ANNA BERGE
It is commonly assumed that the substantive differences between the various Inuit and Yupik languages are found only within their phonology or lexicon, and that syntactic and pragmatic differences are minimal and consequently of minimal importance. In fact, a closer look at the syntax of each of these languages suggests that this assumption needs to be reevaluated. In this paper, I will present evidence from the use of the participial verb mood in the respective languages for claiming that syntactic differences are important. In particular, I will show that the various languages differ in whether or not their participial verb mood can be used as a dependent rather than independent verb mood, in its association with the past tense or perfective aspect, in its use as a connecting mood in discourse or as the preferred mood in focus constructions, and in its use in adverbial clauses.
Special equipment:
Overhead projector
Outcomes and transferability:
This paper will push linguistic research in a new direction, leading to a fuller understanding of the linguistic uniqueness of each language under review (including Greenlandic, Inuktitut, Iñupiaq, Central Alaskan Yup’ik, and Central Siberian Yupik, with reference also to Aleut). In addition, it will raise important questions about issues such as translation and intergroup communication which have yet to be fully explored. For example, since differences in sentence structure between these languages have not been recognized, questions of text translation between one dialect/language and another have not been addressed—yet if these differences are substantial, what is correct in one dialect/language may very well be awkward or unacceptable in another.
Relation to Conference Theme:
This paper is specifically a linguistic paper, and relates directly to the proposed linguistic session "Theoretical and Descriptive Linguistics"; it is also applicable to the sessions on "Narrative and Discourse" or "Special Topics in Language Research".