Cover not available
Part of
Nonverbal Predication in Amazonian Languages
Edited by Simon E. Overall, Rosa Vallejos and Spike Gildea
[Typological Studies in Language 122] 2018
► pp. 103–134

Chapter 4
Nonverbal predication in Kari’nja (Cariban, Suriname)

| University of Oklahoma
This paper describes the forms and functions of nonverbal predication in Kari’nja (Cariban, Suriname). Previous descriptions of nonverbal predication in Kari’nja are limited to a single copular form, and make only passing mention of a subset of functions. Kari’nja employs the copula, as well as apposition (without a copula), and a verbal copula. Formally, each of the three nonverbal predicate structures differs in terms of person marking, negation, TAM, number, interrogative forms, and the types of complements it permits. In addition to structural characteristics, each construction differs in terms of which functional categories it encodes. This paper describes the formal properties and functional motivation for using each available construction in Kari’nja. It thereby provides a more complete analysis of the Kari’nja system specifically, examines the typological characteristics of nonverbal predication more generally, and contributes to our understanding of the ways in which systems can vary and change.
Keywords: Kari’nja, nonverbal predication, copula
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Nonverbal predicate forms
    • 1.2Functional categories of nonverbal predication
    • 1.3Demographics
  • 2.Kari’nja nonverbal predication
    • 2.1Apposition
      • 2.1.1Apposition: Person and number
      • 2.1.2Apposition: Temporal distinctions
      • 2.1.3Apposition: Interrogative forms
      • 2.1.4Apposition: Negation
      • 2.1.5Apposition: Predicate types
      • 2.1.6Apposition: Functions
    • 2.2Copula
      • 2.2.1Copula: Person and number
      • 2.2.2Copula: Temporal distinctions
      • 2.2.3Copula: Interrogative forms
      • 2.2.4Copula: Negation
      • 2.2.5Copula: Constituent ordering and predicate types
      • 2.2.6Copula: Functions
      • 2.2.7Copula: Additional constructions
    • 2.3Verbal copula
      • 2.3.1Verbal copula: Person and number
      • 2.3.2Verbal copula: Temporal distinctions
      • 2.3.3Verbal copula: Interrogative forms
      • 2.3.4Verbal copula: Negation
      • 2.3.5Verbal copula: Complement types
      • 2.3.6Verbal copula: Functions
      • 2.3.7Verbal copula: Additional constructions
    • 2.4Constructions compared
  • 3.Conclusions and future work
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 21 August 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.122.04sap
References (23)
References
Álvarez, José. 2000. La entrada verbal en la lexicografia del Pemón (Caribe). Boletin de Lingüistica 15: 65–94.Google Scholar
. 2005. Predicación no verbal en pemón y kari’ña: ¿Un camino universal en la gramaticalización? Paper presented at Working Conference on the Grammar of Cariban Languages. Centre d’Etude des Langues Indigènes d’Amérique, Paris, 5–9 December.
Carlin, Eithne B. 2001. Of riches and rhetoric: Languages in Suriname. In 20th Century Suriname: Continuities and Discontinuities in a New World Society, Rosemarijn Hoefte & Peter Meel (eds), 220–243. Kingston, Jamaica: Ian Randle.Google Scholar
Courtz, Hendrik. 2007. A Carib Grammar and Dictionary. Toronto: Magoria Books.Google Scholar
Derbyshire, Desmond C. 1985. Hixkaryana and Linguistic Typology. Austin TX: SIL.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W. 2010. Basic Linguistic Theory, Vol. 2: Grammatical Topics. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W. & Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (eds). 2006. Adjective Classes: A Cross-linguistic Typology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2007. Clause types. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol 1: Clause Structure, 2nd edn, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 224–275. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gildea, Spike. 1998. On Reconstructing Grammar: Comparative Cariban Morphosyntax. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees. 1992. Non-verbal Predication: Theory, Typology, Diachrony. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoff, Berend. 1968. The Carib Language. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1995. Configurationality and nonconfigurationality in the Carib language of Surinam. International Journal of American Linguistics 61: 347–377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Verbal Inflection in Carib of Surinam. Paper presented at Working Conference on the Grammar of Cariban Languages, Centre d’Etude des Langues Indigènes d’Amérique, Paris, 5–9 December.
Lewis, M. Paul & Simons, Gary F. (eds). 2013. Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 17th edn. Dallas TX: SIL International. <[URL]>
Meira, Sérgio. 1999. A Grammar ofTiriyo. PhD dissertation, Rice University.Google Scholar
Meira, Sérgio & Gildea, Spike. 2009. Property concepts in the Cariban family: Adjectives, adverbs and/or nouns? In The Linguistics of Endangered Languages. Contributions to Morphology and Morphosyntax, W. Leo Wetzels (ed.), 95–133. Utrecht: LOT Publications.Google Scholar
Payne, Thomas. 1997. Describing Morphosyntax: A Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Pustet, Regina. 2003. Copulas: Universals in the Categorization of the Lexicon. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sapién, Racquel-María. 2015. An innovative main clause construction in Kari’nja (Cariban). Paper presented at Workshop on Diachronic Morphosyntax in South American Languages, Lyon, France, 28–30 May.
Stassen, Leon. 1997. Intransitive Predication. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
UNESCO. 2003. UNESCO Red Book of Endangered Languages. <[URL]>
Yamada, Racquel-María. 2014. Mobilities into (and out of) Konomerume (Donderskamp). In In and Out of Suriname: Language, Mobility, and Identity, Eithne B. Carlin, Isabelle Léglise, Bettina Migge & Paul B. Tjon Sie Fat (eds), 117–138. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. An updated analysis of ky- and -ng in Kari’nja: Evidentiality or deixis? International Journal of American Linguistics.Google Scholar