Perception verb complements in Akatek, a Mayan language

3. PVCS OF TYPE2 167
in such a construction as an oblique argument taking the preposition
iin `in'.
(87) *x-;-'il-wa ix Mikin y-iin aw-el-toj
PERF-B3-see-AP NCL Micaela A3-in A2-leave-DIR
`Micaela saw you leaving.'
Ihave shown that antipassivization of type2 PVCs is grammatical in
Akatek. As opposed to passive constructions, however, the PV cannot
be antipassivized without suppressing the PVC.
3.1.7. Cleft. Another transformation process that can a ect complex
perception constructions is clefting. As illustrated in example
(88), a perception construction involving an NI-PVC in English can
cleft either the PVC subject, or the PVC object, or the whole PVC.
(88) a. Msaw[JdoX].
b. It was [J] that M saw [do X].
c. It was [X] that M saw [J do].
d. It was [J do X] that M saw.
The question I investigate in this section is whether similar clefting
processes are grammatical in Akatek. As was mentioned in chapter
4, unlike English, Akatek does not have relative pronouns. However,
Akatek does have a special cleft particle, ja' (CFT), which renders the
identi cation of cleft constructions unambiguous. First of all, cleft constructions
in independent active transitive and intransitive sentences
are presented. Then, I present the abilities of type2 PVCs to be either
partially or completely clefted.
The most marked cleft construction is to cleft the subject of transitive
verbs, usually denoting the agent (Zavala, 1992b). When the
subject of a transitive verb is clefted, it is put into the preverbal cleft
position accompanied by the cleft particle ja'. The transitive verb obtains
the su x -on and marks only the direct object with a set B pre x.
The subject does not have a referent within the verbal complex as can
be gathered from the absence of a set A marker in example (89). Note
that only third person set B markers are unrealized, set A markers are
never unrealized. Example (89) does not conclusively show that the
zero B3 marker on the verb denotes the object NP adjunct naj Xhunik
`John' and not the clefted subject ix Malin `Mary'. Evidence for this
analysis is derived from constructions involving rst or second person
objects, which are realized on the verb. This is illustrated further below.