Knowledge base · source

Tamura 2000

Tamura, Suzuko (2000). The Ainu language. ICHEL Linguistic Studies 2. Sanseidō 三省堂, Tokyo.

db.aynu.org/2000-suzuko-tamura-the-ainu-language prior-analysis hokkaido

Chapters citing this source

Examples cited from this source

Sentences of the first edition citing this source

1. The object of description is the language's phonological, morphological, morphosyntactic, and discourse structure as documented across the Hokkaido dialect cluster — principally Saru, Chitose, Shizunai, Tokachi, Horobetsu, Mukawa, and Ishikari — drawing on the full range of prior scholarship from Kindaichi and Chiri through the modern reference grammars of Tamura ; , Refsing , Shibatani , Satō , Bugaeva , and Nakagawa . no page Aims, Scope, and Design Philosophy of This Grammar
2. Tamura's Saru dictionary and grammar monograph remain the central data source for that dialect ; . no page Aims, Scope, and Design Philosophy of This Grammar
3. The English-language grammar made the Saru description accessible to non-Japanese readership, though it was not available to this project for direct consultation. no page The History of Ainu Language Description and Previous Research
4. is an English-language grammar sketch of Saru Ainu, adapted from Tamura's 1988 Japanese encyclopedia article. no page Written Sources: Grammars, Dictionaries, and the Philological Record
5. Among the grammars, is the most significant reported source: its analytic coverage of Saru is cited throughout the secondary literature, but the full text is not held in the project corpus, and its grammatical claims are consistently cross-checked against and . no page Written Sources: Grammars, Dictionaries, and the Philological Record
6. works within the same bipartite framework with slightly different labelling; both follow the scheme of . no page Verbal Subclasses: A Valence-Based Word-Class Taxonomy
7. Wild animals and uncultivated plants are absent — nothing in the world is their owner ; . 88 The Alienable/Inalienable Split and Possessive Classification
8. Whether the triggering condition for affiliative marking is the specificity of the possessor or the grammatical demands of the construction (a person prefix or relative-clause structure) is itself a live debate: the older analysis requires a specific referential possessor , while Nakagawa 2024: 227–233 argues the constraint is structural — the affiliative appears wherever a person prefix or relative-clause configuration demands it, regardless of possessor specificity ‹contested›. no page Adnominal Possession: Double Marking and the Appositive Construction
9. The 4th-person prefix a= carries three uses that converge on kin affiliatives: (i) the unspecified-possessor default described above; (ii) the logophoric narrator first person in oral narrative; and (iii) an honorific use, where the speaker marks an esteemed third-party possessor — a deity (kamuy), a divine ancestor, or a high-status figure — with a= rather than the zero 3rd-person form, treating the referent as too elevated for the ordinary 3rd-person default ; . no page Kinship and Honorific Possession
10. The three surface forms are phonologically predictable from the stem-final segment ; ; . no page The Morphological Causative -re / -e / -te
11. Bugaeva and Kobayashi note that a host may say ipe-yar=an ro 'let's have the guest eat' rather than naming the guest as a direct causee, producing a softer formulation ; . 214 The Permissive/Sociative Causative -yar
12. No source read here offers a constituency proof that decides between them ; ; ; ‹contested›. 227 The Nominalizers -p/-pe and -i/-hi (Participant, Event, Place, Fact)
13. The wider biclausal-versus-monoclausal question — whether [clause] ruwe ne, [clause] hawe ne, and their kin are biclausal (an external formal noun heading the preceding clause, the copula predicating the result: ; ) or are grammaticalizing toward monoclausal complex predicates (; ) — is addressed with its evidence in and . 227 Headless, Internally-Headed, and Noun-Modifying Clause Analyses
14. Tamura, Okuda, and Satō take this position ; . 227 Nominalized Complements and Control/Raising
15. Aspectual resultative / progressive: a periphrastic aspect form semantically close to wa an / kor an, expressing an unspecified or vaguely defined condition ; . 186 siri ne — the Direct-Perception / Situational Evidential
16. When she quotes a different speaker, the original 1st-person of the quoted speaker is replaced by the 4th/indefinite person — the pronoun asinuma for the singular logophoric-like reference, the prefix a= on transitive stems, and the suffix =an on intransitive stems — and the result is semi-direct ; . 75 First-Person Narration, the Logophoric Fourth Person, and Reported Discourse
17. is explicit that the 4th-person-in-quote is not indirect narration. 75 First-Person Narration, the Logophoric Fourth Person, and Reported Discourse
18. Third, the non-Saru dialect behaviour of the quotative system — what role ari/ani plays in the DRD/SDRD/IRD split, and whether the same transitivity constraint holds — has not been described at the same level of detail as the Saru–Chitose baseline in and . no page First-Person Narration, the Logophoric Fourth Person, and Reported Discourse
19. catalogues "special terminology including taboo and prayer words" as a vocabulary class of the language. no page Honorific, Ritual, and Taboo Registers