# The history of prepositions in Mojeño Trinitario

Françoise ROSE

francoise.rose@cnrs.fr

Dynamique Du Langage (CNRS, Université de Lyon)

Seminario: *Diacronía y adposiciones: origen y evolución*

Universidad de Sonora, November 14, 2019

## 1. Preliminaries

### 1.1. The history of adpositions

* A universal functional category, not necessarily realized by a structural category in individual languages (DeLancey, 2005)

* Origin: frequently grammaticalized from either transitive verbs or relational nouns (Hagège, 2010; Lehmann, 2002)

* Evolution: may develop into case (Lehmann, 2002) or subordinators (Genetti, 1991; Rose, 2013a)

### 1.2. Mojeño Trinitario

* Mojeño (Arawak, lowland Bolivia)

* Vehicular language of the Jesuit missions, 17th and 18th centuries (Marbán, 1702)

* Trinitario, Ignaciano, Javeriano and Loretano dialects (Rose, 2010)

* Old Mojeño: described in Marbán's *Arte*, and illustrated in a catechism (Marbán, 1702)

* Mojeño Trinitario

* Previous descriptions (Gill, 1957)

* Textual database (~ 8h) collected in the field since 2005 https://www.ortolang.fr

* Isolated sentences collected by stimuli (~2h)

* Elicited sentences (4900)

### 1.3. Adpositions in Arawak languages

* No adpositions have been reconstructed for Proto-Arawak, only case suffixes

* "Inalienably possessed nouns often function as adpositions, the adpositional argument being cross-referenced with A/Sa/Possessor prefixes." (Aikhenvald, 1999)

* Danielsen (2012) : the Arawak split

* Adpositions/cases on noun phrases in North Arawak

* Valency-changing in verbs in South Arawak

**This talk:**

**Mojeño Trinitario has one central ‘universal’ preposition**

**Nominal origin of the preposition**

**Development into a subordinator**
## 1.4. Overview of the talk

<table><tr><td>2.</td><td>Language overview</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>3.</td><td>Adpositions in Mojeño Trinitario</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>4.</td><td>The origin of the Mojeño Trinitario preposition e ~ ye'e</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>5.</td><td>The development of the Mojeño Trinitario preposition in a te subordinator</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>6.</td><td>Summary</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>7.</td><td>Take-home message</td><td>20</td></tr></table>

## 2. Language overview

* Agglutinating language with a rich morphology

* Large number of suffix and enclitic slots and fewer prefix slots, especially on verbs (1)

(1) wi=po n-a-k-uch-ku-'-vi=yre.
NEG=PFV 1SG-IRR-CAUS-go_out-CLF-ACT-2SG=FUT
'I will not take you out of it.'T8.040

* Generalized allomorphy

* due to a rich system of morphophonemic rules

* and a pervasive rhythmic syncope process (Rose, 2019b): every weak vowel (except the final one) is targeted by syncope (but only about half of those do syncopate)

(2) /su-jusVti-piçenu-tfo=jore/

<table><tr><td>su</td><td>ju</td><td>sV</td><td>ti</td><td>pi</td><td>çe</td><td>nu</td><td>tfo</td><td>jo</td><td>re</td></tr><tr><td>(.</td><td>x)</td><td>(.</td><td>x)</td><td>(.</td><td>x)</td><td>(.</td><td>x)</td><td>.</td><td>.</td></tr><tr><td>s_</td><td>ju</td><td>s_</td><td>ti</td><td>p_</td><td>çe</td><td>n_</td><td>tfo</td><td>j_</td><td>re</td></tr><tr><td colspan="10">[sjus.tip.çen.'tfoj.re]</td></tr></table>

'She is going to cut (them) at the neck.'

* Parts-of-speech :

* Both nouns and verbs can be used as arguments and predicates without overt marking, but nouns are most often used as arguments, and verbs as predicates.

* Morphological combinatorics as a defining criterion : person markers

Nouns : prefixes for possessors (3) or suffixes for the sole argument of nominal predicates (4)

Transitive verbs (5) : prefixes (for A) and suffixes (for O).

Intransitive verbs (6) : prefixes only (for S).
(3) **n-owsa**
1SG-village
'my village'

(5) **n-echji-ko-'e**
1SG-talk.to-ACT-2PL
'I am talking to you'.

(4) 'jiro-nu=po'
man-1SG=PFV
'I was a man then'.

(6) **n-ute-k=po**
1SG-come-ACT=PFV
'I just came'.

<table><caption>Table 1. Paradigm of person markers (Rose, 2015 for more details on the paradigm)</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Prefixes (Poss, A, Sa, Sp)</th><th>Suffixes (P, argument of nonverbal predicate)</th><th>Pronouns</th><th>Demonstrative formatives</th><th>Articles</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1SG</td><td>n-</td><td>-nu</td><td>nuti</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>2SG</td><td>py- (~ p-)</td><td>-vi</td><td>piti</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>1PL</td><td>vy- (~ v-)</td><td>-(wok)ovi</td><td>viti</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>2PL</td><td>a-</td><td>-'e</td><td>eti</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>3M(SG.H) speaker ♂</td><td>ma- (~ mu-, m-)</td><td>-</td><td>ema</td><td>ma</td><td>ma</td></tr><tr><td>3M(SG.H) speaker ♀</td><td>ñi- (~ ñ-)</td><td>-</td><td>eñi</td><td>ñi</td><td>ñi</td></tr><tr><td>3F(SG.H)</td><td>s-</td><td>-</td><td>esu</td><td>su</td><td>su</td></tr><tr><td>3PL(H)</td><td>na- (~ n-)</td><td>-woko (3PL)</td><td>eno</td><td>no</td><td>no</td></tr><tr><td>3NH(SG/PL)</td><td>ta- (~ t-)</td><td></td><td>eto</td><td>jo (SG)<br>ma (PL)</td><td>to</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>ty- (~ t-) on<br>verbs; -ono (3PL)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

* The basic constituent order is AVO in transitive clauses (7), and VS in intransitive clauses (8). Arguments are optional and not case-marked.

(7) ene takepo [ma t-siso 'chane]A ma-m=po [ma 'chane]o.
and then ART.M 3-black person 3M-take=PFV ART.M person
'And then the black man took the man'. T8.045

(8) ene ty-ute-k=pu=iji [ema ma viya t-ekie-ri-k=ri'i] s.
and 3-come-ACT=PFV=RPT PRO.M ART.M man 3-transform-PLURACT-ACT=IPFV
'Then came the man who transforms people.' T6.003

* Many valency-changing devices, among which 3 applicative markers (9)-(11), and an applicative construction based on classifiers (Rose, 2019a)

* Possible grammaticalization path from cases/adpositions to applicative

* Another grammaticalization path: from oblique classifiers (12) to applicative (13)
(9) **n-wachri-ri-s-no**
1SG-buy-PLURACT-ACT-**APPL**
'su
ART.F
1SG.mother
'I went shopping for my mother.' elicited

(10) **Calixta** **s-iso-'u-cho**
Calixta 3F-weed-**APPL**-ACT
'to
ART.NH
'santi
field
ART.NH
sukri-ono
plantation-PL
'Calixta weeded the field for the plantations.' elicited

(11) **p-jo-ka**
DEM-NH.SG-PROX
kaecha
shovel
1SG-weed-**APPL**
'to
p-jo
DEM-NH.SG
'n-ésane
1SG-field
'With this shovel, I weed my field.' elicited

(12) **t-eja-me-re-ko**
3-sit-**CLF:fabric**-PLURACT-ACT
't-e
3NH-PREP
pjo
DEM
'ni-ye'e
3M-GPN
'estera
mat
'The man is sitting on his mat.' Path_S_51

(13) **a.**
**to**
ART.NH
**kwoyu**
horse
**ty-ow-'o**
3-be-ACT
**t-e**
3**NH-PREP**
**to**
ART.NH
'une
water
'The horse is in the water.' elicited

**b.**
**to**
ART.NH
**kwoyu**
horse
**t(a)-ow-e-ko**
3NH-be-**CLF:liquid**-ACT
**to**
ART.NH
'une
water
'The horse is in the water.' elicited

* Referential noun phrases are always introduced by a determiner (article (13) or demonstrative (11)), while non-referential noun phrases and nominal predicates are not.

* 3 classes of nouns with respect to possession:

* those that require a possessive prefix (a.k.a. inalienable, obligatorily possessed or relational);

* those that may take a possessive prefix (a.k.a. alienable, or optionally possessed);

* those that cannot take a possessive prefix (a.k.a. absolute or non-directly possessible).

* For obligatorily and optionally possessed nouns : Possr-POSSESSEE POSSESSOR (14).

(14) **Noe** **s-apijane** **su** **meme**
Noe 3F-last_name ART.F mother.1SG
'Noe is my mother's last name.' T9.003
### 3. Adpositions in Mojeño Trinitario

* Pervasive, polysemous preposition *e* ~ *ye'e*

* More complex structures with *te* + *N*

* One emergent preposition from a verb

#### 3.1. The universal preposition *e* ~ *ye'e* (synchronic perspective)

* A separate word

* Preceding its object NP

* Taking a person prefix, which agrees with its object

(15) *na-esta-k=ri'i* **t-e** to *chkote.*
3PL-whip-ACT=IPFV **3NH-PREP** ART.NH whip
‘They were whipping him **with** the whip.’ T2.039

(16) *juiti v-yon=ñore v-echjirikwo=yre na-e p-no-kro*
today 1PL-go=FUT 1PL-talk=FUT **3PL-PREP** DEM-H.PL-POT.LOC
‘Today we are going to talk **with** these (the rainbows).’ T24.087

= an inflected preposition, like in Welsch, Irish, Breton (Jaworska, 1999)

<table><caption>Table 2. Paradigm of the inflected preposition</caption><thead><tr><th>Preposition forms</th><th>Analysis</th><th>Agreement category</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>te</strong></td><td><strong>ta-e</strong></td><td>non-human</td></tr><tr><td><strong>nae</strong></td><td><strong>na-e</strong></td><td>human plural</td></tr><tr><td><strong>se</strong></td><td><strong>su-e</strong></td><td>feminine singular</td></tr><tr><td><strong>mue</strong></td><td><strong>ma-e</strong></td><td>masculine singular (male speaker)</td></tr><tr><td><strong>ñe</strong></td><td><strong>ñi-e</strong></td><td>masculine singular (female speaker)</td></tr></tbody></table>

* Specificities of *te* non-human form

* Most frequent form (used with abstract noun phrases and propositional content, see section 5).

* Morphologically complex *ta-e* **3NH-PREP** but obligatory phonological simplification in *te* (*tae*)

* Conveys various meanings (not only spatial ones): in, to, from, with, for,...

(17) *ema t-nara-ko=o'i* **t-e** to *ma-peno.*
PRO.M 3-rest-ACT=IPFV **3NH-PREP** ART.NH 3M-house
‘He was resting **in** his house.’ T6.048
(18) asike vi- uch-ko=po t-e to 'resia
CONJ 1PL-go.out-ACT=PFV 3NH-PREP ART.NH church

vi-utek=po t-e to v-ye'e kavildo.
1PL-come=PFV 3NH-PREP ART.NH 1PL-GPN town_council
'So we got out **from** the church and went **to** our town council.' T24.023

(19) v-yujpan-ko-w=yore s-e p-su-ka veno 'seno.
1PL-ask.a.favor-ACT-MID=FUT 3F-PREP DEM-F-PROX Lady woman
'**We are going to ask a favor to this Lady.**' T23.020

* The form *e* is in complementary distribution with a longer allomorph *ye'e*
  *o* *ye'e* used when the object of the preposition is pronominal
  *o* its ‘object’ is encoded in the person prefix

(20) a- juiti v-yon=ñore v-echjirikwo=yre na-e p-no-kro.
today 1PL-go=FUT 1PL-talk=FUT 3PL-PREP DEM-H.PL-POT.LOC
'Today we are going to talk **with** these (the rainbows).' T24.087

b- juiti sache n-echjirikwo=yre p-ye'e
now day 1SG-talk=FUT 2SG-PREP
'Today I am going to talk **with** you.' T8.003

(21) py-uusamre p-imori-ko t-e i-peno p-ju-ena ora=ri'i
2SG-be.happy 2SG-visit-ACT 3NH-PREP 1PL-house DEM-NH-DIST hour=IPFV
'You are happy to visit **(PREP) our house** at this time.' T28.030

b. p-ju-ena yoti p-imori-k=ri'i v-ye'e, meme.
DEM-NH-DIST night 2SG-visit-ACT=IPFV 1PL-PREP Lady
'This evening, you came to visit **(PREP) us**, Lady.' T28.032

*o* *ye'e* also found with a third person prefix when no NP follows, i.e. in cases of
  anaphoric reference.

(22) ene porfin v-itekpo=po yoti=po v-itekpo=o'i ta-ye'e
and finally 1PL-arrive=PFV night=PFV 1PL-arrive=IPFV 3NH-PREP
[Preceding sentence: The ground travel was long before our arrival to Bermeo.] 'In the
end, we arrived, it was already night time when we arrived **there** (lit. to it).' T38.065
<table><caption>Table 3. Morphosyntactic distribution of the two allomorphs *e ~ ye'e* of the preposition</caption><thead><tr><th>Person</th><th>Prefix</th><th>PREP + NP</th><th>PREP + Ø</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1<sup>st</sup> person singular</td><td>n-</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2<sup>nd</sup> singular</td><td>pi-</td><td>/</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1<sup>st</sup> plural</td><td>vi-</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2<sup>nd</sup> plural</td><td>a-</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3<sup>rd</sup> non-human</td><td>ta-</td><td></td><td>ye'e</td></tr><tr><td>3<sup>rd</sup> human plural</td><td>na-</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3<sup>rd</sup> feminine singular</td><td>s-</td><td>e</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3<sup>rd</sup> masculine singular (male speaker)</td><td>ma-</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3<sup>rd</sup> masculine singular (female speaker)</td><td>ñi-</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

* A third form: the *e* allomorph has a phonetic realization with a final glottal stop

* No conditioning

* Does not fit the regular prosodic word template (no final consonant)

(23) *Ene v-kíj'e-yre ene vi-uumut-yore-poo'i t-e' to comunidade.*
there 1PL-go_to-FUT and 1PL-meet-FUT-CONC.MOT 3NH-PREP ART.NH community
‘There we are going to go and we are going to have meetings in the communities.’
T32.006

* Can be semantically specified by classifiers classifying obliques (Rose, 2019a)

(24) a. *t-junopo=po* **t-e** to *smeno*
3-run=PFV **3NH-PREP** ART.NH woods
‘S/he ran **to/in/from** the woods.’ T11.018

b. *t-jumpo-je-cho* **t-e** to *smeno*
3-run-CLF:interior-ACT **3NH-PREP** ART.NH woods
‘S/he ran **inside** the woods.’ elicited

* Can take TAME clitics

TAME morphology is found on all major parts of speech, when used as predicates, but also (though more rarely) on non-predicative elements (Rose, 2017).

(25) *porke* *ema=ri'i=ni* **t-e'=ripo...** *t-e* to... *t-e* *kalavoso*
*because* 3M=IPFV=PAST **3NH-PREP=PFV** 3NH-PREP ART.NH 3NH-PREP cell
‘Because he is in... in a... in jail.’ T40.152
## 3.2. Locative relational nouns

* Complex prepositional expressions, based on : *te* (DET) 3-N NP

* Intermediary noun is a relational noun

<table><tr><td>-ína'u</td><td>'top of'</td><td>-míro'u</td><td>'front of' &lt; -miro 'face'</td></tr><tr><td>-ju'e</td><td>'stomach, interior'</td><td>-mópeku</td><td>'below'</td></tr><tr><td>-giñoku</td><td>'corner' &lt; -giño 'ear'</td><td>-cheyo</td><td>'lip, edge'</td></tr><tr><td>-mueku</td><td>'behind'</td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

* Construction based on the genitive construction

* Relational noun is not modifiable, often without determiner (nonreferential)

(26) *ty-okchu-ri-k=ri'i*   *p-jo*   *perota*
3-stamp-PLURACT-ACT=IPFV   DEM-NH.SG   ball

<table><tr><td><b><i>t-e</i></b></td><td><b><i>p-jo</i></b></td><td><b><i>ta-míro'u</i></b></td><td><b><i>p-jo</i></b></td><td><b><i>'chope</i></b></td><td><b><i>smeno</i></b></td></tr><tr><td>3NH-PREP</td><td>DEM-NH.SG</td><td>3NH-face</td><td>DEM-NH.SG</td><td>big</td><td>forest</td></tr><tr><td colspan="6">'The man plays with the woman, he kicks the ball in front of the big forest.'</td></tr><tr><td colspan="6">Path_S_32</td></tr></table>

(27) *ene*   *p-ñi*   *pona*   *ty-uch-ko-pri'i*
and   DEM-M   other   3-exit-ACT-CONC.MOT

<table><tr><td><b><i>t-e</i></b></td><td><b><i>ta-mópeku</i></b></td><td><b><i>to</i></b></td><td><b><i>mari</i></b></td></tr><tr><td>3NH-PREP</td><td>3NH-below</td><td>ART.NH</td><td>stone</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4">'He is standing on the round stones, and the other one is going out from under the stone.'</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4">Path_C_53</td></tr></table>

## 3.3. Similarity preposition (section taken from Rose, 2019c)

* *kuti* root with 4 different distributions and functions

* A similarity verb 'to look like, to resemble'

(28) *v-kuti=richu*   *j-ma-ni*   *pak-chicha-no.*
1PL-*be_like*=RESTR   DEM-NH.PL-PROX   dog-EMP-PL
'We are just like these poor dogs.'</td><td>T10.031</td></tr></table>

* A similarity preposition 'like'

(29) *eto*   *ma-nok=po*   *to*   *ta-em'i=i'i*   *ma*   *'chane=ri'i,*
PRO.NH   3M-make=PFV   ART.NH   3NH-shape=PFV   ART.M   human=IPFV

<table><tr><td><b><i>kuti</i></b></td><td><b><i>j-ma-ni</i></b></td><td><b><i>estatua.</i></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><i>like</i></b></td><td>DEM-NH.PL-PROX</td><td>statue</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3">'From this he made the shape of a human being, like these statues.'</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3">T6.043</td></tr></table>
* A subordinator ‘as if’

(30) esu p-su-ka 'seno p-yeno=yore p-echpojri-i=yore
PRO.F DEM-F-PROX woman 2SG-wife=FUT 2SG-take_care=PLURACT=FUT

kuti s-itswo=yre esu p-pórape.
as_if 3F-change=FUT PRO.F 2SG-sibling

'This woman will be your wife, you will take care of her, as if she was
becoming your older sister.' T19.123

* An epistemic marker ‘it seems’

(31) “kuti no-kñ-ojo=o’i ‘chañ-ono t-e p-ju-ena m-peno”
it_seems H.PL-NVIS-EXI=IPFV person-PL 3NH-PREP DEM-NH.SG-DIST 1SG-house
‘ “It seems there is someone in my house”. ’ T18.025

* Diachronic hypothesis

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /><figcaption>Figure 1. Developments of the similarity verb</figcaption></figure>
## 4. The origin of the Mojeño Trinitario preposition *e* ~ *ye'e*

**GENERAL DIACHRONIC HYPOTHESIS:**
**the preposition *e* ~ *ye'e* developed from a noun *ye'e***

**Diachronic hypothesis 1. The allomorph *e* has been reduced from *ye'e*.$$

* Phonological arguments for *ye'e* → *e*

- deletion of final *e*

- deletion of *y*

- deletion of glottal stop

- deletion of /a/ of *ta-ye'e*

○ Rhythmic syncope (Rose, 2019b)

- Reconstructible as a diachronic process (Carvalho & Rose, 2018)

- Targets the initial vowel, but the vowel of the prefix *ta-* is always opaque to syncope (underapplication of syncope)

(32) *ene* *takee'i*
*ene* **ta-ke**=*ri'i*
DEM 3NH-be.so-IPFV
‘it is like that’ T2.025

Reduction of *ta-ye'e* in *te* is independent from the syncope process.

○ Apocope found in natural speech in non-final position within a prosodic phrase.

(33) [en te pjue mesa]
*ene* *t-e* *pV-jo-e*
DEM 3NH-PREP DEM-NH-DIST
‘there on the table’ Loc_L_01

*mesa*
*table*

Apocope could explain deletion of final /e/ in *-ye'e* when an NP follows.

○ Diphthong *ae* [əe] resulting from a+e at morpheme boundaries is optionally reduced as [ɛ] or [e]

(34) [nə̃eno] ~ [nɛno]
*na-eno*
3PL-mother
‘their mother’

(35) [tyanekjore]
*ti-ana-e-ko=jore*
3-cross-CLF:liquid-ACT=FUT
’s/he will cross the water’

If /y/ was deleted or transparent for some hiatus resolution, diphthongization could explain the simplification in /e/.
o Intervocalic glottal stop deletes in synchrony when hiatus resolution applies over the glottal stop (in contexts where it is less stressed)

(36) təere ~ taʔire
taʔi-še
earring-NPSD
‘earring’

This shows that glottal stop is unstable.

o The realization of the preposition with a final glottal stop as in (37) could be a trace of the full *ye’e* form

(37) ene t-yom=pu=iji ñ-e´ ñi Maati.
and 2-go=PFV=RPT 3M-PREP ART.M Martin
‘So she went to (the) Martin.’ T35.05

Not every aspect of the phonetic reduction can be explained, but it seems very likely.

• Morphosyntactic arguments:

o Rare instances of *ye’e* as a preposition before a full NP

(38) t-echjirikwo-m=po eno, eno trinrano-no
3-talk-PL=PFV PRO.3PL PRO.3PL trinitario-PL

ene na... na-ye'e no 'o'i-ono
and HES 3PL-PREP ART.PL rainbow-PL

‘They started to talk, the Trinitario people, and with... with the rainbows.’ T24.104

o Only the *ye’e* allomorph of the preposition is attested in Old Mojeño (Marbán, 1702).

- «prepositions» that follow the noun, like the «ablative» -cu (case suffixes)

- ‘General noun’ -yee used as pronominal pronoun (‘mine’, ‘yours’....) serves to express prepositions (Marbán, 1702: 10-11).

- No mention of a form *te*

(39) Old Mojeño (Marbán, 1702: 5, 9)

a. ti-yapo=pó ta-yee<fnref n="1" /> anumo-cù
3-ascend=PFV 3NH-PREP sky-LOC
‘He ascended into heaven.’ (Sp. Subio a los Cielos.)

b. b-imetourui-qui-a=po ma-yee Sacerdote
1PL-confess-ACT-IRR=PFV 3M-PREP priest
‘We have to confess to the priest.’ (Sp. (hemos de) confessarnos con el Sacerdote)

o The form *ye’e* is used in synchrony in a formally very similar construction 1/2/3-ye’e (NP), a sub-type of the genitive construction (see below)

<footnote n="1">¹ Note that Marban systematically omitted the glottal stop in his transcriptions.</footnote>
Diachronic hypothesis 2: The form *ye'e* was originally a noun.

* Morphology of *e* ~ *ye'e* could be of either verbal or nominal origin:

* Prefixes on *e* ~ *ye'e*
    = possessor on possessed nouns
    = subjects on transitive verbs with a third person object (see Table 1 and Rose (2011))

* TAME clitics: same as on verbs and nouns

(40) *n(a)-omo* *t-e'=rich'o* *na-ji'u*
3PL-carry 3NH-PREP=still 3PL-shoulders
‘They were still carrying it with their shoulders.’ T25.020

(41) *t-iimui-ko-n=rich'o*
3-dance-ACT-PL=still
‘They still dance’.

(42) *kope-ni* *t-e* *to* *chkote-mu'=rich'o*, ...
past.day-PAST 3NH-PREP ART.NH whip-CLF:setting=still
‘In the old days, still in the time of the whip,...’ T2.045

* Syntactic arguments :
  * Prepositional phrase // genitive phrase with inalienable head (43), (44)

(43) a. *s-apijane* *su* *meme*
3F-last.name ART.F mother.1sg
‘the last name of my Mom’ T9.003

b. *s-e* *su* *Pransiska*
3F-PREP ART.F Françoise
‘with Françoise’ elicited

(44) a. *to* *ta-kunara'i* *to* *koje*
ART.NH 3NH-shadow ART.NH moon
‘the reflection of the moon’ T6.017

b. *t-e* *to* *vkugi*
3NH-PREP ART.NH tree
‘in the tree’ T35.070

* Homophonous form *ye'e*, a generic relational noun used in genitive constructions of non-directly possessible nouns.

(45) *to* *moto* **ma-ye'e** *ma* *Peru*
ART.NH motorcycle 3M-GPN ART.M Pedro
‘Pedro's motorcycle’ elicited
In this construction, *ye'e* is a noun :

- It obligatorily takes a prefix agreeing with its possessor.

- It can take a plural suffix. (46)

- It can be preceded by a determiner. (47)(48)

- It can take nominal irrealis -(i)na (the only TAME marker that is distinct for N and V). (47)

- It can be used without an overt noun for the possessee. (48)

- It can be verbalized. (49)

(46) ene mojomo-on=tse=ro tata j-ma-ni p-ye'-ono paku
and mangy-PL=contrast=then Sir DEM-NH.PL-PROX 2SG-GPN-PL dog
'But there are mangy (they have scabies), Sir, your dogs here.' T10.014

(47) Poreso nuti m-woo'o to p-nok-gi-a
therefore 1SG 1SG-want ART.NH 2SG-leave-ACT-IRR

to p-ye'e-na rekuero
ART.NH 2SG-GPN-IRR souvenir

'That's why I want you to leave your souvenir.' T38.012

(48) s-echti-k=ri'i to s-ye'e=yo esu.
3F-cut-ACT=IPFV ART.NH 3F-GPN=FUT 3F
'She hurried to cut hers (her share).' T27.031

(49) ene p-ko-y'e to awariente?
and 2SG-VZ-GPN ART.NH alcohol
'And do you have alcohol?' T30.078

<table><caption>Table 4. Differences between *ye'e* as a preposition and *ye'e* as a GPN</caption><thead><tr><th>ye'e allomorph of PREP</th><th>ye'e GPN</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>never followed by an NP</td><td>generally followed by an NP</td></tr><tr><td>not preceded by a determiner</td><td>preceded by a determiner</td></tr><tr><td>oblique meaning</td><td>no specific meaning</td></tr></tbody></table>

The preposition allomorph *ye'e* plausibly has a nominal origin.

**Diachronic hypothesis 3: The preposition *e* ~ *ye'e* has grammaticalized from a *ye'e* noun.**

* Scenario for grammaticalization: the genitive construction as a source construction

<table><caption>Figure 2. Comparison of prepositional phrase with genitive phrase</caption><thead><tr><th colspan="2">genitive phrase</th><th rowspan="2">→</th><th colspan="2">prepositional phrase</th></tr><tr><th>(DET) 3-ye'e<sub>N</sub></th><th>DET N</th><th>3-e</th><th>DET N</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>possessee</td><td>possessor</td><td></td><td>PREP</td><td>O of PREP</td></tr></tbody></table>

The preposition is a possible reflex of an obligatorily prefixed noun in a genitive construction.
NB: There was no articles in Old Mojeño (Rose, 2013b).

* Decategorialization (Heine & Kuteva, 2002): preposition has lost most nominal morphology

* except the person prefix (inflected preposition)

* and TAME (rare)

* Semantic bleaching ?

* Semantics of the original noun ?

* Very generic

* Olza (Mojeño Ignaciano, Olza 2002: 858): a general noun "propriety of, object of, thing".

* Cognate forms in other Arawak lggs (for example *le'jé* relational noun in Yukuna (Lemus Serrano, 2015); *-ye* locative postposition in Baure also incorporated in the verb (Danielsen, 2007))

* Rather seems to have gained some meaning

* ‘Oblique’ meaning

* Underspecified

* Interpreted depending on lexical verb and context

* Phonetic reduction

* Could be explained by frequency (context 2 more frequent)

* *ye'e* is a non-final position within a prosodic phrase (Context 2): *apocope*

* Influence of Spanish *de* ?

<table><caption>Figure 3. Hypothesis of reduction of ye'e into e</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Stage 1</th><th>Stage 2</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Context 1</td><td>1/2/3-ye'e</td><td>1/2/3-ye'e</td></tr><tr><td>Context 2</td><td>3-ye'e NP</td><td>3-e NP</td></tr></tbody></table>
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>Figure 4. Schema of possible grammaticalization from noun to preposition</figcaption></figure>

* Same scenario accounts for the current use of locative relational nouns (see Section 3.2)
  o *te* + relational noun + NP → complex preposition + N

(50) **t-e** **ta-ju'e** **p-jo** **peti**
3NH-PREP 3NH-interior DEM-NH.SG house
‘Within the house.’ [Answer to the question : Where is the dog ?] Loc_C_71

o Some of these nouns can be incorporated in the verb (could start of new cycle where prepositions turn into valency-changing derivation)

(51) **n-sio-mopeku-‘o** **t-e** **to** **mesa**
2SG-enter-below-ACT 3NH-PREP ART.NH table
‘I went below the table.’ elicited
5. The development of the Mojeño Trinitario preposition in a *te* subordinator

The preposition *e* introduces verbs

* In structures on a continuum from very prototypical noun phrases to subordinate clauses

* Only the form *te* of the preposition is selected as a subordinator

* Non-human is used for abstract elements (therefore propositional content)

* *te* is the allomorph used when the preposition is followed by a complement

* Typologically common that the same form is used as a adposition and a subordinator

* 5 types identified in Rose (2006) along a continuum between prototypical subordination (with a finite clause) (52) and prototypical adpositional phrases (with the dependent clause having features typical of NPs) (53).

(52) *French West Indies Creole (Hazaël-Massieux, 2004)*

a. **dépi** bonmatin-la-sa
**since** morning-DEF-DEM
‘Since this morning,...’

b. i ka palé-moin dépi moin ka palé-li.
3 IPFV speak-1SG since 1SG IPFV speak-3
‘He speaks to me since I speak to him.’

Polyfunctionality: the element introduced by the adposition can be clearly identified as either an NP or a dependent clause.

(53) *Lezgi (Haspelmath, 1993 ex 539, 1080)*

a. Xatimat [k'wal **patal**] qhsan dis ehlitir.
Xatimat house **for** good woman COP:PST
‘Xatimat was a good woman for the house.’

b. Ada-z [Ali amuq'-un **patal**] wuc iji-da-t'a c i-zwa-c-ir.
he-DAT Ali stay-MSD **for** what do-FUT-CND know-IPFV-NEG-PST
‘He didn’t know what to do in order for Ali to stay.’

An adposition introducing a noun phrase in both cases, only the part of speech of the lexical root of the head differs.

* Intermediate cases:

-Adposition + non-finite clauses

-Adposition + finite clauses marked by a dependency marker (on the verb, or at clause boundary)

- Adposition + finite clauses with a “translatif substantivisant” (Lemaréchal, 1994), or
“nominal marker”

= a marker necessary for either a nominal element or a clause to be used as an argument, or as an object of adposition
(54) Tahitian (Vernaudon, cp; see analysis in Vernaudon & Rigo, 2004)

a. Ua fiu roa 'o_na i te i'a.
ACC tired.of very 3SG PREP ART fish
'He is tired of fish'

b. Ua fiu roa 'o_na i te 'amu i te i'a.
ACC tired.of very 3SG PREP ART eat PREP ART fish
'He is tired of eating fish'

A unique function as adposition : the « translative » turns clauses into nominal elements.

* Mojeño Trinitario : very frequent use of *te* for complement clauses and different semantic types of adverbial subordination (see the variety of meanings of examples (55) to (60))

* 4 different constructions:

* Typical subordinate clauses (finite verb form, no determiner)

(55) **te** **p-itekp-a=po** **p-iimui-gi-a**
SUB 2SG-arrive-IRR=PFV 2SG-dance-IRR
**'When** you arrive, you will have to dance.' T8.041

* Typical noun phrases: verbs nominalized with determiner and nominalizer

(56) **t-itekpo-m=po** **t-e** **to** **na-kasae-s-rare**
3-arrive-PL=PFV 3NH-PREP ART.NH 3PL-hunt-ACT-HAB.OBL.NZ
**'They arrived where** they always hunt.' T19.004

* Less typical noun phrases: verbs nominalized with a nominalizer only (no determiner)

(57) **t-e** **ñi-pui-s-ra=rine=jich=eji**
3NH-PREP 3M-walk-ACT-EV.NZ=RESTR=INTENS=RPT

eñi t-yono t-e to ewire=gne
PRO.3M 3-go 3NH-PREP ART.NH far.away=INTENS

'Walking so much (**because** he walked so much), he went very far away.' T19.59

* "Substantivized clauses": clauses nominalized with a determiner only (finite verb form). The determiner serves as a nominal marker for the whole clause

(58) **ene** **n-naekch-i'-wo=o'i** **t-e** **to** **n-ipruj-ri-k=po**
there 1SG-start-APPL-MID=IPFV 3NH-PREP ART.NH 1SG-cure-PLURAC-ACT=PFV
**'There I started to** cure (people).' T12.017

(59) **t-e** **to** **p-a-wro'o** **to** **p-etavi-gi-a-nu**
3NH-PREP ART.NH 2SG-IRR-want ART.NH 2SG-pass-ACT-IRR=1SG

juiti p-iimui-k=yore
now 2SG-dance-ACT=FUT

**'If** you want to pass me, you have to dance now.' T19.057
(60) ta-puch=pu=iji
3NH-get.close=PFV=RPT t-e
3NH-PREP to
ART.NH mraka=po
strong=PFV

t-ek'o=o'i
3-be.hungry=IPFV to
ART.NH 'iyo
monkey
'He got closer, **because** the monkey was really hungry.' T6.054

## How does the finite type of dependent clause emerge ?

* (Re)Finitization: acquisition of morphosyntactic finiteness features by a dependent construction (Givón, 1994; Rose, 2016).

* o Gradual finitization

Heine (2009): diachronic scenario of clause expansion = reinterpretation of a nominal participant as a propositional participant + invasion of the nominal structure by clausal syntax

<table><caption>Table 5. Clause expansion (Heine, 2009)</caption><tr><td>Stage 1 – The extended noun</td><td>The complement is filled by a non-finite clause, with the internal structure of a noun phrase.</td></tr><tr><td>Stage 2 – Mixed morphosyntax</td><td>The nominal structure is gradually invaded by a clausal syntax.</td></tr><tr><td>Stage 3 – Clausal syntax with nominal relics</td><td>The complement clause is now a fully-fledged subordinate clause, with relics of nominal morphosyntax.</td></tr><tr><td>Stage 4 – The fully-fledged complement clause</td><td>The complement clause is indistinguishable in its morphosyntax from a finite main clause.</td></tr></table>

see also Givón (2016)'s Scenario 1 (with functional distinction); called "gradual finization" by Rose (2016)

* o Instantaneous finitization

Heine (2009): finite complement clauses can also emerge from clause integration, that is to say a copying of a finite construction in the complement position, without necessarily supposing a previous nominal construction.

see also Harris and Campbell (1995: 312); Givón (2016)'s Scenario 2; called "instantaeous finization" by Rose (2016)

* Mojeño Trinitario illustrates instantaneous finitization (Rose, 2016).

* o No intermediate construction with mixed morphosyntax, leaving no evidence of prior nominalization of these innovative finite dependent clauses

**Diachronic hypothesis : The reanalysis of *te* as a subordinator results from the extension of finiteness into dependent clauses.**
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Figure 5. Schema of possible development from preposition to subordinator</figcaption></figure>

## 6. Summary

* a ‘semantically universal’ preposition in Mojeño Trinitario

* an inflected preposition

* homophonous with a generic possessive noun

* also used introducing verbs

* in a variety of ‘dependent clauses’ types (nominalized or not, with or without a determiner)

* Diachronic hypotheses on the preposition:

* grammaticalized from a relational noun, in the genitive construction

* reanalyzed as a subordinator, through instantaneous finitization of dependent clauses

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Figure 6. Schema of possible origin and development of preposition e</figcaption></figure>
## 7. Take-home message

1. Adpositions can grammaticalize from both nouns and verbs in the same language

2. Adpositions can develop into subordinators, whatever their origin

3. Cycles of “adverbial markers” (case, relational nouns, oblique classifiers) that integrate verbal morphology as valency-changing morphemes, which may lead to need for new adpositions

## Abbreviations

♂ male speaker; ♀ female speaker; ACC accuative; ACT active; APPL applicative; ART article; CAUS causative; CLF classifier; CND conditional; CONJ conjunction; COP copula; DEM demonstrative; CONC.MOT concomitant motion; DAT dative; DIST distal; EMP empathy; EV.NZ event nominalizer; EXI existential; F feminine (singular); FUT future; GPN generic possessive noun; HAB.OBL.NZ habitual oblique nominalizer; HES hesitation marker; INTENS intensifier; IPFV imperfective; IRR irrealis; LOC locative; M masculine (singular); MID middle; MSD masdar; NEG negation; NH non-human; NPSD non-possessed; NVIS non-visual evidence; PFV perfective; PL plural; PLURACT pluractional; PST past; POT.LOC potential location; PREP preposition; PRO pronoun; PROX proximal; RESTR restrictive; RPT reportative; SG singular; SUB subordinator; VZ verbalizer.

## References

Aikhenvald, A. (1999). The Arawak language family. In R. M. W. Dixon & A. Aikhenvald (Eds.), *The Amazonian languages* (pp. 65–106). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Carvalho, F. O. de, & Rose, F. (2018). Comparative reconstruction of Proto-Mojeño and the phonological diversification of Mojeno dialects. *Liames, 18*(1), 7–48.

Danielsen, S. (2007). *Baure: An Arawak language of Bolivia*. Leiden: CNWS.

Danielsen, S. (2012). *Morphological characteristics and the geographical distribution of Arawakan features*. Presented at the International Congress of Americanists, Vienna, Austria.

DeLancey, S. (2005). Adpositions as a non-universal category. In Z. Frajzyngier, A. Hodges, & D. S. Rood (Eds.), *Linguistic Diversity and Language Theories* (pp. 185–202).
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.72.10del

Genetti, C. (1991). From Postposition to Subordinator in Newari. In E. Traugott & B. Heine (Eds.), *Approaches to Grammaticalization* (pp. 227–255). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Gill, W. (1957). *Trinitario Grammar*. San Lorenzo de Mojos: Misión Nuevas Tribus.

Givón, T. (1994). Nominalized Clauses in Ute: The diachronic seesaw of finite structure. In *Segundo Encuentro de Lingüística en el Noroeste, Memorias: Vol. Tomo 1* (pp. 269–310).
Hermosillo: Editorial Unison.

Givón, T. (2016). Nominalization and re-finitization. In C. Chamoreau (Ed.), *Finiteness and Nominalization*. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Hagège, C. (2010). *Adpositions*. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Harris, A., & Campbell, L. (1995). *Historical Syntax in Cross-Linguistic Perspective*.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Haspelmath, M. (1993). *A grammar of Lezgian*. Berlin New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hazaël-Massieux, M.-C. (2004). De la connexion aux Œconnecteurs †, en français et en créole.
*Travaux Du CLAIX, 19*.
Heine, B. (2009). From nominal to clausal morphosyntax. Complexity via expansion. In T. Givón & M. Shibatani (Eds.), *Syntactic Complexity: Diachrony, Acquisition, Neuro-Cognition, Evolution* (pp. 23–51). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins.

Heine, B., & Kuteva, T. (2002). *World lexicon of grammaticalization*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jaworska, E. (1999). Prepositions and Prepositional Phrases. In K. Brown & J. Miller (Eds.), *Concise Encyclopedia of Grammatical Categories* (pp. 304–311). Oxford: Elsevier.

Lehmann, C. (2002). New reflections on grammaticalization. In I. Wischer & G. Diewald (Eds.), *New reflections on grammaticalization*. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.

Lemaréchal, A. (1994). Désignation et dénomination: Superparties du discours et parties du discours. In L. Basset & M. Pérennec (Eds.), *Les classes de mots. Traditions et perspectives* (pp. 146–168). Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon.

Lemus Serrano, M. (2015). *La possession nominale en yucuna, langue arawak de l'Amazonie colombienne* (Mémoire de Master). INALCO.

Marbán, P. (1702). *Arte de la lengua Moxa, con su Vocabulario, y Cathecismo*. Lima: Imprenta Real de Joseph de Contreras.

Rose, F. (2006). Le syncrétisme adpositions/subordonnants. Proposition de typologie syntaxique. *Faits de Langues*, 28(Coordination et subordination : typologie et modélisation), 205–216.

Rose, F. (2010). Dialectes en danger : les derniers locuteurs du mojeño javeriano de Bolivie. In C. Grinevald & M. Bert (Eds.), *Faits de Langues* (Vol. 35–36, "Linguistique de terrain sur langues en danger: locuteurs et linguistes", pp. 255–264). Paris: Ophrys.

Rose, F. (2011). Who is the third person ? Fluid transitivity in Mojeño Trinitario. *International Journal of American Linguistics*, 77(4, special issue on Argument-encoding systems in Bolivian Amazonian languages), 469–494.

Rose, F. (2013a). Finitization. A shift of dependency-coding strategy from Proto-Tupi-Guarani to Emérillon. *Diachronica*, 30(1), 27–60.

Rose, F. (2013b, March). *The emergence of articles in Mojeño*. Presented at the Workshop on Languages with and without articles, Paris.

Rose, F. (2015). Innovative complexity in the pronominal paradigm of Mojeño. A result of contact? In F. Gardani, P. Arkadiev, & N. Amiridze (Eds.), *Borrowed morphology* (pp. 241–267). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Rose, F. (2016). On Finitization. In C. Chamoreau & Z. Estrada Fernández (Eds.), *Finiteness and Nominalization* (pp. 347–372). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Rose, F. (2017). *Nominal TAME marking in Mojeño, a language with ubiquitous TAME marking*. Presented at the WAIL, Santa Barbara.

Rose, F. (2019a). From classifiers to applicatives in Mojeño Trinitario: a new source for applicative markers. *Linguistic Typology*.

Rose, F. (2019b). Rhythmic syncope and opacity in Mojeño Trinitario. *Phonological Data and Analysis*, 1(2), 1–25.

Rose, F. (2019c). Similar but different: the functions of the Mojeño Trinitario root expressing similarity. *Faits de Langues*, 51, 227–245.

Vernaudon, J., & Rigo, B. (2004). De la translation substantivante à la quantification : Vers une caractérisation sémantique de l'article te en tahitien. *Bulletin de La Société de Linguistique de Paris*, XCIX(1), 457–480.