Cover not available
Article published In:
Concentric
Vol. 46:1 (2020) ► pp.21–65

The three agent demoting prefixes (ki-, m-u-, kur-) in Katripul Puyuma

Their origins and possible development

| Academia Sinica
This paper discusses the origins and possible grammaticalization pathways of three agent demoting prefixes in Katripul Puyuma, ki-, m-u- and kur-. All three morphemes can attach to both nominal and verbal stems. When they attach to nominal stems, they denote the meaning of ‘get’, ‘go’, and ‘reflexive’, respectively, and when they attach to verbal stems, they express situation types that are often associated with the middle domain (Kemmer 1993). Working from the perspective of grammaticalization, this paper traces the origins and possible development of the three named morphemes, with supporting evidence drawn from cognates of other Formosan languages.
Keywords: agent demotion, grammaticalization, passive, middle, anticausative, Puyuma
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Some remarks on the literature, terminology, and framework
    • 2.1Voice and transitivity
    • 2.2A note on passive, anticausative, and middle in typological studies
    • 2.3Valence
  • 3. Ki- as a passive marker
    • 3.1 Ki- attaches to a nominal stem
    • 3.2 Ki- attaches to a verbal stem
    • 3.3Semantic motivations
    • 3.4Grammaticalization pathway
    • 3.5 Ki- in other Formosan languages
  • 4. M-u- as an anticausative marker
    • 4.1 M-u- attaches to nominal stems
    • 4.2 M-u- attaches to verbal stems
    • 4.3Semantic motivations and restrictions
    • 4.4Grammaticalization pathway
    • 4.5 M-u- in other Formosan languages
  • 5. Kur- as a middle marker
    • 5.1 Kur- attaches to nominal stems and precategorial roots
    • 5.2 Kur- attaches to verbal stems
    • 5.3Semantic motivations and restriction
    • 5.4Grammaticalization pathway
    • 5.5 Kur- in other Formosan languages
  • 6.A note on shared grammaticalization
  • 7.Summary and direction for future studies
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • List of abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 1 May 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/consl.00012.ten
References (62)
References
Aldridge, Edith. 2016. Ergativity from subjunctive in Austronesian languages. Language and Linguistics 17.1:27–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis, Elena Anagnostopoulou, and Florian Schäfer. 2006. The properties of anti-causatives crosslinguistically. Phases of Interpretation: Studies in Generative Grammar 91, ed. by Mara Frascarelli, 187–211. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis, and Edit Doron. 2012. The syntactic construction of two non-active voices: Passive and middle. Journal of Linguistics 481:1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blust, Robert. 1999. Subgrouping, circularity and extinction: Some issues in Austronesian comparative linguistics. Selected Papers from the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun and Paul Jen-kuei Li, 31–94. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
. 2003a. Three notes on early Austronesian morphology. Oceanic Linguistics 42.2:438–478. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003b. Thao Dictionary. Language and Linguistics Monograph Series A5. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Bourdin, Philip. 2008. What, if anything, counts as a grammaticalization pathway? The case of so-called ventive and itive passives. Paper presented at the International Conference of New Reflections on Grammaticalization 4 (NRG 4), University of Leuven, Belgium.
Chen, Victoria. 2017. A Reexamination of the Philippine-Type Voice System and Its Implications for Austronesian Primary-Level Subgrouping. Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawai’i at Mānoa, Honolulu.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard, Iren Hartmann, Martin Haspelmath, Andrej Malchukov, and Søren Wichmann. 2015. Introduction. Valency Classes in the World’s Languages vol. 1: Introducing the Framework, and Case Studies from Africa and Eurasia, ed. by Andrej Malchukov and Bernard Comrie, 3–26. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrell, Raleigh. 1982. Paiwan Dictionary. Pacific Linguistics C-73. Canberra: The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1994. The pragmatics of de-transitive voice: Functional and typological aspects of inversion. Voice and Inversion, ed. by Talmy Givón, 3–44. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy, and Lynne Yang. 1994. The rise of the English GET-passive. Voice: Form and Function, ed. by Barbara A. Fox and Paul J. Hopper, 119–149. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1987. Transitivity Alternations of the Anticausative Type. Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar
. 1990. The grammaticalization of passive morphology. Studies in Language 14.1:25–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1993. More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. Causatives and Transitivity, ed. by Bernard Comrie and Maria Polinsky, 87–120. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin, and Iren Hartmann. 2015. Comparing verbal valency across languages. Valency Classes in the World’s Languages vol. 1: Introducing the Framework, and Case Studies from Africa and Eurasia, ed. by Andrej Malchukov and Bernard Comrie, 41–71. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd, and Tania Kuteva. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2002. Voice in western Austronesian: An update. The History and Typology of Western Austronesian Voice Systems, ed. by Fay Wouk and Malcolm Ross, 7–16. Pacific Linguistics 518. Canberra: The Australian National University.Google Scholar
2005. The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar: Typological characteristics. The Austronesian Languages of Asia and Madagascar, ed. by Alexander Adelaar and Nikolaus P. Himmelmann, 110–181. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J., and Sandra A. Thompson. 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56.2:251–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, Wei-chen. 2012. A Study of Verbal Morphology in Puljetji Paiwan. MA thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.Google Scholar
Kallulli, Dalina. 2006a. Argument demotion as feature suppression. Demoting the Agent: Passive, Middle and Other Voice Phenomena, ed. by Benjamin Lyngfelt and Torgrim Solstad, 143–166. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006b. A unified analysis of passive, anticausatives and reflexives. Empirical Issues in Formal Syntax and Semantics 6, ed. by Oliver Bonami and Patricia Cabredo-Hofherr, 201–225. Retrieved June 20, 2019, from [URL]
Kazenin, Konstantin I. 2001. Verbal reflexives and the middle voice. Language Typology and Language Universals: An International Handbook, vol. 21, ed. by Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard Konig, Wulf Oesterreicher and Wolfgang Raible, 916–927. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kemmer, Suzanne. 1993. The Middle Voice. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1994. Middle voice, transitivity, and the elaboration of events. Voice: Form and Function, ed. by Barbara A. Fox and Paul J. Hopper, 179–230. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klaiman, M. H. 1992. Middle verbs, reflexive middle constructions and middle voice. Studies in Language 16.1:35–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuo, Jonathan Cheng-Chuen. 2015. Argument Alternation and Argument Structure in Symmetrical Voice Languages: A Case Study of Transfer Verbs in Amis, Puyuma, and Seediq. Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawai’i at Mānoa, Honolulu.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Fire, Women, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, Robin. 1971. Passive resistance. Chicago Linguistic Society 71:149–162.Google Scholar
Latrouite, Anja. 2011. Voice and Case in Tagalog: The Coding of Prominence and Orientation. Doctoral dissertation, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth. 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Li, Paul Jen-kuei. 1973. Rukai Structure. Institute of History and Philology Special Publications, no. 64. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
. 1977. The internal relationships of Rukai. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology 48.1:1–92.Google Scholar
Li, Lilian Li-ying. 2018. A Grammar of Isbukun Bunun. Doctoral dissertation, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.Google Scholar
Lin, Hsuang. 2013. The Middle Voice in Paiwan. MA thesis, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1969. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej. 2015. Valency classes and alternations: Parameters of variation. Valency Classes in the World’s Languages vol. 1: Introducing the Framework, and Case Studies from Africa and Eurasia, ed. by Andrej Malchukov and Bernard Comrie, 73–130. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1984. On the Nature of Grammatical Relations. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, vol. 101. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mocciaro, Egle. 2014. Passive in motion: The early Italian auxiliary andare (‘to go’). COME and GO off the Beaten Grammaticalization Path, ed. by Maud Devos and Jenneke van der Wal, 45–68. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nedjalkov, V. P., and G. G. Sil’nickij. 1969. Tipologija morfologičeskogo i leksiceskogo kauzativov [Typology of morphological and lexical causatives]. Tipologija Kauzativnyx Konstrukcij: Morfologičeskij Kauzativ [Typology of Causative Constructions: A Morphological Causatives], ed. by A. A. Xolodovič, 20–50. Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
Ogawa, Naoyoshi, and Erin Asai. 1935. The Myths and Traditions of the Formosan Native Tribes (Texts and Notes). Taipei: Taihoku Imperial University.Google Scholar
Payne, Thomas E. 1997. Describing Morphosyntax: A Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quack, Anton. 1981. Das Wort der Alten: Erzahlungen zur Geschichte der Puyuma von Katipol (Taiwan) [The Words of the Elders: Stories of the History of Katripul Puyuma (Taiwan)]. St. Augustin: Haus Völker und Kulturen.Google Scholar
Reid, Lawrence A., and Hsiu-chuan Liao. 2004. A brief syntactic typology of Philippine languages. Language and Linguistics 5.2:433–490.Google Scholar
Robbeets, Martine, and Hubert Cuyckens. 2013. Towards a typology of shared grammaticalization. Shared Grammaticalization: With Special Focus on the Transeurasian Languages, ed. by Martine Robbeets and Hubert Cuyckens, 1–20. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross, Malcolm. 2002. The history and transitivity of western Austronesian voice and voice-marking. The History and Typology of Western Austronesian Voice Systems, ed. by Fay Wouk and Malcolm Ross, 17–62. Pacific Linguistics 518. Canberra: The Australian National University.Google Scholar
. 2009. Proto Austronesian verbal morphology: A reappraisal. Austronesian Historical Linguistics and Culture History: A Festschrift for Robert Blust, ed. by Alexander Adelaar and Andrew Pawley, 295–326. Pacific Linguistics 601. Canberra: The Australian National University.Google Scholar
. 2015. Some Proto Austronesian coronals reexamined. New Advances in Formosan Linguistics, ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun, Stacy F. Teng and Joy J. Wu, 1–38. Asia-Pacific Linguistics Series 17: Studies on Austronesian Languages 3 (Asia-Pacific Linguistics Open Access). Canberra: The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Sansò, Andrea, and Anna Giacalone Ramat. 2016. Deictic motion verbs as passive auxiliaries: The case of Italian andare ‘go’ (and venire ‘come’). Transactions of the Philological Society 114.1:1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schäfer, Florian. 2008. The Syntax of (Anti-)causatives: External Arguments in Change-of-State Contexts. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1988. Voice in Philippine languages. Passive and Voice, ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani, 85–142. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Solstad, Torgrim, and Benjamin Lyngfelt. 2006. Perspective on demotion: Introduction to the volume. Demoting the Agent: Passive, Middle and Other Voice Phenomena, ed. by Benjamin Lyngfelt and Torgrim Solstad, 1–20. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Starosta, Stanley. 1971. Derivation and case in Sora verbs. Indian Linguistics 321:194–206.Google Scholar
. 1995. A grammatical subgrouping of Formosan languages. Austronesian Studies Relating to Taiwan, ed. by Paul Jen-kuei Li, Cheng-hwa Tsang, Ying-kuei Huang, Dah-an Ho and Chiu-yu Tseng, 683–726. Symposium Series of the Institute of History and Philology, No. 3. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Teng, Stacy Fang-ching. 2008. A Grammar of Puyuma, an Austronesian Language of Taiwan. Pacific Linguistics 595. Canberra: The Australian National University.Google Scholar
. 2018. A reconstruction of the Proto Puyuma aspectual and modal system. Oceanic Linguistics 57.2:303–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Jr, Robert D., and Randy J. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Unsworth, Sharon, Froso Argyri, Leonie Cornips, Aafke Hulk, Antonella Sorace, and Ianthi Tsimpli. 2011. Bilingual acquisition of Greek voice morphology and Dutch gender: What do they have in common? Proceedings of the 35th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, ed. by Nick Danis, Kate Mesh and Hyunsuk Sung, 590–602. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Zeitoun, Elizabeth. 2007. A Grammar of Mantauran (Rukai). Language and Linguistics Monograph Series A4-2. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Zeitoun, Elizabeth, and Stacy Fang-ching Teng. 2009. From ki-N ‘get N’ in Formosan languages to ki-V ‘get Ved’ (passive) in Rukai, Paiwan and Puyuma. Discovering History Through Language: Papers in Honour of Malcolm Ross, ed. by Bethwyn Evans. 475–500. Pacific Linguistics 605. Canberra: The Australian National University.Google Scholar