Cover not available
Part of
Grammaticalization meets Construction Grammar
Edited by Evie Coussé, Peter Andersson and Joel Olofsson
[Constructional Approaches to Language 21] 2018
► pp. 241–276

Constructionalization areas

The case of negation in Manchu

Heine & Kuteva (2005) proposed the concept of a grammaticalization area. Given the recent appearance of the concept of constructionalization, (Traugott & Trousdale, 2013) it seems reasonable to ask whether there are constructionalization areas as well. The paper exemplifies this concept with the help of the Tungusic language Manchu and some surrounding languages. Manchu does not have the common Tungusic negative verb e‑, but, like Mongolian, employs the negative existential akū instead (e.g., Ikegami, 1999 [1979]). Manchu and Mongolian share not only this development, but also an underlying interlingual constructional network (Höder, 2012). The paper proposes the name areal construction grammar as a label for those aspects of construction grammar that are concerned with the study of language contact.
Keywords: Tungusic, Manchu, Mongolic, Khalkha Mongolian, negation, negative existential cycle, shared constructionalization, constructionalization area, interlingual constructional network, areal construction grammar
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2. Tungusic
  • 3.Mongolic
  • 4.Surrounding languages
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Special abbreviations
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 23 May 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.21.c9
References (79)
References
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2013). Areal diffusion and parallelism in drift: Shared grammaticalization patterns. In M. Robbeets, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Shared grammaticalization. With a special focus on the Transeurasian languages (pp. 23–41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aixinjueluo, Y. (1990). Tantan manyude jingyu 5 [Discussing the Jing dialect of Manchu]. Manchu Studies, 11, 22–37.Google Scholar
(1991). Tantan manyude jingyu 6 [Discussing the Jing dialect of Manchu]. Manchu Studies, 13, 3–16.Google Scholar
Barðdal, J., & Gildea, S. (2015). Diachronic construction grammar. Epistemological context, basic assumptions and historical implications. In J. Barðdal, E. Smirnova, L. Sommerer, & S. Gildea (Eds.), Diachronic construction grammar (pp. 1–49). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergen, B. (2012). Louder than words. The new science of how the mind makes meaning. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Birtalan, Á. (2003). Oirat. In J. Janhunen (Ed.), The Mongolic languages (pp. 210–228). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brosig, B. (2015). Negation in Mongolic. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, 95, 67–136.Google Scholar
Chaoke, D. O. (2006). Xiandai xiboyu kouyu yanjiu [Research on modern spoken Sibe]. Peking: Renmin chubanshe.Google Scholar
(2007). Nanmu elunchunyu yanjiu [Research on the Nanmu dialect of Oroqen]. Peking: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
(2009). Ewenkeyu cankao yufa [Reference grammar of Solon]. Peking: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe.Google Scholar
Croft, W. (1991). The Evolution of negation. Journal of Linguistics, 27(1), 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Di Cosmo, N. (2006). The diary of a Manchu soldier in seventeenth-century China. “My service in the army”, by Dzengšeo. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Diessel, H. (2006). Demonstratives, joint attention, and the emergence of grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(4), 463–489. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. (2013). On the six-way word order typology, again. Studies in Language, 37(2), 267–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ebata, F. (2011). Sakha (Yakut). In Y. Yamakoshi (Ed.), Grammatical sketches from the field (pp. 179–212). Tokyo: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.Google Scholar
Fried, M. (2013). Principles of constructional change. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 419–437). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Georg, S. (2003). Ordos. In J. Janhunen (Ed.), The Mongolic Languages (pp. 193–209). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gorelova, L. M. (2002). Manchu grammar. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Hauer, E. (2007). Handwörterbuch der Mandschusprache. Second edition. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Heine, B. & Kuteva, T. (2005). Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, B., & Kuteva, T. (2010). Contact and grammaticalization. In R. Hickey (Ed.) Handbook of language contact (pp. 86–105). Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M., & Östman, J.-O. (2014). Reflections on constructions across grammars. Constructions and Frames, 6(2), 137–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Höder, S. (2012). Multilingual constructions. A diasystematic approach to common structures. In K. Braunmüller, & C. Gabriel (Eds.), Multilingual individuals and multilingual societies (pp. 241–257). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hölzl, A. (2015). A typology of negation in Tungusic. Studies in Language, 39(1), 118–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). New evidence on Para-Mongolic numerals. Journal de la Société Finno-Ougrienne, 96, 21–37.Google Scholar
Ikegami, J. (1999 [1979]). Manshuugo to tsunguusugo. Sono koozoojoo no sooiten to mookogo no eikyoo. In J. Ikegami (Ed.), Manshuugo kenkyuu (pp. 344–358). Tokyo: Kyuuko Shoin.Google Scholar
Janhunen, J. (1991). Material on Manchurian Khamnigan Evenki. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
(1996). Manchuria. An ethnic history. Helsinki: The Finno-Ugrian Society.Google Scholar
(2003a). Proto-Mongolic. In J. Janhunen (Ed.), The Mongolic languages (pp. 1–29). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2003b). Khamnigan Mongol. In J. Janhunen (Ed.), The Mongolic languages (pp. 83–101). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2006). The Mongolic languages. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language & linguistics, Second edition (pp. 231–234). Oxford: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012a). Mongolian. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012b). The expansion of Tungusic as an ethnic and linguistic process. In A. Malchokov, & L. J. Whaley (Eds.), Recent advances in Tungusic linguistics (pp. 5–16). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
(2012c). Khitan. Understanding the language behind the scripts. SCRIPTA, 4, 107–132.Google Scholar
Janhunen, J., Peltomaa, M., Sandman, E., & Dongzhu, X. (2008). Wutun. München: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Kałużyński, S. (1977). Die Sprache des mandschurischen Stammes Sibe aus der Gegend von Kuldscha, Volume 1. Warschau: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.Google Scholar
Kane, D. (1989). The Sino-Jurchen vocabulary of the Bureau of Interpreters. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Kim, J., Ko, D., Chaoke, D. O., Han, Y., Piao, L., & Boldyrev, B. V. (2008). Materials of spoken Manchu. Seoul: Seoul National University Press.Google Scholar
Kiyose, G. N. (1977). A study of the Jurchen language and script: Reconstruction and decipherment. Kyoto: Shōwado.Google Scholar
(2000). Genealogical relationship of Jurchen dialects and literary Manchu. Central Asiatic Journal, 44(2), 177–189.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar. A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lefebvre, Claire. (2015). Relabeling in language genesis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Malchukov, A. L. (2013). Verbalization and insubordination in Siberian languages. In M. Robbeets, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Shared grammaticalization. With special reference on the Transeurasian languages (pp. 177–208). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mu Yejun. (1986). Alechuka manyu de shuci yu gezhuci [Numerals and case markers in Alchuka Manchu]. Manchu Studies, 2, 2–17.Google Scholar
. (1987). Balayu [The Bala language]. Manchu Studies, 2, 2–31, 128.Google Scholar
. (1988). Lun balayu de yuyin bianhua [Discussing the sound changes of Bala]. Manchu Studies, 6, 1‒26.Google Scholar
Muhamedowa, R. (2016). Kazakh. A comprehensive grammar. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, I. (1994). Evenki. In P. Kahrel & R. van den Berg (Eds.), Typological studies in negation, 1-34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nedjalkov, V. P., & Otaina, G. A. (2013). A syntax of the Nivkh language. The Amur dialect. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Noël, D. (2007). Diachronic construction grammar and grammaticalization theory. Functions of Language, 14(2), 77–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norman, J. (2013). A comprehensive Manchu-English dictionary. Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robbeets, M. (2014). The development of negation in the Transeurasian languages. In P. Suihkonen, & L. J. Whaley (Eds.), On diversity and complexity of languages spoken in Europe and North and Central Asia (pp. 401–420). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Róna-Tas, A. (2017). Khitan Studies I. The graphs of the Khitan small script 2. The vowels. Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 70(2), 135–188.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, R. (2010). Chinese Pidgin Russian. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 25(1), 5–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinor, D. (1949). Le verbe mandjou. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris, 45, 146–155.Google Scholar
Skribnik, E. (2003). Buryat. In Juha Janhunen (Ed.), The Mongolic Languages (pp. 102–128). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stary, G. (2009). Geister, Dämonen und seltsame Tiere. Ein mandschurisches Liaozhai zhiyi aus Xinjiang. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Steen, F., & Turner, M. (2013). Multimodal Construction Grammar. In M. Borkent, B. Dancygier, & J. Hinnell (Eds.), Language and the Creative Mind (pp. 255–274). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Thomason, S. (2010). Contact explanations in linguistics. In R. Hickey (Ed.) Handbook of language contact (pp. 31–47). Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E. C., & Trousdale, G. (2013). Constructionalization and constructional change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trousdale, G. (2014). On the relationship between grammaticalization and constructionalization. Folia Linguistica, 48(2), 557–577. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsumagari T. (2003). Dagur. In J. Janhunen (Ed.), The Mongolic Languages (pp. 129–153). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2009). Grammatical outline of Uilta (revised). Journal of the Graduate School of Letters, 4, 1–21.Google Scholar
Verbiest, F. (1682). Elementa linguae tartaricae. Paris: Moette.Google Scholar
Veselinova, L. (2014). The negative existential cycle revisited. Linguistics, 52(6), 1327–1389.Google Scholar
Veselinova, L. (with Skirgård, H.). (2015). Special negators in the Uralic languages: Synchrony, diachrony and interaction with standard negation. In M. Miestamo, A. Tamm, & B. Wagner-Nagy (Eds.), Negation in Uralic languages (pp. 547–599). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Veselinova, L. (2016). The negative existential cycle through the lens of comparative data. In E. van Gelderen (Ed.), Cyclical change continued (pp. 139–188). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Möllendorff, P. G. (1892). A Manchu grammar with analysed texts. Shanghai: American Presbyterian Mission Press.Google Scholar
Wagner-Nagy, B. (2015). Negation in Selkup. In M. Miestamo, A. Tamm, & B. Wagner-Nagy (Eds.), Negation in Uralic languages (pp. 133–158). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang Q. (2005). Manyu yanjiu [Research on Manchu]. Peking: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Wiedenhof, J. (1994). Standard Mandarin. In P. Kahrel, & R. van den Berg (Eds.), Typological studies in negation (pp. 93–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wuge S., & Cheng, M. (1730). Manju nikan hergen-i Cing wen ki meng bithe. Man han zi Qingwen qimeng [Enlightenment on the Manchu language in Manchu and Chinese scripts], Volume 3. [URL]. Accessed 22 April 2016.
Yamada, M, Pellard, T., & Shimoji, M. (2015). Dunan grammar (Yonaguni Ryukyuan). In H. Patrick, S. Miyara, & M. Shimoji (Eds.), Handbook of the Ryukyuan languages. History, structure, and use (pp. 449–478). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Yamakoshi, Y. (2007). Shinehen buriyaatogo no clitic [The clitics in Shineken Buryat]. Asian and African Languages and Linguistics, 2, 1–15.Google Scholar
(2011). Shineken Buryat. In Y. Yamakoshi (Ed.), Grammatical sketches from the field (pp. 137–177). Tokyo: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa.Google Scholar
Yu W., Kwon, J., Choi, M., Shin, Y., Borjigin, B., & Bold, L. (2008). A study of the Tacheng dialect of the Dagur language. Seoul: Seoul National University Press.Google Scholar
Zhang P. (2013). The Kilen language of Manchuria. Grammar of a moribund Tungusic language. Hong Kong: University of Hongkong. (Doctoral dissertation.)Google Scholar
Zhao J. (1989). Xiandai manyu yanjiu [Research on modern Manchu]. Peking: Minzu chubanshe.Google Scholar
Zikmundová, V. (2013). Spoken Sibe, Morphology of the inflected parts of speech. Prague: Karolinum.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Ungerer, Tobias & Stefan Hartmann
2023. Constructionist Approaches, DOI logo
Salaberri, Iker
2021. The word order of negation in the history of Basque. Diachronica 38:2 ► pp. 259 ff. DOI logo
Östman, Jan-Ola
2018. Constructions as cross-linguistic generalizations over instances. In Constructions in Contact [Constructional Approaches to Language, 24], ► pp. 181 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.