Cover not available

Article published In: Lexical flexibility in Oceanic languages
Edited by Eva van Lier
[Studies in Language 41:2] 2017
► pp. 358–407

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Roots and stems in Amis and Nêlêmwa (Austronesian)

Lexical categories and functional flexibility

 | LACITO-CNRS, LABEX EFL
Published online: 5 October 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.41.2.04bri
Abstract
In constrast with Nêlêmwa (Oceanic, New Caledonia) whose lexemes are most generally subcategorised as nouns or verbs and undergo category-changing derivations, in Amis (Formosan), roots are pervasively categorially neutral, yet they contain semantic features and instructions that allow or disallow combination with primary derivational affixes which specify their class and category. Lexical categories are expressed after roots are derived into morphosyntactic words projected in a syntactic frame; they are then quite rigidly subcategorised as verbal, nominal or adjectival-modifying heads. Still, word forms display some functional flexibility; for instance, nouns and derived nouns, pronouns, numerals may be predicative in equative, ascriptive and focus constructions, simply by being in the syntactic position of the verb. Such functional flexibility is asymmetrical and does not apply to derived verb stems which must be nominalised to achieve argument function.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Some characteristic features of Nêlêmwa and Northern Amis
    • 2.1Characteristic features of Nêlêmwa
    • 2.2Comparing Amis and Nêlêmwa
  • 3.Northern Amis (Formosan)
    • 3.1Categorially neutral roots and derivations
      • Primary vs. secondary derivation
      • Secondary applicative voices
      • Secondary, category-changing derivation
      • 3.1.1Noun stems: noun markers and case-marking
      • 3.1.2Verb stems: voice affixes and verb classes
    • 3.2‘Nounier’ and ‘verbier’ roots in Amis: a limit to categorially neutral roots?
      • 3.2.1Entity-denoting roots
        • 3.2.1.1Entity-denoting roots derived by mi- and ma-
        • 3.2.1.2Entity-denoting roots: semantics and derivations
      • 3.2.2Action-denoting and property-denoting roots
      • 3.2.3Tools and instruments as a testing ground of neutral categoriality
      • 3.2.4Summary
    • 3.3Voice affixes and verb classes: argument structure and alignment
      • 3.3.1Primary voice affixes: mi-, ma-, <um>, Ø-
      • 3.3.2Property and quantifier stems: ma- and Ø- stems
        • A.Stative, property ma- verbs
        • B.Bare adjectival and quantifier stems
      • 3.3.3Ambient, natural phenomena: ma- and -an stems
      • 3.3.4Uncontrolled processes, states affixed by -an
      • 3.3.5The lability of roots hosting UV -en
        • A.Action and property denoting roots
        • B.Manner of action verbs derived from entity-denoting roots by -en
      • 3.3.6Summary
    • 3.4The instrumental affix sa-
      • 3.4.1Instrument nouns derived by sa- from roots
      • 3.4.2Secondary derivation: instrumental, purposive event nominals
      • 3.4.3Secondary instrumental derivation: sa-pi-, sa-ka-, sa-Ø-
    • 3.5The conveyance and benefactive si-
      • 3.5.1Conveyance si- on entity-denoting roots
      • 3.5.2The applicative conveyance voice affix si-
        • Summary
    • 3.6The case of caused transfer pa- and causative pa-: Valency increase
      • 3.6.1Deriving entity-denoting roots into caused transfer pa- verb stems
        • Alignment of caused transfer pa- stems
        • 3.6.1.1Comparing mi- verb stems with caused transfer pa- verb stems
        • 3.6.1.2Comparing conveyance si- with caused transfer pa- verb stems
        • 3.6.1.3Comparing caused transfer pa- with stative ma- verb stems
      • 3.6.2Deriving causative pa- verb stems from other root types
      • 3.6.3Causative-indirective pa-pi-, pa-ka- verb stems
        • Summary
    • 3.7Derivational aspectual affixes
      • 3.7.1Inchoative actions, transformation activities: mi-sa- derivations
        • A.On entity-denoting roots
        • B.On stative, property-denoting roots
        • C.Comparing AV mi-sa- with NAV ma-sa-
      • 3.7.2 Mah(a)- derivations: immediate, ongoing process
        • A.On entity-denoting roots: mah-(ka)- or mah(a)-Ca-
        • B.On action or motion denoting roots: mah(a)-(ka)-
      • 3.7.3Deriving stative roots: mala- change of state and pala- caused change of state
        • A.Entity-denoting roots: expressing a change of state
        • B.Stative, property roots
    • 3.8Category-changing derivation of verb stems
      • 3.8.1Deverbal actor or undergoer nouns derived by -ay
      • 3.8.2Event nouns derived with perfective ni-
        • A.Perfective event nominals derived from mi- and ma- stems
        • B.Perfective event nominals in LV : ni-…-an
      • 3.8.3Distinguishing perfective event nominals from stative, abstract nouns
      • 3.8.4Deverbal time or place nouns: pi-…-an, ka-…-an
        • A.Deverbal time or place nouns from mi-verb stems: pi-…-an
        • B.Place and time nouns derived from ma- verb stems: ka-…-an
        • C.Locative, time nouns derived from stative Ø- stems: ka-…-an
    • 3.9Asymmetrical functional flexibility of derived noun and verb stems
  • 4.Categorially neutral roots in Amis: towards a conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (40)
References
Besnier, Niko. 2000. Tuvaluan. A Polynesian language of the Central Pacific. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blust, Robert. 1999. Subgrouping, circularity and extinction: some issues in Austronesian comparative linguistics. In E. Zeitoun & P. J. K. Li (eds.), Selected papers from the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 31–94. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. The Austronesian languages. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics 602.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. revised edition online at: [URL]. Open Access Monographs.
Bril, Isabelle. 2000. Dictionnaire nêlêmwa-nixumwak-français-anglais. LCP 14, Paris, Peeters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. Le nêlêmwa (Nouvelle-Calédonie): Analyse syntaxique et sémantique, LCP 16, Paris, Peeters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. In press. Lexical and functional categories in Nêlêmwa (New Caledonia) and some other Austronesian languages: fluid vs. rigid categoriality. In V. Vapnarsky and E. Veneziano (eds.), Lexical polycategoriality: Cross-linguistic, cross-theoretical and language acquisition approaches, 207–242. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Broschart, Jürgen. 1997. Why Tongan does it differently: Categorial distinctions in a language without nouns and verbs. Linguistic Typology 11. 123–165. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Teresa. 1987. Verbal constructions and verbal classifications in Nataoran-Amis. Canberra: Pacific linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, William. 2000. Parts of speech as typological universals and language particular categories. In Petra Vogel and Bernard Comrie (eds.), Approaches to the typology of word classes, [EALT 23], 65–102. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald. 2000. Introduction. In Dixon & Aikhenvald (eds.), Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity, 1–29. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas & Toshiki Osada. 2005. Mundari: The myth of a language without word classes. Linguistic Typology 9(3). 351–390.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foley, William A. 1998. Symmetrical voice systems and precategoriality in Philippine languages. Paper presented at the 3rd LFG conference, Brisbane.
2008. The place of Philippine languages in a typology of voice systems. In P. Austin & S. Musgrave (eds.), Voice and grammatical relations in Austronesian languages, 22–44. Stanford: CSLI publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees & Eva van Lier. 2010. An implicational map of parts of speech. Linguistic Discovery 8(1). 129–156. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus. 2005. Tagalog. In Alexander Adelaar & N. Himmelmann (eds.), The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar, 350–376. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. Lexical categories and voice in Tagalog. In Simon Musgrave & Peter Austin (eds.), Voice and grammatical relations in Austronesian languages, 247–293. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huang, Lillian M. 1995. The case markers and pronominal system in Amis. Journal of National Chengchi University 701. 217–257.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. & Cécile Manorohanta. 2001. Quantitative study of voice in Malagasy. Oceanic Linguistics 40(1). 67–84. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kroeger, Paul. 1998. Nouns and verbs in Tagalog: a reply to Foley. Asia SIL School. Paper presented at the 3rd LFG Conference, Brisbane. 30 June – 3 July, 1998.
Kuo, Jonathan Cheng-Chuen. 2015. Argument alternation and argument structure in symmetrical voice languages: A case study of transfer verbs in Amis, Puyuma, and Seediq. Hawaii: Hawaii University PhD dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lazard, Gilbert. 1999. La question de la distinction entre nom et verbe en perspective typologique. Folia linguistica 33(3–4). 389–418.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 2008. Roots, stems and word classes. In: Umberto Ansaldo, Jan Don and Roland Pfau (eds.): Parts of Speech: descriptive tools, theoretical constructs. Special Issue of Studies in Language 32(3), 43–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lieber, Rochelle. 2006. The category of roots and the roots of categories: what we learn from selection in derivation. Morphology 161. 247–272. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. 1994. The implications of ergativity for a Philippine voice system. In Barbara Fox & Paul Hopper (eds.), Voice, form and function, 247–277. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mosel, Ulrike & Even Hovdhaugen. 1992. Samoan reference grammar. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reid, Lawrence. 1992. On the development of the aspect system in some Philippine languages. Oceanic Linguistics 31(1). 65–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm. 1995. Reconstructing proto Austronesian verbal morphology; evidence from Taiwan. In Paul Jen-kuei Li, Dah-an Ho, Ying-kuei Huang & Cheng-hwa Tsang (eds.), Austronesian studies relating to Taiwan, 727–791. Symposium Series of the Institute of History and Philology (Academia Sinica 4). Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen. 1993. Syntactic categories & subcategories. In Joachim Jabobs, Arnim von Stechow, Wolfgang Sternefeld & Theo Vennemann (eds.), Syntax, An International Handbook of Contemporary research, 646–686. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. Scales between nouniness and verbiness. In Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher, & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Language Typology and Language Universals, Vol. 11, 495–509. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi. 2009. Elements of complex structures, where recursion isn’t. In T. Givón & M. Shibatani (eds.), Syntactic complexity. Diachrony, acquisition, neuro-cognition, evolution (TSL 85), 163–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi & Prashant Pardeshi. 2002. The causative continuum. In M. Shibatani (ed.), The grammar of causation and interpersonal manipulation (TSL 48), 85–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Starosta, Stanley, Andrew Pawley & Lawrence Reid. 1982 [2009]. The evolution of focus in Austronesian. In Amran Halim, Lois Carrington & Stephen Wurm (eds.), Papers from the Third International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Vol. 2: Tracking the Travellers (Pacific Linguistics C-75), 145–170. Canberra: The Australian National University. [Subsequently published in Zeitoun, Elizabeth (ed.), 2009. Formosan linguistics: Stanley Starosta’s contributions (Language and Linguistics Monograph Series), Vol. 21, 297–328. Taipei: Academia Sinica.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Starosta, Stanley. 2002 [2009]Austronesian Focus as derivation: Evidence from nominalization. Language and Linguistics 3.2: 427–479. [Subsequently published in Zeitoun, Elizabeth (ed.), 2009. Formosan linguistics: Stanley Starosta’s contributions (Language and Linguistics Monograph Series), Vol. 21, 297–328. Taipei: Academia SinicaGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Teng, Stacy. 2014. Grammaticalization of predicative possession in Nanwang Puyuma and as a basis for reconstruction in PAN. Oceanic Linguistics 53(1). 136–154. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsuchida, Shigeru. 1988. Amis. In Takashi Kamei, Rokuro Kono & Eiichi Chino (eds.), The Sanseido Encyclopedia or Linguistics, Vol 1: Languages of the World, Part one, 447–449. Tokyo: Sanseido.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsukida, Naomi. 2008. Verb classification in Amis. In Mark Donohue & Søren Wichmann (eds.), The typology of semantic alignment, 277–293. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wolff, John U. 1973. Verbal inflection in Proto-Austronesian. In Andrew B. Gonzalez (ed.), Parangal kay Cecilio Lopez: Essays in honor of Cecilio Lopez on his seventy-fifth birthday (LSP Special monograph Issue n°4), 71–91. Quezon City: Linguistic Society of the Philippines.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, Joy. 2006. Verb classification, case marking, and grammatical relations in Amis. Buffalo: State University of New York Ph.D Dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zeitoun, Elizabeth & Lillian M. Huang. 2000. Concerning ka-, an overlooked marker of verbal derivation in Formosan languages. Oceanic Linguistics 391. 415–427.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (8)

Cited by eight other publications

Jheng, Wei-Cherng Sam
2025. On the syntax of restrictive relative clauses in Siwkolan Amis. Concentric. Studies in Linguistics 51:1 ► pp. 70 ff. DOI logo
Zeitoun, Elizabeth
2025. 106729 Non-verbal predication in Formosan languages. In Non-verbal Predication in the World’s Languages, ► pp. 1067 ff. DOI logo
Chen, Victoria, Jonathan Kuo, Maria Kristina S. Gallego & Isaac Stead
2022. Is Malayo-Polynesian a primary branch of Austronesian?. Diachronica 39:4 ► pp. 449 ff. DOI logo
Bril, Isabelle & Stavros Skopeteas
2021. The syntax and prosody of focus in Northern Amis (Formosan). Faits de Langues 52:1 ► pp. 61 ff. DOI logo
Bril, Isabelle
2020. Indefinite expressions and accessibility hierarchy to core argument functionsin a sample of Austronesian languages(and beyond). Studies in Language 44:2 ► pp. 407 ff. DOI logo
Bril, Isabelle
2022. Lexical restrictions on grammatical relations in voice constructions (Northern Amis). STUF - Language Typology and Universals 75:1 ► pp. 21 ff. DOI logo
Bril, Isabelle
2024. Adversative and experiential applicative constructions in Northern Amis (Austronesian). Linguistics 62:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
van Lier, Eva
2016. Lexical flexibility in Oceanic languages. Linguistic Typology 20:2 ► pp. 197 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue