Conclusion
This chapter was devoted to Inherent Complement Verbs in
Gh?maìlaì'. In this chapter, I have addressed their
morphosyntactic properties. In doing so, their formal features as well as their
semantics have been discussed. Being compositional or metaphorical, ICVs in the
language understudy can be classified into regular and irregular. Looking at
their morphosyntactic features, Gh?maìlaì' ICs can be
pronominalized in certain discourse context. This is an indication that IC
bears phi-features in this language as opposed to Ga (Korsah 2011) or Gungbe
(Aboh 2015). It has also been shown that IC cannot be marked with a question
feature in Gh?maìlaì'. As far as focalization is concerned, it
has been argued that both the verb and its complement can be focused though the
focused IC has a predicate focus reading. On the basis of these morphosyntactic
properties, it have been claimed that Gh?maìlaì' ICVs are either
intransitive or transitive. They purely merge under a functional position
namely ?° that selects an abstract VP which licenses a bare NP. This NP
incorporates to the abstract V. This functional behavior of verbs can also be
mirrored in Serial Verb Constructions, the topic of the next chapter.
Chapter 5: Serial Verb Constructions (SVCs)
117
Introduction
The preceding chapter has addressed a type of verb
construction wherein the verb and its complement are semantically tied such
that it is difficult to state on whether the nominal constituent is an argument
of the verb or otherwise. The present chapter deals with another type of verbal
construction wherein there is more than one verb that function as a single
predicate. This latter has been referred to as serial verb constructions, verbs
series or verbal serialization in the literature. Their typology as well as
their morphosyntactic properties in Gh?maìlaì' are investigated
herein. In doing so, the chapter is structured as follows: section 1
distinguishes serial verb constructions from other types of multiverb
constructions. Section 2 classifies serial verb constructions following their
semantic functions. Section 3 tackles their morphosyntactic features and
section 4 has to do with their derivation.
5.1. Serial Verb Constructions vs other multiverb
constructions
This section aims at distinguishing serial verb constructions
from other multiverb constructions that can be attested in
Gh?maìlaì'. In this vein, formal properties that characterize
serial verb constructions are addressed as well as diagnostics that
differentiate SVCs from other multiverb structures.
5.1.1. General characteristics of SVCs
Aikhenvald (2006:1) defines a serial verb construction as a
sequence of verbs which act together as a single predicate, without any overt
marker of coordination, subordination, or syntactic dependency of any other
sort. She proposes the following properties that are cross-linguistically
useful in the recognition of a serial verb construction.
V' SVCs encode a single predicate reading. In other
words, verbs which made up SVC function as a syntactic whole such that, most of
the time, SVCs are translatable as single or coordinated predicates into
non-serializing languages like English.
V' SVCs are monoclausal and do not allow makers of
syntactic dependency on their components. More precisely, they are devoid of
formal linking device such as one can argue that they are coordinate or
subordinate structures. This property is a criterion that distinguishes SVC
from coordination or subordination.
118
y' SVC has the intonational properties of monoverbal clause,
and not of a sequence of clauses.
y' Verbs which form a SVC share tense, aspect, mood, modality,
illocutionary force and polarity values. This implies that no independent
choice or contrast in any of these categories is possible for the individual
components of an SVC. They cannot be separately negated or focused.
y' SVCs encode one event. All verbs in an SVC form a
close-knit structure perceived as a conceptual unit. As Lord (1974:196) points
out, the verbs in SVC all refer to sub-parts or aspects of a single overall
event.
y' SVCs share at least one argument. They do not allow
duplicate roles, that is, they tend not to have two different agents, two
themes or two instruments.
To see how these properties work in Gh?maìlaì',
let us consider the following data:
(1)
a. Ta^laì k?Ì s?Ì? laÌ?t?
aì
Tala PST2 come show 1SG.ACC «Tala came and showed
me»
b. Ta^laì k?Ì v?Ì ?waÌ???Ì
?keì Tala PST2 write letter read «Tala wrote a
letter and read it»
c. Ta^laì k?Ì l?Ì luÌ?gaì
s?Ì?
Tala PST2 take bucket come «Tala
bring a bucket»
In the data above, the verbs follow one another within the
same clause as in (1a). There is no overt connector that links these verbs such
that one can argue that they are instances of coordination or subordination.
They represent a single predicate (1c); they form the core of a single clause.
They share tense / aspect values as the past tense is marked once per SVC. They
also share at least one argument, mostly the subject
(Ta^laì).
5.1.2. Serial verb construction vs. coordinate
structure
Coordinate structures are distinct from serial verb
constructions by the presence of a coordinative marker that rules out a
monoclausal interpretation. This suggests that, in coordinate
119
clauses, both subject and temporal feature can be overtly
expressed and that core arguments need not be shared.
Moguo (2016: 271) does an inventory of
Gh?maìlaì's coordinative markers. Accordingly, the following
coordinators are attested in the language:
(2)
pû «and/with» k?Ì «or»
biì? «and» daÌ?g?Ì
«but»
n?ì? «then»
Puì «and/with» is exclusively used
only for NP coordination whereas others are used for VP coordination as well as
sentence coordination. Puì, né? and
biì? are cumulative coordinators; daÌ?g? is a
restrictive one meanwhile kà coordinates alternative clauses as
shown in the examples below:
(3)
a. Ta^laì pû Ba?ka^m k? tsù msé Tala
COORD Bakam PST2 eat fufu corn «Tala and Bakam ate fufu corn»
b. Ta^laì k?Ì s?Ìk m-taìp
n?ì? tiì Tala PST2 wash PL-shoe COORD sleep «Tala washed
shoes and slept»
c. Ta^laì g?tiì v?Ì ?waÌ???Ì
bi? ?keì ??msiì
Tala FUT2 write letter COORD read gospel
«Tala will write the letter and will read the gospel
»
(4)
a. Ta^laì k?Ì s?Ìk m-taìp
daÌ?g? e kaÌt? j????ì
Tala PST2 wash PL-shoe COORD 3SG
PST2.NEG dry
«Tala washed the shoes but he didn't dry them»
b. Ta^laì g?tiì né mkoì k?Ì e
g?tiì t?û? p?Ì
Tala FUT2 cook beans COORD 3SG FUT2 pound
cocoyam
«Tala will cook beans or he will pound cocoyam».
In the examples above, the presence of the coordinative
particles n?ì?, bi?, k?Ì and
daÌ?g? rules out a monoclausal reading of these structures.
Moreover, temporal features are expressed once in
120
cumulative structures (3) whereas in (4), each conjunct has
its own tense marker. In (3c), the subject of the first conjunct controls that
of the second. Given Baker (1989)'s generalization according to which covert
coordination does exist in serializing languages, it can be argued that
Gh?maìlaì' object sharing SVCs are not instances of covert
coordination. The main evidence of this fact is that the object of an SVC
structure can be extracted as shown in (5) below. This operation is impossible
in coordinate structure given the coordinate structure constraint (Ross
1967).
(5)
a. Ta^lá k?Ì v?Ì ?waÌ???Ì
?keì
Tala PST2 write letter read
«Tala wrote a letter and read it»
b. A b? ?waÌ???Ì j?? Ta^lá k?Ì
v?Ì _____ ?keì aá
It be letter REL Tala PST2 write read REL «It is the
letter that Tala wrote and read»
5.1.3. Serial verb construction vs.
Consecutivization
The main distinction between serial verb constructions and
consecutive constructions relies on their intonational properties in
Gh?maìlaì'. SVCs have a single intonation contour, while
consecutive constructions have phonological break which corroborate with their
interpretation as multi-clausal unit. Moreover, subject argument of each verb
occurring in a consecutive structure can be overtly expressed as shown
below:
(6)
a. Ta^lá g?tiì lu? si s?Ìk siìdj??
khiìm g?ìn?Ìm
Tala FUT2 wake up wash floor feed pig
«Tala will wake up, sweep the floor and feed the
pig.»
b. N??n?^ k?Ì tû? ?j? pj? kwa?
Nono PST2 draw
water 1PL.NOM carry «Nono drew water and we carried it»
5.1.4. Serial verb construction vs. subordinate
structure
A subordinate clause is different from SVC by the presence of
a subordinative particle which rules out a monoclausal interpretation. This
indicates that in subordinate structures, the
121
subject and the temporal setting might be overtly expressed.
Temporal features, aspectual value, negation as well as core arguments are not
shared.
Gh?maìlaì' uses different strategies to encode
subordination. It can be indicated either by nominalization within an
infinitival clause with né «to (in order)» or by
various subordinative particles such as d3jégà «so
that», gé «that», tà
«until», pâ2 «as» as highlighted in the
following data:
(7)
a. Ta^laì g3tiì y3 goì
d?jâgâ é g3tiì kaìp pjà
Tala FUT2 go
farm SUB 3SG.NOM FUT2 pick avocado «Tala will go to farm so that he will
pick avocado»
b. Ba?kàm kà w? ?kw?ì gâ
é g3tiì y3 go Bakam PST2 PROG think COMP 3SG FUT2 go
farm
«Bakam was thinking that she will go to
farm»
As shown in the data above, the presence of the subordinators
d3jégé (7a) and gé (7b) eliminate a
monoclausal interpretation of these sentences. Moreover, core arguments,
temporal setting as well as aspectual feature are overtly expressed in each
conjunct.
Let us consider the examples below that distinguish SVCs from
subordination by infinitival construction.
(8)
a. Ta^laì kà s3Ì?
là?t? aì
Tala PST2 come show 1SG.ACC «Tala came and
showed me.»
b. Ta^laì kà s3Ì2
nâ là2t? aì
Tala PST2 come INF
show 1SG.ACC « Tala came to show me.»
(9)a. Ta^laì g3tiì Y3 t
fâ? m-taìp Tala FUT2 go search
PL-shoe
«Tala will go and look for shoes.» b.
Ta^laì g3tiì Y3 nâ t fâ?
m-taìp Tala FUT2 go INF search PL-shoe
122
«Tala will go to look shoes.»
In (9) above, the same proposition is casted in a serial verb
construction (8a and 9a) as opposed to subordination by infinitival
construction (8b and 9b). Morphologically, the subordinate forms are reduced in
that they do not inflect for tense. Besides, the significant distinction
between these sentences is that the subordinate construction semantically
indicates intentionality, meanwhile the serial verb construction expresses the
idea of sequentiality.
5.2. Types of serial verb constructions
According to Aikhenvald (2006:21) and Kiebling (2011:30), in
terms of their composition, serial verb constructions fall into two broad
classes: symmetrical and asymmetrical SVCs. This opposition corresponds to Osam
(2003)'s distinction between clause chaining serialization and integrated
serial verb construction in Akan. It also matches with Foley and Olson (1985)'s
dichotomy of core layer serialization vs. nuclear layer serialization. This
section aims at classifying Gh?maìlaì' verb series on the basis
of their composition following Aikhenvald (2006)'s repartition. In addition to
their composition, SVCs are also classified following their semantic functions.
In fact, SVCs are cross-linguistically used to express a wide range of
functions amongst which direction and orientation, benefactive, comparative,
modality, instrumental...etc.
5.2.1. Asymmetrical serial verb
constructions
This class of SVCs may be made up of one verb from a large,
open or unrestricted class and another from a semantically or grammatically
restricted or closed class. As Aikhenvald (1999) claims , they denote a single
event described by the verb from an unrestricted class. Following Durie (1997),
the verb from an open class is referred to as a major verb whereas the term
minor verb or coverb (Kiebling 2011:90) is used for the verb selected from a
grammatically restricted class. The latter tends to get grammaticalized as it
is the case of the Ewe verb na «give» which becomes a
functional particle, namely a benefactive marker in this Kwa language (Ameka
2002:2). The minor verb provides a modificational specification to the whole
construction. Semantic subclasses of asymmetrical SVCs in
Gh?maìlaì' are addressed below.
5.2.1.1. Direction and orientation
As claimed by Aikhenvald (2006:22), this type of serial verb
construction is extremely attested in serializing languages. Also referred to
as deictic SVC (Givon 1991:139), this kind of serial verb construction is made
up of a minor verb which is typically a verb of motion or
123
movement with the semantics of orientation. The following
Gh?maìlaì' SVCs encode the idea of orientation.
(10)
a. Ta^laì g?tiì l?Ì dz?ì
s?Ì?
Tala FUT2 take clothe come «Tala will bring
clothe.»
b. Ta^laì g?tiì l?Ì luÌ?gaì
g??
Tala FUT2 take bucket go
«Tala will take away the bucket.»
In the data above, the minor verbs are s32
«come» and g?? «go» whereas the major verb is
là «take». The motion verbs s?Ì?
«come» and g?? «go» provide directional specification to
the serial verb construction. Là s32 «take- come»
means «bring» meanwhile là g?? «take-go»
encodes «take away». Moreover, the motion verb g?? (??) has been
grammaticalized in the language. In addition to its lexical status as in (10b)
above, this verb is widely used as the root marker of future tenses. Indeed,
when we observe the form of future tense markers in Gh?maìlaì',
one may notice that the particle g? is common to all these future
morphemes. What fundamentally changes is the particle that refers to the time
frame as shown below:
Table 13 : Gh?maìlaì ' future tense
markers
|
Markers
|
Segmentation
|
Time frame
|
Type of future
|
|
g???
|
g?-ya
|
few minutes or hours
|
Immediate future (FUT1)
|
|
g?tiì
|
g?-tI
|
a day or several days
|
Near future (FUT2)
|
|
g?t?w?ì
|
g?-tJwaì
|
some months or few years
|
Distant future (FUT3)
|
|
g?laì?
|
g?-lá?
|
undetermined time
|
Hypothetic future (FUT4)
|
5.2.1.2. Aspect and tense
Some asymmetrical serial verb constructions often encode
aspectual meanings. Cross-linguistically, the minor verbs used in this type of
verb series impart the semantics of progressive, habitual, continuative, or
iterative meanings (see Aikhenvald 2006:185). Aikhenvald (2006:23) acknowledges
that aspectual meanings expressed with SVCs may correlate with tense, but she
have not found an example of an SVC used just for encoding tense. As it will be
illustrated below,
124
Gh?maìlaì' used SVCs for imparting both aspect
and tense. More precisely, Gh?maìlaì' native speakers use a
serial verb construction to encode iterative meaning and to express future
tense especially within imperative structures.
(11)
a. Ta^laì k?Ì kwiÌ? d??
?kaìp?
Tala PST2 increase amount money
«Tala increased the amount of money.»
b. Ta^laì k?Ì kwiÌ? haì
?kaìp bi^ pû
Tala PST2 increase give money to 3PL.DAT «Tala again
gave them money»
(12)
a. Ta^laì k?Ì loì??? tiì
Tala
PST2 quickly sleep «Tala slept early.»
b. Po tiì s?Ìk mtaìp!
2PL.NOM
sleep wash shoes «Wash the shoes tomorrow!»
(13)
a. Ta^laì k?Ì t?w?ì sim
Tala PST2 stay market
«Tala spent time in the market
b. t?w?ì kw?ì pa?
stay build house
«Build the house next year»
In (11a, 12a, 13a), the verbs kwiÌ?
«increase», tiì «sleep» and
t?wé «stay» are respectively used in a non-SVC
structures. When they co-occur with another verb in the same clause, they
encode new semantic function. In (11b), kwiÌ? is an aspectual
marker; it is used to express the semantics of iterative. In (12b and13b),
tiì and t?wé are respectively used as tense
markers. They indicate the moment at which the action denoted by the following
verbs will be done. As one may notice, the
125
verbs tI «sleep» and t?wé
«stay» have been grammaticalized into future time frame
particles (see the table in § 5.2.1 above).
5.2.1.3. Increasing valency
Certain kinds of asymmetrical serial verb construction are
used as valency-increasing strategies. They are used to introduce various
arguments as well as obliques. By doing so, they expand the argument structure
of a given construction. Cross-linguistically, causatives, benefactives,
instrumentals, and comitatives are encoded by serial verb constructions in
serializing languages. As for Gh?maìlaì', causation and
instrumentation are typically expressed by verb series. The verb of causation
is generally the first verb just like the verb introducing instrument in
instrumental series as shown below:
(14)
a. Ta^lá k?Ì y?Ì muì?? já?
?k?deì Tala PST2 make knife cut banana «Tala made the
knife cuts banana»
b. Ta^lá k?Ì l?Ì d??m koì?
th?ìpjaÌ
Tala PST2 take axe cut avocado tree
«Tala used an axe to cut avocado tree»
In the data above, the minor verbs are yà
«make» and là «take». Typical
causative SVCs in Gh?maìlaì' involve the coverb yà
«make»; thereby they are different from cause-effect serial verb
constructions which are symmetrical series. The instrumental SVC in (14b)
includes the verb là «take». Besides, the instrument
of V2 is the theme of V1. The verb «take» is also used to derive
associative or comitative (Aikhenvald 2006:26) SVCs. In these structures, it
gets the meaning «be with» and introduces the associative argument as
shown in the example below:
(15)
a. Ta^lá k?Ì l?Ì mu^ foÌ
s?Ì?
Tala PST2 take child chief come «Tala
came with the prince.»
b. Ba?kám g?tiì l?Ì N?^n?? ?? go?
Bakam FUT2 take Nono go farm «Bakam will go to farm with
Nono»
126
In some instrumental SVCs, the verb introducing the instrument
describe the way in which the action of the other verb is performed as
demonstrated below:
(16)
a. Ta^laì k?Ì l?Ì g?? pf?ì
bap
Tala PST2 take strength eat meat
«Tala quickly ate the meat» b.Ta^laì
k?Ì l?Ì kwè ??Ìm
Tala PST2 take joke speak
«Tala jokingly spoke»
Other types of valence increasing serial verb constructions
are benefactive ones. In the language under study, benefactive SVCs include a
verb of transfer and a preposition that introduces the beneficiary or recipient
argument as illustrated by the data below:
(17)
a. Ta^laì k?Ì joì b?? haì bi^ N?^n??
Tala PST2 buy pot give to Nono «Tala bought Nono a
pot»
b. N?^n?? k?Ì v?Ì ?waÌ???Ì
t?jaÌ bi^ maìp e
Nono PST2 write letter send to mother 3SG.1.POSS
«Nono send her mother a letter»
The minor verbs in (17) above are the verbs of transfer
t?jaÌ «send» and haì
«give». The preposition bi^ «to» indicates
that the following DPs, namely N?^n?? and maìp e
«her mother», are the beneficiaries of the action described by
the first verbs.
5.2.1.4. Comparison
Asymmetrical serial verb constructions are also used to encode
comparative and superlative meanings. This kind of verb series always involve
verbs with a meaning of «exceed» as minor verb. In a West Chadic
language spoken in Nigeria like Goemai, the verb imparting the comparative
meaning to the whole construction is translated as «surpass». This is
illustrated in (18) below:
127
(18) kuma f'yer ma ni
also become.big (SG) surpass 3SG
«And (he) has grown bigger than him» (Hellwig
2006:101)
As far as Gh?maìlaì' is concerned, serial verb
constructions are used to mark comparison. As a matter of fact, verb series
with comparative meaning in the language under study include the verb
t?jè «surpass» as V2. Moreover, this verb has been
grammaticalized into a comparative marker. The following data (19) are
instances of comparative SVCs whereas those in (19) show that the minor verb
t?jè serves as a comparative maker elsewhere.
(19)
a. N?^n?? k?Ì tiì t?j?Ì
Ta^laì
Nono PST2 sleep surpass Tala «Nono slept more than
Tala»
b. Ba?ka^m twaÌ t?j?Ì N?^n??
Bakam.PRS
be beautiful surpass Nono «Bakam is more beautiful than
Nono».
(20)
a. Ta^laì k?Ì f?Ì? m?Ìtwa^
t?j?Ì taìp e
Tala PST2 drive car COM father 3SG.1.POSS
«Tala drove car more than his father»
b. N?^n?? g?tiì tsù ms?? t?j?Ì
p?ì
Nono FUT2 eat fufu corn COM pounded cocoyam
«Nono will eat more fufu corn than pounded cocoyam»
As it has been shown in this subsection,
Gh?maìlaì' has enriched his functional particles stock with the
grammaticalization of minor verbs that occur in serial verb constructions. Some
TAM particles as well as the comparative marker in Gh?maìlaì' are
the outcomes of the grammaticalization process that targets some verbs.
5.2.2. Symmetrical serial verb constructions
Unlike asymmetrical serial verb constructions, this class of
SVCs is made up of verbs selected from unrestricted classes. According to
Kiebling (2011:37), symmetrical SVCs indicate an immediate succession of events
or actions in a sequence which is characterized by tight logical
128
and temporal coherence. In this vein, the order of components
tend to be iconic, mirroring the temporal sequence of subevents. Following
Aikhenvald (2006:22), all the components of symmetrical SVCs have equal status
since none of them determines the semantic or syntactic properties as a whole.
Semantic subclasses of symmetrical SVCs in Gh?maìlaì' are
discussed in the following lines.
5.2.2.1. Sequential serial verb constructions
Also referred to as consecutive serial verb constructions
(Stewart 2001), the order of components follows the temporal sequence of
subevents described by each verb of the series as illustrated below:
(21)
a. Ta^laì k?Ì n?ì bap pf?ì
Tala PST2 cook meat eat «Tala cooked meat and ate
it»
b. N?^n?? g?tiì ??Ìm Ba?ka^m pû?
Nono FUT2 catch Bakam beat
«Nono will catch Bakam and beat her»
In the above examples, the verbs are linked by a temporal
sequence in which the event encoded by the first verb is performed before the
one of the second verb. Accordingly, V1 and V2 express consecutive events. In
other words, the action described by the second verb closely follows the one
that is expressed by the first verb. Data in (21) also show that there are two
transitive verbs that have one shared object sandwiched between them. Moreover,
no overt pronoun appears after the second verb. It is relevant to note that
this type of sharing has been a very popular object of generative inquiry in
serializing languages (Baker 1989, Collins 1997, Hale 1991, Hiraiwa &
Bodomo 2008, and Aboh 2009).
5.2.2.2. Cause-effect or resultative serial verb
constructions
This kind of symmetrical SVCs have an iconic component order.
Indeed, the verb of causation always precedes the verb that refers to the
effect or the result. The following constructions are instances of cause-effect
SVCs in Gh?maìlaì'.
(22) 129
a. Ta^laì k?Ì t??Ì muì l?Ì
Tala PST2 beat child cry
«Tala made child cry by beating him»
b. N?^n?? k? t?aìm k?ì s?Ì
Nono PST2 hit plate split
«Nono shattered the plate»
As it is shown in the data above, the action expressed by the
second verb is caused by that of first verb. In (22a) for example, the child
cried as Tala beat him as well as the plate is shattered because Nono hits it.
Furthermore, the object of the first verb is the subject of V2. The verbs
involved in the series have a relation of causality, thereby are similar to
causative SVCs. As Aikhenvald (2006:16) pointed out, causative SVCs are
asymmetrical since the verb that refers to causation in the series comes from a
closed set of transitive verbs; while cause-effect SVCs tend to be symmetrical.
They are switch-function SVCs. As for Gh?maìlaì', the two types
of SVCs are iconic, that is the verbs encoding causation always precedes the
verbs referring to the consequence. Causative SVCs involve the verb ??
«make», while cause-effect SVCs include any transitive verb.
5.2.2.3. Manner serial verb constructions
In this kind of symmetrical SVCs, the first verb describes
the way in which the action expressed by the second is performed. The first
verb functions as a modifier of the action encoded by the second verb. So, the
first verb is the modifying verb whereas the second verb is the main verb. As
far as Gh?maìlaì' is concerned, the language uses two strategies
to convey manner serialization, namely increasing valency strategy and simple
strategy. Increasing valency refers to the fact that some instrumental series
in the language are also used to impart manner serialization as it has been
shown in (14) above (see § 5.2.1.3). The other strategy is the raison
d'être of the data in (23) below:
(23)
a. Ta^laì k? j?ìmn?ì fa?aì
Tala PST2 be slow work «Tala worked slowly»
130
b. Ta^laì g?tiì lo??? pf?ì bap
Tala FUT2 be quick eat meat
«Tala will quickly eat the meat».
Most of the first verbs appearing in manner serialization in
Gh?maìlaì' have been identified as
adverbs elsewhere (Foba 2015:94).
5.3. Morphosyntactic properties of
Gh?maìlaì' SVCs
This section aims at discussing the morphosyntactic features
of serial verb constructions in Gh?maìlaì'. In doing so, the
expression and marking of grammatical categories within SVCs as well as their
interaction with question formation and focalization are also addressed.
5.3.1. Marking of grammatical categories
The monoclausality of serial verb constructions in
Gh?maìlaì' can be mirrored through the single
marking of verbal categories such as tense, aspect and negation.
It can also be captured through some
morphosyntactic operations, namely nominalization and
subordination.
5.3.1.1. Tense
These functional categories are marked once per serial verb
construction in Gh?maìlaì' as it
can be noticed in the following data:
(24)a. N?^n?? g?tiì l?Ì
jw?ìtsù s?Ì?
Nono FUT2 take food come
«Nono will bring food.»
b.*N?^n?? l?Ì jw?ìts?ì g?tiì
s?Ì?
Nono take food FUT2 come
«Nono will bring food.»
c. *Ta^laì k?Ì joì
mtaìp k?Ì fiÌ?
Tala PST2 buy shoes PST2
sell
«Tala bought shoes and sold them
As it is shown in (24) above, single marking of tense is
attested in the language under study. In (24a), the two verbs, là
«take» and s?Ì ? «come», share the
same tense marker «g?tiì», though this latter appears just
before the first verb. This tense particle has scope over the two verbs of the
construction. Data in (24b andc) rule out the possibility for the tense marker
to be marked either on the second verb or on each components of the series.
131
5.3.1.2. Aspect
This verbal category is expressed diversely within
Gh?maìlaì' verb series. Single and
concordant markings of aspect are both attested in the language.
This property can be mirrored in
the data below:
(25) a. Ta^laì k?Ì joì mtaìp
w?ì fiÌ?
Tala PST2 buy shoes PROG sell
«Tala was buying shoes and was selling them»
b. Ba?ka^m k?Ì w?ì l?Ì
?kaìp g??
Bakam PST2 PROG take money
go «Bakam was taking away the money»
c. Ba?ka^m k?Ì w?ì né
msé w?ì dz?ì
Bakam PST2 PROG
cook fufu corn PROG eat «Bakam was
cooking fufu corn and was eating it.»
d. * Ba?ka^m k?Ì w?ì l?Ì
?kaìp w?ì g??
Bakam PST2 PROG
take money PROG go «Bakam was
taking away the money»
Data in (25a and b) show that aspect can be marked once per
serial verb construction. The aspect particle can appear either on the first
verb or on the second one and has the scope over the two verbs. The
construction in (25c) demonstrates that each verb in Gh?maìlaì'
SVCs can have its own aspect marker. However, this property is restricted to
consecutive SVCs as (25d) implies. Moreover, (25a) indicates that functional
elements can occur between V1 and V2. This will be significant when the issue
of derivation of SVCs will be addressed.
5.3.1.3. Negation
Just like tense, negation receives a single marking per serial
verb construction in Gh?maìlaì'. As claimed by Kari (2003), verbs
in series are not independently negated such that any attempt to negate serial
verbs independently , like when the verbs appear in simple constructions from
which SVC derives, renders them illegible. Let us observe the following
data:
(26)a. N?^n?? t?^ g?tiì l?ì
jw?ìts?ì s?Ì? p?ì
Nono NEG FUT2 take food come
NEG «Nono will not bring food»
132
b. Ta^laì kaÌt? jó
mtaìp fiÌ? ( p?ì)
Tala PST2.NEG buy shoes sell
NEG «Tala did not buy shoes and sell them.» (27)
a. *N?^n?? g?tiì l?Ì jw?ìts?ì
t?^ s?Ì2 p?ì
Nono FUT2 take food NEG come NEG
«Nono will not bring food.»
b. *Ta^laì kaÌt?
jó mtaìp p?ì
kaÌt? fiÌ?
p?ì
Tala PST2.NEG buy shoes NEG
PST2.NEG sell NEG
«Tala did not buy shoes and sell them.»
The data in (26) above reveal that negation is marked once in
the serial verb construction by the discontinous morphemes t?^
...pé. The first particle appears immediately before the verb while
the second occurs at the sentence final position. Data in (27) show that it is
impossible for each verb of the series to have its own negative morpheme (27b)
just like the negative particle cannot appear on the second verb (27a). Even
though the first particle is placed before the first verb, it has scope over
the other verb of the series.
5.3.1.4. Nominalization
Nominalization is a word class changing derivation process
which generally turns verbs into nouns. It was been argued in chapter 3 that
the infinitive particle also acts as a nominalizer in Gh?maìlaì'
since the infinitive form is a nominalized form of the verb (see § 3.2.1
above). It is important to note that, in the language under study, verbs are
also turned into nouns via reduplication. However, this process is restricted
to the derivation of agents. As for serial verb constructions, they receive a
single marking of nominalizer per construction as it can be mirrored in the
data below.
(28)a. Ta^laì k?Ì v?Ì ?waÌ???Ì
?keì
Tala PST2 write letter read
«Tala wrote a letter and read it»
b. Juì n?ì-v?Ì
?waÌ2??Ì ké k?Ì t?j?Ì Ba?ka^m
2SG.3.POSS
INF-write letter read PST2 surpass Bakam «YOUR writing
and reading of the letter surpassed Bakam»
133
c. *Jû n?ì-v?Ì
?waÌ???Ì n?ì- ke^ k?Ì t?j?Ì
Ba?kam
2SG.3.POSS INF-write letter
INF-read PST2 surpass Bakam «YOUR writing and reading of
the letter surpassed Bakam»
d. *Jû v?Ì ?waÌ???Ì
n?ì-ke^ k?Ì t?j?Ì Ba?ka^m
2SG.3.POSS write letter INF-read PST2 surpass
Bakam
«YOUR writing and reading of the letter surpassed
Bakam»
As shown in the above data, serial verb constructions are
nominalized the way monoverbal constructions are. The nominative morpheme
appears on the first component and has scope over the second component. As
example (28c) implies, each verb cannot have its own nominalizer. Similarly, it
is impossible to see the nominalizer occurs on the second verb (28d). This
nominalization process for SVCs is another evidence of their monoclausal
status.
5.3.1.5. Subordination
The monoclausal status of serial verb constructions can also
be captured in their syntactic behavior especially within subordination. As
Rose (2009) observed, serial verb constructions can form a unique predicate of
a subordinate clause introduced by a single relativizer or subordinator, just
like any single verb. The following examples are instances of subordinate
clauses including SVCs.
(29) a Mtaìp mj? Ta^laì k?Ì
joì fiÌ? aì kaìt?
pu?
shoes 4REL Tala PST2 buy sell REL
PST2.NEG be good «Shoes that Tala bought and sold were not
good.»
b. N?^n?? kwè g?ì Ba?ka^m
g?tiì l?Ì jw?ìts?ì s?Ì? Nono think
COMP Bakam FUT2 take food come «Nono
thinks that Bakam will bring food.»
c. N?ì-j?^mn?ì faì? j?
Ta^laì kuÌ? aì t?^ g?laì?
kwi^t? p?ì
INF-be slow work 3REL Tala like
REL NEG FUT4 help NEG
working slowly that Tala likes will not be helpful
«The fact that Tala likes to work slowly will never be
helpful.»
The examples above show that subordinative particles are marked
once per construction involving
verb series. In (29a), the sandwiched object of the SVC is
relativized, a further evidence that
Gh?maìlaì' SVCs are not instances of covert
coordination. In (29b), an SVC is part of the
134
subordinate clause introduced by the complementizer
gé, while in (29c) it is the verb series which is relativized
via nominalization.
5.3.2. Question and Focus marking
In Gh?maìlaì' just like in Ewe (Ameka 2006:140),
components of serial verb constructions can be questioned and focused
separately. As for question marking, yes/no questions are signaled by the
utterance of final particles a or l?ì (Tala 2015: 68).
Even though these interrogative particles are marked once per SVC and they
appear at the sentence final position, they can have scope over all the
components of the series. Their scope could also be restricted on only one verb
of the series. Let us observe the data in (30) below:
(30)a. Ta^laì k?Ì joì mtaìp
fiÌ?
Tala PST2 buy shoes sell
«Tala bought shoes and sold them»
b. Ta^laì k?Ì joì mtaìp fiÌ?
a ?
Tala PST2 buy shoes sell QM
«Did Tala buy shoes and sell them?»
c. Ta^laì k?Ì s?Ìk mtaìp
fiÌ?
Tala PST2 wash shoes sell
«Tala washed shoes and sold them.»
d. Ta^laì k?Ì joì mtaìp
s?Ìk
Tala PST2 buy shoes wash
«Tala bought shoes and washed them.»
The question in (30b) above can be answered in several
fashions, indicating thereby components on which the question particle has
scope. It can be answered by «yes, Tala did buy and sell» or
«no, Tala didn't buy and sell» where the scope of the question is
over both verbs. However, it can also be answered with either (30c), implying
question scope over the second verb, or (30d), implying question scope over the
first verb. Moreover, components of SVCs can be individually questioned using
the content question strategy as shown below:
(31)a. Ta^laì k?Ì joì mtaìp
fiÌ?
Tala PST2 buy shoes sell
«Tala bought shoes and sold them»
b.
135
Ta^laì k?Ì jó mtaìp ??Ì
k?ì ?
Tala PST2 buy shoes do what ? «What did Tala buy shoes and
do?»
c. Ta^laì k?Ì ??Ì k?ì
fiÌ??
Ta^laì PST2 do what sell
«What did Tala do and sell?
In the above examples, content questions are marked by the
interrogative determiner ké. To question a VP or a happening,
the wh-phrase ké «what» and the functional verb
yà «do» are employed. The verbs forming the SVC in
(31a) can each be questioned, as in (31b) and (31c). As far as focus is
concerned, each component of a serial verb construction can be focused. In
Gh?maìlaì', verb focus is realized via predicate doubling. The
two copies of the verb occur IP-internally and convey a contrastive reading.
The following data are instances of focalization of SVC components.
(32) a. Ba?ka^m k?Ì n?ì ms?ì
tsù
Bakam PST2 cook fufu corn eat
«Bakam cooked fufu corn and ate it.»
b. Ba?ka^m k?Ì n?ì msé
n?ì tsù
Bakam PST2 cook fufu corn
cook eat
«Bakam COOKED fufu corn and ate (as opposed to
roasted)»
c. Ba?ka^m k?Ì n?ì msé
tsé tsé
Bakam PST2 cook fufu corn eat eat
«Bakam cooked fufu corn and ATE it (as opposed to
sold)»
d. *Ba?ka^m k?Ì n?ì tsé
msé dzé
Bakam PST2 cook eat fufu corn
eat
«Bakam cooked fufu and ATE it.»
As shown in the examples above, each verb of the series can be
focused. Verb focusing in Gh?maìlaì' is derived mainly by
duplication of the verb IP-internally. The complement of the clause is thereby
sandwiched between the two copies of the verb. What particulary happens with an
SVC is that the focalization of the first verb exhibits this pattern; the
object is effectively sandwiched between the two verb copies as in (32b) above.
This is not the case with the second verb focusing
136
where the two verb copies are contiguous (32c) and any
insertion of the object between the copies leads to ungrammaticality (32d).
This could be an indication that object sharing in Gh?maìlaì'
SVCs is asymmetrical.
5.3.3. Argument structure
It has been argued that serial verb constructions are
monoclausal and represent a single predicate. By being so, they share at least
one argument, mostly the external argument. This subsection takles the
transitivity properties of SVCs components.
Most of the verbs that occur in a serial verb constructions
generally share the same Agent. This is the case of some SVCs in
Gh?maìlaì' which generally combines a two-place predicate verb
with an intransitive one. This combination does not rend the argument structure
of the whole clause more complex than that of one of its component. For
example, the verbs occurring in the SVC in (33) below have the following
subcategorization frames: là «take» c-selects two XP
and sà «come» c-selects one XP.
(33) Ta^lá g?tiì l?Ì dz?ì
s?Ì?
Tala FUT2 take clothe come
«Tala will bring clothe.»
As one may notice, the argument structure of this clause is
not the sum of the arguments of each component. This SVC is a two-place
predicate clause selecting Ta^laì as Agent and dzé
«clothe» as Theme. SVCs combining an intransitive verb with a
transitive one are two-place predicate constructions.
Similarly, there are some SVCs which, in addition to the
external argument, share an internal argument. These are bona fide serial verb
constructions (SVCs) because they obey the Argument-Sharing Hypothesis.
Accordingly, the Argument Sharing Hypothesis states that, in a serial verb
construction, V1 and V2 must share an internal argument (Collins 1997:463). The
following data are instances of SVCs sharing an internal argument.
(34) a. Ta^lá k?Ì l?Ì d??m
koì? th?ìpjaÌ
Tala PST2 take
axe cut avocado tree «Tala used an axe to cut avocado
tree»
b. Ta^lá k?Ì y?Ì muì??
já? ?k?deì
Tala PST2 make knife cut banana
«Tala made the knife cuts banana»
137
c. Ta^laì k?Ì jó b?? haì bi^
N?^n??
Tala PST2 buy pot give to Nono
«Tala bought Nono a pot»
d. N?^n?? g?tiì ??Ìm Ba?ka^m pû?
Nono FUT2 catch Bakam beat
«Nono will catch Bakam and beat her»
Each SVC above shares an internal argument. In (34a), the
theme of V1 (l?Ì «take») is the instrument of V2 (koì?
«cut»). By the same token, the theme of V1 in (34b) is the agent of
V2. In (34c), V1 and V2 share the same theme whereas in (34d) they share the
same patient. Internal argument sharing SVCs have been of particular
theoretical interest because of the issue of how to formally represent object
sharing (Baker 1989, Hale 1991, Collins 1997 and Aboh 2009).
5.4. Derivation of serial verb
constructions
Most of the propositions on how to formally represent serial
verb constructions `structure relies on the argument sharing hypothesis. These
proposals posit the argument sharing hypothesis as a necessary condition on
serialization and argue for a serializing parameter. This parameter is
formulated by Collins (1997:493) as follows: «I (tense) can license
multiple Vs».
In this vein, Baker (1989)'s double-headed structure with a
ternary-branching structure in which the object is shared by the two verbs (see
§ 1.3.1 above) cannot account for the structure of object-sharing SVCs in
Gh?maìlaì'. Indeed, apart from being ruled out by modern
approaches to phrase structure, the syntactic behavior of
Gh?maìlaì' SVCs when they are focused clearly shows that object
sharing is asymmetrical in narrow syntax. More precisely, as highlighted by the
data in (32) above, the direct object can only be pied-piped with V1 in
Gh?maìlaì' under predicate doubling. Baker (1989)'s double-headed
structure just like Hale (1991)'s VP-adjunction structure seem to be more
appropriate for symmetric object-sharing structures like in
DaÌgaìaìrè (Hiraiwa and Bodomo 2008).
Similarly, Collins (1997)'s VP-shell structure is based on the
mediation of object-sharing by an empty category namely pro, to which the
second verb assigns its semantic role and it is coindexed with the object of
the first verb. However, there is no evidence of the existence of an empty
category within Gh?maìlaì' SVCs. Morever, the serializing
parameter as formulated by Collins (1997) stipulates that I (tense) can license
multiple Vs not multiple Is. As a matter of fact,
138
it has been shown that I-type functional elements that
expresses aspect specifications can occur between V1 and V2 (see example (25)
in § 5.3.1.2 above). Just like in Edoì, certain middle-field
adverbs which Stewart (1998) treats as heads, can appear between the shared
object and V2 in Gh?maìlaì' as shown below:
(35) a. Ba?ka^m k?Ì né msé
tJaijtaì dz?ì
Bakam PST2 cook fufu corn well eat
«Bakam cooked fufu corn and ate it well.»
b. Ta^laì g?tiì joì mtaìp
laÌ gy? fiÌ?
Tala FUT2 buy shoes quickly sell
«Tala will buy shoes and quickly sell them»
These examples show that any derivation based on argument
sharing hypothesis cannot account for Gh?maìlaì' SVCs structures.
Thus, Aboh (2009)'s proposal according to which the argument sharing hypothesis
is not a necessary condition on serialization will be adopted.
Aboh (2009) proposes an analysis of serial verb construction
which is not based on argument sharing hypothesis. Indeed, Aboh argues that the
space between V1 and V2 involves more syntactic positions than previously
assumed because it may involve tense, aspect markers, adverbs and clitic
pronoun. He therefore proposes an analysis in which, given the temporal
iconicity condition, the first verb merges as a functional (verbal) element
within the extended projection of the lexical verb (the second verb) that
introduces the arguments. The data in (25) is an evidence that there is an
aspect head between V1 and V2. Moreover, the examples in (35) above show that
adverbs can occur between V1 and V2. Following Cinque (1999)'s analysis of
adverbs as expressions of functional projections namely AspPs, these examples
are an evidence of the existence of an aspect position between V1 and V2. On
the basis of what has been exposed above, the following tree diagram is the
representation of the construction in (35a).
(36) 139
TP
Spec T'
Ba?ka^m T AspP
k?Ì Spec Asp'
Ba?ka^m Asp FP
n?ì F AspP
Spec Asp'
ms?ì Asp ?P
t???t?ì Spec ?'
Ba?ka^m ? VP
dzé V NP dz?ì
ms?ì
The derivation of the instrumental SVCs in (37a) is represented
in (37b) below:
(37) a. Ta^laì g?tiì l?Ì d??m lo???
koì? th?ìpjaÌ
Tala FUT2 take axe
quickly cut avocado tree «Tala will use an axe to cut avocado
tree»
b. TP
Spec T'
Ta^laì T AspP
g?tiì Spec Asp'
Ta^laì Asp FP
l?Ì F AspP
Spec Asp'
d??m Asp ?P
lo??? Spec ?'
Ta^laì ? ?PINST
koì? Spec ?INST'
d??m ?INST VP
koì? V NP
koì? th?ìpjaÌ
140
In the above tree diagrams, V1 is merged in a functional
projection, the higher AspP. In this position, it doesn't have an internal
theta-role to assign but selects for complement within which the object is
being licensed. In (37b), the instrument is introduced by the lower ?P and it
latter move to the specifier position of the lower AspP. The main issue now is
how to account for the structure of focused SVCs. This will be the object of
future inquiry.
| 
