A differentkind of constructionis used.
The languagecontainsan extensiveinventory of derivational
suffixes,among them many verbalisers,some with quite concrete
meanings.The verb 'to fish' in (13)is basedon the noun root neqe'fish, food' with a verbalisingsuffix-ssur-'hunt, catch'.
p.c.)
(13) Yup'ik denominalverbderivation(GeorgeCharles,speaker
Neqssurnaurtut-llu.
neqe-ssur-naur-tu-t: llu
fi sh-hunt-customorily-nun.rlorc-3.pr : and
'And theyusedto fish.'
The baseof the verb, the noun root neqe' 'fish', is not referential,so
the fish are not representedin the pronominal suffix, and the verb is
intransitive.
Evansnotesthat'have' constructionsoften take non-referential
objects.The kind of Yup'ik denominalintransitiveconstruction
item
The possessed
seenin (13)is alsousedto predicatepossession.
noun
The
the
clause.
argument
of
is not expressedas a core
representingit simply servesas the baseof the verb, narrowing
the kind of ownershippredicated.
- 1E/sF-'15:22- disk/sr
101-2/05-mithun.3d
jc:Fd/J,.rasrrres
oF rrrEPlrLoLoGIcALsocIErY101,2003
248 rRANsAcrroNs
(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.)
(14) Yup'ik possession
aataka.
Qimugtengqerrlallruuq
aata-ka
qimugte-ngqerr-1arJlru-u-q
dog-have-ttst-Ylrsr-nrrn.rxorc-3.sGfat her' l.scIsG
mYfather
he usedto dog-hate
'My father usedto havedogs.'
Suchdenominalintransitive constructionsare alsousedto predicate
and absenceof entities.
the presence
(ElenaCharles,speakerp.c.)
(15) Yup'ik presence
Campaput
YungqellruYaqelliniuq.
yug-ngqerrJlru-yaqeJlini-u-q
campa-put
e-nAst-actually-apparentlycamp-l.ttlsc person-hat
INTR.INDIc-3.sG
our camp (ms) apparentlyit had actually person-had
'Therehad apparentlybeenpeopleat our camp.'
(16) Yup'ik absence@lenaCharles,speakerp.c.)
nukalPiartaicuunateng'
Nunat
nukalpiar-taite-yuite-na-teng
nuna-t
villag e-tt- man.in.p rime'lack-nas.Nnc-suBoRDrNATrvr-3.PL
villages they are not usuallylacking in hunters
'The villagesare neverwithout a man in his prime (a good
hunter and Provider).'
Thesedenominal constructionsservemany of the samekinds of
lexical,syntacticand discoursepurposesas noun incorporationin
other languages(Mithun 1998a,b).While they are probably descended from noun-verb compounds, they are now structurally
distinct. The morphemeswith verb-like meaningssuch as 'hunt',
'have'and 'lack' areno longerroots,but ratherderivationalsuffixes.
They form a large but closedset, and neveroccur in initial position
in words,the only positionin which roots occur.
in YuP'ik
3.4. Definiteness
Evans (1999)proposesthat an important differencebetweenthe
independentpronouns of English and German on the one hand,
and the pronominal affixesof polysyntheticlanguageson the other,
* disk/sr
- 15:22
101-2l0t nithun.3d
- 1815/3
lc:/3drufirpsflrps
MITHUAN - PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT
249
is the fact that independentpronouns are always definite, while
pronominal affixesmay or may not be' As noted earlier,pronominal
suffxes in Yup'ik and other polysyntheticlanguagesare used only
for core arguments.Indefinite core argumentsare actually relatively
rare in Yup'ik. Participants are usually introduced in other gramdo occurwith lexicalnominalsthat
maticalpositions.But sentences
can be interpretedasindefinite, that is, with nominalsthat represent
entities not previously idenffiable to the audience.(Definitenessis
not markedformally in Yup'ik.)
(17) Yup'ik indefinitenominal (ElenaCharles,speakerp.c.)
Allaneq-am
allaneq: am
ikantengnaqlallruuq
ikani-te-ngrraqe-la-llru-u-q
Over.there.RESTR-be-'r/-HAB-PASTst/anger: EMPIdATIC
rNtn.nrotc-3.sc
'A strangertried to stayover there
qikertarrarmi.
qikertar-rrar-mi
isIand-li ttIe-t oc t'rtw
on a little island.'
At issuehereis whetherpronominalaffixesthat are coreferential
with indefinite lexical nominals must themselvesbe considered
like
We know that in languages
indefinite,that is, non-identifiable.
definiteness
not
have
the
same
pronouns
need
English, independent
value as their lexical antecedents.English speakersregularly introduce referents with an indefinite NP, then subsequentlyrefer to
them with (definite)pronourrs:A sttangertried to stay overthere-He
nevermanagedto catchanyfsh. Yup'ik pronominal suffxesdo differ
ftom English independentpronouns in that their referentsmay be
identified within the sameclause.(Evans notes that even English
allows speakersto establishthe referenceof pronouns within the
samesentence,as in He who hesitatesis lost.)
Yup'ik has gone further than many languagesin prohibiting
indefinite transitive patients altogether. Such participants can be
only asobliques,markedwith the ablativecase.Recountexpressed
ing a story abouttwo hunters,Mr. Charlesnotedthat theycaughta
small bird. The indefinite norninal a small b#d could not be castas a
- disk/sr
101-2/oFmithun.3d
- 1E/5/3
- 15:22
lc:pdrurrDsllrps
250 rRANsAcrroNs
oF Tm pr LoLocIcALsocIETY101,2003
core argument,so it was expressedas an oblique (ablative)and not
represented
in the pronominalsuffx.
(18) Yup'ik indefinite(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.)
Yaqulcuarmek-llu-gguq,
yaquJek-cuar-rnek: llu : gBuQ
wing-haveJit tle-sn,rl.'rmn: a/so: nrmsev
a little bird, they say
'It seemsthosetwo
pitellinilutek
taukuk.
pitellini-lu-tek
tauku-k
lfrqt.RlsrR-DU
catch.game-app arenl/)r-strBoRDrNA:rrvr-3.ou
thosetwo
they two apparentlycaught
caughta smallbird.'
Once introduced, the bird was consideredidentifiable (defiaite), so
it could be expressedas a core a.rgumentand referred to by
pronominal suffixes.
(19) Yup'ik definite(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.)
Wani-wa nerevkenaku,
now : right nere-vke-na-ku
right now g4'-NBG-SUBORDINATTVE-By'3.SC
right now wenot edtingit now
'Let's not eat it right now, . . . '
Many languages
showprohibitionsagainstindefiniteor non-specific
core arguments.The Yup'ik prohibition againstindefinite transitive
absolutivesprobably reflectsthe fact that this is one of the most
mentions:I wanta cat; I'll get a
commonpositionsfor non-specific
cat; I'm look@ for a cat.The choiceof an altemativeconstruction,
in which the participant is not expressedas a core argument,was
apparently generalised.
3.5. Yup'ik indefnitepro forms 'someone'
, 'something'
Sincethey are referential and definite, English anaphoricpronouns
to mean'someone'or 'something'.
arenot usedwith openreference
a
sentence
Iike He borrowedi/ to mean
do not use
Englishspeakers
- 15:22
- 1E/5/3
101-2/osmithun.sd
- disk/sr
lcl3druIrrpsfrrps
MITHUAN _ PRONOI.INS AND AGREEMBNT
25I
'someoneborrowedit', evenif they know that the borrowerwasa
man. Similarly, they do not use a sentencelike He married her to
mean 'He married someone'.The sameprinciples hold for Yup'ik
pronominalsuffixes.Theyareusedonly whenthereis an identifiable
referent.
(20) Yup'ik third-personreference(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.)
Navrallruyugnarqaa.
navrarJlru-yugnarqe-a-a
borrow-PAsr-probabl7-rn.nuc-3.sc/3.sl;
'He borrowedit.'
Not: 'someoneborrowedit.'
'He borrowedsomething.'
In order to expressa statementlike 'Someonemust have borrowed
my knife', speakersestablisha hypothetical referent with an independentpro form 'someone',and referto this hypotheticalreferent
pronominallywithin the verb.
(21) Yup'ik independentindefnite (GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.)
nuussiqa navrallruyugnarqaa.
Kitum
nuussiq-ka nawar-llru-yugtarqe-a-a.
kitum
knife-l.sclso borrow'vtsr-probably'
satneone.Enc
TR.INDIC-3.SG/3.SG
'someonemust haveborrowedmy knife''
Pronomiaal suffxes referring to transitive patientsshow the same
pattern.The Yup'ik sentencain (19) can mean only 'He married
her' or'She marriedhim'. It cannotbe interpretedas 'He married
The pronominalsuffixmust be referential'
someone'.
(22) Yup'ik (GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c', elicited)
Kassuutellrua.
kassuute-llru-a-a
IDICATTVE-3.
SG/3.SG
m4rrl-PAST-TRANSTTTVE.n
'He married her.' or 'She married him.'
Not: 'He married someone.'
To express 'He married someone' there are two options. If the
identity of the bride is unimportant in the discourseat that point,
- 18/5/3
101-z/os-mithun.3d
- 1s:22- disk/sl
lc:pdrufrresfrres
oF TrtEPHILoLocIcALsocIETY101,2003
252 TRANsAcrIoNs
an intransitive form of the verb marry is used,with no pronominal
referenceto the indefinitepatient.
elicited)
(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.,
(23) Yup'ik detransitivisation
Kassuutellruuq.
kassuute-llru-u-q
m4rrl-pAsr-INTRANSITIvE.nrprclrrw-3.sc
: 'He got married.'
'He married(someone).'
If the speakerwishes to establish a refetent with an independent
indefinite nominal representingthe semanticpatient of an event,
rather than simply leaving it unspecified,an independentpro form
meaning'someone'or 'something'can be used.As an indefinite,
however,it cafixot qualify as the absolutive of a transitive clause.
An intransitiveverb is usedinstead,and there is no pronominal
mention of the indefiniteparticipant. The indefinitepro form is in an
obliquecase,the ablative.
(24) Yup'ik indefinitepatient(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.,elicited)
tangellrua.
a. Kitumek
tangerr-llru-u-a
kitu-mek
I .sG
someone- AB;LATTV!see-PAsr-INTRANSTTTVB.INDICATIYE-
'I sawsomebody.'
nalkutuq.
b. Camek
nalke-ute-u-q
ca-mek
something - ABLATT,,IE
f nd-orrn.lNsrrwlsER-INTRANsnrvE.
INDIC- T.SG
'I found something.'
Evans(1999:270)hasdevisedan ingenioustest for referentiality
that involves repetition. A Bininj Gun-Wok adverbialprefix mean1ngagain canbeused(a) for exactrcplays(Hefell overagain),@) fot
transition back to a previous state (Theiungle gretv back over the
ruins again) and (c) for replays with token replacement,that is,
repetitionof actionsin which one or more participantsis replaced
andI caught
with anotherofthe sametype (I caughtafish yesterday,
(one) again today; I saw someonein there yesterday, and saw
someoneelsein therc again today). It is type (c) that is of interest
here. Evansreports that in Bininj Gun-wok, a regular third-person
pronominal prefix can appear in such consfuctions meaning
- 18/58- 15:22
101-2/0$mithun.3d
- disk/sr
lc:pdrurrfpsrras
MITHUAN ' PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT
253
'another,someoneelse',wherea personalpronoun would not be
acceptablein English.
(25) Bininj Cun-wok (Kunwinjku) replay (Evans 1999:271' citing
Carroll 1995:363)
wanjh bi-yawoyh-yam-i
then 3/3ncrcn.oanct.vts'r'again-spear-PAsT.IMPRF
na-buyika
masc-other
'then he would (go againand) spearanother'
Under repetition, Yup'ik pronominal suffixespattern like English
independentpronouns:their referencemust remain constant.The
transitiveverb in (26a)can beusedonly if the participant is the same
through the repetition, that is, if the groom married the same
woman again. If he married someoneelsethe secondtime around,
the intransitiveverb in (26b) must be used,with no pronominal
referenceto the bride.
(26) Yup'ik pronominalsuffxeswith repetition(GeorgeCharles,
speakerp.c.,elicited)
a. Ataamcali kassuutellrua.
ataam cali kassuute-llru-a-a
again still mdrrl'-PAsr-TR.INDIc-3.sG/3'sG
'He marriedher again.'
b. Ataam cali kassuutellruuq'
ataam cali kassute-lku-u-q
again still r??drrl-PAsr-INTR.rr'mrc-3.sc
'He remarried.'
This contrastswith the interpretation of the noun roots that serveas
the basis for denominal verbs. Sincethey are non-referential,they
neednot be interpretedwith constantreference.
(27) Yup'ik denominalverb with repetition(Jacobson1984:525)
Tuntutenqigtuq.
tuntuk-te-nqigte-u-q
3.sc
car ibou-catch-agam-rNTR.INDrc'He caughtcaribouagain.'
The structureof the Bininj Gun'wok examplein (25)above,'then
- disk/sr
- 15:22
101-2/0$mithun.3d
- 18/5/3
lc:pdprrrpsrras
socIETY101,2003
oF TrrE?HrLoLoGlcAL
254 TRANsAcrIoNs
he would go again and spearanother', is in the end probably much
like its counterpartsin Yup'ik and other languageswith pronominal
affixes. The Bininj Gun-wok again prefix may certainly have
specialpropertiesthat distinguishit from the Englishadverb'But
rn"ft"i it doesor not, the independentnominal 'other' in 'then
other'has the capacityto establisha referent,
he.would.spear.it
which is referredto by the pronominal prefix in the verb.
3.6. Yup'iknon'sPecifcmentions
Among the types of non-referential mentions are non-specific
nominals, those for which there is not necessarilyany referent at
a1l.Suchmentionsoccur,for example,in irrealiscontexts,as in the
frequently citedI want to marry an lrtshman,wherethe speakerhas
no particular Irishman in mind. The grammar of Yup'ik ensures
that suchentitiesare neverrepresentedby pronominal suffixes'The
nominalsin (28)and (29)belowcan be understoodas non-specific'
The speakermay utter the first without having a particular woman
in mind. andthe secondwithout knowingwhethera potentialhelper
exists.
mention(GeorgeCharles,speakerp'c',
(28) Yup'ik non-specific
elicited)
Kassuucugtua
kassuute-1rrg-tu-a
malryr-DEsIDERATTvE-rNTR.rNDlc-1.sG
'I want to marry
yupiarmek
yuk-piar-mek
arnarnek.
arnar-mek
p er son- r eal - ASLATrVE w Oman- A3.LATr\n
a Yup'ik woman.'
mention(GeorgeCharles,speakerp'c')
(29) Yup'ik non-specific
Yuartua
yuar-tu-a
search.for -rstx.rNDlc-l.sG'
'I am looking for
- disk/sr
101-2/05-tnithun.3d
- 18/5F- 15:22
lcX3drufrrpsfirps
MITHUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT
255
ikayurtakamnek.
ikayur-ta-kar-mnek
l.sc/sc.mmrrw
rsm-uNREALrsED.FUTURE.nrrNcfte/p-NorvnN,n
my potential helper
someoneto helpme.'
Becauseof the prohibition against indefinite transitive patients in
Yup'ik , thesenon-specificentitiesarecastasobliques(ablatives).The
clausesare thus grammaticallyintransitive, and there is no pronominal relerenceto eitherthe Yup'ik womanor the potentialhelper.
undernegation:'no one','nothing'
3.7. Yup'ikindefinites
Other commonly cited non-referential expressionsare negated
indefinitessuch as 'no one', 'not anyone', 'nothing' and 'not
anything'. As noted, Yup'ik pronominal suffixes are always
referential, even under negation. The transitive clause in (30a)
can be used only with a specific,referential patient. If the patient
is non-referential, an intransitive version like that in (30b) must
be used, with no pronominal referenceto the non-existent
individual.
(30) Yup'ik pronominalsuffxeswith negation(GeorgeCharles,
speakerp.c.,elicited)
a. Kassuutenritaa.
kassuute-nrite-a-a
mar f y -NEGATIVE-TR.rNDIC-3. SG/3.SG
'He didn't marry her.'
b. Kassuutenrituq.
kassuute-nrite-u-q
3.sc
rrl4//y-NEGATTW-INTR.TNDIC'He didn't marry anyone.'
There is also an alternative construction for expressingnegative
A hypothetical
indefinites,parallelto that usedfor non-negatives.
referentcan be establishedwith an independentindefinite 'someone'
or'something', which is then referredto in statementsabout that
hypotheticalworld. Suchstatemeotscan be negated:'It is not the
casethat someonecame'.
- disk/sr
101-2/05-mithun.3d
- 18/5p- 15:22
lc:Fdp/rrpslrrps
256 rRANsAcrIoNsoF rr{E PHrLoLocrcALsocIETY101,2003
(31) Yup'ik indefnite negation(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.)
tainrituq.
a. Kina
tai-nrite-u-q
kina
someonecome-NBGATIvE-rNtn.INorc-3.sc
'No onecame-'
tangenritae.
b. Kinkut
tangerr-nrite-a-a
kinkut
INDIc-3.Pr-/3'sc
someone.PLsee-NEoATrvE-TR.
him.'
one
saw
'No
Since the independent indefinite pro forms are indefinite, they
cannot be cast as transitive absolutives.They appear as obliques
(ablatives),and the verb is intransitive.
(32) Yup'ik indefinitenegation(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.)
tangellrunrituq'
a. Kitumek
tangerr-llru-nrite-u-q
kitu-mek
SOMEONE. ABLATI\IB JEE-PAST-NEGATIVE'INTRANSITTVE.
INDIC-J.SG
'He didn't seeanYoneat all.'
nalkutenrituq.
b. Camek
nalke-ute-nrite-u-q
ca-mek
g
n-l,t,.twn
e
t
h
in
som
f nd-orruNsrrrvISER-NEG-INTR.
TNDIC.J.SG
'Shedidn't find aqthing at all.'
j.8. Yup'ikconlentqueslions
Other non-referring expressionsare question words. Question
may not be referential,but they can establisha
words themselves
referentwhich is then referredto pronominally. Content questions
of coursepresupposethe existenceof the entities to be identified.
the existence
of peopleat a feast.
The questionin (33)presupposed
(33) Yup'ik contentquestion(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c')
Kinkut-llu tuantellruat?
kirkut : llu tuan-te-llru-a-et
to-PAsr-TR.INDIc-3.pr,/3.sc
who.pt-=too there.rlESTp.-gI.
and whoall they wentto thatPlace
'So whoall was there?'
101-2/0Smithun.3d
- diskrfsr
- 18/58- 15:22
lcl3drufrresfrres
MITHUAN _ PRONOIINS AND AGREEMENT
25'I
The prohibition against indefinite transitive patients extends to
questionwords, which are tle sameas indefinite pro forms, so the
questionwordsusedfor theseforms are oblique.
(34) Yup'ik content question(ElizabethAli, speakerp'c.)
Camek
ca-mek
neqengqercit?
neqe-ngqerr-cl-t
2.sG
something-ABil,Nrr\IE
food-have-nil^nxxocATrvE
'What do you have to eat?'
3.9. Yup'ik weatherterms
There is one context in which Yup'ik pronominal suffixesare used
The final -4 in the verbs
non-referentially:weather expressions.
singular.
belowis the third-person
(35) Yup'ik weatherexpressions
a. Ivsirtuq.
ivsir-tu-q
raln-nffn.tNorc-3.sc
'It is raining.'
Akercirtu-q.
'It is sunnY.'
b.
c. Kavcirtu-q 'It is hailing.'
d. Taicirtu-q. 'It is foggY.'
'It is snowing.'
e. Qanirtu-q
It would be difficult, however,to arguethat theseexamplesreveala
differencein referentiality or definitenessbetweenYup'ik pronompronouns.English
inal suffixesand Englishor Germanindependent
it and German esare usedin exactly the sameway: It is raining, Es
tegnet.
The Yup'ik pronominal suffixes thus match the independent
pronouns of English and German in referentiality and deflniteness
in all ways but one. Their referentiality and identifiability can be
establishednot only by the extralinguistic context, inference,the
speechevent and a lexical nominal elsewherein the discoutse,but
alsoby a lexical nominal in the sameclause.A key to unpackingthe
featuresof referentiality and identifiability is the recognition that a
non-referentialor non-identifiablelexicalnominalmay introducea
101-2/05-|nithun.3d
- 16/58- 15:22- disk/sr
[:pdruIrrpsirrps
socIETY101'2003
oF rrrEPHILoLocIcAL
258 TRANsAcrIoNs
referent which is then referred to by referential and definite
pronominal affixes. The lexical nominal aad pronominal a-ffxes
need not match each other in referentiality or identifiability.
Non-referentialmentions in Yup'ik are accomplishedby other
constructions:derivationand detransitivisation.
4. Nlvero
The fact that the referentialityand definitenessvaluesof pronominal
affixesareindependentof thoseof the lexicalnominalsthat establish
their referenc€is particularly easyto seein Navajo. Navajo is an
Athabaskan languagespoken in the southwesternUnited States,
primarily in Arizona and New Mexico. It is polysynthetic, but it
differstypologically in a numberof waysfrom Yup'ik. While Yup'ik
is exclusivelysuffixing,Navajo is exclusivd prefixing.While Yup'ik
independentnominals are marked for number and case,Navajo
nominals are not. The meaningsexpressedby affixesare generally
quite different. But nearly all of the properties of the Yup'ik
pronominal suffxes are echoedin the Navajo pronorninal prefxes.
In Navajo asin Yup'ik, obligatory pronominal affixeson everyverb
identify the core argumentsof the clause.The Navajo pronominal
prefixes,like the Yup'ik suffixes,distinguishnumber and grammalical role. There are also severalcategoriesof third person' As in
Yup'ik, there are no independentpronouns comparableto the
unstressedindependent pronouns of English or German. Verbs
with their pronominal prefixescan constitutecompletegrammatical
A sampleverb is in (36).
in themselves.
sentences
(36) Navajo verb (Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c.)
Chihidahiihriid.
ch'ihi-da-0-hi-iid-l-tt'iid
l.Pt-.xnt-rxfy. rapilly.Yvs
out.horizontallyonn-3.osJ-sBRrATftEanother.'
one
after
'We tfuew them out
In Navajo as in Yup'ik, the basic pronominal prefixesare used
only referentially, evenwhen they are formally zero, like the thirdperson object preflx in (36) above.Non-referentialmentionsare
made with alternativeconstluctions.Some are the same as in
Yup'ik, and some are different.Navajo containsno denominal
- disk/sr
101-2/05-mithun.3d
- |8/58- 15:22
lc:/3drurrrpslras
MITI{UAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT
259
verb derivation like that seenin Yup'ik, or noun incorporation,
though some other Athabaskanlanguagesdo' It does contain
detransitivising morphology, however, which eliminates nonreferential entities from expression as core arguments, and
in pronominalprefixes.
arcordinglyfrom expression
4.1. Navajodetransitirisation
Languagesof the Athabaskal family contain a small set of old
derivational prefixes, traditionally (and inappropriately) termed
'classifiers'.Their basic function is to alter transitivity. Two of
these.-/- and -d-, serveto detransitiviseverbs. The effect of such
detransitivisationcan be seenin (37), wherethere is no pronominal
referencsto the agent,the personor peopleputting thingsaway.
(Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c.)
(37) Navajo detransitivisation
Hasht'e'nii'nil.
hasht'e-'-ni-d-nil
mo ve.sever a l. obi ect s.PRF
in. or der -UNSp,o&J-TRM-DETRANSITIVER:
'Thingswereput away.'
Transitivity alternations involving these prefixes are pervasive,
though their semanticsare not always transparent, becausethey
have been used to form lexical items for specificpurposes,lexical
items that can continueto developsemanticallyas independent
entities.
4.2. The Navajopronominalcalegories
As noted above,Evans(1999:255)has proposedthat pronominal
a.ffixesmust differ from independent pronouns in lacking the
capacity to distinguish referentiality and definiteness.Particularly
pertinentto this issueare the Navajo pronominalcategories.
4.2.1. TheNavajobasicpronominalptefixes
The basicsubjectpronominal prefixescan be seenin the paradign in
(38), These verbs are based on the imperfective form -nd of the
stem 'play', with the atelic prefix na-'atound'. (Due to extensive
in
individualprefixescanvary considerably
phonologicalprocesses,
101-2/0+mithun,3d
- 18/5/3
- 15:22-disk/sr
lc:/3drurrnsrrQs
260 rRANsAcrIoNsoF rrrE PHILoLocrcALsocIErY101,2003
their shapes,and it can be difficult to discern the morphological
componentsof prefix strings.)The pronominalprefixeshere have
beenunderscored.
(38) Navajo pronominalsubjects
naashn6 'I am playing'
nanin6 'you are playng'
'(he or she)is playing'
naan6
'we two are playing'
neii'n6
naahn6 'you two areplaYing'
naan6
'(they two) arePiaYing'
ndeii'n6 'we (threeor more) are playing'
ndaahn6 'you (threeor more) are playing'
ndaan6 'they (threeor more) are playing'
There are distinct prefixesfor first- and second-personsingular and
dual subjects.Plurality (three or more) is indicated by a separate
prefix, basicallyda-,which originatedasa distributive and still serves
iszero,
that functionin somecontexts.Thethird-personsubjectprefix
when
is,
only
referentially,
that
but eventhezeroform is alwaysused
its referentis clearfrom the extralinguisticor linguistic context.
Direct and indirect objects are also expressedby pronominal
prefixes.The verb 'carry up' below is built on the imperfectivestem
teehwith the prefixha-'ttP'.
(39) Navajo pronominalobjects
a. hashniheeh
ha-sh-ni-l-teeh
up-1.*.owscr -2.sc.suBJEcr-TRANSITTvISER-carryr.IMPRF
'you arecarryingme up'
b. hanishteeh
ha-ni-shj-teeh
I .sc.suBJEcr-TRANsrrrvIsER-c4/TJr'.IMPRF
up-2.sc.oBJEc"Tyou
up'
'I am carrying
c. haniheeh
ha-O-ni-l-teeh
c4rrl.IMPRF
up-3.*.owrrr -2.sc.suBJEcr-TRANsrrrvIsER'you are carryinghim/heruP'
18/58- 15:22-disk/sr
101-2/05mithun.3dlc:pdrurrrpsrrrps
MITI{UAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT
261
With first- or second-personsubjects, the third-person object
pronoun is again zero, as in (39c). But if the subject is third
person,the third-person objectstake one of two forms: proximate
bi- or obviativeyi-.
(40) Navajo third-personobjects
a. habilteeh
ha-bi-0-l-teeh
ap-3.m.onrrerr-oBrccr-3.srntEcr-TRANsmI\'ISERcarry.IMPRI.
'heishe/itis carrying him/heruP'
b. hailteeh
ha-l-0-l-teeh
r4-3,orvnrrw.onlrcr-3. suBJEcr-TRANSITTvISERcatryJMPR!
'he/sheis carrying him/her/it uP'
The proximateprefix br'-is usedessentiallyif the objectis higherin
discoursetopicality than the subject(,4 mosquitobit him), and the
obviativeprefix7r- is usedif the objectis lower (Ile swattedit).
All three of thesethird-person pronominal prefixes,zero,bi- and
yr'-,areusedonly referentially,that is, to evokeestablishedreferents.
Repetitive constructionslike those discussedby Evans confirm the
referentiality of thesepronominal prefixes,evenwhen they are zero
in form. Navajo containsa prefix with meaningsessentiallythe same
as that describedfor Bininj Gun-wok. It indicatesrepetitionof an
action or return to a previous location, state or condition. Significantly, pronominal referencemust remain constant through the
repetition. The command in (41a) could be a requestto wash an
objector bathea baby.That in (4lb) is a requestto washthe same
object or bathethe samebaby again.It could not be usedto ask
someoneto washanotherobjector anotherbaby.
(41) Navajo repetitive(Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c., elicited)
a. Tdrrigis!
t6-0-ni-gis
iw olving.water-3.oBJEcr-2.sc.suBrrcr-ru6.Iupnr
'Washit!'
- 1ElsB-15:22
101-z/o$mithun.3d
- disk/sr
lc:/3dprrresrrres
oF rIrE PHrLoLocIcALsocIETY101,2003
262 TRANsAcrIoNs
(41) b. Tdniinieis!
t6-ni6-0-nigis
involving.water -twYrrrwn-3.osJEcr-2.sc.srtBJEcr-rub.nrpnr
'Washit again!'
4.2.2. Navajogenericmentions
Navajo contains a separate pronominal category for generic
referenceto humans. It has the basic form ii- for subjects and
Aw- for objects and possessors,and could often be translated as
'one' or 'people'.As can be seenin (42c,d), it also patternslike
the British use of'one' in that continuing genericreferencesare
still genericin form: 'When one isn't hungry one doesn't eat',
'One is fortunate to have one's food'. As might be expected,the
genericprefixesappearin generalstatements.Statementsin this
form are often used as indirect commands and for indirect
referenceto the speaker.
(42) Navajo genericprefx (Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c.;Goossen
1995:283.284)
a. Ch'66hhn6h66shii nida'iich'id.
ch'66h h66hg66shiini-da-'-ii-ch'id
around-olsrn-tsNsP.oBJ-cnNnRlcfutilely avidly
futilely
avidly
scf atck.IMPBS
one
scratching things hete and
-was
there
'Peoplewerestill really diggingaround.'
b. Doo ijinii da.
doo 'a-ii-nii
ROI
TTNSP,OBJECT-GENBRIC.SIJBJECT.SaJ'.IMPRNEG
'One doesn'tsay that.' : 'Don't saythat.'
c. Doo dichin iililg66
doo dichin ii-lii: g66
: because
not hungercENBRrc.suBtacr'be
'When a personisn't hungrY,
doo iiy{:i da.
doo ii-ydri da
IO'
da
GENERIC.ST,'BJECT-E4'NEGATIVE
he doesn'teat.'
- 18/5F- 1s:22- dislvsr
101-2/o$mithun.3d
lc:pdrufrrpsfrrps
MTTHUAN- pRoNottNs AND AGREEMENT
(42) d. Hach'iya'
hw-ch'iy4'
263
h6lfpgo
h6J{ : go
GEI{RTC.POSSFSSOR-/0o d t he r e - e xis t.NETJTER.IMPRF :
SUBORDINATE
one'sfood
'Oneis fortunate
that thereexists
hizhdnee'.
hw-zh6nee'.
/zcky.Nrurrn.rurru
cENERIc.oBJEcr-6e.
it isfortunatefor one,
to havefood.'
This category is also used for respectful reference,such as to
relatives. It is used as well to track protagonists in narrative and
to differentiateparticipants. For this reasonit is sometimestermed
the alternatethird personor fourth personby Navajogrammarians.
participants
4.2.3. Navajounspecfied
As noted,if a verb like -cha'cry' is usedwith a zero third-personsubjectpronominal prefix, it can only mean 'He is crying' or 'Sheis
crying',not 'someoneis crying'. (Navajoverbscannotconsistof a
single syllable. If there is not sufficient morphological materia.lto
prothetic'peg'syllableyr'-is added
yieldtwo syllables,a meaningless
for bulk. This syllable is distinct from the third-person-obviative
object prefix mentionedabove and an aspectualprefix of the same
shape,which occupydifferentpositionsin the prefix string.)
(43) Navajo third-person subject
Yicha.
y!Gcha
PROTITETIC-3.STJBJECT-C//,IMPRF
'He or sheis crying.' Not: 'Someoneis crying.'
prefix is used'
To say'someoneis crying', the unspecified-subject
(The basic shapeof this prefix is a glottal stop, usually written ' in
the practical orthography but omitted word-initially. Various
vowels are added to it in particular contexts, however, so the
prefix may appear as '-, 'a-, 'i- or 'e.) The unspecified-subject
r l8/5p- 15:22
101-2/o&mithun.3d
- disk/s.
lc:Fdp/rrpslrrps
264 rRANsAcrroNsoF rrll PHILoLocIcALsocIErY 101,2003
prefix is usually used to focus on an event rather than the
participants.
(44) Navajo unspecifiedsubject(Young 2000:36)
Acha.
'a-cha
UNSPBCIFIED.ST'BJECT-C/J/.DURATIVE.IMPRF
'Thereis crying,someoneis crying.'
The situation is the samefor objects.With first- or second-person
subjects,the third- person pronominal object prefix is zero, as in
verbsmeaning'I'm eatingit' or 'I ateit' Eventhis zerois referential.
The verbs with the zero object prefix cannot be usedto mean 'I'm
eating' or 'I ate'. With third-personsubjects,the third-person
pronominal object prefix is yi This prefix, too, is referential:it
canbe usedonly to mean'He's eatingit' or 'He ateit', not 'He ate'.
(45) Navajo referential objects
a. Yish{1.
yi-0-sh-a
pRorHETIc-3,oBJEcrl.sc.suBlncr-edr.rttaPRF
'I'm eatingit.' Not: 'I'm eating.'
b. Yiviiv66'.
yi-yiiy{{'
PRF
3.osJEcr-coluprETrvE-ed/.
'He ate it.' Not: 'He's eating.'
If the object is unspecified,the unspecified-objectprefix is used-It
prefix, but it occursin
hasthe sameshapeasthe unspecified-subject
prefixes, before the
object
the position occupied by the other
prefix position.
unspecified-subject
(46) Navajo unspecifiedobjects
a. AshdL.
'a-sh-{
I.SG.SI]BJECT-E4'.IMPRF
TJNSPBCTFIED.OBJECT.
'I'm eating.'
b. Ayiiy6l+'.
'a-yii-O-y{{'
T'NSPECIFIED,OBJECT-COMPLETIVE-3. SUBJECT-E4'.PRF
'He ate.'
- 18/58- 15:22-disk/sr
101-2/05{ithun.3d
lc:pdrufrrpsfrrps
MITHUAN - PRONOUNS AND AGRBEMENT
zo)
4.2.4. Navajo qmbientmentions
Navajo contains another prefix category for non-referential mentions. It hasthe basicform hw- (alsoappearingas ho-,hoo-,ha' or
termedthe 'areal'or 'spatial'category,it is usedfor
fraa).Sometimes
ambient conditions, characteristicsof an area and much more. Its
function can be seenby cornparingthe pairs ofverbs below' The first
verb in eachsethas a basicreferentialthird-personzero pronominal
prefix, the second,a hw- Prefix.
(47) Navajo ftw- subjects(Young,Morgan and Midgette 1992)
a. -zh66h
Yizh6qh. 'It (a horseor goat) becomesgentle,tame,
tractable.'
Hoozh66h.'Things (weather,conditions)become
Pleasant,Peaceful.'
b. -t166'
'They (clothes)arewet.'
Ditl66'.
Hoditl66'. 'It's wet aroundhere,the groundis wet.'
(48) Navajo frw-objects(Young, Morgan and Midgette 1992)
'movemultipleobjectsswiftlythroughthe air'
a. d66h
Yishd66h. 'I'm wiPingit off''
Hashdeeh. 'I'm cleaningup, clearingup around here,
removingvegetation,tidying up the place.'
'scratch,Paw'
b. -ch'id
Yishch'id. 'I'm scratchingit.'
Hashch'id. 'I'm feelingaroundan area,asin hair for lice''
The differences among the basic third-person category the
unspecifiedcategory and the ambient or areal category, can be
seenby comparingthe setsof verbsin (a9). (Ihe basicthird-person
form of 'be yellow',with zerothird-personsubjectprefix,containsa
prefix ft- that marksphysicalattributes')
(49) Navajo unspecifiedL and ambient ftw- (Young, Morgan and
Midgette 1992)
'It is yellow or yellowishgreen.' (zero)
a. l-itso.
'Thereis a yellow-greenspot or
Altso.
('-)
patch.'
(hw-)
yellow-green.'
is
'The area
Haltso.
* disk/sr
101-2/0$mithun.3d
- 1E/5F- 15:22
lc:/3dru/rasrras
266
socIETY101, 2003
rRANsAcrIoNsoF TrrEPHILoLOGIcAL
(49) b. Sh6dl66zh. 'I paintedit (my house).'
Ashdleesh. 'I did the Painting.'
Hosh6dl66zh.'I painted(insidemy house).'
(zero)
('-)
(hw-)
Both the unspecifiedand areal prefixeshave becomeelementsof
numerouslexicalisedprefix stemcollocations.In thesecontextsthe
original meaningsof the prefixeshave often expandedand sometimes evenfaded. They arc pafi. of the basic verbs used for 'drive'
and 'ride', for example,for 'talk' and 'sing', 'causetrouble' and
mofe.
(50) Navajo samplecollocations(Dolly Sou16,speakerp.c.)
ilwod.
a. Nihil
nih-il
'i-l-wod
1.FL- w i t h IJNSPECIFIED.SI,BJECT-DETRANSITIVISNN-6CNd,PNT
with us somethingbent (somethingran)
'Somethingran with us : we drove.'
hashchiih.
b. Bik'ijf
ha-sh-l-chiih
bi-k'ijf
3-ONIO
AMBIENT.OB'ECT.1.SC.STTST-TRANSITIVISER.
become.nasty.IM?*t
'I causethingsto becomenastyfor him.' : 'I bring trouble
on him.'
in use
4.3. TheNavajoprefix categories
SinceNavajo offerssucha rangeof prefix options, it is instructiveto
examine the kinds of choice made by speakersin potentially
non-referentialand indefinitecontexts.
4.3.L Referentialityin Navajo
The referenceof Navajo pronominal prefxes can be establishedin
the same ways as that of English and German independent
pronouns:by the extralinguisticcontext,by the speechact itself
(for first and secondpersons),by linguistic context or by inference
from information in any of those.As in Yup'ik, it may also be
establishedby lexical nominalswithin the sameclause.If a third
personis identifiedby a lexical nominal in the samesentence,a basic
third-personprefix alwaysappearswith the verb: zeto,bi or yi-.
* ls:22- disk/sr
101-2/oFmithun.3d
- 1E/5/3
lct3drufrrpsfirps
M1THUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMBNT
26'7
(51) Navajo lexicalsubject(Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c.)
Aad66
nt'66'ashk6ytlzhi,
nt'66'ashii: k6: y6zhi
aa:doo
17"rs :from
then boy : pI-:DIMINUTT!'E
'Thenfrom theresomelittle boys
yikaht{6.
yi-O-kah:lti3
PROG.3.SI'BJECT.DETRANSITIVISER -MUI t iP I C.WAI K.
PROG : EMPHATIC
they were walking along
camealong.'
4.3.2. Generic reference
As expected, generic reference is made with the special generic
pronominal prefixes. When the generic (fourth-person) preflxes
ji-lhw-'one' are used generically,they do not co-occurwith a lexical
nominal. The alternation can be seen in two sentencesfrom an
anecdote told by Mrs. Soul6 that were separatedby a small side
comment. In the first she used a generic construction, and in the
second a referential third-person lexical nominal 'all the people'
with third-person (zero) subject prefix.
(52) Navajo (Dolly Sou16,speakerp.c.)
jineezhj66'.
shli
Ako tl'66'o
ji-ni-s-j66'
uLo 11'66':go shif
thm night : at probably dre-TRM-DuR.sEQ-multipk.lie.down.exr
'And then at night they must have gone to bed.'
[A long time ago, when we used to live in hogans,
in those days we used to sleepon top of sheepskins.]
Ato 6i shii
ako 6i shii
t'ar at'e
t'aa at'e
then that perhaps a/ r,rNsp.sUsrEcr-re.I.{EUTER.TMPRI
then that perhaps all it is
'And then probably all
- disk/sr
101-2/0tmithun.3d
- 18/58- 15:22
lc:pdpfrresfrres
socETY101,2003
oF TI{BPHrLoLocIcAL
268 TRANsAcrIoNs
din6 neezj66'.
din6 ni-s-0-j66'
peaplermr-s.rnr- 3.sswrrr -multipIe.Iie.down.pxv
peoplc they went to bed
the peoplein the hoganhad goneto bed.'
in Natajo
4.3.3. Definiteness
Even if the lexical nominal is indefinite, as in'Then somelittle boys
camealong' in (51) above,a basicthird-personprefix appearson the
verb rather than an unspecifiedprefix. The samesituation can be
seenwith direct objects.If a lexicalnomina.lidentifiesthe object,a
basicthird-personpronominalprefix is chosen.(Navajo doesnot
havetheprohibitionagainstindefinitedirectobjectsseenin Yup'ik.)
(53) Navajo lexicalobject@olly Soul6,speakerp.c.)
Bilasiana Vwuy66'.
bilas6ana Vr-Vu-0-V6d'
3.oBvrATrvE.oBJEcr-cor,rprnrwr-3.swrEcr-eat.P\F
apple
he ate it
apple
'He ate an apple.'
An unspecifiedprefix cannot be used in this context. The verb
ayiiy46' 'he ate', with unspecified-object prefix 'a-, would be
unacceptable.
'something'
4.j.4. Navajoindcfinitepro forms 'someone',
The equivalents of English 'someone' and 'something' can be
expressedeither with unspecifed prefixes, as above, or with
independent indefinite pro forms. The independent pro forms
establish a referent, which is then referred to in the verb by the
basicthird-personpronominalprefixes:zero,yi or bi-.
(54) Navajo indefinitesubject(Dolly Sou16,speakerp.c.)
Haishii shinoolch66l.
haishii shi-n-oo-l-ch66l
someonel.sc.osrscr-rH-3.suBJEcr.PRoc-TRANsrrIvIsERchase.PPoc
someonehe or sheis chasingme
is chasingme.' (I don't know who.)
'Someone
101-2/0$mithun.3d
- 18/5/3-15:22
- diskrfsr
lcv3dlfrrps[rps
MITHUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT
269
Compare:Shinoolch66l.
shi-n-ooj-ch6el
PRoG-TRANSITTI'IsER1.sc.oerncr-rH-3.suBJEcr.
chase.ppoc
'He or sheis chasingme.'
Not: 'Someoneis chasinsme.'
(55) Navajo indefinite object construction (Young, Morgan and
Midgette 1992:250)
neil'in.
Ha'it'iishii
bha'6t'ii=shri na-i-0j-'in
: DvB rn-3'ouvterrvu.osr-3.suBlrn'bark'
something
DTJR.IMPRF
he is barking at it
sonething
'He's barking at something.'
Compare:Neil'in.
na-i-0-l-'in
3.suBJ-TRANsITTvISER-rd/k.
rH-3.osvIATrvE.oBJDUR.IMPRF
'He's barkingat it.'
Not: 'He is barking at something.'
It is significantthat eventhough Navajo containsspecialprefixesfor
unspecifiedsubjectsand objects,they are not used when an indea hypothetical
pendentword for someone
or somethingestablishes
referent. The regular definite referential third-person pronominal
prefixesmust be used,picking up the reference.The pronominal
prefixesneednot match the independentnominalsin referentiality
or definiteness.
4.3.5. Non-specificmmtions
The same constructionsare used for non-specificmentions.A
hypothetical referent is establishedby an independentpro form.
This referent,which existswithin the world ofthe sentence,is picked
up by the pronominalprefix.
|8/58- 15:22
101-2/05-.nithun.3d- disk/sr
lct3drufrrpsfrrps
270 rRANsAcrroNs
oF rHEpHrLoLocrcAL
socrEry101,2003
(56) Navajo non-specifc mention (Young, Morga:r and Midgette
1992:931)
Ha'it'ffiila
bik'iniyago
bi-k'!ni-ya: go
ha'it'ihii:da
:
3.osvrATrvE.oBJ-on-rrura-2.sc.
sarzafiizg' n'{D$I\IIIE
SUBJ-g0.PRF : SUB
something
if you comeon it
hadidiilwosh.
ha-di-dii-l-wosh.
out-auditor ily -rxcrprrw.2.sc.susJ-DETRANsTTTvBER-ye//.nnur.n
'Holler if you find anything!'
In English, pronominal referencecan also be made to referents
establishedwithin the world of the senten€e,even if there is no
correspondingreferent in the real world, as in Evans' If you fnd a
dodo,bring it homeas a pet for my daughter(1999:257).
4.3.6. Negatedindefinitesin Nat'ajo
Negativeindefiniteconstructionscan beformed by negatinga clause
containingan unspecifiedsubjector unspecifiedobjectpreflx.
(57) Navajo negatedindefinite(Goossen1995:298)
T'6adoo ay6ni
da.
da
t'iridoo 'a-0-ydn:i
WiThOUt
IJNSPBCIFIED OBJECT-3.STJ}J.E4',IMPRF :
NOMINALISER
tuithout his eating something
'He isn't eatinganything.'
NEC
not
Alternatively, a hypothetical referent can be establishedwith a
lexical nominal and referred to with a basic third-person pronominal prefix.The entity may not existin the real world, but reference
has beenestablished
within the world of the sentence.
(58) Navajo absence(Dol1ySou16,speakerp.c.)
Shichidi
6din.
shi-chidi
'6-Gdin
l .possnsson-car
away.out.of.sight-3.stsstucr-be.none.NEUTER
it is non-existent
my car
'I don't havea car.'
- disk/sr
101-2/os-mithun.3d
- 18/5p- 15:22
lc:pd!/r.psflrps
MITHUAN _ PRONOIJNS AND AGREEMENT
2"11
4.3.7. Navajocontentquestions
Navajo content questionsalso show patterns similar to those in
the existenceof the entity to
Yup'ik. A contentquestionpresupposes
be identified.The speakerwho askslMhohid it? is presupposingthat
thereis someonewho hid it. In Navajo,asin Yup'ik, a hypothetical
referent is establishedwith an independentquestion word, then
referredto by a pronominal prefix in the verb. Again it is significant
that the pronominal prefix doesnot simply match the independent
questionword in definiteness.The verbs of content questionsmust
contain a basic third-person pronominal prefix referring to the
prefix.
participant,ratherthan anunspecified
questioned
(59) Navajo contentquestions(Dolly Soul6,speaker)
a. H6ili neidis'ii'la?
hrlili na-Yi-di-s-0Jjii' : la
nrncr-rn-hlde.Pw- a
who rrur-3.oan-vrsual/y-oun.sne3.st
who slhehid it
it?'
-whohid
b. Haoit'iili ndanohlch6?
ha'6t'iil6 ni-da-0-n-oh-l-ch6
rn-prsrn-3.osmcr-2.pr.su'sJ-TRANISITIvISERwhat
chase.cottt
uwhat you all are chasingit
'What are you guyschasing?'
Yes-no questions can contain unspecifiedprefixes; they do not
necessarily involve a hypothetical referent whose existence is
by a questionword.
presupposed
and established
(60) Navajoyes-noandcontentquestions
@olly Soul6,speakerp.c.)
a. iiy{ilash?
Lii-y{.{.': ash
UNSPBCIflED.OBJECT-COMPLETIVE.EA'.PRF = INTERROGATTVE
heatesomething?
'Did heeat?'
b. IJa' 6t'ii li iyiiy66'1
ha'at'ii la yt-yi-yri{
3.ogvhrrvn.ostEcr-coMPlETl\lE-e.rr.PRF
what
he ate it
what
'What did he eat?'
- disk/sr
101-2/05-rnithun.3d
- 18/5/3
- 15:22
lcv3druIrrpslrrps
socIETY101,2003
272 rRANsAcrroNs
oF Tr# pHILoLoGIcAL
4.3.8. Navajosmbientprertxes
The areal prefixes of the basic form hw-, which invoke general
circumstancesbut not specificreferents,cannot co-occur with
coreferentialnominals. If a lexical nominal is presentto establish
reference,the pronominal prefix must be the basic third-person
referentialzero,bi- or yi-.
(61) Navajo Areal prefix (Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c.)
a. Hodilhil.
ho-dil-hil
obr -phvsical.character ist ic-be.dark.NsurEn
AREAL.sUBJEcT-c
'It's dark (out).'
nizh6nigo
b. T6nteel
ni-0-zh6ni:go
t6-nteel
water-broad visually-3.svuncr-nrce: ADvERBIALIsER
ocean
beautifully
'The oceanis beautifully
dilhil.
di-0-l-hil
color -3.stwncr -physi cal.characteristic-be.da*.xBurr,p
it is dark colored
dark (in color).'
4.j.9. Navajoweatherterms
Finally, we sawthat in Yup'ik, weatherexpressionscontain regular
third-personpronominal suffixes,comparableto the it of English /l
is ruining and the es of German Es regnet.SomeNavajo weatier
terms show the same pattern, with basic third-person subject
prefixes.Othersshowarealprefixes.
(62) Navajo basicthird-personweatherconstructions(Dolly Sou16,
speakerp.c.)
a. Yidzaas.
yi-0-dzaas
pnornnrlc-3,susJEcr-Jzolr.IMpRF
'It is snowine.'
101-2/0$mithun.3d
- 18/58- 15:22- disk/sr
lc:Fdru/rrpsrrres
MrrrruAN - pRoNouNs AND AGREEMENT
273
(62) b. (T6) naaftin.
water na-O-l-tin
water downward-3.suBJECFCLASSTFIER'fall.nrcxr
'It is raining.'
c. Nl6 naaltin.
nil6 na-0-l-tin
hail downward-3.suBrECT-cLAssIFIER-/a//.namr
'It is hailing.'
(63) Navajo Areal weatherconstructions(Young, Morgan and
Midgette 1992)
a. Hatin.
ha-tin
l*eAI .suarcr-y'eeze.n'renr
'It is freezing(out).'
Compare:Yitin.
yi-O-tin
ez e.IMPPF
PROTHETIC-3.SUBJECT-y'e
'It (an object)is freezing.'
b. Honeezk'62i.
ho-nee-s-k':izi
SEQUENTTAL-De.
cool.XrUren
ARBAL.STJBTECT-TH-DURATIVE.
'It is cool (the weather).'
Compare:Sik'62i.
si-0-k'6zi
cool.Nrcrren
sEettEl-3.sustEcr-6e.
DuRATTvE.
'It is cool.' (iron, water,a corpse)
4. CoNcLUsloN
The obligatorinessof pronominal affxes does not entail a lack of
referentiality or definitenessafter all. In the languagesexamined
here, Yup'ik and Navajo, pronominal affixes are used only
referentially, except in weather expressions.In terms of their
referentiality and definiteness,tley are just like the independent
pronouns of languageslike English and German. They contrast
endingson verbs in those
with the redundantsubject-agreement
- 15:22-disk/sr
101-2/0tmithun,3d
- 18/5/3
lc:/3dpfrresfirps
socIErY101,2003
oF Tm PHILoLocIcAL
2'74 rRANsAcrroNs
languagesbecause,unlike them, they are capable of invoking
referentson their own within clauses.
In clauses with no independent lexical nominal to establish
reference,pronominal affxes do not have open reference.They
are used only when a referent has beenestablishedin one way or
another. Basic third-person pronominal affixescan be interpreted
only as 'he', 'she','they', 'it', 'him', 'her', 'them', never'someone',
'something','people'or 'things' (unlessthe pronoun has acquired
a conventionalisedgeneric use, like English they.) Referenceis
establishedin languageswith pronominal affixesjust as it is in
English and German: by the extralinguistic context, by the speech
eventitself (for first or secondperson)and by lexical mention in
previous discourse.Yup'ik and Navajo differ from English and
German simply in the absenceof a restriction: pronominal
referencecan be establishedwithin the sameclauseas well. This
property may be related to the fact that in languages with
pronominal affixes, each verb constitutes a complete minimal
clausein itseli the skeletonor nucleusof the clause.It has long
like Englishand German,independbeenknown that in languages
ent pronouns need not match their lexical antecedentsin referentiality or definiteness,though they may match in certain feature
values such as number or gender.The same principle governs
pronominal affixes and their antecedents.This fact is especially
easy to see in Navajo, where spealers have choices between
referential pronominal prefixes and unspecifiedsubject or object
prefixes.If a clausecontainsan independentlexicalnominal that
establishesreference,a definite referential pronominal prefix must
be used, even if the independentword that establishesthe
referenceis non-referentialor indefinite.
Indefinite and non-referentialmentionsareaccomplishedthrough
other strategies.Navajo contains a distinct set of prefixesfor
unspecifiedparticipants. Otherwisefor indefinites hke someoneor
something,for negatedindefiniteslike no oneor nothing,and for the
targetsof contentquestionslike who and what,Yup'ik and Navajo
exploit the samestrategy.A hypotheticalreferentis establishedwith
an independentindefinite pro form (someone,something),and that
referentis evokedwith a pronominal affix.
Yup'ik, Navajo and other languageswith pronominal affixes
15:22
101-2/0tmithun.3d
- disk/sr
- 18/5/3*
lc:/3drurrasrrms
MITIIUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT
275
contain alternative constructions for non-referential expressions,
though the alternativesvary acrossthe languages(Mithun 2002).
Yup'ik containsextensivedenominalverb derivation, for example.
Navajo contains an impressiveelaboration of prefix categories,
distinguishing referential third persons, generics,indefinites and
ambientsituations.Both Yup'ik and Navajo make extensiveuse
of detransitivisation,so that pronominal affixesdo not represent
non-referentialentities.
The data discussedhere are quite similar to the material cited by
Evans(1999)from Bininj Gun-wok, Warray, Mangarayi,Lummi,
Georgian, Aztec, Cayuga and Greenlandic (another Eskimoan
language).In those languages,as in Yup'ik and Navajo, the
referenceof pronominal affixescan be establishedby extralinguistic
or linguisticcontext,outsideor insideof the clause.The examples
cited by Evansfrom thoselanguagesgenerallycontain overt lexical
items that establishthe referenceof the pronominal affixes:child,
man, boy, wtfe, people, women,seal, dog, door, flowers, cigarette,
just
some,another.In thoselanguages,
marking.someone,
something,
as in Yup'ik and Navajo, all pronominal affixesare referentialand
definite.(Someareof courselike Englishin the conventionaluseof
particular referentialpronouns as generics.)As in Yup'ik and
Navajo, non-referentialmentionsare madeby alternativeconstructions. The inventoriesof alternatives,and tleir relative frequencies
ofuse, vary from languageto language,but they aregenerallyquite
similar to those seenhere: detransitivisation,noun incorporation
and verbalderivation.
The referentiality of pronominal affixeshas been of interest to
syntacticiansconcemedwith the identificationof the core argumentsof clauses.On oneview.it is the lexicalnominalsthat arethe
true arguments.Clauseswithout lexical nominals are assumedto
have dropped them. On another view, it is the pronominal affxes
that are the arguments, and coreferential nominals are simply
adjunctswith no syntactic status. The material seenhere indicates
that pronominal affixescertainly function as core arguments,but
their presencedoesnot entail a specificsyntactic statuson the part
of coreferentialnominalsin the sameclause.Independentnominals
in Yup'ik carry explicit inflectional marking of their syntacticroles,
with ergative and absolutivecase endings on core arguments.
't01-2los-mithun.3d
- disk/sr
- 18/58- 15:22
lc:pdprrasfiDs
socIETY101,2003
oF rnE PrflLoLoGIcAL
276 rRANsAcrIoNs
Nominalsin Navajo,by contrast,caffy no casemarking,but thereis
with
a detectablebasicconstituentorder that could be associated
subjectand object roles. In languagesof the Iroquoian family,
nominals carry no case marking and constituent order has no
relation to syntacticrole. Sincethey evoke the sameentity, lexical
nominals and coreferential pronominal affixes may simply share
that status, and languagesmay differ in the extent to which the
nominals are integratedformally into the clause.This is in keeping
with the unifcation approach advocated by Evans, in which
information about participants is built up over the course of
speechfrom multiple referring expressions.The information can
nominals,incorporatednouns,independent
comefrom independent
pronouns,pronominal affixes,redundantgrammaticalagreement
and of courseinference.
It is perhapsunfortunate that the study of agreemontis rooted
historically in work on languageslike English and German. Use
of the term 'agreernentmarkers' for pronominal affixesmay have
led to an assumptionthat they necessarilyagreein all features
with the items that establish their reference,including referentiality and definiteness.Agreementis of coursenot the primary
function of pronominal affixes; their role is to evoke referents.
Redundant grammatical agreementmarkers such as the subject
endings of English and German verbs, are actually quite rare
cross-linguistically. In her sample of 272 lango.ages,Siewierska
(1999:238)found thatjust two, well under|ok, containgrammatical
agreementmarkersof this type.
Individual pronominal affx systemsvary across languagesin
the categoriesthey distinguish and the ways they are used. In the
end, however, pronominal affxes function referentially much like
independentpronouns.
Department of Linguistics
Universityof Califomia
Santa Barbara, California
usA 93106
edu
Email: [email protected].
101-2/05-mtthun.3d
- l8/5/3- 15:22
- disk/sr
lc:pdprrresrr4es
MITT{UAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT
277
ABBREvIATIoNS
1
FIRST PERSON
NEG
2
sEcoND PERSoN
OBJ
NEGATIVE
OBJECT
personalcommunication
3
THIRD PERSoN
p.c,
ABS
ABSOLUTN'E CASE
PL
PLURAL
ADV
ADVERBIAL
PRR
PERFECTWE
CONT
CONTINUATTW
PROG
PROGRESSIVE
DEM
DEMONSTRATIVE
INTERROGATTVE
DISTR
DISTRIBUTIVE
Q
R
DU
DUAL
RESTR
RESTRICTED
DUB
DUBITATN'E
SEQ
SEQUEL
DUR
DURATIVE
SG
SINGULAR
FEM
FEMININE
SUB
STJBORDINATII'E
HAB
HABITUAL
SUBJ
SUBJECT
IMPRF
MPERFECTTVE
T1I
TIIEMATIC
INDIC
INDTCATIVE MOOD
TR
TRANSITIVE
INTR
INTRANSITTVE
TRM
TBRMINATIIts
MASC
MASCULINE
IJ'NSPEC UNSPECIFIED
COREFERENTIAL
REFTRENcES
and tine, Univetsity of Chicago.
CHAFEWALLACE,1994.Discourse, consciousness,
CoRBErr, GREVILLE,2003. 'Agreemenl the range of the phenomenon alld the
principles of the SMG Agreement Databa.se', Transactio\s of the Philological
Society l0l, 155-202
EVANS,NrcHot"As, 1999. 'Why argument affixes in polysynthetic languages are not
pronouns: evidence from Bininj Gun-wok', Sprachtypologie und Universalien'
forschung 52, 255-281.
GoossEN,IRvn, 1995. Dini Bizaad, Flagstaff, AZ: Salina Bookshelf.
JAcoBSoN,STE\EN,1984. tup'ik Eskimo dictionau), Fairbanks, AK; Alaska Native
LanguageC€nter.
1998a.'The s€quencingof grammaticization effects', in Monika
MITrIUN, MARTAT$IE,
S. Schmidt, Jennifer R. Austin and Dieter Stein (eds.), Histofical Linguistics 1997,
Amsterdam:John Benjamins,291-314.
MrrHUN, MARTANN41998b. 'Yup'ik roots and affixes', in Osalito Miyaoka and
Minoru Oshirna (eds.), Languagesof the North Pacifc Rim 4, Kyoto, Japan: Kyoto
University Gruduate School of Letters, 63-76.
MnIruN, MARIANNE,2002, 'The referential status of pronominal amxes', MS.
SrEwrf,RsKA,ANNA, 1999. 'From anaphoric pronoun to grammatical agreement
101-2/0tmithun.3d
- 18/5/3- 15:22- dislvsr
lcl3diJfrDs/rDs
278
TRANsAcrroNsoF THEpHILoLocrcAL socIBTy 101, 2003
marker: why objects don't make it', in Greville Corbett (ed.), Ag\eement (Speclal
25l .
isslueof Folia Linguistiea X){J{IIID, n
YouNc, RoBERT,2000, The Navajo wrb system:an overview, Nbuquerque: University
of New Mexico Press.
YouNG, Rom.T & MoRc,{r{ WnuAM, u'ith tho assistanceof MDGBTTE,SALLY,1992.
Awlytical lexicon of -lvzvaJb,Albuqu€rque: University of New Mexico Press.