Top Banner
81 2010 183 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM 1) ) MINOURA Nobukatsu Contents: Introduction 1. The data and their representation 2. Internally-headed relative clauses 3. Relative clauses to Shibatani’s ‘nominalization’ 4. Examination of TTM data 5. Summary Conclusion and further remarks Introduction Malagasy Sign Language is the first language of many of the deaf people in Madagascar. Its name in Malagasy is Tenin’ny Tanana Malagasy (literally, Malagasy Hand Language) and it is abbreviated TTM (Minoura 2008). In this paper I am going to investigate what is usually called relativization. 1. The data and their representation The data have been collected in Antananarivo, Madagascar from my deaf language consultant M me Raobelina Nivo Haingo Holy Tiana Eva between August 2004 and August 2010. Most of the data used in this paper are from my data collected in August 2010 unless otherwise noted. M me Eva jotted down sentences on notebooks using written Malagasy words. She was always aware that the sentences should be in TTM of the deaf people but not in written Malagasy. And although the sentences have been written using Malagasy words, most of the sentences are ungrammatical according to the written Malagasy grammar. After writing some pages, M me Eva would sign the sentences to my video camera, with which I recorded her signing. Later I went over the video recording while looking at the notebooks with M me Eva’s writings and made corrections. That is to say that I added words, erased words, and/or changed word orders since
46

Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

Apr 24, 2020

Download

Documents

dariahiddleston
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 183

Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM1))

MINOURA Nobukatsu

Contents:

Introduction

1. The data and their representation

2. Internally-headed relative clauses

3. Relative clauses to Shibatani’s ‘nominalization’

4. Examination of TTM data

5. Summary

Conclusion and further remarks

Introduction

Malagasy Sign Language is the first language of many of the deaf people in Madagascar. Its

name in Malagasy is Tenin’ny Tanana Malagasy (literally, Malagasy Hand Language) and it is

abbreviated TTM (Minoura 2008).

In this paper I am going to investigate what is usually called relativization.

1. The data and their representation

The data have been collected in Antananarivo, Madagascar from my deaf language

consultant Mme Raobelina Nivo Haingo Holy Tiana Eva between August 2004 and August 2010.

Most of the data used in this paper are from my data collected in August 2010 unless otherwise

noted. Mme Eva jotted down sentences on notebooks using written Malagasy words. She was

always aware that the sentences should be in TTM of the deaf people but not in written Malagasy.

And although the sentences have been written using Malagasy words, most of the sentences are

ungrammatical according to the written Malagasy grammar. After writing some pages, Mme Eva

would sign the sentences to my video camera, with which I recorded her signing. Later I went

over the video recording while looking at the notebooks with Mme Eva’s writings and made

corrections. That is to say that I added words, erased words, and/or changed word orders since

Page 2: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

184� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

sometimes Mme Eva did not sign exactly in the same way as she had written in the notebooks.

In this paper, I increased the number of lines by two in the data representation as compared

to Minoura (2008). Instead of trying to transform all of Mme Eva’s writings into the lines of

“labels,” this time I am showing Mme Eva’s writings and labels separately. E.g. Minoura’s (2008)

example (17) was represented as follows:

(1) HANKANY BEHORIRIKA IX-3

(FUT) go.to Behoririka (s)he

‘(S)he will go to Behoririka’

This would be represented in this paper as follows:

(2) h-ankany � � � Behoririka izy � what MmeEva has written2)

AV.FUT-go.there� Behoririka (s)he � the gloss of the written words

MANKANY� � � BEHORIRIKA IX3 � labels of TTM signs3)

go.there Behoririka (s)he � the gloss of the TTM signs

‘(S)he will go to Behoririka’ � the translation

The line 1 represents what Mme Eva wrote (hyphens added in order to show morph

boundaries) with the glosses in the line 2. The line 3 represents the labels to the signs and the

line 4 being the glosses to the labels. I tried to make one-to-one correspondences between the

labels and the signs, but this effort has not been completed, i.e. there are some many-to-one and

one-to-many correspondences left. It is inevitable as spoken/written Malagasy and TTM have

different categorizations in their lexicons and in their grammars. You should have also noticed

that the grammatical markings, e.g. AV.FUT, are present in the glosses for Mme Eva’s writings but

are lacking in the glosses for the labels of the TTM signs. This means that the grammatical

distinctions suggested by written Malagasy words are lacking in TTM. E.g. the AV/OV

distinction is not relevant to TTM unless the OV verb in question takes a cliticized ergative (=

genitive) actor marking. Tense is irrelevant in TTM verbs. On the other hand, tense is marked

in the oblique-case preposition signs: AMIN’NY (non-past), TAMIN’NY (past) (Minoura 2008:66

fn. 2).

Page 3: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 185

2. Internally-headed relative clauses

The idea to this paper budded when I found a sentence in TTM in 2008 which could not be

analyzed without admitting that there are so-called internally-headed relative clauses in TTM.

(3) m-an-deha toerana tia-nao aiza

AV.PRES-VM4)-go.to place like(OV)-GEN2 where

[MANDEHA TOERANA TIA-GEN25)] AIZA

go.to place like(OV)-you where

‘Where is the place that you want to go to?’

I marked the labels to TTM with brackets for the seeming internally-headed relative clause

and marked the seeming internal head with an underline. The seeming head TOERANA is not

at either periphery of the clause but is positioned in the middle of the clause.

Mme Eva wrote and signed the following sentences after (3).

(4) tia hafa toerana aiza

like other place where

[TIA HAFA TOERANA] AIZA

like other place where

‘where is the other place (you) want to go to?’

(5) toerana vita m-a-mangy t-aiza

place finish AV.PRES-VM-visit PST-where

[TOERANA FINISH MAMANGY] AIZA

place finish visit where

‘where is the place (you) have visited?’

In both (4) and (5), the head noun TOERANA is placed at a periphery of the clause; it is at

the end of the clause for (4) and at the beginning of the clause for (5). These could possibly be

analyzed as externally-headed relative clauses, (4) having its head following the relative clause

and (5) having its head preceding the relative clause, but this issue will be considered over in the

sections 4 and 5.

Page 4: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

186� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

2.1. Internally-headed relative clauses in the literature

Keenan (1985:161-163) shows examples of internal relative clauses. E.g. Tibetan has the

following example (Keenan:161):

(6) [Peem� thep� � khii-pa] the nee yin

Peem(ERG) book(ABS) carry-PART � �the(ABS) I(GEN) be

‘The book Peem carried is mine’ (bracketing and underlining mine)

Keenan (1985:161) writes: “Internal RC, recall, are ones which present a domain noun

internal to Srel and are thus syntactically headless.” He further writes: “First let us establish that

internal RCs are indeed NPs, a point which in some cases at least is not immediately obvious

since the domain noun occurs in normal NP position in Srel and consequently Srel may appear to be

simply some sort of subordinate clause rather than an NP. In the examples which follow,

however it seems best to treat Srel as a clause which has been sufficiently nominalized to take

determiners, case markings, and adpositions, all properties which are characteristic of NPs

(Keenan 1985:161).” Recently Shibatani (2010) restates that internally-headed or head-internal

relative clauses (Keenan’s internal RCs) are NPs, which is in line with Keenan’s claim that Srel

have the properties of NPs. This will be revisited in the section 3.

2.2. Internally-headed relative clauses in other signed languages

Ichida (1998) has examples of internally-headed relative clauses in Japanese Sign Language

(JSL):

(7) TANAKA [SUZUKI BENTÔ TSUKURU] TABERU

Tanaka Suzuki box.lunch make eat

‘Tanaka eats the box lunch that Suzuki has made’ (bracketing and underlining mine)

Tang, Lau, and Lee (2010) have examples of internally-headed relative clauses in Hong Kong

Sign Language (HKSL):

(8) ________________________________re

YESTERDAY IXa FEMALE CYCLE IXa IX1 LETTER 1SENDa

Page 5: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 187

‘I sent a letter to that lady who cycled yesterday’

In this example the seeming head noun of the relative clause FEMALE is not at the

periphery but in the middle of the relative clause. And HKSL has a non-manual marker (NMM)

for relative clauses marked ‘re’ with a line showing the scope of the NMM. It is also noteworthy

that HKSL relative clauses make use of indexing (IX) within the relative clauses, which does not

seem to be echoed by JSL and TTM.

3. Relative clauses to Shibatani’s ‘nominalization’

Shibatani (2010) argues that some types of atypical relative clauses are not actually relative

clauses with an internal head but actually they should be considered headless.

Figure 1. Headedness parameter (Shibatani 2010:2)

Shibatani argues that some types of widely presented relative clauses, which are asterisked

in the scheme above, are actually not relative clauses. By the way the argument that left-headed

relative clauses are actually not relative clauses is relevant to Japanese. For some languages it

may be the opposite and that right-headed relative clauses are NOT relative clauses but

left-headed relative clauses are.

Shibatani (2010:25) argues that ‘headless relative clauses’ including widely argued

internally-headed relative clauses are actually results of nominalization. He claims that

grammatical nominalization does NOT make nouns as classified in the parts of speech of

Page 6: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

188� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

languages. Nominalization is classified into two subtypes: lexical nominalization, which actually

makes nouns and grammatical nominalization, which does not make nouns.

Figure 2. Classification of nominalization

Shibatani further argues that the primary function of grammatical nominalization is event

nominalization and argument nominalization is derived by metonymy from event nominalization.

With this in mind I looked at TTM data and the seeming internally-headed relative clause (3)

now appears to be a case of argument nominalization. TTM, of course, has event nominalization.

Moreover, it appears to me that TTM also has adjunct nominalization with or without a “head.”

The adjunct nominalization is not included in the above chart, but in Shibatani’s (2010:96) slides,

there are examples from Marinax Atayal (Austronesian) which suggest that he is also aware of

adjunct nominalization, but it is not clear if his ‘argument nominalization’ actually includes adjunct

nominalization.

4. Examination of TTM data

In this section TTM data concerning grammatical nominalization are examined. The

Page 7: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 189

grammatical nominalization which has been recorded in TTM are event nominalization, argument

nominalization, and adjunct nominalization. And each type of nominalization can be marked with

a head sign6) or otherwise. Especially for the latter cases when there is no head sign, there may

be a non-manual marker(s) (NMM[s]) involved, but I have not looked into NMMs this time. As

in the previous TTM examples, NPs formed by grammatical nominalization will be bracketed and

the head sign will be underlined if it exists.

4.1. Event nominalization

Event nominalization in TTM is materialized with or without a head sign. The head which

marks event nominalization, if it is used at all, is FA, but it is seldom used and it can be an

influence from spoken and/or written Malagasy. I presume that event nominalization is

primarily not marked with a head sign; it can be marked by a NMM(s), but this has not been

clearly noticed and set apart as for now.

4.1.1. Event nominalization without a head sign

Most of the event NPs do not have a head sign which marks the event nominalization.

(9) aho tampoka aotomobilina sy moto

I suddenly car and motorbike

IX1 TAMPOKA [AOTOMOBILINA SY MOTO

I suddenly car and motorbike

m-if-an-dona n-a-hita t-@

AV.PRES-RECIP-VM-hit AV.PST-VN-SEE PST-OBL

MANDONA(RECIP)] MAHITA7) TAMIN’NY

hit(RECIP) see OBL(PST)

maraina

morning

MARAINA

morning

‘I suddenly saw a car and a motorbike hit each other in the morning’

Page 8: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

190� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

(10) [aotomobilina m-i-taingina foana] tsy mety,

car AV.PRES-VM-ride always not suitable

AOTOMOBILINA MITAINGINA FOANA TSY.METY,

car ride always not suitable

tsy m-i-asa hozatra

not AV.PRES-VM-work system

TSY MIASA HOZATRA

not work system

‘always riding a car is no good; your system does not get worked up’

(11) menomenona i8) mama trano m-a-loto,

complain(OV) DEF mother house AV.PRES-VM-dirty

MENOMENONA MAMA [TRANO MALOTO],

complain mother house dirty

ataov-y m-ana-dio hoy mama

do-IMP AV.PRES-VM-clean say mother

ATAOVY M(AN)ADIO9) HOY MAMA

IMP clean say mother

‘mother is complaining that the house is dirty. “clean the house,” says mother’

(12) m-i-andry olona m-an-ampy a-vela

AV.PRES-VM-wait person AV.PRES-VM-help OV-leave

[MIANDRY OLONA MANAMPY] MAMELA10)

wait person help leave

‘forget about waiting for somebody to help you out’

An event NP can precede the predicate (9, 10, 12) or follow it (11).

4.1.2. Event nominalization with a head sign

The head sign which marks event nominalization is FA. But this can be an influence from

Page 9: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 191

spoken/written Malagasy and it may not be a part of the ‘real’ TTM of the native deaf signers.

(13) tapaka fifanarahana t-@ � � fivoriana fa

cut agreement PST-OBL � � meeting that

TAPAKA FIFANARAHANA TAMIN’NY � � FIVORIANA [FA

cut agreement OBL(PST) � � meeting that

ianao no11) filoha mitarika � vonjimaika � � 1

you NMLZ president lead � temporary � � one

IX2 FILOHA MITARIKA � VONJY � MAIKA � � IRAY

you president lead � save � hurry � � one

taona m-aha-ritra

year AV.PRES-VM-last

TAONA MAHARITRA]

year last

‘The agreement was reached upon at the meeting that you would be the interim

president to lead for one year long’

An event NP with the head sign FA follows the predicate (13) and it does not precede

the predicate.

4.1.3. Summary for event nominalization

When the event NP is headed with FA, it follows the predicate in the main clause. When

the event NP is headless, it can precede or follow the predicate in the main clause.

4.2. Argument nominalization

Argument NPs which are created by grammatical nominalization have a head sign, i.e. either

a noun sign or a content-question (wh-question) sign. The head sign perhaps can be placed at

neither periphery of the NP, as is suggested by (14), but this example can be possibly looked

upon as a case of location nominalization (section 4.3.1.). Otherwise most of the examples that I

have of argument NPs have their head signs at either periphery of the NP, i.e. at the beginning of

Page 10: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

192� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

the NP or at the end of it. I will not decide which type is more typical of TTM and more typical a

relative clause from a typological point of view at this moment.

(14) m-an-deha toerana tia-nao aiza� � (=3)

AV.PRES-VM12)-go.to place like(OV)-GEN2 where

[MANDEHA TOERANA TIA-GEN2] AIZA

go.to place like(OV)-you where

‘Where is the place that you want to go to?’

4.2.1. Argument nominalization with a head noun at the beginning of the NP

There are argument NPs with their head nouns at the beginning of the NPs.

(15) nama-ko m-a-mangy matetika tsy misy

friend-GEN2 AV.PRES-VM-visit often not be

[NAMANA-GEN2 MAMANGY MATETIKA] TSY.MISY

friend-my visit often not be

‘my friends who visit me often do not exist’

(16) volo tia-nao inona vehivavy

hair like(OV)-GEN2 what woman

[VOLO TIA-GEN2] INONA VEHIVAVY

hair like(OV)-GEN2 what woman

‘women of what kind of hair do you like?’

The sentence (16) has a sentence-final topic VEHIVAVY and it can be literally translated as

“as for women, what is the hair that you like?”

(17) m-aha-sosotra olona m-an-dona

AV.PRES-VM-vex person AV.PRES-VM-bump

MAHASOSOTRA [OLONA MANDONA]

vex person bump

‘people who bump into me annoy me’

Page 11: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 193

(18) olona ao m-an-dondona jere-o

person there AV.PRES-VM-knock look.at-IMP

[OLONA IX MANDONDONA] MIJERY13)

person there knock look.at

‘look at the person who is knocking (at the door) down there’

(19) saofera olana tsy m-i-tandrina, � tia

driver problem not AV.PRES-VM-be.careful � like(OV)

[SAOFERA] OLANA [TSY MITNDRINA,� � � � � TIA

driver problem not be.careful like(OV)

m-if-an-inana h-a-hazo olona betsaka

AV.PRES-RECIP-VM-compete AV.FUT-VM-get person many

MIFANINANA MAHAZO OLONA BETSAKA

compete.with.each.other get person many

m-iditra

AV.PRES-enter

MIDITRA]

enter

‘drivers who are not careful and who like competing with each other getting more

people are problematic’

In the sentence above (19), OLANA is the predicate and the rest looks like a split NP.

(20) ba kiraro-ko jere-o m-i-fangaro any

knit shoe-GEN1 look.at-IMP AV.PRES-VM-be.mixed there

[BA.KIRARO-GEN1] MIJERY14) [MIFANGARO IX]

knit shoe-GEN1 look.at be.mixed there

‘look at my socks which are mixed up there’

Page 12: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

194� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

This sentence (20) exhibits an argument noun which is split apart by the imperative verb.

Argument NPs with a head noun at the beginning of the NP can precede the predicate (15,

16. 18), follow it (17), or surround it (19, 20), with the NP being a split NP.

4.2.2. Argument nominalization with a head content-question sign at the beginning of the NP

There are argument NPs with their head content-question signs at the beginning of the NPs.

(21) tsy mety fetsifetsy inona m-i-hinana, ataov-y

not suitable sly what AV.PRES-VM-eat do(OV)-IMP

TSY.METY FETSIFETSY [INONA MIHINANA], ATAOVY

not.suitable sly what eat IMP

zara-o

divide(OV)-IMP

MIZARA15)

divide

‘It is no good to be stingy about what you eat; share it’

(22) olana tsy � � m-an-dre, tsy m-aha-lala inona

problem not� � AV.PRES-VM-hear not AV.PRES-VM-know what

OLANA TSY MANDRE, TSY MAHALALA [INONA

problem not hear not know what

vaovao ao TV

new there TV

VAOVAO IX TV]

new there TV

‘It is a problem that I do not hear; I do not know what is new on the TV’

(23) ahoana m-if-an-inana vato be io

how AV.PRES-RECIP-VM-compete rock big that

AHOANA MIFANINANA VATO BE IX

Page 13: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 195

How compete(RECIP) rock big that

m-i-bata, iza mafy m-aha-zaka

AV.PRES-VM-carry who strong AV.PRES-VM-bear

MIBATA [IZA MAFY MAHAZAKA]

carry who strong bear

‘how about competing carrying that big rock on the shoulder (to decide) who is

stronger and can bear’

Argument NPs with a head content-question sign at the beginning of the NP all follow the

predicate like for the above data (21, 22, 23). It may imply that argument NPs with a head

content-question sign (rather than a regular noun) are closer in usage to spoken and/or written

Malagasy, in which arguments follow the predicates, but the word order in the example (23),

“VATO BE IX MIBATA” as an event NP is foreign to spoken and/or written Malagasy, therefore it

must be following TTM syntax.

4.2.3. Argument nominalization with a head noun at the end of the NP

There are argument NPs with their head nouns at the end of the NPs.

(24) fety m-i-jery olona feno toerana,

festival AV.PRES-VM-watch person full place

[FETY MIJERY OLONA] FENO TOERANA,

festival watch person full place

m-an-ahirana m-i-voaka ao

AV.PRES-VM-be.trouble AV.PRES-VM-go.out there

MANAHIRANA MIVOAKA IX

be.trouble go.out there

‘the place is full of people watching the festival; it is troublesome going out of that

place’

(25) m-i-voaka m-iditra olona betsaka ao shoprite

Page 14: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

196� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

AV.PRES-VM-go.out AV.PRES-enter person many there Shoprite

[MIVOAKA MIDITRA OLONA] BETSAKA IX SHOPRITE

go.out enter person many there Shoprite

‘people going out and entering are numerous at the Shoprite’

(26) aho n-i-vidy glasy tampoka afa.baraka

I AV.PST-VM-buy ice.cream suddenly shame

[IX1 MIVIDY GLASY] TAMPOKA AFA.BARAKA

I buy ice.cream suddenly shame

latsaka

drop

latsaka

drop

‘the ice cream that I had bought suddenly dropped to my dismay’

(27) n-amp-indram-i-ny ahy boky io aho

PST-CAUS-lend-OV-GEN3 me book that I

[AMPINDRAMINA-GEN3 IX1 BOKY IX] IX1

lend(OV)-(s)he me book that I

tia m-am-aky

like AV.PRES-VM-read

TIA MAMAKY

like read

‘I want to read the book that (s)he has lent me’

In the above example (27), if you put the index (IX) sign within the argument NP, then the

head noun, BOKY is not at the end of the NP. Is this a case of a NP with its head at neither of its

periphery? Or is the index (IX) sign outside of the NP? Both options need to be thoroughly

examined further in the future.

In all of the above examples, the NPs in question precede the predicates. Is there a

Page 15: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 197

tendency that a head noun is drawn closer to the right periphery which is in turn closer to the

predicate? This, again, needs to be further examined. But consider the example (28) as a

counterexample.

4.2.4. Argument nominalization with a head content-question sign at the end of the NP

There is an example of an argument noun with its head content-question sign at the end of

the NP.

(28) ianao m-aha-lala laoka inona

you AV.PRES-VM-know food what

IX2 MAHALALA [LAOKA INONA]

you know food what

‘do you know what the food is?’

In the example (28), the head content-question sign, INONA is at the end of the NP and

moreover, the NP follows the predicate. This goes against the premature speculation and

generalization that I made in section 4.2.3. that the head sign may be drawn to the periphery of

the NP closer to the predicate in the main clause.

4.2.5. Summary for argument nominalization

Argument nominalization requires a head sign, either a content-question sign (INONA

‘what,’ IZA ‘who’) or a noun sign. The location of the head sign within the NP is mostly at the

beginning or at the end, but there are cases in which the head sign is placed at neither periphery

of the NP (14, 27). The argument NP can be placed before the predicate or after the predicate in

the main clause. In some cases the NP surrounds the predicate in the main clause, with the NP

itself having been split (19, 20). The split may be caused by topicalization and the predicate may

be placed at the so-called Wackernagel’s position (i.e. second in the clause). As for the

placement of the head sign within the NP and the placement of the NP in the main clause,

argument NPs look quite similar to location NPs (4.3.1.).

4.3. Adjunct nominalization

Adjunct nominalization can be realized with or without a head sign. When a head sign is

Page 16: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

198� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

present, it is rather clear what type of nominalization is constructed. But when there is no head

sign in the NP in question, the division between the subtypes becomes blurry. It is possible that

a large category of the “adjunct nouns” can become handy when there is no head sign within

such NPs. It is similar to what the very versatile circumstance voice (CV) forms of verbs can be

used for in spoken and written Malagasy.

4.3.1. Location nominalization

Now, location nominalization is considered. All the examples in my hand with location

nominalization have a head sign: TOERANA (place), AIZA (where), etc. This brings us back

to the familiar example (29) below which has been already mentioned twice in this paper.

(29) m-an-deha toerana tia-nao aiza (=3, 14)

AV.PRES-VM16)-go.to place like(OV)-GEN2 where

[MANDEHA TOERANA TIA-GEN2] AIZA

go.to place like(OV)-you where

‘Where is the place that you want to go to?’

I am not all that sure if the NP is acting as an adjunct (namely a locative noun) or an

argument in the equational content-question sentence. This ambiguity may be implying how the

relevant part of the TTM grammar should be described. I will try not to come to a hasty

conclusion at this moment.

I tried to look for more locative-like and adjunct-like examples, but the more I look at the

TTM examples, the more they look like cases with areal nouns just like in some spoken

languages like Athabaskan languages, in which areal nouns behave sometimes like adjuncts and

sometimes like nominal arguments.

(30) ianao tia toerana aloha sa aoriana

you like place in.front or in.back

[IX2 TIA TOERANA] ALOHA SA AORIANA

you like place in.front or in.back

‘you prefer a place in front or in the back?’

Page 17: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 199

(31) alakamisy tsena toerana ao mahamasina

Thursday market place there Mahamasina

[ALAKAMISY TSENA TOERANA] IX MAHAMASINA

Thursday market place there Mahamasina

‘on Thursdays, the place where the market takes place is in Mahamasina’

(32) tanana m-i-tokana lavitra tsy tsara

town AV.PRES-VM-set.apart far not good

[TANANA MITOKANA LAVITRA] TSY TSARA

Town set.apart far not good

‘a town which is set apart far is not good’

(33) toerena m-i-fidy tsara m-i-tsangantsangana

place AV.PRES-VM-choose good AV.PRES-VM-take.a.walk

[TOERANA] MIFIDY [TSARA MITSANGANTSANGANA]

place choose good take.a.walk

aiza

where

AIZA

where

‘(I am) choosing a place good for taking a walk; which place is good?’

The above example (33) is a case of split location NP “TOERANA ~ TSARA

MITSANGANTSANGANA.”

(34) taksibrosy be.dia.be ho any faritany aho

taxi.brousse many to there city I

TAKSIBROSY BE.DIA.BE HO IX [FARITANY IX1

taxi.brousse many to there city I

h-an-deha vakansy

Page 18: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

200� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

AV.FUT-VM-go vacation

MANDEHA VAKANSY]

go vacation

‘many bush taxis go to cities I want to go to for a vacation’

In the above example (34), the noun, FARITANY (city) is preceded by a direction marker,

HO and a deictic pointing, IX.

(35) efitra fandraisam-bahiny olona m-isy

room reception-guest person AV.PRES-be

[EFITRA FANDRAISANA VAHINY] OLONA MISY

room reception guest person be

‘in the guest room there is a person’

Finally, this example (35) looks like a definitive case in which the NP headed by EFITRA

(room) seems to act as an locative adjunct.

TTM location NPs are probably like areal NPs which act sometimes like locational

arguments of predicates and sometimes like locative adjuncts.

4.3.1.1. Summary for location nominalization

Location nominalization requires a head sign (TOERANA ‘place,’ AIZA ‘where,’ and various

other signs with an areal meaning). The location of the head sign within the NP is mostly at the

beginning or at the end, but there is a case in which the head sign is placed at neither periphery

of the NP (29). The location NP can be placed before the predicate or after the predicate in the

main clause. In one case the NP surrounds the predicate in the main clause, with the NP itself

having been split (33). The split may be caused by topicalization and the predicate may be

placed at the so-called Wackernagel’s position (i.e. second in the clause). As for the placement

of the head sign within the NP and the placement of the NP in the main clause, location NPs look

quite similar to argument NPs (4.2.). Some examples, especially (29-31, 33) look like cases of

locative equational sentences in which two location NPs are equated.

4.3.2. Time nominalization

Page 19: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 201

Time NPs without a head sign which have a future meaning probably cannot be

distinguished readily from condition NPs without a head sign which have a future meaning. And

just like the location NPs, time NPs sometimes act like temporal arguments of predicates and

sometimes like temporal adjuncts.

4.3.2.1. Time nominalization with a head sign

Now, we will look at some time NPs with a head sign.

(36) fotoana m-i-vory tsy.maintsy tonga foana filoha,

time AV.PRES-VM-gather must come always president

[FOTOANA MIVORY] TSY.MAINTSY TONGA FOANA FILOHA

time gather must come always president

filoha lefitra, mpitam-bola

president vice treasurer

FILOHA LEFITRA MPITANA VOLA

president vice keeper money

‘at the time of a meeting, the president, the vice president, and the treasurer must

always come’

(37) fotoana n-an-drais-a-ny fanasan-ny tompo

time CV.PST-VM-receive-CV-GEN3 feast-of.the lord

[FOTOANA ANDRAISANA17)-GEN3 FANASANA-IX TOMPO]

time receive-(s)he feast-of.the lord

t-@ alahady

PST-OBL Sunday

TAMIN’NY ALAHADY

OBL(PST) Sunday

‘the time when (s)he received communion was last Sunday’

This example (37) perhaps is a case of temporal equational sentences in which two time NPs

Page 20: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

202� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

are equated. This is similar to my argument for locative equational sentences in the section

4.3.1.1.

(38) andro m-an-drivotra ataov-y m-a-tevina

day AV.PRES-VM-windy do(OV)-IMP AV.PRES-VM-thick

[ANDRO MANDRIVOTRA] ATAOVY MATEVINA

day windy IMP thick

akanjo-n-jaza

clothes-of-baby

AKANJO ZAZA

clothes baby

‘on a windy day, make (your) baby’s clothes thick’

(39) mandra-pahavita18) fiofanana io mihaona isika

until-end training that meet we

[MANDRAKA FAHAVITA FIOFANANA IX] MIHAONA IX1pl

until � end training that meet we

‘until the end of the training, we see each other’

(40) asa-nao hita ny vokatra tohizo [hatrany

work-GEN2 be.seen(OV) the result continue(OV.IMP) until

ASA-GEN2 HITA IX VOKATRA MANOHY19) [HATRANY

work-your be.seen the result continue until

tena tsara

very good

TENA TSARA]

very good

‘as for your work, the result is visibile, continue until it is very good’

4.3.2.2. Time nominalization without a head sign

Page 21: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 203

Time nominalization without a head sign probably cannot be readily distinguished from

condition nominalization without a head sign (4.3.3.2.). It is especially true when the

grammatically nominalized NP has a future meaning. Then probably they cannot be

distinguished and they should be put into the same category. But at this moment I have not

done so. I.e. I did not put together time nominalization without a head sign (this section) and

condition nominalization without a head sign. (4.3.3.2.). Moreover, sometimes the headless

adjunct NPs seem to have a more general “adjunct NP” feeling than just time or conditional NPs

(cf. 42).

(41) anana m-i-tetika a-tao m-a-dinika

leafy.vegetable AV.PRES-VM-cut OV-do AV.PRES-VM-small

[ANANA MITETIKA] MANAO20) MADINIKA

leafy.vegetable cut do small

‘when you cut leafy vegetables into small pieces, make them very small’

(42) sakafo lany tampoka tonga ianao

food gone suddenly come you

[SAKAFO LANY] TAMPOKA TONGA IX2

food gone suddenly come you

‘when the food was gone, you suddenly came over’

(43) olana ianao m-isy � � tsara � namana� � m-i-zara,

problem you AV.PRES-be� � good � friend � � � AV.PRES-VM-divide

[OLANA IX2 MISY] � � TSARA � NAMANA� MIZARA

problem you be � � good friend divide

m-i-ova maivamaivana ianao

AV.PRES-VM-change light(REDUP) you

MIOVA MAIVANA(REDUP) IX2

change light you

‘when you have a problem, it is better to share it with a friend; you will feel relieved’

Page 22: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

204� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

(44) m-i-vidy entana maromaro taki-o facture

AV.PRES-VM-buy goods many demand-OV.IMP invoice

[MIVIDY ENTANA MARO(REDUP)] MITAKY21) FACTURE

buy goods many demand invoice

‘when you buy a lot of goods, ask for an invoice’

(45) aza hadino bus m-i-taingina taki-o billet

NEG.IMP forget bus AV.PRES-VM-ride demand-OV.IMP ticket

AZA HADINO [BUS MITAINGINA] MITAKY22) BILLET

NEG.IMP forget bus ride demand ticket

‘when you ride a bus, don’t forget to ask for your ticket’

The last sentence (45) is interesting in that the time NP splits the main clause.

(46) sai-nao reraka fanatanjahan-tena m-ila m-an-ao

mind-GEN2 tired sport AV.PRES-need AV.PRES-VM-do

[SAINA-GEN2 RERAKA] FANATANJAHAN-TENA MILA MANAO

mind-your tired sport need do

‘when your head is tired, you need to engage in some sports’

(47) tampoka fikambanana m-an-ampy intsony inona

suddenly association AV.PRES-VM-help no.more what

[TAMPOKA FIKAMBANANA MANAMPY INTSONY] INONA

suddenly association help no.more what

a-tao

OV-do

MANAO23)

do

‘when suddenly the association does not help you any longer, what are you going to

do?’

Page 23: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 205

In all the above cases in this subsection, the “time NP” interpretation relies solely on the

meaning of the signs and it might be more appropriate to call the time NPs “adjunct NPs” instead

for the meaning of the NPs can be a bit broader than just being time NPs.

4.3.2.3. Summary for time nominalization

When a time NP is headed, the head sign is FOTOANA (time) or some other noun sign with

a temporal meaning. This head sign is placed at the beginning of the time NP. A time NP, with

or without a head sign, can be placed before the predicate or after it. When there is no head sign

in the NP, it is sometimes hard to or it is perhaps of no use to distinguish between a time NP and a

condition NP (4.3.3.2.).

4.3.3. Condition nominalization

When condition nominalization is marked with a head sign, it is with OHATRA (if, for

example). When condition nominalization is not headed with OHATRA, the NP can possibly be

not only confined to being a conditional NP but considered a broader “adjunct NP.”

4.3.3.1. Condition nominalization with a head sign

Conditional NPs, when marked with a head sign, it is with OHATRA (if, for example).

(48) io oh: m-anam-bola afaka m-an-ao

that if AV.PRES-have-money free AV.PRES-VM-make

IX [OHATRA MANANA VOLA] AFAKA MANAO

that if have money free make

trano be

house big

TRANO BE

house big

‘that person, if (s)he has money, (s)he can build a big house’

In this example above (48), probably the index sign IX is topicalized and placed at the

beginning of the sentence. But you can also look at this sentence as a case where a condition

Page 24: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

206� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

noun is placed in the middle of the main clause.

(49) oh: tsy ampy vola ao fikambanana

if not enough money there association

[OHATRA TSY AMPY VOLA IX FIKAMBANANA]

if not enough money there association

tompo-n-andraikitra m-an-olo mpitam-bola

owner-of-responsibility AV.PRES-VM-replace keeper-money

TOMPO ANDRAIKITRA MANOLO MPITANA VOLA

owner responsibility replace keeper money

‘if the money is not sufficient at the association, the one responsible to replace money

is the treasurer’

(50) m-i-tady hevitra zavatra iri-na h-anan-ana

AV.PRES-VM-seek idea thing desire-(OV) FUT-have-OV

MITADY HEVITRA ZAVATRA MANIRY24) MANANA25)

seek idea thing desire have

oh: trano tsy.misy

if house not.be

[OHATRA TRANO TSY.MISY]

if house not.be

‘look for ideas as to things desirable to have e.g. if you do not have a house’

(51) oh: zavatra tsy hay, tsara m-an-ontany,

if thing not understand good AV.PRES-VM-ask

[OHATRA ZAVATRA TSY HAY], TSARA MANONTANY,

if thing not understand good ask

aza m-enatra

NEG.IMP AV.PRES-ashamed

Page 25: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 207

AZA MENATRA

NEG.IMP ashamed

‘if there are things you do not understand, it is better to ask; do not feel ashamed’

You can see headed conditional NPs which are placed closer to the beginning of the main

clause (48, 49, 51) and closer to the end of the main clause (50). The head sign for the condition

NP, OHATRA is placed at the beginning of the NP.

4.3.3.2. Condition nominalization without a head sign

Condition nominalization without a head sign probably cannot be readily distinguished from

time nominalization without a head sign (4.3.2.2). It is especially true when the grammatically

nominalized “noun” has a future meaning. Then perhaps they cannot be distinguished and they

should be put into the same category. But at this moment I have not done so. I.e. I did not put

together condition nominalization without a head sign (this section) and time nominalization

without a head sign. (4.3.2.2). Moreover, sometimes the headless adjunct NPs seem to have a

more general “adjunct NP” feeling than just time or conditionNPs.

(52) sai-nao reraka fanatanjahan-tena m-ila m-an-ao (=46)

mind-GEN2 tired sport AV.PRES-need AV.PRES-VM-do

[SAINA-GEN2 RERAKA] FANATANJAHAN-TENA MILA MANAO

mind-your tired sport� � � � � � � � � � need do

‘if your head is tired, you need to engage in some sports’

The above example (52) is identical with the example (46) in the headless time NP section.

It is hard and probably useless to distinguish between headless time NPs and headless condition

NPs in some cases.

(53) ianao tsy� � tia� � m-i-asa, � tampoka� lany � vola

you not� � like� � AV.PRES-VM-work � suddenly � gone � money

IX2 TSY� TIA� � MIASA [TAMPOKA LANY � VOLA

you not� � like� � work � suddenly � gone � money

Page 26: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

208� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

sy harena-nao, ho aiza ianao, tsara

and riches-GEN2q to where you good

SY HARENA-GEN2] HO AIZA IX2 TSARA

and riches-your to where you good

m-ila m-aha-leo tena

AV.PRES-need AV.PRES-VM-able.to.support self

MILA MAHALEO TENA

need able.to.support self

‘you do not want to work. if your money and riches are suddenly gone, where will

you go? you had better and need to be independent’

(54) diso-be� � � � hevitra� ray aman-dreny fanirian-janaka

wrong-big thought father with-mother wish-child

DISO BE HEVITRA RAY RENY [FANIRIANA

wrong big thought father mother wish

tsy m-ana-tanteraka

not AV.PRES-VM-be.accomplished

ZANAKA TSY MANATANTERAKA]

child not be.accomplished

‘father and mother will be greatly disappointed if their child’s wish will not be

accomplished’

A headless condition NP can be placed closer to the beginning of the main clause (52, 53) or

closer to the end of the main clause (54).

4.3.3.3. Summary for condition nominalization

When condition NP is headed, the head sign is OHATRA (if). This head sign is placed at

the beginning of the condition NP. A condition NP, with or without a head sign, can be placed

before the predicate or after it. When there is no head sign in the NP, it is sometimes hard to or

it is perhaps of no use to distinguish between a condition NP and a time NP (4.3.2.2.).

Page 27: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 209

4.3.4. Reason nominalization

Reason NPs can be headed with ANTONY (reason) or FA (because) or be headless. Note

that the head sign FA is identical with the head sign sometimes used for event nominalization

(4.1.2.). FA looks more spoken/written Malagasy-like and ANTONY looks more TTM-like.

4.3.4.1. Reason nominalization with a head sign

We will take a look at the examples of reason NPs headed with ANTONY or FA.

(55) aza m-an-ome � � � azy fa m-an-araraotra

NEG.IMP AV.PRES-VM-give him/her because AV.PRES-VM-take.advantage.of

AZA MANOME IX3 [FA MANARARAOTRA

NEG.IMP give him/her because take.advantage.of

io

that

IX]

that

‘do not give it to him for he will take advantage of it’

(56) olana TT ao� � � TV antony � � filoha TV

problem sign.language there� � TV reason � � president TV

OLANA TENIN’NY.TANANA IX� � � TV [ANTONY FILOHA TV

problem sign.language there TV reason president TV

m-i-ova-ova

AV.PRES-VM-change-change

MIOVA(REDUP)]

change(REDUP)

‘there is a problem with the sign language (interpretation) on TV because the

president of the TV station is constantly changing’

Page 28: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

210� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

(57) lavaka kely be.dia.be m-isy hazo antony

hole small many AV.PRES-be tree reason

LAVAKA KELY BE.DIA.BE MISY HAZO [ANTONY

hole small many be tree reason

bibi-kely m-i-hinana

worm-small AV.PRES-VM-eat

BIBY KELY MIHINANA]

worm small eat

‘there are a lot of holes in the tree because small worms eat it’

In the above examples (55-57) of reason NPs with a head sign, the reason NPs are placed at

the end of the main clauses.

4.3.4.2. Reason nominalization without a head sign

Reason NPs without a head sign can be interpreted as other types of grammatically

nominalized NPs without a head sign. If that is more appropriate, those headless grammatically

nominalized NPs should be lumped together as adjunct NPs, but I have not done so at this

moment.

(58) ianao efa n-am-angy anay, izahay faly

you already AV.PST-VM-visit us we happy

IX2 EFA MAMANGY26) IX1pl IX1pl FALY

you already visit us we happy

m-a-hita anao

AV.PRES-VM-see you

[MAHITA IX2]

see you

‘you have visited us already; we are happy to see you’

(59) sakafo tsy.ampy, torana izy

Page 29: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 211

food not.enough faint (s)he

[SAKAFO TSY.AMPY], TORANA IX3

food not.enough faint (s)he

‘because food was not enough, (s)he fainted’

(60) tara-tara izy mbola m-am-angy m-am-angy olona

late(REDUP) (s)he still AV.PRES-VM-visit AV.PRES-VM-visit person

TARA(REDUP) IX3 [MBOLA MAMANGY(REDUP) OLONA]

late(REDUP) (s)he still visit(REDUP) person

‘(s)he is being late for (s)he is still visiting people’

(61) boky ity ome-o azy m-ila izy

book this give-OV.IMP him/her AV.PRES-need (s)he

BOKY IX MANOME27) IX3 [MILA IX3]

book this give him/her need (s)he

‘give him/her this book for (s)he needs it’

(62) m-amp-a-lahelo izy aho ome-ko vola

AV.PRES-CAUS-VM-sad (s)he me give(OV)-GEN1 money

[M(AMP)ALAHELO28] IX3 IX1] OME-GEN1 VOLA

(make) sad (s)he me give(OV)-I money

‘because (s)he makes me sad, I give him/her money’

(63) izy fahaizana ambony voninahitra n-a-hazo

(s)he ability at.the.top honor AV.PST-VM-receive

[IX3 FAHAIZANA AMBONY] VONINAHITRA MAHAZO29)

(s)he ability at.the.top honor receive

‘because (s)he has a top ability, (s)he was honored’

(64) m-ando loko tandrem-o m-i-kasika

wet color be.careful-OV.IMP AV.PRES-VM-touch

[MANDO LOKO] TANDREMO30) MIKASIKA

Page 30: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

212� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

wet color be.careful(IMP) touch

‘the paint is wet, be careful not to touch it’

(65) kadradraka feno fanafody famonoana bibi-kely

cockroach full chemical killing insect-small

[KADRADRAKA FENO] FANAFODY FAMONOANA BIBY KELY

cockroach full chemical killing insect small

m-amp-i-asa

AV.PRES-CAUS-VM-work

MAMPIASA

use

‘because (this place) is full of cockroaches, use pesticide”

(66) écolage tsy voa-efa-ny 2 volana, m-i-anatra

tuition not OV-pay-GEN3 two month AV.PRES.VM-study

[ÉCOLAGE TSY VOAEFA-GEN3 ROA VOLANA] MIANATRA

tuition not pay(OV)-(s)he two month study

tsy n-a-hazo

not AV.PST-VM-can

TSY MAHAZO31)

not can

‘because (s)he has not paid tuition for two months, (s)he cannot study’

(67) mpampianatra tsy n-a-hazo karama, m-i-tokana,

teacher not AV.PST-VM-receive salary AV.PRES-VM-strike

[MPAMPIANATRA TSY MAHAZO32] KARAMA], MITOKANA,

teacher not receive salary strike

m-amp-i-anatra tsy.n-a-hazo

AV.PRES-CAUS-VM-study NEG.AV.PST-VM-can

Page 31: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 213

MAMPIANATRA TSY.MAHAZO33)

teach cannot

‘because the teachers did not receive salary, they are on a strike; they cannot teach’

Some reason NPs without a head precede the predicates (59, 62-67); some follow the

predicates (58, 60, 61). Unlike the reason NPs with a head (4.3.4.1), these examples can be

interpreted as having an adjunct NP with a broader meaning instead of having a strictly defined

reason NP. Otherwise they can also be interpreted as coordinate two (or more) clauses placed

one after another with a loose syntactic connection.

4.3.4.3. Summary for reason nominalization

Reason nominalization can be constructed with or without a head sign. When it has a head

sign, it is FA (because) or ANTONY (reason). The head sign is placed at the beginning of the

reason NP. A reason NP with a head sign comes after the predicate, whereas a reason NP

without a head sign can come before the predicate or after it.

4.3.5. Instrument nominalization

It was hard to find examples of instrument nominalization.

(68) tsara zezika m-an-iry tsara voly

good manure AV.PRES-VM-grow good produce

[TSARA ZEZIKA] MANIRY TSARA VOLY

good manure grow good produce

‘good agricultural produce grows with good manure’

In the above examples, it is hard to decide if TSARA ZEZIKA acts as an instrument NP as

presently presented or as an argument NP as a causer of a causative construction. If the latter is

the case, the causativity does not seem to be explicitly coded in this TTM example.

The following example (69) is not a case of instrument nominalization, but is presented as a

related case.

(69) fanjakana m-i-antoka frais

Page 32: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

214� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

government AV.PRES-VM-guarantee fare

FANJAKANA MIANTOKA [FRAIS CL:FIARAMANIDINA(DIR)

government guarantee fare go.by.plane

m-an-droso sy m-i-verina

AV.PRES-VM-go and AV.PRES-VM-come.back

CL:FIARAMANIDINA(INV) MANDROSO SY MIVERINA]

come.back.by.plane go and come.back

‘the government guarantees the round-trip airfare (the airfare with which to go and

come back)’

In the example (69), the NP is actually an argument NP in the main clause. The head sign

FRAIS, however, acts as instrumental within the NP. Moreover Mme Eva repeated the “to go and

to come back” meaning first with the classifier (CL) construction and then with the lexical signs.

4.3.5.1. Summary for instrument nominalization

There is so few examples of instrument nominalization and it is hard to make any kind of

generalization. But as for the example that I have (68), the instrument NP is headless and the

NP is placed before the predicate.

4.3.6. Purpose nominalization

Purpose nominalization can be expressed with a head sign HO or without it.

4.3.6.1. Purpose nominalization with a head sign

Now we will look at purpose nominalization with a head sign HO.

(70) n-i-rotsaka ho fidi-na filoha-m-pirenena izy

AV.PST-VM-put.in so.that choose-OV president-of-country (s)he

MIROTSAKA34) [HO MIFIDY35] FILOHA FIRENENA IX3]

put.in so.that choose president country (s)he

‘(s)he cast a ballot so as to choose the president of the country’

Page 33: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 215

(71) pataloha io a-vadi-badih-o ho maina

trouser that OV-turn.over(REDUP)-IMP so.that dry

PATALOHA IX MAMADIKA36)(REDUP) [HO MAINA]

trouser that turn.over so.that dry

‘turn the trousers over and over so that they get dry’

4.3.6.2. Purpose nominalization without a head sign

We will take a look at the examples of purpose nominalization without a head sign.

(72) m-i-vidy manga manta a-tao lasary

AV.PRES-VM-buy mango unripe OV-make condiment

MIVIDY MANGA MANTA [MANAO37) LASARY]

buy mango unripe make condiment

‘buy unripe mango so as to make lasary’

(73) izahay ambanivohitra h-an-deha dadatoa

we country.side AV.FUT-VM-go uncle

IX1pl AMBANIVOHITRA MANDEHA38) [DADATOA

we country.side go uncle

m-amp-i-hindrana aotomobilina

AV.PRES-CAUS-VM-borrow car

MAMPIHINDRANA AOTOMOBILINA]

lend car

‘we are going to the country side so as to lend our uncle the car’

(74) fianakaviana m-i-tady aotomobilina a-hofa

family AV.PRES-VM-seek car OV-rent

FIANAKAVIANA MITADY AOTOMOBILINA MANOFA39)

family seek car rent

m-i-tsangantsangana h-an-deha

Page 34: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

216� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

AV.PRES-VM-take.a.trip AV.FUT-VM-go

[MITSANGANTSANGANA MANDEHA40]]

take.a.trip go

‘the family is looking for a car to rent so as to go on a trip’

(75) any an-tanàna-ny m-am-ono omby fety be

there ARL-village-GEN3 AV.PRES-VM-kill cow feast big

IX TANÀNA-GEN3 MAMONO OMBY [FETY BE

there village-their kill cow feast big

a-tao

OV-do

MANAO41)]

do

‘there in their village, they are killing a cow so as to have a big feast’

In the above examples (72-75) of the headless purpose nominalization, the headless purpose

NPs follow the predicates of the main clauses.

4.3.6.3. Summary for purpose nominalization

Purpose nominalization can be effected with or without a head sign. When it has a head

sign, it is HO (so that) and the head sign is placed at the beginning of the NP. The NP, with or

without a head sign, comes after the predicate in the main clause.

4.3.7. Precaution nominalization

In this section we will look at examples of precaution nominalization.

4.3.7.1. Precaution nominalization with a head

Now, we will look at examples of precaution nominalization with a head. But the “head” has

no manual expression. It is expressed only in the mouthing “sao.” It may imply that all the

precaution NPs are actually headless. Or otherwise it can be interpreted that the mouthing

“sao” is actually the head of the precaution NPs. I will not decide which seems to be the case for

Page 35: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 217

the moment.

(76) tantan-o zaza io sao tsy hita

take.by.hand-OV.IMP child that lest not see

MITANTANA42) ZAZA IX [ TSY HITA]

take.by.hand child that (lest) not see

‘take that child by the hand lest you lose sight of him/her’

(77) m-i-tebiteby izy sao maty zana-ny

AV.PRES-VM-tremble (s)he lest die child-GEN3

MITEBITEBY IX3 [ MATY ZANAKA-GEN3]

tremble (s)he (lest) die child-his/her

‘(s)he fears his/her child might die’

The example (77) may have no precaution connotation, but it is marked with the “sao”

mouthing like in the example (76).

4.3.7.2. Precaution nominalization without a head

The following example (78) is a case of precaution nominalization without the “sao”

mouthing.

(78) m-ando loko tandrem-o m-i-kasika (= 64)

wet color be.careful-OV.IMP AV.PRES-VM-touch

MANDO LOKO TANDREMO43) [MIKASIKA]

wet color be.careful(IMP) touch

‘the paint is wet, be careful so as not to touch it’

4.3.7.3. Summary for precaution nominalization

Precaution nominalization can be constructed with or without a head ‘element.’ The head

‘element’ is not a sign but a mouthing “sao” not accompanying manual expression. The head

‘element’ “sao” comes at the beginning of the precaution NP. The precaution NP, with or without

Page 36: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

218� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

a head, is placed after the predicate in the main clause.

4.3.8. Manner nominalization

The following examples may not be actual cases of manner nominalization. They have the

head signs FOMBA (manner) or TOETRA (state, condtion). These signs seem to denote

manner within the NPs, but perhaps they act as arguments within the main clauses. This

ambiguity reminds me of the location nominalization (4.3.1.) in which the location NPs can be

interpreted as locative NPs and/or locational argument NPs within the main clauses.

(79) fomba m-am-boly zana-n-tsaonjo lavaka maro-maro

manner AV.PRES-VM-plant child-of-taro hole many(REDUP)

[FOMBA MAMBOLY ZANAKA SAONJO] LAVAKA MARO(REDUP)

manner plant chil taro hole many(REDUP)

m-ila

AV.PRES-need

MILA

need

‘the way how you plant taro seeds needs many many holes’

(80) tsy.mety toetra-ny m-an-ambony tena

not.suitable nature-GEN3 AV.PRES-VM-consider.highly.of self

TSY.METY [TOETRA-GEN3 MANAMBONY TENA]

not.suitable nature-his/her consider.highly.of self

‘his/her nature to consider highly of him/herself is not good’

(81) tsy.mety fomba-nao zavatra m-i-zara,

not.suitable manner-GEN2 thing AV.PRES-VM-divide

TSY.METY [FOMBA-GEN2 ZAVATRA MIZARA],

not.suitable manner-your thing divide

m-i-ova m-i-alona sasany

Page 37: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 219

AV.PRES-VM-change AV.PRES-VM-envy some

MIOVA MIALONA SASANY

change envy some

‘the way you divide up things is not good; some people will become envious’

4.3.8.1. Summary for manner nominaliztion

I do not have real cases of manner nominalization so far. The cases I have are the

constructions in which there is a manner sign (FOMBA ‘manner’ or TOETRA ‘state, nature’) at

the beginning of the NP. The NP can precede or follow the predicate in the main clause. The

manner sign in the NP, however, actually acts as an argument in the main clause.

4.3.9. Concession nominalization

Concesion nominalization is realized without a head sign. Below are some examples:

(82) nahoana m-i-jery fotsiny lavo izy,

why AV.PRES-VM-look.at only fall (s)he

NAHOANA MIJERY FOTSINY [LAVO� � �IX3],

why look.at only fall (s)he

ampi-o, m-a-ratra karakara-o

help-OV.IMP AV.PRES-VM-wounded take.care-OV.IMP

MANAMPY44) MARATRA MIKARAKARA45)

help wounded take.care

‘why are you only looking at him/her although (s)he fell? help the wounded! take care

of him/her’

(83) trano m-an-ofa 25.000ar isam-bolana

house AV.PRES-VM-rent 25.000 ariary every-month

TRANO MANOFA 25.000 ARIARY ISAN VOLANA

house rent 25.000 ariary every month

rano tsy.misy

Page 38: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

220� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

water not.be

[RANO TSY.MISY]

water not.be

‘in order to rent the house you need 25.000 ariary every month although there is no

water’

4.3.9.1. Summary for concession nominalization

Concession NPs do not have a head sign. A concession NP is placed after the predicate in

the main clause.

5. Summary

The types and the subtypes of grammatical nominalization are made into a table below:

Page 39: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 221

Table 1. Types of grammatical nominalization

Types Subtypes Grammaticalized

or typical heads if

they exist

Placements of

the head sign

in the NP and

the NP in the

main clause

Headless

grammat-

ical

nominal-

ization

Placement of

the NP in the

main clause

Corresponding

conventional

‘clause’ names

Event NPs FA ‘that’ HI, PoPr ²� PrPr/PoPr Subordinate

clause

Argument

NPs

INONA ‘what’, IZA

‘who’, and various

nouns

HI/HF/HInt,

PrPr/PoPr/

CircPr

�� Relative clause

Location

NPs

TOERANA ‘place’,

AIZA ‘where’, etc.

HI/HF/HInt,

PrPr/PoPr/

CircPr

�� Locative clause

Time NPs FOTOANA ‘time’

etc.

HI, PrPr/PoPr ²� PrPr/PoPr Temporal

clause

Condition

NPs

OHATRA ‘if’ HI, PrPr/PoPr ²� PrPr/PoPr Conditional

clause

Reason NPs FA ‘because’,

ANTONY ‘reason’

HI, PoPr ²� PrPr/PoPr Reason clause

Instrument

NPs

- ²� PrPr Instrumental

clause

Purpose NPs HO ‘so that’ HI, PoPr ²� PoPr Purposive

clause

Precaution

NPs

“sao” ‘lest’ HI, PoPr ²� PoPr Precautional

clause

Manner NPs FOMBA? ‘manner,’

TOETRA? ‘state’

HI, PrPr/PoPr �� Manner clause

Adjunct

NPs

Concession

NPs

- ²� PoPr Concessive

clause

Page 40: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

222� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

The types and subtypes of grammatical nominalization can be re-classified partially

regardless of the pre-classification into event nominalization, argument nominalization, and

adjunct nominalization.

Event nominalization forms a class by itself. An event NP can be constructed with or

without a head sign. When it is headed, the head sign is FA at the beginning of the NP (HI).

When it is headed with FA, the event NP follows the predicate (PoPr) in the main clause. When

the event NP is headless, it can precede (PrPr) or follow the predicate (PoPr) in the main clause.

Argument nominalization and location nominalization form a class together for they behave

in a similar way. Both argument nominalization and location nominalization require a head sign.

The head sign can be placed at the beginning of the NP (HI), at the end of the NP (HF), or in the

middle of the NP (HInt)46). This sets these types of nominalization apart from other types of

headed grammatical nominalization for which the head sign can be placed only at the beginning

of the NP (HI). And the NP can be placed before the predicate (PrPr), after it (PoPr), or

surround it (CircPr) in the main clause. In the last case the NP is split into two parts and the

predicate is placed in the Wackernagel’s position (second in the clause).

Time nominalization and condition nominalization form a class together for they behave in a

similar way. They can be formed with or without a head sign. If the NP has a head, the head is

placed in the beginning of the NP (HI). And the NP, with or without a head, can come before the

predicate (PrPr) or after it (PoPr) in the main clause.

Purpose nominalization and precaution nominalization (‘lest’-nominalization) form a class

together because they behave in the similar way. They can be effected with or without a head.

The head is a sign for the purpose NP. The head for the precaution NP manifests itself only as

mouthing without accompanying manual expression. If the NP has a head, the head is placed in

the beginning of the NP (HI). And the NP, with or without a head, comes after the predicate

(PoPr) in the main clause.

Reason nominalization can be effected with or without a head sign. When it has a head, the

head sign is placed at the beginning of the NP (HI). When the NP has the head sign, the NP

comes after the predicate (PoPr) in the main clause. When the NP has no head sign, the NP can

come before the predicate (PrPr) or after it (PoPr) in the main clause.

Other subtypes are probably not ready for any generalization because the examples are

limited in number, but I will show the characteristics of the data that I have so far.

Instrument nominalization is effected without a head sign and the NP is placed before the

Page 41: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 223

predicate (PrPr) in the main clause.

Concession nominalization is effected without a head sign and the NP is placed after the

predicate (PoPr) in the main clause.

I do not have true examples of manner nominalization. We still need to look for appropriate

examples in the future.

Conclusion and further remarks

This time I looked at the manually-expressed portion of TTM regarding what is

conventionally called “relativization” and what is called by Professor Shibatani (2010)

“grammatical nominalization.” I expanded Professor Shibatani’s grammatical nominalization by

including adjunct nominalization. As non-manual markers (NMM) have been hard to be isolated

in my data so far, I have not examined the NMM for the grammatical nominalization. But this

aspect of TTM needs to be examined in the future research. As for now, I do not know if

different types and subtypes of nominalization have different NMM.

As for the position of the “head” within the grammatically nominalized NP, I am not ready to

make concluding remarks. Although most of the grammatically nominalized NPs have their

head at the beginning of the NP except for the examples of argument nominalization and location

nominalization, this phrase-initial position can be perhaps a result of influence from spoken and

written Malagasy. When the word order of S, O, and V of TTM is examined, all the possible six

patterns are found unlike for spoken and written Malagasy (Minoura 2008). But when the word

order of just two constituent, i.e. subject and verb(or predicate), is looked at, the SV order is more

unmarked and neutral in TTM whereas the VS order is more unmarked and neutral in spoken

and written Malagasy. Thus TTM does not follow the Malagasy word order in all the aspects,

but TTM can be influenced by spoken and written Malagasy because TTM is quite heavily in

contact with spoken and written Malagasy on daily basis. Therefore any hint of influence from

spoken and written Malagasy needs to be deeply scrutinized if not excluded altogether from the

beginning of the examination of the TTM data. With the relatively free placement of the “head

sign” within argument NPs and location NPs in my data, I am reluctant to make a final verdict as

to whether the NP-initial placement of the head is the “norm” for TTM or rather the NP-final

placement of the head is the norm for TTM. This point needs to be re-examined in the future.

My future agenda include: videotaping of more spontaneous data, examination of NMM

related to grammatical nominalization, and re-evaluation of the subclassification of the

Page 42: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

224� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

grammatical nominalization taking the NMM into consideration.

References Ichida, Yasuhiro 1998

“Nihon Shuwa no meeshikunai no gojun ni tsuite (On the word order withing noun phrases in Japanese Sign Language)”, preprints for the 24th conference of the Japan Association of Sign Linguistics, pp. 50-53

Keenan, Edward L 1985 “Relative clauses”, Timothy Shopen, Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Volume II, Complex

Constructions (Cambridge University Press), pp. 141-170 Minoura, Nobukatsu 2008

“Word order in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)”, Area and Culture Studies,Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Tokyo, pp. 47-69, vol. 77

Shibatani, Masayoshi 2010 “On the typology of relative clauses”, Powerpoint slides for hislecture at Nanzan University on May 5, 201047),

frames 1-109 Tang, Gladys, Prudence Lau, and Jafi Lee 2010 “Strategies for relativization in HKSL”, preprints for the Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research 10

conference at Purdue University, pp. 77-79

Notes

1) The abbreviations used in this paper are: ABS (absolutive), ARL (areal [prefix]), AV (actor voice), CAUS (causative), CircPr (circum-predicate), CL (classifier [construction]), CV (circumstance voice), DEF (definite), DIR (direct [voice]), ERG (ergative), FUT (future), GEN (genitive), HF (head-final), HI (head-initial), HInt (head-internal), HKSL (Hong Kong Sign Language), IMP (imperative), INV (inverse [voice]), IX (index[ing]), NEG (negative), NMM (non-manual marker), NMLZ (nominalizer), NP (noun phrase), OBL (oblique), O (object), OV (object voice), PART (participial), pl (plural), PoPr (post-predicate), PrPr (pre-predicate), PRES (present), PST (past), re (non-manual marker for relative clauses in HKSL), RC (relative clause), RECIP (reciprocal), REDUP (reduplication), S (subject), Srel (relative clause), TTM (Tenin’ny Tanana Malagasy: Malagasy Sign Language), V (verb), VM (valency marker).

2) Many written Malagasy words were then mouthed when Mme Eva later signed. Mouthing means moving the mouth as if one is pronouncing the words orally, but it does not necessarily accompany audible and understandable speech sounds. But I did not make efforts to clearly mark which signs accompanied Malagasy mouthing and which signs did not do so. Of the five lines in the examples, the top two lines are Mme

Eva’s efforts to write down TTM signs using written Malagsy words and their translation. They may not be too relevant to TTM except for some cases where e.g. tense marking which is totally lacking in TTM verbs is “mouthed.”

3) The labels of signs are written in all capitals. 4) The grammatical markings AV (actor voice), PRES (present), and VM (valency marker) in written and spoken

Malagasy has no corresponding elements in TTM, thus they are not written out in the fourth lines (i.e. the gloss of the signs) of the examples.

5) The label to a TTM verb sign is marked (OV) when it takes an encliticized ergative actor marker (Minoura 2008:55-58), which is here labeled GEN (genitive). The ergative enclitics and the genitive enclitics are identical in their positioning to their hosts and in their prosodic features and I consider them identical morphemes for each person marked.

6) I am not trying to distinguish the “external” head of a plausible relative clause and the “head” of the

Page 43: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 225

grammatically nominalized “headless” NPs. The latter “head” is argued by some linguists to be an “internal head,” which argument is refuted by Shibatani (2010). Shibatani (2010) argues that the “internal head” is not an argument in the main clause, but the NP’s argument interpretation is derived by metonymy from the corresponding grammatically nominalized event NP. But with an appropriate term lacking, I will continue to call both actual head signs of relative clauses and misplaced signs which can be called “head (sign)s” by the proponents of internally-headed relative clause head signs.

7) The past tense suggested by the written Malagasy word is not manually expressed in TTM, although it could be possibly said to be expressed in the mouthing, but this is in conflict with the present-time marking of the preceding written word, mifandona.

8) No sign was expressed corresponding to the written Malagasy word “i.” 9) The signs for the intransitive verb or adjective, MADIO ([be] clean) and the transitive verb, MANADIO (clean)

are identical. Unlike written and spoken Malagasy which has the causative prefix amp-, aha-, an-, etc., TTM usually does not make use of any morphological or syntactic means of expressing causative, but sometimes an auxiliary verb MIOVA (change) is used to express causative.

10) The manual expressions of the signs AVELA (OV) and MAMELA (AV) are identical and there is no voice differences corresponding to spoken and written Malagasy in TTM. Therefore I chose the label for the more unmarked AV form MAMELA for the TTM sign.

11) No sign was expressed corresponding to the written Malagasy word “no.” 12) The grammatical markings AV (actor voice), PRES (present), and VM (valency marker) in written and spoken

Malagasy have no corresponding elements in TTM, thus they are not written out in the fourth lines (i.e. the gloss of the sign labels) of the examples.

13) The imperative in TTM can be marked by a NMM, but I have not been able to constantly extract and identify such an imperative NMM yet. Finding it will be my future task, but at this moment I will leave it unmarked in the labeling of TTM examples. Thus I wrote the AV and indicative form MIJERY for the label of the TTM sign here. By the way, in some examples, ATAOVY serves as an imperative auxiliary or particle in TTM as in (11).

14) For the label of the sign, I chose the AV form MIJERY for there is no difference in the manual production of the signs MIJERY (AV) and JEREO (OV.IMP).

15) For the label of the sign, I chose the AV form MIZARA for there is no difference in the manual production of the signs MIZARA (AV) and ZARAO (OV.IMP).

16) The grammatical markings AV (actor voice), PRES (present), and VM (valency marker) in written and spoken Malagasy have no corresponding elements in TTM, thus they are not written out in the fourth lines (i.e. the gloss of the signs) of the examples.

17) As an AV form of a verb cannot take a genitive (ergative) actor marking, I have written the label in the CV form, but apart from the genitive actor enclitic, the manual movement of the AV MANDRAY and the CV ANDRAISANA are identical. TTM does not distinguish between AV and CV forms as well as OV forms. As for voice, TTM has other markings unrelated to spoken/written Malagasy, but that is out of scope of this paper.

18) Probably this form (pahavita � fahavita) is not a correct form in written Malagasy without a proper suffix. 19) The manual expressions of the signs TOHIZO (OV.IMP) and MANOHY (AV) are identical. They may be

different with regard to NMMs, but this is not considered at this moment and I chose the label for the more unmarked AV form MANOHY for the TTM sign.

20) For the lable of the sign, I chose the AV form MANAO instead of its corresponding OV form ATAO because the OV property of the sign (e.g. genitive/ergative actor marking) is absent and the manual expression is identical for both MANAO and ATAO.

21) The manual expressions of the signs TAKIO (OV.IMP) and MITAKY (AV) are identical. They may be different with regard to NMMs, but this is not considered at this moment and I chose the label for the more unmarked AV form MITAKY for the TTM sign.

Page 44: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

226� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

22) The manual expressions of the signs TAKIO (OV.IMP) and MITAKY (AV) are identical. They may be different with regard to NMMs, but this is not considered at this moment and I chose the label for the more unmarked AV form MITAKY for the TTM sign.

23) The manual expressions of the signs ATAO (OV) and MANAO (AV) are identical and there is no voice differences corresponding to spoken and written Malagasy in TTM. Therefore I chose the label for the more unmarked AV form MANAO for the TTM sign.

24) The manual expressions of the signs IRINA (OV) and MANIRY (AV) are identical and there is no voice differences corresponding to spoken and written Malagasy in TTM. Therefore I chose the label for the more unmarked AV form MANIRY for the TTM sign.

25) The manual expressions of the signs HANANANA (OV.FUT) and MANANA (AV) are identical and there is no voice and tense differences corresponding to spoken and written Malagasy in TTM. Therefore I chose the label for the more unmarked AV form MANANA for the TTM sign.

26) The past tense suggested by the written Malagasy word is not realized in the TTM sign. 27) This sign is not marked for OV in TTM, the imperativity may be expressed by a NMM, but this is out of the

scope of this paper and is not dealt with in this paper and thus it is not marked in the gloss for the TTM sign. 28) Causativity is not manually marked and there is no manual distinction between MALAHELO and its causative

counterpart MAMPALAHELO although they can be distinguished in mouthing. 29) The past tense suggested by the written Malagasy word is not manually expressed in TTM, although it could

be possibly said to be expressed in the mouthing. 30) The OV imperative sign TANDREMO is differently manually expressed from its (AV) indicative counterpart

MITANDRINA. If the former is an inflected form of the latter or if they are separate lexical entries are not known as for now.

31) The past tense suggested by the written Malagasy word is not manually expressed in TTM, although it could be possibly said to be expressed in the mouthing.

32) The past tense suggested by the written Malagasy word is not manually expressed in TTM, although it could be possibly said to be expressed in the mouthing.

33) The past tense suggested by the written Malagasy word is not manually expressed in TTM, although it could be possibly said to be expressed in the mouthing.

34) The past tense suggested by the written Malagasy word is not manually expressed in TTM, although it could be possibly said to be expressed in the mouthing.

35) The OV sign (FIDINA) and the AV sign (MIFIDY) are not manually differentiated. Therefore I wrote the unmarked AV form for the label of the TTM sign.

36) The written Malagasy word, vadibadiho is a reduplicated OV imperative form. The reduplication is expressed manually in the TTM sign, but there is no AV/OV distinction in TTM and although the imperative mood may be expressed by a NMM, but this is not of our concern in this paper and therefore I chose the AV form MAMADIKA for the label of the TTM sign and left OV and imperative out from the label.

37) The OV sign (ATAO) and the AV sign (MANAO) are not manually differentiated. Therefore I wrote in the unmarked AV form for the label of the TTM sign.

38) The future tense suggested by the written Malagasy word is not coded in the TTM sign. 39) The OV sign (AHOFA) and the AV sign (MANOFA) are not manually differentiated. Therefore I wrote in the

unmarked AV form for the label of the TTM sign. 40) The future tense suggested by the written Malagasy word is not coded in the TTM sign. 41) The OV sign (ATAO) and the AV sign (MANAO) are not manually differentiated. Therefore I wrote in the

unmarked AV form for the label of the TTM sign. 42) The manual expressions of the signs TANTANO (OV.IMP) and MITANTANA (AV) are identical. They may

be different with regard to NMMs, but this is not considered at this moment and I chose the label for the more unmarked AV form MITANTANA for the TTM sign.

Page 45: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

�������( 81)¤2010-� � � � � � � � � � � � 227

43) The imperative sign TANDREMO is differently manually expressed from its (AV) indicative counterpart MITANDRINA. If the former is an inflected form of the latter or if they are separate lexical entries are not known as for now.

44) The manual expressions of the signs AMPIO (OV.IMP) and MANAMPY (AV) are identical. They may be different with regard to NMMs, but this is not considered at this moment and I chose the label for the more unmarked AV form MANAMPY for the TTM sign.

45) The manual expressions of the signs KARAKARAO (OV.IMP) and MIKARAKARA (AV) are identical. They may be different with regard to NMMs, but this is not considered at this moment and I chose the label for the more unmarked AV form MIKARAKARA for the TTM sign.

46) Professor Shibatani (2010) argues against the treatment of the noun in the middle of the NP as a head, but I will not go into it for now.

47) I could not attend the lecture but the file of Professor Shibatani’s Powerpoint slides were kindly provided to me by Nishida-san of the Center for Linguistics, Nanzan University. My gratitude is due.

Page 46: Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign …repository.tufs.ac.jp/bitstream/10108/62989/5/acs081010...184 Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)

228� � Relativization or Nominalization in Malagasy Sign Language (TTM)^� � �¡

��ZxKfÒ�(TTM)�ëò�����������

� � �¡

� ��Ä��TTM*�����µ�(2010)�a�RS�l���T ß�^~%�<mn%&,

TTM ��µ��a�×�¤_Y-���]�ؤ�X-���*I��ªf�'���"��

aÜ�(ñò�°�,�°�@QÆ]�ªf�'���*��QÆ��%��NPN*��E¤�

�-*�Ü]�H°"���0*�F]��¢�ëò�NP*8�]*�F����¾%&,

� ×��������E������,��E"���0H°� NP *c���F%�NP �

�¢*8��6#��,��E"Ü��0�NP ��¢*8��hi���]²6#���]

²��,

� Ø���]�ö����¬�E±*jW�g�,��E�E�Ä�>M*�0���6M*

�0�F��Ä��,H*�F���*jW�¨�g?+Ä��"�NP *c�������

��o¡�F�°�,NP ���¢*8��hi���0²�6#���0²��,����

�¢*8��(i�¤Wackernagel�F-�FÓ�NP_>"iQ���]²��,

� ¬���]������¬�E±*jW�g�,��E���Ä���©�°��0���

NP*c���F��,NP����E*�Ü����¯��¢*8��hi���0²�6#

���0²��,

� èl���]Óèl����¬�E±*jW�g�,��E���Ä�èl���*�0�

Ò�Öt*��Ò���Ä���Óèl���*�0�Ò�Öt���¯��¤�òÄ)©�

°�,��E"���0�NP*c���F��,NP����E*�Ü����¯��¢*8

��6#��,

� ýq�������E���Ä���E"���0�NP *c��F�°�,��E"��

�0�NP��¢*8��6#��,��E"Ü��0�NP��¢*Ö��hi����6#

��,

� I�Êh����!N����Ý����"c�°&,

� �6*ï³��_/7�*Öîs��_L��]]�H°�a�������Ü¢Ò�¶n

(NMM)�«����]Ä��,������E"NP*c���F���]]�����F�

��]*zÌ�"a� TTM �]��ܶg*���¾���]�NMM ]*�DÄS���

�*��QÆ*<ïK���]gz"�6*ï³Ä��,