Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T00:43:54.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Innovations and neutralizations in the Warlpiri pronominal system1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Edith L. Bavin  and
Tim Shopen
Edith L. Bavin
Affiliation:
La Trobe University and Australian National University
Tim Shopen
Affiliation:
La Trobe University and Australian National University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The paradigm functions as a domain for certain processes of change. There can be changes in the number of grammatical categories or in the forms used to represent them. Thus, Benveniste (1968) contrasts change involving only the forms while the system remains the same (‘conservative’ change) with innovations in which there is change in the categories and the oppositions. In this paper, we will discuss both types of change in the Warlpiri pronominal system. Warlpiri is an Aboriginal language spoken in central Australia by about 3000 people. Our research has been carried out at Yuendumu, a remote community 300 km northwest of Alice Springs. While the majority of people in the community (about 750) have Warlpiri as their mother tongue, there are also about 65 non-Aboriginal people who speak English, and a few speakers of other Aboriginal languages closely related to Warlpiri. Although there is limited exposure to English, Warlpiri is the community language at Yuendumu.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , March 1987 , pp. 149 - 175
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Arlotto, A. (1972). Introduction to historical linguistics. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co.Google Scholar
Bavin, E. L. & Shopen, T. (1985). Change in progress in Warlpiri: cross-reference clitics in the auxiliary. MS.Google Scholar
Benveniste, E. (1968). Mutations of linguistic categories. In Lehmann, W. & Malkiel, Y. (eds) Directions for historical linguistics. Austin: University of Texas Press. 83–94.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (1985). Morphology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. L. & Brewer, M. (1980). Explanation in morphophonemics: change in Provençal and Spanish preterite forms. Lingua 52. 271–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1983). Convention and contrast in acquiring the lexicon. In Seiler, Th. B. & Wannenmacher, W. (eds), Concept development and the development of word meaning. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. & Herman, R. (1984). Structure and use in the acquisition of word formation. Lg 60. 542–590.Google Scholar
Dorian, N. C. (1982). Loss and maintenance in contact-situations. In Lambert, R. D. & Freed, B. F.The loss of language skills, Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. (1966). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Greenberg, J. (ed.), Universals of language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 73–113.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. (1966). Language universals, with special reference to feature hierarchies. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Haiman, J. (1983). Iconic and economic motivation. Lg 59. 781–819.Google Scholar
Hale, K. (1973a). Person marking in Warlpiri. In Anderson, S. & Kiparsky, P. (eds), A Festschrift for Morris Halle, New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. 308–344.Google Scholar
Hale, K. (1973b). Deep surface canonical disparities in relation to analysis and change: an Australian example. In Sebeok, T. (ed), Current trends in linguistics XI. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. (1932). Zur Struktur des russischen Verbums. In Roman Jakobson, selected writings Vol 2. Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar
Laughren, M. (1977). Pronouns in Warlpiri and the category of number. MS.Google Scholar
Mańczak, W. (1958). Tendances générales des changements analogiques. Lingua 7. 298–235 & 387–420.Google Scholar
Robertson, J. S. (1983). From symbol to icon. Lg 59. 529–540.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1973). Cognitive prerequisites for the development of grammar. In Ferguson, C. & B. Slobin, D. I. (eds), Studies in child language development. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1977). Language change in childhood and history. In Macnamara, J. (ed), Language learning and thought. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (in press). Introduction and conclusion. Slobin, D. (ed), In The cross-linguistic evidence for the language making capacity. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Watkins, C. (1962). The Indo-European origins of the Celtic verb. Dublin: The Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.Google Scholar