wp1: TYPOLOGY
Clause combining without clause linkage markers: A case study of Australian Languages
Linguistic diversity in northern Australia - each label corresponds roughly to a linguistic, social, or nation group. Created by Dave Foster (Foster Type) for Australian Geographic
overview
Australian languages are interesting from the perspective of clause combining, because many have been described to have relatively few specialised markers for clause linkage, like conjunctions or subordinators. (e.g. Dixon 2002ː 86-87). Instead, clause combining in these languages seems to rely heavily on clause-internal markers, for categories such as modality, tense, or information structure (e.g. Merlan 1981, McGregor 1988, Verstraete 2010). Using a representative sample of Australian languages, we will analyse the resources available for clause combining, both specialised resources and clause-internal categories that are co-opted to do clause-combining work.
SELECTED REFERENCES
Dixon, Robert. 2002. Australian Languages: Their Nature and Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Merlan, Francesca. 1981. “Some functional relations among subordination, mood, aspect and focus in Australian languages.” Australian Journal of Linguistics 1, 175-210.
McGregor, William. 1988. “Mood and subordination in Kuniyanti.” In Austin (ed.), Complex sentence constructions in Australian languages, 37-67. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe. 2010. “Focus, mood and clause linkage in Umpithamu (Cape York Peninsula, Australia).” In Bril (ed.), Clause Linking and Clause Hierarchy: Syntax and pragmatics, 451-468. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Dana Louagie
Partner
William McGregor
Partner