| (71) |
/h 1
par 2
  so/ |
| Nom [Exp] |
`my1 friend2
slept3’
|
|
| (72) |
/h1
tap 2
thąde3/ |
| Nom [A] Acc [0] |
`I1 eat3
rice2’
|
|
| (73) |
| /tamyā1 tabróch2 hwliyą3/ |
| Nom [A] Acc [0] |
`the tiger1
saw3 the hunter2’
|
|
| (74) |
/jyimcyane1
mčd
2
taméy n3
hakẽso4/ |
| Nom [A] Dat [G] Acc [0] |
`Jimchane1
showed4
the man2 and elephant3’
|
|
| (75) |
| /jyįbmalł1
jyimcyaned 2
tįra3
haso4/ |
| Nom [A] Dat [R] Acc [0] |
`Jabmalu1 gave4
a sword3 to Jimchane2’
|
|
|
It may be necessary and worthwhile to compare the dative
object with the sentences with the dative location sentences --
|
| (76) |
| /h1
į2
bóliyą3/ |
| Nom Dat |
'I1 went3
home2’
|
|
|
-- where the verb is intransitive. A point to be
mentioned here is that the behavior of the dative object is distinctive in
that it cannot be topicalized like the accusative object.
|
Apart from the four arguments
considered above, the verbs can also take other arguments like the
instrument, place, source, time, etc. However, it is not necessary that all
arguments should overtly be present in the sentence. Sometimes the arguments
can form part of the semantic content of the verb. This gives rise to the
phenomenon of what we called here `Argument-inclusive Verbs’. The included
arguments usually refer to specific objects or beings instead of members of
a group as in English verbs like, `kick’, `bite’, `sting’, etc.
|
|
(1) Subject-Inclusive Verbs :
|
| /w-/
|
`to bark (as a dog)’ |
| /hró-/ |
`to bark (as a deer)’ |
| /thįg-/ |
`to bite (as a dog)’ |
| /chč-/ |
`to bite (as a fish)’ |
| /p-/ |
`to bite (as a snake)’ |
| /hįą-/
|
`to ripen (as a fruit)’ |
| /ham-/
|
`to ripen (as paddy)’ |
/tabró-/
|
`to molt (as a snake)’
|
|
(2) Object-Inclusive Verbs :
|
| /tył-/ |
`to break (a stick)’ |
| /phrẽ-/ |
`to break (a thread)’ |
| /tyłkį-/ |
`to break (coconut/glass),to shatter’ |
| /cśm-/ |
`to blow (air)’ |
| /ma-/
|
`to blow (nose)’ |
| /né-/ |
`to wear (ornaments)’ |
| /kig-/ |
`to wear (clothes)’ |
/s-/
|
`to wear (shoes)’
|
|
