Active & stative verbs in biclausal sentences.

[bi1 at soas.ac.uk]

I know it doesn't quite answer your question, but even if you do
mention the deer in that type of sentence, I think you would often put in
is^ or ins^ or ins^ eya following deer as a change of subject na thah^ca
ki ins^ eya lila watukha.  However Violet and others may be able to
confirm or correct this
Bruce

Date sent:      	Thu, 12 Feb 2004 14:15:29 -0800
Send reply to:  	siouan at lists.colorado.edu
From:           	Shannon West <shanwest at uvic.ca>
To:             	siouan at lists.colorado.edu
Subject:        	Re: Active & stative verbs in biclausal
sentences.

> Rankin, Robert L wrote:
>
> > So, in the language(s) YOU are studying, can
> >you have something like:
> >
> >1.  I ran fast and am very tired.  (two conjugated verbs)
> >
> >And, then, in the sentence:
> >
> >2.  The boy chased the deer and (X) was very tired.
> >
> >Would the sentence, without any noun or pronoun mentioned for X, mean
> >"the boy chased the deer and he (the boy) was very tired" OR would it
> >mean "The boy chased the deer and he (the deer) was very tired."?  Or
> >would it simply remain ambiguous?  How do speakers treat this?
> >
> >These are things I should know, but I don't.  Anyone have answers here?
> >
> >Bob
> >
> >
> In Nakoda, my consultant would not allow the object of the first clause
> to be the subject of the second, regardless of the verb class. So
> sentences like (2) are never ambiguous to her. The only way you could
> get that the deer was tired was to put in an emphatic pronoun, a big
> pause and the consideration that the deer was old information. Even then
> she didn't overly like the construction.
>
> Even sentences like "The man insulted the woman and then (x) sulked"
> always read that the subject of the first clause was the subject of the
> second. It helped motivate my argument that there is a VP in Nakoda.
>
> Shannon
>