Article in:
Studies in Language
Vol. 45:4 (2021) ► pp. 938–967

Äiwoo wâtu and the typology of comparatives

| University of Oslo
This paper examines a comparative construction in the Oceanic language Äiwoo and argues that it differs from those known in the typological literature on comparatives on two counts. It is similar to a so-called ‘exceed’ comparative in involving a morpheme meaning ‘go far’; but unlike canonical exceed comparatives, the construction is intransitive, and the standard of comparison is expressed as an oblique. Moreover, the standard is indicated not only by this oblique phrase but also by a directional marker on the verb, in an extension of the frequent use of directionals in Äiwoo to indicate peripheral participants. This construction thus, on the one hand, expands the established typology of comparative constructions; and on the other, shows that the use of directional morphemes to indicate peripheral participants, otherwise attested e.g. for recipients of give verbs, may extend to the standard in comparative constructions, pointing to an avenue for further typological exploration.
Keywords: comparatives, typology, Oceanic, directionals
Published online: 14 December 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.20022.nae
References

References

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
2006 Serial verb constructions in typological perspective. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & Robert M. W. Dixon (eds.), Serial verb constructions: A cross-linguistic typology, 1–68. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Sigfrid, Daniel Fleischer, Remus Gergel, Stefan Hofstetter, Sveta Krasikova, Christiane Savelsberg, John Vanderelst & Elisabeth Villalta
2009 Cross-linguistic variation in comparative constructions. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 9. 1–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Besnier, Nico
2000 Tuvaluan. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan D.
2012 Universals in comparative morphology: Suppletion, superlatives, and the structure of words. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W.
1994 Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 Comparative constructions: a cross-linguistic typology. Studies in Language 32(4). 787–817. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
François, Alexandre
2004 Reconstructing the geocentric system of Proto-Oceanic. Oceanic Linguistics 43(1). 1–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hamel, Patricia J.
1993 Serial verbs in Loniu and an evolving preposition. Oceanic Linguistics 32(1). 111–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hanink, Emily
2020 Explicit comparison in Fijian. In Michael Franke, Nikola Kompa, Mingya Liu, Jutta L. Mueller & Juliane Schwab (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 24, vol. 1, 256–272. Osnabrück/Berlin: Osnabruck University and Humboldt University of Berlin.Google Scholar
Hohaus, Vera
2018 How do degrees enter the grammar? Language change in Samoan from [-DSP] to [+DSP]. Proceedings of TripleA 4: Fieldwork perspectives on the semantics of African, Asian and Austronesian languages, 106–120. Available at https://​publikationen​.uni​-tuebingen​.de​/xmlui​/handle​/10900​/78334 (last access 18 November 2020).
Lichtenberk, František
1985 Syntactic-category change in Oceanic languages. Oceanic Linguistics 24(1/2). 1–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Margetts, Anna & Peter K. Austin
2007 Three-participant events in the languages of the world: Towards a cross-linguistic typology. Linguistics 45(3). 393–451. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Næss, Åshild
2011 Directional verbs in Vaeakau-Taumako. Oceanic Linguistics 50(1). 120–139. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018a Standing up to the canoe: Competing cognitive biases in the encoding of stative spatial relations in a language with a single spatial preposition. Cognitive Linguistics 29(4). 807–841. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018b Plural-marking strategies in Äiwoo. Oceanic Linguistics 57(1). 31–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Næss, Åshild, & Even Hovdhaugen
2011 A grammar of Vaeakau-Taumako. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Næss, Åshild, & Mathias Jenny
2011 Who changes language? Bilingualism and structural change in Burma and the Reef Islands. Journal of Language Contact 4. 217–249. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rehg, Kenneth L.
1981 Ponapean reference grammar. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm
2003 Talking about space. In Malcolm Ross, Andrew Pawley & Meredith Osmond (eds.), The lexicon of Proto Oceanic vol. 2: The physical environment, 221–283. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm & Åshild Næss
2007 An Oceanic origin for Äiwoo, the language of the Reef Islands? Oceanic Linguistics 46(2). 456–498. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roversi, Giovanni
2019 The morphosyntactic structure of the Äiwoo verb. Oslo: University of Oslo MA thesis. Available at https://​www​.duo​.uio​.no​/handle​/10852​/69258 (last access 18 November 2020).
Schapper, Antoinette & Lourens de Vries
2018 Comparatives in Melanesia: Concentric circles of convergence. Linguistic Typology 22(3). 437–494. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schütz, Albert J.
1985 The Fijian language. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Senft, Gunter
(ed.) 2004 Deixis and demonstratives in Oceanic languages. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Stassen, Leon
1985 Comparison and Universal Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stolz, Thomas
2013 Competing comparative constructions in Europe. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Klinken, Catharina
1999 A grammar of the Fehan dialect of Tetun, an Austronesian language of West Timor. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar