1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Asia-Pacific Language Variation
  4. Volume 9, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 9, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2215-1354
  • E-ISSN: 2215-1362
PDF
EPUB

Abstract

Abstract

The Oceanic language Matukar Panau has three equivalent morphosyntactic strategies for describing the direction of the event represented by a verb, with a system of ten directional morphemes that can appear in each construction. This variation is explored using a corpus from Matukar Panau and analysed quantitatively with Bayesian regression analyses to assess what factors influence the choice of directional construction. Variables pertaining to the lexical verb and the directional morphemes are found to be the most important factors affecting the variation in the directional system. Sociolinguistic factors are shown to play a less significant role. The findings have implications for the grammaticalization of directional elements, as well as the typology of directional constructions in Oceanic languages.

© 2023 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 3.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aplv.23005.dav
2024-01-11
2026-03-11

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/aplv.23005.dav
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/aplv.23005.dav.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/aplv.23005.dav&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
    (2018) Serial verbs. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198791263.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198791263.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  2. Ameka, Felix K. & Essegbey, James
    (2013) Serialising languages: Satellite-framed, verb-framed or neither. Ghana Journal of Linguistics, 2 (1), 19–38.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Barth, Danielle
    (collector) (2010) Matukar Panau Language Documentation. Collection DGB1 atcatalog.paradisec.org.au [Open Access]. CitetononCRdoi:10.4225/72/56E97A2420C64
     https://doi.org/Cite to nonCR doi: 10.4225/72/56E97A2420C64 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2019) Variation in Matukar Panau kinship terminology. Asia-Pacific Language Variation, 5 (2), 138–170. 10.1075/aplv.00004.bar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aplv.00004.bar [Google Scholar]
  5. Barth, Danielle & Anderson, Gregory D. S.
    (2015) Directional constructions in Matukar Panau. Oceanic Linguistics, 51 (1), 206–239. 10.1353/ol.2015.0009
     https://doi.org/10.1353/ol.2015.0009 [Google Scholar]
  6. Barth, Danielle & Evans, Nicholas
    (2017) SCOPIC design and overview. InDanielle Barth & Nicholas Evans (Eds.), The Social Cognition Parallax Interview Corpus (SCOPIC): A Cross-linguistic Resource (pp. 1–21). University of Hawai’i Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Barth, Danielle & Ross, Malcolm
    (In Press). Clause chaining in Matukar Panau (Oceanic). InHannah Sarvasy & Alexandra Aikhenvald Eds. Clause chaining in the languages of the world. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Beavers, John, Levin, Beth & Tham, Shiao Wei
    (2010) The typology of motion expressions revisited. Journal of Linguistics, 46 (2), 331–377. 10.1017/S0022226709990272
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226709990272 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bisang, Walter
    (1995) Verb serialization and converbs – differences and similarities. InMartin Haspelmath & Ekkehard König (Eds.), Converbs in Cross-Linguistic Perspective (pp. 137–188). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110884463‑006
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110884463-006 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bresnan, Joan & Nikitina, Tatiana
    (2010) The gradience of the dative alternation. InLian-Hee Wee & Linda Ann Uyechi (Eds.), Reality exploration and discovery: Pattern interaction in language and life (pp.161–185). CSLI Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Bürkner, Paul-Christian
    (2017a) brms: An R Package for Bayesian Multilevel Models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software, 80 (1), 1–28. 10.18637/jss.v080.i01
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2017b) Advanced Bayesian multilevel modeling with the R package brms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1705.11123. 10.32614/RJ‑2018‑017
     https://doi.org/10.32614/RJ-2018-017 [Google Scholar]
  13. Carpenter, Bob, Gelman, Andrew, Hoffman, Matthew D., Lee, Daniel, Goodrich, Ben, Betancourt, Michael, Brubaker, Marcus, Guo, Jiqiang, Li, Peter, & Riddell, Allen
    (2017) Stan: A Probabilistic Programming Language. Journal of Statistical Software, 76 (1), 1–32. 10.18637/jss.v076.i01
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v076.i01 [Google Scholar]
  14. Chelliah, Shobhana L., & Utt, Tyler P.
    (2017) The Syntax and Semantics of Spatial Reference in Lamkang Verb. Himalayan Linguistics, 16 (1), 28–40. 10.5070/H916130760
     https://doi.org/10.5070/H916130760 [Google Scholar]
  15. Coupé, C.
    (2018) Modeling linguistic variables with regression models: Addressing non-Gaussian distributions, non-independent observations, and non-linear predictors with random effects and generalized additive models for location, scale, and shape. Frontiers in psychology, 91, Article5131, 1–21. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00513
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00513 [Google Scholar]
  16. Croft, William
    (2008) On iconicity of distance. Cognitive Linguistics, 19 (1), 49–57. 10.1515/COG.2008.003
     https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2008.003 [Google Scholar]
  17. Crowley, Terry
    (1987) Serial verbs in Paamese. Studies in Language, 11 (1), 35–84. 10.1075/sl.11.1.03cro
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.11.1.03cro [Google Scholar]
  18. (2002) Serial verbs in Oceanic: A descriptive typology. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198241355.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198241355.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  19. Davey, Kira
    (2021) A quantitative study of directional constructions in Matukar Panau [Honours thesis, Australian National University]. Australian National University Open Research. https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/274367
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Dilley, Laura, Gamache, Jessica, Wang, Yuanyuan, Houston, Derek M., and Bergeson, Tonya R.
    (2019) Statistical distributions of consonant variants in infant-directed speech: evidence that /t/ may be exceptional. Journal of Phonetics, 751, 73–87. 10.1016/j.wocn.2019.05.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2019.05.004 [Google Scholar]
  21. Durie, Mark
    (1988) Verb serialization and “verbal-prepositions” in Oceanic Languages. Oceanic Linguistics. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3623147. 10.2307/3623147
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3623147 [Google Scholar]
  22. Early, Robert
    (1993) Nuclear layer serialization in Lewo. Oceanic Linguistics, 32 (1), 65–93. www.jstor.org/stable/3623097. 10.2307/3623097
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3623097 [Google Scholar]
  23. England, Nora C.
    (2011) A grammar of Mam, a Mayan language. University of Texas Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Flego, Stefon & Forrest, Jon
    (2021) Leveraging the temporal dynamics of anticipatory vowel-to-vowel coarticulation in linguistic prediction: A statistical modeling approach. Journal of Phonetics, 88 (1): 101093. 10.1016/j.wocn.2021.101093
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2021.101093 [Google Scholar]
  25. Fleischman, Suzanne & Waugh, Linda R.
    (2016) Discourse pragmatics and the verb: The evidence from Romance. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315403588
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315403588 [Google Scholar]
  26. Foley, William A. & Olson, Mike
    (1985) Clausehood and verb serialization. InJohanna Nichols & Anthony C. Woodbury (Eds.), Grammar inside and outside the clause (pp. 17–60). Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Foley, William A.
    (2010) Clause linkage and nexus in Papuan languages. InIsabelle Bril (Ed.) Clause linking and clause hierarchy: Syntax and pragmatics (pp. 27–101). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/slcs.121.02fol
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.121.02fol [Google Scholar]
  28. Gelman, Andrew & Rubin, Donald B.
    (1992) Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences. Statistical Science, 7 (4), 457–472. 10.1214/ss/1177011136
     https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177011136 [Google Scholar]
  29. Grafmiller, Jason, Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, and Hinrichs, Lars
    (2018) Restricting the restrictive relativizer: constraints on subject and non-subject English relative clauses. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 14(2), 309–355. 10.1515/cllt‑2016‑0015
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2016-0015 [Google Scholar]
  30. Gries, Stefan Th.
    (2010) Useful corpus-linguistics statistics. InAquilinio Sánchez & Moisés Almela (Eds.), A mosaic of corpus linguistics: Selected approaches (pp. 269–291). Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Guajardo, Gustavo
    (2021) Co-occurrence Strength and Transitivity Effects on Spanish Clitic Case Variation With Reverse-Psychological Predicates. Frontiers in Psychology, 121:712959. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.712959
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.712959 [Google Scholar]
  32. Guy, Gregory
    (1988) Advanced VARBRUL analysis. InKathleen Ferrara, Becky Brown, Keith Walters, & John BaughLinguistic change and contact: NWAV-XVI (Texas Linguistic Forum 30) (pp. 124–136). University of Texas, Department of Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Halsey, Lewis G.
    (2019) The reign of the p-value is over: what alternative analyses could we employ to fill the power vacuum?. Biology letters, 15 (5), 20190174. 10.1098/rsbl.2019.0174
     https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2019.0174 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hamel, Patricia J.
    (1993) Serial Verbs in Loniu and an Evolving Preposition. Oceanic Linguistics, 31 (1), 111–132. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3623099. 10.2307/3623099
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3623099 [Google Scholar]
  35. Haspelmath, Martin
    (2016) The serial verb construction: Comparative concept and cross-linguistic generalizations. Language and Linguistics, 17 (3), 291–319. 10.1177/2397002215626895
     https://doi.org/10.1177/2397002215626895 [Google Scholar]
  36. Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania
    (2002) World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511613463
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613463 [Google Scholar]
  37. Lazard, Gilbert
    (2002) Transitivity revisited as an example of a more strict approach in typological research. Folia Linguistica, 36 (3–4), 141–190. 10.1515/flin.2002.36.3‑4.141
     https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.2002.36.3-4.141 [Google Scholar]
  38. Lemoine, Nathan P.
    (2019) Moving beyond noninformative priors: why and how to choose weakly informative priors in Bayesian analyses. Oikos, 128 (7), 912–928. 10.1111/oik.05985
     https://doi.org/10.1111/oik.05985 [Google Scholar]
  39. Levinson, Stephen C.
    (2003) Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511613609
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613609 [Google Scholar]
  40. Levshina, Natalia
    (2016) When variables align: A Bayesian multinomial mixed-effects model of English permissive constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 27 (2), 235–268. 10.1515/cog‑2015‑0054
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2015-0054 [Google Scholar]
  41. (2019) Comparing Bayesian and frequentist models of language variation: The case of help + (to) infinitive. Unpublished manuscript.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Longacre, Robert E.
    (2007) Sentences as combinations of clauses. InTimothy Shopen (Ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description (pp. 372–420). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511619434.007
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619434.007 [Google Scholar]
  43. MacKenzie, Laurel
    (2020) Comparing Constraints on Contraction Using Bayesian Regression Modeling. Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 31, 581. 10.3389/frai.2020.00058
     https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2020.00058 [Google Scholar]
  44. Meyerhoff, Miriam
    (2013) Syntactic variation and change: The variationist framework and language contact. InIsabelle Léglise & Claudine Chamoreau (Eds.), The interplay of variation and change in contact settings (pp. 23–52). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/silv.12.02mey
     https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.12.02mey [Google Scholar]
  45. (2015) Turning variation on its head: Analysing subject prefixes in Nkep (Vanuatu) for language documentation. Asia-Pacific Language Variation, 1(1), 78 – 108. 10.1075/aplv.1.1.04mey
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aplv.1.1.04mey [Google Scholar]
  46. Næss, Åshild
    (2011) Directional verbs in Vaeakau-Taumako. Oceanic Linguistics, 50(1), 120–139. 10.1353/ol.2011.0007
     https://doi.org/10.1353/ol.2011.0007 [Google Scholar]
  47. Nalborczyk, Ladislas, Batailler, Cédric, Lœvenbruck, Hélène, Vilain, Anne, & Bürkner, Paul-Christian
    (2019) An introduction to Bayesian multilevel models using brms: A case study of gender effects on vowel variability in standard Indonesian. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62(5), 1225–1242. 10.1044/2018_JSLHR‑S‑18‑0006
     https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_JSLHR-S-18-0006 [Google Scholar]
  48. Nicenboim, Bruno, and Vasishth, Shravan
    (2016) Statistical methods for linguistic research: Foundational Ideas – Part II. Language and Linguistics Compass, 10(11), 591–613. 10.1111/lnc3.12207
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12207 [Google Scholar]
  49. Pawley, Andrew
    (2003) Grammatical categories and grammaticisation in the Oceanic verb complex. InAnastasia Riehl and Thess Savella (Eds.), Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics, 191, (pp. 149–172).
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Pawley, Andrew & Hammarström, Harald
    (2017) The Trans New Guinea family. InBill Palmer (Ed.) The languages and linguistics of the New Guinea Area : A comprehensive guide (pp. 21–156). De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110295252‑002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110295252-002 [Google Scholar]
  51. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2021) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Ross, Malcolm
    (2004a) The grammaticalization of directional verbs in Oceanic languages. InIsabelle Bril & Françoise Ozanne-Rivierre (Eds.), Complex predicates in Oceanic languages: Studies in the dynamics of binding and boundness (pp. 297–329). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110913286.297
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110913286.297 [Google Scholar]
  53. (2004b) Demonstratives, local nouns and directionals in Oceanic languages: A diachronic perspective. InGunter Senft (Ed.), Deixis and demonstratives in Oceanic languages (pp. 175–204). Pacific Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. (2008) A history of metatypy in the Bel languages. Journal of Language Contact, 2(1), 149–164. 10.1163/000000008792525255
     https://doi.org/10.1163/000000008792525255 [Google Scholar]
  55. (2013) Takia. InJohn Lynch, Malcolm Ross & Terry Crowley (Eds.), The Oceanic languages (pp. 216–248). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. San Roque, Lila, Gawne, Lauren, Hoenigman, Darja, Miller, Julia C., Spronck, Stef, Rumsey, Alan, Carroll, Alice & Evans, Nicholas
    (2012) Getting the story straight: Language fieldwork using a narrative problem-solving task. Language Documentation and Conservation, 61, 135–174. https://hdl.handle.net/2066/139704
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Schokkin, Dineke
    (2013) Directionals in Paluai: Semantics, use, and grammaticalization paths. Oceanic Linguistics, 52(1), 169–191. 10.1353/ol.2013.0009
     https://doi.org/10.1353/ol.2013.0009 [Google Scholar]
  58. Speelman, Dineke
    (2014) Logistic regression: A confirmatory technique for comparisons in corpus linguistics. InDylan Glynn & Justyna A. Robinson, Corpus methods for semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy (pp. 487–533). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/hcp.43.18spe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.43.18spe [Google Scholar]
  59. Speelman, Dirk, Heylen, Kris, & Geeraerts, Dirk
    (Eds.) (2018) Mixed-effects regression models in linguistics. Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑69830‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69830-4 [Google Scholar]
  60. Sperlich, Wolfgang B.
    (1993) Serial verb constructions in Namakir of Central Vanuatu. Oceanic Linguistics, 32 (1), 95–110. www.jstor.org/stable/3623098. 10.2307/3623098
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3623098 [Google Scholar]
  61. Tagliamonte, Sali A., & Baayen, R. Harald
    (2012) Models, forests, and trees of York English: Was/ were variation as a case study for statistical practice. Language Variation and Change, 24(2), 135–178. 10.1017/S0954394512000129
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394512000129 [Google Scholar]
  62. Tagliamonte, Sali A., & Smith, Jennifer
    (2006) Layering, competition and a twist of fate: Deontic modality in dialects of English. Diachronica, 23(2), 341–380. 10.1075/dia.23.2.06tag
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.23.2.06tag [Google Scholar]
  63. Talmy, Leonard
    (2000) Toward a cognitive semantics: Vol. II: Typology and process in concept structuring. MIT press.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Terrell, Tracy D., Tschirner, Erwin & Nikolai, Brigitte
    (2005) Picture File to accompany Kontakte: A Communicative Approach, 5th edition. The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Traugott, Elizabeth C., & Trousdale, Graeme
    (2010) Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization: How do they intersect?InElizabeth C. Traugott & Graeme Trousdale (Eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization (pp. 19, 44.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.90
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.90 [Google Scholar]
  66. van Ravenzwaaij, Don, Cassey, Pete & Brown, Scott D.
    (2018) A simple introduction to Markov Chain Monte–Carlo sampling. Psychon Bull Rev, 251, 143–154. 10.3758/s13423‑016‑1015‑8
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1015-8 [Google Scholar]
  67. Vasishth, Shravan & Nicenboim, Bruno
    (2016) Statistical methods for linguistic research: Foundational ideas–Part I. Language and Linguistics Compass, 10(8), 349–369. 10.1111/lnc3.12201
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12201 [Google Scholar]
  68. Vasishth, Shravan, Chen, Zhong, Li, Qiang & Guo, Gueilan
    (2013) Processing Chinese relative clauses: Evidence for the subject-relative advantage. PloS one, 8(10), 1–15. 10.1371/journal.pone.0077006
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0077006 [Google Scholar]
  69. Vehtari, Aki, Gelman, Andrew & Gabry, Jonah
    (2017) Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC. Stat Comput, 271, 1413–1432. 10.1007/s11222‑016‑9696‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-016-9696-4 [Google Scholar]
  70. Weinreich, Uriel, Labov, William & Herzog, Marvin I.
    (1968) Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. InWinfred P. Lehmann & Yakov Malkiel (Eds.), Directions for historical linguistics (pp. 95–195). University of Texas Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Wolk, Christoph, Bresnan, Joan, Rosenbach, Anette & Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt
    (2013) Dative and genitive variability in Late Modern English: Exploring cross-constructional variation and change. Diachronica, 30(3), 382–419. 10.1075/dia.30.3.04wol
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.30.3.04wol [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/aplv.23005.dav
Loading
Directional constructions in Matukar Panau
Asia-Pacific Language Variation 9, 156 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1075/aplv.23005.dav
/content/journals/10.1075/aplv.23005.dav
/content/journals/10.1075/aplv.23005.dav
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Bayesian regression; corpus linguistics; directionals; grammaticalization; lexicalization; morphosyntactic variation; Oceanic; serial verbs

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error