Does any language have a clusivity distinction in the second-
Simon (op. cit.), discussing variation in pronoun forms in the Ambrym language of the eponymous island, says in a footnote:
Let me mention in passing that this distributional picture of forms on the roughly triangular island looks suspiciously similar to what we find in dialect geography when an innovative form spreads from a centre outwards and where the outer edges still retain the old form. However, this cannot be a good characterisation of the diachrony of the pronouns in the varieties of Ambrym because this would entail an innovation by the volcanos.
Innovation by volcanoes may be unlikely, but innovation due to volcanoes is an interesting possibility that has been (some would say fairly) overlooked.* For one thing, if the center of the volcanic island had been inhabited previously, the population would have dispersed and/or decreased very rapidly indeed following an eruption.
But I propose a deeper causal link: presence of a natural hazard in the form of a volcano may well motivate the development of clusivity in second-
Clearly (1) is more efficient in a dangerous situation when you don’t want to waste time specifying that the hot lava shouldn’t be allowed to get non-
The influence of volcanoes on language change is, so far, an untrodden field
Simon, Horst J. (2005). “Only you? Philological investigations into the alleged inclusive-
* Except, of course, for the popularized claim that “the Polynesians” have n words for lava, where n is some impressive-
|Thank You, Philosophy of Language
|SpecGram Vol CLXXXIV, No 3 Contents|