1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Studies in Language. International Journal sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language”
  4. Volume 49, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 49, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0378-4177
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9978
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

One of the central goals of human language is to convey intended messages successfully to the addressee. However, communication inherently involves uncertainty or unexpectedness which hinders this delivery. Different languages have different strategies to manage unexpectedness. In this article, we explore the strategies used in Murrinhpatha, an Australian Aboriginal language with highly flexible syntax, that is, free constituent order and frequent NP omission. We argue that Murrinhpatha speakers utilise the language’s syntactic flexibility to manage referential expectations. Highly unexpected referents tend to be expressed preverbally, while expected referents which need to be ‘reinforced’ are usually expressed postverbally. Uniquely expected referents are usually syntactically omitted. We argue that expectation and uncertainty provide a more convincing account of Murrinhpatha compared to an account of accessibility. Our findings shed new light on several aspects of syntactically flexible languages, including pragmatic salience and newsworthiness, and the functional distinction between postverbal NPs and NP omission.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23031.ma
2024-10-04
2025-06-18

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/sl.23031.ma
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adamou, Evangelia, Katharina Haude & Martine Vanhove
    (eds.) 2018 Information structure in lesser-described languages: Studies in prosody and syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.199
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.199 [Google Scholar]
  2. Arnold, Jennifer E.
    2010 How speakers refer: The role of accessibility. Language and Linguistics Compass4(4). 187–203. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2010.00193.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00193.x [Google Scholar]
  3. Arnold, Jennifer E., Janet G. Eisenband, Sarah Brown-Schmidt & John C. Trueswell
    2000 The rapid use of gender information: Evidence of the time course of pronoun resolution from eyetracking. Cognition76(1). B13–B26. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(00)00073‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00073-1 [Google Scholar]
  4. Arnold, Jennifer E. & Zenzi M. Griffin
    2007 The effect of additional characters on choice of referring expression: Everyone counts. Journal of Memory and Language56(4). 521–536. 10.1016/j.jml.2006.09.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.09.007 [Google Scholar]
  5. Austin, Peter
    2001 Word order in a free word order language: The case of Jiwarli. InJane Simpson, David Nash, Mary Laughren, Peter Austin & Barry Alpher (eds.), Forty years on: Ken Hale and Australian languages, 305–323. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Austin, Peter & Joan Bresnan
    1996 Non-configurationality in Australian aboriginal languages. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory14(2). 215–268. 10.1007/BF00133684
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00133684 [Google Scholar]
  7. Baker, Brett & Ilana Mushin
    2008 Discourse and grammar in Australian languages. InIlana Mushin & Brett Baker (eds.), Discourse and grammar in Australian languages, 1–23. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.104.04bak
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.104.04bak [Google Scholar]
  8. Beeching, Kate & Ulrich Detges
    (eds.) 2014 Discourse functions at the left and right periphery: Crosslinguistic investigations of language use and language change. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004274822
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004274822 [Google Scholar]
  9. Blythe, Joe
    2009 Doing referring in Murriny Patha conversation. Sydney: University of Sydney Ph.D. dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Bock, June Kathryn & Richard K. Warren
    1985 Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition21(1). 47–67. 10.1016/0010‑0277(85)90023‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(85)90023-X [Google Scholar]
  11. Bowern, Claire
    2008 Bardi arguments: Referentiality, agreement and omission in Bardi discourse. InIlana Mushin & Brett Baker (eds.), Discourse and grammar in Australian languages, 59–85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.104.06bow
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.104.06bow [Google Scholar]
  12. Chafe, Wallace
    1994 Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. 2015 A grammar of the Seneca language. Oakland: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Clark, Herbert H. & Gregory L. Murphy
    1982 Audience design in meaning and reference. InJean-François Le Ny & Walter Kintsch (eds.), Advances in psychology, 287–299. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Dixon, Robert M. W.
    1972 The Dyirbal language of North Queensland. London: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139084987
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139084987 [Google Scholar]
  16. Downing, Pamela & Michael Noonan
    (eds.) 1995 Word order in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.30
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.30 [Google Scholar]
  17. Evans, Nicholas
    1985 Kayardild: The language of the Bentinck Islanders of North West Queensland. Canberra: The Australian National University Ph.D. dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. 2003 Bininj Gun-wok: A pan-dialectical grammar of Mayali, Kunwinjku and Kune. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Ferreira, Victor S.
    2019 A mechanistic framework for explaining audience design in language production. Annual Review of Psychology70(1). 29–51. 10.1146/annurev‑psych‑122216‑011653
     https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011653 [Google Scholar]
  20. Fletcher, Janet & Andrew Butcher
    2014 Sound patterns of Australian languages. InHarold Koch & Rachel Nordlinger (eds.), The languages and linguistics of Australia, 91–138. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110279771.91
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110279771.91 [Google Scholar]
  21. Frank, Michael C. & Noah D. Goodman
    2012 Predicting pragmatic reasoning in language games. Science336(6084). 998. 10.1126/science.1218633
     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1218633 [Google Scholar]
  22. Franke, Michael & Gerhard Jäger
    2016 Probabilistic pragmatics, or why Bayes’ rule is probably important for pragmatics. Zeitschrift Für Sprachwissenschaft35(1). 3–44. 10.1515/zfs‑2016‑0002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/zfs-2016-0002 [Google Scholar]
  23. Fukumura, Kumiko & Roger P. G. van Gompel
    2010 Choosing anaphoric expressions: Do people take into account likelihood of reference?Journal of Memory and Language62(1). 52–66. 10.1016/j.jml.2009.09.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  24. Givón, Talmy
    1983a Topic continuity and word-order pragmatics in Ute. InTalmy Givón (ed.), Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study, 141–214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.3.04giv
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.3.04giv [Google Scholar]
  25. 1983b Topic continuity in discourse. InTalmy Givón (ed.), Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study, 5–41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. (ed.) 1983c Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.3
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.3 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2011 Ute reference grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/clu.3
     https://doi.org/10.1075/clu.3 [Google Scholar]
  28. Gleitman, Lila R., David January, Rebecca Nappa & John C. Trueswell
    2007 On the give and take between event apprehension and utterance formulation. Journal of Memory and Language57(4). 544–569. 10.1016/j.jml.2007.01.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.01.007 [Google Scholar]
  29. Gordon, Bryan
    2016 Information-structural variations in Siouan languages. InCatherine Rudin & Bryan Gordon (eds.), Advances in the study of Siouan languages and linguistics, 393–423. Berlin: Languages Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Grice, Herbert P.
    1975 Logic and conversation. InPeter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Speech Acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004368811_003
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_003 [Google Scholar]
  31. Gundel, Jeanette, Nancy Hedberg & Ron Zacharski
    1993 Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language69(2). 274–307. 10.2307/416535
     https://doi.org/10.2307/416535 [Google Scholar]
  32. Gürer, Aslı & Aslı Göksel
    2019 (Prosodic-) structural constraints on gapping in Turkish. InAyse S. Özsoy (ed.), Word order in Turkish, 219–259. Cham: Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑11385‑8_7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11385-8_7 [Google Scholar]
  33. Hale, Ken
    1983 Warlpiri and the grammar of non-configurational languages. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory1(1). 5–47. 10.1007/BF00210374
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00210374 [Google Scholar]
  34. 1992 Basic word order in two “free word order” languages. InDoris L. Payne (ed.), Pragmatics of word order flexibility, 63–82. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.22.03hal
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.22.03hal [Google Scholar]
  35. Hobbs, Jerry R.
    1979 Coherence and coreference. Cognitive Science3(1). 67–90. 10.1207/s15516709cog0301_4
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0301_4 [Google Scholar]
  36. İşsever, Selçuk
    2019 On the ban on postverbal wh phrases in Turkish: A syntactic Account. InAyse S. Özsoy (ed.), Word order in Turkish, 67–90. Cham: Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑11385‑8_3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11385-8_3 [Google Scholar]
  37. Karmiloff-smith, Annette
    1985 Language and cognitive processes from a developmental perspective. Language and Cognitive Processes1(1). 61–85. 10.1080/01690968508402071
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690968508402071 [Google Scholar]
  38. Kehler, Andrew & Hannah Rohde
    2013 A probabilistic reconciliation of coherence-driven and centering-driven theories of pronoun interpretation. Theoretical Linguistics39(1–2). 1–37. 10.1515/tl‑2013‑0001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2013-0001 [Google Scholar]
  39. 2019 Prominence and coherence in a Bayesian theory of pronoun interpretation. Journal of Pragmatics1541. 63–78. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.04.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.04.006 [Google Scholar]
  40. Kibrik, Andrej A.
    2011 Reference in discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199215805.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199215805.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  41. Kiss, Katalin É.
    1981 Structural relations in Hungarian, a “free” word order language. Linguistic Inquiry12(2). 185–213.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Levinson, Stephen C.
    2000 Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  43. López, Luis
    2014 Dislocations and information structure. InCaroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford handbook of information structure, 402–421. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.003
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.003 [Google Scholar]
  44. Ma, Chun Long
    2024 Referential choice and free constituent order in Murrinhpatha narrativesMelbourne: The University of Melbourne Ph.D. dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Mansfield, John
    2019 Murrinhpatha morphology and phonology. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9781501503306
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501503306 [Google Scholar]
  46. McGregor, William
    2013 Optionality in grammar and language use. Linguistics51(6). 1147–1204. 10.1515/ling‑2013‑0047
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013-0047 [Google Scholar]
  47. Meyer, Karen S.
    1992 Word order in Klamath. InDoris L. Payne (ed.), Pragmatics of word order flexibility, 167–192. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.22.07sun
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.22.07sun [Google Scholar]
  48. Mithun, Marianne
    1992 Is basic word order universal?InDoris L. Payne (ed.), Pragmatics of word order flexibility, 15–61. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.22.02mit
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.22.02mit [Google Scholar]
  49. 1996 Grammar sketches: The Mohawk language. InJacques Maurais (ed.), Quebec’s aboriginal languages: History, planning, and development, 159–173. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781800418127‑008
     https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800418127-008 [Google Scholar]
  50. 2006 The Iroquoian languages. InKeith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of language & linguistics. 2nd edn, 31–34. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 10.1016/B0‑08‑044854‑2/02269‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/02269-0 [Google Scholar]
  51. Mushin, Ilana
    2005 Word order pragmatics and narrative functions in Garrwa. Australian Journal of Linguistics25(2). 253–273. 10.1080/07268600500233027
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07268600500233027 [Google Scholar]
  52. Mushin, Ilana & Brett Baker
    (eds.) 2008 Discourse and grammar in Australian languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.104
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.104 [Google Scholar]
  53. Nieuwland, Mante S. & Jos J. A. Van Berkum
    2008 The neurocognition of referential ambiguity in language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass2(4). 603–630. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2008.00070.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00070.x [Google Scholar]
  54. Nordlinger, Rachel
    2011 Transitivity in Murrinh-Patha. Studies in Language35(3). 702–734. 10.1075/sl.35.3.08nor
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.35.3.08nor [Google Scholar]
  55. Nordlinger, Rachel & Evan Kidd
    2023 Uncovering ergative use in Murrinhpatha: Evidence from experimental data. Australian Journal of Linguistics43(1). 69–86. 10.1080/07268602.2023.2222086
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2023.2222086 [Google Scholar]
  56. Nordlinger, Rachel, Gabriela Garrido Rodriguez & Evan Kidd
    2022 Sentence planning and production in Murrinhpatha, an Australian “free word order” language. Language98(2). 187–220. 10.1353/lan.2022.0008
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2022.0008 [Google Scholar]
  57. Payne, Doris L.
    1987 Information structuring in Papago narrative discourse. Language63(4). 783–804. 10.2307/415718
     https://doi.org/10.2307/415718 [Google Scholar]
  58. (ed.) 1992 Pragmatics of word order flexibility. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.22
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.22 [Google Scholar]
  59. Poletto, Cecilia & Giuliano Bocci
    2016 Syntactic and prosodic effects of information structure in Romance. InCaroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford handbook of information structure, 642–662. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.14
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.14 [Google Scholar]
  60. Rohde, Hannah & Andrew Kehler
    2014 Grammatical and information-structural influences on pronoun production. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience29(8). 912–927. 10.1080/01690965.2013.854918
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.854918 [Google Scholar]
  61. Rude, Noel
    1992 Word order and topicality in Nez Perce. InDoris L. Payne (ed.), Pragmatics of word order flexibility, 193–208. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.22.08rud
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.22.08rud [Google Scholar]
  62. Simard, Candide
    2010 The prosodic contours of Jaminjung, a language of Northern Australia. Manchester: The University of Manchester Ph.D. dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. 2018 On being first. InEvangelia Adamou, Katharina Haude & Martine Vanhove (eds.), Information structure in lesser-described languages: Studies in prosody and syntax, 85–118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.199.04sim
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.199.04sim [Google Scholar]
  64. Simpson, Jane
    2007 Expressing pragmatic constraints on word order in Warlpiri. InAnnie E. Zaenen (ed.), Architectures, rules, and preferences: Variations on themes by Joan W. Bresnan, 403–427. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Simpson, Jane & Ilana Mushin
    2008 Clause-initial position in four Australian languages. InIlana Mushin & Brett Baker (eds.), Discourse and grammar in Australian languages, 25–57. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.104.05sim
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.104.05sim [Google Scholar]
  66. Stevenson, Rosemary J., Rosalind A. Crawley & David Kleinman
    1994 Thematic roles, focus and the representation of events. Language and Cognitive Processes9(4). 519–548. 10.1080/01690969408402130
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969408402130 [Google Scholar]
  67. Swartz, Stephen
    1991 Constraints on zero anaphora and word order in Warlpiri narrative text. Darwin: Australian Aborigines and Islanders Branch, Summer Institute of Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Tachihara, Karina & Adele E. Goldberg
    2020 Cognitive accessibility predicts word order of couples’ names in English and Japanese. Cognitive Linguistics31(2). 231–249. 10.1515/cog‑2019‑0031
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2019-0031 [Google Scholar]
  69. Tily, Harry & Steven Piantadosi
    2009 Refer efficiently: Use less informative expressions for more predictable meanings. Proceedings of the Workshop on the Production of Referring Expressions: Bridging the Gap between Computational and Empirical Approaches to Reference, 8pps.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Vogels, Jorrig, Emiel Krahmer & Alfons Maes
    2019 Accessibility and reference production: The interplay between linguistic and non-linguistic factors. InJeanette Gundel & Barbara Abbott (eds.), The Oxford handbook of reference, 336–364. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Walsh, Michael
    1987 The impersonal verb construction in Australian languages. InRoss Steele & Terry Threadgold (eds.), Language topics: Essays in honour of Michael Halliday, 425–438. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23031.ma
Loading
Managing expectations
Studies in Language. International Journal sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language” 49, 194 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.23031.ma
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23031.ma
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23031.ma
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Australian Aboriginal languages; free constituent order; NP omission; referential uncertainty

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