Language and Culture Research Centre, James Cook University

26 October 2016

The alignment and person-marking system in Karijona (Cariban,

Northwest Amazonia)
David Felipe Guerrero Beltrán

1. Background

 Karijona is an endangered Cariban language. According to Meira (2000a) and

Gildea (2012) classifications, Karijona belongs to the ‘Taranoan’ group of the
Guianan Branch, together with Tiriyo and Akuriyo.
 There is approximately 30 ethnic Karijona scattered over different locations in the
Colombian parts of the Amazon.
 Currently, Karijona has only 4 identified active speakers (one family), 10 identified
fluent speakers who are able to hold a conversation and tell traditional stories in
Karijona and approximately 15 speakers who understand Karijona and have some
competency in the language. All speakers of Karijona are bilingual (with Spanish).
 It has been reported that there are some Karijona in the Department of Caquetá
living with the Coreguaje people at the Gorgonia reservation (Quebrada Nutrias,
close to the Caquetá river) and apparently there is an entire isolated community at
the Chibiriquete National Park (between Departments of Caquetá and Guaviare,
close to the Apaporis river) (Franco, 2002). The linguistic situation in both cases is
unknown at this moment (see Map 1-2).

MAP 1. Approximate distribution of Speakers of Taranoan Languages

1
MAP 2. The current distribution of Karijona Speakers

 Information on Karijona in this presentation was obtained during two field trips of
a couple of months in Miraflores (Guaviare, Colombia) (2015, 2016), where I
collected data for my thesis (“Structure of the simple sentence in Karijona”,
Guerrero, 2016). That was a part of my BA course in Linguistics (Universidad
Nacional de Colombia).

 The corpus (Robayo, 1983a; 1983b; Meira & Carijona, 2000; Guerrero, 2015;
Rodriguez & Guerrero, 2016) consists of about 12 hours of transcribed recordings,
including traditional stories, historical accounts, and everyday conversations, as
well as some questionnaires (course requirement).

2
2.1. Some notes on typological features of Cariban languages

 The grammatical relations are expressed by person-marking prefixes with only one
prefix per verb (Derbyshire, 1999; Aikhenvald, 2012: 222).

 There are four distinct sets of person prefixes that can be classified into
(Derbyshire, 1999):
-Transitive A-oriented prefixes (A markers)
-Transitive O-oriented prefixes (O markers)
-Intransitive SA-oriented prefixes (SA markers)
-Intransitive SO-oriented prefixes (SO markers)

 In the agreement process, the first and second person outrank the third (1/2 ≥ 3)
person (Derbyshire, 1999: 33-34; Aikhenvald, 2012: 222), in accordance with the
Nominal Hierarchy (Dixon, 1994: 85):

1st person ≥ 2nd person ≥ 3rd person ≥ proper nouns ≥ common nouns

 Some Cariban languages (Akawaio, Arekuna, Makushi and Kuikuro) have

numerous ergative-absolutive characteristics, others have nominative-accusative
alignment and some others have split ergativity features, where A= SA and O=SO.

 The split ergative systems of a number of Cariban languages do not always

correspond to ‘stative’ vs. ‘active’ semantic distinctions of the S argument.

2.2. Typological profile of Karijona

 Karijona is mainly an agglutinating language with predicate marking and no

marking of core arguments.

 Syntactic functions are expressed through:

- cross-referencing on the verb (one prefix position),
- constituent order of S/A/O core arguments, and
- postpositions for peripheral arguments.

 There is a tendency for the constituent order to be SV and AOV in intransitive and
transitive clauses, with the Karijona predicate occurring in the clause-final position.
However, depending on a number of pragmatic factors, the language also permits
VS and OVA constituent orders.

 Verbs, nouns and adverbs are open word classes.

 Quantifiers, demonstratives and particles as well as postpositions are closed word

classes.

3
 In terms of their morphological and syntactic properties, Karijona word classes can
be also divided into two groups:

I. Verbs, nouns, and postpositions - these word classes can be inflected by cross-
referencing markers (a postposition in (1a), a noun in (1b)).

(1a) [əwɨ]S [w-a-Ø-e]PRED [əyi-mare-ne]PERI

əwɨ w-a-Ø-e əyi-mare-ne
1.MIN 1.SA-AUX.NUF-MIN-IPFV 2-ASOC-AUG
‘I’m with you (more than one person).’

(1b) [kɨ-kaikuʧi-rɨ-ko]S [itu tawə-Ø]PERI [n-ehena-Ø-Ø-nə]PRED

kɨ-kaikuʧi-rɨ-ko itu tawə-Ø nɨ-ehena-Ø-Ø-nə
1+2-dog-DET-AUG.POSSESOR forest INES-MIN 3-run-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘Our dog runs in the forest.’

II. Adverbs, quantifiers, demonstratives, and particles - word classes which cannot
be inflected by cross-referencing markers.

 The non-spatial setting is expressed through combinations of two partially

independent morphological paradigms on the verb (see Table 1).

- The TENSE PARADIGM contains two tense markers for future FUT and
non-future NFUT.

- The ASPECT-MOOD PARADIGM contains five different aspect markers whose

meanings depend on their combination of tense markers, particles, and (temporal)
adverbs. They have recognizable prototypical meanings: imperfective IPFV,
durative DUR, habitual HAB, perfective PFV, and remote REM. The imperative
IMP marker belongs to this category as well.

TABLE 1. Karijona TAM markers

Tense Aspect-Mood Meaning

- durative present
-e (IPFV)
- immediate future
-nə (DUR) for 3rd person - durative non-future
-Ø (NFUT) -kədəkə (HAB) - habitual past
-ɨ (PFV) - perfective past
-ne (REM) - remote past
-kə (IMP) - immediate imperative
-e (IPFV) - future (non-immediate)
-ta (FUT)
-kə (IMP) - delayed imperative

(2) NFUT - IPFV combination

[əwɨ]S [t-ənə-ya-Ø-e]PRED
əwɨ i-ənəh-Ø-Ø-e
1.MIN 1.A-eat.meat-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
’I’m eating.’ or ‘I’m going to eat (right now).’
4
  In terms of predicate marking, Karijona has

- a 1/2/1+2/3 person system expressed by A/O prefixes (one cross-referencing

position), and
- a minimal/augmented number system (Dixon, 2010: 197) realized as a suffix -tə
and a special particle =toto (NSAP.COLL).

TABLE 2. Verb structure in Karijona

Person - Root - Tense - Number - Aspect-Mood (= Enclitics)

Person Tense Number Aspect-Mood

Root Enclitics
-1 +1 +2 +3

-e (IPFV) =toto (NSAP.COLL)

i- (1.A) yɨ- (1.O) -nə (DUR) =rehe (FRST)
mɨ- (2.A) əyi- (2.O) verbal -Ø (NFUT) -Ø (MIN) -kətəkə (HAB) =ha (EMPH)
kɨse- (1+2.A) kɨ- (1+2.O) root -ta (FUT) -tə (AUG) -ɨ (PFV) =ke (NEG)
nɨ- (3.A) ɨ- (3.O) -ne (REM) =tɨ (EV.REP)
-kə (IMP) =se (DES)

 Further examples of verbal marking in Karijona are illustrated in (3a) and (3b).

(3a) m-e-ya-tə-i
mɨ-eh-Ø-tə-e
2. SA -come-NFUT-AUG-IPFV
‘You (more than one) are coming.’ or ’You (more than one) are going to come.’

(3b) wɨ-tə-Ø-Ø-e=rehe
yɨ-tə-Ø-Ø-e=rehe
1.SO -go-NFUT-MIN-IPFV=FRST
‘I almost go (but I am not going to go).’

 It is important to say here that despite the referential characteristics of particle

=toto (NSAP.COLL) in terms of person and number, it has a different distribution
from free pronouns: the pronouns are independent morphemes but the particle
=toto is an enclitic that always depends on a host (cf. Table 3, §4). In Karijona, this
enclitic triggers the meaning of a collective non-SAP (Speech Act Participant), it is
cognate with the proto-Taranoan ‘third-person collective particle’ *toto (Meira
2000a: 95).

5
3. Person system (free pronouns and cross-referencing markers)

TABLE 3. Karijona free pronouns and cross-referencing markers

Free pronouns Cross-referencing A/O markers

(A/O) - Verb - MIN (A/O) - Verb - AUG
MIN AUG
A O MIN A O AUG
1 əwɨ aɲa i- yɨ- -Ø nɨ- ɨ- -Ø
2 əmərə aɲamoro mɨ- əyɨ- -Ø mɨ- əyɨ- -tə
V V
1+2 kɨmərə kɨɲamoro kɨse- kɨ- -Ø kɨse- kɨ- -tə
3.PROX nərə namoro
nɨ- ɨ- -Ø nɨ- ɨ- (=toto)
3.NPROX məkə məkamoro

 There are six pronouns for 1/2/1+2 contrasting in MIN/AUG and a set of (at least)
four pronoun forms for 3rd person contrasting in MIN/AUG (and proximal PROX
and non-proximal NPROX) that can also function similarly to nominal
demonstratives.

 The 3rd person free pronouns function similarly to the others in the system in terms
of their distribution, deictic function and verbal agreement, as in (4a-b).

(4a) [əwɨ]s [y-ahe-ya-Ø-e]PRED

əwɨ yɨ-aheh-Ø-Ø-e
1.MIN 1.𝐒𝐎 -die-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘I’m going to die.’

(4b) [nərə]s [n-ahe-ya-Ø-e]PRED

nərə nɨ-aheh-Ø-Ø-e
3.MIN.PROX 3.𝐒𝐀-die-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘He is going to die.’

 However, in other contexts, those pronouns can also function as noun modifiers, as
in (4c).

(4c) [məkamoro kaikuʧi]s [n-ehena-Ø-nə]PRED [itu tawə-Ø]PERIF

məkamoro kaikuʧi nɨ-ehena-Ø-nə itu tawə-Ø
3.AUG.NPROX dog 3.SA -run-NFUT-DUR forest INES-MIN
‘These dogs are running in the forest.’

 Similarly to many other Cariban languages (§2.1) (Derbyshire, 1999; Meira, 2000b;
Aikhenvald, 2012: 222-224), in Karijona transitive constructions, the cross-
referencing markers are divided into two subsets in accordance with the
grammatical relations they express: the A markers and the O markers (§4). Both
are expressed in the same cross-referencing prefix position.

6
(5a) [e-wa-Ø-Ø–e]PRED the A markers
i-wa-Ø-Ø–e
1.A-teach-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘I’m going to teach (him).’

(5b) [ye-wa-Ø-Ø-e]PRED the O markers

yɨ-wa-Ø-Ø–e
1.O-teach-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘(He) is going to teach me.’

 There is a syncretism of forms between 1st person augmented 1.AUG and 3rd
person minimal 3.MIN cross-referencing prefix (see Table 3). That is, they have the
same morphological forms for the A/O syntactic functions, as in (6a-b).

(6a) [aɲa]A [ne-nah-Ø-ɨ]PRED 1[AUG]

aɲa nɨ-nah-Ø-ɨ
1.AUG 1[AUG].A-eat-NFUT-PFV
‘We ate.’

(6b) [mərə]A [ne-nah-Ø-ɨ]PRED 3[MIN]

mərə nɨ-nah-Ø-ɨ
3.MIN.NPROX 3[MIN].A-eat-NFUT-PFV
‘He ate.’

 Karijona 2nd and 1+2 A/O prefixes combine with either the MIN (-Ø) or the AUG (-
tə) suffixes, as in (7a-b).

(7a) [kɨmərə]S [kɨs-eh-Ø-Ø-ɨ]PRED

kɨmərə kɨse-eh-Ø-Ø-ɨ
1+2.MIN 1+2. 𝐒𝐀-come-NFUT-MIN-PFV
‘We (you and me) came.’

(7b) [kɨɲamoro]S [kɨs-e-Ø-tə-wɨ]PRED

kɨɲamoro kɨse-eh-Ø-tə-ɨ
1+2.AUG 1+2. 𝐒𝐀-come-NFUT-AUG-PFV
‘We (all of us) came.’

 The particle NSAP.COLL =toto is restricted to constructions where 3.AUG pronouns

are not expressed (i.e. namoro 3.AUG.PROX and məkamoro 3.AUG.NPROX), as in (7c-
d). Cf. (7e), where =toto is omitted when the pronoun məkamoro is present.

(7c) [n-enə-Ø-nə=toto]PRED (7d) [də-Ø-mə=toto]PRED

nɨ-enə-Ø-nə=toto tə-Ø-ɨ=toto
3.A-look-NFUT-DUR=NSAP.COLL 3. 𝐒𝐀 .go-NFUT-PFV=NSAP.COLL
‘(They) are looking.’ ‘(They) left.’

7
(7e) [məkamoro]S [də-Ø-mə]PRED
məkamoro tə-Ø-ɨ
3.AUG.NPROX 3. 𝐒𝐀 .go-NFUT-PFV
‘They left.’

4. Transitive constructions and agreement processes

4.1 Previous proposals (Robayo, 2000; Meira, 2000a)

 According to the previous proposals, Karijona has a hierarchy of person for

agreement, where ‘SAP’ outranks 3rd person (1/2 ≥ 3).

 That means, when an SAP (1st/2nd) and a 3rd person are participants, the SAP is
always marked with their respective syntactic function (either A or O). That means,
under SAP, the 3rd person is unmarked. See examples (8a-b).

(8a) [me-wa-Ø-Ø-e]PRED 2>3

mɨ-wa-Ø-Ø-e
2.A-teach-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘You are going to teach (him).’

(8b) [ke-wa-Ø-Ø-e]PRED 3 > 1+2

kɨ-wa-Ø-Ø-e
1+2.O-teach-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘(He) is going to teach us’.

 Following Meira’s (2000a) terminology, there are two additional kɨ- and nɨ- prefixes:

- THE LOCAL PREFIX kɨ- when both A and O are SAP (1>2 or 2>1), as in (9a-b).

(9a) [əmərə]A [k-euru-Ø-Ø-e]PRED local prefix for 2>1

əmərə kɨ-euru-Ø-Ø-e
2.MIN LOCAL-shake-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘You are moving me.’

(9b) [əwɨ]A [k-euru-Ø-Ø-e]PRED local prefix for 1>2

əwɨ kɨ-euru-Ø-Ø-e
1.MIN LOCAL-shake-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘I am moving you.’

- THE DEFAULT PREFIX nɨ-, indicating A and O are third persons (3>3), as in (9c-d).

(9c) [ne-wa-Ø-Ø-e]PRED default prefix for 3>3

nɨ-wa-Ø-Ø-e
DEFAULT-teach-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘He is going to teach (him).’

8
 The default prefix is not expressed when an overt O NP directly precedes the verb:

(9d) [nərə]O [wa-Ø-Ø-e]PRED

nərə wa-Ø-Ø-e
3.MIN.PROX teach-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘(He) is going to teach him.’

4.2 Hierarchical agreement revised

 The analyses of Robayo (2000) and Meira (2000a) are accurate but they focus only
on the category of person, leaving out one central factor relevant for the agreement:
the number.

 This becomes apparent when we take all the combinatorial possibilities for A>O in
Karijona, as illustrated in Table 4.

TABLE 4. Agreement system in Karijona

O 1.MIN 2.MIN 1+2.MIN 3.MIN/1.AUG 2.AUG 1+2.AUG 3.AUG

A
1.MIN ___ 1>2 __ 1>3 1>2 __ 1>3
kɨ-(V)-Ø i-(V)-Ø kɨ-(V)-tə i-(V)-Ø
2.MIN 2>1 ___ __ 2>3 __ __ 2>3
kɨ-(V)-Ø mɨ-(V)-Ø mɨ-(V)-Ø
1+2.MIN ___ ___ __ 1+2>3 __ __ 1+2>3
kɨse-(V)-Ø kɨse-(V)-Ø
3.MIN/1.AUG 3>1 3>2 3>1+2 3𝑖 > 3𝑗 3>2 3>1+2 3𝑖 > 3𝑗
yɨ-(V)-Ø əyɨ-(V)-Ø kɨ-(V)-Ø ɨ->nɨ-(V)-Ø əyɨ-(V)-tə kɨ-(V)-tə ɨ->nɨ-(V)-Ø
2.AUG 2>1 ___ __ 2>3 __ __ 2>3
kɨ-(V)-tə mɨ-(V)-tə mɨ-(V)-tə
1+2.AUG ___ ___ __ 1+2>3 __ __ 1+2>3
kɨse-(V)-tə kɨse-(V)-tə
3.AUG 3>1 *3>2 *3>1+2 3𝑖 > 3𝑗 *3>2 *3>1+2 *3𝑖 > 3𝑗
yɨ-(V)-Ø əyɨ-(V)-Ø kɨ-(V)-Ø ɨ->nɨ-(V)-Ø əyɨ-(V)-tə kɨ-(V)-tə ɨ->nɨ-(V)-Ø
(=toto) (=toto)1 (=toto) (=toto) (=toto)
The sign ‘>’ is used here for ‘X acting over Y’

 As Table 4 shows, in the Karijona agreement:

- SAP outranks the 3rd person (1/2 ≥ 3) (as proposed by Robayo, 2000 and Meira,
2000a),
- but also AUG/COLL number outranks MIN (AUG ≥ MIN) (in red Table 4):
o There is always the AUG -tə suffix present in
1.MIN>2.AUG and 2.AUG>1.MIN.
o The collective non-SAP particle =toto is used when the pronoun is not
expressed, as in:

1 *Not documented in the current corpus.

9
 3.AUG>1.MIN and 3.AUG>3.MIN.
 Therefore, when both participants are SAP, 2nd person (that takes the AUG suffix
-tə) outranks the 1st person in the number agreement [1+2 ≥ (2 ≥ 1) ≥ 3], as in (10):

(10) [aɲamoro]A [kɨ-hɨnə-Ø-tə-i]PRED 2≥1

aɲamoro kɨ-hɨnəh-Ø-tə-e
2.AUG 1+2.O-kill-NFUT-AUG-IPFV
‘(All of) you are going to kill me.’

 At the same time, an omitted 3rd person participant triggers number agreement
using the NSAP.COLL particle =toto, even when there is no person agreement (A/O
prefix), as in (11).

(11) [irə tərə]PERI[=toto]A [yi-chika-Ø-Ø-Ø]PRED

irə tərə=toto yɨ-chika-Ø-Ø-ɨ
DEM INES=NSAP.COLL 1.O-takeout-NFUT-MIN-PFV

[y-arə-Ø-Ø-Ø=toto]PRED [aɲa mɨnə ya-Ø]PERI

yɨ-arə-Ø-Ø-ɨ=toto aɲa mɨnə ya-Ø
1.O-carry-NFUT-MIN-PFV=NSAP.COLL 1.AUG house ALL-MIN
’And then, they take me out (and they) carry me to my house.’

 In many cases, LOCAL and DEFAULT markers are not enough to ‘specify’
grammatical relations in Karijona. Additionally, there are two complementary
strategies used as well (see §4.2.1 and §4.2.2):

i) the constituent order,

ii) the combination of both overt and omitted free pronouns.

4.2.1 Revision of the LOCAL marker

 When two participants (free pronouns) are expressed in a transitive clause, the
constituent order AOV/OVA defines grammatical relations, as in (12a).

(12a) [əmərə]A [əwɨ]O [k-ewa-Ø-Ø-Ø]PRED

əmərə əwɨ kɨ-ewa-Ø-Ø-ɨ
2.MIN 1MIN 1+2.O-teach-NFUT-MIN-PFV
‘You taught me.’

 If only one of the participants is expressed by a pronoun, free pronouns are used
for disambiguation. Then, it is always a free pronoun in the A function, never the
O, as in (12b-c).

(12b) [əmərə]A [kɨ-wa-Ø-Ø-e]PRED

əmərə kɨ-wa-Ø-Ø-e
2.MIN 1+2.O-search.for-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
‘You are searching for me.’

10
(12c) [əwɨ]A [kɨ-wa-Ø-Ø-e]PRED
əwɨ kɨ-wa-Ø-Ø-e
1.MIN 1+2.O-search.for-NFUT-MIN-IPFV
'I am searching for you.‘

 If none of the arguments is expressed in the clause, the meaning is usually clear
from the context and the usual interpretation is 2>1 (e.g. ‘You are searching for
me’).

 Considering the above, it is more ‘economical’ to consider kɨ- as having a special

function of the 1+2.O marker, and not to be as a separate ‘local’ marker, as in the
analyses of Meira (2000a).

4.2.2. Revision of the DEFAULT marker

 In contrast to the analyses of Meira (2000a) (§4.1), my data shows that there is more
than just one marker in transitive verbs when A and O arguments are the 3 person
(3>3).

 There are two markers: nɨ- for 3.A and ɨ- for 3.O. Their distribution depends on the
constituent order within the clause as well as the presence/absence of free pronouns.

I. When both A and O arguments are expressed, there is no agreement on the verb.
Therefore, the constituent order shows the grammatical relations, as in (13a).

(13a) [məkə]A [wui]O [na-ya-Ø-nə]PRED

məkə wui nah-Ø-Ø-nə
3.MIN.NPROX cassava eat.cassava-NFUT-MIN-DUR
‘He is eating a cassava.’

II. When only one core argument is expressed, the verb agrees with it, according to its
respective syntactic function. In (13b), the O argument agrees with 3.O ɨ-; in (13c), the A
argument agrees with 3.A nɨ-. 2

(13b) [wui]O [i-na-Ø-Ø-nə]PRED

wui ɨ-na-Ø-Ø-nə
cassava 3.O-eat.cassava-NFUT-DUR
‘(He) is eating a cassava.’

(13c) [məkə]A ne-na-Ø-Ø-nə]PRED

məkə nɨ-na-Ø-Ø-nə
3.MIN.NPROX 3.A-eat.cassava-NFUT-DUR
‘He is eating (a cassava).’

2 Whether the agreement depends on animacy of A/O is yet unclear.

11
  When the A argument is not expressed but corresponds to a referent with AUG
meanings, the NSAP.COLL particle =toto is always present, as in (13d).

(13d) [[aɲa Ø-womi-rɨ]O eho-rɨ=s=a=ke=toto]S

aɲa i-womi-rɨ eho-rɨ=se=a=ke=toto
1.AUG 3.O-language-DET find-NF=DES=NMZ=NEG=NSAP.COLL

[n-a-i]PRED
n-a-i
3.A-AUX.NFUT-IPFV
‘They don't want to learn (lit. 'find') our language.’

III. In transitive clauses, there is always at least one 3rd person participant, expressed
with a free pronoun.

5. Intra-clausal alignment system (Dixon, 1994)

 The alignment of core arguments in intransitive and transitive clauses, and its
consequent S-split is different from other Taranoan languages.

 According to Meira (2000a; 2000b), Tiriyo and Akuriyo have an ‘epiphenomenal S-

split’ where some intransitive stems (𝐒𝐀 verbs) select a set of A-markers in the
agreement, and others (𝐒𝐎 verbs), select the O-markers.

 The author refers to this as a kind of idiosyncratic fluid-S system (in terms of
Dixon (1994)), which does not have semantic motivations but is due to unknown
accidental historical changes related to detransitivization.

 The alignment system in Karijona is synchronically different. According to the

semantic type and meaning of the NP, there are three distinctive patterns: an
ergative-absolutive pattern, a nominative-accusative pattern and a split ergative
pattern. To understand these, we need to look at 1/2/1+2/3 person in more detail
(see Table 5).

TABLE 5. Agreement system and alignment patterns in Karijona

Person A marker O marker S marker Agreement preference

i- yɨ- yɨ- 1>2→1+2 1>3→1 3>1→1 ergative-
1
kɨ-VERB(-tə) i-VERB yɨ-VERB(=toto) absolutive
mɨ-(-tə) əyɨ-(-tə) mɨ(-tə) 2>1→1+2 2>3→2 3>2→2
2
kɨ-VERB(-tə) əy-VERB(-tə) əy-VERB(-tə) nominative
nɨ-(=toto) ɨ- nɨ-(=toto) NP𝑖 > NP𝑗 → Ø NP>3→NP 3>NP→NP -accusative
3/1.AUG
VERB nɨ-VERB ɨ-VERB(=toto)
kɨse-(-tə) kɨ-(-tə) kɨ-(-tə)/ 1+2>3→1+2 3>1+2→1+2 S-split
1+2 ----------------
kɨse-(-tə) kɨ-VERB(-tə) kɨ-VERB(-tə) pattern

12
The sign ‘>’ is used here for ‘X acting over Y’

5.1. First person agreement (ergative-absolutive pattern)

 The agreement for the 1st person in the intransitive clause is made regularly with
the 𝐒𝐎 marker. Although there are some irregular forms for the SO marker,
intransitive verbs never agree with the SA marker. This is completely independent of
TAM factors or the semantic nature of the verb.

 The intransitive verb ‘to come’ marked with the SO marker yɨ- in (14a), with the
transitive verb ‘to kill’ marked with O marker yɨ- in (14b).

(14a) [y-e-Ø-Ø-e]PRED O
yɨ-eh-Ø-Ø-e
1.𝐒𝐎 -come-NFUT-IPFV
‘I am coming.’

(14b) [yɨ-hɨnəh-Ø-Ø-ɨ]PRED SO=O

yɨ-hɨnəh-Ø-Ø-ɨ
1.O-kill-NFUT-MIN-PFV
‘(He) kills me.’

5.2 Second/third person agreement (nominative-accusative pattern)

 For the 2nd and 3rd person agreement, intransitive verbs always select the 𝐒𝐀 marker,
as in (15a-b), cf. (15c). There are no irregular forms.

(15a) [aɲamoro]A [m-e-Ø-Ø-tə-wɨ]PRED SA=A

aɲamoro mɨ-eh-Ø-Ø-tə-ɨ
2.AUG 2.SA-come-NFUT-AUG-PFV
‘You arrived (came).’

(15b) [məkamoro kaikuʧi]S [n-ehena-Ø-Ø-nə]PRED [itu tawə]PERI SA=A

məkamoro kaikuʧi nɨ-ehena-Ø-Ø-nə itu tawə
3.AUG.NPROX dog 3.SA -run-NFUT-DUR forest INES
‘Those dogs are running at the forest.’

(15c) [machuhuri hunɨ]O [m-ənə-Ø-tə-i]PRED A

machuhuri hunɨ mɨ-ənə-Ø-tə-e
tapir meat 2.A-eat.meat-NFUT-AUG-IPFV
‘(You) are eating the tapir meat.’

5.3. Inclusive person agreement (S-split pattern)

 The inclusive 1+2 person involves the most complicated alignment pattern in
relation to the other persons. Similar to many Cariban languages (Meira, 2000b), the
inclusive person marking in Karijona shows an S-split pattern, where some
intransitive verbs select the A-markers and some others select O-markers.

13
 In (16a-b), the verb ‘die’ takes the SA marker and the verb ‘leave’ takes the SO
marker.

(16a) [kɨs-ah-Ø-Ø-e]PRED (16b) [kɨ-tə-Ø-tə-i]PRED

kɨse-ah-Ø-Ø-e kɨ-tə-Ø-tə-e
1+2. 𝐒𝐀-die-NFUT-MIN-IPFV 1+2. 𝐒𝐎-go-NFUT-AUG-IPFV
‘(We) are sick (lit. dying).’ ‘(We, many of us) are leaving.’

 In (16c), ‘sleep’ is marked with SO, and ‘rest’ with SA.

(16c) [k-onɨk-ɨ-rɨ tawə]PERI [kɨs-ere-ta-Ø-e]PRED

kɨ-onɨk-ɨ-rɨ tawə kɨse-ereh-ta-Ø-e
1+2. 𝐒𝐎-sleep-TV-NMZ INES 1+2. 𝐒𝐀-rest-FUT-MIN-IPFV
‘We are going to rest (when) sleeping.’

 This has no apparent semantic motivation for the S-split. It could be due to some
internal division of Karijona verbs (possibly related to agentive/non-agentive
connotations of the verb). See Table 6.

TABLE 6. Set of established intransitive verbs showing S-split in Karijona

𝐒𝐀 verbs 𝐒𝐎 verbs 𝐒𝐀 /𝐒𝐎verbs

aheh ‘die’
anənu ‘go up’ tə ‘go away’ euh ‘answer’
kəka ‘scream’ hokonoh ‘work’ eharaga ‘dance’
eurana ‘laugh’ onɨh ‘sleep’ tuda ‘go out’
ereh ‘rest’ ai (auxiliary verb)
ehɨ ‘come’

 Some verbs can also select both markers (see ‘𝐒𝐀 /𝐒𝐎verbs’ in Table 6), as in (17a-
b). It is not yet clear which semantic differences arise when the speaker selects one
prefix over the other one.

(17a) [k-eharaga-Ø-Ø-Ø]PRED SO=O

kɨ-eharaga-Ø-Ø-ɨ
1+2.SO-dance-NFUT-MIN-PFV
‘(We) are dancing.’

(17b) [kɨs-eharaga-Ø-Ø-Ø]PRED SA=A

kɨse-eharaga-Ø-Ø-ɨ
1+2.SA-dance-NFUT-MIN-PFV
‘(We) are dancing.’ (associative/reciprocal reading)

14
8. Summary

 The expression of Karijona grammatical relations is a complex system, which

involves hierarchical preference in agreement of person and number, constituent
order and the presence/absence of core arguments.

 Karijona shows a mixed intra-clausal alignment system that depends on the

semantic nature and meaning of the NP involved in the agreement. The same
system can have ergative-absolutive, nominative-accusative and S-split patterns.

 The agreement (cross-referencing person) and the alignment systems have to be

treated as different and partially independent parts of the Karijona grammar. The
former one functions based on a well-defined person and number hierarchy, and
the latter according to idiosyncratic patterns (1/2/1+2/3).

Abbreviations
≥ Outrank relation
X>Y X acting over Y
1 First person
1+2 Inclusive person
2 Second person
3 Third Person
A Subject of transitive constructions
ALL Allative
AUG Augmented
AUX Auxiliary verb
COLL Collective
DES Desiderative
DUR Durative
EMPH Emphatic
EV Evidential
FRST Frustrative
FUT Future
HAB Habitual
IMP Imperative
INES Inessive case
INF Infinitive
IPFV Imperfective
MIN Minimal
N Noun
NEG Negation
NF Non-finite
NFUT Non-future
NMZ Nominalizer
NP Nominal phrase
NPROX Non-proximal
NSAP Non-speech Act Participant

15
O Object
PFV Perfective
PROX Proximal
PTCL Particle
REM Remote
REP Reported
S Subject of intransitive constructions
SAP Speech act participants
TDEIC Temporal deictic
TLOC Temporal locative
TV Thematic vowel
V Verb

References

Aikhenvald, A. (2012). The languages of the Amazon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Derbyshire. (1999). Carib. In R. Dixon, & A. Aikhenvald, The Amazonian languages (pp. 22-
64). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dixon, R. M. (1994). Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dixon, R. (2010). Basic Linguistic Theory. Vol II. Grammatical Topics. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Dixon, R. M. (2012). Basic Linguistic Theory. Vol III. Further grammatical topics. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Franco, R. (2002). Los Carijona de Chibiriquete. Bogotá: Fundación Puerto Rastrojo.
Gildea, S. (1998). On reconstructing grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gildea, S. (2012). Linguistic Studies in the Cariban Family. In L. Campbell, & V. Grondona,
Handbook of South American Languages (pp. 441-494). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Guerrero, D. (Compiler). (2015). Complex sentences and verbal person-marking prefixes in
Karijona. [E. Carijona, A. Benjumea, O. Romero, & C. E. Miranda, Performers]
Puerto Nare, Guaviare, Colombia.
Guerrero, D. (2016). Structure of simple sentences in Karijona. Bogota: UNAL.
Meira, S. (2000a). A Reconstruction of Proto-Taranoan: Phonology and morphology. Munich:
LINCOM Europa.
Meira, S. (2000b). The accidental intransitive split in the Cariban family. In S. Gildea,
Reconstructing grammar. Comparative linguistics and grammaticalization (pp. 201-230).
Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Meira, S.; Carijona, M. (Compilers). (2000). Why our Children don't speak our language
[Horacio Carijona, Performer]. La Pedrera, Amazonas, Colombia.
Robayo, C. (Compiler). (1983a). Mi vida. [H. Carijona, Performer] La Pedrera, Amazonas,
Colombia.
Robayo, C. (1983b). Análisis fonológico de timbres vocálicos de la lengua Carijona. Bogotá:
Instituto Caro y Cuervo (Documento Inédito).
Robayo, C. (2000). Avance sobre Morfología Carijona. In: M. S. González de Perez, & M. L.
Rodríguez de Montes, Lenguas Indígenas de Colombia: Una visión descriptiva. Bogotá:
Instituto Caro y Cuervo.
Rodriguez, A., & Guerrero, D. (Compilers). (2016). Parts of Speech Questionnaire. [O.
Romero, E. Carijona, & M. Narvaez, Performers] Miraflores, Guaviare, Colombia.

16