Cover not available
Part of
The Lexicon–Syntax Interface: Perspectives from South Asian languages
Edited by Pritha Chandra and Richa Srishti
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 209] 2014
► pp. 197–216

Not so high

The case of causee in South Asian Languages (Hindi, Kashmiri, Punjabi & Manipuri)

| Central Institute of Indian Languages Mysore
The status of the causee argument in Hindi and other South Asian Languages has been contentious in recent literature as it takes instrumental/ablatice Case marker and hence, seems comparable to an instrumental/ablative adjunct (-se in Hindi, athi in Kashmiri, tõ: in Punjabi, and -n∂ in Manipuri). The question is whether the instrumental/ablative Case marker appearing on the causee and on an instrumental adjunct should only receive an analysis of accidental homophony or a more principled analysis between the two is possible? The paper here argues that such an analysis is certainly possible. The instrumental/ablative is an adjunct and in causatives, the causee argument is merged to the Voice head as its specifier (the position involving -se/athi/tõ:/n∂ being valued as a structural, rather than a lexical, Case). It is further argued that though, this position is υP-external, i.e. ‘high’ but not ‘high’ enough to count as the subject.
Keywords: ?P-external, Argument/Adjunct, Causative alternation, Voice
Published online: 25 March 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.209.09sri
References (29)
References
Ahmed, Tafseer. 2009. Spatial Expressions and Case in South Asian Languages. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Konstanz.Google Scholar
Balachandran, Lakshmi Bai. 1970. A Case Grammar of Hindi with Special Reference to Causative Sentences. Doctoral Dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca.Google Scholar
Bhatt, Rajesh & Embick, David. 2004. Causative Derivations in Hindi. Ms. University of Texas & University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Collins, Chris. 2005. A smuggling approach to the passive in English. Syntax 8(2): 81–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davison, Alice. 1982. On the form and meaning of Hindi passive sentences. Lingua 58(1–2): 149–179. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeLancey, Scott. 1989a. Verb agreement in Proto-Tibeto-Burman verb. Bulletin of the School of Oriental & African Studies 52(2): 315–333. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67(3): 547–619.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David. 1997. Voice and the Interfaces of Syntax. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Hook, Peter. 1979. Hindi structures: Intermediate level. Michigan Papers on South and South East Asia 16, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Kachru, Yamuna. 1980. Aspects of Hindi Syntax . Manohar Publications: Delhi.Google Scholar
Khokholova, Ludmila. V. 1997. Infringement of morphological and syntactic operations’ pairing in “Second causative” formation. Paper presented at the XVIII South Asian Language Analysis Round Table , JNU, New Delhi.
Kidwai, Ayesha. 1995. Binding and Free Word Order Phenomenon in Hindi-Urdu. PhD thesis, Jawaharlal Nehru University.Google Scholar
. 2000. XP-Adjunction in Universal Grammar: Scrambling and Binding in Hindi-Urdu . New York: OUP.Google Scholar
Mahajan, Anoop. 1990. On the A/A-Bar Distinction and Movement Thoery . PhD Thesis, MIT.Google Scholar
Manning, Christopher. 1994. Argument Structure as a Locus for Binding Theory . Ms. University of Sydney.Google Scholar
Masica, Colin P. 1991. The Indo-Aryan Languages . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mohanan, Tara. 1994. Argument Structure in Hindi . Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Nikolaeva, Irina & Tolskaya, Maria. 2001. A Grammar of Udihe . Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pandharipande, Rajeshwari. 1981. Transitivity in Hindi. 11(2): 161–179. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Pylkkänen, Liina. 2002. Introducing Arguments. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian. 2008. Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First Phase Syntax . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Licensing of instrumental case in Hindi/Urdu in Causatives. Working Papers on Language & Linguistics 38. Tromsø University: Septentrio Acdemic Publishing.Google Scholar
Richa. 2003. Possessive Reflexives and Pronominals in Hindi-Urdu and Indian sign Language: A Minimalist Analysis. M.Phil. Dissertation, Jawaharlal Nehru University.Google Scholar
. 2008. Unaccusativity, Unergativity and the Causative Alternation in Hindi: A Minimalist Analysis. Doctoral Dissertation, J.N.U. Delhi.Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 2008. Smuggling, Affectness and Argument Structure Alternation. Ms. University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rosen, Carol & Wali, Kashi. 1989. Twin passives, inversion, and multistratalism in Marathi. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7(1): 1–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saksena, Anuradha. 1982. Topics in the Analysis of Causatives with an Account of Hindi Paradigms . Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Yeon, Jaehoon. 2003. Korean Grammatical Constructions: Their Form and Meaning . London: Saffron Books.Google Scholar
Whorf, Benjamin Lee. 1945. Grammatical categories. Language 21(1): 1–11. Linguistic Society of America. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Arkadiev, Peter M. & Jurgis Pakerys
2015. Lithuanian morphological causatives. In Voice and Argument Structure in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 2], ► pp. 39 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.