Simba&Rafiki, Hakuna Matata: Nominal Coordination and Noun Class Agreement in Swahili
Ai Taniguchi ([email protected]) April 30, 2013
I.◦.:*˙◦I◦˙*:.◦.I.◦.:*˙◦I◦˙*:.◦.I.◦.:*˙◦I◦˙*:.◦.I.◦.:*˙◦I◦˙*:.◦.I.◦.:*˙◦I
1 Overview
• What happens when you conjoin DPs in a noun-class language? • Agreement Options in Swahili: Resolved (“smart”) Agreement, Default
Agreement, and maybe Closest Conjunct Agreement
• Depends on if it’s agreeing with T (subject) or v/Agr? (object) • Depends on animacy of noun
2 Background
Swahili (a.k.a. Kiswahili) is a Bantu language spoken in east Africa (Kenya, Tanzania, etc.). A polysynthetic language rich in agreement, it is a language of interest in terms of its morphosyntax.
2.1 Basic Facts
• SVO, with some freedom in word order • pro-drop
• Verb mandatorily agrees with subject and animate objects • Verb optionally agrees with inanimate objects
• 14(ish) noun classes
2.2 Agreement
• Basic verbal morphology: (1) Yohana John.1SG a-li-chek-a 1SG-PST-laugh-FV ‘John laughed’ (2) Yohana John.1SG a-li-ki-vunj-a 1SG-PST-OA7-break-FV kiti chair ‘John broke the chair’
SA = Subject Agreement # = Noun class OA = Object Agreement FV = Final vowel • Post-verbal subject: (3) A-li-chek-a 1SG-PST-laugh-FV Yohana John.1SG ‘John laughed’ (4) A-li-ki-vunj-a 1SG-PST-7SG-break-FV kiti chair.7SG Yohana John.1SG ‘John broke the chair’
3 Coordination and Verbal Agreement
• Conjoined animate subjects: Resolved agreement1, (no LCA) • Conjoined animate subjects,post-verbal: Resolved (or FCA?)
• Conjoined inanimate subjects: Default (CL8/CL102) agreement (or LCA?)3
1Plural of the corresponding noun class
2Varies by speaker; CL8 is the “things” class and CL10 is the “catch-all” class 3Concrete nouns favor default, and abstract nouns prefer LCA, supposedly.
• Conjoined inanimate subjects,post-verbal: Default (or FCA??) • Conjoined objects: FCA(?)
3.1 Subject (5) Animate subjects (CL1) a. Mwanamume man.1SG na and mtoto child.1SG wa-li-chek-a 1PL-PST-laugh-FV ‘the man and the child laughed’
b. * Mwanamume man.1SG na and mtoto child.1SG a-li-chek-a 1SG-PST-laugh-FV ‘the man and the child laughed’
c. Wa-li-chek-a 1PL-PST-laugh-FV mwanaume man.1SG na and mtoto child.1SG ‘the man and the child laughed’
(6) Animate subjects (CL1)4 a. Haroub Haroub.1SG na and Naila Naila.1SG wa-li-kuj-a 1PL-PST-come-FV ‘Haroub and Naila came’
b. * Haroub Haroub.1SG na and Naila Naila.1SG a-li-kuj-a 1SG-PST-come-FV Int: ‘Haroub and Naila came’
c. Wa-li-kuj-a 1PL-PST-come-FV Haroub Haroub.1SG na and Naila Naila.1SG ‘Haroub and Naila came’
d. A-li-kuj-a 1SG-PST-come-FV Haroub Haroub.1SG na and Naila Naila.1SG ‘Haroub and Naila came’
(7) Inanimate subjects (Same class)
a. Mti tree.3SG na and mpira ball.3SG vi-li-anguk-a 7PL-PST-fall-FV ‘the tree and the ball fell’
b. Vi-li-anguk-a 7PL-PST-fall-FV mti tree.3SG na and mpira ball.3SG ‘the tree and the ball fell’
c. * Mti tree.3SG na and mpira ball.3SG mi-li-anguk-a 3PL-PST-fall-FV ‘the tree and the ball fell’
(8) Inanimate subjects (Different classes) a. Sanduku box.5SG na and mpira ball.3SG vi-li-anguk-a 7PL-PST-fall-FV ‘the box and the ball fell’
b. Vi-li-anguk-a 7PL-PST-fall-FV sanduku box.5SG na and mpira ball.3SG ‘the box and the ball fell’
(9) Inanimate subjects (Different classes)5
a. Mguu leg.3SG wa of meza table na and kiti chair.7SG ki-me-vunj-ik-a 7SG-PERF-break-PSV-FV ‘The leg of the table and the chair are broken’
(10) Inanimate subjects (Transitive verb) a. Sanduku box.5SG na and mpira ball.3SG vi-li-(ya)-vunj-a 7PL-PST-5PL-break-FV madirisha windows.5PL
‘the box and the ball broke the windows’ b. Vi-li-(ya)-vunj-a 7PL-PST-5PL-break-FV madirisha windows.5PL sanduku box.5SG na and mpira ball.3SG 5Marten (2000)
‘the box and the ball broke the windows’
3.2 Object (11) Animate objects (CL1) a. (Mimi) (I) ni-na-m-pend-a 1SG-PRES-1SG-like-FV mwanamume man.1SG na and mtoto child.1SG
‘I like the man and the child’ b. (Mimi) (I) ni-na-wa-pend-a 1SG-PRES-1PL-like-FV wanaume men.1PL na and mtoto child.1PL ‘I like the men and the child’
c. (Mimi) (I) ni-na-m-pend-a 1SG-PRES-1SG-like-FV mwanamume man.1SG na and watoto children.1PL
‘I like the man and the children’ d. (Mimi) (I) ni-na-wa-pend-a 1SG-PRES-1PL-like-FV wanaume men.1PL na and watoto children.1PL ‘I like the men and the children’
e. * (Mimi) (I) ni-na-wa-pend-a 1SG-PRES-1PL-like-FV mwanamume man.1SG na and mtoto child.1SG ‘I like the man and the child’
(12) Inanimate objects (Same class) a. (Mimi) (I) ni-na-u-pend-a 1SG-PRES-3SG-like-FV mti tree.3SG na and mpira ball.3SG ‘I like the tree and the ball’
b. * (Mimi) (I) ni-na-i-pend-a 1SG-PRES-3PL-like-FV mti tree.3SG na and mpira ball.3SG ‘I like the tree and the ball’
c. * (Mimi) (I) ni-na-vi-pend-a 1SG-PRES-7PL-like-FV mti tree.3SG na and mpira ball.3SG ‘I like the tree and the ball’
(13) Inanimate objects (Different classes) a. (Mimi) (I) ni-na-li-pend-a 1SG-PRES-5SG-like-FV sanduku box.5SG na and mpira ball.3SG ‘I like the box and the ball’
b. * (Mimi) (I) ni-na-vi-pend-a 1SG-PRES-7PL-like-FV sanduku box.5SG na and mpira ball.3SG ‘I like the box and the ball’
c. * (Mimi) (I) ni-na-ya-pend-a 1SG-PRES-5PL-like-FV sanduku box.5SG na and mpira ball.3SG ‘I like the box and the ball’
4 Previous Analyses (Marten (2000))
• Data kind of a mess (Out of novel, no glosses, no minimal pairs, no data about objects...)
• Resolved agreement: Morphological Agreement (“Part of Swahili gram-mar”?)
• Default agreement: Anaphoric Agreement (Conjoined NPs are an anaphor of “empty” nominal subject)
• FCA and LCA: Syntactic Agreement (Agreement with linearly closest conjunct)
• Something crazy about inverted subjects
5 Distributed Morphology and Nominal Coordination
How does the Swahili data work out with DM?
5.1 Boskovic 2009
• Probe has (a lump of) uninterpretable features that need to be valued by Goal
• [uF: ] unvalued uninterpretable feature • [iF:Value] pre-valued interpretable feature • ⋆[uF:Value] pre-valued uninterpretable feature • Interpretable = has an effect on semantics
• Uninterpretable = doesn’t have an effect on semantics • Intrinsic case, number = pre-valued interpretable • Gender = pre-valued uninterpretable
• uF can delete (once valued), but not iF • [uF:Value] can delete (under Match)
• If a probe has EPP feature, valuator determines movement
5.2 Application to Swahili
Assumptions:
• Object agreement is actually agreement, not pronoun incorportation (Ngonyani 1998)
• Noun class is Gender + Number
• [uNum: , uGen: , EPP] on T (subject agreement) • [uNum: , uGen: ] on Agr (object agreement) ? • [iNum:X, uGen:Y] on Goal DPs (pre-specified) • [iNum:PL] AND [uGen:CL1] on &P (pre-specified)
(14) Animate Subjects (Resolved).... TP . .... .. T′ . .... .. vP. .... .. v′ . .... .. VP ... .. V √ laugh . .. .. v . .. .. &PiN um:+P L,uGen:CL1 . .... .. &′ . .... .. DP2 [ iN um:−P L uGen:CL1 ] √ child . .. .. & . .. .. DP1 [ iN um:−P L uGen:CL1 ] √ man . .. .. T uN umuGen::CL1+PL EP P . .. .. .
(15) Inanimate Subjects (Default)....
TP . .... .. T′ . .... .. vP. .... .. v′ . .... .. VP . .... .. DP window . .. .. V √ broke . .. .. v . .. .. &PiN um:+P L,!uGen:CL1 . .... .. &′ . .... .. DP2 [ iN um:−P L !uGen:CL3 ] √ ball . .. .. & . .. .. DP1 [ iN um:−P L !uGen:CL3 ] √ tree . .. .. T uGenuN um:CL7: +P LDEF AU LT EP P . .. .. . (16) Objects (Comitative).... TP . .... .. T′ . .... .. vP. .... .. v′ . .... .. VP . .... .. DP. .... .. np. .... .. PP. .... .. DP [ iN um:−P L uGen:CL1 ] √ child . .. .. P with . .. .. nP [ iN um:−P L uGen:CL1 ] √ man . .. .. D . .. .. V √ like . .. .. v [ uN um:-PL uGen:CL1 ] . .. .. DP I . .. .. T . .. .. (17) Objects (FCA).... TP . .... .. T′ . .... .. vP . .... .. v′ . .... .. VP. .... .. &PiN um:+P L,uGen:CL1 . .... .. &′ . .... .. DP2 [ iN um:−P L uGen:CL1 ] √ child . .. .. & . .. .. DP1 [ iN um:−P L uGen:CL1 ] √ man . .. .. V √ like . .. .. v [ uN um:-PL uGen:CL1 ] . .. .. DP I . .. .. T . .. ..
(14) Objects (FCA)- Take 2.... TP . .... .. T′ . .... .. AgrP. .... .. Agr′ . .... .. vP . .... .. v′ . .... .. VP . .... ..
&PiN um:+P L,uGen:CL1<<IN ACT IV E
. .... .. &′ . .... .. DP2 [ iN um:−P L uGen:CL1 ] √ child . .. .. & . .. .. DP1 [ iN um:−P L uGen:CL1 ] √ man . .. .. V √ like . .. .. v . .. .. DP I . .. .. Agr [ uN um: uGen: ] . .. .. . .. .. T . .. .. 5.3 SomeMatatas
• Object Agreement: FCA or Comitative?? “Together” data: (15) Matukio... result... ya of ku-m-fung-a INF-1SG-tie-FV Jeejee Jeejee.1SG na and Sichana Sichana.1SG pamoja together
‘the result of tying Jeejee and Sichana together’ • Number on &P and its DPs don’t have to be the same?
• Predictions for animate nouns in other classes? (e.g., Ki-jana ‘young man, teenager (CL7)’)
• Is noun class “gender” actually [iGen:X], not [uGen:X]? Semi-productive: M-ti, ki-ti, u-ti
• Adjectives can’t modify conjoined DPs: *man.1SG and child.1SG 1PL.beautiful
• Subject inversion: How does it have to work in relation to this data? DP Extraposition? Movement to C? (834 squib wahoo!!)
6 Acknowledgment
A big thank you to graduate students Jonathan Choti (Linguistics, MSU) and Alem Otieno (Horticulture, UGA) for their help with the coordination data! Asante sana!!
7 References
Bošković, Ž. (2009). Unifying first and last conjunct agreement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 27(3), 455-496.
Halle, M., & Marantz, A. (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. The view from building, 20, 111-176.
Marten, L. (2000). Agreement with conjoined noun phrases in Swahili. In Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere: Swahili Forum VII (Vol. 64, pp. 75-96). Ngonyani, D. (1998). V-to-I movement in Kiswahili. Afrikanistische