West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL) (38th : 2020)

A reanalysis of the Austronesian nasal prefix : Evidence from Desa, a Malayic language of West Kalimantan Sommerlot, Carly J. 2020-03-08

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
73804-Sommerlot_C_Austronesian_reanalasys_WCCFL38_2020_handout.pdf [ 496.3kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 73804-1.0389872.json
JSON-LD: 73804-1.0389872-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 73804-1.0389872-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 73804-1.0389872-rdf.json
Turtle: 73804-1.0389872-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 73804-1.0389872-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 73804-1.0389872-source.json
Full Text
73804-1.0389872-fulltext.txt
Citation
73804-1.0389872.ris

Full Text

A reanalysis of the Austronesian nasal prefix: Evidence from Desa, a Malayic language of West Kalimantan Carly J. Sommerlot1 University of Texas at Arlington WCCFL 38 | Vancouver, BC | March 8th, 2020 1 Introduction The focal point of this talk is the nasal prefix found in many languages of Indonesia. In some languages, like Standard Indonesian (SI), this nasal prefix occurs as meN-; in others, like Jakarta Indonesian (JI), it occurs as just N-:  (1) Fera men-ulis buku.       SI   Fera MEN-write book   ‘Fera writes a book’  (2) Anak itu nge-baca buku.      JI   child that N-read  book   ‘The child is reading a book’            (Tjung 2006: 21) The nasal prefixes in (1) and (2) are generally analyzed as actor voice morphemes (Voskuil 2000; Son and Cole 2004; Nomoto and Shoho 2007; Sneddon et al 2013), partially on the basis that they are in complementary distribution with the passive prefix di-; (2’) is not possible.  (2) Buku itu di-tulis  oleh Fera.     SI   book that PV-write by Fera   ‘The book is written by Fera’  (2’) *Buku itu di-men-ulis oleh Fera.     book that PV-MEN-write by Fera   ‘The book is written by Fera’ However, there have been numerous other analyses proposed for the nasal prefix, including:  • a transitive marker (Chung 1976; Cole and Hermon 1998) • an agentive marker (Wouk 1989; Gil 2002; Englebretson 2003) • Case-marking the direct object (Guilfoyle et al 1992; Son and Cole 2004)  • an antipassive marker (Fortin 2006) • having aspectual features (Soh and Nomoto 2009, 2010, 2015) One feature of the nasal prefix that has been agreed upon is that it blocks DP movement across it. In (3), the DP apa has moved across the verb, which results in (3). (3’), with the nasal prefix, is ungrammatical.  1 Many, many thanks to my consultants and friends in West Kalimantan for their contributions to this; namely, Mama Luki, who has worked with me for three years now; Fera and Ressy, without whom this work wouldn’t have been possible; and Pak Mardi and Bu Utik, who have generously hosted me every year. I must also extend my thanks to the Jerold A. Edmondson Endowment Grant, which made travelling to Indonesia to collect this data possible. Any mistakes in interpretation are my own. 2  This contrasts with (4), where the DP siapa has not moved across the verb, and the nasal prefix is retained. (3) Apa yang Fera beli?       SI   what COMP Fera buy   ‘What did Ali buy?’  (3’) *Apa yang Fera mem-beli?     what COMP Fera MEN-buy   ‘What did Fera buy?’  (4) Siapa yang mem-beli buku itu?   who COMP MEN-buy book that   ‘Who bought the book? This has been used as evidence that Indonesian (and other related languages) have a subjects-only restriction on extraction (Keenan and Comrie 1977).  In this talk, I provide data from a previously undocumented language of Indonesia that shows evidence from extraction for a split meN- prefix into two prefixes. This has the potential to reveal facts about the nasal prefix in other related languages.  2 Desa, a Malayic language of West Kalimantan Desa2 is a previously undocumented language spoken in Suak Mansi, in the Sanggau Regency3.    2 This is not to be confused with another language called Desa spoken further up north along the Kapuas River, as described by Collins and Herpanus (2014). Sommerlot (in prep) notes important differences between these two. Desa is the word for ‘village’ in a variety of languages of Indonesia, which is likely the reason multiple languages have this name. 3 This data was collected through original fieldwork over the course of three summers from 2017-2019. Map 1. Map of Borneo and West Kalimantan 3   Desa shows significant similarities with Malayic languages (Iban, Kanayatn, Indonesian, Malay), particularly in verbal morphology (Ross 2005).  2.1 Basic syntactic features of Desa Desa syntax resembles Indonesian syntax in many ways: it has canonical SVO word order and both a nasal prefix and a di- prefix, used in undergoer-oriented sentences. The nasal prefix can occur as meN- (5) or as N- (5’). (5) Sidah men-anam bunga di taman.   (meN- + tanam) 3PL MEN-plant flower in field ‘They plant flowers in the field’4 (5’) Sidah n-anam bunga di taman.    (N- + tanam) 3PL N-plant flower in field ‘They plant flowers in the field’ Undergoer-oriented sentences result in the undergoer moving to the sentence-initial position, the verb taking the prefix di-, and the agent occurring in a prepositional phrase headed by oleh ‘by’. (6) Buku yen tongah di-tulis  (oleh lelaki yen). book that PROG PV-write  by man that ‘The book is being written by the man’ Desa additionally has an undergoer-oriented construction that resembles object voice in Indonesian (Chung 1976).  (7) Kayu inya5 bewaq6. wood 3SG bring ‘He brings wood’ 3 Extraction in languages of Indonesia Given Desa’s similarity in its voice system to Indonesian, we might expect that the nasal prefix in Desa also blocks DP movement across it in extraction contexts. Consider the pattern in SI and JI below, where both meN- and N- pattern identically in extraction. 3.1 Extraction in SI As noted before, extraction that results in DP movement over the verb disallows the nasal prefix. This is true of A’-movement, as in wh-questions (8-9) (Saddy 1991; Soh 1998; Cole and Hermon 1998):    4 Like Indonesian, there is no tense marking in Desa. Dependent upon context, sentences such as (5) could be interpreted as having past or present tense. 5 There is one difference between the object voice in Desa and in Indonesian: Desa allows full DPs as agents, whereas Indonesian does not. As this does not bear on the analysis at hand, I leave this difference aside. 6 I am using the orthographic convention of representing a glottal stop as q. 4  OBJECT QUESTION (8) Apai [CP yang [TP Fera  beli  ti]]?    what      COMP       Fera  buy  ‘What did Ali buy?’  (8’) *Apai [CP yang [TP Fera  mem-beli ti]]?     what      COMP      Fera  MEN-buy   ‘What did Fera buy?’ SUBJECT QUESTION (9) Siapai [CP yang [TP ti  mem-beli buku itu]]?   who      COMP  MEN-buy book that  ‘Who bought the book? This applies in relative clauses as well, in (10-11): OBJECT RC (10) Bajui [CP yang [TP dia beli ti]] kecil.      shirt      COMP       3SG buy  small  ‘The shirt that s/he is buying is small’  (10’) *Bajui [CP yang [TP dia mem-beli ti]] kecil.     shirt      COMP       3SG MEN-buy  small   ‘The shirt that s/he is buying is small’ SUBJECT RC (11) Wanitai [CP yang [TP ti mem-beli baju ini]] tinggi.     woman      COMP  MEM-buy shirt this tall  ‘The woman who is buying this shirt is tall’ Futhermore, meN- blocks A-movement as well (Cole and Hermon 1998; Nomoto 2008). This explains why di- passives cannot take meN-, and further explains why the object voice in Indonesian can only take a bare, unaffixed (in terms of voice morphology) verb.  (12) [TP [Buku itu]i [VP dia baca ti]].         book that      3SG read   ‘S/he read the book’  (12’) *[TP [Buku itui] [VP dia mem-baca ti]].            book that      3SG AV-read   ‘S/he read the book’ In both A-movement and A’-movement, if the DP moves over the verb, the nasal prefix cannot occur. 3.2 Extraction in Jakarta Indonesian JI patterns identically to Standard Indonesian, but the nasal prefix is N- instead. N- blocks DP movement in A’-movement in JI (Wouk 1999; Tjung 2006). (13-14) shows this pattern in wh-questions.   5  OBJECT QUESTION (13) Apai [CP  yang [TP anak itu baca ti]]?    what       COMP       child that read   ‘What is the child reading?’  (13’) *Apai [CP  yang [TP anak itu nge-baca ti]]?     what       COMP       child that N-read    ‘What is the child reading?’                SUBJECT QUESTION (14) Siapai [CP yang [TP ti nge-baca buku]]?                who      COMP  N-read  book  ‘Who is the one that is reading a book?’     (Tjung 2006: 22a, 23a) And again, like SI, this is true in relative clauses as well. OBJECT RC (15) Bukui [CP yang [TP anak itu baca ti]] mahal.    book      COMP      child that read  expensive   ‘The book that the child is reading is expensive’ (15’) *Bukui [CP yang [TP anak itu nge-baca ti]] mahal.   book      COMP      child that N-read   expensive ‘The book that the child is reading is expensive’ SUBJECT RC (16) Anak [CP yang [TP ti nge-baca buku]] temen gue.   child      COMP  N-read  book friend 1SG   ‘The child that is reading a book is my friend’     (Tjung 2006: 22b, 23b)  Object voice in JI additionally cannot occur with the nasal prefix, suggesting that N- also blocks A-movement. (17) [TP [Kain itu]i [VP gua beli ti]].        cloth that      1SG buy   ‘The cloth was bought by me’ (17’) *[TP [Kain itu]i [VP gua nge-beli ti]].         cloth that      1SG N-buy   ‘The cloth was bought by me’           (Tjung 2006: 63b)  3.3 Extraction in Desa Desa, at first glance, seems to show this same pattern. The nasal prefix meN- blocks A’-movement over the verb; this is true of wh-questions, as seen in (18-19). OBJECT QUESTION (18) Opaii [CP yang [TP inya boli ti]]?  what      COMP        3SG buy  ‘What did s/he buy? 6   (18’) *Opaii [CP yang [TP inya mem-boli ti]]?     what      COMP        3SG MEN-buy   ‘What did s/he buy? SUBJECT QUESTION (19) Sopaii [CP yang [TP ti mem-ewaq kayu]]?  who      COMP  MEN-bring wood  ‘Who brings wood?’ And additionally holds in relative clauses as well: OBJECT RC (20) Talii [CP yang [TP aku ikuq ti keq perau yen]] kuat.  rope      COMP       1SG tie  to boat that strong  ‘The rope that I tie to the boat is strong’ (20’) *Talii [CP yang [TP aku men-ikuq ti keq perau yen]] kuat.    rope      COMP       1SG MEN-tie   to boat that strong ‘The rope that I tie to the boat is strong’ SUBJECT RC (21) Aku me-liet [lelaki yen]i [CP yang [TP ti men-ikuq tali yen]].  1SG AV-see man that      COMP  MEN-tie  rope that  ‘I see the man that ties the rope’ However, this is not true of N-. N- does not block A’-movement, as it is acceptable in both subject and object extraction contexts. OBJECT QUESTION (22)  Opaii [CP yang [TP inya m-oli ti]]?   what      COMP        3SG N-buy  ‘What did s/he buy? SUBJECT QUESTION (23) Sopaii [CP yang [TP ti m-ewaq kayu]]?  who      COMP  N-bring  wood  ‘Who brings wood?’    OBJECT RC   (24) Talii [CP yang [TP aku n-ikuq ti keq perau yen]] kuat.   rope      COMP       1SG N-tie  to boat that strong   ‘The rope that I tie to the boat is strong’ Note that the affixation of N- is not limited to certain verbs or contexts, but occurs quite frequently: (25) Opai yang sidah ny-ual?   what COMP 3PL N-sell   ‘What are they selling?’  (26) Opai yang lelaki yen m-igang?   what COMP man that N-hold   ‘What is the man holding?’ 7   (27) Buku to, opaq-ku m-oli.   book that father-1SG N-buy   ‘That book, my father bought’  (28) Beiju yang inya tongah m-oli mahal.   shirt COMP 3SG PROG N-buy expensive   ‘The shirt that s/he bought is expensive’  (29) Tolong makan buah yang aku n-ungkong.   please eat fruit COMP 1SG N-cut   ‘Please eat the fruit that I cut’ Both meN- and N- block A-movement, however; neither are allowed in object voice in Desa. (30) [TP Kayui [VP inya bewaq ti]].      wood      3SG bring ‘He brings wood’ (30’) *[TP Kayui [VP inya mem-ewaq ti]].        wood      3SG MEN-bring ‘He brings wood’ (30’’) *[TP Kayui [VP inya m-ewaq ti]].        wood      3SG N-bring ‘He brings wood’ Desa thus crucially differs from SI and JI in a few ways: one, there is evidence that meN- should be separated into new morphemes, as one blocks A’-movement, and one does not; and two, the prefix N- only blocks A-movement, not A’-movement. This is summarized in Table 1.  A’-movement   Subject Extraction Object Extraction A-movement meN- (SI) ✓ ✗ ✗ N- (JI) ✓ ✗ ✗ meN- (D) ✓ ✗ ✗ N- (D) ✓ ✓ ✗      Table 1. Blocking effects of the nasal prefixes in SI, JI, and Desa (D) 4 Analysis The extraction data suggests that Desa cannot be analyzed the same as SI and JI, given its different pattern. Crucially, I am arguing that while Desa must have a split-Voice projection (Pylkkännen 2002; Harley 2017), SI and JI only have one higher verbal projection. This is to account for the bundling of functions onto one prefix in SI and JI, whereas functions are split in Desa.      8            SI / JI        DESA          4.1 Analysis of SI and JI Previous analyses of SI have relied upon a phase-based approach (Aldridge 2008; Nomoto 2008; Cole et al 2008). They propose that meN- occupies v (Voice in Cole et al 2008) and lacks an EPP feature, and that prevents an object from moving to the edge of the vP phase.  Compare (31a) to (31b) below. (31a) Apa yang Fera beli?   ‘What does Fera buy?’ (31b) *Apa yang Fera mem-beli?  ‘What does Fera buy?’   NO EPP FEATURE PHASE EDGE PHASE EDGE NOT ACCESSIBLE TO HIGHER PROJECTIONS 9    (31b) shows that meN- is in complementary distribution with a null prefix which does carry an EPP feature, and forces movement of the DPobject to the phase edge. 4.2 Analysis of Desa I suggest extending this analysis to the Desa data, with modifications to account for the differences. The most crucial disinction is that Desa has two prefixes: me- and N-. I extend the phase-based approach in the following ways:  SI / JI     DESA  Verbal projection is vP   Verbal projection is VoiceP + vP   meN- is located in highest phase  me- is located in highest phase; N- in v  meN- lacks an EPP feature  me- lacks an EPP feature   Null morpheme with EPP  Null morpheme with EPP   meN- as actor voice; license EA / me- as actor voice; N- licenses EA / assigns [ACC]  assigns [ACC]    me- subcategorizes for N-  The two prefixes are located in different heads: me- in Voice, and N- in v. N- is located in v, but vP isn’t a phase edge, and thus N- does not affect movement out of the clause. When just N- is prefixed on the verb, the head of voice is occupied by a null morpheme which carries an EPP feature and and is in complementary distribution with me-. As N- licenses the external argument and assigns [ACC], this accounts for why it blocks A-movement.                  10  Compare the two structures below for (32a) with just N-, and (32b) with me- and N-.  (32a) Opai yang inya m-oli?   ‘What does s/he buy?’  (32b) *Opa yang inya mem-oli?    ‘What does s/he buy?’    4.3 Regarding N-‘s function 4.3.1 Unergatives and unaccusatives I have analyzed N- as licensing an external argument and assigning [ACC]. The nasal prefix meN- has previously been analyzed as being associated with an external argument in the past (Son and Cole 2008; Nomoto 2008). In Desa, I am arguing that this function is associated with N- only. One piece of evidence comes from N-‘s behavior with intransitives. We might expect a prefix associated with an external argument to only occur with unergatives, and not unaccusatives. This is true in Desa.      PHASE EDGE PHASE EDGE NOT ACCESSIBLE TO C NO EPP FEATURE 11  UNERGATIVES UNACCUSATIVES n-ari ‘dance’ jetu ‘fall’ (*ny-etu) n-angis ‘cry’ detang ‘come’ (*n-etang) be-kejar ‘run’ tumbuh ‘grow’ (*n-umbuh) be-jalan ‘walk’ tidoq ‘sleep’ (*n-idoq)  be-nyani ‘sing’ roboh ‘collapse’ (*ny-oboh) be-nafas ‘take a breath’  be-diri ‘stand’  Table 2. Unergative and unaccusative verbs in Desa Table 2 shows that N- does not frequently occur on intransitive verbs (which fits if N- assigns [ACC]), but occasionally attaches to a few unergative verbs. There is no evidence that it can attach to unaccuastives, except when they become transitive with the addition of a causative meaning:  (33a) Inya jetu.   3SG fall   ‘S/he falls’  (33b) Inya ny-etu pinang yen.   3SG N-fall cup that   ‘S/he drops the cup’  (34a) Aku tidoq.   1SG sleep   ‘I sleep’  (34b) Aku tauq n-idoq onaq bijaq yen.   1SG can N-sleep child  that   ‘I can put the children to sleep’  When this occurs, N- must be prefixed onto the verb, indicating 1) that there is now an agent, and 2) there is a direct object with which to assign [ACC] to.  4.3.2 Volition Further evidence of N-‘s function comes from contexts with clear volition by the agent. When there is no clear volitional agent, there are two strategies in which to convey this: use an undergoer-oriented construction, or use a bare verb. Consider the pair in (35):  (35a) Aku losi beiju-ku.   1SG lose shirt-1SG   ‘I lost my shirt (but it wasn’t my fault)’  (35b) Aku ni-losi-ken beiju-ku.   1SG N-lose-CAUS shirt-1SG   ‘I lost my shirt (and it was my fault)’ The nasal prefix N- is only possible in (35b), when the agent is at fault for the action.    12  5 Conclusions I have argued that Desa has two nasal prefixes, me- and N-, and me- is a voice morpheme, while N- licenses the external argument and assigns [ACC] to the DP object. Me- subcategorizes for N-, which accounts for why they always co-occur. Desa crucially has a split-Voice projection, which allows for both prefixes. This contrasts with SI and JI, where only the highest projection (vP in Aldridge 2008; Voice in Cole et al 2008) is necessary as the structure reflects the morphological realization.  5.1 Reconsidering meN- and N- in related languages I have argued on the basis on this data that meN- in SI or N- in JI is contributing both functions of me- and N- in Desa: attributing some voice function, but additionally licensing the external argument and assigning [ACC]. This could account for why previous authors have struggled with identifying the function of meN-: it has several interrelated functions.  5.1.1 Diachronic implications How did this develop? The meN- prefix has been reconstructed to Proto-Malayo-Polynesian (PMP) as *maN-, and has further been reconstructed to Proto-Malayic (Ross 2005). So when did maN- split into two prefixes, as found in Desa? Malayic languages of Borneo are significantly understudied, but there was no split in Indonesian/Malay. It has been noted that languages of Indonesia, if they have any nasal prefix at all, are more likely to have N- (Gil 2002). This has interesting implications:       Did *maN- first divide into two (like in Desa), and then re-fuse into one morpheme N- in Jakarta Indonesian? Or did it simplify into N- from PMP? Why is Desa the only documented language with a split in the nasal prefix? 5.2 Future directions One interesting feature of these two prefixes is that there does not seem to be any identifiable difference in distribution in actor-oriented constructions. The use of N- (not as a separate prefix, but as a shortened, colloquial form) in Indonesian has been found to be loosely associated with high transivitity (Kaswanti Purwo 1986; Wouk 2004). At this point, this does not seem to be the case in Desa, but this requires more careful analysis and data collection in the future.  6 References Aldridge, Edith. 2008. Phase-based account of extraction in Indonesian. Lingua 118: 1440–1469. Chung, Sandra. 1976. On the subject of two passives in Indonesian. In Subject and topic, ed. Charles N.   Li, 57–99. New York: Academic Press.  PMP *maN- SI meN- (voice, licensing EA, assigning [ACC]) DESA me- (voice) N- (licensing EA, assigning [ACC]) JI N- (voice, licensing EA, assigning [ACC]) 13  Cole, Peter, and Gabriella Hermon. 1998. The typology of wh-movement: Wh-questions in Malay. Syntax   1: 221–258.  Cole, Peter, Gabriella Hermon, and Yanti. 2008. Voice in Malay/Indonesian. Lingua 118: 1500-1553.  Collins, James T. & Herpanus. 2018. The Sekujam language of West Kalimantan (Indonesia). Wacana 19: 425-458. Englebretson, Robert. 2003. Searching for structure: The problem of complementation in Colloquial   Indonesian conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Gil, David. 2002. The prefixes di- and N- in Malay/Indonesian dialects. In The history and typology of   Western Austronesian voice systems, ed. Fay Wouk and Malcolm Ross, 241-283. Canberra:   Pacific Linguistics. Guilfoyle, Eithne, Henrietta Hung, and Lisa Travis. 1992. Spec of IP and Spec of VP: Two subjects in   Austronesian languages. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 10: 375–414. Keenan, Edward L., & Bernard Comrie. 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic inquiry 1: 63-99. Legate, Julie A. 2014. Voice and v: Lessons from Acehnese, Vol. 69. MIT Press. Nomoto, Hiroki. 2008. A unified analysis of funny control. Paper presented at the 12th International   Symposium on Malay/Indonesian Linguistics (ISMIL), Leiden, the Netherlands, June 2008. Nomoto, Hiroki, and Isamu Shoho. 2007. Voice in relative clauses in Malay: A comparison of written and   spoken language. In Corpus-based perspectives in linguistics, ed. Yuji Kawaguchi, Toshihiro   Takagaki, Nobuo Tomimori, and Yoichiro Tsuruga, 353–370. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Ross, Malcom D. 2005. Internal subgrouping of Malayic. Papers in Austronesian subgrouping and   dialectology, 97. Saddy, Douglas. 1991. WH scope mechanism in Bahasa Indonesia. In MIT working papers in linguistics   15: More papers on wh-movement, ed. Lisa L. S. Cheng and Hamida Demirdash, 183–218. Sneddon, James N. 1996. Indonesian: A comprehensive grammar. Canberra: Allen & Unwin. Soh, Hooi Ling. 1998. Certain restrictions on A-bar movement in Malay. In Proceedings of the third and   fourth meetings of Austronesian Linguistics Association 1996–1999, ed. Matthew Pearson, 295   308. Los Angeles: Department of Linguistics, University of California. Soh, Hooi Ling, and Hiroki Nomoto. 2009. Progressive aspect, the verbal prefix meN-, and stative   sentences in Malay. Oceanic Linguistics 48: 148–171.  Soh, Hooi Ling, and Hiroki Nomoto. 2010. Degree achievements, telicity and the verbal prefix meN- in   Malay. Paper presented at the 14th International Symposium on Malay/Indonesian Linguistics   (ISMIL), Minneapolis, April/May 2010. Son, Minjeong, and Peter Cole. 2008. An event-based account of -kan constructions in Standard   Indonesian. Language: 120-160. Tadmor, Uri. 2015. Languages of Western Borneo Documentation Project. Jakarta Field Station, Department of Linguistics, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.  Tjung, Yassir. 2006. The formation of relative clauses in Jakarta Indonesian: A subject-object asymmetry. PhD diss., University of Delaware. 14  Willett, Marie L. 1993. Object preposed construction in Malay. Master’s thesis, Memorial University of   Newfoundland.  Wouk, Fay. 1989. The use of verb morphology in spoken Jakarta Indonesian. PhD diss., UCLA. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.73804.1-0389872/manifest

Comment

Related Items