Adverbial and Argument-Doubling Clauses in Cree - MSpace

5.3 Adverbial Clauses
We have already discussed that adverbial clauses, which demonstrate adjunct-like
behaviour, are not A-doubling expressions, i-e., they are not r-linked to an argument
within the matrix verbal complex. Certainly there are semantic and pragmatic links
between the subordinate and matrix clauses, but there is no dependency between the
arguments of these clauses. The adverbial clause does not need to be construed with an
matrix argument. In this section, 1 want to rnake this absence of linking explicit by
presenting some representations of adverbial clauses occurring with matrix verbs.
Two examples with representations of stmctural location are given in (85) and
(86). In (85) the subordinate clause precedes the verb, while in (86) it follows the matrix
verb." In both examples, the adverbial clause is not r-linked to apro in the matrix clause.
(85) [,[, pro,-6-sipwêhtêyan] [ , [, pro,-niki-pêhtawâw-prok ] [,atim.]]]
cj-1eave.N-2
1 -pst-hear. S. o. TA-(l-3) dog-3
'When you went out, 1 heard the dog.'
@SI
In (85), the adverbial clause 6-szpShtêyan 'when you wem out' has no referential-linking
to the matrix clause niki-péhuwciw atim '1 heard the dog'. Al1 of the pronominal
arguments, in both clauses, have different referents. This is indicated by the subscnpted
indexes on eachpro. The matrix clause dso contains an A-doubling NP atim 'dog(prox)'
which is indicated by being r-linked to the theme argument in the matrix verbal complex.
I use the sentence hierarchy described by Russell and Reinholtz (1995)- as discussed in section 3.2.2.
For more detail, see Russell and Reinholtz (1995).