Factbites
 Where results make sense
About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   PR   |   Contact us  

Topic: Tongic


Related Topics

In the News (Tue 22 Dec 09)

  
  Polynesian languages -- Facts, Info, and Encyclopedia article   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-08)
They are considered to be a part of the Austronesian language group, belonging to the Eastern Malayo-Polynesian branch of that family.
They fall into two groups: (additional info and facts about Tongic) Tongic and (additional info and facts about Nuclear Polynesian) Nuclear Polynesian.
There are two broad subgroups: Tongan and Niuean are considered part of the Tongic division and all others are considered part of the Nuclear Polynesian division.
www.absoluteastronomy.com /encyclopedia/p/po/polynesian_languages.htm   (353 words)

  
 [No title]
One of the shared innovations that define the Tongic subgroup is the merger of *s and *h.
For example, PPn *komo (PEP *omo ‘suck’ Generally, PPn *k is retained in PEP: PPn *kiato (PEP *kiato ‘outrigger boom’ Exercise: State the phonological innovations that define Tongic, Nuclear Polynesian, and Central Eastern Polynesian subgroups.
History of Polynesian Subgrouping 2.1 Standard Model Pawley (1966) proposed Proto Tongic (PTo), Proto Nuclear-Polynesian (PNP), Proto Samoic-Outlier (PSO), and Proto Eastern Polynesian (PEP), based on the shared morphological innovations.
www2.hawaii.edu /~yotsuka/course/345-PNF04.doc   (734 words)

  
 UH Press Journals: Oceanic Linguistics, vol. 35, no. 2 (1996)
Some of the reconstructions are questionable, especially at the Proto-Polynesian level, because of distributions that are limited to Tongic and languages that have clearly or potentially borrowed from Tongic (East Uvean, Anutan, Tikopian, and, to a lesser extent, East Futunan).
Rennellese seems particularly conservative among the Outliers and has a number of agreements with Tongic not known from Nuclear Polynesian--other than languages that have borrowed from Tongic.
At least two explanations are possible for the conservatism of Rennellese: the larger scale of its society in terms of numbers of people and in terms of named roles or relations of importance, and (2) it may include undetected borrowings from Tongic or languages that have borrowed from Tongic.
www.uhpress.hawaii.edu /journals/ol/OL352.html   (972 words)

  
 UH Press Journals: Oceanic Linguistics, vol. 40, no. 1 (2001)
Proto-Polynesian (PPn) is divided into two primary branches: Tongic and Nuclear Polynesian.
Between the two subgroups, only the Tongic languages regularly retain what is traditionally reconstructed as PPn *h, which derives from Proto-Oceanic *s.
However, residues of PPn *h are found in certain words in Nuclear Polynesian languages.
www.uhpress.hawaii.edu /journals/ol/OL401.html   (1264 words)

  
 COOL5 abstracts   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-08)
The goals are to describe questions in Niuean and to place them into a typology of question formation in an attempt to understand why Niuean has the types of questions it has, and not other types.
Second, a number of languages in higher order subgroups of Proto Polynesian are ergative: the two languages of the Tongic subgroup, several of the unclassified languages branching directly off of the Nuclear Polynesian node, and the majority of the languages in the Ellicean subgroup (subgrouping according to Marck 2000).
Data from Tongic and Samoic languages are used for comparison.
rspas.anu.edu.au /linguistics/ANConfs/5COOL-ABSTRACTS.html   (10206 words)

  
 AFLA Abstracts
Thematic prominence (being the topic or focus) of the instrumental NP makes it into a core argument of the verb, which is enabled by the fact that the same preposition can mark instrument as well as non-instrument obliques.
An analysis is presented which accounts for the properties of Niuean questions, but which calls into doubt some claims that have been made regarding universal properties of questions and the left periphery (Baker 1970, Belletti 2001, Boscovic 2000a,b, Cheng 1991, Greenberg 1966, Rizzi 1995, 1999).
It is also known that accusative languages have a passive construction, typically involving the passive morpheme –Cia and the agent marker e, whereas ergative languages apparently lack such a construction (Clark 1976, Chung 1978).
ling.cornell.edu /afla/ABSTRACTS.htm   (14523 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)

Factbites
  About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   Press   |   Contact us  
Copyright © 2005-2007 www.factbites.com Usage implies agreement with terms.