Adverbial and Argument-Doubling Clauses in Cree - MSpace

examinhg how they behave with different types of matrix verbs.
We can examine the interpretation(s) subordinate clauses receive with both
transitive and intransitive matrix verbs. A subordinate clause can only receive an
argument-doubling interpretation when it is introduced by an appropriate transitive mat&
verbal complex, with an argument available for r-linking. If the matrix clause contains an
intransitive verb (i.e., no available argument26), an argument-doubling interpretation is not
possible. In contrast, adverbial clauses generally receive the same interpretation regardless
of the transitivity, or availability of arguments, of the matrix verbal complex.
First, we will take a single subordinate clause 2-sipw2htCt m2riy 'whedthat Mary
lefi', and compare the interpretations it receives when introduced by bot h transitive and
intransitive matrix verbs.
(58) a. ni kiskênirnâw ê-sipwêhtêt mèriy .
1 -know.TA-( 1-3) cj-1eave.N-3 Mary-3
' I know that Mary lefi.'
2-sipwêhtët mériy = argument-doubling clause
b. niniton ê-sipwêhtêt rnèriy.
1 -cry.AI- 1 cj-1eave.N-3 Mary-3
' 1 cried when Mary lefi.'
ê-sipwêh~bt rnêriy = adverbial clause
In (5 8), the subordinate clause ê-sipBhtë! mêriy 'whenlthat Mary leaves' receives
a different interpretation in each sentence. In (Ha), it occurs with a transitive verb
ïhe numkr of arguments a verb hûs to assip is not nacrurily dependent on verb classification. Some
AI verbs can intcoduce Adoubling NPs and clauses. Argument identification, then, must be determineci
by a verb's lexical meaning and semantic content, mt by its morphological classincation. More research
on this topic ne& to be done.