1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Linguistic Variation
  4. Volume 24, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 24, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2211-6834
  • E-ISSN: 2211-6842
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper investigates the morphology, syntax, and semantics of five non-interrogative constructions that involve wh-expressions in Kaqchikel, a Mayan language of the K’ichean branch spoken in Guatemala. We focus on the properties of maximal free relative clauses, existential free relative clauses, free relative clauses, free choice items and negative indefinites. We show that the interpretive properties of these constructions are strikingly similar to those found in a number of unrelated languages.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lv.22012.dun
2024-01-12
2024-12-13

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/lv.22012.dun
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abbott, Barbara
    1992 “Definiteness, existentials, and the ‘list’ interpretation. Proceedings of semantics and linguistic theory (SALT) 2. Chris Barker and David Dowty (eds.), pp.1–16. Columbus, Ohio: Department of Linguistics, Ohio State University. 10.3765/salt.v2i0.3028
     https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v2i0.3028 [Google Scholar]
  2. 1993 “A pragmatic account of the definitenesseffect in existential sentences”. Journal of Pragmatics, vol.191, pp.39–55. 10.1016/0378‑2166(93)90069‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(93)90069-2 [Google Scholar]
  3. Aissen, Judith
    1992 “Topic and focus in Mayan.” Language, 681, pp.43–80. 10.1353/lan.1992.0017
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1992.0017 [Google Scholar]
  4. 1996 “Pied piping, abstract agreement, and functional projections in Tzotzil.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 141, pp.447–491. 10.1007/BF00133596
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00133596 [Google Scholar]
  5. 1999 “Agent focus and inverse in Tzotzil”. Language75(3), 451–485. 10.2307/417057
     https://doi.org/10.2307/417057 [Google Scholar]
  6. AnderBois, Scott, Miguel Oscar Chan Dzul, Jessica Coon, and Juan Jesús Vázquez
    2019 “Relativas Libres en Ch’ol y Maya Yucateco Y La Tipología de Cláusulas Relativas Sin Núcleo”. Proceedings of Form and Analysis in Mayan Linguistics, 51. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4d837983
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Babby, Leonard
    1980 Existential Sentences and Negation in Russian. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bennett, Ryan
    2019 “La tensión vocálica en el kaqchikel de Sololá, Guatemala: un studio preliminar.” In, eds.Esther Herrera Zendejas and Verónica Reyes Taboada, eds., Fonología segmental: procesos e interacciones, pp.13–46. Mexico City, Mexico: Colégio de México. 10.2307/j.ctvkwnq26.4
     https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvkwnq26.4 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bochnak, M. Ryan and Lisa Matthewson
    2015 Methodologies in Semantic Fieldwork. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190212339.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190212339.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bresnan, Joan and Jane Grimshaw
    1978 “The Syntax of Free Relatives in English”. Linguistic Inquiry, vol.9, num. 3, pp.331–391.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Broadwell, George Aaron
    2000 “Word Order and Markedness in Kaqchikel”. In, Proceedings of the LFG00 Conference, Miriam Butt and Tracy Holloway King (eds). Available at: csli-publications.stanford.edu/LFG/5/lfg00broadwell.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  12. 2001 “Optimal order and pied-piping in San Dionicio Zapotec.” InFormal and empirical issues in optimality theoretic syntax. Peter Sells (ed.), pp.197–224. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Broadwell, George Aaron, and Lachlan Duncan
    2002 “A new passive in Kaqchikel.” Linguistic Discovery, 1(2), pp.26–43. 10.1349/PS1.1537‑0852.A.161
     https://doi.org/10.1349/PS1.1537-0852.A.161 [Google Scholar]
  14. Brown, R. McKenna, J. Maxwell, and W. E. Little
    2006 La Ütz Awäch? An Introduction to Kaqchikel Maya Language. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Buell, Leston
    2011 “Zulu ngani ‘why’: Postverbal and yet in CP.” Lingua, 1211, pp.805–821. 10.1016/j.lingua.2010.11.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.11.004 [Google Scholar]
  16. Campbell, Lyle
    1977 Quichean Linguistic Prehistory. University of California, Publications in Linguistics, Vol.811. Berkeley: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Can Pixabaj, Telma A.
    2015 Complement and Purpose Clauses in K’iche’. Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.
  18. Caponigro, Ivano
    2003 Free Not to Ask: On the Semantics of Free Relatives and Wh-words Cross-linguistically. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
  19. 2004 “The semantic contribution of wh-words and type-shifts: Evidence from free relatives crosslinguistically.” Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 14, Robert B. Young (ed.), pp.38–55. Ithaca, New York: CLCPublications, Cornell University. 10.3765/salt.v14i0.2906
     https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v14i0.2906 [Google Scholar]
  20. Caponigro, Ivano and Anamaria Fălăuş
    2018 “Free Choice Free Relative Clauses in Italian and Romanian.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 36(2): 323–363. 10.1007/s11049‑017‑9375‑y
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-017-9375-y [Google Scholar]
  21. Caponigro, Ivano
    2021 “Introducing Headless Relative Clauses and the findings from Mesoamerican Languages.” InIvano Caponigro, Harold Torrence, and Roberto Zavala, eds., Headless Relative Clauses in Mesoamerican Languages. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780197518373.003.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197518373.003.0001 [Google Scholar]
  22. Caponigro, Ivano, Harold Torrence, Roberto Zavala
    (eds.) 2021 Headless Relative Clauses in Mesoamerican Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780197518373.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197518373.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  23. Clark, Eve
    1978 “Locationals: Existential, locative, and possessive constructions.” In, J. H. Greenberg, C. A. Ferguson, and E. A. Moravcsik, eds., Universals of human language, Vol. 4, pp.85–126. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen
    1991 On the Typology of Wh-Questions. PhD Dissertation. MIT.
  25. 1997 On the Typology of Wh-Questions. New York: Garland Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen and Anastasia Giannakidou
    2005 “The Non Uniformity of Wh-Indeterminates With Free Choice in Chinese.” Quantificational Structures, Kook-hee Gil and George Tsoulas (eds.). London: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Clemens, Lauren, and Jessica Coon
    2018 “Deriving verb-initial word order in Mayan.” Language, 94, 2: 237–280. 10.1353/lan.2018.0017
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2018.0017 [Google Scholar]
  28. Collins, Christopher
    1991 “Why and How Come.” MIT Working Papers in Linguistics151.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Coon, Jessica
    2009 “Interrogative Possessors and the Problem with Pied-Piping in Chol.” Linguistic Inquiry, 40, 1: 165–175. 10.1162/ling.2009.40.1.165
     https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2009.40.1.165 [Google Scholar]
  30. Dayal, Veneeta
    1997 “Free relatives and ever: Identity and free choice readings.” Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT)71, pp.99–116. Ithaca, New York: CLC Publications Cornell. 10.3765/salt.v7i0.2787
     https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v7i0.2787 [Google Scholar]
  31. 1998 “ANY as Inherently Modal.” Linguistics & Philosophy211, pp.433–476. 10.1023/A:1005494000753
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005494000753 [Google Scholar]
  32. 2004 “Licensing by Modification.” Ilha Do Desterro, N°47, pp.217–238.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Eberhard, David M., Gary F. Simons, and Charles D. Fennig
    (eds.) 2019 Ethnologue: Languages of the World. Twenty-second edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. England, Nora C.
    1991 “Changes in basic word order in Mayan languages.” International Journal of American Linguistics, 57, 4: 446–86. 10.1086/ijal.57.4.3519735
     https://doi.org/10.1086/ijal.57.4.3519735 [Google Scholar]
  35. 2011 “Plurality Agreement in Some Eastern Mayan Languages”. International Journal of American Linguistics, vol.77, no.3, pp.397–412. 10.1086/660974
     https://doi.org/10.1086/660974 [Google Scholar]
  36. von Fintel, Kai
    2000 “Whatever.” Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT)101, pp.27–39. Ithaca, New York: CLC Publications Cornell. 10.3765/salt.v10i0.3101
     https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v10i0.3101 [Google Scholar]
  37. García Matzar, Pedro and José Obispo Rodríguez Guaján
    1997 Rukemik ri Kaqchikel Chi’: Gramática Kaqchikel. Guatemala City, Guatemala: Editorial CHOLSAMAJ.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Giannakidou, Anastasia
    2001 “The Meaning of Free Choice.” Linguistics and Philosophy, vol.241, pp.659–735. 10.1023/A:1012758115458
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012758115458 [Google Scholar]
  39. Guarcax González, José Celestino
    2016 Las cláusulas relativas en el kaqchikel de Sololá. Master’s thesis, Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Grosu, Alexander
    1994 Three Studies in Locality and Case. London and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. 2004 “The syntax-semantics of modal existential wh-constructions.” Balkan Syntax and Semantics, Olga Mišeska Tomić (ed.), pp.405–438. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.67.21gro
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.67.21gro [Google Scholar]
  42. Grosu, Alexander and Fred Landman
    1998 “Strange Relatives of the Third Kind.” Natural Language Semantics, 61, pp.125–170. 10.1023/A:1008268401837
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008268401837 [Google Scholar]
  43. Gutiérrez-Bravo, Rodrigo
    2012 “Relative clauses in Yucatec Maya: Light heads vs. Null domain”. Relative Clauses in Languages of the Americas.: A typological overview. Bernard Comrie and Zarina Estrada-Fernández (eds.). pp.253–268. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/tsl.102.12gut
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.102.12gut [Google Scholar]
  44. Gutiérrez Bravo, Rodrigo
    2013 “Free relative clauses in Yucatec Maya.” Language Typology and Universals (Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung/STUF, vol.661, pp.22–39. 10.1524/stuf.2013.0003
     https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2013.0003 [Google Scholar]
  45. Gutiérrez Bravo, Rodrigo
    2015 Las Claúsulas Relativas en Maya Yucateco. México: El Colegio de México.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Haspelmath, Martin
    1997 Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Heaton, Raina
    2017 A Typology of Antipassives, with Special Reference to Mayan. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Hawai’i at Manoa.
  48. Heaton, Raina, Kamil Deen, and William O’Grady
    2016 “The status of syntactic ergativity in Kaqchikel.” Lingua, 1701, pp.35–46. 10.1016/j.lingua.2015.10.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.10.006 [Google Scholar]
  49. Henderson, Robert
    2007 “Observations on the syntax of adjunct extraction in Kaqchikel”. Proceedings of the Congress on Indigenous Languages of Latin America-III. Accessed1/15/15: www.ailla.utexas.org/site/cilla3_toc.html
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Henderson, Robert and Jessica Coon
    2018 “Adverbs and variability in Kaqchikel Agent Focus”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 361, pp.149–173. 10.1007/s11049‑017‑9370‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-017-9370-3 [Google Scholar]
  51. Horn, Lawrence
    2000 “Pick a theory: not just any theory.” Negation and Polarity: Syntactic and Semantic Perspectives, L. Horn and Y. Kato (eds.), pp.147–192. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198238744.003.0006
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198238744.003.0006 [Google Scholar]
  52. Instituto Nacional de Estadística
    Instituto Nacional de Estadística 2018 Características generales de la población. Censo 2018. Censo Nacional XII de La Población y VII de Vivienda. República de Guatemala. Accessed onMay 1, 2023: https://www.censopoblacion.gt/
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Izvorski, Roumyana
    1998 Non-indicative wh-complements of possessive and existential predicates. InPius N. Tamanji & Kiyomi Kusumoto (eds.), NELS 28: Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, 159–173. Amherst, MAAmherst, MA: GLSA Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. 2000 “Free adjunct free relatives”. Proceedings of the 19th West Coast Conference in Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 19), Roger Billerey and Brook Lillehaugen (eds), pp.232–245. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Kandybowicz, Jason and Harold Torrence
    2011 How Why is Different: Wh- in-situ in Krachi. Snippets231: 5–6.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Kim, Sok-Ju
    2011 “Word Order Variables in Patzun Kaqchikel.” Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, vol.321, pp.120–144. 10.17161/KWPL.1808.8105
     https://doi.org/10.17161/KWPL.1808.8105 [Google Scholar]
  57. Kratzer, Angelika and Junko Shimoyama
    2002 Indeterminate Pronouns: The View from Japanese. Paper presented at the3rd Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics. March 2002.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Kuroda, S.-Y.
    1965 Generative Grammatical Studies in The Japanese Language. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  59. Larson, Richard
    1987 ““Missing Prepositions” and the Analysis of English Free Relative Clauses.” Linguistic Inquiry, vol.18, num.2, pp.239–266.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Link, Godehard
    1983 “The logical analysis of plural and mass terms: a lattic-theoretica approach.” Meaning, use, and interpretation of language, Rainer Bäuerle, Christoph Schwarze, and Arnim von Stechow (eds.), pp.302–323. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110852820.302
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110852820.302 [Google Scholar]
  61. Matthewson, Lisa
    2004 “On the Methodology of Semantic Fieldwork”. International Journal of American Linguistics, vol.70, no.4, pp.369–415. 10.1086/429207
     https://doi.org/10.1086/429207 [Google Scholar]
  62. McNally, Louise
    1992 An Interpretation for the English Existential Construction. Ph.D. dissertation. University of California, Santa Cruz, CA.
  63. 2011 “Existential Sentences.” Semantics: an International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, vol.21, pp.1829–1848. C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger & P. Portner (eds). Berlin: de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Milsark, Gary
    1974 Existential Sentences in English. Ph.D. dissertation. MIT, Cambridge, MA.
  65. 1977 “Toward an explanation of certain peculiarities of the existential construction in English”. Linguistic Analysis, 31, pp.1–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Munro, Pamela
    2017 “The Mesoamerican linguistic area revisited." InKaren Dakin, Claudia Parodi, & Natalie Operstein (eds.), Langauge Contact and Change from Mesoamerica and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp.335–353. 10.1075/slcs.185.16mun
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.185.16mun [Google Scholar]
  67. Patal Majzul, Filiberto, Lolmay Pedro Oscar Garcia Matzar and Ixchel Carmelina Espantzay Serech
    2000 Rujunamaxik ri Kaqchikel Chi’: Variación Dialectal en Kaqchikel. Guatemala City, Guatemala: CHOLSAMAJ.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Pesetsky, David
    1982 Paths and Categories. Ph.D. dissertation. MIT.
  69. 1987 Wh-in-situ: Movement and unselective binding. InE. Reuland & A. G. B. ter Meulen (eds), The Representation of (In)Definiteness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 98–129.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Rawlins, Kyle
    2008 (Un)conditionals: an investigation in the syntax and semantics of conditionalstructures. Ph.D. dissertation, UC Santa Cruz.
  71. van Riemsdijk, Henk
    2005 Free relatives: A syntactic case study. InMartin Everaert and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Reinhart, Tanya
    1998 Wh-in-situ in the Framework of the Minimalist Program. Natural Language Semantics61: 29–56. 10.1023/A:1008240014550
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008240014550 [Google Scholar]
  73. Rizzi, Luigi
    2001 On the Position Int(errogative) in the Left Periphery of the Clause. InGuglielmo Cinque and Giampaolo Salvi (eds.), Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi, 287–296. Amsterdam: Elsevier North-Holland. 10.1163/9780585473949_016
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9780585473949_016 [Google Scholar]
  74. Royer, Justin
    2021 “Headless Relative Clauses in Chuj”. Headless Relative Clauses in Mesoamerican Languages, Ivano Caponigro, Harold Torrence, Roberto Zavala (eds.). New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780197518373.003.0010
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197518373.003.0010 [Google Scholar]
  75. Rullmann, Hotze
    1995 Maximality in the Semantics of WH-Constructions. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts.
  76. Shlonsky, Ur and Gabriela Soare
    2011 Where’s ‘why’?. Linguistic Inquiry421: 651–669. 10.1162/LING_a_00064
     https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00064 [Google Scholar]
  77. Šimík, Radek
    2011 Modal Existential wh-Constructions, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Groningen, Holland; published by LOT – Netherland Graduate School of Linguistics (www.sfb632.uni-potsdam.de/~simik/pdf/simik-thesis.pdf).
  78. Šimík, Radek
    2018 “Free relatives”. Draft to appear in Semantics Companion, Daniel Gutzmann, Lisa Matthewson, Cécile Meier, Hotze Rullmann, and Thomas Ede Zimmermann (eds.). Wiley Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Smith Stark, Thomas
    1988 “‘Pied-piping’ con inversion en preguntas parciales.” Ms. Centro de estudios lingüísticos y literarios, Colegio de México y Seminario de lenguas indígenas.
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Stiebels, Barbara
    2006 “Agent focus in Mayan languages”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 241, 501–570. 10.1007/s11049‑005‑0539‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-005-0539-9 [Google Scholar]
  81. Tonhauser, Judith
    2003a “On the Syntax and Semantics of Content Questions in Yucatec Maya”. InProceedings of the 6th Workshop on American Indian Languages (WAIL)Castillo, J. (ed.), Santa Barbara: Santa Barbara Papers in Linguistics, vol.141, 106–121.
     [Google Scholar]
  82. 2003b “F-constructions in Yucatec Maya”. The Proceedings of SULA 2. Jan Andersson, Paula Ménendez-Benito, Adam Werle (eds.). pp.203–223. Amherst, Massachusetts: Graduate Linguistics Student Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Tredinnick, Victoria
    2005 On the Semantics of Free Relatives with –ever. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
  84. Tummons, Emily
    2010 Positional Roots in Kaqchikel Maya. Master’s thesis, University of Kansas.
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Vlachou, Evangelia
    2007 Free Choice in and out of Context: Semantics and Distribution of French, Greek and English free choice items. Ph.D. dissertation, LOT.
/content/journals/10.1075/lv.22012.dun
Loading
Indeterminate pronouns in Kaqchikel
Linguistic Variation 24, 116 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.22012.dun
/content/journals/10.1075/lv.22012.dun
/content/journals/10.1075/lv.22012.dun
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): free relative clause; negative indefinite; relative clause; wh-question

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