Volume 41, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0378-4177
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9978
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


In constrast with Nêlêmwa (Oceanic, New Caledonia) whose lexemes are most generally subcategorised as nouns or verbs and undergo category-changing derivations, in Amis (Formosan), roots are pervasively categorially neutral, yet they contain semantic features and instructions that allow or disallow combination with primary derivational affixes which specify their class and category. Lexical categories are expressed after roots are derived into morphosyntactic words projected in a syntactic frame; they are then quite rigidly subcategorised as verbal, nominal or adjectival-modifying heads. Still, word forms display some functional flexibility; for instance, nouns and derived nouns, pronouns, numerals may be predicative in equative, ascriptive and focus constructions, simply by being in the syntactic position of the verb. Such functional flexibility is asymmetrical and does not apply to derived verb stems which must be nominalised to achieve argument function.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Besnier, Niko
    2000Tuvaluan. A Polynesian language of the Central Pacific. London, New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Blust, Robert
    1999 Subgrouping, circularity and extinction: some issues in Austronesian comparative linguistics. In E. Zeitoun & P. J. K. Li (eds.), Selected papers from the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 31–94. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 2009The Austronesian languages. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics 602.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 2013 revised edition online at: pacling.anu.edu.au/materials/Blust2013Austronesian.pdf. Open Access Monographs.
  5. Bril, Isabelle
    2000Dictionnaire nêlêmwa-nixumwak-français-anglais. LCP 14, Paris, Peeters.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 2002Le nêlêmwa (Nouvelle-Calédonie): Analyse syntaxique et sémantique, LCP 16, Paris, Peeters.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. . In press. Lexical and functional categories in Nêlêmwa (New Caledonia) and some other Austronesian languages: fluid vs. rigid categoriality. In V. Vapnarsky and E. Veneziano eds. Lexical polycategoriality: Cross-linguistic, cross-theoretical and language acquisition approaches, 207–242. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Broschart, Jürgen
    1997 Why Tongan does it differently: Categorial distinctions in a language without nouns and verbs. Linguistic Typology1. 123–165. doi: 10.1515/lity.1997.1.2.123
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1997.1.2.123 [Google Scholar]
  9. Chen, Teresa
    1987Verbal constructions and verbal classifications in Nataoran-Amis. Canberra: Pacific linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Croft, William
    2000 Parts of speech as typological universals and language particular categories. In Petra Vogel and Bernard Comrie (eds.), Approaches to the typology of word classes, [EALT 23], 65–102. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110806120.65
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110806120.65 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dixon, R. M. W. & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald
    2000 Introduction. In Dixon & Aikhenvald (eds.), Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity, 1–29. Cambridge: CUP. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511627750.002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627750.002 [Google Scholar]
  12. Evans, Nicholas & Toshiki Osada
    2005 Mundari: The myth of a language without word classes. Linguistic Typology9(3). 351–390.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Foley, William A.
    1998 Symmetrical voice systems and precategoriality in Philippine languages. Paper presented at the3rd LFG conference, Brisbane.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 2008 The place of Philippine languages in a typology of voice systems. In P. Austin & S. Musgrave (eds.), Voice and grammatical relations in Austronesian languages, 22–44. Stanford: CSLI publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hengeveld, Kees & Eva van Lier
    2010 An implicational map of parts of speech. Linguistic Discovery8(1). 129–156. doi: 10.1349/PS1.1537‑0852.A.348
    https://doi.org/10.1349/PS1.1537-0852.A.348 [Google Scholar]
  16. Himmelmann, Nikolaus
    2005 Tagalog. In Alexander Adelaar & N. Himmelmann (eds.), The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar, 350–376. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 2007 Lexical categories and voice in Tagalog. In Simon Musgrave & Peter Austin (eds.), Voice and grammatical relations in Austronesian languages, 247–293. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Huang, Lillian M.
    1995 The case markers and pronominal system in Amis. Journal of National Chengchi University70. 217–257.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Keenan, Edward L. & Cécile Manorohanta
    2001 Quantitative study of voice in Malagasy. Oceanic Linguistics40(1). 67–84. doi: 10.1353/ol.2001.0007
    https://doi.org/10.1353/ol.2001.0007 [Google Scholar]
  20. Kroeger, Paul
    1998 Nouns and verbs in Tagalog: a reply to Foley. Asia SIL School. Paper presented at the3rd LFG Conference, Brisbane. 30 June – 3 July, 1998.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kuo, Jonathan Cheng-Chuen
    2015Argument alternation and argument structure in symmetrical voice languages: A case study of transfer verbs in Amis, Puyuma, and Seediq. Hawaii: Hawaii University PhD dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Lazard, Gilbert
    1999 La question de la distinction entre nom et verbe en perspective typologique. Folia linguistica33(3–4). 389–418.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lehmann, Christian
    2008 Roots, stems and word classes. In: Umberto Ansaldo , Jan Don and Roland Pfau (eds.): Parts of Speech: descriptive tools, theoretical constructs. Special Issue of Studies in Language32(3), 43–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Lieber, Rochelle
    2006 The category of roots and the roots of categories: what we learn from selection in derivation. Morphology16. 247–272. doi: 10.1007/s11525‑006‑9106‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-006-9106-2 [Google Scholar]
  25. Mithun, Marianne
    1994 The implications of ergativity for a Philippine voice system. In Barbara Fox & Paul Hopper (eds.), Voice, form and function, 247–277. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.27.11mit
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.27.11mit [Google Scholar]
  26. Mosel, Ulrike & Even Hovdhaugen
    1992Samoan reference grammar. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Reid, Lawrence
    1992 On the development of the aspect system in some Philippine languages. Oceanic Linguistics31(1). 65–92. doi: 10.2307/3622966
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3622966 [Google Scholar]
  28. Ross, Malcolm
    1995 Reconstructing proto Austronesian verbal morphology; evidence from Taiwan. In Paul Jen-kuei Li , Dah-an Ho , Ying-kuei Huang & Cheng-hwa Tsang (eds.), Austronesian studies relating to Taiwan, 727–791. Symposium Series of the Institute of History and Philology (Academia Sinica 4). Taipei: Academia Sinica.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Sasse, Hans-Jürgen
    1993 Syntactic categories & subcategories. In Joachim Jabobs , Arnim von Stechow , Wolfgang Sternefeld & Theo Vennemann (eds.), Syntax, An International Handbook of Contemporary research, 646–686. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 2001 Scales between nouniness and verbiness. In Martin Haspelmath , Ekkehard König , Wulf Oesterreicher , & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Language Typology and Language Universals, Vol.1, 495–509. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Shibatani, Masayoshi
    2009 Elements of complex structures, where recursion isn’t. In T. Givón & M. Shibatani (eds.), Syntactic complexity. Diachrony, acquisition, neuro-cognition, evolution (TSL 85), 163–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.85.07ele
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.85.07ele [Google Scholar]
  32. Shibatani, Masayoshi & Prashant Pardeshi
    2002 The causative continuum. In M. Shibatani (ed.), The grammar of causation and interpersonal manipulation (TSL 48), 85–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.48.07shi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.48.07shi [Google Scholar]
  33. Starosta, Stanley , Andrew Pawley & Lawrence Reid
    1982 [2009] The evolution of focus in Austronesian. In Amran Halim , Lois Carrington & Stephen Wurm (eds.), Papers from the Third International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Vol. 2: Tracking the Travellers (Pacific Linguistics C-75), 145–170. Canberra: The Australian National University. [Subsequently published in Zeitoun, Elizabeth (ed.) 2009 Formosan linguistics: Stanley Starosta’s contributions (Language and Linguistics Monograph Series), Vol.2, 297–328. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Starosta, Stanley
    2002 [2009]Austronesian Focus as derivation: Evidence from nominalization. Language and Linguistics3.2: 427–479. [Subsequently published in Zeitoun, Elizabeth (ed.) 2009 Formosan linguistics: Stanley Starosta’s contributions (Language and Linguistics Monograph Series), Vol.2, 297–328. Taipei: Academia Sinica
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Teng, Stacy
    2014 Grammaticalization of predicative possession in Nanwang Puyuma and as a basis for reconstruction in PAN. Oceanic Linguistics53(1). 136–154. doi: 10.1353/ol.2014.0006
    https://doi.org/10.1353/ol.2014.0006 [Google Scholar]
  36. Tsuchida, Shigeru
    1988 Amis. In Takashi Kamei , Rokuro Kono & Eiichi Chino (eds.), The Sanseido Encyclopedia or Linguistics, Vol 1: Languages of the World, Part one, 447–449. Tokyo: Sanseido.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Tsukida, Naomi
    2008 Verb classification in Amis. In Mark Donohue & Søren Wichmann (eds.), The typology of semantic alignment, 277–293. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199238385.003.0011
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199238385.003.0011 [Google Scholar]
  38. Wolff, John U.
    1973 Verbal inflection in Proto-Austronesian. In Andrew B. Gonzalez (ed.), Parangal kay Cecilio Lopez: Essays in honor of Cecilio Lopez on his seventy-fifth birthday (LSP Special monograph Issue n°4), 71–91. Quezon City: Linguistic Society of the Philippines.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Wu, Joy
    2006Verb classification, case marking, and grammatical relations in Amis. Buffalo: State University of New York Ph.D Dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Zeitoun, Elizabeth & Lillian M. Huang
    2000 Concerning ka-, an overlooked marker of verbal derivation in Formosan languages. Oceanic Linguistics39. 415–427.
    [Google Scholar]

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