Suyá language

Kĩsêdjê (Suyá, Kĩsêdjê: Kĩsêdjê kapẽrẽ [kĩˈsedʒe kaˈpẽɺẽ]) is a Northern Jê language (Jê, Macro-Jê) spoken in Mato Grosso, Brazil. It is closely related to Tapayúna; together, they form the Tapajós branch of Northern Jê.[3]:7

Not to be confused with Yarumá language (Carib).
Kĩsêdjê (Suyá)
Kĩsêdjê kapẽrẽ
Pronunciation[kĩˈsedʒe kaˈpẽɺẽ]
Native toBrazil
RegionXingu Indigenous Park, Mato Grosso
EthnicityKĩsêdjê (Suyá)
Native speakers
350 (2006)[1]
Language codes
ISO 639-3suy
Glottologsuya1243
ELPSuyá[2]

Kĩsêdjê is closely related to Tapayúna;[4][5]:10–2 the common past on the Tapajós River, shared by the Kĩsêdjê and the Tapayúna, is still part of their oral history.[3]:9 Phonological differences between the languages include the reflexes of Proto-Northern Jê *m/*mb, *mr/*mbr, *c (in onsets), *ñ (in codas), and *b (in stressed syllables). In Kĩsêdjê, these consonants are reflected as m/mb, mr/mbr, s, n, and p, respectively, whereas Tapayúna has w ([w̃]), nr ([ɾ̃]), t ([t̪]), j ([j]), and w ([w]) in the same words.[3]:85[5]:10–2

Phonology

Consonants

Kĩsêdjê preserved the consonants of Proto-Tapajós almost intact, with the exception of the sound change *t̪ʰ > s.[6]:560

Onsets

The following table lists some of the possible onsets of Kĩsêdjê;[7]:126 in addition, most of these can further combine with /w/ or /ɲ/ (in words whose Proto-Northern Jê etyma contain one of *wa, *wə̂, or *jê, which are analyzed as complex nuclei). Underlying nasals acquire an oral phase preceding an oral nucleus.[7]:127–8

Kĩsêdjê onsets
labial labial + rhotic dental/(post)alveolar palatal velar velar + rhotic glottal glottal + rhotic
plain stops p /p/ [p] t /t/ [t̪] k /k/ [k]
aspirated stops th /tʰ/ [t̠ʰ] kh /kʰ/ [kʰ] khr /kʰɺ/ [kʰɹ]
fricatives s /s/ [s] h(w) /h(w)/ [h(w)] hr /hɺ/ [hɺ]
prenasalized stop nt /ⁿt/ [nt̪]
nasal stops m/mb /m/ [m]/[mb] mr/mbr /mɺ/ [mɺ̃]/[mbɺ] n/nd /n/ [n]/[nd] nh/j /ɲ/ [ɲ]/[nj] ~ [j] ng /ŋ/ [ŋ]/[ŋg] ngr /ŋɺ/ [ŋɹ̃]/[ŋgɹ]
sonorants w /w/ [w] r /ɺ/ [ɺ]

Vowels

The vowel inventory of Kĩsêdjê is shown below (the orthographic representation is given in italics; the characters in slashes stand for the IPA values of each vowel).[7]:125 Nonato (2014) reports that there is no allophonic variation.[7]:127 By convention, the tilde, which is part of the graphemes that denote nasal vowels, is left out in the orthography following <m>, <n>, and <nh> (but not <ng>), as in <mo> [mɔ̃] ‘to go (plural)’. In addition, the vowels /ɘ̃/ and /ã/ are not differentiated in the orthography (both are written as <ã>).[7]:130–1

Oral Nasal
i /i/ y /ɨ/ u /u/ ĩ /ĩ/ ỹ /ɨ̃/ ũ /ũ/
ê /e/ â /ɘ/ ô /o/ ẽ /ẽ/ ã /ɘ̃/ õ /õ/
e /ɛ/ á /ɜ/ o /ɔ/
a /a/ ã /ã/

Echo vowels

Kĩsêdjê has a phenomenon whereby an echo vowel is obligatorily inserted in utterance-final words whose underlying form ends in a consonant;[7]:128–30[8] that way, all utterances end in vowels on surface in Kĩsêdjê. Vowel epenthesis often causes the underlying coda to lenite. The resulting alternations are represented orthographically, as in thep [ˈt̠ʰɛp̚] / thewe [ˈt̠ʰɛwɛ] ‘fish’, wit [ˈwit̚] / wiri [ˈwiɾi] ‘only’, ngrôt [ˈŋgɹot̚] / ngrôrô [ˈŋgɹoɾo] ‘the Pleiades’, khẽn [ˈkʰɛ̃n̚] / khẽne [ˈkʰɛ̃nɛ̃] ‘stone’, hwysysôm [hʷɨsɨˈsom̚] / hwysysômy [hʷɨsɨˈsomɨ] ‘mosquito’.[8] In words that end in an underlying rhotic coda, echo vowels are inserted regardless of whether the word is in the utterance-final position, as in ngõrõ [ˈŋɔ̃ɺɔ̃] ‘to sleep’ (forms such as *[ˈŋɔ̃ɺ] are unattested).[7]:128–30

Morphology

Finiteness

As in all other Northern Jê languages, verbs inflect for finiteness and thus have a basic opposition between a finite form (also form B[5] and main form[7]) and a nonfinite form (also form A[5] and embedded form[7]). Finite forms are used in matrix clauses only, whereas nonfinite forms are used in all types of subordinate clauses[7]:140 as well as in some matrix clauses.[9][10] Nonfinite forms are most often formed via suffixation and/or prefix substitution. Some verbs (including all descriptives with the exception of katho ‘to leave’, whose nonfinite form is kathoro) lack an overt finiteness distinction.

The available nonfinite suffixes are /-ɺ/ (the most common option, found in many transitive and intransitive verbs, with its allomorph /-j/ after the vowel /a/), /-n/ (found in some transitive verbs), as well as /-k/, /-m/, and /-t/ (found in a handful of intransitive verbs which take a nominative subject when finite), as shown in the table below.[7][5]

Nonfinite suffixes in Kĩsêdjê
finitenonfinitegloss
suffix /-ɺ/ (/-j/ after /a/)
momorõto go (plural)
pĩpĩrĩto kill (singular)
rêrêrêto cross
jantôjantôrôto hang (plural)
pypyryto take (singular)
twâtwârâto bathe
ngrengereto dance
mbambajto know, to hear, to understand
hwahwajto kill (plural)
kapakapajto extract (singular)
kakajto grill (singular)
suffix /-n/
rurunto spill
mbâmbânto grab (singular)
kakhêkakhênto scratch
ahwêtáhwênto work
jandêjandênto press, to squeeze
jarẽjarẽnto say
suffix /-k/
thythykto die
rwârwâkto descend
ihwêhwêkto fart
suffix /-m/
thẽthẽmto go (singular)
ikhõkhõmto drink
tatãmto stand (singular)
suffix /-t/
angjêngjêtto enter (plural)

In Proto-Northern Jê, several verbs derived their finite forms by means of leniting the stem-final consonant (*-t, *-c, *-k → *-r, *-j, *-r).[6]:544 In Kĩsêdjê, at least three verbs retain this pattern,[7][5] though the relation between the finite and nonfinite forms has been obfuscated by a series of regular sound changes, including *-ôj > -wâj (-âj after a labial), *-c > -t.

Nonfinite suffixes in Kĩsêdjê
finitenonfiniteglossProto-Northern Jê finiteProto-Northern Jê nonfinite
ngõrõnhonto sleep*ŋõr*ñõt
pâj / pâjipôtto arrive*bôj*bôc
ro hwâj / ro hwâjiro hôtto extract (plural)*pôj*pôc

The erstwhile palatalizing prefix

In Proto-Northern Jê, a small set of verbs formed their nonfinite forms by employing one of the aforementioned processes and a morphophonological process whereby the onset of the stressed syllable became palatal, and the nucleus of the stressed syllable was raised (if possible); this has been attributed to the influence of an underlying palatalizing nonfinite prefix. In Kĩsêdjê, some of these verbs still follow the archaic pattern, though the relation between the finite and nonfinite forms has been obfuscated by a series of regular sound changes.[6]

finitenonfinitegloss
kutho (pl. jatho)kusôn (pl. jasôn)to ignite
kujathekujasêkto push
ngõrõnhonto sleep
ngõnhorõto give
(khrã) tha(khrã) syryto cut off (singular)
nenhyrỹto do so, to say so

Prefix substitution or loss

In addition to the aforementioned processes, the finiteness inflection may involve prefix substitution or loss. For example, the valency-reducing prefixes are a(j)- (anticausative) and a- (antipassive) in finite verb forms, but wi- and tá-/tu-, respectively, in the nonfinite forms.[6]:541, 544 In addition, some verbs which denote physiological activities or movement have a prefix (i- and a-, respectively) in their finite forms but not in the nonfinite form. Some examples are given below.[11]

Finiteness and prefix alternations in Kĩsêdjê
finitenonfinitegloss
anticausatives
ajkhẽwikhẽnto laugh
ajpãwipãnto be drunk
akhrõwikhrõnto gather (of people, anticausative)
antipassives
ajarẽtujarẽnto narrate
ambratámbrato shout
apêtápêrêto blow (of wind)
apitápirito go up
akhĩn / akhĩnitákhĩnto shout
ahwêtáhwênto work
physiological verbs
ikhõkhõmto drink
ihwêhwêkto fart
movement verbs
atátáráto enter (singular)
angjêngjêtto enter (plural)

Nominative–absolutive clauses

Future, progressive, continuous, completive, and negated clauses in Kĩsêdjê show a cross-linguistically rare morphosyntactic alignment pattern, known as the nominative–absolutive alignment.[10]:191

Kĩsêdjê has also been considered unusual in the literature because of its unexpected (from a cross-linguistic point of view) distribution of ergative and nominative marking of transitive agents in certain types of clauses, such as future and negative clauses.[9] More specifically, transitive agents expressed by a full noun phrase are nominative (marked by the subject marker ra in the examples below), whereas pronominal transitive agents are ergative, as in the following examples:[9]:86–7

 Ludo	ra	thep	khu-ru		mã.
 Ludo	SM	fish	eat.PL-NF	FUT
 ‘Ludo will eat fish.’
 Ro-txi		ra	mĩ-txi		pĩ-rĩ		khêrê.
 anaconda-AUG	SM	caiman-AUG	kill.SG-NF	NEG
 ‘The anaconda did not kill the caiman.’
 I-re		hwĩ-sy		rẽ-n		mã.
 1SG-ERG	tree-seed	throw.PL-NF	FUT
 ‘I will pick fruit.’
 I-re		hwĩ-ngrá	janto-ro	khêrê.
 1SG-ERG	tree-dry	hang.PL-NF	NEG
 ‘I didn't hang the firewood.’

Such split has been previously considered to be impossible by R. M. W. Dixon:[12]

Cross-referencing systems are thus basically pronominal (with the affixes having developed from free-form pronouns, in some earlier stage of the language). We would expect them to be on a nominative-accusative pattern, since this characterizes pronouns at the extreme left of the hierarchy … What we can predict is that, if there is a ‘split’ of this kind, then bound prefixes will be accusative and case-marking on free forms will be ergative. This is exactly what is found.

References
  1. Kĩsêdjê (Suyá) at Ethnologue (18th ed., 2015)
  2. Endangered Languages Project data for Suyá.
  3. Nikulin, Andrey (2020). Proto-Macro-Jê: um estudo reconstrutivo (PDF) (Ph.D. dissertation). Brasília: Universidade de Brasília.
  4. Rodrigues, Cíntia Karla Coelho (2011). "Comparando as consoantes das línguas Tapajúna e Suyá". Alfa: Revista de Linguística. 55 (2): 601–11. doi:10.1590/S1981-57942011000200011.
  5. Santos, Ludoviko Carnasciali dos (1997). Descrição de aspectos morfossintáticos da língua Suyá (Kĩsêdjê), família Jê (PDF) (Ph.D. dissertation). Florianópolis: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina.
  6. Nikulin, Andrey; Salanova, Andrés Pablo (October 2019). "Northern Jê Verb Morphology and the Reconstruction of Finiteness Alternations". International Journal of American Linguistics. 85 (4): 533–567. doi:10.1086/704565.
  7. Nonato, Rafael (February 2014). Clause Chaining, Switch Reference and Coordination (PDF) (Ph.D. dissertation). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  8. Beauchamp, Jérémie (2019). "Echo and default epenthesis in Kĩsêdjê". In Reisinger, D. K. E.; Lo, Roger Yu-Hsiang (eds.). Proceedings of the Workshop on the Structure and Constituency of Languages of the Americas 23 (PDF). University of British Columbia. pp. 26–39.
  9. Gildea, Spike; Castro Alves, Flávia de (2020). "Reconstructing the Source of Nominative-Absolutive Alignment in Two Amazonian Language Families". In Barðdal, Jóhanna; Gildea, Spike; Luján, Eugenio R. (eds.). Reconstructing Syntax. Brill. pp. 47–107. doi:10.1163/9789004392007_003. ISBN 978-90-04-39199-4.
  10. Gildea, Spike; Castro Alves, Flávia de (2010). "Nominative-absolutive: Counter-universal split ergativity in Jê and Cariban" (PDF). Typological Studies in Language. 89: 159–200. doi:10.1075/tsl.89.07gil. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
  11. Nonato, Rafael; Suyá, Jamtô; Suyá, Kawiri (December 6, 2012). Dicionário Kĩsêdjê-Português (PDF). Rio de Janeiro: Museu do Índio. Retrieved 4 August 2020.
  12. Dixon, R. M. W. (1994). Ergativity. Cambridge University Press.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.