Download tpt_Passive - SIL International

International Conference on Mesoamerican Linguistics
California State University, Fullerton. February 22-23, 2013
The Tlachichilco Tepehua
“passive” and its functions
James K Watters
SIL International
from Brown, Beck, et al. 2011:333
WALS, Chapter 107: Passive
Constructions (Anna Siewierska)
A construction has been classified as passive if
it displays the following five properties:
• it contrasts with another construction,
the active;
• the construction displays some special
morphological marking of the verb;
WALS, Chapter 107: Passive
Constructions (Anna Siewierska)
• the subject of the active corresponds to a nonobligatory oblique phrase of the passive or is
not overtly expressed;
• the subject of the passive, if there is one,
corresponds to the direct object of the active;
• the construction is pragmatically restricted
relative to the active.
World Atlas of Linguistic Structures
Totonac-Tepehua -kan
Highland Totonac, Aschmann & Wonderly 1952:
If a verb is unmarked for person, “the subject is implicitly
third person, singular and identified [i.e. definite].”
e.g., paʃiː-y “s/he/it bathes him/her/it.”
bathe-IPF
Totonac-Tepehua -kan
Highland Totonac, Aschmann & Wonderly 1952 (cont)ː
-kan “marks unidentified character of the third person
subject, replacing the identified meaning implicit in the
verb stem. It may follow either intransitive or transitive
stems.” (135-36) e.g.,
paʃiː-kan “someone bathes him/her/it.”
bathe-USBJ(IPF)
-kan in Totonac-Tepehua
Coatepec Totonacː
McQuown ([1940]1990) noted that -kan is “un afijo que
señala un sujeto indefinido”
paːʃkiː-y
love-IPF
“lo quiere”
paːʃkiː-kan “lo quiere uno” (161-3)
love-USBJ(IPF)
“Mackay (1999) argues that the suffix –kan…
from Misantla Totonac is an indefinite subject
suffix, since the notional object is represented
by an object prefix.
“But she notes that, in the closely related
language Tepehua, the notional object is
represented on the verb by subject affixes
rather than object affixes with verbs bearing
this suffix, arguing that it is a passive in
Tepehua.” (Keenan and Dryer 2006)
-kan in Misantla Totonac
(Mackay 1999:191,2)
“In sentences which lack any overt indication of
a subject, /-kan/ ‘I.S.’ serves to indicate that
the subject of the verb is indefinite or
unspecified… In Tepehua, Watters (1988) has
found that when /-kan/ occurs on transitive
verbs, the verb takes subject inflection to mark
the notional object, as would be expected in a
passive construction. In Misantla Totonac this
never happens.”
the –kan construction…
In Totonac languages, if the undergoer is first or
third person, the verb is inflected for first or third
object, as one would expect in an impersonal
construction.
the –kan construction…
However, for Totonac languages other than
Misantla, if the undergoer (the notional object) is
second person, the verb is inflected for second
person subject—the object is apparently
“advanced to subject,” as one would expect in a
passive construction.
Totonac of Filomena Mata
(McFarland 2009)
a) laaqtsin-k'ḁ
see-USBJ\2SBJ(PFV)
“You saw yourself.” or “You were seen.”
b) kaa-laaqtsin-kḁ
OBJ.PL-see-USBJ(PFV) (Filomena Mata Totonac; McFarland
2009:188)
“They saw themselves.” or ”Someone saw them.”
Here, for the “indefinite subject” in Totonac
“… the ‘someone does X’ gloss is formally
appropriate; that is, in the sentence ‘someone
sees me’, for example, the verb ‘see’ is inflected
with the first person object prefix and with –kan.
However, verbs in –kan with second person
subjects take 2nd person subject markers, have
the formal characteristics of an atypical passive,
and are more appropriately glossed as, for
example, ‘you are seen’.” [my emphasis]
(McFarland 2009:206)
Upper Necaxa Totonac (Beck 2004)
kin–tuks–kán-Ø
1OBJ–hit–IDF–
IMPF
‘I was hit’
‘I hit myself’
——
tuks–kán–å
hit–IDF–
2SG.SUBJ:IMPF
‘you were hit
‘you hit yourself’
Ø–tuks–kán–Ø
3OBJ–hit–IDF–
IMPF
‘s/he was hit
‘s/he hit
her/himself’
Ø–kA–tuks–kán–Ø
3OBJ–PL.OBJ–
hit–IDF-IMPF
‘they were hit
‘they hit
themselves’
Filomena Mata Totonac:
kin-kaa-laaqtsin-kan-ni
1OBJ-OJB.PL-see-USBJ-2OBJ
“Someone sees us.” or “We see ourselves.”
(McFarland 2009:188)
Tlachichilco Tepehua:
k-laqts’in-kan-a-w
1SBJ-see-USBJ-IPF-1PL
“We are seen.” or “We see ourselves.” (Watters
1988)
Common Tepehua verb inflection for
subject
Subject
sing.
1
2
3
Object
plural
kʔ
Ø
sing.
1
2
3
(k-) -w
ʔ -t’ik
ta-
plural
kin-n
Ø
kin-ta-…-w
ta-…-n
lak-
extension of reflexive to passive
Langacker 1976; Langacker & Munro 1975
S
N
N
S
V
N
N
V
x
x
Δ
x
“in both configurations, the subject and direct object are nondistinct” (801)
-kan constructions
with intransitives (Tlachichilco):
ʔantʃa ʔalin-kan
“someone’s there”
there exist-USBJ(IPF)
ʔakamin-kan tehkan haːntu ka-p’aʃ-t’i
smell-USBJ(IPF) when NEG IRR-bathe-2SBJ
“one really smells when you don’t bathe”
-kan constructions
with intransitives (Pisaflores):
ʔan láka čaʔaʔ wíilá-ka-ɬ
DET PREP casa sentado-SI-PFV
“En la casa hay gente.”
(MacKay and Trechsel 2010)
-kan constructions
with transitives (Tlachichilco):
reflexive
laqts’in-k’an
(me-ʔeman)
see-USBJ/2SBJ(IPF) (2POSS-self)
“you are seen” “you see yourself”
nonreflexive: impersonal or passive?
hun-kan ni ʃaːpay
tell-USBJ(IPF) the man
“the man is told” “the man tells/calls himself”
with transitives (Pisaflores):
nonreflexiveː
k'a-la'ts'in-k'an-t'it
IRR-see-USBJ-2PLSBJ
“(that) you(pl) may be seen”
k'a-ʃt'aʔ-ni-k'an-a'i-t'it
IRR-give-DAT-USBJ-FUT-̊2PLSBJ
“you(pl) will be given it”
kin-ta-la'ts'in-kan-a-n
1OBJ-3PL-see-USBJ-IPF-2OBJ
“we are seen”
functions of –kan construction
deverbal nominals (Watters 1996)ː
action
ʔiʃ-maqniː-ka p’aʃni
“the killing of a pig”
3POS-kill-USBJ(NOM) pig
object
ʔiʃ-paː-maqniː-kan p’aʃni
3POS-INS-kill-USBJ(NOM) pig
“killing instrument of a pig”
Functions of –kan : unknown or irrelevant
subject
Tauncha julchan laqataun p'axni junil
one
day
one
pig
said.to
ni burro: “¿Vali'iycha kos saqnancha
the
burro
why
very gather.firewood
y jantu mast'akni-k'an?
and not make.rest-USBJ(2SBJ)
One day a pig said to the burroː “Why do you get
firewood so much and you aren’t made to rest?”
Functions of –kan : unknown subject
”Kit'in jantu aqtaun k-mapatsa-kan.
I
neg once
Si ox k-vava-kan”
1SBJ-use-USBJ
va naul ni p'axni.
always good 1SBJ-feed-USBJ
FOC said the pig.
“I’m never made to work. I’m always fed well,” the pig said.
functions of –kan construction
participant identification, as in quotation
formulas:
…waː naw-ɬ yuː maːnaːvin ni kuxtu,
FOC say-PFV the owner the cornfield
waː hun-ka-ɬ
ni ʃanati.
FOC tell-USBJ-PFV the woman.
“The cornfield owner told the woman.”
Lit: “The cornfield owner said, the woman was
told.”
functions of –kan construction:
topic chains (“switch function”)
‘Yes, I’m cooking,’ says the girl.
‘Sit down,’ the woman is told[-kan], was set[-kan] a
chair and then sat down.
The girl was cooking real nice tortillas, she makes
everything that she takes to the cornfield, she put it in
(a basket); she put in mole and turkey, and then she
began to be gossiped to [-kan], is told[-kan] words
that are not true.’ (see discussion of this example in
Van Valin 2005:104-5)
distinguishing passives and
impersonals
…the near-universal recognition of passives and
the corresponding neglect of impersonals
introduce a tacit descriptive bias in favor of
passives. Constructions that occupy the
communicative niche associated with the
passive are often treated as passives, even
when they differ from passives in respects that
are clearly noted in the traditional, specialist,
and pedagogical literature. (Blevins 2003)
Is verb inflection for person decisive?
Legate 2012 argues that Acehnese has a
true passive construction, in which “the
raised object...behaves as a grammatical
subject”(506), even though the “verbal
prefix bears... features of the (implicit)
agent.” (521)
Syntactic test?
the infinitive construction
ʔa-ɬ ʔiː-niʔ ni stapu [subj-control of the infinitive]
go-PFV get-INF the beans
“s/he went to get the beans”
*ʔan-ka-ɬ
ʔiː-ni ni stapu
go-USBJ-PFV get-INF the beans
ʔan-ka-ɬ
[NP ʔiʃ-ʔiː-ka
ni stapu]
go-USBJ-PFV 3POS-get-USBJ(NOM) the beans
“the getting of the beans was gone for”
Morphosyntactic test?
the desiderative
Tlachichilco:
k-ʔi:-putun-kan
1SBJ-get/buy-DES-USBJ(IPV)
“I want to be bought [married]” (preferred rdg.)
“I’m wanted to be bought [married].”
lak-ʔi:-putun-kan
3OBJ-get/buy-DES-USBJ(IPV)
“They want to be bought [married]” (preferred rdg.)
“They are wanted to be bought”
Tepehua: Pisaflores and Tlachichilco
Pisaflores:
kin-ta-laʔts'in-kan-a:-n
1OBJ-3PL-see-USBJ-IPF-2OBJ
“We are seen.”
Tlachichilcoː
k-laqts'in-kan-a-w
1SBJ-see-USBJ-IPF-1PL
“We are seen.” (Pisaflores: OK, dispreferred)
Tepehua: Pisaflores and Tlachichilco
Pisaflores:
k-laʔts'in-kan-aː-w
ki-ʔakstu-k’an
1SBJ-see-USBJ-IPF-1PL 1POS-self-PLPOS
“We see ourselves.”
Tlachichilcoː
k-laqts'in-kan-aː-w
ki-ʔaman-k’an
1SBJ-see-USBJ-IPF-1PL 1POS-self-PLPOS
“We see ourselves.”
When –kan “IDF” occurs on a transitive verb, the
undergoer is marked by…
general Totonac &sing.
Pisaflores
1
2
3
Tlach.Tepehua sing.
1
2
3
plural
kin- OBJ (kin-ta…-w OBJ)*
ʔ SBJ
(ʔ -t’ik SBJ)*
Ø
lak- OBJ
plural
k-/kin- SBJ or OBJ (k-) –w SBJ
ʔ SBJ
ʔ -t’ik SBJ
Ø
lak- OBJ
*in Northern Totonac, -kan does not occur with 1pl or 2pl
Totonac:
Misantla
OBJ
OBJ
OBJ
Other
OBJ
SBJ
OBJ
OBJ
OBJ
SBJ
OBJ
Tepehua
Pisaflores:
OBJ
SBJ
Tlachichilco:
SBJ/OBJ SBJ
SBJ
OBJ/SBJ
SBJ
OBJ
SBJ
OBJ
Is it a passive?
In Tlachichilco Tepehua, -kan may occur on
• intransitives, marking an impersonal
construction
• transitives, marking a reflexive, or on
• transitives, marking a passive construction, as
seen by inflection for person and some
tentative syntactic evidence.
For Pisaflores Tepehua, -kan may simply mark
“unspecified subject” rather than “passive”
Some final observations
The inflection of verbs for person in the
Totonac-Tepehua family, differ along a
hierarchy reported elsewhere in the family
(Beck 2003, Watters 1988:311-13):
2
>
1
>
3
more likely
less likely
to be surface subject
Additional evidence for 2 > 1,3:
Tepehua directionals: neutralization of
proximal vs. distal with 2nd person subject
family-wide irregularity in 2nd person motion
verbs, perhaps from suppletion across
paradigms “come” and “go”
References
Aschmann, Herman and William L. Wonderly. 1952. Affixes and implicit categories in Totonac verb inflection. International Journal of American
Linguistics 18:130-145
Beck, David. 2003. Person-hierarchies and the origin of asymmetries in Totonac verbal paradigms. Linguistica Atlantica 23, 35 – 68.
--------2004. A Grammatical Sketch of Upper Necaxa Totonac. LINCOM: Europa.
Blevins, James P. 2003. Passives and impersonals. J. Linguistics 39, 473–520.
Cecil H. Brown, David Beck, Grzegorz Kondrak, James K. Watters, Søren Wichmann. 2011. Totozoquean International Journal of American
Linguistics, 77. 3 323-372.
Dryer, Matthew S. & Haspelmath, Martin (eds.). 2011. The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Munich:
Max Planck Digital Library. Available online at http://wals.info/ Accessed on 2013-02-17.
Keenan, Edward L. and Matthew S. Dryer. 2007. Passive in the world’s languages.. In
Timothy Shopen, Language Typology and Syntactic Description: Volume 1. 325-361. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Langacker, R.W. and P. Munro. 1975. Passives and their meaning. Language 51:789-830.
Langacker, R.W. 1976. Non-Distinct Arguments in Uto-Aztecan. Berkeley: University of California.
Legate, Julie Anne. 2012. Subjects in Acehnese and the nature of the passive. Language 88:495-525.
MacKay, Carolyn J. 1999. A grammar of Misantla Totonac. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
MacKay, Carolyn J. and Frank R. Trechsel. 2010. Tepehua de Pisaflores, Veracruz. México: El Colegio de México.
McFarland, Teresa Ann. 2009. The phonology and morphology of Filomeno Mata Totonac.
Dissertation, UC Berkeley.
McQuown, Norman A. 1990. Gramática de la lengua totonaca. (Coatepec). México: UNAM
Van Valin, R. 2005. Exploring the syntax-semantics interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Watters, James K. 1988. Topics in Tepehua grammar. Dissertation, UC Berkeley.
-------1996. The interpretation of deverbal nominals in Tepehua. In Masayoshi Shibatani and
Sandra A. Thompson eds., Grammatical Constructions: Their form and meaning. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.