Typecraft v2.5
Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "Multi-verb constructions in Edo"

Line 1: Line 1:
                '''  MULTI-VERB CONSTRUCTIONS IN ÈDÓ'''
 
 
 
Multi-verb constructions provide useful insight into the question of how languages distinguish between adjunction and complementation. The term multi-verb constructions is defined as consisting of verbs in series that can function as independent verbs in simple sentences, with at least one shared argument and no marking of syntactic dependency (cf. Amaka 2005:2).
 
Multi-verb constructions provide useful insight into the question of how languages distinguish between adjunction and complementation. The term multi-verb constructions is defined as consisting of verbs in series that can function as independent verbs in simple sentences, with at least one shared argument and no marking of syntactic dependency (cf. Amaka 2005:2).
  

Revision as of 15:48, 13 July 2009

Multi-verb constructions provide useful insight into the question of how languages distinguish between adjunction and complementation. The term multi-verb constructions is defined as consisting of verbs in series that can function as independent verbs in simple sentences, with at least one shared argument and no marking of syntactic dependency (cf. Amaka 2005:2).

Èdó

Òzó kòkó Àdésúwà mòsé
“Ozo raised Adesuwa to be beautiful”
Òzó
òzó
OzoSBJAGT
Np
kòkó
kòkó
raisePAST
Vtr
Àdésúwà
àdésúwà
Adesuwa.AFFDO
Np
mòsé
mòsé
be.beautifulPAST
Vitr


The verbs in series need not bear one/same marking for tense, aspect, mood or negation and need not share subjects. They include SVCs, consecutive constructions, covert co-ordination, overlapping constructions, V+ modifier constructions and V+ infinitival complement constructions.

Èdó

SVC

Òzó lé ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́ khiẹ̣̣̣̣́n
“Ozo cooked rice and sold”
Òzó
òzó
OzoSBJAGT
Np
cookIVH
V
ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́
ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́
rice.AFFDO
N
khiẹ̣̣̣̣́n
khiẹ̣̣̣̣́n
sellIVH
V


Covert co-ordination

Òzó gbọ̣̣̣̣̀ọ̣̣̣̣́ ívìn , bòló òká
“Ozo planted cooconut and peeled corn”
Òzó
òzó
OzoSBJAGT
Np
gbọ̣̣̣̣̀ọ̣̣̣̣́
gbọ̣̣̣̣̀ọ̣̣̣̣́
plantPASTH
Vtr
ívìn
ívìn
coconut.AFFDO
CN
,bòló
,bòló
peelPASTH
Vtr
òká
òká
cornDOTH
CN


V+modifier constuctions

Òzó rhùlé ̣rè làọ̣̣̣̣́ òwá
“Ozo ran into the house”
Òzó
òzó
ozoSBJAGT
Np
rhùlẹ̣̣̣̣́rè
rhùlẹ̣̣̣̣́
runIVRT
Vitr
làọ̣̣̣̣́
làọ̣̣̣̣́
enter.V>P
PREP
òwá
òwá
houseGOAL
N


V+infinitival complement construction

Íràn kùgbé-rè tòbíràn rrí ízẹ̣̣̣̣̀
“They ate the rice together by themselves”
Íràn
íràn
They3PLNOMSBJAGT
Np
kùgbérè
kùgbé-rè
jointogetherPASTRT
Vtr
tòbíràn
tòbíràn
by.themselves3PLREFLACC
 
rrí
rrí
eat
Vtr
ízẹ̣̣̣̣̀
ízẹ̣̣̣̣̀
riceDOTH
CN


Ewe

Consecutive constructions

Mí-nɔ yi-yi-m má-vá
“You be going (and) I will come (i.e.follow)”
2PLNOMSBJAGT
PN
be.at
V
yiyim
yiyim
  go
V
má
má
1SGNOMSBJAGT
PN
come
V


Overlapping constructions

Kofí fo-e wò-dze anyí
“Kofi struck him/her, S/he fall down”
Kofí
kofí
KofiSBJAGT
Np
fo
fo
struck
V
e
e
AFF3SGACCDO
PN
AFF3SGNOMSBJ
PN
dze
dze
contact
V
anyí
anyí
ground
 


This study examines multi-verb constructions in (a Benue-Congo language) with the aim of identifying and classifying them and their argument sharing patterns.

We draw main background assumptions from the following sources; implemented Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammars for Norwegian (Hellan 2003) and Ga (Hellan 2007) a Kwa language spoken in Ghana; an HPSG account of argument realization patterns (Beermann, Hellan and Sætherø 2003); and a theory of event structure template (Pustejovsky 1995, 2006).

Èdó is spoken in Èdó state in Mid-Western Nigeria and belongs to the Edoid language group (Elugbe1979). It is a head initial SVO language with an open syllable system with no consonant clusters.

With respect to verbal morphology, verbs can be inflected for the purpose of pluralizing nouns they occur with and to mark iteration.

Simple sentence: V+plural suffix

Ọ̣̣̣̣̀ gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀n-nẹ̣̣̣̣́ èbé
“He/she wrote books”
Ọ̣̣̣̣̀
ọ̣̣̣̣̀
3SGSBJNOMAGT
PN
gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀nnẹ̣̣̣̣́
gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀nnẹ̣̣̣̣́
writePLIVH
V
èbé
èbé
bookDOTH
CN


Tense and transitivity are marked on the verb either through tonal changes or by affixation of a past tense suffix –rV under appropriate licensing conditions. With plural verbs,the order is the plural suffix before the past suffix.

Simple sentence: Present tense

Ọ̣̣̣̣̀ gbẹ̣̣̣̣́n
“He/she is writing”
Ọ̣̣̣̣̀
ọ̣̣̣̣̀
3SGSBJNOMAGT
PN
gbẹ̣̣̣̣́n
gbẹ̣̣̣̣́n
writePRESH
Vtr

Simple sentence: Past tense

Ọ̣̣̣̣̀ gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀n-nẹ̣̣̣̣́-rè
“He/she wrote several times”
Ọ̣̣̣̣̀
ọ̣̣̣̣̀
3SGNOMSBJAGT
PN
gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀nnẹ̣̣̣̣́rè
gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀nnẹ̣̣̣̣̣̣̣̣̣́rè
writePLIVRT
Vtr


11 multi-verb constructions in Èdó are shown to pattern into four structural types with respect to the distribution of the past tense suffix –rV, an infinitival marker , a floating anaphor tòbórè 'by him/her/it self ', VP adverbs and argument sharing patterns:

1. V+ modifier constructions: durational, directional, locational, manner constructions:

   -rV licensed, infinitival yá not licensed. One verb in the series is reanalyzed as 	adverb.

2. V (P) +V (P) constructions: resultatives, negative resultatives, consequential and covert

   co-ordination constructions: -rV not licensed, infinitival yá not licensed. The verbs in   
   series have the same values for Tense, Aspect and Mood (TAM).

3. V + mood constructions: purpose constructions: -rV licensed, infinitival yá not licensed.

   V2 has a positive value for MOOD.

4. V+ infinitival complement constructions: comitative and instrumental constructions:

     -rV licensed, infinitival yá licensed and V2 is non-finite.


The –rV suffix also interacts in an interesting way with the temporal structures of multi-verb constructions. Overlapping events license –rV while non-overlapping events do not

The study also examines multi-verb constructions in the following languages of the Niger-Congo: Igbo and Yoruba (Benue-Congo), Gurenne (Oti-Volta), Ga, Baule, Akan and Ewe (Kwa) and situate properties of Èdó multi-verb constructions within typology common to these languages.

ÈDÓ

Íràn kùgbé-rè kó!kó ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́
“They joined together and gathered the rice”
Íràn
íràn
3PLNOMSBJAGT
PN
kùgbérè
kùgbé
joinIVRT
Vtr
kó!kó
kó!kó
gather
Vtr
ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́
ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́
riceDOTH
N
Òzó lé ìzẹ́ ré
“Ozo cooked rice and ate”
Òzó
òzó
OzoSBJAGT
Np
cookPASTH
Vtr
ìzẹ́
ìzẹ́
riceDOTH
CN
eatPASTH
Vtr

IGBO

Ó wè-re ìte byá
“S/he came with a pot”
Ó
ó
3SGNOMSBJAGT
PN
wère
re
takeØASP
V
ìte
ìte
potDOTH
CN
byá
byá
come.ASP
V

AKAN

Ama noa di
“Ama cooks and then eats”
Ama
ama
AmaSBJAGT
Np
noa
noa
cook
Vtr
di
di
eat
Vtr

YORUBA

Ó mú ìwé wá
“He brought the book”
Ó
ó
3SGNOMSBJAGT
PN
take
V
ìwé
ìwé
bookDOTH
CN
come
V

EWE

Kofí ná (bé) wò-ɖu nú-á
“Kofi made him/her eat the thing”
Kofí
kofí
KofiSBJAGT
Np
give
V
 
COMP
AFF3SGACCSBJ
PN
ɖu
ɖu
eat
V
núá
á
thingDOTHDEF
CN

BAULE

ɔsi-li aliɛ-`n sɔkɔ-li tro`n
“S/he pounded the futu and prepared the sause”
ɔ
ɔ
3SGNOMSBJAGT
PN
sili
sili
poundCOMPL
V
aliɛ`n
aliɛ`n
foodDOTHDEF
CN
sɔkɔli
sɔkɔli
prepareCOMPL
V
tro`n
tro`n
sause.AFFDEFDO
CN

GURENNE

Bà diki mà tá`asi zí'à ná
“They sent me to that place”
3PLNOMSBJAGT
PN
diki
diki
take
V
1SGACCDOTH
PN
tá`asi
tá`asi
send
V
zí'à
zí'à
placeENDPNT
CN
DEF
 

Ga

E kɛ wolo lɛ ha mi
“He gave me the book”
E
e
3SGNOMSBJAGT
PN
move
V
wolo
wolo
bookDOTH
CN
 
DET
ha
ha
give
V
mi
mi
1SGGOAL
PN


Multi-verbs identified include SVCs in all the languages discussed, consecutive constructions and overlapping constructions in Ewe and covert co-ordination in Èdó, Igbo and Baule. Typological features used for identification include: tense, mood, aspect, negation, adverb distribution, predicate cleft and argument sharing patterns. The findings show that the typological features of a language determine the type of multi-verb construction it licenses. Also while, inflection may demarcate multi-verb types within a language, the pattern observed for a language may not map onto another language.

With respect to argument sharing, the following types are discussed; token sharing of subjects; switch sharing; overt reference sharing of subjects; covert reference sharing of subjects; token sharing of objects ; overt reference sharing of objects and covert sharing of objects. The patterns found in the languages studied support the claim that languages with rich verbal agreement features allow recoverability of unexpressed arguments and tend to license null subjects and objects. Object sharing patterns show asymmetry with respect to switch sharing and reference sharing. Languages that have overt reference subject sharing patterns do not have switch sharing (Ewe, Ga and Baule) while those that do not, tend to employ token/covert reference sharing of subjects and switch sharing (Èdó, Yoruba and Akan).This is buttressed by data from Attie and Likpe closely related languages to these languages. With respect to object sharing, these languages that do not have switch sharing all have covert sharing of objects, while those that have, do not have covert sharing of objects. Èdó belongs to the type that does not have overt reference sharing of subjects and tend to employ token sharing of subjects and switch sharing. For object sharing, Èdó does not have covert sharing of objects and employs mainly token sharing of objects.In particular, object sharing in multi-verb constructions in Èdó is analyzed as token sharing by grammatical function.

Two schemas are posited to account for Èdó multi-verb constructions:

1. Verb-serial-compl (ement)-phrase with a complementation structure for the

   V (P) +V (P) resultative and V+infinitival complement constructions.

2. Serial-mod-phrase with an adjunction structure for V+mood constructions, V+modifier

  constructions and V (P) +V (P); consequential, purpose, and negative resultative  
  constructions.