[Lingtyp] valence markers and wide scope

David Inman davinman at uw.edu
Tue Apr 16 04:24:20 UTC 2019

At least the passive morpheme can do this in Nuuchahnulth (nuk) in "serial
verb constructions," which I think are (perhaps banally) zero-coordination,
but with some other syntactic features. There's three patterns. First,
there can be a single passive marker which scopes over both verbs:

(1) hišimy̓uʔap̓aƛ̓atuk ʔaniicsʔaƛ p̓atquk, m̓uč̓ičtup
hišimy̓uƛ=!ap=!aƛ*=!at*=uk ʔana-iics=!aƛ p̓atquk, m̓uč̓ičtup
gather.together.PERF=CAUS=now*=PASS*=POSS only-carry=now belongings
"They were made to have gathered together and carried their belongings and

Second, there can be a single passive morpheme that scopes over the first
verb but the second verb is not notionally passive:

(2) hiniic̓aƛ̓at ʔucačiƛ ʕaaḥuusʔatḥ ʔaḥʔaaʔaƛ maʔiłukʔi
hiniic=!aƛ=*!at* ʔucačiƛ ʕaaḥuusʔatḥ ʔaḥʔaaʔaƛ maʔił=uk=ʔi
carry=now=*PASS* go.to.PERF Ahousaht and house=POSS=ARTICLE
'She was carried and brought to Ahousaht and his house."

In this case "go to Ahousaht" is not I think passivized. That is, the
subject of "be carried" is a null third person 'her' and the subject of "go
to" is the same her, and its object is "Ahousaht (and his house)."

The final case is the passive being "copied" over to other verbs in the
clause, even if they are intransitive or the passive does not normally
apply. Cases (1) and (2) are somewhat marked by comparison to (3) below,
which is more typical..

(3) ƛawiičʔats łuučm̓uupukqs hiłʔat c̓uumaʕaas
ƛaw-iičiƛ=*!at*=s łuučm̓uup=uk=qas hił=*!at* c̓uumaʕaas
be.near-PERF*=PASS*=1sg sister=POSS=DEF.1sg be.at=*PASS* Port.Alberni
"My sister came to me at Port Alberni (to visit)."

The verb hił "be at" is presumably not notionally passive, since the
subject of passivized "be near" (=approached by) is 1SG - I was approached
by - and "be at" still takes its normal location object "Port Alberni." (I
am still at Port Alberni, Port Alberni is not at me.) I analyze this as
essentially passive concord across verbs.

I'm curious if there's any of this morpheme doubling in the pattern you're
seeing in Chacobo.

David Inman
PhD Candidate
University of Washington Linguistics

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 7:26 PM Adam James Ross Tallman <
ajrtallman at utexas.edu> wrote:

> Hello everyone,
> I'm wondering if anyone has come across cases of
> valence morphemes/derivations described as "affixes" or "clitics" that can
> have wide-scope over coordinated verbs, like in English (imagining the
> passive is just marked by "was").
> "The monkey was lifted up and untied (by his mother)"
> but where the passive morpheme is analyzed as an affix or a clitic (by
> someone) - presumably in such cases there would be no "government" of the
> verb forms as there is in English.
> I've found in Chacobo the bound affix/clitics vary in terms of whether
> they can have wide scope depending on the type of coordinate/subordinate
> construction, and right now the difference seems to be a somewhat arbitrary
> structural fact (indeed I just analyze it as a difference in the "size" of
> the constituent being coordinated).
> But I have a suspicion that there is something else about the semantics of
> valency and its relationship to wide-scope, so any pointers would be very
> appreciated.
> best,
> Adam
> --
> Adam J.R. Tallman
> PhD, University of Texas at Austin
> Investigador del Museo de Etnografía y Folklore, la Paz
> ELDP -- Postdoctorante
> CNRS -- Dynamique Du Langage (UMR 5596)
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20190415/74f4fecb/attachment.htm>

More information about the Lingtyp mailing list