Abstract
AbstractThis study is based on a sample of 116 languages from the Mainland East and Southeast Asian linguistic area. Its first objective is to examine four distinct synchronic patterns of areal polysemy, created by the semantic domains of copular, locative, existential and possessive verbs and the constructions they form. As a consequence, its second objective is to model the diachronic change underlying four language types identified on this basis from the data. We argue that there are three grammaticalization pathways which motivate the four synchronic patterns: Type III languages are distinguished by the grammaticalization chain: (Postural verb) > (Dwell) > Locative > Existential > Possessive,while the other two types, Type II and Type IV, show an opposing pathway: (Grasp) > Possessive > Existential. Type I and Type II languages additionally reveal a recurrent polysemy betweenLocativeandCopularverbs. On this basis, an implicational universal is adduced to the effect that no diachronic adjacency exists betweenlocativeandpossessiveconstructions. Crucially, the intervening stage of anexistentialconstruction provides the necessary bridging context forpossessivereanalysis in this first pathway, whilepossessiveverbs are formally distinct fromlocativesin the second, bearing no diachronic relationship to them. The findings on the patterns of polysemy sharing reinforce the notion of a clear typological split between Tibeto-Burman languages on the one hand, and Sinitic, Kra–Dai, Hmong–Mien, and Austroasiatic on the other.
Highlights
We argue that there are three grammaticalization pathways which motivate the four synchronic patterns: Type III languages are distinguished by the grammaticalization chain: (POSTURAL VERB) > (DWELL) > LOCATIVE > EXISTENTIAL > POSSESSIVE, while the other two types, Type II and Type IV, show an opposing pathway: (GRASP) > POSSESSIVE > EXISTENTIAL
On the basis of these shared patterns of polysemy across the Mainland East and Southeast Asian area, we propose an implicational universal to the effect: If a language uses the same verb for locative and possessive constructions, this verb can be used in existential constructions
We summarize the findings on the two main grammaticalization chains which underlie the formation of the synchronic areal patterns in Mainland East and Southeast Asian area (MESEA) and the implicational universal we have proposed on the basis of this analysis: LOCATIVE > EXISTENTIAL > POSSESSIVE and GRASP > POSSESSIVE > EXISTENTIAL
Summary
The relationship of existence and location to possession has been the subject of a vast field of research including studies in both linguistics and philosophy. The first objective of the present study is a typological one to investigate the extent of polysemy as opposed to the use of distinct forms in the lexical fields carved out by copular, locative, existential and possessive verbs in languages of the Mainland East and Southeast Asian area (MESEA) in a purely synchronic perspective. To this end, the patterns for ‘splitting’ and ‘sharing’ of verbal forms are analyzed by using a sample of 116 languages from Sino-Tibetan, Hmong–Mien, Kra–Dai and Austroasiatic, leading to the establishment of four main language types. The locations for the 116 languages and the areal distribution for the four language types are illustrated in two accompanying maps
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
