The Hebrew University Logo
Syllabus The dynamics of person marking systems:Diachrony morphosyntax, Sociopragmatics - 41807
òáøéú
Print
 
close window close
PDF version
Last update 19-09-2017
HU Credits: 2

Degree/Cycle: 2nd degree (Master)

Responsible Department: linguistics

Semester: 1st Semester

Teaching Languages: English

Campus: Mt. Scopus

Course/Module Coordinator: Dr. Linda Konnerth

Coordinator Email: linda.konnerth@mail.huji.ac.il

Coordinator Office Hours:

Teaching Staff:
Ms. Linda Konnerth

Course/Module description:
This seminar takes the grammatical category of person and looks at how actual person marking systems in languages around the world evolve to become the way they are. This includes the discussion of general mechanisms of language change as well as the specific properties of first person (speaker), second person (addressee) and third person. The latter will be examined vis-à-vis the force played by the paradigmatic nature of person marking. Connections to related grammatical domains are explored, such as deixis and impersonal constructions including voice, in particular the passive.

Course/Module aims:
A seminar aimed to prepare MA students to engage with a particular topic by accumulating a knowledge base and from there develop one’s own research project.

Learning outcomes - On successful completion of this module, students should be able to:
- design their own research project
- critically read journal articles
-recapitulate basic knowledge of person marking

Attendance requirements(%):
90

Teaching arrangement and method of instruction: Lectures and interactive data analysis; student presentations at the end of the semester

Course/Module Content:
I. What types of person marking systems exist?
- (1) Introduction to the patterns that we’ll be trying to understand
- (2) First person, Second person, Third person; speech-act participants (Ariel 1998)
- (3) Typology of person marker paradigms (Siewierska 2004: §3); (Cysouw 2003: §4)

II. Where do they come from?
II.1 (4) Innovative personal pronouns (Heine and Song 2011); (Siewierska 2004: §7.1)

II.2 Innovative verbal person markers and person marking systems
- (5) Deixis-based constructions (Konnerth 2015); (Huber 2014; Pate 2016)
- (6) Impersonal constructions (reading TBA)

- (7) Why are there non-paradigmatic, innovative markers for individual transitive scenarios? (Heath 1991); (DeLancey to appear)
- (8) Is there a (universal) person hierarchy underlying the patterns of so-called hierarchical indexation? (Gildea and Zúñiga 2016); (Witzlack-Makarevich et al. 2016)
- (9) Why are some verbal person markers zeros? (Grossman 2016); (Bickel et al. 2015)

III. Where do they go to?
- (10) Passive and impersonal constructions (reading TBA)
- (11) Egophoricity (Widmer and Zemp 2017)
- (12) Loss of verbal person indexation (DeLancey 2010)

IV. (13+14) Student presentations

Required Reading:
I. What types of person marking systems exist?
- (1) Introduction to the patterns that we’ll be trying to understand
- (2) First person, Second person, Third person; speech-act participants (Ariel 1998)
- (3) Typology of person marker paradigms (Siewierska 2004: §3); (Cysouw 2003: §4)

II. Where do they come from?
II.1 (4) Innovative personal pronouns (Heine and Song 2011); (Siewierska 2004: §7.1)

II.2 Innovative verbal person markers and person marking systems
- (5) Deixis-based constructions (Konnerth 2015); (Huber 2014; Pate 2016)
- (6) Impersonal constructions (reading TBA)

- (7) Why are there non-paradigmatic, innovative markers for individual transitive scenarios? (Heath 1991); (DeLancey to appear)
- (8) Is there a (universal) person hierarchy underlying the patterns of so-called hierarchical indexation? (Gildea and Zúñiga 2016); (Witzlack-Makarevich et al. 2016)
- (9) Why are some verbal person markers zeros? (Grossman 2016); (Bickel et al. 2015)

III. Where do they go to?
- (10) Passive and impersonal constructions (reading TBA)
- (11) Egophoricity (Widmer and Zemp 2017)
- (12) Loss of verbal person indexation (DeLancey 2010)

IV. (13+14) Student presentations

Ariel, Mira. 1998. “Three Grammaticalization Paths for the Development of Person Verbal Agreement in Hebrew.” In Discourse and Cognition: Bridging the Gap, edited by Jean-Pierre Koenig, 93–111. Stanford: CSLI.
DeLancey, Scott. 2010. “Towards a History of Verb Agreement in Tibeto-Burman.” Himalayan Linguistics 9 (1): 1–39.
Gildea, Spike, and Fernando Zúñiga. 2016. “Referential Hierarchies: A New Look at Some Historical and Typological Patterns.” Linguistics 54 (3): 483–529.
Grossman, Eitan. 2016. “From Rarum to Rarissimum: An Unexpected Zero Person Marker.” Linguistic Typology 20 (1): 1–23.
Heath, Jeffrey. 1991. “Pragmatic Disguise in Pronominal-Affix Paradigms.” In Paradigms: The Economy of Inflection, edited by Frans Plank, 75–89. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Heine, Bernd, and Kyung-An Song. 2011. “On the Grammaticalization of Personal Pronouns.” Journal of Linguistics 47 (3): 587–630. doi:10.1017/S0022226711000016.
Konnerth, Linda. 2015. “A New Type of Convergence at the Deictic Center: Second Person and Cislocative in Karbi (Tibeto-Burman).” Studies in Language 39 (1): 24–45.
Siewierska, Anna. 2004. Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Selected sections)
Widmer, Manuel, and Marius Zemp. 2017. “The Epistemization of Person Markers in Reported Speech.” Studies in Language 41 (1): 33–75.

Additional Reading Material:
Bickel, Balthasar, Alena Witzlack-Makarevich, Taras Zakharko, and Giorgio Iemmolo. 2015. “Exploring Diachronic Universals of Agreement: Alignment Patterns and Zero Marking across Person Categories.” In Agreement from a Diachronic Perspective, edited by Jürg Fleischer, Elisabeth Rieken, and Paul Widmer, 29–52. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The Paradigmatic Structure of Person Marking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DeLancey, Scott. to appear. “Deictic and Sociopragmatic Effects in Tibeto-Burman SAP Indexation.” In Diachrony of Hierarchical Systems. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Huber, Christian. 2014. “Subject and Object Agreement in Shumcho.” In Trans-Himalayan Linguistics: Historical and Descriptive Linguistics of the Himalayan Area, edited by Thomas Owen-Smith and Nathan Hill, 221–74. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
Pate, David. 2016. “Deictic Motion Verbs in Pashto: To Whom Shall We Come?” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 79 (1): 103–28.
Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena, Taras Zakharko, Lennart Bierkandt, Fernando Zúñiga, and Balthasar Bickel. 2016. “Decomposing Hierarchical Alignment: Co-Arguments as Conditions on Alignment.” Linguistics 54 (3): 531–61.

Course/Module evaluation:
End of year written/oral examination 0 %
Presentation 20 %
Participation in Tutorials 0 %
Project work 30 %
Assignments 0 %
Reports 0 %
Research project 50 %
Quizzes 0 %
Other 0 %

Additional information:
 
Students needing academic accommodations based on a disability should contact the Center for Diagnosis and Support of Students with Learning Disabilities, or the Office for Students with Disabilities, as early as possible, to discuss and coordinate accommodations, based on relevant documentation.
For further information, please visit the site of the Dean of Students Office.
Print