Update Grammar.md (#213)

* Update Grammar.md

Various minor changes.

* Additional minor edits

---------

Co-authored-by: Daniel W. Hieber <[email protected]>

pages/Grammar/Grammar.md

@@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
 # Algonquian Word-Structure Basics
 
-(Written for the Nisinoon Project; last updated July 2, 2021) {.title-note}
+(Written for the Nisinoon Project; last updated December 31, 2024) {.title-note}
 
 Monica Macaulay {.author}
 
 ## Introduction {#introduction}
 
 This document provides an overview of word structure in Algonquian languages.
 
-**Caveat:** The view in this document is influenced by my familiarity with some of the Central Algonquian languages (especially Menominee); it may not be quite right for some of the other languages, especially the Plains languages, which are really different. But this should work for most of the languages. I will make updates as I learn more! (Input appreciated!)
+**Caveat:** The view in this document is strongly influenced by my familiarity with some of the Central Algonquian languages (especially Menominee); it may not be quite right for some of the other languages, especially the Plains languages, which are really different. But this should work for most of the languages. I will make updates as I learn more! (Input appreciated!)
 
 ## Contents {#contents}
 
@@ -37,9 +37,9 @@ The classic way to divide up Algonquian lexical categories at the very highest l
 
 {.numbered .list}
 
-Sometimes a few other things are included under the “do inflect” heading, e.g., pronouns, negators, etc. <dfn>Particle</dfn> is usually a vast category, and some authors have subdivided it further, adding, for example, prepositions (see, e.g., Oxford [[2007](#Oxford2007)] for discussion of the category <dfn>particle</dfn> in Innu-Aimun).
+Sometimes a few other things are included under the “do inflect” heading, e.g., pronouns, negators, etc. <dfn>Particle</dfn> is usually a vast category, and some authors subdivide it further, adding, for example, prepositions (see, e.g., Oxford [[2007](#Oxford2007)] for discussion of the category <dfn>particle</dfn> in Innu-Aimun).
 
-Notice that there aren't any adjectives or adverbs (although some authors do use these labels).
+Note that there aren't any adjectives or adverbs (although some authors do use these labels).
 
 ## Derivation vs. Inflection {{> backlink/backlink }} {#derivation-vs-inflection}
 
@@ -49,16 +49,16 @@ The distinction is a little fuzzy around the edges, but basically:
 - <dfn>Inflection</dfn> creates <dfn>words</dfn>; adds information that doesn't really change the meaning of the stem; it just provides information like person (e.g. the subject is first person {{{tln 'I' }}}, number (singular or plural), etc.
 {.bulleted .list}
 
-In Algonquian languages you pretty much always have to have inflection on verbs (except in some cases where we say there's a zero morpheme).
+In Algonquian languages you pretty much always have to have inflection on verbs (except in some cases where we might argue that there's a zero morpheme).
 
 This project is concerned with the derivational morphemes of Algonquian.
 
 ## Components {{> backlink/backlink }} {#components}
 
-The basic derivational morphemes in Algonquian languages are called <dfn>components</dfn>, and Nisinoon is creating a cross-Algonquian dictionary of these components. There are three types, which correspond to where in the stem they appear. The following is from my in-progress Menominee grammar (Macaulay, [in prep](#MacaulayPrep)).
+The basic derivational morphemes in Algonquian languages are called <dfn>components</dfn>, and Nisinoon is a cross-Algonquian dictionary of these components. There are three types, which correspond to where in the stem they appear. These are illustrated in the following template:
 
 <figure class=figure id=fig:components>
-  <figcaption class=caption>Menominee Stem Components</figcaption>
+  <figcaption class=caption>Algonquian Stem Components</figcaption>
   <table>
     <tr>
       <td>Initial</td>
@@ -129,24 +129,24 @@ Components occur in all lexical categories, not just verbs. But the particles te
 
 ## Hyphenation {{> backlink/backlink }} {#hyphenation}
 
-Our standard for hyphens is:
+In Nisinoon, our standard for hyphens is:
 
-- **Initials:** hyphen at right, e.g. {{{inex 'siso-' 'mez'}}}
-- **Medials:** hyphen on both sides, e.g. {{{inex '-askw-' 'mez'}}}
-- **Finals:** hyphen at left, e.g. {{{inex '-ape' 'mez'}}}
+- **Initials:** hyphen at right, e.g. {{{inex 'siso-' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'cut'}}}; Blackfoot
+- **Medials:** hyphen on both sides, e.g. {{{inex '-askw-' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'grass'}}}; Delaware
+- **Finals:** hyphen at left, e.g. {{{inex '-ape' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'sit'}}}; Menominee
 {.bulleted .list}
 
-However, other authors don't necessarily follow this. We enter the data their way but convert it to the standard above in the project orthography.
+However, other authors don't necessarily follow this. In that case we enter the data their way but convert it to the standard above in the project orthography.
 
 ## Animacy {{> backlink/backlink }} {#animacy}
 
 Nouns in Algonquian languages can be animate or inanimate.
 
 - This can correlate with intuitive notions of animacy, i.e. if something is living it should be animate, but if not, it should be inanimate. But this is by no means always the case. It's just like gender in European languages---there, some nouns might be masculine, some might be feminine, but there's not necessarily any correlation with the object and sex. (Tables are feminine in Spanish, but masculine in German, for example. Why?) There's a huge literature on why particular nouns are either animate or inanimate in Algonquian languages; for our purposes we'll just say it can be arbitrary.
 
-- In most of the languages the plural is different depending on animacy---e.g. in Menominee, animate plurals have the suffix {{{inex '‑ak' 'mez'}}} and inanimate plurals have the suffix {{{inex '-an' 'mez'}}} ({{{inex 'āmōw' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'bee' 'mez'}}}, {{{inex 'āmōw**ak**' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'bees'}}}; {{{inex 'mēn' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'blueberry'}}}, {{{inex 'mēn**an**' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'blueberries'}}}).
+- In most of the languages the plural is different depending on animacy---e.g. in Menominee, animate plurals have the suffix {{{inex '‑ak' 'mez'}}} and inanimate plurals have the suffix {{{inex '-an' 'mez'}}} ({{{inex 'āmōw' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'bee'}}}, {{{inex 'āmōw**ak**' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'bees'}}}; {{{inex 'mēn' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'blueberry'}}}, {{{inex 'mēn**an**' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'blueberries'}}}).
 
-- In a few of the languages (and in the hypothetical proto-language) the singular also has different suffixes depending on animacy.
+- In a few of the languages, e.g. Miami-Illinois (and in the hypothetical proto-language), the singular also has different suffixes depending on animacy.
 
 - Verbs agree with subjects or objects in animacy; see next section.
 
@@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ Verbs in Algonquian languages are categorized in two ways:
 - <dfn>Animacy</dfn> (animate or inanimate)
 {.bulleted .list}
 
-The two intersect like this (again, from my in-progress Menominee grammar):
+The two intersect like this:
 
 <div class=fig-item-wrapper>
 
@@ -179,7 +179,7 @@ Table: Verbs and Animacy {.caption}
 
 That is, intransitive verbs are categorized by the animacy of their subjects (and of course they don't have objects), and transitive verbs are categorized by the animacy of their objects. The abbreviations given for each type are used extensively.
 
-This matters because there are different verb paradigms (sets of endings) for each type. And for our purposes, verb finals will create not just verb stems, but verb stems of a particular type (e.g. a <abbr class=gl>ta</abbr> verb).
+This matters because there are different verb paradigms (sets of endings) for each type. And for our purposes, verb finals will create not just verb stems, but verb stems of a particular type (e.g. a <abbr class=gl>ta</abbr> verb stem).
 
 Some of the types have subcategories, which are usually numbered---the <abbr class=gl>ai</abbr> and <abbr class=gl>ti</abbr> verbs have these, so you'll see e.g. <abbr class=gl>ai2</abbr> or <abbr class=gl>ti1</abbr>. In some of the languages you'll see, e.g., <abbr class=gl>ti1a</abbr> and <abbr class=gl>ti1b</abbr>.
 
@@ -209,11 +209,11 @@ Usually, verbs come in pairs---<abbr class=gl>ai</abbr> and <abbr class=gl>ii</a
 
 You can see that they differ, but only a bit. Usually the difference comes in the final, which makes sense, because that's the component that gives a stem its category.
 
-In some cases you find sets of four, where all four verb types are based on a common initial, e.g. Menominee {{{inex 'maehkīhotaew' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'it is painted red'}}} <abbr class=gl>ii</abbr>, {{{inex 'maehkīhosow' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'it (animate) is painted red'}}} (<abbr class=gl>ai</abbr>), {{{inex 'maehkīhonaew' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 's/he paints him, her, it (animate) red'}}} <abbr class=gl>ta</abbr>, {{{inex 'maehkīhotaw' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 's/he paints it red'}}} <abbr class=gl>ti</abbr>.
+In some cases you find sets of four, where all four verb types are based on a common initial, e.g. Menominee {{{inex 'maehkīhotaew' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'it (inanimate) is painted red'}}} <abbr class=gl>ii</abbr>, {{{inex 'maehkīhosow' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'it (animate) is painted red'}}} (<abbr class=gl>ai</abbr>), {{{inex 'maehkīhonaew' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 's/he paints him, her, it (animate) red'}}} <abbr class=gl>ta</abbr>, and {{{inex 'maehkīhotaw' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 's/he paints it red'}}} <abbr class=gl>ti</abbr>.
 
 ## Primary vs. Secondary Derivation {{> backlink/backlink }} {#primary-vs-secondary-derivation}
 
-What was described in the [Components](#components) section is what is known as <dfn>primary derivation</dfn>, where an initial, an optional medial, and a final form a stem. But you can take a stem created this way and add another final to it to create a larger stem---this is called <dfn>secondary derivation</dfn>. (Authors use different terms for what I’m calling the "stem" here; some call it an "initial" or a "derived initial".) These are illustrated below (again, from my Menominee grammar [Macaulay, [in prep](#MacaulayPrep)]):
+What was described in the [Components](#components) section is what is known as <dfn>primary derivation</dfn>, where an initial, an optional medial, and a final form a stem. But you can take a stem created this way and add another final to it to create a larger stem---this is called <dfn>secondary derivation</dfn>. (Authors use different terms for what I’m calling the "stem" here; some call it an "initial" or a "derived initial".) These are illustrated below (these templates come from my in-progress Menominee grammar [Macaulay, [in prep](#MacaulayPrep)]):
 
 <figure class=figure id=fig:primary-derivation>
   <figcaption class=caption>Primary Derivation</figcaption>
@@ -293,7 +293,7 @@ Following are some examples from Menominee:
 
 </ol>
 
-These examples represent the standard kind of secondary derivation, where a final is added to a stem. Very rarely, you’ll find someone who allows secondary derivation to add a medial as well as a final (e.g. Drapeau [1980](#Drapeau1980): 317).
+These examples represent the standard kind of secondary derivation, where a final is added to a stem. Very rarely, you’ll find an analysis in which secondary derivation can be added a medial as well as a final (e.g. Drapeau [1980](#Drapeau1980): 317).
 
 ## Formatives {{> backlink/backlink }} {#formatives}
 
@@ -320,7 +320,7 @@ The example below comes from a paper I coauthored on this topic (Macaulay & Salm
   </div>
 </figure>
 
-Examples of formatives (all from Menominee):
+Examples of formatives (all from Bloomfield's analysis of Menominee):
 
 - ### Postradical extensions
 
@@ -346,6 +346,8 @@ For authors who divide finals into two parts, a concrete part and an abstract pa
 
 The problem we have with the notion of formative has to do with the definition of <dfn>morpheme</dfn>. A <dfn>morpheme</dfn> is supposed to be the smallest unit of sound and meaning or function. But if components are morphemes, then what are the formatives? Morphemes shouldn't be made up of smaller parts, especially meaningful parts (like with the premedials). But if the formatives are the morphemes, then what status does the component have? If it's not a morpheme, what is it?
 
+Following (Macaulay & Salmons [2017](#MacaulaySalmons2017)), we treat cases in which a component has multiple forms (e.g. one with, one without an accretion) as allomorphs of the same morpheme.
+
 ## Deverbal Formations {{> backlink/backlink }} {#deverbal-formations}
 
 <dfn>Deverbal</dfn> in the sense it is used here means "formed from a word" (<em>not</em> formed from a verb).
@@ -354,7 +356,7 @@ The traditional Algonquianists also see derivation happening to create morphemes
 
 For example, Bloomfield believed that a number of finals were derived from stems or words ("deverbal finals"). He cites the word {{{inex 'mahka͞esen' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'shoe, moccasin'}}} and notes that in a word like {{{inex 'maeqteku**ahkesen**' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'wooden shoe'}}} we find a final of the form {{{inex '‑ahkaesen' 'mez'}}} {{{tln 'shoe'}}}. For him, the fact that they're similar means the latter is derived from the former---apparently synchronically, although he's (frustratingly) never specific.
 
-Although we believe that this kind of relationship is purely historical, when an author says that something is deverbal, we make a note of it, and note the source, if they give it.
+Although we believe that this kind of relationship is purely historical, when an author says that something is deverbal, we make a note of it in the database, and note the source, if they give it.
 
 ## References {{> backlink/backlink }} {#references}
 
@@ -364,10 +366,10 @@ Although we believe that this kind of relationship is purely historical, when an
 - Drapeau, Lynn. 1980. <cite>Le rôle des racines en morphologie derivationelle</cite>. Recherches linguistiques à Montréal 14:313-326. {#Drapeau1980}
 - Frantz, Don & Inge Genee (eds.). 2015–2020. <cite>Blackfoot Dictionary</cite>. [https://dictionary.blackfoot.atlas-ling.ca](https://dictionary.blackfoot.atlas-ling.ca). {#FrantzGenee2015}
 - Goddard, Ives. 1990. <cite>Primary and Secondary Stem Derivation in Algonquian</cite>. International Journal of American Linguistics 56(4):449-483. {#Goddard1990}
-- Macaulay, Monica. in preparation. <cite>Menominee grammar</cite>. {#MacaulayPrep}
+- Macaulay, Monica. in preparation. <cite>Menominee Reference Grammar</cite>. {#MacaulayPrep}
 - Macaulay, Monica and Joseph Salmons. 2017. <cite>Synchrony and Diachrony in Menominee Derivational Morphology</cite>. Morphology 27(2):179-215. {#MacaulaySalmons2017}
 - Nichols, John D. 2015. <cite>Ojibwe People's Dictionary</cite>. [https://ojibwe.lib.umn.edu/main-entry/ozhaashisagaa-vii](https://ojibwe.lib.umn.edu/main-entry/ozhaashisagaa-vii). {#Nichols2015}
-- O'Meara, John. 1990. <cite>Delaware stem morphology</cite>. Montreal, Quebec: McGill University Ph.D. dissertat {#OMeara1990}
+- O'Meara, John. 1990. <cite>Delaware Stem Morphology</cite>. Montreal, Quebec: McGill University Ph.D. dissertation {#OMeara1990}
 - Oxford, Will. 2007. <cite>Towards a Grammar of Innu-Aimun Particles</cite>. M.A. thesis,  Department of Linguistics, Memorial University of Newfoundland. {#Oxford2007}
 - Wolfart, H. Christoph. 1973. <cite>Plains Cree: A Grammatical Study</cite>. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series, Vol 63(5):1-90. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. {#Wolfart1973}
 {.references-list}