In contrast, th linguistic space between the constituent
elements of a phrase in characterised by potential
pause. There is thus no potential pause between
odzü ‘water’ and da ‘beat’ in
the complex odzü da ‘water-beat (= swim)’
while there is between ·aiho-yi
and da-e in
|
|
375 |
1. |
 aiho-yi
da-e |
| |
|
Daiho-acc
beat-snt |
|
By this criterion, the fomrer viz., odzü da
water-beat (=swim) qualifies as a compound while
the latter viz. daiho-yi da-e ‘beat Daiho’
does not. The "syntactic" part of the
phonetic-syntactic criterion refers to the syntactic
correlates of the phonetic property of potential
pause. They are Noninterruptibility and Interrogatability.
A linguistic complex characterised by potential
pause can be interrupted by parenthetical material
i.e., material added as an afterthought, while
a complex of words, with no potential pause in
between can not be. Thus, the complex odzü
da, ruled a compound by the criterion of
potential pause, cannot be interrupted :
|
|
*375 |
2. |
odzü
make do |
| |
|
water cold
beat |
| |
|
|
|
375 |
3. |
aiho-yi
süda-no da-e |
| |
|
‘beat Daiho
with stone’ |
|
Components of compounds can not be answers to questions whereas
parts of noncompounds can be
|
|
375 |
4. |
ni
adi da-e |
| |
|
‘what did
you beat ?’ |
| |
|
|
| |
|
could not
elicit |
| |
|
|
|
375 |
5. |
ai1
odzü2
da3 -e0
|
| |
|
I1
water2
-beat3
(=swim) |
| |
|
|
| |
|
but, on
the other hand |
| |
|
|
|
375. |
6. |
ni
a hie-yi
da-e |
| |
|
who did
yo (sg.) beat ?’ |
| |
|
|
| |
|
could elicit |
| |
|
|
|
375. |
7. |
ai
daiho-yi da-e |
|
|
because ·aiho
‘Daiho’ does not form part of a compound while
odzü of odzü da ‘water-beat
|
|
(= swim)’ does. This criterial correlate rules
out of the compoundhood status of sequences like
olo so ‘song do ( to sing)’ ovo so
‘work do (to work)’, odo so ‘dance
do (to dance)’, ocü rü ‘nature rain (to
rain)’ |
All these can be interrupted
|
| 376
|
olo
kaxi so |
‘sing two
songs’ |
| |
song two
do |
|
| |
|
|
| |
ovo
kali so |
‘doa single
piece of work’ |
| |
|
|
| |
work one
do |
|
| |
ocü-no
rü-e |
‘it rained
(no, the interrupting material being
the particle of identification)’ |
| |
|
|
| |
odo
padi so |
‘do four
dances’ |
| |
dance four
do |
|
|
This phonetic-syntactic
structural property of compoundhood is sufficient
in that a stretch of linguistic characterised
internally by potential pause is not a compound.
It is, however, not necessary in that all linquistic
stretches characterised by absence of potential
pause are not compounds. Thus, the sequence adi
le what fut ‘where are yo going ?’ is not
characterised by potential pause, but is obviously
not a compound as it could be interrupted :
|
|
377 |
adi
so le |
| |
|
| |
do |
| |
|
| |
‘what will
you do ?’ |
|
where so ‘to do’ is not a morphological
formative taking its appointed place in morphotactic
space, but a lexical item interposing syntactic
space a posteriori. |
The Semantic Criterion
|
The semantic criterion states that compounds may acquire a
supervening or noncompoisitional meaning,
whole-different-from-the-sum-of-parts meaning, as an upshot of the
unitization basic to compounding: ‘may’ because this is a
sufficient, not a necessary criterion, as has already beenb
averred. A multiword complex hwich has a noncompositional meaning
is necessarily a compound 21
|
21.
|
It could be an idiom too, but idioms are outside the tether
of this grammar.
|
