Sobre a concordância de foco do agente em Proto-Maia

Autores

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20396/liames.v22i00.8670032

Palavras-chave:

Proto-Maia, Q'eqchi', Construção de foco do agente, Concordância, Maia Clássico

Resumo

Em muitas línguas maias, uma construção especial é usada se o sujeito de um verbo transitivo estiver em foco, a chamada construção de foco do agente. Embora essa construção tenha dois participantes, ela é morfologicamente intransitiva e corresponde a apenas um argumento. As línguas maias modernas diferem em qual argumento o verbo concorda na construção do foco do agente. Em algumas, o verbo concorda com o sujeito, em outras com o objeto e em outras com o sujeito ou o objeto, dependendo de qual argumento é mais alto na hierarquia de pessoa. Todos esses sistemas de concordância foram propostos por diferentes autores como o sistema original usado no Proto-Maya. Com base em evidências do Q'eqchi' colonial, este artigo propõe que em proto-maia o verbo não concordava com nenhum argumento na voz antipassiva do foco. A variedade de diferentes sistemas de concordância dessa construção nas línguas maias modernas resulta do fato de que a concordância na construção do agente-foco se desenvolveu após a divisão do proto-maia.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Biografia do Autor

Thilo Momme Holtmann, University of Cologne

Mestrando na Universidade de Colônia.

Referências

Acker, Ann Michelle (2016). Voice and valence in Q’anjob’al (PhD dissertation). Los Angeles: University of California. Available at: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4mk3j9sr

Aissen, Judith (1999). Agent focus and inverse in Tzotzil. Language 75(3): 451-485. https://doi.org/10.2307/417057 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/417057

Aissen, Judith (2017). Agent focus and passive in Tsotsil. In Jason Ostrove; Ruth Kramer; Joseph Sabbagh (Eds.), Asking the right questions: Essays in honor of Sandra Chung, pp. 143-161. Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz. Available at: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8255v8sc

Ayres, Glenn (1983). The antipassive “Voice” in Ixil. International Journal of American Linguistics 49(1): 20-45. https://doi.org/10.1086/465763 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/465763

Barrett, Edward Rush (1999). A grammar of Sipakapense Maya (PhD dissertation). Austin: The University of Texas at Austin.

Berendt, Carl Hermann (1875). Arte de lengua Cacchí Para Bien común. Available at https://archives.lib.byu.edu/repositories/ltpsc/archival_objects/ref733_wla

Brown, Linda Kay (1978). Word formation in Pocomchi (Mayan) (PhD dissertation). Stanford: Stanford University.

Campbell, Lyle (1977). Quichean linguistic prehistory. Berkeley: The University of California Press.

Campbell, Lyle (1984). The implications of Mayan historical linguistics for Glyphic Research. In John S. Justeson; Lyle Campbell (eds.), Phoneticism in Mayan Hieroglyphic Writing, pp. 1-17. Albany: State University of New York.

Corbett, Greville G. (2006). Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dayley, Jon Philip (1981). Tzutujil grammar (PhD dissertation). Berkeley: University of California. Available at: https://escholarship.org/content/qt4cx9t9b1/qt4cx9t9b1_noSplash_aa75d270aef86e270815c99e2bf9ede2.pdf

Dayley, Jon Philip (1983). Voice and ergativity in Mayan languages. In Alice Schachter; Wallace L. Chafe; Leanne Hinton (Eds.), Studies in Mesoamerican Linguistics, pp. 5-119. Survey of California and Other Indian Languages. Santa Barbara: University of California.

DuBois, John William (1981). The Sacapultec language (PhD Dissertation). Berkeley: University of California.

Erlewine, Michael Yoshitaka (2016). Anti-locality and optimality in Kaqchikel agent focus. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 34: 429-479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-015-9310-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-015-9310-z

Freeze, Ray (1980). A petición of 1619 in K’ekchi’ (Maya). Tlalocan 8: 111-129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19130/iifl.tlalocan.1980.44

Gelderen, Elly van (2011). The grammaticalization of agreement. In Heiko Narrog; Bernd Heine (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, pp. 491-501. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0039 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0039

Grinevald Craig, Colette (1979). The antipassive and Jacaltec. In Laura Martin (Ed.), Papers in Mayan Linguistics, pp. 139-164. Columbia: Lucas Brothers Publishers.

Heaton, Raina (2017). A typology of antipassives with special reference to Mayan (PhD dissertation). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i at Manoa. Available at: http://ling.hawaii.edu/wp-content/uploads/HEATON_Raina_Final_Dissertation.pdf

Hou, Liwen (2013). Agent focus in Chuj reflexive constructions (BA honors thesis). Montreal: McGill University.

Houston, Stephen; Robertson, John; Stuart, David (2000). The language of Classic Maya inscriptions. Current Anthropology 41(3): 321-356. https://doi.org/10.1086/300142 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/300142

Hull, Kerry; Carrasco, Michael D.; Wald, Robert (2009). The first-person singular independent pronoun in Classic Ch’olan. Mexicon 31(2): 36-43.

Kaufman, Terrence (2015). Mayan Comparative Studies. Available at: https://www.albany.edu/ims/pdlma/2015%20Publications/Kaufman-Mayan%20Comparative%20Studies.pdf

Lacadena, Alfonso (2000). Antipassive constructions in the Maya Glyphic Texts. Written Language and Literacy 3(1): 155-180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.3.1.08lac

Larsen, Thomas W. (1981). Functional correlates of ergativity in Aguacatec. Berkeley Linguistics Society 7: 136-153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v7i0.2075

Law, Danny; Stuart, David (2017). Classic Mayan. An overview of language in ancient hieroglyphic script. In Judith Aissen; Nora C. England; Roberto Zavala Maldonado (eds.), The Mayan Languages, pp. 128-172. London / New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315192345-6

Mateo Toledo, Eladio (2017). Q’anjob’al. In Judith Aissen; Nora C. England; Roberto Zavala Maldonado (eds.), The Mayan Languages, pp. 533-569. London / New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315192345-20

Mondloch, James Lorin (1981). Voice in Quiche-Maya (PhD dissertation). Albany: State University of New York at Albany.

Mora-Marín, David (2009). A test and falsification of the ‘Classic Ch’olti’an’ hypothesis: A study of three Proto-Ch’olan markers. International Journal of American Linguistics 75(2): 115-157. https://doi.org/10.1086/596592 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/596592

Morán, Francisco. 1695. Arte en lengua Cholti que quiere decir lengua de milperos. Available at: https://archives.lib.byu.edu/repositories/ltpsc/archival_objects/ref667_7q1

Norman, William M.; Campbell, Lyle (1978). Toward a Proto-Mayan syntax: A comparative perspective on grammar. In Nora C. England (Ed.), Papers in Mayan Linguistics, pp. 136-156. Columbia: University of Missouri.

Quizar, Robin; Knowles-Berry, Susan M. (1988). Ergativity in the Cholan languages. International Journal of American Linguistics 54(1): 73-95. https://doi.org/10.1086/466075 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/466075

Robertson, John (1980). The structure of pronoun incorporation in the Mayan verbal complex, New York / London: Garland.

Romero, Sergio (2019). El K’iche’ evangeliza al Q’eqchi’: La Theologia Indorum (K’iche’) como modelo de discurso doctrinal para las Coplas de Luís de Cáncer (Q’eqchi’). In Rodolfo Cerrón-Palomino; Álvaro Ezcurra Rivero; Otto Zwartjes (Eds.), Lingüística misionera: Aspectos lingüísticos, discursivos, filológicos y pedagógicos, pp. 221-243. Lima: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Fondo Editorial. Available at: http://repositorio.pucp.edu.pe/index/handle/123456789/170258

Sattler, Mareike (2004). An Analysis of the Arte de la lengua Ch’olti by Fray Francisco Morán. In: Søren Wichmann (ed.), The linguistics of Maya writing, pp. 365-405. Salt Lake City: The University of Utah Press.

Schweitzer, Jürgen (2006). Das Grosse im Kleinen. Zur diachronen Typologie des Maya-Verbalkomplexes, unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des ch’olotzeltalischen Zweiges (PhD dissertation). München: Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität.

Seler, Eduard (1887). Das Konjugationssystem der Maya-Sprachen. Berlin: Gebr. Unger.

Smith-Stark, Thomas (1978). The Mayan antipassive: some facts and fictions. In Nora C. England (ed.), Papers in Mayan Linguistics, pp. 169-187. Columbia: University of Missouri.

Stiebels, Barbara (2006). Agent focus in Mayan languages. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 24: 501-570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-005-0539-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-005-0539-9

Stoll, Otto (1884). Zur Ethnographie der Republik Guatemala. Zürich: Orell Füssli.

Verhoeven, Elisabeth; Skopeteas, Stavros (2015). Licensing focus constructions in Yucatec Maya. International Journal of American Linguistics 81 (1): 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1086/679041 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/679041

Vinogradov, Igor (2017a). From enclitic to prefix: diachrony of personal absolutive markers in Q’eqchi’. Morphology 27: 105-122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-016-9293-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-016-9293-4

Vinogradov, Igor (2017b). El Arte de Lengua Cacchí para Bien comun y los estudios diacrónicos de la gramática q’eqchi’. Estudios de Cultura Maya 49: 201-225. https://doi.org/10.19130/iifl.ecm.2017.49.770 DOI: https://doi.org/10.19130/iifl.ecm.2017.49.770

Zavala, Roberto (1997). Functional analysis of Akatek voice constructions. International Journal of American Linguistics 63 (4): 439-474. https://doi.org/10.1086/466340 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/466340

Downloads

Publicado

2022-08-10

Como Citar

HOLTMANN, T. M. Sobre a concordância de foco do agente em Proto-Maia. LIAMES: Línguas Indígenas Americanas, Campinas, SP, v. 22, n. 00, p. e022009, 2022. DOI: 10.20396/liames.v22i00.8670032. Disponível em: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/liames/article/view/8670032. Acesso em: 29 nov. 2022.