Comparative Constructions in Saisiyat
Date Issued
2008
Date
2008
Author(s)
Sung, Lihsin
Abstract
The present thesis investigates the comparative constructions in Saisiyat with particular focus on their syntactic structures and typological characteristics so as to offer an in-depth exploration of how a comparative relationship is realized in Saisiyat.ust as commented by Kennedy (to appear), “The ability to establish orderings among objects and make comparisons between them according to the amount or degree to which they possess some property is a basic component of human cognition.” However, the comparative construction has been a notorious yet intriguing research topic since languages demonstrate great variations in constructing a comparative structure. ne variation stems from the categorical status of the adjectives of which gradability is the essential feature for a comparative predicate. Therefore, we first characterize a group of lexemes that can constitute the comparative predicates in Saisiyat, the so-called putative adjectives. It is demonstrated that the Saisiyat adjectives are generally verb-like in terms of their syntactic behavior. Specifically, since they share similar morphosyntactic patterns with stative verbs despite certain distinctions concerning valency, it seems to be plausible to treat them as a subgroup of stative verbs. In regard to the modification devices in Saisiyat, the adjective modification of a noun is always concomitant with a marker ’ima while the adjective predication is unmarked. This fact reinforces the claim that Saisiyat adjectives are strongly verb-like. e then conduct a syntactic analysis of entity comparisons in Saisiyat on the basis of Stassen’s (1985) typological framework. It is revealed that Saisiyat possesses three main comparative constructions, including the Juxtaposition construction (TYPE 1), the Addity construction (TYPE 2) and the Exceed Construction (TYPE 3). For TYPE 1, the comparative reading is inferred by juxtaposing two nominals or adversative clauses. TYPE 2, being mono-clausal in nature, gains the comparative sense via an addition of the dative-case marked standard NP to a typical one-argument AF construction. It is suggested that Stassen’s criteria are able to accommodate the Juxtaposition construction while a straightforward categorization for the Addity construction is still blurred due to the poly-functions pertaining to the dative case. The Exceed construction, is dubbed this name to characterize the existence of a bare verb root, -Salaz ‘exceed; surpass’ in addition to the kin-marked comparative predicate. While TYPE 2 allows no focus alternation, TYPE 3 has two focus alternations, namely the AF or the RF construction, which are hosted by the exceed-verb alone. The Exceed construction in Saisiyat is analyzed as an SVC and thus accords with the Exceed-1 comparative in terms of Stassen’s (1985) framework. he three comparative devices also apply to event comparisons. The two events in a comparison are coded as embedded clauses as the action verbs are finite with the focus inflection. The matrix predicates in event comparisons are the comparative predicate in TYPE 2, and the exceed-verb in TYPE 3. Finally, we find no morphological device to mark equative and superlative constructions in Saisiyat. The former relationship is conveyed via SVC while the latter is conveyed via pragmatic inference.
Subjects
Saisiyat
comparative constructions
typology
adjectives
File(s)![Thumbnail Image]()
Loading...
Name
ntu-97-R93142006-1.pdf
Size
23.53 KB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum
(MD5):8234ddf5a234ff2856a288976c505575