[Lingtyp] query: instrument voice

[David Gil]

Matthew,

The reason I don't call it an applicative is that (in most cases) the 
instrumental argument must occur before the verb in a topic-like position.

This can be illustrated with the Roon instrumental prefix /u-/ in the 
following examples:

(1)

	

* Eros-i

	

t-u-karuk

	

ai-i-ya

	

Eros-pers

	

3sg:anim-instr-chop

	

tree-3sg:anim-def

'Eros chopped the tree'

(2)

	

I-seref

	

kaman

	

fa

	

Eros-i

	

t-u-karuk

	

ai-i-ya

	

1sg-look.for

	

axe

	

for

	

Eros-pers

	

3sg:anim-instr-chop

	

tree-3sg:anim-def

'I'm looking for an axe for Eros to chop the tree with'

(3)

	

I-seref

	

kaman

	

Eros-i

	

t-u-karuk

	

ai-i-ya-ri-ya

	

1sg-look.for

	

axe

	

Eros-pers

	

3sg:anim-instr-chop

	

tree-3sg:anim-def-3sg:inan-def

'I'm looking for the axe that Eros chopped the tree with'

Sentence (1) is ungrammatical, and cannot be salvaged by adding a 
postverbal NP or PP referring to the axe; in this respect it differs 
from typical applicative constructions.  In contrast, sentences (2) and 
(3) are fine, because the instrumental prefix /u-/ is licensed by the 
preceding NP /kaman/ referring to the axe.  True, this is not exactly 
the same as how things work in Philippine languages, but it is more like 
Philippine instrumental voice than anything else I can think of 
(including applicatives). In particular, in (3), the instrumental prefix 
is required in order to license relativization (in contrast, 
relativization of other oblique arguments is zero-marked).  To use Paul 
Schachter's terminology, in both (2) and (3), "subjecthood properties" 
seem to be split between the agent (which, as you correctly point out, 
controls agreement) and the instrument.

Very similar patterns obtain in the other Austronesian and 
non-Austronesian languages that I mentioned, which — given the apparent 
rarity of this pattern elsewhere — is strongly suggestive of language 
contact.

David


On 22/02/2022 03:41, Matthew Dryer wrote:
>
> David,
>
> Why would you not say that the instrumental construction in Meyah, 
> Sougb, and Hatam is an applicative, since the A rather than the 
> instrument controls subject agreement?
>
> Matthew
>
> *From: *Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf 
> of David Gil <gil at shh.mpg.de>
> *Date: *Monday, February 21, 2022 at 7:40 PM
> *To: *"lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org" 
> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Subject: *[Lingtyp] query: instrument voice
>
> Dear all,
>
> In the Austronesian languages of Taiwan, Philippines and Madagascar, 
> there is a verbal affix that is said to mark "instrument voice"; 
> loosely speaking, it marks the topic or subject of the clause as 
> bearing the semantic role of instrument.
>
> Is anybody familiar with similar instrument-voice constructions from 
> other parts of the world?
>
> The reason I ask is that a similar construction is present also in 
> some languages of the Bird's Head and Cenderawasih Bay regions of New 
> Guinea, eg. Biak, Roon, Wamesa and Wooi (Austronesian), and Hatam, 
> Sougb, Meyah and Moskona (non-Austronesian). What's curious about this 
> construction is that, unlike the well-known Austronesian cases, it is 
> the only morphologically-marked voice in each of the languages in 
> question; there is no "ordinary" morphological passive construction.  
> My feeling is that this construction is quite uncommon 
> cross-linguistically, but I would like to get a feel for the extent to 
> which this is indeed true.
>
> Thanks,
>
> David
>
> -- 
> David Gil
> Senior Scientist (Associate)
> Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
> Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
> Deutscher Platz 6, Leipzig, 04103, Germany
> Email:gil at shh.mpg.de
> Mobile Phone (Israel): +972-526117713
> Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81344082091

-- 
David Gil

Senior Scientist (Associate)
Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
Deutscher Platz 6, Leipzig, 04103, Germany

Email:gil at shh.mpg.de
Mobile Phone (Israel): +972-526117713
Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81344082091
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20220222/e05334d8/attachment.htm>