Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorVander Klok, Jozina-
dc.description.abstractThis dissertation examines a number of syntactic and semantic aspects of the full set of TAM (tense-aspect-modal) markers in the dialect of Paciran Javanese (Western Malayo-Polynesian, Austronesian), spoken in East Java, Indonesia. First, I identify the inventory of TAM markers in Paciran Javanese and determine their grammatical category. Specifically, I show that there is a set of adverbs (koyoke, ketoke, jekene ‘direct.evidential’, watake, bonake ‘indirect.evidential’, mesthine ‘EPIST.should’, kudune ‘ought’, paleng ‘maybe’, mesthi ‘EPIST.must’) as well as a set of auxiliaries (kudu ‘DEONT.must’, lagek ‘PROG’, ape ‘FUT’, wes ‘PERF’, tau ‘EXP.PERF’, oleh ‘allow’, iso ‘can’). Furthermore, I establish that TAM markers individually observe a strict relative order in Paciran Javanese beyond the observation that TAM adverbs > TAM auxiliaries, maintaining the proposal for a universal hierarchy of TAM projections as in Cinque (1999). Investigating the order in Paciran Javanese provides insight in particular into the syntactic position of root modal projections, left open in Cinque (1999): the necessity root modal projection must be separated from the possibility projection by a low aspectual projection. Second, I focus on the syntaxof the set of TAM auxiliaries in Paciran Javanese. I show that three different constructions of (i) VP-topicalization, (ii) subject-auxiliary answers to yes-no questions, and (ii) auxiliary fronting in yes-no questions all partition the set of TAM auxiliaries into the same two groups. As well, I present the unique properties of each of these syntactic constructions in Paciran Javanese. In my analysis of each construction within the Minimalist framework (Chomsky 1995), I propose that an intermediate complementizer-like projection serving as a phase edge above vP mediates the partition of two sets of TAM auxiliaries in all three constructions despite their different properties. Third, I establish the lexical specification of the modal system in Paciran Javanese based on results from a variety of fieldwork methods such as a modal questionnaire that I designed, storyboards (, elicitation and interviews. I find that many modals such as oleh ‘allow’, iso ‘can’, mesthi ‘EPIST.must’ in Paciran Javanese lexically specify for both the modal force (possibility vs. necessity) and the type of modality (e.g. epistemic, based on the available evidence; deontic, based on a body of rules and regulations; etc.). I show that other modals only lexically specify for the modal force, but not for the type of modality: for instance, kudu can only have necessity force, but allows for all root modal interpretations.en_US
dc.publisherMcGill Universityen_US
dc.subjectAustronesian Languagesen_US
dc.subjectWestern Malayo-Polynesian Languagesen_US
dc.subjectPaciran Javanese - Grammaren_US
dc.titleTense, aspect, and modal markers in Paciran Javaneseen_US
Appears in Collections:Dissertations (restricted access)

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
DissJVK_e-submission_dec15_0.pdf4.82 MBAdobe PDFView/Open    Request a copy

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.