Body-part syntax

Christian Lehmann

Professor emeritus of University of Erfurt

www.christianlehmann.eu

Introduction

Purpose

  • compile the set of grammatical constructions conditioned by body-part expressions
  • systematize these constructions on a functional basis
  • illustrate the variation from diverse languages

Focus on syntax.

Complete version:

https://www.christianlehmann.eu/publ/lehmann_body.pdf

The status of body-part grammar

Body parts and their properties manifest themselves in the grammar of every language not because of their function in a system of cognition and communication,
but because of their fundamental role in human life.

Meronymy

The meronymic relation between P and W is susceptible to two interpretations:

  1. It may be interpreted as a possessive relation such that the animate being is the possessor of the body part.
    This relation is asymmetric and typically coded in a possessed nominal with the body-part term as its head.
  2. It may be interpreted as a sympathetic relation such that whatever affects the part necessarily affects the whole, and what affects the whole necessarily affects one of its parts.
    This relation is almost symmetric and typically coded by a relation of syntactic phora* between the animate being and its body part.

* Syntactic phora is endophora inside the sentence and the clause.

Empathy hierarchy

SAPNon-SAP
humannon-human
animateinanimate
individualmass
objectplace
entityproposition

Semantic properties

  • W is generally higher up on the empathy hierarchy than P.
  • Semantic relationality: relation to a possessor of a certain kind is inherent in P.
  • Possessor has control over possessum.
  • Body part is by itself sufficiently individuated in the discourse.

Structural reflections of inalienability

Derelationalization
E1a.n-wi’
TzutujilPOSS.1.SG-head
my head
 b.wii’-aaj
head-DEREL
(the/a) head
Relationalization
E2a.ake-’u
Mekeomouth-POSS.1.SG
my mouth
b.ake-mu
mouth-POSS.2.SG
your mouth
E3a.e-’ungaanga
MekeoREL-POSS.1.SGcanoe
my canoe
b.e-mungaanga
 REL-POSS.2.SGcanoe
your canoe

Structural reflections of inalienability

Possessive classes

E4k-hnyaʔs-aʔ-ke
MohawkA.1.SG-throat-NM-LOCNR
(place of) my throat
E5aw-eri
MohawkU.1.SG-heart
my heart
E6a.inchi'
YucatecPOSS.1.SGmouth
my mouth
 b.*lechi'=o'
DEMmouth=R2
that mouth
E7a.intaamn-el
YucatecPOSS.1.SGliver-REL
my liver
 b.letaamn=o'
DEMliver=R2
that liver

Spatial and instrumental functions

Typical body parts are essentially determined by two kinds of function:

  1. They bear a meronymic relation to their next inclusive whole
    and bear contiguous spatial relations to each other.
  2. They are controlled by their whole and may serve it as an instrument.

Body-part constructions

Basic construction types

  1. Constructions dedicated to the possessive relation:
    1. attribution of the possessive relation to the body part
    2. attribution of the possessive relation to its whole.
  2. Attribution of property to body part.
  3. Constructions involving a body part as participant
    1. whole is possessor
    2. whole is affected
    3. whole is local dependent
    4. whole is actor.

Attribution of possession

Constructions of attribution of possession
   propositional function
possessive relation
attributed to              ╲		 reference predication
possessum possessed nominal
W’s P		 predication of belonging
P belongs to W
 
possessor proprietive nominal
W (provided) with P		 ascription of possession
W has P
E8a.the professor’s beard
b.the beard is the professor’s
E9a.the professor with the beard
a.the professor has a beard

Part is bearer of possessive relation

E10uti'a'lkalak'úulumlek'u'k'um=a'
Yucatec[POSS.3propertyPOSS.1.PLCL.domesticturkey]DEMfeather=R1
this feather belongs to our turkey
E11?inti'a'llepoolhe'l=o'
Yucatec[POSS.1.SGproperty]DEMheadPRSV=R2
that head is mine

Whole is bearer of possessive relation

E12lemáakyaants'oyti'=e'
YucatecDEMperson[EXISTscarLOC]=R3
the man who has a scar
E13yaanuxikintuunichyaanuxikinche'
YucatecEXISTPOSS.3earstoneEXISTPOSS.3eartree
the stones have ears, the trees have ears (i.e. they can hear)
E14hachyaanuxikin
YucatecreallyEXISTPOSS.3ear
he has fine ears

Ascription of property to body part

  1. W's P is the bearer of the ascription
  2. W is the bearer of the ascription
E15a.Linda’s legs are long.
b.Linda has long legs.

Part is bearer of ascription

E16chowak-takumúuk'yooklex-ch'úuppaal=e'
Yucateclong-ADJ.PLPOSS.3strengthfootDEMF-girl=R3
the girl has long legs (lit.: long are the legs of the girl)

Whole is bearer of ascription

E17j'ailescheveuxnoirs
FrenchIhave\1.SGDEF:PLhair\PLblack:PL
I have black hair
E18Sylvieestjoliedesyeux
FrenchSylviaispretty:Fof:DEF.PLeye\PL
Sylvia has pretty eyes (lit.: is pretty of the eyes)

Participant roles of body parts

Hierarchy of semanto-syntactic functions
levelfunction
1actor
2undergoer
3indirectus
4place ~ instrument | possessor
Functions of part and whole
part is
whole is   ╲		undergoerplaceinstrument
possessorsituation involves WPr’s PUsituation happens on WPr’s PLsituation happens by WPr’s PIs
indirectussituation affects PU to WIdsituation extends to WId on PL╳
undergoersituation affects WU, to wit PUsituation affects WU on PL╳
actorWA controls PUWA acts deploying PLWA acts with PIs

Whole is possessor

Whole is possessor of undergoer

(XA) [ PU WPr ]

E19y-a’l-ahutabukal
C.YucatecSBJ.3-say-CMPLSBJ.3tie(SUBJ)POSS.3neck
he said he would hang himself

Whole is possessor of local dependent

(XA) [ PL WPr ]

E20there is pain in my heart
E21she stepped on my foot

Whole is affected

Sympathetic situation

Affectedness of part and whole
part is
whole is  ╲		undergoerplace
indirectussituation affects PU to WIdsituation extends to WId on PL
undergoersituation affects WU, to wit PUsituation affects WU on PL

Whole is indirectus

Whole is indirectus, part is undergoer

(XA) WId PU

E22thumòsdémoiéssutaiḗdē
A.Greeksoul(M):NOM.SGhoweverI:DATyearn:MID.3.SGalready
ēd'állōnhetárōn
andother:GEN.PL.Mcompanion(M):GEN.PL
my mind is already yearning as well as my companions' (Hom. Od. 484f)
E23a.nízōsoi(tā̀s)kheîras
A.Greekwash:PRS.1.SGthou:DAT[ DEF:ACC.PL.Fhand(F):ACC.PL ]
I wash your hands
 b.nizō(tā̀s)kheîrassou
wash:PRS.1.SG[ DEF:ACC.PL.Fhand(F):ACC.PLthou:GEN ]
I wash your hands

Whole is indirectus

Whole is indirectus, part is local dependent

(XA) WId PL

E24mihi'stlanternainmanu
LatinI:DATislantern(F):NOM.SGinhand(F):ABL.SG
I have a lantern in hand (Pl. Am. 406)
E25sese ...Caesariadpedesproiecerunt
LatinRFL.ACCCaesar:DAT.SGatfoot(M):ACC.PLforward:throw:PRF:3.PL
they threw themselves at Caesar’s feet (Caes. BG 1, 31)

Whole is undergoer

Whole and part are undergoers

(XA) WU PU

Double subject construction

E26bidbid-gadyanga-nga-rnbilyurr(ngayu)
Yawuruthrob-INTNS1-be-IPFVheart(ABS)I.ABS
my heart is beating hard

Whole is subject, part is object

E27a.jemesuiscassélajambe
FrenchImeambrokenDEF:F.SGleg(F)
I broke a leg
 b.j'aicassémajambe
Ihave\1.SGbrokenmy:F.SGleg(F)
I broke my (peg) leg

Whole is undergoer

Whole and part are undergoers

Double undergoer with actor

E28an-bamat-bu-mnal
WarrayCL.III-headSBJ.1.SG-hit-PST.PFVman
I hit the man on the head
E29nízōsetā̀skheîras
A.Greekwash:PRS.1.SGthou:ACCDEF:ACC.PL.Fhand(F):ACC.PL
I wash your hands

Whole is undergoer

Whole is undergoer, part is local dependent

(XA) WU PL

E30doleoaboculis
Latinache:1.SGfromeye(M):ABL.PL
I have pain in the eyes (Pl. Cist. 58)
E31auribu'teneolupum
Latinear(F):ABL.PLhold:1.SGwolf(M):ACC.SG
I have a wolf by the ears (Ter. Phorm. 506)

Whole is actor

Whole is actor, part is undergoer

WA PU

E32oculosaperuisti
Latineye(M):ACC.PLopen:PRF:2.SG
you opened your eyes (Cic. Mil. 85, 11)
E33nízomaitā̀skheîras
A.Greekwash:PRS.MID.1.SGDEF:ACC.PL.Fhand(F):ACC.PL
I wash my hands (lit.: I get washed w.r.t. the hands)

Whole is actor

Part is instrument

E34LindaschnipstemitdemFinger.
GermanLindasnappedwithDEF:M.DAT.SGfinger(M)
Linda snapped her finger.

Part is local dependent

E35Gun-bid-benga-garrme-ngdaluk
MayaliCL.IV-hand-ABL1>3-grasp-PST.PFVwoman
I touched the woman with my hand

Part and whole in analogous functions

E36malikikalaka-npakati-rningirntinyuntulu-rlu
WarlpiridogADMON-SBJ.2.SGtread-NPSTtailthou-ERG
you are liable to step on the dog’s tail
E37ngaju0-rna-rlardakamaliki-kiyarnka-jangirnti-ki
WarlpiriI(ABS)PRF-SBJ.1.SG-IO.3handdog-DATseize-PSTtail-DAT
I grabbed the dog by the tail with my hand
E38namakalanga-kurrayuka-mikurdu-kurra
WarlpiriantPRSear-ALLenter-NPSTchild-ALL
the ant is crawling into the child’s ear
E39kurdu-ngkuka-jurdaka-ngkupaka-rningaju
Warlpirichild-ERGPRS-OBJ.1.SGhand-ERGstrike-NPSTI(ABS)
the child is striking me with its hand

Incorporation of body-part term

Whole is undergoer

E40a-bikbik+bakme-ng
MayaliSBJ.1-rib+crack-PST.PFV
I cracked my ribs
E41a.s-oβáa-yos-éy
TupinambáPOSS.3-faceA.1.SG-U.3.INAN-wash
I washed his face
 b.a-s-oβá+éy
A.1.SG-U.3.AN-face+wash
I face-washed him
E42gu-gunnga-mim+baba-ng
MayaliLOC-rightSBJ.1-eye+hurt-NPST
my right eye hurts

Incorporation of body-part term

Whole is actor

P is undergoer

E43hhe’+chi’-nah-ih
YucatecPFVopen+mouth-CMPL-ABS.3
he tattled
E44gat-gubal-nabat+dayny-mi-yi-n
WarrayIRR:SBJ.1.SG-nearly-hand+cut-AUX-RFL-PST
I nearly cut my hand

Incorporation of body-part term

P is instrument

E45a.k=inlom-iklexibpaalyéetelink'ab=a'
YucatecIPFV=SBJ.1.SGprick-INCMPLDEMboywithPOSS.1.SGhand=R1
 b.k=inlom+k’ab-t-iklexibpaal=a’
IPFV=SBJ.1.SGprick+hand-TRR-INCMPLDEMboy=R1
I prick this boy with my hand

Conclusions 1

  1. Body parts are subordinate to the whole that they are parts of. This relation is intrinsic in their concepts, which thereby become relational.
  2. This semantic relationality appears in the grammatical structure of the great majority of languages as a possessive relation which is coded in a possessed nominal.
  3. Typical body parts are vital organs of a human being and controlled by the latter. The nouns designating them are therefore usually in the class of inalienable nouns of those languages which have such a class. Other body parts may be treated as alienable.
  4. The relationality of a body-part term may be taken up in language structure in two opposite ways:
    1. It may be reflected in morphological structure by an obligatory indexing of the whole in a possessive construction.
    2. Since the whole is necessarily co-present in the situation, the relationality of the part may be taken as a sufficient basis to infer the whole.

Conclusions 2

  1. A body part bears a relation of consubstantiality to its whole. This determines its partaking in situations in which the whole is involved:
    1. If a property is attributed to a part, then the whole is characterized by this property of its part. Consequently, the property may be ascribed either to the whole or to the part.
    2. If the whole controls the situation, its part will typically serve as an instrument.
    3. If the part is affected by the situation, the whole is affected, too. This founds a sympathetic relation between them. There are various syntactic strategies of coding the two undergoer roles.
    4. If a component of the situation is located with respect to the part, it is also located with respect to the whole.
  2. The above are default roles of a body part in a situation. As a consequence, the grammatical strategies for coding the relevant functions may be less complex than for other kinds of objects in the same functions.

References

Indications of the sources of the language data and bibliographical references are in the publication:

Lehmann, Christian 2022, ‘Foundations of body-part grammar’. Zariquiey, Roberto & Valenzuela, Pilar (eds.), The grammar of body-part expressions. A view from the Americas. Oxford: Oxford University Press; pp. 14-76.