Complex Predicates in Rabha

.........................................................................................................................

आभ्यंतर (Aabhyantar)      SCONLI-12  विशेषांक         ISSN : 2348-7771

.........................................................................................................................

13. Complex Predicates in Rabha

Indira Das, Jadavpur University, Kolkata.

Abstract

This paper discusses complex predicates of Rabha spoken in Northern part of West Bengal Complex Predicates are grammatical constructions consisting of two or more predicates which enter into a co-predicating domain(Butt, 1995). The types of CPs dealt with in this paper are Explicator Compound verb constructions, Serial Verb Constructions and Conjunct Verbs. ECV constructions is a major areal feature of South Asian languages. It refers to a sequence of two verbs, V1 and V2, in which the main verb of the sentence ,V1 for SOV languages, is followed by another verb, i.e. V2 which is delexicalised in the construction. Conjunct Verbs are the constructions where the complex predicate is formed with a adjective/noun/infinitival with another light verb. A serial verb construction is a string of verbs having no conjunctions in between, within a single clause that express simultaneous or immediately consecutive actions, with a single grammatical subject. This paper attempts a preliminary analysis of the aforementioned constructions in the light of event based semantics, telicity and syntactic structure on the basis of some diagnostics.

Introduction: A ‘complex predicate’ by definition is a grammatical category which is formed by the co-occurrence of two lexical items, i.e. a ‘host’ and a ‘light verb’. In such a combination of two lexical items, the light verb loses is ‘bleached’ in terms of its semantic content and can take a ‘host’, which could be nouns, adjectives, infinitival or stem form of the verbs. The host verbs contribute to the semantic content of the argument. In such constructions, two or more predicating elements enter into a co-predicating domain (Butt, 1995). The light verb and the main verb or ‘host’ together function as the predicate of the clause.

Research methodology: Questionnaire method was adopted to collect data. The Lingua Descriptive Studies questionnaire and questionnaires from “A Manual of Linguistic Field Work and Structures of Indian Languages” by Anvita Abbi (2001), were used to elicit data from the speakers.

The paper is divided into four sections. The first is a general introduction to the topic under study and the methodology followed for elicitation of data. The second section is a brief overview of the Rabha language. The third section is a description of complex predicate formations with their discussions. The fourth section deals with the analysis of the Explicator Compound Verbs and Serial Verb constructions on the basis of some syntactic tests, and a description of their underlying differences.

According to UNESCO, Rabha is one of the vulnerable North-Eastern languages in India. It is spoken mainly three regions - in the lower part of the state of Assam, in Jalpaiguri of northern part of West Bengal and east and west Garo hills of the state of Meghalaya. According to Grierson (1903) Rabha belongs to the Bodo subgroup of Assam Burmesesection of the Tibeto-Burman language family. Burling (2003:175) includes Rabha in Bodo-Koch group, and Rabha along with A’tɔng, Ruga. There are three main dialects of Rabha mainly, Rongdani, Maitori and Kocha. The current study is based on the language spoken in North Khoerbari in the Alipurduar district of West Bengal. The dialect is known as Kochakrau by the locals and it is quite distinct from the other the dialects spoken in Assam and Meghalaya. The Rabha community we visited consisted of roughly around 30 families.

Rabha is a verb final language and therefore, shares the typical features of SOV language like Bengali, Hindi, Tamil etc. As it belongs to the Tibeto-Burman language family, it shares mostly all the major Tibeto-Burman language features. The language is rich in its classifier system and the tense of the language is not always clearly defined and there is a dependency on the realis/irrealis mood of the sentence. Rabha lacks an agreement between the verb and the subject of the sentence. The verb forms are generally inflected for tense and aspect. The various types of complex predicates found in Rabha lead us to focus on the light verbs in each of the constructions. Light verbs, although semantically bleached, behave as an important part of the predicate. And in each of the following constructions, the light verb contributes uniquely to the whole semantic as well as syntactic nature of the sentence.

Explicator Compound Verbs or ECVs: These constructions are a major areal feature of South Asian languages. It refers to a sequence of two verbs V1 and V2, in which the main verb of the sentence, V1 for SOV languages, is followed by another verb, i.e. V2 which is delexicalised in the construction. V1 is the main or predicating verb and is mostly in its stem/non-finite form. While V2 is a morphologically finite verb, removed from its lexical meaning. And it is marked for relevant grammatical categories such as person, number, gender, tense, aspect and modality. The V2 in ECV constructions are the light verbs which are distinct from auxiliaries (for further explanation see Butt & Lahiri, 2013). Hook (1991) describes lights verbs as a stage in the process of grammaticalisation from main verbs to auxiliaries. The constructions presented below are instances of ECV constructions.

1.ama-i aŋ-o bicil dakaŋ la-ou

Mother I-ACC dress wear(V1) give(V2)-PERF

“Mother made me wear the dress”

In the above example, the V1 and V2 both act as a single predicate for the subject. And the V2 is the light verb which does not carry its associated lexical meaning rather it contributes to the lexical semantic information of agentivity (as opposed to experiencer) of the Subject, as well as the aspectual meaning of completion. Here V2 also imparts information towards the telicity of the sentence (i.e. whether the action in initiated, ongoing or completed), the action of ‘making wear’ here points to the completion of the sentence and it is directed towards the beneficiary. Some other examples of these type of constructions are:

2. Aŋ mai sa ʃaou

I rice eat(v1)-do.PRF(v2)

“I have eaten up the rice.

In this example, the V2 carries the aspectual meaning of volitionality of the subject, as well as completion of the action.

3.akaʃ rita-wɔ gʌtət jʌk-ou

akaʃ rita-DEF kill(V1) throw-out(V2)-PRF

“Akash killed Rita”

Indira Das, Jadavpur University.(2017)

In this construction, V1 and V2 are in a co-predicating form, where the V2 carries the semantic information of completion of the action, while not literally meaning ‘to throw out’. Our next point of complex predicate constructions are Serial Verb construction(SVC).

Serial Verb Constructions(SVC): A serial verb construction is a string of verbs having no  conjunctions in between, within a single clause that express simultaneous or immediately consecutive actions, with a single grammatical subject. The restriction found is that only one tense/aspect marking is allowed, per clause. The rest of the verbs appear either in the stem form or in a conjunctive participal form. Unlike the verb compunds discussed above,in the SVC structures, all the verbs in the series retain their core meanings and the events denoted by the verbs follow each other sequentially while each of the verb encoding a separate event. We have the following instances of SVCs:

4. Aŋ mai sa-mən capou

1SG rice eat-CP[V1] get up-PRF[V2]

“I ate rice and stood up”

Here, we see the subject undergoing two events, eating and then getting up. The final verb only carries inflection for aspect.

However in an SVC construction, that has more than two verbs, one of the events may be represented by two verbs that are in the form of verb compound. For example, the following constructions in Rabha exhibit such formations.

5. umɔr iskul lei-mən leka dao-mən pəraı ̃abak-ou

3sg school go-CP[V1 book open-CP[V2] read[V3] sit-PRF[V4]

“He went to school opened his book and sat to study”

6.aŋ umbu-mən sa-mən ha bʌi li-ou

I bathe-CP[V1] eat-CP[V2] soil plough[V3] go-PRF[V4]

“I bathed, ate and went for ploughing”

In these sentences we find [V3V4] to be in a compound verb construction. Note that V3 differs from verbs V1 and V2 by being in its non-finite form and not in its CP form. V3 and V4 combine here to provide the lexical information of ‘read’ and ‘plough’, in the respective sentences. While V4 although isn’t losing much of its semantic context, it acts as a supporting verb to V3. In both the instances, ‘sit’ and ‘go’ mark the initiation of the events concerned. While the previous verbs V1, V2 are events that have been completed sequentially.

Conjunct Verbs: In these constructions, the complex predicate formation takes place in the form of N+V, or N+(non-finite V)+V , or Adj.+V. The following constructions are instances of each of the forms–

7.amai aŋ-o kəm tʌrei dim-ou

mother me-DEF work-(N) do(V) say(V)-perf

Indira Das, Jadavpur University.(2017)

“Mother told me to do work”

This construction is of the form of { N+non-finite V+ V}, the final verb takes the inflection

here. While the non-finite verb acts as a verbaliser for the Noun.

8.sa-do nʌgʌ-wɔ nemca tʌkʌ-ou

Children-pl house-DEF dirty(adj.) do(V)-PERF

“children made the house dirty”

This construction is of the form Adj.+V

9. umɔr aŋ-o map lau-ou

She.2SG me.1SG forgiveness(N) give(V) –PERF

“She forgave me”

This construction is the N+V form of conjunct verbs. Here the verb ‘give’ acts as a verbaliser for the noun ‘Forgiveness’

In the next section we analyse the complex predicates on the basis of some diagnostics, to distinguish them on the basis of their syntactic structure. The CPs to be analysed are ECVs and SVCs only.

The CPs are analysed on the basis of four test – i) Intervening Object NPs, ii) Intervening adverbials, iii)Intervening inflections and, iv) Wh- question formation.

[i]Intervening object NPs-In all the tests of intervening object NPs, the ECVs do not allow intervention between the two verbs while SVCs allow them. The following constructions can

be instantiated:

10a. Aŋ mai sa ʃaou

I rice eat(v1)-do.PRF(v2)

“I have eaten up the rice.

10b. * Aŋ sa mai ʃaou

I eat(v1) rice do.PRF(v2)

Here the V1V2 complex does not allow the intervention of the NP.

11a. aŋ umbu-mən sa-mən ha bʌi li-ou

I bathe-CP[V1] eat-CP[V2] soil plough[V3] go-PRF[V4]

“I bathed, ate and went for ploughing”

11b. aŋ umbu-mən mai sa-mən ha bʌi li-ou

Indira Das, Jadavpur University.(2017)

I bathe-CP[V1]rice eat-CP[V2] soil plough[V3] go-PRF[V4]

“I bathed, ate rice and went for ploughing”

Here the SVCs allow an intervening NP between the verbs. The SVCs can also have non

shared objects for each of the verbs in the construction.

[ii]Intervening adverbial test

12a. Aŋ mai-a momor momor sa ʃaou

I rice -ACC quickly eat(v1)-do.PRF(v2)

“I have quickly eaten up the rice.

12b.*Aŋ mai-a sa momor momor ʃaou

I rice -ACC eat(v1) quickly do.PRF(v2)

As we see in (12a) and (12b), the adverbial may occur before V1 V2 complex, but not

between them.

13a. a ŋ mai sa -m ən momor momor capou

1.SG rice eat-CP quickly get-up.PRF

“I ate rice and quickly got up”

13b. a ŋ mai-a momor momor sai-m ən capou

1.SG rice quickly eat-CP get-up.PRF

“I ate rice quickly and got up”

In both (13a) and (13b), the adverbial can occur freely with any of the verbs.

[̛iii] Intervening inflections

14a. sai-mən awa-wo lʌjʌm lei-ou

eat-CP father-NOM walk(V1) go(V2)-PRF

“Having eaten his meal father went out for a walk”

14b.* sai-mən awa-wo lʌjʌm-ou lei-ou

eat-CP father-NOM walk-PRF(V1) go(V2)-PRF

The construction in (14 b) is ungrammatical because there is an intervening inflectional marking on V1. In ECV constructions only the V2 can get such inflections.

Indira Das, Jadavpur University.(2017)

In SVCs only the conjunctive participal form of the verb is allowed for all the verbs except the final verb. No other inflection is allowed between. This can be observed in the

constructions (15a,b).

15a. aŋ umbu-mən sa-mən ha bʌi li-ou

I bathe-CP[V1] eat-CP[V2] soil plough[V3] go-PRF[V4]

“I bathed, ate and went for ploughing”

15b. *aŋ umbu-ou sa-ou ha bʌi li-ou

I bathe-PRF[V1] eat-PRF[V2] soil plough[V3] go-PRF[V4]

[iv] Wh- question formation – Since VCs form a single event unit, question formation tests

do not allow partial question extraction from the V1V2 unit. By forming the wh- question of

sentence number (3), we get the following-

16a. Akas rita-wo utu ŋ tak-ou?

Akas Rita –ACC what do-PRF

“ What did Akash do to Rita?”

16b. Akas rita-wo utu ŋ tak-ou j ʌkou?

Akas Rita –ACC what do-PRF throw-out(V2)

In (16a) the question is correctly formed only when the entire compound is questioned. In

(16b) we try to form the question by partial extraction of the verb compound but the result is

ungrammatical.

However, with SVCs each of the verbal units can be singled out and questioned separately.

Here, sentence number (4) is formed into the following questions.

16a. umɔr iskul lei-mən utu ŋ tak-ou?

3sg school go-CP what do-PRF

“What did he do after going to school?”

16b. umɔr iskul lei-mən leka dao-mən utu ŋ tak-ou?

3sg school go-CP book open-CP what do-PRF

“What did he do after going to school and opening the book?”

In (16a,b) we see that question formation can occur by extracting any of the verbs in the SV construction.

Conclusion: The verb compounds in ECV constructions and the Conjunct Verb Constructions focus on parts of the event, the light verbs carry the semantic information of Indira Das, Jadavpur University.(2017) the telicity of the event as well. ECV constructions and the Conjunct Verb Constructions code only single events, while SVCs represent more than one event.

In terms of standard syntactic tests, verb compounds of the ECVs require strict adjacency while the SVCs allow intervening NPs and adverbs. In all of the complex predicates discussed above, one commonality can be found, i.e.in all of them the verbs share the same subject. Another commonality that’s found is that in every complex predicate, the final verb gets inflected for tense/aspect.

Further work on North Bengal’s Rabha is necessary for us to understand the nuances of this language even better. Being a vulnerable language, there isn’t much documentation of the language, specially the language spoken in Alipurduar district, the Koch Rabha. To conclude, this work is a preliminary attempt at discussion the complex predicate formations in Rabha and their semantic content and syntactic structure.

References:

·         Abbi, Anvita. A Manual of Linguistic Field Work and Structures of Indian Languages. Lincom Europa (2001)

·         Grierson, G.A. Linguistic Survey of India (Vol. III, part.II,pp.102-105, 106-108)

·         Subbarao, K.V. et.al. A Typological Rabha Grammar. An unpublished dissertation on grammatical aspects of the Rabhas, project of ABILAC, 2000.

·         Saeed, John I. Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing(2003)

·         Ramchand, G., Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First Phase Syntax. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.( 2008)

·         Chatterji, S.K., 1926. The Origin and Development of the Bengali Language, Volume II. D. Mehra, Rupa & Co, Calcutta. 1975 edition.

·         Butt, Miriam, Structure of Complex Predicates in Urdu. PhD dissertation. Stanford University, 1993.

·         Butt, Miriam and A. Lahiri, Diachronic Pertinicity of Light Verbs, Lingua, 2013.

·         Basu, Debarchana and R. Wilbur, Complex predicates in Bangla: An event-based analysis. Rice Working paper in Linguistics, vol. 2, 2010.

·         Das, Pradeep Kumar. Compound Verb. Available at https://www.pkdas.in