1887
Volume 3, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2215-1354
  • E-ISSN: 2215-1362
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Yami relative clauses (RCs) can either precede the head noun, for example, ‘child,’ as in ‘I saw the child who cannot hold still’, functioning as restrictive RCs ([RC] + a + Head NP), or follow it as in ‘I saw that child, who cannot hold still’, functioning as nonrestrictive RCs for complementation strategy (Head NP + a + [RC]). The VARBRUL results demonstrate that head final RCs are predominant in Yami, and Yami speakers use them to connect the given referent with the previous discourse to convey given information. The study found that Subject head nouns outnumber other grammatical roles of head NPs, and that Subject head noun with Subject RC construction is produced more than any other RC constructions, which indicates that Yami RCs are used to modify the Subject for topic continuity.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aplv.3.1.05cha
2017-09-19
2019-12-07
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aldridge, Edith
    (2002) Nominalization and wh-movement in Seediq and Tagalog. Language and Linguistics, 3(2), 393–426.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. (2004) Internally headed relative clauses in Austronesian languages. Language and Linguistics, 5(1), 99–129.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Chafe, Wallace L.
    (1976) Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics and point of view. In Charles N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp.25–55). New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. (1987) Cognitive constraints on information flow. In Russell Tomlin (Ed.), Coherence and grounding in discourse (pp.21–51). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.11.03cha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.11.03cha [Google Scholar]
  5. Chang, Hui-Huan , & Rau, D. Victoria
    (2011) Word order variation in Yami. Paper presented at thefirst NWAV Asia-Pacific, University of Delhi, India.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chang, Hui-Huan , Rau, D. Victoria , & Dong, Maa-Neu
    (2015a) Constructing high quality audio learning materials using Lexique Pro. Electronic poster presented at theICLDC 4, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. (2015b) Constructing a Yami online audiovisual dictionary. Paper presented at13-ICAL, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (2015c) Constructing an audiovisual morpheme-by-morpheme database: A case of Yami. Paper presented at TheFifth Conference on Heritage Maintenance for Endangered Languages in Yunnan, China, Yuxi Normal University, Yuxi City, Yunnan, China.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Chen, Hui-Ping
    (1998) A sociolinguistic study of second language proficiency, language use, and language attitude among the Yami in Lanyu. Master’s thesis, Providence University, Taiwan.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cohen, Jacob
    (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46. doi: 10.1177/001316446002000104
    https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104 [Google Scholar]
  11. Comrie, Bernard
    (2008) Prenominal relative clauses in verb-object languages. Language and Linguistics, 9(4), 723–732.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. D’Arcy, Alexandra , & Tagliamonte, Sali
    (2008) Who knew? New insights into the social life of relatives. Paper presented atNew Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV) 37, Houston, Texas.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Dixon, Robert M. W.
    (1979) Ergativity. Language, 55(1), 59–138. doi: 10.2307/412519
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412519 [Google Scholar]
  14. (1988) A grammar of Boumaa Fijian. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. (1994) Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511611896
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611896 [Google Scholar]
  16. (2006) Complement clauses and complementation strategies in typological perspective. In Robert M. W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (Eds.), Complementation: A cross-linguistic typology (pp.1–48). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. (2010) Basic linguistic theory: Grammatical topics: volume 2. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Dixon, Robert M. W. , & Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
    (Eds.) (2000) Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511627750
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627750 [Google Scholar]
  19. Dryer, Matthew S.
    (2005) Order of relative clause and noun. In Martin Haspelmath , Matthew S. Dryer , David Gi , & Bernard Comrie (Eds.), The world atlas of language structures (pp.366–367). Oxford University Press. Available fromwals.info/chapter/90
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Du Bois, John W.
    (1980) Beyond definiteness: The trace of identity in discourse. In Wallace L. Chafe (Ed.), The pear stories: Cognitive, cultural, and linguistics aspects of narrative production (Advances in discourse processes, volume 3) (pp.203–274). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. (1987) The discourse basis of ergativity. Language, 63(4), 805–855. doi: 10.2307/415719
    https://doi.org/10.2307/415719 [Google Scholar]
  22. Fox, Barbara A. , & Thompson, Sandra A.
    (1990) A discourse explanation of the grammar of relative clauses in English conversation. Language, 66(2), 297–316. doi: 10.2307/414888
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414888 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gibson, Edward
    (1998) Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68(1), 1–76. doi: 10.1016/S0010‑0277(98)00034‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00034-1 [Google Scholar]
  24. Givón, Talmy
    (1983) Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. In Talmy Givón (Ed.), Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study (Typological studies in language 3) (pp.1–41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.3.01giv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.3.01giv [Google Scholar]
  25. (1993) English grammar: A function-based introduction, volume1 & 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. (2011) Ute reference grammar. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/clu.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/clu.3 [Google Scholar]
  27. Gordon, Raymond G. Jr.
    (2005) Ethnologue: Languages of the world (15th edition). SIL International. Available fromwww.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=243-16
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Greenberg, Joseph H.
    (1963) Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Joseph H. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of language (pp.73–113). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Guy, Gregory R. , & Bayley, Robert
    (1995) On the choice of relative pronouns in English. American Speech, 70(2), 148–162. doi: 10.2307/455813
    https://doi.org/10.2307/455813 [Google Scholar]
  30. Haviland, Susan , & Clark, Herbert
    (1974) What’s new? Acquiring new information as a process in comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13(5), 512–521. doi: 10.1016/S0022‑5371(74)80003‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80003-4 [Google Scholar]
  31. Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.
    (2005) The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar: Typological characteristics. In Alexander Adelaar & Nikolaus P. Himmelmann (Eds.), The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar (Routledge family language series, volume 7) (pp.110–181). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Keenan, Edward
    (1985) Relative clauses. In Timothy Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Complex constructions (pp.141–170). Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Keenan, Edward , & Comrie, Bernard
    (1977) Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 8(1), 63–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. King, Jonathan , & Just, Marcel Adam
    (1991) Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30(5), 580–602. doi: 10.1016/0749‑596X(91)90027‑H
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90027-H [Google Scholar]
  35. Lambrecht, Knud
    (1994) Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620607
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620607 [Google Scholar]
  36. (2002) Topic, focus, and secondary predication. The French Presentational Relative Construction. In Claire Beyssade , Reineke Bok-Bennema , Frank Drijkoningen , and Paola Monachesi (Eds.), Proceedings of Going Romance 2000 (pp.171–212). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Landis, J. Richard , & Koch, Gary G.
    (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. doi: 10.2307/2529310
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310 [Google Scholar]
  38. Levey, Stephen
    (2006) Visiting London relatives. English World-Wide, 27(1), 45–70. doi: 10.1075/eww.27.1.04lev
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.27.1.04lev [Google Scholar]
  39. Li, Paul Jen-kuei , & Tsuchida, Shigeru
    (2002) Pazih dictionary (Language and Linguistics Monograph Series A2–1). Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Liao, Hsiu-chuan
    (2002) The interpretation of tu and Kavalan ergativity. Oceanic Linguistics, 41(1), 140–158. doi: 10.1353/ol.2002.0022
    https://doi.org/10.1353/ol.2002.0022 [Google Scholar]
  41. Lin, Yi-hui
    (2007) A sociolinguistic study on Yami language vitality and maintenance. Master’s thesis, Providence University, Taiwan.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Liu, Adlay Kun-long
    (2005) The structure of relative clauses in Jianshi Squliq Atayal. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 31(2), 89–110.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. (2015) Outside-in or inside-out functional uncertainty? An LFG analysis on relativisation in Jianshi Squliq Atayal. In Elizabeth Zeitoun , Stacy Teng , & Joy Wu (Eds.), New advances in Formosan languages (pp.533–554). Canberra, Australia: Asia-Pacific Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. MacWhinney, Brian , & Pléh, Csaba
    (1988) The processing of restrictive relative clauses in Hungarian. Cognition, 29(2), 95–141. doi: 10.1016/0010‑0277(88)90034‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(88)90034-0 [Google Scholar]
  45. Meyerhoff, Miriam , & Evans, Nicholas
    (2016) All the way up, and the way down: Bridging micro-variation and macro-variation. Plenary workshop presented atNWAV AP 4, Chiayi, Taiwan: National Chung Cheng University.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Milroy, Lesley
    (1987) Observing and analyzing natural language. Malden, MA; Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Prince, Ellen
    (1981) Towards a taxonomy of given-new information. In Peter Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp.223–255). New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Quirk, Randolph
    (1957) Relative clauses in educated spoken English. English Studies, 38(1), 97–109. doi: 10.1080/00138385708596993
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00138385708596993 [Google Scholar]
  49. Rau, D. Victoria
    (1995) Yami language vitality. Paper presented at theConference on Language Use and Ethnic Identity, Institute of Ethnology, Academia Sinica, Taipei.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. (2000) Word order variation and topic continuity in Atayal. In Marian Klamer (Ed.), Proceedings of AFLA 7 (pp.211–230). Department of Linguistics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. (2002) Nominalization in Yami. Language and Linguistics, 3(2), 164–195.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. (2005) Iconicity, tense, aspect, and mood morphology in Yami. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 31(1), 65–94.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Rau, D. Victoria , & Dong, Maa-Neu
    (2006) Yami texts with reference grammar and dictionary (Language and Linguistics, Institute of Linguistics, Special Monograph Series Number A-10). Taipei: Academia Sinica.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. (2016) Dawu yufa gailun [An introduction to Yami grammar]. Taipei: Council of Indigenous Peoples.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Rau, D. Victoria , & Yang, Meng-Chien
    (2009) Digital transmission of language and culture. In Margaret Florey (Ed.), Language endangerment and maintenance in the Austronesian region (pp.207–224). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Rau, D. Victoria , Yang, Meng-Chien , Chang, Hui-Huan Ann , & Dong, Maa-Neu
    (2009) Online dictionary and ontology building for Austronesian languages in Taiwan. Language Documentation and Conservation, 3(2), 192–212.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Ravin, Yael , & Leacock, Claudia
    (2000) Polysemy: Theoretical and computational approaches. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Reid, Lawrence A. , & Liao, Hsiu-chuan
    (2004) A brief syntactic typology of Philippine languages. Language and Linguistics, 5(2), 433–490.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Sankoff, David , Tagliamonte, Sali , & Smith, Eric
    (2005) Goldvarb X: A variable rule application for Macintosh and Windows [Computer program]. Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto. Available fromindividual.utoronto.ca/tagliamonte/goldvarb.html
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Schachter, Paul , & Otanes, Fe T.
    (1972) Tagalog reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Tagliamonte, Sali
    (2002) Variation and change in the British relative marker system. In Patricia Poussa (Ed.), Relativisation on the north sea littoral (pp.147–165). Munich: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Tagliamonte, Sali A. , Smith, Jennifer , & Lawrence, Helen
    (2005) No taming the vernacular! Insights from the relatives in northern Britain. Language Variation and Change, 17(1), 75–112. doi: 10.1017/S0954394505050040
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394505050040 [Google Scholar]
  63. Tang, Chih-Chen Jane
    (2002) On nominalization in Paiwan. Language and Linguistics3(2), 283–333.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Tottie, Gunnel , & Rey, Michel
    (1997) Relativization strategies in earlier African American Vernacular English. Language Variation and Change, 9(2), 219–247 doi: 10.1017/S0954394500001885
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500001885 [Google Scholar]
  65. Traxler, Matthew J. , Morris, Robin K. , & Seely, Rachel E.
    (2002) Processing subject and object relative clauses: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 47(1), 69–90. doi: 10.1006/jmla.2001.2836
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2836 [Google Scholar]
  66. Warren, Tessa , & Gibson, Edward
    (2002) The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity. Cognition, 85(1), 79–112. doi: 10.1016/S0010‑0277(02)00087‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00087-2 [Google Scholar]
  67. Zeitoun, Elizabeth
    (2007) A grammar of Mantauran Rukai. Language and Linguistics Monograph Series A4-2. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/aplv.3.1.05cha
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/aplv.3.1.05cha
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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