In:Discourse Particles: Syntactic, semantic, pragmatic and historical aspects
Edited by Xabier Artiagoitia, Arantzazu Elordieta and Sergio Monforte
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 276] 2022
► pp. 101–130
Chapter 4Agreeing complementizers may just be moody
Published online: 17 May 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.276.04dem
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.276.04dem
Abstract
This study investigates two discourse-related particles, ya and şo, in
Laz, an endangered South Caucasian language. We argue that both ya and şo are
indexical shift complementizers which can occur without an overt embedding verb, suggesting root
complementizer behavior. However, when they appear embedded, the mood specification of the embedding verb determines
which of the two will surface, suggestive of complementizer agreement in mood features. We show that, while
ya and şo need to be semantically distinct in their root occurrences, there are
compositionality challenges against the null hypothesis that ya and şo keep their
meanings when embedded. As an alternative to a formal agreement account, we propose to semantically relate the
embedded and root occurrences of these complementizers.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The particles ya and şo are complementizers
- 2.1Evidence for the complementizer status of ya and şo
- 2.2Evidence for the complementizer status of ya and şo
- 3.On the morphological distinctness of ya and şo
- 3.1What do the roots complementizers in Laz mean?
- 3.2Embedded ya and şo
- 3.2.1Are embedded ya and şo differentiated through agreement?
- 3.2.2Are embedded ya and şo differentiated semantically?
- 4.Final remarks
Acknowledgments Notes References
References (41)
Anand, Pranav & Nevins, Andrew. 2004. Shifty
operators in changing contexts. In Proceedings of
Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 14, Robert B. Young (ed), 20–37. Ithaca: CLC Publications.
Baker, Mark C., & Bobalijk, Jonathan. 2017. On
Inherent and Dependent Theories of Ergative
Case. In The Oxford Handbook of
Ergativity, Jessica Coon, Diane Massam, & Lisa De Mena Travis (eds), 113–134. Oxford: Oxford University Press. <
Bjorkman, Bronwyn M. & Zeijlstra, Hedde. 2019. Checking
up on (ϕ-) Agree. Linguistic
Inquiry 50(3): 527–569.
Boeder, Winfried. 2002. Speech
and thought representation in the Kartvelian (South Caucasian)
languages. In Reported Discourse: A meeting ground of
different domains [Typological Studies in Language 52], Tom Güldemann & Manfred von Roncador (eds), 3–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. <
Brasoveanu, Adrian. 2013. Modified
numerals as post-suppositions. Journal of
Semantics 30(2): 155–209.
Carstens, Vicki. 2016. Delayed
valuation: a reanalysis of goal features, “upwards” complementizer agreement, and the mechanics of
Case. Syntax 19(1): 1–42.
. 2000. Minimalist
inquiries: The framework. In Step by step: Essays in
honor of Howard Lasnik, Roger Martin, David Michaels, Juan Uriagereka & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds), 89–155. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
. 2001. Derivation
by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in
language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed), 1–52. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. <
Demirok, Ömer & Öztürk, Balkız. 2015. The
logophoric complementizer in Laz. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi [Journal of
Linguistics
Research] 26(2): 45–69.
Demirok, Ömer, Özyıldız, Deniz, & Öztürk, Balkız. 2019. Complementizers
with attitude. In Proceedings of North East
Linguistic Society (NELS) 49, Maggie Baird & Jonathan Pesetsky (eds), 213–222. Amherst MA: GLSA.
Diercks, Michael. 2013. Lubukusu
complementizer agreement as a logophoric relation. Natural Language &
Linguistic
Theory 31(2): 257–407.
Etxepare, Ricardo. 2008. On
quotative constructions in Iberian
Spanish. In Pragmatics of Clause
Combining, Ritva Laury (ed), 35–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. <
. 2013. Quotative
expansions. In Romance Languages and Linguistic
Theory 2011: Selected Papers from ‘Going Romance’ Utrecht 2011, Sergio Baauw, Frank Drijkoningen, Luisa Meroni & Manuela Pinto (eds), 93–124. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. <
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1985. Logophoric
Systems in Chadic. Journal of African Languages and
Linguistics 7(1): 23–38.
Güldemann, Tom. 2002. When
‘say’ is not say: the functional versatility of the Bantu quotative marker ti with special
reference to Shona. In Reported discourse: a meeting
ground for different linguistic domains, Tom Güldemann & Manfred von Roncador (eds.), 253–288. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. <
. 2008. Quotative
Indexes in African Languages: A Synchronic and Diachronic
Survey. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Kaplan, David. 1989. Demonstratives:
An essay on the semantics, logic, metaphysics, and epistemology of demonstratives and other
indexicals. In Themes from
Kaplan, Joseph Almog, John Perry & Howard Wettstein (eds), 481–563. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Klamer, Marian. 2000. How
report verbs become quote markers and
complementisers. Lingua 110(2): 69–98.
Lacroix, René. 2009. Description
du dialecte laze d’Arhavi (caucasique du sud, Turquie): grammaire et
textes. PhD dissertation, Université Lumière
Lyon 2. <[URL]>
Lord, Carol. 1993. Historical
Change in Serial Verb
Constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Podobryaev, Alexander. 2014. Persons,
imposters, and monsters. PhD
dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
Portner, Paul. 1997. The
semantics of mood, complementation, and conversational force. Natural Language
Semantics 5(2): 167–212.
. 2004. The
semantics of imperatives within a theory of clause
types. In Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT)
14, Robert B. Young (ed), 235–252. Ithaca: LSA and CLC Publications.
Portner, Paul, Pak, Miok & Zanuttini, Raffaella. 2019. The
speaker-addressee relation at the syntax-semantics
interface. Language 95(1): 1–36.
Schlenker, Philippe. 1999. Propositional
attitudes and indexicality. PhD
dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
Shklovsky, Kirill, & Sudo, Yasutada. 2014. The
syntax of monsters. Linguistic
Inquiry 45(3): 381–402.
Sundaresan, Sandhya. 2019. A
New Theory of Indexical Shift. Ms, University of Leipzig. <[URL]> (30
September 2021)
