I like the following example because it shows a contrast between two kinds of complement structures in Copala Triqui. One type is
V[ASP x] [S V[ASP x]...]
with matching aspect between the two verbs. Hollenbach calls these subject complement structures, which seems like a good name to me.
The other type is
V[ASP x] SUBJi [S V[ASP x] SUBJi...]
with matching aspect between the two verbs and coreference between the two subjects. We might call these subject equi structures, remembering that in Triqui the second instance of the SUBJ is usually overt.
In the example below, ca'vee 'be possible' is a subject complement verb, while quisij 'succeed in doing' is a subject equi verb:
Another example of a subject-equi verb is nó xcúún 'should':
(More of Paul's sexism here!) Nó xcúún is a little different from sij 'succeed in', since the complement of nó xcúún seems to always be in the potential, regardless of the aspect of the main verb. So it is subject-equi, but without the aspect-matching requirement.
V[ASP x] [S V[ASP x]...]
with matching aspect between the two verbs. Hollenbach calls these subject complement structures, which seems like a good name to me.
The other type is
V[ASP x] SUBJi [S V[ASP x] SUBJi...]
with matching aspect between the two verbs and coreference between the two subjects. We might call these subject equi structures, remembering that in Triqui the second instance of the SUBJ is usually overt.
In the example below, ca'vee 'be possible' is a subject complement verb, while quisij 'succeed in doing' is a subject equi verb:
2 Thessalonians 1:10 |
Another example of a subject-equi verb is nó xcúún 'should':
1 Cor 14:33 |
(More of Paul's sexism here!) Nó xcúún is a little different from sij 'succeed in', since the complement of nó xcúún seems to always be in the potential, regardless of the aspect of the main verb. So it is subject-equi, but without the aspect-matching requirement.
No comments:
Post a Comment