Mirativity and the near deixis copula dule in Neo-Aramaic
Introduction
Mirativity continues to be a widely debated phenomenon in linguistics. Recently, it has also been attracting attention in the field of Semitic studies, particularly Biblical Hebrew (Zewi, 1996, Miller-Naudé and van der Merwe, 2011, Cohen, 2015b). Mirativity in Aramaic has been hinted at by Goldenberg (1992) and Khan (2012); however, the language has not been studied explicitly from the angle of this category. The purpose of this article is, therefore, to provide fresh insights into mirativity based on data from a group of Neo-Aramaic dialects (NA). These, rather than being mere typological additions to examples known already from literature,1 furnish viable information on mirativity markers which do not readily yield themselves to the existing diagrams, such as that one proposed by Peterson (2013). The examples will be analysed in an order that mirrors the extensions of the meaning from deictic/presentative to mirative. Furthermore, it will be argued that the diachronic perspective on the NA data provides solid ground for disjoining mirativity from evidentiality.
If in defining mirativity we follow DeLancey (1997) or LaPolla (2003), the novelty status of information comes to the fore. Then, mirativity would be a pragmatic–cognitive category, concerned with the organisation of information within the world of discourse.2 If, however, after Peterson (2013: 1) we consider the expression of surprise as the core function of mirativity, we are then primarily concerned with the speaker's attitude towards the proposition. In this light, mirativity would, by definition, still fall within the domain of modality.3 The latter interpretation of mirativity as a kind of modality is here assumed for two reasons. Firstly, this is what the morphosyntactic parameters of the NA data presented in this article suggest. Secondly, newness appears to be often included in the sense of surprise, but the opposite is not necessarily true. That is, placing the expression of surprise at the centre of mirativity allows for semantic extensions to other phenomena, including such nuances of meaning as annoyance or irony, which are not immediately associated with novelty status.4 Nevertheless, it will be argued that the coding of mirativity is not fully grammaticalised in the languages analysed here; in this situation, mirative reading arises thanks to pragmatic factors such as contrast and saliency. The present paper focuses then on mirativity as a kind of modality in a handful of NA dialects whose reading is enhanced by the discourse context and which expresses primarily, but not exclusively, surprise.
Section snippets
State-of-the-art of mirativity in Neo-Aramaic
A connection between particular verbal constructions and overtly labelled mirativity has received some attention in the Semitic languages. This phenomenon was discussed, for example, in Miller-Naudé and van der Merwe (2011), where the mirative function of the Biblical Hebrew particle hinnē is described, while Khan (2012) applied the term ‘mirativity’ to one of the functions of the NA perfect tense described by Goldenberg (1992). In other works, the term is not explicitly used, for instance,
Syntax and semantics of presentatives in the dialects around Diyana
The dialects around Diyana have, next to the basic unmarked copula ʾile, also the deictic copulas hole, wele and dule.6 This situation is similar to that of other NENA dialects which usually feature beyond the basic copula also separate forms for distal and proximal reference. The NENA copula used for near deictic
The preterite
In contrast with the near deixis copula in a nominal clause and in compound verbal forms common to many NENA dialects, in CDZ, the element du-, found in the copula dule, may be inflected with a set of personal agreement pronouns (the so-called L-set) to appear with the preterite, e.g.:CDZ (7) du-la ti-lux du-3sg.f come.pst-2sg.m ‘Here, you came.’11 (8) du-loxün ti-loxün du-2pl come.pst-2pl ‘Here, you came.’
In a speech situation
In a number of occurrences attested in a speech situation, it is difficult to ascribe the deictic or presentative reference as the basic semantic meaning to the copula dule and the du-element; even more so than to the instances in the previous section. Consider the following situation in which the speaker tries to recall an English equivalent of a word in NA and concludes:HG (16) dun munšùy’ ʾengliziˈ near.deic.cop.1sg forget.res.ptcpl.3sg.m English ‘I have forgotten (my) English.’
The basic use of the near deixis copula
Similarly to hinnē in Biblical Hebrew, with its primarily deictic nature (cf. Miller-Naudé and van der Merwe (2011), Miller-Naudé and van der Merwe 2011: 61), also for dule in NENA, the basic function remains the deictic/presentative expression and its syntactic contexts is the nominal clause, or the participial and infinitival predicate. It should to be recognised, therefore, that dule does not necessarily code mirativity, given that it had not been grammaticalised as its dedicated marker. In
Expanding the typological scheme
Discussing at some length the diachronic and syntactic parameters of du-elements in NENA (Section 1.3) allows us to reorganise the taxonomy of mirativity proposed by Peterson (2013: 17), in which parasitic propositional mirativity utilises markers ascribed either to evidentiality, or a semantic expression of control. On the other hand, Peterson suggests the category of non-parasitic mirativity which is an expression of surprise independent of other categories in a language. While this is
Conclusions
It was argued in this article that the presentatives and near deictics in NA contribute to refining our understanding of mirativity, especially as a modal category. The connection between the deictic reference and the expression of surprise is the pointing to an event immediately relevant to the speaker. It was demonstrated, however, that the near deictic copula and its cognate du- have not been grammaticalised as mirativity markers, but rather that mirativity is one of the possible semantic
Acknowledgements
The data on the dialects of Azran Gargarnaye and Hawdiyan Gargarnaye have been gathered as part of the project “Documentation of the North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic Dialect Cluster of Gargarnaye”, grant number IPF 0203, funded by the Endangered Languages Documentation Programme whom I hereby wish to thank for their support. I am also indebted to the anonymous reviewers and the editors of the Journal of Pragmatics for their insightful remarks. Finally, I would like to dedicate this article to Shlimun
Lidia Napiorkowska is a lecturer in Hebrew at Warsaw University, Faculty of Oriental Studies where she focuses on the linguistic aspects of Semitic languages, particularly Modern Hebrew and Neo-Aramaic. Her current research includes exploring the endangered varieties of North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic, especially the Christian dialects from north-eastern Iraq. She has been documenting the rare varieties around Diyana for her PhD degree and during her post-doctoral project at the University of
References (29)
The mirative and evidentiality
J. Pragmat.
(2001)The place of evidentiality within the universal grammatical space
J. Pragmat.
(2001)Evidentiality
(2004)Language Change
(2015)Four versions of a Neo-Aramaic children's story
ARAM Period.
(2009)The particle wal in the Jewish Neo-Aramaic Dialect of Zakho
The function of presentatives: a comparative angle
(2015)Mirativity: The Grammatical Marking of Unexpected Information
Linguist. Typol.
(1997)Textual coherence as a pragmatic phenomenon
- et al.
Evidentiality in discourse
Intellect. Pragmat.
(2014)
Spatial reference in discourse
Evidentiality in the Balkans with special attention to Macedonian
Aramaic perfects
Isr. Orient. Stud.
Grammaticalization
Cited by (0)
Lidia Napiorkowska is a lecturer in Hebrew at Warsaw University, Faculty of Oriental Studies where she focuses on the linguistic aspects of Semitic languages, particularly Modern Hebrew and Neo-Aramaic. Her current research includes exploring the endangered varieties of North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic, especially the Christian dialects from north-eastern Iraq. She has been documenting the rare varieties around Diyana for her PhD degree and during her post-doctoral project at the University of Cambridge.