Anna Siewierska

1
Never too much of a good thing why so many
languages have more than one passive
Anna Siewierska Dik Bakker Lancaster
University
2
The canonical construction

• i) Agent defocusing Patient promotion
• ii) Semantic properties
• (a) Semantic valence predicate (agent, patient)
• (b) Subject is affected
• iii) Syntactic properties
• (c ) Encoding agent ? oblique or not
  expressed
• patient ? subject
• (d) Valence of predicate Active P/n
• Passive P/n - 1
  
• iv) Morphological properties
• Active Predicate
• Passive Predicate passive
• v) Pragmatically marked vis a vis the active

3
Skewed areal and genetic distribution
4
Language internal distribution

• Enormous differences in use of passive
• Productivity of construction
• Any transitive verb
• Only one verb Skou (Donahue 2004)
• Genre register factors
• Number and variety of passive constructions

5
What counts as a distinct passive?

• A construction-based approach
• Any systematic difference in form, semantics or
  use too wide
• Agentive vs. agentless
• Different forms of agent marking
• Presence vs. absence of thematic subject
• Different thematic role of subject
• This paper distinctive verbal morphology
• Different auxiliary or light verb
• Different affixation not evident allomorphs
• Different form of lexical verb in periphrastic

6
English be vs. get passives

• Same form of lexical verb different aux
• She got fired by her boss.
• She was fired by her boss.

7
Kachiquel suffixal prefixal passive
a. Xta Maria x-tzub-äx r-oma a Juan
CL Maria COM-kiss-PASS 3-by CL Juan b.
Xta Maria x- ki-tzub-aj r-oma a Juan
CL Maria COM-PASS-kiss-TR 3-by CL Juan
Maria was kissed by Juan.
From 3pl to passive
7
8
Ukrainian ne/te vs. no/to passive

• Same aux different form lexical verb
• nemovlja bulo znajdene/znajdeno u
  koyku
• baby AUX foundNSG/foundNSG in basket
• A baby was found in a basket.

9
Russian periph. vs. synthetic passive
a. Takie stati ne byli opublikovany such
articlesNOM NEG werePL publishedPL za
granicej beyond border Such articles were
not published abroad. b. V Rossii prodolzalo
ne proizvoditsja in Russia continued NEG
producePASS takix napitkov such
drinksGEN There continued not to be any such
drinks produced in Russia.
10
Current sample 311 lgs with passives
11
more than 1 passive 92/311 (30)
12
Areal distribution of 1 1 passive
13
Areal distribution of 1 vs. 2 vs. 2
14
Verbal marking 1 1 passive
15
Why more than one passive?

• No iconic or economic motivation for structural
  synonymy within languages (Croft 2003105-106)
• Some differences in function
• What type of differences in function?
• How are these differences distributed globally
  and in relation to type of passive verbal marking?

16
Type of differences between passives

• Main constituents
• Subject
• Agent
• Verb
• Semantic factors
• TAM
• Nature of state of affairs
• Assessment
• Pragmatic factors
• Information structure
• Text type genre

17
Subject

• Presence
• Semantic role
• Animacy
• Person

18
Subject Presence Kannada

• (Sridhar 1980) padu experience vs. agu become
• Krishnanu-indu Ramu-Ø ko-pattu-nu
• Krishna-INST Rama-NOM kill-PASS-PAST
• Rama was killed by Krishna.
• Rama-nannu kollal-ayi-yu
• Ram-ACC killINF-PASS-PAST
• Ram was killed.

19
Subject Semantic role Dutch

• Het boek wordt hem toegestuurd
• the book become him sent
• The book is sent to him.
• Hij wordt het boek toegestuurd.
• Hij krijgt het boek toegestuurd.
• he gets the book sent
• He is sent the book

20
Subject Animacy Imbabura Quechua

• Maria-ka juya-shka ka-rka
• Maria-TOP love-PAST.PART be-PAST3
• Maria was seen.
• Maria-ka juya-y tuku-rka
• Maria-TOP love-INF become-PAST3
• Maria was seen.
• Aycha-ka miku-shka ka-rka
• meat-TOP eat-PAST.PART be-PAST3
• The meat was eaten.
• Aycha-ka miku-y tuku-rka

21
Subject Person Coeur dAlene

• m (1SG or 3) vs. t
• Cevleq-n-t-Ø-m
• LOC.burrd-t-3SG-PASS
• He was buried.
• vcunvmey-n-t-eli-t
• point.know-d-t-1PAT-PASS
• We were taught.

22
Agent

• Possibility of agent expression
• Obligatoriness of agent
• Nature of covert agent human vs. any
• Person of agent non SAP vs. any

23
Agent Presence Buru (Grimes 1991)

• Sira dapa-k eflali (ringe)
• they get-ACP beat (him)
• They got beaten up.
• Subu di ek-fuka-k ringe
• door DIST PASS-open-ACP 3SG
• The door was opened by him.

24
Agent Omissability Mandarin

• Jin-yu (bei) xiao-mao chi-diao le
• goldfish PASS cat eat-up PERF
• The gold fish has been eaten by the cat.
• Jin-yu (rang) xiao-mao chi-diao le
• goldfish PASS cat eat-up PERF
• The gold fish has been eaten by the cat.

25
Agent any vs. human Lunda

• Kasumbi Ø-na-sum-ew-j
• domestic fowl S/A-TAM-bite-PASS-FV
• A domestic fowl has been bitten(e.g. by a
  snake.)
• a-na-sum-j kasumbi
• PASS-TAM-bite-FV domestic fowl
• A domestic fowl has been bitten (by a person
  not by a snake)

26
Agent Person Quiche

• (Campbell 2000 249)
• -in-cay-tax aw-umal
• ASP-1SG-hit-PASS 2SG.POSS-by
• I got hit by you.
• -in-cay aw-umal
• ASP-1SG-hitPASS 2SG.POSS-by
• I got hit by you.
• -in-cay r-umal ri acih
• ASP-1SG-hitPASS 3SG.POSS-by the man
• I got hit by the man.

27
Main constituents Verb

• Lexical
• morphological derived vs. underived
• valency

28
Verb Lexical Tzutujil

• A few verbs take the archaic passive marker vr,
  kamo carry, tojooj to pay, chapooj to grab,
  scold
• All other verbs can take the simple passive with
  the infix j- or suffix x or the completive
  passive in -taj

29
Verb Morphological Older Egyptian

• (Reintges 2008)
• 1. Internal passive ij
• 2. Suffixal passive w
• 3. Reduplication applied to verbal root
• Passive 1 2 can apply to any verb. Passive 3
  can only apply to transitive verbs that are not
  derived

30
Valency Krongo

• (Reh 1985228-9)
• -atini (TR) vs. aca (DTR)
• N-apa-ati? a?a?
• ½-PRFhit-PASS I
• I have been hit.
• K-ada-aca nan-kurusi a-kaaw
• PL-PRFgive-PASS PL-money DAT-person
• The money has been given to the man.

31
Semantics

• TAM
• Nature of state of affairs
• generic vs. episodic
• stative vs. dynamic
• accidental vs. volitional
• Assessment
• adversative vs. neutral
• beneficial vs. adversative

32
Aspect Polish byc vs. zostac

• Ciasto bylo pieczone / upieczone
• cake was bakedIMPERF / bakedPERF
• przez ciocie Hele
• by aunt Helen
• The cake was baked by aunty Helen.
• Ciasto zostalo pieczone / upieczone
• cake remain bakedIMPERF / bakedPERF
• przez ciocie Hele
• by aunt Helen

33
Modality Deontic

• Gujarati
• synthetic a (possibility, necessity,
  prohibition) vs. periphrastic aa come
  (non-modal)
• Sardinian
• Periphrastic-essere be (non-modal) vs.
  periphrastic kerrere need bollit want
  (modal)

34
Gujarati -a vs. aa

• Possibility (participant internal)
• Chokraathii purU bolayU
  nahi
• boyOBLABL fully sayPASSP.PRTN NEG
• The boy could not express himself.
• Non-modal
• Prasav thayaanii bhaaiione jaaN
• delivery being of brothers information
• karvaamAA aavii
• doINFOBLin comeP.PLFSG
• The brothers were informed about the
  delivery.

35
Sardinian éssere vs. kérrere vs. ?bole

• Custa domo est istata fraicata dae un'Italianu
• 'This house was built by an Italian.'
• Cussas fainas keren fattas de nos corcare
• Those chores need to be done before we go to
  bed.
• Custa cicara de cafei bollit buffada
• This cup of coffee must be drunk.

36
Modality epistemic Cayuvava

• (Key196728)
• Synthetic ada- certainty
• ada-kæcæ it is cut off.
• mera-ada-boro it will be given with certainty
• Synthetic bae- probability
• a-bæ-boroæ it is given, probably
• a-bæ-kociro if I am believed, I am probably
  believed

37
Generic vs. Episodic Norwegian

• s vs. bli (Faarlund 1997514)
• Oppgavene levere-s hver uke
• the.exercises hand.in-pass every week
• The exercises are handed in every week.
• Oppgavene ble levert for seint
• the.exercises become handed too late
• The exercises were handed in too late

38
Stative vs. Dynamic Estonian

• olema be -tud part. vs. saama get
  infinitive in -da (Torn-Leesik 200211-13)
• Maja projekt oli
  valmistatud
• houseGEN planNOM bePAST3SG make
• Jürissoni poolt
• Jürisson by
• The design plans of the house were drawn up by
  Mr Jürisson.
• Patsiendid said arsti käest
  noomida
• patientsNOM get3PL doctorGEN from
  reprimandINF
• The patients got reprimanded by the doctor.

39
Volitional vs. Accidental Maanyan

• (Gudai 1985226)
• Kawaweq yeruq na-jalak daya-ni
• deer the PASS-spear by he
• The deer was speared by him.
• Bukuku ta-rakit daya anak-ni
• book-1SG PASS-burn by son-3SG
• My book has been accidentally burnt by his
  son.

40
Adversative vs. Beneficial Vietnamese

• bi vs. duoc
• Anh ay bi nguoita danh
• he PASS someone hit
• He was hit by someone.
• Anh ay duoc Kim danh
• he PASS Kim hit
• He was hit by Kim (fortunately, he liked it)

41
Adversative vs. Neutral Indonesian

• (Ing Djiang 198849) kenabe hit vs. di-
• Ali kena tipu seorang dukun
• Ali be hit deceive one-CLAS medicine man
• Ali was deceived by a medicine man.
• Buku ini di-beli oleh nya di Athenaeum
• book this PASS-bought by him at Athanaeum
• The book was bought by him at the Athanaeum
  bookshop.

42
Pragmatics

• Information structure
• Register and genre

43
Information structure Kakchiquel

• (Broadwell Duncan 2002)
• In the ki-passive in contrast to the standard
  äxpassive both Agent and Patient convey given
  information

44
Register Southern Min

• (Matthews Yip 2001269)
• Ngo seng4jat6 bei2 jan4 aak
• I always PASS people cheat
• I keep being cheated.
• Jau5 saam bei6 hin2-faan2 loi6dei6
• exist three PASS send-back mainland
• Three were sent back to the mainland.

45
Distribution of differences

• Areal
• Type passive marking

46
Area semantic differences
47
Area semantic differences
48
Type verbal marking

• Periphrastic
• Synthetic
• Both

49
V marking by area
50
V marking and type of differences

• In principle choices between passives motivated
  by any of the factors considered should involve
  any type of passive synthetic, periphrastic or
  both

51
V marking semantic differences
52
V marking semantic differences
53
The major asymmetries

• Adversative differences favour distinctions
  between periphrastic passives
• TAM differences disfavour distinctions between
  periphrastic
• Verb distinctions favour synthetic
• Agent differences disfavour distinctions between
  periphrastic

54
Adversative semantics

• Lgs with more than one passive
• SEAOc periph
• Eurasia periph
• Africa Coptic periph
• NAmerica Central Yupik synth
• Adverse in a general sense (inanimate subject)
• (?passive or resultative) -cir vs. -ma
• Lgs with one passive
• Japanese, Tungusic (Evenki, Even), Manchu synth

55
TAM

• Synthetic vs. Synthetic
• NAmerica MesoAmer Mayan, Uto-Aztecan
• Periphrastic vs. Synthetic
• Eurasia Europe

56
Periph vs. synth in Europe

• Periphrastic
• perfective
• specific event
• subject not restricted
• overt agent
• higher register
• Synthetic
• imperfective
• generic event
• inanimate subject
• no agent
• lower register or neutral

57
Periph synth outside Europe

• Only 6 in the sample
• TAM not involved
• Event not involved
• Subject necessarily inanimate in the more
  periphrastic in Cubeo
• Agent no agent in the periphrastic in Coptic,
  Cubeo, Buru
• Purepcha has calqued a periphrastic passive on
  Spanish and introduced an agent

58
TAM and periphrastic

• No lgs where synthetic passive is perfective and
  periphrastic imperfective
• Modal distinctions involving capability,
  necessity and possibility favour periphrastic

59
Person and synthetic

• Restrictions involving person relating to either
  the subject or the agent favour synthetic
  passives
• Subject Interior Salish, Quileute, Moseten,
  Ostyak
• Agent Mayan, Bantu, Uto-Aztecan

60
Conclusions

• Contrary to what was stated in the abstract, only
  about 1/3 of the languages with passives have
  more than 1 (in terms of the measure adopted
  here)
• Lgs with more than one passive are mainly in
  Eurasia, NAmerica (Meso) SEAOc
• Lgs with periphrastic passives appear to be more
  likely to have more than one passive than
  languages with synthetic passives

61
Conclusions

• The type of language-internal differences
  displayed by passives are areally skewed
• There are also asymmetries relating to type of
  verb-marking of the passive
• Adversative differences favour distinctions
  between periphrastic passives
• TAM differences disfavour distinctions between
  periphrastic
• Person differences favour distinctions between
  synthetic

62
The wider context

• Why some languages favour multiple passives,
  while others do not, and yet others have no
  passives at all?