If there are no classes of noun or verb in Tagalog, how can there be noun phrases and verb phrases? This paper contributes to the discussion on form classes in Tagalog by taking a detailed, inductive, line-by-line look at the structures and constituents found in a randomly selected Tagalog text, to create a typology of the structures found therein. It is shown that, while there are very obvious constructions with generally clearly differentiated functions, they do not correspond with noun phrases and verb phrases in Indo-European languages, as it cannot be said that one form is used for predication and another for reference.
HimmelmannNikolaus. 2008. Lexical categories and voice in Tagalog. Voice and Grammatical Relations in Austronesian Languages, ed. by AustinPeterMusgraveSimon247–293. Stanford: CSLI.
KaufmanDaniel. 2009. Austronesian nominalism and its consequences: a Tagalog case study. Theoretical Linguistics35.1:1–49.
4.
LambrechtKnud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.
5.
LaPollaRandy J.2010. Feilübin Tagaluoyu (Tagalog) de cilei fanchou [The lexical categories of the Tagalog language of the Philippines]. Yuyanxue Luncong [Essays on Linguistics] 41:1–14. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
ReidLawrence A.2000. Sources of proto-oceanic initial prenasalization: the view from outside Oceanic. Grammatical Analysis: Morphology, Syntax, and Semantics: Studies in Honor of Stanley Starosta, ed. by De GuzmanVidea P.BenderByron W.30–45. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
8.
ReidLawrence A.2002. Determiners, nouns, or what? Problems in the analysis of some commonly occurring forms in Philippine languages. Oceanic Linguistics41.2:295–309.
