Summary Details
| Query: |
Pronouns and Demonstratives
|
|
| Author: | Susan Lloyd McBurney | |
| Submitter Email: | click here to access email | |
| Linguistic LingField(s): |
Morphology
Syntax |
|
| Summary: |
Dear Linguist List Folks-
Here is a summary posting I would like to have distributed to the list. Thanks! Susan McBurney ****** POSTING ********* Earlier this month I posted a query (Linguist 14.492) regarding languages where first and second person pronouns (as opposed to third person pronouns) might be related to or derived from demonstratives. I would like to thank the following people for responding: John Koontz Magnus Liw Tim Thornes Junji Kawai Peter Backhaus Mark Donohue R?my Viredaz Robin Shoaps Prof. Thomas Chacko Wolfgang Schulze Ilhan M. Cagri Bart Mathias Richard Laurent I?ve included the responses below. Susan McBurney University of Washington Seattle, Washington mcburney@u.washington.edu _________________________________________________________________________ ***** In the Siouan family, the typical third person pronominal independent pronominal e is a sort of demonstrative in origin, used only emphatically - something like 'it is that one that ...'. The first and second person emphatic independents are usually either old independents (looking rather like some of the inflectional prefixes, however) or old independents combined with e, e.g., wi or wi(y)e for a first person. However, in Winnebago, the fist and second person are reported to share a single independent emphatic form ne, which is presumably of demonstrative origin, cf. Teton le 'this', though the correspondence here is irregular, and the details are therefore obscure. John Koontz ***** As far as I know: not. On the contrary there seem to be som possible connection between 1st and 2nd personal stems and those of demonstratives in case of demonstrative systems based on three levels, such as Turkish ben/biz ''I/we'' - bu ''this''; sen/siz ''you'' - shu ''that''; o/onlar ''he, she, it/they'' or ''that/those yonder'' but this may be superficial; it appears as if the form shu actually is derived from the combination of ishbu in older stages of the lgg, and thus not connected to sen. In several Turkic lggs there's another demonstrativ tigi used in it's place. In the aberrant and very intresting Chuvash language (the only survivor of the West Turkic group) there are up to five different demonstratives and the 1st person deictic is not bu but ku. Maybe this was the ancient Turkic form and bu was invented later under the influence of ben? Not having the material at hand now, I remember that the Maldivian (Dhivehi) demonstratives struck me as resembling the original personal pronominal stems. This lgg is Indo-Aryan and related to Sinhalese of Sri Lanka. It uses new words, partly honorific, for the original Indo-Aryan personal pronouns, but the older forms were ma ''I'' and t(a?) ''you(sg)'' corresp to Hindi main and tuu, or Bengali mui and tui, etc. Now, the word for ''this'' is mii and for ''that, by you'' tii (or cii?) and ''that, yonder'' ee. In Sinhalese there are just mee ''this'' and ee ''that''. The mii/mee-are possible etymologically influenced by the 1st personal stem in ma- since no other Modern Indo-Aryan lgg has a similar demonstrative stem. But check it up with Cain&Gair, Dhivehi, LINCOM series! What is very intriguing in connexion to this question of yours is the fact that several lggs seem to exhibit two sets of personal pronominal stems, such as the Indo-European lggs - nominative stem *eg- ''I'' < Sanskrit aham; Latin and Greek ego; German ich, Armenian (y)es, etc., and oblique stem *(e)m- ''me, my'' < Skr. mahya; Latin mihi, Ancient Greek emege; German mich, Armenian indz. nominative stem *wey- ''we'' Other examples of this phenomenon is the opposition between emphatic and non-emphatic personal stems in many African lggs, such as Swahili mimi/ni ''I'', wewe/ku ''you(sg)'', sisi/tu ''we'', etc. Maybe one of the stems above is of demonstrative origin while the other is the original personal? Regards Magnus Liw ***** In Northern Paiute (W. Numic, Uto-Aztecan), the third person singular pronouns are identical to demonstratives for the most part (I can't say as I would call them ''derived'' from them, as they code the same deictic categories and carry the same cases, etc.). What may be of interest is the fact that the proximal base {i-} (in a fairly wide-spread sound-symbolic pattern of front vowel = proximal, back vowel = distal) appears to do double duty as a non-subject (object or possessor) proclitic coding first person singular: su=nana i=punni NOM=man 1=see.DUR 'The man sees me.' u-su i=punni DIST-NOM 1=see.DUR 'She/He/It/That one sees me.' i-su i=punni PROX-NOM 1=see.DUR 'She/He/It/This one sees me.' su=nana i=naa NOM=man 1=father 'The man is my father.' I don't have the data with me, but I suspect this pattern is true for most of the Numic languages. Langacker's (1976) 'Overview of Uto-Aztecan Grammar' probably gives details as to the extent of this feature in the family. Tim Thornes Department of Linguistics University of Oregon and Tribal Linguist Burns Paiute Tribe ***** I think the second person pronoun in Japanese (/anata/) originally meant 'over there'. A Classical Japanese dictionary that I have at hand (Obunsha 1965 Kogo Jiten) gives several meanings for /anata/ including 'you', but the top of the list is 'over there'. Junji Kawai Department of Asian Studies University of Canterbury Christchurch New Zealand ***** there are such pronouns in Japanese: anata (lit.: this side) - you omae (lit.: (honor.)front - you sochira (lit.: that side) - you kochira (lit.: this side) - I It should however be mentioned that it is not uncontroversal whether these words may really be called pronouns, because they are very akin to nouns. I'm sorry that I cannot give you any references at the moment (there are many, also in English, which should not be hard to find), because I am not at my office at the moment. I will be back at the end of May this year. If you are still interested then please let me know. Kind regards, Peter Backhaus, University of Duisburg, Germany ***** Quite a few Austronesian languages use 'that' to refer to 2SG. In Indoneian, for instance, this is a politeness marker for some: di situ, LOC that (near you), for 'you'. In Muna the original 2SG form, < proto-Austronesian *i-kahu, has been completely replaced by a form based on situ: they now say ihintu (with *s > h, and the same politeness *i- at the front). A reference for the Muna data form a hisotrical point of view is Berg, Ren? van den. 1991. Muna historical phonology. In J.N. Sneddon, ed., Studies in Sulawesi linguistics part II: 2-28. NUSA 33. synchronically, try Berg, Ren? van den. 1989. A grammar of the Muna Language. KITLV, Verhandelingen 139. Dordrecht/Providence: Foris. There're probably other written accounts -Austronesianists talk about this a lot, but Muna is the one that comes to mind. -Mark ***** The only example I know (in European languages) is the Italian first plural non-subject enclitic pronoun ci 'us', which is identical with the enclitic demonstrative adverb ci 'there' (also used as pronoun 'in it, to it'). from Latin hic-ce . However, this example is a sort of accident, which I presume arose by analogy with vi , which is the enclitic form of both voi 'you' (plural, Latin vos ) and ivi 'there' (adverb, Latin ibi ), so that enclitic vi means 'there', 'in it, to it' (etymologically from 'there') and non-subject 'you'. The reason why the expected form *ni (as enclitic allomorph of noi , Latin nos ) was abandoned is perhaps that it was not different enough from the other enclitic ne 'from here, from there', 'from it', 'of it' (from Latin inde 'from here'). This explanation of ci 'us' is probably well-known, but I have not checked an historical grammar. I don't know what difference there is between vi and ci in their values as 'there' and 'in it, to it'. The examples given in the Italian-French dictionary I have at home do not confirm, at least for the modern language, the hypothesis that ci = 'here' and vi = 'there' (which would more easily explain the change 'here' > 'us'). However, French largely ignores the difference between 'this' and 'that' and even between 'here' and 'there', so that you will find more reliable information in a dictionary or grammar intended for English speakers. Best regards, R?my Viredaz ***** In Sakapultek (Quiche branch, Mayan family, Guatemala) first and second person pronouns are derived from demonstrative elements. However, full pronouns are not a single morpheme and the other component of each is not clearly related to demonstratives. ra en 1 sg pronoun < ra' 'distal demonstrative' ra at 2 sg pronoun vs. l ara 3 sg pronoun < li 'article' + ra' 'distal demonstrative' This is probably as close as you will come to finding demonstrative based speech act participant pronouns. Best, Robin Shoaps University of California, Santa Barbara ***** Indian languages like Hindi and Malayalam -- these belong to New Indo-Aryan and Dravidian language families respectively -- systematically distinguish between third person references to places, people, and things that are pragmatically present and those that are textually introduced. Hindi: 1./yeh/ ''this person'' can be used only to refer to someone who can be pointed to. 2./woh/ '' he'' stands for someone already introduced in the discourse by means of an NP, or for someone visible but standing far from the utterance setting. Malayalam: /ivan/ same as Hindi1 /avan/ same as Hindi2 What is more pertinent to your query, however, is the case in Malayalam, in which, the proximate demonstrative clitic /ee/ can be used along with first and second person pronouns as emphasis markers. Malayalam: /ee njan/ ''this I/me'', meaning the very same person talking to you, used as almost a metalinguistic assertion of responsibility for the statement that follows. / ee nee/ ''this you'', used as an emphatic device in questioning the honesty/ responsibility/ genuineness of one's interlocutor. Please feel free to contact me if you think you could use more details/ examples from these languages. Regards Thomas Chacko ***** It's a really interesting question you have raised! That had been - in the past - several proposals to derive personal pronouns from deicitic structures. The perphaps most famous one is the the case of Indoeuropean *eg?ho: which has since long been compared to a deictic marker as it shows up e.g. in Latin ec- (ecce). Others have compared the second personal singular pronoun *tu(:) to the to-deixis (distal?) of Indeuropean. However, as far as I know, no systematical research has been done yet on this issue (probably because many linguists treat personal pronouns as 'basic' terms). I have addressed the question in a section of my 1998 book 'Person, Klasse, Kongruenz', vol. 1 (in two parts). Munich: Lincom Europa, pp. 575-598. Wolfgang Schulze ***** I think it's interesting that in Turkish, the 1st person pronoun is ''ben'' and the demonstrative ''this'' is: ''bu'' The second person pronoun is ''sen'' and the demonstrative which I will call ''contrastive this'' is: ''shu'' The third person pronoun is ''o'' and the demonstrative ''that'' is: ''o'' -Ilhan ***** Japanese doesn't have pronouns syntactically or morphologically distinct from nouns, but the term is often applied to certain person/thing-referent-variable nouns. There are in modern Japanese ''kare'' for ''he/him'' and ''kanojo'' for ''she/her.'' These are related to ''are'' = ''that/those yonder'' and ''ano ___'' = ''that/those ___ yonder.'' (''Kanojo'' is a somewhat bizarre word probably, as common knowledge has it, made up for translation from western literature; the ''jo'' is Sino-Japanesse for ''woman.'' Neither of these words are especially polite. One would more often say ''ano hito'' = ''that person (male or female)'' or to be very polite ''ano kata'' = ''that direction.'' A no--longer very polite word for second person is ''anata.'' Originally, this was quite polite, and literally means ''yonder.'' Etymologically, it matches the above ''ano kata'' very closely semantically, and must be somehow related morphologically (as if < ''an(o k)ata,'' although no one has explained the ''minus '-o k-''' part, to my knowledge). In the past there was a similar 2nd person word, ''sonata.'' the ''so-'' part of this contrasts in a number of words with the ''a-'' of ''anata,'' and means ''there (by you).'' A cocky-sounding first person ''pronoun'' used (mostly) by young men is ''ore.'' This may possibly be related to ''kore'' = ''this (one)''; I doubt anyone knows for sure. There are lots of person-referent words in the history of Japanese, but these would seem to be the closest to what you are looking for. Bart Mathias ***** Italian has one pronoun that derives from a locational adverb. It's ci 'us,' and it came about like this: (1) Latin IBI 'there' gave It. vi 'idem.' (2) Unstresed Latin VOS also gave vi 'you' [objective pl.]. You would expect unstressed NOS, then, to give Italian *ni, but (3) Meanwhile, something like Latin ECCE 'behold' + HIC 'here' gave Italian ci 'here.' (4) Since ci 'here' already contrasted with vi 'there' as adverbs, speakers extended the same contrast to objective pronouns, according to the following unconscious equation (solve for ?) vi 'there' : ci 'here' :: vi 'you' is to ? 'us' This Italian example gives further support to the idea that 'here' really is a ''first-person'' adverb, 'there' a ''second-person'' adverb, and ''yon[der]' a ''third-person'' adverb. Well, they are not quite a demonstrative, but one does what one can. Dr. Richard Laurent ***** |
|
| LL Issue: | 14.796 | |
| Date Posted: | 19-Mar-2003 | |
| Original Query: | Read original query | |
|
Back |
||
|
|
||
|
Sums main page
|
||
|
About LINGUIST
|
Contact Us
|
Report Broken Link
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents. |
|
