Abstract
Indicative sentences in Dogon have a subject of S/A type identifiable by convergent criteria. However, Dogon imperatives diverge from English in lacking full-fledged referential subjects. Specifically, covert imperative actors (“subjects”) cannot bind transpersonal reflexive pronominals the way indicative subjects do. Instead, Dogon imperative verbs morphologically index addressee number. Dogon hortatives have both overt first-person plural subjects and imperative-like second-person addressees. We must therefore tease apart (referential) subjecthood and addresseehood. Crosslinguistic comparisons (Basque allocutives, Russian transpersonal reflexives) bring out similarities and differences. A cultural focus on immediate observation as opposed to projected result, also observed in action verb semantics, may be behind the Dogon difference.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.