Agreement principles in coordinative and comitative constructions in Bezhta
Khalilova Z. M. Printsipy soglasovaniya s
sochinennoy imennoy gruppoy i komitativnoy konstruktsiyey v
bezhtinskom yazyke. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana.
814.
The article deals with the main
principles of verbal agreement with the coordinative and comitative
noun phrases in Bezhta. In Bezhta, nominal categories of gender and
number are implied to cross-reference the verbal arguments. Bezhta
has a covert category of gender and there are four nominal genders
in the singular: male human nouns are (gender 1), female human
nouns (gender 2), animate nouns (gender 3), and animate and
inanimate nouns (gender 4). There are two genders in the plural,
human plural and non-human plural.Bezhta, like other Daghestanian
languages, uses different markers to express noun phrase
coordination and comitative noun phrases. A coordinative noun
phrase consists of two conjoined noun phrases which share the same
function and are always marked with the same case. The coordinative
noun phrase has the following pattern [A=na B=na] meaning ‘A and
B’, where -na ‘and’ is a coordinative enclitic used bisyndetically,
i.e. attached to both conjoined noun phrases. A comitative noun
phrase also consists of two noun phrases but they have different
syntactic functions (different cases). The comitative marker
attaches to the secondary participant of the event, with whom the
main participant accomplishes an action [X with Y]. It is the
Absolutive main participant of the comitative noun phrase that
controls the gender/number agreement. Agreement with the
coordinative noun phrase has some peculiarities. A coordinative
noun phrase includes two nouns that can be of the same or different
genders. We establish the following gender resolution rules for
coordinative noun phrase: 1) if all conjuncts are human nouns, then
the human plural gender is used; 2) if all conjuncts are non-human
nouns, then the non-human plural gender is used; 3) if one of the
conjunct is human, and the other noun is non-human, then the human
plural gender is used. The same agreement principles are found in
the disjunctive noun phrase formed with the conjunction ‘or’.
Keywords
References
А. В. Архипов. Типология комитативных
конструкций. М.: Знак, 2005.
Б. Комри, М. Ш. Халилов, З. М.
Халилова. Грамматика бежтинского языка: Фонетика. Морфология.
Словообразование. Лейпциг — Махачкала: АЛЕФ, 2015.
Е. А. Бокарев. Цезские (дидойские)
языки Дагестана. М.: Изд-во АН СССР, 1959.
К. И. Казенин. Синтаксис современного
лакского языка. Махачкала: АЛЕФ, 2013.
А. Е. Кибрик. Очерки по общим и
прикладным вопросам языкознания (универсальное, типовое и
специфичное в языке). М.: Изд-во МГУ, 1992.
А. Е. Кибрик, Я. Г. Тестелец (ред.).
Элементы цахурского языка в типологическом освещении. М.: Наследие,
1999.
А. Е. Кибрик и др. (ред.).
Багвалинский язык. Грамматика. Тексты. Словари. Москва: Наследие,
2001.
А. А. Магометов. Табасаранский язык
(Исследования и тексты). Тбилиси: Мецниереба, 1965.
Н. Р. Сумбатова, Ю. А. Ландер.
Даргинский говор селения Танты: грамматический очерк, вопросы
синтаксиса. М.: Языки славянской культуры, 2014.
М. Ш. Халилов. Некоторые особенности
образования причастий в бежтинском языке // Р. Х. Темирова, А. М.
Джандаров, М. О. Мижаева (ред.). Отглагольные образования в
иберийско-кавказских языках. Черкесск: Карачаево-Черкесский ордена
"Знак Почета" НИИ истории, филологии и экономики, 1989. С.
12–16.
G. Corbett. Agreement. Cambridge:
Cambridge Academic Publishers, 2006.
D. Forker. A Grammar of Hinuq.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2013.
M. Haspelmath. A Grammar of Lezgian.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1993.
Z. Khalilova. A Grammar of Khwarshi.
Utrecht: LOT, Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics,
2009.
J. Nichols. Ingush Grammar. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2011.
L. Stassen. AND-languages and
WITH-languages // Linguistic Typology 4, 2000. P. 1–54.
H. van den Berg. Coordinating
constructions in Daghestanian // M. Haspelmath (ed.). Coordinating
Constructions. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 2004. P. 197–226.