would rightly be called nominalization, whereas the former process would be the opposite— verbalization or denominalization.
U Pe Maung Tin’s overall observations about Burmese are that it is a highly verb- prominent language and that suppression of the subject and omission of personal pronouns in
connected text result in a reduced role of nominals. This observation misses the critical role of postpositional particles marking sentential arguments and also of the verb itself being so
marked
. Interestingly, his predisposition is to highlight the verb, whereas the perspective of
this study emphasizes the nominal. In constructions with postpositionals U Pe Maung Tin observed of the verb:
It makes the fullest use of suffixes to express not only the tenses but also other distinctive meanings, four or five suffixes being sometimes tacked on to the end.
It makes compounds with other verbs…enlarges its meaning by means of auxiliary or helping verbs…forms adjectives and adverbs…forms verbal nouns and noun-verbs
and verbal noun-verbs…forms some of the most commonly used conjunctions…the Burmese sentence is dominated by the verb and verb-formations. U Pe Maung Tin
1956:200
Given that there are basically two parts of speech as building blocks, and since much of the grammar is generated by compositional construction using the same two types of
building material, it is reasonable to champion the verb as the predominant form for it is present in many nominalizations. The key to the view of Burmese being structured by
nominals is found in the role of the particles.
3.4.8 Okell
Okell 1969, 1994a, 1994b, 1994c, 1994d, a Burmese language lecturer at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, presents one of the most thorough
analyses of Burmese to date, and is one of most productive scholars of Burmese. His earliest work on Colloquial Burmese 1969 distinguished two basic forms, types of “units of
meaning”: words and particles.
7
The first refers to lexical meaning and the second to grammatical meaning. Figure 18 demonstrates the membership of the six form classes within
these two basic divisions.
7
Okells Particles are divided into three classes—Formatives the
t-
a- nominalizing prefix, and an array of
phonological process templates that carry lexicalized meaning, Markers subordinating and coordinating particles, and Postpositions sentence-medial and sentence-final pragmatic particles.
Figure 18. Basic form classes and sub-classes Okell 1969:1
For constructional types, Okell follows an approach similar to Cornyn’s figure 17 divisions of Form, Expression, and Sentence but with a two-part division of Word and
Expression presented in table 9. One difference between Okell’s 1969 reference grammar and his 1994d language
learner’s grammatical outline is that in 1969 his approach was more abstract reducing the various constructions into two basic forms and his categories were more elaborate. Since it
was a full reference grammar, he made many distinctions of pattern variation critical for a comprehensive analysis of Colloquial Burmese. The later work is specifically for language
learning and the grammar outline in the earlier one 1969: 209–246 is intended to facilitate that purpose. While both approaches are valid for their different purposes, the earlier
grammar dealt with the nature of Burmese categories on their own terms and results in something quite different from the standard European language perspective and a different
form of grammatical hierarchy cf. figure 16. Okell’s Word is the unit of the prototypical Noun or Verb, whereas the Expression is the unit of predication. It should be noted that
simple or complex words, with or without a particle, may form pragmatic predications.
Classification Types Examples
Simple word word alone
Compound word word + word + word…
Word
Derived word word + formative
Word word simple, compound, derived with or without
markers andor postpositions, used as a constituent element in a phrase, clause or sentence
Phrase expression subordinate
or coordinate + head co- head
Noun Clause: Independent, Dependent Clause
Verb Clause: Independent, Dependent
Expression
Sentence One Independent Clause optionally with other
Dependent Clauses Table 9. Constructional units of Burmese Okell 1969:2, 169, 170
The types of classifications used in the 1994d grammatical outline are more like the traditional grammatical hierarchy: noun phrase and verb phrases word units with “suffixes”,
clauses subordinate and relative, and sentences. A slot-filler approach is taken with regard to structural patterns, and the role of particles “suffixes” in relation to the appropriate
constructional types are displayed. Okell 1994d:212–213 takes an innovative approach to
the rather complex embedding patterns of natural Burmese by developing the terms “inside the phrase” and “outside the phrase” to refer to the lowest level of immediate constituents in
the former and then, in the latter, to the construction in which the first pattern is a constituent structure. These patterns typically refer to the structured use of particles. “Outside the phrase”
refers also to the sentence-final pragmatic particles “suffixes” in Okell’s system. The example in table 10, adapted from Okell 1994d:212–213 demonstrates this way of handling
some of the recursive embedding structures of the Burmese sentence.
Outside :
Noun phrase 1 suf
fix Verb
Phrase suffix
Inside: Noun phrase 1
Noun phrase 2 Verb phrase
noun
suffi x
noun suffi
x verb
suffi x
noun noun noun
noun verb
noun
usaemfh rdwf aqG vJ
syef
\
ynf vm
wf
av`
kya.nau mit hcwe lai: gya.pan
pyany
-ka. la
-tai - le
I male love relative also Japan country S come
NomSf Sf
“My friend comes from Japan, as well, you know.” Table 10. Representation of Okell’s insideoutside phrase structure
Okell’s presentation of the generalized phrase structure rather than the role a specific constituent plays in the sentence i.e., complement clause, derived noun reflexive
complement is an advance toward generalizations of the type drawn in this study. By naming a construction by its lexical form e.g., noun phrase or verb phrase the role of the particles is
missed. The example in table 10 shows that the particle is the unit structuring the embedding. One solution is to recognize that the lexical form is not the head of the construction, but
rather, the particle. What appeared as a linear stacking up of particles at the end of a noun or verb phrase is as Okell demonstrates a higher level of constituency. By taking a non-linear
view of constituency beyond the immediate phrase, we find a repeated order, or rule of ordering, of the Burmese sentence as a whole. These ordering patterns extend not only to the
sentence, but also beyond and represent a conceptual framework which operates as a default pattern of Burmese grammar.
3.4.9 Wheatley
