Seminar Series: Abstract

15.30
March 20 2009
Seminar Room C

Attrition of Actor Voice Morphology and Fronted Content Questions in the Austronesian languages of Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia
I Wayan Arka

Arka argues that progress in the understanding of voice-related phenomena in the Austronesian languages of Nusa Tenggara, where verbal morphology is diminishing or completely gone, can only be achieved by having a detailed comparative study of how a range of coding resources are employed to express (semantic/syntactic) argument structure and its associated information structure. Investigation into the complex constraints of pragmatics, semantics and syntax of fronted content questions associated with arguments provides a window for this. He argues that the canonical/default function of the nasal (voice) prefix is to express the speaker’s intention to draw the addressee’s attention towards the Actor (A) as TOP(IC). In certain languages (such as Balinese and Standard Indonesian), the A argument must also be the grammatical subject (SUBJ) and PIVOT (PIV). There is empirical evidence that SUBJ cannot always be equated with PIV. It will be demonstrated that the selection of A as SUBJ, TOP, and/or PIV is independent of the verbal (nasal) marking. It is therefore expected that when the nasal prefix is gone, (e.g. in the isolating languages of Manggarai and Rongga) the pragmatically salient argument must still be grammatical subject/PIV. In contrast, in some languages, even though the prefix is still present, the link between this prefix and the syntactic status of A as SUBJ and/or PIV may be diminishing. In the Puyung dialect of Sasak, for example, there is no requirement for the verb to be in the nasal form when A is subject (example (1a)). Nevertheless, the nasal prefix is still linked to the canonical pragmatic constraint which requires that the A argument must be highly prominent across all layers of structures. Thus, we expect to still find a restriction on using the nasal prefix when the Undergoer is questioned with a fronted question (1b). Arka will also discuss restrictions of fronted questions in other Austronesian languages including colloquial Indonesian and the languages that show no clear grammatical subject such as Keo and Endenese. He will offer an integrated model of analysis and propose new voice construction types mapped onto a typological space of voice for the Austronesian languages of Indonesia.

(1)
a.
Aku pikir Amir beli / meli buku jari Tono. (Sasak: Puyung)
1s think Amir buy/N.buy book for Tono
‘I think Amir bought a book for Tono.’

b.
Apa saq mu-m pikir Amir beli/*meli jari Tono
what FOC PAS-2 think A buy/N.buy for Tono
‘What did you think Amir bought for Tono?’