PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT: THE INFORMATION STATUS OF PRONOMINAL AFFIXES

- disk/sr 3d- 18/5p- 15:22 101-2/05-rnitrrun lcJ3drufrrpsfrps

Tronsactioi of lhe PhilologicatSociety\olnme l0l:2 (2003)235-278

PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT: THE INFORMATION STATUSOF PRONOMINALAFFIXESI By Mlnur.rNe Mlrntnt (lniversity of California, Santa Barbara AssrRAcr Pronominal a.ffixesare often assumedto representan intermediatestageof diachronicdevelopmentbetwqenindependent pronouns like English ie and redundant inflectional markers like English -s. The path of developmentwould involve changesin distribution, form arrd function. Recently it has beenproposedthat pronominal affxes are functionally closer to the redundant subject agteementmarkers of English and Germanthan to independentpronouns,becausethey cannot distinguish referentiality or definiteness.An examination of the use of pronominal affixes in connected speechin two unrelated polysynthetic languages,Central Alaskan Yup'ik Eskimo and Navajo, indicates that the affixes are actually essentiallyequivalentin referentiality and definitenessto the independentpronouns of Englishand German.Referenceand in Yup'ik and Navajo in the same areestablished definiteness ways as in English and other languages,plus one more. Alternative constructionsare used for non-referentialmentions.In somecases,thesesystemsactuallyshowfiner distinctions of referentiality and definitenessthan those of English and other Europeanlanguages. I I would like to thank Greville Corbett, Nick Evans,Bernard Comrie and other participants at the Agreement Workshop, held in conjuntio! with^ the the autumr i002 meeting of thJ Linguistics Associalion of Great Bdtain, for their helpful comments and discussion. I am especially grateful as well to the speakers who eenerouslv contributed thcir time and expertis€ in documenting their languag€s; -Eli*b"ttt Ali, et.nu Charles, George Charles and John Charlos for Central Alaskan Ilro y Ida Soul6 for Nivajo. Consultation with the Surrey lVlorphology and Yup'ik Grouo and partiiipation in the Agreement Workshop were made possible by funding f.o- ihe ESRC: fsnc (urt noooz38228-This support is gratefully acknowledged O The PhilologicalSociety2003 Publishedbv BlackwellPublishinq - . -- 9"600Galsingt; Road,O;ford OX4 2DQ and 350Main Str€€t,Malden'MA 02148,USA'

n tq3

101-2/05-mithun.3d - 15:22 - disk/sr - 18/5/3 lc:/3dpfrrpslrrps

236

rRANsAcrroNsoF TIiE pHrLoLocrcALsocrETyl0l. 2003

1. INTRoDUcrroN A frequently cited type of grammatical change is the evolution of independent anaphoric pronouns into pronominal clitics or affixes, and then into redundant verbal inflectional endings. These diachronic stages are reflected synchronically in the kinds of markers that occur cross-linguistically,as below. (1) Independent anaphoric pronouns: German and English Er beobachtetsie. Er beobachtet. He watches them. He watches.

(2) Pronominal suffixes:Central Alaskan Yup'ik Nayura-bi. Nayurtu-q. watch-3.sr:13 .pt watch-3.se 'He watchesttem.' 'He watches.' (3) Redundantverbalinflection:Germanand English Er beobacht-et. He watch-es, Such markers are sometimesdiscussedtogether as agreement,but they differ in sometimes subtle and interesting ways, many discussedby Corbett (2003, this volume). The diachronic path linking them would involve changesin distribution, form and function. Perhaps the easiestdifference to see among them is distributional. Independent pronouns occur in complementary distribution with lexical nominals(apart from appositiveconstructions). A nuclear clause in English or Gerrnan may contain a pronoun aloneor a lexicalnominal, but not both in the samegrammatical role. (4) Independentpronouns:Germanand English a. Er beobachtet. Mein Vater beobachtet. Er beobachtetdie Kinfls1. Not: *Mein Vater er beobachtet. xEr beobachtetsie die Kinder.

* 15:22-disk/sr 3d- 18/5/3 101-2/0emithun lcl3drufiAsfrrps

MITHUAN - PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT

237

(4) b. He watches. My father watches He watchesthe childrenNot: *My fatherhe watches' *He watchesthemthe chililren. Pronominal affixes,by contrast,are obligatory in everyclause'They may occur alonein the clausejust like independentpronouns'or they may be accompaniedby coreferentiallexical nominals' They typicallyreprssentall core arguments. (5) Ptonominalsuffxes:CentralAlaskanYup'ik Nalurtu-q^ walc&-3.sc.ess 'He watches.' nayurtu-q' Aata-ka walcft-3.sc-,lrs x; her-L,scl fat 'My fatherwatches.' Nayura-i. watch-3.scl3.PL 'He watchesthem.' naYura-i. Cuignilnguu-t botter-PL watch-3.sc/3.Pr 'He watchesthe otters.' Not: *Aataka nayurtu+CuignilnguutnayuraRedundantverbal inflectional affixesare obligatory in everyclause, like pronominal affixes,but they neveroccur on their own' They are lexicalnominalor pronoun' by an independent alwaysaccompanied (6) Redundantverbalinflection:Germanand English a. Er beobacht-et. Mein Vater beobacht-et. Not: *Beobacht-et. b. He watch-es. My father watch-es' Not: *Watch-es.

* 15:22 - disk/st 101-2/os-mithun.3d - 18/5/3 lc:FdruIrrpsrrrps

101,2003 socrETY oF rlrE PHILoLoGICAL 218 TRANsAcrroNs by Siewierska(1999),markersat the first two stages, As discussed that is, independentpronouns and pronominal affixes,are the most cornmon crosslinguistically, but the diachronic transition from stageto stageis not necessarilyabrupt, and systemsat intermediate stagesdo occur. Siewierskanotes, for example,that Palauan pronominal prefixes are in complementary distribution with independentpronouns,but they co-occutwith lexicalNPs. The evolution from independentpronoun to redundantinflection involves changesin form and function as well. Formally, markers and there is often a loss of losetheir phonologicalindependence, aswell. On the functionalside'it has been phonologicalsubstance observedthat the processultimately resultsin a lossof referentiality' remarks,'The endpointof the historicalevolutionof As Siewierska agreementmarkers from anaphoric person pronouns is the loss of referentiality on the part of the person marker and the obligatory presenceof the nominal argumentwith which it agrees'(1999:225)' This scenarioraisesquestionsabout the lelallvs fiming of the various shifts.Do they occur in sequenceor do they overlap?In particular, doesthe loss in referentiality occur before or after the markershavebecomeformally dependentand obligatory?Viewed synchronically,are pronominal affixesreferential?In an intriguing paper, Evans (1999)proposesthat argumentaffixesin polysynlh"ti" lu.rgoag"t, especiallythose representingdirect objects, lack important criterial features of pronouns: referentiality and definiteness.He attributesthe semanticdifferenceto the obligatoriness of the affixes. Being obligatory, they will no longer be able to encodesuch contrastsas referentialvs non-referential,definite vs indefinite and so on. As a result,bound object afrxes in at leastsome polysynthetic languagespattern more like subject agreement than like freeptonouns,in morphologyin Europeanlanguages that they specifypersonand numberinformation while remaining non-cornmittalabout referenceand discoursestatus.(Evans 1999:255) Evans'sargumentsare basedon material lrom Bininj Gun-wok, a dialect chain of northern Australia, but he maintains that they extendto other polysyntheticlanguagesas well, citing languages

- disrysr 101-2/oFmithun.3d - 1E/58- 15:22 lcpdruIrrpsflrps

MITHUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMBNT

239

from the Eskimo-Aleut, Iroquoian, Salishan, Uto-Aztecan and South Caucasianfamilies, among others. In what follows. the notions of referentiality and definiteness will first be examinedmore closely,then the functions of pronominal affixess/ill be investigatedin two unrelated polysynthetic languages:CentralAlaskanYup'ik, an Eskimo-Aleutlanguageof southwesternAlaska, and Navajo, an Athabaskan languageof the American Southwest.It will be seenthat the pronominal affixesin both of theselanguagesare referentialand definite in all but one of their uses,a usetypical of the independentpronounsof Germanand Englishas well. Non-referentialmentionsare generallymadewith alternativeconstructions. Termsusedfor the markersat various stagesalong the diachronic path vary considerably.As discussedby Siewierska(1999) and others, the hypothesiseddiachronic evolution results in a cline so authorsdiffer in that doesnot lend itself to easysegmentation, the number of types of marker they distinguish and the terms they usefor each.Somereferto al1markersalongthe clineas'agreement markers'; others use that term only for pronominal affixes and redundantinflection; still othersuseit only for redundantinflection. The schemaadopted here is the tripartite division proposed by and implicit in the work of Evans.FoliowingSiewierska Siewierska and Evans, markers at the three stageswill be referred to as (i) independentpronouns, (ii) pronominal affxes and (iii) redundant markers. grammaticalagreement 2. RBTSRENTTAI-IrY AND DEFINTTENESS

The notion of referenceis rarely given a succinctdefiaition in the literature on semantics.The concepttendsinsteadto be introduced by example.Lyons (1977:174)statesthat'the term "reference"has and to do with the relationshipwhich holdsbetweenan expression what that expression stands for on particular occasions of its utterance'.He providesthe illustrationbelow. When a sentencelike 'Napoleonis a Corsican'is uttered to make a statement,we will say that the speakerrefers to a certain individual (Napoleon) by means of the referring

- disk/sr - 15:22 101-2/os-mithun.3d - 1E/5/3 [:pdrurrnsrrrps

socIErY101,2003 oF THEPHILoLoGICAL 240 rRANsAcrIoNs expression.If the referenceis successful,the referring expression will correctly identify for the hearer the individual in question:the referent.(Lyons 1977:t77) the notion ofreferencethroughclause Chafe(1994)approaches function.Onecanthink of a clauseasverbalisingthe ideaof an eventof starc. Each of these event or state ideas contains within it other' included ideasthat can be said to be participan s in the events or states.Theseparticipants are typically the ideas of people, objects, or abstractions,for which the term refercnts is appropriate. . . . With a few exceptionssuch as raining a,nd bi'eingcold (of the weather), things do not happen and states do not exist without the inclusion of referentswho perform them, are affected by them, or participate in them in other ways. . . . It is important to keep in mind, however,that in this usageevents,states,and referentsare all ideas that exist in the minds of speakersand listeners.Whether or not they have correlatesin the "real world" is irrelevant. I can (and do) think of the featsof ScarlettO'Hara as naturally as those of Marilyn Monroe. That only one of these teferents ever existed in "reality" makes no difference to my thought or speech.(Chafe 1994: 67). Both Lyons and Chafe distinguish several kinds of referents: specific individuals (individual referents), groups of individuals (group referents)and typical instancesof a class(genericreferents)' But not all linguistic expressionsevoke the idea of a particular NPs, individual,groupor class.Examplesof Englishnon-referential used when there is no referent at all, either particular or generic, includethosecitedby Chafein (7). (7) SomeEnglishnon-referentialNPs (Chafe1994:103-4) a. NPs that specifymore fully the nature of an event He lovestellingjokes. b. Indefnite pronouns whateverthe casemaYbe c. Non-specificmentionsin irrealis contexts I think I'll buy a newsPaPer.

- disk/sr 101-2105-mithun.3d - 15:22 - 18/5f3 lcl3drufirpsfrrps

MITHUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMBNT

nA l

(7) d. Negativepronouns No oneever went to Seattleon their way to somewhereelse. e. Contentquestionwords Who told you that? f. Non-referentiali/ It is raining. The term 'definiteness'generallyrefersto the grammaticalencoding of identitrability. Chafe (199a: 93) defines the property of identifiablity very simply: 'An identifiablereferentis onethe speaker assumesthe listener will be able to identify'. Identifiable referents to bealreadyshared Theyare:i. assumed sharethreecharacteristics. by the listener; ii. verbalisedin a sufficiently identifying way; iii. contextuallysalient.By (i), an identffiablereferentis assumedby the speakerto be alreadypart of the hearet'sknowledge.This knowledgemight be direct, asin I'vefed thedag,whereboth speakerand listenerare alreadyfamiliar with the family pet. It might comefrom asin Chafe's prior discourse.Or it might be derivedby association, gals Volkswagen, and they were in a These exampleof the horn in kepthonkin'thehorn.Criterion(ii) reflectsthe fact that a speakeris obligated to categorisea sharedreferent in a way that allows the for identilistenerto identify it. The linguisticresourcesnecessary pronoun alonemay in some cases a the situation: ficationvary with be sufficient,in others a demonstrativemay be appropriate, and in still othersa commonnoun, a modified noun or a proper name, may Criterion(iii), contextualsalience,'hasto do with the be necessary. degreeto which a referent "stands out" from other referentsthat might be categorisedin the sameway. It may be establishedby the discourse,by the environment within which a conversation takes place,by the socialgroup to which the partipants in a conversation of humanexperiencr'(Chafe1994:100). belong,orby commonness identifiability aredistinctbut related'Thefeature Referentialityand of identifiability is irrelevant for two kinds of NP: thosewith generic referentsand thosewith no referentat all (Chafe1994:101-5). 3. CSNTRAI- At-,c.sKAN YUP'K

Central Alaskan Yup'ik is a languageof the Eskimo-Aleut family Alaska. Yup'ik verbsconsistof an initial spokenin southwestern

18/58- 15:22-disk/sr 101-2/0$mithun.3dlc:/3druflrpsilrps

socIErY101,2003 oF THEPHILOLOGICAL 242 rRANsAcrroNs root, optionally followed by one or more derivational or modifying suffixes,plus an obligatory inflectional ending.The endingcontains a mood suffix that usually distinguishestransitivity, and a pronominal suffx identifying the core arguments of the clause' In the examplescited here, the first line representsthe utterance ln the community orthography; the second, a segmentation into morphemes;the third, morpheme-by-morphemeglossing;and the fourth, a free translation. (8) Yup'ik verb structure Nayuruararput. nayur-uar-ar-Put 1.pr/3.pr purpose'rRANsIsrrvE.INDIcarnn' serious. e-without. observ 'We watchedthem for sometime.' The pronominal suffixes do not distinguish gender, but they do distinguishfour persons(frst, second,third and corefetentialthird), three numbers (singular, dual and plural), and two grammatical roles. (The coreferentialthird-personcatogory,abbreviatedn, is used for participants that are coreferential with the subject of that clauseor a higher one.)There are no independentpronouns comparableto the unstressedpronouns of English or German. forms meaning,for example,'I (Independentemphatic./contrastive myself' exist, but they are not equivalent to English or German unstressedpronouns. They are used only in pragmatically marked contexts.) Verbs with their pronominal suffixes can' and often as in themselves, do, constitutecomplete,grammaticalsentences above.

3.1. Referentialityin Yup'ik In languageswith independentpronounslike Englishor German, the referenceof the pronounscan be establishedin a number of ways. Similar strategiescan be seenbehind the use of the Yup'ik pronominal suffxes. The passagebelow comes from a family conversationabout a hunting trip. The pronominal suffixesare underscored.

- 18/5/3 101-z/otmithun.3d - 15:22-disk/sr lc:/3drufrreslrres

MITHUAN - PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT

(9) Yup'ik otter an€cdote(ElenaCharles,speakerp.c.) a. Ayaginarpiuq, AyaginarPi-u-q do-rNrn.tNorc-3.sc name 'Ayaginarsaid, b. "Tang!"-gguq"Cuignilnguut! cuignilngur-t tang-ggq : iootrl QUoTATI\,"E otter-PL "Look! Otters! tang c. Atak-gguq tang atak:ggug : well.then r:EAr.sIYlook What do you say d. arulaiqarluta arula-ir-qarJu-ta be.in.motion-xwi-brueft-sulonorN,lrrvs-1.pr we stop brieflY " e. naluqaqurlaput. nayur-qaqur-la-put obser ve-intermit tently' oP'tATrvE-l.Pt13.PL and watchthemfor a while?" f. Angerluku, anger-1u-ku 4/'S}'El-SUBORDINATIVE-R/3.SG

I answeredhim, g. "Kiik patagmekpisqelluku." kiiki patagmekpi-sqe-lu-ku hurry at.once do-ask-suronlrNATlvE-BR/3.sc "Hurry, ask him to do it!" h. Arulaiqerluta arula-ir-qerteJu-ta be.in motion-NpcATrvE-/4st-suBoRDrNATnE-l,PL We stoppedquicklY i nayuruararput. nayur-uar-ar-Put purpose'rn.nrorc-n1.prl3.pr obser ve-without.serious. and we watchedthem for sometime.

243

- 15:22 101-2/osmithun.3d - disk/sr - 18/5/3 lc:Fdprfrpsrras

2M

TRANsAcrIoNsoF rm Ps[oLocIcAL socIErY l0l, 2003

j. rliit

pugellrani puge-ller-ani coN'rsMPonenl'r-3'sc associate-3.ptJu; sur/ace-pesr. When one of them surfaced, egrnian k. nutegariini egmian n uteg-arte-a-ani shoot-suddenly-coNsEQUENTIAL-3R -x:13.w r ight.away he shot it right away l. nallarrluku. nallarle-lu-ku I it-sunonoruerrw-pJ3.sc and he hit it.' ilang-at

In languageswith independentpronouns, the referenceof firstpronounsis established by the speechevent:firstand second-person personpronouns are directly interpretedasrepresentingthe speaker (with perhaps others) and second-personpronouns as the hearer (with perhapsothers).The samedirect interpretation can be seenof pronominal suffixes.An example Yup'ik first- and second-person (h-i) 'We stoppedquickly and we watched above: appearsin lines themfor sometime'. The referenceof independentthird-person pronouns in English and other languagescan be establishedby a lexical nominal in prior discourse.The samestrategyca:rbe seenin line (e): 'Otters! What do you say we stop and watch them for a while?'. The nominal antecedentneed not be in the immediatelyprecedingsentence. The next referenceto the otters was a pronominal suffix several lines later: 'Hurry! Ask him to do it! We stopped quickly and watchedthem for sometime' (i). Reference can also be established through inference and/or extralinguisticcontext.When Mrs. Charlessaid, 'Hurry! Ask him to do it!' (g) the referent of the pronominal suffx 'him' was the personoperatingthe motor on the boat. The referencewas not establishedby a lexical antecedent,but it was easily inferred from the situation without further explanation: this was the only person in a position to carry out the suggestion. So far the principles for establishing the referenceof Yup'ik pronominal suffixesare similar to those for establishingthe

- 1E/58- 15:22 101-2/05-mithun.3d - disk/sr lc:/3drurrrpsIras

MTTHUAN- pRoNouNs AND AGREEMENT

245

referenceof English or German independeutpronouns. A referent may be designatedby a pronominal suffx so long as it can be associatedwith an idea of a particular individual, a group of individuals or a typical member of a class.But it is obvious from the ottor anecdotethat Yup'ik pronominal suffixes differ in an important way from English and German pronouns.They may co-occurwith a coreferentiallexical nominal in the sameclause,and the reference.We saw this it can be this nominal that establishes structure in the opening sentenceof the anecdotewith the name Ayaginarand later with the nominal iliit 'one of them'. (9) Yup'ik otter anecdote(ElenaCharles,speakerp.c.) a. Ayaginar piuq, Ayaginarpi-u-q do-wrn.rNotc-3.sc name 'Ayaginarsaid, j. niir pugellrani puge-ller-ani ilang-at associate-3.ptisc sar/oce-rasr.coNTEMPonanw-3.sc 'When oneof them surfaced,' . . ' In English and German, referencecan be establishedwithin the clausefor somepronouns:Mary alwaystakesher dog with het. Tlte only restriction in theselanguagesis against the establishmentof pronominal referencefor core argumentsby material within the clause:Mary she takes her ilog with her. Ytrp'ik simply lacks this in all of the same canbe established restriction.In Yup'ik, reference context, by extralinguistic places as in English and German, inference,the speechact itself and linguistic context beyond the clause,and within the clauseas well. This phenomenonwill be furtherin section4. discussed All of the pronominal suffxesin the otter anecdoteare referential. But asEvans(1999)points out, pronominal affixesin languageslike Yup'ik must be presentin everyclause.Speakersof Yup'ik, like speakersof other languages,do make non-referentialmentions. Evansconcludesthat pronominalaffxes,particularlythoserepresenting direct objects,mustbeincapableof distinguishingreferentiality.A closerlook at the way Yup'ik speakersusetheir language,however, shows that pronominal suffxes are as referential and definite as

- 15:22 101-2/0fFmithun.3d - disk/sr - 18/5/3 lc:/3drufrrps[rps

socIErY101,2003 oF THEPHILoLocIcAL 246 rRANsAcrroNs Englishpronouns.Non-referentialmentionsaregenerallymadewith alternativeconstructionsthat avoid the useof pronominalsuffixes. 3.2. Yup'ikgenericreference At the edgeof referentialityis genericreference.Genericmentions are usually classified as referential by semanticists,but generic referenceis in a sensemore abstract than other reference,in that it evokesa typical member of a class,rather than an identifiable individualin the rea.lworld. Evans(1999:265)notesthat in English 'third personpersonalpronounsdo and other Europeanlanguages, generic interpretation not allow a [as in (l0a)]; to obtain this a bare plural must be usedinsteadof a pronoun', as in (10b). (10) Specificand genericreference(Evans1999:265) a. Shescoldsthem. b. Shescoldspeople. Evansreports that in Bininj Gun-wok, both can be encodedwith a bound objectprefix. (11) Bininj Gun-wok(Gun-djeihmi)pluralobjects(Evans1999:265) alege daluk gaban-du-ng. FEM.DEMwoman 3l3.pt--scold-r.loN.pA'sr

'That womanscoldspeople.'or 'That womanis scoldingthem.' In many languages,certain pronouns have a conventionalised genericuse,like Englishyoz and they.Evanscites the exampleThey ln alwaystry to get you to pay more thanyoa want to (1999:-257). Yup'ik, pronominal suffixesare never given genericreadingson their own. Pronominal suffxes are used only when the referent A Yup'ik constructiontranslatedwith they evoke is established. (12). her husbandreturnedfrom a hunt When genericreferenceis in Mrs. Charlesgreetedhim with this remark, empty-handed, (12) Yup'ik genericreference(ElenaCharles,speakerp.c.) Canrituq. ca-nrite-u-q do. som et hing -t*o-INTR.TNDIc-3. sG

'It's a1lright.

- disk/sr 101-2/o5mithun.3d -'18/s/3- 15:22 lc:pdru/rresrras

MITHUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT

247

piterrlainayuitut. Yuut pi-te-rrlainar-yu-ite-u-t yuk-t pef son-"Lthing-catch-conI tantIy-HA!-NEG-INTR.TNDIC-3.PL Peopledon't alwayscatchgame.' The noun yuut 'people' establisheda referent that was then picked up in the pronominalsuffix-l'they'on the verb.This verb,with its third-person-pluralpronominal suffx, could not be usedwithout an identifiablereferent.It couldconstituteaperfectlyacceptablesentence alone,but thepronominal suffx could only beinterpretedasreferring to some referent establishedby previous discourseor the extralinguisticcontext:Piterrldinayuitut'Theydon't alwayscatchgame'. 3.3. Yup'ik quaffiing noms Another type of potentially non-referential expressionin English involves nouns that qualify the nature of an event, as in Chafe's exampleHe lovestellingiokes. Such entities are not referred to by pronominalsuffixesin the Yup'ik counterpartsto theseexpressions' A differentkind of constructionis used. The languagecontainsan extensiveinventory of derivational suffixes,among them many verbalisers,some with quite concrete meanings.The verb 'to fish' in (13)is basedon the noun root neqe'fish, food' with a verbalisingsuffix-ssur-'hunt, catch'. p.c.) (13) Yup'ik denominalverbderivation(GeorgeCharles,speaker Neqssurnaurtut-llu. neqe-ssur-naur-tu-t: llu fi sh-hunt-customorily-nun.rlorc-3.pr : and 'And theyusedto fish.' The baseof the verb, the noun root neqe' 'fish', is not referential,so the fish are not representedin the pronominal suffix, and the verb is intransitive. Evansnotesthat'have' constructionsoften take non-referential objects.The kind of Yup'ik denominalintransitiveconstruction item The possessed seenin (13)is alsousedto predicatepossession. noun The the clause. argument of is not expressedas a core representingit simply servesas the baseof the verb, narrowing the kind of ownershippredicated.

- 1E/sF-'15:22- disk/sr 101-2/05-mithun.3d jc:Fd/J,.rasrrres

oF rrrEPlrLoLoGIcALsocIErY101,2003 248 rRANsAcrroNs (GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.) (14) Yup'ik possession aataka. Qimugtengqerrlallruuq aata-ka qimugte-ngqerr-1arJlru-u-q dog-have-ttst-Ylrsr-nrrn.rxorc-3.sGfat her' l.scIsG mYfather he usedto dog-hate 'My father usedto havedogs.' Suchdenominalintransitive constructionsare alsousedto predicate and absenceof entities. the presence (ElenaCharles,speakerp.c.) (15) Yup'ik presence Campaput YungqellruYaqelliniuq. yug-ngqerrJlru-yaqeJlini-u-q campa-put e-nAst-actually-apparentlycamp-l.ttlsc person-hat INTR.INDIc-3.sG

our camp (ms) apparentlyit had actually person-had 'Therehad apparentlybeenpeopleat our camp.' (16) Yup'ik absence@lenaCharles,speakerp.c.) nukalPiartaicuunateng' Nunat nukalpiar-taite-yuite-na-teng nuna-t villag e-tt- man.in.p rime'lack-nas.Nnc-suBoRDrNATrvr-3.PL villages they are not usuallylacking in hunters 'The villagesare neverwithout a man in his prime (a good hunter and Provider).' Thesedenominal constructionsservemany of the samekinds of lexical,syntacticand discoursepurposesas noun incorporationin other languages(Mithun 1998a,b).While they are probably descended from noun-verb compounds, they are now structurally distinct. The morphemeswith verb-like meaningssuch as 'hunt', 'have'and 'lack' areno longerroots,but ratherderivationalsuffixes. They form a large but closedset, and neveroccur in initial position in words,the only positionin which roots occur. in YuP'ik 3.4. Definiteness Evans (1999)proposesthat an important differencebetweenthe independentpronouns of English and German on the one hand, and the pronominal affixesof polysyntheticlanguageson the other,

* disk/sr - 15:22 101-2l0t nithun.3d - 1815/3 lc:/3drufirpsflrps

MITHUAN - PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT

249

is the fact that independentpronouns are always definite, while pronominal affixesmay or may not be' As noted earlier,pronominal suffxes in Yup'ik and other polysyntheticlanguagesare used only for core arguments.Indefinite core argumentsare actually relatively rare in Yup'ik. Participants are usually introduced in other gramdo occurwith lexicalnominalsthat maticalpositions.But sentences can be interpretedasindefinite, that is, with nominalsthat represent entities not previously idenffiable to the audience.(Definitenessis not markedformally in Yup'ik.) (17) Yup'ik indefinitenominal (ElenaCharles,speakerp.c.) Allaneq-am allaneq: am

ikantengnaqlallruuq ikani-te-ngrraqe-la-llru-u-q

Over.there.RESTR-be-'r/-HAB-PASTst/anger: EMPIdATIC rNtn.nrotc-3.sc 'A strangertried to stayover there qikertarrarmi. qikertar-rrar-mi isIand-li ttIe-t oc t'rtw on a little island.' At issuehereis whetherpronominalaffixesthat are coreferential with indefinite lexical nominals must themselvesbe considered like We know that in languages indefinite,that is, non-identifiable. definiteness not have the same pronouns need English, independent value as their lexical antecedents.English speakersregularly introduce referents with an indefinite NP, then subsequentlyrefer to them with (definite)pronourrs:A sttangertried to stay overthere-He nevermanagedto catchanyfsh. Yup'ik pronominal suffxesdo differ ftom English independentpronouns in that their referentsmay be identified within the sameclause.(Evans notes that even English allows speakersto establishthe referenceof pronouns within the samesentence,as in He who hesitatesis lost.) Yup'ik has gone further than many languagesin prohibiting indefinite transitive patients altogether. Such participants can be only asobliques,markedwith the ablativecase.Recountexpressed ing a story abouttwo hunters,Mr. Charlesnotedthat theycaughta small bird. The indefinite norninal a small b#d could not be castas a

- disk/sr 101-2/oFmithun.3d - 1E/5/3 - 15:22 lc:pdrurrDsllrps

250 rRANsAcrroNs oF Tm pr LoLocIcALsocIETY101,2003 core argument,so it was expressedas an oblique (ablative)and not represented in the pronominalsuffx. (18) Yup'ik indefinite(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.) Yaqulcuarmek-llu-gguq, yaquJek-cuar-rnek: llu : gBuQ wing-haveJit tle-sn,rl.'rmn: a/so: nrmsev a little bird, they say 'It seemsthosetwo pitellinilutek taukuk. pitellini-lu-tek tauku-k lfrqt.RlsrR-DU catch.game-app arenl/)r-strBoRDrNA:rrvr-3.ou thosetwo they two apparentlycaught caughta smallbird.' Once introduced, the bird was consideredidentifiable (defiaite), so it could be expressedas a core a.rgumentand referred to by pronominal suffixes. (19) Yup'ik definite(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.) Wani-wa nerevkenaku, now : right nere-vke-na-ku right now g4'-NBG-SUBORDINATTVE-By'3.SC right now wenot edtingit now 'Let's not eat it right now, . . . ' Many languages showprohibitionsagainstindefiniteor non-specific core arguments.The Yup'ik prohibition againstindefinite transitive absolutivesprobably reflectsthe fact that this is one of the most mentions:I wanta cat; I'll get a commonpositionsfor non-specific cat; I'm look@ for a cat.The choiceof an altemativeconstruction, in which the participant is not expressedas a core argument,was apparently generalised. 3.5. Yup'ik indefnitepro forms 'someone' , 'something' Sincethey are referential and definite, English anaphoricpronouns to mean'someone'or 'something'. arenot usedwith openreference a sentence Iike He borrowedi/ to mean do not use Englishspeakers

- 15:22 - 1E/5/3 101-2/osmithun.sd - disk/sr lcl3druIrrpsfrrps

MITHUAN _ PRONOI.INS AND AGREEMBNT

25I

'someoneborrowedit', evenif they know that the borrowerwasa man. Similarly, they do not use a sentencelike He married her to mean 'He married someone'.The sameprinciples hold for Yup'ik pronominalsuffixes.Theyareusedonly whenthereis an identifiable referent. (20) Yup'ik third-personreference(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.) Navrallruyugnarqaa. navrarJlru-yugnarqe-a-a borrow-PAsr-probabl7-rn.nuc-3.sc/3.sl; 'He borrowedit.' Not: 'someoneborrowedit.' 'He borrowedsomething.' In order to expressa statementlike 'Someonemust have borrowed my knife', speakersestablisha hypothetical referent with an independentpro form 'someone',and referto this hypotheticalreferent pronominallywithin the verb. (21) Yup'ik independentindefnite (GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.) nuussiqa navrallruyugnarqaa. Kitum nuussiq-ka nawar-llru-yugtarqe-a-a. kitum knife-l.sclso borrow'vtsr-probably' satneone.Enc TR.INDIC-3.SG/3.SG

'someonemust haveborrowedmy knife'' Pronomiaal suffxes referring to transitive patientsshow the same pattern.The Yup'ik sentencain (19) can mean only 'He married her' or'She marriedhim'. It cannotbe interpretedas 'He married The pronominalsuffixmust be referential' someone'. (22) Yup'ik (GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c', elicited) Kassuutellrua. kassuute-llru-a-a IDICATTVE-3. SG/3.SG m4rrl-PAST-TRANSTTTVE.n 'He married her.' or 'She married him.' Not: 'He married someone.' To express 'He married someone' there are two options. If the identity of the bride is unimportant in the discourseat that point,

- 18/5/3 101-z/os-mithun.3d - 1s:22- disk/sl lc:pdrufrresfrres

oF TrtEPHILoLocIcALsocIETY101,2003 252 TRANsAcrIoNs an intransitive form of the verb marry is used,with no pronominal referenceto the indefinitepatient. elicited) (GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c., (23) Yup'ik detransitivisation Kassuutellruuq. kassuute-llru-u-q m4rrl-pAsr-INTRANSITIvE.nrprclrrw-3.sc : 'He got married.' 'He married(someone).' If the speakerwishes to establish a refetent with an independent indefinite nominal representingthe semanticpatient of an event, rather than simply leaving it unspecified,an independentpro form meaning'someone'or 'something'can be used.As an indefinite, however,it cafixot qualify as the absolutive of a transitive clause. An intransitiveverb is usedinstead,and there is no pronominal mention of the indefiniteparticipant. The indefinitepro form is in an obliquecase,the ablative. (24) Yup'ik indefinitepatient(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.,elicited) tangellrua. a. Kitumek tangerr-llru-u-a kitu-mek I .sG someone- AB;LATTV!see-PAsr-INTRANSTTTVB.INDICATIYE-

'I sawsomebody.' nalkutuq. b. Camek nalke-ute-u-q ca-mek something - ABLATT,,IE f nd-orrn.lNsrrwlsER-INTRANsnrvE. INDIC- T.SG

'I found something.' Evans(1999:270)hasdevisedan ingenioustest for referentiality that involves repetition. A Bininj Gun-Wok adverbialprefix mean1ngagain canbeused(a) for exactrcplays(Hefell overagain),@) fot transition back to a previous state (Theiungle gretv back over the ruins again) and (c) for replays with token replacement,that is, repetitionof actionsin which one or more participantsis replaced andI caught with anotherofthe sametype (I caughtafish yesterday, (one) again today; I saw someonein there yesterday, and saw someoneelsein therc again today). It is type (c) that is of interest here. Evansreports that in Bininj Gun-wok, a regular third-person pronominal prefix can appear in such consfuctions meaning

- 18/58- 15:22 101-2/0$mithun.3d - disk/sr lc:pdrurrfpsrras

MITHUAN ' PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT

253

'another,someoneelse',wherea personalpronoun would not be acceptablein English. (25) Bininj Cun-wok (Kunwinjku) replay (Evans 1999:271' citing Carroll 1995:363) wanjh bi-yawoyh-yam-i then 3/3ncrcn.oanct.vts'r'again-spear-PAsT.IMPRF na-buyika masc-other 'then he would (go againand) spearanother' Under repetition, Yup'ik pronominal suffixespattern like English independentpronouns:their referencemust remain constant.The transitiveverb in (26a)can beusedonly if the participant is the same through the repetition, that is, if the groom married the same woman again. If he married someoneelsethe secondtime around, the intransitiveverb in (26b) must be used,with no pronominal referenceto the bride. (26) Yup'ik pronominalsuffxeswith repetition(GeorgeCharles, speakerp.c.,elicited) a. Ataamcali kassuutellrua. ataam cali kassuute-llru-a-a again still mdrrl'-PAsr-TR.INDIc-3.sG/3'sG 'He marriedher again.' b. Ataam cali kassuutellruuq' ataam cali kassute-lku-u-q again still r??drrl-PAsr-INTR.rr'mrc-3.sc 'He remarried.' This contrastswith the interpretation of the noun roots that serveas the basis for denominal verbs. Sincethey are non-referential,they neednot be interpretedwith constantreference. (27) Yup'ik denominalverb with repetition(Jacobson1984:525) Tuntutenqigtuq. tuntuk-te-nqigte-u-q 3.sc car ibou-catch-agam-rNTR.INDrc'He caughtcaribouagain.' The structureof the Bininj Gun'wok examplein (25)above,'then

- disk/sr - 15:22 101-2/0$mithun.3d - 18/5/3 lc:pdprrrpsrras

socIETY101,2003 oF TrrE?HrLoLoGlcAL 254 TRANsAcrIoNs he would go again and spearanother', is in the end probably much like its counterpartsin Yup'ik and other languageswith pronominal affixes. The Bininj Gun-wok again prefix may certainly have specialpropertiesthat distinguishit from the Englishadverb'But rn"ft"i it doesor not, the independentnominal 'other' in 'then other'has the capacityto establisha referent, he.would.spear.it which is referredto by the pronominal prefix in the verb. 3.6. Yup'iknon'sPecifcmentions Among the types of non-referential mentions are non-specific nominals, those for which there is not necessarilyany referent at a1l.Suchmentionsoccur,for example,in irrealiscontexts,as in the frequently citedI want to marry an lrtshman,wherethe speakerhas no particular Irishman in mind. The grammar of Yup'ik ensures that suchentitiesare neverrepresentedby pronominal suffixes'The nominalsin (28)and (29)belowcan be understoodas non-specific' The speakermay utter the first without having a particular woman in mind. andthe secondwithout knowingwhethera potentialhelper exists. mention(GeorgeCharles,speakerp'c', (28) Yup'ik non-specific elicited) Kassuucugtua kassuute-1rrg-tu-a malryr-DEsIDERATTvE-rNTR.rNDlc-1.sG

'I want to marry yupiarmek yuk-piar-mek

arnarnek. arnar-mek

p er son- r eal - ASLATrVE w Oman- A3.LATr\n

a Yup'ik woman.' mention(GeorgeCharles,speakerp'c') (29) Yup'ik non-specific Yuartua yuar-tu-a search.for -rstx.rNDlc-l.sG' 'I am looking for

- disk/sr 101-2/05-tnithun.3d - 18/5F- 15:22 lcX3drufrrpsfirps

MITHUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT

255

ikayurtakamnek. ikayur-ta-kar-mnek l.sc/sc.mmrrw rsm-uNREALrsED.FUTURE.nrrNcfte/p-NorvnN,n my potential helper someoneto helpme.' Becauseof the prohibition against indefinite transitive patients in Yup'ik , thesenon-specificentitiesarecastasobliques(ablatives).The clausesare thus grammaticallyintransitive, and there is no pronominal relerenceto eitherthe Yup'ik womanor the potentialhelper. undernegation:'no one','nothing' 3.7. Yup'ikindefinites Other commonly cited non-referential expressionsare negated indefinitessuch as 'no one', 'not anyone', 'nothing' and 'not anything'. As noted, Yup'ik pronominal suffixes are always referential, even under negation. The transitive clause in (30a) can be used only with a specific,referential patient. If the patient is non-referential, an intransitive version like that in (30b) must be used, with no pronominal referenceto the non-existent individual. (30) Yup'ik pronominalsuffxeswith negation(GeorgeCharles, speakerp.c.,elicited) a. Kassuutenritaa. kassuute-nrite-a-a mar f y -NEGATIVE-TR.rNDIC-3. SG/3.SG

'He didn't marry her.' b. Kassuutenrituq. kassuute-nrite-u-q 3.sc rrl4//y-NEGATTW-INTR.TNDIC'He didn't marry anyone.' There is also an alternative construction for expressingnegative A hypothetical indefinites,parallelto that usedfor non-negatives. referentcan be establishedwith an independentindefinite 'someone' or'something', which is then referredto in statementsabout that hypotheticalworld. Suchstatemeotscan be negated:'It is not the casethat someonecame'.

- disk/sr 101-2/05-mithun.3d - 18/5p- 15:22 lc:Fdp/rrpslrrps

256 rRANsAcrIoNsoF rr{E PHrLoLocrcALsocIETY101,2003 (31) Yup'ik indefnite negation(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.) tainrituq. a. Kina tai-nrite-u-q kina someonecome-NBGATIvE-rNtn.INorc-3.sc 'No onecame-' tangenritae. b. Kinkut tangerr-nrite-a-a kinkut INDIc-3.Pr-/3'sc someone.PLsee-NEoATrvE-TR. him.' one saw 'No Since the independent indefinite pro forms are indefinite, they cannot be cast as transitive absolutives.They appear as obliques (ablatives),and the verb is intransitive. (32) Yup'ik indefinitenegation(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c.) tangellrunrituq' a. Kitumek tangerr-llru-nrite-u-q kitu-mek SOMEONE. ABLATI\IB JEE-PAST-NEGATIVE'INTRANSITTVE. INDIC-J.SG

'He didn't seeanYoneat all.' nalkutenrituq. b. Camek nalke-ute-nrite-u-q ca-mek g n-l,t,.twn e t h in som f nd-orruNsrrrvISER-NEG-INTR. TNDIC.J.SG

'Shedidn't find aqthing at all.' j.8. Yup'ikconlentqueslions Other non-referring expressionsare question words. Question may not be referential,but they can establisha words themselves referentwhich is then referredto pronominally. Content questions of coursepresupposethe existenceof the entities to be identified. the existence of peopleat a feast. The questionin (33)presupposed (33) Yup'ik contentquestion(GeorgeCharles,speakerp.c') Kinkut-llu tuantellruat? kirkut : llu tuan-te-llru-a-et to-PAsr-TR.INDIc-3.pr,/3.sc who.pt-=too there.rlESTp.-gI. and whoall they wentto thatPlace 'So whoall was there?'

101-2/0Smithun.3d - diskrfsr - 18/58- 15:22 lcl3drufrresfrres

MITHUAN _ PRONOIINS AND AGREEMENT

25'I

The prohibition against indefinite transitive patients extends to questionwords, which are tle sameas indefinite pro forms, so the questionwordsusedfor theseforms are oblique. (34) Yup'ik content question(ElizabethAli, speakerp'c.) Camek ca-mek

neqengqercit? neqe-ngqerr-cl-t

2.sG something-ABil,Nrr\IE food-have-nil^nxxocATrvE 'What do you have to eat?' 3.9. Yup'ik weatherterms There is one context in which Yup'ik pronominal suffixesare used The final -4 in the verbs non-referentially:weather expressions. singular. belowis the third-person (35) Yup'ik weatherexpressions a. Ivsirtuq. ivsir-tu-q raln-nffn.tNorc-3.sc 'It is raining.' Akercirtu-q. 'It is sunnY.' b. c. Kavcirtu-q 'It is hailing.' d. Taicirtu-q. 'It is foggY.' 'It is snowing.' e. Qanirtu-q It would be difficult, however,to arguethat theseexamplesreveala differencein referentiality or definitenessbetweenYup'ik pronompronouns.English inal suffixesand Englishor Germanindependent it and German esare usedin exactly the sameway: It is raining, Es tegnet. The Yup'ik pronominal suffixes thus match the independent pronouns of English and German in referentiality and deflniteness in all ways but one. Their referentiality and identifiability can be establishednot only by the extralinguistic context, inference,the speechevent and a lexical nominal elsewherein the discoutse,but alsoby a lexical nominal in the sameclause.A key to unpackingthe featuresof referentiality and identifiability is the recognition that a non-referentialor non-identifiablelexicalnominalmay introducea

101-2/05-|nithun.3d - 16/58- 15:22- disk/sr [:pdruIrrpsirrps

socIETY101'2003 oF rrrEPHILoLocIcAL 258 TRANsAcrIoNs referent which is then referred to by referential and definite pronominal affixes. The lexical nominal aad pronominal a-ffxes need not match each other in referentiality or identifiability. Non-referentialmentions in Yup'ik are accomplishedby other constructions:derivationand detransitivisation. 4. Nlvero The fact that the referentialityand definitenessvaluesof pronominal affixesareindependentof thoseof the lexicalnominalsthat establish their referenc€is particularly easyto seein Navajo. Navajo is an Athabaskan languagespoken in the southwesternUnited States, primarily in Arizona and New Mexico. It is polysynthetic, but it differstypologically in a numberof waysfrom Yup'ik. While Yup'ik is exclusivelysuffixing,Navajo is exclusivd prefixing.While Yup'ik independentnominals are marked for number and case,Navajo nominals are not. The meaningsexpressedby affixesare generally quite different. But nearly all of the properties of the Yup'ik pronominal suffxes are echoedin the Navajo pronorninal prefxes. In Navajo asin Yup'ik, obligatory pronominal affixeson everyverb identify the core argumentsof the clause.The Navajo pronominal prefixes,like the Yup'ik suffixes,distinguishnumber and grammalical role. There are also severalcategoriesof third person' As in Yup'ik, there are no independentpronouns comparableto the unstressedindependent pronouns of English or German. Verbs with their pronominal prefixescan constitutecompletegrammatical A sampleverb is in (36). in themselves. sentences (36) Navajo verb (Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c.) Chihidahiihriid. ch'ihi-da-0-hi-iid-l-tt'iid l.Pt-.xnt-rxfy. rapilly.Yvs out.horizontallyonn-3.osJ-sBRrATftEanother.' one after 'We tfuew them out In Navajo as in Yup'ik, the basic pronominal prefixesare used only referentially, evenwhen they are formally zero, like the thirdperson object preflx in (36) above.Non-referentialmentionsare made with alternativeconstluctions.Some are the same as in Yup'ik, and some are different.Navajo containsno denominal

- disk/sr 101-2/05-mithun.3d - |8/58- 15:22 lc:/3drurrrpslras

MITI{UAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT

259

verb derivation like that seenin Yup'ik, or noun incorporation, though some other Athabaskanlanguagesdo' It does contain detransitivising morphology, however, which eliminates nonreferential entities from expression as core arguments, and in pronominalprefixes. arcordinglyfrom expression 4.1. Navajodetransitirisation Languagesof the Athabaskal family contain a small set of old derivational prefixes, traditionally (and inappropriately) termed 'classifiers'.Their basic function is to alter transitivity. Two of these.-/- and -d-, serveto detransitiviseverbs. The effect of such detransitivisationcan be seenin (37), wherethere is no pronominal referencsto the agent,the personor peopleputting thingsaway. (Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c.) (37) Navajo detransitivisation Hasht'e'nii'nil. hasht'e-'-ni-d-nil mo ve.sever a l. obi ect s.PRF in. or der -UNSp,o&J-TRM-DETRANSITIVER:

'Thingswereput away.' Transitivity alternations involving these prefixes are pervasive, though their semanticsare not always transparent, becausethey have been used to form lexical items for specificpurposes,lexical items that can continueto developsemanticallyas independent entities. 4.2. The Navajopronominalcalegories As noted above,Evans(1999:255)has proposedthat pronominal a.ffixesmust differ from independent pronouns in lacking the capacity to distinguish referentiality and definiteness.Particularly pertinentto this issueare the Navajo pronominalcategories. 4.2.1. TheNavajobasicpronominalptefixes The basicsubjectpronominal prefixescan be seenin the paradign in (38), These verbs are based on the imperfective form -nd of the stem 'play', with the atelic prefix na-'atound'. (Due to extensive in individualprefixescanvary considerably phonologicalprocesses,

101-2/0+mithun,3d - 18/5/3 - 15:22-disk/sr lc:/3drurrnsrrQs

260 rRANsAcrIoNsoF rrrE PHILoLocrcALsocIErY101,2003 their shapes,and it can be difficult to discern the morphological componentsof prefix strings.)The pronominalprefixeshere have beenunderscored. (38) Navajo pronominalsubjects naashn6 'I am playing' nanin6 'you are playng' '(he or she)is playing' naan6 'we two are playing' neii'n6 naahn6 'you two areplaYing' naan6 '(they two) arePiaYing' ndeii'n6 'we (threeor more) are playing' ndaahn6 'you (threeor more) are playing' ndaan6 'they (threeor more) are playing' There are distinct prefixesfor first- and second-personsingular and dual subjects.Plurality (three or more) is indicated by a separate prefix, basicallyda-,which originatedasa distributive and still serves iszero, that functionin somecontexts.Thethird-personsubjectprefix when is, only referentially, that but eventhezeroform is alwaysused its referentis clearfrom the extralinguisticor linguistic context. Direct and indirect objects are also expressedby pronominal prefixes.The verb 'carry up' below is built on the imperfectivestem teehwith the prefixha-'ttP'. (39) Navajo pronominalobjects a. hashniheeh ha-sh-ni-l-teeh up-1.*.owscr -2.sc.suBJEcr-TRANSITTvISER-carryr.IMPRF 'you arecarryingme up' b. hanishteeh ha-ni-shj-teeh I .sc.suBJEcr-TRANsrrrvIsER-c4/TJr'.IMPRF up-2.sc.oBJEc"Tyou up' 'I am carrying c. haniheeh ha-O-ni-l-teeh c4rrl.IMPRF up-3.*.owrrr -2.sc.suBJEcr-TRANsrrrvIsER'you are carryinghim/heruP'

18/58- 15:22-disk/sr 101-2/05mithun.3dlc:pdrurrrpsrrrps

MITI{UAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT

261

With first- or second-personsubjects, the third-person object pronoun is again zero, as in (39c). But if the subject is third person,the third-person objectstake one of two forms: proximate bi- or obviativeyi-. (40) Navajo third-personobjects a. habilteeh ha-bi-0-l-teeh ap-3.m.onrrerr-oBrccr-3.srntEcr-TRANsmI\'ISERcarry.IMPRI.

'heishe/itis carrying him/heruP' b. hailteeh ha-l-0-l-teeh r4-3,orvnrrw.onlrcr-3. suBJEcr-TRANSITTvISERcatryJMPR!

'he/sheis carrying him/her/it uP' The proximateprefix br'-is usedessentiallyif the objectis higherin discoursetopicality than the subject(,4 mosquitobit him), and the obviativeprefix7r- is usedif the objectis lower (Ile swattedit). All three of thesethird-person pronominal prefixes,zero,bi- and yr'-,areusedonly referentially,that is, to evokeestablishedreferents. Repetitive constructionslike those discussedby Evans confirm the referentiality of thesepronominal prefixes,evenwhen they are zero in form. Navajo containsa prefix with meaningsessentiallythe same as that describedfor Bininj Gun-wok. It indicatesrepetitionof an action or return to a previous location, state or condition. Significantly, pronominal referencemust remain constant through the repetition. The command in (41a) could be a requestto wash an objector bathea baby.That in (4lb) is a requestto washthe same object or bathethe samebaby again.It could not be usedto ask someoneto washanotherobjector anotherbaby. (41) Navajo repetitive(Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c., elicited) a. Tdrrigis! t6-0-ni-gis iw olving.water-3.oBJEcr-2.sc.suBrrcr-ru6.Iupnr 'Washit!'

- 1ElsB-15:22 101-z/o$mithun.3d - disk/sr lc:/3dprrresrrres

oF rIrE PHrLoLocIcALsocIETY101,2003 262 TRANsAcrIoNs (41) b. Tdniinieis! t6-ni6-0-nigis involving.water -twYrrrwn-3.osJEcr-2.sc.srtBJEcr-rub.nrpnr 'Washit again!' 4.2.2. Navajogenericmentions Navajo contains a separate pronominal category for generic referenceto humans. It has the basic form ii- for subjects and Aw- for objects and possessors,and could often be translated as 'one' or 'people'.As can be seenin (42c,d), it also patternslike the British use of'one' in that continuing genericreferencesare still genericin form: 'When one isn't hungry one doesn't eat', 'One is fortunate to have one's food'. As might be expected,the genericprefixesappearin generalstatements.Statementsin this form are often used as indirect commands and for indirect referenceto the speaker. (42) Navajo genericprefx (Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c.;Goossen 1995:283.284) a. Ch'66hhn6h66shii nida'iich'id. ch'66h h66hg66shiini-da-'-ii-ch'id around-olsrn-tsNsP.oBJ-cnNnRlcfutilely avidly futilely

avidly

scf atck.IMPBS one scratching things hete and -was there

'Peoplewerestill really diggingaround.' b. Doo ijinii da. doo 'a-ii-nii ROI

TTNSP,OBJECT-GENBRIC.SIJBJECT.SaJ'.IMPRNEG

'One doesn'tsay that.' : 'Don't saythat.' c. Doo dichin iililg66 doo dichin ii-lii: g66 : because not hungercENBRrc.suBtacr'be 'When a personisn't hungrY, doo iiy{:i da. doo ii-ydri da IO'

da

GENERIC.ST,'BJECT-E4'NEGATIVE

he doesn'teat.'

- 18/5F- 1s:22- dislvsr 101-2/o$mithun.3d lc:pdrufrrpsfrrps

MTTHUAN- pRoNottNs AND AGREEMENT

(42) d. Hach'iya' hw-ch'iy4'

263

h6lfpgo h6J{ : go

GEI{RTC.POSSFSSOR-/0o d t he r e - e xis t.NETJTER.IMPRF : SUBORDINATE

one'sfood 'Oneis fortunate

that thereexists

hizhdnee'. hw-zh6nee'. /zcky.Nrurrn.rurru cENERIc.oBJEcr-6e. it isfortunatefor one, to havefood.' This category is also used for respectful reference,such as to relatives. It is used as well to track protagonists in narrative and to differentiateparticipants. For this reasonit is sometimestermed the alternatethird personor fourth personby Navajogrammarians. participants 4.2.3. Navajounspecfied As noted,if a verb like -cha'cry' is usedwith a zero third-personsubjectpronominal prefix, it can only mean 'He is crying' or 'Sheis crying',not 'someoneis crying'. (Navajoverbscannotconsistof a single syllable. If there is not sufficient morphological materia.lto prothetic'peg'syllableyr'-is added yieldtwo syllables,a meaningless for bulk. This syllable is distinct from the third-person-obviative object prefix mentionedabove and an aspectualprefix of the same shape,which occupydifferentpositionsin the prefix string.) (43) Navajo third-person subject Yicha. y!Gcha PROTITETIC-3.STJBJECT-C//,IMPRF

'He or sheis crying.' Not: 'Someoneis crying.' prefix is used' To say'someoneis crying', the unspecified-subject (The basic shapeof this prefix is a glottal stop, usually written ' in the practical orthography but omitted word-initially. Various vowels are added to it in particular contexts, however, so the prefix may appear as '-, 'a-, 'i- or 'e.) The unspecified-subject

r l8/5p- 15:22 101-2/o&mithun.3d - disk/s. lc:Fdp/rrpslrrps

264 rRANsAcrroNsoF rrll PHILoLocIcALsocIErY 101,2003 prefix is usually used to focus on an event rather than the participants. (44) Navajo unspecifiedsubject(Young 2000:36) Acha. 'a-cha UNSPBCIFIED.ST'BJECT-C/J/.DURATIVE.IMPRF

'Thereis crying,someoneis crying.' The situation is the samefor objects.With first- or second-person subjects,the third- person pronominal object prefix is zero, as in verbsmeaning'I'm eatingit' or 'I ateit' Eventhis zerois referential. The verbs with the zero object prefix cannot be usedto mean 'I'm eating' or 'I ate'. With third-personsubjects,the third-person pronominal object prefix is yi This prefix, too, is referential:it canbe usedonly to mean'He's eatingit' or 'He ateit', not 'He ate'. (45) Navajo referential objects a. Yish{1. yi-0-sh-a pRorHETIc-3,oBJEcrl.sc.suBlncr-edr.rttaPRF 'I'm eatingit.' Not: 'I'm eating.'

b. Yiviiv66'. yi-yiiy{{' PRF 3.osJEcr-coluprETrvE-ed/. 'He ate it.' Not: 'He's eating.' If the object is unspecified,the unspecified-objectprefix is used-It prefix, but it occursin hasthe sameshapeasthe unspecified-subject prefixes, before the object the position occupied by the other prefix position. unspecified-subject (46) Navajo unspecifiedobjects a. AshdL. 'a-sh-{ I.SG.SI]BJECT-E4'.IMPRF TJNSPBCTFIED.OBJECT.

'I'm eating.'

b. Ayiiy6l+'. 'a-yii-O-y{{' T'NSPECIFIED,OBJECT-COMPLETIVE-3. SUBJECT-E4'.PRF

'He ate.'

- 18/58- 15:22-disk/sr 101-2/05{ithun.3d lc:pdrufrrpsfrrps

MITHUAN - PRONOUNS AND AGRBEMENT

zo)

4.2.4. Navajo qmbientmentions Navajo contains another prefix category for non-referential mentions. It hasthe basicform hw- (alsoappearingas ho-,hoo-,ha' or termedthe 'areal'or 'spatial'category,it is usedfor fraa).Sometimes ambient conditions, characteristicsof an area and much more. Its function can be seenby cornparingthe pairs ofverbs below' The first verb in eachsethas a basicreferentialthird-personzero pronominal prefix, the second,a hw- Prefix. (47) Navajo ftw- subjects(Young,Morgan and Midgette 1992) a. -zh66h Yizh6qh. 'It (a horseor goat) becomesgentle,tame, tractable.' Hoozh66h.'Things (weather,conditions)become Pleasant,Peaceful.' b. -t166' 'They (clothes)arewet.' Ditl66'. Hoditl66'. 'It's wet aroundhere,the groundis wet.' (48) Navajo frw-objects(Young, Morgan and Midgette 1992) 'movemultipleobjectsswiftlythroughthe air' a. d66h Yishd66h. 'I'm wiPingit off'' Hashdeeh. 'I'm cleaningup, clearingup around here, removingvegetation,tidying up the place.' 'scratch,Paw' b. -ch'id Yishch'id. 'I'm scratchingit.' Hashch'id. 'I'm feelingaroundan area,asin hair for lice'' The differences among the basic third-person category the unspecifiedcategory and the ambient or areal category, can be seenby comparingthe setsof verbsin (a9). (Ihe basicthird-person form of 'be yellow',with zerothird-personsubjectprefix,containsa prefix ft- that marksphysicalattributes') (49) Navajo unspecifiedL and ambient ftw- (Young, Morgan and Midgette 1992) 'It is yellow or yellowishgreen.' (zero) a. l-itso. 'Thereis a yellow-greenspot or Altso. ('-) patch.' (hw-) yellow-green.' is 'The area Haltso.

* disk/sr 101-2/0$mithun.3d - 1E/5F- 15:22 lc:/3dru/rasrras

266

socIETY101, 2003 rRANsAcrIoNsoF TrrEPHILoLOGIcAL

(49) b. Sh6dl66zh. 'I paintedit (my house).' Ashdleesh. 'I did the Painting.' Hosh6dl66zh.'I painted(insidemy house).'

(zero) ('-) (hw-)

Both the unspecifiedand areal prefixeshave becomeelementsof numerouslexicalisedprefix stemcollocations.In thesecontextsthe original meaningsof the prefixeshave often expandedand sometimes evenfaded. They arc pafi. of the basic verbs used for 'drive' and 'ride', for example,for 'talk' and 'sing', 'causetrouble' and mofe.

(50) Navajo samplecollocations(Dolly Sou16,speakerp.c.) ilwod. a. Nihil nih-il 'i-l-wod 1.FL- w i t h IJNSPECIFIED.SI,BJECT-DETRANSITIVISNN-6CNd,PNT

with us somethingbent (somethingran) 'Somethingran with us : we drove.' hashchiih. b. Bik'ijf ha-sh-l-chiih bi-k'ijf 3-ONIO

AMBIENT.OB'ECT.1.SC.STTST-TRANSITIVISER. become.nasty.IM?*t

'I causethingsto becomenastyfor him.' : 'I bring trouble on him.' in use 4.3. TheNavajoprefix categories SinceNavajo offerssucha rangeof prefix options, it is instructiveto examine the kinds of choice made by speakersin potentially non-referentialand indefinitecontexts. 4.3.L Referentialityin Navajo The referenceof Navajo pronominal prefxes can be establishedin the same ways as that of English and German independent pronouns:by the extralinguisticcontext,by the speechact itself (for first and secondpersons),by linguistic context or by inference from information in any of those.As in Yup'ik, it may also be establishedby lexical nominalswithin the sameclause.If a third personis identifiedby a lexical nominal in the samesentence,a basic third-personprefix alwaysappearswith the verb: zeto,bi or yi-.

* ls:22- disk/sr 101-2/oFmithun.3d - 1E/5/3 lct3drufrrpsfirps

M1THUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMBNT

26'7

(51) Navajo lexicalsubject(Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c.) Aad66 nt'66'ashk6ytlzhi, nt'66'ashii: k6: y6zhi aa:doo 17"rs :from

then boy : pI-:DIMINUTT!'E

'Thenfrom theresomelittle boys yikaht{6. yi-O-kah:lti3 PROG.3.SI'BJECT.DETRANSITIVISER -MUI t iP I C.WAI K. PROG : EMPHATIC

they were walking along camealong.' 4.3.2. Generic reference As expected, generic reference is made with the special generic pronominal prefixes. When the generic (fourth-person) preflxes ji-lhw-'one' are used generically,they do not co-occurwith a lexical nominal. The alternation can be seen in two sentencesfrom an anecdote told by Mrs. Soul6 that were separatedby a small side comment. In the first she used a generic construction, and in the second a referential third-person lexical nominal 'all the people' with third-person (zero) subject prefix. (52) Navajo (Dolly Sou16,speakerp.c.) jineezhj66'. shli Ako tl'66'o ji-ni-s-j66' uLo 11'66':go shif thm night : at probably dre-TRM-DuR.sEQ-multipk.lie.down.exr 'And then at night they must have gone to bed.' [A long time ago, when we used to live in hogans, in those days we used to sleepon top of sheepskins.]

Ato 6i shii ako 6i shii

t'ar at'e t'aa at'e

then that perhaps a/ r,rNsp.sUsrEcr-re.I.{EUTER.TMPRI then that perhaps all it is 'And then probably all

- disk/sr 101-2/0tmithun.3d - 18/58- 15:22 lc:pdpfrresfrres

socETY101,2003 oF TI{BPHrLoLocIcAL 268 TRANsAcrIoNs din6 neezj66'. din6 ni-s-0-j66' peaplermr-s.rnr- 3.sswrrr -multipIe.Iie.down.pxv peoplc they went to bed the peoplein the hoganhad goneto bed.' in Natajo 4.3.3. Definiteness Even if the lexical nominal is indefinite, as in'Then somelittle boys camealong' in (51) above,a basicthird-personprefix appearson the verb rather than an unspecifiedprefix. The samesituation can be seenwith direct objects.If a lexicalnomina.lidentifiesthe object,a basicthird-personpronominalprefix is chosen.(Navajo doesnot havetheprohibitionagainstindefinitedirectobjectsseenin Yup'ik.) (53) Navajo lexicalobject@olly Soul6,speakerp.c.) Bilasiana Vwuy66'. bilas6ana Vr-Vu-0-V6d' 3.oBvrATrvE.oBJEcr-cor,rprnrwr-3.swrEcr-eat.P\F apple he ate it apple 'He ate an apple.' An unspecifiedprefix cannot be used in this context. The verb ayiiy46' 'he ate', with unspecified-object prefix 'a-, would be unacceptable. 'something' 4.j.4. Navajoindcfinitepro forms 'someone', The equivalents of English 'someone' and 'something' can be expressedeither with unspecifed prefixes, as above, or with independent indefinite pro forms. The independent pro forms establish a referent, which is then referred to in the verb by the basicthird-personpronominalprefixes:zero,yi or bi-. (54) Navajo indefinitesubject(Dolly Sou16,speakerp.c.) Haishii shinoolch66l. haishii shi-n-oo-l-ch66l someonel.sc.osrscr-rH-3.suBJEcr.PRoc-TRANsrrIvIsERchase.PPoc someonehe or sheis chasingme is chasingme.' (I don't know who.) 'Someone

101-2/0$mithun.3d - 18/5/3-15:22 - diskrfsr lcv3dlfrrps[rps

MITHUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT

269

Compare:Shinoolch66l. shi-n-ooj-ch6el PRoG-TRANSITTI'IsER1.sc.oerncr-rH-3.suBJEcr. chase.ppoc 'He or sheis chasingme.' Not: 'Someoneis chasinsme.' (55) Navajo indefinite object construction (Young, Morgan and Midgette 1992:250) neil'in. Ha'it'iishii bha'6t'ii=shri na-i-0j-'in : DvB rn-3'ouvterrvu.osr-3.suBlrn'bark' something DTJR.IMPRF

he is barking at it sonething 'He's barking at something.' Compare:Neil'in. na-i-0-l-'in 3.suBJ-TRANsITTvISER-rd/k. rH-3.osvIATrvE.oBJDUR.IMPRF

'He's barkingat it.' Not: 'He is barking at something.' It is significantthat eventhough Navajo containsspecialprefixesfor unspecifiedsubjectsand objects,they are not used when an indea hypothetical pendentword for someone or somethingestablishes referent. The regular definite referential third-person pronominal prefixesmust be used,picking up the reference.The pronominal prefixesneednot match the independentnominalsin referentiality or definiteness. 4.3.5. Non-specificmmtions The same constructionsare used for non-specificmentions.A hypothetical referent is establishedby an independentpro form. This referent,which existswithin the world ofthe sentence,is picked up by the pronominalprefix.

|8/58- 15:22 101-2/05-.nithun.3d- disk/sr lct3drufrrpsfrrps

270 rRANsAcrroNs oF rHEpHrLoLocrcAL socrEry101,2003 (56) Navajo non-specifc mention (Young, Morga:r and Midgette 1992:931) Ha'it'ffiila bik'iniyago bi-k'!ni-ya: go ha'it'ihii:da : 3.osvrATrvE.oBJ-on-rrura-2.sc. sarzafiizg' n'{D$I\IIIE SUBJ-g0.PRF : SUB

something

if you comeon it

hadidiilwosh. ha-di-dii-l-wosh. out-auditor ily -rxcrprrw.2.sc.susJ-DETRANsTTTvBER-ye//.nnur.n 'Holler if you find anything!' In English, pronominal referencecan also be made to referents establishedwithin the world of the senten€e,even if there is no correspondingreferent in the real world, as in Evans' If you fnd a dodo,bring it homeas a pet for my daughter(1999:257). 4.3.6. Negatedindefinitesin Nat'ajo Negativeindefiniteconstructionscan beformed by negatinga clause containingan unspecifiedsubjector unspecifiedobjectpreflx. (57) Navajo negatedindefinite(Goossen1995:298) T'6adoo ay6ni da. da t'iridoo 'a-0-ydn:i WiThOUt

IJNSPBCIFIED OBJECT-3.STJ}J.E4',IMPRF : NOMINALISER

tuithout his eating something 'He isn't eatinganything.'

NEC

not

Alternatively, a hypothetical referent can be establishedwith a lexical nominal and referred to with a basic third-person pronominal prefix.The entity may not existin the real world, but reference has beenestablished within the world of the sentence. (58) Navajo absence(Dol1ySou16,speakerp.c.) Shichidi 6din. shi-chidi '6-Gdin l .possnsson-car away.out.of.sight-3.stsstucr-be.none.NEUTER it is non-existent my car 'I don't havea car.'

- disk/sr 101-2/os-mithun.3d - 18/5p- 15:22 lc:pd!/r.psflrps

MITHUAN _ PRONOIJNS AND AGREEMENT

2"11

4.3.7. Navajocontentquestions Navajo content questionsalso show patterns similar to those in the existenceof the entity to Yup'ik. A contentquestionpresupposes be identified.The speakerwho askslMhohid it? is presupposingthat thereis someonewho hid it. In Navajo,asin Yup'ik, a hypothetical referent is establishedwith an independentquestion word, then referredto by a pronominal prefix in the verb. Again it is significant that the pronominal prefix doesnot simply match the independent questionword in definiteness.The verbs of content questionsmust contain a basic third-person pronominal prefix referring to the prefix. participant,ratherthan anunspecified questioned (59) Navajo contentquestions(Dolly Soul6,speaker) a. H6ili neidis'ii'la? hrlili na-Yi-di-s-0Jjii' : la nrncr-rn-hlde.Pw- a who rrur-3.oan-vrsual/y-oun.sne3.st who slhehid it it?' -whohid b. Haoit'iili ndanohlch6? ha'6t'iil6 ni-da-0-n-oh-l-ch6 rn-prsrn-3.osmcr-2.pr.su'sJ-TRANISITIvISERwhat chase.cottt uwhat you all are chasingit 'What are you guyschasing?' Yes-no questions can contain unspecifiedprefixes; they do not necessarily involve a hypothetical referent whose existence is by a questionword. presupposed and established (60) Navajoyes-noandcontentquestions @olly Soul6,speakerp.c.) a. iiy{ilash? Lii-y{.{.': ash UNSPBCIflED.OBJECT-COMPLETIVE.EA'.PRF = INTERROGATTVE

heatesomething? 'Did heeat?' b. IJa' 6t'ii li iyiiy66'1 ha'at'ii la yt-yi-yri{ 3.ogvhrrvn.ostEcr-coMPlETl\lE-e.rr.PRF what he ate it what 'What did he eat?'

- disk/sr 101-2/05-rnithun.3d - 18/5/3 - 15:22 lcv3druIrrpslrrps

socIETY101,2003 272 rRANsAcrroNs oF Tr# pHILoLoGIcAL 4.3.8. Navajosmbientprertxes The areal prefixes of the basic form hw-, which invoke general circumstancesbut not specificreferents,cannot co-occur with coreferentialnominals. If a lexical nominal is presentto establish reference,the pronominal prefix must be the basic third-person referentialzero,bi- or yi-. (61) Navajo Areal prefix (Dolly Soul6,speakerp.c.) a. Hodilhil. ho-dil-hil obr -phvsical.character ist ic-be.dark.NsurEn AREAL.sUBJEcT-c 'It's dark (out).' nizh6nigo b. T6nteel ni-0-zh6ni:go t6-nteel water-broad visually-3.svuncr-nrce: ADvERBIALIsER ocean beautifully 'The oceanis beautifully dilhil. di-0-l-hil color -3.stwncr -physi cal.characteristic-be.da*.xBurr,p it is dark colored dark (in color).' 4.j.9. Navajoweatherterms Finally, we sawthat in Yup'ik, weatherexpressionscontain regular third-personpronominal suffixes,comparableto the it of English /l is ruining and the es of German Es regnet.SomeNavajo weatier terms show the same pattern, with basic third-person subject prefixes.Othersshowarealprefixes. (62) Navajo basicthird-personweatherconstructions(Dolly Sou16, speakerp.c.) a. Yidzaas. yi-0-dzaas pnornnrlc-3,susJEcr-Jzolr.IMpRF 'It is snowine.'

101-2/0$mithun.3d - 18/58- 15:22- disk/sr lc:Fdru/rrpsrrres

MrrrruAN - pRoNouNs AND AGREEMENT

273

(62) b. (T6) naaftin. water na-O-l-tin water downward-3.suBJECFCLASSTFIER'fall.nrcxr 'It is raining.' c. Nl6 naaltin. nil6 na-0-l-tin hail downward-3.suBrECT-cLAssIFIER-/a//.namr 'It is hailing.' (63) Navajo Areal weatherconstructions(Young, Morgan and Midgette 1992) a. Hatin. ha-tin l*eAI .suarcr-y'eeze.n'renr 'It is freezing(out).' Compare:Yitin. yi-O-tin ez e.IMPPF PROTHETIC-3.SUBJECT-y'e

'It (an object)is freezing.' b. Honeezk'62i. ho-nee-s-k':izi SEQUENTTAL-De. cool.XrUren ARBAL.STJBTECT-TH-DURATIVE.

'It is cool (the weather).' Compare:Sik'62i. si-0-k'6zi cool.Nrcrren sEettEl-3.sustEcr-6e. DuRATTvE. 'It is cool.' (iron, water,a corpse) 4. CoNcLUsloN The obligatorinessof pronominal affxes does not entail a lack of referentiality or definitenessafter all. In the languagesexamined here, Yup'ik and Navajo, pronominal affixes are used only referentially, except in weather expressions.In terms of their referentiality and definiteness,tley are just like the independent pronouns of languageslike English and German. They contrast endingson verbs in those with the redundantsubject-agreement

- 15:22-disk/sr 101-2/0tmithun,3d - 18/5/3 lc:/3dpfrresfirps

socIErY101,2003 oF Tm PHILoLocIcAL 2'74 rRANsAcrroNs languagesbecause,unlike them, they are capable of invoking referentson their own within clauses. In clauses with no independent lexical nominal to establish reference,pronominal affxes do not have open reference.They are used only when a referent has beenestablishedin one way or another. Basic third-person pronominal affixescan be interpreted only as 'he', 'she','they', 'it', 'him', 'her', 'them', never'someone', 'something','people'or 'things' (unlessthe pronoun has acquired a conventionalisedgeneric use, like English they.) Referenceis establishedin languageswith pronominal affixesjust as it is in English and German: by the extralinguistic context, by the speech eventitself (for first or secondperson)and by lexical mention in previous discourse.Yup'ik and Navajo differ from English and German simply in the absenceof a restriction: pronominal referencecan be establishedwithin the sameclauseas well. This property may be related to the fact that in languages with pronominal affixes, each verb constitutes a complete minimal clausein itseli the skeletonor nucleusof the clause.It has long like Englishand German,independbeenknown that in languages ent pronouns need not match their lexical antecedentsin referentiality or definiteness,though they may match in certain feature values such as number or gender.The same principle governs pronominal affixes and their antecedents.This fact is especially easy to see in Navajo, where spealers have choices between referential pronominal prefixes and unspecifiedsubject or object prefixes.If a clausecontainsan independentlexicalnominal that establishesreference,a definite referential pronominal prefix must be used, even if the independentword that establishesthe referenceis non-referentialor indefinite. Indefinite and non-referentialmentionsareaccomplishedthrough other strategies.Navajo contains a distinct set of prefixesfor unspecifiedparticipants. Otherwisefor indefinites hke someoneor something,for negatedindefiniteslike no oneor nothing,and for the targetsof contentquestionslike who and what,Yup'ik and Navajo exploit the samestrategy.A hypotheticalreferentis establishedwith an independentindefinite pro form (someone,something),and that referentis evokedwith a pronominal affix. Yup'ik, Navajo and other languageswith pronominal affixes

15:22 101-2/0tmithun.3d - disk/sr - 18/5/3* lc:/3drurrasrrms

MITIIUAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT

275

contain alternative constructions for non-referential expressions, though the alternativesvary acrossthe languages(Mithun 2002). Yup'ik containsextensivedenominalverb derivation, for example. Navajo contains an impressiveelaboration of prefix categories, distinguishing referential third persons, generics,indefinites and ambientsituations.Both Yup'ik and Navajo make extensiveuse of detransitivisation,so that pronominal affixesdo not represent non-referentialentities. The data discussedhere are quite similar to the material cited by Evans(1999)from Bininj Gun-wok, Warray, Mangarayi,Lummi, Georgian, Aztec, Cayuga and Greenlandic (another Eskimoan language).In those languages,as in Yup'ik and Navajo, the referenceof pronominal affixescan be establishedby extralinguistic or linguisticcontext,outsideor insideof the clause.The examples cited by Evansfrom thoselanguagesgenerallycontain overt lexical items that establishthe referenceof the pronominal affixes:child, man, boy, wtfe, people, women,seal, dog, door, flowers, cigarette, just some,another.In thoselanguages, marking.someone, something, as in Yup'ik and Navajo, all pronominal affixesare referentialand definite.(Someareof courselike Englishin the conventionaluseof particular referentialpronouns as generics.)As in Yup'ik and Navajo, non-referentialmentionsare madeby alternativeconstructions. The inventoriesof alternatives,and tleir relative frequencies ofuse, vary from languageto language,but they aregenerallyquite similar to those seenhere: detransitivisation,noun incorporation and verbalderivation. The referentiality of pronominal affixeshas been of interest to syntacticiansconcemedwith the identificationof the core argumentsof clauses.On oneview.it is the lexicalnominalsthat arethe true arguments.Clauseswithout lexical nominals are assumedto have dropped them. On another view, it is the pronominal affxes that are the arguments, and coreferential nominals are simply adjunctswith no syntactic status. The material seenhere indicates that pronominal affixescertainly function as core arguments,but their presencedoesnot entail a specificsyntactic statuson the part of coreferentialnominalsin the sameclause.Independentnominals in Yup'ik carry explicit inflectional marking of their syntacticroles, with ergative and absolutivecase endings on core arguments.

't01-2los-mithun.3d - disk/sr - 18/58- 15:22 lc:pdprrasfiDs

socIETY101,2003 oF rnE PrflLoLoGIcAL 276 rRANsAcrIoNs Nominalsin Navajo,by contrast,caffy no casemarking,but thereis with a detectablebasicconstituentorder that could be associated subjectand object roles. In languagesof the Iroquoian family, nominals carry no case marking and constituent order has no relation to syntacticrole. Sincethey evoke the sameentity, lexical nominals and coreferential pronominal affixes may simply share that status, and languagesmay differ in the extent to which the nominals are integratedformally into the clause.This is in keeping with the unifcation approach advocated by Evans, in which information about participants is built up over the course of speechfrom multiple referring expressions.The information can nominals,incorporatednouns,independent comefrom independent pronouns,pronominal affixes,redundantgrammaticalagreement and of courseinference. It is perhapsunfortunate that the study of agreemontis rooted historically in work on languageslike English and German. Use of the term 'agreernentmarkers' for pronominal affixesmay have led to an assumptionthat they necessarilyagreein all features with the items that establish their reference,including referentiality and definiteness.Agreementis of coursenot the primary function of pronominal affixes; their role is to evoke referents. Redundant grammatical agreementmarkers such as the subject endings of English and German verbs, are actually quite rare cross-linguistically. In her sample of 272 lango.ages,Siewierska (1999:238)found thatjust two, well under|ok, containgrammatical agreementmarkersof this type. Individual pronominal affx systemsvary across languagesin the categoriesthey distinguish and the ways they are used. In the end, however, pronominal affxes function referentially much like independentpronouns. Department of Linguistics Universityof Califomia Santa Barbara, California usA 93106 edu Email: [email protected].

101-2/05-mtthun.3d - l8/5/3- 15:22 - disk/sr lc:pdprrresrr4es

MITT{UAN _ PRONOUNS AND AGREEMENT

277

ABBREvIATIoNS 1

FIRST PERSON

NEG

2

sEcoND PERSoN

OBJ

NEGATIVE OBJECT

personalcommunication

3

THIRD PERSoN

p.c,

ABS

ABSOLUTN'E CASE

PL

PLURAL

ADV

ADVERBIAL

PRR

PERFECTWE

CONT

CONTINUATTW

PROG

PROGRESSIVE

DEM

DEMONSTRATIVE

INTERROGATTVE

DISTR

DISTRIBUTIVE

Q R

DU

DUAL

RESTR

RESTRICTED

DUB

DUBITATN'E

SEQ

SEQUEL

DUR

DURATIVE

SG

SINGULAR

FEM

FEMININE

SUB

STJBORDINATII'E

HAB

HABITUAL

SUBJ

SUBJECT

IMPRF

MPERFECTTVE

T1I

TIIEMATIC

INDIC

INDTCATIVE MOOD

TR

TRANSITIVE

INTR

INTRANSITTVE

TRM

TBRMINATIIts

MASC

MASCULINE

IJ'NSPEC UNSPECIFIED

COREFERENTIAL

REFTRENcES and tine, Univetsity of Chicago. CHAFEWALLACE,1994.Discourse, consciousness, CoRBErr, GREVILLE,2003. 'Agreemenl the range of the phenomenon alld the principles of the SMG Agreement Databa.se', Transactio\s of the Philological Society l0l, 155-202 EVANS,NrcHot"As, 1999. 'Why argument affixes in polysynthetic languages are not pronouns: evidence from Bininj Gun-wok', Sprachtypologie und Universalien' forschung 52, 255-281. GoossEN,IRvn, 1995. Dini Bizaad, Flagstaff, AZ: Salina Bookshelf. JAcoBSoN,STE\EN,1984. tup'ik Eskimo dictionau), Fairbanks, AK; Alaska Native LanguageC€nter. 1998a.'The s€quencingof grammaticization effects', in Monika MITrIUN, MARTAT$IE, S. Schmidt, Jennifer R. Austin and Dieter Stein (eds.), Histofical Linguistics 1997, Amsterdam:John Benjamins,291-314. MrrHUN, MARTANN41998b. 'Yup'ik roots and affixes', in Osalito Miyaoka and Minoru Oshirna (eds.), Languagesof the North Pacifc Rim 4, Kyoto, Japan: Kyoto University Gruduate School of Letters, 63-76. MnIruN, MARIANNE,2002, 'The referential status of pronominal amxes', MS. SrEwrf,RsKA,ANNA, 1999. 'From anaphoric pronoun to grammatical agreement

101-2/0tmithun.3d - 18/5/3- 15:22- dislvsr lcl3diJfrDs/rDs

278

TRANsAcrroNsoF THEpHILoLocrcAL socIBTy 101, 2003

marker: why objects don't make it', in Greville Corbett (ed.), Ag\eement (Speclal 25l . isslueof Folia Linguistiea X){J{IIID, n YouNc, RoBERT,2000, The Navajo wrb system:an overview, Nbuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. YouNG, Rom.T & MoRc,{r{ WnuAM, u'ith tho assistanceof MDGBTTE,SALLY,1992. Awlytical lexicon of -lvzvaJb,Albuqu€rque: University of New Mexico Press.