Gender flip and person marking in Benchnon (North Omotic)

Subject agreement in the North Omotic language Benchnon (Rapold 2006) lacks dedicated person marking, but indirectly indicates person distinctions through asymmetries in the distribution of gender markers. In one verbal paradigm, first and second person subjects are expressed by feminine morphology,...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Matthew Baerman
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Open Library of Humanities 2020-07-01
Series:Glossa
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.glossa-journal.org/articles/1191
id doaj-f745c9976b5642459f3d3528eadde0d5
record_format Article
spelling doaj-f745c9976b5642459f3d3528eadde0d52021-09-02T15:43:46ZengOpen Library of HumanitiesGlossa2397-18352020-07-015110.5334/gjgl.1191525Gender flip and person marking in Benchnon (North Omotic)Matthew Baerman0Surrey Morphology Group, University of SurreySubject agreement in the North Omotic language Benchnon (Rapold 2006) lacks dedicated person marking, but indirectly indicates person distinctions through asymmetries in the distribution of gender markers. In one verbal paradigm, first and second person subjects are expressed by feminine morphology, and in the other paradigm they are expressed by masculine morphology. This is hard to reconcile with any known notion of how gender assignment works. I show that it can be explained as the particular instantiation of a rare but cross-linguistically recurrent pattern in which a (reduced) person marking system is generated by restrictions on gender agreement: only third person subjects control semantic gender agreement, while first and second person are assigned default gender. In Benchnon the default gender switched from feminine to masculine over the course of its history, yielding two contrasting verbal paradigms. The older one is morphologically frozen, the newer one is a reflection of still-active agreement conditions. Further developments show that the older paradigm can be adapted to conform to the newer conditions, showing that the division between morphosyntactically motivated and arbitrarily stipulated morphology is a fluid one.https://www.glossa-journal.org/articles/1191inflectionparadigmsgenderpersondiachrony
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Matthew Baerman
spellingShingle Matthew Baerman
Gender flip and person marking in Benchnon (North Omotic)
Glossa
inflection
paradigms
gender
person
diachrony
author_facet Matthew Baerman
author_sort Matthew Baerman
title Gender flip and person marking in Benchnon (North Omotic)
title_short Gender flip and person marking in Benchnon (North Omotic)
title_full Gender flip and person marking in Benchnon (North Omotic)
title_fullStr Gender flip and person marking in Benchnon (North Omotic)
title_full_unstemmed Gender flip and person marking in Benchnon (North Omotic)
title_sort gender flip and person marking in benchnon (north omotic)
publisher Open Library of Humanities
series Glossa
issn 2397-1835
publishDate 2020-07-01
description Subject agreement in the North Omotic language Benchnon (Rapold 2006) lacks dedicated person marking, but indirectly indicates person distinctions through asymmetries in the distribution of gender markers. In one verbal paradigm, first and second person subjects are expressed by feminine morphology, and in the other paradigm they are expressed by masculine morphology. This is hard to reconcile with any known notion of how gender assignment works. I show that it can be explained as the particular instantiation of a rare but cross-linguistically recurrent pattern in which a (reduced) person marking system is generated by restrictions on gender agreement: only third person subjects control semantic gender agreement, while first and second person are assigned default gender. In Benchnon the default gender switched from feminine to masculine over the course of its history, yielding two contrasting verbal paradigms. The older one is morphologically frozen, the newer one is a reflection of still-active agreement conditions. Further developments show that the older paradigm can be adapted to conform to the newer conditions, showing that the division between morphosyntactically motivated and arbitrarily stipulated morphology is a fluid one.
topic inflection
paradigms
gender
person
diachrony
url https://www.glossa-journal.org/articles/1191
work_keys_str_mv AT matthewbaerman genderflipandpersonmarkinginbenchnonnorthomotic
_version_ 1721173268560347136