# Verb-initial grammars: A multilingual/parallel perspective # ESRC Project RES-000-23-0505 # Oxford University # Charles Randriamasimanana # Malagasy syntax & semantics: # Malagasy simple sentences – Case-marking & NPs: ESRC-OX-05-CR101/201. # My purpose here is to show how case-marking works in Malagasy, in the process distinguishing # between three different types of nouns depending on the nature of the phrasal head, i.e. a D # accompanying a proper name(PN), a Det accompanying a common noun (CN) or a DX, which can go # with either PN or CN. In the second half of this document, it will be seen that a verb that # assigns accusative case does not necessarily undergo passive. # Three main types of noun: # A. Proper name (PN) = bare NP headed by a D; pattern A; # B. Common noun (CN) = optionally headed by a Det thus forming a DetP, # i.e Definite phrase; pattern B; # C. Either PN or CN headed by DX; pattern C. # Case-marking pattern: # Pattern A. With bare NPs with D, i.e. PN # Nominative = ø Accusative = an. # Pattern B. With DetP no accusative marker ‘an’ at all possible. # Pattern C. With DX ‘previous mention’ ilay, accusative marker ‘an’ # is optional. # Three types of determiner: # Type D = { i 'intimate + proper name', ry 'proper name & associates', # Ra... 'familiar + proper name', Ikala 'intimate + female proper name', # Ingahy 'familiar + male proper name', Ramatoa 'Mrs.', Ramatoakely 'Miss', # Andriamatoa 'The honorable Mr...', Itompokovavy 'the late + intimate + female # proper name', Itompokolahy 'the late + intimate + male proper name', ... }. # Type Det = ny 'the entire set (of entities)'. # Type DX = { ilay 'the previous mention', ity 'this.singular.near.speaker', # ireto 'these.plural.near.speaker', iny 'this.singular.near.hearer', ireny 'these. # plural.near.hearer', iry 'this.visible.far', irery 'these.plural.visible.far', # itsy 'this.singular.to.the.side', iretsy 'these.plural.to.the.side', # iro ''this.singular.visible', irero 'these.plural.visible', ...}. # Typical ‘traditional’ proper names = {i Koto, Ikoto, Rakoto; i Naivo, # Ranaivo, i Soa, Rasoa; IKala, Rakala; i Ketaka, Iketaka, Raketaka; # i Tefy, Ratefy; i Vololona, Ravololona}. # Apparent exceptions behave as expected, i.e. as PN following pattern A # above: { NyAvana, NyOny, NyAina,…} # F 1: Testfile for Case in simple Malagasy sentences. # However see File 3 below for Case in sentences involving complex predicates as many verbs # appear to be superficially simple and yet involve rather complex morphology. # General pattern A: Nominative case-marker ø but D is obligatory. # Ungrammatical Bakoly ve no manapaka bozaka? (0! 0 0 0) # Bakoly ve no m- an-(t)apaka bozaka? # Bakoly Q focus pres-prf.an-root.tapaka grass # "Is it Bakoly who is cutting grass?" # This sequence is adapted from Ileana Paul (2000: 177, ex. 48). # Note the absence of D.sg 'i' in front of 'Bakoly'. I Bakoly ve no manapaka bozaka? # I Bakoly ve no m- an-(t)apaka bozaka? # D.sg Bakoly Q focus pres-prf.an-root.tapaka grass # "Is it Bakoly who is cutting grass?" # Note the presence of D.sg 'i' in front of 'Bakoly'. # Ungrammatical Omaly ve Bakoly no manapaka bozaka? (0! 0 0 0) # Omaly ve Bakoly no m- an-(t)apaka bozaka? # yesterday Q Bakoly focus pres-prf.an-root.tapaka grass # "Was it yesterday that Bakoly was cutting grass?" # This sequence is adapted from Ileana Paul (2000: 178, ex. 49). # Note the absence of D.sg 'i' in front of 'Bakoly'. Omaly ve i Bakoly no nanapaka bozaka? # Omaly ve i Bakoly no n-an- (t)apaka bozaka? # yesterday Q D.sg Bakoly focus past-prf.an-root.tapaka grass # "Was it yesterday that Bakoly was cutting grass?" # Note the presence of D.sg 'i' in front of 'Bakoly'. # Ungrammatical Bakoly ve dia manapaka bozaka? (0! 0 0 0) # Bakoly ve dia m- an-(t)apaka bozaka? # Bakoly Q topic pres-prf.an-root.tapaka grass # "Bakoly, is she cutting grass?" # This sequence is adapted from Ileana Paul (2000: 178, ex. 50). # Note the absence of D.sg 'i' in front of 'Bakoly'. I Bakoly ve dia manapaka bozaka? # I Bakoly ve dia m- an-(t)apaka bozaka? # D.sg Bakoly Q topic pres-prf.an-root.tapaka grass # "Bakoly, is she cutting grass?" # This sequence was adapted from Ileana Paul (2000: 178, ex. 50). # Note the presence of D.sg 'i' in front of 'Bakoly'. # General pattern A: Accusative-marker 'an' obligatory on D. Nahita an’i Koto i Soa. # Nahita an’ i Koto i Soa. # N-a-hita an' i Koto i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc D.sg Koto D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw Koto (intimate)." # Ungrammatical Nahita i Koto i Soa.(0! 0 0 0) # N-a-hita i Koto i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita D.sg Koto D.sg Soa. # "Soa (intimate) saw Koto (intimate)." Nahita an-dry Koto ry Soa. # N-a-hita an- d-ry Koto ry Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc-d-D.pl Koto D.pl Soa # "Soa & associates saw Koto & associates." # Note the presence of the accusative particle 'an'. # Note the epenthetic d between 'an' and D.plur 'ry.' # Ungrammatical Nahita ry Koto ry Soa.(0! 0 0 0) # N-a-hita ry Koto ry Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita D.pl Koto D.pl Soa # "Soa & associates saw Koto & associates." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an'. Nahita an-dRaKoto Rasoa. # N-a-hita an- d-Ra- koto Ra-soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc-d-D.sg koto D.sg-soa # "Rasoa (familiar) saw Rakoto (familiar)." # Note the presence of the accusative particle 'an'. # Note the epenthetic 'd' between 'an' & 'Rakoto'. # Ungrammatical Nahita RaKoto Rasoa.(0! 0 0 0) # N-a-hita Ra-koto Ra-soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita D.sg-koto D.sg-soa # "Rasoa (familiar) saw Rakoto (familiar)." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an'. Nahita an'Ikala Soa i Koto. # N-a-hita an’ Ikala Soa i Koto. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc D.sg Soa D.sg Soa # "Koto (intimate) saw Soa (very intimate, only between females)." # Note the presence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # D.sg 'Ikala". # Ungrammatical Nahita Ikala Soa i Koto.(0! 0 0 0) # N-a-hita Ikala Soa i Koto # past-pref.a-root.hita D.sg Soa D.sg Koto # "Koto (intimate) saw Soa (very intimate, only between females)." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # D.sg 'Ikala'. Nahita an-dRamatoa Rakala i Koto. # N-a-hita an- d-Ramatoa Rakala i Koto. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc-d-D.sg Rakala D.sg Koto # "Koto (intimate) saw Mrs. Rakala (deferential)." # Note the presence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # D.sg 'Ramatoa'. # Note the epenthetic 'd' between the accusative particle 'an' and # D.sg 'Ramatoa'. # Ungrammatical Nahita Ramatoa Rakala i Koto.(0! 0 0 0) # N-a-hita Ramatoa Rakala i Koto # past-pref.a-root.hita D.sg Rakala D.sg Koto # "Koto (intimate) saw Mrs. Rakala (deferential)." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # D.sg 'Ramatoa'. Nahita an’Ingahy Rakoto i Soa. # N-a-hita an' Ingahy Rakoto i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc D.sg Rakoto D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw Mr. Rakoto (somewhat familiar)." # Note the presence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # D.sg 'Ingahy'. # Ungrammatical Nahita Ingahy Koto i Soa.(0! 0 0 0) # N-a-hita Ingahy Rakoto i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita D.sg Rakoto D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw Mr. Rakoto (somewhat familiar)." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # D.sg 'Ingahy'. Nahita an’Andriamatoa Rakoto i Soa. # N-a-hita an' Andriamatoa Rakoto i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc D.sg Rakoto D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw Mr. Rakoto (deferential)." # Note the presence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # D.sg 'Andriamatoa'. # Ungrammatical Nahita Andriamatoa Rakoto i Soa.(0! 0 0 0) # N-a-hita Andriamatoa Rakoto i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita D.sg Rakoto D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw Mr. Rakoto (deferential)." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # D.sg 'Andriamatoa'. Nahita an’i NyAina i NyAvana. # N-a-hita an' i Nyaina i NyAvana. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc D.sg Nyaina D.sg NyAvana # "NyAvana (intimate) saw NyAina (intimate)." # Note the presence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # D.sg 'i'. # Note that 'NyAina' is a proper name, not analyzed as a combination # of 'Ny + Aina'. # Ungrammatical Nahita NyAina i NyAvana.(0! 0 0 0) # N-a-hita Nyaina i NyAvana. # past-pref.a-root.hita Nyaina D.sg NyAvana # "NyAvana (intimate) saw NyAina (intimate)." # Note the absence of the accusative particle and that of # D.sg 'i' in front of the proper name 'NyAina'. # Ungrammatical Nahita an'NyAina i NyAvana.(0! 0 0 0) # N-a-hita an' Nyaina i NyAvana. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc Nyaina D.sg NyAvana # "NyAvana (intimate) saw NyAina (intimate)." # Note the absence of D.sg 'i' in front of the proper name 'NyAina'. # General pattern B: accusative-marker 'an' incompatible with Det 'ny'. Nahita ny ankizy i Soa. # N-a-hita ny ankizy i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita Det.unspec child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw the (previous mention) children." # Note the absence of the accusative case particle 'an' in front # of Det.unspec 'ny'. # Ungrammatical Nahita an’ny ankizy i Soa.(0! 0 0 0) # N-a-hita an’ ny ankizy i Soa.(0! 0 0 0) # past-pref.a-root.hita acc Det.unspec child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw the (previous mention) children." # Note the presence of the accusative case particle 'an' in front # of Det.unspec 'ny'. # Note that Det 'ny' is unspecified in that it refers to a set, which # can comprise a whole set of entities (plural) or only one single # entity (singular) in case of familiarity. # Thus the following sequence # Nahita ny lehilahy ny vehivavy. # N-a-hita ny lehilahy ny vehivavy. # past-pref.a-root.hita Det.unspec man/men Det.unspec woman/women # "The woman saw the man." (original translation) # This sentence is adapted from Ileana Paul (2000: 15, ex 23a.). # It should be translated as 'The (previous mention) women saw # the (previous mention) men." Nahita ny lehilahy ny vehivavy. # N-a-hita ny lehilahy ny vehivavy. # past-pref.a-root.hita Det.unspec man/men Det.unspec woman/women # "The woman saw the man." (original translation) # This sentence is from Ileana Paul (2000: 15, ex 23a.). # It should be translated as 'The (previous mention) women saw # the (previous mention) men." # The above sequence cannot appear discourse-initially; first # one needs (a) to introduce all the entities comprised in # the set in a previously explicit discourse and (b) refer to # all members of the set. Nahita ny alika ny zazavavy. # N-a-hita ny alika ny zazavavy. # past-pref.a-root.hita Det.unspec a/dog(s) Det.unspec a/girl(s) # "The girl sees the dog." (original translation) # This sentence is from Matthew Pearson (2001: 28, ex 19a.). # It should be translated as 'The (previous mention) girls saw # the (previous mention) dogs." # The above sequence cannot appear discourse-initially; first # one needs (a) to introduce all the entities comprised in # the set in a previously explicit discourse and (b) refer to # all members of the set. # General pattern C: accusative-marker an optional on DX. Nahita ilay ankizy i Soa. # N-a-hita ilay ankizy i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita DX.sg child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw the (previous mention) child." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # DX.sg 'ilay''the previously mentioned' Nahita an’ilay ankizy i Soa. # N-a-hita an' ilay ankizy i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc DX.sg child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw the (previous mention) child." # Note the presence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # DX.sg 'ilay''the previously mentioned' Nahita ity ankizy i Soa. # N-a-hita ity ankizy i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita DX.sg child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw this (previous mention) child." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # DX.sg 'ity''this.near.the.speaker' Nahita an’ity ankizy i Soa. # N-a-hita an' ity ankizy i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc DX.sg child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw the (previous mention) child." # Note the presence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # DX.sg 'ity''this.near.the.speaker' Nahita ireto ankizy i Soa. # N-a-hita ireto ankizy i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita DX.pl child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw these (previous mention) children." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # DX.pl 'ireto''these.near.the.speaker'. Nahita an’ireto ankizy i Soa. # N-a-hita an' ireto ankizy i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc DX.pl child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw these (previous mention) children." # Note the presence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # DX.pl 'ireto''these.near.the.speaker'. Nahita iro ankizy i Soa. # N-a-hita iro ankizy i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita DX.sg child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw this (previous mention) child." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # DX.sg 'iro''this.near.the.speaker/hearer'. Nahita an’iro ankizy i Soa. # N-a-hita an' iro ankizy i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc DX.sg child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw this (previous mention) child." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # DX.sg 'iro''this.near.the.speaker/hearer'. Nahita irero ankizy i Soa. # N-a-hita irero ankizy i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita DX.pl child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw those (previous mention) children." # Note the absence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # DX.pl 'irero''these.near.the.speaker/hearer'. Nahita an’irero ankizy i Soa. # N-a-hita an' irero ankizy i Soa. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc DX.pl child(ren) D.sg Soa # "Soa (intimate) saw those (previous mention) children." # Note the presence of the accusative particle 'an' in front of # DX.pl 'irero''these.near.the.speaker/hearer'. # Remarks on pseudo-transitive verbs in Malagasy: # In Malagasy, many verbs look like they could be simple transitive verbs; in reality, they are # not as they do not undergo passive. A typical example is 'mahita''to see'. This phenomenon seems # to be generally related to the morphological complexity of the verbal predicate under consideration. # At first, we will consider apparently simple predicates before delving into complex ones. # Part A: Morpheme aha > a & lack of morphological Fusion, i.e. a complex predicate # comprising this morpheme remains complex in that there is no fusion between the # higher and the lower predicates. See Randriamasimanana (1986:129-177) for further # details. This contrasts with the situation to be dealt with in Part B. hita # hita root 'be.seen'; mahita # mahita m+a+hita pseudo-transitive verb 'to see' or 'to be able to see'; # at first sight, the form mahita looks like a straightforward and simple predicate; # in reality, it is a complex predicate, which will assign accusative case to its # complement, but not be able to undergo passive as a morphological unit; we will # label this type of verb as 'pseudo-transitive'; # mahita < m+a+hita < m+aha+hita 'active.voice.pres-aha-root.hita'; standard Malagasy being # an h-dropping variety, aha reduces to aa > a, hence the apparent prefix a; evidence for # deriving a from aha, mahita = 'see' as well as 'can see'(ABILITATIVE meaning); the # above solution was first suggested in Rabenilaina (1996:133, Table 11). # Evidence that mahita is a pseudo-transitive V: # (A) It is true that 'mahita' requires a complement, which appears to be a Direct Object,i.e. # DO at least, as far as case-assignment is concerned; consider Nahita an'Ikala Soa i Koto. # N-a-hita an’ Ikala Soa i Koto. # past-pref.a-root.hita acc D.sg Soa D.sg Soa # "Koto (intimate) saw Soa (very intimate, only between females)." # Ungrammatical: Nahita Ikala Soa i Koto.(0! 0 0 0) # N-a-hita Ikala Soa i Koto # past-pref.a-root.hita D.sg Soa D.sg Koto # "Koto (intimate) saw Soa (very intimate, only between females)." # (B) However, if mahita was really a transitive V it should be possible to 'promote' its DO # to grammatical subject. Now this is totally impossible! The reason for this kind of # phenomenon can be related to the general behavior of ABILITATIVE aha when combining with other # roots, i.e. passive roots (exactly the case of mahita) as well as nonpassive roots. # In the sequence ABILITATIVE aha + root, we have two separate predicates, i.e. # the higher predicate aha and the lower root predicate. The complex aha + root # can assign accusative case to its complement; but because we do not have one single # predicate but two different ones, passive of the complex sequence is totally impossible. # The above phenomenon is not restricted to the pseudo-transitive V mahita. It applies # to all sequences comprising ABILITATIVE aha + passive root (first section). Consider # the examples below Nahaloaka an'ilay varavarana i Koto. # N-aha-loaka an' ilay varavarana i Koto. # past-aha-root.loaka acc DX.sg window D.sg Koto # 'Koto managed to perforate the window.' # Ungrammatical: Nahaloakan'i Koto ilay varavarana.(0! 0 0 0) # N-aha-loaka-n(a) i Koto ilay varavarana . # past-aha-root.loaka-suff.ana D.sg Koto DX.sg window # 'The window was managed to be perforated by Koto.' # The above sentence simply does NOT exist in Malagasy and the initial sequence does not # have a passive voice counterpart comprising the verbal prefix aha: An attempt was made # to passivise on the complex verbal predicate aha + loaka, with the AGENT encoded as a # genitive introduced by -n(a). In fact, the nearest equivalent to a passive voice sequence # is the following Loakan'i Koto ilay varavarana. # Loaka-n' i Koto ilay varavarana. # root.loaka-clitic.na D.sg Koto DX.sg window # 'The (previous mention) window has been successfully perforated by Koto.' # where the ABILITATIVE prefix aha has been taken off the passive root and the AGENT # is now encoded as a genitive via the clitic -n(a) 'by'. Note that the two sequences # ' Nahaloaka an'ilay varavarana i Koto' in the active voice with aha and the perfective # aspect sequence 'Loakan'i Koto ilay varavarana' are cognitively equivalent. # The above phenomenon is not restricted to the pseudo-transitive V mahita. It also applies # to all sequences comprising ABILITATIVE aha + nonpassive root (second section); recall that # this is an open-ended process. Consider the following examples Nahasasa an'ilay lamba i Soa. # N-aha-sasa an' ilay lamba i Soa. # past-aha-root.sasa acc DX.sg linen D.sg Soa # 'Soa managed to wash the (previous mention) linen.' # Ungrammatical: Nahasasan' i Soa ilay lamba.(0! 0 0 0) # N-aha-sasa-n(a) i Soa ilay lamba. # past-aha-root.sasa-suff.(a)na D.sg Soa DX.sg linen # 'The (previous mention) linen was managed to be washed by Soa.' # The above sentence simply does NOT exist in Malagasy and the initial sequence does not # have a passive voice counterpart comprising the verbal prefix aha: An attempt was made # to passivise on the complex verbal predicate aha + sasa, with the AGENT encoded as a # genitive introduced by -n(a). In fact, the nearest equivalent to a passive voice sequence # is the following Voasasan' i Soa ilay lamba. # Voa-sasa-n(a) i Soa ilay lamba. # Perf-root.sasa-clitic.na D.sg Soa DX.sg linen # 'The (previous mention) linen has been successfully washed by Soa.' # where the ABILITATIVE prefix aha has been taken off the nonpassive root and the AGENT is now # encoded as a genitive via the clitic -n(a). The two sequences 'Nahasasa an'ilay lamba i Soa' # in the active voice with aha and the perfective aspect sequence 'Voasasan' i Soa ilay lamba' # are cognitively equivalent. # Part B: Absence of morpheme aha > a & morphological Fusion, i.e. a complex predicate # from which this morpheme aha > a is absent indicates that there may be a fusion between the # higher and the lower predicates. This contrasts with the situation dealt with in # Part A above. tapaka be.cut manapaka m+an+(t)apaka > manapaka genuinely transitive verb 'to cut' # In the active voice, Fusion of the lower predicate, i.e. the root 'tapaka''be.cut' into the # the higher predicate 'an' is quite apparent in the disappearance of the initial consonant of # the root and in the homorganic nasal assimilation usually affecting the nasal of prefix an. # Evidence that manapaka 'to cut' is a genuinely transitive verb. Its complement can not only # take the accusative case-marker 'an'; its direct object can also become a subject, as in Nanapaka an'ilay tady i Paoly. # N-an-(t)apaka an' ilay tady i Paoly. # past-pref.an-root.tapaka acc DX.sg rope D.sg Paul # "Paul cut the (previous mentioned) rope.' Notapahin'i Paoly ilay tady. # No-tapah-in' i Paoly ilay tady. # past.pass-stem.tapah-suff.ina D.sg Paul DX.sg rope # 'The (p.m.) rope was cut by Paul.' # This last sequence shows that the initially complex sequence n+an+tapaka has become one # single unit and that passive on the entire sequence is possible with passive 1 affixes # no...ina. This is characteristic of a typically transitive verb, which is explicitly # indicated in the lexicon by a label like MANIPULATIVE an in the active voice sequence # m+an 'active.voice.present.tense-prf.an' along with its passive 1 counterpart involving # the affixes 'no...ina'. # As expected, with manapaka m+an+(t)apaka the prefix an is MANIPULATIVE an since the embedded # predicate tapaka 'be.cut' is not a psychological predicate. See Randriamasimanana (1986: # 20-26), for example, for further illustrations. If, on the other hand, the prefix an was # CAUSAL, then the embedded predicate is more than likely to be a psychological predicate. # Part C: Pseudo-transitive complex predicates. # It is not just the sequence ABILITATIVE aha+root, which gives rise to a pseudo-transitive # complex predicate, as was shown to be the case in Part A above. It is also the case with # most other causative constructions including the following, which all clearly involve # an embedded psychological predicate: # CAUSAL aha+root mahafaty # root faty N 'corpse'; # m+aha+faty 'pres-aha-faty''dangerous' Io no nahafaty an'i Paoly. # Io no nahafaty an' i Paoly # this focus past-aha-root.faty acc D.sg Paul # 'It is this which caused Paul's death.' # Ungrammatical: Io no nahafaty i Paoly.(0! 0 0 0) # Io no nahafaty i Paoly # this focus past-aha-root.faty D.sg Paul # 'It is this which caused Paul's death.' # The accusative case-marker an has been left out and the second sequence is irretrievably # ungrammatical. # Ungrammatical: Nahafatesan'i Paoly io.(0! 0 0 0) # N-aha-fate-s-an' i Paoly io. # past-aha-stem.fat(i>e)-s-suffix.ana D.sg Paul this # 'It is this which caused Paul's death.' # Putative passive voice for 'Io no nahafaty an'i Paoly'. # An attempt was made to passivise on the complex predicate aha+faty and the output is # totally ungrammatical. This sequence simply does not exist in Malagasy!Apparently the # embedded predicate faty 'be-corpse' behaves like a psychological predicate. # CAUSAL aha+voa+root mahavoasazy # root sazy N 'punishment'; # mahavoasazy m+aha+voa+sazy 'pres-aha-perfective.voa-sazy''to make someone liable to a # punishment'; Io no nahavoasazy an'i Paoly. # Io no nahavoasazy an' i Paoly # this focus past-aha-voa-root.sazy acc D.sg Paul # 'It is this which made Paul liable to a punishment.' # Ungrammatical: Io no nahavoasazy i Paoly.(0! 0 0 0) # Io no nahavoasazy i Paoly # this focus past-aha-voa-root.sazy D.sg Paul # The accusative case-marker an has been left out and the second sequence is irretrievably # ungrammatical. # Ungrammatical: Nahavoasazin'i Paoly io.(0! 0 0 0) # N-aha-voa-saz(i)-in' i Paoly io. # past-aha-voa-stem.sazi-suffix.ina D.sg Paul this # Putative passive voice for 'Io no nahavoasazy an'i Paoly', which simply # does not exist in Malagasy!Apparently the embedded predicate voasazy 'be-punished' behaves # like a psychological predicate. # ank+adjective mankarary # mankarary m+ank+arary 'pres-ank-arary' from (m)arary 'sick''to make someone sick'; Io no nankarary an'i Paoly. # Io no nankarary an' i Paoly # this focus past-ank-arary acc D.sg Paul # 'It is this which caused Paul to get sick.' # Ungrammatical: Io no nankarary i Paoly.(0! 0 0 0) # Io no nankarary i Paoly # this focus past-ank-arary D.sg Paul # 'It is this which caused Paul to get sick.' # The accusative case-marker an has been left out and the second sequence is irretrievably # ungrammatical. # Ungrammatical: Nankararin'i Paoly io.(0! 0 0 0) # N-ank-arar(i)-in(a) i Paoly io. # past-ank-(m)arary-pass.ina D.sg Paul this # Putative passive voice for 'Io no nankarary an'i Paoly', which simply # does not exist in Malagasy!Apparently the embedded predicate (m)arary 'be-sick' behaves # like a psychological predicate. # CAUSAL an+root mandreraka # root reraka 'be-exhausted'; # mandreraka # m+an+d+reraka 'pres-pref.an-ep.d-reraka''to tire seomeone out'; Nandreraka an'i Paoly i Jeanne. # N-an-d-reraka an' i Paoly i Jeanne. # past-pref.an-ep.d-reraka acc D.sg Paul D.sg Jeanne # 'Paul was fed up with Jeanne.' # Ungrammatical: Nandrerahin'i Jeanne i Paoly.(0! 0 0 0) # N-an-d-rerah-in(a) i Jeanne i Paoly. # past-pref.an-ep.d-rerah-suffix.ina D.sg Jeanne D.sg Paul # Putative passive for 'Nandreraka an'i Paoly i Jeanne', which simply # does not exist in Malagasy! Apparently the embedded predicate reraka 'be-exhausted' behaves # like a psychological predicate. # Exceptionally (genuine) complex transitive verb: The only grammatical causative # prefix which allows both (i) case-assignment and (ii) passive to the whole verbal # complex is MANIPULATIVE amp, as will be illustrated immediately below. Also see # Randriamasimanana (1986: 42-46) for further illustrations. # DIRECTIVE amp in sequence m+amp+ V mampandeha # basic verb mandeha 'to go'; # m+amp+andeha 'active.voice.pres-amp-andeha''to ask someone to go'; Mampandeha an'i Paoly i Jeanne. # m-amp-andeha an' i Paoly i Jeanne. # active.voice.pres-amp-andeha acc D.sg Paul D.sg Jeanne # here (m)andeha contains a feature [ + CONTROL] and Paul has control over # whether he will go or not; note the presence of the accusative case-marker; # we have two distinct predicates: amp is the higher predicate and andeha is # the lower predicate; hence the impossibility of passive (see below); # 'Jeanne asks Paul to go.' This is the preferred reading for m+amp+V. # Ungrammatical: Mampandeha i Paoly i Jeanne.(0! 0 0 0) # m-amp-andeha i Paoly i Jeanne. # active.voice.pres-amp-andeha D.sg Paul D.sg Jeanne # here (m)andeha contains a feature [ + CONTROL] and Paul has control over # whether he will go or not; note the absence of the accusative case-marker # an, which explains the ungrammaticality of the sequence; # Ungrammatical: Ampandehanan' i Jeanne i Paoly.(0! 0 0 0) # ø-amp-andeh(a)-an(a) i Jeanne i Paoly. # passive.voice.pres-amp-andeha-suffix.ana D.sg Jeanne D.sg Paul # here (m)andeha contains a feature [ + CONTROL] and Paul has control over # whether he will go or not; # 'Ampandehanan' i Jeanne i Paoly' can NEVER mean 'Jeanne asks Paul to go.' # MANIPULATIVE amp in sequence ø+amp+ V+ana ampandehanana # basic verb mandeha 'to go'; # ø+amp+andeh(a)+ana 'passive.voice.pres-amp-andeha-suffix.ana''to be dragged along'; Mampandeha an'i Paoly i Jeanne. # m-amp-andeha an' i Paoly i Jeanne. # active.voice.pres-amp-andeha acc D.sg Paul D.sg Jeanne # here (m)andeha contains a feature [ - CONTROL] and Paul has no control over # whether he will go or not; he is simply being dragged along so that 'mampandeha' # is one single predicate, not a complex one with a higher and a lower predicate; # 'Jeanne drags Paul along'. This additional reading of m+amp+V requires some context. # Ungrammatical: Mampandeha i Paoly i Jeanne.(0! 0 0 0) # m-amp-andeha i Paoly i Jeanne. # active.voice.pres-amp-andeha D.sg Paul D.sg Jeanne # here (m)andeha contains a feature [ - CONTROL] and Paul has no control over # whether he will go or not; he is simply being dragged along; note the absence # of the accusative case-marker, which accounts for its ungrammaticality; Ampandehanan' i Jeanne i Paoly. # ø-amp-andeh(a)-an(a) i Jeanne i Paoly. # passive.voice.pres-amp-andeha-suffix.ana D.sg Jeanne D.sg Paul # here (m)andeha contains a feature [ - CONTROL] and Paul has no control over # whether he will go or not; again he is simply being dragged along; # 'Ampandehanan' i Jeanne i Paoly' can NEVER mean 'Jeanne asks Paul to go.' # This MANIPULATIVE interpretation of ø+amp...ana where the entire sequence is one # single predicate in the passive voice does not require any context of any kind. # Charles Randriamasimanana, PhD in Linguistics (Malagasy, Austronesian)