|Full Title:||Exploring Other Patterns: Loan Verb Accommodation|
|Start Date:||10-Sep-2017 - 13-Sep-2017|
|Meeting Email:||click here to access email|
|Meeting Description:||Literature on verb borrowing distinguishes four major strategies of loan verb accommodation (Wohlgemuth 2009): direct insertion, indirect insertion, light verb strategy and paradigm insertion. Direct insertion means adapting a form from the donor language into the recipient language without any morphological modification:
Indirect insertion implies a morphological modification tool, usually a verbalizer:
(2) Modern Greek
Light verb strategy is the use of a native inflected light verb in combination with a borrowed item:
(3) Korlai Portuguese
Paradigm insertion is a rare case of borrowing of an entire paradigm, like finite verbal paradigm borrowing from Russian in the mixed language Mednyi Aleut (Thomason 1997).
A handful of verb borrowings, however, could not be assigned to one of the four main accommodation strategies described by (Wohlgemuth 2009). They were included by the author in a residual category ''other patterns'' and were not further differentiated in the statistical analyses.
In this workshop we will be looking at the possible accommodation techniques that do not represent either of the four strategies of loan verb accommodation and, hence, would be classified as the ''other patterns'' category in the loan verb typology. The goal is to collect, analyze, compare, and, possibly, classify the corresponding data from different languages.
A relevant example is the use of a preverb as an accommodation strategy in Georgian. Namely, preverb da- gets used with English loans as roots of Georgian verb forms:
''I will share it.''
Obviously, the use of a preverb in (4) is an example of borrowing that is neither a paradigm insertion nor a light verb strategy. It is not a direct insertion either, because the corresponding native Georgian verb forms
are associated with a different preverb (4 vs. 5). The loan roots are not inserted directly into the verb frame consisting of native morphemes (including preverb) but require the selection of a specific preverb – da-:
*da-v-a-ziar-eb / ga-v-a-ziar-eb.
''I will share it.''
Note that the use of the preverb in (4) is not an indirect insertion, but an indispensable part of the verb frame expressing tense and aspect.
The preverb da- occupies a special place among Georgian preverbs. By form, they are simple and complex. The complex ones are formed via adding the element mo- to the simple ones, to refer to the speaker-oriented movement. The da- is different by lacking its complex counterpart (damo-) in Modern Georgian. By form, one can consider the preverb to be impoverished. By function, it became more grammaticalized, as it acquired an extra grammatical function of expressing distributivity, unlike other preverbs (Shanidze 1973).
For loan verb accommodation, Georgian uses a morpheme, which has no place in the typology of loan verb accommodation strategies, which is a genuine part of a verb frame and is highly grammaticalized. It is interesting to find out whether and what types of loan verb accommodation strategies are used cross-linguistically that do not fall into the four main categories of the typology of loan verb accommodation strategies.
|Linguistic Subfield:||General Linguistics; Language Documentation; Typology|
| This is a session of the following meeting:
50th Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea
|Calls and Conferences main page|