Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T19:08:44.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relative clauses and possessive phrases in two Australian languages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2026

R. M. W. Dixon
R. M. W. Dixon*
Affiliation:
University College London
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dyirbal and Gumbaiŋgar are alike in that (1) possessive phrases and relative clauses are marked by the same or similar affixes, probably cognate between the two languages; and (2) the syntax of possessive phrases is similar. Relative clause constructions are on the surface less similar: in Dyirbal the relative clause marker is always attached to the verb, but in Gumbaiŋgar it is attached sometimes to the verb and sometimes to a noun. It is shown that in each language possessive phrases can be dealt with as a special instance of the relative clause construction; and that a common set of rules can be set up for the two languages, but with different conditions and slightly different ordering. An ‘affix transfer’ rule is needed to generate all possessive phrases (but is not required for relative clauses) in Dyirbal; in Gumbaiŋgar this rule is needed for all possessive phrases and for some relative clauses. The syntactic similarity of the two languages may be evidence of genetic relationship.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , March 1969, pp. 35 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © 1969 by Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allen, W. S. 1964. Transitivity and possession. Lg. 40.337–343.Google Scholar
Chao, Yuen Ren. 1948. Mandarin primer. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1969. Remarks on nominalization. Readings in English transformational grammar, ed. by Jacobs, Roderick A. and Rosenbaum, Peter. Waltham: Blaisdell.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 1968. The Dyirbal language of North Queensland. Ph.D. thesis, University of London. (To be published in revised form by Cambridge University Press.).Google Scholar
Smythe, W. E. 1948–49. Elementary grammar of the Gumbaiŋgar language (North Coast, N.S.W.) (Oceania linguistic monographs, 8.) Sydney. [Reprinted from Oceania 19.130–91 (1948); 19.254–99, 20.29–65 (1949); corrigenda in Oceania 21.73–6 (1950).].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taplin, Rev. G. 1880. Grammar of the Narrinyeri tribe of Australian Aborigines. Addendum to The folklore, manners, customs and languages of the South Australian Aborigines (1879). Adelaide: Government Printer.Google Scholar