Morphological Complexity in Maltese: A divergence from canonicity

MMM8

Maris Camillerimaris.camilleri@surrey.ac.uk

Paradigm-Internal------------------------Focuses on what differencesexist from the canonical paradigm

Binyanim system--------------------------Issues related with the traditionalperceptions on the Maltese binyanim system

Morphological Complexity

Inflectional Material Lexical material

Same paradigm

Different paradigm

Same paradigm

Different paradigm

different same same different

grammatical grammatical lexical lexical

one form one cell

one formone cell

one form one cell

one form one cell

laqat ‘hit’

IMPERF PERF

n-o-lqot lqat-t 1.SGt-o-lqot lqat-t 2.SGj-o-lqot laqat 3.SG.Mt-o-lqot laqt-et 3.SG.Fn-o-lqt-u lqat-na 1.PLt-o-lqt-u lqat-t-u 2.PLj-o-lqt-u laqt-u 3.PL

laqat ‘hit’

IMPERF PERF

n-o-lqot lqat-t 1.SGt-o-lqot lqat-t 2.SGj-o-lqot laqat 3.SG.Mt-o-lqot laqt-et 3.SG.Fn-o-lqt-u lqat-na 1.PLt-o-lqt-u lqat-t-u 2.PLj-o-lqt-u laqt-u 3.PL

laqat ‘hit’

IMPERF PERF

n-o-lqot lqat-t 1.SGt-o-lqot lqat-t 2.SGj-o-lqot laqat 3.SG.Mt-o-lqot laqt-et 3.SG.Fn-o-lqt-u lqat-na 1.PLt-o-lqt-u lqat-t-u 2.PLj-o-lqt-u laqt-u 3.PL

laqat ‘hit’

IMPERF PERF

n-o-lqot lqat-t 1.SG

t-o-lqot lqat-t 2.SG

j-o-lqot laqat 3.SG.M

t-o-lqot laqt-et 3.SG.F

n-o-lqt-u lqat-na 1.PL

t-o-lqt-u lqat-t-u 2.PL

j-o-lqt-u laqt-u 3.PL

ħarab ‘escape’

IMPERF PERF

n-a-ħrab ħrab-t 1.SGt-a-ħrab ħrab-t 2.SGj-a-ħrab ħarab 3.SG.Mt-a-ħrab ħarb-et 3.SG.Fn-a-ħarb-u ħrab-na 1.PLt-a-ħarb-u ħrab-t-u 2.PLj-a-ħarb-u ħarb-u 3.PL

ħarab ‘escape’IMPERF PERF

n-a-ħrab ħrab-t 1.SG

t-a-ħrab ħrab-t 2.SGj-a-ħrab ħarab 3.SG.M

t-a-ħrab ħarb-et 3.SG.F

n-a-ħarb-u ħrab-na 1.PLt-a-ħarb-u ħrab-t-u 2.PLj-a-ħarb-u ħarb-u 3.PL

żar ‘visit’IMPERF PERF

n-żūr żor-t 1.SG

ż-żūr żor-t 2.SG

j-żūr żār 3.SG.M

ż-żūr żār-et 3.SG.F

n-żūr-u żor-na 1.PL

ż-żūr-u żor-t-u 2.PL

j-żūr-u żār-u 3.PL

mar ‘go’IMPERF PERF

m-mūr mor-t 1.SG

t-mūr mor-t 2.SG

j-mūr mār 3.SG.M

t-mūr marr-et 3.SG.F

m-morr-u mor-na 1.PL

t-morr-u mor-t-u 2.PL

j-morr-u marr-u 3.PL

syllable-structure alternationse.g. laqat – laqt – lqat

syllable-structure alternationse.g. laqat – laqt – lqat

ablaut-changese.g. mār – mūr

syllable-structure alternationse.g. laqat – laqt – lqat

ablaut-changese.g. mār – mūr

stress-shiftse.g. wàqaf – waqàf

syllable-structure alternationse.g. laqat – laqt – lqat

ablaut-changese.g. mār – mūr

stress-shiftse.g. wàqaf – waqàf

ablaut-compoundinge.g. wèħel – weħìl

syllable-structure alternationse.g. laqat – laqt – lqat

ablaut-changese.g. mār – mūr

stress-shiftse.g. wàqaf – waqàf

stem-extensionse.g ħass – ħassē

ħass ‘feel’

PERF

ħassej-t 1^2 1

ħass 3.SG.M 2

ħass-et 3.SG.F

ħassē-w 3.PL 3

IMPERF

j-ħoss 3.SG.M 4

j-ħoss-u 3.PL

ħass ‘feel’

PERF

ħassej-t 1^2 1

ħass 3.SG.M 2

ħass-et 3.SG.F

ħass-u 3.PL

IMPERF

j-ħoss 3.SG.M 3

j-ħoss-u 3.PL

ħass ‘feel’PERF

ħassej-t 1^2 1

ħass 3.SG.M 2

ħass-et 3.SG.F

ħassē-w 3.PL 3

IMPERF

j-ħoss 3.SG.M 4

j-ħoss-u 3.PL

ħass ‘feel’PERF

ħassej-t 1^2 1

ħass 3.SG.M 2

ħass-et 3.SG.F

ħass-u 3.PL

IMPERF

j-ħoss 3.SG.M 3

j-ħoss-u 3.PLsam ‘fast’PERF

som-t 1^2 1

sām 3.SG.M 2sām-et 3.SG.F

sām-u 3.PL

IMPERFj-sūm 3.SG.M 3j-sūm-u 3.PL

sam ‘fast’PERF

somej-t 1^2 1

sām 3.SG.M 2sām-et 3.SG.F

samē-w 3.PL 3

IMPERFj-sūm 3.SG.M 4j-sūm-u 3.PL

What to do with this non-canonicity:

What to do with this non-canonicity:

GENERAL

• Understand the complexity existing in the morphological component

• Understand the relations and patterns involved across and within paradigms

What to do with this non-canonicity:

L-Specific

Classify Maltese verbs on the basis of their surface representation

What to do with this non-canonicity: Classify Maltese verbs on the basis of

their surface representation See how Semitic Maltese differs

from non-Semitic Maltese, if at all

What to do with this non-canonicity: Classify Maltese verbs on the basis of

their surface representation See how Semitic Maltese differs

from non-Semitic Maltese, if at all This morphological complexity also

displays dialectal variation

What to do with this non-canonicity: Classify Maltese verbs on the basis of

their surface representation See how Semitic Maltese differs

from non-Semitic Maltese, if at all This morphological complexity also

displays dialectal variation Contribute to the Semitic literature,

the importance of stem analyses, and what can we do with them

Maltese binyanim system: Derivation

Traditional scholars:• Borg (1988),• Borg & Azzopardi-Alexander (1997),• Borg & Mifsud (1999),• Aquilina (1973)

Maltese binyanim system: Derivation

Traditional scholars:• Borg (1988),• Borg & Azzopardi-Alexander (1997),• Borg & Mifsud (1999),• Aquilina (1973)

Active-Passive

Maltese binyanim system: Derivation

Traditional scholars:• Borg (1988),• Borg & Azzopardi-Alexander (1997),• Borg & Mifsud (1999),• Aquilina (1973)

Active-Passive• Hoberman & Aronoff (2003)

sieħ ’call’ DIALECT

siħ-t I 1.SG

PERF

siħ-t 2.SGsieħ 3.SG.Msieħ-et 3.SG.Fsiħ-na 1.PLsiħ-t-u 2.PLsieħ-u 3.PLn-sejjaħ vs. *n-sieħ II 1.SG

IMPERF

s-sejjaħ 2.SGj-sejjaħ 3.SG.Ms-sejjaħ 3.SG.Fn-sejħ-u 1.PLs-sejħ-u 2.PLj-sejħ-u 3.PL

sejjaħ ’call’ DIALECTsiħ-t ~ sejjaħ-t 1.SG

PERFsiħ-t ~ sejjaħ-t 2.SGsieħ ~ sejjaħ 3.SG.Msieħ-et ~ sejħ-et 3.SG.Fsiħ-na ~ sejjaħ-na 1.PLsiħ-t-u ~ sejjaħ-t-u 2.PLsieħ-u ~ sejħ-u 3.PLn-sejjaħ vs. *n-sieħ 1.SG

IMPERF

s-sejjaħ 2.SGj-sejjaħ 3.SG.Ms-sejjaħ 3.SG.Fn-sejħ-u 1.PLs-sejħ-u 2.PLj-sejħ-u 3.PL

ħabbeb ‘cause to love’ħabbej-t I ~ ħabbib-t II 1.SG

PERF

ħabbej-t ~ ħabbib-t 2.SGħabbeb II 3.SG.Mħabb-et [I/II] 3.SG.Fħabbej-na I ~ ħabbib-na II 1.PLħabbej-t-u I ~ ħabbib-t-u II 2.PLħabbē-w [I/II] 3.PLn-ħabbeb II 1.SG

IMPERF

t-ħabbeb 2.SGj-ħabbeb 3.SG.Mt-ħabbeb 3.SG.Fn-ħabb-u 1.PLt-ħabb-u 2.PLj-ħabb-u 3.PL

1. *Ħabbej[I]-t-hom ma’ xulxinlove-1.SG-3.PL.ACC with each other*I love them with each other

2. Ħabbej[II]-t-hom/ħabbib-t-hom ma’ xulxinmade.love-1.SG-3.PL.ACC with each otherI made them love each other

ħasel ‘wash’ I - n-ħasel ? VII

ħasel ‘wash’ I - n-ħasel ? VII3a. It-tarbija n-ħasl-et DEF-baby.SG.F mrkr-washed-3.SG.F #The baby washed The baby was washed

ħasel ‘wash’ I - n-ħasel ? VII3a. It-tarbija n-ħasl-et DEF-baby.SG.F mrkr-washed-3.SG.F #The baby washed The baby was washed

b. It-tifel n-ħaselDEF-boy mrkr-washed

The boy washed

ħasel ‘wash’ I - n-ħasel ? VII3a. It-tarbija n-ħasl-et DEF-baby.SG.F mrkr-washed-3.SG.F #The baby washed The baby was washedb. It-tifel n-ħasel

DEF-boy mrkr-washed The boy washedc. It-tifel n-ħasel b’barmil

żebgħa DEF-boy mrkr-washed with.bucket paint li waqa’ fuq-u COMP fell.3.SG.M on-3.SG.M.ACC The boy was washed with a bucket of paint that fell on him

t- NOT PASSIVE

t- NOT PASSIVE t-kellem ‘speak’

t- NOT PASSIVE t-kellem ‘speak’

a. t-kellem ma’ ‘with’…

t- NOT PASSIVE t-kellem ‘speak’

a. t-kellem ma’ ‘with’…b. *t-kellem minn X ‘from X’

(as agent by-phrase)

t- NOT PASSIVE t-għallem ‘learn’

t- NOT PASSIVE t-għallem ‘learn’

a. t-għallem j-i-lgħab ma’ l-oħrajn VAL-mrkr-learn.3.SG.M 3.SG.M-play with DEF-others ‘He learnt how to play with others’

t- NOT PASSIVE t-għallem ‘learn’

a. t-għallem j-i-lgħab ma’ l-oħrajn VAL-mrkr-learn.3.SG.M 3.SG.M-play with DEF-others ‘He learnt how to play with others’

b. t-għallem minn omm-u VAL-mrkr-learn from mother-3.SG.M.ACC *‘He was taught from his mother’

t- NOT PASSIVE t-għallem ‘learn’

a. t-għallem j-i-lgħab ma’ l-oħrajn VAL-mrkr-learn.3.SG.M 3.SG.M-play with DEF-others ‘He learnt how to play with others’

b. t-għallem minn omm-u VAL-mrkr-learn from mother-3.SG.M.ACC *He was taught from his mother’

c. t-għallem mingħand omm-u VAL-mrkr-learn from mother-3.SG.M.ACC ‘He learnt from his mother’

t- NOT PASSIVE

• t-kellem ‘speak’• t-għallem ‘learn’• t-fisser ‘mean’• t-fewwaq ‘burp’

Tfisser ≠ ġie m-fisser ‘came.3.SG.M PASS.prt-explain’

Tfisser ≠ ġie m-fisser ‘came.3.SG.M PASS.prt-explain’

tgħallem ≠ ġie mgħallem ‘came.3.SG.M PASS.prt-thought’

n- NOT PASSIVE: Real evidence

ta ‘give’ – I

n- NOT PASSIVE: Real evidence

ta ‘give’ – I n-agħta ‘was given’ – VII

n- NOT PASSIVE: Real evidence

ta ‘give’ – I nagħta ‘was given’ – VII ġie mogħti ‘was given’ – Periphrastic

n- NOT PASSIVE: Real evidence

ta ‘give’ – I nagħta ‘was given’ – VII ġie mogħti ‘was given’ – Periphrastic ġie nagħtat

n- NOT PASSIVE: Real evidence

ta ‘give’ – I nagħta ‘was given’ – VII ġie mogħti ‘was given’ – Periphrastic ġie nagħtat

n- NOT PASSIVE: Real evidence

ta ‘give’ – I nagħta ‘was given’ – VII ġie mogħti ‘was given’ – Periphrastic ġie nagħtat

n- NOT PASSIVE: Real evidence

ta ‘give’ – I nagħta ‘was given’ – VII ġie mogħti ‘was given’ – Periphrastic ġie nagħtat

References:

Aquilina, J. (1973). The structure of Maltese: A mixed grammar and vocabulary. Royal University of Malta.

Borg, A. (1988). Ilsienna. Ħas Sajjied: Malta. Borg, A. & Azzopardi-Alexander, M. (1997). Maltese.

Routledge: New York. Borg, A. & Mifsud, M. (1999). Il-forom (Binyanim) in

Maltese: Inflection or derivation? MMM2,Malta. Corbett, G. (2005). The canonical approach in typology.

In Z. Frajzyngier, A. Hodges, & D. S. Rood (eds.) Linguistic Diversity and Language Theories (Studies in Language Companion Series 72), 25-49. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Corbett, G. (2007). Canonical typology, suppletion and possible words. Language, 83, 8-42.

Corbett, G. (2011). Higher order exceptionality in inflectional morphology. In H. J. Simon & H. Wiese (eds.) Expecting the unexpected: Exceptions in grammar (pp. 107-137). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hoberman, R. D. & Aronoff, M. (2003). The verbal morphology of Maltese. In J. Shimron (ed.) Language processing and acquisition in languages of Semitic, root-based morphology (pp. 61-78). John Benjamins: Amsterdam/Philadelphia.

Stump, G. (2006). Heteroclisis and paradigm linkage. Language, 82(2), 279-322.

Thornton, A. M. (in press). Overabundance (multiple cells realizing the same cell): a noncanonical phenomenon in Italian verb morphology. To appear in M. Goldbach et al. (eds.), Morphological Auonomy: Perspectives from Romance Inflectional Morphology. Oxford: OUP.