1. 1 Syntax-semantics mismatches and complex predicate formation in Formosan languages Henry Y. Chang Academia Sinica henryylc@gate.sinica.edu.tw

2. 2 Introduction: SVCs in Kavalan (1)a.m-atiw=iku m-ara tu sunis AF-go=1S.NOM AF-takeOBL child I go and bring a child back. b. qatiw-an-ku m-ara ya sunis go-PF-1S.GEN AF-take NOM child I go and bring the child back.

3. 3 Observations and generalizations 1.Clitic pronouns on the first verb > first verb as the matrix verb 2.The first verb can be inflected for either AF or NAF, while the second verb can only be inflected for AF > (i) The second verb as dependent (ii) Syntax-semantic mismatch: semantic argument of the embedded verb as matrix subject

4. 4 The mismatches are also found in adverbials (2)a.paqanas-an-ku t ayta ya sulal slow-PF-1S.GEN see NOM book I read the book slowly. b.pataz-an-ku-ti s upas ya qRitun often-PF-1S.G-ASP buff NOM car I buffed my car often. (Chang 2006)

5. 5 The mismatches are not restricted to SVCs: Also found in Paiwan (3)a. ku- acuvung a ma-sengseng a kava 1S.GEN-finish LNKAF-make NOM clothes I have finished making my clothes. b. ku-g alu a k im a hung 2S.GEN-slow LNK search NOM book I searched the book slowly. (Wu 2005)

6. 6 Also in Mayrinax (4)a. wah-an i m-itaal ni yumin i yaya go-LF LNK AF-see GEN Yumin NOM mother Yumin went to see his mother. b. naqaru-un-mi ima-bahuq ku situing la finish-PF-1S.GEN AF-wash NOM clothes PART I have finished washing the clothes. (Huang 1995: 193)

7. 7 Also in Amis Saisiyat Thao Puyuma (as reported in Huang (1997))

8. 8 Research question Why the mismatches?

9. 9 Raising analogue? (5) a. It seems that John is happy. b. John seems to be happy. (1) b. qatiw-an-ku m-ara ya sunis go-PF-1S.GEN AF-take NOM child I go and bring a child back. b. qatiw-an-ku [ VP m-ara t i ] ya sunis i

10. 10 Problems with raising analysis: 1. Unmotivated ( NP-movement is case- driven) (1) b. qatiw-an-ku [ VP m-ara t i ] ya sunis i OBL NOM 2. The matrix verbs are not of raising verbs

11. 11 The mismatches are reminiscent of complex predicate constructions (I) (6)a.John ran his shoes threadbare. b.John hammered the metal flat. (7)a.Zhangsan ku-de shoupa dou shi le ZS cry-DE handkerchief all wet ASP Zhangsan cried and he made his \ handkerchief wet. b. Zhangsan ba shoupa dou ku shi le ZS BA handkerchief all cry wet ASP c. Zhangsan ku-shi le shoupa ZS cry-wet ASP handkerchief (J. Huang 1992)

12. 12 The mismatches are reminiscent of complex predicate constructions (II) (8)a.Jean les=a fait reciter a Pierre (French) Jean made Pierre recite them. b.Maria la=fa riparare a Giovanni (Italian) Maria makes Giovanni repair it. c.Maria lo=hizo arreglar a Juan (Spanish) Maria made Juan fix it. (Rosen 1990:17)

13. 13 My proposal Verb sequences in question as complex predicates – two verbs act as a single predicate Complex predicates as argument structure merger (Rosen 1990) Argument sharing provides the basis for the merger As head of the clause, the first verb attract the major grammatical markers such as TAM and bound pronouns.

14. 14 Complex predicate formation in Kavalan (1)b. qatiw-an-ku m-ara ya sunis go-PF-1S.GEN AF-take NOM child I go and bring the child back. go (Actor i ) + take (Actor i, patient) argument structure merger in the syntax Complex argument structure: go-take (Actor, patient)

15. 15 Event-sharing in Kavalan (2)a. paqanas-an-ku t ata ya sulal slow-PF-1S.G see NOM book I read the book slowly. slow (event i ) +read (Actor, theme, event i )(Kratzer 1995) argument structure merger Complex AS: slow-read (Actor, theme, event)

16. 16 CPs in Tsou (1/2): Evidence from focus harmony (09)a. mi-o ahoi bon-U AF-1Sstart(AF)eat-AF tatacUmU OBLbanana I start eating bananas. b. os-oahoz-aan-a NAF-1Sstart-PFeat-PF otacUmU NOMbanana I start eating the bananas. (Chang 2005)

17. 17 CPs in Tsou (2/2): Evidence from compounding (10)a. mi-o o-hoi ta tacUmU AF-1S eat-start(AF)OBL banana I start eating bananas.(=9a) b. os-o o-hoz-a o tacUmU NAF-1S eat-start-PF NOM banana I start eating the bananas.(=9b)

18. 18 Event-sharing and CP formation in Tsou (11)a.mi-ta butas-o eobak-o ta oko AF-3S violent-AF hit-AF OBL child He hit a child violently. b.i-ta utasv-a eobak-a o oko NAF-3S violent-PF hit-PF NOM child He hit the child violently.

19. 19 Evidence for event-as-argument: Ambient serialization in Paamese (12)a.ko-muasi-e 0-vaa-hise 2S:REAL-hit-3S 3S:REAL-MULT-how many How many times did you hit him? b.ni-muasi-e he-haa-relu 1S:FUT-do-3S 3S:FUT-MULT-three I will do it three times. (Crowley 2002:81)

20. 20 Event-sharing in Paamese (11)b. ni-muasi-e he-haa-relu 1S:FUT-do-3S 3S:FUT-MULT-three I will do it three times. (Crowley 2002:81) Three-times (event i ) +do (agent, patient, event i ) argument structure merger Complex AS: do-three-times (agent, patient, event)

21. 21 Typology of CPs 1.Resultative/biclausal (Mandarin) 2.Causative/Infinitival (French, Paiwan, M. Atayal, Amis) 3. SVC (Kavalan, Tsou, Seediq, S. Atayal, Saisiyat, Thao, Puyuma) 4. Verb-particle (English, German) 5. Light verb (English, Hindi-Urdu)

22. 22 Complex predicate spectrum biclausal monoclausalword DE- construction infinitivesecondary predicate SVClight verbparticle construction compound ChineseRomance, Paiwan, (Amis, M. Atayal) English Chinese Kwa, Oceanic, Chinese, Tsou, Kavalan, Seediq, (W. Atayal, Saisiyat, Puyuma, Thao) Hindi-Urdu Eng, Chin Germanic, Chinese Chinese, Tsou

23. 23 Conclusions Complex predicate formation is very productive in Formosan languages. It cuts across various semantic categories (including adverbials) and syntactic structures (SVCs and non-SVCs). A possible basis for complex predicate formation is argument sharing (including event sharing).

24. 24 Residual questions (13)a.supaR-an-ku=ti=isu tu babar-an-na know-PF-1S.G=ASP=2S.N OBL beat-PF-3S.G I knew that he beat you. (Kavalan) b.kula-un-ku-su m- ekan ido know-PF-1S.N-2S.G AF- eat rice You know that I ate rice. (Seediq, Chang 1997:74) c.k elang ni kui ti kai tu know G Kui NOM Kai na-v eLi tua kun PERF-buy OBL skirt Kui knew that Kai bought a skirt. (Paiwan, Tang 1999:536)

25. 25 Selected references Brill, Isabelle. 2004. Complex predicates in Oceanic languages. Mouton de Gruyter. Chang, Henry Y. 2005. Focus harmony and restructuring in Tsou. Paper presented at AFLA12, UCLA, April 30-May 2. ___. 2006. The guest playing host: Adverbial modifiers as matrix verbs in Kavalan. Clausal structure and adjuncts in Austronesian languages. ed. by Hans-Martin Gartner, Paul Law, and Joachim Sabel, 43-82. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Crowley, Terry T. 2002. Serial Verbs in Oceanic: a descriptive typology. Oxford University Press. Huang, James C.-T. 1992. Complex predicates in control. Control and grammar, ed. by R.K. Larson, S. Iatridou, U. Lahiri and J. Higginbotham, pp. 109-147, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Huang, Lillian M. 1995. A study of Mayrinax syntax. Taipei: the Crane Publishing Co. ____. 1997. Serial verb constructions. Paper presented at the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, Dec. 28-30. Kratzer, Angelika. 1995. Stage-level and individual-level predicates. The generic book, ed. by Gregory N. Carlson and Francis Jeffry Pelletier, 125-175, Chicago: the Chicago Press. Rosen, Sara Thomas. 1990. Argument structure and complex predicates. New York: Garland Publishing.

26. 26 Acknowledgements Acadmia Sinica and NSC for financial support Informants for providing linguistic data Isabelle Bril for sharing her ideas with me Students at my Formosan syntax seminar at Tsing Hua for discussions of various relevant issues with me