9/22/15 small groups meeting

This week, we did elicitation with Harsha in the seminar room.  We brought as props two glass bottles and a stuffed "Mudkip" toy.  We also produced a stuffed "Pikachu"

toy.
Our goal was to examine animacy and definiteness, as well as demonstratives.

"Give me this bottle"
ei botol-ta dao
this bottle-DEF give

"Give me these bottles"
ei botol-gulo dao
give bottle-DEF.PL give

"Give me that bottle"
oi botol-ta   dao
that bottle-DEF give

"Give me those bottles"
oi botol-gulo dau
give bottle-DEF.PL give

There appeared to be two definite markers, -ta and -gulo, with the former being singular and the latter being plural.

"Give me a bottle"
akta botol dao
one bottle give

"Give me whichever bottle"
jekono akta botol dao
whichever one bottle give

"Give me any two bottles"
jekono duʈo botol dao
whichever two bottle give

"From within that group of three, give me any two bottles"
oi tinte botol-er mod:the teke jekono duʈo dao
that three bottle-"ER" "within that group" whichever two give

"Akta" had an indefinite sense, was translated directly as "one" but said to have a meaning similar to "any"; it didn't distinguish what bottle was being asked for.

"Give me that mudkip"
oi mudkip-ta dao
that mudkip-DEF give

"Give me that mudkip"
oi mudkip-ta-ke dao
that mudkip-DEF-ANI? give

"Give me that bottle"
*oi botol-ta-ke dao
that bottle-DEF-ANI give

With some items, including various stuffed Pokemon plushies, the suffix -ke could be added, glossed here as an optional animacy marker as it could not occur in this

same situation with inanimate objects. -Ke could also be used after -gulo if the object in question was plural. It would also be used with proper nouns and names, as

discussed in a scenario where there are a variety of people named Sam and a particular Sam is being requested.

"Give me those mudkips"
oi mudkip-gulo / mudkip-gulo-ke dao
that mudkip-DEF.PL / mudkip-DEF.PL-ANI give

"Give me that Sam"
oi Sam-ta / Sam-ta-ke dao
that Sam-DEF / Sam-DEF-ANI give

When asked if there was a situation where "botoltake" could be used and it would not sound odd or wrong, the following resulted:

"Fill that bottle"
botol-ta-ke bhore dao
bottle-DEF-ANI fill_up give

The suffix "ER" noted much earlier was then brought up again.

"The bottle is open"
botol-er chipi khola
bottle-"ER" cap open

Note that Harsha described "khola" as an adjective rather than a verb, and mentioned that one could omit the "is" in "is open" that English would use, which is

evidence of a zero copula. Several examples were elicited in which the -ER suffix acted similarly to a genetive.

"Which bottle do you want?"
kon botol-ta chai?
which bottle-DEF want

When given an example situation where he was at a carnival and had won a prize, and the shopkeeper asked what he wanted, implying one of the prizes on display but not specifying this, the following resulted:

"What do you want?"
ki chai?
what want

ji ki chai?
of what want

bane ki chai?
in/of what want

"Give me the mudkip's tail" (assuming the tail is already known)
mudkip-er lej-ta dao
mudkip-GEN tail-DEF give

"Give me the tail of that specific mudkip"
mudkip-tar lej-ta dao
mudkip-ta-er lej-ta dao
mudkip-DEF-GEN tail-DEF give

When the -er suffix comes after the -ta suffix, the result is -tar. Attempts to add the -ke suffix led to different results:

"The mudkip gives its own tail"
mudkip-ta-ke nij-er lej-ta dao
mudkip-DEF-?? self-GEN tail-DEF give

"The mudkip gives itself a tail"
mudkip-ta nije-ke lej dai
mudkip-DEF self-?? tail give

"The mudkip gives itself its own tail"
mudkip nije-ke nij-er lej-ta dai
mudkip self-to self-GEN tail-DEF give
OR
mudkip nij-er lej-ta dai nije-ke
mudkip self-GEN tail-DEF give self-??

"I gave myself a tail"
ami nijeke akta lej di
1sg self-?? one tail gave

"The mudkips give themselves one tail each"
mudkip-gulo nije-der-ke lej dai
mudkip-PL self-PL?-?? tail give

The -ke morpheme in this case appears not to mark animacy, but the indirect object of some verb, or possibly a dative case. Further exploration of this could include

pronouns and interaction with plurality (would "mudkipguloke nijer lejta dao" be valid?). Also note the use of "nijederke" rather than "nijeke" for plural reflexive

constructions.



"So I heard you like mudkips?"
ami shunlam tumi mudkip bhalo basho
1sg heard you mudkip like/love

"So I heard you're in love with a mudkip?"
ami shunlam tumi mudkip-ke bhalo basho
1sg heard you mudkip-ANI like/love

Here the animacy marker appears to be indicating definiteness though not accompanied by -ta.