Cover not available
Part of
Diverse Scenarios of Syntactic Complexity
Edited by Albert Álvarez González, Zarina Estrada-Fernández and Claudine Chamoreau
[Typological Studies in Language 126] 2019
► pp. 139–166

Grammaticalization of the linking devices with ka in Purepecha

| CNRS (SEDYL/CELIA – CEMCA
This paper describes, in synchrony, the use, form, and position of the linking devices with ka in coordinating phrases and clauses and in subordinate clauses. This study also explores the relation between the different occurrences of ka and investigates a diachronic common source. Taking into account such parameters as weight, cohesion, and variability (Lehmann 2002), I advance the hypothesis that there have been two routes of grammaticalization. These two routes include the free coordinator ka which has given rise to a dependent marker -ka that forms subordinators, and the subjunctive mood -ka which seems to be the grammaticalization of the assertive mood marker -ka used for speech-act participants.
Keywords: grammaticalization, Purepecha, coordination, subordination, linker, coordinator
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Basic typological characteristics of Purepecha
  • 3.Coordinator ka
    • 3.1General properties and interphrastic uses
    • 3.2Interclausal uses
      • 3.2.1Coordinated finite clauses
      • 3.2.2Coordinated non-finite chain-medial clauses
  • 4. ka used in subordinate finite clauses
    • 4.1 -ka at the beginning of the subordinate clause: Different kinds of subordinator
    • 4.2 -ka at the end of the subordinate clause: A compulsory suffix on the verb
  • 5.Conclusion: Two hypotheses about the source and grammaticalization of ka
    • Stage 1. Coordinator of two words or noun phrases
    • Stage 2. Coordinator of verb phrases
    • Stage 3. Coordinator of finite clauses
    • Stage 4. Coordinator of chain-medial clauses
    • Stage 5. Marker at the beginning of a subordinate clause
    • The specific route of the subjunctive mood
  • Acknowledgments
  • Abbreviations
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 4 July 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.126.06cha
References (32)
References
Bril, Isabelle & Rebuschi, Georges. 2006. Coordination, subordination et co-jonction: Faits linguistiques et concepts. Faits de Langues 28: 7–20.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Perkins, Revere & Pagliuca, William. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Capistrán, Alejandra. 2002. Variaciones de orden de constituyentes en p’orhépecha. Topicalización y focalización. In Del Cora al Maya Yucateco. Estudios lingüísticos sobre algunas lenguas indígenas mexicanas, Paulette Levy (ed.), 349–402. México: UNAM.Google Scholar
Chamoreau, Claudine. 2004. Localización de espacios utilizando deícticos en purepecha. In VII Encuentro Internacional de Lingüística en el Noreste, Isabel Barreras Aguilar & Mirna Castro Llamas (eds), 531–554. Hermosillo: UniSon.Google Scholar
. 2007. Grammatical borrowing in Purepecha. In Grammatical Borrowing in Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds), 465–480. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2009. Hablemos purepecha, Wanté juchari anapu. Morelia: Universidad Intercultural Indígenas de Michoacán / IIH-UMSNH / IRD / CCC-IFAL / Grupo Kw’anískuyarhani de Estudiosos del Pueblo Purépecha.Google Scholar
. 2012. Dialectology, typology, diachrony and contact linguistics. A multi-layered perspective in Purepecha. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung (STUF – Language Typology and Universals) 65(1): 6–25.Google Scholar
. 2014. Types of enclitic in Purepecha. In Patterns in Meso-American Morphology, Jean-Léo Léonard & Alain Kihm (eds), 119–143. Paris: Michel Houdiard Editeur.Google Scholar
. 2016. Non-finite chain-medial clauses in the continuum of finiteness in Purepecha. In Finiteness and Nominalization [Typological Studies in Language 113], Claudine Chamoreau & Zarina Estrada Fernández (eds), 83–104. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 2017. Purepecha. A polysynthetic but predominantly dependent-marking language. In Handbook of Polysynthesis, Michael Fortescue, Marianne Mithun & Nicholas Evans (eds), 667–695. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Cristofaro, Sonia. 2003. Subordination. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Foley, William & Van Valin Jr., Robert D. 1984. Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Friedrich, Paul. 1975. A Phonology of Tarascan. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 1984. From meaning to sound. In Handbook of Middle American Indians, Vol. 2, Munro S. Edmonson (ed.), 56–82. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Giacalone Ramat, Anna & Mauri, Caterina. 2011. The grammaticalization of coordinating interclausal connective. In Handbook of Grammaticalization, Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds), 656–667. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Gilberti, Maturino. 1987[1558]. Arte de la lengua de Michuacan. Morelia: Fimax Publicistas Editores.Google Scholar
Givón, T. 2001. Syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Harris, Alice & Campbell, Lyle. 1995. Historical Syntax in Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1995. The converb as a cross-linguistically valid category. In Converbs in Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Martin Haspelmath & Ekkehard König (eds), 1–55. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2007. Coordination. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol.2, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 1–51. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. The Genesis of Grammar. A Reconstruction. Oxford. OUP.Google Scholar
de Lagunas, Juan Baptista. 1983[1574]. Arte y Diccionario con otras obras en lengua Michuacana. Morelia: Fimax.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 2002[1982]. Thoughts on Grammaticalization, 2nd rev. edn. Erfurt: Universität Erfurt.Google Scholar
Longacre, Robert. 2007. Sentences as combinations of clauses. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol. 2: Complex Constructions, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 52–150. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matras, Yaron. 1998. Utterance modifiers and universals of grammatical borrowing. Linguistics 36(2): 281–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. The borrowability of structural categories. In Grammatical Borrowing in Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds), 31–73. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Medina Plaza Juan. 1998[1575]. Dialogo sobre la naturaleza. Zamora: El Colegio de Michoacán y Fideicomiso Teixidor.Google Scholar
Monzón, Cristina. 2004. Los morfemas espaciales del p’urhépecha. Zamora: El Colegio de Michoacán.Google Scholar
Smith-Stark, Thomas. 1994. Mesoamerican calques. In Investigaciones lingüísticas en Mesoamérica, Carolyn Mackay & Verónica Vázquez (eds), 15–50. Mexico: IIF-UNAM.Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra, Longacre, Robert & Hwang, Shin Ja. 2007. Adverbial clauses. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 237–300. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wares, Alan. 1984. Tarascan Verb Inflection, 93–100. Mexico: SIL.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Chamoreau, Claudine
2016. Non-finite chain-medial clauses on the continuum of finiteness in Purepecha. In Finiteness and Nominalization [Typological Studies in Language, 113], ► pp. 83 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 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.