Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T19:56:13.971Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ergative-antipassive alternation in Inuktitut: Analyzed in a case of new-dialect formation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2017

Julien Carrier
Julien Carrier*
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper analyzes the ergative-antipassive alternation in Inuktitut using a variationist sociolinguistic approach. This alternation is not a typical linguistic variable, as these constructions are traditionally believed to have different syntactic functions. However, the nature of those functions remains controversial (e.g., Bittner 1987, Manga 1996), and they are undergoing changes in some dialects (e.g., Johns 2001, Carrier 2012), with the antipassive being increasingly used in place of the ergative. Thus, a variationist sociolinguistic approach is employed here to identify the significant functions of these constructions, and to find the specific context where they overlap and the language change is taking place. The study examines data collected in Resolute Bay, Nunavut, which presents a case of new-dialect formation due to the High Arctic relocation. The analysis reveals the functions of these constructions, describes the source of fading ergativity for the dialects considered in this study, and supports Trudgill's (2004) theory on new-dialect formation.

Résumé

Cet article analyse l'alternance entre les constructions ergative et antipassive en inuktitut suivant une approche sociolinguistique variationniste. Cette alternance ne correspond pas à une variable linguistique typique puisque les fonctions syntaxiques de ces constructions sont traditionnellement considérées comme différentes. Cependant, il existe toujours une polémique sur la nature de ces fonctions (p.ex. Bittner 1987, Manga 1996), et celles-ci subissent présentement des changements dans certains dialectes (p.ex. Johns 2001, Carrier 2012), où la construction antipassive est de plus en plus utilisée, au détriment de la construction ergative. Ainsi, une approche sociolinguistique variationniste est employée ici afin d'identifier les fonctions de ces constructions et le contexte spécifique dans lequel celles-ci se chevauchent et où les changements linguistiques sont en train de se produire. Cette étude examine des données provenant de Resolute Bay, au Nunavut, où un nouveau dialecte de l'inuktitut s'est formé suite à la Délocalisation du Haut-Arctique. L'analyse révèle les fonctions syntaxiques de ces constructions, identifie la source de la perte d'ergativité pour les dialectes examinés dans cette étude, et corrobore la théorie de Trudgill (2004) sur la formation d'un nouveau dialecte.

Keywords

Inuktitutmorphosyntactic variationergativitylanguage changenew-dialect formationInuktitutvariation morphosyntaxiqueergativitéchangements linguistiquesformation d'un nouveau dialecte
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 62 , Issue 4: Variation at the Crossroads: Advancing theory by integrating methods/La Variation: Faire progresser la théorie par l'intégration des méthodes , December 2017 , pp. 661 - 684
Copyright
© Canadian Linguistic Association/Association canadienne de linguistique 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This research was supported by the SSHRC Insight Grant Within and Beyond the Inuktitut Word to Alana Johns, by the Northern Scientific Training Program and by a SSHRC Institutional Grant of the Department of Linguistics at the University of Toronto. The present article is a substantially modified version of one I wrote as a requirement for the PhD program at the University of Toronto. I would like to thank the participants, Louisa Sudlovenick Gillespie and the late Saila Michael, for transcribing and translating the recordings; and also Naomi Nagy, Alana Johns and Sali Tagliamonte for their suggestions.

References

Berge, Anna. 2011. Topic and discourse structure in West Greenlandic agreement constructions. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittner, Maria. 1987. On the semantics of the Greenlandic antipassive and related constructions. International Journal of American Linguistics 53(2): 194–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrier, Julien. 2012. L'expression de la transitivité en Itivimiut. Master's thesis. Université du Québec à Montréal.Google Scholar
Clarke, Sarah. 2009. The manifestation of viewpoint aspect in Inuktitut. Studia Linguistica 63(3): 292–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorais, Louis-Jacques. 1988. Tukilik: An Inuktitut grammar for all. Québec: Association Inuksiutiit Katimajiit.Google Scholar
Dorais, Louis-Jacques, and Sammons, Susan. 2002. Language in Nunavut: Discourse and Identity in the Baffin Region. Iqaluit: Nunavut Arctic College.Google Scholar
Dorais, Louis-Jacques. 2003. Inuit uqausiqatigiit: Inuit languages and dialects. Iqaluit: Nunavut Arctic College.Google Scholar
Dussault, René, and Erasmus, George. 1994. The High Arctic relocation: A report on the 1953–55 relocation. Ottawa: Canadian Government Publishing.Google Scholar
Fortescue, Michael. 1984. West Greenlandic. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Fortescue, Michael. 1995. The historical source and typological position of ergativity in Eskimo languages. Études/Inuit/Studies 19(2): 61–75.Google Scholar
Government of Nunavut. 2013. Resolute Bay 2013. Retrieved from <http://www.gov.nu.ca/sites/default/files/files/Resolute%20Bay%20Profile%20new%20layout.pdf>>Google Scholar
Hallman, Peter. 2008. Definiteness in Inuktitut. Ms., University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Johns A. 1978. Definiteness and indefiniteness: A study in reference and grammaticality prediction. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Johns, Alana. 2001. Ergative to accusative: Comparing evidence from Inuktitut. In Grammatical Relations in Change, ed. Faarlund, Jan-Terje, 205–221. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johns, Alana. 2006. Ergativity and Change in Inuktitut. In Ergativity: Emerging Issues, ed. Johns, Alana, Massam, Diane and Ndayiragije, Juvenal, 293–311. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johns, Alana. To appear. Anaphoric arguments in Unangax and Eastern Canadian Inuktitut. In Studies in Linguistics in Honor of Michael Fortescue, ed. Berge, Anna and Kaplan, Lawrence. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center.Google Scholar
Johnson, Daniel Ezra. 2015. Rbrul (version 2.3.3) [software]. Available from <http://www.danielezrajohnson.com/Rbrul.R>>Google Scholar
Kalmár, Ivan. 1979. Case and context in Inuktitut. Ottawa: National Museums of Canada.Google Scholar
Lyons, Christopher. 1999. Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Makivik Corporation and The National Film Board of Canada. 2014. In The IQQAUMAVARA project. Retrieved from <http://www.iqqaumavara.com/en/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/ils_se_souviennent1.jpg>>Google Scholar
Manga, Louise. 1996. An explanation for ergative versus accusative languages: An examination of Inuktitut . Doctoral dissertation, University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana, and Tagliamonte, Sali. 2001. African American English in the Diaspora. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana, and Turpin, Danielle. 1999. Does the futur have a future in (Canadian) French? Probus 11(1): 133–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team. 2008. R: A language and environment for statistical computing (version 3.2.1) [software]. Available from <https://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/base/>>Google Scholar
Sadock, Jerrold. 1980. Noun incorporation in Greenlandic: A case of syntactic word formation. Language 56(2): 300–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, David. 1988. Sociolinguistics and syntactic variation. In Linguistics: The Cambridge survey, ed. Newmeyer, Frederick J., 140–161. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Edgar W. 2003. The dynamics of New Englishes: From identity construction to dialect birth. Language 79(2): 233–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Lucien. 1979. Inuktituorutît, Grammaire purement esquimaude. Québec: Éditeur officiel du Québec.Google Scholar
Spreng, Bettina. 2005. Third person arguments in Inuktitut. UBCWPL 17: 215–225.Google Scholar
Spreng, Bettina. 2012. Viewpoint aspect in Inuktitut: The syntax and semantics of antipassives . Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 2004. New-dialect formation: the inevitability of colonial Englishes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar