Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-03T19:10:06.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nominal juxtaposition in Australian languages: An LFG analysis1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2009

LOUISA SADLER  and
RACHEL NORDLINGER
LOUISA SADLER*
Affiliation:
Department of Language and Linguistics, University of Essex
RACHEL NORDLINGER*
Affiliation:
School of Languages and Linguistics, The University of Melbourne
*
Authors' addresses: (Sadler) Department of Language and Linguistics, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester CO4 3SQ, UK[email protected]
(Nordlinger) School of Languages and Linguistics, Arts Centre Building, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is well known that Australian languages make heavy use of nominal juxtaposition in a wide variety of functions, but there is little discussion in the theoretical literature of how such juxtapositions should be analysed. We discuss a range of data from Australian languages illustrating how multiple nominals share a single grammatical function within the clause. We argue that such constructions should be treated syntactically as set-valued grammatical functions in Lexical-Functional Grammar (LFG). Sets as values for functions are well-established in LFG and are used in the representation of adjuncts, and also in the representation of coordination. In many Australian languages, coordination is expressed asyndetically, that is, by nominal juxtaposition with no overt coordinator at all. We argue that the syntactic similarity of all juxtaposed constructions (ranging from coordination through a number of more appositional relations) motivates an analysis in which they are treated similarly in the syntax, but suitably distinguished in the semantics. We show how this can be achieved within LFG, providing a unified treatment of the syntax of juxtaposition in Australian languages and showing how the interface to the semantics can be quite straightforwardly defined in the modular LFG approach.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 46 , Issue 2 , July 2010 , pp. 415 - 452
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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.)

Footnotes

[1]

This paper results from joint research into coordination strategies in Australian Aboriginal languages funded by a British Academy grant (SG-39545). Earlier versions of this work have been presented at the ALS05 Conference in Melbourne, 2005, and the LFG06 conference in Konstanz, 2006. We thank both audiences for helpful feedback that has led to substantial improvements in the presentation and argumentation, and we are also grateful to two anonymous JL referees for comments and to Avery Andrews, Doug Arnold, Brett Baker and Mary Dalrymple for comments and discussion. Of course, we remain responsible for remaining errors and inadequacies.

References

REFERENCES

Acuña-Fariña, & Carlos, Juan. 1999. On apposition. English Language and Linguistics 3.1, 59–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, Doug. 2004. Non-restrictive relative clauses in construction-based HPSG. In Müller, Stefan (ed.), HPSG04, 27–47. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. http://csli-publications.stanford.edu/HPSG/5/arnold.pdf (10 July 2009).Google Scholar
Arnold, Doug. 2007. Non-restrictive relatives are not orphans. Journal of Linguistics 43.2, 271–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, Peter. 1981. A grammar of Diyari, South Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Austin, Peter. 2001. Word order in a free word order language: The case of Jiwarli. In Simpson, et al. (eds.), 305–323.Google Scholar
Austin, Peter & Bresnan, Joan. 1996. Non-configurationality in Australian Aboriginal languages. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 14.2, 215–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blake, Barry J. 1979. A Kalkatungu grammar. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Blake, Barry J. 1983. Structure and word order in Kalkatungu: The anatomy of a flat language. Australian Journal of Linguistics 3.2, 143–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blake, Barry J. 1987. Australian Aboriginal grammar. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Blake, Barry J. 2001. The noun phrase in Australian languages. In Simpson, et al. (eds.), 415–425.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan. 2001. Lexical Functional Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bril, Isabelle. 2004. Coordination strategies and inclusory constructions in New Caledonian and other Oceanic languages. In Haspelmath, (ed.), 499–533.Google Scholar
Butt, Miriam & King, Tracy Holloway (eds.). 2004. LFG ’04. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. http://cslipublications.stanford.edu/LFG/9/lfg04.html (10 July 2009).Google Scholar
Crystal, David. 1997. A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dalrymple, Mary. 2001. Lexical Functional Grammar. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalrymple, Mary. 2004. Noun coordination: Syntax and semantics. Presented at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Dalrymple, Mary, Dyvik, Helge & Sadler, Louisa. 2007. Gender resolution and gender indeterminacy. Presented at LFG Conference 2007, Stanford.Google Scholar
Dalrymple, Mary & Kaplan, Ronald M.. 2000. Feature indeterminacy and feature resolution. Language 76.4, 759–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalrymple, Mary, Kaplan, Ronald M. & King, Tracy Holloway. 2004. Linguistic generalizations over descriptions. In Butt, & King, (eds.), 199–208. http://csli-publications.stanford.edu/LFG/9/lfg04dkk.pdf (10 July 2009).Google Scholar
Dalrymple, Mary, Kaplan, Ronald M., Maxwell, John T. & Zaenen, Annie (eds.). 1995. Formal issues in Lexical-Functional Grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Dench, Alan. 1995. Martuthunira: A language of the Pilbara Region of Western Australia. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 1977. A grammar of Yidiny. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 2002. Australian languages: Their nature and development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Espinal, Maria Teresa. 1991. The representation of disjunct constituents. Language 67, 726–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Nicholas. 1995. A grammar of Kayardild: With historical-comparative notes on Tangkic. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabb, Nigel. 1990. The difference between English restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses. Journal of Linguistics 26.1, 57–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falk, Yehuda. 2001. Lexical-Functional Grammar: An introduction to Parallel Constraint-Based Syntax. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Gaby, Alice. 2006. A grammar of Kuuk Thaayorre. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
Goddard, Clifford. 1985. A grammar of Yankunytjatjara. Alice Springs: Institute for Aboriginal Development.Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth L. 1966. Kinship reflections in syntax. Word 22, 318–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hale, Kenneth L. 1973. Person marking in Warlbiri. In Anderson, Stephen R. & Kiparsky, Paul (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle, 308–344. New York: Holt, Rinehard and Winston.Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth L. 1981. On the position of Warlpiri in a typology of the base. Bloomington, IN: Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Hale, Kenneth L. 1983. Warlpiri and the grammar of non-configurational languages. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 1.1, 5–47.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2004. Coordinating constructions: An overview. In Haspelmath, (ed.), 3–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin (ed.) 2004a. Coordinating constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2007. Coordination. In Shopen, Timothy (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, vol. II: Complex constructions, 2nd edn., 1–51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1978. Ngandi grammar, texts and dictionary. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1984. Functional grammar of Nunggubuyu. Canberra: AIAS.Google Scholar
Heycock, Caroline & Zamparelli, Roberto. 1999. Toward a unified analysis of DP conjunction. In Dekker, Paul (ed.), The Twelfth Amsterdam Colloquium, 127–132. Amsterdam: The Institute for Logic, Language and Computation (ILLC), University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Heycock, Caroline & Zamparelli, Roberto. 2000. Friends and colleagues: Plurality and NP-coordination. In Hirotani, Masako, Coetzee, Andries, Hall, Nancy & Kim, Ji-Yung (eds.), 30th Annual Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistic Society (NELS 30) 341–352. Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistic Student Association (GLSA).Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray S. 1977. X-bar syntax: A study of phrase structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Johannessen, Janne Bondi. 1998. Coordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, Ronald M. & Maxwell, John T. III. 1988. Constituent coordination in Lexical-Functional Grammar. 12th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 88), vol. 1, 303–305. Budapest: Association for Computational Linguistics. [Reprinted in Dalrymple et al. (eds.), 1995, 199–210.]Google Scholar
Keizer, Evelien. 2005. The discourse function of close appositions. Neophilologus 89, 447–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keizer, Evelien. 2007. The English noun phrase. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempson, Ruth. 2003. Nonrestrictive relatives and growth of logical form. 22nd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 22), 301–314.Google Scholar
King, Tracy Holloway & Dalrymple, Mary. 2004. Determiner agreement and noun conjunction. Journal of Linguistics 40.1, 69–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lekakou, Marika & Szendröi, Kriszta. 2007. Eliding the noun in close apposition, or Greek polydefinites revisited. In Breheny, Richard & Velegrakis, Nikolaos (ed.), UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 19, 129–154. London: University College London.Google Scholar
Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 2000. Inclusory pronominals. Oceanic Linguistics 39.1, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNally, Louise. 1993. Comitative coordination: A case study in group formation. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 11, 347–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, Charles F. 1992. Apposition in contemporary English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nash, David. 1986. Topics in Warlpiri grammar. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Nordlinger, Rachel. 1998a. A grammar of Wambaya, Northern Territory (Australia). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Nordlinger, Rachel. 1998b. Constructive case: Evidence from Australian languages. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Pensalfini, Robert. 2003. A grammar of Jingulu: An Aboriginal language of the Northern Territory. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Peterson, Peter. 2004. Non-restrictive relatives and other non-syntagmatic relations in an LF framework. In Butt, & King, (eds.), 391–397. http://csli-publications.stanford.edu/LFG/9/lfg04peterson.pdf (10 July 2009).Google Scholar
Potts, Christopher. 2003. The logic of conventional implicatures. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potts, Christopher. 2005. The logic of conventional implicatures. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Progovac, Ljiljiana. 1997. Slavic and the structure for coordination. In Lindseth, Martina & Franks, Steven (eds.), Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Indiana Meeting 1996, 207–224. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Linda. 1988a. Asymmetric feature distribution in pronominal ‘coordinations’. In Barlow, Michael & Ferguson, Charles A. (eds.), Agreement in natural language, 237–250. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Linda. 1988b. Conditions for verb-coded coordination. In Hammond, Michael, Moravcsik, Edith & Wirth, Jessica (eds.), Studies in syntactic typology, 53–73. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharp, Janet. 2004. Nyangumarta: A language of the Pilbara Region of Western Australia. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Simpson, Jane. 1991. Warlpiri morphosyntax: A lexicalist approach (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Simpson, Jane & Bresnan, Joan. 1983. Control and obviation in Warlpiri. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 1, 49–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, Jane, Nash, David, Laughren, Mary, Austin, Peter & Alpher, Barry (eds.). 2001. Forty ears on: Ken Hale and Australian languages. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Singer, Ruth. 2001. The inclusory construction in Australian languages. Honours thesis, University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
Singer, Ruth. 2005. Comparing constructions across languages: A case study of the relationship between the inclusory construction and some related nominal constructions. Presented at Association for Linguistic Typology conference ALT VI, Padang, Indonesia, July 2005.Google Scholar
Stirling, Lesley. 2008. ‘Double reference’ in Kala Lagaw Ya narratives. In Mushin, Ilana & Baker, Brett (ed.), Discourse and grammar in Australian languages, 167–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vries, Mark de. 2006. The syntax of appositive relativization: On specifying coordination, free relatives and promotion. Linguistic Inquiry 37, 229–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wechsler, Stephen & Zlatić, Larisa. 2003. The many faces of agreement. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Wilkins, David P. 2000. Ant, ancestors and medicine: A semantic and pragmatic account of classifier constructions in Arrernte (Central Australia). In Senft, Gunter (ed.), Systems of nominal classification, 147–216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Stephen. 1999. Coverbs and complex predicates in Wagiman. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar