当報告の内容は、それぞれの著者の著作物です。

Copyrighted materials of the authors.
タイトル：「準動詞に関する通言語学的研究」（2013年度第1回研究会）

Title: Cross-linguistic Research on “Verbals” (The 1st meeting)
日時：2013年5月11日（土曜日）10:30-17:00

Date/Time: 11 May 2013 (Sat.) 10:30-17:00
場所：AA 研マルチメディアセミナー室 (306)Venue: Room 306 (Multimedia Seminar Room), ILCAA
Language: Japanese
1. Yasuhiro YAMAKOSHI (ILCAA Joint Researcher / Sapporo Gakuin University)“Aims and plans of the project”
2. Fuyuki EBATA (ILCAA Joint Researcher / Niigata University)“Sakha (Yakut) verbal inflectional forms and their syntactic function”
Sakha verbal inflectional forms are traditionally divided into three classes:
finite verbs, participles, and converbs. It is very salient in Sakha that this classificationis strongly related to the syntactic functions of these classes. Some participles may
appear as the predicate of a main clause, which is the only case to which the relation
between form and function does not apply. Sakha participles can contain verbal
grammatical categories such as polarity, tense, and person/number; Sakha converbs also
exhibit polarity and person/number. Compared with these inflectional forms, deverbalnouns have fewer verbal properties; specifically, they cannot contain polarity orperson/number, although they can retain the valency of the base verb.
3. Yasuhiro YAMAKOSHI (ILCAA Joint Researcher / Sapporo Gakuin University)“On the function of ‘participles’ in Buryat”
Traditionally, the verbal inflection of the Mongolic languages, including Buryat,
has been classified into three inflectional classes: finite verbs, participles (in otherwords, “verbal nouns”), and converbs. Each class has a particular syntactic function.
Finite verbs appear as predicates of main clauses, participles mainly appear aspredicates of nominal and adjectival clauses, and converbs appear as predicates ofadverbial clauses. However, this classification may be unsuitable. It is because someparticiples also appear as predicates of adverbial clauses. These function seems to be
similar to that of adjectives, which can modify both nouns and verbs. However,participles are different from adjectives. When a participle is used as the predicate of an
adverbial clause, it always appears with some enclitical particles, which do not appear
with adjectives that modify verbs. Therefore, we cannot define participles as inflectional
V→A transposition, as suggested by Haspelmath and Sims (2010).
4. Iku NAGASAKI (ILCAA Joint Researcher / NINJAL)“Verbal inflection in Kolyma Yukaghir: Functions and morphology of participles”
This presentation aims to describe the morphology and functions of verb
inflectional forms in Kolyma Yukaghir. It also discusses the grammatical characteristics
of Kolyma Yukaghir participles and examines the difference between participles anddeverbal derivatives. The main points of this paper are as follows:(1) Verb forms in Kolyma Yukaghir can be divided into three types according totheir syntactic functions: finite forms, participles, and converbs. Although the finiteforms, the converbs, and one of the participles (the JE-participle) aremonofunctional, two of the participles, the ME-participle and the L-participle, aremultifunctional. The ME-participle can be used in adjectival and main clauses, andthe L-Participle can be used in adjectival, nominal, and main clauses.
(2) The distinction between participles and deverbal derivatives cannot always bemade by the preservation of the argument structures.
Indeed, they have clear differences in the possibilities for marking some verbal
categories (person/number of the subject, tense, and evidentiality).
(3) The three participles also vary in the possibilities for marking verbal categories.
The ME-participle is formally similar to finite forms. The L-participle exhibits
similarities to finite forms and nouns. The JE-participle is similar to the converbs,
in that the two forms show few verbal characteristics.
5. Reiko ASO (ILCAA Joint Researcher)“Participles in Hateruma (Yaeyama Ryukyuan) : Functions of Plain Forms andCliticized Forms”
In Hateruma, each plain form of verbs corresponds to each syntactic function,that is, a predicate of the main clause, adnominal clause, or adverbial clause. Therefore,
it seems that each form can be classified as finite, participle, and converb. However, thisis not the case when some clitics attach to a certain participle, called “bare participle” inthis paper. This paper provides a description of verb forms and its functions,distinguishing plain verb forms from verbs with clitics to show that some clitics provide
bare participles with new functions. The author suggests that in Hateruma, the practiceof classifying verbs in terms of correspondence between forms and functions needs
further discussion especially for participles, since the syntactic functions of bareparticiples cannot be determined simply from plain verb forms.