Morphology

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 57–87

Borrowing contextual inflection: evidence from northern Australia

Original Paper

Abstract

Gurindji Kriol is a north Australian mixed language which combines lexical and structural elements from Gurindji (Pama-Nyungan), and Kriol (English-lexifier). One of the more striking features of the grammar of Gurindji Kriol is the presence of the Gurindji case paradigm including ergative and dative case-markers within a Kriol verbal frame. Given the fragility of inflectional morphology in other language contact situations, particularly contextual inflections such as structural case markers, this situation bears closer scrunity. This paper argues that the presence of Gurindji case morphology is the result of pervasive code-switching practices which immediately preceded the genesis of the mixed language. As the code-switching stabilised into a mixed language, case-marking was integrated into predicate argument structure of Gurindji Kriol via nominal adjunct structures. Yet, these case markers were not absorbed unscathed. Although the Gurindji Kriol case paradigm bears a close resemblance to its Gurindji source in form, these case markers have not been perfectly replicated in function and distribution. Contact with Kriol functional equivalents such as prepositions and word order have altered the function and distribution of these case markers. The last part of this paper examines the shift that has occurred in Gurindji-derived case morphology in Gurindji Kriol.

Keywords

Borrowing Code-switching Mixed language Gurindji Kriol Inflectional morphology Contextual inflection Case marker 

Abbreviations

ABL

Ablative

ALL

Allative

AUX

Auxiliary

COM

Comitative

DAT

Dative

DU

Dual

DYAD

Kinship pair

ERG

Ergative

FOC

Focus

FUT

Future

IMPF

Imperfect

INC

Inclusive

LOC

Locative

NEG

Negative

O

Object

OBL

Oblique

PAUC

Paucal

PERF

Perfect

PL

Plural

PROG

Progressive

PRS

Present

PST

Past

QN

Question nominal

S

Subject

SG

Singular

TAG

Tag question

TOP

Topic

TR

Transitive

1

First person

2

Second person

3

Third person

-

Morpheme break

=

Clitic break

>

Acting on

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aboh E., Ansaldo U. (2007) The role of typology in language creation. In: Ansaldo U., Matthews S., Lim L. (eds) Deconstructing Creole. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 39–66Google Scholar
  2. Aikhenvald A.Y., Dixon R.M.W. (2007) Grammars in contact: A cross-linguistic typology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Amberger, M., Baker, B., Harvey, M. (eds) (2010) Complex predicates: Cross- linguistic perspectives on event structure. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. Austin P., Bresnan J. (1996) Non-configurationality in Australian Aboriginal languages. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14: 215–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bakker, P. (1997). A language of our own: The genesis of Michif, the Mixed Cree-French Language of the Canadian Métis (Vol. 10). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bakker P. (2003) Mixed languages as autonomous systems. In: Matras Y., Bakker P. (eds) The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 107–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Booij G. (1994) Against split morphology. Yearbook of Morphology 1993: 27–50Google Scholar
  8. Booij G. (1996) Inherent versus contextual inflection and the split morphology hypothesis. Yearbook of Morphology 1995: 1–16Google Scholar
  9. Booij G. (2007) The grammar of words: An introduction to linguistic morphology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  10. Chappell H., McGregor W. (1995) Prolegomena to a theory of inalienability. In: Chappell H., McGregor W. (eds) The grammar of inalienability: A typological perspective on body part terms and the part-whole relation. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 3–30Google Scholar
  11. Charola, E. (2002). The verb phrase structure of Gurindji Kriol. Unpublished Honours, Melbourne University, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  12. Disbray S., Simpson J. (2005) The expression of possessive in Wumpurrarni English, Tennant Creek. Monash University Linguistics Papers 4(2): 65–85Google Scholar
  13. Dixon R.M.W. (1979) Ergativity. Language 55(1): 59–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dixon R.M.W. (1980) The languages of Australia. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Dixon R.M.W. (1994) Ergativity. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gardani F. (2008) Borrowing of inflectional morphemes in language contact. Peter Lang, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  17. Haugen, E. (1950). The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language, 26.Google Scholar
  18. Heath, J. (1978). Linguistic diffusion in Arnhem Land (Vol. 13). Canberra: AIAS.Google Scholar
  19. Heine B. (1997) Possession: Cognitive sources, forces, and grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hercus L. (2005) The influence of English on possessive systems as shown in two Aboriginal languages, Arabana (northern SA) and Paakantyi (Darling River, NSW). Monash University Linguistics Papers 4(2): 29–42Google Scholar
  21. Hudson J. (1983a) Grammatical and semantic aspects of Fitzroy Valley Kriol. Darwin, SILGoogle Scholar
  22. Hudson J. (1983) Transitivity and aspect in the Kriol verb. Papers in Pidgin and Creole Linguistics. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics (A-65) 3: 161–175Google Scholar
  23. Jelinek E. (1984) Empty categories, case and configurationality. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2: 39–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jones, C., Meakins, F., & Buchan, H. (in progress). Citation-speech vowels in Gurindji Kriol and local Australian English.Google Scholar
  25. Klavans J. (1983) The syntax of code switching: Spanish and English. In: King L.D., Matey C.A. (eds) Selected papers from the 13th linguistic symposium on romance languages.. Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 213–232Google Scholar
  26. Langlois A. (2004) Alive and Kicking: Areyonga Teenage Pitjantjatjara. Pacific Linguistics, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  27. Laughren M. (1988) Toward a lexical representation of Warlpiri verbs. In: Wilkins W. (eds) Thematic relations. Academic Press, New York, pp 215–242Google Scholar
  28. Laughren M. (1989) The configurationality parameter and Warlpiri. In: Maracz L., Muysken P. (eds) Configurationality: The typology of asymmetries. Foris Publications, Dordrecht, Holland, pp 319–353Google Scholar
  29. Matras Y. (2007) The borrowability of structural categories. In: Matras Y., Sakel J. (eds) Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 31–73Google Scholar
  30. Matras Y., Sakel J. (2007) Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  31. Mayer, M. (1994 [1969]). Frog, where are you? China: Puffin.Google Scholar
  32. McConvell, P. (1985). Domains and code-switching among bilingual Aborigines. In M. Clyne (Ed.), Australia, meeting place of languages (Vol. C-92, pp. 95–125). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
  33. McConvell P. (1988) Mix-im-up: Aboriginal code-switching old and new. In: Heller M. (eds) code-switching: Anthropological and sociolinguistic perspectives. Mouton de Gruyter, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  34. McConvell, P. (1996). Gurindji grammar. Unpublished manuscript, Canberra.Google Scholar
  35. McConvell P. (2002) Mix-im-up speech and emergent mixed languages in Indigenous Australia. Texas Linguistic Forum (Proceedings from the 9th Annual Symposium about Language and Society) 44(2): 328–349Google Scholar
  36. McConvell P. (2008) Mixed languages as outcomes of code-switching: Recent examples from Australia and their implications. Journal of Language Contact 2: 187–212Google Scholar
  37. McConvell P., Meakins F. (2005) Gurindji Kriol: A mixed language emerges from code-switching. Australian Journal of Linguistics 25(1): 9–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McGregor W. (2002) Verb classification in Australian languages. Mouton de Gruyter, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  39. McGregor W. (2010) Optional ergative case marking systems in a typological-semiotic perspective. Lingua 120(7): 1610–1636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Meakins, F. (2007). Case marking in contact: The development and function of case morphology in Gurindji Kriol, an Australian mixed language. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Melbourne, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  41. Meakins F. (2008a) Unravelling languages: Multilingualism and language contact in Kalkaringi. In: Simpson J., Wigglesworth G. (eds) Children’s language and multilingualism: Indigenous language use at home and school. Continuum, New York, pp 247–264Google Scholar
  42. Meakins F. (2008b) Land, language and identity: The socio-political origins of Gurindji Kriol. In: Meyerhoff M., Nagy N. (eds) Social lives in language. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 69–94Google Scholar
  43. Meakins F. (2009) The case of the shifty ergative marker: A pragmatic shift in the ergative marker in one Australian mixed language. In: Barddal J., Chelliah S. (eds) The role of semantics and pragmatics in the development of case. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 59–91Google Scholar
  44. Meakins F. (2010) The development of asymmetrical serial verb constructions in an Australian mixed language. Linguistic Typology 14(1): 1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Meakins, F. (to appear). Which Mix?—code-switching or a mixed language—Gurindji Kriol. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages.Google Scholar
  46. Meakins F., O’Shannessy C. (2005) Possessing variation: Age and inalienability related variables in the possessive constructions of two Australian mixed languages. Monash University Linguistics Papers 4(2): 43–63Google Scholar
  47. Meakins F., O’Shannessy C. (2010) Ordering arguments about: Word order and discourse motivations in the development and use of the ergative marker in two Australian mixed languages. Lingua 120(7): 1693–1713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Moravcsik E. (1978) Universals of language contact. In: Greenberg J. (eds) Universals of human language: Vol. 1 method and theory. Stanford University Press, Stanford CA, pp 95–122Google Scholar
  49. Munro J. (2000) Kriol on the move: A case of language spread and shift in Northern Australia. In: Siegel J. (eds) Processes of language contact: Studies from Australia and the South Pacific. Saint-Laurent (Quebec), Fides, pp 245–270Google Scholar
  50. Munro, J. (2005). Substrate language influence in Kriol: The application of transfer constraints to language contact in Northern Australia. Unpublished PhD, University of New England, Armidale.Google Scholar
  51. Muysken P. (1981) Generative studies on Creole languages. Foris Publications, Dordrecht, Holland, Cinnaminson, NJGoogle Scholar
  52. Muysken P. (1981) Halfway between Quechua and Spanish: The case for relexification. In: Highfield A., Valdman A. (eds) Historicity and variation in Creole studies. Ann Arbor, Karoma, pp 52–78Google Scholar
  53. Muysken P. (1997). Media lengua. In: S. G. Thompson, Contact languages: A wider perspective (pp. 365–426). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  54. Muysken P. (2000) Bilingual speech: A typology of code-mixing. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  55. Myers-Scotton C. (1993a) Duelling languages: Grammatical structure in code-switching. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  56. Myers-Scotton C. (1993b) Social motivations for code-switching: Evidence from Africa. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  57. Myers-Scotton C. (1998a) A way to dusty death: The Matrix Language turnover hypothesis. In: Grenoble L.A., Whaley L.J. (eds) Endangered languages: Language loss and community response. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 289–316Google Scholar
  58. Myers-Scotton C. (1998) Codes and consequences: Choosing linguistic varieties. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  59. Myers-Scotton C. (2000) What matters: The out of sight in mixed languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3(2): 119–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Myers-Scotton C. (2002) Contact linguistics: Bilingual encounters and grammatical outcomes. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  61. Myers-Scotton C. (2003) What lies beneath: Split (mixed) languages as contact phenomena. In: Matras Y., Bakker P. (eds) The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 73–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Myers-Scotton C., Jake J. (2000a) Four types of morpheme: Evidence from aphasia, code-switching, and second-language acquisition. Linguistics 38(6): 1053–1100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Myers-Scotton C., Jake J. (2000b) Testing the 4-M model: An introduction. Journal of Bilingualism 4(1): 1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Nichols J. (1992) Linguistic diversity in space and time. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  65. Nordlinger R. (1998) Constructive case: Evidence from Australian languages. CSLI Publications, Stanford, CAGoogle Scholar
  66. O’Shannessy C. (2005) Light Warlpiri: A new language. Australian Journal of Linguistics 25(1): 31–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. O’Shannessy C. (2008) Children’s production of their heritage language and a new mixed language. In: Simpson J., Wigglesworth G. (eds) Children’s language and multilingualism: Indigenous language use at home and school. Continuum, New York, pp 261–282Google Scholar
  68. O’Shannessy C. (2009) Language variation and change in a north Australian Indigenous community. In: Preston D., Stanford J. (eds) Variationist approaches to indigenous minority languages. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 419–439Google Scholar
  69. Pakendorf B. (2009) Intensive contact and the copying of paradigms: An Ëven dialect in contact wiht Sakha (Yakut). Journal of Language Contact 2: 85–110Google Scholar
  70. Sandefur J. (1979) An Australian Creole in the northern territory: A description of Ngukurr- Bamyili Dialects (Part 1). Darwin, SILGoogle Scholar
  71. Sapir, E. (1927). Language. New York.Google Scholar
  72. Schultze-Berndt E. (2002) Preverbs as an open word class in Northern Australian languages: Synchronic and diachronic correlates. Yearbook of Morphology 2003: 145–177Google Scholar
  73. Simpson J. (1991) Warlpiri morpho-syntax: A lexicalist approach. Kluwer, Dordrecht, HollandGoogle Scholar
  74. Singh R. (1982) On some ‘redundant compounds’ in Modern Hindi. Lingua 56: 345–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Smith I., Paauw S. (2006) Sri Lanka Malay: Creole or convert. In: Deumart A., Durrleman S. (eds) Structure and variation in language contact. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 159–182Google Scholar
  76. Speas M. (1990) Phrase structure in natural language. Kluwer, Dordrecht, HollandGoogle Scholar
  77. Thomason S. (1997) Mednyj Aleut. In: Thomason S.G. (eds) Contact languages: A wider perspective. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 449–468Google Scholar
  78. Thomason S. (2001) Language contact: An introduction. Edinburgh University Press, Georgetown University Press, Edinburgh, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  79. Thomason S. (2003) Social factors and linguistic processes in the emergence of stable mixed languages. In: Matras Y., Bakker P. (eds) The mixed language debate: Theoretical and empirical advances. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 21–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Thomason S., Kaufman T. (1988) Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  81. Treffers-Daller J. (1994) Mixing two languages: French-Dutch contact in a comparative perspective. Mouton de Gruyter, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  82. Weinreich, U. (1974 [1953]). Languages in contact: Findings and problems. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  83. Whitney W.D. (1881) On mixture in language. TAPA 12: 5–26Google Scholar
  84. Winford D. (2003) An introduction to contact linguistics. Blackwell, Malden USAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Languages and Comparative CulturesUniversity of QueenslandSt LuciaAustralia

Personalised recommendations