Fourth person (in Slavey language)
I was reading a Wikipedia article about the Slavey (Slave) language in Canada, and it says that Slavey has first, second, third and fourth person. I've never heard about a language having a fourth person, so I was just wondering if someone here knows when is this used and how it works? Or, since it isn't very likely you're familiar with this particular language, just in general, what does a fourth person in a language denote?
grammar linguistic-typology american-languages
add a comment |
I was reading a Wikipedia article about the Slavey (Slave) language in Canada, and it says that Slavey has first, second, third and fourth person. I've never heard about a language having a fourth person, so I was just wondering if someone here knows when is this used and how it works? Or, since it isn't very likely you're familiar with this particular language, just in general, what does a fourth person in a language denote?
grammar linguistic-typology american-languages
Yes. Other languages with this feature include many of the indigenous languages of Canada. Even completely unrelated languages, Salish, Algonquian, Inuit. I have no idea why this feature is so strongly areal.
– Wilson
6 hours ago
add a comment |
I was reading a Wikipedia article about the Slavey (Slave) language in Canada, and it says that Slavey has first, second, third and fourth person. I've never heard about a language having a fourth person, so I was just wondering if someone here knows when is this used and how it works? Or, since it isn't very likely you're familiar with this particular language, just in general, what does a fourth person in a language denote?
grammar linguistic-typology american-languages
I was reading a Wikipedia article about the Slavey (Slave) language in Canada, and it says that Slavey has first, second, third and fourth person. I've never heard about a language having a fourth person, so I was just wondering if someone here knows when is this used and how it works? Or, since it isn't very likely you're familiar with this particular language, just in general, what does a fourth person in a language denote?
grammar linguistic-typology american-languages
grammar linguistic-typology american-languages
asked 10 hours ago
lmclmc
326211
326211
Yes. Other languages with this feature include many of the indigenous languages of Canada. Even completely unrelated languages, Salish, Algonquian, Inuit. I have no idea why this feature is so strongly areal.
– Wilson
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Yes. Other languages with this feature include many of the indigenous languages of Canada. Even completely unrelated languages, Salish, Algonquian, Inuit. I have no idea why this feature is so strongly areal.
– Wilson
6 hours ago
Yes. Other languages with this feature include many of the indigenous languages of Canada. Even completely unrelated languages, Salish, Algonquian, Inuit. I have no idea why this feature is so strongly areal.
– Wilson
6 hours ago
Yes. Other languages with this feature include many of the indigenous languages of Canada. Even completely unrelated languages, Salish, Algonquian, Inuit. I have no idea why this feature is so strongly areal.
– Wilson
6 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
The fourth person is a (rare) synonym for the obviative. In languages with this feature, when there are two third-person referents and one of them is less salient, the less salient one may be marked as obviative and the more salient one as proximative. According to Rice (1989), the fourth-person pronoun go- is used for objects when the subject is third person (sorry, the source doesn't provide morpheme boundaries or a morpheme-by-morpheme gloss, and I'm not familiar with American languages):
(1) nágoneht'u
'S/he is hitting them(human).'
The fourth-person pronoun ye- is used for third-person direct nonhuman objects when the subject is third person, as a fourth-person possessor (Rice doesn't go into much detail about this use), and used for third-person oblique arguments whose subjects are animate and in the third person:
(2) rígodéhtá
'S/he is counting them(human).'
(The e is nasalised - no idea how to type the Americanist symbol, sorry)
(3) yeyíe káidhah
4.guts
(Again, the i is nasalised, and the gloss for the second word is also missing in the main text.)
(4) yegts'é rádí
4.to 3.gives.help
'S/he helps him/her.'
References:
Rice, K. (1989). A grammar of Slave. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
For a typical Algonkian obviative system, see Obviation, Inversion, and Topic Rank in Ojibwa, by Richard Rhodes.
– jlawler
5 hours ago
add a comment |
As a layman in linguistics I found this explanation pretty illuminating:
In English, when we have a non-SAP (speech act participants) involved in the discourse, there is the potential for ambiguity. For example, consider:
“John was in a tizzy last night and got into a fight with Bill. He hit him so hard that he broke his jaw.”
Here, it isn’t clear that who broke whose jaw.*
In languages with what’s called an “obviative” system, however, there is a means of marking two different 3rd persons such that the doer and the doee of an action are clear, even when there are only pronouns in the phrase. These two types are often called 3rd person (or “proximate”) and 4th person (or “obviate”). The details of these systems vary a bit from language to language, but in the broadest strokes, the proximate 3rd person is the topic of the discourse, while the obviative 4th person is used for everything else.
add a comment |
Block Block quite the adventure for you
New contributor
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "312"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f30864%2ffourth-person-in-slavey-language%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The fourth person is a (rare) synonym for the obviative. In languages with this feature, when there are two third-person referents and one of them is less salient, the less salient one may be marked as obviative and the more salient one as proximative. According to Rice (1989), the fourth-person pronoun go- is used for objects when the subject is third person (sorry, the source doesn't provide morpheme boundaries or a morpheme-by-morpheme gloss, and I'm not familiar with American languages):
(1) nágoneht'u
'S/he is hitting them(human).'
The fourth-person pronoun ye- is used for third-person direct nonhuman objects when the subject is third person, as a fourth-person possessor (Rice doesn't go into much detail about this use), and used for third-person oblique arguments whose subjects are animate and in the third person:
(2) rígodéhtá
'S/he is counting them(human).'
(The e is nasalised - no idea how to type the Americanist symbol, sorry)
(3) yeyíe káidhah
4.guts
(Again, the i is nasalised, and the gloss for the second word is also missing in the main text.)
(4) yegts'é rádí
4.to 3.gives.help
'S/he helps him/her.'
References:
Rice, K. (1989). A grammar of Slave. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
For a typical Algonkian obviative system, see Obviation, Inversion, and Topic Rank in Ojibwa, by Richard Rhodes.
– jlawler
5 hours ago
add a comment |
The fourth person is a (rare) synonym for the obviative. In languages with this feature, when there are two third-person referents and one of them is less salient, the less salient one may be marked as obviative and the more salient one as proximative. According to Rice (1989), the fourth-person pronoun go- is used for objects when the subject is third person (sorry, the source doesn't provide morpheme boundaries or a morpheme-by-morpheme gloss, and I'm not familiar with American languages):
(1) nágoneht'u
'S/he is hitting them(human).'
The fourth-person pronoun ye- is used for third-person direct nonhuman objects when the subject is third person, as a fourth-person possessor (Rice doesn't go into much detail about this use), and used for third-person oblique arguments whose subjects are animate and in the third person:
(2) rígodéhtá
'S/he is counting them(human).'
(The e is nasalised - no idea how to type the Americanist symbol, sorry)
(3) yeyíe káidhah
4.guts
(Again, the i is nasalised, and the gloss for the second word is also missing in the main text.)
(4) yegts'é rádí
4.to 3.gives.help
'S/he helps him/her.'
References:
Rice, K. (1989). A grammar of Slave. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
For a typical Algonkian obviative system, see Obviation, Inversion, and Topic Rank in Ojibwa, by Richard Rhodes.
– jlawler
5 hours ago
add a comment |
The fourth person is a (rare) synonym for the obviative. In languages with this feature, when there are two third-person referents and one of them is less salient, the less salient one may be marked as obviative and the more salient one as proximative. According to Rice (1989), the fourth-person pronoun go- is used for objects when the subject is third person (sorry, the source doesn't provide morpheme boundaries or a morpheme-by-morpheme gloss, and I'm not familiar with American languages):
(1) nágoneht'u
'S/he is hitting them(human).'
The fourth-person pronoun ye- is used for third-person direct nonhuman objects when the subject is third person, as a fourth-person possessor (Rice doesn't go into much detail about this use), and used for third-person oblique arguments whose subjects are animate and in the third person:
(2) rígodéhtá
'S/he is counting them(human).'
(The e is nasalised - no idea how to type the Americanist symbol, sorry)
(3) yeyíe káidhah
4.guts
(Again, the i is nasalised, and the gloss for the second word is also missing in the main text.)
(4) yegts'é rádí
4.to 3.gives.help
'S/he helps him/her.'
References:
Rice, K. (1989). A grammar of Slave. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
The fourth person is a (rare) synonym for the obviative. In languages with this feature, when there are two third-person referents and one of them is less salient, the less salient one may be marked as obviative and the more salient one as proximative. According to Rice (1989), the fourth-person pronoun go- is used for objects when the subject is third person (sorry, the source doesn't provide morpheme boundaries or a morpheme-by-morpheme gloss, and I'm not familiar with American languages):
(1) nágoneht'u
'S/he is hitting them(human).'
The fourth-person pronoun ye- is used for third-person direct nonhuman objects when the subject is third person, as a fourth-person possessor (Rice doesn't go into much detail about this use), and used for third-person oblique arguments whose subjects are animate and in the third person:
(2) rígodéhtá
'S/he is counting them(human).'
(The e is nasalised - no idea how to type the Americanist symbol, sorry)
(3) yeyíe káidhah
4.guts
(Again, the i is nasalised, and the gloss for the second word is also missing in the main text.)
(4) yegts'é rádí
4.to 3.gives.help
'S/he helps him/her.'
References:
Rice, K. (1989). A grammar of Slave. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
edited 9 hours ago
answered 10 hours ago
WavesWashSandsWavesWashSands
2,2261029
2,2261029
For a typical Algonkian obviative system, see Obviation, Inversion, and Topic Rank in Ojibwa, by Richard Rhodes.
– jlawler
5 hours ago
add a comment |
For a typical Algonkian obviative system, see Obviation, Inversion, and Topic Rank in Ojibwa, by Richard Rhodes.
– jlawler
5 hours ago
For a typical Algonkian obviative system, see Obviation, Inversion, and Topic Rank in Ojibwa, by Richard Rhodes.
– jlawler
5 hours ago
For a typical Algonkian obviative system, see Obviation, Inversion, and Topic Rank in Ojibwa, by Richard Rhodes.
– jlawler
5 hours ago
add a comment |
As a layman in linguistics I found this explanation pretty illuminating:
In English, when we have a non-SAP (speech act participants) involved in the discourse, there is the potential for ambiguity. For example, consider:
“John was in a tizzy last night and got into a fight with Bill. He hit him so hard that he broke his jaw.”
Here, it isn’t clear that who broke whose jaw.*
In languages with what’s called an “obviative” system, however, there is a means of marking two different 3rd persons such that the doer and the doee of an action are clear, even when there are only pronouns in the phrase. These two types are often called 3rd person (or “proximate”) and 4th person (or “obviate”). The details of these systems vary a bit from language to language, but in the broadest strokes, the proximate 3rd person is the topic of the discourse, while the obviative 4th person is used for everything else.
add a comment |
As a layman in linguistics I found this explanation pretty illuminating:
In English, when we have a non-SAP (speech act participants) involved in the discourse, there is the potential for ambiguity. For example, consider:
“John was in a tizzy last night and got into a fight with Bill. He hit him so hard that he broke his jaw.”
Here, it isn’t clear that who broke whose jaw.*
In languages with what’s called an “obviative” system, however, there is a means of marking two different 3rd persons such that the doer and the doee of an action are clear, even when there are only pronouns in the phrase. These two types are often called 3rd person (or “proximate”) and 4th person (or “obviate”). The details of these systems vary a bit from language to language, but in the broadest strokes, the proximate 3rd person is the topic of the discourse, while the obviative 4th person is used for everything else.
add a comment |
As a layman in linguistics I found this explanation pretty illuminating:
In English, when we have a non-SAP (speech act participants) involved in the discourse, there is the potential for ambiguity. For example, consider:
“John was in a tizzy last night and got into a fight with Bill. He hit him so hard that he broke his jaw.”
Here, it isn’t clear that who broke whose jaw.*
In languages with what’s called an “obviative” system, however, there is a means of marking two different 3rd persons such that the doer and the doee of an action are clear, even when there are only pronouns in the phrase. These two types are often called 3rd person (or “proximate”) and 4th person (or “obviate”). The details of these systems vary a bit from language to language, but in the broadest strokes, the proximate 3rd person is the topic of the discourse, while the obviative 4th person is used for everything else.
As a layman in linguistics I found this explanation pretty illuminating:
In English, when we have a non-SAP (speech act participants) involved in the discourse, there is the potential for ambiguity. For example, consider:
“John was in a tizzy last night and got into a fight with Bill. He hit him so hard that he broke his jaw.”
Here, it isn’t clear that who broke whose jaw.*
In languages with what’s called an “obviative” system, however, there is a means of marking two different 3rd persons such that the doer and the doee of an action are clear, even when there are only pronouns in the phrase. These two types are often called 3rd person (or “proximate”) and 4th person (or “obviate”). The details of these systems vary a bit from language to language, but in the broadest strokes, the proximate 3rd person is the topic of the discourse, while the obviative 4th person is used for everything else.
answered 24 mins ago
Andrew SavinykhAndrew Savinykh
1064
1064
add a comment |
add a comment |
Block Block quite the adventure for you
New contributor
add a comment |
Block Block quite the adventure for you
New contributor
add a comment |
Block Block quite the adventure for you
New contributor
Block Block quite the adventure for you
New contributor
New contributor
answered 4 hours ago
Mohd Zamri MahamadMohd Zamri Mahamad
1
1
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Linguistics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f30864%2ffourth-person-in-slavey-language%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Yes. Other languages with this feature include many of the indigenous languages of Canada. Even completely unrelated languages, Salish, Algonquian, Inuit. I have no idea why this feature is so strongly areal.
– Wilson
6 hours ago