Abstract
Verbs in San Pedro Amuzgo, an Oto-Manguean language of Mexico, often have two different stems in the paradigm, one used with singular subjects and the other with plural subjects. This split motivated by number is typologically interesting due to its rarity, since number splits are commonly along the S/O vs. A distinction, not the S/A vs. O distinction. Apart from at stem level, the split is also manifested in the incompletive of an inflectional class of verbs. At stem level the plural stem is derived in a variety of unproductive ways, making the relation between singular and plural stems, synchronically, one of suppletion. In this article, we study the distribution and the morphological properties of this split in depth, using a sample of almost 600 fully inflected verbs from a large database compiled by native linguist Fermín Tapia and now publicly accessible on the Surrey Morphology Group’s website. We also place it in a typological context, relating it to other systems we have observed.
Acknowledgments
We are immensely grateful to Fermín Tapia for letting us use his database on San Pedro Amuzgo and to Yuni Kim for her generosity in sharing her revisions with us. We presented a first version of this article in Budapest in 2014 at the International Morphology Meeting and we are thankful for the comments received. We also want to thank Frans Plank as editor of LT for his help and to the three anonymous referees for their valuable time and for all their useful comments. All errors and deficiencies remain our own responsibility.
Abbreviations
1/3 1st/3rd person; comp=complementizer; cont=continuous; cpl=completive; dem=demonstrative; det=determiner; du=dual; excl=exclusive; fut=future; hon=honorific; hum=human; incl=inclusive; incpl=incompletive; ind=indicative; intr=intransitive; irr=irrealis; m=masculine; obj=object; pl= plural; prf=perfect; prg=progressive; pro=pronoun; prs=present; pst=past; red=reduplication; sg=singular; subj=subject; subjv=subjunctive; tr=transitive.
References
Angulo, Jaime de. 1933. The Chichimeco language (central Mexico). International Journal of American Linguistics 7. 152–194.10.1086/463802Search in Google Scholar
Apóstol Polanco, Jair. 2014. Clases flexivas verbales en el amuzgo de Xochistlahuaca, Guerrero. México, DF: Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social MA thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Beach Bradley, Cornelius. 1902. “We” the plural of “I”? Modern Language Notes 17(1). 1–3.10.2307/2917294Search in Google Scholar
Buck, Marjorie J. 2000. Gramática amuzga de San Pedro Amuzgos, Oaxaca. In Stewart & Stewart 2000, 361–480.Search in Google Scholar
Buck, Marjorie J. 2012. Gramática del amuzgo de Xochistlahuaca. Manuscript.Search in Google Scholar
Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia. 2010. Verbal plurality and event plurality. Manuscript for the DGfS-CNRS Summer School on Linguistic Typology, Leipzig. https://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/conference/2010_summerschool/pdf/course_materials/Cabredo2010plV.pdf (accessed 1 July 2015)Search in Google Scholar
Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia & Brenda Laca. 2012. Introduction: Event plurality, verbal plurality and distributivity. In Patricia Cabredo Hofherr & Brenda Laca (eds.), Verbal plurality and distributivity, 1–24. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110293500Search in Google Scholar
Caron, Bernard. 2012. Hausa grammatical sketch. Version 3. https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00647533 (accessed 1 July 2015)Search in Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville G. 2000. Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139164344Search in Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville G. 2015. Morphosyntactic complexity: A typology of lexical splits. Language 91. 145–193.10.1353/lan.2015.0003Search in Google Scholar
Daniel, Michael. 2013. Plurality in independent personal pronouns. In Matthew Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max-Planck-Institut für evolutionäre Anthropologie. http://wals.info/chapter/35 (accessed 1 July 2015)Search in Google Scholar
Donohue, Mark & Søren Wichmann (eds.). 2008. The typology of semantic alignment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199238385.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Eulenberg, John B. 1971. Conjunction reduction and reduplication in African language. In Chin-Wu Kim & Herbert Stahlke (eds.), Papers in African linguistics (Current Inquiry into Language and Linguistics 1), 71–80. Edmonton: Linguistic Research.Search in Google Scholar
François, Alexandre. 2009. Verbal number and suppletion in Hiw. Paper read at the Eleventh International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Aussois, France.Search in Google Scholar
Gillon, Carrie & Robert Mailhammer. 2015. Reanalyzing the morphology and semantics of verbal plural marking in Quechan. International Journal of American Linguistics 81. 573–593.10.1086/683160Search in Google Scholar
Göksel, Aslı & Celia Kerslake. 2005. Turkish: A comprehensive grammar. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203340769Search in Google Scholar
Henderson, Robert. 2012. Ways of pluralizing events. Santa Cruz, CA: University of California at Santa Cruz doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Jamieson, Carole Ann. 1982. Conflated subsystems marking person and aspect in Chiquihuitlán Mazatec verbs. International Journal of American Linguistics 48. 139–167.10.1086/465725Search in Google Scholar
Kim, Yuni. In press. Tonal overwriting and inflectional exponence in Amuzgo. In Enrique L. Palancar & Jean Léo Léonard (eds.), Tone and inflection: New facts and new perspectives. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Search in Google Scholar
Kim, Yuni. To appear. A morphophonological parameter hierarchy for Amuzgo glottalization classes. In Palancar et al. (eds.) (to appear).Search in Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin. 2005. Morphological autonomy and diachrony. In Geert E. Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2004, 137–175. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/1-4020-2900-4_6Search in Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. 1991. Active/Agentive case marking and its motivations. Language 67. 510–546.10.1353/lan.1991.0015Search in Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. 1999. The languages of Native North America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Mosonyi, Esteban Emilio. 2000. Elementos gramaticales del idioma piaroa. In María Stella González de Pérez & María Luisa Rodríguez (eds.), Lenguas indígenas de Colombia: Una visión descriptiva, 657–668. Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Search in Google Scholar
Newman, Paul. 1980. The classification of Chadic within Afroasiatic. Leiden: Leiden University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Palancar, Enrique L. 2013. The evolution of number in Otomi: The many faces of the dual. Studies in Language 37. 94–142.10.1075/sl.37.1.03palSearch in Google Scholar
Palancar, Enrique L. & Heriberto Avelino. To appear. Inflectional complexity and verb classes in Chichimec. In Palancar et al. (eds.) (to appear).Search in Google Scholar
Palancar, Enrique L., Matthew Baerman & Timothy Feist (eds.). To appear. Inflectional complexity and verb classes: A view from the Oto-Manguean languages of Mexico.Search in Google Scholar
Plank, Frans. 1999. Split morphology: How agglutination and flexion mix. Linguistic Typology 3. 279–340.10.1515/lity.1999.3.3.279Search in Google Scholar
Polian, Gilles. 2013. Gramática del tseltal de Oxchuk. México, DF: Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social.Search in Google Scholar
Rosés Labrada, Jorge E. 2015. The Mako language: Vitality, grammar and classification. London, Ont.: University of Western Ontario doctoral dissertation; Lyon: Université Lumière-Lyon 2 doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Rupp, Jaime & Nadine de Rupp. 1996. Diccionario chinanteco de San Juan Lealao, Oaxaca (Serie de Vocabularios y Diccionarios Indígenas “Mario Silva y Aceves” 35). México, DF: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano.Search in Google Scholar
Smith-Stark, Thomas C. & Fermín Tapia García. 1986. The active-static nature of Amuzgo (Otomanguean). Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, New York.Search in Google Scholar
Smith-Stark, Thomas C. & Fermín Tapia García. 2002. El amuzgo como lengua activa. In Paulette Levy (ed.), Del cora al maya yucateco: Estudios lingüísticos sobre algunas lenguas mexicanas, 81–129. México, DF: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Search in Google Scholar
Stewart, Cloyd & Ruth Stewart. 2000. Diccionario amuzgo de San Pedro Amuzgos, Oaxaca. México, DF: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano.Search in Google Scholar
Stump, Gregory T. 2001. Inflectional morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486333Search in Google Scholar
Suárez, Jorge A. 1983. La lengua tlapaneca de Malinaltepec. México, DF: Instituto de Investigaciones Filológicas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Search in Google Scholar
Sweet, Henry. 1886. An Anglo-Saxon primer, with grammar, notes and glossary, 3rd edition. Oxford: Clarendon.Search in Google Scholar
Tamura, Suzuko. 2000. The Ainu language. Tokyo: Sanseido.Search in Google Scholar
Valenzuela, Pilar M. 1997. Basic verb types and argument structures in Shipibo-Conibo. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
©2015 by De Gruyter Mouton
