order alternatively but equally, perhaps more
meaningfully, seem marked, somehow nonbasic.
|
| 440. |
onaĩo-yi-sü1
omi no2 di-oĩie3 |
fire2
burnt3 the child1
|
| |
|
|
| 441 |
ayi1
bus-no2 she3
|
(the) bus2
hit3 me1
19
|
|
The following exemplify the unfailing persistence with which
the subject occupies the sentence-initial position.
|
| 442
|
a. |
ai1
imemüi2 -ko-e |
I1
(am) (a) Mao2 |
|
|
b. |
pfo(hĩ1
omüi dakaĩhamüi2 |
he1
became3 (a) brigand
2 |
| |
|
so-ĩi-e3
|
|
|
|
c. |
onia1
ocü2 vu ta-e3 |
Onia1
went3 home2(in
her native village) |
|
|
d. |
a1
dzürieo2 kosa3
kati4 kaxi5 |
my1
elder brother2
brought6 two
5 |
| |
|
pfo vu-e6 |
small4
cats 3 |
|
|
e. |
lohrü-no1
larübvü2 kali3
pi-e4 |
Lohrü1
gave4 a3
book2 |
|
|
Mao is a partially ergative or split ergative language
because the transitive subject shows up in the ergative
only in specific contexts : (a) the inanimate (including
natural force) agent subjects of unitransitive verbs (egs.
443-g) (b) animate subjects of bicentennial, typically
though not necessarily, syntactic-causative (as opposed
to morphological causative) structures and (c) agent subjects
of ditransitive verbs both of whose nonsubject participants
are propositional roles or inner completions,20are
obligatorily marked by no
|
| 443 |
a |
bas-na-ĩi-no
ayi she |
the bus hit
me |
| |
b. |
omi-no onaĩo-yi-sü
di-oĩie |
(the) fire burnt
the child |
| |
c. |
cürü-no
(oca) omo-yi-sü |
rains destroyed
the crops |
| |
|
so mashü-oĩie
|
|
| |
d. |
cükri-no
sübu-yi he kongo-oĩie |
(the) wind has
shaken (the) tree(s) |
|
|
19.
|
In any case these are not good
examples of a flexible word order leading to difficulties |
| in
identifying the subject because the other nominal
constituent viz. the DO is morpho logically marked
by yi. |
|
20
|
This third linguistic context of ergative marking is subject to further regorisation as native speakers displayed
differential judgment. |
|
e. |
mikrüli/mikrüyi1
cüni-no2 |
(the) Imphal1
heat2 killed4
him3 |
| |
pfo-yi3
di ĩha-oĩie4
|
|
|
f. |
omi-na1
sübü2 lohe3 |
(the) landslide1
destroyed5
the |
| |
kobu-ta-yi-sü4
so mashü-oĩi-e5 |
trees2
that were4
there3
|
|
g. |
ozhie dzü-no1
propa-yi2
so |
(the) dew/frost1
destroyed3
(the) |
| |
mashü-oĩi-e3
flowers2
|
|
|
| 444. |
1 |
a. |
pfota
lopüi-yi soĩha-e3 |
they
(excl.pl.)1
killed3
her2 |
|
|
b. |
{
pfota-no } 1
|
|
|
|
|
{
} |
ayi
peno2 lopüi-yi3
soĩha-e4
|
|
|
|
{
*pfota } |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
‘they
(excl. pl.)1
made me2
kill4
|
her
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
2 |
a. |
pfohĩ
shahramüi la2
|
modo-e3
|
|
|
|
they
(du.)1
learnt3
English2
|
|
| |
|
b. |
{
pfohĩ-no }1 |
|
|
|
|
{
} |
atayi
peno2 shahramüi
la3 modo-e4
|
|
|
|
{
*pfohĩ } |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
they
(du.)1
made us |
(excl.
prn. & excl. pl.)2
learn4
|
|
|
|
|
English3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
a. |
kaikho1
pfoyi2
nie3
kaikho1 |
saw3
her2 |
|
|
b. |
{
kaikho-no }1 |
|
|
|
|
{
} |
a2
he3 pfoyi4
mani-e5
|
|
|
|
{ *kaikho } |
|
|
|
|
‘Kaikho1
showed5
her4
to3 |
me2
|
|
Ergativity has to do with genuine argument
augmentation, not merely with the overt presence/absence of an NP : Thus,
|
| 4
|
a. |
camaikho1
kaikho2
cü3 21
hu vu-e4
|
| |
|
Chamaikho1
guested4
Kaikho’s2
house3
|
|
|
21.
|
This expression, albeit
grammatically odd English, renders exactly the Mao verb hu (vu) ‘to visit as a guest’ |
