Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Analysis of Mobile Affixes in Western Armenian: Order, Phonology, Syntax, and Prosody, Lecture notes of English Language

The placement and mobility of indicative affixes in four western armenian dialects: standard western, hamshen, gyumri, and akhalkalaki. The authors discuss morphologically-arbitrary affix order, phonologically-conditioned affix mobility, syntactically-conditioned affix mobility, and prosodically-conditioned clisis. The analysis requires a holistic approach to affix order involving morphological, phonological, syntactic, and prosodic factors.

What you will learn

  • What is the role of morphological, phonological, syntactic, and prosodic factors in affix order in Western Armenian?
  • What are the different patterns of affix order in Western Armenian dialects?
  • How does phonology, syntax, and prosody influence affix mobility in Western Armenian?

Typology: Lecture notes

2021/2022

Uploaded on 09/12/2022

damyen
damyen 🇺🇸

4.4

(27)

274 documents

1 / 2

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Mobile affixes across Western Armenian: conflicts across modules
Keywords: Armenian, mobile affixes, information structure, clitic, prosody, phase
Nikita Bezrukov (UPenn) & Hossep Dolatian (SBU)
Introduction: In Western Armenian (Vaux, 1998), the indicative is marked by adding an
affix to the verb. The affix has different positions in different dialects and contexts. We
describe its placement in four Western dialects: Standard Western (SWA), Hamshen (HA),
Gyumri (GA), and Akhalkalaki (AA). Across these dialects, we see morphologically-arbitrary
affix order (SWA, HA, GA, AA), phonologically-conditioned affix mobility (HA, GA, AA),
syntactically-conditioned affix mobility (GA, AA), and prosodically-conditioned clisis (AA).
These patterns needs a holistic approach to affix order involving morphological, phonological,
syntactic, and prosodic factors (6). We explain some of the data and factors below.
(1) SWA
a. g-ertas
b. g@-khales
(2) HA
a. g-ertas
b. khales-gu
(3) GA
a. k-ertas
b. khel´es-g@
(4) AA
a. g-ertas
b. kheles-g@
(5) Gloss
a. ‘you go’
b. ‘you walk’
(6) a. Arbitrary prefixhood (SWA, HA, GA, AA): indcindc-/ {_,V}
b. Phonological mobility (HA, GA, AA): indcindc-/ {_,[+vowel]V}
c. Syntactic mobility (GA, AA): indcindc-/ [phase ... X ... {_,V} ]
d. Prosodic separability (AA): F ... indc Findc ...
e. Suffixation elsewhere (SWA, HA, GA, AA): indc-indc elsewhere
I. Standard Western: In SWA (1), the indicative affix has two surface allomorphs: [g-]
before V-initial bases (1a) and [g@-] before C-initial bases (1b). Underlyingly, the affix is /g/
with schwa epenthesis to repair complex onsets. Complex onsets are banned in Armenian.
Although Armenian is primarily suffixing, the affix is arbitrarily a prefix because it originated
from the construction kaj ev X ‘I stand and X’. Its arbitrary status as a prefix can be modeled
with rule that prefixes it to the verb (6a), while other affixes are suffixes elsewhere (6e). We
set aside schwa epenthesis for space.
II. Hamshen: For Hamshen (2), the affix is the prefix [g-] before V-initial bases (2a) but
asuffix [-gu] (2b) after C-initial bases. For simplicity, let us assume that [g-] and [-gu] are
two suppletive allomorphs, not derived from a common UR /gu/.1The prefix [g-] is used to
provide an onset to the V-initial verb; the suffix [-g@] is used elsewhere. This is formalized
with a rule placing the affix before a V-initial verb (6b)2. Such phonologically-conditioned
mobility is rare but attested, e.g. Huave (Kim, 2010), but still controversial (Paster, 2006)
III. Gyumri: Similar to Hamshen, the affix in Gyumri (3) is [k-] before V-initial bases (3a)
and [-g@] after C-initial bases (3b). However in Gyumri, a C-initial base is forced to use
[g(@)-] as a prefix in specific syntactic contexts. We describe two of these contexts below.
In both, underlining marks sentential stress. The phase is vP or FocP and it coincides with
the verbal predicate. Specific objects move out of vP (Kahnemuyipour, 2009).
1This is purely for illustrative purposes. There is little empirical evidence for or against having one UR.
2This can alternatively modeled with Onset»Align-L with no change in adequacy.
1
pf2

Partial preview of the text

Download Analysis of Mobile Affixes in Western Armenian: Order, Phonology, Syntax, and Prosody and more Lecture notes English Language in PDF only on Docsity!

Mobile affixes across Western Armenian: conflicts across modules

Keywords: Armenian, mobile affixes, information structure, clitic, prosody, phase Nikita Bezrukov (UPenn) & Hossep Dolatian (SBU)

Introduction: In Western Armenian (Vaux, 1998), the indicative is marked by adding an affix to the verb. The affix has different positions in different dialects and contexts. We describe its placement in four Western dialects: Standard Western (SWA), Hamshen (HA), Gyumri (GA), and Akhalkalaki (AA). Across these dialects, we see morphologically-arbitrary affix order (SWA, HA, GA, AA), phonologically-conditioned affix mobility (HA, GA, AA), syntactically-conditioned affix mobility (GA, AA), and prosodically-conditioned clisis (AA). These patterns needs a holistic approach to affix order involving morphological, phonological, syntactic, and prosodic factors (6). We explain some of the data and factors below.

(1) SWA a. g-ertas b. g@-khales

(2) HA

a. g-ertas b. khales-gu

(3) GA

a. k-ertas b. khel´es-g@

(4) AA

a. g-ertas b. kheles-g@

(5) Gloss a. ‘you go’ b. ‘you walk’

(6) a. Arbitrary prefixhood (SWA, HA, GA, AA): indc→ indc-/ {,V} b. Phonological mobility (HA, GA, AA): indc→ indc-/ {,[+vowel]V} c. Syntactic mobility (GA, AA): indc→ indc-/ [phase ... X ... {_,V} ] d. Prosodic separability (AA): F ... indc → F indc ... e. Suffixation elsewhere (SWA, HA, GA, AA): indc→ - indc elsewhere

I. Standard Western: In SWA (1), the indicative affix has two surface allomorphs: [g-] before V-initial bases (1a) and [g@-] before C-initial bases (1b). Underlyingly, the affix is /g/ with schwa epenthesis to repair complex onsets. Complex onsets are banned in Armenian. Although Armenian is primarily suffixing, the affix is arbitrarily a prefix because it originated from the construction kaj ev X ‘I stand and X’. Its arbitrary status as a prefix can be modeled with rule that prefixes it to the verb (6a), while other affixes are suffixes elsewhere (6e). We set aside schwa epenthesis for space.

II. Hamshen: For Hamshen (2), the affix is the prefix [g-] before V-initial bases (2a) but a suffix [-gu] (2b) after C-initial bases. For simplicity, let us assume that [g-] and [-gu] are two suppletive allomorphs, not derived from a common UR /gu/.^1 The prefix [g-] is used to provide an onset to the V-initial verb; the suffix [-g@] is used elsewhere. This is formalized with a rule placing the affix before a V-initial verb (6b)^2. Such phonologically-conditioned mobility is rare but attested, e.g. Huave (Kim, 2010), but still controversial (Paster, 2006)

III. Gyumri: Similar to Hamshen, the affix in Gyumri (3) is [k-] before V-initial bases (3a) and [-g@] after C-initial bases (3b). However in Gyumri, a C-initial base is forced to use [g(@)-] as a prefix in specific syntactic contexts. We describe two of these contexts below. In both, underlining marks sentential stress. The phase is vP or FocP and it coincides with the verbal predicate. Specific objects move out of vP (Kahnemuyipour, 2009).

(^1) This is purely for illustrative purposes. There is little empirical evidence for or against having one UR. (^2) This can alternatively modeled with Onset»Align-L with no change in adequacy.

Bare Object: Armenian is SOV. In Gyumri, if the C-initial verb has a non-bare object, the suffix [-g@] is used (7a). But if the verb has a bare object, the prefix [k@-]^3 is instead used (7b). An object is bare if it lacks the definite suffix. It semantically acts as a generic noun.

(7) a. ara-n Ara-def

girkh-@ book-def

[vP

tsaxe-g@] sells-ind ‘Ara is selling the book’

b. ara-n Ara-def

[vP girkh book

k@-

tsaxe] ind-sells ‘Ara is selling books’

Focus: For focus-neutral sentences, C-initial verbs take the suffix [-g@] (8a); if there’s narrow focus, then the prefix [k@-] (8b) is used. Note the distance between the affix and focus.

(8) a. [F ocP ov who

girkh-@ book-def

g@-

tsaxe] ind-sells ‘Who is selling the book?’

b. [F ocP ara-n ara-def

girkh-@ book-def

k@-

tsaxe ] ind-sells ‘ARA is selling the book’

The prefix-suffix switch is correlated with the predicate changing or expanding. Structurally, the prefix is used to mark a larger syntactic phase (Kahnemuyipour, 2009). We model this with a rule that prefixes the affix when the phase is larger than the verb (6c). Prefixation (6a), phonological (6b), syntactic (6c), and elsewhere rules (6e) are ordered.

IV. Akhalkalaki: In Akhalkalaki (4), the affix has a similar distribution as in Gyumri (9). But, it has an additional prosodic requirement: it must be adjacent to sentential stress (10). This adjacency is formalized in (6d). Pauses mark the direction of attachment for the affix.

(9) a. ara-n Ara-def

girkh-@ book-def

[vP

tsaxe-g@ ] sells-ind ‘Ara is selling the book’

b. ara-n Ara-def

[vP girkh book

g@-

tsaxe ] ind-sells ‘Ara is selling books’

(10) a. [F ocP ov-g@ who-ind

girkh-@ book-def

tsaxe ] sells ‘Who is selling the book?’

b. [F ocP ara-n-g@ ara-def-indc

girkh-@ book-def

tsaxe ] sells ‘ARA is selling the book’

Conclusion: In sum, these Armenian dialects display rare and theoretically controversial processes. In terms of theoretical insights and formalizations, affix mobility requires the use of cross-modular constraints and factors which challenge current theories of affix order. In specific, the data provides robust evidence for affix mobility conditioned by phonology, syntax, and prosody. Integrating these multiple factors can be formalized as an interaction of cross-modular rules or constraints within a single grammar.

References: [1] Kahnemuyipour, A. (2009). The syntax of sentential stress. Number 25 in Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [2] Kim, Y. (2010). Phonolog- ical and morphological conditions on affix order in huave. Morphology 20 (1), 133–163. [3] Paster, M. (2006). Phonological conditions on affixation. Ph. D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA. [4] Vaux, B. (1998). The phonology of Armenian. Oxford University Press, USA.

(^3) Note schwa epenthesis to repair the banned onset cluster.