For those who don't like grammar, you might not want to read the rest of this post.
I'm working on attempting to figure out how Gumawana tracks its participants in a story. Participants are both people and things that a speaker has to keep track of while telling a story. What I'm struggling with at the moment is the interesting use of the Gumawana word for "one" which is tayamo [taYAmo]. So far I've discovered that Gumawana does not have a system where they mark nouns as either definite or indefinite. English uses "a" and "the" to mark the majority of nouns as either indefinite or definite. English can leave both off to give the idea of a class of nouns like in the clause "elephants are big". I'm not referring to any particular elephant nor do I have one particular one in mind. I'm just talking about elephants in general.
So without such an overt system, how do Gumawana speakers tell when a noun is definite or indefinite. As I read the stories that have been written by native speakers over the years, I sense that context plays a huge role in determining this. They also mark nouns with possession for example to say "I am going to go fishing for some fish." a Gumawana speaker will say "I fish my fish." By saying "my fish" he is not referring to any particular fish he could point out since he hasn't caught them yet. What he is saying is that the fish are for eating. They accomplish this concept by the use of one of their possessive phrases (they have three!). I am still learning how this all works.
Instead of an overt system of marking definite and indefinite nouns, Gumawana speakers seem to be more interested in the status of the participant. In other words, they mark those participants who are important to the overall story and plot. Those who are minor or trivial are never marked in any way when they are introduced. So in some of the stories I've collected the authors will begin with something like "one boy whose name was Gumasai." What they are saying is "there once was a certain boy whose name was Gumasai." The italicized word translate the word tayamo as it is used here. Again, not all participants are introduced this way, only those who are most important to the story from the author's perspective.
One way they mark a participant as prominent is by means of either the word tayamo "one" when the participant is being introduced. Then they use a suffix on the noun [-ya] to mark those participants who are the center of attention at a particular point in the story once they have been introduced. Only one noun in a clause can be marked with -ya.
This discovery is vital to good translating. So now I must apply it to our translating by looking at each participant in how he/she/it is introduced so that those who are the most important are to be marked with tayamo when they first appear.
The word tayamo is also used with the word for "time". When this phrase is used it seems to mark a break in the story line. It implies that there is a major shift in the story that happened at a particular time. In other words, the events that happened at that time are being marked as prominent.
I still am working to refine my hypothesis. The goal is to be able to predict when it will occur. Not quite there yet. So much to learn still.
I'm working on attempting to figure out how Gumawana tracks its participants in a story. Participants are both people and things that a speaker has to keep track of while telling a story. What I'm struggling with at the moment is the interesting use of the Gumawana word for "one" which is tayamo [taYAmo]. So far I've discovered that Gumawana does not have a system where they mark nouns as either definite or indefinite. English uses "a" and "the" to mark the majority of nouns as either indefinite or definite. English can leave both off to give the idea of a class of nouns like in the clause "elephants are big". I'm not referring to any particular elephant nor do I have one particular one in mind. I'm just talking about elephants in general.
So without such an overt system, how do Gumawana speakers tell when a noun is definite or indefinite. As I read the stories that have been written by native speakers over the years, I sense that context plays a huge role in determining this. They also mark nouns with possession for example to say "I am going to go fishing for some fish." a Gumawana speaker will say "I fish my fish." By saying "my fish" he is not referring to any particular fish he could point out since he hasn't caught them yet. What he is saying is that the fish are for eating. They accomplish this concept by the use of one of their possessive phrases (they have three!). I am still learning how this all works.
Instead of an overt system of marking definite and indefinite nouns, Gumawana speakers seem to be more interested in the status of the participant. In other words, they mark those participants who are important to the overall story and plot. Those who are minor or trivial are never marked in any way when they are introduced. So in some of the stories I've collected the authors will begin with something like "one boy whose name was Gumasai." What they are saying is "there once was a certain boy whose name was Gumasai." The italicized word translate the word tayamo as it is used here. Again, not all participants are introduced this way, only those who are most important to the story from the author's perspective.
One way they mark a participant as prominent is by means of either the word tayamo "one" when the participant is being introduced. Then they use a suffix on the noun [-ya] to mark those participants who are the center of attention at a particular point in the story once they have been introduced. Only one noun in a clause can be marked with -ya.
This discovery is vital to good translating. So now I must apply it to our translating by looking at each participant in how he/she/it is introduced so that those who are the most important are to be marked with tayamo when they first appear.
The word tayamo is also used with the word for "time". When this phrase is used it seems to mark a break in the story line. It implies that there is a major shift in the story that happened at a particular time. In other words, the events that happened at that time are being marked as prominent.
I still am working to refine my hypothesis. The goal is to be able to predict when it will occur. Not quite there yet. So much to learn still.
2 comments:
Dear Clif,
This post was helpful too, especially the part about tayamo 'one' and how this marks a main participant.
Thanks again.
bill_jancewicz@sil.org
Bill,
I wish I could take credit for the analysis of "tayamo". But I can't. Stephen pointed this out to me years ago. I think he knows Gumawana discourse better than I do and he has never been there!
Clif
Post a Comment