![]() |
Project B11:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fieldwork in Ladakh
|
Valency Dictionary of Ladakhi Verbs |
||||||||||||||||||||
surveyed |
main entries |
without sub-entries |
with sub-entries |
sub-entries total |
examples |
|||||||||||||||
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
|
total |
895 |
905 |
924 |
925 |
654 |
641 |
634 |
596 |
241 |
264 |
290 |
329 |
664 |
786 |
886 |
1046 |
7443 |
9283 |
11193 |
12980 |
DOM
(Shamskat) |
783 |
794 |
791 |
780 |
539 |
(539) |
511 |
466 |
235 |
256 |
280 |
314 |
589 |
704 |
738 |
821 |
5241 |
5683 |
6079 |
6252 |
GYA (Kenhat) |
261 |
354 |
572 |
814 |
121 |
152 |
299 |
502 |
140 |
203 |
273 |
312 |
349 |
535 |
745 |
908 |
1076 |
1930 |
3102 |
4492 |
SAS (S) |
116 |
(116) |
(116) |
(116) |
52 |
(52) |
(52) |
(52) |
64 |
(64) |
(64) |
(64) |
86 |
(86) |
95 |
(95) |
429 |
(429) |
(429) |
(429) |
LEH (K) |
1 |
101 |
102 |
(102) |
– |
62 |
62 |
(62) |
2 |
34 |
40 |
(40) |
2 |
56 |
69 |
(69) |
4 |
434 |
523 |
(523) |
CEM (K) |
88 |
(88) |
(88) |
(88) |
56 |
(56) |
(56) |
(56) |
32 |
(32) |
(32) |
(32) |
46 |
(46) |
(46) |
(46) |
285 |
(285) |
(285) |
(285) |
TIR (S) |
62 |
(62) |
(62) |
(62) |
32 |
(32) |
(32) |
(32) |
30 |
(30) |
(30) |
(30) |
47 |
(47) |
(47) |
(47) |
144 |
156 |
(156) |
(156) |
ARA (S) |
51 |
78 |
98 |
(98) |
28 |
39 |
48 |
(48) |
23 |
39 |
50 |
(50) |
29 |
51 |
70 |
(70) |
126 |
208 |
343 |
(343) |
TEA (S) |
– |
– |
– |
40 |
– |
– |
– |
9 |
– |
– |
– |
31 |
– |
– |
– |
44 |
– |
– |
– |
220 |
WAK (S) |
29 |
(29) |
(29) |
(29) |
15 |
(15) |
(15) |
(15) |
14 |
(14) |
(14) |
(14) |
21 |
(21) |
(21) |
(21) |
49 |
(49) |
(49) |
(49) |
SKI (S) |
– |
– |
15 |
(15) |
– |
– |
4 |
(4) |
– |
– |
11 |
(11) |
– |
– |
16 |
(16) |
– |
– |
59 |
(59) |
NYO (K) |
– |
– |
13 |
(13) |
– |
– |
10 |
(10) |
– |
– |
3 |
(3) |
– |
– |
4 |
(4) |
– |
– |
22 |
(22) |
KRD (S) |
5 |
(5) |
(5) |
(5) |
1 |
(1) |
(1) |
(1) |
4 |
(4) |
(4) |
(4) |
9 |
(9) |
(9) |
(9) |
20 |
(20) |
(20) |
(20) |
LEH2 (K) |
6 |
(6) |
(6) |
(6) |
1 |
(1) |
(1) |
(1) |
5 |
(5) |
(5) |
(5) |
5 |
(5) |
(5) |
(5) |
8 |
(8) |
(8) |
(8) |
other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57 |
72 |
92 |
117 |
Comparison with other lexical sources |
|||||
|
main entries |
full examples |
pattern variation |
collocations |
varieties |
BRGY
CT |
ca. 1200 |
ca. 30 - 40% |
few cases |
no specifical focus |
1 |
CDTD |
1339 |
– |
almost none |
almost none |
high number, incomplete sets |
Hackett 2003 CT |
694 |
ca. 25 - 30% |
almost none |
small number |
1 |
Haller 2004 Amdo |
566 |
ca. 90% |
almost none |
almost none |
1 |
LhV 2005 Lhasa |
750/1110 |
ca. 60 % |
few cases |
as separate entries |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
VDLV |
925 |
> 100 % |
special focus |
special focus |
2 dialect groups, |
case
relevant readings |
1641 |
> 100 % |
|||
readings total |
2203 |
|
|
|
|
CT verbs tested |
1398 |
ca. 50 % shared in each variety, ca. 45 % shared
by both varieties shared among both dialects: ca. 85%
|
|||
Domkhar |
780 |
||||
Gya |
814 |
||||
non-attested CT
verbs |
563 |
||||
adjectivals |
36 |
||||
verbs not in CT |
38 |
||||
unclear relation |
171 |
CDTD: Bielmeier, Roland. In preparation. Comparative dictionary of Tibetan dialects. Vol. I: Verbs. [Preprint 2008]
Hackett, P.G. (2003): A Tibetan verb lexicon. Verbs, classes, and syntactic frames. Ithaca, Boulder: Snow Lion.Haller, F. (2004): Dialekt und Erzählungen von Themchen. Sprachwissenschaftliche Beschreibung eines Nomadendialektes aus Nord-Amdo. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.
LhV: Bailey, G. and Ch. E. Walker (2004): Lhasa Verbs. A Practical Introduction. Lhasa: Tibetan Academy of Social Science.top
B11 project page
B11 publications
SFB main page
kuʃunaŋ trakuʃu (apples and peaches) – on the comparison of comparative expressions in structurally differing languages
Clause
types – overview |
|||||||||||||||
‡ preferred order, change of position possible:
“x‡ ‡y” means that x and y may
exchange their position (thus y, x), “(x y)‡ ‡z” means that the group x, y and z may
exchange their position without changing the order within the group
(hence z, x, y) |
|||||||||||||||
A. Main patterns |
|||||||||||||||
0-place predicates |
|||||||||||||||
00
|
– |
– |
– |
WT: /rgyal/ ‘o.k.’, /rden/ ‘true’, introductory /yot/ ‘once upon the time’ |
|||||||||||
1-place predicates |
|||||||||||||||
01
|
Abs |
– |
– |
change,
motion |
|||||||||||
2-place predicates |
|||||||||||||||
02
|
Abs |
Abs |
– |
predication, WT transformation, low
transitive verbs |
|||||||||||
03
|
|||||||||||||||
03a |
Abs |
~Loc |
– |
affection, oriented motions, position, change into |
|||||||||||
03b |
~Loc=top |
Abs |
– |
existence (at a given place) |
|||||||||||
04
|
Abs |
Abl |
– |
get out [–ctr], move away [±ctr] |
|||||||||||
05
|
Abs |
Com |
– |
contact, separation [± ctr]; WT: [–ctr] & cause, media, instrument |
|||||||||||
06
|
Aes |
Abs |
– |
possession, WT: experience, affection |
|||||||||||
07
|
Erg |
~Loc |
– |
directional activity |
|||||||||||
08
|
Erg |
Abs |
– |
non-directional activity, transformation, high
transitive verbs |
|||||||||||
3-place predicates |
|||||||||||||||
09
|
|||||||||||||||
09a |
Erg |
~Loc |
Abs |
transfer (to R) |
|||||||||||
09b
|
Erg |
Abs |
~Loc |
deposit, transformation into
(sgyur, byed) |
|||||||||||
09c |
~Loc=top |
Erg |
Abs |
WT: drag along (topicalisation of LCT argument necessary) |
|||||||||||
10
|
|||||||||||||||
10a |
Erg |
Abl |
Abs |
take away-type I |
|||||||||||
10b
|
Erg |
Abs |
Abl |
take away-type II |
|||||||||||
11
|
|||||||||||||||
11a |
Erg |
Abs |
Com |
join, mix see, separate, exchange (‘theme’ oriented), fill with |
|||||||||||
11b
|
Erg |
Com |
Abs |
exchange (recipient oriented) |
|||||||||||
B. Marginal patterns |
|||||||||||||||
1-place predicates |
|||||||||||||||
12
|
Aes/~Loc |
– |
– |
WT: emphasised emotions |
|||||||||||
13
|
Erg/Instr |
– |
– |
some animal sounds; WT: non-focusing use of sense organ, ploughing, harvesting, work fast |
|||||||||||
2-place predicates |
|||||||||||||||
14
|
|||||||||||||||
14a |
Abs‡ |
‡Instr/Gen |
|
WT: [–ctr] events & cause,
media, instrument; |
|||||||||||
14b
|
Abs |
Gen |
– |
WT: fill with [–ctr] (Shamskat = 14a borrowed from Kenhat); |
|||||||||||
15
|
|||||||||||||||
15a |
~Loc/Aes |
Gen |
– |
WT: fill into with [–ctr] (Shamskat); CT tshugs |
|||||||||||
15b
|
Aes |
Instr/Gen |
– |
WT: be harmful [–anim] |
|||||||||||
15c |
Aes | Instr |
– |
CT: be damaged [–anim] (thugs) |
|||||||||||
16
|
Aes | Com |
– |
WT: be content, satiated (/tshims/) |
|||||||||||
17
|
Aes/~Loc |
~Loc |
– |
WT: /eloa cha/ 'be forgetful (about sth)' and other mental states; experiencer of 13 |
|||||||||||
18
|
Aes |
Abl |
– |
WT: get scolded/beaten (/khoa gerganehane phok/) |
|||||||||||
19
|
Erg |
Com |
– |
WT: press, collocation: divorce |
|||||||||||
20
|
Erg |
Instr/Gen |
– |
CT: collocation: khus ḥdebs, phus ḥdebs, promise (possConstr); WT: non-focused use of sense organ |
|||||||||||
21
|
Erg |
Abl |
– |
CT:
directional activity (partitive): drink from; begin with; WT:
non-focused use of sense organ |
|||||||||||
3-place predicates |
|||||||||||||||
22
|
Abs |
Abs |
Abs |
WT: reflexive transformation (/co/), ‘it’s my beer’ |
|||||||||||
23
|
(Abs |
Abs‡)‡ |
‡~Loc |
WT: reflexive transformation (/zgyur/) |
|||||||||||
24
|
Abs |
Com |
Abs |
WT: collocation: mix with; come into a discussion |
|||||||||||
25
|
Abs |
Abl |
Abs |
WT: motion from, protection |
|||||||||||
26
|
|||||||||||||||
26a |
Abs |
Abl |
~Loc |
WT: motion from x to y |
|||||||||||
26b
|
Abl |
~Loc(‡ |
‡)Abs |
WT: gapping from x to y |
|||||||||||
26c |
~Loc |
Abl(‡ |
‡)Abs |
WT: exceptive exist (03b + REL) |
|||||||||||
27
|
Abs |
~Loc |
~Loc |
WT: labour force exchange |
|||||||||||
28
|
|||||||||||||||
28a |
Aes/~Loc |
Abs |
~Loc |
WT: get sth stuck, be left behind, have enough, obtain into; perception through sense organ; experiencer of 03a |
|||||||||||
28b
|
Aes/~Loc |
~Loc |
Abs |
WT: believe; experiencer of 03b |
|||||||||||
28c |
Aes |
Aes |
Abs |
WT: experiencer of 06 |
|||||||||||
29
|
Aes |
~Loc |
~Loc |
WT: be expert (in sth), be in harmony (with), /cikcigika eloa cha/ |
|||||||||||
30
|
Aes |
Abl‡ |
‡Abs |
WT: obtain from; perception through sense organ |
|||||||||||
31
|
Aes |
Abs |
Com |
WT:
sense organ; experiencer of 05 |
|||||||||||
32
|
|||||||||||||||
32a |
Aes |
Abs |
Instr/Gen |
WT: have enough for; experiencer of 15a; |
|||||||||||
32b
|
Aes |
Instr/Gen |
Abs |
WT: sense perception through sense organ |
|||||||||||
32c |
~Loc |
Instr |
Abs |
CT:
x-la y-kyis (medium) luspa med 'be complete' |
|||||||||||
33
|
|||||||||||||||
33a |
Aes |
Abs |
Abs |
WT: experience as; /ŋo šes/; get more; exper. of 02 |
|||||||||||
33b
|
~Loc |
Abs |
Abs |
WT: become more (on a certain place 03b+ RST) |
|||||||||||
34
|
Erg |
Abs |
Abs |
WT: transformation (/co/), estimation, repetition (timeArg); collocation: decide; consider (Kenhat) |
|||||||||||
35
|
Erg |
~Loc |
~Loc |
remember, warn, praise, talk, ask, teach so about |
|||||||||||
36
|
|||||||||||||||
36a |
Erg |
Abs‡ |
‡Instr/Gen |
WT: fill with [+ctr], lower price by, be enough by Ken/Sham; OT/CT: collocation: promise |
|||||||||||
36b
|
Erg |
Abs |
Gen |
WT: fill with [+ctr] (Shamskat) |
|||||||||||
37
|
|||||||||||||||
37a |
Erg |
~Loc |
Instr |
CT: collocation: promise |
|||||||||||
37b
|
Erg |
~Loc |
Gen |
WT: fill (into), cover (upon) with [+ctr] (Shamskat) |
|||||||||||
38
|
Erg |
~Loc‡ |
‡Abl |
WT: protect, focusing use of (sense) organ, directional, chase away |
|||||||||||
39
|
Erg |
Com‡ |
‡~Loc |
WT: fill with; touch with organ (/ñuk/) (Kenhat) |
|||||||||||
4-place (including
collocations) |
|||||||||||||||
40
|
Abs |
Abl |
~Loc |
Abs |
WT: collocation: crawl & SRC/GOAL |
||||||||||
41
|
Abs |
Abl |
~Loc |
~Loc |
WT: go, come from X to Y for work |
||||||||||
42
|
Abs |
Com |
~Loc |
Abs |
WT: colloc.: get into a discussion (Kenhat) |
||||||||||
43
|
Abs |
~Loc |
~Loc |
Abs |
WT: collocation: believe [+ctr] |
||||||||||
44
|
Abs
|
~Loc |
Abs |
Abs |
WT: collocation: believe [+ctr] |
||||||||||
45
|
|||||||||||||||
45a |
Aes |
Abs |
~Loc |
Abs |
WT: experiencer of 21 |
||||||||||
45b
|
Aes |
~Loc |
Abs |
Abs |
WT:
/rden šes/ 'believe' |
||||||||||
45c |
Aes |
Aes |
Abs |
Abs |
WT: experiencer of 29a (/ŋo šes/); |
||||||||||
46
|
|||||||||||||||
46a |
Aes |
~Loc |
~Loc |
Abs |
WT: believe so with respect to sth |
||||||||||
46b
|
Aes |
Aes |
~Loc |
Abs |
WT: experiencer of 27b |
||||||||||
47
|
Erg |
(Abl |
~Loc‡)‡ |
‡Abs |
WT: transfer from to; exchange / barter |
||||||||||
48
|
Erg |
Abs |
Abl |
Abs |
WT: colloc.: turn back animals (Kenhat) |
||||||||||
49
|
Erg |
~Loc‡ |
‡Abs‡ |
‡~Loc |
WT: remind, sell for I, collocation: divide, promise, believe (+ctr) |
||||||||||
50
|
Erg |
(Abs |
Abs‡)‡ |
‡~Loc |
WT: transfer/put as, sell for II, colloc. invite, /rden šes/ (+ctr) |
||||||||||
51
|
Erg |
Abs | Com | Abs |
WT: establish social relationship between 2 persons |
||||||||||
52
|
Erg |
Com |
Abs |
Com |
WT:
exchange / barter |
||||||||||
53
|
Erg |
Com‡ |
‡(Abs‡ |
‡~Loc) |
WT: exchange / barter |
||||||||||
54
|
Erg |
~Loc |
~Loc |
~Loc |
WT: write to sb about sth in a letter |
||||||||||
55
|
Erg |
~Loc |
Abs |
Instr/Gen
|
CT: promise; WT: fix the price for with, lower the price by |
||||||||||
56
|
Erg |
~Loc |
~Loc |
Instr/Gen |
Not yet attested! OT/CT promise
(CONTind) |
||||||||||
5-place (collocations) |
|||||||||||||||
57
|
Erg |
~Loc |
~Loc |
Abs |
Abs |
WT: lower the price & beneficiary |
|||||||||
58
|
|||||||||||||||
58a |
Erg |
Abl |
Abs |
~Loc |
~Loc |
WT: take a bride |
|||||||||
58b
|
Erg |
~Loc |
(Abl |
~Loc)‡
|
‡Abs
|
WT: lower the price |
|||||||||
59
|
Erg |
Abs |
Abl |
~Loc | Abs |
WT: turn back animals |
|||||||||
60
|
Erg |
~Loc |
~Loc |
Abs
|
Instr/Gen |
WT: lower the price |
|||||||||
|
Erg (coll) |
~Loc |
Com |
Abs |
WT: exchange, barter, mix |
||||||||||
C. Special contexts: |
|||||||||||||||
impersonal constructions (often possessor constructions with first argument) |
|||||||||||||||
1-place |
|||||||||||||||
61 |
Abl |
– |
– |
WT; have pain (zer gzer); CT starting with |
|||||||||||
2-place |
|||||||||||||||
62
|
Abl |
Abs |
– |
hon speech CONTdir |
|||||||||||
63
|
Abl |
~Loc |
– |
hon
speech CONTind |
|||||||||||
3-place |
|||||||||||||||
64
|
Abl |
~Loc |
Abs |
honorific speech CT CONTdir |
|||||||||||
65
|
Abl |
~Loc |
~Loc |
Not yet attested! honorific speech CT
CONTind |
|||||||||||
4-place |
|||||||||||||||
special negation patterns |
|||||||||||||||
66
|
Aes |
Abl |
– |
have (nothing) but (CT, TVP) |
|||||||||||
(30) |
Aes |
Abl |
Abs |
|
|||||||||||
special numerical patterns |
|||||||||||||||
01 |
Abs |
– |
– |
the two
are one (LAD) |
|||||||||||
03b |
~Loc |
Abs |
– |
at X are 2, 3, 4 Y |
|||||||||||
13 |
~Loc |
– |
– |
at X
(are 2, 3, 4 (number adjektivals!), TVP v74) |
|||||||||||
D. Experiencer amplification (only WT) |
|||||||||||||||
33a |
Aes |
Abs |
Abs |
experiencer of 02 |
|||||||||||
28a |
Aes |
Abs |
~Loc |
experiencer of 03a |
|||||||||||
30 |
Aes |
Abs |
Abl |
experiencer of 04 |
|||||||||||
31 |
Aes |
Abs |
Com |
experiencer of 05 |
|||||||||||
67
|
Aes |
Abs |
Gen/Instr |
experiencer of 15 |
|||||||||||
68
|
Aes
|
Loc |
Gen/Instr |
experiencer of 16 |
|||||||||||
28c |
Aes |
Aes |
Abs |
experiencer of 06 |
|||||||||||
69
|
Aes |
Erg |
~Loc |
Not yet attested! experiencer of 07 |
|||||||||||
70
|
Aes |
Erg |
Abs |
experiencer of 08 |
|||||||||||
71
|
Aes |
(Abl |
~Loc)‡
|
‡Abs
|
experiencer
of 26a |
||||||||||
46b |
Aes |
Aes |
~Loc |
Abs |
experiencer of 28b (with /rden šes/) |
||||||||||
72
|
Aes |
Erg |
~Loc |
Abs |
experiencer of 09a |
top
B11 project page
B11 publications
SFB main page
kuʃunaŋ trakuʃu (apples and peaches) – on the comparison of comparative expressions in structurally differing languages
Table 1: Sound changes in Kenhat
|
(sub-)
phonemic
tone |
laryngalisation |
palatalisation |
fricativisation
of cluster |
||||
initial
radical |
medial |
|||||||
w
> ɦ |
y
> ɦ vs. ɦ > y |
ʃ > ç |
voiceless |
voiced
|
||||
Sham |
– |
– |
ø |
– |
– |
– |
– |
|
LEH |
– |
– |
ø |
– |
– |
g |
– |
|
CEM |
– |
? |
+ |
ø |
+ |
k,p |
g,b |
voiceless |
SHA |
+ |
+ |
+ |
? |
+ |
k |
– |
voiceless |
GYA |
+ |
+ |
ɦ-o,u |
y-i,e |
– |
– |
m-g |
voiceless |
HML |
– |
– |
– |
? |
– |
k,t,p |
g,d,b |
all |
MAN |
– |
? |
– |
? |
– |
k,t,p |
g,d,b |
(all) |
Table 2: Kenhat morphophonemics
|
loss
of final -s
after |
genitive agent |
definiteness
marker |
evidential
marker |
||||||
consonant |
vowel |
|||||||||
p,k,m |
cluster>ø |
umlaut |
stem
neutralisation |
|
‑se
gen. |
|||||
|
-ŋs |
-gs |
future |
past |
||||||
Sham |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
{po} |
suk,
khantsuk |
|
LEH |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
+ |
– |
{po} |
ok,
anok |
k(y)ak |
CEM |
+ |
+ |
– |
+ |
+ |
+ |
+ |
{de} |
{kak} |
{kanak} |
SHA |
+ |
+ |
– |
+/substitute |
+ |
+ |
+ |
{de} |
? |
? |
GYA |
+ |
+ |
– |
+/substitute |
+ |
+ |
+ |
{de} |
ak,
{kak} |
{khanak} |
HML |
+ |
+ |
+ |
diphtong |
– |
+ |
– |
? |
hak |
ø |
MND |
– |
– |
– |
diphtong |
– |
? |
? |
? |
? |
The Kenhat
dialects differ thus in
many ways quite substantially from the Shamskat dialects and it does not
seem
to be suitable to discuss these differences as mere dialectal variance.
The
differences manifest themselves most obviously on the phonetical level
(fricativisation
and emerging tone vs. clusters) and on the grammatical level (genitive
vs.
ergative agent marking, verbal auxiliaries), but also on the semantic
level.
From a merely
phonetical
perspective, the differences between the various Ladakhi dialects
appears to be
gradual, and it might seem justified to group the Leh dialect with the
phonetically conservative Shamskat
dialects. However this approach does not
account for the essential difference on the grammatical level, due to
which the
Leh dialect can only be grouped with the phonetically innovative Kenhat
dialects. The somewhat unexpected mixed character of the Leh dialect
itself can
be easily explained by historical facts (Leh as an important point of
commercial exchange, repeated settlement of Balti speakers around Leh).
Interestingly enough, it is the historically ‘younger’ dialects that
have, by and large,
influenced the historically ‘older’ one.
The findings do not only show that a classification of dialects cannot be achieved merely according to the phonetical surface, which may suffer more easily from external influences than the grammatical layer. They likewise show that a classification in terms of ‘conservative’ vs. ‘innovative’ might be quite misleading if based solely on phonetics. After all, the Kenhat dialects might have retained more lexical and grammatical archaisms than the Shamskat dialects.
Literature:
top
B11 project page
B11 publications
SFB main page
kuʃunaŋ trakuʃu (apples and peaches) – on the comparison of comparative expressions in structurally differing languages
top
B11 project page
B11 publications
SFB main page
kuʃunaŋ trakuʃu (apples and peaches) – on the comparison of comparative expressions in structurally differing languages
on the
comparison of comparative expressions in structurally differing
languages
(from the abstract for Linguistic Evidence 2008,
poster session, revised)
These examples illustrate a
basic dilemma: When
comparing non-identical items – which is the main purpose of a
comparison – one
has to neglect part of the difference and to abstract either from the
outer, formal
features or from the inner, seemingly more substantial features.
Although
scientific discourse has often enough looked down upon the naïve mind,
capable
only to compare the outer shape but not the essence, both approaches
may be
found in the linguistic literature, e.g. originally functional labels
such as
the High German Perfekt
are
transferred on grounds of formal similarity to the southern dialects
where the
construction in question functions as a preterite,
while the perfect function is filled
with the so-called Doppelten
Perfekt.
Conversely, it is claimed by typologists that cross-linguistic
comparison can
only be based on meaning (Haspelmath 2004), following from which formal
differences
do not matter (much). Embedded nominalisation, e.g., is thus often
equated with
relative clauses in English, which is typically the only way to
translate it
appropriately. Note, however, the asymmetry in both practices: the
dialects are
described from the perspective of the ‘standard variety’, whereas
lesser-known
exotic languages are described from the perspective of linguistic
‘standard
languages’ such as English (or, in earlier attempts: Latin). Both are
not
described as entities in their own right, nor are they ever accepted as
descriptive models (or challenges).
This is not to say that
meaning does not
matter. In fact, even the modest tasks of translation or of describing
(and
thus understanding) an exotic language are based on the fundamental
hermeneutic
principle that however different the outer appearance (wording or
structure),
utterances are comparable as long as the intended or the conveyed
meaning (the
function) is the same, i.e. when referring to the same ‘objective’
situation.
How well this hermeneutic
principle actually
works may be demonstrated on the basis of a very small segment of
linguistic
utterances, namely comparative expressions of equality and difference.
The
situation in the outside world is quite manageable: We have two
entities, A (the
item to be compared) and S (the standard to which something is
compared), to
which we ascribe, for the sake of simplicity, a perceptible and
measurable,
i.e. scalable property X.
In English, scalar properties
are typically
expressed by adjectives or more precisely: adjectivals with nominal
properties,
and the relation of equality and similarity are expressed by the
relators as … as and like, while the
relation of difference is expressed by the relator than
and a comparative morpheme -er added to the adjective,
hence A is as X as S (equality), A is X like S (similarity), or A is Xer
than S
(difference).
In Exot-ese, the situation is
somewhat more
complicated: To start with, this language and its family did not
originally
possess basic adjectives, but only basic adjective-verbs (verbal
adjectivals),
which imply certain dynamic properties (inchoative, resultative),
besides
derived adjectives for states. The latter are used in comparative
expressions
of equality and similarity together with relators that correspond to as and like, but they cannot be used for
a relation of difference. In some
of the varieries, only certain forms of the verbal adjectival can be
used. This
holds also for analytic comparative constructions, since the
quantitative
adjectivals more or less are likewise
of verbal character. The
speakers of Exot-ese have thus to take refuge to a syntactical
solution, namely
to add a semantically opaque postposition to the S argument, which
functions as a relator. The standard
construction is:
S-Postposition,
A Xes. This might be interpreted as ‘In
relation to S,
A Xes’.
Another, somewhat less
felicitous paraphrase, missing
out the
dynamic character of the property itself as well as the question what
the expression really means, could be ‘In relation to S, A
differs
with respect of a plus in X’.
Exot-ese differs from English
in many other
respects. E.g. the negation markers are obligatorily bound to a verb or
its
auxiliary and thus always operate on the whole clause. In the case of
constituent negation (nobody, not anybody),
an indefinite or limiting
quantifier plus an emphatic conjunction must be used, e.g. Anybody
/ A single person ever does not X in relation to S, but I
fear, neither alternative has the same logical entailments as the
English
sentence Nobody is Xer than S.
In English it is possible,
formally at least,
to exchange S and the negated item A: A
is Xer than nobody. Such sentences are acceptable when Xer
than is not meant to express a relation of properties but a
direct relation between the items, e.g. Something
is better than nothing. But in Exot-ese, we cannot, on formal
grounds, exchange
the negated item, simply because it does not exist. Like in the case of
the
comparative construction or the constituent negation, we have to
reformulate
and reorder the various elements in order to arrive roughly at the
intended
meaning. Since we need a noun to which we can apply the postposition
and since
only sentences can be negated, we may take resort to an embedded
nominalisation.
However, construction
substitutes are often not
very perfect matches, they may allow for certain ambiguities that are
not there
in the model (or vice versa). Even more, structural differences could
well be
symptoms of functional differences, which might become more evident
when
viewing the language in its entirety and not only a small segment.
Finally,
differences that might be still tolerable at an elementary level may
accumulate, up to the moment where it is impossible to say, by any
interpretative means or formal argument, whether the expressions in
question
can still be compared in a meaningful way, because it is no longer
apparent
that they still refer to (roughly) the same situation. In contrast to
its
English ‘counterpart’, the Exot-ese sentence A Xes in
relation to anybody nonexisting is acceptable for some of
the speakers even when expressing a relation of properties. This may be
mainly
due to the fact that it allows alternative interpretations, such as A Xes in relation to anybody else or A is as
X as nobody else. But how do we
know? If Exot-ese does not have constituent negation and also no
comparative, are we not actually comparing here pears and
peaches?
Reference
Haspelmath, M. (2004). Does linguistic explanation presuppose linguistic description? Studies in Language 28.3: 554-579.
top
B11 project page
B11 publications
SFB main page
(1)
|
den |
do_ |
_rdemo |
dug_ |
_jaŋ, |
ʧi-aŋ |
met-khan-i |
naŋ-ʧig-basaŋ |
KHAL |
then |
that.df |
beautiful(adj) |
be.exp |
and |
what-fm |
NG2.exist/have/be.n.exp-nom-g |
house-lq-rel |
(2)
SKI |
su-aŋ |
riŋmo |
met-kan-basaŋ |
Tsheriŋ |
(riŋmo) |
duk. |
LEHa/b
|
su-ʒig-aŋ |
*(riŋmo) |
met-kan-esaŋ |
Tsiriŋ |
riŋmo |
duk. |
|
who-(lq)-fm |
long(adj) |
NG2.be.n.exp-nom-rel |
name |
(be.long(adj)) |
be.exp |
|
‘In relation to
whosoever not being tall (assimilated knowledge), Tshering is (tall)
(visual evidence).’ ~ modest excess: Tshering is taller than anybody who is not tall. (SKI: %, LEHa: %%, LEHb: *). ~ extreme excess: Tshering is taller than nobody else (i.e. extraordinary tall). (LEHb: o.k., LEHa: %) |
top
B11 project page
B11 publications
SFB main page
"Language change and the
fossilization of the Old Tibetan b- prefix in Ladakhi and Balti."
A
Valency Dictionary
of Ladakhi Verbs
Clause
types (an overview)
Kenhat
kuʃunaŋ
trakuʃu
(apples and peaches) – on
the
comparison of comparative expressions in structurally differing
languages
Technical notes:
"High altitude sickness" of computers and hard drives
Hard drives for electronic notebooks or laptops are commonly not
specified for operation in altitudes higher than 3.000 m above sea
level. Obviously, the air becomes too thin to support the head at its
proper operation heigth. If the air heats up through operation, it
becomes even thinner (an effect that in earlier years repeatedly made
Indian Airlines, starting from Leh at noon time, unload passengers and
luggage, rather than to change its flight schedule - a state
enterprise). Although the head might not crash, it might have
difficulties to read and write, leading to ongoing fragmentation of all
files.
Rather unplanned and with out any gratification for the laboratory
rabbit, the field trips to Leh, situated in 3.500 m, turned out to be
online experiments, testing the quality of hard drives. Three trips up
to now, three hard drives: Toshiba (I), Hitachi, Toshiba (II). Here is
the report:
2002, Toshiba (I): two or three days after arriving in Leh, the laptop
started producing a very disturbing creaking or squealing noise when
accessing the hard drive, as if metal was scratching on metal. Starting
up the system and particularly saving the files became slower and
slower every day, in the end taking about 5 to 10 minutes for starting
up and several minutes for the system's security back up of a small
file. Eventually, after only two weeks in the field, the following
message appeared on the screen:
"Unknown Hardware or Software Error"
and the laptop stopped working. It was not a total crash, though, the
laptop could be started again, after cooling down and would run for
about an hour until the ventilator would set in for the first time. I
used the laptop thus to backup all the work done in internet cafes. All
computers around me were working without any problem.
Back in Delhi (merely 250 m or so above sea level), starting the laptop
for a backup, I was immediately startled by the absence of the creaking
noise and realised that the starting time had been considerably reduced
again. The laptop worked smoothly again, for hours and hours.
2003, Hitachi: Started grumbling in a deep voice after some days,
particularly after heating up, obviously also fragmenting the files,
but did not become slow in a perceivable manner. Worked three month
without problem.
2004, Toshiba (II): Started with the creaking noise after about three
weeks of operation. Became considerably slow while saving both the
document and the securitiy backups, thus I decided to run the
defragmentation in the sixth or seventh week. I am not sure whether
that was a wise decision, since the files of the operating system could
not be defragmented (and perhaps underwent further fragmentation during
the process). Operating the computer thus was going on with
increasingly reduced speed (eg opening up the media player sometimes
took about three minutes) and much more noise, and the last week I
reckoned every hour on having to exchange the hard drive. Document
saving, however, worked smoothly again until the end of the field trip.
Recommendations: Although other people's computers and laptops seem to
be working without any problem at Leh and similar altitudes, new
generations of hard drives might be even more sensitive to thin air,
and there is no guaranty that one gets the error message in time before
the head crashes. One should thus think of alternatives involving no
hard drive at all. If the laptop can boot from the USB drive one could
have the operating system on the USB stick, otherwise one could use
Linux on CD (Knoppix).
To be continued...
... in fact
like in an ordinary evolutionary setting, a not-so-fit hard drive can
also have some advantageous sides. In this case, as it was much more
sensitive to heat than the fit hard drive, its unexpected
non-functionality within 5 min. of use, turned out to be an important
signal that the laptop was constantly overheated.
The reason for this was that the ventilator did not switch on any more,
but who would realise, in the middle of one's work, whether or not the
ventilator had switched on or of inbetween. Thus in 2006 I had been
working happily for about 3 weeks on a laptop with fever. No wonder
that the flashcards always felt unusually warm...
Electrone
harvesting:
Feeding
two mouths with
four empty spoons:
2 car batteries, 4 chargers, 1 stabilizator, but –
no
electricity in Leh.
In
theory and as long as
the water of the Indus river is not frozen, a hydrel power plant
provides Leh
with electricity during the day time, while in the evening hours from
seven to
eleven (when the hydrel power is transmitted to villages in the
vicinity of
Leh) power is provided by a public diesel generator. (Don't ask me, why
this
switch is necessary. Its main reason seems to be to make life even more
complicated. Before 2005, it regularly caused hundreds of e-mails to be
unsent,
as the computers in the internet cafés went down.)
Practically, there are many
reasons why any of the two plants does not work propperly.
In May and June
2005, for no obvious reason (except perhaps that the snowmelt was late)
we did
not get any electricity during the day time (except one or two hours on
a few days).
But it seemed that the people from the power department were trying
their best
to compensate, as the diesel generator operated for five, sometimes
even six
hours in the evening.
In July 2006,
Ladakh suffered severely from heavy rain falls. As a result of the
floods, the
hydrel plant went out of work for about two months, because sand and
stones had
been swept into the canal. There is no kind of lock at the head of the
canal,
which could prevent such calamities. Sharp tongues assert that this is
not
because the engeneers did not think of the possibility of floods, but
just
because they did: who be so 'stupid' and construct something useful
that would
make his further employment superfluous. The only problem is, that the
money
for the repair works does not flow as fast as the floods. (Fortunately
for all
Ladakhis, there was yet the Ladakh festival to come, at the beginning
of
September, serving the promotion of tourism, and this was reason enough
to
'speed up' the process.)
But unlike the year before, the loss at the daytime
was by no means compensated in the evening, although everybody would
have been
happy if the normal quantity (four hours daily) would have been
supplied. In
the contrary, diesel generated evening power was supplied only every
alternate
day (in some sections of Leh, as I heard, not even on every alternate
day!)
between seven and eleven, but hardly more than two hours all together,
and with
the lowest voltage possible. As a result,
every other evening
one could not breathe freely
in the
bazaar: all shopkeepers were
running their
own small generators.
The laptop batteries (Panasonic) would each run for three
hours (much better batteries are available now for Levono and perhaps
other products) and would take the same time to recharge, while working
on the
computer.
Provided, they could be recharged in the night time, I did not need
more than
about two hours from an external source, i.e. a 12 V car battery
(during this time one of the batteries was again partly charged). To
recharge a
car battery, however, takes about three or four times the working time,
as the
corresponding chargers are very slow. According to the display, the
maximum output is 6
A, but one is told to set the output on maximally 3 A. Even this might
be too
high, since the voltage provided by either power plant might suddenly
rise – and
surrogate
fuses are not always available in the bazaar. When leaving for dinner,
it was thus
advisable to turn the ouput down to 1-2 V. Yet, having upgraded my
'power plant' from one to two car
batteries with
two chargers each, I might have been content with two hours power
supply
daily...
At this point I would like to acknowledge the solidarity shown by the
staff from a neighbouring hotel and by the owner of an internet café,
allowing us to work in their rooms while their generators were running.
Something about the prices (2006):
A precharched car battery (Exide) is
available for about 3.150 Rs, a good charger for about 1.500 Rs.
Generators are
available in Leh from 15.000 Rs on (they are hired out for a daily rate
of
1.000
Rs!). Small subsidised solar panels (below 20 VA/h) might be available
second hand
for about 20.000 Rs., but a workable (and unsubsidised) solution would
have required
an
investment of at least 300.000 Rs (exchange rate 1 Euro = 56-57 Rs).
Backpackers'
solutions?
A colleague, working in Zanskar in 2008, had spent quite some money on
a foldable solar panel equipment, but while the solar cells seem to
have been working (at least for some time), the supplied battery had
neither any tolerance for overcharging
nor
any indication of the charging status (as a matter of course, both
features are found with car batteries), nor
did the charger have an automatic stop device (as modern chargers for
litium batteries have), thus
the battery broke down immediately after the first attempt of charging.
Find a suitable battery in the bazaar of Fadum! The batteries that were
available, were, as it turned out, of no great help. Or perhaps also
the solar panel simply did not provide enough energy. Needless to say
that there was no technical support from the side of the vendors.
Reasons
for optimism?
In 2007 and 2008 we did not suffer any major power cut in Leh.
top
B11 project page
B11 publications
SFB main page
kuʃunaŋ
trakuʃu
(apples and peaches) – on
the
comparison of comparative expressions in structurally differing
languages