Re: A question about connecting sentences

Hey.

Matt's Tokana examples reminded me of a similar device in Tepa. Recall
that in Tokana dependent clauses are marked as such by the suffix _-n_.
In Tepa, embedded clauses are inflected for the identity or non-identity
of the subjects of the clauses. That is, if the subject of the embedded
clause is the same as the subject of the main clause (or the head noun
if the embedded clause is a relative), the clitic _e=_ is attached to
the verbal word of the subordinate clause. If the subject of the
embedded clause is different from the subject of the main clause (or the
head noun) the clitic _a=_ is attached to the verbal word. What this
means is that embedded clause get marked as such because of the
referential properties of their subjects. Some examples:

1.  0-    pitee neqaa   teeli a=  0-    pulu humahma    =nka
    3>3'- see:B woman:B Teeli DS= 3>3'- pick fruit:DIST =some
    'Teeli saw the woman while she [the woman] was picking some fruit.'

2.  0-    pitee neqaa   teeli e=  0-    pulu humahma    =nka
    3>3'- see:B woman:B Teeli SS= 3>3'- pick fruit:DIST =some
    'Teeli saw the woman while she [Teeli] was picking some fruit.'

3.  0-    pitee neqaa   teeli e=  0-    pulu humahma    =nka
    3>3'- see:B woman:B Teeli SS= 3>3'- pick fruit:DIST =some
    'Teeli saw the woman [who was] picking some fruit.'

In sentence 1, the subject of the embedded clause is 'the woman', which
is different from the subject of the main clause, 'Teeli', so the verb
of the embedded clause is marked with _a=_ 'different subject'. In 2,
the subjects are the same, so the verb of the embedded clause is marked
with _e=_ 'same subject'. In 3, the embedded clause is a relative
modifying 'the woman'; since the subject of the relative is
coreferential with the head of the relative, the clause is marked with
_e=_ 'same subject'. (Notice that the relative clause in 3 is a
"head-internal" relative; the relativized noun remains in the embedded
clause rather than moving out into the main clause as in English. Head-
internal relatives are the rule in Tepa.) Sentences 1 and 3 are almost,
but not quite synonymous.

Since adjectives in Tepa are better thought of as stative verbs, this
means that any "adjectival" modifier will be marked as an embedded
clause.

4.  e=  0- hati  tikna
    SS= 3- sharp tooth:COLL
    'sharp teeth'

5.  e=  0- hati  ne- tikna      suu
    SS= 3- sharp 3-  tooth:COLL dog
    'the dog's sharp teeth'

6.  tina  -pa   e=  0- hati  suu
    tooth -HAVE SS= 3- sharp dog
    'The dog has sharp teeth.'

In these examples, the stative predicate 'be sharp' functions like a
relative clause modifying 'teeth'. An interesting construction is number
6, in which the noun 'tooth' becomes a predicate by suffixation of _-pa_
'have X'. The stative predicate 'be sharp' still functions as a
relative, but in this case, the head noun 'tooth' has been extracted
from the relative clause, unlike the other relative clause shown in 3,
where the head remains internal to its clause.

Dirk

--
Dirk Elzinga
dirk.elzinga@m.cc.utah.edu                   "All grammars leak."
http://www.u.arizona.edu/~elzinga/                 -Edward Sapir