Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Another Look at the Marking of Plural Personal Noun Constructions in Austronesian Languages

Another Look at the Marking of Plural Personal Noun Constructions in Austronesian Languages In a recent note in this journal, Robert Blust, using data from Philippine and Formosan languages, proposes a functional difference for Proto-Austronesian between the forms of genitive common noun phrase markers, such that PAN *nu marked 'genitive of common nouns', while PAN *na marked 'genitive of plural personal nouns'. This paper examines the Philippine and Formosan evidence for these reconstructions and concludes that the evidence provided is the result of convergent development in the languages cited, and cannot be considered evidence for the proposed reconstructions. Alternate reconstructions that better account for the Philippine evidence are proposed. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Oceanic Linguistics University of Hawai'I Press

Another Look at the Marking of Plural Personal Noun Constructions in Austronesian Languages

Oceanic Linguistics , Volume 46 (1) – Jul 30, 2007

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-hawai-i-press/another-look-at-the-marking-of-plural-personal-noun-constructions-in-zH7Qb0jNOa
Publisher
University of Hawai'I Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 University of Hawai'i Press. All rights reserved.
ISSN
1527-9421
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In a recent note in this journal, Robert Blust, using data from Philippine and Formosan languages, proposes a functional difference for Proto-Austronesian between the forms of genitive common noun phrase markers, such that PAN *nu marked 'genitive of common nouns', while PAN *na marked 'genitive of plural personal nouns'. This paper examines the Philippine and Formosan evidence for these reconstructions and concludes that the evidence provided is the result of convergent development in the languages cited, and cannot be considered evidence for the proposed reconstructions. Alternate reconstructions that better account for the Philippine evidence are proposed.

Journal

Oceanic LinguisticsUniversity of Hawai'I Press

Published: Jul 30, 2007

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$499/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month