Mermaid Construction in Tatar
Chihiro Taguchi
Nara Institute of Science and Technology
taguchi.chihiro.td0@is.naist.jp

162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

1.1. Introduction: Mermaid Construction
Mermaid Construction (MMC):●●

compound-predicate construction
typically consists of a predicate, a noun, and a copula(Superficially:)●

Hanako=ga
ik-u
yotee=da.
Hanako=NOM go-NPST
plan=COP“Hanako plans to go.” (Japanese)# Hanako=ga
yotee=da.
Hanako=NOM plan=COP“Hanako is a plan.”
2162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

1.1. Introduction: Mermaid Construction●Tsunoda (2020b):
ik-u yotee=da is a compound predicate
the sentence is monoclausal
Hanako=ga
ik-u
yotee=da.
Hanako=NOM go-NPST
plan=COP VP“Hanako plans to go.” (Japanese)3
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

1.1. Introduction: Mermaid Construction
Five prototypical properties of MMC (Tsunoda 2020b):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The structure is [Clause] Noun Copula, superficially at least.
The Noun is an independent word (not a clitic) that is a noun.
The subject of the Clause and the Noun are non-coreferential.
The Clause can be used as a sentence by itself.
The Clause is not the subject of the “Noun + Copula”.

* Not the necessary and sufficient conditions

4
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

1.1. Introduction: Tatar language●●●●Turkic > Kipchak > Tatar
SOV, AN, agglutinative
scrambling in colloquial speech
MMC unreported in Tsunoda (2020)

(5)

Belem
däräžä-seknowledge level-POS.3

šaqtïj tübän
NP very lowi-dešul bu klass-nïŋ
COP-PST.3 EMP this class-GEN NP“The level of study in this class was very low.”5
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

2. MMC in Tatar(6) Öj-gäqajt-ïrɣa(isäp|nijät)
house-DAT return-INF (thought|intention)
LT: “[To go home] the intention is.”FT: “(One) plans to go home.”

(Ø).
(COP)

(7) Superficial structure of the Tatar MMC[Infinitival Clause] Noun (Copula)6
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

2.1. Tatar Infinitives
Morphology:-positive:
negative:-(I)rGA / -ArGA-mAsKA

Syntax (semantics):-

independent infinitive (deontic, modal, imperative)
adverbial modifier (modal, aspectual)(adnominal modifier; peripheral usage)(nominal phrase; controversial usage)

7
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

2.1.1. Independent infinitive
Deontic, imperative meaning(8) Tïrïš-ïp
endeavor-CVB“Study hard.”

uqï-rɣa.
study-INF

Speaker’s wish with the past tense copula i-de(10) Öj-gäqajt-ïrɣai-de.
house-DAT return-INF COP-PST.3“(I) would like to go home.”

8
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

2.1.2. Infinitive as a modifier
Adverbial modifier (modal, purposive, aspectual, desiderative, etc.):(11) Dust-ïbïz-nï
aeroport-qa qaršï+al-ïrɣafriend-1PL-ACC airport-DAT pick.up-INF“We went to the airport to pick up our friend.”

bar-dï-q.
go-PST-1PL

Adjective modifier (modal, degree):(12) Kit-ärgä
tiješ.
leave-INF obligatory“(One) must leave.”

9162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

2.1.2. Infinitive as a modifier
Noun modifier
marginal; co-occur with an existential predicate(14) Äjt-ergä
xaq-ïmsay-INF
right-POS.1SG“I have a right to say.”

bar.
exist

(15) Kil-ergä
isäb-embar.
come-INF thought-POS.1SG exist“I have a plan to come.”

10
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

2.2. Contrastive analysis
To what extent do Tatar MMCs conform with the five prototypical MMC properties(Tsunoda 2020b)?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The structure is [Clause] Noun Copula, superficially at least.
The Noun is an independent word (not a clitic) that is a noun.
The subject of the Clause and the Noun are non-coreferential.
The Clause can be used as a sentence by itself.
The Clause is not the subject of the “Noun + Copula”.

11
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

a. [Clause] Noun Copula
ClauseNoun(6) Öj-gä
qajt-ïrɣaisäp / nijät
house-DAT return-INF thought / intention“I am planning to go home.”

Copula(Ø).
(COP).

The Tatar copula in the present tense is usually zero
→ (6) has the structure of [Clause] Noun Copula.
☑ Property a.

12
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

b. The Noun is an independent word
ClauseNoun(6) Öj-gäqajt-ïrɣaisäp / nijät
house-DAT return-INF thought / intention“I am planning to go home.”

Copula(Ø).
(COP).

isäp (“thought, thought”) and nijät (“intention”) are both independent nouns☑ Property b.

13
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

c. The subject and the Noun are not coreferential
No overt subject observed in the Tatar MMC.
However, the intender (actor) can be expressed by the possessive suffix attached tothe Noun.
If we assume a covert PRO as the actor of the infinitive verb in (17), it isnon-coreferential with the noun, because “I” is not “intention” itself.
(17) Öj-gä
qajt-ïrɣa(isäb|nijät)-em
house-DAT return-INF (thought|intention)-POS.1SG“I am planning to go home.”(Ø).
(COP).

☑ Property c.
14
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

d. The Clause can be used as a sentence by itself
Clause(18) Öj-gä
qajt-ïrɣa.
house-DAT return-INF
LT: “To go home.”
FT: “(It is in the cards that one) goes home.”(18) is grammatical with the independent infinitive structure mentioned in §2.1.1.
☑ Property d.

15
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

e. The Clause is not the subject of “Noun + Copula”
Typically the Tatar infinitives do not have a nominal function-cf. verbal noun
INF: qajt-ïrɣareturn-INF“to return, for returning”

VN: qajt-uw
return-VN“returning, the act of returning”→ Not the subject of “Noun + Copula”☑ Property e.

16
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

2.2.2. Grammaticalization and monoclausality
Monoclausality of the Tatar MMCs:
Deleting the infinitive results in a nonsensical sentence(20)# (Isäp|nijät)
Ø(thought|intention) COP
intended: “It is the intention.”
Traits of grammaticalization:
Selective Noun slot does not allow substitution with a synonym(21) *Öj-gä
qajt-ïrɣaplan.
house-DAT return-INF plan
intended: “(One) plans to go home.”
17
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

2.2.2. Grammaticalization and monoclausality
Selective tense:
The Tatar MMCs typically occur only in the present tense.
% Öj-gäqajt-ïrɣaisäp
i-de.
house-DAT return-INF thought
COP-PST.3
intended: “I was planning to go home.”

cf. Japanese MMC’s selectiveness on tense(22) Seezee benkyoosuru
koto=da.
hard study.NPST
thing=COP“Study hard.”(23)* Seezeebenkyoosuru
koto=datta.
hardstudy.NPST
thing=COP.PST
intended: “You should have study hard.”

18
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

2.3. Other nouns that allow the MMCwaqït “time” and röxsät “permission”
can have an actor (subject?) in dative(24) Miŋajoqla-rɣawaqït.
1SG.DATsleep-INF
time“It’s time for me to sleep.”(25) Aŋaker-ergä
3SG.DAT
enter-INF“He/She may come in.”röxsät.
permission

19
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

2.3. Other nouns that allow the MMCwaqït “time” and röxsät “permission”:
different syntactic behavior from that of isäp and nijät
position of the attached enclitics(26) Joqla-rɣawaqït=mï?
sleep-INF
time=Q“Is it time for sleep?”(* Joqla-rɣa=mï waqït?)sleep-INF=Q time(28)Qajt-ïrɣa=mï
isäp?
return-INF=Q
thought“(Are you) planning to come back?”(? Qajt-ïrɣareturn-INF

isäp=me?)thought=Q20
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

3. Flows of grammaticalization
Tsunoda’s (2020b) hypotheses on the origin of the MMC’s grammaticalization
1.
2.
3.
4.

adnominal clauses
noun-predicate sentences whose subject is a complement clausecleft sentences
language contact

New hypotheses of the Tatar MMCs:
1.
2.

extension of infinitival modification
subject inversion

21
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

3.1. Extension of infinitival modification
The Tatar infinitives typically modify verbs as an adverbial→ The infinitives are extended to modify (abstract) nouns
only when there is an existential predicate(31) Öj-gä
qajt-ïrɣa(isäb|nijät)-em
house-DAT return-INF (thought|intention)-POS.1SG“I have a plan to go home.”bar.
exist.

22
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

3.2. Ellipsis of an existential predicate
The existential predicate is dropped:(31) Öj-gäqajt-ïrɣa(isäb|nijät)-em
house-DAT return-INF (thought|intention)-POS.1SG“I have a plan to go home.”bar.
exist.

This is confirmed by the fact that its past-tense counterpart is unacceptable andhas to be realized with the existential predicate:(32) Qajt-ïrɣaisäp(bar i-de| % i-de).
return-INF thought
exist COP-PST.3. | COP-PST.3“(I) was planning to come back.”
23
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

3.3. Formation of a compound predicate
The Tatar MMC Nouns can be interpreted as “quasi-particle” nouns
Comparison with the particle inde “already”:(34) Qajt-tï-ŋ=mï
inde?
return-PST-2SG=Q already“Are you back already?”(28)Qajt-ïrɣa=mï
isäp?
return-INF=Q
thought“(Are you) planning to come back?”(35) *Qajt-tï-ŋ
inde=me?
return-PST-2SG already=Q
intended: “Are you back already?”(? Qajt-ïrɣareturn-INF

isäp=me?)thought=Q

Syntactic similarity
24
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

3.4. Subject Inversion?
Colloquial Tatar allows scrambling(36) Min tatarča
döres
söjlim=me?
1SG in_Tatarcorrectly
speak:PRS.1SG=Q“Am I speaking Tatar correctly?”(37) Tatarča
in_Tatar= (36)dörescorrectly

söjlim=me
speak:PRS.1SG=Q

min?
1SG

25
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

3.4. Subject inversion?
the Tatar MMC nouns might also have undergone the subject inversion* Isäp — öj-gäqajt-ïrɣa.
thought
house-DAT return-INF“The plan is to go home.”(6) isäp
öj-gäqajt-ïrɣathoughthouse-DAT return-INF“I am planning to go home.”isäp.
thought*[Noun [INF COP]] → [[INF COP] Noun]26
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

4. Conclusion
This study has:●reported 4 MMC nouns found in Tatar●

discussed their idiosyncratic properties:○○●

quasi-particle nouns (more grammaticalized):
isäp “thought”, nijät “intention”
nouns (less grammaticalized):waqït “time”, röxsät “permission”

proposed 2 new possibilities of grammaticalization paths based on the finding

27
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021

Thank you for your attention.

28
162nd Conference of the Linguistic Society of Japan, June 26, 2021