1
Towards a typology of Zeros, three types of ZERO in Teop
Ulrike Mosel, Kiel University, Germany, umosel@gmx.de
ZERO anaphora is found in constructions where a complement is not phonetically represented,
but understood from the context because it shares the same referent with some antecedent
nominal or pronominal form. In addition to this kind of zero anaphor, which may be called
canonical zero anaphor, Teop also shows two kinds of ZERO construction without a direct
nominal or pronominal antecedent. In the first kind of construction, henceforth called associative
zero anaphor, the interpretation of the missing complement is facilitated by the association with a
verb or some other word whose meaning implies the existence of particular persons or things, but
does not refer to them. In the second kind of construction the interpretation of ZERO is solely
facilitated by the situational context and hence called situational ZERO.
The three types of ZERO, which are certainly found in other languages as well, have in common
that the ZERO is found in syntactically independent clauses and that it may be replaced by a
pronoun or a NP. This is not the case in constructions of syntactically controlled subject omission
in complement clauses.
1. Canonical anaphoric ZEROs
In Teop ZERO anaphor is not determined by any grammatical rules of the kind that a nominal or
pronominal antecedent must occur in the immediately preceding clause or that ZERO anaphor is
restricted to subjects or certain clause types. The following example comes from a legend about
two brothers and an evil spirit. While the brothers were fishing, the spirit appears from the water
and demands fish, and when the fish is finished the older brother cuts up the body of the younger
one, until only the head is left over. When he buries the head, a coconut palm grows from it.
The elder brother and the spirit are mentioned by NPs in (1a), but later on both are represented by
ZERO. In (1d) the ZERO is to be interpreted as the brother, in the subsequent clause (1e),
however, as the spirit. The right interpretation is solely facilitated by the context, as we know that
the brother is cutting, while the spirit is eating. There are not any other indications of a change of
the topical subject, but the position of the canonical anaphoric ZERO is grammatically
determined.
2
(1a) San_01R.047 -49
'And his brother cut his leg and threw (it) to the spirit, whose name was Suvin.'
(1b) San_01R.047
Me= ZERO paa
an vakavara
maa
and4 (spirit) TAM eat ADVR- be.finished hither
'And ( the spirit) had finished eating it,'
me= ZERO paa
tavus
and= (spirit) TAM come.out
'and (the spirit) came out again,'
bona
it
habana,
again
(1c) San_01R.047
"Uuu, dee maa
ta
iana!"
Uuu, give hither NSPEC.ART. fish
'"Uuu! Give me some fish!"'
(1d) San_01R.047
Me=
ZERO paa
pee vahabana bona
meha moo- -na
=e
and4= (brother) TAM cut again
OBJ.ART. other leg- 3SG.POSS= 3SG
'And (the brother) cut again another leg'
me=
ZERO
paa
busu
ZERO me
and=
(brother) TAM throw (leg)
too
'and (the brother) threw (the leg), too.'
(1e) San_01R.047
Me=
ZERO paa
an
and=
(spirit) TAM eat
'And (the spirit) ate it again.'
habana bona.
again it
The conjunction me 'and4' is a coordinator of independent clauses. Clause internal coordination is
signified by three other conjunctions.
3
2 Associative anaphoric ZEROs
The following example illustrates associative ZERO anaphor. The crucial lexical items are:
bai 1 n.o., mango tree; bai 2 n.a. mango fruit
vua 1 n.a. 'fruit of s.th.', vua 2 v.i.'bear fruit'
tasu v.dt., 'throw s.th. at s.o./s.th. (with the goal or recipient as the primary and the theme as an
optional secondary object)
The nouns bai 'mango tree' and bai 'mango fruit' are semantically related homonyms which
belong to different noun classes (i.e. n.o. and n.a.), and similarly, vua n.a. 'fruit of s.th.' and vua
v.i., 'bear fruit' are semantically related, but distinct homonymous lexemes. This kind of
homonymy probably contributes to the fact that in Teop zero anaphor constructions may occur
without nominal antecedents as long as the semantics of some noun or verb provides enough
information to correctly associate a predicate with its implied arguments. In the example below,
the woman has been introduced before by an antecedent NP, but the referent mango can only be
inferred from the noun bai 'mango tree' and the verb vua 'bear fruit'.
(2a) RP_Teop_Mat_01.017
O
bai
na
vua
ART. mango.tree TAM bear.fruit
'The mango tree was bearing fruit.'
nana.
3SG.IPFV
(2b) RP_Teop_Mat_01.018
Me= ZERO
paa
taneo tea
tasu
and= (woman) TAM start
COMP throw
'And (she) started to throw (s.th. at the mango),'
ZERO,
(mango)
(2c) RP_Teop_Mat_01.019
ZERO
tasu
vai ZERO), ahiki
ta
bai,
(woman) throw now (mango) not.exist NSPEC.ART
mango
'(she) threw (at the mango), but there was not any mango (that fell down)'
4
3 Situational ZEROs
Teop imperatives as found in (1c), here repeated for convenience as (3), are not marked as
imperatives, but have the same uninflected form as all other verb forms, e.g. tasu 'throw in (2c).
(3)San_01R.047
"Uuu, dee maa
ta
iana!"
Uuu, give hither NSPEC.ART fish [
'"Uuu! Give me some fish!"'
In unmarked, non-contrastive imperatives, the addressee is not signified, but is understood from
the context or the situation. Only if it is stressed that the addressee and nobody else is supposed to
do the action, a second person pronoun is used.
(4a) Iar_02R.148
Eam a
abana dee maa
2PL ART. men
bring hither
'You, the men, bring the fish,'
a
ART
(4b) Iar_02R.149
a
moon te=
am paa
ART. woman PREP= 2PL TAM
'your women bake (them).'
iana,
fish
tao maa.
bake hither
On the basis of (4a) we may asume a ZERO in (3), because it is possible to identify a position for
the missing addressee pronoun:
(5)
"Uuu, ZERO dee maa
Uuu,
(2SG) give hither
'"Uuu! Give me some fish!"'
ta
iana!"
NSPEC.ART.SG fish [
This analysis is also supported by the next example, which, in addition, also shows a similar case
of associative ZERO as (2): A witch says to an old woman that she wants to drink a coconut and
the old woman replies that she should pick one herself:
5
(6)Aro_04R.030
E
subuava sue vai, "Overe
oi
no osi maa am ZERO"
ART
old.woman say now coconut.palm there go pick hither 2PL1 (coconut)
'The old woman said, "The coconut palm (is) there, you go and pick (a coconut) yourself."'
4 Syntactically controlled omission of subjects
Teop has two types of syntactically controlled subject omissions in complement clauses.
Depending on the lexical properties of the superordinate verb, either its subject or its object is the
controller of the subject omission. The first type is found with the verb rake 'want', the second
type with the verb vaasusu 'teach':
Sha_01R.109
Naa na
rake nom
tea
tavus
1SG TAM want 1SG.IPFV COMP come.out
'I want to become a bird.'
potee a
naovana.
be.like ART bird
San_02R.093
Enaa kahi
vaasusu a=
v=
ame=
am
1SG TAM teach 2PL.OBJM= IMM= 2PL.OBJM= 2PL
'I want to teach you'
tea
paku o
taba vai.
COMP
make ART
thing DEM
'to make this thing.'
Since the omission of the subject of the complement clause is obligatory, it is impossible to treat
it like a ZERO and give it a particular position in the clause.
1
The 2PL is the polite form of address for single addressees.
6
4 Conclusion
Teop has three types of ZEROs with different grammatical properties as well as the syntactocally
controlled subject omission in complement clauses, which is not classified as a ZERO in this
typology.
Table 1: Three types of ZEROs in Teop
explicit nominal
antecedent
canonical ZERO
associative ZERO
yes
no
situational ZERO
(imperatives)
syntactically
controlled argument
omission
no
yes in the
immediately
preceding matrix
clause
referent implied by
some other preceding
expression
yes (other nouns and
verbs)
no
clause constituent
(substitutable by
pronoun or NP)
yes
yes
yes (by the
complement taking
predicate)
no
yes
None of the types of ZERO is grammatically restricted, but solely depends on the context and the
speaker's choice.