The theory of feature systems: One feature versus two for Kayardild tense-aspect-mood
The theory of feature systems: One feature versus two for Kayardild tense-aspect-mood
复制标题
特征系统理论：Kayardild 时态-体-语气的一个特征与两个特征
作者：
Erich R. Round;G. Corbett
特征是所有主要的句法和词法理论的核心。然而，确定特定语言的特征及其值的清单，特别是确定是否在同一语义-句法领域中假设一个或两个特征，可能是一项不平凡的任务。我们从《卡亚尔迪尔德》中的时体语气()来说明这一点，并引出了在单特征分析和双特征分析之间的一般判断原则，从而对特征系统理论及其类型学做出了贡献。卡亚迪尔德表现出惊人的曲折复杂性，在两项主要研究中进行了研究(Evans 1995A；2013轮)，事实证明它对我们的主题特别有启发性。埃文斯和朗德都声称，《卡亚尔迪尔德》中的分句不是一个而是两个同时具有特征。虽然一种语言有两个相同类型的功能是完全可能的，但这是不寻常的。因此，我们建立了一般性的论点，可以证明假设两个特征而不是一个特征是合理的；然后我们将这些论点专门应用于卡亚尔迪尔德·。我们的发现与埃文斯和朗德都不同；在所有方面，根据的一两个特征进行分析的证据要么大致平衡，要么明显倾向于只有一个特征的分析。因此，即使面对高度复杂的语言事实，我们也可以采用原则性的方法来处理我们处理的是一个特征还是两个特征的问题，这对我们中许多寻求严格类型学科学的人来说是令人鼓舞的。我们还发现，在许多方面令人兴奋的异国情调的卡亚迪尔德，在它的语法的这一角是相当普通的。
Features are central to all major theories of syntax and morphology. Yet it can be a non-trivial task to determine the inventory of features and their values for a given language, and in particular to determine whether to postulate one feature or two in the same semantico-syntactic domain. We illustrate this from tense-aspect-mood (TAM) in Kayardild, and adduce principles for deciding in general between one-feature and two-feature analyses, thereby contributing to the theory of feature systems and their typology. Kayardild shows striking inflectional complexities, investigated in two major studies (Evans 1995a; Round 2013), and it proves particularly revealing for our topic. Both Evans and Round claimed that clauses in Kayardild have not one but two concurrent TAM features. While it is perfectly possible for a language to have two features of the same type, it is unusual. Accordingly, we establish general arguments which would justify postulating two features rather than one; we then apply these specifically to Kayardild TAM. Our finding is at variance with both Evans and Round; on all counts, the evidence which would motivate an analysis in terms of one TAM feature or two is either approximately balanced, or clearly favours an analysis with just one. Thus even when faced with highly complex language facts, we can apply a principled approach to the question of whether we are dealing with one feature or two, and this is encouraging for the many of us seeking a rigorous science of typology. We also find that Kayardild, which in many ways is excitingly exotic, is in this one corner of its grammar quite ordinary.