Why does the Andi causative suffix agree in number?

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Oxford University Press., 2020

The Causative/Inchoative alternation involves pairs of verbs, one of which is causative and the other non-causative syntactically and semantically (e.g., John broke the window vs. The window broke). In its causative use, an alternating verb is used transitively and understood as externally caused. When used non-causatively, the verb is intransitive and interpreted as spontaneous. The alternation typically exhibits an affected argument (i.e., a Theme) in both intransitive and transitive uses, whereas the transitive use also involves a Causer that brings about the event. Although they are often volitional agents (e.g., John broke the window with a stone), external causers may also be non-volitional causers (e.g., The earthquake broke the windows) and instruments (e.g., The hammer broke the window). Morphologically, languages exhibit different patterns reflecting the alternation, even intralinguistically. In languages like English, alternations are not morphologically coded, but they are in most languages. Languages like Hindi commonly mark causative (or transitive) alternations by means of different mechanisms, such as internal vowel changes or causative morphology. In many European languages, a subset of alternating verbs may exhibit an uncoded alternation, but most alternating verbs mark anticausativization with a reflexive-like clitic. In Yaqui (Uto-Aztecan), different patterns are associated with different verbal roots. The alternation may be uncoded, equipollent (i.e., both alternating forms are coded), and anticausative. Theoretically, different approaches have explored the alternation. Both lexical and syntactic causativization and anticausativization accounts have been proposed to explain the alternation. A third approach postulates that both forms are derived from a common source.

2013

1996

The ltelmen language shows many inslances of regular schwa/zero alternations. Even though the language permits quite extensive consonant clusters, I argue in this paper that the alternating schwas (and perhaps all inslances of schwa) are cpcnthetic; schwa is inserted to break up a disfavoured consonant cluster. The rule which insetts schwa must apply cyclically in the verbal system, but non-cyclically in the nominal system. Apparent elamples of cyclic rule application are problematic for non-derivational, conscraint-based approaches to phonology, such as many versions of Optimality Theory (01). Thus. much recent work has been devoted to reanlayzing purported examples of cyclicity from an O.T. perspective. While it may be possible to devise an account of the Itelmen data in terms of parallel conscraint evaluation, current O.T. approaches are insufficient; in particular, the best candidare for an explanation of the NounIVerb differences (Base Identity) makes exactly the wrong predictions for Itelmen.

Morphological Analysis in Comparison, 2000

Salish evidence on the causative-inchoative alternation Henry Davis This paper brings data from a lesser-known language (St'at'imcets, also known as Lillooet Salish) to bear on the problem of cross-linguistic variation in the causative-inchoative alternation. 1n contrast to better-...

Language, 2004

The action at a distance that is characteristic of consonant harmonies stands as a pivotal problem to be addressed by phonological theory. Consider a familiar example from Chumash. The character of coronal fricatives and affricates in Chumash is determined by the rightmost coronal sibilant (1a). This agreement alters /s/ to [S] when preceding a root or suffix palatoalveolar (1b), and conversely /S/ is realized as [s] when preceding [s] (1c). The rightmost sibilant can occur at any distance from the affected fricatives/affricates, and the altered consonants may occur in a root or affix. Data are drawn from Poser (1982) and Shaw (1991). (1) a. SÖapiÖtSoÖit 'I have good luck' sÖapiÖtsoÖus 'he has good luck' b. s-ixut 'it burns' S-ilakS 'it is soft' c. uSla 'with the hand' usla-siq 'to press firmly by hand' Another representative case is seen in the nasal agreement of Kikongo. In this language, the voiced stop in the suffix-idi in (2a) is realized as [ini] in (2b) when preceded by a nasal consonant at any distance in the stem, consisting of root and suffixes (prefix nasals are excluded). The examples are from Piggott (1996). (2) a. m-bud-idi 'I hit' b. tu-kin-ini 'we planted' n-suk-idi 'I washed' tu-nik-ini 'we ground' * We would like to thank Eric Bakovic@ and Kie Zuraw for detailed comments on this paper. For suggestions and comments on this or related work we are also grateful to