English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 91913/122132 (75%)
Visitors : 25784395      Online Users : 223
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/112600

    Title: 論雅美語動詞詞綴的功能
    Functions of Yami Verbal Affixes
    Authors: 黃婉婷
    Huang, Wan Tin
    Contributors: 張郇慧
    Chang, Hsun Huei
    Huang, Wan Tin
    Keywords: 雅美語
    Verbal affixation
    Subject-verb agreement
    Potentive mood
    Potentive ma-
    Resultative ma-
    Stative ma-
    Patient voice affix
    Date: 2017
    Issue Date: 2017-09-13 14:04:34 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 許多文獻不斷的在探討南島語言動詞詞綴的變化與句子主語的關係,動詞詞綴與主語之間的關係早期被稱為焦點系統(focus system),後來被修正為語態系統(voice system)。但南島語的語態系統與英文的主動/被動語態相似卻不雷同,南島語有主事者語態(actor voice)、受事者語態(patient voice)、地點語態(locative voice)、受惠者語態(beneficiary voice)、工具語態(instrumental voice)等等。除此之外,動詞詞綴與主語的論旨角色之間的對應並不像英文主語/被動語態般有規律,且可被預測。因此,有看法認為動詞詞綴的主要功能是增加或減少句子的及物性(transitivity analysis)。雅美語是屬於南島語系的台灣原住民語言,擁有豐富的動詞詞綴,本文主要的目的就是探討這些動詞詞綴的功能。這些詞綴包括Ø, m-, mi-, <om>/om-, ma-, man-/mang-, ni-, -en, -an, i-, 以及 ka- -an。本文採用Foley(2005)修訂版的宏觀角色層級(revised macro-role hierarchy)來檢視雅美語主語的語意屬性(semantic property),比較這些詞綴在不同類型的句子裡的表現,我們認為這些詞綴的功能並不僅限於改變句子的及物性或語態,而是同時扮演著好幾個不同功能。動詞詞綴 -an 在雅美語中不只表示地點語態,也標示受事者語態,與 -en 有類似的功能。研究發現,至少有三組詞根/詞幹(root/stem)與 -an 跟 -en 有不同的互動。其中一組詞根/詞幹只能被 -an 附加,另一組只能被 -en 附加,第三組則可以被 -an 或 -en 附加。這項發現顯示詞根/詞幹的詞彙語義會影響動詞詞綴的附加選項。本文同時探討了動詞詞綴 ma- 的四項功能,包含主事者語態(activity)、狀態語態(stative)、濳在情態(potentive)跟結果語態(resultative),這四種功能包含了語態(voice)、情態(mood)、終結點(telicity)。由此,本研究認為雅美語的動詞詞綴不只擁有表語態或及物性的功能,而是多功能的詞綴。
    Austronesian languages have exhibited a unique subject-verb relation that has been extensively studied beginning from last century. This relation has been referred to as focus and later on the term voice has replaced it due to its pragmatic usage. Austronesian focus or voice refers to verbal affixation that signals the thematic role of the clause subject. However, this subject-verb relation is not as regular and predictable as the Englsih active-passive voice system. Hence, an alternative view has proposed that the function of these verbal affixes is to transitivize/intransitivize clauses—transitivity analysis. The present study proposes that the function or functions of these verbal affixes should not be limited to signal the thematic role of a clause or to transitivize/intransitivize clauses, and suggests that the verbal affixes in Yami are multi-functional. This proposal is further supported by the affixes ma- and -an in Yami. Semantic properties of subject participants of clauses containing Yami verbal affixes including Ø, m-, mi-, <om>/om-, ma-, man-/mang-, ni-, -en, -an, i-, and ka- -an are examined via the modified version of Foley’s (2005) revised macro-role hierarchy. Based on the semantic property of a clause subject, it is attested that the affix -an serves a similar function as the affix -en in Yami to construct clauses with an undergoer subject in addition to its original function of constructing clauses with a locative subject. There are at least three different sets of roots/stems that are observed to interact with affixes -an and -en in constructing undergoer subject clauses. One set can only be affixed with -en, one only with -an, and the third one can be affixed with both affixes. This has implied that the lexical property of roots/stems has some influence on the choice of the verbal affixation. The semantic property of -an and -en clause subject has some subtle meaning difference when they are compared via the modified version of Foley’s (2005) revised macro-role hierarchy. The -an clause subject is causally affected and might not undergo change of state while the -en clause subject undergoes change of state.

    Four sub-types of ma- clauses are identified including stative ma-, resultative ma-, potentive ma-, and activity ma-. The set of roots/stems that can only be affixed with the affix -en to construct undergoer subject clauses can be affixed with resultative ma- while the set that can only be affixed with -an cannot. The semantic properties of -an and -en clause subjects differ in affectedness have been further confirmed. The potentive ma- simultaneously serves two functions that include signaling an undergoer subject and potentiality of the event, whereas the affix -an serves two different voice functions—undergoer or locative voice. In addition to the view of multifunctionality of these verbal affixes, it is suggested that the study of the Yami verbal system has to take the lexical property of roots/stems into consideration.
    Reference: Asai, Erin. 1936. A Study of the Yami Language: An Indonesian Language spoken on Botel Tobago Island. 93pp, Leiden: J. Ginsberg.

    Ball, Douglas. 2007. On Ergativity and Accusativity in Proto-Polynesian and Proto-Central Pacific. Oceanic Linguistics, 46: 128-153.

    Blake, F.R. 1925. A Grammar of Tagalog Language. New Haven: American Oriental Society. American Oriental Series, 1.

    Blust, Robert. 2009. The Austronesian Languages. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.

    Bloomfield, Leonard. 1917. Tagalog texts with grammatical analysis. University of Illinois Studies in Language and Literature 3:2-4. Urbana: University of Illinois.

    Chang, Claire Hsun-huei. 1997. On thematic structure of Yami verbs. NSC report 85-2418-H-004-001.

    Chang, Claire Husin-huei. 2000. 雅美語參考語法 (A Reference Grammar of Yami). 台北:遠流出版(Taipei: Yuen Liu Publishing Co.)

    Chang, Henry Yungli. 1997. Voice, case, and agreement in Seediq and Kavalan. Ph. D. dissertation, Hsinchu: National Tsing Hua University.

    Chang, Henry Y. 2004. AF verbs: Transitive, intransitive, or both? In Papers in Honor of Professor Hwang-Cherng Gong on His Seventieth Birthday. Language and Linguistics monograph series number 4, ed. by Lin et al, 95-120. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.

    Chang, Henry Y. 2011. Transitivity, ergativity and status of O in Tsou. Language and cognition: Festschrift in Honor of James H-Y. Tai on his 70th birthday, ed. by Jung-hsing Chang & Jenny Y.-C. Kuo. 227-308. Taipei: Crane.

    Chang, Yuching. 2011. 達悟語 ma-型動詞之句法、語意衍生之探討 (A discussion of syntax and semantics on ma-verbs in Yami). MA thesis, Hsinchu: National Tsing Hua University.

    De Guzman, Videa P. 1997. Verbal affixes in Tagalog: inflection or derivation? Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, ed. by Cecilia Odé & Wim Stkhof, 303-326. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Editions Rodopi B.V.

    Deng, Duen-hun. 2005. Argument-function linking in Yami: An optimality-theoretic account. M.A. thesis, Taipei: Nation Chengchi University.

    Dixon, Robert M. W. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Dixon, Robert M. W. 2005. A Semantic Approach to English Grammar, 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Donohue, Mark. 2004. POc *ma- and the adjectives: Oceanic as seen through possibly productive morphology in Tukang Besi. Oceanic Linguistics 43:149–76.

    Dowty, David R. 1979. Word meaning and montague grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company.

    Dowty, David R. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67:547-619.

    Drossard, Werner. 1984. Das Tagalog als Reprɑ̈sentant des aktivischen Sprachbaus. Schriftenreihe zur Linguistik. Tübingen: Narr.

    Drossard, Werner. 1994. The systematization of Tagalog morphosyntax. Arbeitspapier Nr. 19 (Neue Folge). Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universitɑ̈t zu Köln.

    Evans, Bethwyn, and Malcolm Ross. 2001. The history of Proto-Oceanic *ma-. Oceanic Linguistics 40:269–90.

    Fillmore, C. 1970. The grammar of hitting and breaking. In Jacobs, R. And Rosenbaum, P. (eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar, 120-133. Waltham, MA: Ginn.

    Foley, William, A. 2005. Semantic parameters and the unaccusative split in the Austronesian language family. Studies in Language 29.2:385-430.

    Foley, William, A. 2008. The Place of Philippine Languages in a Typology of Voice Systems. In Peter K. Austin and Simon Musgrave, ed., Voice and Grammatical Relations in Austronesian Languages, 22-44. Standford: CSLI Publications.

    Gerdts, Donna. 1988. Antipassives and causatives in Ilokano: Evidence for an ergative analysis. In Richard McGinn, ed., Studies in Austronesian Linguistics, 295-321. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Center for International Studies. [Southern Asia Series, 76.]

    Harvey, Mark. 1979. Subgroups in Austronesian. Canberra: The Australian National University BA honours thesis.

    Haspelmath, Martin. 1993. More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. In: Comrie, Bernard & Polinsky, Maria (eds.) Causatives and transitivity, 87-120. (Studies in Language Companion Series, 23.) Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2005. The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar: typological characteristics. The Austronesian Languages of Asia and Madagascar, ed. by K. Alexander Adelaar & Nikolaus P. Himmelmann: 110-181. London & New York: Routledge.

    Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2006. How to miss a paradigm or two: multifunctional ma- in Tagalog. Catching Language: The Standing Challenge of Grammar Writing, ed. by Felix Ameka, Alan Dench & Nicholas Evans, 487-526. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2008. Lexical categories and voice in Tagalog. Voice and Grammatical Relations in Austronesian Languages, ed. by Peter Austin & Simon Musgrave, 247-293. Standford: CSLI.

    Ho, Arlene, Y.L. 1990. Yami Structure: A descriptive study of the Yami Language. M.A. thesis, Hsinchu: National Tsing Hua University.

    Holmer, Arthur. 1996. A parametric grammar of Seediq. Travaux de l’Institut de Linguistique de Lund 30. Lund: Lund University Press.

    Hopper, Paul, J. and Sandra A. Thompson. 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56.2: 251-299.

    Huang, Huei-ju, and Shuanfan Huang. 2007. Lexical perspectives on voice construction in Tsou. Oceanic Linguistics 46.2: 424-455.

    Huang, Lillian M. 1993. The voice system in Atayal. Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Languages in Taiwan, ed. by Feng-fu Tsao & Mei-hui Tsai, 73-98. Taipei: Crane.

    Huang, Lillian M. 1995. 泰雅語參考語法(A Reference of Mayrinax). 台北:遠流出版社(Taipei: Crane Publishing.)

    Huang, Lillian M. 2000. Verb classification in Mayrinax Atayal. Oceanic Linguistics 39 (2): 364-390.

    Huang, Lillian M. 2001. Focus system of Mayrinax Atayal: a syntactic, semantic and pragmatic perspective. Journal of Taiwan Normal University: Humanities and Social Sciences 46.1-2:51-69.

    Huang, Shuanfan. 2002. The pragmatics of focus in Tsou and Seediq. Language and Linguistics 3.4:665-694.

    Huang, Shuanfan. 2005. Split O in Formosan languages. Language and Linguistics 6(4): 783-806.

    Huang, Shuanfan, and Michael Tanangkingsing. 2011. A Discourse Explanation of the Transitivity Phenomena in Kavalan, Squliq, and Tsou. Oceanic Linguistics 50.1: 97-123.

    Huang, Shuping, and Li-May Sung. 2008. The undergoer focus ma- in Kavalan. Oceanic Linguistics 47.1: 159-184.

    Huang, Wan-tin. 2006. Yami voice system revisited: with particular reference to the ditransitive constructions. M.A. thesis, Taipei: National Chengchi University.

    Katamba, Francis. 1993. Morphology. New York: Palgrave.

    Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Levin, B., and M. Rappaport Hovav. 2005. Argument Realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Liao, Hsiu-Chuan. 2004. Transitivity and Ergativity in Formosan and Philippine Languages. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Hawaii.

    Liao, Hsiu-Chuan. 2011. Some morphosyntactic differences between Formosan and Philippine Languages. Language and Linguistics 12.4:845-876.

    Maclachlan, Anna E. 1996. Aspects of ergativity in Tagalog. Ph.D. dissertation, McGill University.

    Mithun, Marianne. 1994. The implications of ergativity for a Philippine voice system. Voice: its Form and Function. Typological Studies in language 27. Barbara Fox and Paul Hopper, eds. Amsterdam: John Benjamin's. 247-277.

    Manning, Christopher D. 1996. Ergativity: argument structure and grammatical relaitons. Standford: Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI).

    McFarland, Curtis D. 1976. A provisional classification of Tagalog verbs. Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa Monograph Series No. 8. Tokyo: Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.

    Mithun, Marianne. 1994. The implications of ergativity for a Philippine voice system. Voice: its Form and Function. Typological Studies in language 27. Barbara Fox and Paul Hopper, eds. Amsterdam: John Benjamin's. 247-277.

    Payne, Thomas. E. 1982. Role and reference related subject properties and ergativity in Yup’ik Eskimo and Tagalog. Studies in Language 6:75-106.

    Payne, Thomas. E. 1997. Describing morphosyntax: A guide for field linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Ramos, Teresita, and Maria Lourdes Bautista. 1986. Handbook of Tagalog verbs: inflections, modes, and aspects. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.

    Rau, D. Victoria, and Maa-Neu Dong. 2006. Yami texts with reference grammar and dictionary. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.

    Reid, Lawrence A. 1992. On the development of the aspect system in some Philippine languages. Oceanic Linguistics 31.1: 65-69.

    Ross, Malcolm D. 2009. Proto Austronesian verbal morphology: A reappraisal, in Alexander Adelaar and Andrew Pawley (ed.), Austronesian Historical Linguistics and Culture History: A festschrift for Robert Blust, Pacific Linguistics, Canberra Australia, pp. 295-326.

    Ross, Malcolm. 2015. Reconstructing proto Austronesian verb classes, Language and Linguistics, 16.3:279-345.

    Ross, Malcolm & Teng, Stacy Fang-ching. 2005. Formosan Languages and Linguistic Typology. Language and Linguistics 6.4:739-781.

    Teng, Stacy Fang-ching. 2007. A Reference Grammar of Puyuma, an Austronesian Language of Taiwan. Ph. D. dissertation, Canberra: Australian National University.

    Tsuchida, Shigeru, Yamada, Yukihiro & Moriguchi, Tsunekazu. 1987. Lists of Selected Words of Bantanic Languages. University of Tokyo. 198pp.

    Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1985. Passive and related construction: A prototype analysis. Language 61:821-848.

    Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1988. Voice in Philippine languages. In Passive and Voice, ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani, 85-142. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Shih, Louise Yu-mien. 1997. Yami morphology. MA thesis, Taichung: Providence University.

    Shih, Louise Yu-mien.2013. Transitivity and valency-changing derivations in Yami. Ph. D. dissertation, Kaohsiung: National Kaohsiung Normal University.

    Starosta, Stanley, Andrew Pawley and Lawrence A. Reid. 1982. The evolution of focus in Austronesian. Paper presented at the Third Internal Conference on Austronesian Languistics, Bali.

    Starosta, Stanley. 1997. Formosan clause structure: Ergativity, transitivity, and case marking. In Chinese languages and linguistics IV: Typological studies of languages in China, ed. by Chiu-yu Tseng, 125-154. Taipei: Academia Sinica.

    Starosta, Stanley. 1999. Transitivity, ergativity, and the best analysis of Atayal case marking. Selected Papers from the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun and Paul Jen-kuei Li, 371-392. Taipei Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.

    Starosta, Stanley. 2002. Austronesian ‘Focus’ as derivation: Evidence from nominalization. Language and Linguistics 3.2:427-479.

    Van Valin, Robert D., Jr. 1981. Grammatical Relations in Ergative Languages. Studies in Language 5.3. 361-394.

    Vendler, Z. 1967. Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Walton, Charles. 1986. Sama Verbal Semantics: Classification, Derivation, and Inflection. Manila: Linguistic Society of the Philippines.

    Wu, Joy Jing-Lan. 2007. “Voice” markers in Amis: A role and reference grammar analysis. Language and Linguistics 8:95-142.

    Yami New Testament. 1994. Taipei: The Bible Society in the R.O.C.

    Zeitoun, Elizabeth. 1992. A syntactic and semantic study of Tsou focus system. M.A. thesis, Hsinchu: National Tsing Hua University.

    Zeitoun, Elizabeth and Lillian M. Huang. 2000. Concerning ka-, an overlooked marker of verbal derivation in Formosan languages, Oceanic Linguistics 39.2: 391-414.
    Description: 博士
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0965555021
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[語言學研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    502101.pdf3614KbAdobe PDF287View/Open

    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

    社群 sharing

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback