Abstract
This paper investigates the extraction of an internal argument as the trigger in Tsou applicatives. It is observed that a locative applicative (LA) advances as the trigger an indirect object (IO), not a direct object (DO), whereas a(n) instrumental/benefactive applicative seems to advance either an IO or a DO. In this paper, I argue that the seemingly DO extraction in an IA is actually an IO extraction and that the DO is anteceded by an IO introduced by an IA head that functions as the matrix predicate of a complex predicate. The complex predicate analysis is supported by the fact that an IA with the seemingly DO extraction is required to take a ditransitive verb as its complement and receives a double transitive marking. The complex predicate analysis also applies to a double applicative, where an IA is stacked over an LA. A double transitive is believed to instantiate the well-motivated conceptualization of a transported theme/causand as an instrument and a double applicative that of a goal as a beneficiary.
Highlights
This paper deals with extractions in Tsou causative applicative constructions (CA hereafter) in light of the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 2000, 2001, 2008)
The term is intended for a three-argument verb that is typically marked by applicative morphology in Tsou; it does not refer to a double object construction (DOC)
Given that temporal adverbials of this sort have been proven to merge in the domain of TP cross-linguistically (Cinque 1999), the reflexive trigger in question should have moved from its base position within VP to a position around or above TPa
Summary
This paper deals with extractions in Tsou causative applicative constructions (CA hereafter) in light of the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 2000, 2001, 2008). Most of the previous studies on applicatives are concerned with accusative languages, notably Germanic languages like English and Bantu languages like Chichewa and Kichaga It is less known how applicativization works in ergative. In the context of Chomsky’s phase theory, the present paper endorses one of the two competing phase-based accounts in the Austronesian literature—I adopt Aldridge’s (2004, 2005, 2008a, b) view rather than Rackowski and Richards’s perspective and treat what have been labeled as focus/voice markers in the literature as light verbs/applicative heads instead of as markers of Case agreement, as will be reviewed in sections The Case agreement approach-The ergative/light-verb analysis. Section Phase theory of applicatives proposes a complex predicate analysis of CAs and argues that the trigger extractions consistently start from SpecApplP in Tsou. Section Concluding remarks concludes the paper with some discussions on its typological and theoretical implications
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
