Re: Question about anaphora

On Monday, June 2, 2003, at 07:11  PM, And Rosta wrote:

> Dirk:
>> The Numic languages also have switch reference, but that system has
>> its
>> origin in the tense/aspect system of the language. I had switch
>> reference in Tepa (the precursor to Miapimoquitch), but it has now
>> become entwined with deixis in Miapimoquitch. There is a three-way
>> deictic distinction which is cross-cut with same subject/different
>> subject as follows:
>>
>>            same subject   different subject
>> proximal    te=             ta=
>> distal      ke=             ka=
>> neutral      e=              a=
>>
>> The consonant encodes deixis and the vowel encodes same/different
>> subject. All of these forms are proclitics which appear on the first
>> element of subordinate clauses
>
> How come you describe this as cross-cutting, rather than the following
> simpler(?) analysis?
>
>   e-   same subj
>   a-   diff subj
>
>   t-   proximal
>   k-   distal
>
It's probably just a syllabic bias (syllable = formative). But I have
always thought of these elements (they're called determiners in the
Miapimoquitch grammar) as being unitary in a Word-and-Paradigm kind of
way. Maybe I'll have to mess up the system a bit to make them less
analyzable ...

> --And.
Dirk
--
Dirk Elzinga
Dirk_Elzinga@byu.edu

"I believe that phonology is superior to music. It is more variable and
its pecuniary possibilities are far greater." - Erik Satie