Cover not available
Part of
Verb Valency Changes: Theoretical and typological perspectives
Edited by Albert Álvarez González and Ia Navarro
[Typological Studies in Language 120] 2017
► pp. 107–132

The semantics of Nahuatl tla- constructions

 | Universidad de Sonora-CONACyT
Nahuatl tla- constructions are described as complex predicates formed by a verbal base and an unspecified object pronoun that has weakened its formal status in favor of an abstract semantic contribution. We propose that the formal status of tla- is that of a defective pronoun, which fails to make a formal contribution in favor of a semantic one and causes the verbal base to be interpreted in a specific fashion. Furthermore, we show that the meaning of the resulting complex constructions depends on both, the tla- semantic contribution and the verbal base semantic and configurational properties. Based on descriptive and theoretical background, we disagree with tla- being categorized as an antipassive marker – as others propose –, instead we suggest that tla- constructions are the result of an event modification process and that the outcome of this process depends on how the operation interacts with the verbal base lexical properties.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The Nahuatl tla- constructions
  • 3.The tla- formal status
  • 4.Types of tla- predicate constructions
    • 4.1The Hale & Keyser’s theory of Argument Structure
    • 4.2Transitive verbal bases for tla‑ constructions
    • 4.3Unergative verbal bases
    • 4.4Unaccusative verbal bases
  • 5.A note on the anti antipassivisation analysis of Nahuatl tla- constructions
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 30 September 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.120.05nav
References (57)
References
Basilico, David. 2012. The antipassive and its relation to scalar structure. In The End of Argument Structure? [Syntax and Semantics 38], María Cristina Cuervo & Yves Roberge (eds), 75–103. Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
Bibis, Nick & Roberge, Yves. 2004. Marginal clitics. Lingua 114: 1015–1034. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, Johnathan. 1993. Ergativity and ergative unergatives. In Papers on Case and Agreement II, [MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 19], Colin Phillips (ed.), 45–88. Cambridge MA: Dept. of Linguistics, MIT.Google Scholar
Chamoreau, Claudine. 2008. Voz antipasiva en lenguas nominativo-acusativas. El caso del purépecha. In Memorias del IX encuentro internacional de lingüística en el noroeste, Tomo 1, Zarina Estrada Fernández & Ana Lidia Munguía Duarte (eds), 105–124. Hermosillo: Unison.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
. 1998. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 15. Cambridge MA: Dept. of Linguistics, MIT.Google Scholar
Chung, Sandra & Ladusaw, William. 2004. Restriction and Saturation. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cocchi, Gloria. 1999. Nominative and ergative languages: Towards a unified theory of case checking. Syntaxis 2: 103–129.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Dayal, Veneeta. 2003. A semantics for pseudo incorporation. Ms, Rutgers University. <[URL]>
de la Fuente, Ana. 2007. Les aspects sémantiques de lʹincorporation nominale en nahuatl. PhD dissertation, Université de Paris 3.Google Scholar
Déchaine, Rose-Marie & Wiltschko, Martina. 2002. Decomposing pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 409–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Declerck, Renaat. 1979. Aspect and the bounded/unbounded (telic/atelic) distinction. Linguistics 17: 761–794. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Distinguishing between the aspectual categories ‘(a)telic’, ‘(im)perfective’ and ‘(non)bounded’. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics 29: 48–64.Google Scholar
Demonte, Violeta. 2002. Preliminares de una clasificación léxico-sintáctica de los predicados verbales del español. In Ex oriente lux: Festchrift für Eberhard Gärtner zu seinem 60, Geburtstag, Sybille Grosse & Axel Schönberger (eds), 121–144. Frankfurt: Valentia.Google Scholar
Dowty, David R. 1979. Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67: 547–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Espinal, M. Teresa & McNally, Louise. 2007. Bare singular nominals and incorporating verbs. In Proceedings of the III NEREUS International Workshop. Definiteness, Specificity and Animacy in Ibero–Romance Languages [Arbeitspapiere des Fachbereichs Sprachwissenschaft 122], Georg Kaiser & Manuel Leonetti (eds), 45–62. Konstanz: University of Konstanz.Google Scholar
Espinal, M. Teresa. 2017 this volume. Morphosyntactic defectiveness in complex predicate formation. In Verb Valency Changes: Theoretical and Typological Perspectives [Typological Studies in Language 120], Albert Álvarez González & Ía Navarro (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Farkas, Donka & de Swart, Henriette. 2003. The Semantics of Incorporation. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Flores Nájera, Lucero. 2009. La voz antipasiva en el náhuatl de San Isidro Buensuceso, Tlaxcala. In Memorias del Congreso de Idiomas Indígenas de Latinoamérica-IV. Centro para Idiomas Indígenas de Latinoamérica (CILLA), University of Texas, Austin. <[URL]>
Foley, William A. & Van Valin Jr., Robert D. 1985. Information packaging in the clause. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol.1, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 282–364. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Givón, T. 2001[1984]. Syntax, Vol. 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth L. & Keyser, Samuel Jay. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Kenneth L. Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds), 53–109. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1997. The limits of argument structure. Theoretical Issues at the Morphology-Syntax Interface, Amaya Mendikoetxea & Miriam Uribe-Etxebarria, 203–230. Bilbao: Servicio de Publicaciones de la UPV.Google Scholar
. 1998. The basic elements of argument structure. In Papers from the UPenn/MIT Roundtable on Argument Structure and Aspect [MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 32], Heidi Harley (ed.), 73–118. Cambridge MA: Dept. of Linguistics, MIT.Google Scholar
. 2002. Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument Structure. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harley, Heidi. 2004. Merge, conflation, and head movement: The First Sister Principle revisited. In Proceedings of NELS 34, Kier Moulton & Matthew Wolf (eds), 239–254. Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
. 2005. How do verbs get their names? Denominal verbs, manner incorporation, and the ontology of verb roots in English. In The Syntax of Aspect. Deriving Thematic and Aspectual Interpretation, Nomi Erteschik-Shir & Tova Rapoport (eds), 42–64. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hay, Jennifer, Kennedy, Christopher & Levin, Beth. 1999. Scalar structure underlies telicity in ‘degree achievements’. In Proceedings of SALT 9, Tanya Matthews & Devon Strolovitch (eds), 127–144. Ithaca NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1976. Antipassivization: A functional typology Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 2: 202–2011.Google Scholar
Juárez, Cristian & Albert Álvarez Gonzalez. 2017 this volume. The antipassive marking in Mocoví: Forms and functions. In Verb Valency Changes: Theoretical and Typological Perspectives [Typological Studies in Language 120], Albert Álvarez González & Ía Navarro (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, Angelina. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In Phrase Structure and the Lexicon, Johan Rooryck & Laurie Zaring (eds), 109–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 1989. Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics. In Semantics and Contextual Expression, Renate Bartsch, Johan van Benthem & Peter van Emde Boas (eds), 75–115. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
. 1992. Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In Lexical Matters, Ivan A. Sag & Anna Szabolcsi (eds), 29–54. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Launey, Michel. 1979. Introduction à la Langue et à la Littérature Aztèques, Tome 1: Grammaire. Paris: L’Harmattan. Also 2011. An Introduction to Classical Nahuatl, English translation/adaptation by Christopher Mackay. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth & Rappaport-Hovav, Malka. 2005. Argument Realization [Research Surveys in Linguistics Series]. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1997. No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. U. Penn WPL 4: 201–225.Google Scholar
. 2001. Words. Paper presented at the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, University of Southern California Los Angeles, 24 February.
Marantz, Alec. 2005. Objects out of the lexicon: Objects as events. Ms, MIT. <[URL]>
Massam, Diane. 1990. Cognate objects as thematic objects. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 35(2): 161–190.Google Scholar
Mateu, Jaume. 2002. Argument structure. Relational construal at the syntax-semantics interface. PhD dissertation, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. <[URL]>
Navarro, Ía. 2009. Predicados complejos con le en español mexicano. PhD dissertation, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
Navarro, Ía & Espinal, M. Teresa. 2012. Le-predicates and event modification in Mexican Spanish. Lingua 122(4): 409–431. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peregrina, Manuel. 2005. Caracterización de la transitividad en la narrativa nahuatl de la Huasteca Veracruzana. MA thesis, Universidad de Sonora.Google Scholar
Peregrina, Manuel, Alvarez González, Albert & Estrada-Fernández, Zarina. 2017 this volume. Transitivity and valency-changing operations in Huasteca Nahuatl. In Verb Valency Change: Theoretical and Typological Perspectives [Typological Studies in Langage 120], Albert Álvarez González & Ía Navarro (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polinsky, Maria. 2005. Antipassive Constructions. In The World Atlas of Language Structures, Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gill, & Bernard Comrie (eds). 438–441. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, Malka & Levin, Beth. 1998. Building verb meanings. In The Projection of Arguments. Lexical and Compositional Factors, Miriam Butt & Wilhem Geuder (eds), 97–134. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Real-Puigdollers, Cristina. 2008. The nature of cognate objects. A syntactic approach. Proceedings ConSOLE XVI, 157–178. <[URL]>
Smith, Carlota. 1970. Jespersen’s ‘Move and Change’ class and causative verbs in English. In Linguistic and Literary Studies in Honor of Archibald A. Hill, Vol. 2: Descriptive Linguistics, M. Ali Jazayery, Edgar C. Polomé & Werner Winter (eds), 101–109. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Spreng, Bettina. 2006. Antipassive morphology and case assignment in Inuit. In Ergativity: Emerging Issues, Johns Alana, Diane Massam & Juvenal Ndayiragije (eds), 247–270. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. On the conditions for antipassives. Language and Linguistics Compass 47(7): 556–575. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics, Vol. 1. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tenny, Carol L. 1994. Aspectual Roles and the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tuggy, David. 1981. The Transitivity-related Verbal Morphology of Tetelcingo Nahuatl: An Exploration in Cognitive Grammar. PhD dissertation, University of California, San Diego. <[URL]>
. 2010. Function becomes meaning: The case of Nawatl tla- . In A Mosaic of Languages and Cultures: Studies Celebrating the Career of Karl J. Franklin [SIL Electronic Publications 19]. Kenneth A. McElhanon & Ger Reesink (eds), 310–326. <[URL]>
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Peregrina Llanes, Manuel, Albert Álvarez González & Zarina Estrada-Fernández
2017. Transitivity and valency-changing operations in Huasteca Nahuatl. In Verb Valency Changes [Typological Studies in Language, 120], ► pp. 82 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 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.