Adverbial and Argument-Doubling Clauses in Cree - MSpace

Le-, more prominent in the discourse, while the other is marked as obviative. In (28), the
direction marker indicates that a participant higher on the animacy hierarchy acts upon a
participant that is lower on the hierarchy. The verbal infiection indicates that a third
person plural proximate and an obviative participant are involved. Because proximate
participants are higher than obviative participants on the animacy hierarchy, we know that
the proximate plural acts upon the obviative. In (29), we see the inverse fonn of the verb.
This rneans that the obviative (lower on hierarchy) acts upon the proximate (higher on
hierarchy). In (28) and (29). the direction markers are underlined.
(28) wâparnew ak.
see. TA-dir-(3 p-3')
'They (prox) see himlthern (obv). '
wâpamgwa k.
see.TA-inv-(3'-3 p)
'He/They (obv) seedsee them (prox). '
These examples also demonstrate that the proximatelobviative distinction is not based on
the ro!es of subject and object.
This section has introduced the difTerent verb orden as well as verbal morphology.
The agreement morphemes senre to identi@ the pronominal arguments which are situated
within the verbal cornplex. We also introduced the role of obviation, and demonstrated
that obviation status is not dependent upon thematic roles.