The many faces of Austronesian
voice systems: some new
empirical studies
Pacific Linguistics 571
Pacific Linguistics is a publisher specialising in grammars and linguistic descriptions,
dictionaries and other materials on languages of the Pacific, Taiwan, the Philippines,
Indonesia, East Timor, southeast and south Asia, and Australia.
Pacific Linguistics, established in 1963 through an initial grant from the Hunter Douglas
Fund, is associated with the Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies at The
Australian National University. The authors and editors of Pacific Linguistics publications
are drawn from a wide range of institutions around the world. Publications are refereed by
scholars with relevant expertise, who are usually not members of the editorial board.
FOUNDING EDITOR:
Stephen A. Wurm
EDITORIAL BOARD:
John Bowden, Malcolm Ross and Darrell Tryon (Managing Editors),
I Wayan Arka, David Nash, Andrew Pawley, Paul Sidwell, Jane
Simpson
EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD:
Karen Adams, Arizona State University
Alexander Adelaar, University of Melbourne
Peter Austin, School of Oriental and African
Studies
Byron Bender, University of Hawai‘i
Walter Bisang, Johannes GutenbergUniversität Mainz
Robert Blust, University of Hawai‘i
Lyle Campbell, University of Utah
James Collins, Universiti Kebangsaan
Malaysia
Bernard Comrie, Max Planck Institute for
Evolutionary Anthropology
Soenjono Dardjowidjojo, Universitas Atma
Jaya
Matthew Dryer, State University of New York
at Buffalo
Jerold A. Edmondson, University of Texas at
Arlington
Nicholas Evans, University of Melbourne
Margaret Florey, Monash University
William Foley, University of Sydney
Karl Franklin, Summer Institute of
Linguistics
Charles Grimes, Universitas Kristen Artha
Wacana Kupang
Nikolaus Himmelmann, Ruhr-Universität
Bochum
Lillian Huang, National Taiwan Normal
University
Bambang Kaswanti Purwo, Universitas Atma
Jaya
Marian Klamer, Universiteit Leiden
Harold Koch, Australian National University
Frantisek Lichtenberk, University of
Auckland
Patrick McConvell, Australian Institute of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Studies
William McGregor, Aarhus Universitet
Ulrike Mosel, Christian-AlbrechtsUniversität zu Kiel
Claire Moyse-Faurie, Centre National de la
Recherche Scientifique
Bernd Nothofer, Johann Wolfgang GoetheUniversität Frankfurt am Main
Ger Reesink, Universiteit Leiden
Lawrence Reid, University of Hawai‘i
Jean-Claude Rivierre, Centre National de la
Recherche Scientifique
Melenaite Taumoefolau, University of
Auckland
Tasaku Tsunoda, University of Tokyo
John Wolff, Cornell University
Elizabeth Zeitoun, Academica Sinica
The many faces of Austronesian
voice systems: some new empirical
studies
Edited by
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross
Pacific Linguistics
Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies
The Australian National University
Published by Pacific Linguistics
Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200
Australia
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics
First published 2005
National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry:
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies
Bibliography
ISBN 0 85883 556 8.
1. Austronesian languages – Voice. I. Arka, I Wayan.
II. Ross, Malcolm (Malcolm D.). III. The Australian National
University. Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies.
Pacific Linguistics. IV. International Conference on
Austronesian Linguistics (9th :, 2002 : Canberra, ACT).
V. International Conference on Oceanic Linguistics
(5th :, 2002 : Canberra, ACT).
499.2
Copyedited by Basil Wilson
Typeset by Jeanette Coombes
Cover design by Cirils Printers
Printed and bound by Cirils Printers, Fyshwick, Canberra
Table of contents
1
Introduction
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross
2
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’: evidence from the Kerayan
Beatrice Clayre
17
3
The Palu’e passive: from pragmatic construction to grammatical device
Mark Donohue
59
4
Passive without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
87
5
Two passive-like constructions in Tongan
Yuko Otsuka
119
6
Grammatical relations in Puyuma
Stacy Fang-ching Teng
137
7
Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages:
a typological perspective
Masumi Katagiri
1
153
8
Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog
Daniel Kaufman
175
9
The richness of Madurese voice
William D. Davies
197
10
Topic continuity, voice and word order in Pendau
Phil Quick
221
11
Semantic analysis of the Moronene verbal prefix moNSuree Andersen and T. David Andersen
243
v
1
Introduction
I WAYAN ARKA AND MALCOLM ROSS
1 Preliminaries
The Ninth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics and the Fifth
International Conference on Oceanic Linguistics were both held at The Australian National
University in Canberra during January 2002. Rather than publish a single very diverse
collection of conference papers, the organisers favoured a series of smaller compilations on
specific topics. One such volume, on Austronesian historical phonology, has already been
published as Lynch (2003). The present volume represents another such compilation,
although three of the papers (those by Davies, Donohue and Teng) were not presented at
the conferences.
The Austronesian voice (or ‘focus’) system has been widely acknowledged as a
significant challenge to historical, descriptive and typological linguistics, as well as to
theoretical syntax. Since the publication of Schachter (1976), who questioned the
universality of the grammatical relation ‘subject’ from a Philippine perspective, there has
been much research on Austronesian voice, with data from both Philippine and nonPhilippine languages, for example the collection on papers in Wouk and Ross (2002). This
volume, in a sense a follow-up to that volume, 1 contains ten papers in the area of
Austronesian voice which provide fresh data and some new perspectives on old problems.
To our knowledge, no data from two of the ten languages, Palu’e and Moronene, have been
published previously, whilst data from Puyuma, Madurese, Pendau and Manggarai are not
easily accessible. In this introductory chapter, we present a brief overview of each paper
(§2), and then comment on the significance of these papers in relation to research on
Austronesian voice systems (§3).
A note on terminology: our authors vary in their chosen terminologies, and we have
made no attempt to bring them into line with each other. Indeed, there are good reasons for
many of their differences. For the purposes of this introduction, however, we will talk
1
A ‘follow-up’ both in the thematic sense and in the sense that Wouk and Ross represents a thematic
compilation of papers from a workshop at the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian
Linguistics held in Taipei in 1997.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 1–15.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2005.
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics.
1
2
Introduction
about subjects (rather than ‘topic’ or ‘pivot’), about voice (rather than the Philippinists’
‘focus’), about the semantic roles of actor and undergoer, and about actor and undergoer
voices (preferring ‘undergoer’ to ‘patient’, as Philippine-type voice systems can often be
said to make a primary contrast between actor and undergoer voices, with more than one
undergoer voice, one of which is the patient voice; see, for example, Himmelmann 2005).
2 The papers
Most of the papers in the volume are descriptive, though often with theoretical insights,
and each mainly concerns a single language. One paper is an exception to this
generalisation. Beatrice Clayre offers an areal survey with historical implications. She
outlines the voice system in Kelabitic languages (Lun Dayeh, Kerayan dialects and
Sa’ban), a subgroup of the North Sarawak group, describing and comparing their verbal
voice and aspect affixes, the marking of noun phrases, the number and function of pronoun
sets, and word order. She shows that a relatively elaborate Philippine-type voice (‘focus’)
system is encountered in Lun Dayeh in the north of the area, but has become a more
simplified system in all of the southern dialects of Kerayan and Sa’ban. Lun Dayeh has
three voices (actor, patient—Clayre’s ‘undergoer’—and instrument) with a remnant of the
locative/benefactive voice, appropriate verb affixation and three separate pronoun sets
showing distinct encoding of subject vs non-subject on one hand and actor vs non-actor
roles on the other. Sa’ban and all other Kerayan dialects have only two voice types: actor
and undergoer. Verb affixation and pronoun sets are also reduced. Pronominal forms
showing certain distinctions of grammatical relations have changed or been lost. For
example, set I pronouns, which mark subject in Lun Dayeh, mark core relations in Sa’ban.
The Lun Dayeh set II pronouns are almost gone in Sa’ban. With set II pronouns gone,
similar proclitics corresponding to Lun Dayeh set III pronouns are found only in certain
Kerayan dialects. The verbal morphology has been much simplified, e.g. the reduction of
the actor-voice prefix to N-, which is already gone in certain dialects (i.e. the actor-voice
verb has no actor-voice prefix), yielding a more isolating structural type. The demise of
voice morphology correlates with the increasing significance of periphrastic constructions
and relatively fixed word order (e.g. the emergence of a verb phrase where a non-subject
core argument must follow the verb). However, fossilised remnants of morphologically
marked voice are still found in a small group of conservative verbs suggesting earlier
versions of the dialects.
The remaining papers in the volume are largely descriptive. The next two concern
Palu’e and Manggarai respectively, languages of the Indonesian island of Flores which
both reflect an isolating tendency like that of Sa’ban and the Kerayan dialects but carried
significantly further.
Mark Donohue discusses voice in Palu’e and argues that Palu’e is a language that has
just begun grammaticalising a topic construction into a passive voice, thereby providing a
piece of evidence for an origin of voice systems in pragmatic structuring devices. While
reflexive binding data is inconclusive, a number of other tests (adverbial placement,
quantifier float, conjunction reduction, purposive clause) clearly show that AVP (AgentVerb-Patient) and PAV constructions are two grammatically different constructions in
Palu’e. The P in the PAV structure is grammatically subject and is not therefore simply a
preposed or topicalised P of the corresponding active AVP structure. Donohue concludes
that the PAV construction is an instance of passive, despite lack of passive morphology. He
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross
3
asks whether this unusual passive is a start towards a more elaborate system or a relic of an
earlier more elaborate system.
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas discuss a passive construction in Manggarai. They
argue that, despite the absence of voice morphology, syntactically Manggarai has a
passive, in which the agent appears with the preposition l(e) ‘by’. After outlining basic
grammatical relations in Manggarai (isolating, canonical SVO order with a possible VOS
structure and possibly with enclitic subject), they give evidence to support the idea that the
l(e) construction is passive. Firstly, the backgrounded Agent marked by l(e) is indeed
syntactically oblique, even though it is generally obligatorily present. Secondly, there is a
word-order change, accompanied by a change in pronominal subject enclitic that is no
longer in agreement with the backgrounded agent. This indicates that the le agent is not
the subject in the le construction. Thirdly, reflexive binding further supports the claim that
the le Agent is Oblique. Arka and Kosmas show that reflexive binding in Manggarai is
sensitive to a surface grammatical relations hierarchy where the reflexive must be
syntactically outranked by the binder. Thus, the le agent cannot bind a reflexive subject
but a reflexive le Agent can be bound by a non-agent subject. Arka and Kosmas also
discuss issues associated with the analysis in a wider typological context.
Although Tongan is geographically and genealogically far from the other languages
discussed in this volume, it also has a morphologically isolating tendency which has led to
analytical controversy. Yuko Otsuka shows that Tongan is ergatively aligned, despite
morphosyntactic similarities with the accusative languages of eastern Polynesia. She also
shows that the Tongan reflexes of the famous -Cia verbal form are not passive in Tongan,
unlike their cognates in various other Polynesian languages. The focus of her discussion,
however, is two constructions that appear passive-like and might each appear to be a
passive: the agentless passive construction and the VOS construction. She shows on the
basis of syntactic criteria, however, that despite appearances neither of these constructions
is passive. Her tests include the use of possessor pronouns with nominalisations, the
distribution of clitic pronouns, and behaviour under coordination with the conjunction mo.
Instead, she suggests that the agentless transitive construction is precisely that—a
construction with an unspecified agent — and the VOS construction is a permuation of the
default VSO construction which expresses a particular kind of focus.
At the opposite extreme of complexity among Austronesian languages is the voice
system of Puyuma, a language of southern Taiwan, described by Stacy Fang-Ching Teng.
While there are four different voices — actor, patient, locative and instrumental/
beneficiary — not all verbs exhibit all four voice alternations. Teng shows that there are
asymmetries between the actor voice and non-actor (i.e. undergoer) voice sentences in
terms of verbal morphology and pronominal clitic marking. There is a unique affix for
each undergoer voice type, e.g. -aw for patient, -ay for locative, -anay for instrumental/
beneficiary, and there are at least five affixes for the AV actor voice (ma-, <em>, mu-, miand zero). There are two clitics on an undergoer voice verb, a genitive actor proclitic and a
nominative (subject) enclitic but there is only a single clitic, namely the nominative
(subject) enclitic, on an actor voice verb. The third person genitive and nominative clitics
can often be cross-referenced by free argument NPs, which receive different case markings
depending on their grammatical functions (subject or oblique), noun classes (common,
proper, or location nouns), definiteness, and number. Puyuma is also shown to have
complex free pronominal forms, distinguished by number and the associated grammatical
functions (neutral or oblique, possessor of subject or non-subject, and definiteness). Teng
4
Introduction
discusses the issues of transitivity and grammatical system alignment in Puyuma and
concludes that Puyuma is morphosyntactically ergative as far as independent clauses are
concerned but accusative in regard to relative clause and serial verb constructions.
Moving southwards into the Philippines, the next two papers concern Tagalog. Masumi
Katagiri re-examines data from Tagalog and other Philippine languages and discusses
some of the issues surrounding the ergative hypothesis from a typological perspective.
Based on Dixon’s (1994:146) antipassive criteria, she argues that the actor voice
construction is not an antipassive as there is no good evidence that it is derived from the
patient voice. Actor voice verbal morphology, e.g. Tagalog mag-, is arguably not a unique
formal marking of antipassive-intransitive derivation because it is morphologically
indistinguishable from the intransitive mag- verb which differs from it only in the absence
of an undergoer. Crosslinguistically, as in Dyirbal (Australia), the two kinds of intransitive
are marked differently. Moreover, the claim that the patient voice verb is more basic than
the actor voice verb does not always get support because the morphological structure of
mag- verbs in Tagalog is not necessarily more complex than the patient voice verbs. In
fact, certain patient voice verbs are marked for their voice while the corresponding actor
voice verbs are unmarked. Furthermore, there is conflicting evidence as to the syntactic
status of the undergoer of an actor voice clause: it ought to be oblique under the antipassive
analysis. However, adjunct fronting and participial adjunct tests show that the genitivemarked undergoer argument of the actor voice construction is a core (or term) argument.
However, Katagiri shows that a dative-marked undergoer associated with certain actor
voice verbs appears to be an oblique as two tests for core status in Tagalog suggest that it is
demoted to Oblique. Crucially, a serious problem arises because a verb may allow a
genitive-marked undergoer or a dative-marked undergoer, the choice of which is governed
by the specificity of the undergoer: a specific undergoer is dative-marked whereas a nonspecific undergoer is genitive-marked. Katagiri concludes that there is no plausible
morphological or syntactic evidence to support an ergative analysis for the Tagalog voice
system. She proposes instead that Tagalog shows signs of a split alignment system, with
the actor voice construction representing an accusative construction and the undergoer
voice construction an accusative construction. The conditions for the split are the
definiteness and affectedness of the undergoer and tense/aspect/mood. For example, the
undergoer voice construction is typically used, sometime obligatorily, when the undergoer
is definite or highly affected, or when the construction is in realis or perfective aspect.
However, there is variation among the Philippine languages as to how these conditions
apply.
Daniel Kaufman discusses the pragmatic relations of focus and topic in Tagalog (as
opposed to ‘focus’ and ‘topic’ in their Philippinist sense). He shows that Tagalog
possesses regular syntactic expressions of focus and topic. The two are highly
grammaticalised in Tagalog. He further argues that prosody functions as a back-up
alternative in marking the focus when the syntax is unable to do so. Illustrations are given
of constructions with double focus, e.g. where the effects of the syntactic focus are
pragmatically inappropriate. Based on observation of the interaction between the syntax
and the prosody of topic and focus, he explains previously unaccounted cases of
‘scrambling’ whereby one variant constituent order is preferred over another in particular
pragmatic contexts.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross
5
William Davies presents data from Madurese, a language of the west Java region,
arguing that its ostensible two-voice (actor/undergoer) system is actually as rich as those of
the Philippines. He proposes an ‘extended voice system’ analysis for Madurese whereby
the derivational affixes -agi and -e (usually each identified along with their Javanese,
Balinese and Indonesian counterparts as both causative and applicative) are considered part
of the voice system. He demonstrates how argument mappings (semantic roles and their
surface grammatical relations) in Madurese and Tagalog are basically the same. The key
difference is in the morphology involved. For example, when the beneficiary is linked to
subject in Tagalog, a single morphological rule marked by ipag- is required. In contrast,
the same process requires two morphological rules in Madurese, marked by the two affixes
e- and -agi. The analysis is also supported by evidence from connected discourse, which
shows a high percentage (80%) of verbs with -agi (or -e) in undergoer voice. Comparative
data from Madurese and Cebuano texts shows a striking distributional similarity between
the undergoer voice in Madurese (including -agi and -e forms) and the undergoer voices in
Cebuano.
Phil Quick deals with two major voice forms, nong- verbs and ni- verbs, in Pendau. He
argues that nong- verb and ni- verb clauses are both transitive, and he analyses them as
active and inverse voice respectively. Quantitative evidence and criteria are presented to
support the analysis. He shows that relative topicality or continuity of actor and undergoer
is crucial for the selection of a nong- verb or a ni- verb construction. When the actor
argument is more topical (manifests greater topic continuity) than the undergoer argument,
then the nong- verb construction tends to be chosen, otherwise the ni- verb construction
serves as the default. Quick opposes the analysis of ni- verbs as passive because they are
syntactically transitive and the actor argument is highly topical and rarely omitted: these
are not characteristics of passives. His investigation also reveals that, whatever its causes,
constituent order variation is not determined by topic continuity in Pendau.
Suree and David Andersen discuss voice alternation in Moronene, a Bungku-Tolaki
language of south-east Sulawesi. The discussion focuses on the semantic contrast between
clauses in which the undergoer/object is indexed on a plain verb stem by an absolutive
clitic (the Verb-ABS construction) and those in which the verb takes the prefix moN- (the
moN-verb construction). The moN-verb tends to have an ordinary, general or non-specific
undergoer/object. It also appears to follow the antipassive pattern found in other languages
with a highly topical agent and a low topicality patient. However, it is possible for the free
undergoer noun phrase cross-referencing the absolutive clitic to be indefinite and the
undergoer noun phrase of the moN-verb clause to be definite. If the undergoer is definite,
the choice of moN-verb or verb-ABS construction reflects certain semantic differences: the
moN-verb construction is associated with whole processes, durative/non-punctual, nonvolitional, or irrealis events whereas the verb-ABS construction is associated with a
particular act/action and is punctual/aspectually bounded, volitional, and realis. Factors
relating to individuation such as animacy and plurality are also shown to play a role; e.g. a
definite animate undergoer typically co-occurs with a verb-ABS construction whereas a
definite inanimate undergoer tends to co-occurs with a moN-verb. In Hopper and
Thompson’s (1980) terms the verb-ABS construction expresses higher transitivity whereas
the moN-verb construction serves for lower transitivity.
6
Introduction
3 Discussion
3.1 Historical themes
As we noted earlier, the paper with the strongest historical implications is Clayre’s. The
Kelabitic languages offer us in microcosm a picture of a process which must have occurred
independently in a number of different places and at different times. This is the breakdown
of a Philippine-type voice system like those of Puyuma (Teng) and Tagalog (Katagiri) into
an actor/undergoer voice opposition. The beginnings of the breakdown process are already
visible in Lun Dayeh, where the locative voice has fallen out of use, but simplification has
proceeded much further in Sa’ban and the Kerayan dialects. The instrumental voice is lost,
leaving a simple actor/undergoer contrast and aspect morphology is replaced by an
auxiliary. Proto Kelabitic evidently distinguished the actor voice affixes *m- (from PMP
*-um-), also serving as dynamic intransitive, *N- (from PMP *maN-) and zero (from PMP
zero; for PMP reconstructions see Ross 2002a:48–51), and had a separate stative
intransitive *me-. The first two have been partially merged in Lun Dayeh (where Clayre’s
N- is a diaform encapsulating lexically determined m- and ng-). In Sa’ban and the Kerayan
dialects these morphological distinctions (which were probably never complete anyway)
are being or have already been lost; and the functional load of pronominal case marking is
reduced as genitive forms (set II) are displaced by nominative forms (set I) so that the latter
come simply to mark core (term) grammatical function.
It is instructive to note that this is not the same breakdown process as has occurred in
other places (indeed, it is more extreme). Throughout much of western Indonesia and
Malaysia a system like the one described by Davies for Madurese has emerged (cf. for
example, Poedjosoedarmo 2002 on Javanese, Quick 2002 on Pendau and Arka 2003 on
Balinese). The system has on the surface also been reduced to an actor/undergoer contrast,
but applicative suffixes have been recruited to allow the selection of a variety of semantic
roles as subject, resulting in a system with the same flexibility as the Philippine systems, as
Davies points out. In such systems the genitive/nominative case marking distinction is
usually maintained in pronouns (but often not in noun phrases). The emergence of
‘Indonesian-type’ systems like Madurese has been reconstructed by Wolff (1996; see also
Ross 2002a:52–56, 2002b:451–453), whilst Mead (2002) presents Sulawesi variants of this
emergence and Ross (2002b:459–464) suggests an overarching morphosyntactic history
accounting for most of the languages of Sulawesi.
A historical point of a different kind emerges from Clayre’s data. She shows that all the
languages she describes have a clausal constituent order in which a non-subject core noun
phrase (a full noun phrase) must directly follow the verb. The non-subject core noun
phrase is the actor in an undergoer voice construction and the undergoer in an actor voice
construction. This symmetry has also been recorded for Balinese (Arka 2003), for Batak
(Sumatra; Emmorey 1984; Schachter, ed. 1984; Norwood 2002) and for Pendau (Sulawesi;
Quick, this volume). This wide distribution suggests that it was present at an early stage in
the history of Indonesian-type languages. It is not apparently a general Philippine feature,
however, and this raises the question: Did this innovation occur once in a common
ancestor of the Kelabitic languages, Balinese, Batak and Pendau? Or did it occur
independently, perhaps with the loss of noun-phrase case marking, in different places? If it
occurred only once, then when did it occur? Holmer (2002) and Huang (2002) agree that a
similar constituent order is the default in Seediq (northern Taiwan), but this is not true of
Puyuma, where constituent order is freer (Stacy Teng, pers. comm.). Did this innovation
occur as a rigidification of the order in a language like Seediq? This matter is significant in
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross
7
the reconstruction of the history of the languages of western Indonesia and Malaysia and
deserves further attention.
3.2 Typological themes
3.2.1 Types of Austronesian voice systems
The voice systems of Austronesian languages are typologically quite diverse. There are
three major types with regard to voice, namely Types 1, 2 and 4 below. We have added
Type 3, whose membership is much smaller but which is represented by two contributions
to this book.
1.
Languages with multiple voice types, marked by verbal morphology and often
accompanied by case marking of free nominal arguments. There is always one actor
voice, which is either intransitive or lower in transitivity than the remaining voices,
which are conveniently grouped together as undergoer voices. The undergoer voices
allow noun phrases with a variety of semantic roles to become subject: patient, theme,
location, instrument, beneficiary etc. Such systems have been labelled by
Himmelmann (2002) ‘Philippine-type’ systems, although they occur not only in the
Philippines but also in Taiwan, northen Borneo, northern Sulawesi and Madagascar.
Philippine-type languages described in the contributions to this volume are Puyuma,
Tagalog and Lun Dayeh. They are assumed to be the most conservative of
Austronesian voice systems.
2.
Languages conventionally analysed as having two voices, actor and undergoer,
supplemented by applicative suffixes which allow locations, instruments,
beneficiaries and noun phrases of other semantic roles to become the undergoer.
These may be labelled ‘Indonesian-type’ languages, although they are located in
western Indonesia and Malaysia. Their development from Philippine-type systems is
described by Ross (2002a, 2002b). In the more conservative Indonesian-type
languages, the undergoer voice continues to be the default transitive, but in some
languages the actor voice is competing for this role (see, for example, Wouk 2002 on
Sasak). (Conservative) Indonesian-type languages described in the contributions to
this volume are Pendau, Moronene and Madurese. Other well-known members of this
type are Classical Malay, Balinese (Arka 2003) and Toba Batak (Schachter 1984).
3.
Languages with two voice types, active and passive, but not morphologically marked
on the verb. This is a characteristic of certain isolating languages of Flores, of which
Manggarai and Palu’e are described in this volume.
4.
Languages with no voice alternation. These languages could be labelled the ‘eastern
Austronesian type’, as they are located in eastern Nusa Tenggara, New Guinea, Island
Melanesia, Polynesia and Micronesia. These languages typically have pronominal
subject proclitics or prefixes and object enclitics or suffixes on the verb, and have an
applicative derivational morpheme (Pawley 1973; Ross 2004). A free NP may
scramble to reflect certain pragmatic information, but scrambling does cause a change
in the grammatical relation of the argument(s). No language of this type is discussed
8
Introduction
in his volume, as the contributions are concerned with voice systems. Descriptions of
such languages are relatively plentiful. 2
These four types of course by no means exhaust the voice-related types of Austronesian
language. Sa’ban and the Kerayan dialects described by Clayre in this volume resemble
Type 1 but with only one undergoer voice. Some isolating languages of Flores appear to
lack voice, but also lack the morphology attributed to Type 3, e.g. Nage-Keo (Baird 2002).
A few languages which otherwise belong to Type 4 have innovated a passive voice. One is
Roviana (northwest Solomons; Corston 1996). Others are found in Micronesia. Polynesian
languages are aberrant members of Type 4. Some of these have a passive voice, but the
one described in this volume, Tongan, has passive-like constructions which are evidently
not actually passives.
3.2.2 Syntactic issues
Two major groups of syntactic issues arise in the papers in this volume. The first centres
on the question: How should Austronesian voice systems be characterised in terms of
syntactic typology? The second concerns the use of these voice systems in discourse: How
does a speaker decide which voice to use? We do not attempt to keep these issues apart in
the discussion below, as they are loosely intertwined.
The first set of issues has been a concern at least since Schachter (1976). Davies’
observation that the Madurese verbal suffixes -e and -agi should be regarded, functionally
at least, as part of the voice system, effectively takes an earlier suggestion by Starosta
(1986) and stands it on its head. Verhaar (1984) also treats Indonesian -i and -kan as being
part of a single system, as they form circumfixes me- -i and me- -kan. Starosta recalls that
applicative suffixes like -e and -agi have the function of allowing a noun phrase with a
semantic role other than patient or theme (e.g. instrument, beneficiary, location) to be
‘promoted’ to the grammatical function of undergoer. 3 He then points out that this is
precisely the function of locative and instrument/beneficiary voice morphology in
Philippine-type languages. The difference between applicatives as conventionally
understood and Philippine-type voice morphology is that an applicative suffix typically
promotes an oblique noun phrase to object (the undergoer grammatical function in an
accusative language) whereas, at least in the default (undergoer voice) construction of a
Philippine-type language, this promotion is to subject. The functional parallel is clear,
however. What is more, as Davies observes, the oblique noun phrase in Madurese is also
promoted to subject if the verb is in the undergoer voice. Thus an alternative analysis, not
canvassed by any of the contributors to this book (but see Himmelmann 2005), would be to
2
3
For example, Tetun (Timor; Van Klinken 1999), Taba (Maluku, Indonesia; Bowden 2001), Manam (north
New Guinea; Lichtenberk 1983), Tawala (southeast Papua; Ezard 1997), Tolai (New Britain; Mosel
1984), Hoava (northwest Solomon Is; Davis 2003), Kwaio (southeast Solomon Is; Keesing 1985), NorthEast Ambae (northern Vanuatu; Hyslop 2001), Sye (southern Vanuatu; Crowley 1998), Fijian (Dixon
1988), Samoan (Mosel & Hovdhaugen 1992). A collection of sketches of languages mostly of this type is
also found in Lynch, Ross and Crowley (2002).
It should be noted that -e/-agi and similar suffixes in other Indonesian-type languages (e.g. -i/-kan in
Indonesian and -in/-ang in Balinese) may have a range of functions with the applicative function being
only one of them. These suffixes commonly also have a causative function, where an actor, rather than an
undergoer, argument is introduced. It is unclear and debatable whether they should be regarded as being
‘polysemous’ or ‘homonymous’ forms and whether or not they are part of (extended) voice systems.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross
9
treat both Indonesian- and Philippine-type languages as having a single undergoer/actor
voice alternation (with undergoer as the default voice in many languages), enriched by
applicative morphology which allows a location, instrument or beneficiary noun phrase to
be promoted to undergoer. The applicative morphemes would be the Madurese suffixes -e
and -agi and their equivalents in other Indonesian-type languages, and the locative and
instrument/beneficiary voice morphology of Philippine-type languages. This equivalence
between the two language types is functional. Systemic and morphological differences
remain. Thus Madurese (or any other Indonesian-type languages such as Indonesian,
Javanese and Balinese) has three actor voice forms, one unsuffixed and two suffixed
respectively with -e and -agi, whereas Puyuma and Tagalog have only one. The
applicatives in Indonesian-type languages take the form of suffixes. In Philippine-type
languages the locative and instrument/beneficiary voice forms are constructed with a
variety of affixes and, importantly, are morphologically sometimes no more complex than
patient voice forms.
In Philippine-type systems in particular there has been some debate as to whether the
actor voice form is intransitive, and sometimes categorical statements have been made
asserting that it is (Starosta 1999). Teng shows that in Puyuma the actor voice is indeed
intransitive: the undergoer can only be expressed as an oblique. Clayre indicates that the
same is true of Lun Dayeh. In Tagalog, on the other hand, as Katagiri shows, actor voice
clauses are not categorically intransitive. In Pendau and Moronene, both of which hover
somewhere near the boundary between Philippine-type and Indonesian-type systems,
Quick and the Andersens show that the actor voice is not only not intransitive, but is not
limited to an indefinite undergoer argument.
This leads to a further question: if the undergoer voice is the default voice in most
systems of both the Philippine and Indonesian types, then what is the function of the actor
voice, and how should it and the voice system as a whole best be classified typologically?
Our authors have varying views, and rightly so, as the voice systems they describe differ
from each other, often in quite subtle ways. Occasionally they disagree simply because
their terminological usage differs.
According to Teng, Puyuma independent clauses are syntactically ergative, as the actor
of a transitive clause — always undergoer voice — is encoded differently (with the
genitive) from the subject of an intransitive (with the nominative). Puyuma is the clearest
case among the languages described here of such a system, and many linguists would in
such circumstances call the actor voice ‘antipassive’. Teng does not choose to do so,
perhaps with good reason, as the terms ‘ergative’ and ‘antipassive’ are used by linguists to
denote a variety of features, and not all of them are present in Puyuma. Katagiri argues that
one set of definitions involves the notion that ‘passive’ and ‘antipassive’ are
morphologically derived from the form of the default voice. No Tagalog voice form is
clearly derived (and the same would be true of Puyuma), so none should be labelled
‘passive’ or ‘antipassive’. The criterion that Teng uses for applying the label ‘ergative’ to
Puyuma depends on the fact that only undergoer voice clauses are transitive, but this
criterion does not apply to Tagalog, where Katagiri shows that some actor voice clauses
are arguably transitive. Katagiri instead suggests that the Tagalog voice system tends
towards the features of a split system as it is described by Dixon (1994). The undergoer
voice is favoured in the realis mood and when the undergoer is highly affected. The actor
voice is at least less disfavoured in the irrealis. Katagiri also draws attention to the fact
that neighbouring Philippine languages behave in different ways. Cebuano has less
10
Introduction
constraints on the use of the actor voice and may perhaps be said to be further from an
ergative system than Tagalog is. Kapampangan, on the other hand, has a system of
pronominal crossreferencing which is ergative in its alignment.
Teng’s characterisation of the Puyuma actor voice as intransitive does not mean that an
actor voice clause never has a patient argument, but rather that the actor voice is
intransitive in its morphosyntax and any patient is not a core argument but is encoded with
the oblique case and interpreted as indefinite. In Tagalog such a patient/undergoer is often
encoded with the genitive, and Katagiri finds its core/peripheral status is ambiguous.
Nonetheless, there is a strong tendency to interpret it as indefinite. Moronene takes us a
step further, according to the Andersens: syntactically both the verb-ABS (undergoer voice)
and the moN-verb (actor voice) constructions are transitive, but voice selection is based on
criteria which resemble those in Tagalog. If the actor voice is chosen, the undergoer will
in most cases be interpreted as indefinite. But sometimes the undergoer is definite, and the
actor voice encodes the fact that the clause is low in transitivity by the criteria of Hopper
and Thompson (1980), e.g. the undergoer is not well individuated or the event is irrealis or
non-punctual or non-volitional.
There is no indication in Davies’ account of Madurese voice that the definiteness of the
undergoer affects voice selection, but Madurese voice selection seems otherwise to be
determined by factors similar to those at work in Tagalog and in Moronene. We write
‘seems’ because Davies describes voice selection in a rather different framework from
Katagiri or the Andersens. He says that Madurese follows Classical Malay, as described
by Hopper (1979), in using the undergoer voice for foreground information (the story line)
and the actor voice for background information (descriptive support for narrated events). It
is reasonably clear that background information clauses are likely to have the lowtransitivity features listed by Hopper and Thompson, i.e. that the Moronene and Madurese
criteria for voice selection are similar.
Whether Moronene and Madurese apply these criteria to the same degree or in the same
way is of course another matter. The differences among Philippine languages should make
us wary, but it is worth noting that Davies finds roughly the same distribution of actor and
undergoer voices in narrative text as Bell (1988) does in Cebuano.
Interestingly, the Andersens choose to use the label ‘antipassive’ for the Moronene actor
voice where Katagiri rejects it in rather similar circumstances. 4 The reason for this is
simple. As discussed above, Katagiri uses the terminology of Dixon (1994) and his
predecessors, whereas the Andersens use Givón’s (1994) rather different definition, which
is based on his measures of discourse ‘topicality’ (Referential Distance and Topic
Persistence), i.e. the continuity of references to a particular discourse participant. In
Givón’s usage an antipassive voice is one in which the actor is not only more topical than
the undergoer (this is also true of his ‘active’ voice) but the undergoer is of very low
topicality. The Andersens’ application of topicality measures to the actor and undergoer of
Moronene actor voice clauses reveals a pattern similar to that recorded by Forrest (1994)
for the Bella Coola antipassive.
The difference between Dixon’s and Givón’s definitions of ‘antipassive’ is one of
morphosyntax vs discourse function, and also one of categoriality. If one applies Dixon’s
criteria, one arrives at a categorical morphosyntax-based definition of ‘antipassive’
4
In fact Katagiri’s morphological criterion for an antipassive is fulfilled in Moronene, as the actor voice
form in moN- can be said to be derived from the uninflected undergoer voice form. The syntactic criterion
for an antipassive is not fulfilled, however, as the actor voice form is transitive.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross
11
(although Katagiri shows that this isn’t as easy as it seems). If one applies Givón’s criteria,
one arrives at a topicality-based definition where the measure is a matter of degree
(although Givón recognises an ‘active’/‘antipassive’ contrast only where there are two
constructions in contrast).
A large part of Quick’s paper is devoted to an application of Givón’s topicality
measures to Pendau. He finds that where the topicality of the undergoer is greater than or
equal to that of the actor, the undergoer voice is chosen. Where the topicality of the actor
is greater than the topicality of the undergoer, then the actor voice is selected. This
suggests that, at least with regard to topicality, the determinants of voice selection in
Moronene and Pendau are quite similar. Although the Andersens and Quick both apply
Givón’s measures, comparable figures are limited to the following, showing the
percentages of actors and undergoers in actor voice clauses with a Referential Distance of
1–3 (high topicality) and > 3 (low topicality) in the two languages: 5
1–3
>3
Moronene
Pendau
A
U
A
U
97
2
45
55
88
12
57
43
The two sets display similar tendencies but indicate that the choice of actor voice in
Moronene is, if anything, more categorical than in Pendau. Its A is highly topical in 97%
of cases in the Moronene corpus, 88% in the Pendau corpus.
However, undergoer topicality as measured by a Referential distance of 1–3 is perhaps
not the only determinant of voice selection. Pastika (1999), for example, reports the
following statistics of topicality for actor voice (AV) and undergoer voice (UV) clauses in
Balinese:
AV
1–3
>3
UV
A
U
A
U
89
11
14
76
80
20
77
23
As far as actor voice clauses are concerned, Balinese shows a similar tendency to
Moronene and Pendau. However, it should be noted that the topicality of the actor is still
higher than that of the undergoer even in undergoer voice clauses in Balinese. The
significant factor for voice selection in Balinese appears to be the topicality of the
undergoer rather than the topicality of the actor.
At first sight the relationship between these topicality figures and the determinants of
voice selection mentioned above in regard to Tagalog, Moronene, Madurese and Balinese
is perhaps not immediately obvious. However, there is such a relationship. Definiteness
reflects topicality: topical items are definite or generic. Topicality entails discourse
continuity, which is more likely to occur in the story-line (foreground) of a narrative than
in the supporting background. And, as we observed above, the transitivity of twoargument clauses telling the story is likely to be higher than of those expressing the
background. So topicality, reflected in definiteness, is associated with the higher5
Like Givón, the Andersens categorise Referential Distance into 1 (the referent is mentioned in the
previous clause), 2–3 (mentioned 2–3 clauses back) and > 3 (mentioned more than 3 clauses back). We
have combined their figures for 1 and 2–3 to render them comparable with Quick’s.
12
Introduction
transitivity clauses which tell the story. Pastika (1999) reports that a combination of
topicality and foregrounding is a strong predictor of voice selection in Balinese.
In Puyuma and apparently Lun Dayeh, independent clauses with an actor and an
undergoer are in undergoer voice unless the undergoer is indefinite, in which case
(intransitive) actor voice is selected. 6 In the other languages discussed above, this
categoriality is weakened, but the undergoer voice remains the default choice for
independent clauses with an actor and an undergoer. The actor voice is the marked choice,
selected when (i) the undergoer is indefinite, or (ii) the actor significantly outweighs the
undergoer in topicality, or (iii) the clause has low transitivity in Hooper and Thompson’s
terms (these three conditions are partially interdependent). These statements clearly apply
to Tagalog and to Moronene (although not necessarily to the same degree). They also
appear to apply to Madurese, since Davies says that the undergoer voice also reflects topic
continuity of the undergoer. 7 We do not know whether (i) and (iii) apply to Pendau, but
(ii) certainly does.
The generalisations about voice selection above apply only to independent clauses.
There is widespread evidence that voice selection in subordinate clauses is syntactically
constrained in many Philippine- and Indonesian-type languages. Only the subject of a
relative clause may be relativised, and so the speaker selects the voice which places the tobe-relativised noun phrase in the subject slot. Similarly, in complement clauses with a
deleted controlee: the controlee must be the subject of the complement clause.
Contributions to this volume indicate that these statements are true of Puyuma, Tagalog
and Madurese. Contributions to Wouk and Ross, eds (2002) indicate that they are true of
Seediq (northern Taiwan) (Holmer 2002), Bonggi (Sabah) (Boutin 2002) and Sasak (Wouk
2002).
From Kaufman’s contribution it is clear that the syntactic constraint on voice selection
plays a major role in conversational Tagalog. Kaufman is not concerned with syntax per
se but with the Tagalog constructions that are used to express pragmatic focus and
topicalisation. His allosentences entail a predicate nominal and a subject consisting of an
embedded clause with a deleted subject corresponding to the predicate nominal. Again, the
deleted noun phrase must be the subject of the embedded clause. The fourth left-hand
allosentence illustrates topicalisation. Here the topic marker ay is preceded by a topicalised
noun phrase, and yet again the corresponding noun phrase is the deleted subject of the
clause following ay.
Kaufman’s concern, incidentally, with applying Lambrecht’s (1994) information
structure theory to Tagalog represents an important step in understanding the mapping of
grammar onto discourse structure, a step which strikes us as long overdue in the study of
Austronesian languages. Associated with this, as Kaufman shows, is the study of
intonational phonology and its relationship to information structure (see e.g. Ladd 1996;
Beckman et al. in press), which to our knowledge has yet to be carried out in relation to an
Austronesian language.
Three papers in the volume concern languages which are of neither the Philippine nor
the ‘Indonesian’ type. We write ‘Indonesian’ in inverted commas because two of these,
Palu’e and Manggarai, are languages of Flores, in central Indonesia. They have, however,
lost the voice morphology which characterises Indonesian-type languages. Both Donohue,
6
7
The same generalisation is made by Gault (2002:371) about Sama Bangingi’, a language of the Sulu
archipelago in the south-western Philippines.
On Holmer’s (2002) account these statements apparently apply to Seediq (northern Taiwan), too.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross
13
for Palu’e, and Arka and Kosmas, for Manggarai, describe a passive which is not marked
morphologically. Instead, in Palu’e it is marked by undergoer–actor–verb constituent
order, whilst in Manggarai the passive construction as a whole is usually identifiable
through the presence of an oblique actor marked with the preposition l(e).
These papers bring us back yet again to the question: How should Austronesian voice
systems be characterised in terms of syntactic typology? Whereas in Philippine-type and
Indonesian-type languages it is the actor voice about which this question is most often
asked (although Quick does ask if the Pendau undergoer voice is a passive, and shows that
it isn’t), in Palu’e and Manggarai, the question is asked about a putative undergoer voice
construction: Is it a passive? Now when analysts ask whether the actor voice in a
Philippine- or Indonesian-type language is an antipassive (or when Quick asks whether the
Pendau undergoer voice is a passive), the question is not, ‘Is this a voice?’ but only, ‘What
voice is this?’ In the cases of Palu’e and Manggarai, however, the more fundamental
question is asked: If this is a voice, it is passive, but is it in fact a voice? The authors of
both papers adduce strong syntactic arguments to show that, despite the lack of inflection,
the constructions they describe are both passive voices, and that there are typological
precedents for them.
The third paper in this trio is Otsuka’s on Tongan. She describes three constructions in
Tongan which could be or have been claimed to be passive. The -Cia construction she
dismisses as a fossil, focusing on the agentless transitive and VOS constructions. She
shows that, despite appearances, they are not passives.
References
Arka, I Wayan, 2003, Balinese morphosyntax: a lexical-functional approach. Canberra:
Pacific Linguistics.
Baird, Louise, 2002, A grammar of Keo: an Austronesian language of East Nusantara. PhD
thesis, The Australian National University.
Beckman, Mary E., Julia Hirschberg and Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel, in press, The
original ToBI system and the evolution of the ToBI framework. In Sun-an Jun, ed.
Prosodic models and transcription: towards prosodic typology. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Bell, Sarah J., 1988, Voice and foreground/background in Cebuano. In Richard McGinn,
ed. Studies in Austronesian linguistics, 427–440. Athens, Ohio: Center for Southeast
Asian Studies, Ohio University Center for International Studies.
Boutin, Michael E., 2002, Nominative and genitive case alternations in Bonggi. In Wouk
and Ross, eds 2003:209–239.
Bowden, John, 2001, Taba: description of a South Halmahera language. Canberra:
Pacific Linguistics.
Corston, Simon H., 1996, Ergativity in Roviana. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Crowley, Terry, 1998, An Erromangan (Sye) grammar. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i
Press. Oceanic Linguistics Special Publication 27.
Davis, Karen, 2003, A grammar of the Hoava language, Western Solomons. Canberra:
Pacific Linguistics.
Dixon, R.M.W., 1988, A grammar of Boumaa Fijian. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
14
Introduction
—— 1994, Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Emmorey, Karen, 1984, The intonation system of Toba Batak. In Schachter, ed.
1984:37–58.
Ezard, Bryan, 1997, A grammar of Tawala: an Austronesian language of the Milne Bay
area, Papua New Guinea. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Forrest, Linda B., 1994, The de-transitive clauses in Bella Coola: Passive versus inverse.
In Givón, ed. 1994:147–168.
Gault, JoAnn, 2002, Some aspects of focus in Sama Bangingi. In Wouk and Ross, eds
2002:367–378.
Givón, Talmy, ed., 1994, Voice and inversion. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P., 2002, Voice in two northern Sulawesi languages. In Wouk
and Ross, eds 2002:7–16.
—— 2005, The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar: typological
characteristics. In N.P. Himmelmann and Alexander Adelaar, eds The Austronesian
languages of Asia and Madagascar. London: Routlege Curzon.
Holmer, Arthur, 2002, The morphology and syntax of Seediq focus. In Wouk and Ross,
eds 2002:333–354.
Hopper, Paul J., 1979, Aspect and foregrounding in discourse. In Talmy Givón, ed.
Discourse and syntax, 213–241. New York: Academic Press.
Hopper, Paul J. and Sandra Thompson, 1980, Transitivity in grammar and discourse.
Language 56:251–299.
Huang, Shuanfang, 2002, The pragmatics of focus in Tsou and Seediq. Language and
Linguistics 3:665–694.
Hyslop, Catriona, 2001, The Lolovoli dialect of the North-East Ambae language, Vanuatu.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Keesing, Roger M., 1985, Kwaio grammar. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Ladd, D. Robert, 1996, Intonational phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lambrecht, Knud, 1994, Information structure and sentence form: topic, focus and the
mental representations of discourse participants. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Lichtenberk, Frantisek, 1983, A grammar of Manam. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i
Press. Oceanic Linguistics special publication No. 18.
Lynch, John, 2003, Issues in Austronesian historical phonology. Canberra: Pacific
Linguistics.
Lynch, John, Malcolm Ross and Terry Crowley, 2002, The Oceanic languages. Richmond:
Curzon Press.
Mead, David, 2002, Proto Celebic focus revisited. In Wouk and Ross, eds 2002:143–177.
Mosel, Ulrike, 1984, Tolai syntax and its historical development. Canberra: Pacific
Linguistics.
Mosel, Ulrike and Even Hovdhaugen, 1992, Samoan reference grammar. Oslo:
Scandinavian University Press.
Norwood, Clodagh, 2002, Voice and valency alternations in Karo Batak. In Wouk and
Ross eds, 2002:181–207. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross
15
Pastika, I Wayan, 1999, Voice selection in Balinese narrative discourse. PhD thesis,
The Australian National University
Pawley, Andrew K., 1973, Some problems in Proto Oceanic grammar. Oceanic
Linguistics 12:103–188.
Poedjosoedarmo, Gloria, 2002, Changes in word order and noun phrase marking from
Old to modern Javanese: implications for understanding developments in western
Austronesian ‘focus’ sytems. In Wouk and Ross, eds 2002:311–330.
Quick, Phil, 2002, A sketch of the primary transitive verbs in Pendau. In Wouk and Ross,
eds 2002:101–122.
Ross, Malcolm, 2002a, The history and transitivity of western Austronesian voice and
voice-marking. In Wouk and Ross, eds 2002:17–62.
—— 2002b, Final words: research themes in the history and typology of western
Austronesian languages. In Wouk and Ross, eds 2002:451–474.
—— 2004, The morphosyntactic typology of Ocean c languages. Language and
Linguistics 5:491–541.
Schachter, Paul, 1976, The subject in Philippine languages: topic, actor, actor-topic or
none of the above. In Charles Li, ed. Subject and topic, 491–518. New York:
Academic Press.
Schachter, Paul, ed., 1984, Studies in the structure of Toba Batak. UCLA Occasional
Papers in Linguistics 5.
Starosta, Stanley, 1986, Focus as recentralisation. In Paul Geraghty, Lois Carrington and
S.A. Wurm, eds FOCAL I: Papers from the Fourth International Conference on
Austronesian Linguistics, 73–95. Canberra: The Australian National University.
Starosta, Stanley, 1999, Transitivity, ergativity and the best analysis of Atayal case
marking. In Elizabeth Zeitoun and Paul Jen-kuei Li, eds Selected papers from the
Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 371–392. Taipei:
Institute of Linguistics (Preparatory Office), Academia Sinica.
Van Klinken, Catherina, 1999, A grammar of the Fehan dialect of Tetun, an Austronesian
language of West Timor. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Verhaar, John M.W., 1984, Affixation in contemporary Indonesian. In Bambang Kaswanti
Purwo, ed. Towards a description of contemporary Indonesian: preliminary studies,
Part I, 1–26. Jakarta: NUSA.
Wolff, John U., 1996, The development of the passive verb with pronominal prefix in
western Austronesian languages. In Bernd Nothofer, ed., Reconstruction,
classification, description: festschrift in honor of Isidore Dyen, 15–40. Hamburg:
Abera.
Wouk, Fay, 2002, Voice in the languages of Nusa Tenggara Barat. In Wouk and Ross, eds
2002:285–309.
Wouk, Fay and Malcolm Ross, eds, 2002, The history and typology of western
Austronesian voice systems. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
2
Kelabitic languages and the
fate of ‘focus’: evidence from
the Kerayan
BEATRICE CLAYRE
1 Introduction
Kelabitic dialects or languages 1 are a subgroup of the North Sarawak group of
languages (Blust 1997). They are spoken across the borders of Sabah, Sarawak and
Kalimantan Timur in the interior of Borneo (see Map 1). Members of this language group
include Lun Dayeh, Kelabit, and Sa’ban. 2 Linguistically, they occupy an area of transition
between the languages of Sabah to the north which have a developed focus (or voice)
system, and the languages of Sarawak and Kalimantan to the south which have a much
reduced, or even lost, focus (or voice) system. 3
The term ‘voice’ will be used here in preference to ‘focus’. The aim of this paper is to
outline the voice system as it occurs in Lun Dayeh and Sa’ban and to compare this with the
results of a brief survey of Kelabitic languages in Kalimantan Timur undertaken in 1995. 4
1
2
3
4
This language group was formerly called the ‘Apo Duat’ group (Hudson 1978). The terms dialect and
language are used loosely here. No dialect testing has been undertaken, but there appears to be
considerable mutual intelligibility between many of the dialects. On the other hand, there are examples
of lack of mutual intelligibility, for example between Lun Dayeh and Sa’ban despite many similarities
between some dialects, for example Kelabit and Lun Dayeh, some speakers maintain that they are
separate languages.
In placenames and language names, an apostrophe indicates a glottal stop. Lg and K. are abbreviations
for long and kuala meaning ‘river mouth’, P. and B. are abbreviations for paa’ or baa’ ‘river’, and T. is
an abbreviation for tanjung ‘headland’.
The term ‘focus’ is used here in the sense of Philippine-type focus.
I am grateful to the Culture and Conservation research programme of the Kayan Mentarang National
Park project and the Ford Foundation (Jakarta) who made this survey possible, the staff of the World
Wide Fund for Nature in Samarinda who took care of my travel arrangements in Kalimantan, and
Samuel S.T. Padan who accompanied me on the survey. I am indebted to Dr Bernard Sellato who first
interested me in this survey, and who so generously shared his knowledge of the area and its languages
with me.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 17–57.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2005.
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics.
17
18
Beatrice Clayre
Issues particularly addressed here are: voice and aspect affixes with verbs, the marking
of nouns, the number and function of pronoun sets, and word order. 5
Map 1: Kelabitic languages in Sabah, Serawak and Kalimantan Timur
5
These were some of the issues which, in 1995, Dr René van den Berg and I agreed to look at in our
respective areas of interest, Sulawesi and central northern Borneo, with a view to preparing a preliminary
typological picture of ‘focus’ in these regions (Clayre 1995; Wouk 2002:1).
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
19
2 The voice system in Lun Dayeh and Sa’ban
2.1 Lun Dayeh
Historically, the Lun Dayeh (‘people of the interior’) inhabited the mountainous areas of
north-west Kalimantan Timur. There they are also known as Lun Tana’ Luun (highland
people who cultivate dry rice), Putok or Kemaloh Murut. Around the eighteenth century
some Lun Dayeh groups spread down the Trusan, Limbang and Lawas rivers into north
Sarawak where they were, until recently, known as Murut. 6 They now call themselves Lun
Bawang (‘people of the country’). Over the last hundred years, other Lun Dayeh have
migrated from Kalimantan, via the Padas river to Sabah, where they have recently legally
registered their name as Lundayeh. 7
The dialect of Lun Dayeh described here is that of the Kemaloh area of the Kerayan in
Kalimantan. 8
2.1.1 Lun Dayeh verbal affixation
2.1.1.1 Voice and aspect
Lun Dayeh has three voices: actor, undergoer and instrument, but there are indications
that at an earlier stage in the language there was at least one other voice which may have
been locative or benefactive. 9 Table 1 shows the affixes that signal the voice of a Lun
Dayeh verb. The only other affixes that may occur with a voice affix are those marking
aspect. In Lun Dayeh imperfective aspect is unmarked, only perfective aspect is marked,
and in perfective aspect undergoer voice is unmarked. The voice and aspect affixes of Lun
Dayeh transitive clauses are given in Table 1, together with the affixes that signal
imperative mood.
6
7
8
9
In the literature they were also called Sarawak Murut to distinguish them from the ethnically and
linguistically distinct Sabah Murut (also known as Timugon, Tagal etc.).
For further information on Lun Dayeh and related groups see Bolang and Harrisson (1949), Cense and
Uhlenbeck (1958:21–23), Crain (1978), Langub (1987), Lees (1959), Schneeberger, (1979), Southwell
(1949), Tuie (1995).
I am most grateful to Semion Lalung of Sipitang, Sabah, for working with me on the preliminary
analysis of his language in 1972 when he was a student in the UK. His parents came from Lg Nuat in
the Kemaloh region of Kalimantan. I am also grateful to Daniel Teghang and Hendrik Gughang Tebari,
originally from Lg Nuat, now living in Kampong Baru, Kerayan region, Kalimantan Timur, for language
help in 1995.
The evidence for this voice is firstly the occurrence of two imperative suffixes -a and -i (see §2.1.1.2),
and secondly one example in my data of the affix combination piN-√-an, as in the following perfective
aspect sentence with the verb root beré ‘give’:
Idé nepimeréan mu
lawid di.
who PF.?V:give GEN.2S fish AP
‘To whom did you give the fish?’
It was explained to me that this construction would be used if, for example, you were checking that a
child had delivered the fish to the right person.
20
Beatrice Clayre
Table 1: Lun Dayeh voice and aspect affixes
Actor
Undergoer
Instrument
?Locative/benefactive*
Imperfective
N-en
piNØ
Perfective
ne-N-in-/-ine-piNØ
Imperative
N-u
Ø
-a, -i
* See footnote 9.
The prefix N- symbolises homorganic nasal substitution and it signals actor voice. Before
roots with initial l or r, it occurs as nge- (for example ngelamud ‘to mix’, and ngeramit ‘to
scratch’) and before vowel-initial roots as ng- (for example ngalap ‘to take’). Examples
(1–2) below illustrate verbs marked for actor voice with the verb roots kekeb ‘cover’ and
put ‘blowpipe’. 10 This prefix occurs with verbs in imperfective aspect in contrast to verbs
in perfective aspect which add ne- before the N- prefix.
(1)
Ngekeb
lacang nih uih
atun …
AV:cover pot
this PIV.1S first
‘I am covering the pot first/before …’
(2)
Ngukab serei di uih
em nebila
nah ieh.
AV:open bottle AP PIV.1S and ST:shatter PT 3S
‘I was opening the bottle and it shattered.’
Perfective aspect in actor voice is signalled by adding the prefix ne- before the N- prefix
as illustrated in (3) with the root beru ‘wash something’.
(3)
Idé
nemeru
lacang
inih.
PF.AV:wash cooking pot this
‘Who washed this cooking pot?’
PIV.who
Undergoer voice is marked by the suffix -en added to the root, as illustrated in example
(4), with the root beli ‘buy’. This suffix occurs only with verbs in imperfective aspect.
(4)
Belien kuh
lal
ineh ku
usin
inih.
buy:UV 1S.GEN PIV.hen that with money this
‘I’ll buy that hen with this money.’
The infix -in- signals perfective aspect, and in Lun Dayeh this infix occurs only with
verbs in undergoer voice, which are otherwise unmarked. This affix is infixed following
the initial consonant of the root (for example karem ‘capsize’, kinarem ‘capsized’). It
occurs as in- before a vowel-initial root (for example ukab ‘open’, inukab ‘opened’);
however, roots with a schwa as the penultimate vowel show a pattern of verbal ablaut in
10
Abbreviations used in interlinear glosses: 1, 2, 3 first, second, third person; 1EP first person plural
exclusive; 1IP first person plural inclusive; AP anaphoric particle; AV actor voice; D dual pronoun; FP
friendly particle; GEN genitive; IMP imperative; IMPF imperfective; IV instrument voice; LP locative
particle; NEG negative; NPNA non-pivot non-actor; P plural; PIV pivot; PF perfective; PM personal noun
marker; PT particle; QP question particle; REL relative pronoun; S singular; ST stative; UV undergoer
voice; ( ) brackets indicate voice markings which are not present; { } brackets indicate voice markings
which are cancelled; the symbols /c/ and /j/ represent voiceless and voiced affricates, /ng/ the velar nasal,
/e/ the schwa, /é/ the front open-mid vowel, and /:/ lengthened vowel.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
21
which the schwa is replaced by -i- (for example beré ‘give’, biré ‘given’). 11 Examples
(5–6) illustrate verbs in perfective aspect (and undergoer voice) with the infixes -in- (5)
and -i- (6). The verb root in (5) is pipi ‘form or shape’ and in (6) kekeb ‘cover’.
(5)
Kareb tana pangeh p-in-ipi
neh …
when land finish
<UV.PF>-form GEN:3S
‘When she had created the land …’
(6)
K-i-keb
kuh
lacang di peh.
<UV.PF>-cover 1S.GEN pot
AP PT
‘I covered the pot already.’
Examples (7–9) illustrate verbs in instrument voice and imperfective and perfective
aspect. The verb root in (8) is taban ‘to take away’, in (9) it is até ‘death’. Examples (4)
and (7) highlight the difference between undergoer and instrument voice.
(7)
Pimeli kuh
lal usin
inih.
IV:buy 1S.GEN hen PIV.money this
‘I will use this money to buy the hen.’
(8)
Bekang
inih pinaban
kuh
barang
PIV.basket this IV:take away GEN.1S things
‘I will use this basket to take these things away.’
(9)
Anun
nepingaté neh
neneh.
PIV.what PF.IV:die
3S.GEN NPNA:3S
‘What did he use to kill him?’
inih.
this/these
2.1.1.2 Imperatives
Examples (10–12) illustrate the use of the imperative suffixes. These suffixes are
attached to an unaffixed verb root and are not in common use, probably because it is
regarded as more polite to use a verb in indicative mood as illustrated in examples (13–14).
All three imperative suffixes may occur with the same root, for example libud-u, libud-a
and libud-i ‘roll!’. The suffix -u (10) signals undergoer voice, while the -a suffix (11)
seems to be used when the object is at a distance or out of sight 12 and was translated by
informants as ‘go and do x’. The function of the -i suffix (12) is uncertain. The verb root
in example (10) is kekeb ‘cover’, and in (11–12) it is beru ‘wash something’. 13
11
12
13
(10)
Kekebu
lacang ineh mikat.
cover:UV.IMP PIV.pot that quickly!
‘Cover the pot quickly!’
(11)
Berua
sawan ineh kareb m-ecang.
wash:?V.IMP cup
that while ST-light
‘Go and wash that/those cup/s while it is still (day)light!’
See Blust (1997) for a discussion of ablaut in western Borneo.
This is the way it was explained to me by a Lun Dayeh speaker.
The final glottal stop of the root disappears when a suffix is added.
22
Beatrice Clayre
(12)
Berui
bigan ineh.
wash:?V.IMP plate that
‘Wash that plate!’
More polite imperatives are obtained by using indicative mood in actor or undergoer
voice, as illustrated in examples (13–14). The verb root in both examples is beré ‘give’.
(13)
Meré
buku ineh ni=Dawat.
AV:give book that PM.NPNA=Dawat
‘Give that book to Dawat!’
(14)
Beré:n mu
kuyuh
inih ni=Balang!
give:UV 2S.GEN PIV.shirt this PM.NPNA=Balang
‘Give this shirt to Balang!’
2.1.1.3 Intransitive verbs in Lun Dayeh
Intransitive verbs occur either as simple, unaffixed roots or with the infix -em- (mbefore vowel-initial roots), which is the reflex of PAn *-um- in Lun Dayeh. 14 Perfective
aspect is signalled by adding the prefix ne-. Examples (15–16) illustrate two intransitive
verbs with the -em- infix, tulud ‘fly’ and languy ‘swim’, the former in imperfective aspect
(unmarked), and the latter in perfective aspect. Example (17) illustrates an intransitive
verb marked for perfective aspect (ne-) and actor voice (m-), and example (18) ilustrates
two unaffixed roots (tudo ‘stay/sit’, rudap ‘sleep’) with the perfective prefix ne-.
(15)
Ieh
temulud
rat
pe-tinueh guta
dalan amé pe-kabing,
across path go
LP-left
PIV.3S <AV>:fly from LP-right
inih bian luk doo tutu.
this omen REL good very
‘It is a very good omen, (when) it flies from right to left across the path.’
(16)
Idi
uko
nelemanguy
nengubit puet
neh.
then PIV.dog PF.<AV>:swim PF.AV:bite buttock GEN:3S
‘Then the dog swam (to him) and bit his buttocks.’
(17)
Idé
(18)
Idi bang se-decem kai
netudo
nerudap
then in
one-night PIV.1EP PF.(AV):stay PF.(AV):sleep
nemenad
bua kuh
di.
PIV.who PF.AV:climb fruit
1S.GEN AP
‘Who climbed up my fruit (tree)?’
bang pulung.
in
forest
‘Then for one night we stopped and slept in the forest.’
14
One verb in Lun Dayeh retains the -um- form of the infix: kuman ‘to eat’. It occurs with other voice and
aspect affixes as follows: nekuman (AV.PF), kenen (UV.IMPF), kinan (UV.PF). Notice that the -um- and
-in- infixes do not co-occur (as they do in some Dusunic languages), but -in- replaces the -um- infix.
The stative forms of this verb (see §2.1.1.4) are mekan and nekan.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
23
In Lun Dayeh -em- occurs only with intransitive verbs. 15 There is one known example
of its occurrence with a meteorological verb: m-udan ‘raining’ (Himmelmann 2002:9,
fn.5). In Tagalog and Kimaragang Dusun the infix -um- occurs in change of state
predicates (Kroeger 1990:§1.2.6), but this usage does not occur in Lun Dayeh which
signals change of state with amé ‘go’ as illustrated in (19).
(19)
Don ineh amé me-sia
leaf that go ST-red
‘The leaf becomes red.’
2.1.1.4 Other verb affixes in Lun Dayeh
The stative verb affixes in Lun Dayeh are me- ‘present state’ and ne- ‘completed state’
(m- and n- before vowel-initial roots), and the two prefixes can also respectively signal the
potential for an action to be performed, or involuntary action. The stative prefix is added
to the verb root, but does not give rise to homorganic nasal substitution, which occurs only
with dynamic actor voice verbs. Notice too that the stative perfective prefix ne- replaces
the imperfective me- prefix; it is not added to it as occurs with the dynamic actor voice
perfective prefix ne- (3, 16–17). Stative verbs with a me- prefix are illustrated in examples
(20, 22), and with ne- in (21). 16
(20)
Me-beré mu
kuyuh inih ni=Balang.
ST-give GEN.2S shirt this PM.NPNA=Balang
‘Are you able to give this shirt to Balang?’ OR: ‘Can you give …’
(21)
Ne-kekeb kuh
lapung nah.
ST-cover GEN.1S lamp
PT
‘I accidentally covered the lamp.’
(22) a. Na
meraut
ku
apuy, meseb iko napeh.
ST:burn 2S later
‘Don’t play with fire, you are liable to get burnt.’
(OR: ‘… you may burn yourself.’)
NEG. AV:play with fire
b. Na
meraut ku
apuy mekeseb
mu
ruma napeh.
NEG. AV:play with fire ST:ke:burn GEN.2S house later
‘Don’t play with fire, you are liable to burn the house down.’
In addition, the stative prefixes can combine with other affixes, such as -ke- and -te-,
whose function is not yet fully understood (22b). 17 Lun Dayeh stative constructions are
always in undergoer voice. Stative affixation is not discussed further here, but it may be
noted that there are some similarities between the Lun Dayeh stative system and that
described by Kroeger (1990) for Kimarang Dusun in Sabah.
15
16
17
With the possible exception of k-um-an ‘eat’. This verb, along with beré ‘give’ and (t)aru ‘do’ or
‘make’, is remakable in all Kelabitic languages for retaining affixes which appear to have been lost in
other verbs (see §2.2.1.3, and §3.1.2.1).
Compare the stative form of these verbs with the actor voice forms ngekeb and meré in (1) and (13). The
actor voice form of meseb (22) is ngeseb ‘burn something’
The affix -ke- (-k- before vowel initial roots) may signal the presence of a non-pivot actor.
24
Beatrice Clayre
Other verb affixes in Lun Dayeh are: pe- ‘reciprocal’, peri- ‘multiple’(action or actors),
and si- pretence action, all occur in actor voice type of constructions, and all signal
perfective aspect by adding the prefix ne-. These affixes are not described further here.
2.1.2 Lun Dayeh pronoun sets
Lun Dayeh has three sets of pronouns distinguished by their function in a clause.
Pronouns of set I are free pronouns, and mark the pivot of the clause whether it is the actor,
the undergoer, or the instrument. Set II pronouns always occur immediately following the
verb or noun they qualify. They mark the non-pivot actor when they follow a verb, and the
possessor when they follow a noun. Set III pronouns indicate non-pivot and non-actor
arguments, such as the undergoer in actor voice, or an oblique in any voice.
The first and second person plural pronouns of sets I and II are identical in form, but
different in function. Their function is made clear by word order in the clause. Only the
occurrence of the proclitic ne= distinguishes the pronouns of set III from those of set II but
the two sets function in different ways. The proclitic ne=/n= 18 seems to function in a
similar way to the personal noun marker ni=. 19
Table 2: Lun Dayeh pronoun sets
1S
2S
3S
1IP
1EP
2P
3P
Pivot
I (pivot)
uih
iko
ieh
tau
kai
muyuh
ideh
Non-pivot
II (actor/genitive)
III (non-actor)
kuh
nekuh
mu
nemu
neh
neneh
tau
netau
kai
nekai
muyuh
nemuyuh
deh
ndeh
The use of set II pronouns as genitives (GEN) is illustrated in (23 and 25, 29), and as
actors in undergoer voice clauses in (26–28). Examples (24, 25, 27, 28) illustrate the use
of pronouns of set I as the pivot (PIV) of the clause. In (24–25) the pivot is the actor in an
actor voice construction and in (27, 28) the pivot is the undergoer in an undergoer voice
construction. Pronouns of set III (NPNA) are illustrated in (24–26, 28, 29); in (24–25, 29)
in the role of undergoer in actor voice clauses, and in (24, 26, 28) as obliques in both actor
and undergoer voice clauses. In (24) the oblique is preceded by the verb, amé ‘go’, which
is commonly used to indicate direction towards, and in (28) by the preposition rat ‘from’.
(23)
18
19
rumah kuh
house GEN:1S
‘my house’
In some dialects of Lun Bawang in Sarawak, the proclitic occurs as ke=/k=.
See §2.1.3. Ne= cannot be interpreted as a preposition, as it does not occur elsewhere in the language,
and pronouns with this proclitic can co-occur with a preposition (see (28)).
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
(24)
Iko
(25)
Kareb uih
isuut idi tinan kuh
mebhang nekuh
while PIV.1S small then mother GEN.1S AV:forbid NPNA:1S
25
nguit
neneh
amé nekuh.
PIV.2S AV:bring NPNA:3S go
NPNA:1S
‘You bring it/him to me.’
melalid
kudeng
ST:naughty if
uih
na
maya
PIV.1S not AV:follow
bala neh
word GEN.3S
idi
ieh
ngeteb 20 nekuh.
then PIV.3S AV:strike NPNA:1S
‘When I was small, my mother forbade me to be naughty, if I did
not obey her then she would strike me.’
(26)
Beked
ini beré:n kuh
nemu.
PIV.shirt this give:UV GEN.1S NPNA:2S
‘I’ll give this shirt to you.’
(27)
Uih
initun
neh.
PIV.1S (UV).PF:ask GEN.3S
‘He asked me.’ (‘I was asked by him.’)
(28)
(29)
Inapung
kuh
ieh
rat neneh.
(UV).PF:hide GEN.3S PIV.3S from NPNA:3S
‘I hid it from him.’
Na
doo
NEG. good
tu
irin
kai
ngaceku na
lemluen
very vegetable GEN.1EP because NEG. person
ngasa
neneh
AV:look after NPNA:3S
‘Our vegetable(s) is/are not very good because no one looks after it.
2.1.3 Lun Dayeh noun phrase markers
In Philippine type ‘focus’ languages, noun phrase markers indicate the semantic role of
an argument. It will be apparent already from the examples given above that there are no
noun phrase markers for common nouns in Lun Dayeh. In a clause with two core
arguments the role of each is indicated by its constituent order (see §2.1.4).
There are two personal noun phrase markers in Lun Dayeh: i= and ni=, 21 whose
function seems to have been similar to that of pronouns of sets I and III, but which today
are used less consistently, if at all. The marker i= occurs with personal nouns that are
syntactic pivots, but may also be found before a personal noun that is an undergoer. On
the other hand, the marker ni= never occurs with pivots, but does occur before personal
20
21
Ngeteb normally means ‘to cut’ or ‘to sting’.
In some dialects of Lun Dayeh the noun markers are i= and ki=.
26
Beatrice Clayre
nouns and some kinship terms 22 that are either undergoers or non-pivots and non-actors. 23
Examples (13–14, 20, 31–32) illustrate the use of ni= before personal nouns or kindred
terms which are not pivots, and example (30) the use of i= before a personal noun which is
the pivot of the clause.
(30)
I=Agong
ngenecuk
nekuh
ngarem
namu,
leh!
PM.PIV=Agong PF.AV:order NPNA:1S AV:capsize NPNA:2S FP
‘Man! Agong told me to capsize you!’
(31)
Uih
nenecat
ni=Pengiran.
PIV.1S PF.AV:hit PM.NPNA=Pengiran
‘I hit Pengiran.’
(32)
Kareb uih anak megai uih
ngitun
While 1S child often PIV.1S AV:ask
ni=apu
ratnan …
PM.NPNA=grandfather about
‘When I was a child I often asked grandfather about …’
The interrogative pronoun idé ‘who’ occurs with the proclitic n= when it is not the pivot
of the clause. In example (33–34) idé is the pivot in an actor voice and an undergoer voice
clause respectively, but in (35) nidé is the non-pivot-non-actor pronoun in an actor voice
clause.
(33)
Idé
nenawar
nekuh
PIV.who
PF.AV:call
NPNA.1S just now
ina dei?
‘Who called me just now?’
(34)
Idé
daren
PIV.who call:UV
mu.
GEN.2S
‘Who are you calling?’
(35)
Nawar
nidé
iko
AV:call NPNA:who PIV.2S
nah?
PT
‘Who are you calling?’
2.1.4 Word order in Lun Dayeh
In Lun Dayeh only the pronoun sets, and less consistently the personal noun markers,
are marked to indicate the semantic role of an argument in a clause. Common nouns are
never marked by any kind of phrase marker. This lack of morphological information
means that constituent order is important for the interpretation of the clause. In any clause
with one or two core arguments, the prescribed position of the non-pivot argument is
immediately following the verb. This applies to the undergoer in actor voice constructions
22
23
Boutin (2002:215) describes similar usage in Bonggi. In Lun Dayeh the noun phrase marker also occurs
in folk stories with animal names, e.g. i=/ni=pelanok ‘Mr Mousedeer’, and examples of ni= before the
word lun ‘person(s)’ have been noted.
The set III pronoun proclitic ne= and the noun phrase marker ni= may be allomorphs of a marker for
oblique case or non-pivot arguments.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
27
(marked by set III pronouns, for example (24)) and to the actor in undergoer (and
instrument) voice constructions (marked by set II pronouns, for example (7, 26–28)). The
pivot (marked by set I pronouns) whose semantic role, as actor, undergoer, or instrument,
is signalled by the voice affix on the verb, is more free. It may occur before or after the
verb-plus-non-pivot construction: compare examples (1, 24) in actor voice and (27–28) in
undergoer voice. Instruments in instrument voice constructions occur either at the
beginning or end of the clause (7–9). Obliques follow the verb and its core arguments
(4, 24, 26).
2.2 Sa’ban
Originally, the Sa’ban lived along the upper Bahau river and its tributaries in
Kalimantan Timur, where they were also known as Berau or Merau (Schneeberger
1979). 24 The Bahau is a tributary of the Kayan river, and the area settled by the Sa’ban is
located south of the mountains which separate the Bahau-Kayan river system from the
Kerayan-Mentarang-Sesayap river system. The area was also inhabited by other ethnic
groups, such as the Murik and the Kenyah. 25 There were once several Sa’ban villages,
each with its own slightly different dialect, but the region is now deserted, and the Sa’ban
have dispersed, some to the upper Baram river in Sarawak, 26 others to the upper Kerayan,
and others again downriver to Apau Peng, Tanjong Selor, and other towns in Kalimantan
Timur.
The dialect of Sa’ban described here is that spoken today in Lg Banga’ in the upper
Baram area of Sarawak. 27 Although Sa’ban is a member of the Kelabitic language group,
it looks and sounds very different from Lun Dayeh because of the many sound changes
which have taken place in the language (Blust 1999; Clayre 1972; Clayre in preparation). 28
24
25
26
27
28
The Merau Kalun mentioned by Schneeberger (1979:31, 33) can be identified as Sa’ban from the Kalun
river (known to the Sa’ban as Pei’ Aloon) whose dialect is somewhat different to that of Sa’ban from the
Bahau area.
The Murik (also known as Ngurik) moved away from the Bahau area in the nineteenth century, some
migrating to Sarawak. There were several Kenyah groups in the area, one of which, the Lepo’ Ké
Kenyah, migrated with the Sa’ban to Sarawak after the war, and settled at Lg Banga’.
Sa’ban first started moving to the Baram area about the beginning of the twentieth century, but the
greatest migration took place following World War II (Bolang & Harrisson 1949:117).
I would like to record my thanks to all members of the Sa’ban communities of Lg Banga’ and Lg Puak
who over the years have helped me learn their language. In 1967–68 I had lived in Lg Banga’ for
eighteen months, and I am grateful to the Committee for South-east Asian studies of the British
Academy for grants which allowed me to return to Lg Banga’ in 1999 and 2000 for two periods of
research, each of three months duration. I also wish to express my gratitude to the Sarawak State
Planning Unit for permission to carry out research on the Sa’ban language, and to the Sarawak Museum
and the Majilis Adat Istiadat in Kuching for sponsoring my research.
In Sa’ban orthography /h/ in word-final position represents the voiceless counterpart preceding a voiced
sonorant; /a/ represents a open-mid fronted back unrounded vowel [], contrasting with the close-mid
central unrounded vowel [ə] represented in the orthography by /e/; /ú/ represents a near-close central
lightly rounded vowel [¨]; all vowels may be lengthened and are written as two like vowels, /aa/ etc.; all
consonants except glottal stop, /h/, /w/ and /y/ may occur as geminates in word-initial position (Clayre,
in preparation).
28
Beatrice Clayre
2.2.1 Sa’ban verb affixation
2.2.1.1 Voice and aspect
Compared to Lun Dayeh the Sa’ban voice system is much reduced. There are only two
voices in Sa’ban transitive clauses: actor and undergoer. In addition, actor voice is marked
morphologically only in imperfective aspect and undergoer voice only in perfective aspect.
Perfective aspect in actor voice is signalled by an auxiliary verb, and imperfective aspect in
undergoer voice by a periphrastic construction. Sa’ban voice and aspect affixes are set out
in Table 3.
Table 3: Sa’ban voice and aspect affixes
Imperfective
Perfective
Actor
N-
Ø
Undergoer
Ø
i-
The actor voice affix is, as in Lun Dayeh, a nasal prefix which assimilates to the
position of the initial consonant of the root. In Sa’ban, however, there has been extensive
erosion of word-initial consonants, vowels and even syllables of Sa’ban words and roots.
This means that when the N- prefix is added to an eroded root it assimilates to the position
of what in Proto Kelabit-Lun Dayeh (PKLD) was a medial consonant, and produces wordinitial consonant clusters. Table 4 compares a selection of verb roots from PKLD, Lun
Dayeh and Sa’ban to illustrate the effect of the erosion on Sa’ban verbs.
Table 4: A comparison of verbs marked for actor voice in PKLD,
Lun Dayeh and Sa’ban
PKLD
to arrange
to give
to smell
to ask
to burn (tr)
to shave
be ashamed
cover
29
*nepipin
*meray
*muen
*mutuh
*ngeseb
*ngiki
*miguq
*kekeb
Lun Dayeh
mipin
meré
muen
mutuh
ngeseb
ngiki
migu
kekeb
Sa’ban
mpén
mraay
mwin
ntew
nsep
ncey
njewə
kap (n)
ngkap (v)
The basic form of the actor voice, nasal prefix (N-) in Sa’ban is m-, which contrasts
with Lun Dayeh where the basic nasal prefix is ng-/nge-. A Sa’ban verb can be marked in
other ways, and these are: gemination of the initial consonant of the root (for example,
lluen ‘to roll up’, rrúet ‘to sew’, and nnal ‘to see’ 30 ), or use of the prefix lV- (le-, la-, lu-,
29
30
PKLD examples here and elsewhere in this paper are taken from Blust (1999).
In Lun Dayeh these would be ngelulun, ngerut and nier respectively.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
29
for example luwat in example (52)), 31 which may be a borrowing from Kenyah or Kayan
(Galvin 1967, passim; Southwell 1990:509). There are also several common verbs which
occur without any affixation in actor voice, for example alaak ‘to take’, aro ‘to do/make’,
abeh ‘to carry on the back’, kaap ‘to look for’. All such verbs appear to function in the
same way as a verb marked with a N- actor voice affix.
Examples of verbs marked for actor voice with a N- prefix are given in (51 (mawaal),
58–59 (mpal)), with initial geminate consonants in (38 (nnet), 49 (nnal)) and with a lVprefix in (52 (luwat)). Examples of the unaffixed verb roots, aroə and alaak occur in (37
and 39).
Perfective aspect in actor voice is not signalled by affixation as it is in Lun Dayeh.
Instead, the verbal auxilliary pi ‘finished’ or ‘already’ is placed before the verb, which
retains its actor voice marking, as illustrated in example (36). A very common
construction with pi is: ‘after doing x he did y’ as illustrated in example (37).
(36)
Dei ieh lé
ieh pi
mataay.
then 3S (AV):know 3S finish AV:die
‘Then he knows that he has died.’
(37)
Pi
deh aro
nguen ieh iwét
deh nguen
finish 3P (AV):make coffin 3S (UV).PF:take 3P coffin
ay may lem maaə ay.
in house SP
‘After they have made his coffin they take it into the house.’
(it is taken into the house).
SP go
Undergoer voice is not morphologically marked in Sa’ban, but the affix i- that signals
perfective aspect occurs only in undergoer voice. This affix has no allomorphs in Sa’ban,
but there is a conditioned variant y- which occurs before roots beginning with the vowel a,
and this has an optional variant j- [dZ], for example, yawaal or jawaal ‘called’ (mawaal ‘to
call’). Undergoer voice verbs in perfective aspect (iwét ‘taken, itap ‘bitten’, ibút ‘poured’)
are illustrated in examples (37–39).
(38)
Pi
nnet
nah Ra’ Kueng itap
Ra’
finish AV:climb PT Ant Giant PF.(UV):bite Ant
ay
AP
hroel
egg
ssúek
ay.
macaque AP
‘After Giant Ant had climbed up, he bit the macaque on his testicles.’
(39)
Deh alaak
hloeng ieh, aro
ieh lem
3P
(AV):take bone
3S (AV):do 3S in
ajueng, ibút
gong
PF.(UV):pour
deh pey réek
may wan hloeng ay.
3P
water ricewine go on bone
AP
‘They take his bones and put them (him) in a gong, then they pour rice
wine over the bones.’
31
In some cases lV- appears to make a root transitive or causative, e.g. manoot ‘float’ (by itself) and lanoot
‘to make something float’, or wak ‘fence’ and luwak ‘make a fence’. On the other hand, there are verbs
such as kku and leku which both mean ‘to sit’ (intransitive) and are used interchangeably in Lg Banga’
today.
30
Beatrice Clayre
2.2.1.2 Undergoer voice in imperfective aspect: a periphrastic construction
Undergoer voice is not marked morphologically on the Sa’ban verb. In imperfective
aspect, it occurs as a periphrastic construction formed with the verb aro ‘do/make’. In
fact, depending on the form of aro, both imperfective and perfective periphrastic
constructions can be produced. 32 The main verb in these constructions retains its actor
voice markings but these are cancelled by the signals on the preceding auxiliary verb aro.
This occurs as an 33 in imperfective constructions and aro in perfective constructions and
is followed by the non-pivot (NP) actor. The following diagram, in which curly brackets
indicate the affixes that are cancelled, shows this periphrastic construction:
Imperfective
Perfective
an
aro
+
+
NP actor
NP actor
+
+
{AV}:verb
{AV}:verb
The imperfective periphrastic undergoer construction is illustrated in example (40) and the
perfective in (41–42). The verbs, puet ‘jump’ and kku ‘sit’, in (40) are unaffixed roots
which are typical of Sa’ban actor voice intransitive verbs.
(40)
Puet
deh kku
deh wan ddueng lemluen,
(AV):jump 3P (AV):sit 3P on shoulder person(s)
an
deh mlu
oeng
lún.
do:UV 3P {AV}:cut throat person(s)
‘They jump up and sit on peoples’ shoulders and cut their throats.’
(41)
Aro
lún
mpat
ieh koduet ún ddéeng.
(UV.PF):do person(s) {AV}:back 3S like
leaf dried.in.sun
‘They left her behind like a withered leaf.’
(42)
Aro
ieh mayong
luwak ley raah, Yomban ay.
(UV.PF):do 3S {AV}:spear chest man big Yomban SP
He speared the respected elder, Yomban, in the chest.’
2.2.1.3 Undergoer voice in imperfective aspect: fossilised remains of a former suffix
A very few Sa’ban verbs have retained fossilised remnants of the undergoer voice
morpheme -en. These are rien (mraay ‘to give’), an (aro ‘to do/make’), nan (maan ‘to
eat’), aben (abeh ‘carry on back’), and apan ‘take’ 34 Examples (43–45) illustrate the use
of apan (43), rien (44) and aben (45).
32
33
34
This type of construction also occurs in Lun Dayeh, where it can occur in imperfective and perfective
aspect and imperative mood (Clayre 2002).
Aro is one of the few Sa’ban verbs which retains a fossilised remnant of the PAn undergoer voice suffix
-en. In some dialects of Sa’ban, such as P. Riew, an [n] is realised as [n]. The form an is a reduced
form of ruen, tuen, and uen, which are the equivalent forms in Lun Dayeh, Kelabit, and Sembudud
dialects respectively, see examples (73–76) and Table 12. Although the Sa’ban form of uen is an, uem
occurs in Sa’ban imperative constructions (see (55)), the final consonant of the word being the fossilised
remains of the set II second person pronoun mu.
The verb apan ‘take’ (and apuem ‘take.IMP-2S’) seems to exist only as undegoer voice forms. For
example:
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
(43)
Apan
deh kat ay an
deh mrang
ieh wan ataw.
take:UV 3P fish AP do:UV 3P {AV}:place 3S on
stone.
‘They take the ‘kat’ fish and they place it on a stone.’
(44)
Si’ pah
naan ataw nok la rien
namay
ay.
PT where place stone REL want give:UV NPNA:1EP AP
‘Where is the stone that (you) want to give to us?
(45)
Ken aben
ceh tah kaang
nai ngaan anak ceh nah.
QP carry:UV 2S PT backpack this with child 2S PT
‘Are you going to carry this backpack as well as your child?’ 35
31
2.2.1.4 Sa’ban intransitive verbs
The intransitive actor voice infix -um- (-em- in Lun Dayeh) occurs as m- before vowelinitial roots in Sa’ban, for example, malaan ‘to walk’, but the form -em- is rare and occurs
only as a fossilised form in verbs such as temdiew ‘to wail’ and lemdiek ‘to slash
undergrowth’. 36 Some intransitive verbs have geminate initial consonants, for example,
rruet ‘to descend’, nnet ‘to climb’ (example (38)), but most occur as roots, for example,
puet ‘to jump’, kku ‘to sit’ (example (40)), sieng ‘to arrive’, diep ‘to sleep’ (example 46),
languey ‘to swim’, or hlut ‘to fly’.
(46)
Malaan Ataw Apuey iraat
AV:walk Stone Fire
from
lem hnong
yaay
dey ieh
in headwaters yonder then 3S
sieng
lem Pey Angaw nah, dey ieh diep
si nah.
river Angaw PT
then 3S (AV):sleep PT that
‘Fire Stone walked/journeyed from yonder headwaters, then he arrived
at the river Angaw, and slept there.’
(AV):arrive in
2.2.1.5 Imperatives in Sa’ban
There are no imperative suffixes in Sa’ban. Periphrastic undergoer constructions (47)
or verbs marked for actor voice (48) are used as imperatives, although the former is
regarded as more polite.
(47)
An
ciem ngkoet
tana nok-nay!
do:UV 2P
{AV}:dig ground REL-this
‘Dig this ground!’
(48)
May ceh alaak
ayew ntaah!
AV:go 2S (AV):take wood NPNA:1ID
‘Go and collect firewood for the two of us!’
Apan
ciem al,
luwa
taam.
fowl smear with blood 1IP
take:UV 2P
‘(You plural) Get a chicken and let us smear ourselves with (its) blood.’
35
36
The verb abeh means to carry on the back, and a kaang is a basket designed to be carried on the back.
In Lun Dayeh these verbs are temido and lemidik (PKLD *l-em-idik) respectively.
32
Beatrice Clayre
2.2.1.6 Other verb affixes in Sa’ban
Unlike Lun Dayeh, where stative verbs are marked by the prefixes me- or ne-, in Sa’ban
stative affixation varies according to the verb root, and generally refers only to completed
state. In the following examples both the stative and the actor voice forms of the verb are
given: hmat ‘held’ (mmat ‘to hold’), hlén ‘bolted’ (llén ‘to lock/bolt’), hlaa ‘thrown
down’ (mlaa ‘to throw/scatter’); hrap ‘immersed’ (rrap ‘to immerse’), belséeng ‘bright’
(leséeng ‘to make light’), peldok ‘muddy’ (ledok ‘to muddy’, dok ‘mud’), plaap ‘be inside
something’ (llaap ‘put something inside another’), palaay ‘tame’ (malaay ‘to tame’); ssin
‘left behind’ (nsin ‘to leave behind’), tto ‘fall/drop’ (nto ‘drop’ (intentionally)), tapét
‘stuck’ (mapét ‘stick something’), telpew ‘freed’ (lepew ‘free something’), taoot ‘be
afraid’ (maoot ‘to frighten’), telnyet ‘obscured’ (lenyet ‘to obscure’). A stative form is
occasionally used to indicate involuntary action, for example tto ‘fall/drop’, but ability to
perform an action is indicated by the auxilliary verb parap ‘able’ and not by verb
morphology. Stative verbs are not discussed further here.
One other affix found in Sa’ban is the ‘reflexive’ prefix se-/s-, as in sapueng ‘hide
oneself’. Continuous or multiple action or actors is indicated by reduplication of the full
verb root.
2.2.2 Sa’ban pronouns and noun markers
Table 5: Sa’ban pronoun sets
1S
2S
3S
1IP
1EP
2P
3P
I
éek
ceh
ieh
taam
amay
ciem
deh
(II)
(-)
(-m)
(-n)
–
–
–
–
III
neéek
nceh
nyeh
ntaam
namay
nciem
ndeh
There are two sets of pronouns in Sa’ban, I and III, and fossilised remains of pronouns
of set II. 37 Pronouns of set I fulfil the functions of sets I and II in Lundayeh; that is, they
signal the pivot of the sentence (the actor in actor voice clauses and the undergoer in
undergoer voice clauses), the actor in undergoer voice clauses, and following a noun, the
possessor. In addition, in Sa’ban these pronouns also signal the undergoer in actor voice
clauses, a function fulfilled by set III pronouns in Lun Dayeh. Table 6 compares the
functions of the pronoun sets in Lun Dayeh and Sa’ban. Brackets are used to indicate the
functions of the fossilised pronouns.
37
In addition, Sa’ban has complete sets of dual, and paucal (3–10 people) pronouns. These show dialectal
variations; for example, ‘they two’ is daweh in the P. Riew dialect and déeh in the P. Angaw dialect.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
33
Table 6: A comparison of pronoun functions in Lun Dayeh and Sa’ban
Actor voice
Language
Actor
Lun Dayeh
Sa’ban
Possession
Undergoer voice
Oblique
II
Undergoer
I
III
II
I(II)
I
III
I(II)
Oblique
Actor
I
Undergoer
III
III
I
I
III
The function of a pronoun in a clause is shown by its constituent order, 38 and when
present, by the affix on the verb, as shown in examples (49) and (50). Examples (49, 51–
53) are actor voice clauses. The verb is marked by an actor voice prefix, and the non-pivot
undergoer, a set I pronoun, immediately follows the verb. Example (50) is an undergoer
voice clause, in which the verb is marked for perfective aspect (which occurs only in
undergoer voice) and the non-pivot actor, a set I pronoun, follows the verb.
(49)
Éek
nnal
ieh.
PIV.1S AV:see 3S
‘I see him.’
(50)
Éek
inal
ieh.
PIV.1S (UV).PF:see 3S
‘He saw me.’
(51)
(52)
Wey ceh
mawaal éek, dey éek
aray
apu
good PIV.2S AV:call 1S
then PIV.1S (AV):come meet
‘Call me, then I will come and meet you.’
Oh, dey nah éek
oh, then PT PIV.1S
luwat
ceh.
2S
pi
lataat ceh ina
in
already advise 2S just now don’t
ieh.
(AV):empty out 3S
‘Oh, I told you just now not to empty it out.’
(53)
Deh
temdiew
ieh iraat wan sataat
yaay.
39
PIV.3P <AV>wail 3S from on
ground
yonder
‘They wail (for) her from down there on the ground.’
Sa’ban set III pronouns, like Lun Dayeh set III pronouns, occur with a proclitic ne= or
n=, but whereas Lun Dayeh pronouns are basically set II pronouns with the proclitic, the
Sa’ban set III pronouns are basically set I pronouns with the proclitic. Furthermore,
Sa’ban set III pronouns only signal an oblique argument as illustrated in examples (48) and
(54). They do not signal the undergoer in actor voice as they do in Lun Dayeh.
(54)
38
39
Ndeh nok-nay ciek eu-eu iraay
ieh neéek
why REL-this small very (UV).PF:give 3S NPNA:1S
‘Why did he give me this very small (portion)?’
See §2.2.3
The sataat is an area of ground around a house which is kept clear of weeds and rubbish.
34
Beatrice Clayre
Table 5 lists three singular pronoun forms which are similar to the pronouns of set II
in Lun Dayeh. These are: - (1S), -m (2S) and -n (3S). They occur as fossilised remnants
at the end of certain nouns which are kindred terms; for example: hnaa- ‘my mother’,
hnaa-m ‘your mother, and hnaa-n ‘his/her mother’, tama- ‘my father’, tama-m ‘your
father’ and tama-n ‘his/her father’. The third person form is also the general word for
‘mother’ and ‘father’. The same Sa’ban verbs that retained fossilised remains of the
undergoer suffix -en have also retained fossilised remains of these pronouns. They occur
in undergoer voice imperative constructions, for example: rie-m ‘(you) give!’, noe-m
‘(you) eat!’, apue-m ‘(you) take!’, and ue-m ‘(you) do!’ as illustrated in example (55).
(55)
Uem
nto
si úeng
ay nan
éek, ih!
do:UV.2S(GEN) {AV}:drop one banana AP eat:UV 1S
FP
‘Friend, throw down a banana for me to eat!’
There is no noun phrase marker for common nouns or proper nouns in Sa’ban, but n- or
nah occurs before oblique nouns that refer to humans, as for example in (56–57).
(56)
Dey
then
ssúel ieh
mraay lé
n=lun
awéeng
wife GEN.3S AV:give know PM.NPNA=people village
nok-nah …
REL-that
‘Then his wife informs the people of that village …’
(57)
Hmew ssúel ieh
nah=hley
ieh nok pi
word wife GEN.3S PM.NPNA=husband 3S REL finish
mataay nah …
die
PT
‘(His) wife says to her husband who has died …’
2.2.3 Word order in Sa’ban
In Sa’ban, as in Lun Dayeh, the non-pivot core argument must follow immediately after
the verb, for example (49) and (50) in actor voice and undergoer voice repectively. In
actor voice transitive clauses the pivot core argument usually occurs before the verb, as for
example (58), but it can occur after the verb-plus-non-pivot core argument, as in (59); it
may not occur immediately following the verb (60).
(58)
mpal
ku nok-nah.
PIV.1S AV:beat dog REL-that
‘I beat that dog.’
(59)
Mpal
ku nok-nay
AV:beat dog REL-this
‘I beat this dog.’
(60)
Éek
éek.
PIV.1S
* Mpal
éek
ku nok-nay.
AV:beat PIV.1S dog REL-this
*‘This dog beat me.’
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
35
In actor voice intransitive clauses, the actor may occur before or after the verb, for
example (38, 40, 46). In undergoer voice clauses the undergoer pivot is relatively free and
may occur before the verb-plus-non-pivot core argument, as illustrated in (50, 54) or after
it, as illustrated in (37, 38). Oblique arguments (marked by set III pronouns) occur after
the verb and its core arguments (48, 54). 40
3 Kelabitic dialects or languages in Kalimantan Timur
In Kalimantan Timur on the other side of the border from Sarawak and Sabah is a
district called Kerayan, which takes its name from the Kerayan river, one of the headwaters
of the Mentarang-Sesayap river system. The people living in the Kerayan were known to
speak dialects related to Lun Dayeh, but references in the literature were brief. Indeed, Jay
Crain, writing in 1978, commented on ‘the lacunae of knowledge about the heartland of the
[Lun Dayeh] population in the interior of East Kalimantan’ (Crain 1978:123). These
Kerayan dialects are of particular interest linguistically, since they are located
geographically between Lun Dayeh spoken in the north, and Sa’ban in the south of a
region that is only fifty-seven miles long (Schneeberger 1945). The first serious attempt to
study the languages of the Kerayan was made in 1993 by Bernard Sellato who, in addition
to many word lists, also collected information on cultural features and history (Sellato
1997). 41 The research for this paper was carried out in July 1995. A month had been set
aside for the project, but bad weather seriously delayed flights to and from the area, 42 and
prevented trips to the more remote villages. Twenty-three language informants were
interviewed in the Kerayan, five in Samarinda and one in Tarakan. 43 They were, with few
exceptions, mature adults and their details are given in Appendix 1, and the location of
their home villages shown on Map 2.
The linguistic picture in the Kerayan district has been made more complex by the policy
carried out in the early 1970s, of regrouping or relocating villages, whereby eighty-nine
villages (each probably with its own minor dialect) were reduced to twenty-seven. Today,
as a result, two or more distinct dialects may be spoken in one village, as for example at Lg
Layu, where Sa’ban, Lengilo’ and other dialects are spoken, and Sellato observed in 1993
that regional linguae francae were developing (Sellato 1997). 44
40
41
42
43
44
In stative verb clauses the verb usually occurs in clause-initial position. For example:
Ttuet
nah kuet ieh pi abieng.
smashed PT leg 3S LP left
‘His left leg was completely smashed.’
Dr Sellato generously made his word lists available to me.
The Kerayan region is a plateau, 1000–1100 m high, and access from the east coast of Kalimantan is by
small, usually single-engine, aircraft.
Language work in Samarinda concentrated on a study of the pronouns, and of the reflexes of Blust’s
voiced aspirates (*bh, *dh, *gh). Following the Kerayan survey I interviewed a Kelabit, John Terawé,
from Bario, Sarawak.
Sellato has recorded in detail, all the known movements of people (and therefore of dialects) in the
Kerayan area within living memory (Sellato n.d.).
36
Beatrice Clayre
Sellato tentatively distinguished four major dialect groups in the Kerayan region: Lun
Dayeh in the northwest, Kelabit, including Lun Baa’ in the west, Lengilo’ in the mid and
upper Kerayan, and Sa’ban further south. These labels, with minor modifications, are
followed here.
Map 2: Villages in the Kerayan distict, Kalimantan Timur
The term Kelabit will be restricted to the language spoken by the Kelabit people who
live across the border in Sarawak in an area known as the Kelabit highlands. The
relationship between the Kelabit language and Lun Dayeh has long been recognised.
Kelabit word lists and vocabularies have appeared in various publications since 1896, but
the most authoritative is Blust’s ‘Kelabit–English vocabulary’ published in 1993 (Blust
1993; Bolang and Harrisson 1949:119–122; Douglas 1911; Ray 1913:155–196; Roth
1896:2, appendix:103; Southwell 1949:104–105). The ethnonym Lun Baa’ will be used to
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
37
refer to the ‘Kelabits’ in the Kerayan region. These are people who cultivate wet rice and
inhabit the Bawan and Belawit valleys in the west of the Kerayan area. (Langub 1987:33;
Schneeberger 1979:30; Sellato 1997; Southwell 1949:105–107).
The Lengilo’ are probably the people recorded in 1939 by Schneeberger as Ulun Milau
and Ulun Kerayan. They were located in the east of the region along the middle reaches of
the Kerayan river, but Sellato records that some Lengilo’ have since moved into the upper
reaches of that river and are living alongside Sa’ban who have migrated there from the
upper Bahau (Schneeberger 1979:22, 29–31; Sellato 1997 and n.d.).
Two general terms will be used to refer to the remaining dialects in the survey: central
dialects and upper Kerayan dialects. This is because the dialects spoken in these areas are
diverse and cannot yet be included under a single umbrella linguistic or ethnic term.
Central dialects consist of a small group of dialects clustered around the Kurid river in the
centre of the region. Sellato identified them as a subgroup of Lun Baa’ called Kurid, but
central dialects, such as that of P. Padi, exhibit interesting differences from the Lun Baa’
dialects and for this reason have been kept separate here. 45 The upper Kerayan area is
located in the south of the Kerayan region and, as a result of the relocation policy, the
dialects spoken there are more diverse and include major groups such as Sa’ban and
Lengilo’.
3.1 Verbal affixation in Kerayan dialects
Kerayan dialects have only two voices: actor and undergoer. No examples of
instrument voice were found outside Lun Dayeh. Compared to Lun Dayeh there is a
noticeable reduction in the number of affixes occurring with verbs. There are for example
no suffixes, and the number of pronoun sets is also reduced.
3.1.1 Actor voice
3.1.1.1 Imperfective aspect
In transitive verbs, most Kerayan dialects signal actor voice by a nasal prefix (N-), and
imperfective aspect is unmarked. In Lun Dayeh the basic actor voice prefix is ng-/nge-,
but many of the Kerayan dialects mark actor voice more commonly with the prefix m-/me-,
as in Sa’ban. These are the Lun Baa’ dialects, and two dialects of the upper Kerayan,
P. Sing, and P. Kaber, while the dialects that use ng-/nge- are the Lengilo’ dialects, and
P. Tera. Kelabit appears to belong to the latter group. The P. Padi dialect is remarkable
for its general lack of actor voice affixation. Table 7 illustrates actor voice affixation on
verbs from five Kerayan dialects, including P. Padi. 46
45
46
They could be referred to as Kurid dialects, but I prefer to use a neutral term for them until we have a
better definition of what characterises a Kurid dialect. According to Sellato the P. Padi dialect is close to
Kurid, and the P. Padi people came to the area from Ba Kelalan (Sarawak) six generations ago (Sellato
n.d.).
The Kerayan dialects have not yet been analysed phonemically, and spelling in this paper generally
follows the system devised by Blust for Kelabit. The labiodental fricative which is an allophone of /p/ in
Lun Dayeh has here been written as [f ] since it is an indicator of dialectal difference (see §4.3); [ə] and
[] have both been written as e, as in Kelabit, but given the fact that they contrast in Sa’ban, it is possible
that they are separate phonemes in some of the upper Kerayan dialects.
38
Beatrice Clayre
Table 7: Five Kerayan dialects with verbs marked for actor voice
Verb
Lun Dayeh
B. Liku
(Lengilo’)
Sembudud
(Lun Baa’)
Sa’ban
P. Padi
(Central)
drink
bite
see
kill
burn something
take
fan
tear
cover
wash s.th.
shoot with blowpipe
do, make
ngirup
ngetep
nier
ngaté
ngeseb
ngalap
nefer
ngeraak
ngekeb
meru
ngefut
nganau
ngirop
ngetep
niel
ngaté
ngeseb
ngalap
ngefel
neraak
ngekeb
muro
ngeput
naro
merop
metep
miel
maté
meseb
malap
mefer
meraak
mekeb
muro
meput
maro
merop
ntep
nnal
mataay
nsep
alaak
mpel
rraak
ngkap
mru
mpuet
aro
irop
tep
iel
ngaté
seb
alap
fel
neniit
nekeb
uro
put
aro
In the languages of Sabah, the typical actor voice prefix mong- (m-pong-), has been
analysed as m- signalling ‘actor voice’ and -pong- signalling ‘transitivity’ (Kroeger
1988:222). In Lun Dayeh and all the Kerayan dialects, including Sa’ban, there is only the
one prefix, but why some languages mark actor voice predominantly by ng-/nge- and
others by m-/me- is not obvious. Lun Baa’, Sa’ban and the other Kerayan dialects are not
alone among Bornean languages in opting for m-/me- as the basic actor voice prefix. In
Berawan (Sarawak) the largest subgroup of transitive verbs takes me-/m- in actor voice,
imperfective aspect (Clayre 1994:237), but this prefix (or a homophonous prefix) was also
found with intransitive and stative type verbs. For example, mittéén ‘to stand’, matoong
‘float’, mittam ‘black’, meliram ‘bruised’. A similar situation occurs in Melanau, a coastal
language of Sarawak, for example, maid ‘wipe’, mepit ‘throw away’, mungu’ ‘sit’, murék
‘climb up’, muaw ‘confused’, mama’ ‘dirty’.
Among Kerayan dialects, Lun Dayeh appears to be the more unusual in using nge-/ngto signal actor voice, but Lun Dayeh also has a productive stative verb system, marked by
the prefix me-/m-, 47 and the two systems, dynamic and stative, are kept separate by the use
of nge-/ng- to mark actor voice.
3.1.1.2 Perfective aspect in actor voice
Differences in signalling perfective aspect have already been noted between Lun Dayeh,
where it is signalled morphologically by the prefix ne-/n-, and Sa’ban, where it is signalled
by an auxiliary verb, pi ‘finish’. In Kerayan dialects both forms, the prefix and the
auxiliary, are used, and, depending on the dialect, the verb co-occurring with the auxiliary
may be marked by the perfective aspect prefix ne-/n-, or simply by the actor voice prefix
N-.
47
See §2.1.1.4.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
39
All Kerayan dialects, except P. Sing and P. Kaber, produced at least a few examples of
perfective aspect being marked by the prefix ne- added to a verb marked for actor voice as
illustrated in example (61). In questions such as ‘Who did x?’, there were examples in
some dialects (Kelabit, B. Liku, Binuang and P. Kurid) of verbs being marked either by neor only by the actor voice prefix, N-. Compare examples (61) and (62) both from Binuang.
(61)
Jé
nengekab
fé.
PIV.who PF.AV:cover water
‘Who covered the water?’
(62)
Jé
muro
tiok
nih.
PIV.who AV:wash spoon(s) this/these
‘Who washed this/these spoon(s)? 48
In addition to signalling perfective aspect by adding the prefix ne- to the actor voice
form of the verb, many dialects in the north and mid Kerayan areas (for example, Lg
Midang, P. Lutut, Lg Padi, Lg Mutan) add the auxiliary verb pengeh ‘finish’ (or the
dialectal equivalent) to the construction, as illustrated in example (63) from Lg Mutan.
(63)
Iek
pengeh nemefer apuy.
PF.AV:fan fire
‘I fanned the fire.’
PIV.1S finish
In other dialects of the same area of the Kerayan (for example, B. Liku, Binuang,
T. Karya), the auxiliary pengeh may occur either with a verb marked with the perfective
prefix ne-, or with a verb marked only by the actor voice prefix N-. In these dialects the
latter is the more common construction. Compare the examples illustrated in (64a and b)
from Binuang. In (64a) pengeh co-occurs with a verb marked for perfective aspect by the
prefix ne-, and in (64b) pengeh co-occurs with a verb marked only for actor voice.
(64) a. Wih
pengeh neneraak bekad neh.
PIV.1S finish PF.AV:tear shirt that
‘I have torn that shirt.’
b. Wih
pengeh meré
bekad neh
PIV.1S finish AV:give shirt that
‘I gave that shirt to you.’
ko-so.
NPNA-2S
In the upper Kerayan dialects of P. Sing, P. Kaber and P. Tera, perfective aspect is no
longer signalled morphologically, but by the auxiliary verb pengeh. The main verb is
marked only by the actor voice prefix, just as in Sa’ban. This is illustrated in examples
(65–66) from P. Sing. The first clause (65) is in imperfective aspect, and the verb is
marked by an actor voice prefix m-, the second (66) is a clause in perfective aspect,
signalled by the auxiliary pengeh, and the main verb is marked by the actor voice prefix
m-. These may be compared with example (36) from Sa’ban.
48
The language helper commented at the time that nemuro was not in common use. Most verbs checked
in this construction in Binuang were, however, marked for perfective aspect, the remainder were marked
only for actor voice.
40
Beatrice Clayre
(65)
Wih
meraak bekad.
PIV.1S AV:tear shirt
‘I tear the shirt.’
(66)
Wih
pengeh meraak bekad.
PIV.1S finish AV:tear shirt
‘I have torn the shirt.’
The Sembudud dialect was unusual as the perfective prefix n-, rather than being added
to the actor voice prefix m-, actually replaced it. For example meraak and neraak, ‘tear’
and ‘tore’ and maro and naro ‘do’ and ‘did’ (Table 8). Examples (67a–b) from
Sembudud illustrate this with the verb muro ‘to wash something’.
(67) a.
b.
Idan ko
muro
seduk neh?
when PIV.2S AV:wash spoon that
‘When will you wash that/those spoon(s)?’
Yé nuro
seduk neh?
who PF:wash spoon that
‘Who washed that/those spoon(s)?’
Occasional examples of a similar usage were noted in T. Karya, where, for example,
mefer ‘fan’ (IMPF) and nefer (PF) occur. In Lun Dayeh this pattern of replacing m- by noccurs only with stative verbs, but in Sembudud these are not stative verbs, nor does
Sembudud have a stative system comparable to Lun Dayeh. It appears that m- in
Sembudud signals both actor voice and imperfective aspect, and n- actor voice and
perfective aspect.
The P. Padi, a dialect that eschewed the use of prefixes in actor voice, generally
prefixed verbs with n- or ne- in perfective aspect. Table 8 gives examples of verbs from
five Kerayan dialects, including P. Padi, to illustrate the dialectal variations that occur in
the affixes signalling actor voice and perfective aspect.
In actor voice (imperfective aspect) Kerayan dialects fall into two main groups
according to the form of the prefix predominantly used to signal actor voice: nge-/ng or
me-/m-. In Lun Dayeh and Lengilo’, to the north and east of the region, nge-/ng- is the
predominant form of the prefix, and in Lun Baa’ and Upper Kerayan dialects (except P.
Tera) in the west and south of the region, me-/m- predominates. The central dialect of P.
Padi is unusual in having lost any marking for actor voice.
Perfective aspect marking in actor voice is much less clear, but does shows a more
north-to-south distinction. In the north in Lun Dayeh the main way of signalling perfective
aspect is by the prefix ne-, while pengeh rarely occurs. In the upper Kerayan area in the
south the perfective prefix ne- has been lost, and only the auxilary verb pengeh (or a
dialectal equivalent) occurs. In between these two extremes, the auxiliary pengeh
commonly occurs in perfective constructions, sometimes with a verb also marked by the
perfective prefix ne- and sometimes with verbs marked only by the actor voice prefix N-.
The Sembudud dialect is idiosyncratic and replaces the actor voice prefix m- by the
perfective aspect prefix n-.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
41
Table 8: The imperfective and perfective forms of verbs in
actor voice from five Kerayan dialects
Dialect
verb
Lun Dayeh
give
fan
wash (dish)
do/make
shoot (with blowpipe)
cover
give
fan
wash
shoot
cover
tear
give
fan
wash
do/make
tear
cover
give
fan
wash
do/make
shoot
give
fan
wash
do/make
cover
shoot
L. Mutan
(Lengilo’)
Sembudud
(Lun Baa’)
P. Padi
(Central)
Sa’ban
Actor voice
(imperfective)
meré
mebher
meru
nganau
ngeput
ngekeb
meray
mefer
nemero*
ngeput
ngekab
ngederaak
meré
mefer
muro
maro
meraak
mekab
ré
fel
uro
aro
put
mraay
mpel
mru
aro
ngkap
mpuet
Actor voice
(perfective)
nemeré
nemebher
nemeru
nenganau
nengeput
nengekeb
nemeray
nemefer
nemero
nengeput
nengekab
nengederaak
neré
nefer
nuro
naro
neraak
nekab
ré
nefel
nuro
naro
neput
auxiliary verb, pi
‘finished’, plus main
verb marked for actor
voice
* All other Lengilo’ dialects had mero or muro as the imperfective form of this verb
This variation in usage over such a small area suggests that the morphological marking
of perfective aspect, as seen in Lun Dayeh, is giving way to the use of a verb auxiliary as
seen in Sa’ban. Table 9 shows the predominant markings for perfective aspect (in actor
voice) in Kerayan dialects.
42
Beatrice Clayre
Table 9: The marking of perfective aspect in actor voice declarative
clauses in Kerayan dialects
Marking
+PF+AV+verb
Aux +PF+AV+verb
Aux +PFR +verb
Aux +PF+(AV)verb
Aux +PF+AV+verb
and
Aux
+AV+verb
Aux
+AV+verb
Dialect
Lun Dayeh,
Kelabit, Lg Mutan, Lg Padi (Lengilo’); Lg Midang
Lun Baa’); P. Kurid (Central)
Sembudud (Lun Baa’)
P. Padi (Central)
B. Liku, Binuang (Lengilo’); T. Karya (Lun Baa’)
P. Kaber, P. Sing, P. Tera (U.Kerayan); Sa’ban
Aux indicates the use of the auxiliary verb, pengeh.
PF and AV represent the appropriate aspect and voice prefixes
R indicates that the imperfective prefix is replaced by the perfective prefix
(AV) indicates that actor voice is unmarked
The replacement of actor voice (imperfective) prefix m- by actor focus perfective prefix
n- that occurs in Sembudud contrasts with the usage in the Berawan language of Sarawak.
In Berawan m- signals actor voice imperfective, and n- undergoer voice perfective. For
example: muppo ‘beat’, nuppo ‘beaten’; merrah ‘scatter’, nerrah ‘scattered’; malaa
‘take’, nalaa ‘taken’; mitéén ‘split’, nitéén ‘split’(Clayre 1994 and fieldnotes). Also some
verbs in the Melanau language signal actor voice imperfective by the prefix m-, and
undergoer voice perfective by replacing m- by n-. For example, miib ‘tow’ niib ‘towed’;
mebin ‘carry on back’ nebin ‘carried on back’, makup ‘scoop up’ nakup ‘scooped
up’(Clayre 1996:73).
3.1.1.3 The intransitive infix -em- in Kerayan dialects
The infix -em- that occurs in Kerayan dialects is a reflex of the PAn affix *-um-. The
infix is realised as -um- only with the verb kuman ‘eat’. In all other verbs the affix is
realised as -em-, or m- before vowel-initial stems. This affix, which marks actor focus
intransitive verbs, is found in Lun Dayeh, Kelabit and most Lengilo’ dialects (Table 10).
A metathesised form occurs in Lun Baa’ dialects, illustrated by melanguy (Table 10).
Otherwise in some Lun Baa’ dialects, and in all dialects of the central area and upper
Kerayan the affix has been lost. In addition, the P. Padi dialect has lost the initial
consonant of PKLD *laΝuy ‘swim’, the dialects of P. Kaber, P. Padi and Sa’ban show loss
of the initial syllable of PKLD *ed hiΝ ‘arrive’, and Sa’ban has lost most of the first syllable
of PKLD *tulud ‘fly’.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
43
Table 10: The distribution of the -em- affix in Kerayan dialects
Dialect
PKLD
Lun Dayeh
Kelabit
Lengilo’
Lun Baa’
Central area
Upper
Kerayan
Bario
Binuang
Lg Mutan
Lg Padi
B. Liku
P. Lutut
Pa’ Mering
T. Karya
Sembudud
Lg Midang
Lg Kabid
P. Padi
P. Tera
P. Sing
P. Kaber
Sa’ban
swim
*laΝuy
lemanguy
lemanguy
lemanguy
temuron #
temurun
lemangoy
melanguy
melanguy
melanguy
melanguy
languy
languy
anguy
langoy
languy
langoy
langoey
fly
*tulud
temulud
temulud
temulud
temulud
temulud
tulud
temulud
tulud
tulud
tulud
tulud
tulud
tulud
tulud
tulud
tulud
hlut
arrive
*ed hiΝ
mecing
med hing
meséng
meséng
mesing
mesé:n
mesing
mesing
mesing
meséng
mecing
mecing
sén
mesé:n
mirat
si:ng
sieng
# In Lun Dayeh temurun means ‘to descend’
3.1.2 Undergoer voice in Kerayan dialects
3.1.2.1 Imperfective aspect
In Lun Dayeh, verbs in undergoer focus (imperfective aspect) are signalled by the suffix
-en added to the root (Table 1, and example (4)). In Sa’ban this suffix is no longer in use,
but there is fossilised evidence for its former existence in the language (see §2.2.1.3, and
examples (43–45)).
In Kerayan dialects this suffix has all but disappeared, it remains only as a fossilised
form in three commonly used verbs: beré ‘give’ (Table 11); kuman ‘eat’ and (t)aru ‘do’
or ‘make’. For example, kenen ‘eaten’, the undergoer voice (imperfective) form of kuman
‘to eat’, is found in Kelabit and the Kerayan dialects of Lun Baa’(Lutut and Sembudud),
Lengilo’(Lg Mutan, B. Liku, and Binuang), and upper Kerayan (P. Tera, P. Kaber).
Example (68) is from Binuang (Lengilo’).
(68)
Kenen
so luba
nih.
eat:UV.IMPF 2S PIV:rice this
‘Will you eat this rice?
44
Beatrice Clayre
The undergoer voice form of beré ‘give’ shows considerable variation between the
dialects in the Kerayan, although the actor voice form of the verb is identical in most
dialects (Table 11).
Table 11: Voice and aspect markings of the verb beré ‘give’ in Kerayan dialects
(P) indicates the use of a periphrastic construction.
Actor voice
Dialect
Lun Dayeh
Kelabit
Lengilo’
Lun Baa’
Central area
Upper
Kerayan
Sa’ban
*
#
IMPF
PF
Bario
Binuang
meré
meré
meré
nemeré
nemeré
meré
Lg Padi
meray
nemeray
P. Mering
Sembudud
P. Kurid
P. Padi
meré
meré
meré
ré
nemeré
neré
neré
ré
P. Sing
meré
meré
P. Tera
meré
meré
P. Keber
meƒay
mraay
meƒay
mraay
Undergoer voice
beré:n
(P) meré
beré:n
(P) meré
beré:n
(P) meray
beré
beré
(P) ré
ré:n
(P) ré
ré
(P) meré
(P) ré
(P) meré
Ø
rien
IMPF
PF
biré
biré
biré
biray
iré
iré
iré
iré
iré
-*
iƒay #
iraay
The undergoer voice (perfective) form was not recorded in P. Tera.
No undergoer voice (imperfective) form could be elicited in P. Kaber. Note too that in this
dialect an initial or intervocalic r of other dialects is realised as a voiced velar fricative. P.
Kaber is not alone in these respects, the P. Aloon dialect of Sa’ban, not included in this
survey, also appears to lack an undergoer voice form of the verb ‘to give’, and in that dialect
initial and intervocalic r is realised as a voiced velar plosive.
Table 11 shows consistent loss of the initial consonant or the initial syllable of the verb
beré in central and upper Kerayan dialects. The beré:n form that occurs in Lun Dayeh and
Lengilo’ dialects is illustrated in (69) from Binuang, and the reduced form rén is illustrated
in (70) from the dialect of P. Padi (central). An example of the Sa’ban reduced form, rien,
is illustrated in (44).
(69)
Bekad
neh beré:n
wih ko=ieh.
PIV.shirt that give:UV.IMPF 1S NPNA=3S
‘I will give this shirt to him.’
(70)
Yakad
nih rén
wih ki=kyo.
PIV.shirt this give:UV.IMPF 1S NPNA=2S
‘I will give this shirt to you.’
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
45
In some Lun Baa’ dialects (for example, Lg Midang, P. Mering, Sembudud) the suffix
appears to have been lost altogether, and undergoer voice is signalled by the verb root
beré, as illustrated in (71) from P. Mering. In the central and upper Kerayan dialects of
P. Kurid, P. Tera and P. Sing not only has the suffix been lost, but also the first syllable of
the verb root, producing ré as illustrated in (72) from P. Sing. In the dialects of Lg Padi,
Lg Mutan, Lg P. Sia, P. Kaber and Sa’ban the final vowel is realised as /ay/, which is
closer to the PKLD form *meray.
(71)
Bekad
neh beré
wih
ki=ieh.
PIV.shirt that give:(UV) (GEN)1S NPNA=3S
‘I will give that shirt to him.’
(72)
Bekad
nih ré
wih wan keh.
PIV.shirt this give:(UV) 1S for
2S
‘I will give this shirt to you.’
A periphrastic construction, similar to that described for Sa’ban (§2.2.1.2), was
produced for undergoer voice imperfective constructions in many of the Kerayan dialects.
In some dialects (Binuang, Lg Padi, P. Padi, P. Sing, and P. Tera), both morphological and
periphrastic constructions were offered, as indicated in Table 11, for the verb beré ‘give’.
The periphrastic construction consists of the undergoer voice (imperfective) form of the
verb (t)aru ‘to do/make’ followed by the non-pivot actor (NP) and the main verb. The
dialectal variations in the undergoer voice form of the verb (t)aru are listed in Table 12
together with a diagrammatic representation of this periphrastic construction. In this
construction any voice markings on the main verb are cancelled following (t)aru.
Table 12: The dialectal forms of the verb (t)aru in the periphrastic
undergoer construction in Karayan dialects
Dialect
Lun Dayeh
Kelabit
Sembudud, P. Mering,
P. Padi, P. Kaber
Lg Padi, Lg Mutan
P. Tera, Lg Sing
B. Liku, Binuang, P. Kurid
(t)aru
ruen
tuen
uen
+NP actor
+NP actor
+NP actor
+NP actor
+{AV}:verb
+{AV}:verb
+{AV}:verb
+{AV}:verb
ngen
nen
en
+NP actor
+NP actor
+NP actor
+{AV}:verb
+{AV}:verb
+{AV}:verb
Example (73) shows that this type of construction is also known in Lun Dayeh, although
it is not so commonly used as it is in Kerayan dialects. Example (74) is from Bario
Kelabit, and (75) is from P. Kurid. Here the main verb is not the actor voice imperfective
form meré, but a reduced form, ré. Example (76) illustrating the periphrastic form from
Binuang may be contrasted with (69), the morphological construction from Binuang.
(73)
Ruen
mu
manak
ebha luk rupen
mu.
do:UV.IMPF GEN.2S. {AV}:boil water REL drink:UV.IMPF GEN.2S
‘Do you boil the water that you drink?
46
Beatrice Clayre
(74)
Tuen kuh
meré
sapa ineh ngen neh. 49
do:UV GEN.1S {AV}:give shirt that to
3S
‘I will give the shirt to him.’
(75)
Akad neh en
wih ré
wan co.
shirt this do:UV 1S give for 2S
I will give this shirt to you.’
(76)
Bakad neh en
wih meré
ko=so.
shirt
this do:UV 1S
{AV}:give NPNA=2S
‘I will give this shirt to you.’
The periphrastic construction is also used as a polite imperative in Lengilo’, and in
central and upper Kerayan dialects, as illustrated in (77) from Binuang.
(77)
En
so ngelaak
do:UV.IMPF 2S AV:cook
‘Cook that rice!’
luba neh.
rice that
The undergoer voice suffix -en is in regular use in Lun Dayeh, but it does not occur in
Kerayan dialects, except as a fossilised remnant with a very few verbs. These remnants are
an indication that the suffix was once in use in Kerayan dialects; thus verbs, such as beré
‘give’, provide useful information on the demise of this part of the voice system in the
Kerayan area. They also demonstrate the strategies employed, such as the use of a
periphrastic construction, to fill the gap left behind.
Some features noted in the use of undergoer voice (imperfective) verbs in the Kerayan
are also known from other Bornean languages. A similar periphrastic construction has
been recognised in some of the languages of Sarawak, for example Kayan (Clayre 1995).
The use of the simple verb root to signal undergoer voice (imperfective), as illustrated by
the occurrence of beré in Lun Baa’ dialects (71), has been noted in languages such as
Penan and Melanau in Sarawak, and in some languages of southeast Kalimantan (Clayre
1996:69, 73, 75). The reduction of beré ‘give’ to ré in the dialects of P. Kurid, P. Tera and
P. Sing is also not without comparative parallels, since a similar phenomenon was noted in
Penan, where ala: ‘take’ occurred in certain constructions as la: (Clayre 1996:69).
3.1.2.2 Undergoer focus and perfective aspect
It has already been noted in Lun Dayeh that the perfective aspect infix -in- occurs only
with verbs in undergoer voice (which is otherwise unmarked), and that the infix -in- occurs
as in- before vowel-initial roots and as an ablaut -i- in roots with a schwa as the
penultimate vowel. 50 Table 13 lists the perfective undergoer voice form of six verbs from
twelve Kerayan dialects. It is apparent from this table that several phonological processes
are at work in these dialects, the final result of which is that in several dialects the
49
50
Blust (1993) glosses ngen as ‘a particle preceding personal names and titles’ in which case it appears to
be similar to the personal noun markers ni= or ki=, and possibly i=, in Lun Dayeh (Blust does not record
i= in Kelabit). He also glosses it as ‘to’, presumably a preposition, and Amster (1995) glosses it only as
a preposition ‘for’, ‘to’ ‘at’. In Sa’ban the preposition meaning ‘to’ is ngaan. For the purposes of this
paper the occurrence of ngen in examples (74) and (84) is interpreted as a preposition.
See §2.1.1.1
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
47
perfective infix becomes a prefix. These dialects are: Lun Baa’, central, and upper
Kerayan dialects and two Lengilo’ dialects (B. Liku and Binuang). Phonological changes
concerning this infix are discussed below in §4.1.
Table 13: Six Kerayan verbs marked for undergoer voice and perfective aspect
Dialect
wash
fan
tear
cover
take
do/make
h
Lun Dayeh
biru #
bib er
diraak
kikeb
ilap **
inalap
tinaru
Kelabit
binuru
bibher
riraak
kikeb
alap
sinaru
Lg Mutan
biro
bifer
diraak
ikeb
ilap
sinaro
Binuang
yuro
ifel
iraak
ikeb
yalap
yaro
B. Liku
yuro
–
iraak
ikeb
yalap
yaro
P. Lutut
yuru
ifer
diraak
ikeb
yalap
yaro
Sembudud
yuro
ifel
iraak
ikeb
yalap
yaro
P.Padi
yuro
ifel
iraak
ikeb
yalap
yaro
P. Kurid
yuro
ifel
iraak
ikeb
yalap
yaro
P.Tera
yuro
ifel
iraak
ikeb
yalap
yaro/
P. Kaber
iƒo
ipel
iƒaak
ikeb
yalaak
aƒo/
Sa’ban
iru
ipel
iraak
ikap
alaak
aro/
Lengilo’
Lun Baa’
Central
Upper
Kerayan
#
**
The majority of the Kerayan dialects reflect a verb root with [u] as the penultimate vowel i.e.
buru; however, Lun Dayeh, Lg Mutan, Lg Padi and P.Keber all have a schwa as the
penultimate vowel in the actor voice imperfective form of the verb, which implies a root
beru (see Table 8).
The two forms, ilap and inalap, suggest that there may be a variant form of the root with an
initial schwa instead of an initial [a].
Undergoer voice in Karayan dialects has more in common with the Sa’ban system than
with the Lun Dayeh system. The undergoer voice suffix -en of Lun Dayeh has been all but
lost in Kerayan dialects, but surviving fossilised remains on verbs such as beré ‘give’
(Table 11) show that it was in use in earlier versions of the dialects. Morphological
marking of the undergoer voice (imperfective) form of the verb is replaced, as in Sa’ban,
by a periphrastic construction with the verb (t)aru ‘do/make’. In perfective aspect an
undergoer voice verb continues to be marked morphologically, 51 but the phonological
changes which are taking place in Kerayan dialects are resulting in the former infix
becoming a prefix.
51
The auxiliary pangeh ‘finished’ also occurs with verbs marked for perfective aspect in undergoer voice,
but it never replaces the affix -in-/i- as it does the perfective prefix ne- in actor voice in Sa’ban and some
Kerayan dialects.
48
Beatrice Clayre
3.1.2.3 Other verb affixes in Kerayan dialects
No other verbal affixes were elicited during this survey. An abortive attempt was made
to collect data on stative verbs for comparison with the Lun Dayeh system, but it appears
that Kerayan dialects do not have a stative system comparable to that described above for
Lun Dayeh.
3.2 Pronoun Sets in Kerayan dialects
Grammatically, there is only one set of pronouns in Kerayan dialects (set I), but this one
set can be divided into two groups according to the dialectal form of the pronouns.
Pronouns of the first or wih group occur in all Lun Baa’ dialects, all central dialects, in two
Lengilo’ dialects (Binuang and B. Liku), and in P. Sing, and P. Tera in the upper Kerayan.
Pronouns of the second or éek group occur in two Lengilo’ dialects (Lg Padi and Lg
Mutan), and in three dialects from the upper Kerayan (Lg P. Sia, P. Kaber, Lg Rungan).
There is some dialectal variation within each of these two groups of pronouns, so diaforms
are used to list them in Table 14.
Table 14: Kerayan pronouns, Set I (diaforms)
1S
2S
3S
1IP
1EP
2P
3P
wih dialects
wih
(i)ko
ieh
tau
kai
(m)uyuh
(i)deh
éek dialects
iek/éek
(i)keh
ieh
(ki)tam
kami/amay
mé
deh
Pronouns of set I in Kerayan dialects perform the functions of pronouns of set I and II in
Lun Dayeh; that is, they function as the actor and undergoer in both actor and undergoer
voice clauses, and following a noun, they signal the possessor. Their function in a clause is
made clear by their constituent order and, to a lesser extent, by the affix on the verb.
Pronouns functioning as actors in actor voice clauses are illustrated in examples (63–66),
pronouns functioning as actors in undergoer clauses are illustrated in examples (68–72).
Pronouns functioning as undergoers in actor voice clauses are illustrated in example (78)
from Sembudud (Lun Baa’) and (79) from P. Kaber (Ulu Kerayan). 52
52
(78)
Wih
mier
ieh.
(PIV)1S AV:see 3S
‘I see him.’
(79)
Éek
menal ieh.
(PIV)1S AV:see 3S
‘I see him.’
Due to an oversight, the only elicited examples of undergoers in undergoer voice clauses in other
Kerayan dialects are of nouns, not pronouns.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
49
Pronouns similar to pronouns of set II in Lun Dayeh were noted in two Kerayan dialects
(Lg Padi and Lg Mutan) and in Kelabit, 53 but they had no separate function, and in every
case could be replaced by a pronoun from the Kerayan set I. Examples (80–82) illustrate
this ambivalence from the dialect of Lg Mutan. Note in (81) that in Lun Dayeh a set II
pronoun could not occur in this position; it would have to be a set III pronoun (nemu) as
illustrated in example (24).
(80)
(81)
ruma/ kuh
house 1S
‘my house’
Iek
nier
(or iek)
(1S)
mu (or ikeh).
(PIV)1S AV:see 2S
(2S)
‘I see you.’
(82)
Lawid
neh ilap
iek (or kuh).
(PIV)fish that UV.PF:take 1S (1S)
‘I caught that fish.’
In Lun Dayeh, pronouns of set III marked by the proclitic ne=/n= function as
undergoers in actor voice clauses, and as obliques, but in Sa’ban, pronouns marked by
ne=/n= only indicate obliques. In many Kerayan dialects oblique pronouns were marked
by ki= (or ke=/ko=) in constructions parallel to those marked by ne=/n= in Lun Dayeh, as
shown in examples (64b, 69–71, 76). 54 Dialects of the upper Kerayan marked obliques by
a preposition preceding a pronoun of set I, as in examples (72 and 75) from P. Sing and
P. Kurid respectively, but both systems are in use in dialects such as Sembudud, T. Karya
and P. Padi.
Bario Kelabit has a set of genitive pronouns similar to those in Lun Dayeh (set II) but,
as in the Kerayan dialects, their use seems to be on the wane, and in the examples elicited
in 1995, pronouns of set I were also used to signal possession (83), and non-pivot actors
(84). The undergoer in actor focus clauses, which is marked by set III pronouns in Lun
Dayeh, is simply marked by a set I pronoun in Kelabit (85).
(83)
(84)
ruma/ iko (or mu di)
house 2S (or 2S PT)
‘your house’
Sapa/
sineh biré
uih ngen neh.
this
UV.<PF>:give 1S to
3S
‘I gave this shirt to him.’
(PIV)shirt
(85)
Uih
nier
(PIV)1S
AV:see 3S
ieh.
‘I see him.’
53
54
They were also noted in Lg P. Sia, but the dialect of that language helper was suspiciously close to Lun
Dayeh although he used pronouns of the éek set.
Dialects with this proclitic were: Lun Baa’ (Sembudud, Lembudud, T. Karya, P Mering); Lengilo’
(Binuang, B. Liku); Central (P. Padi), upper Kerayan (P. Tera).
50
Beatrice Clayre
Pronouns of the wih set are phonetically similar to Lun Dayeh pronouns. In turn the
Lun Dayeh pronouns have phonetic similarities with pronouns belonging to set I (pivot set)
in languages of Sabah. The first person plural forms tau and kai are phonetically similar to
takau and akai in Timugon, tokou and okoi in Kimaragang, and toko and kai in Tombonuo
(Clayre 1996:56). 55 The second person plural pronoun which occurs in the wih dialects,
(m)uyuh, has phonetic similarities only with languages in Sabah, where muyu occurs in the
nominative and genitive pronoun sets of Ida’an, and muyun in the accusative set of the
same language; nuyu and duyuh occur in the genitive pronoun sets of Tombonuo and
Kimaragang respectively, and ramuyun occurs among the non-pivot (non-focus) non-actor
set of Timugon (Moody 1991; Clayre 1996:57).
Dialects with the éek set of pronouns include two Lengilo’ dialects (Lg Padi and Lg
Mutan) and dialects of the upper Kerayan, excluding P. Sing and P. Tera. In the éek
dialects the first person singular pronoun is realised as iek in the dialects of Lg Padi, Lg
Mutan and Lg P. Sia, and as éek in Lg Rungan, P. Kaber, and Sa’ban. Some older Sa’ban
recall that their grandparents said ak, and this certainly links Sa’ban to the many Bornean
languages which have some form of aku, but not with the Lun Dayeh and Kerayan dialects
which have wih. The first person plural pronouns, (ki)tam and (k)ami occur as kitam and
kami in the Lengilo’ dialects of Lg Padi and Lg Mutan, and as taam and amay in the Lg
Rungun dialect and in Sa’ban. These pronouns are quite distinct from the first person
plural pronouns in the wih set. The links of (ki)tam and (k)ami are with the Kayan, Murik
and Penan languages located to the south of the Kerayan in Sarawak and Kalimantan
(Clayre 1996:57). The pivot first person plural pronouns in Kayan are itam or tam and
kamé/; in Penan itam or tam and amé or mé and in Murik itam and kami/. The second
person plural pronoun of the éek dialects of Lg Mutan, Lg Padi and Lg P. Sia, is mé, which
has no immediately obvious similar form in neighbouring languages. In the éek dialects of
Lg Rungun and Sa’ban this pronoun occurs as ciem. Blust (1999) in a paper on Sa’ban
suggested that this pronoun, together with the first person singular, éek, the second person
singular, ceh, the first person plural inclusive, taam, and some dual and paucal forms of
Sa’ban pronouns, may have a Kayan source. The source may have been a language closely
related to Kayan, Murik or Ngurik, as the Murik once lived alongside the Sa’ban in the
Bahau, before migrating to Sarawak in the nineteenth century.
The second person singular pronoun has a back vowel [] in wih dialects and a central
vowel [ə] in éek dialects. It is phonetically similar to ko(h) or ikaw in Tombonuo and
Kimaragang Dusun, and kou in Timugon, but also to the second person singular forms, ika
and iko, which occur in Kayan and Kenyah dialects (Clayre 1996:56–57).
In the Bario dialect of Kelabit in Sarawak, the pronouns uih, iko, ieh, tau and muyuh are
typical of the wih group, but the first person plural exclusive pronoun is kami, which is
typical of the éek group.
3.3 Noun markers
Common nouns have no noun markers in Kerayan languages. Markers for proper nouns
were not researched in this survey, but one example of the use of a personal noun marker
55
Sellato (pers. comm.) informs me that tau or to and kai occur in Aoheng and other languages of
Kalimantan.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
51
to signal an oblique argument occurred spontaneously in a B. Liku example (86). Oblique
pronouns in the B. Liku dialect are marked by the proclitic, ke=. 56
(86)
So
meré
bakad nih ki=Samwel.
this PM.NPNA=Samuel
‘You give this shirt to Samuel.’
(PIV):2S AV:give shirt
3.4 Word order
Given that all the Kerayan data were elicited, and that the responses may have been
influenced by the Indonesian or Lun Dayeh languages used in the interviews, it would be
unwise to attempt to draw firm conclusions concerning the importance of word order in
Kerayan dialects. It would appear, however, that in actor voice clauses, the preferred order
is SVO. One consistent pattern that does emerge is that the non-pivot core argument always
occurs immediately following the verb.
4 Phonological processes observed in Kerayan dialects
It will already have become apparent that, in addition to the grammatical changes that
are happening in Kerayan dialects, many phonological changes are also taking place.
Analysis of these changes is at a very preliminary stage, 57 and attention is drawn here to
only a few cases relating to the verbs and pronouns discussed earlier.
4.1 The infix -in-, -i- ablaut, and consonant deletion
The evidence from Kerayan verbs suggests that the processes taking place in verbs with
the infix -in-, such as binuru/ (Kelabit) ‘washed’, tinaru/ (Lun Dayeh) ‘done/made’ and
inalap (Lun Dayeh) ‘taken’ (Table 13), are as follows: the first stage is the deletion of n
from the affix to produce biuru/, tiaru/ and ialap, the forms biuru/ and ialap were not
recorded, but the form tiaru/ occurs in the Lg Padi dialect of Lengilo’; the next stage is the
deletion of the root-initial consonant which would produce iuru/ and iaru/, in which, as in
ialap, the former -in- infix looks like a prefix i-; the final stage involves reinterpretation
with the loss of syllabicity of initial i before vowels to produce yuru/, yaru/ and yalap, 58
and these forms occur in Lun Baa’, Lengilo’ and central dialects. In the upper Kerayan
dialects of P. Sing and Sa’ban, even the y- prefix form has been lost and the verb occurs as
an unaffixed root, alaak and aro/ (Table 13). In P. Kaber while yalaak retains the y-, aƒo/
(‘done’) has lost any marking. These processes may be diagrammed as in Table 15.
Another change taking place in most Kerayan dialects is the lowering of a final high back
vowel to a mid back vowel (Table 13).
56
57
58
See fn. 54.
I am grateful to Carolyn Rensch of SIL for her comments during preliminary discussions about the
phonological changes taking place in the Kerayan.
A similar loss of syllabicity occurs with u in word-final position, for example uih ‘1st person sg.’ in Lun
Dayeh, is realised as wih in Kerayan dialects.
52
Beatrice Clayre
Table 15: Phonological processes associated with the -in- infix in Kerayan verbs
Forms in bold occur in at least one dialect
Root
buru/ ‘wash’
taru/ ‘make’
alap ‘take’
addition of -inbinuru/
tinaru/
inalap
n- deletion
>biuru/
>tiaru/
>ialap
initial C deletion
>iuru/
>iaru
i- realignment
>yuru/
>yaru/
>yalap
In the case of verbs with the -i- ablaut form, such as biru/, bibher, diraak, and kikeb
(Table 13), the deletion of the consonant /n/ from -in- has already taken place. These verbs
also show loss of the initial consonant of the root. This process, however, is not yet
complete in all Lun Baa’ and Lengilo’ dialects since P. Lutut and Lg Mutan both retain
some initial consonants, but it is complete in dialects of the central area and upper Kerayan
(Table 13). Where this process has taken place the i- retains its syllabicity since it
precedes a consonant, and the end result is that the perfective infix effectively becomes a
prefix. The processes may be diagrammed as in Table 16.
Table 16: Phonological processes associated with the -i- ablaut in Kerayan verbs
Root
kekeb ‘cover’
deraak ‘tear’
beré
‘give’
Schwa to -i- ablaut
kikeb
diraak
biré
Initial C deletion
ikeb
iraak
iré
4.2 Palatalisation of /k/, and the case of the second person singular pronoun
Within the Kerayan area the second person singular pronoun has undergone two
noticeable sound changes. These are the loss of the initial vowel, and palatalisation. These
two processes are illustrated by the dialectal realisations of the second person singular
pronouns listed in Table 17. An additional change is seen in the éek dialects where the
final vowel is realised as a schwa followed by a word-final h.
Table 17: Realisations of the second person singular pronoun iko in Kerayan dialects
Wih dialects
Éek dialects
Realisation
iko
ko
kJo
ico
co
so
sJo
ikeh
keh
ceh
Dialect
Lg Nuat, Lg Midang, P. Lutut,
T. Karya, P. Mering, Sembudud
P. Padi
Lg Kabid
P. Kurid
B. Liku, Binuang
P. Tera
Lg Mutan, Lg Padi, Lg P. Sia
Lg Rungan, P. Keber
Sa’ban
Lun Dayeh
and Lun Baa’
Central
Lengilo’
upper Kerayan
Lengilo’, upper Kerayan
upper Kerayan
These examples show /i/ causing palatalisation of a following /k/ and, then, in most
dialects being deleted, with its presence being perpetuated by palatalisation.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
53
4.3 The realisation of /p/ and /bh/ as [f]
In some dialects of Lun Dayeh, the phoneme /p/ occurs in all positions of the word; in
other dialects (including the dialect of Lun Dayeh described in this paper) /p/ has a
labiodental allophone [f] that occurs in word-initial and word-medial positions. For
example, some dialects say [purut] ‘dowry’ and [tupəd] ‘stand’ and others say [furut] and
[tufəd]. However, [p] occurs in word-final position in all dialects, for example /ngalap/
[ŋalap] ‘to take’. 59 In Kerayan dialects word-medial (intervocalic) /p/ is realised as a
voiceless plosive, as for example in laput ‘cloud’, lipen ‘tooth, tuped ‘stand’. In wordinitial position in most Kerayan dialects /p/ is realised as a voiceless plosive, but in Lun
Baa’ dialects it is realised as a labiodental fricative [f]. For example /pengeh/ or [fəŋəh]
‘finished’, /palad/ or [falad] ‘palm’(of hand) and /pung/ or [fuŋ] ‘wild animal’.
A labiodental fricative that may not be an allophone of /p/ 60 does, however, occur in
most dialects of Kerayan as the reflex of what Blust calls the voiced aspirate, */bh/, of
PKLD (Blust 1993:146–148). In Kelabitic languages this phoneme is reflected in three
ways: in Kelabit and most dialects of Lun Dayeh its reflex is a voiced aspirate; in three
dialects (Lg Sing, P. Keber and Sa’ban) its reflex is /p/; but in most Kerayan dialects its
reflex is a voicless labiodental fricative [f], with an optional bi-labial variant [∏]. 61 In
Table 18, the reflexes of PKLD */bh/ in Kerayan dialects are illustrated and contrasted with
the occurrence of */p/ and */b/.
Table 18: Examples from Kerayan dialects of the reflexes of PKLD */bh/, */b/ and */p/
Dialect
PKLD
Kelabit
Lun Baa’:
Lengilo’:
Central:
Upper
Keryan:
P. Lutut
Sembudud
T. Karya
Lg Padi
B. Liku
Lg Kabid
P. Padi
P. Tera
Lg Sing
P. Kaber
Sa’ban
smoke
*rebhun
rebhun
refun
refun
refun
refun
defun
fun
fun
fun
depun
lepun
pu:n
to fan
*bebher(n)
mebher
mefer
mefer
mefer
ngefer
ngefel
mefel
fel
ngefel
mpel
mepel
mpel
water
*ebhaq
ebha/
fa/
fa//
fa/
fa/
fé/
fé/
fé/
fé/
pé/
pei/
pei/
hair
*ebhuk
ebhuk
fuk
fuk
fok
fuk
fok
fok
fuk
fok
pok
pok
puek
tooth
*lipen
lipen
lipen
lipen
lipen
lipen
–
lipen
–
–
ipen
ipen
ipan
ashes
*abuh
abuh
abuh
abuh
abuh
abuh
abuh
abuh
abuh
abuh
abuh
abeu
abeu
Note that the symbol é represents a front open-mid vowel, and e represents the schwa.
*bebher is a nominal form, but the Kerayan examples of this word are verb forms
59
60
61
In the ‘[f] dialects’ when a suffix is added to a verb ending with /p/, the /p/ then becomes intervocalic
and is realised as [f]. For example, /ngalap/ ‘to take’ > [lafen] ‘to be taken’ (UV.IMPF) and [lafu] ‘take!’
(UV.IMP).
No minimal pairs occur in my limited data, but in several dialects such as P. Padi (central), Lg Mutan
(Lengilo’) and P. Tera (upper Kerayan), there are close contrasts between [p] and [f] in words such as
[fun] ‘smoke’ and [puŋ] ‘wild animal’, or [fok] ‘hair (head)’ and [po/on] ‘beginning’ or ‘trunk of tree’.
Blust (1993:147) lists other dialects and languages in Sarawak with the reflexes, p and f.
54
Beatrice Clayre
In addition to illustrating that [f] is a reflex of PKLD */bh/ the table also illustrates other
sound changes that have been taking place in the Kelabitic dialects of the Kerayan. For
example, the loss of initial vowels, illustrated by *ebha and *ebhuk, the loss of initial
consonants as illustrated by *lipen, the loss of initial syllables as illustrated by *rebhun,
and the replacement of final /r/ by /l/ as illustrated in *mebher.
5 Final comments
This survey based on limited data collected over a very short period nevertheless
highlights phonological and morphological changes that are taking place over a small
geographical area.
Lun Dayeh, in the north of the area and adjacent to Sabah, is still recognisable as a
Philippine type ‘focus’ language with three voices, appropriate verb affixation and separate
pronoun sets. Differences between the pronoun sets are, however, evident only in the
singular pronouns, the plural pronouns having already been neutralised.
The range of voice types in all other Kerayan dialects is reduced to two: actor and
undergoer. Verb affixation and pronoun sets are also reduced. In most dialects pronoun
sets are reduced to one set that fulfils all the functions of the three sets in Lun Dayeh. Set
III pronouns in Lun Dayeh were marked by a proclitic, but similar proclitic marking is
found in only seven Kerayan dialects (Sembudud, Lembudud, T. Karya, B. Liku, Binuang,
P. Padi and P. Tera); all other dialects signalled an oblique pronoun by a preposition.
Verb affixes marking the semantic role of the pivot are reduced to a nasal prefix (N-)
signalling actor voice, and a form of -in- signalling perfective aspect in undergoer voice.
All verb suffixes have been lost, including the undergoer voice (imperfective aspect) suffix
-en. The latter has been replaced by a periphrastic construction but fossilised remnants
occurring with a small group of conservative verbs indicate that undergoer voice was
morphologically marked in earlier versions of the dialects. The actor voice perfective
prefix ne- is in the process of being replaced by an auxiliary verb, pengeh. The actor voice
prefix (N-) itself seems to be under threat in many dialects, such as Sa’ban, where some
verbs occur without a prefix, for example alaak ‘take’ or abeh ‘carry on the back’, and P.
Padi where most actor voice verbs had no prefix.
To compensate for the loss of information carried by the pronoun sets and verb affixes,
constituent order becomes more important. In Lun Dayeh the verb regularly occurs in
clause-initial position, but in Kerayan languages more often the pivot occurs in this
position. In Lun Dayeh and all the Kerayan languages, it is the rule that the non-pivot
argument always follows immediately after the verb.
The introduction of periphrastic constructions, verb auxiliaries and prepositions indicate
that Kerayan dialects are moving away from a morphologically marked language structure
to a more isolating kind of language structure.
The survey also shows that many of the phonological and morphological changes that
have been noted in Sa’ban are part of a wider picture of language change affecting the
whole of the Kerayan region.
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
55
Appendix 1: List of language helpers
Dialect
Name
Age
Sex
Lun Dayeh
Lun Dayeh
Lun Dayeh
Lun Dayeh
Lun Dayeh
Lun Baa’
Lun Baa’
Lun Baa’
Lun Baa’
Lun Baa’
Lun Baa’
Lun Baa’
Central
Central
Central
Lengilo’
Lengilo’
Lengilo’
Lengilo’
Lengilo’
U Kerayan
U. Kerayan
U. Kerayan
U. Kerayan
U. Kerayan
U. Kerayan
U. Kerayan
Sa’ban
Sa’ban
Kelabit
Andreas Padan
Hendrik Udan
TekHu Tebari/
GukHang Tebari/
Hendrik Tadem
Mitun Tilo
Isaak Surang
Markus Petrus
Sigar Lau
Elisa Piuk
Fatima Kayeh
Aurin Yusup
Ayub Sigar
Ganit Dolof
Moses Dawat
Dorce Liu
Nikelas Pengiran
Juliana Martin
Samuel S T Padan
Simsun Duyung
Ediento Toran
Sakai Riang
Armi Yudan
Pelipa Abdulah
Martinus Jalung
Ediento Toran
Darius Kamis
Franky Aran
Arsufandi Matius
John Terawe
40s
40s
70s
70s
50s
50s
40s
20s
70s
50s
30s
20s
40s
40s
40s
30s
30s
40s
30s
40s
20s
30s
30s
18
30s
20s
20s
50s
20s
40s
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
F
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
M
M
M
M
F
M
M
M
M
M
M
Interview
Origin of helper
location
Tarakan
Lg Umang
Lg Bawan
Lg Sepayang
Kampung Baru
Lg Nuat
Kampung Baru
Lg Nuat
Lg Bawan
Lg Nuat
Lg Midang
Lg Midang
T.Karya
T. Karya
Samarinda
T. Karya
Lembudud
Lembudud
Lg Bawan
Sembudud
Lg Bawan
P. Lutut
Pulau Sapi
P. Mering
Lg Bawan
Lg Kabid
Lg Bawan
P. Kurid
Lg Bawan
P. Padi
Lg Bawan
Lg Padi
Samarinda
Lg Padi
Lg Bawan
B. Liku
Lg Bawan
Binuang
T. Lapang
Lg Mutan
Lg Bawan
P. Ibang
Lg Bawan
Lg P. Sia
Lg Bawan
P. Tera
Lg Bawan
P. Sing
Lg Bawan
P. Kaber
Lg Bawan
P. Ibang
Samarinda
Lg Rungan
Lg Bawan
Lg Tua
Samarinda
Lg Tua
Miri
Bario
56
Beatrice Clayre
References
Amster, Matthew H., 1995, Kelabit/English, English/Kelabit glossary. Kuching: Rurum
Kelabit Sarawak.
Blust, Robert, 1993, Kelabit–English vocabulary. Sarawak Museum Journal 65:141–226.
—— 1997, Ablaut in northwest Borneo. Diachronica 14:1–30.
—— 1999, Language, dialect and riotous sound change: the case of Sa’ban. In Graham
W. Thurgood, ed. Papers from the Ninth Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian
Linguistics Society. Arizona State University, Program for Southeast Asian Studies.
Bolang, A. and Tom Harrisson, 1949, Murut and related vocabularies. Sarawak Museum
Journal, 5(1) (NS):116–124.
Boutin, Michael E., 2002, Nominative and genitive case alternations in Bonggi. In Wouk
and Ross 2002:209–239.
Cense, A.A. and E.M. Uhlenbeck, 1958, Critical survey of studies on the languages of
Borneo. ‘S-gravenhage: Het Koninklijk Institut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde.
Clayre, Beatrice, 1972, A preliminary comparative study of the Lun Bawang (Murut) and
Sa’ban languages of Sarawak. Sarawak Museum Journal 20:145–171.
—— 1994, Verb affixes in Berawan. In Cecilia Odé and Wim Stokhof, eds Proceedings
of the Seventh International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Leiden 22–27
August 1994. Leiden University: Department of Languages and Cultures of South East
Asia and Oceania, Projects Division.
—— 1995, A preliminary typology of the languages of middle Borneo. Paper presented at
the fourth biennial conference of the Borneo Research Council, Brunei.
—— 1996, The changing face of focus in the languages of Borneo. In Steinhauer
1996:51–88.
—— 2002, Observations on Lundayeh auxiliaries and the case of aru’. In K. Alexander
Adelaar and Robert Blust, eds Between worlds: linguistic papers in memory of David
John Prentice, 49–63. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
—— in preparation, The phonology of Sa’ban.
Crain, Jay B., 1978, The Lun Dayeh. In Victor T. King, ed. Essays on Borneo societies,
123–142. Hull Monographs on South-east Asia, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Douglas, Reginald S., 1911, A comparative vocabulary of the Kayan, Kenyah and Kelabit
languages. Sarawak Museum Journal 1(1):75–119.
Galvin, A. Dennis, 1967, [Kenyah vocabulary], unpublished MS.
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P., 2002, Voice in western Austronesian: an update. In Wouk and
Ross 2002:7–16.
Hudson, Alfred B., 1978, Linguistic relations among Borneo peoples with special
reference to Sarawak: an interim report. In Mario Zamora, Vinson Sutlive and Nathan
Altshuler, eds Sarawak: Linguistics and development problems, 1–44. Williamsburg:
Studies in Third World Societies 3, Department of Anthropology, College of William
and Mary.
Kroeger, Paul R., 1988, Verbal focus in Kimaragang. In Steinhauer 1996:217–240.
—— 1990, Stative aspect and unaccusativity in Kimaragang Dusun. Oceanic Linguistics
29(2):110–131
Kelabitic languages and the fate of ‘focus’
57
Langub, Jayl, 1987, Ethnic self-labelling of the Murut or Lun Bawang of Sarawak.
Sojourn 2(2):289–299. Singapore: Insitute of South-east Asian Studies.
Lees, Shirley P., 1959, Lun Daye Phonemics. Sarawak Museum Journal 13–14:56–62.
Moody, David C., 1991, Continuity and development in Ida’an narrative discourse. In
Stephen H. Levinsohn, ed. Thematic continuity and development in languages of
Sabah, 137–162. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Ray, Sidney H., 1913, The languages of Borneo. Sarawak Museum Journal 1(4):1–196.
Roth, Henry Ling, 1896, The natives of Sarawak and British North Borneo. 2 vols.
London: Truslove and Hanson.
Schneeberger, Werner F., 1945, The Kerayan-Kalabit highland of central northeast
Borneo. The Geographical Review 35:544–562.
——1979, Contributions to the ethnology of central northeast Borneo. Studia Ethnologica
Bernesia 2. Institute of Ethnology, University of Berne.
Sellato, Bernard, 1997, Agricultural practices, social organization, settlement patterns, and
ethnogenetic processes in East Kalimantan. In K.W. Sörensen and B. Morris, eds
People and plants of Kayan Mentarang, 27–57. London: World Wide Fund for
Nature and UNESCO.
—— n.d., Kerayan Settlements. Unpublished MS.
Southwell, C. Hudson, 1949, Structure of the Murut language. Sarawak Museum Journal,
5(1)(NS):104–115.
—— 1990, Kayan–English dictionary (second edition). Kuching: Sarawak Literary
Society.
Steinhauer, Hein, ed., 1996, Papers in Austronesian Linguistics No.3. Canberra: Pacific
Linguistics.
Tuie, Meechang, 1995, Masyarakat Lun Bawang Sarawak. Kuching: Dewan Bahasa dan
Pustaka.
Wouk, Fay, 2002, Introduction. In Wouk and Ross 2002:1–4.
Wouk, Fay and Malcom Ross, eds, 2002, The history and typology of western
Austronesian voice systems. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
3
The Palu’e passive: from pragmatic
construction to grammatical device
MARK DONOHUE
1 An alternation in Palu’e
Voice constructions are usually associated with changes in the pragmatic status of the
arguments of a clause, and so bear a strong resemblance to topic constructions in terms of
their information structuring effects and entailments. Importantly, however, a defining
criterion of voice alternations is that they morphologically monitor the changing status of
the arguments of the verb, in terms of their grammatical function identity. By contrast,
topic constructions are held to not affect the grammatical status of the arguments, but to
restructure their pragmatic status. I shall present data from Palu’e, an Austronesian
language of Central Indonesia, showing evidence that the language that has (recently)
begun grammaticalising a topic construction into one member of a grammatical voice
system, providing possible insights into the origin of voice systems in pragmatic
structuring devices, and the nature of voice systems as constructional oppositions.
Palu’e is an Austronesian language spoken on the island of Palu’e, just off the middle of
the north coast of Flores, in southern Indonesia. As with other languages of central Flores
it has little bound morphology, with only some aspectual and adverbial clitics joining the
language’s four genitive clitics as enclitics. There are some incipient proclitics, marking
case and agreement for 1SG subject, but they do not concern us here. There are two
possibilities for encoding bivalent clauses, which can be illustrated in the alternation
between (1) and (2), showing clauses with AVP and PAV orders, respectively. 1 The
translations offered are taken from informants’ translations into Indonesian. I have called
1
In addition to A, S and P, which are defined following Comrie (1978) as the most agent-like argument of
a lexical predicate, the single argument of a monovalent verb, and the most patient-like argument of a
lexical predicate respectively, the following abbreviations are used: 1, 2, 3 first, second and third person;
COMP complement(iser); CORE core; EMPH emphasis; GEN genitive; LNKR linker; NOM nominative; PASS
passive; PERF perfective; PL plural; PRED predicate; PREP preposition; R realis; RED reduplication; SG
singular; V1 active-like voice (A is subject); V2 passive-like voice (P is subject); VP verb phrase. Thanks
are due to my Palu’e-speaking friends on Batam, and to Kazuya Inagaki.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 59–85.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2005.
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics.
59
60
Mark Donohue
the different clause types ‘unmarked’ and ‘marked’, based mainly on their frequency of
occurrence. 2
(1)
Unmarked clause type in Palu’e
A
V
P
Ia
cube vavi vaa.
3SG shoot pig
that
‘He shot that pig.’
(2)
Marked clause type in Palu’e
P
A
V
Vavi vaa ia
cube.
pig that
3SG shoot
‘That pig, he shot (it).’ OR: ‘That pig was shot by him.’ 3
There is no doubt that sentences such as (1) represent the unmarked, or ‘basic’, coding
choice in Palu’e: this is the structure most frequently encountered in narrative of whatever
genre, it is the form given in response to pragmatically neutral translation requests, and it is
the form that is translated with unmarked (= active, non topicalised) clause structures in
Indonesian. Our question concerns the best analysis of (2): is it better analysed as an
instance of topicalisation, bearing a relationship to (1) similar to that which pertains
between the first translation given for it, ‘That pig, he shot’, and the translation given for
(1), or is it in fact an instantiation of a voice alternation, showing a relationship more
similar to that between the second translation of (2) and the translation given for (1)?
Following a short survey of voice systems, and the passive in particular, I shall present
various tests for the syntactic status of the arguments in AVP clauses such as (1) and PAV
clauses such as (2), and based on this empirical investigation shall discuss the implications
of the Palu’e data for our models of voice systems in general, and the historical
development of the Austronesian voice system in particular.
2 Voice systems and some atypical passives
All languages utilise some form of diathesis, and often more than one; but they can be
hard to tell apart. In this discussion the analysis of the diathesis is problematic, the clearest
choices being between a passive(-like) analysis and a topicalisation analysis.
An alternation in diathesis may be grammaticalised, as in the use of a voice system, or
more purely pragmatic, such as in the function of topicalisation, which is ‘overlaid’ as a
separate pragmatic module on the grammatical structure without affecting, for instance, the
2
3
Palu’e examples are presented in a phonemic transcription. This matches IPA norms, with the following
exceptions: b, c, j represent [∫, tS, dZ], mb and nd (and , which does not appear in the data here) are
prenasalised (marginal) phonemes, and the accent ´ marks regular bimoraicity for the vowel of a
monosyllabic foot. Phonemic CC clusters are broken up with an epenthetic vowel. The hyphen - marks a
clitic boundary; there are no affixes in Palu’e, so this distinction does not need to be maintained.
For these two sentences, the Indonesian forms given would be: (1) Dia panah babi itu (2) Babi itu dia
panah ~ Babi itu dipanah dia ~ Babi itu dipanahnya.
The Palu’e passive
61
assignment of subject and object functions. In many instances these two systems will
overlap in a language: most languages with a passive voice, for instance, require the P to
be topical, and code it as such. English is a language that does not have this requirement,
but does have both a grammaticalised voice system and a productive system of pragmatic
topichood.
(3)
(4)
English: active/passive alternation
Cats always chase those rats in the afternoon.
Those rats always get chased by cats in the afternoon.
(5)
English: topic alternation
Those rats, cats always chase(’em) in the afternoon.
(6)
English: topicalised agent appearing with a passive voice in the same sentence
By cats, those rats always get chased in the afternoon.
The similarity of voice and topicality is often reflected in the morphosyntax of a
language. A complement clause in (Singapore) Hokkien may appear without a
complementiser if the main clause object is in the VP, as in (7), but requires a
complementiser if the object is external to the VP, through either topicalisation or
passivisation, seen in (8) and (9), respectively. Thus, regardless of the grammatical status
of the VP-external argument, its absence from the VP serves to trigger the requirement for a
complementiser, khi.
(7)
Hokkien: simple complement construction
Mama [VP kio kinna [COMP cia p ] ].
mother
tell child
eat rice
‘Mother told the child to eat the rice.’
(8)
Hokkien: main clause passivised
Kinna [VP [ho
mama] kio [COMP *(khi) cia p ] ].
child
PASS mother tell
COMP eat
rice
‘The child was told by mother to eat the rice.’
(9)
Hokkien: main clause topicalised
Hi e
kinna, mama [VP kio __ [COMP *(khi) cia p ] ].
That LNKR child mother
tell
COMP eat
rice
‘That child, mother told to eat the rice.’
Comparing the English and Hokkien passive constructions shown in the sentences
above we can observe most of the cross-linguistic diversity that is associated with passives,
and which is summarised in Table 1. Here the notation m-X is used to indicate that some
extra of morphology is present on the X, be it inflectional, derivational, adpositional or
case.
62
Mark Donohue
Table 1: The English and Hokkien passive constructions compared
word order
verbal morphology
nominal morphology (A)
Grammatical status of A
Grammatical status of P
Pragmatic status of A
Pragmatic status of P
English
Active
Passive
A [VP V P ] P [VP V (A) ]
V
Hokkien
Active
Passive
A [VP V P ] P [VP A V ]
NP
m-AUX m-V
(m-NP)
V
NP
V
m-NP
SUBJ
OBL
SUBJ
OBL
OBJ
SUBJ
OBJ
SUBJ
(free)
(free)
(free)
tends to TOPIC
(free)
(free)
not TOPIC
(free)
In English, and indeed overwhelmingly frequently in languages with a voice
construction (Siewierska 1984; Haspelmath 1990), there is marking on the verb, or at least
on a verbal auxiliary or the verb phrase, to indicate the passive construction. Similarly the
A, optional in the passive construction, is overtly marked usually in a way that is consistent
with some sort of adjunct. In Hokkien, on the other hand, we find that the verb is
unchanged morphologically from the form seen in the active, and that the only indicators
of the passive are the preverbal position of the A (the normal position for adjunct) and the
marker ho that appears with this NP. Another difference is related to the sole morphological
exponence of the passive being the marking on the A: the A is obligatory in this clause, not
optional, as in English.
(10)
(11)
Hokkien: active clause
I
[VP phah hi
3SG
hit
that
‘He hit that dog.’
e
kau ].
LNKR dog
Hokkien: passive clause
Hi e
kau [VP [ho
that LNKR dog
PASS
‘That dog was hit by him.’
i]
phah ].
3SG hit
Hokkien: agentless passive clause
(12) * Hi e
kau [VP phah ].
that LNKR dog
hit
‘That dog was hit.’
Unlike a language like English, in which the pragmatic and grammatical tiers are quite
separate, allowing for a demoted agent to be topicalised, the passive agent cannot appear
topicalised in Hokkien, a fact which sets it apart from other adjuncts.
(13)
Hokkien: main topicalised P
Hi e
kau, i
[VP phah ].
that LNKR dog 3SG
hit
‘That dog, he hit.’
The Palu’e passive
63
Hokkien: topicalised agent in passive clause 4
(14) * [Ho
i],
hi e
kau [VP phah ].
PASS 3SG that LNKR dog
hit
‘By him, that dog was hit.’
(15) * [i], hi
e
kau [VP ho
3SG that LNKR dog
PASS
‘Him, that dog was hit by.’
phah ].
hit
The differences between the passives in the two languages shown are quite
considerable, but commonalities are also clear: the grammatical status of the arguments
changes, crucially involving what seems to be a defining feature of voice systems
generally, a change in the identity of the argument assigned subject status. The
morphology required by the construction can typically range from the multiple highly
explicit instances, as in English, to the single NP marker ho in Hokkien.
With this background sketch of passive variation (and it is just a sketch; more detailed
accounts of the kind of variation encountered cross-linguistically can be found in, amongst
others, Foley and Van Valin 1984, Klaiman 1991, Shibatani, ed. 1988, Siewierska 1984,
and Van Valin and LaPolla 1997) we can proceed to a syntactically detailed discussion of
the AVP:PAV alternation in Palu’e.
3 The Palu’e alternation: syntactic or pragmatic?
We can first examine whether the PAV clauses in Palu’e are in fact instances of simple
topicalisation, rather than a distinct clause type, or whether they are simple sentences
without any necessary topicalisation, but with another sort of clause-internal alternation.
We know there is a sentence-initial topic position from sentence pairs such as the
following. In (16) the goal appears in the usual postverbal position, but in (17) it appears
in a sentence-initial topic position. The usual prosodic correlates of topical status are
found: an intonationally distinct contour on the topical phrase, the possibility of a pause
following the topic, and (for core nominals) the possibility of appearing in the clause with
a resumptive pronoun (this will be illustrated later).5
4
5
(16)
Ia pana le
nata-gu.
3SG go
PREP village-1GEN
‘He went to our village.’
(17)
Le
nata-gu,
ia
pana.
PREP village-1GEN 3SG go
‘To our village, he went.’
There is another passive construction in Hokkien, involving a VP-initial passive marker tio. This is a
compulsorily agentless passive, allowing sentences such as Hi e kau tio phah ‘That dog was hit’, but
not (for most speakers) *hi e kau tio i phah.
Three morphemes, le, lae and lau, will all be glossed simply as PREP for ‘preposition’. They are generic
prepositions which vary, amongst other factors, in the relative elevation of the NP that they mark (lae:
lower, lau: higher). These factors are not relevant to the discussion here.
64
Mark Donohue
It is possible to topicalise on any phrasal element in the clause. In (18) we can see an
adaptation of (16) with a topicalised subject; (19) shows the use of a resumptive pronoun
inside the clause.
(18)
Ata
laki vaa, pana le
nata-gu.
person male that
go
PREP village-1GEN
‘That man(,) went to our village.’
(19)
Ata
laki vaa, ia
pana le
nata-gu.
person male that
3SG go PREP village-1GEN
‘That man, he went to our village.’
We can determine that the topic must appear preceding the clause by examining the
distribution of temporal expressions in the clause. Building on (16), examples (20) and
(21) show the (myriad) possibilities for the temporal noun vaicvi ‘yesterday’.
(20)
Ia pana le
nata-gu
vaicvi.
3SG go
PREP village-1GEN yesterday
‘He went to our village yesterday.’
(21) a.
Ia pana vaicvi le natagu.
b.
Ia vaicvi pana le natagu.
c.
Vaicvi ia pana le natagu.
Simply put, the time expression can appear in any position in the clause, as shown in
(22).
(22)
A time adverbial may occur anywhere in its clause, not intruding into
NPs or PPs
When there is a topicalised element in the sentence we find a constraint on the possible
positions for temporal adjuncts: a temporal adjunct may not appear preceding the
topicalised phrase. Sentence (24) illustrates the inability of a time expression to precede a
topicalised oblique, and in (26) we can see that a time expression cannot precede a
topicalised subject (S).
(23)
Le
nata-gu,
ia
pana vaicvi.
PREP village-1GEN 3SG go
yesterday
‘To our village, he went.’
(24) a.
Le natagu, ia vaicvi pana.
b.
Le natagu, vaicvi ia pana.
c. * vaicvi le natagu, ia pana
(25)
Ata
laki
vaa, pana le
nata-gu
vaicvi.
person male that
go PREP village-1GEN yesterday
‘That man(,) went to our village yesterday.’
(26) a.
Ata laki vaa, (ia) vaicvi pana le natagu.
b.
Ata laki vaa, vaicvi (ia) pana le natagu.
c. * Vaicvi ata laki vaa, (ia) pana le natagu
The Palu’e passive
65
The placement of time expressions clearly delimits the left edge of the clause, and the
topic, which occurs sentence-initially preceding all other elements of the clause, can only
be followed by a time expression, never preceded by one.
Turning to bivalent clauses, we find a very similar picture. The basic AVP sentence in
(27) can be expanded by means of a time expression as shown in (28), with the temporal
occurring in all positions, as described in (29). This unproblematically matches the
description in (22).
(27)
Ia cia
kami.
3SG look.for 1PL.EX
‘He looked for us.’
(28)
Ia cia
kami
vaicvi.
3SG look.for 1PL.EX yesterday
‘He looked for us yesterday.’
(29) a. Ia cia vaicvi kami.
b. Ia vaicvi cia kami.
c. Vaicvi ia cia kami.
When we examine the PAV construction we find that there is no evidence to indicate
that the sentence-initial NP in P role is a topic. No intonation break is required between
this NP and the rest of the clause, 6 and we find that temporal adjuncts may precede this NP.
This is shown in (31) and (32). Note particularly that (32c), elaborating on the basic clause
in (30), is grammatical. This contrasts strongly with the putatively analogous, but
ungrammatical, sentence in (26)c.
(30)
Kami
ia
cia.
1PL.EX 3SG look.for
‘He looked for us.’ (OR: ‘We were looked for by him.’)
(31)
Kami
ia
cia
vaicvi.
1PL.EX 3SG look.for yesterday
‘He looked for us yesterday.’
(32) a. Kami ia vaicvi cia.
b. Kami vaicvi ia cia.
c. Vaicvi kami ia cia.
These facts suggest the following different structures, representing a topic structure in
(33), and the PAV structure in (34).
6
Topicalisation of the P, with behaviour identical to other topics, including the intonation cues, is also
possible, but is not the construction being discussed here.
66
Mark Donohue
Approximate representation of a topicalisation structure
(33)
CP
XPTOP
IP
time
Approximate representation of a PAV structure
(34)
IP
NPP
IP/NP
time
It is clear, then, that the PAV clause in Palu’e does not involve the P appearing in a preclausal Topic position. Having established that the PAV construction is not simply an
instance of topicalisation, we can now turn to tests that will elicit the syntactic status of the
arguments in AVP and PAV clauses.
4 Testing the syntactic status of the alternation
In this section I shall present arguments that the alternation between AVP and PAV
orders in Palu’e correlates with a change in the grammatical status of the arguments of the
clause. The evidence used comes from three different constructions: the two floated
quantifier constructions allow us to identify core arguments, and conjunction reduction and
purposive subordination allow us to identify which core argument is the grammatically
privileged subject. 7
4.1 Argument/Adjunct status
The status of the PAV clauses as instances of topicalisation or passives can be partly
decided by examining the status of the A. If the A is a core argument, then the
topicalisation analysis is strongly supported, since that would indicate no ‘demotion’. On
the other hand syntactic evidence that the A is not a core argument would strongly support
an analysis of this construction as involving a passive voice contrast with the AVP coding
option.
Morphologically it is not clear that the A should be treated as an adjunct. It is a general
characteristic of adjuncts in Palu’e that they are marked by a preposition (though the
7
Donohue (2003), and many others, shows that, in essence, not all constructions are equal for the
purposes of determining subject. The constructions selected here appear to be adequately diagnostic for
Palu’e.
The Palu’e passive
67
converse proposition, that prepositions always mark adjuncts, is not true, as will be
demonstrated below), and that they follow all subcategorised-for nominals in the clause.
Some examples are shown in (35)–(37), illustrating a locative preposition and the
instrumental/accompaniment preposition.
(35)
Clause with two core arguments and one adjunct (locative)
Ia bere kaju lae uma.
3SG chop wood PREP garden
‘He chopped the wood in the garden.’
(35)’ * Ia bere kaju uma
(35)” * Ia bere lae uma kaju
(36)
Clause with an instrumental
Ia bere kaju noo tobo.
3SG chop wood PREP machete
‘He chopped the wood with a machete.’
(36)’ * Ia bere kaju tobo
(36)” * Ia bere noo tobo kaju
(37)
Clause with a comitant
Aku pana lau Todo noo ina-gu.
1SG go
PREP Todo PREP mother-1GEN
‘I went to Todo with my mother.’
(37)’ * Aku pana lau Tobo inagu
(37)” # Aku pana noo inagu lau Todo
The presence of prepositional marking, in contrast to the bare NPs that are core
arguments, might be thought to be a test for grammatical status. There are, however, some
verbs that select for prepositionally marked postverbal NPs (thus, PPs), which are
demonstrably not adjuncts, evidenced by their different behaviour when appearing
preverbally. An example of this sort of prepositionally marked object in an unmarked
postverbal position can be seen in (38). We can see from this example that there are some
predicates that, when they take a nominal object, must have it marked with a preposition;
aro is one such predicate. The use of this preposition is obligatory with this predicate.
(38)
(39)
8
Object obligatorily marked by a preposition 8
Aku aro noo kau.
1SG love PREP 2SG
‘I love you.’
* Aku aro kau
The morphosemantic information encoded in the preposition noo can also be coded by the obviously
related, but proscribed, incipient case marker no()-; thus, in the immediately preceding sentences the
object of hatred, noo ia, will be realised prescriptively as ['nO/O ia] ~ ['nO/O ja], but in normal speech as
['nO/ia] or ['nOija], these last two variants showing degrees of cliticisation: no-ia ~ no-ia, rather than
being realised as two separate words, noo ia. The syntactic behaviour of the two morphemes in the
clause is in all cases identical, and for the sake of brevity only the full preposition noo will be described
here.
68
Mark Donohue
Other predicates, however, appear with objects that may be marked with a preposition,
or with a bare NP. An example of this kind of predicate is kau ‘hate’.
(40)
(41)
Object optionally marked by a preposition
Aku kau noo ia.
1SG hate PREP 3SG
‘I hate him.’
Aku kau ia.
1SG hate 3SG
‘I hate him.’
By contrast, ‘normal’ bivalent predicates such as cia ‘look for’, seen earlier, do not
allow for a prepositional option. While (27) is grammatical, prepositionally coded objects
with this predicate are not: *ia cia (noo / le / lau / lae) kami. When we compare the
behaviour of the PP that normally follows a predicate such as aro or kau with a PP in a
clause such as those seen in (35)–(37), we find differences. Sentences with a topicalised
adjunct appear with the PPs retaining their prepositions when appearing preverbally, as in
(42) and (43), based on (37).
(42)
Noo ina-gu,
aku pana lau Todo.
PREP mother-1GEN 1SG go
PREP Todo
‘With my mother, I went to Todo .’
(43)
Lau
Todo, aku pana noo ina-gu.
1SG go
PREP mother-1GEN
‘To Todo, I went with my mother.’
PREP Todo
On the other hand, the preposition must be omitted in sentences based on clauses such
as (38)–(41) with a topicalised object. This can be seen in (44)–(47), where only bare NPs
are acceptable, regardless of whether or not the verb permits alternation in the appearance
of the preposition or not.
(44)
Ia aku aro.
3SG 1SG love
‘I love him.’
(45) *
Noo ia aku aro
(46)
Ia aku kau.
3SG 1SG hate
‘I hate him.’
(47) * Noo ia aku kau
We can see that some prepositionally marked NPs behave as do Ps in bivalent clauses
when in a preverbal position, showing that they are not in fact adjuncts, but rather
exceptionally case-marked arguments of the verb. This is analogous to English predicates
such as ‘look at’, which take prepositionally marked objects (the ungrammaticality of *he
looked it at proves that a phrasal verb analysis is untenable for these predicates). Under
passivisation the preposition is ‘left behind’, and does not occur with the new subject: it
was looked at, *at it was looked. Palu’e shows similar behaviour in the topicalisation
structure shown in (46), but does not allow preposition stranding as English does. These
The Palu’e passive
69
arguments show that morphological tests alone, such as the presence or absence of a
preposition marking an NP, are not sufficient to judge the grammatical status of a
participant. The floated quantifier constructions do, however, provide us with a syntactic
test that can be appealed to in order to decide whether a nominal is argument or adjunct.
4.1.1 Simple floated quantifiers
The universal quantifier tetión ‘all’ must appear in a clause-final position in Palu’e. 9
When a monovalent clause appears with a clause-final quantifier, the quantifier can only
be interpreted as being restricted to the S of the clause (regardless of the semantic nature of
the S; this applies to all the tests illustrated here, though other tests, such as the
possibilities available for adverbial clause marking, are sensitive to the unergative/
unaccusative distinction).
(48)
Aku ari-gu
nodo tetión.
1SG younger.sibling-1GEN sit
all
‘All of my younger brothers and sisters are sitting down.’
Even when there is an adjunct closer to the quantifier than the subject, the quantifier
cannot be interpreted as being restricted to the adjunct.
(49)
Konen pana le
nua
vaa tetión.
3PL
go
PREP village that
all
‘All of them went to that/those village(s).’
* ‘They went to all of those villages.’
Floated quantifiers are also found with bivalent verbs; in this case the restriction of the
quantifier is potentially ambiguous, as the quantifier can be interpreted as being restricted
to either of the core arguments (but not both at the same time).
(50)
Konen bere somu vaa tetión.
3PL
chop garlic that all
‘They chopped all of that garlic.’ OR: ‘All of them chopped that garlic.’
Notably, in bivalent clauses too the quantifier cannot be interpreted as being restricted
to an adjunct nominal, even if it is ‘closer’ to the quantifier. Only the core arguments of
the clause are eligible to control the NP-external quantifier.
(51)
Konen bere somu noo kti vaa tetión.
3PL
chop garlic with knife that all
‘All of them chopped the garlic with those knives.’ OR:
‘They chopped all of the garlic with those knives.’
* ‘They chopped the garlic with all of those knives.’
When we examine a PAV construction with a floated quantifier we find that a reading
with the quantifier restricted to the A is not possible, as seen in (52).
9
It is clear that konen ‘3PL’ and tetión ‘all’ must, at least historically, be morphologically complex,
involving the use of the third person genitive -n. Synchronically, however, there is no alternation and so
these lexemes must be treated as unanalysable. Some of the data in this section has been presented as
Donohue (2004c).
70
Mark Donohue
(52)
Somu konen bere tetión.
garlic 3PL
chop all
‘They chopped all of the garlic.’ OR: ‘The garlic was all chopped by them.’
* ‘All of them chopped the garlic.’
The data here indicate that the restriction of the floated quantifier is to non-adjunct
arguments; as long as an argument is core, be it an A, S or P, it may be the restriction of
the floated quantifier. This applies to monovalent clauses, and to bivalent AVP clauses. In
PAV clauses, however, only the P may be the restriction of the quantifier. Either the
restriction of this quantifier construction changes in the PAV clause type, or else the
grammatical status of the arguments has changed, such that only the P ‘counts’ as a nonadjunct, while the A behaves as an adjunct.
4.1.2 Augmented floating quantification
Floated quantifiers may appear with other nominals, strikingly with non-core nominals
being a possibility. In these cases the simple tetión construction described in §4.1.1 is not
used. Rather, the verb must have an extra cliticised unit, naba, and a nominal to which the
quantifier is restricted must be reduplicated. 10 If either the reduplication or the clitic naba
are omitted, then the clause is ungrammatical; if both are omitted, then the only possible
interpretation of the restriction of the quantifier is to a core argument of the clause, since
this is then a case of simple, rather than augmented, floated quantification. These
possibilities (and impossibilities) are shown in (53)–(56).
(53)
Konen(-konen) vaa pana-naba le
nata-nata
tetión.
3PL-RED
that go-all
PREP village-RED all
‘They went to all the villages.’
* ‘All of them went to the villages.’
(54) * Konen vaa pana naba le nata tetión.
(55) * Konen vaa pana le nata-nata tetión.
(56)
Konen vaa pana le
nata
tetión.
3PL
that
go PREP village all
‘They all went to the villages.’
* ‘They went to all of the villages.’
The sentences in (53)–(56) show the behaviour of the quantifier in monovalent clauses.
It is not the case that the -naba (RED-) construction is used only to express quantification
of adjunct participants. This quantifier construction is also found with bivalent clauses
without adjuncts, in which case the floated quantifier is unambiguously restricted to the P,
not the A. This can be seen in (57).
(57)
10
Konen vaa ka-naba keo-keo tetión.
3PL
that eat-all
corn-RED all
‘They ate all the corn.’
* ‘All of them ate the corn.’
Reduplication is an option that is available for indicating plurality of nouns, regardless of the present of
quantifiers in the clause. Plural pronouns may be reduplicated, but are usually not, and do not require it.
The Palu’e passive
71
If a bivalent clause has an adjunct, then ambiguity over the scope of the quantifier
arises; the restriction of the quantifier is to either the P in the clause or to an adjunct.
(58)
Konen bere-naba lambu-lambu noo kti(-kti)
tetión.
3PL
cut-all
cloth-RED
PREP knife-RED all
‘They cut all the cloth with knives.’ OR: ‘They cut the cloth with
all of the knives.’
So far we have seen instances of the augmented quantifier with both monovalent and
bivalent clauses, with the quantifier restricted to an adjunct or the P. This behaviour is
different in PAV clauses. This construction can be used with a PAV construction, but the
only possible interpretation is that the quantification is restricted to the A, not the P. Again
we have evidence of the changed syntactic status of the P.
(59)
Keo(-keo) konen vaa ka-naba tetión.
corn-RED
3PL
that eat-all
all
‘They all ate the corn.’
* ‘They ate all of the corn.’
It is clear that the simple tetión construction is restricted to core arguments, any of A, S
or P, as opposed to adjuncts, over which it cannot have scope. The augmented -naba
(RED-) tetión is differently restricted, being able to modify non-core participants or a core
P: it is restricted to anything other than an S or an A. This data shows that in the PAV
construction, the A cannot be interpreted as a core argument, and shows behaviour similar
to the adjuncts of other clause types. The P in a PAV clause, on the other hand, behaves in
a similar way to the S or A of the other clause types in not being able to be modified by the
floated quantifier. This suggests that the assignment of lexical arguments to grammatical
functions is different in the two clause types, the P in the PAV clause behaving like a
monovalent clause’s S, and the A of the PAV clause behaving like an adjunct.
4.2 Testing for subject
The tests in the previous section allow us to judge the core status of the A in a PAV
clause. We have not, however, judged the functional status of the P with respect to the A to
determine which is more syntactically privileged. In other words, we have not evaluated
which of A and P should be considered the subject of the clause in AVP and PAV clauses.
Two tests are advanced here to investigate this question.
4.2.1 Conjunction reduction
In sentences with coordinated clauses we find that one NP of the second conjunct may
be omitted under conditions of co-identity with an NP in the first conjunct. In SV+AVP
conjunction the restriction on the identity of the omitted argument and its antecedent is that
they must both be either S or an A in their own clause. Sentences illustrating this are
shown in (60)–(63).
(60)
S=S
Aku pula
lae nua lka
__ nodo le
kandera.
1SG return PREP house and.then
sit
PREP chair
‘Ij came back home, and then Øj sat down.’
72
Mark Donohue
(61)
(62)
(63)
S=A
Ama-gu
pana le
uma
lka
__ take rero-n.
father-1GEN return PREP garden and.then
meet friend-3GEN
‘My fatherj went to the garden, and then Øj met his friend.’
A=S
Ama-gu
kla kaju lka
__ pula
lae nua.
father-1GEN split wood and.then
return PREP house
‘My fatherj split some wood, and then Øj returned home.’
P≠S
Ama-gu
lie ina-gu
lka
__ nodo.
father-1GEN see mother-1GEN and.then
sit
‘My fatherj met my motherk, and then Øj/*k sat down.’
From the data above is uncontroversial to assume that there is a constraint that restricts
conjunction reduction to members of the S,A grouping, indicating its privileged status in
this construction. We do, however, find instances of S = P correspondences, but only
when the P occurs preverbally in a PAV clause.
(64)
(65)
P = S with preverbal P
Aku ia
balu lka
__ palu
lae nua-n.
1SG 3SG hit and.then
return PREP house-3GEN
‘Hej hit mek, and then Øk returned to his house.’
* ‘Hej hit mek, and then (hej) returned to his house.’
P ≠ S if P is postverbal
Ia balu aku lka
__ palu
lae nua-n.
3SG hit 1SG and.then
return PREP house-3GEN
* ‘He hit me, and then I returned to his house.’
‘He hit me, and then (hej) returned to his house.’
Other instances of the S,P grouping being the privileged one when the P is preverbal
can be seen in examples (66) and (67).
(66)
(67)
S=P
Ina
loo-gu
ia pela lka
__ mea-u.
mother small-1GEN 3SG watch and.then
shy-PERF
‘Hei watched my auntj, and then (shej) got embarrassed.’
* ‘Hei watched my auntj and then Øi got embarrassed.’
P=S
Ama loo-de
ia
pela lka
__ kau
ia.
father small-12GEN 3SG watch and.then
angry 3SG
‘Hei watched my unclej, and then (hej) got angry with himi.’
* ‘Hei watched my unclej and then Øi got angry with himj.’
It is clear that, whatever syntactic privileges in a cross-clausal deletion construction
accrue to S in a monovalent SV clause and the A in an AVP clause are also found with the P
in a PAV clause, to the exclusion of those privileges being found on the A.
The Palu’e passive
73
4.2.2 Purposive clauses
Purposive clauses with tene ‘will’ are restricted in terms of coreference possibilities,
allowing overt omission of an argument in the purposive clause if and only if both it and
the argument with which it shares identity are either an S or an A in their own clause. The
data, however, are not so clear, and require a more elaborate argument.
In the following sentence there is one possible referent available to control the
subordinate clause, since there is only one argument of the monovalent predicate of the
main clause.
(68)
Ia pau
tene __ pana.
3SG get.up for
go
‘He got up in order to go.’
The following data involve a monovalent predicate in the main clause and a bivalent
predicate in the purposive clause. Both are completely grammatical, and while (69) is
unproblematic, the interpretation of (70) is equivocal.
(69)
Keo-gu
pana le
Cua tene
elder.sibling-1GEN go
PREP Cua for
__
cia
ata
pisa-n-e.
search person shaman-3GEN-EMPH
‘My elder brother went to Cua in order to look for a shaman.’
(70)
Keo-gu
pana le
Cua tene ata
elder.sibling-1GEN go PREP Cua for person
pisa-n-e
ravi.
shaman-3GEN-EMPH cure
‘My elder brother went to Cua in order for a shaman to heal him.’
The coreference data in these sentences can be interpreted as showing that in purposive
clauses the omitted argument can be either the A or the P of the purposive clause.
Alternatively, looking at the construction through voice-coloured glasses, we could analyse
the second clause as showing a preverbal ‘by-phrase’ NP ata pisane, and an omitted S (of a
passive clause). That is, the second conjunct in (70) represents a PAV construction, shown
in (71), and not an AVP construction such as that shown in (72).
(71)
(72)
P
A
V
Keogu pana le Cua tene [ __ ata
pisa-n-e
ravi ].
for
person shaman-3GEN-EMPH cure
‘My elder brother went to Cua in order for to be healed by a shaman.’
A
V
P
Keogu pana le Cua tene [ ata
pisa-n-e
ravi __ ].
for
person shaman-3GEN-EMPH cure
‘My elder brother went to Cua in order for a shaman to heal (him).’
Empirically we cannot choose between these two analyses. The nature of the restriction
becomes clear only when we examine sentences in which the first clause is bivalent (or if
we apply the floated quantifier test described in §4.1.1 and §4.1.2). In these instances
there are clear restrictions on which argument can be gapped into the purposive clause.
74
Mark Donohue
(73)
Ia cube vavi tene __ mata.
3SG shoot pig for
die
‘Hei shot the pig in order (for Øi) to die.’
* ‘He shot the pig in order for it to die.’
In this sentence the only grammatical reading is the implausible one, that the A of the
first clause, the shooter, is coreferent with the S of the second clause, the entity dying. This
indicates that the constraints on cross-clausal coreference are syntactically governed, and
not simply pragmatically constrained. We can confirm this impression by examining a
similar bivalent–monovalent coordination, with a PAV construction in the first clause in
(74).
(74)
Vavi ia
cube tene __ mata.
pig 3SG shoot for
die
* ‘He shot the pig in order to die.’
‘He shot the pig in order for it to die.’
Here the same semantic constraints on plausibility are operating, but the only possible
interpretation has changed. Clearly conjunction reduction in Palu’e is governed by
syntactic factors, more than semantic or pragmatic plausibility.
4.2.3 Tests for subject status
The data from coordination and purposive subordination show that there is a clearly
privileged argument in both constructions: in both cases, while the S of a monovalent
clause is privileged, the privileged argument in a bivalent clause is the A if the clause has
AVP order, and the P if it has PAV order. Assuming that conjunction reduction, if restricted,
is restricted to a subject, this means that the subject of an AVP clause is the A, and the
subject of a PAV clause is the P. These facts, combined with the evidence for valency
alternations presented in §4.1, clearly indicate that a voice alternation has applied in the
language.
4.3 Constructions with invariant restrictions
The tests in §4.2 have shown that there is morphosyntactic evidence for an alternation
in the assignment of grammatical functions to different syntactic roles in the different
coding options. In this section I shall show that, if we examine the data from reflexive
constructions, we find that there is also evidence for a grammatical relationship between
the A and the P remaining the same.
4.3.1 Reflexive binding
A complication in the analysis is found when we examine the data that reflexive
constructions allow us to examine. A standard analysis of reflexive binding involves the
assumption that the higher argument (in terms of a thematic hierarchy) may bind the
reflexive pronoun in a lower argument; conversely, a reflexive in a higher position may not
be licensed by a lower argument. Thus given a bivalent clause with two core arguments, an
The Palu’e passive
75
agent and a patient, an agent may bind a reflexive pronoun for the patient, but not the other
way around (Dalrymple 1993). This is shown in (75a) and (75b), representing a
grammatical sentence such as He hurt himself, and an ungrammatical sentence such as
*himself hurt him.
(75)
Reflexive binding: active clause
a. ‘PRED 〈agent, patient 〉’
|
|
binder reflexive
b. * ‘PRED 〈agent, patient 〉’
|
|
reflexive binder
In a passive clause there is only one core argument; it will, by virtue of its core status,
outrank any adjuncts. In this case the only reflexive that may be coded is on the (adjunct)
agent, not the (core) patient. The disparity in grammatical functions overrides the
difference in semantic roles. The following schema illustrates sentences such as I was hurt
by myself, and the ungrammaticality of *myself was hurt (by me).
(76)
Reflexive binding: passive clause
a. ‘PASS.PRED 〈patient〉〈agent 〉’
|
|
binder reflexive
b. * ‘PASS.PRED 〈patient〉〈agent 〉’
|
|
reflexive binder
When we examine the data from reflexives in Palu’e AVP clauses, the predictions from
(75) are borne out: only the A may bind a P, not the other way round.
(77)
Aku bere tmbo-gu.
1SG chop body-1GEN
‘I chopped myself.’
(78)
* Tmbo-gu
bere aku.
body-1GEN chop 1SG
‘myself chopped me’
The data for the PAV construction, however, do not fit the predictions from (76) for
passive clauses. Only the P may be coded with a reflexive, bound by the A; the predicted
patient binding a reflexive A does not emerge.
(79)
Tmbo-gu
aku bere.
body-1GEN 1SG chop
‘Myself, I chopped.’ OR: ‘Myself was chopped by me.’ 11
(80) * Aku tmbo-gu
bere.
1SG body-1GEN chop
‘I, myself chopped.’ OR: ‘I was chopped by myself.’
The reflexive data, then, do not obviously support the view that in the PAV construction
the A is demoted to adjunct status. They may, however, be interpreted as suggesting that
the A in the PAV construction is just as much a core argument as it is in an AVP
construction, which would not be compatible with a passive analysis.
11
Ungrammatical in English, but acceptable in Indonesian (with different grammatical function
assignment) as Diriku kuiris.
76
Mark Donohue
4.3.2 Discussion of the reflexive data
Apart from the conclusions obtained by examining the reflexive data, the analysis of the
Palu’e AVP/PAV alternation can unproblematically be described as one showing an
active/passive alternation. While there are two core arguments in the AVP construction,
with the A being the syntactically most privileged argument, the PAV construction presents
the A as a non-core argument, and the P as the privileged argument. Apart from the lack of
any morphological marking, this presents itself as a classic case of a passive alternation.
The reflexive data, however, do not behave in that way. By comparison, western
Austronesian voice systems typically do not involve demotion of the agent to nonargument status in the non-active voice, and so it is with the reflexive data seen in §4.3.1;
this will be illustrated below.
When we compare the Palu’e reflexive data with that from other western Austronesian
languages with symmetrical voice systems (Tagalog, Tukang Besi and Indonesian are used
to exemplify these patterns), we find a remarkable congruence in the facts of reflexive
binding. In the sentences below the grammatical subjects are shown in bold (the
judgments for Palu’e are based on the evidence from the quantifier constructions,
conjunction reduction and purposive sentences presented earlier). In the first four
examples we can see the predicted pattern of the A binding a reflexive P, while the A is the
grammatical subject. 12
(81)
Voice1, A antecedes reflexive P
Aku pela tmbo-gu.
1SG watch body-1GEN
‘I looked at myself.’
(Palu’e)
(82)
Naka-kita=ako
ng=sarili=ko.
V1:PERF-see=1SG.NOM GEN=self=1SG.GEN
‘I saw myself.’
(Tagalog)
(83)
Te
ia no-’ita te
karama=no.
CORE 3SG 3R-see CORE self=3GEN
‘S/he saw her/himself.’
(Tukang Besi)
(84)
Dia me-lihat diri=nya.
3SG V1-see self=3SG.GEN
‘S/he saw her/himself.’
(Indonesian)
In the alternative voice, morphologically marked in Indonesian and Tagalog, though not
in Palu’e, the identity of the grammatical subject is changed, but the conditions on binding
remain the same.
(85)
12
Voice2, A antecedes reflexive P
Tmbo-gu aku
pela.
body-1GEN 1SG watch
‘I looked at myself.’
(Palu’e)
In examples from Tagalog, Tukang Besi and Indonesian a distinction between clitics and affixes needs to
be made, and so the conventions = to indicate a clitic boundary and - to indicate an affix boundary are
used. These conventions differ from the presentation of Palu’e material elsewhere in this paper.
The Palu’e passive
(86)
Na-kita=ko
ang=sarili=ko.
V2:PERF-see=1SG.GEN NOM=self=1SG.GEN
‘I saw myself.’
(Tagalog)
(87)
Te
karama=no no-’ita=‘e te
ia.
CORE self=3GEN
3R-see=3P CORE 3SG
‘S/he saw her/himself.’
(Tukang Besi)
(88)
Diri=nya
di-lihat=nya.
self=3SG.GEN V2-see=3SG.GEN
‘S/he saw her/himself.’
(Indonesian)
77
For Indonesian and Tagalog the explanation of these patterns is that we find the nonsubject A binding the subject P in (86) and (88) because, unlike the case of English
passives, there is no agent demotion involved in western Austronesian voice systems; the
As in (86)–(88) are demonstrably objects, not adjuncts. This analysis is problematic for
Palu’e, however, since we have good evidence, from the augmented floating quantifier
construction, that the A in PAV clauses behaves as an adjunct, indicating that a common,
‘garden variety’ passive has applied, as far as the assignment of grammatical functions is
concerned in the voice alternation (active subject corresponds to passive adjunct, active
object corresponds to passive subject). All we can state with certainty is that while the AVP
clauses show a clear alignment of grammatical properties, the PAV clauses show a split in
these properties, in that the reflexive data does not indicate a demotion of the A.
5 Conclusions: the Palu’e voice system
We have seen that there is a passive alternation in Palu’e, although some data, here
represented by the reflexive construction, do not line up with the prototypical structure that
might, based on a cross-linguistic survey, be expected in the behaviour of passives. Table 2
shows which argument displays the most syntactically privileged behaviour in the
constructions examined here. The columns are divided according to whether we are
discussing the (bivalent) AVP construction, the PAV construction, or a monovalent
construction, in which case the single argument must precede the verb.
Table 2: Grammatical evidence:
the restriction of five different constructions
Floated quantifiers: I
Floated quantifiers: II
Conjunction reduction
Purposive clauses
Reflexives: antecedent?
AVP construction
PAV construction
A
9
OBL
A
9
9
9
9
9
P
9
9
9
P
9
9
9
OBL
9
SV
S
9
9
9
OBL
9
Almost all the evidence points clearly to the PAV construction being best analysed as a
coding choice that involves an alternation in voice, compared to the AVP construction. If
the PAV construction was simply a topicalised variant of the AVP construction, then we
78
Mark Donohue
would not expect to see the variation in behaviour that marks the A as privileged in AVP
and the P as privileged in PAV clauses, nor the relative orderings with respect to time
adverbials that we examined in §3. The data from all the constructions except reflexive
bindings indicates that the voice alternation is an active/passive one, involving a pivotal P
in the PAV construction, in which the A is syntactically oblique. The reflexive data are not
consistent with this analysis. The reflexive data imply that there is no change in the status
of the A and the P, which is incompatible with a passive analysis involving demotion. But
the data from the naba RED- tetión quantification construction clearly points to the A of
the PAV construction being best analysed as an adjunct. How can this be resolved?
The answer lies in the morphological form of the Palu’e voice construction. While a
typical voice alternation involves the structures seen in the left columns of Table 3, as
exemplified by the English passive data in §2, and an active/antipassive pattern would be
that shown in the centre columns. The Palu’e voice shows the pattern seen on the right.
This is clearly typologically marked with respect to the other two patterns, which both
show strong patterns of morphological asymmetry between the two coding options.
Table 3: Passive voice, antipassive voice and voice in Palu’e compared
basic voice
non-basic voice
Active/passive
A
P
V
NP
NP
V
m-NP
NP
m-V
Active/antipassive
A
P
V
NP
NP
V
NP
m-NP m-V
Palu’e alternation
A
P
V
NP
NP
V
NP
NP
V
There are, of course, languages with voice systems other than those involving passive or
antipassive alternations, most notably the voice alternations found in the Algonquian
languages or the western Austronesian languages, in which there is no morphological
markedness relation between the two (or more) voices in the language; Table 4 compares
Palu’e to representations of these language types, arranged for comparison with Table 3.
Table 4: Inverse voice, Philippine-like voice and Palu’e compared
voice1 (‘A-centric’)
voice2 (‘P-centric’)
Inverse voice
A
P
V
NP
NP
m-V
NP
NP
m-V
Philippine-like voice
A
P
V
NP
NP
m-V
NP
NP
m-V
Palu’e alternation
A
P
V
NP
NP
V
NP
NP
V
Comparing these data, we can see that there is more commonality between Palu’e and
the other language types, in terms of what Foley (1998) calls ‘symmetricality’ between the
voice alternations in these systems. In both the inverse and the Philippine-type systems the
amount of morphological marking on the verb is the same in both voice types, just as it is
in Palu’e (of course, the fact that in Palu’e there is no morphology in both instances is
significant, as we shall relate). Another point of similarity between the Philippine-type
voice alternation and the Palu’e one concerns reflexive antecedency: the Palu’e data on
reflexives from §4.3.1 are a challenge to the analysis of the AVP/PAV alternation as
involving a passive voice alternation, but, as we saw in §4.3.2, they are consistent with the
types of voice systems observed in related languages to the west. These languages,
The Palu’e passive
79
however, do not employ passive voices, 13 while we have seen that Palu’e does. Can we
reconcile the evidence for a passive voice alternation in Palu’e with the fact that the A and
P in the reflexive construction does not show a change in syntactic status?
An unambiguous example of a language with a passive construction, involving
demotion of the A to an adjunct function and yet retaining the A as the antecedent of a
reflexive in either passive or active voice, is Marathi (Joshi 1993). In Marathi the verb is
marked as passive, and there is a special case marker for the (optional) by-phrase agent in
these clauses, all indicating an unproblematic passive. Yet at the same time the antecedent
of the aapan reflexive is restricted to only the by-phrase agent (which Joshi calls the
logical subject), not the grammatical subject. Similar conditions apply to reference to
gapped arguments in un adverbial clauses. This arises because of a condition in the
grammar of Marathi that requires these constructions to refer to the argument that is
highest-ranked on the thematic hierarchy from the verb’s subcategorisation frame. While
the agent in the sentences is clearly an adjunct, marked by the postposition kadun, the
higher thematic role that it bears is enough to license it, and only it, being the antecedent of
the reflexive, regardless of the changes in grammatical function assignment. These data are
proof that it is possible for a construction to be analysed as a passive while the reflexive
data behave very differently from the expected pattern. The behaviour of reflexives
indicates that, at least optionally, they can best be regarded as being constrained by the
relative positions of the arguments in argument structure, regardless of any grammaticalfunction changing operations (such as passive, or potentially other voice) that have applied
to the clause. 14 The reflexive data, in short, are not incompatible with a passive analysis of
the voice system, though they do represent a highly unusual pattern.
What, then, of the lack of passive-marking morphology? While there are examples of
languages lacking verbal (or auxiliary) morphology to indicate the passive, there is usually
at least some indication of the passive, either as a VP-level marker (such as the Mandarin
bèi, and other passive markers) or on the NP itself (such as Hokkien ho described in §2, or
Manggarai le [Arka and Kosmas, this volume]). Is there a precedent for a voice alternation
with no morphological marking at all?
A case similar to the Palu’e one can be found in Lango (Noonan & Bavin-Woock 1978;
Foley & Van Valin 1984; Noonan 1992), in which only the order of the A and the P
indicates the choice of voice. In (89) the grammatical subject is dákó, while in (90) it is
lócà. The only morphological or phrase-structural difference between the two clauses is
the position of the P in the clause.
13
14
See Schachter (1976, 1977) for the ‘classic’ presentation on these issues, Kroeger (1993) or Falk (2000a,
2000b) for more recent formal treatments. Indonesian is the exception. In Indonesian in addition to an
‘A-centric’ and ‘P-centric’ voice, which behave as described in §4.3.2 without demotion, there is a
passive voice, which employs the same verbal morphology as the P-voice, but with additional nominalmarking morphology, suggesting that the importance of nominal marking, hinted at in the Hokkien
examples seen in §2, is also salient in Austronesian languages. The equivalents of (88) in this true
passive voice would be the clause seen in (i) below. Note that (ii) is ungrammatical, confirming the
oblique status of the oleh phrase. See Arka and Manning (1998) for further discussion.
(i) Dia di-lihat oleh diri=nya.
(ii) * Diri=nya di-lihat oleh=nya.
self=3GEN V2+-see by=3SG
3SG V2+-see by self=3GEN
‘He was seen by himself.’
‘Himself was seen by him.’
This predicts that a ‘quirky reflexive’ such as that in Palu’e or Marathi should be possible in a language
with a non-passive voice alternation (an antipassive, for instance). To my knowledge this has not been
attested.
80
Mark Donohue
(89)
(90)
Voice1: active
Dákó
ò-jwát-ò
lócà.
woman 3SG-hit-3SG man
‘The woman saw the man.’
Voice2: passive
Lócà dákó
ò-jwát-ò.
man woman 3SG-hit-3SG
‘The man was seen by the woman.’
(Lango)
(Lango)
In Lango too the A is the antecedent of the reflexive in both voices, and the marking of
agreement on the verb shows clearly that there is no demotion of either argument. Some
controversy has been associated with the analysis of the Lango alternation shown above as
a voice alternation (e.g. Woolford 1991). In Tukang Besi, which we have seen in examples
(83) and (87), there is no dedicated voice morphology, but the alternation in voice is
indicated by a (potential) change in case marking on the NPs, and a change in the amount
of pronominal agreement found on the verb (Donohue 1999:51–54, 461–490; 2004a).
Indonesian also shows what appears to be a purely word-order defined voice
alternation, but only for first and second person As, and only with that class of verbs that
do not show regular voice marking (though see Chung 1978 for a caution on the analysis
of bare ‘stem’ verbs as invariably representing non-active clauses in Indonesian; Cartier
1984 also provides relevant discussion). Consider the following sentences using the verb
makan, which in this construction shows no verbal marking in the active or non-active
voices, and has a first person singular A and a P that vary only in its positions, not in any
NP-marking. 15
(91)
(92)
Indonesian
Voice1: active
Saya makan nasi itu.
1SG eat
rice that
‘I ate that rice.’
Voice2: ‘objective’ / ‘inverse’
Nasi itu saya makan.
rice that 1SG eat
‘I ate that rice.’ OR: ‘That rice was eaten by me.’
This alternation seems to be identical to that found for Palu’e. The only significant
difference involves the non-oblique status of the A in (92) compared to the Palu’e
translation in (93), in which aku is oblique (as demonstrated earlier in this paper).
(93)
15
Lama vaa aku ka.
rice
that 1SG eat
‘I ate that rice.’ OR: ‘That rice was eaten by me.’
The lack of alternation in makan reflects the fact that the morphology which is functionally cognate with
the active me- prefix — seen earlier in (84) — is here frozen onto the lexical root as *ma-, attached to
the historical root *kaən. This historical prefix is present even in the non-local A non-active voices,
where marking with di- is obligatory: di-makan, *di-kan.
The Palu’e passive
81
More significantly, the apparently zero-morphological alternation seen in the
Indonesian examples only manifests itself in a highly restricted set of circumstances: the A
must be first or second person, and the verb must (irregularly) not take any active marking
for there to be no morphological alternation. In Palu’e, on the other hand, this alternation
is regular for all persons and for all verbs: any combination of A and P can appear, and no
verbs are marked in either the active or the passive (other than for aspect and some forms
of subordination).
In summary, the Palu’e PAV construction that we have examined can be productively
analysed as a passive alternative of the AVP construction, and the apparently aberrant
reflexive data are, while unusual, not unprecedented.
6 Implications for our understanding of ‘voice’
The Palu’e voice is an unusual exemplar of a voice system. In analysing it, when
compared to more prototypical voice systems, we must conclude that it is either the very
beginning of a voice system, or the very end of one. The two competing hypotheses run as
follows:
1.
Modern Palu’e voice is an inceptive ‘proto-voice’ system
• the contemporary voice system is a recent innovation in Palu’e, and as
such has not yet acquired all the hallmarks of a fully ‘mature’ voice
alternation, including morphological marking (on nouns and on the verb),
nor has the reflexive construction yet adapted to the presence of a
function-changing construction in the language;
2.
Modern Palu’e voice is the relic of an earlier more elaborate system
• an earlier stage of the language possessed a more ‘complete’ voice
system, presumably with both morphological and syntactic characteristics
that were more ‘neat’ with respect to their characterisation in a typology
of voice.
Of course, in a real sense these two hypotheses are not ‘in competition’ — there is
nothing to preclude both of them from being applicable and true descriptors of the Palu’e
situation, and I shall return to this point later in this section. Nonetheless, the implications
of these two positions are quite different, and are most easily examined in isolation from
each other. If we assume position 1, then we are claiming that it is possible for a passive
alternation to exist in a language in the absence of any morphological marking. In effect,
we are claiming that there is such a thing as a passive construction, independent of any
morphological ‘load-bearers’. While this is not necessarily a bad claim, it certainly is one
that is awkward for most of the widespread theoretical approaches to morphosyntax. In a
theory, such as Lexical-Functional Grammar, which claims that operations such as passive,
causative, applicative etc. are derived in the lexicon, the absence of any morphological
material means that we must assume a zero-derivational process such as that which is
assumed by some to apply to noun–verb alternations in, for instance, English. The
extensive precategoriality that characterises Palu’e would lend support to this view of zero
derivation (for instance, tusu can be used in a sentence as either a referent translatable as
‘breast’, or as a predicate translatable as ‘suckle (on a breast)’, and kti, translated here in
referential functions as ‘knife’, can equally be used predicatively with the sense ‘cut off,
82
Mark Donohue
sever (as using a knife)’). The data is more problematic for those theories (such as most
Chomskyan-derived models) that assume that the alternation in grammatical behaviour
between the active and the passive is due to a change in the available Case roles: we could
imagine that the Hokkien-style passive, in which only the demoted A is marked with an
extra morpheme, could be analysed as having this morpheme absorbing the objectassigning Case role, and then being realised through movement prepositionally on the
preverbal oblique A; the now caseless P then moves away from the verb and acquires
subject properties through its new structural position. This is obviously not possible by
means of any overt morpheme in Palu’e, and the analysis can be salvaged only if we posit
a phonologically-null morpheme, or movement at LF. Adopting this first position would
also be the same as claiming that many of the diagnostics that are used to test kinds of
voice systems, particularly the reflexive construction as a test of core or oblique status,
belong together only in the passive ‘construction’ artefactually: that they are, in fact,
independent variables that coincide only as what we recognise as voice ‘types’ (passive,
antipassive, inverse, Philippine-type) over a long period of time.
If we were to adopt the second stance, then we would be assuming that some of the
diagnostics of a ‘construction’ are more or less stable than others. Assuming that Palu’e
previously possessed a Philippine-type voice alternation (since we have attested examples
of non-demoting voice in western Austronesian languages, and a reflexive construction in
Palu’e that behaves just as the reflexive behaves in these related languages), we would be
claiming that the amount of morphological material slowly reduced (similar to a languagewide extension of the particular Indonesian construction seen in (91) and (92)), but that
even as the morphological clues to the construction are dropping the construction is
changing. The motivation for the change towards an active–passive alternation, rather than
the A-voice–P-voice alternation can only be guessed at. 16 The implication, however, is
that syntactic change is possible without any morphological grammaticalisation: rather
than morphology instigating the syntactic reinterpretation, the departure of morphology
would have to be held responsible for the reinterpretation. We are also dealing, if we
attempt to model this historical picture in morphologically based frameworks such as
described above, a sequence of two different null morphemes. Clearly a model that admits
the existence of various grammatical constructions is preferable to one that requires
morphological markers to drive the syntactic derivations that it assumes. We also require
the model to allow a relationship to exist between the A and the P in both the AVP and the
PAV constructions that is identical, in order to drive the reflexive binding data. That is,
there must be something constant in the representation of both the AVP and the PAV
construction, even though there are clearly changing patterns of grammatical behaviour
with respect to, for instance, floating quantifiers and conjunction reduction. This implies
that we are best off considering a theoretical model that allows us to deal with separate
modules of structure at the same time, such as the argument structure distinct from
functional and constituent structures in Lexical Functional Grammar (e.g. Bresnan 2001).
Up to this point I have been using the label ‘construction’ simply as shorthand to refer
to different syntactic phenomena that might just as easily have been described as
‘structures’ or ‘derivations’ or whatever other theory-specific term one might prefer. The
16
Though it is worth noting that a change from non-demotional to demotional voice types is attested in
Malay/Indonesian varieties as they occur in the east of the archipelago, away from their western
homeland and presumably influenced by other eastern languages (Donohue 2004b).
The Palu’e passive
83
data we have seen, however, has an important part to play in determining the legitimacy of
the label ‘construction’ as the most appropriate one to describe the whole nature of voice
alternations. The Palu’e voice alternation cannot be easily described as being a derivation,
since there is no morphology involved in its creation: both the active and the passive are
unmarked by any non-lexical morphology. We might appeal to non-overt morphology, but
this would be simply applying an analysis to suit the theoretical constructs that we already
have in place, and not empirically examining the data. Similarly we might, in a
movement-based model of syntax, assume that there was a null operator that (for instance)
absorbed the accusative case assigned by the verb to the P, and so forced that argument to
a VP-external position (following standard Chomskyan analyses of passives — see, for
instance, Jaeggli (1986) or Baker, Johnson and Roberts (1989)). I believe that the Palu’e
data best support an analysis of construction primacy. The ‘construction’ of voice
alternation is clearly what is being manipulated historically here, not any particular
morpheme. There may well have been overt voice-marking morphology in Palu’e’s past,
and there might be overt morphemes associated with voice alternations in the future, but
the contemporary language has an unmarked passive. If it has changed from an inverse(like) system to the modern system, then we have to accept that there are some
morphosyntactic markers of the voice construction that are more resistant to change than
others — the behaviour of reflexives, for instance, has not changed, even though the other
evidence examined here suggests that the voice alternation is not inverse, but passive. On
the other hand we must also accept that there are some aspects of the passive construction
that are not as central as others: the voice alternation does not exist in Equi or raising
constructions, where only active interpretations can be found. If ‘passive’ is a construction,
this must be a non-essential part of the construction. While the only model that allows us to
accurately think about the voice alternation is that of unified constructions, the idea of the
‘construction’ as a monolithic entity has been challenged by the inconsistencies in the
behaviour of the construction.
As an epilogue, it is worth considering the analytical passive in Palu’e, which is formed
with the verb coma ‘(be) affect(ed)’. This construction does not allow for the expression of
the A, but also acts to change grammatical functions, as seen in the coordination data in
(95).
Analytical passive in Palu’e
P
V
(94)
Vavi vaa coma cube.
Pig that
affect shoot
‘That pig was shot.’
(95)
Vavi
vaa coma cube lka
__ laju
pig
that affect shoot and.then
run
‘That pig was shot and then ran to the bush.’
lae
uta.
PREP bush
An analytical passive such as that seen in these two sentences is clearly an innovative
development in Palu’e, since most other instances of passives in Austronesian languages,
and certainly the more archaic versions, involve morphological marking. 17 This might
imply that systemically the language is filling a ‘need’ for a voice, which might
17
The striking exception to this concerns the numerous analytical passives that can be found in nonstandard varieties of Malay, using kena ‘affect’ or dapa ‘receive’. These, too, seem to appear in varieties
of Malay that have lost the synthetic di- prefix in a passive use on verbs (Donohue 2004b).
84
Mark Donohue
conceivably lend some weight to the second proposition above: as the earlier voice system
deteriorates, a new analytical passive construction is born. But without extensive
comparative data from other Flores languages, we can only speculate.
References
Arka, I Wayan and Christopher D. Manning, 1998, Voice and grammatical relations in
Indonesian: a new perspective. In Miriam Butt and Tracey King, eds On-line LFG
proceedings. Available at http://www-csli.stanford.edu/publications/LFG3/lfg98toc.html.
Baker, Mark, Kyle Johnson and Ian Roberts, 1989, Passive arguments raised. Linguistic
Inquiry 20:219–251.
Bresnan, Joan, 2001, Lexical functional syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.
Cartier, A., 1984, De-voiced transitive verb sequences in formal Indonesian. In Frans
Plank, ed. Objects: towards a theory of grammatical relations, 161–183. New York:
Academic Press.
Chung, Sandra L., 1978, Stem sentences in Indonesian. In S.A. Wurm and Lois
Carrington, eds Second International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics:
proceedings, 355–365. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Comrie, Bernard, 1978, Ergativity. In Winifred P. Lehmann, ed. Syntactic typology:
studies in the phenomenology of language, 329–394. Sussex: The Harvester Press.
Dalrymple, Mary, 1993, The syntax of anaphoric binding. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Donohue, Mark, 1999, A grammar of Tukang Besi. Grammar Library series No. 20.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
—— 2003, The ingredients of grammatical functions: sorting subjects and pivots in
Tukang Besi. Unpublished MS, National University of Singapore.
—— 2004a, Voice oppositions without voice morphology. In Paul Law, ed. Proceedings
of AFLA 11, ZAS, Berlin 2004. University of Newcastle. ZASPiL Nr. 34, October
2004:73–88. Berlin: Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie
und Universalienforschung, Berlin. Also available at
http://www.zas.gwz-berlin.de/index.html?publications_zaspil.
—— 2004b, Voice varieties in Indonesian/Malay. Paper presented to the conference
Diversity and Universals in Language: The Consequences of Variation. Stanford
University, California, 21–23 May 2004.
—— 2004c, Floating quantifiers and universal grammar. In Christo Moskowsky, ed.
Proceedings of the 2003 conference of the Australian Linguistics Society.
University of Newcastle. Published online at
http://www.newcastle.edu.au/school/lang-media/news/als2003/proceedings.html.
Falk, Yehuda, 2000a, Pivots and the theory of grammatical functions. In Miriam Butt
and Tracy Holloway King, eds Proceedings of the LFG00 conference, University
of California at Berkeley, 123–139. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
—— 2000b, Philippine subjects in a monostratal framework. In Carolyn Smallwood
and Catherine Kitto, eds The proceedings of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics
Association VI, 133–136. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics.
The Palu’e passive
85
A more complete version of this paper is available at
http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msyfalk/PhilippineSubjects.pdf.
Foley, William A., 1998, Symmetrical voice systems and precategoriality in Philippine
languages. Unpublished MS, Department of Linguistics, University of Sydney.
Foley, William A. and Robert D. Van Valin, 1984, Functional syntax and universal
grammar. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 38. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Haspelmath, Martin, 1990, The grammaticization of passive morphology. Studies in
Language 14 (1):25–72.
Jaeggli, Osvaldo, 1986, Passive. Linguistic Inquiry 17:587–633.
Joshi, Smita, 1993, Selection of grammatical and logical functions in Marathi. PhD
dissertation, Stanford University.
Klaiman, M.H., 1991, Grammatical voice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kroeger, Paul R., 1993, Phrase structure and grammatical relations in Tagalog. Stanford:
CSLI publications.
Noonan, Michael, 1992, A grammar of Lango. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
Noonan, Michael and Edith Bavin-Woock, 1978, The passive analog in Lango.
In Proceedings of the fourth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society,
128–139. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
Schachter, Paul, 1976, The subject in Philippine languages: Topic, Actor, Actor-Topic or
none of the above. In C.N. Li, ed. Subject and Topic, 491–518. New York: Academic
Press.
—— 1977, Reference-related and Role-related properties of Subjects. In Peter Cole and
Jerrold M. Sadock, eds Syntax and semantics 8: grammatical relations, 279–305.
New York: Academic Press.
Shibatani, Masayoshi, ed., 1988, Passive and voice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Siewierska, Anna, 1984, The passive: a comparative linguistic analysis. London: Croom
Helm.
Van Valin, Robert D. and Randy J. LaPolla, 1997, Syntax: structure, meaning and
function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Woolford, Ellen, 1991, Two subject positions in Lango. In Kathleen Hubbard, ed.
Proceedings of the seventeenth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society,
February 15–18, 1991: special session on African language structures, 231–243.
Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
4
Passive without passive
morphology? Evidence from
Manggarai
I WAYAN ARKA AND JELADU KOSMAS
1 Introduction
This paper deals with a passive-like construction in Manggarai 1 which appears to be
typologically unusual because it has no specific verbal passive morphology on the verb. 2
Rather than verbal marking, the passive in Manggarai is marked analytically on the Agent
argument, i.e. by means of the preposition le, which can be shortened to l=. 3 This is
illustrated by the sentences in (1): sentence (1a) is a canonical sentence with the Agent
1
2
3
Manggarai is a language belonging to the Central-Malayo Polynesian subgroup of Austronesian
languages (Blust 1993), spoken by around 400,000 speakers in western and north central Flores
(Indonesia). It has four main dialects (Verheijen 1991:315): the dialects of East Manggarai, Central
Manggarai, S>H Manggarai (named after the /s/ and /h/ correspondence, also called Rego), and West
Manggarai. Unless otherwise stated the data reflect the dialect of Central Manggarai as described in
Kosmas (2000). The second author is a native speaker of Manggarai.
We thank Bill Foley, Mark Donohue, Adrian Clynes, and Erik Zobel for their comments on the earlier
version of this paper when it was presented at the Ninth International Conference on Austronesian
Linguistics, Canberra. Special thanks must go to Laurie Reid, Bernard Comrie, Jane Simpson and
Malcolm Ross who have read the paper thoroughly and given us detailed and useful comments. All
errors are, however, ours.
The preposition le may appear as l= and li (and sometimes ali). These allomorphs are partly
phonologically and partly lexically determined. Le is used for common nouns and pronouns beginning
with a consonant (e.g. le polisi ‘by the police’, le hau ‘by you’, le meu ‘by you’). Clitic l= is used when
the following noun begins with a vowel, e.g. l=aku ‘by me’, l=ami ‘by us (inclusive)’, l=iha ‘by
him/her’. Li is used when the following noun object is a proper name (or kin terms used as such), e.g. li
John ‘by John’, li kakak ‘by our/your elder brother/sister’. It should be noted that li= is replaced by le=
in some dialects (e.g. in Rego).
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 87–117.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2005.
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics.
87
88
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
coming before the verb, and sentence (1b) is a pragmatically marked structure with the
backgrounded Agent coming after the verb and marked by l=. 4
(1) a.
b.
Aku cero latung=k.
1s fry corn=1s
‘I fry/am frying corn.’
Latung hitu cero l=aku=i.
corn
that fry by=1s=3s
‘The corn is (being) fried by me.’
In this paper we argue that sentence (1b) is indeed syntactically passive. That is, (i) the
Patient latung, which was object) 5 in (1a), is subject in (1b); 6 and (ii) the Agent aku
marked by prepositional clitic l= in (1b) is syntactically a non-core argument. We will
present the evidence shortly to support the proposal that sentence (1b) is an instance of
passive despite the fact that the verb has the same form as in (active) sentence (1a). We
argue that the non-typical characteristics of the le passive in Manggarai are independently
motivated by Manggarai’s language-specific property as an isolating language.
The paper is organised as follows. First, basic surface clause structures in Manggarai
are presented in §2, followed by a brief discussion on clitic sets in §3. Evidence for
passive constructions without passive morphology is given in §4. A typological note on
the analysis is discussed in §5. Finally, §6 forms the conclusion.
2 Basic clause structures
Morphologically, Manggarai is isolating (i.e. words in Manggarai are typically
monomorphemic). Structurally, it could be classified as a head-initial language. Its clause
structure, for example, is typically VOS or SVO and its phrasal syntax has its head coming
first (e.g. prepositional phrase instead of postpositional phrase). Subject (and in certain
circumstances, object) can be expressed by an NP which is also cross-referenced by a
pronominal enclitic that agrees with it. Pronominal clitic agreement associated with
subject is exemplified by aku (subject NP) and =k (enclitic) in (1a). Agreement associated
with object is given in (7) below.
4
5
6
The following abbreviations are used in this paper: 1, 2, 3 first, second and third person; A actor, APPL
applicative; ART article; ASP aspect; AV agentive voice; DET determiner; GEN genitive; IN inchoative;
IRR irrealis; NOM nominative; NUM number; OBJ grammatical object; OBL oblique; OV objective voice;
p plural; subscript p polite; P patient; PASS passive; PERS person; POSS possessive; R realis; s singular;
S (intransitive) subject.
The terms ‘subject’ and ‘object’ are used in this paper to refer to ‘surface’ grammatical relations. A
semantic role can be manifested in different grammatical relations, e.g. a Patient can be grammatically an
object or subject.
It should be noted, however, that the object in (1a) and the subject in (1b) are not semantically the same:
one is indefinite, the other definite. Sentence (1a) is a natural active sentence with an indefinite object but
it would be acceptable also with a definite object. Strictly speaking, (1b) cannot therefore be a ‘true
derivation’ of (1a). Indeed, there is evidence from western Austronesian languages that passive is not
derived from active or vice versa; see footnote 46.
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
89
We will show later that an enclitic alone or an NP alone can function as subject (or
object). When both the enclitic and the free NP are present, we argue that the enclitic is the
‘real’ subject or object. 7 Unlike subject and object (which are core arguments), an oblique
can never be cross-referenced by a pronominal enclitic. Moreover, an oblique is more
mobile than subject and object (further discussed in §4.1).
The following are some important features of Manggarai syntax.
First of all, the sentence-initial free NP is in fact the default TOP(ic) and it is also by
default the grammatical subject of the sentence (which is possibly clause-external in an
extended 8 clause structure). The inference that it is the default TOP comes from the
restriction that it must be definite. For example, omitting the article hi 9 of hi enu ‘the girl’
from the subject NP in sentence (2a) below gives rise to a bad sentence as shown by (2b):
(2) a.
Hi
enu cebong sili tiwu lewe.
ART girl bath
in pool long
‘The girl took a bath in the long pool.’
b. * Enu cebong
girl bath
sili tiwu lewe.
in pool long.
The TOP NP can be ‘cross-referenced’ by an enclitic pronoun. 10 This is already
exemplified by the transitive sentence in (1a), in which enclitic =k agrees with aku. More
examples are given in (3), where the sentences are intransitive. In (3a), enclitic =i (third
person singular) agrees with hia and in (3b) it agrees with hi Kode. In (3c), enclitic =s
(third person plural) agrees with ise. In contrast to (3c), sentence (3d) is bad because
agreement is violated (i.e. =i is incompatible with ise).
(3) a.
Hia pa’u eta
mai
bubung mbaru hitu=i.
3s fall above from top.roof house that=3s
‘(S)he fell down from the roof top of the house.’
b.
Hi
Kode
ka’eng wa
tana=i.
ART monkey stay
down ground=3s
‘The monkey lives on the ground.’
c.
Ise lonto musi
mai ami=s.
3p sit
behind from 1pi=3p
‘They sat/were sitting behind us.’
d. * Ise
7
8
9
10
lonto musi
mai
ami=i.
That is, the enclitic is the argument that bears subject or object relation whereas the free NP may simply
carry the pragmatic function of TOP. This TOP NP is also identified as the subject/object due to its
‘anaphoric’ relation with the enclitic.
An ‘extended clause’ is a clause structure that includes an extra clausal NP in the TOP (possibly
adjoined) position; to be discussed shortly with reference to the tree diagram in (5) below.
The determiner (e.g. hitu ‘that’) also has the same function as the article.
The cross-reference of a clitic by a free pronoun/NP in a clause is optional. However, when it is present,
it may be associated with topicality (where the clitic appears to act like a resumptive pronoun), or it may
also be accompanied by certain emphasis or additional meaning (typically ‘surprise’ or ‘disbelief’),
which is absent when there is no cross-reference. Semantic and pragmatic aspects of enclitic agreement
are discussed in detail in Arka (to appear.a).
90
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
The enclitic pronoun may function as an anaphoric pronoun. The antecedent of the
enclitic may be within the same (extended) clause. This type of anaphoric relation is
exemplified by =i and =s in (3). However, the antecedent of the enclitic may be in a
different clause or sentence preceding the clause containing the enclitic. Therefore, the
enclitic in this context generally functions to maintain topic continuity in a stretch of
sentences. For example, in the following quotation from a story, the enclitic =i in (4),
which is the subject in the first sentence and an object in the second one, refers to a child
(who gets lost in the jungle and becomes a sago tree), mentioned in the preceding clause:
(4)
Iti wa
tanah ghitu=i. Ghau peke waeng neteng loho=i.
that down soil
that=3s
2s
must water every day=3s
‘He is down there inside the ground. You must water him every day.’
Let us be specific about the structural position of the sentence-initial NP that acts as the
antecedent for the enclitic pronoun. It appears that it occupies a clause-external position of
TOP position within an extended clause structure (see Bresnan 2001:116). To illustrate the
point, consider sentence (3a), which can be analysed as having the structure shown in (5).
In this structure, the verb pa’u and the following PP etamai bubung are within VP; and then
the VP and the enclitic =i form the clause. (For simplicity, the internal structure of VP is
not shown.) The clause is represented as IP, which represents a projection of the category
I, where I is a functional category that carries Tense or Aspect information, i.e.
traditionally the auxiliary. (IP corresponds to the traditional symbol S (=sentence)). The I
category is not realised in this structure and is not shown in the tree. 11 ) The (pronominal)
clitic subject is within the clause, represented as within the (lower) IP. The extended clause
structure is represented as the higher IP, which includes a TOP position outside the lower IP.
The TOP position is an adjunction position (i.e. a position that is adjoined to IP to form
another higher IP). 12 The TOP NP and the subject enclitic are co-indexed by a subscript i to
show that they must agree in their referential features (PERS and NUM), otherwise the
structure is not acceptable (e.g. (3d)).
(5)
IP
IP (Clause)
NPi
(TOP)
VP
Hia
pa’u eta
mai
bubung mbaru hitu
3s
fall
above from top.roof house that
‘(S)he fell down from the top roof of the house.’
11
12
Clitici
(SUBJ)
=i.
=3s
Words belonging to this I category include reme ‘PROG’, paka ‘must’ and kudut ‘FUT’. These auxiliaries
precede verbs in Manggarai.
Alternatively, one could adopt an analysis where the TOP NP position occurring sentence-initially is not
adjoined to the IP. It is perhaps in the specifier position of the CP (complement phrase). We leave this
for further research.
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
91
Supporting evidence for the analysis shown in (5), where the enclitic pronoun is subject,
comes from the structural properties of the enclitic. In particular, it can be attached to the
final word of different kinds of syntactic units contained in the VP, that precede it within
the clause. For example, it can be attached to the object NP of a transitive verb as in (1a),
to a PP agent as in (1b), and, if the verb is intransitive, to the last word of an oblique/
adjunct PP as in (5).
In real texts, either the free NP TOP alone or the enclitic pronoun alone can appear as
subject. This gives the impression that either of them is optional. However, they cannot
both be absent in a given clause (unless the subject is controlled in an embedded clause).
Hence, sentences (6a, b) are both fine, but sentence (6c) is not (as an independent clause).
The fact that the two nominals which are involved in the agreement do not have to show up
together at the same time suggests that the nature of the ‘agreement’ is not grammatical
(i.e. it is not like subject–verb agreement in English).
However, in certain circumstances, the enclitic pronoun can function as an object (but
not an oblique). Consider examples (7). Sentence (7a) is a simplified version of the
second clause in (4), where =i is the patient object of the verb waeng. The enclitic (=i)
cannot be understood to refer to the subject ghau ‘2s’ (because =i and ghau have different
referential features). In (7b) enclitic =i is cross-referenced by the (Patient) NP ata hitu
‘that person’, which follows it. Note that the Patient NP cannot be extraposed sentenceinitially (i.e. unacceptability of (7c). The unacceptability of sentence (7c) suggests that the
enclitic object agreement is highly constrained: the enclitic that agrees with the sentenceinitial TOP is restricted to the subject function, i.e. it cannot be object.13
(6) a.
b.
Hia ongga aku.
3s hit
1s
Ongga aku=i.
hit
1s=3s
c. * Ongga aku.
‘(S)he hit me.’
(7) a.
b.
Ghau peke waeng=I …
2s
must water=3s
‘You must water him …’
(Rego)
Aku kawe=i
ata
ghitu.
1s look.for=3s person that
‘I’m looking for that person.’
c. * Ata ghitu
Aku
kawe=i.
Furthermore, it appears that the distribution of the enclitic pronoun functioning as object
is also constrained by the PERS category of the object. For example, the first and second
person object enclitics are not possible as illustrated by the contrast in (8). Sentence (8a) is
13
The presence of the object clitic appears to exclude the presence of the subject clitic. That is, the
construction of the type * kawe=i=k ‘look.for=3s=1s’ ‘I’m looking for him’ is not acceptable. It is not
clear at this stage why this is the case.
92
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
bad because the Patient object is =k, the first person pronominal clitic. To make this
sentence acceptable, a free (i.e. non-clitic) pronoun (aku) must be used (8b). 14
(8) a. * Ghia ongga=k.
3s
hit=1s
‘(S)he hit me.’
b.
(Rego)
Ghia ongga aku.
3s
hit
1s
‘(S)he hit me.’
While subject and object arguments in Manggarai may be expressed as enclitics and/or
receive enclitic agreement, oblique arguments may not. Thus, in contrast to (9a) where the
Goal oblique is expressed by hia (a free pronoun), sentence (9b) is bad because the oblique
is expressed by the corresponding clitic form, =i. The contrast in (9c–d) further shows that
an oblique argument cannot receive enclitic agreement.
(9) a.
Aku tombo agu hia.
1s talk with 3s
‘I talked with him/her.’
b. * Aku tombo
c.
agu=i.
Aku tombo agu hi
Joni.
1s talk
with ART name
‘I talked with Joni.’
d. * Aku
tombo
agu=i
hi Joni.
To conclude, enclitic agreement is a property of core (i.e. subject and object) arguments
in Manggarai (bearing in mind that object enclitics have certain restrictions). Obliques do
not share this property.
3 (En)clitics in Manggarai
There are three kinds of clitics in Manggarai that are of interest. The three are shown in
Table 1: pronominal subject/object (or core) enclitics (column 3), pronominal GEN(itive)
enclitics (column 4), and the POSS(essive) d(e) clitic shown here with free pronominal
forms (column 5). 15 For simplicity’s sake, only the GEN and POSS clitics are discussed in
this subsection.
14
15
The exact condition of the distribution of the enclitic pronoun that may function as object needs further
study. At this stage, bearing in mind that there are restrictions of the distribution of the object enclitic
agreement, it is enough to point out that pronominal enclitic agreement is a property of core in
Manggarai because a non-core argument never gets this property. That is, while the relation between the
clitic and its antecedent is anaphoric in nature (i.e. not syntactic), the distribution of the clitic itself is
syntactically constrained because it must be a core argument.
We do not label the d(e) clitic as Genitive to underline the fact that the clitic itself is not inflected and is
formally distinct from the pronominal (inflected) GEN clitic. It is not clear at this stage whether
historically d(e) is a Locative marker corresponding to di found in other Austronesian languages of
Indonesia. A locative in contemporary Manggarai is expressed by an unrelated prepositional form, one.
For this reason, d(e)= is labelled as POSS rather than Locative even though we do not exclude the
possibility that the possessive meaning might be historically derived from the locative meaning (e.g.
‘something is with/in/at me’). (This point was raised for us by Laurie Reid.)
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
93
The pronominal GEN clitic is inflected for PERS and NUM whereas the POSS clitic is not.
The POSS clitic may appear, however, as either syllabic de or non-syllabic (i.e. only
consonant) d=. 16 Both GEN and POSS clitics are used to express possession and
nominalisation. Nominalisation examples are given in (11)–(12) below.
Table 1: Free pronouns and pronominal clitics in Manggarai
FREE
(1)
1s
2s
3s
1p.e
1p.i
2p
3p
(2)
aku
hau
hia
ami
ite
meu
ise
SUBJ
17
(3)
=k
=h
=i
=km
=t
=m
=s
GEN
(4)
=g
=m
=n
=gm
=d
=s
=d
POSS.(with free pronouns)
(5)
d=(aku)
de=(hau)
d=(iha)
d=(ami)
d=(ite) (plural polite form)
de=(meu)
d=(ise)
Another difference between the two kinds of clitics is illustrated in (10). The
pronominal GEN enclitic is attached to the possessed noun whereas the POSS d(e) clitic is
generally attached to the pronominal possessor. The pairs in (10) illustrate alternative
ways of expressing possession in Manggarai.
(10) a.
buku=k
book=1s.GEN
buku
book
d=aku
POSS=1s
‘my book’
b.
buku=m
book=2s.GEN
buku
book
de=hau
‘your(s.) book’
POSS=2s
c.
buku=t
buku
book=1pi.GEN book
d=ite
POSS=1pi
‘our book’
d.
buku=s
book=2p.GEN
de=meu
POSS=2p
‘your (p.) book’
buku
book
Examples (11)–(14) show that the POSS and GEN clitics are used to mark the ‘possessor’
in nominalisation. The crucial point to note is that, using Dixon’s/Comrie’s terminology
(Comrie 1978; Dixon 1979; 1994), the possessor can be S (the sole core argument of the
intransitive verb), A or P (Actor and Patient core arguments of the transitive verb).18
Examples in (11) show that POSS de= NPs are associated with S while the ones in (12)
show they are associated with A (12a) and P (12b).
16
17
18
In other dialects such as Kempo, d= becomes g= in some members of the clitic group: g=aku ‘1s.GEN’,
g=au ‘2s.GEN’, g=ami ‘1p.e.GEN’, g=emi ‘2p.GEN’. It should be noted that the clitic d= may attach to
the preceding unit, hence it shows up as =d, especially in its use in nominalisation (see §4.2).
In the Kempo dialect, the pronominal enclitics functioning as subject enclitics and GEN enclitics are not
distinguishable, see Semiun (1993).
The fact that the enclitics in Manggarai can be associated with the three core arguments (S, A and P)
suggests that morphologically speaking nominalisation does not provide evidence for accusative or
ergative system alignment.
94
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
(11) a.
b.
(12) a.
b.
mata de
keraeng tu’a
die POSS master old
‘the death of the older brother/sister’
mai
de
dokter hitu
come POSS doctor that
‘the coming/arrival of the doctor’
weli de
ende
buy POSS mother
‘the buying (of/by) Mother’
pika=d
kaba
situ
sell=POSS buffalo that
‘the selling of the buffalo’
Pronominal GEN clitics can also be associated with an S possessor as in (13a), a P
possessor as in (13b), and an A possessor as in (14). There are two things to be noted here.
First, the GEN enclitic must agree with the following nominal: (13c) is unacceptable
because the third person singular clitic =n does not agree with the plural NP ata situ.
Second, the property of the bound pronominal as a clitic is evident from the fact that its
distribution is not constrained by the grammatical category of the host (Zwicky 1985,
1987; Zwicky & Pullum 1983). For instance, in (14a), it appears attached to the head verb
whereas in (14b) it is cliticised to the Patient NP (of the VP). It should be noted that the
first clitic =n agrees with the NP acu hitu (i.e. the Agent) in the examples in (14) whereas
the second one appearing on the predicate dilem-dilem ‘deep-deep’ agrees with the
nominalised V(P) akit (indus)=n.
(13) a.
lako=n
ata
hitu
go=3s.GEN person that.s
‘the leaving of the person’
b.
weli=n
mbaru hitu
buy=3s.GEN house that
‘the buying of the house’
c. * lako=n
ata
situ
go=3s.GEN person that.p
‘the leaving of the persons’
(14) a.
b.
Akit=n
acu hitu dilem-dilem=n.
bit-3s.GEN dog that.s deep-deep=3s
‘The dog’s bite is very deep.’
Kempo
(Semiun 1993:77)
Akit indus=n
acu hitu dilem-dilem=n.
bit cat-3s.GEN dog that.s deep-deep=3s
‘The dog’s bite on the cat is very deep.’
To sum up, Manggarai is poor in verbal morphology and makes use of clitics to show
alternative syntactic expressions of the argument (S, A or P) of the verb.
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
95
4 The passive le
There is evidence that the le construction that gives rise to a backgrounding effect is
syntactically passive. That is, we argue that the alternation shown in (1), repeated as (15),
involves (a) syntactic demotion of the Agent to non-core status and (b) syntactic promotion
of the Patient to subject status.
(15) a.
b.
Aku cero latung=k.
1s fry corn-1s
‘I fry/am frying corn.’
Latung hitu cero l=aku=i.
corn
that fry by=1s=3s
‘The corn is (being) fried by me.’
In what follows, we present evidence that the le Agent is not subject.
convincing evidence that it is an oblique.
There is
4.1 The Agent marked by le is not subject
First, evidence for the idea that the le Agent is not subject comes from enclitic
agreement. Recall that TOP-subject can have pronominal agreement. In (15a), aku is TOP
and the real subject is the enclitic =k. In (15b), there is a change in agreement triggered by
the promotion/ foregrounding of the Patient NP latung hitu: this NP now agrees with the
enclitic =i. This is what is expected on the analysis that sentence (15b) is a passive
structure. That is, the Patient is indeed grammatically subject of this sentence and the le
agent is not subject. Then, we expect that the le Agent can no longer have clitic
agreement. This is confirmed as shown by the unacceptability of (16a, b):
(16) a. * Latung hitu cero=k l=aku.
(cf. (15b))
b. * Latung hitu cero l=aku=k.
Second, further evidence comes from structural positions. Given the analysis that the le
Agent has non-core status, it is expected that it is adjunct-like and is therefore more mobile
than the NP agent. We expect that it may appear in several positions. This is confirmed.
For example, the le Agent can appear after the subject enclitic as in (17a), after a sentence
adverbial like meseng ‘yesterday’ as in (17b), or it can even appear before the subject
enclitic as already observed in (1b, 15b), repeated here again for comparison as (17c).
(17) a.
Kala
situ
toto=s
l=ise.
betel.nuts that.p show=3p by=3p
‘The betel nuts were shown by them.’
b.
Latung hitu cero meseng l=aku.
corn
that fry
yesterday by=1s
‘The corn was fried by me yesterday.’
c.
Latung hitu cero l=aku=i.
corn
that fry by=1s=3s
‘The corn is (being) fried by me.’
(=(1b/15b))
96
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
In contrast, the Agent NP typically appears in two fixed positions: sentence-initially
before a verb phrase (VP) or sentence-finally after a VP. Crucially, it cannot come within a
VP (i.e. it cannot intervene between verb and its Patient object NP). Thus, the following
contrast is expected in the present analysis where the le Agent is not subject:
(18) a.
Cero l=aku latung hitu.
fry
by=1s corn
that
‘I fried the corn.’
b. * Cero aku latung hitu.
fry
1s
corn
that
‘I fried the corn.’
V – PP(OBL) –NP(SUBJ)
V – NP(SUBJ) – NP (OBJ)
Sentence (18a) (acceptable) is a passive structure with the Patient coming sentence-finally
as subject while the oblique le Agent appears (possibly inside the VP) before the Patient
NP. In contrast, structure (18b) is not allowed in Manggarai because it would be
interpreted as an active structure with its Agent (subject) NP intervening in the VP sequence
(i.e. between the verb and the Patient object).
Note that our analysis of Manggarai clause structures claims: (i) that the Agent NP and
the le Agent PP are syntactically different arguments (i.e. the TOP/subject NP vs the Agent
oblique PP) and (ii) that structurally they occupy different positions. Further evidence to
support these claims comes from the contrast shown in (19). Sentence (19b) is bad
because the le Agent (l=ise), which is an oblique, is forced to appear in the (default)
19
TOP/subject position before the verb.
(19) a.
Ise ongga ata
hitu.
3p hit
person that.s
b. * L=ise ongga ata
by=3p hit
person
‘They hit the person.’
hitu.
that.s
Third, the le construction appears to be driven by the same (syntactic) motivation as
drives a passive structure in some other languages, namely the need for the Patient to be
manifested as subject to meet some syntactic requirement such as control, in which case
the Agent is then forced to be demoted or backgrounded. Manggarai is like some other
Austronesian languages of Indonesia in preferring the subject argument to be controlled.
Constructions that involve control are, among others, purposive clauses, participial clauses
and relative clauses. In what follows, we exemplify each of these clause types in turn.
Consider the purposive clauses (marked by te) in (20). (The controlled or gapped
argument position is indicated by a dash.) The purposive clause in (20a) is intransitive
with its sole argument controlled and gapped. The clause in (20b) is (active) transitive, its
Agent being the subject argument. Control is fine. Sentence (20c) shows a failed attempt
19
However, sentence (19b) can be made acceptable by nominalising the head verb as in shown below:
L=ise ongga-n ata
hitu.
by=3p hit-GEN3s person that.s
‘They hit the person.’ (lit. ‘The hitting of the person was by them.’)
This sentence is quite different from sentence (19b). It is not a passive counterpart of (19a); rather it is
the one where the preposition (le) acts as the head predicate and the nominalised verb acts as the subject
argument of the predicate. We will not discuss the issue of nominalisation in this paper any further.
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
97
to control the Patient argument because the Patient is the object argument of the purposive
clause. Finally, sentence (20d) shows the acceptable version of (20c) where a passive
structure is used allowing the Patient argument to be expressed as subject. Note that the
Agent of this purposive clause must appear in its oblique function, marked by le.
(20)
Controlled clauses: purposive clauses:
a.
Ame mo one lo’ang
[te __ toko].
father go Loc bedroom te
sleep
‘Father went into the bedroom to sleep.’
b.
Ame mo le uma
[te __ weri mawo].
father go to garden te
plant rice
‘Father went to the garden to plant rice.’
Kempo
(Semiun 1993:93)
c. * Ame
mo wa kota [te dokter priksa ___ ].
father go Loc town te doctor examine
‘Father goes to town to be examined by (the/a) doctor.’
d.
Ame mo wa kota [te __ priksa le dokter].
father go Loc town te
examine by doctor
‘Father goes to town to be examined by the doctor.’
Participial adjuncts (or perhaps ‘nominalised’ complements) involving control are
exemplified in (21). 20 Sentence (21a) (acceptable) shows that the Agent of an active
participial adjunct is controlled. Sentence (21b) (unacceptable) shows an attempt to
control the Patient of an active participial adjunct (i.e. object-controlled). In order to have
an acceptable version of (21b) where the Patient is controlled, the Patient must be
manifested as subject and the Agent is demoted and backgrounded to oblique as shown in
20
Unlike the purposive clauses, the participial adjuncts involving intransitive verbs have no ‘clear’ control
structure as shown by the unacceptability of sentence (a) below. Instead, intransitive verbs are
obligatorily nominalised; both GEN structures are possible as shown by (b) and (c).
a. * Aku porong hia lako.
1s
see
3s walk
‘I saw him walking.’
b.
Aku porong lako d=iha.
1s
see
walk GEN=3s
I saw him walking.’ (lit. ‘I saw his walking.’)
c.
Aku porong lako=n.
1s
see
walk=GEN.3s
‘I saw him walking.’ (lit. ‘I saw his walking.’)
The difference between participial adjuncts and purposive clauses with respect to intransitive verbs is
perhaps due to the marking. Purposive clauses have a special marking to show subordination, namely te,
whereas participial clauses have no such special marking. Manggarai, then, extends GEN marking for
this purpose. However, it is still not clear why ‘a gap’ strategy in the subject position is ruled out
because a transitive verb allows this strategy as shown in (21a). (Other Austronesian languages of
Indonesia such as Indonesian and Balinese allow both gapping and nominalisation strategies.) It should
be noted that the GEN strategy is also possible for a participial adjunct with a transitive verb as shown by
the following example:
d.
Aku ita tengo acu-e d=ia.
(Kempo, Semiun (1993), ex. 252)
1s
see hit
dog-? GEN=3s
‘I saw him hitting the dog.’ (lit. ‘I saw his hitting (of) the dog.’)
98
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
(21c). This is just like the purposive clause exemplified in (20c–d), where the passive
structure must be used.
(21) Controlled clauses: participial adjunct:
a.
Aku ita hia [ __ emi seng
hitu].
1s
see 3s
take money that.s
‘I saw him taking the money.’
(A is controlled)
(active participial)
b. * Aku ita hia [polisi deko __ ].
1s
see 3s police arrest
‘I saw him arrested by the police.’
(P is controlled,
Active participle)
c.
(P is controlled)
(passive participial)
Aku ita hia [__ deko le polisi].
1s
see 3s
arrest by police
‘I saw him arrested by the police.’
The same restriction with respect to control is also observed in relativisation. The
relative markers differ depending on the dialects, e.g. se (Rego) and ca (Kempo). The
following examples (from Rego) show that non-subject arguments cannot be controlled:
(22) a
Ata
molah [se __ ita aku] ghitu rebao
ngo gi.
person girl
REL see 1s
that
just.now go
already
‘The girl [who saw me] has just gone.’
(Rego)
b. * Ata
molah [se aku ita __ ] ghitu rebao
ngo gi.
person girl
REL 1s
see
that
just.now go already
‘The girl [that I saw] has just gone.’
c.
Ata
molah [se __ ita l=aku ] ghitu rebao
ngo gi.
person girl
REL
see by=1s that
just.now go already
‘The girl [that I saw or that was seen by me] has just gone.’
d. * Ata
molah [se aku ita le __ ] ghitu rebao
person girl
REL 1s
see by
that just.now
* ‘The girl [that I was seen by __ ] has just gone.’
ngo gi.
go already
Relativisation of the Agent argument of the active structure is fine (22a). No change in
syntax of the embedded clause is observed (except the gapping of the Agent subject
position). Again, an attempt to relativise/control the Patient object gives rise to a bad
sentence (22b). To enable the Patient to be relativised, it should be manifested as subject,
which triggers a passive structure, in which case the Agent is expressed as an oblique
(22c). Relativisation of an oblique also leads to a bad sentence as exemplified by (22d).
Relative clause structures are also used to express contrastive FOC, in which case the
same constraint applies. For example, when the patient argument is given constrastive
FOC, a passive structure is used as shown in (23b).
(23) a.
Joni
ca [ __ tengo acu].
name
REL
hit
dog
‘It is John who hit the dog.’
‘John is the one who hit the dog.’
(Kempo)
Semiun (1993, ex. 278)
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
b.
polisi].
Joni
ca [ __ tengo le 21
name REL
hit
by/of police
‘It is John who was hit by the police.’
99
(Kempo)
Semiun (1993, exx. 279, 280)
The evidence presented so far indicates that the PP Agent (marked by le) is not
syntactically subject. Let us now turn to evidence from reflexive binding, optionality, and
grammatical encoding which suggests that the PP (le Agent) is indeed an oblique.
4.2 The Agent marked by le is an oblique argument
Evidence from reflexive binding strongly indicates that the le Agent has non-core status.
Reflexive binding in Manggarai is sensitive to a grammatical relations hierarchy. One
such hierarchy (observed across languages and also relevant in Manggarai) is the
Subject>Object>Oblique hierarchy (Keenan & Comrie 1977, among others; Bresnan
2001), where notation ‘>’ means ‘… more prominent than …’. 22 The evidence comes
from the following examples:
(24) a.
b.
Hiai mbele weki ru-ni
3s
kill
body self-3s.GEN
‘S/he killed himself/herself.’
<hiai, selfi>
Subj. Obj.
(active)
Hiai mbele le ru-ni
3s
kill
by self-3s.GEN
‘S/he was killed by himself/herself.’
<<hiai><selfi>>
Subj. Obl.
(passive)
In the active structure (24a), the reflexive (weki) run is thematically Patient and
syntactically object. Since it is object, it is grammatically outranked by hia (subject).
Binding of object (run) by subject (hia) is therefore fine. In (24b), the syntactic ranking of
the Agent and Patient is reversed: the Patient is syntactically subject (the highest ranked
syntactic function) whereas the Agent now gets marked by le. The evidence of the reversal
of ranking comes from the fact the Patient of the passive construction in (24b) (i.e. hia) can
bind the le Agent (le run). That is, the Agent reflexive run marked by le must be
grammatically outranked by (i.e. lower than) the Patient hia/wekin, otherwise binding
would not be possible. We take this evidence of successful binding of the le Agent by
sentence-initial Patient hia to suggest that sentence (24b) is indeed a passive sentence
where the le Agent is an oblique.
21
22
The POSS marker de can be also used here instead of le. According to Semiun (1993:83) the difference
between le and de is the semantics of the verb: le implies an action-like situation, whereas de implies a
state-like situation.
a. Aku cumang Joni ca
deko le polisi.
1s
meet
name REL catch by police
‘I met John, who was caught by the police.’
b. Ho’o loce ca
nanang de
ine.
GEN mother
this mat REL plait
‘This is the mat that was plaited by Mother.’
However, a close look at argument structures across languages, the following ranking is also attested: (a)
Core Arguments outrank Non-core arguments, (b) within sets of cores/non-cores, prominence reflects
semantic prominence (Manning 1996a, 1996b; Wechsler & Arka 1998; also Arka 1998, 2003).
100
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
Now, if the subject argument of the passive structure is reflexive, then there should be a
problem in having le Agent bind the reflexive. This is because the reflexive would
syntactically outrank its intended binder. We expect binding to fail. The expectation is
borne out. Consider (25) below. The intended binding (i.e. reading (ii)) fails. The
sentence is acceptable only in its first reading, where the Agent must be someone else. In
reading (i), the reflexive form encodes emphasis only (i.e. an emphatic reading). In short,
the failure of binding shown by reading (ii) is what is expected on the passive analysis of
the le agent.
(25)
Weki ru-ni
mbele le hia*i/j.
<<selfi><hiaj/*i>>(passive)
body self-3s.GEN kill
by 3s
(i) ‘(S)hei (himself/ herself) was killed by him j /herj.’
(ii) *‘(S)he was killed by himself/herself.’
Further evidence from reflexive binding is illustrated by the active-passive alternation in
examples (26)–(27). In (26a), the reflexive wekin precedes the Goal oblique hi ase ‘little
sibling’ (marked by kamping), whereas in (26b) it follows the oblique. Notice that in both
cases wekin can be bound only by subject (hi ema ‘father’, index i), not by oblique
(kamping hi ase, index j). This suggests that linear precedence does not play any role in
reflexive binding in Manggarai. What matters is syntactic prominence: the binder must be
syntactically more prominent than its bindee. Thus, we expect that if the Goal hi ase is
manifested as the grammatical subject by means of passivisation then binding is possible.
This is indeed the case, as shown by (27), where the goal hi ase is the only possible binder
of reflexive wekin. The fact that the passive Agent (i.e. PP Agent li ema) now fails to bind
the theme wekin suggests that the Agent is now an oblique. That is, if the le Agent were a
core argument (i.e. not oblique) it would be able to bind the (object/theme) reflexive wekin.
Note that, as (24a) shows, when the Agent and the Theme are both core arguments, the
Agent is a possible binder because it is thematically higher than the Theme/Patient (cf.
Manning 1996a, 1996b).
(26) a.
Hi
emai toto weki-ni/*j one kaca kamping
ART father show refl-3
at
mirror to
b.
Hi
emai
hi
asej.
ART little.sibling
toto
kamping hi
asej
weki-ni/*j one kaca
to
ART little.sibling refl-3
at mirror
‘Father showed himself in the mirror to (the/my) little sibling.’
ART father show
(27)
Hi
asej
toto
weki-nj/*i li emai one kaca.
refl-3
by father at
mirror
‘The/my little sibling was shown himself by Father in the mirror.’
ART little.sibling show
However, one might reject the passive analysis on the ground that the le Agent oblique
in many cases appears to be obligatory. This is unusual on the passive analysis since a
passive Agent in other languages is generally optional. One would take it as evidence that
the le Agent may be a core argument rather than an oblique.
We argue that such an analysis is untenable for the following reasons. First, in theory,
there is no reason why an oblique should always be optional. Certain obliques may be
obligatory for various reasons. For example, the locative oblique of the verb put in English
is obligatory. This is a lexically specific constraint of the verb put.
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
101
Second, our study reveals that the requirement that in Manggarai the oblique Agent be
obligatorily present in Manggarai is due to an independent, language-specific constraint
associated with grammatical-relation marking of this language. In other languages, where
passivisation is marked morphologically on the verb, the Agent oblique is indeed generally
optional because verbal morphology has done the job of marking the passive structure. In
contrast, in isolating languages like Manggarai, there is no such verbal marking strategy. 23
Simply reversing the word order would result in confusion of the linking (Agent vs
Patient). Prepositional marking with le is the only means to encode the passive structure.
Since it is the only marker, it is understandably obligatory; otherwise no passive structure
would be recognised.
Third, related to the second point just mentioned, we expect that, when the verb has
received certain marking to encode a passive structure, which is by means of cliticisation
in Manggarai, the le agent is optional. 24 This is confirmed. Consider (28):
(28) a.
Poli=s
emi=d
(l=ise) bao
surak situ.
already=3p take=POSS by=3p just.now letter that.p
‘The letters have been taken (by them) (just now).’ (lit. ‘The letters
were already, the taking (of them) just now (by them).’)
b.
Nia=s
na’a=d
bao
surak situ
(le hau) .
where=3p place=POSS just.now letter that.p (by 2s)
‘Where were the letters placed just now (by you)?’ (lit. ‘Where were
they, the placing of the letters just now (by you)?’)
c.
Toem
tiba=n
tegi
d=ite
(l=ise) .
not.exist accept-3GEN demand POSS=1p.i by=3p
‘Our demand was not accepted (by them).’ (lit. ‘The acceptance
of our demand (by them) did not exist.’)
In (28a) and (28b), the verbs (emi, na’a) are nominalised by the POSS marker =d. The
head predicates of these sentences are poli and nia, which host the subject enclitic =s
agreeing with the grammatical subject surak situ. Crucially, the demoted Agent is not
obligatorily present. (This is indicated by putting the Agent within brackets.) If it is
present, it is marked by the oblique marker l(e). In (28c), the verb is nominalised by the
inflected pronoun =n, and again the Agent — which must be marked by l= (if present) —
is optional.
Fourth, although uncommon, Agentless passive structures are indeed attested in texts.
This kind of passive is typically used when the Patient (of a semantically transitive verb) is
maintained as the topic along a stretch of clauses. The agent is either well understood from
the context or is deleted because it is clear or considered unimportant in a given context.
Consider the underlined clause in the following quotation:
23
24
Verheijen (1977) concludes that there appears to be no clear evidence that Manggarai was historically a
suffixing language. (However, given Manggarai is an Austronesian language, some earlier stage must
have had affixation.)
However, it should be noted that the cliticisation does not have to be passivisation (cf. examples
(12)–(14)).
102
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
(29)
Sai
one puar, ita le ghia bakuk ghang d-anak-n
arrive in forest see by 3s
basket rice
POSS-child-3.GEN
gho ata ngai weo kin one lobo ghaju
(Rego)
this REL PROG hang still in tip wood
‘Arriving in the forest, he saw the rice basket of his child (still) hanging
on a tip of a branch (of a tree). (lit. ‘(He) arrived in the forest, (and) the
rice basket of his child which was still being hung on a tip of a tree was
een by him.’)
In this example, the semantically transitive verb weo ‘hang’ is used intransitively, i.e. it is
used in a passive structure without an Agent. Recall that only subject can be relativised in
Manggarai. This excludes the analysis that the relativised Patient of the verb weo is object.
In other words, the underlined relative clause cannot be understood as an active clause with
its Agent subject missing, rather as a passive clause with its subject Patient controlled and
its Agent unexpressed.
Finally, the idea that the le agent is an oblique gets support from its grammatical
category expression. That is, obliques in Manggarai are always marked by prepositions.
Core arguments (i.e. subject and object) are always bare NPs, not marked by a preposition.
The contrast in (30) shows that a Goal/Locative oblique must be PP (30a), otherwise the
sentence is not acceptable (30b). Then, when the Goal/Locative argument is promoted to
subject (31a), in which case it is a core argument, the promotion to core status necessarily
requires a change in marking. That is, the Goal argument must be NP; otherwise the
structure is bad (31b). Also, in this passive construction, the passive Agent must be PP
because it is an oblique; it cannot be NP (hence the unacceptability of (31c)).
(30) a.
Aku puci ngger one lo’ang.
1s enter to
in
room
‘I entered (into) the room.’
b. * Aku puci lo’ang.
1s enter room
‘I entered the room.’
(31) a.
Lo’ang hitu puci le ata
tako.
room
that enter by person steal
‘The room was entered by a thief.’
b. * Ngger one lo’ang hitu puci le ata
tako.
to
in room that enter by person steal
‘*To the room was entered by a thief.’
c. * Lo’ang hitu puci ata
tako.
room
that enter person steal
‘The room was entered by a thief.’
In short, the basic function of the prepositions, e.g. le (marking the Agent), ngger one
‘into’ (marking Goal) — is to mark non-core status. Core arguments do not get preposition
marking. Therefore, we rule out the analysis which treats the PP (le) Agent as a core
argument. The le Agent should be analysed as an oblique.
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
103
Finally, the claim regarding le as a passive marker should be slightly modified. This
claim needs to be revised given the fact that Manggari le is not uniquely associated with
the passive construction. It also has locative, goal and instrumental function in Manggarai,
reinforcing the oblique nature of le, e.g. le puar ‘in the forest’, le pasar ‘to the market’, and
le wase nol ‘with a (piece of) rope (called) nol’. 25 Thus, a better or more correct claim is
to say that le is simply an oblique marker. 26
To summarise, there is evidence to support the following ideas. First, backrounding/
demotion of the Agent argument is also accompanied by foregrounding/promotion of the
Patient argument. Second, the backgrounded le Agent is not subject and the foregrounded
Patient is subject. Evidence comes from agreement (examples (15)–(16), structural
positions (17)–(19), and control (20)–(23). Third, the backgrounded le Agent should be
analysed as an oblique argument for the following reasons:
•
•
•
•
The le Agent, unlike the bare Agent NP, may appear in different positions
(examples (17)–(19). This suggests that a PP Agent is structurally an
Adjunct-like unit, hence a non-core or oblique, because subject (or a core
argument) has a fixed position.
The le Agent cannot bind a core Theme/Patient reflexive argument, which it
thematically outranks (examples (24b) and (27)). This is not expected on the
analysis that the le Agent is a core argument because if the Agent and the
Theme/Patient are both core arguments, the Agent must be able to bind the
Theme.
The le Agent may be optional or unexpressed in certain circumtances
(example (28)).
In Manggarai, le is a preposition marking an oblique/adjunct; a core
argument is never realised by a PP in this language (cf. examples. (30)–(31)).
5 Discussion
Typologically speaking, passive is a category of voice that is generally associated with
verbal forms having certain passive morphology. That is, a particular affix on the verb is
identified as a passive morpheme. Let us call this type of passive the ‘morphological’
passive. Haspelmath (1990) adopts a strong view claiming that the verbal morphology
associated with the passive construction is an essential part of the passive. He claims that
‘passive constructions without passive morphology do not exist’ (1990:27). 27 (In his view,
25
26
27
The following example illustrates the instrumental function of le:
Kempet le
haju=n.
clamp with wood=3
‘It’s clamped with a piece of wood.’
Le has been so far roughly glossed with ‘by’ for ease of the exposition of passives. It should perhaps be
better glossed as either OBL (for Oblique), Pcase (i.e. prepositional case (marker)), or simply LE (i.e. as a
marker). This avoids the necessity of determining what its exact case marking function is, or what its
word class is, matters which are crucial to a full accounting of the syntax of the language. The fact that
it can alternate with de in some contexts is an interesting case that deserves further studies.
He makes his claim slightly weaker in the summary of the paper by saying that they are ‘rare or nonexistent’ (1990:62).
104
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
other morphological devices used in passive constructions such as (prepositional) agent
markers which are not specific to passive constructions are not considered ‘passive
morphology’. We shall see below that Manggarai poses a challenge to his view.) He
adopts the following definition of passive constructions:
(32) A construction is called passive if:
i.
ii.
iii.
the active subject corresponds either to a non-obligatory oblique
phrase or to nothing; and
the active direct object (if any) corresponds to the subject of the
passive; and
the construction is somehow restricted vis-à-vis another unrestricted
construction (the active), e.g. less frequent, functionally specialised,
not fully productive.
Based on a genetically stratified sample of 80 languages (the Gramcats sample), only 31
were found to have a passive. Haspelmath notes that there are at least six expression types
of morphological passives, as shown by Table 2. Among them, the ‘stem affix’ passive,
i.e. the passive with its passive affix being attached directly to the verb stem, inside
inflectional affixes (i.e. aspect, tense, and person markers), is by far the most common
type. The English type where the passive is expressed by an auxiliary plus a participle
verb is not a typical one.
Table 2: Expression types of passive morphemes in the Gramcats sample
(Haspelmath 1990)
Expression types
additional stem affix
auxiliary verb (+participle)
extra-inflectional affix
differential-subject person markers
alternate stem affix
particle
Number of languages
25
6
3
2
1
1
We will not discuss and exemplify each of the types in this paper. Rather, we want to
discuss the typology of passives in relation to the Manggarai data, taking into account
Haspelmath’s claim that there are no such things as ‘passives without passive morphology’
because, according to him, the passive is essentially a verbal morphological category
(diachronically) motivated by ‘inactivation’ of the verbal situation. 28 He further claims
that inactivisation is the original function of the passive, not the participant backgrounding
or foregrounding. (The latter is a consequence of inactivisation.) The evidence for this,
according to him, comes from the grammaticalisation path, where the case of inactive
auxiliaries is probably the most common source of passive morphology across languages;
for example, just to mention some languages outside Austronesian languages here, Korean
28
By this, he means, ‘non-agentive’ (i.e. ‘the opposite of active, actional’). All state verbs are ‘stative’;
hence they are typically ‘inactive’. However, inactive verbs may express ‘dynamic’ situations. For
example, Maria was kissed by Juan is as dynamic as the corresponding active. Inactive verbs are
typically intransitive but they can be transitive (e.g. ‘undergo’ and ‘suffer’).
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
105
passive affix -ji (from (<) the verb ji- ‘fall’), Tamil -pat¢ (< the verb pat¢u ‘fall, happen’),
Equadorian Quechua -ri (< the verb ri- ‘go’), Turkic -il/-l (< the verb ol- ‘be’), and
Japanese -ar(e) (< the verb aru ‘be’) (see Haspelmath 1990 for more examples and further
details).
Morphological passives in Austronesian languages of Indonesia are typically found in
the Indonesian-type languages dominating the western part of Indonesia. Examples (33)–
(39) show some Indonesian languages that have passive morphology (Indonesian,
Balinese, Makasarese, Javanese, Menó-Meneé Sasak, and Bima). Some of them may have
more than one passive affix. Indonesian di- and ter- (33) and Javanese di- and ke- (36)
differ in volitionality of the event, e.g. ter-/ke- implying an accidental event. Balinese kaand -a (34) differ in register, with ka- being used in high register (see Arka 1998 and Arka
to appear, for further details). Di- and ra- in Bima (39) differ in mood (realis vs irrealis).
(33) a. Anak itu di-gigit
(oleh anjing).
child that PASS-bite by
dog
‘The child was bitten by a dog.’
(Indonesian)
b. Mereka ter-tabrak ((oleh) mobil).
3p
PASS-hit
by
car
’They (accidentally) got hit by a car.’
(34) a. Ipun ka-icen
jinah antuk Bapak Guru.
3
PASS-give money by
father teacher
‘(S)he was given money by the teacher.’
(Balinese)
b. Nyoman beli-ang-a
nasi teken I
Meme.
NAME
buy-APPL-PASS rice by
ART mother
‘Rice was bought for Nyoman by Mother.’
(35)
Ni-jakkalak-i ri pulisi.
PASS-arrest-3 by police
‘He was arrested by the police.’
(36) a. Klambi-ne di-kumbah aku/kowe/Siti.
shirt-DEF PASS-wash 1s /2s/Name
’The shirt was washed by me/you/Siti.’
(Makasarese)
(Manyambeang, Mulya,
and Nasruddin 1996)
(Javanese)
(Sawardi 2001)
b. Klambi-ne ke-kumbah aku/kowe/Siti.
shirt-DEF PASS-wash 1s/2s/Name
‘The shirt was accidentally washed by me/you/Siti.’
(37)
Aku te-gitaq isiq Ali.
1s PASS-see by NAME
‘I was seen by Ali.’
(Menoó-Mené Sasak)
(Austin 2002)
(38)
‘U-to-kiki’i
na
iko’o
2s.R-PASS-bit NOM you
‘You were bitten.’
(Tukang Besi)
(Donohue 2002)
(39) a. Sia ra-ha’a
ba ngao ede.
3s PASS.REAL-bit by cat that
‘(S)he has been bitten by the cat.’
(Bima)
(Jauhary 2000)
106
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
b. Wela ede di-weli
ba La Amir.
kite that PASS.IRR-buy by ART NAME
‘The kite will be bought by Amir.’
While some Austronesian languages outside Flores show morphological passives, other
Austronesian languages in Flores do not even have passives. Although we talk about
‘passive’ in Manggarai, Manggarai does not have a typical passive because the head verb
bears no verbal morphology.
We have provided evidence for the analysis that the construction with the
(backgrounded) le agent is passive even though the verb form of this construction
morphologically has the same form as the active counterpart. Indeed, the le Agent
construction in Manggarai also passes Haspelmath’s passive criteria formulated in (32).
The first criterion — optionality of an oblique — is satisfied because the le agent is indeed
omissible 29 in certain limited contexts; see discussion in §4.2, examples (28) and (29). The
second criterion—the passive subject corresponds to the active object — is also satisfied.
The Patient of the le (passive) construction is indeed grammatically subject. The evidence
comes from a number of tests (agreement, structural positions, reflexive binding and
control) discussed in §4.1. As for the third criterion — markedness and functionality —
we can say for certain that the passive is pragmatically marked (i.e. functionally
specialised). The distribution of the passive in texts is slightly less frequent than the
corresponding active construction in a small sample of texts that we have looked at. 30 As
seen in Table 3, the use of active and passive constructions vary across texts (intransitive
29
30
Passives with obligatory agents are reported to exist (Siewierska 1984:35). Indonesian is said to have
this kind of passive based on the analysis of Chung (1976). This is the Indonesian non-agentive
construction with pronominal clitic on the verb, e.g. buku itu ku=baca ‘book that 1s=read’. However,
current research (Arka & Manning 1998) suggests that this type of structure is not really syntactically
passive because the verb is syntactically transitive with buku itu ‘the book’ being the subject argument
and the Agent clitic ku= being a core non-subject argument (i.e. not an oblique). In our definition of
(syntactic) passive, the syntactic shift of the Agent and Patient of the transitive verb is crucial. This
includes the most important criterion where the Patient becomes subject and the Agent loses its subject
status. Typically, the Agent becomes an (optional) oblique but the Agent can also be totally suppressed
from the argument structure of the derived passive verb (i.e. the Agent cannot show up). Some
languages, however, allow a construction where the Agent is not subject but it is still a core argument.
This includes, for example, the inverse voice found in Algonquian, a language in north America (Mithun
2001:222–228) and the non-agentive voices found in Indonesian languages such Balinese (Arka 1998,
2003) and the Philippine languages such as Tagalog (Kroeger 1993). There is good evidence to consider
that this type of construction is not passive for syntactic and pragmatic reasons, e.g. the Agent is still
very much prominent syntactically and pragmatically (see, among others, Arka and Manning (1998),
Foley (1998), Mithun (2001:225) and Purwo (1989)). The Indonesian buku itu ku=baca ‘book that
1s=read’ is then more like an inverse rather than a passive. This Indonesian construction is different
from the passive construction in Manggarai in at least two respects. First, the Agent clitic ku= in
Indonesian is always obligatory whereas the le Agent in Manggarai may be optional in certain
circumstances. And second, crucially, there is evidence that the le Agent, unlike the Indonesian Agent
clitic ku=, is not core.
It should be noted that text 4 Sungke Cahap appears to show a slightly greater number of passives (16) to
actives (12). A closer look at this story, however, reveals that it is about a variety of social and physical
problems suffered by a person who has a bad habit of talking while sleeping. The focus of the story is
‘Patient-oriented’; i.e. how this person undergoes a variety of bad experiences with other people. The
high proportion of passive verbs is expected. We believe that the genre has a distinct effect on the type
of structures used as text 4 shows, which may be inconsistent with the generalisation that actives are
more common than passives across text types.
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
107
verbs such as ‘come’ and ‘sit’ are excluded). Out of a total of 94 transitive verbs, around
two thirds of them (62 verbs, or 66%) appear in active constructions whereas 26 are in
passives with agents and only 6 in agentless passives. 31
There seems to be evidence from Austronesian languages of Indonesia to support
Haspelmath’s observation that an inactive verb may get grammaticalised (and
morphologised) to become a passive marker. For example, the ‘informal’ Indonesian
passive ke- could have come from the verb kena ‘be adversely hit by, suffer’. 32 Both of
them (i.e. sentences (40a) and (40b) are used interchangeably nowadays. In standard/
formal Indonesian, the di- passive (40c) is used, however. 33
Table 3: The frequency of actives and passives in some Manggarai texts
Text titles
1
2
3
4
Wendong ata manusia le darat
‘The abduction of a man by a spirit’
Tombo tora mangan rana mese
‘The story of the lake Rana Mese’
Sungke cahap
‘The story about talking while sleeping’
Tombo Ka agu Kode
‘The crow and the monkey’
Total
Actives
19
Passive
with agents
6
Passive
without agents
1
11
8
–
12
11
5
20
1
–
62
26
6
Total
94
(40) a. Ia kena tipu.
3s hit
cheat
‘(S)he was/got cheated.’
31
32
33
b.
Ia ke-tipu.
3s PASS-cheat
‘(S)he was/got cheated.’
c.
Ia di-tipu.
3s PASS-cheat
‘(S)he was/got cheated.’
The figures given in Table 3 are based on limited texts. While they are indicative that the active
construction is more common than the passive construction, further quantitative research based on a
larger corpus that consists of a variety of text types in Manggarai is needed. This might give us a better
understanding of the distribution of different voices. One of the crucial issues worth investigating is the
distribution of the agentless passive. For example, the figure in Table 3 which indicates that 6 out 94
examples are of an agentless passive might suggest that there could be something more than simply a
‘performance’ fact.
Apparently, this ‘informal passive’ in Indonesian is related to Javanese ke-. It is unclear, however,
whether the Javanse ke- also came from an inactive verb ‘suffer or hit’. Malcolm Ross (pers. comm),
however, doubts this: the prefix ke- is probably derived from the PAN/PMP *ka-.
The historical origin of the passive prefix di- is a matter of debate. There are at least three competing
hypotheses. It could come from (i) a captured (locative) preposition di-, or (ii) a third person pronoun
dia, or (iii) the PAST affix ni- (see Ross (2004) for detailed discussion).
108
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
It is not clear at this stage whether Balinese passive ka- illustrated in (41) also came from
an inactive verb. 34 Balinese ka-, unlike the informal Indonesian ke- or Javansese ke-, has
no accidental or adversative meaning.
(41)
Gumi-ne
ka-prentah
(antuk/teken bangsa gelah).
country-DEF PASS-govern by
people own
‘The country is governed (by our own people).’
The historical origin of le in Manggarai is unclear at this stage. Particularly, we do not
know for sure whether le used to be a verb, but it most probably never was. The
apparently related (cognate?) words in other western Austronesian languages are all
prepositions (e.g. Indonesian oleh, Balinese olih and Acehnese lé). In contemporary
Manggarai, le is a preposition. Indeed, Verheijen’s (1967) dictionary lists it only as a
preposition. No other entries of the same form are listed as verbs of the ‘inactive’ type
meaning ‘suffer’ and the like. (Recall that Haspelmath (1990) claims that the common
historical path of the passive marker is from an inactive verb.)
If Manggarai le was never a verb, then Manggarai is indeed a language that has a
passive without passive morphology, contrary to Haspelmath’s generalisation, because le is
not a unique marker of the passive construction. As noted earlier in §4.2, the preposition le
is also used to encode locative, goal, and instrument. It is worth discussing other
languages that have been cited to have a Passive without passive morphology (which
potentially challenge Haspelmath’s claim). In what follows, we briefly discuss Chinese
and Acehnese cases. 35
Like Manggarai, Chinese is an isolating language. Like Manggarai, it employs the
same verb form (i.e. without any additional affix) in both active and passive
constructions. 36 For example, the verb form zhemo appears in the active sentence (42a) as
well as in the passive counterpart (42b). The passive construction is marked by (what is
believed now to be) the preposition bei. Bei may appear without its Agent complement NP
as shown by example (42c).
(42) a.
34
35
36
Zhou Hua zhemo Gao Qiang.
NAME
torment NAME
‘Zhou Hua tormented Gao Qiang.’
(Shi 1997)
Balinese ka- was possibly borrowed from (Old) Javanese (Clynes 1989), and the shift in meaning might
have taken place in Old Javanese.
Also relevant here is evidence from creole languages such as the pair below from Jamaican Creole
(Bernard Comrie, pers. comm.):
a. Dem sel-aaf di bota. ‘They have sold all the butter.’
b. Di bota sel-aaf.
‘The butter has all been sold.’
As with Manggarai, the virtual lack of inflectional morphology seems to be a relevant factor. These
examples show a syntactic shift (of the patient di bota ‘the butter’) that is not coded by the verbal
morphology (i.e. the verb in (b) has no passive morpheme). A detailed comparison of Manggarai with
creole languages is beyond the scope of this paper.
It should be noted that the functions performed by the passive are more usually performed in Chinese by
topicalising the patient of an otherwise default clause. Such a structure may appear with or without an
agent. I thank Malcolm Ross for pointing this out to me. In any case, however, the verb has the same
form.
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
b.
Gao Qiang
Zhou Hua zhemo.
NAME
BEI NAME
torment
‘Gao Qiang was tormented by Zhou Hua.’
c.
Wo bei liyongle.
I
BEI use.ASP
‘I was used.’
109
bei
Haspelmath (1990) argues that the Chinese bei passive is not a counterexample to his
claim because there is (historical) evidence, discussed in (Bennett 1981; Hashimoto 1988;
Zhang 1990), that bei was not a preposition, but a verb. 37 In Old Chinese, it was a verb
meaning ‘to receive’(Bennett 1981), ‘to sustain’ (Hashimoto 1988) or ‘to cover’ (which
later changed to ‘suffer’) (Zhang 1990). The double functions of bei (as a preposition and a
verb-like/passive marker) have led to competing analyses of the exact status of this
morpheme as reviewed in Shi (1997). In short, the data that seems to be against
Haspelmath’s claim turns out, from a historical perspective, to support his analysis that a
passive marker originates from an ‘inactive’ verb.
Turning to the Acehnese case, we have a different situation. Consider the examples in
(43), 38 which show that the verb form geu-côm ‘3p-kiss’ in the alleged passive sentence
(43b) also employs the same verb form as the active (43a). Sentence (43b) is claimed to be
passive by Lawler (1977) but is disputed by Durie (1988). Durie (1988) argues that the socalled passive in Acehnese illustrated by (43b) is in fact not passive, but rather a wordorder variant of the active structure (43a) (i.e. sentence (43b) is a kind of Patient
preposing). The controversy over the analysis boils down to whether the notion of
‘Subject’ (on which the notion of ‘Passive’ is based) can be proved to be relevant in
Acehnese. 39 In particular, the validity of the passive analysis of sentence (43b) very much
depends on the evidence that the sentence-initial NP (in this case lôn) is grammatically
‘Subject’. Durie (1988) argues that it is not. In fact, Durie (1987) argues that no surface
grammatical relations of subject and object can be identified in Acehnese. Lawler (1988)
in his reply to Durie (1988) points out that such notions as ‘subject’ (and also ‘Passive’)
are appropriate for Acehnese, at least according to a more recent grammar of Acehnese by
Asyik (1987), 40 a native speaker of the language.
(43) a.
b.
37
38
39
40
Gopnyan ka geu-côm
shep
IN 3-kiss
‘She kissed me.’
lôn.
1p
Lôn ka geu-côm lé-gopnyan.
1p
IN 3-kiss
- shep
‘I was kissed by her.’
Evidence that it is not an ordinary preposition comes from the fact that it does not behave like a
preposition in modern Chinese; e.g. bei can be left stranded as in (42c) whereas a real preposition cannot
(Shi 1997:46; Hashimoto 1988).
The subscript ‘p’ means ‘polite’ and IN means ‘INCHOATIVE’.
However, one could embrace a framework or analysis that does not make use of subject and object
metalanguage but can still talk about passives (e.g. Foley & Valin 1984; Shibatani 1985).
We have not been able to consult this work.
110
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
It should be noted that Acehnese, unlike Manggarai and Chinese, is not strictly speaking
an isolating language. Acehnese crucially differs from these two languages in having an
agreement system marked on the verb that is sensitive to the verbal semantics or argumentroles of the verb. For example, the bound pronoun geu- in (43) agrees with the Agent
argument; hence it agrees with Gopnyan, irrespective of whether the free NP Agent appears
before the verb as in the active sentence (43a) or after the verb as in the alleged passive
structure (43b), where the free NP agent must be marked by a preposition-like marker lé.
(This marker is not glossed in (43b) and poses a potential problem in Durie’s analysis 41 ).
The agreement is particularly clear in the case of intransitive verbs where a split is
recognised: an action-like intransitive verb such as ‘run’ gets agreement like the transitive
Agent whereas a Patient-like intransitive verb like ‘fall’ does not get this agreement (see
Durie 1987 for details).
Recall that Manggarai also shows (en)clitic agreement. However, the enclitic
agreement in Manggarai significantly differs from the agreement in Acehnese in that
Manggarai clitic agreement is indeed sensitive to surface grammatical relations: it is
associated with subject, which is therefore not restricted to the Agent role. This has been
discussed in subsections (4.1 and 4.2) to prove that there is passivisation in Manggarai (i.e.
object–subject alternation of the Patient of the transitive verb).
Another difference between Manggarai and Acehnese relates to the grammatical status
of the Agent argument of the semantically transitive verb. We have argued at length that
the Agent marked by le in Manggarai is oblique. This is not easily resolved in Acehnese
due to the presence of the pronominal geu- on the verb. A bound pronoun that precedes a
verb (or occurs morphologically on the verb) and receives cross-reference with a floating
PP (typically after the verb) is in fact not unique to Acehnese. Balinese and Sasak are other
such languages. This type of structure poses a problem in the analysis of, for example,
Balinese voice. However, current research on Balinese (particularly with evidence from
binding and other properties as discussed in Arka (1998, to appear)) has led to progress in
the understanding of such a structure. For this reason, we briefly discuss the Balinese
examples and then turn to Sasak.
In Balinese, there is evidence for grammaticalisation of the bound pronoun as a passive
marker. Consider examples in (44) where the third person bound pronoun -a can be made
explicit by a following PP teken Wayan as in (44c). In contemporary Balinese, this is
unambiguously a syntactic passive, as argued in (Arka 1998, to appear). However, the PP
Agent in Balinese, like the one in Acehnese, can be absent as in (44b). This is an
ambiguous structure. On one hand, the (bound) pronoun =a can be understood as an
argument of the verb, in which case the verb is associated with Objective Voice (OV). This
kind of voice, typical in western Austronesian voice systems, reflects an Undergoeroriented voice (where the Patient is subject) but, unlike passive voice, the Agent is still a
core argument. On the other hand, it may be simply a variant of passive (44c) with the
Agent being unexpressed. Arka (1998; to appear) argues that in the presence of the PP
Agent (i.e. of the type (44c), the construction is indeed syntactically passive because the
evidence overwhelmingly shows that the Agent is an oblique. In short, in contemporary
Balinese, the bound pronoun lives a double life (as a bound pronoun and as a ‘passive’
marker). The evidence for the analysis of different voices in Balinese is much clearer than
41
He analyses it as an ‘ergative’ marker, which seems to add more controversy, rather than clarification, to
the Acehnese analysis.
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
111
that in Acehnese thanks to the verbal voice morphology in Balinese, particularly the
marking of the Active Voice (AV) by a nasal prefix. That is, we are absolutely sure that the
Patient argument in (44b) is grammatically subject. A similar claim with absolute certainty
apparently cannot be made for the Acehnese data in (43b).
(44) a.
b.
Wayan
maang
NAME
AV.give NAME
Nyoman pipis.
money
’Wayan gave Nyoman money.’
Nyoman baang=a pipis.
OV.give=3 money
‘(S)he gave NYOMAN (not someone else) money.’
NAME
c.
Nyoman baang-a
pipis
(teken Wayan).
give-PASS money by
Wayan
‘Nyoman was given money (by Wayan).’
NAME
A similar example from Menó-Mené Sasak is given in (45) (Austin 2002), where bound
clitic =n is cross-referenced by PP isiq Herman. While Austin explicitly claims that this
type of sentence is transitive (not passive), he is not explicit in saying whether it is ‘active’
or ‘agentive’ voice. (Note that the Balinese OV verb illustrated in (44b) is also
syntactically transitive but it is not ‘agentive/actor-oriented’.) This is presumably because
Menó-Mené Sasak does not distinguish grammatical relations other than core versus
oblique (Austin 2002, fn. 6). In this case, then, the PP Agent construction in Menó-Mené
Sasak is closer to that in Achenese than to that in Balinese. Unlike Acehnese, however,
Menó-Mené Sasak clearly has a passive construction with verbal passive morphology (te-,
example (37) repeated here as (45b)). Note that the same preposition (isiq) is used to mark
the Agent NP.
(45) a. Yaq=n gitaq kanak-kanak=no isiq Herman.
fut=3 see
child-child=tjat by NAME
‘Herman will see the children.’
(Austin 2002)
b. Aku te-gitaq isiq Ali.
1s PASS-see by NAME
’I was seen by Ali.’
The points that we want to highlight with the data from other (Austronesian) languages
of Indonesia are these. First, the analysis of a passive without passive morphology in other
languages such as Acehnese, for example, is hard to demonstrate because the presence of
the bound pronominal Agent clitic or prefix on the verb may indicate that the verb is still
transitive (i.e. no change in transitivity as is the case if we have passivisation). Other
processes in Acehnese such as reflexive binding appear to be sensitive to a semantic role
hierarchy (Durie 1987), so they do not help much. In contrast, the situation in Manggarai
is much clearer because there are language-specific properties such as the agreement clitic
and reflexive binding that help us to show that the grammatical relation of the bare Agent
NP is different from that of the PP (le) Agent.
Secondly, an apparently similar
(pronominal) bound form that might be encountered in other constructions might have
been grammaticalised to become a different voice marker. In other words, on the basis of
the same morphology (e.g. Balinese bound form -a), we cannot jump to the conclusion that
the form (and the verb/construction) is associated with a single voice. It may be
112
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
ambiguous between two different voices, Objective Voice (OV) and Passive voice. In
Manggarai, we do not have this ambiguity; we can claim with certainty that we have a
clear distinction between active and passive constructions.
Finally, a close association of the preposition that marks an Agent (e.g. le in Manggarai)
with the passive construction needs a brief comment here. The preposition would not be
conventionally regarded as a passive marker. Thus, the Indonesian oleh ‘by’ or the
Balinese antuk/teken ‘by’ is the preposition that marks the oblique Agent but is not
considered a passive marker because the verb has passive morphology, di- (Indonesian)
and ka- (Balinese). These verbal affixes are the passive markers because they indicate that
the clauses are passives. (The PP agents with oleh/teken may be absent.) However, the
preposition le in Manggarai is the only indication by which a passive construction is
recognised. In isolating languages, due to the lack of passive morphology on the verb, any
‘marker’ (outside the verb) that indicates a passive understandably serves as a significant
cue. This is confirmed by research from language processing (in other languages of a
similar type). For example, Li, Bates, and MacWhinney (1993) reports that, while there is
evidence for the significance of animacy in Chinese speakers’ use of different cues in
sentence processing, bei is a powerful cue, helping the speakers select the second noun
more than any other cue. Indeed, even if the prepositional marker for oblique is not
generally considered a passive marker (e.g. in languages like English), it turns out to be a
crucial cue. A report on language comprehension and production of the passive voice
among ten severely prelingually deaf boys and girls (Power & Quigley 1973) indicates that
more than half of them correctly understood passive sentences and less than half correctly
produced such sentences. Crucially, they interpreted passive sentences in terms of the
surface word order and the preposition by was the only passive marker for most of these
children. It appears that much emphasis has been placed on the use verbal morphology to
identify the (so-called) Passive in the linguistic literature on voice but verbal voice
morphology might not be as significant or powerful a marker as we initially thought.42
6 Conclusion
Manggarai is an instance of a language that has a passive construction without passive
verbal morphology. This passive construction appears with le, signalling the oblique status
of the Agent argument of the (semantically transitive) verb. We have presented evidence
to support the analysis that the le Agent construction passes typical tests for passive.
However, since le is not unique to the passive (i.e. it is also used to mark locatives,
instrumental, and goals), it cannot be claimed that it is the passive marker in Manggarai. It
is simply a prepositional ‘case’ of non-core status, signalling a passive construction. (It is
also used in other construction types.)
Typologically speaking, it is not really surprising to have a passive without passive
morphology. If one looks at how passives get expressed cross-linguistically, as Haspelmath
points out, they are of numerous types (morphological, analytical, or a combination of
these) with the voice morphology, if any, not originally used to mark passives. An earlier
42
It appears that the ‘whole construction’ is recognised as passive (which is also true with the deaf
children). As far as the Manggarai data is concerned, the Agent le may be missing and the context could
play a role in the recognition of the construction as passive.
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
113
study by Andersen (1989) also reveals the same conclusion and he further concludes that
‘the existence of passive morphology is neither necessary nor sufficient for the definition
of the passive’. In other words, passive morphology is not central to the characterisation of
the passive construction.
The question then is what characterises passives cross-linguistically. Siewierska
(1984:39–40) lists a number of properties that distinguish passives from actives (the order
of NPs, special verbal morphology, etc.) but further suggests that none of them can be used
for defining passives in all passive constructions. One way of characterising passives
cross-linguistically is to abstract away from overt or surface expressions by referring to
certain (abstract) relations such as ‘subject’ and ‘object’, which is in fact a practice that has
43
been a long tradition in linguistics.
Such abstract relations are taken up again in
contemporary syntactic theories, notably Relational Grammar (Perlmutter & Postal 1977)
and Lexical Functional Grammar (e.g. Bresnan (1982)). An attempt to formulate the
universal characterisation within Relational Grammar is given in Perlmutter and Postal
(1977), which is contested in O‘Grady (1980) but is defended in Dryer (1982). 44 (Note
that the characterisation of passives from Haspelmath cited in (32) makes use of the
notions of ‘subject’ and ‘object’ as well.) The advantage of using abstract relations such as
subject and object is that it allows us to draw generalisations without saying anything about
passive morphology (or other overt markings).
However, a morphological characterisation of passives seems to be assumed in at least
two current theories. This seems to be a drawback because it leads to a problem. In LFG
(Alsina and Mchombo 1990; Alsina and Mchombo 1993; Bresnan and Kanerva 1989;
Bresnan 2001; Dalrymple 2001, among others), passive alternations are dealt with under
alternative linking within LMT (Lexical Mapping Theory), in which certain morphology on
the verb (i.e. a passive affix) signifies a marked linking where the Agent is either totally
suppressed from the argument structure of the verb or prevented from being mapped onto
subject. The passive in Manggarai would pose a problem to this conception of
passivisation as a morpholexical process. In this view, passivisation necessarily involves
morphological derivation (or affixation). 45 However, as we have seen, passivisation in
Manggarai involves no such derivation. Likewise, it is arguably hard to deal with the
Manggarai passive in the Case-theoretic Chomskyan transformational model of grammar
(see for example Webelhuth 1995; Guilfoyle, Hung, and Travis 1992), where passivisation
is also associated with morphological verbal marking because the basic assumption of this
model is that passivisation involves movement of an NP (i.e. the Patient) motivated by
Case (absorption). It is assumed that the passive affix is said to ‘absorb’ Case that would
be otherwise assigned to the Patient by the transitive verb. As result, the Patient has to
move to a position where it may receive Case (i.e. to the subject position). Again, we
cannot appeal to such a Case-theoretic explanation to account for the passive in Manggarai
43
Another way of doing it is to analyse different kinds of voice in terms of prototypes, in which pragmatic,
semantic, syntactic and morphological properties are considered (see Shibatani 1985 for details.)
44
As noted in Siewierska (1984), when we speak of a universal characterisation of passive we do not mean
that the passive is a universal phenomenon, because it is obvious that many languages lack this voice
category. For example, Austronesian languages of eastern Indonesia (e.g. Taba (Bowden 2001))
typically show no passives. Based on the Gramcats sample, Haspelmath (1990) remarks that ‘it is more
likely for a language to lack a passive than to have one’.
45
Analysing passives within a version of LFG e.g. Andrews and Manning (1999), where passives can be
viewed as complex predicates might solve the problem. We leave this for further research.
114
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
because there is no affix on the verb that can absorb Case in the first place.46 Discussing
the theoretical issues of Manggarai passive in detail is certainly beyond the scope of the
present paper.
References
Alsina, Alex and Sam Mchombo, 1990, The syntax of applicatives in Chichewa: problems
for a theta theoretic asymmetry. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8:543–505.
—— 1993, Object asymmetries and the Chichewa applicative construction. In S.
Mchombo. Stanford, ed. Theoretical aspects of Bantu grammar, 17–45. CSLI
Publications.
Andersen, Paul Kent, 1989, Is there a passive morphology? (Gibt es passivmorphologie?).
Linguistische Berichte 121:185–205.
Andrews, Avery and Christopher Manning, 1999, Complex predicate and information
spreading in LFG. Stanford: CSLI.
Arka, I Wayan, 1998, From morphosyntax to pragmatics in Balinese. PhD dissertation,
University of Sydney, Sydney.
—— 2003, Balinese morphosyntax: a lexical-functional approach. Canberra: Pacific
Linguistics.
—— to appear a, Aspects of core pronominal enclitics in Manggarai. In G. Reesink and
B.K. Purwo, eds Thinking and speaking, in memory of John Verhaar. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins.
—— to appear b, Voice and the syntax of =a/-a verbs in Balinese. In P.K. Austin and
S. Musgrave, eds Voice and grammatical relations in Austronesian languages.
Stanford: CSLI.
46
The idea of NP movement within this Case-theoretic passive analysis may have problems from a
typological perspective with respect to cases: (i) where passivisation does not appear to affect the
grammatical role of the patient nominals (e.g. the passive in Mayan languages) (Shibatani, ed. 1988:2–3;
Shibatani 1985), or (ii) where passives do not seem to have active counterparts as in Indonesian
(examples below, pointed to us by Yassir N. Tjung, pers. comm.) and in Nootka-Nitinaht (Rose &
Carlson 1984).
(i)
Uang-nya di-beli-kan
mobil oleh Amir.
(passive)
by NAME
money-DEF PASS-buy-APPL car
‘The money was used to buy a car by Amir.’
(ii)?? Amir
membeli-kan uang-nya
mobil.
NAME AV.buy-APPL money-DEF car
‘Amir bought the car with the money.’
In a lexically based model such as LFG (within the linking theory) (Bresnan & Kanerva 1989; Bresnan
2001; Alsina & Mchombo 1990; Alsina & Mchombo 1993; Dalrymple 2001, among others), the two
problems just mentioned can be easily dealt with because active and passive verbs may share argument
structures. Crucially, however, there is no requirement that the Patient that is linked to subject (in the
passive verb) must be always linked to object first. That is, there is no one-to-one relation between active
and passive constructions. Arguments for the idea that passivisation are a lexically-based relational
change (not a syntactic transformational process) is discussed, among others, in Bresnan (1978, 2001).
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
115
Arka, I Wayan and Christopher Manning, 1998, Voice and grammatical relations in
Indonesian: a new perspective. In Butt and King, eds The Proceedings of the LFG
'98 Conference, Stanford: CSLI, http://csli-publications.stanford.edu/LFG/3/lfg98toc.html.
Asyik, Abdul Gani, 1987, A contextual grammar of Achenese sentences. Dissertation,
University of Michigan.
Austin, Peter, 2002, Clitics in Sasak, eastern Indonesia. Paper read at Paper presented
at the Tenth National Congress of the Indonesian Linguistics Society Conference,
Denpasar.
Bennett, Paul A., 1981, The evolution of passive and disposal sentences. Journal of
Chinese Linguistics 9:61–89.
Blust, Robert, 1993, Central and central-eastern Malayo-Polynesian. Oceanic Linguistics
32 (2):241–293.
Bowden, John, 2001, Taba: description of a south Halmahera language. Canberra: Pacific
Linguistics.
Bresnan, Joan, 1978, A realistic transformational grammar. In M. Halle, J. Bresnan and
G.A. Miller, eds Linguistic theory and psychological reality, 1–59. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
—— 2001, Lexical functional syntax. London: Blackwell.
Bresnan, Joan, ed., 1982, The mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: the MIT Press.
Bresnan, Joan and Jonni M. Kanerva, 1989, Locative inversion in Chichewa: a case study
of factorization in grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 20:1–50.
Chung, Sandra, 1976, On the subject of two passives in Indonesian. In Charles N. Li, ed.
Subject and topic, 57–99. NewYork: Academic Press.
Clynes, Adrian, 1989, Speech styles in Javanese and Balinese: a comparative study. MA
thesis, The Australian National University, Canberra.
Comrie, Bernard, 1978, Ergativity. In W.P. Lehman, ed. Syntactic typology: studies in the
phenomenology of language, 329–394. Austin: University of Austin Press.
Dalrymple, Mary, 2001, Lexical functional grammar. San Diego: Academic Press.
Dixon, R.M.W., 1979, Ergativity. Language 55:59–138.
—— 1994, Ergativity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Donohue, Mark, 2002, Voice in Tukang Besi and the Austronesian focus system. In F.
Wouk and M.D. Ross, eds The history and typology of western Austronesian voice
systems, 81–99. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Dryer, Matthew S., 1982, In defense of a universal passive. Linguistic Analysis 10:53–60.
Durie, Mark, 1987, Grammatical relations in Acehnese. Studies in Language 11:365–399.
—— 1988, The so-called passive of Acehnese. Language 64:104–113.
Foley, William A., 1998, Symmetrical voice systems and precategoriality in Philippine
languages. Sydney: University of Sydney.
Foley, Willam A. and Robert Van Valin, 1984, Functional syntax and universal grammar.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
116
I Wayan Arka and Jeladu Kosmas
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.
Hashimoto, Mantaro J., 1988, The structure and typology of the Chinese passive
construction. In Shibatani, ed. 1988:329–354.
Haspelmath, Martin, 1990, The grammaticization of passive morphology. Studies in
Language 14:25–72.
Jauhary, Eddy, 2000, Pasif bahasa Bima. MA thesis, Udayana University, Denpasar.
Keenan, Edward L. and Bernard Comrie, 1977, Noun phrase accessibility and universal
grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8:63–99.
Kosmas, Jaladu, 2000, Argumen aktor dan pemetaannya. MA thesis, S2 Linguistik,
Universitas Udayana, Denpasar.
Kroeger, Paul, 1993, Phrase structure and grammatical relations in Tagalog. Stanford:
CSLI Publications.
Lawler, John M., 1977, A agrees with B in Achenese: a problem for relational grammar.
In P. Cole and J.M. Sadock, eds Grammatical relations (Syntax and semantics, 8),
219–48. New York: Academic Press.
—— 1988, On the questions of Acehnese ‘passive’. Language 64:114–117.
Li, Ping, Elizabeth Bates and Brian MacWhinney, 1993, Processing a language without
inflection: a reaction time study of sentence interpretation in Chinese. Journal of
Memory and Language 32:169–192.
Manning, Christopher, 1996a, Argument structure as a locus for binding theory. In Miriam
Butt and Tracy Holloway King, eds Proceedings of the LFG ’96 Conference, Rank
Xerox Research Centre, Grenoble, France, August 26–28. Stanford: CSLI
(http://csli-publications.stanford.edu/LFG/1/toc-lfg1.html).
—— 1996b, Ergativity: argument structure and grammatical relations. Stanford: CSLI.
Manyambeang, A.K, Abdul Kadir Mulya and Nasruddin, 1996, Tatabahasa Makassar.
Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Mithun, Marianne, 2001, The languages of native north America. Cambridge University
Press: Cambridge.
O’Grady, William D., 1980, The universal characterization of passivisation. Linguistic
Analysis 6:393–405.
Perlmutter, David M. and Paul M. Postal, 1977, Toward a universal characterization of
passivisation. In K. Whistler, et al. eds Proceedings of the Third Annual Meeting of
the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 394–417. California: University of California
Berkeley.
Power, D.J. and Stephen P. Quigley, 1973, Deaf children’s acquisition of the passive voice.
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 16:5–11.
Purwo, Bambang Kaswanti, 1989, Voice in Indonesian : a discourse study. In B.K. Purwo,
ed. Serpih-serpih telaah pasif bahasa Indonesia, 344–442. Jogyakarta: Kanisius.
Rose, Suzanne M. and Barry F. Carlson, 1984, The Nootka-Nitinaht passive.
Anthropological Linguistics 26:1–12.
Passives without passive morphology? Evidence from Manggarai
117
Ross, Malcolm D., 2004, Notes on the prehistory and internal subgrouping of Malayic.
In J. Bowden and N.P. Himmelmann, eds Papers in Austronesian subgrouping and
dialectology, 97–109. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Sawardi, F.X., 2001, Kesimetrisan objek bahasa Jawa. Nuansa Indonesia 16 (15):16–22.
Semiun, Agustinus, 1993, The basic grammar of Manggarai: Kempo subdialect. MA
thesis, La Trobe University, Melbourne.
Shi, Dingxu, 1997, Issues on Chinese passive. Journal of Chinese linguistics 25:41–70.
Shibatani, Masayoshi, 1985, Passives and related constructions: a prototype analysis.
Language 61:821–848.
Shibatani, Masayoshi, ed., 1988, Passive and voice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Siewierska, Anna, 1984, The passive. London: Croom Helm.
Verheijen, J.A.J., 1967, Kamus Manggarai I (Manggarai-Indonesia). ’s-Gravenhage:
Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde.
—— 1977, The lack of formative in affixes in the Manggarai language. NUSA 5:35–37.
—— 1991, Manggarai dan Wujud Tertinggi, Jakarta: LIPI-RUL.
Webelhuth, Gert, ed., 1995, Government and Binding theory and the Minimalist Program.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Wechsler, Stephen and I Wayan Arka, 1998, Syntactic ergativity in Balinese: an argument
structure based theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16:387–441.
Zhang, Hongming, 1990, Metaphor or Function? Bleaching or Gaining? Mid-America
Linguistics Conference papers: 446–460.
Zwicky, Arnold M., 1985, Clitics and particles. Language 61:283–305.
—— 1987, Suppressing the Zs. Journal of Linguistics 23:133–148.
Zwicky, Arnold M. and Geoffrey K. Pullum, 1983, Cliticization vs. inflection. Language
59:502–513.
5
Two passive-like constructions
in Tongan
YUKO OTSUKA
1 Introduction
Polynesian languages divide into two groups in terms of case marking: accusative and
ergative. The former consists of Eastern Polynesian languages, while Tongic and many of
the Samoic-Outlier languages are ergative. 1 It is also well known that the accusative
languages in the Polynesian family have a passive construction, typically involving the
passive suffix -Cia, whereas the ergative languages apparently lack such a construction.
It has been shown in the literature that cognates of -Cia exist in Tongan, although they do
not function as passive morphemes, nor is such affixation productive (Chung 1978;
Tchekhoff 1973). However, some have claimed that there are constructions that are
typically interpreted as passive, namely (a) VOS constructions and (b) agentless transitive
constructions (Churchward 1953; Lynch 1972; Tchekhoff 1973). This paper re-examines
these passive-like constructions in Tongan. It will be shown that agentless transitive and
VOS constructions are not syntactically passive in that the ABS-marked argument in these
constructions does not exhibit the properties of subjects 2 in Tongan. There are four
syntactic phenomena that are associated solely with subjects: (a) alienable possessive
pronouns, (b) clitic pronouns, (c) mo coordination, and (d) control. None of these applies to
the ABS-marked arguments in VOS and agentless transitive constructions. The current study
proposes that (a) VOS constructions are derived as a result of scrambling, and (b) agentless
transitive is an instance of pro-drop, permitted in Tongan with some restrictions.
1
2
Some do not agree on this generalisation. For instance, Gibson and Starosta (1990) argue that Maori, an
Eastern Polynesian language, is ergative.
By ‘subject’ I refer to A and S in Dixon’s (1979) terms.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 119–135.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2005.
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics.
119
120
Yuko Otsuka
2 Passive in Polynesian
This section discusses the so-called passive construction in Polynesian. First, the three
construction types found in the accusative languages (i.e. Eastern Polynesian) and those
found in the ergative languages such as Tongan and Samoan will be compared. On the
surface each of the three constructions found in the former has a corresponding
construction in the latter. However, only Eastern Polynesian is said to have a passive
construction. It will be shown that despite the superficial similarities, there are some
significant differences between the passive construction in Eastern Polynesian and the
active transitive construction in the ergative languages.
2.1 Three constructions in Polynesian
It is generally accepted that a passive exists in Eastern Polynesian. Eastern Polynesian
has three constructions: intransitive, transitive, and passive, as illustrated below. 3
(1) Maori (Biggs 1969, cited by Clark 1976:42, 67)
Intransitive TNS V NP
Ka
haere te
wahine ki te
whare.
go
DEF woman to DEF house
‘The woman goes to the house.’
TNS
Ka
inu
te
tangata i
te
wai.
TNS drink DEF man
ACC DEF water
‘The man drinks the water.’
Transitive
TNS V NP i/ki NP
Passive
TNS V-Cia NP e NP Ka inu-mia
te
TNS drink-Cia DEF
wai
e
te tangata.
water AGT DEF man
‘The water is drunk by the man.’
Passive constructions have a uniform structure in Eastern Polynesian languages. The verb
is affixed by -Cia, 4 the underlying object appears in NOM, and the underlying subject
appears as an oblique NP, marked by the agent marker e.
Other Polynesian languages, which are ergative, such as Tongan also have three
constructions.
3
4
Abbreviations used in this paper include: ABS absolutive; ACC accusative; AGT agent; ALIEN alienable; DEF
definite; d. dual; ERG ergative; FUT future; INALIEN inalienable; INDEF indefinite; NOM nominative; PRED
predicate; POSS possessive; PRS present; PST past; s. singular; TNS tense; 1 first person; 3 third person. The
asterisk * indicates that the sentence is ungrammatical.
-Cia is the label generally used to represent variable forms of the so-called Polynesian passive suffix. C
stands for the variable consonant, which is lexically determined. For example, in Maori there are eleven
variants: -a, -ia, -hia, -kia, -mia, -ŋia, -ria, -tia, -ina, -kina, -whina. Pawley (2001) agrees with Clark
(1976) that Proto Polynesian *-Cia was not passive but transitive, and gives the following analysis: -i
comes from the Proto Oceanic short transitive suffix and -a from the Proto Oceanic object clitic, which
was required when the object of a transitive verb was a specific noun.
Two passive-like constructions in Tongan
121
(2) Tongan
Intransitive Tns V (‘a) NP
Middle
Tns V (‘a) NP i/ki NP
Na‘e
ha‘u ‘a
PST
come ABS
‘The man came.’
e
tangata.
DEF man
Na‘e sai‘ia ‘a
e
tangata ‘i
PST like
ABS DEF man
in
tamasi‘i. 5
DEF boy
‘The man liked the boy.’
he
Transitive
Tns V ‘e NP (‘a) NP
Na‘e
PST
inu
‘e
he
tangata ‘a
drink ERG DEF man
ABS
e
vai.
DEF water
‘The man drank the water.’
The striking resemblance between the three constructions in Eastern Polynesian and those
found in Tongan is immediately noticeable. The Tongan middle construction is identical to
the Maori transitive construction in that the subject is unmarked 6 and the other NP is
marked by a preposition i ‘in, at, on’ or ki ‘to’. The choice of preposition is lexically
determined by the verb. Middle constructions are so called because they are semantically
transitive, requiring two participants, but syntactically intransitive, taking only one core
argument. The NP marked by i/ki is considered an oblique object. Similarly, transitive
constructions in Tongan and passive constructions in Maori are very alike except that the
verb is always suffixed by -Cia and the e-marked NP occurs sentence-finally in the latter.
In this discussion passive is considered to be a productive syntactic operation that
applies to a transitive construction and detransitivises it. 7 Specifically, passivisation has
the following effects: (a) the underlying object appears as the surface subject in terms of
case marking and other syntactic properties; and (b) the underlying subject appears as an
oblique NP if they are present at all. Passive in Maori illustrated above conforms to this
definition, as far as the case marking is concerned. Specifically, passivisation in Maori has
the following characteristics: (a) -Cia attaches to a transitive verb; (b) the underlying
object (marked by i in the transitive construction) is unmarked, suggesting that it is in
NOM; and (c) the underlying subject (unmarked in the transitive construction) is marked by
e, suggesting that it is an oblique NP.
5
6
7
The difference between the two definite articles e and he are morphophonological. The latter is used
immediately following the ergative case marker ‘e or prepositions ‘i ‘in, at’, ki ‘to’, and mei ‘from’.
‘Unmarked’ here does not necessarily mean the absence of noun markers. In Tongan, it is marked by ‘a.
However, this element can be considered to be ‘unmarked’ for the following reasons: (a) compared to
the distribution of ‘e, which is limited to the transitive subject, the distribution of ‘a can be characterised
as default; and (b) it can be, and often is, dropped when it is followed by a definite article e. Note also
that in other languages that show a similar pattern such as Samoan and East Futunan, ABS is marked by
zero-morpheme.
Thus, stative verbs that are translated as passive in English such as Tongan lavea ‘injured’ and ngalo
‘forgotten’ are not considered to be passive in the following discussion, as they do not involve any
syntactic operation.
122
Yuko Otsuka
2.2 Tongan -Cia
Passive constructions similar to those of the Eastern Polynesian languages cannot be
found in Tongan. It is true that -Cia also exists in Tongan and some verbs ending in -Cia
do seem to have a passive meaning. However, -Cia in Tongan does not function as a
passive suffix that induces passivisation as a syntactic operation. Let us assume that a
passive affix has at least the following two properties: (a) affixation is productive, and (b)
it changes the valency of a (transitive) verb to which it attaches with the agent argument
demoted to an oblique NP. Churchward (1953:242) notes that -Cia verbs in Tongan divide
into three subclasses according to their meaning: (a) durative, (b) passive, and (c) courtesy
speech. The class of ‘intransitive verbs that may appear to be passive’ includes verbs
ending in -a, -fia, -hia, -kina, -mia, -ngia, -sia, or -ia. The -Cia verbs in Tongan are
typically intransitive, but the root may be a transitive verb, adjective, or noun. In addition,
as noted by Chung (1978), the affixation of -Cia to transitive verbs is not a productive
process. Of the 94 -Cia verbs included in the Tongan Dictionary (Churchward 1959), 71%
have passive meaning. 8 However, intransitive verbs that have a passive meaning and are
derived from a transitive verb make up only 3% of the total. What is more, we find some
instances in which the derived word is a transitive verb. In other words, -Cia does not
necessarily detransitivise a verb. Indeed, in some cases, it actually transitivises an
intransitive verb.
If -Cia is not a passive morpheme, then, why is it that so many of the -Cia verbs have
passive meaning? It seems that the Tongan -Cia bears a feature [+affected]. In fact, 87%
of the -Cia verbs included in the dictionary differ from their stem in terms of the feature
[+affected]. 9 Consider the following examples.
(3) a.
b.
c.
d.
maluuluu
‘ataa‘ataa
‘uha
‘anuhi
‘moist, soft’
‘free, not busy’
‘to rain’
‘to spit’
–
–
–
–
maluuluungia
‘ataa‘ataaina
‘uheina
‘anuhia
‘moistened, softened’
‘to be freed, cleared’
‘to be caught in the rain’
‘to mess up by spitting on’
The affected entity is the subject if it is an intransitive verb or adjective, or the object if it is
a transitive verb. Thus, it seems that Tongan -Cia is a morpheme that assigns a semantic
feature [+affected] to its internal argument, rather than a syntactic feature [+passive]. Since
the passive voice is necessarily associated with affectedness, a sentence containing a -Cia
verb is likely to be translated as passive in English. Hence, we may argue that the passive
meaning associated with -Cia verbs arises due to the semantic property [+affected] and not
as a result of passivisation.
3 Passive-like constructions in Tongan
We have seen that -Cia is not a passive morpheme in Tongan and that passive
constructions similar to those found in Eastern Polynesian do not exist in Tongan.
8
9
Note, however, that some of the verb roots in any case have a passive meaning: e.g., malu ‘to be
sheltered’ vs. malungia ‘to be shaded, overshadowed’.
A similar observation has been made by Cook (1988) regarding -Cia in Samoan, which is also an ergative
language.
Two passive-like constructions in Tongan
123
However, there are constructions that are claimed to have passive interpretation in Tongan.
These are the agentless transitive (VO) and VOS constructions.
3.1 Agentless transitive
In natural Tongan discourse, we frequently encounter sentences with a transitive verb,
but with only one argument. Churchward (1953) claims that such sentences are interpreted
as passive. Consider (4) below. The verb, ‘ave ‘take’ is a transitive verb and usually takes
two arguments, as illustrated by (4a). However, (4b) contains only one argument, which is
marked as ABS.
(4) a.
Na‘e
‘ave ‘e
Sione ‘a e
tamasi‘i ki he fale mahaki.
take ERG Sione ABS DEF child
to DEF house sick
‘Sione took the boy to the hospital.’
PST
b.
Na‘e ‘ave ‘a
e
tamasi‘i ki
PST take ABS DEF boy
to
‘The boy was taken to the hospital.’
he
DEF
fale mahaki.
house sick
By definition, ABS-marked NPs are either intransitive subjects or direct objects. Thus, it is
possible to analyse (4b) as an intransitive construction with the ABS-marked NP being the
subject. 10 In this view, the verb ‘ave in (4b) is considered to be intransitive as a result of
passivisation, presumably by the affixation of a zero-passive morpheme. This is the
analysis proposed by Lynch (1972). 11 In contrast, Churchward (1953) and Tchekhoff
(1973) consider the agentless transitive to be an instance of argument-drop, an operation
freely permitted in Tongan.
3.2 VOS constructions
While the unmarked order is VSO, Tongan freely allows VOS sentences. Churchward
(1953) notes that the VOS order is used when the emphasis is on the object. He argues that
VOS sentences are translated as passive because in English it is the way to encode the
emphasis on the object.
(5) a.
b.
10
11
Na‘e
‘ave ‘e
he
faiako ‘a
e
tamasi‘i.
PST
take ERG DEF teacher ABS DEF boy
‘The teacher brought the boy.’
Na‘e ‘ave ‘a
e
tamasi‘i ‘e
he
faiako.
PST take ABS DEF boy
ERG DEF teacher
‘The boy was brought by the teacher.’
Tchekhoff (1973) observes that Tongan verbal constructions with only an ABS-marked NP can be
divided into three classes: a) those in which the ABS-NP can only be interpreted as the patient, such as
tamate ‘to kill’, b) those in which the ABS-NP can only be interpreted as the agent, such as ‘ave ‘to take’,
fa‘ele‘i ‘to bear a baby’, and c) those in which the ABS-NP can be interpreted either as the agent or the
patient, such as taki ‘to lead’. However, Tchekhoff does not consider the case (b) as passive.
To be precise, Lynch (1972) claims that Tongan is an accusative language, arguing that ‘a, ‘i, and ‘e are
the NOM-marker, the ACC-marker, and the Agent marker respectively, as in Eastern Polynesian.
124
Yuko Otsuka
On the other hand, Lynch (1972) proposes that the VOS construction is syntactically
passive. He argues that the NP marked by ‘a is the (derived) subject and the NP marked by
‘e is the agent appearing in oblique, ‘e being the agent marker. 12 In the next section, we
will see that the ABS-marked NPs in VOS and the agentless transitive are not syntactic
subjects, and that these constructions should not be regarded as passive.
3.3 Are the ABS-NPs in passive-like constructions ‘subject’?
Subjects, whether ABS or ERG, are distinguished from objects in Tongan in a number of
syntactic phenomena: e.g. the use of possessive pronouns, the use of clitic pronouns,
control, and mo-coordination. In this section, we will examine whether the ABS-marked
NPs in VOS and agentless passive constructions behave like subjects in terms of these
syntactic phenomena.
3.3.1 Possessive pronouns
Tongan has two sets of possessive pronouns: alienable (‘e-class) and inalienable (hoclass). When an alienable possessive pronoun precedes a verb, it refers to the subject of
the verb. In contrast, an inalienable possessive pronoun preceding a verb refers to the
object. Thus, inalienable possessive pronouns cannot occur with an intransitive verb.13 See
(6) below. As illustrated by (6a, b), the subject of an intransitive verb must be represented
by an alienable possessive pronoun. Example (6c) shows that when used with a transitive
verb, an alienable possessive pronoun refers to the subject. In contrast, (6d) shows that an
inalienable possessive pronoun must refer to the object when used with a transitive verb.
12
13
Lynch’s analysis is questionable in some crucial respects. First, empirical evidence does not support his
assumption that Tongan is an accusative language. Secondly, transitive verbs such as ‘ave ‘take’ never
occur in what Lynch calls accusative construction, as illustrated below.
Na‘e ‘ave ‘a
e
faiako kia Sione.
PST
take ABS DEF teacher ACC Sione
Intended meaning: *‘The teacher took Sione.’
Actual meaning: ‘(Someone) took the teacher to Sione.’
Lynch proposes that some verbs in Tongan may only occur in intransitive passive, but not in active
transitive.
Stanley Starosta (pers. comm.) points out that this is an instance of nominalisation and therefore cannot
be used to make hypotheses about clause structure. While his point is acknowledged, it should be noted
that it only poses a problem if the derived noun has an argument structure distinct from the base verb.
However, Tongan zero-derived nominalisation keeps the argument structure of the base verbs. It is
always the subject that appears with ‘e-possessive. In addition, they can also take the object, as
illustrated below. In this respect, it is rather similar to gerunds in English.
‘ene
kai ‘a
e
ika
ALIEN.POSS.3.s. eat ABA DEF fish
‘his eating the fish’
For this reason, I consider the use of alienable possessive pronouns to be a phenomenon associated with
subjects in Tongan.
Two passive-like constructions in Tongan
(6) a.
125
‘ene
foki
ALIEN.POSS.3.s. return
‘his returning’
b. * hono
foci
INALIEN.POSS.3.s. return
c.
‘ene
taki
ALIEN.POSS.3.s. lead
‘his leading (someone)’
d.
hono
taki
INALIEN.POSS.3.s. lead
‘his being led (by somebody)’
The ABS-marked NP in VOS and agentless transitive constructions behaves the same as
objects rather than subjects: it cannot occur as an alienable possessive pronoun. Consider
(7) below.
(7) a.
‘ene
‘ave ki he
ALIEN.POSS.3.s. take to DEF
fale mahaki
house sick
*‘his being taken to the hospital’
‘his taking (someone) to the hospital’
b.
hono
‘ave ki he
fale mahaki
INALIEN.POSS.3.s. take to DEF house sick
‘his being taken to the hospital’
As (7a) shows, ‘ave ‘take’ cannot occur with an alienable possessive pronoun and have a
passive meaning. Note that the phrase itself is grammatical, as long as the passive
interpretation is not intended. Furthermore, (7b) confirms that the ABS-marked argument
in (4b) as well as (5b) is the object.
3.3.2 Clitic pronouns
Tongan has a set of clitic pronouns, which appear in the position between the tense
marker and the verb. The use of clitic pronouns is restricted to subjects. A pronominal
object must be realised as an independent pronoun. See (8) below.
(8) a.
b.
Na‘a ku ‘alu ki ai.
PST
1.s. go
to there
‘I went there.’
Na‘a ku
‘ave ‘a
e
tamasi‘i ki
PST
1.s. take ABS DEF boy
to
‘I took the boy there.’
c. * Na‘a
ai.
there
ku ‘ave ‘e
he
faiako ki ai.
1.s. take ERG DEF teacher to there
‘The teacher took me there.’
PST
126
Yuko Otsuka
‘ave au ‘e
he
faiako ki ai. 14
PST
take 1.s. ERG DEF teacher to there
‘The teacher took me there.’
Na‘e
d.
As shown by (8a), a pronominal subject in an intransitive construction occurs as a clitic.
Thus, if the ABS-marked argument in VOS and agentless transitive constructions is in fact
the subject, we would expect a construction similar to (8a) when the relevant argument is
pronominal. The following data argue against this hypothesis.
Na‘a ne ‘ave ki he
fale mahaki.
3.s. take to DEF house sick
‘He took (someone) to the hospital.’
*‘He was taken to the hospital.’
(9) a.
PST
b. * Na‘a ne ‘ave ‘e
he
faiako ki he
fale mahaki. 15
PST
3.s. take ERG DEF teacher to DEF house sick
As illustrated by (9a), the ABS argument of an agentless transitive cannot be realised as a
clitic pronoun. Note that the sentence is grammatical, but the clitic pronoun must be taken
as the subject of the verb ‘ave ‘take’. Similarly, the ABS argument of a VOS construction
cannot occur as a clitic pronoun, as shown by (9b). The sentence is ungrammatical, for it
contains two subjects, the clitic ne and the ERG-marked NP, he faiako ‘the teacher’. These
data show that the ABS argument is not the subject, but the object in VOS and agentless
transitive constructions.
3.3.3 Control
The third test involves control. I assume that the embedded clause in control
constructions such as (10) below contains a phonetically null argument PRO that is
coreferential with an argument of the matrix verb.
(10) a.
b.
John wants [PRO to go].
John persuaded Mary [PRO to go].
It is attested that, universally, PRO can occur in the subject position of the embedded
clause, but never in the object position (Chomsky 1981). For example, consider the
following English sentences.
14
15
Note that pronominal objects appear in the position immediately after the verb and without the ABS
marker, rather than in the regular position following the subject. Otsuka (2000) proposes that this is due
to a rule that requires incorporation of pronominal object into the verb. In marked speech, independent
pronouns can occur in the regular VSO order, both as a subject and as an object. However, in that case,
they must be preceded by an appropriate case marker, as illustrated below.
Na‘e ‘ave ‘e
ia ‘a
e
tamasi‘i ki he fale mahaki.
PST
take ERG 3.s. ABS DEF boy
to DEF house sick
‘He took the boy to the hospital.’
Sentence (9b) is ungrammatical because clitic doubling is not permitted in Tongan. Clitic pronouns
cannot co-occur with a coreferential NP.
Two passive-like constructions in Tongan
(11) a.
b.
127
John wants [PRO to be praised].
*John wants [someone to praise PRO].
Sentence (11a) is grammatical because PRO is the subject of the embedded clause, whereas
(11b) with PRO as the object is ruled out, as it violates the above-mentioned universal
restriction on control.
Our question is whether VOS and/or the agentless transitive can occur in a control
construction with PRO in place of the ABS argument. If such a construction is permissible,
then the ABS-marked argument in VOS and the agentless transitive should be considered to
be the subject. As illustrated by (12) below, PRO cannot occur in place of the ABS-marked
argument in VOS and agentless transitive constructions. 16 Sentences (12a) and (12b) are
ungrammatical because PRO occurs as an object. 17
(12) a.
b.
<Agentless Transitive>
*‘Oku loto ‘a
e
tamasi‘i [ke ‘ave PRO ki ai].
PRS
want ABS DEF boy
to take
to there
‘The boy wants to be taken there.’
<VOS>
*‘Oku loto
PRS
want
‘a
e
tamasi‘i [ke ‘ave PRO ‘e
he
ABS DEF boy
to take
ERG DEF
tangata ki ai].
man
to there
‘The boy wants to be taken there by the man.’
To conclude, the control data also show that the ABS-marked argument in VOS and the
agentless transitive is not the subject. In other words, these constructions should not be
regarded as passive.
3.3.4 mo coordination
Finally, let us consider yet another phenomenon that exclusively applies to subjects.
When two clauses are conjoined by the conjunction mo, the second clause may, and
generally does, contain a gap. The gap is taken to be a result of argument deletion under
identity with an argument of the first clause. However, the deletion does not apply freely,
but is restricted to subjects. 18 That is, an argument may be deleted only if it is the subject
16
17
18
Ergative arguments can be PRO as illustrated below.
‘Oku loto ‘a
e
tamasi‘i [ke ‘ave PRO ‘a e
tangata ki ai]
PRS
want ABS DEF boy
to
take ABS
DEF man
to there
‘The boy wants to take the man there.’
However, note that both (12a) and (12b) are grammatical if we take PRO to be controlled by the matrix
subject e tamasi‘i ‘the boy’. The embedded object is assumed to be phonetically null, an instance of
argument-drop. Accordingly, (12a) means ‘The boy wants to take (someone) there’, and (12b), ‘The boy
wants the man to take (someone) there’.
This may sound obvious to the reader. However, it should be noted that Tongan demonstrates an ergative
pattern with another conjunction pea: an argument of the second clause may be deleted only if it bears
the same case (either ERG or ABS) as the coreferential argument in the first clause. Hence, the subjectonly constraint on mo coordination is a useful diagnostic for subjecthood in Tongan.
128
Yuko Otsuka
of the second clause and is coreferential with the subject of the first clause. In other words,
the two clauses conjoined by mo must have the common subject. See (13) below, in which
Ø stands for the gap.
(13) a.
b.
*Na‘e tangi ‘a
Hinai mo
PST
cry
ABS Hina and
‘Hina cried and Mele hit (her).’
taa‘i ‘e
Mele Øi.
hit ERG Mele
tangi ‘a
Hinai mo
PST
cry
ABS Hina and
‘Hina cried and (she) hit Mele.’
taa‘i Øi
hit
Na‘e
‘a
Mele.
ABS Mele
Sentence (13a) is ungrammatical since the gap in the second clause is the object. Similarly,
sentences in (14) illustrate that the gap must be coreferential with the subject of the first
clause; the subject of the second clause cannot be deleted if it is coreferential with the
object of the first clause.
(14) a.
Na‘e
taa‘i ‘e
Hinai ‘a Melej mo kata Øi/*j.
hit
ERG Hina ABS Mele and laugh
‘Hina hit Mele and (Hina/*Mele) laughed.’
PST
b.
Na‘e
taa‘i ‘e
Sionei ‘a
Pilaj mo ‘akahi
hit ERG Sione ABS Pila and kick
‘Sione hit Pila and (Sione/*Pila) kicked Taniela.’
Øi/*j ‘a
PST
Taniela.
ABS Taniela
The subject-only constraint on mo coordination can be used as a diagnostic for
subjecthood. If the ABS-marked NP in a VOS and/or an agentless transitive construction is
the subject, then, it should be able to be part of mo coordination, either as the gap or as the
antecedent. Example (15) shows that mo coordination is not permissible with such an NP.
(15) a.
b.
<Agentless Transitive>
Na‘e taa‘i ‘a
Mele mo tangi Ø.
PST
hit
ABS Mele and cry
‘Mele was hit and (*Mele/the one who hit Mele) cried.’
<VOS>
Na‘e taa‘i ‘a
Mele ‘e
Hina mo tangi Ø.
PST
hit ABS Mele ERG Hina and cry
‘Mele was hit by Hina and (*Mele/Hina) cried.’
Both (15a) and (15b) are grammatical, with the gap obligatorily taken to be coreferential
with the agent of the first verb, i.e. the implied subject in (15a) and Hina in (15b).
Similarly, the ABS-NP of the agentless transitive and VOS constructions cannot occur as a
gap coreferential with the intransitive subject of the first clause, as shown in (16) below.
This suggests that the ABS-NP is not the subject of the relevant constructions.
(16) a.
<Agentless Transitive>
* Na‘e tangi ‘a
Mele mo taa‘i Ø.
PST cry
ABS Mele and hit
Intended meaning: ‘Mele cried and was hit.’
Two passive-like constructions in Tongan
b.
129
<VOS>
* Na‘e tangi ‘a
Mele mo taa‘i Ø ‘e
Hina.
PST
cry
ABS Mele and hit
ERG Hina
Intended meaning: ‘Mele cried and was hit by Hina.’
To summarise, none of the four syntactic phenomena in which subjects are
distinguished from objects treat the ABS-marked NP of VOS and the agentless transitive as a
subject. Consequently, we may conclude that these constructions are not passive as defined
in §2.1 above. In the remaining sections, an alternative analysis of VOS and the agentless
transitive in Tongan will be proposed.
4 Agentless transitive as pro-drop
Let us discuss the agentless transitive first. I propose that the agentless transitive
contains a phonetically null subject. Theoretically, there are two possibilities as to what
this phonetically null subject can be: (a) pro and (b) topic variable in the sense of Huang
(1984, 1989). It will be shown below that both possibilities are available in Tongan.
4.1 Pro-drop in Tongan
In Tongan, a pronominal argument can be omitted under two conditions: (a) it is third
person singular and (b) its referent is identifiable by virtue of context. Thus, we frequently
encounter subjectless sentences as well as objectless sentences in Tongan. It should be
noted that the subject may be omitted in intransitive as well as transitive constructions.
Furthermore, a subjectless transitive sentence does not necessarily require the passive
interpretation. Consider (17) and (18) below.
(17) A:
B:
(18) A:
B:
‘Oku ‘i fē
PRS
in where
‘Where is Mele?’
‘a
Mele?
ABS Mele
Na‘e ‘ave ‘a
Sione ki he ako.
PST take ABS Sione to DEF school
‘(She) took Sione to school.’
Ko
e
hā
e
me‘a na‘e fai ‘e
Pita?
PRED DEF what DEF thing PST do ERG Pita
‘What did Pita do?’
Na‘e
kai ‘a
e
ika.
PST
eat ABS DEF fish
‘(He) ate fish.’
Let us assume that the phonologically absent subject in (17) and (18) is syntactically
present, because otherwise such sentences would be ruled out due to the Extended
Projection Principle (EPP), which requires that a sentence have a subject (Chomsky 1981).
It is known that empty pronouns in Chinese and Japanese observe a similar condition:
their identity must be retrievable by virtue of context. Huang (1984, 1989) proposes that
the Chinese-type empty pronouns are not pro, but should be treated as a variable bound by
130
Yuko Otsuka
topic. I take Huang’s approach to be applicable to Tongan and assume the null pronouns
in cases like (17) and (18) to be topic variables.
Another kind of phonetically null subjects is found with unaccusative verbs that take a
sentential complement.
(19) a.
‘Oku tonu
[ke ‘alu ‘a
Sione].
correct to go
ABS Sione
‘It is good for Sione to go.’
PRS
b.
‘Oku
tapu
[ke ifi
‘a
e
tamaiki ako].
prohibited to smoke ABS DEF children school
‘It is prohibited for the students to smoke.’
PRS
These sentences lack an overt subject. Let us assume that there is a phonetically null
expletive in the subject position of these constructions (cf. Levin and Massam (1986) for a
similar analysis of the relevant Niuean data).
4.2 Proposal: topic variable and proarb
I propose that the agentless transitive involves the topic variable: when the subject is
third person singular and represents the known information, it is realised as a topic variable
rather than a pronoun. This conforms to Churchward’s (1953) observation that the
agentless transitive is used when the object is emphasised. In a context where the subject
represents known information and the object, the new information, the former is reduced to
the topic variable. Consequently, only the object surfaces as an overt element. I propose
that an agentless transitive construction such as (4b) above has the representation
illustrated in (20), in which e stands for the topic variable.
(20)
Na‘e ‘ave e ‘a
e
tamasi‘i ki he
fale mahaki.
PST take
ABS DEF boy
to DEF house sick
‘(He) took the boy to the hospital.’
Note that given the topic-variable analysis, a null pronoun in Tongan must not have
arbitrary reference. However, this is not entirely true. While the agentless transitive
always implies the existence of agent, the speaker need not know the identity of the agent
in question. Thus, in an appropriate context, an agentless transitive may have a generic
subject similar to English they. 19 Consider the following examples.
(21) a. Na‘e holoki
‘a
e
fale lotu.
PST demolish ABS DEF house pray
‘The church was demolished.’
19
This point is made particularly clear by one informant, who claims that the use of the agentless transitive
in a context like that shown below is unacceptable.
Na‘e ‘ave ‘a
e
tamasi‘i ki he fale mahaki.
PST take ABS DEF boy
to DEF house sick
Ko
Sione na‘a ne ‘ave ia ki ai.
PRED Sione PST
3.s. take 3.s. to there
‘The boy was taken to the hospital. It is Sione who took him there.’
Two passive-like constructions in Tongan
131
b. ‘E
fetongi ‘a
e
maka.
FUT replace ABS DEF battery
‘The battery will be replaced.’
In order to account for these examples, it is necessary to assume another type of null
pronoun. I propose that sentences such as (21a, b) contain the generic pro, not the topic
variable. The generic pro must have arbitrary reference, in a way analogous to PRO with
arbitrary reference.
To summarise, I propose that there are three kinds of null pronouns in Tongan: (a) topic
variable, (b) expletive, and (c) pro with arbitrary reference, proarb. Agentless transitive is
indeed a transitive construction with a null subject. The null subject may either be a topic
variable or proarb. Accordingly, an agentless transitive may have either of the following
two constructions.
(22) a.
b.
TNS V topic-variable ABS-NP
TNS V proarb ABS-NP
The (22a) construction is used when the identity of the agent has been established in the
previous conversation. The (22b) construction is used when the existence of the agent is
implied but its identity is not known to the speaker. The presence of the phonetically null
subject (i.e., either the topic variable or proarb) is supported by the mo coordination test.
Both the topic variable and proarb may serve as the argument coreferential with the gap in
the second clause. See (23) below: e stands for the topic variable, and Ø, the gap.
(23) a.
b.
Na‘e ‘ave e ‘a e
tamasi‘i ki h
fale mahaki mo foki Ø.
PST
take ABS DEF boy
to DEF house sick
and return
‘(He) took the boy to the hospital and returned.’
Na‘e holoki proarb ‘a e
fale
lotu mo langa Ø ‘a
PST
demolish
ABS DEF house pray and build
ASB
e
fale mahaki.
DEF house sick
‘(They) demolished the church and built a hospital.’
5 VOS construction as scrambling
As for VOS construction, I propose that it is derived from the unmarked order VSO by
scrambling. So far, we have restricted our attention to the transitive constructions and the
alternation between VSO and VOS. However, such an alternation is not limited to transitive
constructions. As illustrated below, the order in which NPs and PPs appear in intransitive
constructions (24) and middle constructions (25) is also flexible although the default order
is one in which the subject NP precedes the PP.
(24) a.
Na‘e
‘alu ‘a
Sione ki Tonga.
go ABS Sione to Tonga
‘Sione went to Tonga.’
PST
132
Yuko Otsuka
Na‘e ‘ alu ki Tonga ‘a
Sione.
PST
go to Tonga ABS Sione
‘Sione went to Tonga.’
b.
(25) a.
Na‘e
tokoni ‘a
Sione ki he faiako.
PST
help
ABS Sione to DEF teacher
‘Sione helped the teacher.’
b.
Na‘e
tokoni ki he
faiako ‘a
Sione.
PST
help
to DEF teacher ABS Sione
‘Sione helped the teacher.’
Note that in (24) and (25) there is no semantic difference between the (a)-sentences and
(b)-sentences. Such freedom regarding the constituent order is found in certain other
languages such as Japanese. The phenomenon is referred to as scrambling in the literature.
Given the fact that the word order alternation is not restricted to the one between VOS and
VSO in Tongan, we may consider Tongan to be a language that permits scrambling. Hence,
it can be argued that VOS is an instance of scrambling.
Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that native speakers never interpret VOS
constructions as passive. The idea that VOS sentences are interpreted as passive derives
from Churchward’s (1953:67) comment on the difference between VOS and VSO: ‘The
difference in emphasis is much the same as it is in English between ‘David killed Goliath’
and ‘Goliath was killed by David’’. However, Churchward also emphasises the point that
the two sentences do not differ from each other in terms of voice. His claim can be
summarised as follows: (a) English uses passive when the emphasis is on the object rather
than the subject, and (b) Tongan, lacking passive, expresses the emphasis on the object by
placing the object before the subject. Churchward uses a passive in translating the Tongan
VOS sentence in order to illustrate the subtle difference between VOS and VSO in Tongan.
The difference is the focus of the sentence, which can be more accurately compared to the
pitch accent in English. In English the element in focus carries the pitch accent. Thus, the
more accurate translation of Churchward’s example cited above would be ‘David killed
Goliath’ and ‘David killed Goliath’, respectively, where the elements carrying the pitch
accent are in bold type.
Native speakers consider that VOS and VSO are essentially the same semantically when
the two sentences are presented in isolation without any context. However, a significant
distinction arises when certain context is provided. When asked to select the appropriate
answer(s) to a wh-question, Tongan speakers clearly distinguish VOS from VSO. Compare
(26) and (27) below.
(26) Q:
Ko
hai na‘e fili
‘e
Sione?
who PST choose ERG Sione
‘Who did Sione choose?’
PRED
A1: Na‘e
fili
‘a Pila ‘e Sione.
choose ABS Pila ERG Sione
‘Sione chose Pila.’
PST
A2: *Na‘e fili
‘e Sione ‘a Pila.
PST choose ERG Sione ABS Pila
‘Sione chose Pila.’
Two passive-like constructions in Tongan
(27) Q:
133
Ko
hai na‘a ne fili
‘a
Pila?
PRED who PST 3.s. choose ABS Pila
‘Who chose Pila?’
A1: *Na‘e fili
‘a Pila ‘e
Sione.
PST choose ABS Pila ERG Sione
‘Sione chose Pila.’
A2: Na‘e fili
‘e Sione ‘a
Pila.
PST choose ERG Sione ABS Pila
‘Sione chose Pila.’
When the wh-word is the object, the answer must be VOS. Similarly, when the wh-word is
the subject, the answer must be VSO. 20 VOS in this case does indicate the focus on the
object.
Thus, it is reasonable to argue that scrambling is triggered by the feature [+focus] in
Tongan. The focused element is fronted so as to appear immediately following the verb.
When the object bears the feature [+focus], it will appear in this position, thus preceding
the subject, yielding the order VOS.
6 Concluding remarks
This study re-examines the two constructions in Tongan, agentless and VOS transitive,
which have been claimed to have passive meaning. Empirical evidence supports the
current proposal that they do not involve passivisation as a syntactic operation, but have to
do with pro-drop and scrambling, respectively. First, the ABS-marked NPs in these
constructions are not treated as subjects in various syntactic phenomena such as the use of
possessive pronouns and clitic pronouns, control and mo coordination. Second, I have
argued that the agentless transitive contains a phonetically null subject. Tongan permits
two types of null arguments, topic variables and the arbitrary pro. The passive
interpretation associated with the agentless transitive arises when the subject is the
arbitrary pro, i.e. unspecified agent. Finally, it has been shown that it is misleading to say
that VOS is associated with passive meaning. Rather, the contrast between VOS and VSO is
that the focus is on the object in the former. The situation can be captured more
appropriately if we regard VOS as a result of scrambling triggered by focus. When the
object has the feature [+focus], it will be fronted and appear in the position preceding the
subject.
The current study raises some important questions concerning the study of passives in
Polynesian languages, particularly those belonging to the Tongic and Samoic-Outlier
subgroups. As mentioned earlier, in contrast to the Eastern Polynesian languages these
languages are said to lack passive constructions with -Cia suffixed verbs. It should be
noted that the alternation between VSO and VOS is also freely permitted in other Polynesian
languages such as Samoan, East Uvean, and East Futunan. These languages are similar to
20
A more natural, preferred option is to use the nominal construction such as below.
Ko
Sione.
PRED Sione
‘It is Sione.’
134
Yuko Otsuka
Tongan in that (a) case marking is ergative and (b) -Cia does not function as a productive
passive morpheme. 21 Native speakers of these languages also do not seem to be aware of
any particular semantic differences between VOS and VSO. In other words, VOS and VSO
are used interchangeably. This observation leads us to the following questions: (a) whether
VOS constructions in these languages are also associated with focus; and more generally,
(b) whether there is a correlation between the lack of passive and VOS construction. In fact,
the more fundamental question would be whether these languages actually do not have
passives, and, if not, what alternatives they have to compensate for the lack of passives. In
order to answer these questions, we need to specify the functions of passive (syntactic,
semantic, or pragmatic) and examine how each of such functions is realised in the
languages which apparently lack passives. The present discussion on the passive-like
constructions in Tongan is intended to serve as a starting point of the more extensive
research on languages without passives.
References
Biggs, Bruce, 1969, Let’s learn Maori. Wellington: A.H. and A.W. Reed.
Chomsky, Noam, 1981, Lectures on government and binding. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Chung, Sandra, 1978, Case marking and grammatical relations in Polynesian. Austin:
University of Texas Press.
Churchward, C. Maxwell, 1953, Tongan grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
—— 1959, Tongan dictionary. Nuku‘alofa: Tongan Government Printing Press.
Clark, Ross, 1976, Aspects of Proto-Polynesian syntax. Auckland: Linguistic Society of
New Zealand.
Cook, Kenneth, 1988, A cognitive analysis of grammatical relations, case, and transitivity
in Samoan. PhD dissertation, University of California, San Diego.
—— 1996, The Cia suffix as a passive marker in Samoan. Oceanic Linguistics 35:57–76.
Dixon, R.M.W., 1979, Ergativity. Language 55:59–138.
Gibson, Jeanne D. and Stanley Starosta, 1990, Ergativity East and West. In P. Baldi, ed.
Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, 195–210. Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter.
Huang, C.-T. James, 1984, On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic
Inquiry 15: 531–574.
Huang, C.-T. James, 1989, Pro-drop in Chinese: a generalized control theory. In Osvaldo
Jaeggli and Kenneth J. Safir, eds The null subject parameter, 185–214. Dordrecht:
Kluwer Academic.
Levin, Juliette and Diane Massam, 1986, Classification of Niuean verbs: notes on case.
In Paul Geraghty, Lois Carrington and S.A. Wurm, eds FOCAL I: Papers from the
Fourth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 231–244. Canberra:
Pacific Linguistics.
21
Cook (1996) argues that certain Samoan clause types that contain -Cia suffixed verbs can be analysed as
impersonal passives.
Two passive-like constructions in Tongan
135
Lynch, John, 1972, Passives and statives in Tongan. Journal of the Polynesian Society
81:5–18.
Otsuka, Yuko, 2000, Ergativity in Tongan. Doctoral dissertation, Oxford University.
Pawley, Andrew, 2001, Proto Polynesian *-CIA. In Joel Bradshaw and Kenneth L. Rehg,
eds Issues in Austronesian morphology, 193–216. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Tchekhoff, Claude, 1973, Some verbal patterns in Tongan. Journal of the Polynesian
Society 82:281–292.
6
Grammatical relations in Puyuma
STACY FANG-CHING TENG
1 Introduction
Payne (1997:129), points out that grammatical relations, such as ‘subject’ or ‘object’,
can be defined as ‘relations between arguments and predicates in a level of linguistic
structure that is independent of semantic and pragmatic influences’. He also suggests that
the formal properties that most directly identify grammatical relations are case marking,
participant reference marking on verbs, and constituent order. Among the three properties,
I find the first two, the case marking and participant reference marking (or the voice
system), play important roles in showing grammatical relations in Puyuma. 1
The paper is organised as follows: in §2, the voice system will be examined, and actor/
non-actor voice asymmetries will be investigated. Section 3 deals with the case marking of
nouns and pronouns. In §4, I will discuss semantic and syntactic aspects of transitivity. A
discussion of the notion of ‘ergativity’ as it relates to Puyuma follows in §5.
2 Voice
Like many other Formosan or Philippine languages, in Puyuma four different voices can
be distinguished; 2 namely, actor voice, patient voice, locative voice, and instrumental/
beneficiary voice, as exemplified from (1a) to (1d).
1
2
I am grateful to Wayan Arka, John Bowden, Malcolm Ross and Elizabeth Zeitoun for their comments on
drafts of this paper. The responsibility for its contents is mine.
Different labels and categorisations are often given by different linguists in the literature. For example,
Cauquelin (1991) names them actor focus, object focus, referent focus, and instrument focus; while Tan
(1997) and Huang (2000a) merge Cauquelin’s object focus and referent focus under the label patient
focus and distinguish only three different voices, which are actor focus, patient focus, and
instrumental/beneficiary focus. Teng (1997) makes a distinction only between actor voice and non-actor
focus.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 137–151.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2005.
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics.
137
138
Stacy Fang-Ching Teng
(1) a.
d<em>iru=ku 3
<AV>bathe-1SG.NOM 4
‘I washed.’ 5
b.
ku=dirus-aw
na
gung
1SG.GEN-bathe-PV DF.NOM ox
‘I washed the ox.’
c.
ku=dirus-ay
na
enay na
bias
1SG.GEN-bathe-LV DF.NOM water DF.NOM hot
‘I washed in hot water.’
d.
ku=dirus-anay
na
enay
1SG.GEN-bathe-IV DF.NOM water
‘I washed Aliwaki with the water.’
kan
aliwaki
SG.OBL Aliwaki
(Cauquelin 1991:43–44)
In each sentence, there is only one nominative argument. The voice marker in each
example reflects the role of the nominative argument, but the correlation between semantic
role and a specific voice marking is not as regular as in the above examples. Taking the
instrumental/beneficiary voice as an instance, the nominative arguments in the following
examples are not restricted to instrument or beneficiary; but also theme (2a) and patient
(2b), and the semantic role in (2c) is hard to define because it is a lexicalised phrase. 6
(2) a.
ku=tuLud-anay
na
sarekuDan kana
1SG.GEN-pass-IV DF.NOM stick
temumuwan
DF.OBL offspring
‘I passed the stick to the offspring.’
b.
ku=remerem-anay
na
kinsas
1SG.GEN-press.down-IV DF.NOM police
‘I pressed the police down.’
c.
tu=Tukul-anay tu=Dakur
3.GEN-lug-IV
his.NOM-back
‘He hunched his back.’
Thus, we need to note that the labels given to those voice affixes are for the sake of
convenience; they do not necessarily reflect the semantic role of the nominative argument
in a given sentence. 7
3
4
5
6
7
The capital letters D, L, T in Puyuma represent retroflex sounds, and the letter e schwa [ə], and the
apostrophe sign the glottap stop [/]
Abbreviations used in this paper include: 1, 2, 3 first, second, third person; ASP aspect; AV actor voice;
BV beneficiary voice; Ca- Ca-reduplication; CAUS causative; COP copula; DF definite; EXC exclusive;
GEN genitive; ID indefinite; IRR irrealis; IV instrumental voice; LOC locative, LV locative voice; NEG
negator; NEU neutral; NMSR nominaliser; NOM nominative; OBL oblique; PL plural; PROG
progreessive; PROJ projective; PV patient voice; REAL realis; RED reduplicate; SG singular; TOP topic; indicates a prefix or suffix; < > indicates an infix; = indicates a clitic.
The free translations in the examples are from Cauquelin, but the interlinear glosses are mine.
Many linguists (Kess 1976:178; Li 1995:665; Huang 1995:38, among others) have pointed out that for
many Philippine or Formosan languages it is almost impossible to have a one-to-one correlation between
the voice affixes and the semantic roles they denote.
Although there seems to be a tendency that these affixes actually indicate the degree of affectedness of
the nominative argument.
Grammatical relations in Puyuma
139
Not all Puyuma verbs demonstrate four voice alternations as shown in (1a) to (1d). For
example, for the verb kutang ‘to spear’ in (3), there is no locative voice form *kutang-ay,
and no instrumental voice form *kutang-anay. For the verb pulang ‘to help’ in (4), there is
no patient voice form *pulang-aw, and no instrumental voice form *pulang-anay.
(3) a.
aDi=ta
la
karuwa
can
NEG-1PL.INC.NOM ASP
k<em>utang
<AV>spear
‘We couldn’t spear.’
b.
ta=kutang-aw
la
na
Lutang
1PL.INC.GEN-spear-PV ASP DF.NOM monkey
‘We’ve speared the monkey(s).’
(4) a.
b.
karuwa=ku la pulang i
ruma’ i
sabak
can-1SG.NOM ASP help.AV LOC house LOC inside
‘I can then help my family.’
ku=pulang-ay
i
1SG.GEN-help-LV
NOM
nanali
b<en>ase
my.mother <AV>wash.clothes
‘I helped my mother wash the clothes.’
From the above examples, we find that for a verb to have how many and which voice
forms is to an extent unpredictable; first, not every verb has all the four alternations, and
second, even when we know the semantic relationship between the verb and the
nominative argument, which undergoer voice affix to take is not always predictable.
Sometimes, certain voices are missing because of the semantics of this given verb.
Puyuma sentences display some asymmetries between the actor voice sentences and the
non-actor voice sentences. First, in sentences denoting realis mood, 8 while there is a oneto-one correlation between the non-actor voice markers and the voice they denote, the
relation between the actor voice markers and actor voice is many-to-one. 9 For example, in
(1a) and (4a), the actor voice is marked by <em> and Ø respectively. 10
Second, consider the following templates for actor voice verbs and non-actor voice
verbs:
(5) a.
8
9
10
V-pro[NOM]
d<em>away=ta
AV-make-1PL.INC.NOM
‘We made (something).’
Actor voice markers are missing in irrealis and imperative construction.
This was also demonstrated in Zeitoun et al. (1996) and Tan (1997).
There are at least five different AV markers, including ma-, <em>, mu-, mi- and Ø. Huang (2000b) has
pointed out that in Maryrinax Atayal the selection of a particular marker for a verb to some extent
lexically determined; some verbs can take more than one AV marker, marking different degrees of
dynamicity/transitivity. The same phenomenon is also found in Puyuma. For example:
a. ma-bu’ut na
lawlaw
AV-stop DF.NOM light
‘The light went out.’
b. b<en>u’ut Da
apuy
<AV>stop ID.OBL fire
‘He stopped a fire.’
140
Stacy Fang-Ching Teng
b.
pro[GEN]=V=pro[NOM]
tu-ka-aw-ku
3.GEN-tell-PV-1SG.NOM
‘S/he told me.’
For actor voice verbs, there is only one enclitic pronoun. 11 However, for non-actor
voices, as well as the subject pronoun, there is always a genitive pronoun, the non-subject
actor, prefixed to the verb. All full nouns are optional, but the bound pronouns are
obligatory. For example:
(6) a.
b.
aDi
tu=na’u-i
(na
NEG
3.GEN-look-LV
NOM child
walak) (kan tinataw)
OBL his/her/their.mother
‘The mother didn’t look after the children.’
*aDi
na’u-i
na
walak kan
NEG look-LV NOM child
tinataw
OBL his/her/their.mother
3 Case marking
Puyuma makes a three-way case distinction: nominative, marking the grammatical
subject, genitive, marking the non-subject actor, and oblique, marking the other arguments.
While independent nouns depend on the noun phrase markers preceding them to assign a
case role, the form of a pronoun shows its case role. Case marking of nouns and pronouns
is discussed in §3.1 and §3.2 respectively.
3.1 Case marking of nouns
Three classes of nouns are distinguished: proper nouns, common nouns, and location
nouns. Each is preceded by different sets of noun phrase markers. Table 1 presents the
noun phrase markers in Puyuma.
Table 1: The noun phrase markers in Puyuma
Types of nouns
Common nouns
indefinite
definite
Location nouns
Proper nouns
singular
plural
Cases
Nominative
Oblique
a
Da
na/ina
kana
i
kan
na
kana
i
The nominative case marks the grammatical subject in a sentence, while the oblique
case marks non-subject arguments. The non-subject arguments include the non-subject
11
There is no third person nominative bound pronoun. So, when a verb is not suffixed with a pronoun, we
know that the nominative argument is third person.
Grammatical relations in Puyuma
141
agent (which has a genitive bound pronoun cross-reference with the full noun), 12 and the
oblique arguments.
Common nouns are subcategorised into two classes in terms of whether the referent is
definite or indefinite. For example:
(7) a.
Dua
me-nau-a
a
Tau
i…
come.AV AV-see-PROJ ID.NOM people TOP
‘People come to see ...’
b.
paragan=ta
Da
ruma
build.AV-1PL.NOM ID.OBL house
‘We built houses.’
c.
tu=aLak-aw
na
barasa
3.GEN-take-PV DF.NOM rock
‘They took the rock.’
d.
mu-Tereb kurenang kana
baLi
AV-fall
follow.AV DF.OBL wind
‘It fell down with the wind.’
Proper nouns consist of personal names and kinship terms. They are further
subcategorised in terms of number, as indicated by sentences (8a) to (8d).
(8) a.
12
tu=paDek-aw
i
temutaw
3.GEN-carry.on.back-PV SG.NOM his.grandparent
‘He carried his grandmother on his back.’
b.
tu=bes-besbes-ay
kan
ma’iDang kakawalan
3.GEN-RED-massage-LV SG.OBL old
Kakawalan
‘The old man Kakawalan kept massaging him.’
c.
tu=pu-kiping-ay
na
namali
kay baeli
3.GEN-CAUS-clothes-LV PL.NOM my.father and my.brother
‘They have my father and brother wear the traditional clothes.’
d.
tu=pulabus-ay t<em>engerD kana barubaru
3.GEN-almost-LV <AV>kill
PL.OBL Barubaru
‘They were almost killed by Barubaru people.’
Although both buwang and walak are marked by oblique case in the following sentences, walak has a
genitive bound pronoun cross-reference with it, but buwang doesn’t. Thus, the non-subject agent, even
though marked oblique, still behaves differently from the oblique arguments.
a. tu=laseD-aw kana
buwang i
temutaw
3.GEN-hide-PV DF.OBL hole
SG.NOM his/her/their.grandparent
‘He hid his grandmother in the hole.’
b.
tu-paDek-aw
i
temutaw
kana
3.GEN-carry.on.back.PV SG.NOM his/her/their.grandparent DF.OBL
‘The child carried his grandmother on back.’
walak
child
142
Stacy Fang-Ching Teng
Location nouns refer to places (9a), directions (9b), and locative relations 13 (9c).
(9) a.
m-uka=ku
i
taihok
AF-go-1SG.NOM LOC Taipei
‘I went to Taipei.’
b.
ma-kiteng i
timuL
AV-small LOC south
‘It is small in the south.’
c.
ku=atel-anay
na
paysu i
nguwayan kantaw
1SG.GEN-throw-IV DF.NOM money LOC front
3.OBL
‘I threw the money in front of him.’
There is only one locative noun phrase marker in Puyuma, and location nouns will usually
co-occur with it, whether being a subject (10a) or not (10b).
(10) a.
b.
ku=seLap-ay
i
sabak
1SG.GEN-sweep-LV LOC inside
‘I swept the inside.’
sagar=ku
i
baLangaw
like.AV-1SG.NOM LOC Taitung
‘I like Taitung.’
In addition to place names and relator nouns, some common nouns which have locative
connotations, such as ruma’ ‘house’, kaLi ‘river’, LangiT ‘sky’, ine ‘sea’, Dekal ‘village’
can sometimes be marked by i. For instance:
(11) a.
b.
mi-riwanes na
LangiT
AV-rainbow DF.NOM sky
‘The sky has a rainbow.’
ulaya a
riwanes i
LangiT
exist ID.NOM rainbow LOC sky
‘There is a rainbow in the sky.’
Both sentences are grammatical, and the voice marking and case marking suggest that
LangiT in (11a) is the core argument, while in (11b) it is more like an adjunct.
When a genitive pronoun is preceded by i, it refers to their place.
(12)
13
ta=ateD-anay
i
kantaw
1.INC.GEN-send-BV LOC their.place
‘We sent them back to their place.’
Locative relations are often encoded by ‘relator nouns’ in Puyuma. A relator noun is a noun which does
not name an entity but indicates the spatial relation between two entities. For example, in English,
‘front’ in the phrase ‘in front of’, and ‘back’ in the phrase ‘in back of’ are relator nouns. Relator nouns in
Puyuma are LikuDan ‘back, after’, nguwayan ‘front, before’, isaT ‘above, up’, and so on.
Grammatical relations in Puyuma
143
3.2 Case marking of pronouns
There are both bound and free pronouns in Puyuma.
summarised in Table 2.
The bound pronouns are
Table 2: The bound pronouns in Puyuma
Number/Person
1
person
-ku
ku-
Singular
2nd
person
-yu
nu-
3
person
Ø
tu-
(INC)
-ta
ta-
ku-; ti-
nu-
tu-
ta-
st
Cases
Nom
subject
possessor
of
subject
Gen
rd
1
st
Plural
1
2nd
(EXC)
person
-mi
-mu
niammust
mi-
mu-
3rd
person
Ø
tu-
tu-
There are both genitive and nominative bound pronouns. Nominative bound pronouns
denote the grammatical subject and are usually cliticised to the first element 14 in a
sentence, as exemplified in (13a). Genitive bound pronouns can denote a non-subject
actor, as shown in (13b), or the possessor of a noun when this noun is the grammatical
subject in the sentence, as in (13c).
(13) a.
s<em>a-sanga’=ta
Da
derederan i,
Ca<AV>produce-1PL.INC.NOM ID.OBL spear
TOP
‘When we were making spears, ….’
b.
ta=tusuk-aw
kana
derederan
1PL.INC.GEN-pierce DF.OBL spear
‘We pierced them (the monkey) with the spears.’
c.
an ma-kiteng ta=Takuban
i,
sayma
if AV-small our.NOM-Takuban TOP few
‘If our Takuban is small, few (bamboos are needed).’
Free pronouns occur in neutral, possessive, and oblique forms, which are summarised in
Table 3.
The neutral free pronouns usually appear in the topic position or in cleft sentences, as
shown in the sentences below:
(14) a.
b.
14
taita
i,
ka<a>Du=ta
i
taihok
1INC.NEU TOP <PROG>live-1PL.INC.NOM LOC Taipei
‘As for us, we are living in Taipei.’
amau taytaw
na
s<em>a-senay
COP
3SG.NEU NOM Ca<AV>-sing
‘It is him who was singing.’
The first element is not restricted to a verbal element; it can be a negator or a nominal predicate.
144
Singular
Number/Person
st
1
person
Cases
Neutral
nd
2
person
Plural
rd
3
person
st
1
(incl.)
st
1 (excl.)
2nd
person
3rd
person
kuiku
yuyu
taytaw
taita
mimi
muimu
Ø
nanku
nanu
nantaw
nantu
nanta
naniam
nanemu
nantaw
nantu
kanku
Possessive possessor definite
kananku
of nonsubject indefinite Daku
Dananku
kanu
kananu
kantu
kanantu
kanta
kananta
kaniam
kananiam
kanemu
kananemu
kantu
kanantu
Oblique
kanu
possessor of subject
kanku
Danu
Datu
Data
Daniam
Danemu
Datu
Dananu Danantu Dananta Dananiam Dananemu Danantu
kantaw
kanta
kaniam
kanemu
kantaw
Stacy Fang-Ching Teng
Table 3: The Free Pronouns in Puyuma
Grammatical relations in Puyuma
145
The neutral pronouns are also used as the reply for the interrogative sentences starting
with i manay ‘who’.
(15) a.
i
manay na
Da-Dua i
baLangaw
Ca-come LOC Taitung
‘Who is coming to Taitung.’
NOM who
b.
NOM
kuiku
1SG.NEU
‘Me.’
We might suspect from the above examples that the neutral pronouns are actually
nominative pronouns. However, the third person pronoun taytaw can appear in declarative
sentences beginning with verbal predicates, and the participant it manifests can be the
nominative argument, as in (16a) and (16b), or the genitive argument, as in (16c). In those
cases, the free pronoun is optional, and its function is basically emphatic.
(16) a.
ku=babuLas-ay
Da
1SG.GEN-lend-LV
ID.OBL hat
kabung
taytaw
3.NEU
‘I lent him a hat.’
b.
c.
sa’eru-‘eru
misasa la
taytaw
laugh.AV-RED one
ASP 3.NEU
‘She was laughing alone.’
tu=pa-a-arum-ay
nu-kiruan
taytaw
3.GEN-CAUS-PROG-dry-LV your.NOM-clothes 3.NEU
‘He is drying your clothes.’
The possessive free pronouns refer to possessors of nouns. If the noun is the
grammatical subject, then it is preceded by one set of pronouns, which assign it the
nominative case, as shown in (17a); if the noun is not the grammatical subject, then
another set of possessive pronouns assign it the oblique case, as in (17b).
(17) a.
tu=reTa-anay
nantu
basak
3.GEN-put.down-BV their.NOM bag
‘The elders put down their bags.’
b.
tu=betbet-anay la kantu
basak
3.GEN-bind-IV ASP their.OBL bag
‘They bound their bags.’
kana
ma’iDangan
DF.OBL old.people
It should be noticed that the possessors of non-subjects are further subcategorised into two
classes in terms of the definiteness of the possessed nouns. For example:
(18) a.
aDi ka-la-laDam
kananku
in-aLak-an
NEG ka-PROG-know my.DF.OBL REAL-take-NMSR
tu=ngaLad
kan
Luba’ib
his.NOM-name SG.OBL Luba’ib
‘He would not know (the story about) my taking Luba’ib’s name.’
146
Stacy Fang-Ching Teng
b.
tu=pa-uLuL-ay
Datu
aTengaLan
3.GEN-CAUS-put.finger(s).in.mouth her.ID.OBL thumb
‘She put her thumb (in the child’s mouth).’
c.
aDi=mi
ma-laDam Datu
ngaLad kanDu kana
suan
NEG-1EXC.NOM AV-know its.ID.OBL name
that.OBL DF.OBL dog
‘We didn’t know the dog’s ancester’s name.’
The reason why the possessive pronouns marking subject do not make definite/indefinite
distinction is that in Puyuma the subject is definite in most of the cases. 15
The oblique pronouns are non-subjects. Examples are given below:
(19)
muwa’i=yu
mi-kataguin kanku
willing.to-2SG.NOM AV-spouse 1SG.OBL
‘He said to her ‘will you marry me?’
tu=ka-aw
3.GEN-say-PV
4 Transitivity
Different points of view about transitivity in Philippine-type languages are held by
different linguists. Some linguists (e.g. Starosta 1997, 1999; Liao 2004) assert that the
non-actor voice sentences are transitive, while the actor voice sentences are intransitive.
Other linguists (e.g. Kroeger 1993) suggest that both actor voice and non-actor voice
sentences are transitive. As is pointed out by Ross (2002), the matter of transitivity can be
viewed from two angles: semantics and morphosyntax.
From the morphosyntactic point of view, a sentence is transitive if it has at least two
core arguments. In many languages of the world, the pronominal clitics represent core
arguments. On this basis, we may say non-actor voice sentences in Puyuma are transitive
as there are always two enclitics on the verb. However, this is not probative, as some
languages have oblique enclitics.
Another diagnostic for testing corehood is obligatory control. Only core arguments can
be obligatory controllers.
In Puyuma, agents, being subject or not, can always be controllers. For example, in
(20a), the controller is -ku the subject, while in (20b) the controller is tu- the non-subject
agent.
(20) a.
b.
kurudung=ku
mi-eDeng kana
tutwi
lean.against-1SG.NOM AV-sleep DF.OBL puppy
‘I leant against the puppy to sleep.’
tu=Lugas-aw me-na’u
3.GEN-lift-PV AV-see
‘He lifted it to see.’
A non-agent argument can be a controller only when it is the subject, which is the
nominative argument, as illustrated in (21a) and (21b).
15
Except in equational and existential sentences.
Grammatical relations in Puyuma
(21) a.
b.
147
tu=bau-baui-aw=ku
m-uka i
takesi-an
3.GEN-RED-push-PV-1SG.NOM AV-go LOC study-NMSR
‘She urged me to go to school.’
tu=gingaging-aw (na
Takuban)
mu-Tereb
3.GEN-shake-PV
DF.NOM meeting.place AV-fall
‘It (the wind) shook (the meeting place) down.’
Arguments other than the nominative arguments and genitive arguments cannot be
controllers. For example in (22a) the oblique argument bekaLan ‘new rice’ cannot be the
controller of the verb m-u-ami; in (22b) the controller is the agent tu-, not the oblique
argument LangeTi. Similarly, in (22c), the controller is -ku not paDekan.
(22) a.
aDi=ta
k<em>a-kasu Da
bekaL-an m-u-ami
new-NMSR AV-go-north
‘We are not bringing new (rice) to the north.’
NEG-1PL.NOM Ca<AV>bring
b.
c.
ID.OBL
tu=pa-laDam-aw
Da
3.GEN-CAUS-know-PV
ID.OBL stick
LangeTi pa-karun
CAUS-work
‘They used the stick to teach them to work.’
ma-tara-paDek=ku
Da
paDekan mu-languy
AV-take-carry.on.back-1SG.NOM ID.OBL backpack AV-swim
‘I swam with a backpack on my back. ‘
We have demonstrated that both nominative and genitive arguments can be manifested
as enclitics on verbs, and only they can be controllers. So they are core arguments. And
while each non-actor voice sentence has two core arguments, actor voice sentences have
only one core argument. This suggests that actor voice sentences are intransitive.
From the semantic perspective, Hopper and Thompson (1980:251–253) suggest
transitivity should be viewed as a continuum rather than a binary property. They propose a
number of parameters of transitivity, as stated in (23).
(23)
Participants
Kinesis
Aspect
Punctuality
Volitionality
Affirmation
Mode
Agency
Affectedness of O
Individuation of O
High
Low
2 or more participants, A and O
action
telic
punctual
volitional
affirmative
realis
A high in potency
O totally affected
O highly individuated
1 participant
non-action
atelic
non-punctual
non-volitional
negative
irrealis
A low in potency
O not affected
O non-individuated
Hopper and Thompson go on to add that the referents of nouns with the properties, such
as being proper, human/animate, concrete, singular, count, and referential/definite (as
148
Stacy Fang-Ching Teng
opposed to common, inanimate, abstract, plural, mass, and non-referential), are more
highly individuated.
In Puyuma texts, in independent clauses, if the undergoer is definite, then, it will be
chosen to be the subject, and the sentence will be manifested as non-actor voice. For
example:
(24) a.
b.
puka=ku
Da
apuT
put.AV-1SG.NOM ID.OBL flower
‘I put some flowers.’
ku=puka-ay
na
apuT Da
pakeLing
1SG.GEN-put-LV DF.NOM flower ID.OBL hook
‘I added some hooks to the wreath.’
Thus, from semantic perspective, non-actor voice sentences are also higher in
transitivity.
5 Ergativity 16
Following Dixon (1994), ergativity in this paper is viewed as a linguistic feature which
treats the only argument in an intransitive clause (S, hereafter) and the undergoer in a
transitive clause (O, hereafter) in the same way. Ergativity is in opposition to accusativity,
which refers to a system in which S is treated the same as the actor in a transitive clause
(A, hereafter.) Thus, the two systems can be illustrated by the diagram below:
Accusative
Ergative
A
A
S
S
O
O
Let us examine the marking of arguments in Puyuma sentences. Sentence (25a) is an
example of intransitive sentence, and sentence (25b) is transitive.
(25) a.
b.
aru ki<a>naTay i
temutaw
will <IRR>die
SG.NOM his.grandparent
‘His grandmother is going to die.’
tu=kiumal-ay i
temutaw
3.GEN-ask-LV SG.NOM his.grandparent
‘He asked his grandmother.’
The only argument in the intransitive sentence (25a) and the O argument in (25b) bear
the same marking, while the A argument in (25b) is marked differently. This means
Puyuma is syntactically ergative.
Croft (2001:155) proposes a Subject Construction Hierarchy, which defines ‘an
implicational scale such that for any construction on the scale, if the construction patterns
16
Ergativity in this paper does not refer to ergative case markings; rather we discuss ergative alignment.
Grammatical relations in Puyuma
149
ergatively, then all the constructions to the right of it on the scale also pattern ergatively; if
the construction patterns accusatively, then all the constructions to the left of it on the scale
also pattern accusatively’.
(26)
The Subject Construction Hierarchy
coordination < purposive < relativisation < verb agreement < case marking
We have demonstrated that Puyuma patterns ergatively in simple constructions, and
since Puyuma displays no verb agreement, we move on to investigate relativisation.
It has been demonstrated in Ross and Teng (2003) that relative clauses in Puyuma
pattern accusatively. Let us start from the role the domain noun plays in the matrix clause.
It is found that NPmtx can be actor or non-actor, being the grammatical subject or not. In
other words, there is no constraint on what role NPmtx plays, semantically or syntactically.
On the other hand, two different strategies are utilised according to whether the NPrel is an
actor or not. If the NPrel plays the role of actor (either S or A in Dixon’s terms), then the RC
is manifested as a clause; on the other hand, if the NPrel is an undergoer (O in Dixon’s
terms), then the RC is nominalised. Examples are given in (27) and (28). This suggests that
A and S pattern together, while O uses another construction. So relative clauses in
Puyuma pattern accusatively.
(27) a.
NPrel as S
kiyumal=ta
Da mialup {Da mi-a-kelep
kaDini}
ask.AV-1PL.NOM OBL god
OBL AV-ASP-reside here
‘We asked gods who reside here.’
b.
NPrel as A
iDi
{na
aDi kiberay kan
tayban Da
bini}
this.NOM DF.NOM NEG get.give SG.OBL Tayban ID.OBL seed
‘This (person), who didn’t get seeds from Tayban …’
(28) a.
NPrel as O (Patient)
ala
amuna saDu {tu=T<in>ekeL(-an) 17 }
na
asi
maybe because a.lot 3NOM.GEN-<REAL>drink(-NMSR) DF.NOM milk
‘Maybe because the milk he drank is a lot.’
b.
NPrel as O (Instrument)
tu=laseD-aw i
TaLu-TaLun {na in-abak-an
3.GEN-hide-PV LOC Red-grass
NOM REAL-contain-NMSR
kana
walak} na
paDekan
child
NOM basket
‘She hid the basket which was used to contain the child.’
OBL
c.
NPrel as O (Location)
{nantu
3NOM.GEN
17
p<in>uatel-an
kana
drop<REAL>drop-NMSR OBL
tangtang}
box
Although the infix <in> serves mainly as a modal marker denoting the realis modality, it nevertheless
occurs only in the nominalised construction in Puyuma. In those cases, the marker -an can be omitted.
150
Stacy Fang-Ching Teng
na
dare i,
mi-ngaLad la D
matang k<em>a
NOM soil TOP AV-name
ASP OBL Matang say<AV>say
‘The soil (place) in which the box was dropped, people said it gets the
name Matang.’
According to the Subject Construction Hierarchy, this implies that all constructions to
the left of relativisation on the scale should also pattern accusatively. This implication
needs further investigation. However, we do find that in complex constructions, such as
serial verb constructions, it is the agent which is the grammatical subject, even if the
undergoer is definite. For example:
(29) a.
b.
kurudung=ku
mi-eDeng kana
lean.against-1SG.NOM AV-sleep DF.OBL
‘I leant against the puppy to sleep.’
tutwi
puppy
mu-laseD i
Taru-Tarun pa-su’su’
kantu
walak
AV-hide LOC RED-grass
CAUS-breast her.OBL child
‘She hid in the field to breast-feed her child.’
To sum up, Puyuma simple independent clauses are morphosyntactically ergative. In
complex constructions, such as serial verb constructions and relative clauses, it is
syntactically accusative.
References
Cauquelin, Josiane, 1991, The Puyuma language. Journal of the Royal Institute of
Linguistics and Anthropology 147:7–60.
Croft, William, 2001, Radical construction grammar: syntactic theory in typological
perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dixon, R.M.W., 1994, Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dryer, Matthew S., 1997, Are grammatical relations universal? In Joan Bybee, John
Haiman, Sandra A. Thompson, eds Essays on language function and language type,
115–143. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hopper, Paul J. and Sandra Thompson, 1980, Transitivity in grammar and discourse.
Language 56:251–299.
Huang, Lillian M., 1995, A study of Mayrinax syntax. Taipei: The Crane Publishing
Company.
—— 2000a, A reference grammar of Puyuma. (In Chinese). Taipei: Yuan-liou Publishing
Company.
—— 2000b, Verb classification in Maryrinax Atayal. Oceanic Linguistics 39:364–390.
Kess, Joseph F., 1976, Reconsidering the notion of focus in the description of Tagalog. In
Nguyen Dan Liem, ed. South-east Asian linguistics vol.2, 173–186. Canberra: Pacific
Linguistics.
Kroeger, Paul, 1993, Phrase structure and grammatical relations in Tagalog. Stanford:
CSLI.
Grammatical relations in Puyuma
151
Li, Paul Jen-kuei, 1995, Formosan vs. non-Formosan features in some Austronesian
languages in Taiwan. In Paul Jen-kuei Li et al., eds Austronesian Studies Relating to
Taiwan, 651–681. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
Liao, Hsiu-chuan, 2004, Transitivity and ergativity in Formosan and Philippine languages.
PhD dissertation, University of Hawai’i, Honolulu.
Payne, Thomas E., 1997, Describing morphosyntax: a guide for field linguists. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Ross, M.D., 2002, History and transitivity of western Austronesian voice. In F. Wouk and
M.D. Ross, eds The history and typology of Western Austronesian voice systems, 17–62.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Ross, M.D. and Stacy Fang-ching Teng, 2003, The notion of “verb” in Puyuma: a
Construction Grammar approach. Paper presented in the Symposium on the Notion
of ‘Verb’ in Formosan Languages, Academia Sinica, Taipei.
Starosta, Stanley, 1997, Formosan clause structure: transitivity, ergativity, and case
marking. In Chiu-yu Tseng, ed. Chinese languages and linguistics vol.4: Typological
studies of languages in China, 125–154. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
—— 1999, Transitivity, ergativity and the best analysis of Atayal case marking. In
Elizabeth Zeitoun and Paul Jen-kuei Li, eds Selected papers from the Eighth
International Conference on Austronesian linguistics, 371–392. Taipei: Academia
Sinica.
Tan, Cindy R., 1997, A study of Puyuma simple sentences. MA thesis. Graduate Institute
of English, Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Teng, Stacy F., 1997, Complex sentences in Puyuma. MA thesis. Graduate Institute of
English, Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Zeitoun, Elizabeth, L. Huang, M. Yeh, A. Chang and J. Wu, 1996, The temporal,
aspectual, and modal systems of some Formosan languages. Oceanic Linguistics
35:21–56.
7
Voice, ergativity and transitivity
in Tagalog and other Philippine
languages: a typological
perspective
MASUMI KATAGIRI
1 Introduction
In recent studies of Philippine languages, there have been a number of analyses that
treat these languages as ergative in type (e.g. Payne 1982; Cooreman, Fox & Givón 1984;
Gerdts 1988; De Guzman 1988; Blake 1990; Mithun 1994). This paper re-examines and
discusses some of the issues surrounding the ergative hypothesis from a typological
perspective, and proposes an alternative view that will lead to a unified account of the
Philippine-type voice system. 1
In Philippine languages, each major clause has one NP in ‘primary relation’, which in
Tagalog is marked by prepositional ang (or si with singular personal names, sina with
plural personal names). Henceforth I label such markers ‘ANG’. The semantic role of the
2
ANG-marked NP is cross-referenced on the verb by an affix. In transitive clauses in which
an agentive nominal A and a patient nominal P are present, then, there are at least two
possible sentences: those in which A is marked by ANG, and those in which P is marked by
ANG. When other NPs with different semantic roles, such as Beneficiary, Direction or
1
2
This paper is a revised version of ‘Typological positions of Philippine-type languages and their voice
systems’, presented at the 9th International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Canberra, January
8–11, 2002. The work contained here was partly supported by a grant from the Japan Society for the
Promotion of Science for the Grant-in-Aid for Encouragement of Young Scientists ‘Typological studies
on voice and ergativity in Philippine-type languages’ (No. 12710283).
The status of ANG-marked NPs has long been under debate in Philippine linguistics — specifically,
whether they are subject or topic — but I simply refer to them as ANG-marked NPs or ANG-NPs. since
the issue is beyond the scope of this paper. Sama, a language spoken in southern parts of the
Philippines, does not have a marker corresponding to ang, but verbal affixes tell us which nominal in a
clause is in primary relation.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 153–174.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2005.
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics.
153
154
Masumi Katagiri
Recipient, Locative, and Instrumental are also present, each one of them can basically be
marked by ANG, too. Since it is now generally agreed that such alternations are those of
voice, I refer to the types of clauses and verbal forms as Actor Voice (AV) clauses and
forms, Patient Voice (PV) clauses and forms, and so forth. 3
In the ergative analysis of Philippine languages, PV clauses are treated as basic
transitive clauses, while AV clauses are analysed as their detransitivised versions. Since
the sole argument of intransitive sentences (S) is also marked by ANG, the ANG-marked NP
is labelled as absolutive, the PV clauses are construed as ergative (active), and the AV
clauses as antipassive. The following Tagalog sentences from De Guzman (1988:323–
324) illustrate the point. 4 (Henceforth, unless otherwise indicated, quoted examples are
from Tagalog and their glosses and translations are original).
(1) a.
Nagsalita ang babae.
spoke
S
woman
‘The woman spoke.’
b.
Lulutuin ng babae
ang manok.
will.cook A woman P
chicken
erg
abs
‘The chicken will be cooked by the woman.’
‘The woman will cook the chicken.’
c.
Magluluto ang babae
ng manok.
will.cook A
woman P chicken
abs
gen
‘The woman will cook (a) chicken.’
From the ergative viewpoint, the PV sentence (1b) is treated as a basic transitive and the AV
sentence (1c) is considered as an antipassivised version of (1b). Most of the arguments for
regarding PV sentences as basic originate from the strong patient-preference or patientorientedness observed in Tagalog and other Philippine languages in general — that is,
preference for the PV construction over the AV construction in transitive sentences.
Cooreman, Fox and Givón (1984:17), for example, describe the PV construction in Tagalog
as being ‘by far the commonest’, based on their statistical data.
Although patient-preference or patient-orientedness is an earmark for an ergative
system, one cannot (and should not) classify an entire grammar as ergative on the basis of
one characteristic alone, since most of the languages have both accusative and ergative
characteristics within their grammars. In particular, no matter how predominant a certain
clause type may be over another, there should be some morphosyntactic properties that
3
The alternations are traditionally called ‘actor focus’ or ‘actor topic’, ‘goal focus’ or ‘goal topic’, and so
forth, but these terms, especially ‘focus’ and ‘topic’, do not reflect their general use.
4
Abbreviations: A agentive argument of a transitive clause; ABS/abs absolutive; ACC accusative; ADV
adverbial; ANG ang for common nouns, si for singular personal names and sina for plural personal names
in Tagalog, and their equivalents in other Philippine languages; AOR aorist; AP antipassive; AV actor
voice; cho chômeur; Cont contemplated; DAT dative; def definite; ERG/erg ergative; GEN/gen genitive;
Imp imperfective; Inf infinitive; INSTR instrumental; LK linker; LOC locative; NOM nominative; OBL/obl
oblique; P patient argument of a transitive clause; Perf perfective; PL plural; PRES present; PV patient
voice; S subject (sole argument) of an intransitive clause; SG singular; spec specific;1 first person; 2
second person, or direct object relation; 3 third person.
Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages
155
indicate its unmarkedness. Moreover, even if the unmarkedness of a certain clause type is
evidenced morphologically, this does not automatically provide support for the claim that
its counterpart is derived from it. The latter may be a clause type governed by a different
principle.
In this paper, I show that a careful study of morphological and syntactic properties of
AV verbal forms and clauses in comparison with their PV counterparts indicates that the AV
construction is not derived from the PV construction, and hence, not an antipassive
construction. Rather, on the assumption that the Philippine-type voice system represents a
case of split system, it is shown that Tagalog may be taken to represent a very early stage
of split, arising through the grammaticalisation of a fluid system.
2 Actor voice construction as antipassive
Based on studies of a wide variety of languages, Dixon (1994:146) puts forward criteria
by which a process or a construction may be recognised as antipassive:
(2) a. the construction/process applies to an underlying transitive clause and
forms a derived intransitive;
b. the underlying A NP becomes the S of the antipassive;
c. the underlying O [=P] NP acquires a peripheral function, being marked
by a non-core case, preposition, etc.; this NP can be omitted, although
there is always the option of including it;
d. there is some explicit formal marking of an antipassive construction
(generally, by a verbal affix or else by a periphrastic element in the verb
phrase although it could be marked elsewhere in the clause).
To identify a certain clause or construction as ‘antipassive’, one should carefully see if it
exhibits all or most of the properties shared by prototypical antipassive constructions in
other languages. To call a certain construction antipassive on the basis of only one or two
properties is quite dangerous because that property may have no direct bearing on the issue
in question (see below).
In most of the studies which claim or assume Philippine languages as ergative, there
have been extensive discussions of why PV sentences should be analysed as basic transitive
and thus ergative — based mainly on patient-orientedness as I mentioned above — but,
with a few exceptions, most of the scholars are then forced to classify AV sentences as
antipassive without presenting convincing evidence. In the following subsections, I
examine Philippine AV sentences in terms of the criteria above and argue against the
antipassive analysis for such sentences. I will first examine the morphological markedness
of AV verbs ((2d) above) for reasons that will be clear from the following discussion.
2.1 Morphological markedness of AV verbs
As Dixon (1994) suggests, I assume criterion (2d), i.e. explicit formal marking on the
verb, should always be maintained for a certain sentence to be identified with antipassive,
given that it also satisfies some or all the other criteria. This is a plausible assumption
156
Masumi Katagiri
because we can find a number of constructions in accusative languages that satisfy all the
criteria above except (2d). For example, such English intransitive sentences as ‘She has
already eaten’, ‘She is cooking’, ‘She drinks’, ‘Speed kills’, etc. are not generally
considered to be antipassive. 5 Although these sentences are syntactically intransitive
(satisfying (2a)), the agent is an intransitive subject (satisfying (2b)), and the patient is
omitted (satisfying (2c)), there is no explicit formal marking on the verbs or anywhere else
in the clauses that is distinct from their transitive counterparts, i.e. ‘She has already eaten a
meal’, ‘She is cooking a meal’, ‘She drinks alcohol’, ‘Speed kills people’, etc.
In the same vein, Turkish and some Indic languages have another type of construction
that satisfies (2a), (2b) and (2c), but not (2d). In Turkish, a typical accusative language, an
inanimate and indefinite direct object does not receive an accusative case, as shown in (3b)
below:
(3) Turkish
a.
Ben kitab-ı
al-dı-m.
I
book-ACC buy-PAST-1SG
‘I bought the book.’
b.
Ben kitap al-dı-m.
I
book buy-PAST-1SG
‘I bought a book.’ (I did book-buying.)
c.
Kitab-ı,
ben al-dı-m.
book-ACC I
buy-PAST-1SG
‘The book, I bought.’
d. * Kitap, ben al-dı-m.
book I
buy-PAST-1SG
(For: ‘A book, I bought.’)
It is well attested that the caseless object in (3b) kitap ‘book’ is morphologically
incorporated into the verb and loses its termhood as direct object, as indicated by
inapplicability of scrambling (3d), and by other tests such as adverb insertion,
relativisation, etc. (Kuribayashi 1989). And incorporation in Turkish (and in other
languages for that matter) is a valency-decreasing device which derives intransitive
sentences when it is applied to transitive clauses. Thus, sentences such as (3b) satisfy all
the criteria in (2) except (2d), i.e. explicit formal marking on the verb, but they are not
construed as antipassive.
Moreover, the incorporation phenomenon is widely observed also in ergative-type
languages, and if it exists, it occurs independently of the antipassive construction. The
following sentences from Chukchee illustrate the point: (4a) is an antipassive sentence, in
which the verb is overtly marked for antipassive, and (4b) is a sentence in which the object
is incorporated into the verb.
5
But see Heath (1976).
Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages
157
(4) Chukchee (Kozinsky, et al. 1988:667)
a.
tla
ine-nni-gi
mčkw-a.
mother+ABS AP-sew-3SG+AOR shirt-INSTR
‘The mother sewed the shirt.’
b.
tla
mčkw-nni-gi.
mother+ABS shirt-sew-3SG+AOR
‘The mother sewed the shirt.’
Hence, I assume that explicit formal marking on verbs that indicates they are derived
from their transitive counterparts is the most essential property in identifying a certain
construction as antipassive, given that it also satisfies other criteria. In the case of
Philippine languages, then, one must show that AV forms are morphologically more
complex than and derived from their PV counterparts in order to analyse AV sentences as
antipassive. De Guzman (1979, 1992) is the first, to my knowledge, that drew attention to
the issue. In her attempt to claim that PV forms function as basic transitives, she shows
that certain classes of AV verbs in Tagalog, specifically those marked by an AV affix mag-,
are more complex than their PV forms.
Tagalog verbs inflect for voice and aspect/mood, and major action verbs take either
-um- or mag- for AV, and -in, i- or -an for PV. 6 Although there are some correlations
between the semantic nature of a verb and a form of affixes it takes for each voice, it is
largely unpredictable which particular voice affix a given verb takes. For example, luto
‘cook’ takes either -in or i- for PV (lutuin/iluto), but it takes mag- rather than -um- for AV
(magluto, not *lumuto). For the present discussion, I will simply refer to the verb classes
as UM-verbs, MAG-verbs, IN-verbs, I-verbs, and AN-verbs. The perfective aspect
characterises an event as completed, the imperfective as not completed but begun, and the
contemplated as not begun (Schachter & Otanes 1972:66). Reduplication of the first
syllable of the root indicates that the action is not completed. The following (5) shows
paradigms for verbs sulat ‘write’, bigay ‘give’, and tulong ‘help’. Voice affixes are in
boldface in the following paradigms, with -ø indicating that the form is unmarked for voice
(see below).
(5)
Infinitive
sulat (AV)
bigay (AV)
sulat (PV)
bigay (PV)
tulong (PV)
s-um-ulat
mag-bigay
sulat-in
i-bigay
tulung-an
Realis
Perfective
+begun
+completed
Imperfective
+begun
–completed
Irrealis
Contemplated
–begun
–completed
s-um-ulat
nag-bigay
s-in-ulat-ø
i-b-in-igay
t-in-ulung-an
s-um-u-sulat
nag-bi-bigay
s-in-u-sulat-ø
i-b-in-i-bigay
t-in-u-tulung-an
su-sulat-ø
mag-bi-bigay
su-sulat-in
i-bi-bigay
tu-tulung-an
The points to be discussed in this subsection are: the morphological structure of an AV
affix mag-, morphological unmarkedness of PV verbs which take a PV affix -in, and
occurrence of unaffixed PV verb.
6
The affix -an is often classified as Locative or Directional voice affix.
158
Masumi Katagiri
2.1.1 Morphological structure of MAG- verbs
Although an AV affix mag- has been treated as one unit in the standard analysis, De
Guzman (1979, 1992) analyses it as an AV affix -um- plus a gerundive-forming affix pag-.
Her arguments are based on the facts that the initial consonant of the affix mag- is
phonologically close to and a viable alternative form of an AV affix -um-, and that the affix
pag- appears as it is in other non-PV. For example, De Guzman (1992) argues that the root
luto ‘cook’ inflects for voice as in (6) (in infinitive forms). Each voice affix is boldfaced:
(6)
Actor Voice
mag(<um+pag)-luto
Patient Voice
lutu-in / i-luto
Beneficiary Voice
i-pag-luto
Locative Voice
pag-lutu-an
Thus, PV forms are shown to be simpler compared with the other voice forms in that the PV
affix attaches directly to the root while in the other voice forms a voice affix is attached to
gerundive stems. The above analysis of the internal structure of MAG- verbs is also
supported by Blake (1990) and Himmelmann (1991). De Guzman (1992) provides similar
arguments for non-volitive verbs such as kita ‘see’, which inflects for voice as PV makita
(<ma+kita) versus AV makakita (<ma+ka-kita). Based on these verb forms in which
Patient Voice is shown to be simpler than other voice forms in their morphological
structure, De Guzman concludes that PV verbs are unmarked voice forms.
Although the above argument — if it is assumed to be correct — shows that AV verbs of
mag- class (or other non-PV forms for that matter) are morphologically more complex than
their corresponding PV forms, it has no direct bearing on the claim that AV forms are
antipassive, as implied by the ergative hypothesis. In general, antipassive forms in ergative
languages are not only morphologically more complex than their active (ergative)
counterparts, they are derived from their active counterparts, just like direct passive verbs
in accusative languages are derived from their active counterparts, and its derivation is
explicitly marked by verbal affixes or periphrastic elements in the verb phrase. For
example, Dyirbal antipassive forms are derived from their active base by affixing ŋa-y to
their corresponding active (ergative) forms, Yidiny by affixing -:ji-n.
(7)
a.
Yidiny (Dixon 1994:59–60)
Waguja-ŋgu jugi-ø
gunda-l.
man-ERG
tree-ABS cut-PRES
‘The man is cutting a tree.’
b.
Wagu:ja-ø gunda-:ji-ŋ jugi-:l. (galba:n-da).
man-ABS cut-AP-Pres tree-LOC axe-INST
‘The man is cutting a tree (with an axe).’
c.
(De Guzman 1998)
Wagu:ja-ø gunda-l.
man-ABS cut-PRES
‘The man is cutting.’
[Ergative=Basic transitive]
[Antipassive=derived
intransitive]
Notice that the structure of the verb in the antipassive sentence (7b) reflects that it is not
only more complex than, but also derived from, its ergative counterpart in (7a) gunda ‘cut’,
with tense inflection being marked at the outmost. It is also important to note that although
antipassive sentences like (7b) are syntactically intransitive, they should be clearly
Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages
159
distinguished from non-derived intransitive sentences like (7c), in which a patient nominal
is simply omitted, and there is no marking on the verb distinct from that of (7a).
This is not the case in Tagalog as the paradigm for luto ‘cook’ in (6) illustrates. If the
AV form were an antipassive form derived from its corresponding PV form, we would
expect such forms as *maglutuin or *mag-iluto for infinitive AV, which never occur in
Tagalog verbs. Also, verbal forms in AV sentences with a patient nominal and those
without one are not morphologically distinct, as shown in (8).
(8) a.
b.
Nagluluto
ang babae
ng manok.
AV.Imp+cook ANG woman GEN chicken
‘The woman is cooking a chicken.’
Nagluluto
ang babae.
AV.Imp+cook ANG woman
‘The woman is cooking.’
In fact, most of the ergative proposals for Tagalog and other Philippine languages assume
that AV sentences are intransitive, and thus antipassive. However, being intransitive and
being antipassive are essentially independent properties of a given construction, as
mentioned earlier with regard to English and Turkish examples, and whether the
construction in question is intransitive should be evidenced independently. I will discuss
the issue separately in §2.2.
2.1.2 Morphological unmarkedness of IN- verbs
The second point concerns morphological unmarkedness observed in IN- verbs in the
paradigms (5). As pointed out by some linguists (cf. Blake 1990; Himmelmann 1991;
Kroeger 1993a; De Guzman 1998), IN- verbs are unmarked for PV voice in realis
(perfective and imperfective) contexts, while UM- verbs are unmarked for AV voice in
irrealis (contemplated) contexts. In particular, much attention has been paid to the
morphological unmarkedness of realis IN- verbs, which leads to the claim that the PV
construction is basic transitive (ergative), from which AV forms are derived (antipassive).
Traditionally, the infix -in- is taken to be a marker for Patient Voice in realis context, in the
same manner that the infix -um- marks Actor Voice. But it seems to be generally agreed
now that the infix -in- is an aspectual marker rather than a voice marker because it is
common to all the non-AV forms in realis mood (Blake 1990). Consider, for example, the
following paradigm for bili ‘buy’, with the infix -in- being underlined and voice affixes
boldfaced:
(9)
Actor Voice
Patient Voice
Locative Voice
Beneficiary Voice
Instrumental Voice
Causal Voice
Infinitive
bumili
bilhin
bilhan
ibili
ipambili
ikabili
Realis
Perfective
bumili
binili
binilhan
ibinili
ipinambili
ikinabili
Imperfective
bumibili
binibili
binibilhan
ibinibili
ipinambibili
ikinabibili
Irrealis
Contemplated
bibili
bibilhin
bibilhan
ibibili
ipambibili
ikabibili
160
Masumi Katagiri
It is clear from (9) that the infix -in- is common to all the non-AV forms in realis mood.
Kroeger (1993a:16, fn.7) notes that an ‘OV [=PV] suffix -in and perfective infix -in- are
etymologically distinct, the OV [=PV] marker -in < PAn [=Proto Austronesian] *-n, the
aspect marker -in- < PAn *-in, though they have the same shape in Tagalog due to a merger
of PAn * and *i as /i/’. Thus, it is plausible to assume on these etymological grounds that
the Tagalog infix -in- is a realis (perfective and imperfective) marker, while the suffix -in
is a PV marker, and that the voice affix is absent in realis forms of IN- verbs.
Notice that PV suffixes in some other languages take shapes distinct from perfective or
past affixes, which provides clearer support for the above assumption. For example, the
corresponding PV suffix is -en in Ilokano and -on in Cebuano, while the marker for past
tense or perfective aspect is -in- in Ilokano and gi- in Cebuano. In these languages, too, the
PV suffix is absent in past tense or perfective aspect. For example, consider the following
paradigm for an Ilokano root bisita ‘visit’:
(10)
Ilokano
bisitaen
‘to visit’ (PV)
binisita
‘visited’
binisbisita
‘was visiting’
bisbistaen
‘is visiting’
bisitaento
‘will visit’
One may wonder why, then, the infix -in- does not occur in AV forms in realis mood.
Kroeger (1993a:15) notes that the perfective infix -in- is realised as a mutation to an
identical form beginning with /n/ in AV forms whose initial prefix begins with /m/ in the
infinitive form. That is, the initial consonant of nagbigay (‘gave’ AV perfective) above is
taken to be a mutation form of the infix -in-. For UM-verbs, on the other hand, there is no
phonological trace of the infix within Tagalog, which itself is an interesting fact, but we
can detect its trace in the corresponding AV forms in Ilokano:
(11) Ilokano
panaw pumanaw
(root)
‘to leave’
pimmanaw pimampanaw
‘left’
‘was leaving’
pumampanaw pumanawto
‘is leaving’
‘will leave’
It is phonologically plausible to assume that the infixes -imm- (past) and -im- (past
progressive) are merged forms of a past tense marker /in/ plus AV affix /um/. Thus, the
above paradigm of an Ilokano verb seems to provide indirect evidence for the claim that
the infix -in- in Tagalog also marks (realis) aspect rather than patient voice in general.
The fact that verbs which take -in for PV in Tagalog (and the corresponding verb classes
in other Philippine languages) are unmarked for voice in realis mood leads some linguists
to claim that PV forms are basic transitive forms from which AV verbs are derived (cf.
Blake 1990; De Guzman 1998). One of the problems with this line of argument is that it
overgeneralises this morphological argument to the entire grammar. Firstly, notice such a
statement as ‘PV forms are morphologically unmarked for voice’ can be true only for one
class of verbs, i.e. IN- verbs. The other PV verb classes, i.e. I- verbs and AN- verbs are
always marked for voice. It does not provide enough evidence to the claim that PV forms
are unmarked and basic on the basis of one class of verbs.
Secondly, IN- verbs are unmarked for voice only in realis mood (i.e. perfective and
imperfective aspects). In irrealis mood (contemplated aspect), they are marked for PV,
while UM- verbs in turn are unmarked, e.g. susulat-ø (AV) versus susulat-in (PV) ‘will
write’. With the line of argument above, then, we would be forced to make the dubious
claim that in irrealis mood AV forms are morphologically unmarked and thus are the basic
forms from which PV forms are derived, while in realis mood it is the other way around.
Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages
161
Thirdly, since the voice affix of IN- verbs in realis mood is zero, it does not provide
sound evidence for a claim that the corresponding AV verbs are derived. That is, we have
no morphological clue to determine whether the latter are derived from PV forms or not.
Thus the morphological unmarkedness of one class of PV verbs in a limited aspectual
context does not give sound evidence for the claim that PV forms are basic transitive
(ergative) and AV forms are derived (antipassive). It is critical to note here, though, that
this is not to deny that PV sentences with IN- verbs are the most typical transitive clauses.
In particular, some of the problems mentioned above are obviously related to transitivity in
the sense of Hopper and Thompson (1980), which I clarify in §3. The main problem of
concern here is the treatment of AV sentences as antipassive.
2.1.3 Unaffixed PV verbs
Similar problems arise with arguments relating to the occurrence of unaffixed PV verbs.
As pointed out by Cena (1977:14–15), Tagalog has a class of verbs that require neither
voice nor aspect affixes, and those ‘bare’ verbs function as PV verbs, as illustrated by the
following examples (glosses and translations are mine):
(12) (Cena 1977:14–15)
a. Hawak/Hinahawakan ni
John ang libro.
hold/PV.Imp+hold
GEN John ANG book
‘John holds the book.’
b.
*Hawak si John ng libro.
(For: ‘John holds a book.’)
c.
Humahawak si
John
AV.Imp+hold ANG John
‘John holds a book.’
ng
libro.
GEN book
A verb that can occur without being marked for aspect and voice can function only as PV,
as in (12a), while an AV verb must be inflected for voice and aspect, as in (12c). The
occurrence of unaffixed verbs which can only function as PV verbs leads some linguists to
claim that PV verbs are unmarked and basic, and that AV verbs are derived from them.
However, only a handful of verbs can occur unaffixed, and they can function as PV verbs
only in realis contexts. Other such verbs included in Cena’s (1977) and De Guzman’s
(1992) lists are kuha ‘get’, dala ‘carry’, taban ‘hold’, akay ‘lead’, pasan ‘carry on one’s
shoulders’, kipkip ‘carry under one’s arm’, sakop ‘conquer’, and ari ‘own, possess’. There
seem to be slight semantic similarities among these verbs, such as possession or
conveyance, but it is not clear yet why these verbs do not require voice and aspect affixes.
More interestingly, Himmelmann (1999) points out that these unaffixed verbs are used
only in realis context, and that in irrealis mood it is AV verbs that can appear unaffixed.
For example:
(13)
(Bloomfield 1917:221 quoted by Himmelmann 1999)
Hampas[=Humampas] na
kayo, mga bata, sa
mga langgam.
blow [AV.Inf+blow]
now 2PL PL
child LOC PL
ant
‘Whip at the ants, boys.’
162
Masumi Katagiri
Overall, then, these facts about morphological complexity and unaffixed roots do not
support the antipassive analysis of AV sentences since PV verbs are morphologically
unmarked in certain contexts, but AV verbs are unmarked in other contexts. As mentioned
earlier, all the problems in the ergative analysis discussed in this section boil down to the
fact that AV verbs are treated as antipassive forms derived from PV verbs. As we have seen
in this section, AV verbs in Tagalog are in no way derived from PV verbs. In other words,
the PV/AV alternation is not that of active/antipassive.
2.2 AV sentences as intransitive
It is clear from the above discussion that while a certain class of AV verbs, i.e. MAGverbs, can be analysed as being morphologically more complex than their corresponding
PV verbs in certain contexts, AV forms including MAG- verbs are in no way derived from
their corresponding PV forms. On the other hand, past works have shown that AV
sentences in Tagalog and other Philippine languages encode events that are less transitive
than their corresponding PV sentences in terms of individuation (cf. Hopper & Thompson
1980). The critical point is how productively such transitivity is reflected in the grammar.
In this section, I discuss the syntactic arguments surrounding the issue, i.e. whether AV
sentences are grammatically intransitive.
It is not at all straightforward whether a given sentence in Tagalog is grammatically
intransitive. In line with Palmer (1994:181), I assume that a sentence is ‘grammatically
intransitive’ if P is either absent or demoted to oblique status. In other words, even if a
given sentence is ‘semantically transitive’, i.e. two participants are present with A
performing an action on P, it is ‘grammatically intransitive’ if P is omitted or demoted to
an oblique. Incidentally, ‘semantically intransitive’ sentences, i.e. those without P, are
always ‘grammatically intransitive’.
As observed in many languages, accusative or ergative, P is readily omitted for some
action verbs such as ‘cook’ and ‘eat’ when the referent of P is generic or understood
without any previous context. In ergative languages, since one of the functions of the
antipassive construction is to defocus P, such deletion is much more productive, not
restricted to such verbs. In the case of Tagalog, however, P of AV sentences is not readily
deleted unless its referent is present in the previous context. The following sentences
without any previous context in which the referent of P is mentioned are either
unacceptable or elliptical:
(14) a. ?? Nag-dadala
sila.
AV.Imp+carry they
‘They are carrying (something).’
b. ?? B-um-ibili sila.
AV.Imp+buy they
‘They are buying (something).’
c.
Namimili (< Nang+bibili) sila (ng pagkain).
AV.Imp+buy
they GEN food
‘They are buying/shopping (food).’
Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages
163
Although P can be omitted in sentences like (14c), the verbs that can take the AV affix
mang- are restricted to those which typically denote actions that are habitual or recursive,
or those performed toward plural referents (cf. Oue 1994).
It is more difficult to determine whether demotion of P to an oblique has occurred in the
AV construction. Kroeger (1993a, b) argues against such an analysis on the basis of two
tests, namely, adjunct fronting and participial adjunct constructions. Kroeger shows that
while adverbial phrases marked by an oblique case sa can be fronted, the patient nominal
of AV sentences that is marked by a genitive case never undergoes fronting. Compare
(15a) and (15b):
Nagluluto
ang babae ng
manok sa
kusina.
AV.Imp+cook ANG woman GEN chicken OBL kitchen
‘The woman is cooking a chicken in the kitchen.’
(15)
a.
Sa kusina nagluluto ang babae ng manok.
‘In the kitchen, the woman is cooking a chicken.’
b.
*Ng manok nagluluto ang babae sa kusina.
(For: ‘A chicken, the woman is cooking in the kitchen.’)
Ungrammaticality of (15b) suggests that the genitive-marked patient nominal manok
‘chicken’ is not an oblique.
This is further supported by evidence from what Kroeger calls participial adjunct
constructions. It is shown that Terms may control the gap in a participial nang ‘while,
when’ clause. The following examples illustrate that genitive-patients can control a gap of
such clauses, and therefore terms.
(16)
(Kroeger 1993a:47)
Nanghuli
ng
magnanakaw ang
AV.Perf+catch GEN thief
NOM
ø
polis [nang
police ADV
pumapasok
AV.Imp+enter
sa
bangko].
OBL bank
‘The police caught a/the thief when entering the bank.’
According to Kroeger, the sentence (16) is ambiguous; either the agent polis ‘police’ or the
patient magnanakaw ‘thief’ can be interpreted as controlling the gap of the participial
clause. In contrast, the following example (17) is unambiguous. Only the agent Juan
‘Juan’ can be interpreted as the controller, ‘because the dative argument hari ‘king’ is an
oblique, and hence not a possible controller’ (Kroeger 1993a:48).
(17)
(Kroeger 1993a:48)
Bumisita
si
Juan sa
hari nang nagiisa
ø.
AV.Perf+visit NOM Juan DAT king ADV AV.Imp+one
‘Juan visited the king alone.’ (Juan is alone)
Thus, Kroeger (1993a:48) concludes ‘the data from adjunct fronting and participial
adjuncts provide clear evidence for the termhood of genitive patients’.
At first glance, it appears clear from the above arguments that the patient nominal of an
AV clause is not demoted to an oblique, and hence the AV clause is not grammatically
intransitive. However, it also follows that a dative-marked patient nominal is demoted to
164
Masumi Katagiri
an oblique since it cannot control the gap of a participial clause as in (17). Also, it is
accessible to fronting, as in the following example:
(18)
Sa
kaibigan tumatawag
ang babae.
friend
AV.Imp+call ANG woman
‘(To) the/a friend, the woman is calling.’
OBL
In fact, a patient nominal of an AV clause is marked either by genitive ng, or by
oblique/dative sa, depending on the verb. Some verbs only subcategorise for a ng- patient
while other verbs subcategorise for a sa- patient, and still others can take either one with
differences in specificity: ng for non-specific patients, and sa for specific patients.
(19)
Nagluto
ang babae ng/*sa manok.
AV.Perf+cook ANG woman GEN/OBL chicken
‘The woman cooked a/*the chicken.’
(20)
(Cena 1995:29)
Tumulong
si
Ben sa/*ng bata.
AV.Perf+help ANG Ben OBL/GEN child
‘Ben helped the child.’
(21)
(De Guzman 1999)
a. Magbabasa ang bata
will.read-AV 2,abs child
ng
libro.
2-cho, obl book
[-def/-spec]
‘The child will read a book.’
b. Babasa
ang
bata sa
libro.
will.read-AV 2,abs child 2-cho, obl book
[+spec]
‘The child will read of/from the book.’
Since sa-marked patients behave in the same manner as ‘pure’ obliques such as locative
and temporal adjuncts in terms of fronting and control of a participial clause, one might
assume that sa-marked patients have been demoted to oblique status, while ng-marked
patients have not (cf. Cena 1995). However, a serious problem arises when a verb allows
either sa patients or ng patients with differences in specificity, as in (21a) and (21b). On
the assumption that sa patients are demoted while ng patients are not, the situation would
be unique from a cross-linguistic point of view: non-specific (ng-marked) patients are not
demoted to obliques while specific (sa-marked) patients are. The universal tendency is the
reverse: patients that are low in referentiality are more likely to be put into periphrastic
status, such as obliques.
De Guzman (1999) takes a different approach. In her analysis of Tagalog and other
Philippine languages in RG framework, both ng patients and sa patients are demoted,
specifically to 2-chômeur, but they are distinguished in terms of syntactic operativity: ng
patients are syntactically inoperative while sa patients are operative. This argument can
take account of fronting, but not of control of participial clauses since sa patients cannot
control the gap of a participial clause, as in (17).
Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages
165
Overall, then, there is no convincing evidence that might indicate that a patient nominal
of AV sentences is demoted to an oblique. We have seen that the case is similar with
omission of patient nominals: although they are not omitted in general, there are cases
where they can be deleted, especially with an AV affix mang-. It follows that it is not
empirically possible to determine whether AV sentences in Tagalog are grammatically
intransitive.
As pointed out by some linguists, on the other hand, AV sentences in Philippine
languages in general are less transitive than their PV sentences in terms of transitivity
parameters (Hopper & Thompson 1980). For example, the patient of AV sentences is less
individuated than that of PV sentences in that the former is typically non-specific and/or
indefinite while the latter is mostly definite and specific. This implies that Tagalog has not
formally regularised such different degrees of transitivity into the grammar. In other
words, Tagalog may be at a transitional stage of grammaticalisation of transitivity, and
hence, it cannot be classified straightforwardly in terms of accusative/ergative parameter.
In the next section, I discuss this possibility and propose a view in which the voice system
in Tagalog is better treated as a split system.
3 Split voice system
In the preceding sections, we have seen that there is no morphosyntactic evidence that
might indicate that AV verbs and clauses are antipassive. It follows, then, that the AV
construction in Tagalog is not a construction derived from the PV construction but better
taken to be a system governed by a different principle. In this section, I demonstrate a
view in which the Philippine voice system is a split system with different degrees of split
in different languages.
With regard to the typology of Philippine languages, Shibatani (1988:113) concludes ‘in
their overall characteristics, they are neither accusative nor ergative’. Taking a step
forward toward a more positive characterisation, Shibatani (1999) claims that the voice
system of Philippine languages represents a fluid voice system. According to him, in so
far as both AV forms and PV forms involve some morphemes, ‘there is no basic diathesis in
Philippine languages; all constructions are derived’ (Shibatani 1999). The voice system is
fluid if there is no basic diathesis, and the voice alternation between AV and PV is not
conditioned by those factors which condition split, such as semantic nature of NPs,
tense/aspect/mood, etc. This implies, then, that the distinction between AV and PV is made
pragmatically, rather than grammatically, directly reflecting its context of use.
This characterisation of the Philippine voice system as fluid may largely hold for
Cebuano, on which Shibatani’s argument is mostly based. This is reflected in the almost
equal text frequency of AV and PV clauses in Cebuano for semantically transitive clauses.
For example, Shibatani (1988) reports his Cebuano corpus contained 52% AV clauses
versus 46% PV clauses, while Payne (1994), whose survey is restricted to perfective
sentences, reports 41% AV versus 59% PV.
However, this characterisation of the Philippine voice system as fluid does not suffice
to explain the remarkable patient-orientedness observed in Tagalog and other Philippine
languages in general. This patient-orientedness is partially reflected in the text frequency,
e.g. 24% AV versus 76% PV in Tagalog, according to Cooreman, Fox and Givón (1984).
Moreover, as we have seen in the preceding sections, there is some morphological
Masumi Katagiri
166
evidence to show that certain PV verbs are unmarked for voice in certain moods in
Tagalog. In fact, the distinction between AV and PV in Tagalog seems to be more
grammatically motivated compared with Cebuano, exhibiting more of a split character than
a fluid.
Dixon (1994) surveys the kinds of factors that condition splits, and summarises them as
follows:
(22)
Factors that condition splits:
a. Semantic nature of the core NPs
b. Semantic nature of the main verbs
c. Tense or aspect or mood of the clause
d. Grammatical status of a clause, i.e. whether it is main or subordinate, etc.
It is shown, for example, that if a language exhibits a split conditioned by
tense/aspect/mood, an ergative system is likely to be employed in past tense or perfective
aspect, while an accusative system is found in future tense, imperfective aspect, negative
polarity, or imperative or hortative moods. Moreover, Dixon (1994) argues that some
languages that show a split system do not just operate with one conditioning factor, but
involve a combination of two or more conditioning factors. If the voice system of
Philippine languages is a split conditioned by one or more than one of the factors in (22),
it is expected that PV sentences are manifestations of an ergative system, while AV
sentences are those of an accusative system.
The factors that condition splits are apparently related to transitivity of a clause.
Hopper and Thompson (1980) propose the parameters of transitivity as given in the
following table:
Table 1: Parameters of transitivity
(Hopper & Thompson 1980)
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
Parameter
Participants
Kinesis
Aspect
Punctuality
Volitionality
Affirmation
Mode
Agency
Affectedness of P
Individuation of P
High
2 or more central
kinetic
telic
punctual
volitional
affirmative
realis
A high in potency
P totally affected
P highly individuated
Low
1 participant
static
atelic
non-punctual
non-volitional
negative
irrealis
A low in potency
P not affected
P not individuated
In the following sections, I discuss the situation of Tagalog in terms of each of these
factors, in comparison with some other Philippine languages, and argue that Tagalog is at
an early stage of split conditioned by the semantic nature of NPs (22a) and by
tense/aspect/mood (22c).
Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages
167
3.1 Split conditioned by the semantic nature of NPs
In the case of Philippine languages, splits conditioned by the semantic nature of NPs are
observed in individuation of P (Parameter J) and affectedness of P (Parameter I). The
individuation of P is concerned specifically with definiteness/referentiality of P.
It is well known that whenever a patient is definite, there is a strong preference to
choose the patient as the ANG-NP, resulting in PV sentences in Tagalog and other Philippine
languages in general (cf. Schachter & Otanes 1972; Foley & Van Valin 1984:239).
However, it is also widely acknowledged that there are differences among different
languages as to how strongly the above rule applies. For example, this rule applies more
strongly to Tagalog than to Cebuano:
(23) a.
b.
Nagluto
ang babae ng/*sa manok.
AV.Perf+cook ANG woman a/*the chicken
‘The woman cooked a/*the chicken.’
Niluto
ng
babae
ang
[=(19)]
manok.
PV.Perf+cook GEN woman ANG chicken
‘The woman cooked the chicken.’
(24)
a.
b.
Cebuano 7
Miluto
ang babaye
AV.Perf+cook ANG woman
‘The cooked a/the chicken.’
ug/sa manok.
a/the chicken
Giluto
sa
babaye ang manok.
PV.Perf+cook GEN woman ANG chicken
‘The woman cooked the chicken.’
In Cebuano, the patient of AV sentences can take either ug or sa, depending on its
definiteness, i.e. ug for an indefinite patient and sa for a definite one, as in (24a). In
contrast, the distinction between ng and sa in Tagalog is more of a grammatical one
determined by subcategorisation of verbs rather than a semantic one such as definiteness.
Thus, the definite patient must be an ANG phrase in PV sentences like (23b).
However, the so-called ‘definite object constraint’ (Schachter & Otanes 1972) is not an
absolute constraint even in Tagalog. A definite patient can occur in AV sentences, as in
the following sentence:
(25)
(Bloomfield 1917:48 quoted by Himmelmann 1991:39)
Nagdadala
sila ng
sarile nilang banda ng
musika.
AV.Imp+bring 3PL GEN own
3PL+LK band
GEN music
‘They bring their own band.’
In general, then, PV clauses are high in transitivity since the definite or highly
individuated patient is likely to be expressed in PV clauses, while an indefinite patient is
likely to be expressed in AV clauses. However, as seen in sentences like (25), it is not an
absolute condition but a tendency, which is stronger than in Cebuano. Hence, we may say
7
I wish to thank Cora Lalobis from Cebu City, Cebu for providing me with the Cebuano data that appear in
this paper.
168
Masumi Katagiri
that Tagalog is more ergative than Cebuano in terms of definiteness of P, but it is not at all
an absolute condition to determine the split.
With regard to the degrees of ergativity, Kapampangan, a language spoken in central
Luzon, seems to be more ergative than Tagalog in that it has developed cross-referencing
pronouns that operate clearly in an ergative manner. Consider the following examples:
(26)
a.
b.
Kapampangan
Minta ya i
Rosa king Maynila.
AV+go 3SG ANG Rosa OBL Manila
‘Rosa went to Manila.’
Linutu
ne[<na+ya]-ng
PV+cook [3SG+3SG]-LK
‘Rosa cooked the banana.’
Rosa ing
sagin.
Rosa ANG.3SG banana
b’. Linutu
no[<na+la]-ng Rosa reng
sagin.
PV+cook [3SG+3PL]-LK
Rosa ANG.3PL banana
‘Rosa cooked the bananas.’
c.
Miglutu ya-ng
sagin i
Rosa.
AV+cook 3SG-LK banana ANG Rosa
‘Rosa cooked bananas.’
In intransitive sentences like (26a), the third person singular enclitic pronoun ya crossreferences the sole argument S, Rosa. In PV sentences like (26b) and (26b’), two enclitic
pronouns occur in portmanteau forms, and it is clear from (26b’) that the third person
singular enclitic pronoun na cross-references the A, and the third person plural pronoun la
cross- references the P. Hence, ya in (26b) cross-references the P, sagin ‘banana’, rather
than the A, Rosa. Thus, the enclitic ya is taken to be an absolutive pronoun for the third
person singular nouns that cross-references S and P in exclusion of A.
Even in Kapampangan, however, there are some cases in which an absolutive pronoun
does not occur. For example, Mithun (1994) points out that mass nouns and abstract nouns
are not cross-referenced by any pronoun.
(27)
Kapampangan (Mithun 1994:253)
Tatanggapan ku
(ø)
ing amun
mu.
accepting
1ERG (ABS) ABS challenge your
‘I accept your challenge.’
Since mass or abstract nouns are low in individuation, it is also taken to be a case of split in
terms of the individuation of P.
The second point regarding the semantic nature of NPs is concerned with the
affectedness of P. When a main verb is high in transitivity in terms of affectedness of P,
the PV construction is preferred or sometimes obligatory in Tagalog:
(28) a.
Pinatay
ni
Juan
PV.Perf+kill GEN Juan
‘Juan killed the/a dog.’
ang
aso.
ANG dog
Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages
169
b. * Pumatay
si
Juan ng
aso.
AV.Perf+kill ANG Juan GEN dog
(For: ‘Juan killed a dog.’)
c.
(29) a.
Sino ang pumatay
ng
aso?
who ANG AV.Perf+kill GEN dog
‘Who killed a dog?’
Sinira
ng
bata ang mesa.
PV.Perf+break GEN child ANG table
‘The child broke the/a table.’
b. *? Sumira
ang bata ng
mesa.
AV.Perf+break ANG child GEN table
(For: ‘The child broke a table.’)
c.
(30) a.
Sino ang sumira
ng
mesa?
who ANG AV.Perf+break GEN table
‘Who broke a table?’
Kinagat
ng aso ang anak ni Juan.
PV.Perf+bite GEN dog ANG child GEN Juan
‘The dog bit Juan’s child.’
b. ?? Kumagat
ang aso sa
anak ni
Juan.
AV.Perf+bite ANG dog OBL child GEN Juan
(For: ‘The dog bit Juan’s child.’)
(Cena 1995:7 (Gloss and translation are mine))
c.
Ano ang kumagat
sa anak ni
Juan?
what ANG AV.Perf+bite OBL child GEN Juan
‘What bit Juan’s child?’
With verbs like patay ‘kill’, sira ‘break’, kagat ‘bite’, etc., whose patient is highly affected,
the AV construction is usually avoided in Tagalog unless such syntactic pressures like whquestion, clefting or relativisation force AV forms to occur ((28c), (29c), and (30c)). Low
acceptablitiy of AV sentences ((28b), (29b), and (30b)) suggests that PV sentences are
higher in transitivity in terms of affectedness of P.
On the other hand, Cebuano allows both AV and PV in such cases. For example,
compare Tagalog sentences (29a, b) with their Cebuano equivalents (31a, b):
(31)
a.
b.
Cebuano
Gipatay
ni
Juan
PV.Perf+kill GEN Juan
‘Juan killed the dog.’
Mipatay
si
Juan
AV.Perf+kill ANG Juan
‘Juan killed a/the dog.’
ang
ero.
ANG dog
ug/sa ero.
a/the dog
Again, we can say that Tagalog is more ergative than Cebuano in that PV forms are
strongly preferred with verbs of high transitivity such as patay ‘kill’ in Tagalog, while AV
forms as well as PV are allowed in Cebuano.
170
Masumi Katagiri
If a verb does allow either AV or PV, the distinction signals different degrees of
affectedness of P. Consider the following sentences (glosses and translations are mine):
(32)
a.
b.
(Cena 1977:6–7)
Binaril
ni
Juan si
Fred.
PV.Perf+shoot GEN Juan ANG Fred
‘Juan shot Fred.’
Bumaril
si
Juan kay
Fred.
AV.Perf+shoot ANG Juan OBL Fred
‘Juan shot at Fred.’
The PV construction in (32a) encodes an event in which the patient is wholly affected,
while the AV construction in (32b) encodes one in which the patient is either not directly
affected or just partially affected.
Overall, then, definiteness and affectedness of P are factors that may condition splits
between the AV construction and the PV construction in Tagalog. The important point,
however, is that these factors are not determinative, i.e. even when the P is definite, and
wholly affected, we can find cases in which the AV construction is used. Hence, we can
say that Tagalog is still at an early stage of split, where grammaticalisation of transitivity,
i.e. its regularisation in the grammar, is not at all complete compared with other languages
like Kapampangan.
3.2 Split conditioned by tense/aspect/mood
We have seen in §2 that IN- verbs are morphologically unmarked for voice in realis
mood. This morphological unmarkedness is also partially reflected in syntax. As
mentioned above, with verbs of high transitivity like patay ‘kill’, the AV construction is
usually avoided in perfective aspect. However, in imperfective or contemplated aspect,
acceptability of the AV construction increases:
(33) a. * Pumatay
si
Juan ng
aso.
AV.Perf+kill ANG Juan GEN dog
(For: ‘Juan killed a dog.’)
b.
Nagpapatay si
Juan ng
aso.
AV.Imp+kill ANG Juan GEN dog
‘Juan kills a dog.’ (‘John butchers dogs.’)
c.
Papatay
si
Juan ng aso.
AV.Cont+kill ANG Juan GEN dog
‘Juan will kill a dog.’
[=(28b)]
Dixon (1994) argues that if there is a split conditioned by tense/aspect/mood, an ergative
system is likely to be employed in past tense or perfective aspect, while an accusative
system is found in future tense, imperfective aspect, negative polarity, or imperative or
hortative moods. The above examples illustrate the point although the split in Tagalog is
not clear-cut but remains a tendency.
Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages
171
Also recall from §2 that UM- verbs are unmarked for voice in irrealis mood. Moreover,
unaffixed ‘bare’ verbs can function as AV verbs in irrealis, especially in imperative or
hortative mood. In the following examples, bare forms of verbs function as AV verbs:
(34)
(Bloomfield 1917:221 quoted by Himmelmann 1999)
Hampas na kayo, mga bata, sa
mga langgam.
blow
now 2PL
PL
child LOC PL
ant
‘Whip at the ants, boys.’
(35)
[=(13)]
(Himmelmann 1999)
Umuwi
na tayo, Daddy! Uwi
na
tayo!
AV+return.home now 1PL Daddy
return.home now 1PL
‘Let’s go home Daddy! Let’s go home!’
In other words, the PV forms are more likely to be unmarked in realis mood, while the AV
forms are more likely to be unmarked in irrealis mood. This is expected if we assume that
the PV construction represents an ergative system and the AV construction an accusative
system.
The split characteristic is further observed in the case of so-called pseudo-verbs. Some
adjectives of liking/disliking, necessity, and ability can function as verbs, such as gusto
‘like, want’, ayaw ‘don’t like’, ibig ‘like, want’ nais ‘like, want’, kailangan ‘need’, etc. (cf.
Schachter & Otanes 1972:261ff.). But in their bare forms, they do not usually function as
AV verbs. They occur either in the so-called ‘non-topic’ construction, in which no ANGmarked NP occurs, or the PV construction, in which a patient (theme) is ANG-marked. For
example:
(36) a.
b.
Gusto/Kailangan ng
bata ng
libro.
like/need
GEN child GEN book
‘The child likes/needs a book.’
[Non-topic]
Gusto/Kailangan ng
bata ang libro.
like/need
GEN child ANG book
‘The child likes/needs the book.’
[PV]
c. * Gusto/Kailangan ang bata ng
libro.
like/need
ANG child GEN book
(For: ‘The child likes/needs a book.’)
[AV]
Thus, these pseudo-verbs are highly patient-oriented in that if one of the NPs is marked by
ANG, it is the patient in Tagalog.
On the other hand, ayaw ‘don’t like’, the negative counterpart of gusto ‘like’, allows AV
as well as non-topic and PV constructions, as in (37c) (Schachter & Otanes 1972:265):
(37) a.
b.
Ayaw
ni
Juan ng
mansanas.
don’t.like GEN Juan GEN apple
‘Juan doesn’t like an apple.’
[Non-topic]
Ayaw
ni
Juan ang mansanas.
don’t.like GEN Juan ANG apple
‘Juan doesn’t like the apple.’
[PV]
172
Masumi Katagiri
c.
Ayaw
ng mansanas si
Juan.
don’t.like GEN apple
ANG Juan
‘Juan doesn’t like an apple.’
[AV]
Interestingly, the corresponding Cebuano form does not allow PV. Compare the
Tagalog sentences in (37) with their corresponding Cebuano sentences in (38):
(38)
a.
Cebuano
Dili
nako
ug
nangka.
don’t.like 1SG.GEN GEN jackfruit
‘I don’t like jackfruit.’
b. * Dili
nako
ang nangka.
don’t.like 1SG.GEN ANG jackfruit
(For: ‘I don’t like the jackfruit.’)
c.
Dili
ako
ug
nangka.
don’t.like 1SG.ANG GEN jackfruit
‘I don’t like jackfruit.’
[Non-topic]
[PV]
[AV]
Thus, even with pseudo-verbs that usually exhibit strong patient-orientedness, negation
opts for the AV construction. This is expected if we assume that the PV construction
represents an ergative construction while the AV construction an accusative construction.
The situation accords with a general tendency: an ergative system is more likely to be
found in clauses that describe some definite result while an accusative system is more
likely to be employed when the clause refers to something that has not happened.
In sum, the PV construction is more likely to be employed in realis mood or perfective
aspect, while the AV construction is more likely to be found in irrealis mood, imperfective
aspect, imperative and hortative moods, and in negative polarity. This is in accordance
with the general tendency of split observed in other languages in which an ergative system
is more likely to be found in the former contexts while an accusative system is more likely
to be employed in the latter. An important difference of Tagalog from those languages
with clear splits is that the factors that condition the splits are not at all definite factors in
the choice of particular voice.
4 Conclusion
This paper started off with a discussion of the nature of the actor-voice construction in
Tagalog and other Philippine languages. Although the ergative analysis assumes that the
actor-voice construction is an antipassive, I have shown that such an interpretation is not
morphologically and syntactically plausible. I have presented another interpretation of the
AV construction as accusative, and suggested that Tagalog seems to be at an early stage of
split voice system in that factors that condition splits in other languages are not
determining factors.
In the discussion, some significant differences among different Philippine languages
have also been mentioned. It has been shown that Kapampangan is more ergative than
Tagalog in that the former has developed a cross-referencing pronominal system that
operates clearly in an ergative manner, and that Cebuano is less ergative than Tagalog in
that it often allows the AV construction where Tagalog does not. Similar differences in the
Voice, ergativity and transitivity in Tagalog and other Philippine languages
173
voice system are also observed in other Austronesian languages. For example, Polynesian
languages, a subgroup of the Austronesian family, also exhibit differences in ergativity.
Dixon (1994) points out that while such Austronesian languages as Tongan and Samoan
are ergative, some other languages like Maori are accusative with a passive construction
being extensively used. It is also reported that Formosan languages in general have
Philippine-type voice systems with differences in ergativity/accusativity. I believe that
careful studies of a wider variety of Austronesian languages will enable a unified account
of the Philippine-type voice system, which in turn will give an explanation of the
motivation behind the rise of ergative characteristics observed widely in Austronesian
languages.
References
Blake, Barry J., 1990, Relational grammar. London: Routledge.
Bloomfield, Leonard, 1917, Tagalog texts with grammatical analysis. 3 vols. Urbana IL:
University of Illinois.
Cena, Resty M., 1977, Patient primacy in Tagalog. Paper read at the LSA Winter Meeting,
Chicago, Illinois.
—— 1995, Surviving without relations. Philippine Journal of Linguistics 26:1–31.
Cooreman, Ann, Barbara Fox and Talmy Givón, 1984, The discourse definition of
ergativity. Studies in language 8:1–34.
De Guzman, Videa P., 1979, Morphological evidence for primacy of patient as subject in
Tagalog. Paper read at the LSA Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, California.
—— 1988, Ergative analysis for Philippine languages: an analysis. In McGinn, ed.
1988:323–345.
—— 1992, Morphological evidence for primacy of patient as subject in Tagalog.
In M.D. Ross, ed. Papers in Austronesian linguistics, No. 2, 87–96. Canberra: Pacific
Linguistics.
—— 1998, The ergative analysis: a different view of structure. Lecture in the series
Ergativity in Philippine languages. University of the Philippines, Diliman, 10th
December.
—— 1999, On the ng-agent and the ng-patient in Tagalog. Lecture in the series Ergativity
in Philippine languages. University of the Philippines, Diliman, 18th March.
De Wolf, Charles M.,1988, Voice in Austronesian languages of Philippine type: passive,
ergative, or neither? In Shibatani, ed. 1988:143–93.
Dixon, R.M.W., 1994, Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Foley, William A. and Robert D. Van Valin, 1984, Functional syntax and universal
grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gerdts, Donna B., 1988, Antipassives and causatives in Ilokano: evidence for an ergative
analysis. In McGinn, ed. 1988:295–321.
Heath, Jeff, 1976, Antipassivization: a functional typology. Proceedings of the Second
Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 202–211.
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P., 1991, The Philippine challenge to Universal Grammar.
Arbeitspapier Nr. 15. Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft.
174
Masumi Katagiri
—— 1999, Lexical categories and voice in Tagalog. Manuscript.
Hopper, Paul and Sandra Thompson, 1980, Transitivity in grammar and discourse.
Language 56:251–299.
Kozinsky, Isaac Š., Vladimir P. Nedjalkov and Maria S. Polinskaya, 1988, Antipassive
in Chukchee: oblique object, object incorporation, zero object. In Shibatani, ed
1988:651–706.
Kroeger, Paul R., 1993a, Phrase structure and grammatical relations in Tagalog. Stanford:
CSLI Publications.
—— 1993b, Another look at subjecthood in Tagalog. Philippine Journal of Linguistics
24:1–15.
Kuribayashi,Yuu, 1989, Accusative marking and noun–verb constructions in Turkish.
Gengo Kenkyuu (Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan) 95:94–119.
McGinn, Richard, ed., 1988, Studies in Austronesian Linguistics. Athens, Ohio: Center for
International Studies.
Mithun, Marianne, 1994, The implications of ergativity for a Philippine voice system. In
Barbara Fox and Paul J. Hopper, eds Voice: form and function, 247–277. Amsterdam/
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Oue, Masanao, 1994, Firipino-go Bumpoo Nyuumon (Introduction to the Filipino
Grammar). Tokyo: Hakusuisha.
Palmer, Frank R., 1994, Grammatical roles and relations. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Payne, Thomas E., 1982, Role and reference related subject properties and ergativity in
Yup’ik Eskimo and Tagalog. Studies in Language 6:75–106.
—— 1994, The pragmatics of voice in a Philippine language: actor-focus and goal-focus
in Cebuano narrative. In Talmy Givón, ed. Voice and inversion, 317–364. Amsterdam/
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Schachter, Paul and Fe Otanes, 1972, Tagalog reference grammar. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Shibatani, Masayoshi, 1988, Voice in Philippine languages. In Shibatani, ed. 1988:85–142.
—— 1991, Grammaticization of topic into subject. In Elizabeth C. Traugott and Bernd
Heine, eds Approaches to grammaticalization, vol. 1, 93–133. Amsterdam/
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
—— 1999, Case, voice and language type. Lecture at University of the Philippines,
Diliman, 8th June.
Shibatani, Masayoshi, ed., 1988, Passive and voice. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Benjamins.
8
Aspects of pragmatic focus
in Tagalog
DANIEL KAUFMAN
1 Background
This paper sets out to accomplish the following three goals:
i. to show that Tagalog possesses regular syntactic expressions of the
universal pragmatic relations of focus and topic;
ii. to identify the role of prosody in the pragmatic component of Tagalog;
iii. to account for a portion of what was previously considered to be
semantically vacuous scrambling in Tagalog based on the first two
observations.
Because of its typologically interesting nature, the morphosyntax of Philippine case/
voice alternations has overshadowed work on the pragmatics of these languages. 1
Consequently, work on Philippine languages has often conflated syntactic and pragmatic
categories, a problem which is reflected by the use of pragmatic terms such as ‘topic’ and
‘focus’ to refer to what should properly be considered grammatical relations. Assumptions
about the pragmatics and discourse role of the Tagalog ang phrase (which has been
variously termed ‘focus’, ‘topic’, and ‘subject’ among others) have too often gone
unexamined.
As a repercussion of ignoring discourse context we are left with the appearance that
scrambling is applied freely as an ‘optional rule’. But upon taking a closer look at the
interactions between the pragmatic and syntactic components of the grammar we find that
much of this variation is in fact conditioned by information structure. Within the
Chomskyan model, information structure has been subsumed into the syntax to a large
extent by positing functional projections for pragmatically salient positions. The presence
of a Topic Phrase and Focus Phrase in the left periphery of the sentence has been proposed
in numerous places. These serve as potential landing sites for movement from case
1
Tagalog pragmatics is the primary focus of Naylor (1975) and is given a brief treatment by Schachter
and Otanes (1972) and Kroeger (1993:Ch. 3).
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 175–196.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2005.
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics.
175
176
Daniel Kaufman
positions. Pragmatically salient functional projections are now widely accepted in
generative work on languages that are described as being ‘discourse configurational’ (e.g.
Hungarian, Catalan, Somali) as well as those which are not generally characterised as such
(e.g. Italian, English).
For the purposes of this paper, I abstract away from the full implications of an X-bar
theoretic analysis in order to give attention to the basic pragmatic and syntactic properties
of topic and focus in Tagalog. I also show that a prosodically based analysis of the
postverbal field as that of Zubizarretta (1998) may be profitably applied to Tagalog to
account for some of what was previously dismissed as free word order variation.
1.1 Definition of terms
I rely here primarily on Lambrecht’s (1994) framework for dealing with topic and
focus. Lambrecht defines topicality as the following:
A referent is interpreted as the topic of a proposition if in a given discourse the
proposition is construed as being about the referent, i.e. as expressing information
which is relevant to and which increases the addressee’s knowledge of this referent.
Following Reinhart (1982), we may say that the relation ‘topic-of’ expresses the
pragmatic relation of aboutness which holds between a referent and a proposition
with respect to a particular discourse. The term ‘pragmatic relation’ should be
understood as meaning ‘relation construed within particular discourse contexts’.
Topic is a pragmatically construed sentence relation. (Lambrecht 1994:127)
The focus of a sentence on the other hand is conceived of as a relation between the
pragmatic presupposition and assertion of a sentence:
PRAGMATIC PRESUPPOSITION:
The set of propositions lexico-grammatically
evoked in a sentence which the speaker assumes the hearer already knows or is ready
to take for granted at the time the sentence is uttered.
PRAGMATIC ASSERTION: The proposition expressed by a sentence which the hearer
is expected to know or take for granted as a result of hearing the sentence uttered.
FOCUS: The semantic component of a pragmatically structured proposition whereby
the assertion differs from the presupposition. (Lambrecht 1994: 213)
Lambrecht (1994) exemplifies these notions with the sentences in (1) and (2). Without
entering into the particulars of this construction and the mapping between intonation and
information structure, we see how these pragmatic categories follow basic intuitions
closely.
(1)
My car broke DOWN.
Presupposition: ‘speaker’s car is a topic for comment x’
Assertion: ‘x = broke down’
Focus: ‘broke down’
(2)
My CAR broke down.
Presupposition: ‘speaker’s x broke down’
Assertion: ‘x = car’
Focus: ‘car’
a.
Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog
b.
177
Presupposition: ∅
Assertion: ‘speaker’s car broke down’
Focus: ‘speaker’s car broke down’
The intonation pattern in (1) correlates strictly with the given information structure. (1)
is appropriate only when the speaker’s car is a topic or possible contrastive topic. On the
other hand, because of the nature of this type of predicate in English, the intonation
indicated in (2) may correlate to one of two different information structures. In (2a) there
is narrow focus on the argument, making this sentence appropriate in answering the
question, ‘What broke down?’. This same intonation pattern may also be used to signal
wide focus as represented in (2b) where no presupposition is evoked. In this case the focus
and assertion are identical.
1.2 Methodology
All natural languages allow for multiple ways of saying the same thing with essentially
the same words. Daneš (1966) of the Prague School, coined the term ALLOSENTENCES (on
analogy with the allophone) to refer to the various surface manfestations of a single logical
proposition. Elements such as word order, sentential stress and passivisation may all
contribute to creating the different allosentences of a single proposition.2
Here we undertake a systematic comparison of allosentences in Tagalog, concentrating
particularly on position and intonation. By examining the interaction between discourse
conditions, intonation and word order, we can better understand the role of topicalisation,
focalisation and scrambling in Tagalog. In comparing allosentences, I employ the
question–answer pair method that has become popular in the literature since Jackendoff
(1972) where it was introduced as a formal diagnostic for focus. Here the focus of a given
sentence is revealed by examining what questions that sentence may answer felicitously.
The informative part of the answer — the part of the answer which corresponds to the
information being sought by the question — is taken to be the focus. Observe the simple
dialogue in (3).
(3)
A:
What did John take to the picnic?
B:
John took potato salad to the picnic.
The underlined portion of B’s response (which would be given prosodic prominence) is
the focus based on the fact that it provides the answer elicited by a preceding question. 3
The unacceptability of (4a) and (4b) within the same context shows that these sentences
cannot contain the same information structure as the answer in (3).
2
3
This was reflected in earlier Generative work where scrambling, passivisation, etc. were seen as rules
that applied to an underlying structure which corresponded more directly to semantic content.
I abstract away from the elliptic nature of natural discourse in order to concentrate on the differences
which exist between formally different but semantically similar full sentences. Thus, although it might
be argued that a more natural answer to A’s question above might simply be ‘potato salad’, we must
remember that this is in part due to the absence of potential ambiguity in such a simple context. Within
actual discourse, full sentences are often employed to relate the focus to particular referents. The
question–answer test represents only a truncated version of discourse and is thus an ‘extreme case’ of
how discourse relations such as topic and focus function within a larger context.
178
(4)
Daniel Kaufman
A: What did John take to the picnic?
a. B: # The picnic is where John took the potato salad.
b.
# John took the potato salad to the picnic.
Employing this and other diagnostics we find that Tagalog does possess well defined,
pragmatically significant positions within the phrase structure. Furthermore, we find that
Tagalog employs syntactic methods commonly where English employs phonological
means.
2 Allosentences in Tagalog
Tagalog, like many Austronesian languages, possesses a predicate-initial word order.
The predicate may be of any category and since Tagalog lacks a copula there is little
syntactic distinction between verbal and non-verbal predicates. The variants we are
concerned with here involve occupying the predicate position with different elements from
the sentence, inversion with the particle ay, and fronting of the oblique phrase. We can see
the basic paradigm of Tagalog allosentences under investigation in (5-9). 4
(5)
Lumangoy
ang bátá sa
AV.COM:swim NOM child OBL
‘The child swam in Bulacan.’
(6)
Bátá ang lumangoy
sa
Bulakan.
child NOM AV.COM:swim OBL Bulacan
‘The one who swam in Bulacan is a child.’
(7)
Ang
bátá ay lumangoy
NOM child ay AV.COM:swim
‘The child, swam in Bulacan.’
(8)
Sa
(9)
Sa
Bulakan.
Bulacan
sa
OBL
Bulakan.
Bulacan
Bulakan ay lumangoy
ang bátà.
OBL Bulacan ay AV.COM:swim NOM child
‘In Bulacan, the child swam.’
Bulakan lumangoy
ang bátà.
OBL Bulacan AV.COM:swim NOM child
‘It was in Bulacan that the child swam.’
Sentences (5)–(9) may all truthfully describe the same situation but all differ in regard
to topic and focus (information structure) and the novelty of the participants (definiteness).
Sentences such as those in (6) have been considered to be clefts by several authors
(Kroeger 1993; Aldridge, 2002) but for our purposes it is sufficient to treat them simply as
nominal predicate sentences without concern for their derivation. Sentences (7) and (8)
4
Abbreviations used: ADJ adjectival; AV actor voice; CAU causative; COM completed aspect; CV
conveyance voice; EXT existential; GEN genitive (ergative) case marker; GER gerund; IMP imperative;
INC incomplete aspect; INF infinitive; IRR irrealis; LNK linker; LV locative voice; NEG negative; NOM
nominative (absolutive) case marker; NONV non-volitional; OBL oblique/locative case marker; P
personal (+human); PV patient voice; Q question marker; REP reported speech; STA stative. Pronouns
are nominative unless glossed otherwise.
Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog
179
exemplify ay inversion of the subject, and an oblique, respectively. Ay inversion involves
preposing an ang phrase or oblique phrase to the preverbal position followed by the
particle ay. Sentence (9) exemplifies a different kind of fronting operation which may only
apply to obliques and adjuncts. It is characterised by the fact that it forms a unitary
prosodic phrase with the rest of the sentence and that clitics follow the fronted element
directly, in contrast to ay inversion (cf. Kroeger 1998a). The difference in clitic placement
is seen in (10) (clitics are underlined).
(10) a.
b.
Sa
Bulakan sila lumangoy.
OBL Bulacan 3.PL AV.COM:swim
‘It was in Bulacan that they swam.’
Sa
Bulakan ay lumangoy
sila.
OBL Bulacan ay AV.COM:swim 3.PL
‘In Bulacan, they swam.’
It will be shown here through the use of the question–answer test and through several
syntactic diagnostics that XP in the construction [XP [ang YP]] occupies a focus position
while DPs and PPs preceding ay in sentences such as (7) and (8) are topics. Similar
conclusions have been reached by Schachter and Otanes (1972), Naylor (1975) and
Kroeger (1993). What will be further developed here is the extent to which these
pragmatic relations appear to follow universal syntactic configurations for foci and topics.
3 Identifying the focus and topic positions in Tagalog
The information structure of the allosentences discussed in the previous section was
already hinted at by the translations. These intuitions can be systematically verified
through the question–answer test. In (11) we see three allosentences expressing the same
proposition in answer to a question which elicits VP focus.
A: Ano ang ginawá
ninyo
sa
what NOM OV.COM:do 2.PL.GEN OBL
‘What did you do in Bulacan?’
(11)
Bulakan?
Bulacan
a. B: Nag-píknik
kami
sa Bulakan.
AV.COM-picnic 1.PL.EX OBL Bulacan
‘We picnicked in Bulacan.’
b.
Sa
Bulakan ay nag-píknik
kami.
Bulacan ay AV.COM-picnic 1.PL.EX
‘In Bulacan, we picnicked.’
OBL
c.
# Sa
Bulakan kami
nag-píknik.
Bulacan 1.PL.EX AV.COM-picnic
‘It was in Bulacan that we picnicked.’
OBL
Several important points may be gleaned from native speaker judgements concerning
(11a–c). Because Bulacan is mentioned in the question it is part of the background and
cannot felicitously be presented as the focus. The unacceptability of (11c) therefore
suggests that the position occupied by the oblique phrase is indeed a focus position. The
180
Daniel Kaufman
acceptability of (11b), on the other hand, suggests that the oblique occupies a topic position
and that topicalisation of a referent in the background is optional, not effecting felicity
judgements. These generalisations are supported by the judgments found in (12) where the
question elicits focus on the oblique phrase.
(12)
A:
Saan kayo nag-píknik?
where 2.PL AV.COM-picnic
‘Where did you picnic?’
a. B: #? Nag-píknik
kami
sa Bulakan.
AV.COM-picnic 1.PL.EX OBL Bulacan
‘We picnicked in Bulacan.’
b.
# Sa
Bulakan ay nag-píknik
kami.
Bulacan ay AV.COM-picnic 1.PL.EX
‘In Bulacan, we picnicked.’
OBL
c.
Sa
Bulakan kami
nag-píknik.
Bulacan 1.PL.EX AV.COM-picnic
‘It was in Bulacan that we picnicked.’
OBL
(12b) shows that, as it was infelicitous to present an element from the background as a
focus, e.g. (11c), it is also infelicitous to present elicited information as a topic. The
elicited focus, sa Bulakan, must appear either in the focus position as in (12c) or more
marginally in postverbal position with the verb as predicate. The fact that (12a) is not fully
accepted by all speakers as an appropriate response is noteworthy. This suggests that the
verb must be interpreted as part of the focus in this position. That is, (12a) can serve to
answer the questions, ‘What did you do in Bulakan?’, ‘What did you do?’ or ‘What
happened?’ but cannot answer a question where the verb is part of the background. If this
turns out to be the dominant interpretation then we may conclude that the first position of
the clause proper is a focus position regardless of the lexical category which fills it.
3.1 Focus sensitive operators
Typically, the class of words considered to be focus sensitive includes the adverbs
‘only’, ‘also’, ‘even’, and negation (Rooth, 1996; König, 1991). This class of words is
predicted to only take scope over the focus of a sentence. We can therefore predict that
focus sensitive elements will be ungrammatical if syntactically forced to associate with a
topic as presupposed information should not be available for modification. These
predictions are borne out by the scope and grammaticality of negation as shown in (13).
(13) a.
Hindí sa
Bulakan kami
nag-píknik.
Bulacan 1.PL.EX AV.COM-picnic
‘It wasn’t in Bulacan where we had a picnic.’
NEG
b.
OBL
Hindí kami
nag-píknik
sa
Bulakan.
AV.COM-picnic OBL Bulacan
‘We didn’t picnic in Bulacan.’
NEG
1.PL.EX
Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog
c.
181
*Hindí sa
Bulakan ay nag-píknik
kami.
NEG
OBL Bulacan ay AV.COM-picnic 1.PL.EX
(cf. * ‘Not in Bulacan, we picnicked.’)
In (13a) we find the oblique focus construction with the clause-initial negator hindí. 5
The only reading available in (13a) is the one in which negation takes narrow scope over
the oblique phrase and the proposition ‘we picnicked’ is presupposed. This contrasts with
(13b), where negation may take scope over the entire sentence. 6
If we try to negate the phrase fronted with the particle ay the result is ungrammatical as
seen in (13c). The ungrammaticality of (13c) further supports the analysis of this type of
fronting as a topicalisation. A pure phrase-structural approach to these facts could simply
state that this results from a universal clausal architecture where the order TopP > NegP >
FocP is generated in the left periphery. This, however, is no more than a stipulated
template. The semantic basis for these facts is that negation takes scope from its surface
position. Because negation cannot scope over a topic it must therefore follow it as in (14).
Sa
Bulakan ay hindí kami
nag-píknik.
OBL Bulacan ay NEG
1.PL.EX AV.COM-picnic
‘In Bulacan, we didn’t picnic.’
(14)
The facts are similar for quantificational adverbs which are also considered to be
members of the universal set of focus-sensitive items. The Tagalog quantificational adverb
lang ‘only’, can be seen to follow the same pattern of scope and grammaticality as that of
negation.
(15) a.
Sa
simbahan lang ako nag-bi-bigay ng
pera.
only 1.SG AV-INC-give GEN money
‘It’s only to the church that I give money.’
OBL church
b.
Sa
simbahan ay nag-bi-bigay lang ako ng
pera.
church
ay AV-INC-give only 1.SG GEN money
‘To the church, I only give money.’ (OR: ‘In church, all I do is give money.’)
OBL
c.
*Sa
OBL
simbahan lan ay
church
only ay
nag-bi-bigay ako ng
pera.
AV-INC-give
1.SG GEN money
(15a) shows that lang may associate only with the oblique phrase, and cannot take wider
scope with the meaning, ‘the only thing I do is give money to the church’. Again, this
supports the idea that the oblique in clause-initial position is focused. In (15b) we see that
the focus-sensitive adverb lang may not associate with the PP fronted with ay but rather
must associate with the VP or a constituent thereof. We can obtain a unified explanation
for why the second position clitic lang cannot follow, and negation may not precede, a
preposed topic. Adverbial clitics such as lang modify the prosodic hosts to their left or
5
6
The negator hindí is a host for clitic placement thus the pronominal clitic kami appears preverbally in
(13b)
This has implications for the issue of symmetry between lexical categories since we find no
presupposition, ‘x happened in Bulacan’ in (13b) when the verb is in the predicate position. Based on
(12) and (13) we may conclude that when the verb is in predicate position it must be part of the focus
(for many speakers) but does not render the rest of the sentence presuppositional as does the fronted
oblique phrase. This suggests that the element filling the predicate position must be part of the focus but
that only fronted obliques are in a dedicated focus phrase.
182
Daniel Kaufman
larger constituents which contain that host. We see then that the same scopal basis for the
ungrammaticality of (13c) applies also to (15c). Interestingly, it is only when the verb is in
predicate position that the adverbial clitic may take wide scope over the entire proposition
as in (16).
Nag-bí-bigay lang ako ng
péra
sa
simbáhan.
AV-INC-give
only 1.SG GEN money OBL church
‘I only give money to the church.’ (All that happens is I give money
to church.)
(16)
This again suggests that when the verb is in this position the sentence is not split into a
focus and a presupposition.
3.2 Cooccurence of focus and wh- elements
Wh- questions are also seen to interact differently with topics and foci. Both from the
semantics of wh- questions and their cross-linguistic behaviour, we expect to find a parallel
between wh- elements and foci. In Tagalog we find an exact parallel between the position
of the wh- words, ano ‘what’, alin ‘which’ and síno ‘who’ and the position of the NP in the
cleft-like construction.
Síno ang lumangoy
sa
ílog?
who NOM AV.COM:swim OBL river
‘Who swam in the river?’ (OR: ‘Who was the one who swam in the river?’)
(17)
Similarly we find that the position of the wh- words saan ‘where’, kailan ‘when’ and
paano ‘how’ occupy the same position as the fronted oblique. This set of wh-words also
acts as a host for clitics as was observed with fronted obliques. The two constructions are
compared in (18) and (19).
(18) a.
b.
(19) a.
b.
Saan ka
pumunta?
where 2.SG AV.COM:go
‘Where did you go?’
Sa
Maníla ka
ba pumunta?
OBL Manila 2.SG Q
AV.COM:go
‘Did you go to Manila?’
Kailan ka
nag-túrò?
when 2.SG AV.COM-teach
‘When did you teach?’
Kahápon ka ba nag-túrò?
yesterday 2.SG Q AV.COM-teach
‘Was it yesterday you taught?’
(cf. Nagtúro ka kahápon? – ‘Did you teach yesterday?’)
These fronted elements are in complementary distribution. Thus, an oblique cannot cooccur in the initial focus position with an oblique wh- element.
(20) *
Saan ka kahápon pumunta?
where 2.SG yesterday AV.COM:go
Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog
(21) *
183
Kailan ka
sa
Maníla pumunta?
when 2.SG OBL Manila AV.COM:go
Again, from a purely phrase-structural standpoint, the argument could be made that the
focus phrase happens to be unique within the clause. Although this position is taken by
Rizzi (1997), he also suggests a semantic basis for such a template. The ungrammaticality
of multiple focus phrases may be a result of the bifurcating nature of focus. As we
observed above, the presence of focus renders the rest of the sentence into a
presupposition. Given that these two pragmatic relations are mutually exclusive it is
unclear how this operation may apply recursively and still yield an interpretable output. In
the presence of two focus phrases, what is designated as focal by the first, will be rendered
as presuppositional by the second. 7
This brings us back to the issue of categorial symmetry. If there is no inherent
pragmatic difference between verbal and nominal predicate sentences we expect (22) to be
felicitous.
? Kailan ba babae
ang magiging
presidente?
when Q woman NOM IRR.LV:become president
‘When is it a woman that will become president?’
(22)
We find though that (22) is not fully acceptable. There is a strong tendency to follow
wh- words of the type in (22) with a verb and not a noun. This appears to be one of the
few areas in Tagalog where lexical categories are syntactically relevant.
Stronger judgments are found for the following example. In (23a) a pronoun is in the
predicate position of a cleft-like construction while in (23b) the wh- element is in the
position reserved for focused obliques. (Recall that the pronoun appears in second position
in [23b] because of its clitic status.)
(23) a.
b.
Siya ang
sikat.
3.SG NOM famous
‘S/he is the famous one.’
Saan siya sikat?
here 3.SG famous
‘Where is s/he famous?’
Crucially, we find that these two structures may not co-occur as in (24) and (25).
(24)
7
* Saan siya ang sikat?
where 3.SG NOM famous
(For, ‘Where is s/he the famous one?’)
This particular property is one of those which distinguish syntactic focus from prosodic focus. Crosslinguistically there appears to be no restriction on sentences containing multiple elements which are
prosodically focused. This is the distinction which Rooth (1996) refers to as ‘strong’ versus ‘weak’
focus. ‘Strong focus’ is realised through syntactic means and usually contains an exhaustive listing
effect and the property of turning the non-focal portion of the proposition into a presupposition. The
difference can be seen in comparing a cleft (syntactic focus) as in (i) with prosodic focus as in (ii).
(i) #Either it was John who broke the window or the window isn’t broken.
Presupposition: x broke the window
(ii) Either JOHN broke the window or the window isn’t broken.
No presupposition
184
Daniel Kaufman
*? Saan
babae
ang mas ma-tangkad?
where woman NOM more ADJ-height
(For, ‘Where is it that women are taller?’)
(25)
A comprehensive treatment of the ungrammaticality behind (24) and (25) must await
further research. 8 For our purposes, it is sufficient to note that a parallel exists between the
fronted oblique and the cleft-like construction on the one hand and their wh- counterparts
on the other hand.
3.3 Relative positions of topic and focus
Interrogatives may not occur fronted with ay as in (26) suggesting that foci in general
are banned from occurring before ay.
(26) a.
b.
*Saan ay
where ay
*Ano ay
what ay
pumunta
ka?
AV.COM:go 2.SG
ginawa
mo?
PV.COM:do 2.SG.GEN
Taking fronting with ay to be a topicalisation, the facts in (26) are accounted for by the
pragmatic incompatibility of a focus in a topic position. This is true for English as it is for
Tagalog. (27a) contains a topicalised PP in a declarative sentence while (27b) displays the
ungrammaticality of having a wh- phrase (a focus by definition) in the position of a topic.
(27) a.
To George, they gave a tortoise.
b.
*To whom, they gave a tortoise?
We do find topics co-occurring with foci in sentences such as (28a) in which the topic
precedes a focused oblique. The reverse order, focus>topic, as in (28b) is not allowed in
Tagalog as is also the more general case. 9
(28) a.
b.
8
9
Ang isdá ay sa
túbig na-bú-búhay.
NOM fish ay OBL water STA-INC-live
‘Fish live in the water.’
*Sa túbig ang isdá ay
OBL water NOM fish ay
na-bú-búhay.
STA-INC-live
See Foley (1998) and Kroeger (1998b) for other issues involved in lexical categoriality in Tagalog.
Compare, for instance, Hebrew where topics are often marked by coindexed resumptive pronouns:
(i) [Dagim]Top, ba-maym]Foc hem
ħayyim.
3.PL-M live-PL-M
fish
in-water
‘Fish, they live in the water.’
(ii) *[Ba-maym]Foc [dagim]Top hem
ħayyim
in-water
fish
3.PL-M live-PL-M
Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog
185
3.4 Recursivity
Recursivity is widely accepted to be a property of topics as opposed to ‘strong’ (see
fn.7) focus in several languages. Multiple topics are also allowed in Tagalog, although this
possibility is tempered by the well-known Austronesian constraint on object extraction.
Multiple topic constructions as in (29) and (30) necessarily contain adjuncts and obliques
besides the ang phrase.
(29)
Ngayon ay siya ay
now
ay 3.SG ay
‘Now he is scared.’
(30)
Ngayon ay
now
ay
na-tá-tákot.
STA-INC-fear
itong
dalawang bátá ay
this-LNK two-LNK child ay
palibhásá
because
ay intersado …
ay interested
‘Now, these two children, on account of being interested …’
(Taken from Wolff forthcoming; text 20)
As shown by (31), recursion of focus is ungrammatical, as is cooccurence of a focused
phrase with a wh- element (cf. §3.2).
(31)
* Sa
OBL
Bulakan
Bulacan
kahapon sila
yesterday 3.PL
pumunta.
AV.PRF:go
3.5 Dislocation
Left-dislocation constructions are also widely held to be compatible with topics in
contrast to foci. Left-dislocation is marked by a preposed argument co-indexed with a
resumptive pronoun in base position. Indeed we find that in Tagalog, resumptive pronouns
do not refer back to foci but may be co-indexed with topics. Example (32) shows a
question–answer pair in which the Agent, Dódong, has topic status while (33) is a
minimally differing question–answer pair in which the Agent has focus status. The status
of B’s response containing left-dislocation is regarded as more felicitous in the context of
(32) than it is in the context of (33).
(32)
A: Ano ang ginagawa ni
Dódong ngayon?
what NOM PV.IMP:do P.GEN Dodong now
‘What’s Dodong doing now?’
B: Si
Dódong, nag-ááral
siya sa
UP.
Dodong AV.INC-study 3.SG OBL UP
‘Dodong, he studies at UP.’
P.NOM
(33)
A: Sino ang nag-ááral
sa
who NOM AV.INC-study OBL
‘Who studies at UP?’
UP?
UP
186
Daniel Kaufman
Dódong, nag-ááral
siya sa
P.NOM Dodong
AV.INC-study 3.SG OBL
‘Dodong, he studies at UP.’
B: #Si
UP.
UP
In addition, a preposed focus cannot be coindexed with a resumptive pronoun as in (34).
(34)
*Si
P.NOM
Dódong ang nag-ááral
siya
sa
Dodong NOM AV.INC-study 3.SG OBL UP
UP.
The findings above are summarised in Table 1. Preposed topic refers to the constituent
preposed with the particle ay or with comma intonation while the preposed focus I take to
be the first phrase in the basic clause (following any preposed topics).
The results show clearly that topic and focus have distinct syntactic properties in
Tagalog and furthermore that these properties align well with larger cross-linguistic
patterns. We can now move onwards to goals (ii) and (iii) as outlined in the introduction,
namely describing the role of prosody in focusing, and accounting for some of the free
word order in Tagalog by recourse to the prosodic component.
Table 1: Preposed topic versus preposed focus in Tagalog
PREPOSED TOPIC
SINGLE PROSODIC PHRASE
ASSOCIATION WITH only, NEG
CO-OCCURRENCE WITH WHRECURSIVITY
LEFT-MOST POSITION
LICENSES RESUMPTIVE PRONOUNS
*
*
3
3
3
3
PREPOSED FOCUS
3
3
*
*
*
*
4 The role of prosody in focusing
If Tagalog possesses a syntactic focus position, as has been shown, when would
prosody be necessary to mark pragmatic relations? It will be shown in this section that
prosody functions somewhat as a last resort to mark the focus when the syntax is unable to
do so. The cases where syntax is unable to mark focus are the following:
i. double focus (as used for contrastive purposes);
ii. situations where the ‘strong’ effects of syntactic focus are pragmatically
inappropriate;
iii. focus within non-predicational domains (i.e. NPs, PPs, relative clauses etc.).
4.1 Double focus
Double focus typically occurs in a situation where two separate constituents of a
previous statement are contrasted. As mentioned earlier, one of the characteristic effects of
syntactic focus is to turn the non-focus portion of the sentence into a presupposition. Thus,
we can see that the syntactic position discussed earlier is incompatible with more than one
focus leaving double focus to be realised prosodically rather than syntactically. We see in
Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog
187
(35) that A’s question contains two overt arguments, pérà ‘money’ and gúrò ‘teacher’. In
a response which contrasts one of these arguments, the optimal answer focuses the
contrasted constituent via the syntactic focus position. In the case of an oblique this would
involve fronting as in (35a) whereas in the case of a contrasted NP as in (35b) this would
involve fronting the NP in the cleft-like structure. However, when both the NP and the PP
are contrasted the syntactic position is no longer available for either phrase. Rather, the
focus must be realised prosodically as indicated in (35c). Any attempt to focus one
constituent syntactically while focusing the other prosodically as in (35d) and (35e) results
in ungrammaticality since the portion not included in the syntactic focus will always be
interpreted as a presupposition.
A: Dápat ba-ng mag-bigay ng
pérá
sa mga gúrò?
should Q-LNK AV.INF-give GEN money OBL PL
teacher
’Should one give money to the teachers?’
(35)
a. B: Hindè sa mga bátá ka na lang mag-bigay ng
pérà.
neg
OBL pl
child 2.SG only
AV.INF-give GEN money
‘No, just give money to the KIDS.’
b.
Hindè, regálo na lang ang i-bigay
mo
sa
mga
NEG
gift
only
NOM CV.IMP-give 2.SG.GEN OBL PL
gúrò.
teacher
‘No, just give GIFTS to the teacher.’
c.
d.
Hindè, mag-bigay ka na lang ng
kéndi sa
mga bátà.
NEG
AV.IMP-give 2.SG only
GEN candy OBL PL
child
‘No, just give CANDY to the KIDS.’
* Hindè, sa
NEG
e.
OBL
mga bátá ka na lang mag-bigay ng kéndi.
PL
child 2.SG only
AV.INF-give GEN candy
* Hindè, kendi na lang ang i-bigay
mo
sa
mga bátà.
NEG
candy only
NOM CV.IMP-give 2.SG.GEN OBL PL
child
4.2 Avoiding exhaustivity
The second case where syntactic focus is inadequate is that in which the semantic
effects of ‘strong’ focus are inappropriate within a given context. The effect referred to
here in particular is exhaustive listing, which is universally associated with clefts.
Exhaustive listing is the phenomenon by which, for a sentence such as It’s John who broke
a window, we obtain the reading, ‘there is a unique x such that x broke a window and x is
John’. In other words, ‘John’ is understood to be an exhaustive list of possible entities who
broke a window within the discourse context. In the cleft-like structure, the exhaustive
listing effect can be derived compositionally by virtue of the fact that the headless relative
is within the domain of the definite determiner ang. 10 Thus, the determiner properties of
10
Definite descriptions are understood to trigger uniqueness readings. Cf. Kadmon (2001) for a general
overview of these issues.
188
Daniel Kaufman
ang yield the presupposition, ‘There is a unique x such that x broke a plate’ in (36). The
assertion is, ‘x = Kengkoy’.
Si
Kéngkoy ang naka-básag
ng
pinggan.
P.NOM Kengkoy NOM AV.COM.NONV-break GEN plate
‘Kengkoy was the one who broke the plate (accidentally).’
(36)
Now we can see how the exhaustive listing effect might be inappropriate in a discourse
such as (37).
(37)
A:
May binili
ka
PV.COM:buy 2.SG
‘Did you buy anything?’
EXT
ba?
Q
a. B: ? Radyo ang binili
ko.
radio NOM PV.COM:buy 1.SG.GEN
‘Yes, a radio is what I bought.’
b.
Bumili
ako
ng
radyo.
AV.COM:buy 1.SG GEN radio
‘Yes, I bought a radio.’
The sentence in (37a) can be considered felicitous through the pragmatic process known
as ‘accommodation’ (Lewis 1979). Here a presupposition is accepted (i.e. accommodated)
by an interlocutor as felicitous where in fact no such presupposition existed in the previous
discourse. By virtue of the semantics of definite descriptions, (37a) presupposes that there
was something that B bought although no such presupposition exists in A’s question. As a
result, (37a) is felt to require an extra step on A’s part, and this is manifested by slightly
reduced discourse felicity. In cases such as these, where focus is elicited on a constituent
but where no uniqueness or exhaustivity is appropriate, prosodic focus comes into play as
in (37b). This generalisation is equally true for definite foci as in (38).
(38)
A: Meron ka
ba-ng
na-kilála
sa
New York?
EXT
2.SG Q-LNK PV.COM-know OBL New York
‘Did you meet anyone in New York?’
B: Na-kilála
ko
doon ang pangúlo.
PV.COM-know 1.SG.GEN there NOM president
‘I met the president in New York.’
The third case mentioned above in which preposing is not an option is the case of focus
within non-predicational domains. The difference between predicational and nonpredicational domains is essentially that between a sentence and an NP. In Tagalog, this
difference manifests itself morphosyntactically in the following way: a predication is
distinguished by the presence of two XPs in apposition as in (39) while an NP has its subconstituents connected by the nasal linker as in (40). 11
11
The linker has two allophonic variants: the velar nasal occurs following a word with a final vowel, /n/, or
glottal stop; while /na/ occurs after words ending in anything else.
Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog
(39) a.
b.
(40) a.
189
Ma-súngit
an gúrò.
ADJ-grouchy NOM teacher
‘The teacher is grouchy.’
Gúrò ang ma-súngit.
teacher NOM ADJ-grouchy
‘The grouchy one is a teacher.’
(ang) gúro-ng
ma-súngit
NOM teacher-LNK ADJ-grouchy
‘(the) grouchy teacher’
b.
(ang) masúngit
na
gúrò
nom ADJ-grouchy LNK teacher
‘(the) grouchy teacher’
c.
ang nása Manílà ko-ng
kapatid
NOM LOC Manila 1.SG.GEN-LNK sibling
‘my sibling in Manila’
d.
ang ma-talíno-ng
kapatid ko-ng
nása Manílà.
NOM ADJ-intelligence-LNK sibling
1.SG.GEN-LNK LOC Manila
‘my smart sibling in Manila’
The pragmatically salient clause-initial positions discussed earlier are predictably absent
within the smaller domain of the NP. Despite the fact that NPs permit a very wide range of
word-order permutations, there is no syntactically determined focus position. The topic
position is also absent as shown in (41). 12
(41) a.
b.
12
gúrò-ng
(*ay) ma-súngit
teacher-LNK ay
ADJ-grouchy
ma-súngit
(*ay) na
(*ay) gúrò
ADJ-grouchy
ay LNK ay
teacher
However, topicalisation and focalisation of obliques within a larger nominal domain may be found in
more formal language as in (i) (from traditional poetry) and (ii), respectively.
(i)
Pagbati ang sa
inyo ay akin-g
hatid.
greetings NOM OBL 2.PL ay 1.SG.GEN-LNK escort
‘My delivery to you is greetings.’
(ii) ang
sa
akin lang mag-ma-mahal
NOM OBL 1SG only AV-IRR:love
‘the (one) who will love only ME’
Interestingly, we find that these positions are only licensed by verbs. Focused obliques may not be
fronted with gerunds as shown in (iii), but rather must remain in their postverbal position as in (iv).
(iii) * ang
sa
akin lang pagma-mahal
NOM OBL 1SG only GER:love
(iv) ang
pagma-mahal sa
akin lang
NOM GER:love
OBL 1SG only
‘the love of only ME’
190
Daniel Kaufman
We find then, as in the previous two cases reviewed, that the prosody is the only
available means of indicating focus when focus is elicited on a single constituent within a
larger referring expression.
(42)
A: Sino ba? Iyon-g
ma-bait na babáe?
who Q that-LNK ADJ-nice LNK woman
‘Who was it? That nice woman?’
B: Hindí iyon, iyon-g
babáe-ng
ma-súngit!
NEG
that that-LNK woman-LNK ADJ-grouchy
‘Not that one, the grouchy woman!’
The question which leads us to the next section is, ‘In the absence of pragmatically
salient syntactic positions, what are the determinants of word order in referring
expressions?’. To answer this we must first examine some basic features of Tagalog
prosody.
5 Basic Tagalog prosody and its consequences
Although a truly adequate description of Tagalog prosody has yet to be produced, basic
points have been described by Schachter and Otanes (1972). These, in addition to
preliminary acoustic studies I have undertaken, prove to be sufficient for accounting for
the word-order variation discussed here. Tagalog possesses two prosodic characteristics
relevant here:
i. Focus is marked with a high tone and is linked to a stressed syllable within
the focus.
ii. There is no regular defocalisation strategy in Tagalog such that postfocal or
anaphoric material is phonologically reduced (via intonation, duration or
intensity).
The first characteristic is part of a larger cross-linguistic phenomenon of iconic marking
and is certainly not unique to Tagalog. 13 The second characteristic, however, sets Tagalog
apart from English and is ultimately responsible for the word order variation under
discussion.
It has been shown by recent work in the field of sentence prosody and the phonology–
syntax interface that languages may be gainfully classified into roughly two groups
according to whether or not they possess a process of phonological defocalisation (cf. Ladd
1996; Zubizarreta 1998). 14 Defocalisation refers to a phonological reduction effecting
13
14
Focus spreading — that is, the ability of one pitch movement to signal focus on a larger constituent —
cannot be discussed here for lack of space. This issue must be addressed in a more comprehensive
account of focus in Tagalog.
Main contributors to the development of this grouping include Zubizarretta (1998), who formalises the
prosodic difference between these two language groups as the interactions between a set of rules; Ladd
(1996:175–179), who gives examples of cross-linguistic variation in defocalisation (referred to by him as
deaccenting); as well as Contreras (1976) and Vallduvi (1991) who both offer evidence for prosodysyntax interactions in Spanish and Catalan respectively similar to what I claim here for Tagalog.
Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog
191
background information which follows the focus portion of the sentence. English, and
perhaps Germanic languages in general, allow for defocaliaation as in the exchange in
(43).
(43) A: I had the time of my life in the jungles of Uruguay in the summer of
seventy-eíght.
B: That’s funny, I was stuck in a cóal mine in Uruguay in the summer
of 1978.
The repeated information in B’s response to A, marked by italics, is felicitous in
English so long as it is phonologically reduced. This defocalisation is manifested most
notably by a flattening of the pitch contour and a reduction in the overall duration. In A’s
statement, assuming a pronunciation which consisted of a unitary intonational phrase, the
nuclear stress (marked by the acute accent) would fall on the final accentable unit, ‘eight’.
In B’s response, on the other hand, the italicised portion would be extrametrical and not be
calculated in determining the placement of nuclear stress which would thus fall on the first
vowel of the compound ‘coal mine’. This is a phenomenon which distinguishes languages
like English and German on the one hand from languages such as Spanish (Contreras
1976), European Portuguese (Cruz-Ferreira 1998) and Catalan (Vallduvi 1991) on the
other hand. The first group utilises defocalisation while the latter group does not. Tagalog
patterns very much with the latter group in not employing this strategy. We can see this in
the pitch track below which comes from a recording of a native speaker uttering B’s
response in (44) as a reaction to A’s statement.
(44)
A: Marámi raw ang nag-lúlútó
ng adóbo.
many
REP NOM AV.COM-cook GEN adobo
‘Many people cooked adobo.’
B: Si
Joey rin nag-lúlútó
raw ng
adóbo.
P.NOM Joey also AV.COM-cook REP GEN adobo
‘Joey is also cooking adobo (I heard).’
We do not find a flattening of the intonational contour which typically marks
defocalisation. Instead, we see a secondary pitch movement on adóbo at the end of the
intonational phrase regardless of the fact that it was mentioned in the immediately
preceding context.
192
Daniel Kaufman
si Joey |
rin |
nagluluto |
raw |ng|
adobo|
It is now important that we introduce the notion of ‘default stress’. In the default case,
the most prominent stress in the sentence (i.e. the sentential or nuclear stress) coincides
with the final phrasal stress of the larger intonational domain. This gives the general
impression that the final phrase of a sentence is the most prominent.
If we conceive of these prosodic tendencies as constraints (Truckenbrodt 1995), we can
easily imagine a situation in which a conflict arises in satisfying all of them at once. In the
clearest case, this occurs when a focalised constituent, seeking to be marked intonationally,
is found in a position which does not receive the default sentential stress (i.e. anywhere but
the the final prosodic phrase). In this case, the inability to defocalise would cause a clash
between the principle of giving prominence to the focused constituent and the default
nuclear stress. In these cases, it is the syntax which rescues these sentences by placing the
focalised constituents in the appropriate position in the sentence in order to receive the
nuclear stress (i.e. the sentence-final position). Thus we may explain the following types
of word-order alternations in the responses of (45) and (46).
(45)
A:
Ano ang gusto mo-ng
prutas na ma-ásim?
what NOM like 2.SG.GEN-LNK fruit
LNK ADJ-sour
‘What fruit do you like that is sour?’
B:
Gusto ko
ng ma-ásim na mangga.
want 1.SG.GEN GEN ADJ-sour LNK mango
‘I like sour mango.’
#? Gusto ko
ng
mangga-ng ma-ásim.
want 1.SG.GEN GEN mango-LNK ADJ-sour
Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog
193
A: Alin ang Amerikáno-ng dumating
kanína?
which NOM American-LNK COM.AV:arrive earlier
‘Which American arrived earlier today?’
(46)
a. B: Iyo-ng
Amerikáno-ng ma-tangkad.
that-LNK American-LNK ADJ-height
‘The tall American.’
b.
#? Iyo-ng
ma-tangkad na
Amerikáno.
that-LNK ADJ-height LNK American
Extending this principle of prosodically motivated movement to the clausal level, we
find that the order of phrases is also determined to an extent by the same considerations
effecting NP-internal order. The order of the postverbal arguments in (45) and (46) is a
function of their divergent focus marking. This is reflected concretely by the different
readings obtained as a result of the interactions with the focus-sensitive word rin ‘also’ in
(47) and (48).
(47)
Bukod kay
Ricky,
besides P.OBL Ricky
kay
ipiná-kilala
ko
rin
CV.COM.CAU-know 1.SG.GEN also
Paolo si
John.
John
‘Besides Ricky, I also introduced John to Paolo.’
Focus implication: I also introduced Ricky to Paolo.
P.OBL Paolo P.NOM
(48)
Bukod
besides
kay
Ricky,
P.OBL Ricky
ipiná-kilala
ko
rin
CV.COM.CAU-know 1.SG.GEN also
si
John kay
Paolo.
John P.OBL Paolo
‘Besides Ricky, I also introduced John to Paolo.’
Focus implication: I also introduced John to Ricky.
P.NOM
We are now in a position to explain previously unaccounted for cases of ‘scrambling’.
The canonical phrasal order for Tagalog sentences with non-Actor Voice verbs and full
NPs is widely accepted to be [VERB [GEN-P][NOM-P][OBL-P]]. Nevertheless, it has been
noted that native speakers accept all permutations with little hesitance. Employing the
methodology of eliciting speaker judgments in a pragmatic vacuum, this variation appears
entirely unmotivated. Moreover, since we are dealing not with pragmatically marked
syntactic positions but rather with the results of prosodic interactions with the syntax,
speakers themselves do not sense any inherent focal distinctions between these minimal
pairs. Equipped however with a basic understanding of Tagalog prosody we can approach
this variation in a more informed manner. The ‘non-canonical’ order [VERB [NOM-P]
[GEN-P]] turns out to be the preferred order provided that we can find a context in which
GEN-P must be prosodically focused. Such a context is presented in (49). (Note that the
use of the cleft-like construction to focus the Agent would be infelictous here.)
(49)
A: Kinaúsap
ng báwat propeso ang mga
PV.COM:speak.with GEN each professor NOM PL
194
Daniel Kaufman
estudyánte, dí
ba?
student
NEG Q
‘Each professor spoke with the students, right?’
a. B: Hindì. Hindí kinaúsap
ang mga estudyánte
NEG
NEG
PV.COM:speak.with NOM PL
student
ni
Propesor Martínez.
P.GEN Professor Martínez.
‘No. Professor Martínez didn’t speak with the students.’
b.
#? Hindì. Hindí kinaúsap
ni
Propesor Martínez
NEG
NEG
PV.COM:speak.with P.GEN Professor Martínez.
ang
mga estudyánte.
NOM PL
student
6 Conclusion
It has been shown here that while the left-periphery is often home to pragmatically
salient syntactic positions — indeed this has been claimed to be a universal in verbinitial/predicate-initial languages — the right periphery also plays an important role in
focalisation by virtue of being the natural position of sentential stress. In Tagalog,
utilisation of the right periphery can be best characterised as a last resort for focus marking
to be realised, the grammar realising this marking through the syntax when possible.
I would like to briefly address here the relationship between pragmatic focus and the
Philippine voice/case system which has dominated the limelight of linguistic investigations
into Tagalog and other languages. As stressed earlier, Tagalog case marking has no
implicit pragmatic content. We must note however that the relationship between the voice
morphology and pragmatic focus is not an arbitrary one either.
To recap, when exhaustive listing is appropriate, the voice morphology selects the
thematic role of the focus which appears as the predicate in apposition to a headless
relative clause. This is what has been referred to here as the cleft-like structure as shown
in (50).
(50) a.
b.
Bátá ang lumálangoy.
child NOM AV.IMP:swim
‘It’s a child that is swimming.’
Si
Juan ang lumálangoy.
Juan NOM AV.IMP:swim
‘It’s Juan that is swimming.’
P.NOM
c.
Dágat ang nilálanguyan ni
Juan.
sea
NOM LV.IMP:swim P.GEN Juan
‘It’s in the sea that Juan swims.’
Similarly, when the focus may be expressed as an oblique phrase, the oblique focus
position may be used for the same effect as in (50). Oblique fronting may occur without
regard to Voice marking.
Aspects of pragmatic focus in Tagalog
(51)
195
Sa
dágat siya lumálangoy.
OBL sea
3.SG AV.IMP:swim
‘It’s in the sea that s/he swims.’
When exhaustive listing is not appropriate, an element of any type may be aligned with the
right edge of the intonational phrase in order to receive the nuclear stress. This type of
‘prosodic movement’ also takes place without regard to voice marking. Therefore, we see
that information structure interacts with voice only in one out of the three focusing
strategies available in Tagalog. This is an indirect result of the Austronesian constraint
against object extraction and should not be understood to be directly related to case
marking. In Tagalog and similar Philippine languages, voice/case is determined by the
definiteness of arguments and not information structure.
References
Aldridge, Edith, 2002, Nominalization and wh-movement in Seediq and Tagalog.
Language and Linguistics 3(2):393–426.
Contreras, Heles, 1976, A theory of word order with special reference to Spanish.
Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.
Cruz-Ferreira, Madalena, 1998, Intonation in European Portugese. In Daniel Hirst and
Albert Di Cristo, eds Intonation systems, 167–178. Cambridge University Press.
Daneš, František, 1966, A three-level approach to syntax. In František Daneš et al. eds.
Travaux linguistiques de Prague vol. I, 225–440. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama
Press.
Foley, William, 1998, Symmetrical voice systems and precategoriality in Philippine
languages. Manuscript available on
http://www.sultry.arts.usyd.edu.au/LFG98/austro/download/download.htm
Jackendoff, Ray, 1972, Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge:
MIT Press.
Kadmon, Nirit, 2001, Formal pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
König, Ekkehard, 1991, The meaning of focus particles: a comparative perspective.
London: Routledge.
Kroeger, Paul, 1993, Phrase structure and grammatical relations in Tagalog. Stanford:
CSLI Publications.
—— 1998a, Tagalog clitics and clause structure. In Lourdes Bautista, ed. Pagtanaw:
Essays in honor of Teodoro A. Llamazon, 53–72. Manila: Ateneo de Manila
University Press.
—— 1998b, Nouns and verbs in Tagalog: a reply to Foley. Manuscript available on
http://www.sultry.arts.usyd.edu.au/LFG98/austro/download/download.htm.
Ladd, Robert D., 1996, Intonational phonology. Cambridge University Press.
Lambrecht, Knud, 1994, Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge University
Press.
Lewis, David, 1979, Scorekeeping in a language game. In R. Baurle, U. Egli, A. von
Stechow, eds Semantics from a different point of view, 127–187. Berlin: Heidelberg.
196
Daniel Kaufman
Naylor, Paz Buenaventura, 1975, Topic, focus and emphasis in the Tagalog verbal clause.
Oceanic Linguistics 14:12–79.
Reinhart, Tanya, 1982, Pragmatics and linguistics: an analysis of sentence topic. Indiana
University Linguistics Club.
Rizzi, Luigi, 1997, The fine structure of the left periphery. In Liliane Haegeman, ed.
Elements of grammar: handbook in generative syntax, 281–337. Dortrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Rooth, Mats, 1996, Focus. In Shalom Lappin, ed. Handbook of contemporary semantics,
271–297. Oxford: Blackwell.
Schachter, Paul and Fe T. Otanes, 1972, Tagalog reference grammar. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Truckenbrodt, Hubert, 1995, Phonological phrases: their relation to syntax, focus and
prominence. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Vallduví, Enric, 1991, The role of plasticity in the association of focus and prominence.
Proceedings of the Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL) 7:295–306.
Wolff, John, forthcoming, Tagalog texts. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Zubizarretta, Maria, 1998, Prosody, focus and word order. Cambridge: MIT Press.
9
The richness of Madurese voice
WILLIAM D. DAVIES
Perhaps the most conspicuous feature of western Austronesian languages is the voice
system, the morphosyntactic system for identifying the semantic role of the most
prominent argument in a given clause. 1 This argument has been referred to variously as
subject, topic, and focus of the clause, what Starosta (1986) succinctly characterises as the
‘perpetual centre of the sentence’. This is not an issue that will concern us here; I will
adopt the term ‘subject’ for convenience, a position I consider correct but will not argue
for. The concern here is the richness of this system in Madurese, the fourth most widely
spoken language in Indonesia with obvious similarities to Javanese, Indonesian, Balinese,
Sundanese, and others. It is well known that Philippine languages such as Tagalog,
Cebuano and Ilokano permit a variety of arguments of a clause to be selected as the
subject, with concomitant verbal morphology. Examining the literature, it is less clear that
languages such as Madurese and its closest relatives have this same richness. I argue here
that the voice system of Madurese is every bit as rich as some other western Austronesian
languages; by recognising that certain suffixes not universally considered part of the voice
system crucially participate in encoding voice distinctions, this richness becomes apparent.
While there are some proposals that these suffixes are part of the voice system (e.g. Naylor
1978) and their development has been traced from the Proto Austronesian voice system
(Wolff 1996; Ross 2002), this view has not always been conspicuous in the literature.
Here I propose an analysis that captures the similarities of the Madurese and Philippine
systems, and present novel comparative evidence from connected discourse.
The paper is organised as follows. Section 1 briefly reviews the richness of the voice
systems of Philippine languages and some other western Austronesian languages. Section
2 provides the basics of what is usually recognised as comprising the voice system of
Madurese. Section 3 introduces the ‘extended’ voice system for Madurese. Section 4
1
I would like to thank Wayan Arka and Stan Dubinsky for comments on preliminary drafts of this work.
As much as I might like to place the blame on them or others, I accept responsibility for any errors or
omissions. This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation through grant SBR9809044 to the University of Iowa. The Obermann Center for Advanced Studies provided an excellent
atmosphere to work on this project as well as some of the necessary physical support.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 197–220.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2005.
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics.
197
198
William D. Davies
discusses the use of voice in Madurese discourse, noting parallels with Philippine
languages. Section 5 concludes, briefly describing some additional evidence from
alternative object voice marking.
1 Voice in Philippine and western Austronesian languages
In Tagalog, a wide variety of clausal dependents may be selected as the perceptual
centre of the clause, what Schachter (1976) refers to as the topic of the clause. As
described in Schachter and Otanes 1972, the actor, object, directional, beneficiary, causee,
location, instrument, measure phrase, and others may serve as topic, and in most cases the
verb in the clause takes distinctive morphology. This is partially illustrated in (1), in which
different arguments of the same predicate are most prominent (Schachter 1976:494–495). 2
(1) a.
Mag-salis
ang babae ng bigas sa sako para sa bata.
AT-will.take.out T-woman
G-rice
D-sack
B-child
‘The woman will take some rice out of a/the sack for a/the child.’
b.
Aalisin
ng babae ang bigas sa sako para sa bata.
GT.will.take.out A-woman T-rice
T-sack
B-child
‘A/The woman will take the rice out of a/the sack for a/the child.’
c.
Aalisan
ng babae ng bigas ang sako para sa bata.
DT.will.take.out A-woman G-rice
T-sack
B-child
‘A/The woman will take some rice out of the sack for a/the child.’
d.
Ipag-salis
ng babae ng bigas sa sako ang bata.
BT-will.take.out A-woman G-rice
D-sack T-child
‘A/The woman will take some rice out of a/the sack for the child.’
The examples in (1a–d) show examples of what Schachter refers to as actor-topic (AT),
goal-topic (GT), direction-topic (DT), and beneficiary-topic (BT) verbs, respectively. The
voice marking is distinct in each case.
It is important to note one well-attested property of the Tagalog subject (Schachter’s
‘topic’) 3 which it shares with other Austronesian languages; that is, it must be specific or
definite in some sense. The subject may not be what Soemarmo (1970) characterises as
[-anaphoric, -specific] in the system he develops. Specifically, the subject must be marked
such that ‘the speaker assumes that [the] hearer knows the referent’ (1970:38). (In casual
speech this is not adhered to in many western Austronesian languages.) Note that in all
cases the ang-marked nominal is translated with the definite article in English. This
specificity of reference is something that recurs in Austronesian languages and is shared by
Madurese. There are other properties of subjects that these languages share. In many of
them only subjects can be directly relativised, and in some, though not Tagalog, only the
subject can be the locus of control. So, it is clear that the subject has special priority in
these languages,
2
3
The following abbreviations are used in the morphemic glosses: A actor; AV actor voice; B
CS causative; D direction; DEF definite; DET determiner; G goal; GEN genitive; IRR irrealis; P
PST past tense; RED reduplication; REL relative clause marker; OV object voice; T topic.
Some, including Kroeger (1993), use ‘subject’ to refer this argument in Tagalog.
beneficiary;
preposition;
The richness of Madurese voice
199
Malagasy is one such language. Keenan (1976) identifies four morphologically distinct
voices, which he labels active, goal, circumstantial, and intermediary; these are now
generally referred to in the literature on Malagasy as actor topic (AT), theme topic (TT),
circumstantial topic (CT), and the a- passive, respectively. Examples are given in (2) (from
Paul 2000).
(2) a.
Nanapaka ity hazo ity tamin’ny
antsy i Sahondra.
PST.AT.cut this tree this PST.P.GEN.DET knife Sahondra
‘Sahondra cut this tree with the knife.’
b.
Notapahin’i Sahondra
tamin’ny
antsy ity hazo ity.
PST.TT.cut.GEN.Sahonda PST.P.GEN.DET knife this tree this
‘Sahondra cut this tree with the knife.’
c.
Nanapahan’i Sahondra ity
hazo ity ny antsy.
PST.CT.cut.GEN. Sahonda this tree this det knife
‘Sahondra cut this tree with the knife.’
d.
Nafatratra ny
harona ny vary.
PST.A.stuff
DET basket
DET rice
‘The rice was stuffed into the basket.’
In (2a-d), the actor, theme, instrument, and material theme are subject, respectively. In
each case, it is the subject that must be specific, can be relativised, or can be controlled. 4
Other possible subjects are benefactee, location, time, purpose, manner, and others with
verbs taking the circumstantial morphology (Keenan 1976).
The foregoing show that in Philippine languages and Malagasy the voice systems make
a variety of arguments available to be the perceptual centre of a given clause.
2 Basic voice in Madurese
The literature on Indonesian, Javanese, and the others generally recognises two
morphologically marked voices, in what have been referred to as ‘Indonesian-type’
systems (Wolff 1996; Ross 2002). The first is variously referred to as active, actor focus,
actor voice, and others. The second has been referred to as passive, nonactor focus, object
voice, and others. 5 I will use actor voice (AV) and object voice (OV) in the discussion here.
2.1 Transitive predicates
In Madurese, actor voice occurs on syntactically transitive verbs and some intransitive
verbs when the actor of the clause is the subject. The morphological manifestation of actor
voice is either a nasal consonant or the prefix a-. The choice of the nasal or a- prefix
appears to largely be a lexical idiosyncrasy. As is true of the actor voice prefix in
Javanese, the nasal consonant assimilates to the place of articulation of the initial
consonant of the verb root. Additionally, root-initial obstruents are deleted. Unlike
4
5
See, for example, Paul (2000) for evidence of these properties of the Malagasy subject.
For various characterisations of voice in various Indonesian-type languages, see Arka (1998), Bintoro
(1980), Cumming (1986), Naylor (1978), Sneddon (1996), and Thomas (1980), among many others.
200
William D. Davies
Javanese, in which the deletion occurs only with voiceless obstruents, all three series of
consonants (voiceless, aspirated, and voiced) delete in the presence of the nasal actor voice
prefix. The data in (3) illustrate this assimilation and additionally show that the base form
of the morpheme ng- occurs with vowel-initial roots (as well as the liquids l and r).
(3)
Verb Root
enom ‘drink’
rosak ‘ruin’
baca ‘read’
toles ‘write’
kera ‘think’
bundhu’ ‘wrap’
semprot ‘spray’
Actor Voice
ngenom
ngrosak
maca
noles
ngera
mundhu’
nyemprot
The prefix a- marks actor voice for a variety of syntactically transitive verbs. While
Stevens (1968) reports that a- is used predominantly with roots with initial aspirated and
voiced consonants, there seems to be a great deal of dialectal and individual variation. The
roots in (4) exemplify some of those that generally take the a- form.
(4)
Verb Root
berri’ ‘give’
temmo ‘meet’
gabay ‘make’
jelling ‘look at’
sassa ‘wash’
Actor Voice
aberri’
atemmo
agabay
ajelling
asassa
A number of roots admit either manifestation of actor voice, with some variation among
speakers.
(5)
Verb Root
kerem ‘send’
buketagi ‘prove’
bukka’ ‘open’
Actor Voice
ngerem or akerem
mokteagi or abukteagi 6
mokka’ or abukka’
The choice of ng- versus a- with transitive roots appears to be rather arbitrary for the
most part; however, the eastern dialect shows some preference for a- and the western some
preference for ng-. One class for which there appears to be a preference for the a- form
across dialects is with verbs of saying. Thus one finds abala ‘say’, akoto’ ‘whisper’,
atanya ‘ask’, alapor ‘report’, and others. Notably, however, oca’ ‘speak’ generally takes
the ng- prefix, although aoca’ is attested. 7
6
7
As a general rule, high vowels follow voiced and voiceless obstruents, but not nasals. Thus, there is a
vowel alternation apparent in mokteagi~abukteagi and mokka’~abukka’. However, there is also speaker
variation, and for some the high vowel of the root perseverates in the actor voice form, resulting in
mukteagi and mukka’.
Predicates of this class are clearly semantically transitive but may appear to be syntactically intransitive
since frequently there is no overt complement, as in (i):
(i) Marlena a-koto’
dha’ Siti.
Siti
Marlena AV-whisper to
‘Marlena whispered to Siti.’
The richness of Madurese voice
201
2.2 Object voice and the bare-stem construction
Object voice in Madurese indicates that the actor of a transitive predicate has not been
selected as the subject in the clause. Except for a few cases discussed in §5, object voice is
invariantly marked with the prefix e-.
Examples of the voice alternation for some transitive roots follow.
(6)
(7)
(8)
a.
Ali maca
buku-na Siti.
Ali AV.read book-DEF Siti
‘Ali read Siti’s book.’
b.
Buku-na
Siti e-baca Ali.
book-DEF Siti OV-read Ali
‘Ali read Siti’s book.’
a.
Ba’eng a-temmo Bambang neng pasar?
you
AV-meet Bambang at
market
‘Did you meet Bambang at the market?’
b.
Bambang e-temmo ba’eng neng pasar?
Bambang OV-meet you
at
market
‘Did you meet Bambang at the market?’
a.
Sengko’ mokol
I
AV.hit
‘I hit Alwi.’
Alwi.
Alwi
b.
Alwi e-pokol
Alwi OV-hit
‘I hit Alwi.’
sengko’.
I
Finally, although ignored in most of the literature, many speakers of Madurese also
accept a bare-stem form in which the theme or object is the most prominent argument of
the clause. 8 This is similar to the Indonesian construction that Sneddon (1996) refers to as
‘passive type two’ and Chung (1976b) characterises as ‘object preposing’. In this
construction, the object occurs clause-initially, and the agent in immediate preverbal
position. Below are the bare-stem analogues of the clauses in (6–8).
8
(6)
c.
Buku-na Siti Ali baca.
book-DEF Siti Ali read
‘Ali read Siti’s book.’
(7)
c.
Bambang ba’eng temmo neng pasar?
Bambang you
meet
at
market
‘Did you meet Bambang at the market?’
However, it is indeed possible to include an overt object, in which case the a- prefix is still used:
(ii) Marlena a-koto’
dha’ Siti ja’
Hasan badha e kamar.
Siti COMP Hasan exist at room
Marlena AV-whisper to
‘Marlena whispered to Siti that Hasan was in the room.’
There are some speakers who do not accept this form when specifically asked. However, even a great
many of these speakers use it in conversation.
202
(8)
William D. Davies
c.
Alwi sengko’ pokol.
Alwi I
hit
‘I hit Alwi.’
It has been reported for Indonesian that bare-stem forms can occur with the agent
preceding the verb and the patient following, with the agent retaining its function as the
subject (for example Musgrave 2001, Voskuil 2000). One can also find clauses of the
form actor–bare predicate–object, as in (9).
(9)
a.
Ali baca buku-na Siti.
Ali read book-DEF Siti
‘Ali read Siti’s book.’
b.
Sengko’ pokol Alwi.
I
hit
Alwi
‘I hit Alwi.’
However, the sentences in (9) are not ‘active’, as has been claimed for Indonesian. The
sentences in (9a,b) are simply analogues of (6c) and (8c) respectively, in which the subject
has been postposed. There are two types of evidence for this. First, (9a,b) cannot be
spoken with neutral intonation. There must be rising intonation on the predicate (baca or
pokol) followed by a slight pause before the postposed patient subject (Siti or Alwi).
Second, a similar restriction on indefinites is found in both the bare-stem forms. As is
generally the case, indefinites are disallowed, or at least dispreferred, as subjects in the
standard bare-stem form, as the ungrammaticality of (10a,b) show.
(10) a. * Buku Ali baca.
book Ali read
(Ali read a book.)
b. * Oreng sengko’ pokol.
man
I
hit
(I hit someone.)
The same restriction applies to the patient when it follows the bare stem.
(11) a. * Ali baca buku.
Ali read book
(Ali read a book.)
b. * Sengko’ pokol oreng.
I
hit
man
(I hit someone.)
This is not a restriction shared when actor voice morphology occurs on the predicate, as
(12a, b) show.
(12) a.
Ali maca
buku.
Ali AV.read book
‘Ali read a/the book.’
The richness of Madurese voice
b.
Sengko’ mokol
I
AV.hit
‘I hit someone.’
203
oreng.
man
2.3 Intransitive predicates
As is true of other western Austronesian languages, actor voice morphology occurs with
some intransitive roots as well. Although there are certainly exceptions, for the most part,
actor voice morphology occurs only with ‘active’ roots, predicates which denote some
degree of agentivity or volitionality on the part of the subject. And, for the most part, asignals the actor voice with intransitives. Examples of both a- and ng-marked roots are
given in (13).
(13)
Verb Root
lako ‘work’
berka’ ‘run’
tare ‘dance’
pate ‘die’
abber ‘fly’
Actor Voice
alako
aberka’
atare
mate 9
ngabber
A number of apparently agentive predicates, for example, entar ‘go’, dhateng ‘come’, buru
‘run’, take no voice morphology, as is true of non-agentive predicates such as labu ‘fall’,
badha ‘exist’, and raja ‘be big’. At first blush, this might appear to undermine the
active/non-active distinction which seems to correlate with the presence or absence of actor
voice morphology on intransitives. However, as Arka (1998) points out, in the main, those
motion predicates which lack actor voice morphology are verbs of directed motion, e.g.
‘come’, ‘go’, rather than verbs of manner of motion, e.g. ‘run’, ‘dance’. It has been
suggested that directed motion predicates are unaccusative while manner of motion verbs
are unergative (Hoekstra 1984; Levin & Hovav Rappaport 1995).10 Thus, roughly
speaking, unergative predicates in Madurese take actor voice morphology, while
unaccusative predicates do not, as has been argued for Balinese (Arka 1998) and Javanese
(Davies 1991). 11
9
10
11
The inclusion of mate ‘die/dead’ may be viewed as controversial. Arka (1998) places this in his list of
intransitives taking no overt voice morphology. However, in Madurese, pate is clearly the root, as seen
in the object voice form of the causative ‘kill’, e-pate-e and the nominalised form pate-na maleng rowa
‘that thief’s death’.
The terms ‘unergative’ and ‘unaccusative’ were suggested by Perlmutter and Postal in various works to
distinguish classes of intransitives based on whether the initial structure contained a subject or no
subject, respectively. See Perlmutter and Postal (1984) for suggested universal criteria for membership
in each class.
There are apparent exceptions to this generalisation. Predicates such as totop ‘be closed’, kante ‘tied
up’, and others that seem by all accounts and tests to be unaccusatives can take the a- prefix, as in:
Labang-nga a-totop.
door-def
AV-close
‘The door is closed.’
I have no explanation for this at this time.
204
William D. Davies
There is also a class of stative transitive predicates (at least semantically transitive) that
take no voice morphology. This class includes, but is not limited to, percaja ‘believe’,
yaken ‘be sure’, kasta ‘regret’, tao ‘know’, enga’ ‘remember’, baji’ ‘hate’. For the most
part, verbs of this class that take nominal complements (as opposed to clausal
complements) take prepositional complements, as in (14). 12
(14) a.
b.
Hasan percaja dha’ Siti.
Hasan believe to
Siti
‘Hasan believes Siti.’
Amir enga’
dha’ jawab-ba.
Amir remember to
answer-DEF
‘Amir remembered the answer.’
Given the facts of intransitives and stative transitives, it is reasonable to suggest that
Madurese is what Klimov (1974) has referred to as an ‘active’ language, as distinct from
the classification of nominative versus ergative; that is, the marking system is sensitive (at
least to some degree) to the semantics of the predicate, marking ‘active’ predicates
differently from ‘non-active’ predicates. (Arka 1998 has argued explicitly for this for
Balinese.)
3 ‘Extending’ the voice system
Two suffixes generally omitted from discussion of Madurese voice are -agi and -e.
Like their counterparts in Javanese and Indonesian (-ake/-i and -kan/-i respectively), -agi
and -e are usually considered derivational suffixes. In the main, they seem to play a role
similar to what are referred to as ‘applicative affixes’ in Bantu languages, and in
theoretical work on Austronesian languages this term is often applied to these suffixes, for
example Arka (1998), Musgrave (2001), Ross (2002). And indeed they seem to have the
same function as applicatives. However, I will attempt to argue here that they work in
concert with the generally recognised voice morphology in the same way that voice works
in the Philippine languages.
In some environments, these suffixes appear to extend the valence of a base predicate or
produce a change in the meaning of a lexical item. In (15), each is used to form a
causative of a base intransitive predicate.
(15) a.
b.
Siti nedhung-ngagi ana’-eng.
Siti AV.sleep-AGI child-DEF
‘Siti put her child to bed.’
Ali mate-e
maleng.
Ali AV.die-E thief
‘Ali killed the thief.’
In this way, -agi and -e function on a par with the Madurese causative prefix pa-,
illustrated in (16).
12
Frequently the preposition is omitted in speech, perhaps for reasons of redundancy. This occurs with
similar predicates in Javanese (Davies 1993).
The richness of Madurese voice
(16) a.
Ita ma-senneng Bambang.
Ita AV.CS-happy Bambang
‘Ita makes Bambang happy.’
b.
Siti ma-tedhung ana’-eng.
Siti AV.CS-sleep child-DEF
‘Siti put her child to bed.’
205
However, -agi and -e also occur in other apparent valence-altering constructions,
constructions in which an argument that normally occurs in a prepositional phrase occurs
as a prepositionless noun phrase, what Chung (1976a) referred to as ‘object creating’
constructions for Indonesian. This is the use that is most like the Bantu applicatives. The e suffix is used predominantly when a locative argument occurs as a bare NP, as illustrated
in (17b) and (18b).
(17) a.
b.
(18) a.
b.
Atin entar dha’ Jakarta.
Atin go
to
Jakarta
‘Atin went to Jakarta.’
Atin ng-entar-e Jakarta.
Atin AV-go-E
Jakarta
‘Atin went to Jakarta.’
Siti nyaba’ buku neng meja.
Siti AV.put book at
table
‘Siti put the book on the table.’
Siti nyaba’-i meja buku.
Siti AV.put-E table book
‘Siti put the book on the table.’
In (17b), Jakarta no longer occurs with the preposition dha’, when the -e suffix occurs.
Note also that actor voice morphology obligatorily occurs on the verb; this shows that the
clause in (17b) is syntactically transitive. Similarly, in (18b), the locative, meja ‘table’
occurs without its preposition, and in unmarked word order occurs immediately following
the predicate, the position of the ‘primary’ object. Here (as in (19b)) -e occurs as -i due to
the phonological environment. The suffix can also be used with human directional
locatives, as with verbs of saying. This is illustrated in (19b), where the addressee Siti
occurs as a bare NP.
(19) a.
b.
Ita a-bala dha’ Siti ja’
Hasan badha e kamar.
Ita AV-say to
Siti COMP Hasan exist at room
‘Ita said to Siti that Hasan was in the room.’
Ita a-bala-i Siti ja’
Hasan badha e kamar.
Ita AV-say-E Siti COMP Hasan exist
at room
‘Ita said to Siti that Hasan was in the room.’
The arguments that -agi occurs with are predominantly beneficiaries (20b) and
instruments (21b).
206
William D. Davies
(20) a.
b.
(21) a.
b.
Hasan melle sepato anyar kaangguy na’-kana’. 13
Hasan AV.buy shoe new for
RED-child
‘Hasan bought new shoes for the children.’
Hasan melle-agi
na’-kana’ sepato anyar.
Hasan AV.buy-AGI RED-child shoe
new
‘Hasan bought the children new shoes.’
Siti noles
dha’ tembo’ bi’ po’lot.
Siti AV.write to
wall
with pencil
‘Siti wrote on the wall with a pencil.’
Siti noles-sagi
po’lot dha’ tembo’. 14
Siti AV.write-AGI pencil to
wall
‘Siti wrote with a pencil on the wall.’
In (20b), the beneficiary, na’kana’ ‘children’, occurs without its preposition, kaangguy
‘for’, and in (21b), the instrument, po’lot ‘pencil’, occurs without bi’ ‘with’.
One further environment for -agi is when the argument denoting the subject matter of
discussion 15 for some verbs of report occurs without a preposition, as with bala ‘say’ in
(22b).
(22) a.
b.
Marlena a-bala dha’ Ita parkara Bambang.
Marlena AV-say to
Ita about
Bambang
‘Marlena talked to Ita about Bambang.’
Marlena a-bala-agi Bambang dha’ Ita.
Marlena AV-say-AGI Bambang to
Ita
‘Marlena talked about Bambang to Ita.’
Now, in the (b)-sentences in (17–22), -e and -agi do not actually increase the semantic
valence of the predicate. No new arguments are introduced. Only the syntactic
configuration changes. Various theoretical frameworks handle these types of alternations
in different ways. In some, such as Lexical-Functional Grammar and Head-Driven Phrase
Structure Grammar, the alternations that occur in (17–22) are treated in the lexicon, and it
is assumed that the suffixes are a reflex of the application of lexical rules. On the other
hand, in frameworks such as Government Binding Theory or Relational Grammar, these
types of alternations are handled in the syntax, and the suffixes are a reflex of syntactic
rules. Regardless of the framework one adopts, however, in each case the now
prepositionless object has been foregrounded to an extent. It has taken on a slightly more
significant role in the clause, although surely not the significance of the subject.
13
14
15
The form kaangguy is the involitive form of angguy ‘use’ and is used to mark beneficiaries and some
adverbial and complement clauses. Although different from typical Madurese prepositions, it is
essentially used as an unanalysed form by current speakers.
Noles ‘write’ is one of a handful of verbs that can take both the -agi and -e suffixes. When the -e suffix
is used, the locative argument is selected as the bare NP object, as in .
Siti noles-e
tembo’ bi’ po’lot.
with pencil
Siti AV.write-E wall
‘Siti wrote on the wall with a pencil.’
This is the term used by Schachter and Otanes (1972), which I use here to make the comparison between
Tagalog and Madurese more perspicuous.
The richness of Madurese voice
207
Additionally, it is important to note the semantic roles of the arguments involved:
direction (17), location (18), beneficiary (20), instrument (21), and subject matter of
communication (22). These are precisely the types of arguments that Philippines
languages have distinct voices for. And in Madurese when the predicates appear in object
voice rather than actor voice, these are the arguments that occur as the subject.
(17) c.
Jakarta e-entar-e Atin.
Jakarta OV-go-E Atin
‘Atin went to Jakarta.’
(18) c.
Meja juwa e-saba’-i buku
table that OV-put-E book
‘Siti put the book on the table.’
(19) c.
Siti e-bala-i Ita ja’
Hasan badha e kamar.
Siti OV-say-E Ita COMP Hasan exist at room
‘Ita told Siti that Hasan was in the room.’
(20) c.
Na’-kana’-eng e-belli-agi sepato anyar bi’ Hasan.
RED-child-DEF
OV-buy-AGI shoe
new by Hasan
‘Hasan bought the children new shoes.’
(21) c.
Pot’lod-da e-toles-sagi Siti dha’ tembo’.
pencil-DEF OV-write-AGI Siti to
wall
‘Siti wrote with a pencil on the wall.’
(22) c.
Bambang e-bala-agi Marlena dha’ Ita.
Bambang OV-say-AGI Marlena to
Ita
‘Marlena talked about Bambang to Ita.’
bi’ Siti.
by Siti
The effect of the suffixes -e and -agi together with object voice morphology, then, is to
make available as subject essentially the full range of arguments that can be selected as
subject in western Austronesian languages possessing much richer voice systems. The key
difference between Madurese and Philippine languages is the ‘route’ an argument takes to
subjecthood. Viewed derivationally, an oblique argument in Madurese takes two steps to
becoming a subject: it first becomes a bare NP object and then becomes a subject.
Conversely, all arguments that are candidates for subjecthood in Philippine languages
become subjects in a single move in a derivational system. This difference can be
characterised as the difference between a language in which subject is the only target of
syntactic revaluation, versus a language in which both subject and object are.
However, it is not necessary to take a derivational position, and in fact it obfuscates the
similarity of the two languages. In a non-derivational framework of mapping arguments to
syntactic positions, oblique arguments in Madurese can be mapped directly to subject
position in the same way as in Philippine languages. The difference lies in the morphology
that accompanies the mapping. Taking a framework neutral approach to mapping, one can
envision a system in which the mapping of argument to syntactic position is specified by
linking thematic roles to grammatical functions, so that a representation such as (23a)
would be part of the representation of the clause in (23b). 16
16
The type of analysis pursued here could easily be converted into any of the frameworks that adopt an
explicit and articulated theory of mapping, such as LFG’s Lexical Mapping Theory (Bresnan & Kanerva
208
William D. Davies
(23) a.
b.
put <agent theme location>
|
|
subject object
Siti put the book on the table.
The Madurese version of (24) would be identical.
(24) a.
b.
nyaba’ <agent theme location>
|
|
subject object
Siti nyaba’ buku neng meja.
Siti AV.put book at
table
‘Siti put the book on the table.’
Distinguishing the English and Madurese examples are the morphological rules that
accompany the mapping information. In Madurese, when the agent or actor is mapped to
subject, the predicate takes actor morphology. What actor morphology is appropriate with
the root saba’ ‘put’ (that is, ng- or a-) is an idiosyncratic property of the lexical item.
Clearly, different mapping is possible with the verb ‘put’. In the object voice (or the
passive in English), the theme is linked to subject. Thus, the sentence in (25b) would
include (25a) as part of its representation. 17
(25) a.
esaba’ <agent theme location>
subject
b.
17
Buku-na
e-saba’ Siti neng
book-DEF OV-put Siti at
‘Siti put the book on the table.’
meja.
table
1989) or Gerdt’s Mapping Theory (Gerdts 1993). I have chosen a theory-neutral approach here to
underscore the fact that many frameworks are compatible with the proposed analysis. Arka (1998)
includes a Lexical-Mapping Theory treatment of Balinese and Davies (1995) a Mapping Theory
treatment of Javanese. Each framework is different from the present proposal in including a layer of
structure between the thematic and GF layers. In each theory, the mapping proposed here would take
place between the posited intermediate layer and the layer that feeds the syntactic representation. All
morphological generalisations proposed here could thus be easily translated into either theory.
It is not precisely clear at this point if (25b) should have the mapping representation in (25a) or one in
which the agent is linked to an object function as in (i).
The representation in (i) is that proposed by Arka (1998) for the object voice construction in Balinese.
Arka presents data from quantifier float and resumptive pronouns in left-dislocation as evidence that the
actor in the object voice has the property of a ‘term’ (that is, it behaves like other core arguments that
take no prepositional marking). Unfortunately, Madurese does not appear to have the same restriction on
these properties so that some obliques as well as ‘terms’ are eligible. There is therefore no compelling
reason to represent the actor in object voice as being linked to the object function. Not doing so further
underscores the similarity between Madurese and Tagalog .
The richness of Madurese voice
209
The representation in (25a) would trigger an object voice morphological rule, one that
might specify the manifestation of object voice morphology when a nonactor is linked to
subject. 18
Linking an oblique argument to one of the grammatical functions can be accomplished
in a similar fashion. As shown above, the location can map to the object position, as
represented in (26).
(26) a.
b.
nyaba’i <agent theme location>
|
subject object
Siti nyaba’-i meja buku-na.
S AV.put-E table book-DEF
‘Siti put the book on the table.’
As in (24a), the agent is mapped to the subject, triggering the rule ensuring actor voice
morphology. However, unlike (24a), in (26a) the location is linked to the object position,
not the theme. This mapping will trigger a separate morphological rule, one which ensures
that when a location is mapped to a grammatical function -e (realised as -i here through
regular phonological processes) is suffixed to the verb.
Finally, consider the case in which the location is mapped onto the subject position. 19
(27) a.
esaba’i <agent theme location>
subject
b.
Meja juwa e-saba’-i buku
table that OV-put-E book
‘Siti put the book on the table.’
bi’ Siti.
by Siti
The mapping in (27a) will trigger two morphological rules. The locative rule is triggered
since the location is mapped to a grammatical function. The object voice rule is triggered
since a nonactor argument is linked to the subject function. The application of these two
morphological rules results in the verb form esaba’i ‘put’.
Predicates with benefactive arguments can be analysed in a similar way. The
difference, of course will lie in the morphological manifestation of mapping the
beneficiary to a grammatical function. Rather than triggering the locative rule, a rule
ensuring the affixation of -agi is triggered. The analysis of the various forms with the verb
belli ‘buy’ is presented in (28).
18
19
Of course, there would have to be an alternative allowing for the bare-stem form as well.
It is worth noting that unlike Balinese and apparently some dialects of Javanese (Wayan Arka pers.
comm.), Madurese does not have symmetrical object doubling. That is, when the locative argument of a
verb like saba’ ‘put’ occurs as a bare NP, the theme argument cannot be the subject of the object voice
construction. Thus, the sentence below, in which this is attempted, is ungrammatical.
*Buku juwa e-saba’-i meja juwa bi’ Siti.
book that OV-put-E table that by Siti
(The book was put on the table by Siti.)
210
William D. Davies
(28) a.
melle <agent theme beneficiary>
|
|
subject object
Hasan melle sepato anyar kaangguy
Hasan AV.buy shoe
new for
‘Hasan bought new shoes for the children.’
b.
ebelli
na’-kana’.
RED-child
<agent theme beneficiary>
subject
Sepato anyar juwa e-belli Hasan kaangguy
shoe
new that
OV-buy Hasan for
‘Hasan bought those new shoes for the children.’
c.
melleagi
na’-kana’.
RED-child
<agent theme beneficiary>
|
subject object
Hasan melle-agi
na’-kana’ sepato anyar.
Hasan AV.buy-AGI RED-child shoe new
‘Hasan bought the children new shoes.’
d.
ebelliagi
<agent
theme beneficiary>
subject
Na’-kana’-eng e-belli-agi sepato anyar bi’ Hasan.
RED-child-DEF
OV-buy-AGI shoe
new by Hasan
‘Hasan bought the children new shoes.’
Inasmuch as the beneficiary is mapped to a grammatical function in (28c, d), -agi must be
affixed for the predicate to be well-formed.
A brief consideration of argument mapping in Tagalog highlights the similarities
between voice marking in Tagalog and the morphology found in Madurese. First off, the
analysis for the actor topic clause in (1a) is given in (29).
(29) a.
b.
magsalis
<agent theme location beneficiary>
|
subject
Mag-salis
ang babae ng bigas sa sako para sa bata.
AT-will.take.out T-woman
G-rice
D-sack B-child
‘The woman will take some rice out of a/the sack for a/the child.’
As a language that makes no apparent use of the grammatical function object, only a
subject function is included in the argument-function mapping in (29a). Just as in the case
of Madurese, in Tagalog mapping the agent to the subject triggers an actor topic rule, and
the actor topic morphology appropriate for the verb salis ‘take out’ occurs in (29b). The
goal topic clause can be given the same analysis as the object voice in Madurese.
The richness of Madurese voice
(30) a.
211
aalisin <agent theme location beneficiary>
subject
b.
Aalisin
ng babae ang bigas sa sako para sa bata.
GT.will.take.out A-woman T-rice
D-sack
B-child
‘A/The woman will take the rice out of a/the sack for a/the child.’
Just as in the object voice structure in Madurese, the theme is linked to the subject. In
Tagalog this configuration will trigger goal topic morphology on the verb. Naturally, the
direction topic and the benefactive topic structure can be given similar analyses:
(31) a.
aalisan <agent theme location beneficiary>
subject
b.
(32) a.
Aalisan
ng babae ng bigas ang sako para sa bata.
DT.will.take.out A-woman G-rice
T-sack
B-child
‘A/The woman will take some rice out of the sack for a/the child.’
ipagsalis <agent
theme location beneficiary>
subject
b.
Ipag-salis
ng babae ng bigas sa sako ang bata.
BT-will.take.out A-woman G-rice
D-sack T-child
‘A/The woman will take some rice out of a/the sack for the child.’
The linking of the location to the subject triggers the direction topic rule in (31), and the
linking of beneficiary to subject triggers the benefactive topic rule (32), which basically
states that if a beneficiary is mapped to subject the appropriate benefactive topic
morphology must occur on the predicate.
Under the foregoing analysis, the similarity between the voice morphology in Tagalog
and the morphology in Madurese is unmistakable: when the beneficiary in Tagalog is
linked to the subject function the morphological rule that affixes ipag- to salis is triggered,
and when the beneficiary in Madurese is linked to the subject function the morphological
rules that affix e- and -agi to belli are triggered. Thus, the function of e-…-agi here in
Madurese is the same as the function of the benefactive topic voice marking in Tagalog.
Viewed in this way, both e- and -agi are voice markers in the language.
The analysis of these forms in Indonesian (where there has been the most extensive
discussion) is somewhat mixed. However, Naylor (1978) explicitly draws the same
parallel being made here, identifying -i as locative focus and -kan as instrument focus and
positing a null suffix for goal focus. For his part, Verhaar, in various works but
particularly in Verhaar (1984), treats the -i and -kan suffixes in Indonesian as being part of
a single system. He refers to -i as the ‘locative role marker’ and describes -kan as
belonging to five ‘semantic species’, ‘benefactive’, ‘instrumental’, ‘dative-accusative’,
‘accusative-causative’, and ‘noncausative’. Importantly, he takes men…i and men…kan to
be circumfixes ‘deriving men- verbs’ (1984:6). He thus considers the actor voice marking
and the suffixes -i and -kan part of a single system, although he does not use the
terminology voice to describe this. However, Verhaar does not (to my knowledge) treat
212
William D. Davies
the object voice marker di- together with these suffixes as circumfixes. In neither case
does positing a circumfix seem appropriate for Madurese. As outlined above, the actor
voice, object voice, locative ‘voice’, and benefactive/instrumental ‘voice’ are all
morphological manifestations of different argument/grammatical function mappings which
work in complementary ways to signal the various voice possibilities in Madurese.
Whether ‘voice’ is precisely the appropriate notion for this strikes me as a terminological
issue. What is more important here is the recognition that the prefixes and the suffixes (in
some of their instantiations) should comprise a system the end of which is the same as the
voice system in languages such as Tagalog and Malagasy.
4 Some determinants of voice
While it is relatively uncontroversial that the selection of actor voice and object voice is
related to identifying the ‘perpetual centre of the sentence’, what is less clear is what
determines which argument a speaker wishes to identify as such. Although the focus of
this paper is not to provide a definitive detailed answer to this question, I would like to
explore what some of the contributing factors are and suggest that the case for the
‘extended voice’ proposal in §3 gains a bit of support from this. The observations in this
section result from the examination of four examples of extended oral narratives, two
representing the genre of folktales and two historical narratives. 20
4.1 Discourse and syntactic factors
Perhaps unsurprisingly, both discourse and syntactic factors appear to contribute to
voice selection. Before examining these factors, it is necessary to delimit the corpus under
consideration. The relevant data for analysis are those clauses containing syntactically
transitive predicates, the domain where voice marking makes an interesting difference.
Clauses with intransitive verbs (e.g. ajalan ‘walk’, ngoca’ ‘say’), transitive verbs that take
no voice marking (e.g. andhi’ ‘have’, tao ‘know’) and non-verbal predicates (i.e.
prepositional and nominal predicates) are not relevant to determining voice selection
factors, and so they are excluded from consideration. In the texts examined here, 35%–
45% of predicates are transitive verbs with voice morphology. In these texts, 45%–53%
are marked for actor voice and 47%–55% for object voice (including the bare stem variety,
which is rare). So the distribution is fairly equal, though object voice is slightly more
common.
4.1.1 Discourse factors
Three types of discourse factors can be identified as playing a role in the determination
of voice: foregrounding vs backgrounding, topic continuity, and impersonal structure.
20
The narratives were transcribed from voice recordings collected from speakers in Bangkalan and Iowa
City (born and raised in Bangkalan).
The richness of Madurese voice
213
Hopper (1979) presents evidence that in Malay discourse 21 foregrounded information
(‘the language of the actual story line’) occurs in object voice (‘passive’) and background
information (‘the language of supportive material which does not itself narrate the main
events’) occurs in actor voice (‘active’). Examination of the specific Madurese texts
considered here indicates a similar pattern, although this is by no means set in stone. 22 For
example, in the introduction to the story Bang Mera so Bang Pote ‘Onion and Garlic’,
background information occurs in the actor voice:
(33)
Reng lake’ gelle’
ng-rabad-i Bang Pote.
person male previous AV-care-E Garlic
‘The man took care of Garlic.’
(34)
Melana jiya bapa’-eng Bang Pote nyare
bine se
teppa’.
because this father-DEF Garlic
AV.seek wife REL right
‘Because of this, Garlic’s father was looking for a good wife.’
Action that moves the story forward often occurs in object voice, as in the following
examples.
(35)
Samper gelle’
cloth
previous
e-tabang
OV-search
bi’ Bang Pote.
with Garlic
A-longoe-a, aba’eng lo’ bisa a-longoe.
AV-swim-IRR she
not can AV-swim
‘Garlic searched for the cloth. She wanted to swim, but she couldn’t swim.’
(36)
Daddi e-toro’
bunte’ neng
so
OV-follow behind at
‘So, she followed along the bank.’
penggir-ra.
edge-DEF
The examples in (35, 36) also illustrate another aspect of discourse that can exert
influence on voice selection — topic continuity. The subject of (35), samper gelle’ ‘the
cloth’, is also the subject in (36). Thus, (36) takes object voice not only because it is
foregrounded material but also because it continues the topic of the discourse. This can
also be seen in (37, 38), where an element introduced as an object in one sentence is taken
up as the topic in the following clause.
(37)
Oreng lake’ gelle’
andhi’ saba tape lo’ pate raja, ne’-kenne’
person male previous have field but not really big RED.small
‘The man had a field. But it was not really big. It was quite small.’
(38)
Jiya se
e-garap gabay ng-engon-e ana’-eng bi’ aba’eng.
this REL OV-work make AV-raise-E child-DEF with him
‘He worked the field to feed his child and himself.’
Example (38) contains background information, so we might expect actor voice on garap
‘work’ instead of the object voice that occurs. However, the sentence takes up the object
21
22
Hopper based his observations on what seems to be relatively formal historical discourse.
Hopper (1979) also proposes that the generalisation is applicable to Tagalog, though according to Bell
(1988), the foreground/background distinction fails to provide an explanation of voice selection in
Cebuano.
214
William D. Davies
of the previous sentence as its topic, and the subject selection carries with it the
requirement of object voice.
A third discourse factor is the use of object voice when the narrator wishes to
de-emphasise the agent or omit it altogether as in a story-telling mode or in historical
narrative, similar to the function of passive in English narration.
(39)
E-tanam-e padhi saba-na.
OV-plant-E
rice
field-DEF
‘The field was planted with rice.’
(40)
E-careta-agi gitek gelle’
terros
noju dha’ Madu Oro.
OV-story-AGI
raft previous continue north to
Madu Oro
‘It was told that the raft then continued north to Madu Oro.’
In both of these sentences, the agent is omitted. In (39), the agent is unimportant to the
action. The focus is on the field sabana and the agent can be inferred from the context and
hence is omitted. The sentence in (40) contains a story-telling device. The agent is
nonspecific, and authenticity of the report is supported through reference to historical
precedent.
4.1.2 Syntactic factors
Syntactic factors also play a role in determining voice selection, at times overriding
discourse factors and at times forcing voice selection to coincide with voice selection
determined by discourse factors.
As previously established, only subjects may be relativised or clefted. Thus, the voice
of the verb of the relativised or clefted clause must be consistent with this constraint. This
accounts for object voice selected in background sentences (41) and actor voice selected in
foreground sentences (42).
(41)
Bakto jiya keya barang dagang-an-na se
time this also thing trade-NOM-DEF REL
e-tangge’ dhari
OV-bring from
Palembang e-juwal dha’ Sumenep.
Palembang OV-sell to
Sumenep
‘Also at this time, merchandise brought from Palembang was sold to
Sumenep.’
(42)
Aba’eng e-gigir-in bi’ ma’ butha se ngakan-an oreng.
she
OV-mad-E with father giant REL AV.eat-IT
person
‘Father giant, who ate people, got mad at her.’
Although the sentence in (41) provides background information in the story, tangge’
‘bring’ occurs in the object voice since it is the patient of this verb that is the head of the
relative clause. (The matrix verb juwal ‘sell’ occurs in the object voice since the agent is
unknown, hence non-specific.) In (42), the matrix verb gigir ‘mad’ is in the expected
object voice since this is a sentence that moves the storyline along. However, since the
head of the relative clause ma’ butha ‘father giant’ is the agent, kakan ‘eat’ occurs in the
actor voice.
The richness of Madurese voice
215
Obligatory control structures also influence voice selection. There is a marked
preference in Madurese for the controllee in a control construction not only to be the
subject of the embedded clause, but also the agent. 23 Therefore, the majority of embedded
transitive verbs in control structures occur in the actor voice, again regardless of whether
the clause is part of backgrounded (43) or foregrounded (44) information.
(43)
Aba’eng terro lo’ a-berri’-a
she
want not AV-give-IRR
‘She didn’t tell Garlic about this.’
tao
dha’ Bang Pote.
know to
Garlic
(44)
Bangsa Cara e-soro
raja nga-bine-e Raga Padmi.
Bangsa Cara OV-order king AV-wife-E Raga Padmi
‘The king ordered Bangsa Cara to marry Raga Padmi.’
In (43), the complement of the predicate terro ‘want’ is lo’ aberri’a tao dha’ Bang Pote
‘not tell Garlic’, and the embedded predicate berri’ ‘give’ occurs in the actor voice. Here
both the controller aba’eng ‘she’ and the controlled position are actors. In (44), the
controller is the patient subject Bangsa Cara and the controlled position, the subject of
ngabinee ‘marry (a woman)’ is an agent actor, despite the fact that the sentence serves to
move the story line along.
Adverbial clauses also appear to exert influence over the voice of the verb. For the
most part, when the subject of the adverbial clause is coreferent with a matrix clause
argument, the predicate occurs in actor voice.
(45)
Mare ng-rengkes-se, duli kalowar e-sambi klambi-na se kotor.
finish AV-tidy-E
soon go.out OV-bring cloth-DEF REL dirty
‘After cleaning the room, she quickly went out and brought his dirty clothes.’
In (45), the controlled subject of the adverbial clause mare ngrengkesse ‘after cleaning up’
is coreferent with the understood agent of the matrix clause. However, in the majority of
the cases where there is no coreferent argument in the adverbial clause, the verb is marked
for object voice, as is bukka’ open’ in the adverbial clause sedang ebukka’ labangnga bi’
bapa’-eng Bang Pote ‘when Garlic’s father opened the door’ in (46).
(46)
Sedang
when
e-bukka’ labang-nga bi’ bapa’-eng Bang Pote,
OV-open door-DEF
with father-DEF Garlic
ebu’-eng
bi’ Bang Mera temmo-na la
mate.
mother-DEF with Onion
meet-DEF already AV.die
‘When Garlic’s father opened the door, the mother and Onion were
already dead.’
4.2 -agi and -e in discourse
The occurrence of the suffixes -agi and -e is somewhat rare in the texts; however, where
they occur is instructive of the role they play in voice marking. Recall that according to
23
While it is grammatically acceptable for non-subject agents to be controlled, it is rare to find this
construction in daily conversation.
216
William D. Davies
the analysis proposed here, these morphemes have two functions: to derive causatives or to
‘inflect’ verbs for voice, as distinguished in (47) and (48) respectively.
(47)
Aba’eng mate-e
Bangsa Cara.
he
AV.die-E Bangsa Cara
‘He killed Bangsa Cara.’
(48)
Aba’eng ngerem-e ana’-eng Marlena pesse.
He
AV.send-E child-DEF Marlena money
‘He sent Marlena’s child money.’
Before proceeding, it is important to clarify the sense in which these suffixes have noncausative uses. Wayan Arka (pers. comm.) points out that there are Balinese predicates
such as atur ‘offer’ which can occur only with the suffix -ang or -in (the Balinese
counterparts of -agi and -e, respectively). Thus, in actor voice, Balinese allows only (49)
or (50). A form ngatur does not exist as a well-formed transitive predicate.
(49)
Cang ngatur-ang pipis-e
sig Ida Peranda-ne.
I
AV.offer-ANG money-DEF to
ART priest-DEF
‘I offered the money to the priest.’
(50)
Cang ngatur-in
Ida Peranda
I
AV.offer-IN ART priest
‘I offered money to the priest.’
pipis.
money
What is crucial in these examples is the fact that one of the morphological suffixes is
obligatory, in the same way that actor voice morphology is obligatory. This supports the
notion that these suffixes are a part of the voice morphology in Balinese. Interestingly, the
predicate ‘give’ in Javanese exhibits the same behavior. While there are forms ngekekake
(or the dialectal variants ngekekna and ngekekne) and ngekeke, there is no form *ngeke(k).
While I am aware of no examples like this from Madurese, the Balinese and Javanese facts
offer some limited support to the notion that -agi and -e function as part of the voice
morphology of the language. It is such a non-causative use that is of importance here.
Note that all verbs taking these suffixes also take either actor or object voice
morphology. In the sample, 40% of all verbs taking -agi or -e (in both causative and
noncausative functions) occur with actor voice morphology and 60% occur with object
voice morphology. This distribution is comparable to the overall distribution of AV and OV
morphology on transitive verbs. However, when the causatives are eliminated, only 20%
of these verbs take AV morphology. The overwhelming majority, 80%, occur with OV
morphology.
This fact is important because it suggests that -agi and -e play an important role in voice
marking. First, it should be noted that the causative uses of -agi and -e are largely
represented by two verbs that recur frequently due to the subject matter of the stories,
mate-e ‘kill’ and ngedhingngagi ‘listen to’. Second, the fact that the majority of these
verbs occur with OV morphology seems to indicate that the primary role of these
morphemes in non-causative use is to make it possible to select as subject an oblique
argument, whether in support of a discourse function or for purely syntactic reasons. Some
examples include making the subject matter of discussion subject, as with e-tanya-agi ‘ask
about’ and e-careta-agi ‘tell about’. In (51), the subject matter dha’iya ‘like this’ is the
subject of the clause, required by topic continuity from the preceding sentence.
The richness of Madurese voice
(51)
217
E-tanya-agi dha’iya, kancil mekker.
OV-ask-AGI like.this deer
AV.think
‘When asked this, the deer thought.’
Others make the addressee the subject, as with e-bala-i ‘say to’ and e-tanya-e ‘ask to’. In
(52), the addressee is the subject. Here the addressee is understood.
(52)
So ma’ butha e-tanya-e.
by giant
AV-ask-E
‘She was asked by the giant.’
Yet other examples illustrate making the location subject, as with e-entar-e ‘go into’ and etanam-e ‘plant in’. In (53), discourse reasons dictate the object voice and the structure
with a location subject.
(53)
Daddi
so ebu’-eng
Bang Mera e-entar-e Bang Pote.
become by mother-DEF Onion
OV-go-E
Garlic
‘So, Onion’s mother went to Garlic.’
A final point of comparison with Philippine languages is suggestive. Bell (1988)
provides some statistics regarding voice selection in Cebuano texts. It turns out that the
statistics from the four Madurese texts considered here are remarkably similar. Bell’s
statistics reveal the following distribution of voice (using Bell’s terminology):
(54)
Cebuano voice distribution
Agent-topic
50.7%
Object-topic
31.6%
Reference-topic
12.4%
Instrument-topic
5.0%
Total goal-topic
49.3%
It should be noted that Goal-topic is a cover term employed by Bell to refer to all voice
morphology other than Agent-topic morphology. The following table provides comparable
statistics for the Madurese texts, with the OV figure reduced by the number -agi and -e plus
OV combinations and the -agi and -e figures excluding causative and AV usage.
(55)
Madurese voice distribution
Actor voice
48.0%
Object voice
38.3%
-e
9.7%
-agi
4.0%
Total object voice
52.0%
The ‘object voice’ number (38.3%) should be compared with Bell’s ‘object-topic’ (31.6%)
and the ‘total object voice’ number (52%) with Bell’s ‘total goal-topic’ (49.3%). While
these are casual statistics and should be approached cautiously, all the totals are
remarkably similar across the two languages. This similarity certainly lends some
credence to the hypothesis that the designated morphology is serving a similar function in
the two languages.
218
William D. Davies
5 A final bit of evidence and a conclusion
Alternative object voice morphology available with a subset of predicates provides a
further bit of evidence for the proposal that -agi and -e contribute to the voice system in
Madurese. With certain predicates object voice is marked with the prefix eka- rather than
e-. These are all predicates that take prepositional objects rather than simple noun phrase
objects. Included in this group are verbs such as tao ‘know’, percaja ‘believe’, peggel
‘angry’, loppa ‘forget’, and a host of others. Examples are in (56).
(56) a.
b.
Hasan eka-peggel-le bi’ Siti.
Hasan OV-angry-E with Siti
‘Siti is angry with Hasan.’
Jawap-a
eka-loppa-e bi’ sengko’.
answer-DEF OV-forget-E with me
‘I forgot the answer.’
Interestingly, there is some variation among speakers and within speakers regarding the
use of the eka- prefix and the voice suffixes. Therefore, one finds the alternations in (57–
59).
(57) a.
b.
(58) a.
b.
Hasan e-bala-agi bi’ Siti dha’ Marlena.
Hasan OV-say-AGI with Siti to
Marlena
‘Siti talked about Hasan to Marlena.’
Hasan eka-bala bi’ Siti dha’ Marlena.
Hasan OV-say with Siti to
Marlena
‘Siti talked about Hasan to Marlena.’
Bambang e-kasta-e
Ita ja’
aba’eng mangkat.
Bambang OV-regret-E Ita COMP he
leave
‘Ita regretted about Bambang that he left.’
Bambang eka-kasta Ita ja’
aba’eng mangkat.
Bambang OV-regret Ita COMP he
leave
‘Ita regretted about Bambang that he left.’
(59) a.
Tarentan-na
e-bellis-i Hasan.
old.sibling-DEF OV-hate-E Hasan
‘Hasan hates his older brother.’
b.
Tarentan-na
eka-bellis Hasan.
old.sibling-DEF OV-hate Hasan
‘Hasan hates his older brother.’
In the (a) sentences we find the standard object voice morpheme e- along with the suffix agi (57) or -e (58, 59). In the (b) sentences, however, we find only the object voice
morpheme eka- and neither -agi nor -e. In these sentences the morpheme eka- appears to
be doing all the work of marking the voice; that is, eka- indicates that the subject of the
sentence is an oblique argument. This is much like the richer voice system of the
Philippine languages, and provides some additional suggestive evidence that despite the
surface appearance and traditional analyses the voice system of Madurese is every bit as
rich as some of its western Austronesian relatives.
The richness of Madurese voice
219
References
Arka, I Wayan, 1998, From morphosyntax to pragmatics in Balinese: a Lexical-Functional
Grammar approach. PhD dissertation, University of Sydney.
Bell, Sarah J., 1988, Voice and foreground/background in Cebuano. In Richard McGinn,
ed. Studies in Austronesian linguistics, 427–440. Athens, OH: Ohio University.
Bintoro, 1980, Javanese transitive verbs: a tagmemic analysis. NUSA Linguistic Studies in
Indonesia and Languages in Indonesia 8.
Bresnan, Joan W. and Jonni Kanerva, 1989, Locative inversion in Chichewa: a case study
of factorisation in grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 20:1–50.
Chung, Sandra A., 1976a, An object-creating rule in Bahasa Indonesia. Linguistic Inquiry
7:41-87.
—— 1976b, On the subject of two passives in Indonesian. In Li, ed. 1976:57–98.
Cumming, Susana, 1986, Word order change in Malay. In Geraghty et al., eds 1986:97–
111.
Davies, William D., 1991, Against an ergative analysis of eastern Javanese. ESCOL ’90,
79–89.
—— 1993, Javanese subjects and topics and psych verbs. Linguistics 31:239–277.
—— 1995, Javanese adversatives, passives, and Mapping Theory. Journal of Linguistics
31:15–51.
Geraghty, Paul, Lois Carrington and S.A. Wurm, eds, 1986, FOCAL I: Papers from the
Fourth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics. Canberra: Pacific
Linguistics.
Gerdts, Donna B., 1993, Mapping Halkomelem grammatical relations. Linguistics
31:591–621.
Hoekstra, Teun, 1984, Transitivity. Dordrecht: Foris.
Hopper, Paul J., 1979, Aspect and forgrounding in discourse. In Talmy Givon, ed
Discourse and syntax, 213–241. New York: Academic Press.
Keenan, Edward L., 1976, Remarkable subjects in Malagasy. In Li, ed. 1976:247–301.
Klimov, Georgij A., 1974, On the character of languages of active typology. Linguistics
131:11–25.
Kroeger, Paul R., 1993, Phrase structure and grammatical relations in Tagalog. Stanford:
CSLI Publications.
Levin, Beth, and Malka Rappaport Hovav, 1995, Unaccusativity at the syntax-lexical
semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Li, Charles N., ed., 1976, Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press.
Musgrave, Simon, 2001, Non-subject arguments in Indonesian. PhD dissertation,
University of Melbourne.
Naylor, Paz Buenaventura, 1978, Toward focus in Austronesian. In S.A. Wurm and Lois
Carrington, eds Second International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics:
proceedings, 395–442. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Paul, Ileana, 2000, Malagasy clause structure. Unpublished McGill University PhD
dissertation.
220
William D. Davies
Perlmutter, David M. and Paul M. Postal, 1984, The 1-Advancement Exclusiveness Law.
In David M. Perlmutter and Carol Rosen, eds, Studies in Relational Grammar 2,
81–125. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ross, Malcolm, 2002, The history and transitivity of western Austronesian voice and
voice-marking. In Fay Wouk and Malcolm Ross, eds The history and typology of
western Austronesian voice systems, 17-62. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Schachter, Paul, 1976, The subject in Philippine languages: topic, actor, actor-topic, or
none of the above. In Li, ed. 1976:491–518.
Schachter, Paul and Fe Otanes, 1972, A Tagalog reference grammar. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
Sneddon, James, 1996, Indonesian: a comprehensive grammar. London: Routledge.
Starosta, Stan, 1986, Focus as recentralisation. In Geraghty et al, eds 1986:73–95.
Soemarmo, Marmo, 1970, Subject-predicate, focus-presupposition, and topic-comment in
Bahasa Indonesia and Javanese. Unpublished UCLA PhD dissertation.
Stevens, Alan, 1968, Madurese phonology and morphology. American Oriental Society.
Thomas, Michael R., 1980, Verb affixes and focus in Bahasa Indonesia. In Paz B. Naylor,
ed. Austronesian studies, 63–70. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Verhaar, John M.W., 1984, Affixation in contemporary Indonesian. In Bambang Kaswanti
Purwo, ed. Towards a description of contemporary Indonesian: preliminary studies,
Part I, 1–26. Jakarta: NUSA.
Voskuil, Jan, 2000, Indonesian voice and A-bar movement. In Ileana Paul, Vivianne
Phillips and Lisa Travis, eds Formal issues in Austronesian linguistics, 195–213.
Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Wolff, John U., 1996, The development of the passive verb with pronominal prefix
in western Austronesian languages. In Bernd Nothofer, ed. Reconstruction,
classification, description: festschrift in honor of Isidore Dyen, 15-40. Hamburg:
Abera.
10
Topic continuity, voice and
word order in Pendau
PHIL QUICK
1 Introduction ∗
This study of topic continuity in Pendau examines several issues. First, does the inverse
construction behave more like a typical passive or more like a transitive? Second, can the
choice between a ni- verb and a nong- verb be predicted on the basis of discourse-level
information, and, if so, on the basis of what parameters? Third, does Pendau have a true
passive construction? Fourth, is the variation of SV/SVO with VS/VOS a result of topic
continuity or of other criteria?
The main findings in this paper concern the criteria for selecting active voice and
inverse voice transitive constructions in Pendau, and show that both constructions are basic
transitives. After a brief introduction to some of the grammar of Pendau, I present a
quantitative analysis based on Givón’s (1983, 1994) approach to topic continuity. After
this, further quantitative results are presented, identifying the functional equivalent of
passive in Pendau and addressing the problem of word-order variation (SV/SVO versus
VS/VOS).
2 Grammatical background
2.2 Active voice and inverse voice
Transitive verbs can be inflected in either active voice or inverse voice without a change
in transitivity. 1 Examples (1) and (2) contrast the nong- and the ni- transitive verb forms.
The verbs in these sentences can be interpreted as primary transitive verbs (Andrews
∗
1
Pendau is a western Austronesian language group of about 3000–5000 speakers in Central Sulawesi,
Indonesia. Interlinear abbreviations used in this paper are: 1SG first singular person; AB absolute case;
AV active voice; DY dynamic verb class; GE genitive case; IV inverse voice; PN proper noun; PT primary
transitive verb class; RE realis modality; SF augmented stem former; and ST stative verb class.
See Quick (1997, 1999, 2001, 2003) for the background and basis for the pragmatic inverse voice
construction and the analysis on which this paper is based.
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 221–242.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2005.
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics.
221
222
Phil Quick
1985), and they represent active voiceand inverse voice clause constructions respectively.
Transitive clauses which have an agent (A) and a patient (P) argument such as these can be
considered to be prototypical transitive constructions. 2 In the free translation the
capitalised NP indicates the pivot or subject in Pendau. 3 The two differences between the a
and b sentences in (1)–(2) are in the verbal prefix and in the case markers on the postverbal
arguments (see Quick 1997, 2003 for the full discussion of these as active voice and
inverse voice respectively). Compare examples (1)–(2) with Table 1, which shows that
inverse voice results from the realignment of the macro roles. Examples (1a) and (2a)
show the SVO word order for active voice and inverse voice respectively. Examples (1b)
and (2b) contrast the same clauses in their VOS word order variants and demonstrate that
the same meaning can occur in both active voice and inverse voice in either word order.
Table 1: Macro role realignment
(1)
(2)
2
3
Active voice
Subject
actor role
V
Object
undergoer role
Inverse voice
Subject
undergoer role
V
Object
actor role
a.
Siama’u
nonuju
si=ama=’u
N-pong-tuju
PN/AB=father=1SG/GE RE-SF/PT-send
Pivot=A
‘MY FATHER sent my mother.’
b.
Nonuju
siina’u
N-pong-tuju
si=ina=’u
RE-SF/PT-send PN/AB=mother=1SG/GE
non-pivot=P
‘MY FATHER sent my mother.’
a.
Siama’u
nituju
si=ama=’u
ni-tuju
PN/AB=father=1SG/GE IV/RE-send
Pivot=P
‘My mother sent MY FATHER.’
siina’u.
si=ina=’u
PN/AB=mother=1SG/GE
non-pivot=P
siama’u.
si=ama=’u
PN/AB=father=1SG/GE
Pivot=A
niina’u.
ni=ina=’u
PN/GE=mother=1SG/GE
non-pivot=A
Following Dixon (1979, 1994) and Andrews (1985), agent and patient can be represented as prototypical
arguments that have been symbolised as A and O respectively. Others, such as Comrie (1989), have used
the same idea with the partially different labels of A and P respectively. In this paper I will follow
Comrie’s labels A and P to refer to the basic argument positions of transitive clauses.
The identification of subject is based on a methodological procedure which requires identifying the pivot
first in two clauses of the same sentence (for the mechanics of this procedure see Quick 2003). The use
of the term ‘pivot’ in this paper reflects this preliminary procedure when it is used before identifying the
grammatical subject in Pendau. For purposes of understanding this paper the terms ‘pivot’ and
‘grammatical subject’ may be understood to mean the same thing.
Topic continuity, voice and word order in Pendau
b.
Nituju
niina’u
ni-tuju
ni=ina=’u
IV/RE-send PN/GE=mother=1SG/GE
non-pivot=A
‘My mother sent MY FATHER.’
223
siama’u.
si=ama=’u
PN/AB=father=1SG/GE
Pivot=P
The transitive clauses are contrasted with intransitive clauses in examples (3) and (4).
The difference between a and b in each of these examples contrasts SV and VS word order
respectively.
(3)
(4)
a.
SiYusup
neriing.
si=Yusup
N-pe-riing
PN/AB=Joseph RE-SF/DY-bathe
Pivot= SA
‘Joseph bathed.’
b.
Neriing.
siYusup.
N-pe-riing
si=Yusup
RE-SF/DY-bathe PN/AB=Joseph
Pivot= SA
‘Joseph bathed.’
a.
SiYusup
nanabu.
si=Yusup
no-nabu
PN/AB=Joseph ST/RE-fall
Pivot= SP
‘Joseph fell (down).’
b.
Nanabu. siYusup.
no-nabu si=Yusup
ST/RE-fall PN/AB=Joseph
Pivot= SP
‘Joseph fell (down).’
Table 2 compares the word orders for basic transitive clauses and their associated
transitive verb affixes in Pendau. Each verb type has a rigid argument position that is
postverbal, and each verb type has a flex argument position that is in either (a) a preverbal
position or (b) in a postverbal position which must follow the rigid argument position. The
flex positions are marked in Table 2 by circles around the arguments which have more than
one word order position. However, what is relevant is that this pattern suggests that both
the nong- verb clause and the ni- verb clause have one single underlying word order. The
flex position is identified as that of the pivot since preverbally this is the position in which
the pivot occurs in relative clauses, and the rigid position as that of the non-pivot. Word
order variation is a pragmatic discourse function that is discussed in §5.
224
Phil Quick
Table 2: A and P argument positions in Pendau transitive clauses
1.
A
2.
3.
P
4.
nong-V
P
nong-V
P
ni-V
A
ni-V
A
A
P
Turning now to noun phrases, Pendau has two pronoun sets and a noun phrase marking
system as seen in Table 3. Noun phrases are either common nouns or proper nouns. There
are two sets of pronouns and noun phrase markers, which I will refer to as absolute (AB)
and genitive (GE). The distribution of the absolute and genitive NPs in Pendau is different
from the expected traditional usage. Genitive NPs are used in two distinct syntactic
positions (Table 3): (1) genitive noun phrases, and (2) the A argument of inverse voice
Absolute NPs are used in all other core argument positions (i.e. ‘elsewhere’), including
second objects of ditransitive clauses (except instrumental NPs), the objects of
prepositional phrases, and in both argument positions of equative clauses and copula
clauses.
Table 3: The core case system in Pendau (pronouns and noun phrase markers)
SG.
PL.
1
2
3
1 INC
1 EXC
2
3
Proper Nouns
Common Nouns
Absolute
Genitive 4
a’u
oo
io
ito
ami
emu
jimo
=’u (’u-, no’u-)
=mu (mu-)
=nyo
=to
mami
miu
nijimo
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
si=
Ø / (u=)
ni=
nu=
–
nu=
Instrument
Finally, also shown in Table 3 is the instrument case marker nu. Instruments are
marked by nu when they are not the pivotof the clause. Although nu appears on one hand
to be preposition-like, it behaves more like a core argument (second object marker) than an
oblique argument marker. Andrews (1985:128–130) discusses the ambiguous status of
instrument and second objects in general.
4
The genitive pronoun set also includes the fronted pronouns ’u- and mu- for first and second person
respectively, effectively becoming verbal prefixes. The genitive pronoun set is a mixed set, some are
enclitics, and some are free words (distinguishable by phonological criteria).
Topic continuity, voice and word order in Pendau
225
3 Topic (referential) continuity
3.1 Introduction to topic continuity in Pendau
When people talk, they usually talk about particular things or topics. Some referents are
talked about more often than others and for longer stretches at a time. Topic continuity,
then, refers not only to whether or not a particular referent remains central to a discourse
over a long period of time, but also to how a particular referent which is mentioned more
than once is tracked or referred to later on within a discourse. Linguists have often noticed
that more continuous referents are realised linguistically in more different ways than less
topical elements. Sometimes highly topical elements need not even be realised overtly at
all.
Topic continuity manifests itself in a variety of ways in Pendau, as listed in (5). 5 This
ranks the manifestations of continuity from those associated with the most continuous
referents to the least continuous (from top to bottom respectively). This ranking fits well
with Givón’s (1990:917) observations that ‘referents that are already active require
minimal coding.’
(5)
zero anaphora
agreement in abilitative verbs
conjugational portmanteaux pronouns (defective paradigm in inverse voice)
clitic pronouns (genitive pronouns, including mixed clitics and free pronouns)
independent pronouns (absolute case pronouns)
full noun phrase
left-dislocation
3.2 Methodology and background of the four Pendau texts quantified
In order to examine how topic continuity manifests itself in Pendau narrative genres,
four narrative texts have been analysed in some detail. The following sections (§3.3–§3.4)
give the results of the analysis of the texts with a total of 746 clauses following specific
quantitative methodologies proposed by Givón and others (Givón, ed. 1983 and 1994).
These four texts are referred to as Mtext 1–4 (or sometimes simply as M1–M4). Table 4
shows the total number of clauses for each text, the title, the author, and whether the text
was recorded or composed. 6 The texts were coded following a tagging convention that has
been developed for this kind of analysis, and that can be quantified quickly by a computer
program (the Multilinear Discourse Analysis software developed primarily by the author
and reported on in Quick 1996). Each participant in every clause was identified and then
marked according to its realisation (e.g. zero anaphora or a particular noun-phrase type), its
macro-roles/semantic roles and grammatical relations, etc. Other database fields mark
categories such as event/non-event, quotation or speech margin, word-order type, etc.
5
6
Compare this with the typological listing in Payne (1997:345).
‘Composed’ means that a story has been authored by a native Pendau speaker who has had some training
in writing/authoring skills as well as considerable natural talent to perform what I have judged to be
some of the best narrative material in Pendau.
226
Phil Quick
Table 4: Texts analysed and quantified
Text name in English
Style
Author
# of clauses
Mtext 1
(M1)
The story of the seven men in search
of rattan and the two that got lost
(fktale01.txt)
oral
(recorded)
SiDidi
94
Mtext 2
(M2)
The story of the monkey and the turtle
who were friends (turtle.pin)
composed
Josep Piri
221
Mtext 3
(M3)
The story of the flesh-eater who found a
monkey to be his friend (troll.int)
composed
Josep Piri
354
Mtext 4
(M4)
The story of the pelican who swallowed
the grandfather’s grandson (tambao.tst)
composed
Josep Piri
77
3.3 Text profiles according to NP types and participants
This section provides a preliminary look at the raw profile of the four texts before going
on to examine specific measures of topic continuity in each text. Figures 1–4 show raw
numbers of referent realisations in different linguistic guises for each text. The
abbreviations are defined as follows: DEM is a NP coded simply as a demonstrativeN1 a
full noun phrase in the absolute case, N2 a full noun phrase in the genitive case (as agent),
P1 an absolute case pronoun, P2 a genitive case pronoun (as agent), P3 a pronominal affix
(associated with the genitive case pronouns since they function as agent), QN/QF quantifiers
or quantifier floating adverb functioning as a simple NP, RC relative clauses, and ZR, marks
zero anaphora. 7 The different graph bars indicate different participants or characters in a
story for a particular NP type.
Consistent among these texts are high total scores for the absolute noun phrases (N1),
the absolute pronoun case (P1) and zero anaphora. From this raw data one can already note
that the high scores for N1 and P1, and those for N1 and ZR, are roughly equivalent. This is
significantly different from what the literature generally says about argument realisation.
This will be discussed further in the light of topic continuity in later sections.
7
In the later quantification methods it was found to be adequate to collapse the lower frequency NPs
annotated here as QN/QF, RC, DEM into the appropriate N1 or N2 (usually the former). In my counting of
RCs I am quantifying only the head noun as a token that is modified by a RC.
Topic continuity, voice and word order in Pendau
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
DEM
N1
N2
P1
P2
P3
QN/QF
RC
ZR
Figure 1: Participants 1–37 NP profile of Mtext 1
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
DEM
N1
N2
P1
P2
P3
QN/QF
RC
Figure 2: Participants 1–39 NP profile of Mtext 2
ZR
227
228
Phil Quick
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
DEM
N1
N2
P1
P2
P3
QN/QF
RC
ZR
Figure 3: Participants 1–30 NP profile of Mtext 3
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
DEM
N1
N2
P1
P2
P3
QN/QF
RC
Figure 4: Participants 1–11 NP profile of Mtext 4
ZR
Topic continuity, voice and word order in Pendau
229
3.4 Selection criteria and transitivity evidence from discourse-based quantification
Two major questions are addressed in this section. First, does the inverse construction
behave like a typical passive? 8 Secondly, can the choice between a ni- verb and a nongverb be predicted on the basis of discourse-level information, and, if so, on the basis of
what parameters? These two problems will initially be explored following Givón’s topic
continuity methodology in §3.4.1 (Givón 1994; see Quick 1997, 2001, 2003 for previous
work on this topic in Pendau). The first question is answered by using Givón’s basic
methodology. The second question is partially answered by applying Givón’s
methodology, but it is more fully answered in §3.4.2 by applying Dryer’s (1994)
supplementary method. Dryer’s method is a modification of Givón’s.
3.4.1 Applying Givón’s method
Topic continuity analysis measures the frequency of occurrence of nominal arguments
that are tracked in core argument positions. 9 Givón states:
These methods are based on the assumption that more topical, (thematically
important) referents tend to be both more anaphorically accessible (‘continuous’) and
more cataphorically persistent (‘recurrent’). Neither measure assesses topicality
directly. Rather, they measure the referential continuity properties of referents, in two
— opposite — textual directions. It is assumed then that the two measures should
correlate with the two respective cognitive dimensions of topicality. (Givón 1994:10)
The quantification is carried out by examining each core argument of each transitive
clause in a text and counting ‘back’ to find a match (thus measuring referential distance)
and counting ‘forward’ to find a match (measuring topic persistence
In this study, measurement of referential distance (RD) is made according to the
conventions developed by Givón (1994). Once a core argument has been identified
(whether it is expressed overtly or not), the analyst then looks backwards in the text until a
previous reference to the same entity is found. One of two different values for RD is then
ascribed: (1) distance of 1–3 (the most recent reference was made in any of the three
immediately preceding clauses); (2) distance >3 (no reference was made in any of the three
preceding clauses. 10
8
9
10
This has been addressed many times in the literature on the Philippine languages. Shibatani (1988:96)
gives a representative opinion (where his use of ‘goal-topic’ is equivalent to ‘inverse’ in Pendau):
In conclusion then, it is clear that while the patient nominals in the goal-topic
construction and the passive in English and other languages are similar in regards to
subject/topic role, these two constructions show far more significant differences. Past
analyses that view the Philippine non-actor topic construction passive miss important
overall characteristics of this construction that are not shared by the prototypical
passives: namely, (i) it is not an agent defocusing mechanism in that it syntactically
encodes both agent and patient, just as in active transitive clauses in other languages,
and (ii) its functional load of coding a transitive event is as great as that of the actortopic construction.
All core arguments required as actor or undergoer (coded here as A and P respectively) in a clause are
counted whether they appear overtly or covertly.
Providing a detailed rationale for these particular measurements is beyond the scope of this paper.
Givón (1994) provides extensive discussion of why these particular measures (and those used for topic
230
Phil Quick
In this paper the designation ni- is used as shorthand to refer to all inverse voice
constructions, and the designation nong- is used as shorthand to refer to all active voice
constructions.
Tables 5a–d show the raw values for the referential distance for the four texts (Mtext
1–4) analysed. A look at these four tables shows that each text patterns in generally the
same way.
Starting with the first column for Tables 5a–d, in 66%–74% of instances the P argument
of the ni- (inverse) construction has a RD of 1–3, indicating high topicality. In only
25%–33% of cases does the P argument of the ni- construction display low topicality, i.e.
RD > 3. The A argument of the ni- construction has a RD of 1–3 in 89–96% of cases and is
thus even higher in topicality than the P argument in the same construction. In just 3%–
17% of cases does the A argument in this construction have a RD > 3, i.e. low topicality.
Continuing to the third column, the P argument of the nong- (active) construction, the
the number of high-topicality (RD 1–3) cases ranges from 27% to 57%, whilst it occurs
42%–72% with a RD > 3, i.e. low topicality. The statistics for the P argument of the nongconstruction thus vary widely between these four texts, and it must be concluded that its
topicality varies from text to text. However, when we look at the A argument in the nongconstruction we see that the A is highly topical with a RD of 1–3 80–89% of the time and
an RD > 3 in only 10%–20% of cases
In sum, in the ni- (inverse) construction both P and A display high topicality, A even
higher than P. In the nong- (active) construction, A is highly topical, whist P varies in
topicality but is always much lower than A.
Table 5a: Referential Distance values–Mtext 1
ni-
ni-
nong-
nong-
RD
P
A
P
A
1–3
32 (74.42%)
26 (89.66%)
5 (27.78%)
53 (85.48%)
>3
11 (25.58%)
3 (10.34%)
13 (72.22%)
9 (14.52%)
Total
43 (100%)
29 (100%)
18 (100%)
62 (100%)
Table 5b: Referential distance values–Mtext 2
ni-
ni-
nong-
nong-
RD
P
A
P
A
1–3
36 (66.66%)
54 (93.10%)
9 (33.33%)
33 (80.49%)
>3
18 (33.33%)
4 (6.90%)
18 (66.67%)
8 (19.51%)
Total
54 (100%)
58 (100%)
27 (100%)
41 (100%)
persistence) are appropriate. Givón actually uses three measurements, with the first category (RD=1–3)
split into two subcategories (RD=1, and RD=2–3). The less precise measurement is deemed sufficient
for current purposes. Due to programming constraints the referential distance measure is tabulated from
the fourth clause of the text, and the topic persistence measure stops being tabulated at the tenth clause
from the end.
Topic continuity, voice and word order in Pendau
231
Table 5c: Referential distance values–Mtext 3
ni-
ni-
nong-
nong-
RD
P
A
P
A
1–3
70 (70.71%)
65 (82.28%)
24 (53.34%)
79 (89.77%)
>3
29 (29.29%)
14 (17.72%)
21 (46.76%)
9 (10.23%)
Total
99 (100%)
79 (100%)
45 (100%)
88 (100%)
Table 5d: Referential distance values–Mtext 4
ni-
ni-
nong-
nong-
RD
P
A
P
A
1–3
19 (70.37%)
26 (96.30%)
8 (57.14%)
15 (88.24%)
>3
8 (29.63%)
1 (3.70%)
6 (42.86%)
2 (11.76%)
Total
27 (100%)
27 (100%)
14 (100%)
17 (100%)
Figures 5 and 6 compare RDs between the two constructions. Figure 5 shows a scatterplot display for the RD for ni- and nong- verb constructions when the RD is 1–3 for either A
or P in each of the four texts. The relative topicality of A seems to have little or no bearing
on whether on not a ni- or a nong- form of the verb is used. Topicality of P, though, seems
to be a much better predictor of voice. If P has high topicality, the ni- construction is
chosen, but if it doesn’t, the speaker chooses the nong- construction.
If the A in the ni- clause was actually an oblique of a passive, then the A should be
expected to display much lower than in Figure 5. I would also expect it to be lower in
topicality than the A in the nong- verb constructions (see §4). What appears dramatically
here is that the A in the ni- verb is actually higher in topicality than the A in the nong- verb
in three out of four of these texts, although this difference would not appear to be
statistically significant.
Figure 5 illustrates that topicality of P as measured by RD in the ni- verb construction is
much higher than the topicality of P in the nong- verb construction measured by the same
criterion. This is what I would expect from a transitive construction which makes the P the
pivot (or subject).
232
Phil Quick
100
90
M1 niM1 nongM2 niM2 nongM3 ni-
80
70
60
50
40
M3 nongM4 niM4 nong-
30
20
10
0
RD of A 1-3
RD of P 1-3
Figure 5: Percentages of ni- and nong- verb constructions
with RD = 1–3 for P and A (Mtexts 1–4)
100
90
M1 niM1 nong-
80
70
M2 ni-
60
M2 nongM3 ni-
50
40
M3 nong-
30
M4 niM4 nong-
20
10
0
RD of A > 3
RD of P > 3
Figure 6: Percentages of ni- and nong- verb constructions
with RD > 3 for P and A (Mtexts 1–4)
Figure 6 shows that for gaps greater than three clauses (i.e. discontinuous topics as
against uninterrupted topics in Figure 5) non-topical A arguments are seldom encountered
in either voice, but that if the P argument is not topical, then the nong- voice tends to be
used more frequently than ni-. One of the reasons for high topicality of A in both voices is
that A arguments generally occur in ‘runs’, i.e. the same participant is frequently a topical
A for several continuous clauses. On the other hand, P arguments may or may not be
continuous.
Topic continuity, voice and word order in Pendau
233
3.4.2 Applying the Dryer method
A methodology supplementary to Givón’s basic method of quantifying topic continuity
was proposed by Dryer (1994). I have also applied Dryer’s methodology to the Pendau
data since it gives even clearer reasons for voice selection than does Givón’s on its own to
finding an answer to the question whether the choice between a ni- verb and a nong- verb
can be predicted on the basis of discourse level information, and, if so, on the basis of what
parameters.
The Dryer method uses roughly the same counting procedures as outlined above, except
that the topicality measures for A and P are compared so that the results obtained are
measures of relative topicality between A and P rather than absolute topicality of A or P
alone. There are three possible scores for each comparison: 11 .
(a)
A was mentioned in a more recent clause than P.
(b)
A and P were both mentioned most recently in the same clause.
(c)
P was mentioned in a more recent clause than A.
The statistics obtained from the application of the Dryer method can be viewed in two
ways. 12 In what Dryer calls the ‘vertical’ analysis, the relative topicality measures of A
versus P are computed as percentages within each clause type. In Dryer’s ‘horizontal’
analysis, the starting point is relative topicality, and selection of clause type is computed as
a percentage for each relative topicality measure.
Tables 6a–d show the Dryer vertical analysis of referential distance for each text. These
tables also show a similarity in the statistics for all the four texts. These tables underscore
and provide background information in understanding Tables 7a–e which give the Dryer
horizontal analysis values. These statistics show a clustering effect that allows us to make
a provisional statement regarding when a speaker tends to choose a ni- verb construction
over the nong- verb construction. When the RD of A for a given clause is less than P, then
the nong- verb construction is more frequently chosen (this is expanded further below).
Table 6a: Relative referential distance of A and P’s (vertical analysis) Mtext 1
11
12
ni-
nong-
RD of A lower
12 (40.00%)
28 (75.68%)
RD of A and P same
7 (23.33%)
3 (8.11%)
RD of P lower
11 (36.67%)
6 (16.22)
Total
30 (100%)
37 (100%)
Again, as for the application of Givón’s methodology, measures of referential distance alone rather than
for RD and topic persistence will give fairly clear results, so no measures for topic persistence will be
recorded here.
Dryer (1994) presents an additional means of analysing topic continuity data which he calls the ‘vertical
analysis’ and the ‘horizontal analysis’.
234
Phil Quick
Table 6b: Relative referential distance of A and P’s (vertical analysis) Mtext 2
ni-
nong-
RD of A lower
15 (22.39%)
17 (40.48%)
RD of A and P same
25 (37.31%)
5 (11.90%)
RD of P lower
27 (40.30%)
20 (47.62)
Total
67 (100%)
42 (100%)
Table 6c: Relative referential distance of A and P’s (vertical analysis) Mtext 3
ni-
nong-
RD of A lower
30 (26.32%)
51 (50.00%)
RD of A and P same
36 (31.58%)
19 (18.63%)
RD of P lower
48 (42.11%)
32 (31.37%)
Total
114 (100%)
102 (100%)
Table 6d: Relative of distance of A and P’s (vertical analysis) Mtext 4
ni-
nong-
RD of A lower
3 (9.38%)
4 (21.05%)
RD of A and P same
15 (46.88%)
6 (31.58%)
RD of P lower
14 (43.75%)
9 (47.37)
Total
32 (100%)
19 (100%)
Tables 7a–d show the Dryer horizontal analysis for each text and Table 7e gives
combined totals for all of the texts. Table 7e shows quite clearly that when A is more
topical than P, speakers tend to choose a nong- construction, but when P is equal in
topicality, or greater in topicality than A, speakers tend to choose a ni- construction.
Table 7a: Relative referential distance of A and P’s (horizontal analysis) Mtext 1
ni-
nong-
Total
RD of A lower
12 (30.00%)
28 (70.00%)
40 (100%)
RD of A and P same
7 (70.00%)
3 (30.00%)
10 (100%)
RD of P lower
11 (64.71%)
6 (35.29%)
17 (100%)
Topic continuity, voice and word order in Pendau
235
Table 7b: Relative referential distance of A and P’s (horizontal analysis) Mtext 2
ni-
nong-
Total
RD of A lower
15 (46.88%)
17 (53.13%)
32 (100%)
RD of A and P same
25 (83.33%)
5 (16.67%)
30 (100%)
RD of P lower
27 (57.45%)
20 (42.55%)
47 (100%)
Table 7c: Relative Referential Distance of A and P’s (horizontal analysis) Mtext 3
ni-
nong-
Total
RD of A lower
30 (37.04%)
51 (62.96%)
81 (100%)
RD of A and P same
36 (65.45%)
19 (18.63%)
55 (100%)
RD of P lower
48 (60.00%)
32 (40.00%)
80 (100%)
Table 7d: Relative referential distance of A and P’s (horizontal analysis) Mtext 4
ni-
nong-
Total
RD of A lower
3 (42.86%)
4 (57.14%)
7 (100%)
RD of A and P same
15 (71.43%)
6 (28.57%)
21 (100%)
RD of P lower
14 (60.87%)
9 (39.13%)
23 (100%)
Table 7e: Relative referential distance of A and P’s (horizontal analysis)
All texts combined
ni-
nong-
Total
RD of A lower
60 (38%)
100 (62%)
160 (100%)
RD of A and P same
83 (72%)
33 (28%)
116 (100%)
RD of P lower
100 (60%)
67 (40%)
167 (100%)
Figure 7 summarises the statistics from Tables 7a–d in one graph. These data show that
there are clear differences in tendency between the choices of a nong- clause and a niclause. A choice between a nong- and a ni- clause is based more often than not on the
degree of topic continuity. The rule of thumb in choosing between a ni- and a nong- verb
construction can be stated as follows.
• If the P argument is more continuous (RD of P<A) or just as continuous as
the A argument (RD of P=A), than the ni- verb construction will more
often be chosen
•
If the A argument is more continuous than the P argument (RD of A<P)
than the nong- verb construction will more often be chosen
236
Phil Quick
M1 RD A<P
100
M1 RD A=P
M1 RD P<A
90
80
M2 RD A<P
M2 RD A=P
70
60
M2 RD P<A
M3 RD A<P
50
40
M3 RD A=P
M3 RD P<A
30
20
10
0
ni-
nong-
M4 RD A<P
M4 RD A=P
M4 RD P<A
Figure 7: Frequency of ni- and nong- clauses according to whether the A is equal
to P in referential distance (RD A=P), the A is less than P in referential distance
(RD A<P), or the P is less than A in referential distance (RD P<A) in Mtexts 1–4
4 Does Pendau have a ‘passive’?
Givón (1994) sets out a number of criteria for determining which structures in a
language might be labelled as passive, and how to distinguish passives from inverse
constructions. The first criteria are related to topicality and are measured by RD and TP of
A. According to Givón, passives are used when A arguments are not topical by either
measure. We have already seen in §3 that the ni- construction in Pendau fits neither of
these criteria, and is thus not a good candidate for a passive.
Givón (1983:23) also states that
… the text frequency of passives is much much lower than that of actives, somewhere
between 5–20 percent of all main, affirmative, declarative clauses … This by itself
tags the passive as a discontinuous device in discourse, by virtue of its rarity.
In the texts analysed in §3, the ni- construction was actually used over twenty per cent
more often than the nong- construction. Table 7e showed a grand total of 243 ni- clauses
in all texts versus a grand total of 200 nong- clauses. By Givón’s frequency criterion then,
the Pendau ni- construction makes a better inverse than it does a passive.
Givón (1994:12) gives another quantitative diagnostic for distinguishing passive from
inverse voice. This diagnostic is the difference in frequency of omission of A arguments in
each kind of structure.
Tables 8a–e display the total occurrences for the four possible occurrences or nonoccurrences (labelled as overt and covert respectively) for nong- and ni- clause
constructions. In Tables 8a–e it can be seen that the A argument is rarely omitted (or
covert) in the ni- clause construction, and in fact the A argument is more often omitted in a
nong- construction in some of the texts. 13
13
These data also argue against the antipassive interpretation of the nong- construction, as an antipassive
would be expected to omit the P argument rather than the A argument.
Topic continuity, voice and word order in Pendau
237
Table 8a: Frequency of overt/covert A/P arguments in Mtext 1
Mtext 1
AV
IV
1 Both A/P Overt
11
13
2 A Overt, (P Covert)
1
9
3 P Overt, (A Covert)
2
5
4 Both A/P Covert
0
1
Table 8b: Frequency of overt/covert A/P arguments in Mtext 2
Mtext 2
AV
IV
1 Both A/P Overt
25
35
2 A Overt, (P Covert)
11
20
3 P Overt, (A Covert)
3
9
4 Both A/P Covert
0
3
Table 8c: Frequency of overt/covert A/P arguments in Mtext 3
Mtext 3
AV
IV
1 Both A/P Overt
28
69
2 A Overt, (P Covert)
16
31
3 P Overt, (A Covert)
15
3
4 Both A/P Covert
5
0
Table 8d: Frequency of overt/covert A/P arguments in Mtext 4
Mtext4
AV
IV
1 Both A/P Overt
6
15
2 A Overt, (P Covert)
1
17
3 P Overt, (A Covert)
8
0
4 Both A/P Covert
2
1
It is clear then that the Pendau ni- construction is better treated as an inverse than as a
passive by all of the criteria discussed by Givón.
The stative construction is a more likely candidate for passive (since it clearly fits all
Givón’s criteria for a passive outlined above). Tables 9a–d demonstrate that the ‘agent’ or
238
Phil Quick
‘effector’ (E) that brought about the state described in a stative construction 14 is a more
likely oblique candidate that fits the profile for frequency of occurrence of the agent of a
passive voice construction than the A of the inverse construction. The E argument only
occurs 5 times in a main clause while the Su occurs 62 times in all of these texts. Su refers
to the stative verb subject which is an undergoer subject.
Table 9a: RD of clause arguments in Mtext 1
Mtext 1
Su
E
1–3
14
0
>3
0
0
Table 9b: RD of stative clause arguments in Mtext 2
Mtext 2
Su
E
1–3
14
2
>3
4
0
Table 9c: RD of stative clause arguments in Mtext 3
Mtext 3
Su
E
1–3
24
3
>3
4
0
Table 9d: RD of stative clause arguments in Mtext 4
Mtext 4
Su
E
1–3
2
0
>3
0
0
Table 9e shows that the relative frequency of stative clauses compared with clauses of
other types also fits Givón’s criteria for a passive very well. Out of 746 clauses in these
four texts only 62 clauses (or 8.3%) were stative clauses.
14
Stative verbs with an ‘effector’ adjunct may be a ‘middle voice’ which differs from stative constructions
in which no ‘effector’ appears. However the statistics here refer to all main clauses which have a stative
verb in them.
Topic continuity, voice and word order in Pendau
239
Table 9e: Total number of stative clauses in Mtexts 1–4
# of stative clauses
# of total clause types
Mtext1
6 (6.4%)
94
Mtext2
24 (10.9%)
221
Mtext3
30 (8.5%)
354
Mtext4
2 (2.6%)
77
Total Clauses
62 (8.3%)
746
If we were to look for a discourse functional equivalent for a passive in Pendau, a much
better candidate for such a structure would be the stative construction.
5 Word order variation in Pendau
This section presents the findings of statistics on word-order variation and attempts to
find a motivation for selecting between the SV/SVO and VS/VOS word orders which were
discussed in Quick (2003, Ch. 12). The subject can appear either before or after the verb in
both intransitive and transitive clauses. The majority of clauses in narrative texts appear
with the subject preceding the verb. However, there are a significant number of clauses
with verbs from all verb classes in which S follows the verb.
Table 10 displays raw basic word-order scores for Mtext 3 which has a total of 354
clauses. Only clauses that had an overt subject were counted, and the 75 clauses with no
overt subject are not included in this tabulation. (These figures do not include clauses that
had covert objects but overt subjects.) The figures show that both word orders are quite
frequent, but that SV/SVO is more frequent than VS/VSO.
Table 10: Frequency of word order types SV/SVO and VS/VOS
SV/SVO
VS/VOS
178 (64%)
101 (36%)
Total Clause Population
279
Table 11 shows the values for referential distance of the subject (S) in each of the word
orders. These figures show that the subject has about the same degree of topic continuity
in either word order; that is, it has occurred within the previous three clauses 83% of the
time whatever the word order.
Table 11: Comparison of the referential distance of the S between SV/SVO
and VS/VOS word orders: Mtext 3
RD
SV/SVO
VS/VOS
1–3
148 (83%)
84 (83%)
>3
30 (17%)
17 (17%)
178 (100%)
101 (100%)
Total
240
Phil Quick
Since it is often mentioned in the literature on topic continuity that pronouns are more
topical than full NPs, I then specified a further distinction by quantifying the subjects that
occurred as full noun phrases (N1) and those occurring as pronouns (P1). This was done for
both word orders and the results are tabulated in Table 12a for VS/VOS and Table 12b for
SV/SVO.
Table 12a: Comparison of the S as N1 and P1 in VS/VOS word order
RD VS/VOS
N1
P1
1–3
57 (77%)
27 (100%)
>3
17 (23%)
0 (0%)
Total
74 (100%)
27 (100%)
Table 12b: Comparison of the S as N1 and P1 in SV/SVO word order
RD SV/SVO
N1
P1
1–3
72 (72%)
76 (97.5%)
>3
28 (28%)
2 (2.5%)
Total
100 (100%)
78 (100%)
Rau (1997:382) in her discussion of word-order variation in Atayal (Austronesian,
Taiwan) states that:
The results of VARBRUL runs indicate that topicworthiness is the only factor that has
any significant effect on word order variation. Proper nouns strongly favor the SV
order, followed by common nouns, while personal pronouns strongly disfavor the SV
order. Topicworthiness corresponds well with Givón's topic continuity. In other
words, VS order is associated with topic continuity while SV order is associated with
topic discontinuity.
However, in Pendau, both word orders reflect similar statistics. This is contrary to the
assumed expectation that the postverbal subject would reflect greater topic continuity. Not
surprisingly nearly all of the absolute case pronouns (P1) were referential within the last
three clauses. However, what is surprising is that 77% of 74 tokens for the full noun
subjects in VS/VOS orders (N1) had a RD of less than four.
Table 12c shows that full noun phrase subjects occur more commonly than pronominal
subjects in the VS/VOS word order, while in the SV/SVO word order there are roughly equal
numbers of full noun phrase and pronominal subjects.
Table 12c: Comparison of total occurrences of N1 and P1 in SV/SVO
and VS/VOS word orders
SV/SVO
VS/VOS
N1 (etc.)
89 (52%)
74 (73%)
P1
81 (48%)
27 (27%)
Total
170 (100%)
101 (100%)
Topic continuity, voice and word order in Pendau
241
When the grammatical subject is in the postverbal position it is more likely to occur as a
full noun phrase than as pronoun. This distinction demonstrates that the full noun phrase is
favored in about a 3:1 ratio when the subject is in the postverbal position. Since the
referential distance of a subject is approximately the same when comparing preverbal and
postverbal subject clause constructions, it must be (provisionally) concluded that the
difference between the use of VS/VOS and SV/SVO word orders has nothing to do with topic
continuity. This indicates that there must be an independent factor apart from topic
continuity which results in the difference between word orders. Further research is needed
to determine what might cause word-order variations. Obvious possibilities include the
placement of NPs in different positions for the purposes of emphasis, or the positioning of
heavy NPs in places where their use is less awkward.
References
Andrews, Avery, 1985, The major functions of the noun phrase. In Timothy Shopen, ed.
Language typology and syntactic description, 1: Clause structure, 62–154.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Comrie, Bernard, 1989, Language universals and linguistic typology (second edition).
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dixon, R.M.W., 1979, Ergativity. In Language 55:59–138.
—— 1994, Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dryer, Matthew S., 1994, The discourse function of the Kutenai inverse. In Givón, ed.
1994:65–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Givón, Talmy, 1983, Introduction. In Givón, T., ed. Topic continuity in discourse: a
quantitive cross-language study, 1–41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
—— 1990, Syntax: a functional-typological introduction, vol 2. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
—— 1994, The pragmatics of de-transitive voice. In Givón, ed. 1994:3–44.
Givón, Talmy, ed., 1994, Voice and inversion. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Payne, Thomas, 1997, Describing morphosyntax: a guide for field linguists. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Quick, Philip, 1996, Multilinear discourse analysis software demonstration. In H. Andrew
Black, Alan Buseman, David Payne and Gary F. Simons, eds Proceedings of the 1996
general CARLA conference, November 14–15, 1996, 291–309. Waxhaw, NC/Dallas:
JAARS and Summer Institute of Linguistics.
—— 1997, Active and inverse voice selection criteria in Pendau, a Western Austronesian
language. In Cecilia Odé and Wim Stokhof, ed. Proceedings of the Seventh
International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 461–481. Amsterdam:
Editions Rodopi B.V.
—— 1999, Sekilas tata bahasa Pendau. In Bambang Kaswanti Purwo, ed. Panorama
Bahasa Nusantara, 1–44. Jakarta: Referensia.
—— 2001, A sketch of the primary transitive verbs in Pendau. In Fay Wouk and Malcolm
Ross, eds The historical and typological development of western Austronesian voice
systems, 101–122. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
242
Phil Quick
—— 2003, A grammar of the Pendau language. PhD dissertation. The Australian
National University.
Rau, Der-hwa V, 1997, A discourse analysis of Atayal word order variation. In Papers for
the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 381–399. Taipei:
Unpublished Proceedings.
Shibatani, Masayoshi, 1988, Voice in Philippine languages. In Masayoshi Shibatani, ed.
Passive and voice, 85–142. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
11
Semantic analysis of the
Moronene verbal prefix moNSUREE ANDERSEN AND T. DAVID ANDERSEN
1 Introduction
1.1 Moronene clause types
Moronene, a Bungku-Tolaki language of Southeast Sulawesi, has a number of different
clause types which fall into the category of dyadic semantically transitive clauses. 1 These
clauses have an agent which is manifested as transitive actor and an undergoer which is
manifested as object. 2 This paper will focus on the semantic contrast between clauses in
which the undergoer/object is indexed on the verb and those in which it is not.
Before we turn to the matter at hand, it will be helpful to give a brief summary of some
of the basic intransitive and transitive clause types in Moronene. The main factor
distinguishing the types is the case of the person markers which are cliticised to the verb or
auxiliary. These are either nominative (NOM), indexing either the actor of a transitive
1
2
We want to express our gratitude to David Mead, who encouraged us to present this paper at the Ninth
International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, and gave us valuable feedback to improve it. Our
thanks also go to many Moronene speakers who provided the data on which our analysis is based, in
particular to the storytellers Wede, Ndasi, and Narson, who provided many of our texts, to Tipu and
Ndoke for their recorded discussion of rice rituals, for Agus Poli and Sultan Wudhawie for hundreds and
hundreds of sentences for the Moronene lexicon, and to Estelita for natural Moronene conversations.
The data upon which this paper is based was gathered from 1991 to 2001 mainly from the villages of
Taubonto (Rarowatu subdistrict) and Pusu’ea (Poleang Timur subdistrict) in the Buton district of
Southeast Sulawesi. This research was conducted under cooperative agreements between the Summer
Institute of Linguistics and the Indonesian Government, specifically the Department of Education, the
Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) and the Village Community Development Office (PMD). We are
grateful to all these organisations for their facilitation of our work among the Moronene people.
In this paper the following terminology will be used: actor, the surface constituent which refers to the
initiator of the predication in a transitive clause; object, the surface constituent which refers to the
undergoer of a transitive clause; subject, the surface constitutent constituting the sole core argument in
an intransitive clause (when referring to the terminology of others, subject may also refer to the transitive
actor); agent, the underlying initiator of an event; undergoer, the underlying entity affected by an event
(cf. Matti 1994:84, n.10).
I Wayan Arka and Malcolm Ross, eds
The many faces of Austronesian voice systems: some new empirical studies, 243–278.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 2005.
Copyright in this edition is vested with Pacific Linguistics.
243
244
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
clause or the subject of an intransitive clause, absolutive (ABS), indexing the object of a
transitive clause or (like NOM) the subject of an intransitive clauses, or possessive (POS),
indexing the actor of a transitive clause with undergoer focus. It is beyond the scope of this
paper to discuss the features of all these clause types. The important question of the
presence and order of noun phrases corresponding to actor and object is ignored. The list of
clause types is not exhaustive. Each clause type will be given an acronym in parentheses,
and all the subsequent examples will be marked with the acronyms of all the clause types
found in them. When there is more than one clause the acronyms are separated by
semicolons. This may aid those who wish to compare similar clause types found in the
data.
1.1.1 Intransitive clause types
The subject of intransitive clauses may be marked either with an absolutive clitic or a
nominative clitic. Among the factors influencing the choice of case are the presence or
absence of conjunctions and other grammatical functors in the clause. This will not be
discussed here. 3
1. Unmarked verb (V) 4
(1)
3
4
Is
te-tii
ma’e.
start RES-descend uncle
‘First uncle arrived.’ (laku113)
Abbreviations of glosses: ABS absolutive; AF action focus; AF/NF action focus/non-finite; ANTIPASS
antipassive; APPL applicative; ARF actor focus; ART article; BEN benefactive; CAUS causative; CERT
certainty; COMPL complementiser; CMS commiserative; CTR contra-expectation; CTRS contrastive
emphasis; e exclusive; FUT future; h honorific; i inclusive; IMPF imperfective; IMPV imperative; INT
intransitive; LG ligature; LOC locative applicative; NEG negative; NOM nominative; NR nominaliser;
p plural; PASS passive; PI person indicator; PL plural; POS possessive; PRF perfective; PROG
progressive; Q question marker; RED reduplication; REL relativiser; s singular; STV stative; SUP
superlative; TR transitive; UF undergoer focus; V verb; VRt transitive verbaliser; 1, 2, 3 first, second,
third person.
Abbreviations of texts: coco1 (Moweweu epu. [Making coconut oil] Pusuea 1991), col (Colisi. [Pinkie]
By Ndasi. Taubonto 1992), dahu (Tulurano Dahu ronga Koe. [Story of the Dog and the Egret] By Ndasi.
Taubonto 1992), dic (Moronene lexicon. Compiled by T. David Andersen, Agus Poli and Sultan
Wudhawie), diu (Petampu’uno Ica Diu. [The Origin of the Dugong] By Wede. Taubonto 1994), kol
(Kolopua ronga Ndoke. [The Turtle and the Macaque] By Rambe. In Muthalib et al. 1991), laku (Laku
and Manu. [Conversation about civet and chickens] By Sudin, Sese, Maa, and Rondo. Pusuea 1991),
lang (Langko’oheo. By Wede. Taubonto 1994), Maegani (Tinano I Maegani, Miano Cantete.
[Maegani’s Mother, the Person in the Latrine] By Wede. Taubonto), ndoke (Ndoke hela Buea. [The
Macaque and the Crocodile] By Narson. Kendari 1994), perc (Percakapan. [Conversations] By Estelita.
Taubonto), roo (Roo Mpae. [Rice Medicine] By Tipu and Ndoke. Taubonto), sio (Wuu Sio Ropa. [Nine
Fathom Hair] By Wede. Taubonto 1992?), wola (Tulurano Wola ronga Kore. [Story of the Rat and the
Frog] By Ndasi. Taubonto 1992.)
Unmarked here means unmarked by a person marker. There is a wide variety of derivational intransitive
verb prefixes, but those are ignored here.
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
245
2. Verb + ABS (VAb)
(2)
Nta
lako-kami hai peta.
go-1peABS at ricefield
‘We’re going to go to the ricefield’ (perc)
FUT
2a. Auxiliary + ABS + verb (AuAbV)
(3)
Nde’e i Tadi ari-o
tii
di-ceena?
indeed PI Tadi already-3sABS descend this-there
‘Has Tadi already come down here?’ (laku26)
3. NOM + verb (NV) 5
(4)
Ka-i
leu
korua i Arbaa.
then-3sNOM come below PI Arba
‘Then Arba came down.’ (laku120)
3a. NOM + auxiliary + verb (NAuV)
(5)
Ka-u
daa um-owu.
then-2sNOM be
INT-slash
‘Then you slash.’ (roo3)
1.1.2 Passive clause types
Passive clauses involve the use of the undergoer focus prefix ni- (or infix -in-) on the
verb. In other respects they are similar to intransitive clause types 2 and 2A. In rare cases,
the agent may be present as an oblique, as in example (7).
4. ni-verb + ABS (ABS = undergoer) (nVAb)
(6)
T[in]arima-a
moico-si
langa-ku.
[UF]accept-3sABS good-CTR brideprice-1sPOS
‘My brideprice was well accepted.’ (w:46)
4a. Auxiliary + ABS + ni-verb (ABS = undergoer) (AuAbnV)
(7)
Daa-ko
nta ni-rako hai polisi.
be-2sABS FUT UF-catch at police
‘You may be caught by the police.’ (7a)
1.1.3 Transitive clause types
One subtype of transitive clause is characterised by indexing the undergoer/object with
absolutive clitics on the verb stem. There are several types:
5
This includes cases in which the third singular nominative clitic -i is assimilated by the conjunctions ki
‘if’ and hi ‘COMPLEMETISER’ (ki+i = ki; hi + i = hi)
246
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
5. Verb + ABS (ABS = undergoer) (tVAb)
(8)
Lako-mo onto-o
koie lere.
go-IMPV see-3sABS that sedge.grass
‘Go look at that sedge-grass.’ (diu 127)
(9)
Sie-mo
ka’asi po-pate-kami!
don’t-IMPV CMS CAUS-kill-1peABS
‘Please don’t kill us!’
5a. Auxiliary + Verb + ABS (ABS = undergoer) (AuVAb)
(10)
Yo laku ari
kea’-o
manu.
ART civet already bite-3sABS chicken
‘The civet bit the chickens.’ (laku11)
6. Auxiliary + ABS + verb + ABS (1st ABS = agent; 2nd ABS = undergoer) (AuAbVAb)
(11)
Ari-aku-mo
wowa-hira.
finish-1sABS-PRF bring-3pABS
‘I already brought them.’ (laku20)
7. NOM + verb + ABS (NOM = agent; ABS = undergoer) (NVAb)
(12)
Mi-m-pasipole-e
ile.
2pNOM-PL-undertake-3sABS tomorrow
‘You take care of it tomorrow.’ (laku75)
7a. NOM + auxiliary + verb + ABS (NOM = agent; ABS = undergoer) (NAuVAb)
(13)
Taba tina
manu
ku-da’a
nta balu-’o.
only female chicken 1sNOM-NEG FUT sell-3sABS
‘But the hens I won’t sell.’ (laku49)
Another subtype of transitive clause is that with undergoer focus, where the agent is
marked on the verb with a possessive suffix.
8. ni-verb + POS (POS = agent) (nVG)
(14)
Da-hoo pe’ico raro-m-punti
da in-onto-ngku.
be-3sABS yon
group-LG-banana REL UF-look-1sPOS
‘Over there there is a group of banana trees which I can see.’ (sio44)
A third subtype of transitive clause does not have the undergoer indexed on the verb.
A transitive verb without such an absolutive clitic to mark the object occurs with the moNverb prefix. In almost all cases, a moN- prefix and an absolutive clitic referring to an
object cannot co-occur. There are two forms of the prefix, moN- and poN-. The former is
a non-finite form (Mead (1998:173) calls it a participle), whereas the latter is finite. The
moN- prefix will be glossed AF/NF ‘action focus/non-finite’, whereas the alternative poNprefix will be glossed AF ‘action focus’ (implicitly finite). The reasons for this gloss will
become clear by the end of the paper. Etymologically, the poN- form is more basic, and
the moN- form arose from coalescence of the participle marker -um- with the poN- (Mead
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
247
1998:173). But in Moronene the moN- form is more frequent and the -um- infix no longer
exists as a participle marker, so for convenience we will refer to verb forms with either
prefix collectively as moN-V forms. The various clause types with moN-V forms are set
out below.
9. Unmarked moN-Verb (mV)
(15)
Mo-’ita
puhu, mo-’ita
in-isa.
AF/NF-ask corn AF/NF-ask UF-pound
‘He asked for corn, he asked for husked rice.’ (laku153)
9a. Unmarked poN-Verb (pV)
(16)
Po-wawa yo
boru.
AF-carry ART umbrella
‘Take an umbrella.’ (perc)
9b. Auxiliary + moN-Verb (AumV)
(17)
Osie-mo
mo-wada koie karambau-ku.
don’t-IMPV AF/NF-pay that buffalo-1sPOS
‘Don’t pay for that buffalo of mine.’ (Maegani 224)
10. moN-Verb + ABS (ABS = agent) (mVAb)
(18)
Nta
mo-weweu-kita
yo
wala.
FUT AF/NF-make-1piABS ART fence
‘We’re going to make a fence.’ (perc)
10a. Auxiliary + ABS + moN-Verb (ABS = agent) (AuAbmV)
(19)
Da-hira-po
mo-hoho
kawasa-no mokole-do.
be-3pABS-IMPF AF/NF-worship rich-3sPOS king-3pPOS
‘They still worship the glory of their king.’ (dic:hoho)
10b. poN-Verb + ABS (ABS = agent) (pVAb)
(20)
Po-lesa-ko-mo
ta’i
sapi.
AF-step.on-2sABS-PRF faeces cow
‘You have stepped on some cow manure.’ (perc10)
11. NOM + poN-Verb (NOM = agent) (NpV)
(21)
Ka-i
po-ndo’u penda.
then-3sNOM AF-drink again
‘Then he drank again.’ (Maegani 118)
11a. NOM + auxiliary + moN-Verb (NAumV)
(22)
To-daa nta mo-weweu epu.
1pi-be FUT AF/NF-make coconut.oil
‘We’re going to make coconut oil.’ (coco1)
248
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
The N in the prefixes symbolises a nasal ligature which appears before roots starting
with voiceless stops. For example:
mom-pa’u
mom-pepe
mon-tabe
mon-totai
mong-kela
mong-kerusi
‘to pour’
‘to pound’
‘to forbid’
‘to slice up’
‘to tilt’
‘to sweep’
Since the nasal ligature only appears before three consonants, in most cases the prefix
appears as mo- or po-. It is important to distinguish the moN- and poN- prefix from other
homophonous mo- and po- prefixes which can co-occur with the object clitic. These latter
prefixes occur with derived causative verbs and verbs of ability and in a small number of
other verbs where its meaning is unclear, being a frozen form. Examples:
mo-ko-mosele-’o
mo-ko-sangke-’o
mo-turusi-o
mo-dea-ho
mo-wee-ho
‘to cause it to be wet’
‘to be able to harvest it’
‘to let him’
‘to hear it’
‘to give him’
The transitive moN- and poN- prefixes contrast with other prefixes marking intransitive
verbs, such as me-, ma-, um- and ko-. For example:
me-baho ‘bathe oneself’
mo-baho ‘bathe someone’
ma-daga ‘be on guard’
mo-daga ‘guard something’
um-ahi
‘draw water’
mo-’ahii ‘fill’
ko-’onto
‘able to see’
mo-’onto ‘see’
Objects marked by absolutive clitics tend to be important participants in the story or
important props, definite or specific noun phrase objects. For example:
(23)
Ka-i
leu
susu-o
ana-no.
then-3sNOM come milk-3sABS child-3sPOS
‘Then she came and breast-fed her child.’ (diu 37) (NV;tVAb)
(24)
Ka-i
wiso-’o
koie yo
kuli ng-kuliri-no, yo
then-3sNOM enter-3sABS that ART skin LG-lory-3sPOS ART
babu-no
koie yo
tina
sangia.
clothes-3sPOS that ART woman fairy
‘Then he put in that lory skin, the fairy’s clothes.’ (lang26) (NVAb)
In contrast, objects occurring with moN- verb prefix tend to be ordinary props, general
or non-specific noun-phrase objects. For example:
(25)
Da-ho-mo
sisimbu mo-’u’ungke da
nta t[in]ora-ako-mo.
be-3sABS-PRF wander AF/NF-search REL FUT [PAS]live-APPL-PRF
‘He was wandering around looking for something to live off.’ (wola4)
(AuAbV;mV)
Moronene verbal prefix moN(26)
249
Nilako-no-mo
mong-kuli-si
me’asa punti
immediately-3sPOS-PRF AF/NF-skin-LOC one
banana
‘He immediately peeled one banana.’ (kol33) (mV)
Yet there are quite a number of significant examples of other possibilities such as:
A V-ABS form with an object noun phrase which is semantically indefinite:
(27)
Ka-i
te-leu
awa-a
eo
wai.
then-3sNOM INT-come find-3sABS vine rattan
‘Then he arrived and found a rattan vine.’ (lang49) (NV;tVAb)
(28)
Ka-i
awa-a
olumpu-’ute.
then-3sNOM find-3sABS hut-little
‘Then he found a little hut.’ (sio52) 6 (NVAb)
A moN-V form with an object noun phrase which is definite:
(29)
Da-hoo kolopua tangasa mo-aha
pali-no.
be-3sABS turtle
PROG
AF/NF-sharpen axe-3sPOS
‘The turtle was sharpening his axe.’ (kol20) (AuAbmV)
Even later in this text, this ‘axe’ has no possessive clitic, yet it is definite:
(30)
Mo-hapa-a
ka-u
daa mo-’aha
pali?
AF/NF-what-3sABS then-2sNOM be
AF/NF-sharpen axe
‘Why are you sharpening the axe?’ (kol21) (NAumV)
In other examples, the object of a moN-V form is marked as definite by the use of
demonstratives:
(31)
ka-i
po-’oli koie ica mokokondo’u e’e
then-3sNOM AF-buy that fish thirsty
water
‘Then he bought that “thirst fish”.’ (diu9) (NpV)
(32)
Hai hapa ari-a-u
mo-’ala
co’o ana n-tina-’ate
at
what finish-LOC-2sPOS AF/NF-take you child LG-woman-little
koie yo
arataa?
that ART treasure
‘Little girl, where did you get that treasure?’ (diu112) (mV)
From this evidence one can conclude that Moronene verbs can have object agreement
marked not only for definite objects, but also for indefinite specific objects. But how can
one explain moN-V forms with a definite object?
1.2 Similar verb forms in Sulawesi languages
Many Sulawesi languages have forms which seem to be functionally similar to and
often cognate with the moN-V and V-ABS forms in Moronene. The verb form equivalent to
the moN-V form generally has a transitive prefix added to the transitive verb stem. In
6
This example is discussed in Mead (1998:179).
250
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
reference to western Austronesian languages Kroeger (1996:33) says ‘PoN- appears in a
variety of languages as a marker of ‘transitivity’ and has sometimes been analyzed as an
antipassive marker’.
The moN-V form in Bungku-Tolaki languages, including Moronene, is regarded as an
antipassive form by Mead (1998:172–183). In Mori Bawah, according to the analysis of
Esser (1933), active forms (e.g. V-ABS) are used so long as the patient is a specific (whole)
entity, whereas non-specific patients require the antipassive (Mead 1998:174). In Tolaki,
however, the antipassive can be used with specific patients when they are first mentioned
in the discourse. Active forms are used with definite patients (Mead 1998:176, citing data
from Scott Youngman). In Kulisusu, also, the antipassive is used with indefinite patients
(Mead 1998:180).
The Balantak language of Central Sulawesi has an irrealis actor focus prefix mVng-.
Busenitz (1994:1) says ‘the primary function of the AF prefix is to mark the actor as the
topic of the clause’. This prefix, as with Moronene moN-, cannot co-occur with object
agreement.
In the Da’a language of Central Sulawesi, the realis actor focus prefixes are naN-/neN/noN- and the irrealis actor focus prefixes are maN-/meN-/moN- (Barr 1988a:19,
1988b:122). Actor focus is used when there is a change of actor or when props or minor
participants are introduced as objects (Barr 1988b:84, 91). But this pattern is overruled
when the object is a thematic prop, in which case goal focus is used (Barr 1988b:97).
In the Uma language of Central Sulawesi, the actor focus is marked by the prefix mpo-.
It is used primarily ‘when the actor or the activity of the actor is the topic of the sentence
or when the actor is being contrasted or highlighted’ (Martens 1988:173). In contrast to
Moronene, it is possible for the object to be marked with a clitic pronoun on such actor
focus verbs. For example:
(33)
Uma-a dota m-po-’ubu’-ko
not-I
want ARF-TR-carry-you
‘I don’t want to carry you.’ (Martens 1988:173)
In the Konjo language of South Sulawesi, there are two verbal prefixes with the form
ang-. The first is attached to the infinitive and affects the initial consonant of the verb stem.
It ‘indicates a semitransitive verb with actor focus; there may or may not be an object, but
it cannot be a definite object, i.e. one that is clearly specified’ (Friberg 1991:108). If an
absolutive clitic occurs on the verb, it refers to the actor. The second ang- prefix attaches
to the basic root or derived stem and does not affect the initial consonant of the stem. It
‘indicates a transitive verb with goal focus; i.e., the goal (or object) is fully specified’
(Friberg 1991:108). The absolutive clitic on the verb refers to the object.
Among Sulawesi languages some terms used for verb forms equivalent to V-ABS in
Moronene and contrasting with the subject/actor focus forms include ‘object focus’
(Friberg 1996:144) or ‘goal focus’ (Barr 1988b:78) or ‘undergoer focus’ (Himmelmann
1996:118).
A number of descriptions of Sulawesi languages give examples of constructions
described as actor focus or subject focus or antipassive occurring with definite objects,
similar to the Moronene examples cited above. The usual case is for undergoers of such
verbs to be indefinite/low in topicality, but authors who describe these languages
acknowledge that exceptionally sometimes the patient can be definite. What explanations
are put forward for these non-prototypical constructions?
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
251
In Konjo, Friberg uses the explanation that the formally definite noun phrase with the
subject focus verb form is indefinite in its meaning, i.e. one of many. Note the following
Konjo example:
(34)
L-angng-inrang-a
berangta.
FUT-VRt-borrow-1ABS knife-2hPOS
‘I want to borrow (one of) your knives.’ (Friberg 1996:144)
In the Mamasa language of South Sulawesi, there is an antipassive construction which
uses an actor focus prefix. Here is an extract of Matti’s (1994:74–75) discussion of this
construction:
Although the antipassive is most often used with indefinite objects, occasionally it
occurs with definite objects.
(35)
Ung-kolo(ng)-mi
ade’
adi-[n]na.
ARF-carry.on.ones.back-PRF/3 it.is.said younger.sibling-3
‘She carried her younger sibling on her back.’
Although the object adinna ‘her younger sibling’ is definite due to the possessive
suffix -na, its definiteness is not being stressed; rather this is the only way that the
younger sibling could be referred to due to the nature of the noun adi. Here the object
is being reintroduced into the story, but once again it is not in ‘focus’.
Here are some similar examples of antipassive constructions with definite objects found
in the Mamuju language of South Sulawesi:
(36)
Ma(l)-lalle-a’
arloji-ku’.
TR-look.for-1ABS watch-1POS
‘I’m looking for my watch.’ (Strömme 1994:107)
(37)
Na
ma-[n]appasa-a’ poo-poo-na
Cia.
RED-nappy-3POS Cia
‘I’m going to wash Cia’s nappies.’ (Strömme 1994:108)
FUT
TR-wash-1ABS
In relation to the last example, Strömme (1994:108) says, the object is also definite
(Cia’s nappies). So why is the antipassive construction with absolutive actor still used?
The answer is probably that ‘Cia’s nappies’ here is just used as a cover for or
generalisation for all the other things the person is going to wash.
In Tolaki, Mead (1998:177) cites the following example of an antipassive being used
with an object which is specific and known to both the speaker and his audience (e.g.
definite):
(38)
Tewali-’i-ki
ku-onggo [m]o-saru
la’usa-miu?
be.possible-3s-CERT 1s-want
PART:ANTIPASS-borrow ladder-2p
‘May I certainly borrow a ladder of yours?’
Mead suggests that this construction is motivated by considerations of politeness:
refering to the item to be borrowed as if it were indefinite is more polite than using a V-ABS
form.
The aim of this paper is to examine Moronene clauses with moN-V forms which are
similar to those cited above for other Sulawesi languages, and to posit a semantic analysis
which accounts for the usage. In contrast to descriptions which mention only such ‘definite
252
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
object’ constructions as exceptions, we aim to undertake a more systematic investigation,
and to use a cognitive approach to present a more integrated account.
2 Prototypical meaning
Our aim in this paper is to clarify the meanings and functions of moN-V verb forms in
Moronene, especially vis-a-vis the transitive V-ABS construction. The moN-V forms will
be analysed in terms of a prototypical meaning and various extended meanings. We will
examine examples showing various kinds of meaning differences correlating with the
above-mentioned grammatical marking distinction. We will survey these meaning
differences to trace other grammaticalised semantic patterns. And to obtain a plausible
interpretation, we shall examine a cognitive grammar approach to verb semantics.
The first step is to examine various aspects of the prototypical meaning of moN- verbs
in Moronene.
2.1 Act on nonspecific object versus act on specific object
The basic pattern of contrast between the two verb forms is that the moN-V form
designates an act on a nonspecific object whereas the ABS-V form designates an act on a
specific object. The large majority of cases can be explained using this pattern.
Some examples which contrast the moN-V and V-ABS forms:
mo-rako ‘catch’ versus rako-’o ‘catch it/him/her’
(39)
saba
nta mo-rako
pera-no kadadi da in-onto-no.
appear FUT AF/NF-catch all-3sPOS animal REL PAS-see-3sPOS
‘It appeared and was going to catch any animal it saw.’ (col 78) (V;mV;nVG)
(40)
Ka-ndo
men-teka-’u’ungke nde’e miano me'alu rako-’ira
then-3pNOM PL-?-search
indeed person many catch-3pABS
ko’ira miano m-po-nonako.
those person LG-NR-steal
‘Then the crowd of people searched and searched and caught those thieves.’
(col 48) (NV;tVAb)
mong-kea ‘bite’ versus kea-’o ‘bite it/him/her’
(41)
Da-hoo nta mong-kea miano.
be-3sABS FUT AF/NF-bite person
‘It will bite someone.’ (col85) (AuAbmV)
(42)
Iso tealo kea-’o
yo
wontu.
start pass bite-3sABS ART mosquito
‘Just then a mosquito passed by and bit him.’ (lang65) (V;tVAb)
Some other examples illustrating the use of moN-V forms with non-specific objects:
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
253
(43)
Kana’umpe cami hi-co
me-lako pong-kaa wua ng-keu.
how
we.ex COMPL-1peNOM PL-go
AF-eat
fruit LG-wood
‘How about if we go and eat fruit.’ (ndoke11) (NV;pV)
(44)
Da-haku mo-’awa doi
hai ai-ai
boku-’u.
be-1sABS AF/NF-find money at RED-gap book-2sPOS
‘I found money in between the leaves of your book.’ (dic:ai) (AuAbmV)
2.2 Antipassive voice
One way of explaining this prototypical meaning is to call it antipassive voice. Mead
(1998:172–183) claims that the moN-V forms in Bungku-Tolaki languages, including
Moronene, are antipassive forms.
Some scholars have a narrow definition of antipassive based on grammatical features. It
can also be defined more broadly on the basis of discourse function. According to a
narrower grammatical definition, antipassive clauses display characteristics of intransitive
clauses. They may be objectless, or the object may be verb-incorporated, or it may be
marked as oblique. In ergative languages, the agent of this construction carries absolutive
marking, and the verb is coded as intransitive. Foley and van Valin (1984:110–111)
describe an antipassive construction as one that allows the actor to function as pivot.
(‘Pivot’ is defined as a noun phrase crucially involved in the grammatical construction.)
An example of a broader definition is that of Mead (1998:155), who defines
antipassives as ‘constructions in which the patient has lowered referentiality or topicality.’
According to Givón (1990:566–567), in the prototypical antipassive clause, the agent has
high topicality (continuous from the preceding text and persistent in the subsequent text)
and the topicality of the patient is much lower than in the active voice, and the patient
tends to be thematically unimportant.
In the following sections we will evaluate the extent to which the moN-V form matches
the narrower or broader definition of antipassive.
2.3 Absolutive actor construction
There is a particular construction in Moronene which has some similarities to an
antipassive construction as defined grammatically. It involves the use of a moN-V form.
We shall call it the absolutive actor construction. The actor is marked with absolutive
rather than the more common nominative marker. Elsewhere in the language, the
absolutive subject marker is normally used in an intransitive clause. For example:
(45)
Nta
lako-’aku-mo.
FUT go-1sABS-PRF
‘I'm going to go.’ (VAb)
The types of tense-aspect found with the absolutive actor construction are only the
definite future tense (nta + mo-V) and the contra-anteriority aspect -mo on the finite verb
(po-V), which do not use auxiliaries. Some examples:
254
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
(46)
Nta
mo-’ala-aku-mo
e’e.
FUT AF/NF-take-1sABS-PRF water
‘I’m going to fetch water.’ (mVAb)
(47)
Nta
(48)
O kia,
po-’awa-aku-si
ku-’ari
lako d[um]ahu.
O friend AF-get-1sABS-PRF 1sNOM-finish go [INT]dog
‘Hey, friend, I got something when I went hunting.’ (perc7) (pVAb;NAuV;V)
(49)
Po-lesa-ko-mo
ta’i
sapi.
AF-step.on-2sABS-PRF faeces cow
‘You have stepped on some cow manure.’ (perc10)
mom-pule-kami
bede.
FUT AF/NF-restore-1peABS dike
‘We’re going to repair dikes.’ (perc) (mVAb)
This construction resembles an antipassive construction in that it marks the actor of a
transitive verb with an absolutive marker. However it does not fulfil the criteria of a
prototypical antipassive construction with regard to its undergoer. As mentioned above,
typical antipassive clauses may be objectless, or the undergoer may be verb-incorporated,
or it may be marked as oblique. These strategies of dealing with the undergoer are related
to the categorisation of the clause as intransitive. None of these characteristics match the
Moronene absolutive actor construction. The undergoer appears in the normal position for
an object after the verb without any oblique marking (in Moronene, oblique constituents
can be marked with the general preposition hai as in examples (7) and (44)). Nor is this
construction restricted to thematically unimportant objects. Note the following examples
with definite objects. The second example below uses zero anaphora (shared argument)
with a topical object.
(50)
Nta mom-po-’engka-’o-mo
tama-no
Eka, yo
laica-no.
FUT AF/NF-CAUS-stand-3sABS-PRF father-3sPOS Eka ART house-3sPOS
‘Eka’s father is going to build his house.’ (c28) (mVAb)
(51)
A: Daa-ko
mo-wawa
sica?
be-2sABS AF/NF-carry brush
B: Da-haku. Nde’e nta mo-’ala-ko?
be-1sABS Q
FUT AF/NF-take-2sABS
A: ‘Do you have a brush with you?’ (AuAbmV)
B: ‘Yes I do. Do you want to borrow it?’ (perc2) 7 (mVAb)
These considerations indicate that the Moronene absolutive actor construction differs in
some ways from a prototypical antipassive construction. With regard to the somewhat
similar subject focus construction in Konjo (including example (34) above), Friberg
(1996:144) says ‘These types of constructions could be viewed as antipassive, but the
antipassive analysis is not justified in Konjo’. With regard to similar constructions in Uma
which Martens (1988:176–177) called antipassive, Himmelmann (1996:119) cautions as
follows: ‘With an “ergative” analysis, the antipassive solution is problematic, since the
7
This example is discussed in Mead (1998:180).
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
255
UNDERGOER (P) is not marked as an oblique participant (which is especially awkward in
examples … where it is definite and specific)’. The Moronene constructions are best
handled in the same way. They are best regarded as transitive clauses, not intransitive.
Using a syntactic definition of antipassive, the Moronene moN-V forms, even when
occurring in the absolutive actor construction, are best regarded as something other than
antipassive.
2.4 Topicality pattern of moN-V forms 8
To complement the evaluation of the grammatical features of moN-V constructions, it is
helpful to investigate the topicality pattern of moN- verbs in discourse. Various studies
have found correlations between measures of referential distance and topic persistence and
different voice constructions, such as active, passive, inverse, and antipassive. A major
function of voice is to indicate the relative topicality of the agent and patient. The four
voices can thus be defined pragmatically in terms of the relative topicality of the agent and
patient as shown in Table 1:
Table 1: Relative topicality of the agent and patient in the four main voices
(Givón 1994:8)
Voice
active-direct
Inverse
Passive
Antipassive
Relative topicality
AGT > PAT
AGT < PAT
AGT << PAT
AGT >> PAT
Givón gives the following pragmatic definitions for each of the voices:
Active-direct: The agent is more topical than the patient, but the patient retains
considerable topicality.
Inverse: The patient is more topical than the agent, but the agent retains
considerable topicality.
Passive: The patient is more topical than the agent, and the agent is extremely nontopical (‘suppressed’, ‘demoted’).
Antipassive: The agent is more topical than the patient, and the patient is
extremely non-topical (‘suppressed’, ‘demoted’). (Givón 1994:8–9)
2.4.1 Topicality patterns of voice
Givón and other scholars have developed statistical measures which can have a
diagnostic function, helping the researcher to decide which constructions in a particular
language are fulfilling topicality functions similar to active, passive, inverse, or antipassive
constructions in other languages. These are the measures of referential distance and topic
persistence. In Givón, ed. (1994) are found detailed studies of these measures for eleven
8
The following sections are adapted from Chapter 6 of Andersen (2001)
256
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
languages. The way these studies have linked the measures of referential distance and
topic persistence to different voices is as follows:
The assumption is that the relative topicality of the agent and patient helps determine
the choice between different voices. As shown in Table 1, one would expect that activedirect voice would usually have a highly topical agent and a patient of medium topicality.
Inverse voice would usually have a highly topical patient and an agent of medium
topicality. Antipassive voice would usually have a highly topical agent and a patient of
low topicality. Passive voice would usually have a highly topical patient and an agent of
low topicality.
The use of the word ‘usually’ in the previous sentences indicates that not every use of a
particular voice will follow the prototypical pattern. Hence one would expect that a large
percentage of clauses in a particular voice would follow the expected topicality pattern, but
there would be a small percentage which departed from the expected pattern. These
percentages have been calculated in the studies found in Givón, ed. (1994).
For each voice, the percentages of clauses with low, medium or high referential distance
is calculated. A referential distance of one, which indicates that the referent was
mentioned in the previous clause, is defined as low. Low referential distance is associated
with high topicality. A referential distance of two or three is defined as medium. A
referential distance of more than three is defined as high. High referential distance is
associated with low topicality.
For topic persistence, two categories are used, high and low. A topic persistence of zero
to two is defined as low. This means that the referent is mentioned only zero to two times
in the following ten clauses. Low topic persistence indicates low topicality. A topic
persistence of three to ten is defined as high. This means that the referent is mentioned
three or more times in the following ten clauses. High topic persistence indicates high
topicality.
2.4.2 Antipassive voice in Moronene
Mead (1998:172–180) suggests that in Moronene, verbs with moN- or poN- prefixes
function as an antipassive voice. In order to test this hypothesis, the referential distance
and topic persistence was calculated for semantically transitive clauses in three Moronene
narrative texts. They consisted of two prose texts, Petampu’uno Ica Diu (392 clauses long)
and Colisi (229 clauses long) and a 566 clause extract from one narrative epic poetry text,
Kada. In the set of semantically transitive clauses from the three narrative texts, there are
47 clauses with moN- or poN- prefixes. The referential distance and topic persistence
percentages for these 47 clauses are set out in Table 2.
Table 2: Topicality values for MoN-v/pon-v clauses
Referential distance
Topicality
Agent
High (1)
74%
Medium (2–3)
23%
Low (>3)
2%
Patient
30%
15%
55%
Topic persistence
Topicality
Agent
High (>2)
85%
Patient
17%
Low (0–2)
83%
15%
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
257
What we expect in an antipassive voice is a highly topical agent and a patient with low
topicality. Comparing the figures in Table 2 (Morenene) with the typical values set out in
Table 3 below (Bella Coola [Salishan, Canada]), it is clear enough that this construction
does act like an antipassive voice. The referential distance figures show that the agent is
more topical than the patient. There are 74% of agents which have referential distance of 1
(high topicality) versus 30% of patients. Almost no agents (2%) have referential distance
over 3 (indicating low topicality), whereas 55% of patients do.
The topic persistence figures are even more decisive: 85% of the agents are topical
(high topic persistence) whereas only 17% of the patients are topical (most have low topic
persistence). These figures are fairly close to those for the antipassive in Bella Coola. In
Table 3 we give the figures for the -m antipassive in Bella Coola (Forrest 1994:160) as a
basis for comparison. One difference is that the Moronene forms have slightly more topical
patients than is the case in the Bella Coola antipassive.
Table 3: Topicality values for antipassive voice in Bella Coola
Referential distance
Topicality
High (1)
Medium (2–3)
Low (>3)
Agent
80%
5%
15%
Patient
25%
10%
65%
Topic persistence
Topicality
Agent
High (>2)
85%
Low (0–2)
15%
Patient
10%
90%
In terms of topicality, moN-V forms in Moronene are somewhat similar to antipassive
verbs found in some other languages. But there are also some less typical characteristics.
While the patient is usually non-topical, there is a significant minority of topical patients.
3 Cognitive grammar analysis
Before we examine the Moronene data in more detail, it will be helpful to review some
aspects of verbal semantics based on cognitive grammar. According to the approach of
cognitive grammar expounded by Ronald Langacker, a verb is a symbolic expression
whose semantic pole designates a process which involves a continuous series of changes of
state through a span of conceived time. To constitute a processual predication ‘a series of
component states (not just a single state) must be profiled’ (Langacker 1987:246). Yet at
the same time ‘the profiled process is prototypically … construed as constituting a single
event’ (Langacker 1991b:212). This helps us bear in mind that there are a number of
possible components in internal semantic structure, which include elements relating to
action, participants, change of state and conceived time. One predication may be a single
event of ‘kill’ in which phases of one person causing someone to die and the other person
dying are combined within a unity of time, whereas in another case it may be just the phase
of causing someone to die which is profiled. Choices of verb forms are available on the
basis of what should be included within the scope of predication, which can include
participants, setting, clusters of acts or actions or the whole process. Or the choice of a
particular verb form may be due to specific variants in the internal semantic structure of a
verb itself. There are various possible variants of each component. A verb form may be
chosen to designate a particular variant of one semantic component or to designate a
258
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
combination of variants from more than one semantic component, such as the temporal
component and the quality of action.
Before doing any further interpretation, we need to examine verbs using the approach of
cognitive grammar. A verb denotes either an act, or series of actions or a state. Lyons
suggests that the proposition of a clause should be called a situation. which may be an
event, a process or a state. A situation may be static or dynamic (Lyons 1977:483). Let us
take a look at a dynamic situation. A situation is dynamic because, if we describe it
cognitively according to Langacker, there is involvement of energy, either physical or
mental. When there are two participants, a so-called two-place predicate, there is an
energy flow from the energy source to the energy sink (Langacker 1991a:292), that is from
the actor to the undergoer, and it implies a change of state component, or the affectedness
of the object. Affectedness of the object may be considered as the final or end point of an
action, giving a clear boundary or boundedness of an action.
The following diagrams may help clarify this matter:
Figure 1: (Langacker 1991b:211)
In reference to the above diagram Langacker (1991b:210–211) says:
we arrive at a more complex conceptualization representing the ‘normal observation
of a prototypical action’, whose essential content is diagramed in Figure 1. The stage
model contributes the notion of a viewer (V) observing an event from a vantage point
external to its setting. …The event constitutes a prototypical action when it focuses
on two participants construed as instantiating the maximally opposed role archetypes,
namely agent and patient. The transmission of energy is depicted by a double arrow,
whose direction serves to distinguish the agent and patient participants. The squiggly
arrow indicates the patient’s resulting change of state.
Langacker (1991b:216) gives a number of English example sentences which he
diagrams (1991b:217) in Figure 2.
(5)
a. Floyd broke the glass (with the hammer).
b. The hammer (easily) broke the glass.
c. The glass (easily) broke.
(6)
a. Floyd hit the glass (with the hammer).
b. The hammer hit the glass.
c. Floyd hit the hammer against the glass.
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
259
Figure 2: (Langacker 1991b:217)
Langacker (1991b:216–217) explains the diagram as follows:
In (5a), break profiles the entire action chain connecting the agent and patient, and the
agent is selected as subject. In (5b), which designates the interaction between the
instrument and the patient, the subject is the instrument. Only the patient’s change of
state is profiled by break in (5c), and the patient is chosen as subject. ... Though an
oversimplification, it is sufficient here to analyze (6c) as profiling only the first
segment of the action chain, as shown in Figure [2(e)]; hit is thus attributed the
approximate value ‘wield in a hitting-type motion’, and the prepositional phrase
specifies the resulting contact with the glass. Except for the change from break to hit,
(6a) and (6b) are parallel to their counterparts in (5).
On the basis of the above cognitive explanation, we hypothesise that when one uses the
form of verb with ABS object agreement, it designates the assertion of a vivid or a dynamic
action, a kind of action which involves energy flow in a way which is instantaneous,
punctual, direct, and forceful. In contrast we hypothesise that moN-V denotes a less
dynamic action, which is less punctual, less direct, less volitional. This can be reflected in
the lexical meaning itself, either as a less concrete action or as a more static process.
4 Patterns of semantic variation
In this section we will present various hypotheses as to factors influencing the choice of
a moN-V form as against a V-ABS form which can explain seemingly anomalous uses —
that is, when the object is definite and more topical.
260
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
The discourse function of an antipassive is to show low topicality of the object. It was
demonstrated above that this is indeed the case with the large majority of objects used with
moN-V. But what about the others? In the texts studied, 17% of the moN-V clauses had
objects with high topicality. Why were moN-V forms used in these clauses? Let us
examine some specific examples.
The clause in the following example occurs three clauses after the ‘thirst fish’ has been
introduced as an important topical prop. In fact the events surrounding the ‘thirst fish’
represent the instigating incident of the whole story. Note the use of a definite noun phrase
object with the moN-V.
(52)
Ka-i
po-’oli koie ica mokokondo’u e’e.
then-3sNOM AF-buy that
fish thirsty
water
‘Then he bought that “thirst fish”.’ (diu9) (NpV)
Three clauses later the fish is the topical object by zero anaphora of two moN-V forms.
In this part of the text, the fish is a participant in eight successive clauses.
(53)
Ka-i
po-nahu arumai ka-i
pong-kaa.
then-3sNOM AF-cook heard then-3sNOM AF-eat
‘Then she cooked it and ate it.’ (diu12) (NpV;NpV)
The following example shows another important prop, the treasure, as the object of a
moN-V form. At this point in the text the treasure is a participant in three of the previous
four clauses as well as the following two clauses.
(54)
Hai hapa ari-a-u
at what finish-LOC-2sPOS
mo-’ala
co’o
ana
AF/NF-take you(sg) child
n-tina-’ate
koie yo
arataa?
LG-woman-little that ART treasure
‘Little girl, where did you get that treasure?’ (diu112) (mV)
The following example shows another important prop, the cooking spices, as the object
of a moN-V form. At this point in the text these cooking spices have been mentioned four
times previously.
(55)
Dadi-si
koma i-tonia ki-ku
daa kaa-hira
ka’iaa diie
become-CTR right at-new if-1sNOM be
eat-3pABS than this
hi-ku
ari-mo
lako mo-’ala
nta po-gule-ku.
go
AF/NF-take FUT NR-curry-1sPOS
‘It would have been better just now if I had eaten them rather than what
I’ve done going and getting my cooking spices.’ (Maegani 68) (NAuVAb;
NAuV;mV)
COMPL-1sNOM finish-PRF
In these examples, the prototypical meaning of moN- verbs does not fit. The object is
specific and definite rather than nonspecific. It is topical rather than nontopical. Hence we
need to discover other extended meanings of the moN- verb form which will explain these
usages.
In the following sections, various semantic factors will be identified which are
associated with the use of moN-V forms with definite objects. Examples of such clauses
will be presented. It must be understood that in each case a large number of examples of
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
261
V-ABS clauses having the same semantic features could have been given. It is usually the
case that when there is a specific definite object, a V-ABS form is the default choice. The
reason few examples of V-ABS clauses are given below is because such clauses are not the
focus of this paper.
4.1 Whole process versus act/action
Note the two constructions below, when the objects for both verb stems are definite, but
different verb forms are used:
(56)
Ka-i
po-nahu arumai ka-i
pong-kaa.
then-3sNOM AF-cook heard then-3s NOM AF-eat
‘Then she cooked it and ate it.’ (diu12) (NpV;NpV)
(57)
Leu-ho-mo
kolopua ala-a
bangke-no
koie ndok
come-3sABS-PRF turtle
take-3sABS corpse-3sPOS that monkey
ka-i
sampali-o
naamo nahu-o.
then-3sNOM butcher-3sABS and
cook-3sABS
‘Then the turtle came and took the corpse of that monkey and cut it up
and cooked/boiled it.’ (kol 45) (VAb;tVAb;NVAb;tVAb)
In both cases the objects of nahu ‘cook’ are definite. In example (56) with the moN-V
form (cited earlier as example (53)), the definite object is represented by zero anaphora. In
the V-ABS construction in the example (67), the definite object is represented by an
absolutive clitic.
A further way of clarifying the difference is by looking at the inherent semantic
structure: monahu is a whole process while nahu-o is one possible stage in cooking or a
more distinctive way of cooking.
Hence the choice between the verb monahu and nahuo is a matter of chunking clusters
of actions as against one action, that is the process as a whole versus one act/action. In a
similar way, the process of loading can be divided up into acts such as an act of grabbing,
or lifting up, or putting down. Other verbs which use the prefixed moN-V form or clitic
V-ABS form to represent different semantic components of verbs include:
mongkaa ‘eat’
vs. kaa-ho ‘eat it’
mo-ndo’u ‘drink’
vs. ndo'u-o ‘drink it up’
mo-’ulea ‘serve(food)’ vs. ulea-ho ‘load it on’
The moN-V form profiles the entire action series, whereas the V-ABS form specifies one
act or action, especially the one seemingly significant key action, such as loading food on
the plate, not counting lifting food towards the eater. An act of the mouth opening for
water or food is more vivid than the word representing the entire action of eating or
drinking.
The following examples illustrate the difference between mong-kaa ‘eat’ and kaa-ho
‘eat it’:
(58)
Ku-’ari
mong-kaa induwa
ni-wuhai ondo-no
i Suriani
1sNOM-finish AF/NF-eat yesterday UF-steam yam-3sPOS PI Suriani
262
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
kana to’u hi-cu
daa mo-dea-dea.
like very COMPL-1sNOM be
STV-RED-drugged
‘Yesterday I ate Suriani’s steamed wild yams, it was as if I was drugged.’
(dic:dea) (NAumV;NAuV)
(59)
Ku-’ari
mong-kaa yo
roo
mo-lombi da ni-owa-no
1sNOM-finish AF/NF-eat ART medicine STV-fat REL UF-bring-3sPOS
i
Sultan hai Kandari
at Kendari
‘I ate the health tonic that Sultan brought from Kendari.’ (dic:dengke)
(NAumV;nVG)
PI Sultan
(60)
Nilako-no-mo
immediately-3sPOS-PRF
koie tuuna-ni-akono-’o
kolopua
that fall-LOC-3sBEN-3sABS turtle
ko-kona-a
bolo nganga-no, laulau-no-mo
na’a-na
RED-hit-3sABS in
mouth-3sPOS direct-3sPOS-PRF also-3s
kolopua kaa-ho.
turtle
eat-3sABS
‘Immediately he dropped it down to the turtle and it went straight in his
mouth, and the turtle ate it up right away.’ (kol 34) (tVAb;tVAb;tVAb)
(61)
Ya-ho-po
nde'e koie harimau ka-i
saisai-no
then-3sABS-IMPF indeed that tiger
then-3sNOM direct-3sPOS
saba
rako-’o
koie dara ka-i
kaa-ho.
appear catch-3sABS that horse then-3sNOM eat-3sABS
‘Then that tiger suddenly appeared, caught that horse and ate it up.’ (col 71)
(NV;tVAb;NVAb)
(62)
Nilako-no
kaa-hira
orua-’ira.
immediately-3sPOS eat-3pABS two-3pABS
‘it immediately ate up both of them.’ (wola 28) (tVAb)
When you are talking about a routine meal, one uses mong-kaa to describe the whole
process. The object tends to be normal routine food. The use of kaa-ho focuses on the
action of actually putting the food in one’s mouth and devouring it. The type of food tends
to be less predictable, less routine. The temporal component also tends to differ, with
mong-kaa more likely to be durative or habitual and kaa-ho more likely to be punctual.
The following examples illustrate the difference between mo-ndo’u ‘drink’ and ndo’u-o
‘drink it’. Note that in both examples the object is definite:
(63)
O kia
O friend
mi-’osie
mo-ndo’u
akoie tua
mo-silu, ntada’a
2hNOM-don’t AF/NF-drink that toddy STV-sour perhaps
tua
lembahi.
toddy long.time
‘Friend, don’t drink that sour palm wine, perhaps it is old.’ (dic:silu) (NAumV)
(64)
Da-hoo lawa
ndo’u-o.
be-3sABS receive drink-3sABS
‘She would receive it and drink it up.’ (diu15) (AuAbV;tVAb)
Moronene verbal prefix moN(65)
263
Sa-pura-no-mo
susu da hai tonde-no
hi
ari
when-used.up-3sPOS-PRF milk REL at glass-3sPOS COMPL finish
ndo’u-o
ka-i
pe-tiani-ako
penda e’e
n-tee.
drink-3sABS then-3sNOM INT-add-APPL again water LG-tea
‘When he was finished drinking the milk in his glass he filled it again with
tea.’ (dic:tianio) (NAuVAb;NV)
Note that in the above examples with ndo’u-o, the action series is broken into two acts.
The following examples illustrate the difference between mo-’ulea ‘serve(food)/load’
and ulea-ho ‘load it’:
(66)
Sa-mo-taha-no
when-STV-cooked-3sPOS
ni-nahu-no
ka-i
PAS-cook-3sPOS then-3sNOM
po-’ulea-hakondo hai piri.
AF-serve-3pBEN
at plate
‘When the food was cooked, he served it up for them on a plate.’
(dahu19) (NpV)
(67)
Ka-i
ala-a
ulea-ho
hai bungku-no.
then-3sNOM take-3sABS load-3sABS at back-3sPOS
‘Then he took him and loaded him on his back.’ (ndoke4) (NVAb;tVAb)
(68)
Hai apa
at
what
daha-no
mpe mo-’ulea
place-3sPOS often AF/NF-load
ue
akoie oto
rattan that
car
da
sadia tealo?
always pass
‘Where is the place he keeps loading rattan onto that car that keeps passing
by?’ (dic:ulea) (mV;V)
REL
In the first example the object is definite and is represented by zero anaphora. In the
second example, the object is also definite, and the action series is broken up into two acts,
each of which uses the V-ABS form. There seems to be a partial lexicalisation of the
distinction between these two forms. Whereas the meaning ‘load’ can be found with either
the moN-V form or the V-ABS form, the meaning ‘serve’ seems to be virtually restricted to
the moN-V form. See further discussion of lexicalisation in §4.6 below.
The next examples relate to the verb mo’ihii ‘to fill up’. Both examples come from the
same text in which the crew of a boat want to fill up their boat with goods. The first
example is the first occurrence of this verb in the text and represents the process as a
whole, using a moN-V:
(69)
Sampe arumai
until
heard
ka-i
ari
koie bangka, ka-ndo
then-3sNOM finish that boat
then-3pNOM
m-po-’ihii bangka-do.
PL-AF-fill boat-3pPOS
‘When the boat was finished, they filled up their boat.’ (Maegani 139)
(NV;NpV)
The following clauses in the text describe a discussion about the goods they should buy
to fill the boat up with. Then the process is described again, broken down into separate
264
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
actions of buying and filling. In this case the V-ABS form me’ihii-ho is used, since it
represents the last act of the whole process.
(70)
Ndo-sabe
3pNOM-go.up
penda
again
m-pe-balanda kokeena m-po-’oli yo
there
PL-AF-buy ART
PL-INT-shop
mina-mina pera-no da
mo-wondu,
yo
sabu,
perfume
all-3sPOS REL STV-fragrant ART soap
pera arataa
all
wealth
kokeena hai wonua, ka-ndo
me-’ihii-ho koie bangka-do.
there
at place then-3pNOM PL-fill-3sABS that boat-3pPOS
‘They went up again to go shopping there and bought all sorts of fragrant
perfumes, soap, all sorts of costly goods at that place, then they filled up
their boat.’ (Maegani 143) (NV;V;mV;NVAb)
4.2 Durative action versus punctual action
A second factor influencing the choice of verb form involves a distinction in the
temporal element of the internal structure of the verb. The moN-V form designates a more
durative action whereas the V-ABS form designates a more punctual action. Examples:
mo-wawa ‘bring (with)’ versus wawa-a ‘take it away, bring it to’
(71)
Daa-ko
mo-wawa
sica-’u?
be-2sABS AF/NF-bring brush-2sPOS
‘Do you bring your brush?’ (perc2) (AuAbmV)
(72)
Da-haku mo-wawa
diie watu m-pe-’eso ka-u
be-1sABS AF/NF-bring this stone LG-INT-rub then-2sNOM
eso-aku
itea ki-to
pe-baho.
rub-1sABS soon if-1piNOM INT-bathe
‘I am bringing this rubbing stone so you can rub me shortly if we bathe.’
(dic:eso) (AuAbmV;NVAb;NV)
The above examples involve non-telic situations; the bringing of the brush or stone has
no explicit end point. This contrasts to the examples below with V-ABS forms:
(73)
Bawa-hira
orua-’ira hai otu-ng-keu.
bring-3pABS two-3pABS at end-LG-wood
‘It carried the two of them to the top of the tree.’ (wola27) (tVAb)
(74)
Koie miano da
mo-pusu
that person REL STV-blind
me-’e’eta hai aku
INT-ask
at me
ka-ku
then-1sNOM
wawa-a
lako hai garega.
bring-3sABS go
at church
‘That blind man asked me to take him to church.’ (dic:e’eta) (V;NVAb;V)
The durative nature of the next example is indicated by the use of the auxiliary daa ‘be’,
which gives the sense of “he was picking” as well as the following clauses of the narrative
which describe other events that occurred as he was picking the fruit. Because moN-V
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
265
portrays an action in an overall holistic way, it has a greater chance to be selected to
represent setting.
(75)
Mo-mone ka-i
daa mo-’upui wua-no
INT-climb then-3sNOM be AF-pick
fruit-3sPOS
koie
that
to-tandai-ho
ki daa k[in]aa.
RED-try-3sABS if be
[UF]eat
‘He climbed up and picked that fruit and tried it whether it was edible.’
(Maegani 84) (V;NAumV;tVAb;NAunV)
Some further examples of moN-V clauses with definite objects with a durative meaning:
(76)
Pempi-pempia-haku-mo
i’aku ari
mo-daga-daga
koie
RED-how.many.times-1sABS-PRF I
finish AF/NF-RED-guard that
ana-’ate.
child-small
‘Time and time again I have taken care of that little child.’ (dic:daga) (AumV)
(77)
Koie Maegani hi
daa men-tade mo-rede
that Maegani COMPL be
INT-stand AF/NF-make.staccato.sound
pana’api koie hai rope-no
bangka.
gun
that at bow-3sPOS boat
‘That Maegani who was standing shooting off the gun at the bow of the boat’
(Maegani 156) (NAuV;mV)
In case of temporal variation, between durative and punctual, cognitively they differ in
space and time. In other words, a punctual action is more specific in the space and time
domain of a verb than a durative action is. This is reflected in the contrast between wawaa ‘bring to’ at a particular place and time and mo-wawa ‘bring (with)’ at a nonspecific
place and during a duration of time.
It is equally possible to find V-ABS clauses in durative contexts when the object is
definite. This simply means that the primary transitive usage of V-ABS takes precedence
over a possible secondary usage of moN-V. An example:
(78)
mau te’asa mincu ki-u
dio-ho
koie labu …
even one
week if-2sNOM keep-3sABS that pumpkin
‘even if you keep that pumpkin for a week …’ (dic:baku) (NVAb)
4.3 Non-volitional action versus volitional action
Another factor influencing the choice of verb form is volition. In this pattern, the moNV form designates a less volitional action whereas the ABS-V form designates a more
volitional action. This pattern is applicable only to verbs designating actions which
commonly happen accidentally.
mo-lesa ‘step on (accidentally)’
vs. lesa-’o ‘tread on it, step on it (on purpose)’
Some examples:
266
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
(79)
Hawiako-hira ko’ira beke-beke-no
tari
da-hoo
nta
throw-3pABS those RED-joint-3sPOS bamboo be-3sABS FUT
mo-lesa
tuai-u
ka-i
bela
karu-no.
younger.sibling-2sPOS then-3sNOM injured foot-3sPOS
‘Throw away those bamboo joints; your little sister will step on them and
injure her foot.’ (dic:beke) (tVAb;AuAbmV;NV)
AF/NF-step.on
(80)
Osie-mo
mo-’ala
keu
n-tangkalasi ki sa-u
da’a
don’t-IMPV AF/NF-take wood LG-thorn.tree if NEG-2sNOM NEG
to’ori te’iaa-mo ka-u
po-lesa
riu-no.
know only-PR then-2sNOM AF-step.on thorn-3sPOS
‘Don’t take that thorn tree wood; if you don’t know it, you’ll just step on
its thorns.’ (dic:tangkalasi) (AumV;NAuV;NpV)
(81)
Ka-u
osie to’u-o
then-2sNOM don’t really-3sABS
pendu-pendua lesa-'o
bolo
RED-twice
step.on-3sABS in
laica-no
i Dodi.
house-3sPOS PI Dodi
‘Don’t you ever set foot in Dodi’s house again!’ (dic:haramu) (NAuVAb)
The prototypical meaning of moN- can override this distinction between volitional and
non-volitional. In the following example, the topicality of the object influences the choice
of the V-ABS form, although the action in non-volitional.
(82)
Tende
due.to
me-bosi-no
pe’ico
INT-spring-3sPOS that
bengkaro ongkona-a
hi
trap
as.soon.as-3sABS COMPL
tealo dahu lesa-’o
ba-i
to-tamua
dahu.
pass dog
step.on-3sABS how-3sNOM RED-thrown.up dog
‘Due to the springiness of that trap, as soon as a dog passes and steps on it,
the dog will be really strung up.’ (dic:bosi) (NV;tVAb;NV)
4.4 Irrealis versus realis
Another factor which may influence the choice of verb form is realis versus irrealis.
Unlike some other languages in Sulawesi, Moronene does not have a separate set of irrealis
verb prefixes. Some examples suggest that an irrealis context, especially negation, may
favour the use of a moN-V form rather than a ABS-V form. Note the following examples of
negated moN-V clauses with a definite object.
(83)
Poh, ka-i
gee then-3sNOM
rua
me-ngkae Maegani, mau
down INT-stetch Maegani even
mo-’onto
AF/NF-see
tina-no
na-i
da’a, da-hoo
tutuwi-o
woman-3sPOS NEG-3sNOM NEG be-3sABS close-3sABS -3sPOS
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
267
mata-no, ka-i
ala-a
renta-a
koie tina-no.
eye
then-3sNOM take-3sABS pull-3sABS that mother-3sPOS
Well, Maegani stretched his hand down, he didn’t even see his mother, he
was covering his eyes, then he grabbed his mother and pulled her.’
(Maegani 171) (NAuV;mV;AuAbVAb;NVAb;tVAb)
Note that in the above example the clause in question, mo’onto tinano, is followed by
two V-ABS clauses with tinano as the topical object.
(84)
Kicua karambau-’ute-no ta’ico
da ari
lako ni-dosa-ngku
if
buffalo-small-3sPOS that.above REL finish go
UF-debt-1sPOS
da
mate, da-haku nta wada-’o, da-haku nta oli-o,
REL die
be-1sABS FUT pay-3sABS be-1sABS FUT buy-3sABS
na-hoo
nangkua
be-3sABS because
karambau-’ea-no, na-ku
da’a
buffalo-big-3sPOS NEG-1sNOM NEG
nta
FUT
mo-’oli
na-mo-nangi.
AF/NF-buy because-INT-lose
‘If his small water buffalo which I had gone and borrowed was the one
that died, I would pay for it, I would buy it, but because it was his big
water buffalo, I wouldn’t buy it because it lost.’ (Maegani 250)
(AuV;nVG;V;AuAbVAb; AuAbVAb;NAumV;V)
The above example gives a nice contrast between the use of the V-ABS form oli-o in a
positive clause, followed by the use of the moN-V form mo-’oli in a negative clause. The
objects of both clauses have the same definiteness and topicality. The following two
clauses representing successive clauses in a dialog show the identical contrast:
(85)
Da-hoo ndoka nta leu
ro’ico
mokole oli-o
be-3sABS please FUT come that.below king
buy-3sABS
miano i cantete.
person at latrine
‘That king down there is going to come to buy the person in the latrine.’
(Maegani 161) (AuAbV;tVAb)
(86)
Hee, osie mo-’oli
miano i cantete; me’alu-o
miano
hey don’t AF/NF-buy person at latrine many-3sABS person
i
laica.
at house
‘Hey, don’t buy the person in the latrine; there are many people in the house.’
(Maegani 162) (AumV;VAb)
Some further examples of negated clauses with definite objects using moN-V forms:
(87)
Na-ku
paisa mo-’ala
doi-’u.
NEG-1sNOM never AF/NF-take money-2sPOS
‘I never took/stole your money.’ (dic:ala) (NAumV)
268
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
(88)
Mo-hali
to’u-o.
Osie-mo,
nda’a-mo nta mo-’ala.
STV-expensive very-3sABS don’t-IMPV not-PRF
will AF/NF-take
‘It is very expensive. No, I will not buy it.’ (perc 4.e) (VAb;AumV)
In (88), the implicit definite object can be interpreted as a case of zero anaphora.
Other irrealis contexts include imperative clauses and future tense. Note the following
imperative examples with definite objects using moN-V forms:
(89)
Po-hule-mo
na’a-u kia, mo-’al
karambau-’u.
INT-return-IMPV also-2s friend AF/NF-take buffalo-2sPOS
‘Go home, friend, get your water buffalo.’ (Maegani 204) (V;mV)
(90)
Po-’ala-mo
na’a-u kia,
manu-’u.
AF-take-IMPV also-2s friend chicken-2sPOS
‘Friend, get your chicken.’ (Maegani 258) (pV)
(91)
Lako-mo mo-dampo
pe’ico-’ira kinaa.
go-IMP
AF/NF-cover yon-PL
rice
‘Go cover those plates of rice.’ (dic:dampo) (V;mV)
The following examples illustrate the difference between mo-daga versus daga-’o
‘guard/mind’. The moN-V form is used in an irrealis future context, whereas the V-ABS
form is used in a past realis context.
(92)
Ico’o
da nta mo-daga-’akita
laica
you(sg) REL FUT AF/NF-guard-1piBEN house
‘You are the one who will guard the house for us.’ (col 13) (mV)
(93)
Ka-i
totoro
then-3sNOM sit
ka’asi koie i
CMS that PI
Siti
Siti
daga-’o
guard-3sABS
tukaka-no.
elder.sibling-3sPOS
‘Then poor Siti sat and watched over her elder brother.’ (sio59) (NV;tVAb)
The following are further examples of moN-V forms being used in an irrealis future
context with definite objects:
(94)
Hapa-mo ka’asi co'o
ka-u
daa nta lako mo-ro-rongo
what-PRF poor you(sg) then-2sNOM be
FUT go AF/NF-RED-carry
koie bio?
that egg
‘What will you go and carry that egg with, poor thing? (Maegani 280)
(NAuV;mV)
(95)
Mau hi-to
teleu nta mo-’ita
mo-’oli
manu-no,
even if-1piNOM arrive FUT AF/NF-ask AF/NF-buy chicken-3sPOS
mo-’oli
karambau-no, na-i
ehe nta mo-wee-kita.
AF/NF-buy buffalo-3sPOS NEG-3sNOM want FUT TR-give-1piABS
‘Even if we arrive and ask to buy his chicken, buy his water buffalo, he won’t
want to give them to us.’ (Maegani 323) (NV;AumV;mV;mV;NAuVAb)
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
269
Note that it is also possible to find V-ABS clauses in irrealis contexts, whether negative,
imperative, or future. Some examples:
(96)
Na-i
da’a-mo
awa-a
sandala-no da tuna.
find-3sABS sandal-3sPOS REL fall
‘He’s not going to find his sandal which fell down.’ (dic:sempo) (NAuVAb;V)
NEG-3sNOM NEG-PRF
nta
FUT
(97)
Dio-ho-mo
isala koie ni-wawa-u.
put.away-3sABS-IMPV first that UF-carry-2sPOS
‘Put down what you are carrying first.’ (dic:sakoi) (tVAb)
(98)
O Dedi da-ko-si
bara nta poko-sicu-’o
koie dopi?
O Dedi be-2sABS-CTR Q
FUT able-shift-3sABS that board
‘Dedi, will you be able to shift that board?’ (dic:sicu) (AuAbVAb)
4.5 Non-individuated object versus individuated object
There are several factors which relate to the individuation of the object. Perhaps the
most obvious is the definiteness or specificity of the object, and this factor accounts for the
choice of verb form in the large majority of cases. Another factor influencing the choice of
a moN-V with a definite object is animacy. An inanimate object is less individuated than
an animate object. Whereas the V-ABS form occurs freely with objects of the highest level
of animacy, namely human beings, the objects of moN-V forms have lower animacy. In
almost all of the examples cited thus far, such objects are animals or inanimate objects.
The following examples illustrate the difference in usage of mon-toria ‘guard/mind’ versus
toria-ho ‘guard it/mind it’ with regard to animacy:
(99)
Ma-ngku-mo i’aku-mo da mon-toria
laica.
later-1s-PRF I-CTRS
REL AF/NF-guard house
‘Later I will be the one who guards the house.’ (co14) (mV)
(100)
Po-’ia-mo
nde’e na’a-u toria-ho
ana-’u
INT-stay-IMPV indeed also-2s guard-3sABS child-2sPOS
‘Just stay and mind your child.’ (lang42) (V;tVAb)
Although both objects are definite, and both clauses are irrealis, we hypothesise that the
moN-V is used with less animate, less individuated, less topical objects, while the V-ABS
form used with more topical individuated animate objects.
Only one example has been found so far in the texts examined of a moN-V form used
with a definite (and highly topical) human object. It was given as example (83) in the
previous subsection.
Another factor regarding individuation of the object is plurality. Plural objects or mass
objects are less individuated than singular objects. When the V-ABS form is used, a
distinction is made between a singular object marked with -o and a plural object marked
with -’ira. The plural suffix, however, tends to be restricted to humans. If the object is
plural and inanimate, one way of avoiding the choice between singular and plural
absolutive clitics is to simply use the moN-V form which does not mark the object
morphologically. The following examples illustrate the use of moN-V forms in clauses
with definite plural inanimate objects:
270
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
(101)
Ka-ndo
ala-a
nde’e sabe mo-’ala
ko-’ira yo
pera
then-3pNOM take-3sABS indeed go.up AF/NF-take that-PL ART all
sabu da
me-mo-wondu
soap REL PL-STV-fragrant
‘They went up and took all those fragrant soaps.’ (Maegani 175)
(NVAb;V;mV)
(102)
Lako mo-’o-’ala
pera nta po-gule-no
koie
go
AF/NF-RED-take all
FUT NR-curry-3sPOS that
‘He went to gather all those spices he would use.’ (Maegani 56) (V;mV)
It is of course also possible to find V-ABS clauses in with plural inanimate definite
objects. This simply means that the primary ‘volitional agent + affected undergoer’ usage
of V-ABS takes precedence over the possible secondary ‘non-individuation of undergoer
’usage of moN-V.
An example:
(103)
Lako-mo poko-tinda-hira
luwuo sabara-u.
go-IMPV CAUS-pack-3pABS all
belongings-2sPOS
‘Go pack up all your belongings.’ (dic:sabara) (V;tVAb)
4.6 Lexicalisation
It was mentioned above that in some verbs such as mo-’ulea ‘serve/load’ versus ulea-ho
‘load it’, there is a partial lexicalisation of the semantic distinction between the two forms.
A thorough investigation of this phenomenon is beyond the scope of this paper, but we will
mention several further examples.
One type of lexicalisation relates to the presence of the partly homophonous intransitive
prefix mo-/po- or the stative prefix moN-. When this prefix occurs with a verb root which
also is a transitive verb form, there can be an avoidance of the transitive moN-V form to
avoid ambiguity. Instead the V-ABS form is always used for transitive. Some examples:
Intransitive
mo-gora
mo-nangi
mom-pande
mon-to’ori
‘be noisy’
‘lose’
‘work at trade’
‘adult’
Transitive
gora-’o
nangi-o
pande-’o
to’ori-o
‘make noisy’
‘defeat’
‘know’
‘know’
The theoretically possible transitive forms *mo-gora ‘make noisy’ *mo-nangi ‘defeat’,
*mom-pande ‘know’, and *mon-to’ori ‘know’ are not attested.
The type of lexicalisation exemplified mo-’ulea ‘serve/load’ versus ulea-ho ‘load it’, is
when both transitive forms exist, but certain meanings are restricted to one of the forms.
For example, the verb forms mo-wolohi and wolohi-o can mean ‘give in return, repay’.
There is also a secondary meaning ‘replace (lost or damaged item)’, but this meaning is
restricted to the V-ABS form wolohi-o. Similarly the verb forms mon-timpa and timpa-a
mean ‘find’. There is also an idiomatic expression timpa-a laro meaning ‘regain
consciousness’. This idiom is restricted to the V-ABS form.
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
271
4.7 Summary
From the above survey, the grammatical distinction of V-ABS versus moN-V seems to be
used for grouping verbs into two contrastive categories with a semantic motivation. The
semantic variants may be due to the action component or the more relational component of
the verb, that is the object. The action component includes the temporal component
(punctual as against durative) as well as volitional as against nonvolitional.
The relational component involves variation of the object in quantity or specificity. The
semantic field is forced to be wide or narrow only because of the size of the object, or else
the unclear boundary of the object, mingled among many, until one is singled out.
For the purposes of exposition, each of the illustrative examples has been listed under
one particular extended meaning. But with some examples, several meanings are combined
at once. The following clause, for example, comes simultaneously under the category of
irrealis, durative and non-individuated object:
(104)
Lako mo-dai-dai-’akita
ko-’ira ica-’ate hai towo ni’i.
go
AF/NF-RED-burn-1piBEN that-PL fish-small at
shell coconut
‘Go grill those little fish for us in a coconut shell.’ (dic:dai) (V;mV)
Many of the semantic factors discussed above can be related to the overarching category
of transitivity. The seminal paper on this topic is Hopper and Thompson (1980). They
define transitivity in terms of a set of ten independent features, each of which has a high
transitivity value and a low transitivity value. The overall transitivity of a clause can be
measured through the combination of these features. The individual features identified by
Hopper and Thompson are as follows:
Table 4: Features of transitivity
(Hopper & Thompson 1980:252)
A. PARTICIPANTS
B. KINESIS
C. ASPECT
D. PUNCTUALITY
E. VOLITIONALITY
F. AFFIRMATION
G. MODE
H. AGENCY
I. AFFECTEDNESS OF O
J. INDIVIDUATION OF O
HIGH
LOW
2 or more participants
Action
Telic
Punctual
Volitional
Affirmative
Realis
A high in potency
O totally affected
O highly individuated
1 participant
Non-action
Atelic
Non-punctual
Non-volitional
Negative
Irrealis
A low in potency
O not affected
O non-individuated
The last feature, individuation of object, can be further analysed according to different
nominal features which correlate with individuation. These are set out below :
272
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
Table 5: Features of object individuation
(Hopper & Thompson 1980:253)
INDIVIDUATED
NON-INDIVIDUATED
Proper
Human, animate
Concrete
Singular
Count
Referential, definite
Common
Inanimate
Abstract
Plural
Mass
Non-referential
Among the factors affecting transitivity propounded by Hopper and Thompson, seven
are mentioned in the previous sections: definiteness of object, durativity, volition,
affirmative/negative, realis/irrealis, plurality and animacy. We can then encompass many
of the semantic influences by stating the V-ABS forms are used in contexts of higher
transitivity whereas moN-V forms are characterised by lower transitivity.
Having a widely open semantic field, the moN-V form seems to cover more variations
of lexical meaning patterns than the V-ABS. It seems like a relatively unmarked or general
verb form used for more general functions of low transitivity.
5 Photographic analogy
The data presented in the previous section can be explained by propounding a polysemy
network for the various meanings of moN-V. The primary meaning would be antipassive;
and there would be the following extended meanings: whole process, durative, nonvolitional, irrealis, non-individuated object. One question that arises is: what is the point of
contact semantically which sanctions such extensions of meaning?
One helpful analogy to explain the contrastive behavior of moN-V versus V-ABS is how
we take a photograph. The implications of this analogy will shed light on some of the
interconnections between the various meanings of moN-V forms.
In the following discussion we will examine a number of statements about the
distinction between moN-V versus V-ABS forms and see how these statements can be
elucidated using a photographic analogy.
1.
moN-V portrays an action in an overall or general sense.
The moN-V form has its semantic field relatively widely open with regard to its
semantic variants. To obtain an overall or general picture, one uses a simple camera, or a
sophisticated camera, or even better a video camera with a wide angle lens to give a
general impression to the viewer of the overall situation or scene. That is why including a
specific object does not change the overall or general impression.
The moN-V form is more or less a default or general verb for an action. In many cases
the moN-V form is the citation verb form. That is to say, if one elicits a verb from a
Moronene speaker using the national language as a cue, the verb form elicited will usually
be the moN-V form.
Moronene verbal prefix moN2.
273
In certain instances, a non-specific object tends to involve a less dynamic
action or a more general verb.
A picture giving an overall or general impression tends to be more characteristically
inclusive and so the object tends to be inclusive or general and does not need to be made
explicit. Such objects are highly predictable, stereotypical, non-referential. A general
impression of the object is also obtained by looking at the object as a by-product of the
process or in a generalised way, such as food being the object of eating or cooking or
serving, water being the object of drinking, a house/building being the object of building,
clothes being the object of washing. Such general predictable objects are often suppressed:
(105)
Impia ka-i
pom-po-’engka?
when then-3sNOM AF-CAUS-get.up
‘When will he build it?’ (perc28) (NpV)
Such an object, however, may be made explicit:
(106)
3.
Tade-tade-no-mo
nde’e mo-kea
mo-ndo’u e’e.
suddenly-3sPOS-PRF indeed INT-want AF/NF-drink water
‘Suddenly she wanted to drink water.’ (diu 13) (V;mV)
A dynamic action or specific verb requires a specific object, not
necessarily a definite object.
For a dynamic action or specific verb, the action is more punctual, direct or concrete.
The object can have some sort of boundaries to sharply direct the action, to achieve a
dynamic action. In relation to the way a verb presents a situation, the V-ABS form can be
compared to a zoomed focus. To achieve a zoomed picture, it is easier when there is
something definite or referential in the speaker’s and the hearer’s knowledge. But in
general a zoomed focus just requires a specific object.
(107)
Ka-i
awa-a
olumpu-’ute.
then-3sNOM find-3sABS hut-little
‘Then he found a little hut.’ (sio52) (NVAb)
However, even when using a wide-angle lense, it is still possible to focus on a particular
object. In other words, it is still possible to focus on a definite object when using a moN-V
form. One situation in which this is appropriate is where the object is a type or group
specification (Langacker 1991a:53) rather than a specific individual. When one type is
contrasted with another, this is sufficient reason to justify making a contrastive focus. The
photographer focuses on one entity to show contrast with another entity which is left out of
focus. Consider this example:
(108)
Mo-tasu
koie na’a-na pae ka-u
rabusi-o.
also-3s rice then-2sNOM pull.up-3sABS
‘You dibble that rice, then you pull out weeds.’ (roo10) (mV;NVAb)
AF/NF-dibble that
From the context, the focus is not on one particular rice plant, but on rice as a type of
plant in contrast to corn which was mentioned earlier in the text. This can fall under the
category of non-individuated object.
When a V-ABS form is used, the zoomed focus may be on an object noun phrase which
does not seem to be marked grammatically as specific, but is specific from the context:
274
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
(109)
Ka-ndo
daa si-simbu
tungkale-e
ewo, tungkale-e
then-3pNOM be RED-wander rummage-3sABS grass rummage-3sABS
saro.
rubbish
‘They wandered around rummaging in the grass, rummaging in the rubbish.’
(col 26) (NAuV;tVAb;tVAb)
In this case, the boundary of the ewo ‘grass’ is established by shared knowledge that it
designates the grass around that particular house. Another example is an object which is
one mingled among many being brought into individual identity or existence.
(110)
Lau-lau-no-mo
totoro naamo mo-’upu
ka-i
RED-until-3sPOS-PRF sit
and
AF/NF-pick then-3sNOM
kuli-si-o
ronga kaa-ho.
skin-APPL-3sABS with eat-3sABS
‘he went and sat down and picked one, then he peeled it and ate it up.’
(kol25) (V;mV;NVAb;tVAb) 9
Even a mass noun with an unspecified boundary may gain a boundary due to a previous
action and thus be available for zooming:
(111)
Ka-i
um-ahi ...
mo-’o-’ala-akono
tina-no
then-3sNOM INT-draw.water AF/NF-RED-take-3sBEN mother-3sPOS
e’e,
da-hoo
leu
wowa-a,
da-hoo
lawa
ndo’u-o.
water be-3sABS come carry-3sABS be-3sABS receive drink-3sABS
‘Then she drew water … and fetched it repeatedly for her mother, she
would bring it, and she would receive it and drink it up.’ (diu15)
(NV;mV;AuAbV;tVAb;AuAbV;tVAb)
In the above example, when e’e ‘water’ is first mentioned with the verb mo’o’ala ‘take’,
it has no boundary. However when it is brought from the well wowa-a, its identity is fixed
as the water which has just been fetched.
4.
Less dynamic actions or general verbs need no object agreement on the
verb, but dynamic actions or specific verbs do.
The most inner and final or end component of verb structure, which is the change of
state component, may or may not be present. The speaker may not include the change of
state component in his general or widely opened picture of the action. If it occurs, it is
tightly bound to the particular dynamic action and the affected object, as seen more easily
from the chart in §3 above (Figure 2). An overall action is not concerned for only one
particular action or a particular object or the possible affectedness of the object. Consider
the following examples:
(112)
9
O kia
po-’awa-aku, ari-aku
mom-pando wawi.
O friend AF-get-1sABS finish-1sABS AF/NF-spear pig
‘Friend, I got it, I have speared a pig.’ (perc7) (pVAb;AuAbmV)
This example is discussed in Mead (1998:179).
Moronene verbal prefix moN(113)
275
Inai da
ari
pando-o
sapi-’u
ka-i
dungku
who REL finish spear-3sABS cow-2sPOS then-3sNOM until
me-luarako tariti-no.
INT-go.out intestines-3sPOS
‘Who speared your cow so that its intestines spilled out?’ (dic:tariti)
(AuVAb;NV)
In the first example, mompando wawi ‘speared a pig’ is presented as an overall action.
The object is indefinite. The verb pando ‘spear’ in both V-ABS and moN-V forms do not
differ in terms of temporal component of the action, both have the same degree of
directness of action and in both cases the object is specific. In the first example the speaker
just wanted to present the overall scene of activity, so he was not concerned about
presenting the end point of the activity and he did not specify the object. By itself, the
moN-V form does not necessarily imply the success of the attack. The speaker gave a
general picture of his state of success using the verb po’awaaku ‘I got it’ first, and only
then mentioned the content of success.
The verb mo-’awa ‘get/obtain’ implies that the object is affected, but the affectedness is
not as prominent as in the case of the V-ABS form awa-a. This is because the picture which
is taken with mo-’awa has to cover the overall action, possibly all the physical and mental
actions. So the prominence is on a general state of success rather than on the action as
such.
Another set of interesting examples is:
(114)
Da-hoo kolopua tangasa mo-aha
pali-no.
be-3sABS turtle
PROG
AF/NF-sharpen axe-3sPOS
‘The turtle was sharpening his axe.’ (kol20) (AuAbmV)
(115)
Aha-’akita-’o
ta’owu-nto.
sharpen-1piBEN-3sABS machete-1piPOS
‘Sharpen our machetes!’ (perc24) (tVAb)
(116)
Anto, aha-’akita-’o
pali.
Anton sharpen-1piBEN-3sABS axe
‘Anton, sharpen the axe for us.’ (perc31) (tVAb)
Note that both mo-’aha/aha-’o are used with a definite object. Based on the meaning of
the verb mo-’aha/aha-'o ‘sharpen’, it is a durative action in both forms and both forms
occur with a specific object. When one commands that one’s machete should get
sharpened, one would expect a result, namely the affectedness of one’s machete. So the
form V-ABS seems to match this expectation. In contrast, when one uses mo’aha, the
affectedness is not in focus, but rather just describing the overall activity.
With a dynamic, specific verb, the object is a prototypical direct object, with salient
affectedness, and so the object is more crucially involved in the action. The affected object
together with the affectedness seem to be tightly bound and also close to the action which
directly has contact with such an object. When the affectedness is in focus, automatically
one zooms in on the object and the particular action next to it. So grammatically it is
marked saliently with ABS clitic on the verb stem.
In relation to valency, Langacker explains how an object can be more tightly bound to
the verb than the subject is, for objects are inner-layer participants. This is reflected in their
276
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
integration at the phonological pole (Langacker 1991b). This applies particularly, we
suggest, in the case of a dynamic verb, because of the relation between the act causing the
affectedness and the affected object.
5.
It is misleading to label the moN-V form as actor or subject focus in the
Philippinist sense (akin to ‘voice’).
The less dynamic verb has an object which may or may not be affected by the action
and so it is involved, but not crucially, in the overall picture of the action. Grammatically
it is hence not marked on the verb stem. The question is whether this moN-V form best
described as subject pivot instead, which means the subject becomes a pivot. Some call it
an actor focus or subject focus, as it is generally claimed that there are primary and
secondary roles or pivots that are actor and undergoer or subject and object. According to
Friberg (1996:143), in Konjo, ‘subject focus implies that there is no object or that the
object is not relevant to the action at hand’; in other words the object is out of focus.
To explain why moN-V is not actor or subject focus, from the perception view, let us
return to our photo-taking analogy again. In an overall picture the actor of an action is
included, whereas in a zoomed picture only part of the actor is included, such as the hand
or the mouth as the representative of the actor within the frame. To the viewer, seeing the
hand or the mouth reminds him of the actor. With the general view provided by a moN-V
form, the fact that one sees the whole body of the actor, but perhaps not so focused on one
particular part, is not as important as the overall impression of the scene, with some other
verb components also prominent. The primary role or pivot has not disappeared, yet it is
not primarily prominent in the whole picture. It is not profiled. It is rather an action or
activity which is in focus and profiled.
The use of the term ‘actor/subject focus’ in contrast to ‘undergoer/object focus’ gives
the impression that each form zooms in and focuses in an equivalent way either on the
actor subject or the undergoer object. But for Moronene, this would be a misleading
impression. It might be fair enough to call the V-ABS form ‘object/undergoer focus’. The
object is profiled. But a shift from a V-ABS form to a moN-V form does not imply that the
photographer simply moves the camera a bit to focus on the actor rather than the
undergoer. The actor is not profiled with a moN-V form. Rather it implies that the camera
is not shifted, but instead the zoom is adjusted to a wider angle to take in the whole scene.
Hence we suggest that some better terms to describe the moN-V form in Moronene are
‘action focus’ 10 or ‘activity focus’ or ‘scene focus’.
6 Conclusion
In many ways, the Moronene moN-V form may seem to have parallel behavior to
similar forms in other Sulawesi languages. Yet some unexpected features of its usage, such
as its occurrence with definite, specific objects in many Moronene texts, has been a
stimulus for further investigation. Semantic analysis and a cognitive grammar approach
have served well in clarifying this behavior. So instead of labelling it as actor or subject
focus or as antipassive, it is labelled in several different ways to elucidate its behavior as
understood from a cognitive-semantic approach.
10
Mead (1998:177) uses the term ‘action-focus’ to describe the Moronene moN-V form.
Moronene verbal prefix moN-
277
What are the best terms to use to describe the distinction between the V-ABS and moN-V
forms? It depends which aspect of the distinction we want to emphasise. To reflect the
semantic distinctions in verb behaviour, the terms ‘dynamic/less dynamic’ or ‘more
transitive/less transitive’ can be used for V-ABS and moN-V forms respectively. The term
‘semitransitive’ is a helpful label for the moN-V forms to indicate that they are more
transitive than intransitive verbs, but not as transitive as the V-ABS forms. To reflect
perceptually-conditioned distinctions in the scope of predication, the terms ‘specific/
general’ verb can be used for V-ABS and moN-V respectively. With regard to focus or
profiling, the V-ABS forms can be characterised as ‘affectedness-focus’ and the moN-V
forms as ‘action-focus’.
Himmelmann (2002:14) distinguishes two contrasting approaches to the analysis of
voice phenomena in western Austronesian languages. In one approach, the so-called actor
focus is analysed as an antipassive contrasting to an unmarked transitive construction. In
the second approach, the different voices are regarded as ‘valency-neutral alternations’ so
that in ‘actor voice the actor is the syntactic pivot, in undergoer voice the undergoer is the
syntactic pivot, but both constructions share the same transitivity value’. The approach of
this paper is perhaps more allied to the second approach than the first, but with some
significant differences and refinements. The two Moronene verb forms have been
presented as having the same valency, but differing in transitivity with regard to other
factors. And the semantic difference is not merely a change of pivot, but involves a cluster
of more subtle distinctions.
This paper represents a preliminary exploration of the semantics of the Moronene verbal
prefix moN-. Various aspects of its meaning have been illustrated and explicated in terms
various extended meanings and analogies. Further work is needed to refine the analysis,
both in terms of examining a larger number of examples and in understanding how the
various meanings interrelate to form a polysemy network.
It is likely that the semantics of similar verb prefixes in other languages in Sulawesi is
different from that in Moronene. But investigation along the lines attempted in this paper
may possibly reveal somewhat similar patterns of variation in meanings.
References.
Andersen, T. David, 2001, Discourse functions of clause types in Moronene narrative
poetry. PhD tutorial paper. Fuller Theological Seminary.
Barr, Donald, 1988a, Da’a verbal affixes and clitics. In Steinhauer 1988:11–49.
—— 1988b, Focus and mood in Da'a discourse. In Steinhauer 1988:77–129.
Busenitz, Robert L., 1994, Marking focus in Balantak. In van den Berg 1994:1–15.
Esser, S.J., 1927, Klank- en vormleer van het Morisch (Phonetics and morphology of Mori)
part 2. Verhandelingen van het Koninklijk Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en
Wetenschappen 67/4. Bandoeng: Nix
Foley, W.A. and R.D. van Valin, 1984, Functional syntax and universal grammar.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Forrest, Linda B., 1994, The de-transitive clauses in Bella Coola: passive versus inverse.
In Talmy Givón, ed. 1994:147–168.
278
Suree Anderson and T. David Andersen
Friberg, Barbara, 1991, Ergativity, focus and verb morphology in several South Sulawesi
languages. In Ray Harlow, ed. VICAL 2, Western Austronesian and contact
languages, papers from the Fifth International Conference on Austronesian
Linguistics,103–130. Auckland: Linguistic Society of New Zealand.
—— 1996, Konjo’s peripatetic person markers. In Steinhauer 1996:137–171.
Givón, Talmy, 1990, Syntax: a functional-typological introduction, vol.2.
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
—— 1994, The pragmatics of de-transitive voice: Functional and typological aspects of
inversion. In Talmy Givón, ed. 1994:3–44.
Givón, Talmy, ed., 1994, Voice and inversion. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P., 1996, Person-marking and grammatical relations in Sulawesi.
In Steinhauer, 1996:115–136.
—— 2002, Voice in western Austronesian: an update. In Fay Wouk and Malcolm Ross,
eds The history and typology of western Austronesian voice systems, 7–16. Canberra:
Pacific Linguistics.
Hopper, P.J. and S.A. Thompson, 1980, Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language
56:251–299.
Kroeger, Paul R., 1996, The morphology of affectedness in Kimaragang Dusun. In
Steinhauer 1996:33–50.
Langacker, Ronald W., 1987, Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 1: theoretical
prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
—— 1991a, Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 2: descriptive application. Stanford:
Stanford University Press.
—— 1991b, Concept, image, and symbol: the cognitive basis of grammar. Berlin and New
York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lyons, John, 1977, Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Martens, Michael, 1988, Notes on Uma verbs. In Steinhauer 1988:167–237.
Matti, David F., 1994, Mamasa pronoun sets. In van den Berg 1994:65–89.
Mead, David, 1998, Proto-Bungku-Tolaki: reconstruction of its phonology and aspects of
its morphosyntax. Doctoral dissertation, Rice University.
Steinhauer, Hein, ed., 1988, Papers in western Austronesian linguistics No 4, 11–49.
Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Steinhauer, Hein, ed., 1996, Papers in Austronesian linguistics No. 3. Canberra: Pacific
Linguistics.
Strömme, Kari K., 1994, Person marking in the Mamuju language. In van den Berg
1994:91–113.
van den Berg, René, ed., 1994. Studies in Sulawesi Linguistics, Part 3, NUSA 36.