f.
Tt|yfY
i a-rap hnai. ‘ here’ ‘at this place’
g.
TuAsmrsm:
i ka.bhya mra: ‘these poems’
The data in 86 demonstrate that the deictic specifier can be used with a variety of concrete or abstract nouns. The selection and translation of both deictics appear the same in
their English translations. Okell and Allott 2001:261 attribute the difference between the two to a difference in formality, with
T
i being the more formal. They relate the latter form
to a historical process whereby Burmese emulated and translated Pali texts word-for-word. And, where a stylistic form was lacking, one was created or imported for use within a
specific context to serve as that specific Pali grammatical function Okell 1965. Both Okell and U Hoke Sein, in his Burmese-English-Pali Dictionary 1978:1044 note the relative
equivalence of Burmese
T
i to Pali ayam.
While the historical process is undeniable, what is of interest here are the resources Burmese brought to that solution, and how the system adapted, adopted, and accommodated
its own underlying structure, or structuring processes. It is beyond the scope of this study to examine the extent of historical borrowing of structure, but what will be examined is the
systematic nature of the use of deictic particles in regard to nominalization. We will look at the usage in Formal Burmese and at the structure as it is represented in modern Colloquial
Burmese.
Having established the use of
onf
sany for deixis of nominals, and the similarity in
distribution and function of
T
i, the discussion now turns to an examination of the system
to which each of these specifiers belong and the implications for nominalization in Burmese.
4.3.3.2.1.2 Degrees of Deixis
Deixis in Formal Burmese lexically relates to three degrees of distance, one distal and two proximal. The proximal differ in the degree of immediacy. All three are realis declarative
mood. There is also an irrealis deixis which shifts the mood into an interrogative sense see 4.3.3.2.2. The normal sense of the deictic center
is represented by
onf
sany as ‘this here’.
The proximal
T
i is even closer than a general ‘here’; it is more immediate spatially and
temporally.
4.3.3.2.1.3 The Deictic- Possessive- Sentence Proximal Template
The counterpart of realis
onf
sany as a deictic particle is not irrealis
rnf
many, but
T
i
.
These two proximal deictic markers both have allomorphs which occur in sentence-final position. The
onf
sany variant is of the same phonological and orthographic shape,
whereas the allomorph of
T
i
is
e ..This sentence-final marker
3
indicates realis, but with more assertion and emphasis. It is punctiliar, more pointed, more emphatic in temporal
space. If sentence-final
onf
sany were to have a deictic function in that terminal position, it
3
The modern spoken form of both
T
i allomorphs are almost the same as the sentence-final form except for
creaky tone [
i
.].
would be rendered ‘that’s it’, whereas sentence final
e.
would express the idea of ‘so there’, ‘that’s it’, or ‘so here’
Figure 40. Three degrees of realis deixis
Furthermore, it can be observed that the close proximal deictic particle e.
occurs as the possessive postposition in Formal Burmese, and contrasts with the regular proximal
onf
sany possessive reading in the same phrase position. The difference between normal
realis
onf
sany possession and the more marked close proximal e. possession is a more
intense sense of possession, or a “closer” or clearer role of possession being referenced rather than the possibility of possession as relative clause. Examples of deictic
T
i are shown in
86. Examples of clause- and phrase-level use of this mega-morpheme are shown in 87. 87 Example with Final
e.
a.
w amuf \yD: w amuf csdK: ap `
ta yauk pri:
ta yauk hkyui:
se e.
one Clf-person Cp one Clf-person break Cs NomSf
‘.. one by one they tried to break it.’ b.
r jum cif yif tvkyf | av
`
ma. kra
hkang pang
a-lup ra.
le e.
Neg long time
Tm Emp
work De
Att-easy NomSf
‘In no time, he got a job.’ 88 Example of Possessive
e.
a.
xdk ajumif uav: trnf rSm a|_ 0g \zpf yg onf
htui kraung ka-le: e. a-many hma
hrwe wa hprac pa sany
Dm-d cat little
Pos name Top gold
yellow happen
Pl NomSf
‘That kitten’s name is ‘Golden Yellow’.’ b.
tFvdyf wdkh vuf atmuf cH bö
ingalip tui. e.
lak auk hkam
bhawa.
English Pl Pos
hand under Ug
existence
‘An existence of being under the hand of the British’
The use of deixis for proximal purposes provides a sense of temporal and spatial immediacy. As such, it is based on numerous metaphors structuring the meaning of the text
and the experience of the speech act participants, as well as discourse referents and topics as physical objects within mental spaces. Textually deictic reference shifts or adjusts the
attention of the topical frame.
Considering sentence-final
onf
sany, some deictic aspects are retained, although
not focal. The deictic sense of ‘that’ or ‘that-ness’ is accentuated in the declarative statement regarding the entire preceding sentence-as-an-object, as a nominal unit. The preceding
nominal unit is being pointed out deictically, as well as the operation of terminal bounding of the Nominal + Particle expression itself as a completed construction. The ‘that-ness’ of an
object infers its existence as some type of linguistic object. It is that sense of inference and the nominalizing character of particle itself that contributes the nominal character to the unit
as a whole.
This variety of nominalization while derivational to some degree, retains predicational characteristics that lend themselves to the kinds of distinctions made by
Vendler 1967 and Grimshaw 1990 regarding event and result nominalizations. Event nominals are extendable, modifiable with adverbials, due to the fact that the verb is “still
alive” even though the verbal profile is cognitively bounded figure 5 and figure 29. With regard to sentence-final nominalizations using
onf
sany, the verbal sense is highly active
and somewhat analogous to event nominals. The contrasting case is with
t-
a-
nominalization which displays a more hearty boundary profile of the verb, which in turn produces a nominal closer in effect to result nominals. The event or process is more fixed in
those cases. Compare
\rifh onf
mrang. sany high + Nom ‘It’s high.’ [Event] with
t\rifh
a-mrang. Nom + high = ‘height’ or ‘highness’ [Result].
The ability to refer deictically may be a matter completely separate from the profile of a verb, but it would appear that eventive senses are less deictic than those that are more
result-like. While sentence-final
onf
sany exhibits some character of deixis, it is not
prominent.
4.3.3.2.2 Deictic Template – Irrealis
rnf
many
Unlike realis with three degrees of deixis figure 40, irrealis has only one, which is here called proximal figure 41. It appears in constructions as the pre-nominal modifier of a
nominal or a postpositional particle with the function of an interrogative designator. The meaning of
rnf
many in its designator role is close to ‘what’ as an interrogative, or
interrogative force WH- in English. The head of the compound with
rnf
many determines
the sense of the whole, as in 89 a–c.
Figure 41. One degree of irrealis deixis with
rnf
many
89 a.
rnf ol
many su NomIrRl person
‘Who?’ b.
rnf odkh
many sui. NomIrRl Pth
‘How?’ c.
rsm: pGm aom \rdkh
whdk onf \rdkh
rnf um rÑ
mya cwa sau: mrui. tui.
sany mrui.
many ka hmya.
many Q AttNom city Pl NomTopic city Nom
Tm RNg
om \zpf ju onf
sa phrac kra. sany
only be Pl-S NomSf
‘Most towns are name-only towns.’ in name only Example 89c demonstrates another component of meaning for
rnf
many, the sense
of ‘name’. Name within the irrealis mood is not definite, but indefinite and is questionable. The sense of the restrictive negative
rÑ
hmya. together with a further restriction
om
sa
contributes a greater restriction to something already doubtful. It is interesting that English has the same sense of ‘name’, both as something definite and positive ‘name your price’
and in the indefinite and tending toward the pejorative ‘in name only’.
4.3.3.3 Evidential Functions of
onf
sany
Nominalization and deixis function together with notions of evidentiality to specify the relation of the speaker to the information presented in the sentence, i.e., how it came to be
known reported information, hear-say, guessing from facts, observed by speaker and how much validity the speaker feels towards that information, the degree of assertion or force the
speaker intends valid or known versus unknown or probable. The two-termed opposition in sentence-final position
onf
sany and
rnf
many, realis and irrealis respectively,
corresponds to oppositions within the deictic and evidential systems.
System Unrealized
Realized Immediate
rnf
many
onf
sany
T
i: Evidential