Stative sentences with stative verbs

These sentences differ both from the other stative sentences and from event sentences. Un- like other stative sentences which have, at most, a bare copula for a verb, the verb in stative verb sentences can receive a rather full set of tense, affix, and pronoun affixes. 35 188 a. Jara-ka bo. here-INDIC you ‘You are here.’ b. Hebe-fa to dalhidi-koana. full-FUT the run-thing ‘The carbus will be full.’ c. Seme-ka to sikalho. sweet-INDIC the sugarcane ‘The sugarcane is sweet.’ d. Somole-ka-i hibin. drunk-INDIC-he already ‘He is already drunk.’ As can be seen in the above examples, this type of sentence also differs from other types in its word order. This is the only type of sentence in Arawak where the subject clearly seems to follow the verb. 36 189 a. Stative sentence: Fonasia-fa lirabo. hungry-FUT he.over.there ‘He will be hungry.’ b. Simple intransitive event sentence: Lirabo osy-fa. he.over.there go-FUT ‘He will go.’ In addition to the basic verb-subject ordering for these stative sentences, one occasion- ally does find subject-first ones. However, such sentences seem to be the result of subject fronting. As is the case with event sentences, in stative sentences it is also possible to front various constituents to the LSAP position. 80 Noun Phrase and Sentence Syntax 35 See Figure 8 in Section 2.4.2.1 for a summary of stative verb affixes. 36 Semantically, the second NP in attributive sentences seems more subject-like than the first. However, there is always some uncertainty created by the fact that the first constituent in attributive sentences seems to be an NP also, and therefore might be the subject. In event sentences, I have no clear examples of a subject, other than a relative pronoun or question word, moving to the LSAP position. 37 This may simply be because subject posi- tion is adjacent to the LSAP and therefore such movement is undetectable. In stative verb sentences, however, the subject can be fronted to LSAP, and the results of this fronting are visible. The fronting creates stative verb sentences with what appears to be a surface subject-verb constituent order. That this subject has landed in the LSAP posi- tion can be shown by the fact that in stative sentences with fronted subjects, no other con- stituents can be fronted to the LSAP. 190 a. Hebe-fa to dalhidi-koana mothi. full-FUT the run-thing tomorrow ‘The car will be full tomorrow.’ b. Mothi hebe-fa to dalhidi-koana. tomorrow full-FUT the run-thing ‘Tomorrow the car will be full. c. To dalhidi-koana hebe-fa mothi. the run-thing full-FUT tomorrow ‘The car will be full tomorrow.’ d. Mothi to dalhidi-koana hebe-fa. tomorrow the run-thing full-FUT ‘Tomorrow the car will be full.’ That the nominal following stative verbs is, in fact, the subject can be shown by the fact that when it is relativized, the subject-relativization suffix -thi-tho WH.SUBJ appears. 191 a. aba hebe-tho kekere a full-WH.SUBJ basket ‘a full basket a basket which is full’ b. to hehe-tho ada-yda the yellow-WH.SUBJ tree-skin ‘the yellow bark’ It is possible to use postpositions in Arawak as stative verbs see also Section 2.4.2.2 on derived stative verbs by simply placing them in the verb position in the clause. When used in this way, they can receive tense and aspect suffixes as well as the pronominal pre- fixes and suffixes normally used with stative verbs. Interestingly, sentences of this type have two NP arguments and could be regarded as stative analogues to transitive event sen- tences. As in other stative sentences, the subject in these sentences also follows the verb. 3.2 Sentence Structure 81 37 That a question word or relative pronoun is in the LSAP position can be shown by the fact that it cannot be preceded by another fronted constituent unless that constituent is in TOPIC position. Thus the following sentence, spoken without an intonation break between ‘tomorrow’ and the rest of the sentence, is unacceptable: Mothi alikan fonasia-fa ? tomorrow who hungry-FUT ‘Tomorrow who will be hungry?’ 192 a. Mothi bahy loko-fa no. tomorrow house in-FUT she ‘Tomorrow she will be in the house.’ b. Lo-jono koboroko-ka da-mathia. his-extended.family among-INDIC my-friend ‘My friend is e.g. sitting there with his family.’ c. Tho-loko-ka-i. it-in-INDIC-he ‘He is in it e.g. the house.’ Again, the grammatical roles of the nominals in question can be identified through the test of relativization. Arawak seems to treat the noun phrase preceding such a postpositional verb as an object, and the one following as a subject. As is the case with both event and stative clauses, when the subject, in this case the nominal following the verb, is relativized, the subject relativization suffix -tho-thi WH.SUBJ appears. 193 a. Bahy oko-ka li wadili. house in-INDIC the man ‘The man is in the house.’ b. li wadili bahy loko-thi the man house in-WH.SUBJ ‘the man in the house’ c. Li wadili [da-sikoa loko-thi koba] anda. the man [my-house in-WH.SUBJ past] arrive ‘The man, who used to be in my house, came.’ When the nominal preceding the verb in these sentences is relativized, it is treated the same as an object of transitive event sentence, and the object-relativization suffix -sia WH.OBJ appears see also Chapter 4 on relative clauses. 194 to sikoa ama loko-sia-ka li wadili… the house what in-WH.OBJ-INDIC the man… ‘the house in which the man iswas…’ 82 Noun Phrase and Sentence Syntax

Chapter 4 Relative Clauses

Several of the preceding sections have dealt in some detail with relative clauses. In par- ticular, sections on the structure of the noun phrase discussed their distribution, and sec- tions dealing with the LSAP Left Sentential Adjunct Position of the sentence and the structure of dummy verb sentences started to give some idea of the internal structure of relative clauses. The picture presented so far, however, has been sketchy and simplified. For example, almost none of the relative clauses treated in the above sections contained relative pronouns. The structure of relative clauses and relative-clause-like constructions in Arawak exhibits a fair range of complexity. Relative pronouns are optional in many cases and required in others; the subject- and object-relativizing verb suffixes sometimes seem to be optional; the verb-subordinating suffix is sometimes present and other times not. Postpositions may or may not be stranded by relative pronoun fronting, depending on the postposition. The fol- lowing sections attempt to develop an analysis of these facts. A number of necessarily interconnected issues need to be discussed in this context. In or- der to do this in an organized fashion, it will be useful to begin with a general character- ization of Arawak relative clauses, and then to discuss problems with, or issues arising out of, this characterization in more detail later. In general, the following statements hold for Arawak relative clauses: 1. A number of constituents in Arawak are accessible to relativization. 2. Relative clauses have the same structure as non-relative event and stative clauses with the following exceptions: a They contain a gap. b They may have a relative pronoun in the clause-initial LSAP which corre- sponds to the gap. c In the case of subject and object relativization, the verb is marked by special suffixes: -thi-tho, or -sia, respectively. Relativization of other constituents is not indicated on the verb.

4.1 Differences in Pre- and Post-Head Relative Clauses

One of the distinctions already made with regard to Arawak relative clauses is between those that precede their head and those that follow it. Previous sections on the constitu- ents of the noun phrase 3.1 dealt chiefly with the kinds, or complexity, of relative clauses 83 which can appear in these two positions—“heavy” relative clauses occur after the head while “light” ones may either precede or follow it—and with the interaction between the possessor NP position of the matrix noun phrase and pre-head relative clauses. The distinc- tion between pre-head and post-head relative clauses, in turn, correlates with the accept- ability of an overt WH-word in the LSAP of the relative clause. An explicit WH-word is never acceptable in a pre-head relative clause but is generally optional in a post-head one. 195 a. Da-malhiti-fa to bahy tho-myn. I-make-FUT the house her-for ‘I will make the house for her.’ b. to bahy [da-malhiti-sia-fa › tho-myn] the house [I-make-WH.OBJ-FUT › her-for] ‘the house I will make for her’ c. to bahy [ama da-malhiti-sia-fa › tho-myn] the house [what I-make-WH.OBJ-FUT › her-for] ‘the house which I will make for her’ d. to [da-malhiti-sia-fa ›] bahy the [I-make-WH.OBJ-FUT ›] house ‘the house I will make’ e. to [ama da-malhiti-sia-fa ›] bahy the [what I-make-WH.OBJ-FUT ›] house ‘the house which I will make’ 196 a. Na ibili-non dalhida bahy-nro. the little-HUMAN.PL run house-toward ‘The children ran home.’ b. na ibili-non [› dalhidi-thi bahy-nro] the little-HUMAN.PL [› run-WH.SUBJ house-toward] ‘the children who ran home’ c. na ibili-non [alikan › dalhidi-thi bahy-nro] the little-HUMAN.PL [who › run-WH.SUBJ house-toward] ‘the children who ran home’ d. na [› dalhidi-thi] ibili-non the [› run-WH.SUBJ] little-HUMAN.PL ‘the children who ran’ e. na [alikan › dalhidi-thi] ibili-non the [who › run-WH.SUBJ] little-HUMAN.PL ‘the children who ran’ Other than modifications made to the above relative clauses to make them heavy or light enough to appear in their respective positions, the clauses are similar in all other respects: 84 Relative Clauses