Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 11 – uploaded by Wolfgang Behr

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Table 11. Grammatical cohesion domains in Mandarin Table 12. Phonological cohesion domains in Mandarin

Table 11 Grammatical cohesion domains in Mandarin Table 12. Phonological cohesion domains in Mandarin

Related Figures (16)

Figure 1. Areas covered by the languages in the sample according to the 16th edition of the Ethnologue (Lewis 2009). Base map from http://naturalearthdata.com/ (last access 15 September 2018)
Figure 1. Areas covered by the languages in the sample according to the 16th edition of the Ethnologue (Lewis 2009). Base map from http://naturalearthdata.com/ (last access 15 September 2018)
Table 1. Bunan morpheme types
Table 1. Bunan morpheme types
Table 3. Phonological cohesion domains in Bunan 3.2 Chintang
Table 3. Phonological cohesion domains in Bunan 3.2 Chintang
Table 2. Grammatical cohesion domains in Bunan 3.1.3 Synopsis of Bunan cohesion domains
Table 2. Grammatical cohesion domains in Bunan 3.1.3 Synopsis of Bunan cohesion domains
Table 4. Chintang morpheme types
Table 4. Chintang morpheme types
Table 5. Grammatical cohesion domains in Chintang
Table 5. Grammatical cohesion domains in Chintang
Table 6. Phonological cohesion domains in Chintang
Table 6. Phonological cohesion domains in Chintang
Table 7. Burmese morpheme types verbs that express different temporal-aspectual notions or serve a valency- changing function, e.g. the preverbal translational motion secondary verb @wa (from @wa ‘go’) and the postverbal progressive secondary verb ne (from ne ‘stay’). Secondary verbs display a number of properties that makes them recognizable as verbs. Preverbal secondary verbs can be marked for their dependent status with the verbal marker pid3 (consisting of the sequential marker pi - a grammatical- ized form of the full verb pi ‘finish’ - and the contrastive marker t3 / d3), while postverbal secondary verbs inflect for polarity. Both preverbal and postverbal sec- ondary verbs select the main verb in so far as they do not license arguments directly but rely on their selected verb and its valence structure for this.
Table 7. Burmese morpheme types verbs that express different temporal-aspectual notions or serve a valency- changing function, e.g. the preverbal translational motion secondary verb @wa (from @wa ‘go’) and the postverbal progressive secondary verb ne (from ne ‘stay’). Secondary verbs display a number of properties that makes them recognizable as verbs. Preverbal secondary verbs can be marked for their dependent status with the verbal marker pid3 (consisting of the sequential marker pi - a grammatical- ized form of the full verb pi ‘finish’ - and the contrastive marker t3 / d3), while postverbal secondary verbs inflect for polarity. Both preverbal and postverbal sec- ondary verbs select the main verb in so far as they do not license arguments directly but rely on their selected verb and its valence structure for this.
Table 8. Grammatical cohesion domains in Burmese Table 9. Phonological cohesion domains in Burmese
Table 8. Grammatical cohesion domains in Burmese Table 9. Phonological cohesion domains in Burmese
3.4 Mandarin Chinese
3.4 Mandarin Chinese
Table 10. Mandarin morpheme types Verbs inflect for aspect and tense/mood, while polarity is coded at the phrasa evel. V2 morphemes fall into two classes: preverbal and postverbal secondary erbs. They all select verbs in the sense that they are not able to support their ow1 rguments and thus depend on the argument structure of the main verb. Thei: tatus as verbs rather than inflectional markers rests on the fact that they can b nflected for aspect, independently of the main verb. We only recognize one pre erbal secondary verb, which is the durative secondary verb zai £. Evidence fo: selection relationship between zai and its main verb comes from the fact tha t only combines with verbs that display an active Aktionsart (Li & Thompsot 981: 217). Other preverbal auxiliaries such as néng fié ‘can’, yao 2 ‘want’ etc. are \ot analyzed as secondary verbs, as there is no evidence that they select verbs fo: heir realization. [28] Manuel Widmer, Mathias Jenny, Wolfgang Behr and Balthasar Bickel
Table 10. Mandarin morpheme types Verbs inflect for aspect and tense/mood, while polarity is coded at the phrasa evel. V2 morphemes fall into two classes: preverbal and postverbal secondary erbs. They all select verbs in the sense that they are not able to support their ow1 rguments and thus depend on the argument structure of the main verb. Thei: tatus as verbs rather than inflectional markers rests on the fact that they can b nflected for aspect, independently of the main verb. We only recognize one pre erbal secondary verb, which is the durative secondary verb zai £. Evidence fo: selection relationship between zai and its main verb comes from the fact tha t only combines with verbs that display an active Aktionsart (Li & Thompsot 981: 217). Other preverbal auxiliaries such as néng fié ‘can’, yao 2 ‘want’ etc. are \ot analyzed as secondary verbs, as there is no evidence that they select verbs fo: heir realization. [28] Manuel Widmer, Mathias Jenny, Wolfgang Behr and Balthasar Bickel
3.5 Synthesis
3.5 Synthesis
“agreement’, A for the most agent-like, P for the most patient-like argument Table 13. Degree of verbal inflectional synthesis. The coding procedure follows that o Bickel & Nichols (2005), further expanded in Bickel et al. (2020). “agr” stands for “agreement”, A for the most agent-like, P for the most patient-like argument Table 13. Degree of verbal inflectional synthesis. The coding procedure follows that of There are various ways in which the distribution of morpheme types, cohesion
“agreement’, A for the most agent-like, P for the most patient-like argument Table 13. Degree of verbal inflectional synthesis. The coding procedure follows that o Bickel & Nichols (2005), further expanded in Bickel et al. (2020). “agr” stands for “agreement”, A for the most agent-like, P for the most patient-like argument Table 13. Degree of verbal inflectional synthesis. The coding procedure follows that of There are various ways in which the distribution of morpheme types, cohesion
Figure 2. Posterior probabilities of the La effect on morphology (in log odds/counts/ sizes). Black dots indicate the medians and black horizontal lines the 50%, 80% and 90% intervals around them (with decreasing thickness); the dashed vertical line is at o (null effect). The coloring is proportional to predictive performance (model “weight”). Values closer to o (blue) indicate better performance without the L2 factor, values closer to 1 (red) indicate better performance with the L2 factor, values around .5 (white) suggest ambiguous evidence. See Table Si in the Supporting Materials for the numbers Figure 2 presents the results. There is an overall difference between the esti- mates for morpheme types (reflecting SELECTION and INFLECTION) and the COHESION variables (domains and constraints) on the one hand, and the estimate for SYNTHESIS on the other hand. We describe these results in turn.
Figure 2. Posterior probabilities of the La effect on morphology (in log odds/counts/ sizes). Black dots indicate the medians and black horizontal lines the 50%, 80% and 90% intervals around them (with decreasing thickness); the dashed vertical line is at o (null effect). The coloring is proportional to predictive performance (model “weight”). Values closer to o (blue) indicate better performance without the L2 factor, values closer to 1 (red) indicate better performance with the L2 factor, values around .5 (white) suggest ambiguous evidence. See Table Si in the Supporting Materials for the numbers Figure 2 presents the results. There is an overall difference between the esti- mates for morpheme types (reflecting SELECTION and INFLECTION) and the COHESION variables (domains and constraints) on the one hand, and the estimate for SYNTHESIS on the other hand. We describe these results in turn.
indicates presence, white cells indicate absence of the type The first case concerns preverbs, which are attested in the low-admixture languages Bunan and Chintang, but absent in the high-admixture languages Burmese and Mandarin. Preverbs reflect a bipartite stem structure that is some- times claimed to be and the Caucasus ( are found in severa and some with less an archaic feature of Eurasia, surviving only in the Himalayas Bickel & Nichols 2007). Within Sino-Tibetan, bipartite stems subgroups in the greater Himalayan region, some with more L2 admixture: rGyalrongic, Qiang, Tibetan, Tamangic, Newar, as well as West Himalayish and Kiranti (Hildebrandt 2005; Jacques 2018). This distribution sugges that their absence s that preverbs might reconstruct to the proto-language and in Burmese and Mandarin indeed results from massive L2 admixture. At the same time, bipartite stems have been posited elsewhere as areal
indicates presence, white cells indicate absence of the type The first case concerns preverbs, which are attested in the low-admixture languages Bunan and Chintang, but absent in the high-admixture languages Burmese and Mandarin. Preverbs reflect a bipartite stem structure that is some- times claimed to be and the Caucasus ( are found in severa and some with less an archaic feature of Eurasia, surviving only in the Himalayas Bickel & Nichols 2007). Within Sino-Tibetan, bipartite stems subgroups in the greater Himalayan region, some with more L2 admixture: rGyalrongic, Qiang, Tibetan, Tamangic, Newar, as well as West Himalayish and Kiranti (Hildebrandt 2005; Jacques 2018). This distribution sugges that their absence s that preverbs might reconstruct to the proto-language and in Burmese and Mandarin indeed results from massive L2 admixture. At the same time, bipartite stems have been posited elsewhere as areal
Related topics:
Second Language AcquisitionMorphological evolutionLanguage contactMorphological theoryChinese Language and LinguisticsLinguistic Morphology
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved