Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
An Analysis of Problematic Relative Clauses in the Young Variety of Oirat (Based on Kalmyk and Xinjiang Oirat)
|Title:||An Analysis of Problematic Relative Clauses in the Young Variety of Oirat (Based on Kalmyk and Xinjiang Oirat)|
|Date Issued:||01 Apr 2006|
|Publisher:||University of Hawai'i at Mānoa Department of Linguistics|
|Citation:||Indjieva, Elena. 2006. An Analysis of Problematic Relative Clauses in the Young Variety of Oirat (Based on Kalmyk and Xinjiang Oirat). University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa Working Papers in Linguistics 37(4).|
|Series:||University of Hawai‘I at Mānoa Working Papers in Linguistics|
|Abstract:||With respect to the range of permissible relative clauses, there are two varieties of Oirat: Young and Old.1 There are certain types of relative clauses that are assessed as grammatical by the Old speakers of Oirat, while the Young speakers consider them marginally grammatical or ungrammatical. I conclude that this distinction between the two varieties of Oirat is caused by the two possible interpretations of constructions with two semantically equivalent NPs in the nominative case (henceforth double NomNP constructions). In Young Oirat, the double Nom constructions are interpreted as equatives, which in the case of relatives with the relativized in/direct object or oblique are garden–path structures2 that forestall the intended interpretation. As a result, in Young Oirat (unlike the Old Oirat), a whole range of relatives with the relativized in/direct object or oblique are misinterpreted or considered to be ungrammatical. Since double NomNP constructions occur mostly in relatives with relativized indirect objects, this type of relative is the most problematic in Young Oirat. Considering that relativized obliques and genitives are much less problematic, it appears that Young Oirat violates the accessibility hierarchy for relativization proposed by Keenan and Comrie.3 However, my analysis concludes that Young Oirat is in compliance with the hierarchy as the factor that inhibits the relativization of some relatives is extraneous. I conclude that there are two main reasons for the equative interpretation of the double NomNP constructions in Young Oirat: (1) emergence of an equative copula, and (2) the loss of the extended property of the genitive case.|
|Rights:||Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike License|
|Appears in Collections:||
Working Papers in Linguistics - 2006|
Please email firstname.lastname@example.org if you need this content in ADA-compliant format.
Items in ScholarSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.