A Grammar of Kambera

Klamer, Marian

doi:10.1515/9783110805536

Cited by 156 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Kambera data are based on a corpus analysis by Onvlee (1984), a comprehensive Kambera-Dutch dictionary, while the Dutch data are based on a corpus analysis of the standard dictionary of Dutch (Van Dale Groot Woordenboek der Nederlandse Taal), and on an experiment with Dutch native speakers. The formal complexity of the items discussed here has been motivated independently in the literature on Kambera and Dutch (for Kambera, see van der Hulst & Klamer 1997a, 1997b, Klamer 1998for Dutch, see Booij 1995:35-43, and the references cited there). The semantic classifications of the items came from independent sources as well.…”

Section: Structural Complexity Correlates With Semantic Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…), data from prosody, reduplication, and language games indicate that the final consonant is not fully integrated into the prosodic template that is generally applicable for Kambera root forms-the trochaic foot. (Evidence and independent motivation of the prosodic complexity of (C)VCVC roots is given in van der Hulst & Klamer 1997a, 1997band Klamer 1998. In other words, though Kambera consonant-final roots are morphologically simple (they are morphological roots, not derived words), they are prosodically complex, because they consist of a foot combined with an additional consonant.…”

Section: Structural Complexity Correlates With Semantic Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Semantically Motivated Lexical Patterns: A Study of Dutch and Kambera Expressives

Klamer¹

2002

lan

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Structural Complexity Correlates With Semantic Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Structural Complexity Correlates With Semantic Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantically Motivated Lexical Patterns: A Study of Dutch and Kambera Expressives

Klamer¹

2002

lan

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Beneficiaries/Recipients are regularly marked with a dative clitic, as in (4) (cf. Klamer, 1998, for details):3 (3) Da-ngarrdi -ya na uhu 3pN-take -3sA ART rice 'They take the rice' (4) Da-ngarrdi -nya na uhu i Ama 3pN-take -3sD ART rice ART father 'They bring father the rice'…”

Section: Kambera Report Constructionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kambera and Buru are both classified as Central MalayoPolynesian languages. Kambera has 150,000 speakers, is spoken on the island of Sumba in Eastern Indonesia, and described in Klamer (1998). Buru has 43,000 speakers, is spoken in Central Maluku, Indonesia, and described in Grimes (1991).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How report verbs become quote markers and complementisers

Klamer

2000

Lingua

Self Cite

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many languages across the world, verbs reporting speech, thoughts and perceptions (also referred to as quotative verbs) grammaticalise into quote markers and/or complementisers. This paper analyses the change of the items kua and fen in the Austronesian languages Tukang Besi and Buru, as originally full lexical 'report' verbs that became open to reinterpretation as grammatical items after having undergone 'semantic bleaching'. It is proposed that the 'semantic bleaching', which crucially involves loss of argument structure, is caused by a mismatch between linguistic levels -here between surface syntax and lexical argument structure. The mismatch involves a violation of universal constraints on 'Semantic Transparency' and 'Structural Simplicity', and results in a reduced lexical representation of the report verb as a predicate without arguments. The multifunctional, polysemous character of this 'grammaticalised' item is now a consequence of its interaction with particular surface syntactic constructions. In other words, 'V to C' grammaticalisation is a structurally determined variable interpretation of a lexically impoverished item, and does not involve a change in category (labels) (contra Harris and Campbell, 1995:63; Reh, 1984: 37-38: see also Haspelmath, 1998: 327-328). This view of grammaticalised verbs as lexical forms with reduced argument structure may be extended to other areas of verb-grammaticalisation.The " I particularly wish to thank Miriam Butt and Miriam Meyerhoff and the Lingua reviewer, whose suggestions helped to shape this paper in its present form. I also thank the following people for their valuable comments and criticisms on the various predecessors of this paper or the talks reporting about it: Geert Booij, Joan Bresnan, Mark Donohue, Tom Giildemann. Bemd Heine, Gertjan Postma, Ger Reesmk, Nigel Vincent, Lourens de Vries, Jan-Wouter Zwart, and the participants of the HIL workshop on Quotative structures (Leiden, November 1998), especially Johan Rooryck. A short conference version of this paper is to appear in the Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Austronesian Linguisttcs. held in Taipei similar path of grammaticalisation of report verbs across languages is explained by proposing a list of structural characteristics (of syntax and discourse) that appear to be relevant in allowing the grammaticalisation to take place. Genetically related languages may diverge because they differ in one (or more) of those characteristics: the report verb in Kambera, a language closely related to Buru and Tukang Besi, did not grammaticalise because of a different surface constituent order. 0

show abstract

“…In the literature it has been referred to as 'Sumbaneesch' (Wielenga 1909), 'Sumba(a)sch' (Onvlee 1925), 'Kamberaas' (Onvlee 1984), and 'Bahasa Sumba/Kambera' (Kapita 1982). Klamer (1998a) is a recent grammar of the language. 3 The information presented in this chapter is based on a corpus of 12-hours of spontaneous speech, plus additional elicitation, collected in Sumba during 12 months of fieldwork between 1991 and 1994 in one village, Katàka.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%