Andrej A Kibrik Institute of Linguistics Russian Academy

Andrej A. Kibrik (Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences) aakibrik@gmail. com Basics of referential systems: Sorting things out DAARC 2009 Conference Goa, India, 2009 1

Familiar facts: ‘he plays/played’ Zero Free pronoun ~ zero Bound pronoun Agreement Free pronoun plus agreement Free pronoun ~ zero plus agreement Japanese English Mandarin Ø asonda he played tā~Ø zà wánshuă ne Spoken French Latin English (present) Russian i-žu (graphic il joue) lūd-it he play-s on~Ø igra-et 2

Relevant questions § § § § What performs the discourse act of reference in each case? What kinds of referential devices are found across languages? What typological parameters are necessary and sufficient to account for the observed diversity? How can one put languages’ referential systems on equal footing? Is agreement really different from reference? How many times can one referent be referred to in one clause? (in particular, when there is a full NP and a reduced (pronominal) device in the same clause) What shall we do about differences between various clause participant positions? 3

How can one approach these questions? § There are many contradictory and partial accounts § § of referential phenomena (cf. notions such as “argument type parameter”, “pro-drop”, etc. ), and there is a need for a general, integrated account This observed mosaic picture calls for organization and systematization One should always bear in mind that all referential devices only exist for actual reference in discourse, performed in real time 4

Plan of talk § This paper is a part of a typological study based § § § on the material of 200 languages I outline three main parameters of this typology Then I provide characterization of some of the world’s major languages in terms of this typology This is useful for cross-linguistic comparison, but it is also essential for understanding individual languages: one can appreciate the peculiarities of a given system only through knowing its position in a typological space 5

Parameter 1: Basic types of referential devices § Full vs. reduced § Three basic types of reduced referential devices (refs) § Free pronouns § Bound pronouns § Zero refs Overt refs § This talk: mostly third person reference 6

Zero refs § § Yidiny (Australia; Dixon 1977: 514) Ø gali: ɲ/ Ø wawa: liɲu/ ɲinaɲunda/ go. past look. going. past bama ŋabi person. abs many. abs sit. dat. subord <. . . > § Ø § bama: l person. erg Ø wawa: liɲu/ look. going. past Ø wawa: l/ see. past 7 ‘They went, went and saw lots of people sitting there <…> They

Free pronouns § Lyélé (Burkina Faso; Showalter 1986: 211) § e zɛ y e k’ e kwè e la he arise he again he take he leave §e § vò e pyà gɔ li bi jaa-esho he go he search bush people place ‘He went back and looked for the place where the bush people lived’ 8

Bound (affixal) pronouns § Abkhaz (South-Western Caucasus) § i-rə-l-tejt’ it-them-she-gave ‘She gave it to them’ 9

Three basic refs § Bound pronouns are by far the most frequent ref cross-linguistically § Free pronouns are the least frequent ref § Some languages are firmly committed to one type of ref, while other are less consistent 10

WALS composer: Dryer and Siewierska Gur § Abkhaz Yidiny Consistent languages: free, bound, zero 11

Parameter 2: Tenacious vs. recessive pronouns § Abkhaz (South-Western Caucasus) § i-rə-l-tejt’ it-them-she-gave ‘She gave it to them’ § i-č’kº’əncºa d-rə-pxyan his-sons he-them-called ‘He called his sons’ 12

Tenacious vs. recessive pronouns § Recessive pronouns: a complementary distribution with coreferential NPs in the same clause § Example: English § Tenacious pronouns: cooccur with coreferential NPs in the same clause § Example: Abkhaz § Recessiveness correlates with freeness § Tenacity correlates with boundness § However… 13

Free tenacious pronouns § § Spanish “clitic doubling” Comajoan 2006: 73 § y da-ø -ø and the 3 sg. dat la seize- chica pues le le girl then quita 3 sg. dat hit-pres. 3 sg al sombrero niño el chico al 14

Free tenacious pronouns § Bilua (a Papuan language of Solomon islands; Obata 2003: 115, 30) § Omadeu § Sai vo=a there 3 sg. m. nom=lig taku sike tamania ke=beta e=ke. one time five brother&sister 3 pl. nom=cont stay-hist ‘Once upon a time, there were five brothers and sisters living. ke=papue=v=e ziolo devil 15

Bound recessive pronouns § Upper Kuskokwim (Alaska) § yi-ne-łŒanh 3. acc-pref-(3. nom)look ‘S/he is looking at it/him/her’ § gugaŒ ne-łŒanh baby pref-(3. nom)look ‘S/he is looking at the baby’ 16

Both free tenacious and bound recessive pronouns § South Efate (Austronesian, Vanuatu; Thieberger 2006: 269, 113 -114) § Ra=pitlak iskei. 3 du. real. nom=have one ‘They had a daughter. ’ tesa child nmatu girl I=skot-i-r to. 3 sg. real. nom=be. with-trans-3 pl. acc ‘She stayed with them. ’ § Ale, ntuam i=na stay 17

Boundness and tenacity § The parameters “free vs. bound” and “recessive vs. tenacious” are in fact independent § Frequency cline: § bound tenacious V § free recessive V § free tenacious V § bound recessive 18

Tenacity and argumenthood § i-č’kº’əncºa d-rə-pxyan § Kibrik 1988 § Mithun 2003 § Siewierska 2004 § Corbett 2006 § Distributed argumenthood his-sons he-them-called ‘He called his sons’ 19

Parameter 3: Sensitivities § Consistent languages § Inconsistencies/sensitivities: § various degrees of consistency in a language’s commitment to a certain referential device – some languages use a variety of devices whose heterogeneity may be very high § Zero reference - Yidiny § Free recessive pronouns - Lyélé § Bound tenacious pronouns – Abkhaz § § Clause participant position Construction type Referent’s level of activation Referent’s definiteness, specificity, etc. 20

Sensitivity A: Clause participant position § Latin § Subject: bound tenacious pronouns § Object: free recessive pronouns § Gela (Oceanic Austronesian, Solomon Islands, Crowley 2002) § Subject: free tenacious § Object: bound tenacious § …most other combinations attested as well… 21

Latin “agreement” Bound tenacious pronouns (just as in Abkhaz), but only in the subject position Quintus Horatius Flaccus, Satires, Book 1, Chapter 5 c = Cicirrus, s = Sarmentus § § rogaba-t denique cur umquam fugisse-t, ask. impf-3 sg finally why sometime flee. plpf. conj-3 sg cui satis una farr-is libra foret, who. dat enough one grain-gen. sg pound be. impf. conj-3 sg 22

Abkhaz vs. Latin § How are the Abkhaz and the Latin patterns § § different? Both use bound pronouns The only difference is in sensitivity: § Abkhaz: all pronouns are bound and tenacious pronouns are insensitive § Latin: pronouns are bound and tenacious only in the subject pronouns there is an important sensitivity along the lines of clause participant position 23

Sensitivity B: Referent’s level of activation § In Mandarin, zero and free pronoun tā occur with comparable frequency § Interpreting available analyses (Hedberg 1996, Li and Thompson 1979, Giora 1996, Chu 1998, Pu 2001, inter alia) it appears that zero is used at the highest level of referent activation, while third person pronouns at a somewhat lowered level. 24

What all this is good for? § For profiling individual languages’ referential § § systems After profiles of a significant number of languages is available, for the construction of a fully-fledged typology of referential systems For an individual language, details of its referential system must be assessed against the background of the basic characterization 25

Profiles of several of the world’s major languages Language Primary ref Presence and kind of sensitivity English FRP – Spanish BTP; FTP Clause participant position: subject; object French BTP; BRP Referential properties: definite; indefinite Russian BTP; FRP+BTP; FRP Clause participant position and degree of activation: maximally activated subject; object Japanese Zero – Mandarin Zero; FRP Degree of activation: higher; lower 26

Focus on English § Primary ref: free pronoun § Free pronouns are recessive § Are agreement markers refs? § No § They are cross-linguistically highly exotic § They very rarely appear as the sole bearers of referents’ properties in a clause § They must be recognized as truly automatic, nonreferential agreement affixes § Sensitivities 27

Clause participant position + construction type § English: § High degree of propensity to free pronouns § However, free pronouns yield to zero reference in some special contexts, in particular: § subject position of non-first coordinate clauses 28

English zero subject § Al Gore is truth. Think about it. He says what needs to be said without fear, without posturing. He leads. (paragraph) He succeeds in the worlds of politics, business, and diplomacy. He reads and Ø writes history. He has access to the smartest people on the planet. 29

Focus on Hindi § A highly complex system § All major types of refs are found: free pronouns, bound pronouns (agreement), and zero § Primary ref: free pronouns § Secondary ref: bound pronouns (agreement) § § operating on the ergative basis Bound pronouns are tenacious: they cooccur with additional referential devices, either free pronouns or full NPs Sensitivity: free pronouns yield to zero under certain discourse circumstances 30

Hindi free pronouns and agreement (= bound pronouns? ) § vah 3 Sg(Nom) ‘He is going’ § us-ne jaa rahaahai go be. Prog. 3 Sg. M kitaab 3 Sg-Erg book(Nom. F) ‘She read the book’ (Prasad 2003: 75 -76) pa. Rhii read. Perf. 3 Sg. F 31

Hindi zero reference § fan. Tuush-ne aadmiyo. N-kaa gussaa saaman-par utaaraa Fantush-Erg men-of anger furniture-on took. down ‘Fantush took out his anger with the men on the furniture’ § Ø vahaa. N kii sab kursiyaa. N to. R daalii. N there of all chairs(Nom. F) break. Inf put. Perf. 3 Pl. F ‘He broke all the chairs there’ (Prasad 2003: 92) 32

Hindi sensitivity § Prasad (2003: 101) formulates the basis for the choice of zero over a third person pronoun in terms of Centering Theory, and her formulation can be reinterpreted as follows: § Zero is used under highest referent activation, third person pronoun is used under intermediate activation 33

On a sad note § In this domain – one of the worst misnomers in linguistics, § picked up by linguists of various theoretical views with a surprising ease § Pro-drop 34

Which languages are prodrop? § Those that use zero reference, such as Yidiny or § § Japanese Those that use insensitive bound pronouns, such as Abkhaz Those that use bound pronouns, sensitive to clause participant position, such as Latin Those that use sensitive free pronouns, such as Mandarin or Russian In other words, all un. English languages 35

The parameter of Englishness § Siewierska and Bakker 2005 § A sample of 428 languages § 96. 2% of languages are “pro-drop” § This “parameter” completely fails to account for the diversity of un. English languages § Plea: DROP PRO-DROP! 36

Conclusion: framework for a description of a language’s referential system § Preferred type of ref: zero vs. free pronoun vs. bound pronoun § Pronouns: recessive vs. tenacious § Sensitivities: § Whether the language is consistent or not § What bases for sensitivities are attested § What options are used depending on sensitivities 37