Applicative undergoer
METHODOLOGY: EVENT FRAMING AND FOUR TYPES OF CONSTRUCTIONS USED FOR VERB CLASSIFICATION
5.3 The blaq UV qu’ O construction
5.3.2 What the blaq UV qu’ O construction is not
In this section, I argue that the blaq UV qu’ O construction is neither a serial verb construction (SVC), nor an adverbial verb construction (AVC), nor an auxiliary verb construction (AuxVC). I first address the issue of how the blaq construction differs from a serial verb construction.
5.3.2.1 Blaq UV qu’ O construction not a serial verb construction (SVC)
First, a blaq UV qu’ O construction cannot be accounted as a serial verb construction. There are at least three reasons for this exclusion. First, according to Crowley (2002:10), SVCs are “syntactic constructions involving what can be analyzed at the surface level as single clauses, but which are nevertheless expressed by means of multiple predicates”; in contrast, a blaq UV qu’ O construction involves two clauses.
Second, argument-sharing is another distinctive characteristic of SVCs (Baker 1989;
Collins 1997; Aikhenvald 2006); however, the actor in the event specified by the second verb in a blaq UV qu’ O construction can be generic, while the actor performing a commending act is always the first person speech act participant. Third, as proposed in M. Y. Yeh and S. Huang (2009), in Atayal SVCs, the second verb must be in an AV form, in contrast to the blaq UV qu’ O construction where the second verb is always an
157
UV. (5.1c) and (5.9) are examples for SVC:
(5.9) (Sinica Archive: (11-025-c))
liq-un=su mita’ qu’ a p<in>hkny-an
good-un=2SG.GEN m.see NOM FIL walk<PST>walk-LOCNMZ
nqu’ ts<in>ring-an.
GEN <PST>begin-LOCNMZ
‘You should observe well that what people had experienced at the beginning.’
Liq-un in either (5.1c) or (5.9) is an adverbs-like verb used to specify the manner in which an action like the steaming action in (5.1c) or the seeing action in (9) is carried out.
5.3.2.2 Blaq UV qu’ O construction not an adverbial verb construction (AVC)
Second, the blaq UV qu’ O construction is not an adverbial verb construction proposed by Chang (2009). As pointed out in Chang (2009:439), “AVC is a typologically unusual construction in which adverbials expressing manner, iteration, frequency, and so forth, surface as higher verbs in syntax”. (5.10) illustrates AVCs for Tsou:(5.10) (Chang 2009:443 (7a); original data, glossing, and translations) a. Mi-’o
pasu-po-poha’o
(pasunaeno).AV-1SG sing-RED-slow.AV sing.AV
‘I sang slowly.’
b. Os-’o
pasu-po-poha’v-a (pasunaev-a).
UV-1SG sing-RED-slow-PV sing-PV
‘I sang (the song) slowly.’
As can be seen from (5.10), the manner adverbial verb poha’o ‘slow’ can be in either an
AV or a PV form, and under the concord restriction, its following lexical form should occur in the same voice form. This differs from the Atayal blaq UV qu’ O construction, where blaq is in bare form and the following verb is in a UV form.
5.3.2.3 Blaq UV qu’ O construction not auxiliary verb construction (AuxVC)
Blaq may function like an auxiliary verb28; but note that when it is used as an auxiliary, it must appear in a totally different construction, and thus has very different meaning, as in:
(5.11) blaq=nya’ niq-un qu’ t<n>ahuq ni’ ciwas.
MOD=3SG.GEN eat-un NOM <PST.OBJNMZ>cook GEN PN
‘He likes to eat Ciwas’s dishes.’
In (5.11), blaq means ‘like to’ and functions as an attitudinal auxiliary verb for the speaker to express his or her attitude toward the proposition conveyed in the complement clause. No evaluating or commending act is possible.
At the structural level, (5.11) is identical to (5.12), (5.13), and (5.14):
(5.12) aki’=naha’ ’sa-n hbyaw ga’, (i)yat=naha’
MOD=3PL.GEN go-an chase TOP NEG=3PL.GEN cin-hebang rwa’.
CIN-measure FP
‘Though they wanted to chase (boars), it wasn’t the territory where they could step into.’
28 An auxiliary verb is a grammatical word used to supplement information like tense, aspect, modality, or polarity on the event specified by the following lexical verb (cf. Egerod 1966:348). In addition to the name ‘auxiliary’, Egerod (1966) and Rau (1992) give lexemes with the same grammatical function like a negator ini’, a progressive marker cyux/nyux, an affirmative marker si’ etc. different names. These names
159
(5.13) Batad Ifugaw (Newell 1993:21; cited in Reid and Liao 2004: 449 (24b)) Adi lahhīnon Umāngob nan batu ede.
NGTV separate Umāngob DET stone that
‘Umāngob won’t separate the stones from that (soil).’
(5.14) Ivatan (Larson 1986:11; cited in Reid and Liao 2004: 452 (52))
Oyod=na sira a chinasi ni ina o
true=GEN.3S NOM.3P LIG pity GEN mother NOM
manganak=na=ya.
children=GEN.3S=that
‘Mother truly pitied her children.’
In (5.12), aki’ means ‘want’ and, like blaq in (5.11), is also an epistemic auxiliary verb in Squliq Atayal. In (5.13), according to Reid and Liao (2004), adi is an aspectual auxiliary verb.29 (5.14) illustrates a sentence with a less closely bound auxiliary verb; in this case, the auxiliary verb oyod ‘true’ requires a ligature a between itself and its dependent “main” verb chinasi ‘pity’ (Reid and Liao, 2004:451).
To summarize briefly, we have shown that the blaq UV qu’ O construction differs from either SVCs, or AVCs or AuxVCs. Namely, though there is a verb sequence in the construction in question, blaq cannot attract a pronominal clitic, unlike that in the other three constructions. It is a complex construction consisting of a speech act verb blaq and an incomplete complement clause. The reasons for the incompleteness have also been provided in foregoing discussion, and meanwhile, insufficient information out of the
29 Reid and Liao (2008) proposes two characteristics of auxiliary verbs in Philippine languages are: (i) they “require the following verb to agree with them in transitivity, and sometimes also in tense or aspect”, and (ii) “they attract to themselves any second-order pronominal or adverbial clitics, and sometimes other pronominal forms that would otherwise be complements of the following verb”. The negator agguy in Batad Ifugaw, the future marker ’sá in Guinaang Bontok, and the modal marker ka- ‘must’in Botolan Sambal are instances for auxiliary verbs enumerated in their paper. But there is some morphosyntactic difference regarding auxiliary verbs between Squliq Atayal and Philippine languages. A conspicuous difference is on the agreement in transitivity and tense or aspect as well between an auxiliary verb and its following lexical verb. No agreement of the sort occurs in Squliq Atayal, but that is not the case in Philippine languages. For a detailed discussion on auxiliary verbs, please refer to Reid and Liao.
incompleteness can also be supplied from the perspective of semantic frames. (5.15) illustrates a frame used to activate the speaker using another blaq UV qu’ O construction, blaq yal ktan qasa’.
(5.15) (gaga’ na’ Atayal: 145-153)
cyux mqwas qu’, cyux iy kyaw kyaw ASP m.sing NOM ASP FIL roar roar
para’ qasa’ lga’, kyal-un=nya’
Formosan.barking.deer that FP:TOP speak-un=3SG.GEN maha’. hcyux iy, cyux iy kyaw nanu’ sa la’.
QUOT ASP FIL ASP FIL roar what that FP
cyux ciliq la’ ay, para’ ga’ ma’ rwa’.
ASP capture FP FP Formosan.barking.deer TOP QUOT FP
blaq yal kt-an, qasa’.
good very see-an that
‘The Formosan barking deer was roaring; he (i.e., the old man) said the Formosan barking deer was hunt. That is really (a) good (TV program) worth watching!’