Cover not available
Part of
Caused Accompanied Motion: Bringing and taking events in a cross-linguistic perspective
Edited by Anna Margetts, Sonja Riesberg and Birgit Hellwig
[Typological Studies in Language 134] 2022
► pp. 57–75

The expression of directed caused accompanied motion (CAM) events in Chipaya

| Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich | Universität zu Köln
The paper investigates the expression of directed caused accompanied motion (directed CAM) events in Chipaya, an endangered isolate of the Bolivian highlands. Directed CAM events are defined through the following four components: motion; causation; accompaniment; and directedness. Chipaya has only two take verbs that express these notions: ʂixk‑ ‘take’ and tʃhitʃh‑ ‘take.to’. Directed CAM events in Chipaya are expressed either through these verbs or by manner-specific CAM verbs when these are subordinated to ʂixk‑ ‘take’ and tʃhitʃh‑ ‘take.to’. The findings presented in the following result from a project on “Cross-linguistic patterns in the encoding of three-participant events – investigating BRING and TAKE”, drawing on data from fieldwork by the Chipaya DobeS team.
Keywords: directed CAM events, take and take.to, manner-specific CAM verbs, subordination, Bolivia
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1The Chipaya language and data
    • 1.2Grammatical background relevant for the expression of directed CAM-events
  • 2.Directed CAM-events in Chipaya
    • 2.1Directed CAM-verbs: take
    • 2.2Manner-specific CAM-verbs and their role in expressing directed CAM-events
  • 3.Summary
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 25 May 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.134.03han
References (13)
References
Adelaar, W. (2007). Threatened languages in Hispanic South America. In M. Brenzinger (Ed.), Language diversity endangered (pp. 9–28). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Adelaar, W., & Muysken, P. (2004). The languages of the Andes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cerrón-Palomino, R. (2006). El chipaya o la lengua de los hombres del agua. Lima: Fondo Editorial de la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.Google Scholar
(2009). Chipaya. In M. Crevels & P. Muysken (Eds.), Lenguas de Bolivia: Ámbito andino (Vol. 1, pp. 28–77). La Paz: Embajada de Reino de los Países Bajos and MUSEF and Plural Editores.Google Scholar
Cerrón-Palomino, R., & Ballón Aguirre, E. (2011). Chipaya: Léxico-Etnotaxonomía. Nijmegen: Radboud Universiteit and Lima: Fondo Editorial Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.Google Scholar
Dedenbach-Salazar Sáenz, S. (2006). Nominal case relations. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Dedenbach-Salazar Sáenz, S. & DobeS team members (2007). Vocabulary of the Chipaya language. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Dedenbach-Salazar Sáenz, S., & Hannß, K. (2008). Chipaya case markers ‑kiś and ‑kin: Subject and speaker reference. Indiana, 25, 77–95.Google Scholar
Hannß, K. (2008). The lost language of the Urus of Bolivia: A grammatical description of the language as documented between 1894 and 1952 (Doctoral dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen). Retrieved from [URL]
Lakusta, L., Muentener, P., Petrillo, L., Mullanaphy, N., & Muniz, L. (2017). Does making something move matter? Representations of goals and sources in motion events with causal sources. Cognitive Science, 41(3), 814–826. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olson, R. D., & Olson, F. (1966). Quintunaca liyaquic̃a (No. 2). Cochabamba: Imprenta Indigenista Boliviana.Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, A., & Rohde, A. (2004). The goal bias in the encoding of motion events. In G. Radden & K.-U. Panther (Eds.), Studies in linguistic motivation (pp. 249–268). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar