Cover not available
Article published In:
Studies in Language
Vol. 43:1 (2019) ► pp.195–230
News from the field

General converbs in Andi

ORCID logo | Linguistic Convergence Laboratory NRU HSE Moscow

This paper describes the semantic and morphosyntactic properties of general converb constructions in Andi, a language of the Avar-Andic group of the East Caucasian language family. There are two general converbs in Andi, both of which are homophonous with a finite verb form (the aorist and the perfect, respectively). There is a considerable functional overlap between the two converbs. Both can be used to render the first stage of a complex event. The perfect / converb can also specify manner. An additive particle lo often accompanies the perfect as converb, while a specialised particle lodːu appears with the aorist as converb. The situation in Andi is unusual, because the two converbs are functionally very similar and not opposed in terms of aspect. In addition, Andi seems to be the only East Caucasian language where a specialised particle (i.e. lodːu) is found in this type of converbal clauses.

Keywords: general converb, additive, Andi, East Caucasian
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Andi
    • 2.1Andi verbal morphology
      • 2.1.1Periphrastic and nonfinite forms
      • 2.1.2The perfect / general converb
  • 3.Perfect / General converb 1 (pst -dːu)
    • 3.1Resultative
    • 3.2Evidentiality
    • 3.3Preceding event
    • 3.4Cause
    • 3.5Manner and simultaneity
    • 3.6Clause chaining
  • 4.Aorist / General converb 2 (pst -ø)
    • 4.1Preceding event
    • 4.2Instrumental
    • 4.3Clause chaining
  • 5.The particles lodːu and lo
    • 5.1The aorist converb and lodːu
    • 5.2The perfect converb and lo
      • 5.2.1The additive lo and its functions in Andi
      • 5.2.2The additive in converbal clauses
    • 5.3The particles lo and lodu in Zilo
    • 5.4The function of particles in converbal clauses
    • 5.5The lo construction vs. the lodːu construction
  • 6.Conclusion
    • 6.1Semantics
    • 6.2Particles
    • 6.3General converbs in Andi and East Caucasian
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
  • Sources
Published online: 12 June 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.18026.ver
References
Alisultanova, Mesedu A.
(transl.) & Patimat A. Magomedova (ed.) 2010 Dunjalla baχunnirsːi χalɢilƛol ɢʷanab mits’ːillasːol muχal [World fairy tales in Andi]. Makhachkala: Nural iršad.Google Scholar
Belyaev, Oleg
2018 Aorist, resultative and perfect in Shiri Dargwa and beyond. In Diana Forker & Timur Maisak (eds.), The semantics of verbal categories in Nakh-Daghestanian languages, 80–119. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berg, Helma van den
2004 Coordinating constructions in Daghestanian languages. In Martin Haspelmath (ed.), Coordinating constructions, 197–226. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., Revere D. Perkins & William Pagliuca
1994 The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cercvadze, Ilja I.
1965 Andijskij jazyk (Rezjume) [The Andi language (Summary) (in Russian)]. In Ilja Cercvadze, 4Andiuri ena [The Andi language (in Georgian)], 311–392. Tbilisi: Mecniereba.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard, Diana Forker & Zaira Khalilova
2012 Adverbial clauses in the Tsezic languages. In Volker Gast & Holger Diessel (eds.), Clause linkage in cross-linguistic perspective, 157–190. Berlin / Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creissels, Denis
2009 Participles and finiteness: the case of Akhvakh. Linguistic Discovery 7.1. 106–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 External agreement in the converbal construction of Northern Akhvakh. In Volker Gast & Holger Diessel (eds.), Clause linkage in cross-linguistic perspective, 127–156. Berlin / Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 Person variations in Akhvakh verb morphology: functional motivation and origin of an uncommon pattern. STUF – Language typology and Universals 61(4). 309–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dirr, Adolf M.
1906 Kratkij grammatičeskij očerk andijskago jazyka [A grammar sketch of Andi] Sbornik materialov dlja opisanija mestnostej i plemën Kavkaza [Collection of materials for the description of places and tribes of the Caucasus]. Tbilisi: Upravlenie Kavkazskago Učebnago Okruga.Google Scholar
Dwyer, Arienne
2000 Direct and indirect experience in Salar. In Lars Johanson & Bo Utas (eds.), Evidentials. Turkic, Iranian and neighbouring languages, 45–59. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eulenberg, Alexander, Konstantin Kazenin, A. Solovjeva & Sergej Tatevosov
1996 Adjunct clauses. In Alexandr E. Kibrik, Sergej G. Tatevosov & Alexander Eulenberg (eds.), Godoberi, 197–209. München / Newcastle: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Forker, Diana
2016 Toward a typology for additive markers. Lingua 1801. 69–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forker, Diana & Oleg Belyaev
2016 Word order and focus particles in Nakh-Daghestanian languages. In M. M. Jocelyne Fernandez-Vest & Robert D. Van Valin, Jr. (eds.), Information structuring of spoken language from a cross-linguistic perspective, 239–262. Berlin / Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
1995a The converb as a cross-linguistically valid category. In Martin Haspelmath & Ekkehard König (eds.), Converbs in cross-linguistic perspective, 1–56. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
1995b Contextual and specialized converbs in Lezgian. Martin Haspelmath & Ekkehard König (eds.) Converbs in cross-linguistic perspective, 415–440. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kalinina, Elena & Nina Sumbatova
2007 Clause structure and verbal forms in Nakh-Daghestanian languages. In Irina Nikolaeva (ed.), Finiteness. Theoretical and empirical foundations, 183–249. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kalinina, Elena Ju. & Svetlana Ju. Toldova
1999 Atributivizacija [Attributivization]. In Alexandr E. Kibrik & Jakov G. Testelets (eds.), Élementy caxurskogo jazyka v tipologičeskom osvečšenii [Elements of Tsakhur in a typological perspective], 377–419. Moscow: Nasledie.Google Scholar
Kazenin, Konstantin I.
2001 Deepričastnye konstrukcii [Gerundial constructions]. Alexandr E. Kibrik, Konstantin I. Kazenin, Jekaterina A. Ljutikova & Sergej G. Tatevosov (eds.), Bagvalinskij jazyk. Grammatika. Teksty. Slovari [The Bagvalal language. Grammar. Texts. Dictionary], 554–594. Moscow: Nasledie.Google Scholar
Kazenin, Konstantin I. & Yakov G. Testelets
2004 Where coordination meets subordination: Converb constructions in Tsakhur (Daghestanian). In Martin Haspelmath (ed.), Coordinating constructions, 227–240. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Khalilova, Zaira A.
2011 Evidentiality in Tsezic languages. Linguistic Discovery 9(2). 30–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kibrik, Alexandr E. & Sandro V. Kodzasov
1990 Sopostavitel’noe izučenie Dagestanskix jazykov. Imja. Fonetika [Comparative study of Daghestanian languages. Nouns. Phonetics]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo Universiteta.Google Scholar
Kibrik, Andrei A.
1985 Absentiv-Aorist un Resultativ in der andischen Sprache. In Heinz Fähnrich (ed.), Sprachen Europas und Asiens, 55–66. Jena: Friedrich Schiller Universität.Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard
1995 The meaning of converb constructions. In Martin Haspelmath & Ekkehard König (eds.), Converbs in cross-linguistic perspective, 57–96. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lindstedt, Jouko
2000 The perfect – aspectual, temporal and evidential. In Östen Dahl (ed.), Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe, 365–384. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Maisak, Timur
To appear. Structural and functional variations of the perfect in the Lezgic languages. In Kristin Melum Eide & Marc Fryd eds. The perfect volume Amsterdam John Benjamins
2018 The aorist/perfect distinction in Nizh Udi. In Diana Forker & Timur Maisak (eds.), The semantics of verbal categories in Nakh-Daghestanian languages, 120–165. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maisak, Timur A.
2016 Glagol’naja sistema rikvaninskogo govora andijskogo jazyka: formoobrazovanie [The verbal system of the Rikvani dialect of Andi: conjugation]. Andi working seminar. Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Science, Moscow. October 2016 (Handout)Google Scholar
2017 Éndoklitiki vnutri glagola: teper’ i v andijskom [Endoclitics inside the verb: now also in Andi]. Tipologija morfosintaksičeskix parametrov [Typology of morphosyntactic parameters]. Insititute of Contemporary Linguistic Research (MPGU) / Institute of Linguistics RAS. Moscow. 25–27.10.2017. (Handout)Google Scholar
Molochieva, Zarina
2010 Tense, aspect and mood in Chechen. Leipzig: University of Leipzig dissertation.Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, Vladimir P.
1995 Some typological parameters of converbs. In Martin Haspelmath & Ekkehard König (eds.), Converbs in cross-linguistic perspective, 97–136. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, Vladimir P. & Sergej Je. Jaxontov
1988 The typology of resultative constructions. In Vladimir P. Nedjalkov (ed.), Typology of resultative constructions, 3–62. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna
2011 Ingush grammar. Berkley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna & David A. Peterson
2010 Contact-induced spread of the rare Type 5 clitic. LSA Annual Meeting, Baltimore. 07.01.2010. (Extended abstract) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rochant, Neige
2016 Subordinate particles in Zilo dialect of Andi. Andi working seminar. Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Science, Moscow. November 2016 (Handout)Google Scholar
Rochant, Neige & Samira Verhees
2017 The (auxiliary) verb b-iʁidu in Andi. Historical Linguistics of the Caucasus. École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris. 12–14.04.2017. (Handout)Google Scholar
Salimov, Xangerej S.
2010 (1968) Gagatlinskij govor andijskogo jazyka [The Gagatli dialect of Andi]. Makhachkala: Institut Jazyka, Literatury I Iskusstva imeni G. Cadasy.Google Scholar
Sulejmanov, Jakub G.
1957 Grammatičeskij očerk andijskogo jazyka. Na materiale govora s. Rikvani [A sketch of the grammar of Andi. Based on material from the dialect of the village Rikvani]. Moscow: Institut Jazykoznanija Akademii Nauk Sojuza SSR Moskva dissertation.Google Scholar
Tatevosov, Sergei
2001 From resultatives to evidentials: Multiple uses of the perfect in Nakh-Daghestanian languages. Journal of Pragmatics 33(3). 443–464. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verhees, Samira
2018 The perfect in Avar and Andi. Cross-linguistic variation among two closely-related East Caucasian languages. In Dalila Ayoun, Agnès Celle & Laure Lansari (eds.), Tense, aspect, modality and evidentiality: Cross-linguistic perspectives, 261–280. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar

Sources

Lukašdi bosam rerhanoɬːi χabar
[Gospel of Luke (in Andi)]. Moscow: Institute for Bible Translation 2015.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Maisak, Timur & Samira Verhees
2024. The ‘Still Not’ Present in Andi: identifying the grammaticalization source. Folia Linguistica 0:0 DOI logo
Maisak, Timur A.
2023. Chapter 5. From an adverb/postposition ‘behind’ to a discourse marker. In Discourse Phenomena in Typological Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series, 227], ► pp. 93 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 april 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.