Expressing multiple human participants in the Malekula languages

Abstract

In the languages of Malekula Island, Vanuatu (Austronesian/Oceanic), there are several structural possibilities to refer to situations where more than one human participant holds the same semantic role. In this paper, we document the diversity in these single-role dual/multi-participant constructions. We draw on published grammars of Malekula languages, as well as corpora of data collected in the field for Neverver (Central Western Malekula), Espiegle Bay (Tepërav – Northern Malekula) and Atchin (Eastern Malekula) for our study.

At least five structural types are attested although not all are reported in all grammatical accounts. Type (1) employs a comitative preposition, a strategy found commonly in WITH-languages (cf. Stassen 2000). Type (2) involves a plural inclusory pronoun and a second human NP. Such constructions form a phrasal inclusory pronominal construction (cf. Lichtenberk 2000). Type (3) has a proper noun combined with a plural subject index inclusive of the reference the proper noun. This kind of structure is analysed as a split inclusory pronominal construction (cf. Lichtenberk 2000), or an associative plural (cf. Corbett 2000; Daniel & Moravcsik 2013; Mauri & Sansò 2019). Type (4) involves a sequence of two or more proper nouns with no overt coordination, co-occurring with a plural subject index on the verb. Finally, type (5) involves a verb of accompaniment.

In surveying the Malekula languages for these structures, we examine the morphosyntactic organisation of each structure, seeking to understand the range of structural possibilities available in each language, and the sources of morphology. We consider whether the strategies are available for any participants, or limited to humans, giving consideration to the Animacy Hierarchy. Of particular interest is the shift from prepositional WITH to conjunctive AND in some languages, as well as the relationship between verbal morphology and morphology found in inclusory pronominal constructions. Examples: 1. Mama blev bbubbu ar-uv father with grandfather 3REAL:DU-go ‘Dad and grandfather went ....’ (Barbour 2012:127 [66]) 2. Nam-ix mama nari-vlem 1EXCL:NSG-APPL father 1EXCL:REAL:DU-come ‘My father and I came ...’ (Barbour 2012:130 [73]) 3. Lesien at-uv lon noxos. L. 3REAL.PL-go LOC garden ‘Leisen and them went to the garden. (Barbour 2012:130 [75]) 4. Ana-Aki, Lenaus, Ela, Letang, Leraxsil, Leraxbel, Lemeldan, A. L. E. L. L. L. L. Mary Alice, Lemelue at-xavux nani M. L. 3RE- coconut ‘Ana-Aki, Lenaus, Ela, Letang, Lerakhsil, Lerakhbel, Lemeldan, Mary Alice (and) Lemelue planted coconuts (Barbour 2012:276 [48]) 5. At-uv ati-blev vinang. 3REAL:PL-go 3REAL:PL-be with woman:ANA ‘They went with the woman.’ (Barbour 2012:276 [48])