Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:28:08.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Deictic motion verbs in Pashto: to whom shall we come?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2015

David Pate
David Pate*
Affiliation:
SIL International
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper investigates the uses of the deictic motion verbs in Pashto. First, the paper focuses on the Pashto verbs COME and GO. The Pashto COME verb is unique in that it requires a directional person marker. These person markers are used in specific situations, which are outlined in this paper. Furthermore, the verbal person marker and the dative argument of the motion verb can differ in person. Such person “mismatches” are explained in terms of ascendance on the Person Hierarchy and of a semantic understanding of person. Second, this paper shows that the phenomenon of directional person markers extends to all Pashto motion verbs. Finally, the paper briefly discusses how Pashto COME and GO do not align with cross-linguistic analyses of COME and GO verbs in other languages. This misalignment is credited to the unique three-way deictic split of COME.

Keywords

Deictic motionPerson hierarchyDeictic projectionVerbal directive pronounsReference point setVerbs with thematic argumentsPashto
Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 79 , Issue 1 , February 2016 , pp. 103 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © SOAS, University of London 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Babrakzai, Farooq. 1999. “Topics in Pashto syntax”, PhD Dissertation, University of Hawai‘i at Manoa.Google Scholar
Efimov, V.A. 2011. The Ormuri Language in Past and Present. (FLI Language and Culture Series, 6.) Islamabad: Forum for Language Initiatives. (Originally published in Russian as: Jazyk ormuri v sinxronnom i istoričeskom osveščenii. Moskva: Izdatel'stvo “Nauka”, Glavnaja Redakcija Voctočnoj Literatury, 1986.)Google Scholar
Feiz Zarrin Ghalam, Parastou. 2007. “The expression and conceptualization of motion through space and manner of motion in Persian and English: a comparative analysis”, PhD Dissertation, Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1971. “How to know whether you're coming or going?”, reprinted in Rauh, Gisa (ed.), Essays on Deixis, 1983, 219–27. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1997. Lectures on Deixis. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Gathercole, Ginny. 1977. “A study of the comings and goings of the speakers of four languages? Spanish, Japanese, English and Turkish”, Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 2, 61–94.Google Scholar
Gathercole, Ginny. 1978. “Towards a universal for deictic verbs of motion”, Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 3, 72–88.Google Scholar
Kroeger, Paul R. 2005. Analyzing Grammar: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics, vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nakazawa, Tsuneko. 1990. “Pragmatic account of the distribution of come and go in English, Japanese and Korean”, in Hoji, H. (ed.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics, vol. 1, 97–110. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Oshima, David Y. 2012. “GO and COME revisited: what serves as a reference point?”, Proceedings of Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS), vol. 32, 287–98.Google Scholar
Pate, David M. 2012. “Second position clitics and subordinate tʃe clauses in Pashto”, MA thesis, Graduate Institute of Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Roberts, Taylor. 2000. “Clitics and agreement”, PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Tegey, Habibullah. 1977. “The grammar of clitics: evidence from Pashto (Afghani) and other languages”, PhD Dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Wechsler, Stephen. 2010. “What ‘you’ and ‘I’ mean to each other: person indexicals, self-description, and theory of mind”, Language 86/2, 332–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar