05.08.2013 Views

Perception verb complements in Akatek, a Mayan language

Perception verb complements in Akatek, a Mayan language

Perception verb complements in Akatek, a Mayan language

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!