Mirativity

Last updated

In linguistics, mirativity, initially proposed by Scott DeLancey, is a grammatical category in a language, independent of evidentiality, [1] [2] that encodes the speaker's surprise or the unpreparedness of their mind. [1] [3] Grammatical elements that encode the semantic category of mirativity are called miratives (abbreviated MIR). [4] [5]

Contents

History of the concept

Albanian has a series of verb forms called miratives or admiratives. These may express surprise on the part of the speaker, but may also have other functions, such as expressing irony, doubt, or reportedness. [6] The Albanian use of admirative forms is unique in the Balkan context. It is not translatable in other languages. The expression of neutral reportedness can be rendered by 'apparently'. [7]

While acknowledging the Balkanist term admiratives, DeLancey (1997) promoted miratives as a cross-linguistic term, which he adapted from Jacobsen's (1964) description of the Washo language. [8] [9] According to DeLancey (1997), Turkish, Hare, Sunwar, Lhasa Tibetan, and Korean exhibit a grammatical category to mark information that is new to the speaker. [4]

In Turkish, the verbal suffix -mIş appears in the same slot as the past tense -di. [10] [11]

Kemal

gel-di

Kemal gel-di

'Kemal came.'

Kemal

gel-miş

Kemal gel-miş

'Kemal came.'

While it is reasonable to assume that -mIş marks indirect evidentiality [12] as long as 'inference' and 'hearsay' interpretations [13] are concerned, this does not explain the 'surprise' use of the suffix in the following sentence: [13] [14]

Kız-ınız

daughter-your

çok

very

iyi

good

piyano

piano

çal-ıyor-muş.

play-PRES-MIR

Kız-ınız çok iyi piyano çal-ıyor-muş.

daughter-your very good piano play-PRES-MIR

'Your daughter plays the piano very well!'

Citing DeLancey as a predecessor, many researchers have reported miratives in the Tibeto-Burman family and other languages. [15] [16]

Criticisms

Mirativity is not necessarily expressed through a category on its own; Aikhenvald (2004) points out that a mirative meaning may also be coded by using other grammatical devices such as an evidential [17] or tense [18] marker. This led some researchers to question the status of mirativity as a grammatical category. Lazard (1999) suggested that evidentials and miratives would be subsumed under the term mediative. [19] Hill argued that the evidence given by DeLancey and by Aikhenvald (2004) was either wrong or insufficient. [20]

In Lhasa Tibetan, the direct evidential verb 'dug may express mirativity in contrast to the other existential verbs, especially when it is used in a statement on the speaker themselves: [21] [22]

nga-r

1-LOC

deb

book

de

that

yod.

exist

nga-r deb de yod.

1-LOC book that exist

`I have that book'

nga-r

1-LOC

deb

book

de

that

'dug.

exist

nga-r deb de 'dug.

1-LOC book that exist

`I have that book [which I should have returned].'

However, the mirative account does not hold for the following sentence, where 'dug is used as an auxiliary verb and has nothing to do with surprise, sudden discovery nor unexpectedness: [23] [24]

nga

1

na-gi-'dug.

sick-PRES-AUX

nga na-gi-'dug.

1 sick-PRES-AUX

`I'm sick at the moment.'

While DeLancey (2012) made no mention of Turkish, Sunwar or Korean, he still promoted Hare, Kham, and Magar as clear cases of miratives. Hill (2015) in response provided an alternative analysis of Hare, re-analyzing DeLancey's evidence for 'mirativity' as direct evidentiality. [25]

Responses to criticisms

Hengeveld and Olbertz (2012) argue against Hill (2012) for miratives as a distinct category, citing data from Tarma Quechua, Ecuadorian Highland Spanish, Xamamauteri (a Yanomaman language), Kham, and Cupeño. [26] DeLancey (2012) also argued strenuously against Hill's (2012) claims. [27] [20] Zeisler (2018), focusing on the Tibetic languages, considers both Hill and DeLancey to be partly wrong and partly right, and argues that the relevant categories in Tibetic languages represent grammatical marking of "speaker attitude" rather than of evidentiality. [28]

Semantics

Unlike evidentials, miratives may mark novelty of information to anyone involved in the conversation rather than the speaker’s source of information, [29] although what is labelled as 'miratives' varies in meaning. Aikhenvald (2012) analyses variations of mirative meanings as follows: [30]

  1. Sudden discovery, sudden revelation or realization by the speaker, by the audience (or addressee), or by the main character;
  2. Surprise of the speaker, of the audience (or addressee), or of the main character;
  3. Unprepared mind of the speaker, of the audience (or addressee), or of the main character;
  4. Counter-expectation to the speaker, to the addressee, or to the main character;
  5. Information new to the speaker, to the addressee, or to the main character.

Apparently, a mirative marker does not always cover all of those values. For example, !Xun, a Northern Khoisan language has a mirative particle kohà, which can follow an evidential marker but is in complementary distribution with the counter-expectation marker kò. [29] This suggests that mirativity forms a different grammatical category from evidentiality while surprise and counter-expectation are expressed by different particles in the language.

Coding of mirativity

Many languages can express surprise or new information using an interjection like 'Wow!'. [31] In English, the expression of surprise can be rendered by 'oh, look!' or 'lookee there!'. Intonation can also contribute to expression of mirative meanings. [32]

Some languages have a sentence-final particle (SFP) for mirativity. In Cantonese, the SFP wo3 expresses noteworthiness while wo4 is associated with unexpectedness, both of which fit the definition of miratives in contrast with the hearsay evidential wo5. [33]

Mirativity can be expressed through verbal morphology, as is the case with the "sudden discovery tense" marker -naq in Tarma Quechua: [34] [35]

chawra-qa

then-TOP

cha:-qa

that-TOP

ka-ku-naq

be-CUST-3.A/S.MIR

alqu

dog

chawra-qa cha:-qa ka-ku-naq alqu

then-TOP that-TOP be-CUST-3.A/S.MIR dog

‘So it turned out that he was a dog [not a human being as he had appeared to be].’

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Quechuan languages</span> Language family of the Andes in South America

Quechua, also called Runa simi in Southern Quechua, is an indigenous language family that originated in central Peru and thereafter spread to other countries of the Andes. Derived from a common ancestral "Proto-Quechua" language, it is today the most widely spoken pre-Columbian language family of the Americas, with the number of speakers estimated at 8–10 million speakers in 2004, and just under 7 million from the most recent census data available up to 2011. Approximately 13.9% of Peruvians speak a Quechua language.

In linguistics, grammatical person is the grammatical distinction between deictic references to participant(s) in an event; typically, the distinction is between the speaker, the addressee, and others. A language's set of pronouns is typically defined by grammatical person. First person includes the speaker, second person is the person or people spoken to, and third person includes all that are not listed above. It also frequently affects verbs, and sometimes nouns or possessive relationships.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Deixis</span> Words requiring context to understand their meaning

In linguistics, deixis is the use of words or phrases to refer to a particular time, place, or person relative to the context of the utterance. Deixis exists in all known natural languages and is closely related to anaphora, with a sometimes unclear distinction between the two. In linguistic anthropology, deixis is seen as the same as, or a subclass of, indexicality.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Macro-Arawakan languages</span> Proposed language family

Macro-Arawakan is a proposed language family of South America and the Caribbean centered on the Arawakan languages. Sometimes, the proposal is called Arawakan, and the central family is called Maipurean.

In linguistics, evidentiality is, broadly, the indication of the nature of evidence for a given statement; that is, whether evidence exists for the statement and if so, what kind. An evidential is the particular grammatical element that indicates evidentiality. Languages with only a single evidential have had terms such as mediative, médiatif, médiaphorique, and indirective used instead of evidential.

Robert Malcolm Ward "Bob" Dixon is a Professor of Linguistics in the College of Arts, Society, and Education and The Cairns Institute, James Cook University, Queensland. He is also Deputy Director of The Language and Culture Research Centre at JCU. Doctor of Letters, he was awarded an Honorary Doctor of Letters Honoris Causa by JCU in 2018. Fellow of British Academy; Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities, and Honorary member of the Linguistic Society of America, he is one of three living linguists to be specifically mentioned in The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics by Peter Matthews (2014).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jaqaru language</span> Aymaran language spoken in Peru

Jaqaru (Haq'aru) is a language of the Aymaran family. It is also known as Jaqi and Aru. It is spoken in the districts of Tupe and Catahuasi in Yauyos Province, Lima Region, Peru. Most of the 2000 ethnic Jaqaru have migrated to Lima.

Alexandra Yurievna "Sasha" Aikhenvald (Eichenwald) is an Australian-Brazilian linguist specialising in linguistic typology and the Arawak language family of the Brazilian Amazon basin. She is a professorial research fellow at Central Queensland University

Tibetan grammar describes the morphology, syntax and other grammatical features of Lhasa Tibetan, a Sino-Tibetan language. Lhasa Tibetan is typologically an ergative–absolutive language. Nouns are generally unmarked for grammatical number, but are marked for case. Adjectives are never marked and appear after the noun. Demonstratives also come after the noun but these are marked for number. Verbs are possibly the most complicated part of Tibetan grammar in terms of morphology. The dialect described here is the colloquial language of Central Tibet, especially Lhasa and the surrounding area, but the spelling used reflects classical Tibetan, not the colloquial pronunciation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murui Huitoto language</span> Witotoan language of Peru and Colombia

Murui Huitoto is an indigenous American Huitoto language of the Witotoan family. Murui is spoken by about 1,100 Murui people along the banks of the Putumayo, Cara-Paraná and Igara-Paraná rivers in Colombia. In Peru it is spoken in the North alongside the Ampiyacu and Napo rivers by some 1,000 people. Some Murui speakers live also outside their territories, for instance the vicinity of Leticia, Amazonas, Colombia.

Functional grammar (FG) and functional discourse grammar (FDG) are grammar models and theories motivated by functional theories of grammar. These theories explain how linguistic utterances are shaped, based on the goals and knowledge of natural language users. In doing so, it contrasts with Chomskyan transformational grammar. Functional discourse grammar has been developed as a successor to functional grammar, attempting to be more psychologically and pragmatically adequate than functional grammar.

In linguistics, allocutive agreement refers to a morphological feature in which the gender of an addressee is marked overtly in an utterance using fully grammaticalized markers even if the addressee is not referred to in the utterance. The term was first used by Louis Lucien Bonaparte in 1862.

Anna Siewierska was a Polish-born linguist who worked in Australia, Poland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. She was professor of linguistics at Department of Linguistics and English Language Lancaster University and a leading specialist in language typology.

Scott DeLancey is an American linguist from the University of Oregon. His work focuses on typology and historical linguistics of Tibeto-Burman languages as well as North American indigenous languages such as the Penutian family, particularly the Klamath. His research is known for its diversity of its thematic and theoretical reach.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Toʼabaita language</span> Malaita language of the Solomon Islands

Toʼabaita, also known as Toqabaqita, Toʼambaita, Malu and Maluʼu, is a language spoken by the people living at the north-western tip of Malaita Island, of South Eastern Solomon Islands. Toʼabaita is an Austronesian language.

Associated motion is a grammatical category whose main function is to associate a motion component to the event expressed by the verbal root.

The guiltive is a term introduced by John Haiman for the speaker attitude whereby the speaker overtly presents themself as generous or indifferent but actually means the opposite of what they are saying, with the intention of making the addressee feel guilty.

In historical linguistics, subjectification is a language change process in which a linguistic expression acquires meanings that convey the speaker's attitude or viewpoint. An English example is the word while, which, in Middle English, had only the sense of 'at the same time that'. It later acquired the meaning of 'although', indicating a concession on the part of the speaker.

In linguistics, egophoricity refers to a grammatical category that marks one's personal involvement in an event. In languages with this category, an egophoric form is used for expressing information to which the self has "privileged access" as opposed to an allophoricform.

References

  1. 1 2 DeLancey 1997, p. 35.
  2. ↑ Aikhenvald 2012, p. 436.
  3. ↑ DeLancey 2001, pp. 369–370.
  4. 1 2 DeLancey 1997.
  5. ↑ Peterson 2016.
  6. ↑ Friedman 1986, p. 180.
  7. ↑ Friedman 2021, p. 180.
  8. ↑ Jacobsen 1964.
  9. ↑ DeLancey 1997, p. 36.
  10. ↑ Slobin & Aksu 1982.
  11. ↑ DeLancey 1997, p. 37.
  12. ↑ de Haan 2013.
  13. 1 2 Slobin & Aksu 1982, p. 187.
  14. ↑ DeLancey 1997, p. 38.
  15. ↑ Hill 2012, p. 390.
  16. ↑ DeLancey 2012, p. 529.
  17. ↑ Aikhenvald 2004, pp. 207–208.
  18. ↑ Aikhenvald 2004, p. 214.
  19. ↑ Lazard 1999.
  20. 1 2 Hill 2012.
  21. ↑ DeLancey 2001, p. 374.
  22. ↑ Hill 2012, pp. 401–402.
  23. ↑ Denwood 1999, p. 151.
  24. ↑ Hill 2012, p. 404.
  25. ↑ Hill 2015.
  26. ↑ Hengeveld & Olbertz 2012.
  27. ↑ DeLancey 2012.
  28. ↑ Zeisler 2018.
  29. 1 2 Aikhenvald 2012, p. 448.
  30. ↑ Aikhenvald 2012, p. 437.
  31. ↑ Aikhenvald 2004, p. 234.
  32. ↑ DeLancey 2001, p. 377.
  33. ↑ Matthews 1998.
  34. ↑ Adelaar 2013.
  35. ↑ Aikhenvald 2012, p. 450.

Bibliography

Relevant literature

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.