Pragmatic accommodation as a catalyst for the development of (non-)finiteness
-
Peter Slomanson
Abstract
A morphological asymmetry is shared by certain Dravidian (and Finnic) languages. The phonological shape of a negation element is dependent on the finiteness of the verb it negates. Pragmatic factors are identified that could motivate the development of this shared asymmetry, using evidence from the grammar of a Dravidian-influenced contact language. I will show that contrastive finiteness marking (finite and non-finite morphology) can facilitate the development of pragmatically-motivated linear reordering of affirmative clauses and negated clauses in order to accommodate new information structure conventions, extending the contrast to negated verbs by expanding the functional range of a negative imperative marker.
Radical contact languages resulting from collective adult second language acquisition in naturalistic social contexts are typically presumed to feature reduced functional morphology, in which only highly salient contrasts, such as temporal contrasts, are formally instantiated. If a formal finiteness contrast and other relatively marked properties (“complexity”) could develop in a highly analytic contact language that did not previously have them, this suggests that such a sequence of changes is in fact as plausible among genetically-unrelated languages in a sprachbund as it is over longer periods of time in genetically-related languages. We can observe this by examining grammatical change in a language that previously lacked both a finiteness contrast and a corresponding negation asymmetry, but which developed both the contrast and the asymmetry as a result of contact with a genetically-unrelated language that has analogous properties.
Sri Lankan Malay (SLM) has undergone grammatical change due to contact with Dravidian (primarily Sri Lankan Muslim Tamil). Several of these changes involve verb morphology and syntax, and are plausibly motivated by discourse-pragmatic triggers. Consideration of tense and (non-)finiteness phenomena, as well as their reflexes in SLM negation, suggests a discourse-pragmatic motivation for these changes. Two discourse processes could conspire to motivate the development of the new morphology in SLM. The first is a clausal asymmetry, in which the predicate representing the most recent event is ordinarily in focus, indicated by tense morphology and position of the clause relative to clauses referring to subsequent events. The second is the communicative need to reassign focus in certain contexts to a temporally non-primary clause, one referring to an event that did not take place first. In spite of a constraint in Dravidian languages blocking the marking of functional contrasts under negation (so that only a negation morpheme can be prefixed to the verb), negation morphology encodes an obligatory finiteness contrast, optimally supporting these information-structuring processes. The clause describing the most recent event in a sentence remains visibly finite under negation, when a temporally secondary clause is focused.
Abbreviations
- 1S
first person singular
- 3S
third person singular
- ABE
abessive
- ACC
accusative
- ADE
adessive
- ASP
aspect
- AUX
auxiliary
- CMP
complementizer
- COP
copula
- DAT
dative
- DET
determiner
- EXS
existential
- FIN
finite
- GEN
genitive
- ILL
illative
- IND
indefinite
- INF
infinitival
- NEG
negative
- NFN
non-finite
- NMX
non-matrix
- NMZ
nominalizer
- P
preposition/postposition
- PL
plural
- POS
possessive
- PRD
predicate
- PRG
progressive
- PRT
participle
- PST
past tense
- PTV
partitive
- TNS
tens
References
Ansaldo, Umberto. 2008. Sri Lanka Malay revisited: Genesis and classification. In Arienne Dwyer, K. David Harrison & David S. Rood (eds.), A world of many voices: Lessons from documented endangered languages (Typological Studies in Language), 13–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.78.02ansSearch in Google Scholar
Ansaldo, Umberto. 2009. Contact languages: Ecology and evolution in Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511642203Search in Google Scholar
Ansaldo, Umberto. 2011. Metatypy in Sri Lanka Malay. In Rajendra Singh & Ghanshyam Sharma (eds.), Annual review of South Asian Languages and linguistics, 3–15. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110270655.3Search in Google Scholar
Ansaldo, Umberto. 2014. SLM is dead, Long Live Sri Lanka Malay: A review article of Nordhoff 2013. Journal of Language Contact 7(2), 381–391.10.1163/19552629-00702006Search in Google Scholar
Bakker, Peter. 2000. Rapid language change: Creolization, intertwining, convergence. In Colin Renfrew, April M. McMahon & Larry Trask (eds.), Time depth in historical linguistics, 585–620. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archeological Research.Search in Google Scholar
Bakker, Peter. 2013. Sri Lanka Malay: New findings on contact. In Sebastian Nordhoff (ed.), Extreme language contact – The case of Sri Lanka Malay, 53–83. Amsterdam: Brill.10.1163/9789004242258_004Search in Google Scholar
Bickerton, Derek. 1984. The language bioprogram hypothesis. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 7. 173–221.10.1017/S0140525X00044149Search in Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1989. From purposive to infinitive – A universal path of grammaticization. Folia Linguistica Historica X(1–2), 287–310.10.1515/flih.1989.10.1-2.287Search in Google Scholar
Hussainmiya, Bachamiya Abdul. 1987. Lost Cousins: The Malays of Sri Lanka. In Dunia Melayu Occasional Paper 2. Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Institut Bahasa, Kesusasteraan dan Kebudayaan Melayu.Search in Google Scholar
Hussainmiya, Bachamiya Abdul. 2008 [1990]. Orang Rejimen: The Malays of the Ceylon rifle regiment. Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Institut Bahasa, Kesusasteraan dan Kebudayaan Melayu.Search in Google Scholar
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1990. Syntactic change. In Edgar C. Polomé (ed.), Research guide on language change, 365–388. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Miestamo, Matti. 2005. Standard negation: The negation of declarative verbal main clauses in a typological perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Mufwene, Salikoko. 1989. On the so-called ‘infinitive’ in Atlantic creoles. Lingua 77. 297–330.10.1016/0024-3841(89)90043-0Search in Google Scholar
Nordhoff, Sebastian. 2009. A grammar of upcountry Sri Lanka Malay. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Ph.D. dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Nordhoff, Sebastian. 2012. Commentary on Smith’s papers. Journal of Language Contact 5. 73–79.10.1163/187740912X623415Search in Google Scholar
Papiha, S.S., S.S. Mastana & R. Jayasekara. 1996. Genetic variation in Sri Lanka. Human Biology, 68, 707–737.Search in Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen F. 1998. The borrowing of meaning as a cause of internal syntactic change. In Monika S. Schmid, Jennifer R. Austin & Dieter Setin (eds.), Historical Linguistics 1997 (Current issues in linguistic theory), 339–362. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.164.22priSearch in Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen F. 2001. Yiddish as a contact language. In Norval Smith & Tonjes Veenstra (eds.), Creolization and contact, 263–289. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cll.23.12priSearch in Google Scholar
Slomanson, Peter. 2006. Sri Lankan Malay Grammars: Lankan or Malay? In Ana Deumert & Stephanie Durrleman (eds.), Structure and variation in contact languages, 135–158. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cll.29.08sloSearch in Google Scholar
Slomanson, Peter. 2008a. Progressive Aspect in Sri Lankan Malay and the Syntactic Status of ambe(l). Paper presented at the Twelfth International Symposium on Malay/Indonesian Linguistics, at the University of Leiden, The Netherlands.Search in Google Scholar
Slomanson, Peter. 2008b. The perfect construction and complexity drift in Sri Lankan Malay. In Peter Cole & Gabriella Hermon (eds.), Lingua vol. 118, 10, 1640–1655. Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.1016/j.lingua.2007.08.009Search in Google Scholar
Slomanson, Peter. 2009. Morphological finiteness as increased complexity in negation systems. In Enoch Aboh & Norval Smith (eds.), Complex processes in new languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cll.35.16sloSearch in Google Scholar
Slomanson, Peter. 2010. Pragmatic accommodation as a motivation for typological shift. In Congressus XI Internationalis Fenno Ugristarums (FU11) Piliscsaba 2010, Pars V, 293–300. Budapest: Reguly Társaság.Search in Google Scholar
Slomanson, Peter. 2011. Dravidian features in the Sri Lankan Malay verb. In Claire Lefebvre (ed.), Creoles, their substrates, and language typology, 383–409. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.95.22sloSearch in Google Scholar
Slomanson, Peter. 2012. The Significance of Sri Lankan Malay and the Importance of Explicit Process Models. Paper presented at the 16th International Symposium on Malay and Indonesian Linguistics, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka.Search in Google Scholar
Slomanson, Peter. 2013a. Known, inferable, and discoverable in Sri Lankan Malay research. In Sebastian Nordhoff (ed.), Extreme language contact – The case of Sri Lanka Malay, 85–119. Amsterdam: Brill.10.1163/9789004242258_005Search in Google Scholar
Slomanson, Peter. 2013b. Sri Lankan Malay. In Susanne Maria Michaelis, Philippe Maurer, Martin Haspelmath & Magnus Huber (eds.), The survey of pidgin & creole languages. Volume 3, contact languages based on languages from Africa, Asia, Australia, and the Americas, 77–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Ian, Scott Paauw & Bachamiya Abdul Hussainmiya. 2004. Sri Lanka Malay: The state of the art. In Rajendra Singh (ed.), Yearbook of South Asian Languages 2004, 197–216. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110179897.197Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Ian & Scott Paauw. 2006. Sri Lanka Malay: Creole or Convert? In Ana Deumert & Stephanie Durrleman (eds.), Structure and variation in contact languages, 159–181. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cll.29.09smiSearch in Google Scholar
Smith, Ian. 2012a. Adstrate influence in Sri Lanka Malay: Definiteness, animacy and number in accusative case marking. Journal of Language Contact 5. 5–22.10.1163/187740912X623389Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Ian. 2012b. Comments on Nordhoff’s “Establishing and Dating Sinhala Influence in Sri Lanka Malay”. Journal of Language Contact 5. 58–72.10.1163/187740912X623406Search in Google Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel. 1963 [1957]. Languages in contact: Findings and problems. The Hague: Mouton.Search in Google Scholar
©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Introduction
- Nominalization and the problem of indirect access: Evidence from Ossetian
- Pragmatic accommodation as a catalyst for the development of (non-)finiteness
- On case and tense: The role of grounding in differential subject marking
- Deriving the scale of finiteness from parasitic syncretism
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Introduction
- Nominalization and the problem of indirect access: Evidence from Ossetian
- Pragmatic accommodation as a catalyst for the development of (non-)finiteness
- On case and tense: The role of grounding in differential subject marking
- Deriving the scale of finiteness from parasitic syncretism
