Language Contact and Change in the Americas......Page 2
Editorial page......Page 3
Title page......Page 4
LCC data......Page 5
Table of contents......Page 6
Foreword......Page 8
Language contact and change in the Americas......Page 10
1. The state of the art: A sketch......Page 11
2. The contributions in this book......Page 16
References......Page 20
Part I: North America: California......Page 24
1. Introduction......Page 26
2. Background......Page 27
3. Cultural similarities and trade contacts......Page 29
4. Linguistic similarities......Page 30
4.1 History of language contact in Round Valley......Page 31
4.2 Features shared by Yuki and Pomoan......Page 32
4.3 Features shared by Yuki with Wintun and Athabaskan......Page 33
4.4 Yuki and Wappo......Page 35
5. Conclusion......Page 37
References......Page 38
Appendix......Page 40
1. Introduction......Page 42
2. Diachrony in hierarchical systems......Page 43
3.1 Dependent-marked languages......Page 46
3.2 Agent-patient systems (both dependent‑ and head‑marked)
......Page 49
3.3.1 Hierarchical and inverse languages......Page 52
3.3.2 Languages with portmanteau affixes......Page 59
4.1 Passives in dependent-marked languages......Page 61
4.2 Passives in hierarchical and inverse languages......Page 63
4.3 Passives in languages with portmanteau affixes......Page 67
5. Summary and conclusions
......Page 68
References......Page 69
Appendix......Page 72
1. Introduction......Page 76
2. Data sources......Page 78
3.1 Phonology of Northeastern Pomo......Page 79
4.1 Background......Page 82
4.2 Minimum speech community size in California......Page 84
5.1 Laryngeal increments......Page 86
5.2 Glottal-initial words......Page 88
6.2 Citation form of animate nouns......Page 89
6.4 Adjectives......Page 90
7.1 Merger of *s and *š......Page 92
7.2 Fronting of *k to t̯......Page 93
7.3 Voiceless laterals and voiceless allophone of rhotic......Page 94
7.4 Alienable vs. inalienable possession......Page 95
7.5 Nominative/accusative case marking......Page 96
8. Conclusion......Page 97
References......Page 98
1. Introduction......Page 100
2. Background......Page 101
3.1 Word-final glottalization......Page 102
3.2 Word final [h]......Page 104
3.3 Word final ejective obstruents......Page 108
3.4 Allomorphy as a reason to prefer diachronic explanations......Page 109
4. Conclusions......Page 111
References......Page 112
Part II: North America: Athabaskan, Iroquoian, and Uto-Aztecan......Page 114
1. Introduction......Page 116
2.1 Morphology of the directionals......Page 117
2.3 Absolute frame of reference and Major River Orientation......Page 119
3. The Ahtna region......Page 124
4.1 The bilingual fieldwork conditions......Page 126
4.2 Hints of contact-induced change......Page 129
4.3 Evidence of change: ‘Upriver’ becoming equated with ‘north’......Page 132
4.4.1 Ngge’ ‘upland’ in the Matanuska River drainage......Page 139
4.4.2 Tgge’ ‘up (vertically)’ along the Tazlina River to Tazlina Lake.......Page 140
4.4.3 Why ngge’ and tgge’?......Page 142
5. Conclusion......Page 145
References......Page 146
1. Introduction......Page 148
2. The structure of the verb word: The conjunct-disjunct distinction......Page 150
2.2 The word nature of the verb unit......Page 151
2.3 A return to the disjunct/conjunct distinction: Differences in patterning......Page 152
3. The historical development of the verb word: A brief overview......Page 155
4. Prefix-initial nasals: Reflexes in FGH Dene......Page 156
5. What is more conservative?......Page 162
6.1 Tone......Page 163
6.2 h-epenthesis......Page 165
7. Interim summary......Page 166
8.1 The shift in nasalization: Reducing allomorphy......Page 167
9. Consequences: Two perspectives......Page 169
9.2 A socio-cultural perspective......Page 170
References......Page 172
1. Early contact history......Page 176
2. History of literacy......Page 178
3.1 Oneida morphology......Page 181
3.4 Semantic shifts......Page 182
3.5 Borrowing names......Page 183
4.2. Language differences......Page 184
4.2.2 r vs l......Page 185
4.2.5.1 Description of whispering. The process that involves devoicing of final syllables was described by Lounsbury (1942, 1953) as characteristic of sentence-final pronunciations. Because it is somewhat problematic to define sentences (independent of t......Page 187
4.2.5.2 Development of whispering. Was this whispering process part of Oneida in the late 18th century? The documents in the Kirklandcollection show almost no evidence of it. There are just a few words where an expected final syllable is missing but ther......Page 188
5.2 ‘metal’ to ‘money’......Page 190
5.3 ‘serious’ to ‘sacred’......Page 191
6.2 Codeswitching......Page 192
7. Conclusion......Page 194
References......Page 195
1. Introduction......Page 198
2. Language shift as captured in the Tsonnontuan dictionaries......Page 202
3. How Tsonnontuan relates to Pre-Seneca reconstructions......Page 203
4. Wendat phonology in the Tsonnontuan dictionaries......Page 206
4.1 Wendat changes not reflected in Tsonnontuan or Modern Seneca......Page 209
5. Lexical borrowings from Wendat into Seneca......Page 212
6. Meaning differences reflected in the Tsonnontuan dictionaries......Page 217
7. Wendat influence on Modern Seneca grammar......Page 220
8. Speaking Seneca with a Wendat accent......Page 223
9. Conclusion......Page 225
References......Page 226
1. Introduction......Page 228
2.1.1 Still residually lexical......Page 229
2.1.2 Grammaticalized......Page 231
2.2 ‘Make’/‘become’ -ti-/-ri-......Page 234
2.3.1 Still marginally lexical......Page 235
2.3.2 More recent grammaticalization......Page 236
2.3.3 The nominalizer or passive suffix -ta......Page 238
2.4.1 Still marginally lexical......Page 240
2.4.2 Multiple grammaticalization......Page 241
2.5.1 Still marginally lexical......Page 245
2.5.2 Grammaticalized......Page 247
3.1 ‘Go’ -pa-/-va-......Page 249
3.2 ‘Be’ -na-......Page 250
4. Discussion......Page 252
References......Page 254
Part III: Northern Mexico, Mesoamerica and South America......Page 256
1. Introduction......Page 258
2. Historical perspectives......Page 260
4. Hypotheses about possible kinds of changes in endangered languages......Page 265
4.1 Normal change?......Page 267
5.1 Xinkan agriculture and views of language diversification......Page 268
5.2 Language contact in Misión La Paz and change in situations of intensive language contact......Page 269
5.3 Lexical borrowing in Matacoan languages......Page 273
6. Historical linguistic contributions to language documentation and language revitalization......Page 274
7. Conclusions......Page 276
References......Page 277
Introduction......Page 282
1. Outline of the Jakaltek noun classifier system......Page 283
1.1 The categorization schema of the Jakaltek noun classifier system......Page 284
1.2 A grammaticalized noun classifier system......Page 285
1.3 How the specifics of the Jakaltek system fed a typology of classifier systems......Page 286
2.1 Constraints on the classification schema in the 1970s......Page 288
2.2 Earlier adaptability of the system in colonial times......Page 289
3. Extensive changes in the system by 2000......Page 290
3.1 Data collection......Page 291
3.2.2 Regularized use of postnominal mention of non-traditional material......Page 292
3.2.3 A new case of class extension for plastic objects......Page 293
3.2.5 Addition of new classifiers to the inventory......Page 294
4. Discussion: Classifier systems and language contact......Page 295
4.1 Variation and change in an endangered language environment......Page 296
4.2 An endangered Mayan language in the midst of revitalization efforts......Page 297
4.2 Epilogue on cycles of classifier systems and language contact......Page 298
References......Page 302
Language contact and word structure......Page 306
1. The Tariana of north-west Amazonia: Past and present......Page 307
2. How the Tariana language has changed under Tucano influence......Page 310
3. Recent changes in Tariana under pressure from Tucano......Page 312
3.1 The Tucano influence on Tariana morphology: Verb compounding......Page 313
3.2 How language contact has affected the order of morphemes in Tariana......Page 318
Acknowledgements......Page 321
References......Page 322
1. Introduction......Page 324
2. The Quechua language family and its contact situation......Page 325
3. Native diachronic processes......Page 327
3.1 Auxiliation......Page 328
3.2 Formation of verbal suffixes from auxiliaries......Page 331
4.1 Material replication: The social constraint of perceived similarity......Page 335
4.2 Pattern replication and enhancement: Contact as a catalyst for internally-motivated auxiliation......Page 337
4.3 Typological consequence: Preference for periphrasis > increasing role for analytic expression......Page 338
5.1 Pattern replication: Reverse order of periphrasis constituents......Page 339
5.2 Typological consequence: Obstruction of suffix formation > decreased role for synthesis......Page 341
6. Conclusions......Page 343
References......Page 344
1. Introduction......Page 348
2. The languages under study......Page 350
3. Atypical uses of the present perfect in Andean Spanish......Page 351
4. Cuzco Quechua -sqa, the Spanish perfect, and the question of epistemological association......Page 353
5. Development of a past from the present perfect in Quechua......Page 355
6. Discourse structuring......Page 357
7. SCQ -sha ‘pst
‘prf.as.pst’ can communicate surprise......Page 362
8. Conclusion......Page 366
References......Page 368
Part IV: The Americas and beyond......Page 372
1. Introduction......Page 374
2. Methodology and caveats......Page 376
3. Results......Page 379
4. The Americas......Page 382
References......Page 384
Appendix: Maps, tables, and figures......Page 385
1. Introduction and background......Page 394
2.1 Yurok – Karuk – Takelma – Yokuts
......Page 397
2.3 Wintun – Maiduan – Washo – Miwok – Costanoan......Page 399
2.5 Ramaytush – Uto-Aztecan......Page 401
2.6 Costanoan – Esselen – Salinan – Chumash......Page 402
3. The U.S. Southeast and Mesoamerica......Page 403
3.2 Mesoamerica......Page 404
3.3 Huastec – Atakapa......Page 405
4. The southern central Andes and adjacent lowlands......Page 407
4.1 The Uru and the Chipaya......Page 408
4.4 Root for ‘dog’ shared by Uru-Chipayan and Guaicuruan languages......Page 409
5. Conclusion
......Page 410
References......Page 411
Index......Page 420
