98
introduces the speaker before he or she takes part in a confrontational dialogue cf. §8.3.4. Confrontational dialogue accounts for seven of the over-codings in the Fish story
and four in the Cow story. The peak episode of the Cow story consists mainly of quoted speech and three different participants speak in this episode—the bull owner, Rabbit, and
the elders. In two instances, the subjects are made explicit to avoid ambiguity of who is speaking to whom in the Cow story.
7.1.3 Subject is previous non-subjectnon-addressee S3
Subjects that are involved in the previous independent clause in a non-subject role, other than in a closed conversation, receive an S3 label. The findings for this
category differed for each story. Therefore, identifying a default for this category proves difficult. I present the results from the Cow story first and then proceed with explaining
the results from the Fish and Life stories.
Table 21: Distribution of S3 category for the Cow story
S3 Cow owner
Bull owner Both owners
Elders Total
PRO 1
1
PRO+RC 1
1
Total: 1
1 2
Only two examples fit the S3 environment in the Cow story. Although the one referring expression is a pronoun, the referent is unambiguous from the context. In one
example from the Cow story 111, the object of the previous clause becomes the subject of the next clause. The subject is made explicit because any other referring expression
would have been ambiguous whether the referent is the cow or bull owner.
99 111 K
+ speak stop 3S REL graze cow
female ‘The bull owner stopped speaking with the one who grazed the cow.’
+ 3S REL graze cow
female have NMLZ worry about 3S REL
graze cow male
‘The one who grazed the cow had concerns about the one who grazed the bull.’ [Cow 15-6]
In example 112 the object and the subject of the previous clause become a plural pronoun subject in the next narrated clause there is quoted text between these two
clauses. While this is not a strict interpretation for this category, it seems to fit best in this category rather than in the S1 or S4 category.
112 + after that 3S speak for to
3S REL graze cow male
‘After that he the cow owner said to the one who grazed the bull...’ +
2222 after that PL
3S RECP know day ‘After that they agreed upon a day to meet together.’ [Cow 56 61]
Table 22 below shows the distribution of referring expressions for the Fish story.
100
Table 22: Distribution of S3 category for the Fish story
S3 Jii-Mlii
J-M Smelt-
fish S-F
People Aunt Mom
of fish
They Total
Ø 4
3 3
2 sisters 2 J-M
S-F 14
PRO 1 J-M
S-F 1
KIN 1
1
KIN+POSS 1
1
KIN+POSS+DEM 1
1
DET+KIN+POSS+ DEM
2 2
Total: 6
3 3
1 2
11 20
Statistically, the default for the Fish story is a zero. However, if this category is divided into two sub-categories, the data is more revealing. The first sub-category occurs
when the subject and the object in the previous clause together become the plural subject in the following clause. The second sub-category occurs when the object in the previous
clause becomes the subject in the following clause. In every instance of the former situation where the subject and object of the previous clause become a plural subject in
the following clause, the referring expression is zero. This sub-category occurs in 6 out of the 14 43 zero referring expressions in the S3 category. In example 113 there is an
intervening quote between the two clauses given. 113
+ ++
+ +
K K
K K
sib.young reply ‘The younger sister replied to Jii-Mpoon, “quote.” ’
K K
K K
+ V0 RECP argue much INCHO
‘The two sisters began to really argue.’ [Fish 50 52]
101
The second sub-category in the S3 environment where the object of the previous clause becomes the subject in the subsequent clause occurs in 9 out of the 20 occurrences
47. The default for this sub-category is an explicit noun phrase. In a topic-prominent language this makes sense as a zero would co-refer with the subject of the previous
clause, rather than the object. Once a participant is newly introduced or restaged in the postverbal position, it then can become topical in the next clause according to
Lambrecht’s Topic Acceptability Scale 1994:165. Example 114 illustrates the object becoming the subject, as well as the new topic in the subsequent clause.
114 HHHH
sound arrive mother bachelor fish
DEM3 ‘The sound got to Bachelor Fish’s mom.’
HHHH +
K DET mother bachelor fish DEM3 say
’The mother of Bachelor Fish said to him...’ [Fish 282-3]
Two of the subjects that are zeros and fit the S3 environment prove interesting. They occur when some adverse circumstance befalls a participant.
32
In example 115, the fish gets shot by one of the uncles and dies. Rather than implicate the uncle and state that
he killed the fish, the second clause 115b avoids this by simply stating “The fish died.” 115 a. +
K K
K K
+ after that 3S shoot
with crossbow from here ‘After that he shot the fish with a crossbow from here.’
32
Similar constructions of the existential verb + verb adverse occur in other stories when something is killed or shot and the subject is zero.
102 b. K
K K
K +
EXIST die ‘The fish died.’
[Fish 295-6]
Table 23: Distribution of S3 category for the Life story
S3 American army
Pol Pot Khmer Rouge
Total Ø
1 1
PRO+EMPH 1
1
NP 1
1
Total: 1
1 1
3
Due to the relatively short length of the Life story, there are only three instances of subjects that fit the S3 category. It is interesting to note that one is a zero, another is a
pronoun phrase, and the third is a full noun phrase. Only the full noun phrase is unambiguous; the other two instances allow one to infer the correct referent through
relational givenness of the verb and the context.
7.1.4 Subject is not mentioned in previous clause S4
