cedh wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:23 am
I don't think that would count as raising, no. It looks like two clauses in apposition to each other, the first of them functioning as a topic for the second one. (At least if "concern" is really a finite verb in that example.)
Right, well, ek here is a kind of coverb, actually. More of a transposed adverbial, really.
cedh wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:23 am
Your basic, single-clause example also doesn't really look like raising to me, because the subject of the second verb is in the expected position for a non-raised structure. What exactly is the relationship between the matrix clause and the embedded clause though? Is the embedded clause syntactically an argument of the matrix verb "appear"? And if yes, subject or object?
In terms of Chomskyan grammar, I'm not sure. I've been reading a bunch of articles on how to analyze V-initial languages, and they don't seem to be compatible with Chomsky's basic theories without modification. Different linguists have different ideas on what those modifications are. There's a concensus that Irish and Welsh have an underlying SVO structure that's transformed to VSO, which just seems a bit far-fetched. There's a theory that Tagalog is verb-initial to satisfy prosodic requirements. All of this seems to ignore the fact that from a logical perspective, verb-first makes a lot of sense. Anyway, just using 2D, non-tree representation, I'd say it was something like:
[kigja [edelei-muoda [progasôm]]]
[appear [become-INF=high [price]]]
I'd say
edelei-muoda progasôm is a subject of
kigja, and
progasôm is the subject of
edelei-muoda.
Raising would presumably move
progasôm to be the subject of
edelei-muoda, downgrading it to object status. So a raised version would be
kigja progasôm edelei-muoda, perhaps with a pronoun:
kigja progasôm edelei-muoda kja.
But I just have this notion that the language has a preference for pushing NPs rightward and thus does not do raising, and several other transformations that are common in seemingly all languages.
cedh wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:23 am
Does the language have similar constructions with other matrix verbs (which might have a different argument structure)?
When an intransitive is relativized:
pare gumerôs ê-dôl asê-ptar
wrote come-PTC DEF=man this-DEF=book
the man who came wrote this book
This is in keeping with the" NPs move to the right" notion. Relativives (i.e. participles) normally go after the head, so this is an actual transformation. But
gumerôs ê-dôl acts as the subject of the clause.
If the participle were transitive, this wouldn't occur most of the time, and the RC could even be moved all the way to the end.
Another thing, the participle takes on case, so if the verb took a dative subject (perception, emotion and involuntary movement/position verbs do this), you'd get another case form:
kigiv gumerôsim ê-dôl asê-ptar
saw come-PTC-DAT ê-dôl-DIR asê-ptar-DIR
the man who came saw the book
cedh wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:23 am
And superficially unrelated but possibly relevant: How are secondary predicates handled?
Secondary predicates are already exemplified in my original sample sentence; they move all the way up and cliticize to the verb:
selei-mauldṙ
make-beautiful
In a sentence:
sele-mauldṙ ȝes tuo
made-beautiful 1S 3S.M
I made him beautiful
The adjective prevents the pronoun
ȝes to cliticize, without a complement in its way it would be
-es:
sel-es draunna maundṙ
make-1S thing<PL> beautiful<PL>
I make beautiful things
akam chinjir wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2019 9:37 am
I happened upon an example of raising from Tongan, which is verb-initial, maybe it's interesting.
ʻe lava [ʻo ako ʻe Pita ʻa e lea faka-tonga]
TNS possible/can COMP learn ERG Peter ABS DET language Tongan
Peter can learn Tongan
ʻe lava ʻe Pita [ʻo ako ʻe Pita ʻa e lea faka-tonga]
TNS possible/can ERG Peter COMP learn ABS DET language Tongan
Peter can learn Tongan
(Source: Polinsky and Potsdam,
Austronesian syntax, 43.)
So very much look like it does raising, but on an optional basis.