Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 699

Oceanic Linguistics Special Publication No.

21

The Causatives of Malagasy

Charles Randriamasimanana

University of Hawaii Press


Honolulu

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Randriamasimanana, Charles. The causatives of Malagasy. (Oceanic linguistics special publication ; no. 21) Bibliography: p. 1. Malagasy languageCausative. I. Title., II. Series. PL5373.R36 1986 499'.35 86-16017 ISBN 0-8248-1079-1 (pbk.) Publication of The Causatives of Malagasy has been supported in part by grants from The University Publications Sub-Committee, the Research and Graduate Studies Committee of the Arts Faculty, and the Research and Graduate Studies Committee of the English Department, each of the University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. Camera-ready text copy was prepared using the facilities of the English Department, University of Melbourne, under the supervision of the author.

In loving memory of my father, my mother and my grandmother

CONTENTS

FOREWORD ACKNOWLEDGMENTS GENERAL INTPODDCTICN

pages xiii-xiv xv-xvi 1 2-201 2-7 7-28 29-74 75-85 86-128 129-177 178-194 195-200 201

CHAPTER CUE: THE CAUSATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS OF MALAGASY Introduction Section 1: Animacy Section 2: Control Section 3: Entailment Section 4: Productivity Section 5: Fusion Section 6: Markedness Conclusions Footnotes CHAPTER TWO: PREVIOUS SCHOLARSHIP ON MALAGASY CAUSATIVES Introduction Griffiths Parker Ferrand Malzac Dahl Rajaona Rabenilaina Conclusions Footnotes

202-229 202-203 203-205 205-206 206-208 208-210 210-213 213-221 221-222 222-224 225-229

viii

CHAPTER THREE: KEFLEXIVIZATION Introduction The Process Scope of Present Study Criteria for Markedness Mditional Criterion for Markedness Assumption Section Is Reflexivization and Granmatical Relations Section 2: Reflexivization and non-Causative Constructions Section 3: Reflexivization and Causative Constructions Section 4: Reflexivization and the Cyclic Convention Section 5: Reflexivization and Pronominalization Conclusions _

230-323 230-236 231 232 232-234 234-235 235-236

236-249

249-264

265-274

274-30

301-320 321-323 324-417 324-325 326-386 326-343 344-345 345-365

CHAPTER FOUR: PRCNOMINALIZATIQN Introduction Section Is The Basic Process Human Trigger Assumption Summary: Human Trigger and Proncminalization Animate But Non-Human Trigger Assumption Sunmary: Non-Human, Animate Trigger and Pronominalization Non-Animate Trigger Assumption Sunmary: NOn-Animate Trigger and Pronominalization

365-367 367-384

384-386

ix

Section 2: Other Relevant Parameters The "Precede" Parameter The "Command" Parameter Forward Pronominalization Backward Pronominalization Section 3: The Cyclic Convention Against Simultaneous and Free Order Rule Applications Against Simultaneous Rule Application Against Free Order Rule Application Ordering of Rules Conclusions Footnotes CHAPTER FIVE: PASSIVIZATION Introduction Section Is The Basic Process The Relevant Parameters Malagasy Verb Classification Distribution of Passive Affixes Additional Parameters: Tense and Aspect Ihe Semantics of Passive Affixes Relevance of the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy Order of the Different Types of Oblique Case-marking and the Passive Voice Relative Order of the Different Types of Oblique Summary: Relative Order and Properties of the Obliques

386-404 387-397 397-403 404 404 405-414

405-406 406-407 407-409 409-414 414-416 417 418-590 418 419-493 420-421 421-429 429-446 446-449 450-454 454 454-465 465-476

477-490

490-493

Section 2 s The Passive and Complex Structures Verbal Construction Types Bgui-1 Equi-2 Raising-to-DO Raising-to-Su Complementizer Fa and Application of Affixal Passive

493-588

495-509 509-525 525-539 539-554

554-567

Affixal Passive Contingent upon Underlying Fa 567-568 Causative Constructions Predicate-Raising Causatives Restriction on Affixal Passive Affixal Passive and Causal Causatives Coniplement-Causatives and Nature of the Embedded Verb Cbmplement-Causative and Verbal Aspect The Causative aha and the Nature of the Predicate in the Embedded Clause The Causal Causative aha and Affixal Passive The Causal Causative ank (a) and Affixal Passive General Restriction on Affixal Passive and the Dichotomy between PredicateRaising Causatives and Comp-Causatives Summary: the Different Types of Biibedded Clauses Affixal Passive and the Cycle Conclusions 586 587-588 588-590 585-586 582-584 580-582 578-580 574-576 576-578 568-570 570-572 572-574

xi

CHAPTER SIX: HE BI-SENTENTIAL SOURCE OF ALL CAUSATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS Introduction Section 1: Bi-Sentential Source Co-Occurrence Restrictions on the Verb Transportability of Adverb and Scope Ambiguity Do-So Replacement Izany-Replacement Reflexivization to N Tenany and Pronominalization Section 2: Single S Output Sentential Question Formation Exclamation Formation No-Longer Negation Izy-Substitution Distinction between DO and 10 Demotion of the Embedded Su to DO Passivization Conclusion Footnotes GENERAL CONCLUSIONS APPENDIX A: List of Abbreviations APPENDIX B: Classes of Verbs BIBLIOGRAPHY 637-639 640-672 641-644 644-646 647-649 650-654 655-661 661-669 669-672 672-673 674 675-676 677 678-680 681-683 607-623 624-631 631-637 591-674 591-592 592-639 592-607

TABLES

Table 1: The Animacy Parameter Table 2: Control by Causee Table 3: The Entailment Parameter Table 4: The Different types of Embedded Predicates Table 5: The Degree of Fusion of the Higher and Lower Predicates Table 6: Markedness Table 7: Anaphoric Pronominalization: Human Trigger Table 8: Anaphoric Pronominalization: Non-Human Animate Trigger Table 9: Anaphoric Pronominalization: Non-Animate Trigger Table 10: Verb Classes Table 11: Distribution of the Different Verbal Affixes Table 12: The Different Types of Oblique Table 13: The Order of the Different Types of Oblique Table 14: Types of Clause That Can be Embedded Table 15: Criteria for the Distinction between DO and 10

28 74 85 128

176 194 344

366

385 427

449 491 492 586

661

FOREWORD

Most previous studies on Malagasy syntax have been concerned primarily with classification of the various surface structures that occur in Malagasy. These studies have provided a wealth of invaluable information on Malagasy sentence structure, reflecting both the strengths and the weaknesses, of this methodology. More recently, developments in transformational and generative graitmar have been applied to provide deeper insight into many aspects of Malagasy sentence structure. Pioneering work in this area has been carried out by Edward L. Keenan, some of whose relevant publications are cited in the bibliography to the present work. Charles Randriamasimanana's study of Malagasy causative cons ' structions is the most comprehensive application to date of this methodology to Malagasy syntax. Charles Randriamasimanana shows that, although Malagasy causative constructions appear to consist of a single clause, many of their properties can only be given insightful analysis if one assumes a level of analysis at which the causative construction consists of two distinct clauses. In fact, a Malagasy causative construction requires two distinct levels of syntactic analysis: one where it is biclausal (accounting for the similarities to other complex sentences) and one where it is monoclausal (accounting for the similarities to other simple sentences). This monograph will be Of interest as a detailed illustration of the application of this methodology to an Austronesian language and for the way in which it uses linguistic argumen-

xiv

tation to evaluate competing analyses. But even linguists whose interests are less theoretical will find Charles Randriamasimanana's study an invaluable source of insight into a wide range of syntactic phenomena and semantic distinctions in Malagasy grammar.

December 19, 1985 Bernard Comrie

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express m/ thanks and appreciation to the following persons and institutions without whose encouragement and help this book would have never been published in English: Noam Chomsky and Kenneth Hale, both of MIT, who expressed in many ways their academic interest in this little known language and whose help made it possible for me to prepare the final manuscript for publication; Bernard Comrie, of TJSC, who originally took the initiative of proposing The Causatives of Malagasy as a PhD dissertation under the title A Study of the Causative Constructions of Malagasy; Edward Keenan, of UCLA, who not only was generous of his time in discussing most aspects of this study, but who also, with Elinor Ochs, extended their hospitality to me upon my first arrival in California and subsequently, provided guidance and financial support in periods of need. I would like to express my gratitude to the Publications Sub-Committee of the University of Melbourne for its generous publication grant. I am grateful to the Arts Faculty of the University of Melbourne^,for its Research Development Scheme during 1984, 1985 and 1986. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the English Department for the research money it granted me as well as the constant support it gave during the preparation of the manuscript. The following native speakers of Malagasy, who happened to be in the United States, provided me with their grammaticality

xvi

judgments and intuitions, absolutely crucial when i y cwn were n uncertain: B. Andriamanalimanana, L. Koziol nee Randrianarivony, A. Rabakoarihanta, H. Rahaingoson, J. Rajaofera, R. Rakotomalala, F-X Ramarosaona, B. Ranaivoarisoa, V. Randrianasolo and his wife, M. Rasamimanana, H. Rasolondramanitra, V. Razafimahatratra, and M. Razafimamonjy. It goes without saying that the final decision was mine so that any error or mistake in the present publication should not be attributed to any of my consultants. Several of the sentence types used in this work originated from personal letters written over a period of several years by ir parents before their death, whereas others were inspired by r/ two daily newspapers, i.e. Atrika and Vaovao, published in Madagascar and graciously sent to me by the Embassy of the Democratic Republic of Madagascar in Washington, D.C., in the United States. Many thanks to John Pater son, who helped me prepare the final copy of the manuscript, and to Heather Bcwe whose cooperation with the final proof-reading was much appreciated. Last but not least, I would like to pay a special tribute to my father, Randriamasimanana, my rrother, Denise Rasoamanana, and my grandnother, Gertrude Rakala, for their encouragements, love, understanding and sacrifice.

Parkville, Victoria, Australia January, 1986

GENERAL INTRODOCTION

The present study deals with the Causative Constructions of Malagasy, showing that all of them have to be derived from bi-sentential sources. A number of tests will be used to establish the validity of such a hypothesis. These will include but will not be restricted to Reflexivization, Pronominalization, and Passivization, each one of these processes being described in great detail in Chapters Three, Four, and Five, respectively. Chapter One presents all the Causative Constructions of the language and proposes a set of six parameters to account for all the semantic and syntactic aspects thereof in a systematic manner: Animacy, Control, Entailment, Productivity, Degree of Fusion, and Markedness. Chapter Two provides a rapid review of previous works touching upon the Malagasy Causatives and written between 1854 and 1974 by the following authors: Griffiths (1854), Parker (1883), Ferrand (1903), Malzac (1908), Dahl (1951), Rajaona

(1972), and Rabenilaina (1974). Finally, Chapter Six exploits the findings of all previous chapters and presents additional evidence to bear on the issue of the bi-sentential sources of all Causative constructions.

CHAPTER ONE

THE CAUSATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS OF MALAGASY

0.1

Introduction. The relevant parameters for an adequate description of the Causative Constructions of Malagasy. The purpose of Chapter One is two-fold: first, to in-

troduce all the Causative Constructions of Malagasy, and second, to propose a set of six factors which will account for all the semantic and syntactic aspects thereof in a systematic manner. In fact, the following are the parameters relevant for a description of the Causative Constructions of this language:

Animacy (Section 1), Control (Section 2), Entailment (Section 3), Productivity of the different Causative predicates (Section 4), Degree of fusion of the higher and the lower predicates (Section 5) , Markedness (Section 6).

Throughout the present chapter, bi-sentential sources for all Causative Constructions will be assumed (see Chapter Six for justification of such a hypothesis).

0.2

The Causative Constructions of Malagasy. Malagasy has the following types of Causative Con-

structions:

(1)a.

Nanao

izay handehanan'

i Jeanne i Paoly1. Paul

past-do comp fut-circ-go-by Jeanne

"Paul was doing so that Jeanne would leave."

b.

Nanao

izay hividianan'

i Jeanne ny boky i Paoly. Paul

past-do comp fut-circ-buy-by Jeanne the book

"Paul was doing so that the book would be bought by Jeanne."

(2)a.

Nanery

an' i Jeanne handeha i Paoly. Jeanne fut-go Paul

past-force

"Paul was forcing Jeanne to leave."

b.

Nanery

an' i Jeanne hividy ny boky i Paoly. Jeanne fut-buy the book Paul

past-force

"Paul was forcing Jeanne to buy the book."

(3) a.

Namela an'i Jeanne handeha i Paoly. past-let Jeanne fut-go Paul

"Paul was allowing Jeanne to leave."

b.

Namela an'i Jeanne hividy ny boky i Paoly. past-let Jeanne fut-buy the book Paul

"Paul was allowing Jeanne to buy the book."

(4)a.

N-amp-andeha an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-go Jeanne Paul

"Paul was having Jeanne go."

b.

N-aitp-ividy

ny boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly. Jeanne Paul

past-caus-buy the book

"Paul was having Jeanne buy the book."

(5)a.

N-amp-iakanjo an'ilay zaza Rasoa. past-caus-dress the child Rasoa

"Rasoa was dressing the child."

b.

N-amp-idina

ny saina i Paoly. Paul

past-cause-lower the flag

"Paul was causing the flag to come down," i.e. "Paul was lowering the flag."

c.

N-amp-ianjera ny latabatra/an1i Jaona i Paoly. past-caus-fall the table/ John Paul

"Paul was causing the table/Paul to fall."

d.

N - aha - sasa past-caus-wash

ny

fitaratra i Paoly. Paul

the glass

"Paul was causing the glass to be washed," i.e. "Paul managed to wash the glass."

e.

N - am -(v)aky

ny fitaratra i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-broken the glass "Paul was breaking the glass."

(6)a.

N - aha - resy past-caus-be in defeat

an'i Jaona i Paoly. Jaona Paul

"Paul succeeded in causing John to be in defeat, i.e. "Paul managed to defeat John."

b.

N - aha - vaky

ny fitaratra i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-broken the glass

"Paul caused the glass to be in the broken state i.e. "Paul managed to break the glass."

(7)a.

Ny ditra-ny

no

n-ampa-voa-kapoka an'i P. P

the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-punish

"It was his mischief which was the cause of P's having been punished."

b.

Ny adala-ny

no

n-aha-resy

an'i P. P

the stupidity-his part past-caus-in-defeat

"It was his stupidity which was the cause of P's having been defeated."

c.

Ny resaka no the talk

n-an-dreraka

an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

part past-caus-fed up

"It was the talk which fed Jeanne up," or "Because of the talk, Jeanne was fed up."

d.

Ny sakafo no

n-ank-arary an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

the food part past-caus-sick

"It was the food which sickened Jeanne," i.e. "It was the food which caused Jeanne to be sick."

In ( 1 ) w e have the "persuasive" construction; in (2), the "coercive"; in (3), the "permissive"; and in (4), the "neutral" Directive respectively. These first four subtypes represent what will be referred to as Directive. In (5), we have the Manipulative; in (6), the Abilitative; and in (7), the Causal constructions. With these it is usual to cleft on the Subject (henceforth Su) NP, as illustrated under 2.2.4 to 2.2.7 of Chapter Five, for example; now, if Clefting does not occur, a special intonation has to be used with a pause demarcating the non-fronted Su from the rest of the sentence. Finally, (7)c. with Causal 3 an(a) tends to acquire a Manipulative reading. (See 6.1.9) The following are examples similar to those referred to above, showing that Clefting is optional: (8)a. N - ampa - sosotra an'i Paoly io. past-caus-angry Paul this

"Paul was angry because of this," or "This angered Paul."

b.

Io

no

n - ampa - sosotra an'i Paoly. Paul

this part past-caus-angry

"It was because of this that Paul was angry," or "Because of this, Paul was angry."

(9) a.

N - aha - voa- kapoka

an'i Paoly ny ditra-ny. Paul the mischief-his

past-caus-passive-strike

"Paul was punished because of his mischief."

b.

Ny ditra-ny no

n - aha - voa - kapoka an'i Paoly. Paul

the mishief part past-caus-passive-strike "It was because of his mischief that Paul was punished."

In (8)a. and (9)a., Clefting has not applied, and a special intonation is needed, whereas in (8)b. and (9)b., Clefting has applied.

Section 1

Animacy

1.0

The Animacy Parameter. In Section 1, assuming bi-sentential sources for all

Causative Constructions and if the Su of the matrix clause is referred to as the Causer and that of the embedded clause as the Causee, both in the underlying sequence, the Animacy parameter yields the following pattern: 1. if ws have a Directive or Manipulative construction, then the Causer is Animate; 2. if we have a Causal construction, the Causer is not Animate; 3. but if we have an Abilitative construction, the Causer is optionally Animate.

Furthermore, 4. in a Directive construction, the Causee is also Animate; 5. in a Manipulative construction, the Causee is typically nonAnimate; 6. in an Abilitative construction, the Causee is optionally Animate; 7. in a Causal construction, the Causee is typically Animate and under aha or ampa, the latter is obligatorily deleted while the Causer is typically non-Animate.

1.0.1

Criteria for Each Type of Construction. As will be seen in Sections 4 and 5, the classification

into four different types of Causatives for those constructions where fusion takes place (see Section 5) correlates with the following characteristics of each: 1. A Causal construction is one where the Causative prefix, i.e. ampa, aha, ana, or anka, meets one of the following requirements: a. if (See Section 4) it can entoed a transitive verb, the latter must be in the Affixal Passive form with the perfective aspect marker voa; b. if it can embed an intransitive verb, the latter must be in the Affixal Passive form with the perfective aspect marker tafa, unless it is a Psychological predicate (see 1.5); c. if it can embed a root passive or an adjective, the latter must be a Psyctological predicate (see 1.5). 2. An Abilitative construction is one where the lower predicate can be either a Psychological or a non-Psychological predicate and where the sequence with the lower predicate strip-

ped of its higher Causative predicate has the same cognitive meaning as the sequence without the Causative predicate (see 2.2.2.4). 3. A Manipulative construction is one where ClauseUnion can precede Affixal Passive (see 4.1.13). 4. A "neutral" Directive construction is one which is not subject to any of the above restrictions.

1.1

Hie Causative Prefix Amp (a). The Causative prefix amp (a) can enter into three types

of constructions: - "neutral" Directive, when both the higher and the lower Sus are Animate; - Manipulative, if only the higher Su is Animate, but not the lower Su; - Causal, if the higher Su is not Animate.

1.1.1

The Directive Causative Amp(a). In the following examples, amp (a) has the Directive

reading:

(10)a.

N - amp - andidy ny mofo an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-cut the bread Jeanne Paul

"Paul was having Jeanne cut the bread."

b.

N - anp - andidy ny mofo {an'azy/*an'ilay izy} izy. past-caus-cut the bread him/her *it he/she

"He/she was having him/her/*it cut the bread."

10

c. ?*N - anp - andidi - n' i Paoly an'i Jeanne ny nrofo. past-caus-cut-pass-by (intended reading) "Paul was having the bread cut by Jeanne." Paul Jeanne the bread

(11)a.

N - anp - itsangana an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-stand-up Jeanne Paul

"Paul was having Jeanne stand up."

b.

N - amp - itsangana {an'azy/*an'ilay izy} izy. past-caus-stand-up him/her *it "He/she was having him stand up." he/she

c.

*N - anp - itsangana-n'

i Paoly i Jeanne. Jeanne

past-caus-stand-up-pass-by Paul "Paul was having Jeanne stand up."

The ungrammatically of the relevant portion of (10 )b. and (11) b. shews that the underlying Su of the lower clause is indeed Animate since izy/azy refers to an Animate in Pronominalization (see details in Chapter Four). (10)c. is marginally grammatical, which

suggests that we only have tendencies and not absolutes. (11)c. could be gramnatical but with a different meaning, i.e. "Paul stood Jeanne up."

1.1.2

The Manipulative Causative Amp (a). In the following examples, anp (a) has the ffcnipulative

reading:

11

(12)a.

N - anp -idina

ny saina i Paoly. Paul

past-oaus-go-down the flag "Paul was lowering the flag."

b.

N - amp - idina {an'ilay izy/*an'azy} izy. past-caus-go-dcwn it/*prep him/her he/she

"Paul was lowering it/*him/*her."

c.

N - amp - idini - n' past-caus-go-down-pass-by

1 Paoly ny saina. Paul the flag

"The flag was being lowered by Paul."

d.

N - anp - iakanjo an'ilay zaza Rasoa. past-caus-dress that child Rasoa

"Rasoa was dressing the child."

e.

N - anp - iakanjo - n -dRasoa ilay zaza. past-caus-dress-pass-by-Rasoa that child "the child was being dressed by Rasoa."

f.

N - aitp - ianjera ny latabatra i Paoly. past-caus-fall the table Paul

"Paul was causing the table to fall," i.e. "Paul made the table fall."

g.

*N - anp - ianjera - n'i Paoly ny latabatra. past-caus-fall-pass-by Paul the table (intended reading) "The table was made to fall by Paul."

12

The lower Su is not Animate in (12)a., (12)b., and (12)c., judging from the ungrammaticality of the sequence after the substitution with azy "him/her," as in (12)b. But the higher Su is indeed Animate since it can be replaced with izy "he/she," as shown in (12)b. Furthermore, in (12)a., (12)b., (12)c., (12)d., and (12)e., Affixal Passive with ...(i)n(a) can apply after ClauseOnion in contrast to (12)d., where Affixal Passive has not applied and as a result, the sequence lends itself to an ambiguous interpretation as either a Manipulative or a "neutral" Directive Causative; in (12)e., where the lower verb is a non-Psychological predicate and Affixal Passive has applied, the output is grammatical and can only be assigned a Manipulative reading, while in (12)f., which has a Psychological predicate in the lower clause, the resulting sequence, as shown in (12)g., is ungrairmatical. Likewise, in (12)c., the lower verb is not a Psychological predicate and Affixal Passive after Clause-Union yields a grammatical output with an unambiguous interpretation, i.e that of a Manipulative Causative. Finally, in (12)a., we have a case of "controlled" Manipulation, as opposed to the "ballistic" type of Manipulation found in (12)f: in the first instance, causation remains effective throughout the entire phase, whereas in the second, causation provides only the initial impulse. The terminology is borrowed from Shibatani (1973).

1.1.3

The Causal Causative Amp(a). Amp(a) has the Causal reading in the following senten-

ces, where Fronting of Su with insertion of the particle no has applied. Typically, the embedded predicate is one where the Causee retains no Control.

13

(13)a.

Ny eritreri-ny no the mind-her

n - anp - ijaly an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

part past-caus-suffer

"It was because of her mind that Jeanne suffers."

b.

{llay izy/*lzy} no n-anp-ijaly {an'azy/*an'ilay izy}. it/*he/*she him/her/*it

"It was because of *him/*her/it that Jeanne suffers."

(14) a.

Ny orana no

n-anp-ianjera ny trano.

the rain part past-caus-fall the house "It was because of the rain that the house fell."

b.

{llay izy/*izy} no n-anp-ianjera {an'ilay izy/*azy}. it *he/*she it/*him/*her

"It was because of it that it fell."

The grammaticality pattern emerging from (13) and (14) suggests that the higher Su is always non-Animate, as evidenced by the distribution of different forms of pronouns, whereas the lower Su can be Animate, as in (13), or non-Animate, as in (14). As will be seen in Section 3, there is Entailment of the lower clause in both (13) and (14).

1.2

The Causative Prefix Aha. Aha can show up in two types of constructions:

- Abilitative, when both the higher and the lower Sus are optionally Animate, i.e. both the higher and the lower Sus are Animate, only the higher Su is, both the higher and the lower Sus are nonAnimate, and only the lower Su is Animate;

14

- Causal, when the higher Su is not Animate.

1.2.1

the Abilitative Causative Aha. Four cases exist in the Abilitative reading of aha

depending cm the Animacy of the Causer and the Causee and given all theoretical possibilities: - Both the higher and the lower Sus are Animate, as in

(15)a.

N - aha - zaka past-caus-carried

an'i Jeanne i Paoly. Jeanne Paul

(zaka "(be) carried" is a root passive) "Paul managed to carry Jeanne."

b.

Zaka-n'

i Paoly i Jeanne. Jeanne

carried-by Paul

"Paul managed to carry Jeanne."

- Only the higher Su is Animate, as in

(16)a.

N - aha - loka

ny varavarana i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-with-hole the door

(loka "(be) with a hole" is a root passive) "Paul managed to make a hole in the door."

b.

Loka-n'

i Paoly ny varavarana.

with-hole-by Paul the door "Paul managed to make a hole in the door."

15
V

- Both the higher and the lower Sus are not Animate, as in

(17) a.

N - aha - zaka past-caus-carried

ny entana ny nozana. the luggage the scale

"The scale could lift the luggage."

b.

Zaka-n1

ny mozana ny entana.

carried-by the scale the luggage "The scale could lift the luggage."

- Only the lower Su is Animate, as in

(18)a.

N - aha - zaka an'i Jeanne ny nozana. past-caus-carried Jeanne the scale

"The scale was able to support Jeanne."

b.

Zaka-n1

ny nozana i Jeanne. Jeanne

carried-by the scale

"The scale was able to support Jeanne."

In all of the above sentences, the a. and b. sequences have the same cognitive meaning.

1.2.2

The Causal Causative Aha. In the Causal reading, the higher Su is typically not

Animate: - but if the lower Su is Animate, then we have a Psychological predicate:

16

(19)a.

N - aha - variana past-caus-be-absorbed

an'i Paoly ny raharaha. Paul the affair

"The affair absorbed Paul."

b.

Variana i Paoly tamin'

ny raharaha.

absorbed Paul because-of the affair "Paul was absorbed because of the affair."

- If the lower Su is not Animate, then we have a non-Psychological predicate:

(20)

Ny rivotra no n- aha - vaky

ny fitaratra.

the wind part past-caus-broken the glass "The glass got broken because of the wind."

- It is also possible for the lower Su to be Animate, with a nonPsychological predicate in the perfective aspect involving voa or tafa:

(21)a.

Ny ditrany

no

n-aha-voa-kapoka

an'i Paoly. Paul

the mischief part past-caus-strike

"It was because of his mischief that Paul was punished."

b.

Ny adalany

no

n-aha-tafa-janona

an'i Paoly. Paul

the stupidity-his part past-caus-stay

"It was because of his stupidity that Paul was left behind."

17

1.3

The Causative Prefix An (a). The Causative prefix an(a) can enter into two different

types of constructions: - Manipulative, when the higher Su is Animate; however, it is also possible to marginally have the Manipulative reading even if the lower Su is Animate, as in (23) below. - Causal, when the higher Su is not Animate.

1.3.1

The Manipulative Causative An(a). Typically, in the Manipulative reading of an (a), the

higher Su is Animate and the lower Su, not Animate (however, see sentence (5)a.):

(22)

N - am - (v)aky ny fitaratra i Paoly. past-caus-broken the glass Paul

(vaky "(be) broken" is a root passive) "Paul was doing so that the glass be-broken," i.e. "Paul was breaking the glass."

However, it is possible to have the higher and the lower Sus Animate although this appears to be marginal:

(23)

?I Jeanne no

n-an-dreraka

an'i Paoly. Paul

Jeanne part past-caus-fed-up

(reraka "(be) fed up" is an adjective) "It was because of Jeanne that Paul was fed up."

In its Manipulative reading, (23) is acceptable, although thischaracterizes a very familiar style.

18

1.3.2

Bie Causal Causative An (a). When the higher Su is not Animate:

- then, if the lower Su is Animate, we have a Causal reading with a lower Psychological predicate, as in

(24)

Hay resaka no that talk

n-an-dreraka

an'i Paoly. Paul

part past-caus-fed-up

"It was because of the talk that Paul was fed up."

- But, if the lower Su is not Animate, then we have a Causal reading with a lower predicate which is not Psychological, as in

(25)

Ilay vato no

n-am-(v)aky

ny fitaratra.

that stone part past-caus-broken the glass "It was because of the stone that the glass got broken."

1.4

The Causative Prefix Ank(a). The Causative prefix ank(a) can enter into three dif-

ferent types of constructions: - Manipulative, as in (116)a. and (116)b.; - Abilitative, when the higher Su is optionally Animate; - Causal when the higher Su is not Animate.

1.4.1

The Abilitative/Causal Ank(a). When the higher Su is optionally Animate, we have the

Abilitative reading, as in (26), whereas when it is not Animate, we have the Causal reading, as in (27). Thus:

19

(26)a.

N - ank - arenin-tsofina i Paoly. past-caus-be-deaf-of-ear Paul

((h)arenina "(will be) deaf" is an adjective) "Paul made a deafening noise."

b.

I Paoly no

n-ank-arenin-tsofina.

Paul part past-caus-deaf-of-ear "It was Paul who made a deafening noise."

(27)a.

Hay sakafo no that food

n-ank-arary an'i Paoly. Paul

part past-caus-sick

((h)arary "(will be) sick" is an adjective) "The food sickened Paul," i.e. "It was because of the food that Paul got sick."

b.

Ilay sakafo no that food

n-ank-arary

ny vavoni-ny.

part past-caus-sick the stomach-his

"It was the food which upset his stomach."

(28)a.

*I Jeanne no

n-ank-arary

an'i Paoly. Paul

Jeanne part past-caus-sick

*"Jeanne was the cause of Paul's being sick."

b. ?*I Jeanne no

n-ank-arary

ny vavoni-ny.

Jeanne part past-caus-sick the stomach-his "It was Jeanne who upset his stomach."

In (28), the higher Su is Animate, and in the Causal reading, the sequences are of very doubtful grammaticality.

20

1.5

The Causative Constructions and Animacy. All the Causative prefixes, i.e. amp (a), aha, an (a),

and ank(a), can have the Causal reading whose main characteristic is that the higher Su is not Animate, as illustrated in the preceding paragraphs. Furthermore, Causal constructions share one comnn feature in that they comprise either a Psychological predicate or an Affixal Passive with voa/tafa in the lower clause. The following segment of this chapter will provide five criteria for distinguishing between a Psychological and a nonPsychological predicate. With the former: 1. the embedded predicate must take an Animate Su; 2. the eirbedded Su is not an Agent; 3. Clause-Union cannot precede Affixal Passive; 4. Clause-Union and Affixal Passive cannot co-occur; 5. a Psychological predicate cannot take an Agent in the genitive case.

1.5.1

Psychological Predicates and Animacy. Typically, with a Psychological predicate, the embedded

Su of the underlying representation is Animate, as opposed to the Manipulative reading, where it is not Animate:

(29) a.

N - am - (v)aky ny

kitay i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-broken the wood "Paul was chopping the wood."

b.

*N - am- (v)aky an'i Jaona i Paoly. past-caus-broken John Paul

"Paul was chopping John."

21

(30)a.

N - an - (t)afitohina an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-be-upset Jeanne Paul

(tafitohina "(be) upset" is an adjective) "Paul was causing Jeanne to be upset."

b.

*N - an - (t)afitohina ny sai-n' i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-be-upset the mind-of Jeanne Paul

*"Paul was causing Jeanne's mind to be upset."

In (29), the underlying enbedded Su mist be non-Animate since the sentence (29) b. with an Animate Su yields an irretrievably ungranmatical sequence. This is the Manipulative reading. On the other hand, in (30)a., the lower Su must be animate, as can be inferred from the grammaticality pattern eiterging from the pair (30)a. and (30)b. In (30)b., therefore, we have a Psychological predicate in the lower clause.

1.5.2

Criteria for Agency. With the Causal reading, the enbedded Su is not an

Agent. For an NP to be an Agent, it must satisfy the following conditions: 1. it can be used to answer the question:

Nanao

inona i

NP?

past-do what deic NP "What was NP doing ?"

2. it can enter into combination with the adverbial expression fanahy iniana "deliberately";

22

3. its predicate must be able to form an Affixal Passive with the no...ina form (See Chapter Five on Passivization); 4. it can enter into combination with the expression amin'izay denoting a purpose; 5. it yields a grammatical sequence with the progressive aspect marker eo amp... followed by a verb in the circumstantial voice; and 6. it can show up in a sequence comprising an Instrument NP Thus, in:

(31)a.

Tbfoka i Jeanne. fed-up Jeanne

"Jeanne is/was fed up."

i Jeanne is not an Agent since it does not have any of the properties listed:

b.

Nanao

inona i Jeanne? Jeanne

past-do what

"What was Jeanne doing ?"

*Tfoka (izy). fed-up (he/she) "(He/she was) fed up.11

c.

*Fanahy inian' soul

i Jeanne

ny

tofoka.

willed-by Jeanne

carp fed-up

*"Jeanne deliberately was fed up."

23

d.

*No - tofh - in1 passive-fed-up-by

i Paoly i J(eanne). Paul J(eanne)

*"J was caused to be fed up by Paul."

e.

*Tofoka i J amin'izay voa-karakara fed-up

ny enta-ny.

J in-order pass-take-care-of the luggage-her

?*"J was fed up for her luggage to be-taken care of."

f.

*T-eo anp-i-tofoh-ina

i J no

tonga

i P.

past prcgr-circ-fed-up J part arrived P *"J was in the process of being fed up when P arrived."

g.

*Tt>foka t-amin' fed-up past-instr

ilay boky i J. that book J

*"J was fed up by using the book."

By contrast, in a non-Psychological State predicate like vaky "being in the state of having been smashed," it is possible to have the following sequences:

(31')a.

Vaky

ny fitaratra.

broken the glass "The glass is broken."

b.

N - am - (v)aky ny fitaratra i Paoly. past-caus-broken the glass Paul

"Paul was causing the glass to be broken," i.e. "Paul was breaking the glass."

24

c.

Nanao

inona i Paoly? Paul

past-do what

"What was Paul doing ?"

d.

Fanahy inian' soul

i P ny

namaky

willed-by P comp past-caus-broken

ny fitaratra. the glass "Paul was deliberately smashing the glass."

e.

No - vaki - n' i Paoly ny fitaratra. pass-broken-by Paul the glass

"The glass was being smashed by Paul."

f.

No - vaki - n 'i Paoly ny fitaratra past-broken-by Paul the glass

amin'izay ho tafa-voaka izy. in-order fut pass-exit he/she "Paul was smashing the window so as to exit."

g.

T-eo ampamakiana

ny fitaratra i Paoly Paul

past progr-cire-break the glass

no

tonga i Jaona.

part arrived John "Paul was in the process of breaking the glass when John arrived."

25

1.5.3

Distinction between Psychological and non-Psychological Predicates: Clause-Union preceding Passivization. With a Psychological predicate, it is not possible to

have a Clause-Union preceding Affixal Passive, whereas this is a possibility with a non-Psychological predicate (See (12) c.):

(32)a.

N - amp - isafoaka an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-angry Jeanne Paul

b.

*N - amp - isafoaka-n'

i Paoly i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-caus-angry-passive-by Paul (interpretation for both a. and b.)

"Paul was causing Jeanne to get angry."

(33)a.

N - anp - ieritreritra an'i Paoly ilay olona. past-caus-think Paul the person

b.

*N - amp - ieritrereti-n'

ilay olona i Paoly.

past-caus-think-passive-by the person Paul "The person was arousing suspicions in Paul's mind."

In (32), where Clause-Union precedes Affixal Passive, we have the Manipulative reading of amp(a) in a.^, whereas the b. sentence remains ungramraatical. Likewise, in (33)a., which does not allow Clause-Union to precede Affixal Passive in the intended reading, amp(a) has the Causal interpretation. Hcwever, (33)b. becomes grammatical with the meaning "The person gave Paul a choice between an unspecified nunfoer of alternatives," where the other person is in a position of Control over Paul.

26

1.5.4

Distinction between Psychological and non-Psychological: Possibility of Clause-Union and Passivization. With a Psychological predicate, it is not possible to

have Clause-Union and Affixal Passive, whereas this is possible with a non-Psychological predicate:

(34)a.

N - an - (t)afitohina an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-upset "Paul upset Jeanne," or "Jeanne was upset because of Paul." Jeanne Paul

b.

*No - tafitohi - n'i Paoly i Jeanne, passive-upset-by Paul Jeanne

(no interpretation whatsoever)

(35) a.

N - am - (v) aky ny fitaratra i Paoly. past-caus-broken the glass "Paul was breaking the glass." Paul

b.

No - vaki - n ' i Paoly ny fitaratra. pass-broken-by Paul the glass

"The glass was being deliberately broken by Paul," or "Paul was breaking the glass."

In (34)a., we have a Psychological predicate, hence the ungrammaticality of Affixal Passive, as seen in (34)b. On the other hand, (35)a. comprises a non-Psychological predicate and (35) b., where Affixal Passive has applied, is graiimatical.

27

1.5.5

Another Criterion: Possibility of Expressing the Agent. With a Psychological predicate, it is not possible to

express the Agent in the genitive case, whereas this is possible with a non-Psychological predicate:

(36) a.

Vaky

ny fitaratra.

broken the glass (same as (31')a-) "The glass is/was in the state of having been broken."

b.

Vaki-n'i Paoly ny fitaratra. broken-by Paul the glass "The glass is/was broken by Paul."

(37) a.

Tafitohina i Paoly. upset Paul

"Paul is/was upset."

b.

*Tafitohin'i Jeanne i Paoly. upset-by Jeanne Paul

"Paul is/was upset by Jeanne."

In (37)a., we have a Psychological predicate and therefore, it is not possible to have the sequence in (37) b. with the Agent in the genitive case: the latter is irretrievably ungranmatical. By contrast, in (36)a., the predicate is a non-Psychological m e and the sentence in (36) b., with the Agent in the genitive case, is perfectly grammatical. i

28

1.5.6

Summary: Animacy. Hie first parameter dealt with in this section, i.e.

Animacy distinguishes between four types of Causative constructions whose features are reported on Table 1.

Table 1

The Animacy Parameter

Underlyingly

Higher Su

Lower Su

"Neutral" Directive

[+Animate]

[H-Animate]

Manipulative

[+Animate]

[+/- Animate]

Abilitative

[+/- Animate]

[+/- Animate]

Causal

[-Animate]

[+Animate]

Note:

Higher Su = CAUSER; Lower Su = CAUSEE; + = Positive; - = Negative ; +/- = Optional.

29

Section 2

Control

2.0.1

The Control Parameter. This Section will consider the Control parameter, which

expresses the degree of Control exercised by the Causee and which is based on: - the nature of the embedded predicate, i.e. Aether it refers to an Activity or a State, as is made evident by the voice and aspect marker used or that can be used with the root of the lower predicate; - as well as the presence or absence of Intent, as shewn by the compatibility or incompatibility with certain adverbial nodifications. The distinction drawn under 1.5 between Psychological and non-Psychological predicates, along with the findings made in Section 1 with respect to the Animacy parameter, will be assumed since there are sentences like "Mati-n'i Jaona i Paoly (Dead-by John Paul)", i.e. "Paul was dead as a result of John's doing," where i Jaona "John," a human, hence Animate, is assumed to be an Agent. This contrasts with exanples like "Mati-n'ny hanoanana i Paoly (literally "dead because of hunger Paul)," i.e. "Paul died of hunger," where ny hanoanana "the hunger," is non-Animate, and therefore, is not assumed to be an Agent in the genitive case. Finally, note that although Affixal Passive in the nonperfective aspect typically encodes Control, as opposed to Root Passives, which usually do not, there exist a nunber of exceptions, of which lasa "(be) gone" is one.

30

2.0.2

Interaction of Causative Constructions with Mverbial Modification. All the Directive and the Manipulative constructions:

interact with the active or circumstantial voices or the Affixal Passive forms no...ina and a-, all of which denote an Activity and are compatible with the modifier fanahy inian'i NP (ny) "soul-willed," i.e. "deliberately," but not with tsy satry (not preferred) "not willingly, accidentally." All the Causal constructions interact with a Psychological predicate, whether the latter is a root passive or an adjective, which denotes a State. All of them are conpatible with tsy satry "accidentally," but not with fanahy inian'i NP (ny) "deliberately." Falling between these two extremes, the Affixal Passive forms voa and tafa, on the one hand, bhave as though they were Activity predicates since initially their agent is expressed but must be deleted under a Causal predicate; yet, en the other hand, they behave like Stative predicates, i.e. the union of the set of Psychological predicates with Animate Causees (for example (19) a) and that set of predicates which can have an Animate or non-Animate Causee (for example (17)a.), which does not involve Psychological predicates or predicates which refer to, or can refer to, an Activity. In fact, these Stative predicates are not compatible with fanahy inian (ny) "deliberately," but are conpatible with tsy satry "accidentally."

2.1.0

The Causative Constructions and Intent. In this Subsection, it will be shown:

31

1. that the "persuasive," the "coercive," the "permissive," and the "neutral" Directive constructions with amp(a) and an (a) allow voice and aspectual forms of the lower predicate, i.e. active, circumstantial, and no...ina or a Affixal Passive forms, which refer to a Deliberate Activity; 2. that the Causal constructions with aha and amp (a) allow, in the lower clause, voice and aspectual forms, i.e. voa/tafa, which correlate with an Activity turned into a State but which is not Intentional, as in the case of a Psychological predicate. They also allow a root passive or an adjective in the lower clause in the case of a Psychological predicate; 3. falling between these two, lies an intermediate zone represented by the Abilitative aha construction which not only a. allows a root passive or an adjective in the enbedded clause, but b. which also allows substitution of the Abilitative aha predicate by the Affixal Passive form no...ina and a, both of which correlate with Deliberate Activity.

2.1.1

The "Persuasive" Directive Construction. In the "persuasive" Directive construction, the em-

bedded predicate must be in the circumstantial voice. Furthermore, it cannot be a Stative predicate (however, see 6.2.7 to 6.2.9).

(38)a.

Nanao [izay h-an-didi-an'i J(eanne) ny mofo] i P(aoly). did oomp fut-circ-cut J(eanne) the bread P(aul)

"P(aul) was doing so that the bread would be cut by J (eanne)."

32

b.

H-andidy ny itofo i J(eanne). fut-cut the bread J(eanne) "J(eanne) will be cutting the bread."

c.

*Nanao [izay h-andidy ny irofo (an)i J(eanne)] i P(aoly) did camp fat-cut the bread J(eanne) P(aul)

(no interpretation whatsoever)

d.

No - didi - n' i J(eanne) ny irofo. pass-cut-by J(eanne) the bread

"The bread was being cut by J(eanne)."

e.

*Nanao [izay no-didi-n'i J (eanne) ny riDfo] i P(aoly). did coup pass-cut-by J (eanne) the bread P(aul)

(only intended reading) *"P was doing so that the bread was being cut by J."

(39)a.

Nanao [izay h-an-defa-s-an'i J ny entana] i P. did cortp fut-circ-send-by J the luggage P

"P was doing so that the luggage would be sent by J."

b.

Ho a-lefa - n' i J(eanne) ny entana. fut pass-send-by J(eanne) the luggage "The luggage will be sent by J(eanne)."

c.

*Nanao [izay ho a-lefa-n' i J ny entana] i P. did coirp fut pass-send-by J the luggage P

(oily intended reading) "P was doing so that the luggage would be sent by J."

33

(40)a.

Voa - didi - n' i Jeanne ny iiDfo. pass - cut - by Jeanne the bread

"The bread has been cut by Jeanne."

b.

*Nanao [izay voa-didi-n'i Jeanne ny mofo] i Paoly. did comp pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread Paul

(only intended reading) *"Paul was doing so that the bread has been cut by Jeanne."

(41)a.

Tafa - petraka i Jeanne, pass - sit Jeanne

"Jeanne found herself sitting."

b.

*Nanao [izay tafa-petraka i Jeanne] i Paoly. did comp pass-sit Jeanne Paul

(cnly intended reading) "Paul was doing so that Jeanne found herself sitting."

(42)a.

Lasa i Jeanne, gone Jeanne

(lasa "(be) gone" is a root passive) "Jeanne is/was gone."

b.

*Nanao [izay lasa i Jeanne] i Paoly. did comp gone Jeanne Paul

(only intended reading) "Paul was doing so that Jeanne was gone."

34

(43)a.

Reraka i Jeanne. tired Jeanne

"Jeanne is/Was tired."

b.

*Nanao [izay reraka i Jeanne] i Paoly. did camp tired Jeanne Paul

(oily intended reading) "Paul was doing so that Jeanne got tired."

The graimaticality of (38)a. and (39)a., where the enbedded verb is in the circumstantial voice, shows that the latter can be in the circumstantial voice. The ungranmaticality of (38) c., where the enbedded verb is in the active voice, indicates that the latter cannot be in the active voice; insertion of the preposition an in front of the lower Su does not improve its grammaticality. The ungranmaticality of (38)e. with the Affixal Passive form no...ina in the imperfective aspect and that of (39)c. with the Affixal Passive form a, also in the imperfective aspect, suggests that the enbedded clause cannot take any Affixal Passive form in the imperfective aspect. The ungranmaticality of (40)b. with the perfective aspect-marker voa and that of (41)b. with the perfective aspect-marker tafa (see Chapter Five: 1.0 for further details) shew that the enbedded predicate cannot be an Affixal Passive form with a perfective aspect. Finally, the ungranmaticality of (42)b. with a root passive and (43) b. with an adjective demonstrates that a root passive or an adjective are ruled out in the embedded clause of the "persuasive" Directive. From (38) to (43), we have all the different possibilities that can occur and since only a verb in the circumstantial

35

voice is allowed in the embedded clause, it follows that the latter is obligatory.

2.1.2

The "Coercive" or "Permissive" Directive Constructions. In the "coercive" or "permissive" Directive constru-

ctions, the enbedded predicate must be either in the active or in the affixal Passive with no.. .ina or a. It cannot be a Stative predicate.

(44)a.

Nanery/Namela

an'i J hanasa an' i P i K. J fut-wash P K

past-force/past-let

"K was forcing/allowing J to wash P."

b.

H -an -(s)asa - n' i J an'i P ny savony. fut-circ-wash-by J P the soap

"The soap is being used by J to wash p."

c.

*Nanery / Nmsla an'i J hanasa-ny past-force/past-let j fut-wash-pass-by-her

an'i P ny savony i K. P the soap K

"K was forcing/letting P be washed with the soap by J."

d.

Nanery / Namela an'i P ho-sasa-n' i J i K. past-force/past-let P pass^wash-tay J K

"K was forcing/allowing P to be washed by J."

36

(45) a.

Bo a-lefa

any T(amatave) iP(aoly). P(aul)

fut pass-send to T(amatave) "P will be sent to T."

b.

Nanery/Namela

an'i P ho a-lefa

any

T i J. J

past-force/past-let

P fut pass-send there T

"J was forcing/allowing P to be sent to T," or "J forced/let P (to) be sent to T."

(46)a.

Ho voa - sasa - n' i J i P. fut pass - wash - by J P

"P will have been washed by J."

b.

*Nanery/*Namela an' i P ho voa-sasa-n' i J i K. past-forced/past-let P fut pass^wash-by J K

*"K was forcing/allowing P to have been washed by J."

(47)a.

Nanery/Namela

an'i J h-ipetraka i P. J fiat-sit p

past-force/past-let

"P was forcing/allowing J to sit."

b.

Tafa-petraka i J(eanne). pass-sit J

"J found herself sitting."

c.

*Nanery/Nanela

an'i J ho tafa-petraka i P. J fut pass-sit P

past-force/past-let

*"P was forcing/allowing J to find herself sitting."

37

(48) a.

lasa

i J(eanne). J(eanne)

fut gone

"J will be gone."

b.

*Nanery/Namela

an'i J ho lasa i P. J fat gone P

past-forced/past-let

?*"P was forcing/allowing J to be gone."

(49) a.

Matahotra

iJ(anne).

pres-afraid J(eanne) "J is afraid."

b.

*Nanery/Nairela

an'i J ho matahotra

i P.

past-force/past-let

J fut pres-afraid P

*"P was forcing/allowing J to be afraid."

In (44) a. and (44)d., the enbedded verb is in the active voice and the Affixal Passive no.. .ina, respectively; both are grammatical. By contrast, in (44) c., where the lower clause has its verb in the circumstantial voice, the output is ungramraatical despite the fact that the lcwer clause on its own, as shown in (44)b., is perfectly granmatical. (45) illustrates the case where the enbedded predicate has the Affixal Passive form with a. When the lower predicate has the perfective aspect marker voa or tafa, the output is ungrammatical, as shown in (46) b. and (47)c. In (48), we have a root passive and, in (49), an adjective: the ungranmaticality of their b. sequences suggests that the lower clause cannot comprise a Stative predicate. From all this, it

38

follows that the active voice or the imperfective aspect Affixal Passive with no..ina or a is mandatory (see 1.1.2 for the difference between no...ina and a).

2.1.3

The "Neutral" Directive Construction. In the "neutral" Directive construction, the embedded

predicate must be in the active voice since it transpires that none of the other voice possibilities yield granmatical sequences. Furthermore, a Stative predicate or a root passive is ruled out, as is made evident by the grammaticality pattern of the sentences below.

(50)a.

- anp - andidy ny mofo an'i Jeanne i Paoly. the bread Jeanne Paul

past-caus-cut

"Paul was having Jeanne cut the bread."

b.

H-andidy ny mofo i Jeanne, fut- cut the bread Jeanne "Jeanne will be cutting the bread."

c.

No - didi - n' pass - cut - by

i Jeanne ny mofo. Jeanne the bread

"The bread was being cut by Jeanne."

d.

*N - ampa - no - didi - n' i Jeanne ny mofo i Paoly past-caus-pass - cut - by Jeanne the bread Paul

(only intended interpretation) "Paul was having the bread cut by Jeanne."

39

(51) a.

N - anp - andefa ny entana an'i J (eanne) i P(aoly). past-caus-send the luggage J(eanne) P(aul)

(note that the enbedded verb is in the active voice) "P (aul) was having J (eanne) send the luggage."

b.

H-andefa ny entana fut-send the luggage

i J (eanne). J(eanne)

"J(eanne) will be sending the luggage."

c.

Ho a-lefa-n'

i J (eanne) ny entana.

fut pass-send-by J (eanne) the luggage (note the embedded verb in the passive voice with a, non-perfective aspect-marker "ballistic" interpretation in d. below) "The luggage will be sent by J(eanne)."

d.

*N - ampa- (ho) - a-lefa-n' past-caus-(fut)-pass-send-by (only intended reading)

i J ny entana i P. J the luggage P

"P was having the luggage sent by J."

(52)a.

H - anp - anasa an'i Jaona an'i Jeanne i Paoly. fut-caus-wash John Jeanne Paul

"Paul will be having Jeanne wash John."

b.

H - anasa an'i Jaona fut-wash John

i Jeanne. Jeanne

"Jeanne will be waging John."

40

c.

Voa - sasa - n'i Jeanne i Jaona. passive-wash-by Jeanne John

"John has been washed by Jeanne."

d.

*N - ampa - voa -sasa-n'i Jeanne i Jaona i Paoly. past-caus-pass-wash-by Jeanne John Paul

(only intended interpretation) *"Paul was having John have been washed by Jeanne."

53)a.

N - anp - i- petraka past-caus-prf-sit down

an'i Jeanne i Paoly. Jeanne

"Paul was having Jeanne sit down."

b.

H - i- petraka fut-prf-sit down

i Jeanne, Jeanne

"Jeanne will sit dcwn."

c.

Tafa - petraka i Jeanne, pass-sit dcwn Jeanne

(notice absence of Control by the Su) "Jeanne found herself sitting."

d.

*N - anpa - tafa - petraka an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-pass-sit down (only intended interpretation) *"Paul was having Jeanne find herself having sat dcwn. Jeanne Paul

41

(54)a.

N - anp - andeha an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-go Jeanne Paul '

"Paul was having Jeanne leave."

b.

H - andeha fut-go

i Jeanne, Jeanne

"Jeanne will be going."

c.

Ho lasa i Jeanne, fut gone Jeanne. "Jeanne will be gone."

d.

*N - anpa - (ho) - lasa an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-(fut)-gone Jeanne Paul

(cnly intended interpretation) *"Paul was having Jeanne be gone."

(55) a.

H-arary i Jeanne. fut-sick Jeanne "Jeanne will be sick."

b.

*N - anp - arary an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-sick Jeanne Paul

(only intended interpretation) *"Paul was having Jeanne be sick."

All of the a. sequences, where the enbedded clause has a verb in the active voice are grammatical, from (50) to (54). Hie ungrammatically of (50)d., (51)d., (52)d., and (53)d. shows that the

42

lower clause cannot have its verb in the Affixal Passive, whether it is in the perfective or imperfective aspect. Hie ungrammatically of (54)d. and (55)b. indicates that the lower predicate cannot be a root passive or an adjective respectively, which suggests that the Causee must retain Control.

2.1.4.1

Hie Manipulative Amp (a) Construction. In the Manipulative amp (a) construction, the eirbedded

predicate is either in the active or in the circumstantial voice. The latter phenomenon has been labelled passive, i.e. Passivization applies after Clause-Union has taken place, this is the diagnostic test for a Manipulative construction.

(56)a.

N - anp - andeha an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-walk Jeanne Paul

I 'Paul was having Jeanne walk."

b.

N - anp - andeha-n-an' i Paoly i Jeanne. past-caus-circ-walk-by Paul Jeanne

'Jeanne was being made to walk by Paul.n

(57) a.

No - sasa - n'i Jeanne ny lanfoa. pass^wash-by Jeanne the linen

"The linen was being washed by Jeanne.n

b.

*N - ampa - no - sasa - n'i Jeanne ny lamba Rasoa. past-caus-pass-wash-by Jeanne the linen Rasoa

(notice passive in the lower clause exclusively) *"Rasoa was making the linen washed by Jeanne."

43

(58) a.

Voa

~ sasa ny lantoa.

pass-wash the linen "The linen has been washed."

b.

*N - anpa - voa - sasa ny lamba i Jeanne, past-caus-pass-wash the linen Jeanne

"Jeanne was washing the linen."

(59)a.

(Tafa) - latsaka
ir

ilay taratasy.

(pass) - be-dropped the letter "The letter was dropped (accidentally)."

b.

*N - anpa - tafa - latsaka an'ilay taratasy i Paoly. past-cau s-pass-be-dropped the letter Paul

*"Paul was causing the letter to be dropped accidentally. "

c.

*N - airpa - latsaka an' ilay taratasy i Paoly. past-caus-be-dropped the letter Paul

*"Paul was having the letter dropped accidentally."

(60)a.

Potsy ny rindrina. white the wall "The wall is white."

b.

*N - anpa - fotsy ny rindrina i Paoly. past-caus- white the wall Paul

"Paul was whitewashing the wall."

44

In (56)a., the enbedded predicate is in the active voice, whereas in (56) b., it is in the circumstantial voice. In both cases the sequences are grammatical. By contrast, in (57)b. and (59)b., involving verbs in the Affixal Passive with perfective and imperfective aspect, the sentences are ungrammatical even though in each case, the lower clause becomes granmatical, as shown in the relevant a. sequences, when used in isolation. In (59)c., we have the root passive latsaka "be in the state of having been dropped" while in (60)b., the enbedded clause comprises an adjective. The ungranmaticality of these two sentences suggests that Manipulative amp(a) cannot embed a root passive or an adjective. However, exanple (5)a. involving the Stative verb miankanjo "be dressed in" shows that it is possible for the lcwer verb to be a Stativ predicate.

2.1.4.2

Restriction on the Manipulative Causative Amp (a). However, if the lower clause has a Stative predicate,

then it must be in the active voice since, as the following examples demonstrate, if it shows up in the passive, the output is ungrammatical. Ihis contrasts with those cases where the lower verb is in the active voice.

(61)a.

H - ianjera ny latabatra. fut-fall, the table

"the table will fall."

b.

N - anp - ianjera ny latabatra i Paoly. past-caus-fall the table Paul

"Paul made the table fall."

45

c.

H - i - anjera - n' ny vilia ny latabatra. fut-circ-fall-by the plate the table

"The table is where the plate(s) fell."

d.

*N - anp - i - anjera - n' ny vilia ny latabatra past-caus-circ-fall-by the plate the table

i Paoly. Paul "Paul made the table fall."

(61)b., which comprises the lower predicate shown in (61)a. and which is in the active voice, is grammatical. (61)d. with sequence (61)c. in its lower clause is ungranmatical. The only difference between (61)b. and (61)d. is that in the latter case, the

embedded verb is in the circumstantial voice.

2.1.4.3

Prefix Substitution with the Manipulative Causative Anp (a). When the embedded verb is a Stative predicate, although

not a Psychological predicate (see this distinction under 2.0.2), the Affixal Passive form corresponding to the Manipulative anp (a) has the a prefix, which substitutes for the Causative predicate and the verb prefix.

(62)

N - a - zera - n' i Paoly ny latabatra. past-pass-fall-by Paul the table

"The table has been made to fall by Paul" (compare with (61) b.)

46

The Affixal Passive prefix a replaces both the higher Causative predicate amp (a) and the prefix of the verb, in this case ian, leaving the root zera.

2.1.5.1

Restrictions on the Manipulative Causative An(a). In the Manipulative an(a) construction, the lower pred-

icate must be a root passive or an adjective that is Stative but ret Psychological; furthermore, it irust be the case that the Causee does not have any Control. Hi is excludes root passives like lasa which attribute some Control to the Causee.

(63)a.

*N - an - andidy ny mofo an" i Jeanne i Jaona. past-caus-cut the bread Jeanne John

(compare with (50)a.) *"John was making cut Jeanne the bread."

b.

*N - an - andeha-n-an' i Paoly an' i Jeanne i Jaona. past-caus-circ-go-by (oonpare with (56)b.) *"John was making Jeanne to be walkedfayPaul." Paul Jeanne John

c.

*N - an - no - didi - n' i Jeanne ny mofo i Paoly. past-caus-pass-cut-by (coitpare with (50) c.) Jeanne the bread Paul

d.

*N - an - voa - sasa - n ' i Jeanne an' i Jaona i Paoly. past-caus-pass-wash-by (coitpare with (52) c.) Jeanne John Paul

47

e.

*n - ana - a - lefa - n' i Jeanne ny entana i Paoly. past-caus-pass-send-by (compare with (51)c.) Jeanne the luggage Paul

f.

*N - ana - tafa - petraka an' i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-pass-sit (compare with (53)c.) Jeanne Paul

64)a.

N - an - datsaka

an' ilay taratasy i Paoly. the letter Paul

past-caus-be dropped

(see (59)a. with latsaka "(be) dropped") (the relevant meaning entails no Control by Causee) "Paul was dropping the letter."

b.

N - am -(f)otsy ny rindrina i Paoly. past-caus-white the wall Paul

(see (60)a. with fotsy "white") "Paul was whitewashing the wall."

c.

*N - an - atahotra an' i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-afraid Jeanne Paul

(see (49)a. with matahotra "(be) afraid) "Paul was frightening Jeanne."

d.

*N - an - dasa an" i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-gcne Jeanne Paul

(see (54)c. with lasa "(be) gone") "Paul was sending Jeanne away."

In (64)a., the embedded predicate is a root passive, latsaka "in the state of having been dropped." In (64)b., it is an adjective, fotsy "white." In both instances, the sequences are grammatical. However, in (64)c., the embedded clause also comprises an adjective, matahotra "afraid of"; yet, the sequence is ungrammatical. The difference between (64)a., (64)b., and (64)c. lies in the fact that the latter is a Psychological predicate. As for (64)d., its ungrammaticality seems to be due to the fact that, although lasa "gene" is a root passive, the Causee still retains Control. The ungrammatical sentences in (63) show that the embedded clause cannot comprise an active voice verb, as seen in (63)a., a circumstantial voice verb, as seen in (63)b., or any form of Affixal Passive, as can be inferred from (63)c. to (63) f. In all the cases shown in (63), no interpretation whatsoever could be assigned to the ungrammatical sequences.

2.1.5.2

Prefix Substitution with the Manipulative Causative An (a). In the Manipulative an (a) construction, the active

prefix an (a) of the typically transitive verb can be replaced by the no...ina circumfix of Affixal Passive.

(65)a.

Vaky

ny fitaratra.

broken the glass "The glass is/has been/was broken."

b.

N - am -(v)aky

ny fitaratra i Jaona. John

past-caus-broken the glass "John was breaking the glass."

49

c.

NO - vaki - n' i Jaona ny fitaratra. pass-broken-by John the glass

"The glass was being smashed by John."

2.1.5-3

Passive with A or Tafa Prefix. If the verb is a Stative intransitive, then the

relevant Affixal Passive is a in the most typical case:

(66) a.

N - ian - tonta ny entana. past-act-fall the luggage

"Ohe luggage fell."

b.

N - a - tonta - n' i Jaona ny entana. past-pass-fall-by John the luggage

"ftie luggage was being dropped by John."

(67)a.

Latsaka ny taratasy. dropped the letter (note "accidental" meaning) "The letter has dropped."

b.

N -

i - latsaka ny taratasy. the letter

past-pref-fall "The letter fell."

c.

N - a - latsak'

i Paoly ny taratasy.

past-pass-dropped-by Paul the letter (note "deliberate activity" meaning) "Hie letter was being dropped by Paul."

50

d.

N - an - datsaka ny taratasy i Paoly. past-caus-dropped the letter "Paul was dropping the letter." Paul

(68)a.

Tafa - latsaka ny taratasy. pass-dropped the letter

"Hiey/Someone managed to drop the letter."

b.

Tafa-latsak'

i Paoly ny taratasy.

pass-dropped-by Paul the letter "The letter was able to be dropped by Paul," i.e. "Paul managed to drop the letter."

(66)a., w= have a typically intransitive verb that is also

Stative. Its imperfective passive form is obtained by substituting a for its prefix. By contrast, in (67), to the root passive form in the a. sequence correspond an intransitive verb, as seen in the b. sentence, or a transitive verb, as shown in the d. sentence. Furthermore, the perfective aspect marker tafa acquires the Abilitative meaning.

2.1.6.1

Restrictions on the Abilitative Aha Construction. In the Abilitative construction involving the Causative

aha, the lower predicate is either a root passive or an adjective provided it is not a Psychological predicate. This requirement proves necessary since otherwise, the construction yields a Causal interpretation, to the exclusion of the relevant meaning.

51

jg9ja<

Zaka

ny entana.

bearable the luggage (ambiguity between perfective and non-perfective reading, in isolation) "The luggage can be carried."

b.

N - aha - zaka

ny entana i Paoly.

past-caus-bearable the luggage Paul (exclusively perfective reading of zaka) "Paul managed to carry the luggage."

c.

Sosotra angry

i Jeanne, Jeanne

(no tense-marker = ambiguity) "Jeanne is/was irritated."

d.

*N - aha - sosotra an' i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-angry Jeanne Paul

(acceptable only in the Causal reading) "Paul managed to irritate Jeanne."

(70)a.

Fotsy ny rindrina. white the wall "The wall is/was white."

b.

N - aha - fotsy ny rindrina i Paoly. past-caus-white the wall Paul

(exclusively past tense interpretation) "Paul managed to whitewash the wall."

52

c.

Reraka i Jeanne, tired Jeanne

"Jeanne is/was tired."

d.

*N - aha - reraka an" i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-tired Jeanne Paul

"Paul managed to exhaust Jeanne."

In the a. and c. sequences, all the predicates are either adjectives or root passives. Yet, the c. sentences cannot be embedded under the Abilitative aha, all the outputs, as shown in (69)d. and (70 )d., are ungranmatical. This ungrammaticality seems to be due to the fact that in the c. sequences, we have Psychological predicates,.whereas in the a. sequences, we do not.

2.1.6.2

Voice Restrictions on the lower Clause. In the Abilitative construction with the Causative aha,

the lower predicate cannot be an active voice verb, a circumstantial voice verb or a passive with the perfective aspect marker voa or tafa:

(71)a.

H - andeha i Jeanne, fut-go Jeanne

"Jeanne will be going."

b.

*N - aha - handeha an1 i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-fut-go Jeanne Paul

"Paul managed to have Jeanne go."

53

(72)a.

H - an - deha - n - an' i Jeanne i Paoly. fut-circ-go - by Jeanne Paul

"Paul is where Jeanne will go."

b.

*H - aha - handehanan' i Jeanne i Paoly. fut-caus-circ-go-by Jeanne Paul

"Paul can be where Jeanne will go." -

(73)a.

Latsaka ny taratasy. dropped the letter "The letter has been dropped."

b.

N - aha - latsaka ny taratasy i Paoly. past-caus-dropped the letter Paul

"Paul managed to drop the letter."

(74)a.

Voa - latsaka ny taratasy. pass-dropped the letter

"Hie paper has been dropped (deliberately)."

b.

*N - aha - voa - latsaka ny taratasy i Paoly. past-caus-pass-dropped the letter Paul

"Paul managed to drop the letter."

(75)a.

Tafa - latsaka ny taratasy. pass-dropped the letter

(sane as (68)a.) "The paper was successfully dropped."

54

b.

*N - aha - tafa - latsaka ny taratasy i Paoly. past-caus-pass-dropped the letter Paul

"Paul managed to drop the paper."

In (71)a., we have an active voice verb. When the sentence is in isolation, it is perfectly grammatical; but when it is embedded under Abilitative aha, the output is ungrairmatical, as shown in (71) b. The sane applies to (72), which involves a verb in the circumstantial voice; to (74) and (75), which involve Affixal Passive with voa and tafa, respectively. Hcwever, in (73)b., the output is grammatical with a root passive which is not Psychological, as explained under 2.1.6.1.

2.1.6.3

Possibility of Prefix Substitution. Since the lower predicate is not Psychological, one can

replace the higher Causative with the no..in(a) Affixal Passive:

(76)a.

Zaka-n'

i Jeanne ny fahoria-ny.

bearable-by Jeanne the grief-her "Her grief could be borne by Jeanne."

b.

N - aha - zaka

ny

fahoria-ny i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-caus-bearable the grief-her "Jeanne managed to bear her grief."

c.

No -zaka-in'

i Jeanne sany irery ny fahoria-ny. alone the grief-her

pass-bearable-by Jeanne by

"Her grief was borne willingly by Jeanne alone," i.e. "Jeanne stoically bore her grief alone."

55

2.1.6.4

Restrictions on the Causal Construction Aha. In the Causal construction with aha or amp(a), the em-

bedded verb, if it is not a Psychological predicate, must be in the perfective aspect of Affixal Passive:

(77)a.

N - i - petraka

i Jeanne (*tamin' izy nisolifatra). because she -past-trip-up

past-pref-sit-down Jeanne

"Jeanne sat dcwn (*due to her tripping up)."

b.

Tafa - petraka i Jeanne tamin' izy nisolifatra. pass-sit-down Jeanne because she tripped-up

"Jeanne found herself sitting due to the fact that she tripped up."

c.

Izy nisolifatra no

n - aha/anpa - tafa - petraka

she past-trip-up part past- caus - pass - sit

an'i Jeanne. Jeanne "It was because she tripped up that Jeanne found herself sitting."

d.

*lzy nisolifatra no

n - aha/anpa -(i)-petraka

she past-trip-up part past- caus - pref- sit

an' i Jeanne. Jeanne "It was because she tripped up that Jeanne found herself sitting."

56

(78)a.

N - i - petraha - n' i J(eanne) ilay seza (.*tamin'izy past-circ-sit - by J(eanne) the chair when she

(the Causal reading of tamin(a) is the relevant one)

nisolifatra). tripped-up *"J sat dcwn on the chair (*due to her tripping up)."

b.

*Izy nisolifatra no

nipetraka i J an'ilay seza. J the chair

she past-trip-up part past-sit

*"Due to her tripping up, J sat on the chair."

(79)a.

N - i - jery

ny boky i J noho ny hatezeran'i P. J due-to the anger-of P

past-pref-look-for the book

"J was looking for the book because of P's anger."

b.

No - jere - n' i J ny boky noho

ny hatezeran'i P. P

pass-look-for-by J the book due-to the anger-of

"Ohe book was being looked for by J because of P's anger."

c.

*Ny hatezeran'i P no the anger-of

n - aha/anpa - no - jere- n'

P part past-caus - pass-look-for-by

i J ny boky. J the book ?"It was because of P's anger that the book was being looked for by J."

57

in (77)c., the embedded predicate is in the perfective aspect form of Affixal Passive, i.e. with tafa, and the sequence is granmatical. By contrast, in (78)b., it is in the active voice and the sequence is ungrammatical. Likewise, in (79)c., it is in the imperfective form of Affixal Passive and the output is irretrievably ungrammatical. In all of these examples, we have nonPsychological predicates, as opposed to Psychological predicates, as in (8)b. and (19).

2.1.7.1

Restriction on the Causal Construction An(a); Psychological Root Passive. In the Causal construction with an(a), the lower pred-

icate must be a Psychological predicatetietherthe latter is a root passive or an adjective. Hie crucial factor here seems to be that the Causee retains no Control since a root passive which lends itself to an ambiguity of interpretation between a Deliberate Activity and an Accidental Event does not qualify. First, it can be a root passive provided the latter is not a Psychological predicate:

(80)a.

Tafitohina i Jeanne tamin' upset

i Paoly.

Jeanne because-of Paul

(notice absence of Control by Causee) "Jeanne was upset because of Paul."

b.

N - an - (t)afitdhina an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-upset Jeanne Paul

"Jeanne was upset because of Paul."

58

(81) a.

Vaky

ny fitaratra tamin'

i Paoly.

broken the glass

because-of Paul

(notice ambiguity of interpretation)

h i i 'The glass was/got broken because of Paul. i


b. *N - am -(v)aky ny fitaratra i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-broken the glass

"The glass got broken because of Paul.n

In (80)a., we have a Psychological predicate and the output is grammatical, as can be seen in (80)b. On the contrary,in (81)a., we have a non-Psychological root passive and the result in (81)b. does not yield the intended reading.

2.1.7.2

Restriction on the Causal Construction an(a); No Passive.

ina

Second, in the Causal construction with an (a), the lower predicate cannot be an affixal Passive with no...ina;

(82)a.

Sahirana i Jeanne tamin'ny vola. in-trouble Jeanne because-of the money (notice absence of Control by Causee)

i i t 'Jeanne was in trouble because of the money.i


b. No -shiran- in' i Paoly i Jeanne tamin' pass-in-trouble-by Paul ny vola.

Jeanne because-of the money

(notice Control exerted on Causee by Causer)

i i "Paul was disturbing Jeanne because of the money."

59

c.

Ny vola

no

n - an - (s)ahirana an1 i J(eanne). J(eanne)

the money part past-caus-in-trouble

"The money was the reason why J was in trouble."

d.

*Ny vola

no

n-an-no-sahirana-in1

i P an'i J. P J

the money part past-caus-pass-in-trouble-by

i "The money was the reason whyP was disturbing J.i

2.1.7.3

Restriction on the Causal Construction an(a): Active Voice in the Lower Clause. Finally, it is not possible to embed an active verb

under the Causal construction with an (a), as will be shown under 4.2.14 and 4.2.15, hence the impossibility of having a circumstantial voice form or the Affixal Passive with a, which can only accompany an active voice verb (See (83)b. and (84)b.).

2.1.8.1

Restrictions on the Causal Construction Ank(a). In the Causal construction with ank(a), it is not pos-

sible to have a transitive (See (152) b.) or an intransitive (See (151)b.) verb. In other words, the lower predicate cannot be an active voice verb. It cannot be a circumstantial or' an Affixal Passive in the imperfective aspect:

(83)a.

N - a- leha-n' i Jeanne i Paoly noho past-circ-go-by Jeanne

ny hasosora-ny.

Paul due-to the anger-her

"Paul was where Jeanne went because of her anger," i.e. n 'Jeanne was going to have a word with Paul because she was angry.n

60

b.

*Ny hasosora-ny no

n-ank/an(a)-a-leha-n'i J an'i P. J P

the anger-her part past-cause-circ-go-by

"Because of her anger, J went where J was,"i.e. "Her anger was causing J to go and have a word with P."

(84)a.

N - sahiran - in'i P i J tamin' ny vola. pass-in-trouble-by P J due-to the money

"P was disturbing J because of the money."

b.

*Ny vola

no

n-anka/an(a)-no-sahiran-in' i P i J. J

the money part past-caus-pass-in-trouble-by P "Because of the money, P was disturbing J."

2.1.8.2

Further Restriction on the Causal Construction Ank(a): Affixal Passive. Furthermore, the ungranmaticality of the sequences in

4.2.19 and 4.2.20 shows that the embedded predicate cannot have the Affixal Passive forms in voa or tafa.

2.2.0

The Indispensability of the Agent. In this Subsection, it will be shown that: 1. the active and the circumstantial voices, the no. .-

.ina and a forms of Affixal Passive correlate with Activity since the Agent must be expressed; 2. a typical Psychological predicate, whether it is a root passive or an adjective, correlates with State since the notion of Agency is not relevant and an Agent cannot be introduced into the clause; and

61

3. Affixal Passives with voa or tafa correlate with either Activity with the presence of an Agent, or a State with its absence. The concept of indispensability of the Agent will be used to show that (a) where an Activity predicate is involved, the Agent cannot be dispensed with; (b) where a Psychological predicate is involved, the concept of . A e c . is not relevant .gny, since it cannot be expressed in the clause; and (c) in the case of the Abilitative aha and tafa, the Agent can be dispensed with.

2.2.1

Explicit Agent. Hie active and the circumstantial voices as well as the

no...ina and the a forms of Affixal Passive require an Agent:

(85) a.

N - an - didy ny mofo i Jeanne. past-act-cut the bread Jeanne "Jeanne was cutting the bread."

b.

*N - an - didy ny mofo. past-act-cut the bread *"Cutting the bread."

c.

No - didi - n ' i Jeanne ny mofo. pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread

"The bread was being cut by Jeanne."

d.

*Nb - didi - na pass-cut

ny nDfo. the bread

"The bread was being cut."

62

(86)a.

N - an - didy ny mofo tamin'ny antsy i Jeanne, past-act-cut the bread with the knife Jeanne

"Jeanne was cutting the bread with the knife."

b.

N - an - didi - an'i Jeanne ny mofo ny antsy, past-circ-cut-by Jeanne the bread the knife

"The knife was being used by Jeanne to cut the bread."

c.

*N - an - didi -ana past-circ-cut

ny mofo the bread

ny antsy. the knife

"The knife was being used to cut the bread."

(87) a.

N - an - (ts)ipy ny rano i Jeanne. past-act-throw the water Jeanne

"Jeanne was throwing the water out."

b.

N - a -tsipi- n' i Jeanne ny rano. past-pass-thrcw-by Jeanne the water

"The water was being thrown out by Jeanne."

c.

*N - a - tsipy past-pass-throw

ny rano. the water

"The water was being thrown out."

As can be inferred from previous examples, in particular (35), the Agent surfaces as either a Su or a genitive. In (85), the a. and c. sequences are grammatical since the Agent is encoded as the final Su, in the first, and in the genitive, in the second. In the b. and d. sequences, where it is left out, the sentences

63

are ungrammatical. Are precluded situations where the b. sequences come as answers to the question "Nanao inona i Jeanne?" (literally: past-do what Jeanne?) "What was Jeanne doing ?" In (86)b.( the verb is in the circumstantial voice with the Agent in the genitive. When the Agent is left out, the sentence becomes ungrammatical, as in (86) c. Hie sane grammaticality pattern

arises in the case of the so-called "controlled" manipulation, as in (85)d., as well as the "ballistic" verb, as in (87): the b. sequence, where the Agent is expressed, is grammatical whereas the c. sentence, where it has been left out, is ungrammatical.

2.2.2.1

Impossibility of Expressing the Agent. A Psychological predicate, whether it is a root passive

or an adjective, correlates with State since the concept of Agent cannot find its expression in the clause:

(88)a.

N - atory past-sleeping

i Jeanne tamin1

ilay fanafody.

Jeanne because-of the nedicine

"Jeanne slept because of the medicine."

b.

*N - atori - n'

ilay fanafody i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-sleeping-by the medicine

(89)a.

Tafitohina i Jeanne tamin' upset

i Paoly.

Jeanne because-of Paul

"Jeanne was upset because of Paul."

b.

*Tafitohi-n1 i Paoly i Jeanne, upset-by Paul Jeanne

64

In (88)a. and (89)a., i Jeanne is not an Agent. The ungrairtnaticality of the b. sequences shows that the Agent cannot be expressed at all. This contrasts with the following:

(90)a.

Maty i Paoly. dead Paul

(Autonomous Event requiring no Agent) "Paul is dead."

b.

Mati - n' i Jaona i Paoly. dead -by John Paul

(result of a Deliberate Activity) "Paul is dead as a result of John's doing," i.e. "Paul has been killed by John."

2.2.2.2

Deletion of the Agent. Affixal Passive in the perfective voice, with voa on a

transitive verb or tafa on an intransitive one, allows deletion of the Agent. This is mandatory under the higher Causal Causative predicate.

(91)a.

N - ifidy an'i p(aoly) i J(eanne). past-choose P J

"J(eanne) chose P(aul)."

b.

Voa - fidi - (n' i J) i P. pass-choose- (by J) p

"P has been chosen (by J)."

65

c.

I J no

n - aha/airpa - voa - fidy an'i P. P

J part past-caus-pass-choose "It was because of J that P was chosen."

<. 3

*I K(oto) no K

n - aha/ampa - voa - fidin'i J an'i P. J P

part past-caus-pass-choose-by

"It was because of K that P was chosen by J."

(92)a.

N - amp - iditra an'i J i P. past-caus-enter J P

"P was having J enter."

b.

Taf - iditr (i P) i J. pass-enter-by (P) J

"J was actually brought in (by P)."

c.

I P no

n - ampa - taf - iditra an' i J. J

P part past-caus-pass-enter

"It's because of P that J was actually brought in."

d.

*I P no

n - aitpa - taf- iditr 'i K i J. J

P part past-caus-pass-enter-by K

"It's because of P that J was brought in by K."

In (91) d. and (92) d., the Agent is expressed and the sequences are ungraiunatical, Whereas in the c. sentences, it is left out and the output is grammatical. Hie b. sequences show that the Agent can be expressed when the simplex sentences are in iso-

66

lation. Furthermore, in the b. examples, the Agent in the genitive case can be left out, as indicated by the parentheses. This represents a shift from Activity, with the Agent expressed, to State, with no Agent.

2.2.2.3

Mechanism for Deleting or Inserting the Agent. Affixal Passive with a contrasts with the one in tafa,

in that tafa loses its Agent obligatorily a s shown in 2.2.2.2 whereas a allows the introduction of an Agent into a construction which originated as a non-Psychological Stative predicate:

(93)a.

N - i - petraka teo ambony latabatra ilay boky. past-pref-lying past-on table the book

(Autonomous Event requiring no Agent) "The book was lying on the table."

b.

N - a - petrak' i Paoly teo airbony latabatra ilay boky. past-pass-put-by Paul past-on table the book

(Deliberate Activity requiring an Agent) "The book was being put on the table by Paul."

2.2.2.4

Expression of the Abilitative Meaning. The above is corroborated by the fact that the Abil-

itative construction with aha is synonymous, on the one hand, with the corresponding, non-Psychological root passive without the higher Causative predicate and, on the other i n the absence of the cor re spending root passive, with the root of the verb prefixed with tafa:

67

(94)a.

N - aha - zaka

ny entana i Paoly.

past-caus-bearable the luggage Paul (sane cognitive meaning as the b. sequence below) "Paul managed to carry the luggage."

b.

Zaka-n'

i Paoly ny entana.

bearable-by Paul the luggage (same cognitive meaning as a. above) "The luggage was successfully carried by Paul," i.e. "Paul managed to carry the luggage."

(95)a.

Tafa-petrak'i Paoly teo antoony latabatra ilay boky. pass-lie-by Paul past-on table the book

"The book was successfully made to lie by Paul on the table," i.e. "Paul managed to put the book on the table."

b.

TSafa-petraka pass-lie

teo anbony latabatra ilay boky. past-on table the book

"The book was successfully made to lie on the table."

In (94), there is a corresponding root passive and in such a case, it is this root passive which is synonymous with the Abilitative aha construction. In (95), there is no corresponding root passive, but rather, a non-Psychological Stative verb and therefore, it is the structure with tafa which carries the Abilitative meaning. Now, in (94)b. as well as in (95)b., the Agent can be left out.

68

2.2.2.5

The Overall System for the Insertion or Deletion of the agent. Thus, it appears that the imperfective affixal Passive

a allows the language to transform a State into an activity by introducing an agent into a clause with a non-Psychological state predicate. By contrast, the perfective markers voa and tafa allow it to reverse the process by deleting the Agent from a clause with an activity predicate, thus transforming it into a State. At the two extreme poles of the continuum, we have, at one end, the active, the circumstantial, and the no...ina Affixal Passive voices, where the Agent must be expressed, and, at the other, the Psychological predicate, which is not compatible with an Agent.

2.3.0

Intent. In this Subsection, it will be shown that: 1. the active voice, the circumstantial voice as well

as the imperfective aspect Affixal Passive with no...ina and a correlate with the presence of Intent; 2. a Psychological predicate (either a root passive or an adjective) correlates with the absence of Intent; and that 3. the perfective aspect affixal Passive with voa and tafa as well as the abilitative tafa correlate with the absence of Intent like a Psychological predicate but correlate with the presence of an agent in the underlying sequence, which gets deleted subsequently, as shown under 2.2.2.2.

2.3.1

Intent and Voice affixes. The active voice, the circumstantial voice, and the

affixal Passive forms with no...ina and a are compatible with

69

fanahv iniana (ny) "deliberately", but are not compatible with hsv satry "accidentally."

(96) a.

N-andidy ny mofo i Jeanne. past-cut the bread Jeanne "Jeanne was cutting the bread."

b.

Fanahy inian' i Jeanne ny

nandidy ny irofo.

soul willed-by Jeanne comp past-cut the bread "J(eanne) was deliberately cutting the bread," or "It was deliberately that J was cutting the bread."

c.

*Nandidy ny mofo tsy satry

i Jeanne.

past-cut the bread not willingly Jeanne "Jeanne was cutting the bread accidentally."

(97)a.

N-andeha i Jeanne, past-go Jeanne

"Jeanne was leaving."

b.

Fanahy inian' i Jeanne ny

nandeha.

soul willed-by Jeanne comp past-go "J(eanne) was leaving of her own free will," or "It was of her own free will that J was leaving."

c.

*Nandeha tsy satry

i Jeanne.

past-go not willingly Jeanne "Jeanne was leaving accidentally."

70

(98)a.

N-an-didi-an'

i J(eanne) ny irofo.

past-circ-cut-by J(eanne) the bread (circumstantial voice with partitive reading) "A portion of the bread was being cutfcyJ(eanne)."

b.

Fanahy inian' i CL n y

nandidia-ny^^

ny mofo.

soul willed-by J comp past-circ-cut-her the bread "It was deliberately that J was cutting the bread."

(99)a.

No - didi - n' i J ny irofo. pass-cut - by J the bread

"The bread was being cut up by J."

b.

Fanahy inian' i J no - didi - na ny mofo. soul willed-by J pass-cut the bread

*"The bread was deliberately being cut by J."

(100) a.

N - an - (ts)ipy ny rano i J. past-ac t-threw the water J

"J was throwing the water out."

b.

N - a - tsipi - n' i J ny rano. past-pass-throw-by J the water

"The water was being threwn out by J."

c.

Fanahy inia-n' i J n-a-tsipy soul

ny rano.

willed-by J past-pass-throw the water

"The water was deliberately being thrown out by J."

71

d. *N - a - tsipi - n' i Jeanne tsy satry past-pass-throw-by

ny rano.

Jeanne not willingly the water

*"The water was being accidentally thrown away by Jeanne."

2.3.2

Intent and Mjectival Predicates. A Psychological predicate, whether it is a root passive

or an adjective, is corrpatible with tsy satry "accidentally", but not with fanahy iniana...(ny) "deliberately":

(101)a.

Tafitohina i Jeanne, upset Jeanne

"Jeanne is/was upset."

b.

Tafitohina tsy satry upset

i Jeanne,

not deliberately Jeanne

"Jeanne was inadvertently upset."

c. *Fanahy inian' soul

i Jeanne ny

tafitohina.

willed-ty Jeanne comp upset

*"Jeanne was being deliberately upset."

(102)a.

Lasa i Jeanne, gone Jeanne

"Jeanne is/was gone."

b.

Lasa tsy satry

i Jeanne,

gone not deliberately Jeanne "Jeanne was gone inadvertently."

72

c. *Fanahy inian' soul

i Jeanne ny

lasa.

willed-by Jeanne comp gone

*"Jeanne was being gone deliberately."

2.3.3

Intent and Perfective Affixal Passive. The Affixal Passive forms voa and tafa behave like Sta-

te predicates since they are not conpatible with fanahy inian'i NP (ny) "deliberately," but are conpatible with tsy satry "not deliberately, accidentally":

(103)a.

Voa - kapoka i Jeanne, pass-hit Jeanne

"Jeanne was hit."

b. *Fanahy inian' soul

i Jeanne ny

voakapoka.

willed-by Jeanne comp pass-hit

?"Jeanne got hit deliberately."

c.

Voa - kapoka tsy satry pass-hit

i Jeanne,

not deliberately Jeanne

"Jeanne was hit accidentally."

(104)a.

Tafa - petraka i Jeanne, pass-sit Jeanne

"Jeanne found herself sitting."

b. *Fanahy inian' scul

i Jeanne ny

tafapetraka.

willed-by Jeanne comp pass-sit

*"Jeanne found herself deliberately sitting."

73

c.

Tafa - petraka tsy satry pass-sit

i Jeanne,

not deliberately Jeanne

?"Jeanne found herself accidentally sitting."

(105) a.

Taf (a) - akatr' i Paoly ny entana. pass-bring-up-by Paul the luggage "The luggage was able to be successfully brought upstairs by Paul," i.e. "Paul managed to bring the luggage upstairs," or "Paul was able to bring the luggage upstairs."

b. *Fanahy inian' soul

i Paoly (ny) tafakatra ny entana.

willed-by Paul (camp) pass-up the luggage

"Paul deliberately managed to bring the luggage upstairs."

c. *Taf(a)-akatr1

i Paoly tsy satry

ny entana.

pass-bring-up-by Paul not deliberately the luggage *"Paul accidentally managed to bring the luggage upstairs."

As was done previously, the asterisk in front of the Malagasy sequence entails that the sentence is irretrievably ungrammatical and cannot receive any interpretation whatsoever. The English translation provided oily makes explicit the intended reading.

2.3.4

Summary: the Control Parameter. The information provided by the Control parameter is

summarized and reported on Table 2.

74

Table 2

Control by Causee

Activity Deliberate

State Not Deliberate

Causatives

Prefix

"persuasive" Directive "coercive" "permissive" "neutral" Manipulative Manipulative Abilitative Causal Causal Causal Causal

0 0 0 Amp (a) Amp (a) An (a) Aha Aha Amp (a) An (a) Ank (a)

+
* * *

* * * * * * *

* * * * * * *

* * * * *

+ + +

+
* * *

+
* *

+ +/*
* * * * * * * * * * * *

S S

+ + + + +
*

s
* * * *

s
* * * *

+ +
* *

+ +
* *

Note:

1 = Active voice; 2 = Circumstantial voice;

7. = Root passive; 8. = Adjective;

3 = Affixal passive no...ina; + = Grammatical 4 = Affixal passive a 5 = Affixal passive voa; 6 = Affixal passive tafa;
*

= Ungrammatical; = Either;

S = Substitution.

CD
* * * * *

+ + + + +
?

75

Section 3

Entailment

3_0

Entailment. In Section 3, it will be shown that: 1. in a "persuasive" Directive construction, the pres-

ence or absence of Entailment, defined as the semantic correlate of the perfective aspect of a predicate and synonymous with Resultative, is dependent upon the tense of the embedded verb, whether the latter is a State predicate or not; 2. in the "coercive," the "permissive," and the "neutral" Directive constructions as well as the Manipulative an (a), there is no Entailment; 3. in the Manipulative construction with amp (a) ,if the embedded verb is a non-Stative predicate, there is no Entailment, whereas when it is a Stative predicate, the compound verb formed with the higher Causative carries with it an Entailment; 4. in the Abilitative aha construction, there is Entailment; and 5. in all of the Causal constructions,rietherthe embedded predicate is Psychological or not, there is Entailment.

3.1

Entailment and the "Persuasive" Directive Causative. In a "persuasive" Directive construction, the presence

of Entailment is dependent upon the tense of the embedded verb. If the latter is in the past tense, there is Entailment, otherwise there is none.

76

(106)a.

Nanao

izay h-an-deha-n-an'i Jeanne^ i paoly Jeanne^ Paul

past-do conp fut-circ-go-by

"Paul was doing so that Jeanne would leave"

b.

fa tsy n-andeha izy^. but not past-go sne^ "but she did not."

(107)a.

Nanao

izay n-an-deha-n-an'i Jeanne^ i Paoly Paul

past-do comp past-circ-go-by Jeanne^ "Paul was doing so that Jeanne left"

b. *fa tsy n-andeha izy^. but not past-go she^ (continuation in the intended reading) "but she did not."

(108) a.

Nanao

izay h-i-an-jer-an1

ny

latabatra^ i paoly Paul

past-do conp fut-circ-fall-by the table^ "Paul was doing so that the table would fall"

b.

fa tsy n-ianjera ilay izy^. but not past-fall that it^ "but it did not."

(109)a.

Nanao

izay n-i-an-jera-n'

ny

latabatra^ i Paoly Paul

past-do conp past-circ-call-by the table^ "Paul was doing so that the table fell"

77

b. *fa tsy n-ianjera ilay izy^ but not past-fall the it^ *"but it did not fall."

in (106) and (107), we have a non-Stative predicate in the embedded clause, whereas in (108) and (109), we have a Stative predicate.

3.2

Entailment and the "Neutral," "Coercive," and "Permissive" Directive Causative Constructions. The "neutral," the "coercive," and the "permissive"

Directive constructions correlate with the absence of Entailment:

(110)a.

N - anp - andidy ny mofo an'i Jeanne^ i Paoly past-caus-cut the bread Jeanne^ Paul

"Paul was having Jeanne^ cut the bread"

b.

kanefa tsy nandidy but

izy^.

not past-cut she^

"but she^ did not."

(111) a.

Nanery

an'i Jeanne ^ handidy an'ilay irofo i Paoly ^ Jeannei fut-cut the bread Paul

past-force

"Paul was forcing Jeannei to cut the bread"

b.

kanefa tsy nandidy izy^. but not past-cut she^

"but shei did not."

78

(112)a.

Namela past-let

an'i Jeanne^ handidy an'ilay mofo i Paoly. Jeanne^ fut-cut the bread Paul

"Paul was allowing Jeanne^ to cut the bread"

b.

kanefa tsy nandidy izy^. but not past-cut she^

"but shei did not."

All of the a. sentences above are perfectly grammatical and acceptable with their continuations in b., which substantiates the claim made earlier.

3.3

Entailment and the Manipulative Causative Amp (a). The Manipulative anp (a) construction, just like the

Manipulative an (a) construction, correlates with the absence of Entailment. There is, however, with the first the proviso that if the embedded verb is an exclusively Stative predicate, then there is Entailment:

(113)a.

N - anp - idina

ny saina i Paoly Paul

past-caus-cone-down the flag

(Stative reading for embedded verb is relevant one) "Paul was lowering the flag"

fa tsy n-aha-taf-idina. but not past-caus-pass-cone-down "but did not cause to be lowered," i.e. "but did not manage."

79

b.

N - a r - din - in' ip

i Paoly ny saina

past-caus-coma-down-pass-by Paul the flag "The flag was caused to be down by Paul," i.e. "the flag was being lowered by Paul"

fa tsy taf-idina. but not pass-cone-down "but was not successfully lowered."

(114)a.

N - amp - i - atonta ny latabatra^ i Paolyj past-caus-prf-fall the table^ Paulj

(notice exclusive Stative reading of embedded verb) "Paul made the table fall"

*fa tsy voa-tonta-nyj ilay izy^. but not pass-fall-hinij the it^ "but did not manage."

b.

N - a - tonta - n ' i Paoly^ ny latabatra past-pass-fall-by Paulj the table

(notice use of "ballistic" passive prefix a substituting for the Stative prefix _ of the active voice) i "The table was being made to fall by Paul"

fa tsy voa-tonta-nyj. but not pass-fall-hirrij "but was not successfully made to fall*" . e "Paul tried to make the table fall but did not manage.

80

(115)a.

N - an - doka

ny varavarana

i Paoly

past-caus-with-hole the door

deic Paul

(note ambiguity of interpretation of the embedded verb: loka "with a hole" can refer to a Deliberate Activity) "Paul was making a hole in the door"

fa tsy n-aha-loka. but not past-caus-with-hole "but did not succeed."

b.

No - loha - an' i Paoly.. ny varavarana pass-with-hole-by Paul^ the door "The door was being put a hole in by Paulj"

fa tsy voa-loka-nyj. but not pass-with-hole-by-hinij "but not successfully," i.e. "Paul tried to make a hole in the door but did not manage."

(116)a.

N - ank - adala an'i Paoly^ i Jeanne past-caus-crazy Paul^ Jeanne

(note exclusive Stative nature of embedded predicate) "Jeanne (tried to) make Paul^ crazy"

*fa tsy adala izyi tsy akory. but not crazy he^ not at-all "but he^ is not crazy at all."

/ 81

j, -.

n - ank - adala - in1

i Jeanne i Paoly^ Paul^

past-caus-pass-crazy-by Jeanne "Paulj, was made crazy by Jeanne"

*fa tsy adala tsy akory. but not crazy not at-all "but he^ is not crazy at all."

(113) and (115), the embedded clauses are not Stative pred-

icates, i.e. neither Psychological nor non-Activity predicates, and there is no Entailment, as can be inferred from the grammaticality of their continuations. In (114)a., however, there is Entailment since it is not possible to have the second part of the sentence; in this case, we have a non-Psychological Stative predicate. On the other hand, in (116), the embedded clause comprises a Psychological predicate carrying with it an Entailment since it is not possible to have the second part of the sentence.

3.4

Entailment and the Abilitative Constructions. The Abilitative constructions correlate with the pres-

ence of Entailments

(117)

N - aha - zaka

an'i Jeanne^ i Paolyj Jeanne^ Paulj

past-caus-bearable

"Paul managed to carry Jeanne"

*fa tsy zaka-ny^

izy^.

but not bearable-him. shej l "Paul managed to carry Jeanne *but did not manage to."

82

(118)

N - aha - loka

ny varavarana^ i p (aoly) j P(aul) j

past-caus-with-hole the door^

"P(aul) managed to perforate the door"

*fa tsy voa-loka-ny^

ilay izy^.

but not pass-with-hole-hiirij the it^ "P managed to perforate the door *but did not manage."

(119)

N - alia - zaka

ny entana^ ny mozanaj

past-caus-carried the luggage^ the scalej "The scale could lift the luggage"

*fa tsy zakan'

ilay izy^ ireto^. itj these^

but not carried-by the

"but it couldn't lift them (the pieces of luggage)," i.e. "The scale could lift the luggage *but could not."

(120)

N - aha - zaka

an' i Jeanne^ ny nozanaj Jeanne^ the scalej

past-caus-carried

"The scalej could lift Jeanne^"

*fa tsy zaka-n'

ilay izyj izy^. she^

but not carried-by itj

"but itj could not lift her^" "The scale could lift Jeanne *but could not lift her."

Hie ungraitmaticality of the continuation of each sentence, from (117) to (120), shows that it is not possible to cancel what is expressed under the aha construction, in the lower clause.

83

3 5

Entailment and the Causal Causative Constructions. Hie Causal reading correlates with the presence of En-

tailment: (121) Ny ditrany no n-ampa/aha-voa-kapoka

the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-hit (note perfective aspect-marker on ertfoedded verb)

an'i Paoly^ *fa tsy voa-kapoka izy^. Paul^ but not pass-hit he^

"It was because of his mischief that Paul was punished, *but he was not punished."

(122)

Ny adala-ny

no

n-aha-resy

an'i Paoly^ Paul^

the stupidity-his part past-caus-defeated

(note exclusive Stative reading of embedded verb)

*fa tsy resy

izy^.

but not defeated he. l "It was because of his stupidity that Paul was defeated, *but he was not defeated."

(123)

Ny resaka no the talk

n-an-dreraka an' i Jeanne^ Jeanne.

part past-caus-fed-up

*fa tsy reraka izy^. but not fed-up she^ "It was because of the talk that Jeanne was fed up, *but she was not fed 5)."

84

(124)

Ny

sakafo no

the food

an'i Jeanne i Jeanne^ part past-caus-sick

n-ank-arary

(note exclusive Stative reading of embedded verb)

*fa tsy narary izy^. but not sick she. l

"It was because of the food that Jeanne got sick, *but she was not sick."

The continuation of each one of the sentences from (121) to (124) is ungrammatical. This suggests that it is not possible to cancel what is expressed in the lower clause under a Causal prefix. Hewever, there is the possibility of having a word gams. In this case, the root passive under the prefix does not have the sane meaning as the one vhich is negated. Thus:

(125)

Ilay resaka no the talk

n-an-(t)afitohina an' i Jeanne^ Jeanne^

part past-caus-fed-up

"Jeanne was fed up because of the talk"

fa tsy tafitohina izy^ tsy akory. but not stumbling she^ not at-all

"but she did not stumble at all."

3.6

Summary: the Entailment Paraneter. Table 3 gives the results found in this Subsection rel-

ative to the Entailment parameter.

85

Table 3

The Entailment Parameter

Causative Construction

Prefix

Stative Non-St. Entail.

"persuasive" "coercive" Directive "permissive" "neutral" Manipulative Manipulative Abilitative Causal Causal Causal Causal

0 0 0 Amp (a) Amp(a) An (a) Aha Aha Amp (a) An (a) Ank(a)

+/*
* * *

+ + + + +
*

Y/N N N N Y/N N Y Y Y Y Y

+ + + + + + +

+
* * * *

Note: * = Not Possible; + = Possible; +/* = Either + Or


i

Stative = Psychological or not 7 non-St. = Not Stative; Entail. = Entailment;

Y = Presence of Entailment; N = Absence of Entailment; Y/N = Restriction.

86

Section 4

Productivity

4.0

Productivity. Hi is fourth Section will address the issue of the pro-

ductivity of each one of the Causative Constructions. As far as the Unmarked constructions are concerned (see Section 6 for the distinction between Marked vs. Unmarked): 1. "Neutral" Directive amp(a) can embed verbs from two open classes, i.e. transitive and intransitive verbs the only

proviso with the latter being that it be a non-Stative predicate (see (5)c.); 2. Abilitative aha can embed predicates from one open class, i.e. adjectives, and one closed class, i.e. root passives with no restrictions; 3. Manipulative an (a) can also embed predicates from one open class, i.e. adjectives, and one closed class, i.e. root passives although in both cases, the lower verb must be a nonPsychological Stative predicate; 4. Manipulative amp (a) can embed verbs from one open class, i.e. intransitive verbs, with no restriction in the case of a Stative verb, otherwise, with the proviso that Afflxal Passive can apply after Clause-Union; and 5. Manipulative ank (a) only accepts a very limited number of adjectives in the lower clause. As far as Marked constructions are concerned: 1. Causal aha can enibed verbs from three open classes, i.e. transitive, intransitive, and adjectives, and one closed

87

class, i.e. root passives; but there is a restriction on the first two, i.e. the lower verb must be passivized with the perfective aspect voa or tafa respectively; 2. the same applies to Causal anp (a), which is different from aha only in terms of register: amp(a) is characteristic of Child Speech and Colloquial Malagasy; 3. Causal an(a) accepts one open class, i.e. adjectives ,and one closed class, i.e. root passives, both being subject to the restriction that the lcwer verb must be a Psychological predicate; and finally 4. Causal ank(a) is restricted to a very limited set of adjectives.

4.0.1

Definition of Productivity. Productivity can be assessed in terms of: 1. the range of predicate types a given Causative con-

struction can embed: (a) voa/tafa Affixal passive; (b) a predicate derived from application of Affixal Passive after Clause-Union; (c) typically transitive verbs; (d) typically intransitive verbs; (e) root passives; and (f) adjectives; and 2. the distinction between open vs. closed classes, whether there are restrictions accompanying one class, i.e., for exanple, Psychological predicates are the oily ones allowed, otherwise, Affixal Passivization with voa/tafa is obligatory.

88

4.1.1

Productivity and the "Neutral" Directive amp(a). With the "neutral" Directive amp(a), Affixal Passive

with voa or tafa is not possible:

(126)a.

- amp - ikarakara ny sakafo an1 i Jeanne i Paoly. the food Jeanne Paul

past-caus-prepare

"Paul was having Jeanne prepare the food."

b. *N - ampa- voa- karakara(n'i Jeanne) ny sakafo i Paoly. past-caus-pass-prepare(-by Jeanne) the food Paul

"Paul was having the food prepared (by Jeanne)."

c.

H-i-karakara

ny sakafo i Jeanne, Jeanne

fut-prf-prepare the food

"Jeanne will prepare the iteal."

d.

Voa - karakara - n' i Jeanne ny sakafo. pass- prepare - by Jeanne the food

"The meal has been prepared by Jeanne."

As shown in (126)c., the embedded verb of (126)a. has the ^prefix, which receives the Deliberate Activity interpretation, to the exclusion of the Stative meaning. And although the lower clause, as seen in the d. sequence, yields a perfectly granmatical output with the voa passive in isolation, it cannot be embedded under amp(a) since this results in an irretrievably ungrammatical sequence, as shown in b., whether the Agent is expressed or not. Likewise with:

89

(127)a.

N - amp - itsangana an'i Jaona i Paoly. past-caus-get-up John Paul

"Paul was having John stand up."

b. *N - ampa - tafa - tsangana an' i Jaona i Paoly. past-caus-pass - stand-up John Paul

c.

H - itsangana i Jaona. fut-stand-up John

"John will stand up."

d.

Tafa - tsangana pass - stand-up

i Jaona. John

"John managed to stand up.11

Although the lower clause c. gives a perfectly grammatical sentence in isolation, when passivized a s shown in d. it cannot be embedded under amp(a), the output being ungrammatical.

4.1.2

The "Neutral" Directive Amp(a) and Transitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. With the "neutral" Directive amp (a), any transitive

verb can get embedded, as seen in (4)b.

4.1.3

The "Neutral" Directive Amp(a) and Intransitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. Likewise, any non-Stative (See 2.1.3) intransitive verb

can be embedded under the Directive amp (a). One such case is the sequence (4) a.

90

4.1.4

Defining the Prototypical "Neutral" Directive Amp(a). In a typical "neutral" Directive anp (a) construction

with the denoted Su of the lower clause overtly expressed, it is not possible to have Affixal Passive after Clause-Union since the Causee typically retains Control:

(128)a.

N - amp - ihinana sakafo an' i Jaona i Jeanne. past-caus-eat food John Jeanne

(Causee retains Control) "Jeanne was having John eat his food."

b. *N - amp - ihina-n' i Jaona sakafo i Jeanne, past-caus-eat-by Jaona food Jeanne

(Causee has no Control whatsoever) *"Jeanne was having John eat his food."

The sentence (128)b. no longer has the intended reading since a shift in meaning has occurred. It can oily be assigned a different interpretation, i.e. "Jeanne spoon-fed John" and that, therefore, the latter will have to be either a baby or an incapacitated adult, with a Manipulative reading.

4.1.5

Hie Prototypical "Neutral" Directive Amp(a) and Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. The "neutral" Directive amp(a) can embed an intransit-

ive verb and again Affixal Passive cannot apply after application of Clause-Union (see proviso relative to the Control by Causee under 2.1,3):

91

(129) a.

N - amp - ivory ny vahoaka i P(aoly). past-caus-gather the people P(aul)

"P(aul) was having the conmunity hold a meeting."

b.

H-ivory

ny vahoaka.

fut-gather the people "The community will gather."

c. *N - amp - ivori - n' past-caus-gather-pass-by

i P ny vahoaka. P the people

*"The community was being made to hold a rreeting by P."

4.1.6

The "Neutral" Directive amp (a) and Root Passives in the Lower Clause. Under the "neutral" Directive amp(a), a root passive

predicate cannot be eirfoedded:

(130)a. *N - anpa - lasa an' i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus- gone Jeanne Paul

*"Paul had Jeanne gone."

b. *I Paoly no

n - airpa - lasa an'i Jeanne. Jeanne

Paul part past-caus-gone

*"It was Paul who made Jeanne gone."

Whether i Paoly is fronted or not, the above sentence remains ungraimiatical: the sentence (130) b. is ungraimatical in the Directive reading and can only be assigned the Causal interpretation "It was because of Paul that Jeanne was gone."

92

4.1.7

Ihe "Neutral" Directive Amp (a) and Adjectival Predicates in the Lower Clause. Likewise, under the "neutral" Directive amp(a), an

adjective cannot be embedded:

(131)a. *N - ampa - sosotra an' i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-angry Jeanne Paul

"Paul caused Jeanne to show anger."

b. *I Paoly no

n - ampa - sosotra an' i Jeanne. Jeanne

Paul part past-caus-angry

"It was Paul who caused Jeanne to shew anger."

Both sentences are ungrammatical in the intended reading. Furthermore, the b. sequence can only have a Causal interpretation, i.e. "It was because of Paul that Jeanne was angry."

4.1.8

The Manipulative Causative Anp(a) and Affixal Passives in the Lower Clause. The Manipulative Causative airp(a) does not allow Af-

fixal Passive in the lower clause:

(132) a.

N - airp - i - akatra ny seza i Paoly. past-caus-prf-go-up the chair Paul i "Paul brought the chair upstairs."

b.

Taf(a)akatra ny seza. pass-0-go-up the chair "The chair has been brought upstairs."

93

c.

*N - ampa - taf(a) - akatra ny past-caus-pass - go-up

seza i Paoly.

the chair Paul

(note perfective aspect-marker tafa on embedded verb) "Paul brought the chair upstairs."

although the lower clause is grammatical by itself, as can be deduced from the grammatical!ty of (132)b., vtei it is embedded under Manipulative amp (a), as in (132) c., the output becomes ungrairmatical. This contrasts with the case of (132) a. above, where the lower clause has not been passivized.

4.1.9

The Manipulative Causative Amp(a) and Lower Transitive Verbs. The Manipulative Causative anp (a) does not allow a

typically transitive verb phrase in the lower clause:

(133) a.

H-i-asa

tany

i Jaona

fut-prf-word ground John "John will till the ground."

b. *N - anp - iasa tany past-caus-^work ground

an' i Jaona i Paoly. John Paul

"Paul was subjecting John to tilling the ground."

c. *N - anp - iasa- in" i Paoly tany past-caus-work-by Paul ground

i Jaona. John

"John was being subjected to tilling the ground by Paul."

94

(133)c. is irretrievably ungrammatical. This suggests that the sentence (133)b., which contains (133)a., does not have the

Manipulative reading.

(133)b. is grammatical with a totally

different interpretation, i.e. the Directive meaning.

4.1.10

The Manipulative Causative Anp (a) and lower Intransitive Verbs. The Manipulative Causative amp (a) allows an intransit-

ive verb in the embedded clause:

(134) a.

H-andeha ny fiara. fut-go/run the car "The car will run."

b.

N - anp - andeha ny fiara i Paoly. past-caus-go the car Paul

"Paul drove the car."

c.

N-airp-andehanan' i Paoly ny fiara. past-caus-go-pass-by Paul the car "The car was driven by Paul."

Indeed, the grammaticality of (134)b., where the siitplex sentence (134) a. has been embedded under the Manipulative Causative amp(a) shows that this is the case. The grammaticality of the output of Passivization after Clause^Jnion, which constitutes a diagnostic test for this construction, as in (138)c., supports the stated generalization.

95

4.1.11

Ihe Manipulative Causative .Amp (a) and Root Passives in the lower clause. Ihe Manipulative Causative amp(a) does not allow a root

passive in the lower clause:

(135) a. *N - anpa - potika ny past-caus-smashed

fitaratra i Paoly. -Paul

the glass

"Paul was smashing the glass."

b.

Potika ny

fitaratra.

smashed the glass "Ihe glass has been smashed."

The root passsive potika "smashed" yields a perfectly grammatical sentence in (135)b., yet when it gets embedded under Manipulative amp (a) the output is ungrammatical.

4.1.12

The Manipulative Causative Amp (a) and Lower Mjectival Predicates. The Manipulative Causative amp (a) cannot embed an ad-

jectival clause:

(136)a.

Potsy ny rindrina. white the wall "The wall is/was white."

b. *N - anpa - fotsy ny rindrina i Paoly. past-caus-white the wall Paul

"Paul was whitewashing the wall."

96

4.1.13

The Manipulative Causative Amp(a) and Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. The Manipulative Causative amp(a) allows Affixal Pas-

sive after Clause-Union, assuming that the embedded predicate is a non-Psychological Stative verb:

(137)a.

N - anp - i - dina

ny saina i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-prf-come-down the flag "Paul was lowering the flag."

b.

N - anp - i - din - in1 past-caus-prf-come-dcwn-by

i Paoly ny saina. Paul the flag

"The flag was being lowered by Paul."

The relevant reading for the i prefix of the embedded verb in the ^ a. sequence is the Stative one exclusively here.

4.1.14

The Manipulative Causative An(a) and Perfective Aspect Verbs in the Lower Clause. The Manipulative Causative an (a) cannot embed a pred-

icate with the perfective aspect-marker voa or tafa:

(138)a.

N - an - datsaka ny taratasy i Paoly. past-caus-dropped the letter Paul

"Paul was dropping the letter (at the post office)."

b.

Latsaka ny taratasy. dropped the letter

"The letter has been dropped (deliberately or not)."

97

c.

Voa/Tafa- latsaka ny pass-dropped

taratasy.

the letter

"The letter has been dropped (deliberately)."

< . *n - ana - voa/tafa - latsaka ny 3 past-caus-pass-dropped

taratasy i Paoly. Paul

the letter

(138)a. contains (138)b., which comprises a root passive, i.e. latsaka "in the state of having been dropped"; it is grammatical. Haw, although the cor re spending predicate voa/tafa exists and can yield a well-formed sentence, as seen in (138) c., when the latter is embedded under an (a), the output is irretrievably ungrammatical, as seen in (138) d.

4.1.15

Ihe Manipulative Causativeftn(a)and Transitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. Likewise, it is not possible to have a transitive verb

under the Manipulative Causative an(a);

(139) a.

H-andidy ny itofo i Jeanne. fut-cut the bread Jeanne "Jeanne will be cutting the bread."

b. *N - an - (h)andidy ny nofo an" i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-(fut)-cut the bread Jeanne Paul

*"Paul was having cut Jeanne the bread."

t o interpretation whatsoever can be given to the sentence (139)b. f

98

4.1.16

The Manipulative Causative an(a) and Intransitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. It is impossible to eirbed an intransitive verb under

the Manipulative Causative an (a):

(140)a.

H - andeha i Paoly. fut-go Paul

"Paul will be going."

b. *N - an - (h)andeha an'i Paoly i Jaona. past-caus-go Paul John

*"John was having go Paul."

(141)a.

H - itsangana i Paoly. fut-stand-up Paul

"Paul will stand up."

b. *N - an - (h)itsangana an'i Paoly i Jaona. past-caus-stand-up Paul John

*"John was having stand up Paul."

(140)b. and (141)b. cannot be assigned any interpretation whatsoever .

4.1.17

The Manipulative Causativefin(a)and Adjectival Predicates in the Lower Clause. An adjective can be embedded under the Manipulative

Causative an(a):

99

(142) a.

N-am-(f)otsy ny rindrina i Paoly past-caus-white the wall (compare with (136)b.) "Paul was whitewashing the wall." Paul

b. *N-ana-manga ny rindrina i Paoly. past-caus-blue the wall Paul

*"Paul was painting blue the wall."

Hie ungranmaticality of (142) b. suggests that there are sone restrictions although the set of adjectives that can be embedded is still very large.

4.1.18

The Manipulative Causativefin(a) and Passive. It is possible to have Clause-Union before Affixal Pas-

sive, i.e. the circumstantial voice:

(143)a.

N-am-otsy

ny rindrina tamin'ilay borosy i Paoly. with the brush Paul

past-caus-white the wall

"Paul was whitewashing the wall with the brush."

b.

N-am-otsi-an' past-caus-white-circ-by

i Paoly ny rindrina ilay borosy. Paul the wall the brush

"The brush was what Paul was using to paint the wall."

ttie Instrumental-Oblique tamin'ilay borosy in (143)a. has been promoted to Su in (143)b., with the concomittent shift from the active to the relevant passive voice of the verb.

100

4.1.19

The Abilitative Causative Aha and Verbs in the Perfective Aspect in the Lcwer Clause. The Abilitative Causative aha cannot embed a predicate

with the perfective aspect-marker voa or tafa despite the fact that the corresponding clause yields a perfectly grairmatical sentence in isolation:

(144)a.

N - aha -

loka

an'ilay vato i Paoly. the rock Paul

past-caus-with-hole

"Paul managed to perforate the stone."

b.

(Voa)-loka

ilay vato.

passive-with-hole the rock "The rock has been perforated."

c, *N - aha - voa - loka

an'ilay vato i Paoly. the rock Paul

past-caus-perf^with-hole

"Paul managed to perforate the rock."

Although the root passive in (144) b. can take the voa prefix on its own, only the form without the perfective aspect-marker can be embedded under the Causative aha, as can be inferred from the grammaticality of (144)a. and the ungrammaticality of (144)c.

4.1.20

The Abilitative Causative Aha and Intransitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. The Abilitative Causative aha cannot take an intransit-

ive verb in the lower clause:

101

(145) a.

H-andha i Paoly. fut-go Paul

"Paul will be going."

b. *N - ah(a) - andeha (an'i Paoly) i Jaona. past-caus-go Paul John

*"john managed for Paul to go."

c.

Afaka n-andeha i Paoly. can past-go Paul

"Paul was able to walk."

The sequence (145)a., which comprises an intransitive verb, is perfectly grannatical in isolation. However, it cannot be embedded under the Abilitative Causative aha, as the ungrammaticality of (145)b. demonstrates. Leaving the Causee out does not help retrieve the grammaticality of the sequence, as shown in (145)b. Instead, Malagasy resorts to Raising-to-Su modal predicates like afaka "can", as illustrated in (145)c., to egress the intended meaning.

4.1.21

The Abilitative Causative Aha and Adjectival Predicates in the Lower Clause. The Abilitative Causative aha can take an adjective in

the lower clause, as is evident from the grammaticality pattern of the following sequences. In each case, the clause embedded in the a. sentence is shown in isolation as sequence b.

102

(146)a.

N - aha - tsara an'i Jeanne io past-caus-good

fanafody io.

Jeanne this medecine this

"This medicine improved Jeanne's health," or "Jeanne's health improved thanks to the medicine."

b.

Tsara i Jeanne, good Jeanne

"Jeanne is good," i.e. "Jeanne is in good health."

(147)a.

N - aha - ratsy an'i Jeanne io past-caus-bad

fanafody io.

Jeanne this itedecine this

"This medicine turned Jeanne into a bad person," or "Jeanne became a bad person because of the medicine."

b.

Ratsy i Jeanne, bad Jeanne

"Jeanne is bad," i.e. "Jeanne is a bad person."

The meanings of (146)a. and (147)a. are dependent on the interpretation of the lcwer clauses found in (146)b. and (147)b. respectively: the first refers to Jeanne's health, whereas the second alludes to her character.

4.1.22

The Abilitative Causative Aha and Transitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. It is not possible to embed a transitive verb under the

Abilitative Causative aha:

103

(148) a.

H-andefa ny fiara i Paoly. fut-drive the car Paul

"Paul will be driving the car."

b. *N - ah(a)- andefa ny fiara i Paoly. past-caus-drive the car Paul

(no interpretation whatsoever)

c.

Afaka n-andefa can

ny fiara i Paoly. Paul

past-drive the car

"Paul was able to drive the car."

d.

vita-n'i Paoly ny n-andefa ny fiara. done-by Paul coirp past-drive the car "The driving the car is/can be done by Paul," i.e. "Paul managed to drive the car."

Instead, Malagasy uses a Saising-to-Su modal predicate, here afaka "can", as seen in (148)c., to express the Abilitative interpretation and a Sentential Su construction, as shown in (148)d., if the focus is on the perfective aspect, with the meaning of the English verb "manage". As for the permission reading of English can, this language utilizes another Raising-to-Su modal, m-ahazo instead of afaka.

4.1.23

The Abilitative Causative Aha and Clause-Union Followed by Affixal Passive. It is impossible to have Clause-Union before Affixal

Passive under the Abilitative Causative aha:

104

(149)a.

N - aha - resy

an'i Paoly i Jaona. Paul John

past-caus-in-defeat

"John was able to cause Paul to be in defeat," i.e. "John managed to defeat Paul."

b. *N - aha - rese -n' past-causin-defeat-by

i Jaona i Paoly. John Paul

*"Paul was managed to be caused to be in defeat by John," i.e. "John managed to defeat Paul."

c.

No - rese -n'

i Jaona i Paoly. Paul

pass-in-defeat-by John

"Paul was deliberately inflicted a defeat by John."

(149)a., we have an active voice verb and the output is gram-

matical, whereas in (149)b. Affixal Passive with the suffix ina has applied after Clause-Union, and the resulting sequence is irretrievably ungrammatical. However, sentence (149)c. shows that if the Affixal Passive circumfix no...ina replaces aha, then the output becomes grammatical. In other words, a prefix substitution has to operate.

4.1.24

The Manipulative Causative Ank(a) and Affixal Passive in the Lower Clause. The Manipulative Causative anka does not allow Affixal

Passive with the perfective aspect-marker voa for a transitive verb or tafa for an intransitive verb in the lower clause:

105

(150)a.

N - ank - adala an'i Paoly i Jeanne, past-caus-crazy Paul Jeanne

"Jeanne made Paul lose his mind."

b. *N - anka - voa/tafa - adala an'i Paoly i Jeanne, past-caus-perfective-crazy Paul Jeanne

No interpretation whatsoever can be assigned to (150)b.

4.1.25

The Manipulative Causative Ank(a) and a Transitive or Intransitive Verb in the Lower Clause. Hie Manipulative Causative anka cannot embed an in-

transitive or a transitive verb:

(151)a.

H - andeha i Jeanne, fut-go Jeanne

"Jeanne will be leaving."

b. *N - ank - andeha (an'i Jeanne) i Paoly. past-caus-go Jeanne Paul

(no interpretation whatsoever)

(152)a.

H - andidy ny mofo i Jeanne, fut-cut the bread Jeanne

"Jeanne will be cutting the bread."

b. *N - ank - andidy ny mofo (an'i Jeanne) i Paoly. past-caus-cut the bread Jeanne Paul

(no interpretation whatsoever)

106

Leaving out the Causee NP i Jeanne from the embedded clause does not help improve the ungraimaticality of the sentence (151) b., v t i h remains totally ric incomprehensible. The same holds for

(152)b. The intended meaning for (151)b. is "Paul caused Jeanne to leave," whereas for (152)b. it is "Paul made Jeanne cut the bread."

4.1.26

The ffenipulative Causative Ank (a) and Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. Affixal Passive can apply after Clause-iJnion when the

higher predicate is the ffenipulative Causative anka. In typical cases, the compound verb acquires the meaning of the Ingressive aspect:

(153)a.

N - ank - adala - in'i Jeanne i Paoly past-caus-crazy-by (sane as (116)b.) "Paul was made crazy by Jeanne," i.e. "Jeanne tried to make Paul lose his mind." Jeanne Paul

b.

N - ank - adala an'i Paoly i Jeanne past-caus-crazy (sane as (116)a.) "Jeanne made Paul lose his mind," i.e. "Jeanne tried to make Paul lose his mind." Paul Jeanne

c.

Adala i Paoly. crazy Paul

"Paul is crazy."

107

rle simplex sentence (153)c. has been embedded under the Manipulfi ative Causative anka, as shown in (153)b. In (153)a., once Clause-Onion has taken place, thus yielding (153)b., the latter is passivized.

4.1.27

The Manipulative Causative Ank(a) and a Root Passive in the Lower Clause. The Manipulative Causative ank(a) cannot embed a root

passive, especially if the latter is one where the Causee retains Control, like Lasa "gone":

(154) a.

Lasa i Jeanne, gone Jeanne

"Jeanne is gone," i.e. "Jeanne has left."

b. *N - anka - lasa an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-cau s-gone Jeanne Paul

(no interpretation whatsoever)

This ungranmaticality pattern suggests that the restriction is by and large syntactic and not semantic in nature since no root passive of any kind can be embedded under the Ifcnipulative anka.

4.1.28

The Manipulative Causative Ank(a) and Mjectival Predicates in the Lower Clause. However, the ttenipulative Causative anka can take cer-

tain adjectives:

108

(155)a.

H - arary i Jeanne, fat-sick Jeanne

"Jeanne will be sick."

b.

N - ank - arary an'i Jeanne ny sakafo. past-caus-sick Jeanne the food

"The food made Jeanne sick."

(156)a.

H - atanjaka i Jeanne, fut-strong Jeanne

"Jeanne is strong."

b. *N - ank - atanjaka an'i Jeanne ny sakafo. past-caus-strong Jeanne the food

"The food made Jeanne strong."

Thus, it accepts (h)arary "will-be-sick", but not (h) atanjaka "will-be-strong." The predicate of (155)a. in combination with the Manipulative Causative anka lends itself to a Gontactive interpretation, where the time of the Causal event and that of its result are so close as to coincide with each other, whereas (156)a. rules this out. Furthermore, notice that neither (155)b. nor (156)b. can undergo Affixal Passive after Clause-Union, which suggests that a causal interpretation should also be possible for (155)b. And this turns out to be the case. Since Affixal Passive constitutes a diagnostic test for the Manipulative Causative interpretation and since (155)b. can be assigned a Causal interpretation, the latter should be considered the usual, most natural meaning associated with this type of construction.

109

4 2.1

Itie Causal Causative Aha and Perfective Aspect Passives in the Lower Clause. Ihe Causal Causative aha allows Affixal Passive with

yea or tafa in the lower clause before Clause-Union takes place:

(157)

Ny heri-ny

no n-aha-taf (a)-akatra an'i Paoly. Paul

the strength-his part past-caus-pass-go-up

"It was because of his strength that Paul managed to go upstairs."

qhe embedded clause comprises a predicate with the perfective aspect-marker tafa since the verb is an intransitive one. We have already seen one case where the embedded predicate is a transitive verb, as in (121), and therefore the perfective aspect-marker to be used is voa.

4.2.2

The Causal Causative Aha and Passive in the lower Clause. The Causal Causative aha allows a transitive verb in

the lower clause provided the latter is passivized:

(158)a.

N - ikapoka an'i Paoly R noho past-strike

ny ditra-ny.

Paul x because-of the mischief-his

"X punished Paul because of his mischief."

b.

Voa- kapoka i Paoly noho pass-strike

ny ditra-ny.

Paul because-of the mischief-his

"Paul has been punished because of his mischief."

110

c.

Ny ditra-ny

no

n-aha-voa-kapoka

an'i Paoly. Paul

the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-strike " i 'Because of his mischief, Paul was punished.''

In (158)a., the predicate is a transitive verb whose Su is R, short for Ranona, "x," in Malagasy, and whose object is an'i Paoly "Paul, direct object." (158)b. represents the passivized version with omission of the Agent, which is natural when the aspect is perfective and the Agent unspecified. (158)c. is the final output after Raising of ny ditrany of (158)b. to Su position and Fronting of the sane NP separated from the rest of the sentence by the particle no.

4.2.3

The Causal Causative Aha and Intransitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. The Causal Causative aha allows an intransitive verb in

the lower ^clause provided the latter is in the passive form with the perfective aspect-marker tafa:

(159)a.

N - iakatra i Paoly. past-go-up Paul

t "Paul went upstairs. i

b.

Taf (a)-akatra i Paoly. pass-go-up Paul

i "Paul managed/was able to go upstairs.i

c. *Ny heri-ny

no

n-ah(a)-akatra an'i Paoly. Paul

the strength-his part past-caus-go-up

Ill

(. j

Ny heri-ny

no

n-aha-taf(a)-akatra an'i Paoly. Paul

the strength-his part past-caus-pass-go-up

"Because of his strength, Paul managed to go upstairs."

(159) a. shows the sinplex sentence with an intransitive verb in isolation. In (159)b., the intransitive verb has been passivized with the use of the perfective aspect-marker tafa. Ihe ungramraaticality of the sequence shown in (159)c., as opposed to the grammaticality of the one in (159)d., is due to the fact that in the former the perfective aspect-marker tafa has been left out. This corresponds to a non-application of Passive in the lower clause and suggests that Passive is mandatory.

4.2.4

The Causal Causative Aha and Root Passives in the lower Clause. The Causal Causative aha allows a root passive in the

lower clause:

(160) a.

Hay rivotra no the wind

n-aha-rendrika ny santoo.

part past-caus-sunk the boat

"It was because of the wind that the boat got sunk."

b.

Rendrika ny sambo. sunk the boat

"The boat got sunk."

Topically, the predicate of the lower clause is one where the Causee does not retain Control, as is evident in the case of rendrika "got sunk," with a perfective aspect interpretation.

112

4.2.5

Hie Causal Causative Aha and Adjectival Predicates in the Lower Clause. The Causal Causative aha allows an adjective in the

embedded clause:

'

(161)a.

Ny asa-ny

no

n-aha-fptsy

ny volo-n'i Paoly.

the work-his part past-caus-white the hair-of Paul "It was because of his job that Paul's hair got white.11

b.

Fotsy ny volo-n'i Paoly t-amin'

ny asa-ny.

white the hair-of Paul past-because-of the job-his "Paul's hair got white because of his job."

Here, as before, the adjective in the lower clause is one which typically does not attribute any Control to the Causee.

4.2.6

The Causal Causative Aha and Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. Ihe Causal Causative aha does not allow Affixal Passive

after Clause-Uhian:

(162)a. *N - aha - fotsi-n' ny asa-ny ny volo-n'i Paoly. past-caus-white-by the job-his the hair-of Paul "Paul's hair was whitened by his job."

b. *Ny volo-n'i Paoly no

n-aha-fotsi-n'

ny asa-ny.

the hair-of Paul part past-caus-white-by the job-his *"It was Paul's hair that was whitened by his job."

113

Whether Fronting-of-Su applies, as in (162)b., or not, as in (162)a., the output remains irretrievably ungrammatical.

4.2.7

The Causal Causative amp(a) and Perfective Aspect Verbs in the lower Clause, the Causal Causative amp(a) allows Affixal Passive with

tie perfective aspect-marker voa on transitive verbs, as in (158)c., and the perfective aspect-marker tafa on intransitive verbs, as in (159) d.

4.2.8

The Causal Causative Amp (a) and Transitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. Hie Causal Causative amp(a) allows a transitive verb in

the lower clause provided the latter is passivized with voa, as illustrated by the following sequences:

(163)a.

Hifidy an'i Jeanne R noho

ny hatsaratarehi-ny.

fut-choose Jeanne x because-of the beauty-her "X will choose Jeanne because of her beauty."

b.

Voa-fidy pass-dhoose

i Jeanne noho

ny hatsaratarehi-ny.

Jeanne because-of the beauty-her

"Jeanne has been chosen because of her beauty."

c.

Ny hatsaratarehi-ny no the beauty-her

n-ampa-voa-fidy

an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

part past-caus-pass-choose

"It was because of her beauty that Jeanne has been chosen."

114

(164) a. Hifidy an'i J(eanne) i P(aoly) noho ny hatsaratarehiny. fut-choose Jeanne Paul due-to the beauty-her

"P(aul) will choose J(eanne) because of her beauty."

b. *Voa-fidi-n'

i P i J noho

ny hatsaratarhi-ny.

pass-choose-by P

J due-to the beauty-her ,

"J was chosen by P because of her beauty."

c. *Ny hatsaratarehi-ny no the beauty-her

n-ampa-voafidi-n' i P an'i J.

part past-caus-pass-choose-by

"It was because of her beauty that Jeanne was chosen by Paul."

The ungrammaticality of (164)b., as opposed to the grammaticality of (163)b., suggests that it is usually the case that the Agent is deleted when the verb is in the perfective aspect. Now, when such an Agent is retained and the entire clause is embedded under the Causal Causative amp (a), the output, as shown in (164)c., is irretrievably ungraiunatical. This contrasts with the grairmaticality of (163) c., where the Agent has been deleted from the lower clause. In both instances, Fronting-of-Su has taken place and the only difference pertains to the deletion or retention of the Agent.

4.2.9

The Causal Causative Anp(a) and Intransitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. The Causal Causative amp(a) allows an intransitive verb

in the lower clause provided that the latter is passivized with tafa:

115

(165) a.

N-ijanona i J(eanne) noho past-stay

ny havizana-ny.

J(eanne) because-of the exhaustion-her

"J(eanne) stayed behind because of her exhaustion."

b.

lfa-janona i J noho pass-stay

ny havizana-ny.

J because-of the exhaustion-her

"J (happened to) stay behind cwing to her exhaustion."

c.

Ny havizana-ny

no

n-ampa-tafa-janona an'i J. J

the exhaustion-her part past-caus-pass-stay

"Because of her exhaustion, J (happened to) stay behind."

(166)a.

N-itresaka

ny

fitaratra t-amin'

ilay entana.

past-break-up the glass

past-because-of the luggage

"Ihe glass broke up because of the luggage."

b. *Tafa-tresaka ny fitaratra t-amin' pass-break-up the glass

ilay entana.

past-because-of the luggage

(no interpretation whatsoever)

c. *Ilay entana

no

n-ampa-tafa-tresaka

ny fitaratra.

the lugggage part past-caus-pass-break-up the glass (no interpretation whatsoever)

Although the intransitive predicate nijanona "stayed behind" in (165)a. attributes to its Su some degree of Control, the use of the perfective aspect-marker tafa wipes out any such Control so

116

that (165)b. now irrplies that the Su exercised no Control whatsoever over the situation, to a point of acquiring an Adversative meaning.

4.2.10

The Causal Causative Amp (a) and Foot Passives in the Dower Clause. Hie Causal Causative amp (a) allows root passives in the

enfoedded clause:

(167)a.

Ny rivotra no the wind

n-ampa-latsaka

ny taratasy.

part past-caus-dropped the letter

"It was because of the wind that the letter dropped onto the floor," or "Because of the wind, the letter dropped onto the floor."

b.

Latsaka ny taratasy. dropped the letter "The letter dropped to the floor," or "Hie letter is on the floor."

Latsaka "in the state of having been dropped" in (167)b. belongs to the so-called root passive class where the Su is not an Agent but rather a Patient.

4.2.11

Hie Causal Causative Amp (a) and Adjectival Predicates. Hie Causal Causative anp(a) allows an adjective in the

lower clause:

117

(168)a.

Ny fofo-ny

no

n-ampa-ratsy an'io

fanafody io.

the smell-its part past-caus-bad

this medecine this

"It is because of its smell that this is bad medecine," i.e. "What makes this medicine bad is its smell."

b.

Ratsy io bad

fanafody io.

this medicine this

"This medicine is bad."

4.2.12

The Causal Causative Amp(a) and Affixal Passive After Clause-union. In the case of the Causal Causative amp (a), it is not

possible to have Affixal Passive after Clause-Union:

(169)

*I Jeanne no

n-anpa-voa-fidi-n'

ny hatsaratarehi-ny.

Jeanne part past-caus-pass-choose-by beauty-her (compare with (163)c.) (no interpretation whatsoever)

(170)

*I Jeanne no

n-ampa-tafa-jano-n'

ny havizana-ny.

Jeanne part past-caus-pass-stay-by the exhaustion-her (compare with (165)c.) (no interpretation whatsoever)

In (169) and (170), as is evident in the linear order of anpa and voa for the first and tafa for the second, Clause-Union takes place before Passive, Whose overt trace is -n' in both instances, is made to apply.

118

4.2.13

The Causal Causative An(a) and Affixal Passive in the Perfective Aspect in the Lower Clause. The Causal Causative an(a) cannot embed a verb with the

perfective aspect-marker voa, as shown in (238) of the present Chapter, or tafa, as in the following illustrative exarrple:

(171)

*Ny havizana-ny

no

n-ana-tafa-janona an'i Jeanne. Jeanne

the exhaustion-her part past-caus-per f-stay

"It was because of her exhaustion that Jeanne stayed."

The interpretation given under the sequence is the one expected in English, but the sentence (171) cannot be assigned any meaning at all in Malagasy.

4.2.14

The Causal Causative An(a) and Transitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. The Causal Causative an(a) does not allow a transitive

verb in the lower clause even if it is passivized with the perfective aspect-marker voa, as seen in (238)c.

4.2.15

The Causal Causative An(a) and Intransitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. The Causal Causative an(a) cannot embed an intransitive

verb:

(172)a.

H-ilatsaka ny orana noho fut-drop

ny hafanana.

the rain because-of the heat

"The rain will drop because of the heat," i.e. "It will rain because of the heat."

119

b.

*Ny hafanana no the heat

n-an-ilatsaka ny orana.

part past-caus-drop the rain

"It was because of the heat that it rained."

Hilatsaka of (172) a. is an intransitive verb and as such, cannot be embedded under the Causal Causative an (a). Hi is holds true of any and all intransitive verbs and suffers no exception.

4.2.16

Hie Causal Causative an(a) and Root Passives in the Lower Clause. Hie Causal Causative an (a) can take a root passive

provided the latter is a Psychological predicate, as in (7)c.:

(173)a.

Latsaka ny taratasy tamin' dropped the letter

ny rivotra.

past-because-of the wind

(compare with (167)a.) "Hie letter dropped because of the wind."

b. *Ny rivotra no the wind

n-an-datsaka

ny taratasy.

part past-caus-dropped the letter

"It was because of the wind that the letter dropped."

(174)a.

N-an-datsaka an'i Paoly tamin'

ilay vola i Jaona.

past-caus-dropped Paul past-with the money John "John enrolled Paul (in a school) with the money."

b.

N-an-datsaha-n' i Jaona an'i Paoly ilay vola. past-caus-drop-by John Paul the money

"Hie noney was used by John to enroll Paul."

120

(173) b. with the Causative an (a) can only be assigned a Manipulative reading and is ungramnatical in the intended interpretation given under the sequence. As a matter of fact, as shown in (174)b., Affixal Passive can apply after Clause-Union with this verb to yield the Manipulative interpretation.

4.2.17

The Causal Causative An(a) and Adjectival Predicates in the Lower Clause. Ihe Causal Causative an (a) can take an adjective pro-

vided it is a Psychological predicate, as shown above. But even then, some Psychological predicates cannot be embedded under Causal an (a):

(175)a.

Sahirana i Jeanne tamin'

ilay resaka.

concerned Jeanne because-of the talk "Jeanne was concerned because of the talk."

b.

Ilay resaka no the talk

n-an-(s)ahirana an'i Jeanne,

part past-caus-concerned Jeanne

"It was because of the talk that Jeanne was concerned."

(176)a.

Sosotra i Jeanne tamin' angry

ilay resaka.

Jeanne because-of the talk

"Jeanne was angry because of the talk."

b. *Ilay resaka no the talk

n-an-(s)osotra an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

part past-caus-angry

(no interpretation whatsoever)

121

c.

Hay resaka no the talk

n-aha-sosotra an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

part past-caus-angry

"It was because of the talk that Jeanne grew angry."

(177) a. *N-iha-sahirana

tsikelikely

i Jeanne.

past-ingr-concerned little-by-little Jeanne "Jeanne was itore and more concerned."

b.

N-iha-sosotra past-ingr-angry

tsikelikely

i Jeanne,

little-by-little Jeanne

"Jeanne got more and more angry."

The Psychological predicate in (175)a. poses no problem since the output, as seen in (175)b., is perfectly grammatical. But the one in (176)b. yields an irretrievably ungrammatical sequence. This suggests that there exists one additional restriction, i.e. the opposition between Punctual and non-Punctual aspect. Thus, in (177)a., we have a Punctual predicate, as can be inferred from the ungrammatically of the sequence, as opposed to (177)b., where the predicate is non-Punctual and therefore can enter into combination with the Ingressive aspect prefix iha "to become." Hswever, rote that, unlike (176)b., the sequence (177)a. can be assigned a meaning with a more elaborate context of use.

4.2.18

The Causal Causative An (a) and Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. With the Causal Causative an(a), Affixal Passive cannot

apply after Clause-Union:

122

(178)a.

Ny vola

no

n-ana-(s)ahirana an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

the money part past-caus-concerned

"It was because of the money that Jeanne was concerned."

b. *l Jeanne no

n-an-(s)ahirana-n'

ny vola.

Jeanne part past-caus-concerned-by the money (no interpretation whatsoever)

Affixal Passive has applied after Clause-Union in (178)b. and the output is irretrievably ungrammatical.

4.2.19

The Causal Causative Ank(a) and Affixal Passive in the Perfective Aspect in the Icwer Clause. Hie Causal Causative ank (a) does not allcw Affixal Pas-

sive with tafa or with voa in the lower clause:

(179)a.

Tafa-tontoona i Paoly tamin' pass-fall

ilay horohorontany.

Paul because-of the earthquake

"Paul fell because of the earthquake."

b. *llay horohorontany no n-anka-tafa-tombona an'i Paoly. that earthquake part past-cau-pass-fall Paul

(no interpretation whatsoever)

c.

Voa-kapoka i Paoly noho

ny ditra-ny.

pass-strike Paul because-of the mischief-his "Paul was punished because of his mischief."

123

< . *Ny ditra-ny 3

no

n-anka-voa-kapoka

an'i Paoly. Paul

the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-strike (no interpretation whatsoever)

(179) a. with the intransitive verb

m-i-tombona "to fall (lit-

erally: present-prefix-root)" in the perfective aspect with tafa and (179)c. with the transitive verb m-i-kapoka "to strike (literally: present-prefix-root)" in the perfective aspect with voa are perfectly grammatical. Now, viien these verbs get embedded under the Causal Causative predicate anka, the outputs, as shewn respectively in (179)b. and (179)d., are irretrievably ungrammatical.

4.2.20

Ihe Causal Causative Ank(a) and Transitive Verbs in the Lower Clause. With the Causal Causative ank(a), a transitive verb

cannot be embedded even if the latter is passivized, as seen in (179)d. Furthernore, rot even a predicate which optionally takes the perfective aspect prefix voa, like latsaka "in the state of having been dropped," can be embedded:

(180)a.

(Voa-)latsaka ny

taratasy noho i Paoly. due-to

(pass-)dropped the letter

"The letter has been posted thanks to Paul."

b. *I Paoly no

n-ank-(voa-)latsaka

ny taratasy.

Paul part past-caus-(pass)-dropped the letter (no interpretation whatsoever)

124

4.2.21

Hie Causal Causative Ank (a) and Intransitive Verbs in the Dower Clause. Hie Causal Causative ank (a) does not allow an intrans-

itive verb even if it is passivized with tafa, as seen in (179)d. Not even a predicate which optionally takes the perfective aspect prefix tafa, like latsaka, can be embedded:

(181)a.

(Tafa-)latsak('i Jaona) i Paoly. (pass)-enroll (-by John) Paul

"John managed to get Paul enrolled."

b. *I Jaona no n-anka-(tafa-)latsaka an'i Paoly. John part past-caus-pass-dropped (no interpretation whatsoever) Paul

4.2.22

Hie Causal Causative Ank(a) and Root Passives in the Lower Clause. Hie Causal Causative anka does not allow a root passive

in the lower clause:

(182)a.

Potika ny

fitaratra tamin'

ny rivotra.

broken the glass

because-of the wind

"Hie glass is/was broken by the wind."

b. *Ny rivotra no the wind

n-anka-potika

ny fitaratra.

part past-caus-broken the glass

(no interpretation whatsoever)

125

potika "to be in the state of having been broke" in (182) a. belongs to the finite set of so-called root passives whose main characteristic is that the Su does not encode an Agent but rather a patient and yet the sentence type where it shows up is basic in the sense that Passive has not applied.

4.2.23

The Causal Causative Ank(a) and Adjectival Predicates in the Lower Clause. The Causal Causative ank (a) allows only a limited set

of adjectives:

(183)a.

H-atavy i Jeanne amin' fut-fat

ny sakafo.

Jeanne because-of the food

"Jeanne will get fat with the food."

b.

Ny sakafo no

n-ank-atavy an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

the food part past-caus-fat

"It was the food which caused Jeanne to get fat."

(184)a.

Fotsy ny volo-n' i Paoly tamin'

ny asa-ny.

white the hair-of Paul because-of the job-his "Paul's hair got white because of his job."

b. *Ny asa-ny

no

n-anka-fotsy

ny volo-n'i Paoly.

the job-his part past-caus-white the hair-of Paul (no interpretation whatsoever)

In (183)b., the predicate (h-)atavy "(fut-)fat", as shown in (183)a., has been embedded under the Causal Causative anka and

126

the output is perfectly grammatical. However, in (184)b., where the predicate fotsy "white", as shown in (184)a., has been embedded under the same Causal Causative prefix, the resulting sequence is irretrievably ungrammatical.

4.2.24

The Causal Causative Ank(a) and Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. Hie Causal Causative ank (a) typically disallows Affixal

Passive after Clause-Union:

(185)

*N - anka - tavi - z - in'i Paoly i Jeanne. past-caus-fat-epenth-by *"Paul fattened Jeanne." Paul Jeanne

Although, as seen in (183)b., the sequence anka-tavy "to cause to become fat" is permissible in Malagasy, it is not possible to passivize the entire complex predicate after Clause-Union, as the ungrammatically of (185) demonstrates: the epenthetic z breaks i up the sequence of two identical vowels, i.e. the first being the end of the root tavi (conventionally written y in final position of a word) and the second, the initial of the Passive suffix ina; the NP i Paoly, the Agent, is attached to the Passive suffix ina the usual way, i.e. the final vcwel of ina deletes. In this particular case, since the embedded predicate is not necessarily perfective, the Agent is preferably expressed in the clause. However, this does not improve the grammaticality of (185) in any way whatsoever.

127

2.25

Suirmary: The Nature of the Embedded Predicate. Most of the findings made in this Section can be repor-

ted onto a table giving the different possibilities for each Causative construction (see Table 4). As we move from the Unmarked "neutral" Directive to the Abilitative and the Manipulative anka, the type of predicate that can be embedded changes from a typically transitive verb phrase to a root passive or an adjective; then, with the Marked constructions, as the nunfoer of classes of predicates that can be embedded decreases from two for Causal Causatives amp (a) and aha to oily one for the Causal Causative anka and even then the set of predicates that can be embedded under the latter is very restricted the importance of the restrictions becomes evident: thus, for the Causal Causatives aha and amp(a), the lower verb must be passivized with the perfective aspect voa or tafa provided it is transitive or intransitive; otherwise, if it is neither, no restrictions apply to the classes of root passives and adjectives. For the Causal Causative an(a), the two classes it can embed are subject to the restriction that the lower predicate be a Psychological predicate whereas for the Causal Causative anka, there are very probably other factors involved since the set of adjectives that can get embedded appears to be very restricted.

128

Table 4

Hie Different Types of Embedded Predicates

Causative Constructions

Types of Predicates A B C D E F

"Neutral" Directive 3mp(a) * Unmarked Manipulative artp(a) Manipulative an(a) Abilitative aha
*

+ * * *

+ + * *

* + + *

* * + +

* * + +

* *

Causal aha Marked Causal an$>(a) Causal an (a) Causal ank(a)

+ +/* +/* * + +/* +/* * * * *

+ +

+ +

* +/* +/*

Nbte: * = Unqranmatical + = Grammatical +/* = Restriction ?

A = Voa/Tafa B = Typically Transitive Verb C = Typically Intransitive Verb

= Very Limited Set D = Clause-Union precedes Affixal Passive E = Root Passive F = Adjective.

129

Section 5

Fusion

5.0.1

The Fusion Parameter. Hiis Section will address the issue of the Fusion of

the higher and the lower predicates as well as their degree of fusion. It will be shown (see Table 5) that: 1. the "persuasive," the "coercive," and the "permissive" Directive constructions do not show fusion; 2. the "neutral" Directive, the Manipulative, the Abilitative, and the Causal constructions present evidence that suggests that fusion takes place; 3. the features characteristic of the first set alluded to in 1 above cluster in an area to be defined under 5.0.3 below whose values are negative, i.e. indicating a lack of fusion; 4. those characteristics of a subset of the second set alluded to above in 2, specifically the first three, cluster in another area whose values are predominantly positive, i.e. signalling maximal fusion (this is the Unmarked series of Causative prefixes defined in the next Section); and 5. the features of the subset of Causative constructions called Causal, i.e. the set of Marked Causative prefixes, occupy an area somewhat parallel but not identical with that of the non-fusion set, as defined above in 1, and whose values are exclusively negative.

130

5.0.2

Criteria for Fusion. Whether a particular construction shows fusion or not

will be assessed mainly, but not exclusively, in terms of the stepwise denotion of the underlying Su of the lower clause down the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy, as outlined in Comrie (1976b). As for the degree of fusion, it will be evaluated using the following processes on the lower predicate: 1. Negation Operator Tsy-Placerrent; 2. Affixal Passive with voa or tafa; 3. Pronominalization to an independent pronoun (see 5.6.1 of Chapter Three for further details); 4. Reflexivization to ny tenany (see 5.3 of Chapter Three); 5. Reflexivization to tena (see 1.0 of Chapter Three); and 6. Clause-Union preceding Affixal Passive. It will be assumed that criteria 5 and 6 have positive values as far as fusion is concerned and therefore indicates maximal fusion, whereas criteria 1, 2, and 3 suggest a negative amount.

5.0.3

Preview. At the end of the present Section, a table will be

drawn utilizing two axes: 1. one, horizontal from left to right, lists the processes enumerated under 5.0.2 in the relevant order; and 2. the other, vertical, listing the different Causative constructions with the corresponding prefixes, incorporating the

131

findings relative to the other five parameters under investigation. The areas designated under 5.0.1 refer to the clusters of features that each construction possesses. 5.1.1 Fusion and the Directive Causative Constructions. There is no fusion in the "persuasive*" the "coercive," and the "permissive" Directive constructions since: 1. in the case of the first, as shown in (l)a. or (38)a., for example, the Causee a s defined under 1.0 occupies the genitive position so that stepwise demotion down the KeenanComrie Hierarchy could not have taken place; and 2. as for the last two, there is no demotion either since, as will be shown in Chapter Five, Section 2, an Equi-2 construction is involved which deletes the embedded Su.

5.1.2

Pronominalization, Negation, and Affixal Passive Tests. In all three constructions, Pronominalization to an

independent pronoun, i.e. azy "him/her," for example, Placement of the Negation Operator Tsy, and Affixal Passive are allowed in the lower clause:

(186)a.

Nanao (*izay)(tsy) hikarakarana

azy^ i paoly^. Paul^

past-do (camp) (not) fut-cire-prepare h i u ir

"Paul was doing so that he would(not)be taken care of."

b.

Nanery

an'i Jeanne(tsy) hikarakara azy^ i paoly^. Jeanne(not) fut-prepare him^ Paul^

past-force

"Paul was forcing Jeanne (not) to take care of him."

132

c.

Name la an'i Jeanne (tsy) hikarakara azy^ i Paoly^ past-let Jeanne (not) fut-prepare him^ Paul^

"Paul was allowing Jeanne (not) to take care of him."

(187)a.

Nanery

an'i Jeanne ho-didi-na Jeanne fut-operate-on-pass

i Paoly. Paul

past-force

"Paul was forcing Jeanne to be operated on."

b.

Namela an'i Jeanne (tsy) ho-didina i past-let

Paoly

Jeanne not fut-past-pass Paul

"Paul allowed Jeanne not to be operated on."

All the sentences in (186) comprise the independent pronoun azy "him/her," coreferential with the higher Su. All of them are grammatical. Likewise, they can all have Tsy "not" in the lower clause without any change in their grammaticality pattern. Furthermore, in (186), the oonplementizer izay is obligatory; otherwise, the output becomes irretrievably ungrammatical. Also, the embedded verb shows up in the circumstantial voice. Passivization has also applied to the embedded verbs in (187) a. and (187) b., although there is a major difference between the two in that the circumstantial voice is mandatory in (186) since the sentence will be ungrammatical otherwise, whereas in the last two cases, Passivization applies optionally (see 2.1.1 and 2.1.2).

5.1.3

Reflexivization Tests. In a "persuasive" Directive construction, Reflexiviz-

ation to ny tenany/tena is not relevant after Clause-Union since

133

the process would have applied on a lower cycle if the conditions


0f

the rule were met before Equi-1 deletes the lower Su:

(188) a. ?Nanao izay hikarakarana {ny tenanyi/tenai} i Paolyi. past-do comp fut-cire-prepare self^ Paul^

b.

Natao-n' i Paoly izay hikarakarana {ny tenany^tena^}. pass-do-by Paul^ coup fut-c ire-prepare self^

"Paul did whatever (was needed) to take care of himself."

c.

Nanao [ s 0 izay hikarakara an'i P^ P^] i P^]/.

In (188)a., the verb manao "to do" is in the active voice in the past tense and the sentence sounds slightly less natural than (188)b., where the same verb, manao, is in the passive voice. (188)c. represents the presumed underlying sequence corresponding to either. The possibility of Reflexivization to tena shows that at the stage the process applied, both the trigger and its victim were clausemates, as shown in (188)c.

5.1.4

Fusion and the "Persuasive" Directive Causative. In a "persuasive" Directive construction, there is no

fusion since the higher and the lower predicates are separated by the obligatory conplementizer izay, as can be inferred from the ungrairmaticality of the sequence without the conplementizer in (186)a. Hie rule of Affixal Passive after Clause-Onion, therefore, is not relevant.

134

5.1.5

Reflexivization, the "Coercive" and "Permissive" Directive Causative constructions. With the "coercive" and the "permissive" constructions,

Reflexivization to ny tenany or tena is ruled out if the higher Su is the trigger:

(189)a. *Nanery

an'i J(eanne) hikarakara {ny tenany^/tena^} J(eanne) fut-prepare selfi

past-force

i P(aoly) i . P(aul) .

*"P(aul) was forcing J(eanne) to take care of himself."

b. /[glNanery an'i J^ [gghikarakara an'i Pj i J^] i Pj gl ]/ (190)a. *Nairela an'i J hikarakara {ny tenanyi/tenai} i P^. past-let Jeanne fut-prepare selfi Pi

was allowing J to take care of himself^."

b. /[glNamela an'i J^ [gghikarakara an'i Pj i Jj_] i Pj]/.

Assuming the underlying representations in (189)b. and 190)b., for complex sentences with either manery "force" or mamela "let" as their main verb, on cycle SO, the requirements for Reflexivization are not net. On cycle SI, Equi-2 deletes the lower Su under coreference with the higher DO. This is followed by Reflexivization to either ny tenany or tena. Hie outputs, as shown in (189)a. and (190)a. respectively, are irretrievably ungrammatical although the intended neaning for each was provided.

135

s.i.6

Affixal Passive, the "Coercive" and "Permissive" Directive Causative Constructions. In the "coercive" and the "permissive" constructions,

there is no fusion since an entire NP separates the higher and the lower predicates, as shown in 5.1.2. Hie rule of Affixal passive after Clause-Union is, therefore, not relevant.

5.2.1

Fusion and the "tfeutral" Directive Causative Amp (a) Construction. With the "neutral1' Directive amp (a), there is fusion

between the higher and the lower predicates since the enfoedded Su of the underlying sequence gets demoted to the next available spot on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy. Thus:

(191)a.

H-andha i Jeanne. fut-go Jeanne

"Jeanne will be leaving."

b.

N-amp-andeha an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-go Jeanne Paul

"Paul was having Jeanne go."

c. *N-amp-andeha 0 past-caus-go

i Jeanne i Paoly. Jeanne Paul

When the lower clause is on its cwn, as in (191)a., there is no preposition preceding its Su and the sequence is grammatical, but vtei it gets embedded under the Causative amp (a), as in (191) b.,

136

which is grammatical, as opposed to the ungrammatical (191)c the preposition an, marking the Direct Object or DO position, becomes mandatory. This is what has been referred to under 5.0.2 as demotion (for further details, see 2.4.0 of Chapter Six).

5.2.2

Negation-Placement in the Icwer Clause. Tsy-Placement cannot apply in the lower clause:

(192)

*N-anapa-tsi-andeha an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-not-go Jeanne Paul

"Paul was having Jeanne not go."

The Negation Operator tsy "not" is embedded between the Causative predicate anpa and the lower verb (h-)andeha "(future-)go," and its final vowel is conventionally written with an _i, as opposed to y. in word-final position. This proves that Negation has applied on the lower clause. Furthermore, in Malagasy, an initial h is optionally deleted and it tends to be deleted in ny dialect. In most other positions, the h is preserved merely to help break up a sequence of two or more vowels and prevents it from undergoing dipthongization or coalescence.

5.2.3

Affixal Passive in the Dower Clause. Affixal Passive cannot apply in the lower clause:

(193) a. N-anp-andidy ny mofo an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-cut the bread Jeanne Paul

"Paul was having Jeanne cut the bread."

137

b. *N-arapa-voa-didi-n1

(an) i Jeanne ny mofo i Paoly. Jeanne the bread Paul

past-caus-pass-cut-by

"Paul was having the bread cut by Jeanne."

c. *N-ampa-no-didi-n'

(an) i Jeanne ny irofo i Paoly. Jeanne the bread Paul

past-caus-pass-cut-by

"Paul was having the bread cut by Jeanne."

d. *N-ampa-didi-n' past-caus-cut-by

(an) i Jeanne ny irofo i Paoly. Jeanne the bread Paul

"Paul was having the bread cut by Jeanne."

In (193)a., the sentence in the lower clause comprising the verb (h)andidy "(future-)cut," is in the active voice and the sequence is perfectly grammatical. By contrast, in (193)b., in (193)c., and (193)d., the lower verb is in the passive voice, first with the perfective aspect-marker voa, then with the non-perfective aspect-marker no...ina, and finally with the non-perfective aspect suffix (i)na, the initial of this affix probably coalescing with the final vowel i of the verbal root didy, in isolation, ^ or didi in the middle of a word. The latter series of sentences remain irretrievably ungrammatical. The English translation under each sequence only represents the intended meaning.

5.2.4

Pronominalization. Pronominalization to an independent pronoun is mandat-

ory in Indirect Object or 10 position, as is quite evident from the grairmaticality pattern provided by the following sentences:

138

(194)a. /[N-amp-[andidy past-caus-cut

ny mofo ho an'i Paoly^ R] ipaoly^]/. the bread for Paul^ x Paul^

b.

N-amp-andidy ny itofo ho azy^ i Paoly past-caus-cut the bread for h i L it Paul^

"Paul^ was having x cut the bread for him^."

c. *N-anp-andidy ny nofo ho an'ny tenany^ i Paoly past-caus-cut the bread for himself^ Paul^

*"Paul^ was having x cut the bread for himself^."

in (194)a., the underlying sequence comprises the lower Su R, short for Ranona "x," an entity different from Paul but whose identity is not relevant, and the Su of the higher clause. When Clause-Union takes place, R somehow deltes, and the sentence surfaces as (194)b., with the independent pronoun azy, coreferential with the higher Su. Now, if we substitute ny tenany for azy, the resulting sequence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical, as shown in (194)c. Finally, although for lack of space, no future tense marker h is posited with the underlying embedded verb andidy "to cut," it would be more accurate, given the absence of entailment noted in 3.2 and associated with this particular construction, to have (h-)andidy "(future-)cut," which is also consistent with the treatment of initial h in the variety of Malagasy being described.

5.2.5

Reflexivization to Ny Tenany. However, Reflexivization to ny tenany is mandatory in

DO position:

139

(195)a. /[ N-anp-[ amono an'i Jeannei i Paoly] i Jeannei]/. past-caus-kill Jeanne^ Paul Jeanne^

b.

N-anp-amono

ny tenany^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne^, Paul Jeanne ^ ^

past-caus-kill selfi

*"Jeanne was having Paul kill herself."

c. *N-amp-aire>no

azy^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne Paul Jeanne^

past-caus-kill her^

Assuming the underlying representation (195) a. for (195)b., the NP occuping the DO position an'i Jeanne, ooreferential with the higher Su i Jeanne, must go into ny tenany, as can be inferred from the grammaticality of (194)b., but not into the independent pronoun azy, as the ungranmaticality of (194),c. shows.

5.2.6

Reflexivization to Tena. Reflexivization to tena is impossible under the "neu-

tral" Directive amp (a) if the trigger is the Su of the higher clause and its victim, the DO of the embedded clause, i.e. Reflexivization to tena cannot follow Clause-Union:

(196)

*N-amp-amono

tenai an'i Paoly i Jeanne^ Paul Jeanne^

past-caus-kill self^

*"Jeanne was having Paul kill herself."

(197)

N-amp-amono

tenai an'i Paolyi i Jeanne, Paul^ Jeanne

past-caus-kill self^

"Jeanne was having Paul kill himself."

140

In the irretrievably ungrantnatical (196), Reflexivization to tena follows Clause-Union since oily then will its structural description be met, with the higher Su as the trigger and the embedded clause DO as its victim. By contrast, if both the trigger and its victim belong in the embedded clause, then Reflexivization takes place before Clause-Union, as in the grammatical (197).'

5.2.7

Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. Affixal Passive cannot follow Clause-Union under a

"neutral" Directive amp(a):

(198)a. /[N-aitp-[(h)ibata

ny entana i Jaona] i Paoly]/. Paul

past-caus-(fut)-carry the luggage John

b.

N-amp-ibata

ny entana an'i Jaona i Poly. John Paul

past-caus-carry the luggage

"Paul was having John carry the luggage."

c. *N-amp-ibata-in'

i Paoly an'i Jaona ny entana. John the luggage

past-caus-carry-pass-by Paul (no interpretation whatsoever)

(199)a. /[N-amp-[iakatra ny entana] i Paoly]/. past-caus-go-up the luggage Paul

b.

N-amp-iakatra

ny entana

i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-go-up the luggage

"Paul carried the luggage upstairs."

141

c.

N-anp-(i)akar-in' past-caus-go-up-pass-by

i Paoly ny entana. Paul the luggage

"The luggage was being carried upstairs by Paul."

First, notice that the optional initial h for future tense is represented on the verb of the lower clause in the underlying sequence in (198) a. This is consistent with the absence of entailment associated with a "neutral" Directive amp (a). The grammatically pattern found in (198)b., with the compound verb in the active voice, as opposed to (198)c., with the sane verb in the passive voice, shows that Affixal Passive cannot apply after Clause-Union in such a construction. On the other hand, in (199), we have a Manipulative anp(a) and, therefore, Affixal Passive can apply after Clause-Union, yielding the graimaatical (199) c., where the prefix _ of the eirbedded verb shows up optionally in the i sense that, in Colloquial Malagasy, it coalesces with a and the root of the verb starts with an open e or, in careful speech, the prefix _ is kept distinct from the subsequent a of akar. i

5.2.8

Fusion and the Manipulative Causative Amp(a). The Manipulative Causative amp(a) requires fusion since

demotion of the lower Su is mandatory:

(200)a.

N - anp - idina

an' i Paoly i Jeanne. Jeanne

past-caus-go-down prep Paul

"Jeanne was bringing Paul downstairs."

b. *N - anp -idina past-caus-go-down

i Paoly i Jeanne, Paul Jeanne

142

In (200)a., the NP i Paoly, which initially was the Su of the embedded verb idina "to go down," has been denoted to DO, as is made evident by the presence of the preposition an in front of it. New, if, as in (200)b., the preposition an is left out, the sequence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical.

5.2.9

Negation-Placement in the lower Clause. the Manipulative Causative amp (a) does not allow place-

ment of the Negation Cperator tsy on the lower clause:

(201)a. *N-anpa-tsi-(i)dina

an'i Paoly i Jeanne. Paul Jeanne

past-caus-neg-go-down

b.

Tsy (h)idina

i Paoly.

neg (fut-)go-down Paul "Paul will not go downstairs."

(201)a., with the Negation Cperator tsy intervening between the Causative and the verb of the lower clause, is irretrievably ungrammatical and cannot be assigned any interpretation whatsoever. Yet, when the lower clause is on its cwn as an independent clause, as shown in (200)b., the sentence comprising tsy is perfectly grammatical. Notice, however, that the optional h marking the future tense in (200)b. is absent from (201)a. altogether.

5.2.10

Affixal Passive in the lower Clause. The Manipulative Causative arrp(a) does not allow Affix-

al Passive in the lower clause:

143

(202) a. *N - ampa - voa - idina ny saina i Jeanne. past-caus-pass-go-down the flag

b.

Voa-idina

ny saina.

pass-go-dcwn the flag '"Hie flag has been lowered."

As shown in (202) b., the lower clause on its cwn with the perfective aspect-marker voa of Passive is perfectly graitnatical. jKwever, when it gets embedded under a Manipulative Causative amp(a), as in (202)a., the resulting sequence is irretrievably ungrammatical and cannot be assigned any interpretation whatsoever .

5.2.11

Pronominalization. Under the Manipulative Causative anp (a), Pronominal-

ization to an independent pronoun is disallowed:

(203)a.

/[ N-airp- [iasa ho an'i Paoly i Jaona] i Paoly^]/. past-caus-work for Paul^ John Paul^

b.

Hiasa

ho an'i Paoly i Jaona. Paul John

fut-work for

"John will work for Paul."

c.

Hiasa

ho a.zyi i jaona j. Jctaj

fut-work for him^

"John, will work for hiir^."

144

d. *N-anp-iasa ho azy.. an'i Jaona i Paoly^ past-caus-work for him^ John Paul^

e. *N-amp-iasa an'i Jaona ho azy^ i Paoly^. past-caus-work John for hinu Paul^

f.

N-amp-iasa

an'i Jaona i Paoly. John Paul

past-caus-work

"Paul was having John work for him," or here "Paul was profiting from John's labor."

g.

N-amp-iasa-in'

i Paoly i Jaona. John

past-caus-work-pass-by Paul

"Paul was profiting frcm John's labor."

If we start from an underlying sequence like (203)a., where the embedded clause comprises an Oblique NP ho an'i Paoly coreferential with an HP in the main clause, the resulting sequence, as shown in either (203)d. or (203)e, i.e. whether the independent
pronoun

precedes or follows the DO NP, is irretrievably ungram-

matical. mwever, in (203)b. and (203) c., the lower clause in isolation is perfectly grammatical,tietherthe Oblique NP shows up as a full-fledged noun phrase or in pronoun form. Furthermore, if the coreferential NP of (203)a. is taken away frcm the embedded clause, then the output, as seen in (203) f., is perfectly grammatical, with an ambiguous interpretation between a "neutral" Directive and a Manipulative Causative. However, it is only in the latter case that the sequence can undergo Passive, as shown in (203)g., i.e. Affixal Passive after Clause-Union.

145

5.2.12

Reflexivization to Ny Tenany. The Manipulative Causative amp(a) allows Reflexiviz-

ation to ny tenany after Clause-Union, especially when there is gome enphasis involved:

(204)

N-airp-iasa

ny tenany., tokoa i Paolyi. self really Pauli

past-caus-work

"Paul was really applying himself to his work," or "Paul was really getting the maximum out of his body."

In (204), as opposed to (205) belcw, the sequence comprising ny tenany cannot have the reading Where the compound verb refers to an action which is habitual, to irean something like "Paul was really working for himself."

5.2.13

Reflexivization to Tena. The Manipulative Causative amp(a) allows Reflexiviz-

ation to tena after Clause-union has taken place:

(205)

N-amp-iasa

tena^ (tokoa) i Paoly

past-caus-work sel^ (really) Pauli "Paul was (really) applying himself to his work," or "Paul was (really) working for himself."

As remarked earlier in 5.2.12, a sequence comprising ny tenany sounds more natural with the adverb tokoa, whereas this is not the case with tena, as seen in (205). In fact, in its habitual aspect reading, the sentence sounds better without the adverb.

146

5.2.14

Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. The Manipulative Causative anp(a) allows Affixal Pas-

sive after Clause-Union, with a slightly different meaning:

(206)a.

N - amp - iasa an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-work Jeanne Paul

"Paul was having Jeanne work."

b.

N - amp - iasa - in' past-caus-work-pass-by

i Paoly i Jeanne, Paul Jeanne

"Paul was exploiting Jeanne's work."

In (206)a., there is no indication as to what kind of Control the Causer i Paoly exerts over the Causee i Jeanne, as opposed to (206)b., where the Causee loses all Control.

5.2.15

Fusion and the Manipulative Causative An(a). With the Manipulative Causative an(a), there is fusion

between the higher and the lower predicates since the embedded Su gets demoted down the hierarchy:

(207)a.

Potika ny fitaratra. broken the glass "The glass was broken."

b.

N - am - (p)otika ny fitaratra i Paoly. past-caus-broken the glass "Paul was breaking the glass." Paul

147

c.

No - poteh - in"

i Paoly ny fitaratra.

pass-broken-pass-by Paul the glass "Paul was breaking the glass."

(207)a., the NP ny fitaratra "the glass" is a Su since the for it. In

nominative pronoun ilay izy can be substituted

(207) b., it is a DO since it can be promoted to Su through Passivization, as in (207)c.

5.2.16

Negation-Placement in the lower Clause. The Manipulative Causative an(a) does not allow Tsy-

placement in the lower clause despite the fact that the negative sentence on its own is perfectly grammatical:

(208)a.

Tsy potika ny fitaratra. not broken the glass "The glass is/was not broken."

b. *N-ana-tsi-potika

ny fitaratra i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-neg-broken the glass (no interpretation whatsoever)

The sentence comprising the Negation Operator Tsy is perfectly grammatical, as seen in (208)a., in isolation. However, when it gets embedded under the Manipulative Causative an(a), it becomes irretrievably ungrammatical, if the Negation - Operator Tsy is maintained in the lower clause, but if the latter is left out, then the output, as shown in (207)b. above is grammatical.

148 i 5.2.17 Affixal Passive in the Perfective Aspect in the lower Clause. The Manipulative Causative an(a) cannot embed
a

Affixal Passive with either voa or tafa in the lower clause:

(209)a.

Voa-vaky

ny kitay.

pass-chopped the wood "The wood has been chopped."

b.

N - am - (v)aky

ny kitay i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-chopped the wood "Paul was chopping the wood."

c. *N-an-voa-vaky

ny kitay i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-pass-chopped the wood (no interpretation whatsoever)

(210)a.

Tafa-tsangana ny saina. pass-erect the flag

"Ohe flag has been erected."

b.

N - an - (ts)angana ny past-caus-erect

saina i Paoly. Paul

the flag

"Paul was erecting the flag."

c. *N-an-tafa-tsangana

ny

saina i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-pass-erect the flag (no interpretation whatsoever)

149

in (209)a- and (210)a., we have in isolation sentences comprising the two perfective aspect-markers of Passivization. Hie two are perfectly grammatical. So are the outputs just in case voa or tafa are left out, as in (209)b. and (210)b. respectively. If, however, they are maintained, then the sequences, as in (209)c. and (210)c., become irretrievably ungrammatical and cannot be assigned any interpretation whatsoever. -

5.2.18

Pronominalization. the Manipulative Causative an(a) does not allow Pronom-

inalization to an independent pronoun in the lower clause:

(211) a.

Tsara i Jeanne. good Jeanne

"Jeanne is good."

b.

N-ana-tsara

tena^ i Jeanne

past-caus-good self^ - Jeannei "Jeanne was bragging about herself."

c. *N-ana-tsara

azyi

i Jeanne^. Jeanne^

past-caus-good her^

When the independent clause shown in (211)a. is embedded under the Manipulative Causative an(a), Clause-Union takes place and this feeds Reflexivization to tena since (211) b. is grammatical. Naw, substituting azy for tena makes the sentence irretrievably ungraimnatical in the coreferential reading, as in (211) c.

150

5.2.19

Reflexivization to Ny Tenany. The Manipulative Causative an(a) allows Reflexivization

in the case of a Marked structure:

(212)

N-ana-tsara past-caus-good

ny tenany^ i Jeanne^. self^ Jeanne^

i i "Jeanne was bragging about herself."

(212), where ny tenany has been substituted for tena of (211)b., is grammatical and has the sane cognitive meaning as the latter. However, (212) is somewhat more formal than (211)b.

5.2.20

Reflexivization to Tena. The Manipulative Causative an (a), as seen in (211) b.,

allows Reflexivization to tena after Clause-Onion.

5.2.21

Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. Hie Manipulative Causative an(a) allows Affixal Passive

after Clause-Union:

(213) a.

N-ana-tsara past-caus-good (same as (212))

ny tenany.^ i Jeanne self^ Jeanne

i i 'Jeanne was bragging about herself n

b.

N-a-tsara-in' past-pass-good-by

i Jeanne^ ny tenany^ Jeanne^ self^

"Jeanne was bragging about herself."

151

in (213)a., Clause-Union has taken place but not Affixal Passive, in (213)b., on the other had, Affixal Passive has applied after Clause-Union. Notice, however, that there has been a substitution of the nonperfective aspect-marker of Passive a for the Manipulative Causative prefix an (a) in (213) b. as well as suffixation with in (a). As in many other previous examples, the final a deletes in front of a subsequent vcwel, in this case the deictic i of the NP i Jeanne.

5.2.22

Fusion and the Abilitative Causative Aha. With the Abilitative Causative aha, there is also fu-

sion between the higher and the lower predicates since the embedded Su of the underlying sequence gets denoted down the hierarchy:

(214)a.

Zaka be-able-to-be-carried

i Jeanne. Jeanne

"Jeanne can be carried."

b.

N - aha - zaka an' i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-carry prep Jeanne . Paul "Paul managed to carry Jeanne."

c. *N - aha - zaka 0 i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-carry Jeanne Paul

In (214)a., the NP i Jeanne is the Su of the clause. In (214)b., it has turned into a DO and as such, the preposition an has ap-

152

peared in front of it. If the preposition is left out, as in (214)c., the sequence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical.

5.2.23

Negation-Placement in the Icwer Clause. The Abilitative Causative aha does not allow Tsg-

Placement on the lower clause:

(215)a.

Tsy zaka

ny entana.

not be-able-to-be-carried the luggage "(We) cannot carry the luggage."

b.

N-aha-zaka

ny entana i Paoly.

past-caus-carry the luggage Paul "Paul managed to carry the luggage."

c. *N-aha-tsi-zaka

ny entana i Paoly.

past-caus-neg-carry the luggage Paul

The sentence (215)a., embedded under the Abilitative Causative aha in (215 )b., yields a grammatical output just in case the Negation Operator tsy is left out. If, as in (215) c., it is maintained in the embedded lower clause, then the resulting sentence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical and cannot be assigned any interpretation at all.

5.2.24

Affixal Passive in the lower Clause. The Abilitative Causative aha does not allow Affixal

Passive in the lower clause:

153

(216)i

I/oka

ny varavarana.

with-a-hole the door "Hie door has a hole in it."

b.

Voa - loka

ny varavarana.

pass-with-a-hole the door "(Someone) has made a hole in the door."

c. *N-aha-voa-loka

ny varavarana i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-pass-with-a-hole the door

d. *I Paoly no n-aha-voa-loka

ny varavarana.

Paul part past-caus-pass-with-a-hole the door i Hie predicate loka "with-a-hole," as seen in (216)a. and (216)b., takes the perfective aspect-marker voa optionally. However, if the version with voa gets embedded under the Abilitative Causative aha, the output, becomes irretrievably ungrammatical, as shown in (216)c., where the Su i Paoly has not been fronted, or, as shown in (216)d., where the Su has been fronted and demarcated from the rest of the sentence by the particle no.

5.2.25

Pronaminalization. Hie Abilitative Causative aha does not allow Pronom-

inalization to an independent pronoun in the lower clause:

(217)

*Tsy n-aha-zaka

azy-L i Paoly^ Pauli Paul^

neg past-caus-carry h i u ir

"Paul did not manage to carry himself."

154

(217) with a coreferential reading between the Su i Paoly and the derived DO azy is irretrievably ungrammatical.

5.2.26

Reflexivization bo Ny Tenany. Reflexivization to ny tenany after Clause-Union under

the Abilitative Causative aha is possible in a Marked structure:

(218)a.

Tsy n-aha-zaka neg past-caus-be-carried

ny tenany^ i Jeanne^. self^ Jeanne^

"Jeanne could not lift herself," or "Jeanne could not tolerate her own self."

b. *N-aha-zaka

ny tenanyi i Jeanne Jeanne^

past-caus-be-carr ied self.

(note absence of negation operator tsy)

c.

Ny tenany^ (ihany) no zaka-n' self^

i Paoly

(only) part be-carried-by Paul^

"The only person Paul can tolerate is himself."

Ny tenany yields a grammatical sentence in (218)a., under the Negation Operator Tsy. The sequence (218)b., where the Negation Operator is left out, becomes somewhat ungrammatical, i.e. at least in the absence of an elaborate context. On the other hand, in (218)c., where the Abilitative Causative aha has been left out and Passive has applied, as evidenced by the suffix (i)n(a) on the root zaka, the sentence regains its grammaticality, especially with fronting of the derived Su ny tenany.

155

5.2.27

Reflexivization to Tena. The Abilitative Causative aha allows Reflexivization to

tena after Clause-Union:

(219) a. /[ Tsy n - aha- [ zaka

i Jeanne.^ ] i Jeanne ]/. Jeannei

neg past-caus-be-carried Jeanne^

b. *Tsy n-aha-zaka

an'i Jeanne i Jeanne-. i neg past-caus-be-carried Jeanne^ Jeanne^ (no interpretation whatsoever)
\

c.

Tsy n-aha-zaka neg past-caus-be-carried

tena^ self^

i Jeanne^, Jeanne^

"Jeanne could not carry herself around," i.e. "Jeanne could not get around."

Assuming an underlying representation like (219)a. for (219)c., which is perfectly grammatical, since the structural description for Reflexivization to tena is met after Clause-Union has taken place, non-application of the rule yields the ungrammatical (219)b. Furthermore, note that the clause embedded under the higher Causative in (219)a. can stand on its own, as shown above in (214) a.

5.2.28

Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. Hie Abilitative Causative aha does not allow Affixal

Passive after Clause-Union although, as was noted in 2.1.6.3 above, it is possible to have a prefix substitution:

156

(220)a.

N -aha - zaka

an'i Jeanne i Paoly. Jeanne Paul

past-caus-be-carried

(similar to (17)a. and (18)a.)


II-

i 'Paul was able/managed to carry Jeanne. i

b. *N-aha-zaka-(i)n'

i Paoly i Jeanne. Jeanne

past-caus-be-carr ied-pass-by Paul

c.

Zaka-n'

i Paoly i Jeanne. Jeanne

be-carried-by Paul

"Paul managed to carry Jeanne.n

In contrast to (218)c., where the Causative prefix aha has been left out, thus yielding a grammatical sequence, in (220)b. the sentence comprises both the Causative prefix and Affixal Passive and the result is ungrammatical. The sentence (220)c. proves that zaka is a root passive predicate.

5.3.1

Fusion and the Causal Causative Aha. The Causal Causative aha requires fusion since the

demotion of the initial Su of the embedded clause is mandatory:

(221)a.

Ny hatezera-ny no the anger-her

n-aha-lasa

an'i Jeanne.

part past-caus-gone prep Jeanne

t iIt was because of her anger that Jeanne left.i i

b. *Ny hatezera-ny no the anger-her

n-aha-lasa

Jeanne Jeanne

part past-caus-gone

157

c.

Lasa i Jeanne noho gone

ny hatezera-ny.

Jeanne because-of the anger-her

"Jeanne left because of her anger."

In (221) c., the NP i Jeanne is the Su since it can be replaced with the nominative form of the independent pronoun izy "he/she." In the relevant Causative construction, however, the DO preposition an', as seen in (221)a., must precede the NP i Jeanne, initially a Su, otherwise, the output is irretrievably ungrammatical, as shown in (221)b.

5.3.2

Negation-Placement in the lower Clause. Ihe Causal Causative aha allows Tsy-Placement in the

lower clause:

(222)a.

Ny hatezera-ny no

n-aha-lasa an'i J(eanne).

the anger-her part past-caus-gone J(eanne) (same as (221)a.) "It was because of her anger that J(eanne) left."

b.

Ny hatezera-ny no

n-aha-tsi-lasa

an'i J. J

the anger-her part past-caus-neg-gone

"It was because of her anger that J did not leave."

In (222)a., the embedded predicate lasa "gone" has not been negated, which is the case in (222) b. Both are equally grammatical. As seen previously, the Negation Operator tsy is written tsi since it occupies an internal position in the word.

158

5.3.3

Affixal Passive in the lower Clause. Ihe Causal Causative aha allows Affixal Passive in the

lower clause:

(223) a.

Voa-fidy

ij(eanne).

pass-choose J(eanne) "J(eanne) has been chosen."

b.

Ny bika-ny

no

n-aha-voa-fidy

an'i J. J

the shape-her part past-caus-pass-choose

"It was because of her good looks that J was chosen."

(223)a. shows a sentence comprising a passive verb in the perfective aspect with voa. In (223)b., (223) a. has been embedded under the Causal Causative aha, yielding a perfectly grammatical output.

5.3.4

Pronominalization. The Causal Causative aha allows Pronominalization to an

independent pronoun:

(224) a.

Voa-kapoka i P (aoly) ^ noho

izyj tsy nianatra.,

pass-strike P(aul)i because hei neg past-study "P(aul) got punished because he did not study."

b.

Izy^ tsy nianatra he^


neg

no

n-aha-voa-kapoka

an'i P^. P^

past-study part past-caus-pass-strike

"It was because he did not study that P got punished."

159

rje complementizer noho of the embedded clause in (224) a. requiji res a Marked word order, with the Su preceding the verb. Furthermae, the embedded Su cannot delete even under coreference with the main clause Su, as is the case in Malagasy Pronominalization in this type of construction (see footnote 2 to Chapter Four for details). In (224)b., the Causal-Oblique clause has been promoted to Su and fronted with insertion of the particle no.

5.3.5

Reflexivization to Ny Tenany. With the Causal Causative aha, Reflexivization to ny

tenany is possible:

(225)a.

N - aha - sosotra an' i Jeanne.^ ny tenany^ past-caus-angry Jeanne^ selfj

"Jeanne was angry with herself."

b.

Sosotra tamin' angry

ny tenanyi i Jeanne Jeanne^

because-of self^

"Jeanne was angry with herself."

Ihe two sequences (225)a. and (225)b., the first with the Causative prefix and the second without it, have the sane cognitive meaning.

5.3.6

Reflexivization to Tena. With the Causal Causative aha, Reflexivization to tena

is iiipossible, as is made quite evident by the grammaticality pattern of the following sentences:

160

(226)a. *Ny fikiriza-ny

no

n-aha-tafita

tena R.

the perseverance-his part past-caus-successful self x "Because of his perseverance, x was successful."

b.

Tafita

R noho

ny fikiriza-ny.

successful x because-of the perseverance-his "X was successful because of his perseverance."

In (226)a., tena and R are supposed to be coreferential and the sequence is irretrievably ungrammatical. Hie sentence (226)b. shows the embedded predicate of (226)a. in the main clause.

5.3.7

Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. Hie Causal Causative aha does not allcw Affixal Passive

after Clause-Union:

(227)a. *N-aha-lasa-nan1

ny hatezera-ny i Jeanne. Jeanne

past-caus-gone-pass-by the anger-her (compare with (221)a.)

b. *I Jeanne no

n-aha-lasa-nan1

ny hatezera-ny.

Jeanne part past-caus-gone-pass-by the anger-her

(228)a. *N-aha-voa-fidi-n'

ny bika-ny

iJ(eanne).

past-caus-pass-choose-pass by the shape-her J(eanne) (compare with (163)c.)

b. *I J no

n-aha-voa-fidi-n'

ny bika-ny.

J part past-caus-pass-choose-pass-by the shape-her

161

jn all of the above sentences, Passive applies after Clauserjnion. All of them are irretrievably ungrammatical, whether Clefting is made to apply, as in (227)b. or (228)b., or not, as in (227) a. and (228) a. No interpretation whatsoever can be assigned to these sequences.

5.3.8

Fusion and the Causal Causative Amp (a). The Causal Causative amp (a) triggers fusion since demo-

tion of the lower Su down the hierarchy is mandatory:

(229)a.

Ny adala-ny

no

n-anpa-voa-dona

an'i Paoly. Paul

the stupidity-his part past-caus-pass-strike

"It was because of his stupidity that Paul got hit."

b. *Ny adala-ny

no

n-ampa-voadona

0 i Paoly. Paul

the stupidity-his part past-caus-pass-strike (no interpretation whatsoever)

Ihe grairmaticality pattern found in (229) shows that, when the initial Su NP i Paoly of the embedded clause surfaces with the preposition an in front of it, the sentence is grammatical, as in (229) a. By contrast, if the preposition an in front of the NP is left out, the sequence becomes irretrievably ungraimiatical.

5.3.9

Negation-Placement in the lower Clause. The Causal Causative amp(a) allows Tsy-Placement in the

lower clause, as can be inferred from the grammaticality of the following pair of sentences:

162

(230)a.

Ny adala-ny

no

n-anpa-lasa

an'i Paoly. Paul

the stupidity-his part past-caus-gone

"It was because of his stupidity that Paul left."

b.

Ny adala-ny

no

n-ampa-tsi-lasa

an'i Paoly. Paul

the stupidity-his part past-caus-neg-gone

"It was because of his stupidity that Paul did not go."

(230)a., the grammatical sequence does not comprise the Nega-

tion Operator tsy, whereas in (230)b., it does.

5.3.10

Affixal Passive in the lower Clause. Hie Causal Causative amp (a) allows Affixal Passive in

the lower clause:

(231)a.

Ny hakamo-ny

no

n-airpa-tafa-janona an'i Paoly. Paul

the laziness-his part past-caus-pass-stay

"It was because of his laziness that Paul was left behind."

b.

Tafa-janona i Paoly. pass-stay Paul

"Paul was left behind."

Uhlike the sentence (7)a. involving the perfective aspect-marker voa and the sequences (7)b. and (7)c. with a root passive in the lower clause, in (231) above, we have a structure comprising the other perfective aspect-marker, i.e. tafa.

163

5 3.11

Pronominalization. The Causal Causative anp (a) allows Pronominalization to

an independent pronoun:

(232)a.

Voa-dona i Paoly ^ noho pass-hit

izy^ tsy n-ety

Paul^ because-of he^ neg past-accept

n-iala

t-eo.

past-leave past-there "Paul got hit because he did not accept to leave the spot."

b.

Izy^ tsy n-ety

n-iala

t-eo

no

he^ neg past-accept past-leave past-there part

n-airpa-voa-dona past-caus-pass-hit

an'i Paoly Paul^

"It was because he did not accept to leave the spot that Paul got hit."

In (232)a., there is some emphasis on the lower NP Su, i.e. izy, whereas in (232)b., fronting of the entire Causal-Oblique clause has taken place with insertion of the particle no.

5.3.12

Reflexivization to Ny Tenany. The Causal Causative amp (a) allows Reflexivization to

ny tenany since the following sentences are quite acceptable in Malagasy:

164

(233)a. TN-ampa-sosotra an'i Jeanne.^ ny tenany past-caus-angry Jeanne^ self^

"Jeanne was angry because of herself."

b.

Ny tenany^ ihany no self^

n-airpa-sosotra an'i Jeanne^, Jeanne^

only part past-caus-angry

"It was because of herself that Jeanne was angry."

In (233)a., the fact that the Su NP ny tenany has not been fronted with insertion of the particle no causes the sentence to be of dubious grammaticality. However, if Eronting-of-Su applies and if furthermore the adverb ihany "only" is added for the purposes of emphasis, the sequence becomes perfectly grammatical, although it may be characteristic of Colloquial Malagasy and, therefore, is not considered appropriate for the standard language.

5.3.13

Reflexivization to Tena. The Causal Causative anp(a) does not allow Reflexiviz-

ation to tena at all:

(234) a. *N-anpa-tafita

tena^ i Jeanne^ Jeanne^

past-caus-successful self^

b.

N-aha-tafita

tena^ i Jeanne^, Jeanne^

past-caus-successful self^

"Jeanne managed to be successful."

The behavior of the Causal Causative amp (a) in (234) a., which is irretrievably ungrammatical, contrasts with that of the Causal

165

Causative aha, which allows Reflexivization to tena, as is quite


evident in (234)b.

5.3.14

Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. With the Causal Causative amp(a), Affixal Passive is

ruled out after Clause-Union:

(235) a. *I P no

n-airpa-voa-dona-n'

ny adala-ny.

P part past-caus-pass-hit-pass-by the stupidity-his (compare with (229)a.) (no interpretation whatsoever)

b.

*N-arrpa-voa-dona-n'

ny adala-ny

i Paoly.

past-caus-pass-hit-pass-by the stupidity-his Paul (no interpretation whatsoever)

In both the sequences (235)a. and (235)b., Passive has already applied for the first tine in the lower clause, as is marked by the presence of the Affixal Passive prefix voa, and then reapplies after Clause- Union has taken place, as indicated by the suffix (i)n(a) . In both instances, the sentences are irretrievably ungrammatical and have no meaning at all.

5.3.15

Fusion and the Causal Causative An(a). The Causal Causative an(a) requires fusion since demo-

tion of the underlying Su of the lower clause is obligatory with Clause-Union, down the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy, as illustrated by the grammaticality pattern of the following set of sentences:

166

(236)a.

Ny resaka no the talk

n-an-(t)afitohina an' i Jeanne. prep Jeanne

part past-caus-upset

"It was the talk which upset Jeanne."

b. *Ny resaka no the talk

n-an-(t)afitohina 0 i Jeanne. Jeanne

part past-caus-upset

c.

Tafitohina i Jeanne tamin' upset

ny resaka.

Jeanne because-of the talk

"Jeanne was upset because of the talk."

In (236)a., the NP i Jeanne, which was the initial Su of the lower clause, now has the DO preposition an in front of it and the sentence becomes granmatical. On the other hand, in (236)b., the same NP remains in the Su position and hence is not preceded by the preposition. Hie resulting sequence is ungrammatical. In (236)c., we have the lower clause embedded under the Causal Causative an(a) in the main clause position.

5.3.16

Negation-Placement in the Lower Clause. Hie Causal Causative an (a) disallows Tsy-Placemsnt in

the lower clause:

(237)a.

Ny resaka no the talk

n-an-(t)afitohina an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

part pas-caus-upset

"It was because of the talk that Jeanne was upset."

b. *Ny resaka no the talk

n-ana-tsi-tafitchina an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

part past-caus-neg-upset

167

in (237)awhich is the same sequence as (236)a., the lower clause does not oonprise the negation Operator Tsy and the sentence is grammatical, in (236)b., on the other hand, Tsy has been placed on the lower clause, yielding the irretrievably ungranmatical output, with no interpretation possible.

5.3.17

Affixal Passive in the Lower Clause. The Causal Causative an(a) does not allow Affixal Pas-

sive in the lower clause:

(238)a.

Ny resaka no the talk

n-an-(t)ohina an'i Jeanne. Jeanne

part past-caus-touch

"It was the talk which touched Jeanne."

b.

Voa - tdhina i Jeanne, pass-touch Jeanne

"Jeanne was touched."

c. *Ny resaka no the talk

n-ana-voa-tohina

an'i Jeanne. Jeanne

part past-caus-pass-touch

(no interpretation whatsoever)

(238)b. represents a simple sentence with the perfective aspectmarker voa. If the latter gets embedded under the Causal Causative an(a) along with the aspect-marker, the resulting sequence, as shown in (238)c., is irretrievably ungrammatical. However, if the perfective aspect-marker voa is left out, as in (238)a., then the output becomes perfectly grammatical.

168

5.3.18

Pronominalization. With the Causal Causative an (a), Pronominalization to

an independent pronoun is possible:

(239)a.

Ny

tsy n-i-karakara-n'

i Jeanne azyi Jeanne h r u ir

camp neg past-circ-take-care-of-by

no

n-an-(t)afitohina an'i Paoly... Paul^

part past-caus-upset

"It was because of the fact that Jeanne did not take care of h i u that Pauli was upset." it

b.

Tafitohina i Paoly^ noho upset

izy^ tsy

Paul^ because-of he^ neg

n-i-karakara-in'

i Jeanne,

past-circ-take-care-of-by Jeanne "Paul^ was upset because Jeanne did not take good care of hirrL."

In both (239)a. with the Causal Causative an(a) and (239)b. without the Causative, the NP i Paoly and the independent pronoun azy "him," in the first instance, or izy "he," in the second, have the same referent. Furthermore, this coreferential interpretation is the more natural reading.

5.3.19

Reflexivization to Ny Tenany. The Causal Causative an(a) allows Reflexivization to

tenany when there is strong emphasis:

169

(240)a.

Ny tenany^ ihany no self ^

n-an-dreraka an'i Jeanne^.

only part past-caus-fed-up Jeanne^

"It was with herself that Jeanne was fed up."

b. ?*Reraka i Jeannei tamin' fed-up

ny tenany.^.

Jeanne^ because-of selfi

"Jeanne was fed up with herself."

Xn (240)b., no strong emphasis is involved and the sequence is of dubious grairmaticality, whereas in (240)a., there is emphasis, as made evident by the insertion of the adverb ihany along with fronting of ny tenany, and the output is perfectly grammatical.

5.3.20

Reflexivization to Tena. The Causal Causative an (a) does not allow Reflexiv-

ization to tena even under a strong emphasis:

(241)a. *Tena^ ihany no

n-an-dreraka an'i Jeanne^.

self^ only part past-caus-fed-up Jeanne^ (compare with (240)a.)

b. *Reraka i Jeanne^ tamin-tena fed-up Jeanne^ because-of-sel^

(compare with (240)b.)

Both (241) a. and (241) b. are irretrievably ungrammatical in the preferential interpretation of the NP i Jeanne and the reflexive. However, if tena is taken to itean "you-idiot," in other

170

words, in the absence of coreference, then the two sequences become perfectly grammatical and acceptable: (241)a. would be assigned the reading "it was with you-idiot that Jeanne was fed up," whereas (241)b. would then mean "Jeanne was fed up with youidiot."

5.3.21

Affixal Passive After Clause-Union. The Causal Causative an(a) does not allow Affixal Pas-

sive after Clause-Union:

(242)a.

Ny resaka no

n-an-(s)ahirana

an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

the talk part past-cause-concerned

"It was the talk which caused Jeanne to be concerned."

b.

N-sahiran(a)-in'i Paoly i Jeanne, pass-concerned-by Paul Jeanne

"Paul was disturbing Jeanne."

c.

Sahirana i Jeanne, concerned Jeanne "Jeanne is/was preoccupied,"

*I Jeanne no

no-sahiran(a)-in' ny resaka.

Jeanne part pass-concerned-by the talk

(242)c. shews the simplex sentence embedded under the Causal Causative an(a) in (242)a., where the initial Su NP i Jeanne has been denoted to DO position, as is made evident by the presence

171

0f

the DO preposition an in front of it. In (242) b., the grammat-

ical! ty of the sequence comprising Affixal Passive in the nonperfective aspect with no...ina suggests that the predicate which is of interest to us here can undergo Passive. Yet, if (242) a. gets passivized, as shown in (242)d., the output is irretrievably
ungrammatical.

5.3.22

Fusion and the Causal Causative Ank (a). The Causal Causative ank(a) requires fusion since the

enbedded Su of the underlying sequence gets demoted along the hierarchy:

(243)a.

Ny resaka no

n-anka-leo

an' i Paoly.

the talk part past-caus-fed-up prep Paul "It was because of the talk that Paul got fed up."

b. *Ny resaka no

n-anka-leo

0 i Paoly. Paul

the talk part past-caus-fed-up

c.

Leo

i Paoly tamin'

n resaka.

fed-up Paul

because-of the talk

"Paul is/was fed up because of the talk."

(243) c. shows the simplex sentence comprising the Su NP i Paoly enbedded under the Causal Causative ank(a) in (243)a., where the initial Su NP has now been demoted to DO, hence the DO preposition an in front of it. NOw, if the DO preposition is left out of the sequence, as in ((243)b., the output becomes irretrievably ungrammatical, with no meaning whatsoever.

172

5.3.23

Negation-Placement in the lower Clause. The Causal Causative ank (a) does not allow Tsy-Placp_

ment in the lower clause:

(244)a.

Ny

resaka no

n-ank-arary

an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

the talk

part past-caus-sick

"It was because of the talk that Jeanne got sick."

b. *Ny resaka no the talk

n-anka-tsi-arary an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

part past-caus-neg-sick

(no interpretation whatsoever)

The grammaticality pattern found in (244) clearly indicates that the conditioning factor is the presence or absence of the Negation
Operator

Tsy in the lower clause.

5.3.24

Affixal Passive in the lower Clause. The Causal Causative ank (a) does not allow Affixal Pas-

sive in the lower clause, as the grairmaticality pattern of the following pair of sequences proves:

(245)a.

*Ny rivotra no the wind

n-anka-voa-latsaka

ny taratasy.

part past-caus-pass-dropped the letter

(no interpretation whatsoever)

b.

Voa-latsaka ny taratasy. pass-dropped the letter "(Someone) has dropped the letter."

173

although (245)b. with the perfective aspect-marker voa is a grammatical sentence in isolation, it becomes irretrievably ungrammatical if it gets embedded under the Causal Causative predicate ank(a), as shown in (245)a.

5.3.25

Pronominalization. The Causal Causative ank (a) allows Pronominalization to

an independent pronoun when a very strong emphasis falls on tenarg, following the ooreferential pronoun:

(246)

lzyi tenany^ no n-anka-leo he^

an'i Paoly^. Pauli

self^ part past-caus-fed-up

"It was because of himself that Paul was fed up."

The enphasis is made evident in (246) by the presence in the same sentence of both the independent pronoun izy and tenany, the second being coreferential with the first.

5.3.26

Reflexivization to Ny Tenany. The Causal Causative ank (a) allows Reflexivization to

ny tenany when there is a strong emphasis:

(247)

Ny tenanyi ihany no self^

n-anka-leo

an'i Paoly^ Paul^

only part past-caus-fed-up

"Indeed, it ws with himself that Paul was fed up."

ie enphasis is marked by the insertion of the adverb ihany after the reflexive.

174

5.3.27

Reflexivization to Tena. The Causal Causative ank(a) does not allow Reflexiv-

ization to tena:

(248)a.

*N-anka-leo

tena^ i Paoly^. Paul^

past-caus-fed-up self^

(no interpretation whatsoever)

b.

^Tena^ no

n-anka-leo

i Paoly^.

self^ part past-caus-fed-up Paul^ (no interpretation whatsoever)

Whether coreferential tena is fronted, as in (248)b., or not, as in (248)a., the output remains irretrievably ungrammatical. In fact, no interpretaticn can be assigned to either sequence. Note, however, if tena of (248)b. takes the definite article i, the sentence becomes granmatical and means "it is you-idiot who got Paul fed up."

5.3.28

Summary: the Fusion Parameter. If we now report all of the findings made in Section 5

onto Table 5, we notice among other things that a s far as the fusion structures are concerned the Manipulative constructions show maximal fusion, as opposed to the Causal constructions, which present only minimal fusion. Falling between these two extremes, the "neutral" Directive Causative leans slightly toward the negative pole, whereas the Abilitative Causative aha leans slightly toward the positive pole.

175

The fact that the Manipulative constructions tend towards maximal fusion is corroborated by the possibility of substituting the Affixal Passive non-perfective aspect-marker a for the higher Causative predicate amp (a) or an (a) and the verb prefix, as was shown to be the case in 2.1.4.3 and 2.1.5.3. As for the Abilitative Causative aha, the following exanples appear to be crucial:

(250)a.

N - i - latsaka ny taratasy. past-pref-fallen the letter "The letter fell."

b.

N - a - latsak' past-pass-fallen-by

i paoly ny taratasy. Paul the letter

"Hie letter was being dropped by Paul."

c.

N - aha - latsaka ny taratasy i Paoly. past-caus-fallen the letter Paul

"Paul managed to drop the letter."

there is a substitution of a for aha in the process of Passivization, as can be inferred from the comparison of the sequences in (250)b. and (250)c., if we assume that (250)c. is in sone sense more basic. Hiis confirms the view that there is also maximal fusion with the Abilitative Causative aha.

176

Table 5

Degree of Fusion of the Higher and Lower Predicates


1

Fusion: Minimal

Maximal

Marked ET Construction

Prefix E-l E-2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

N N N N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y/N Directive "p" N N N "c" "l"

0 0 0

+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 + + + 0 0 0 + 0 + + + + 0 + + + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 +
* * * * * * * * *
*

* * *

0 0
*

"n" Anp(a)

+ +
* * *

Y f l Manipulative Artp(a) /c N Y Y Y Y Y Manipulative An (a) Abilitative Causal Causal Causal Causal Aha Aha Amp (a) An (a) Ank (a)

+ + + +/* + + +/* +
*
* *

* * * * *

0 + + + + + 0 + + + + + 0 + 0 +
* * * *

+ + + +

L 2 Note: ET = Entailment, E-! = Equi-1, E-: = Equi-2, 0 = Demotion of the embedded Su, 1 = Negation Tsy-Placement in the lower clause, 2 = Affixal Passive in the lower clause, 3 = Pronominalization, 4 = Reflexivization to ny tenany 5 = Reflexivization to tena / 6 = Clause-Union precedes Affixal Passive

177

Table 5 (Cont'd)

N = Negative, Y = Positive, y/N = Either Y or N "p" = persuasive, "c" = coercive, "1" = permissive, and "n" = neutral Directive. 0 = Not Relevant, + = Grammatical, * = Ungrammatical, +/* = Either + or *.

178

Section 6

Markedness

6.0

Markedness. In Section 6, the different types of Causative constru-

ctions presented in Section 1 will be assessed, to determine their Markedness status. Seven criteria will be adopted for determining whether a given structure is Marked or not: 1. whether an Affixal Passive or Root Passive is obligatory in the lower clause; 2. Whether a Psychological Predicate is mandatory; 3. the compound verb made up of the higher and the lower predicates or if there is no fusion, the lower predicate carries with it an Entailment; 4. Emphatic Pronoun coreferential with an NP in the matrix clause and occupying the underlying Su position is obligatory in the embedded clause; 5. Clefting is obligatory; 6. the presence of Amalgamation whereby one and the sane Causative construction can have two different readings; and 7. whether a Causative construction can be used in the enbedded clause of the "persuasive" Directive construction without any alteration whatsoever in its predicate. A construction will be deemed Marked if it neets the majority of the criteria listed above.

179

$ 1.0

Markedness Criteria. This first Subsection will consider the criteria given

from 1- to 6. above. It will appear that all of the Causal constructions, i.e. aha, amp (a), an (a), and ank (a) are Marked; whereas the "persuasive," the "coercive," the "permissive," and the "neutral" Directive constructions are Unmarked. Likewise, it will be seen that the Manipulative Causatives amp (a) and an (a) and the Abilitative Causative aha are Unmarked.

6.1.1

Markedness and the "Persuasive" Directive Causative. The "persuasive" Directive construction is Unmarked

since: 1. there is one criterion which is applicable, i.e. the necessity for the circumstantial voice in the lower clause, as was shown to be the case under 2.1.1; 2. the lower clause may comprise a non-Psychological Predicate, as can be inferred from the grammaticality of sentences like (l)a. and (l)b. with verbs of the type of mandeha "to go" or mividy "to buy"; 3. sentences like (106)a. and (106)b. suggest that with this type of construction, the content of the embedded clause is not necessarily entailed, as explained under 3.1; 4. sentences like (188)a., where the ooreferential Su NP i Paoly of the embedded clause, as seen in (188)c., is deleted, show that the Emphatic Pronoun criterion does not apply; 5. a sentence like (l)a., where Clefting has not applied, is grammatical: this suggests that it cannot be the case that Clefting is obligatory with this construction; and

180

6. a sentence like (l)a. is not subject to an ambiguity of interpretation. Therefore, there is no Amalgamation.

6.1.2

Markedness, the "Coercive" and the "Permissive" Directive Causatives. With the "coercive" and the "permissive" Directive

Causative constructions: 1. Affixal Passive with no...ina is optional, as shown under 2.1.2, since there is a choice between it and its active counterpart; 2. sentences like (44)a., where the enbedded verb hanasa "will wash," prove that the lower predicate does not have to be Psychological; 3. the sentences (111) and (112) with their continuations prove that these two constructions do not carry an Entailnent of the proposition of the lower predicate; 4. these two constructions involve Equi-2 (see Chapter Five, Section 2) and therefore, the underlying Su of the embedded clause does not show up on the surface as an independent pronoun, even under emphasis; 5. the grammaticality of sentences like those in (2) and (3) involving no Clefting shows that the latter is not obligatory; and 6. a sentence like (2) or (3) involving a "coercive" or a "permissive" Directive meaning does not lend itself to a different interpretation. Therefore, there is no Amalgamation. All of the above suggests that both the coercive and the permissive constructions are Unmarked.

181

Markedness and the "Neutral" Directive Causative. With the "neutral" Directive Causative amp(a): 1. the embedded verb must be in the active voice, as

shown under 2.1.3; 2. it cannot h e a Psychological Predicate (see example i (55)); 3. there is no Entailment (see (110)); 4. as can be inferred from the exaitple in (14)b. of Chapter Three cm Reflexivization, there is an Unlike-Su constraint obtaining between the matrix Su and the embedded Su; it follows that it is impossible to have an Emphatic Independent Pronoun in Su position, as can be seen under 5.2.11 of the present Chapter; 5. the grammaticality of sentences like those in (4) involving the "neutral" Directive anp (a) shows that it cannot be the case that Clefting is obligatory since those sentences are grammatical and yet, have not undergone Clefting; and 6. the structures belonging to this construction do not lend themselves to any ambiguity of interpretation (see (4) a. and (4)b., for exanple). All of the above suggests that the "neutral" Directive construction is Unmarked.

6.1.4

Markedness and the Manipulative Causative Amp(a). With the Manipulative Causative anp (a); 1. Affixal Passive cannot apply on the lower clause, as

can be inferred from the ungrammaticality of (57)b., (58) b., and (59)b., Wiich involve the no...ina, voa, and tafa aspectual forms respectively;

182

2. the lower predicate cannot be a Psychological Predicate since this yields an ungrammatical sequence, as in (59)c 3. however, there is Entailment when the embedded verb is a non-Psychological Stative predicate, as in (114)a.; 4. Emphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is disallowed, as shown under 5.2.11; 5. the graimiaticality of sentences like those in (5)a., (5)b., and (5)c., where Clefting has not applied, indicates that it is not the case that Clefting is obligatory; and 6. a structure like (12) d. involving the Manipulative Causative anp (a) and an Animate Causee can lend itself to an ambiguity of interpretation. One case in point:

(251)a.

N - anp - iasa an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-work Jeanne Paul

b. c.

"Paul was having Jeanne work," or "Paul was exploiting Jeanne's work."

(251)a. can mean either (251)b. or (251)c. All of the above suggests that the Manipulative Causative amp (a) is only partially Marked.

6.1.5

Markedness and the Manipulative Causative An(a). With the Manipulative Causative an (a): 1. Affixal Passive is not allowed in the lower clause,

as can be inferred from (138)c. and (138)d.; 2. the lower predicate cannot be a Psychological Predicate, as seen in 2.1.5.1;

183

3. there is no Entailment, as shown in (115); 5. Emphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is not possible, as is evident in 5.2.18; 6. the grammaticality of sentences like (5)e. involving the Manipulative Causative an (a), where no Clefting has taken place, suggests that it is not the case that Clefting is obligatory; and 7. a sentence like (5)a. does not lend itself to an ambiguity of interpretation. As a consequence of this, Amalgamation does not arise. All of the above suggests that the Manipulative Causative an (a) is Unmarked.

6.1.6

Markedness and the Abilitative Causative Aha. With the Abilitative Causative aha; 1. Affixal Passive is not allowed in the lower clause,

as shown under 2.1.6.2 and 4.1.19 and as can be inferred from the possibility of substituting no...ina for aha, as shown explicitly in 2.1.6.3; 2. a Psychological Predicate is not mandatory, as suggested by the examples under 2.1.6.1; 3. however, there is Entailment, as shown under 3.4; 4. Enphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is not possible, as can be inferred from 5.2.25; 5. the grammaticality of sentences like those in (6) involving the Abilitative Causative aha but where no Clefting has taken place suggests that it is not the case that Clefting is obligatory; and

184

6. sentences like those in (6) do not lend themselves to an ambiguity of interpretation. As a consequence of this Amalgamation does not arise. All of the above suggests that the Abilitative Causative aha is Unmarked.

6.1.7

Markedness and the Causal Causative Aha. With the Causal Causative aha; 1. Affixal Passive with voa or tafa is obligatory when

the embedded clause comprises a non-Psychological Predicate, as seen under 2.1.6.4 and from 4.2.1 to 4.2.3; 2. from 1 above, it follows that a Psychological Predicate is not mandatory in the embedded clause; 3. there is Entailment, as shown under 3.5; 4. Errphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is possible, as shown under 5.3.4; 5. sentences like (7)b. with Clefting are the normal cases since those in (9) not involving Clefting necessitate a special intonation without which they become ungrammatical; 6. sentences like (7)b. or (9) do not give rise to an ambiguity of interpretation. Therefore there is no Amalgamation. All of the above suggests that the Causal Causative aha is Marked.

6.1.8

Markedness and the Causal Causative Amp(a). With the Causal Causative amp (a); 1. Affixal Passive with voa or tafa is obligatory when

the embedded clause conprises a non-Psychological Predicate, as seen under 2.1.6.4, 4.2.8 and 4.2.9;

185

2. from 1 above, it follows that a Psychological Predicate is not mandatory in the embedded clause; 3. there is Entailment, as was shown under 3.5; 4. Emphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is possible,
aS

was shown under 5.3.11; 5. sentences like (7)a. with Clefting are the normal

cases since that in (8)a. involving no Clefting necessitates a special intonation without which it becomes ungranroatical; 6. sentences like (7)a. and (8) do not give rise to an antoiguity of interpretation. It follows that there is no Amalgamation. All of the above suggests that the Causal Causative amp (a) is Marked.

6.1.9

Markedness and the Causal Causative An(a). With the Causal Causative an(a): 1. Affixal Passive is not allowed in the lower clause,

as shown under 4.2.13; 2. a Psychological Predicate is mandatory in the lower clause, as per 4.2.16; 3. there is Entailment, as seen under 3.5; 4. Emphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is possible, as shown under 5.3.18; 5. although in the overwhelming majority of cases (see (7)c. and (176)c., for example), Clefting applies, there are instances like (80)b., where it does not apply, yet the output is grammatical.ftiissuggests that it is not the case that Clefting is obligatory; however

186

6. in the case of the sentence (80) b. involving the Causal Causative an(a) but where Clefting has not applied, there is a possibility of ambiguity since (80)a. can mean not only that "Jeanne got fed up with Paul," but also something like "Paul took an active part in causing Jeanne to be fed up." Therefore, there is Amalgamation. All of the above shows that the Causal Causative an (a) should be considered Marked.

6.1.10

Markedness and the Causal Causative Ank(a). With the Causal Causative ank(a); 1. Affixal Passive is not allowed, as was shown under

2.1.8.1, 4.2.19, and 4.2.20; 2. a Psychological Predicate is mandatory in the lower clause, as seen under 4.2.19 to 4.2.24; 3. there is Entailment, as seen under 3.5; 4. Emphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is possible, as shown under 5.3.25; 5. although in the overwhelming majority of cases (see (7)c. and (176)c., for example), Clefting applies, there are instances like (80) b., where it does not apply, yet the output is grammatical. This suggests that it is not the case that Clefting is obligatory; and 6. there is, at least, one case involving the Causal Causative ank(a), i.e the sentence (116)a., where the lower predicate is an adjective, adala "foolish," and which also has a Manipulative reading, as is made evident by the grarrmaticality of the sequence where Affixal Passive to ina applies after ClauseUnion, as shown in (116)b. This is a case of Amalgamation.

187

All of the above suggests that the Causal Causative ankja). should be considered Marked.

6.2.0

Additional Criterion for Markedness. This second Subsection will consider the last criter-

ion, i.e. whether the predicate or main verb in a particular Causative construction can be used in the embedded clause of the "persuasive" Directive construction without any change of voice. If a construction can be used thus, its Causative prefix will be considered Marked; if not, it will be deemed Unmarked. This last criterion corroborates the findings made in the first Subsection, i.e. all the Causal constructions are Marked, whereas the remaining structures, i.e. the "persuasive," the "coercive," the "permissive," and the "neutral" Directive Causatives as well as the Manipulative and the Abilitative constructions are Unmarked.

6.2.1

Hie "Persuasive" Directive Causative. The "persuasive" Directive construction does not meet

the last criterion since, as was shown under 2.1.1, the lower predicate must be in the circumstantial voice; yet, criterion "7" requires that the main verb manao "to do" remain in its active form.

6.2.2

The "Coercive" and the "Permissive" Directive Causative Constructions. The "coercive" and the "permissive" Directive constru-

ctions do not meet criterion "7" since the a. sequence belcw

188

yields an irretrievably ungrammatical sentence when it gets embedded under the "persuasive" construction. The English translation provided makes explicit the intended reading.

(252)a.

N-anery/N-arrela

an'i J(eanne) h-andeha i P(aoly). J(eanne) fut-go P(aul)

past-force/past-let

"P(aul) was forcing/allowing J(eanne) to go."

b. *N-anao [izay n-anery/n-amela an'i J handeha i P] R. past-do coirp past-force/let J fut-go P R

"P was doing so that P forced/allowed J to go."

c.

Nanao [izay n-anere-n/n-amela-n' i P an'i J handeha] R. past-do corap past-circ-force/let-by p J fut-go R

"R was doing so that J was forced/allowed by P to go."

The ungrarrmaticality of the sentence (252) b., vhere the verb nanery "forced," or name la "allowed" is in the active voice, as opposed to the grammaticality of the sentence (252)c., where the same verb is in the circumstantial voice, indicates that the "coercive" and the "permissive" Directive constructions do not meet criterion "7." This confirms the view provided under 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 that both constructions be considered Unmarked.

6.2.3

The "Neutral" Directive Causative. The compound predicate of the "neutral" Directive con-

struction with amp (a) with the lower verb in the active voice, cannot be embedded under the matrix of the "persuasive" construction:

189

(253)a.

N - anp - andidy ny mofo an'i J(eanne) i P(aoly). past-caus-cut the bread J(eanne) P(aul)

"P(aul) was having J(eanne) cut the bread."

b. *N-anao [izay n-anp-andidy ny mofo an'i J (an'i P)] R. past-do conp past-caus-cut the bread J P R

"R was doing so that P had J cut the bread."

i h grammaticality pattern found in (253) indicates that the je "neutral" Directive construction does not meet criterion "7," even when the Causee, between parentheses in (253)b., is left out.

6.2.4

The Manipulative Causative Amp (a). Hie compound predicate of the Manipulative Causative

construction with amp (a) meets criterion "7" and thus confirms the finding made under 6.1.4:

(254)a.

N - amp - an-deha - n - an' i P(aoly) i J(eanne). past-caus-circ-walk-by P(aul) J(eanne)

"P(aul) stood J(eanne) up (and helped her) to walk."

b.

N-anao [izay n-amp-an-deha-n-an1 past-do ocaip past-caus-circ-walk-by

i P an'i J] R. P J R

"R was doing so that P stood J up (and helped her) to walk."

(254) a. shows a sentence with its verb in the circumstantial voice, i.e. with the circumfix an... (a)n(a) surrounding the

190

verbal root. Now, such a sentence can be embedded under the "persuasive" Directive Causative, as the grammaticality of

(254)b. indicates.

6.2.5

Hie Manipulative Causative an (a). The compound predicate of the Manipulative Causative

with an(a) cannot show up in the embedded clause of the "persuasive" construction:

(255) a.

N - am - (v)aky

ny kitay i P(aoly). P(aul)

past-caus-chopped the wood

"P(aul) was chopping the wood."

b. *N-anao [izay n-am-(v)aky

ny kitay (i P)] R. P R

past-do conp past-caus-chopped the wood "R was doing so that P chopped the wood."

(255)a. shows a sentence comprising the Manipulative Causative with an(a), perfectly grammatical in isolation. However, when the sentence appears under the "persuasive" Directive, whether its original Su NP i Paoly is maintained or left out, the output remains irretrievably ungrammatical, as seen in (255) b. This construction, therefore, does not meet criterion "7," confirming the view proposed in 6.1.5 that this is an Unmarked structure.

6.2.6

The Abilitative Causative Aha. The compound predicate of the abilitative Causative aha

construction cannot be embedded as is under the matrix of the "persuasive" Directive structure:

191

(256)a.

N - aha - zaka

ny entana i Paoly.

past-caus-bearable the luggage Paul "Paul managed to carry the luggage."

b. *N-anao [izay n-ha-zaka

ny entana] Rakoto.

past-do camp past-caus-bearable the luggage Rakoto "Rakoto was doing so as to be successful in carrying the luggage."

In (256)a., we have a grammatical sentence comprising the Abilitative Causative aha in isolation. When it is embedded under the main predicate of the "persuasive" Directive construction, the resulting sequence is irretrievably ungrammatical, as seen in (256) b., where the original Su NP of (256) a. has been left out. As we remarked about (255)b. above, this does not seem to be a relevant factor.

6.2.7

The Causal Causative Aha/Anp(a) Constructions. The compound predicate of the Causal aha/amp(a) con-

struction can be embedded without any change of any kind under the matrix clause of the "persuasive" Directive structure:

(257)a.

Ny ditra-ny

no

n-aha/anpa-voa-kapoka an'i Paoly. Paul

the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-hit

"It was because of his mischief that P was punished."

b.

N-anao [izay n-aha/anpa-voa-kapoka an'i Paoly] Rakoto. past-do ooitp past-caus-pass-hit Paul Rakoto

"Rakoto did so as to get Paul punished."

192

The sentence (257)a. comprises a Causal aha/ampa predicate. The grammaticality of (257) b,, vhere the Causal predicate has been embedded under the "persuasive" Directive predicate, proves that our above claim holds. This confirms what was found under 6 . 1 . 7 , i.e. that Causal aha is Marked.

6.2.8

The Causal Causative An(a). The compound predicate of the Causal Causative an (a)

construction can be embedded without any change under theroatrix clause of the "persuasive" Directive structure:

(258)a.

Ilay resaka no the talk

n-an-(t)afitohina an'i Jeanne. Jeanne

part past-caus-upset

"It was because of the talk that Jeanne was upset."

b.

N-anao [izay n-an-(t)afitohina an'i Jeanne] i Paoly. past-do comp past-caus-upset Jeanne Paul

"Paul was doing so as to upset Jeanne."

As in other previous cases, (258)a. shows a grammatical sentence comprising the relevant Causative predicate. The grammaticality of (258)b. with the same predicate embedded under the matrix of the "persuasive" Directive an(a) corroborates the finding made under 6.1.9, i.e. that Causal an(a) should be considered Marked.

6.2.9

The Causal Causative Ank(a). The compound predicate of the Causal Causative ank(a)

can be embedded without any change under the matrix clause of the "persuasive" Directive construction:

193

(259)a.

Hay sakafo no the food

n-ank-arary an'i Jeanne. Jeanne

part past-caus-sick

"It was because of the food that Jeanne got sick."

b.

N-anao [izay n-ank-arary an'i Jeanne] i Paoly. past-do coup past-caus-sick Jeanne Paul

"Paul was doing so that Jeanne got sick."

Again, the grammaticality pattern found in (259) indicates that Causal ank (a) should be considered fferked, as was predicted in 6.1.10.

6.2.10

Summary: the Markedness Parameter. All the findings made in Subsection 6 are reported onto

Table 6.

194

Table 6

Markedness

Causative

Prefix

"persuasive" "coercive" Directive "permissive" "neutral" Manipulative Manipulative Abilitative Causal Causal Causal Causal

0 0 0 Amp (a) Anp (a) An (a) Aha Aha Anp (a) An (a) Ank (a)

+
* * * * * *

* * * * * * *

* * * *

*
*

* *

* * * *

* * * *

* * * * *

*
*
*

+/*
*

+/* +
* * * *
*

* *

+ +/* + + +/* +
* *

+ + + +

+ +
* *

+ + + +

+ +

+ +

+ +

Note. 1 = Affixal Passive Obligatory, 2 = Psychological Predicate Obligatory, 3 = Entailment, 4 = Emphatic Pronoun, 5 = Obligatory Clefting, 6 = Amalgamation, 7 = Embedding. * = Unmarked, + = Marked, +/* = Partially Marked

195

72 ^.

Conclusions. Hie Animacy Parameter. In conclusion, it appears that in view of examples such

as sentence (90), initially cited in 2.0.1, the Animacy parameter is necessary. In a Directive construction, i.e. the "persuasive," the "coercive," the "permissive," or the "neutral" Causatives," both the Causer and the Causee are typically Animate, as explained under 1.0, except for the first subtype, where the Causee can optionally be non-Animate, as can be inferred from the grammaticality of exanples such as (108)a. which involves a non-Animate Causee. In a Manipulative construction, the Causer is Animate, as in (12), v i i e the Causee is typically non-Animate, although it ril does not have to be the case, as shown in (5)c. In the Abilitative construction, both the Causer and the Causee are optionally Animate, as is evident in (15) to (18). In a Causal construction, the Causer is typically non-Animate, as in (27), but does not always have to be, judging from the quasi-grammaticality of the example in (28)b., where it is an Animate NP.

7.2

Hie Control Parameter. Hie notion of Control has to supplement the first para-

meter. In the case of the "persuasive," the "coercive," the "permissive," and the "neutral" Directive constructions, the Causee retains Control, as illustrated in 2.1.1 to 2.1.3. Furthermore, in the first subtype, the circumstantial voice is mandatory (2.1.1), while in the second and the third, Affixal Passive in the non-perfective aspect is optional (2.1.2), and with the last one, the active voice is obligatory (2.1.3). All three forms

196

refer to a Deliberate Activity (2.0.2). As far as the Manipulative constructions are concerned, there is Control, as is made abundantly clear in 2.1.4.3 to 2.1.5.2, although it is not exercised by the Causee but by the Causer. In the Abilitative construction, there is a selectional restriction which allows only non-Psychological predicates (2.1.6.1) to be embedded.

7.3

The Entailment Parameter. The Entailment parameter defined as the semantic cor-

relate of the perfective aspect-marker of a predicate and synonymous with "resultative," yields the following pattern: A. If fusion takes place and if the embedded clause comprises a predicate referring to a State, there is Entailment: (1) the lower predicate is a Psychological predicate, as in the case of Causal an(a) and ank(a); (2) the lower verb is a non-Psychological, Stative predicate, as in the case of the Manipulative Causative amp (a) in (114); and (3) the lower verb is a non-Psychological, non-Stative predicate, but is in the perfective aspect form of Affixal Passive, with either voa or tafa, as in the case of the Causal Causatives aha and amp (a) in (121) and (122); however, if there is maximal fusion and if in the process the embedded Stative verb (2.1.4.3) loses not only its tense but also its Stative prefix, i.e. i, then there is no Entailment. This is the case in the example (114)b.; this also applies to the Manipulative construction an (a) since it is possible to have the following pair of sentences whose verbs are formed on the same radical:

197

(260)a.

N - i - tsangana ny lay. past-pref-set-up the tent "Hie tent was in the state of having been set up."

b.

N - a n - (ts)angana ny lay i Paoly. past-pref-set-up the tent Paul

"Paul was setting up the tent."

B. If there is no fusion of the higher and the lower predicates, there is no Entailment unless the embedded verb is in the past tense, as explained under 3.1.

7,4

The Productivity Parameter. Ohe Productivity parameter specifies the type of stru-

cture that can be embedded under the different Causative predicates. Thus, in the "persuasive" Directive construction, the embedded clause may have a typically transitive verb ((38)a.) or an intransitive verb, whether the latter is Statiye ((108)a.) or not ((107)a.). The only restriction is that the embedded verb be in the circumstantial voice (2.1.1). In the "coercive" and the "permissive" Directive constructions, the embedded clause may have a typically transitive verb (44) or an intransitive verb, provided the latter is not Stative (48). Such an embedded verb may be in the active voice or in the Affixal Passive in the non-perfective aspect with no. ina, as in (44) d. In the "neutral" Directive construction, the embedded predicate may be typically transitive (2.1.3) or an intransitive

198

verb, provided the latter is not Stative ((54)a. and (54)b,; also 4.1.3). In the Manipulative constructions, a distinction has to be made between amp (a) and an (a). With the first, the embedded predicate, if it is not a Stative verb, is in the circumstantial voice ((56)b.), while if it is a non-Psychological Stative verb, then it must remain in the active voice (2.1.4.2). NO typically transitive verb (4.1.9), no root passive (4.1.11), and no adjective (4.1.12) is allowed in the lower clause. On the other hand, with the Causative an(a), the embedded clause may include a root passive (2.1.5.1) or an adjective (4.1.17), provided it is not a Psychological predicate (2.1.5.1). In the Abilitative construction with aha, the embedded predicate is either a non-Psychological root passive ((69)a.) or a non-Psychological adjective (4.1.21). in the case of the Causal constructions, there exist two subtypes: with aha or arnp(a), a transitive or an intransitive verb can show up in the embedded clause, provided it is in the perfective aspect of Affixal Passive with voa (4.2.8) or tafa (4.2.9); with an (a) and ank (a) t o a certain extent' the embedded clause is a Psychological predicate,tietherit is a root passive (4.2.10) or an adjective (4.2.11). In the case of ank(a), the set of adjectives that can be in the lower clause is very limited (4.2.23), although from the ungrammaticality of (184)b., where the Causee is non-Animate, it can be inferred that they must be Psychological predicates. As we nDve from the "persuasive" Directive to the Causal ank(a) construction, the range of sentence types that can

199

be embedded decreases and at the same time, the set of predicates ^at can occur in the lower clause becomes more and more restricted. Thus, there is only a very limited set that can co-occur
with

ank(a). This contrasts with the "persuasive" Directive con-

struction, where even a Psychological predicate can be embedded under the main clause, provided it combines with the relevant Causal prefix, as shown under 6.2.0.

7.5

The Fusion Parameter. When the embedded predicate is a non-Stative verb,

there is the possibility of applying the circumstantial form of Affixal Passive after Clause-Union in the case of the Manipulative construction with amp (a). This argues for the necessity of the Fusion parameter. m this respect, the Manipulative constructions show maximal fusion of the higher and the lower predicates (5.2.8 to 5.2.21), whereas a Causal construction evinces minimal fusion (5.3.1 to 5.3.27). The "neutral" Directive construction leaning slightly toward the negative pole (5.2.1 to 5.2.7) and the Abilitative Causative aha leaning toward the positive pole (5.2.22 to 5.2.28) fall between those two extremes. On the other hand, the "persuasive," the "coercive," and the "permissive" Directive constructions do not present evidence suggesting fusion (5.1.5 and 5.1.6).

7.6

The Markedness Parameter. The Markedness parameter distinguishes between the ends

of a continuum represented, on the one hand, by the Causal constructions, i.e. with aha (6.1.7), aitp(a) (6.1.8) (also 6.2.7 for

200

both), an (a) (6.1.9 and (6.2.8), and ank (a) (6.1.10 and 6.2.9), which are clearly Marked and, on the other hand, by the "coercive" and the "permissive" Directive constructions (6.1.2 and 6.2.2), the "neutral" Directive anp (a) (6.1.3 and 6.2.3) and the Manipulative an (a) (6.1.5 and 6.2.5), vMch are clearly Unmarked. Falling between these two extremes: A. the "persuasive" Directive is only slightly Marked with respect to the obligatoriness of the circumstantial voice in its enbedded clause (6.1.1) and when the latter has its verb in the past tense, thus triggering Entailment (3.1); B. the Manipulative anp (a) construction is Marked to a greater extent since (i) vtoen its embedded clause ccaiprises a Stative verb, there is Entailment (6.1.4(3)); (ii)tienits embedded clause comprises a non-Stative verb in the active voice, there is the possibility of an ambiguity of interpretation (6.1.4); (iii) the compound Causative predicates can be embedded as is under the matrix clause of the "persuasive" Directive construction (6.2.4).

201

CHAPTER ONE FOOTNOTES

\jhen a literal translation is given first, the translation in good English will be provided after the notation i.e.

References to examples in the text will be made between paren-

theses followed by a letter specification wherever necessary and only one number will be used.

^Unless otherwise indicated, the references given between parentheses refer to (a) portion(s) of the same chapter. Furthermore, where a sequence a numbers separated by (a) period (s) is (are) involved, the first refers to the appropriate Section, the second to the Subsection, and the rest to the relevant paragraph or portion thereof.

Sjhen no specific reference to a sentence is given, i.e. when only a letter is used for example, (a) the sequence being referred to is located in the same paragraph.

CHAPTER TWO

PREVIOUS SCHOLARSHIP ON MALAGASY CAUSATIVES

0.0

Introduction. This chapter presents a rapid review of works touching

upon Malagasy Causatives. It will became apparent that: 1. Traditional grainnarians as well as
modern

linguists

are agreed that Malagasy has, at least, one Causative prefix anp (a), although nearly all of them in their works provide numerous examples showing that aha, an (a) and ank (a) can also serve as Causative prefixes. The universal recognition of amp (a) as a Causative prefix is undoubtedly due to the fact that it is the most productive of all i n the sense defined in Chapter Ore; It was the only one considered to be a Causative by traditional grammarians until Rajaona (1972) included aha into the list, along with amp (a), but dismissed ank (a) on morphological grounds. 2. One area where native speakers' intuitions were needed was that relative to the meaning of the Causative prefix amp (a): it was only with Rajaona (1972) that it became relatively clear that this morpheme could mean something like "let" or "order someone to do something" (see Rajaona 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4).

203

3. However, due to his theoretical framework, Rajaona (1972) could not consider all of the above prefixes as involving
Causative constructions (see his 6.9, 6.10 and 6.11). In fact, he

adopts a structuralist approach characterized by simple correlations and no utilization of imiti-factor analyses: thus, if a given linguistic item has property a, then it also has property t . in short, if a then b. He does not utilize a multivariate ap) proach, along the lines indicated in Keenan (1976b), vfoere the number of conditioning factors is necessarily superior to one1.
Further more,

his approach is more like an item analysis than a

process analysis as far as the voice system is concerned. Last S i not least, his criteria are not always syntactic in nature. xt

1.1

Griffiths and the Causatives of Malagasy. Causative constructions caught the attention of tradi-

tional grammarians as far back as Griffiths (1854), who wrote Grammar of the Malagasy Language in the Ankova Dialect. But he considered anpa to be the only Causative construction of the language, which in his words was "formed by prefixing marnp to simple verbs" (p.120). The latter could take different forms, which the author did not analyze into their constituent parts; he simply gave them as unanalyzed wholes with no boundaries between the different morphemes. Thus, he presented examples like the following:

Causative of the "reflective verb"2:

(1)

manpilahatra "to cause to arrange themselves";

204

(2)

Causative of the "potentative verb": mampahalahatra "to cause to be able to arrange";

(3)

Causative of the "intensive verb": mairpihihiatra "to cause to be better, to beautify";

(4)

Causative of the "transitive verb": manpandahatra "to cause to arrange";

(5)

Causative of the "reciprocative verb": mampifandahatra "to cause to arrange reciprocally."

1.2

Griffiths' Methodology. Griffiths (1854) relied on a combination of notional

and formal criteria. On the one hand, he used headings such as "reflective verb," "potentative verb," or "intensive verb," which ' appear to be notionally based although he did not provide an elucidation as to what was meant exactly on the other hand, he had recourse to the presence of the an prefix as his criterion for the transitive verb and that of ii for the reciprocative verb. (2) and (3) are sequences which, at least nowadays, have no counterpart in the language and might reflect the fact that the grammarian was not a native speaker of Malagasy. Such a hypothesis is corroborated by a long list of alleged Causative constructions involving the mahampamp sequence (see Griffiths, p.121), which mast native speakers whose grammatical judgments were available to me consider totally ungrammatical. Thus:

205

a_

Mahairpaitpalahatra "to have power to cause to be able to arrange,"

b.

Mahampampandahatra "to have power to cause to arrange,"

irretrievably ungrammatical.

Griffiths and the Semantics of Causatives. as to the non-implicative meaning attached bo the Causative amp (a), there was no indication of it in the grammar.

2.1

Parker and his Methodology. Parker (1883) in his Concise Grammar of the Malagasy

Language also considers mampi to be the only Causative construction in the language, although he had examples involving ana, as in manatsara "to render good," or aha, as in mahatsara "to possess the power to make a thing good" (see (Parker, p.18)). Furthermore, he segmented each complex Causative verb into its constituent parts. Thus, he had sequences like the following:

(7)

m - amp - i m - airp - iha m - amp - aha m - amp - a m - aitp - an m - aitp - ana m - anp - anka.

206

However, he did not give one single illustrative example of

sentence involving the relevant construction, and no explanation was provided as to the exact meaning of the Causative prefix.

2.2

Voice in Malagasy. Unlike Griffiths, who did not distinguish between the

passive proper and the circumstantial voice, Parker had a threeway classification: 1. the active voice; 2. the passive voice; 3. the relative voice, i.e. the circumstantial voice.

2.3

Contrast between Voa Passive and Tafa Passive. Furthermore, Parker noticed the contrast between a pas-

sive with the prefix voa and the one with the prefix tafa: the first usually implies an external agent, whereas the second characterizes internal agency. He did not support his general statement with examples, but the following pair of verbs from my data illustrate what he meant:

(8)a.

tafa - petraka "to find oneself sitting (accidentally)";

b.

voa - petraka "to be placed (somewhere)(deliberately)."

3.1

Ferrand and the Causatives of Malagasy. Like his predecessor, Ferrand (1903) in his Essai de

Grammaire Malgache considered mampa to be the only Causative

207

construction of the language. Nevertheless, he had examples of words which involved all of the other Causative prefixes. Thus, he gave:

(9)

mandrava "to demolish," rava "demolished" (English) (see (Ferrand, p. 120));

(10)

manajamba "to cause to be blind," jamba "blind" (see (Ferrand, p. 131));

(11)

mankarary "to make sick," marary "sick" (see (Ferrand, p. 132));

(12)

mahory "to cause to be miserable," ory "miserable" (see (Ferrand, p. 135));

which we could segnent respectively into

(91)

m - an - drava pres-caus-denolished

(10')

m - ana - jamba pres-caus-blind

(11')

m - ank (a) - (h) arary pres-caus-(fut-)sick

(12')

m - ah(a) - ory pres-caus-miserable.

208

Ferrand, by the way, did not say anything at all about the meaning of the Causative construction.

4.1

Malzac and the Causatives of Malagasy. Although Malzac (1908) is believed to be the most com-

prehensive of all Malagasy grammars, it does not provide its readers with an exhaustive list of all the Causative constructions of the language. Here again, ampa is considered to be the only Causative prefix, despite the fact that, like Ferrand

(1903), the author presents examples involving all the other constructions. Thus:

(13)

Nahavoafitaka

ahy ny

fihatsaram-belatsihiny.

past-caus-pass-err me

the hypocrisy-his

(see (Malzac, p. 58, paragraph 141)) "His hypocrisy induced roe into error." (English)

(14)

Nameno

vary ny kitapony izy. the bag-his he

past-full rice

(see (Malzac, p. 133, paragraph 277)) "He filled his bag with rice." (English)

(15)

Mankahery pres-caus-strong (see (Malzac, p. 62, paragraph 153)) "to strengthen." (English)

We can analyze the predicate in (13) into the tense-marker n, the Causative aha, and the passive voafitaka "to be in the state of

209

having been misled." Nameno of (14) is made up of n-an-(f)eno, feno being an adjective meaning "full." Mankahery of (15) comprises m-ank (a)-ahery, with the adjective hahery "strong" in the future tense, as indicated by the initial h, which drops out.

4.2

Correspondence between Active Prefix and Passive. Malzac felt that there was some connection between the

active prefix of a verb and its corresponding passive, although it would be necessary to wait for Bajaona (1972) to have a systematic study of this. Thus, Malzac wrote that "active verbs with a prefix manka, mampa, mampan, and mapi have their participle in ina and keep their prefix without m" (English3).

(15)

Mankahery "to strengthen"; ankaherezina "who is strengthened" ; Maiipatahotra "to frighten"; anpitahorina "who is frightened" ; Mampananatra "to have someone given advice to"; aitpananarina "who is given advice"; Maitpivavaka "to have worship"; anpavavahina "who is made to worship"; (see (Malzac, p. 62, paragraph 153)).

4.3

Voice in Malagasy. However, the connection was not systematic in lYfelzac's

nind. Although he had exaitples of root passives with the Abilitative meaning, as in the following sentence directly quoted from his book:

210

(17)

Tsy tohako

ny

nataony

ahy, ka niala

neg bearable-me conp past-pass-do me, so past-leave i "I could not bear what he did to me; so, I left" (see (Malzac, p. 56, paragraph 138))

and although he realized that the prefix no and ho indicate the tense of the passive verb (see Malzac, p. 65, paragraph 160), i.e. the past and the future and as such could be left out he did not divide the passive forms into root and affixal passives. In fact, he had the following classification: "root passive"; "passive participle" with voa; passive participle" with tafa; passive participle" with a suffix; passive participle" with the a prefix."

4.4.

Circumstantial Voice. Malzac also felt that the so-called circumstantial voi-

ce which he called relative voice was restricted to elements denoting time, place, and instrument, or means with which something is accomplished. He stated in his paragraph 169 that "it always has for its subject whatever phrases expresses time, place, or instrument."

4.5

Malzac and the Semantics of Causatives. Like all of his predecessors, Malzac did not provide an

analysis of the exact meaning of the Causative prefix ampa.

5.1

Dahl and the Causatives of Malagasy. Dahl (1951), in his book entitled Malgache et Manjaan,

also recognized one Causative prefix, i.e. ampa, for Malagasy,

211

although he had examples suggesting that ana, an, aha, anka could also be used as Causatives. Thus,

(13)a.

Manapaka

ny

tady amin'ny

antsy izy.

pres-caus-cut the rope with the knife he "He is cutting the rope with the knife" (English) (see (Dahl, p. 222))

b.

/[ M-an-[ (t)apaka ny pres-caus-cut

tady] amin'ny

antsy izy]/

the rope with the knife he

(19)

M - aha - faly "to rejoice"; faly "joyous" (see Dahl, p. 167)

(20)

M - an - arary "to make sick" (see (Dahl, p. 169); also see (11) and (11')).

(18)b. is the underlying representation we could assign to the author's (18)a. Obviously, the gloss under each word as well as the translation in English is mine.

5.2

Voice in Malagasy. Dahl, like Malzac, felt that the Causative construction

was part of the active voice in that "the action is envisaged in its relationship with the agent" (see Dahl, p. 144), as opposed to the passive, where "the action is envisaged in its relationship with one of its direct objects" (see Dahl, p. 193). He defined direct object in purely formal terms, i.e. the word which

212

immediately follows the verb except a proper name, which is preceded by an. For example, if we look at the following pair:

(21)a.

Nitady

ny mpianatra i Paoly Paul

past-seek the student

"Paul was looking for the student(s)"

b.

Nitady

an'i Jeanne i Paoly Jeanne Paul

past-seek

"Paul was looking for Jeanne"

we find that in (21)a., the NP ny mpianatra is a direct object since it follows the verb immediately; in (21) b., on the other hand, since the direct object is a proper name, it has to be preceded by the preposition an.

5.3

Passive Voice. Furthermore, Dahl suggested that the passive form with

voa and that with tafa both denote Perfectivity, the only difference being that the first indicates a Deliberate Action, whereas the second has the Accidental meaning (see Dahl, p. 216). My findings corroborate these observations (see Chapter Five: Passivization 1.2.2 for voa and 1.2.3 for tafa).

5.4

Dahl and the Semantics of Causatives in Malagasy. Nevertheless, Dahl did not attempt an analysis of the

meaning of the Causative anpa and, as a consequence of this, failed to see the correlation between Affixal Passive and the

213

Deliberate concept, on the one hand, and Boot Passive and the Accidental meaning, on the other.

Rajaona and the Causatives of Malagasy. Rajaona (1972) is the first native speaker of Malagasy to look closely at the Causative constructions of the language, gtilike all the authors mentioned above, who touched upon the Causatives while in the process of writing a practical grammar of Malagasy mainly for the use of foreigners who wanted to study the language Rajaona, in his Structure du Malgache, presents an integrated theory.

6.2

Rajaona and the Semantics of Malagasy Causatives. First of all, Rajaona emphatically states, in his para-

graph 2.2.36, that a sentence like:"

(22)

N - amp - (t)ao trano ny rahalahiko Rakobo past-caus-do house the brother-my Rakoto

"Rakoto had ny brother build a house" (English) (see (Rajaona, p. 167))

"does not tell us whether my brother has accepted to build that house or not, nor whether the said house is being built or not. In an utterance with a Causer, we do not witness the carrying out of what is to be done, but rather the mere expression of the order which is given" (English). In other words, the embedded predicate has a non-perfective, progressive or ingressive interpretation exclusively.

214

6.3

Distinction between Factitive and True Causative. However, in his 5.5.4, Rajaona introduces a distinction

between a so-called factitive and a truly Causative meaning Qf amp. The contrast could be illustrated with a pair of sentences like:

(23)

N - anp - iteny an-d-Rabe ny npitsara. past-caus-speak Rabe the judge

"The judge ordered Rabe to speak."

(24)

N - aitp - atory ny ankizy

Rasoa.

past-caus-sleep the child(ren) Rasoa "Rasoa put the child (ren) to sleep."

In (23), "the judge ordered Rabe to speak" and the sentence does not allow us to infer whether the latter spoke or not this is the factitive amp whereas (24), on the other hand, according to Rajaona, implies that "the child(ren) slept" and in his terminology, this is the true Causative. Hcwever, such an implication is not necessary, as can be inferred from the grammaticality and acceptability of the example (25) below.

6.4

Hie Nature of the Embedded Predicate. There is a contradiction between his general character-

ization of the semantics of anp in Rajaona ( 2.2.38) and his redefinition of what he terms "true causative" amp in Rajaona (5.5.4). He fails to see that the difference between (23) and (24) correlates with the fact that, in the first instance, the

215

embedded verb denotes an Activity, whereas, in the other, it indicates a state. Furthermore, mandatory in (24)" can have the Abilitative neaning characteristic of root passives, so that the sentence does not entail that "the child (ren) is (are) asleep" since it is possible to have, for example:

(25)

Nanpatory

ny ankizy

Rasoa fa tsy natory

past-caus-sleep the children Rasoa but not past-sleep

ry zareo. they "Rasoa had the children go to sleep, but the latter did not sleep."

(25) suggests that the embedded State predicate can have a Perfective or an Xmperfective reading. This is corroborated by the fact that in Malagasy, the predicate matory "(be) asleep" can show up in the passive imperative form matoria "sleep!" In fact, the phenomenon is quite widespread since even a predicate like maty "(be) dead" possesses a passive imperative form, i.e. mates-a "drop dead!"

6.5

Voice in tfelagasy. Second, Rajaona considers the Causative phenomenon to

be one involving voice essentially. In his terminology (see (Rajaona, 5.5.2)), there is a Causative voice, along with eight other voices for the sentence types where a verb is present. Thus, we have:

216 4 1. the agentive voice ; 2. the objective voice"5; 3. the intermediary (agissive) voice^; 4. the stative voice^; 5. the circumstantial voice ; 6. the instrumentive voice"'; o 7. the applicative voice ; 8. the causative voice; and 9. the reciprocal voice.
c

On the one hand, he defines voice as "the syntactic orientation of the linguistic message from the vantage point of one of the elements making up the utterance" (see (Rajaona, 2.1.3)). On the other hand, he defines the Su as "the element whether it be the agent, the object, the intermediary, the instrument, the circumstance necessarily present in the utterance, from the viewpoint of which the process is presented and (see (Rajaona, 2.1)). Thus, in a sentence in the objective voice, the subject will be that element which is the Goal of the process, i.e. semantically the endpoint of the action; no agent is necessary and the verb takes the ina suffix. (See (Rajaona, 2.2.7)) By contrast, in a sequence in the intermediary (agissive) voice, the subject will be that element which is the Intermediary of oriented syntactically"

217

the action; no agent is necessary and the verb takes the a passive prefix. (See (Rajaona, 2.2.7))

g_6

The Causative Voice. With respect to the Causative voice, however, Rajaona

notes: (a) that the agentive voice is different from the Causative voice (although the two have a number of common features) since with the first, the verb has the an prefix and it is not possible to introduce a Causee:

(26)a.

M-an-(t)ao trano ny rahalahiko build house the brother-icy

"My brother is building a house"

b.

*M-an(t)ao trano ny rahalahiko Rakoto build house the brother-my Rakoto

whereas, in the second, this is possible:

(27)

Mr-amp-an-(t)ao trano ny rahalahiko Rakoto caus build house the brother-iry Rakoto

"Rakoto has ny brother build a house" (see (Rajaona 2.2.32)).

(b) that the Causative voice which is a complex voice implies the Agentive or the Stative voice (Rajaona, 2.2.40), as could be seen in (27) with an agentive Causative, or, as in (25) with a Stative Causative.

218

6.7

Restrictions on Combinations of Voices. However, later on, in Rajaona 2.3.3, while trying to

determine the distribution of the different voice prefixes he has uncovered, he asserts that "the voice prefixes are mutually exclusive. Subsequently, within one given verb form, there can c i y sl be one and only one prefix" (English). But, immediately after his general statement, he gives examples of the following type:

(28)

M - aitp - an - dio pres-caus-pref-verb radical "To have someone clean up (something),"

where amp signals the Causative voice, and an marks the agentive voice. This contradicts the very statement he just made.

6.8

Permissible Combinations of Voices. To solve this problem, Rajaona proposes in his 2.3.14

that "by and large, in Malagasy, a verb form can have one or more voice morphemes." And accordingly, as it includes one, two, three, four, or five of those, it is said to be of the first, second, third, fourth, or fifth degree. In his words, "a degree indicates the number of semantioo-grammatical features characteristic of the subject" (English). This allows him to distinguish between: on the one hand, the intermediary (agissive) voice, the instrumentive voice, and the applicative voice, which are necessarily of the first degree, since they can only have one voicemarker on the verb; and on the other hand, voices like the CausQ ative, which are not of the first degree .

219

Thus, the intermediary, the instrumentive, and the applicative voices are necessarily of the first degree, whereas the agentive Causative, e.g. m-amp-an-dio, and the Stative Causative, e.g. m-amp-i-dio, are of the second degree. However, the voices Which are said to be of the third degree and beyond are, for the most part, difficult if not impossible to use in actual sentences, and most of the sequences do sound rather strange, if one can only ascertain their meaning. llius:

(29)

M - anp - if - an - dio pres-caus-recip-pref-verb radical "to cause two persons to clean each other"

nay be theoretically possible, but it is not certain at all that it ever occurs in actual speech.

6.9

Sentence Types. So far, the embedded clause always involved a verbal

element. But, as Rajaona points out, there exist two major types of sentences in Malagasy, the second of which does not present a verb and is of the equative type. Thus, in:

(30)

Ny hatezerany no

mahamena

ny mason-d-Rakoto

the anger-his part pres-caus-red the eye-of-Rakoto "Anger caused Rakoto's eyes to be red"

IS., according to Rajaona, is a "clrconstance de l'attributif" and therefore, not a Causative prefix. Just as in

220

(31)

Ny maha-eto

an-d-Rakoto dia ny alakamisy Rakoto part the thursday

the pres-?-here

"Thursday is the time period when Rakoto is here,"

roaha is not a Causative but only indicates the "circumstance of the attributive," whatever the latter may mean. Furthermore, he considers manka, manpa, mampaha to be mere variants of this nonCausative aha, although many of his own examples shew a Causative meaning, as, for example, in:

(32)

M-anka- (a) tavy pres-caus-fat "to cause (someone) to become fat" (English) (see (Rajaona 2.4.13)).

6.10

Rajaona and the Causative Ank(a). Finally, Rajaona dismisses the idea that anka could be

a Causative prefix for the following reasons dealing with productivity: there are certain forms with the nank prefix which do not have the corresponding adjective with the ma prefix, like:

(33)

M-anka-loza "to cause to be furious," pres-caus-fur ious

the majority of the forms with a na prefix do not allow ank; thus

(34)

M-aloto "(present) dirty,"

cannot combine with the Causative prefix anka.

221

6.11

Rajaona's Definition of a Causative Prefix. Given Rajaona's assumption that the agentive voice,

i.e. with an, is essentially different from the Causative voice9, and if aha and anka are not Causatives, it follows that there should only be one Causative prefix, i.e. amp (a).

6.12

Rajaona's Exanples. Yet, from his cwn exanples, it becomes evident that

there exist other Causatives, namely an(a), aha, and ank(a). Anong others:

(35)

M-am-(f)otsy; fotsy "whiten" "white"

(see (Rajaona, p. 417)).

(36)

Ianao no you

n-aha-mahantra anay

part past-caus-poor us-exclusive

"You are the one who caused us to be poor."

(37)

M - ank -asiaka pres-caus-angry "to cause (someone) to be angry" (see (Rajaona, p. 551)).

7.1

Rabenilaina and the Causatives of a Dialect. Rabenilaina (1974), in his Description Morphosyntaxique

du Bara. also finds that the Bara dialect of Malagasy has a Causative prefix ag, corresponding to the Merina amp(a), with the two meanings defined by Rajaona and explained under 6.3 above.

222

Furthermore, Rabenilaina remarks that the so-called "true causative" meaning of a shows up especially when it is prefixed to an intransitive verb denoting a State or a Quality. On the other hand, when the embedded verb is transitive, the prefix has a "directive" reading (see (Rabenilaina, 2-2.4b)). Following the model proposed by Rajaona, he also found that the Causative prefix amp(a)/ap can combine with an affixal passive (see (Rabenilaina, p. 212)).

7.2

The Causative Aha. Again, there are indications that suggest that there

may be other Causative prefixes besides ajo. Thus, aha with a Causative meaning shows up in some of the author's examples, in particular:

(38)

N'ini m-aha-sarotsy

azy?

what pres-caus-difficult it "What makes it difficult?" (English) (see (Rabenilaina, p. 44)).

8.1

Conclusions. Amp (a) is the most productive of all the Causative

constructions of Malagasy and, as a result, it could not go unnoticed. Ank (a) is the least productive and none of the traditional grammar ians recognized it as a Causative prefix. Rajaona (1972) himself could not accept it as such. Strangely enough, he also discarded an (a) whose distribution is much wider than that of ank (a) ; actually, as pointed out in Chapter One, an (a) can

223

gifted any root passive and most adjectives. But, he felt that gnfa) was the voice-marker for the agentive voice, as could be inferred from some of his general statements, for example, in Kajaona 2.2.40. And because this was so, he could not view it as a Causative prefix since for him, the Causative voice is to be kept distinct from the so-called "voix agentive."

8.2

Rajaona and the Causative Aha Prefix. As for aha, Rajaona's position is somewhat ambiguous.

On the one hand, he considers it to be a voice-marker in an eguative sentence (see (30)); on the other, he does not view it as a Causative prefix since that would counter his claim that Causativization is mainly a voice phenomenon not one involving the perfective/imperfective aspect of the verb as has been claimed by grammarians like Jespersen (1963).

8.3

Earlier Grammarians. Due to their status as non-native speakers of Malagasy,

most traditional grammarians did hot even suspect the exact meaning of the Causative prefix axip(a), whereas Rajaona (1972) found the coexistence of the "true causative" and the "factitive Causative" somewhat disconcerting. He did not realize that the socalled "true causative" meaning is only one of two possibilities v t i h can occur with a State predicate in the embedded clause, ric vdiereas the "factitive" meaning is obligatory when the latter denotes an Activity, the verb being in the active voice in the lower clause.

224

8.4.1

Rajaona's Methodology. Rajaona (1972) adopts a so-called "functional-stru-

ctural" approach, which makes two fundamental assumptions: 1. A "linguistic item" is an unanalyzable entity, it exists only if it can stand in opposition to another item, along the paradigmatic axis. This prevents him from considering "a linguistic item" as having formal properties. 2. Given the above, the linguist can obtain oppositions which, at best, can be viewed as correlations. It is never the case that a particular form possesses a whole range of formal properties. As a corollary, linguistic analysis can only deal with simple dichotomies: either a linguistic form is an A or it is not.

8.4.2

Rajaona's Definition of Causativization. Given 8.4.1(1) and the fact that Rajaona (1972) only

-recognized aitp(a), his dilemma was to choose between two equally plausible definitions of Causativization as: 1. either a voice phenomenon; 2. or an aspect phenomenon; without isolating any of the relevant properties of the linguistic form. With 8.4.1(2), the choice of one solution precludes the other, although his data clearly suggest that aha covers the equative sentence type and amp (a) is the Causative prefix accompanying all sentences conprising a verb. A multi-factor type of analysis with its set of assumptions would have allowed Rajaona to reach conclusions similar to those made in the present study (see Chapter One, Section 7).

225

CHAPTER TWO FOOTNOTES

Igee footnote 4 for an illustration of this point.

^ e expression used by the author being referred to is retained.

1he original text is in French, the translation into English is

provided by the author of this study.

Sajaona (1972) opposes "agent" to "siege du proes." See his 2.2.11, pp. 142-143. For him, an "agent" presupposes an "object" (Goal), or an "agi" (Intermediary) in the utterance. If a Su is "agent," then it has a verb with one of the following prefixes: i , ira, mi, or man; more crucially, it is obligatorily accompanied n by an "object" or an "agi." On the other hand, if a Su is "sige du proces," it also has one of the same set of prefixes but it does not have an "object" nor an "agi." Thus, for Rajaona:

(l)a.

M - an - doko ny rindrina aho peindre le mur je

"Je peinds le mur," i.e. "I am painting the wall," (English)

b.

M - an - doko aho "Je peinds," i.e. "I am a painter," (English)

ato "I" of (l)a. is an "agent" since its verb is accompanied by the "object" ny rindrina "le mur," but aho of (l)b. is not h e

226

claims that it is a "siege du procls" since its verb does not have an "object." In his words, aho of (l)b. is "accidentellement siege du proems." In (l)a., where the Su aho "I" is also an "agent," Rajaona claims that we have a "voix agentive," as opposed to (l)b., where the Su is a "siege du proes" and where, therefore, we have a "voix stative."

Rajaona (1972) opposes "voix objective" to "voix agissive." in

his 2.2.7-, p. 139, he states that the first has the following characteristics: (a) its passive form is the ina suffix; (b) no agent is necessary with this form; (c) semantically, the Su is the endpoint of the action. For the second, he has the following features: (a) its passive verb has the a form; (b) no agent is necessary with this form; (c) semantically, the Su is the intermediary of the action. As for his definition of "agi" vs. "objet," it is essentially semantic in nature. Thus, in Rajaona 2.2.4, p. 135, he writes:

...Appelons "agi" 1'element qui exige cortme predicat une forme verbale pre fixe a, oonme ny tranony "sa maison" dans a-orin'ny raiko ny tranony litt. "sa maison est oonstruite par mon pre" et "objet" 1'element forne verbale en ana, tranony "sa maison" dans loko-an(a)'ny raiko litt. "sa maison est peinte par mon pere."

227

He goes on in Rajaona 2.25, p. 135:

..."bjet," 1'element eonsidr dans ce qu'il a de purement passif et de reeptif, en tant que sinple ecran sur lequel se projette l'action verbale;... "agi," 1'element transform! et model par 11 action verbale transitive ou plus exactemant l1element pntre, "agi" par cette action et eonsidr meme, de ce fait, comme la matire dont se nourrit cette action.

Hie following are additional examples taken directly fran Rajaona' work:

(2) a.

A-hofa ity trano ity. "Cette maison est louer," i.e. "This house is to be rented." (English)

b.

Ho-fa-ako ity trano ity. "Cette maison est louee par moi," i.e. "Hiis house is being rented by me." (English)

g Rajaona (1972) recognizes that the circumstantial voice is a complex one. Judging from his examples in 2.2.26-28, it encompasses the Oblique-Instrumental and the Oblique-Locative, at least:

228

(3)

Mi-kapoka ny zanany amin'ity firitsoka ity Rakoto. "Rakoto frappe son enfant avec cette badine," i.e. "Rakoto is flogging his child with this stick." (English)

(31)

I-kapoh(a)-an(a)-dRakoto ny zanany ity firitsoka ity. "Cette badine est le moyen-avec-lequel Rakoto frappe son enfant," i.e. "This stick is the instrument-with-which Rakoto is flogging his child." (English)

(4)

Mam-(p) etraka ny boky eo ambony latabatra i Koto. "Koto pose le livre sur la table," i.e. "Koto is patting the book on the table." (English)

(41)

Am-(p)etrah(a)-an(a)'i Koto ny boky eo antoony latabatra. "Sur la table est-le-lieu-ou-Koto-pose le livre," i.e. "On the table is-where-Koto-is-putting the book." (English)

^Rajaona (1972) defines the problem in the following manner in his 2.2.17, p. 147: "Sur le plan 'structural, un enonce dont le sujet est un instrument, exige, sous peine d'invalidit simantique et syntaxique, la presence obligateire d'un objet-expansion." E > him, the "voix instrumentive" has the following featr tures: (a) the instrument being the Su, the verb has the a prefix; (b) the sentence has an "objet" obligatorily. Example:

229

A-fono ny entana io taratasy io. "Ce papier est-11instrument-avec-lequel-est-en-traind'etre enveloppe le paquet," i.e. "This paper is the instrument-with-which-is beingwrapped-up the parcel." (English)

Apparently, this "applicative voice", as he calls it in his 2 . 1 . 1 3 , p. 128, is the same as what he terms "destinataire", in his 2.2.21-2.2.23. When the Su is a "destinataire," the verb has the ana suffix and the presence of two NPs, one of which is an "agi" is obligatory. Thus, in:

(6)

Mandraraka ity rano ity amin'ny afo aho. "Je verse cette eau sur le feu," i.e. "I am spilling this water over the fire." (English)

Q Rajaona (1972) eliminates an (a) as possible Causative prefix on the grounds (see his 2.2.40, p. 168) that a "causative voice" necessarily implies either a "voix agentive" or a "voix stative." Therefore, one can only speak of either the "voix causative de l'agentif" for constructions like m-amp-andidy "to have (someone) cut (something)" or the "voix causative du statif" for structures like m-amp-atory "to make (someone) sleep.11

CHAPTER THREE

REFLEXIVIZATION

0.1

Introduction. The main purpose of this chapter is to show that the

following parameters are necessary for an adequate statement of the rule for Reflexivization in Malagasy:

Grairmatical relations, Semantic roles, Clausematiness (initial or derived), Valency of the verb. Degree of fusion of the higher and lower predicates, Cyclic convention, Boundedness, Command, Unlike-Su Constraint.

231

The Process. Assuming identity between the referent of the trigger

and that of its victim: Reflexivization makes crucial use of grammatical relations. Only a Su can trigger Reflexivization. However, there exists a finite set of predicates, all involving Marked sentences, where the trigger is not a Su but an Agent or an Experiencer. In these cases, Pronominalization is the preferred strategy. When the trigger and its victim are clausemates initially, as in the case of non-Causative constructions, the latter goes into tena if it is a DO; but if it is not a DO, then it surfaces as ny tenany. When the trigger and its victim are not clausemates initially, as in the case of Causative constructions, then in the case of the "neutral" Directive construction, i.e. with the higher Causative predicate ampa, which does not involve maximal fusion of the higher and lower predicates, or in that of the "persuasive" Directive construction, the victim, which is a DO, goes into ny tenany, after Clause-Union has taken place; in the case of a Jfenipulative construction or the Abilitative aha construction, which involves maximal fusion, the victim, which is necessarily a DO, goes into tena. The Cyclic Convention is necessary to capture the Ordering Paradox resulting from the fact that, in non-Causative constructions, Reflexivization precedes Clause-Onion, whereas in Causative constructions, Clause-Union precedes Reflexivization.

232

0.3

Scope of Present Study. The present study will focus on Unmarked structures, as

opposed to Marked constructions, which involve Displacement, i.e_ either Politeness or Emphasis. Thus, the sentence

(1)

Tonga

ny tena-ko/0

(Politeness)

arrived the body-of me "I (my humble person) arrived"

where the personal suffix ko "of/by me" could be left out if it is recoverable from the context of the utterance, involves Politeness. In fact, ny tenako could be replaced by aho "I," when the occasion is less formal.

(2)

Tonga

izyi

tena-nyi

arrived he^/she^ body-of-his.i/hersi "He^/she^ himself^/herself^ cane"

where the independent pronoun izy "he/she" shows up with the reflexive form ny tenany, involves Emphasis.

0.4

Criteria for Markedness. Marked constructions, which will be left out of consi-

deration, possess two main characteristics: Only a victim is present within the sentence; there is no trigger; and such a victim can csily occupy the Su position, as can be inferred from the ungrammaticality of the following sentences.

233 *Nahita ny Saw tenako i Paoly.

(3)

the body-of-me deictic Paul

*"paul saw itself."

(4)

*Mahita azy^ tenany.^ Saw

aho.

h i u body-of-him.^ I it

*"l saw him^ himself

(5)

*Nanome boky ny tenako gave book the body-of-me

Paoly. Paul

*"paul gave (a) book(s) to myself."

(6)

*Nanome boky azy^ tenany^ gave

aho.

book h i u body-of-him.^ I it

*"I gave him.^ himself (a) book(s)."

(7)

*Nikaroka

hevitra ho an'ny tenako for the body-of-me

i Paoly. Paul

looked-for idea

*"Paul looked for ideas for myself."

(8)

*Nikaroka

hevitra ho azy^ tenany ^

aho.

looked-for idea

for h i u body-of-him^ I ir

*"I looked for ideas for him.^ himself

(9)

*Nitsipaka ny

hevitry ny tenako

i Paoly. Paul

rejected the idea-of the body-of-me *"Paul rejected the idea(s) of nyself."

234

(10)

*Nitsipaka ny rejected the

hevitr'izy^ tenany^

aho.

idea-of he^ body-of-him^ I

*"I rejected the idea(s) of hinh himself^."

In (3) and (4), the victim is a DO; in (5) and (6), it is an io; in (7) and (8), it is an Oblique; and in (9) and (10), it is Genitive.
a

0.5

.additional Criterion for Markedness. However, there is at least one type of structure which

is Marked and which involves both a trigger and a victim. This is the construction with the Marked SVO word order, as opposed to the unmarked VOS order of Malagasy.

(11)a.

Namita-tenai

i Paolyi/izyi.

past-lie-selfi Paul/hei "Paul^/he^ is telling lies to himself^"

b.

Namitaka ny tenany^ past-lie the body-of-hirru

i Paoly^/izy^. Paul^/he^

"Paul^/he^ is telling lies to himself^."

c.

Paoly^/izy^ ihany no

namitaka ny tenany

deic Paul^/he^ only part told-lies the body-of-hin^ "It was Paul himself^ who induced himself into error."

Both sequences (11)a. and (11)b. show the Unmarked VOS order, except that in the first, there is no enphasis of any kind with

235

tena. Ihis contrasts with the situation in (11)b., where there is g j e sort of emphasis in that Paul refers to his cwn body as jn though it was an entity which had an independent existence. This is what was called Displacement earlier. In (11)c., the word order is SVO with the Su i Paoly to the left of the verb and the UO nv tenany to its right. (Gonpare with (2) above, where both iz^ and tenany are to the right of the verb.)

0.6

Assunption. Furthermore, it will be assumed that structures like

(12) a. and (12) c. are derived from bi-clausal sources as represented in (13)a. and (13)b. respectively:

(12) a.

M-an-(s)asa ny pres-wash

lamba

Jeanne.

the linen deic Jeanne

"Jeanne is washing the linen."

b.

M - i - sasa stative-wash

ny lamba. the linen

"The linen is clean (as a result of washing)."

c.

*M-an-(s)asa tena^ny tenany^ pres-wash

Jeanne^.

self^/the body-of-hers.^ deic Jeanne^

"Jeanne^ i s washing herself j^."

d.

*M - i - sasa i Jeanne, stative-wash Jeanne

"Jeanne is clean (as a result of washing)."

236 (13) a. /tgi M-an- [g2~i-sasa ny laraba 32] i Jeanneg^] pres-prf-prf-wash the linen Jeanne

b.

/[ gl M-an-[s2-i-sasa *i Jeanne^ 32] i Jeanne^ s l ] pres-prf-prf-wash Jeanne^ Jeanne^

In (12)a. and (12)c., an

is a Manipulative Causative, whereas i

in (12) b. and (12) d. is a Stative verbal prefix, which typically can be predicated of a non-human, non-animate NP. It follows from the bi-clausal source for manasa "to wash" that it cannot take a EO which is human, in this instance, i Jeanne, as seen in (12)c. There is an Unlike-Su Constraint operating on the Causee of the underlying representation (13)b. of a Manipulative Causative, as will be seen in Section 3.2.4, whenever the embedded clause comprises a verbal predicate of the Stative type.

Section 1

Reflexivization and Grammatical Relations

1.0

Introduction. Section 1 will show that Reflexivization makes crucial

use of grammatical relations: 1. Only a Su can trigger Reflexivization; 2. although there is a finite set of predicates which take a sentential Su, where the trigger is not a Su but an Agent or an Experiences

237 ^y Restrictions on Reflexivization. Only a Su can trigger Reflexivization. No grammatical relations other than Su can trigger reflexivization in Malagasy.

l.l.l

Potential Trigger for Reflexivization. A Su can trigger Reflexivization.

(14)a.

N-ikarakara

tenai i

Jeannei

past-take-care-of self ^ deic Jeanne^ "Jeanne^ took care of herself^"

b.

N-ikarakara

tena^

izy^. she^

past-take-care-of self^

"She.^ took care of her selfi."

c.

N-ikarakara

tena^ ve/angaha izyi? shei

past-take-care-of selfi question "Did she^ take care of herselfi?"

d.

N-ikarakara

tena^ anie

izyi (4)! shei

past-take-care-of self^ excl

"(Did you not know) shei took care of herselfi'"

In (14) a. the NP i Jeanne is a Su, as shown by the possibility of replacing i Jeanne with the independent Su form izy "he/she" in

(14)b., the insertion of a question particle like ve or angaha to

238 its left, as in (14)c., or by the fact that it can be surrounded by anie. as in (14)d.

1.1.2

Restrictions. A non-Su cannot trigger Reflexivization:

(15)a.

Naniraka an'i Petera^ hamono sent

tena^ i Jeanne,

Peter^ will-kill self.^

"Jeanne ordered Peter^ to kill himself^."

b.

Niandry an'i Jeanne^ hikarakara expected

tena^'i Paoly.

Jeanne^ will-take-care-of self^

"Paul expected Jeanne^ to take care of herself^."

(16)a.

*Nanome an'i Koto^ hevitra ho an'ny tenany^ gave Koto^ idea for

i Paoly. Paul

the body-of-him^

b.

*Nanome hevitra ho an'ny tenanyi gave idea for

an'i Koto^ i Paoly. Koto^ Paul

the body-of-hinu

"Paul gave Koto^ ideas for himself^."

(17)a.

*Niresaka tamin'i Koto.^ momba ny tenany^ aho. talked past-with Koto^ about self^ I

b.

*Niresaka momba ny tenany^ tamin' talked about selfi past-with

i Koto^ aho. Kotoi I

"I talked with Kotoi about himself^"

239

(18)a.

*Nilaza tamin'i Koto ny tantaran'i Paoly nomba said past-to Koto the story-of Paul^ about

ny tena-nyi

i jaona.

the body-hisi John

b.

*Nilaza tamin'i Koto nDmba ny tenany^ said past-to Koto about self^

ny

tantaran'

the story-of

i Paoly^ i jaona. Paul^ John

"John told Koto about Paulas story about himself^."

In (15), we seem to have a trigger which occupies a DO position. In fact, it will be shown below that Bgui-2 has applied on the higher cycle to delete the underlying Su of the lower clause under identity of referent with the non-Su NP i Petera and that this lower clause has already triggered Reflexivization to tena in the embedded clause before Clause-Union applies. V e have a f trigger in the 10 position in (16), in the Oblique in (17) and in the Genitive in (18). In all of these sequences, where the trigger is a non-Su, the resulting sentence is irretrievably ungrammatical.

1.1.2.1

Apparent Violation of Restriction. In sentences of the type of (15)a., where the potential

trigger apparently occupies a DO position, it can be shown that in reality an Equi-2 rule has applied to delete the actual trigger for Reflexivization:

240 (19)a. Niangavy an'i Jeanne^ hikarakara requested tenai i Paoly.

Jeanne^ will-take-care-of self^ deic Paul

"Paul requested of Jeanne^ that she^ take care of herselfi."

b.

/[ gl Niangavy an'i Jeanne^ [ g 0 hikarakara an'i Jeanne^ requested Jeanne^ will-take-care Jeanne^

i Jeanne^] i paoly]]/ Paul

c.

[qq hikarakara

tena^

i Jeanne^] Jeanne.

will-take-care self^

d.

/[ gl Niangavy an'i J i [ g 0 hikarakara requested J^

tenai 0^] i P]/

will-take-care self 0i] i P]/

(19)a. is the same sequence as (19)d. and its underlying sequence is represented in (19)b. Application of Reflexivization to tena on the lower cycle yields (19)c. while Egui-2 deletes the lower Su to give (19)d. In this analysis, it is assumed that Reflexivization is a cyclic rule, as will be shown in Section 4 of the present chapter. Another assumption made here is that there exist in this language Equi-2 constructions, where a non-Su NP in the main clause triggers deletion of the underlying Su of the embedded clause. Some justification for this will be provided in Chapter Five.

241

1.1.2.2

Direct Feeling Representation. Furthermore, miangavy "to request" and maniraka "to

give a verbal order to someone," as is the case with one subset


0f

squi-2 verbs, are verbs of linguistic communication. Since in

Malagasy it is possible for the speaker to refer to i Jeanne in (20) in either one of two ways shown below, it is suggested that the deep structure corresponding to (19)a. or (15)a. should involve some kind of Direct Feeling representation of the proposition expressed in the lower clause, along the lines indicated in Kuno (1975).

(20) a.

ianaOj, ihany no

mikarakara

anao^.

Su-you^ only part take-care-of you^ "You^ are the only one who should take care of yourself."

b.

Jeanne^ ihany no mikarakara

an'i Jeanne^! Jeanne^

deic Jeanne^ only part take-care-of

"(You know) Jeanne, you^ are the only one who should take care of yourself^!"

(21)a.

/[Niangavy an'i Ji["oka ianaoi hikarakara requested J^ let you

anaoi"]i P]/ P

will-take-care you^

b.

Niangavy an'i J^ ["Aoka i Ji hikarakara an'i Ji"] iP]/ requested Ji let Ji will-take-care Ji P

242

c.

Niangavy an'i J\ [ 0 hikarakara an'i ^ requested ^ will-take-care

i ^

i p. p

(20) a. and (20 )b. shew the two possibilities for the speaker to refer to i Jeanne, his interlocutor. (21)a. is the Direct Peeling representation of (19) a. With the substitution of i Jeanne for both ianao "Su-you" and anao "DO-you", we obtain (21)b. Deletion of the particle aoka "let" yields (21)c., which is exactly the

same as the underlying sequence proposed in (19)b.

1.1.2.3

Wbrd Order Change. There is evidence to support the view that the process

of enbedding the independent clause beginning with aoka "let" involves a change in word order:

(22)a.

Nanao tabataba did. noise

Jeanne.

deic Jeanne

"Jeanne did (a lot of) noise."

b.

Sosotra i Jaona tamin' angry

io zavatra io.

John causal-obl this thing this

"John is angry because of this thing."

c.

Sosotra i Jaona tamin' angry

i Jeanne nanao tabataba. did noise

John causal-obl

"John is angry because of Jeanne's noise-making."

d.

*Sosotra i Jaona tamin'ny angry

nanao tabataba i Jeanne. noise Jeanne

John causal-obl did

243

in (22)a., where we are dealing with an independent clause, the word order is the Unmarked VOS, as opposed to the same clause embedded under a Causal-Oblique, as in (22)c., where the order becomes Marked, i.e. turns into SVO; otherwise, the sequence is ungraiimatical, as in (22)d. (For further details on the Unmarked VOSX order, see Section 2)

1.1.2.4

Another Apparent Violation of Restriction. Another type of conplex structure where the trigger

seerrs to be a DO is illustrated in (23), where the Su of the embedded clause has been raised to DO of the matrix clause.

(23)a.

Niandry an'i Jeanne.^ hikarakara expected

tenai i Paoly. Paul

Jeanne^ will-take-care-of selfi

"Paul expected Jeanne.^ to take care of herself^"

b.

/[Niandry [hikarakara an'i Jeannei i Jeannei] i Paoly]/. hikarakara tena^ i jeannei i Paoly.

Reflexive: Raising:

Niandry an'i Jeannei hikarakara tenai

There is some justification for such an underlying representation (See Chapter Five, Subsection 2.1.3.0, for further details about Raising-to-DO):

(24)a.

Jeannei hikarakara

tenai-..

deic Jeanne^ will-take-care-of selfi "For Jeanne^


to

take care of herselfi..."

244

b.

J^ hikarakara

tena^ no andrasan'

deic J^ will-take-care selfi part be-expected-by deic p *"For J^ to take care of herself^ is what P is waiting for", i.e "Paul is waiting for Jeanne^ to take care of herselfi."

(25) a.

*Niandry

izay i Jeannehikarakara

tena

i i Paoly.
Paul

expected conp

Jeannei will-take-care-of selfi

b.

Niandry an'i Jeanne^ izay hikarakara waited

tenai i Paoly. Paul

Jeannei conp will-take-care selfi

"Paul is waiting for Jeannei to take care of herself^."

As seen in (24)a., it is possible to front the Su of the embedded clause and then Passive can apply on the matrix verb as in (24)b. This shows that in (24) i Jeanne belongs in the ertbedded clause. However, in (25)b., i Jeanne cannot be said to belong in the embedded clause since it precedes the complementizer izay and therefore falls outside of the clause beginning with izay and ending with tena^, as is demonstrated by the ungrammaticality of (25)a. and the grammaticality of (25)b. Last but not least, izay of (25)b. cannot be construed as a relative clause to mean something like "Paul is waiting for Jeanne who will take care of herself."

1.2

Genitive Trigger for Reflexivization. However, there is a set of predicates, which include

root passive verbs like tia "be liked," zaka "be bearable," atao

245

be done," arobara "be said," aleo "be preferred," and tadidy "be remembered," airong others, and which take a sentential Su. in these cases, the trigger for Reflexivization is not a Su but an agent or an Experiencer in the Genitive. Given the fact that the set is finite, although fairly large, the phenomenon will be considered marginal.

1.2.1

NO Corresponding Active Voice. Notice that the finite set just alluded to cannot be

derived from active bases. First of all, the following sequence conprising fantatra "be known" and a sentential Su does not have the corresponding sentence with an active voice verb:

(26)

Fantatr' i

P^ tsara loatra ny m-ampa-hory comp pres-caus-miserable

known-by deic P^ well too

ny tenany^. the body-of-him "It is too well known to Pauli what causes him^ to be miserable" i.e. "Paul^ knows all too well what makes him^ miserable."

(27)

*M-am-(f)antatra tsara loatra ny m-aitpa-hory pres-act-known well too cotip pres-caus-be miserable

ny tenanyi

Paoly
Pauli>

the body-of-him. d e i c .

246

Sequence (27) with the same predicate fantatra "be-known," as in (26), but in the active voice with the Causative prefix an yields an irretrievably ungrammatical sentence. No semantic interpretation whatsoever can be assigned to (27). Second, even in cases where the corresponding sentence with an active verb is grammatical and acceptable, its meaning is totally different from the one comprising the relevant root passive.

(28)a.

Fantatr'

i Paoly ny toetra-n'

i Jeanne, Jeanne

be-known-by Paul the character-of "Jeanne's character is known to Paul"

i.e. "Paul knew/knows Jeanne's character."

b.

N-am-(f)antatra ny toetra-n' active-be-known

i Jeanne i Paoly. Paul

the character-of Jeanne

"Paul tried to figure out Jeanne's character."

It follows that (27) cannot be proposed as the underlying representation for (26).

1.2.2

Non-Subject Trigger. The trigger for Reflexivization is not a Su but an

Experiencer in the Genitive case with a predicate like fantatra "(be) known," which takes a sentential Su.

(29)a.

Fantatr'i P^ tsara loatra angaha ny m-ampa-hory known-by P^ well too part oomp pres-caus-miserable

247 ny tenany^? the body-of-him^ "Does Paul^ know very well what causes hira^ to be miserable?"

b.

Fantatr'i P^ tsara loatra anie ny m-ampa-hory known-by P^ well too excl comp pres-caus-miserable

ny tenany^i the body-of-him " (Well) Paul^ knows all too well what causes him^ to be miserable1"

(30)a.

*Fantatr'

izy^ tsara loatra ny m-anpa-hory

be-known-by hinu well too oonp pres-caus-miserable ny tena-ny^. the body-of-him^. "He^ knows all too well what causes him^ to be miserable."

b.

Fanta-ny^

tsara loatra ny

m-airpa-hory

known-by-hinu well too

ccatp pres-caus-miserable

ny tenany^. the body-of-him^ "It is known to hin^ all too well what causes hin^ to be miserable."

248 (29) a. with the insertion of the question particle angaha ana (29) b. with the insertion of the exclamation particle anie show that the two clauses have a sentential Su. Note that these
are

the sane basic structure as (26) above. The ungrammatically of (30) a. proves that the NP i Paoly is not a Su since it cannot be replaced with the Su form of the independent pronoun izy "he/she". The sentence (30)b. with the clitic form of the pronoun, i.e. -ny "by him/her," confirms the view that it is indeed in the Genitive case.

1.2.3

Criterion for Basicness. Even in those cases where the corresponding sentence

with an active verb exists and is cognitively synonymous with the sequence comprising the relevant root passive form, it can be shown that the latter is more basic. The following sentence with the predicate zaka "bearable" and a sentential Su does have the corresponding sentence with an active voice verb, which is the sane as the Causative construction, i.e. with Abilitative aha.

(31)a.

Tsy zaka-n'

i Paoly^ ny tsy nikarakara-n'

not bearable-by Paul^ conp not past-circ-take-care-by

i Jeanne ny tenany^. Jeanne the body-of-him^ "The fact that Jeanne did not take care of h r u was not it bearable to Paul^', i.e. "Paul^ could not accept the fact that Jeanne did not take care of hiiru."

249

b.

Tsy n-aha-zaka

ny

tsy nikarakara-n'

not past-caus-bearable coup not past-circ-take-care-of

i Jeanne^ n y

tenany^

i Paoly.

Jeanne1, the body-of-him,Paul 1 sj "Paul could not accept the fact that Jeanne.^ did not take care of herself^." Now, as will be shown in Chapter Six, (31) b. with the Abilitative aha construction has a bisentential source, and as such, is less basic than its non-Causative counterpart in (31) a. In fact, (31)b. involves three different clauses or cycles, whereas (31)a. only involves two. In (31)a., the trigger for Beflexivization is 1 Paoly, an Experiencer in the Genitive case, since it passes all the tests applied in (29) and (30).

1.3

The Victim of Reflexivization. As far as the victim of Beflexivization is concerned,

it will appear in Section 2 that it too is constrained by Grammatical Relations since it shows up as tena if it occupies the DO position, but as ny tenany if it is an 10 or an Oblique.

Section 2

Reflexivization and non-Causative Constructions

2 0

introduction. In Section 2, it will be seen that in non-Causative

Constructions

250 1. When the trigger and its victim are clausemates initially, 2. the latter, if it is a DO, goes into tena, 3. but if it is an IO or an Oblique, then it surfaces as ny tenany. Justification for Equi-1, Equi-2, Raising-to-DO, and Raising-to-Su is provided in Section 2 of Chapter Five. Ihe focus of the second part of this section is the interaction of Reflexivization with Equi-1 and Raising-to-Su.

2.1

Ihe Victim as Tena. In a simplex sentence, the victim goes into tena if it

is a DO, or into ny tenany if it is not.

2.1.1

Restrictions on the Victim as Tena. In a simplex sentence with the Unmarked VOS word order,

where the trigger and its victim are clausemates, the latter goes into tena if it is a DO:

(32) a.

Namono tena^ i Paoly^. killed self ^ Paul^

b.

/[ Namono an'i Paolyi i pady^/ killed Pauli pauli

(33) a.

Namono an'i Jaona i Paoly. killed John Paul

"Paul killed John."

251 b. No-vono-in' passive-kill-by i Paoly i Jaona. Paul John

t "John was being killed by Paul.i

(32)a. whose underlying representation is provided in (32)b. has both the trigger and its victim within the sane clause. Evidence for this is provided by (33)b., where the DO an'i Jaona of (33)a. has been promoted to Su through Passivization. Furthermore, the presence of the preposition an in an'i Jaona is a clear indication that this NP occupies a DO position.

2.1.2

Basic Word Order. Indeed, the Unmarked word order is VOS, as in (32) and

(33), as opposed to the SV(O) of the following set of sentences:

(34)

*I

Paolyi namono tenai.

deic Paul^ killed selfi (contrast with the word order in (32)a.) "Paul^ killed himself

(35)a.

*I Paoly namono an'i Jaona. Paul killed John

(contrast with the order in (33)a.) t "Paul killed John. i

b.

*I

Jaona no-vono-in'

i Paoly.

deic John passive-kill-by deic Paul (contrast with the order in (33)b.) n "Jbhn was killed by Paul."

252 If there is no strong pause between the Su, i.e. i Paoly or i Jaona, and the constituents of each sentence, and if all three sequences are not part of an exhaustive list in the sense of

S.Kuno (1972) where what happened to Paul is contrasted with what happened to John, etc, in an enumeration, (34) and (35) are ungrammatical and unacceptable. Hiere are only three cases where the SVO order is possible:

(36)

Paoly ^ no naraono tena^.

deic Paul^ part killed self^ "It is Paul^ who killed himself^"

(37)

Nalahelo

J tamin'

P^ naircno tena^

was-afflicted deic J causal-Obi deic P^ killed self^ "J was afflicted because of P^'s killing himself^."

(38)

I Paolyi namono tena^,i Jeanne nandositra ary i Jaona Paul, killed selfl i niatonta. fell "As for Paul^, he^ killed himself^ whereas Jeanne took off and John fell." Jeanne took-off and John

In (36) we have defting on the Su; in (37) the clause embedded under the Causal-Oblique has the SVO order; and in (38), we have

253

an enumeration of different events which took place at the same time. Compare this with the intended reading provided for each of the sentences in (34) and (35).

2.1.3

ie Victim of Reflexivization and Marked Word Order. When the word order is the Marked one, i.e. SVO, it is

possible for the DO to go not only into tena but also into ny tenany. However, in the latter case, there is additional Emphasis or indirect Causation.

(39)

Paoly ^ ihany no namono tena^.

deic Pauli only part killed selfi "Pauli is the only one who killed himselfi."

(40)

I Paoly^ Pauli

ihany no only part

namono ny tenany killed selfi

*"It was Pauli himselfi who killed himselfi-" i.e. "It was Paula's own action which killed himi" in the sense of "Paul^ was responsible for hiSi own death."

(41)

*Namono ny tenany^ i paoly killed self. Pauli

"Paul^ killed himselfi."

The ungranmaticality of (41) with a VOS word order contrasts with the grammaticality of (39) and (40), both with the SVO word order and the no particle inserted after the Su. Furthermore, there are two important differences between the meaning of (39) and that of

254 (40): on the one hand, (39) holds true of a situation where Paul takes a knife at time T 1 and uses it to kill himself at a slightly later time T 2; on the other hand, (40) is true of
a

situation where at time T 1 he sets up a deadly mechanism to prevent burglars from entering his hare and then at a later date, T 2, he inadvertently steps into the trap and thus kills himself. In this case, T 1 and T 2 can be very far apart and not oily that but premeditation is absent since presumably Paul did not intend to kill himself. In short, (39) has a Contactive interpretation, whereas (40) has an Indirect Causation interpretation.

2.1.4

The Victim as Ny Tenany. In a simplex sentence where the trigger and its victim

are clausemates, the latter goes into ny tenany if not a DO:

(42) a.

Nanome enta-mavesatra ny tenany ^ i Paoly^ gave luggage-heavy self^ Pauli

"Paul^ was imposing a heavy burden upon himself^."

b.

*Nanome enta-mavesatra gave luggage-heavy

tena^ self^

i Paoly^. Paul^

(43)a.

Nikaroka hevitra ho an'ny tenany^ i Paoly looked-for idea for self^ Pauli

"Paul^ was seeking ideas for himself^."

b.

*Nikaroka hevitra ho (an) tena^ looked-for idea for self, l

i Paoly Paul^

255

in (42) we have an 10, whereas in (43) we have a BeneficiaryOblique. In both instances, the sequences with tena are irretrievably ungrairmatical in the intended reading, while the ones
with

ny tenany are grammatical. However, in the case of (43)b.,

if the preposition an is inserted in front of tena, the sentence becomes grammatical in Colloquial Malagasy, but with a totally different and unrelated interpretation:" Paul was seeking ideas for you-idiot," you referring to the hearer.

2.1.5

Tests for 10. That ny tenany in (42) a. is an 10 is shown by the fol-

lowing tests (For further details see Chapter Six, Section 8):

(44)a.

Nanome enta-mavesatra ny mpianatra i Paoly. gave luggage-heavy the student Paul

(same meaning as b. below)

b.

Nanome enta-mavesatra an'ny mpianatra i Paoly. gave luggage-heavy the student Paul

"Paul imposed a heavy-burden on the student(s)."

(45)

Nanome enta-mavesatra gave luggage-heavy

ho an'ny mpianatra i Paoly. for the student Paul

"Paul gave a heavy burden for the student(s)."

(46)

*Ny irpianatra no nanome enta-mavesatra i Paoly. the student part gave luggage-heavy Paul

"It is on the student(s) that Paul imposed a heavy burden."

256 The grammaticality of (44)b. shows that if we substitute rg mpianatra "the student(s)" for ny tenany of (42)a., as in (44)a., it is possible to have a co-occurrence of an and The well-

formedness of (45) proves that insertion of the particle to is also possible in front of ny mpianatra. But (46), with fronting of ny mpianatra, is irretrievably ungrammatical. Now, this is a pattern characteristic of an 10 (as opposed to that of a DO).

2.1.6

Tests for Beneficiary-Oblique. That ny tenany in (43) a. is a Beneficiary-Oblique is

shown by the following tests (For further details see Chapter Five at the end of Section 1):

(47)a.

Nikaroka hevitra ho an'ny tenany^ i Paoly sought idea for self^ Paul^

"Paul^ sought ideas for himself

b.

Ny tenany^ ihany no n-i-karoh-an' self ^

i Paoly^ hevitra.

only part past-circ-seek-by Paul^ idea

"It was for himself^ Paul^ sought ideas."

c.

TN-i-karoh-an' past-circ-seek-by

i Paolyi hevitra ny tenany^ Paul^ idea selfi

"Paul^ was seeking ideas for himself^."

d.

Ho an'ny tenany^ ihany no n-i-karoh-an'i P^ hevitra. for self ^ only part circ-seek-by P _ idea j

"It was only for himself^ that Pauli sought ideas."

257

First, (47)a. has the ho an' preposition, which is characteristic of the Beneficiary-Oblique. Second, the contrast in grammaticall y between (47)b. with Clefting and (47)c. without Clefting, when the verb is in the circumstantial form of Passive, suggests that Clefting is preferred. Third, (47)d. shows that Clefting with the preposition ho an' is possible although this appears to be optional, judging from the grammaticality of (47)b. Hie above pattern is characteristic of a Beneficiary-Oblique.

2.2

Complex non-Causative Sentences. In a complex non-Causative sentence, since the trigger

and its victim are actually clausemates underlyingly, the victim also goes into tena if it is a DO, or into ny tenany if it is not, i.e. if it occupies the 10 slot on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy or anyone of the ten types of Oblique dealt with in Passivization, Subsection 1.3.2.

2.2.1

Reflexivization in Equi-2 Constructions. In 1.1.2.1 of Section 1, one illustrative example of an

Equi-2 structure was presented, where a non-Su trigger in the matrix clause triggers the deletion of the underlying Su of the embedded clause after Reflexivization to tena applies on the lower cycle. In that instance, the victim occupies a DO position. In the following examples, the matrix clause verbs are predicates that trigger Equi-2, mibaiko "to order (someone to do something)" and maioela "to allow (someone to do something)" and the victims of Reflexivization are an 10 and an Oblique respectively in the embedded clause.

258

(48)a.

Nibaiko an'i P^ hanome ordered

valin-kasasarana ny tenanyi self^

P^ will-give reward

i J(aona). J(ohn)

b.

*Nibaiko an'i P. hanome ordered

valin-kasasarana tena^ i J. self^ J

P^ will-give reward

(intended reading for both a. and b.) "J ordered P^ to grant himself^/herself^ a reward."

(49)a.

Namela an'i P i hitady let

trano ho an'ny tenany^ i J. selfi J

P i will-seek house for

b.

*Namela an'i P. hitady let

trano ho an-tenai

i J.
J

Pj will-seek house for selfi

(intended reading for both a. and b.) "J let P^ look for a house for himselfi/herselfi."

Assume that Bgui-2 deleting the Su of the embedded clause applies only after Reflexivization has taken place in the subordinate structure. The contrast in graxmaticality between the a. and the b. sequences in (48) and (49) shows that when the victim is an 10 or an Oblique it can only surface as ny tenany, even in the case of a oonplex structure involving Equi-2. As was pointed out in connection with the sentence (43)b., the sequences (48)b. and (49)b. can only be granmatical in Colloquial Malagasy in a totally different sense, i.e. "John ordered Paul to give you-idiot a reward" and "John let Paul look for a house for you-idiot."

259

2.2.2

Reflexivization in Raising-to-DO Constructions. In 1.1.2.4, one illustrative example of a Raising-to-DO

structure was presented where the Su of the embedded clause was raised to DO of the matrix clause. In that instance, the victim occupies the DO position in the lower clause and therefore ends up as tena. In the following exanples, the victims are an 10 and an Oblique respectively:

(50)a.

Niandry an'i J. hanme expected

enta-mavesatra ny tenany^ i P. selfi P

0\ will-give luggage-heavy

b.

*Niandry an'i X hanome expected

enta-mavesatra tenai i P. P

will-give luggage-heavy selfi

(intended reading for both a. and b.) "Paul expected to impose a burden upon herselfi."

(51)a.

Niandry an'i J\ hitady expected

trano ho an'ny tenanyi i P. selfi P

J^ will-seek house for

b.

*Niandry an'i J^ hitady expected

trano an-tenai i P.
p

J i will-seek house selfi

(intended reading for both a. and b.) "P expected of ^ that shei would look for a house for herselfi>"

The b. sequences, where the victim shows up as tena, are irretrievably ungrammatical. This contrasts with the grammaticality of the a. sequences with ny tenany.

260 2.2.3 Reflexivization and Bqui-1 Constructions. The following structures show the interaction between Reflexivization and Bqui-1, where the higher Su deletes the embedded Su of the underlying sequence, thus removing the actual trigger for Reflexivization on the lower cycle (See Chapter Five, 2.1.1.0.3, for further details):

(52)a.

Hamono

tena^

i Paolyi. Paul^

will-kill himself^

b.

*Hamono

ny tenany ^ i Paoly^. Paul^

will-kill self ^

(intended reading for both a. and b.) "Paul^ will kill himselfi."

(53)a.

Nitetika ny

hamono

tena^

i paoly Paul^

planned comp will-kill self ^

b.

*Nitetika ny hamono

ny tenany^ i PaolyiPaul^

planned comp will-kill self^ (intended


reading for

both a. and b.)

"Pauli planned to kill himself

(52) a. is a simplex sentence. Hie ungrairmaticality of (52)b., contrasted with the grammaticality of (52)a., indicates that the victim must be tena in such a case, and this correlates with the fact that the victim is in the same clause as its trigger. The contrast in grammaticality between (53)a. and (53)b. suggests that initially tena had its trigger within the same clause, i.e.

261

the one embedded under nitetika. Notice that in both (52) a. and (53)a. the victim tena occupies the DO position. The following sequences show cases where the victim is an xo and an Oblique respectively:

(54)a.

Nitetika ny hanome

valin-kasasarana ny tenany^ i j^. self^

planned coup will-give reward

b.

*Nitetika ny hanome

valin-kasasarana (an-)tena^ i j^. self^

planned conp will-give reward (intended reading for both a. and b.)

"John^ planned to grant himself^ a reward."

(55)a.

Nitetika ny hitady

trano ho an'ny tenany^ i p^. himself^ p^

planned conp will-seek house for

b.

*Nitetika ny hitady

trano ho (an-)tena^ self^

i p^, p^

planned conp will-seek house for (intended reading for both a. and b.)

"Paul^ planned to look for a house for himself^."

Again, as in the case of Equi-2 in 2.2.1, Raising-to-DO in 2.2.2, Equi-1 structures conform to the generalization made under 2.2 above.

2.2.4.1

Reflexivization and Raising-to-Su Constructions. The following structures show the interaction between

Beflexivization and Raising-to-Su (See Chapter Five, 2.1.4.6, for further details):

262

(56)a.

Fantatra fa namono tena^ i Paoly known oomp killed self^ Paul^

b.

Fantatra i Paoly^ fa namono tena^. known


Paul

i coup killed selfi

(interpretation for both a. and b.) "It is a known fact that Paul^ killed himself

(57)a.

Fantatra fa

ny tenany^ ihany no voa-vno-n'i p^. only part pass-hit-by p^

be-known conp self^

b.

*Fantatra i P^ fa ny tenany^ ihany no known P^ coirp self^ only part

voa-vonony^.

c.

*Fantatra ny tenany^ fa voa-vono-n'i P^. known self ^ conp pass-hit-by P^

(intended reading for a., b., and c.) *"It is a known fact that it was himself^ that was hit by Paul/', i.e. "It is a known fact that it was Paul^ who got himself^ hit."

In (56)a. fantatra "be known" is a Raising-to-Su predicate with a sentential Su which conprises i Paoly. Hie grammaticality of (57)a. indeed argues that i Paoly, in the genitive case here, since the lower clause is in the passive voice with the perfective aspect-marker voa-, belongs in the lower predicate. Hie contrast in grammaticality between (56)a. and (57)b. shows that in

263

the first sequence i Paoly is still a Su at the time Raising-togu applies, whereas this is not the case in the second sequence. Furthermore, the ungranmaticality of (57)c. shows that Raisingto-Su is restricted to an environment where the word order is Unmarked, i.e. VOS, as that found in the lower clause of (56)a., which contrasts with the Marked order SVX (X being the Agent) found in the lower clause of (57) a. Thus, the domain of application of Raising-to-Su is the complement of that of Raising-toDO since in the latter case, the order in the embedded clause is SVO, as in:

(58) a.

?I X hikarakara

tena^ no

andrasa-n'

i P.

J^ will-take-care-of self part pass-expect-by P "It is for Jeanne^ to take care of herself that is expected by Paul", i.e. "Paul is expecting Jeanne^^ to take care of herself."

b.

?Izy^ hikarakara

tena^ no

andrasa-n'i

i P.

she^ will-take-care-of self part pass-expect-by P "Paul is waiting for Jeanne^ to take care of herself."

Although (58)a. and (58) b. are of dubious graiimaticality, their grammaticality is enhanced by the use of a special international pattern, with a strong pause just before the particle no. The matrix verb is andrasana "be-expected ," passive form of miandry "to expect". The NP i Jeanne in (58)a. is indeed a Su since it can be replaced with the Su form of the independent pronoun izy "he/she."

264

2.2.4.2

Hie Victim of Reflexivization and Case-Marking. Fran (56) through (58) above, the victim was a do. i<he

following examples provide cases where it is an 10 and an Oblique, respectively:

(58)a.

Fantatra fa hanome

valin-kasasarana ny t e n a n y j self^

known conp will-give reward

b.

*Fantatra fa known

hanome valin-kasasarana tena. i j. l l" self^

conp will-give reward

(intended reading for both a. and b.) "It is a known fact that Jch^ w i n grant himself a reward."

(59)a.

Fantatra fa hitady

trano ho an'ny tenany^ i p^. self ^ p^

known conp will-seek house for

b.

*Fantatra fa hitady known

trano ho (an-)tena^ i p^. for self^ p^

conp will-seek house

(intended reading for both a. and b.) "It is a known fact that Paul^ will look for a house for himself^."

2.3

Summary. It seems therefore that in a complex, non-Causative

sentence, the trigger of Reflexivization and its victim are always clausemates initially and that the victim goes into tena if it is a DO, or into ny tenany if it is an 10 or an Oblique.

265 Section 3

Reflexivization and Causative Constructions

3>0

introduction. In Section 3, the interaction of Reflexivization with

the Causative Constructions of Malagasy will be investigated. It will be seen that: 1. the trigger of Reflexivization and its victim are not necessarily clausemates initially. In fact, it appears that typically, in a Causative Construction, the trigger and its victim are not clausemates. If the trigger and its victim are clausemates initially, and if the victim is a DO, it goes into tena, but if it is either an IO or an Oblique, then it goes into ny tenany. NOw, there is a limit as to the number of arguments a complex Causative predicate can take. There is evidence to suggest that the maximal number is three. All of this leads one to hypothesize that Causativization is a process which allows one to increase the valency of the verb. 2. When the trigger and its victim are not clausemates, -in the case of the Manipulative an (a) and ank (a) or the Abilitative aha contructions, which involve maximal fusion, the victim goes into tena; -in the case of the "neutral" Directive construction, which involves minimal fusion, the victim goes into ny tenany; -an Unlike-Su Constraint operates on the underlying sequence of the "neutral" Directive amp (a) and the Manipulative

266 amp (a), whereas this does not seem to be the case with the rfenj_ puLative ank(a) or the Abilitative aha. On the other hand, as f ar as the Manipulative an is concerned, the above restriction holds when the embedded predicate is a verb but not when it is adjectival, as in an equative type of construction. This rules out Reflexivization in the first two instances, which tends to confirm a finding (to be presented in a publication (in preparation) entitled "The Tense/Aspect System of Malagasy") relative to
a

distinction between External vs. Internal Agent in the aspectual system of Malagasy.

3.1

Preview. Typically, in a Causative contruction, the trigger and

its victim do not show up as clausemates initially. However, there is at least one case where they do, i.e. with the "neutral" Directive Causative amp(a).

3.1.1

Clausematiness. The trigger and its victim can be clausemates initial-

ly, as in (60)a. When they are, the victim goes into tena if it is a DO, but if it is an IO or an Oblique, then Malagasy resorts to an alternative strategy to avoid the accumulation of four arguments, all dependent on one complex Causative predicate, as will be shown in (61)c.

3.1.2

Clausematiness and Grammatical Relations. When the trigger and its victim are clausemates ini-

tially, the victim shows up as tena if it is a DO:

267

(60)a.

N-anp-airono

tenai an'i Jeanne^ i Paoly. Jeanne ^ ^ Paul

past-caus-kill self.^

n "Paul caused Jeannei to kill herself^"

b.

H-amono will-kill

tena^ self^

i Jeanne^ i* Jeanne^

i "Jeanne^ will kill herself. i l

Ihe sequence (60) a. contains the simplex clause in (60)b., where initially the trigger was the Su i Jeanne and the victim tena, a I ) In (60)a., i.e. in the output, tena remains a DO. X.

3.1.3

Substitute Strategy. When the trigger and its victim are clausemates ini-

tially, and if the latter is an 10 or an Oblique, then Malagasy substitutes a different construction, breaking up the complex Causative predicate accompanied by four NPs into the passive form asaina "be-told" followed by another verb.

(61)a.

H-anolotra an'ilay taratasy an'i Paoly i Jeanne. will-hand the letter Paul Jeanne

"Jeanne will hand the letter to Paul."

b.

*N-amp-anolotra an'ilay taratasy ny tenany^ past-caus-hand the letter self.

an'i Jeanne i Paoly^_ Paul. l "Pauli had Jeanne hand him the letter." Jeanne

268 c. Nasain'i P^ natolotr1 i J azy^ ilay taratasy.

was-told-by P^ was-handed-by J hirn^ the letter "Was told by Pauli that the letter be handed to hiir^ by Jeanne", i.e. "Pauli asked Jeanne to hand hirn^ the letter."

(62)a.

H-itady

trano ho an'i Paoly i Jeanne. Paul Jeanne

will-look-for house for

"Jeanne will look for a house for Paul."

b.

*N-amp-itady

trano ho'-an'ny tenanyi an'i Jeanne self^ Jeanne

pasty-caus-look-for house for i Paoly^. Paul

"Paul^ had Jeanne look for a house for him^."

c.

Nasain'

i Paoly^ nitady

trano ho azy^ i Jeanne, Jeanne

was-told-by Paul^ looked-for house for him^

"Was told by Paul^ looked for a house for him^ Jeanne", i.e. "Paul^ asked Jeanne to look for a house for him^."

The simplex sentences in (61) a. and (62) a. are the lower clauses in (61)b. and (62)b. respectively. In (61)b., it is an'i Paoly, initially an 10, which is coreferential with the higher Su, whereas in (62)b., it is ho an'i Paoly, initially an Oblique, which is coreferential with the higher Su. In both cases, the outputs are ungrammatical. However, there is an alternative strategy, which consists in using a different construction with the

269

passive form asaina "be-told". This has the effect of breaking up the sequence of four arguments, as can be seen in (61) c. and (62) c. The only difference is that in (61) c. passive also applies in the lower clause since its DO is definite underlyingly and can therefore be promoted to Su at a later stage, whereas Passive cannot apply in (62)c. since its DO is indefinite and, as a consequence, cannot be promoted to Su.

3.2.1

NOn-clausematiness and the "Neutral" Directive Causative Construction. If the trigger and its victim are not clausemates

intially and if the higher predicate is the "neutral" Directive Causative amp (a), then the victim goes into ny tenany.

(63)a.

N-anp-amono past-caus-kill

ny tenany^^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne^ self Paul Jeanne^

*"Jeannei caused Paul to kill herself."

b.

/[N-anp-[amono ny tenan'i Jeanne^ i paoly] i Jeanne^]/ past-caus-kill self Jeanne. l Paul i Jeanne.

First, it is assumed that the Causative construction has a bisentential source, as shown in (63) b. (See Chapter Six for further details). Second, it is also assumed that the victim is a straight DO, as opposed to the demoted Su of the embedded clause, which, as shown in Chapter Five, turns out to fall in between a straight DO and an 10. The grammaticality of (63) a. with only three NP arguments dependent on the complex Causative predicate contrasts with

270 the ungrammatically of (61) b. and (62) b., each with four arguments. Uie above, in conjunction with the finding made in 3 . 1 . 3 suggests that with Causative constructions, the victim can only be either an initial Su or a derived DO.

3.2.2

Non-clausematiness and the Manipulative Causative an (a) and ank(a) Constructions. If the trigger and its victim are not clausemates ini-

tially and if the higher predicate is the Manipulative an (a) /ank (a) with the proviso that the entoedded clause be of the or the Abilitative aha construction, then the

equative type

victim goes into tena.

(64)a.

Tsara i

Paoly.

good deic Paul "Paul is good."

b.

N-ana-tsara past-caus-good

tena^ i Paoly self Pauf

"Pauf made himself (appear) to be good", i.e. "Pauf boasted about himself."

c.

?N - i - sasa past-stative-wash

i Jeanne, Jeanne

"Jeanne was clean as a result of washing."

d.

*N - an - (s)asa past-caus-wash

tena./ny tenanyi self

i Jeanne^. Jeannei

"Jeanne^ was washing herself."

271

(65) a.

Mala i Paoly. crazy Paul

"Paul is crazy."

b.

N - ank - adala tena^ i Paoly^. past-caus-crazy self^ Paul^

"Paul^ drove himself^ crazy", i.e. "Pauli worried himself to death."

(66) a.

Tafita successful

i Paoly. Paul

"Paul is successful", i.e. "Paul achieved his goal(s)."

b.

N - aha - tafita

tena^ i Paoly Paul^

past-caus-successful self^

"Paul managed to be successful", i.e. "Paul^ managed to achieve his^ goal(s)."

In (64) d. Manipulative an (a) embeds a clause which comprises a verbal predicate, the one shown in (64)c., but without the Stative prefix _i. It is irretrievably ungrammatical. Uiis contrasts with the grammaticality of (64)b., where the embedded predicate is adjectival.

3.2.3

Non-clausematiness and the Manipulative Amp(a). If the trigger and its victim are not clausemates ini-

tially and if the higher predicate is the Manipulative ampa, then the sequence is ill-formed if it contains a Reflexive.

272 (67) a. ?*Hiakatra ny seza.

will-go-up the chair (intended reading) "The chair will go up."

b.

N - anp - iakatra ny seza past-caus-go-up the chair

i Paoly. Paul

"Paul will bring the chair upstairs."

c.

N - amp - akari - n'

i Paoly ny seza.

past-caus-go-up-passive-by Paul the chair "The chair was brought upstairs by Paul."

(68) a.

Hiakatra i Paoly. will-go-up Paul "Paul will go upstairs."

b.

N - anp - iakatra an'i Paoly i Jaona. past-caus- go-up Paul John

Either "John brought Paul upstairs," or "John had Paul go upstairs."

c.

*N - anp - iakatra ny tenany^ i Paoly past-caus- go-up


1

self

Paul^

*"Pauli brought himself upstairs."

d.

/[N - anp -[iakatra i Paoly ^ past-caus- go-up Paul.

i Paoly^]/ Pauf

273

(67) b. is a typical Manipulative anp (a) construction since it is possible to have Passive after Clause-Union, as seen in (67) c.: the higher Su is different from the lower Su in the underlying sequence, as is apparent in (67)b. This is also the case in (68)b. Now, in the ungrammatical (68) c., the lower Su has the same referent as the higher Su, as shown in (68) d. All of the above suggests that there exists an Unlike-Su Constraint operating in the case of Manipulative amp (a) constructions.

3.2.4

Unlike-Su Constraint. If the trigger and its victim are not clausemates ini-

tially and if the higher predicate is the "neutral" Directive anp (a), then the sequence is ill-formed if the embedded Su of the underlying representation has the same referent as the higher Su. If, on the other hand, the Causer and Causee are different, the sequence becomes perfectly grammatical.

(69) a.

Handidy mofo will-cut bread

i Jeanne. Jeanne

"Jeanne will cut some bread."

b.

N - anp - andidy mofo an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-cut bread Jeanne Paul

"Paul had Jeanne cut seme bread."

/[N - anp -[andidy mofo past-caus-cut bread

i Jeanne] i Paoly]/ Jeanne Paul

274 (70) a. Handidy nofo will-cut bread (sane as (69)a.) "Jeanne will cut sane bread." i Jeanne. Jeanne

b.

*N - anp - andidy mofo ny tenany i Jeanne^. past-caus-cut bread self Jeanne^

*"Jeanne^ had herself cut some bread."

c.

/[N - anp -[andidy mofo past-caus-cut bread

i Jeanne^] i Jeanne^]/ Jeanne Jeanne

(69)b. is a "neutral" Directive amp(a) construction with (69)a. in its lower clause. Likewise, (70)b. has (70)a. embedded under amp (a). The, contrast in grammaticality between (69) b. and (70) b. is due to the fact that, in the latter, the embedded Su of the underlying sequence shown in (70)c. is coreferential with the higher Su. This is not the same as the grammatical (69) b. whose underlying representation is in (69)c. All of the above indicates that the Unlike-Su Constraint, as explained in 3.0.(2), is operative in the case of the "neutral" Directive construction.

Section 4

Reflexivization and the Cyclic Convention

4.0

Introduction. Section 4 will argue for the necessity of the Cyclic

Convention in view of the fact that:

275

1. Reflexivization interacts with Equi-1, Equi-2, Raising-to-DO, and Raising-to-Su in a way which makes it clear that in a non-Causative construction, it precedes Clause-Union; and 2. yet, Reflexivization interacts with Clause-Union in
a

causative construction in a manner which suggests that it must

follow Clause-Union. Furthermore, it will be seen that Reflexivization is a' bounded rule, i.e. clause-bounded for tena, and applies to the next lower clause for ny tenany.

4.1

Hie Ordering of Reflexivization. Reflexivization interacts with Equi-1, Equi-2, Raising-

to-DO, and Raising-to-Su in a way which indicates that in a nonCausative construction, it must precede each one of these processes involved in Clause-Union.

4.1.1

Reflexivization Before Equi-1. Reflexivization interacts with Clause-Union in a way

which shows that it must precede Equi-1:

(71) a.

Nitetika

ny hamono

tena^

i Paoly^. Paul^

past-plan comp will-kill self^ (same as (53)a.)

b.

/[Nitetika [ny hamono an'i Paoly^] i Paoly^]/ past-plan camp will-kill Paul^ Paul^

(interpretation for both a. and b.) "Pauli intended to kill himself^"

276 (72) a. [ny hamono tena^ i paoly^] Paul^

conp will-kill self^

b.

Nitetika

[ny

hamono

tena^

Oi

] i Paoly.. Pauli

past-plan ccaip will-kill self ^

(73) a.

*[ny

hanono an'i Paoly^ i paoly^] Paul^ Paul^

conp will-kill

b.

*Nitetika

[ny hamono

an'i Paoly^ Paul^

Oi

] i Paoly Paul^

past-plan conp will-kill

c.

Nitetika

[ny hanono

tena^

] i Paolyi. Pauli

past-plan conp will-kill self

The underlying sequence corresponding to (71)a. is given in (71)b. If Reflexivization applies, as in (72)a., to the lower clause, the output feeds Equi-1, which then yields (72)b. Now, if Reflexivization does not apply in the lower clause, as in (73)a., and if Equi-1 applies first, as in (73) b., then in order to derive (73)c., one must assume that Reflexivization to tena is not a clause-bounded rule. This is an unwarranted assumption, as will be shown in Subsection 4.4.1. Furthermore, the solution where Equi-1 precedes Reflexivization is less desirable since it appeals to two irretrievably ungrammatical sequences of the language, namely (73) a. and (73) b., although this does not appear to be necessary. As a matter of fact, (72)a. without the complementizer constitutes an actual sentence of Malagasy, meaning "Paul will kill himself." The same holds true of (72)b.

277

1.2

Reflexivization Before Equi-2. Reflexivization interacts with Clause-Union in a way

which suggests that it must precede Equi-2:

(74)a.

Nibaiko

an'i Paoly^ hamono Pauf

tena^ i Jeanne. Jeanne

past-order

will-kill self

b.

/[Nibaiko an'i P ^ [hamono an'i Pi i P ^ i J]/ . past-order P ^ fut-kill j Pi P^ j J

"Jeanne ordered Pauf to kill himselfi."

(75) a.

Hairono

tena^ i Paoly Pauf O^ ] i J. J

will-kill self b. Nibaiko an'i P. [hamono tena^

past-order

P_L fut-kill self

(76)a.

*[harrono an'i Paoly will-kill Pauf

i Paolyi] Pauf

b.

*Nibaiko an'i P ^ [hanono an'i Pi . past-order fut-kill Pi

0i ] i J. 0i J

c.

Nibaiko an'i P ^ [hamono ^ past-order Pi fut-kill

tenai self

Oi ] i J.
0i

Again, in order to derive (76)c., where the trigger for Reflexivization to tena is presumably an'i Paoly, outside the lower clause, one has to assume that this subrule is not clause-bound-

278

ed. Furthermore, such a solution where Equi-2 precedes Reflexivization forces one to posit ungrammatical intermediate structures, i.e. (76)a. and (76)b., which are by no means necessary, since (75)a. and (75)b. are possible alternatives.

4.1.3

Direct Feeling Representation and Raising-to-DO. Raising-to-DO does not interact with Reflexivization in

exactly the sane way as Equi-1 and Equi-2 since Reflexivization to tena is impossible. Hie following sentence comprises the Reflexive ny tenany, but it is not the output of the process described so far. Rather, it results from the application of ClauseTHion to an embedded clause which already has ny tenany in its Direct Feeling representation.

(77)a.

Niandry expected

ny tenanyi hotonpoina self^ ccmp be-boss-passive

i Paolyi> Paul^

"Paul^ expected himself^ to be served", i.e. "Paul^ expects other people to be subservient to him^ and to satisfy every one of his caprices."

b.

/[Niandry ["ny tenakoi ho hotonpoina"] expected

i P^]/. P^

self ^ conp future-boss-passive

In (77)b., we have in the embedded clause a conplementizer ho and a future tense marker ho. Somehow either one of them will be filtered out or the two will merge. The word order in the embedded clause is the Marked SV one. If the underlying representation proposed in (77)b. is justified, it follows that Reflexivization precedes Clause-Union.

279

4.1.3.1

Justification for Direct Peeling Representation. One type of justification for a Direct Feeling repres-

entation is that many of the Raising-to-DO verbs,tiiehshare the g i e characteristics as miandry "expect", are verbs of mental at representation of the same type as milaza "to consider oneself as something, as is apparent through one's verbal behavior," mihevitra "to consider oneself as something, as is apparent in one's patterns of thought," and to a certain extent manao "to consider oneself as something, as is apparent through one's actions" as opposed to verbs like miangavy "to request", which involve Equi-2 and which are verbs of linguistic communication.

(78)

Milaza ny tenany^/azy^ ho consider self

mahay

i Paoly^

/hirr^ conp intelligent Pauli

"Pauf considers himselfi intelligent."

(79)

Mihevitra ny tenany .j/azyi ho consider self/hin^

mahay

i Paolyi.

ccaip intelligent Pauli.

"Pauf considers himselfi intelligent."

(80)

Nanao considered

ny tenanyi tsy ho selfi

zavatra tokoa i Paolyireally Pauli

not conp thing

"Pauf considered his selfi not to be a thing," i.e. "Paul showed total abnegation."

4.1.3.2

Postposition. It is possible to paraphrase (78) and (79), but not

(80), in the following manner:

280 (81) Milaza...i Paoly^ [hoe mahay say Paul^ quote intelligent ny tenany. self

"Pauf says that he^ is intelligent."

(82)

Mihevitra...i Paolyi [hoe mahay think Pauf

ny tenanyi]. self

quote intelligent

"Pauf thinks that he^ is intelligent." -

(83)

*Nanao...i Paoly^ [hoe tsy ho did Pauf

zavatra ny tenany. self

quote not coirp thing

(no interpretation whatsoever)

In (81), milaza literally neans "to say"; in (82),

mihevitra

literally signifies "to think"; and in (83), manao means "to do". The granmaticality of (81) and (82) shows that it is possible to extrapose the embedded clause from the position indicated by ... and substitute hoe "quote.. .unquote" for the Indirect Discourse complementizer ho of (78) and (79). Notice the VS word order in the embedded clause in (81) and (82), as opposed to the SV order in (77) to (80). (83), for its part, is irretrievably ungrammatical.

4.1.3.3

Indirect Discourse Formation. In each of the examples in (78) and (79), the embedded

clause comprising the Reflexive form ny tenany stripped of its complementizer, does exist in the language as an independent clause, provided the necessary shift in person is effected. Nbte the change in word order, from the Unmarked VS to the Marked SV.

281

(84) a.

Mahay

ny tena-ko.

intelligent the body-of-me "I (my humble person) am intelligent."

b.

Ny tena-ko

mahay.

the body-of-me intelligent "As for me (my humble person), I am intelligent."

c.

*Mahay

ny tena-ny.

intelligent the body-of-him "He (his humble person) is intelligent."

d.

*Ny tena-ny

mahay.

the body-of-him intelligent "He (his humble person) is intelligent."

The contrast in grammaticality between the sentences in a. and b., and those in c. and d. proves that only the first person ny tena-ko "I (ny humble person)" is possible, but not *ny tena-ny "he (his humble person)". This suggests that an Indirect Discourse Formation is necessary which will shift the Direct Discourse first person ny tena-ko into ny tena-ny in the process of embedding a. under the appropriate matrix verb.

4.1.4

Reflexivization Before Raising-to-Su. Reflexivization interacts with Clause-Union in a way

which suggests that it must precede Raising-to-Su with a matrix predicate of the type of fantatra "(be) known."

282

(85)a.

Fantatra known

fa

namono tenai Paoly Pauli

conp killed selfi

b.

Fantatra known

i Paoly^ fa

namono tenai-

Paul^ comp killed selfi

"It is a known fact that Paul^ killed himselfi."

(86)a.

Namono tenai i Paolyi. killed self^ Pauli

b.

Fantatra known

i Paoly^ fa

namono tenai-

Paul^ conp killed selfi

(87) a.

Fantatra known

fa * [namono an'i Paoly ^ i Paolyi]. ^ conp killed Paul^ Pauli

b.

Fantatra known

i Paolyi

fa

[namono an'i Paolyi]. Pauli

Paul^ conp killed

c.

Fantatra known

i Paolyi fa

[namono tenai].

Pauli comp killed selfi

In (85)a., Raising-to-Su has not applied yet, as opposed to the situation in (85) b. Now, if Reflexivization to tena applies in the embedded clause, as in (86) a., and then the embedded Su is raised into the matrix clause, one obtains (86)b. If, on the other hand, Reflexivization to tena does not apply in the lower clause, one is forced to resort to an intermediate structure like (87)a., which is ungrammatical. More importantly, in (87)c., Re-

283 flexivization to tena will have to apply across clause-boundary. However, in Subsection 4.4 below, we will see that Clausematiness is a crucial parameter for Reflexivization to tena in non-Causative constructions. It seems then that Reflexivization must be j a e to precede Raising-to-Su. nd

4.2

Reflexivization After Clause-Union. Yet, Reflexivization interacts with Clause-Union in

Causative Constructions in a manner which suggests that it must follow Clause-Union.

4.2.1

Reflexivization and the "Neutral" Directive Causative Amp(a) Construction. Reflexivization to tena interacts with Clause-Union in

Causative Constructions of the "neutral" Directive type and supports the generalization just proposed.

(88) a.

N - amp - amono tenai an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-kill self^ Jeanne^ Paul

"Paul had/caused Jeanne^ to kill herself^."

b.

/[N- aitp -[aiiDno an'i Jeanne^ past-caus-kill Jeanne^

i Jeanne^ i Paoly]/. Jeanne^ Paul

c.

*N - amp - amono an'i Jeanne.^ an'i Jeanne^ past-caus-kill Jeanne^ Jeanne^

i Paoly. Paul

Reflexivization to tena applies in the embedded clause of (88) b. since its structural description is met. In this case, therefore,

284 Reflexivization precedes Clause-Union since its non-application on the lower cycle yields the irretrievably ungrarrmatical (88)c.: only a Su can trigger Reflexivization and the initial trigger i Jeanne has now been demoted from Su to DO. (See Chapter Six, Subsection 2.5.0 and subsequent paragraphs about Demotion).

4.2.2

Reflexivization After Clause-Union in Other Causative Constructions. Reflexivization to tena cannot apply before Clause-

Union in Causative Constructions of the Manipulative ana and anka as well as the Abilitative aha type since in each one of the embedded clauses in the b. sequences below, which constitutes an actual sentence of Malagasy in isolation, the predicate is intransitive and, as a result, Reflexivization cannot apply.

(89)a.

N - ana - tsara tena^ i Paoly ^. past-caus-good self Paul^

"Pauf made himself (appear) to be good", i.e. "Paul,, praised himself."

b.

/[N- ana -[tsara i Paoly^ i Paoly-jJ/. past-caus-good Pauf Paul^

(90) a.

N - ank - adala tena.^ i Paoly^. past-caus-crazy self paul^

"Pauf worries himself to death."

b.

/[N- ank-[adala i Paoly^ Paoly jj/. past-caus-crazy Pauf Pauli

285

(91) a.

N - aha - tafita

teru^ i Paoly.^ Paul^

past- caus-successful self^

"Paul managed to reach his goal(s)

b.

/[N- aha - [tafita

i Paoly^ i Paoly^/. Paul^

past-caus-successful Paul^

Ihe underlying representation for each sequence is given in b. Hach one of the embedded clauses from (89) to (91), as shown in (64)a. to (66)a., are actual sentences of Malagasy: the structural description of Reflexivization is not yet met before ClauseUnion applies. It can only be inferred that Clause-Union mast precede Reflexivization.

4.3

The Ordering Paradox and its Solution. To solve the Ordering Paradox derived from, on the one

hand, the interaction between Reflexivization and Equi-1, Equi-2, Raising-to-DO, and Raising-to-Su, and, on the other, that between Reflexivization and Causative Constructions, the Cyclic Convention is made to apply, thus capturing both orderings.

4.3.1

The Order: Reflexivization Before Clause-Union. Thus, to account for the ordering of Reflexivization

before Clause-Union in complex non-Causative constructions involving Equi-1 or Equi-2, as well as in the case of the "neutral" Directive Causative, Reflexivization applies in the lower clause, as in (72)a. for Equi-1, (75)a. for Equi-2, or (88)a. for the relevant Causative since the structural description of the rule will have been met at that particular stage of the derivation.

286

4.3.2

The Order: Reflexivization After Clause-Union. Likewise, to account for the ordering Clause-Union be-

fore Reflexivization in Causative Constructions, there is the fact, quite evident in the underlying structures shown in (89)b. to (91)b., that the embedded clauses comprise intransitive predicates and that Clause-Union is necessary to increase the valency of the verbs, transforming them into transitives. The structural description of Reflexivization will only be met after ClauseUnion has taken place.

4.4

Boundedness. Reflexivization is a bounded rule in that: 1. on the one hand, in the case of the victim tena, it

is clause-bounded; and 2. on the other, in the case of the victim ny tenany, application of this subrule is restricted to a situation where the victim is in the next lower clause from its trigger, as in the Causal and the "neutral" Directive Causative Constructions.

4.4.1

Evidence for Boundedness of Tena-Reflexive. That Reflexivization to tena is a clause-bounded rule

is evident from the following data:

(92) a.

Nilaza i Paoly f a said Pauii

hamono

tena^

that will-kill selfi

"Pauf said that hei will kill himself."

b.

/[Nilaza [fa hamono an'i Paoly^ i paoly^ i Paolyi]/. said comp will-kill Pauf Pauli Pauli

287 (93) a. *Nilaza i Paolyi f a said hamono tena.^ i Jaona. John

Paul^ that will-kill seiq

*"Pauli said that John will kill himself^"

b.

/[Nilaza [fa hamono an'i Paoly^ i Jaona] i Paoly^]/. said comp will-kill Paul^ John Paul^

(94)a.

N-amp-amono

tena^ an'i Paoly^ i Jeanne, Paul^ Jeanne

past-caus-kill self^

"Jeanne caused Paul^ to kill himself^."

/[N-anp-aitDno

an'i Paoly i Paolyi] i Jeanne]/, Paul^ Paul^ Jeanne

past-caus-kill

(95)a.

*N-amp-anono

tena.^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne^. Paul Jeanne^

past-caus-kill self^

*"Jeanne^ caused Paul to kill herself^"

b.

/[N-anp-amono an'i Jeanne^ i paoly] i Jeanne^/, past-caus-kill Jeanne^ Paul Jeanne^

The underlying sequences are given in b. for each of the actual sentences found in a. In (92) a Zero-Pronominalization rule (See details in Chapter Four) has deleted the embedded Su in (92)b. after Reflexivization has applied. The output is the grammatical (92) a. In (93), as is evident in (93)b., the trigger for Reflexivization is the higher Su, whereas its victim is the DO of the lower clause. The resulting sentence (93)a. is irretrievably

288

ungrammatical. In (92) and (93), we had non-Causative constructions. However, the situation in Causative Constructions is
not

fundanentally different: in (94)b., both the trigger and its victim are clausemates and the output (94)a. is grammatical; this contrasts with (95)b., where the trigger and its victim are in different clauses, yielding the ungrammatical (95)a.

4.4.2

Evidence for the Boundedness of Ny-Tenany-Reflexive. As far as non-Causative constructions are concerned,

Reflexivization to ny tenany is applicable if both trigger and victim are clausemates in a Marked structure:

(96)a.

I Paoly^ ihany no Paul^

namono

ny tenany self ^

only part past-active-kill

"Paul^ is the onei who killed himself^", i.e. "P^ bears the entire responsibility for his^ own death."

b.

Ny tenany^ ihany no no-vono-in' i Paoly self ^ only part pass-kill-by Paul^

"Someone was killed by Paul^ and that is himself^."

c.

Ny tenany^ ihany no voa-vono-n' i Paoly^. self^ only part pass-kill-by Paul^

"Someone has been unwittingly killed by Paul^ and that is Paul^ himself"

(97)a.

*Nataon'

i P^ i 2a y nanonoan'

i J ny tenany^. selfj^

was-done-by P i comp circ-kill-by J "Pauli had Jeanne kill himself."

289

b.

/[Nanao [(izay) namono ny tenan'i P. i j] i P^]/. did (coup) killed self-of P^ j p^

(98) a.

Nataon'

i P izay namonoan'

i ^ ny tenany^. self^

was-done-by P camp circ-kill-by J^

"Paul caused Jeanne^ to kill herself^."

b.

*Nataon1

i p izay namono

ny tenany^ i j^.

was-done-by P comp past-act-kill self^

c.

/[ N-anao [ izay n-amono ny tenany^ i j^] i P]/ past-do comp past-kill self^ p

(99) a.

*Namono ny tenanyi i Jeanne killed self^ Jeannei

"Jeanne^ killed herself^"

b.

/[Namono ny tenan'

i Jeanne^ i Jeanne^]/, Jeanne^

killed the body-of-her Jeanne^

In (96)a., the trigger and its victim are clausemates, as could be inferred from the possibility of promoting the DO ny tenany to Su: in (96)b., the verb has the nonperfective aspect marker no.. ina, whereas in (96)c., it has the perfective aspect marker voa. Furthermore, although it is an independent clause, the word order in (96) a. is the Marked SVO, as opposed to the Unmarked VOS order, as in (99), but which is ungrammatical. The contrast in

290 grammaticality between (97) a. and (98) a. is due to the fact that in the first, the trigger and its victim, as shown in the underlying representation in (97)b., belong in different clauses, hence its ungrammaticality; whereas, in the second, both trigger and victim are clausemates, as seen in (98)c. In addition, ny tenany in (98) c. is itself in an embedded clause, with its verb obligatorily in the circumstantial form of Passive (see Chapter Five). Otherwise, the ungrammatical (98)b. ensues. This suggests that the embedded clause in (98)a. is derived from (99)b. through Passivization. Since a passive is Marked, it follows that the embedded clause containing ny tenany in (98)b. is Marked.

4.4.2.1

Clausematiness and Ny-Tenany-Reflexive. In the case of structures like those in (96), it seems

that they involve clausemates so that it is to be concluded that Reflexivization to ny tenany can be clause-bounded. The following examples show that it does not have to be so:

(100)

Sosotra tamin' angry

ny tenany i Paoly^. Pauf

past-with self

"Pauf was angry with himself."

(101)a. ?Sosotra i Paolyi tamin' angry Pauf

ny tenany^ self

because-of

"Pauf was angry because of himself."

b.

N-aha-sosotra past-caus-angry

an'i Paoly^ n y tenany^. Pauf self

"Pauf was angry because of himself."

291 Sosotra Paoly^ tamin' angry izyi tsy tafita.

(102) a.

Paul^ because-of he^ not successful

"Paul^ was angry because of the fact that he^ was not successful."

b.

Izy^ tsy tafita

no

n-aha-sosotra an'i Paoly^. Paul^

he^ not successful part past-caus-angry

"Hie fact that he.^ was not successful angered Pauli."

In (100), tamina means "with," but in (101)a. it can only have a Causal-Oblique interpretation. Now, Passivization shows that the cut-off point for prorroting an NP to Su is precisely the CausalOblique. This suggests that the latter is not part of the clause since (101)a., although of doubtful granmaticality with a Causal tamina, has the sane cognitive meaning as (101)b. with the corresponding Causative Construction. Since, as will be shown in Chapter Six, (101)b. must be derived from a bi-sentential source, it follows that the same may apply to (101) a. And indeed, (102), which oonprises a sentence embedded under the Causal-Oblique preposition, suggests that this is the case: in (102)a., the embedded clause immediately follows the Causal tamina, whereas in (102)b., it has been fronted, hence insertion of the particle r a r to separate the sentential Su from the verbal predicate.

4.4.2.2

Causal-Oblique vs. Causal Causative Source. The following data confirm the view that a Causal-

Oblique construction is the source of the corresponding Causal Causative and not the other way around. It is, therefore, a piece of evidence in favor of th bi-sentential source for (101) a.:

292

(103)a. /C sl N - aha -f s2 sosotra i P a o ^ S ] i P a o ^ past - caus - angry Paul^ Pauli

S1]/.

b.

Sosotra i Paoly. angry Paul

c.

N - aha - sosotra an'i Paolyi i Paolyipast-caus-angry Paul^ Pauli

d. *N - aha - sosotra tena^ past-caus-angry self^

i PaolyiPauli

e. *N - aha - sosotra ny tenany.^ i Paolyipast-caus-angry selfi Pauli

f. *I Paolyi no n-aha-sosotra ny tenanyi. Pauli part past-caus-angry selfi

(104)a.

?Sosotra i Paolyi tamin1 angry Paul^ Causal-Obi

ny tenanyi. selfi

"Pauli is angry with himselfi."

b. ?N - aha - sosotra an'i Paoly^ ny tenanyipast-caus-angry Paul^ selfi

"Paul^ is angry with himselfi-"

c-

Ny tenany^ no n-aha-sosotra an'i Paolyi. self^ part past-caus-angry Pauli

"It was with himself , that Paul,- was angry."

293

If, as in (103)a., the Causal Causative is assumed to be the underlying representation for a sentence containing a Causal-Oblique and if Reflexivization is to apply, m e should be able to get a granmatical sequence with tena: Clause-Union yields (103) c. and the structural description of the rule is therefore net. Now, (103)d. is irretrievably ungrammatical, a sharp contrast with (91)a. Furthermore, along the lines sketched in 4.3.2, as illustrated in (98)a., it should be possible to have ny tenany In the embedded clause. In fact, (103)a. is a Marked structure from an aspectual viewpoint since the higher predicate is the Causal aha and since the latter canrallyembed a sequence with a predicate in the perfective aspect, as shown in Chapter One, Section 4. But, (103)e. is ungrammatical and even fronting of the Su in (103)f. does not help retrieve the situation as is the case in (104) c. with the fronting of Su on the intermediate structure (104) b. If, on the other hand, the sentence (104)a. containing the Causal-Oblique is assumed to be the underlying sequence for the corresponding Causative Construction (101)b., then Reflexivization to ny tenany is easily accounted for: the trigger is a Su, i.e. i Paoly, and its victim occupies an Oblique position, and therefore must shew up as ny tenany. In the process of Causativization, which involves Clause-Union, the embedded Su is denoted to DO and the Causal-Oblique ny tenany is raised to become the higher Su. The grammaticality of (104)c. corroborates the proposed derivation.

4.4.2.3

Restrictions on the Causal-Oblique Preposition. New, there is a co-occurrence restriction between the

294

Psychological predicate and its Causal-Oblique preposition, either tamina or noho, both meaning "because". The restriction seems to hold particularly between the predicate and its preposition, which actually serves as a conplementizer, when the governed element is not an NP but a sentence/clause.

(105)a. *Taitra surprised

i Paoly fa niakatra

i Jeanne.

Paul conp went-upstairs Jeanne

b.

*Taitra surprised

i Paoly satria niakatra Paul conp

i Jeanne.

went-upstairs Jeanne

c.

*Taitra surprised

i Paoly noho i Jeanne niakatra. Paul conp Jeanne went-upstairs

d.

Taitra surprised

i Paoly tamin' i Jeanne niakatra. Paul comp Jeanne went-upstairs

(intended reading for entire subset) "Paul was surprised at Jeanne's coming upstairs."

(106)a. *Tafita

i Paoly

fa

nikiry

0^

successful Pauli

conp persevered Oi

b.

*Tafita

i Paoly^ satria nikiry Paul^ coup perservered

successful

Tafita

i Paoly ^ noho

izyi nikiry.

successful Pauli

coup he.^ persevered

295

d. *Tafita

i Paoly ^ tamin' izy.^ nikiry.

successful Pauli conp he.^ persevered (intended reading for entire subset) "Paul^ was successful because he^ was perseverant."

(107)a.

Nandroaka an'i J(eanne) i K(oto) fa tsy tia azy^ 0 J J i threw-out J (eanne) ^ Kotoj coup not love her _ he

b. *Nandroaka an'i threw-out J.


1

i Kj satria tsy tia azy^ Oj. K carp


J

neg love h r - 0 e,
- J L

c. *Nandroaka an'i J^ i Kj noho izyj tsy tia azy^. threw-out J^ K^ conp hej not love her^

d. *Nandroaka an'i J. i K tamin'izy- tsy tia azy-. l j j J threw-out Kj conp hej neg love her^ (intended reading for entire subset) "Kj threw J^ out because hej does not love her^."

(108) a.

No-roah-an'

i Kj i J i fa

tsy tia-nyj

0i

pass-throw-out-by Kj

J^ corrp not pass-love-by-him 0^

b.

No-roah-an' i Kj i thrown-out-by Kj

satria tsy tia-nyj carp not loved-by-him Oi

c. *No-roah-an' i Kj i ^ noho izy^ tsy tia-nyj. thrown-out-by Kj coitp she^ not loved-by-hinij

296 d. *tto-roah-an1 i K^ i J i tamin'izyi tsy tia-nyj. J i coup she^ not loved-by-himj

thrown-out-by Kj

(intended reading for entire subset) "J^ was thrown out by Kj since she^ was not loved by hinij",i.e. "Kj threw J^ out because hej does not love her^"

Hie pattern of grammaticality and acceptability in (105) and (106) shows that, with taitra "be awakened", the relevant Causal-Oblique preposition is tamina, whereas with tafita "besuccessful", it is noho. Furthermore, (107) and (108) suggest that this type of co-occurrence restriction is not limited to typically intransitive verbs. In fact, the grammaticality and acceptability pattern found in the last two sets of examples indicates that typically transitive verbs co-occur with fa or satria, both with the Causal interpretation.

4.4.2.4

Boundedness- and Selection Restriction of Preposition. If indeed it is the case that there is a co-occurrence

restriction between the matrix verb and its preposition or complementizer , then it follows that such a verb selects the latter. It can only be inferred that the victim of Reflexivization can only show up in the next lower clause, in the case of the CausalOblique, and hence, given the derivation proposed in 4.4.2.2, in that of the Causal Causative as well.

4.4.2.5

Boundedness in Causative Constructions. In Causative Constructions, Reflexivization to ny tena-

ny is restricted to the next lower clause since:

297

in Causative Constructions not involving Fusion (See Chapter One, Section 5, for further details), if the trigger and its victim are separated by an intermediate clause, the output is irretrievably ungrammatical; and in Causative Constructions involving Fusion, embedding of another Causative predicate is not permitted, so that there is no possibility of having Reflexivization apply beyond the next lower clause.

4.4.2.5.1 Evidence for Boundedness from Directive Causatives. The first two sequences below involving the "coercive" and the "permissive" Directive constructions show that when the trigger and its victim have an intermediate cycle separating them, the output is irretrievably ungrammatical and cannot receive any interpretation whatsoever:

(109)a. *Navelan'

i X n-anp-amono

ny tenany^ an'i P Rj. P Rj.

was-allcwed-by f past-caus-kill self

b. /[ gl Namela an-dRj [ g 2 n-anp -[ g3 amono ny tenan'i f allowed Rj past-caus-kill the body-of J^

1 P

S3]
Rj

S2J

1 J

i SlVJi

(intended reading for a. and b.) *"Ji allowed R to have P kill herselfi",i.e. "Ji allowed R to have P kill heri."

298

(110)a. *Noteren' was-forced-by

i J. n-airp-amono

ny tenany^ an'i p r. selfi


p

f past-caus-kill

b. /[ gl Nanery an-dRj [ g 2 n-amp-[ S 3 amono ny tenan' i forced Rj past-caus-kill the body-of

1 P

Bj S2l Rj

1 J

i ]/ Ji

(intended reading for a. and b.) *"Ji forced R to have P kill herself', i.e. "Ji forced R to have P kill heri."

(111)a.

N - anp - amono ny tenanyi past-caus-kill

an'i P i J ^ p J^

the body-of-her^

b. /[ gl N - anp -[ g 2 amono ny tenan'i Ji i P g 2 ] i Ji]/ past-caus - kill the body-of J^ P Ji

(actual interpretation for a. and b.) *"Ji had P kill herselfi", "Ji had P kill heri."
i,e

'

Yet, when the trigger and its victim are in two adjacent clauses, as in (111), the output is grammatical. Notice that in both (109)a. and (110)a., there is only a sequence of three NPs following the coiplex Causative predicate, and that the Unlike-Su Constraint operative in "neutral" Directive Constructions is

respected in both, as is apparent in the lowest and the next-tolowest cycles in (109)b. and (110)b.

299 4.4.2.5.2 Evidence for Boundedness from Other Causatives. A Causative predicate involving Fusion, as explained in Chapter One, Section 5, does not allow embedding of another Causative predicate however, see exceptions below in 4.4.2.5.3 and under Section 6.2.0 of Chapter One.

(112) a.

Hianatra will-study

i Paoly. Paul

"Paul will study."

b.

H - amp - ianatra fut-caus-study

an'i Paoly i Jaona. Paul John

"John will cause Paul to study", i.e. "John will teach Paul."

c. *N-amp-amp-ianatra

an'i Paoly an'i Jaona Rakoto. Paul John Rakoto

past-caus-caus-study

"Rakoto had John cause Paul to study", i.e. "Rakoto had John teach Paul."

d.

Nasain-dRakoto

n-amp-ianatra an'i Paoly i Jaona. Paul John

was-told-by-Rakoto past-caus-study

"John was told by Rakoto to cause Paul to study", i.e. "Rakoto had John teach Paul."

Again, the ungrammaticality of the sentence (112)c. cannot be attributed to the presence of an exceptionally heavy sequence of four NPs since it only has three. Furthermore, the Unlike-Su Constraint is respected since the three NPs do not have the same

300

referent: Malagasy has recourse to the alternative strategy using asaina "be-told-to" in the main clause, as seen in (112)d. if ^

bedding of another Causative is not possible, then there should be no possibility of having the trigger of Reflexivization and its victim separated by an intermediate clause. From this, it can be inferred that in a Causative Construction, Reflexivization can only apply into the next lower clause.

4.4.2.5.3 Apparent Counter-Examples. Hie one exception to the general rule stated above, relative to the possibility of embedding another Causative under a matrix Causative predicate, involves the finite set of non-Psychological root passives of the type of vaky "broken." As the following set of examples show, such predicates can be doubly embedded:

(113) a.

Vaky

ny fitaratra/* i Paoly. Paul

broken the glass / *

"The glass/*Paul is broken."

H - am- (v)aky ny

fitaratra

i Paoly. Paul

fut-caus-broken the glass

"Paul will cause the glass to be broken", i.e. "Paul will break the glass."

N - anp - am - (v)aky ny

fitaratra an'i Paoly i Jaona. Paul John

past-caus-caus-broken the glass

"John had Paul cause the glass to be broken", i.e. "John had Paul break the glass."

301

(114)a.

M - i - verina

ny tantara.

pres-stative-repeat the history "History is repetitive", i.e "History repeats itself."

b. *M - am - (v) erina tenai ny tantara^ pres-caus-repeat self^ the history^ "History repeats itself."

Even the behavior of sentences like (113) c. constitutes a piece of indirect evidence in favor of the boundedness of Reflexivization since the root passive being non-Psychological, it will not take an animate Su, as can be inferred from the relevant portion of (113) a. Now, in Malagasy, the trigger of Reflexivization is restricted to animate NPs, as can inferred from the ungranniaticality of (114)b. and the grammaticality of sentences of the type of (60)b.

Section 5

Reflexivization and Pronominalization

5.0

Introduction. Section 5 will demonstrate that Reflexivization and

Pronominalization are in complementary distribution with respect to the clausematiness condition and the degree of fusion of the higher and the lower predicates in the case of bi-sentential sources.

302

1. Hie victim shows up as tena - when both the trigger and its victim are clausemates, either initially, as in non-Causative constructions; -or derived, as in the Manipulative or Abilitative Causative Constructions, both involving maximal fusion. In both cases, there is the proviso that the victim be a DO, but not an IO or an Oblique. 2. Hie victim ends up as ny tenany -when both the trigger and its victim are clausemates, either initially, as in non-Causative constructions, but the victim is an IO or an Oblique (exclusive of Causal-Oblique, See Chapter Five on Passivization); and -when the trigger and its victim are not clausemates, either only initially, as in the case of typical Raising-to-DO verbs (See 4.1.3.1) or in that of the "neutral" Directive (See Section 3), or always so, as in the case of the Causal-Oblique Causative. 3. Hie victim shows up as 0/tena/ny tenany/izy, i.e. optionally as a pronoun (See Chapter Four, Section 1, for further details).

5.1

Assumptions. In the present study about Reflexivization in Malagasy,

the following type of structure has been factored out since the apparent victim does not fit into the prototypical case:

(115)a.

Mikarakara

ny tenany^

fatratra i Jeanne^. Jeanne ^

takes-care-of the body-of-hef indeed

" Jeanne^ takes good care of her^ own body."

303

b.

Mikarakara takes-care-of

tenai self.^

fatratra i Jeannei. indeed Jeanne

"Jeanne takes good care of herself."

in (115)a., ny tenany refers exclusively to Jeanne's body, whereas this is not the case in (115) b. Therefore, in the first sequence, there is a distinction between Jeanne as a person and her body. This is a case of what was referred to as Displacement, which makes the sentence under consideration Marked, therefore, less basic.

5.2

The Form of the Victim of Reflexivization. The victim of Reflexivization shows up as tena when

both the trigger and its victim are clausemates, either initially in non-Causative constructions or derived in the Manipulative and Abilitative Causatives.

5.2.1

Non-Causative Construction Environment. The victim ends up as tena when both the trigger and

its victim are clausemates initially in non-Causative constructions :

(116) a.

Namita-tena^ i paoly^. deceived-self, Paull l "Paul, deceived himself^"

b. /[Namitaka an'i Paoly^ ^ Paolyj_]/. deceived Paul^ Paul^

304

(117)a.

Nikasa hanavo-tena^

P(aoly)

intended will-save-self^ p(aul)^ "P(aul) ^ intended to save himself^"

b. /tSx Nikasa [S2 hanavotra an'i P^ i P^] i P^]/. intended will-save P^ p^ Pi

The underlying sequences corresponding to the a. sentences are represented in b. in both instances, the trigger and its victim show up in the same clause. The example (116)a. is a simplex sentence; (117)a., a complex one. (See other exanples in Section 2). In (116), the verb ends up with a final syllable in ka so the DO tena undergoes Cbject-Incorporation into the verb. This process is activated whenever the verbal predicate ends up in ka, tra, or na. As a result, the compound turns into an intransitive verb.

5.2.2

Causative Construction Environments. The victim goes into tena when both the trigger.and its

victim become clausemates after Clause-Union, as in the case of the Manipulative and the Abilitative Causatives.

(118) a.

N-anp-ijaly past-caus-suffer

tena.j/*ny tenany^ i Jeanne^. self^ Jeanne^

"Jeanne^ made herself suffer," i.e. "Jeanne was a masochist."

b. /[N-airp-[ijaly an'i Ji/*ny tenan'i J i i jy i ji]/. past-caus-suffer J^ the body-of J^ J^ J_ j

305

(119)a.

N-ank-adala

tena^/*ny tenany^

i Jeanne^,

past-caus-crazy self^the body-of-he^ Jeannej "Jeanne worried about every trifle."

b. /[N-ank-[adala

i J.j/*ny tenan'

i J^ i J ] / . J

past-caus-crazy J i the body-of-her

(120) a.

N-aha-tafita

tena./*ny tenanyi

i Paolyj.

past-caus-successful self/ the body-of-her^ Pauf "Pauf caused himself to be successful", i.e. "Pauf managed to achieve his^ goal(s)."

b. /[N-aha-[tafita past-caus-successful

i Pi/*ny tenan' i Pi] i Pi]/, P^/*the body-of P^ P^

All the portions of the a. sequences comprising ny tenany are ungrammatical in the relevant reading, and all the b. sequences with ny tenany are simply not acceptable since, as was pointed out in 4.1.3.3, only ny tena-ko "my humble person", in the first person singular, is possible just in case the lower clause has a Direct Peeling representation. This does not apply to the Manipulative and the Abilitative Causatives.

5.3

Hie Victim of Reflexivization as Ny tenany. The victim of Reflexivization goes into ny tenany in

the following cases: - obligatorily, when the trigger and its victim are derived clausemates, as in the "neutral" Directive Causative Constructions; and

306 - optionally, when the trigger and its victim are not clausemates, as in the case of typical Raising-to-DO verbs.

5.3.1

Ny-Tenany-Reflexive and the "Neutral" Directive. Ny tenany is obligatory in the "neutral" Directive

Causative Construction:

(121)a.

N - anp - amono ny tenany^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne^ past-caus-kill self^ Paul Jeanne^

"Jeanne^ caused Paul to kill herself^", i.e. "Jeannei caused Paul to kill heri."

b. *N - anp - amono azyi past-caus-kill heri

an'i Paoly i Jeanne^. Paul Jeannei

(no interpretation whatsoever)

c. *N - anp - amono 0^ past-caus-kill 0^

an'i Paoly i Jeanne^. Paul Jeannei

(no interpretation whatsoever)

d. *N - anp - amono tena^ past-caus-kill self^

an'i Paoly i Jeanne^. Paul Jeanne^

(coreferentiality exclusively with Causee)

The ungrammaticality of (121) b. with azy coreferential with the higher Su i Jeanne, (121)c. with a coreferential and (121)d.

with a coreferential tena, proves that only a coreferential ny tenany is possible.

307 Ny-Tenany-Reflexive and Raising-to-DO Environment. Ny tenany is optional with a typical Raising-to-DO verb:

5.3.2

(122)a.

Nilaza ny tenanyi ho said selfi

mahay

i Paolyi.

corrp intelligent Paul^

b.

Nilaza azy^ said him. l

ho

mahay

i Paoly

comp intelligent Paul^

c.

Nilaza said

ho

i Paoly-, i comp intelligent zero-pro^ paul^

mahay

d.

Nilaza tenai said self^

ho

mahay

i Paoly^

coup intelligent Paul^

(same reading for entire subset) "Paul^ considers himself^ intelligent."

In (122) a. and (122) b., the word order of the embedded clause is Marked, i.e. SV(O); the retention of pronoun strategy is used, this contrasts with (122)c., where the embedded clause has the Unmarked V(0)S order, and therefore, the zero-pronoun. (For further details, see Chapter Pour on Pronominalization). This suggests that the embedded i Paoly was in the Su position underlyingly in the sentence (122)c. Last, notice (122)d., where the victim is tena. Thus, the full range of options is possible under a typical Raising-to-DO verb like milaza: 0, tena, ny tenany, and azy, all of them with a coreferential reading with i Paoly.

308

5.3.3

Alternation Ny Tenany/Azy. Ny tenany alternates with azy in the Causal-oblique

Construction, but not with 0 nor with tena; ^

(123)a.

Nanao izay n-aha-soa did

ny tenany^ i Paoly self^ Paul^

what past-caus-good

b.

Nanao izay n-aha-soa did

azy^

i paoly^. i Paul^

what past-caus-good him i Oi

c. *Nanao izay n-aha-soa did

i Paolyi. Pauli

what past-caus-good zero-pro^

d. *Nanao izay n-aha-soa did

tena^

i Paolyi. Pauli

what past-caus-good self^

(relevant meaning for entire subset) "Paul^ did whatever caused hin^ to be good", i.e. "Paul^ did whatever was good for himi."

5.4.1

Non-Relevance of the "Precede" Parameter. The grammatically pattern from non-Causative con-

structions provides evidence that supports the view that the "precede" parameter Malagasy. is not relevant for Reflexivization in

(124)

N-ikasa

h-amono tena^ Oi i

Paolyi.

past-intend fut-kill self^

<aeic pauli

"Pauli intended to kill himselfi-"

309 N-anery an'i Paolyi h-amono tenai 0 i i Jaona.

(125)

past-force deic Pauli

fut-kill selfi deic John

"John forced Pauli to kill himself^"

(126)

N-anao ny tenanyi tsy ho past-do self^

zavatra i

Paolyj.

not coup thing deic Paul^

"Paul^ considered himself^ not to be a thing," i.e. "Paul showed total abnegation."

(127)

Fantatra fa known

n-amono

tena^ i

Paoly

comp past-kill self^ deic Paul^

"It is a (well-known) fact that Pauli killed himself ..y

The sentence (124) involves Equi-1, tiereas (125), (126) and (127) trigger Equi-2, Raising-to-DO and Raising-to-Su, respectively. In all of these examples, the victim precedes its trigger, yet all of them turn out to be perfectly grammatical.

5.4.2

Non-Relevance of the "Precede" Parameter for Causative constructions. Ihe following data, where all of the Causative con-

structions of the language interact with Reflexivization, prove that the "precede" parameter is not relevant either.

(128)

Nanao

izay nannnoan'

i Paoly^ tena^ i Jaona. John

past-do camp past-circ-kill-by Paul^ self^ "John did so that Pauli ould kill himself^" i.e. "John engineered Paul's death."

310 (129) N-anery past-force an'i Paoly^ h-amono tena^ O^ i Jaona. John

Pau^ fut-kill selfi

"John forced Paul. to kill himself^."

(130)

N-amela past-let

an'i Paoly^ h-amono

tenai 0^ i Jaona. John

Pauli fut-kill self^

"John allowed Paul^ to kill himself

(131)

N-amp-amono

tena^ an'i Paoly^ i Jaona. Paul^ John

past-caus-kill self^

"John had Pauli kill himselfi."

(132)

Tsy n-aha-fehy

tena^ i Paoly Paul^

not past-caus-control selfi

"Paul^ did not manage to control himself^"

(133)

Ny tenany^ ihany no n-ampa-sosotra an'i Paoly self ^ only part past-caus-angry Pauli

"It was with himself^ that Pauli was angry."

(134)

Ny tenany^ ihany no n-aha-tsiravina an'i Paoly selfi only part past-caus-fed-up Paul^

"It was with himself ^ that Pauli was fed 15)."

(135)

Ny tenanyi ihany no n-an-dreraka self^

an'i Paoly^ PauL^

only part past-caus-tired

"It was of himself^ that Paul^ was tired," i.e. "Paul^ was tired of himself."

311

(136)

Ny tenanyi ihany no n-anka-leo self^ only part past-caus-tired

an'i Paoly.^. Paulj_

"It was of himself^ that Pauli has had enough," i.e. "Pauli has had enough of himself."

All of the Causative constructions of Malagasy are represented in the above data, where the victim precedes its trigger except in (128); yetf all of the sentences are perfectly grammatical: from (128) to (136), we have the "persuasive," the "coercive," the "permissive," the "neutral" Directives as well as the Abilitative aha, the Causal amp(a), aha, an(a) and ank(a) constructions.

5.5.1

Relevance of the "Command" Parameter in non-Causative constructions. The grammaticality pattern emerging from the following

minimal pairs, which involve Equi-1, Equi-2 and Raising-to-DO, establishes the relevance of the "command" parameter in nonCausative constructions.

(137)a.

Ny tenany^ ihany no no-kasa-in' i Paoly^ ho-vono-ina. self^ only part pass-intend-by Paul^ pass-kill-by

"It was himself^ that was intended by Pauli to be killed," i.e. "Pauli intended to kill himself

b. *I Paoly^ ihany no no-kasa-in' ny tenany^ ho-vono-ina. Paul^ only part pass-intend-by self^ (no interpretation whatsoever) pass-kill-by

312

(138)a.

Ny tenany^ ihany no no-tere-n' self^

i J ho-vono-in' i p._

only part pass-force-by J pass-kill-by p.

"It was himself^ that was forced by J to be killed by Pi," i.e. "J forced P i to kill himself^"

b. *I P. ihany no no-tere-n'

i J ho-vono-in' ny tenany^.

P^ only part pass-force-by J pass-kill-by self^ (no interpretation whatsoever)

(139)a.

Ny tenany^ ihany no n-antena-in' i J ho-vono-in'i p^. self^ only part pass-expect-by J pass-kill-by p^

"It was himself^ that was expected by J to be killed by P-," i.e. "J expected P- to kill himself.." l i J b. *I P^ ihany no n-antena-in' i J ho-vono-in'ny tenany^. P^ only part pass-expect-by J pass-kill-by self^

In (137), we know that in an Equi-1 construction, as shown in 4.1.1, the victim of Reflexivization was actually commanded by a trigger which deleted subsequently: the normal output of such a derivation is (137)a., whereas (137)b. represents a case where the trigger never governed its victim. Likewise, in (138)a., the trigger also commanded its victim, prior to the application of Equi-2, as explained in 4.1.2; contrasting thus with (138)b., where the trigger never commanded its victim at any stage of the derivation. As for (139)a., Raising-to-DO has applied on the DO ny tenany to lift it from the lower into the main clause, the underlying sequence being of the type argued for in 4.1.3 for

313

this type of construction; this accounts for the ungranmaticality of (l39)b., where the trigger does not command its victim. Finally, Faising-to-Su constructions are not relevant to the point at issue here.

S.i,2

Relevance of the "Command" Parameter for Causatives. The following data involving all of the Causative con-

structions of this language prove that the "command" parameter is crucial for an adequate account of the Reflexivization process in Malagasy.

(140)a.

N-anao izay n-anono-an'

i P^ n y tenany^ i J. selfi J

past-do comp past-circ-kill-by p^ (Indirect Causation)

"J did so that P i would kill himselfi," i.e. "J engineered P's death."

b. *N-anao izay n-amono-an'

ny tenany^ an'i P^ i J. P^ J

past-do comp past-circ-kill-by self^ (no interpretation whatsoever)

(141)a.

N-anery an'i Pj h-airono ny tenanyi i J. past-force P i fut-kill selfi J

"J forced P i to kill himself^"

b. *N-anery

ny tenanyi h-anono an'i P i i J. fut-kill Pt j

past-force self.

(no interpretation whatsoever)

314

(142)a.

N-amela an'i Pi h-amono ny tenanyi i j. past-let P A fut-kill selfi J

"J allowed P i to kill himselfi-"

b. *N-amela ny tenanyi h-amono an'i P^ i J. past-let selfi fut-kill Pi J

(no interpretation whatsoever)

(143)a. ?N-amp-amoho

ny tenany^ an'i Pi i J. Pi J

past-caus-kill sel^ "J had P t kill himself

b. *N-amp-amono

an'i P^ ny tenanyi i J. Pi selfi J

past-caus-kill

(no interpretation whatsoever)

(144) a.

Tsy n-aha-fehy

ny tenanyi i J i# ^

not past-caus-control self^

"Ji did not manage to control himselfi."

b. *Tsy n-aha-fehy

an'i J i ny tenanyi Ji selfi

not past-caus-control

(no interpretation whatsoever)

(145)a.

Ny tenany^ ihany no n-ampa-sosotra an'i Piselfi only part past-caus-angry Pi

"It was with himselfi that Pi was angry."

315

b. *I

ihany no n-arnpa-sosotra ny tenany^. P^ only part past-caus-angry self^

(no interpretation whatsoever)

(146)a.

Ny tenany^ ihany no n-aha-tsiravina an'i P^. self^ only part past-caus-fed-up P^

"It was with himself ^ that P^ was fed up."

b. *I P^ ihany no n-aha-tsiravina ny tenany^. P^ only part past-caus-fed-up self^ (no interpretation whatsoever)

(147)a.

Ny tenany^ ihany no n-an-dreraka an'i Piself^ only part past-caus-tired P^

was tired of himself

(148)a.

Ny tenany^ ihany no n-anka-leo self ^

an'i PiP^

only part past-caus-tired

"P^ has had enough of himself^."

b. *I Pj ihany no n-anka-leo P^ only part past-caus-tired (no interpretatiai whatsoever)

ny tenany^. self^

Prom (140) to (148), we have the "persuasive," the "coercive," the "permissive," the "neutral" Directive Causatives, followed by the Abilitative and the Causal amp (a), aha, an (a) and ank (a). In all of the a. versions, the trigger commands its victim, whereas in all of the b. sequences it does not. Thus, in all of the a.

316 constructions, the underlying trigger occupies the Su position at the time Reflexivization applies. This supports the view that the relevant underlying representation for a Causal construction is a structure comprising ny tenany in a Causal-Oblique position. A Raising rule would then turn ny tenany into the Su of the higher clause and the original Su would be demoted to DO position on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy.

5.6.1

Distribution of Independent Pronouns on Hierarchy. The independent and clitic forms of Pronominalization

are in complementary distribution on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy. Confining ourselves to human triggers, it transpires that an independent form can show up as a Su, a DO, an 10 and a Beneficiary-Oblique, whereas a clitic is mandatory when the victim occupies a Source-Oblique, a Comitative-Oblique or a Genitive position.

(149)a.

N-itsangana i

Paoly.

past-stand deic Paul "Paul was standing."

b.

N-itsangana izy. past-stand he "He was standing."

c. *N-itsangana-ny. past-stand-clitic (no interpretation whatsoever)

317

(150)a.

N-itady

an'i

Jeanne i

Paoly.

past-search deic Jeanne deic Paul "Paul was looking for Jeanne."

b.

N-itady

azy i

Paoly.

past-search her deic Paul "Paul was looking for her."

c. *N-itadi-ny

Paoly.

past-search-clitic deic Paul (no interpretation whatsoever)

(151)a.

N-anome

boky an'i

Jeanne i

Paoly.

past-give book

deic Jeanne deic Paul

"Paul gave (a) book(s) to Jeanne."

b.

N-anome

boky azy

i Paoly.

past-give book her deic Paul "Paul gave her (a) book(s)."

c. *N-anome

boki-ny

Paoly.

past-give book-clitic deic Paul (no interpretation whatsoever)

(152)a.

N-anomana

sakafo ho an'i

Paoly i

Jeanne.

past-prepare food

for deic Paul deic Jeanne

"Jeanne was preparing food for Paul."

318

b.

N-anomana

sakafo ho azy

i Jeanne,

past-prepare food

for him deic Jeanne

"Jeanne was preparing food for him,i.e. Paul ."

c. *N-anomana

sakafo.(ho)-ny

Jeanne.

past-prepare food

for-clitic deic Jeanne

(no interpretation whatsoever)

In (149), the relevant position is a Su and substitution of an independent pronoun for the NP i Paoly in the a. sequence yields the grammatical sentence (149)b., as opposed to (149)c., where a clitic pronoun has shown up and which results in an ungramnatical structure. In (150) and (151), the relevant positions are a DO and an 10 respectively while in (152), we have an NP in the Beneficiary Oblique. Two positions, i.e. Instrument and DirectionalOblique, which typically involve non-animate NPs, have been left out of consideration. Finally, whether we keep the ho particle in (152)c. or not, the output remains irretrievably ungrammatical and lacks interpretation.

5.6.2

Distribution of Clitics on Hierarchy. Still assuming the different types of Oblique and the

ordering proposed in Passivization, Subsection 1.3.2, we note that Manner-Oblique, locative-Oblique and Temporal-Oblique have to do with non-animate NPs and therefore do not fall under the scope of our present investigations. As for Source-Oblique, Comitative-Oblique and Genitive, the following set of sentences provides all relevant data.

319

(153)a.

Avy t-any

amin'i

Paoly ilay hevitra.

came past-from prep deic Paul the idea "Hie previously-mentioned idea came from Paul."

b. *Avy t-any

amin' azy

ilay hevitra. the idea

came past-from prep him

c.

Avy t-any

ami-ny

ilay hevitra.

came past-from prep-clitic th idea "The previously-mentioned idea came fran him."

(154)a.

N-andeha n-iaraka

t-amin'

Jeanne i Paoly.

past-go past-accompany past-with deic Jeanne deic Paul "Paul went with Jeanne."

b. *N-andeha n-iaraka

t-amin'

azy

Paoly.

past-go past-accompany past-with her deic Paul

c.

N-andeha n-iaraka

t-ami-ny

Paoly.

past-go past-acconpany past-with-clitic deic Paul "Paul went with her."

(155)a.

N-anasa

ny akanjon'

Paoly i

Jeanne,

past-wash the clothes-of deic Paul deic Jeanne "Jeanne was washing Paul's clothes."

b. *N-anasa

ny akanjon'

azy i

Jeanne,

past-wash the clothes-of him deic Jeanne

320

c.

N-anasa

ny akanjo-ny

Jeanne,

past-wash the clothes-clitic deic Jeanne "Jeanne was washing his clothes."

Hie grairmaticality pattern emerging from these sets of examples indicates that when the victim is a Source-Oblique, as in (153), a Oomitative-Oblique, as in (154), or a Genitive, as in (155), then it must show up as a clitic. The b. sequences comprising the independent form remain ungramraatical; however, there are regional dialects of Malagasy where the latter sentences would be acceptable, especially in their Colloquial variety.

5.6.3

Relationship between Clitics and the Tena/Ny Tenany Alternation. As was pointed out in 2.1.3 above, in connection with

the minimal pair made up of the sentences (39) and (40), the use of the definite article in ny tenany carries with it the im-

plication of Indirect Causation as opposed to the simple use of tena with its Contactive interpretation. This correlates with the fact that tena occupies the DO/IO position exclusively on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy, whereas in ny tena-ny, the clitic ny "of-his/hers" is in the Genitive case. This dichotomy between Indirect vs. Contactive Causation parallels the aspectual problem uncovered in 1.1.2 of Chapter One: Hie Causative1 Constructions of Malagasy, relative to "ballistic" vs. "controlled" Manipulation: in the first instance, the Agent only provides the initial impulse while in the second, he has to follow through every single phase of the action.

321 Conclusions: Granmatical Relations. It appears that the nine parameters presented in the introduction to the present chapter are indispensable for an adequate account of Reflexivization in Malagasy. Grammatical Relations have proven necessary since in this language, oily a Su can trigger Reflexivization. However, there exist a limited set of verbs like fantatra "be-known," with no corresponding active voice structures, where the trigger is either anftgentor an Experience! in the genitive. Furthermore, vdien the victim fills up the DO slot, it shows up as tena, but whenever it occupies an 10 or an Oblique position, then it surfaces as ny tenany.

6.2

Clausematiness and Fusion. In non-Causative structures, the trigger and its victim

are always clausemates, whereas in Causative constructions, Clause-Union can turn the two items into derived clausemates, and depending on the degree of fusion between the higher and the lower clauses, the output contains either tena with maximal fusion, or ny tenany with minimal fusion.

6.3

Valency of the Compound Verb. Now, the valency of the compound verb resulting from

Clause-Union seems to be limited since whenever an embedded verb takes three NP arguments on its own, the native speaker naturally resorts to an alternative strategy, which enables him/her to break -up the sequence of four consecutive arguments, substituting a non-Causative structure for the Causative construction and replacing the Ny-Tenany-Reflexive with an independent pronoun.

322

6.4

The Cyclic Convention. The Cyclic Convention, as put forth in Ross (1967) and

Baker (1978), provides a simple solution to the Ordering Paradox which results from the interaction of Reflexivization an^

Clause-Union in non-Causative constructions, on the one hand; that of Reflexivization in Causative constructions and ClauseUnion, on the other.

6.5

Boundedness and Unlike-Su Constraint. Reflexivization is a bounded rule since in the case of

tena, the trigger and its victim show up in the same clause, whereas in that of ny tenany, the victim must belong in the next lower clause, otherwise an ungrairmatical sentence ensues. In this connection and relative to the "neutral" Directive Causative, the Causee cannot have the same referent as the Causer, although the lower clause cm its own forms a fully grammatical simplex sentence and despite the fact that the "neutral" Directive amp (a) can embed any predicate, transitive or intransitive. this Unlike-Su Constraint, first proposed in Perlmutter (1968), pertains to the "neutral" Directive construction amp(a) and the Manipulative amp (a), but does not apply to Causal aha, an (a), and ank (a), judging from the grammatically pattern found in 4.2.2. The ill-formedness of a sequence containing a Reflexive in the lower clause of a Manipulative Causative can be attributed, in part, to the1 fact that typically in such a construction, the initial Su of the embedded clause is non-animate. Now, the data presented in (114) indicates that the trigger for Reflexivization in Malagasy has to be animate.

323

g.6

Hie "Command" parameter. Hie "command" parameter appears crucial in both Caus-

ative and non-Causative constructions, while the "precede" parameter turns out to be irrelevant. Hie same situation prevails with Pronominalization in this language. Hius, in a Causal Causative, it transpires that the Causer originates in the CausalOblique position before it ascends to the Su position of the complex sentence. Vfe know from Passivization in Malagasy that the cut-off point for promotion to Su on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy is the Source-Oblique, which immediately precedes the CausalOblique. Hiis suggests that the latter does not belong in the same clause as the DO or the 10, for example.

6.7

Distribution of Independent and Clitic Forms. Hie view that the Causal-Oblique and consequently,

whatever is to its right on the hierarchy do not belong in the same simplex sentence as the other, higher positions explains the distribution of independent pronouns and clitics in Malagasy. In fact, an independent pronoun can show up as a Su, a DO, an 10 or a Beneficiary-Oblique, whereas a clitic is the only form possible for an NP occupying the following positions: a Source-Oblique, a Comitative-Oblique, a Causal-Oblique and a Genitive.

CHAPTER ECUR

PRONCMXNALIZATIQN

0.1

Introduction. The main purpose of this chapter is to describe how

anaphoric pronominalization works in Malagasy, assuming that the trigger is referential1 and singular. More specifically: 1. There are four forms the victim can take: Zero-pronoun, Hay + pronoun, pronoun, and Demonstrative, these forms being in complementary distribution with respect to the syntactic positions occupied by both the trigger and its victim on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy and according to whether the latter is human, non-animate or non-human but animate. 2. Only the "command" parameter is relevant to the exclusion of the "precede" parameter. 3. Pronominalization is a cyclic rule.

0.2

Assumptions. It will be assumed that the trigger of anaphoric pro-

nominalization and its victim are in different clauses2. This

325

will have the effect of discarding constructions with an emphatic pronoun in both simplex and complex sentences:

(1)a.

IzYj no

Rakotoi.

he^ part Rakoto^ "He^ is the one^ who-^ is Rakoto^."

b.

*Rakotoi izyi. Rakotoi he^ "Hei is Bakotoi."

(2)a.

Ny m-aha-Rakotoi

azyi dia izao.

the pres-caus-Rakoto^ hirn^ part this "This is the reason why (I am saying) he^ is Rakoto^."

b.

/[gQ izao this

ny [ g 2 m-aha [ - izyi no Rakotoi]]]/. gj the pres-caus he^ part Rakotoi

The sentence (l)a. is a simplex one although the word order is Marked and the pronoun izy and Rakoto are coreferential. The sequence in (l)b. is also a simplex one but the vrord order is Unmarked and the sentence is irretrievably ungraicmatical. Now, the sentence in (2) a. is a complex one and the underlying representation proposed for it in (2)b. makes this explicit: there has been a demotion of the emphatic Su of S3 to DO along with Subject Shifting during the process of Clause-Union of S2 and S3, giving the sequence m-aha-Rakoto azy, then the portion ny m-aha-Rakoto azy is fronted with insertion of the particle dia.

326

Section 1

The Basic Process

1.0

Introduction. In Section 1, it will be shown that the four forms of

the victim enumerated in 0.1 above are in complementary distribution. Specifically: a. when both the trigger and its victim occupy the Subject position, the latter goes into Zero-pronoun obligatorily if the trigger is human, otherwise this is only a strong tendency; b. when both the trigger and its victim occupy the DO position, the latter goes into a Zero-pronoun or optionally a Pronoun if the trigger is human; now, if the trigger is animate but not human, the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun, a Pronoun, or Hay + Pronoun; but if the trigger is not animate, then the

victim goes into either a Zero-pronoun or Ilay + Pronoun; c. when both the trigger and its victim do not occupy the Su or the DO position, and if the trigger is human, then the victim goes into a Pronoun obligatorily, although this is only a strong tendency if the trigger is animate but not human; whereas when the trigger is not animate, the victim goes into Ilay + Pronoun or optionally into a Demonstrative like io "this" if the trigger is either an Oblique or a Genitive.

1.1.0

Human Trigger Assumption. Assuming that the trigger is referential, human and

singular and furthermore

327

a. if both the trigger and its victim occupy the Su position, then the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun obligatorily; b. if both the trigger and its victim occupy the DO position, then the victim goes into either a Zero-pronoun or a Pronoun optionally; and c. if both the trigger and its victim do not occupy the Su or the DO position, then the victim must surface into a pronoun.

1.1.1

Both Trigger and Victim Are Sus. When both the trigger and its victim occupy the Su

position, then the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun obligatorily:

(3) a.

N-andeha n-ianatra CK i Paoly past-go past-study CK "Paul went to study." Paul^

b.

*N-andeha n-ianatra izy^ i paoly^. past-go past-study he^ "Paul went to study." Paul^

(4) a.

N-anomboka n-ianatra CK i paoly past-begin past-study (L "Paul began to study." Paul^

b.

*N-anomboka n-ianatra izy^ i paoly^. past-begin past-study he^ "Paul began to study." Paul^

328

(5)a.

N-ikasa

(ny)

h-andeha O i i Paolyi(L Pauli

past-intend (conp) fut-go "Paul intended to go."

b.

*N-ikasa

(ny)

h-andeha izyi i Paolyi. hei Pauli

past-intend (conp) fut-go "Paul intended to go."

(6)a.

N-aniry

(ny)

h-andeha O^ i PaolyiPauli

past-wish (conp) fut-go "Paul wished to go."

b.

*N-aniry

(ny)

h-andeha izy^ i Paolyihe^ Pauli

past-wish (conp) fut-go "Paul wished to go."

(7)a.

H-iakatra eo

i Paoly^ rehefa tonga

Oi-

fut-go-up there Paul^ when

arrived Oi
arrives

"Paul^ will come up here when hei

*"

b.

*H-iakatra eo

i Paoly^ rehefa tonga

izyi-

fut-go-up there Paul^ when

arrived hei

"Pauli wiii come up here when hei arrives."

(8)a.

N-ilaza i Paolyi f a

h-andeha OiOi

past-say Pauli that fut-go

"Paul^ gaid that hei would go."

329

b.

*N-ilaza i Paolyi f a past-say Pauli

h-andeha izy^ hej

that fut-go
would

"Pauli said that hei

(9)a.

N-isotro

taoka i Paoly^^ ka

mamo Oi.

past-drink booze

Paul^ therefore drunk Oi

"Paul drank (sane) booze and, as a result, is drunk."

b.

*N-isotro

taoka i Paolyi ka Pau^

mamo izyi.

past-drink booze

therefore drunk hei

"Paul drank (sane) booze and, as a result, is drunk."

(10)a.

N-ino

i Paoly^ fa

ho afaka h-andeha Oi. fut-go Oi

past-believe Paul^ that fut can

"Paul^ believed that hei would be able to go."

b.

*N-ino

i Paoly^ f a

ho afaka h-andeha izyi. fut-go hei

past-believe Pau^

that fut can

"Paul^ believed that hei would be able to go."

(11)a.

Sosotra i Paoly^ f a angry

tsy afaka

Oi.

Paul^ since neg successful Oi

"Paul^ is/was angry because hei is/was not successful."

b.

*Sosotra i Paoly fa angry

tsy afaka

izyi.

Paul^ since neg successful hei

"Paul^ is/was angry because hei is/was not successful."

330

(12) a.

T-any

i Paolyi f a tsy t-eto

0^ ..

past-there Pauli but neg past-here Oi "Paul was there but not here."

b.

*T-any

i Paoly^ fa tsy t-eto

izy^.

past-there Paul^

but neg past-here he^

"Paul was there but not here."

In all of the sentences from (3) to (12), the trigger and its victim are Sus. When the victim surfaces as a Zero-pronoun, as in all of the a. sequences, the outputs are perfectly grammatical; tiereas when the victim shows up as a coreferential independent pronoun, as in the b. sequences, the sentences are irretrievably ungrammatical from (3) to (7), while from (8) to (12) the b. versions would be possible in either Child Speech or Foreigner Talk.

1.1.2

Both Trigger and Victim Are DOs. When both the trigger and its victim occupy the IX)

position, the latter can optionally go into either a Zero-pronoun or a Pronoun:

(13)a.

H-anampy an'i J. i P fa tsy h-ijery 0^ fotsiny. fut-help P but ng fut-look 0^ oily

"P will not cily look at J. but will also help 0^"

b.

H-anampy an'i J^ i P fa tsy h-ijery fut-help J^

azy^ fotsiny.

P but neg fut-look her^ only

"P will not only look at J i but will also help her^"

331

(14)a.

N-itady an'ilay olonai i paoly fa tsy n-ahita 0i. past-seek the personi p au i but neg past-see 0 i

"Paul looked for the person.^ but did not see him^."

b.

N-itady an'ilay olonai i Paoly fa tsy n-ahita azy^ past-seek the person Paul but neg past-see hinu

"Paul looked for the person^ but did not see hiir^."

In both (13) and (14), the trigger and its victim are simultaneously DOs. Both the a. version with the Zero-pronoun and the b. sequence with the Pronoun form are perfectly grammatical.

1.1.3.0

Both Trigger and Victim Are Neither Sus Nor DOs. When both the trigger and its victim do not occupy the

Su or the DO position, then the victim must go into a Pronoun. First, we will consider the cases where oily the trigger is a Su or a DO; then, we will look at those where only the victim is a Su or a DO; last, we will take up those where the trigger and its victim do not occupy the Su or the DO position simultaneously.

1.1.3.1

Only the Trigger Is a Su. The victim must surface into a Pronoun if only the

trigger occupies the Su position:

(15)a.

*N-ilaza i Paoly^ f a past-say Pauli

h-itory

0 i ny fokonolona.

that fut-complain 0 i the community

"Paul^ said that the community will file a complaint against him^."

332

b.

N-ilaza i Paoly f a

h-itory

azy ny fokonolona.

past-say Paul^ that fut-oomplain him^ the community "Paul^ said that the community will file a complaint against hiiiu."

(16)a.

*N-ilaza i Paoly^ fa h-anome trano past-say Paul^ that fut-give house

ny fokonolona. the community

b.

N-ilaza i Paoly^ fa h-anome trano azy^ ny fokonolona. past-say Paul^ that fut-give house him^ the community "Paul^ said that the community will give him^ a house."

(17)a.

*N-ilaza i P^ fa h-iaraka past-say P^ that fut-accompany

ny fokonolona. the community

b.

N-ilaza i P^ fa

h-iaraka

ami-ny^

ny olona.

past-say P^ that fut-accompany with-him^ the people "P^ said that the people will go with him^."

(18) a.

*N-ilaza i P^ fa

h-amonjy ny tanana-CK

ny olona.

past-say P^ that fut-help the village-his^ the people

b.

N-ilaza i P^ fa

h-amonjy ny tanana-ny^

ny olona.

past-say P^ that fut-help the village-his^ the people "Pi said that the people will help his^ village."

From (15) to (18), the trigger is a Su but not the victim. As a result, the a. sequences, where the victim shows up as a Zero-

333

pronoun, are ungrammatical in the intended reading, i.e. where the Su NP of the matrix clause is ooreferential with the Zeropronoun of the embedded clause. Now, if the victim surfaces as a pronoun, as in the b. versions, the outputs are perfectly grammatical.

1.1.3.2

Only the Trigger Is a DO.

The victim must surface into a Pronoun if only the trigger occupies the DO position:

(19)a.

*Hoe h-anampy an'i J. i p kanefa tsy nety said fut-help X p but neg accepted

t^.

b.

Hoe h-anampy an'i J^ i p kanefa tsy nety said fut-help p but

izy^.

neg accepted she^

"It is said that P would help J^ but she.^ did not accept."

(20)a.

*Hoe h-anampy an'i J. i P fa tsy h-anome vola 0^. said fut-help J^ P but neg fut-give money

b.

Hoe h-anampy an'i X said fut-help J^

i p fa tsy h-anome vola azy^. p but neg fut-give money her^

"It is said that P would help J^ but not give her^ money."

(21) a. *N-anampy an'i J^ i p na dia past-help J^

efa n-anome vola

aza. part

p although already gave money

334

b.

N-anampy an'i J^ i p na dia efa n-anome vola azy^ a z a past-help J^ p although al. gave money her^

"P helped X although he had already given her^ itDney.n

(22) a.

*N-anampy an'i J^ i p n a tsy nahavonjy ny trano-Oi aza. past-help J^ p al.neg managed-to-save the house

b.

N-anampy an'i J. i P na tsy nahavonjy ny trano-ny^ aza. past-help J^ P al.neg m.-to-s. the house-her^

"P helped J^ although he did not manage to save her^ house."

In the sentences from (19) to (22), the trigger is in the DO position, whereas the victim is a Su in (19), an 10 in (20), an Oblique in (21), and a Genitive in (22). Now, if the victim shows up as a Zero-pronoun, as in the a. versions, the sentence is irretrievably ungrammatical. By contrast, if the victim surfaces into an independent pronoun, as in the b. versions, the sequences become perfectly grammatical, this suggests that the pronoun is obligatory.

1.1.3.3

Only the Victim Is a Su. The victim must go into a Pronoun if only the victim

occupies the Su position:

(23)a.

*N-anome

boky an'i Jeanne^ i paoly kanefa mbola Jeanne^ Paul but not-yet

past-give book

335

tsy faly foana CL. neg happy at-all CL

b.

N-anome

boky an'i Jeannei i paoly kanefa mbola Jeannei paui but not-yet

past-give book

tsy faly foana izy^. neg happy at-all she^ "Paul gave Jeanne^^ (a) book(s) but shej was not yet happy."

(24) a.

*Hoe h-anampy an'i J^ i P kanefa tsy nety said fut-help J^ P but neg accepted

0_ j.

b.

Hoe h-anampy an'i J^ i P kanefa tsy nety said fut-help J^ P but

izy^.

neg accepted she^

"It is said that P will help J^ but she^ did not accept."

(25) a.

*N-andefa entana t-any amin'i Jeanne^ i Paoly past-send parcel past-to Jeanne^ Paul

kanefa mbola but

tsy faly foana (L.

not-yet neg happy at-all ( K

b.

N-andefa entana t-any amin'i Jeanne^ i Paoly past-send parcel past-to Jeanne. paul

336

kanefa mbola but

tsy faly foana izy^.

not-yet neg happy at-all she^

"Paul sent Jeannei a parcel but the latter^ was not yet happy."

(26)a.

*N-andefa ny enta-n'

i Jeanne

i Paoly na dia Paoly although

past-send the luggage-of Jeanne.^

tsy n-arisika loatra

aza (L.

neg past-eager too-much neg

b.

N-andefa ny enta-n'

i Jeanne^ i Paoly na dia Paul although

past-send the luggage-of Jeanne^

tsy n-arisika loatra

aza zy^.

neg past-eager too-much neg she^ "Paul sent Jeanne^s parcel although the latter ^ was not very eager."

In (24) the trigger is a DO, in (23) it is an 10, in (25) it is an Oblique, and in (26) it is a Genitive. On the other hand, the victim is invariably a Su. In the a. versions, the victim shows up as a Zero-pronoun and the outputs are ungrammatical; whereas in the b. sequences, the victim surfaces as a pronoun and the sentences are perfectly grammatical. This grammaticality pattern shows that Pronoun is obligatory.

1.1.3.4

Only the Victim Is a DO. The victim must go into a Pronoun if only the victim

337

occupies the DO position:

(27)a.

*N-ilaza i Paoly^ fa h-itory past-say Paul^ that fut-corrplain

0 i ny fokonolona. the community

b.

N-ilaza i Paoly^ f a h-itory

azy^ ny fokonolona.

past-say Paul^ that fut-complain him^ the c. "Paul^ said that the community will file a complaint against h i K it

(28)a.

*N-anome

boky

an'i Jeannei i paoly na dia Jeanne.^

tsy

past-give book(s)

paul although neg

n-aha-fantatra

CK tsara aza.

past-caus-known (K well neg

b.

N-anome

boky

an'i Jeanne^ i paoly na dia Jeannei

tsy

past-give book(s)

paul although neg

n-aha-fantatra

azy^ tsara aza.

past-caus-known her^ well neg "Paul gave Jeanne.^ (a) book(s) although he did not know heri very well."

(29)a.

*N-andefa entana t-any amin'i Jeanne^ i paoly past-send parcel past-there Jeanne^ paul

na dia

tsy tia CL aza.


ne g

although neg like (h

338

b.

N-andefa entana t-any amin'i Jeanne^ i paoly past-send parcel past-there Jeanne^ Paul

na dia

tsy tia azy^ aza.

although neg like her^ neg "Paul sent Jeanne ( a ) parcel(s) although he does/did

not like heri very nruch."

(30)a.

*N-andefa ny enta-n' i Jeannei i paoly na dia past-send the parcel-of Jeanne^ p au i although

tsy tia 0^ loatra

aza.

neg like 0^ too-much neg

b.

N-andefa ny enta-n' past-send the parcel-of

i Jeanne^ i Paoly na dia Jeanne^ Paul although

tsy tia azy^ loatra neg

aza.

like her^ too-much neg

"Paul sent Jeanne^'s parcel although he does/did not like her^ too much."

In (27) the trigger is a Su; in (28), an 10; in (29), an Oblique; and in (30), a Genitive. The victim is invariably a DO. In all of the a. versions, the victim shows up as a Zero-pronoun and the outputs are ungrammatical. This contrasts with the b. sequences, where the victim surfaces as a coreferential independent pronoun.

339

1.1.3.5

Trigger and Victim Other Than Su or DO. When neither the trigger nor its victim is a Su or a

CO, then the victim must be a Pronoun:

(31) a.

*N-anolotra boky past-hand book(s)

an'i J (eanne) i i p(aoly) J (eanne) ^ p(aul)

nony avy n-anolotra CK harona. after done past-hand (L basket

b.

N-anolotra boky

an'i J (eanne) ^ i p(aoly) J (eanne) ^ p(aul)

past-hand book(s)

nony avy n-anolotra azy^ harona. after done past-hand her^ basket(s) "P handed J^ a book after handing her^ a basket."

(32)a.

*N-anolotra ny boky past-hand

an'i J. i p J^ P

the book(s)

fa tsy afaka n-andefa an'ilay izy CK. but neg can past-send it CK

b.

N-anolotra ny boky

an'i J^

ip p

past-hand the book(s)

fa tsy afaka n-andefa an'ilay izy t-any ami-ny^. but neg can past-send it past-to her^

"P gave ^ the book for he could not send it to heri-"

340

(33)a.

*N-anolotra boky

an'i

i p fa tsy p but neg

past-hand book(s)

n-ahita an'ilay boky-CK. past-see the book-CK

b.

N-anolotra boky

an'i J\

i p fa tsy p but neg

past-hand book(s)

n-ahita an'ilay boki-ny^. past-see the book-her^

"P handed J\ a book since he did not see her^ book."

(34)a.

*N-andefa entana t-any amin' i J. i p past-send parcel past-to J^ P

na dia

efa

n-anome

(h boky

aza.

although already past-give (h book(s) neg

b.

N-andefa entana t-any amin'i J. i p past-send parcel past-there J^ P

na dia

efa

n-anome

azy^ boky

aza.

although already past-give her^ book(s) neg "P sent J\ a parcel although he had already given her a book."

(35)a.

*N-andefa entana t-any amin'i J. i p past-send parcel past-there J. p

341

na dia

efa

n-andefa boky

0 t aza.

although already past-send book(s) Oj neg

b.

N-andefa entana t-any amin'i J. i p past-send parcel past-there J^ p

na dia

efa

n-andefa boky t-any ami-ny^

aza.

although already past-send book past-there her^ neg "P sent J^ a parcel although he had already sent her^ a book."

(36)a.

*N-andefa ny entana t-any amin'i J. i p past-send the parcel past-there p

raha vao

nahazo

ny adiresy-(L.

as-soon-as past-receive the address-0^

b.

N-andefa ny entana t-any amin'i J. p past-send the parcel past-there J^ p

raha vao nahazo

ny adiresi-ny^.

as-soon-as past-reeive the address-her^ "P sent dress." the parcel as soon as he received her^ ad-

(37)a.

*N-anaiky

ny

h-andefa ny enta-n'i J. i p p

past-accept comp fut-send the parcel-of J.

342

na dia

efa n-anome fahafahampo Ch tamin' ny asa aza satisfaction with the work neg

although al. gave

b.

N-anaiky

ny

h-andefa ny enta-n' i J. i p p

past-accept conp fut-send the parcel-of J^

na dia

efa nanome fahafahampo azy^ tamin1ny asa aza. satisfaction her^ with the work neg

although al. gave

"P accepted to send J^'s parcel although he had lready given her^ satisfaction with the work."

(38)a.

*N-andefa ny enta-n' i J. i p past-send the parcel-of J^ p

raha vao avy n-iresaka CK. as-soon-as past-talk (h

b.

N-andefa ny enta-n'

i J. i p p

past-send the parcel-of J\

raha vao avy n-iresaka tami-ny^. as-soon-as past-talk with-her^

"P sent J^'s parcel as soon as he had talked to her^."

(39) a.

*N-andefa ny enta-n'

iJ.jp p

past-send the parcel-of J^

nony avy n-andefa ny taratasy-(h. after past-send the letter-her^

343

b.

N-andefa ny enta-n1

i J. i p p

past-send the parcel-of J^

nony avy n-andefa ny taratasi-ny^. after past-send the letter-her^

"P sent J ^ s parcel after he had sent heri letter."

From (31) to (33) the trigger is an 10, from (34) to (36) it is an Oblique, whereas from (37) to (39) it is a Genitive. In each set of sentences, the victim is an 10, as in (31), (32) and

(33), or an Oblique, as in (34), (35), and (36), or a Genitive, as in (37), (38) and (39). When the victim shows up as a Zeropronoun, as in the a. sequences, the outputs are ungrammatical, whereas when the victim surfaces as a Pronoun in its clitic form, as in all of the b. sentences, the outputs become perfectly grammatical.

344

1.1.4

Summary: Human Trigger and Pronominalization. All of the above information can be summarized in the

following manner on Table 7.

Table 7

Anaphoric Pronominalization: Human Trigger

Trigger

Victim

SO

DO

10

OBL

GEN

SO DO 10 OBL GEN

0; *Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro 0; Pro

*0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro

*0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro

*0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro

*0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro

Note; SU = Subject, DO = Direct Object, 10 = Indirect Object, OBL = Oblique, GEN = Genitive; 0 = Zero-pronoun, Pro = Pronoun, either independent or clitic; * = ungramraatical; Absence of * = Grammatical. See summary next page.

345

Assumptions: 1. Trigger = Referential; 2. Trigger = Human; 3. Trigger = Singular. Summary (see symbols p 367): a. When trigger = Su and victim = Su, victim = 0 obligatorily; > b. when trigger = DO and victim = DO, victim = O/Pro optionally; > c. when both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO, then victim Pro obligatorily, i.e.

if only trigger = Su, victim = Pro obligatorily, > if only trigger = DO, victim if only victim = Su, victim Pro obligatorily, Pro obligatorily,

if only victim = DO, victim = Pro obligatorily; > if both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO, then victim = Pro obligatorily.

1.2.0

Animate But Non-Human Trigger Assumption. Assuming that the trigger is referential, singular and

animate but not human, and furthermore: a. if both the trigger and its victim occupy the Su position, then the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun although Hay + pronoun can also be marginally acceptable; b. if both the trigger and its victim occupy the DO position, then the victim can optionally go into a Zero-pronoun, a Pronoun, or Ilay + Pronoun; and c. if both the trigger and its victim do not occupy the Su or the DO position, then the victim tends to go into a Pronoun, except:

346

- when the victim occupies the Su position, in which case, it goes into Hay + Pronoun; - or when oily the trigger or only the victim is a DO - or both the trigger and its victim are neither Su nor DO, then, the victim can optionally surface into Ilay + Pronoun.

1.2.1

Both Trigger and Victim Are Sus. When both the trigger and its victim occupy the Su

position, then the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun although ilay + Pronoun can sometimes also be marginally acceptable:

(40)a.

N-ivovo

ny alikai fa latsaka t-ao anaty lavaka 0^. into hole hei

past-bark the dog^ since fallen

"The dog^ was barking because iti fell into a hole."

b.

*N-ivovo

ny alika^ fa latsaka t-ao anaty lavaka izy^. hole hei

past-bark the dog^ since fallen into

c.

Nivovo ny alika^ fa latsaka tao anaty lavaka ilay izy^. barked the dog^ since fallen into "The dog^ was barking because iti hole it^ hole."

fel1 nto a

(41)a.

N-anomboka n-ivovo past-begin past-bark

0^ ny alikai. the dogi

"The dog began to bark."

b.

*N-anomboka n-ivovo izy^ n y alikaipast-begin past-bark he^ the dogi

347

C.

*N-ancmboka n-ivovo ilay izyi ny alika^. past-begin past-bark i. t, the dog^

"The dog began to bark."

(42) a.

N-itady

h-ihinam-bary (L ny alika^.

past-seek fut-eat-rice (h the dog^ "The dog wanted to eat rice."

b.

*N-itady

h-ihinam-bary izyi n y alikai.

past-seek fut-eat-rice he^ the dog^ "The dog wanted to eat rice."

c.

*N-itady

h-ihinam-bary ilay i y ,n y alika^ z, it^ the dog^

past-seek fut-eat-rice

"Hie dog wanted to eat rice."

(43) a.

T-any

ny alikai fa tsy t-eto but neg past-here

past-there the dog^^

"The dog was there but not here."

b.

*T-any

ny alika^ fa tsy t-eto

izy^.

past-there the dog^

but neg past-here hei

"The dog was there but not here."

c.

*T-any ,

ny alikai f a tsy t-eto

ilay izy

past-there the dog^

but neg past-here iti

"The dog was there but not here."

348

(44)a.

N-andeha n-ikarenjy (h ny alikai. past-go past-roam CK the dogi "The dog went roaming around."

b.

*N-andeha n-ikarenjy izy^^n y alikaipast-go past-roam he^ the dogi

c.

*N-andeha n-ikarenjy ilay izyi ny alikaipast-go past-roam it^ the dogi

(45)a.

N-itetika h-isambotra akoho past-plan fut-catch

ny alika^

chicken the dog^

ka n-andrasa-ko

tsara (L.

so pass-wait-for-by-me well "Hie dog^ wanted to catch (some) chickens so I watched iti carefully."

b.

*N-itetika h-isambotra akoho past-plan fut-catch

ny alikai

chicken the dog^

ka n-andrasa-ko

tsara izy^ he^

so pass-wait-for-by-me well

c.

N-itetika h-isambotra akoho past-plan fut-catch

ny alika,

chicken the dog

ka n andrasa-ko so past-wait-for-by

tsara ilay izy^ well he. l

349

"The dog^ wanted to catch (some) chickens so I watched it^ carefully."

in all of the above sentences, both the trigger and its victim occupy the Su position. NCw, when the victim surfaces as a Zeropronoun, as in the a. versions, the outputs are grammatical; but when it goes into the preferential independent pronoun izy, the sentences become ungrammatical. Hcwever, as seen in (40) c. and again in (45) c., it is also possible to have the victim go into Hay + Pronoun when there is some emphasis on the victim. Notice that in the last two sentences, the victim is in a clause which is not embedded within the matrix, as is the case with (41) and (42). The grammatically pattern above shows that the sequence with a Zero-pronoun is always grammatical when both trigger and victim are Sus, but that it can sometimes go into Ilay + Pronoun since native speakers' judgments vary.

1.2.2

Both Trigger and Victim Are DOs. When both the trigger and its victim occupy the DO

position, then the victim can optionally go into a Zero-pronoun, a Pronoun, or Ilay + Pronoun:

(46)a.

Tokony h-androaka ny alika^ i paolyj should fut-chase the dog^ Paulj

kanefa m-atahotra but

0^ 0j.

pres-afraid 0^ 0j

"Paul should chase the dogi, but is afraid of( hin^)."

350

b.

Tokony h-androaka ny alika^ i paolyj should fut-chase the dogi Paulj

kanefa m-atahotra but

azy^ Oj.

pres-afraid-of h i u Oj ir

"Paul should chase the dog^ but is afraid of him^.'

c.

Tokony h-androaka ny alka^ i paolyj should fut-chase the dogi paulj

kanefa nt-atahotra but

ilay izyi Oj. iti Oj

pres-afraid-of

"Paul should chase the dog^, but is afraid of iti-"

(47)a.

Tsy n-ikarakara

ny alika^ i Paolyj Paulj

neg past-take-care-of the dog

fa tena

tsy n-iraharaha 0 i O . j0 i Oj

but really neg past-care

"Paul did not feed the dog^, and did not care about (hirr^)."

b.

Tsy n-ikarakara

ny alika^ i paoly Oj Paul Oj

neg past-take-care-of the dog

fa tena

tsy n-iraharaha azy.^ Oj. hinu Oj

but really neg past-care

"Paul did not feed the dog^ and did not care about him.."

351

c.

Tsy n-ikarakara

ny alika^ i p(aoly) j p(aul)j

neg past-take-care-of the dog^

fa tena

tsy n-iraharaha ilay izy^ Oj. it^ Oj

but really neg past-care

"P did not feed the dogi and did not care about it^"

(48)a.

Hoe h-anampy ny soavaly^ i Pj said fut-help the horse^ Pj

fa tsy hoe h-ijery 0 ^ fotsiny tsy akory Oj. . but neg said fut-look 0 i only neg at-all Oj

"P was supposed to help the horse^ and not just look at (him^)."

b.

Hoe h-anampy ny soavaly^ i Pj said fut-help the horse Pj

fa tsy hoe h-ijery

azy^ fotsiny tsy akory Oj. neg at-all Oj

but neg said fut-look-at hirn^ only

"P was supposed to help the horse^ and not just look at him^."

c.

Hoe h-anampy ny soavaly^ i Pj fa tsy said fut-help the horse Pj but neg

hoe h-ijery said fut-look-at

ilay i2yi fotsiny tsy akory Oj. iti only neg at-all Oj

352

"P was supposed to help the horse and not just look at it. "

In the sentences from (46) to (48), the trigger is a DO and the victim is also a DO. The three versions, a. with Zero-pronoun, b. with azy, and c. with ilay + izy, yield grammatical sequences, it can be concluded that the choice is free between these three forms. However, the c. version appears to be the most natural, whereas the b. sentence sounds somewhat unnatural without a more elaborate context and the a. version is ambiguous between one interpretation where the Zero-pronoun refers to an antecedent in the sentence and another where the Zero-pronoun refers to the overall situation and not just to a specific antecedent.

1.2.3.1

Only the Trigger Is a Su. When cnly the trigger occupies the Su position, the

victim goes into Ilay + Pronoun obligatorily:

(49)a.

*N-anome

vary ny alika^ i Paoly fa

naona CK.

past-give rice the dog^

Paul since hungry C K

"Paul gave the dogi some rice since he^ was hungry."

b.

*N-anome

vary ny alika^ i Paoly fa

naona izy^.

past-give rice the dog^

Paul since hungry he^

"Paul gave the dog^ some rice since he^ was hungry."

c.

N-anome

vary ny alika^ i Paoly fa

naona ilay izy^. t^

past-give rice the dogi "Paul gave the dog. s o m

Paul since hungry


r i c e s i n c e it .

hungry .

353

(50)a.

*N-iafina tamin'ny alika_L i paoly fa past-hide from the dogi

masiaka

0i.

Paul since ferocious 0 i

"Paul was hiding from the dogi for hei was ferocious."

b.

*N-iafina tamin'ny alikai i Paoly fa past-hide from the dogi

masiaka izy^

Paul since ferocious he^

"Paul was hiding from the dog. for he^ was ferocious."

c.

N-iafina tamin'ny alika., i Paoly fa masiaka ilay izy^ past-hide from the dog^ Paul since f. it^

"Paul was hiding from the dog^ for it^ was ferocious."

(51)a.

*N-itsaha-n' i Paoly ny rambo-n'ny alika^ ka nivovo 0^ past-tread-by Paul the tail-of the dog^ so barked "Paul was walking on the doge's tail, so he^ barked."

b.

*N-itsaha-n'i Paoly ny rambo-n'ny alika^ ka nivovo izy^ past-tread-by Paul the tail-of the dog^ so barked he^ "Paul was walking on the doge's tail, so he^ barked."

c.

Nitsahan'i P ny rambon' ny alika^ ka nivovo ilay izy^ tread-by P the tail-of the dog^ so barked it^

"P was walking on the dog^s tail, so it barked."

The sentences from (49) to (51) have their

trigger occupying

non-Su position: an 10 in (49), an Oblique in (50), and a Geni tive in (51). Hie a. sentences, where the victim goes into Zero-pronoun, are irretrievably ungrammatical and, in fact, can

354

not be interpreted (only the intended meaning provided); likewise for the b. sequences, which however are conceivable in Child Speech or Foreigner Talk. By contrast, the c. sequences with the victim showing up as ilay + Pronoun are perfectly granmatical.

1.2.3.2

Only the Trigger Is a DO. When only the trigger is a DO, the victim can optional-

ly surface into Ilay + Pronoun except when the latter is a Su, in which case it is obligatory:

(52)a.

*Nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa tsy nety chased the dog.

nandeha 0^. 0\

p but neg accepted went

"p chased the dog^ but the latterdid not yield."

?*Nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa tsy nety nandeha izy^. chased the dog^ p but neg acc. went he^

"p chased the dogif but the latter^ did not yield."

c.

Nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa tsy nety nandeha ilay izy^ chased the dog^ P but neg acc. went
ifc

"P chased the dog , but the latterdid not yield." i (53)a. Tia handroaka ny alika^ i p kanefa matahotra 0^. want will-chase the dog^ p but afraid

"P wants to chase the dogit but is afraid of hirn^."

Tia handroaka ny alika^ i p kanefa matahotra azy^. want will-chase the dog^ p but afraid him^

"P wants to chase the dog^ but is afraid of hin^."

355

C.

Tia handroaka ny alikai i p kanefa matahotra ilay izy. w. will-chase the dogi p but afraid it^

"P wants to chase the dogi, but is afraid of iti."

(54)a.

*Tsy nandroaka ny alikai i p fa nanome vary neg chased the dogi p but gave rice

"P did not chase the dog^, but gave him^ rice."

b.

Tsy nandroaka ny alika.^ i p fa nanome vary azy^ neg chased the dog^ p but gave rice him^

"P did not chase the dog^, but gave hinii rice."

c.

Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa nanome vary ilay izy^. neg chased the dog^ p but gave rice it^

"P did not chase the dog^, but gave it^ rice."

(55)a.

*Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa niafina 0 ^ .. neg chased the dog.^ p but hid 0^ .

"P did not chase the dog^, but hid from hirn^."

b.

Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i P fa niafina tami-ny^. neg chased the dog^ p but hid from-him^

"P did not chase the dog^, but hid from him^."

c.

Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa niafina tamin'ilay izy neg chased the dog^ p but hid from it^

"P did not chase the dog^ but hid from iti."

356

(56)a.

*Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa nikitika ny rambo-0.. neg chased the dog^ p but touched the tail-his.

"P did not chase the dog^ but touched hisi tail."

b.

Tsy nandroaka ny alikai i p fa nikitika ny rainbo-ny^. neg chased the dog^ p but touched the tail-his^

"P did not chase the dog.,, but touched his.^ tail."

c.

Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa nikitika neg chased the dog^ p but touched

ny rambon' ilay izy^. the tail-of it i "P did not chase the dog , but touched its^ tail." i Except for (53), in the sentences from (52) to (56), oily the trigger is a DO. Furthermore, in (52), the victim is a Su, and only the sequence (52) c. with Ilay + Pronoun is perfectly grammatical. In (54), the victim is an 10 and, as a result, both (54)b. and (54)c. are grammatical. Likewise, in (55), where the victim is an Oblique, both (55)b. and (55)c., are grammatical. In (56), with the victim in the Genitive case, both (56)b. and (56)c. are grammatical. This subset of sentences contrast with (53), which has its victim in the DO position with the predicate matahotra "be-afraid-of (something)" and which allows the coreferential Zero-pronoun, as in (53)a., along with the other two options in (53)b. and (53)c.

357

1.2.3.3

Only the Victim Is a DO. When only the victim is a DO, then it can optionally

surface into Ilay + Pronoun, except when the trigger is a Su, in which case it is obligatorily a Pronoun:

(57)a.

*Nivovo ny alika^ f a

nitoraka

Oi ny ankizy.

barked the dogi since threw-stone Oi the child(ren) "The dogi barked since the child threw stones at himi."

b.

Nivovo ny alikai f a

nitoraka

azyi ny ankizy.

barked the dogi since threw-stone h r i the child (ren) iri "The dogi barked since the child threw stones at himi."

c.

?Nivovo ny alika^ fa nitoraka (an')ilay izyi ny ankizy. barked the dogi s. threw-st. iti the child

"The dog^ barked since the child threw stones at iti-"

(58)a.

*Nanome vary ny alkaj^ i p rehefa avy namaha Oigave rice the dog^ p after done untied Oi

"P gave the dogi rice after untying himi."

b.

Nanome vary ny alikai i p rehefa avy namaha azyi. gave rice the dog.^ p after done untied himi

"P gave the dogi rice after untying himi."

c.

Nanome vary ny alikai i p rehefa avy namaha ilay izyigave rice the dogi p after done untied iti

"P gave the dogi rice after untying it^"

358

(59) a.

*Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i p rehefa avy nitoraka 0 ^ hid from the dog.^ p after done threw-st C^

"P hid from the dog^ after throwing stones at him

b. . Niafina tamin'ny alika.^ i p rehefa avy nitoraka azy^. hid from the dog^ p after done threw-st himi

"P hid fran the dog^ after throwing stones at himi."

c.

Niafina tamin'ny alka^ i p rehefa avy hid from the dog^ p after done

nitoraka (an') ilay izy^ threw-stone it,

"P hid from the dogi after throwing stones at iti-"

(60)a.

*Nanitsaka ny rambo-n'ny alikai i P no sady nandaka Oi. trod the tail-of the dog.^ p also kicked Oi

"p stepped on the dog^s tail and kicked himi-"

b.

Nanitsaka ny rambon'ny alika^ i P no sady nandaka azy^. trod the tail-of the dogi P also kicked hinii

"P stepped oi the dog^s tail and kicked himi-"

c.

Nanitsaka ny rambon'ny alika^ i p no sady nandaka trod the tail-of the dog.^ p also kicked

(an') ilay izyi. i "P stepped on the doge's tail and kicked iti-"
ifc

359

In

(57), the trigger is a Su, and as the gramraaticality pattern

of this subset shows, oily a Pronoun is possible: (57)b. is perfectly grammatical, whereas (57)c. is marginally so. In (58), the trigger is an 10 while in (59) and (60), it is respectively an Oblique and a Genitive. In all three subsets, the sequences in b. and c., with either a Pronoun or Ilay + Pronoun are perfectly grammatical.

1.2.3.4

Both Trigger and Victim Other Than Su or DO. Both the trigger and its victim do not occupy the Su or

the DO position, then the victim can optionally surface into Ilay + pronoun:

(61)a.

*Nanome vary ny alikai i p rehefa avy nanome rano 0 i . gave rice the dog^ p after done gave water

"P gave the dog^ rice after giving him^ water."

b.

Nanome vary ny alikai i p rehefa avy nanome rano azy^. gave rice the dog^ p after done gave water him^

"P gave the d c ^ rice after giving hiir^ water."

c.

Nanome vary ny alikai i p rehefa avy nanome rano gave rice the dogi p after done gave water

(an1) ilay izy^. it. l "P gave rice to the dogi after giving iti water."

360

(62) a.

*Nanome vary ny alika^ i p rehefa avy niaraka gave rice the dog^ p after done accompanied

o^

"P gave rice to the dog^ after accompanying himi."

b.

Nanome vary ny alika^ i p rehefa avy niaraka tami-ny^. gave rice the dog^ P after done accomp-with-hiitii

"P gave rice to the dog^ after accompanying himi."

c.

TNancme vary ny alika i P rehefa avy niaraka gave rice the dog^ p after done accompanied

tamin'ilay izy^. with it^

"P gave rice to the dogi after accompanying iti-"

(63)a.

*Nanone vary ny alika., i P rehefa nahita ny vilia-0^. gave rice the dog^ p after saw the plate-0i

"P gave rice to the dog^ after seeing hiSi plate."

b.

Nanome vary ny alikai i P rehefa nahita ny viUa-ny^ gave rice the dogi P after saw the plate-hiSi

"P gave rice to the dog^ after seeing hiSi plate."

c. ?*Nanome vary ny alika^ i p rehefa nahita gave rice the dog^ p after saw

ny vilia-n'ilay izy^. the plate-of iti

"P gave rice to the dog^ after seeing itSi plate."

361

(64)a.

*Niafina tamin'ny alikai i p f a tsy nanome sakafo 0 ^ hid from the dogi p but neg gave food himi
food

"P hid from the dogi but did not give himi

-"

b.

Niafina tamin'ny alika^^ i p f a tsy nanome sakafo azyi hid from the dogi p but neg gave food himi

"P hid from the dogi but did not give himi food."

c.

Niafina tamin'ny alika^^ i p fa tsy nanome sakafo hid from the dcg.^ p but neg gave food

(an') ilay izy^. i "P hid from the dogi but did not give iti food."
ifc

(65)a.

*Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i P fa tsy niaraka hid from the dogi

Oi.

p but neg accompanied Oi

"P hid from the d c ^ but did not go with himi."

b.

Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i P fa tsy niaraka tami-nyi. hid frcmi the dogi P but neg aceomp with-himi

"P hid from the dogi but did not go with himi."

c.

Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i p fa tsy niaraka hid from the dog^ p but neg accompanied

tamin'ilay izy^. with i. t^

"P hid from the dogj^ but did not go with iti."

362

(66)a.

*Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i p ary nanitsaka ny rarabo-O^. hid from the dog^ p and trod the tail-o^

"P hid from the dog. and stepped on his tail." 1 i b. Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i p ary nanitsaka ny rambo-ny. hid from the dog^ P and trod the tail-his^

"P hid from the dogi and stepped on his^ tail."

c.

Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i p ary nanitsaka hid from the dog^ p and trod

ny rambo-n'ilay izyi. the tail-of i^

"P hid from the dog^ and stepped on its^ tail."

(67) a.

*Nanitsaka ny ranibo-n'ny alika^ i P raha handeha trod the tail-of the dog^ p when fut-go

hanome

vary Oi.

fut-give rice Oi

b.

Nanitsaka ny ranibo-n'ny alika^ i p raha handeha trod the tail-of the dog^ p when fut-go

hanome

vary azy^.

fut-give rice hinu "P stepped c i the dog^s tail when he/she was about x to give him. rice."

363

c.

Nanitsaka ny ranibo-n'ny alika^ i p raha handeha trod the tail-of the dogi p when fut-go

hanome

vary (an') ilay izy^. it^

fut-give rice

"P stepped C i the doge's tail when he/she was about x to give itj rice."

68)a.

*Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' angry

ny alika^ i p ka nandeha p so went

with the barking-of the dog^

niafina tamy-(h. hid from-Oj

b.

?Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' angry

ny alika^ i P ka nandeha p so went

with the barking-of the dog^

niafina tami-ny^. hid from-hiitij

"P was angered by the barking of the dog^ and so, went hiding from him^."

c.

Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' angry

ny alika^ i p ka nandeha p so went

with the barking-of the dog^

niafina tamin'ilay izy^. hid from itj

"P was angered by the barking of the dog^ and so, went hiding from itj."

364

(69)a.

*Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' angry

ny alika^ i p ka p so

with the barking-of the dog^

n-itsaha-ny

ny rambcMK.

pass-tread-by-him/her the tail-CK "p was angered by the barking of the dog^ and so, stepped c i his^ tail." x

b.

Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' angry

ny alika^ i p ka p so

with the barking-of the dog^

n-itsaha-ny

ny rambo-ny^.

pass-tread-by-him/her the tail-his^ "P was angered by the barking of the dog^ and so, stepped cm hisj^ tail."

c.

Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' angry

ny alika^ i p ka p so

with the barking-of the dog^

n-itsaha-ny

ny rambo-n'ilay izy^. it^

pass-tread-by-him/her the tail-of

"P was angered by the barking of the dog^ and so, stepped on hiSj tail."

In (61), both the trigger and its victim occupy the 10 position and the a. version with a Zero-pronoun is ungrammatical, but both (61)b. and (61) c. with a Pronoun and Ilay + Pronoun respectively are perfectly grammatical. In (62), the trigger is an 10, but the

365

victim is an Oblique: (62)b. with a Pronoun in its clitic form is ^e most natural although some native speakers sometimes find (62)c. not totally acceptable. In (63), the trigger is an 10, whereas its victim is a Genitive: here again, (63)b. with a clitic Pronoun appears preferable to (63)c. which comprises Ilay + pronoun although the latter is not ungrammatical. The sentences in (64) have their trigger in the Oblique and their victim in the XO position: the grammatically pattern makes it quite evident that there exists a choice between a Pronoun, as in (64)b., and Tlav + Pronoun, as in (64) c. In (65), both the trigger and its victim are Obliques and the choice between a Pronoun, as in (65)b., and Ilay + Pronoun, as in (65)c., subsists. However, when the victim is a Genitive, as in (66), while the trigger remains an Oblique, there seems to be a strong preference for a Pronoun, as is evident in (66) b. compared with (66) c. comprising Ilay + Pronoun. New, when the trigger is a Genitive and its victim, an 10, as in (67), both the b. sequence with a Pronoun and the c. version with Ilay + Pronoun are grammatical. In (68), the trigger is a Genitive but its victim, an Oblique: the preference seems to go towards the c. sequence with Ilay + Pronoun although the one in (68)b. is not totally ungrammatical. Finally, in (69), both the trigger and its victim are Genitives: both a Pronoun, as in (69)b., and Ilay + Pronoun, as in (69)c., are grammatical although the latter sounds more natural.

1.2.4

Summary: Non-Human, Animate Trigger and Pronominalization. All of the above, from 1.2.0 to 1.2.3.4, can be sum-

marized on Table 8.

366

Table 8

Anaphoric Pronorainalization: Non-human Animate Trigger

Trigger/'

Victim

SO

DO

10

OBL

GEN

SU

0;*Pro

*0; Pro

*0; Pro *Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro

*0; Pro

?Ilay+Pro *llay+Pro

*Ilay+Pro ?*Ilay+Pro

DO

*0;*Pro Ilay+Pro

0; Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro ?Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro ?Ilay+Pro

10

*0;*Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro Ilay+Pro

OBL

*0;*Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro ?Ilay+Pro

GEN

*0;?*Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro Ilay+Pro

*0;?Pro Ilay+Pro

*0; Pro Ilay+Pro

Note: 0 = Zero-pronoun; Pro = Pronoun; Ilay+Pro = Ilay + Pronoun;* = Ungrammatical ; ? or ?* = Doubtful Grammaticality. See summary next page.

367

Assumptions 1. Trigger = Referential, 2. Trigger = Animate but not human, 3. Trigger = Singular, guirmary: a. When both trigger and victim = Su, then victim Zero-pronoun;

b. when both trigger and victim = DO, then victim Zero-pronoun/Pronoun/Ilay+Pronoun;

c. when both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO, -if oily trigger = Su, victim = Pro; > -if oily trigger = DO, victim Pro/Ilay+Pro;

-if oily victim = Su, victim => Ilay+Pro; s -if only victim = DO, victim except when victim = Su; -if both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO, then victim Pro/Ilay+Pro Pro/Ilay+Pro,

except when victim = Genitive;

Mote: = Is; =/= Is Not; / = Either Or;

= show(s) up as.

1.3.0

Non-Animate Trigger Assumption. Assuming that the trigger is referential, singular and

non-animate and furthermore: a. if both the trigger and its victim occupy the Su position, then the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun preferably although Ilay + Pronoun is sometimes possible; b. if both the trigger and its victim occupy the DO position, then the victim can optionally go into a Zero-pronoun, Ilay + Pronoun or sometimes a Pronoun, although sequences with a Pronoun are generally not very good; but

368

c. if both the trigger and its victim do not occupy the Su or the DO position, then the victim goes into Ilay + Prononn except when the trigger is either an Oblique or a Genitive, in which case the victim can optionally surface into a Demonstrative here Io "this."

1.3.1

Both Trigger and Victim Are Sus. When both the trigger and its victim occupy the Su

position, then the latter preferably goes into a Zero-pronoun although Ilay + Pro is sometimes a definite possibility:

(70)a.

Nirodana ny trano^ f a fell

efa

be simba loatra 0^.

the house^ since already big damage too it^

"The house^ fell since it^ had too much damage."

b.

*Nirodana ny trarex fa fell

efa be simba loatra izy^. he^

the house^ since al. big damage too

c.

Nirodana ny trano^ f a efa be simba loatra ilay izy^. fell the house^ s. al.big damage too it^

"Hie house^ fell since it^ had too much damage."

d.

*Nirodana ny trano^ fa efa be simba loatra io^. fell the house^ s. al. big damage too this^

(71)a.

Nilatsahan' ny varatra ny trano^ ka niatonta 0^. fallen-on-by the thunder the house^ so fell "Thunder fell on the housesubsequently, it^ fell."

369

b.

*Nilatsahan'ny varatra ny trance ka niatonta zy^. fallen-by the thunder the house^ so fell it^

c. ?*Nilatsahan'ny varatra ny tranoi ka niatonta ilay izy^. fallen-by the thunder the house^ so fell it^

"Thunder fell on the house^; subsequently, it^ fell."

d.

*Nilatsahan1 ny varatra ny trano.^ ka niatonta io^. fallen-by the thunder the house^ so fell this^

In (70) and (71), both the trigger and its victim are Sus and the grammatically pattern found in the above sentences suggests that the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun: all of the a. sequences are perfectly grammatical, whereas the ones in the c. versions with Ilay + Pronoun are sometimes grammatical, as in (70)c., and sometimes of doubtful grammatically, as in (71) c.

1.3.2

Both Trigger and Victim Are DOs. When both the trigger and its victim occupy the DO

position, then the victim can optionally go into a Zero-pronoun, Ilay + Pronoun, or even into a Pronoun sometimes:

(72)a.

Nanandrana nandrodana ny trano^ ry Paoly tried tore-down the housei p au l and associates

fa tsy naharodana but neg managed-to-tear-down "Paul and Associates tried to tear down the house, but did not manage."

370

b.

TNanandrana nandrodana ny trano^ ry Paoly tried

tore-down the house^ Paul and associates

fa tsy naharodana but neg managed-to-tear-down

azy^.

"Paul and Associates tried to tear down the house, but did not manage."

c.

Nanandrana nandrodana ny trano^ ry Paoly tried tore-down the house^ Paul and associates

fa tsy naharodana but neg managed-to-tear-down

(an') ilay izyj. itj

"Paul and Associates tried to tear down the house, but did not manage."

d.

*Nanandrana nandrodana ny trano^ ry Paoly tried tore-down the house^ Paul and associates

fa tsy naharodana but neg managed-to-tear-dcwn

(an') io^. this^

(73)a.

Nitady ny fiara^ i p fa tsy nahita Oj. sought the ear^ p but neg saw Oj

"P was looking for the car^, but did not find itj."

b.

*Nitady ny fiara^ i p fa tsy nahita azy^. sought the ear^ p but neg saw itj

371

c.

Nitady ny fiarai i p f a sought the e a ^

tsy nahita (an1) ilay izyi. i^

p but neg saw

"P was looking for the carif but did not find it^"

d.

*Nitady ny fiara^^ i P fa tsy nahita (an') ioj. sought the car p but neg saw i. t^

"P was looking for the car v, but did not find itj."

In (72) and (73), both the trigger and its victim are DOs and as a result, there is a choice between three possibilities although the zero-pronoun appears to be the nost natural. The sentences (72)a., (72)c., (73)a. and (73)c. with either a Zero-pronoun or Ilay + Izy are perfectly grairmatical; those in (72)d. and (73)d. with the demonstrative Io "this," ungrammatical; and those with the Pronoun azy sometimes, as in (72)b., of dubious grairmaticality, if not totally ungrammatical, as in (73)d.

1.3.3.1

Only the Trigger Is Either a Su Or a DO. When cxily the trigger is either a Su or a DO, then the

victim goes into Ilay + Pronoun obligatorily:

(74) a.

*Nirodana ny trano^^ f a tsy tia handany vola fell the house^ but neg want fut-spend money

anty-(h intsony ny tompo-ny^. on-it^ longer the owner-its^

"Hie house ^ crumbled down since its cwner no longer wanted to spend any money on it.."

372

b. ?*Nirodana ny trance fell

fa tsy tia handany

vola

the housej but neg want fut-spend money

ami-nyj intsony ny tompo-nyj. on-itj longer the cwner-itsj "The housej crumbled down since itsj owner no longer wanted to spend any money on itj."

c.

Nirodana ny tranoj fa tsy tia handany fell

vola

the housej but neg want fut-spend money

amin'ilay izyj intsony ny tompo-nyj. on it i longer the owner-itSj

"The housej crumbled down since itSj owner no longer wanted to spend any money an itj." d. ?*Nirodana ny trano j fa tsy tia handany fell vola

the housej but neg want fut-spend money

amin'ioj intsony ny tompo-nyj. on thiSj longer the owner-itSj

(75)a.

*Nirodana ny tranOj fa tsy tia hanarina fell the housej but neg want fut-erect

ny vatana-Oj intsony ny tompo-nyj. the body-of-Oj longer the owner-its^ "Ihe housej fell but itSj owner no longer wanted to erect itSj body."

373

b.

*Nrodana ny tranOj fa tsy tia hanarina fell the housej but neg want fut-erect

ny vata-ny^

intsony ny tompo-nyj.

the body-of-itj longer the owner-itSj

c.

Nirodana ny tranoj fa tsy tia hanarina fell the housej but neg want fut-erect

ny vata-n'ilay izyj intsony ny tompo-nyj. the body-of itj longer the owner-itSj
itSj

"The housej fell but erect itSj body."

owner no longer wanted to

d.

*Nirodana ny tranOj fa tsy tia hanarina fell the housej but neg want fut-erect

ny vata-n' iOj

intsony ny tompo-nyj.

the body-of thiSj longer the owner-itSj

(76)a.

*Nandrodana ny tranOj ry Paoly tore-down the housej Paul and associates

fa tsy tia handany

vola amy-Oj intsony.

but neg want fut-spend money on-Oj longer "Paul and Associates tore the housej down since they no longer wished to spend money on it.."

374

b.

*Nandrodana ny tranOj ry Paoly tore-dcwn the house^ Paul and associates

fa tsy tia handany

vola ami-nyj intsony.

but neg want fut-spend money on-itj longer

c.

Nandrodana ny tranOj r y Paoly tore-down the house^ Paul and associates

fa tsy tia handany

vola amin'ilay izyj intsony. itj longer

but neg want fut-spend money cm

"Paul and Associates tore the housej down since they no longer wished to spend money on itj."

d.

*Nandrodana ny tranOj ry Paoly tore-dcwn the housej Paul and associates

fa tsy tia handany

vola amin'iOj intsony.

but neg want fut-spend money on thiSj longer

(77)a.

*Nandrodana ny tranOj ry Paoly tore-down the house Paul and associates

fa tsy tia hanarina ny rindrina-Oj intsony. but neg want fut-erect the wall-Oj longer

b.

*Nandrodana ny tranOj ry Paoly tore-down the house Paul and associates

375

fa tsy tia hanarina ny rindri-ny^ intsony. but neg want fut-erect the wall-its^ longer

c.

Nandrodana ny trano^ r y paoly tore-down the house Paul and associates

fa tsy tia hanarina ny rindri-n'ilay izy^ intsony. but neg want fut-erect the wall-of it^ longer

"Paul and Associates tore the house^ down since they no longer wished to erect its^ walls."

d.

*Nandrodana ny trano^ r y Paoly tore-down the housei paul and associates

fa tsy tia hanarina ny rindri-n'io^ intsony. but neg want fut-erect the wall-of it^ longer

In (74) and (75), only the trigger is a Su, whereas in (76) and (77) only the trigger is a DO. Only the c. sequences with Ilay + Pronoun are perfectly grammatical in the intended readings.

1.3.3.2

Only the Victim Is Either a Su Or a DO. When only the victim is either a Su or a DO, then it

goes into Ilay + Pronoun although when the trigger is either an Oblique or a Genitive, the victim can optionally show up as a Demonstrative here Io "this":

(78)a.

*Nipetraka tao amin'ilay trano^ r y Paoly dwelt in the housei P a u l


m

associates

376

na dia

malemy aza Oj.

although shaky neg (h

b.

*Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj ry Paoly dwelt in the house^ Paul and associates

na dia

malemy aza izyj.

although shaky neg itj

c.

Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj ry Paoly dwelt in the housej Paul and associates

na dia

malemy aza ilay izyj. itj

although shaky neg

"Paul and Associates lived in the housej although itj was shaky."

d.

Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj ry Paoly dwelt in the housej Paul and associates

na dia

malemy aza iOj.

although shaky neg thisj "Paul and Associates lived in the housej although it. was shaky."

(79)a.

*Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj r y Paoly dwelt in the house. Paul and associates

377

na dia

tsy tia (h aza.

although neg like (K neg "Paul and Associates lived in the house^ although they did not like itj."

b.

*Nipetraka tao amin'ilay trano^ ry Paoly dwelt in the house^ Paul and associates

na dia

tsy tia azyj aza.

although neg like itj neg

c.

Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj ry Paoly dwelt in the house^ Paul and associates

na dia

tsy tia an'ilay izyj aza. itj neg

although neg like

"Paul and Associates lived in the house^ although they did not like itj."

d.

Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj ry Paoly dwelt in the housej Paul and associates

na dia

tsy tia an'iOj aza. this, neg

although neg like

"Paul and Associates lived in the housej although they did not like itj."

(80)a.

*Nahita ny sari-n' saw

ny tranOj ry Paoly
m d

the picture-of the housej p a u l

associates

378

na dia

tsy mazava tsara aza (h.

although neg clear well neg CL

b.

*Nahita ny sari-n'

ny

tranOj r y Paoly

saw

the picture-of the house^ Paul and associates

na dia

tsy mazava tsara aza izyj.

although neg clear well neg itj (compare with (80)a. above)

c.

Nahita ny sari-n' saw

ny tranOj r y Paoly

the picture-of the house^ p au l and associates

na dia

tsy mazava tsara aza ilay izyj. itj

although neg clear well neg

"Paul and Associates saw the picture of the housej although itj was not quite visible."

d.

Nahita ny sari-n' saw

ny tranOj ry Paoly

the picture-of the housej Paul and associates

na dia

tsy mazava tsara aza iOj.

although neg clear well neg thiSj "Paul and Associates saw the picture of the housej although itj was not quite visible."

(81)a.

*Nahita ny toera-n' ny tranOj r y paoly saw the site-of the house. Paul and associates

379

rehefa nitady O^. when sought CK

b.

*Nahita ny toera-n1 ny trano^ ry Paoly saw the site-of the house^ Paul and associates

rehefa nitady azy^. when sought it^

c.

Nahita ny toera-n1 ny tranoi ry Paoly saw the site-of the house^ Paul and associates

rehefa nitady an'ilay izy^. when sought it^

"Paul and Associates saw the site of the house^ when they looked for it^."

d.

Nahita ny toera-n' ny trano^ ry Paoly saw the site-of the house^ Paul and associates

rehefa nitady an'io^. when sought this^

"Paul and Associates saw the site of the house^ when they looked for it^."

In (78) and (79), the trigger is an Oblique, whereas in (80) and (81) it is in the Genitive. In each pair of sentences, the victim shows up as a Su in the first and as a DO in the second.

380

1.3.3.3

Both Trigger and Victim Other Than Su or DO. When both the trigger and its victim are neither a Su

nor a DO, then the victim goes into Ilay + Pronoun although when the trigger is an Oblique or a Genitive, the victim can optionally go into a Demonstrative here Io "this":

(82)a.

*Nipetraka tao amin'ny trano^ ry Paoly dwelt in the house^ Paul and associates

kanefa

tsy nandany vola tamy-CK. money on-it^

although neg spent

b.

?Nipetraka tao amin'ny trano^ ry Paoly dwelt in the house^ Paul and associates

kanefa

tsy nandany vola tami-ny^. money on-it^

although neg spent

"Paul and his associates lived in the house. although they did not spend noney on it^."

c.

Nipetraka tao amin'ny trano^ ry Paoly dwelt in the house paul and associates

kanefa

tsy nandany vola

tamin'ilay izy^. it^

although neg spent

money on

"Paul and his associates lived in the house^ although they did not spend noney on it..

381

d,

Nipetraka tao amin'ny trano^ ry Paoly dwelt in the housej Paul and associates

kanefa

tsy nandany vola


money

tamin'iOj.
on thiSj

although neg spent

"Paul and his associates lived in the housej although they did not spend money on itj."

33)a.

*Nipetraka tao amin'ny tranOj ry Paoly dwelt in the housej Paul and associates

kanefa

tsy nety

nanome ny hofa-Oj. the rent-Oj

although neg accepted gave

b.

?Nipetraka tao amin'ny tranOj ry Paoly dwelt in the housej Paul and associates

kanefa

tsy nety

nanome ny hofa-nyj. the rent-itsj

although neg accepted gave

"Paul and his associates lived in the housej although they did not accept to give itSj rent."

c.

Nipetraka tao amin'ny tranOj ry Paoly dwelt in the housej Paul and his associates

kanefa

tsy nety

nanome ny hofa-n'ilay izyj. the rent-of itj

although neg accepted gave

"Paul and his associates lived in the housej although they did not accept to give itSj rent."

382

d.

Nipetraka tao amin'ny trano^ ry Paoly dwelt in the house^ Paul and associates

kanefa

tsy

nety nanome ny hofan-'io. the rent-of thiSj

although neg accepted gave

"Paul and his associates lived in the housej although they did not accept to give rent for itj."

[84)a.

*Tsy nety

nanome ny hofa-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly

, neg accepted gave the rent-of the housej Paul & assoc.

fa tsy tia hovoarohirchy

tamy Oj.

but neg want will-be-involved with Oj

b.

*Tsy nety

nanome ny hofa-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly

neg accepted gave the rentof the house. Paul & assoc.

fa

tsy tia hovoarohirohy

tami-nyj.

but neg want will-be-involved with-itj

c.

Tsy nety

nanome ny hofa-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly

neg accepted gave the rent-of the housej Paul & assoc.

fa

tsy tia hovoarohirohy

tamin'ilay izyj. itj

but neg want will-be-involved with

"Paul and his associates did not accept to give the rent for the housej since they did not want to be involved with itj."

383

d.

Tsy nety

nanome ny hofa-n" ny trano^ ry Paoly

neg accepted gave the rent-of the house^ Paul & assoc.

fa

tsy tia hovoarohirohy

tamin' iOj.

but neg want will-be-involved with thiSj "Paul and his associates did not accept to give the rent for the housej since they did not want to be involved with itj."

(85)a.

*Nijanona tany

ivela-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly

remained there outside-of the housej Paul & assoc.

fa tsy tia hiditra

tao anaty Oj.

but neg want will-enter in inside Oj

b.

Nijanona tany

ivela-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly

remained there outside-of the housej Paul & assoc.

fa tsy tia hiditra

tao

anati-nyj.

but neg want will-enter there inside-of-itj "Paul and his associates stayed outside the housej since they did not want to enter itj."

c.

Nijanona tany

ivela-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly

remained there outside-of the housej Paul & assoc.

fa tsy tia

hiditra

tao

anati-n' ilay izyj. it.

but neg want will-enter there inside-of

384

"Paul and his associates stayed outside the house^ since they did not want to enter it^."

d.

Nijanona tany

ivela-n' ny trano ry Paoly

remained there outside-of the house^ Paul and associates

fa tsy tia hiditra tao

anati-n' io^.

but neg wan will-enter there inside-of this^ "Paul and associates stayed outside the house^ since they did not want to enter it^."

In (82) and (83), the trigger is an Oblique, whereas in (84) and (85), it is a Genitive. The grammaticality pattern in the first pair suggests that there is a choice between Ilay + Pronoun, as in (82)c. and (83)c., and the demonstrative j "this," as in (82)d. and (83)d. Furthermore, a ooreferential clitic pronoun seems marginally possible, as in (82)b. and (83)b. As for the second pair, the choice subsists between Ilay + Pronoun, as in (84)c. and (85)c., and the demonstrative io "this," as in (84)d. and (85)d. Last but not least, notice that when both the trigger and its victim, as in (85)b., occupy the Genitive position, the sequence with the coreferential clitic pronoun becomes fully granmatical.

1.3.4

Summary: NOn-Animate Trigger and Pronominalization. All of the above information from 1.3.1 to 1.3.3.3 can

be summarized in the following manner on Table 9.

385

Table 9 Anaphoric Pronominalization: Non-Animate Trigger

Trigger

/
SU 0; *Pro

Victim DO 10 OBL GEN

SU

?0; *Pro ilay + pro *io

*0; *Pro ilay + pro *io

*0; *Pro ilay + pro *io

?ilay + pro *io

DO

*0; *Pro ilay + pro *io

0; *Pro ilay + pro *io

*0; *Pro ilay + pro *io

*0; *Pro ilay + pro *io

10

QBL

*0; *Pro ilay + pro io

*0; ?*Pro ilay + pro io

*0; ?Pro ilay + pro io

*0; *PrO ilay + pro io

GEN

*0; *Pro ilay + pro io

*0; ?*Pro ?ilay + pro io

*0; ?Pro ilay + pro io

*0; Pro ilay + pro io

Mote: 0 = Zero-pronoun; * = Ungrammatical; Pro, Ilay + Pro, or io = Alternate forms. Absence of * = Grammatical. See summary overleaf.

386

Assumptions: 1. Trigger = Referential; 2. Trigger =/= Animate; 3. Trigger = Singular. Sunmary: a. When both trigger and victim = Su, then, victim Zero-pronoun

although Ilay + Pronoun also possible sometimes; b. When both trigger and victim = DO, then, victim = Zero-pronoun/ilay + pronoun > sometimes also a Pronoun; c. When both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO, then -when only trigger = Su or DO, victim = ilay + pronoun; -when oily victim = Su or DO, victim = ilay + pronoun; > -when both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO, then, victim = Ilay + Pronoun > although when trigger = Obi or Gen, victim Denonstrative optionally.

Section 2

Other Relevant Parameters

2.0

Introduction. Section 2 will show that: 1. the "precede" parameter is not relevant; 2. only the "command" parameter is relevant; 3. Forward Pronominalization is possible whether the

trigger conmands its victim or not; and

387

4. Backward Pronominalization is possible only when the trigger commands its victim.

2.1.1

The "Precede" Parameter. The "precede" parameter is not relevant since in each

one of the following sentences, the trigger may precede or follow its victim i n these instances a Zero-pronoun yet, all the sequences are perfectly granmatical:

(86)a.

Tsy fantatr'i P na handeha i J\ n a tsy handeha 0^. neg known-by P if will-go J i Q r neg will-go

"It is not known to P whether J will go or not," i.e. "P does not know whether J will go or not."

b.

Tsy fantatr'i P na handeha (h na tsy handeha i J^. neg known-by P if will-go Ch or neg will-go "P does not know whether J will go or not." J^

(87)a.

Nitsangana i P^ dia nandray ny boki-ny CK. stood-up P^ and took the book-his

"P stood up and took his book."

b.

Nitsangana dia nandray ny boki-ny (L i p^. stood and took the book-his (L p^

"P stood up and took his book."

(88)a.

Nitsangatsangana i P i f a tsy nahalala 0^. took-a-walk but neg knew

"P^ took a walk since hej did not know."

388

b.

Nitsangatsangana fa tsy nahalala Oj i Pj. took-a-walk but neg knew Oj Pj

"Pj took a walk since hej did not know."

(89)a.

Nianatra i Pj sy namaky kitay Oj. studied Pj and chopped wood Oj

"P did some studying and chopped wood."

b.

Nianatra sy namaky kitay Oj i Pj. studied and chopped wood Oj Pj

"P did seme studying and seme wood-chopping."

(90)a.

Nianatra i Pj dia namaky kitay Oj. studied Pj and chopped wood Oj

"P did some studying and chopped wood."

b.

Nianatra dia namaky kitay Oj i Pj. studied and chopped wood Oj Pj

"P did some studying and seme wood-chopping."

(91)a.

Nianatra i Pj ary koa namaky kitay Oj. studied Pj and also chopped wood Oj

"P did seme studying and cut wood."

b.

Nianatra ary koa namaky kitay Oj i Pj. studied and also chopped wood Oj Pj

"P did some studying and some wood-chopping."

389

(92)a.

T-any

i Pj fa tsy t-eto

Oj.

past-there Pj but neg past-here Oj "P was there but not here."

b.

T-any

fa tsy t-eto

Oj i Pj. Pj

past-there but neg past-here Oj

"P was there but (certainly) hot here."

(93)a.

Nalahelo i Pj f a was-sad

tsy afaka

Oj.

Pj because neg successful Oj

"Pj was sad because hej did not succeed."

b.

Nalahelo fa

tsy afaka

Oj i Pj.

was-sad because neg successful Oj i Pj "Pj was sad because hej did not succeed."

(94)a.

Raha vao

tonga

i Pj dia hiakatra

any

Oj.

as soon as arrived Pj then will-go-up there Oj "As soon as Pj comes, hej will go up there."

b.

Raha vao

tonga

dia hiakatra

any

Oj i Pj. Pj

as soon as arrived then will-go-up there Oj "As soon as hej comes, Pj will go up there."

(95)a.

Rahatrizay any i Pj dia hikarakara whenever

an'io Oj.

there Pj then will-take-care-of this Oj

"Whenever Pj gets there, hej will take care of this."

390

b.

Rahatrizay any whenever

dia hikarakara

an'io Ch i Pj.

there then will-take-care-of this Oj Pj

"Whenever he^ gets there, Pj will take care of this."

(96)a.

Mianatra i Pj studies

no sady

mampianatra Oj. Oj

Pj at same time teaches

"P studies and at the same time teaches."

b.

Mianatra no sady

manpianatra Ch i Pj. (h Pj

studies at same time teaches

"P is both a student and a teacher."

(97)a.

Nilaza i Pj fa said

handeha Oj.

Pj that will-go Oj

"Pj said that hej will go."

b.

Nilaza fa said

handeha Oj i Pj. Pj

that will-go Oj

"Pj said that hej will go."

(98)a.

Nanantena i Pj fa hoped

ho-afaka

Oj.

Pj that will-be-successful Oj

"Pj was hoping that hej would be successful."

b.

Nanantena fa hoped

ho-afaka

Oj i Pj. Pj

that will-be-successful Oj

"Pj was hoping that hej would be successful."

391

(99) a.

Nisotro taoka i drank booze

ka

mano

0i.

P i go drunk Oi

"P drank and subsequently got drunk."

b.

Nisotro taoka ka mamo (h i p^. drank book so drunk CL p^

"P drank and got drunk."

(100) a.

Nikasa

(ny)

handeha 0 i i p ^ kan jo tsy lasa ^ but neg gone 0 i

intended (carp) will-go 0 i

"P wanted to go, but did not leave."

b.

Nikasa

(ny)

handeha kanjo tsy lasa (h i p^. neg gone CK p^

intended (camp) will-go but

"P wanted to, but did not leave."

In all of the a. sentences from (86) to (100), the trigger precedes the victim with the possible exception of the relevant portion of (100)a., whereas in the b. sequences it is the victim which precedes the trigger.

2.1.2

Evidence Against the "Precede" Parameter. The "precede" parameter is not relevant since in each

one of the following sentences, the trigger may precede or follcw its victimin each of the following instances, a Pronoun yet, nearly all the sequences are grammatical. Hie two cases which seem to be exceptional will be dealt with below.

392

(101)a.

Niresaka tamin'i ^ i p dia nanatitra azyj. talked to 0\ p and escorted her^

"P talked to J^ and then, after the talk, escorted her j.11

b.

Niresaka tami-nyj i p dia nanatitra an'i Jj. talked to-her^ p and escorted Jj

"P talked to Jj and then, escorted herj."

c.

Niresaka tami-nyj sy nanatitra an'i ^ i P. talked to-herj and escorted Jj P

"P talked to Jj and then, escorted her^."

(102)a.

Nananatra an'i Jj i p no sady nibedy advised ON

azy^.

P and also reprimanded her^

"P gave ON some advice and at the same time reprimanded herj."

b.

Nananatra azy^ i p no sady nibedy advised her^

an'i Jj. Jj

p and also reprimanded

"P gave her^ some advice and at the same time reprimanded Jj."

c.

Nananatra azyj n o sady nibedy advised

an'i Jj i P. Jj P

herj a t also reprimanded

"P gave herj some advice and at the same time reprimanded J.."

393

(103)a.

Nilaza tamin'i J. i p fa said to

hanome

azy^ vola.

p that will-give her^ noney

"P told Jj that he will give herj noney."

b.

Nilaza tami-ny^ i p fa said to-her ^

hanome an'i Jj vola. Jj money

p that will-give

"P told herj that he will give jv money."

c.

Nilaza tami-nyj fa said

hanome an'i Jj vola i P. Jj money P

to-herj that will-give

"P told herj that he will give Jj money."

(104)a.

Nanantena ny fahatongava-n'i J. i P hoped the coming-of X p

kanefa tsy tonga but

izyj.

neg arrived she^

"P was hoping that Jj would come, but shej did not."

b.

Nanantena ny fahatongava-ny^ i p hoped the coming-of-hiSj p

kanefa tsy tonga but neg arrived

i Jj.

"P was hoping that Jj would come, but shej did not."

c. *Nanantena ny fahatongava-ny^ i p hoped the ocaning-of-his. p

394

kanefa tsy tonga but neg arrived

i J. i P. X p

"P was hoping that Jj would come, but shej did not.

(105)a.

T-any

amin'i J. i P taloha X

fa tsy any

past-there with

P previously but neg there

ami-ny^

intsony izao.

with herj no-more now "P used to be at Jj's, but not any longer."

b.

T-any

ami-ny^

taloha

fa tsy any

past-there with-her^ previously but neg there

ami-n'i X with

intsony

izao i P. P

X no-longer now

"P used to be at Jj's, but not any longer."

c.

T-any

ami-ny^

taloha

fa tsy any

past-there with-her^ previously but neg there

ami-n'i X with

intsony

izao i P. P

Jj no-longer now

"P used to be at Jj's, but not any longer."

(106)a.

Niaraka

tami-n'i X X

i p taloha P previously

accompanied with

395

kanefa tsy mahita azyj intsony. but neg see her^ no-longer

"p used to go out with X although he no longer sees herj."

b.

Niaraka

tami-nyi i p taloha

accompanied with-her^ P previously

kanefa tsy mahita an'i J^ intsony. but neg see 0\ no-longer

"p used to go out with J^ although he no longer sees her^"

c.

Niaraka

tami-ny^ taloha

kanefa tsy mahita neg see

aaxscpanied with-hsr^ previously but

an'i J. intsony i P. J^ no-longer P "p used to go out with CT although he no longer sees her.,."

(107)a.

Nalahelo an'i J. i p fa tsy nahita azy^ intsony. missed J^ p but neg saw her^ no-longer

"p missed J^ since he no longer saw her^."

b.

Nalahelo azyi i p fa tsy nahita an'i Jj intsony. missed heri p but neg saw Jj no-longer \_

"p missed her^ since he no longer saw J^."

396

c.

Nalahelo azy^ f a tsy nahita an'i J^ intsony i P. missed her^ but neg saw J^ no-longer P

"P missed her^ since he no longer saw J^."

(108)a.

Raha mikotaba amin'i J. i p dia manome azy^ rariny. if make-fuss with J^ P so give her^ right

"If P makes a fuss with sound right."

, he will make her^ cause

b.

Raha mikotaba ami-ny^ i p dia manome an'i J^ rariny. if make-fuss with-her^ P so give J^ right

"If P makes a fuss with her^, he will make the cause of J^ sound right."

c.

Raha mikotaba ami-ny^ dia manome an'i J^ rariny i P. if make-fuss with-her^ so give J^ right P

"If P makes a fuss with her^, he will make the cause of J^ sound right."

Rahatrizay manome boky an'i J^ i P whenever (109)a. dia hampahatsiahy azy^ ilay resaka. so will-remind "Whenever P gives of the talk." her^ the talk (a) book(s), he will remind her^ give book J^ p

Rahatrizay manome boky azy^ i p whenever b. give book her^ p

397

dia hampahatsiahy an'i X so will-remind

ilay resaka.

J^ the talk

"Whenever P gives J i ( a ) book(s), he will remind heri of the talk."

c.

Rahatrizay manane boky azy^ dia hampahatsiahy whenever give book her^ so will-remind

an'i J. ilay resaka i P. ^ the talk P

"Whenever P gives heri (a) book(s), he will remind ^ of the talk."

The sentence (104)c. is ungrammatical since the sequence has two Sus; this obviously does not relate to the issue under consideration. On the other hand, (103)b. poses problems that will be taken up under 2.2.3.1 and 2.2.3.2. Otherwise, the grammatically of the b. and c. sequences, from (101) to (109), suggests that the "precede" parameter is not relevant since in each one of them the victim precedes its trigger.

2.2.1

The "Command" Parameter. The "command" parameter, as proposed in Langacker

(1969), is relevant since the following sequences show that whenever the trigger commands the victim here, a Zero-pronoun the sentence is grammatical, whereas whenever the trigger does not command the victim, the sentence becomes ungrammatical:

398

(110)a.

Nandeha i P^ [{fa sao/fandrao/andrao} maninona went P^ for fear that do-something

o^].

"Pi left for fear that something should befall him^."

b. *Nandeha 0 i [{fa sao/fandrao/andrao} maninona went CK for fear that

i pi].

do-something P ^ j

"Pi left for fear that something should befall him^."

(111) a. Nilaza [fa nandeha 0^] i Paoly^. said that went CK


left

Paul^ -"

"Pauli said that hei

b. *Nilaza Ch [fa nandeha i Paoly^]. said 0 i that went Pau^

"Pauli said that hei left."

(112) a. Nanantena [fa hoafaka hoped that will-be-successful 0i

i Paolyi. Pauli

(same as (98)b.) "Pauli was hoping that he^ would be successful."

b.

*Nanantena (h [fa hoafaka hoped

i Paolyi].

0i that will-be-successful Pauli ^ successful."

"Pauli was hoping that hei

(113)a.

Nisotro taoka [ka mamo 0i] i paoly^. drank booze so drunk (h Pauli

(same as (99)b.) "Paul drank and got drunk."

399

b. *Nisotro taoka 0 i [ka mamo i Paolyj]. drank booze (L so drunk Paulj

"Paul drank and got drunk."

(114)a.

Nalhelo [fa was-sad

tsy afaka

(L] i paolyj. paulj

since neg successful CK

(same as (93)b.)

"Paul^ was sad because hej did not succeed."

b. *Nalahelo 0 i [fa was-sad

tsy afaka

i Paolyj].

(L since neg successful Paulj

"Paul^ was sad because hej did not succeed."

(115)a.

Raha vao

tonga

[dia hiakatra

any

Ch] i paolyj. Paulj

as soon as arrived so will-go-up there Oj (same as (94)b.)

"As soon as Paulj comes, hej will go up there."

b.

Raha vao

tonga

Oj [dia hiakatra

any i Paolyj].

as soon as arrived Oj so will-go-up there Paulj "As soon as he . comes, Paulj will go up there." J

In (111)a., (112)a., (113)a., and (114)a., there is a pause just before the main clause Su, toward the end of each sentence. All of these sequences are grammatical, the subordinate clause being embedded under each matrix in the absence of Postposition. In all of the ungrammatical sentences, i.e. as seen in (110)b., (lll)b., (112)b., (113)b., and (114)b., such a pause comes right after the

400

main clause verb, suggesting that the explicit Su belongs in the lower clause: in the relevant reading, where the Zero-pronoun is coreferential with the Su of the embedded clause, all of these sentences are ungrammatical. However, there exists a totally different, non-coreferential interpretation where this second set of sentences are grammatical. This describes a situation where (Hi) b., for example, would come as the second of a pair of utterances and, more specifically, would constitute a reply to a question relative to what a previously mentioned person did. The same holds true of (112)b., (113) b., and (114) b. But again, this is the non-coreferential reading and therefore, is not relevant. As far as (115)b. is concerned, it is grammatical since, as will be seen in 3.4.2 of Section 3, Adverb Preposing applies after pronominalization.

2.2.2

Relevance of the "Command" Parameter. The following sentences also show that the "command"

parameter is relevant since whenever the trigger commands the victim rhere, a Pronoun the sentence is grammatical, whereas whenever the trigger does not command the victim, the sentence is ungrammatical:

(116) a.

Nilaza i P a o ^ [fa tsy noraharahi-nyj^ said Paul^ that neg was-oonsidered-by-him^

ny olona [(izay) nanafitohina azy^]]. the people who irritated hinu

"Paul^ said that he^ ignored the people who irritated him. "

401

*Nilaza izy^ [fa tsy noraharahi-nyj said he^ that neg was-consider ed-by-h imj

ny olona [(izay) nanafitohina an'i Paoly/]]. the people who irritated Paul^

*Nilaza izyj [fa tsy noraharahi-n' said

i Paolyj

he^ that neg was-considered-by Paulj

ny olona [(izay) nanafitohina azy^] ]. the people who irritated hih it

"He^ said that hej ignored those who irritated Paulj.

Tsy fantatr'i Paolyj [na handeha izyj na tsia 0j]. neg known-by Paulj if will-go hej or neg

"It is not known to Paul^ whether hej will go or not, i.e. "Paulj does not know whether hej will go or not.

*Tsy fanta-nyj

[na handeha i Paolyj na tsia Oj]. Paulj or neg

neg known-by-himj if will-go

"Hej does not know whether Paulj will go or not."

Nankany amin'i Jeanne^ i Paoly went to Jeanne. paul

[fa sao naninona

izy^].

for fear did-something she^ "Paul went to see Jeannei for fear that something should happen to her.

402

b. *Nankany ami-ny^ i paoly went to-her^ Paul

[fa sao naninona for fear did-something

i Jeanne^]. Jeanne^

"Paul went to see her^ for fear that soirething should happen to Jeanne^."

In all of the a. sentences, from (116) to (118), the trigger belongs in the matrix clause and, as such, commands the victim. By contrast, in all of the b. sequences, the trigger belongs in the lower clause and, therefore, does not command the victim. All of the a. sentences are perfectly granmatical, whereas none of the b. sequences are, at least, in the relevant, ooreferential reading.

2.2.3.1

One Apparently Anomalous Case. Hie sentence (103)b. presents not a coordinate but a

subordinate structure since, like a typical subordinate, it allows a n^ complementizer, Passive, and DO-Fronting. Hius, the following is a typical subordinate structure and allows:

Ny-complementizer:

(119)

Nikasa

ny

handeha (h i paoly Paul^

intended camp will-go CK

"Paul was planning to leave."

403

Passive and DO-Fronting:

(120)

[Ny handeha 0^ no nokasai-n'

i Paolyj.

oomp will-go Oj part was-intended-by Paulj "It was hisj leaving which was intended by Paulj," i.e. "To leave, that was what Paul was planning."

Uie sentence (103) allows both of the above:

(121)

Nolaza-in'i P^ tami-ny fa hanome an'i J vola izyj. was-said-by Pj to-her that will-give J money hej

"Pj told her that hej will give her money."

Ny complementizer and DO-Fronting:

(122)

Ny

hanome an'i Jj vola no

nolaza-in'i P tami-nyj.

camp will-give Jj money part was-said-by P to-herj "It was the giving JN money which was told herj by P," i.e. "What P told herj was that he would give Jj money."

2.2.3.2

De Dicto vs. De Re Interpretation. Furthermore, there is a systematic difference of per-

spective between (103)a., on the one hand, and (103)b. and (103) c., on the other; the first has a "de re" interpretation, whereas the last two have a "de dicto" reading. Since the latter is accompanied by some kind of emphasis, (103)b. and (103)c. can be considered Marked. If that is indeed the case, then the command parameter still remains relevant for all Unmarked structures.

404

2.3.1

Forward Pronominalization. Forward Pronominalization is possible, whether the

trigger commands its victim or not: 1. In the examples given above, the following involve Forward Pronominalization, where the trigger commands its victim: (86)a., (87)a., (88)a., (89)a., (90)a., (91)a., (92)a., (93)a., (96)a., (97)a., (98)a., (99)a., (100)a., (101)a., (103)a., (104) a., (105)a., (106)a., (107)a., (116)a., and finally (117)a. All of these sentences are granmatical. 2. In the examples previously given, the following involve Forward Pronominalization, where the trigger does not command its victim: (94)a., (95)a., (108)a., and (109)a. All of these sentences are granmatical.

2.3.2

Backward Pronominalization. Backward Pronominalization is possible only when the

trigger commands its victim: 1. In our previous examples above, the following involve Backward Pronominalization: (86)b., (87)b., (88)b., (89)b., (90) b., (91)b., (92)b., (93)b., (94)b., (95)b., (97)b., (99)b., (100) b., (101)b., (101)c., (102)b., (102)c., (104)b., (105)b., (105) c., (106)b., (106)c., (107)b., (107)c., (108)b., (108)c., (109)b., and (109)c. All of these are grammatical sentences. 2. In the examples already provided, the following involve Backward Pronominalization, where the trigger does not command its victim: (110)b., (lll)b., (112)b., (113)b., (114)b., (116)b., (117)b., and (118)b. All of these sentences are ungrammatical.

405

Section 3

The Cyclic Convention

3.0

Introduction.

Section 3 will attempt to shew that: 1. The interaction of Pronominalization and Reflexivization provides some evidence in favor .of Rule Ordering and against Simultaneous or Free Order Rule Application. 2. The interaction of Backward Pronominalization and Adverb preposing argues against Simultaneous Rule Application. 3. The application of Zero-pronominalization and Raising-to-DO argues against Free Order Rule Application. 4. Given the above, the rules must be ordered; furthermore, Pronominalization is a Cyclic Rule i n the sense of Ross (1967) and Baker (1978) since in one case Adverb Preposing

precedes Pronominalization, whereas in another Pronominalization precedes Adverb Preposing, thus presenting an Ordering Paradox.

3.1

ftjainst

Simultaneous and Free Order Rule Applications.

Clause-Union feeds Reflexivization, but bleeds Pronominalization since we have the following pair of sentences:

(123)a.

/[ N-ank- [adala i Jeanne^ i Jeanne^]/ past-caus[crazy Jeannei Jeanne^

b.

N-ank-adala

tena^ i Jeanne^, jeannej

past-caus-crazy selfi

"Jeanne^ d r Q v e herselfi crazy."

406

c. *N-ank-adala past-caus-crazy O i

i jeannei. Jeanne^

Both (123)b. and (123)c. derive from the same underlying representation shown in (123)a., where the environment for Pronominalization is met: the trigger is the Su of the matrix clause and its victim, the underlying Su of the embedded clause. Yet, the sentence (123)c., where Pronominalization has applied, is ungrammatical in the relevant reading. If a Simultaneous or Free Order Rule Application were possible, we should have evolved a grairmatical sequence, which is not the case at all. The other interpretation, which is not relevant for present purposes, is the one where the Zero-pronoun and the NP _ Jeanne of (123) c. are not coi referential. In this case, the Zero-pronoun refers to an arbitrary set of individuals necessarily comprising the speaker, the hearer or both.

3.2

Against Simultaneous Rule Application. If we are to apply Backward Pronominalization and

Adverb Preposing simultaneously to:

(124)a.

/[Atao-ko [ fa h-ikarakara

an'io i Paoly^

done-by-me that will-take-care-of this Paul^

[rahatrizay tonga whenever

any i Paoly ^j]/

arrived there Paul^

b.

[Rahatrizay tonga whenever

any i Paoly^j aia ataoko

arrived there Paul^ part done-by-me

407

[fa hikarakara

an'io

0^]].

that will-take-care-of

this 0. l

"Whenever PaoL arrives, it is believed by me that (he^ w i u take care of this," i.e. "Whenever Pauli shows up, I think he^ will take care of this."

c. * [Rahatrizay tonga whenever

any

0^ dia ataoko

arrived there 0^ part done-by-me

[fa hikarakara

an'io i Paoly^j.

that will-take-care-of this Paul^

Barring the "de dicto" interpretation for (124)c., the sequence is ungrammatical for the same reason as (103)b. above, as explained in 2.2.3.2. If that is so, then a Simultaneous Rule Application has an undesirable effect: the constraint on Backward Pronominalization whereby it can take place only when the trigger commands its victim will have to be abandoned, although such a constraint is needed on independent grounds.

3.3

Against Free Order Rule Application. The following data argues against free ordering of

rules:

(125)

/M-ihevitra ["Mahay pres-thing intelligent

aho^] i Paolyj/ Paul^

408

(126)

*M-ihevitra ho

mahay

izy^ i Paolyi Paul^

pres-think corap intelligent he^

"Paul considers him to be intelligent," i i (127) *M-ihevitra ho mahay 0 i i Paolyi Paul^

pres-think comp intelligent Ch "Paul^ considers

to be intelligent,"

(127')

/[N-ilaza ["Handeha aho^] i Paoly^/ past-say will-go Paul^

(128)

*N-ilaza [fa

handeha izy^ i paolyj Paul^

past-say that will-go he^

"Pauli said that he^ would go,"

(129)

N-ilaza [fa

handeha 0 ^ i Paolyi .] Paul^

past-say that will-go 0^

"Pauli said that hei would go."

Given an underlying representation of the type of (125) and assuming an Indirect Discourse Formation Rule, which shifts aho "I" into the third person singular pronoun izy along with the insertion of the ho complementizer, as shown in (126), we should be able to obtain a grammatical sequence after application of Zeropronoun since both the trigger and its victim are Sus underlyingly in (125) and the potential trigger commands its victim. Instead, the output, as seen in (127), is irretrievably ungranmatical. This output must be blocked. There exist two possibilities:

409

1. ordering Raising-to-DO before Zero-pronoun; or 2. positing a Global Rule which would state that no pronoun derived from a first person as a result of Indirect Discourse Formation can delete under Zero-pronominalization. - Now, given an underlying sequence of the type of (127'), with Indirect Discourse Formation, we get (128), which is ungrammatical; but with Zero-pronoun, the sentence becomes perfectly grammatical, as in (129). However, our hypothesis number 2 above predicted that (129) should be ungrammatical. Since (129) is definitely grammatical and since hypothesis 2 makes the wrong prediction, it can only be inferred that it is defective and must be abandoned. We are thus left with hypothesis number 1, which involves Rule Ordering.

3.4.1

Ordering of Rules. Given the above, we may assume at this stage that rules

such as Pronominalization are ordered. But then, the following sequences involving Pronominalization and Adverb Preposing show that in one case Adverb Preposing precedes Pronominalization, whereas in another, Pronominalization precedes Adverb Preposing:

(130)

[Rahatrizay tonga whenever

any

i Paoly^] dia atao-ko part done-by-me

arrived there Paul^

[fa h-ikarakara

an'io 0^].

that will-take-care-of this (same as (124)b.) "Whenever Pau^ shows up, I think this." will take care of

410

(131)

[Rahatrizay tonga whenever

any

0^ dia atao-ko

arrived there 0^ part done-by-me

[fa h-ikarakara

an'io i Paolyj. this Pauli

that will-take-care-of

(same as (124)c. except for Rule Ordering) "Whenever he^ shows up, I think Paulj will take care of this."

(132)

[Rahatrizay m-anome boky an'i Jeanne^ i Paolyj] whenever pres-give book Jeanne^ Paulj

dia

[h-ampahatsiahy azy^ ilay resaka Oj]. her^ the talk Oj

part will-remind (same as (109)a.)

"Whenever Paulj gives Jeannej (a) book(s), hej will remind herj of the talk."

(133)

[Rahatrizay m-anome whenever

boky azyj i Paolyj] Paulj

pres-give book her^

dia

[h-ampahatsiahy an'i Jeanne^ ilay resaka Oj]. Jeannej the talk Oj

part will-remind (same as (109)b.)

"Whenever Paulj gives herj (a) book(s), hej will remind Jeannej of the talk."

In (130) and (132), Adverb Preposing applies to the adverbial clause before Pronominalization; the reverse is true of (131)r

411

where Zero-pronominalization has applied first, and (133), where pronominalization to the independent ooreferential pronoun azy has already taken place.

3.4.2

Derivations. Here are the derivations for (130) and (131):

(130')a. /Atao-ko

[ fa

h-ikarakara

an'io i Paoly^ this Paul^

done-by-me that will-take-care-of

[rahatrizay tonga whenever

any i Paoly^]]/.

arrived there Paul^

b.

[Rahatrizay tonga whenever

any i P a o l y d i a

ataoko

arrived there Paul^

part done-by-me

[fa

h-ikarakara

an'io

i Paoly.

that will-take-care-of

this Paul. l i Paoly^] dia ataoko part done-by-me

c.

[Rahatrizay tonga whenever

any

arrived there Paul^

[fa

h-ikarakara

an'io

0^].

that will-take-care-of

this 0^

(131')a. /Atao-ko

[ fa

h-ikarakara

an'io this

i Paoly^ Paul.

done-by-me that will-take-care-of

412

[rahatrizay tonga whenever

any i Paoly^]]/.

arrived there Paul^

b. Ataoko

[fa

h-ikarakara

an'io i Paoly^ this Paul^

done-by-me that will-take-care-of

[rahatrizay tonga whenever

any

(h ] ].

arrived there

c.

[Rahatrizay tonga whenever

any

(h] dia ataoko part done-by-me

arrived there

[fa

h-ikarakara

an'io i Paoly^]. this Paul. l

that will-take-care-of

In the derivation of yielding

(130), Adverb Preposing applies first,

(130')b., followed by Pronominalization, as seen in

(130')c. On the other hand, that of (131) requires the application of Forward Pronominalization, as in (1311)b., followed by Adverb Preposing, as shown in (131')c.

3.4.3

More Derivations. Here are the derivations for (132) and (133):

(132')a. /[H-ampahatsiahy an'i Jeanne^ iiay resaka i Paolyj will-remind Jeanne^ the talk Paulj

[rahatrizay m-anome whenever

boky an'i Jeanne^ i paolyj]]/. Jeanne^ paulj

pres-give book

413

b.

[Rahatrizay m-anome whenever

boky an'i Jeanne^ i Paolyj] Jeanne^ Paulj

pres-give book

dia [h-anpahatsiahy an'i Jeanne^ ilay resaka i Paolyj]. part will-remind Jeanne the talk Paulj

c.

[Rahatrizay m-anome whenever

boky an'i Jeanne^ i Paolyj] Jeanne^ Paulj

pres-give book

dia

[h-anpahatsiahy azy^ ilay resaka Oj]. her^ the talk Oj

part will-remind

)a. /[H-anpahatsiahy an'i Jeanne^ ilay resaka i Paolyj will-remind Jeanne.^ the talk Paulj

[rahatrizay m-anome whenever

boky an'i Jeanne^ i Paolyj]]/. Jeanne^ Paulj

pres-give book

b.

[H-ampahatsiahy an'i Jeanne^ ilay resaka i Paolyj will-remind Jeanne^ the talk Paulj

[rahatrizay m-anome whenever

boky azyi Oj]].

pres-give book her^ Oj

c.

[Rahatrizay m-anome whenever

boky azy^ Oj]

pres-give book her^ Oj

dia [h-anpahatsiahy an'i Jeanne.^ ilay resaka i Paolyj]. part will-remind Jeannei the talk Paulj

414

In the derivation of (132), Adverb Preposing applies first, as seen in (132')b., followed by Pronominalization, as shown in (132')c. On the other hand, that of (133) involves Forward Pronominalization, as in (133')b., before Adverb Preposing, as in (133')c.

4.0

Conclusions. In conclusion, it seems that in order to be able to

describe Pronominalization in Malagasy, we have to factor out Marked structures, not only of the type presented under 0.2 but also that explained under 2.2.3.2. Furthermore, it has been necessary to assume throughout this chapter that a Zero-pronoun, a Pronoun, Ilay + Pronoun, or a Demonstrative as a victim of Pronominalization always has a trigger within the sentence. This has enabled us to discard a sequence of the type:

(134)

Tonga

0?

perf-arrived 0 "He/she or you has/have arrived?"

whose main characteristics are (a) that it only has a victim, but no explicit trigger, and (b) that the Zero-pronoun here can be used to refer to a third person toward whom sane deference is due or to the hearer with whom the speaker does not wish to have a confrontation situation. In other words, (134) can be used for the sake of Politeness and is therefore Marked. Last but not least, structures like (134) are inherently ambiguous and we have confined ourselves to the transparent reading in the case of sequences which do lend themselves to the

415

same type of ambiguity. Thus, in quite a few cases like (27), where the victim occupies the DO position, or (31), where it is an jo, and (64), where it is an Oblique there is a reading on which Zero-pronoun can refer to a trigger whose referent encompasses the speaker, in which case the sequence would be grammatical. We have held this assumption constant throughout all of the examples given.

4.1

Distribution of the Different Forms. Given the two assumptions made under 0.1 relative to

the nature of the trigger (referential and singular), it appears that the four possible forms (0.1 above) of the victim under Pronominalization are in complementary distribution with respect to the syntactic/semantic positions occupied by the trigger and its victim on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy, and according to whether the latter is human, non-animate or non-human, but animate. In this connection, it is interesting to note that: 1. Zero-pronominalization is heavily syntactically conditioned since it can only occur if both the trigger and its victim are jointly Sus; 2. at the other end of the scale, when the trigger is low on the Keenan-Comrie Hierachy and if it refers to a non-animate thing, a Demonstrative can replace a Pronoun; 3. when the trigger is human, the form of the victim is the least Marked, whereas this is not the case when it has either a non-animate or an animate but non-human referent. This also justifies the decision taken to leave the plural forms out of consideration since for example izy ireo "he/she these" involve

416

the simple Pronoun izy in combination with the plural Demonstrative ireo. 4. We have a tripartite division, where when both the trigger and its victim are Sus, then Zero-pronoun is obligatory, as opposed to when both the trigger and its victim do not occupy the Su or the DO positions; falling in between, we have a situation where both trigger and victim are DOs, in which case we can optionally have either one of two forms belonging to the outer positions. And furthermore, 5. only the "conmand," but not the "precede" parameter is relevant, and Pronominalization is a Cyclic Rule, as shown in the last section of this chapter. Finally, in Chapter Uiree on Reflexivization in its Subsection 5.6.1, it is shown that the form independent or clitic the victim, i.e. Pro of Pronominalization, could take, is heavily conditioned by its syntactic/semantic position.

417

CHAPTER POOR FOOTNOTES

Icoreferentiality between the victim and its trigger is assumed.


2

I will also set aside those cases where a clause is embedded

under noho/tamina "because of" Causal-Oblique (see Passive):

Sosotra i Jeanne^ noho angry

izy^ tsy nahita an'i Paoly. Paul

Jeanne^ because she^ neg saw

"Jeanne^ was angry due to her^ not seeing Paul."

*Sosotra i Jeannei noho/tamina Oi tsy nahita an'i Paoly. angry Jeannei because Oi neg saw Paul

*Sosotra i Jeannei noho/tamina tsy nahita an'i Paoly zy^ angry Jeannei because neg saw Paul shei

*Sosotra i Jeannei noho/tamina tsy nahita an'i Paoly Oi. angry Jeannei because neg saw Paul Oi

The word order in the embedded clause is marked since instead of the usual VOS, we have SVO. Likewise, I am discarding complex cases where the pronoun is accompanied by modifiers, as in:

Niaraka

tamin'izy

roa i Paoly. Paul

accompanied with

they two

"Paul went with the two of them."

In all of the b. sequences in 2.2.1, there is a strong pause

after the zero-pronoun, just like in the a. sentences.

CHAPTER FIVE

PASSIVE ZATION

0.0

Introduction. The purpose of this chapter is to describe how the pro-

cess of Passivization operates: first, in Section 1, at the level of the simplex sentence; then, in Section 2, in its interaction with other processes such as Equi-1, Equi-2, Raising-to-DO, and Raising-to-Su, the last two being defined as in Postal (1974). Furthermore, Section 1 comprises three divisions: 1. Subsection 1 deals with the classification of Malagasy verbs; 2. Subsection 2, with the cline between a typically transitive and a typically intransitive verb and the connection between the two; and 3. Subsection 3 addresses the issue of the order of the different types of Oblique. Section 2 explores the behavior of Passive, first in non-Causative constructions in Subsection 1, then in Causative Constructions in Subsection 2.

419

Section 1

The Basic Process

0.1

Introduction. The purpose of Section 1 is to show that: 1. Malagasy has five different passive affixes: a. (no)...(ina), both elements of which are optional,

depending on the type of predicate dealt with and on the tense of the verb (see 1.2.5); b. voa; c. a; d. tafa; and e. an/i...i/ana the so-called "circumstantial form"-

- the alternation an/i depending on the prefix of the verb, as will be explained under 1.1.7, whereas that between i/a of the suffix does not seem to be predictable; 2. that the distribution of the above affixes is constrained by the following factors: a. the class to which a given verb belongs; b. whether the verb is transitive or intransitive; c. whether it is in the imperfective/perfective aspect; d. as well as the syntactic/semantic position occupied by the NP to be promoted to Su position on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy (1977).

0.2

Scope of Present Study. The description of Passivization in Malagasy will be

confined to the process at work with verbs of Classes 1 and 2, as

420

defined under 1.1.1 and 1.1.2 below, since: 1. only these two represent open classes; and 2. with the exception of Class 5 comprising two verbs

and which, therefore, could be considered marginal, Class 2 presents the relevant features of Classes 3 and 4, as can be seen on Table 10.

1.0

Hie Relevant Parameters. It will be shown that: 1. Verbs in Malagasy subdivide into five different

classes, the first two of which are open, all the others being closed. Classes 1 and 2 are the cries which give verbs that take the above-mentioned passive affixes. 2. The distribution of the different passive affixes are, in part, constrained by a combination of two factors, i.e. transitivity and aspect: a. if the verb is typically transitive and in the imperfective aspect (see 1.1.8(1)), no...ina is used, although when an Cfcject-Incorporation has taken place within the VP, only the a form can show up for illustrative examples of Object-Incorporation in other languages, see Mardirussian (1975) and Sugita (1974) ; however, if the verb is in the perfective aspect, then we have voa instead of no...ina and tafa instead of a; b. if the verb is optionally transitive, there is a choice (see 1.1.8(2)) between no...ina and a in the imperfective aspect, and between voa and tafa in the perfective aspect; and c. if the verb is typically intransitive and does not have the corresponding transitive verb with the an(a) prefix, it can only take the circumstantial form an/i...i/an in the imper-

421

fective aspect; however, if a typically intransitive verb has the corresponding transitive verb with the an (a) prefix, and if the latter is a root (this holds for class 2.M), it can take no...ina in the imperfective aspect, and voa in the perfective aspect, but if the latter is an intransitive verb with an _ prefix, the a i form is to be used in the imper fective aspect and tafa in the perfective aspect (see 1.1.8(3)). 3. Furthermore, it is possible to promote to Su an NP occupying a syntactic/semantic position between Su and Comit-

ative-Oblique on the hierarchy: a. if the NP to be promoted is a DO or an 10 and if the verb is in the imperfective aspect, it takes the no...ina circumfix; b. if the NP to be promoted is an Oblique-Intermediary (or, henceforth, Intermediary, for short) or an Instrumental and if the verb is in the imperfective aspect, the latter takes the a prefix; c. however, if in (a) and (b) above, the verb is in the perfective aspect, then the latter takes the voa prefix; and d. if the NP to be promoted is an Instrumental, a Beneficiary, a Manner, a Locative, or a Temporal, then the verb takes the an/i...i/ana circumfix, depending on its subclass.

1.1.0

Malagasy Verb Classification. Verbs in Malagasy subdivide into five different classes

according to: 1. whether the root corresponding to a given verb is used in isolation or not.

422

2. If the root is used, it will have to be determined whether it is used in an active or passive construction; 3. whether a given verb has an affixal form or not. 4. And if so, whether such a derivative form is used in an active or passive construction. Only sample illustrations will be provided in the text although more verbs belonging to different classes will be given in the appendices.

1.1.1

Class 1 Verbs. In Class 1, the root corresponding to a given verb can-

not be used in isolation but only with an affix, thus yielding both an active and a passive derivative verb. Thus, with a root like loto "dirt":

(l)a.

*Loto ny trano ny ankizy. dirt the house the child(ren)

b.

N - an - doto ny trano ny ankizy. past-pref-dirt the house the child(ren) "The children were dirtying the house."

c.

No - loto -in' ny ankizy pass-dirt-by

ny trano.

the child(ren) the house

"The children were dirtying the house."

d.

Voa - loto - n' ny ankizy pass-dirt-by

ny trano.

the child(ren) the house

"Hie house has been dirtied by the children."

423

1.1.2

Class 2 Verbs. In Class 2, the root corresponding to a given verb can

be used in isolation as a passive, although it also yields both an active and passive derivatives, both in the non-perfective and the perfective aspects . Thus, latsaka "be in the state of having been dropped" gives:

(2)a.

Latsaka ny taratasy. dropped the letter "The letter is in the state of having been dropped."

b.

N - an - datsaka ny taratasy i Paoly. past-pref-dropped the letter "Paul ws dropping the letter." Paul

c.

N - a - latsak' past-pass-dropped-by

i Paoly ny taratasy. Paul the letter

"The letter was being dropped by Paul."

d.

Voa - latsak' pass-dropped-by

i Paoly ny taratasy. Paul the letter

"Paul has managed to drop the letter."

1.1.3

Class 3 Verbs. In Class 3, the verb is only used as a root passive and

does not present an active or a passive derivative. Thus, lasa "be gone" gives:

424

(3)a.

Lasa ny entana. gone the luggage "The luggage is gone."

b.

*N - an - dasa ny entana i Paoly. past-pref-gone the luggage Paul (intended meaning provided belcw) "Paul was taking the luggage."

c.

*N - a - lasa - n' i Paoly ny entana. past-pass-gone-by Paul the luggage

"The luggage was being taken by Paul."

d.

*No - lasa - n' i Paoly ny entana. pass-gone-by Paul the lugage

"The luggage was being taken by Paul."

Although (3) a. with the root passive lasa is perfectly grammatical, if it is combined with the active prefix an, as in (3)b., or the nonperfective aspect affixes a, as in (3)c., and no...ina, as in (3)d., the sequence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical. The verbs belonging to Class 3 are limited in number and comprise the following: afaka "can," tokony "should," aleo "had rather," tonga "be in the state of having arrived," and avy "in the process of coming."

1.1.4

Class 4 Verbs. In Class 4, the verb is also used as a root passive and

it has an active derivative:

425

(4) a.

Re

ny vaovao.

heard the news "Hie news has been/was heard."

b.

N - an - dre

ny vaovao i Paoly. Paul

past-pref-heard the news

"Paul was hearing the news."

c.

*N - a - re

ny vaovao i Paoly. Paul

past-pass-heard the news

?*No - re - nes - in' i Paoly ny vaovao. pass-heard-by Paul the news

"The news has been/was being heard by Paul."

In (4) a. and (4)b., the root re is used as a passive and in the active voice in combination with the prefix an, respectively, and the sentences are grammatical, whereas in (4)c., it is combined with the Affixal Passives a, and the resulting sequence is irretrievably ungrammatical. The sequence (4)d. is only marginally acceptable and is characteristic of Foreigner Talk. Class 4 has a limited set of verbs which comprise: hita "be seen," very "be lost," lafo "be expensive," and afaka "be liberated."

1.1.5

Class 5 Verbs. ' In Class 5, the root is used as an active, although it

also has a passive derivative. With mila "need," we get:

426

(5)a.

M - ila

ny boky i Paoly. Paul

pres-need the book

"Paul needs the book(s)."

b.

*N - an - ila

ny boky i Paoly. Paul

past-pref-need the book

c.

*N - a - ila - n' i Paoly ny boky. past-pass-need-by Paul the book

d.

N - ila - in past-need-by

i Paoly ny boky. Paul the book

"The book was needed by Paul."

In (5) a., the root mi la is used as an active and it can also be used, as in (4)d., with the Affixal Passive n(o) ...in(a) since the latter is a perfectly grammatical sentence. Hcwever, it cannot be combined with the active prefix an, as can be inferred from the ungrammaticality of (4)b., or with the Affixal Passive prefix a. Class 5 has oily two members: mi la "need," and sahy "dare."

1.1.6

Sunmary: Hie Verb Classes of Malagasy. All of the information provided in the paragraphs from

1.1.1 to 1.1.5, which pertain to the different verb classes of Malagasy, can be summarized on Table 10, according to whether a verb is a root or a derivative and hew it is used.

427

Table 10

Verb Classes

Cl.l

CI.2

CI.3

CI. 4

CI. 5

as Active Root Used as Passive Active Derivative Passive Derivative

OK

OK OK OK

OK
* *

OK OK
*

* *

OK OK

OK

Note: CI. = Class; * = NOt Used; OK = Used.

1.1.7

Transitivity. Furthermore, the verbs in Classes 1 and 2 can be sub-

divided according to whether: 1. their DO must occur, in which case we have a typically transitive verb; 2. it can optionally be left out; and 3. it can never take a DO, in which case we have a typically intransitive verb. For purposes of illustration, we will confine ourselves to Class 1 except for Subclass 2.M under 1.1.8 which can be subdivided into the following three categories, depending on whether the verb must take a DO, can optionally take one or cannot:

428

1. Typically transitive verbs, i.e. those that must have a DO: a. l.A, the TVP or transitive verb phrase has the an prefix and does not have the corresponding intransitive verb with the j prefix (see (6)d.); L b. l.A1, the TVP has the i prefix but not the corresponding intransitive verb with the _ prefix (see (7)d.); and i c. l.B, the TVP has the an prefix and has the corresponding intransitive verb with the i prefix, but the latter can. not co-occur with an Instrumental or with a Causal (see(8)a.). With a verb from one of the above subclasses, Object Incorporation cannot take place, as opposed to the last two: d. l.C, the TVP has the an prefix (see (9)a.); e. l.C', the TVP has the ^prefix (see (10)a.); and where Object Incorporation can take place, as in (10)f. and g.

2. Optionally transitive verbs, i.e. those whose DO can be left out: a. l.D, the TVP has the an prefix and has the corresponding intransitive verb with i, which can take an Instrumental but not a Causal (see (11)d. and (11) e.); b. l.E, the TVP has the an prefix and has the corresponding transitive verb with _i, which cannot take an Instrumental (see (12) e.), or a Causal (see (12) f.); c. l.F, the TVP has the an prefix and the corresponding intransitive verb with i, which cannot take an Instrumental (see (13)e.), or a Causal (see (13)f.); however, with this Subclass, there is a possibility of Object Incorporation (compare (13)h and (13) i.);

429

d. l.G, the TVP with an has the corresponding intransitive with i , which can take a Causal, but not an Instrumental . (see (14)d.); e. l.H, the TVP with an has no corresponding intransitive with i (see (15) d.). With a verb from Subclass l.D to l.H, Object Incorporation cannot take place, as opposed to the next two: f. 1.1, the intransitive verb has the an prefix (see (16)); and g. I.J., the intransitive verb has the i prefix (see (17)); which result frcm Object incorporation.

3. Typically intransitive verbs, i.e. those which cannot take a DO at all: a. l.K, the intransitive verb has the an prefix, but there exists no corresponding TVP (see (18)); b. l.L, the intransitive verb has the i prefix, but ^ there is no corresponding TVP (see (19)); c. 2.M, the intransitive verb is a root denoting a State (see (20)); and d. 2.M', the intransitive predicate is an adjective (see (20') and (21)).

1.1.8

Distribution of Passive Affixes. Hie distribution of the different passive affixes is as

follows:

430

1. With typically transitive verbs, as defined above, and in the imperfective aspect: a. with Subclasses l.A, l.A', and l.B, only no...ina can be used (see (6) to (8)); however b. with Subclasses l.C and l.C', which originally have an Intermediary, but which undergo Object Incorporation, oily the a form is possible (see (9) and (10)).

2. With optionally transitive verbs in the imperfective aspect: a. with Subclass l.D, no...ina is the passive form used (see (11)); b. with Subclass l.E, there is a choice between no. . ina and a (see (12)b. & (12)g.); and c. with Subclass l.F, l.G, l.H, 1.1, and l.J, only the a form of passive is used (see (13) to (17)).

3. With typically intransitive verbs in the imperfective aspect: a. with Subclasses l.K and l.L, there is no possibility of using no...ina nor a; only the circumstantial form an/i...i/ana can be used (see (18) and (19)); b. with Subclass 2.M, if the corresponding intransitive verb with the prefix exists, then it is possible to use the a

form to introduce the Agent (see (20)c.); otherwise, no...ina has to be used (see (20')d. and (21) d.); and c. with Subclasses 2.M and 2.M1, if the corresponding active derivative with an exists, but not the intransitive verb with i, then the no...ina affix can be used.

431

1.1.8.1

Illustrative Examples of Verbs in l.A to l.C*. In this Section, Subclasses l.A to l.C', as defined

above, will be illustrated:

(6)a.

N - an - dodona an'i Jeanne i Paoly. [l.A] past-pref-hurry Jeanne Paul

"Paul was hurrying Jeanne."

b.

No-dodona-n' i Paoly i Jeanne, pass-hurry-by Paul Jeanne

"Jeanne was being hurried by Paul."

c.

Voa-dodo-n'

i Paoly i Jeanne, Jeanne

pass-hurry-by Paul

"Jeanne has been hurried by Paul."

d.

*N-i-dodona

i Jeanne.

past-pref-hurry Jeanne "Jeanne hurried."

e.

*N-a-dodona

i Jeanne.

past-pass-hurry Jeanne "Jeanne was being hurried."

(7)a.

N-i-kendry

ny varavarana i Paoly. [l.A'] Paul

past-pref-aim-at the window "Paul was aiming at the windcw."

432

b.

NO-kendre-n' pass-aim-at-by

i Paoly ny varavarana. Paul the window

"The window was being aimed at by Paul."

c.

Voa-kendr-in1 pass-aim-at-by

i Paoly ny varavarana. Paul the window

"The window has been aimed at by Paul."

a.

*N-i-kendry

i Paoly.

past-pref-aim-at Paul *"Paul was aiming at."

e.

*N-a-kendr-in'

i Paoly ny varavarana.

past-pass-aim-at-by Paul the window "The window was being aimed at by Paul."

(8) a.

N-ana-pasaka

ny ovy

i Jeanne. [l.B]

past-pref-smash the potato Jeanne "Jeanne was smashing the potatoes."

b.

NO-pasah-an' i Jeanne ny ovy. pass-smash-by Jeanne the potato "The potatoes were being smashed by Jeanne."

c.

Voa-pasak'

i Jeanne ny ovy.

pass-smash-by Jeanne the potato "The potatoes have been smashed by Jeanne."

433

d.

N-i-pasaka

ny ovy.

past-pref-smash the potato "Hie potatoes burst open."

e.

*N-a-pasak1 past-pass-sraash-by

i Jeanne ny ovy. Jeanne the potato

f.

*N-i-pasaka

tamin'

ny sotro ny ovy.

past-pref-smash past-with the spoon the potato g. *"Hie potatoes burst open with the spoon."

*N-i-pasaka

ny vy

tamin'

i Paoly.

past-pref-smash the potato because-of Paul "Hie potatoes burst open because of Paul."

(9) a.

N - an - doa ny vola i Paoly. [l.C] past-pref-pay the noney Paul "Paul was paying the money."

b.

*No - loa- v-in' i Paoly ny vola. pass-pay-by Paul the money

c.

Voa-loa-n' i Paoly ny vola. pass-pay-by Paul the money "Hie money has been paid by Paul."

d.

*N - i - loa

ny vola.

past-pref-pay the money

434

e.

N-a-loa-n'

i Paoly ny vola.

past-pass-pay-by Paul the money "Hie money was being paid by Paul."

f.

N-an-doa

vola i Paoly.

past-pref-pay money Paul g. (compare with (9)a.) "Paul was paying money."

N-anao loa

vola i Paoly. Paul

past-do payment money

"Paul made a money payment."

(10) a.

N - i - telina

ny fanafody ny marary. [l.C1]

past-pref-swallow the medicine the patient "Hie patient was swallowing the medicine."

b.

*NO-telo-m-in'

ny marary ny fanafody.

pass-swallcw-by the patient the medicine

c.

Voa-teli-n'

ny marary ny fanafody.

pass-swallcw-by the patient the medicine "The medicine has been swallowed by the patient."

a.

*N - i -telina

ny marary.

past-pref-swallow the patient *"Hie patient swallowed."

435

e.

N-a-tel'i-n'

ny marary ny fanafody.

past-pass-swallow-by the patient the medicine "Hie medicine was being swallowed by the patient."

f.

N-i-telina fanafody ny marary. past-pref-swallcw medicine the patient (compare with (10)a.) "Hie patient swallowed (some) medicine."

g.

Nanao

teli-noka

ny marary.

past-do swallcwing-of-insect the patient "Hie patient was gulping down (something)."

Hie grammatically pattern in (6), (7), and (8) suggests that with Subclasses l.A, l.A', and l.B, only no...ina can be used, as opposed to that found in (9), (10), and (11), where only the a form of Affixal Passive is possible.

1.1.8.2

Illustrative Examples of Verbs in l.D to l.J. Hie following sentences illustrate Subclasses l.D, l.E,

l.F, l.G, l.H, 1.1, and l.J:

(11)a.

N-an-dalotra

ny trano i Paoly. [l.D] Paul

past-act-plaster the house

"Paul was plastering the house."

b.

No-lalor-in'

i Paoly ny trano.

pass-plaster-by Paul the house "Hie house was being plastered by Paul."

436

c.

Voa-lalotr' pass-plaster-by

i Paoly ny trano. Paul the house

"The house has been plastered by Paul."

d.

N-i-lalotra

t-amin'

ny loko ny trano.

past-pref-plaster past-with the paint the house "The house was plastered with the paint."

e.

*N-i-lalotra

ny trano t-amin' i Paoly.

past-pref-plaster the house past-with Paul

*N-a-lalotr' f.

i Paoly ny trano.

past-pref-plaster-by Paul the house "Hie house was being plastered by Paul."

N-ana-tono (12) a.

ny hena i Jeanne. [l.E] Jeanne

past-pre f-barbecue the neat

"Jeanne was barbecuing the meat."

No-tono-in' b.

i Jeanne ny hena.

pass-barbecue-by Jeanne the meat "The meat was being barbecued by Jeanne."

Voa-tono-n' c.

i Jeanne ny hena.

pass-barbecue-by Jeanne the meat "The neat has been barbecued by Jeanne."

437

d.

N-i-tono

ny hena.

past-pref-barbecue the meat "The meat was in the state of having been barbecued."

e.

*N-i-tono

taraina

vy

ny hena.

past-pref-barbecue past-with iron the meat "The meat was in the state of having been barbecued with iron."

f.

*N-i-tono

ny hena tamin'

i Jeanne,

past-pref-barbecue the meat past-with Jeanne g"Hie meat was in the state of having been barbecued because of Jeanne."

N-a-tono-n'

i Jeanne ny hena.

past-pass-barbecue-by Jeanne the meat "Hie meat was being barbecued by Jeanne."

(13) a.

N-am-(p)etraka ny vola tao amin'ny banky Paoly.[l.F] past-pref-put the money in the bank Paul

"Paul was putting the money into the bank."

b.

*No-petraha-n' i Paoly tao amin'ny banky ny vola. pass-put-by Paul in the bank the money

c.

Voa-petrak' i Paoly tao amin'ny banky ny vola. pass-put-by Paul into the bank the rroney

"Hie money has been deposited by Paul at the bank."

438

a.

N-i-petraka tao amin'ny banky ny vola. past-pref-put in the bank the money

"The noney was in deposit at the bank."

e.

*N-i-petraka tao amin'ny banky tamin'ny lakile ny vola. past-pref-put in the bank with the key the money

*"The money was in deposit at the bank with the key."

f.

*N-i-petraka tao amin'ny banky ny vola tamin' i Paoly. past-pref-put in the bank the money because-of Paul

"Hie noney was in deposit at the bank because of Paul."

g.

N-a-petrak'

i Paoly tao amin'ny banky ny vola. in the bank the money

past-pass-put-by Paul

"The money was being put into the bank by Paul."

h.

N-am-(p)etraka vola tao amin'ny banky i Paoly. past-pref-put money in the bank Paul

"Paul was putting (seme) money into the bank." (same as (13)a.)

i.

N-anao petra-bola

tao amin'ny banky i Paoly. the bank Paul

past-do deposit-noney in

"Paul made a money deposit at the bank."

(14) a.

N-an-dahatra

ny mpianatra i Paoly. [1.6] Paul

past-pref-line-up the pupils "Paul lined 1 the pupils." 5

439

b.

*No-lhara-n1 pass-line-up-by

i Paoly ny mpianatra. Paul the pupils

"The pupils were being lined up by Paul."

c.

Voa-lahatr'

i Paoly ny mpianatra.

pass-line-up-by Paul the pupils "The pupils have been lined up by Paul."

d.

N-i-lahatra

ny mpianatra noho

i Paoly

past-pref-line-up the pupils

because-of Paul

"The pupils lined up because of Paul"

/*tamin'ny tady. with the rope "with the rope."

e.

N-a-lahatr'

i Paoly ny mpianatra.

past-pass-line-up-by Paul the pupils "The pupils were being lined up by Paul."

(15)a.

N-an-dripaka

ny fahavalo ny tafika. [l.H] the array

past-pref-destroy the enemy

"The array was destroying the enemy."

b.

*No-ripah-an'

ny tafika ny fahavalo. the enemy

pass-destroy-by the army

440

c.

Voa-ripaky

ny tafika ny fahavalo. the enemy

pass-destroy-by the a r y ra

"The enemy has been destroyed by the army."

d.

*N-i-ripaka

ny fahavalo.

past-pref-destroy the enemy

e.

N-a-ripaky

ny tafika ny fahavalo. the enemy

past-pass-destroy-by the army

"The enemy was being destroyed by the army."

f.

Ripaky

ny tafika ny fahavalo. the enemy

destroyed-by the ariny

"The enemy has been destroyed by the army."

(16)a.

N-an-dainga i Paoly. [1.1] past-pref-lie Paul "Paul was lying."

b.

N-anao lainga i Paoly. past-do lie Paul

"Paul was making up (a) lie (s)."

c.

N-anao lainga be i Paoly. past-do lie big Paul

"Paul was making up (a) big lie(s)."

441

d.

N-anao an'ila lainga be i Paoly. past-do the lie big Paul

"Paul was making up the said lie(s)."

e.

N-atao-n'

i Paoly ilay lainga be. big

past-pass-do-by Paul the lie

"The big lie was being made up by Paul."

f.

*No-tao-n' i Paoly ilay lainga be. pass-do-by Paul the lie big

"The big lie was being made by Paul."

(17)a.

N-i-fofofofo

ny rivotra. [l.J]

past-blcw-violently the wind "The wind was blowing violently."

b.

N-anao f ofofofo ny rivotra. past-do violence the wind "There was (were) (a) violent gust(s) of wind."

c.

N-a-fofofofo-n'

i Paoly ny rivotra.

past-pass-violence-by Paul the wind "The wind was made to blow violently by Paul," i.e. "Paul was letting the wind blow violently."

d.

*No-fofofofo-n' i Paoly ny rivotra. pass-violence-by Paul the wind

442

Hie grammatically pattern shows that the generalization made under 1.1.8 holds. The sentence (13)i. suggests that the apparent DO vola "(some) noney" originates in some other case, here Genitive, since we literally have "deposit of money," whereas if it had the definite article n^, the underlying representation would have been something like Nanao petraka tamin'ny vola i Paoly. literally "Did deposit with the money Paul," i.e. "Paul made a deposit with the money." Furthermore, the oily difference between (12)b. with no...ina and (12)g. with a is that in the first case, "Jeanne is actively engaged in the process of barbecuing the meat," whereas in the second, "she just put it on the fire and let it take care of itself," so to speak. Finally, in the a. versions of (16) and (17), we have intransitive verbs with an and jl prefixes respectively, whereas in the b. versions, their unincorporated DOs show up; if the DOs are definite and get promoted to Su position, as in (16) e. and (17) c., the a form of Affixal Passive is used. ( I , 1.1.8.3 Illustrative Examples of Verbs in l.K to 2.M'. The following sentences illustrate Subclasses l.K, l.L, 2.M and 2.M':

(18)a.

N-an-javona

i Paoly. [l.K]

past-pref-disappear Paul "Paul disappeared."

b.

*N-an-javona

ny mpianatra i Paoly. Paul

past-pref-disappear the pupils

443

c.

*No-zavona-n1

i paoly ny mpianatra.

pass-disappear-by Paul the pupils

d.

*N-a-zavona-n'

i Paoly ny npianatra.

past-pass-disappear-by Paul the pupils

e.

Omaly no n-an-javona-n1

i Paoly.

yesterday part past-circ-disappear-by Paul "It was yesterday that Paul disappeared."

(19) a.

N-i-lomano

i Paoly. [l.L]

past-pref-swim Paul "Paul was swiircning."

b.

*N-i-lomano

ny ranoniasina i Paoly. Paul

past-pref-swim the sea *"Paul was swimming the sea."

c.

*No-lomano-s-an' i Paoly ny ranomasina. pass-swim-by Paul the sea

d.

*N-a-lcmano-s-an' i Paoly ny rananasina. past-pass-swim-by Paul the sea

e.

Ny ranomasina no the sea

n-i-lomano-s-an' i Paoly.

part past-circ-swim-by Paul

"It was in the sea that Paul was swimming."

444

(20) a.

Latsaka ny taratasy. [2.M] dropped the letter "The letter is in the state of having been dropped.

a'.

*Latsaka ny taratasy NP. dropped the ltter NP "Someone dropped the letter."

b.

N-i-latsaka

ny taratasy.

past-pref-dropped the letter "The letter dropped."

c.

N-a-latsak'

i Paoly ny taratasy.

past-pass-dropped-by Paul the letter "The letter was being dropped by Paul," i.e. "Paul was dropping the letter."

a.

*No-latsaha-n1

i Paoly ny taratasy.

pass-dropped-by Paul the letter

(20")a.

Rovitra ny taratasy. [2.M] torn-up the letter "Ihe letter is in the state of having been torn up.

a'.

*Rovitra ny taratasy NP. torn-up the letter NP "Someone tore up the letter."

445

b.

*N-i-rovitra

ny taratasy.

past-pref-torn-up the letter

c.

*N-a-rovitr'

i Paoly ny taratasy.

past-pass-torn-up-by Paul the letter

d.

No-rovit-in'

i Paoly ny taratasy.

pass-torn-up-by Paul the letter "Hie letter was being torn up by Paul," i.e. "Paul was tearing up the letter."

>l)a.

Mainty ny volo. [2.M'] black the hair "The hair is black."

a'.

*Mainty ny volo NP. black the hair NP "Someone blackened the hair."

b.

*N-i-mainty

ny volo.

past-pref-black the hair

c.

*N-a-mainti-n'

i Paoly ny volo.

past-pass-black-by Paul the hair

d.

NO-mainti-s-in' i Paoly ny volo. pass-black-by Paul the hair

"Paul was dyeing the hair black."

446

The contrast in gramraticality between the a. and the b. versions in (18) and (19) and that between the a. and the b. versions in (20), (20'), and (21) suggests that these are typically intransitive predicates, with Subclasses l.K and l.L, the granmaticaiity pattern shows that only the circumstantial voice with an/i. .^j/ana is possible since only the e. versions of (18) and (19) are granmatical. As for Subclass 2.M, the Affixal Passive with a is possible only if the intransitive verb with the _ prefix corresi ponding to the root passive, as in (20)b. but not in (20')b., exists. This is in conformity with what was stated under 1.1.8(2) above.

1.2.1

Additional Parameters: Tense and Aspect. As the tripartite division seen under 1.1.7 above sug-

gests, the cline between a typically transitive and a typically intransitive verb is important. However, it is not the only factor involved in the selection of the different passive forms. It appears that the distribution of the affixes listed under 0.1 is also constrained by: 1. the perfective or imperfective aspect of the verb, the latter being defined as in Comrie (1976a); and 2. the tense of the verb.

1.2.2

Prototypical Transitivity and Aspect. If a verb is typically transitive whether it has an

an or an i prefix and furthermore, if it is in the imperfective aspect, then it will take the no...i/ana circumfix:

447

(22)a.

N-an-didy

ny mofo i Jeanne.

past-pref-cut the bread Jeanne "Jeanne was catting the bread."

b.

N-didi-n' i Jeanne ny nofo pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread

fa tsy voa-didi-ny. but neg pass-cut-by-her "The bread was being cut by Jeanne, but was not successfully cut by her," i.e. "Jeanne was trying to cut the bread, but in vain."

(23)a.

N-i-jery

ny mpianatra i Jeanne. Jeanne

past-pref-seek the pupils

"Jeanne was looking for the pupils."

b.

N-jere-n' i Jeanne ny mpianatra pass-seek-by Jeanne the pupils

fa tsy hita-ny. but neg seen-by-her "The pupils were being sought by Jeanne but not successfully," i.e. "Jeanne was trying to look for the pupils, but in vain."

However, if a verb is transitive but in the perfective aspect/ then it will take the voa passive prefix:

448

(24)

Voa-didi-n' i Jeanne ny mofo pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread

"The bread has been cut by Jeanne,"

*fa tsy voa-didi-ny. but neg pass-cut-by-her "but in vain." "The bread has been cut by Jeanne,*but has not been cut."

1.2.3

Optional Transitivity and Aspect. Now, if a verb is optionally transitive and is in the

imperfective aspect, then it will take the a passive prefix:

(25)a.

N-i-janona past-pref-stop

i Jeanne, Jeanne

"Jeanne stopped (on her own)."

b.

N-a-janon-n'

i Paoly i Jeanne Jeanne

past-pass-stop-by Paul

fa tsy voa-jano-ny. but neg pass-stop-by-him "but in vain." "Paul tried to leave Jeanne behind, but in vain."

However, if the optionally intransitive verb is in the perfective aspect, then the relevant passive prefix is tafa;

449

(26)

Tafa-janona (*i Paoly) i Jeanne pass-stop (by Paul) Jeanne

"Jeanne was left behind,"

*fa tsy voa-jano-ny. but neg pass-stop-by-him "but in vain." "Jeanne was left behind, *but was not left behind."

In (26), the Agent cannot be expressed at all since the sequence comprising the genitive NP i Paoly is ungrammatical (also see Chapter One, Section 2.2.2.2).

1.2.4

Suirmary: Distribution of the Passive Affixes. The above information in 1.2.2 and 1.2.3 is summarized

on Table 11:

Table 11

Distribution of the Different Verbal Affixes

Transitive Verb

Intransitive Verb

Active

Imperfective

-an-/-i-

-i-

Passive

Imperfective Perfective

no. ..i/ana voa-

-atafa-

450

1.2.5

The Semantics of Passive Affixes. As was stated under 0.1(1.a.), both elements in the

circumfix no...ina can be left out altogether or cxily ina shows up. this yields the following situation: 1. On the one hand (see 1.2.6): a. when the verb is a root, i.e. the bare form with no affix, it denotes a State or Autonomous Event, i.e. without an Agent, or is Abilitative with one; b. when the verb is a root which can take the tafa prefix, it acquires the meaning of Abilitative or Accidental; and c. when other affixes go on the verb, then it denotes a Deliberate Activity. 2. On the other hand (see 1.2.7): a. when the verb only has the ina suffix, it refers to a Habitual Activity or Event if there is no Agent, but if there is one, then it refers to an ongoing Activity or Event or even something imminent; and b. when the verb has no...ina, it refers to the equivalent of the English past tense or even the immediate past, as opposed to ho...ina, which refers to the future.

1.2.6

Illustrative Examples for Case 1. The following examples illustrate case 1 made under

1.2.5 above:

(27)a.

Loka

ny biriky.

[State]

with-hole the brick "The brick has a hole in it."

451

b.

Efa

loka

ny biriky fa tsy nisy n-an-doka.

already with-hole the brick but neg there past-hole "The brick already had a hole in it/ but no one made it."

c.

*Fanahy inian' deliberately-by

i Paoly loka

ny biriky.

Paul with-hole the brick

"Paul deliberately made a hole in the brick."

(28)a.

N-i-tombona

i Paoly (noho

i Jaona).

past-pref-fall Paul

(because-of John)

"Paul fell (because of John)."

b.

Tafa-tombona (tsy satry) pass-fall

i Paoly. [Accidental]

(neg deliberately) Paul

"Paul fell (inadvertently)."

c.

*Fanahy inian' deliberately-by

i Paoly ny

tafa-tonibona.

Paul camp pass-fall

*"Paul fell inadvertently and deliberately."

(29) a.

Loka-n'

i Paoly ny biriky. [Abilitative]

with-hole-by Paul the brick "Paul made a hole in the brick," or "Paul managed to make a hole in the brick."

b.

N-aha-loka

ny biriky i Paoly. Paul

past-caus-with-hole the brick

"Paul managed to make a hole in the brick."

452

(30)a.

Zaka-n'

i Paoly ny entana. [Abilitative]

bearable-by Paul the luggage "Paul oould carry the luggage," or "Paul managed to carry the luggage."

(31) a.

No-lQh(a)-an' pass-with-hole-by

i Paoly ny biriky. [Activity] Paul the brick

"Paul was making a hole in the brick."

b.

Fanahy inian' deliberately-by

i Paoly no-loh(a)-ana ny biriky. Paul pass-^with-hole the brick

"Paul was deliberately making a hole in the brick."

The sentence (27) does not have an Agent, therefore, the bare form denotes a State/Autonomous Event, as opposed to (29) a. and (30)a., which do have an Agent and which have the Abilitative interpretation; the sequence (28)b. shows the Accidental meaning, although tafa in tafa-tsangana, for example, translates into "managed to stand up." In (31), with both no and an (a), the verb denotes a Deliberate Activity.

1.2.7

Illustrative Exarrples for Case 2. The following examples illustrate case 2 under 1.2.5:

(32)a.

(Tokony) ho-kapch-ina

ny zaza maditra.

should fut-pass-strike the child unruly "Unruly children (must) receive corporal punishment."

453

b.

(Tokony) no-kapdh-ina

ny zaza maditra.

should past-pass-strike the child unruly "Hie unruly children (should) have received corporal punishment."

(33)a.

Kapoh-in'i Paoly amin'ny fehikibo ny zaza maditra. strike-by Paul with the belt the child unruly

"Paul is in the process of administering corporal punishment to the unruly children," or "Paul is about to administer corporal punishment to the unruly children."

b.

No-kapch-in' i Paoly tamin'ny fehikibo ny zaza maditra. past-strike-by Paul with the belt the child unruly

"Paul was administering corporal punishment to the unruly children."

c.

Ho-kapoh-in' i Paoly amin'ny fehikibo ny zaza maditra. fut-strike-by Paul with the belt the child unruly

"Paul will be administering corporal punishment to the unruly children."

First, the examples (32) and (33) contrast with (l)a. under 1.1.1 above in that the latter is ungraiimatical, whereas the first two are perfectly grammatical. However, all three share the same characteristic in that they are not root verbs and, as a result of this, the passive affixes are mandatory, as opposed to the case seen in (29)a. and (31)a., where the affixes are optional

454

since we have a root passive to start with . Furthermore, the prefix no encodes the past tense, as can be seen in (33)b., and differs from ho, which can replace it, in that the latter refers to the future, as is quite apparent in (33)c.

1.3.1

Relevance of the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy. As explained above under 1.0(3), it is possible to

promote any NP occupying anyone of the semantic/syntactic positions from DO down to Source-Oblique to Su. In the process, the NP loses its preposition, but the equivalent information is encoded oi the verb itself. First, it will be shown that the Oblique encompasses a number of positions, then the order of these different types of Oblique will be investigated.

1.3.2

Order of the Different 'types of Oblique. Assuming the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy and leaving aside

the Goal-Oblique, we have the following types of Oblique in Malagasy: 1. Intermediary 2. Instrument 3. Directional 4. Beneficiary 5. Manner 6. Locative 7. Temporal 8. Source 9. Ccmitative 10. Causal

455

in the order just stated.

1.3.2.1

Case-Marking and the Active Voice. In the active voice, the following prepositions mark

the different cases on the noun. When the Intermediary is a comi o NP, whether it is definite or not, there is no preposition rn accompanying it, as can be seen in (13)a. and (13)h. above. Furthermore, we have:

(34)

N-an-(t)ohana ny fiara tamin'ny vato i Paoly. past-act-block the car Instr the stone Paul

"Paul was blocking the car with the stone."

(35)

N-an-daka

ny baolina tamin'ny loha-ny with the head-his

past-act-kick the ball

"(Paul) was kicking the ball with his head"

ho ao amin'ny but i Paoly. Direct the goal Paul

"into the goal."

(36)

N-an-ome past-act-give

an'ilay mofo tamin-kafaliana/ the bread Manner joy/

"(Jeanne) was giving the bread with joy/"

haingana ho an'ny mpiasa i Jeanne. Benef the worker Jeanne

Manner quick

"quickly for the worker(s)."

456

(37)

N-i-asa

tsara i Paoly tany Antsirabe. Paul Loc Antsirabe

past-act-work well

"Paul was working well at Antsirabe."

(38)

N-i-anatra

tao Antsirabe 0

taloha/

past-act-study Loc Antsirabe Temp previously "(Paul) was studying at Antsirabe previously/

tamin'io

fotoana io this

i Paoly. Paul

Terrp this time "at that time."

(39)

N-an-dre

an'ity vaovao ity avy this news this coming from

past-act-heard

"(Paul) heard this news from "

tany Toamasina omaly Loc Tamatave yesterday "Tamatave yesterday."

i Paoly. Paul

(40)

N-i-ainga

avy

tao Antsirabe

past-act-leave coming from Loc Antsirabe " (Jeanne) departed from Antsirabe"

n-iaraka

tamin' i Paoly i Jeanne. Paul Jeanne

past-accompany Comit "with Paul."

457

(41)

N-i-ainga n-iaraka

tamin' i Bozy i Paoly Bozy Paul

past-leave past-accompany Comit


n "Paul left with Bozy'

noho because-of

i Jeanne. Jeanne

i "because of Jeanne.i

In (34), the underlined NP represents an Instrument-Oblique; in (35), it is a Directional; in (36), the preposition tamina is optional with a Manner-Oblique, but obligatory with a Beneficiary. The underlined NP in (37) is a Locative, and in (38), it is a Terrporal-Oblique; in (39), we have a root verb avy "coming" combining with an ordinary Locative tany for Source-Oblique; in (40), we have the verb miaraka "to accompany" in the past tense with the general preposition (t)amin(a), also in the past tense, as marked by the presence of the tense-prefix Jt. Finally, in (41), noho "because of" signals a Causal-Oblique. The following sentences show that indeed verbs are used instead of prepositions for Source and Comitative Obliques:

(39')

Avy

t-any

Toamasina i Paoly. Paul

coming past-there Tamatave (portion of (39)) i "Paul came from Tamatave.i

458

(40')

N-i-araka t-amin' i Paoly i Jeanne. past-go past-with Paul Jeanne

(portion of (40)) i i 'Jeanne accompanied Paul."

1.3.2.2

Criteria for Setting up Different Types of Oblique. In the active voice, the position of the Oblique NP

relative to Su whether to its left or to its right (in conjunction with the preposition used as well as the possibility of Clefting) allows us to differentiate ten types of Oblique. Thus:

(42)a.

N-an-defa an' i Jaona i Paoly. past-send John Paul

"Paul was sending John."

b.

*N-an-defa past-send

i Jaona i Paoly. John Paul

"Paul was sending John.ii

(43)a.

N-an-(t)ohana ny fiara tamin'ny vato i Paoly. past-block the car with the stone Paul

(same as (34)) "Paul was blocking the car with the stone.n

b.

*N-an-(t)ohana ny fiara i Paoly tamin'ny vato. past-block the car Paul with the stone

"Paul was blocking the car...with the stone."

459

(44) a.

H-an-deha ho any Toamasina i Paoly. fut-go to Tamatave Paul

"Paul will be going to Tamatave."

b.

H-an-deha i Paoly ho any Toamasina. fut-go Paul to Tamatave

"Paul will go to Tamatave."

(45) a.

N-i-tondra mofo ho an'ny npiasa i Jeanne, past-bring bread for the worker Jeanne

"Jeanne was bringing bread for the worker(s)."

b.

N-i-tondra nofo i Jeanne ho an'ny mpiasa. past-bring bread Jeanne for the worker "Jeanne was bringing bread for the worker(s)."

(46) a.

N-i-laza ny vaovao tamin'alahelo lehibe i Paoly. past-tell the news with grief big Paul

"Paul was announcing the news with great sorrow."

b.

N-i-laza ny vaovao i Paoly tamin'alahelo lehibe. past-tell the news Paul with grief big

"It was with great sorrow that Paul was announcing the news."

(47) a.

N-ana-tono

ny hena tao amin'ny lakozy i Jeanne, in the kitchen Jeanne

past-barbecue the meat

"Jeanne was barbecuing the meat in the kitchen."

460

b.

N-ana-tono

ny hena i Jeanne tao amin'ny lakozy. in the kitchen

past-barbecue the meat Jeanne

"Jeanne was barbecuing the meat in the kitchen (emphasis)."

(48) a.

N-an-ohatra ny akanjo tamin'ny alakamisy i Jeanne, past-try-on the robe on the thursday Jeanne

"Jeanne was trying the robes on on Thursday."

b.

N-an-ohatra ny akanjo i Jeanne tamin'ny alakamisy. past-try-on the robe Jeanne on the thursday

"On Thursday, Jeanne was trying the robes on."

(49) a.

N-i-ainga avy tany Toamasina tamin'ny fito i Paoly. past-leave from Tamatave at the seven Paul

"Paul departed from Tamatave at seven."

b.

N-i-ainga tamin'ny fito i Paoly avy tany Toamasina. past-leave at the seven Paul from Tamatave

"Paul left at seven from Tamatave."

(50) a.

N-an-deha niaraka tamin'i Paoly i Jeanne, past-go with Paul Jeanne

"Jeanne was leaving with Paul."

b. ?*N-an-deha i Jeanne niaraka tamin'i Paoly. past-go Jeanne with Paul

"Jeanne was leaving with Paul."

461

(51) a.

N-an-defa ny entana i Jeanne noho

i Paoly.

past-send the luggage Jeanne because-of Paul "Paul was sending the luggage because of Paul."

b.

*N-an-defa ny entana noho

i Paoly i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-send the luggage because-of Paul

"Jeanne was sending the luggage off because of Paul."

If the Oblique NP is an Intermediary, as in (42)b., or an Instrument, as in (43)b., then it cannot be moved to the right of Su. But, if it is a Directional, as in (44), or a Beneficiary, as in (45), then it can be noved to the right of Su. Now, if it is a Manner-Oblique, as in (46), or a Locative, as in (47), then it can be moved to the right of Su, although in the latter position, it carries with it some emphasis; therefore, this is the Marked position. If the Oblique NP is Temporal, as in (48), its Unmarked position is after the Su, although it can be reordered in front of Su, in which case, there is a pause after the DO ny akanjo; this, therefore, is the Marked position. In the case of SourceOblique, as in (49), or a Comitative-Oblique, as in (50), the marker is a verb and the Oblique NP can always show up after the Su, either as an afterthought or for the purposes of emphasis: there must be a pause after the Su, for the utterance to be acceptable, but even then, as can be seen in (50) b., native speakers'judgments vary. Finally, if the Oblique NP is a Causal, then it can oily occur after Su, as can be deduced from the grammaticality pattern emerging from (51).

462

1.3.2.3

additional Tests. The above distinction is corroborated by the possibi-

lity or impossibility of Clefting, with or without retention of the preposition:

(52)a.

Nanolotra an' i Jaona an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-hand John Jeanne Paul

"Paul was handing John to Jeanne."

b.

*(*An) i Jaona no

nanolotra an'i Jeanne i Paoly. Jeanne Paul

John part past-hand

(53)a.

Nandoto

ny ankanjony

tamin'ny fotaka ny ankizy.

past-dirty the clothes-their with the mud the child "The children were dirtying their clothes with mud."

b.

(Tamin')ny fotaka no nandoto with the mud

ny akanjony ny ankizy.

part past-dirty the cl.-their the ch.

"It is with the mud the children were dirtying their clothes."

(54)a.

Nandefa

vola ho any amin'ny ankizy i Jeanne, the child Jeanne

past-send money to

"Jeanne was sending money to the children."

b.

*(*Ho any amin')ny ankizy no nandefa to

vola i Jeanne.

the child part past-send money Jeanne

"It is to the children that Jeanne was sending money."

463

(55) a.

Nandoko

ny trano ho an'ny namany

i Paoly.

past-paint the house for the friend-his Paul "Paul was painting the house for his friend."

b. *(*Ho an')ny namany

no

nandoko

ny trano i Paoly.

for the friend-his part past-paint the house Paul "It was for his friend Paul was painting the house."

(56)a.

Nandeha tamim-pilaminana ny mpianatra. past-go with-quiet the student(s)

"The students were leaving quietly."

b. ?*(Tamim-)pilaminana no nandeha ny mpianatra. with quiet part past-go the student(s)

"It was with calm that the students were leaving."

(57) a.

Nanindrona

ny ankizy tao amin'ny efitra i Paoly. in the room Paul

past-give-shots the child

"Paul was giving shots to the children in the roan."

b.

*(Tao amin')ny efitra no nanindrona in

ny ankizy i Paoly.

the room part past-give-shot the child Paul

"It was in the room that Paul was giving shots to the children."

(58)a.

Nanohatra

ny akanjo i Jeanne tamin'io andro io. Jeanne on this day this

past-try-on the robe

"Jeanne was trying the robes on that day."

464

b.

(Tamin')io andro io no on

nanohatra ny akanjo i Jeanne

this day this part past-try-on the robe Jeanne

"It was that day Jeanne was trying the robes on."

(59)a.

Niainga past-leave

avy tany Toamasina i Paoly. from Tamatave Paul

"Paul was departing frcni Tamatave."

b.

(Avy tany) Toamasina no niainga from

i Paoly.

Tamatave part past-leave Paul

"It was from Tamatave that Paul was leaving."

(60)a.

Nandeha niaraka tamin'i Paoly i Jeanne, past-go with Paul Jeanne

"Jeanne was accompanying Paul."

b.

t(*Niaraka tamin') i Paoly no nandeha i Jeanne. with Paul part past-go Jeanne

"It was Paul that Jeanne was accompanying."

(61) a.

Nandefa

ny entana i Jeanne noho

i Paoly.

past-send the luggage Jeanne because-of Paul "Jeanne was sending the luggage because of Paul."

b.

*(*Noho)

i Paoly no nandefa

ny entana i Jeanne,

because-of Paul part past-send the luggage Jeanne "It was because of Paul that Jeanne was sending the luggage."

465

in (52) t we have an Intermediary an'i Jaona which cannot be clefted, whether the preposition is retained or deleted; in (53), the Instrument tamin'ny fotaka "with the mud" can be optionally clefted and if clefted, the preposition can be dropped or retained optionally; in (54), the Directional ho any amin'ny ankizy cannot be clefted at all; likewise for the Beneficiary ho an'ny namany in (55); cleftlng on a Manner-Oblique does not yield a very good sentence, as can be seen in (56), even when the preposition is retained; from (57) to (59), we respectively have a locative, a Temporal, and a Source, and Clefting is Optional although retention of the relevant preposition is obligatory; finally, (60) and (61) show that it is impossible to cleft on a Comitative or on a Causal Oblique.

1.4.1

Case-Marking and the Passive Voice. In the case of passive structures, the information

which was available with the noun is encoded in the verb so that the distribution of the different passive affixes along with Clefting should also allow us to distinguish between the ten types of Oblique. That indeed seems to be the case since each syntactic/semantic position has its own features with the possible exception of Manner and Causal.

1.4.2

The Relevant Examples. The following set of sentences provide all the relevant

features needed to determine whether our distinction between the ten different types of Oblique holds in passive structures, as was shown to be the case for their active counterparts:

466

(62) a.

N-a-tolotr'

i Paoly an'i Jeanne i Jaona. Jeanne John

past-pass-hand-by Paul

"John was being handed to Jeanne by Paul."

b.

(*An) i Jaona no n-a-tolotr'

i Paoly an'i Jeanne. Jeanne

John part past-pass-hand-by Paul

"It was John that was being handed to Jeanne by Paul."

(63)a.

N-an-doto-an'

ny ankizy ny akanjo-ny

ny fotaka.

past-circ-dirt-by the child the clothes-their the mud "The mud was being used by the children to dirty their clothes."

b.

(Tamin') ny fotaka no with the mud

n-an-doto-an'

ny ankizy

part past-circ-dirt-by the child

ny akanjo-ny. the clothes-their "It was with the mud that the children were dirtying their clothes."

(64) a.

N-an-defa-s-an' past-circ-send-by

i Jeanne vola ny ankizy. Jeanne money the child

"Hie children were being sent money by Jeanne."

b.

(*Ho any amin') ny ankizy no to

n-an-defa-s-an'

the child part past-circ-send-by

467

i Jeanne vola. Jeanne money "It was to the children that money was being sent by Jeanne."

?*N-an-doko-an' (65)a. 7

i Paoly ny trano ny nama-ny.

past-circ-paint-by Paul the house the friend-his "Paul was painting for his friend(s)."

b.

(Ho an1) ny namany for

ho

n-andoko-an'

the friend-his part past-circ-paint-by

i Paoly ny trano. Paul the house "It was for his friend that Paul was painting the house."

(66)a.

*tf-an-ome-z-an1

i Jeanne mofo ho an'ny mpiasa

past-circ-give-by Jeanne bread for the worker

ny hafalia-ny. the joy-her "Jeanne was giving bread for the workers out of joy."

b.

*(Tamin-)kafaliana no with joy

n-an-ome-z-an'

i Jeanne

part past-circ-give-by Jeanne

nofo ho an'ny mpiasa. bread for the worker

468

"It was with joy that Jeanne was giving bread for the workers."

(67) a. ?*N-an-indro-n-an'

i Paoly ny ankizy ny efitra.

past-circ-give-shot-by Paul the child the room "The room was where the children were being given shots by Paul."

b.

*(Tao amin1) ny efitra no in

n-an-indro-n-an1

the room part past-circ-give-shot-fcy

i Paoly ny ankizy. Paul the children "It was in the room that the children were being given shots by Paul."

(68) a.

N-an-ohar-an'

i Jeanne ny akanjo io andro io.

past-circ-try-on-by Jeanne the robe this day this "that was the day when Jeanne was trying the robes an."

b.

(Tamin')io on

andro io

no

n-an-ohar-an'

this day

this part past-circ-try-on-by

i Jeanne ny akanjo. Jeanne the robe "It was on that day that Jeanne was trying on the robes."

469

(69) a.

*N-i-aing(a)-anI

i Paoly Toamasina.

past-circ-depart-by Paul Tamatave "Tamatave was where Paul departed from."

b.

(Avy tany) Toamasina no from

n-i-aing(a)-an' i Paoly.

Tamatave part past-circ-depart-by Paul

"It was from Tamatave that Paul departed."

(70)a.

*N-i-araka tamin' i P no past-act-go with "J left with P."

n-an-deha-n-an' i J. J

P part past-circ-go-by

b.

*(*N-i-araka tamin') i P no past-act-go with

n-an-deha-n-an'i J.

P part past-circ-go-by J

"It was with P that J left."

(71)a.

*N-an-defa-s-an'

i Jeanne ny entana i Paoly.

past-circ-send-by Jeanne the luggage Paul "Paul was being sent the luggage by Jeanne."

b.

*(Noho) i Paoly no n-an-defa-s-an'i Jeanne ny entana. because Paul part past-circ-send-by J. the luggage "It was because of Paul that Jeanne was sending the luggage."

in (62), the verb has the a form of Affixal Passive and the no.- - i a form would yield an ungrammatical sequence (this holds true n f all the sentences from (62) to (71)); the grarrmaticality pat-

470

tern in (62) suggests that Clefting is optional since (62)a. with no Clefting and the version of (62) b. not comprising the preposition an are perfectly grammatical. For (63), Clefting is optional since both (63) a. without Clefting and (63) b. with Clefting are grammatical; the preposition tamin' can be retained optionally, as indicated by the graitmaticality of both sequences in (63). In (64), Clefting is optional, as is apparent in the graitmaticality pattern, although the sequence in (64)b. comprising the prepositional phrase ho any amin is ruled out, which shows that the preposition cannot be retained. In (65), Clefting is preferred, judging from the awkwardness of (65)a., whereas the possibility of both sequences in (65)b., i.e. with or without the relevant prepositional phrase, indicates that the latter is optional. In (66), Clefting with preposition retention is obligatory. In (67), Clefting is preferred, and the preposition,

obligatory. In (68), Clefting is optional, and the preposition, optional. As for (69), Clefting is obligatory, but the preposition, optional. Hie granmaticality pattern emerging from (70) indicates that Clefting is impossible, whether the preposition is retained or not. Finally, for (71), Clefting is obligatory, and the preposition must be retained. Note that the different types of Oblique show up in the sentences from (62) to (71) in the order given under 1.3.2 above.

1.4.3

Promotion to Su and Distribution of Passive Affixes. Hie following data show the correlation between the

type of Oblique which is promoted to Su and the Affix which can go on the verb:

471

(72) a.

*No-tolor-an' i Paoly an' i Jeanne i Jaona. pass-hand-by Paul Jeanne John

(compare with (52)) "John was being handed by Paul to Jeanne."

b.

N-a-tolotr'

i Paoly an'i Jeanne i Jaona. Jeanne John

past-pass-hand-by Paul (same as (62)a.)

"John was being handed by Paul to Jeanne."

c.

*(*fln) i Jaona no n-an-(t)olor-an' i Paoly an'i Jeanne. John part past-circ-hand-by Paul Jeanne

"It was Paul who was being handed by Paul to Jeanne."

(73) a.

*No-toha-n-an' i Paoly ny fiara ny vato. pass-block-by Paul the car the stone

"the stone was being used by Paul to block the car."

b.

N-a-toha-n'

i Paoly ny fiara ny vato. the stone

past-pass-block-by Paul the car (compare with (43))

"The stone was used by Paul to block the car."

c.

N-an-(t)oh(a)-an' i Paoly ny fiara ny vato. past-circ-block-by Paul the car (compare with (34)) "The stone was used by Paul to block the car." the stone

472

(74)a.

*No-lefa-s-an'i Jeanne vola ny ankizy. pass-send-by Jeanne money the child

"The children were being sent money by Jeanne."

b.

*N-a-lefa-n'

i Jeanne vola ny ankizy.

past-pass-send-by Jeanne money the child "The children were sent money by Jeanne."

c.

N-an-defa-s-an' i Jeanne vola ny ankizy. past-circ-send-by Jeanne money the child (same as (64)a.) "The children were being sent money by Jeanne."

(75) a.

*Nb-loko-in' i Paoly ny trano ny nama-ny. pass-paint-by Paul the house the friend-his "Paul was painting the house for his friend(s)."

b.

*N-a-loko-n'

i Paoly ny trano ny nama-ny.

past-pass-paint-by Paul the house the friend-his "Paul painted the house for his friend(s)."

c.

(Ho an') ny nama-ny for

no

n-an-doko-an1

the friend-his part past-circ-paint-by

i Paoly ny trano. Paul the house (same as (65) b.) "It was for his friend(s) that Paul was painting the house."

473

(76) a. *Tamin-kafaliana no with joy

n(o)-cme-n' i Jeanne mofo

part past-give-by Jeanne bread

ho an'ny itpiasa. for the worker (compare with (66)b.) "It was with joy that Jeanne was giving bread for the workers."

b.

*Tamin-kafaliana no with joy

n-a-(o)me-n'

i Jeanne mofo

part past-pass-give-by Jeanne bread

ho an'ny mpiasa. for the worker. "It was with joy that Jeanne was giving bread for the workers."

c.

Tamin-kafaliana no with joy

n-an-ome-z-an'

i Jeanne mofo

part past-circ-give-by Jeanne bread

ho an'ny mpiasa. for the worker "It was with joy that Jeanne was giving bread for the workers."

(77)a. **N-tsindrom-in' i Paoly ny ankizy ny efitra. pass-<jive-shot-by Paul the child the room "The room was where the children were being given shots by Paul."

474

b.

**N-a-tsindro-n'

i Paoly ny ankizy ny efitra.

past-pass-give-shot-by Paul the child the room "The room was where the children were being given shots by Paul."

c.

?*N-an-(ts-)indron-an'

i Paoly ny ankizy ny efitra.

past-circ-give-shot-by Paul the child the room (see (67)a.) "It was in the room that the children were being given shots by Paul."

(78)a.

*NO-har-in'

i Jeanne ny akanjo io

andro io. this

pass-try-on-by Jeanne the robe (see (68)a.)

this day

"That was the day when Jeanne was trying the robes on."

b.

*N-a-ohatr1

i Jeanne ny akanjo io

andro io. this

past-pass-try-on-by Jeanne the robe

this day

"That was the day when Jeanne was trying the robes on."

c.

N-an-ohar-an'

i Jeanne ny akanjo io andro io.

past-circ-try-on-by Jeanne the robe this day this "That was the day when Jeanne was trying the robes on."

(79)a.

*Avy tany Toamasina no from

no-aing-an' i Paoly.

Tamatave part pass-leave-by Paul

(compare with (69)b.) "It was from Tamatave that Paul departed."

475

b.

*Avy tany Toamasina no from

n-a-(a)ing-an'

i Paoly.

Tamatave part past-pass-leave-by Paul

"It was from Tamatave that Paul departed."

c.

Avy tany Toamasina no from

n-i-aing-an'

i Paoly.

Tamatave part past-circ-leave-by Paul

(see (69)b.) "It was from Tamatave that Paul departed."

(80)a.

*Niaraka tamin'i Paoly no with (see (70)a.)

no-leha-n'i Jeanne,

Paul part pass-go-by Jeanne

"It was with Paul that Jeanne departed."

b.

*Niaraka tamin'i Paoly no with

n-a-leha-n'

i Jeanne.

Paul part past-pass-go-by Jeanne

"It was with Paul that Jeanne departed."

c.

*Niaraka tamin'i Paoly no with (see (70)b.)

n-an-deha-n-an'i Jeanne.

Paul part past-circ-go-by Jeanne

"It was with Paul that Jeanne departed."

(81) a. *Noho

i Paoly no no-lefa-s-an1 i Jeanne ny entana.

because-of Paul part pass-send-by Jeanne the luggage (see (71)a.) "It was because of Paul that Jeanne was sending the luggage."

476

b.

*Noho

i Paoly no n-a-lefa-s-an' i Jeanne ny entana part past-pass-send-by J. the luggage

because-of P.

"It was because of Paul that Jeanne was sending the luggage."

c.

Noho

i Paoly no n-an-defa-s-an' i Jeanne ny entana. part past-circ-send-by J. the luggage

because-of P. (see (71) b.)

"It was because of Paul that Jeanne was sending the luggage."

In (72), an Intermediary-Oblique NP has been promoted to Su position and the verb can take the a form of Affixal Passive, as is indicated t y the grammaticality of the sentence (72) b. The uns granmaticality with the sequence (72) c. with the circumstantial form of Passive, i.e. with the circumfix an...an, shows the correlation between promotion of an Intermediary-Oblique to Su and the occurrence of the a form of Passive on the verb. In (73), it is an Instrument-Oblique which occupies the Su position and the verb can optionally take either the a form, as in (73)b., or the an...an circumstantial form of Affixal Passive, as in (73)c. In all of the remaining sentences, except for the Garnitative, as shown in (80)c., which is irretrievably ungranniatical, the circumstantical form of Affixal Passive is mandatory, judging from the grammaticality patterns found in (74), with a Directional NP as Su; in (76), with a Manner NP as Su; in (77), with a locative as Su; in (78), with a Temporal as Su; in (79), with a Source as Su; and finally, in (81), with a Causal as Su.

477

1.5.1

Relative Order of the Different Types of Oblique. Hie following data show that the different types of

Oblique have the order made explicit under 1.3.2:

(82)a.

N-an-(t)ohana

ny fiara

tamina vato i Paoly. with stone Paul

past-pref-block the car

Intermediary Instrument "Paul was blocking the car with a stone."

b.

*N-an-(t)dhana

tamina vato ny fiara

i Paoly.

past-pref-block Instrument Intermediate "Paul was blocking with a stone the car."

(83)a.

N-an-daka

ny baolina tamin'ny loha-ny with the head-his Instrument

past-pref-kick the ball

"(Paul) was "kicking" the ball with his head"

ho ao amin'ny but i Paoly. into the goal Paul

Directional (same as (35)) "Paul was "kicking" the ball with his head into the goal."

b.

*N-an-daka

ny baolina ho tao amin'ny but into Directional the goal

past-pref-kick the ball

478

tamin'ny loha-ny i Paoly. with the head-his Paul Instrumental "Paul was "kicking" the ball into the goal with his head."

(84)a.

N-an-defa

mofo ho any Toamasina ho an'ny npiasa to Tamatave for the worker Beneficiary

past-pref-send bread

Directional i Jeanne. Jeanne

"Jeanne was sending bread to Tamatave for the workers.

b.

*N-an-defa

mofo ho an'ny mpiasa ho any Toamasina Tamatave

past-pref-send bread for the worker to I Beneficiary i Jeanne. Jeanne

Directional

"Jeanne was sending bread for the workers to Tamatave.

(85)a.

*N-an-ome past-pref-give

an'ilay mofo tamin-kafaliana the bread with-joy Manner

ho an'ny mpiasa i Jeanne. for the worker Jeanne Beneficiary "Jeanne was giving the bread with joy for the workers

479

b.

N-an-ome past-pref-give

an'ilay mofo ho an'ny mpiasa the bread for the worker Beneficiary

tamin-kafaliana i Jeanne, with-joy Manner "Jeanne was giving bread for the workers with joy. Jeanne

(86) a.

N-i-asa

tsara i Paoly tany Antsirabe. Paul at Antsirabe

past-pref-work well Manner

locative

"Paul was working well at Antsirabe."

b.

*N-i-asa

tany Antsirabe tsara i Paoly. Antsirabe well Manner Paul

past-pref-work at

Locative

"Paul was working at Antsirabe well."

(87) a.

N-i-anatra

tao Antsirabe taloha

i Paoly.

past-pref-study at Antsirabe previously Paul Locative Temporal

"Paul was studying at Antsirabe previously."

b.

*N-i-anatra

taloha

tao Antsirabe i Paoly. Paul

past-pref-study previously at Antsirabe Temporal Locative

"Paul was studying previously at Antsirabe."

480

(88)a.

Nandre ny vaovao avy tany Toamasina omaly heard the news front Source Tamatave

i Paoly.

yesterday p. Temporal

"Paul heard the news from Tamatave yesterday."

b.

*Nandre ny vaovao omaly heard the news

avy tany Toamasina i Paoly. Tamatave P.

yesterday from Temporal Source

"Paul heard the news yesterday front Tamatave."

(89)a.

Niainga avy tany Toamasina niaraka tamin'i Jaona departed from Source Tamatave with Comitative J.

i Paoly noho

i Jeanne.

Paul because-of Jeanne Causal "Paul departed from Tamatave with John because of Jeanne."

b.

Niainga niaraka tamin'i Jaona avy tany Toamasina departed with John from Souce Tamatave

Comitative

i Paoly noho

i Jeanne.

Paul because-of Jeanne Causal "Paul departed with John from Tamatave because of Jeanne."

481

c.

*Niainga noho

i Jeanne avy tany Toamasina Tamatave

departed because-of Jeanne from Causal Source

niaraka tamin' i Jaona i Paoly. with Comitative "Paul departed because of Jeanne from Tamatave with John." John Paul

d.

*Niainga noho

i Jeanne niaraka tamin'i Jaona with Comitative John

departed because-of Jeanne Causal

avy tany Toamasina i Paoly. from Source "Paul departed because of Jeanne with John from Tamatave." Tamatave Paul

Hie grammatically pattern in (82) shows that Intermediary precedes Instrument; that in (83) suggests that the latter precedes Directional, which in turn precedes Beneficiary since we have a minimal pair in (84) in the relevant interpretation of the b. sequence. The sentences from (85) to (87) prove that a Beneficiary precedes Manner, that Manner precedes Locative, and that Locative precedes Temporal. In (88), since the a. sequence is grammatical and the b. sentence ungrammatical, it can only be inferred that

482

Source precedes Temporal. The grammaticality pattern found in (89) shows that Source precedes Comitative since (89)a. is the Unmarked structure: oily two pauses are necessary, one after Comitative, and another after the Su, as opposed to (89)b., where a total of four pauses are indispensable, i.e. one after niainga, another after Comitative, a third after Source, and a fourth after the Su. Finally, (89) c. and (89)d. prove that it is not possible for a Causal to precede a Comitative or a Source, it can, therefore, be concluded that a Comitative precedes a Causal.

1.5.2

Relative Order of Obliques in the Passive Voice. In all the exairples from (82) to (89), the verbs were

in the active voice. The following data demonstrate that even if the verbs were in the passive voice, the order of the different types of Oblique would remain the same:

(90)a.

No-daka-n' i Paoly tamin'ny loha-ny ho ao amin'ny but pass-kick-by Paul with the head-his into Instrument ny baolina. the ball (compare with (83)) "The ball was being "kicked" by Paul with his head into the goal." the goal

Directional

b.

No-daka-n' i Paoly ho ao amin'ny but tamin'ny loha-ny pass-kick-by Paul into the goal with the head-his Instrument

Directional

483

ny baolina. the ball "Hie ball was being "kicked" by Paul into the goal with his head."

(91) a.

N-a-lefa-n' past-pass-send-by

i Jeanne ho any Toamasina Jeanne for Tamatave

Directional

ho an'ny mpiasa ny mofo. for the worker the bread

Beneficiary (compare with (84)) "Hie bread was sent by Jeanne to Tamatave for the workers."

b. ?*N-a-lefa-n1

i Jeanne ho an'ny mpiasa the worker

past-pass-send-by Jeanne for

Beneficiary

ho any Toamasina ny mofo. for Tamatave the bread

Directional "The bread was sent by Jeanne for the workers to Tamatave."

(92) a.

N-ome-n'

i Jeanne tamin-kafaliana ho an'ny mpiasa for the worker Beneficiary

past-give-by Jeanne with-joy Manner

484

ny nofo. the bread (see (85)) "Hie bread was being given by Jeanne with joy for the workers."

b.

N-ome-n'

i Jeanne ho an'ny mpiasa tamin-kafaliana

past-give-by Jeanne for the worker with-joy Beneficiary Manner

ny nofo.
/

the bread "The bread was being given by Jeanne for the workers with joy."

Voa-hafatra tsara tany an-trano ny ankizy. (93)a. pass-message well at home the child

Manner Locative "The children were well instructed at hone."

*Voa-hafatra tany an-trano tsara ny ankizy. b. pass-message at home well the child Manner

Locative

"The children were at home well instructed."

(94) a.

Tany Antsirabe no at

n-i-anar-an'

i Paoly taloha.

Antsirabe part past-circ-study-by Paul before Temporal

Locative

"It was at Antsirabe that Paul was studying before."

485

b.

Taloha

tao Antsirabe no

n-i-anar-an'

i Paoly.

previously at Antsirabe part past-circ-study-by Paul Temporal Locative

(compare with (87)) "It was previously at Antsirabe that Paul was studying."

(95) a.

Re

omaly

avy tany T(oamasina) ny vaovao. from T(amatave) the news

heard yesterday

Teitporal Source "The news was heard yesterday from T(amatave)."

b.

?*Re heard

avy tany T omaly from Source

ny vaovao.

T yesterday the news Temporal

"The news was heard from T yesterday."

c.

Avy tany T no from Source

n-an-dre-n-e-s-ana ny vaovao omaly. the news yesterday

T part past-circ-heard

"It was from T that the news was heard yesterday."

(96) a.

Lasa avy tany Antsirabe niaraka tamin' i Paoly gone from Source Antsirabe with Comitative Paul

i Jeanne. Jeanne "Jeanne left Antsirabe with Paul."

486

b.

*Lasa niaraka tamin'i Paoly avy tany Antsirabe gone with Comitative Paul from Source Antsirabe

i Jeanne. Jeanne "Jeanne left with Paul Antsirabe."

(97)a.

Tsy lasa niaraka tamin'i Jaona i Paoly noho i Jeanne, neg gone with Comitative John Paul because-of J. Causal

"Paul did not leave with John because of Jeanne."

b.

*Tsy lasa i Paoly noho i Jeanne niaraka tamin'i Jaona. neg gone Paul because-of J. Causal with Comitative John

"Paul did not leave because of Jeanne with John."

c.

*Tsy lasa noho i Jeanne niaraka tamin'i Jaona i Paoly. neg gone because-of J. Causal with Comitative John Paul

"Paul did not leave because of Jeanne with John."

The sentence (90)a. is the Unmarked structure since it can be uttered without any pause between the two obliques, whereas in (90) b., such a pause is mandatory otherwise the sentence becomes ungranmatical; furthermore, in the latter case, the Instrument is either an afterthought or carries with it seme emphasis; there-

487

fore, Instrument precedes Directional. The graitmaticality pattern in (91) suggests that Directional precedes Beneficiary, at least, in the relevant interpretation of the b. sequence. As for (92)a., it requires a special intonation and a pause between the two Obliques, whereas (92)b. does not; so, it can be inferred that the latter is the Unmarked structure and if so, then Beneficiary precedes Manner. On the other hand, the sentence (93) presents a clear case where Manner must precede Locative, otherwise the sequence is ungrammatical. Again, in (94), the a. version, where Locative precedes Temporal is the Unmarked structure while the other is definitely more emphatic. In (95), the b. sequence is granmatical with a special intonation and carries with it some emphasis, just like the c. version, which is clearly Marked. In the intended reading, only the a. version of (96) is grammatical, otherwise the sentence would mean something like "Jeanne accompanied Paul who is from Antsirabe." Finally, with (97), only the a. version, where the Causal-Oblique occupies the position to the right of the Su, is grammatical. Therefore, the last three sets of examples show that Temporal should precede Source, that Source should precede Comitative, and that Comitative should precede Causal, respectively.

1.5.3

Additional Data. That the order of the different types of Oblique is the

one given under 1.3.2 is corroborated by the following sets of sentences with a high concentration of Obliques in each one of them, the first set having a verb in the active voice, whereas the second has its verb in the passive:

488

(98)

N-an-didy

ny

nofo

tamin'ny antsy ho an'ny mpiasa

past-act-cut the bread with the knife for the worker

haingana tao an-dakozy i Jeanne cmaly. quick in kitchen Jeanne yesterday

"Yesterday, Jeanne was quickly cutting the bread for the worker(s) in the kitchen."

(99)

N-an-doko

ny latabatra tamin'ny loko-ny haingana with the paint-his quick

past-act-paint the table

tao an-dakozy i Paoly omaly. in kitchen Paul yesterday

"Yesterday, Paul was quickly painting the table with his paint in the kitchen."

(100)

N-i-karoka

ny . fanjaitra tamin'ny andreby with the magnet

past-act-search the needle

ho an'ny reni-ny

haingana teo am-pandriana i Paoly in bed Paul,

for the mother-his quick

omaly. yesterday

"Yesterday, Paul was quickly looking for the needle with the magnet for his mother on the bed."

489

(101)

N-ana-tono

ny hena tamin'ny antsy ho an'ny

past-act-barbecue the meat with the knife for the

nama-ny

haingana tao an-dakozy i Jeanne omaly. in kitchen Jeanne yesterday

friend-his quick

"Yesterday, Jeanne was quickly barbecuing the meat with the knife for her friend in the kitchen."

(102)

NO-didi-n'i Jeanne tamin'ny antsy ho an'ny mpiasa pass-cut-by Jeanne with the knife for the worker

haingana tao an-dakozy ny nofo omaly. quickly in kitchen the bread yesterday

(same meaning as (98) above)

(103)

NO-loko-in' i Paoly tamin'ny loko-ny haingana tao anpass-paint-by Paul with the paint-his quick in

dakozy ny latabatra omaly. kitchen the table yesterday

(same meaning as (99) above)

(104)

No-karoh-in'

i Paoly tamin'ny andreby ho an'ny for the

pass-search-by Paul with the magnet

reni-ny haingana teo am-pandriana ny fanjaitra omaly. mother-his quick in bed the needle yesterday

(same meaning as (100) above)

490

(105)

No-tono-in' pass-barbecue-by

i Jeanne tamin'ny antsy ho an'ny Jeanne with the knife for the

nama-ny

haingana tao an-dakozy ny hena omaly. in kitchen the meat yesterday

friend-her quick

(same meaning as (101) above)

Both in (98) and its passive counterpart (102), the Instrumental precedes the Beneficiary, the Beneficiary acmes before the Manner, the Manner before the Locative, and the latter before the Temporal-Oblique; however, in the active voice structure, there is a slight preference for some speakers to have the Manner before the Beneficiary-Oblique. This also holds true of all the other sentences presented above. In (99) and (100), the Instrumental precedes the Manner-Oblique, the Manner-Oblique before the Locative-Oblique, and the latter before the Temporal-Oblique. The same applies to (104) and (105), which have verbs belonging to different subclasses.

1.6.1

Summary: Relative Order and Properties of the Obliques. A list of the different types of Oblique in the rele-

vant order, along with a number of their properties with respect to (a) the preposition(s) used; (b) their position, i.e. to the left or to the right, relative to the Su; (c) Clefting; (d) Clefting with a preposition; (e) Clefting without a preposition for structures with active voice verbs; and with respect to (f) the affix taken by the verb, i.e. no...i/ana, a, or i/an...ana in combination with (c), (d), and (e) above for structures with passivized verbs, is provided in Table 12.

491

Table 12

The Different Types of Oblique

Active

Passive

l.Interm. an/0 (ny) 2.lnstr. (t)amin(a)

OK

* *

Obi *

Opt * Obl

OK * Opt Opt Opt OK OK * OK OK * * *


* * * * *
*

* * * * * *
*

Cpt Opt Opt Opt Opt


* * * * * * * *

3.Direct. ho ao amin 4.Benef. ho an'i/ny 5.Manner 6.Loc. 7.Temp.

Obl Cpt * Obl Obl Prf Opt Opt Obl Obl Obl * Obl Prf Obl * Obl Opt Opt Opt Obl Obl Opt Opt
* * * *

(t) amin (a) OK M ?* Obi (t)ao amin (t) amin (a) OK M Opt Obi M OK Opt Obi OK M Opt Obi * *

8.Source avy (t)any 9.Comit

miaraka amin OK ?* * * OK *

* *

* *

10.Causal noho/tamin

Obl Obl Obl *

Properties:

a b e d

Note; * = Ungrammatical;OK = Grammatical;Opt = Optional;Obl = Obligatory; Prf = Preferable; ?* = Doubtful;M = Marked; (...)= Optional item; .../... = Choice, a = Left of Su; b = Right of Su; c = Clefting; d = Clefting And Preposition; e = Clefting Without Preposition; f = NO...ina Passive; g = A Passive; h = An...an Circumstantial Form of Passive; i = Clefting And Passive; j = Clefting With Preposition And Passive; k = Clefting Without A Preposition And Passive. See other symbols overleaf.

492

1.6.2

Summary: Hie Voice System of Malagasy. A diagram showing all the relevant syntactic/semantic

positions an NP can occupy, along with affix(es) the passivized verb can take, is given on Table 13.

Table 13 The Order of the Different Types of Oblique

Note: Su = Subject; DO = Direct Object; 10 = Indirect Object; Obi. = Oblique; Gen = Genitive; Interm. = Intermediary; Instr.= Instrument; Benef. = Beneficiary; Loc. = Locative; Temp. = Temporal; Comit. = Comitative; Caus. = Causal; - Perf = Non-Perfective; + Perf = Perfective. ] = Before, On Hierarchy; whereas < > = Domain of Passive Affix(es) below the line, dotted

lines indicating the cut-off point on either side.

493

addendum: Note that Directional and Manner Obliques have been emitted from the diagram in Table 13 oily for lack of space.

Section 2

The Passive and Complex Structures

2.0

Introduction. Section 2 deals with Passive in complex sentences in-

volving subordination: first, in non-Causative, then in Causative constructions. In the first Subsection, it will be seen: 1. that Malagasy possesses two other rules involving preferential deletions besides Zero-Pronominalization, as was shown to be the case in Chapter Pour, Pronominalization: Equi-1 and Equi-2; 2. that it also has two types of Raising: Raising-to-DO and Raising-to-Su; 3. that Affixal Passive interacts with each one of the above rules in a way which shows that it follows the Cyclic Convention; and 4. that the application of Affixal Passive is contingent upon the presence of the general complementizer fa "that." In the second Subsection, it will be shown: 1. that a typical Predicate-Raising Causative, i.e. an (a) can oily take a root passive or an adjective; with this

494

type of construction Affixal Passive can always apply after Clause-Union; 2. but that the Complement-Causative amp (a) can also take the Affixal Passive; however, with this type of construction, Affixal Passive can cxily apply if the embedded clause comprises a typically intransitive predicate; and 3. that Affixal Passive interacts with the different types of Causative constructions of Malagasy in a way which suggests that it follows the Cyclic Convention.

2.1.0

Verbal Construction Types. In this Subsection, a characterization of and justi-

fication for: 1. Equi-1; 2. Equi-2; 3. Raising-to-DO; and 4. Raising-to-Su will be proposed. A summary of the criteria used for distinguishing each one of the above constructions will be given at the beginning of each subsection. A sample list of verbs involving each will be offered. It will be seen that each process interacts with Affixal Passive in a way which suggests that this rule follows the Cyclic Convention. Finally, it will be shown that the application of Affixal Passive on the lcwer clause is contingent upon the presence of the complementizer fa since other full-fledged complementizers rule out this process, as will become evident from the grammaticality patterns of the illustrative sequences presented belcw .

495

2.1.1.0

Equi-1. In the process of Equi-1, the Su of the main clause

triggers deletion of the embedded Su of the underlying sequence. Thus in

(106)a.

N-i-tetika

h-i-vidy

ny trano 0^ i Jeanne^, Jeanne

past-pref-plan fut-pref-buy the house

"Jeanne was making plans to buy the house."

to be derived from:

b. /[S1 N-i-tetika [SQ h-i-vidy ny trano i J^] i J^]/,

on cycle SI, Equi-1 deletes the embedded Su i Jeanne, coreferential with the higher Su:

c.

[S1 N-i-tetika [Sg h-i-vidy ny trano

0^] i J^].

Likewise in

(107)a.

N-i-tetika

ho

any

0^ i Jeanne^, Jeanne

past-pref-plan ccnp there

"Jeanne was making plans to be there."

to be derived from

b.

/[S1 N-i-tetika [SQ ho any i Jj_] i J ] / ,

496

on cycle SI,, the Su i Jeanne in the embedded clause of the underlying sequence, gets deleted since it is ooreferential with the higher Su. Furthermore, note that in (106), for example, the embedded verb carries a tense-marker; whereas in (107), the complementizer ho is homophonous with the future tense-marker ho, which shows up in an equative type of sentence, i.e without a verbal predicate, as in the sentence (155)a. of Chapter One.

2.1.1.0.1 Complexity of Construction. The sentences (106)a. and (107)a. are complex, not

sinplex structures since it is possible to place the negation operator tsy between the two predicates in each:

(108)

Nitetika tsy hividy ny trano past-plan neg fut-buy the house

i jeannej. Jeanne

"Jeanne was making plans not to buy the house."

(109)

Nitetika tsy ho

any

i Jeannej. Jeanne

past-plan neg ccmp there

"Jeanne was planning on not going there."

2.1.1.0.2 Criteria for Subjecthood. In structures like (106)a., the NP i Jeanne is the Su of the higher clause. First, the fact that it is a Su is confirmed by the possibility of substituting the Su pronoun form izy for the NP:

497

(110)

Nitetika hividy ny

trano O^ izy^. he/she

past-plan fut-buy the house

"He/she was making plans to buy the house."

Second, the ungrairmaticality of the following sentence suggests that the NP i Jeanne is the Su of the higher and not the lower clause:

(111)

*Nitetika ho-vidi-n' past-plan pass-buy-by

i Jeanne ny trano. Jeanne the house

The sequence (111), where the embedded verb has been passivized, is irretrievably ungrammatical and cannot be assigned any interpretation at all.

2.1.1.0.3 Justification for Posited Underlying Structure. The existence of sentences involving Reflexivization to tena in the lower clause argues in favor of underlying representations of the type posited in (106)b.:

(112)

Nitetika hanono

tena^ i Jeanne^, Jeanne

past-plan fut-kill self

"Jeanne^ was making plans to kill herself^,"

where tena is coreferential with the higher Su i Jeanne. The major constraints on this type of Reflexivization (see Chapter

Three: 1.1 and 3.1.1) are that: 1. both the trigger and its vie-

498

tim are in the same clause; and 2. that the trigger is necessarily a Su. Ndw, in (112), the NP i Jeanne is the Su of the higher clause, and if it was assumed to be the trigger of Reflexivization to tena, this would violate the clausematerestriction,it follows that a coreferential NP has to be posited in the underlying representation of the lower clause and it will have to be assumed that Reflexivization is a cyclic rule (see Chapter Three: Section 4). Furthermore, since only a Su can trigger Reflexivization, such a coreferential NP must occupy the Su position at one stage of the derivation.

2.1.1.0.4 The Raising Hypothesis. New, it is also possible that the NP i Jeanne in (112) originated in the lower clause but has been lifted into the Su position of the main clause. This is not the case since the main verb is mitetika "to plan on doing something," which belongs in the Equi-1 subcategory. In fact, the following tests distinguish between Equi-1 and Raising-to-Su verbs: 1. an Equi-1 verb takes ny for its oornplementizer, whereas a Raising-to-Su verb takes fa for its complementizer (see the examples proposed in 2.1.4.3); and 2. with a double passive construction with an Equi-1 verb, the complementizer has to be deleted, whereas with a

double passive construction involving a Raising-to-Su verb, the oornplementizer fa cannot be deleted since when it is left out, the sequence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical:

499

(113)a.

N-itetika ny h-ividy ny trano i Jeanne, past-plan coup fut-buy the house Jeanne

"Jeanne was planning to buy the house."

b.

No-teteh-in1 i Jeanne (*ny) pass-plan-by

ho-vidi-ana ny trano.

Jeanne (*conp) pass-buy-by the house

"The house was being planned to be bought by Jeanne," i.e. "Jeanne was planning to buy the house."

(114)a.

Fantatra fa h-andidy ny mofo i Jeanne, known comp fut-cut the bread Jeanne

"It is known that Jeanne will be cutting the bread."

b.

Fantatra *(fa) known

ho-didi-n' i Jeanne ny mofo.

*(carp) pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread

"It is known that the bread will be cut by Jeanne."

3. Postposition of a clause embedded under an Equi-1 verb yields an ungrammatical sequence (see 2.1.1.4), whereas this is always possible under a Raising-to-Su verb (see 2.1.4.4); 4. Passivization under an Equi-1 verb yields an ungrammatical output (see 2.1.1.5), while it can apply freely under a Raising-to-Su verb (see 2.1.4.5); 5. an Equi-1 verb allows a negation in the main clause either on its own or with another negation, whereas a Raising-toSu verb does not allow a negation in the main clause at all. Compare 2.1.4.2 with the following:

500

(115)

Tsy n-itetika (tsy) h-ividy ny

trano i Jeanne. Jeanne

neg past-plan (neg) fut-buy the house

"Jeanne was not planning on (not) buying the house."

6. There is truth-functional equivalence between two structures involving a Raising-to-Su verb, the first of which has an embedded verb in the active, whereas the other has a passive (see 2.1.4.7). This is not the case with an Equi-1 verb since the presence of the complement!zer n blocks the application of Affixal Passive; therefore, the issue of truth-functional equivalence is irrelevant. 7. Under a Raising-to-Su verb, symmetrical predicates yield the same cognitive meaning, although their arguments are rearranged (see 2.1.4.8). With an Equi-1 predicate, this does not hold since such a rearrangement yields an ungraitmatical output:

(116)a.

N-itetika (ny)

h-ividy ny

trano i Paoly. Paul

past-plan (comp) fut-buy the house

"Paul was planning on buying the house."

b. *N-itetika (ny)

h-ividy an'i Paoly ny trano. Paul the house

past-plan (comp) fut-buy (not interpretable)

8. Under a Raising-to-Su verb, there is no tenserestriction on the embedded verb (see 2.1.4.9), whereas under an Equi-1 verb, the future tense-marker h(o) is mandatory.

501

2.1.1.1

Properties of an Equi-1 Construction. to Equi-1 verb has the following characteristics: 1. it can take ny or zero for its complementizer; in

the latter case, the embedded verb retains its active form; 2. complement i zer deletion is obligatory in double passive constructions involving an Equi-1 verb in the matrix clause; 3. Postposition of the embedded clause yields an ungrammatical sequence; 4. Passivization of the embedded verb typically yields an ungrammatical output; 5. in double passives involving an Equi-1 verb, a zeropronoun in the embedded clause always refers to the Su of the main verb in the active voice; and 6. the presence of a ooreferential pronoun within the same clause yields an ungrammatical sequence; 7. it is not possible for a clause embedded under an Equi-1 verb to have in the active voice a pronoun Su ooreferential with the main clause Su, even in a Marked structure with hoe "quote...unquote" complementizer.

2.1.1.2

Distribution of Complementizers. Main verbs triggering Equi-1 can take either a zero, as

can be seen in the sentence (106) above or the sequence (117) a. below, or rr for their complementizer, as in (117)b., but not the general complementizer fa "that" since (117)c. is irretrivably ungrammatical, or mba "so that, please" since (117)d. is ungrammatical:

502

(117)a.

N-itetika

h-ividy ny trano (K i Jeanne^, Jeanne

past-plan conp fut-buy the house

"Jeanne was making plans to buy the house."

b.

N-itetika ny

h-ividy ny trano Ch i Jeannej. Jeanne

past-plan conp fut-buy the house

"Jeanne was making plans to buy the house."

c. *N-itetika fa

h-ividy ny trano CK i Jeanne^. Jeanne

past-plan ccnp fut-buy the house

"Jeanne was making plans to buy the house."

d. *N-itetika mba h-ividy ny trano (K i Jeanne^. past-plan carp fut-buy the house Jeanne

"Jeanne was making plans to buy the house."

2.1.1.3

Equi-1 and Double Passive. In a double passive construction involving an Equi-1

verb, deletion of the complementizer ny is obligatory:

(118)a. *No-teteh-in'i Jeannej ny

ho-vidi-ana Oj ny trano. the house

pass-plan-by Jeanne conp pass-buy-by (no interpretation whatsoever)

b.

NO-teteh-in'i Jeanne^ o

ho-vidi-ana Oj ny trano. the house

pass-plan-by Jeanne conp pass-buy-by

"The house was being planned to be bought by Jeanne," i.e. "Jeanne was planning on buying the house."

503

The sentence (118)a. is irretrievably ungrammatical, whereas its counterpart in (118)b. is perfectly grammatical. "Che one difference between the two is that the first comprises the complementizer ny while the second does not. If, for the moment, it is assumed that the complementizer is present in the underlying sequence, then, it can only be inferred that it has been deleted at a certain stage of its derivation.

2.1.1.4

Equi-1 and Postposition. Typically, it is not possible to postpose the embedded

clause under an Equi-1 verb:

(119)

*N-itetika...i Jeannei h-ividy ny trano Oj, past-plan Jeanne fut-buy the house

(in the absence of a special intonation and context) (compare with (106)a.)
(

(120)

*N-itetika...i Jeanne^ ho

any

[ j/

past-plan... Jeanne carp there (in the absence of a special intonation and context)

where the three dots represent the position vacated by the sentential DO. Hcwever, when there is emphasis, Postposition yields grammatical sequences:

(121)

N-itetika...tokoa i Jeanne^ n y h-ividy ny trano Oj. past-plan really Jeanne camp fut-buy the house

"Jeanne did make plans to buy the house."

504

(122)

N-itetika...tokoa i Jeanne ny ho any i past-plan really Jeanne conp fut there "Jeanne did make plans to be there."

0.

2.1.1.5

Equi-1 and Passivization. Passivization of the embedded clause without a matrix

passive yields ungrammatical sentences with Equi-1 verbs:

(123)a. *N-itetika ny

ho-didina O^ i Jeannej, Jeanne

past-plan cornp pass-cut

"Jeanne was making plans to be operated on,"

to be derived from

b.

/[S1 N-itetika [SQ ny h-andidy an'i Jj R] i Jj]/ past-plan oomp fut-cut J^ r j^

viiere J refers to Jeanne and R, short for Ranona "x", is an unspecified Agent; whereas,

(124)

N-itetika ny

h-andidy ny mofo 0^ i Jeanne^, Jeanne

past-plan conp fut-cut the bread

"Jeanne was making plans to cut the bread,"

has the verb of the embedded clause in the active voice and is perfectly grammatical.

505

2.1.1.6

Equi-1 and Pronominalization. In a double passive construction involving an Equi-1

verb, the embedded clause has a zero-pronoun coreferential with the main clause Su of the active verb, as can be inferred from (112) and (116). It is not possible at all to have the cliticized pronoun form -ny "by him/her" in place of the zero-pronoun:

(125)

*NO-tetehi-n' i Jeanne ho-vidi-nyi pass-plan-by

ny trano.

Jeanne pass-buy-by-her the house

(compare with (118)b.) (intended reading provided belcw) "Jeanne was making plans to buy the house."

2.1.1.7

Equi-1 and Coreferential Pronoun in the Same Clause. Unlike a Raising-to-DO verb (see 2.1.3.7), a typical

Equi-1 verb cannot have a coreferential pronoun within the same clause:

(126) a. *N-itetika azy.. h-andidy ny nofo i Jeanne^ past-plan her fut-cut the bread Jeanne (compare with (171)) "Jeanne was planning on cutting the bread."

b. *N-itetika azy.^ ho any i Jeanne past-plan her comp there Jeanne "Jeanne was planning on being there."

The independent pronoun form azy "him/her" is the DO of the main

506

verb and it is also coreferential with the NP i Jeanne. The sequences with this pronoun are irretrievably ungrammatical, as shown in (126). Now, if the said pronoun is left out, as in (124) above, for example, the output becomes perfectly grammatical. This holds of both (126)a. and (126)b.

2.1.1.8

Equi-1 and Restriction on Coreferentiality of Pronouns. Unlike a Raising-to-DO verb, an Equi-1 verb cannot have

a pronoun coreferential with the main verb Su in the active voice in the embedded clause under the complementizer hoe "quote...unquote" in a Marked structure:

(127)

*N-itetika...tokoa i Jeannei hoe h-ividy ny trano izy^. past-plan really Jeanne.^ cotrp fut-buy the house she^ (see (121)) (no interpretation whatsoever; intended meaning given) "Jeanne did make plans to buy the house."

In (127), the independent pronoun izy "he/she" is coreferential with the NP i Jeanne. The sequence is ungrammatical. Now, if the pronoun izy is left out of the sentence, (127) becomes perfectly grammatical, exactly like (121).

2.1.1.9

Sanple List of Typical Equi-1 Verbs. The following is a sample list of typical Equi-1 verbs:

mitetika "to make plans," manandrana "to try," milofo "to strive," mikatsaka "to aim at," mikely aina "to take great pains in doing something," mihezaka "to make efforts," mikendry "to aim at

507

doing something," misahirana "to belabor," and misafidy "to choose." Two verbs roaniry "to wish, to desire," and milaza "to declare, to say" represent a marginal subclass in that both allow passivization in the embedded clause:

(128)

M-ilaza ho-didi-na 0 ^ i Jeanne^ . pres-say pass-cut-by Jeanne

" Jeanne^ says that she^ will be operated on."

(129)

M-aniry

ho-didi-na CL i Jeanne^, Jeanne

pres-wish pass-cut-by

"Jeanne wishes to be operated on."

2.1.1.10 Equi-1 and the Cycle. Ihe following sentence type shows that Equi-1 interacts with Affixal Passive in a way which suggests that the latter is a cyclical rule:

(130)a.

Ny

n-ilatsaka

ho-fidi-na

no n-andram-an'i Paoly.

ocmp past-compete pass-choose-by part past-try-by Paul "It was to get his name on the ballot that Paul tried to do."

to be derived from

b. /[g2 N-anandrana past-try

ny n-ilatsaka ocmp past-compete

[sg h-ifidy fut-choose

508

an'i Paoly. R g 0 ] i Paolyj g l ] i Paolyi Q2\/. Pauli x Pauli Pauli

c.

On cycle S Q : Passive yields, with deletion of R, the

unspecified Agent of the embedded clause:

[ e ho-fidi-na i Paoly G ]. s 0 0 pass-choose Paul

d.

On cycle

Equi-1 applies

[g ny n-ilatsaka [ g ho-fidi-na i P^ S Q ] i P i comp past-conpete pass-choose P. P.

sl]

[g

ny n-ilatsaka [ g ho-fidi-na

0 i S Q ] i P ^ sl ]. j

e.

On cycle S2: Equi-1 applying before Passive gives

[g2 N-anandrana

ny n-ilatsaka [ g Q ho-fidi-na g0]


g2]

i Paoly. g l ] i Paoly.

N-anandrana 0i

ny n-ilatsaka

ho-fidi-na

i Paoly

N-anandrana ny n-ilatsaka 0 i ho-fidi-na O^ i Paoly^. past-try coup past-cenp pass-choose Paul

Fronting of the sentential Su ny n-ilatsaka ho-fidi-na and insertion of the particle no yields (130) a. This is a sandwich-type

509

argument in favor of the cycle: first, on cycle SO, Passive applies, followed by two subsequent applications of Equi-1; finally passive reapplies on cycle S2.

2.1.2.0

Equi-2. Equi-2 deletes the Su of a lower clause under identity

with a non-Su NP of the main clause. Thus:

(131)a.

N-ibaiko an'i Jeanne^ h-ividy ny trano 0 ^ i Paoly, . past-order Jeanne fut-buy the house Paul

"Paul ordered Jeanne to buy the house,"

to be derived from

b. /[S N-ibaiko an'i J^ [ h-ividy ny trano i J ^ i Paoly]/ past-order Ji fut-buy the house J^ Paul

where the NP i Jeanne, the Su of the embedded clause, is coreferential with the DO an'i Jeanne of the higher clause.

(132)a.

N-ibaiko an'i Jeanne^ [ ho any past-order Jeanne coup there

0^] i Paoly, Paul

"Paul ordered Jeanne to get there,"

to be derived from

b.

/[ N-ibaiko an'i J i [ ho past-order

any i Jj^ ] i Paoly ]/. Paul

J^ coup there J^

510

2.1.2.0.1 Complexity of Construction. Structures like (131)a. and (132)a. are complex, not simplex since it is possible to place the negation operator ts^ in front of the lower verb:

(133)

N-ibaiko an'i Jeannetsy h-ividy ny trano Oj i Paoly. past-order Jeanne neg fut-buy the house Paul

"Paul ordered Jeanne not to buy the house."

2.1.2.0.2 The Underlying Structure. The possibility of Reflexivization to tena in the lower clause suggests that it had a Su at the time this rule applied:

(134)

N-ibaiko an'i Jeannei h-amono tena^ 0^ Paoly, past-order Jeanne.^ fut-kill selfj Paul

"Paul ordered Jeanne^ to kill herselfj,"

where the zero represents the deleted Su NP of the embedded clause.

2.1.2.0.3 Granmatical Relations. In (132), the NP i Jeanne is not a Su since it has the preposition an in front of it and since it can be replaced with the DO form of the independent pronoun, i.e. azy:

(135)

N-ibaiko

azy^

tsy h-ividy ny trano Oj i Paoly. Paul

past-order him/her neg fut-buy the house "Paul ordered her not to buy the house."

511

The NP i Paoly, c i the other hand, is a Su since it can be x replaced with the Su form of the independent pronoun, i.e. izy:

(136)

N-ibaiko an'i Jeannei tsy h-ividy ny trano 0 i izy. past-order Jeanne neg futbuy the house he/she

"He ordered Jeanne not to buy the house."

2.1.2.0.4 Equi-2 and Coreferentiality. Hie embedded Zero-pronoun can only be ooreferential with the DO, but not with the Su of the higher clause, as can be inferred from the grammaticality pattern emerging from the following pair of sentences:

(137)

*N-ibaiko an'i Jeanne tsy h-ividy ny trano O^ i Paoly^. past-order Jeanne neg fut-buy the house Paul

(coreferential network absolutely impossible)

(138)

N-ibaiko an'i Jeannei tsy h-ividy ny trano 0_ i Paoly. j past-order Jeanne neg fut-buy the house Paul

"Paul ordered Jeanne not to buy the house."

In (137), the Zero-pronoun refers to the higher Su and the sentence is irretrievably ungrammatical. In (138), on the other hand, it refers to the DO i Jeanne, i.e. a non-Su, and, as a result, the sequence is perfectly grammatical.

2.1.2.0.5 Deletion vs. Raising. A deletion rather than a Raising process is involved in structures of the type of (131)a. since the relevant NP i Jeanne

512

can oily appear in the higher clause. If a Raising process was involved, it should be the case that in a parallel construction involving nominalization, the relevant NP shows up in the lower clause. This is not the case since:

(139)

*N-ibaiko ny h-i-vidi-anan' i Jeanne ny trano i Paoly, past-order coup fut-circ-buy-by J. the house Paul

is irretrievably ungrammatical, where the NP i Jeanne shows up only in the embedded clause.

2.1.2.1

Properties of Equi-2. An Equi-2 construction has the following properties: 1. it typically takes zero for its complementizer; 2. deletion of the particle mba is optional in a double

passive construction with the subset of Equi-2 verbs which can co-occur with it; 3. Postposition of the embedded clause yields sequences of doubtful grammaticality; 4. unlike with an Equi-1 verb, Passivization of the embedded clause yields a grammatical output; 5. in double passive constructions, the embedded clause cannot have a Zero-pronoun coreferential with the main clause Su of the active voice; 6. the presence within the main clause of a pronoun coreferential with its Su yields an ungrammatical sequence; 7. the presence within a clause embedded under an Equi-2 verb of a Su pronoun, coreferential with the relevant non-Su of the matrix clause, makes the output ungrammatical;

513

8. Reflexivization to tena shows that the embedded Su has been deleted; 9. there is a selectional restriction on the DO taken by an Equi-2 verb; this is also apparent in the restriction on the Su of a double passive construction involving an Equi-2 verb; and 10. there is no truth-functional equivalence between an active construction involving an Equi-2 and its passive counterpart.

2.1.2.2

Complementizers. Main verbs triggering Equi-2 typically take Zero for

its complementizer, but never n^ nor fa:

(140)a.

N-anery an'i Jeanne^ 0 past-force

h-anasa an'i Jaona Oj i Paoly. John Paul

Jeanne camp fut-wash

b. *N-anery an'i Jeanne ny past-force

h-anasa an'i Jaona 0^ i Paoly. John Paul

Jeanne comp fut-wash

(no interpretation possible)

c. *N-anery an'i Jeanne fa past-force

h-anasa an'i Jaona 0^ i paoly. John Paul

Jeanne comp fut-wash

(intended reading provided) "Paul was forcing Jeanne to wash John."

However, there is a subset of verbs belonging to this subcategory which allows the particle mba, a hedgeword meaning "Please":

514

(142)a.

M-ianara! pres-study "Study!"

b.

Mba

m-ianara

(e)!

please pres-study excl. "Please, study!"

(143) a.

Vaki-o

io

taratasy io. this

read-pass-imperative this letter

"Let this letter be read by you," i.e. "Read this letter."

b.

Mba

vaki-o

io

taratasy io. this

please read-pass-imperative this letter "Please, read this letter."

Note that, as a general rule, it is possible to have the particle mba with linguistic communication verbs such as manambitamby "to cajole (someone) into doing something," miangavy "to implore," or manantena "to exhort":

(144)a.

N-anambitaniby an'i J past-persuade

(mba) h-anasa an'i P R. P X

J part fut-wash

"X was gently persuading J to (please) wash P."

b.

N-iangavy

an'i J

(mba) h-anasa an'i P R. P X

past-request

J part fut-wash

"X requested of J that he/she (please) wash P."

515

2.1.2.3

Deletion of Complementizer Mba. Deletion of niba is always possible with the subset of

Equi-2 verbs that can co-occur with it:

(145)

No-tambatambaza-n'i P pass-cajole-by

(mba) ho-sasa-n'i J R.

P part fut-wash-fcy J X

"X was being gently persuaded by P to (please) get washed by J."

Whether mba is in the sequence or not, the sentence remains grammatical.

2.1.2.4

Postposition. Postposition of the lower clause often yields sequences

of doubtful grammaticality:

(146)a.

N-anambitamby an'i J mba h-anasa an'i P R. past-cajole J part fut-wash P X

"X was persuading J to please wash P."

b. ?*N-anambitamby an'i J ...R mba h-anasa an'i P. past-cajole J X part fut-wash P

(more context needed) "X was persuading J to please wash P."

(147)a.

N-anambitamby an'i J mba ho past-cajole

ao

i P.

J part comp there P

"P was persuading J to please be there."

516

b. ?*N-anambitamby an'i J...i P mba ho past-cajole J

ao.

P part comp there

In both (146)a. and (147)a., which are perfectly grammatical, the sentential Object has not been postposed yet. By contrast, in (146)b. and (147)b., Postposition of the sentential Object has taken place, with the position vacated by the embedded clause indicated by three dots in each case, and the results are sequences of doubtful granmaticality.

2.1.2.5 Equi-2 and Passive. Unlike with an Equi-1 verb, application of Affixal Passive on the lower cycle yields grammatical sentences:

(148)a.

N-anery an'i P ho-sasa-n'i J R, past-force P pass-wash-by J X

"X forced P to be washed by J,"

to be derived from

b. /[ gl N-anery an'i P [ s 0 h-anasa an'i P i J ] R ]/. past-force P fut-wash P J X

On cycle SO, Affixal Passive applies since the embedded clause does not have a complementizer, which in the case of an Equi-1 verb, for example, in the matrix prevents Passivization in the lower clause.

517

(149)a-

N-anambitamby an'i P ho-sasa-n'i J R, past-cajole P pass-wash-by J X

"X was gently persuading P to get washed by J,"

to be derived from

b.

/[ sl N-anambitamby an'i Pj [ g Q h-anasa an'i Pj J] R]/. past-cajole Pj fut-wash Pj J X

On cycle SO, Affixal Passive applies to give:

c.

[gg ho-sasa-n' i J i P ]. pass-wash-by J P

This feeds Equi-2 on cycle SI:

d.

[ g l N-anambitamby an'i Pj [ g 0 ho-sasa-n'i J i Pj] R]. past-cajole Pj pass-wash-by J Pj X

[ g l N-anambitaniby an'i Pj [ g Q ho-sasa-n'i J past-cajole Pj pass-wash-by J

0^] R]. Oj X

2.1.2.6

Equi-2 and Coreferentiality. In a double passive construction involving an Equi-2

verb, it is possible to have a Zero-pronoun in the embedded clause. But, the latter can only refer to the DO of the main verb in the active voice, and never to its Su:

518

(150) a.

No-tambatamba-z-an-dR i i a ho-sasa-na rb pass-cajole-by-X

(h i p^.

part pass-wash-by (K i ,pi

"P was being persuaded by X to get washed."

b. *No-tambatainba-zan-dRi mba ho-sasa-na pass-cajole-by-X^ part pass-wash-by

0 i i P.

i P

(coreferentiality absolutely impossible)

In (150)a., the Zero-pronoun refers to the Su of the main verb, which is in the passive voice. This means that initially the Zero-pronoun referred to the DO of the matrix verb in the active voice and the output is perfectly grammatical. By contrast, in (150)b., the Zero-pronoun refers to the Agent R "x" in the genitive case. This Agent R was initially the Su of the main verb in the active voice and the resulting sequence, as seen in (150)b. is irretrievably ungrammatical.

2.1.2.7

Equi-2 and (Preferential Pronoun in the Same Clause. Unlike a Raising to DO verb, it is not possible to have

within the same clause, i.e. the main clause, a pronoun preferential with the Su of the active verb; likewise, Reflexivization to tena is not possible:

(151)a. *N-anery

azy./tenai ho

tony i Jeanne Jeanne^

past-force her^/self^ comp calm (intended reading provided belcw)

"Jeanne^ forced herself^ to remain calm."

519

b.

M-ihevitra

azyi ho

mahay

i Jeanne^

pres-consider her.^ comp intelligent Jeanne "Jeanne^ considers herself^ intelligent."

c.

M-ihevi-tena^

ho

mahay

i Jeanne^,

pres-consider-self^ comp intelligent Jeanne^^ "Jeanne^ considers herself^ intelligent."

There exists a sharp contrast between the behavior of an Equi-2 verb, as seen in (151)a., with respect to Pronominalization and Reflexivization, and that of a Raising-to-DO verb, as illustrated in (151)b. and (151) c. The sentences in (151) a. with the DO azy "him/her" or tena "self" coreferential with the main Su are irretrievably ungrammatical. On the other hand, (151)b. with azy and (151)c. with tena coreferential with the main Su are perfectly grammatical sequences. The only difference between these two sets of sentences has to do with the nature of the main verb, i.e. in the first instance, one of the Equi-2 type and in the second, one of the Raising-to-DO type.

2.1.2.8

Postposition and Coreferentiality. As seen under 2.1.2.4, Postposition gives sentences of

doubtful grammaticality if there is no coreferential pronoun on the surface in the embedded clause, as in (146) and (147). New, if a pronoun Su shows up in the lower clause, which is coreferential with the main clause DO, the output becomes irretrievably ungrammatical:

520

(152)

*N-anambitaniby an'i J^.. .R mba h-anasa ani P izyi. past-cajole J^ X part fut-wash P he^/she^

(catipare with (146)) (intended meaning represented below) "X was persuading J^ for himj/her^ to please wash P."

(153)

*N-anambitamby an'i J^...R mba ho past-cajole J^

any

izy^.

x part comp there he^/she^

(compare with (147)) "X was persuading J^ for him^/her^ to please be there."

2.1.2.9

Equi-2 and Reflexivization. From what we know of Reflexivization to tena in Mala-

gasy, the trigger must be a Su (see Chapter Three: 1.1) and belongs in the same clause as its victim (see Chapter Three: Subsection 2.0.(1) and (3). Now, there exist sentences of the following type:

(154)

N-anambitamby an'i ON (mba) h-ikarakara past-cajole

tena^ R,

J^ part fut-take-care self^ X

"X was gently persuading G\ to (please) take care of himselfi/herselfif"

where tena seems to lack a trigger. The grairmaticality of (154) argues that indeed there is a Su coreferential with the higher clause DO an'i Jeanne underlyingly since only a Su can trigger Reflexivization to tena and it must belong in the same clause as its victim.

521

2.1.2.10 Selectional Restrictions on the DO of an Equi2 Verb, There is a selectional restriction on the DO an Equi-2 verb can take:

(155)a.

N-anery

an'i

h-andeha Oj R. X fut-go Oj X

past-force

"X was forcing J to leave."

b.

H-andeha i J. fut-go J

"J was leaving."

(156)a. *N-anery

ny raharaha^ h-andeha 0^ R. fut-go O^ X

past-force the affair^ (intended meaning)

"X was forcing the affair to go," i.e. "X was forcing the affair to work out fine."

b.

H-andeha ny raharaha. fut-go the affair

"Things will work out fine."

In (155)a., the DO is a human and, as a result, the sentence is grammatical, whereas in (156)a., it is an inanimate and this yields an ungrammatical sentence despite the fact that the lower clause on its own is perfectly grammatical, as seen in (156)b. However, this restriction is sometimes less apparent in double passives:

522

(157)a. TNo-tere-n'

i P ho-didi-n' i J ny mofo,

pass-force-by P pass-cut-by J the bread "Hie bread was being forced by P to be cut by J,"

to be derived from the intermediate structure:

b.

/[sl N-anery ny mofo^ [gg h-andidy ny mofo^ i J] i p]/. past-force the bread fut-cut the bread J p

2.1.2.11 Equi-2 and Truth-Functional Equivalence. There is no truthfunctional equivalence between an active sentence with an Equi-2 verb and its double passive counterpart:

(158)a.

N-anery

an'i J h-anasa an'i P R. J fut-wash P X

past-force

(compare with (146)) "X was forcing J to wash P."

b.

No-tere-n-dR

ho-sasa-in' i J i P. P

pass-force-by-R pass-wash-by J

"P was being forced by X to be washed by J."

In (158)a., it is J who is the object of coercion, whereas in (158)b., it is P who is subjected to such a coercion.

2.1.2.12 Sample List of Typical Equi-2 Verbs. The following is a sample list of typical Equi-2 verbs:

523

manery "to force," manome alalana "to grant permission," manambitamby "to cajole, to persuade gently," mibaiko "to order," mandodona "to press (someone)," manentana "to exhort," and maniraka "to send on an errand."

2.1.2.13 Equi-2 and the Cycle. The existence of structures of the following type suggests that Affixal Passive interacts with Equi-2 in a way which supports the cycle:

(159)a.

No-tere-n1

i p h-ilatsaka ho-fidi-na

i J,

pass-force-by P fut-compete pass-elect-by J "J was being forced to enter the competition to get elected," i.e. "J was forced to enter the competition for the election,"

to be derived frcm

b.

/[ g2 N-anery an'i J. past-force Ji

h-ilatsaka [ gQ h-ifidy an i J. fut-compete fut-elect

S0

1 J

iSll

1 p

c.

On cycle SO, Passive followed by unspecified Agent

Deletion yields [go ho-fidi-na i J^] pass-elect-by J

524

d.

On cycle SI, Equi-1 applies

[gj h-ilatsaka [SO ho-fidi-na i Jj gg] i Jj g^] fut-conpete h-ilatsaka pass-elect-by X ho-fidi-na O^ i

e.

On cycle S2, Equi-2 applies before Passive

[g2 N-anery an'i J^ [g^ h-ilatsaka [gg ho-fidi-na Oj] past-force X fut-conpete pass-elect-by

1 J

i Sl] i

1 p p

S2'

[g2 N-anery an'i Jj [ g l h-ilatsaka [ g 0 ho-fidi-na Oj] past-force X fut-conpete pass-elect-by

i SO) 1

S2

f.

Only then, after Equi-2, can Passive apply

[ g 2 No-tere-n'i P [ g l h-ilatsaka [ g 0 ho-fidi-na Oj] pass-force-by P fut-conpete pass-elect-by

i Sl] i

1 J

i S2^' Ji

On cycle SO, as in (159)c., Passive applies. This is followed by one application of Equi-1 on cycle SI, as shown in (159)d., and

525

one of Equi-2 on cycle S2, as illustrated in (159)e. Finally, passive reapplies on cycle S2, as in (159)f.

2.1.3.0

Kaising-to-DO. Raising-to-DO lifts the Su of an embedded clause to the

DO position within the matrix clause. Thus:

(160) a.

M-ihevitra

azyi ho

mahay

i Jeanneif

pres-consider h e ^ comp intelligent Jeanne "Jeanne considers herself intelligent,"

is to be derived from the intermediate structure

b.

/[ M-ihevitra [ ho

mahay

izy^] i Jeanne^]/ Jeanne^

pres-consider comp intelligent she^

where the embedded izy^ coreferential with the NP i Jeanne is marked for emphasis. In fact, (160)a. could be paraphrased as:

c.

M-ihevitra...i Jeanne^ fa pres-consider

mahay

izy^.

Jeanne^ comp intelligent she^

"Jeannei thinks that she^ is intelligent."

In (160)c., the sentential Object, initially in the position indicated by the three dots, has been postposed after the matrix Su. This is accompanied by the use of the complementizer fa instead of ho and the appearance of the coreferential independent pronoun izy in the lower clause.

526

2.1.3.0.1 Raising-to-DO and Reflexivization to Ny Tenany. That it is the process of lifting the embedded Su to DO position which is involved here is confirmed by the existence of structures with Reflexivization to ny tenany:

(161)a.

M-ihevitra

ny tenanyi [ ho

mahay ]

i Jeanne

pres-consider self^

coup intelligent Jeanne^

"Jeanne^ considers herself^ intelligent."

b.

/[ M-ihevitra ["mahay

ny tenako^"] i Jeanne^]/, Jeanne^

pres-consider intelligent myself^

The sequence represented in (161)b. is the underlying structure for (161)a.: the reflexive form ny tenany originates in the lower clause with its Direct Feeling representation ny tena-ko "myself" which shifts to the third person during Indirect Discourse Formation. As remarked in the beginning of Chapter Three on Reflexivization, the embedded clause in (161)b. is a Marked structure, i.e. marked for either Emphasis or Politeness. The complementizer ho surfaces in the process of Indirect Discourse Formation since the embedded clause is of the equative type. Hie grammaticality of (161)a. suggests that the trigger i Jeanne and its victim ny tenany are not clausemates in deep structure.

2.1.3.1

Properties of Raising-to-DO. A Raising-to-DO verb has the following properties: 1. it can take the zero complementizer, the ho comple-

mentizer, as seen in (160), or the nominalizer ny with the embedded verb in the circumstantial voice; however, its comple-

527

mentizer is typically fa "that" if Postposition is made to apply to the sentential Object; 2. deletion of the general complementizer fa is optional in a double passive construction; 3. Postposition is possible; 4. Affixal Passive Raising-to-DO verb is allowed present; 5. an embedded Su pronoun can be coreferential with the Su of a main verb in the active voice in a Marked structure; 6. with many verbs, it is possible to have a coreferential pronoun within the same clause; 7. a Zero-pronoun in the clause embedded under a typical Raising-to-DO verb can refer to either the main clause if the complementizer is fa or to a non-Su in the main clause if the complementizer is mba; 8. Reflexivization to ny tenany is allowed in the main clause; 9. there is no selectional restriction between the main verb and the lifted DO; likewise, there is no selectional restriction on the Su of a double passive construction; and 10. native speakers have a strong preference for Passivization of the main verb when the embedded clause is not an equative sentence. in a clause embedded under a fa is

if the complementizer

2.1.3.2.1 Complementizers. A Raising-to-DO verb can have no conplementizer, as can be seen in sentences such as:

528

(162)

N-ihevitra [ h-andeha ho past-think fut-go

any ] i Jeanne, Jeanne

dir. there

"Jeanne was thinking of going there."

However, a Raising-to-DO verb can be followed by the nominalizer ny (see (210)a.), with the embedded verb in the circumstantial voice. Also see distinction between nominalizer r r and compleg mentizer n^ under (2.1.5.1):

(163)a.

N-anantena an'i Jeanne [h-andidy ny mofo] i Paoly. past-expect J fut-cut the bread P

"Paul was expecting Jeanne to cut the bread."

b.

N-anantena [ny h-an-didi-an'i Jeanne ny mofo] i Paoly. past-expect nam. fut-circ-cut-by J the bread P

"Paul was expecting Jeanne's cutting of the bread."

c. *N-anantena [ny h-andidy ny mofo i Jeanne] i Paoly. past-expect nam. fut-cut the bread J P

Note that with an Equi-2 verb, nominalization with n is out:

(164)a.

N-anery an'i Jeanne.^ [h-andidy ny mofo 0 i ] i Paoly. past-force J fut-cut the bread P

"Paul was forcing Jeanne to cut the bread."

b. *N-anery [ny h-an-didi-an'i Jeanne ny mofo] i Paoly. past-force nom. fut-circ-cut-by J the bread P

529

2.1.3.2.2 Raising-to-DO and Complementizer Fa. Typically, a Raising-to-DO verb can take the complementizer fa when the sentential object has been postposed, without there being a necessity for a special intonation:

(165)

N-ihevitra ... i ^ past-think J

[fa

tokony h-andeha 0i]. J

comp should-fut-go

(compare with (161)) "J^ thought that he^/she^ should go."

(166)

N-anantena an'i J. [fa past-expect

h-andidy ny rrofo

i P. P

J^ oomp fut-cut the bread 0 i

(compare with (163)a.) "P expected J to cut the bread."

(167)

N-anantena an'i J^ [(mba) h-andidy ny rrofo 0^] i P. past-expect J i comp fut-cut the bread P

"P expected of J i that he.j/shej^ would cut the bread."

The sentence (167) has the sane cognitive meaning as (166) although if it comprises the complementizer mba "please," it signals the fact that P's expectation is more distant.

2.1.3.2.3 Fa as the General Complementizer. Fa "that" is the general complementizer since: 1. n, as in (117) for an Equi-1 verb, signals ooreference between the embedded Su, deleted in the course of the derivation, and the main clause Su:

530

2. mba, as in (145) for an Equi-2 verb, signals ooreference between the embedded Su, deleted in the course of the derivation, and a non-Su NP in the main clause; and 3. fa, c i the other hand, can signal either, as in x (165), that the ooreference is between the embedded Su and the main clause Su, or in (166), that it holds between a non-Su of the main clause and the embedded Su.

2.1.3.3

Optional Complementizer Fa Deletion. Deletion of fa is optional even in a double passive

construction involving a Raising-to-DO verb:

(168)

N-antena-in'

i P [(fa) ho-didi-n'i J] ny nrafo].

past-expect-pass-by P camp pass-cut-by J the bread "It was expected by P that J would cut the bread."

It was already seen in (162) and (165) that the complementizer fa is optional when both the main and embedded verbs are in the active voice. Here, in (168), we have a case where both the higher and the lcwer verbs have been passivized.

2.1.3.4

Postposition. Postposition is permissible with typical Raising-to-DO

verbs:

(169)a.

N-anantena an'i Ji#..i p [h-andidy ny itofo Oil. past-expect J P fut-cut the bread

"P was expecting of J\ that hei/shei would cut the bread."

531

b.

N-anantena... i P [ny n-an-didi-an1 past-expect

i J ny mofo].

P nom. past-circ-cut-by J the bread

(compare with (163)b.) "P was expecting J's cutting of the bread."

2.1.3.5

Raising-to-DO and Affixal Passive. Affixal Passive is allowed in the lower clause if the

complementizer fa is present:

(170)a.

N-anantena i P [fa

ho-didi-n' i J ny mofo]. J the bread

past-expect P comp pass-cut-by

"P was expecting that the bread will be cut by J."

b. *N-anantena i P [0

ho-didi-n' i J ny mofo]. J the bread

past-expect P comp pass-cut-by

In (170)a., the complementizer fa is present and the sequence is perfectly grammatical. This contrasts with (170)b., which is almost exactly the same as (170) a. except for the absence of the complementizer fa : (170)b. is irretrievably ungranmatical.

2.1.3.6

Raising-to-DO and Coreferential Pronoun in the Same Clause. As seen in (160)c. under 2.1.3.0, it is possible to

have a Su pronoun, here izy, ooreferential with the Su of the main clause if Postposition applies and if there is emphasis on the identity of the referent involved. By contrast, it was seen under 2.1.2.8 that it is impossible to have the above phenomenon with an Equi-2 verb.

532

2.1.3.7

Coreferential Pronoun in the Same Clause. The example (160)a. shows that with a typical Raising-

to-DO, a pronoun coreferential with the main Su can show up in the same clause. The strongest piece of evidence in support of such a claim cones from placement of the negation operator tsy "not" between azy and the complementizer ho, to yield:

(171)

N-ihevitra

azyi [tsy ho
n eg

mahay]

i Jeannej.

past-consider her^

coup intelligent Jeannej

"Jeanne^ considered herj not to be intelligent."

Note that the ooreference reading between the pronoun azy and the NP i Jeanne no longer obtains, as indicated by the different subscripts. It follows that azy must belong in the matrix clause.

2.1.3.8

Selection of Complementizer and Control. Depending on the choice of complementizer, a Zero-

pronoun in the lower clause under a typical Raising-to-DO verb like manantena "to expect" can refer back to the main clause Su, as seen in (166) with the complementizer fa, or to a non-Su in the matrix clause, as in (167) with the oonplementizer mba. In this respect, a Raising-to-DO verb behaves in a manner which is half-way between that of an Equi-1 verb and that of an Equi-2 construction.

2.1.3.9

Raising-to-DO and Reflexivization to Ny Tenany. A typical Raising-to-DO verb allows Reflexivization to

ny tenany:

533

(172) a.

N-ihevitra

ny tenany.^ [ho

mahay]

i Jeannei.

past-consider self^

comp intelligent Jeanne

"Jeanne^ considered herself^ intelligent."

b.

No-hever-in'

i Jeannei [ho

mahay]

ny tenany

pass-consider-by J ^ .

comp intelligent selfi

"Herself^ was thought by Jeanne^ to be intelligent."

The sentence (172)a. has its verb in the active voice, as opposed to that of (172)b., which has its verb in the passive. The possibility of promotion of the DO ny tenany of (172)a. to Su position through Passivization, as in (172)b., suggests that ny tenany belongs in the same clause as its apparent trigger i Jeanne. This confirms the view that ny tenany really occupies the DO position in the main clause in (172)a. Therefore, the victim and its alleged trigger are clausemates and, according to what is known of Reflexivization in Malagasy (see Chapter Three: 2.1.1), the victim should be tena. This suggests that ny tenany originated as the Su of the embedded clause, without any trigger present in the sentence since the embedded structure is marked for Emphasis, as shown above in (161)b.

2.1.3.10 Absence of Selectional Restriction on DO of Raising. There is no selectional restriction on the Su of a double passive construction involving a Raising-to-DO verb:

(173)

No-hever-in1 i Paoly ho-entina Rasoa/ny fiara. pass-think-by Paul pass-bring Rasoa/the car "Paul was thinking of taking Rasoa/the car."

534

(174)

N-ihevitra ny raharaha h-andeha i Paoly. past-think the affair (compare with (156)) "Paul was thinking that things would work out fine." fut-go Paul

2.1.3.11 Raising-to-DO and Truth-Functional Equivalence. The passive voice structure and the corresponding active construction involving a Raising-to-DO verb are truthfunctionally equivalent. Thus:

(175)a.

N-anantena i Paoly [fa h-ah(a)-azo

h-itondra

past-expect Paul comp fut-caus-be-allcwed fut-take

an-Rasoa/ny fiara]. Rasoa/the car "Paul^ was hoping that he^ would be allowed to take Rasoa/the car."

b.

N-antena-in'

i Paoly [ny h-ah(a)-azo

h-itondra

pass-expect-by P

coup fut-caus-be-allcwed fut-take

an-dRasoa/ny fiara]. Rasoa/the car "Paul was hoping to be allowed to take Rasoa/the car."

The verb in (175)a. is in the active voice, whereas that found in (175)b. is in the passive voice. The two are truth-functionally equivalent.

535

2.1.3.12 Preference for Passive in the Main Clause with Raising. There is a very strong preference for Passive in the main clause with a typical Raising-to-DO verb when the embedded clause is non-equative:

(176)a. ?N-ihevitra an'i J [h-andidy ny mofo] i P. past-think J fut-cut the- bread P

"P was thinking that J would cut the bread."

b.

Nd-hever-in' i P [h-andidy ny mofo] i J. pass-think-by P fut-cut the bread J

?"J was believed by P to be about to cut the bread."

(177) a. *N-anao an'i J [h-andidy ny nofo] i P. past-do J fut-cut the bread P

"P was thinking that J would cut the bread."

b.

N-atao-n' i P [h-andidy ny nofo] i J. pass-do-by P fut-cut the bread J

?"J was believed by P to be about to cut the bread."

In both (176)a. and (177)a., the verbs are in the active voice, and at best, as in (176)a., the sequence is of doubtful grammaticality, whereas in (177)a., the sentence is irretrievably ungranmatical. By contrast, in (176)b. and (177)b., the verbs are in the passive voice and both sequences are perfectly grammatical and sound quite natural.

536

2.1.3.13.1 Sample List of Typical Raising-to-DO Verbs. The following is a sample list of Raising-to-DO verbs: 1. on the one hand, mihevitra "to think, to consider," manao "to consider," mahita "to find," manantena "to expect," manaiky "to accept," mitady "to seek," and milaza "to consider, to declare," take fa or ho for complementizer; 2. on the other hand, mangataka "to request," miangavy "to beseech," can optionally take mba for its complementizer or take the nominalizer ny. Members of the second set are less typical of Raisingto-DO verbs in so far as they do not have seme of the properties enumerated under 2.1.3.1. For example, they do not allow a coreferential pronoun within the sane clause or Reflexivization to tenany:

(178)a.

N-angataka

(*azyi) [ho

entina] i Jeanne^. Jeanne^

past-request her^

comp brought

(compare with (160) a.) "Jeanne was requesting to be taken away."

b.

N-angataka past-request

(*ny tenany^ [ho self^

entina] i Jeanne^, Jeanne^

comp brought

(compare with (172)a.) "Jeanne was requesting to be taken away."

Hie portion of (178)a. which does not comprise the coreferential pronoun azy is perfectly gramnatical, but if azy is inserted into the sequence it becomes irretrievably ungraircnatical. Likewise,

537

the portion of (178) b. which does not include the reflexive ny tenany is perfectly grammatical, but if the latter shows up, the sentence becomes irretrievably ungrairmatical.

2.1.3.13.2 Additional Criteria for Raising-to-DO. Hcwever, members of the second list belong in the Raising-to-DO subclass since: ~

1. they take the nominalizer ng; with the verb in the circumstantial voice:

(179)a.

N-angataka an'i ^ past-request (see (163)a.)

(mba) h-andidy ny nofo fut-cut the bread

0i

i P, P

J i part

"P was requesting of J^ that hej/st^ cut the bread,"

b.

N-angataha-n'

i P ny h-an-didi-an'

i J ny nofo,

pass-request-by P nan fut-circ-cut-by J the bread (see (163)b.) ?"Was requested by P J's cutting of the bread,"

c.

N-angataka an'i J. (mba) h-andeha any past-request J part fut-go there

0 i i P, P

"P was requesting that J go there,"

d.

N-angatah-in'

i P ny h-an-deha-n-an'i J any, J there

pass-request-by P nom fut-circ-go-by ?"Was requested by P J's going there,"

538

2. there is no restriction on the DO of such verbs, as seen in (179)b.; the active and its passive counterpart are truth-functionally equivalent since (179)b. with its verb in the passive has the same cognitive meaning as (179) a. with its verb in the active voice.

2.1.3.14 Raising-to-DO and the Cycle. The grammaticality of the following type of structure involving a Raising-to-DO verb indicates that it interacts with Affixal Passive in a way which is consistent with the Cyclic Convention:

(180)a.

[ g 2 Voa-laza-n'i J [ g l fa n-anantena ny raharaha pass-say-by J ccrap past-expect the affair

S0 h o

voa

-karakara

i S0] Sl]

1 P

S2]' P

comp pass-take-care-of-by

"It is said by J that P was expecting the affair to

be (well) taken care of,"

to be derived from

b.

/[g2 N-ilaza past-say

fa n-anantena [gg n-ikarakara comp past-expect past-take-care-of


g2]/,

ny raharaha R g Q ] i p g l ] i j the affair X P

where R, short for "Ranona", represents an unspecified Agent x.

539

On cycle SO: Passive with ho complementizer insertion yields

c.

[gQ ho voa-karakara-ndR [g0 ho voa-karakara

ny raharaha ny raharaha

gQ] SQ ].

camp pass-take-care-of(-by x) the affair

On cycle SI: Raising-to-DO gives

<3

fa n-anantena ny raharaha [ g 0 ho voa-karakara] i P] conp past-expect the affair comp pass-take-care P.

On cycle S2: Passive applies

e.

[gj Voa-laza-n'i J pass-say-by J

fa n-anantena ny raharaha camp past-expect the affair

[gQ ho voa-karakara camp pass-take-care-of

s q]

iP P ]

On cycle SO, as in (180)c., Passive applies, allowing deletion of the unspecified Agent since the relevant form here is the perfective aspect. This is followed by application of Raising-to-DO, as in (180)d. Then, on the highest cycle, Passive reapplies, as in (180)e., yielding the relevant surface sequence (180)a.

2.1.4.0

Raising-to-Su. Raising-to-Su is the process which consists in lifting

the Su of the embedded clause and making it into the Su of the higher clause. Thus:

540

(181)a.

Fantatra [fa h-andidy ny nofo i Jeanne], known camp fut-cut the bread Jeanne

b.

Fantatra i Jeanne [fa h-andidy ny nofo], known Jeanne coup fut-cut the bread

"It is (a) known (fact) that Jeanne cut the bread,"

where fantatra "be known" is a root passive;

(182)a.

Fantatra [fa h-andeha i Jeanne], known coup fut-go Jeanne

b.

Fantatra i Jeanne [fa h-andeha]. known Jeanne comp fut-go

"It is (a) known (fact) that Jeanne will be leaving."

(183)a.

Fantatra [fa ho avy ny mpianatra]. known camp fut come the student(s)

b.

Fantatra ny mpianatra [fa known the student

ho avy].

oonp fut come

"It is (a) known (fact) that the students will be coning."

In (182)a. and (183)a., the Su NP is in the lower clause, as shown by the parentheses, whereas in (182)b. and (183)b., the

541

same Su NP shows up in the lower clause, as is evident from the fact that it new precedes the complementizer fa.

2.1.4.0.1 Grammatical Relations. In (181)a., the NP i Jeanne is the Su of the embedded clause. First, it is possible to replace it with the Su pronoun form izy:

(184)

Fantatra [fa h-andidy ny mofo izy]. known coup fut-cut the bread he/she

"It is (a) known (fact) that he/she will be cutting bread."

Second, Passivization of the lewer clause of (181)a. yields:

(185)

Fantatra [ fa ho-didi-n' i Jeanne ny mofo]. known conp pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread

"It is (a) known (fact) that the bread will be cut by Jeanne."

The sentence (184) shows that the NP i Jeanne occupies the Su position, while (185) proves that the said NP belongs in the lower clause since it shows up in the genitive case attached to the lower predicate.

2.1.4.0.2 Raising. Yet, in (181) b., the NP i Jeanne is the Su of the higher clause. First, it is still a Su since it can be replaced with the Su pronoun form izy:

542

(186)

Fantatra izy known

[fa

h-andidy ny mofo].

he/she comp fut-cut the bread

"It is (a) known (fact) that he/she will be cutting the bread."

Second, the NP i Jeanne belongs in the higher clause since it is possible to apply Postposition on the embedded clause:

(187)a.

Fantatra [fa h-andidy ny mofo] i Jeanne, known carp fut-cut the bread Jeanne

(compare with (181)a.)

b.

Fantatra... i Jeanne [fa h-andidy ny mofo], known Jeanne comp fut-cut the bread

"It is (a) known (fact) that Jeanne will be cutting the bread,"

where the three dots represent the position vacated by the embedded clause. In (187)a., the Su NP occupies the final position, whereas in (187)b., with the application of Postposition, it is the sentential complement which occupies the final position.

2.1.4.1

Properties of Raising-to-Su. Typical Raising-to-Su verbs share the following proper-

ties: 1. they do not allow a negation in the main clause, whether it is on its own or with another negation in the lower clause;

543

2. deletion of the complementizer fa yields an ungrammatical sequence; 3. Postposition of the embedded clause is possible; 4. Affixal Passive can apply freely on the embedded VP; 5. Reflexivization to tena is possible in the lower clause, which suggests that a predicate triggering Raising-to-Su must be able to take a sentential Su; 6. truth-functional equivalence of two structures, the first of which has an embedded verb in the active and the second, an embedded verb in the passive; 7. symmetrical predicates yield the same cognitive meaning under this type of predicate although their arguments are rearranged; 8. there is no tense-restriction on the embedded verb; 9. this type of predicate is characterized by its selectional transparency in that it does not impose any selectional restriction on the argument with which it can combine in Su position.

2.1.4.2

Raising-tp-Su and Negation. Topical Raising-to-Su verbs do not allow the Negation

Operator tsy in the lcwer clause, whether on its own or with another negation:

(188) a. *Tsy fantatra fa neg known

(tsy) h-andidy ny irofo i Jeanne.

ccmp (neg) fut-cut the bread Jeanne

(contrast with (181)a.) "It is not (a) known (fact) that Jeanne will (not) be cutting the bread."

544

b. *Tsy fantatra fa neg known

(tsy) h-andeha i Jeanne. Jeanne

ccmp (neg) fut-go

(contrast with (182)b.) "It is not (a) known (fact) that Jeanne will not be leaving."

c. *Tsy fantatra fa neg known

(tsy) ho any

ny mpianatra.

comp (neg) fut there the student(s)

(contrast with (183)a.) "It is not (a) known (fact) that the students will not be coming."

2.1.4.3

Complementizer Deletion. Deletion of the complementizer fa yields an irretrie-

vably ungramnatical and uninterpretable sequence:

"(189)a. *Fantatra 0 known

h-andidy ny mofo i Jeanne,

conp fut-cut the bread Jeanne

(contrast with (181)a.) "It is (a) known (fact) Jeanne will be cutting the bread,"

b. *Fantatra 0 known

ho-didi-n' i Jeanne ny mofo.

conp pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread

"It is (a) known (fact) the bread has been cut,"

where the complementizer fa has been deleted and where the higher verb fantatra "be-known" is a root passive.

545

O i above holds with an adjective as the main predicate: te

(190) a.

Marina fa true

h-andidy ny irofo i Jeanne.

comp fut-cut the bread Jeanne

"It is true that Jeanne will be cutting the bread."

b.

Marina fa true

ho-didi-n'i Jeanne ny nofo.

camp pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread

"It is true that the bread will be cut by Jeanne."

c. *Marina 0 true

h-andidy ny nofo i Jeanne.

comp fut-cut the bread Jeanne

(no interpretation whatsoever)

d. *Marina 0 true

ho-didi-n'i Jeanne ny mofo.

ocanp fut-cut-by Jeanne the bread

(no interpretation whatsoever)

The only difference between (190)a. and (190)b., on the one hand, and (190)c. and (190)d., on the other, is that the first pair has the fa complementizer, whereas the second does not. This accounts for the difference in grammaticality between those two sets of sentences.

2.1.4.4

Postposition. Postposition of the embedded clause is always possible,

whether the main predicate is a verb, as in (181) b., or an adjective, as in:

546

(191)a.

Marina [fa ho-didi-n' i Jeanne] ny mofo. true coup pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread

b.

Marina ...ny mofo true

[fa ho-didi-n' i Jeanne].

... the bread ccmp pass-cut-by Jeanne

(meaning for both a. and b. above) "It is true that the bread will be cut by Jeanne."

In (191)a., the sentential subject is in median position, whereas in (191) b., it has been postposed, the three dots representing the vacated position.

2.1.4.5

Affixal Passive in the Lower Clause. Affixal Passive applies freely on the embedded clause,

whether the main predicate is a verb, as in (185), or an adjective, as in (191)a.

2.1.4.6

Reflexivization to Tena. Reflexivization to tena in the lower clause yields a

grammatical sequence:

(192)a.

Fantatra [fa h-amono tena^ i Jeanne^]. known comp fut-kill self^ Jeanne^

b.

Fantatra i Jeanne^ [fa h-amono tena^. known Jeannei coup fut-kill selfi

"It is (a) known (fact) that Jeanne.^ killed herself^"

547

(193)a.

Marina [fa h-amono tena^ i Jeanne. true comp fut-kill self^ Jeanne^

b.

Marina i Jeannei [fa h-amono tena.^. true Jeannei comp fut-kill self.^

"It is true that Jeanne.^ killed herself^."

The possibility of Reflexivization to tena suggests at the time the process applies, the higher Su NP i Jeanne is still in the same clause as its victim. It can be inferred that a main predicate that triggers Raising-to-Su must be able to take a sentential Su. Thus, in:

(194) a.

Hita i Jeanne^ [fa n-amono seen

tena^ ,

Jeanne^ comp past-kill selfi

b.

Hita [fa n-amono

tena^ i Jeanne^], Jeanne^

seen conp past-kill self^

"It is/was evident that Jeanne^ killed herself^,"

the root verb hita "seen" is a Raising-to-Su predicate since the grammaticality of (194)b. shows that it can take a sentential Su. This contrasts with the situation in:

(195) a.

Tezitra i Paolyi [fa tsy n-ikarakara angry

tena^ ,

Paoly^ conp neg past-take-care-of self^

548

b. *Tezitra [fa tsy n-ikarakara angry

tena^ i Paoly^], Paul^

comp neg past-take-care-of self^

(meaning for both a. and b.) "PauIL is angry for not taking care of himself

where tezitra "angry" is not a Raising-to-Su predicate since the ungrammaticality of (195)b. shows that it cannot take a sentential Su. The reading in which we are interested is the one where the predicate tezitra "angry" is attributed to Paul, and not the interpretation where tezitra is attributed to the speaker, in which case (195)b. would be a reply to a question like "What is the matter with you?" to which the interlocutor would use (195)b. to say "(X am) angry because Paul did not take care of himself."

2.1.4.7

Raising-to-Su and Truth-Functional Equivalence. There is truth-functional equivalence between a stru-

cture like (181)a., where the embedded clause has its verb in the active voice, and its counterpart, as in (185), where the verb is in the passive voice. This shows that the truth-functional equivalence of the two types of embedded clauses is not affected under a Raising-to-Su predicate.

2.1.4.8

Symmetrical Predicates. Symmetrical predicates yield the same cognitive meaning

under a Raising-to-Su verb, with their arguments rearranged:

(196)a.

Fantatra [fa h-ilalao amin'i Jeanne i Paoly]. known coup fut-play with Jeanne Paul

"It is known that Paul will play with Jeanne."

549

b.

Fantatra [fa h-ilalao amin'i Paoly i Jeanne], known coup fut-play with Paul Jeanne

"It is known that Jeanne will play with Paul."

(197)a.

Marina [fa h-ilalao amin'i Jeanne i Paoly]. true oornp fut-play with Jeanne Paul

"It is true that Paul will play with Jeanne."

b.

Marina [fa h-ilalao amin'i Paoly i Jeanne], true comp fut-play with Paul Jeanne

"It is true that Jeanne will play with Paul."

In (196)a. and (197)a., the NP i Paoly is the Su of the embedded clause, whereas in (196)b. and (197)b., the Su NP of the embedded clause is i Jeanne. Yet, this rearrangement does not affect the cognitive meaning of the sequences. This property contrasts with that of Egui-2 verbs, as seen under 2.1.2.11.

2.1.4.9

Tense Restrictions in the Embedded Clause. There is no tense restriction whatsoever on the verb

embedded under a Raising-to-Su predicate:

(198)a.

Fantatra [fa n-ilalao t-amin' i J i P]. known coup past-play past-with J P

"It is (a) known (fact) that P was playing with J."

b.

Fantatra [fa m-ilalao 0-amin' i J i P]. known comp pres-play pres-with J P

"It is (well) known that P plays with J."

550

Hie above contrasts with the following situation, 1. where the embedding verb is an Equi-1 predicate, as in:

(199)a. *N-itetika n-ividy ny trano i Jeanne, past-plan past-buy the house Jeanne

b. *N-itetika m-ividy ny trano i Jeanne, past-plan pres-buy the house Jeanne

c.

N-itetika h-ividy ny trano i Jeanne, past-plan fut-buy the house (see (117)) "Jeanne was making plans to buy the house." Jeanne

Only the future tense is allowed in the embedded clause: (199)a., where the embedded verb is in the past tense, is ungrammatical; the same holds of (199)b., where the embedded verb is in the present tense. By contrast, (199)c., where the embedded verb is in the future, is perfectly grammatical. 2. Where the embedding verb is an Equi-2 predicate:

(200)a.

N-anery

an'i Jeanne n-andeha i Paoly, Jeanne past-go Paul

past-force

"Paul forced Jeanne to leave,"

b. *N-anery

an'i Jeanne m-andeha i Paoly, Jeanne pres-go Paul

past-force

551

c.

N-anery

an'i Jeanne h-andeha i Paoly, Jeanne fut-go Paul

past-force

"Paul was forcing Jeanne to go,"

the embedded verb cannot take the present tense, as is made evident by the ungrammaticality of (200)b. But, both the past tense, as in (200)a., and the future tense, as in (200)c., yield perfectly grammatical sequences. 3. Where the embedding verb is a Raising-to-DO predicate:

(201)a.

N-anantena an'i J fa past-expect

n-andicfy ny mofo i P,

J coup past-cut the bread P

"P expected J to have cut the bread,"

b. *N-anantena an'i J fa past-expect

m-andidy ny itpfo i P, P

J comp pres-cut the bread

(no interpretation whatsoever)

N-anantena an'i J fa past-expect

h-andidy ny mofo

i P, P

J coup fut-cut the bread

"P was expecting J to cut the bread,"

the present tense, as shown in (201)b., is ruled out since the sentence comprising it in its lower clause is irretrievably ungrammatical. By contrast, the past tense, as in (201)a., and the future tense, as shown in (201)c., are permissible.

552

2.1.4.10 Selectional Restrictions. A Raising-to-Su predicate does not impose any selectional restriction on the argument with which it can combine in Su position:

(202) a.

Fantatra ny rrpianatra [fa known

ho avy].

the student(s) comp fut come

(see (183)) "It is a (well) known fact that the student(s) will come."

b.

Fantatra ny orana [fa ho avy]. known the rain carp fut ccroe

"It is known that the rain will come," i.e. "It is a (well) known fact that it will rain."

Whether the embedded Su is an animate NP, as in (202)a., or an inanimate NP, as in (202)b., the output is perfectly grammatical. This contrasts with the situation involving an Equi-2 verb, where there is selectional restriction between the DO and the main predicate, as seen under 2.1.2.10.

2.1.4.11 Sanple List of Typical Raising-to-Su Verbs. The tests listed under 2.1.4.1 are applicable to: 1. verbs like fantatra "known" and re "heard," belonging to Class 2 (see 1.1.6); 2. verbs like aleo "preferable," of Class 3; 3. verbs like hita "see", of Class 4; and

553

4. verbs like mety "possible/likely," of class 5. However, it should be emphasized that not all the tests are jointly applicable to each subtype.

2.1.4.12 Raising-to-Su and the Cycle. Raising-to-Su interacts with Affixal Passive in a way which suggests that the latter is a cyclic rule:

(203)a.

[ g 2 Voa-laza-n'i P [ g l fa hita [ gQ fa voa-karakara-n1 pass-say-by P comp seen ccaip pass-take-care

i J tsara ny ankizy. S Q ] J well the child

g l ] g2 ],

"It has been said by P that it can be seen that the children were taken good care of by J,"

to be derived from:

b.

/[ g2 N-ilaza [ g l "Hita [ g 0 fa n-ikarakara past-say seen

ny ankizy

camp past-take-care the child

1 J

sol" Sl3

1 p

S2l/P

c.

[gQ fa no-karakara-in1

i J tsara ny ankizy

SO1'

conp pass-take-care-by J well the child "That the children were taken good care of by J."

554

d.

[g^ Hita ny ankizy^ [gg fa no-karakara-in'i J tsara]] seen the child comp pass-take-care-by J well

"It was evident that the children were taken good care of by J."

e.

[ g 2 voa-laza-n'i P [ g l fa hita...(same as in d. above) pass-say-by P comp seen...

On cycle SO- in (203)c., Affixal Passive applies; then, on the next higher cycle, Raising-to-Su takes place, as shown above in (203)d., and finally, Affixal Passive reapplies on cycle S2, as indicated in (203)e. Again, we have a sandwich-type argument in favor of the cycle.

2.1.5.0

Complementizer Fa and Application of Affixal Passive. In this Subsection, it will be shown that the appli-

cation of Affixal Passive is contingent upon the presence of the complementizer fa underlyingly. First, a series of tests will be proposed for the distinction between the complementizer and the nominalizer ny.

Second, it will be seen that Affixal Passive can apply under the complementizer fa, but not under the complementizer ny. Third, it will be shown that the complementizer n and the complementizer ho are in complementary distribution with respect to the type of structure they can co-occur with, i.e. equative vs. non-equative; since ho only takes the equative type, it will not be relevant for the rule of Affixal Passive and will be set aside.

555

Fourth, since the particle mba will be shown not to have the status of a full-fledged complementizer (see 2.1.2.2) and, in any case, since it characterizes a structure marked for politeness, mba could be regarded as a complementizer which is not typical of the Equi-2 construction. Fifth, the complementizers ny, ho, and fa are present in the underlying representation.

2.1.5.1

Complementizer N vs. Nominalizer Ny. There is a distinction between the complementizer n

and the nominalizer ny;: 1. With the complementizer n, it is possible to have a double passive involving the two subsequent verbs and deletion of the n the two structures, one with two active verbs and the other with two passives, having the same cognitive meaning, as in (204). This is not possible with the nominalizer n^, as shown in (205) below.

(204)a.

N-itetika ny

h-ividy ny fiara 0^ i Jeanne^, Jeanne

past-plan carp fut-buy the car

b.

N-teteh-in'i Jeanne ho-vidi-na 0^ ny fiara^. pass-plan-by Jeanne pass-buy-by the car

"Jeanne was making plans to buy the car."

(205)a.

N-ahita ny f-i-vidi-an-an1i J ny fiara i P. past-see the nom-circ-buy-by J the car

556

b. *Hita-n'i P no-vidi-n'i J ny fiara. seen-by P pass-buy-by J the car "P saw the place where J usually
b u y s / b o u g h t c a r s . "

Hie sentence (205) b. can be grammatical, but with a totally different interpretation than (205)a., i.e. "P saw J buying the car (s)." 2. With the nominalizer ny, it is not possible to have a double passive on the two verbs with deletion of ny.

(206)a.

Fantatra ny n-an-defa-s-an' i J ilay taratasy. known nam past-circ-send-by J the letter

b. *Fantatra 0 known

n-andefa-s-an1

i J ilay taratasy.

comp past-circ-send-by J the letter

c. *Fantatra 0 known

n-a-lefa-n'

i J ilay taratasy.

oomp past-pass-send-by J the letter

"The place is known where the letter was sent by J." 3. Under the complementizer ny, Affixal Passive is not possible, whereas under the nominalizer n, it is obligatory.

(207)a.

Tsy tia-n' i P ny

f-iresak' i J, J

neg loved-by P camp asp-talk

b. *Tsy tia-n'

i P ny

f-i-resah-an'

i J,

neg loved-by P camp asp-circ-talk-by J "P does not like J's way of talking,"

557

to be derived from

c.

/[ gl Tsy tia [go ny [f-iresaka i J] sg] i P neg love comp asp-talk J P

gl ]/

(208)a.

Tsy tia-n' i P ^ ny f-i-resah-ana azyif ^ neg loved-by P^ nom asp-circ-talk him^

b. *Tsy tia-n' i P i ny f-iresak' azyif neg loved-by P i nom asp-talk hirn^ "P^ does not like (people's) talking about him^,"

to be derived from

c.

/[ gl Tsy tia [gg [f-iresaka an'i P^ R] g 0 ] i P^ sl ]/ neg love asp-talk P X P

where _ represents the habitual aspect and X is an unspecified f Agent, who will ultimately get deleted. 4. When ny is a complementizer, izay cannot be

substituted for it; but, v f e ny is a nominalizer, this is tin possible, especially under negation:

(209) a.

N-itetika [ny h-andeha past-plan conp fut-go

i pi P

b. *N-itetika [izay h-andeha O^j i p^ past-plan fut-go P

"P was making plans to leave."

558

(210)a.

Tsy m-aniry

[ny h-an-deha-n-an'ny raharaha] i P. P

neg pres-wish nam fut-circ-go-by the affair

b.

Tsy m-aniry neg pres-wish

[izay h-an-deha-n-an'ny raharaha] i P. fut-circ-go-by the affair P

"P does not want things to go (smoothly) 5. With the complementizer ny, the embedded verb is restricted to the future tense, as can be seen in (199), whereas with the nominalizer ny, there is no such restriction:

(211)a.

Tsara ny h-an-deha-n-an' i Jeanne, good nom fut-circ-go-by Jeanne

"It is a good thing for Jeanne to go."

b.

Tsara ny O-an-deha-n-an' i Jeanne, good nom pres-circ-go-by Jeanne

"It is a good thing that Jeanne takes the habit of going."

c.

Tsara ny n-an-deha-n-an' i Jeanne, good ncm past-circ-go-by Jeanne

"It is a good thing that Jeanne went there." 6. With the complementizer ny, there is necessarily ooreference between the referent of the main Su and that of the embedded Su NP underlyingly:

(219)a.

N-itetika [ny h-andeha 0/] i paolyif past-plan camp fut-go "Paul was planning to leave," Paul

559

b. *N-itetika [ny h-andeha (h] i Paolyj, past-plan conp fut-go Paul

"Paul was planning for someone else to leave,"

where the referent of the NP with the subcript i is different from that of the NP with the subscript j, and which is to be derived respectively from

a1. /[N-itetika [ny h-andeha i Paoly^] i Paoly^]. past-plan comp fut-go Paul^ Paul^

b'. /[N-itetika [ny h-andeha past-plan comp fut-go

Ch ] CK

i Paolyj]. Paulj

(213)a.

N-ahita [ny n-an-deha-n-an'i Jeanne] i Paoly, past-see nom past-circ-go-by Jeanne "Paul saw Jeanne's departure," Paul

b.

N-ahita [ny n-an-deha-n-ana tany Ch] i Paolyj, past-see nom past-circ-go-by there Paul

"Paul saw our/someone else's going there,"

to be derived respectively from

a'- /[ gl N-ahita [ g 0 ny [n-andeha i Jeanne] ] i Paoly]/ past-see nan past-go Jeanne Paul

b'. /[ gl N-ahita [ g 0 ny [n-andeha past-see nam past-go

R^] i Paolyj]/, X Paul

560

where the referent of the NP with the subscript i is different from that of the NP with the subscript j and where R, short for Ranona "X" is an unspecified Agent, ultimately deleted. 7. The nominalizer r can be replaced with the compler mentizer fa, whereas this is never the case with the complementizer ny:

(214)a.

Tsara [ny h-an-deha-n-an' i Jeanne]. good nom fut-circ-go-by Jeanne

b.

Tsara [fa h-andeha i Jeanne]. good coup fut-go Jeanne

"It is a good thing that Jeanne is going (there)."

(215)a.

N-itetika [ny h-andeha 0^] i Paoly^. past-plan comp fut-go 0^ (see (212)a.) "Paul was planning to leave." Paul^

b. *N-itetika [fa h-andeha O^ i Paoly.^. past-plan comp fut-go 0^ Paul^

c. *N-itetika...i Paoly^ [fa h-andeha 0t]. past-plan Pau^ comp fut-go O^ j

In (214), we have the nominalizer n since in this case n, as in (214)a., can be replaced by the general complementizer fa, yielding the grammatical sequence (214) b. This contrasts with the situation in (215), where the n of (215)a. cannot be replaced

561

with the complementizer fa, as shown in (215) b. Even when Postposition is made to apply, as in (215) c.', the output remains irretrievably ungrammatical.

2.1.5.2

Restriction on Affixal Passive. Affixal Passive can apply under the complementizer fa

but not under the nominalizer ny;

(216)a.

Tsara [fa n-andefa ny npianatra i Jeanne]. good comp past-send the student Jeanne

"It is a good thing that Jeanne sent the student(s)."

b.

Tsara [fa n-a-lefa-n' i Jeanne ny npianatra]. good comp pass-send-by Jeanne the student(s) "It is a good thing that the student(s) was (were) sent by Jeanne."

(217)a.

Tsara [ny n/m-andefa

ny npianatra].

good ccatp past/pres-send the student (s) "It is a good thing (for us/you) to have sent/to send the student(s)."

b. *Tsara [ny n/0-a-lefa

ny npianatra].

good comp past/pres-pass-send the student

In (216)a., the complementizer is fa and, as shown in (216)b., it is possible to passivize the embedded verb since the output is

562

perfectly grammatical; whereas, in (217)a., the complementizer is ny and although the embedded predicate is a typical transitive verb, if Passive is to apply, the resulting sequence is the irretrievably ungranmatical (217)b. Whether the embedded verb is in the past tense with n or in the present tense with the zero prefix does not matter at all.

2.1.5.3

Distribution of Complementizers

and Ho.

The complementizer n and the complementizer ho are in oonplementary distribution with respect to the type of structure that can be embedded under them. N typically takes non-equative structures while ho combines with equative structures:

(218)a.

N-ikasa

[ny

h-ividy trano] i Paoly. Paul

past-intend conp fut-buy house

"Paul was planning to buy a house."

b. *N-ikasa

[ho

h-ividy trano] i Paoly. Paul

past-intend conp fut-buy house

"Paul was planning to buy a house."

c.

N-ikasa

[ho

any] i Paoly.

past-intend comp there Paul "Paul intended to be there."

(219)a.

N-ihevitra

azyi [ho

mahay]

i Paoly^ Pauli

past-consider hinu comp intelligent "Paul considered himself intelligent."

563

b. *N-ihevitra

azyi [ny

mahay]

i Paoly^ Pauli

past-consider hinL comp intelligent "Paul considered himself intelligent."

c.

N-ihevitra past-plan

[ny

h-ividy trano] i Paoly. Paul

coup fut-buy house

"Paul was planning to buy a house."

In (218)a., the embedded clause comprises a typically transitive verb under the complementizer n and the sequence is perfectly granmatical. However, if the oonplementizer ho is substituted for ny, the output is the ungrammatical (218)b. Hie only situation where (218)b. may be considered marginally acceptable by a native speaker of Malagasy is when there is hesitation as to what the continuation of the sentence should be after the oonplementizer ho. In such a case, the choice is between a typically transitive verb, as in (218)a., or a typically intransitive predicate, as in (218)c. On the other hand, in (219)a., the complementizer is ho and the embedded predicate is an equative type of structure and the sentence is grammatical, as opposed to (219)b., with the complementizer ny, which is irretrievably ungranmatical. Furthermore, when the same verb mihevitra "to think, to consider" takes the r oonplementizer, as in (219)c., an embedded clause with a r typically sequence. transitive verb yields a perfectly granmatical

2.1.5.4

Complementizer Mba and a Sanple List of Equi-2 Verbs. The following verbs have the properties of Equi-2:

564

manery "to force," mibaiko "to order, to give an order," manome alalana "to give permission to," and manampy "to help." Yet, they never occur with the particle mba. Thus, for example:

(220)a.

N-anery

an'i Jeanne h-andeha i Paoly. Jeanne fut-go Paul

past-force

"Paul was ordering Jeanne to leave."

b. *N-anery

an'i Jeanne mba h-andeha i Paoly. Jeanne part fut-go Paul

past-force

"Paul was ordering Jeanne to please leave."

This contrasts with the behavior of verbs of linguistic communication like miangavy "to request," manentana "to exhort," mitalaho "to beseech," mananibitamby "to cajole (someone) into doing something," and mandodona "to press":

(221)a.

N-iangavy

an'i Jeanne h-andeha i Paoly. Jeanne fut-go Paul

past-request

"Paul was requesting that Jeanne leave."

b.

N-iangavy

an'i Jeanne mba h-andeha i Paoly. Jeanne part fut-go Paul

past-request

"Paul requesting of Jeanne that she leave."

Since the verbs in both (220) and (221) belong in the Equi-2 subcategory and since the insertion of the particle mba in (220) b. yields an ungranmatical sentence, it follows that niba cannot be

565

posited under lying ly for the entire set of verbs of this subclass. In fact, in view of examples such as (142) and (143), the structures involving mba must be considered Marked.

2.1.5.5

Full-fledged Complementizers. In contrast to mba, the complementizers ny, ho, and fa

are obligatorily present underlyingly since their omission leads to ungrammatical sentences:

(222)a.

M-itetika ny

h-andeha i Paoly. Paul

pres-plan comp fut-go "Paul intends to leave."

b. *M-itetika 0

h-andeha i Paoly. Paul

pres-plan conp fut-go "Paul intends to leave."

(223)a.

Tsara fa

lasa i Paoly. Paul

good ccrop gone

"It is a good thing that Paul has left."

b. *Tsara 0

lasa i Paoly. Paul

good conp gone

(224)a.

N-ihevitra ho

any i Paoly.

past-think comp there Paul "Paul was thinking of getting there."

566

b. *N-ihevitra 0

any i Paoly.

past-think carp there Paul (no interpretation whatsoever)

The sentence (222) b. from which the oonplementizer n has been emitted is ungrammatical and seems to be characteristic of Foreigner Talk, whereas (223)b. without the complementizer fa is simply not interpretable. Likewise, (224)b. without the complementizer ho cannot be assigned any interpretation whatsoever.

2.1.5.6

Optional Conplementizer and Deletion. In cases like (117), where the oonplementizer n^ is

optionally present, a oonplementizer deletion rule deletes ny. Thus:

(225) a.

N-andrama-n'i P ^ n-enti-na j pass-try-by

ny fiara,

P_L pass-bring-by C^ the car

"The car was tried by P to be driven," i.e. "P was trying to drive the car,"

to be derived from

b.

/[ gl N-anandrana [gg ny n-itondra ny fiara i P^} i Pj_]/ past-try conp past-drive the car P^ p^

If Affixal Passive is not made to apply on the lower cycle, blocked as it is by the presence of the oonplementizer n, we get after Equi-1:

567

c.

N-anandrana [ny n-itondra ny fiara CL ] i past-try comp past-drive the car Ch p^

"P was trying to drive the car,"

and if on cycle SO, the complementizer

is deleted, we obtain:

d.

N-anandrana [0 past-try

n-itondra ny fiara 0 - i pv. v] O^ p^

comp past-drive the car

Reapplication of Affixal Passive on cycle S yields:

e.

*N-anandrana [0 past-try

n-enti-na

0^ ny fiara] i P^, P^

comp pass-drive-by 0^ the car

which is ungrammatical unless Affixal Passive also applies in the matrix:

f.

N-andrama-n'i P ^ n-enti-na ^ pass-try-by

0 ^ ny fiara. ^

P_L pass-drive-by 0 i the car

"P tried to drive the car."

2.1.6

Affixal Passive Contingent Upon Underlying Fa. Since ny, ho, fa, and mba are the only words in the

language which can serve as complementizers in Indirect Discourse when Postposition of the sentential complement does not apply; since ho can oily take an equative structure (see 2.1.5.3); since mba cannot co-occur with the entire set of verbs belonging in the Bqui-2 subclass; and since even in the latter case, we have a

568

Marked structure, the only two relevant complementizers are ny and fa. Now, if we factor out all the cases where rr is not a complementizer but a nominalizer we are left with cases such as those under 2.1.5.1 and 2.1.5.2, where application of Affixal Passive always yields ungrammatical sequences, as opposed to those where application of Affixal Passive is possible under fa. Furthermore, there are instances like those cited above under 2.1.5.5, where the presence of the complementizer n and the complementizer fa is mandatory. This suggests that they are present underlyingly. Frcm all of the above facts, it follows that the application of Affixal Passive is contingent upon the underlying presence of the complementizer fa.

2.2.0

Causative Constructions. In the following Subsection, it will be shown, on the

one hand, that a typical Predicate-Raising Causative, i.e. an(a), can rally embed an equative type of clause with either a Root Passive or an Adjective for its predicate, but that the Conplement-Causative amp (a) can also take the Affixal Passive in its lower clause; and, on the other hand, that Affixal Passive interacts with Clause-Onion in a way which suggests that the latter is a cyclic rule.

2.2.1

Predicate-Raising Causatives. The Causative an(a), which is a Predicate-Raising Caus-

ative in its Manipulative reading, can embed a clause conprising

569

a root passive, typically one which attributes no Control whatsoever to the Causee. One of the consequences of such a situation is that the Causer exerts complete Control over the Causee, either throughout the entire duration of the Action being described or oily during the initial phase(s) of the said Action in the case of a semi-autonomous Causee. Affixal Passive either with no...ina or a is always possible:

(226)a.

Tapaka ny tady, cut the rope

"The rope has been cut,"

b.

N-an-[(t)apaka ny tady] i Paoly, past-caus-cut the rope Paul

"Paul was cutting the rope,"

c.

NO-tapah-in' i Paoly ny tady, pass-cut-by Paul the rope

"The rope was being cut by Paul,"

to be evolved from:

d.

/t sl N-an-[s0 tapaka ny tady SQ ] i Paoly sl ]/ past-caus cut the rope Paul

(224)a.

Latsaka ny taratasy, dropped the letter "The letter has been dropped,"

570

b.

N-an-[datsaka

ny taratasy] i Paoly, Paul

past-caus-dropped the letter "Paul was dropping the letter,"

c.

N-a-latsak'i Paoly ny taratasy, past-pass-dropped-by Paul the letter "The letter was being dropped by Paul,"

to be derived from:

d.

N-an-[latsaka ny taratasy s q] i Paoly past-dropped the letter Paul

The simplex sentences in (226)a. and (227)a., which are embedded under a higher Causative clause, as shown in (226)d. and (227)d. respectively, each comprise a root passive: tapaka "cut," in the first sequence and latsaka "dropped," in the second. The difference in distribution between no...ina and a seems to be attributable to an aspectual distinction, in that, in (226)b., we have an inherently Durative verb, hence no...ina in (226)c.; as opposed to (227)b., where an inherently Ingressive type of verb appears, hence a for the imperfective passive, as shown in (227)c.

2.2.2

Restriction on Affixal Passive. The Causative an(a) in both its Causal and Manipulative

interpretations can embed a clause comprising an adjective, but Affixal Passive is possible only with the Manipulative reading to the exclusion of the Causal meaning:

571

(228)a.

Mainty ny volo-ny, black the hair-his/her

"His/her hair is black,"

b.

TN-ana-mainty past-caus-black

ny volo-ny^ i Jeannej, the hair-her^ Jeannej

"Jeanne^ was dyeing herj hair black,"

c.

No-mainti-s-in' i Jeanne^ ny volo-ny^, pass-black-by Jeanne^ the hair-her^

"Her^ hair was being dyed black by Jeanne^,"

underlyingly

d.

/[ ^ N-ana-[ SQ mainty ny volo-ny^] i Jeanne^]/. past-caus-black the hair-her^ Jeannej

(229)a.

Reraka i Paoly, tired Paul

"Paul is/was tired,"

b.

N-an-dreraka past-caus-tired

an'i Paoly ny dia. Paul the trip

"Paul is/was tired because of the trip." or "The trip exhausted Paul."

*No-rerah(a)-an' ny dia i Paoly. pass-tired-by the trip Paul

572

to be derived from

d.

/[31 N-an-[s0 reraka i Paoly] ny dia]/. past-caus tired Paul the trip

In both

(228)b. and

(229)b., the simplex sentence shown in

(228)a. and

(229)a. respectively has been embedded under the

Causative predicate an(a), as is made explicit in the underlying sequences proposed in (228)d. and (229)d. Hie sentence (228)b. can cxily be assigned a Manipulative reading and, as a corollary, Affixal Passive with no...ina is possible, as is made evident by the grammaticality of the sequence (228)c. On the other hand, (229)b. can oily have a Causal interpretation and Affixal Passive with no... ina is impossible, as can be inferred from the fact that (229)c. is irretrievably ungrammatical.

2.2.3 "

Affixal Passive and Causal Causatives. However, the Causative an(a) even in its Causal reading

cannot embed a predicate in the Affixal Passive with no...ina, voa, or tafa;

(230)a.

No-tapah (a)-ina ny tady, pass-cut-by the rope

(compare with (226)a.) "Hie rope was being cut,"

b. *N-an-no-tapah(a)-ina

ny tady i Paoly, Paul

past-caus-pass-cut-by the rope

573

to be derived from the intermediate structure

c.

/[ gl N-an-[s0 no-tapah-ina ny tady] i Paoly]/. past-caus pass-cut-by the rope Paul

(231)a.

Voa-tapaka ny tady, pass-cut the rope

"The rope has been cut,"

b. *N-an-voa-tapaka

ny tady i Paoly, Paul

past-caus-pass-cut the rope

to be evolved from

c.

/[ sl N-an-[s0 voa-tapaka ny tady] i Paoly]/. past-caus pass-cut the rope Paul

(232)a.

Tafa-latsak'

i Paoly ny taratasy,

pass-dropped-by Paul the letter (compare with (227)b.) "The letter has been posted,"

b. *N-an-tafa-latsaka

ny taratasy i Paoly, Paul

past-caus-pass-dropped the letter

to be derived respectively from the intermediate structures

c.

/[ [ggTafa-[g-|_latsak' i Paoly ny taratasy]/ pass-dropped-by Paul the letter

574

d.

/[g^ N-an-[gg tafa-latsaka ny taratasy] i Paoly]/. past-caus pass-dropped the letter Paul

The sentence (230)a. has a verb which has undergone Affixal Passive. By itself, the sequence is perfectly grammatical. However, when it is embedded under the higher Predicate-Raising Causative an (a), as in (230 )b., the output becomes irretrievably ungrarmatical. Hie same holds for (231) and (232). Therefore, it can be inferred that the Causative predicate an(a) cannot embed an Affixal Passive.

2.2.4

Complement-Causatives and Nature of the Embedded Verb. The Causative amp(a), which is a Complement-Causative,

can embed an equative type of clause with a root passive or an adjective, especially in its Causal interpretation:

(233)a.

Latsaka ny taratasy noho dropped the letter

i Paoly,

because-of Paul

(compare with (226)a.) "The letter has fallen onto the ground because of Paul,"

b.

I Paoly no

n-ampa-latsaka

ny taratasy,

Paul part past-caus-dropped the letter "It is Paul who was the cause of the dropping of the letter,"

from the following intermediate sequences respectively

575

"

/"SO kanaka n Y taratasy] dropped the letter

noho

i Paoly]]/

because-of Paul

d.

/[gjL N-aitpa-[g0 latsaka ny taratasy] i Paoly]/. past-caus dropped the letter Paul

(234) a.

Mainty ny volo-ny

tamin'

ny fanafody,

black the hair-his/her because-of the medicine (compare with (228)a.) "Her hair is black because of the medicine,"

b.

Ny fanafody no

n-ampa-mainty

ny volo-ny,

the medecine part past-caus-black the hair-his/her "It is the medicine which caused her hair to be black,"

to be evolved respectively from

c.

/[[g0 Mainty ny volo-ny] [g-jtamin' black the hair-his

ny fanafody]]/

because-of the medicine

d.

/[gl N-ampa-[g0 mainty ny volo-ny] past-caus

ny fanafody]/

black the hair-his/her the medecine

In (233)a., the predicate is a root passive, whereas in (234)a., it is an adjective. In (233)b. and (234)b., Clefting has fronted the Su NP. Hie grammaticality of both sequences where the lower clause is (233)a. and (234)a. respectively, shows that the Causative predicate amp (a) can indeed embed a root passive or an ad-

576

jective. Incidentally, Causal Causatives like (233)a. have intermediate structures of the type shown in (233)c. since, as was demonstrated in 1.3.2, a Causal-Oblique is lower on the hierarchy than a Source-Oblique, the cut-off point for premotion to Su. This entails that a Causal-Oblique does not belong in the same simplex sentence as a Source-Oblique.

2.2.5

Complement-Causative and Verbal Aspect. The Complement-Causative anp(a) can embed an Affixal

Passive with the perfective aspect voa or tafa, but not one with the imperfective circumfix no... ina, which implies that it can also embed a non-equative type of clause:

(235)a.

Voa-sazy

i Paoly noho

ny ditra-ny,

pass-punish Paul because-of the mischief-his "Paul has been punished because of his mischief,"

b.

Ny ditra-ny

no

n-ampa-voa-sazy

an'i Paoly, Paul

the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-punish

"It was because of his mischief that Paul was punished,"

to be derived from the intermediate structures, respectively

c.

/[[g0Voa-savy i Paoly][glncho perf-punish Paul

ny ditra-ny]]/

because-of the mischief-his

d.

/[ sl N-ampa[SQ voa-sazy

i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/.

past-caus pass-punish Paul the mischief-his

577

(236)a.

Tafa-janona i Paoly noho pass-remain

ny torimaso-ny,

Paul because-of the sleep-his

"Paul was left behind because he was asleep,"

b.

Ny toriinaso-ny no n-ampa-tafa-janona

an'i Paoly, Paul

the sleep-his part past-caus-pass-remain

"It was because he was asleep, Paul was left behind,"

from the intermediate structures

c.

/[[g0Tafa-janona i Paoly][slnoho perf-remain Paul

ny torimaso-ny]]/

because-of the sleep-his

d.

/[gi N-ampa[gg tafa-janona i Paoly] ny torimaso-ny]/. past-caus pass-remain Paul the sleep-his

(237)a.

NO-saz(i)-ina i Paoly noho pass-punish-by

ny ditra-ny,

Paul because-of the mischief-his

"Paul was being punished because of his mischief,"

b. *Ny ditra-ny

no

n-ampa-no-saz-ina

an'i Paoly, Paul

the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-punish (no interpretation Whatsoever)

to be derived respectively from the intermediate structures

/ttgoNb-saz-ina i Paoly][slnoho pass-punish

ny ditra-ny]]/

Paul because-of the mischief-his

578

<. 3

/[gl N-ampa [sg no-saz-ina i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/. past-caus pass-punish Paul the mischief-his

In (235)b., an Affixal Passive with voa, as shown in (235)a., has been embedded under the higher Causative arrp(a) and the output is grammatical. Likewise, in (236)b., an Affixal Passive with tafa, as seen in (236)a., has been embedded under the Complement-Causative and the resulting sequence is grammatical. But, when the Affixal Passive involves the imperfective aspect circumfix no.. ina, as seen in (237) a., and if this is embedded under amp (a), as in (237)b., then the sentence is irretrievably ungranmatical.

2.2.6

The Causative Aha and the Nature of the Predicate in the Embedded Clause. the Causative aha in its Causal reading can embed a

root passive or an adjective, like the Predicate-Raising an(a), although it will be shown in 2.2.7 below that, like the Complement-Causative amp (a), it also allows non-equative types of structures in the lower clause:

(238)a.

Latsaka ny taratasy noho dropped the letter (same as (233)a.)

i Paoly,

because-of Paul

"The letter fell because of Paul,"

b.

I Paoly no

n-aha-latsaka

ny taratasy,

Paul part past-caus-dropped the letter "It was because of Paul that the letter fell,"

579

to be evolved respectively from the intermediate structures

/[[ggLatsaka ny

taratasy][g^noho

i Paoly]]/

dropped the letter

because-of Paul

d.

/[ gl

N-aha-[gg

latsaka ny taratasy] i Paoly]/. Paul

past-caus dropped the letter

(239)a.

FOtsy ny volo-n'i Jeanne noho

ny aretina,

white the hair-of Jeanne because-of the illness "Jeanne's hair is white because of the illness,"

b.

Ny aretina no

n-aha-fotsy

ny volo-n'i Jeanne,

the illness part past-caus-white the hair-of Jeanne "It was the illness Which caused Jeanne's hair to be white,"

to be derived from the intermediate structures

c.

/[[ggPotsy ny volo-n'i Jeanne][glnoho

ny aretina]]/

white the hair-of Jeanne because-of the illness

<3.

/[ gl

N-aha-[g 0

fotsy ny volo-n'i Jeanne] ny aretina]/. the illness

past-caus white the hair-of Jeanne

In the sentence (238)b., the embedded clause, as in (238)a., comprises a root passive, whereas in (239)b., it has an adjective, as can be seen in (239)a. In both cases, Clefting has fronted

580

the Su NP: i Paoly in (238)b. and ny aretina in (239)b. The grammaticality of (238)b. and (239)b. shows that the Causative predicate aha can embed an equative type of clause.

2.2.7

The Causal Causative Aha and Affixal Passive. The Causative predicate aha can also embed an Affixal

Passive with voa or tafa, but not one with no...ina. Frcm this, it can be inferred that a non-equative type of clause can be embedded under this predicate.

(240)a.

Voa-sazy pass-punish

i Paoly noho

ny ditrany,

Paul because-of the mischief-his

"Paul has been punished because of his mischief,"

b.

Ny ditra-ny no n-aha-voa-sazy the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-punish

an'i Paoly, Paul

to be derived respectively frcm the intermediate structures

c.

/[[ggVoa-savy

i Paoly] [glnoho

ny ditra-ny]]/

pass-punish Paul because-of the mischief-his

/[

S1 N-aha-[g0 voa-sazy past-caus pass-punish

i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/. Paul the mischief-his

(241)a.

Tafa-janona i Paoly noho pass-remain

ny torimaso-ny,

Paul because-of the sleep-his

(same as (236) a) "Paul was left behind because he was asleep,"

581

b.

Ny torimaso-ny no the sleep-his

n-aha-tafa-janona

an'i Paoly, Paul

part past-caus-pass-remain

"It was because he was sleeping that Paul was left behind,"

originating respectively from the underlying structures

c.

/[ [g0Tafa-janona i Paoly][g^noho pass-remain Paul

ny torimaso-ny]]/

because-of the sleep-his

d.

/[gj N-aha-[GQ tafa-janona i Paoly] ny torimaso-ny]/. past-caus pass-remain Paul the sleep-his

(242)a.

No-saz-ina i Paoly noho

ny ditra-ny,

pass-punish Paul because-of the mischief-his "Paul was being punished because of his mischief,"

b. *Ny ditra-ny

no

n-aha-no-saz-ina

an' i Paoly, Paul

the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-punish (no interpretation whatsoever)

respectively, from the intermediate structures

c.

/[[g0No-saz-ina i Paoly][glnoho pass-punish Paul

ny ditra-ny]]/

because-of the mischief-his

d.

/fg]_ N-aha-[gQ no-saz-ina i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/. past-caus pass-punish Paul the mischief-his

582

the grammaticality pattern emerging from (240)a., (241)b., and (242)b., confirms the view that the Causative aha can indeed embed a non-eguative type of structure, i.e. an Affixal Passive with voa or tafa, but not one with no...ina.

2.2.8

The Causal Causative Ank(a) and Affixal Passive. The Causative predicate anka can only embed an adject-

ival predicate, but never a root passive or an Affixal Passive, which suggests that it can only take an equative type of clause. However, since Passivization after Clause-Union is only a trend, as presented in Chapter Six, Subsection 2.6, it cannot be considered a Predicate-Raising Causative. Thus,

(243)a.

H-arary i Paoly amin'

ny sakafo,

fut-sick Paul because-of the food "Paul will be sick because of the food,"

b.

N-ank-arary past-caus-sick

an'i Paoly ny sakafo, Paul the food

"the food caused Paul to be sick,"

to be derived respectively from the intermediate structures

/[[gQH-arary Paoly] [S]_amin' fut-sick Paul

ny sakafo]]/

because-of the food

d.

/[ sl N-anka-[So arary i Paoly] ny sakafo]/. past-caus sick Paul the food

583

(244)a.

Latsaka ny taratasy noho dropped the letter (same as (238)a.)

i Paoly,

because-of Paul

' H e letter fell because of Paul," "i

b. *N-anka-latsaka

ny taratasy i Paoly, Paul

past-caus-dropped the letter (no interpretation whatsoever)

respectively, frcrn the underlying sequences

/[[gQLatsaka ny taratasy][glnoho dropped the letter

i Paoly]]/

because-of Paul

d.

/[gl N-anka-[g0 latsaka ny taratasy] i Paoly]/. past-caus dropped the letter Paul

(245)a.

Voa-sazy pass-punish

i Paoly noho

ny ditra-ny,

Paul because-of the mischief-his

"Paul has been punished because of his mischief,"

b. *N-anka-voa-sazy

an'i Paoly ny ditra-ny, Paul the mischief-his

past-caus-pass-punish

(no interpretation whatsoever)

respectively, from the underlying structures

/[[g0Voa-sazy i Paoly][slnoho ny ditra-ny]]/ pass-punish Paul because the mischief-his

584

<. 3

/[ gl N-anka-[gg voa-sazy past-caus

i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/. the mischief-his

pass-punish Paul

(246)a.

NO-saz-ina i Paoly noho

ny ditra-ny,

pass-punish Paul because-of the mischief-his "Paul was being punished because of his mischief,"

b. *N-anka-no-saz-ina past-caus-pass-punish

an'i Paoly ny ditra-ny, Paul the mischief-his

(no interpretation whatsoever)

respectively, from the intermediate sequences

c.

/[[gpNo-saz-ina i Paoly][g^noho pass-punish Paul

ny ditra-ny]]/

because-of the mischief-his

d.

/[ gl N-anka-[g0 no-saz-ina i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/. past-caus pass-punish Paul the mischief-his

In

the sentence (243)b., the embedded clause comprises an adj-

ectival predicate, as seen in the sequence (243)a., and the output is perfectly grammatical. However, in the sentences (244)b., (245)b., (246)b., Affixal Passive with voa, as in

(245)a., or Affixal Passive with no...ina, as in (246)b., has applied, and the outputs are irretrievably ungraiimatical and, as indicated, cannot receive any interpretation of any kind.

585

2.2.9

General Restriction on Affixal Passive and the Dichotomy between Predicate-Raising-Causatives and CompCausatives. The distinction just established between a so-called

Predicate-Raising Causative, which can oily embed an equative type of clause, and a Complement-Causative, which can also embed a non-equative type of clause, allows us to capture the relevant generalization that accounts for the impossibility of Passive when the embedded clause comprises a typically transitive verb:

(248)a.

N-anp-ividy

ny trano an'i Paoly i Jaona, Paul John

past-caus-buy the house

"John was having Paul buy the house,"

b. *N-amp-ivid(i)-in'i Jaona an'i Paoly ny trano. pass-caus-buy-by John Paul the house

Passive cannot apply after Clause-Union, as indicated by the ungrammatically of (248)b., when the embedded clause has a typically transitive verb. This contrasts with the case where the embedded clause comprises a typically intransitive verb, as in

(249) a.

N-arrp-idina

ny entana i Paoly,

past-caus-go-down the luggage Paul "Paul brought the luggage downstairs,"

b.

N-anp-idin-in'

i Paoly ny entana.

pass-caus-go-dcwn-by Paul the luggage "The luggage was brought downstairs by Paul."

586

The applicability of Passive is, therefore, dependent upon the nature, i.e. equative vs. non-equative, of the embedded clause and, within the non-equative subdivision, a distinction has to be maintained between a clause comprising a transitive and one with an intransitive verb. Only the latter will allcw Affixal Passive after Clause-Union has taken place. As for the situation where the embedded clause is of the equative type, Affixal Passive is always possible after Clause-Union. One of the basic assumptions made here is that Passive is a cyclic rule in that one of its conditioning factors is the nature of the embedded clause.

2.2.10

Summary: Hie Different Types of Embedded Clauses. Hie different types of clauses that can be embedded

under the Causative predicates are summarized on Table 14.

Table 14

Types of Clause That Can be Embedded

Equative Causatives: Adjective Root Passive

Non-Equative Affixal Passive

Anp(a) Aha An (a) Ank(a)

OK OK OK OK

OK OK OK
*

OK OK
* *

Note: OK = grammatical output; * = unqrammatical output.

587

2.2.11

Affixal Passive and the Cycle. Affixal Passive interacts with Clause-Union in a way

which suggests that Passive is a cyclic rule. On the one hand, there are structures like:

(250)a.

N-amp-isondrotra

an'i Jeanne i Paoly, Jeanne Paul

past-caus-get-prorootion

"Paul caused Jeanne to get a promotion," i.e. "Paul gave Jeanne a promotion,"

b.

N-anpa-tafa-sondrotra

an'i Jeanne i Paoly, Jeanne Paul

past-caus-pass-get-promotion

"Paul caused Jeanne to get a promotion," i.e. "Paul was the indirect cause of Jeanne's promotion,"

c. *I Paoly no

tafa-n-ampa-sondrotra

an'i Jeanne, Jeanne

Paul part pass-past-caus-get-promotion

which suggests that Affixal Passive must precede Clause-Union. In (250)a., the verb is in the active voice and the sentence is perfectly granmatical; likewise in (250)b., where Affixal Passive with the perfective aspect-marker tafa has applied on the embedded verb, i.e. Affixal Passive precedes Clause-Union. If, as in (250)c., Affixal Passive with tafa is made to apply after ClauseUnion, the output is ungrammatical. On the other hand, we have:

(251) a.

N-amp-iditra

ny mpianatra i Paoly,

past-caus-enter the student(s) Paul "Paul had the student(s) go in,"

588

b.

Voa-(a)mp-iditr'

i Paoly ny mpianatra,

pass-caus-enter-by Paul the student(s) "Paul managed to have the student(s) go in,"

c. *N-ampa-voa-iditr'

i Paoly ny mpianatra,

past-caus-pass-enter-by Paul the student(s) (no interpretation whatsoever)

where Clause-Union must apply before Affixal Passive. In (251)a., the verb is in the active voice and the sentence is perfectly grammatical; likewise for (251)b., where Clause-Union has applied before Affixal Passive. New, if Affixal Passive with voa were to apply before Clause-Union, as in (251)c., the ensuing sequence becomes totally ungrammatical and cannot be assigned any interpretation whatsoever.

3.1.1

Conclusions. In conclusion, it appears that: 1. Malagasy has three types of passive verbs: a. root passives; b. root passives which can optionally take an affix, as

in (27) and (31); and c. affixal passives. 2. The choice between a root passive and an affixal passive, when the option is available, depends on Aether the VP refers to a State or Autonomous Event, for the first, or a Deliberate Activity, for the second.

589

3. Hie distribution of the different passive affixes is indeed constrained by a combination of factors which comprise: a. the class of the verb; b. its degree of transitivity since, as we saw above in 1.1.7, there is a cline; and c. its perfective or imperfective aspect; d. the syntactic/semantic position occupied by the NP to be promoted to Su on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy. 4. Hie possibility of passivization in a complex structure involving a Causative predicate depends on the nature of the embedded clause, whether it has a transitive or an intransitive predicate.

3.1.2

Verb classes and Obliques. Furthermore, it was shown: 1. that Malagasy has two open classes of verbs, i.e.

Classes 1 and 2, which undergo Affixal Passive; 2. that the different types of Oblique are in a fixed order, relative to each other and that it is possible to promote to Su any NP all the way down to Source-Oblique, the cut-off point.

3.2.1

Parallelism in the Behavior of Affixal Passive in nonCausative and Causative Constructions. Hiere is a striking parallelism between the behavior of

Affixal Passive in non-Causative and Causative constructions: 1. In a non-Causative construction, Raising-to-Su can operate only when the main verb is a root passive or an adjec-

590

tive, Whereas the Causative an (a) can only embed a root passive or an adjective. 2. in a non-Causative construction, Raising-to-DO can operate a. whether the embedded clause comprises a root passive or an adjective, with verbs like mihevitra "to consider"; or b. it comprises an affixal passive, with verbs like manantena "to expect." By contrast, under the Causative amp(a), the embedded clause can be an equative sentence with either a root passive or an adjective, or can comprise an affixal passive. 3. In a non-Causative construction, Affixal Passive is contingent upon the presence in the underlying sequence of the general complementizer fa "that," whereas in Causative constructions, Affixal Passive is possible only under the ComplementCausative amp (a) and aha, to the exclusion of the PredicateRaising Causative an(a). 4. Affixal Passive behaves in non-Causative as well as Causative constructions in a way which indicates that it is a cyclic rule: a. in non-Causative constructions, it interacts with Equi-1, Equi-2, Raising-to-DO, and Raising-to-Su, in a way which provides a sandwich-type argument in favor of the Cyclic Convention; and b. in Causative constructions, it interacts with Clause-Union in two contradictory ways: in one case, Affixal Passive must precede Clause-Union; in the other, Clause-Union must precede Affixal Passive. This Ordering Paradox receives a simple solution with the adoption of the Cyclic Convention.

CHAPTER SIX

THE BI-SENTENTIAL SCXJSCE OF ALL CAUSATIVE CX3NSTR0CTIONS

0.1

Introduction. The purpose of Chapter Six is to show that all Causa-

tive Constructions of Malagasy have to be derived from bi-sentential sources. In Section 1, six tests will be used to establish the validity of such a hypothesis involving: Co-occurrence Restrictions, Scope Ambiguity, Transportability of Adverbs, Do-So Replacement, and Reflexivization. In Section 2, it will be shown that there is only one sinple sentence output since each Causative sequence contains only one subject, as is made evident by the following four tests: Sentential Question Formation, Exclamation Formation, Ifo-Longer Negation, and Izy-Substitution.

592

Ihis view is also confirmed by the possibility of applying Affixal Passive after Clause-Union, although the latter is confined to those Causative constructions, i.e. Manipulative amp(a), Manipulative an (a), and Abilitative aha, which, as was shown in Chapter One, Section 5, evince maximal fusion.

Section 1

Bi-Sentential Source

1.0

Go-Occurrence Restrictions. There are co-occurrence restrictions in a simplex sen-

tence between: 1. the tense-marker on the place adverb and that on the verb; 2. the place adverb and the time adverb; 3. the tense-marker on the verb and that on the time adverb. Yet, in structures involving Causative constructions, these co-occurrence restrictions do not hold. It follows, therefore, that such Causative constructions must have complex, not simplex sources and since in each case we can have only two different tense-markers, it is reasonable to assume that only two clauses are involved. Given then that Causative constructions have complex sentence sources and that they have two clauses each, it can be deduced that they must actually have bi-sentential sources.

593

1.1.1

Co-Occurrence Restrictions On The Verb. In Malagasy, a place adverb takes a tense-marker. Thus:

(1)a.

jlao f-t

i Paoly.

pres-here Paul "Paul is here."

b.

j-any

i Paoly.

pres-there Paul "Paul is there."

(2)a.

T-ato

i Paoly. Paul

past-here

"Paul was here."

b.

T-any

i Paoly.

past-there Paul "Paul was there."

There is a co-occurrence restriction between the tense-marker that can appear on such a place adverb and that of the verb in the same clause1:

(3)

*N-ianatra

-0"-ato

i Paoly omaly.

past-study pres-here Paul yesterday

(4)

N-ianatra t-ato

i Paoly cmaly.

past-study past-here Paul yesterday "Paul was studying here yesterday."

594

1.1.2

The Restriction on Place Mverbs and Causatives. Now/ Causative constructions with a place adverb

typically involve different tense-markers on the place adverb and the verb, respectively:

(5)

N-anao izay h-andehanan' i M XS-ao

an-trano i J. J

past-do comp fut-circ-go-by M pres-there in-home "J did so that M would go into the house."

(6)

H-anao izay n-andehanan'

i M t-ao

an-trano i J. J

fut-do comp past-circ-go-by M past-there in-home "J was about to induce M to go into the house."

(7)

N-anery

an'i M n-andeha t-ao

i P.

past-force

M past-go past-there P

"P just forced M to go there."

(8)

H-anery fut-force

an'i M h-andeha t-ao M fut-go

i P.

past-there P

"P was about to force M to go there."

(9)

N-amp-iditra

an'i M ho ao

an-trano i J. J

past-caus-enter

M fut there in-home

"J was having M enter the house."

(10)

H-amp-iditra fut-caus-enter

an'i M t-ao

an-trano i J. J

M past-there in-home

"J was about to have M enter the house."

595

(11)

N-anp-ilatsaka ny kanety ho ar past-caus-drop the marbles fut there

i P. P

"P was letting the marbles drop over there."

(12)

H-anp-ilatsaka ny kanety t-ary

i P.

fut-caus-drop the marbles past-there P "P was about to let the marbles drop over there."

(13)

N-an-defa

an'i M ho any

an-trano i J. J

fut-caus-flee

M fut there in-home

"J was having M go to the house."

(14)

H-an-defa

an'i M t-any

an-trano i J. J

fut-caus-flee

M past-there in-home

"J was about to send M to the house."

(15)

Tsy n-aha-zaka

ny entana 0-any

A i P. P

neg past-caus-carry the luggage pres-there A

"P did not manage to carry the luggage which is at A(ntsirabe)."

(16)

Tsy h-aha-zaka

ny entana t-any

A i P. P

neg fut-caus-carry the luggage past-there A

"P will not manage to carry the luggage which was at A(ntsirabe)."

(17)

N-aha-lasa

an'i J ho any

am-ponja io.

past-caus-gone

J fut there in-prison this

"This was the reason why J was being sent to prison.

596

(18)

H-aha-lasa fut-caus-gone

an'i J t-any

am-ponja io.

J past-there in-prison this

"This was why J was about to be sent to jail."

(19)

Hay resaka no n-an-(t)afitohina an'i J the talk part past-caus-upset

8-any.

J pres-there

"It was the talk which upset J who is over there."

(20)

Ilay sakafo no the food

n-ank-arary

ny ankizy t-any.

part past-caus-sick the child past-there

"It was the food which caused the child(ren) who was/ were there to be sick."

(21)

Ilay sakafo no n-ank-arary

ny ankizy

any.

the food part past-caus-sick the child pres-there "It was the food which caused the child(ren) who is/ are there to be sick."

In (5) and (6), we have the "persuasive" Directive construction with two different verbs in two different tenses. Judging from the ungrammatically of sentences like (3), the place adverb ao "there" in (6) must belong in the lower clause. The same holds true with the "coercive" (or also "permissive") Directive construction since it is not possible to have the sequence n-andeha "past-go" . f a "present-there" in either (7) or (8). As far as f-o the Causative constructions involving Fusion are concerned (see Chapter One, Section 5 for further details), from (9) to (21), apparently we only have one verb and yet, in (9) and (10), which illustrate the "neutral" Directive type, the tense on the verb is

597

different from that on the place adverb. The same remark applies to the following sequences, (11) and (12) with the Manipulative amp (a), (13) and (14) with the Manipulative an (a), (15) and (16) with the Abilitative aha, (17) and (18) with the Causal aha, (19) with the Causal an (a), (20) and (21) with the Causal ank(a). in each of the Causative constructions from (5) to (21), we have a co-occurrence of two different tense-markers on the verb and the place adverb. Such a co-occurrence in a simple sentence would have resulted in an ungrammatical sequence, as shown in (3). It can only be inferred from the grammaticality of the sentences fran (5) to (21) that complex structures are involved.

1.1.3

Tense Restrictions and Fusion Causatives. Furthermore, the following data show that the fusion

constructions can have no more than two different tense-markers. It is possible to repeat the verb of the lower clause or substitute a synonymous verb for it, as in (28) below to yield:

(22)a.

N-anao izay h-idira-n'

i M -0-any

an-trano i J. J

past-do comp fut-circ-enter M pres-there in-home "J just did so that M would go into the house."

b.

*N-anao izay O-idira-n'

i M ho ao

an-trano i J. J

past-do camp pres-circ-enter M fut there in-hane

c.

N-anao izay n-idira-n'

i M ho ao

an-trano i J. J

past-do comp past-circ-enter M fut there in-home "J persuaded M to go into the house."

598

(23) a.

N-anery

an'i M h-iditra

tf-ao

i J.

past-force

M fut-enter pres-there J

"J was forcing M to go there."

b.

*N-anery

an'i M m-iditra

JS-ao

i J.

past-force

M pres-enter pres-there J

c.

H-anery fut-force

an'i M n-iditra

t-ao

i J.

M past-enter past-there J

"J was about to force M to go in there."

(24)a.

N-amela

an'i M h-iditra - f a f-o

i J.

past-allcw

M fut-enter pres-there J

"J allowed M to go there."

b.

*N-amela

an'i M m-iditra

Z-ao

i J.

past-allow

M pres-enter pres-there J

c.

*H-amela fut-allow

an'i M n-iditra

JS-ao

i J.

M past-enter pres-there J

(25) a.

N-amp-iditra an'i M h-iditra ho ao an-trano i J. past-caus-enter M fut-enter fut there in-home J

"J was having M enter the house."

b.

*N-amp-iditra an'i M m-iditra past-caus-enter

ho ao an-trano i J.

M pres-enter fut there in-hcme J

599

c.

*N-airp-iditra an'i M n-iditra past-caus-enter

ho ao an-trano i J.

M past-enter fut there in-hcroe j

(26)a.

H-amp-iditra an'i M h-iditra t-ao fut-caus-enter

an-trano i J.

M fut-enter past-there in-home J

"J was about to have M enter the house."

b.

*H-amp-iditra an'i M m-iditra fut-caus-enter

t-ao

an-trano i J.

M pres-enter past-there in-home J

c.

*H-amp-iditra an'i M n-iditra fut-caus-enter

t-ao

an-trano i J.

M past-enter past-there in-home J

(27)a.

N-amp-ilatsaka ny kanety h-ilatsaka ho ary past-caus-drop the marbles fut-drop fut there

i P. P

"P was trying to get the marbles to drop over there."

b.

*N-airp-ilatsaka ny kanety

m-ilatsaka ho ary

i P. P

past-caus-drop the marbles pres-drop fut there

c.

*H-anp-ilatsaka ny kanety n-ilatsaka t-ary

i P.

fut-caus-drop the marbles past-drop past-there P

(28)a.

N-an-defa

an'i M h-andeha ho any M fut-go

an-trano i J. J

past-caus-flee

fut there in-home

"J was sending M to the house."

b.

*N-an-defa

an'i M m-andeha ho any

an-trano i J. J

past-caus-flee

M pres-go fut there in-home

600

c.

*H-an-defa fut-caus-flee

an'i M n-andeha ho any

an-trano i J. J

M past-go fut there in-home

(29)a.

H-an-defa fut-caus-flee

an'i M h-andeha t-any M fut-go

an-trano i J. J

past-there in-home

"J was about to send M to the house."

b.

*H-an-defa fut-caus-flee

an'i M m-andeha t-any

an-trano i J. J

M pres-go past-there in-hcme

c.

*H-an-defa fut-caus-flee

an'i M n-andeha t-any

an-trano i J. J

M past-go past-there in-home

(30) a.

Tsy n-aha-bata

ny entana ho-bata-ina ho ary i P.

neg past-caus-carry the lugg. fut-pass-c. fut there P "P did not manage to carry the luggage over there."

b.

*Tsy n-aha-bata

ny entana B'-bata-ina

ho ary i P.

neg past-caus-carry the lugg. pres-pass-c. fut there P

c.

*Tsy h-aha-bata

ny entana no-bata-ina ho ary i P.

neg fut-caus-carry the lugg. past-pass-c. fut there P

(31)a.

Io

no

n-aha-lasa an'i J ho lasa ho any am-ponja. J fut gene fut there prison

this part past-caus-gone

"This was why J was being sent to prison."

b.

*Io

no

n-aha-lasa an'i J ," 0

lasa ho any am-ponja.

this part past-caus-gone

J pres gone fut there prison

601

c.

*Io

no

n-aha-lasa an'i J ho lasa if-any am-ponja2. J fut gone pres-there prison

this part past-caus-gone

(in the intended reading given under a. above)

(32)a.

Io

no

n-aha-lasa an'i J ho lasa t-any am-ponja. J fut gone past-there prison

this part past-caus-gone

"Hiis is be why J will have been sent to prison."

b.

*Io

no

h-aha-lasa an'i J ,0-lasa

t-any

am-ponja.

this part fut-caus-gone

J pres-gone past-there prison

c.

*Io

no

h-aha-lasa an'i J lasa t-any

am-ponja.

this part fut-caus-gone

J gone past-there prison

(33)a.

Ilay resaka no the talk

n-ank-arary

an'i J^-any. J pres-there

part past-caus-sick

"It was because of the talk that J was sick."

b.

*Ilay resaka no the talk

n-ank-arary

an'i J ho any. J fut there

part past-caus-sick

c.

*Ilay resaka no the talk

h-ank-arary

an'i J t-any. J past-there

part fut-caus-sick

All the fusion sequences in a., from (25) to (33), show only two different tense-markers, all of them, grammatical. All of the b. sentences, by contrast, comprise three different tenses and all of them are ungrammatical, with the possible exception of (31)c. Assuming that a simplex sentence can only have one tense-marker,

602

it would appear that since a Causative construction must have a complex sentence source, as shown in 1.1.2 above, such a source has to be bi-sentential. Furthermore, the ungrammaticality of all the sequences in c. suggests that the embedded clause cannot take a past tense or a perfective aspect.

1.1.4

Violation of Restrictions and the Causatives. It is possible to have the co-occurrence of a tense-

marker on the place adverb, which does not normally co-occur with a different time adverb, in a Causative construction:

(34)a.

N-aitp-andeha -0"-any

an'i P i J t-eo. P J past-here

past-caus-go pres-there

"A moment ago, J had P go there."

b.

N-anp-anome

boky an'i J Z-any

i P t-eo.

past-caus-give book

J pres-there P past-here

"A moment ago, P had J given (a) book(s) (by someone) there," i.e.

"A moment ago, P had someone give (a) book(s) to J."

Uie above yields ungrammatical results in a simplex sentence:

(35)

*0-any i Paoly t-eo. pres-there Paul past-here

(36) a.

*N-andeha-flf-any

i Paoly t-eo.

past-go pres-there Paul past-here

603

b.

*N-ancme

boky . f a y C-n

an'i J i P t-eo. J P past-here

past-give book- pres-there

Since the place adverb XS-any "present-there" and the time adverb t-eo "past-here" cannot co-occur in a simplex sentence and since (34)a. and (34)b. containing them are grammatical, it can only be inferred that this Causative construction must be derived from a complex source. And since (34)a. and (34)b. involve only two different tnse-markers, it can be deduced that such a source must in fact be bi-sentential. Further support for the bi-sentential nature of the source comes from the possibility of repeating the embedded predicate:

(37)a.

N-amp-andeha an'i J (h)-andeha if-any past-caus-go J (fut)-go

i P t-eo.

pres-there P past-here

"A moment ago, P had J go there."

b.

*N-amp-andeha an'i J m-andeha 0-any past-caus-go

i P t-eo.

J pres-go pres-there P past-here

In (37)a., we have two different tense nodes, the (h) being optional, and the sequence is grammatical, as opposed to (37)b., with three different tense nodes instead, yielding an ungrammatical sentence. Hie zero-morpheme, which up to now has sinply been glossed as "present," will be taken up in 1.1.5 below.

1.1.5

Restrictions on Occurrences of Tense and Aspect in Sinple Clauses. There is a co-occurrence restriction between the tense/

604

aspect-marker on the verb and that on the same time adverb in the same simplex sentence:

(38)a.

*M-ividy boky i P t-aloha. pres-buy book P past-before

b.

*H-ividy boky i P t-aloha. fut-buy book P past-before

c.

N-ividy boky i P t-aloha. past-buy book P past-before

"Before, P used to buy books."

Yet, the following Causative constructions allow co-occurrence of such different tense-markers:

(39)

N-anao izay h-ividianan'

i P boky taloha

i J.

past-do comp fut-circ-buy-by P book pres-before J "J persuaded P to buy books first."

(40)

N-anery

an'i P h-ividy boky iT-aloha

i J.

past-force

P fut-buy book pres-before J

"J forced P to buy books first."

(41)

N-amela past-let

an'i P h-ividy boky -0"-aloha

i J.

P fut-buy book pres-before J

"J allowed P to buy books first."

605

(42)

N-amp-ividy

boky an'i P /6"-aloha

i J.

past-caus-buy book

P pres-before J

"Beforehand, J had P buy books."

(43)

N-amp-andehanan' past-caus-go-pass-by

i P i J^-aloha. P J pres-before

"Beforehand, P helped J to walk."

(44) a.

Ny ditra-ny

no

m-aha-voa-kapoka

the mischief-his part pres-caus-perf-strike

an'i P/tf-any

am-pianarana.

P pres-there at-school "Because of his mischief, P is punished at school."

b.

*Voa-kapoka i P -CT-any

am-pianarana.

perf-strike P pres-there at-school

c.

Voa-kapoka i P t-any

am-pianarana.

perf-strike P past-there at-school "P has been punished at school."

(45)

N-aha-zaka

enta-mavesatra i P#-aloha. P pres-before

past-caus-caried burden-heavy

"P already managed to carry a heavy burden."

(46)

N-an-(t)afitdhina an'i J io past-caus-upset

-fT-aloha

ka h-ajanony.

J this pres-before so be-stopped

"J is already upset with this and so, stop it."

606

(47)

N-ank-arary an'i J io past-caus-s ick

tf-alha

ka h-ajanony.

J this pres-before so be-stopped

"J is already sick because of this and so, stop it."

In the Causative constructions not involving fusion, i.e in (39), (40) and (41), the time adverb .tF-aloha "present-before" has a narrow scope and belongs in the same clause as the embedded verb since, as was made evident by the possibility of Pronominalization to an independent pronoun, Negation Operator Tsy-Placement and Passivization of the lower verb (see Chapter One, Subsection 5.1.2 for the relevant examples), the sequence has two clauses. From (42) to (47), we have Causative constructions involving fusion, but even in these cases 0-aloha "present-before" can cooccur with a verb in the past tense, as can be seen in each of the examples mentioned: for example, in (42), the time adverb has the present tense morpheme Z on it, whereas the Causative verb n-amp-ividy "past-caus-buy" has the past tense-marker n. Yet, the grammaticality pattern in (38) clearly shows that in a simplex sentence, the past tense t on the adverb' triggers the past tensemarker n on the verb. The sequences from (39) to (47) comprise verbs in the past tense, but it is -ff-aloha "present- before" which shows up and, as will be seen in (50) below, this should yield an ungrammatical sentence. However, all of the relevant sentences are perfectly grammatical. It can only be inferred that complex not simplex sentences are involved. Now, it should be noticed that a zero tense-marker can correspond to either of two tenses, as can be seen in the following exairples:

607

(48)

M-ividy boky i Paoly -0"-aloha. pres-buy book Paul zero-before

"First of all, Paul buys books."

(49)

H-ividy boky i Paoly #-aloha. fut-buy book Paul zero-before

"First of all, Paul will buy books."

(50)

*N-ividy boky i Paoly tf-aldha. past-buy book Paul zero-before

"Before, Paul used to buy books."

The grammatically of (48) and (49) suggests that a zero tensemarker can represent either a present a s in (48) or a future tense-marker a s in (49), whereas the ungramnaticality of (50) in the relevant interpretation shows that it cannot be a past tense-marker. It follows, therefore, that in the sentences from (39) to (47), we have the co-occurrence of two different tensemarkers. In turn, this in conjunction with the data in (38) indicates that indeed the Causative sequences from (39) to (47) must be evolved from complex sources. Furthermore, since each of these sentences contains oily two different tense-markers and since the zero tense-marker can only have the value "present" or "future" it can be deduced from the grammaticality pattern found in (39) to (47) that such a source will have to be bi-sentential.

1.2.1

Transportability of Adverb and Scope Ambiguity. In a simplex sentence, a manner adverb can only occupy

the position immediately to the right of the predicate and have a

608

narrow scope reading. Likewise, such an adverb in a Causative construction can occupy the same position, i.e. immediately to the right of the complex verbal predicate, and have a narrcw scope interpretation. However, it is also possible for such an adverb to be transported to a position immediately to the left of the Su NP of the higher clause, thus giving rise to a scope ambiguity: on one reading, it only modifies the lower predicate; on the other, it modifies the higher predicate. It becomes apparent then that in the wide scope interpretation, the manner adverb has been lifted into the higher clause. In a simplex sentence, a time adverb typically occupies the final position in the sequence with only a wide scope reading possible. Likewise, such an adverb in a Causative construction can occupy the same final position, in which case it also has a wide scope interpretation since it modifies the higher Causative predicate. However, it is possible to transport such an adverb to a position immediately to the left of the Su NP of the higher clause. This gives rise to a scope ambiguity. It seems, then, that in the narrow scope interpretation, the time adverb has been lowered into the embedded clause. The possibility for a manner or time adverb to acquire either a wide or a narrow scope reading in a Causative construction, as opposed to the uniqueness of interpretation of such adverbs in a sinplex sentence, suggests that indeed a Causative construction must be derived from a bi-sentential source.

1.2.2

Position of Manner Mverb in a Simplex Sentence. In a sinplex sentence, a manner adverb can only occupy

the position immediately to the right of the unique predicate, to

609

the exclusion of the sentence final position^:

(51)a.

Niditra moramora i Mary, entered slowly Mary

"Mary came in slowly."

b.

*Niditra i Mary moramora. entered Mary slowly

(52)a.

Nancme boky haingana an'i Jeanne i Paoly. gave book quickly Jeanne Paul

"Paul quickly gave books to Jeanne."

b.

*Nanome boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly haingana. gave book Jeanne Paul quickly

(53)a.

Narary

tokoa i Paoly.

was-sick really Paul "Paul was really sick."

b.

*Narary was-sick

i Paoly tokoa. Paul really

(54)a.

Tsara tokoa i Paoly. good really Paul

"Paul (is/was) really good."

b.

*Tsara i Paoly tokoa. good Paul really

610

(55) a.

Laginina tairpoka i Jaona. fed-up suddenly John

"John suddenly (got) fed up."

b.

*Laginina i Jaona tairpoka. fed-up John suddenly

Hie manner adverb in the a. sequences from (51) to (55) can only have a narrow scope reading. Hie ungrammaticality of the b. sentences shows that this position of the manner adverb in the a. sequences is the basic one.

1.2.3

Position of Manner Adverb and Causatives. In a Causative construction, such a manner adverb can

also occupy the same position as above in the sequence with the same narrow scope reading, i.e. the adverb ranges oily over the lower predicate:

(56)

N-anao izay n-i-dira-n'

i M morairora i J, J

past-do camp past-circ-go-by M slowly "J did so that M entered slowly,"

(57)

N-anery past-force

an'i M h-iditra morairora i J, M fut-enter slowly J

"J forced M to enter slowly,"

(58)

N-amela past-allow

an'i M h-iditra moramora i J, M fut-enter slowly J

"J allowed M to enter slowly,"

611

(59)

N-amp-iditra

moramora an'i M i J, M J

pas t-caus-enter slowly "J had M enter slowly,"

where moramora "slowly" modifies "enter."

(60)

?N-amp-anome

boky haingana an'i J an'i P Kakoto. J P Rakoto

past-caus-give book quickly

"Kakoto had P quickly give books to J."

(61)

N-amp-idina

moramora ny saina i J. the flag J

past-caus-go-down slowly

"J caused the flag to come down slowly," i.e. "J lowered the flag slowly."

(62)

N-ana-tsara

tokoa an'i P i J. P J

past-caus-good really

"J made P (appear to be) really good," i.e. "J really praised P."

(63)

N-aha-zaka

tokoa ny entana i J.

past-caus-carried really the luggage J "J managed to really carry the luggage."

(64)

N-aha-sosotra

tokoa an'i J ilay resaka. J the talk

past-caus-angry really

"J is/was really angry because of the talk."

612

(65)

N-an-(t)afitohina tokoa an'i J ilay resaka. past-caus-upset really J the talk

"J really got upset because of the talk."

(66)

N-ank-arary

tokoa an'i P io. P this

past-caus-sick really

"P really got sick because of this."

1.2.4

Mverb Transportation. Now, in the case of the fusion constructions, it is

also possible to transport the manner adverb, which basically shows up between the compound verb and its DO, to the position immediately to the left of the Su NP of the entire Causative construction:

(67)

N-amp-iditra

... an'i M moramora i J. M slowly J

past-caus-enter ...

"J had M enter slowly (both senses)."

(68)

7N-amp-anome boky past-caus-give book

... an'i J an'i P haingana Rakoto. ... J P quickly Rakoto

Either "Rakoto quickly had P give books to J," or "Rakoto had P quickly give books to J."

(1) 16

N-amp-idina

... ny saina moramora i J. J

past-caus-go-dcwn ... the flag slcwly "J lowered the flag slowly."

613

(70)

N-ana-tsra

... an'i P tokoa i J. P really J

past-caus-good ...

Either "J really made P (appear to be) good," or "J made P (appear to be) really good," i.e. "J was praising P."

(71)

N-aha-zaka

... entana tokoa i J.

past-caus-carried ... luggage really J Either "J really managed to carry the luggage," or "J managed to really carry the luggage."

(72)

N-aha-sosotra

... an'i J tokoa ilay resaka. J really the talk

past-caus-angry ...

Either "It was really the talk which made J angry," or "J was really angry because of the talk."

(73)

N-an-(t)afitohina ... an'i J tokoa ilay resaka. past-caus-upset J really the talk

Either "It was really the talk which upset J," or "J was really upset because of the talk."

(74)

N-ank-arary

... an'i P tokoa io. P really this

past-caus-sick ...

Either "It was really this which caused P to be sick," or "P was really sick because of this."

In each case, the three dots to the left represent the vacated position. In its transported position, the manner adverb from

614

(67) to (74) is ambiguous between a wide and a narrow scope reading. Thus, in (67), to take just one illustrative example, inoramora "slowly" can range over the higher Causative predicate with a wide scope interpretation or over the lower predicate with a narrow scope reading. This shows that transportation of the manner adverb has the effect of lifting the latter from the lower to the higher clause, at least, in one of the two possible readings. As for the non-fusion constructions, frcm (56) to (58), the manner adverb is already immediately to the left of the Su NP.

1.2.5

Position of Time Adverb in a Simplex Sentence. In a simplex sentence a time adverb typically occupies

the absolute final position:

(75) a.

H-iditra ao

i Mary rahatrizay.

fut-enter there Mary in-future "Mary will eventually go in there."

b.

H-iditra ao

rahatrizay

i Mary, Mary

fut-enter there in-future

"Mary will eventually go in there."

(76)a.

H-anome boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly rahatrizay. fut-give book Jeanne Paul in-future

"Paul will eventually give books to Jeanne."

b.

H-anome boky an'i Jeanne rahatrizay i Paoly. fut-give book Jeanne in-future Paul

"Paul will eventually give books to Jeanne."

615

(77)a.

Ho finaritra i Jeanne rahatrizay. fut happy Jeanne in-future

"Jeanne will eventually be happy."

b.

*Ho finaritra rahatrizay i Jeanne, fut happy in-future Jeanne

Barring a special intonation on (77)b., which might slightly lessen the ungrammatically of the sequence, the pattern emerging from the above sentences suggests that the absolute final position is more basic.

1.2.6

Position of Time Mverb and Causatives. In a Causative construction, such a time adverb can al-

so occupy the same final position in the sequence with the same wide scope reading, i.e. the adverb ranges over the higher predicate:

(78)

H-anao izay h-i-dira-n'

i M i P rahatrizay. P in-future

fut-do cotrp fut-circ-enter-by M

"In future, P will do so that M will go in."

(79)

H-anery an'i M h-iditra i J rahatrizay. fut-force M fut-enter J in-future

"In future, J will force M to go in."

(80)

H-amela an'i M h-iditra i J rahatrizay. fut-let M fut-enter J in-future


c

"In future, J will allow M to go in."

616

(81)

H-amp-iditra an'i M i P rahatrizay. fut-caus-enter M P in-future

"In future, P will have M go in."

(82)

H-airp-idina

ny seza i P rahatrizay.

fut-caus-go-down the chair P in-future "P will eventually bring the chair downstairs."

(83)

H-an-datsaka

ny taratasy i P rahatrizay. P in-future

fut-caus-dropped the letter

"P will eventually drop the letter."

(84)

Mbola h-aha-tatitra an'io i p rahatrizay. still fut-caus-carry this p in-future

"P will eventually manage to carry this."

(85)

Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i P io still fut-caus-happy

rahatrizay.

P this in-future

"P will eventually be happy with this."

(86)

Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i P io still fut-caus-tired

rahatrizay.

P this in-future

"P will eventually get tired of this."

(87)

Mbola h-anka-leo

an'i P io

rahatrizay.

still fut-caus-fed-up

P this in-future

"P will eventually get fed up with this."

617

1.2.7

Mverb Transportation. Now, the time adverb can be transported to the position

immediately to the left of the Su NP of the entire Causative:

(88)

H-anao izay h-idira-n'

i M rahatrizay i P ... P

fut-do camp fut-circ-enter-by M in-future

Either "Eventually, P will do so that M will come in," or "P will do so that M will eventually come in."

(89)

H-anery/H-amela an'i M h-iditra rahatrizay i J ... fut-force/fut-let M fut-enter in-future J

Either "Eventually, J will force/let (to) M cone in," or "J will force/let M (to) eventually core in."

(90)

H-amp-iditra an'i M rahatrizay i P ... fut-caus-enter M in-future P

Either "In future, P will have M go in," or "P will have M go in in future."

(91)

H-amp-idina

ny seza rahatrizay i P ... P

fut-caus-go-down the chair in-future

Either "Eventually, P will bring the chair down," or "P will eventually bring the chair downstairs."

(92)

H-an-datsaka

ny taratasy rahatrizay i P in-future P

fut-caus-dropped the letter

Either "Eventually, P will drop the letter," or "P will eventually drop the letter."

618

(93)

Mbola h-aha-tatitra an'io still fut-caus-carry

rahatrizay i P ... P

this in-future

Either "P will eventually manage to carry this," or "P will manage to eventually carry this."

(94)

Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i P rahatrizay io ... still fut-caus-happy P in-future this

Either "Eventually, P will be happy with this," or "P will eventually be happy with this."

(95)

Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i P rahatrizay io ... still fut-caus-tired P in-future this

Either "Eventually, P will get tired of this," or "P will eventually get tired of this."

(96)

Mbola h-anka-leo

an'i P rahatrizay io ... P in-future this

still fut-caus-fed-up

Either "Eventually, P will get fed up with this," or "P will eventually get fed up with this."

The transported adverb frcm (88) to (96) new gives rise to a scope ambiguity. It has the effect of lowering the adverb from the higher clause into the lower clause, at least, in one of the two possible readings.

1.2.8

Ambiguity of Mverbial Modification. The possibility of a choice between continuation a. or

b. below indicates that every single one of the following senten-

619

ces containing a time adverb positioned immediately to the left of the Su NP is indeed ambiguous:

(97)

H-anao izay h-idira-n'

i M rahatrizay i P P

fut-do comp fut-circ-enter-by M in-future (same as (88)) "P will do so that M will go in eventually,"

a.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no h-anao izany. but neg known if when P part fut-do that

"although it is not known when P will do that."

b.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i M no h-anao izany. but neg known if when M part fut-do that

"although it is not known when M will do that."

(98)

H-anery/H-amela an'i M h-iditra rahatrizay i J fut-force/fut-let (same as (89)) "J will force/let (to) M go in eventually," M fut-enter in-future J

a.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i J no h-anao izany. but neg knewn if when J part fut-do that

"although it is not known when J will do that."

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i M no h-anao izany. but neg known if when M part fut-do that

"although it is not known when M will go in."

620

(99)

H-amp-iditra an'i M rahatrizay i P fut-caus-enter (same as (90)) "P will have M go in eventually," M in-future P

a.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no h-anao izany. but neg known if when P part fut-do that

"although it is not known when P will do that."

b.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i M no h-anao izany. but neg known if when M part fut-do that

"although it is not known when M will do that."

(100)

H-amp-idina

ny seza rahatrizay i P P

fut-caus-go-down the chair in-future (same as (91))

"P will bring the chair down eventually,"

a.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no h-anao izany. but neg kncwn if when P part fut-do that

"although it is not known when P will do that."

b.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana no ho taf-idina io. but neg known if when part fut perf-dcwn it

"although it is not known when the chair will (actually) be down there."

621

(101)

H-an-datsaka

ny taratasy rahatrizay i P in-future P

fut-caus-dropped the letter (same as (92))

"P will drop the letter eventually,"

a.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no h-anao izany. but neg kncwn if whenP part fut-do that

"although it is not known when P will do that."

b.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana ny taratasy no ho but neg known if when the letter part fut

tafa-latsaka. perf-dropped "although it is not known When the letter will (actually) be posted."

(102)

Mbola h-aha-tatitra an'io still fut-caus-carry (same as (93))

rahatrizay i P P

this in-future

"P will manage to carry this eventually,"

a.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no but neg known if when P part

h-aha-vita fut-caus-done

(an') izany. that

"although it is not known when P will manage."

622

b.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana io but neg known if when

no

ho

this part fut

voa-tatitr'i P. perf-carry P

"although it is not known when this will (actually) have been carried."

(103)

Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i P rahatrizay io still fut-caus-happy (same as (94)) "P will be happy with this eventually," P in-future this

a.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana io but neg known if when

no

this part

h-aha-finaritra an'i P. fut-caus-happy P

"although it is not known when this will cause P to be happy."

b.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no ho finaritra. but neg known if when P part fut happy

"although it is not known when P will be happy."

(104)

Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i P rahatrizay io still fut-caus-tired (same as (95)) "P will get tired of this eventually," P in-future this

623

a.

kanefa tsy fantatra io na rahaoviana no h-an-dreraka but neg known this if when part fut-caus-tired

an'i P. P "although it is not known when this will cause P to be tired."

b.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no but neg known if when

ho reraka.

P part fut tired

"although it is not known when P will get tired."

(105)

Mbola h-anka-leo

an'i P rahatrizay io P in-future this

still fut-caus-fed-up (same as (96))

"P will get fed up with this eventually,"

a.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana io but neg known if when

no

this part

h-anka-leo fut-caus-fed-up

an'i P. P

"although it is not known when this will cause P to be fed up."

b.

kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no but neg known if when

ho leo.

P part fut fed-up

"although it is not known when P will get fed up."

624

1.3

Do-So Replacement. One equivalent of the English phrase "do so" is toraka

izany koa in Malagasy, where toraka means "like, such as," izany "that," and koa "also," with the same type of ambiguity:

(106)

H-anao izay h-idira-n'

i Mary i Paoly; Paul

fut-do coirp fut-circ-enter-by Mary

"Paul will do so that Mary will go in there;"

toraka izany koa i Jaona. same that also John

"same with John."

a.

H-anao izay h-idira-n'

i Mary i Jaona. John

fut-do conp fut-circ-enter-by Mary

"John will do so that Mary will go in there."

b.

H-anao izay h-idira-n'

i Jaona i Paoly. Paul

fut-do carp fut-circ-enter-by John

"Paul will do so that John will go in there."

(107)

H-anery/H-amela an'i Mary h-iditra i Jaona; fut-force/fut-let Mary fut-enter John

"John will force/allow Mary to go in there;"

toraka izany koa i Paoly. same that also Paul

"same with Paul."

625

a.

H-anery/H-amela an'i Mary h-iditra i Paoly. fut-force/fut-let Mary fut-enter Paul

"Paul will force/allow Mary to go in there."

b.

H-anery/H-amela an'i Paoly h-iditra i Jaona. fut-force/fut-let Paul fut-enter John

"John will force/allow Paul to go in there."

(108)

H-amp-iditra an'i Mary i Paoly; fut-caus-enter Mary Paul

"Paul will have Mary go in there;"

toraka izany koa i Jaona. same that also John

"same with John."

a.

H-anp-iditra an'i Mary i Jaona. fut-caus-enter Mary John

"John will have Mary go in there."

b.

H-amp-iditra an'i Jaona i Paoly. fut-caus-enter John Paul

"Paul will have John go in there."

(109)

H-amp-idina

ny zazakely i Jaona; John

fut-caus-go-down the child

"John will bring the child downstairs;"

626

toraka izany koa i Mary, same that also Mary

"same with Mary."

a.

H-amp-idina

ny zazakely i Mary, Mary

fut-caus-go-down the child

"Mary will bring the child downstairs."

b.

H-amp-idina fut-caus-go-down

an'i Mary i Jaona. Mary John

"John will bring Mary downstairs."

(110)

H-an-datsaka fut-caus-enrolled

an'i Koto i Paoly; Koto Paul

"Paul will enroll Koto (at a school);"

toraka izany koa i Jaona. same that also John

"same with John."

a.

H-an-datsaka fut-caus-enrolled

an'i Koto i Jaona. Koto John

"John will enroll Koto."

b.

H-an-datsaka fut-caus-enrolled

an' i Jaona i Paoly. John Paul

"Paul will enroll John."

627

(111)

Mbola h-aha-zaka

an'i Jeanne i Paoly; Jeanne Paul

still fut-caus-carried

"Paul will be able to carry Jeanne;"

toraka izany koa i Jaona. same that also John

"same with John."

a.

Mbola h-aha-zaka

an'i Jeanne i Jaona. Jeanne John

still fut-caus-carried

"John will eventually be able to carry Jeanne."

b.

Mbola h-aha-zaka

an'i Jaona i Paoly. John Paul

still fut-caus-carried

"Paul will eventually be able to carry John."

(112)

Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i Paoly io; still fut-caus-happy Paul this

"Paul will eventually be happy with this;"

toraka izany koa i Jeanne, same that also Jeanne

"same with Jeanne."

a.

Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i Paoly i Jeanne, still fut-caus-happy Paul Jeanne

"Paul will be happy with Jeanne."

628

b.

Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i Jeanne io. still fut-caus-happy Jeanne this

"Jeanne will be happy with this."

(113)

Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i Paoly i Jeanne; still fut-caus-tired Paul Jeanne

"Paul will eventually get tired of Jeanne;"

toraka izany koa i Mary, same that also Mary

"same with Mary."

a.

Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i Paoly i Mary, still fut-caus-tired Paul Mary

"Paul will eventually be tired of Mary."

b.

Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i Mary i Jeanne, still fut-caus-tired Mary Jeanne

"Mary will eventually get tired of Jeanne."

(114)

Mbola h-anka-leo

an'i Paoly i Jeanne; Paul Jeanne

still fut-caus-fed-up

"Paul will eventually get fed up with Jeanne;"

toraka izany koa i Mary, same that also Mary

"same with Mary."

629

a.

Mbola h-anka-leo

an'i Paoly i Mary, Paul Mary

still fut-caus-fed-up

"Paul will eventually get fed up with Mary."

b.

Mbola h-anka-leo

an'i Mary i Jeanne, Mary Jeanne

still fut-caus-fed-up

"Mary will eventually get fed up with Jeanne."

In the a. interpretation of the above sentences, the NP to the right of the phrase "do so" occupies the Su slot, as opposed to the b. version, where it fills the DO position. In the first instance, the phrase refers to the higher Causative clause; in the second, it refers to the lower predicate. Thus, for example, in (108)a., toraka izany koa replaces nampiditra an'i Mary, whereas in (108)b. it substitutes for hiditra only. Once again, this type of ambiguity points to a bi-sentential source for the Causative constructions since, by contrast, there is no such ambiguity in simplex sentences, as is quite evident from the following examples.

(115)

N-andeha i Paoly; toraka izany koa i Jeanne. past-go Paul ; same that also Jeanne

"Paul left; so did Jeanne."

(116)

N-idina

i Paoly; toraka izany koa i Jeanne, that also Jeanne

past-go-down Paul; same

"Paul came downstairs; so did Jeanne."

630

(117)

N-andidy mofo i Paoly; toraka izany koa i Jeanne, past-cut bread Paul; same that also Jeanne

"Paul was cutting bread; so was Jeanne."

(118)

N-itady an'i Jeanne i Paoly; toraka izany koa i Mary, past-seek Jeanne Paul; same that also Mary

"Paul was looking for Jeanne; so was Mary."

Furthermore, the following exairples indicate that only a Su can trigger the Malagasy equivalent of "do so":

(119)

N-ikapoka an'i P i J.. toraka izany koa izyj, past-hit P Jj same that also hej

"J hit P j ; so did hej," where i =/= j -

(120)

N-anome

boky an'i J ^ j i P;*toraka izany koa azy^y . J ^ p same that also him-jy.

past-give book "P gave books to J

so did (he) him/herjy.."

(121)

N-andefa taratasy t-any past-send letter

amin'i J i P;*toraka izany J P; same that

past-there to

koa t-any

amin'i M. M

also past-there to

"P sent a letter to J; *so did (he) to M."

The second portion of the sentence (119) is grammatical only in the reading where the pronoun is not interpreted as coreferential

631

with the NP i P; both NPs are Sus and we know from Pronominalization that when both the trigger and its victim occupy the Su position, the victim must surface as a Zero-pronoun, ihe grammaticality of (119) proves that indeed a Su can trigger the Malagasy equivalent of "do so." As for (120), whether the pronoun in the second part of the sentence is or is not coreferential with the IO of the first portion, the sequence remains irretrievably ungrammatical; notice that azy "him" is a DO/IO form of the independent pronoun. In (121), the second portion makes use of an Oblique NP and the sentence is ungramnatical.

1.4

Izany-Replacement. In Malagasy, the pronoun izany "that, far from the

speaker" can, among other things, refer to an entire sentence:

(122)a.

N-anome

boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly. Marina ve Jeanne Paul

izany?

past-give book

true quest that

"Paul gave (a) book(s) to Jeanne. Is that so?"

b.

Lasa i Paoly. Marina ve gene Paul

izany?

true quest that

"Paul left. Is that so?"

Izany "that" refers back to the previous sentence and is separated from its predicate by the question particle ve, which indicates that it occupies the Su position. In the following sentences, izany refers either to the entire Causative sequence or just to the lower clause:

632

(123)

H-anao izay h-idira-n' i M i P; toraka izany koa i J. fut-do carp circ-enter-by M (same as (106)) "P will do so that M will go in there; same with J." P same that also J

a.

H-anao (an1) izany i J. fut-do that J

(compare with (106)a.) "J will do that."

b.

H-anao (an1) izany an'i J i P. fut-do that J P

(compare with (106)b.) "P will do that to J."

(124)

H-anery an'i M h-iditra i J; toraka izany koa i P. fut-force M fut-enter J same that also P

(compare with (107)) "J will force M to go in there; same with P."

a.

*H-anery/H-amela an'izany i P. fut-force/fut-let that P

"P will *force/allow this."

b.

H-anery/H-amela an'i P h-anao izany i J. fut-force/fut-let P fut-do that J

"J will force/allcw P to do that."

633

(125)

H-amp-iditra an'i M i P; toraka izany koa i J. fut-caus-enter (same as (108)) "P will have M go in there; same with J." M P; same that also J

a.

H-amp-anao (an') izany i J. fut-caus-do that J

((123)a. embedded under the Causative) "J will have (someone) do that."

b.

H-amp-anao (an') izany an'i J i P. fut-caus-do that J P

"P will have J do that.n

(126)

H-amp-idina

ny zazakely i J; toraka izany koa i M. J; same that also M

fut-caus-go-down the child (same as (109))

"J will make the baby go downstairs; same with M," or "J will bring the baby downstairs; same with M."

a.

H-anao (an') izany i M. fut-do that M

"M will do that."

b.

H-amp-anao an'izany ny zazakely i M. fut-caus-do that the child M

((126)a. embedded under the Causative) "M will have the baby do that."

634

(127)

H-an-datsaka an'i K i P; toraka izany koa i J. fut-caus-enroll. (same as (110)) "P will get K enrolled; same with J." K P same that also J

a.

H-anao (an') izany i J. fut-do that J

(compare with (110)a.) "J will do that."

b.

H-anao (an1) izany an'i J i P. fut-do that J P

(one additional argument, compared to (127)a.) "P will do that to J."

(128)

Mbola h-aha-zaka an'i J i P; toraka izany koa i K. still fut-caus-carry J (compare with (111)) "P will be able to carry J; same with K." P same that also K

a.

Mbola h-aha-vita

an'izany i J. that J

still fut-caus-done

(vita is a root passive meaning "(be) done") "J will be able to do that."

b.

Mbola h-aha-vita

an'izany an'i J i K. that J K

still fut-caus-done

"P will be able to do that to K."

635

(129)

Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i P io; still fut-caus-happy

na

tsy mino

P this; even neg believe

an'izany aza i P. that neg P

(compare with (112) "P will he happy because of this; although P does not believe this."

a.

Tsy mino

i Pi fa

h-aha-finaritra (an") azyi io. hirr^ this

neg believe P i that fut-caus-happy

"Pi does not believe that he^ will be happy with his."

b.

Tsy mino neg believe

i P^ fa

ho finaritra izy^ amin'io. hei with this

P i that fut happy

"P^ does not believe that he^ will be happy with this."

(130)

Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i P i J; na still fut-caus-tired P J

tsy mino

izany

even neg believe that

aza i J. neg J

(compare with (113)) "P will eventually get tired of J; although J does not believe that."

a.

Tsy mino

i Ji fa

h-an-dreraka an'i P 0 i . P

neg believe J i that fut-caus-tired

"Ji does not believe that P will get tired of heri."

636

b.

Tsy mino

i 0\ f a

ho reraka ami-nyj_ i P.

neg believe J i that fut tired with-heri P does not believe that P will get tired of her^."

(131)

Mbola h-anka-leo

an'i P i J; na P

tsy mino

izany

still fut-caus-fed-up

J; even neg believe that

aza i J. neg J

(compare with (114)) "P will eventually get fed up with J; although J does not believe that."

a.

Tsy mino

i Ji fa

h-anka-leo

an'i P izy^. P she^

neg believe

that fut-caus-fed-up

"J^ does not believe that P will get fed up with her^." "(Strong emphasis on izy "she," just as in (129)b.)

b.

Tsy mino

iJjfa

ho leo

i P. P

neg believe 0\ that fut fed-up heri

"J^ does not believe that P will get fed up with heri."

In the a. sequences of the sentences from (123) to (131), the independent pronoun izany "that" replaces the entire Causative construction, whereas in the b. sentences it only substitutes for

the lower clause, as is made apparent by the use of the lower predicate of the Causative in the embedded clause. The ambiguity of the above sentences provides additional evidence for the bi-

637

sentential source of the Causative constructions. The ungrammatically of the sequence in (124)a. with the verb manery "to force" is due to a selectional restriction between the verb and its DO, as was shown to be the case in Chapter Five, Section 2.1.2.10 above. Furthermore, in (124) the option h-amela "future-allcw" was left out for lack of space exclusively.

1.5

Reflexivization to Ny Tenany and Pronominalization. In Malagasy, it is possible to reflexivize to ny tena-

ny, in which case the trigger and its victim are not in the same clause, as shown in (132).

(132)

Tia-n' i P i h-ikarakara

ny tena-nyj^ i J.

liked-by P i fut-take-care-of the body-his^^ j i- wants J to take care of him^." i

(133)a. ?*Tia

ny tena-nyi

i Ji i-

liked the body-her^


ft

likes herselfi."

b. *N-anome

voninahitra ny tena-ny^ i the body-her^

past-give honor

n "J^ showed respect towards herself^."

c. **N-ividy trano ho an'n tena-ny^ i past-buy house for the body-her^

i t "J^ bought (a) house(s) for herself^."

638

d.***N-andefa entana ho an'ny tena-ny.^ i j., past-send parcel for the body-her^

"J^ mailed a parcel to herself^."

e.***N-andefa ny enta-n'

ny tena-ny^ i j i# Ji

past-send the parcel-of the body-he^ "J^ sent her^ own parcel."

The sentences in (133) show that Reflexivization to ny tenany is at the very best marginal when the target is a DO while their degree of grammaticality diminishes as the target occupies a lower position on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy: in (133)b. it is an 10, in (133)c. and (133)d. it is an Oblique, and in (133)e. it is a Genitive. Likewise, Pronominalization to an independent pronoun occurs when the trigger and its victim are not clausemates (see Chapter Pour for details):

(134)

N-itady an'i Paoly ^ i Jeanne fa tsy n-ahita azy^. past-seek Paul^ Jeanne but neg past-see him^

"Jeanne was looking for Paul^ but did not find him^."

(135) a.

N-itady

ny nama-ny^

i Jeanne^,

past-seek the friend-her^ Jeanne^ "Jeanne^ vras looking for her^ friend."

b. *N-itady

ny nama-n'azy.^ i Jeanne^,

past-seek the friend-her^ Jeanne^ "Jeanne^ w a s looking for her^ friend."

639

In (134), the trigger and its victim belong in different clauses and the output is grammatical with the application of Pronominalization to an independent pronoun. In (135)b., the trigger and its victim are clausemates and the output is irretrievably ungrammatical in both the author's dialect and Standard Malagasy, as opposed to the use of the clitic, as can be seen in (135)a. However, in certain dialects of Malagasy, especially in their Colloquial version, (135)b. may sound quite acceptable in ordinary conversations. Fran the above, it follows that if a structure allows either Reflexivization to ny tenany or Pronominalization to an independent pronoun, this will constitute a piece of evidence in favor of its bi-sentential source. Now, with all of the Causative constructions, it is possible to do, if not both, at least one or the other. If we refer back to the general picture provided by Table 5 and, in particular, to Section 5 of Chapter One, dealing with the Fusion parameter and its interaction with the Causatives we will see that the "persuasive," the "coercive," and the "permissive" Directive constructions allow Pronominalization as defined above, but not Reflexivization to ny tenany; that the "neutral" Directive construction allows both; that all the Manipulative constructions allow Reflexivization to ny tenany; that the Abilitative construction also allows the latter; that all the Causal Causatives allow both. Otiis being the case, it can only be inferred that all the Causative constructions must be derived from bi-sentential sources.

640

Section 2

Single S Output

2.0

Introduction. In Subsection 1.2.1 above, we saw that a manner or

place adverb could be transported to the position immediately to the left of the Su NP of the entire Causative sequence, thus giving rise to a scope ambiguity. It follows then that whatever is situated immediately to the right of the ambiguous adverb must be a Su. Now, it is quite apparent from all the exanples in 1.2.4 that there is, in fact, only one such Su NP. In this section, it will be shown that in all Causative constructions, there is only one Su NP in the output sequence and that the Su of the embedded clause in the underlying representation gets denoted stepwise down the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy in all constructions involving Fusion (see Chapter One, Section 5). The assumption here is that in a simplex sentence there is only one single Su, as the ungrammaticality of the following sentence demonstrates:

(136)

*N-amono an'i Petera i Paoly i Jaona. past-kill Peter Paul John

"John, Paul killed Peter."

The following tests show that a sequence containing a Causative construction can only have one Su NP: 1. Sentential Question Formation; 2. Exclamation Formation; and 3. No-Longer Negation supplemented by Izy-Substitution.

641

2.1

Sentential Question Formation. In order to question a statement, a particle angaha "is

it the case that...?" has to be posited immediately to the left of the Su NP, as indicated in Keenan (1976a). It follows that whatever is situated to the right of angaha must be a Su NP. the following sentences shew that there can only be one Su NP:

(137)a.

N-anao izay h-idira-n'

i Jeanne angaha i Jaona? John

fut-do comp circ-enter-by Jeanne quest

"Did John do so that Jeanne would go in there?"

b. *N-anao izay h-idira-na

angaha i Jeanne i Jaona? Jeanne John

past-do comp circ-enter-fcy quest

(138)a.

N-anery/N-amela an'i Mary h-iditra angaha i Jaona? past-force/past-let Mary fut-enter quest "Did John force/allow Mary to go in there?" John

b. *N-anery/N-amsla an'i Mary h-iditra angaha i Jaona? past-force/past-let Mary fut-enter quest John

(139)a.

N-amp-iditra

an'i Mary angaha i Paoly? Mary quest Paul

past-caus-enter

"Did Paul have Mary go in there?"

b. *N-amp-iditra

angaha an'i Mary Mary

Paoly? Paul

past-caus-enter quest

642

(140)a.

N-amp-idina

ny zazakely angaha i Jeanne? quest Jeanne

past-caus-go-down the child

"Did Jeanne bring the baby downstairs?"

b. *N-amp-idina

angaha ny zazakely i Jeanne? Jeanne

past-caus-go-down quest the child

N-an-datsaka (141)a.

an'i Koto angaha i Paoly? Koto quest Paul

past-caus-enrolled

"Did Paul enroll Koto?"

*N-andatsaka b.

angaha an'i Koto i Paoly? Koto Paul

past-caus-enrolled quest

N-aha-zaka past-caus-carried (142) a.

an'i Jeanne angaha i Paoly? Jeanne quest Paul

"Did Paul manage to carry Jeanne?"

*N-ahazaka

angaha an'i Jeanne i Paoly? Jeanne Paul

past-caus-carried quest b.

N-aha-finaritra an'i Paoly angaha io? past-caus-happy Paul quest this

"Was Paul happy with this?" (143)a. *N-aha-finaritra angaha an'i Paoly io? past-caus-happy quest Paul this

b.

643

(144)a.

N-an-dreraka

an'i Paoly angaha i Jeanne? Paul quest Jeanne

past-caus-tired

"Was Paul tired of Jeanne?"

b. *N-an-dreraka

angaha an'i Paoly i Jeanne? Paul Jeanne

past-caus-tired quest

(145)a.

N-anka-leo

an'i Paoly angaha i Jeanne? Paul quest Jeanne

past-caus-fed-up

"Was Paul fed up with Jeanne?"

*N-anka-leo

angaha an'i Paoly i Jeanne? Paul Jeanne

past-caus-fed-up quest

Doubling on the Su is not allowed, as is made evident by the ungramnaticality of the b. sentences from (137) to (145). Nor is it possible to place angaha immediately to the left of the Su NP in either the higher or the lower clause, as in

(146)a.

N-anontany i Paoly fa past-ask

h-andeha angaha i Mary. quest Mary

Paul comp fut-go

"Paul asked whether Mary will/would go."

b.

N-anontany angaha i Paoly fa past-ask quest

h-andeha i Mary? Mary

Paul carp fut-go

"Did Paul ask Aether Mary will/would go?"

Ohe grammatically of (146) a. and (146) b. shows that indeed the question particle angaha must be placed in front of the Su NP. In

644

(146)b., a Heavy NP Shift rule applies to position the sentential object fa handeha i Mary beyond the Su NP i Paoly. The ungrairmaticality of the b. sequences from (137) to (145) suggests that there is only one final Su NP in a Causative construction.

2.2

Exclamation Formation. A particle anie is placed immediately to the left of

the Su NP and a particle e optionally positioned after the Su NP. Again, there cannot be two Su NPs:

(147)a.

N-anao izay h-idira-n'

i Jeanne anie i Jaona ()! Jchn (part)

past-do comp circ-enter-by Jeanne part

"Well, (didn't you know) John did so that Jeanne would go in thereI"

b. *N-anao izay h-idira-na anie i Jeanne i Jaona ()! past-do comp circ-enter part Jeanne John (part)

(148)a.

N-anery/U-amela

an'i Mary h-iditra anie i Jaona ()! Mary fut-enter part John (part)

past-force/past-let

"Well, (didn't you know) John forced/allowed Mary to go in there!"

(149)a.

N-amp-iditra past-caus-enter

an'i Mary anie i Paoly () I Mary part Paul (part)

"Well, (didn't you know) Paul had Mary go in there!"

b. *N-amp-iditra

anie an'i Mary i Paoly ()! Mary Paul (part)

past-caus-enter part

645

(150)a.

N-amp-idina

ny zazakely anie i Jeanne (e)! part Jeanne (part)

past-caus-go-down the child

"Well, (didn't you know) Jeanne brought the baby downstairs."

b. *Nbamp-idina

anie ny zazakely i Jeanne (e)! Jeanne (part)

past-caus-go-down part the child

N-an-datsaka (151)a.

an'i Koto anie i Paoly ()! Koto part Paul (part)

past-caus-enrolled

"Well, (didn't you know) Paul enrolled Koto."

*N-an-datsaka b.

anie an'i Koto i Paoly (e)! Koto Paul (part)

past-caus-enrolled part

N-aha-zaka past-caus-carried (152) a.

an'i Jeanne anie i Paoly ()! Jeanne part Paul (part)

"Well, (didn't you know) Paul managed to carry Jeanne!"

*N-aha-zaha

anie an'i Jeanne i Paoly ()! Jeanne Paul (part)

past-caus-carried part b.

N-aha-finaritra an'i Paoly anie io past-caus-happy

()!

Paul part this (part)

"Well, (didn't you know) Paul was happy with this!" (153)a. *N-aha-finaritra anie an'i Paoly io past-caus-happy part (e)! Paul this (part)

b.

646

(154)a.

N-an-dreraka

an'i Paoly anie i Jeanne ()! Paul part Jeanne (part)

past-caus-tired

"Well, (didn't you know) Paul was tired of Jeanne!"

b. *N-an-dreraka

anie an'i Paoly i Jeanne ()! Paul Jeanne (part)

past-caus-tired part

(155)a.

N-anka-leo

an'i Paoly anie i Jeanne ()! Paul part Jeanne (part)

past-caus-fed-up

"Vfell, (didn't you) Paul was fed up with Jeanne!"

b. *N-anka-leo

anie an'i Paoly i Jeanne (I)! Paul Jeanne (part)

past-caus-fed-up part

The graimnaticality of the a. sentences can be accounted for on the grounds that they only have one Su NP each. Hie ungrammatically of the b. sequences stems from the fact that they have two Su NPs each. Here, as in the case of the Question particle angaha, it is to be noted that it is quite possible to position anie inmediately to the left of the Su NP in either the higher or the lower clause, as in:

(156)a.

N-ilaza anie i Paoly fa past-say part

h-andeha i Mary (). Mary (part)

Paul comp fut-go

"Well, Paul said that Mary will/would leave!"

b.

N-ilaza i Paoly fa

h-andeha anie i Mary (). part Mary (part)

past-say Paul camp fut-go

"Well, Paul said that Mary will/would leave."

647

2.3.1

No-Longer Negation. The Negation Operator Tsy "not" is placed at the begin-

ning of the sentence and a particle intsony "no longer," in front of the Su NP:

(157)a.

Tsy n-anao izay h-idira-n'

i Jeanne intsony i Jaona. Jchn

neg past-do carp circ-enter-by Jeanne neg "John no longer did so that Jeanne would go in."

b. *Tsy n-anao izay h-idirana intsony i Jeanne i Jaona. neg past-do conp circ-enter neg Jeanne John

(158)a.

Tsy n-anery/n-amela an'i Mary h-iditra intsony i Jaona neg forced/allowed Mary fut-enter neg John

"John no longer forced/allowed Mary to go in."

b.

Tsy n-anery/n-amela intsony an'i Mary h-iditra i Jaona. neg forced/allowed neg Mary fut-enter Jchn

"John no longer forced/allcwed Mary to go in."

(159)a.

Tsy n-anp-iditra

an'i Mary intsony i Paoly. Mary neg Paul

neg past-caus-enter

"Paul no longer had Mary go in."

b.

Tsy n-anp-iditra

intsony an'i Mary i Paoly. Mary Paul

neg past-caus-enter neg "Paul no longer had Mary go in."

648

(160) a.

Tsy n-amp-idina

ny zazakely intsony i Paoly. neg Paul

neg past-caus-go-down the child

"Paul no longer brought the baby downstairs."

b.

Tsy n-amp-idina

intsony ny zazakely i Paoly. the child Paul

neg past-caus-go-down neg

"Paul no longer brought the baby downstairs."

(161)a.

Tsy n-an-datsaka

an'i Koto intsony i Paoly. Koto neg Paul

neg past-caus-enrolled

"Paul no longer enrolled Koto."

b.

Tsy n-an-datsaka

intsony an'i Koto i Paoly. Koto Paul

neg past-caus-enrolled neg "Paul no longer enrolled Koto."

(162) a^

Tsy n-aha-zaka

an' i Jeanne intsony i Paoly. Jeanne neg Paul

neg past-caus-carried

"Paul no longer managed to carry Jeanne."

b.

Tsy n-aha-zaka

intsony an'i Jeanne i Paoly. Jeanne Paul

neg past-caus-carried neg

"Paul no longer managed to carry Jeanne."

(163) a.

Tsy n-aha-finaritra an'i Paoly intsony io. neg past-caus-happy Paul neg this

"Paul was no longer happy with this."

649

b.

Tsy n-aha-finaritra intsony an'i Paoly io. neg past-caus-happy neg Paul this

"Paul was no longer happy with this."

(164)a.

Tsy n-an-dreraka neg past-caus-tired

an' i Paoly intsony i Jeanne. Paul neg Jeanne

"Paul was no longer tired of Jeanne."

b.

Tsy n-an-dreraka

intsony an'i Paoly i Jeanne, Paul Jeanne

neg past-caus-tired neg

"Paul was no longer tired of Jeanne."

In (157), with the "persuasive" Directive construction, Placement of intsony to the left of the NP i Jeanne yields an ungramnatical sequence, suggesting that the latter could not be considered a potential Su NP. This seems to be the only exception to the general rule evinced by the data. The grammaticality of the sentences in b. suggests that apparently we havetoropotential Su NPs since intsony precedes two NPs. The b. sentences illustrate one stage of the derivation where the embedded Su has just been denoted to a DO position, as is made clear by the presence of the particle an. Hcwever, such a position is not a straight DO yet since it is still immediately to the right of intsony. At this stage, then, we seem to have two Su NPs; the first being that of the higher clause; the second, that of the embedded clause. In fact, in light of what will be shown in 2.3.2 below, the second NP from the right falls between a Su and a straight DO.

650

2.3.2

Izy-Substitution. The a. sentences frail (158) to (164) suggest that it

might be possible to have a Doubling on the Su position, in fact, Izy-Substitution clearly demonstrates that this is not the case and that there is only one Su. Given that izy is Su for "he, she" and azy the DO "him, her," such a substitution yields:

(165)a. *Tsy n-anao izay h-idira-n'

izy intsony izy. le i

neg past-do coup circ-enter-by she neg

b. *Tsy n-anao izay h-dira-n'

izy intsony izy. he

neg past-do carp circ-enter-by she neg

c.

Tsy n-anao izay h-idira-ny

intsony izy. he

neg past-do comp circ-enter-by-her neg "He did not do so that she will go in."

d. *Tsy n-anao izay h-idira-na intsony azy izy. neg past-do coip circ-enter neg her he

e. *Tsy n-anao izay h-idira-na intsony izy izy. neg past-do carp circ-enter neg she he

(166)a. *Tsy n-anery/n-amela

izy h-iditra intsony izy. he

neg past-forced/past-let she fut-enter neg

b.

Tsy n-anery/n-amela

azy h-iditra intsony izy. he

neg past-force/past-let her fut-enter neg "He no longer forced/allowed her to go in."

651

c.

*Tsy n-anery/n-amela

intsony izy h-iditra izy she fut-enter he

neg past-force/past-let neg

d.

Tsy n-anery/n-amela

intsony azy h-iditra izy her fut-enter he

neg past-force/past-let neg

"He no longer forced/allowed her to go in."

(167)a. *Tsy n-anp-iditra

izy intsony izy. le i

neg past-caus-enter she neg

b.

Tsy n-anp-iditra

azy intsony izy. he

neg past-caus-enter her neg "He no longer had her go in."

c. *Tsy n-anp-iditra

intsony izy izy. she he

neg past-caus-enter neg

d.

Tsy n-anp-iditra

intsony azy izy. her he

neg past-caus-enter neg

"He no longer had her go in."

(168)a.

*Tsy n-amp-idina

izy intsony izy. he

neg past-caus-go-down she neg

b.

Tsy n-anp-idina

azy intsony izy. he

neg past-caus-go-down her neg

"He no longer brought her downstairs."

652

c. *Tsy n-anp-idina

intsony i2y izy. she he

neg past-caus-go-down neg

d.

Tsy n-airp-idina

intsony azy izy. her he

neg past-caus-go-down neg

"He no longer brought her downstairs."

(169)a. *Tsy n-an-datsaka

izy intsony izy. he

neg past-caus-enrolled he neg

b.

Tsy n-an-datsaka

azy intsony izy. he

neg past-caus-enrolled him neg "He no longer enrolled him."

c. *Tsy n-an-datsaka

intsony izy izy. he he

neg past-caus-enrolled neg

d.

Tsy n-an-datsaka

intsony azy izy. him he

neg past-caus-enrolled neg "He no longer enrolled him."

(170)a. *Tsy n-aha-zaka

izy intsony izy. he

neg past-caus-carried she neg

b.

Tsy n-aha-zaka

azy intsony izy. he

neg past-caus-carried her neg

"He no longer managed to carry her."

653

c. *Tsy n-aha-zaka

intsony izy izy she he

neg past-caus-carried neg

d.

Tsy n-aha-zaka

intsony azy izy her he

neg past-caus-carried neg

"He no longer managed to carry her."

(171)a. *Tsy n-aha-finaritra izy intsony io. neg past-caus-happy he neg this

b.

Tsy n-aha-finaritra azy intsony io. neg past-caus-happy him neg this

"He was no longer happy with this."

c. *Tsy n-ha-finaritra intsony izy io. neg past-caus-happy neg he this

d.

Tsy n-aha-finaritra intsony azy io. neg past-caus-happy neg him this

"He was no longer happy with this."

(172) a. *Tsy n-an-dreraka

izy intsony izy. she

neg past-caus-tired he neg

b.

Tsy n-an-dreraka

azy intsony izy. she

neg past-caus-tired him neg

"He was no longer tired of her."

654

c. *Tsy n-an-dreraka

intsony izy izy. he she

neg past-caus-tired neg

d.

Tsy n-an-dreraka

intsony azy izy. him she

neg past-caus-tired neg

"He was no longer tired with her."

The above are the same sentences as those used in 2.3.1, except that substitutions have been made to determine whether it is possible to have a grammatical output with two Su pronouns izy "he/she." All of our examples from (166) to (172) clearly prove that Doubling on Su is not possible since all the sequences where izy izy occur are irretrievably ungranmatical. Furthermore, the ungrammaticality of all the possibilities in (165) indicates that in the "persuasive" Directive Causative, the embedded Su of the underlying sequence is not denoted stepwise on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy. The possibility of the clitic form of the pronoun njr, as seen in (165)c., shows that the underlying Su now occupies the Genitive position.

2.4.0

Preview. In this subsection, it will be shown that in a Causa-

tive construction involving Fusion, the embedded Su has been demoted to DO, whether its predicate is intransitive or transitive, thus causing a Doubling on DO. Such a Doubling is also possible in a simplex sentence. First, it will be shown that the distinction between DO and IO is relevant in Malagasy and that there exist four tests to help distinguish them:

655

1. Pronoun Substitution and Coreferentiality; 2. Co-Occurrence Restriction between the particle an and the definite article ny; 3. Bo-Placement in front of the IO is possible; 4. Possibility of Fronting of the DO. Subsequently, the problem of the demotion of the embedded Su to DO will be tackled.

2.4.1

Distinction between DO and IO. Word Order plays a role in determining which NP occu-

pies the DO or IO position in a Causative construction4:

(173)a.

?N-amp-anome

boky an'i Jeanne an'i Jaona i Paoly. Jeanne John Paul

past-caus-give book

"Paul had Jchn give books to Jeanne."

b.

TN-anp-anome

boky an'i Jacna an'i Jeanne i Paoly. John Jeanne Paul

past-caus-give book

"Paul had Jeanne give books to John."

(173)b. cannot be assigned the same reading as (173) a. In the a. sentence, the NP an'i Jeanne precedes the NP an'i Jaona and as such can only be interpreted as an 10 and not a DO; whereas in the b. sequence, the NP an'i Jeanne follows the NP an'i Jaona and can only be interpreted as a DO. The importance of Word Order becomes apparent when one substitutes the pronoun azy "him/her" for both ny taratasy and ny zanany in the following sentence:

656

(174)

N-anp-anoratra ny taratasy ny zana-ny i Paoly. past-caus-write the letter the son-his "Paul had his son write the letter." Paul

(175)

N-amp-anoratra azy io past-caus-write it

an'azy him

i Paoly. Paul

"Paul had him write it."

(176)

*N-amp-anoratra azy past-caus-write him

an'azy io i Paoly. it Paul

(177)

*N-anp-anoratra an'azy past-caus-write him

an'azy io i Paoly. it Paul

The first pronoun azy io in (175) can only refer to the NP ny taratasy and the second, azy, to ny zanany, as is made apparent by the* ungrammatically of (176), where the first pronoun azy now refers to the NP ny zanany and the second, to the NP ny taratasy. Now, inverting the order of the two pronouns of (175) does not improve the grammaticality of the sentence, as in (176), without the DO/IO preposition an in front of azy or, as in (177), with an in front of the sane pronoun. The ungraimiaticality of (176) and (177), as opposed to the grammaticality of (174) and (175), indicates that the DO precedes the 10 in this Causative construction and that the distinction between the twD is relevant in Malagasy: the first NP following a complex Causative predicate is a DO and the second, an 10, as in (174).

657

2.4.2

Co-Occurrence of An and Ny. tfcw, tile preposition an, since it surfaces in both in-

stances in (173), does not enable us to make a clear-cut distinction between a DO and an 10. Nevertheless, the following data show that each has a pattern of its own since a DO comprising the definite article n cannot co-occur with an, but an 10 can:

(178)a.

N-ahita an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-see Jeanne Paul

"Paul saw Jeanne."

b. *N-ahita an'ny zandri-ny past-see the brother-his

i Paoly. Paul

"Paul saw his brother."

(179)a.

N-anome

ny boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly. Jeanne Paul

past-give the book

"Paul gave the book(s) to Jeanne."

b.

N-anome

ny boky an'ny zandri-ny

i Paoly.

past-give the book

the brother-his Paul

"Paul gave the book(s) to his brother."

The sentence (178)b. is ungrammatical since it violates a co-occurrence restriction between an and the DO containing the definite article n. Cn the other hand, the sequence (179)b. is grammatical since the NP ny zandriny "the brother-his" is not a DO but an 10, therefore, there is no violation of the restriction

658

just mentioned. Note that the grammaticality judgments provided here reflect Colloquial Malagasy since (179)b. will be considered ungrammatical by normative grammarians.

2.4.3

Bo-Placement. When an NP fills the DO position, it is not possible to

insert a particle ho (apparently the same morpheme as the future tense-marker, but more probably a Distance marker) immediately to its left, but when it occupies the 10 slot, then the result is grammatical:

(180)a.

N-ahita an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-see Jeanne Paul

"Paul saw Jeanne."

b. *N-ahita ho an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-see part Jeanne Paul

(181)a.

N-anoroe

boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly. Jeanne Paul

past-give book

"Paul gave (a) book(s) to Jeanne."

b.

N-anome

boky ho an'i Jeanne i Paoly. Jeanne Paul

past-give book part

"Paul gave (a) book(s) for Jeanne."

The sentences (181)a. and (181)b. are different to the extent that in the second, the implication is that "Paul and Jeanne were

659

not interacting directly at the scene of the utterance." ohe ungrammaticality of (180)b. shows that the NP an'i Jeanne is a DO in this sequence, whereas the grammaticality of (181)b. suggests that it is an IO in this other sentence.

2.4.4

Fronting of the DO. It is possible to front the DO and insert a particle no

inmediately to its right, whereas this is impossible with the IO. Thus, we get:

(182)

Ny boky no

n-ancme an'i Paoly i Jeanne omaly. Paul Jeanne yesterday

the book part past-give

"As for the books, Jeanne gave Paul some yesterday."

(183)

*An'i Paoly no

n-ancme

ny boky i Jeanne cmaly. Jeanne yesterday

Paul part past-give the book

(184)

N-ancme

ny boky an'i Paoly i Jeanne omaly. Paul Jeanne yesterday

past-give the book

"Yesterday, Jeanne gave the books to Paul."

(185)

I Jeanne no

n-anome

ny boky an'i Paoly omaly. Paul yesterday

Jeanne part past-give the book

"It was Jeanne who gave the books to Paul yesterday."

(186)

*Azy ireo no them

n-anome an'i Paoly i Jeanne omaly. Paul Jeanne yesterday

part past-give

660

(187)

Izy no

n-ancme

ny boky an'i Paoly omaly. Paul yesterday

she part past-give the book

"It was she who gave the books to Paul yesterday."

(188)a.

N-iatonta io

trano io

omaly.

past-fall this house this yesterday "This house fell yesterday."

b.

N-iatonta izy io omaly. past-fall it yesterday

"It fell yesterday."

c.

Izy io no it

n-iatonta omaly.

part past-fall yesterday

"It was it which fell yesterday."

(184) is the basic sentence from which all the others are derived. In (182), the definite DO ny boky "the books" has been fronted, yielding a partitive reading. In (183), the 10 an'i Paoly has been fronted in exactly the same manner as the DO, but the output is irretrievably ungrammatical. As for (185), it results from the application of Fronting to the Su NP i Jeanne. New, as is apparent in (185), it is possible to front the Su NP. The distinction between the Su and the DO is that only the first can have a prcnoun substitute, not the second, and yield a grammatical sequence (see (186)). It appears then that oily the DO can be fronted when it is an NP while the 10 cannot be fronted at all. Furthermore, the grammaticality of the sequences in (188) proves the non-relevance of Animacy.

661

2.4.5

Table of Criteria for Distinction between DO and 10. The information uncovered from 2.4.1. to 2.4.4 can be

summarized on Table 15.

Table 15

Criteria for the Distinction Between DO and 10

DO

10

-Word Order -Prcnoun-Substitution and Co-Referentiality -Co-Occurrence of an S ny -Hp-Placement -Fronting with no

1st position

2nd position

1st not possible not possible possible

2nd possible possible not possible

2.5.0

Demotion of the Embedded Su to DO. In the process of Clause-Union, the embedded Su of the

underlying sequence goes down stepwise on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy, and from the Su position goes to the DO position.

2.5.1

The Case of the Embedded Intransitive Predicate. In all of the following examples, the embedded stru-

cture comprises an intransitive predicate and the former Su is demoted to DO. Application of the Co-Occurrence, Ho-Placement and Fronting tests yields the following sequences:

662

(189)a.

N-amp-iditra

ny npianatra i Jaona. John

past-caus-enter the student

"John had the student(s) go in."

b. *N-amp-iditra

an' ny npianatra i Jaona. Jchn

past-caus-enter part the student

c. *N-amp-iditra

ho

an' ny mpianatra i Jaona. John

past-caus-enter part part the student

d.

Ny npianatra no n-amp-iditra

i Jaona.

the students part past-caus-enter Jchn "As for the students, John had seme go in."

(190)a.

N-ank-adala

ny npianatra i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-caus-crazy the student

"Jeanne drove the student(s) crazy."

b. *N-ank-adala

an' ny npianatra i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-caus-crazy part the student

c. *N-ank-adala

ho

an' ny npianatra i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-caus-crazy part part the student

d.

Ny npianatra no the student

n-ank-adala

i Jeanne.

part past-caus-crazy Jeanne

"As for the students, Jeanne drove sane of them crazy.

663

(191) a. N-ana-tsara

ny mpianatra i Jaona. John

past-caus-good the student "John praised the student(s)

b. *N-ana-tsara

an' ny mpianatra i Jacna. John

past-caus-good part the student

c. *N-ana-tsara

ho

an' ny mpianatra i Jaona. John

past-caus-good part part the student

d.

Ny mpianatra no the student

n-ana-tsara

i Jaona.

part past-caus-good John

"As for the students, John praised some of them."

(192)a.

N-aha-laginina

ny npianatra i Jeanne, Jeanne

pas t-caus-fed-up the student

"Jeanne managed to irritate the student(s)."

b. *N-aha-laginina

an' ny npianatra i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-caus-fed-up part the student

c. *N-aha-laginina

ho

an' ny npianatra i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-caus-fed-up part part the student

d.

Ny npianatra no

n-aha-laginina i Jeanne.

the students part past-caus-fed-up Jeanne "Ss for the students, Jeanne managed to irritate some of them."

664

(193) a. N-an-daginina

ny mpianatra i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-caus-fed-up the student "Jeanne irritated the students."

b. *N-an-daginina

an' ny mpianatra i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-caus-fed-up part the student

c. *N-an-daginina

ho

an' ny npianatra i Jeanne, Jeanne

past-caus-fed-up part part the student

Ny mpianatra no

n-an-aginina

i Jeanne,

the students part past-caus-fed-up Jeanne "As for the students, Jeanne irritated seme of them."

Without any exception, all three diagnostic tests prove that the embedded Su has been demoted to a DO but not to an 10 position since in the b. sentences, the NP comprising the definite article ny cannot co-occur with the particle an, as is made evident by the ungrammatically of all the relevant sentences above; likewise, the ungrammatical c. sentences show that ho cannot co-occur with the particle an; finally, in the d. sequences, Fronting of DO is possible and yields the expected partitive reading.

2.5.2

The Case of the Embedded Transitive Predicate. Even when the embedded predicate is transitive, the em-

bedded Su gets demoted to DO although it does not appear to be a straight DO. The possibility of passivizing by promoting either the original or the derived DO suggests that we may indeed have a

665

case of Doubling on the 1X3, as will be seen in 2.5.3 below. A sentence with a transitive predicate like:

(194)

H-anoratra ny taratasy ny zana-ny, fut-write the letter the son-his

"His son will write the letter,"

(195)

N-amp-anoratra ny taratasy ny zana-ny i Paoly, past-caus-write the letter the son-his Paul

"Paul had his son write the letter,"

(196)

?*N-anp-anoratra ny taratasy an

ny zana-ny i Paoly, Paul

past-caus-write the letter part the son-his "Paul had his son write the letter,"

(197)

N-amp-anoratra ny taratasy ho an' ny zana-ny i Paoly, past-caus-write the letter part the son-his Paul

"Paul had someone write the letter for his son,"

(198)

*Ny zana-ny no

n-amp-anoratra ny taratasy i Paoly, Paul

the son-his part past-caus-write the letter

(194) can be embedded under a Causative predicate and yield (195). New, with the co-occurrence of an and n test, we obtain the marginally grammatical sentence (196), ungrammatical from a normative grammarian's viewpoint although certainly a possibility. With the application of the Ho-Placeroent and the Fronting tests, we get the grammatical sequence (197) and the ungranma-

666

tical sentence (198). Hie grammaticality pattern in (197) and (198) suggests that we are dealing here with an 10, but the semigranmaticality of (196) shows that it is basically a DO. Thus, there seems to be a current tendency for the embedded Su demoted to DO to gradually go down the hierarchy so that here we have an item falling between a straight DO and a straight 10. The ungrammaticality of (198) demonstrates that it is not a straight DO.

2.5.3

Demotion to DO. However, since it is possible to passivize by promoting

either ny taratasy or ny zanany in (194), we can assume that the embedded Su has been denoted to DO:

(199)

N-amp-anorata-n' i Paoly ny taratasy ny zana-ny. pass-caus-wr ite-by Paul the letter the son-his

"His son was made by Paul to write the letter," i.e. "Paul made his son write the letter."

(200)

?N-amp-anorata-n1

i Paoly ny

zana-ny ny taratasy.

pass-caus-write-by Paul the son-his the letter "Paul made his son write the letter."

(201)

N-amp-anoratra ny taratasy an'i Jeanne i Paoly. past-caus-write the letter Jeanne Paul

"Paul had Jeanne write the letter."

(202)

N-amp-anorata-n1

i Paoly ny taratasy i Jeanne, Jeanne

pass-caus-write-by Paul the letter "Paul had Jeanne write the letter."

667

(203)

N-amp-anorata-n' i Paoly an'i Jeanne ny taratasy. pass-caus-write-by Paul Jeanne the letter

"Paul had the letter written by Jeanne."

When we substitute an'i Jeanne for ny zanany of (200), we get (201). In (202), the particle an has been dropped in the process of promoting an'i Jeanne to Su. Further support for considering the denoted Su a DO and not an 10 comes from the fact that it is not possible to passivize by promoting an IO to Su:

(204)

?N-amp-anome

ny boky an' J an'i P i Petera4. J P Peter

past-caus-give the book

"Peter had P give the book(s) to J."

(205)

?N-amp-anome-z-an1 i Petera an'i J an'i P ny boky. pass-caus-give-by Peter J P the book

"Peter had the books given by P to J."

(206)

?*N-amp-anome-z-an1 i Petera an'i J ny boky i P. pass-caus-give-by Peter J the book P

"Peter had the books given by P to J."

(207)

*N-airp-anome-z-an1 i Petera ny boky an'i P i J. pass-caus-give-by Peter the book P J

The ungranmaticality of (207) indicates that the NP i J(eanne), which has been promoted to Su, was originally an 10 and not a DO. This is made evident by the An-ny, the Bo-Placement and the Fronting tests:

668

(208)

?N-airp-anome

ny boky an' ny npianatra an'i P^ i Pj. P^ Pj

past-caus-give the book part the student

"Pj had Pi give the book(s) to the student(s)."

(209)

?N-amp-aname

ny boky ho an'ny npianatra an'i P i i Pj. Pi Pj

past-caus-give the book part the student

"Pj had Pi give the book(s) to the student(s)."

(210)

*(An') i J no

n-anp-anome

ny boky an'i P i i Pj. Pi Pj

(part) J part past-caus-give the book

The pattern of grairmaticality found in the sentences from (199) to (203) shows that Malagasy has Doubling on the DO position in a Causative construction, just like in a sinplex sentence:

(211)

N-anome

ny taratasy ny zana-ny the son-his

i Paoly. Paul

past-give the letter

"Paul gave his son the letter."

(212)

*N-anome

ny taratasy an' ny zanany i Paoly. part the letter Paul

past-give the letter

(213)

*N-anome

ny taratasy ho an'ny zana-ny i Paoly. the son-his Paul

past-give the letter part

(214)

*Ny zana-ny no

n-anome

ny taratasy i Paoly. Paul

the son-his part past-give the letter

669

Again, the ungranrnaticality of (214) suggests that it is not a straight DO.

2.6

Passivization. Given that a Causative construction, as we have just

shown, has one Su and at least one DO, we new have to demonstrate that there is only one verbal predicate, the lower predicate being lifted into the matrix clause during Clause-Union. If the entire verbal complex can be passivized, then we will have a good indication that one single S output is involved at this stage. That indeed seems to be the case:

(215)a.

?N-anp-anome

ny boky an'i Jeanne an'i Paoly i Petera. Jeanne Paul Peter

past-caus-give the book

(grammaticality depends on intcnation and context, at least, partially) "Peter had "Paul give the book to Jeanne."

b.

TN-amp-anome-z-an'i Petera an'i J an'i P ny boky. pass-caus-give-by Peter J P the book

(grammaticality depends on intonation and context, at least, partially) "Peter had the book given to Jeanne by Paul."

c.

TN-anp-ancroe-z-an'i Petera an'i J ny boky i P. pass-caus-give-by Peter J the book P

"Peter had P give the book to Jeanne."

670

(216) a. N-amp-andeha an'i Mary i Jaona. past-caus-go Mary John

"John had Mary leave," in the sense of "John told Mary to leave."

b.

N-amp-andeha-n-an'i Jaona i Mary, pass-caus-go-by John Mary

"John made Mary leave (somewhat ooercively)," or "John dragged Mary away."

(217) a. N-ank-adala

an'i Jaona i Jeanne, John Jeanne

past-caus-crazy

"Jeanne drove John crazy (intentionally or n o t ) o r "John was crazy because of Jeanne."

b.

N-ank-adala-in'

i Jeanne i Jaona. John

pass-caus-crazy-by Jeanne

"Jeanne drove John crazy (only intentionally)." J N-ana-tsara (218)a. an'i Paoly i Jaona. Paul John past-caus-good

"Jbhn caused Paul (to appear to be) good." "John praised Paul." N-a-tsara-in' i Jaona i Paoly. b. pass-good-by Jchn Paul

"Paul was praised by John (lavishly)," in that the latter exaggerated quite a bit.

671

(219)a.

N-aha-laginina an'i Jaona i Jeanne, past-caus-fed-up John Jeanne

"Jchn was fed up with Jeanne."

b. *N-ha-lagin-in'

i Jeanne i Jaona. Jchn

pass-caus-fed-up-by Jeanne

(no interpretation whatsoever)

(220)a.

N-an-daginina an'i Jaona i Jeanne, past-caus-fed-up John Jeanne

"Jeanne was trying to cause John to get angry."

b.

N-an-dagin-an'

i Jeanne i Jaona. John

pass-caus-fed-up-by Jeanne

"Jeanne made a fuss with John."

First, it is to be noticed that all of the above sentences with the exception of (216)b. and (218) are characteristic of Colloquial Malagasy and are not accepted by normative grammarians. Therefore, the application of Affixal Passive after Clause-Union should only be regarded as a tendency. Despite a limited number of cases like (217) and (220), it still remains true, as was shown to be the case in Chapter One, Section 5, that generally in a Causal construction, Affixal Passive cannot apply after ClauseUnion, as can be inferred frcm the ungrammaticality of (219) b. Second, as was pointed out in Chapter One, Section 2.1.3, and as can be seen in (215)a. and (216)a., the "neutral" Directive construction requires that the embedded verb be in the active voice.

672

If this is not the case, then we have a Manipulative reading. Uius, the difference between (215)a. and (215)b. is that in the a. version, the Causer simply asks the Causee to do something, whereas in the b. version the Causer has Control over the Causee. Likewise, in (216) in the a. version, the Causer has no Control over the Causee, whereas in the b. version, he does have Control over the latter. In fact, Control is the denominator ccannon to (217)b., (218)b., and (220)b. (see Chapter One, Section 2).

Finally, one piece of evidence in favor of the view that the above data shows only a tendency is provided by Reflexivization to tena. As was seen in Chapter One, Section 5, this process is possible oily with the Manipulative amp (a) (see 5.2.13 of that chapter), the Manipulative an (a) (see 5.2.20 of the same chapter) , and Abilitative aha (5.2.27 of the same chapter).

Conclusion. It appears, that: 1. All Causative constructions in Malagasy have bi-

sentential sources since: a. there exist Co-Occurrence Restrictions involving the tense-marker on the place adverb and the verb (1.1.1 and 1.1.2), the place adverb and the time adverb (1.1.4), and the tensemarker on the verb and that on the time adverb (1.1.5) which hold in a simplex sentence but which do not hold in Causative Constructions; b. a manner (1.2.2, 1.2.3) or a time (1.2.6 and 1.2.7) adverb can occupy a position in the sentence which gives rise

673

to an ambiguity of interpretation in a Causative Construction involving Fusion; c. the Malagasy equivalent of Do-So (Subsection 1.3) can refer either to the higher Causative clause or to the lower one; d. likewise, Izany-Replaceroent (1.4) can refer to

either the higher Causative clause or to the lower one; and e. either Reflexivization to ny tenany or Proncminalization to an independent pronoun (1.5) or even both can apply in a Causative construction involving Fusion. Nfcw, in both instances, the trigger and its victim cannot be clausemates. It follows that a construction which meets this requirement for these two phenomena necessarily involve a complex not simplex sentence. 2. Clause-Onion takes place and yields a single sentence output, as is made evident by a. the fact that the output sequence is a sequence with only one Su, as is shown by Sentential Question Formation (2.1), Exclamation Formation (2.2), and No-Donger Negation (2.3.1) supplemented by Izy-Substitution (2.3.2); b. the stepwise demotion (2.4.0) down the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy of the embedded Su of the underlying sequence in a Causative construction involving Fusion of the higher and the lower predicates, as was explained in Chapter One, Section 5; and c. the tendency to apply Affixal Passive after ClauseUnion although, in general, the latter is restricted to the Manipulative constructions amp (a) and an (a), as was shown to be the case in Chapter One, Section 5.

674

CHAPTER SIX FOOTNOTES

I am precluding situations where Paul just began studying and,

therefore, is still assumed by the speaker to be in the locality being referred to. In such a case, it is possible to have:

N-ianatra -ff-ao

i Paoly.

past-study pres-there Paul "Paul studied there," i.e. "Paul just went there to study (and is still there now at the time of the utterance)." 2 See explanations relative to (48), (49), and (50) for the

relevant values of the zero-tense morpheme on the time/place adverb. 3 The construction type where the manner adverb cranes as an afterthought, with a pause between it and the subject, will be factored out. 4 These constructions comprising four arguments are rare. Native speakers prefer to resort to an alternative strategy, breaking up a cluster of four NPs with the use of the passive verb asaina "be-told." See Chapter Three: Reflexivization, Substitute

Strategy, Subsection 3.1.3.

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

The main purpose of this work was to show that all the Causative Constructions of Malagasy have to be derived from bisentential sources. First, such a hypothesis allows one to account for all the Causative Constructions of the language in a systematic manner, utilizing oily a set of six parameters: Animacy, Control, Entailment, Productivity, Degree of Fusion, and Markedness. Second, all the Causative Constructions even those undergoing fusion of the higher and the lower predicates interact with the following processes in a way which indicates that a complex not simplex structure is involved: Negation Operator Tsy-Placement, Affixal Passive before Clause-Union, Pronominalization and Reflexivization to ny tenany. Additional evidence to support the Bi-Sentential Source Hypothesis is provided by Co-Occurrence Restrictions, Scope Ambiguity, Transportability of Adverbs, Do-So Replacement, and It-Replacement. Third, the output is a single sentence, as made evident by Sentential Question Formation, Exclamation Formation, and No-Longer Negation supplemented by Izy-Substitution, all of which indicate that there is only one Subject Noun Phrase in the final sequence.

676

Fourth, it appears that there exist different degrees of strength in the process of Clause-Union: 1. In the case of the Unmarked constructions which do not present any evidence of Fusion, i.e. the "persuasive," the "coercive," and the "permissive" Causatives, the strength is minimal since they all allow Negation Operator Tsy-Placement, Affixal Passive, and Pronominalization in the lower clause. 2. Of those which undergo Fusion, i.e. the "neutral" Directive, the Manipulative, the Abilitative, and the Causal constructions, only the Manipulative amp(a) and an(a) show maximal Fusion, as can be inferred from the possibility of application of Affixal Passive after Clause-Union and that of Reflexivization to tena: the "neutral" Directive construction leans slightly toward the negative pole of the continuum and the Abilitative toward the positive end. 3. All of the Causal constructions evince minimal Fusion since with all of them, Pronominalization and Reflexivization to ny tenany are permissible in the embedded clause; and if the finite set of root passives characteristic of the language is set aside, this type of construction also allows Tsy-Placement and Affixal Passive before Clause-Union. Since it is not only possible but necessary to derive all Causative Constructions of this language from bi-sentential structures, it is to be concluded that all of them must have bisentential sources.

APPENDIX A

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Besides the specific symbols provided for each table: VP = Verb Phrase V = Verb Act. = Active Voice Pass. = Passive Voice Circ. = Circumstantial Voice Fut. = Future Tense Pst. = Past Tense Pres. = Present Tense Caus. = Causative Ingr. = Ingressive Aspect Part. = Particle NP = Noun Phrase Art. = Article Su = Subject ED = Direct Object 10 = Indirect Object OBL = Oblique GEN = Genitive C-U = Clause Union e.g. = Exempli Gratia Pref./prf = Prefix Prep. = Preposition

APPENDIX B

CLASSES OF VERBS

Verbs like mitondra "to bring, to carry" and roanka "to take," which have suppletive forms in the Affixal Passive, have been excluded from the Classifications of verbs proposed in Chapter Five; the first is replaced by entina "be brought" and the second, by alaina "be taken."

Here is a sample list of verbs belonging in the different classes:

Class 1: anatra "advice," mananatra "to advise;" avotra "deliverance," manavotra "to deliver;" dotra "fire," mandotra "to put on fire;" eso "irony," maneso "to make fun of;" fafa "sweeping," mamafa "to sweep;" faritra "limit," mamaritra "to limit;" halatra "theft," mangalatra "to rob;" hety "scissors," manety "to cut with scissors;" karama "wage," manarama "to pay a wage;" lalotra "painting," mandalotra "to paint;" loto "dirt," mandoto "to mess up;" lova "heritage," mandova "to inherit;" mosavy "poisoning," mamosavy "to poison;" ohatra "example," manhatra "to try on;" ompa "insult," manornpa "to insult;" onitra "compensation," manonitra "to compensate;" ratra "injury," mandratra "to injure;" sasa "washing," manasa "to wash;" solo "replacement," manolo "to replace;" tafika "army," manafika "to storm;" tahaka "copy," manahaka "to resemble;" tambitamby "cajoling," manambitamby "to

679

cajole;" voly "agriculture," mamboly "to grow (a plant);" zanaka "child," manjanaka "to colonize."

Class 2; araka "which can be followed," manaraka "to follow," arahina "be followed;" foy "which can be given up," manoy "to give up," foina/afoy "be given up;" lany "exhausted," mandany "to exhaust," (no)-laniana "be exhausted;" latsaka "been dropped," mandatsaka "to drop," nalatsaka "was dropped;" levona "been absorbed," mandevona "to absorb," nolevonina "was absorbed;" lavo "lying on the ground," mandavo "to throw onto the ground," nolavoina "was thrown onto the ground;" loka "with a hole," mandoka "to put a hole in, noldhaana "was put a hole in;" pepo "with a buirp," manapepo "to make a bunp in," nopepohina "was made a bunp in;" poritra "crushed," manaporitra "to crush," noporetina "was crushed;" potika "smashed," mamotika "to smash," nopotehina "was smashed;" ripaka "eliminated," mandripaka "to eliminate," noripahana "was eliminated;" rovitra "torn," mandrovitra "to tear up," norovitina "was torn up;" tery "tight," manery "to tighten," noterena "was tightened;" tratra "which can be reached," manatratra "to try to reach," notratrarina "was tried to be reached;" tadidy "which can be remembered," mitadidy "to remember," notadidina "was remembered;" zaka "which can be carried," mizaka "to carry," nozakaina "was carried;" and ambara "been declared," manambara "to declare," nambara "was declared."

Class 3: afaka "can," aleo "had rather," avy "coming," azo "taken," lasa "gone," tokony "must," and tonga "arrived."

680

Class _ : hita "seen," mahita "to see;" lafo "expensive, been 4 bought," mandafo "to sell;" re "been heard," mandre "to hear;" and very "been lost," mam(v)ery "to lose."

Class 5: mila "to need," ilaina "is needed;" sahy "to dare," shina "be dared."

Furthermore, it is to be noticed that many verbs from both class 1 and class 2 can take the Stative prefix i-:

Class 1: fafa "sweeping," mamafa "to sweep," mifafa "to be in the (habitual) state of having been swept;" faritra "limit," mamaritra "to limit," mifaritra "to have its limits clearly delineated;" lalotra "painting," mandalotra "to paint," milalotra "to be in a state of having been painted;" sasa "washing," manasa "to wash," misasa "to be in the state of having been washed" or "to be engaged in the action of washing oneself;" tohana "block," manohana "to block," mitohana "to be in the state of having something to block it."

Class 2:

latsaka "been dropped," mandatsaka "to drop (some-

thing)," milatsaka "to fall;" lavo "laying on the ground," mandavo "to throw someone or something onto the ground," milavo "to be lying;" loka "with a hole," mandoka "to make a hole in something," miloka "to be with a hole;" pepo "with a bump," manapepo "to make a bump in something," mipepo "to be with a bump."

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BAKER, C.L.

(1978) Introduction to Generative-Transformational Syntax. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

OOMRIE, B. COMRIE, B.

(1976a) Aspect. Cambridge University Press. (1976b) "The Syntax of Causative Constructions: Cross-Language Similarities and Divergences," in Shibatani, ed., The Grammar of Causative Constructions, vol. 6, Academic Press.

DAHL, O.C.

(1951) Malgache et Maanjan. Egede Instituttet, Oslo, Norway.

FERRAND, G.

(1903) Essai de Grammaire Malgache, in Leroux, editor, 28, rue Bonaparte, Paris VI@, France.

GRIFFITHS, D.

(1854) Grammar of the Malagasy Language in the Ankova Dialect, Wfcodbridge, E. Pite, London, England.

JESPERSEN, 0.

(1860-1943) The Philosophy of Grammar. G. Allen & Unwin, London, England, 1963.

KEENAN, E.L.

(1976a) "Remarkable Subjects in Malagasy," in C.N. Li, editor, Subject and Topic. New York: Academic Press, pp 303-334.

682

KEENAN, E.L.

(1976b) "Toward a Universal Definition of Subject," in C.N. Li, ed., Subject and Topic. New York: Academic Press, 303-334.

KEENAN, E.L. and B. Comrie (1977) "Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar," Linguistic Inquiry VIII (1): 63-100.

KUNO, S.

(1972) "Pronominalization, Reflexivization and Direct Discourse," Linguistic Inquiry 3, 161-196.

KUNO, S.

(1975) "Three Perspectives in the Functional Approach to Syntax," Papers in the Parasession on Functionalism, April 17, 1975, Chicago Linguistic Society, 276-336.

IANGACKER, R.L.(1969) "On Pronominalization and the Chain of Command," in D.A. Reibel and S.A. Schane, eds, Modern Studies in English: Readings in Transformational Grammar. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

MALZAC, A.

(1908) Graramaire Malgache, Mission Catholique Tananarive, Madagascar.

MARDIRDSSIAN, G.(1975) "Noun Incorporation in Universal Grammar," Chicago Linguistic Society 11: 383-9.

683

PARKER,G. (1883) Concise Grammar of the Malagasy Language, Trubner and Company, 57 and 59, Ludgate Hill, London, England.

PERIMmER, D. (1968) Deep and Surface Constraints in Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT doctoral dissertation.

POSTAL, M.P.

(1974) On Raising. Hie MIT Press.

RABENILAINA, R. (1974) Description Morphosyntaxique du Bara, vol. 1, unpublished Doctorat du 3lme Cycle, Tananarive-Bordeaux, Madagascar-France.

RAJAONA, S.

(1972) Structure du Malgache, Ambozontany, Fianarantsoa, Madagascar.

ROSS, J.R.

(1967) "On the Cyclic Nature of English Pronominalization," in To Honor Roman Jakobson, Mouton, The Hague, The Netherlands, 1669-82.

SHIBAIANI, M.

(1973) A Linguistic Study of Causative Constructions, unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

SUGITA, H.

(1974) "Comparison of Verb Object Relationships in Micronesian Languages," Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 5, Number 9, October 1973, Department of Linguistics, University of Hawaii.

CHARLES RANDRIAMASIMANANA received his Ph.D. from the University of Southern California in 1981 for the study of the syntax of Malagasy, his native tongue. He is now assistant professor of linguistics at the University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.