LINGUIST List 13.1211

Thu May 2 2002

Qs: Urdu Syntax, Phonology-based Iconic Morphology

Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karenlinguistlist.org>



We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.

In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have taken the trouble to respond to the query.

Directory

  • 832, Phrase Structure rules for Urdu
  • Zylogy, Phonology-based diagrammatically iconic morphology

    Message 1: Phrase Structure rules for Urdu

     Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 12:09:25 +0500
    From: 832 <832nu.edu.pk>
    Subject: Phrase Structure rules for Urdu


    Hi all,

    I need help regarding the Urdu(Pakistani lang)Syntax. Does any one knows about any work done on the phrase structure analysis of Urdu? It would be fine even if yo refer me to someone else.

    regards, Hammad Kabir National University of Computers and Emerging Sciences Lahore, PAKISTAN

    Message 2: Phonology-based diagrammatically iconic morphology

     Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 05:23:55 EDT
    From: Zylogy <Zylogyaol.com>
    Subject: Phonology-based diagrammatically iconic morphology




    Greetings to all. Recently I've become aware of a new type of phonosemantically motivated morphological systematicity. In certain historically related language types stem extensions, noun classes, etc. appear to be wholly diagrammatical in nature, almost slavishly following the prevailing phonological winds for their source semantic interpretation.

    Examples include: The suffixal stem extensions of Takelma (Penutian, North America), the "singular" suffixes of verbs stems in Muskogean (North America), various morphological devices in Yuchi (isolate, North America), space encoding prefixes in Siouan (North America), suffixes in Chemakuan (North America), noun class suffixes in !XooN (Khoisan, Africa), sesquisyllabic "prefixes" in certain Mon-Khmer and Munda languages (Austroasiatic, Asia), and many more, including perhaps Mongolian (Asia) and Proto-Indo-European.

    What all the languages with such formations seem to have in common is current or historical isolating tendencies. The affixal systems appear to either be reshaped or streamlined from less harmonic antecedents (as is the case with, for instance, instrument prefix sets in certain languages called bipartite after Jakobson, further popularized by Delancey), or more directly through some sort of co-selectional process during grammaticalization (though I have no evidence of this last hypothetical phenomenon as yet).

    The primary semantic area involved in all these less obviously secondarily streamlined systems is that of encoding location and pathway in verbs (rather than manner of action as is true for instrument terms), or shape and distribution (as is the case for noun classes).

    I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who has done work with such apparently phonologically based morphological stem elements in their research to see whether there is any common thread between them in form and meaning. Any hypotheses as to why languages might go through such a phase in their typological histories would be welcomed. I'll post a summary when enough responses have been received. Thanks to all in advance.

    Best, Jess Tauber zylogyaol.com