On Polypersonal Agreement

If you're new to these arts, this is the place to ask "stupid" questions and get directions!
Post Reply
User avatar
Ælfwine
greek
greek
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon 21 Sep 2015, 00:28
Location: Canada

On Polypersonal Agreement

Post by Ælfwine » Fri 11 Aug 2017, 04:07

I’ve been toying with the idea for a romance language for a while now — first I wanted to make it extremely agglutinative, but I toned down that idea as a surviving Latin language in Turkey became somewhat hard to believe. So, I moved the location to the northeast of Spain and southwest of France, where the language would be influenced by Spanish, French and Basque. I am tentatively calling the language Erromanz, see if you can guess some sound shifts by the name alone. (Hint: <z> is /t͡s/.)

What I am currently interested in is making Erromanz somewhat like Basque in the grammar. Now, I don’t know it would be agglutinative as much as it would be extremely fusional given the sound shifts I have, but like Spanish clitics start stacking in a semi-agglutinative manner. Somewhere along the line I want polypersonal agreement to development, perhaps from pronouns or a fossilized case.

So, my question is, what is an easy way to develop full on polypersonal agreement for a language derived from Latin spoken in the area I described above? My current idea is that the “clitics” described above would start to agree with the verb, though I am a bit at a loss on how this could develop otherwise.
The worst thing you can do to an idea is forget about it.
Sumelic
greek
greek
Posts: 699
Joined: Tue 18 Jun 2013, 22:01

Re: On Polypersonal Agreement

Post by Sumelic » Fri 11 Aug 2017, 08:58

Ælfwine wrote:I’ve been toying with the idea for a romance language for a while now — first I wanted to make it extremely agglutinative, but I toned down that idea as a surviving Latin language in Turkey became somewhat hard to believe. So, I moved the location to the northeast of Spain and southwest of France, where the language would be influenced by Spanish, French and Basque. I am tentatively calling the language Erromanz, see if you can guess some sound shifts by the name alone. (Hint: <z> is /t͡s/.)

What I am currently interested in is making Erromanz somewhat like Basque in the grammar. Now, I don’t know it would be agglutinative as much as it would be extremely fusional given the sound shifts I have, but like Spanish clitics start stacking in a semi-agglutinative manner. Somewhere along the line I want polypersonal agreement to development, perhaps from pronouns or a fossilized case.

So, my question is, what is an easy way to develop full on polypersonal agreement for a language derived from Latin spoken in the area I described above? My current idea is that the “clitics” described above would start to agree with the verb, though I am a bit at a loss on how this could develop otherwise.
Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "start to agree with the verb" (does that just mean that they start to become obligatory?), but I agree that pronominal clitics are the most likely way for a romlang to acquire what is called "polypersonal agreement". Some people have argued (I don't know whether entirely seriously, or mainly out of a sense of contrarianism) for analyzing clitic pronouns in French as affixes, due to things like their relatively high level of obligatoriness, strict ordering constraints, ability to occur with co-referential noun phrases etc. (See e.g. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/do ... 1&type=pdf, for a random example of a text that mentions this).

Conversely, I think I remember reading somewhere an analysis of Basque that argued for some technical syntactic reasons that its verbal/auxiliary person markers are actually derived from a process of clitic doubling rather than agreement in the strict sense. Ah, here it is: A NEW APPROACH TO CLITIC DOUBLING IN BASQUE, Laura Siebecker (Georgetown) & Ruth Kramer (Georgetown):
ERG and ABS affixes on the AUX root are doubled clitics, not agreement markers (cf. Arregi & Nevins, 2012) (henceforth, A&N), for the following reasons [read it to see the reasons] (page 3)
User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 3887
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012, 18:32

Re: On Polypersonal Agreement

Post by Creyeditor » Fri 11 Aug 2017, 17:11

Auxiliaries might also play a role. Clitics might attach to an auxiliary which in turn fuses with the verb. Something like S.CLITIC=O.CLITIC=AUX.S V > S.CLITIC-O.CLITIC-AUX-V, like in French Je=te=ai vu > j't'ai vu [ʃtɛvy]
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :fra: 4 :esp: 4 :ind:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
User avatar
Ælfwine
greek
greek
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon 21 Sep 2015, 00:28
Location: Canada

Re: On Polypersonal Agreement

Post by Ælfwine » Sat 12 Aug 2017, 23:33

Sumelic wrote:
Ælfwine wrote:I’ve been toying with the idea for a romance language for a while now — first I wanted to make it extremely agglutinative, but I toned down that idea as a surviving Latin language in Turkey became somewhat hard to believe. So, I moved the location to the northeast of Spain and southwest of France, where the language would be influenced by Spanish, French and Basque. I am tentatively calling the language Erromanz, see if you can guess some sound shifts by the name alone. (Hint: <z> is /t͡s/.)

What I am currently interested in is making Erromanz somewhat like Basque in the grammar. Now, I don’t know it would be agglutinative as much as it would be extremely fusional given the sound shifts I have, but like Spanish clitics start stacking in a semi-agglutinative manner. Somewhere along the line I want polypersonal agreement to development, perhaps from pronouns or a fossilized case.

So, my question is, what is an easy way to develop full on polypersonal agreement for a language derived from Latin spoken in the area I described above? My current idea is that the “clitics” described above would start to agree with the verb, though I am a bit at a loss on how this could develop otherwise.
Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "start to agree with the verb" (does that just mean that they start to become obligatory?), but I agree that pronominal clitics are the most likely way for a romlang to acquire what is called "polypersonal agreement". Some people have argued (I don't know whether entirely seriously, or mainly out of a sense of contrarianism) for analyzing clitic pronouns in French as affixes, due to things like their relatively high level of obligatoriness, strict ordering constraints, ability to occur with co-referential noun phrases etc. (See e.g. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/do ... 1&type=pdf, for a random example of a text that mentions this).

Conversely, I think I remember reading somewhere an analysis of Basque that argued for some technical syntactic reasons that its verbal/auxiliary person markers are actually derived from a process of clitic doubling rather than agreement in the strict sense. Ah, here it is: A NEW APPROACH TO CLITIC DOUBLING IN BASQUE, Laura Siebecker (Georgetown) & Ruth Kramer (Georgetown):
ERG and ABS affixes on the AUX root are doubled clitics, not agreement markers (cf. Arregi & Nevins, 2012) (henceforth, A&N), for the following reasons [read it to see the reasons] (page 3)
I can't remember what I meant actually.

I knew these languages had something like that, this definitely gives weight to my ideas. I'll admit some of this is above my current level of knowledge, but I have a vague idea of what is going on. I'll have to give it a closer look.
Creyeditor wrote:Auxiliaries might also play a role. Clitics might attach to an auxiliary which in turn fuses with the verb. Something like S.CLITIC=O.CLITIC=AUX.S V > S.CLITIC-O.CLITIC-AUX-V, like in French Je=te=ai vu > j't'ai vu [ʃtɛvy]
Auxiliaries such as a romance future tense marker? Claw gave me a good example of how the romance person markers could be regularized before the development of the future tense on my older thread here, I am wondering if they could develop in the way you say...
The worst thing you can do to an idea is forget about it.
Post Reply