315026852
03
01
01
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
TSL 129 Eb
15
9789027260536
06
10.1075/tsl.129
13
2020032619
DG
002
02
01
TSL
02
0167-7373
Typological Studies in Language
129
01
Austronesian Undressed
How and why languages become isolating
01
tsl.129
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/tsl.129
1
B01
David Gil
Gil, David
David
Gil
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
2
B01
Antoinette Schapper
Schapper, Antoinette
Antoinette
Schapper
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam / Lacito-CNRS
01
eng
520
ix
510
LAN009010
v.2006
CFF
2
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.AUSNES
Austronesian languages
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.HL
Historical linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.ISOL
Linguistics of isolated languages
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.THEOR
Theoretical linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.TYP
Typology
06
01
Many Austronesian languages exhibit isolating word structure. This volume offers a series of investigations into these languages, which are found in an "isolating crescent" extending from Mainland Southeast Asia through the Indonesian archipelago and into western New Guinea. Some of the languages examined in this volume include Cham, Minangkabau, colloquial Malay/Indonesian and Javanese, Lio, Alorese, and Tetun Dili.<br /> <br />The main purpose of this volume is to address the general question of how and why languages become isolating, by examination of a number of competing hypotheses. While some view morphological loss as a natural process, others argue that the development of isolating word structure is typically driven by language contact through various mechanisms such as creolization, metatypy, and Sprachbund effects. This volume should be of interest not only to Austronesianists and historians of Insular Southeast Asia, but also to grammarians, typologists, historical linguists, creolists, and specialists in language contact.
04
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/tsl.129.png
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027207906.jpg
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027207906.tif
06
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/tsl.129.hb.png
07
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/tsl.129.png
25
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/tsl.129.hb.png
27
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/tsl.129.hb.png
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.pre
ix
x
2
Miscellaneous
1
01
Preface
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.int
1
8
8
Chapter
2
01
Introduction
1
A01
David Gil
Gil, David
David
Gil
2
A01
Antoinette Schapper
Schapper, Antoinette
Antoinette
Schapper
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.01gil
9
96
88
Chapter
3
01
Chapter 1. What does it mean to be an isolating language?
The case of Riau Indonesian
1
A01
David Gil
Gil, David
David
Gil
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
20
isolating
20
ludlings
20
Riau Indonesian
20
wordhood
01
This chapter poses the question “What does it mean to be an isolating language?” and addresses it by offering a case study of such a language, Riau Indonesian. First, this chapter surveys the debate concerning the viability of the notion of word as a comparative concept, proposes a definition of word as a cut-off point between two distinct levels of structure, morphology and syntax, and then follows with a definition of an isolating language as one lacking a robust structural unit of word. Next, the chapter presents an extensive exploration of wordhood in Riau Indonesian, examining 14 potential sources of evidence for word structure. Overall, the evidence for wordhood is shown to be sparse, thereby justifying the characterisation of Riau Indonesian as an isolating language and at the same time demonstrating what an isolating language may look like.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.02bru
97
118
22
Chapter
4
01
Chapter 2. The loss of affixation in Cham
Contact, internal drift and the limits of linguistic history
1
A01
Marc Brunelle
Brunelle, Marc
Marc
Brunelle
University of Ottawa
20
Cham
20
contact
20
inscriptions
20
loss of affixation
20
Mon-Khmer
20
monosyllabisation
01
Chamic languages have been spoken in Central Vietnam since about 600 AD. While Classical Cham (9th–15th centuries), had already lost a significant proportion of its Austronesian affixation, it also borrowed new affixes from Mon-Khmer. Modern Cham (16th–19th centuries) underwent another wave of reduction that led to a largely monosyllabic and affixless Colloquial Eastern Cham (20th–21st centuries). <br />In this paper I first look at representative Classical Cham inscriptions, establishing the extent to which they exhibit a reduction of affixation, and discussing possible contact scenarios that may have led to this reduction. I then assess the prevalence of affixation in Modern Cham manuscripts and in Colloquial Eastern Cham, and argue that the role Vietnamese played in Cham monosyllabisation must have been more indirect than previously assumed.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.03gil
119
212
94
Chapter
5
01
Chapter 3. Dual heritage
The story of Riau Indonesian and its relatives
1
A01
David Gil
Gil, David
David
Gil
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
20
complexity
20
creolisation
20
dual heritage
20
isolating
20
language contact
20
Mekong-Mamberamo
20
Riau Indonesian
01
How and why did Riau Indonesian acquire its isolating profile? Its isolating structure may traced back continuously through a series of increasingly large language networks – Malay/Indonesian koinés, Malay/Indonesian in general, Malayic, Western Nusantara, and the Mekong-Mamberamo linguistic area – thereby refuting claims that it is the product of a recent event of creolisation. Riau Indonesian and its relatives exhibit dual heritage: Austronesian and Mekong-Mamberamo. From an Austronesian perspective, the isolating profile developed when Austronesian languages first spread into Nusantara, as a result of contact with the languages that were already present in the region. However, from a Mekong-Mamberamo point of view, the isolating structure may be viewed as the outcome of vertical inheritance dating back as far as we can see.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.04cro
213
252
40
Chapter
6
01
Chapter 4. Voice and bare verbs in Colloquial Minangkabau
1
A01
Sophie Crouch
Crouch, Sophie
Sophie
Crouch
20
bare verbs
20
Indonesian-type voice system
20
Minangkabau
20
Sundic-type voice system
20
voice
01
Minangkabau is an Austronesian language spoken primarily in West Sumatra. Previous studies of voice and morphosyntax, which have largely relied on elicitation-based methodology, suggest that Minangkabau can be characterised as an Indonesian-type language since its active/passive voice system resembles that of Malay/Indonesian. This study, which makes use of a corpus of naturalistic Minangkabau data, finds that the use of bare verbs (i.e. verbs that are unmarked for voice) is pervasive in informal and conversational contexts. Morphological underspecification for voice in the naturalistic data suggests that Colloquial Minangkabau is a distinct variety. The apparent optional nature of voice marking in Colloquial Minangkabau indicates that its function is primarily semantic and conceptual, and that Colloquial Minangkabau is better characterised as having a Sundic-type voice system.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.05con
253
286
34
Chapter
7
01
Chapter 5. Javanese undressed
‘Peripheral’ dialects in typological perspective
1
A01
Thomas J. Conners
Conners, Thomas J.
Thomas J.
Conners
University of Maryland
20
internal dialect variation
20
isolating morphology
20
Javanese
20
peripheral dialects
20
typology
01
This chapter makes two claims about Javanese, one concerning its internal dialect variation, and one concerning its place in mainland Southeast Asian (MSEA) typology. First, Javanese exhibits extreme dialect variation, with many features of these variants not appearing in descriptions of Javanese, which mostly concern the Central variety. Second, the existence of these features changes the position of Javanese in the continuum of isolating-to-synthetic languages. Relevant features from six dialects of Javanese show that the Central variety – that of Yogyakarta and Solo – inadequately characterises Javanese as a whole; rather, the geographically and socially ‘peripheral’ dialects more strongly tend toward isolating morphology. Consequently, Javanese is less of an outlier in the MSEA Sprachbund than is generally acknowledged. Historical evidence shows that the Central variety is innovative with respect to Javanese overall.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.06eli
287
338
52
Chapter
8
01
Chapter 6. Are the Central Flores languages really typologically unusual?
1
A01
Alexander Elias
Elias, Alexander
Alexander
Elias
University of California, Berkeley
20
Central Flores languages
20
Eastern Indonesia
20
isolating languages
20
Mekong-Mamberamo linguistic area
20
substrate influence
01
The languages of Central Flores (Austronesian) are typologically distinct from their nearby relatives. They have elaborate numeral classifier systems, quinary numeral systems, and lack all bound morphology. McWhorter (2019) proposes that their isolating typology is due to imperfect language acquisition of a Sulawesi language, brought to Flores by settlers from Sulawesi in the relatively recent past. I propose an alternative interpretation, which better accounts for the other typological features found in Central Flores: the Central Flores languages are isolating because they have a strong substrate influence from a now-extinct isolating language which belonged to the Mekong-Mamberamo linguistic area (Gil 2015). This explanation better accounts for the typological profile of Central Flores and is a more plausible contact scenario.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.07kla
339
368
30
Chapter
9
01
Chapter 7. From Lamaholot to Alorese
Morphological loss in adult language contact
1
A01
Marian A.F. Klamer
Klamer, Marian A.F.
Marian A.F.
Klamer
Leiden University
20
adult language contact
20
Alorese
20
Lamaholot
20
morphological loss
20
morphological reconstruction
01
Alorese is a prime example of a morphologically isolating language. This paper traces the process of morphological simplification it has undergone by addressing the following questions: (i) What was the morphological profile of its ancestor, pre-Alorese? (ii) When did Alorese start to lose its morphology? (iii) Which factors caused this loss? By comparing the morphological profile of current Alorese with its sister language, Lewoingu-Lamaholot, I conclude that the morphology of pre-Alorese was at least as complex as current Lewoingu-Lamaholot. Pre-Alorese underwent a process of drastic and swift morphological loss after its speakers migrated to Pantar island around 1300 AD. Pre-Alorese must have had a significant proportion of adult second language speakers who acquired it imperfectly, thus causing its morphology to be lost. Thus, this is a good example of morphological simplification due to imperfect adult learning in a small-scale language variety.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.08kli
369
390
22
Chapter
10
01
Chapter 8. Double agent, double cross?
Or how a suffix changes nature in an isolating language: <i>dór</i> in Tetun Dili
1
A01
Catharina Williams-van Klinken
Williams-van Klinken, Catharina
Catharina
Williams-van Klinken
Dili Institute of Technology
2
A01
John Hajek
Hajek, John
John
Hajek
University of Melbourne
20
Austronesian contact
20
isolating language
20
language contact
20
morphological borrowing
20
Portuguese
20
Tetun Dili
01
In East Timor, there have been centuries of contact between the strongly isolating Austronesian language Tetun Dili and the morphologically-rich Romance language Portuguese. In all this time, only one derivational morpheme has been borrowed into Tetun Dili for use with native lexicon. This is -<i>dor</i>, a transparent agentive suffix which neatly fits the word order and stress patterns of existing Tetun Dili agentive compounds. Tetun Dili has borrowed numerous nouns with this suffix. However when in combination with native roots, it has shifted in terms of its semantics, word class of the root and derivation, and even word status, bringing it more in line with pre-existing native agentive morphemes. In other words, Tetun’s strongly isolating nature has won, at least for now.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.09sch
391
446
56
Chapter
11
01
Chapter 9. The origins of isolating word structure in eastern Timor
1
A01
Antoinette Schapper
Schapper, Antoinette
Antoinette
Schapper
Lacito-CNRS
20
convergence
20
irregularity
20
isolating word structure
20
lexicalisation
20
phonological erosion
20
Timor languages
01
This paper addresses the issue of isolating word structure and its origins in the Austronesian and Papuan languages of eastern Timor. McWhorter (2007) claims that both groups of languages evidence extensive loss of grammatical complexity as a result of “interrupted transmission” due to significant non-native acquisition. I refute McWhorter’s assertion that the eastern Timor languages are not “normal” through a detailed exposition of their morphological complexities. Whilst recognising that they are isolating leaning, I argue that there is nothing “unnatural” about the grammars of these languages and that phonological changes within the Timorese Sprachbund provide sufficient explanation of their morphological profiles.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.10don
447
482
36
Chapter
12
01
Chapter 10. Becoming Austronesian
Mechanisms of language dispersal across southern Island Southeast Asia and the collapse of Austronesian morphosyntax
1
A01
Mark Donohue
Donohue, Mark
Mark
Donohue
Living Tongues Institute for Endangered Languages
2
A01
Tim Denham
Denham, Tim
Tim
Denham
The Australian National University
20
Austronesian
20
creolisation
20
family profile
20
Island Southeast Asia
20
language contact
20
substrate
20
typology
01
We examine the spread of Austronesian languages as a process that proceeded in different ways at different times, even in the same locale. We examine the many ways a language can show ‘Austronesian traits’, and confront this with the known presence of pre-Austronesian languages across Island Southeast Asia, and the inferred similarity of social processes between mainland and Island Southeast Asia. We argue that many languages which are classified as Austronesian are indeed exemplary Austronesian languages, but that many others should be considered to be the outcome of creolisation processes, and yet others show the traces of scenarios involving (imperfect) language shift from earlier non-Austronesian languages. Indeed, ‘many’ of the languages should be considered to be non-Austronesian languages (‘Papuan’) with (in some cases minimal) Austronesian (lexical) veneers.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.11mcw
483
506
24
Chapter
13
01
Chapter 11. Concluding reflections
1
A01
John H. McWhorter
McWhorter, John H.
John H.
McWhorter
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.index
507
510
4
Miscellaneous
14
01
Index
02
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
NL
04
20201021
2020
John Benjamins B.V.
02
WORLD
13
15
9789027207906
01
JB
3
John Benjamins e-Platform
03
jbe-platform.com
09
WORLD
21
01
00
105.00
EUR
R
01
00
88.00
GBP
Z
01
gen
00
158.00
USD
S
23026851
03
01
01
JB
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
JB code
TSL 129 Hb
15
9789027207906
13
2020032618
BB
01
TSL
02
0167-7373
Typological Studies in Language
129
01
Austronesian Undressed
How and why languages become isolating
01
tsl.129
01
https://benjamins.com
02
https://benjamins.com/catalog/tsl.129
1
B01
David Gil
Gil, David
David
Gil
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena
2
B01
Antoinette Schapper
Schapper, Antoinette
Antoinette
Schapper
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam / Lacito-CNRS
01
eng
520
ix
510
LAN009010
v.2006
CFF
2
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.AUSNES
Austronesian languages
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.HL
Historical linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.ISOL
Linguistics of isolated languages
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.THEOR
Theoretical linguistics
24
JB Subject Scheme
LIN.TYP
Typology
06
01
Many Austronesian languages exhibit isolating word structure. This volume offers a series of investigations into these languages, which are found in an "isolating crescent" extending from Mainland Southeast Asia through the Indonesian archipelago and into western New Guinea. Some of the languages examined in this volume include Cham, Minangkabau, colloquial Malay/Indonesian and Javanese, Lio, Alorese, and Tetun Dili.<br /> <br />The main purpose of this volume is to address the general question of how and why languages become isolating, by examination of a number of competing hypotheses. While some view morphological loss as a natural process, others argue that the development of isolating word structure is typically driven by language contact through various mechanisms such as creolization, metatypy, and Sprachbund effects. This volume should be of interest not only to Austronesianists and historians of Insular Southeast Asia, but also to grammarians, typologists, historical linguists, creolists, and specialists in language contact.
04
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475/tsl.129.png
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027207906.jpg
04
03
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027207906.tif
06
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/tsl.129.hb.png
07
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/125/tsl.129.png
25
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/tsl.129.hb.png
27
09
01
https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/tsl.129.hb.png
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.pre
ix
x
2
Miscellaneous
1
01
Preface
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.int
1
8
8
Chapter
2
01
Introduction
1
A01
David Gil
Gil, David
David
Gil
2
A01
Antoinette Schapper
Schapper, Antoinette
Antoinette
Schapper
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.01gil
9
96
88
Chapter
3
01
Chapter 1. What does it mean to be an isolating language?
The case of Riau Indonesian
1
A01
David Gil
Gil, David
David
Gil
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
20
isolating
20
ludlings
20
Riau Indonesian
20
wordhood
01
This chapter poses the question “What does it mean to be an isolating language?” and addresses it by offering a case study of such a language, Riau Indonesian. First, this chapter surveys the debate concerning the viability of the notion of word as a comparative concept, proposes a definition of word as a cut-off point between two distinct levels of structure, morphology and syntax, and then follows with a definition of an isolating language as one lacking a robust structural unit of word. Next, the chapter presents an extensive exploration of wordhood in Riau Indonesian, examining 14 potential sources of evidence for word structure. Overall, the evidence for wordhood is shown to be sparse, thereby justifying the characterisation of Riau Indonesian as an isolating language and at the same time demonstrating what an isolating language may look like.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.02bru
97
118
22
Chapter
4
01
Chapter 2. The loss of affixation in Cham
Contact, internal drift and the limits of linguistic history
1
A01
Marc Brunelle
Brunelle, Marc
Marc
Brunelle
University of Ottawa
20
Cham
20
contact
20
inscriptions
20
loss of affixation
20
Mon-Khmer
20
monosyllabisation
01
Chamic languages have been spoken in Central Vietnam since about 600 AD. While Classical Cham (9th–15th centuries), had already lost a significant proportion of its Austronesian affixation, it also borrowed new affixes from Mon-Khmer. Modern Cham (16th–19th centuries) underwent another wave of reduction that led to a largely monosyllabic and affixless Colloquial Eastern Cham (20th–21st centuries). <br />In this paper I first look at representative Classical Cham inscriptions, establishing the extent to which they exhibit a reduction of affixation, and discussing possible contact scenarios that may have led to this reduction. I then assess the prevalence of affixation in Modern Cham manuscripts and in Colloquial Eastern Cham, and argue that the role Vietnamese played in Cham monosyllabisation must have been more indirect than previously assumed.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.03gil
119
212
94
Chapter
5
01
Chapter 3. Dual heritage
The story of Riau Indonesian and its relatives
1
A01
David Gil
Gil, David
David
Gil
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
20
complexity
20
creolisation
20
dual heritage
20
isolating
20
language contact
20
Mekong-Mamberamo
20
Riau Indonesian
01
How and why did Riau Indonesian acquire its isolating profile? Its isolating structure may traced back continuously through a series of increasingly large language networks – Malay/Indonesian koinés, Malay/Indonesian in general, Malayic, Western Nusantara, and the Mekong-Mamberamo linguistic area – thereby refuting claims that it is the product of a recent event of creolisation. Riau Indonesian and its relatives exhibit dual heritage: Austronesian and Mekong-Mamberamo. From an Austronesian perspective, the isolating profile developed when Austronesian languages first spread into Nusantara, as a result of contact with the languages that were already present in the region. However, from a Mekong-Mamberamo point of view, the isolating structure may be viewed as the outcome of vertical inheritance dating back as far as we can see.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.04cro
213
252
40
Chapter
6
01
Chapter 4. Voice and bare verbs in Colloquial Minangkabau
1
A01
Sophie Crouch
Crouch, Sophie
Sophie
Crouch
20
bare verbs
20
Indonesian-type voice system
20
Minangkabau
20
Sundic-type voice system
20
voice
01
Minangkabau is an Austronesian language spoken primarily in West Sumatra. Previous studies of voice and morphosyntax, which have largely relied on elicitation-based methodology, suggest that Minangkabau can be characterised as an Indonesian-type language since its active/passive voice system resembles that of Malay/Indonesian. This study, which makes use of a corpus of naturalistic Minangkabau data, finds that the use of bare verbs (i.e. verbs that are unmarked for voice) is pervasive in informal and conversational contexts. Morphological underspecification for voice in the naturalistic data suggests that Colloquial Minangkabau is a distinct variety. The apparent optional nature of voice marking in Colloquial Minangkabau indicates that its function is primarily semantic and conceptual, and that Colloquial Minangkabau is better characterised as having a Sundic-type voice system.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.05con
253
286
34
Chapter
7
01
Chapter 5. Javanese undressed
‘Peripheral’ dialects in typological perspective
1
A01
Thomas J. Conners
Conners, Thomas J.
Thomas J.
Conners
University of Maryland
20
internal dialect variation
20
isolating morphology
20
Javanese
20
peripheral dialects
20
typology
01
This chapter makes two claims about Javanese, one concerning its internal dialect variation, and one concerning its place in mainland Southeast Asian (MSEA) typology. First, Javanese exhibits extreme dialect variation, with many features of these variants not appearing in descriptions of Javanese, which mostly concern the Central variety. Second, the existence of these features changes the position of Javanese in the continuum of isolating-to-synthetic languages. Relevant features from six dialects of Javanese show that the Central variety – that of Yogyakarta and Solo – inadequately characterises Javanese as a whole; rather, the geographically and socially ‘peripheral’ dialects more strongly tend toward isolating morphology. Consequently, Javanese is less of an outlier in the MSEA Sprachbund than is generally acknowledged. Historical evidence shows that the Central variety is innovative with respect to Javanese overall.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.06eli
287
338
52
Chapter
8
01
Chapter 6. Are the Central Flores languages really typologically unusual?
1
A01
Alexander Elias
Elias, Alexander
Alexander
Elias
University of California, Berkeley
20
Central Flores languages
20
Eastern Indonesia
20
isolating languages
20
Mekong-Mamberamo linguistic area
20
substrate influence
01
The languages of Central Flores (Austronesian) are typologically distinct from their nearby relatives. They have elaborate numeral classifier systems, quinary numeral systems, and lack all bound morphology. McWhorter (2019) proposes that their isolating typology is due to imperfect language acquisition of a Sulawesi language, brought to Flores by settlers from Sulawesi in the relatively recent past. I propose an alternative interpretation, which better accounts for the other typological features found in Central Flores: the Central Flores languages are isolating because they have a strong substrate influence from a now-extinct isolating language which belonged to the Mekong-Mamberamo linguistic area (Gil 2015). This explanation better accounts for the typological profile of Central Flores and is a more plausible contact scenario.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.07kla
339
368
30
Chapter
9
01
Chapter 7. From Lamaholot to Alorese
Morphological loss in adult language contact
1
A01
Marian A.F. Klamer
Klamer, Marian A.F.
Marian A.F.
Klamer
Leiden University
20
adult language contact
20
Alorese
20
Lamaholot
20
morphological loss
20
morphological reconstruction
01
Alorese is a prime example of a morphologically isolating language. This paper traces the process of morphological simplification it has undergone by addressing the following questions: (i) What was the morphological profile of its ancestor, pre-Alorese? (ii) When did Alorese start to lose its morphology? (iii) Which factors caused this loss? By comparing the morphological profile of current Alorese with its sister language, Lewoingu-Lamaholot, I conclude that the morphology of pre-Alorese was at least as complex as current Lewoingu-Lamaholot. Pre-Alorese underwent a process of drastic and swift morphological loss after its speakers migrated to Pantar island around 1300 AD. Pre-Alorese must have had a significant proportion of adult second language speakers who acquired it imperfectly, thus causing its morphology to be lost. Thus, this is a good example of morphological simplification due to imperfect adult learning in a small-scale language variety.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.08kli
369
390
22
Chapter
10
01
Chapter 8. Double agent, double cross?
Or how a suffix changes nature in an isolating language: <i>dór</i> in Tetun Dili
1
A01
Catharina Williams-van Klinken
Williams-van Klinken, Catharina
Catharina
Williams-van Klinken
Dili Institute of Technology
2
A01
John Hajek
Hajek, John
John
Hajek
University of Melbourne
20
Austronesian contact
20
isolating language
20
language contact
20
morphological borrowing
20
Portuguese
20
Tetun Dili
01
In East Timor, there have been centuries of contact between the strongly isolating Austronesian language Tetun Dili and the morphologically-rich Romance language Portuguese. In all this time, only one derivational morpheme has been borrowed into Tetun Dili for use with native lexicon. This is -<i>dor</i>, a transparent agentive suffix which neatly fits the word order and stress patterns of existing Tetun Dili agentive compounds. Tetun Dili has borrowed numerous nouns with this suffix. However when in combination with native roots, it has shifted in terms of its semantics, word class of the root and derivation, and even word status, bringing it more in line with pre-existing native agentive morphemes. In other words, Tetun’s strongly isolating nature has won, at least for now.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.09sch
391
446
56
Chapter
11
01
Chapter 9. The origins of isolating word structure in eastern Timor
1
A01
Antoinette Schapper
Schapper, Antoinette
Antoinette
Schapper
Lacito-CNRS
20
convergence
20
irregularity
20
isolating word structure
20
lexicalisation
20
phonological erosion
20
Timor languages
01
This paper addresses the issue of isolating word structure and its origins in the Austronesian and Papuan languages of eastern Timor. McWhorter (2007) claims that both groups of languages evidence extensive loss of grammatical complexity as a result of “interrupted transmission” due to significant non-native acquisition. I refute McWhorter’s assertion that the eastern Timor languages are not “normal” through a detailed exposition of their morphological complexities. Whilst recognising that they are isolating leaning, I argue that there is nothing “unnatural” about the grammars of these languages and that phonological changes within the Timorese Sprachbund provide sufficient explanation of their morphological profiles.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.10don
447
482
36
Chapter
12
01
Chapter 10. Becoming Austronesian
Mechanisms of language dispersal across southern Island Southeast Asia and the collapse of Austronesian morphosyntax
1
A01
Mark Donohue
Donohue, Mark
Mark
Donohue
Living Tongues Institute for Endangered Languages
2
A01
Tim Denham
Denham, Tim
Tim
Denham
The Australian National University
20
Austronesian
20
creolisation
20
family profile
20
Island Southeast Asia
20
language contact
20
substrate
20
typology
01
We examine the spread of Austronesian languages as a process that proceeded in different ways at different times, even in the same locale. We examine the many ways a language can show ‘Austronesian traits’, and confront this with the known presence of pre-Austronesian languages across Island Southeast Asia, and the inferred similarity of social processes between mainland and Island Southeast Asia. We argue that many languages which are classified as Austronesian are indeed exemplary Austronesian languages, but that many others should be considered to be the outcome of creolisation processes, and yet others show the traces of scenarios involving (imperfect) language shift from earlier non-Austronesian languages. Indeed, ‘many’ of the languages should be considered to be non-Austronesian languages (‘Papuan’) with (in some cases minimal) Austronesian (lexical) veneers.
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.11mcw
483
506
24
Chapter
13
01
Chapter 11. Concluding reflections
1
A01
John H. McWhorter
McWhorter, John H.
John H.
McWhorter
10
01
JB code
tsl.129.index
507
510
4
Miscellaneous
14
01
Index
02
JBENJAMINS
John Benjamins Publishing Company
01
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
NL
04
20201021
2020
John Benjamins B.V.
02
WORLD
08
1065
gr
01
JB
1
John Benjamins Publishing Company
+31 20 6304747
+31 20 6739773
bookorder@benjamins.nl
01
https://benjamins.com
01
WORLD
US CA MX
21
59
14
01
02
JB
1
00
105.00
EUR
R
02
02
JB
1
00
111.30
EUR
R
01
JB
10
bebc
+44 1202 712 934
+44 1202 712 913
sales@bebc.co.uk
03
GB
21
14
02
02
JB
1
00
88.00
GBP
Z
01
JB
2
John Benjamins North America
+1 800 562-5666
+1 703 661-1501
benjamins@presswarehouse.com
01
https://benjamins.com
01
US CA MX
21
14
01
gen
02
JB
1
00
158.00
USD