Kewapi语言的语法化

Yarapea

巴布亚新几内亚技术大学

摘要：语法化是一种语言过程，语言中的词汇词在形式，功能和意义上经历了各种语法或句法环境的变化，通常表现为情感或词缀。当代语言学理论认为，一旦一个词汇项目经历了语法化，它就不再作为一个词汇项目出现。来自Kewapi语言的数据挑战了这一观点，它提供了证据表明，词汇项目只有通过语法化才能被新的语法语境所诱发，并且它们继续保持其标准形式，功能和含义的正常（无标记）语法或句法语境（SOV / SV）。尽管对词汇基本形式进行语义漂白和形态变化，原始词汇语义的细微但重要的保留是对主管本土说话者语言学家清楚可用的语义洞察力。

关键词：语法化，多义词，阴部，词缀，语义漂白，词汇形式，句法语境

1. 介绍

Kewapi是Papua（非南岛语言）语言，在巴布亚新几内亚南部高原省有超过300,000位讲者（Yarapea 2013）。有三种方言 - 东方，南方和西方（如语言地图所示）。

本文的目的是介绍显示语法化形式及其功能的Kewapi语言数据，并提出语言中的语法化是一种由形式，语义和语用功能驱动的语义扩展（多义性）的例子。

KEWA 方言区域地图

语言数据主要来自东Kewapi。本研究报告的语法化形式已在之前检查过Kewapi语言文件。富兰克林（1962，1971）和Yarapea（1992-3,2001-7）记录了相同的形式；仍然有包括西Kewapi方言在内的形式的历史记录。数据交叉检查了八个冗长的真实话语文本 - 通过实地调查确保的传奇故事叙述，叙述叙述，程序性，说明性和商业交易文本。

结果显示六个词汇动词（ada“see”，豌豆“do”，la“saay”，mea“get”，raa“burn”，na“ ~eat“），它们已经被语法化并分布在各种形态语法上下文中。

结论是，动词在其无标记的句法语境（SOV和SV）中仍然起着词汇动词的作用，但在其他形态句法语境中，它们充当中间和/或连续动词，名词性修饰语，分句和语调功能标记。理论上，语言证据表明，语法化是由语义扩展驱动的一种多义词，但正式重新分析，作为名词性修饰语，分句和话语标记。由于在各种形态语法语境或分布中，基本的词汇语义在某种程度上得到了保留，因此在形式和语气的语境中，适当的语义/语用解释可以与动词的词汇语义有关。这对这位母语为英语的语言学家来说非常明显。

文献评论

这里的关注点是：1）以前有关Kewapi语言的文献，2）语法化概念，因为它适用于语言数据。

Kewapi语言的方言

如上所述，Kewapi语言有三种主要方言 - West Kewa，South Kewa和East Kewa。该语言被称为Kewapi语言。但是美国语言学家卡尔富兰克林在1960年代初期首先记录了语言为夸瓦语，这个词今天仍然被用来指西方和南方方言区的人，所以不是该语言的正确名称。

富兰克林（Franklin，1971和其他地方）描述了西维克方言应用了由美国语言学家肯尼斯派克（Kenneth Pike）开发的称为标记理论的语言学理论，但语法描述对大多数结构功能理论家和语言学家来说是难以理解的。

因此，Kewapi语言的母语人士Yarapea（2013年，2006年和其他地方）使用结构功能框架制作了Kewapi语言的第一个参考语法。它对全世界的语言学家和应用语言学家都是可读的。

语法

以前没有任何语言的语法化研究（描述）。所以这项研究是该语言的第一个这样的描述。语法化是一种语言变化的过程，其中词汇意义变为语法意义（Matthews 1997：151）。

文献中语法化案例的表征包括以下内容：

• • 1. 关联形式成为争论标记的形态学案例（Kemenade＆Vincent 1997：161）。
    2. 语义意义持续存在于新的语境中（Hopper 1991：22），以便语法化形式在语义上起多义形式的作用。
    3. 语法化形式作为文章和封闭形式发挥作用（Zwicky 1985）。

在Kewapi中观察到语法化案例的上述特征。下面第3节中的语言数据表明，词汇动词已经在特定的形态句法环境中被克隆化。两种这样的倾向（na-negative）和“maus - causative”进一步发展为词语前缀，除了在词缀（或前缀）的情况下，原始的词义被语义上的漂白（完全丧失的词汇意义），在所有其他的cliticization（包含）的情况下，特定词汇动词的原始语义味道仍然存在，因此这些包含词在语义上起多义形式的作用。

数据分析

以下表1和表2中的语言数据显示，六个词汇动词：

ada“see”，豌豆“do”，la“say / talk”，mea“get”，ra“burn / emit”和na“atat”在形态句法语境中经历了语法化：中间或连续动词形式，参与动词形式，名词形式，封闭式封闭，话语封闭。

表1：独立（形态句法范畴）和依赖（词汇动词）变量

表2：独立（形态句法范畴）和依赖（词汇动词）变量

1. 讨论/解释数据分析

观察所有动词以正常词序（语法上下文）出现是非常重要的 - SOV或SV作为词汇动词。在上面指定或确定的形态句法语境中，它们以语音形式，形式上和语义上作为缩减或变化形式出现，以呈现各种形态句法，语义和语气功能。

正式角色/分配

当词汇动词出现在句子中间时，它们获得内部或连续的动词形式。除了中间和连续动词的其他显着特征之外，连续出现的动词不能被顺序标记“maSEQ”打断，而中间动词串可以用“ma”来排序~SEQacirc;euro;trade;。

形态句法语境为语法化形式的补充分配提供了一个天堂：名词短语（NP），子句，句子，话语。动词的无标记位置是：SOV。语法化发生在动词出现在标记位置时：内侧/连续位置VVV（VP），参与位置VN（它被重新分析为动词的参与形式，用作名词的定语/描述修饰语）。

Kewapi的语法化途径似乎是：=gt;前缀=gt;主要动词=gt;中间/连续动词=gt;参与动词=gt;名词化封闭=gt;封闭封闭=gt; sentential enclitics =gt; discourse enclitics =gt;一个不能出现在口语中的口头形式（SO * V），并且当口头倾向出现在口语中时，它们成为主要词汇动词不可分割的一部分，并被重新分析为口头前缀，而这种情况只发生在两种情况下：原因前缀ma-CAUS和负前缀na-NEG‖。

多义语义角色

词法意义的保留发生在语法化动词出现在：VP和NP时，但仅在Clausal和Discoursal语境中是远程的。在那里，他们获得了如上表1和表2所示的语用角色/含义。

动词mea“get”作为例子封装

动词mea“get”已经变成了案例标记（包含物），并获得了其他的语法含义，如下所示:(也可参见上面的表1和表2）

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

56

Grammaticalization in Kewapi language

Apoi Yarapea

Papua New Guinea University of Technology

Abstract: Grammaticalization is a linguistic process in which lexical words of languages undergo changes in form, function and meaning in various grammatical or syntactic contexts, often manifested as clitics or affixes. Contemporary linguistic theory has it that, once a lexical item undergoes grammaticalization, it ceases to occur as a lexical item. Data from the Kewapi language challenges this claim by providing evidence that lexical items only undergo grammaticalization where they are induced to do so by new grammatical contexts in which they occur and that they continue to retain their standard form, function and meaning in their normal (unmarked) grammatical or syntactic context of occurrence (SOV/SV). The subtle but significant retention of the original lexical semantics, despite semantic bleaching and morphophonemic changes to the lexical base form, is a semantic insight available clearly to the competent native- speaker linguist.

Key words: grammaticalization, polysemy, clitics, affixes, semantic bleaching, lexical forms, syntactic contexts

Introduction

Kewapi is a Papuan (Non-Austronesian) language with over 300,000 speakers in the Southern Highlands Province of Papua New Guinea (Yarapea 2013). There are three dialects – East, South and West (as shown in the Language Map).

The purpose of this article is to present Kewapi language data showing grammaticalized forms and their functions, and to propose that grammaticalization in the language is a case of semantic extension (polysemy) motivated by formal, semantic and pragmatic functions.

The language data is largely from East Kewapi. The grammaticalized forms reported in this study have been checked for occurrences in previous

Kewapi language documentations. Franklinrsquo;s (1962, Map: Kewapi language and dialect areas

1971) and Yarapea (1992-3, 2001-7) document the same forms; there remains an historical account of the forms including the West Kewapi dialect. The data was cross-checked with eight lengthy authentic discourse texts – legend narratives, recount narratives, procedural, expository and business transactional texts secured through fieldwork.

The results show six lexical verbs (ada lsquo;seersquo;, pea lsquo;dorsquo;, la lsquo;sayrsquo;, mea lsquo;getrsquo;, raa lsquo;burnrsquo;, na lsquo;eatrsquo;) that have been grammaticalized and distributed in various morphosyntactic contexts.

It is concluded that the verbs still function as lexical verbs in their unmarked syntactic contexts (SOV and SV), but in other morphosyntactic contexts they function as medial and/ or serial verbs, nominal modifiers, clausal and discoursal function markers. Theoretically, the language evidence shows that grammaticalization is motivated by semantic extension

– a type of polysemy but become formally reanalysed to function as nominal modifiers, clausal and discoursal markers. Appropriate semantic/pragmatic interpretations of the encliticsrsquo; functions in their formal and discoursal contexts can be related to the lexical semantics of the verbs because in the various morphosyntactic contexts or distributions, the basic lexical semantics is somewhat retained. This is quite obvious to this native speaker linguist.

Literature review

The concerns here are: 1) previous literature on the Kewapi language, and 2) the concept of grammaticalization as it applies to the language data.

Dialects of Kewapi language

As mentioned above, the Kewapi language has three main dialects - West Kewa, South Kewa and East Kewa. The language is known as the Kewapi language. But Karl Franklin, an American linguist, in the early 1960s first recorded the language as Kewa, a word which was, and still today, used to refer to people from the West and South dialect areas and so is not the correct name of the language.

Franklin (1971 and elsewhere) described the West Kewa dialect applying a linguistic theory called tagmemics theory developed by an American linguist Kenneth Pike but the grammatical description is unreadable to most structural-functional theorists and linguists.

Therefore Yarapea (2013, 2006 and elsewhere), a native speaker of the Kewapi language, produced the first reference grammar of the Kewapi language, using a structural- functional framework. It is readable for linguists and applied linguists the world over.

Grammaticalization

There has not been any previous study (description) of grammaticalization in the language. So this study is the first such description for the language. Grammaticalization is a process of language change in which a lexical meaning changes into a grammatical meaning (Matthews 1997:151).

Characterizations of cases of grammaticalization in literature include the following:

• • 1. Cliticized forms become morphological case for argument marking (Kemenade amp;Vincent 1997:161).
    2. The semantic meaning persists in new contexts (Hopper 1991:22) so that grammaticalized forms function semantically as polysemous forms.
    3. Grammaticalized forms function as articles and enclitic forms (Zwicky 1985).

The above characterizations of grammaticalization cases are observed in Kewapi. The language data presented in section 3 below shows that lexical verbs have been cliticized in the specified morphosyntactic contexts. Two such proclitics (na- lsquo;negativersquo; and ma- lsquo;causativersquo; have further developed as verbal prefixes. Except in the cases of affixation (or prefixation), where the original lexical meaning is semantically bleached (total loss of lexical meaning), in all other cases of cliticization (enclitization) there is still the original semantic flavor of the particular lexi

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

资料编号：[279317]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word