Negation in Saisiyat: Another Perspective

In a recent paper, Mei-li Yeh compares the distribution and function of eight Saisiyat negators and attempts to resolve the following questions: (1) What is the morphosyntactic relationship that 'oka', 'okay, 'okik, 'amkay, and 'amkik bear to one another? (2) Why are ce...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Oceanic linguistics 2001-06, Vol.40 (1), p.126-134
1. Verfasser: Zeitoun, Elizabeth
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 134
container_issue 1
container_start_page 126
container_title Oceanic linguistics
container_volume 40
creator Zeitoun, Elizabeth
description In a recent paper, Mei-li Yeh compares the distribution and function of eight Saisiyat negators and attempts to resolve the following questions: (1) What is the morphosyntactic relationship that 'oka', 'okay, 'okik, 'amkay, and 'amkik bear to one another? (2) Why are certain negators followed by a "ligature" (either 'i or 'ik) and others not? (3) Is it the negator or the ligature that determines the marking of the negated verb as dependent or independent? While the first of these questions is well handled, Yeh is unable to answer the last two questions. Based on my own fieldnotes, I suggest answers, showing that together with 'oka', 'izi', and 'i'ini', both dynamic and stative verbs occur in their [+dependent] form, and demonstrating that while 'i is a ligature, 'ik is not. I also account for the distributional differences between 'oka', 'Ɔizi', and 'i'ini', on the one hand, and kayni' on the other.
doi_str_mv 10.1353/ol.2001.0014
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2048044584</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2048044584</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1094-e1c6d17fdb457cbad5a7bd56952e5683c6e358c7371fdfafd806fcf60a9200f73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkE1LAzEQhoMoWKs3f8CCJ8GtM_nc9VbELygqVM8hzSa6pd3UZCv035ulIsIMc3l5ZuYh5Bxhgkyw67CaUACc5OYHZISCqrLmFA_JCIDWZYUojslJSksAqLmiI3L57D5M34auaLtibtrU7kx_U0y70H-6WLy6mDbO9u23OyVH3qySO_udY_J-f_d2-1jOXh6ebqez0mJmlg6tbFD5ZsGFsgvTCKMWjZC1oE7IilnpmKisYgp9441vKpDeegmmzrd7xcbkYs_dxPC1danXy7CNXV6pKfAKOBcVz6mrfcrGkFJ0Xm9iuzZxpxH0IEOHlR5k6EFGjrM_6DL_s94m948rOFV6PvgadAHmorJmPyJhYFo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2048044584</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Negation in Saisiyat: Another Perspective</title><source>JSTOR</source><creator>Zeitoun, Elizabeth</creator><creatorcontrib>Zeitoun, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><description>In a recent paper, Mei-li Yeh compares the distribution and function of eight Saisiyat negators and attempts to resolve the following questions: (1) What is the morphosyntactic relationship that 'oka', 'okay, 'okik, 'amkay, and 'amkik bear to one another? (2) Why are certain negators followed by a "ligature" (either 'i or 'ik) and others not? (3) Is it the negator or the ligature that determines the marking of the negated verb as dependent or independent? While the first of these questions is well handled, Yeh is unable to answer the last two questions. Based on my own fieldnotes, I suggest answers, showing that together with 'oka', 'izi', and 'i'ini', both dynamic and stative verbs occur in their [+dependent] form, and demonstrating that while 'i is a ligature, 'ik is not. I also account for the distributional differences between 'oka', 'Ɔizi', and 'i'ini', on the one hand, and kayni' on the other.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0029-8115</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1527-9421</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1527-9421</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1353/ol.2001.0014</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press</publisher><subject>Austronesian languages ; Formosan languages ; Linguistics ; Morphosyntax ; Native languages ; Negation ; Verbs</subject><ispartof>Oceanic linguistics, 2001-06, Vol.40 (1), p.126-134</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2001 University of Hawai'i Press.</rights><rights>Copyright University of Hawaii Press Jun 2001</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zeitoun, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><title>Negation in Saisiyat: Another Perspective</title><title>Oceanic linguistics</title><description>In a recent paper, Mei-li Yeh compares the distribution and function of eight Saisiyat negators and attempts to resolve the following questions: (1) What is the morphosyntactic relationship that 'oka', 'okay, 'okik, 'amkay, and 'amkik bear to one another? (2) Why are certain negators followed by a "ligature" (either 'i or 'ik) and others not? (3) Is it the negator or the ligature that determines the marking of the negated verb as dependent or independent? While the first of these questions is well handled, Yeh is unable to answer the last two questions. Based on my own fieldnotes, I suggest answers, showing that together with 'oka', 'izi', and 'i'ini', both dynamic and stative verbs occur in their [+dependent] form, and demonstrating that while 'i is a ligature, 'ik is not. I also account for the distributional differences between 'oka', 'Ɔizi', and 'i'ini', on the one hand, and kayni' on the other.</description><subject>Austronesian languages</subject><subject>Formosan languages</subject><subject>Linguistics</subject><subject>Morphosyntax</subject><subject>Native languages</subject><subject>Negation</subject><subject>Verbs</subject><issn>0029-8115</issn><issn>1527-9421</issn><issn>1527-9421</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpNkE1LAzEQhoMoWKs3f8CCJ8GtM_nc9VbELygqVM8hzSa6pd3UZCv035ulIsIMc3l5ZuYh5Bxhgkyw67CaUACc5OYHZISCqrLmFA_JCIDWZYUojslJSksAqLmiI3L57D5M34auaLtibtrU7kx_U0y70H-6WLy6mDbO9u23OyVH3qySO_udY_J-f_d2-1jOXh6ebqez0mJmlg6tbFD5ZsGFsgvTCKMWjZC1oE7IilnpmKisYgp9441vKpDeegmmzrd7xcbkYs_dxPC1danXy7CNXV6pKfAKOBcVz6mrfcrGkFJ0Xm9iuzZxpxH0IEOHlR5k6EFGjrM_6DL_s94m948rOFV6PvgadAHmorJmPyJhYFo</recordid><startdate>20010601</startdate><enddate>20010601</enddate><creator>Zeitoun, Elizabeth</creator><general>University of Hawai'i Press</general><general>University of Hawaii Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8BM</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20010601</creationdate><title>Negation in Saisiyat: Another Perspective</title><author>Zeitoun, Elizabeth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1094-e1c6d17fdb457cbad5a7bd56952e5683c6e358c7371fdfafd806fcf60a9200f73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Austronesian languages</topic><topic>Formosan languages</topic><topic>Linguistics</topic><topic>Morphosyntax</topic><topic>Native languages</topic><topic>Negation</topic><topic>Verbs</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zeitoun, Elizabeth</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Oceanic linguistics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zeitoun, Elizabeth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Negation in Saisiyat: Another Perspective</atitle><jtitle>Oceanic linguistics</jtitle><date>2001-06-01</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>40</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>126</spage><epage>134</epage><pages>126-134</pages><issn>0029-8115</issn><issn>1527-9421</issn><eissn>1527-9421</eissn><abstract>In a recent paper, Mei-li Yeh compares the distribution and function of eight Saisiyat negators and attempts to resolve the following questions: (1) What is the morphosyntactic relationship that 'oka', 'okay, 'okik, 'amkay, and 'amkik bear to one another? (2) Why are certain negators followed by a "ligature" (either 'i or 'ik) and others not? (3) Is it the negator or the ligature that determines the marking of the negated verb as dependent or independent? While the first of these questions is well handled, Yeh is unable to answer the last two questions. Based on my own fieldnotes, I suggest answers, showing that together with 'oka', 'izi', and 'i'ini', both dynamic and stative verbs occur in their [+dependent] form, and demonstrating that while 'i is a ligature, 'ik is not. I also account for the distributional differences between 'oka', 'Ɔizi', and 'i'ini', on the one hand, and kayni' on the other.</abstract><cop>Honolulu</cop><pub>University of Hawai'i Press</pub><doi>10.1353/ol.2001.0014</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0029-8115
ispartof Oceanic linguistics, 2001-06, Vol.40 (1), p.126-134
issn 0029-8115
1527-9421
1527-9421
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2048044584
source JSTOR
subjects Austronesian languages
Formosan languages
Linguistics
Morphosyntax
Native languages
Negation
Verbs
title Negation in Saisiyat: Another Perspective
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T01%3A06%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Negation%20in%20Saisiyat:%20Another%20Perspective&rft.jtitle=Oceanic%20linguistics&rft.au=Zeitoun,%20Elizabeth&rft.date=2001-06-01&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=126&rft.epage=134&rft.pages=126-134&rft.issn=0029-8115&rft.eissn=1527-9421&rft_id=info:doi/10.1353/ol.2001.0014&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2048044584%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2048044584&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true