How to phraseologize nominal number
Descrição do Produto
How to phraseologize nominal number
Gender, Class and Determination University of Ottawa September 18-20, 2015 Solveiga Armoskaite University of Rochester
Slide availability }
2
For the sake of sustainability, } Either email me, and I will send you the file } Or download the pdf. from my academia.edu page available as of tomorrow morning
The data puzzle
3
Background Singular underived N derived N Nroot Vroot Nom. knygskyrGen. knygskyrDat. knygskyrAcc. knygskyrInst. knygskyrLoc. knygskyr-
4
Plural underived N derived N Nroot Vroot knygskyrknygskyrknygskyrknygskyrknygskyrknygskyr-
Background Singular Plural underived N derived N underived N derived N Nroot Vroot-NMLZ Nroot Vroot-NMLZ Nom. knygskyr-ybknygskyr-ybGen. knygskyr-ybknygskyr-ybDat. knygskyr-ybknygskyr-ybAcc. knygskyr-ybknygskyr-ybInst. knygskyr-ybknygskyr-ybLoc. knygskyr-ybknygskyr-yb-
5
Background Singular underived N derived N Nom. knyg-a Gen. knyg-os Dat. knyg-ai Acc. knyg-ą Inst. knyg-a Loc. knyg-oje
6
skyr-yb-a skyr-yb-os skyr-yb-ai skyr-yb-ą skyr-yb-a skyr-yb-oje
Plural underived N derived N knyg-os knyg-ų knyg-oms knyg-as knyg-omis knyg-ose
skyr-yb-os skyr-yb-ų skyr-yb-oms skyr-yb-as skyr-yb-omis skyr-yb-ose
Background Singular Plural underived N derived N underived N derived N Nom. knyg-a skyr-yb-a knyg-os skyr-yb-os Gen. knyg-os skyr-yb-os knyg-ų skyr-yb-ų Dat. knyg-ai skyr-yb-ai knyg-oms skyr-yb-oms Acc. knyg-ą skyr-yb-ą knyg-as skyr-yb-as Inst. knyg-a skyr-yb-a knyg-omis skyr-yb-omis Loc. knyg-oje skyr-yb-oje knyg-ose skyr-yb-ose ‘book’ ‘punctuation’ ‘books’ ‘divorce’
7
The puzzle Singular Plural underived N derived N underived N derived N Nom. knyg-a skyr-yb-a knyg-os skyr-yb-os Gen. knyg-os skyr-yb-os knyg-ų skyr-yb-ų Dat. knyg-ai skyr-yb-ai knyg-oms skyr-yb-oms Acc. knyg-ą skyr-yb-ą knyg-as skyr-yb-as Inst. knyg-a skyr-yb-a knyg-omis skyr-yb-omis Loc. knyg-oje skyr-yb-oje knyg-ose skyr-yb-ose ‘book’ ‘punctuation’ ‘books’ ‘divorce’
8
The puzzle, in more detail underived N has a full paradigm Singular underived N derived N Nom. knyg-a skyr-yb-a Gen. knyg-os skyr-yb-os Dat. knyg-ai skyr-yb-ai Acc. knyg-ą skyr-yb-ą Inst. knyg-a skyr-yb-a Loc. knyg-oje skyr-yb-oje ‘book’ ‘punctuation’
9
Plural underived N derived N knyg-os skyr-yb-os knyg-ų skyr-yb-ų knyg-oms skyr-yb-oms knyg-as skyr-yb-as knyg-omis skyr-yb-omis knyg-ose skyr-yb-ose ‘books’ ‘divorce’
Puzzle, in more details: dervided N has either singular or plural i.e., partial paradigm Singular derived N Nom. skyr-yb-a Gen. kskyr-yb-os Dat. skyr-yb-ai Acc. kskyr-yb-ą Inst. kskyr-yb-a Loc. kskyr-yb-oje ‘‘punctuation’ 10
Plural (unattested) underived N derived N knyg-os skyr-yb-os knyg-ų skyr-yb-ų knyg-oms skyr-yb-oms knyg-as skyr-yb-as knyg-omis skyr-yb-omis knyg-ose skyr-yb-ose ‘books’ ‘divorce’
Puzzle, in more detail: dervided N has either singular or plural i.e., partial paradigm Singular (unattested) Nom Gen. Dat. Acc. Inst. Loc. 11
Plural derived N skyr-yb-os skyr-yb-ų skyr-yb-oms skyr-yb-as skyr-yb-omis skyr-yb-ose ‘divorce’
Agreement patterns confirm the split a. Vaikams yra
nelengva suprasti
child.DAT.PL be.3.PRES not.easy
sunkią
skyrybą.
understand.INF hard.ACC.SG punctuationACC.SG
‘Kids have trouble understanding complex punctuation.’ b. *Vaikams yra sunku suprasti sunkias skyryba. Intended: …hard.ACC.PL punctuationACC.SG
12
Agreement patterns confirm the split a. Vaikams yra
nelengva suprasti
child.DAT.PL be.3.PRES not.easy
sunkią
skyrybą.
understand.INF hard.ACC.SG punctuationACC.SG
‘Kids have trouble understanding complex punctuation.’ b. *Vaikams yra sunku suprasti sunkias skyrybą. Intended: …hard.ACC.PL punctuationACC.SG
13
Agreement patterns confirm the split a. Vaikams yra
nelengva suprasti
child.DAT.PL be.3.PRES not.easy
sunkias
skyrybas.
understand.INF hard.ACC.PL divorceACC.PL
‘Kids have trouble understanding complex divorce.’ b. *Vaikams yra sunku suprasti sunkią skyrybas. Intended: …hard.ACC.SG divorceACC.PL
14
Agreement patterns confirm the split a. Vaikams yra
nelengva suprasti
child.DAT.PL be.3.PRES not.easy
sunkias
skyrybas.
understand.INF hard.ACC.PL divorceACC.PL
‘Kids have trouble understanding complex divorce.’ b. *Vaikams yra sunku suprasti sunkią skyrybas. Intended: …hard.ACC.SG divorceACC.PL
15
Research questions. Claims Question 1 } Why are there gaps in the number paradigm with N–yb-? Claims } The gaps in the paradigms manifest derivation by Number Infl } The distinct behaviour of N–yb- is due to the properties of V and nominalizer: } N-yb-singular reflect transitive V base, Theme oriented } N-yb-plural reflect reciprocal V base, Agent oriented 16
Research questions. Claims Question II } How can the distinction between derivation and inflection be retained in the context of N-yb- forms? Claims } Inflection may participate in derivation Blevins 2001 } Morphemes, just like phrases, may be phraseologized Beck & Mel’čuk 2011
17
Outline of the talk }
Data } }
} } } }
Evidence: N-yb-singular contrast with N-yb- plural Evidence:V base of N-yb-singular contrast with V base of N-yb- plural
Theoretical assumptions Proposal Predictions Conclusion, Predictions, Questions
18
Evidence N-yb-singular contrast with N-yb- plural
19
Evidence: N–yb- singular/N–yb- plural are distinct
Test Quantifier ‘lots.of’ Numeral
20
Underived count N
Underived N-ybplural mass N
N-yb-
✗ with singular ✓ with plural
✓
n.a. with singular ✓ with plural
✓
✓
✗
✓
✗
singular
Baseline for comparison: underived N
underived mass N pilna pieno… lots.of milkGEN.SG underived count N ??pilna ožkos lots.of goatGEN.SG (“universal grinder”) 21
*pilna pienų… lots.of milkGEN.PL
pilna ožkų lots.of goatGEN.PL
Evidence: N–yb- singular/N–yb- plural are distinct
}
N-yb- singular pattern like underived mass N, with quantifiers
underived mass N pilna pieno… lots.of milkGEN.SG
22
derived N-yb- singular pilna gamybos, lots.of production
skyrybos, punctuation
kūrybos… creationGEN.SG
Evidence: N–yb- singular/N–yb- plural are distinct
}
N-yb- plural pattern like underived count N, with quantifiers
underived count N pilna ožkų lots.of goatGEN.PL
23
derived N-yb- plural pilna dalybų skyrybų lažybų lots.of partition divorces betsGEN.PL
Evidence: N–yb- singular/N–yb- plural are distinct
}
N-yb- singular pattern like underived mass N, with numerals
underived mass N N-yb- singular *vienas pienas… *viena gamyba, skyryba, kūryba… one milkSG one productionSG punctuationSG creationSG
24
Evidence: N–yb- singular/N–yb- plural are distinct } }
N-yb-plural pattern are similar to underived count N except they are treated like inherently plural N, with numerals
underived count N dvi ožkos… two goatPL
N-yb- plural ??/*dvi dalybos skyrybos two partitionPL divorcePL
lažybos… betPL
*dvejos ožkos a.pair.of goatPL underived inherently plural N But: dvejos žirklės… dvejos dalybos skyrybos lažybos a.pair.of scissorsPL a.pair.of partitionPL divorcePL betPL 25
N–yb- plural are distinct: set ambiguity }
Ona, Jonas ir Marija skyria-si. Ann John Mary divorce-REFL
Interpretations Monogamous (i) ‘Ann, John and Mary are divorcing.’ Polygamous (ii) ‘Ann, John and Mary are divorcing each other.’
26
N–yb- plural are distinct: set ambiguity }
Ona, Jonas ir Marija skyria-si. Ann John Mary divorce-REFL
Interpretations Monogamous (i) ‘Ann, John and Mary are divorcing.’ Polygamous (ii) ‘Ann, John and Mary are divorcing each other.’
27
Evidence: N–yb- singular/N–yb- plural are distinct
Test Quantifier ‘lots.of’ Numeral
28
Underived count N
Underived N-ybplural mass N
N-yb-
✗ with singular ✓ with plural
✓
n.a. with singular ✓ with plural
✓
✓
✗
✓
✗
singular
Evidence
N-yb-singular V base contrasts with N-yb- pluralV base
29
Generalization: V base contrast N-yb-singular is built on a transitive V base …V] - NMLZ-yb- - NUMsingular }
TRANSITIVE
N-yb-plural is built on a reciprocal V base …V] - NMLZ-yb- - NUMplural }
RECIPROCAL
30
A side note on Lithuanian reciprocals }
Reciprocity in Lithuanian is expressed either } } } } }
…periphrastically, with a phrase vienas kitą ‘each other’ …lexically, without any overt manifestation …morphologically, by a reflexive /middle marker -si/-s The marker is highly polysemous in Lithuanian Geniušienė 2007:636 Characteristically, reciprocals do not overlap with semantic reflexives for details, see Geniušienė 2007:652
31
V base samples for N-yb-singular vs. N-yb-plural }
Sample of V bases for N-yb-singular
daryti, gaminti, kūrti, leisti, rūpinti, sergėti, žvalgyti... make produce, create, publish, worry, guard, scout Note some of these V have reciprocal variants, too; only non-reciprocal variants are used for N-yb-singular derivation à Lexical meaning sets them apart
32
V base samples for N-yb-singular vs. N-yb-plural }
Sample of V bases for N-yb-plural
derėti(s), kūmáuti(s), lažintis, vesti(s)… negotiate(recip), godparent(recip), wager(recip), marry(refl) Note some of these V have transitive versions, too; only reciprocal variants are used for N-yb-plural derivation à Lexical meaning sets them apart
33
V base samples for N-yb-singular vs. N-yb-plural }
V bases that allow for either N-yb-singular or N-yb-plural
skirti(s), dalinti(s)… divide(refl) share(refl)
Notes (i) There are few examples of such bases (ii) Crucially, they have distinct (although related) meanings across the singular plural split of the paradigm with –yb-
skir..]V base dal..]V base 34
Singular punctuation division
Plural divorce partition
Evidence: N–yb- singular/N–yb- plural are distinct }
N-yb-singular : Theme oriented, lack of animacy or sentience
a. žaliavų gamyba materialGEN.SG productionNOM.SG ‘production of materials’ b. lietuvių kalbos skyryba LithuanianGEN.PL languageGEN.SG punctuationNOM.SG (i) = ‘punctuation of Lithuanian language’ (ii) = ‘punctuation of language by Lithuanians’
default
c. menininko kūryba artistGEN.SG creationNOM.SG (i) = ‘creation by an artist’ i.e., artists are creating something (ii) ≠ ‘creation of an artist’, i.e. artists are being created 35
Evidence: N–yb- singular/N–yb- plural are distinct N-yb-plural : Agent oriented, sentient & animate a. moterų varžybos womanGEN.PL competitionNOM.PL ‘women’s competition’ }
b. brolių lažybos brotherGEN.PL betNOM.PL ‘brothers bet’ c. brolių dalybos brotherGEN.PL partitionNOM.PL ‘sharing of brothers’ 36
vs.
turto dalybos wealthGEN.PL partitionNOM.PL ‘distribution of wealth’
Theoretical assumptions
37
Elements of nominal projection The elements of nominal projection: S-syntax or L-syntax Hale & Kayser 1993, Travis 2000, among many others
Determination Quantity Countability Categorization root Acquaviva 2015, among others
38
Elements of nominal projection The elements of nominal projection: S-syntax or L-syntax Hale & Kayser 1993, Travis 2000, among many others
Determination Quantity Countability Categorization root Acquaviva 2015, among others
39
Blevins 2001 }
The traditional distinction between derivation and inflection is arguably one of the most vexing questions addressed in current morphological theories. }
40
…the central problem posed by non-finite verbs, non-absolute adjectives, irregular plurals is that they conform the inflectional profile and yet feed processes that exhibit derivational properties
Sample data relevant for Blevins 2001 }
English participles }
}
}
…can be main verbs is eating, was abandoned … or can participate in compound formation man-eating, semi-abandoned
Irregular plurals in German }
}
41
…can function as plural Die Männer ‘the men’, die Spinnen ‘the spiders’ …or be number-neutral stems männerlos ‘manless’, Spinnennetz ‘spider web’
The detail is in the assumptions, according to Blevins 2001 }
Standard assumption
42
Morpheme
Creates lexemes?
Preserves lexemes?
Inflection Derivation
✗ ✓
✓ ✗
The detail is in the assumptions based on Blevins 2001 }
Assumptions à la Blevins 2001
Morpheme
Creates lexemes?
Inflection ✗ Derivation ✓ Inflection~derivation ✓
43
Preserves lexemes? ✓ ✗ ✓
Blevins 2001 Inflection may participate in derivation } All inflection can be regarded as paradigmatic – but it does not follow – and there are no independent grounds for assuming – that all paradigmatic processes are inflectional }
}
Our problem is a symptom of a failure to recognize lexeme-preserving derivation
44
Beck & Mel’čuk 2011 }
The existence of phraseologized complex expressions such as clichés, collocations and idioms, collectively known as phrasemes, is well known and widely accepted
}
Morphological phrasemes, found in both derivation and inflection, are governed by the same principles of phraseologization
}
As with phrases, the associations of morphological meanings and forms are potentially multivariate
45
Beck & Mel’čuk 2011 }
The existence of phraseologized complex expressions such as clichés, collocations and idioms, collectively known as phrasemes, is well known and widely accepted
}
Morphological phrasemes, found in both derivation and inflection, are governed by the same principles of phraseologization
}
As with phrases, the associations of morphological meanings and forms are potentially multivariate
46
Sample data relevant for Beck & Mel’čuk 2011:176 a.
ik-łtatá:-ya: 1SGSUB-sleep-INCOMP ‘I sleep’
b.
łtatá:-ya:-w sleep-INCOMP-1PLSUB:INCL ‘we-including you-sleep’
c.
ik-łtatá:-ya:-w 1SGSUB-sleep-INCOMP-1PLSUB:INCL ‘we-excluding you-sleep’ 47
Beck & Mel’čuk 2011:179 }
Major types of phrases Compositional Noncompositional unrestricted restricted
48
free phrases pragmatemes, collocations, clichés
[impossible] idioms
Beck & Mel’čuk on phrases Type
2011:179-184
Subtype
Example
pragmateme
will you marry me?, best before
collocation
beat to a pulp, pay attention, heavy rain
cliché
the wrong place at the wrong time
weak idiom
lightning rod
semi-idiom
sea dog
strong idiom
shoot the breeze
Compositional
Non compositional
49
Beck & Mel’čuk on morphemes Type
Subtype
Compositional pragmateme
Non compositional
2011:189-214
Example ?not attested
collocation
Russian V aspect English: choice of NMLZ by V based Upper Necaxa: causatives by stative/active V base
cliché
?not attested
weak idiom
Upper Necaxa: subtype of N compounds
semi-idiom
English compounds: pancake, gravyboat
strong idiom Upper Necaxa: non-compositional compounds; exceptional uses of person infl Salishan lexical affixes 50
Proposal
51
Proposals }
Derivation with –yb- is an instance of lexical nominalization } } }
…of limited productivity …idiosyncratic …associated with encyclopaedic semantics Cf. Fábregas & Scalise 2012, among many others
52
Proposals }
Nominalizer –yb- is defective } } }
} }
53
Countability in Lithuanian is always manifested: all N have Num Infl Number Infl interacts with [± count] feature on N Nominalizer –yb- feature inventory [± animate] [± sentient] [± count] feature is lacking Num Infl is a compensatory strategy
Proposals }
Nominalizer –yb- is defective } } }
} }
54
Countability in Lithuanian is always manifested: all N have Num Infl Number Infl interacts with [± count] feature on N Nominalizer –yb- feature inventory [± animate] [± sentient] [± count] feature is lacking Num Infl is a compensatory strategy
Proposals }
Nominalizer –yb- is defective } } }
} }
55
Countability in Lithuanian is always manifested: all N have Num Infl Number Infl interacts with [± count] feature on N Nominalizer –yb- feature inventory (work in progress) [± animate] [± sentient] [± count] feature is lacking Num Infl is a compensatory strategy
How is Num Infl a compensatory strategy for [± count] in –yb- ? skyr-yb-a
skyr-yb-os
Root meaning: divideTRANS } -yb- nominalizer [-animate] [-sentient] } InflSG } Lexeme meaning specialized action or activity, mass
}
}
56
Root meaning: divideRECIP } -yb- nominalizer [+animate] [+sentient] } InflPL } Lexeme meaning specialized action or activity where more than one animate sentient participant is involved, reciprocally; count, inherently (sets of)
How is Num Infl a compensatory strategy for [± count] in –yb- ? skyr-yb-a
Root meaning: divideTRANS } -yb- nominalizer [-animate] [-sentient] } InflSG } Lexeme meaning specialized action or activity, mass }
57
work in progress
skyr-yb-os
Root meaning: divideRECIP } -yb- nominalizer [+animate] [+sentient] } InflPL } Lexeme meaning specialized action or activity where more than one animate sentient participant is involved, reciprocally; count, inherently (sets of) }
Proposals à Lithuanian
N-yb-singular and N-yb-plural case is an instance of
(i) …lexeme preserving derivation where inflection participates in derivation
sensu Blevins 2001
(ii) ... weak idiom subtype of morphological phrasemes whose meaning includes the meaning of all of its constituents as well as an additional meaning that pertain to a lexeme as a whole Beck & Mel’čuk 2011
58
Proposal à Lithuanian
N-yb-singular and N-yb-plural case is an instance of
(i) …lexeme preserving derivation where inflection participates in derivation
sensu Blevins 2001
(ii) ... weak idiom subtype of morphological phrasemes whose meaning includes the meaning of all of its constituents as well as an additional meaning that pertain to a lexeme as a whole sensu Beck & Mel’čuk 2011
59
How are N-yb-singular and N-yb-plural a case of lexeme preserving derivation ? Singular Plural underived N derived N underived N derived N Nom. knyg-a skyr-yb-a knyg-os skyr-yb-os Gen. knyg-os skyr-yb-os knyg-ų skyr-yb-ų Dat. knyg-ai skyr-yb-ai knyg-oms skyr-yb-oms Acc. knyg-ą skyr-yb-ą knyg-as skyr-yb-as Inst. knyg-a skyr-yb-a knyg-omis skyr-yb-omis Loc. knyg-oje skyr-yb-oje knyg-ose skyr-yb-ose ‘book’ ‘punctuation’ ‘books’ ‘divorce’
60
Conclusions, Predictions, Questions
61
Conclusions }
There are instances of lexical nominalization in Lithuanian e.g., derivation of deverbal nouns with –yb-
}
Number Infl may participate in lexeme-preserving derivation Provided that such derivation occurs in well defined, idiosyncratic morphological contexts, e.g., with specific roots merging with –yb-
62
Conclusions }
There are instances of lexical nominalization in Lithuanian e.g., derivation of deverbal nouns with –yb-
}
Number Infl may participate in lexeme-preserving derivation Provided that such derivation occurs in well defined, idiosyncratic morphological contexts, e.g., with specific roots merging with –yb-
63
Could there be syntactic nominalizations of reciprocals in Lithuanian? } }
}
If –yb- in an instance of L-nominalizer of reciprocals, there could/should exist a nominalizer that is S-nominalizer The prediction is borne out: -im- is such a nominalizer possibly, there are more: work in progress
64
Could there be syntactic nominalizations of reciprocals in Lithuanian? a. Laž-yb-os – lošė-jų wager-NMLZ-NOM.PL gambler-GEN.PL ‘Wager is a passion of gamblers.’ b. Laž-in-im-as-is wager-VBLZ-NMLZ-NOM.PL-REFL ‘Wager is a passion of gamblers.’
aistr-a. passion-NOM.SG
lošėjų aistra. gambler-GEN.PL passion-NOM.SG
Note I for the moment, I abstract away from (i) the fine grained meaning differences, which exist…I can’t quite verbalize them yet…the two dictionaries that I consulted treat them as the same; (ii) the 65 intuition that (a) version is much preferred/higher in frequency than (b)
How are –im- and =yb- different? -im} Hardly restricted } Not sensitive to the content of V base } May contain affixes of V base, prefixes or suffixes } As N, allows for an overt V reflexive Side note: underive nouns do not allow reflexive in Lithuanian }
66
-yb} Restricted } Sensitive to the content of V base } Cannot contain any affixes (neither V nor N) } No overt reflexivity, ever }
How are –im- and =yb- different? -im} Hardly restricted } Not sensitive to the content of V base } May contain affixes of V base, prefixes or suffixes } As N, allows for an overt V reflexive Side note: underive nouns do not allow reflexive in Lithuanian }
67
-yb} Restricted } Sensitive to the content of V base } Cannot contain any affixes (neither V nor N) } No overt reflexivity, ever }
How are –im- and =yb- different? -im} Hardly restricted } Not sensitive to the content of V base } May contain affixes of V base, prefixes or suffixes } As N, allows for an overt V reflexive Side note: underived nouns do not allow reflexive in Lithuanian }
68
-yb} Restricted } Sensitive to the content of V base } Cannot contain any affixes (neither V nor N) } No overt reflexivity, ever }
How are –im- and =yb- different? -im} Hardly restricted } Not sensitive to the content of V base } May contain affixes of V base, prefixes or suffixes } As N, allows for an overt V reflexive }
Side note: underived N do not allow reflexive in Lithuanian
69
-yb} Restricted } Sensitive to the content of V base } Cannot contain any affixes (neither V nor N) } No overt reflexivity, ever }
Are there other idiosyncratic [± count] nominalizers in Lithuanian? }
There are, and more than one. –ij- is an example
vyr-as à vyr-ij-a man-MASC.NOM.SG man-NOMZ.-FEM.NOM.SG ‘man’ ‘menfolk’ bajor-as à bajor-ij-a count-MASC.COM.SG count-NOMZ-FEM.NOM.SG ‘count’ ‘aristocracy’ 70
And, finally, other big questions } } } }
What is the semantics of –yb-, and –im-? How does Lithuanian Number semantics work? What about the Theme/Agent relevance? How is the system of Lithuanian nominalizers look like?
71
Acknowledgments à For
inspiration à Martina Wiltschko, Rose Marie Déchaine, organizers of the conference à For comments, suggestions, exclamations } Carrie Gillon } Scott Grimm, Nadine Grimm } Dan Siddiqi } Robert Henderson } Jim Wood, for an engaging dialogue } My Lin226 Morphology students à For financial support } CETL, University of Rochester } Department of Linguistics, University of Rochester 72
Selected references } } } }
}
Beck, David, Mel’čuk, Igor. 2011. Morphological phrasemes and Totonacan verbal morphology. In Linguistics 49(1), 175-228. Blevins, James. 2001. Paradigmatic derivation. In Transactions of the philological society 99, 211-222. Fábregas, Antonio. Scalise, Sergio. 2012. Morphology: from data to theories. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University press. Geniušienė, Emma. 2007. Reciprocal and reflexive constructions in Lithuanian. In Nedjalkov,Vladimir, ed., Reciprocal constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Volume 2, 633-673. Hale, K. & Keyser, S. J. 1993. On Argument Structure and the Lexical Expression of Syntactic Relations. In The view from Building 20. Essays in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, K. Hale and S. J. Keyser (eds), 59-109. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 73
Selected references } }
}
}
Kasperavičienė, Ramunė. 2008. Number categories in abstract nouns. In Kalbų studijos, 12, 16-26. Siloni, Tal. 2008. The syntax of reciprocal verbs: an overview. In König, E., Gast,V. (eds.) Reciprocals and reflexives. Berlin: Mounton. 451-498. Travis, Lisa. 2000. The L-Syntax/S-Syntax Boundary: Evidence from Austronesian. In Ileana Paul,Vivianne Phillips and Lisa Travis (ed.), Formal Issues in Austronesian Linguistics, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 167-194. Yamada, Masahiro. 2010. Plurality, reciprocity, and plurality of reciprocity. Ph D dissertation, University of Delaware.
74
Lihat lebih banyak...
Comentários
