Cover not available
Part of
The ‘Noun Phrase’ across Languages: An emergent unit in interaction
Edited by Tsuyoshi Ono and Sandra A. Thompson
[Typological Studies in Language 128] 2020
► pp. 237–270

Chapter 10
The pragmatics of ‘light nouns’ in Besemah

| University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa

Perhaps the most widely discussed aspect of the NP in western Austronesian languages is the relative clause, which is described in terms of its syntactic relation to the noun it modifies. It is expressed by a ‘relativizer’ and a so-called ‘gap’ in the modifying clause that is co-referential with the head noun. One western Austronesian language that appears to be quite different in this regard is Besemah, a little-described Malayic language of southwest Sumatra. This is because constructions analogous to relative clauses in Besemah are best described as Noun Modifying Constructions (NMC) following studies of similar phenomena in other languages, most notably Japanese. Like Japanese, Besemah NMCs most often occur with a so-called ‘light’ head noun, which has a general, abstract meaning, such as ‘thing’, ‘situation’, etc. This paper shows that NMCs headed by a closed class of light nouns serve a number interactional functions, including formulating reference to discourse entities that are recognizable to participants, elaborating upon discourse entities in increments, jointly working out the identity of a referent in other-initiations of repair, and constructing story beginnings with unattached light nouns among others. I argue that the semantically-bleached nature of light nouns and the ‘loose’ (pragmatically-determined) relationship between the light head noun and modifying elements allow speakers to construct NMCs that fit local contexts and serve various interactional purposes.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Light nouns and noun-modifying constructions in Besemah
  • 3.Data
  • 4.Noun-modifying constructions in Besemah interaction
    • 4.1Referring expressions
    • 4.2Unattached light nouns in NMCs
    • 4.3Light nouns in equational constructions
    • 4.4Light nouns in lexicalizations and fixed expressions
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 15 July 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.128.10mcd
References
Clift, Rebecca
2007 Grammar in time: The non-restrictive ‘which’-clause as an interactional resource. Tech. rep. 55: 51–82.Google Scholar
Cole, Peter & Gabriella Hermon
2005 Subject and non-subject relativization in Indonesian. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 14(1): 59–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1998 Rethinking the typology of relative clauses. Language Design 1: 59–85.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Tsuyoshi Ono
(eds) 2007 Turn Continuation in Cross-linguistic Perspective. Special issue of Pragmatics 17(4).Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Margret Selting
2018 Interactional Linguistics: Studying Language in Social Interaction. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Dingemanse, Mark, Giovanni Rossi & Simeon Floyd
2017 Place reference in story beginnings: A cross-linguistic study of narrative and interactional affordances. Language in Society 46(2): 129–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John W., Stephan Schuetze-Coburn, Susanna Cumming & Danae Paolino
1993 Outline of discourse transcription. In Talking Data: Transcription and Coding in Discourse Research, Jane Anne Edwards & Martin D. Lampert (eds), 45–89. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Englebretson, Robert
2008 From subordinate clause to noun-phrase: Yang constructions in colloquial Indonesian. In Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining. The Multifunctionality of Conjunctions [Typological Studies in Language 80], Ritva Laury (ed.), 1–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ewing, Michael C.
1991 The discourse function of relative clauses in Indonesian. Berkeley Linguistic Society 17: 81–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005 Colloquial Indonesian. In The Austronesian Languages of Asia and Madagascar, K. Alexander Adelaar & Nikolaus P. Himmelmann (eds), 227–258. New York NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ewing, Michael C. & Susanna Cumming
1998 Relative clauses in Indonesian discourse: Face to face and cyberspace interaction. In Papers from the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society, Shobhana L. Chelliah & Willem J. de Reuse (eds), 79–96. Tempe AZ: Program for Southeast Asian Studies, Arizona State Unviersity.Google Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., Barbara, Fox A. & Sandra A. Thompson
2002 Constituency and the grammar of turn increments. In The Language of Turn and Sequence, Cecilia E. Ford, Barbara A. Fox & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 14–38. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Fox, Barbara A.
1987 Discourse Structure and Anaphora: Written and Conversational English. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fox, Barbara A. & Sandra A. Thompson
1990a A discourse explanation of the grammar of relative clauses in English conversation. Language 66(2): 297–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1990b On formulating reference: An interactional approach to relative clauses in English conversation. IPrA Papers in Pragmatics 4(1–2): 183–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 Relative clauses in English conversation: Relativizers, frequency, and the notion of construction. Studies in Language 31(2): 293–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
1984 Notes on story structure and the organization of participation. In Structures of Social Action, J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds), 225–246. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa
2001 Emerging syntax for interaction: Noun phrases and clauses as a syntactic resource for interaction. In Studies in Interactional Linguistics [Studies in Discourse and Grammar 10], Margret Selting & Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen (eds), 25–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
1984 A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In Structures of social action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds), 299–345. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin H.
2015 Other-initiated repair in English. Open Linguistics 1(1): 164–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kornfilt, Jaklin & Nadezhda Vinokurova
2017 Turkish and Turkic complex noun phrase constructions. In Matsumoto, Comrie & Sells (eds), 251–292.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud
2001 A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics 39(3): 463–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laury, Ritva & Marja-Liisa Helasvuo
2015 Detached NPs with relative clauses in Finnish conversations. In Information Structuring of Spoken Language from a Cross-linguistic Perspective [Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 283], M. M. Jocelyne Fernandez-Vest & Robert D. Van Valin Jr. (eds), 149–166. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mandelbaum, Jenny
2013 Storytelling in conversation. In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds), 492–507. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Maruyama, Akiyo
2003 Japanese Wa in conversational discourse: A contrast marker. Studies in Language 27(2): 245–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, Yoshiko
1997 Noun-modifying Constructions in Japanese: A Frame-semantic Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, Yoshiko, Bernard Comrie, & Peter Sells
(eds) 2017a Noun-Modifying Clause Constructions in Languages of Eurasia: Rethinking Theoretical and Geographical Boundaries [Typological Studies in Language 116]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, Yoshiko, Bernard Comrie & Peter Sells
2017b Noun-modifying clause constructions in languages of Eurasia: Rethinking theoretical and geographical boundaries. In Matsumoto, Comrie & Sells (eds), 3–21.Google Scholar
McDonnell, Bradley
2016 Symmetrical Voice Constructions in Besemah: A Usage-based Approach. PhD dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara.Google Scholar
in prep. Generalized Noun Modifying Clause Constructions in Besemah. ms.
Ono, Tsuyoshi & Sandra A. Thompson
1994 Unattached NPs in English Conversation. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 20(1): 402–419. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 Fixedness in Japanese adjectives in conversation: Toward a new understanding of a lexical (‘part-of-speech’) category. In Formulaic Language, Vol. 1: Distribution and Historical Change [Typological Studies in Language 82], Roberta Corrigan, Edith A. Moravcsik, Hamid Ouali & Kathleen Wheatley (eds), 117–146. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Payne, Thomas Edward
1997 Describing Morphosyntax: A Guide for Field Linguists. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ryave, Alan L.
1978 On the achievement of a series of stories. In Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction, Jim Schenkein (ed.), 113–132. New York NY: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1986 Some considerations of a story told in ordinary conversations. Poetics 15(1–2): 127–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
2000 When ’others’ initiate repair. Applied Linguistics 21(2): 205–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi
2008 Relativization in Sasak and Sumbawa, Eastern Indonesia. Language and Linguistics 9(4): 865–916.Google Scholar
Sneddon, James Neil
1996 Indonesian: A Comprehensive Grammar. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Takara, Nobutaka
2012 The weight of head nouns in noun-modifying constructions in conversational Japanese. Studies in Language 36(1): 33–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tjung, Yassir
2006 The Formation of Relative Clauses in Jakarta Indonesian: A Subject-Object Asymmetry. PhD dissertation, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Weinert, Regina & Jim Miller
1996 Cleft constructions in spoken language. Journal of Pragmatics 25(2): 173–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

McDonnell, Bradley
2023. Universal quantifiers, focus, and grammatical relations in Besemah. Studies in Language 47:2 ► pp. 422 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 september 2023. 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.