1 Genesis of an evidential category: revelation from the ‘noisy stream’ Kristine Stenzel Federal University of Rio de Janeiro / [email protected] Objectives: Quick overview of ET evidential systems, particulars of Kotiria system Focus on category of NON-VISUAL sensory evidence in Kotiria • situate the NON-VISUAL category as a contrasting member of the five-category evidential system • demonstrate its structural properties and use • present new hypothesis of its origin THE VAUPÉS REGION AND LOCATION OF KOTIRIA POPULATION 1. Introduction The evidential systems of Eastern Tukanoan languages • obligatory; inflectional (number/ person/ tense-aspect /animacy) • 4-5 categories in realis statements, 2-3 in interrogatives i. VISUAL, indicates direct sensory evidence, w/extension to statements of general fact ii. NON-VISUAL, indicates other-than-visual or internal sensory evidence iii. INFERENCE, expresses conclusions based on directly observed, but after-the-fact, evidence iv. ASSUMED, expresses generally known/shared information, reasoned supposition. v. HEARSAY, indicates secondhand information; may code temporal/aspectual distinctions. 1 2 Table 1. Tuyuca Evidentials (Barnes 1984:258) VISUAL NONVISUAL APPARENT PAST Other 3msg 3fsg 3pl -wɨ -wi -wo -wa -tɨ -ti -to -ta (INFERENCE) -yu -yi -yo -ya Present Other (*2)/3msg (*2)/3fsg (*2)/3pl -a -i -yo -ya -ga -gi -go -ga *-hĩi *-hĩo *-hĩra INFORMED (HEARSAY) -yiro -yigɨ -yigo -yira ASSUMED - -ku -ki -ko -kua -hĩyu -hĩyi -hĩyo -hĩya • 3rd/non-3rd paradigm • inflectional (person, number, gender, tense) 2. The Kotiria (Wanano) system TABLE 2. KOTIRIA EVIDENTIALS (WALTZ & WALTZ 1997; 2000) VISUAL PAST Present NON-VISUAL INDICATED (INFERENCE) INFORMED (HEARSAY) 1st person 2nd/3rd person -(ʔ)i -(ʔ)re -ʔa -ri hi-re -yuʔti 1st person 2nd/3rd person -ha -ra -ka -ri hi-ra -yuʔka • 1st/non-1st paradigm with neutralization of gender and number distinctions • analytic construction for inference TABLE 3. KOTIRIA EVIDENTIALS (Stenzel 2008) NON FIRSTHAND FIRSTHAND EXTERNAL DIRECT NON-VISUAL VISUAL 1ST QUOT. DIFF. -yu’ka -yu’ti HEARSAY PERF -i INTERNAL INDIRECT 2nd/3rd IMPERF PERF IMPERF -ha -re (VISUAL) -ra koa-taNON-VISUAL -ri hiINFERENCE PERF IMPERF -a -ka ASSERTION • semantic features distinguishing each category • aspectual rather than tense distinctions for VISUAL and ASSERTION categories, referential distinctions for HEARSAY • fifth category: NON-VISUAL (different from Waltz & Waltz NON-VISUAL and not directly parallel to other ET NON-VISUALS) 2 3 Kotiria examples with VISUAL, INFERENCE, HEARSAY and ASSERTION evidential a) VISUAL (speaker witnessed or experienced) (1) õpʉ hira yʉ pho’na ~ó-pʉ́ 1 hí-ra yʉ=~pho’dá DEIC.PROX-LOC COP-VIS.IMPERF.2/3 1SG.POSS=children ‘Here he (a missing dog) is, my sons.’ (2) yʉ’ʉse’e bu’ewa’a yoatii yʉ’ʉ́-se’e bu’é-wa’a yoá-ati-i 1SG-CONTR study/learn-go do/make-IMPERF-VIS.PERF.1 ‘(But) I was always going away to study.’ (extension to statements of general fact) (3) phũria khʉariro hira tiro ~phurí-a khʉá-ri-ro hí-ra tí-ró poison-PL hold/have-NOM-SG COP-VIS.IMPERF.2/3 ANPH-SG ‘It (a viper) is extremely poisonous.’ b) INFERENCE (conclusions based on directly observed ‘after-the-fact’ evidence) (4) yoatapʉ wihatu’sʉri hira yóá=ta-pʉ wihá-tu’sʉ-ri hí-ra be.far=REF-LOC MOV.outward-finish-NOM(INFER) COP-VIS.IMPERF.2/3 ‘They’ve just escaped.’ (5) yʉ mahkʉre wãharokari hire yʉ=~bak-ʉ́-ré ~wahá-roka-ri hí-re 1SG.POSS=child-MASC-OBJ kill-DIST-NOM(INFER) COP-VIS.PERF.2/3 ‘My son’s been killed.’ c) ASSERTION (speaker’s own internal sensations) (6) phũriyʉ’dʉaka ~phurí-yʉ’dʉ-a-ka hurt-INTENS-AFFEC-ASSERT.IMPERF ‘It hurts a lot.’ (speaker’s reasoned suppositions about others) (7) yʉ’ʉre a’riro chʉduaro nika yʉ’ʉ́-ré a’rí-ró chʉ́-dua-ro ~dí-ka 1SG-OBJ DEM.PROX-SG eat-DESID-(3)SG be.PROG-ASSERT.IMPERF ‘This thing (the curupira) wants (lit., ‘is wanting’) to eat me.’ 1 In the examples ‘~’ indicates an inherently nasal morpheme, the acute accent ´ indicates High tone; Low tone is unmarked. 3 4 (culturally shared or mythical knowledge) (8) mia wa’i dainakãre chʉka tiro ~bí-a wa’í dá-~ídá-~ká-ré chʉ́-ka ti-ro sardine-PL fish be.small-NOM.PL-DIM-OBJ eat-ASSERT.IMPERF ANPH-SG ‘It (a bass) eats sardines (and) small fish.’ phanopʉre hiatiga mahsayahkaina. ~phadó-pʉ-re hí-ati-a ~basá-yáká-~ídá do/be.before-LOC-OBJ COP-IMPERF-ASSERT.PERF people-steal-NOM.PL ‘In the olden days there were people-stealers.’ (9) d) HEARSAY (10) a. tiro wʉ’ʉpʉ wa’ayu’ka tí-ró wʉ’ʉ́-pʉ́ wa’á-yu’ka ANPH-SG house-LOC go-HSAY.QUOT (Someone specific told me that) ‘He went home.’ b. tiro wʉ’ʉpʉ wa’ayu’ti tí-ró wʉ’ʉ́-pʉ́ wa’á-yu’ti ANPH-SG house-LOC go-HSAY.DIFF (They say that) ‘He went home.’ 3. The Kotiria NON-VISUAL 3.1 Structure • analytic: serialization of Vroots koa and ta • as with all Kotiria constructions that involve verbal complements, the preceding verb is nominalized by a noun class suffix cross-referenced to the Subject: 3PL in (11); 3SG in (12)-(13) • final suffix either from VISUAL (11)-(12) or ASSERTION (13) categories (11) numia ña’aina taa nia koatara ~dubí-a ~ya’á-~ida tá-á ~dí-a koá-ta-ra woman-PL catch-NOM.PL come-(3)PL be.PROG-(3)PL NONVIS-come-VIS.IMPERF.2/3 ‘Women-kidnappers are coming.’ (the speaker hears them approaching) (12) ã yoa tu’sʉ, pairore nʉnʉ wãharo, toi yairose’e tirore nʉnʉti ña’aro koatare ~a=yoá tu’sʉ́ pá-iro-re ~dʉdʉ́ ~wahá-ro to-i yaí-ró-sé’é so=do finish ALT-NOM.SG-OBJ follow/chase kill-(3)SG REM-LOC jaguar-SG-CONTR tí-ró-ré ~dʉdʉ́-ati ~ya’á-ro koá-ta-re ANPH-SG-OBJ follow/chase-IMPERF catch-(3)SG NONVIS-come-VIS.PERF.2/3 ‘Afterwards, while (our dog was) chasing after another animal out there, a jaguar caught him.’ 4 5 (13) te õba’aro’i wi’itarokaro koataa. té ~ó-bá’á-ró-í wi’í-tá-róká-ró all.the.way DEIC.PROX-be.after-LOC arrive-come-DIST-(3)SG ‘(The man heard) him (the curupira) approaching from afar.’ koá-ta-a NONVIS-come-ASSERT.PERF 3.2 Basic semantics • most frequently codes auditory information • indication of extension to other non-visual sensory information (14) borasʉ̃ka’a wa’aro koataa borá-~sʉ-ka’a wa’á-ro koá-ta-a fall-arrive-do.moving go-(3)SG NONVIS-come-ASSERT.PERF ‘(The curupira) fell right down.’ (the speaker hears and additionally feels the vibration from the great creature’s fall) 3.3 Development of Kotiria NON-VISUAL Crosslinguistic ET comparison • Malone (1988) and (Aikhenvald 2002:127): grammaticalization of V compounds with roots ‘seem’ ‘be perceived’ as likely source of ET NON-VISUAL synthetic evidentials • Malone (1988): Some ET Ls (TUY, SIR, YUR) have specific and highly-marked ‘auditory evidence’ constructions with forms i. STEM-NONVIS(SF)-VIS(SF) or ii. STEM-GENDER/NUMBER AUX-NONVIS(SF) AUX= ti(i)/iri ‘do’ • Close semantic relationship of NON-VISUAL and ASSUMED categories in ET Ls o Ls with no NON-VISUAL use ASSUMED category o Ls with both often use NON-VISUAL for internal sensations of speaker and ASSUMED for internal sensations of others • No overlap in Kotiria: NON-VISUAL Semantics more restricted; e.g., not used for internal sensations of speaker (ASSERTION category used for this) 3.3.1 First analysis (Stenzel 2004, 2008): koá ‘taste’ Æ ‘perceive’ (specific internal sensation) (general non-visual sensory information) (15) to di’i noaro koaka to=di’í ~dóá-ró koá-ka 3SG.POSS=meat be.good-SG taste-ASSERT.IMPERF ‘Its (a cow’s) meat tastes good.’ koa then serialized with ta ‘come’ (cislocative direction of external source of non-visual sensory information) (11)-(14) 5 6 Use of NON-VISUAL construction contrasting with use of specific lexical perception verbs as main predicate with non-evidential reading. (17b) cf. (17c) (16) ~yʉ thʉ’o thʉ’o-thu koá ‘see, look; realize’ ‘hear, feel’ ‘smell; understand’ (lit., ‘feel-think’) ‘taste’ (17) a. to khĩ’ori ora karaka duripa, topʉ pihsutaa ñami kʉ̃ta karaka duripa. tó ~khi’ó-rí óra káráká dú-ri-pa tó-pʉ DEF be.arranged-NOM hour[B] rooster speak-NOM- CLS:time REM-LOC pisú-ta-a ~yabí ~kʉ́=ta káráká dú-ri-pa call-come-ASSERT.PERF night one=REF rooster speak-NOM-CLS:time ‘At the appointed cock-crowing hour, (from) that place came a call, at the first nighttime crowing hour.’ b. kʉ̃iro to mahkʉro bʉhkʉrokurero thʉ’oga. ~kʉ́-író to=~bak-ʉ́-ró one-NOM.SG 3SG.POSS=child-MASC-SG ‘One of his sons, the oldest, heard it.’ bʉk-ʉ́-ro-kure-ro elder-MASC-SG-COMP-SG c. mari phʉkʉ tatu’sʉro koataka. ~bari=phʉk-ʉ́ tá-tú’sʉ́-ró 1PL.INC.POSS=parent-MASC come-finish-(3)SG ‘“Our father’s just come (to the meeting place).”’ thʉ’ó-a hear-ASSERT.PERF koá-ta-ka NONVIS-come-ASSERT.IMPERF 3.3.2 Reformulated analysis (Stenzel forthcoming): two koa forms (1) hikoa ‘like’ Æ koa ‘taste (good)’ (18) i. ii. iii. (2) and koa ‘make noise / produce sound’(diachronic) Kotiria names for village of Carurú Cachoeira mõ ‘salt plant’ mõa phoa-ye ‘salt plant rapids’ koama phoaye koá-~ba phoá-yé make.noise-CLS:stream rapids-PL ‘noisy-stream rapids’ koa-ta ‘make.noise-come’ Æ auditory source Æ general NON-VISUAL evidence (recent extension) 6 7 3.3 Areal view: ‘make noise’ verbs as source of NON-VISUAL evidentials • typologically more common scenario (Anderson 1986, Aikhenvald 2004): perception verbs e.g. ‘hear’ ‘feel’ ‘perceive’ Æ NON-VISUAL evidentials In Vaupés: Tariana -hima ‘hear, feel’ Æ NON-VISUAL –mha Desano kari ‘hear, feel, seem’ Æ NON-VISUAL serialization (Miller 1999) • Less common scenario: ‘make noise’ Vs Æ NON-VISUAL markers In Vaupés: parallels in Nadahup (Makú) languages: Hup (Epps 2005) and Yuhup (Ospina Bozzi 2002) Summary/Conclusions: Kotiria evidential system shows a number of departures from general ET patterns: • Reorganization of person distinctions • Neutralization of gram. categories • Preference for analytic constructions (INFERENCE, NON-VISUAL): Retention or recent development? Both? NON-VISUAL construction is recent development: • No parallel in Wa’ikhana • grammaticalization from V-serialization with ‘make noise’ root, with areal non-ET parallels (at least none identified so far!) Abbreviations 1/2/3 AFFECT ALT ANPH ASSERT CLS COMP CONTR COP DEIC DESID DIFF DIM DIST HSAY IMPERF INFER first/second/third person affected alternate anaphoric assertion classifier comparative contrastive copula deictic desiderative diffuse diminutive distal hearsay imperfective inferential INTENS LOC MASC MOV NOM NONVIS OBJ PERF PL POSS PROG PROX QUOT REF REM SG VIS intensifier locative masculine movement nominalizer non-visual objetive (case) perfective plural possessive progressive proximate quotative referential remote singular visual 7 8 References Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2002 Language Contact in Amazonia. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2004 Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Anderson, Lloyd B. 1986 Evidentials, Paths of Change, and Mental Maps: Typologically Regular Asymmetries. In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology, edited by Wallace Chafe and Johanna Nichols, 273–312. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex. Barnes, Janet 1984 Evidentials in the Tuyuca Verb. International Journal of American Linguistics 50(3):255–71. Epps, Patience 2005 Areal Diffusion and the Development of Evidentiality: Evidence from Hup. Studies in Language. 29(3):617–49. Malone, Terrell 1988 The Origin and Development of Tuyuca Evidentials. International Journal of American Linguistics 54(2):119–40. Miller, Marion 1999 Desano Grammar. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics; [Arlington]: University of Texas at Arlington. Ospina Bozzi, Ana María. 2002 Les structures élémentaires do Yuhup Makú, langue de l'amazonie colombienne: morphologie et syntaxe. Université Paris 7: PhD dissertation. Stenzel, Kristine 2004 A Reference Grammar of Wanano, University of Colorado: Ph.D. dissertation. 2008 Evidentials and Clause Modality in Wanano. Studies in Language 32(2):404–44. forthcoming A Reference Grammar of Kotiria (Wanano). University of Nebraska Press. Waltz, Nathan E., and Carolyn Waltz 1997 El agua, la roca y el humo: Estudios sobre la cultura wanana del Vaupés. Bogotá: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano. 2000 El wanano. In Lenguas indígenas de Colombia: Una visión descriptiva, edited by María Stella González de Pérez and María Luisa Rodríguez de Montes, 453–67. Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo. 8
© Copyright 2024 Paperzz
