Case marking in some Dravidian languages

[Peri Bhaskararao]

VYAKARAN: South Asian Languages and Linguistics Net
Editors:  Tej K. Bhatia, Syracuse University, New York
          John Peterson, University of Osnabrueck, Germany
Details:  Send email to listserv at listserv.syr.edu and say: INFO VYAKARAN
Subscribe:Send email to listserv at listserv.syr.edu and say:
          SUBSCRIBE VYAKARAN FIRST_NAME LAST_NAME
          (Substitute your real name for first_name last_name)
Archives: http://listserv.syr.edu

I am sure the discussants on this issue have seen the earlier work on
'Contact and Causation in Hindi' by Anuradha Saxena (both in her paper
in Language and in her book from UCLA).

Bhaskararao

--
***********************************
[Please note the new address of our Institute (given below)]
---------------
Prof. Peri Bhaskararao, Ph.D.
ILCAA, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
Asahi-cho 3-11-1
Fuchu-shi
Tokyo, 183-8534
Japan
Phone & Fax: +81-42-330-5686
************************************


Coelho wrote:

> VYAKARAN: South Asian Languages and Linguistics Net
> Editors:  Tej K. Bhatia, Syracuse University, New York
>          John Peterson, University of Osnabrueck, Germany
> Details:  Send email to listserv at listserv.syr.edu and say: INFO VYAKARAN
> Subscribe:Send email to listserv at listserv.syr.edu and say:
>          SUBSCRIBE VYAKARAN FIRST_NAME LAST_NAME
>          (Substitute your real name for first_name last_name)
> Archives: http://listserv.syr.edu
>
> Dear Dr. Clements,
>
> This is a second and delayed response to this message (enclosed below)
> about causatives you sent to Vyakaran. I'm working on Betta Kurumba, a
> minority Dravidian language spoken in an area overlapping the Kannada,
> Tamil, and Malayalam areas. This language has similar causative sentences
> to the ones you mention, except that it has a third form as well. The three
> forms are given below; the third contains an instrumental postposition. The
> first implies that Bomman was coerced into grinding the flour; the second
> implies that he had greater scope for volition (sort of assigned to do the
> task, agreed to do the task). In both these, the implication is that Bomman
> himself did the job. In the third, which has the instrumental, Bomman plays
> a role in getting the job done, but he does not necessarily do the job
> himself -- he could either have got someone else to do it or done it
> himself. I therefore see the use of the instrumental as a way of reducing
> the role of the causee.
>
> 1)      nawI bommIn-a ma:wI yari-si-s-IdI
>         1SG.NOM Bomman-ACC. flour grind-CAUS-PAST-SG.
>         I made Bomman grind the flour.
>
> 2)      nawI bommIn-a ma:wI yar-pisi-s-IdI
>         1SG.NOM Bomman-ACC. flour grind-CAUS-PAST-SG.
>         I got Bomman to grind the flour.
>
> 3)      nawI bommIn ipIli ma:wI yar-pisi-s-IdI
>         1SG.NOM Bomman INSTR flour grind-CAUS-PAST-SG.
>         I got the flour ground through Bomman.
>
> There are other verbs with which all 3 forms are not possible, only 2 are
> possible -- either of (1) or (2), plus (3) (the choice of (1) or (2)
> relates to a non-past tense marker actually). With those verbs, the issue
> of coercion vs. volition depends on context or the semantics of the verb.
> The 3rd form (containing the instrumental) is normally used to imply that
> the causer did not necessarily do the task himself. I wonder if that
> applies also to the sentence you have with the instrumental -- that your
> Kannada sentence implies that "I" was the instrument of getting the
> biscuits eaten, but did not necessarily eat them myself ... not sure if it
> works.
>
> Gail Coelho
>
>> At 04:09 PM 12/27/01 -0500, J. Clancy Clements wrote:
>>
>>> In Kannada, one finds the dative relation marked by the dative or the
>>> instrumental suffix, as in the examples below.
>>>
>>> Avanu-0 nana-ge bisket-annu tin-is-id-anu
>>> 3SG-NOM 1SG-DAT biscuit-ACC eat-CAUS-PAST-3SG-MASC
>>> 'He fed me the biscuit.'
>>>
>>> Avanu-0 nana-inda bisket-annu tin-is-id-anu
>>> 3SG-NOM 1SG-INST biscuit-ACC eat-CAUS-PAST-3SG-MASC
>>> 'He had me eat a biscuit.'
>>>
>>> This is the type of marking I'm interested in.
>>>
>>>
>>> My questions are:
>>> 1) Regarding Malayalam, is there a difference in meaning (e.g.
>>> logical or
>>> conversational implicatures) between marking an indirect object with a
>>> dative or comitative marker?  If so, how would one describe the
>>> difference?
>>>
>>> 2) Does Tamil have this type of marking, where the indirect object is
>>> marked by a dative suffix or by an instrumental or comitative
>>> suffix?  If
>>> so, are there differences in meaning expressing by using one or the
>>> other
>>> marker?  If so, how would one describe them?
>>>
>>> 3) Does Telegu also have this type of marking??
>>>
>>> Any information on these questions would be greatly appreciated.
>>>
>>> Thanks very much,
>>>
>>>
>>> Clancy Clements
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>                 *********************************************
>>>                 J. Clancy Clements
>>>                 Associate Professor of Spanish and Portuguese
>>>                 Adjunct Associate Professor of Linguistics
>>>                 Director of Undergraduate Studies
>>>                 Dept. of Spanish and Portuguese, BH844, IU-B
>>>                 1020 East Kirkwood Avenue
>>>                 Bloomington, IN 47405
>>>                 Tel 812-855-8612; Fax 812-855-4526
>>>                 http://www.indiana.edu/~spanport/clements.html
>>>                 *********************************************
>>
>
>


--
***********************************
[Please note the new address of our Institute (given below)]
---------------
Prof. Peri Bhaskararao, Ph.D.
ILCAA, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
Asahi-cho 3-11-1
Fuchu-shi
Tokyo, 183-8534
Japan
Phone & Fax: +81-42-330-5686
************************************