(A)symmetri og gensidighed

Reciprokke konstruktioner i acazulcootomí

  • Laurits Stapput Knudsen University of Copenhagen
Keywords: Semantic typology, Reciprocal constructions, Reciprocity, Field work, Linguistic description, Asymmetry

Abstract

This study investigates reciprocal constructions in Acazulco Otomí, a native language of central Mexico. The constructions are investigated using the video stimuli “Reciprocal actions and situation types” (Evans et al. 2004). The study was motivated by two factors: Firstly, certain language internal arguments support the hypothesis that Acazulco Otomí will be quite generous in its categorisation of reciprocity. Secondly, the study will fill a geographic and genealogic gap in Majid et al.’s (2011) study, providing more knowledge about the domain and useful data for future work on reciprocals. The study finds that Acazulco Otomí is indeed quite generous in its categorization and my study therefore supports the hypothesis that  a structuring principle functions across domains in Acazulco Otomí.

Author Biography

Laurits Stapput Knudsen, University of Copenhagen

Forfatteren er cand.mag.stud i lingvistik på Institut for Nordiske Studier og Sprogvidenskab, Københavns Universitet.

References

Berlin, B., & Kay, P. (1969). Basic Color Terms. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Boeg Thomsen, D. & Pharao Hansen, M. (2015a). Lenguaje del paisaje: Testimonios lingüísticos del otomí de Acazulco. I Bajo el volcán: Vida y ritualidad en torno al Nevado de Toluca (s. 25-47). Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.

Boeg Thomsen, D. & M. Pharao Hansen (2015b). Relationships as gestalts: Kinship and space in Otomí. Foredrag ved 13th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Northumbria University, Newcastle, UK, 22.07.2015.

Croft, W. & Poole, K.T. 2008. Inferring universals from grammatical variation: Multidimensional scaling for typological analysis. Theoretical Linguistics 34.1, 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1515/thli.2008.001

Dalrymple, M., Kanazawa, M., Kim, Y., Mchombo, S., & Peters, S. (1998). Reciprocal expressions and the concept of reciprocity. Linguistics and philosophy 21(2), 159-210. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005330227480

ELAN (Version 5.0.0-alpha) [Computer software]. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. Hentet fra https://tla.mpi.nl/tools/tla-tools/elan/

Epps, P. (2011). Reciprocal constructions in Hup. I Evans, N., Gaby, A., Levinson, S. C., & Majid, A. (red.), Reciprocals and Semantic Typology (Typological Studies in Language 98). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.98.18epp

Evans, N., Gaby, A., Levinson, S.C. & Majid, A. (2011) Reciprocals and Semantic Typology. Typological Studies in Language 98. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.98

Evans, N., Gaby, A., Nordlinger, R. (2007). Valency mismatches and the coding of reciprocity in Australian Languages. Linguistic Typology 11, 541-597. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty.2007.033.

Evans, N., Levinson, S.C., Enfield, N.J., Gaby, A. & Majid, A. (2004). Reciprocal constructions and situation type. I: Majid, A. (red.) Field Manual, Vol. 9, 25–30. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.

Gibson, L.F. (1981). Central Pame kinship terms. I: Merrifield, W.R. (1981). Proto Otomanguean kinship. Texas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.

Haspelmath, M. (2003). The geometry of grammatical meaning: Semantic maps and crosslinguistic comparison. I Tomasello, M. (red.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, 2: 211-242. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Haspelmath, M. (2007). Further remarks on reciprocal constructions. I: Nedjalkov, V. P., Reciprocal constructions (kapitel 50). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.71.74has

Heine, B. (2000). Polysemy involving refelxive and reciprocal markers in African languages. I Frajzyngier, Z., & Curl, T. S. (red.), Reciprocals – forms and functions (kapitel 1). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.41.02hei

Hernández-Green, N. (2015). Morfosintaxis verbal del Otomí de Acazulco (Ph.D).

Langendoen, D.T. (1978). The logic of reciprocity. Linguistic inquiry, 9(2), 177-197. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178051

Levinson, S.C. & Burnholt, N. (2009). Semplates: A new concept in lexical semantics? Language, 85(1), 167-173. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.0.0090

Levinson, S.C., Meira, S. & the Language and Cognition Group. (2003). ‘Natural concepts’ in the spatial typological domain – adpositional meanings in cross-linguistic perspective: an exercise in semantic typology. Language 79, no. 3: 485-516. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2003.0174

Majid, A., Bowerman, M., Van Staden, M., & Boster, J.S. (2007). The semantic categories of cutting and breaking events: A crosslinguistic perspective. Cognitive Linguistics, 18(2), 133-152. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog.2007.005

Majid, A., Evans, N., Gaby, A., & Levinson, S.C. (2011). The grammar of exchange: A comparative study of reciprocal constructions across languages. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00034

Merrifield, W.R. (1981). Proto Otomanguean kinship. Texas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.

Murdock, G.P. (1949). Social Structure. New York: The Free Press.

Nedjalkov, V.P. (2007): Overview of the research. Definitions of terms, framework, and related issues. I Nedjalkov, V. P. (red.), Reciprocal constructions (kapitel 1). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.71.06ned

Palancar, E. (2006). Intransitivity and the origins of middle voice in Otomi. Linguistics 44(3), 613-643. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2006.020

Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6847.001.0001

Taylor, J. R. (1989). Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in linguistic theory. Oxford: Clarendon

van der Auwera, J. (2008). In defense of classical semantic maps. Theoretical Linguistics 34(1). 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1515/thli.2008.002

Wright-Carr, D. (2017). La prehistoria lingüística del Bajío. I Campos, E.M.P. & Nava L., E.F. (red.). El Bajío mexicano: estudios recientes, 403-423, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología.

Published
2020-12-15
How to Cite
Knudsen, L. (2020). (A)symmetri og gensidighed. Journal of Language Works - Sprogvidenskabeligt Studentertidsskrift, 5(2), 88-108. Retrieved from https://tidsskrift.dk/lwo/article/view/123469