INFORMATION TO USERS

This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI

films the text directly from the originid or copy submitted. Thus, some

thesis and on copies are in typewriter face, while others may be

from any type of computer printer.

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the

copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality

illustrations and ph print bleedthrough, substandard margins,

and improper alignment can adversely

In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete

manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if

unauthorized copyright materid had to be removed, a note will indicate

the deletion.

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by

sectioning the original, at the upper left-hand corner and

continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each

original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced

form at the back of the book

Photographs included in the o manuscript have been reproduced

xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white

photographic prints are available for any photo hs or illustrations

appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to

order.

A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zecb Road. Ann Alfaor N1 48106-1346 USA

3 13/76 1-47OO 800/52 1-0600

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara

Information Flow and Grammatical Structure in Barbarefio Churnash

A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

in

Linguistics

by

Tsuyoshi Ono

Committee in charge:

Professor Marianne Mithun

Professor Wallace Chafe

Professor Sandra A. Thompson

Professor William Ashby

Professor W. Randall Garr

August 1996

UMI Number: 9807454

UMI Microform 9807454 Copyright 1997, by UMI Company. All rights reserved.

This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, ME 48103

The dissertation of Tsuyoshi Ono i s approved

Committee Chairperson

August 1996

Copyright by

Tsuyoshi Ono

1996

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

There are countless people who have made the

present work possible and who have provided various

types of support throughout my graduate education at UC

Santa Barbara. Rather than try to list them all and

r i sk revealing how poor my memory is, I l ist here only

the people who were most d i rec t ly involved in this work.

I would l i k e to thank Marianne Mithun, Wally Chafe,

Sandy Thompson, B i l l Ashby, Randy Garr , Suzanne Wash,

and Pat Mayes. I am especially grate fu l to Marianne

Mithun for her constant help and encouragement, and to

Suzanne Wash, who generously provided me with the

Barbareno discourse data.

M y work on Barbareno Chumash has been made p o s s i b l e

by grant BNS90-U018 from t h e National Science

Foundation (Marianne Mithun, Principal Investigator).

1 am also grateful to the Santa Barbara Museum of

Natural History for kindly providing the microfilms of

J. P. Harrington's manuscript materials as w e l l as M. S .

Beeler's or ig ina l manuscripts, thereby making this study

possible.

VITA

1982 B.A., Konan University

1985-1987 Teaching Assistant, Department of East Asian Languages and Literatures, University of Oregon

1987 M.A., University of Oregon

1992 Winter Visiting Instructor, Department of East Asian Languages and Literatures, University of Oregon

1987-1994 Research Assistant and Teaching Assistant, Department of Linguistics and Department of Germanic, Oriental, and Slavic Languages and Literatures, University of California, Santa Barbara

1994-1996 Adjunct Instructor, Department of East Asian Studies, University of Arizona

SELECTED PUBLICATIONS

1990 &g, L, and a Clauses in Japanese Recipes : A Quantitative Study. Studies in Language 14:73-92.

1992 With R. Suzuki, Word Order Variability in Japanese Conversation: Motivations and Graimnaticization. Text 12:429-445.

1992 With R. Suzuki, The Development of a Marker of Speaker's Attitude: The Pragmatic Use of the Japanese Grmaticized Verb shhau in Conversation. Proceedings of the 18th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. 204- 213.

1992 The Grmaticizatian of the Japanese Verbs oku and shimau. Cognitive Linguistics 3:367-390.

With P. Mayes, The ~ c c p i s i t i o r i of t h e Japanese Subject Marker m and Its Theoret ica l Impl icat ions . In P. Clancy, ed*, JapaneseIKorean L ingu i s t i c8 Vol. 2. Stanford: Center for t h e Study of Language and Infarmation, Stanford Universi ty. 239-247-

With M. H t h u n and S* Wash, The S h i f t i n g S t a t u s of I n i t i a l G l o t t a l Stop i n Barbarefia Chumash. Proceedings of t h e 1993 Hakan-Penutian Workshop. 199-207

With S. Wash and M. Kithun, F ina l G l o t t a l i z a t i a n i n Barbarefiu Chumash and Its Neighbors. Proceedings of t h e 1993 Hokan-Penutian Workshop. 208-21'7

With S. Thompson, Unattached W s in English Conversation. Praceedinqs of t h e 20th Annual Meeting of t h e ~ e r k e l e ~ - ~ i n ~ i s t i c s Society. 402- 419.

With S. Thompsmn, What Can Conversation T e l l U s about Syntax? I n P. Davis, ed., Descr ipt ive and Theore t ica l M d e s i n t h e New L i n p i s t i c s . Amsterdam: Benjamins. 213-271.

With S * Thompson, The Dynamic Nature of Conceptual Stricture Building; Evidence from Conversation. I n A* Goldberg, ed., Cunceptual S t ruc tu re , Discourse and Language. Chicago: Center f o r the Study of Language and Information, Univers i ty of Chicago Press . 391-399.

With E. Yoshida, A Study of CO-Canstmctian i n Japanese; W e Don't -Finish Each Othe r f s SentencesOm I n N. Akatsuka & S * Iwasaki, eds., Japanese/Korean Lingu i s t i c s 5. Chicago: Center f o r t h e Study of Language and Information, Univers i ty of Chicago P r e s s m 115-129.

To Appear With S. Th~mpson, I n t e r a c t i o n and Syntax i n t h e S t r u c t u r e of Conversational Discourse. In E. Hovy & Dm Scot t , eds., Diecourse Processing: An I n t e r d i s c i p l i n a q Perspective. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag-

To Appear With S * C&ngF Ad HOC Hierarchy: Lexical S t ruc tu re s f o r Reference i n Cansumer Reports Articles. I n B* FoxF e d m F Studies i n Anaphosa. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

To Appear With S * Cmming, Discaurse Syntax* I n T. A* van Dijk, ed., Discourse: A M u l t i d i s c i p l i n a q Int roduct ion. London: Sage.

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Discourse and G r a m m a r

Studies i n Discourse and Grammar ; Gr-aticization Professors Wallace Chafe, P a t r i c i a Clancy, Susanna Cmming, John Du B o i s , Marianne Mthun and Sandra Thampson

Studies i n Native American Languages; Descr ipt ive L ingu i s t i c s

Professors Wallace Chafe and Marianne Mithun

Studies i n Japanese Linguistics Professor P a t r i c i a Clancy

Studies i n Phonetics Professor Ha S* Gopal

vii

Infoz=mation Flow and G r a m m a t i c a l S t r u c t u r e i n Barbarefio Chumash

by

Tsuyashi Ono

This d i s s e ~ a t i o n p re sen t s a d e s c r i p t i o n of some of

the f u n c t i o n a l a spec t s of the grammar of Barbarefio

Chumash, a C a l i f o r n i a language, by c l o s e l y examining

a c t u a l d i s c o u r s e d a t a wi th r e s p e c t t o one area of

research called ' i n f o m a t i a n f low8.

I begin w i t h a b r i e f grammatical ske t ch of

Barbareiio, and t h e n discuss t h r e e d i f fexer i t b u t t i g h t l y

connected areas of t he grammar. 1 f i r s t demonstrate t h e

importance of t h e cure-oblique d i s t i n c t i o n in t h e

argument structure of t h e language by exmin ing s e v e r a l

different aspec t s2 pronominal a f f i x e s , e a n s t i t u e n t

o rder , and core a r w e n t - b u i l d i n g devicese

1 then d e s c r i b e t h e var ious r e f e r e n t i a l forms and

their r e s p e c t i v e discouxse functionse These inc lude

v i i i

pronominal affixes, full NPs, independent pronouns, and

the demonstrative be?. 1 suggest that pronominal

affixes are the default choice because they are

grmatically recpixed and are most commonly used for

the least cognitively demanding task of keeping track af

e s t h l i s h e d pmic ipants in the discourse. In contrast,

f u l l W s are used for the more cognitively demanding

tasks of introducing/reintrod~cing pa*icipants and

clarifying potentially ~ i g u o u s referents in the

discaurse. Independent pronouns and the demonstrative

he2 are used for such tasks as making a contrast and - referxinq ta pa~icipants that are referentially complex

or whose exact identities have been le f t unspecified.

Finally, I describe different constituent order

types and t h e i ~ respective functions. I suggest that

the basic constituent order in Barbare50 is a verb

perhaps fallawed by either the intransitive subject or

the transitive direct object, and perhaps further

followed by an ablique, and that NPs occurring befare

the verb are associated with such marked functions as

t o p i c and focus.

Acknowledgments ........................W....... iv ............................................ V i t a v

Abstract ...m.................................... viii Table of Contents ............................m.e X

List of Uhreviations ..............ern........... xiii

l . Intxoduction ..............m..m............... l L 1 . Language and people ................W....m 2 1.2. Previous work .............m.............. 3 1.3. Theoretical foundation .............W..... 4

1.4. Data and methodology ....................m 6

1.5. Organization .....................W....... 8

Hates for chapter l ........................... 10

2 . Grammatical sketch .....................~..m.. l1

2.L Distinctive sounds ............W.......... 11 2 - 2 0 Basic mo~pho~ogical structure

and lexical categories .W......e.......... 14

2 * 3 m Argument structure and pronominal

affixes .................................. 20 2.4. Constituent arder ........................ 25

4 . Referential choice . a . e e e e o e e e . e e . e . o e m . . . e . . e 72

4.1. Pronominal affixes . . e o e e * e o . o e . . e . . o e e e m . 72

4 . 2 * Full noun phases . e . e e o . e . o e o . . . . e . e . e . e . 79

4 * 3 . Independent pronouns o . . e e e e e e e e e . e . . e e . . . 94

4.4. Daonetrative he2- . e e . . . e . e . . e . e e e e o e e . . . . 103

4 - 5 * Summary e o e e . e o . e . . . o . e . e . e e o e e e o o ~ e e o . . . . 113

Bibliography a o e e m e e e * w . * * w m . e e m * a e . m m m * a m . a o e * a . 168

xii

1

l0 =

1FL =

2

20 =

2PL =

3 - - 3PO =

AGT =

A2 =

ART =

CA =

COB! =

DAT

DIR =

DIS =

DP =

DU =

D r n =

EM =

EVT =

first person

f i r s t person direct object

f i r s t person pluxal

second person

seeand person direct abject

second person plural

third person

third person plural direct object

agentive

Alienable possessiun

article

causative

comitative

dative

directional

distal

dependent

dual

dusat ive

emphatic

future

habitual

inde f in i t e

ins t m e n t a l

locative

negative

nominalizer

noun past

plural

proximate

past

reduplication

resultative

reflexive

remote

repetitive

superlative

transitive

xiv

1. Introduction

Baxbarefio Chumash is a North h e r i c a n Indian

language indigenaus to Santa Barbara, California. This

d i s se r t a t ion descxibes some funct ional aspects of the

grammar of t h e Barbzueiio Chumash by c l a se ly examining

ac tua l ckiscourse data. Specif ical lyg t h i s w i l l be done

based on the findings and the asswtptions i n one area of

research ca l led 5nfonnation flowF (Chafe 1987, 1994}g

which suggests that t h e use of d i f f e r en t grammatical

foms is motivated by the changing cogni t ive s t a t e of

the information i n t he speaker% and t h e hearer*^ minds.

Aspects of t h e grammu which will be dealt with in t h i s

disse-ation are axgument structure g r e f e x e n t i a l choice,

and consti tuent ozder. These have been chosen because

they axe the areas where the in t e r face of grammar and

discourse function is most evident.

Since s tudies of l i ngu i s t i c farms based on

discourse data have been xather scarce, p a r t l y because

of a general lack of tex tua l materialg a8 w e l l as the

dominance of uconstmcted sentencem methodolagy, this

d i s se r t a t ion w i l l make an impoz=txint new contxibution t o

t h e f i e l d . F ~ i c u l a r l y because o f its r i c h morphology,

the s t ruc ture of Baxbarefio Chumash is r a the r d i f fe ren t

from inany well-docmented languages* For t h i s reasonp

the present diseertation will provide the f i e l d with a

much-needed database which should help to genexate new

ideas and to evaluate already exis t ing theor ies of

language.

1.1. Language and people

The Chuniash languages w e r e o r ig ina l ly spoken by

between S a n L u i s Obispo and Malibup at the western edge

of the San Joaquin Valley? and on the i s l ands i n t h e

S a n t a Barbara Chanriel. The family i nc ludes at l e a s t six

dif ferent languages, now referred to by the names aÂ

~ s s i ~ n s around which t h e i r speakers l ived*

Ohispeiio Central Chumash

Ventureiio Barbareiio Ynesefio Puris he50

Island Chumash

Barbazefio Chumash belongs t o t he Central Chumash

subfamily and was spoken u n t i l 1965. The las t s p e d c e ~ ~

Masy Yee? who died in 1965, w a s a l so the last speaker of

any Chumash language* The genetic re la t ionship of t he

Chumash languages t o any larger f d ~ y ~ s t o c k has not

been es tab l i shed-

1.2- Pzevious work

There has been little published woxk on t h e Chumash

languages in general, and on Bazbazefio i n pa r t i cu la r .

There is a sho r t Barbarefio Chuxnash grammatical sketch

(Beeler 19761, a Barbaxeiia narrat ive with a s m a l l word

list of a p p r o x a a t e l y 1,000 words (Beeler 19781, and a

longer version of t h e same narra t ive ( B e e l e r and

Whistler 1980)- There is a r a t h e r extensive grammar of

Ynesefio Chumash (Applegate 1972)- There are some works

on redupl icat ion in Ynesefio and Basbarefia (Applegate

1976; Wash 1995aIt on g l o t t a l i z a t i o n i n Barbarefio

(fithun et al. 1994; Ono et a l . 1994a1, and on a

phenamenan called F s ib i lant harmony in Barbarefio and

Ventusefio ( B e e l e r 1970b; Harrington 1974; Puser 1982;

Mithun t o appear)- There is also some comparative waxk

on t h e Chuxnash family ( K l u 1973, 1977# 1981).

Additionally thexe ie an unpublished wo~king dict ionary

of Barbareiio Chumash which contains a p p s o x h t e l y 2,000

wards (Whistler 1980) T h i s i t e m has been widely

c i rculated amang scholars who are intezested in Chumash.

There is alsa an unpublished manuscript containing a

grammatical sketch, a word list, and a na r ra t ive (Eeeler

19'70a) which was the b a s h f o r some of Beelerrs

publications listed above.

1*3* Theoretical foundatian

Thie d i s s e e a t % o n is based on an approach o f t en

ca l l ed funct ional l i ngu i s t i c s . The c h a a c t e r i s t i c s of

t h i s approach can be summarized as f ~ l l o w s : it focuses

on the funct ional aspects of language; it examines t h e

re la t ionsh ip between par t icu la r forms and t h e i r

functions. The functions propased by t h i s approach are

of ten psycholugi~ally andior socio-culturallymutivated.

This tendency is partly due to the working a s s m p t i ~ n s

t h a t language i s a pa r t of t he human cogni t ive

mechanism, and t h a t it is used foz s o c i a l functions in

a large sacia-cuXtura1 context*

As a na tu ra l consequence of these warking

assumptions, f u n c t i o n a l ~ y ariented l i n g u i s t s very often

use natural discourse as a database r a t h e r than

constructed data, which are the standaxd f o r many o the r

schools af l i n g u i s t i c s ~ When epaken discourse is

examined by func t i ana l ly oriented l i n g u i s t s , f o r

example, audiotapes or videotapes are made af naturally

aecuxring discourse. These are later transcrfied, of ten

using a de t a i l ed transcription system (@.g*, nu B o i s et

al. 1993)* Using these data, eithex very r i c h

q u a l i t a t i v e analyses (emgm, s t u d i e s i n Chafe 1 9 8 0 ) a r

q a n t i t a t i v e analyses axe pe r f amed ( e * g m , s t u ~ e s i n

Giv6n 1983 ; Du B a i s 1987 1 . Sometimes, even e q e r h e n t a l

method01aq-y is emplayed t o eva lua te pre-exist ing

t heo r i e s (e .g . , Tomlin 1987)- The care taken by

funct ional ly a r i en t ed l i n g u i s t s with t h e data as w e l l as

t h e i r methodological considera t ion8 may be seen as a

natural progression of t h e f i e l d .

There ase two othex c h u a c t e r i s t i c s of t h i s

appxoacb which cut across i ts emphasis an p s y c h a l ~ g i c a l

and sacio-cul tura l factors m One c h m a c t e r i s t i c is an

i n t e r e s t i n diachronic aspects of language* T h i s can be

seen i n t h e notion af g r m a t i c i z a t i o n , which has played

a major role i n t h e work of numy func t iona l ly o r i en t ed

linguists (@.gm, s tud i e s in m a u g o t t and Heine 1991;

Hopper and Traagott 1993). It is based on t h e idea t h a t

language is f l u i d and c~ns tant ly changing; tkough

h i s t o r i c a l praeesses, new grammatical c o n s t m c t i o n s are

cans tan t ly evolving t o f u l f i l 1 var ious func t iona l

purposes. The other c h a x a c t e r i s t i c is an intexest in

examining not only one language but a n&ez of

languages i n the woxld and in learning from t h e

diffexences mci s ~ l ~ i t i e s among them ( e. g g , Hopper

and Thompson 1980: Given 1984, 1990; Mithun 1987; C o m r i e

1989) g

Among many different approaches and areas of

invest igat ion i n functional 1 i n ~ i s t i . c ~ , t h i s

dissedation w i l l focus on one broad area called

finfoxmation flowf (Chafe 1987 , 1994) which suggests

that t h e use of particular l i n g u i s t i c forms is motivated

by t h e changing cognitive s t a t e of the information i n

the speaker's and the hearer's minds.

1 .4 . Data and methodology

There are t w o main sources of data for the study of

Baxbaxefia Chumash. F i s s t , enunnous amounts of data were

collected by the l a t e John Harringtan, an

anthopological l i n g u i s t for the Sndtheunian

InstitutionF from the early 1910's u n t i l h i s death in

1961. During this period, he worked with several

epeakers, including the last Chumaeh speaker, M a r y Y e e .

Barrington's data exist in the farm o f micrafibs of

50,000 to 100,000 pages of his original f i e l c i n ~ t e s , slip

files and texts (Haxrington 1912-1961). The textual

materials, which are most relevant to this dissertation,

include many different genres such as traditional tales,

ethnographic accounts, personal narratives, historical

narratives, myths, and religious texts. Second, the

late Madison Beeler, a Berkeley linguist, worked with

Mary Yee during the 1950's and 1960's and left

fieidnotes and texts, as well as audio recordings of

some of these materials (Beeler 1954-1961). Both

Harrinqt.on8s and Heeler's data are in the collections of

the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, from which

all of the data for "this dissertation come.

Approximately 250 texts from microfilm reel # S 9 of

Barrington's data have been given an interlinear,

morpheine-by-morpheme analysis by Suzanne Wash for the

Chumash Language Project headed by Dr. Marianne

Mithun. These texts are primarily ethnographic

accounts, all from Mary Tee. I will make my functional

analyses of Barbareno grammar based on these textual

data. Though these texts will be the primary source for

this dissertation, I will be complementing then with

examples from BeelerOs data as well as other published

sources .

Analyses of each aspect of Barbareno Chmnash w i l l

be based on detailed examinations of t h e discourse

context where the linguistic forms i n quest ion occur

( i . e . , particular cons t i tuen t order variation,

particular r e f e r e n t i a l forms, etc.). Thus my analyses

w i l l pr imari ly be qual i tat ive i n nature. Based on. these

analyses, I w i l l i d e n t i f y t h e funct ional categories

which are associa ted with linguistic forms i n question.

I w i l l present the results as funct ional descr ip t ions

and I w i l l a l s o seek their t heo re t i ca l implications by

p lac ing t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Barbareno Chumash i n t h e

context of t h e existing funct ional theories of

linguistics i n general and the information f l o w

l i t e r a t u r e i n pa r t i cu l a r .

1.5. Organization

T h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n i s organized in t h e following

way. In chapter 2, I w i l l give a grammatical sketch of

Barbareno Chumash s o t h a t readers w i l l have enough f a c t s

about Barbareiio t o follow t h e rest of the d i s se r t a t ion .

I n chapter 3, I w i l l describe the bas i c argument

s t ruc tu re of Barbareno and the prominent morphological

and syntac t ic f ea tu re s associated with it. I w i l l also

discuss other devices which are closely associated with

the basic argument structure. In chapter 4, I will

discuss factors involved in using different referential

forms. In chapter 5 , I w i l l describe the structures of

different constituent order types and the functions

associated with them. In chapter 6 , I w i l l summarize

the findings of this dissertation and their theoretical

implications. I will also discuss problems of this

investigation and suggest directions for future

research.

N o t e s for Chapter 1

1. Suzanne Hash (p.c. ) states that the analyses of these

t e x t s were done several years ago and not all of them

reflect her current analysis.

2. Grammatical sketch

This chapter gives a brief overview of the grammar

of Barbarefio Chumash in order to provide readers with

basic facts of the language. Included are distinctive

sounds, basic morphological structure and lexical

categories, argument structure and pronominal affixes,

constituent order, and clause-combining. It should be

noted that many of the analyses given in this chapter

are based on work by Beeler (particularly l970a, 1976;

Beeler and Whistler l980 ) .

2.1. Distinctive sounds

Barbarefia Chumash contains the following vowels:

Table Is Barbarena vowels

i a: U

e 0

a

The front and back vowels M, /e/, /U/, and /o/

tend to be low. This conclusion is based on the

following two observations. First, often these sounds

are written with symbols [I], [ g ] , [v], and [ a ] , respectively, in Beeler s f ieldnotes . Second, the

audio-recordings of Mary Tee's speech clearly support

this. In general, the vowels seem to be higher in open *

syllables and lower in closed syllables.

Barbarego Chumash contains the following

consonants :

Table 2: Barbareno consonants

P t k q 2

k A

S S X h

S X

c c

6 &

W Y

W 9 Barbarefio's relatively large set of consonants consists

of plain consonants and their glottalized counterparts.

The sole exception for this reqular-glottalized pairing

is [ S ] for which no [h 1 counterpart is attested in the

existing data. Glottalized sonorants do not occur word

in i t ia l ly .

Some previous studies of Chumash (Applegate 1972;

Beder 1976) have treated aspirated consonants as

dis t inct ive sounds. However, following K l a r (1977) and

Wash ( 1995a) , I w i l l treat them as a combination of a

regular consonant plus an /h/; most of the instances of

aspirated consonants resul t f r o m a morphological process

i l lus trated i n the following example (a

abbreviations is provided on page x i i i ) :

(1) JH59.128L-l28R, t x t 11' line 004 59.128L

&^at t&tty. s-sa?-tuhuy 3-FUT~r&in 'it is g. to rain. '

h The symbol [ ] indicates aspiration.

list of

Aspirated

consonants are found when two identical (or similar)

consonants are placed next to each other. Remaining

aspirated consonants i n a f e w lexical items are

interpreted as a combination of a regular consonant and

an /h/ (e.g., [sha] 'toothp as /*ha/).

Barbareno is known for a phenomenon called sibilant

harmony i n which s ib i lant s within words harmonize w i t h

t h e last s ib i lant of the word in terms o f tongue

posit ion. Thus words contain e i ther only apical (or

alveolar) s ib i lant s [ S ] , [ & l , [c], and [&l, or only

ldnal/blade (or palata l ) s ib i lant s [g 1, [c], and [ c ]

(For details, see Beeler l970b; Harrington 1974.)

Examine the following examples:

(2) JH59.24&241R, txt 26, line 006 59.243X

a e ~ i ~ a ~ ~ i - u i - &S h i ~ e t g t i d e w , &e=s-iy-aqniwili8 hiçAe=fitani EM=3-PI.--think DP=EM=little 'they just do a little thinking.r

(3) JH59.407R-409&, txt 58, line 004 59.408L

k5.m kaGyw6fi. k b ka =B-iy-wefi and thens3-PL-go.to.bed 'then they would go to bed'

N o t i c e that in these examples the third person

pronodnal prefix is realized as [ S ] and [ S ] , respectively, depending on the final sibilant of each

word (for ( 3 ) , itself is the last sibilant ) It

should be noted, however, that this harmony is very

often not observed in the data I looked at (cf. Mithun

to appeal: ) .

2.2. Basic morphological structure and l e x i c a l categories

As could be seen i n the examples above, another

interesting characteristic of Barbare60 Chumash is

polysynthesis. Examine the following examples:

(4) JH59.299L-300L, txt 55, line 003 59.2991,

?alauksukepwon holS?lfi? iwn ?&l-R-su-kep -won ha -1 -win NU -B-CA-bxthe-3P0 DIS-ART-chlld-PL 'She's bathing the childrenF

(6) JES9.7R-8R, txt 5, line 001 59.81.

Barbareno words generally contain multiple morphemes.

As the examples show, most structures axe agglutinative,

and segmentation of words into morphemes is relatively

straightforward.

The two main lexical categories in Barbareno are

nouns and verbs. Here are some examples of nouns:

(7) JH59.205L-205R, txt 21, line 002 59.205L

iheitub&+ hi=he?=l -tubu<r DP=PRX=ART=r ain "rain'

(8) JH59.665Rw666R, txt 69, line 002 59.665R

( 9 ) JH!59.656R-657Lt txt SO, Line OOlb 59.656R

m i c a l l y , nouns are marked with t h e dependent p x o c l i t i c

hi=, as shown i n ( 9 l f and (IO).~ Nouns are a l s o

often marked w i t h one of the three p r o e l i t i c s he?=

*proximate* ( ( 7 ) ) , h02= FdistalF ( ( g ) ) , and hu= @remote0

( ( 8 } ) . These clitics can CO-accur with hi= an nouns, a s

shown i n ( 7 ) and ( g ) * The sound of hi=, heZ=, ha?=,

and hu= is o f t en e l ided, which is seen i n ( 7 ) m The

p r o c l i t i c i n ( 7 ) and ( 8 ) seems to be bes t

c h a a c t e r i z e d as a d e f i n i t e a r t i c l e . I n ( 9 ) and (XO),

possession i s ind ica ted by prefixes and g= on t h e

nouns . (See below f o r more d e t a i l s about these

pref ixes . ) I n p l u r a l i t y is ind ica ted by

redupl icat ion accompanied by lengthening and

g l o t t a l i z a t i o n of t h e final sy l l ab le (Wash 1995a). In

( 10 ) , t h e suffix -iwaS indicates t h e defunct status of

t h e referent ind ica ted by the noun. I n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r

examplef it ind ica t e s a rib of a dead whale.

Here are some examples of vexbs:

(13) J'H59*3OOR-301R0 txt 56, line 002 59.300R

( 13 1 and ,&-. in (14 ) are all pronouns. (See below

for mare details 1 These prefixes are the same as those

used for nouns to indicate possession* In ( I1 ) & is

a ciurative pref In ( 12 ) , sa2- is a future tense

aspect* In (Id), is a negative pre f ix , dli- is a

habitual prefix, and -wag is a past tense suffix*

Notice that both in tenns of form and functionf the

suffix -was is very t 3h i la r to -iwaGf which is used for

nouns to indicate the defunct status of the referent*

It suggests that these suffixes may be related

histaricalLy. Finally, as can be seen in ( 7 ) and (12),

often the same (or a similar) moqheme is used either as

a noun ox a vezb ( 9 a i n F and tuhuv %a rainp)* In

this particular case, glattalization is functioning as

absence of an adjective category (cf. Dhon 1977;

Schachter 1985) . The pxedicating functian of adjectives

in other languages seems ta be served by verbs in

As can be seen in these examples, the morphemes ,hotF#

@goadt, @healthye, and @tastyFi which would be

adjectives in some languages, are serving a predicating

function while being treated m o ~ h o ~ o g i c a l l y as vezbs:

notice the presence of pronou~e S - ~ V - ~ and k, the

negative prefix e, and the past tense suf f ix -wag.

Similarlyi the attributive function of adjectives

in other languages appears to be gemred by nouns in

Barbarefio. Examine the following examples:

(19) JHS9.262R-263L, t x t 32, l ine 001 59.262R

(211 m59-658R-659L, tart 63, l ine 0 0 % ~ 59-658R

( 2 2 ) -59-656R-657Lr txt 50, line 004 59.656R

As can be seen in the above examplesf t h e morphemes

tmanyt, %nall~, t s t rongr f and # o t h e r t , which would be

adjec t ives in some languages, are sesving an a t t r i b u t i v e

function whi le being t r e a t e d m o ~ h o l ~ ~ i c a l ~ y as nouns:

no t ice t h e presence of p r o c l i t i c s bi= and &. In (221,

the noun s t a t u s of the a t t r i b u t i v e element t o the r? is

indicated f u r t h e r by t h e redupl icat ion accompanied by

q l o t t a l i z a t i o n and LenGhening on t h e f i n a l sy l l ab l e

(seen above)m

2m3o & p e n t s t r u c t u r e and pronominal a f f i x e s

I n terns of argument s t ruc tu re , Barbare50 shows

nodnative-accusative pa t teming . Examine t h e following

examples :

(23) JE59.47R-57R, txt 170# l ine 036 59.S2R

( 2 5 ) JE59.633L-635R, txt 128, line 0 0 1 59.633L

naq?fiw b i M - d h i t i t f i , na q-?uv his3 whens3-eat. D P à ˆ A R T gg DPçdo *When a dog ate eggs, p

The sole argument of the intransitive clauses in (23 )

and (24) is marked by the prefix on the verb,

regardless of Its agency (agent in the former and

patient in the latter). Similarly in ( 2 5 ) , the agent of

a tzansitive clause is marked by the same prefix =. The verb does not show any marking for the patient.

This shows that Barbarefio exhibits nominative-accusative

patterning in terms of verbal marking, and can thus be

said to recognize subject and direct object categories.

One thing we should keep in mind is that these

verbal affixes are not "agreement markersw, which are

simply copies of features of independent NPs. They are

full referential pronouns in the form of affixes. For

this reason I will refer t o then as pronominal affixes.

The best evidence for this analysis is that Barbareno

utterances can be complete without full NPs. So

examples (23)-(25) would still be complete utterances

without the noun phrases after the verb. Examples ( 3 )

and ( 4 ) above illustrate such cases. Consider (4) which

is repeated here as (26):

( 26 ) JH59.299L-300L, txt 55, line 003 59,2991.

siyalisoKo3,R6 - in, -iv-~i-aoqolitoy-in 3-K.-DO&-aurroand-20 @they are surrounding your

The subjec t ' they* and t h e d i r e c t object @your are

expressed by pref ixes 8-iv- and a s u f f i x - in

respectively. There are no full NPs i n t h e utterance,

but it s t i l l cons t i tu t e s a complete predication,

suggesting t h a t these a f f ixes are not agreement markers

but full-fledged pronouns. The question of when t o use

t h i s kind of ut terance rather than an ut terance with a

f u l l HP w i l l be addressed in chapter 4.

Since it is crucial to have a good understanding of

how these pronominal a f f ixes work i n order to follow any

Barbareno examples, I w i l l present the spec i f i c s of t h e

Barbarefio pronominal system i n the remainder of t h i s

section. The following t ab le lists t h e subject

prefixes :

Table 3: Barbareno subject pronouns

SG DU PL IDF

I k- k-is- Ic-iy-

3 S s-is- s-iy- s-am-

Subject marking i nd ica tes person and number: lst, Znd,

and 3rd persons; singular, dual, and plural . That is,

the pref ixes br and indicate lst, 2nd, and 3rd

persons respectively. The prefixes i S k - and &v- indica te

dual and plural respectively, and t he lack of these

prefixes ind ica tes singular. The indefinite 9-am-

indicates a nonspecific r e fe ren t 'someone * or ' they8 . For the 3rd person dual, plura l , and indef bite , t h e

pxefix is of ten not used:

(27) JEf59.662R-663R, txt 67, line 001 59.662R

?awaly6nt'e kalaina~liil~r& P S huln6 - 1%~' ?awalyente ka=l m? -am -awl-wag-g? hu=l asaioloq brandy KA=ARTçSM-IDF-&ink-PST-E RM=ART=long.ago 'Brandy was the f avorite drink, '

The l i teral t rans la t ion of t h i s example would be

something l i k e 'Brandy is what they drank long ago'.

Only the i nde f i n i t e am- without t he t h i r d person E is

used to ind ica te t h e nonspecific re ferent 'they'. It

should also be noted that t h e third person g= i s of ten

replaced with t h e nominalizer Pal-:

(28) JH59.27Lg29R, tast 172, l ine 013 59.28R

( 2 9 ) JH59.27L-29R, t x t 172, line 012 59.28L

?ik%i ?alKut6-wnKi. ?ik&u U--qutuwuqs but NM -whistle *but he whistles.'

These examples are taken f r o m the same text. In ( 2 8 ) ,

a fox is referred to by the third person prefix g=, and

in (291, it is refesred to by the nadna l i zer 2al-

instead of g=. 2

The following table lists the direct object

pronominal suff ixes:

Table 4: Barbareno direct object pronouns

SG NON-SG

Object pronouns make fewer distinctions: lst, Znd, and

3rd persons; singulax and nonsingular. The s u f f i x - i w w

marks both 1st and 2nd person nonsingular. 3rd person

singular i s unmarked, as i l lus trated i n ( 2 5 ) above.

When the 3rd person direct object i s plural , it may be

marked by the non-singular suffix -wn. Hawever? as the

following examples suggest, speakers seem to have had

t h e option of using -WUQ or not:

(31) JH59.299L-300L, txt 55, line 002 59.2991,

indicated by the reduplication on the ward 'eyer, and

the verb btiy 'to see@ is marked by the third person

plural suffix -mn. In (321, the dixect object 'many

houses@ is plural as indicated by the reduplication on

the word rhouser; however the same verb bti 'to seer

does not take the plural suf f ix - a n (kutiv and m are

two variants of the Bme verb).

2.4. Constituent order

Many of the above examples may suggest that

Barbarefia is a verb initial language in which the

arguments follow the verb. Examinatian of the data

shows that t h i s is in fact the most common pattern;

however, other types of canst i tuent order are also

found. Examine the follawing examples:

(34) JH59.662Rw663R, ?xt 67, l ine Q O X 59.662R

These examples are taken front the 8-e text. In (33)

pelu ePedxo which appears to be the subject , is placed before the verb. In (341, discussed above as (271, the

morpheme am- in the second word is another pronominal

prefix indicating a nonspecific referent @someoner or

%heyf (called rindef&nite8]. The literal translation

of thie example would be ~umething like @Brandy is what

they drank long agar. As c m be seen, in this example

2awalvente rbrandyr, which appeaxs to be the direct

object, is expressed before the verb (see chapter 5 for

the syntactic status af preverbal NPs).

Even when the axcpments follow the verb, their

order does not seem to be rigid$

nas?aw ilkti na ==S-?uw =h when=3-bite DP=ART=pexaon DP=mWrattleanee 'When a pexson gets bitten by a rattlesnd~e~~

'When the lightning struck the house an 3aley Street in Santa Bazbaxa, *

In ( 3 5 ) the d i r e c t object pxecedes the subject whereas

in (36) the subject precedes the direct object. Unlike

preverbal NPs i n ( 3 3 ) and (341, postverbal HPs axe

typically muked with the dependent proclit ic hi=, a8

shown i n ( 3 5 ) and (36)m

In chapters 3 and 5 , I will discuss in more detail

the statistical skewedness of these different

constituent orders and the motivations behind c h o i c e s

among them in discauxse.

Xn terns of the ordexing of elements w i t h i n noun

phrases , though the modifier o f t e n follows the head, the

apposite order [ i. em, the madif ier + the head) is not uncommon. The following examples illustrate these t w a

types :

( 3 7 ) JH59.345L-347Lt txt 59, line 001 59.345R

(38) JE59.20R-2lR, t%t 4, line 001 59.2X5

We saw above that pzonodnal prefixes mark the subject

on verbs. As seen in (9) arid (IQ), they are also used

to maxk possessors on nouns. In (37) the third person

singular pronominal prefix marks the possessor of

#fat0# 'sheeptm As can be seen' in ( 3 7 ) the modifier

sheep * follows the bead @ fat F and in ( 38 ) the modifier

'long ago0 precedes the head @Indiansg (the modifiers

are underlined).

This section presents a brief overview of clause-

caxnbining in Barbarefio Chumash. Included axe a relative

clause constructiont a sexial verb construction,

sentential subjects and sentential camplements,

conditioaal and time adverbial clau~es~ reason and

purpose clauses, and sequential clausesm

In relative clause constmctiona, the relative

clause follows the head:

?<a house which they lived in at the ai~sion>~

In (39) the head is the subject o f the relative clause,

and in (40) the head is the direct object af the

relative clause. In (41) the head appears to be the

locative oblique of the relat ive clause. In a l l of

these cases, the relative clause is marked by a

dependent p s o c l i t i c hi=, which, as I showed above,

appears on nouns. In ( 39 ) , there is no third pexson

subject prefix g= on the verb marking the head gpersonO

who ta lks . This lack of the prefix is frequently

found in relative clauses.

Two verbs me often juxtaposed, and when t h i s

happens, the first verb seems to indicate the manner or

the aepect in which the event expressed by the second

verb takes place:

( 4 3 ) J.3590275R-276L, txt 31, a line O O X S9.27SR

gyuxl6 - &K hisn&& h&, g - m l e l e k bi*m-R-~+nah 3-tiptoe DP=3-R-R+gu 'he goes t i p t o e i n g (raising h e e l s and going an balls ef feet). @

( 4 4 ) JE5gO525R-S2'7Lr t x t 100, Line 004

lcid~asiyn6 -W& h i ~ i y a n 8 i . n ~ kint+ka =S-iy-nowon h%=s-iv-angin adith%n=3-PL-stap D-3-PL-8at.a.meal *<and then they would step mating>'

As can be seen i n each of these examples, the t w o vexbs

take the same pronoun (S-iv- in (42) and ( 4 4 1 , and in

( 43 ) ) . The secand vexb is marked by a dependent

Sentential subjects and aentential camplements

follow the main c l a w e :

(48) JH59-209L2O9Rf t x t 20, line 003 59.2095

rThey have no word in the Indian lainguage meaning "to lockmf

In each of these examples, the main clause is followed

by the sentential subject or the eentential complement.

In this type of c o n s t ~ c t i o n , the sentential

subject /complement is typically marked by a dependent

proc l i t i c U, which is seen in examples (451- (48) . In

which is a direct quote.

Below we will examine seve ra l repxesentative

condi t ional and t h e adverbial c ~ a u s e s i n Barbareiia.

These tmes of clause^ appear e i t h e r before or after the

main clause, thaugh it h much more common to f ind them

before t h e main clause:

siYeq8t6 hinab&? h h a ~ t u h t u h & y S-iv-erne8 hi==noho+-? hi==na =s-R-tuhay 3-PL-sing DP==much+EH D-hens3-R-rain

H U B T m E Vl%ey sing a l o t when it is raining.'

As can be seen in these examples, the proclitic na=

means e i ther if OS @when m In ( 50 the p=-marked

c l a u s e precedes t h e main clause, and in (51) it follows

the main clause. I n t h e farmex, the main clause is

marked by a prac1iti.c 2i=, sad i n the liittez the

dependent c lause is marked by a dependent p r o c l i t i c hi.=.

This is a t y p i c a l pa t t e rn associated with condit ional

and t h e adverbial clauses: when the dependent clause

precedes t h e main clau8e, t h e main clause is marked by

t h e p r a c l i t i c 3i-; and when the dependent clause follows

the w i n clause, t h e dependent c lause is marked by t h e

dependent proc l i t i c &. Here are nore examples:

- UmD

*If a conet leeks red or ha8 a xeddish color,

cam if they have thoughts.'

a-iv-R+anSin -

-? he?=l =~+?invu - - 7 when 3-PL-R+eat.a.meal-? PRX=ART=R+Indian-EM

TInE #-en Indims are eating a mealr>

- ?i=s-iy-e-tieawi& ?X=3-PL-N-talk

mmi they don't talk.'

The particles ham and may mark conditional and

time adverbial clauses respectively. As can be seen i n

( 52 1 - ( 55 ) , they can occux befoxe or after the main verb.

The following examples i l lu8 tra te the use of reason

purpose clauses:

lmxle 'We &ink the ocean

to vomit a t both enda m

The reason clause is mukeci by a part ic le b y k & and the -

puxpose clause is maxked by a p r o e l i t i c Eukanu. Shorter

foxm @uk4, m, and are often used to mark purpose

clauses. As can be seen i n these examples, these types

of clauses follow the main clause.

Finally, the following example illustrates haw

sequential events are typically expressed in Barbarefio:

( 5 8 ) JH59.36R-40L, txt 175, line 015 59.38R

*The next a.m. very early the rooster crowed. His crowing sounded very sad.

h i k a s h - han isiw?I-won Jrii+kq==s-sdan hi=$-R+iwon DP+so~3-continue-to DP=3-R+aound And he kept on crowing

<and theo ld man got sad at him,>'

Each sequential clause is marked by a combination of

2 . 6 . Summary

I have presented an overview of the grammar of

Barbareno Chumash so that readers may have enough fac t s

to follow the rest of the dissertation. Spec i f ica l ly we

examined dis t inc t ive sounds, basic morphological

structure and lexical categories, argument structure and

pronominal affixes, constituent order, and clause-

35

combining.

Motes for Chapter 2

1. The examples i n t h i s dissertation are given i n the

format illustrated in the following example:

1 JE59.3L-SR. t a c t 166, GN line 013 59.5L \\

2 hilled h i l t ipA -wil hilr?kiyaKllir, 3 h i d =h hi-l çtipawi hi=he?*k-iy-?aqli& 4 DPçARTçpera DPÈARTçtal DPÇPRXçl-PL-langua 5 a person who talks our <1anguaqe>.

Line 1 gives the text reference information. In the

above example, 'JH59.3L-5R' indicates that the example

is taken out of the text which appears from the Left

page of frame #3 to the r ight page of frame t 5 of reel

# 5 9 of the Earrington microfilms. (Each frame contains

t w o or ig ina l pages. ) 'Tact 166 * refers to the number

assigned t o the t e x t and ' l i n e 013 refers to the line

number within the text, both assigned by Suzanne Wash.

' G N P indicates t h a t the example i s taken from the

grammatical notes found with the text, which Harrington

often gave. Finally, the last item on the reference

l i n e '59.5Lr indicates the exact location where the

example is found: the left page of frame #S of reel #59.

Simi lary 'MB, FN2, p74' would mean that the example is

taken from page 74 of Heelerrs f i e ld notebook # 2 . Line

2 gives the way t h e original data w e r e recorded. Some

substitutions in Harringtonss original orthography have

6 - h 9 been made. They are as follows: g -> g, -> -, - -> 2.e

Glottalized consonants as written by Harrinqton (e.g., ^\ S, G, g, S, ff, 2) are written here as &, U, g, &, A,

L. Line 3 and line 4 are the morphological analysis and

the morpheme-by-morpheme gloss respectively, given by

Suzanne Wash or myself. A hyphen ( - ) and an equal sign

(=) on those lines indicate an affix and a clitic

boundary respectively. Though not illustrated in the

above example, a plus sign (+) there would indicate a

morpheme boundary in a lexicalized expression. Line 5

gives the English translation for the example. If the

translation is given in c>, it means that it is provided

by Suzanne Wash or myself because either it was not

provided by the original recorder or it was given in

Spanish. Often, the original translation does not

exactly cover the meanings of all the words and the

morphemes found in each example; it represents only what

the relevant example basically means. I chose to

represent exactly the translations of the original

recorders in order to stay as close as possible to what

is intended not only by them but also by the speaker

M a r y Yee. This may sometimes cause readers difficulty

in matching up the word-by-word gloss and the

translation* I will t ry to explain

2 . The tern @dependent was first

(1995b) to describe bi*.

when necessaq.

introduced by Wash

3 * Certain verbs, such as eha @goodp, wil 'be' and

univiw znecessaryt, seem to prefer the pref ix 2 a L ,

e spec ia l l y when they have a sentent ia l subject as in the

following example:

( 3 0 ) JB59-327L-332&, tx t 138@ line 021 59.331R

3. Argument s t ruc ture

The puqpase of t h i s chaptex is t o describe the

argument s t ruc ture of Ba.rbaxefio Chumash* By examining

t h e pronominal system of Barbarefio, I will first suggest

t h a t certain arguments of verbs are t r ea ted as integxal

parts of t h e vexb because they are expressed i n t h e form

of gr-tically required psonaminal a f f ixes . I w i l l

take this as c r i t e r i a 1 far t h e claim t h a t they are core

arguments m Next I w i l l show t h a t f a c t s about

constituent order corxelate with t h i s observation: when

both core arguments and obliques are expressed as f u l l

NPs i n clauses, the core arguments d i r ec t l y follow t h e

vex% and are folluwed by t h e obliqnes. Then I w i l l

describe t h e m o ~ h ~ l o g i c a l , syntactic, and pragmatic

c h ~ a c t e r i s t i c s associated with the two verbal suffixes

-us and -in* I w i l l suggest t h a t these suffixes are

core =meat-bui ld ing devices, devices umd t o create

d i r e c t objects from argwnents t h a t might atherwise be

c a s t as obliques. The presence of these devices i n the

grammar i t s e l f fur ther suggests t h e importance of the

core-oblique d i s t inc t ion i n Barbaxeiio* Finally, I w i l l

b r i e f l y discuss the gsamauatical s ta tus of pat ients

occurring with verbs maxked by ane uf the core argument-

building devices*

nodnative-accusative pattenling i n which t h e agent

argument of trans i t ive clauses and the s ingle argument

of intrans i t ive clauses are treated in one w a y and the

patient argument of t z a n ~ i t i v e clauses is treated in

another way. W e observed this patteming with re lat ion

to the pzanuminal marking on the verb. L e t us go back

to the examples in 2*3. which i l lu s tra ted this

In these examplea, the subjectss me marked w i t h the

prefix cm the verb regardless of t h e i z agency or the

t r m s i t i v i t y of t h e verb, and t h e r e is no mzufing for

the ciixect abject* Thus the pronominal marking on t h e

verb exhibits nodnative-accusative pa t teming .

I n 2*3., w e further examined the spec i f i c s of this

pronominal marking, and observed t h a t it makes fairly

e labora te d i e t ine t ions for both subjects and dixect

ob jec t s i n tern of pexson and number (see Tables 3 and

4 in chapter 2 ) . What seems to be most s i g n i f i c a n t

&out t h i s pronominal system is t h a t i t s e l abora t e

marking is qrmatically xequired and only certain

arguments of verbs are marked by it. Xn terms of the

argument s t r u c t u r e of t h e verb, t h i 8 f a c t seems t o

suggest that the arguments expressed by t h e pronouns may

have a gpecia l s t a t u s i n t h e g r m x of Barbaxefia

Chumash: they are core arguments of t h e verb (Crof t

1991; Thompson t o appear )*

The present hypothesis n ice ly agrees with t h e

moqhologicd, syntactic, and p~agmat ic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

associa ted with t h e t w a verbal su f f ixes -us and -in

discussed i n 3 . 3 * : t h e s e me devices which give coxe

s t a t u s (as d ixec t ob jec t s ) t o arguments t h a t would

otherwise be oblique* I n o ther wards, t h e behaviar of

these suf f h e s farthex demonstrates that the distinction

between coxe azquments and obliques plays an important

role in the grammar of Bubarefio. Befare we examine

these suffixes, howeve=, I will discuss another area of

BazbaxeEo grammar which displays the impartancze af this

distinction: constituent order.

3 . 2 . Constituent order

1x1 accordance w i t h the pronominal m~king on verbs,

facts of constituent order seem to correlate with the

core-obli-e distinction made for t h e arguments of

verbs* Specifically, when both core arguments and

obliques appeax as Cull SIPS in a clause, nomally the

core arguments follaw the verb and are then followed by

the obliques. X t has been found cross-lin~istically

that the subjects of transitive clauses are rarely

expressed as full NPs in discourse (Du Bois 1987 ) . I

found this to be the case with Barbaxefio* (Far more

detail, see chaptez 5 1 In the unusual instances in

which transitive eubjects are expressed as full NPs, it

is extremely rare to find them with obliques, which are

=extra argumentsa. For this reason, below we will only

look at the order of intransitive subjects and

transitive dimet objects in relation t o abliques

[ 4 ) JHS9.6L-?S, 3, line 002 59e6R

( 1 0 ) JH59*96Z-97R8 t%t 18S8 l i n e 001 59-96L

h- - ii k i & - k ~ ~ k t t ~ ~ ~ ~ hifa? hiho~wdUd$, hi=mafi k-i&-R-IcupuiS us1 =?o? &&,Q- D h h e n l-DW-R-dip DBARTwater DP-DIS=ART'-bucket

v Do/ PM! SuURcE 'when we are dipping water out of a bucket,'

(11) JH59*676R-681L8 txt ?S8 l i n e 005 59.679R

(12) JH59*474L-475R8 txt 83, line 005 59.474L

(13) m59.518R-S20G862%G629L8 ts& 9T8 line 016 59.628% \l

?apS kigeKw&l *i, ?apZ k-i5-eqwel =I =a let 1-DV-maJce D-3-seat DP=ART=IDF

W m/Pl4T =C * L e t s make a seat for 8amebody,#

(14) JE59.466L-467R8 txt 798 l i n e 007 59.466L

v m / P ~ msTR 'she had her face c o v e r e d with a cloth8

Notice that there is no formal marker which indicates

the semantic r e l a t i o n s h i p of these obliques to the verb

(Beeler and Whistler 1980). In each of these examples,

a core argument precedes an oblique in a clause

regardless of the semantic type of the oblique.

S p e c i f i c a l l y , i n ( 4 ) - ( 8 ) , the subject precedes the

oblique i n btrmsitive clauses and in ( 9 ) - ( 14 ) , the direct object precede8 the abLique in transitive

clauses. This particulax ordering can be interpreted as

i conica l ly motivated: aquments semantically more

closely t i ed to the verb are placed closer t o it than

less c ~ u s e l y t i e d anes. This further suggests that the

grammar of Barbmefio attends t o t h e ~ s t i n c t i o n between

core arguments and obliquese

As we wiL1 see i n the next section, certain

argument8 which might otherwise be oblique are cast as

core arguments when one of the core u m e n t - b u i l d i n g

s u f f ~ e ~ i s attached. Xn such cases , these arguments

are normally expressed immediately a f t e r the verb,

ref lect ing t h e status change. This order further

supports the present analysis.

3.3* Care arwent-bui ld ing device3 -us and -in

E3axbaxefio has two verbal suffixes, -us and -in,

which change the =guntent stricture of the verb.

Specif ical ly , the w e of these su f f ixes indicates t h a t

certain arguments which would otherwise be obliques are

direct objects of the verb, that ist cure arguments. l

This type of device ia found i n many other languages and

1988; Croft 1991; Mithun 1994; F a h e r 1994; Ichihashi-

Nakayama 1996; Shibatani 1996; Austin to appear).

Belowp we w i l l discuss the mo~holagical, syntactic, and

pragmatic eh~ac tex i s t i c s assoc iatedwiththe use of -us

and -in. These c h e a c t e r i s t i c s w i l l indicate t h a t

relevant arguments have direct abject status ( L e , core

argument status 1 . W e will f i x s t discuss the suffix -us,

which gives direct object status t o datives, and then

discuse t h e saffix --in, which gives direct object status

3.3.1. The dative -us

The vexbal s u f f i x -us CO-occuxs with a certain type

of NP i l lu s tra ted the following examples:

(15) JH59.563R-57lR, t a c t 107, line 020 59*566L

(17) JHS9.4OR-44L, txt 176, line 008 59.41R

( 2 0 ) JH59.63lR-632R, t x t 127, line 008 59-632s

?and have the me who is to be a, mother <&ink its'

Note that, in ( X 6 ) , the patient 'itr refers ta pitch or

~ l k e e d - j u i c e , which is not expressed as a full HP.

Readers may xemember that, in & ~ ~ b a r e f i a ~ f u l l W s axe

not requixed fox a clause to be grammatical, and that

the third person singular direct object has no mulcing

on the verbe Note also that, in (201, the verb @drinkr

appears w i t h the causative prefix su-, and the @mother8

is t h e person who i~ made to &inke The patient @it8

refexs ta tea, which is not expreesed as a full NP.

Naw, in all of the above examples, the suffix -us

is found at the end of the verb and i.8 followed by a

f u l l HP expressing an e n t i t y which seems to be b e s t

characterized as t h e t a r g e t of an a c t i v i t y or emotion,

o r an e n t i t y i n d i r e c t l y affected (Blake 1994 ) . Further, t h e r e fe ren t of t h e NP co-occurring with -ua is a

sen t i en t being, a na tura l self -moving e n t i t y like 'wavef

i n (19 ) o r an e n t i t y subjected to a re l ig ious a c t i o n

because it is associated with a supernatural being such

as 'a rock p lace which was blessed by a p r i e s t because

t h e Devil was appearing the re* in (18) . Similar sets of

NPs are found to be l i n g u i s t i c a l l y t r ea t ed as a category

i n d i f f e r e n t languages and are of ten called 'dativef

(Blake 1994; Palmer 1994). I w i l l adopt t h i s term to

refer t o t h e type of NPs i l l u s t r a t e d i n t h e above

examples.

The use of the dative suffix -us seems to be

lexically determined t o a l a r g e extent. There are

several observations which suggest this analysis.

F i r s t , only c e r t a i n verbs appeax with us. I n examining

t h e data , paying a t t en t ion t o t h e cases i n which -us

appeaxs, one not ices t h a t t h e verbs that occur with -us

are r a t h e r limited i n number. Second, some verbs seem

always ta occur with t h e s u f f i x -us; 1 have not seen

them without -ua i n my data. In te res t ing ly , t h e s e verbs

together with -U% a ~ e tzeated a8 independent l e x i c a l

i t e m s by earlier researchers including Whistler (1980),

and fo- without -us are not found in these suuxces.

One such example is t h e verb yikus # t o give * , seen i n

( 1 6 ) above. Notice t h a t t h e event described by t h i s

verb always involves a r ec ip i en t , which may be

responsible f o r the l ex ica l i za t ion of t h i s verb

involving t h e d a t i v e recipient . Third, t h e r e a r e o ther

verbs which contain -us whenever a da t ive argument is

present i n t h e ut terance; speakers do not seem t o have

had a choice . One such example i s t h e verb a ' t o sayp

seen i n ( 15 ) above. Whenever 'a person who is ta lked

t u g is discussed by t h e speaker, ? i ~ appears with the

suffix -us. Fourth, of ten t h e semantics indicated by

the use of -us is r a t h e r id iosyncrat ic ; each verb seems

to have had a p a r t i c u l a r meaning associa ted with t h e use

of --uso That is, t h i s suffix sometimes ind ica tes t h e

r ec ip i en t of t h e event, o ther times t h e beneficiary of

t h e event, depending on t h e verb; o the r meanings do not

seem t o be possible. So, f o r example, t h e eu f f ix -us on

t h e verb alwaye indicates the person who is ta lked

t o , not t he benef ic iary of t h e event, which should

c e r t a i n l y be a p o s s i b i l i t y i n a sentence l i k e 'I s a i d

that f o r himr. These observations seem to suggest that

the uses af -ua are laxgely lexically determined*

The addition of -us to the verb seems ta change its

argument structure. Spec i f ica l ly , the dative acquires

core argument status by becoming the direct object. One

indication of this may be seen i n the f a c t that the

marker -12s is expressed as a part of the verb. There

are several other observations which support this

analysis* F i r s t , appearing after -us an the verb, the

3rd person plural suffix -wun marks the plura l i ty of the

dative, not of the patient. Examine the following

examples :

(21) JH59.70R-76R, txt 181, line 021 59.76R

' they bring food to the Indians*Â

( 2 2 } JS59.214L-214R, txt 222, line 002 59.214L

In (21), it is 'the Indians which is plural , not

'food', and the verb takes the th i rd person plural

markex -wun a f tex the dative marker -us. Similarly, in

( 2 2 ) , it is ' the people' which is plural , not ,it ( a

whale) c , and t h e wezb again takes t h e same suf f ixes -us-

wun. W e have t hus seen t h a t the dat ives appearing with - -us a r e treated moqhologically like d i r e c t o b j e c t s a

Second, a f a c t about cons t i tuent oxder a l s o

supports the psesent analysie. In t h e above examplesf

the da t ive NI? directly follaws t h e verb i n a clause.

How, when both the dative and the pat ien t are expressed

as f u l l Ws in a clausef t h e da t ive typically follows

the verb and i s followed i n turn by the p a t i e n t , as

shown in ( 2 1 ) and in t h e follawing example:

I n these examples, t h e verb is masked by t h e s u f f i x -us,

and t h e d a t i v e W precedes t h e p a t i e n t i n t h e clause.

This order is exact ly the apposite of the ane shown by

t h e p a t i e n t direct object and the oblique i n regular

t r a n s i t i v e c lauses , discussed i n 3 - 2 . We have thus seen

that when d a t i v e NPe appear with the suffix -us on the

vezb, they are treated sptactically l i k e direct

ab jects . Finally, when we examine t h e s e m a t i c e of datives

as well as the discourse cantexts i n which they appear,

w e f i n d t h a t they are cen t r a l p m i c i p a n t s i n the event

described by t h e verb, e~pecially compared t o t h e

pa t ien t . It was noted above t h a t t h e r e are Borne verbs

which a l w a y s accur w i t h t he suffix -us and there are

ather verbs which occxu with the suffix -us whenever a

da t ive is present in the ut terance* 1 would like t o

hypothesize t h a t t h i s may be related to the often-

propcased euqgestian t h a t humans like to t a l k about

themselves {Giv6n 1983 Thampson 1990 ) . That is,

because af t h e inherent semantics of dat ives ( L e * ,

humanness), it i~ l i k e l y t h a t they aze viewed by t h e

speakexxi as c e n t r a l pa*icipants i n an event*

Especia l ly w h e n thexe are both a d a t i v e and a patient i n

the uttezance, it is l ike ly t h a t t h e speaker views the

da t ive as a more c e n t r a l pa r t i c ipan t to t h e event than

the p a t i e n t because the fomer is normally human but the

lattez is not m It seems that far this reason datives

are t r e a t e d l i n ~ i s t i c a l l y as an i n t e g r a l part of t h e

verb (i.e., by t h e verbal 8 ~ f f i . 3 ~ -us), just l i k e

subjects and direct objects in regular transitive

clauses. In othex wordsf I am suggesting here that

since datives are viewed as central p e i c i p m t s i n the

event, t h e i r pxesence itself normally guaxantees that

their involvement is expressed as a coxe iiqtzment ( i. e.,

t h e direct objec t ) and accordingly they appeaz with the

However, there are a f e w cases in which the

presence of a dative doe5 not seem to be enough to

result i n t h e use of -us. One such example is seen

regarding t h e use of the verb euwel ,makeg, which

typically appears with -us when the dative i s present i n

the event:

(24 ) JH59.27L49R, tact 172, GN l i n e 004 59.29L

We have already seen one exception to t h i s tendency

in (13) abovef reproduced here with the en t i re t e x t as

Twa little g i r l s w e d ta play making a seat with by pasping each athests arms. One Little gixL would with her zight hand gxaap he= own left a m neaz her hand, and the other I L t t L e girl wauld do likewise. Then with their left hands they wauld grasp each othexxe m, amking a square seat, on which a t h k d little gLr1 would sit. They wd say:

In this example, the vexb appeaxe without the

dative suffix -us and the dative rec ip ient HE! tsameane F

is expressed aftex the patient direct object NI? @a

seat? As can be seen, the dative 8someoner is non-

referential and nan-identifidle* The text ie about a

game of making a seat using hands* In the context in

which this example appearst the speakex is saying that

when they didnet have anything else to do, they played

t h i s game of making a eeat* Thus neither the

referentiality nor the identifidility of t h e dative

seems to really matter here. Probably for that reason,

it is the patient seatF which is treated as a core

argument { i . e , the direct object ) , not the dative in this example*

So these examples suggest that datives, unless they

are playing a minor role in the discauxse as seen i n

( 25 ) , tend to be viewed as central peicipants in events because of their inherent semantics (Le.,

humanness)* Accnrdingly, datives are treated as central

peicip-ts also in the language by being expressed as

an integral part of the verb. In other waxds, 1 am

suggesting that speakers axe indicating the centrality

of dative peicipats by expressing their involvement

as core arguments.

Thus the m a ~ h a ~ a g i c a ~ , syntactic, and pxagmatic

facts all seem to suggest that when the verb is marked

with -us, the dative becames the direct object, and this

suggests that the suffix -us is a device for building

care arguments. Interestingly, Barbarefio has another

device which turns semantic instruments i n t o direct

abjects. This is the t op i c of the next section.

3 . 3 . 2 . The instrumental -in 3

The instmental marker -in seems tu be another

core arvent-building device: it allaws speakers to

cast semantic instruments as direct objects. There are

several ch~actezistics associated with this suffix

which are similar to the ones which we saw regarding the

dative marker -us in the last section. Examine the

following examples$

(27 ) JH59.551L-552R, txt 105, line 002

(28 ) JH59.535L-538R, txt 102, line 015

*There w e r e 2 kinds of money made of <olivella>*

In these examples, the suff ix -in is attached to the end

of the verb and indicates the instrumental function of

the associated HP. In ( 2 7 ) , the patient direct object 'itr refers to a child, which is not expressed as a full

NP. The reader nay remember that in Barbareno, full NPs

axe not required for a clause to be grammatical, and

that the third person singular direct object has no

marking on the verb. As discussed in 2.3., the s u f f i x

-an, which appears between the verb a d the suffix -in

i n (281, indicates the plurality of the patient direct

object 'two kinds of moneye.

One thing which should be pointed out here is that

the term 'instrumental' is used not only for roles like

that i n ( 2 7 ) , which contains a canonical example of an

instrument, but a l s o for roles l i k e that in ( 2 8 ) , in

which 'olivella' is clearly not an instrument for making

money. A better descriptive term for the latter may be

something like Omaterial* or 'source8. It seems that

both of these types of objects represent what the agent

manipulates in order to make the event take place. I am

using the tern 'instrumentalr for both types partly to

account for the fact that these two somewhat different

roles are indicated by the sane marker in Barbarefio.

There are several phenomena which suggest that

instruments, like the datives discussed in t h e last

section, are dizect ub jects when they occur with -in.

First of a l l , when the instruments are plural, their

plurality may be indicated by the third person plural

marker -wun which i s suff5xed af tez the instrumental

marker -in:

( 2 9 ) JH59.313L-316R, t x t 163, l i n e 005 59.314R

'The Indians had many kinds of seeds which they used as food.

They used to make pinole out of them or boil them as mash.'

The suffix -WUQ marks the plurality of the instrumerit

@seedsr which are used to make 'pinole*. This is

similar t o the use of to maxk the plurality of the

patient direct object i n a regular transitive clause.

W e have thus seen that the instruments appearing w i t h

- i ~ are treated moqhologically l i k e direct objects.

Notice in the second line of (29) that the same referent

'seedsr i s kept track of as the patient direct object of

the transitive verbs 'to boil' and ' t o mush' by the

plural suffix -wun.

Constituent order patterns also support the present

analysis. In the above examples, the instrumental HP

directly follows the verb in a clause. Interestingly,

when the patient is also a full HP, it typically f allows

the instrument, as shown in (28) and the following

examples :

(30) JH59.18lL-l82L, txt 17, line 001 59.1811,

(31) JH59.367R-38E, tar t 142, GÃ line 004 59.370R

gKili?~~w6 - i$n h i ~ p 6 h h+lxÈ6 hilstok, S-qili-eqwel-?-h Jii-S-wft ha .4 =%go? bi=i =stuk 3-H&B -sake -?-=S DPm3-wood DPmARTç8yca3~or DP=ARTÈbow

V IMSTR PAT 'he always made a bowl of sycamore wood. '

Notice t h i s order is exactly the opposite of the one

taken by the patient direct object and the oblique i n

regular transitive clauses, examples of which were

discussed in 3.2. We have thus seen that when

instruments occux with the suffix -in on the verb, they

are treated syntactically like direct objects.

Finally, when we examine the roles of these

instrumental arguments in the discourse contexts where

they appear, we find that they are treated as more

central participants than the patients at the level of

discourse. Examine the following example:

(32) JH59.165L-166L, t x t 202, line 00lab 59.1651.

*The people long ago used to be in a hurry to get ready for war , they would take deer-arrows and break each in t w o , maJu.ng two arrows out of one,

hiiaba? hilkuhku ? . hi=l =?&h&? hi=l =R+ku -? DP=ART*aany DP=ARTsR+person-EM

PAT

and w i t h the short arrows "they killed many people.'

This is the entire text. Though it is untitled, one can

tell from the content that the text is about the arrows

(instrument) not about the people (patient). As can be

seen, the instrument 'short, arrows' occurs with the

suffix -in on the verb, and in terns of constituent

order, the instrument precedes the patient.

Examine ( 3 3 ) , which is a reproduction of ( 2 9 ) with

more context:

(33) Title: Native Seeds Do N o t B l o a t One

JH59.313L-316R8 txt 163, line 001 59.313R

Â¥<Thei seeds that they used to grow here and there, after they would eat them,> they don't bloat you. Only the brought-in beans produced bloatedness. The Indiana had many kinds of seeds which they used as food.

a) siyKwelinvun ilpin6 - li s-iy-eqvel-in -win hi=l q i n o l i 3-PL-make -IHS-3P0 DP=ART=pinole

PAS They used t o make pinole out of them

b) kehafcu aiya&lnwun siysumoSwfin. k e h h s-iy-?a*in-wun a-iy-su-moS -wun or 3-PL-boil -3P0 3-PL-CA-mush-3P0 or boil them as mush.

None of these seeds bloated a person, as beans do. The Indians had to learn to stand eating beans as Mexicans do.'

As the content as w e l l as the title suggest, t h i s t e x t

is about Chumash native seeds. The seeds are more

central to the text than 'pinole8, which is mentioned in

passing. As shown in a), the instrument 'seedsp appears

with the suffix ?in an the verb. In the follawing

clauses given i n b ) , the referent 'seeds8 is sustained

as the patient dizect object by the suffix -wn.

Cases such as these seem to suggest that because of

the centrality of some participants in the discourse,

they are treated as such also i n the language by being

expressed as an integral part: of the verb, much as are

subjects and direct objects in regular transitive

clauses. In other words, I am suggesting here that

speakers are indicating the centrality of those

participants by expressing their involvement as core

arguments.

Supporting the above observations, instruments

expressed as obliques do not s e e m t o play a centra l role

in the discourse. One such example i s ( 14 ) above, which

i s reproduced here with t h e entire tex t as ( 3 4 ) :

( 3 4 ) JH59.466Lv467R, txt 79, line 001 59.466L

'There were some Japanese wood-choppers cutting chaparral at San Rogue. It was chaparral 'that they were cutting. It was a single family, consisting of a man and a woman and some children. The woman was cutting wood the same as the man --

-> kesiKm&ywaS iho?stek iio^row i l a a x i - & S , Re =S-iqmay-wag bi=ho?=s-tier -? hi=l =?o&ow h i = l =inaxaki& and=3-cover-PST DP=DIS=3-face-? DP-ARIawhite DP=ARTÈclot

DO/PAT IHSTR she had her face covered with a cloth

She said that it is so I donet get tanned by the heat. '

In the utterance marked by the arrow, the verb is not

suffixed by -iq. Further, the patient 'her face'

directly follows the verb and is followed by the

instrument 'white c loth' . These facts suggest that 'her

face* is the direct object and 'white cloth* is an

oblique argument of the verb. The text is about a

Japanese woman trying to keep her face from getting

tannede4 Thus #white cloth' i s probably not as central

ta the s t a r y as %er face' itself. That fact seems ta

be responsible for the fact that t h e former is expzessed

as an oblique and the latter the dizect abject.

Ta sum up, moqhological, syntactic, and pzagmatic

patterns a l l seem to indicate that when the verb is

marked w i t h -in, the instrument has core argument status

as a direct object, which suggests tha t the euffix -in

is a core awent -bu i l&ng device; it turns instruments

inta direct objects.

3 * 4 * The status of the patient

One thing we need to discuss befaze we c lose t h i s

chapter is the grammatical status of t h e pat ient

occurring w i t h a verb marked by one o f the core

arment-building devices. The different areas of t h e

language which we examined above do not seem t o give us

a clear picture. In terms af murphology, the patient

can st i l l be marked by -wn, as can be seen in (28)

above, reproduced hexe as ( 35 ) :

The p l u r a l i t y of t h e pa t i en t @ 2 kinds of money8 As

marked by --Q which appears befaze the instrumental

suffix ? in on the verb. Obliques cannot be xnaxked with

-mn, which suggeste t h a t t h e pa t i en t i n (35 ) is t r ea t ed

a5 the direct object. However, s y n t a c t i c a l l y this type

of p a t i e n t is not t r e a t e d as the direct object: it

occupies t h e syntac t ic pus i t ion i n which obliques are

normally expzessed, as i l l u s t r a t e d in (35) . Finally, as

w e have discussed above, p r a m a t i c a l l y t h i s type of

p a t i e n t does not play a c e n t r a l role i n t h e d i s ~ o u r s e ,

compared t o t h e da t ive o r t h e instrument. Thus

examination uf these areas of the g r m a x suggests t h a t

the patient a c c u ~ ~ i n g with a verb marked by one of t h e

core a r m e n t - b u i l d i n g devices exh ib i t s only one of t h e

f ea tu res aseociateci with ciixect objects . This euggests

it may i n s t e a d be a rSecandary Object* i n t h e sense of

Dryer (1986).

3.5. S--

W e have looked at the ~ ~ e n t s t ~ c t u r e of

Barbarefiu Cht~mash. W e fkst saw that in terms of verbal

m o q h o l o ~ i t e x h 3 i t s n o h a t i v e - a c c u s a t i v e pat terning:

the agent argument of ii txansitive clause and the s i n g l e

argument of an i n t r a n s i t i v e c l a u s e are t r e a t e d i n one

way ( n a d n a t i v e ) : and the p a t i e n t argument of a

txansitive c l ause is t r e a t e d i n another way

( accusa t ive ) . Spec i f ica l ly , the farmer is expressed by

verbal pref ixes , and t h e lat ter by verbal suf f ixes .

These p a r t i c u l a r ug tments are thus treated as integral

parts of the verb by being expressed in t h e form of

g r m a t i c a l l y required a f f ixes . This fact seems to

suggest that they have a s p e c i a l s t a t u s with relation to

t he verbz they are core arguments. In te res t ing ly , there

is a syntactic phenomenon which carrelatee with t h i s .

Core arguments tend t o be expressed before ab l iepes i n

clauses: they are placed claser to the verb than are

ubliques. W e then examined 8evera l c h m a c t e z i s t i c s

associated with two vexbal suffhea -us and -in. These

c h ~ a c t e r i s t i c s 8uggest t h a t -us and -in axe core

= w e n t - b u i l d i n g devices that cast datives and

instruments as direct objects.' The pxesence of t h i s

type of device itself further suggests that the coze-

oblique distinction play8 an important role in the

grammar of Baxbarek Chumash* Finally, we saw that the

patient occurring w i t h t h e verb marked by one of t h e

core = v e n t - b u i l d i n g devices exhibits only one of the

characteristics associated with direct objects*

Notes for Chapter 3

l. Beeler and Whistler (1980:94, Footnote 13) first

suggested this analysis for -U@.

2. Earlier studies have suggested that -us is a pronoun:

in essence it has been analyzed as a dative pronoun

(Beeler 1970a, 1976; Beeler and Whistler 1980) . The

dative pronoun analysis of -us has certain appeal.

First, -us accupies the peaition in the verb where

direct object suffixes appear. Second, -us is not used

for the first and the second persons$

Unlike (19) above, the involvement of the second person

is indicated not by -us but by the direct object

pronominal suffix A. If -us is a core argument-

building device as the present study suggests, this is

a puzzling phenomenon: -us should also appeax in the

above example. Based on this type of data, the dative

pronoun analysis would present a pranount&le including

-us, as shown belaw:

Table l: Baxbaxefio d ixec t object pronouns

SG (PAT) SG (DAT) MOH-SG (PAT) NON-SG (DAT)

l -it -it - iyuw -iyuw

2 - in - in -iyuw -iyuw

3 -us -wun -us -wun

how eve^, t h e r e is a problem a l s o far t h e da t ive pronoun

analysis: why does only t h e t h i r d person make a

d i s t i n c t i o n between p a t i e n t and dative?

The present d i s s e ~ a t i o n instead analyzes -us a s a

core a r m e n t - b u i l d i n g device (appl ica t ive) f o r t h e

following reasons* ( B e e l e r and Whistler (1980) a l s o

suggest t h i s p o s s f i i l i t y . ) F i r s t , the highly

lex ica l ized nature of -us suggests it is a der iva t iona l

morpheme: t h e function of 'core = v e n t - b u i l d i n g p is

much more l i k e l y t o be expressed by der iva t iona l

morphology than are pronouns. Second, more importantly,

the dat ive pxanoun ana lys i s would need t o account f o r

t h e moqholagical , syntact ic , and pragmatic

c h m a c t e r i s t i c s associated with -us, which all suggest

t h a t it i s a core = w e n t - b u i l ~ n g device. Pronouns

a r e not known f o r 8uch cha rac te r i s t i c s* Third, under

t h e da t ive pronoun analysis, m e would a l s o have t o set

up a category @ i n s t m e n t a l pronoung f o r anather suffix

-in, which, as w e w i l l see later in this chapter,

instruments.

3 . Many of the idea8 expressed in this section were

first presented in Ono et ale (1994b].

4. It should be mentioned that for a woman to keep hex

face from getting tanned (that is, keeping it "whiteu}

is traditionally valued in Japanese c u ~ t u ~ e .

5 . There axe t w o other s u f f i x e s -pi and -mu2 which may

also be care =vent-building devices* These suffixes

are used mostly as locative nodnal izers as in$

(36) ~59.518R-S20L,628&-629&, tx t 97, l i n e 002[2]59-518R

(37 ) J859.458R-464, t a c t 158, line 024 59.463R

@ the storelaouses @

However, 1 have found a few interesting examples:

tThere in the willows was where the bad women hung around far men.

In ( 3 8 ) , the locative - ~ i appears as part of the verb

and s e a s to indicate the location where the moon was

shining: on the mussels. Interestingly, - ~ i is further

followed by the third pexson singular direct object

suffix - a n a In (391, the location pwillowsr where the

bad women hung around for men is expressed preverbally

(see chapter 5 regarding this constituent order), and

the locative -mu2 is suffixed to the verb and again

ioll~wed by - w n a I have not found enaugh examples in

my data to determine whether -mi. and -mu2 are core

= v e n t - b u i l d i n g devices. The rare occurrences of the

type of examples illustrated in ( 3 @ ] and (391 could be

precisely because locations are usually m t viewed by

the speaker as central t a the event, and thus are not

expreeseci as direct objects. Further investigation of

these morphemes is necessary.

4 . Refez-ential choice

Like a the r languages, Barbare60 has several

d i f fe ren t ways of r e fe r r ing t o a given part icipant

(e. g. , diffexent f amus Feitb, t h a t wf and can r e f e r

t o exact ly t h e same man i n English) (Clancy 1980; Giv6n

1983; Chafe 1987; Fox 1987, 1996). In t h i e section, I

w i l l d i s c u ~ e r e f e r en t i a l cho i ce i n Barbareiio and examine

factors which motivate t h e use of d i f f e r en t forms i n

discourse. W e w i l l f i r s t l a ak a t the two most cwunonly

used r e fexen t i a l f o m i n Barbarego discourse:

pronominal a f f i xe s and f u l l noun phxases. Then w e will

look at two minor forms: independent pronouns and the

proximate demonstrative he?. W e w i l l see t h a t the use

of each form is associated w i t h specific factors which

are manifested i n discourse con t ex t s*

4 . L Pronadna l a f f ixes

I n the preceding chapters, w e saw t h a t verbs i n

Basbarefio are marked by pronominal affixes for core

anpmentsf and t h i s is a grammatical requirement f o r

Barbare60 verbs. This requirement has been

g r m t i c i z e d to such an ex ten t t h a t the re axe even

cases of pronominal a f f ixes which seem ta be present

only t o satisfy it. This is particularly evident in

subject pronouns, illustrated in the following examples:

(1) JH59.667I.-668R, txt 71, line 024 59.668R

"then they have to throw the <bowl> awayt

( 2 ) JH59.327L-332I,, txt 138, line 021 59.331R

?a l e t ih6 hisaakaywun iltoht6? ?al-e-Eho hi=s-am -kuy -W h i 4 =R+to -? MM -8-good DPÈ3-IDF-talce-3P DP=ART=R+mussei-EM '<It is not good to gather mussels>'

As discussed in chapter 2, the prefix 2al- in (2 ) is

used as a replacement for the thizci person prefix e.

The use of t h e subject pronouns i n these examples seems

to be motivated by grammar: their main function i s t o

refer to the s i tua t ion expressed in the embedded clause

(similar to the 'it - thatR construction in English). The following set of data further Illustrates the

highly grammaticized nature of Barbareno subject

pronouns :

( 3 ) JH59.128L-l28R, txt 11, line 004 59.1281.

s h a ~ t ~ h t t ~ . 8-8 a? -tuhuy 3-FUT-rain 'it is g. to rain.?

ijAi noho saxtatax; ikhu noho &-&&tax but vezy.much 3-cold * B u t i f s very ccold;

'11 first make a fire.'

( 5 ) JH59.181L-182L. tact 17, line 003.8 59.1811.

tguma?ii p-t £ -mai l g-naxyit and=when 3-be. morning 'in the morningf

In ( 3 ) - ( 5 ) , none of t h e sub jec t pronouns is r e f e r e n t i a l .

They are t h e r e simply because Barbareno grammar requires

them (i.e., they can be thought of as 'dummy subjects').

Thus, t h e above examples suggest t h a t Barbareno

pronominal affixes are highly grananaticized. (Unlike

other c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , Barbareno is similar to English

at least i n t h i s one respec t . ]

However highly graamiaticized t h e uses of t h e

pronominal a f f i x e s may be, it seems t h a t t h e i r main

funct ion st i l l is t o i n d i c a t e t h e involvement of some

p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e even t described by t h e verb. They

a r e always on t h e verb, and that is what is minimally

requ i red by the grammar. This suggests t h a t , i n terms

of t h e r e f e r e n t tracking system i n Barbareno, pronominal

affixes may be t h e d e f a u l t referential choice.

And i n fact when one looks at Barbareno d a t a with

this hypothesis in mind, one finds that the use of

pronominal affixes alone Is by far the most common w a y

of keeping track of referents in discourse. The

following examples are typical discourse segments in the

data. They are indicative of the high frequency of

reference by pronominal, affixes alone:

(6) JH59.407R-409L, txt 58, line 001 59.408L

h6?€ilfk niiiisiy-dutapin~ai , ho =?alikon maii =S-iv-ahtapin -wag DIS=In<iian.Orchard afte-3-PL-eat.supper-PST '<At Indian Orchard, after they ate supper,>

iroe=tSi siyRili?alas&l, ?i=&eEi S-iy-qili-?alaa&l ? I=always 3-PLHAB -pray <they used to pray,:

t ~ d i sifraldalwag %as*-saKutlhan, Eu ==BM&. S-iv-?alas&l-wag Uika=s-iv-saqt*m but=after 3-PL-pray -PST DPiso=3-PL-tell.a.story <but after they prayed> they told bed-time stories

kXffl kasiyw6n. k h ka =s-i~-weh and then*-PL-go.to.bed then they vd go to bed'

( 7 ) JH59.88R-89R, txt 9, l i n e 001 59.89L

m&- ii si$v&ahSgh he?li~in@: ?, mail S-iy-R+anBin -? he?=l =R+?inyu - - ? when 3-PL-R+eat.a.meal-? PRX=ARTçR+Indian-E ^When Indians axe eating a meal,>

i-siye-tip& - wil . ?i=s-iv-e-tipawil ?Id-PL-N-talk they don't talk.

? iy6 -he p s ~ h - ~ h a ~ h a l a l & - -nus ttn, ? i y e h 2-R+saqhalalm-us -man though 2-?%+holler -PAT-3P0 the you holler at them

they don't hear you.'

In ( 6 ) , the participant 'they8 is kept track of by

several instances o f the 3rd person plural subject

prefixes S-iv-. In ( 7 1 , the participant ' Indians is

kept track of again by the same prefixes as well as the

3rd person plural dixect object suffix m-n, and

similarly the generic 'you' is kept track of by both the

2nd person singular subject prefix g= and the 2nd person

singular direct object suffix -in. These examples thus

illustrate that much of the referential work in

Barbarefio is performed by pronominal affixes alone.

Now the amount of information which these affixes

encode is rather small ( o n l y person, number, and case).

For this reason, they seem to be used in situations in

which that much information is sufficient for clear

identification of the referents. That is, these affixes

are used to talk about participants whose referents have

already been fully established in the discourse ('given

information' in Chafe's term (1976, 1987, 1994)).

Example (7) above, which is taken fromthe beginning of

the text, illustrates this point. In (71, the

participant 'Indians' is established at the beginning by

being explicitly introduced by the pronominal affixes -

and a full HP. The participant 'you' is a generic

reference which does not require an explicit

introduction. (Example (6) is discussed below.)

Here is another example taken from the beginning of

a text,:

(8) JH59.205L-205R, txt 21, line 001 59.2051,

a) nasiyexpftS ihe? lt&&* ?i?alsa?tuh&y . na =s3-iy4qeE w=he?=l =&U? ?i=?al-sa?-tuhuy when=3-PL-sing DP*PRX=ART=bird.sp ?I=NM -FUT-rain 'When the huitacoches sing, it is going to rain.

I \\ ?iyalth& -&in hi?alsa?aktinlr 2: hiiuw6-&U, ly-?al-&akin hi=u-sa?-akti-nuna him1 =?uwthu

likely PL-MM -know DP=NM -EWT-come-bring DP=ART==food they know it is going to bring food,

e ) siyexp8t5 hinoh67 hina~tuhtubfl~ fi-iv-expeE hi=naho+-? hi-a =a-R-tuhuy 3-PL-sing DPçnuch+E DPawhenm3-R-rain They sing a lot when it is raining. '

Again bu2 F huit-acoches p is explicitly introduced in

line a) with the third person plural subject prefixes

iv- and a full W . After this introductionf it i8 kept

subject prefix &= ( ~ s c ~ ~ s e c i in 2.3.). Xn line d), the

participant 'rain, F explicitly introduced in line b) , is

r e fe r r ed to by t h e prefix Jal-.

Example ( 6 ) above, which is a l s o taken from t h e

beginning of t h e text, e x h i b i t s a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t way

i n which par t ic ipants are establ ished i n discourse. In

t h i s example, t h e p a r t i c i p a n t 'they' is introduced by

t h e subjec t pronouns S-iv- together with t h e place name

' Indian Orchardr, and t h a t seems t o be s u f f i c i e n t t o

establish the referent i n t h e discourse: apparently

' theyr are ' the people a t Indian OrchardF. That is, i n

t h i s example, though the in t roduct ion of t h e pa r t i c ipan t

i n t h e discourse is not done as e x p l i c i t l y as i n ( 7 ) and

( 8 1 , t h e re fe ren t s t i l l s e e m s t o be c l e a r enough t h a t it

can be referred back t o by t h e subject pronouns i n t h e

rest of t he discourse.

Among different . a c t i v i t i e s deal ing with

pa r t i c ipan t s i n discourse, it seems t h a t maintaining

es tab l i shed re fe ren ts is no t a task which demands much

cogni t ive effort.. The verbs appearing with pronominal

a f f i x e s alone ind ica t e t h a t t h e same par t ic ipants are

s t i l l being ta lked about. W e s a w above t h a t pronominal

affixes a r e p a r t of what is minimally required by t h e

grammar. That is, what w e have here i s t h e following:

t h e smallest l i n g u i s t i c device, minimally required by

the graimnar, is reserved for a task requiring probably

the least amount of cognitive effort in handling

discourse participants. In other words, this pairing of

form and function in Barbareno is iconically motivated,

as has been found cross-linquistically (Clancy 1980;

Given 1983). Interestingly, we noted above that this

grammatically least marked referential choice is most

prevalent in Barbarefio discourse in terms of its

frequency. We will examine in the next section the

other extreme of this iconic pairing in which a

linguistically larger device than pronominal affixes is

used for tasks which seem to require more cognitive

effort than maintaining established participants.

Thus we have seen that pronominal affixes are part

of what is minimally required by the grammar. They are

used when the referents have already been fully

established in the discourse, and they are the most

common referential choice h Barbareh discourse.

4.2. Full noun phrases

In the last section, we saw some instances of

pronominal affixes co-occurring with a full noun phrase.

Specifically, we saw that full NPs are used along with

pronominal a f f i x e s when t h e pa r t i c ipan t s are introduced

i n t h e discourse f o r t h e f i r s t time. Unlike t h e task of

maintaining a l r eady established par t i c ipan t s i n t h e

discourse, t h e in t roduc t ion of pa r t i c ipan t s can be

argued t o be a more cogni t ively demanding t a sk ,

requi r ing a m o r e e x p l i c i t form than pronominal affixes.

Thus for this t a s k no t only t h e pronominal a f f i x e s , t h e

d e f a u l t marking requi red by t h e grammar, bu t also f u l l

Nfs are used. As f o r obliques, they are not marked an

t h e verb by a f f i x e s , so only full NPs are used t o

express them. I n this sect ion, we will examine

s i t u a t i o n s in which full NPs are used for d i f f e r e n t

tasks which seem to r equ i re more cogni t ive effort than

maintaining r e f e r e n t s i n the discourse.

As jus t noted, one obvious s i t u a t i o n i n which full

NPs are used i s t h e in t roduct ion of pa r t i c ipan t s into

t h e discourse . Examples ( 7 1 and ( 8 ) are two such cases.

Here is another one:

( 9 ) JH59.656R-657L, t x t 5 0 , line OOla 59.656R

?iaiyXilihlk hilati~wit~'!? B hiho? siyy&?, ?i=a-iy-qili-hik a s 1 S ?at- * W-5 ' =ho?=s-iv-va? ?l=3-PL-H&B -apply DPÈARTçpois DP*DIS=3-PL-arrow ethey used to apply poiaon to their arrows,>

siykfty iho?smol6 - &n h i ~ c o ~ k 8 ~ , S-iy-kuy 3-PL-take DP=DIS=3=saliva DPÈARTçfrog. <tailcing the saliva of a frog,>

A siyuÈ? -tap hilt$ofi$oÈn - ? hiUOhkiki - 7 , a-iy-uS?itap hi-l =R-&ovni--? his1 =~-Icxlb> -

- W ? 3-PL-ffiix DPçART=R-other- DP=ARTçR-thing- They mix it with other things'

This is the beginning of the text. As can be seen,

several di f ferent participants (underlined) are

introduced f o r the f i r s t time i n the discourse. Full

noun phrases (along w i t h pronominal prefixes f o r t h e

subject) are used f o r t h i s purpose. A f t e r the

introduction, 'the Tularefios', 'a frog', and ' the

s a l i v a F are kept track of by pranominal a f f i x e s S-iv-,

, and non-marking respect ively . (Remember that the

third person singular direct object i s unmarked.;

I t should be noted tha t the introduction of

participants by one explicit mention does not always

establ ish them i n the discourse. There are cases i n

which participants axe repeatedly mentioned by f u l l NPs

at the introductions

(10) JH59.583L-584L, txt 49, line 001 59.5831.

a) mal&*&e ki& anan&-&, '?i& s i i a i k - t i ' l t6, mal* MU. snanahu ?ikhu ai iaAe5i t o any what kind but mostly mussel 'any kind of shell, but mostly mussel shell

b) ftaykg he?gtu?l-w&f hilt6 ftayk6 )Ã e?=(tu?iwa hi=l =&a because PRX=shell DP=ARTaaaussel because ethe shell of a mussel,>

They put. "the mussel-shell on the hot coals, \ i

e ) hikaaa- ii s?aluipaw& -tun, hi+ka=maii S-?aluSpawatun DP+so=when 3-bum.to.ashes and when it is reduced to ashes

hihulSBw, hi=ho =l =Sow DP=DIs=ART-wild. tobacco

they take it and mix it with the Sow8

This is at the beginning of t h e text. The discourse

participant 'mussel s h e l l 0 is explicitly mentioned t w i c e

with a full ftP along with a pronominal affix, and after

that it is kept. track of only by the pronominal a f f i x e s .

Notice i n l i n e a), at the very beginning of t h i s

sequence, 8mussel' itself is introduced with a f u l l NP

f irst . It shows that sometimes it takes more than a

single explicit mention t o es tabl i sh participants i n the

discourse.

Here i s another example:

(11) JH59.334L-344R, txt 137, line 001-1 59.334R

'The old-time Indians had only f i r e l i g h t in the house. <They would make a. f i r e in. the middle of the house. So that as the flame burned, the whole inside of the house was lit up. The old-time Indiana had only f ire l ight in the house.

When the Spaniards came they brought t a l l o w candles, from Mexico, - v\

b) 6 he?lvelweiS-? ?i-At6 -wits higiyapl- ?ikhu he?=l =R+wela -? ?i=s-SutowiE hi.==s-iy-apiqen but ?RX=ARTÈR+candle-E ?I=3-be.quick DP=3-P&-bum

but candles burned down q&Ac3.y and w e r e expensive.'

Again, the participant 'tallow candlesr is expressed

t w i c e w i t h a f u l l HP. N o t i c e here that it is expressed

for the first time a s 'tallow candlese and then

'candlese suggesting that the second mention may not

have t o be as explicit as the first mention (Given

1983). These examples show that sometimes f u l l NPs are

repeated i n order t o es tabl i sh the participants fully i n

the discourse. We have thus examined participant

introduction in discourse, for which full NPs seem to be

the primary device. As we saw in the last section, once

participants are fully established in the discourse,

they are kept track of by pronominal affixes.

Interestingly, however, even after participants are

fully established, they are sometimes still expressed by

f u l l NPs. Several factors seem t o be responsible for

this. One obvious factor i s the presence of other

semantically compatible participants in the discourse

context (Clancy 1980; Giv6n 1983; Fox 1987). Examine

the following example:

(12) Title: ?anafianfcAy

JH59.9L-15L0153L, txt 167, line 001 59.9R

*<It is called> ?aiia&unfi&y, <but> in Spanish la llorona. The Indians believed much in him. ?ana&a~fi&y <cries out like a recently born baby>. <When it cries out near a house>, <it means that some person is going to dies.

rt ?ik% he ?al i iat&o hikl- lkL ? m u &e ?*l-i8a -?&xi hiam- but EH UK -seat-different DPçthin but somewhat different.

A v\ suxwalkA tu his?eKw6- lefi. s-uxwal 4 a t u himas-? -eqwel-Vfi 3-resemble-cat DP=3-NM-make -RES It looks l ike a cat.

The above segment is taken from a text entitled

?anabamb&w, a mythical figure. As can be seenr

is discussed as the main topic in the segment

leading up to line d) . In line d}, Jana&mb&~ is

expressed with a full NI? probably because there are t w o

p e i c i p m t s being contrasted in the utterance. Unless

they are expressed explicitlyr it would be difficult to

ident i fy the referents correctly.

Here is another example:

*They say that the t e c o l o t e t a l k s just like tha XnciiansD Take notice when you hear an -1 aound! H e says it very plain: d4 good person will die.% They used ta be afzaid of ?Ae tecolote- They say that when he sounds near a house, it is a bad amen.

<The coyote3 comes right to the house

e l ?i-siw-?S -w8n w6? we? we? w6? P ?i=s-Riiwon w6? we? we? we? ?1=3-R+sound woh w a h w o h woh and he starts woh woh w o h wah.'

This example comes f r o m the beginning of a tex t . As can

be seen, several animals aire introduced in this segment:

the tecolote (a type o f owl) , the coyote, and the fox.

The coyote is explicitly mentioned i n line d ) probably

because otherwise it would be difficult to h o w which

animal is being referred t o . In particular, the coyote

has just been introduced in line b), and as we s a w

above, that may be part of the reason why it is repeated

with a full B?P in line d ) . Eowevez, more importantly,

in line b) the fox is also introduced fox the first time

in the discourse, and that 3eems t o be the pxbary

reason for the use of a full HP to refer to the coyote

i n l ine d ) . If a f u l l NP w e z e not used there, it would

be very d i f f i c u l t t o identify the referent correctly.

Thus we have seen that the presence of semmtically

compatible p w i c i p a n t s in the discourse cantext

motivates the use of full noun phrases.

WO related factors which seem to be respons31e

far the use of full NPs after the participants have

become ful ly established are thematic break and

perspective change (Clancy 1980; Fox L987; Tondin 1987).

[14) 3HS9.287L-280R, t a c t 34 , line OOla 59.287L

'They were a l l numb with fear when that 1ewLew came in. They say it is samething terrible, it is just like a little child but it stxikes yau numb. In spite c i f the lewlew being there, Jade xeached evex and tcmk a &ink of pispibata and L t gave hin strength.

Jabe was the bravest of all the Indians

He was ~cultured.> He knew haw ta read Spanish and a little Latin. '

This excerpt is also from the beginning of the text. It

appeare to be divided into t w o parts . The first is a

description of a spec i f i c event$ what Jahe did when a

mythical f igure hwlew came i n . The second, maxked by

the azxow, is a description of Jabees assets

Interestingly, Jahe is expressed w i t h a full NP when

the second part begins even though the segment just

before that describes a series of actions i n which Jabe

is a principal participant ( p Jahe reached over and took

a drink af pispibata and it gave him s t r e n g t h f ) . This

e f f ec t of thematic breaks on referent ia l choice has been

observed c x o s s - l i n ~ i e t i c a l l y . It is almost as i f a f t er

the thematic break the p m i c i p m t s that have been

established i n the discourse are cleared from the

memories of t h e speakers, so they must be re-introduced

into t h e discouxse with e x p l i c i t form.

Here is another example. It is taken from the

beginning of (131, reproduced here as (15):

(15) JH59*289L-292R, txt 159, line 001-112 59-289L

eThey say that the tecolote talks just like the Indians.

nafio? ahaxtawti - gin noha-? S-saxtawasin vexyeEl4 3-say-clearly he says it very plain:

g) @&P namutey bihaiikp hi@,w-?i*won, \F

swam -Tip na =mutey -? =l =?&p hi=s-R+iwen 3-IDF-say when=be.neax-2 D ~ D I S = ~ h o u s e DP=3-R+sound They say that when he sounds near a house,

l.. h ) ?i-?a=l&LyU&-

?i=?al-qilalyiqs ?I =a -bad.omen it is a bad omen- p

Again, @teco1oteR is a type of owl which is introduced

in line a) fo r the fhst t h e in the discourse. The

segment leading to l i n e f) is about t h e Chumash

perception of the tecolote t a l k i n g ju s t l i k e themselves.

Line f) begins a new sequence which describes haw t h e

Chumash were a f r a i d af t h e tecolote. So t he r e seem to

be a minor thematic break after l i n e e), and in l i n e f)

the tecolote is expressed as a f u l l W even though it

has been ta lked about i n t h e pzeceding context . That

is, the use of a f u l l W here coincides wi th a thematic

break. W e have thus seen that a thematic bzeak is

another factor which motivates the use of full noun

phrases for t h e p m i c i p m t s which have a l r eady been

es tab l i shed i n t h e discouse.

Another po in t which should be made regarding (15)

i s t h e use of a full HP for t h e t e c o l o t e i n l i n e c) .

One can s a y t h a t a f u l l HP is repeated t h e r e because t h e

t e c o l o t e was j u s t introduced (see t h e discuss ion above

regarding the r e p e t i t i o n of f u l l NPs for newly

introduced pa r t i c ipan t s ) . However, another p o s s i b i l i t y

is t h a t t h i s is due t o a change i n perspective. That

is , t h i s is quoted material (see t h e exclamation mark

provided by Harrington), which seems t o present the

perspect ive of t h e Chumash, who would say what is i n t h e

quote. The quoted material does not d i r e c t l y belong t o

t h e s t o r y l i n e but t o t h e world of t h e quote, and that

may be why the t eco lo te is expressed as a f u l l HP. In

other words, I am suggest ing t h a t t h e r e is a c e r t a i n

kind of break i n perspective f r o m t h e s t o r y l i n e t o the

quoted material, which is responsible f o r t h e use of a

full HP t o r e f e r to t h e t e c o l o t e i n line c ) , j u s t as t h e

use of full MPS can be motivated by a break i n

H e r e is another example:

(16) JH59.36R-40&, txt 175, line 008 59.37R

'<When the Spaniards first came here, they gave a rooster to an old man who lived on the island across. And he took the rooster,> he said; <I thank you much>. And he took it to the island heading for the island

can be seen, t h e rooster is intxuduced at the

beginning of the d i s c o u s e , and it is re-introduced with

a full ?iIP h line a) after the thematic beak ( i . e . , the

next morning after the old m bzm~ght the raoater back

to the i s l a n d ) . A f t e r that, the rooster is kept track

of with pronominal affixes and seems to be fu l ly

established in the sequence preceding line f). Notice,

howevez, tha t i n line f) the rooster is referred to with

a fuI.1 NP tb i rdro again, what is represented in l i n e f]

is quoted material, which seems t o be responsible for

the use of a f u l l there. This is similar t o the use

of full NP3 motivated by thematic break: in t h e former,

there is a break created by a change i n perspective fram

the s to ry line to the world of the quote and i n t h e

latter the re is a break in t h m a t i c i t y * Thus we have

seen that the use of f u l l NPs far e s t d l i s h e d

p a e i c i p m t s i n the discourse is partly motivated by a

break in themt ic i ty ar a change in perspectivee

Finally, another factor which has of ten been

discussed in the literature regarding t h e use of'

explicit form for e s t a l i s h e d p m i c i p a n t s is the

absence of mention or mention only by i n e x p l i c i t ~ O ~ I U S

for a certain duration of discourse (Clancy 1980; Given

1983 } . That i s , p a ~ i c i p a t s are often e x p l i c i t l y re-

introduced after not being mentioned a r a f t e x being

mentioned only by such i n e x p l i c i t fanus as pranouns fax

a s t r e t c h of d i ~ c a u r s e o It has been suggested t h a t t h i s

happens because t he refezents fade fxom the memoxies of

t h e speakers. However, 1 did not f ind t h i s factar

playing a zole in l3arbarefio discoursee This particular

r e su l t could be because mast of the t ex t s i n my data are

r e l a t i v e l y 8hort; they axe not appzopxiate far examining

th i s factor. But it is a l s o pas s ib l e that t h i e factor

is only an epiphenomenon of such factors as thematic

break and perspective change (Fox 1987 ; Tamlin 1987 ) . That isf it is oftem suggested that the longer a stretch

extends without e x p l i c i t mention of the p a ~ i c i p a t s , the snore likely it w i l l be that the p-icipants w i l l be

referred t o with more e x p l i c i t foms* However, this

could be simply because of the fact that the longer the

stretch, the more likely it i s that there are breaks in

thematicity and changes in perspective in the stretch.

This suggests that the real factor in the use ~f

e x p l i c i t fcmw i n such cases may not be the absence of

explicit mentions but breaks i n thematicity and changes

in perspective* And i n fac t , as X have discussed above,

I found in my data t h a t these l a t t e r two factors play a

significant r o l e i n the se lect ion a f full naun phrases

in Bazbarefio.

Thus we have seen that full naun phrases are used

for such puqases a s to introduce particzipants in the

discourse, to dis t inguish some p a a i c i p a n t s from other

pa&icipmts clearly, and to re-intraduce p e i c i p a n t s

after thematic breaks or when there are changes i n

perspective In the last section, we saw that

pronominal affixesf which axe the smallest referential

devices in BarbareEof are used far probably the least

cognitively demanding task of maintaining established

pa-icipats in the discouxse. In the present section,

w e have seen that f u l l NPs, which are lin~istically

much larger? are used for a variety of possibly much

more cognitively d m ~ ~ n g tasks.

In the past two sections, we saw two referential

forms in Barbarefio: pronominal affixes, which are

gr-atically required on verbs? and full NE%, which are

used along with pronominal affixes fox core ~ ~ e n t s .

Even a glance at Baxbareiio discourse data shows that

these two forms axe responsible for most referential

work in Barbarefio: they axe the t w a most commonly used

referential forms*

4.3. Independent pronouns

In the preceding sections, I have suggested that

most referential wark in Barbareiio is performed by full

NPs and pronominal affixes; however occasional~y one

comes across other referential forms in the data* These

are the independent pranauns and the proximate

daunstrative bet?. Since verbs always take pronominal

affixe~ for the core arguments, if independent pronauns

or the d-anstrative be2 axe used for the core

arguments, they appear along with the pxonominal

affixes . Each of these two less commonly used

referential forms seems to be associated with particular

discaurse function8 and pmicular syntactic

c ~ n ~ t m c t i ~ n s which aze used to expzess certain semantic

content* In the present and the following sections, X

will illustxate the uses of these forms*

Among these two referential f o m , 1 will focus un

the independent pzonouns in this section. The following

are the independent pronouns in Bzubarefio Chumash

(Beelex 197Ua, 1976) :

Table 12 Barbare50 independent pronauns

singular dual plural

1st pexson no2 k i 6 E m U S k i kAyM

2nd person pi2 pig& pisk i p i y u

Two categories of person and three of number are

dietinwished in these pxonouns. There do not seem to

be any grammatical restrictions regarding the use of

these pronouns; a8 the examples below suggeet, it

appears that they can be used fox any grammatical

re la t ions (i.e., subjec t , direct object , obliques). The

readers should keep i n mind the fact that these pronouns

are not like pronouns i n English because they occur very

infrequently f o r r a t h e r spec ia l ized func t ions and i n a

limited set of construct ions , which we w i l l examine

below. I have found only about a dozen cases of

independent pronouns i n the data. In terms of discourse

functions, pronominal a f f i x e s are muchmore l i k e English

pronouns. Further, it should be pointed out again t h a t

independent pronouns appear along with pronominal

af f ixes for subjects and d i r e c t objects . This f a c t

nicely cor re l a t e s wi th the functions of independent

pronouns, which involve more than merely keeping t r a c k

of es tabl ished pa r t i c ipan t s i n discourse.

There are three d i f f e r e n t types of s i t u a t i o n s i n

which these independent pronouns occur. F i r s t of al l ,

they are used when a par t i c ipan t is cont ras ted with

other par t ic ipants i n the discourse. Examine t h e

following example:

( 1 7 ) JH59.302L-308Rr txt 161, line 001 59.302L v\

napkti - ti hiin-& - 6k1 hifahai h i m , na =p-hti bi=s-R+R+nah hi=a-&a6 his1 =ku when=2-çe DP4-R+R+go D-3-spirit DP=ARTçoerso *When you see the s p i r i t of a person walking about,

?ikag?ig%XY hibalia? aKi&n hipl? , ?i-ka=s-?ishfiy hiq-?al-sa?-aqSa hi* ?Imiai=3-b.a.siqn.that D-2-MM -m-die DP=2 it either is a sign that you are going to die,

keh&*& h o ? h hulicagah&i kalsa? a K S h kehalbi ho?=i =h hu=l =ka-s-ahaS ka=l =sa?-aq6an or DIS=ARTsperson Rlt=ARTçKA=3-~piri KAzARTçFUT-di or that the person, whose s p i r i t it is, is going t o die.'

As can be seen, 'youF, the person who sees the spirit,

and the person of the s p i r i t are clearly contrasted.

Here is another example:

(18 ) JH59.22L-24L, txt 170, l ine 001 59.22R

klgkS? inakiyhti - wun he?lkopkop& : f) kivM? ?i-a =k-iy-kutiy-wun he?=l =R+kopk6p IPL ?I çwhen=l-PL-se -3P0 PRX=AKTÈR+toa

'To us ail frogs look alike,

And to us all lizards look a l i k e . But to each other they must look different. '

In t h i s example, we, humans, who see frogs and lizards

in one way, and these animals, who see each other in

another way, are contrasted.

Examine the following example:

( 1 9 ) JH59.293I.-298R, txt 160, line 001 59.2931.

'The Indians say that there is everything in the ocean that there i s on the land. <For instance, the baracuda is the snake of the ocean, but the gopher snake is the snake of the land. Just like the baracuda i s the gopher snake of the ocean, "the gopher snake is "the baracuda of "the land.> The sardine i s the lizard of the ocean. O u t the l izard is the sardine o f the land, and the crayfish is the matavenado (Jerusalem cricket?) of the ocean, and the matavenado is the crayfish of t h i s land.>

a) ?ikaBi9d: ? hi?f*tilSap ?i=ka=ç-is-R-k -? hi=?iti=l -<up

IPX. ?I*KA=3-AP-R-person-= DP=here=ARTçlan We are the people of the land.

b) When we get tick we wash ourselves out w i t h the water of the ocean. For three days we drink no water except the water of the ocean. We drink the ocean t o vomit a t both ends.

The <swordfish> are the people of the sea.'

A t the beginning, the Indians are said t o claim that

there i s everything i n the ocean that there is on the

land. After several examples which i l l u s t r a t e this

claim, people on the land are contrasted with swordfish

i n the sea as equivalent: line a) and l i n e c).

Independent pronouns are sometimes found in

situations in which contrast is only weakly implied.

Examine the following example:

'The -three who were befriended. Hawk and Raven and Coyote, happened t o be walking past the house of skunk, and Coyote just happened to say: *Come, let's go in and see the old man, the dancerIn Coyote said: "You two go infw Coyote wanted Skunk to kill them. And so they (all) went in. "Sit down, my friendsf- And Coyote said to Skunks "Please dance a Little, SO that these fellows are amused." And Skunk said: -Alright, I will. I'm already getting a little old, but at least 1' l1 try to dance. But it ' 8 very cold; I l1 first make a flee. Then Irll try t o dance.- Then he straightened his tail. Then he raised h i s tail, and he started to dance. He kept whirling around and around and making his anus get closer and closer t o the faces of his friends. Skunk cried out, saying: "Get a little closer1*, because he wanted to

squirt , his poison on them. And then Raven t h r e w a hot rock SO that it quickly entered h i s anus. Skunk was running a l l over from suffering so much. And he cried out: "This fellow is a bad person; he already has killed many pe~ple.~ And so Skunk died. And Hawk told Coyote:

hoQi h i iti h&% hi ill coae.here DP this.one DP 2 too 'You come here toolu

Â¥Wh should I asked Coyote. And he was already afraid. "Get a move on, hurry and corner But Coyote didn't obey him. And so Hawk finally caught Coyote and threw him into the fire. And there he burned up. Coyote was a bad holllbre . '

Unlike t h e earlier examples, t w o i tems are not over t ly

contrasted i n t h i s example. The independent pronoun pi2

occurs i n a context i n which another p a r t i c i p a n t has

been discussed. A f t e r Skunk, who almost k i l l e d Hawk and

Raven, died, it is malicious Coyote's t u r n t o die: 'you

come here t o o p . In t h i s particular case t h e role of t h e

re fe ren t of t h e pronoun 'you' as t h e primary a c t o r of

the event described by t h e verb @comer can be seen as

weakly contras ted with Skunk, who has just been k i l l ed .

The following example i l lustrates t h e second type

of s i t u a t i o n i n which independent pronouns are used:

(21) JE59.116R-117R, tx t 16, line 001 59.116R

'Once upon a time Luc. brought a magnet hone and picked up a whole chain of needles. She tried to explain to Luiaa, who was horrified, she wd not pay attention and said,

e f i p balyawliitfi hlpt? . h=k-?ip p-?a&yawluE hi- ==l-think 2-beedevilish? DP=2 <I think you are devilish(?)>. '

In this example, there does not seem to be any element

which is contrasted with the referent of the independent

pronoun pi? 'you8. Instead pi2 here seems to be used to

call special attention to the referent, who is

characterized as having the property 'devilish'. This

use will be called 'emphaticr in the following

discussion.

It is of interest that in all of the above cases

the referents referred to by independent pronouns are

participants which are probably not totally new in the

discourse. They may have been already mentioned in the

prior discourse, they may be present at the scene in the

story, or they may refer to the Chumash. In 4 .1 . , I

suggested that pronominal affixes are used to keep track

of fully established participants in the discourse.

Independent pronouns can be said to be more explicit

than pronominal affixes not only because they are more

independent, but also because they appear along with

pronominal affixes . As we have seen above, they perform such functions as contrast and emphatic, which seem to

be more cognitively demanding than merely keeping track

of established referents. In 4.2., I suggested that

full noun phrases are used to introduce participants for

the first t h e in the discourse and to re-introduce them

after thematic breaks, perspective changes, and when

there axe other semantically sixnilax p m i c i p m t a in the

context.. Independent pronouns are less explicit than

full noun phrases because they are generally shorter and

less informative, and the tasks they perform do not seem

to be as cognitively demanding as introducing

participants for the first time in t h e discourse and re-

introducing them for various reasons. That is, this set

of referential forms lies in the middle in terms of

explicitness, performing tasks that also seem to be in

the middle in terms of cognitive demand.

The first two uses of Barbareno independent

pronouns (i.e., contrast and emphatic) are characterized

by discourse functions. The last one seems to be more

semantic/syntactic. There appear to be certain semantic

content expressed by particular syntactic constructions

which require the use of independent pronouns. Examine

the following example:

(22) JH59.47R-57R, txt 178, line 034 59.52L.52R

&aykg ?alw6t W&-y% ki-fenat& in&? kayk6 pal-wot va9i k d e 6 ki=!n~? because MM -leader too like DP=1 '<For he is also a leader like me. 3'

The use of the independent pronoun in this example seems

to be required by the syn tac t i c const ruct ion which

expresses the semantic content ' l i k e me' ; t h e r e is no

other way of expressing it. This i s c l e a r l y not a case

of emphatic, and there does not seem t o be any clear

sense of con t r a s t which is observable in t h e context.

H e r e is another example:

(23 ) JH59.124R-l26R, txt 194, line 001 59.124R

Â¥I is the big green flies that <give notice about something;-. They have a sound of buzzing when they fly. When they get near you, it is a sign that people ace g. t o come to visit you. When they buzz around at night,

it is a sign t h a t one of ye is g. to dieor

Again, the use of the independent pronoun here appears

t o be required by t h e syn tac t ic const ruct ion which

expresses the semantic content 'one of you*. T h i s

u t t e r ance seems t o be associa ted with some sense of

emphasis ( ' i t ' s one of you who is going t o d i e * ) , which

I think comes not from the use of t h e independent

pronoun itself but f r o m t h e expression 'one of you8.

Thus I have shown t h a t the use of one of the less

frequent r e f e r e n t i a l forms is associated wi th p a r t i c u l a r

d iscourse functions and with p a r t i c u l a r syn tac t i c

constructions used to express certain semantic content.

4.4. Dmonstrative be2

The o the r less frequently used r e f e r e n t i a l form i n

Baxbarefio is t he proximate dmonst ra t ive be2. 1 have

found only about a dozen cases of t h i s use of be? in the

data. Just like independent pronouns, this form is

associated with specific discourse functions and

specific syntactic constructions usedto express certain

semantic content. Below, we w i l l examine examples which

illustrate these functions and constructions.

First of all, the dmonst ra t ive he2 is used to

refer t o such types of information as facts, rumors,

events, and ideas which have already been introduced i n

t h e discourse using several clauses. It seems ra the r

d i f f i c u l t to r e f e r back to them i n o ther ways because

t h e full reference t o t h e m would require mentioning

whole ideas a l l over and there are no lexical items

which express these types of information. Examine t h e

following example:

(24) JH59.115L-l16L, txt 190, line 001 59.115L

'There was one Losenzma who used to turn into a at.-lion

b) iBS.-ii~~a?~~-i&n ilkt-it hi^naii=~-@a?-xonon-? hi=l =kiJli DPs=vhen=3-FUT-8teal-TIt DPsART'asometfing when he wd. go out to steal.

\\ A c) hos?unl-*i ?ialth isaaitikfl -yus ih6?.

ho =B-?uniiri ?i=s-itaq hies-am -tikuyus hi=be? DIS=3-wife ?1=3-hear DP=3-IDF-talk-about DP=PRX His wife heard of this. '

As can be seen in line c}, the dmonskrative refers

to t h e rumor that the wife's husband becomes a lion when

he goes out to steal.

Here is another example:

(25) JB59.116R-117R, t a c t 16, line 001 59.116R \v a) saxip&-kg hisnukfi-~u.

0 hi-gnet hi-lokl6 - aya,

saxipaka hi=s-nukuni hi=l -iaagnet hi=lokleaiya once D-3-bring.hoaie DP=ARTçaiagne DP=Lucrecia *Once upon a time Lac. brought a magnet hone

b ) hikap~pa - fcl - fnAn h i h h ~ ? X his?aw-?awux?a-? hika=s-uSpak -7 -in -win hi=l =?&h&? hims-R-?awuxa--? and =3-pick.up-TR-IKS-3PO DPaART=roany DP=3-R-needle-EM

and picked up a whole chain of needles.

c) k6-f& kanaç?lps hilgwi - ga kibi kaçn -a-?ip-UB hi=luvisa now =-hen-3-say-DAT DPçLuis

hihe? alas6 - 1: hihft?, hidea=?al-?açel himbe? DPÈEMsN -be.horrified DPÇPR

She "tried to explain to Luisa. who was horrified, '

to the full event of Lucrecia picking up a whole chain

of needles w i t h a magnet. This was a horrifying event

to Lucrecia's mother, Luisa, because she apparently had

not seen a magnet before.

Here is another example:

( 2 6 ) JH59.60R-6lR, txt 1, line 001 59.6IL \v

a) na nono pyint i i ?i ?aleti% na n d o p-yin6i ?i ?a%-e-Sho when very 2-beehot ?I MM -H-good

'When you are heated you don't want to drink too much cold water.

b 1 ? iyaltb d n w a i ib6? iholkuhkd? ih6?. iy-? a~-&abh-wa~ h i m h a ? hi=ho?=l = R - h + - ? hi==he? PL-NM -know -PST DP=PRX DPÇDISmABTÈR-person+ DPÇPR The Indians knew that. '

In t h i s example, the dmonstrative be2 sefexs t o t h e

idea that when your body temperature is high it is not

good to drink a lot of cold w a t e r .

Notice that, in a l l of these cases, the information

referred to by the proximate demonstrative has just

been intxaduced into t h e discouxse, and he? is used to

refer t o it f o r the second time. Barbare60 has s eve ra l

r e f e r e n t i a l forms with which t h i s kind of r e f e r e n t i a l

t a sk could be performed. However, none of them s e e m s

appropriate here. F i r s t , though the information has

j u s t been introduced, r e f e r r i n g t o it jus t by a

pronominal a f f i x (o r by zero i f it is a t h i r d person

s ingula r d i r e c t o b j e c t ) seems too radical; it would be

d i f f i c u l t f o r t h e hearer to i d e n t i f y t h e r e fe ren t s i n c e ,

unlike t y p i c a l cases of r e f e r r ing , t h e information

represents something which needs several clauses t o

describe it. Second, there is probably no l e x i c a l i tem

which represents t h e kind of infoxmation which he2

refers to i n t h e above examples. That is, I am

suggesting t h a t s i n c e there are no words f o r t hese

ideas, t h e demonstrative be2 is used ins tead to t a l k

about then. F ina l ly , one could a l s o r e f e r t o t h e

information by repeating the whole t h i n g again, b u t t h a t

seems very uneconomical e spec i a l ly because t h a t is

exact ly how t h e information is presented i n t h e i r f i r s t

introduction.

I n addi t ion t o t h i s f i r s t func t ion of f u l l ideas ,

t h e proximate dmons t ra t ive a l s o has a eecond,

related function. It is used t o refer to participants

and concepts f o r which the use of a fu l l NP does not

seem t o be appropriate, or for which there does not seem

to be an appropriate lexical item. Examine the

following example:

( 27 ) JH59.98L-l00L, txt 186, line 001 59.98L

*The h o r s e s would be in the morning with the hair of the <inane> braided. Florentino said: The horses <go> i n the bsuah in the night, ao their manes are t a n g l e d . But Guisa> said: The D e v i l rides the horses at night,

t B u k a he? ?ikas?aly6nt',Ã hilly& -wl'u. Euka be? ?i=ka=s-?alyenta h i = l =Lyawlu thus PRX ?I=K&=3-reins DP=ARTsdevil those are the <reins of "the Devil>.'

The dmonstrative be2 apparently refers to tangled

manes, which have been introduced i n the discourse only

periphrastically using verbs 'the hair of the mane

braided' and 'their manes are tangledF. Referring to

t h i s referent by just a pronominal a f f ix seems to be t o o

radical , because it has not been introduced as a single

concept using a f u l l HP. However, t h i s concept is not

t o t a l l y new either because as we just noted it has

actually been talked about using verbs, which makes the

use of a f u l l NP unnecessary. These reasons seen to

motivate the use o f the dmonstrative be2 in this

example.

Another point which should be made regarding ( 2 7 )

is t h a t what is intended by the speaker could be

something along t h e lines of 'whatever it is which is

t h e tangled s t a t e of manesc. There is probably no

lexical i t em which represen ts this meaning exactly, and

that could be another reason motivating t h e use of he?.

In other words, I am suggest ing t h a t t h e lack of an

appropr ia te l e x i c a l item nay be responsible for t h e use

of he?. In fact, he2 is often used for referents whose

i d e n t i t i e s are not e n t i r e l y straightforward. The

f o l h w i n q example i@ one such use of he?:

( 2 8 ) JH59.172L-173R, txt 205, line 001 59.172L

'The razor-clan lies in "the sad of the Goleta Slough. To gather t h e m , you use a stick which has been nade with a knob a t its end. You find the hole, and by the bole know where the razor-clam is down in the mud. And you stick the stick down i n the amd. T h e razor-clam i s evident ly agape, and closes on the knob.

4 &y~i& ? d i p : ? a l s i t ~ ~ & *^cl hih6? P feiyafoi ?al-?ip ?al-S-iehaxi hi+he? perhaps maybe KM -think MM -3-enemy DP+PRX Perhaps he thinks it is an enemy.'

The d m o n s t r a t i v e he? in t h i s example may appear t o

r e f e r to the s t i ck . However, I would like to suggest

that the use of t h i s p a r t i c u l a r form is motivated by t h e

fact t h a t to t h e clam it is something ne i ther whose

i d e n t i t y nor whose purpose is very clear. That is, t o

the clam, it is not a stick but something i n front of

him which he th inks is a n enemy. There probably is no

s p e c i f i c lexical i tem which presen t s exac t ly this

meaning. The d m o n s t r a t i v e he2 is apparently used f o r

t h i s kind of r e f e r e n t i a l task.

Here is another example:

(29) OT59.227R-228L, txt 231, line 001 59.227R

' B u t to be lucky in love they used ?ayip, they sprinkled ?ay& in the coffee or on the -taw>

tau kanu mhfiiaw hihft ? Su kanu l =?uw hi=-e? for so-that from=ART-eat DPÇPR

so that <eating it> one would f a l l in love.

The d a o n s t r a t i v e he? seam t o r e f e r to whatever l i v i d

food ?ayip, a love potion, is added to; t h e verb Zuw is

normally used to refer to t h e a c t i o n of eating food. It

seem that t h e r e f e r e n t referred t o by he2 is thus

introduced i n a way i n which its exact identity does no t

really matter . To refer to t h i s r e f e r e n t by r epea t ing

t h e whole t h i n g as ' ea t ing t h e coffee o r the s t e w t would

make t h e identity of t h e r e f e r e n t precise , which is

probably not what t h e speaker in tends here. Further,

for the same reason, probably t h i s r e f e r en t has no t been

es tab l i shed i n t h e d iscourse to t h e ex ten t t h a t it could

be r e f e r r e d t o by a pronominal affix. These reasons

@ e m to mativate the use of t he d-onstrative be2 i n

t h i s exanple.

Thus we have seen that t h e proximate demonstrative

he? is used t o refer t o participants or concepts when

e i t h e r t h e use of a full NP is not appropr ia te o r t h e r e

is no appropr ia te lexical item to refer to them. This

type of be2 is vezy similar t o the first type of he2,

which is used t o r e f e r t o such information as f a c t s ,

rumors, events , and ideas which have j u s t been

introduced i n t h e discourse using s e v e r a l c lauses . I n

both of t h e s e types, t h e use of pronominal a f f i x e s does

not seem t o be poss ib le because t h e r e f e r e n t s have not

fully been e s t ab l i shed i n t h e discourse, and f u l l NPs

are not used because t he re is no appropr ia te lexical

item. I n o t h e r words, these two types of he? seen t o

occur i n s i t u a t i o n s i n which t h e use of more common

forms is not a v iab l e option.

It is of interest t h a t t h e d m o n s t r a t i v e he2 is i n

t h e middle i n terms of t h e exp l i c i t ne s s of t h e form,

compared wi th pronominal affixes and f u l l noun phrases.

That i s , t h e demonstrative bez is genera l ly more

independent than pronominal a f f i x e s bu t shorter and less

informative t h a n f u l l NPs. And it is found t o be used

f o r a t a s k which also seems t o be i n t h e middle i n

cognitive demand: what it does i s to talk about the -

referents which have just been introduced in the

discourse but which are for various reasons difficult to

talk about using more common forms. It seems that this

task is cognitively less demanding than introducing

participants for the first time in the discourse and re-

introducing them after thematic break, perspective

change, and when there are other semantically similar

participants, all of which are performed by full NPs.

On the other hand, it is cognitively more demanding than

merely keeping track of fully established participants,

which is performed by pronominal affixes.

The first two uses of the proximate demonstrative

be2 are characterized in terms of discourse functions.

The last one seems to be more semantic/syntactic. There

appear to be certain types of semantic content expressed

by particular syntactic constructions which require the

use of he?. Examine the following examples:

(30) JH59.260L-262L, txt 239, l i n e 001 59.260L

'There are old-men who indulge this way. Constantly they talk a lot of lies.

napesK6 n\is k& h i l M - n % t ~ hlh67: na =p-esqen-us ku h i s 1 =k&n85 h i + u wben=2-ask -DAT person DPçARTÈlil DP+PRX When you ask such a person:'

Ill

(31) JH59.139&-151R, txt 198, line 010 59.140R

'When one '8 spirit leaves oneF s body and wanders about, it is a sign that the person i s going to die.

napantl? hilnahn~-h'an h i i a b a . ~ ~ . ? i ki*&eti hiha?, na --anti? M.4. =R-R+~& h i 4 ==?aha&i?S k d e E h i + m when=2-meet DPÈARTÇR-R+ DP=ART=ghoat like DP+PRX If one meets such a. spirit walking about,'

There do not seem t o be o ther ways of expressing such

ideas as 'a person l i k e t h i s s and 'a s p i r i t like thisr.

This i s similar t o the use of independent pronouns i n

t h a t the use of t h e proximate d a o n s t r a t i v e he2 is

associated not only with p a r t i c u l a r discourse functions

but also with p a r t i c u l a r syntactic construct ions used to

express c e r t a i n semantic content. Notice, however, t h a t

in ( 3 0 ) and (31) even i f it w e r e grammatically poss ib le

t o use o the r more frequent r e f e r e n t i a l forms, it would

still be d i f f i c u l t to do so on o the r grounds. I n both

of t h e s e examples, the re fe ren t of the d a o n s t r a t i v e he2

is not given a name: 'old men who constant ly l ie ' i n

( 3 0 ) and 'a s p i r i t t h a t l e f t t h e body of a person and is

wandering about i n (31) . That is, these r e f e r e n t s seem

t o be t o o complex t o be r e fe r r ed t o by pronominal

affixes, and t h e r e are probably no appropr ia te lexical

items which r ep resen t these meanings. Thus examples

such as t hese suggest that sometimes both the funct ion

and t h e semantics/syntax are responsible for the use of

be?.

In this section, we have examined one of the t w o

less frequently used referential forms: the proximate

d-onstrative be?. S have shown that the dmonstxative

he2 is used far re ferents whose ~efexential mnipulation

seems to be difficult because they are referentially

complex or their exact identities are Left unspecified.

These referents have just been introduced in the

preceding discourse. However, because of their

referential characteristics, they still have not fully

been established in the discourse, so it is not poss ib le

t o use pronominal affixes t o refer to them. Similarly,

it is not possible t o use full Nfs either because again

due to the referential characteristics of these

referents there are probably no appropriate lexical

items for them. I have also suggested that there are

certa in types of semantic content expressed by

particular syntactic constructions which require the use

o f he2.

4.5. Summary

In this chapter, we f i r s t looked at t h e two

referential forms which axe found commonly in Barbarefio

discourse: pronominal affixes and full noun phrases.

These two forms axe responsible for most referential

work in Barbareno discourse. Pronominal affixes are a

part of what is dmhally required by the grammar, and

these are the most common referential choice. This

least marked form is used for what seems to be the least

cognitively demanding task of keeping track of

established participants in the discourse. The more

marked form, full noun phrases, is used for potentially

more cognitively demanding t a s k s such as introducing

participants for the first time in the discourse, re-

introducing ¥the after thematic break and perspective

change, and when there are other semantically similar

participants in the discourse. When the referents are

core arguments, full NPs are used along with pronominal

affixes. Full MPS are the second most common

referential choice in the data. There are two other

referential forms which are used much less commonly:

independent pronouns and the proximate demonstrative

he?. They are in the middle in terms of eqlicitness of

different referential forms, pronominal affixes the

least explicit and full Nfs the most explicit.

Independent pronouns and the proximate demonstrative he2

are found to be associated with particular discourse

functions and particular syntactic constructions used to

express certain semantic content. Some of the functions

with which these two forms are associated seem to be

more cognitively demamlhg than merely keeping track of

established par-ticipants in the discourse, but less

cognitively demanding than introducing and re-

introducing participants in the discourse.

5. Constituent order

The purpose of t h i s chapter is t o descr ibe t h e

cons t i tuen t order of Barbarego Chmnash while re-

examining some of t h e r e s u l t s obtained i n earlier

chapters. I will f i r s t show t h a t though Barbarefio

allows a number of different cons t i tuen t o rde r types, it

is actually very rare that one finds ut te rances with two

core arguments expressed as full NPs (Du B o i s 1987;

Mithun 1987; Payne 1987, 1990; Duranti and Ochs 1990).

I will suggest t h a t this makes it less f r u i t f u l to talk

about const i tuent order i n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l sense: t h e

order of the subject and the d i r e c t ob jec t wi th relation

to t h e verb (cf. Mithun 1987; Payne 1987, 1990) . I n

t h i s dissertation, cons t i tuen t o rder will be examined in

terms of what is exhibited i n discourse data . W e w i n

see t h a t the most typ ica l order i n Barbareno is a verb

followed maximally by only one core argument full NP.

This f inding nicely c o r r e l a t e s with one structural

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h e language: core arguments are

already marked on t h e verb by t h e grammatically required

pronominal affixes. He w i l l further see t h a t one full

HP following the verb is most t y p i c a l l y e i t h e r a

t r a n s i t i v e d i r e c t ob jec t o r an i n t r a n s i t i v e subject,

supporting the cross-linguistic findings referred to as

Preferred Argument Structure' by Du Bois 1987.

Then, based on the findings in chapter 3, I will

discuss the order of obliques in utterances. I will

show that if both core arguments and obliques are

present as full NPs in utterances, obliques are

typically expressed after core arguments. When

arguments which would otherwise be obliques are encoded

as direct objects of a verb containing one of the core

argument-building devices, relevant noun phrases appear

immediately after the verb because they are now core

arguments.

Finally, I will discuss cases in which full noun

phrases are expressed before the verb. Specifically, I

will discuss two types of preverbal NPs, which co-occur

with two diffexent clitics zi= and ka= respectively. I

will suggest further that these preverbal NPs are not as

common as postverbal NPs in the data, and that they are

associated with rather specialized discourse functions.

5.1. Basic constituent order

We have seen above that Barbarefio allows a number

of different constituent order types. Examine the

following examples:

(1) JH59.332R0333R, txt 2, line 001 59.333L

nas?Qw i l k f i na -8-?uw hi.=& =h

+#&P, &=l =xian

whenç3-bit DPKAftTÇperso DPçARTçrattlesna V DO S

'When a person gets bitten by a rattlesnake,'

(2) JE59.686Ro688R, t x t 76, line 004 59.687L 9

ma? li hugpinti - kay hiho? s~unt&w hi? L i p mail hu=s-pintikay hi=ho?=sountaw bi=l =?an when RM=3-strike DP=DIS=lightning DPÈART=hous

v ll S DO hiho? kayi xeyll hihe~ganta walwa- 2; hi=ho?=kayi xeyli hi=he?=santa valwala DP=DIS=street Haley DP=PRX=Santa Barbara

'When the l ightning struck the house on Haley Street in Santa Barbara,

(3) JH59.662RO663R, txt 67, line 005 59.662R $1 v1

pe - lu ?iAetSi sl~.ltafct&~$& hilawalyfint% pelu ? i d d i S-qili-R-tauy-wag bi=l =?awalvente Pedro ?I=always 3-H&B -R-carry -PST DP=ART=brandy

v DO 'Pedro all the tine carried some brandy,'

(4) JH59.662R-663R, txt 67, line 001 59.662R

Â¥awaly6nt kaima~m.ld- ?S halm6 - l&, ?awalvente ka=l m? -am -&&l-was-D? hu=l a~rooloq brandy KA=ARTasNM-IDF-&ink-PST-EM RM=ART=long.ago

v 'Brandy vas the favorite drink,'

In the first two examples, the subjects and the direct

objects are expressed after the verb, but as can been

seen, the order of the two arguments is reversed in the

t w o examples: V DO S in (1) and V S DO in ( 2 ) . In the

last two examples, some arguments are expressed before

t h e verb. Specifically in ( 3 ) what appears to be the

subject and in (4) what appears t o be the d i r e c t object

axe expressed before the verb (however see 5 .3 . f o r the

syntactic status of preverbal We).

Traditionally, discussions of basic constituent

order have presupposed the presence of two full noun

phrases i n clauses (e.g., Greenberg 1966; Hawkins 1 9 8 3 ) .

In particular, researchers have discussed the order of

the subject and the direct object in re la t ion to the

verb as can be seen i n t h e i r use of abbreviated labels

to talk about constituent order: SOV, SVO, VSO, etc.

However, clauses containing two core argument full NPs,

such as in (1) and ( 2 ) , are relatively rare in my data.

In several hundred pages of text, I have found only 15-

20 transitive clauses with both subject and d i r e c t

object noun phrases. This figure concurs with recent

cross-linguistic f indings (e.g., Du Bois 1987; Hithun

1987; Payne 1987, 1990; D u r a n t i and Ochs 1990). At the

same tine it seems t o make it very d i f f i c u l t to

determine the basic constituent order of Barbareno.

However, the present finding seems to make much

more sense if we consider it i n terms of the general

characteristics of human discourse. That is, there

seems to be a certain cognitive constraint against

presenting too many pieces of information a t a time i n

discourse. Speci f ica l ly , it has been suggested t h a t one

cannot present more than one piece of new information

per intonation unit. An intonation u n i t is a speech

u n i t characterized by its prosodically coherent contour

(Chafe 1987, 1994). One of t h e primary reasons f o r

using f u l l NPs is t o present new information i n

discourse. Since using two full. NFs would often mean

presenting two pieces of new information, one tends not

t o f ind two f u l l MPS with a verb.

I n f ac t , as w e saw i n the last chapter, i n

Barbareno discourse, full NPs and other independent

fo rm (i.e., independent pronouns and the proximate

demonstrative m) are used fox cognitively demanding

tasks which include presenting new information. On t h e

other hand, pronominal af f ixes are used f o r t h e

cognitively much less demanding task of keeping t r ack of

f u l l y es tabl ished pa r t i c ipan t s i n discourse. W e

further saw that pronominal affixes are the most typical

r e fe ren t i a l forms and much more commonly used than

independent r e f e r e n t i a l forms i n Barbareno discourse.

I suggested t h a t a l l these f a c t s ind ica te that

pronominal affixes axe the defaul t choice and t h a t a l l

other referential forms are reserved far marked

ac t iv i t i e s . R e f e r e n - f c i a l choice in Barbareno thus

appears to respond t o the cognitive cons t ra in t

concerning the presentation of new information, and that

seems t o be the primary reason for the rarity of verbs

with two core arguments expressed as full NPs.

Having suggested t h e reason f o r t he r a r i t y of

t r ad i t iona l ly celebrated types of const i tuent order i n

my data, however, we s t i l l want to know about t h e

consti tuent order i n Barbarefio Chuniash. Considering t h e

d i f f i cu l t y of ident i fying t h e basic consti tuent order i n

Barbareno i n t r a d i t i o n a l terms, the approach which

should be taken toward understanding Barbareno

consti tuent order seems t o be t o present a descr ipt ion

of d i f fe ren t const i tuent order types commonly found i n

Barbareno discourse. In other words, I am suggesting

t h a t the first step toward understanding the constituent

order in a language may be to observe what speakers of

the language do instead o f simply s t a r t i n g with

assumptions based on s tudies of other languages.

Looking at t h e question i n t h i s way, what appears

t o be t h e most typ ica l consti tuent order type i n

Barbarefio discourse is a verb followed by at most one

core argument f u l l HP. The following is a typical

sequence from the data:

(5) JH59.205L-205R, txt 21, line 001 59.205L

nas iyexp&ti ihe?ltk&r ? i?çlsa?tuhSy na =S-iy-expei ))i=he?=l =&U? ?i=?al-sa?-tuhuy wben=3-P&-sing DPÇPRX=ART=bird.s ?I== -FUT-rain 'When "the huitacoches sing, it is going to rain.

7iyalaKiwa law iheituhfi* iy-?al-aqfiwalaw bi=he?=l çt.ubu-f PL-MM -like DP=PRX=ARTçrai They do like rain.

kg b'a kasiYexp8tg k±p ka=s-iy-expeS now ~o=3-PL-sing They sing and sing,

PS ^

?iyalti^ -&An hi?alsa?aktin& - n'a hiiuwfl - h&, PS iy-?al-&bin hi=?al-sa?-alcti-nuna hi=l = ? u d u likely PL-KM -know DP=liM -FUT-coffle-bring DPa=ART=food they know it is going to bring food,

siyexp&ti hino&? hina5tuhtuhSy B-iy-expefi hi=nofeo+-? hi=na =a-R-tuhuy 3-EL-sing DP=inuch+EM DPçwhen=3-R-rai They sing a lot when it is raining.'

This is the entire text. There are three core argument

f u l l NPs in t h i s sequence, which are underlined. As can

be seen, all. of them are expressed after the verb. In

all other cases, the core arguments are expressed by

pronominal af f ixe s only.

Here i s another example:

(6) JH59.88R-89R, txt 9, line 001 59.89L

a) m&-iisi<ra(iaASlA he?iihi&: ? , mali S-iy-R+aniin -? be?=l =R+?invu - * ? when 3-PG-R+eat.a.meal-? PRX=ARTÈR+Indian-E *<When Indians are eating a meal,>

i-siye-tip&-wil. ?is#-iy-e-tipawil ? 1=3-PL-M-talk they don't talk.

? iy6 -&m psal^-~haU^alalt -nut*, ?iy& p-R+saqhalalm-us -vim though 2-R+holl~~ +AT-3P0 tho you holler at them

?isiyat?it&-Kin, ?i=s-iy-e-itaq-in ?1=3-PL-N-he~-20 they don't hear you.

nod? ~iyaiaiflw iit - Ain noho iy-?alal-?uw hi=! ==?&Q very PL-ACT -eat DPsARTsmeat <they were real mat-eatera.>

tfiunasamlw& -wan iiwi, fiu çn =s-am -ivawan his1 =?a+i soWthatçwhen=3-IDF-cu DP=ARTÇID <So that when they cut someone,>

? i&'^at6 -wits ish& - las iho? f i w a w t - his ?i=s-SutuwiE hiss-%alas hi=ho?=l =?iwawafu.B ?I=3-be-quick D P Ã § 3 - h e a DP=DIS=ART=cut the cut heals quickly.

nan6ho sa&dw ih&.n, na =noho #-am -?uw b n n when==much 3-IDF-eat DP=AR'T^Beat When they eat so much ineat

i a k t 6 -wit8 h i a b t lag iiiwawi - &is. ?i=s-Sutowi& hiss-su-xai&8 hi=l =?iwawaAiS ?I=3-beequick D-3-CA-heal DPÇARTçc <the cut is soon healed.>'

Again, this is the entire text. As can be seen, there

are several core argument NPs appearing after the verbs.

In a l l other cases, the core arguments are expressed by

pronominal affixes alone.

Examine the following example:

( 7 ) JH59.128I,-128R, txt 11, line OOla 59.1281.

*The frogs must have a certain control over the w a t e r .

tayltS s 2 ipas ilwl- JA kayk6 s-?ip-as himluwisa because 3-say-RP DP=Luisa For Luisa. said:

?itauswun i h e l w a ~ w a f c a -k, itaq-us -win hi=he?=l =R-wa&a& - 0 7 hear-DAT-3PO DP=PRX=ARTÈR-frog.sp-E listen to the frogs,

S ? tuhfly. a-S&?-tuhuy 3-FUT-rain it is g. to rain.

And pretty soon r<inclouds would appear. '

Again, t h i s is the e n t i r e tex t . There are five core

arguments expressed as full M P S . Other core arguments

are expressed by pronominal affixes. As can be seen,

all of these NPs except one appear after the verb. The

one HP which appears before the verb, 'the frogs ', i s

found at the beginning of the text. I will discuss this

type of preverbal NP later i n this chapter. These

examples thus suggest that a verb followed by a t most

one core argument full UP is the most typical

c~~stitue~t order in Barbarefie discourse. In factt 1

have found that the vexb-initial order accounte fur

approxdtely 90 percent of the clause8 in the datae2

ZA chapter 4, X suggested that full RIPS are used

when the referents must be explicitly mentioned for such

xeasons a% intxaducing pa~icipats for the first t h e

in the discaurse, clearly distinmishing some

paeicipmts from other participants and re-introducing

pmicipants after thematic breaks ox when these are

changes in perspective. The f u l l NE% in ( 5 ) - ( 7 ) can be

accaunted for by these factorsm In ( 5 1 , all of the

thee fall =S express referents which are being

introduced for the first time in the discourse. In ( 6 1 , the same obse~ation can be made segarding the first

four NPs; those paeicipants axe introduced for the

first t h e in the discourse* Regarding the last two

NPs, 'meate in line h) and 'cut * in line i) , these items have just been talked aboutt so in a strict sense this

is not their fixst introduction* What seems to be

happening is that it is actually a part of a commonly

observed narrative convention in which basically the

same utterance is repeated. Notice the repetition of

similar utterances in lines e)-i)m Far this reasan, 1

would like to suggest that the two HPs %eat8 in line h)

and gcutg i) are still being intzuduced into the

discourse for the f i r s t t h e a In ( 7 1 , a l l NPa except

#frogs in line c) express referents which are

introduced for the f i r s t time in the &scaursea As for

?frogsg, notice that it appears in a quote. As we

discussed in the last chapter, going from the story line

to a quote creates a change in perspective which seems

to motivate the use of a f u l l M? here.

The above observations lead us to the following

hypothesis regarding the basic constituent order in

Barbareiioz a verb is generally fdlawed by at most one

core argument full KP which has to be present for

various reasons. That is, what we have here seems to be

a verb which expxesses either an event or a state and

possibly one core argument expressed as a full W tu

perfom such cognitively demanding tasks as introducing

and re-introducing pa~icipmts and clearly

distinwishing some peicipats fromother pa~icipants

in the discoursee The suggested basic cunstituent order

is summarized in the following:

v (NI

This may look like a rather mdhentary structure f r o m

the perspective of syntax, but as we saw above, it is

possible paztly because most of the xeferential tracking

activities in Barbare60 are pe~fomeci by the pronominal

affixes on the verb. That is, we axe observing the

moqhological richness of the language c~~zelating with

its syntactic sparseness. Or to put it another way, the

moqbological tightness of the language is correlating

with its syntactic looseness.

Studies have shown that cross-lin~istically

transitive direct ~bjects and intransitive subjects are

the structuxal d o t s in which new information is often

expressed (Du Bois 1987). As we just saw above, in

Barbarefia, full W s typically fallow the verb and they

are present because very often they express new

information. Interestingly, when 1 looked at the

syntactic relation of postvexbal NPs, I faund that they

are mostly transitive direct objects and intransitive

snbjects. In fact, most af the a s in ( S ) - ( ? ) above

seem to have one af these syntactic relations. In (51,

*huitacoches (a type af bixd) in line a) is an

intransitive subject, and @xainP in line b) and *foodF

in line d) axe txansitive direct object8 xespectively.

In ( 6 1 , 'Tndians* in line a) and @cut8 in line g) axe

intransitive subjects, and ' m e a t in lines e) and h) , rsameuner in line f), and OcutF in line i) are

transitive dixect objects. Sn (71, rwaterr in line a)

and ?€ra ' h line c) axe txansitive direct objects,

and 'c1oud8 ' in line e) is an intrmsitive subject. The

NP rfrogsf in line a) may seem to be a case of a

transitive subject, hut as I will show in 5.3, it does

not hold a syntactic relationship with the following

part af line a): it is not a syntactic a ~ ~ e n t of the

verb * ~ l e @ l The NP 'LuisaP in line b) seems to be

another candidate for a transitive subject, but even

this case is suspecte First of all, 2ip 'sayF in b) is

a verb which can take only one nominal (i.e., the

speaker) ; another element taken by the verb is the

speaker's utterance* The verb 2in is thus more like an

intransitive verb, and the 'Luisa' moxe like an

intransitive subject. Further, it should be noted that

in my data I have not seen t h e verb m marked with the plural ciixect abject euffhc -wune3 This fact sugge~ts

that Z ~ D may nut be a transitive verb after all (cf.

Munro 1982)e Regazdless of its actual syntactic status,

it thus seems reasonable to suggest t h a t a 'to say is

in essence like an intransitive verb, and accordingly

the NE! *LuisaO is an intransitive subject.

To sum up, mast of the f u l l NPs i n Barbaxefia which

appeax postverbally seem to be e i t h e r in trans i t i ve

subjects or transitive direct objects* As we saw

earlier, t h e s e NPs are pxesent prhaxi ly because they

express new informatione These facts suppart the crass-

l i n g u i s t i c finding of Du B o i s (1987), which suggests

that trans i t ive direct objects and i n t r a s i t i v e subjects

are the grammatical slots in which new infamat ion is

o f t en presented. More hpartantly, they show tha t , i n

terms of g~ammatical reli itians# the mast t y p i c a l

constituent order i n Barbare60 is a verb perhaps

followed by e i t h e r an in txans i t ive subject o r a

t rans i t i ve direct object. Transit ive eubjects are

normally expressed as pronominal prefixes (cf . Dn B o i s

1987) The fol lowing s ~ i z e s the suggested

constituent order h Barbaxe50 in te- of grammatical

relation:

In this sec t ion , we have thus came up w i t h a

description af the basic constituent oxdez o f Barbare60

based on the examination of discourse data* We have

discussed the func t iona l and t h e s t r u c t u r a l

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of this b a s i c cons t i t uen t order. Though

what is presented here may seem r a t h e r d i f f e r e n t from

t r a d i t i o n a l l y celebrated types of c o n s t i t u e n t order

(Greenberg 1966; Hawkins 1983), this i s apparent ly what

Barbareno speakers ope ra t e with when they use the

language in discourse, and thus it can be said to

r ep re sen t what they know about t h e s y n t a c t i c s t r u c t u r e

of t h e language.

5 . 2 . Obliques

Based on the f indings i n chapter 3 and i n the last

section, I would l i k e to discuss i n t h i s s e c t i o n t h e

order of obliques with relation to core arguments in

Barbareno ut terances . As we saw i n t h e l a s t sec t ion , i n

Barbarefio discourse core argument f u l l NPs are t y p i c a l l y

e i t h e r t r a n s i t i v e direct ob jec t s o r i n t r a n s i t i v e

sub j ec t s , while t r a n s i t i v e subjects are t y p i c a l l y

expressed as pronominal p re f ixes .

I n order t o t a l k about the order of c o r e argument

NPs and obl ique NPs within u t t e rances , of course we need

a sufficient number of utterances in which both of these

types of arguments ace overtly expressed. However, as

I pointed out earlier, it is actually very difficult to

find combinations of two full NPs in Barbarefio

utterances. Specifically, it is not common to find both

transitive subjects and obliques overtly expressed in

utterances because in Barbareno discourse transitive

subjects are typically expressed as pronominal prefixes.

Further, obliques axe in some sense "extra argumentsw,

which are only occasionally used in utterances. For

this reason it is not realistic or even useful to

determine the order of obliques in relation to

transitive subjects, leaving us only with the question

of the order of obliques in relation to other types of

core arguments (i.e., intransitive subjects and

transitive direct objects).

We saw in the last section that the basic

constituent order in Barbaz-e5o is a verb followed

perhaps by either a transitive direct object or an

intransitive subject. As we saw in chapter 3, if both

core arguments and obliques are present in utterances,

obliques typically appear after core arguments. The

following examples illustrate the order of obliques in

relation to intransitive subjects:

(8) JH59.6L-7L, txt 3, line 002 59.6R

?iyena siypilikllkw ilpil46-li hjunl-&up, ?iyena S-iy-pililclaw hi-l -oimoli $ i d S u ~ if 3-pl,-f all DP-ART-beans DP=down

v S GOAL 'If beans fell on the floor,#

(9) JH59.658R-659&, tx t 63, line 002 59.658R

hilsa?e~w^l hiskitdn hi=l =sa?-eqwel hi=s-kitwon DP=ARTçFUT-m& D-3-co3~e.out

v hilnohd? s?&i ihca-?is h iho?66k, hi=l ==nofio+-? a-?ua8 hi=l = ? a x u h bi=ho?=n-?tk DP=ART=veq+EM 3-stink DPÈART=bloo DPsDIS=2-nioutA

S SOURCE 'which will snake very stinking blood come out of your mouth. '

(10) JH59.281R-283I., txt 244, line 005 59.283%

sKi.11-wil ilsy6-lpe hiho?sis?6k ika?6?, 8-qili-wil hi=l =sveloe bi=ho?=~-is-?&k hi=ko?o? 3-?iAB -be DPçARTÈserpe DP=DIS=3-AP-mouth DP=Zaca.Lake

v S LOC 'There used to be a <serpent> in Zaca Lake*

(11) JB59.409R-412L, txt 147. line 010 59.412L

8 ~ i l i t ~ ~ 6 kiyantik m6 loK, S-qili-Sho k-iv-antik hu-rooloq 3-HAB -good l-PL-spirit RM-long-ago

v S TIME ?our s p i r i t was always glad in ancient times,'

(12) JH59.485L-494L. txt 87, line 053a 59.493L

swilwaS isiy?ak8y i~ he?ik8skes?i?- ? S-wil-wag hi=s-iv-?akaviS he?=l =R-kesu - * ? 3-be -PST D-3-PL-rack PRXmARTÈR-cheese-E

v S REC 'there was their <rack> for the cheeses'

The verbs are immediately followed by the intransitive

subjects in these examples. The obliques appear after

the intransitive subjects. As can be seen, the meanings

of obliques are not formally marked (Beeler and Whistler

The following examples illustrate the order of

obliques in relation to transitive dixect objects:

(15) Ji359e676R-681Lt tact 75, L i n e 005 59.679R

A s can be seen, the verbs are d ixec t ly fallawed by t h e

t r a n s i t i v e direct objec ts in these examples. The

obliques appear after the t r a n s i t i v e dizect objects.

All of these examples thu8 show t h a t , in term of t h e

co re -ob l iqe d i s t i n c t i o n , the bas ic consti tuent ordex of

Barbare60 seam to be a verb maybe followed by a core

argument and then maybe fu r the r followed by an oblique.

As 1 suggested earlier, t h e one core argument is

typically e i t h e r the i n t r a n s i t i v e subject o r the

transitive d i r e c t abject* These findings regarding

Barbare50 cons t i tuen t order are summarized i n the

following:

It should be noted again t h a t t h i s type of order i n

which NPs appear a f t e r t h e verb amounts to about 90

percent af c lauses i n t h e data.

We saw in chapter 3 t h a t Barbaxefio has a process i n

which certain azguments which would othemise be

abliqyes become direct objec ts by appeaxing with one of

t h e core a r p e n t - b u i l d i n g suff ixes . When this happens,

and both the tikect object and t h e pat ient are expressed

as f u l l NPs, t h e d i r e c t ob jec t i s typically expressed

immediately af ter the verb and is followed by the

patient, reflecting the status change. Spec i f i ca l ly ,

t h i s happens with dat ives and instruments. For datives ,

when this happens the verb takes the dative suf f ix -us

and the plurality of the dative can be marked by the

In both of these examples, the verb takes the euffix

-us, and the dative is now the direct object appeaxinq

r ight after the verb. The patient, l abe l l ed #PATt,

appears after the d i m e t abject. Xn (191, the plurality

of the direct object FIndiansg is marked by t h e direct

object plural auffh reflecting the status change.

can be expressed as direct objects by appearing with an

-in-marked vexbe The new direct object can be marked

with i f the referent is plural, and typically it

directly follows the verb and is fallowed by the patient

i f bath of these arguments are expressed as full NPs.

E x d n e the fallawing examples:

(22) JHS9.18lL-I82Lr t x t 17, line 001 59.18E

1x1 these exwles, instruments are direct objects

appeazing right aftex the verb? which is marked with the

~ n s t m e n t a l suffix -ine The patient, labelled fPATff

follows the direct object .

To sum up, I have 8uggested in t h e last two

section8 t h a t the basic consti tuent order of Barbare50

is a vexb perhaps followed by e i t h e r the t r an s i t i ve

direct object er the i n t r an s i t i ve subject , and pexhaps

fuxther followed by oblique^. Certain types of

arguments which would otherwise be obliques (i.e.,

da t ives and ins t ruments) are cast as direct objec t s of

verb8 containing one of t h e core =ven t -bu i l d ing

suff ixes . When t h a t happens the direct objects

t m i c a l l y a p p e a d i r ec t l y after t h e verb and may be

folluweci by t h e p a t i e n t , reflecting the status change.

5.3. Preverbal elements

In t h e preceding sec t i ans , we have examined the

basic cans t i tuent order of Barbaxeiio Chtamash. In this

sec t i on , w e w i l l examine nonbasic types of cons t i t uen t

order which u e marked i n terms of frequency and

functions. As has been suggested eaxlier, my data

include u t t e r ances i n which full HPs are expressed

before the vexb, as i n ( 2 4 ) and (25 ) :

(251 JH59.662R-663R, t a c t 67 , line 001 59.662R

In ( 24 ) , 'Pedro8 , which appears to be the subject, is

expressed before t h e verb, and i n ( 2 5 ) , *brandy8, which

appears to be the direct object, is expressed before t h e

verb. I ant discuss ing cases such as t h e s e i n t h i s last

s e c t i o n because they are not as f requen t as the bas ic

c o n s t i t u e n t order which we discussed i n t h e last two

sections and f u r t h e r they seem to be assoc ia ted with

marked pragmatic funct ions. The preverbal HP order

amounts t o about 10 percent of c l ause s i n t h e data.

Among ut te rances i n which f u l l HPs occur before the

verb, there appear t o be at l e a s t t w o d i f f e r e n t types.

The first type is charac te r i zed by a p r a c l i t i c ?i= on

t h e c o n s t i t u e n t following t h e preverbal HP, which is

t y p i c a l l y t h e verb. Examine t h e following examples:

(26) JH59.59OR-591L, txt 42, l i n e 001 59.590R

'The Indians did not expect evaryfching they ate to be tender. *

In both o f these examples, there is a full NP occurring

befare the verb, and the verb is marked with a proc l i t i c

2i=. This order is not rare i n d i scoux~e , but it is not

as common as the basic constituent order Ln which f u l l

W s occur after the verb. Further, this order i s

chuacterized by the marked function which the pzeverbal

The pzagmatic function associated w i t h t h i s type af

preverbal NP seems t o be best chaacter ized as the

introduction of a topic (Beexer and Whistler 1980) .

These Ws very often express i d e n t i f i d l e characters

such as ?Indians and 'the old-time peopler,

s tories . Theae kind8 of chaxacte~s /elements are first

set up, then pzedications relevant t o thtm are made i n

the res t of the utterances. (See below for a discussion

of t h e syntactic relationship between this type of

preverbal HP8 and the verbs.]

One piece of evidence supporting the proposed

function of preverbal NPs w i t h 2i= may be seen i n the

fact that they are ch=acteristic of the utterances at

the beginnings of stories. In fact, all of the examples

of these preverbal NPs given in this section come fzom

the openinqs of stories ; mast of them are the very first

utterances. If prevezbal NPs with 2 i = axe associated

with a topic introducing functicm, this d i s t r 3 u t i o n a l

characterist ic makes sense because main p m i c i p a n t s of

the s tor i e s are naturally intzoduced a t the beginning of

the s tor ies . The following examples are typical cases

of preverbal W s with the p r a c l i t i c 3i=:

( 2 8 ) JE59.32OL-322Rr tat i t 165, line 003 59-32UL,32OR

'The early-Spaniards soan after they emer established vineyaxda .

In (281, the HP 'the euly-SpaniardsR is first

presented, and the rest of the utterance talks about

w h a t they did in the Chumash land. In (29 1 , the MP Wwtir seeds that they used to grow here and theret [an

HP ?seeds @ and a relative clau~e modifying- it4) is

first presented, and the rest ~f the utterance is about

their characteristics.

The fallowing example further illustrates the topic

introducing function of pseverbal HPs :

(301 JH59.657R-658L, t x t 61, line 091a 59.657R

t\ b) ?iamsf i - t ip Pihe?

a=s-am -su-tip hi-he? ?X=3-XDF-a-salt DP=PRX they salt it,

The W 'the leaf of angelicat is first presented, and

the rest of the utterance talks about haw it is used as

a remedy fez poison oak. This example is particulaxly

interesting because it shows that more than one

predication caulci be made for the pxeverbal NP: @the

leaf of angelica8 is fisst presented as seen in line a),

and two predicatians regmding angelica leaf aze made,

both of which are marked with the proclitic ?is, as seen

in lines b) and c). Examples such as t h i s furthex

support the proposed function of the preverbal NPs by

showing that the infannation expressed by the preverbal

IWs plays a role at the level af discourse.

It should also be nated that there are often

preverbal elements which are locatgve and temporal

expres S ions :

t h e ranch we always have a goud-ciippexer

*When one &eve a buggy or wagon along one of the old-thie raads @

Both of these examples are the first utterance of the

stories. It seems that theee preverbal elements set up

a frame in which the rest of t h e story is t d d .

XLthough this particular function seems different from

the topic intraducing function which we have examined s o

farf it i s interesting t o see t h a t both of these

functions are served by preverbal elements occuxxing

with the same psoclitic and that they concern the level

Finally, as some of the preceding examples almady

suggest, the elements which accur before the verb in

t h i s t m e of constituent order m y not be the syntactic

azguments of the vezb (Wash 1995b), as in ( 3 3 ) :

(331 JH59.345L-347L, txt 59, line 001 59.345R

ihe? l-vul6-wu

PRX=3-MM -fat-RES DPçPRX=ABTçshe

r-ctallow*- i s the fat o f the mutton, it is a very hard grease. "

A literal translation of this example would be 'sheep's

fa t , its grease is very hardF. The preverbal HP

'sheep's fat0 is not a semantic argument of what is

represented in the la t ter part of the utterance.

Here i s another example:

( 3 4 ) JH59.641R-642R, tact 7 8 , l i n e 005 59.6421.

*Salt. sometiaes cones out white on a person. On a hard working roan, <it comes out> s a l t on h i s back.

\\ ?i n67n6 sutl-SiS h i s son soxyop hiho?lkainl- .

noim S - u t i ~ i i t lti=s-on ~ o x y o p hi.=ho?=~ = Is amiaa ?I very 3-hard DP=3-IDF wash DP=DIS=ARTÈshir

t h a t s a l t coning out makes his sh ir t hard t o wash.'

A l i t e r a l translation of ( 3 4 ) would be 'the coming out

salt, washing the shirt is hard". As the translation

given i n the example suggests, what it means is 'because

of the salt coming out, it is hard t o wash the shirt'.

Again, the preverbal NP "the salt coming out' is not a

semantic argument of what is presented i n the la t ter

part of the uttenince.

W e have seen in earlier chaptexs that, in

&uba.refic#8 verbs themselves can constitute complete

predications. This fact, h conjunction with the above

examples, seems to suggest the following analysis

regaxding the structure of the preverbal constituent

order with the proclitic ?i=. In this particular order,

some topic element and same complete predicatian

relevant to it are juxtaposed on the basis of a rather

loose relationship between the two: the relationship is

not syntactic, but pragmatic.

The present analysis is further supported by the

morphology af the preverbal W s . Preverbal PIPS do not

take the dependent proclitic hi=B which is a

chuacteristic of NPs accu~~ing after the verb (cf.

Beeler 1970aB 1976; Beeler and Whistler 1980; Waeh

1995b). That is, even a glance at the data shows that

typically postvesbal NPs are marked with the proclitic

hi=, but this proclitic does not appear on preverbal

NE%. Fox example, none of the preverbal W s presented

in this section are marked by hi=. So here is a

phenomenon in which the morphology of Barbarefio t x e a t ~

preverbal =S differently from postvecbal WS# which are

cleuer cases of syntactic arguments of the verb. And

this seems to i n d i c a t e further t h a t preverbal NPs are

no t syntactic axguxnents of the verb in the ut terance*

The above analysis concerning the syn tac t i c status

of the poreverbal NPs occurring with seems to accord

nicely with the function of these NPs which 1 suggested

earlier* That is, preverbal NPs have been suggested to

se rve a tapic introducing function, a discourse-level

funct ion, and they are conjoined with ~ o m e pred ica t ians

due to praqnatic relevance.

Thus f a r w e have examined one type of preverbal

c o n s t i t u e n t order* This type is characterized with

preverbal NFs occurring with t h e p r o c l i t i c +?is on the

word f d l o w i n g them, and is not as conman as the basic

c o n s t i t u e n t order in which full NPs follow t h e verb. In

terns of function, it can be characterized as a t o p i c

c o n s t m c t i o n i n which a pzevexbal topic element is

conjoined with some camplete predicat ion based not on

syntax but on pragmatics*

The second type of constituent order in which NPs

occur beeore the verb is c h a a c t e r i z e d by the p r o c l i t i c ,

Jca=f on the verb. Examine t h e f o l l ~ w i n g examples:

(36) -S9.554&562R, txt 106, line 008

#It wa8 grown up people that drank toluache.'

In (35) and (36)# rflowers@ and 'ruoteF which appear to

be the direct objects, are expressed before the verb,

and in (37)? the subject 'grown up people' i s expressed

before the verb. In all of these examples, the verb is

marked with the pxoclitic ka=, and further the

information expressed in the prevexbal NP seems to be

focused, which is part ly observed in the use of such

elements as #rather8 (example (36)) and ,onlyr (example

(37)). Further, ae the examples show, this type of

order is very dten tzanslated by Harringtan with the

cleft construction in Sng1isha M d i t i ~ n a l l y ~ often t h e

infarmation expxessed in these prevexbal NPs may be

contrasted with other information in the utterance, as

seen in the following exaaplez

(38) JH59.58L-GOL, txt 179, line 003 59.59L

'They say t h a t when you see the s p i x i t of someone else,

either you axe g. ta dier or that pes8on is g. to d i e s r

In t h i s example, pthat person @ is contxasted w i t h 'you r ,

and is expressed preverbalzy w i t h the proc1iti.e ka=.

St appears that the preverbal NPs occurring with

ka=, like those with 3 i s f are not syntactic azgtments of

the following element. There are several pieces of

evidence far this analysis.

F i r s t f some ka=-marked words axe actually nouns

rather than verbs:

?It must have been an ep. that chilcken only not gxown-ups e '

In this example, there are two words marked by &a=, bath

of which seem to be nauns because t h e y take the

alienable possessive prefix i s - . Stmctura l ly , what w e

have here in each case is t w a =S jutapased next to

each other. For this reason, though the first IQ in

each cunstmctian (Fchildren* and *gram-ups* } seems to

be the possessor of the following noun epidemic , these

NPs probably axe not its syntactic argument.

The following example further supports t h e present

analysis :

( 4 0 ) JE?59.359R-367&, t x t 141, line 004 59.360R

-> K e b h ho?a;aJiiin kaaiykepkepnu?l-waS ^ysg-iy-R+kep -nu?-iwa5

or DIS-ocean KA=3-PL-R+bathe-LOC-NPST or the ocean was their bathing places. @

The word marked by Jca= is a noun: it i s marked with the

locative nominalizer pm2 and the suffix -iwaS, which

indicates the defunct status of the referent of the

noun. An HP ' a deep place i n a creek, a basin, a slough

or the ocean* is placed before that. Here, there does

not seem to be any syntactic relationship between the

t w o HPs: the f i r s t IIP does not even have a possessive

relationship with the J c a = - ~ k e d m. Such examples seem

to show that utterances containing ka= may be equational

constructions with no syntactic relationship between the

t w o parts.

Second, supporting the above analysis, there are

cases of ka=-marked utterances without an NP preceding

them, as in:

(41) 3H59.139L0151R, txt 198, line 060 59.149L

P% ~eiiia?l'l kaiiy-filihi.kwan, P% Aesnaii kÇ= =? -iy-qili-hik-wun perhaps EMejust KA=ART^NM-PL-HAB -do -3PO *that was probably all that they used to do.'

(42) JH59.428R-432L, txt 150, GM line 001 59.431R e

? ik%?mekaBi~iina&iii -wag ?ikhuÈ&e=Is&=a-iy-?iÈndiÈ-iw but =EM=K&=3-PL-custom -NPST *but that was their custom.*

Agreeing with the e a r l i e r suggestion that ka= may be a

type o f predicate marker (Beeler 1970a, 1976 ; B e e l e r and

Whistler 19801, these examples show t h a t &-marked

ut terances are complete without an HP preceding them.

Notice t h a t kaà appears on a verb i n (41 ) and on a noun

i n (42) : t h e former takes t h e habi tua l p re f ix Uli- and

t h e th ixd person plural d i z e c t ob jec t s u f f i x -mq, and

t h e latter takes t h e defunct nominal s u f f i x -iwas. The

f a c t that ka=-marked ut terances are complete without an

HP preceding them suggests t h a t those NFs appearing

before Jca= may not be real syntactic arguments of what

follows . Final ly , morphology a l s o supports t h e present

analysis. Speci f ica l ly , these preverbal MPS are

typically not marked by the dependent p r o c l i t i c hi=,

which is c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of postverbal NPs, clearer cases

of syntactic arguments of t h e verb.

The f a c t s presented above a l l seen to point t o t h e

conclusion t h a t this second type of preverbal order is

a focus construct ion i n which t h e preverbal HP is

syn tac t i ca l ly independent from what follows and

funct ional ly t h e information which t h e HP presents is

focused. Final ly , in terms of d i s t r ibu t ion , I should

note t h a t , compared t o other types of cons t i tuen t order,

this order seems to be rathex marked; it is used

relatively infxequently in Basbaxefio discoursee

W e have thus discussed two types of prevezbal

orders in Barbaxefio, each of which is characterized by

a particular proc1iti.c CO-occurring with theme

Intereatingl~~ 1 have come across a f e w cases i n the

data which seem to exhibit preverbal NPs aesociated with

both of these two types of orderse Heze is one such

?The Indians l i k e d big game animals rather than amall.?

There are two NPs occurring befare the verbe The first

NP 'Indiansr is followed by the proclitic Z i = , and the

second M? 'big animals * is followed by the proclitic

ka= This utterance seems to be about one

chmacteristic of the IndiansF which ~uggests the topic

status of the first NP. -hext part of the

txanslatian @rather than smallr F which is not in the

Chumash, seems to suggest that the infuxmation expressed

in the secand MP is focused. Finally? though in my data

I have faund only a few cases in which two NPs occur

before the verb, all of them show the ozder shown in

( 43 ) : topic and focus. Thus, these examples not only

show that these t w o types of preverbal NPs can be used

together but further suggest that there are i n fact two

di f ferent s tructural @ l o t s before the verb.

Thus w e have seen Barbareso constituent orders in

which full Ws axe expressed before the verb.

Spec i f ica l ly , I have discussed two types of orders, each

of which i s chaacterized by particulax structural and

functianal characteristicsm It should be noted that the

functians of these two preverbal order types are very

similar to what has been discussed in the l i terature

concerning preverbal orders c r o s s - l i n ~ i s t i c a l l y (Mithun

1987, 1993; Payne 1987; C&ng 1991)e That is, it has

been found i n many languages that preverbal elements are

associated with such prawat ica l ly marked functions as

topic and focus.

5-4- S--

In this chapter, w e have looked at canstituent

order i n Barbarefie. 1 first suggested that the most

typical const i tuent order i n Barbaxe50 i s a verb

followed by at most one core argument full NP . Based on the functions of full Ws given earliex, I then

presented a functional description of Barbare60 basic

constituent order as a vexb which expresses either an

event or a state which may be followed by one core

argument full NP performing such coqnitively demanding

tasks as introducing and re-introducing pmicipants and

clearly distinpishing some pmicipants from other

paeicipmts in the discourse. We then saw that these

f u l l NPs axe typically either intransitive subjects or

transitive direct objects, which suggests a structural

description of Barbareso basic constituent order as a

verb which may be followed by either an intransitive

subject or a transitive direct ob ject . Transitive

subjects are normally expressed as pronominal prefixes.

I further suggested that this rather rudimentary

structure is possible because most refexential tracking

activities in Baxbareiio are performed by the pronominal

affixes an the verb.

Then I talked about the order of obliques in

relation to core arguments. Specifically, 1 suggested

that if utterances have bath a core argument and an

oblique as full NPs, the oblique typically follaws the

core argument* Barbarefio has a pxocess in which c e r t a i n

arguments which would otherwise be ublicpes (da t ives and

instruments) are treated as a e c t objects by appearing

with a verb containing one of t h e core u m e n t - b u i l d i n g

suffixes* 1 discussed t h e consequence i n cons t i tuen t

order of t h i s process t h a t alters g ~ a m m t i c a l xela t ions .

I shmed t h a t when t h i s happens and both t h e d i r e c t

ob jec t and t h e p a t i e n t appear i n t h e ut terance, the

direct object d i r e c t l y fallows t h e verb and is followed

by t h e pa t i en t? r e f l e c t i n g t h e s t a t u s change. To sum

up, B a r b a r e 5 0 basic cons t i tuen t oxder can be summarized

as follows: a verb maybe followed by one core axgtment

f u l l NI? ( e i t h e r t h e t r a n s i t i v e direct objec t or the

i n t r a n s i t i v e s u b j e c t ) ? and maybe f u r t h e r fo lhwed by

obliques.

Finally, w e examined cons t i tuen t o rder types other

than t h e basic a m . Specif ical ly , I discussed cases i n

which NPs a c c w before verbs. These cases seem to be

more marked i n terms of both frequency and functions

than the type that has basic cons t i t uen t ~ x c i e r * I

suggested t h a t there are at least t w o diffexent types of

preverbal orders* I f i r s t d i s c u ~ s e d cases i n which

preverbal NPs co-occur with a p x o c l i t i c Ji= an t h e word

following them* I suggested t h a t these NPs may not have

a syn tac t i c r e l a t i ansh ip with t h e vexb because t h e i r

r e fe ren t s are of ten nut semantic arguments uf what is

represented i n t h e l a t t e r part of t h e ut terance*

Further, these NPs do not take t h e dependent p r o c l i t i c

hi=, which is c h u a c t e r i s t i c of Ws fo lhwinq t h e verb.

1 also suggested t h a t t h e function of these NPs can be

chmacter ized as t h e introduction of a topic ,

representing such i d e n t i f i d l e characters as ' Indiansr

and ' the old-time peopler, m h a t e l h m a n beings, and/ar

main par t ic ipants o f t h e s to r i e s , o r t h e frame i n which

t h e s t o r i e s are to ld . I then discussed cases i n which

pzeverbal elements CO-occur with a pxoc l i t i c ka= on t h e

verb. This is a xe la t ive ly mintx construction which

occurs rather infrequently. I suggested t h a t t h i s

canstruction is used when t h e element accurr5ng before

t h e verb i s focused in t he utterance. I ale0 suggested

that these preverbal NPs xnay not belong syn tac t i ca l ly t o

what follows.

Notes for Chapter 5

1. Even among these cases, the basic constituent order

cannot be easily determined: approximately half of them

had VOS order and the other h a l f VSO. These cases do

not include such examples as ( 3 1 because, as I w i l l

suggest i n 5.3., preverbal NPs do not hold a syntactic

relationship with the verb.

2 . This number includes cases in which oblique NPs

appear after the verb. We w i l l . examine such cases i n

3. Of course, this fact could simply be a consequence of

the fact that quotes are normally singular. As we saw

in czhaptez 3 , the verb Zin @say8 can become a verb that

takes two nominal arguments 'say to/telle by addition of

the dat ive suffix -us, but that i s not what we have i n

( 7 )

4. Suzanne Wash (p.c.) analyzes the material on the

second line in (29) as an appositive clause t o 'their

seeds8 instead of a relative clause modifying it.

6. Conclusion

In this dissertation, we have looked at the

interface between grammatical structure and functional

factors in Barbareno Chmnash, a California language, by

closely examining discourse data. In particular, this

was done based on the findings and the assumptions in

one area of research called 'information f low8 (Chafe

1987, 1994). In this final section, I would like to

review the discussion and summarize the major findings

of the disser'tation.

In chapter 2, as an introduction to Barbarefio

Chumash, I presented its basic structure. First, I

discussed the distinctive sounds in Barbareno. I showed

that it has s i x vowels and a relatively large number of

consonants. Then, I briefly discussed its basic

moqhological structure while presenting the two main

lexical categories (nouns and verbs ) . Next, I discussed

the argument structure of Barbareno; I illustrated the

nominative-accusative patterning of verbal affixes which

indicate the arguments of the verb. I further suggested

that these affixes are pronouns because they are used

without full NPs. I then discussed the specifics of

this pronominal system. Next, I gave a brief discussion

of Barbareno constituent order; I showed that Barbareno

exhibits various constituent order types. Finally, I

described basic clause-combining patterns in Barbarefio.

After examining the basic grammatical structure, we

looked at three tightly related aspects of Barbareno

grammar and their functional correlates. In chapter 3,

we looked at the argument structure of the language. I

first pointed out that certain arguments in Barbareno

are expressed by grammatically required pronominal

affixes (the subjects and the direct objects). That is,

Barbareno treats only certain arguments as integral

parts of the verbs, which can be taken as criteria1 for

core arguments. I then pointed out that facts about

constituent order support this observation. That is,

when these arguments are full NPs, they tend to be

expressed before other NPs ( i.e., obliques ) in a clause.

We then examined the structure and "the function

associated with two verbal suffixes ?us Odativeg and -in

@instrumental0. I suggested that these are devices for

expressing certain arguments as direct objects which

would otherwise be cast as obliques (i.e., datives and

instruments). There are several pieces of evidence

which support this analysis. First, when the referent

of the direct object i s plural , just l i k e other direct

objects it can be marked by the p l u r a l d i r e c t object

su f f ix -mn. Second, when both the dat ive o r

instrumental direct object and the pa t i en t are present

as full NPs i n the clause, the direct object tends to be

expressed before t h e pat ient . Finally, t h e d i r e c t

object seems to represent a par t i c ipan t t h a t is more

cen t ra l t o the event described by the verb and/or more

prominent in the discourse than the pat ient . Thus the

morphological marking, the syn tac t i c pat terning , as well as the semantic or" discourse status a l l seem t o ind ica te

that these arguments are now d i r e c t objects, and t h i s

further suggests t h a t core argumenthood plays an

important role i n the grammatical s t ruc tu re of

Barbareno.

Finally, we briefly examined the grammatical s t a t u s

of the pa t i en t occurring with a verb marked by one of

the core argument-building devices. I suggested t h a t

this type of p a t i e n t does n o t have a l l t h e fea tures

associated with d i r e c t objects.

I n chapter 4, we examined r e f e r e n t i a l choice i n

Barbareno. We first looked at pronominal affixes, which

are the most typical r e f e r e n t i a l forms i n discourse. As

we saw earlier, these affixes have been grannnaticized to

such an extent that subject prefixes are used even when

they do not refer (duanny subject). Thus both frequency

and grammar suggest that pronominal affixes may be the

unmarked or default referential choice for B a r b a d o

speakers.

Pronominal affixes indicate only person, number,

and case, so they seem to be used only when that much

information is enough to keep track of the referent:

more explicit reference is not necessary. That is,

these affixes are used to talk about participants who

have already been fully established in the discourse

(8given information8 in Chafe's term (1976, 1987,

1994) ).

These pronominal affixes often co-occur with full

MPS. I showed that full NPs are used in such s i t u a t i o n s

a s when referents are introduced in the discourse for

the first time or re-introduced after a thematic break

or perspective change, and when there are other

semantically similar referents in the discourse. That

is, these are situations in which reference only by

pronominal affixes would not be explicit enough.

After establishing the uses of these two

r e f e r e n t i a l forms i n discourse, w e looked a t t w o other

fo rm2 independent pronouns and t h e d m o n s t s a t i v e be2.

I suggested t h a t these two forms are not used ve ry o f ten

and t h a t they are associa ted wi th spec ia l i zed funct ions

as w e l l as particular s y n t a c t i c const ruct ions used t o

express c e r t a i n semantic content .

I n chap te r 5, w e looked at the cons t i tuen t o rde r of

Barbarefirt. Barbareiii-i seem t o al low severa l d i f f e r e n t

types of cons t i t uen t orders ; however t r a n s i t i v e verbs

with t h e two core arguments expressed both as f u l l HPs

are extremely rare i n d i scourse (cf. Du Bois 1987) . I

thus suggested t h a t it may no t be use fu l o r even

possible t o t a l k about c o n s t i t u e n t order i n the

t r a d i t i o n a l sense.

W e t hen looked a t the most t y p i c a l cons t i t uen t

order i n discourse: v e r b - i n i t i a l order. I suggested

t h a t i n t h a t order , the verb i s genera l ly followed by a t

most one core argument f u l l NP. As w e saw i n chap te r 4 ,

f u l l WPs are used when t h e r e f e r e n t needs t o be

e x p l i c i t l y mentioned fox va r ious reasons. I thus

suggested t h a t funct ional ly t h e basic cons t i t uen t order

i n Barbareno is a verb represen t ing e i t h e r an even t o r

a state which may be followed by one core argument f u l l

NP performing such cognitively demanding t a s k s as

introducing and re-introducing par t ic ipants and clearly

dis t inguish ing some par t i c ipan t s f r o m o ther pa r t i c ipan t s

i n t h e discourse.

Studies have shown t h a t transitive d i r e c t ob jec t s

and i n t r a n s i t i v e subjects are t h e grammatical slots i n

which new information is o f t en presented (e.g., Du Bois

1987) . I a l s o found that i n Barbareiio postverbal NPs

are mostly transitive direct ob jec t s and i n t r a n s i t i v e

subjects . I thus suggested t h a t s t r u c t u r a l l y the basic

cons t i tuen t order i n Barbareno is a verb perhaps

followed by e i t h e r t h e d i r e c t ob jec t or t h e i n t r a n s i t i v e

subject.

Regarding obliques, we found them appearing after

the core arguments (i.e., t r a n s i t i v e d i r e c t ob jec t s and

i n t r a n s i t i v e sub jec t s ) . As discussed i n chap te r 3,

Barbareno has a process in which certain arguments which

would otherwise be obliques (i.e., datives and

instruments) become direct ob jec t s . When this happens

and both t h e direct object and the pat ien t are expressed

as f u l l MPS, t h e d i r e c t ob jec t t y p i c a l l y appears right

a f t e r t h e verb and is followed by the p a t i e n t ,

r e f l e c t i n g the s t a t u s change.

Finally, we looked at constituent orders in which

full Nfs appear before the verb. Two different types

were discussed. The first type is characterized with

preverbal NPa appearing with a clitic 2i= on the

following word. These preverbal NPs are not strictly

syntactic arguments of the verb. That is, in this type,

preverbal NPs serve a marked function which can be

characterized as the introduction of a topic. Preverbal

NPs and complete predications are conjoined because

there is some type of pragmatic relationship between

them. This particular type of preverbal order is not

uncommon, but it is not as frequently used as the basic

verb initial order. The second type of preverbal order

is characterized with another clitic, ba=, appearing an

the following word. This is a focus construction in

which the preverbal Nfs are the focused elements, and it

is used infrequently in discourse. I suggested that

these preverbal MP8 are not syntactic arguments of w h a t

follows them.

The significance o f this dissertation may be

summarized as the following. First, in spite of the

l a r g e amount of data left by earlier researchers,

Barbareno Chumash has been a little-studied and thus

little-known language. The present dissertation is the

first study on this scale to describe the grammar of

Barbareno Chumash. Particularly because of the rich

morphology of Barbarefio, it provides the field with a

solid database which should help to generate new ideas

and to evaluate already existing theories of language.

Further this dissertation has demonstrated that the

grammar of Barbaxeno Chumash is heavily dependent on the

functional factor's exhibited in discourse. It has thus

firmly established the functional basis of linguistic

structure and has amplified the growing literature in

functional linguistics. Specifically, this was done

with respect to the 'information flow' theory of Chafe

( 1987, 1994 1.

Finally, the investigation for this dissertation

was carried out solely based on the examination of

discourse data. For this reason, the study has also

shown the importance of natural discourse data in the

study of the structure and the functions of a language.

The limitations of this study can be summarized as

the following. First, the research for this

dissertation was executed without consultation with the

specialists of the language, native Barbareno speakers.

T h i s w a s p a r t i c u l a r l y needed t o check t h e formal aspects

of t h e language. Since Barbareno is no longer spoken,

of course t h i s w a s not possible. I only hope t h a t w h a t

I have presented above comes as c lose a s poss ib l e t o

what w a s a c t u a l l y going on i n the language. Second,

related t o t h e first l imi ta t ion , s ince this d i s s e r t a t i o n

was written based solely on data co l lec ted by e a r l i e r

researchers, there were often s i t u a t i o n s i n which it was

d i f f i c u l t to determine what t h e o r ig ina l recorders

intended, be it an unreadable phonetic symbol o r several

d i f f e ren t fonns and/or mult ip le t r ans l a t ions apparently

fo r t h e same i t e m . Harrington of ten made it clear what

each d i f f e r e n t form and translation w a s f o r , bu t there

are still unclear cases which are left for researchers

t o decide. For instance, I o f t e n had to pick one form

or one t r a n s l a t i o n out of several with similar meanings

given by Harrington, since it seemed impract ical t o list

a l l of them. Though I always did my bes t t o represent

what 1 took to be intended by the or ig ina l recorders,

and i f I had t o choose, I chose what appeared t o m e to

be the best a l t e r n a t i v e , some indeterminacy will always

remain i n this kind of research. I only hope my

decisions have not been too far" from the i n t e n t i o n s of

t h e or ig ina l recorders or of the speakers. Third, the

data that I used to examine Barbare60 grammar are mostly

d i f fe ren t types of narratives. For t h i s reason, the

r e su l t s which I have obtained may pertain only to t h i s

genre. Further investigations on other types of data

will be necessary to see how generalizable my r e s u l t s

are. Final ly , t h i s study lacks quantitative

verif icat ion. Same of the f indings and the claims made

i n t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n would benef i t from quantitative

ver i f ica t ion . These l imi ta t ions can be at least

p a r t i a l l y overcome i n future s tudies .

Overall, despi te t h e l imi ta t ions s tated above, some

interesting results have been obtained. The grammar of

Barbareiio Chumash has been shown t o be heavily dependent

on functional f ac to r s exhibited i n discourse, and each

d i f f e ren t aspect of t h e grammar examined here appears t o

be responsive to s p e c i f i c functional fac tors , a strong

confirmation of the value of a function-based approach

t o grammar.

Bibliography

Applegate, Richard B. 1972. Ineseiio Chumash Grammar. Ph-D. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley .

Applegate, Richard B. 1976. Reduplication in Chumash. In Margaret Langdon & Shirley Silver, Eds., Hokan Studies: Papers f r o m the First Conference on Hokan Languages, 271-283. The Hague: Mouton.

Austin, P e t e r . To appear. Causatives and Applicatives in Australian Aboriginal Languages. In Peter Austin & B a r r y Blake, E d s . , Theoretical Iiinquistics and Australian Aboriginal Languages.

Beeler, Madison S. 1954-1961. Manuscript Materials and Audio Recordings of Barbareiio Chumash.

Beeler, Madison S. 1970a. Topics in Barbareno Chumash Grammar. Unpublished Manuscript.

Beeler, Madison S. l970b. Sibilant Harmony in Chumash. International Journal of American Linguistics 36:14-17.

Beeler, Madison S. 1976. Barbare50 Churnash Grannnar: A Farrago. In Margaret Langdon & Shirley Silver, E d s . , Hokan Studies: Papers from the First Conference on Bokan Languages, 251-269. The Hague: MOU~OII.

Beeler, Madison S. 1978. Barbareiia Chumash Text. and Lexicon. In Mohaannad A. Jazayery, Edgar C. Polom6, 6 Werner Winter, Eds., Linguistic and Literary Studies in Honor of Archibald A. Hill, 11: Descriptive Linguistics, 171-193. The Hague: Mouton .

Beeler, Madison S. and Whistler, Kenneth W. 1980. Coyote, Hawk, Raven and Skunk (Barbareno Chumash). In Martha B. Kendall, Ed., Coyote Stories 11, 88- 96. International Journal of American Linguistics Native American Texts Series Monograph No. 6. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Blake, B u r y J. 1994. Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University P r e s s .

Chafe, Wallace L. 1976. Givenness, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics, and Point of View. Charles N. Li, Ed., Subject and Topic, 25-55. New York: Academic Press.

Chafe, Wallace L. (Ed.). 1980. The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural, and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Chafe, Wallace L. 1987. Cognitive Constraints on Information Flow. Russell S. Tomlin, Ed., Coherence and Grounding in Discourse, 21-51. Amsterdam: John Ben jamins.

Chafe, Wallace L. 1994. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Clancy, Patricia M. 1980. Referential Choice in English and Japanese Narrative Discourse. In Wallace L. Chafe, Ed., The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural, and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production, 127-202. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Comrie, Bernard. 1989. Language Oniversals and Linguistic Typology, Second Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Croft , William. 199 1. Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations: The Cognitive Organization of Information. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gumming, Susanna. 1991. Functional Change: The Case of Malay Constituent Order. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Dixon, R. M. W. 1977. Where Have All the Adjectives Gone? Studies in Language 1:19-80.

Dryer, Matthew S. 1986. Primary Objects, Secondary Objects, and Antidative. Language 62:808-845.

Du Bois, John W. 1987. The Discourse Basis of Ergat iv i ty . Language 63:805-855.

Du Bois , John W. , Schuetze-Coburn, Stephan. , Cununing, Susanna., and Paolino, Danae. 1993. Out l ine of Discourse Transcript ion. I n Jane A. Edwards & Martin D. Lamport, Eds., Talking Data: Transcript ion and Coding i n Discourse Research, 45- 89. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Duranti, Alessandro and Ochs , Elinor. 1990. Genit ive Constructions and Agency i n Samoan Discourse. Studies in Language 14:l-23.

Fox, Barbara A. 1987. Discourse S t ruc ture and Anaphora: Written and Conversational English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

POX* Barbara A. (Ed.). 1996. Studies i n Anaphora. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Given, T. (Ed.). 1983. Topic Continuity i n Discourse: A Quan t i t a t i ve Cross-Language Study. Amsterdam: John Ben j amins.

Given, T V 1984 and 1990. Syntax: A Functional- Typological Introduction, Vol. 1-11. Amsterdam: John Ben jamins.

Greenberg, Joseph H. 1966. Some Universals of Grammar with Pa r t i cu l a r Reference t o t h e Order of Meaningful Elements. I n Joseph H. Greenberg, Ed., Universals of Language, Second Edi t ion, 73-113. Cambridge, HA: MIT Press.

Harrington, John P. 1912-1961. Manuscript Materials of Linguistic and Ethnographic Work among t h e Chumash, Kraus Microfilm Edit ion, V o l . 3. Washington, D.C.: National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n .

Harrington, John P. 1974. S i b i l a n t s i n Venturefio. In te rna t iona l Journal of American L ingu i s t i c s 4 0 : 1- 9.

Hawkins I John A. l9 8 3. Word Order Universals : Quantitative Analyses of Linguistic Structure. New York: A c a d d c Press.

Hopperf Paul J. and 7!hompsanf Smdra A* 1980. Txansitivity in Grammar and Discourse. Language 56~251-299.

Hopper? Paul J. and Traugott Elizabeth C* 1993. Grmaticalization. C&ridge:CdridgeUniversity Press.

Ichihashi-Nakayama, Kumiko. 1996. The wApplicatAve* in Bualapai: Its Functions and Meanings. Cagnitive Linguistics 7~227-239.

Khenyi, Alexandre. 1980. A Relational Grammar of Kinyaxwanda. University of California Publications in Linguistics? Vol. 91. Berkeley: University of California Press.

KlarI Kathryn A. 1973. Northern Chumash and the Subgrouping of the Chumash Dialects. M.A. Thesis, Uniweristy of Californiaf Berkeley.

Klar, Kathryn A. 1977. Topics in Eistorical Chumash Grammar. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

Klarf Kathryn A. 1981. Proto-Chumash Person and Number Markers. In Jmes Redden? Ed., Proceedings of the 1980 Hokan Languages Workshop. Southern Illinois Universityf Department of Linguistics Occasional Papers on Linquistcs 9:06-95.

Mithunf Marianne. 1987 . 1s Basic Word Order Universal? In Russell S. T011tlhI Ed. I Caherence and Grounding in Discourse, 281-328. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Mithunp U i a n n e . 1993. Prosodic D e t e d n a n t s of Syntac t ic Form: Central Pomo Const i tuent Ordera I n David A. Petersonf Ed.,, Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Meeting of t h e Berkeley Linguis t ics Society, F e b m q 12-lS, 1993 : Spec ia l Session on Syntac t ic Issues i n Native American Languages, 86-106. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguis t ics Society.

Mithun, Mariamee 1994. The m p l i c a t i a n s of E r g a t i v i t y fox a Phi l ipp ine Voice System In Baxbara Fox & Paul J. Hopper, Eds., Voice: Farm and Function, 247-277. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Mithun, Marimne* To Appear. The Regression of S i b i l a n t Harmony through t h e L i f e of Barbarefio Chumash. I n Jane H i l l & Zyle Campbell, Eds* , a secret f e s t s e h r i f t

Mithun, Mariannemf Ono, Tsuyashie, and Wash, Suzanne. 1994. The S h i f t i n g Sta tus of Initial G l o t t a l Stop i n Barbare50 Chumash. I n Hargaret Gangdon, Ed., Proceedings o f t h e Meeting of t h e Society f a r t h e Study af the Indigenous Languages of the Americas July 2-4 1993 and t h e Hokm-Penutian Workshop July 3 , 1993, 199-207. Survey of Ca l i fo rn i a and Other Indian Languages Report 8. Bezkeley: Department of Linguis t ics , Universi ty of Ca l i forn ia , Berkeley.

Hunro, Pamela. 1982. On t h e T r m s i t i v i t y of rSayF Verbs. In Paul J. Eeppez & Sandra a. Thompson, E d s : , Syntax and Semantics, Vole 15: Studies zn Trans i t i v i ty , 301-318. New York: Academic Press.

Ono, Tsuyoshi., Wash, Suzanne., and f i t h u n , Marianne. 1994a . Fina l G lo t t a l i za t ion i n Barbare60 Chumash and Its Heiqhbars. In Margaxet &angdon, Ed., Proceedings of t h e Meeting of t h e Society f o r t h e Study of t h e Indiqenoua Languages of t h e Americas J u l y 2-4 1993 and t h e Hokan-Penutian Workshop J u l y 3, 1993, 208-217. Survey of Cal i fo rn i a and Other Indian Languages Report 8 . Bexkeley: Department of L i n ~ i s t i c s , Universi ty of Ca l i fo rn i ap Berkeley.

Ono F Tsuyoshi *, Wash, Suzame*, and Mithun, Marimne 1994be The M o q h o a p t a c t i c and Pragmatic C a r ~ e l a t e s of t h e I n s t m e n t a l Suff ix i n Barbauefio Chumash* Paper presented at t h e Hoka-Penutian Workshop, Univezsity of Oregon*

P a h e r , F. R. 1994- G r a m m a t i c a l Roles and Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Presse

Paynet Doris L. 1990- The Pragmatics of Word Order: !Pypological Dimensions of Verb I n i t i a l Languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter*

Poserf W i l l i a m * 1982m Phonological Representat ion and Action-at-a-Distmce. I n Harq van der Hulst & Nomal Smithf Eds.@ The Structure of P h ~ n o l o g i c a l Representations, P a r t IIf 121-158* Dordrecht: Faris *

Schachter, Paula 1985. Pes-of -Speech Sys tems . 1x1 Timothy Shopen, Ed*, Language Typology and Syntactic Deecription, V d m 1: Clause Struc ture , 3- 6 L Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shibatani, Masayashi. 1996 . Applicat ives and Benefactives: A Cognitive Accounta In Masayoshi Shibatani & Sandra A. Thompson, Zds . G r a m m a t i c a l Constmctions: Their Form and Meaning, 157-194* Oxford: Oxford University Press*

TamlinR Russell S. 1987 m Linguis t ic Ref lec t ions of Cognitive Events Russell S T o d i n , Ed . Coherence and Grounding i n DiscourseR 4S5-47ge Amstercim: John Benjamins

Thompsonr Sandra Am 1990. Information F l o w and Dative S h i f t i n English Diecouxse* I n Jerold A* E&ondsonF Crawf ord Feagin? & Peter MGhlhgualer, Eds , Develapsnent and Diversityz Lingu i s t i c Variat ion across T h e and Space* A Fes t sch r i f t f o r Charles- Jmes N. Bailey, 239-253 * Dallas: Summer I n s t i t u t e of L inguis t icse

Thompson, Sandra A. Ta appear* Discourse Motivations far the Core-Oblique Distinctian a8 a Language UnivexsaL In Akio K d o , Ed., ~nctionalism in Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gru*er.

Txaugott, Zlizabeth C. and seine, Bern& (Ed8.)* 1991e Approaches to G&-ticalization, Vol. I-XI* hstexdaxn: John Ben jamins

T ~ g g y , 0 a ~ i . d ~ 1988 . H&huatl Cau~ative/Applicatives in Cognitive Grammar In Brygida Rudzka-Ostp, Ed * , Topics in Cognitive Linguistics, 587-618. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Wash, Suzanne M. 199Sae Productive Reduplication in Barbare60 Chumash. M . I L Thesis, University of California, Santa Barbaxa.

Waeh, Suzmne M. 1995b- Dependency and Constituency in Barbare50 Chumashz A Laok at the Connectives hi- and Zi-* Paper presented at Native hesican Indian Languages Meeting, Department of Linguistics, University of California, Santa Barbara.

Whistler, Kenneth We 1980e An Interim B a x b a r e f i o Churnash Dictionary. Unpublished Manuscript*