Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
Amalia Skilton
June 30, 2016
1 Introduction
This sketch describes fundamental aspects of nominal case in Cushillococha Ticuna (CT). Case is a
central part of CT morphosyntax for three reasons. First, case is the language's primary means of
encoding grammatical relations. The constituent order is flexible, and the verbal morphology is
modest, but almost all nominal constituents -- i.e. full NPs and pronouns -- in a clause must either
be marked for case (modulo differential object marking conditioned by animacy), or apposed to a
case-marked constituent. Second, understanding many aspects of CT syntax and verbal morphology, particularly noun and classifier incorporation and valence-adjusting morphology, requires
reference to case marking. And third, CT lexicalizes many basic action concepts with 'quirky case'
constructions in which a semantically light verb is collocated with a nominal marked for one of
the oblique cases. These semi-compositional constructions form a central part of the lexicon.
The description is organized as follows. §2 gives the case paradigm, and §3 describes the main
functions of each case. §4 summarizes some differential case marking phenomena, which include
interactions of case marking and constituent order (§4.1), differential object marking related to the
animacy hierarchy (§4.2), and unmarked obliques (§4.3), and §5 comments on quirky case. Data
is from my fieldwork in 2015 and 2016 and the texts in Anderson's (1962) pedagogical grammar of
CT. I have read Faco Soares' (2000) and Montes Rodriguez' (2004) morphosyntactic descriptions
of other dialects of Ticuna, but have drawn on them very little here because of significant dialect
differences and the brief treatment of oblique case in these works.
2 Case paradigm
CT exhibits seven cases, shown in Table 1. Case is marked by bound elements which occur after
all nominal derivational morphology. I consider these elements clitics (§2.1) but refer to them
here, agnostically, as 'case markers' and segment them with dashes.
A word may have maximally one case marker. Note that the alienable possession suffix -a¹rɨ³
can co-occur with case markers in constructions involving ellipsis of the head noun in a complex
NP, as exemplifed by the words to¹ma²gɨ⁴a¹rɨ³wa⁵ and ko³ri⁵gɨ⁴a¹rɨ³wa⁵ in (1).
(1)
Alienable possession suffix co-occurs with allative
rɨ¹ tʃa³ŋṵ¹ wɨ⁴ʔi⁴ ɟa⁴ colegio ma²ne⁴ka², to¹ma²gɨ⁴a¹rɨ³wa⁵, ko³ri⁵gɨ⁴a¹rɨ³wa⁵, Lima-wa⁵.
rɨ¹ tʃa³ŋṵ¹ wɨ⁴ʔi⁴ ɟa⁴ colegio ma²ne⁴ka², to¹ma²
-gɨ⁴ -a¹rɨ³ -wa⁵,
and 1sg.sbj- learn one ncl school 'perhaps' non.Ticuna.person -pl -poss -all
ko³ri⁵
-gɨ⁴ -a¹rɨ³ -wa⁵ Lima -wa⁵
non.indigenous.man -pl -poss -all Lima -all
1
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
2
Table 1: Case markers
Case Name
Nominative
Accusative
Dative
Allative
Locative
Comitative/Instrumental
Purposive
Case Marker
∅
-ʔɨ ̃⁵
-na¹
-wa⁵
-gu²
-ma⁴ʔã³
-ka̰¹
'Then I sort of studied in a school, one belonging to non-Ticuna people, one belonging to
white people, in Lima.' (mbu 1:48)
Montes Rodriguez (2004) treats -a¹rɨ³ as a marker of genitive case, but I do not consider it to
be a case marker, for several reasons. First, the case markers listed in Table 1 form a paradigm in
that they cannot co-occur within the word. -a¹rɨ³ is not a member of this paradigm, since it can
co-occur with case markers in structures such as (1). Second, all the case markers in Table 1 either
mark the grammatical relations of core arguments (nominative, accusative) or license obliques.
They do not license the addition of non-head elements to NPs. -a¹rɨ³, on the other hand, does not
mark clause-level grammatical relations; it marks an alienable possession relationship between
two nouns in an NP.
2.1
Phonological status of case markers
While previous authors (Anderson 1962, Montes Rodriguez 2004) have described Ticuna case
markers as suffixes, I analyze them as enclitics. My reasons for this are based on syntax and affix
order. In syntax, case markers can occur only once per noun phrase and always occur on the last
element of the noun phrase. There is no concord within the noun phrase. While it is possible for
the same case marker to occur multiple times in a clause, as in (1), multiple occurrences of the
same case on coreferential nouns can always be shown (via the distribution of noun class particles)
to represent apposition of multiple coreferential NPs, not concord within the NP. In affix order,
case markers can occur both inside and outside of information-structural elements which appear
on words of all classes. On certain pronouns, case can also appear both inside and outside of the
plural/pluractional marker -gɨ⁴, which occurs on nouns and verbs but not on other word classes.
I have also noticed in texts that speakers sometimes pause for up to 1000ms between a nominal
or pronominal stem and the case marker which follows it; I have no examples of pauses this long
between syllables of a morpheme or before morphemes that are clearly suffixes.
Faco Soares (2000) treats the case markers other than the accusative as free phonological
words. I reject this analysis for several reasons. In the phonological domain, two of the markers (the accusative and allative) have tone 5, which does not occur on monosyllabic words. In
morphology, no element which is clearly phonologically free (e.g. acceptable in isolation) ever intervenes between the nominal stem and its case marker. The case markers also trigger suppletive
allomorphy on pronouns. Suppletion does not normally occur across word boundaries, although
there is one case of suppletion across words triggered by case in CT (§4.3). Psycholinguistically,
speakers also have a strong intuition that case markers form a single word with the host. While
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
3
my consultants' intuitions on this issue may reflect the fact that case markers are not written as
separate words in the SIL's Ticuna orthography, orthography does not seem to influence their
judgments about word breaks in other areas of the morphology.
2.2
Absence of applicatives
CT displays a passive, an antipassive, and at least one causative, but seems not to have oblique
applicatives. That is, there is no systematic means of promoting NPs which would normally be
licensed by an oblique case marker to the status of an argument of the verb. This said, there are
a small number of verb roots, such as i³¹nɨ³ 'hear, think' and ba̰i ̰¹ 'be underwater,' which -- unlike
the great majority of CT verbs -- can be treated morphologically as belonging either to the a-class,
a large open class which contains both transitive and intransitive verbs, or to the rɨ-class, a small
closed class consisting mostly of intransitive verbs. When they are marked for the a- class, these
verbs are transitive, obligatorily taking an object and assigning it the accusative case (2a). When
they are marked for the rɨ-class, they behave like intransitive quirky case verbs (§5) and assign
the locative to the theme, which is optional (2b).
(2)
Cases assigned by i³¹nɨ³ 'hear, think'
a. Assigns accusative to obligatory theme when marked for a-class
*(nɨ³¹ʔɨ ̃⁵) tʃa³ɨ³¹nɨ³
nɨ³¹
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃa³ɨ³¹nɨ³
3nr.pro -acc 1sg.sbj- 'hear'
'I thought about/heard it.' (GE.DGG.20160620)
b. Intransitive, with optional theme assigned locative, when marked for rɨ-class
(na⁴³gu²) tʃa³rɨ³ɨ³¹nɨ³
(na⁴³
-gu²) tʃa³rɨ³- ɨ³¹nɨ³
3nr.pro -loc 1sg.sbj- vcl- 'hear'
'I thought about/heard it.' (GE.DGG.20160620)
It is not clear to me whether one of the forms in (2) is derived from the other, or, if so, which is
derived from which. If these verbs are essentially rɨ-class, then the change to the a-class represents
a locative applicative derivation; if they are a-class, this is a middle or antipassive derivation.
2.3
Case markers and allomorphy
Backward-looking allomorphy. The allative and locative cases have the odd property of causing
deletion of immediately following tokens of the imperfective prefix i²- and the verb class prefixes
i²- and i⁵-. These prefixes also delete following certain deictic words, such as nu⁴ã² 'here (locative adverb)' and dau⁵ke³ 'upriver.' If another word intervenes between the allative/locative case
marker (or deictic) and the verb, the prefixes reappear.
Forward-looking allomorphy. Case markers never cause allomorphy on nouns or non-pronominal
deictics. They do, however, cause root allomorphy on several pronouns. These are the 1sg, third
person non-respect (3nr), third person respect (3r), 1incl, and 1excl pronouns. The language's
other pronouns (2sg, 3nr.f, 2pl) and deictics do not undergo this allomorphy. Table 2 gives the
case paradigms for the pronouns which undergo root allomorphy triggered by case.
While I give the nominative as zero-marked in Table 1, bare pronominal roots such as those
shown in the first row of Table 2 are not acceptable subjects (except for the suppletive 1incl
nominative pronoun ɟi²ma⁴ʔ). Free subject pronouns instead normally bear the affix -ma³, such
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
4
Table 2: Case paradigms of suppleting pronouns
Case Name
Nominative
Acccusative
Dative
Allative
Locative
Comitative/Instrumental
Purposive
1sg
tʃo³¹tʃo³¹ʔ-ɨ ̃⁵
tʃo³¹-na¹
tʃo³¹-wa⁵
tʃo³¹-gu²
tʃo³¹-ma⁴ʔã³
tʃau¹-ka̰¹
3nr
nɨ³¹nɨ³¹-ʔɨ ̃⁵
nɨ³¹-na¹
na⁴³-wa⁵
na⁴³-gu²
na⁴³-ma⁴ʔã³
na⁴³-ka̰¹
3r
tɨ³¹tɨ³¹-ʔɨ ̃⁵
tɨ³¹-na¹
tɨ³¹ma³-wa⁵
tɨ³¹ma³-gu²
tɨ³¹ma³-ma⁴ʔã³
tɨ³¹ma³-ka̰¹
1incl
ɟi²ma⁴ʔ
tɨ³¹-ʔɨ ̃⁵
tɨ³¹-na¹
ta³¹-wa⁵
ta³¹-gu²
ta³¹ma⁴ʔã³
ta³¹-ka̰¹
1excl
to³to³-ʔɨ ̃⁵
to³-na¹
to³⁵-wa⁵
to³¹-gu²
to³-ma⁴ʔã
to³-ka̰¹
that the usual subject form of the 3nr pronoun, for example, is nɨ³¹ma³ rather than nɨ³¹. However,
subject pronouns which host clitics such as =i¹ra⁵ 'first' or =i ̃¹ka⁵ 'only' do not need to be marked
with -ma³. This indicates that -ma is not an obligatory marker of the nominative, even on pronouns.
Additionally, -ma³ can co-occur with the accusative and oblique case markers when the plural
marker -gɨ⁴ intervenes between -ma and the case marker. This indicates that the pronominal
element -ma³ does not exclusively expone nominative case. -ma³ also appears as an informationstructural marker on words of all morphological classes, suggesting that it is a clitic.
A second issue in the allomorphy of pronouns concerns the reflexive/reciprocal pronouns.
These are formed by the nominative root followed by the element -gɨ³, e.g. nɨ³¹gɨ³ '3nr reflexive/reciprocal.' When the reflexive/reciprocal pronouns replace an accusative argument, they
are zero-marked. When they replace an argument which would be assigned another case, they
bear the marker for that case, e.g. tɨ³¹gɨ³ma⁴ʔã³ (3nr-com/inst) 'with one another (3r).' The
accusative, then, is in a sense zero-marked on reflexives and reciprocals.
3 Grammatical relations of each case
3.1
Nominative
The morphosyntactic alignment of CT is nominative-accusative. The subjects of intransitive verbs,
as in 3, and transitives, as in 4, are zero-marked. This pattern is insensitive to the thematic role
of the subject. While many subjects (including both of the subject NPs in the examples below) are
followed by the phonologically free particle rɨ¹, rɨ¹ is not an exponent of nominative case. It is a
topic marker and can appear following non-subject arguments as well (§4.3).
(3)
Subject of intransitive is zero-marked
dɨ¹, dɨ¹ rɨ¹ dau³tʃi²ta⁴a¹ne¹wa⁵ na⁴rɨ³ʔɨ⁴.
dɨ¹
dɨ¹
rɨ¹ dau³tʃi²ta⁴ -a¹ne¹
-wa⁵ na⁴rɨ³- ʔɨ⁴
J.bataua J.bataua top high.forest -clf:environment -all 3nr.sbj- vcl- be.standing.tree
(4)
'Jessenia bataua grows in the forest.' (dɨd 0:17)
Subject of transitive is zero-marked
du¹ɨ ̃³ɨ ̃⁴gɨ⁴ rɨ¹ ta² na⁴na³ŋõ̰¹ e³rɨ⁴ nɨ³¹ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴³me⁴³.
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
5
du¹ɨ ̃³
-ɨ ̃⁴
-gɨ⁴ rɨ¹ ta² na⁴na³ŋõ̰¹ e³rɨ⁴
nɨ³¹
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴³be.person -nmlz -pl top also 3nr.sbj- 3nr.obj- eat because 3nr.pro -acc 3nr.sbjme⁴³.
be.good
'And people also eat it, because they like it.' (dɨd 0:30)
In addition, all non-final elements of the noun phrase are zero-marked, and NPs which are in
syntactic positions that prohibit case marking (§4.3) are also zero-marked.
3.2
3.2.1
Accusative
Transitive verbs
When the direct object of a transitive verb is expressed as a phonologically free word and precedes
the verb, it bears the accusative case marker -ʔɨ ̃⁵, modulo differential object marking (§4.2). (5)
and (6) provide examples of the accusative on a pronoun and a free noun.
(5)
Preverbal NP object of transitive bears accusative
tʃau¹e³ne²ẽ³ -ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃa³mu²
1sg.poss- brother -acc 1sg.sbj- send.animate
(6)
'I'm dropping off my brother.' (GE.LCS.20160601)
Preverbal pronominal object of transitive bears accusative
a. 1sg
tʃo³¹
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴dau¹
1sgpro -acc 3nr.sbj- see
'He saw me.' (GE.LCS.20160615)
b. 3sg animate referent
nɨ³¹
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃa¹dau¹
3nr.pro -acc 1sg.sbj- see
'I saw him.' (GE.LCS.20160615)
c. 3sg inanimate referent
nɨ³¹
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃa¹kʷa̰¹
3nr.pro -acc 1sg.sbj- know
'I know.' (OS)
Three factors determine whether an verb's direct object may be realized as a free word: (a) the
person of the direct object; (b) whether the object is a pronoun or a noun phrase; and (c) the morphological class of the verb. Personal pronouns other than the third person non-respect pronoun
are always realized as phonologically free of the verb and assigned the accusative.1 Likewise,
referential NPs are always realized as phonologically free and assigned the accusative, modulo
the differential object marking discussed in §4.2. When the object is a third person non-respect
(3nr) pronoun, however, its realization depends on the class of the verb. CT displays at least nine
verb classes, distinguished by two features: (a) which of three subject agreement paradigms the
verb participates in, and (b) for transitive verbs only, whether the verb permits only a free 3nr
pronoun for 3nr direct objects, only a 3nr object prefix, or either. Verb classes are a complex
area of CT morphology which I do not attempt to cover here.
1
There is an exception to this generalization involving the morphologically exceptional verb wa̰¹e³ 'like, want.'
Skilton
3.2.2
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
6
Accusative beneficiary/maleficiary construction
In general, transitivity is a rigid property of verb roots in CT: finite transitive verbs are ungrammatical without at least a pronominal or prefixal object, and intransitive verbs (which include most
cross-linguistically labile verbs, such as cutting and breaking verbs) require valence-increasing
morphology in order to be used as transitives.
Nevertheless, a large number of CT verbs which one would expect to be intransitive -- including
the existential verbs and many stative, unaccusative, and unergative verbs -- display a kind of
ambitransitivity. Unlike true transitive verbs, these verbs are grammatical without a direct object.
Nevertheless, they can optionally assign the accusative case to a pronoun or noun phrase, which
is then interpreted as a beneficiary or maleficiary of the verb. (7)-(10) illustrate. All of the verbs
shown in these examples are also acceptable without an accusative argument.
(7)
Existential verb assigns accusative to possessor
tʃo³¹ʔɨ ̃⁴ na⁴ŋe²ma⁴ɨ ̃⁴, i⁴ tʃau¹a³kɨ¹gɨ⁴ i⁴ nueve-ma³ me⁴³a³.
tʃo³¹
-ʔɨ ̃⁴ na⁴ŋe²ma⁴ -ʔɨ ̃⁴
i⁴ tʃau¹a³kɨ¹ -gɨ⁴ i⁴ nueve
-ma³
1sgpro -acc 3nr.sbj- exist -nmlz ncl 1sg.poss- child -pl ncl Sp:nueve info
me⁴³a³
well
(8)
'I have nine children total.' (akɨ 0:17)
Stative verb 'be adult, mature' assigns accusative to beneficiary
tʃo³¹ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴ɟa².
tʃo³¹
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴ɟa⁴
1sgpro -acc 3nr.sbj- be.adult
(9)
'Mine (e.g. my crop) is mature.' (GE.LCS.20160620)
Unaccusative verb 'gather' assigns accusative to beneficiary
rɨ¹ ŋe⁴ʔgu²ma⁴ tɨ³¹ʔɨ ̃⁵ na¹ŋu³ta⁴kḛ¹ʔe³gu² i² gu⁵ʔɨ ̃⁴ma³...
rɨ¹ ŋe⁴ʔgu²ma⁴
tɨ³¹ʔ -ɨ ̃⁵ na¹ŋu³ta⁴kḛ¹ʔe³ -gu²
i² gu⁵ -ʔɨ ̃⁴
-ma³
and and.then.npst 1incl -acc 3nr.sbj.sc gather
-simul ncl be.all -nmlz -top
(10)
'When they're [AHS: all] gathered together...' (Anderson 1962: 316-317)
Unergative verb 'lie' assigns accusative to maleficiary
tʃo³¹ʔɨ ̃⁵ ni⁴do³ra³.
tʃo³¹
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ ni⁴do³ra³
1sgpro -acc 3nr.sbj- lie
'He lies to me.' (GE.LCS.20160620)
In all of my non-elicited examples of the accusative beneficiary construction, the accusative
'argument' of the construction is a pronoun referring to a human. In elicitation, however, speakers
also accept NPs referring to humans, as well as pronouns and NPs with animal and inanimate referents, in the beneficiary role. When a deictic or a full NP appears as an accusative beneficiary, it
optionally bears the suffix -ã¹ preceding the accusative, as in (11). I have elsewhere encountered
-ã¹ in only one construction: it licenses the use of an alienably possessed noun as an argument
of the morphologically atypical verbs ã³ 'have inalienable possessum' and ŋe⁴ 'lack inalienable
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
7
possessum.' It seems doubtful, though, that the 'inalienating' use of -ã¹ is relevant in constructions like (11), since the element can also occur on inalienably possessed nouns in the accusative
beneficiary construction.
(11)
Noun phrase as accusative beneficiary
a. Human referent
Bi³¹tu³(ʔã¹)ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴me⁴³.
Bi³¹tu³
-(ʔã¹) -ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴
-me⁴³
pers.name -?? -acc 3nr.Sbj- be.good
'Victoria likes it.' (GE.LCS.20160628)
b. Inalienably possessed human referent
tʃau¹e³ne²ẽ³(ʔã¹)ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴me⁴³.
tʃau¹e³ne²ẽ³ (-ʔã¹) -ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴me⁴³
1sg.poss- brother -?? -acc 3nr.sbj- be.good
'My brother likes it.' (GE.LCS.20160628)
c. Inanimate referent
pu²kɨ³ rɨ¹ nai³¹ãʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴me⁴³.
pu² -kɨ³
rɨ¹ nai³¹ -ã¹ -ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴me⁴³
rain -nmlz top tree -?? -acc 3nr.sbj- be.good
'Rain is good for trees.' (GE.LCS.20160621, ND on optionality of -ã¹)
There are a handful of intransitive verbs, such as ŋu¹ 'arrive,' which do not participate in the
accusative beneficiary construction. All such verbs which I have found so far share the property
that they can be used with the semi-productive valence-altering suffix -ɨ ̃¹. This suffix applies to an
intransitive verb with an impersonal subject, such as tʃɨ⁴ta³ 'be night,' and derives an intransitive
verb with a personal subject that is interpreted as a beneficiary or maleficiary of the event, such as
tʃa³¹tʃɨ⁴ta³ʔɨ ̃¹ (1sg.sbj-be.night-ɨ ̃¹) 'I (esp. accidentally) remain until night falls, spend the night.' I
suspect that the failure of these verbs to participate in the accusative beneficiary construction is
due to blocking by the derived verb with -ɨ ̃¹. In addition, most verbs which do not participate in
the accusative beneficiary construction are semantically unaccusative.
3.3
Dative
The dative affix -na¹ licenses an NP denoting the recipient of either (a) a transitive verb or (b)
a verb which has become intransitive solely as the result of noun or classifier incorporation, as
in (12). CT does not display ditransitive verbs. Instead, cross-linguistically ditransitive verbs,
such as ã³ 'give (inanimate)' and mu² 'give, send (animate),' are monotransitive, requiring only
an accusative argument denoting the theme. It is optional to include the recipient, but when a
recipient occurs, it is marked with the dative (12).
(12)
Dative licenses recipient of transitive (with incorporate)
nɨ³¹na¹ tʃa³mu²e³ne²ẽ³
nɨ³¹
-na¹ tʃa³mu²
-e³ne²ẽ³
3nr.pro -dat 1sg.sbj- send.animate -NI:brother
'I'm dropping off my brother with him / giving my brother to him (e.g. to take care of).'
(GE.LCS.20160601)
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
8
The use of the dative with the recipient/beneficiary of ã³ and mu² represents an important syntactic difference between these verbs and all other intransitive and transitive verbs in CT. While
ã³ and mu² require the dative on the recipient, all other transitive verbs require the purposive
on beneficiaries/recipients (§3.7). Intransitive verbs, as discussed in §3.1 above, employ the accusative beneficiary construction. This indicates that -- even though 'give' has only two obligatory
arguments in CT -- it nevertheless belongs to a different syntactic class than other transitive verbs.
Note, in addition, that the CT dative cannot be used with a general experiencer sense (e.g. 'it
seems to me'), as in Indo-European languages; the purposive fulfils this function (§3.7).
The dative also occurs with a motion sense. In this use, which occurs with both motion and
non-motion verbs, the dative argument refers to an entity which remains at the source location
while the subject moves to another location. The dative argument can sometimes be read as a
beneficiary of the motion, but this is not invariably the case. (13) provides examples of this use
of the dative.
(13)
Dative marks source of motion
a. Dative animate
rɨ¹ ɟe⁵ma²ma³ nɨ³¹na¹ tʃa³ta⁵e¹gu¹ ɟa⁴ tʃa¹ma⁴ʔ (Anderson 1962: 347)2
rɨ¹ ɟe⁵ma² -ma³ nɨ³¹
-na¹ tʃa³ta⁵
-e¹gu¹
ɟa⁴
top there -info 3nr.pro -dat 1sg.sbj- return -dir:return ncl
tʃa¹ma⁴ʔ
1sgpro.nom.Brazil
Anderson translation: 'I returned from there.'
More lit.: 'I returned from there, where he was.'
b. Dative inanimate
ŋu⁴e⁴na¹ tʃi³ã¹ga¹tʃi¹
ŋu⁴e⁴ -na¹ tʃi³ã¹ -ga¹tʃi¹
canoe -dat 1sg.sbj- row -dir:away.from.center
'I'm rowing, going away from the canoe' (ctx: speaker's canoe began to sink, so he got
in another and went back to shore) (GE.LCS.20160621)
c. Motion dative is not restricted to motion verbs
tʃo³¹na¹ na⁴ta⁵e³gɨ⁴.
tʃo³¹
-na¹ na⁴ta⁵e³
-gɨ⁴
1sg.pro -dat 3nr.sbj- buy/sell -plact
'They went off to buy and left me here.' (ctx: answer to question 'Where are your
companions?')
Cannot be read as: 'They are buying for me.' (GE.LCS.20160621, first reading volunteered in discussion of impossibility of second)
Note that in (13), the dative argument does not refer to the source location itself, but to an
entity that is present at the source location. Source locations proper are marked with the allative,
discussed below.
2
My consultants treat the 1sg pronoun tʃa¹ma⁴ʔ as indexing that the speaker is Brazilian, but find the sentence
felicitous.
Skilton
3.4
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
9
Allative
It is with some hesitation that I label the two primarily spatial case markers, -wa⁵ and -gu², as
respectively 'allative' and 'locative.' I describe -wa⁵ as an allative because it prototypically occurs
with motion verbs and licenses an NP which refers to the goal of motion, as in (14). The motion
may be figurative, as in the metaphorical use of ŋu¹ 'arrive' in (14b). -wa⁵ can also mark the source
of motion; in this use, it is optionally followed by the postposition ne⁴ (15).
(14)
(15)
Allative licenses goal of motion
a. Allative with intransitive denoting literal motion
na⁴³ne¹kɨ³wa⁵ ta⁴ʔi ̃⁴³ rɨ¹ ta⁴tʃe³a⁵tɨ³gɨ⁴.
na⁴³- ne¹kɨ³
-wa⁵ ta⁴ʔi ̃⁴³
rɨ¹ ta⁴tʃe³
dposs- stand.of.plants -all 3r.sbj- come/go.plact and 3r.sbj- cut.with.machete
-a⁵tɨ³
-gɨ⁴
-CLI:leaf -plact
'They (old men) go to the place where it (Lepidocaryum tenue) grows and cut its leaves.'
(kot 0:43)
b. Allative with intransitive denoting figurative motion
rɨ¹ na⁴ʔ na⁴ŋu⁵e²ɨ ̃⁴ rɨ¹, kʷa̰¹wa⁵ na⁴ŋu¹gɨ⁴ rɨ¹, nɨ³¹ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴kʷa̰¹.
rɨ¹ na⁴ʔ na⁴ŋu⁵
-e²
-ɨ ̃⁴
rɨ¹ kʷa̰¹ -∅
-wa⁵ na⁴ŋu¹
top comp 3nr.sbj- learn.sc -plact -nmlz top know -nmlz -all 3nr.sbj- arrive
-gɨ⁴
rɨ¹ nɨ³¹
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴kʷa̰¹
-plact top 3nr.pro -acc 3nr.sbj- know
'Since they went to school, they came to know3 (lit. they arrived at knowing), and
they know it (i.e. what one learns in school).' (akɨ 2:17)
Allative plus ne⁴ licenses source of motion
rɨ¹ dau³tʃi¹ta⁴wa⁵ ne⁴ na⁴ʔi ̃⁴³.
rɨ¹ dau³tʃi¹ta⁴ -wa⁵ ne⁴
na⁴ʔi ̃⁴³
top high.forest -all Source 3nr.sbj- come/go.plact
'They came from their garden (lit. from the non-flooding part of the forest).' (maw 0:56)
There is an related use of the allative with motion verbs, especially the semantically light
motion verb ũ⁴³ 'come, go' (∼ suppletive pluractional i ̃⁴³), in which the allative NP refers not to the
goal location, but to an object or person which is present at the goal location. In this construction,
the subject is read as going to a goal location in order to obtain the referent of the allative NP.
(16) provides examples of this use of the allative with inanimate and animate referents. The
two readings shown in (16b) indicate that this use of the allative is formally ambiguous with the
canonical goal use. Note that, while this construction implicates that the subject returns to the
source location with the allative NP, this implicature can be canceled (16c).
(16)
3
Allative with motion verb denotes object to be obtained through the motion
a. ɟu³ra¹wa⁵ na⁴ʔũ⁴³
Outside of sentential complement contexts, the a-class verb roots ŋṵ¹ 'learn' and ŋu¹ 'arrive' are a minimal laryngealization pair. In sentential complements and certain other nominalizations, both roots change to ŋu⁵. Here 'learn'
displays the 5 non-laryngealized allotone, because it is in a subordinate clause introduced by na⁴ʔ, while 'arrive' displays
its underlying non-laryngealized 1 tone.
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
10
ɟu³ra¹ -wa⁵ na⁴ʔũ⁴³
palm.sp -all 3nr.sbj- come/go.sgact
'He went to get huacrapona (palm sp. used to construct floor).' (GE.LCS.20160621)
b. du³tu³ru¹wa⁵ tʃa³ʔũ⁴³
du³tu³ru¹
-wa⁵ tʃa³
-ʔũ⁴³
doctor/nurse -all 1sg.sbj- come/go.sgact
i. 'I'm going (e.g. to school) to become a nurse.' (goal; ∼ 'I am going to where the
nurses are')
ii. 'I'm going to get the nurse (and bring him/her back to attend a sick person).'
(object obtained through motion) (GE.MFC.20160623, discussion of mbu 2:07)
c. te³¹ma¹wa⁵ na⁴ʔũ⁴³ na²tɨ⁵rɨ² tãũ³ta²ma³ i ̃⁴³pa⁴ta³wa⁵ ku³na³na³.
te³¹ma¹
-wa⁵ na⁴- ʔũ⁴³
na²tɨ⁵rɨ² tãũ³ta²ma³ i ̃⁴³
-pa⁴ta³ -wa⁵
M.flexuosa -all imp- come/go.sgact but
neg.imp house -house -all
ku³na³na³
2sg.sbj- 3nr.obj- bring/take.inam.plact
'Go get the Mauritia flexuosa, but don't bring it back to your/the house.' (GE.LCS.20160628)
Besides the goal and source of motion uses, some verbs lexically require that an NP denoting
the static location of the event be marked with the allative. For example, only the allative can
license a location NP with the existential verbs, certain positional verbs, and some other stative
verbs, such as ŋṵ¹ 'feel pain' (where the body part in pain can be either marked with the allative
or incorporated into the verb). (17) provides examples of the static location use of the allative
with an intransitive and a transitive verb.
(17)
Allative marks static location
a. Intransitive positional
dɨ¹, dɨ¹ rɨ¹ dau³tʃi²ta⁴a¹ne¹wa⁵ na⁴rɨ³ʔɨ⁴. (*dau³tʃi²ta⁴a¹ne¹gu²)
dɨ¹
dɨ¹
rɨ¹ dau³tʃi²ta⁴ -a¹ne¹
-wa⁵ na⁴rɨ³- ʔɨ⁴
J.bataua J.bataua top high.forest -clf:land -all 3nr.sbj- vcl- stand.of.tree
'Jessenia bataua grows in the forest.' (dɨd 0:17)
b. Transitive
dau³tʃi²ta⁴a¹ne¹wa⁵ wai⁵ra⁴ tʃa³tu¹ʔu³ (*dau³tʃi²ta⁴a¹ne¹gu²)
dau³tʃi²ta⁴ -a¹ne¹
-wa⁵ wai⁵ra⁴
tʃa³tu¹ʔu³
high.forest -clf:land -all E.precatoria 1sg.sbj- fell.tree
'I cut down a Euterpe precatoria in the forest.' (GE.LCS.20160628)
The use of the allative for stative location is not related to the transitivity or morphological
class of the verb, and none of the verbs which assign the allative for static locations also permit a
static location with the locative case -gu². There are also uses of the allative which are not related
to specific verbs and are not in any way spatial, such as the expression to³¹-ga²-wa⁵ (1excl.possvoice-all) 'in our (excl.) language' and the use of the allative with all manufacturing verbs (e.g.
'make,' 'sew,' 'weave') to mean 'make item (accusative) from material (allative).'
3.5
Locative
The locative -gu² prototypically licenses an NP which refers to the static location of an event or
object. It marks static location for intransitives -- positional and otherwise -- which do not assign
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
11
the allative, and for most transitive verbs. (18) provides examples of the static location use of the
locative.
(18)
Locative marks static location
a. Positional intransitive verb
na⁴³ma³gu² tʃa³tʃi⁴.
na⁴³- ma³ -gu² tʃa³tʃi⁴
dposs- path -loc 1sg.sbj- be.standing
'I am standing in the path.' (GE.LCS.20160621)
b. Non-positional intransitive verb
ŋe²ma⁴ta¹ma⁵ na⁴³bu³e² Kɨ³ʔtʃi³tu¹gu².
ŋe²ma⁴ -ta¹ma⁵ na⁴³bu³
-e²
Kɨ³ʔtʃi³tu¹
-gu²
dem -info 3nr.sbj- be.child -plact Cushillococha -loc
'They were born (lit. were children) right here in Cushillococha.' (akɨ 1:49)
c. Transitive verb
dau³tʃi²ta⁴a¹ne¹gu² dɨ¹e³nɨ¹ tʃa³ʔɨ⁴. (*dau³tʃi²ta⁴a¹ne¹wa⁵)
dau³tʃi²ta⁴ -a¹ne¹
-gu² dɨ¹e³nɨ¹ tʃa³ʔɨ⁴
high.forest -clf:land -loc tambo 1sg.sbj- make
'I made a temporary shelter in the forest.' (GE.LCS.20160628)
With motion verbs, the locative can mark either the ground of motion or the means of motion
(e.g. a vehicle or path). This, not the static location use, is the crucial difference between the
allative and the locative: with motion verbs, the allative can refer only to the goal of motion, the
locative only to the ground or means. (19) provides examples of of these uses of the locative with
motion verbs. Note that in (19a), the grill is the goal of the motion expressed by the directional, but
the ground of the verb root 'sit down.' In cases like this, the verb root rather than the directional
governs the assignment of case to the location NP -- here, it is locative rather than allative.
(19)
Locative with motion verbs
a. Locative marks ground of motion
rɨ¹ ŋi¹ta̰¹mɨ ̃³gu² i²au⁴na²gɨ⁴.
rɨ¹ ŋi¹ta̰¹mɨ ̃³ -gu² i²au⁴
-na²gɨ⁴
top 3f.poss- grill -loc 3f.sbj- sit.down -dir:upward
'She went up and sat down on the grill.' (est 0:40)
b. Locative marks ground/means of motion ('translocative')
ŋi¹rɨ¹ tʃi³ri³ga¹pa⁴ɨ ̃²ma⁴ʔã³ rɨ¹ na⁴³ma³gu² i²ʔũ⁴³.
ŋi¹ -rɨ¹ tʃi³ri³ga¹ -pa⁴ɨ ̃²
-ma⁴ʔã³
rɨ¹ na⁴³- ma³
-gu² i²3f -poss rubber -clf:bucket -com/inst top dposs- clf:path -loc 3f.sbjʔũ⁴³
come/go
'With her rubber pail she went along the path.' (es2 0:35)
c. Locative marks means of motion
wa³pu³ru¹gu² i⁵tʃa³ŋu¹.
wa³pu³ru¹ -gu² i⁵tʃa³ŋu¹
steamship -loc AM:go.and- 1sg.sbj- arrive
'I arrived by steamship.' (GE.LCS.20160621)
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
12
The locative is the semantically most general case. Besides static location, it can also, with
a wide range of verbs, license NPs referring to time, manner, price, and source of information
(like English 'according to'). In addition, CT displays two clause-linking suffixes or clitics with
the segmental form /gu/: the temporal overlap clause-linking element -gu² and the conditional
element -ʔgu². While these are doubtless derived from the manner use of the locative, I consider
them to be homophonous with the locative, rather than to represent a special use of it. This
is because the clause-linking /gu/ elements occur on fully inflected verbs and do not co-occur
with nominalizers, while manner /-gu/ appears only on nouns (whether underived or derived by
nominalizers).
Possibly related to the locative-like clause-linking affixes is the use of the locative in place
of a locative verb in verbless clauses. In these constructions, which are the only clearly verbless
clauses in the language, a referential noun is marked with a subject agreement prefix and the
suffix -gu², as in (20). The noun expresses the subject's location, and the word formed on the noun
is the only element in the clause.
(20)
Verbless locative construction
tʃa³tɨ³re³ -gu²
1sg.sbj- port -loc
'I am in the port.' (Anderson 1962: 355)
Anderson (1962) gives dozens of examples of this construction. However, while my consultants
accept constructions like (20), they always comment that the verbless locative comments are best
as answers to a question of the form 'Where is NP?,' and they more often volunteer an analytic
locative construction employing an existential verb and an allative noun phrase, as in (21) (this
example is also acceptable without the nominalization and cleft). I have never heard anyone
produce a verbless locative construction without my encouragement, including as an answer to a
'where'-question.
(21)
Analytic locative construction with existential assigning allative
tɨ³re³wa⁵ ni⁴ʔi ̃⁴ tʃa³ŋe²ma⁴ɨ ̃⁴
tɨ³re³ -wa⁵ ni⁴ʔi ̃⁴ tʃa³ŋe²ma⁴ -ɨ ̃⁴
port -all 3nr.sbj- cop 1sg.sbj- exist -nmlz
'I'm in the port.' (syntactically but not pragmatically equivalent to 'It's the port that I'm
in'). (GE.LCS.20160621, volunteered in response to 20)
3.6
Comitative/Instrumental
The comitative and instrumental affix -ma⁴ʔã³ licenses an NP which refers to an entity that accompanies the subject in the action of the verb or that is used an instrument to achieve the action
of the verb. (22) provides an example of the comitative use, (23) of the instrumental use. The
comitative/instrumental affix has no clause-linking function.
(22)
Comitative use of comitative-instrumental
wɨ⁴³ʔi⁴ ka⁴na² ga⁴ wɨ⁴³ʔi⁴ ga⁴ ai³¹ru⁵, na³mɨ ̃¹kɨ³ ga⁴ ŋo¹wa⁵ma⁴ʔã³, na⁴³gu² na⁴rɨ³i³¹nɨ ̃³e³ rɨ¹
da³u³tʃi¹ta³wa³ma² ni⁴tʃo⁴³ku².
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
13
wɨ⁴³ʔi⁴ ka⁴na² ga⁴ wɨ⁴³ʔi⁴ ga⁴ ai³¹ru⁵, na³mɨ ̃¹kɨ³
ga⁴ ŋo¹wa⁵
one
time ncl one
ncl dog
3nr.poss- companion ncl Didelphis.sp
-ma⁴ʔã³, na⁴³
-gu² na⁴rɨ³- i³¹nɨ ̃³ -e³
rɨ¹ da³u³tʃi¹ta³ -wa³ -ma²
-com/inst 3nr.pro -loc 3nr.sbj- vcl- 'hear' -plact and high.forest -all -top
ni⁴tʃo⁴³
-ku²
3nr.sbj- enter/exit.plact -dir:inward
(23)
'One time a dog, with his companion, an opossum, had an idea (lit. thought about it) and
went into the forest.' (ngo 0:16)
Instrumental use of comitative-instrumental
i² color-ma⁴ʔã³ ã⁴ na⁴tʃa¹u³gɨ⁴.
i² color
-ma⁴ʔã³
ã⁴ na⁴tʃa¹u³ -gɨ⁴
ncl Sp:color -com/inst ncl 3nr.sbj- dye -plact
'They paint with colors (i.e. commercially produced dyes).' (nai 1:23)
The comitative is interesting for its interactions with verbal number. As many of the examples
above illustrate, number is marked on the CT verb in three ways: (a) by dedicated 1pl and 2pl
subject agreement affixes; (b) for certain verbs (almost all of them motion verbs), by root suppletion; and (c) by verbal number affixes/clitics, such the pluractional suffix -e⁴, the pluractional
affix or clitic -gɨ⁴, and the distributive clitic =tʃi¹gɨ¹. While I have not yet undertaken dedicated
elicitation on verbal number, my strong impression from texts is that the suppletive plural allomorphs of verb roots and the pluractional suffixes occur when either (a) the internal argument is
plural (i.e. the nominative argument for an intransitive or the accusative for a transitive) or (b)
for intransitives only, the action of the verb occurs multiple times.
(22) illustrates that pluractional marking and suppletion can also be triggered by the presence of a comitative NP, even when the nominative argument is singular. In this example, the
morphologically nominative argument of both verbs is the singular NP wɨ⁴³ʔi⁴ ga⁴ ai³¹ru⁵ 'a dog.'
The other NP in the clause, na³mɨ ̃¹kɨ³ ga⁴ ŋo¹wa⁵ma⁴ʔã³ 'his companion an opossum,' is comitative.
Nevertheless, both of the verbs in the clause bear a pluractional affix, and the verb root meaning
'enter, exit' undergoes pluractional number suppletion, appearing as the pluractional tʃo⁴³ rather
than the single-actional ɨ⁴³. As the analogous elicited examples in (24) illustrates, however, plural
subject agreement morphology and pluractional marking are not obligatory in all clauses with a
singular nominative argument and a comitative NP. The 1sg nominative and 3sg comitative are
compatible either with 1sg subject morphology and the single-actional allomorph of the verb, or
with 1excl subject morphology and the pluractional allomorph of the verb.
(24)
Interactions of comitative with subject number and pluractional root suppletion
a. 1sg nominative argument, comitative NP, verb morphologically 1sg
tʃo³¹ma³ ni⁴ʔi ̃⁴ na⁴ma⁴ʔã³ nai³¹ne³kɨ³wa⁵ tʃi³ɨ⁴³ku²
tʃo³¹
-ma³ ni⁴ʔi ̃⁴ na⁴
-ma⁴ʔã³
nai³¹ -ne³kɨ³
-wa⁵
1sg.pro -top 3nr.sbj- cop 3nr.pro -com/inst tree -group.of.plants -all
tʃi³ɨ⁴³
-ku²
1sg.sbj- enter/exit.sgact -dir:inward
'I take him to the forest.' (syntactically but not pragmatically equivalent to 'It's me
that enters the forest with him'). (GE.LCS.20160621)
b. 1sg nominative argument, comitative NP, verb morphologically 1excl
tʃo³¹ma³ ni⁴ʔi ̃⁴ na⁴ma⁴ʔã³ nai³¹ne³kɨ³wa⁵ ti⁴tʃo⁴³ku²
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
14
tʃo³¹
-ma³ ni⁴ʔi ̃⁴ na⁴
-ma⁴ʔã³
nai³¹ -ne³kɨ³
-wa⁵
1sg.pro -top 3nr.sbj- cop 3nr.pro -com/inst tree -group.of.plants -all
ti⁴tʃo⁴³
-ku²
1.excl.sbj- enter/exit.plact -dir:inward
'I take him to the forest.' (GE.LCS.20160621)
Morphologically comitative NPs which refer to an instrument (including to plural instruments)
do not license plural agreement, pluractional affixation, or verb root suppletion.
3.7
Purposive
The purposive affix -ka̰¹ appears on pronouns and referential nouns with two meanings: one
which marks the beneficiary of a transitive verb (other than the special transitives which assign a
dative beneficiary, §3.2), and one which expresses the source of a judgment, translatable as 'in N's
opinion' or 'to N.' (25) exemplifies the beneficiary use of the purposive, (26) exemplifies the 'in N's
opinion' use. The purposive also appears on adnominal deictics with the meaning 'for this/that
reason,' as in (27); this use may be somewhat lexicalized.
(25)
Purposive case licenses beneficiary
ta⁴ma³ toː¹ga⁴wa⁵ i⁴de³¹ʔa¹ɨ ̃⁴gɨ⁴ka̰¹ ni⁴ʔi ̃⁴ na⁴na³ɨ²ɨ ̃⁴ i⁴ ɲa⁴a² instituto.
ta⁴ma³ to¹ -ga⁴ -wa⁵ i⁴de³¹ʔa¹ -ɨ ̃⁴
-gɨ⁴ -ka̰¹ ni⁴ʔi ̃⁴ na⁴neg other -voice -all impf- talk
-nmlz -pl -purp 3nr.sbj- cop 3nr.sbjna³ɨ²
-ɨ ̃⁴
i⁴ ɲa⁴a² instituto
3nr.obj- make -nmlz ncl dem Sp:instituto
(26)
'This institute (the Ticuna bible school) was not constructed for the benefit of people who
speak other languages.' (ibi 1:05)
Purposive case conveys source of judgment
tʃau¹ka̰¹ rɨ¹ do³ra³ ni⁴ʔi ̃⁴.
tʃau¹
-ka̰¹ rɨ¹ do³ra³ -∅
ni⁴ʔi ̃⁴
1sg.pro -purp top lie
-nmlz 3nr.sbj- cop
(27)
'In my opinion, it's not true.' (GE.LCS.20160620)
Purposive case with deictic
ŋe⁴ma²ka̰¹ ta⁴u²ã¹kɨ² nɨ³¹ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃi¹ʔu³.
ŋe⁴ma² -ka̰¹ ta⁴u²
-ã¹kɨ² nɨ³¹
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃi¹ -ʔu³
dem -purp neg.exist -advbz 3nr.pro -acc 1sg- say.VT
'(I don't know the name of that tree species.) For that reason, I can't say it.' (ieɨ 0:54)
The purposive is also an element of the purposive clause-linking construction. In this construction, the purposive clause is introduced by the general complementizer na⁴ʔ. The verb, which is
the final element of the purposive clause, undergoes subject prefix allomorphy and root allotony;
is nominalized by the maximally general nominalizer -ʔɨ ̃⁴; and bears the purposive affix -ka̰¹ outside the nominalizer. All of these operations on the verb are obligatory, while the presence of
an overt complementizer is optional. (28) provides an example of this construction. Purposive
clauses are normally subordinated to a finite clause or another subordinate clause in texts, but
consultants also find them grammatical in isolation.
Skilton
(28)
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
15
Purposive clause-linking construction
rɨ¹ ŋe⁴gu²ma³ i⁴ tɨ⁴ma⁴ʔã³ i⁴na³wa³¹ʔi³tʃi⁴ɨ ̃⁴ na⁴ʔ me⁴³a²ma³ i³ɟa¹we⁵ʔɨ ̃⁴ka̰¹.
rɨ¹ ŋe⁴gu²ma³
i⁴ tɨ⁴
-ma⁴ʔã³
i⁴na³wa³¹ʔi³tʃi⁴
top and.then.npst ncl cotton -com/inst 1excl.sbj- 3nr.obj- smooth.with.thread
-ɨ ̃⁴
na⁴ʔ me⁴³a² -ma³ i³ɟa¹we⁵
-ʔɨ ̃⁴
-ka̰¹
-nmlz comp well -info 3nr.sbj.sc- be.straight.sc -nmlz -purp
'Then we smooth it (wood of a blowgun) with a thread so that it is straight.' (ieɨ 1:45)
4 Differential case marking
CT displays three kinds of differential case marking. First, postverbal NPs, whether pronouns or
referential NPs, are never case-marked. This phenomenon appears to be conditioned primarily
by constituent order, not by the syntactic or thematic role of the NP or by the NP's semantic
properties (e.g. animacy) or morphological properties (e.g. whether the head noun of the NP is
alienable or inalienable). Sentence-initial topic NPs are also not case-marked. I discuss these two
interactions of constituent order and case marking in §4.1. Second, some preverbal NPs which
otherwise appear to be direct objects are zero-marked rather than marked with the accusative.
Almost all zero-marked preverbal object NPs refer to inanimates. In §4.2, I therefore describe this
phenomenon as differential object marking governed by an animacy hierarchy. Finally, speakers
occasionally use oblique NPs with no case marking, generally in situations where the semantics of
the zero-marked NP or the discourse context make the thematic role of the unmarked NP obvious.
I discuss the use of zero-marked obliques in §4.3.
4.1
Constituent order and case marking
The basic constituent orders of CT are SV and SOV. I do not propose these as the basic orders
because consultants use them to translate SV and SVO Spanish sentences in elicitation (although
they do), or because they are the most common in discourse (although they probably are), but
because several morphological reflexes of movement appear when the subject or -- especially -the object is moved to a postverbal position.
Postverbal objects. I begin with case marking of postverbal direct objects. As discussed in
§3.1 above, preverbal direct objects in CT are normally assigned the accusative case. When a
direct object is moved to follow the verb, it obligatorily leaves behind a trace in the preverbal
position. Depending on the morphological class of the verb, this trace will be either an accusative
pronoun or an object prefix on the verb, resulting in a clause with surface SOi VOi constituent
structure. In addition, the postverbal direct object is obligatorily preceded by a particle which
fusionally expones past vs. non-past tense and (in the non-past) the noun class of the object. Tensenoun class particles also obligatorily intervene between the elements of complex NP's, whether in
preverbal or postverbal position.
The examples in (29)-(30) illustrate this pattern. First, observe in (29) that when the lower
animate noun ã² 'mosquito' occurs as a direct object in preverbal position, it is obligatorily marked
for the accusative, whether it is definite (29a) or indefinite (29b). (Like Spanish, CT uses the
numeral 'one' as an indefinite article. There is no definite article.)
(29)
Accusative is obligatory on preverbal direct object
a. ã²ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃa³dau¹, cf: *ã² tʃa³dau¹
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
16
ã²
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃa³dau
mosquito -acc 1sg.sbj- see
'I saw the mosquito (ctx: there is exactly one known mosquito in the mosquito net
with me; I am trying to kill it).' (GE.DGG.20160622)
b. wɨ⁴ʔi⁴ i⁴ ã²ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃa³dau¹, cf: *wɨ⁴ʔi⁴ i⁴ ã² tʃa³dau¹
wɨ⁴ʔi⁴ i⁴ ã²
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃa³dau¹
one ncl mosquito -acc 1sg.sbj- see
'I saw a mosquito.' (GE.DGG.20160622)
When the direct object from (29a) or (29b) is moved to postverbal position, it leaves behind a
trace in the form of the 3nr pronoun in the immediately preverbal position (30a). The preverbal
pronoun is obligatory (30b), resulting in a surface SOVO sentence. In the SOVO structure, the
two objects must be co-referential, the preverbal object (i.e. the trace pronoun) must be casemarked, and the postverbal object cannot be case-marked (30d). The impossibility of accusative
marking on the postverbal object is due to its syntactic position, not solely to the fact that the
trace pronoun has already saturated the argument structure of the verb: a VO structure with a
postverbal accusative and no trace pronoun is also ungrammatical (30c). For brevity, I illustrate
these generalizations using a sentence with a bare noun object correspoding to (29a), but the facts
are the same if the object is an indefinite noun phrase with wɨ⁴ʔi⁴ 'one' (like 29b), an inalienably
possessed noun, an inanimate noun such as pe⁴tʃi² 'basket,' and so on. I note, as well, that the
SOVO structure is not an elicitation artifact; it is also found in texts and natural speech.
(30)
Accusative trace pronoun is obligatory with postverbal direct object
a. nɨ³¹ʔɨ ̃⁵i tʃa³dau¹ i⁴ ã²i .
nɨ³¹
-ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃa³dau¹ i⁴ ã²
3nr.pro -acc 1sg.sbj- see ncl mosquito
'I saw the mosquito.' (GE.DGG.20160622)
b. *tʃa³dau¹ i⁴ ã²
c. *tʃa³dau¹ i⁴ ã²ʔɨ ̃
d. *nɨ³¹ʔɨ ̃⁵ tʃa³dau¹ i⁴ ã²ʔɨ ̃
One consequence of the SOVO structure shown in (30) is that it is very common in CT for
non-subject 3nr pronouns to be cataphoric -- i.e. coreferential with an NP that is mentioned for
the first time later in the discourse, as in 30a -- rather than anaphoric.
Note as well that, while all transitive verbs require some preverbal trace of postverbal objects,
the morphological form of the trace varies according to the class of the verb. As mentioned in
§3.1, CT displays at least nine verb classes. The class membership of a transitive verb determines
(a) whether it can take only a free 3nr pronoun as the direct object, only a 3nr object prefix,
or either; and (b) what the segmental form and tones of the 3nr prefix are. The verb dau¹ 'see,'
used in (29) and (30), allows only a 3nr pronoun as the direct object. For verbs which allow or
require a 3nr object prefix, the form of the prefix is na³- for verbs which have the theme vowel a
in subject agreement and ɟa³- ∼ /a³/ (the second allomorph fuses phonologically with the subject
agreement) for verbs which have the theme vowel i in subject agreement.
Postverbal subjects and possessors. Postverbal subjects, whether they are referential NPs
or pronouns, are obligatorily introduced by a noun class particle, like postverbal objects. They
do not leave behind any obligatory trace other than the verb's subject agreement, presumably
because of free pro-drop of nominative pronouns. Postverbal possessors of preverbal arguments
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
17
are also introduced by a noun class particle. As postverbal subjects and possessors have no effect
on case, I do not exemplify these alternations here.
Topics. Topic NPs in CT occur at the left edge of the clause and obligatorily followed by the
topic particle rɨ¹. NP topics are generally also introduced by a noun class particle or adnominal
deictic. The conjunctive coordinator rɨ¹ 'and' is the same as or homophonous with the topic marker;
so is the first element of the disjunctive coordinator rɨ¹ẽ¹̰ na³ 'or.' Topic NPs are relevant to case
because, even when the topic is coreferential with an accusative argument to the right, it is not
marked with the accusative (31). Topic NPs which refer to obliques can be case-marked (32).
(31)
No accusative on topic object
rɨ¹ ɟe²ma⁴ õ⁴³na³i rɨ¹ na⁴na⁴i ŋõ̰¹ ga⁴ ŋo¹wa⁵.
rɨ¹ ɟe²ma⁴ õ⁴³na³
rɨ¹ na⁴na⁴ŋõ̰¹ ga⁴ ŋo¹wa⁵
and dem cooked.food top 3nr.sbj- 3nr.obj- eat ncl opossum
(32)
'That foodi , the opossum ate iti up.' (ngo 1:58)
Allative on topic goal
Lima-wa⁵ rɨ¹ ŋe⁴ma²ã¹kɨ² tʃa³ŋṵ¹.
ŋṵ¹
Lima -wa⁵ rɨ¹ ŋe⁴ma² -ã¹kɨ² tʃa³Lima -all top dem -advbz 1sg.sbj- learn
'Those things being the case, I studied in Lima.' (mbu 2:10)
4.2
Differential object marking
Beyond the suspension of accusative marking on postverbal objects and topic objects, CT displays a significant degree of differential object marking (DOM) of direct objects. The basic DOM
phenomenon is that certain NPs referring to inanimates, even when they are in the canonical preverbal position and are not topics, cannot be marked with the accusative. (33) exemplifies the
phenomenon with the inanimate and inalienably possessed noun pa³ 'hammock,' but the facts are
the same with alienably possessed nouns. DOM affects only full NPs, not pronouns.
(33)
Differential object marking with mu³ 'weave'
a. Zero-marked object acceptable: nɨ³¹ma³ na⁴pa³ na⁴mu³
nɨ³¹
-ma³ na⁴³- pa³
na⁴mu³
3nr.pro -top dposs- hammock 3nr.sbj- weave
'He weaves the hammock.' (GE.DGG.20160622)
b. Accusative object unacceptable: *nɨ³¹ma³ na⁴pa³ʔɨ ̃⁵ na⁴mu³ (GE.DGG.20160622)
c. mu³ is a transitive verb: *na⁴mu³ (3nr.sbj-weave), corrected to na⁴na³mu³ (3nr.sbj3nr.obj-weave) (GE.DGG.20160622)
DOM in CT is conditioned by a large number of factors, which I can only begin to sketch here.
The clearest conditioning factors involve the animacy and the word class of the direct object.
First, manufacturing verbs, such as 'make,' 'weave,' 'sew' and so on, never assign the accusative
to object NPs. The same is true of verbs which prototypically have an inanimate direct object,
such as tu¹ʔu³ 'fell tree.' This holds even though the verbs in question have all other properties
expected of transitive verbs: they are ungrammatical without an object NP or prefix (e.g. 33c), can
incorporate an inalienably possessed noun referring to the object or a classifier characterizing the
Skilton
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
18
object, take verbal number marking according to the number of the object, and do not participate
in the accusative beneficiary construction. Second, in clauses where an oblique is higher on the
animacy hierarchy than the direct object -- for example, equivalents of 'I gave the book to the
man' -- the direct object generally cannot be marked with the accusative. This aspect of DOM,
however, may reflect interactions between constituent order and case marking, since consultants
also prefer the more animate NP to appear immediately preceding the verb, displacing the direct
object from its canonical position.
Beyond animacy, in texts, when an adnominal deictic or a quantifier acts as the head of an
object noun phrase, it is almost never case-marked. This does not reflect a morphological ban on
case-marking of deictics: in elicitation, speakers accept case marking on all the adnominal deictics
and quantifiers. I therefore suspect that this apparent DOM relates to interactions between information structure and accusative marking rather than morphological or semantic rules. Systematic
analysis of texts will be necessary to resolve this issue.
4.3
Zero-marked obliques
Oblique NPs with no case marking are not type common in CT discourse, but they do exist. Zeromarked obliques, in general, belong to two categories. First, non-pronominal deictics, even when
acting as the head of an NP, are almost never marked with oblique cases (cf. differential object
marking of deictics and quantifiers, discussed in in §4.2 above). The only case markers I have
found on non-pronominal deictics in texts are the purposive, which is used on deictics with the
meaning 'for this/that reason' (example 27) and the allative, with the goal sense. Second, speakers
occasionally produce zero-marked oblique NPs headed by referential nouns, such as the NP in (34).
(34)
Oblique NP with referential head N and no case marking
ta³¹re⁵ ɟa⁴ tau¹ne¹kɨ³ ɟe⁴ma² tʃa³ɟe²ʔma⁴.
ta³¹re⁵ ɟa⁴ tau¹ne¹kɨ³ ɟe⁴ma² tʃa³ɟe²ʔma⁴
two ncl year
dem 1sg.sbj- exist
'I was in the army (lit. there) for two years.' (mbu 2:27)
In (34), the oblique NP ta³¹re⁵ ɟa⁴ tau¹ne¹kɨ³ could also grammatically bear the locative case
marker -gu². The reason that it does not is unclear to me, but I assume that the semantics of the
oblique NP and verb -- which could not reasonably generate any other reading of the role of the
NP -- are responsible.
5 Quirky case
As mentioned in §1 of this description, CT expresses many basic action concepts not with verb
roots, but with collocations of a verb root and a specific oblique case marker. These collocations
are often lexicalized, displaying meanings which are not transparently related to the independent
meanings of the verb root and oblique case marker involved. I refer to verb roots which participate
in at least one not-fully-compositional collocation of verb and oblique case marker as 'quirky case
verbs.' All oblique cases display at least one quirky case collocation.
To illustrate the quirky case phenomenon, in (35)-(39) below, I list, for every oblique case, two
verbs which assign that case in a quirky case collocation. Note that many verbs, such as dau¹ 'see,'
participate in more than one quirky case collocation. Also note that many verbs which assign the
accusative in non-quirky case contexts do not assign the accusative when they occur in a quirky
case collocation.
Skilton
(35)
(36)
(37)
(38)
(39)
Cushillococha Ticuna Morphosyntax: Case
19
Quirky dative
a. Intransitive ka¹ 'scream, yell': with dative, means 'ask question'
b. Otherwise transitive dau¹ 'see': with dative, means 'take care of' (and no longer assigns
accusative)
Quirky allative
a. Intransitive me⁴³ 'be good': with allative, means 'be good for making (allative NP)'
b. Otherwise transitive pa̰¹ 'hug': with allative, still means 'hug' (and no longer assigns
accusative; also, not a real quirky case verb)
Quirky locative
a. Otherwise transitive ŋo²gɨ⁴ 'touch': with locative, means 'feel surface of, palpate' (and
no longer assigns accusative)
b. Intransitive ga⁵u¹ 'be torn': with locative, means 'tear' (also involves change of morphological class)
Quirky comitative/instrumental
a. Transitive u³ 'say': with comitative, means 'tell' (and still assigns accusative)
b. Intransitive ta⁵e³ 'participate in exchange': with comitative, means 'sell'
Quirky purposive
a. Otherwise transitive dau¹ 'see': with purposive, means 'look for' (and no longer assigns
accusative)
b. Intransitive ta⁵e³ 'participate in exchange': with purposive, means 'sell'
It is important to note that no CT verb root is inherently 'quirky,' i.e. obligatorily assigns any
case other than the accusative. Although omitting oblique NPs makes the quirky case readings of
quirky case verbs unavailable, it never results in an ungrammatical sentence. As such, I consider
quirky case verbs which (on the quirky case reading) assign the accusative and one oblique case
to be regular transitive verbs, not three-place predicates, and I analyze quirky case verbs which
assign exactly one oblique case as regular intransitive verbs, not as anomalous transitives. In
support of this analysis, I note (but do not show here) that intransitive quirky case verbs pattern
exactly like non-quirky intransitive verbs with respect to the accusative beneficiary construction,
which is unique to intransitive verbs, while transitive quirky case verbs pattern like non-quirky
transitives with respect to object incorporation, a process unique to transitive verbs.