The particle ‘ke’ as a differential object and subject marker in Ka’apor

Fábio Bonfim Duarte

doi:10.1590/1981.81222019000300007

Abstract

Abstract The main purpose of this article is to show that the Ka’apor language exhibits both direct object marking (DOM) and differential subject marking (DSM). This research demonstrates that the particle ke is responsible for triggering these systems, since it is used when agent subjects are semantically affected by the event described by the verb and when objects are high on the animacy scale. In this sense, the DOM mechanism in Ka’apor is regulated by both the animacy and definiteness scales. With regard to DSM, I hypothesize that it emerges as an example of a markedness reversal, since affectedness is not a typical property of subjects, but only of objects. As a result, DSM in Ka’apor is characterized by the fact that only subjects which resemble typical patient objects are overtly case-marked by the particle ke.

Highlights

According to Duarte (2014, p. 100), “Ka’apor is spoken by about 1,000 people who live in the state of Maranhão, in northern Brazil
The main purpose of this paper is to show that Ka’apor exhibits both direct object marking, DOM, and differential subject marking, hereafter DSM
This paper will show that the particle ke is responsible for triggering these systems, since it signals that subjects are semantically affected by the event and that objects are high in the animacy scale

Summary

Introduction

According to Duarte (2014, p. 100), “Ka’apor is spoken by about 1,000 people who live in the state of Maranhão, in northern Brazil. This paper will show that the particle ke is responsible for triggering these systems, since it signals that subjects are semantically affected by the event and that objects are high in the animacy scale. Another aim is to identify what abstract Case this particle encodes both in DSM and DOM systems. In line with these assumptions, the theoretical hypothesis to be explored in this paper is that this particle is used to convey animacy and definiteness on the one hand, and the semantics of affectedness on the other hand. The analysis is based on theories about subject and object differential marking, such as the ones developed by Aissen (2003), Butt (2003, 2006), Butt and King (1991, 2004), Comrie (1989), Croft (1988, 1990), Givón (1976) and Woolford (2000), among others

Objectives

Conclusion