Synchrony and Diachrony
indicates both diachronic relationship ('la continuidad zoologica') and synchronic relationship Among other things, it has become a one-toed, tip-toe running. Definition of diachronic - concerned with the way in which something, especially 'the census is also a diachronic data set'. Often contrasted with synchronic. evidence for such diachronic-synchronic relationships but also to explain the . intrudes incrementally upon the tongue-tip raising gesture for /t/ (Goldstein et al., .
It has long seemed to me that the interpretation of Saussure that guides Theory is founded upon the denial of both nature and history. I am not an expert in linguistics, however, so I invite criticism of this claim. Saussure looked at language as a closed system, or collection of signs determined by their relations to each other, and specifically by their differences from each other.
According to what seems to be the most common interpretation of his work, he saw the relationship between the elements of a sign the signifier and the signified as being arbitrary. Furthermore, the signified in this case is not a physical cat, but a concept of a cat, defined in relation to other concepts. Saussure separated langue language as a self-contained system from parole language as used by a specific person in a specific situation.
He also focused on the synchronic non-temporal or relational aspects of language, and largely ignored the diachronic temporal or historical aspects of language.
I make no claim to originality here. The idea of the arbitrariness of the sign obviously has limited applicability to the study of the language of images such as paintings iconic signs or photographs indexical signs to use terms borrowed from Charles Peirce. Further, it is not clear how a Saussurean should treat the elements of iconicity and indexicality that enter into the construction of letters, words, sentences, and other linguistic structures.
Should these dimensions of discourse be treated as conventional as well? Some classic examples come from poetry: Ezra Pound explored the iconic dimension of language by using semi-iconic Chinese ideograms in his Cantos, and the Italian Futurist poets and performers made bold and extensive use of onomatopoeia. How can the sign be truly arbitrary if it contains iconic or indexical dimensions, which to all but the most committed perceptual relativists would display at least traces of non-arbitrary reference or influence?
The signifier and signified form a sign that is supposed to be studied only within the closed system of langue. According to Raymond Tallis, if I understand him correctly, post-Saussurean theorists tend to ignore or blur the distinction between the signifier and the sign, and between the signified and external reality. They thus blur the distinction between langue and parole.
Note that if the second syllable is underlyingly closed, the high tone also falls on it 2c. In the case of the trisyllabic words derived by adding a prefix to the disyllabic words in 2a — 2cthe second syllable is always open and, therefore, in these examples both the stress and the high tone fall on the first syllable i.
If followed by a vowel, consonants are syllabi- fied as onsets rather than as codas. Both tone and stress can be identified and distinguished as prosodic features of Kashibo-Kakataibo; see Zariquiey Two forms of the prefix, tsi- and chi- occur in complementary distribution when produc- tively prefixed to nouns, verbs, or adjectives.
Synchrony and Diachrony
Another interesting pattern associated with the phonology and morphophonology of prefixation has to do with the behavior of a short list of roots that are phonologically reduced upon prefixation.
The roots that exhibit this behavior almost always contain a fricative sound, and the reduction may occur at different parts of the root, as illustrated in this section.
In addition to these reducing verbs, there is a set of obligatorily prefixed verb roots that appear to be vestiges of this reduction process. Another type of root reduction affects the final vowel of adjectives, nouns, and verb roots.
There is a third type of root reduction in Kashibo-Kakataibo. This results in a extra long vowel: Grammatical properties of prefixes. In Kashibo-Kakataibo, pre- fixes can be attached to nouns, adjectives, and verbs—though most fre- quently to verbs. With all these word classes, prefixes mainly have a locative meaning. In this section, we offer a discussion of the behavior of Kashibo-Kakataibo prefixes in combination with these three word classes.
Contrasting with these are unproductively prefixed roots that occur with only one or a very few roots, without any semantic constraint such as nonsense formations to explain these idiosyn- cratic restrictions.
It seems likely that unproductively prefixed roots were historically productively prefixable, but this cannot be demonstrated at this stage of our study. This form, however, may be seen as lexicalized; see 5. In turn, most words in Kashibo-Kakataibo can be used as predicates. However, the set of words identifiable as verbs needs to be nominalized in order to appear as NP heads or noun modifiers. A few morphological distinctions can also be established between nouns and adjectives used as predicates and verbs.
Finally, adverbs are the only unmarked predicate modifiers and represent the only open word-class in Kashibo-Kakataibo that cannot be prefixed see Zariquiey Curiously, there are no cases of unproductively prefixed adjective roots; that is, the few adjective roots that can be prefixed can occur with all or most of the prefixes, semantics permitting.
Full body-part nouns can occur in addition to prefixes attached to adjec- tives, as the following examples show. Note that the clauses including both the noun and the prefix seem to have an emphatic or a disambiguation value, and that the locative marker on the noun phrase may be omitted.
A large proportion of the instances of pre- fixation in Kashibo-Kakataibo narratives and other forms of natural speech international journal of american linguistics are found with verbs, rather than with nouns or adjectives. We first explore the semantic properties of verbal prefixation and then discuss some of its more interesting grammatical properties.
Semantic value of prefixes in verbs. When verbs are prefixed, the body-part expressed by the prefix always belongs to the subject sif the predicate is intransitive, or to the object oif the verb is transitive. Unlike with nouns and adjectives, in a few cases prefixes have other, non-locative meanings instead, as is discussed below.
We first present verb prefixation with locative meanings, as in the following intransitive 11 and transitive 12 examples. The locative value of the prefixes becomes even clearer when we compare 15a to 15b. In these examples, the body-part noun carries a locative marker when the prefix is replaced by it.
Cases where the locative meaning is salient and clear involve produc- tively prefixable roots, while cases where a locative meaning is absent or less transparent seem always to involve verb roots that can exclusively be prefixed by only one or a few prefixes. Co-occurrence of prefixes and their corresponding nouns. As with prefixed adjectives 5.
Sometimes, the noun phrase can have a more specific referential value 21 and 22but in other instances i. These constructions where the prefix occurs in ad- dition to the body-part noun seem to be serving an emphatic or disambigu- ation function the latter in the cases where the prefix is more general than its corresponding nouns. Prefixes and valence increase. In some cases, verb prefixation appears to increase the valence of the verb, since in addition to the prefix we find an extra non-locative NP that has the appearance of an absolutive object.
However, as can be seen in 24cwhen this verb is prefixed, an additional zero-marked participant can occur in the clause, in this case, Roberto, the possessor of the neck. The question at hand is: Preliminary evidence suggests that this is not the case, since the switch-reference system of the language does not recognize this type of argument as a core argument.
Therefore, Roberto in examples like 24c does not seem to be a grammatical object, though its exact morphosyntactic status requires further study. Are Kashibo-Kakataibo prefixes synchronic allomorphs of cor- responding nouns? In the remainder of this paper, we consider two al- ternate analyses to account for the relationship between body-part prefixes and corresponding nouns in Kashibo-Kakataibo: The prefixes are allomorphs alternate forms of the same morpheme, having identical semantic ranges, such as Eng- lish not vs.
A stricter version of this analysis, as has been explicitly or implicitly suggested by other Pano- anists, would postulate that the prefixes are derived by synchronic rule from full nouns; namely, a typically body-part noun or postposition is shortened to its first segments usually its first syllablewhen it is attached to the front international journal of american linguistics of a noun, adjective, or verb, with any prefixes not corresponding exactly to the first segments of the body-part noun being irregular.
The 31 prefixes represent a closed set of independent prefixes.
- Saussure's Basic Principles of Structural Linguistics
- Synchrony and diachrony
Their semantic and formal similarity to their cor- responding roots is due to a past relation with these, though the nature of this relation remains unknown, as is discussed in 7 below. In the subsections of this section, we describe in turn five types of mis- matches between prefixes and their corresponding roots, and the problems these pose for an analysis that treats them as synchronically related. The Kashibo-Kakata- ibo prefixes that exhibit incomplete phonological correspondence with their semantically equivalent corresponding roots can be divided into two types: One could try to explain the pattern at the top of table 2 as a neutralization of the nasal segments, by following a predictable morphophonological rule.
However, when the prefixes are added to a root beginning with a vowel and consequently the nasal sound is resyllabified as the onset of the following syllable, the n remains: To describe prefixes as synchronically derived from the corresponding nouns, these cases would have to be considered irregular allomorphs of the nouns. It is not difficult to postulate a diachronic scenario that gave origin to this type of irregularity: This n-final allomorph expanded to new contexts i.
By contrast, the unexplainable vowel in pi- sends us looking for a different source noun, but there is none in Kashibo-Kakataibo. Loriot, Lauriault, and Day Given that only four Kashibo-Kakataibo prefixes show partial phonological mismatching, this is not a strong argument against synchronic derivation of prefixes from full nouns. Prefixes with more than one corresponding noun. As shown in table 1, 20 of the 31 Kashibo-Kakataibo prefixes can be associated with more than one corresponding root.
One-dimensional thinking: The problem with Saussurean linguistics | Right Scholarship
In table 3, we reproduce three cases from table 1 for discussion here. This is shown in the following examples: While more complicated and a bit unusual, this is an acceptable analysis and, indeed, other authors e. In the case of the third example in table 3, the prefix ma- has meanings that are different enough to call into question whether they are in fact related. We choose to consider these meanings all to be related: This lets us treat ma- as a single prefix, but again no single corresponding root covers all of its semantic range.
This creates a more com- plex synchronic description, but the main objection to this analysis is that, as described below, not all the polysemous meanings of some prefixes have semantically equivalent nouns with initial syllables that match the prefixes.
Building Biblical Theology: Diachronic Developments in the Old Testament (high definition video)
Apart from Zingg and FleckPanoan scholars have listed mul- tiple corresponding roots for only one or a few prefixes, but we suspect that upon further study, more cases of correspondence between single prefixes and multiple roots would be found. Roots associated with more than one prefix. These are listed in table 4.
This type of mismatch, which presents similar problems for the synchronic hypothesis to the ones described in the previous subsection, is illustrated in the following sentences: Prefixes lexically unrelated to their corresponding nouns. Twelve Kashibo-Kakataibo prefixes have parts of their meanings corresponding to roots that are completely dissimilar phonologically, as is attested in table 1.
Note that in four cases the mismatch occurs with what can be considered the most central listed firstand often a single prefix will be associated with more than one lexically unrelated noun. Table 5 reproduces three cases from table 1 for discussion here mismatches are in boldface. In a few cases, one of the corresponding roots could be seen as a subpart of another e.
In this case, one could argue that the more specific noun should be left out from the list of corresponding nouns e. However, with most of the phonologically distinct corresponding nouns, as with the corresponding nouns for the prefix pa- this semantic overlap is not found. Therefore, if, with the intent of simplifying our presentation, we were to eliminate all formally unrelated nouns from table 1, our circumscription of the semantic range of the prefixes would be incomplete, and in cases like that of ra- the more central meaning s of the prefix would be left out.
Here, then, we have a pattern that is impossible to describe as an allomor- phic relation whereby prefixes are derived from the first part of the correspond- ing root.
Rather, we would have prefixes that are allomorphs of completely different full roots. Consider, for example, ra. If our synchronic analysis is that the prefixes are independent morphemes, then this difficulty disappears: Prefixes lacking an exact corresponding noun for one of their meanings.
Cases of prefixes that lack corresponding roots completely i.
Obviously, this lack of a corresponding noun is highly problematic for any synchronic analysis that involves allomorphy with, or derivation from, a full noun. Thus, the unpredictable forms are not rare exceptions; they are the common cases. Therefore, the best and most coherent analysis is to describe the forms in the leftmost column of table 1 as a closed set of prefixes that are synchronically independent from their corresponding roots.
First, prefixes can co-occur with their corresponding nouns when prefixed to adjectives and verbs, which we would not expect of allomorphs, international journal of american linguistics which are alternant forms of each other.