Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Historical Linguistics
Vol. 6:2 (2016) ► pp.130–164

Accounting for variability in Malayo-Polynesian pronouns

Paradigmatic instability or drift?

| University of Hawaiʻi | National Museum of the Philippines |
This article is a suggested explanation for the multiple variants of the forms of some Malayo-Polynesian pronouns that have been characterized as the result of drift. The explanation that is given is referred to here as paradigmatic instability, a phenomenon not previously discussed with reference to these problems. In the cases discussed in this article it is the avoidance of forms that are semantically or pragmatically inappropriate within the context of the paradigm in which they occur which renders the forms morphologically variable and the paradigms in which they occur unstable. In Malayo-Polynesian languages, it is the avoidance of a form that is reconstructed as a plural pronoun in Proto-Austronesian but which in all Malayo-Polynesian daughter languages is found as a singular pronoun. Where this form is retained as part of some other plural forms, it has been lost or modified in a wide range of variants in the daughter languages.
Keywords: Malayo-Polynesian languages, pronouns, paradigms, first person inclusive dual pronouns, first person inclusive plural pronouns, variation, Proto-Malayo-Polynesian, Pre-Malayo-Polynesian
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Background
    • 1.2An overview of Austronesian pronominal systems
    • 1.3Variability and drift
  • 2.The reconstruction of a dual pronoun to PMP
  • 3.Paradigmatic instability in PMP pronouns
    • 3.1The development of PMP *=muyu ‘gen.2a’ (‘you all’)
    • 3.2The development of PMP *=tamu ‘gen.1+2a’ (‘we all’)
    • 3.3The development of PMP *=kamu ‘nom.2a (you all)’
    • 3.4The apparent loss of a distinction between PMP *=ta and PMP *=tamu
      • 3.4.1The retention of either PMP *=ta or a reflex of PMP *=tamu
      • 3.4.2Languages with a dual formed by adding ‘two’ to PMP *=ta
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 2 March 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.6.2.01rei
References (47)
References
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1942. Outline of Ilocano Syntax. Language 181.193–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blust, Robert A. 1977. The Proto-Austronesian Pronouns and Austronesian Subgrouping: A Preliminary Report. University of Hawaiʻi Working Articles in Linguistics 9:2.1–15.Google Scholar
. 1993. Central and Central-Eastern Malayo-Polynesian. Oceanic Linguistics 321.241–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. Subgrouping, Circularity and Extinction: Some Issues in Austronesian Comparative Linguistics. Selected Articles from the 8th International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun & Paul J-K Li, 31–94. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
. 2009 [2013]. Austronesian Languages. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. Revised edition available online at [URL].Google Scholar
Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The Paradigmatic Structure of Person Marking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2005. What it Means to be Rare: The Variability of Person Marking. Linguistic Diversity and Language Theories ed. by Zygmunt Frajzyngier, Adam Hodges & David S. Rood, 235–258. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dutton, Tom & Darrell T. Tryon, eds. 1994. Language Contact and Change in the Austronesian World. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenburg, Joseph H. 1988. The First Person Inclusive Dual as an Ambiguous Category. Studies in Language 12:1.1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joseph, Brian D. 2013. Demystifying Drift. Shared Grammaticalization: With Special Focus on the Transeurasian Languages ed. by H. Cuykens, Martine Robeets & Irma Martine, 43–65. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kikusawa, Ritsuko. 2004. Development of the Number Systems in Oceanic Pronoun Systems. Paper presented at The 6th International Oceanic Linguistics Conference (COOL6) , University of the South Pacific, Emalus Campus, July 5, 2004. Available online at [URL].
Lewis, M. Paul, Gary F. Simons, & Charles D. Fennig, eds. 2015. Ethnologue: Languages of the World. 18th ed. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Available online at [URL].Google Scholar
Liao, Hsiu-chuan. 2008. A Typology of First Person Dual Pronouns and Their Reconstructibility in Philippine Languages. Oceanic Linguistics 47:1.1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lithgow, David. 1976. History of Research in Austronesian Languages: Milne Bay Province. New Guinea Area Languages and Language Study, Vol. 2. Austronesian Languages (= Pacific Linguistics, C-39) ed. by S. A. Wurm, 157–170. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Lobel, Jason W. 2010. Manide: An Undescribed Philippine Language. Oceanic Linguistics 49:2.478–510.Google Scholar
. 2016. Northern Borneo Sourcebook: Vocabularies and Functors. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lynch, John, Malcolm Ross & Terry Crowley. 2002. The Oceanic Languages. (= Curzon Language Family Series). Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press.Google Scholar
McFarland, Curtis D. 1974. The Dialects of the Bikol Area. Yale University PhD thesis.Google Scholar
McKay, G. R. 1978. Pronominal Person and Number Categories in Rembarrnga and Djeebbana. Oceanic Linguistics 171.27–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mintz, Macolm W. 1971. Bikol Grammar Notes (= PALI Language Texts: Philippines). Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press.Google Scholar
Panganiban, José Villa. 1966. Talahuluganang Pilipino-Ingles. [Pilipino-English Dictionary]. Manila: Government Printing Office. Google Scholar
Pawley, Andrew. 1999. Chasing Rainbows: Implications for the Rapid Dispersal of Austronesian Languages for Subgrouping and Reconstruction. Selected Articles from the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun & Paul Jen-kuei Li, 95–138. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
. 2006. Origins of the Filipinos: Linguistic and Archaeological Evidence. Article Presented at the 9th Philippine Linguistics Congress (9 PLC) , University of the Philippines, January 25–27, 2006.
Plessis, Frédéric. 1996. Morphologie de Proto-philippine II: Reconstruction du système pronominal Proto-philippin (PPH), Mémoire de DEA. Langues, littératures et civilisations: Etudes austronésiennes. Paris: Institut National des Langues et Civilisations Orientales (INALCO).Google Scholar
Reid, Lawrence A. 1981. Proto-Austronesian Genitive Determiners. Linguistics Across Continents: Studies in Honor of Richard S. Pittman ed. by Andrew Gonzalez & David Thomas, 97–105. Manila: Summer Institute of Linguistics (Philippines) and Linguistic Society of the Philippines.Google Scholar
. 1987. The Early Switch Hypothesis: Linguistic Evidence for Contact Between Negritos and Austronesians. Man and Culture in Oceania 31.41–59.Google Scholar
. 2006. On the Origin of Philippine Vowel Grades. Oceanic Linguistics 45:2.457–472. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Philippine Hunter-Gatherers and Historical Linguistics. Piakandatu ami Dr. Howard P. McKaughan ed. by Loren Billings & Nelleke Goudswaard, 6–32. Manila: Linguistic Society of the Philippines & SIL, Philippines.Google Scholar
. 2009. The Reconstruction of a Dual Pronoun to Proto Malayo-Polynesian. Discovering History Through Language: Articles in Honour of Malcolm Ross (=Pacific Linguistics 605) ed. by Bethwyn Evans, 461–477. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
. 2012. ‘Say What?’ Some Diachronic Developments of the Verb ‘Say’ in Some Western Austronesian Languages. Seminar Presentation, University of Bergen, May 9, 2012.
. 2013a. Who are the Philippine Negritos? Evidence from Language. Human Biology 85:1.329–358. Available online at [URL]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013b. Iraya Field Notes.Google Scholar
Revel, Nicole. 1990. Fleur de paroles: Histoire Naturelle Palawan. Vol. 11. Paris: SELAF.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm. 1992. The Sound of Proto-Austronesian: An Outsider's View of the Formosan Evidence. Oceanic Linguistics 31:1.23–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. The Batanic Languages in Relation to the Early History of the Malayo-Polynesian Language Family. Journal of Austronesian Studies 1:2.1–24.Google Scholar
. 2006. Reconstructing the Case-Marking and Personal Pronouns Systems of Proto Austronesian. Streams Converging into an Ocean: Festschrift in Honor of Professor Paul Jen-kuei Li on his 79th birthday ed. by Henry Y. Chang, Lillian M. Huang & Dah-an Ho, 521–563. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar
Rubino, Carl R. G. 2000. Ilocano Dictionary and Grammar (= PALI Language Texts). Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press.Google Scholar
Sagart, Laurent. 2004. The Higher Phylogeny of Austronesian and the Position of Tai–Kadai. Oceanic Linguistics 431.411–440. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Senft, G. 1986. Kilivila: The Language of the Trobriand Islanders (Mouton Grammar Library 3). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spriggs, Matthew. 2003. Chronology of the Neolithic Transition in Island Southeast Asia and the Western Pacific. The Review of Anthropology 241.57–80.Google Scholar
. 2011. Archaeology and Austronesian Expansion: Where are we now? Antiquity 85:328.510–528. Available online at [URL]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Topping, Donald. 1973. Chamorro Reference Grammar. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press.Google Scholar
Wolff, John U. 2010. Proto-Austronesian Phonology with Glossary. 2 Vols. Southeast Asia Program Publications. Ithaca: Cornell University.Google Scholar
Zeitoun, Elizabeth, Chu Tai-hwa, & Lalo a tahesh kanbaybaw. 2015. A study of Saisiyat Morphology (= Ocenic Linguistics Special Publication No. 40). Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.Google Scholar
Zorc, R. David. 1974. The Internal and External Relations of the Mangyan Languages. Oceanic Linguistics 131.561–600. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1977. The Bisayan Dialects of the Philippines: Subgrouping and Reconstructions. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
. 1986. The Genetic Relationship of Philippine Languages. FOCAL II: Articles from the Fourth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics (= Pacific Linguistics, C94) ed. by Paul Geraghty, S. A. Wurm & Lois Carrington, 147–173. Canberra: Department of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Chen, Victoria, Jonathan Kuo, Maria Kristina S. Gallego & Isaac Stead
2022. Is Malayo-Polynesian a primary branch of Austronesian?. Diachronica 39:4 ► pp. 449 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.