- 1 I owe the original idea about the diachronic source of the “double object” construction to Denis Cr (...)
- 2 I will understand causative in the broad sense (“causatives sensu latiore” in (Kulikov 2001: 888–8 (...)
- 3 Gban (gbá̰; ISO 639-3 code: ggu, Glottocode: gagu1242) is a South Mande language spoken by ca. 60 (...)
1In this paper, I will present a description of the different ways in which causative2 can be expressed in Gban.3 Particular attention will be paid to the productive causative derivation with the suffix ‑kà and the associated “double object” construction. In considering these phenomena, I will adopt a primarily descriptive stance. Terminologically and theoretically, the description largely follows (Kulikov 2001) and (Dixon 2000).
2The paper is structured as follows. In Section 1, I give an overview of the ways of expressing causative in Gban: lexically, including suppletive pairs and lability (1.1), suffixally (1.2), and periphrastically (1.4). In 1.3, I provide a typological characteristic to the morphological subsystem of expressing (anti)causative in Gban based on (Haspelmath 1993). In Section 2, causative suffixation is discussed in more detail. In 2.1, I describe its morphological aspects: form, productivity, and combinability. In 2.2, I describe its semantics: different types of causation that can be expressed by suffixal causatives. And in 2.3, I describe the observed argument coding patterns, including the “double object” construction and its properties (2.3.2). In 2.4, I propose a diachronic hypothesis for the origins of the causative derivation that can explain the emergence of the “double object” construction.
- 4 As can be seen from the examples, gà ‘die’ cannot be used transitively (i.e. it is not labile), n (...)
- 5 A peculiarity of the latter pair is that the anticausative member is already transitive: ‘learn so (...)
3Gban manifests at least two purely lexical (suppletive) causative-anticausative pairs: gà ‘die’ vs. zɛ̀ ‘kill’, illustrated below,4 and gɔ̰̋ ‘try; learn’ vs. gḭ̏ ‘show; teach’.5
- 6 Gban has four level tones and two contour tones: ultra-high (a̋), high (á), low (à), and ultra-l (...)
|
(1a)
|
Ba̋ba̋
|
ɛ́
|
gà.6
|
|
ram
|
3sg\pst
|
die[pfv.hod]
|
4‘The ram died.’
|
(1b)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
ɛ́
|
ba̋ba̋
|
zɛ̀
|
/ *gà
|
/ *gà‑kȁ.
|
|
Soku
|
3sg\pst
|
ram
|
kill[pfv.hod]
|
die[pfv.hod]
|
die‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
5‘Soku killed the ram.’
- 7 It is the number of confirmed anticausative-labile verbs in a studied sample of several dozen verb (...)
6At least for 19 verbs,7 causative-anticausative lability is attested:
|
(2a)
|
Wè
|
wṵ̋
|
ɛ́
|
ylé.
|
|
animal
|
oil
|
3sg\pst
|
melt[pfv.hod]
|
7‘The fat melted (in the sun).’
|
(2b)
|
Mɔ̰̈bì
|
ɛ́
|
wè
|
wṵ̋
|
ylé.
|
|
Monbi
|
3sg\pst
|
animal
|
oil
|
melt[pfv.hod]
|
8‘Monbi melted the fat.’
|
(3a)
|
Vle̋
|
ɛ́
|
gò.
|
|
door
|
3sg\pst
|
open[pfv.hod]
|
9‘The door opened.’
|
(3b)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
ɛ́
|
vle̋
|
gò.
|
|
Soku
|
3sg\pst
|
door
|
open[pfv.hod]
|
10‘Soku opened the door.’
|
(4a)
|
Lȁdíó
|
ɛ́
|
wi̋.
|
|
radio
|
3sg\pst
|
break[pfv.hod]
|
11‘The radio broke.’
|
(4b)
|
Jȁlȅ
|
ɛ́
|
lȁdíó
|
wi̋.
|
|
Diale
|
3sg\pst
|
radio
|
break[pfv.hod]
|
12‘Diale broke the radio.’
- 8 It should be noted that it is indeed not always easy to distinguish between a passive and an antic (...)
13It should also be mentioned — although this phenomenon no longer pertains to the domain of causativity — that active-passive lability (Letuchij 2009; Creissels 2014) has also been observed, for at least 17 verbs. In passive uses of such verbs, the agent participant is not (and cannot be) expressed in Gban.8 Some examples of passive-labile verbs are given in (5)–(7):
|
(5a)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
ɛ́
|
kwa̰̋wȍɛ̏
|
kṵ̋.
|
|
Soku
|
3sg\pst
|
thief
|
catch[pfv.hod]
|
14‘Soku caught the thief.’
|
(5b)
|
Kwa̰̋wȍɛ̏
|
ɛ́
|
kṵ̋.
|
|
thief
|
3sg\pst
|
catch[pfv.hod]
|
15‘The thief got caught / was caught.’
|
(6a)
|
Ú
|
zǐ
|
bè
|
/ flà.
|
|
1pl\pst
|
sauce
|
eat[pfv.hod]
|
lick[pfv.hod]
|
16‘We ate (/ lapped up) the sauce.’
- 9 Henceforth, a superscript “OK” before an example indicates that the entire example was constructed (...)
|
(6b)
|
OK Zǐ
|
ɛ́
|
bè
|
/ flà.9
|
|
sauce
|
3sg\pst
|
eat[pfv.hod]
|
lick[pfv.hod]
|
17‘The sauce was eaten (/ lapped up).’
|
(7a)
|
Ɔ́
|
sa̋
|
gḭ̏
|
Zá̰
|
nɛ̰̏.
|
|
3pl\pst
|
house
|
show[pfv.hod]
|
Jean
|
at
|
18‘They (impers.) showed Jean the house.’
|
(7b)
|
Sa̋
|
ɛ́
|
gḭ̏
|
Zá̰
|
nɛ̰̏.
|
|
house
|
3sg\pst
|
show[pfv.hod]
|
Jean
|
at
|
19‘The house was shown to Jean.’
- 10 Cf. Kakabe, where anticausative-labile verbs can also be passive-labile, too (Vydrina 2011: 205).
20In a couple of cases, both types of lability are attested for the same verb, cf. mḭ̋a̰̋ ‘split (tr.) / chop; split (intr.); be split / chopped’ (8a–c), tà ‘close (tr.); close (intr.); be closed’.10
|
(8a)
|
Yűkwȉ
|
ɛ́
|
mḭ̋a̰̋
|
(ȁ
|
blɛ̋
|
nɛ̰̏).
|
|
tree
|
3sg\pst
|
split[pfv.hod]
|
s/he/it
|
self
|
at
|
21‘The wood split (on its own) [e.g. the fruits on the tree had grown too heavy].’
|
(8b)
|
Yűkwȉ
|
ɛ́
|
mḭ̋a̰̋.
|
|
tree
|
3sg\pst
|
split[pfv.hod]
|
22‘The wood was split/chopped [by someone].’
|
(8c)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
yűkwȉ
|
mḭ̋a̰̋.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
tree
|
split[pfv.hod]
|
23‘Jean chopped the wood.’
24Other types of lability (reciprocal, reflexive, or agent-preserving) have not been attested in Gban.
25As was already mentioned, Gban has a productive causative derivational suffix ‑kà/‑kȁ, which will be the main focus of this paper. Let us give here three preliminary illustrations of causative suffixation:
|
(9a)
|
Se̋
|
ɛ́
|
dő.
|
|
fire
|
3sg\pst
|
light_up[pfv.hod]
|
26‘The fire lit up.’
|
(9b)
|
Ḭ̋
|
se̋
|
dő‑kȁ
|
|
1sg\pst
|
fire
|
light_up‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
27‘I lit the fire.’
(suffixal causative from an intransitive non-labile verb).
|
(10a)
|
Mṵ̋
|
dò
|
ɛ́
|
tȅnḭ̋
|
mɛ̰̏.
|
|
person
|
one
|
3sg\pst
|
child
|
beat[pfv.hod]
|
28‘Someone beat the child.’
|
(10b)
|
M
|
a̰̋
|
tȅnḭ̋
|
mɛ̰̏‑kà.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
child
|
beat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
29‘I made him beat the child.’
(suffixal causative from a transitive non-labile verb).
|
(11a)
|
Gbő
|
ɛ́
|
ylɛ̰̀
|
yi̋
|
di̋.
|
|
canoe
|
3sg\pst
|
enter[pfv.hod]
|
water
|
under
|
30‘The canoe sank (lit. ‘entered the water’).’
|
(11b)
|
Mɔ̰̈bì
|
yë
|
ḭ̀
|
mɔ̰́
|
gbő
|
ylɛ̰̀
|
yi̋
|
di̋.
|
|
Monbi
|
3sg\pst
|
I
|
for
|
canoe
|
enter[pfv.hod]
|
water
|
under
|
31‘Monbi sank (lit. ‘[made] enter the water’) my canoe.’
|
(11c)
|
Mɔ̰̈bì
|
yë
|
ḭ̀
|
mɔ̰́
|
gbő
|
ylɛ̰̀-kȁ
|
yi̋
|
di̋.
|
|
Monbi
|
3sg\pst
|
I
|
for
|
canoe
|
enter‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
water
|
under
|
- 11 Such cases of synonymy of labile simplex verbs and causatives will be discussed in more detail in (...)
32‘Monbi sank (lit. ‘made enter the water’) my canoe.’
(suffixal causative from an anticausative-labile verb).11
33All other aspects of causative suffixation, i.e. morphological, semantic, syntactic, and diachronic, will be discussed in detail in Section 2.
- 12 Only morphological means have been considered, leaving out the periphrastic constructions, which w (...)
34This subsection provides a typological characteristic of the morphological12 system of expressing causative/anticausative in Gban, using the methodology from (Haspelmath 1993).
35In Table 1, I give the Gban verbs corresponding to the 31 meaning pairs from (Haspelmath 1993: 97) and their characterization in terms of expression types (causative, labile, suppletive, etc.). The pairs are ordered by decreasing (presumed) likelihood of their spontaneous occurrence according to (Haspelmath 1993: 104) (more on that below).
|
Meaning pair
|
Gban verb(s)
|
Type
|
|
18. ‘boil (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
—
|
—
|
|
25. ‘freeze (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
wlɔ̰̋ / wlɔ̰̋-kȁ
|
C
|
|
29. ‘dry (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
blɛ̏ / blɛ̏-kà
|
C
|
|
1. ‘wake up (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
vòà / vòà-kȁ
|
C
|
|
20. ‘go out/put out’
|
lȉbi̋
|
L
|
|
11. ‘sink (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
—
|
—
|
|
8. ‘learn/teach’
|
gɔ̰̋ / gḭ̏ ~ gɔ̰̋-kȁ
|
S/C
|
|
13. ‘melt (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
ylé (/ ylé-kȁ)
|
L/C
|
|
31. ‘stop (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
dɛ̰̀ / dɛ̰̀-kȁ
|
C
|
|
23. ‘turn (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
lȉ / lȉ-kà
|
C
|
|
26. ‘dissolve (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
—
|
—
|
|
3. ‘burn (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
kȅ / kȅ-kà
|
C
|
|
14. ‘be destroyed/destroy’
|
kpě
|
L
|
|
27. ‘fill (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
fà (/ fà-kȁ)
|
L/C
|
|
22. ‘finish (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
vò / vò-kȁ
|
C
|
|
7. ‘begin (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
—
|
—
|
|
10. ‘spread (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
kpɔ̋ (/ kpɔ̋-kȁ)
|
L/C
|
|
24. ‘roll (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
blǒ tɔ́ (/ blǒ-kȁ tɔ́)
|
L/C
|
|
16. ‘develop (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
—
|
—
|
|
15. ‘get lost/lose’
|
gṵ̀à̰ / gṵ̀à̰-kȁ
|
C
|
|
21. ‘rise/raise’
|
dȉȁ / dȉȁ-kà
|
C
|
|
28. ‘improve (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
lè ɔ̰́ / lè-kȁ (w)ɔ̰́
|
C
|
|
19. ‘rock (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
fȉfi̋ / fȉfi̋-kȁ
|
C
|
|
17. ‘connect (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
dɔ̀ kèɛ̀
|
L
|
|
12. ‘change (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
lȉ zȁȍ / lȉ-kà zȁȍ
|
C
|
|
9. ‘gather (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
bɔ̀ kèɛ̀ / bɔ̀-kȁ kèɛ̀
|
C
|
|
5. ‘open (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
gò
|
L
|
|
2. ‘break (intr./(tr.)’
|
wi̋
|
L
|
|
6. ‘close (intr.)/(tr.)
|
tà
|
L
|
|
30. ‘split (intr.)/(tr.)’
|
mḭ̋a̰̋
|
L
|
|
4. ‘die/kill’
|
gà / zɛ̀
|
S
|
36Table 1. A sample of Gban verbs and their expression types, based on (Haspelmath 1993)
37Comments on Table 1.
381) “C” = causative pair; “L” = [anticausative-]labile verb; “L/C” = both a labile verb and a derived causative verb available; “S” = suppletive pair; “S/C” = both a suppletive verb and a derived causative verb available.)
392) For the meaning pairs marked with “—”, no suitable verbal equivalents have been attested. For example, ‘begin’ is expressed in Gban by a fixed “noun + verb” combination bò bɛ̋ <head take>, in which the patient is expressed within the NP headed by bò (cf. Bȅa̋ bò ɛ́ bɛ̋ ‘The work began’, lit. ‘The head of the work was taken’ and Kȁȍkḭ̏lè ɛ́ bȅa̋ bò bɛ̋ ‘The farmer started the work’, lit. ‘The farmer took the head of the work’). ‘Boil’ and ‘dissolve’ are translated with similar expressions. ‘Sink’ is translated as lit. ‘(make) enter water’, cf. (11). For ‘develop’, the closest attested equivalent is ‘change [not necessarily for the better]’.
- 13 Non-directed pairs are all pairs except causative and anticausative (directed) ones: labile, equip (...)
40The counts for different expression types and their ratios in Gban are as follows: 26 total, 0 A[nticausative], 15.5 C[ausative], 0 E[quipollent], 9 L[abile], 1.5 S[uppletive]; A/C = 0; % non-dir[ected]13 = 40.
- 14 It seems that M. Haspelmath used 0.5 instead of zeros in all A/C calculations to avoid dividing by (...)
|
total
|
A
|
C
|
E
|
L
|
S
|
A/C14
|
%non-dir.
|
|
Russian
|
31
|
23
|
0
|
5
|
0
|
3
|
46.00
|
26
|
|
German
|
31
|
14.5
|
0
|
4
|
11.5
|
1
|
29.00
|
53
|
|
Greek
|
31
|
13.5
|
0
|
0
|
16.5
|
1
|
27.00
|
56
|
|
Rumanian
|
30
|
24
|
1
|
0
|
3
|
2
|
24.00
|
17
|
|
French
|
31
|
20.50
|
2
|
0
|
7.5
|
1
|
10.25
|
27
|
|
Lithuanian
|
31
|
17.5
|
6
|
6
|
0.5
|
1
|
2.92
|
24
|
|
Hebrew
|
31
|
20.5
|
7.5
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
2.73
|
10
|
|
Arabic
|
31
|
17
|
8.5
|
3
|
1
|
1.5
|
2.00
|
18
|
|
Georgian
|
31
|
9
|
4.5
|
15.5
|
0
|
2
|
2.00
|
56
|
|
Armenian
|
31
|
16
|
8.5
|
5.5
|
0
|
1
|
1.88
|
21
|
|
Swahili
|
31
|
11
|
11
|
8
|
0
|
1
|
1.00
|
29
|
|
Finnish
|
28
|
12
|
13.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
|
1.5
|
0.88
|
9
|
|
Udmurt
|
31
|
10.5
|
12.5
|
4.5
|
2.5
|
1
|
0.84
|
26
|
|
Hungarian
|
31
|
7
|
9
|
12
|
0
|
3
|
0.78
|
48
|
|
Lezgian
|
31
|
8
|
12
|
6
|
5
|
0
|
0.66
|
35
|
|
Hindi-Urdu
|
31
|
7.5
|
14
|
7.5
|
2
|
0
|
0.54
|
31
|
|
Turkish
|
30
|
9
|
17.5
|
2.5
|
0
|
1
|
0.51
|
12
|
|
Mongolian
|
31
|
6
|
22
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
0.27
|
10
|
|
Indonesian
|
31
|
0
|
14
|
17
|
0
|
0
|
0.04
|
55
|
|
Gban
|
26
|
0
|
15.5
|
0
|
9
|
1.5
|
0.00
|
40
|
|
English
|
31
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
25
|
3
|
—
|
94
|
|
Japanese
|
31
|
3.5
|
5.5
|
20.5
|
0.5
|
1
|
—
|
71
|
|
total
|
636
|
243
|
164.5
|
128.5
|
69
|
310
|
|
|
41Table 2. A table of expression types by language from (Haspelmath 1993: 101), with the addition of Gban
42As can be seen, the anticausative/causative ratio (“A/C”) is zero, which puts Gban into the very bottom of the table of languages that was given in [Haspelmath 1993: 101] and is reproduced in Table 2, with the addition of Gban. It finds itself together with Indonesian, which also has only the causative directed expression type (and on the opposite end from Russian, which has (almost) exclusively the anticausative directed expression type).
43The percentage of non-directed pairs (“% non-dir.”) for Gban is relatively high at 40%, which puts it in the upper half of the languages from M. Haspelmath’s sample: between Lezgian with 35% and Hungarian with 48% (the lowest percentage being 9% for Finnish and the highest 94% for English).
44Among non-directed pairs, Gban prefers labile verbs (to equipollent and suppletive pairs), similarly to English, Greek, and German.
45Finally, in terms of the preferences of different verbs for different expression types, the Gban data seem to conform to or at least not to contradict the general tendency described in (Haspelmath 1993: 103–106) that causative marking is more associated with situations that usually occur spontaneously in the nature (and anticausative marking with those that are usually brought about by an external force). In Table 1, the pairs are ordered by decreasing presumed likelihood of their spontaneous occurrence, based on the table in (Haspelmath 1993: 104). We can see that the upper half of the table (not counting the blanks) contains more causatives than the lower half: 11 vs. 7. In particular, the top three pairs are all causative, while the bottom five are all non-causative.
46In addition to the morphological means described above, Gban has several periphrastic constructions, also expressing causative semantics.
471. There are two constructions with seemingly broad causative semantics: “X ȁ yɛ̀kɛ̋, Y P” (lit. ‘X does it, Y P’) (12) and “X ȁ nɔ̰̀, Y P” (lit. ‘X gives it, Y P’) (13)–(14). These two constructions are frequent and seem to be the main competitors to causative suffixation in the grammatical system of Gban.
|
(12)
|
[Zá̰á̰
|
y
|
ä
|
yɛ̀kɛ̋]
|
[mṵ̋
|
dò
|
yë
|
ḭ̀
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
do[pfv.hod]
|
person
|
one
|
3sg\pst
|
I
|
|
yènḭ̋
|
mɛ̰̏].
|
|
brother
|
beat[pfv.hod]
|
48‘Jean made a man beat my brother [provoked him].’ (lit. ‘Jean did it, a man beat my brother.’)
|
(13)
|
[Y
|
ä
|
nɔ̰̀]
|
[ḭ̋
|
Zá̰
|
zɛ̀].
|
|
3sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
give[pfv.hod]
|
1sg\pst
|
Jean
|
kill[pfv.hod]
|
49‘He made me kill Jean.’ (lit. ‘They gave it, I killed Jean.’)
|
(14)
|
[W
|
ä
|
nɔ̰̀]
|
[ḭ̋
|
wè
|
bȅ].
|
|
3pl\pst
|
s/he/it
|
give[pfv.hod]
|
1sg\pst
|
animal
|
eat[pfv.hod]
|
50‘They made/helped me eat some meat [e.g. bought it or gave me money].’
512. There is a construction based on the verb kpɔ̋ ‘spread (out), lay (down)’ with the semantics of coercion, forced causation. It has two variants: with a subordinate clause marked with nḭ́: “X ȁ kpɔ̋=le̋ Y nɛ̰̀ nḭ́ Y P[sbjv]” (lit. ‘X lays it on Y, so that Y P’) (15) and with a nominalization in =le: “X [V]=le kpɔ̋=le̋ Y nɛ̰̀” (lit. ‘X lays P=ing on Y’) (16):
|
(15)
|
Bààkḭ̏lè
|
y
|
ȁ‶
|
kpɔ̏=lȅ
|
mṵ̋
|
fǒfǒ
|
nɛ̰̏
|
|
chief
|
3sg
|
s/he/it
|
ipfv\spread=loc2
|
person
|
all
|
at
|
|
[nḭ́
|
ɔ̏
|
klě
|
wò].
|
|
that
|
3pl
|
hat
|
put[sbjv]
|
52‘The chief compels everybody to wear hats.’ (lit. ‘The chief lays it on everybody, so that they wear hats.’)
|
(16)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
ɛ́
|
[sà
|
sḭ̋=le̋]
|
kpɔ̋=le̋
|
ḭ̀
|
nɛ̰̀.
|
|
Soku
|
3sg\pst
|
song
|
sing=nmlz
|
spread[pfv.hod]=loc2
|
I
|
at
|
53‘Soku forced me to sing [e.g. by threatening to kill me].’ (lit. ‘Soku laid the song-singing on me.’)
- 15 It should be noted that permissive semantics is closely related to causative proper, but is not st (...)
543. There are several constructions with permissive semantics ‘let Y P / allow Y to P’:15
- 16 And its anticausative version: “di̋ yèè Y kɔ̰́, nḭ́ Y P[sbjv]” <road be Y on that Y P[sbjv] (li (...)
55a) “X (ȁ) di̋ kpɔ̋ Y kɔ̰́, nḭ́ Y P[sbjv]” <X (s/he/it) road spread Y on that Y P[sbjv]> (lit. ‘X puts (its) way on Y that Y P’) ‘X allows Y to P’16 (17);
56b) “X di̋ nɔ̰̀ Y nɛ̰̏, nḭ́ Y P[sbjv]” / “X di̋ nɔ̰̀ Y nɛ̰̏, Y P[ind]” <X road give Y at that Y P[sbjv]> / <X road give Y at Y P[ind]> (lit. ‘X gives way to Y that Y P’ / ‘X gives way to Y, Y P’) ‘X allows Y to P’ (18);
57c) “X ȁ gɔ̰̋, (nḭ́) Y P[sbjv]” <X s/he/it accept, (that) Y P[sbjv]> (lit. ‘X accepts it, (that) Y P’) ‘X allows Y to P’ (19);
58d) “X Y tő yɔ̰̏nḭ́, (nḭ́) X P[sbjv]” <X Y leave so that Y P[sbjv]> (lit. ‘X leaves Y this way, (that) Y P’) ‘X lets Y P’ (20).
|
(17)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
dɛ̌=nṵ̋
|
∅‑kè
|
ȁ
|
di̋
|
kpɔ̋
|
ȁ
|
kɔ̰́
|
|
Soku
|
father=pl
|
3pl‑ind.neg
|
s/he/it
|
road
|
ipfv\spread
|
s/he/it
|
on
|
|
nḭ́
|
ɛ̏
|
Mɔ̰̈bì
|
bɛ̋.
|
|
that
|
3sg
|
Monbi
|
take[sbjv]
|
59‘Soku’s parents don’t allow him to marry Monbi.’
|
(18)
|
Ɛ́
|
di̋
|
nɔ̰̈
|
ȁ
|
nḭ̋-lè
|
nɛ̰̏
|
|
3sg\pst
|
road
|
give\pfv.preh
|
s/he/it
|
child-woman
|
at
|
|
nḭ́
|
ɛ̏
|
bò
|
sɔ̋=ő, <…>
|
|
that
|
3sg
|
leave[sbjv]
|
yard=in
|
60‘He allowed his daughter to leave the house {because she asked him.}’
|
(19)
|
M
|
a̰̋
|
gɔ̰̋
|
nḭ́
|
ɛ̏
|
yà.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
accept[pfv.hod]
|
that
|
3sg
|
go[sbjv]
|
61‘I allowed him to go.’
|
(20)
|
Lɛ̌
|
à
|
ɔ̏
|
tő
|
yɔ̰̏nḭ́,
|
|
therefore
|
2pl
|
they
|
leave[sbjv]
|
so
|
|
ɔ̏
|
blɔ̋
|
vi̋
|
wȍ
|
ù
|
kpȍ
|
ve̋i̋i̋, <…>
|
|
they
|
self
|
whole
|
3pl
|
we
|
call[sbjv]
|
before
|
62‘So let them themselves call us first, {then we’ll go.}’
- 17 Note, however, that the true copula yè(è) ‘be’ cannot attach the causative suffix (23e).
634. Finally, denominal causatives (e.g. ‘make clear’, ‘make king’) are also expressed in Gban by means of analytical constructions. More precisely, they are formed on the basis of the corresponding quasi-copular constructions (21)–(22), (24)–(25): as a transitive use of a labile quasi-copula (23a), (26a) or as a causative derived from the quasi-copula (23b–d), (26b–c).17 Denominal causative constructions are illustrated below first for the adjective zlȅi̋i̋ ‘clear’ and then for the noun blȅgbḭ̏ ‘king’.
|
(21)
|
Yi̋
|
‶
|
yȅȅ
|
zlȅi̋i̋.
|
|
water
|
3sg
|
ipfv\be
|
clear
|
64‘The water is clear.’
|
(22a)
|
Yi̋
|
ɛ́
|
yɛ̀kɛ̋
|
zlȅi̋i̋.
|
|
water
|
3sg\pst
|
do[pfv.hod]
|
clear
|
|
(22b)
|
Yi̋
|
ɛ́
|
gȉȅ
|
zlȅi̋i̋.
|
|
water
|
3sg\pst
|
become[pfv.hod]
|
clear
|
65‘The water became clear.’
|
(23a)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
yi̋
|
yɛ̀kɛ̋
|
zlȅi̋i̋.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
water
|
do[pfv.hod]
|
clear
|
|
(23b)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
yi̋
|
yɛ̀kɛ̋-kȁ
|
zlȅi̋i̋.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
water
|
do-caus[pfv.hod]
|
clear
|
|
(23c)
|
OK Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
yi̋
|
gȉȅ-kà
|
zlȅi̋i̋.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
water
|
become-caus[pfv.hod]
|
clear
|
|
(23d)
|
[Zá̰
|
y
|
ä
|
nɔ̰̀]
|
[yi̋
|
‶
|
yȅ
|
zlȅi̋i̋].
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
give[pfv.hod]
|
water
|
3sg
|
ipfv\be
|
clear
|
|
(23e)
|
* Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
yi̋
|
yè-kȁ
|
zlȅi̋i̋.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
water
|
be-caus[pfv.hod]
|
clear
|
66‘Jean made the water clear.’
|
(24)
|
Ɛ̏
|
yȅȅ
|
blȅgbḭ̏.
|
|
3sg
|
ipfv\be
|
king
|
67‘He’s king.’
|
(25a)
|
Ɛ́
|
yɛ̀kɛ̋
|
blȅgbḭ̏.
|
|
3sg\pst
|
do[pfv.hod]
|
king
|
|
(25b)
|
Ɛ́
|
gȉȅ
|
blȅgbḭ̏.
|
|
3sg\pst
|
become[pfv.hod]
|
king
|
68‘He became king.’
|
(26a)
|
W
|
ä
|
yɛ̀kɛ̋
|
blȅgbḭ̏.
|
|
3pl\pst
|
s/he/it
|
do[pfv.hod]
|
king
|
|
(26b)
|
W
|
ä
|
yɛ̀kɛ̋-kȁ
|
blȅgbḭ̏.
|
|
3pl\pst
|
s/he/it
|
do-caus[pfv.hod]
|
king
|
|
(26c)
|
W
|
ä
|
gȉȅ-kà
|
blȅgbḭ̏.
|
|
3pl\pst
|
s/he/it
|
become-caus[pfv.hod]
|
king
|
69‘They made him king.’
- 18 In rapid speech it is reduced to ‑à/-ȁ.
- 19 A foot, understood as a prosodic unit larger than syllable and lesser than a phonological word, pr (...)
- 20 Cf. the same behaviour for a causative from a |CV1.V2| verb: sȉȅ‑kà ‘spoil (tr.)’ (from sȉȅ ‘ (...)
70The causative suffix ‑kà/‑kȁ18 is an inseparable morpheme; it is the only true verbal suffix attested in Gban. The lexical tone of the suffix is low after an ultra-low tone of the stem and ultra-low after other tones. Cf. lȉ ‘turn (intr.)’ → lȉ-kà ‘turn (tr.)’; wlɔ̰̋ ‘cool down (intr.), freeze (intr.)’ → wlɔ̰̋-kȁ ‘cool (tr.), freeze (tr.)’; yà ‘go’ → yà-kȁ ‘make go / let go’. When attached to a verb, the suffix forms an additional prosodic foot19 and participates in the tonal grammatical modifications as part of the verb. That is, a suffixal causative derived from a one-foot verb behaves tonally in the same way as a simplex two-foot verb. Cf. vò‑kȁ ‘finish (tr.)’ (from vò ‘finish (intr.), come to an end’): vȍ‑kȁ ‘finish-caus\pfv.hest’, vȍ‑kä ‘finish‑caus\pfv.preh’, bȅa̋ vő‑kȁ ‘work ipfv\finish‑caus’.20 Compare a simplex two-foot verb yɛ̀kɛ̋ ‘do’: yɛ̏kɛ̏ ‘do\pfv.hest’, yɛ̏kɛ̈ ‘do\pfv.preh’, nɔ̰̌ yɛ̋kɛ̏ ‘thing ipfv\do’.
- 21 They are very similar to the so-called phrasal verbs, or particle verbs, in English, such as give (...)
- 22 In these alternative forms, inflectional tonal changes continue to occur on the verbal part (verb (...)
71With verbs that contain a detachable adverbial-like particle, such as yɛ̏ tɔ̰́ ‘sit down’ or lȉ kɔ̰́ ‘return (intr.)’,21 the causative suffix normally attaches to the verbal (first) element: yɛ̏‑kà tɔ̰́ ‘seat, make sit down’, lȉ-kà kɔ̰́ ‘return (tr.), make return’. However, alternative forms (said to be more characteristic of younger speakers) are also possible, with the suffix attached only to the particle: yɛ̏ tɔ̰́-kȁ, lȉ kɔ̰́-kȁ, or with the repetition of the suffix: yɛ̏‑kà tɔ̰́-kȁ, lȉ-kà kɔ̰́-kȁ.22
72In general, causative suffixation can be considered productive. It is possible with borrowed verb roots, cf. vòtè ‘vote’ (< Fr. voter) → vòtè‑kȁ ‘make vote’. Overall, more than 90 causative lexical items have been attested in my data.
73At the same time, some suffixal causatives or combinations with them are idiomatic, cf. lá-kȁ ‘release, let escape; miss’, which seems to be derived from lá ‘be soiled, not clean’. Cf. also ȁ yȉ‑kà X nɛ̏ ‘notify X (in advance, the day before)’ < yȉ ‘pass a night’ — lit. ‘make it pass a night on X’. Also, for several attested suffixal causatives, no corresponding simplex anticausatives can be established, cf. kpȁ(-)kà ‘grill, roast’ in the absence of *kpȁ.
- 23 With the exception of zè ‘say’, which seems to allow a synonymous causative zè-kȁ ‘say’ (i.e. a (...)
74Causative suffixation is generally possible with both intransitive verbs, like dő ‘light up (intr.)’ → dő‑kȁ ‘light (tr.)’ (9a–b), and (mono)transitive verbs, like mɛ̰̏ ‘beat’ → mɛ̰̏-kà ‘make beat’ (10a–b) (their argument coding patterns will be discussed in 2.3). This also includes labile verbs, like lȉbi̋ ‘go out; put out’ → lȉbi̋-kȁ ‘make put out’ (more details below). At the same time, causative suffixation seems to be impossible for ditransitive verbs: nɔ̰̀ ‘give’, bȁ ‘give back, hand over’, gḭ̏ ‘show’.23 This can be compared to what is reported for, e.g., Abkhaz, Basque, Songhay, and Rawang, where causatives too can be derived from intransitive and transitive but not ditransitive verbs (Kulikov 2001: 888; Dixon 2000: 57, 65).
- 24 However, gà-kȁ <die-caus> is nevertheless possible in the idiomatic expression gbí…gà <breast…die> ‘forget (...)
75Additionally, there are some cases of seemingly arbitrary (lexical) restrictions. Causative suffixation is found to be impossible with some non-labile transitive (cf. zɛ̀ ‘kill’), some non-labile intransitive (cf. gà ‘die’),24 and some labile verbs (cf. passive-labile bɛ̋ ‘take’).
76With regard to causatives from transitive verbs, it should be noted that my second consultant, for some reason, tended to avoid them, often judging such causatives to be less than fully acceptable and, in particular, not allowing causatives from transitives with animate patients: mɛ̰̏ ‘beat’, wlé ‘pierce’, ki̋ő ű ‘bite’. However, my first consultant freely produced and allowed causatives from transitives, including those with animate patients, cf. mɛ̰̏ ‘beat’ (10b).
77Labile verbs, as has already been said, in general allow causative suffixation. Interestingly, it seems that for (anticausative-)labile verbs usually only one of the two logically possible interpretations of the suffixal causative is available: either a causative-of-intransitive interpretation or a causative-of-transitive interpretation, but not both.
78For instance, on the one hand, we attest only the causative-of-transitive interpretation in case of the suffixal causative from kpě ‘collapse, come to ruin; destroy’ → kpě-kȁ ‘make destroy’, not *‘destroy’ (27a–d), and in case of the suffixal causative from tà ‘close (intr.); be closed; close (tr.)’ → tà‑kȁ ‘make close’ and not *‘close (tr.)’ (28a–d).
|
(27a)
|
Kǒ
|
[ɛ́]
|
kpě.
|
|
fence
|
3sg\pst
|
collapse[pfv.hod]
|
79‘The fence collapsed.’
|
(27b)
|
Ɔ́
|
kǒ
|
kpě.
|
|
3pl\pst
|
fence
|
collapse[pfv.hod]
|
80‘They destroyed the fence.’
|
(27c)
|
* Ɔ́
|
kǒ
|
kpě-kȁ.
|
|
3pl\pst
|
fence
|
collapse-caus[pfv.hod]
|
81Int.: ‘They destroyed the fence.’
|
(27d)
|
OK Yë
|
ḭ̀
|
kǒ
|
kpě-kȁ.
|
|
3sg\pst
|
I
|
fence
|
collapse-caus[pfv.hod]
|
82‘He made me destroy the fence.’
|
(28a)
|
Vle̋
|
ɛ́
|
tà.
|
|
door
|
3sg\pst
|
close[pfv.hod]
|
831. ‘The door closed [because of the wind].’
842. ‘The door was closed [by someone].’
|
(28b)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
vle̋
|
tà.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
door
|
close[pfv.hod]
|
85‘Jean closed the door.’
|
(28c)
|
* Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
vle̋
|
tà-kȁ.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
door
|
close-caus[pfv.hod]
|
86Int.: ‘Jean closed the door.’
|
(28d)
|
OK Yë
|
ḭ̀
|
vle̋
|
tà-kȁ.
|
|
3sg\pst
|
I
|
door
|
close-caus[pfv.hod]
|
87‘He made me close the door.’
88On the other hand, we attest only the causative-of-intransitive interpretation in case of the suffixal causative from ylɛ̰̀ ‘enter; put (inside), insert’ → ylɛ̰̀-kȁ ‘put (inside), insert’, not *‘make put (inside)’ (11a–c), (29), and in case of the suffixal causative from ná̰(=é) ‘stick (to) (intr.); stick (tr.), glue’ → ná̰-kȁ(=è) ‘stick (tr.), glue’, not *‘make glue’ (30a–d).
|
(29)
|
* M
|
a̰̋
|
gbő
|
ylɛ̰̀-kȁ
|
yi̋
|
di̋.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
canoe
|
enter‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
water
|
under
|
89Int.: ‘I made him sink my canoe (“made him put my canoe under the water”).’
|
(30a)
|
Vɛ́lȅ
|
ɛ́
|
ná̰=é
|
ta̋blȍ
|
là.
|
|
glass
|
3sg\pst
|
stick[pfv.hod]=loc1
|
table
|
on
|
90‘The glass stuck to the table [on its own].’
|
(30b)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
vɛ́lȅ
|
ná̰=é
|
ta̋blȍ
|
là.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
glass
|
stick[pfv.hod]=loc1
|
table
|
on
|
91‘Jean glued the glass to the table.’
|
(30c)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
vɛ́lȅ
|
ná̰-kȁ=é
|
ta̋blȍ
|
là.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
glass
|
stick-caus[pfv.hod]=loc1
|
table
|
on
|
92‘Jean glued the glass to the table.’
|
(30d)
|
* Ḭ̋
|
Zá̰
|
vɛ́lȅ
|
ná̰-kȁ=é
|
ta̋blȍ
|
là.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
Jean
|
glass
|
stick-caus[pfv.hod]=loc1
|
table
|
on
|
93Int.: ‘I made Jean the glue glass to the table.’
94However, there also seem to exist rarer cases where both causative-of-intransitive and causative-of-transitive interpretations are available, cf. fà ‘be/become many/much; fill’ → fà-kȁ ‘fill; make fill’:
|
(31a)
|
Yi̋
|
ɛ́
|
fà
|
vȕkɔ̏
|
nɛ̰̏.
|
|
water
|
3sg\pst
|
be_many[pfv.hod]
|
pot
|
at
|
95‘Water filled the pot (lit. ‘Water became much/full in the pot’).’
|
(31b)
|
Mɔ̰̈bì
|
ɛ́
|
yi̋
|
fà
|
vȕkɔ̏
|
nɛ̰̏.
|
|
Monbi
|
3sg\pst
|
water
|
be_many[pfv.hod]
|
pot
|
at
|
96‘Monbi filled the pot with water.’
|
(31c)
|
OK Mɔ̰̈bì
|
ɛ́
|
yi̋
|
fà-kȁ
|
vȕkɔ̏
|
nɛ̰̏.
|
|
Monbi
|
3sg\pst
|
water
|
be_many-caus[pfv.hod]
|
pot
|
at
|
97‘Monbi filled the pot with water.’
|
(31d)
|
OK Ḭ̋
|
Mɔ̰̈bì
|
yi̋
|
fà-kȁ
|
vȕkɔ̏
|
nɛ̰̏.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
Monbi
|
water
|
be_many-caus[pfv.hod]
|
pot
|
at
|
98‘I made Monbi fill the pot with water.’
99In cases such as (30b–c) and (31a–d) (also (11b–c) above), we observe synonymy of a simplex labile verb in its transitive use (i.e. fà ‘fill’, ná̰=é ‘glue’) and a cognate suffixal causative in a causative-of-intransitive interpretation (i.e. fà-kȁ ‘fill’, ná̰-kȁ=è ‘glue’). Sometimes they appear to be fully synonymous (as in the examples above), but at least sometimes there seem to be subtle semantic differences between the two verbs; this will be discussed in 2.2.
- 25 Unlike Kakabe (Vydrina 2011: 191) or Mandinka (Creissels & Sambou 2013: 387–388), in which derived (...)
100Suffixal causatives themselves apparently do not allow intransitive uses in Gban:25 intransitive clauses with suffixal causatives are absent from texts and are judged infelicitous by the language consultants (cf. * Ḭ̋ yà-kȁ <1sg\pst go-caus[pfv.hod]>, * Ḭ̋ ylɛ̰̀-kȁ <1sg\pst enter-caus[pfv.hod]>).
101No double suffixal causatives (*Verb-ka-ka) have been attested.
102Suffixal causatives can express a broad spectrum of semantic types of causation: direct (immediate physical, contact causation) (32)–(34); indirect verbal (35)–(37); indirect mediated: by a third person (35) or by supernatural forces (38); assistive: help (39)–(40) or teaching (41); permissive (35). Apart from animate volitional causers, suffixal causatives can also be used for situations with animate non-volitional (42)–(43) as well as inanimate causers (44)–(46):
|
(32)
|
Ɛ̀‑kȅ
|
ȁ‶
|
yȍ‑kȁ
|
ɛ̀
|
kwí=à
|
nḭ̋nɛ̰́, …
|
|
2sg‑cond.aff
|
s/he/it
|
ipfv\pass‑caus
|
thou
|
back=on
|
now
|
103‘If you (sg.) pass it (the calabash of wisdom) to your back, {won’t it be easier for you to climb?}’ (lit. ‘If you make it pass to your back…’)
|
(33)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
ɛ́
|
yűkwȉ
|
lɛ́‑kȁ.
|
|
Soku
|
3sg\pst
|
tree
|
bend‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
104‘Soku bent a twig.’
|
(34)
|
Mɔ̰̈bì
|
|
yi̋
|
főa̋‑kȁ.
|
|
Monbi
|
3sg
|
water
|
ipfv\heat‑caus
|
105‘Monbi heated the water.’
|
(35)
|
Ḭ̋
|
Zá̰
|
yà‑kȁ.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
Jean
|
go‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
106‘I made Jean go.’ The following readings are available:
1071) ‘I sent Jean, I told Jean to go [e.g. instead of me to some event].’
1082) OK ‘I had Jean go [by asking my friend to ask him].’
1093) OK ‘I chased/turned Jean out [against his will].’
1104) OK ‘I allowed Jean to go.’
|
(36)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
yë
|
ḭ̀
|
sà
|
sḭ̋‑kȁ.
|
|
Soku
|
3sg\pst
|
I
|
song
|
sing‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
111‘Soku made me sing’ (OK ‘asked me’; * ‘forced me by menacing me’).
|
(37)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
ɛ́
|
mṵ̋=nṵ̋
|
mɛ̰̌mɛ̰̌
|
bɔ̀‑kȁ.
|
|
Soku
|
3sg\pst
|
person=pl
|
many
|
arrive‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
|
kè=ɛ̀
|
ȁ
|
í
|
sɔ̋=ő.
|
|
each_other=at
|
s/he/it
|
gen
|
yard=in
|
112‘Soku invited (lit. ‘made come together’) many people to his house.’
|
(38)
|
Yë
|
ḭ̀
|
gwà̰‑kȁ
|
gbɔ̀=ò.
|
|
3sg\pst
|
I
|
get_lost‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
bush=in
|
113‘He made me [by sorcery] get lost in the bush.’
|
(39)
|
M
|
a̋
|
zȉ‑kà
|
lɔ̌
|
nɛ̰̏.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
descend‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
palm_tree
|
at
|
114‘I helped him/her get down from the palm tree.’
|
(40)
|
Ḭ̋
|
kǎkwȉ‑nḭ̋
|
ta̋‑kȁ.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
old‑dim
|
walk‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
115‘I helped the old man walk [I was supporting him as he walked].’
|
(41)
|
Ɔ̏
|
Zá̰
|
vútú‑kȁ
|
(yi̋=ő).
|
|
3pl
|
Jean
|
ipfv\swim‑caus
|
water=in
|
116‘They teach Jean to swim.’ / ‘Jean is taught to swim.’
|
(42)
|
Mḭ̋
|
ḭ̀
|
dɛ̌
|
dȅ
|
bò‑kȁ.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
I
|
father
|
passage
|
remove‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
117~‘I made my father cut a path (through the woods).’ / ~‘Because of me, my father cut a path (through the woods).’ (He had to do so because of the very fact that I was with him.)
|
(43)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
∅‑lì
|
ù
|
gwà̰‑kȁ.
|
|
Soku
|
3sg-foc[pst]
|
we
|
get_lost‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
118‘We got lost because of Soku [he didn’t succeed as our guide].’
|
(44)
|
Yèvě
|
|
yi̋
|
főa̋‑kȁ.
|
|
sun
|
3sg
|
water
|
ipfv\heat‑caus
|
119‘The sun is heating the water.’
|
(45)
|
Dȉ
|
bȅbèɛ̀
|
dò
|
yë
|
ḭ̀
|
vòà-kȁ
|
wà
|
dḭ́á̰.
|
|
noise
|
bad
|
one
|
3sg
|
I
|
get_up‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
hour
|
middle
|
120‘A strange noise woke me up in the middle of the night.’
|
(46)
|
Gbíàlȉȅlè
|
‶
|
tȅnḭ̀
|
nɛ̰́
|
yě
|
ka̋-kȁ.
|
|
joy
|
3sg
|
child
|
this
|
laugh
|
ipfv\put‑caus
|
121‘Joy is making the child laugh.’
122At the same time, coercive interpretation (in which causation clearly contradicts the will of the causee) appears to be uncharacteristic of suffixal causatives. It is sometimes accepted, usually not as a first reading (35), but more often it is rejected by the speakers (36). However, this interpretation can be lexically coerced (pun not intended) by the addition of the adverbial …glȉgbó yɛ̋ ‘by force / under compulsion’ (36′). In general, it is more appropriate in these cases to use a periphrastic construction specialized for expressing coercion: the construction with the verb kpɔ̋ ‘spread’, see ex. (15)–(16) in 1.4.
|
(36′)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
yë
|
ḭ̀
|
sà
|
sḭ̋‑kȁ
|
#(glȉgbó
|
yɛ̋).
|
|
Soku
|
3sg\pst
|
I
|
song
|
sing‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
force
|
with
|
123‘Soku made me sing [by force].’
- 26 This discussion and the suggested semantic components/restrictions listed below are preliminary; t (...)
124As was mentioned in 2.1, in the case of causatives from labile verbs we sometimes observe synonymy between a simplex labile verb and a cognate suffixal causative (as in e.g. fà ≈ fà-kȁ ‘fill’, ná̰=é ≈ ná̰-kȁ=è ‘glue’). In some of these cases, the two verbs seemed to be completely synonymous in my data, as in the examples (11b–c), (26a–b), (30b–c) and (31a–d) above. In some other cases, however, there were some semantic contrasts between the two: while the simplex verb behaved neutrally, the causative verb seemed to express additional semantic components or impose additional semantic restrictions.26
125One of the possible components/restrictions introduced by the causative marker concerns the definiteness/deicticity of the patient (note the use of the postpositive demonstrative ~ definite quasi-article bɛ̏):
|
(47a)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
wè
|
wṵ̋
|
(bɛ̏)
|
ylé.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
animal
|
oil
|
there
|
melt[pfv.hod]
|
126‘Jean melted the fat.’
|
(47b)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
wè
|
wṵ̋
|
?(bɛ̏)
|
ylé‑kȁ.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
animal
|
oil
|
there
|
melt‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
127‘Jean melted the~that fat.’ (Omission of bɛ̏ was judged less felicitous; a postpositive demonstrative was suggested in the French translation to highlight the difference in meaning: …la graisse-là.)
|
(48a)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
lȁdíó
|
wi̋.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
radio
|
break[pfv.hod]
|
128‘Jean broke the radio.’
|
(48b)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
lȁdíó
|
*(bɛ̏)
|
wi̋‑kȁ.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
radio
|
there
|
break‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
129‘Jean broke the~that radio.’ (Omission of bɛ̏ was judged infelicitous; a demonstrative was used in the French translation: …la radio qui est là là ‘that radio that’s there’.)
130Another attested effect was related to quantification. In (49), the translations suggest that the causative version conveys an additional idea of ‘much’. In (50), the causative (with a causative-of-intransitive interpretation) was allowed only together with the semi-auxiliary verb yɛ̰̀ ‘do all, do completely’ (note that in this case the addition of bɛ̏ was not enough to make it felicitous).
|
(49a)
|
OK Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
tɔ̏‑nḭ̋
|
kpɔ̋=è
|
ta̋blȍ
|
lȁ.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
cloth‑dim
|
spread[pfv.hod]=loc1
|
table
|
on
|
131‘Jean spread a/the [piece of] cloth on the table.’
|
(49b)
|
OK Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
tɔ̏‑nḭ̋
|
kpɔ̋‑kȁ=è
|
ta̋blȍ
|
lȁ.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
cloth‑dim
|
spread‑caus[pfv.hod]=loc1
|
table
|
on
|
132‘Jean spread the rags / [much] cloth on the table.’
|
(50a)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
yűkwȉ
|
mḭ̋a̰̋.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
tree
|
split[pfv.hod]
|
133‘Jean chopped the wood.’ (= (8c))
|
(50b)
|
* Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
yűkwȉ
|
(bɛ̏)
|
mḭ̋a̰̋‑kȁ.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
tree
|
there
|
split-caus[pfv.hod]
|
134Int.: ‘Jean chopped the wood.’
|
(50c)
|
Zá̰
|
ɛ́
|
yűkwȉ
|
mḭ̋a̰̋‑kȁ
|
yɛ̰̀.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
tree
|
split‑caus[inf]
|
do_all[pfv.hod]
|
135‘Jean finished chopping the wood.’ ~ ‘Jean chopped all the wood.’
136Less reliably, several other factors were observed that facilitated the use of the causative version (while being irrelevant for the simplex version). These include the presence of an overtly expressed instrument (‘Jean pierced the snake (with a stick)’), a benefactive participant (‘I bought some food (for myself)’), or an external cause/causer (‘(Because of me,) Jean broke the radio’).
137Let us now turn to the ways in which arguments are coded in the clauses with suffixal causatives. It is important to mention in advance that Gban has a very rigid S‑PM‑O‑V word order: the subject is the NP that immediately precedes the predicative markers (PMs) and the direct object is the NP that immediately precedes the predicate.
1382.3.1. Clauses with suffixal causatives derived from intransitive verbs (51b) are identical to plain transitive clauses (52). The causer NP occupies the subject position and the causee NP the direct object position.
|
(51a)
|
Sa̋ka̋
|
ɛ́
|
fóá.
|
|
rice
|
3sg\pst
|
heat[pfv.hod]
|
139‘The rice is hot [= has heated].’
|
(51b)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
ɛ́
|
sa̋ka̋
|
fóá‑kȁ.
|
|
Soku
|
3sg\pst
|
rice
|
heat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
140‘Soku heated the rice.’
|
(52)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
ɛ́
|
ba̋ba̋
|
zɛ̀.
|
|
Soku
|
3sg\pst
|
sheep
|
kill[pfv.hod]
|
141‘Soku killed the sheep.’
- 27 No parallel for such “split” of the preverbal position is found in other Mande languages (Vydrin 2 (...)
1422.3.2. Clauses with suffixal causatives derived from transitive verbs exhibit, however, a peculiar pattern. In such clauses, instead of a single preverbal position for a direct object NP, two preverbal positions are observed. The first one is occupied by the causee NP (“former subject”) and the second by the NP expressing the original O-participant (“former direct object”).27
- 28 As noted in 2.1, such causatives from transitive verbs tended not to be fully acceptable for my se (...)
143Two illustrations are given below: a sentence with a suffixal causative mɛ̰̏‑kà ‘make beat’ derived from transitive mɛ̰̏ ‘beat’ (53b) and a sentence with a suffixal causative bȅ‑kà ‘make eat, feed’ derived from transitive bȅ ‘eat’ (54b).28
|
(53a)
|
Mṵ̋
|
dò
|
ɛ́
|
tȅnḭ̋
|
mɛ̰̏.
|
|
person
|
one
|
3sg\pst
|
child
|
beat[pfv.hod]
|
144‘Someone beat the child.’
- 29 In this section, I will mark the boundaries of the two NPs with square brackets for clarity.
|
(53b)
|
Zá̰á̰
|
ɛ́
|
[mṵ̋
|
dò]29
|
[tȅnḭ̋]
|
mɛ̰̏‑kà.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
person
|
one
|
child
|
beat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
145‘Jean made somebody beat the child.’
|
(54a)
|
Ḭ̋
|
wè
|
bȅ.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
meat
|
eat[pfv.hod]
|
146‘I ate meat.’
|
(54b)
|
Wö
|
[ḭ̀]
|
[wè]
|
bȅ‑kà.
|
|
3pl\pst
|
I
|
meat
|
eat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
- 30 For this single verb (therefore this is perhaps a case of lexicalization; this coding was rejected (...)
147‘They let me eat meat ~ They fed me meat.’30
- 31 Instead of one of them occupying a more peripheral position, as, for example, in French: Je ferai (...)
148In other words, in such clauses both the former direct object (original O-participant) and the former subject (causee) occupy direct-object-like positions.31 This corresponds to what have been observed in some other languages and what has been called “double object” strategy in (Polinsky 1995), who discusses Tamil and Kinyarwanda, or syntactic doubling in (Kulikov 2001: 890–891). See also the “type (iii)” of argument marking in morphological causatives from transitives in (Dixon 2000: 50–52), who discusses Hebrew, Oromo, Yagua, and some other languages.
149Cf. an example from (Polinsky 1995: 142, 164):
150Kinyarwanda:
|
(55a)
|
Umukoobwa
|
y-∅-uhagi-ye
|
umwaana.
|
|
girl
|
3sg-pst-wash-pfv
|
child
|
151‘The girl washed the child.’
|
(55b)
|
Umugore
|
y-∅-uhag-iish-ije
|
umukoobwa
|
umwaana.
|
|
woman
|
3sg-pst-wash-caus-pfv
|
girl
|
child
|
152‘The lady made the girl wash the child.’
153Polinsky (1995) shows that even in such cases syntactic tests may reveal certain differences in behaviour between the two NPs, showing that only one of them has a true direct object status. The same is discussed in (Dixon 2000: 50–52), who claims that this is the case for most languages with this pattern. He also notes that in these cases it is generally the causee (and not the original O-participant) which behaves as a true direct object.
154Unfortunately, most of the proposed tests — those involving passivization and reflexives — are inapplicable to Gban, due to its grammatical structure.
155Note: Polinsky (1995) also employed tests involving control of coreference. In Gban, such tests proved mostly inconclusive, except perhaps for control of the depictive: the latter seems to be possible for the causee (57) but not for the original O-participant (56b).
|
(56a)
|
Ḭ̋
|
vȕȅ
|
bȅ
|
kpṵ̏.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
banana
|
eat[pfv.hod]
|
unripe
|
156‘I ate the banana green.’
|
(56b)
|
??? M
|
[a̰̋]
|
[vȕȅ]
|
bȅ‑kà
|
kpṵ̏.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
banana
|
eat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
unripe
|
157Int.: ‘I made him eat the banana green.’
|
(57)
|
OK Ḭ̋
|
[Zá̰]
|
[mà̰]
|
bȅ‑kà
|
gbɛ̏ɛ̏.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
Jean
|
food
|
eat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
dirty
|
158‘I made Jean eat the food dirty [It was Jean who was dirty: I didn’t let him wash himself before eating].’
- 32 It is important to rule out this possibility because the nouns/NPs inside the genitive constructio (...)
159There is strong evidence that these two preverbal nominals indeed occupy two separate clause-level positions and not a single one, i.e. they are not a head and its (preposed) dependent in a genitive construction,32 neither is the second nominal incorporated into the verb.
- 33 This postposition is polysemous and also has benefactive and recipient-benefactive uses (‘for’).
1601) It is impossible to insert the genitive postposition mɔ̰́33 between the two nominals (58), which is optional but possible in the true genitive construction (cf. ḭ̀ mɔ̰́ gbő ‘my canoe’ in (11b)).
|
(58)
|
Ɔ́
|
[Sɔ̀kȕ]
|
(*mɔ̰́)
|
[wè]
|
bȅ‑kà.
|
|
3pl\pst
|
Soku
|
for
|
meat
|
eat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
161‘They fed Soku meat.’
1622) Not only the first (which is insignificant) but also the second position can host focus-marked NPs (59), NPs with modifiers (60), specific definite/indefinite NPs (61), including proper names (60).
|
(59)
|
Mḭ̋
|
[ḭ̀
|
dɛ̌]
|
[dȅ
|
lì]
|
bò‑kȁ.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
I
|
father
|
passage
|
foc_obj
|
remove‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
163‘It was a path (through the woods) that I made my father cut.’
|
(60)
|
Zá̰á̰
|
ɛ́
|
[mṵ̋
|
dò]
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
person
|
one
|
|
[Mɔ̰̈bì
|
/ tȅnḭ̋
|
kléènḭ̋
|
/ *ȁ
|
/ *ḭ̀]
|
mɛ̰̏‑kà.
|
|
Monbi
|
child
|
small
|
s/he/it
|
I
|
beat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
164‘Jean made someone beat Monbi / a small child / *him / *me.’
|
(61)
|
Zá̰á̰
|
yë
|
[ḭ̀]
|
[mṵ̋
|
dò]
|
mɛ̰̏‑kà.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
I
|
person
|
one
|
beat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
165‘Jean made me beat someone.’
1663) Most importantly, a clause-level particle vȍ ‘already, quickly, early’ can be placed between, before and after both positions (62a–с).
|
(62a)
|
Ɔ́
|
[Sɔ̀kȕ]
|
[blú
|
bɛ̏]
|
vȍ
|
bȅ‑kà.
|
|
3pl\pst
|
Soku
|
bread
|
there
|
quickly
|
eat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
|
(62b)
|
Ɔ́
|
[Sɔ̀kȕ]
|
vȍ
|
[blú
|
bɛ̏]
|
bȅ‑kà.
|
|
3pl\pst
|
Soku
|
quickly
|
bread
|
there
|
eat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
|
(62c)
|
Ɔ́
|
vȍ
|
[Sɔ̀kȕ]
|
[blú
|
bɛ̏]
|
bȅ‑kà.
|
|
3pl\pst
|
quickly
|
Soku
|
bread
|
there
|
eat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
167‘They quickly made Soku eat bread.’
168Compare the behaviour of the particle with a true genitival NP in the direct object position (63a–c).
|
(63a)
|
Ḭ̋
|
[Zá̰
|
sa̋]
|
vȍ
|
yò wa̰̋.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
Jean
|
house
|
quickly
|
see[pfv.hod]
|
|
(63b)
|
* Ḭ̋
|
[Zá̰
|
vȍ
|
sa̋]
|
yò wa̰̋.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
Jean
|
quickly
|
house
|
see[pfv.hod]
|
|
(63c)
|
Ḭ̋
|
vȍ
|
[Zá̰
|
sa̋]
|
yò wa̰̋.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
quickly
|
Jean
|
house
|
see[pfv.hod]
|
169‘I already saw Jean’s house.’
- 34 Unfortunately, I was able to test the infelicitousness of genitival NPs with nouns as possessors i (...)
170At the same time, the second preverbal position turns out to have some syntactic limitations that the first one does not. As demonstrated in (60) above, the second position cannot be occupied by a personal pronoun. It also cannot host a genitival NP (neither with a personal pronoun nor with a noun as possessor),34 cf. (64)–(65).
|
(64)
|
* Zá̰á̰
|
ɛ́
|
[mṵ̋
|
dò]
|
[ḭ̀
|
yènḭ̋]
|
mɛ̰̏‑kà.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
person
|
one
|
I
|
sibling
|
beat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
171Int.: ‘Jean made somebody beat my brother.’
|
(65a)
|
Ḭ̋
|
[Sɔ́kȕ]
|
[mlɛ̰̋]
|
kɛ̀-kȁ.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
Soku
|
hair
|
make‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
172‘I made Soku do [my~his] hair.’
|
(65b)
|
* Ḭ̋
|
[Sɔ́kȕ]
|
[Zá̰
|
/ ḭ̀
|
/ ȁ
|
/ ȁ
|
mlɛ̰̋]
|
kɛ̀-kȁ.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
Soku
|
Jean
|
I
|
s/he/it
|
s/he/it
|
hair
|
make‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
173Int.: ‘I made Soku do Jean’s/my/his hair.’
1742.3.3. Additionally, clauses with suffixal causatives from transitives sometimes exhibit a different pattern, which may be described as causee omission or demotion. In such (rarer) cases, there is only one preverbal position, and it is occupied by the NP expressing the original O-participant (“former direct object”), while the causee NP (“former subject”) is either completely missing or is demoted to an oblique position.
175(An inverse pattern for causatives from transitives, i.e. a single preverbal position occupied by the causee NP, has not been attested and has been judged infelicitous, cf. the last interpretation in (66).)
- 35 I should mention that this coding pattern/construction is rare in my data, it was not always judged (...)
176In the first group of cases,35 the causee NP is missing and the causee participant is construed as impersonal (or known from the context); this pattern is similar to French J’ai fait réparer ma voiture ‘I had my car repaired, I made [someone] repair my car’.
|
(66)
|
Mɛ̰̋
|
ɛ̰̀
|
mɛ̰̏-kà.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
thou
|
beat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
1771. ‘Because of me, you were beaten [by somebody].’ ~ ‘I had you beaten.’
1782. ‘I made him beat you.’
1793. * ‘I made you beat somebody.’
|
(67)
|
Zá̰á̰
|
y
|
ä
|
nḭ̋
|
bàtízé-kȁ.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
child
|
baptize‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
180‘Jean had his son baptized.’
|
(68)
|
M
|
ḭ̋
|
sa̋
|
kɛ̀‑kȁ.
|
|
1sg\pst
|
I
|
house
|
make‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
181‘I had my house built / a house built for me [It was built by workers].’
182In the second group of cases, the causee NP is not omitted, but demoted to an oblique position: a postverbal position marked by the comitative~instrumental postposition yɛ̋ ‘with’. In all of such examples in my data, the demoted causee is inanimate. Expression of an animate agentive causee in that position was judged infelicitous, cf. (70c).
|
(69a)
|
Yi̋
|
ɛ́
|
tȅnḭ̋
|
dò
|
zɛ̀.
|
|
water
|
3sg\pst
|
child
|
one
|
kill[pfv.hod]
|
183‘A child drowned.’ (lit. ‘Water killed a child.’)
|
(69b)
|
Y
|
ä
|
zɛ̀-kȁ
|
yi̋
|
yɛ̋.
|
|
3sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
kill‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
water
|
with
|
184‘S/he drowned him/her.’
|
(69c)
|
# Y
|
ä
|
zɛ̀
|
yi̋
|
yɛ̋.
|
|
3sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
kill‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
water
|
with
|
185Int.: ‘S/he drowned him/her.’ (But possible with the literal reading: ‘S/he killed him with water [by giving too much water to drink].’)
|
(70a)
|
Gwlɛ̰́
|
ɛ́
|
Zá̰á̰
|
mɛ̰̏.
|
|
rain
|
3sg\pst
|
Jean
|
beat[pfv.hod]
|
186‘Jean got caught / soaked in the rain.’ (lit. ‘Rain hit Jean.’)
|
(70b)
|
Zá̰á̰
|
ɛ́
|
tȅnḭ̋
|
mɛ̰̏‑kà
|
gwlɛ̰́
|
/ nḭ̋nḭ̋
|
/ yèvě
|
yɛ̋.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
child
|
beat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
rain
|
cold
|
sun
|
with
|
187‘Jean made it so that the child got hit by the rain [i.e. was soaked] / the cold [i.e. froze] / the sun [i.e. got hot] [It may have been unintentional].’
|
(70c)
|
* Zá̰á̰
|
ɛ́
|
tȅnḭ̋
|
mɛ̰̏‑kà
|
mṵ̋
|
dò
|
yɛ̋.
|
|
Jean
|
3sg\pst
|
child
|
beat‑caus[pfv.hod]
|
person
|
one
|
with
|
188Int.: ‘Jean made somebody beat the child.’ (cf. (53b))
|
(70d)
|
Y
|
ä
|
blɛ̋
|
mɛ̰̏
|
gwlɛ̰́
|
yɛ̋.
|
|
3sg\pst
|
s/he/it
|
self
|
beat[pfv.hod]
|
rain
|
with
|
189‘He got himself soaked in the rain [e.g. by forgetting his umbrella].’
190(There is also a very similar series of examples in my data with the expression “wḭ́ X zɛ̀” (lit. ‘wine kills X’) ‘X gets drunk’.)
191As can be seen from (70d), an identical postpositional coding is in fact available in some of these cases even with the corresponding simplex verb without the causative suffix.36 The inanimate participant (‘rain’) can no longer be analyzed here as a causee; it probably should be analyzed as an instrument/means.
- 37 Comparative data have been of little help, unfortunately. Although some other Mande languages also (...)
- 38 I am grateful to Denis Creissels [p. c.] for the original idea.
192A diachronic hypothesis based primarily on internal reconstruction37 can be proposed to explain the observed phenomena, in particular the “double object” construction.38
193The hypothesis can be outlined as follows:
1941) The causative suffix ‑kà was once a causative verb (similar to English make or French faire).
1952) This causative verb took as its object an (unmarked) nominalization of the content verb and it was possible for this nominalization (in the case of transitive content verbs) to have two left-side nominal dependents of its own.
196So the whole construction would look as in (80) (the superscript asterisk denoting reconstruction).
197(80) * Zá̰á̰ ɛ́ [[mṵ̋ dò] [Mɔ̰̈bì] mɛ̰̏nmlz] ka
198lit. ‘Jean [somebody’s Monbi’s beating] caused.’
1993) Later, this construction was reanalyzed as a single finite causative-suffixed verb (into which the nominalized content verb and the causative verb merged) with two NP positions, now clause-level.
200That would give us the modern construction in (81).
201(81) > Zá̰á̰ ɛ́ [mṵ̋ dò] [Mɔ̰̈bì] mɛ̰̏‑kà
202lit. ‘Jean [somebody] [Monbi] beat-caused.’
203(i.e. ‘Jean made somebody beat Monbi.’) (= (60))
204Let us now try to substantiate the proposed scenario. Interestingly, almost all the necessary ingredients can be found independently even synchronically, in present-day Gban:
2051. Gban, like some other Mande languages (cf. Mano below), has periphrastic causative constructions, including one based on nominalization (albeit a marked one): the coercive construction with kpɔ̋ ‘spread’ (see 1.4). Let us reproduce here example (16) in (82) as an illustration:
|
(82)
|
Sɔ̀kȕ
|
ɛ́
|
[sà
|
sḭ̋=le̋]
|
kpɔ̋=le̋
|
ḭ̀
|
nɛ̰̀.
|
|
Soku
|
3sg\pst
|
song
|
sing=nmlz
|
spread[pfv.hod]=loc2
|
I
|
at
|
206‘Soku forced me to sing.’ (lit. ‘Soku laid the song-singing on me.’)
- 39 So one of its varieties is similar to the variety of the kpɔ̋-construction with a subjunctive subo (...)
207Mano, another South Mande language, has as its default means of expressing causative a periphrastic construction based on a transitive causative verb kɛ̄ (< ‘do’) and a subordinate clause (with subjunctive, conjoint, or agreeing marking);39 the direct object position of the causative verb is filled with a dummy pronoun or with the original S- or O-participant. Cf. (83)–(84) (Khachaturyan 2015: 140–141).
|
(83a)
|
Māà
|
kɛ̄
|
āà
|
wɛ́ì
|
dɔ̀kɛ̄
|
ī
|
kɛ̀lɛ̀.
|
|
1sg.perf>3sg
|
do
|
3sg.perf
|
money
|
give
|
thou
|
to
|
208‘I made him give you money.’ (lit. ‘I did it, he gave you money.’)
|
(83b)
|
Māà
|
wɛ́ì
|
kɛ̄
|
á
|
dɔ̀kɛ̄
|
ī
|
kɛ̀lɛ̀.
|
|
1sg.perf
|
money
|
do
|
3sg.sbjv>3sg
|
give
|
thou
|
to
|
209‘I made him give you money.’ (lit. ‘I did the money so that he gave it to you.’)
|
(84)
|
Lɛ́ɛ̀
|
yílí
|
kɛ̀
|
é
|
ɓā.
|
|
3sg.ipfv
|
tree
|
do:ipfv
|
3sg.sbjv
|
bear_fruit
|
210‘He makes the tree bear fruit.’ (lit. ‘He does the tree so that it bears fruit.’)
211A grammaticalization path from a causative verb to a causative suffix has been proposed by Denis Creissels for three other Mande languages. He argues that the causative suffixes ‑ndí (Mandinka, Soninke) and ‑ní (Bozo) grammaticalized from periphrastic causative constructions based on the verb *tin ‘do’ (Creissels 2021).
- 40 The vowel change *ɛ > a seems unmotivated. However, a similar vowel alternation is found in Gban i (...)
- 41 However, a path from ‘put’ to causative is not implausible. Consider the close meaning ‘spread (on (...)
212As for the exact lexical origin of a causative verb *ka that could serve as a source for the suffix ‑kà in Gban, there are currently two hypotheses. First, modern Gban has a verb kɛ̀ ‘make, construct; hunt, court; say, want’ (cognate to the Mano verb kɛ̄ discussed above), which is a perfect match semantically, but problematic phonologically.40 Second, there is a verb ka̋ ‘put (several objects), pour (tr.); fall (several objects), pour (intr.), enter (several objects), gather (intr.); feed, breed’, which is a perfect match phonologically, although is less straightforward semantically.41
2132. Gban has unmarked nominalizations (although they are syntactically more restricted than marked nominalizations with =le) and constructions with semi-auxiliary verbs (other than causative) that take such unmarked nominalizations as their direct objects.
- 42 The unmarked nominalization is glossed here as ‘inf’, but it remains an open question whether it s (...)
214Cf. an example with the semi-auxiliary verb dɔ̀ ‘do well’:42
|
(85)
|
Ɛ̏
|
[fḭ̏ȁ̰=nṵ̏
|
dȁ]
|
dɔ̀.
|
|
3sg
|
tale=pl
|
compose[inf]
|
ipfv\do_well
|
215‘He tells tales well.’
- 43 It is known to be possible in some other South Mande languages [Valentin Vydrin, p. c.], including (...)
- 44 As can be seen from (86), the omissibility of the postpositional marking in the first dependent va (...)
2163. Nominalizations in Gban, as well as in some other Mande languages,43 can have two left-side nominal dependents, both of which may be unmarked. In Gban, it is attested for the marked nominalization in =le:44
|
(86)
|
[[Fíɛ́lȅ
|
OK/?? (mɔ̰́)]
|
[mṵ̋]
|
zɛ̏=lè]
|
|
Pierre
|
for
|
person
|
kill=nmlz
|
217‘murder of a personO by PierreA’
218In fact, the more precise syntactic analysis of this structure should be that the second nominal is the inner argument (direct object) of the nominalized clause, while the first nominal is an external genitival dependent in the NP headed by the nominalization:
|
(87)
|
[[Fíɛ́lȅ
|
(mɔ̰́)]
|
[[mṵ̋]
|
zɛ̏=lè]]
|
|
Pierre
|
for
|
person
|
kill=nmlz
|
219‘murder of a personO by PierreA’
220This analysis of nominalizations in Gban is corroborated by the behaviour of the clause-level particle vȍ ‘already, quickly, early’. This particle can be inserted before the second nominal (88) or before a single nominal corresponding to an O-participant (89). But it cannot be inserted (while still modifying the situation expressed in the nominalized clause) before the first nominal (88) or before a single nominal corresponding to an S-participant (90):
|
(88)
|
(* vȍ)
|
Fíɛ́lȅ
|
mɔ̰́
|
(OK vȍ)
|
mṵ̋
|
(OK vȍ)
|
zɛ̏=lè
|
|
quickly
|
Pierre
|
for
|
quickly
|
person
|
quickly
|
kill=nmlz
|
221‘(quick) murder of a personO by PierreA’
|
(89)
|
(OK vȍ)
|
mṵ̋
|
(OK vȍ)
|
zɛ̏=lè
|
|
quickly
|
person
|
quickly
|
kill=nmlz
|
222‘(quick) murder of a personO’
|
(90)
|
(* vȍ)
|
mṵ̋
|
(mɔ̰́)
|
(OK vȍ)
|
zɛ̏=lè
|
|
quickly
|
person
|
for
|
quickly
|
kill=nmlz
|
223‘(quick) death of a personS’
- 45 They can, however, take genitival NPs beginning with nouns:
2244. Nominalizations in Gban (again, marked nominalizations in =le) for some reason cannot take a personal pronoun or an NP beginning with a personal pronoun45 as their second dependent (93)–(94) (only as their first (91) or their only (96) dependent), similarly to causatives from transitives, cf. (64)–(65) above.
|
(91)
|
[[ȁ
|
mɔ́]
|
[la̋lȁ]
|
kṵ̋a̰̋=le̋]
|
|
s/he/it
|
for
|
money
|
steal=nmlz
|
225‘theft of moneyO by him/herA’
|
(92)
|
[[Fíɛ́lȅ
|
mɔ́]
|
[Zá̰]
|
zɛ̏=lè]
|
|
Pierre
|
for
|
Jean
|
kill=nmlz
|
226‘murder of JeanO by PierreA’
|
(93)
|
* [[Fíɛ́lȅ
|
mɔ́]
|
[ȁ]
|
zɛ̏=lè]
|
|
Pierre
|
for
|
s/he/it
|
kill=nmlz
|
227Int.: ‘? hisO murder by PierreA’
|
(94)
|
[[Fíɛ́lȅ
|
mɔ́]
|
[(*ȁ)
|
yènḭ̋]
|
zɛ̏=lè]
|
|
Pierre
|
for
|
s/he/it
|
sibling
|
kill=nmlz
|
228‘murder of his brotherO by PierreA’
|
(95)
|
OK [[Zá̰
|
/ mṵ̋
|
(mɔ̰́)]
|
zɛ̏=lè]
|
|
Jean
|
|
for
|
kill=nmlz
|
229‘murder of JeanO/*A’
|
(96)
|
OK [[ȁ
|
(mɔ̰́)]
|
zɛ̏=lè]
|
|
s/he/it
|
for
|
kill=nmlz
|
230‘hisO/*A murder’
- 46 It should be noted that (marked) nominalizations of transitive verbs can also, at least sometimes, (...)
2315. Cases of causee omission are, too, compatible with the hypothesis. As was said in 2.3.3, with suffixal causatives from transitives we sometimes observe a single preverbal position, and if it is the case, it corresponds to the original O-participant (‘I made [somebody] beat you’) and not to the causee (* ‘I made you beat [somebody].’). The same is true for nominalizations: if there is a single nominal dependent, it must correspond to the O-participant, cf. (95)–(96) above.46
232So it is possible to directly derive the variety of the modern construction with causee omission (97b) from a variety of the reconstructed construction containing a nominalization with a single dependent (97a).
233(97a) * Mɛ̰̋ [ɛ̰̀ mɛ̰̏nmlz] ka
234lit. ‘I [yourO beating] caused.’
235(97b) > Mɛ̰̋ ɛ̰̀ mɛ̰̏‑kà
236lit. ‘I [youO] beat-caused’
237(i.e. ‘I had you beaten.’) (= (66))
2386. Finally, the proposed hypothesis fits well with the view that the Mande languages have historically undergone a mass reanalysis of nominalization-based constructions into finite ones, where clause-level NPs in a similar way originated in nominal dependents of nominalizations (Nikitina 2011; Khachaturyan & Nikitina 2016).
239The paper described how causative semantics is expressed in Gban: lexically (suppletive pairs and causative-anticausative lability), periphrastically, and, most importantly, morphologically: by the productive derivational suffix ‑kà, with broad causative semantics.
240In the case of suffixal causatives from transitives, a peculiar “double object” coding pattern is observed, with two preverbal clause-level NP positions (the second of which cannot host a personal pronoun or a genitival NP, but can be separated by a clause-level particle).
241The suffixal causative construction is hypothesized to have grammaticalized from a construction based on a causative verb and an unmarked nominalization (as its object), which could itself have two left-side nominal dependents.
242The hypothesis is supported by a number of independent synchronic facts, including the syntactic properties of present-day (marked) nominalizations and the similar way in which personal pronouns behave in the suffixal causative construction and with nominalizations. The hypothesis also fits well with the general view that Mande languages have undergone a mass reanalysis of nominalization-based constructions into finite ones.
2431/2/3 — 1st/2nd/3rd person
244aff — affirmative
245ag — agent noun
246caus — causative
247cond — conditional
248ctnv — continuative
249d — default determiner (Mandinka)
250dim — diminutive
251foc — subject focus
252foc_obj — direct object and nominal dependent focus
253gen — genitive
254hest — hesternal
255hod — hodiernal
256ind — indicative
257inf — infinitive
258ipfv — imperfective
259loc1/loc2 — locative applicative
260neg — negation
261nmlz — nominalization
262(n)pst — (non-)past
263perf — perfect
264pfv — perfective
265pl — plural
266poss — possessive
267preh — pre-hesternal
268purp — purpose
269refl — reflexive
270sbjv — subjunctive
271sg — singular