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.

174 5. PERCEPTION VERB COMPLEMENTS IN AKATEK<br />

3.2. The su x -on. The -on su x - without exception - occurs<br />

only on transitive <strong>verb</strong>s, which can then additionally take the <strong>in</strong>transitive<br />

thematic vowel -i, if the <strong>verb</strong> is the nal constituent, result<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong> -oni. Ihave shown that the <strong>verb</strong>al su x -on is a central structural<br />

property of transitive type2 constructions. The same su x also occurs<br />

on transitive <strong>verb</strong>s when the subject is clefted or relativized. Also, -on<br />

optionally occurs on type2 CVCs as is shown <strong>in</strong> section 3.4.7. What I<br />

have not explicitly mentioned until now, is the fact that the same sufx<br />

occurs also on transitive <strong>verb</strong>s <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>dependent basic sentences. In<br />

the present section I try to br<strong>in</strong>g together what has been hypothesized<br />

about the role of the su x -on hop<strong>in</strong>g that the results help to more<br />

clearly characterize the status of type2 <strong>complements</strong>.<br />

The ma<strong>in</strong> di erence between type2 constructions on the one hand<br />

and relative and cleft constructions on the other is that the former<br />

structures reta<strong>in</strong> person mark<strong>in</strong>g for two core arguments while the latter<br />

mark only one argument on the <strong>verb</strong>. This seems plausible consider<strong>in</strong>g<br />

the fact that <strong>in</strong> relativization and <strong>in</strong> cleft constructions the subject<br />

has been raised to the matrix predicate. The examples below illustrate<br />

this di erence between a type2 complement construction (105), subject<br />

cleft (106), and relativization (107).<br />

(105) x-;-y-ab' ix Mik<strong>in</strong> ;-s-txon-on si'<br />

PERF-B3-A3-hear NCL Micaela B3-A3-sell-SUF rewood<br />

naj w<strong>in</strong>aj<br />

NCL man<br />

`Micaela heard the man sell<strong>in</strong>g rewood.'<br />

(106) ja'-; jun ti' hach-kol-on-oj y-i<strong>in</strong> y-ib'an<br />

CFT-B3 one DEM B2-help-SUF-IRR A3-<strong>in</strong> A3-on.top<br />

q'<strong>in</strong>-al<br />

life-VL<br />

`This one will help you all your life.'<br />

Penalosa & Say (1992)<br />

(107) x-;-s-chi naj w<strong>in</strong>aj chi-;-ma'-on kam<br />

PERF-B3-A3-say NCL man IMPF-B3-hit-SUF die<br />

no' tu'<br />

PRO:animal DEM<br />

` ::: said the man who was kill<strong>in</strong>g the animal.'<br />

Penalosa & Say (1992)<br />

The same extraction of the subject happens <strong>in</strong> Wh-questions like (108).<br />

The Wh-word is extracted from the post<strong>verb</strong>al argument position to

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!