Some Notes on Thematic Negation and Connected Future Narratives in Tlingit
Seth Cable
University of Massachusetts Amherst
January 11, 2016
1.
Introduction
This report summarizes the main empirical findings of my recent field research on the Tlingit
language, which was supported by an ongoing project grant from the National Science
Foundation (#BCS-1322770). This work was carried out in Juneau, AK from 8/1/2015 –
8/8/2015. During my time in Juneau, I had the great fortune to work with four exceptional elders,
all native speakers of the Tlingit language: William Fawcett (Kóoshdaak’w Éesh), Carolyn
Martin (K’altseen), John Martin (Keihéenák’w), and a fourth elder who preferred to remain
anonymous. I am extremely grateful for their generosity and their patience, and for all that
they’ve taught me; aatlein gunalchéesh!
This year’s study was focused on two separate issues concerning Tlingit grammar: (i) the
nature of thematic negation, and (ii) the verbal forms used in connected future narrative.
‘Thematic negation’ refers to cases where it appears that the negative marker tlél forms
part of a verbal theme. Such themes are often the (negative) antonym of a (positive) theme
lacking tlél, for example: ∅-kʼéi ‘good’ vs. tlél sh-kʼé ‘bad’; ∅-léi ‘far’ vs. tlél ∅-lé ‘near’. I’ll
use the term ‘negative theme’ to refer to themes that appear to contain thematic negation. For the
linguist and language documentation, one major question these cases raise is the following: in
cases of thematic negation, does tlél have the same grammatical status as it does in cases of nonthematic negation (e.g., tlél x̱ wasakú, ‘I donʼt know (it)’)? More precisely, is the tlél in tlél sh-kʼé
‘bad’ in any way morphologically incorporated into the verb, like the prefix un- in English
unfriendly, or is it as much a part of the ‘outside sentence’ as the tlél in a plain negated sentence
like tlél x̱ wasakú, ‘I donʼt know (it)’? This overarching analytic question raises a number of more
specific empirical questions, ones of much potential interest to both linguists and language
learners. First, can negative themes be modified by comparative phrases like a yáanáx̱ ‘more
than (it)’, and if so, where does the comparative phrase appear? Is there a syntactic difference
between a comparative phrase modifying a negative theme (e.g., the translation of ‘this is nearer
than that’) and the negation of the comparative phrase itself (e.g., the translation of ‘this is not
farther than that’)? Secondly, can any words or phrases come in between a thematic negation and
the rest of the verbal theme? Thirdly, is it possible to directly negate a negative theme (e.g., the
translation of ‘This is not bad’)? Finally, in some cases, negative themes contain a different
classifier from the corresponding positive theme (e.g., ∅-kʼéi ‘good’ vs. tlél sh-kʼé ‘bad’), or
there is some kind of mutation on the verbal root (e.g. l-tseen ‘strong’ vs. tlél l-cheen ‘weak’).
Can these morphological changes at all occur without the directly preceding negation? That is,
can they occur even if the negation is in a higher sentence (e.g. the translation of ‘I don’t want to
be good’)? Can any other constructions trigger these changes, besides negation? The data
included in this report provide some preliminary answers to all of these questions.
In addition to thematic negation, this year’s study also investigated the form of
connected, future narratives in Tlingit. That is, through the use of a storyboard, I sought to elicit
a connected narrative where all the events of the narrative take place in the future. The primary
question this was meant to address is whether all the (main) verbs in such a narrative must
1 appear in the future mode, or whether future-marking on verbs can be dropped when it’s clear in
the narrative that the speaker is describing future events. For past narratives – narratives where
all the events took place in the past – it’s rather clear that (main) verbs needn’t always bear past
marking (i.e., the so-called ‘decessive’ suffix (Cable 2015)). This fact is reported for past
narratives by Leer (1991), and can be robustly confirmed from casual examination of the great
many past narratives that have been collected and published (Dauenhauer & Dauenhauer 1987,
1990, 1994; Nyman & Leer 1993; inter multa alia). Leer (1991) also reports that future
narratives behave similarly, that not all the verbs in such narratives need to bear future mode
morphology. However, he provides only one short example, and there are no naturally occurring
future narratives that have yet been published that could independently confirm this claim. For
this reason, I sought to elicit such a narrative through the use of a carefully constructed
storyboard. As detailed below, the results confirm Leer’s (1991) statement, but raise a whole
host of unresolved analytic questions.
2.
Some Notes on Methodology
Unless otherwise noted, the data reported below were obtained through interviews with native
speakers of Tlingit (henceforth ‘the elders’). Each two-hour interview was conducted with 2–4
elders present, at the Tlingit Language Lab at the University of Alaska Southeast (226 Egan
Hall).1 Also in attendance during these interviews were James Crippen (PhD Student; University
of British Columbia), whose dissertation committee I am a member of, and Rose-Marie
Déchaine (Professor; University of British Columbia), Mr. Crippen’s doctoral advisor. The
elders were seated about a central table, with water and snacks within easy reach. With the
consent of the elders, three of the five meetings were recorded.2 Recordings were made using a
Zoom H6 portable digital recorder and two Audio Technica omnidirectional microphones,
positioned on the central table. Whether or not recordings were made, careful notes were taken
individually by myself, Mr. Crippen, and Dr. Déchaine. Furthermore, Mr. Crippen provided the
invaluable service of transcribing the elders’ translations upon the whiteboard provided in the
Tlingit Language Lab.3
As the recordings demonstrate, interviews were relaxed in nature. Although there were a
variety of translation and judgment tasks conducted in each interview, I allowed ample time for
the elders to speak with one another and converse about any topic they had an interest in. The
pace of the work was set by the elders, and breaks were taken whenever requested.
The linguistic tasks themselves were straightforward translation and judgment tasks,
designed to address the general research questions listed in Section 1. The translation tasks were
of two types: (i) translations of single sentences, relative to a context, and (ii) translations of
extended stories, via the use of ‘storyboards’. The translation tasks involving single sentences
proceeded as follows. Prior to the interviews, I designed a number of ‘scenarios’, described in
short English sentences. Accompanying each scenario was an English sentence labeled ‘Sentence
to Translate’, which was true and felicitous in the paired scenario. At the interviews, I would
1
Special thanks are owed to the University of Alaska Southeast, and to Professor X̱ ʼunei Lance Twitchell for
granting us access to this space.
2
One elder preferred not to be recorded, and so no recordings were made of the meetings they participated in.
3
I should mention that Mr. Crippen also pursued his own independent lines of research with the elders. Generally
speaking, we tended to divide the two-hour interview time into roughly equal parts between ourselves. The results of
Mr. Crippen’s research are not recorded in this report.
2 read a scenario out loud to the elders, and then ask them for the best Tlingit translation of the
paired English sentence, one that would naturally fit the scenario described.
The translation tasks involving so-called ‘storyboards’ were a bit more involved, but still
quite simple. During the spring of this year, I worked with Rose Underhill (Linguistics Major;
University of Massachusetts Amherst) to design a basic future narrative for the Tlingit elders to
translate; that is, all the events of the narrative take place in the future of the event of speaking.
Once the narrative was finalized, Ms. Underhill illustrated it using simple, evocative pictures.
This storyboard, which was devoid of any English text, was then used to present the narrative to
the Tlingit elders during the interview session. Each elder received a copy of the storyboard, and
looked through it as I read the English version of the story aloud. Having heard the English
version of the story, the elders were then asked to tell the story in Tlingit, working page-by-page
through the storyboard. For more details concerning this ‘storyboard’-methodology, the reader is
referred to the Totem Field Storyboard website (http://totemfieldstoryboards.org/). As an
appendix to this report, I provide the storyboard narrated by the elders (“Hawaii Trip”).
Like the translation tasks above, the judgment tasks put to the elders were quite
straightforward. Having obtained Tlingit sentences via the translation tasks, I would then slightly
alter the translation given, and ask speakers whether they could imagine themselves ever using
the altered translations for the given scenario. If there ever arose disagreement between speakers,
I would allow them to discuss the forms, and then wait until a consensus answer was achieved.
3.
Thematic Negation in Tlingit
As explained in Section 1, this year’s research largely focused upon the nature of thematic
negation in Tlingit. Consequently, I began by eliciting instances of thematic negation, using the
entries in dictionaries of Story & Naish (1973) and Edwards (2009) as my guide. Rose Underhill,
working as my undergraduate RA, combed through these dictionaries looking for instances of
thematic negation. From her extensive list of forms, I identified a select subset to elicit from the
elders. I also chose a number of non-negative themes to elicit and use as controls in various
subsequent questions. The following are the simple imperfective forms that I was able to elicit.
(1)
Non-Negative Themes 4
a.
Yakʼéi
IMPRV.3S.good
It is good.
(A, WF, CM, JM) 5
4
Throughout this report, I employ the following glossing abbreviations, originally developed by Crippen (2013): 1,
‘first person’; 2, ‘second person’; 3, ‘third person’; COMP, ‘comparative mode’; COP, ‘copula’; DEM,
‘demonstrative’; DIM, ‘diminutive suffix’; DUB, ‘dubitative’; ERG, ‘ergative case’; EXCL, ‘exclamative’; FOC,
‘focus particle’; FUT, ‘future mode’; IMPRV, ‘imperfective mode’; Indef, ‘indefinite’; INST, ‘instrumental’; IRR,
‘irrealis’; LOC, ‘locative’; NEG, ‘negation’; NOM; ‘nominalizer’; O, ‘object’; PART, ‘partative’; PERT,
‘pertingent’; POSS, ‘possessive prefix’; PRV, ‘perfective mode’; pl (PL) ‘plural’; PRO, ‘pronoun’; PROG,
‘progressive’; Q, ‘question/indefinite particle’; REFL, ‘reflexive’; REL, ‘relative clause suffix’; S, ‘subject’; sg,
‘singular’; SUB, ‘subordinate clause suffix’; TERM, ‘terminative’.
5
Throughout this report, I will indicate whether a Tlingit sentence was (i) constructed by myself and judged by the
elders to be acceptable, or (ii) actually spontaneously spoken by the elders themselves. In the former case, the
sentence will be followed by a ‘(C)’, for ‘constructed’. In the latter case, I will write the initials of the speaker who
3 b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
Yatʼáa
IMPRV.3S.hot
It is hot.
(A, WF, CM, JM)
Si.áatʼ
IMPRV.3S.cold
It is cold.
(A, WF, CM, JM)
Yasátk
IMPRV.3S.fast
He is fast.
(CM, JM)
Lichʼéeyaḵw
IMPRV. 3S.slow
He is slow
(CM, JM)
Litseen
IMPRV.3S.strong
He is strong.
(A, WF, CM, JM)
Yaa kudzigéi
IMPRV.3S.smart
She is smart
(A)
Shaklig̱ éi
IMPRV.3S.cute
She is cute.
(CM, JM)
Naalée.
IMPRV.3S.far
It is far.
(A)
Likʼátsʼ
IMPRV.3S.shart
It is sharp.
(CM, JM)
Yaawdig̱ íl
PRV.3S.dull
It is dull.
(CM, JM)
X̱ ʼalitseen
IMPRV.3S.expensive
It is expensive.
(A, WF, CM, JM)
provided the sentence: (WF) for William Fawcett, (CM) for Carolyn Martin, (JM) for John Martin, and (A) for the
elder who preferred to remain anonymous.
4 m.
(2)
Yéi kootsʼáankʼ
COMP.IMPRV.3S.shallow.DIM
It is shallow
(JM)
Negative Themes
a.
Tlél ushkʼé
NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.good/bad
It is bad.
(A, WF, CM, JM)
b.
Tlél ulcheen
NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.strong/weak
He is weak.
(A, WF, CM, JM)
c.
Tlél koohélʼk
NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.weak
He is weak.
(WF)
d.
Tlél yaa kushgé
NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.smart/dumb
He is dumb.
(A)
e.
Hél
unalí
NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.far
Itʼs near.
(A)
f.
Tléil x̱ ʼeiltseen
NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.expensive
Itʼs cheap.
(A)
In addition, elders provided the following sentences as conceptually related to some of the
sentences above.
(3)
a.
Du
ká
yáanáx̱
koogéi
wé kʼoodásʼ
3.POSS surface
more.than
COMP.IMPRV.3S.big DEM shirt
His shirt is too long. (Lit., That shirt is longer than him.)
(JM)
b.
Eetí yáanáx̱
kuwáatʼ
??
more.than
COMP.IMPRF.3S.long
His pants are too long.
c.
Ḵúnáx̱ áwé i
yá kwdzig̱ áxkw
very FOC 2.POSS face IMPRV.3S.pock-marked
Your face is full of pockmarks.
(English prompt was “He is ugly.”)
5 du
tuḵdatéeli
3.POSS pants
(JM)
(JM)
d.
e.
Ix̱ ʼakoowoox̱ ʼ
2O.mouth.COMP.IMPRV.wide.
Your mouth is wide.
(English prompt was “He is ugly.”)
(JM)
Kahélʼkich
x̱ at najáḵ
weak.NOM.ERG
1sgO.PROG.3S.kill
Weakness is killing me.
(A)
As explained in Section 1, I was curious whether the negative themes above could be
modified with so-called ‘degree modifiers’ like the comparative phrase a yáanáx̱ ‘more than (it)’.
As shown below, indeed they can. In the examples below, the degree modifier is boldfaced.
(4)
Negative Themes with Degree Modifiers
a.
b.
c.
(CM, JM)
Tlax̱ a yáanáx̱
tlél
ushkʼé
very 3O more.than NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.good/bad
It’s a lot worse than that.
(A)
Ḵúnáx̱ áwé tlél
ulcheen
very FOC NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.strong/weak
Heʼs really weak.
(WF)
d.
A yáanáx̱ áwé tlél
ulcheen
3O more.than FOC NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.strong/weak
He is weaker than him.
(CM)
e.
Héitʼaa
yáanáx̱ hél
yaa ḵooshgé
DEM.one more.than NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.smart/dumb
Heʼs dumber than this one.
(A)
f.
A yáanáx̱
tléil unalí
3O more.than NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.far
Itʼs closer than that.
(A)
Ḵúnáx̱ a yáanáx̱
tléil unalí
very 3O more.than NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.far
Itʼs much closer than that.
(A)
g.
h.
A yáanáx̱ tléil ushkʼé
3O more.than NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.good/bad
It’s worse than that.
A yáanáx̱
áwé ḵúnáx̱ tléil x̱ ʼeiltseen
3O more.than FOC very NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.expensive
This one is way cheaper than it.
(A)
6 yáatʼaa
DEM.one
To serve as controls, I also elicited the following non-negative themes with a yáanáx̱ .
(5)
Non-Negative Themes with Degree Modifiers
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
A yáanáx̱
áwé yakʼéi
3O more.than FOC IMPRV.3S.good
This one is better than it.
yáatʼa
DEM.one
(A)
Tlax̱ a yáanáx̱
yatʼáa
very 3O more.than IMPRV.3S.hot
Itʼs a lot warmer than that.
(A)
Tlax̱ a yáanáx̱
si.áatʼ
very 3O more.than IMPRV.3S.cold
Itʼs a lot colder than that.
(A)
Du yáanáx̱
yasátk
3O more than IMPRV.3S.fast
She is faster than him.
(CM)
Du yáanáx̱
yagóot
3O more.than IMPRV.3S.goes-fast
She goes faster than him.
(JM)
A yáanáx̱
litseen
3O more.than IMPRV.3S.strong
That coffee is stronger.
wé
káaxwee
DEM coffee
(JM)
Wéitʼaa
áwé a yáanáx̱
litseen
DEM.one
FOC 3O more.than IMPRV.3S.strong
That one is a lot stronger than him.
(A, WF)
Ax̱
yáanáx̱
yaa ḵoodzig̱ éi
1sg.POSS more.than IMPRV.3S.smart
She is smarter than me.
(A)
Ḵúnáx̱
a yáanáx̱ naalée
very
3O more.than IMPRV.3S.far
Itʼs really farther.
(A)
Tlél tlax̱
unalí
NEG very IRR.IMPRV.3S.far
Itʼs not very far.
(A)
7 k.
l.
m.
A yáanáx̱
x̱ ʼalitseen
3O more.than IMPRV.3S.expensive
Itʼs more expensive.
(A, WF)
Yáatʼaa
a yáanáx̱
x̱ ʼalitseen
DEM.one
3O more.than IMPRV.3S.expensive
This one is more expensive than that one.
(A)
Ḵúnáx̱
áwé x̱ ʼalitseen
yáatʼaa
very
FOC IMPRV.3S.expensive DEM.one
This one is very expensive.
(WF)
It should be noted that John Martin regularly used the expression eetí yáanáx̱ where others used
a yáanáx̱ . Since the former is not otherwise attested (to my knowledge), I document it below.
(6)
The Degree Modifier Eetí Yáanáx̱ , used by John Martin
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Wé
kaháakw
eetí yáanáx̱ yakʼéi
DEM salmon.roe
?? more.than IMPRV.3S.good
Salmon eggs are the best. (Translation by John Martin)
(JM)
Eetí yáanáx̱ yaawatʼáa
?? more.than face.PRV.3S.hot
Itʼs hotter than hot. (Translation by John Martin)
(JM)
Eetí yáanáx̱ si.áatʼ
?? more.than IMPRV.3S.cold
Itʼs colder. (Translation by John Martin)
(JM)
Eetí yáanáx̱ lichʼéeyáḵw
?? more.than IMPRV.3S.slow
He is slower than her. (Translation by John Martin)
(JM)
Eetí yáanáx̱ yakʼátsʼ
wé lít.aa yax̱ wag̱ ílʼi
náx̱
?? more.than IMPRV.3S.sharp DEM knife PRV.1sgS.sharpen.SUB through
The knife is sharper, after I sharpened it.
(JM)
The following sentence was also offered by John Martin as thematically related to sentence (6e).
(7)
Kúnáx̱ yakʼátsʼ
wé
yagéiyi
lít.aa,
very IMPRV.3S.sharp DEM IMPRV.3S.big.REL knife
wé
kugéiyi
aa
lít.aa ḵu.aa yaawdig̱ íl
DEM IMPRV.3S.small.REL PART knife though IMPRV.3S.dull
The big knife is very sharp, but the small knife is dull.
(JM)
8 Observing the forms in (4), where a negative theme is modified by a degree modifier, the
following generalization comes into view.
(8)
Negative Themes and Degree Modifiers
If a negative theme is modified by a degree modifier, the degree modifier occurs before
the negation marker tlél.
As we’ll see in a moment, this generalization is supported by examining sentences where the
order of tlél and the degree modifier is reversed.
One of the major questions mentioned in Section 1 is whether there is any difference in
form between (i) a negative theme with a degree modifier, and (ii) the negation of a positive
theme with a degree modifier. To explore this question, I elicited constructions of the second
variety; that is, I elicited the negation of certain sentences in (5). These are shown below.
(9)
The Negation of Non-Negative Themes with Degree Modifiers
a.
b.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Tlél tlax̱
unalí
NEG very IRR.IMPRV.3S.far
Itʼs not very far.
(A)
Tlél a yáanáx̱ unalí
NEG 3O more.than IRR.IMPRV.3S.far
(A)
Hél
tlax̱
utʼá.
NEG very IRR.IMPRV.3S.hot
Itʼs not very hot.
(A)
Hél
a yáanáx̱
utʼá
NEG 3O more.than IRR.IMPRV.3S.hot
Itʼs not hotter than that.
(A)
Tlél tlax̱
ukʼé
NEG very IRR.IMPRV.3S.good
Itʼs not very good.
(A)
Tlél a yáanáx̱
ukʼé
NEG 3O more.than IRR.IMPRV.3S.good
Itʼs not better than that.
(A)
Tléil tlax̱
a yáanáx̱
x̱ ʼeiltseen
NEG very 3O more.than IRR.IMPRV.3S.expensive
Itʼs not much more expensive.
(A)
Looking across these sentences, a second generalization seems to arise, summarized below.
9 (10)
The Negation of Positive Themes with Degree Modifiers
If a (positive) theme with a degree modifier is being negated, then the degree modifier
occurs after the negation marker tlél.
To further test the accuracy of generalizations (8) and (10), I asked the elders to judge the
acceptability of sentences (11a) and (11b) in the scenario below.
(11)
Further Evidence for Generalization (10)
Scenario: We have two plates of food that equally good.
a.
Tlél a yáanáx̱
ukʼé
NEG 3O more.than IRR.IMPRV.3S.good
It’s not better than that.
Judgment:
Acceptable in this scenario
b.
A yáanáx̱
tlél ushkʼé
3O more.than NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.good/bad
It’s worse than that.
Judgment:
Not acceptable in this scenario
In this scenario, where the food is equally good, only the negation of a positive theme with a
degree modifier is true (i.e., ‘NOT this is better’); a negative theme with a degree modifier would
be false (i.e., ‘this is MORE bad’). Importantly, the elders confirmed that (11a) is true/acceptable
in this scenario, while sentence (11b) is not. This shows that (11b) – where the degree modifier
occurs before the negation – can only be interpreted as a negative theme with a degree modifier,
and not as the negation of a positive theme with a degree modifier. This result, which confirms
the generalization in (10), is repeated in the parallel examples below.
(12)
Further Evidence for Generalization (10)
Scenario: We have two hats that are the exact same price.
a.
Tléil tlax̱
a yáanáx̱
x̱ ʼeiltseen
NEG very 3O.more.than IRR.IMPRV.3S.expensive
It’s not more expensive than that.
Judgment:
Acceptable in this scenario
b.
A yáanáx̱
tlél
x̱ ʼeiltseen
3O more.than
NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.expenstive
It’s cheaper than that.
Judgment:
Not acceptable in this scenario.
Again, in this scenario, where the hats are equally expensive, only the negation of a positive
theme with degree modifier is true (i.e., ‘NOT this is more expensive’); a negative theme with
degree modifier would be false (i.e., ‘this is MORE inexpensive’). Again, the elders confirmed
10 that in this scenario, only sentence (12a) is acceptable. This shows that (12b), where the degree
modifier precedes the negation, can only be interpreted as a negative theme modified by a degree
modifier, and not as the negation of a positive theme with degree modifier, exactly as predicted
by generalizations (8) and (10).
In summary, (8) and (10) show that there is indeed in Tlingit a syntactic difference
between (i) a negative theme modified by a degree modifier, and (ii) negating the combination of
a positive theme and a degree modifier. In the first case, the degree modifier must occur before
the negation; in the second case, the degree modifier must appear after the negation.
As discussed in Section 1, one of the major questions raised by negative themes is
whether the negation in the theme is a morphological part of the verb – like the prefix un in
English unfriendly – or whether it is instead part of the ‘outside sentence’ – like the word not in
‘Dave is not friendly’. One way of assessing this matter is exploring whether other words and
phrases can come in between thematic negation and the rest of the verbal theme. It’s worth
noting, then, that elders easily allow the focus particle áwé to come in between thematic negation
and the rest of the theme.
(13)
Thematic Negation Followed by Focus Particle
a.
b.
c.
Tlél áwé
NEG FOC
It’s bad.
ushkʼé
IRR.IMPRV.3S.good/bad
Tlél áwé
NEG FOC
He’s weak.
ulcheen
IRR.IMPRV.3S.strong/weak
Tléil áwé
NEG FOC
It’s cheap.
x̱ ʼeiltseen
IRR.IMPRV.3S.expensive
(WF)
(A, WF)
(WF)
However, the facts in (13) don’t easily settle the question yet, since Tlingit does allow áwé to
follow certain ‘preverbs’ – like yax̱ – which are (in some sense) part of the verbal word rather
than the larger sentence (Leer 1991: 140). More striking, though, are sentences like (14), where it
seems that a dubitative particle or even an entire indefinite noun phrase can follow thematic
negation.
(14)
Thematic Negation Followed by an Indefinite NP
a.
b.
Tlél shákdéwé
NEG DUB.FOC
It’s probably bad.
ushkʼé.
IRR.IMPRV.3S.good/bad
(WF)
Tlél daa sá
ax̱ tuwáa ushgú.
NEG anything
IRR.IMPRV.1S.want
I don’t want anything.
11 (A, WF)
c.
Tlél daa sá
NEG anything
Everything is bad.
ushkʼé
IRR.IMPRV.3S.good/bad
(WF)
Note that the main verbs in (14) exhibit the morphological changes associated with the negative
theme, and so these sentences do contain instances of thematic negation. Furthermore, there is an
interesting contrast between sentence (14c) and the superficially similar sentence in (15) below.
(15)
Non-Thematic Negation Followed by an Indefinite NP
Tlél daa sá
NEG anything
Nothing is good.
ukʼé
IRR.IMPRV.3S.good
(WF)
William Fawcett reports that there is a slight difference in meaning between (14c) and (15), and
offered the contrasting English translations above. When questioned further, he confirmed that
(15) is acceptable if a few items are merely so-so (and so simply ‘not good’), while (14c) would
not be acceptable in such a scenario. This judgment supports Mr. Fawcett’s two different
translations for (14c) and (15), and supports the conclusion that (14c) is a case of thematic
negation separated syntactically from the verbal word by an indefinite NP.
The possibility of sentences like (14) strongly indicates that thematic negation is not
morphologically incorporated into the verb, and is instead part of the larger ‘outside sentence’.
Supporting this conclusion is the fact, illustrated below, that elders did not generally accept
sentences where negative themes were directly negated.
(16)
Inability to Directly Negate Negative Themes
a.
* Tlél tlél yaa ḵushgé
NEG NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.smart/dumb
Judgment:
Ill-formed, not meaningful
b.
(i)
Tlél yéi
utí
tlél
ushx̱ éitl
NEG thus 3S.be NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.lucky/unlucky
He’s not unlucky. (Lit. It’s not so that he’s unlucky.)
(C)
(ii)
* Tlél tlél ushx̱ éitl.
NEG NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.lucky/unlucky
Judgment:
Ill-formed, not meaningful
(i)
Tlél wáa sá
utí
NEG how Q
IRR.IMPRV.3S.be
It’s not bad. (Lit. It’s not any way)
c.
(ii)
* Tlél tlél
ushkʼé
NEG NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.good/bad
Judgment:
Ill-formed, not meaningful
12 (WF)
In sentences (16a), (16bii), and (16cii), a negative theme is directly preceded by negation. Elders
generally agreed that these sentences were ill-formed and not meaningful.6 To express the
intended meanings of these sentences, elders preferred either a bi-clausal paraphrase (16bi) or a
separate idiom (16ci). Importantly, if thematic negation were a morphological part of the verbal
word – like English un- in unlucky – then there should be no problem negating negative themes.
Note, for example, that it is quite possible in English to say things like He is not unlucky. On the
other hand, if thematic negation were true sentential negation, then we’d correctly predict that
negating a negative theme should be awkward and ill-formed. Many languages disallow double
sentential negation, and even many English speakers find it highly awkward to say things like He
is not not lucky. Thus, the judgments in (16) give further support to the conclusion that thematic
negation in Tlingit not part of the verbal word, but is instead a part of the larger, ‘outside
sentence’ (i.e., a case of sentential negation).
Knowing now that thematic negation is a case of sentential negation, interesting
questions arise regarding themes like tlél sh-kʼé ‘bad’ and tlél l-cheen ‘weak’. In both such
cases, the negative theme differs from its positive antonym is more than simply the presence of
negation; either the classifier has changed to sh or there is a consonantal mutation on the root.
Since the negation in such themes is sentential negation, it seems then that for roots like kʼéi
‘good/bad’ and tseen ‘strong/weak’, the presence of sentential negation can trigger these
morphological changes (∅àsh; ts à ch). The following two questions therefore naturally
arise: (i) Can these morphological changes also be triggered by negation that is in a higher
sentence? (ii) Can these morphological changes ever be triggered by anything other than
negation?
Regarding the first, question, let us note the contrast between the following sentences.
(17)
Higher Negation Does Not Trigger Morphological Changes
a.
b.
Yéi x̱ waajée
IMPRV.1sgS.think
I think that it’s bad.
tlél
ushkʼéyi
NEG IRR.IMPRV.3S.good/bad.SUB
(JM)
* Tlél yéi x̱ wají
ushkʼéyi
NEG IRR.IMPRV.1sgS.think
IRR.IMPRV.3S.good/bad.SUB
Judgment:
Ill-formed, not meaningful
In the well-formed sentence (17a), the negative marker tlél appears within the same minimal
clause as the verbal form ushkʼéyi, which exhibits the morphological classifier change (∅àsh).
In sentence (17b), however, the negative marker tlél appears within a different, higher clause
than ushkʼéyi. The ill-formedness of (17b) therefore indicates that the morphological classifier
change can only be triggered by tlél if it’s within the same clause as kʼéi. This conclusion is
further supported by the contrast in (18) below.
6
One exception is that the elder preferring to be anonymous found (16cii) acceptable, even though (16a) and (16bii)
were ill-formed for them as well.
13 (18)
Higher Negation Does Not Trigger Morphological Changes
a.
Tlél ax̱ tuwáa ushgú
NEG IRR.IMPRV.1S.want
I don’t want to be bad
tlél
x̱ at ushkʼé.
NEG IRR. IMPRV.1sgS.good/bad.SUB
(JM).
b.
* Tlél ax̱ tuwáa ushgú
x̱ at ushkʼé.
NEG IRR.IMPRV.1S.want IRR. IMPRV.1sgS.good/bad.SUB
Judgment:
Ill-formed, not meaningful
Again, in the well-formed (18a), the verb exhibiting the morphological classifier change is joined
within its clause by the negative marker tlél. In the ill-formed (18b), however, the only instance
of tlél is within a different, syntactically higher clause. Thus, the data in (18) again show that the
morphological classifier change (∅àsh) can only take place if kʼéi is preceded in its own clause
by negation.
Let us next consider the question of whether any other constructions besides negation can
trigger the morphological classifier change found in tlél sh-kʼé ‘bad’ vs. ∅-kʼéi ‘good’. One
worthwhile candidate to consider are so-called ‘conditional adjuncts’, such as English if anything
is good. Note that such constructions in Tlingit share with negation the property of allowing
interrogative phrases like daa sá ‘what’ to be interpreted as indefinites. For example, in both
(19a) and (19b) the interrogative phrase is interpreted as an indefinite (anyone, anything), while
in (19c) it can only be interpreted as a question. Note that in (19a), the interrogative phrase is
preceded by negation, while in (19b) the interrogative phrase is contained in a conditional
adjunct, but sentence (19c) contains neither construction.
(19)
Negation and Conditional Adjuncts Allow Interrogatives to be Indefinites
a.
(i)
Tlél aadóo sá haat woo.aat
haa
NEG who Q IRR.PRV.3S.came 1pl.POSS
Not anyone came to our party.
(ii)
Tlél aadóo sá
táach
NEG who Q
sleep.ERG
Not anyone fell asleep.
ḵu.éexʼi déi
party
to
(JM)
wujaaḵ
IRR.PRV.3S.kill
(A)
b.
Daa sá kʼéiyi,
ax̱
éeshch
yax̱ ayagux̱ sax̱ áa.
what Q IMPRV.3S.good.SUB 1sg.POSS father.ERG 3O.FUT.3S.eat.up
If anything is good, my father will eat it all up.
(WF)
c.
Aadóo sáwé
tá?
who Q.FOC
IMPRV.3S.sleep
Who is sleeping?
Judgment:
Cannot mean ‘Someone is sleeping’.
14 (A)
Since both negation and conditional adjuncts allow interrogatives to be interpreted as indefinites,
it’s worth asking whether both also allow the (∅àsh) classifier change found with k’éi ‘good’.
As shown below, however, the answer is a definite ‘no’.
(20)
Conditional Adjuncts Do Not Trigger Classifier Change
* Daa sá shakʼéyi,
ax̱
éeshch
what Q IMPRV.3S.good.SUB 1sg.POSS father.ERG
Judgment:
Ill-formed, not meaningful
yax̱ ayagux̱ sax̱ áa.
3O.FUT.3S.eat.up
Notice that (20) differs from (19b) only in that the root k’éi bears the sh-classifier in (20), while
it bears the ∅-classifier in (19b). The ill-formedness of (20) therefore shows that the sh-classifier
shift cannot be triggered by a conditional antecedent alone; the change crucially requires
negation. It seems then that, for now, the only construction that can trigger the (∅àsh)
classifier change is negation.
Summing up, the data above indicate that the following questions from Section 1 receive
the following answers.
(21)
Answers to Our Key Questions Regarding Thematic Negation
a.
Question: Can negative themes be modified by comparative phrases like a
yáanáx̱ ‘more than (it)’?
Answer: Yes. See the data in (4).
b.
Question: Is there a syntactic difference between a comparative modifying a
negative theme (e.g., the translation of ‘this is nearer than that’) and the negation
of a comparative itself (e.g., the translation of ‘this is not farther than that’)?
Answer: Yes. See the generalizations (8) and (10), and the data in (4)-(12).
c.
Question: Can any words or phrases come in between a thematic negation and the
rest of the verbal theme?
Answer: Yes. Focus particles (13), dubitatives (14), and indefinites (14).
d.
Question: Is it possible to directly negate a negative theme (e.g., the translation of
‘This is not bad’)?
Question: No. See the data in (16).
e.
Question: Can the morphological changes found in negative themes ever be
triggered by negation in a higher clause?
Answer: No. See the data in (17)-(18)
15 f.
Question: Can the morphological changes found in negative themes ever be
triggered by any constructions other than negation?
Answer: Apparently not. Conditional adjuncts, for example, do not trigger
them. See the data in (19)-(20).
Finally, some additional sentences were elicited to address certain highly technical
questions, the explanation of which would not fit well within the present report. However, in the
interests of providing a complete report of the data obtained, I include these sentences below.
(22)
Additional Sentences Related to Negative Themes and/or Degree Modifiers
a.
b.
Bill ka
ḵín
Bill surface less.than
I am less tall than Bill.
(A)
Ldakát hás
áwé du ḵín
has koodligéi
everyone
FOC 3O less.than PL.COMP.IMPRV.big
Everyone is less tall than him <Bill>.
(JM)
Judgment:
c.
x̱ at kooligéi
1sgO.COMP.IMPRV.big
False if there is one person who is taller than Bill.
Ḵúnáx̱ áwé yawóox̱ ʼ
very FOC IMPRV.3S.wide
Your boat is very wide.
i
yaagú
2.POSS boat
Ḵúnáx̱ áwé yayátʼ
very FOC IMPRV.3S.long
That ladder is very long.
wé
tʼáa dzeit
DEM ladder
e.
Wé yaakw wé
tʼáa dzeit
DEM boat
DEM ladder
That boat is wider than the ladder.
yáanáx̱
more.than
f.
Tlél waa sá utí
NEG how Q IRR.IMPRV.3S.be
d.
(JM)
(JM)
kuliwóox̱ ʼ
COMP.IMPRV.3S.wide
(JM)
wé hít
aadéi kligéiyi
yé
DEM house 3O.to COMP.IMPRV.3S.big.REL way
Itʼs alright for the house to be that tall.
(Lit., ‘It’s alright how tall the ladder is’)
g.
(JM)
Tlél s du tuwáa ushgú
we hít
yei kwligéiyi
yé.
NEG PL.IRR.IMPRV.want DEM house COMP.IMPRV.3S.big.REL way
The house is taller than it’s allowed to be.
(Lit., ‘They don’t like how tall the ladder is’)
(A)
16 For readers who are curious, the data in (22a,b) establish the presence of so-called ‘intervention
effects’ with Tlingit degree modifiers, sentences (22c)-(22e) were obtained while trying
(unsuccessfully) to elicit so-called ‘sub-comparatives’ in the language, and sentences (22f)-(22g)
were obtained while trying (unsuccessfully) to elicit a so-called ‘clausal comparative’.
4.
Connected Future Narrative in Tlingit
As explained in Section 1, one main goal of this most recent period of fieldwork was the
elicitation of a future narrative, a narrative where all the (main) events take place in the future.
The purpose of eliciting such a narrative is to independently test a claim made by Leer (1991:
351-353), that in such narratives, the main verbs need not bear future mode morphology. Leer
supports his claim with the following textual excerpt (I have boldfaced the main verbs as well as
the gloss indicating their mode).
(23)
An Excerpted Future Narrative in Tlingit (Leer 1991: 351-353)
a.
Kayaaní
leaves
tl’áak’ áwé
dry
FOC
aadéi gaxyeeyáa,
3O.to FUT.2sgS.pack
s’igeidí
beaver
kéedi yáx
dam like
gugwatée
FUT.3S.be
tle
then
Ch’u tle
even then
kéet
dam
yóo.
thus
You must pack dry brush there, and it must be like a dam, a beaver dam, like this.
b.
Yá
áa
yei kgeenúk
DEM 3O.at FUT.2sgS.sit.REL
yé
ku.aa
place though
diyínde yóo ḵugax̱ duháa. Sook a
táa
down.to FUT.IndefS.dig
moss 3.POSS bottom
áwé
FOC
yéi gax̱ yee.óo.
FUT.2plS.put
They must dig down at the place where you sit. You must line it with moss.
c.
Shóogu aayí i
first
thing 2sg.POSS
“Ha,
lax̱ éitl
EXCL good.luck
kaadéi
surface.to
daak shayawadudzig̱ íxʼi
aa,
out PRV.IndefS.throw.pile one
Tlʼanaxéedáḵw ax̱
kát
shakawliwáalʼ.”
Tlʼanaxéedáḵw 1sg.POSS surface.to PRV.3S.break
With the first pile (of dry brush) they toss, (you say) “Tlʼanaxéedáḵw has broken
(the dam, so that) good fortune (spills) onto me.”
d.
Tle
then
yéi
thus
áwé
FOC
alx̱ éisʼ
IMPRV.3S.pray
tle dáakde shayagax̱ dulg̱ éech.
then out.to FUT.IndefS.throw
He is (to be) praying thus and they are to toss the piles down.
17 e.
Tle
then
chʼás i
shakée
just
2sg.POSS head.top
a nax̱
3O through
gug̱ washóo
FUT.3S.extend
wé
kayaní tlʼáakʼ.
DEM leaves dry
Only the top of your head must protrude through the dry brush.
f.
Chʼa
just
ldakát
everything
chʼu
even
tle
then
daa sá
what Q
Chʼu
even
tle ldakát
áwé de
then everything FOC already
tle
then
yéi
thus
i
2sg.POSS
aax̱
aydlig̱ íxʼ.
3O.for PRV.2sgS.pray
jeeyís
hand.for
yan uwanée,
PRV.3S.finish
yoo s ikawdusyaayí.
PL.2sgO.PRV.IndefS.make.happen.
Everything, whatever you have prayed for, everything (will) have been prepared
for you, when they do that for you.
Although most of the main verbs above are in the future mode, a few are either in the
imperfective (23d) or the perfective (23f). Note, moreover, that none of verbs heading
subordinate clauses appear in the future mode; in the excerpt above, all such verbs are perfective.
This leads Leer to make the generalization that it is “quite common” for subordinate verbs in
future narratives to lack future marking, but this is “less commonly” found for main verbs in
future narratives (Leer 1991: 353).
The possibility of sentences like (23d) and (23f) in the discourse above raises a whole
host of subsequent questions, most especially: what are the conditions – either rhetorical or
grammatical – under which a non-future verb can be interpreted as referring to a future
occurrence? Relatedly, what is the rhetorical effect – if any – of leaving future marking off of a
verb that in context describes a future event? To answer these questions, we would ideally like to
examine a number of similar such future narratives, to see if any generalizations can be made
about when non-future verbs appear. Unfortunately, future narratives are exceedingly rare in
natural discourse. While existing corpora contain many examples of future-marked verbs, such
verbs typically appear isolated from one another. After all, the kinds of narratives typically
elicited by linguists or anthropologists largely concern either the present or the past; indeed, the
passage in (23) is taken from a narrative that is otherwise past-oriented. Consequently, within the
currently published Tlingit narratives, it is exceedingly difficult to find any extended sequence of
sentences describing connected future events.
To remedy this issue, I sought to elicit an artificially constructed future narrative, using
the storyboard methodology described in Section 2. The storyboard that was used with the elders
– designed by myself and undergraduate RA Rose Underhill – is included here in the Appendix;
it has also now been publicly posted at the Totem Fields Storyboards website
(http://www.totemfieldstoryboards.org/stories/hawaii_trip/). I include below the English version
of the accompanying narrative.
18 (24)
English Language Narration for ‘Hawaii Trip’ Storyboard
a.
Page 1:
This is Mary. And, this is Bill.
b.
Page 2:
(i)
(ii)
c.
Page 3:
I will get on the plane at eight in the morning, and I will arrive in
Hawaii at night.
d.
Page 4:
I will stay in a big hotel by the beach.
e.
Page 5:
On the first day, I’ll be really happy to be away from home.
f.
Page 6:
I’ll walk along the beach, and then I’ll sleep in the sun.
g.
Page 7:
When the sun goes down, I’ll be drinking a mai tai.
h.
Page 8:
Then, I’ll go back to the hotel, and I’ll go to bed.
i.
Page 9:
The next morning, I’ll get up, I’ll get a bath, and I’ll get on a bus.
j.
Page 10:
Since I’ll be taking the bus, I’ll bring money along.
k.
Page 11:
I’ll then go on a tour around the island.
l.
Page 12:
I’ll do many other fun things too.
“Hi Bill, will you be travelling anywhere this summer?”
“Yep! I’m going to go to Hawaii!”
Three elders participated in the creation of the Tlingit version of this narrative: William
Fawcett, Carolyn Martin, and John Martin. The creation of the narrative was largely lead by John
Martin, with Mr. Fawcett and Mrs. Martin providing additional suggestions on occasion. I
include below the Tlingit narrative provided by John Martin. As in (23), I have boldfaced the
main verbs as well as the gloss indicating their mode. Neither Mr. Fawcett nor Mrs. Martin
disagreed with any aspect of the narrative below.
(25)
John Martin’s Tlingit Language Narration for ‘Hawaii Trip’ Storyboard
a.
Page 1:
Nóots tin
smile with
áwé
FOC
Aag̱ áa áwé
then FOC
yéi yaawaḵaa, “Wa.é
ákwé,
PRV.3S.say 2sg.PRO COP.Q
Mary yát
Mary face.to
awdlig̱ én,
3O.PRV.3S.look
Bill.
Bill
Mary?”
Mary
Bill looked at Mary with a smile. Then he said “Hi, Mary!” (Lit., “Is that you
Mary?”)
19 b.
Page 2:
Wé
shaaxʼw sáani chookán tin has alʼeix̱
xʼáatʼ dei
DEM girls
grass
with PL.IMPRV.3S.dance island to
áwé
FOC
ḵukgwatéen.
FUT.1sgS.travel
I’m going to travel to the island where girls dance with grass (skirts).
c.
Page 3:
Xáanaa déi ḵuwuhaayí
áwé,
evening to PRV.become.time.SUB FOC
wé
xʼáatʼ káa
DEM island surface.at
Xʼéig̱ aa
truly
wé yaa ndaḵín
washéen
DEM PROG.3S.fly machine
haa
een
1pl.POSS with
x̱ wasikóo
PRV.1sgS.know
yei kg̱ washḵáaḵ.
FUT.3S.land
xáanaa dé
evening to
kínde
x̱ walg̱ einí
above.to PRV.1sgS.look.SUB
áwé
FOC
ḵuwuhaayí,
PRV.become.time.SUB
ḵutx̱ .ayanahá x̱ wasiteen.
star
PRV.1sgS.see
When evening comes, the plane will land with us on the island. I truly know that
when evening has come, when I look up, I see stars.
d.
Page 4:
Wé
yaa ndaḵín
washéen
DEM PROG.3S.fly machine
haa een
1plO with
wé
xʼáat’ ká
áwé, wé
hít
tlein
DEM island surface FOC DEM house big
haa wdudzix̱ óotʼ,
áa
1plO.PRV.IndefS.transport 3O.at
has akaawaneek
áa
PL.3O.PRV.3S.tell 3O.at
áa
wushḵaag̱ í
3O.at PRV.3S.land.SUB
aadé
3O.to
yéi haa kg̱ watee yé.
Haa een tsú
1plO.FUT.be. place 1plO with also
at gax̱ toox̱ áa
ḵa
IndefO.FUT.1plS.eat and
gax̱ tudanáa,
ḵa ḵwéinapples tsú haa x̱ ʼéide
FUT.1plS.drink and pine.apples too 1plO mouth.to
toowú sagú
toonáx̱ .
Mai tai tsú haa
spirit gladness inside.through mai tai too 1plO
has akakg̱ wanáa.
PL.3O.FUT.3S.dampen
20 káaxwei tsú
coffee too
has akgwatee,
PL.3O.FUT.3S.give
x̱ ʼéidei
mouth.to
The plane having landed with us on the island, we are transported to the big
house where we will be staying. They tell us that we will eat there, and drink
coffee, and they will feed us pineapples to make us happy. Also, they will give us
mai tais to drink.
e.
Page 5:
Yá
neil dáx̱
DEM home from
x̱ wadaḵeení
PRV.1sgS.fly.SUB
sh tóo
yan x̱ wadzinei.
REFL.inside TERM.PRV.1sgS.slacken
áwé,
FOC
chʼa
just
Ldakát át
everything
x̱ át
áyá
1sg.PRO FOC
áwé
FOC
a kaadé x̱ at sakg̱ waxʼáaḵw. Chʼa sh toowú sagú
3O.FUT.1sgS.forget
just REFL.spirit happiness
ḵu.aa a káa
though 3O.surface.at
yánde tukḵwatáan. Wé nóots
TERM.FUT.think
DEM smile
ax̱
yáa
1sg.POSS face.at
ax̱ tuwáa sigóo
IMPRV.1sgS.want
kawunaag̱ í.
PRV.3S.stand.SUB
Having flown from home, I completely relax. I will forget about everything. I will
only contemplate happiness. I want a smile to stand out on my face.
f.
Page 6:
Wé
dleit yáx̱ yateeyi
lʼéiw áwé
DEM white
IMPRV.3S.be.REL sand FOC
a káx̱
3O.surface.on
yaa kg̱ wagóot.
X̱ at wudixweidlí,
kuḵwasakóo
aag̱ aa tsá
PROG.FUT.3S.walk 1sgO.PRV.tire.SUB FUT.1sgS.know then then
wé lʼéiw káxʼ
yánde sh kuḵwastáa.
Tléil wáa sá gug̱ watee
DEM sand surface.at TERM.REFL.FUT.1sgS.sleep NEG how Q FUT.3S.be
táach
x̱ at wujaag̱ í.
Wé pearls daat
sleep.ERG 1sgO.PRV.3S.kill.SUB DEM pearls about
kuḵwajóon
FUT.1sgS.dream
I will be walking along the white sands. When I get tired, I’ll know that I’ll lie
down on the sand. It will be fine to fall asleep. I will dream about pearls.
g.
Page 7:
Wé
g̱ agaan yínde yaa naxíxi,
aag̱ aa áwé haa jeeyís
DEM sun
down.to PROG.3S.fall then FOC 1plO for
kei s at gug̱ washée.
Chʼa yeisú has at sheeyí
áwé,
PL.IndefO.FUT.3S.sing just still PL.IndefO.IMPRV.sing.SUB FOC
21 ‘mai tai’ yéi duwasáagu
héen haa x̱ ʼéide has akkugwanáa.
mai tai 3O.IMPRV.IndefS.call.REL water our mouth.to PL.3O.FUT.3S.dampen
Yéi áwé kadunéek,
thus FOC IMPRV.3S.say
“Déix̱ yidanaayí
two PRV.2sg.drink.SUB
kei at gag̱ eeshée
ḵa chʼa yákwde
IndefO.FUT.2sgS.sing and just involuntarily
tsú
also
g̱ unei akg̱ eelʼéix̱ .”
begin FUT.2sgS.dance
When the sun is going down, then they will sing for us. While they’re still singing,
they will give us those drinks that are called ‘mai tais’. They say, “Once you’ve
drunk two of those, you too will be singing, and you’ll begin to dance.”
h.
Page 8:
A yáanáx̱ wé mai tai x̱ wadanaayí
áwé,
3O beyond DEM mai tai PRV.1sgS.drink.SUB FOC
yú áa
yéi x̱ at yateeyi yé
DEM 3O.at 1sgO.IMPRV.be.REL place
Chʼa yákwde
just involuntarily
a kát x̱ at seiwaxʼáakw.
3O.PRV.1sgS.forget
áwé a yáa
x̱ waagút.
FOC 3O fact.at PRV.1sgS.walk
Áa
neil x̱ wagoodí
áwé,
3O.at inside PRV.1sgS.walk.SUB FOC
tléil yawda.aa,
NEG PRV.3S.delay
tle yánde yaa sh nax̱ astéini
áwé,
then TERM.REFL.PROG.1sgS.sleep.SUB FOC
táach
x̱ at uwajáḵ
sleep.ERG 1sgO.PRV.3S.kill
Tle chʼa yóoxʼ taach
x̱ at uwajáḵ
ḵa wé noots chʼa yeisú
then just DEM.at sleep.ERG 1sgO.PRV.3S.kill and DEM smile just still
ax̱
yáa kaawanáḵ.
1sgPOSS face.at PRV.3S.stand
Having drunk too many mai tais, I forget where I’m staying. I accidentally walk
into it. Having walked inside, there’s no delay, then I lie down and fall asleep. I
fall asleep right there, and a smile still stands on my face.
i.
Page 9:
Kʼidéin x̱ wadlisáa,
shax̱ wdinook áwé chʼa yeisú mai tai yáx̱
well
PRV.1sgS.rest PRV.1sgS.rise FOC just still mai tai like
ax̱
x̱ ʼéi yax̱ duwanook.
Aag̱ áa yéi x̱ at tuwatee
1sgPOSS mouth 3O.IMPRV.IndefS.sense then
1sgO.IMPRV.feel.like
22 sh
daa náx̱
REFL body along
kada.óosʼi. Wé lʼéiw tsú ax̱ gúk tʼéináx̱
washing DEM sand too my ear inside
aax̱
kuḵwa.óosʼ.
Aag̱ áa áwé wé
at kawdudlijooxú
washéen
3O.from FUT.1sgS.wash then FOC DEM PRV.3S.spin.around machine
káanáx̱ kei kḵwagóot. At haa gax̱ dusx̱ óotʼ.
for
FUT.1sgS.walk 1plO.FUT.3S.convey.around
Ldakát át
everything
áwé
FOC
has ashakg̱ wajáa.
PL.3O.FUT.3S.instruct
I rest well, I get up, and my mouth still tastes like mai tais. Then, I feel like
washing. I will also wash the sand out from my ears. I go out for the bus. It will
take us around. They will explain everything.
j.
Page 10:
Wé áa
yéi x̱ at yateeyi
yé,
wé át kawdudlijooxú
washéen,
DEM 3O.at 1sgO.IMPRV.be.REL place DEM PRV.3S.spin.around machine
á
tsu
ax̱
jeeyís yan has awsinei.
Chʼa aan
ḵu
3.PRO again 1sgPOSS for
TERM.PL.3O.PRV.3S.do nevertheless though
dáanaa tlein g̱ altóo
yei kḵwa.oo.
dollar big pocket.at FUT.1sgS.have
At the place where I’m staying, they again ready the bus for me. Nevertheless, I’ll
bring money in my pocket.
k.
Page 11:
Wé at kawdudlijooxú
washéen kax̱ x̱ wagoodí
áwé,
DEM PRV.3S.spin.around machine for PRV.1sgS.walk.SUB FOC
yéi haa yawdudziḵaa wé xʼáatʼ tlein kʼwátʼdáx̱ haa een yei gax̱ dusḵóox̱ .
1plO.FUT.IndefS.tell DEM island big tour
1plO with FUT.IndefS.drive
Haa
waaḵ tín kei kagux̱ sayéi, yéi áwé haa een kaduneek.
1plPOSS eye with FUT.3S.strange thus FOC 1plO with IMPRV.IndefS.say
Kʼwát’dáx̱ a daa
haa een yaa naḵúx̱ u
áwé
tour
3O around 1plO with PROG.3S.drive.SUB FOC
x̱ ʼáax̱
yaa nashtook
mouth.PERT PROG.3S.explode
23 wé washéen.
DEM machine
Having walked to the bus, they tell us that we will be taken on a tour of the big
island. Everything will be strange to our eyes, they tell us. While itʼs driving us
around on the tour, the bus keeps backfiring.
l.
Page 12:
Kʼwát’dax̱ haa een yaa naḵúx̱ u,
wé xʼáatʼ,
tour
1plO with PROG.3S.drive.SUB DEM island
at kawdudlijooxú
washéen een, ḵulitéesʼsháni
át
PRV.3S.spin.around machine with IMPRV.3S.fascinating.REL thing
haa ée has ashukaawajáa. Ax̱
toowú
1plO.at PL.3O.PRV.3S.advise 1sgPOSS inside
áwé
FOC
ḵuyanéekw
IMPRV.3S.pain
wé chookán een has alʼéix̱ i
shaax̱ ʼsáani
DEM grass with PL.3O.IMPRV.3S.dance.REL girls
hél wutusateen.
NEG PRV.1plS.see
While theyʼre driving us on the tour of the island in the bus, they advise us of all
the fascinating things. Iʼm sad that we donʼt see any of those girls who dance with
grass (skirts).
I also include below the suggestions made by Mr. Fawcett and Mrs. Martin for particular pages.
(26)
Suggestions for Particular Pages Made by William Fawcett or Carolyn Martin
a.
b.
c.
Page 1:
Mary yóo duwasáakw,
wé
shaawát.
Mary IMPRV.IndefS.name DEM woman
That woman is named Mary.
Page 2:
Daaḵw aa
xʼáatʼ kaadé
which PART island surface.to
Which island are you traveling to?
(CM)
sáwé
ḵukg̱ eetéen?
Q.FOC FUT.2sgS.travel
(WF)
Page 4:
Áwé wé hít tlein, wé tá daakahídixʼ yéi x̱ at kg̱ watée, éeḵ x̱ án
FOC DEM house big DEM sleep house.at
FUT.1sgO.be beach near
I will stay at a big house, a hotel, by the beach.
(WF)
24 d.
Page 9:
Shukḵwadanóokw, sh
daa kḵwada.óosʼ. Ḵutéesʼi
yei kḵwasanéi
FUT.1sgS.wake
REFL body FUT.1sgS.wash sightseeing FUT.1sgS.do
I will wake up. I will wash myself. I will go sightseeing.
(WF)
e.
Page 10:
Wé
bus káx̱ x̱ wagoodí,
kuḵwaḵéi.
DEM bus for PRV.1sgS.walk.SUB FUT.1sgS.pay
Ách
áwé
3PRO.INSTR FOC
dáanaa ax̱
money 1sg.POSS
jéewu.
hand.LOC
Having walked to the bus, I will pay. For this reason, I’ll have money. (WF)
Examining Mr. Martin’s narration in (25), we find that both parts of Leer’s (1991)
generalization are readily confirmed. First, virtually none of the subordinate verbs bear future
mode marking.7 Secondly, we do find that there are main verbs – ones describing future events –
that do not bear future mode. In fact, of the 48 main verbs in (25) that describe a future event,
only 25 bear future mode morphology. The other 48% of those verbs bear either perfective or
imperfective mode. Lest one suspect that some kind of translation error is responsible for this,
the following should be born in mind. First, the narrative for each page in (25) was produced
entirely fluently. Furthermore, for each page, the narration provided was repeated back to Mr.
Martin by James Crippen. Upon hearing Mr. Crippen’s transcription of his narrative for that
page, Mr. Martin would make suggested corrections and improvements; never did any of these
changes concern the mode-marking on the verb. Finally, once the entire storyboard was narrated,
Mr. Crippen read the complete narration back to all three elders, including Mr. Martin. Again, a
few changes and corrections were suggested, but none of them concerned the mode-marking of
the verb. It is also worth noting that in several cases, a future-marked main verb and a non-future
main verb both appear within the same ‘breath group’ in the narrative ((25c), (25e), (25g), (25i),
(25j), (25k)), rendering it highly improbable that Mr. Martin had somehow momentarily
forgotten the ‘future orientation’ of the narrative.
Having accepted that Mr. Martin does use non-future verbs in (25) to describe future
events, one naturally then wonders what the rhetorical effect (if any) of such a verb choice is. To
probe this question slightly, at one point, Mr. Crippen and I directly asked Mr. Martin about the
choice of verbal mode in his narration for page 8 (25h).8 Mr. Martin’s comments back to us
suggest that his use of non-future verbs might be something similar to a ‘narrative present’ in
English.9 That is, the non-future verbs perhaps portray these future events to the listener more
vividly and immediately than a future-mode verb would. Note that if this were so, we might
understand why such a large proportion of the verbs in (25) are not future-marked. Recall that
7
The only exception is in line (25d): áa yéi haa kg̱ watee yé ‘the place where we will be’. None of the temporal
adjuncts, translated into English as ‘when’-clauses, bear future mode.
8
That is, we briefly asked to confirm that the narration in (25h) was describing ‘things that he’s going to do’ rather
than ‘things that he already did.’
9
“The way I read the picture was… He was facing the evening activity, so that’s what his remarks are. So, present
tense, not future tense. But the very thing that was engulfing him for that evening… the things that he was
experiencing, what was being portrayed, was what was being said.”
25 Mr. Martin was narrating a storyboard, where each of the future events is immediately, visually
presented to the narrator (and possibly his imagined audience). Such a task naturally invites the
use of narrative present in English, and it may similarly prompt the use of constructions with a
parallel meaning in Tlingit.10 For this reason, in my own English free translation of (25), I often
translate non-future main verbs using English narrative present. Nevertheless, it certainly
remains an open and important question for future work what the overall effect of the non-future
verbs in (25) is.
Finally, I should mention that certain aspects of this storyboard were designed to test
whether Tlingit exhibits the restrictions found in other languages on the use of non-future verbs
to describe future events. That is, Tonhauser (2011) reports that in Paraguayan Guarani, nonfuture (main) verbs can be used to describe future events only if either (i) that verb is conjoined
with a preceding verb that does bear future marking, or (ii) that verb is preceded by a ‘because’clause whose verb bears future marking. It should be clear from a cursory examination of (25)
that Tlingit does not appear to exhibit these restrictions. On the other hand, if the use of nonfuture verbs in (25) has a special rhetorical effect, akin to narrative present in English, then it
may not be directly comparable to the use of non-future verbs in Guarani (for which no such
rhetorical effect is reported).
References
Cable, Seth. 2015. “The Tlingit Decessive and ‘Discontinuous Past’: The Curious Implicatures
of Optional Past Tense.” Under revision for Natural Language and Linguistic Theory.
Crippen, James. 2013. “Segmentic and Glossing Tlingit.” Manuscript. University of British
Columbia.
Dauenhauer, Nora Marks and Richard Dauenhauer. 1987. Classics of Tlingit Oral Literature,
Volume 1: Haa Shuká, Our Ancestors: Tlingit Oral Narratives. Juneau, AK: Sealaska
Heritage Foundation Press.
Dauenhauer, Nora Marks and Richard Dauenhauer. 1990. Classics of Tlingit Oral Literature,
Volume 2: Haa Tuwunáagu Yís, For Our Healing Spirit: Tlingit Oratory. Juneau, AK:
Sealaska Heritage Foundation.
Dauenhauer, Nora Marks and Richard Dauenhauer. 1994. Classics of Tlingit Oral Literature,
Volume 3: Haa Kusteyí, Our Culture: Tlingit Life Stories. Juneau, AK: Sealaska Heritage
Foundation.
Edwards, Keri. 2009. Dictionary of Tlingit. Juneau, AK: Sealaska Heritage Institute.
Leer, Jeff. 1991. The Schetic Categories of the Tlingit Verb. PhD Dissertation. University of
Chicago.
Nyman, Elizabeth and Jeff Leer. 1993. Gágiwdul.àt: Brought Forth to Reconfirm. The Legacy of
a Taku River Tlingit Clan. Fairbanks, AK: Alaska Native Language Center.
Story, Gillian and Constance Naish. 1973. Tlingit Verb Dictionary. Fairbanks, AK: Alaska
Native Language Center.
Tonhauser, Judith. 2011. “Temporal Reference in Paraguayan Guarni, a Tenseless Language.”
Linguistics and Philosophy 34: 257-303.
10
I thank Jeremy Pasquereau (p.c.) for bringing this point to my attention.
26 Appendix: The Storyboard “Hawaii Trip”
What follows is the storyboard titled “Hawaii Trip”. This storyboard was designed by Rose
Underhill and Seth Cable. The artwork is by Rose Underhill.
More information on this storyboard can be found at the Totem Fields Storyboards website:
http://www.totemfieldstoryboards.org/stories/hawaii_trip/
27