It should be noted that the pattern of N + V is that of the clausal predication in Burmese. Significantly, this particular structure of nominal compounding demonstrates what
we find at the clause and sentence level—that both these structures are nominal units. This supports the present thesis that clause and sentence units in Burmese operate similarly to
nominal structures—both conceptually and grammatically.
The matter of headedness also arises in these constructions. Forbes noted that immediate constituency does not necessarily follow juncture patterns. The grammatical head
of the final nominalization sequence in a three-member compound often has close juncture whereas the first two elements, which are semantically more blended and grammatically
immediate constituents, are often marked by open juncture. This is contrary to the iconic principle and another indication that phonology, grammar and semantics are not isomorphic,
that is to say, not related constructionally one-to-one.
3.4.6 Minn Latt
Writing in the 1960s under the structuralist influences of the Prague School, Minn Latt published a series of articles 1959, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1966, one of which dealt specifically
with the parts of speech in Burmese 1959. This is an informative set of articles, especially so since they show a Burman linguist struggling with the issues of categories of speech, with
what a word is, and with a European-biased terminology which he ultimately rejects. The distinction between free and bound forms figures heavily in his categorization. Words are
divided into primary words morphemes which are registered in the lexicon, and word or word proper, which are the grammatical forms. Not surprisingly, he concludes there is no
isomorphism between grammar and lexicon. Each word class has both bound and free members. One aspect of his free forms is that “they may become a sentence all on their own”
1959:323. Thus, the term free form is interpreted quite differently than it is by most Western linguists. Minn Latt’s attempt to “Burmanize” linguistic categories is informative for the
purposes of this study, especially his view that single, independent words could predicate, irrespective of being nouns or verbs. The pragmatic use of a single word as an utterance is a
classificatory criterion. This observation is significant in the claim being made here that a predication of existence can underlie all nominals when used in speech.
Beyond these observations, one needs to append that Minn Latt focused on Colloquial Burmese, that he had a propensity for taxonomic units of ever-finer detail, and that he
concluded with fourteen parts of speech and eight sub-categories. Minn Latt’s conclusions are listed in table 8.
Component Part of Speech
Sub-category
Lexical Words 1
Nouns 2
Pronouns 3
Attributes 4
Numerals 5
Verbs 6
Interjections Grammatical Words
1 Grammatical Prefixes
2 Numeratives
3 Rhyming
Syllables 4
Auxiliary Verbs
5 Verb Affixes
a Ordinary b
Emphatic c
Adjectival d
Adverbial 6
Interjection Affix
7 Postpositions
a Auxiliary
b —Proper
8 Particles
a Modification
b Syntactical
Table 8. Parts of speech in Burmese according to Minn Latt 1959 The distinction between bound and free forms appears to rely heavily on his
classification of lexical versus grammatical forms. This distinction is so striking in Burmese, that one might say “Grammar is in the particles.” They are the logical glue and the
manifestation of cognitive operations. They function like the skeleton of a text to which is attached the flesh of the lexicon.
6
3.4.7 Pe Maung Tin
