| Double
causative |
|
Semantically,
one could also have a double causative, i.e. a person instigating another
person to cause a work to be done by a third person, as in: |
i e one
nono pepelo asi cúpekè |
`I caused you to cause him to eat meat’ |
|
|
|
structurally,
it could however, not be said to be a double causative because he noun/pronoun
referring to both the first and second instigator would have the nominative
case marker and the first instigator forms a part of the subordinate clause,
viz., iFe´ono for me/because of me’, with the principal clause
having only a single instigator, i.e., the second instigator. |
| Though
it is possible to have the causative constructions of the type described
above, ordinarily such constructions are not made use of except when the
affected noun refers to an inanimate object or in response to a specific
question which require the agent to be mentioned, for instance to the
question. |
| khuúno
aa
thuúpe anì kya? |
`who
is growing the child ?’ |
the response could :
|
|
| lino
aa
thuúpe anì |
`she
is growing the child’ |
|
|
|
In
closing, it might be stated that basically there are two types of causative
constructions in Sema, viz., agentive and non-agentive causatives. Of
course, the former could have either one or two instigators. But the causative
constructions as a whole are not favoured ones in Sema and are resorted
to only when the affected noun/pronoun refers to an inanimate being or
in response to a question which requires the instigator to be mentioned. |
| 3.3.4.
Active - passive constructions |
|
The
voice is a grammatical function which makes it possible to view the action
of a sentence in two ways without changing the facts represented, as in |
| 1.
|
(a)
ac no
imikiwe |
`the
dog bit me’ |
| |
(b) niye acno
mikiwe |
`I
was bitten by the dog’. |
| 2. |
(a) ino axamnuhu xowà |
`I
plucked the flower’ |
| |
(b) axamnuhu ino xowà |
`the
flower was plucked by me’ |
| |
(c) axamnuhu xowà |
`the flower was plucked’ |
|
|
|
The
sentence 1(a) and 2(a) above are active and the other sentences are passive.
Since the use of passive in Sema is slightly different from many other
known languages, it is felt that a simple description of the usage in
English may clarify the use of passive in Sema. In the undermentioned
sentences 3(a) and 4(a) are active and 3(b) and 4(b) are passive. |
| 3. |
(a) Hatoli saw Ekili. |
| |
(b)
Ekili was seen by Hatoli |
| 4. |
(a) Ekili saw Hatoli |
| |
(b) Hatoli was seen by Ekili |
|
|
| This
relationship betwen the corresponding active and passive sentences was
traditionally associated of such terms as are stated below (Lyons : 1974
: 376) |
| (i) |
The
object of the active sentences becomes the subject of the corresponding
passive sentence. Thus Ekili is the object of 3(a) and the subject
of 3(b) and Hatoli is the object of 4(a) and the subject of 4(b). |
| (ii) |
The
verb is `active’ in `form’ in the more basic (active)
`version’ and `passive’ in `form’ in less basic
(passive) `version’. Thus `saw’ (action) vs `was seen’
(passive). |
| (iii)
|
The
subject of the active sentence is not necessarily `expressed’
(overtly represented); it takes the form of an adjunct marker as
`agentive’ by means of case inflection or by the use of particular
postposition : thus by Hatoli and by Ekili in 3(b) and
4(b) respectively. |
|
|
“The
term active and passive were used in two different senses in the traditional
formulation of the three conditions listed above, in (i) and (iii) they
were applied to sentences whereas in (ii) they were applied to the forms
of the verb” (Lyon 74 : 374). As this point it may be advantageous
to return to the examples in Sema given earlier and compare them with
those of English. In Sema too : |
| (i) |
a
change in the word order of the subject/object of the active sentence
takes place in the corresponding passive sentence. |
| (ii) |
the subject of the active sentence is not necessarily expressed
(i.e., overtly represented) in the corresponding passive
sentence. |
|
