Chapter published in:
Language Variation and Contact-Induced Change: Spanish across space and time
Edited by Jeremy King and Sandro Sessarego
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 340] 2018
► pp. 111–125

Borrowed Spanish discourse markers in narrative

A comparison across three generations of Tojol-ab’al (Mayan) speakers

| Louisiana State University
This pilot study examines texts from three generations of speakers of Tojol-ab’al, a Mayan language that has been in long-term contact with Spanish, to determine the influence from Spanish on Tojol-ab’al narrative discourse. Discourse markers borrowed from Spanish and those indigenous to Tojol-ab’al are examined to determine discourse structure. Discourse markers borrowed from Spanish appear frequently even in the speech of the oldest, monolingual generation. Although the youngest generation uses many more words (nouns, verbs) borrowed from Spanish than do the earlier generations, narrative discourse structure, as indicated by the use of both borrowed and indigenous discourse markers, remains substantially the same through time.
Published online: 13 March 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.340.06bro
References

References

Aikenvald, Alexandra Y.
2002 Language Contact in Amazonia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J.
2001 “Historical Discourse Analysis”. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis ed. by Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen, & Heidi E. Hamilton, 138–160. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Brody, Jill
1986 “Repetition as a Rhetorical and Conversational Device in Tojol-ab’al (Mayan)”. International Journal of American Linguistics 53.255–274. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1987 “Particles Borrowed from Spanish as Discourse Markers in Mayan Languages”. Anthropological Linguistics 29.175–184.Google Scholar
1989 “Discourse Markers in Tojol-ab’al Mayan”. Chicago Linguistic Society Parasession on Language in Context ed. by Bradley Music, Randolph Graczyk & Caroline R. Wiltshire, 15–29. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
1995 “Lending the ‘Unborrowable’: Spanish Discourse Markers in Indigenous American Languages”. Spanish in Four Continents: Studies in Language Contact and Bilingualism ed. by Carmen Silva-Corvalán, 132–147. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
1998 “On Hispanisms in Elicitation”. Convergencia e individualidad: Las lenguas mayas entre hispanización e indigenismo (Colección Americana No. 7, Universität Bremen) ed. by Andreas Koechert & Thomas Stoltz, 61–84. Hanover & Guatemala City: Verlag für Ethnologie.Google Scholar
2001 “From Conquistadores to Zapatistas: Language Contact and Change in Tojol-ab’al”. Southwest Journal of Linguistics 20.1–17.Google Scholar
Brody, Mary Jill
2006 “Responsibility in Tojol-ab’al Gossip: Indirect Speech, Modal Orientation, and Metalinguistic Terms as Used to Construct Self and Other in a Moral Landscape”. Ketzalcalli 2.2–21.Google Scholar
2010 “‘Sticky’ Discourse Markers in Language Contact Between Unrelated Languages: Tojol-ab’al (Mayan) and Spanish”. A New Look at Language Contact in Amerindian Languages ed. by Claudine Chamoreau, Zarina Estrada Fernández & Yolanda Lastra, 9–36. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
2015 “Exact Repetition in Tojol-ab’al”. Paper presented at the Workshop on Exact Repetition, Leipzig, March 2015.
Cepeda, Gladys & María T. Poblete
1996 “Marcadores conversacionales: Función pragmática y expresiva”. Estudios filológicos 31.105–117.Google Scholar
Clyne, Michael G.
2003 Dynamics of Language Contact: English and Immigrant Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Collier, George & Elizabeth R. Quaratiello
2005 Basta! Land and the Zapatista Rebellion in Chiapas, 3rd ed. Oakland: Food First Books.Google Scholar
Darnell, Regna
1990 “Franz Boas, Edward Sapir, and the Americanist Text Tradition”. Historiographia Linguistica 17:129–144. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Bruce
2006 “Towards a Theory of Discourse Markers”. Approaches to Discourse Particles ed. by Kerstin Fischer, 189–204. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1979 “From Discourse to Syntax: Grammar as a Processing Strategy”. Syntax and Semantics, vol. 12: Discourse and Syntax ed. by Talmy Givón, 81–112. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Grimes, Joseph E.
1972 “Outlines and Overlays”. Language 48.513–524. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haugen, Einar
1950 “The Analysis of Linguistic Borrowing”. Language 26.210–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva
2005 Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kwachka, Patricia
1992 “Discourse Structures, Cultural Stability, and Language Shift”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 93:67–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lenkersdorf, Gudrun
1986 “Contribuciones a la historia colonial de los tojolabales”. Los legítimos hombres: Aproximación antropológica al grupo tojolabal, vol. 4, ed. by Mario H. Ruz, 13–102. Mexico City: Centro de Estudios Mayas.Google Scholar
Matras, Yaron
1998 “Utterance Modifiers and Universals of Grammatical Borrowing”. Linguistics 36.281–331. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 “The Borrowability of Structural Categories”. Grammatical Borrowing in Cross-linguistic Perspective ed. by Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel, 31–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Muysken, Pieter
2000 Bilingual Speech: A Typology of Code-Mixing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Poblete, María T.
1998 “Los marcadores discursivo-conversacionales de más alta frecuencia en el español de Valdivia (Chile)”. Estudios filológicos 33.93–103.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1987 Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stolz, Christel & Thomas Stolz
1996 “Funktionswortentlehnung in Mesoamerika. Spanisch-amerindischer Sprachkontakt Hispanoindiana II.” Sprachtypologie und Universalien-Forschung 49.86–123.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah G. & Terrence Kaufman
1988 Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Torres, Lourdes
2006 “Bilingual Discourse Markers in Indigenous Languages”. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 9.615–624. CrossrefGoogle Scholar