Article published in:
The Evolution of Argument Coding Patterns in South American Languages
Edited by Antoine Guillaume and Spike Gildea
[Journal of Historical Linguistics 8:1] 2018
► pp. 95–127

From object nominalization to object focus

The innovative A-alignment in the Tuparian languages (Tupian family)

| Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi
| University of São Paulo
This article proposes that the divergent pattern of verb argument marking found in object focus clauses in the Tuparian branch of the Tupian family comes from the reanalysis of an object nominalization in a cleft construction. Based on the distribution of free and bound person markers, the major alignment pattern can be characterized as nominative-absolutive in simple clauses, with free pronouns expressing the nominative, whereas bound person markers express the absolutive. However, object focus clauses show a distinct alignment pattern: the ergative, and not the absolutive, is indexed by the bound markers on the verb. We present arguments for identifying the object nominalization as the source of this grammar in the object focus clause, showing also how this reanalysis resulted in the nominalizer morpheme and the person markers gaining new functions.
Keywords: internal reconstruction, nominalization, focus construction, morphosyntactic alignment, Tuparian languages, Tupian family
Published online: 20 July 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.16025.gal
References

[ p. 125 ]References

Alves, Poliana M.
2004 O léxico do Tuparí: proposta de um dicionário bilíngüe. Universidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita” PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Aragon, Carolina
2014 A Grammar of Akuntsú, a Tupían Language. University of Hawai‘i,, at Mānoa PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
2008 Fonologia e aspectos morfológicos e sintáticos da língua Akuntsú. Universidade de Brasília MA thesis.Google Scholar
Birchall, Joshua
2015 A Comparison of Verbal Person Marking Across Tupian Languages. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Ciências Humanas 10:2.487–518.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014 Argument Marking Patterns in South American Languages. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Braga, Alzerinda
2005 Aspects Morphosyntaxiques de la Langue Makurap/Tupi. Université de Toulouse PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Brandon, F. R., Luci Seki
1984 Moving Interrogatives Without an Initial +wh Node in Tupi. The Syntax of Native American Languages ed. by Eung-Do Cook & Donna B. Gerdts, 72–102. (=Syntax and Semantics, 16.) New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Galucio, Ana Vilacy
2001 The Morphosyntax of Mekens (TUPI). The University of Chicago PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
2006 Relativização na Língua Sakurabiat (Mekens). Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Ciências Humanas 1:1.49–59.Google Scholar
2011 Nominalization in the Mekens Language. Amerindia 35.237–260.Google Scholar
2014 Estrutura argumental e alinhamento gramatical em Mekens. Sintaxe e Semântica do Verbo em Línguas Indígenas no Brasil ed. by Bruna Franchetto, Luciana Storto & Suzi Lima, 167–196. Campinas: Mercado de Letras.Google Scholar
Galucio, Ana Vilacy & Antonia F. Nogueira
2012 Comparative Study of the Tupari Branch of the Tupi Family: Contributions to Understanding its Historical Development and Internal Classification. Proceedings of the Conference on Indigenous Languages of Latin America V. Austin: Center for Indigenous Languages of Latin America (CILLA).Google Scholar
2014 Causativização e alteração de valência em Mekens e Wayoro. Incremento de Valencia en las lenguas amazonicas ed. by Francesc Queixalós, Stella Telles & Ana Carla Bruno, 211–233. Bogotá: Instituto Caro Y Cuervo.Google Scholar
Galucio, Ana Vilacy, Sérgio Meira, Joshua Birchall, Denny Moore, Nilson Gabas Jr., Sebastian Drude, Luciana Storto, Gessiane Picanço & Carmen Reis Rodrigues
2015 Genealogical Relations and Lexical Distances Within the Tupí Linguistic Family: A Lexicostatistical and Phylogenetic Approach. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Ciências Humanas 10:2.229–274.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gijn, Rik van
2014 Subordination Strategies in South America: Nominalization. The Native Languages of South America: Origins, Development, Typology ed. by Loretta O’Connor & Pieter Muysken, 274–297. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gijn, Rik van, Ana Vilacy Galucio & Antonia F. Nogueira
2015 Subordination Strategies in Tupian Languages. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Ciencias Humanas 10:2.297–324.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 126 ]
Gildea, Spike
1994 The Proto-Cariban and Tupí-Guaraní Object Nominalizing Prefix. Lingüística Tupí-Guaraní/Caribe ed. by Ignacio Prado Pastor, 163–177. (= Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Etnolingüísticos, 8.) Lima, Peru.Google Scholar
1998 On Reconstructing Grammar: Comparative Cariban Morphosyntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2000 Reconstructing Grammar: Comparative Linguistics and Grammaticalization. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 Explaining Similarities Between Main Clauses and Nominalized Clauses. Amerindia 32.57–75.Google Scholar
Gildea, Spike & Flávia de Castro Alves
2010 Nominative-Absolutive: Counter-Universal Split Ergativity in Jê and Cariban. Ergativity in Amazonia ed. by Spike Gildea & Francesc Queixalós, 159–199. (= Typological Studies in Language, 89.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
To appear. Reconstructing the Source of Nominative-Absolutive Alignment in Two Amazonian Language Families. Reconstructing Syntax: Cognates and Directionality ed. by Eugenio Luján, Jóhanna Barðdal & Spike Gildea Leiden Brill Press
Harris, Alice & Lyle Campbell
1995 Historical Syntax in Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, C.
1990 Cross-referencing Changes in Some Tupi-Guarani languages. Amazonian Linguistics: Studies in Lowland South American Languages ed. by Doris Payne, 117–158. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald
1977 Syntactic Reanalysis. Mechanisms of Syntactic Change ed. by Charles Li, 59–139. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Moore, Denny
1994 A Few Aspects of Comparative Tupi Syntax. Revista latinoamericana de studios etnolingüísticos 8.151–162.Google Scholar
Moore, Denny, Ana Vilacy Galucio & Nilson Gabas Jr.
2008 O desafio de documentar e preservar as línguas amazônicas. Scientific American (Brasil) 3.36–43.Google Scholar
Nogueira, Antonia Fernanda
2011 Wayoro ẽmẽto: fonologia segmental e morfossintaxe verbal. Universidade de São Paulo MA thesis.Google Scholar
2017 The Morphosyntax of Nominalization in Wayoro (Tupí): A Preliminary Approach. Diadorim: revista de estudos linguísticos e literários 19.250–275.Google Scholar
To appear. Formas verbais finitas e não finitas na língua Wayoro (Tupi). Universidade de São Paulo PhD dissertation.
Nogueira, Antonia Fernanda, Ana V. Galucio, Nicole Soares-Pinto & Adam R. Singerman
To appear. Termos de parentesco na família Tupari (Tupi). Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Ciências Humanas.
Rodrigues, Aryon. D.
1984 Relações internas na família linguística Tupí-Guaraní. Antropologia 27–28.33–53.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, Aryon Dall’Igna & Ana Suelly Arruda Câmara Cabral
2012 Tupían. The Indigenous Languages of South America: A Comprehensive Guide ed. by Lyle Campbell & Verónica Grondona, 495–574. (= The World of Linguistics, 2.) Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rodrigues, Aryon Dall’Igna, Ana Suelly Arruda Câmara Cabral & Beatriz Carretta
Corrrêa da Silva
2006 Evidências Lingüísticas para a Reconstrução de um Nominalizador de Objeto *-mi para o Proto-Tupí. Estudos da Língua(gem) 4:2.21–39.Google Scholar
[ p. 127 ]
Santos, Jarde
2010 Documentação da língua Wayoró: para a preservação das línguas indígenas amazônicas. Fundação Universidade de Rondônia MA thesis.Google Scholar
Singerman, Adam
2016 Nasal Harmony and Phonotactic Well-Formedness in Tupari. International Journal of American Linguistics 82:4.453–485.Google Scholar
Voort, Hein van der
2007 Proto-Jabutí: Um primeiro passo na reconstrução da língua ancestral dos Arikapú e Djeoromitxí. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Ciências Humanas 2:2.133–168.CrossrefGoogle Scholar