singke
(singke)
#1
236 WILLIAM H. JACOBSEN, JR.
The label head-marking (cf. Nichols 1984, 1986) recognizes that pronomi
nal elements occur as suffixes to verbs (and other predicative words), and
there is no case marking on nouns; congruently, prepositional phrases are
marked on the preposition, and possessed-possessor relations are marked
on the possessed. The early European investigators who took note of the
feature of pronominal incorporation in some American languages would
not have found Nootka noteworthy in this respect, as it is similar to, say,
Latin in admitting only one suffixed pronominal argument, which taken in
conjunction with the passive marker, might refer to either the actor or the
undergoer.^5 But the passive is highly constrained to a reference-tracking
function (see now Rose & Carlson 1984, Whistler 1985, Emanatian 1988),
and thus the language is reference-dominated (Van Valin 1980). It also
seems to be non-configurational (Hale 1979, 1982), which means that there
is little or no constituent structure correlating with grammatical relations.
Van Valin (1985:406) points out that this trait is predictable from that of
head marking, while Nichols (1986:114) speaks of the "flat syntax" to which
head-marked patterns contribute. Nootka lacks grammatical gender, and
not being verb-final it predictably also lacks the reference-tracking
mechanism of switch-reference;^6 this leaves us with the switch-function
mechanism embodied in the passive (cf. Foley & Van Valin 1984:321-367).
As a consequence, many clauses lack any overt marking that would dis
criminate between VS and VO interpretations. Accusative-type means that
the language has a subject category subsuming the single argument of an
intransitive verb and the actor of an active transitive verb; this is seen
clearly in the pronominal paradigms. The language is predominantly suffix
ing in that it has no prefixes other than prefixed reduplication. This is a
blatant contradiction of Lehmann's (1987a:23, 1987b:417-418) claim that
VSO languages are characterized by prefixation: in this respect the
polysynthetic characteristic overrides that of word order.^7
1. Background
Two recent contributions have helped to give an orientation to this paper.
Mithun (1984a) considers the question of subordination in polysynthetic
languages. She finds that the proportion of dependent clauses in connected
discourse can be quite low, such as about 2% for Kathlamet (Chinookan),
6% for Gunwinggu (Australian), and 7% for some Mohawk (Iroquoian)
