Causative Construction in Magahi

1. This presentation will probably involve audience discussion, which will create action items. Use PowerPoint to keep track of these action items during your presentation • In Slide Show, click on the right mouse button • Select “Meeting Minder” • Select the “Action Items” tab • Type in action items as they come up • Click OK to dismiss this box • This will automatically create an Action Item slide at the end of your presentation with your points entered. Causative Construction in Magahi Deepak Alok (M.A. Previous) Department of Linguistics Banaras Hindu University Email : deepak113alok@yahoo.co.in Deepak

2. ABOUT THE TOPIC • Causative constructions play a significant role in different areas of the grammar of a language. • Some languages exhibit morphological causativization whereas some languages undergo complex syntactic processes to realize causative constructions. • Magahi like major indic language such as Hindi, Maithali, Bangla show morphological marking to realize causativization of a verb (haT ‘move’ -> haT-aa ‘remove something/somebody’ -> haT-baa ‘cause/have somebody to remove something/somebody’). Deepak

3. ABOUT THE TOPIC ...CONT. • Causative employs a process of causation, i.e, ‘we assume that there is an external factor, which has forced the normal situation to cause something’. Deepak

4. Criteria to define a causative construction • It is a single event constituting of two sub-events. • These sub-events can be sequential. • One of the sub-event causes the other to happen, and • There must be some argument sharing between the two sub-events. Deepak

5. Two type of causations: indicated in term of degree • The hypothesis of the first degree of causation is “x perform some action for y” • Raam nokar ke bhag-aa de-l-kai • Ram servant ACC remove gave • ‘Ram caused the servant leave.’ Deepak

6. Two type of causations….cont. • The hypothesis of the second degree causation denotes “x to make y perform some action for z” • Raam nokar ke mohan se bhag-baa de-l-kai. • Ram servant ACC Mohan by remove-cause gave • ‘Ram got Mohan to cause the servant to leave.’ Deepak

7. CAUSATIVE VERB FORMATION IN MAGAHI • Morphological process • Highly productive morphological process • It is mainly suffixal in the form of –aa and baa but variation are found. • -aa and –baa are used with the compound verbs.as khi-aa denaa and khi-baa denaa.but with the singal verb form it become –ai/a/au and –bai/ba/bau. As khi-ai/a/au-l-kai and khi-bai/b/bu-l-kai. Deepak

8. Morphological process…cont. E.g. • u laRkii dekha-l-ak. he girl saw ‘He saw the girl.’ • U raam ke laRkiiyaa dekh-aa de-l-kai. he Ram DAT girl showed ‘Ha showed Ram the girl’ • U ram ke laRkiiyaa dekh-ai-l-ak. he Ram DAT girl showed ‘He showed Ram the girl.’ • U raam se hamaraa laRkiiyaa dekh-bai-l-ak. he Ram by me girl get-see ‘He got Ram to show me the girl.’ Deepak

9. Morphological process..cont. • I also used the –aa and the –baa suffix with stem to indicate derivied form likh ‘write’ -> likh-aa ‘dictate’ -> likh-baa ‘get written (by somebody)’ • dekh ‘see’ -> dekh-aa ‘show’ -> dekh-baa ‘get (somebody) see/show’ Deepak

10. Morphological process…cont. • First causative is formed by adding the suffix ‘-aa’ to the non-causative verb stem which implies that the degree of closeness between cause and effect is immediate or direct. E.g. bhag-aa ‘to cause (somebody) to leave’ • The second causative is formed by adding the suffix ‘-baa’ to the non-causative verb stem which implies that the degree of closeness between cause and effect is mediated or less direct. E.g. bhaga-baa ‘to get (somebody) cause (somebody) to leave’ Deepak

11. Magahi has mainly three contrasting verb forms • The basic non-causative verb form, E.g. • bhaag ‘to leave’ (intransitive), (it is a polysemous word, I ignore its other meanings) • dekh ‘see’(transitive) • The first causative form • bhag-aa ‘to cause leave’ • dekh-aa/dikh aapaR-aa ‘to show’ Deepak

12. Magahi has…..cont. • The second causative form, E.g. bhag-baa ‘to get (sb) to cause (sb) leave’ dekh-baa‘to get (sb) show (st) to somebody’ • This is the view that can be applied only with the verb that have clear distinction between these two suffix-aa and –baa. Deepak

13. Magahi has…..cont. • However, some verbs may have four contrasting verb forms, E.g. kaT ‘get cut’ (intransitive) kaaT ‘to cut’ (transitive) kaT-aa ‘to get (sb) to cut (st)’ kaT-baa ‘to get (sb) to cut (st)’ • Other examples baT ‘get divded’ bandh ‘get tied’ Deepak

14. Magahi has…..cont. • Some intransitive verbs have no ‘-aa’ marker form sudhar sudar-baa ‘improve’ ‘get(sb) improve (sb/st)’ nikal nikal-baa ‘get out’ ‘get(sb) take out (st)’ Deepak

15. Some have clear distinction between the marker -aa and -baa dauR ‘to run’ dauR-aa dauR-baa ‘to run’ ‘cause to run’ ‘cause to run’ has ‘to laugh’ has-aa has-baa ‘to laugh’ ‘cause to laugh’ ‘ cause to laugh’ laR ‘to fight’ laR-aa laR-baa ‘to fight’ ‘cause to fight’ ‘cause to fight’ Thahar ‘to stay’Thahar-aa Thahar-baa ‘to stay’ ‘cause to stay’ ‘cause to stay’ Deepak

16. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN –aa AND-baa dauR ‘to run’ A). raam okaraa khuub dauRai-l-kai. Ram his lots cause- run ‘Ram made him run alot’ B.).raam okaraa khuub dauRa-bai-l-kai. Ram his lot cause run ‘Ram made him run a lot’ Deepak

17. THE DIFFERENCE….CONT. • In (A), the causer of the action is Ram and is closed/direct to the cause okaraa ‘him’. That is, Ram is directly involved in making the agent of run to perform the action. However, there may be other intermediate agents as causers. • In (B), on the other hand, Ram is causer of the action who is not directly involved in causing the action of running. There is an intermediate causer (implicit) who is directly causing the agent of run to perform the action. • The difference between (A) and (B) is that the intermediate cause is prominent in (B) whereas it is non-prominent in (A). Deepak

18. THE DIFFERENCE….CONT. (C) u nauaa se apan kes kaT-ai-l-ak/kaT-bai-l-ak. He barbar by self hair cut/got cut ‘He got his (own) hair cut by the barbar’ (D) u nauaa se okar kes *kaT-ai-l-ak/kaT-bai-l-ak He barbar by his hair cut/got cut ‘He got his hair cut by the barbar’. In preliminary examination,it appears that in (C) both the forms are permitted because the action affects the causer himself whereas in (D),the only second causative form is permitted when the affected entity other than the self. Deepak

19. Transitive Verbs • In the case of transitive verbs, some verbs have the -aa and the -baa distinction (1), and some donot (2) Transitive Ditransitive Causative paR ‘read’ paR-aa ‘teach’ paR-baa khaa ‘eat’ khi-aa ‘feed’ khi-baa pi ‘drink’ pi-aa ‘give’ pi-baa Transitive Causative duh duh-aa/duh-baa kar kar-aa/kar-baa de di-aa/di-baa dil-aa/dil-baa jot jot-aa/jot-baa Deepak

20. Lexical causation Magahi have also lexical causation. E.g Jaa(Intr) bhej-aa bhej-baa ‘go’ ‘send’ ‘get-send’ TuuT toR-aa toR-baa Deepak

21. Argument Structure of Causativization in Magahi • To analize the argument structure of causativization in magahi,as we know that the causative construction increases the valency of the verb,I examine the following two issues— A. readjustment of grammatical relation i.e. sub,obj indirect obj,oblique obj etc and B. determining the case of the causee(s) Deepak

22. Causative of Intransitives the extra noun phrase (causer) appears as the subject in the sentence and the subject of the intransitive verb functions as the direct object (causee) goRaa kud-al horse jumpled ‘horse jumped’ papa goRbaa ke kudai-l-thi father horse-ACC made-jump ‘The father caused the horse jump.’ Deepak

23. Causative of Intransitives…Cont. In second causation, the multiple cause termed oblique objects, are marked by the instrumental postposition ‘se/diyaa’. The causer NP, which functions as the subject, is in the nominative case (nominative case is not marked in Magahi) E.g. maamaa bantiyaa se/diyaa ghar jharau-l-kai. maternal uncle Banti-Obl house got-cleaned ‘Mama got the house cleaned by Banti.’ baabaa maamaa se bantiyaa diyaa ghar jhar-bau-l-thi. Baba m.uncle obl Banti by house got-cleaned ‘Baba got Mama to clean the house by Banti.’ Deepak

24. Causation of mono-transitive • the extra NP(causer) appears as the subject while the subject of the transitive with a direct object becomes an indirect object (causee). • If the indirect object functions as a patient cause, it is marked by the accusative-dative postposition ‘ke’. • The direct object of the basic transitive remains as the direct object of the causative construction. E.g.Bantiyaa kitaab paRkaii. Banti book read ‘Banti read the book.’ Bantiyaa santiyaa ke kitaab paRau-l-kai. Banti Santi ACC book taught ‘Banti taught Santi the book.’ Papa maastar se santiyaa ke kitaab paRbau-l-thi. Father teacher by Santi ACC book taught ‘The father got the teacher to teach Santi the book.’ Deepak

25. Causation of mono-transitive.Cont. On the other hand, if the cause is agentive in function, it becomes an oblique object and is marked by the instrumental postposition ‘se/diyaa’as- Nokar gaach kaaT-l-ak Servant tree cut ‘The servant cut the tree’ Maalik nokar se/*ke gaachhiyaa kaT-ai-l-ak Master servant by tree got cut ‘The master got the tree cut by the servant’ Maalik manejar se nokar diyaa gaachhiyaa kaT-bau-l-ak. Master manejar by servant through tree got –cut ‘The master got the manejar cut the tree through the servant.’ Deepak

26. Causation of mono-transitive.Cont. But a handful of transitive verb such as paR ‘to read’,khaa ‘to eat’,chikh ‘to teast ’ permit their causes to be marked by either the accusastive –dative postposition ‘ke’or the instrumantal postposition ‘se/diyaa’ ram choRaa ke kitaab paR-bau-l-ak. Ram boy DAT book taught ‘Ram got the boy taught the book (by sb)’ ram choRaa se kitaab paR-bau-l-ak. Ram boy by book read ‘Ram got the boy read the book’ Deepak

27. Causation of mono-transitive.Cont. But these two type of sentences differ in meaning. Using the accusative-dative postposition allows the cause to described as the ‘beneficiary’ of the action.while the use of the instrumental postposition allows the cause to described as the ‘instrument’ of the action. Deepak

28. Causative of Ditransitives The sub of the non transitive sentence with both indirect objs become an oblique obj in the corresponding causative construction to avoid doubling on indirect and direct obj,as it were. The oblique obj is marked by the instrumental postposition ‘se/diyaa or haathe’ as- Bantiyaa santiyaa ke chiTThii likha-l-ak. Banti santi DAT letter wrote ‘Banti wrote a letter to santi’ Bantiyaa mohan se santiyaa ke chiTThii likha-ai-l-ak/likha-bau-l-ak. Banti Mohan by santi DAT letter got-written ‘Banti got Mohan write a letter to Santi’ Baabaa bantiyaa se santiyaa diyaa/haathe raam ke chiTthii di-bau-l-an. Baba Banti by santi through Ram DAT letter cause gave ‘Baba got Banti send a letter to Ram through santi’ Deepak

29. Syantactic Subclass While describing the process of causativisation in Hindi,Yamuna kachru(1976) divided the verbs in to four syantactic sub classes.I used that in my paper because it is applicable in Magahi. The derivation can be shown as below: 1) Vi kaT Vt kaaT Vcaus kaT-aa/kaT-baa 2) Vt khaa V khi-aa Vcaus khi-baa 3) Vt kar Vcaus kar-aa Vcaus kar-baa 4)Vdouble de Vcaus di-aa Vcaus di-baa Deepak

30. Syantactic Subclass….Cont. • In case of the verbs of the3-d and the 4th classes, the second level of derivation does not imply the addition of any ‘extra agent’ to the verbal case frame .e.g (kar-aa= kar-baa and di-aa= di-baa) Deepak

31. Conclusion The analysis of causative construction in Magahi brings out following basic conclusion • The most common morphological marker for causative is a suffix –baa but there is also variations with the suffix –aa (it shows the transitive and the double transitive verbs derived from the basic intransitive verbs and also causation). • I attempted to show that this variation is semantically explained and this distinction is not available to all the verbs Deepak

32. Conclusion • I also attempted that when the action affects the causer himself the causative form of the verb is optional whereas it is obligatory in the case where action affects the other • In this paper I attempted also the properties of various arguments in causative construction in Magahi. Deepak

33. References • Amritavalli.R. (2001). Morphological Causatives. UTAH and Monoclausality. Linguistic Structure and Language Dynamics in South Asia, Papers from the Proceedings of SALA XIII Roundtable.Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. PP. 389-398. • Kachru, Yamuna (1973), Causative Sentences in Hindi Revisited. In Braj Kachru et al. (eds.), Issues in Linguistics. Papers in Honour of Henry and Renee kahance. 377-393. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. • Tripathi, Saroj (1993). “ Hindi aur Magahi Ki Vyakarnik Sanrachana” “Chandra Prakashan, Mauri, Patna, Bihar.” Deepak

34. References • Kachru, Yamuna (1976). On the Semantics of the Causative Construction in Hindi-Urdu. In masayoshi Shibatani (ed.). Syntax and Semantics 6: The Grammar of Causative Constructions, 353-369. New York: Academic Press. • The Grammar of Causative Constructions: A conspectus MASAYOSHI SHIBATANI “University of Southern California” • Kachru, Yamuna .“Hindi” “ University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign” • Yadav, Ramawatar . “ A Reference Grammar of Maithili” Deepak

35. THANK YOU Deepak