|
|
*b. |
ihƵ1
kati2 hihi3
ti4 mo-e5 |
| |
|
this3
black2 snake1
is4 not5
black 4 |
| |
|
|
|
or |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
c. |
hƵ1
-ti2 kakra3
white3 snake2
-be black1 (=
snake type) |
| |
|
snake-be |
| |
|
blackwhite |
| |
|
|
|
|
*d. |
ihƵ1
kati2 kakra3 |
| |
|
black |
| |
|
white3
black 2 snake3
|
| |
|
|
| 14 |
a. |
cu-kra-ni1
ti-e2 |
| |
|
stone be white clay
(= chalk)1 is
black2 |
| |
|
|
|
|
*b. |
ocu1
kakra2 ti-e
3 |
| |
|
(the) white2
stone1 is black3
|
| |
|
|
|
or |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
c. |
cu-kra-ni
1 kati
2 |
| |
|
black stone-be white-clay
(= chalk) |
| |
|
black2
chalk1 |
| |
|
|
|
|
*d. |
ocu1
kakra2 kati3 |
| |
|
black3
white2 stone1
|
| |
|
|
| 15 |
a. |
tu1-jĆ¼2
-hi0  i-e3
|
| |
|
domestic bovine1
-be big2 (= a
kind of domestic bovine) is small 3 |
| |
|
|
|
|
*b. |
otu1
kajĆ¼2 -hi0
i-e3 |
| |
|
(the) big2
domestic bovine1
is small3 |
| |
|
|
| 16 |
a. |
mo -jĆ¼ -hi
i-e
|
| |
|
pumpkin -be big (=
a kind of big-sized pumpkin) is small |
| |
|
|
|
|
*b. |
omo1
kajĆ¼2 -hi0
i-e3
|
| |
|
the0
big2 pumpkin1
is small3 |
| |
|
|
| 17 |
a. |
hƵ1
-di2 hihi3
madi4 mo-e5 |
| |
|
snake1
-be green2 (=
grass snake) is4
not5 green4
|
| |
|
|
|
|
*b. |
ihƵ1
madi2 hihi3
madi4 mo-e4
|
| |
|
this3
green2
snake1 is4
not5 green4
|
| |
|
|
| 18 |
|
(i) sĆ¼bu-o
kajĆ¼ ā€big tree-dim. (=plant)ā€™ |
| |
|
tree-dim big |
| |
|
(= plant) |
| |
|
|
| |
|
(ii) rĆ¼-o
kajĆ¼ ā€big brookā€™ |
| |
|
river-dim big |
| |
|
(= brook) |
|
Since compositionality is suficient but not necessary, there
are compounds which ARE compositional. Some compositional
compounds are
|
|
379 |
hi)-dzü |
eye-water |
ā€tearā€™ |
| |
|
|
|
| |
odzĆ¼-da |
water-beat |
ā€swimā€™ |
| |
|
|
|
| |
ona-hrĆ¼
|
child-conceive |
ā€to conceiveā€™ |
| |
|
|
|
| |
ona-sokro |
child-abort |
ā€to abortā€™ |
| |
|
|
|
| |
hi)-li
|
eye-one |
ā€to winkā€™ |
| |
|
|
|
| |
hi)-rĆ¼
|
eye-to snare |
ā€to stareā€™ |
| |
|
|
|
| |
pe-mani |
say-show |
ā€to confessā€™ |
|
The Syntactic Insularity Criterion
|
This
criterion states that any multiword linguistic material
evincing evidence of syntactic insularity is a lexical unit,
a compound (or an idiom, which is not our concern here).
This is perhaps a formal upshot of the institutionalisation
that all compounding entails...
|
Some
of the parameters of syntactic insularity are (a) absence
of syntactic status markers: (i) absence of direct object
markers (ii) absence of subject-nonsubject noun agreement
(iii) absence of subject-verb agreement (b) anaphora (c)
notional nonredundancy (d) Noncontrastiveness in syntactic
space and (e) Identity Erasure. Curiously, Identity Erasure,
which obviously is a marker of syntactic insularity, throw
s up conflicting results. The following illustrate each
of these five markers of syntactic insularity.
|
(a)
|
Absence of
Syntactic Status Markers |
|
(i)
|
Absence of animate
Direct Object markers |
|
380 |
1. |
kaisa-no1
ona-yi2 da-oi-e3 |
|
| |
|
Kaisa1
beat3 (the) child2
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| but |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
1a. |
kaisa-(hi)1
ona - { Ćø}2
|
hrĆ¼-lo2
oi-e3 |
| |
|
{*yi} |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
Kaisa1
conceived3 (a)
child2 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
1b. |
kaisa-
(hi)1 ona-
{Ćø}2
|
shkro-oi-e3
|
| |
{*yi} |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Kaisa1
aborted3 (a)
child 2
|
|
|
