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.

3. PVCS OF TYPE2 163<br />

(77) ta chi-on-lo'-w on<br />

COND IMPF-B1p-eat-AP CL1p<br />

`If we eat ::: ' Penalosa & Say (1992)<br />

In the <strong>in</strong>corporat<strong>in</strong>g AP, whose <strong>verb</strong> is marked by the AP su x<br />

-w(i), the former direct object, i.e. usually the patient denot<strong>in</strong>g NP,<br />

has to be directly post<strong>verb</strong>al and cannot take NCLs. However, there<br />

is no correspond<strong>in</strong>g pronom<strong>in</strong>al <strong>verb</strong>al a x for the patient. The set B<br />

marker on the detransitivized <strong>verb</strong> encodes the agent denot<strong>in</strong>g subject.<br />

As can be seen <strong>in</strong> example (78), the semantic agent no' txitam `the<br />

pig' of the transitive construction is the subject, unrealized on the<br />

<strong>verb</strong> s<strong>in</strong>ce third person set B pronom<strong>in</strong>al a xes are zero. The patient<br />

of the transitive construction, aan `corncob', is not realized on the<br />

<strong>verb</strong> at all. This means that for rst and second person patients this<br />

construction is not an option due to the lack of rst and second person<br />

pronouns. Aan `corncob' cannot take an article or a noun classi er nor<br />

can it be moved away from the <strong>verb</strong>al complex <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>corporat<strong>in</strong>g AP<br />

construction.<br />

(78) x-;-nooch-wi<br />

aan no' txitam<br />

PERF-B3-eat.bit<strong>in</strong>g-AP corncob NCL pig<br />

`The pig was eat<strong>in</strong>g the corncob.' Zavala (1997), 456<br />

The third type of AP is called demoted patient AP, s<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>in</strong><br />

this construction, the patient surfaces as an oblique NP marked with<br />

the preposition i<strong>in</strong> `<strong>in</strong>'. The <strong>verb</strong> is marked either with a -wa or with a<br />

-wi su x. In example (79), the patient aan `corncob' can take a noun<br />

classi er ixim and is part of the PP yi<strong>in</strong> ixim aan.<br />

(79) x-;-nooch-wa no' txitam y-i<strong>in</strong> ixim aan<br />

PERF-B3-eat.bit<strong>in</strong>g-AP NCL pig A3-LOC NCL corncob<br />

`The pig was eat<strong>in</strong>g on the corncob.' Zavala (1997), 456<br />

In the demoted patient AP, the patient is made explicit, while <strong>in</strong> the<br />

<strong>in</strong>corporat<strong>in</strong>g AP it is less explicit, <strong>in</strong> that it cannot be marked. In the<br />

absolutive AP the patient is completely suppressed.<br />

Table 6 provides a summary of the structures of APs <strong>in</strong> <strong>Akatek</strong><br />

compared to the structure of an active transitive construction. Generally,<br />

the <strong>verb</strong>al su x w(i)/wa detransitivizes the <strong>verb</strong>, which then takes<br />

only a set B pronom<strong>in</strong>al a x <strong>in</strong>stead of both set B and set A a xes.<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>gly, it can only have one adjunct NP. In AP constructions this<br />

only rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g NP is the subject NP of the former active transitive,<br />

usually denot<strong>in</strong>g the agent, while the patient denot<strong>in</strong>g object NP of

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!