Phi-features and the Modular Architecture of - UMR 7023 - CNRS

74
an inverse morpheme on the verb. 3EA→3O combinations can be direct or inverse
and are not further pertinent here. The status of 1/2EA→2/1O as direct or inverse
varies by language, and will prove crucial. 45
(100) a. Person Hierarchy: 1/2 > 3
(i) 1↔2: inverse in Arizona Tewa, direct in Southern Tiwa, Picurís.
(ii) 3↔3: direct or inverse.
b. Direct: EA and O unmarked for case (bare), EA and O agreement.
c. Inverse: EA oblique, O primary agreement controller.
(i) Arizona Tewa: oblique EA agrees, more poorly than in direct.
(ii) Southern Tiwa, Picurís: oblique nonagreeing EA; inverse verb affix.
Southern Tiwa shows clearly the passive-like quality of the inverse. In direct
1/2EA→3O, (101), as well as 1/2EA→2/1O, (102), the EA and O must be bare DPs
and control agreement. In inverse 3EA→1/2O (103), the EA must appear in a PP (or
oblique) glossed INSTR (-ba), fails to agree like other PPs, and the verb bears the
inverse morpheme glossed PASS (-che). (The gloss A refers to the morphological
class of 'child' that is a mixture of number and animacy.)
(101) a. Ti-mu-ban 'uide [direct context 1→3]
1SGi→Aj-see-PAST child(A)
Ii saw the childj.
b. *'Uidej ∅j-mu-che-ban nai-ba
child(A) A-see-PASS-PAST 1-INSTR
(Allen & al. 1990: 333)
(102) a. I-mu-ban [direct context 1→2]
1SGi→2SGj-see-PAST
Ii saw youj.
b. *aj-mu-che-ban nai-ba
2SG-see-PASS-PAST 1-INSTR
(Alen and Frantz 1983: 304f.)
(103) a. seuanide-ba te-mu-che-ban [inverse context 1→3]
man-INSTR 1SGi-see-PASS-PAST
The man saw mei (I was seen by the man).
45 3→3 combinations might reflect direct 3.PROXEA→3.OBVO vs. inverse 3.OBVEA→3.PROXO,
as in Arnold (1994) for Mapudungun (cf. Kroskrity 1985: 315f.). Applicative constructions
might shed more light on this. They treat the applicative object IO like the direct object of plain
transitives (Allen and Frantz 1983: 308, Allen et al. 1990: 347). However, while 3EA→3O combinations
can be direct or inverse and 1/2EA→XIO→3O are direct, 3EA→3IO→3O can only be inverse
in Southern Tiwa (Rosen 1990: 2.3). This is consonant with person-like properties of even 3 rd
person applicative objects discussed in section 5.2. (The IO prevents O from being 1 st /2 nd person
in Southern Tiwa and Algonquian by the Person Case Constraint of chapter 5, even when it is 3 rd
person and loses the PH-interaction to a 1 st /2 nd person EA; see Béjar and Rezac 2009: 46 note 6
for one approach, as well as Albizu 1997b, Lochbihler 2008, Boeckx 2008b.).