WEKO3
-
RootNode
アイテム
ウラル語族における等位表現の類型
https://doi.org/10.15021/00004455
https://doi.org/10.15021/0000445502ee8ff7-b792-47f7-ba57-ae9ef8a84ac4
| 名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
|---|---|---|
KH_008_2_004.pdf (3.6 MB)
|
|
| Item type | 紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper(1) | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 2010-02-16 | |||||||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||||||
| タイトル | ウラル語族における等位表現の類型 | |||||||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||||||
| タイトル | Typology of Coordination in the Uralic Languages | |||||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||||||
| 言語 | ||||||||||||||
| 言語 | jpn | |||||||||||||
| 資源タイプ | ||||||||||||||
| 資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||||||||||
| 資源タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||||||||||
| ID登録 | ||||||||||||||
| ID登録 | 10.15021/00004455 | |||||||||||||
| ID登録タイプ | JaLC | |||||||||||||
| 著者 |
庄司, 博史
× 庄司, 博史
|
|||||||||||||
| 抄録 | ||||||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||||||||||
| 内容記述 | It is widely known that coordinate conjunctions in the Uralic languages are of comparatively late origin. But it should not be assumed that there was no device to express coordinative relationships between nouns, other than straightforward juxtaposition. On the contrary, there existed various ways to compensate for the lack of coordinate conjunctions. And many scholars have hitherto turned their attention to the phenomena of the Uralic coordination, which might have appeared curious compared with those of modern Indo-European languages. It was not until Ravila's work (1941) that an attempt was made to examine Uralic coordination on a broad scale. Ravila explained the coordination of nouns, in which each juxtaposed noun contains an identical element(s), in connection with the basic principle of the Uralic word order, i.e., the modifier always precedes the modified. According to Ravila, identical elements, such as dual and plural indicators, or case and possessive suffixes, may function only to signal that the nouns containing them belong to the same grammatical category. But he gave no satisfactory answer to the question of why the very curious dual and plural suffixes may be attached, even when each noun indicates a singular object. Ravila explains that the numerus suffixes of nouns have developed in concordance with the numerus conjugations of verbs, and that these suffixes later began to signal coordination when repeated in each noun. However, this hypothesis offers a somewhat conceptual impression without supporting evidence. Moreover, the earlier studies of Uralic coordination, including that of Ravila, could not deal with coordination in general but could only pose arbitrary examples, because their notion of coordination was apparently too abstract. In this paper, I adopt the generally accepted theory of transformational grammar for the definition of coordination: i.e., there are two types of coordination in the deep structure of a sentence, namely, sentence conjunction and phrasal conjunction, each having different characteristics, although they might optionally take the same surface form. Using this framework, I attempt to account for the pecuarlities of all possible coordination types in the Uralic languages. I have classified Uralic coordination into the following 8 types:— I. Juxtaposition of nouns, each having an identical element(s) ; 2. Juxtaposition of nouns without any identical elements; 3. Coordination based on a numerus indicator; 4. Coordination based on a comitative (instrumental) indicator; 5. Coordination based on a nomenp ossessorisd erivational suffix; 6. Coordination based on an enclitic particle of emphathy or augmentation; 7. Coordination by an independent coordinate conjunction derived from a native morpheme stock; and 8. Coordination by a coordinate conjunction of foreign origin. After examining these cases, I reached the following conclusions. Devices for phrasal coordination developed earlier than those for sentence coordination, because the latter could have as well been expressed by a simple juxtaposition of sentences. Type 1 occurs widely among the Uralic languages, when compared to Type 2. This may support Ravila's hypothesis that there needed to be some device to indicate nouns belonging to the same grammatical category, when they were juxtaposed. In this sense the parallel affixation of identical elements has developed as a productive way of coordination. Type 3, 4 and 5 appear to have derived from the peripherical use of their original functions due to the connotation of simultaneousness or accompaniment. Type 3 was used when things expressed by coordinated nouns were regarded as forming a semantic whole. On the other hand Types 6 and 7 have idiosyncracy of sentence coordination. I assume that sentence coordination in the deep structure was reduced to a simple sentence first by means of an enclitic or independent particle which could function as an adverb of augmentation or addition. Present-day Uralic languages seem to have a tendency to develop proper coordinate conjunctions, which can be equally used for both types of coordination, and which, therefore may correspond to the coordinate conjunctions of the well known modern Indo-European languages, from their own stock side-by-side with those of foreign origin. It should be observed, however, that they still retain a shade of their original characteristics in usage and meaning. |
|||||||||||||
| 書誌情報 |
国立民族学博物館研究報告 en : Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology 巻 8, 号 2, p. 424-488, 発行日 1983-08-31 |
|||||||||||||
| 出版者 | ||||||||||||||
| 出版者 | 国立民族学博物館 | |||||||||||||
| 出版者（英） | ||||||||||||||
| 出版者 | National Museum of Ethnology | |||||||||||||
| ISSN | ||||||||||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | ISSN | |||||||||||||
| 収録物識別子 | 0385-180X | |||||||||||||
| 書誌レコードID | ||||||||||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | NCID | |||||||||||||
| 収録物識別子 | AN00091943 | |||||||||||||
| 著者版フラグ | ||||||||||||||
| 出版タイプ | VoR | |||||||||||||
| 出版タイプResource | http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 | |||||||||||||
