argument structure of k'u 'give'
mithun at linguistics.ucsb.edu
Thu Nov 18 18:59:58 UTC 2004
I think one thing we want to keep clear is the fact that the benefactive
prefix is a benefactive applicative, a derivational prefix that alters the
argument structure of the verb stem rather than representing an argument
directly. 'Give' typically doesn't appear with benefactive applicatives,
because it already has a beneficiary in its argument structure.
Applicatives add one. In some languages, applicatives are added only to
intransitive verbs, making them transitive. In others, applicatives can be
added to either intransitives or transitives. In these cases, there are
again two ways to go. The original object/absolutive/patient of the base
transitive can either stick around as an argument, or be displaced, ending
up as some kind of oblique or adjunct or 'chômeur'. The interesting thing
is that in a lot of situations, like here, it can be hard to tell what
happened, because inanimates are not represented on the verb by pronominal
affixes anyway. So Regina's example is especially nifty!
--On Thursday, November 18, 2004 11:44 AM -0700 ROOD DAVID S
<rood at spot.Colorado.EDU> wrote:
> Jan's question about whether we can also use two objects of other persons
> is an important one here. Are "nimak'upi" and/or "manic'upi" possible?
> What about something like uNnic'upi 'they gave you to us/they gave us to
> you' (the expected reading of this one, of course, is 'we gave it to
> you'). It also occurs to me to wonder whether the verb la 'ask for' works
> like k'u. Can one say wicha-ma-la-pi 'they asked me for you'? (I think
> this 'for' is not benefactive, but rather that the verb means 'ask to
> have', doesn't it? If so, then we have a possible two-object verb
> without "benefactive" as one of the core argument roles.)
> David S. Rood
> Dept. of Linguistics
> Univ. of Colorado
> 295 UCB
> Boulder, CO 80309-0295
> rood at colorado.edu
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Jan Ullrich wrote:
>> I have been musing about the wicha-ma-k'u-pi for some time. In fact, I
>> posted on this verb form on 29 February 2000, but it didn't arouse much
>> interest on the list.
>> I encountered it in the following sentence:
>> Tona wicha'mak?u kiN hena' waNzhi'ni wauN'mni kte shni.
>> > From those he gave me I shall lose none.
>> However, the previous sentence of the same text says:
>> Ate tona mak?u kiN hena' oyas?iN el mau'pi kte.
>> All of those that my father gave me will come to me.
>> In both instances the object is animate according to the context.
>> At that time I finally came to a conclusion the wicha'mak?u was some
>> sort of error. Mainly because the text was a translation from English
>> (Buechel's Lakota translation of Bible History) and I believe the
>> results of translations are often unidiomatic. And also, because the use
>> of mak?u for 'he gave them to me' is frequent and common, while I could
>> only one occurrence of wicha'mak?u in this meaning.
>> Therefore I am very surprised by Linda's Assiniboin sentence with
>> wicha'mak?u of the same reading. I always get mak?u from speakers when
>> eliciting sentences like "he gave me two horses" (ShuNkawakhaN nuNpa
>> I also found wicha'mak?u with the meaning "they gave ME to them" as in
>> the sentence recorded by Regina:
>> Thoka'mayaNpi thawa'chiNpi kiN en wicha'mak?u shni wo.
>> = Don't give me to the will of my enemies.
>> This time it is from Riggs/Renvile's Dakota translation of Bible.
>> Riggs/Renvile use mak?u consistently for 'he gave THEM to me'.
>> There is another suspicious verbal form of this kind in Buechel's
>> biblical translation:
>> nima'kahipi = they brought you to me.
>> So I wonder what would be used for expressing "they gave YOU to me" and
>> "they gave ME to you"
>> Would it be nimak'upi and manic'upi respectively, or would one or both of
>> these forms be considered ungrammatical and some other structure would be
>> > lcumberl at indiana.edu
>> > Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 3:12 AM
>> > To: siouan at lists.colorado.edu
>> > Subject: Re: argument structure of k'u 'give'
>> > Quoting ROOD DAVID S <rood at spot.Colorado.EDU>:
>> > >
>> > > Could it also mean 'they were given to me'?
>> > I have this in my data for Asb:
>> > pusapina wiNc^ha-ma-k'u-pi 'they gave me the kittens'
>> > Linda
>> > ---
>> > Pøíchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry.
>> > Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz).
>> > Verze: 6.0.795 / Virová báze: 539 - datum vydání: 12.11.2004
>> Odchozí zpráva neobsahuje viry.
>> Zkontrolováno antivirovým systémem AVG (http://www.grisoft.cz).
>> Verze: 6.0.795 / Virová báze: 539 - datum vydání: 12.11.2004
More information about the Siouan