Perception verb complements in Akatek, a Mayan language
Perception verb complements in Akatek, a Mayan language
Perception verb complements in Akatek, a Mayan language
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
128 4. AKATEK, A `TYPICAL' MAYAN LANGUAGE<br />
the third person is not realized. The ergative set A a xes represent<br />
the marked agreement (M 1). The pronom<strong>in</strong>al a xes on the <strong>verb</strong>al<br />
complex, which have been analysed as arguments, follow anergative<br />
pattern. The subjects of transitive <strong>verb</strong>s (trans A) are realized as<br />
ergative set A pronom<strong>in</strong>al arguments (M 1 <strong>in</strong> Table 9), while subjects<br />
of <strong>in</strong>transitive <strong>verb</strong>s (<strong>in</strong>tr A/P) and direct objects of transitive <strong>verb</strong>s<br />
(trans P) are referred to via absolutive set B pronom<strong>in</strong>al arguments (U<br />
<strong>in</strong> Table 9). This is illustrated for trans A and trans P, and <strong>in</strong>tr<br />
A, respectively, <strong>in</strong> the <strong>Akatek</strong> examples (4) and (5), repeated here for<br />
convenience as (86) and (87), and <strong>in</strong> example (88) for <strong>in</strong>tr P.<br />
(86) x-<strong>in</strong>-a-ten tej<br />
PERF-B1-A2-push DIR<br />
`You pushed me here.' Penalosa & Say (1992)<br />
(87) x-;-b'ey naj Xhunik<br />
PERF-B3-walk NCL John<br />
`John walked.' Zavala (1992b), 43a<br />
(88) x-;-kam naj Xhunik<br />
PERF-B3-die NCL John<br />
`John died.' Zavala (1992b), 43b<br />
One grammatical phenomenon that typologically can be correlated<br />
with an ergative mark<strong>in</strong>g pattern is split ergativity. Split ergativity<br />
stands for the phenomenon that the prevalent ergative mark<strong>in</strong>g pattern<br />
changes to a di erent mark<strong>in</strong>g pattern, ususally an accusative one,<br />
conditioned by special environments such as a speci c aspect or person<br />
(Dixon, 1994). However, <strong>in</strong> <strong>Mayan</strong> <strong>language</strong>s the split ergative mark<strong>in</strong>g<br />
is not an accusative mark<strong>in</strong>g (Dayley, 1981; Larsen, 1990). In<br />
almost all <strong>Mayan</strong> <strong>language</strong>s <strong>in</strong> which it occurs, split ergative mark<strong>in</strong>g<br />
is realized as a shift from absolutive to ergative agreement mark<strong>in</strong>g for<br />
<strong>in</strong>transitive subjects. Put di erently, the (marked) ergative extends to<br />
the <strong>in</strong>transitive subject <strong>in</strong>stead of the (unmarked) absolutive extend<strong>in</strong>g<br />
to the transitive subject, which is the case <strong>in</strong> most split constructions<br />
cross-l<strong>in</strong>guistically. As a result, <strong>in</strong> <strong>Mayan</strong> split constructions both<br />
subjects are cross-referenced by the (marked) ergative pre x, which is<br />
unusual for split systems (Dixon, 1994).<br />
Chort and Mam are exceptions from the split pattern described<br />
above. Chort splits <strong>in</strong>to a three-way system <strong>in</strong> the imperfective aspect,<br />
the <strong>in</strong>transitive subject obta<strong>in</strong>s a yet di erent set of pronom<strong>in</strong>al<br />
markers (Quizar & Knowles-Berry, 1988). Mam follows a neutral<br />
system <strong>in</strong> that the ergative set of pronom<strong>in</strong>al a xes extends to