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. 263–294

Chapter 10
Locative, existential and possessive predication in the Chaco

Nivaĉle (Mataguayan) and Pilagá (Guaykuruan)

| University of Oregon
| CONICET Argentina
| University of Oregon
Nivaĉle (Mataguayan) and Pilagá (Guaykuruan) languages, which geographically overlap in the Argentinian Chaco region of South America, present evidence challenging the often repeated claim that locative predications universally underlie possession predications (Lyons 1967; Jackendoff 1983; DeLancey 2000; Freeze 2001; Langacker 2009, among others). In both languages copular elements can link two Determined Phrases (DPs) to predicate location, possession or existence, i.e. the primary predicative element in such constructions is not a lexical verb. However, Nivaĉle and Pilagá each use a single copular form for both non-verbal existential and possessive predication constructions, and a different copular form for non-verbal locative predication constructions. Subtypes of the various constructions, including negative forms, can be related to Heine’s cognitive possession schemas. In Pilagá, all three negative constructions share the same copular elements, but there are arguably still more similarities between the negative possessive and negative existential constructions compared to the negative locative construction. If these shared features across the two languages are due to areal contact, the influence would have had to have happened at the Proto-Mataguayan and Proto-Guaykuruan languages stage.
Keywords: existential, possession, location, negation, Guaykuruan, Mataguayan
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Nivaĉle preliminaries
    • Determiner phrase
    • Predicate phrase
  • 3.The Nivaĉle locative predication construction
  • 4.Nivaĉle existential constructions
  • 5.Nivaĉle possessive predication constructions
    • 5.1 type i possessive predication construction (Heine’s Genitive schema)
    • 5.2 type ii possessive predication construction (Heine’s Goal schema)
    • 5.3 negative possessive predication construction
    • 5.4Bi-clausal be.at construction
  • 6.Pilagá nonverbal predications
  • 7.The Pilagá affirmative locative predication construction
  • 8.The Pilagá affirmative existential construction
  • 9.Pilagá affirmative possessive predication constructions
  • 10.Pilagá negative constructions
  • 11.Conclusions and contact issues
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 21 August 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.122.10dor
References (45)
References
Campbell, Lyle. 2013. Language contact and linguistic change in the Chaco. Revista Brasileira de Lingüística Antropológica 5(2): 259–292.Google Scholar
Carol, Javier. 2011. Lengua chorote (Mataguayo). PhD dissertation, Universidad de Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V. 1978. Locationals: Existential, locative and possessive constructions. In Syntax, Joseph Greenberg, Charles Ferguson & Edith Moravcsik (eds), 86–126. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William & D. Alan Cruse. 2004. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 2000. The universal basis of case. Logos and Language 1(2): 1–15.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2007. Clause types. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, 2nd edn, Vol. 1: Clause Structure, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 224–275. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fabre, Alain. 2014. Los pueblos de Gran Chaco y sus lenguas, segunda parte: Los Mataguayo. Suplemento Antropológico 40(2): 313–435. <[URL]>
. 2015. Predicative possession in Nivaĉle. LIAMES 15(2): 17–41.Google Scholar
. 2016. Gramática de la lengua nivacle (familia mataguayo, chaco paraguayo). Muenchen: LINCOM.
Freeze, Ray. 2001. Existential constructions. In Language Typology and Language Universals, Martin Haspelmath (ed.), 941–953. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gerzenstein, Ana. 1994. Lengua maká. Estudio descriptivo. Buenos Aires: Colección Nuestra América. Instituto de Lingüística. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Universidad de Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph. 1987. Language in the Americas. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, Analía. 2010. Evidentiality distinctions in Nivacle determiners. Ms, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, Analia. 2015. Segmental and Prosodic Complexity in Nivaĉle. Laryngels, Laterals and Metathesis. PhD dissertation, University of British Colombia. <[URL]>
Heine, Bernd. 1997. Possession: Cognitive Sources, Forces, and Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees. 1992. Non-verbal Predication, Theory, Typology, Diachrony. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1983. Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, Terrence. 1990. Language history in South America: What we know and how to know more. In Amazonian Linguistics: Studies in Lowland South American Languages, Doris L. Payne (ed), 13–73. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Klein, Harriet M. 1985. Current status of Argentine indigenous languages. In South American Indian Languages: Retrospect and Prospect, Harriet Klein & Louisa Stark (eds), 691–731. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Klein, Harriet M. & Stark, Louisa R. 1977. Indian languages of the Paraguayan Chaco. Anthropological Linguistics 19: 378–401.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol.1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2009. Investigations in Cognitive Grammar [Cognitive Linguistics Research 42]. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loukotka, Čestmir. 1968. Classification of South American Indian Languages. Los Angeles CA: University of California.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1967. A note on possessive, existential, and locative sentences. Foundations of Language 3: 390–396.Google Scholar
. 1977. Semantics, Vol. 2. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Najlis, Elena. 1984. Fonología de la protolengua mataguaya. Buenos Aires: Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
Nercesian, Verónica. 2011. Gramática del wichí, una lengua chaqueña. Interacción de la fonología-morfología-semántica y sintaxis en el léxico. PhD dissertation, Universidad de Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
. 2014. Wordhood and the interplay of linguistic levels in synthetic languages: An empirical study on Wichi (Mataguayan, Gran Chaco). Morphology 24: 177–198. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Otero, Manuel & Vidal, Alejandra. 2016. Grammatical nominalization in Nivaĉle. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas (SSILA), Washington DC.
Payne, Doris L. 2009. Is possession mere location? Contrary evidence from Maa. In The Expression of Possession, William McGregor (ed), 105–142. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Payne, Doris L. & Barshi, Immanuel (eds). 1999. External Possession [Typological Studies in Language 39]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rubin, Edgar. 1915. Synsoplevede Figurer. Københaven og Kristiania: Gyldendal, Nordisk Forlag.Google Scholar
Seiler, Hansjakob. 1983. Possession as an Operational Dimension of Language. Tübingen: Günter Narr.Google Scholar
Sørensen, Finn. 2001. Possession spaces in Danish. In Dimensions of Possession [Typological Studies in Language 47], Irène Baron, Michael Herslund & Finn Sørensen (eds), 57–65. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stassen, Leon. 2009. Predicative Possession. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
. 2013. Predicative possession. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. <[URL]>
Stell, Nelida Noemi. 1989. Gramática descriptiva de la lengua niwakle (chulupi). PhD dissertation, Universidad Nacional de Buenos Aires.Google Scholar
Talmy, Leonard. 1972. Semantic Structures in English and Atsugewi. PhD dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Tovar, Antonio. 1951. Un capítulo de lingüística general. Boletín de la Academia Argentina de Letras, Tomo XX, N°77: 369–403. Buenos Aires: Recta Sustenta.Google Scholar
. 1961. Catálogo de Lenguas de América del Sur. Buenos Aires: Sudamericana.Google Scholar
. 1964. El grupo mataco y su relación con otras lenguas de América del Sur. In Actas del 35° Congreso Internacional de Americanistas, Tomo II: 439–452. México.Google Scholar
Vidal, Alejandra. 1997. Noun classification in Pilagá. The Journal of Amazonian Languages 1: 58–111.Google Scholar
. 2001. Pilagá Grammar (Guaykuruan Family, Argentina). PhD dissertation, University of Oregon. (Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Dissertation Services.)Google Scholar
. 2008. Affectedness and viewpoint in Pilagá: A semantically aligned case marking system. In The Typology of Semantic Alignment, Mark Donahue & Søren Wichmann (eds), 412–430. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Viegas Barros, Jose Pedro. 1993-4. ¿Existe una relación genética entre las lenguas mataguayas y guaycurúes? Hacia una Nueva Carta Étnica del Gran Chaco 5: 193–213. Las Lomitas, Formosa, Argentina.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Otero, Manuel A., Doris L. Payne & Alejandra Vidal
2021. Determiners and the Development of Grammatical Nominalization in Nivaĉle*. Studia Linguistica 75:2 ► pp. 234 ff. DOI logo
Vidal, Alejandra & Doris L. Payne
2021. Chapter 11. Polyfunctional vanka- in Nivaĉle and the antipassive category. In Antipassive [Typological Studies in Language, 130], ► pp. 349 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 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.