Western Bukidnon Manobo sentence structure

Lingua 27 (197 1) 21b-262, Q North-Hottand P&Ming

Co+hzny

Not to be reproduced in any form without written permission from the pubhsher

WESTERN

BUKIDNON MANOBO STRUGTURE RICHARD

:

E. ELKINS

sentenceperiphery

.................. Outer periphery . .................. tinjunction . . . .................. l.i.1. Flow marker. . . .................. 1.1.2. Exclzmation . . . .................. 1.1.3. Vocative . . . . .................. 1.1.4. Yitragraph or discourse topic .............. 1.15 Inner periphery ................... 1.2. Sentence topic .................... 1.2.1. The -margin system .................. 1.2.2. Temporal margin. .................. 1.2.2.1 1.2.2.1.1. Class 1 temporal margin. ............... 1.2.2.1.2. Class 2 tempora I. margm ................ Conditional margin .................. 1.2.2.2. Concessive margin .................. 1.2.2.3. Purpose margin ................... 1.2.2.4. Cause margin .................... 1.2.2.5. Sentence types .................... 2. Quasiclausal sentences ................ 2.1. Simple sentences ................... 2.1.1. Merged sentences. .................. 2.1.2. 2.2. Concatenated sentences ................ Parallel sentences. .................. 2.3. 2.4. Conditional sentences ................. Entailment sentences ................. 2.5. 2.51. Reason-action sentences ................ 2.5.2. Question-answer sentences ............... 2.6. Implication sentences ................. 2.6. I. Alternative sentences ................. 2.62. Inference sentences .................. 2.7. Si_x&-&ionsentences ................. 2.7.1. Direct quotation sentences. ..............

;:1.

SENTENG

216

220 220 220 222 224 221 22i 225 225 227 228 228 230 231 233 234 236 240 240

240 241 242 242 243 245 245 249 249 250 250 252 252

WESTERN

2.7.2. 2.8. 2.8.1. 2.8.2. 3.

BUKIDKON

Indirect quotation sentences .............. Quasiquotation sentences ............... Mental indirect quotation sentences ........... ........ Mistaken impression quotation sentences Conclusion. .....................

LIST

act alt Ans ante anti BrPron Bs CauM CauRefP Cl Corn, corn compl ConcPl CondM Conj, conj cons coor DepWeyCl D D

DF Emph, emph Excl, excl F FlM IdComPronInterrCl

IDQ

IF incompl Indep Inf, inf GnomCl IV k-nomC1 lig Lk n!I

AMANOBO

OF SYMBOLS

a,,tion aiternative answer antecedent antithetical brief pronoun base cause margin cause referent phrase clause common completive concessive margin conditional margin conjunction consequent coordinate dependent znrey-introduced clause discourse operation of deletion direction focus emphatic exclamation formula flow marker identificational common ronominal interrogative clause indirect quotation instrument focus incomplet ive independent inference 2’- nominalized clause involuntary mode k,- nominalized clause ligature link marker

217 256 258 258 260 260

R.

218 MIDQ MImpQ Mk *eg NINP Nom, nom NP NTM NTPersNP OF Y P=

1

para Peri Pred PT Pury’il qu QuF R R.W RAS RefP ResS s Seq SF SgCentNP Sim simp Sa’Pron SiS ST !Gbj temp TIP TM UA Voc, voc VocP

E.

ELKINS

mental indirect quotation mistaken impression quotation marker negative pi class noun phrase nominal noun phrase nontopic case marking particle nontopic personal noun phrase object focus operation of permutation identity permutation, i.e. no change of linear order paraphrase periphery predicate paragraph topic purpose margin question question formula reason relator axis clause relator a xis sentence referent phrase restricted sentence sentence sequential subject focus single centered noun phrase simultaneous simple si class (topic) pronoun simple sentence sentence topic subject temporal time phrase topic case marking particle unactualized time aspect vocative vocative phrase paragraph indicates a class indicates alternate choice IrJfthe included symbols in the following environment brackets indicate linear correspondence of the enclosed symbols with symbols in one or more additional sets of

WESTERN

= #

BUKIDNON

MANOBO

219

brackets in the formula. (At least two sets of brackets occur in any one formula where they are used.} equals does not equal, or may not be

This analysis of Western Bukidnon Manobo sentences is hierarchical, taxonomic, and generative. It is hierarchical in that it places the sentence within a hierarchy of grammatical levels beginning with discourse as the highest level and proceeding downward through the paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, word, and stem levels. It is taxonomic in that sentences are classified into discrete, contrasting types. It is generative in that the description of each sentence type is embodied in a formula which, along with pertinent rules, is generative of examples of that sentence type. While a description of this sort las a certain inevitable redundancy - in that sentence types are partially similar as well as contrastive - it presents the basic grammatical patterns in a straightforward manner which facilitates reader comprehension and application to such practical goals as language learning and creation of vernacular literature. The theoretical framework is that of tagrnemics as elaborated by Longacre. l) In addition to the analysis and definition of sentence types, also of interest in this paper is an examination of the restructuring in-

1) The research whose resu ts are embodied in this paper was carried out in a field workshop at the Nasuli base of the Summer Institute of Linguistics on the Island of Mindana,o in the Philippines, January-April, 1968. Th,e workshop was part of a project conducted under Office of Education Contract No. O-8-062838-0391, with Robert E. Longacre as Principal Investigator. Results of the project are summarized in a three3 volu e report: R. E. Longacre, Discourse, Paragraph, and Sentence Structure in Selected Philippine Languages, Summer Institute of Linguistics, Santa Ana, Callifornia, 1968-9. Extensive use was made of a concordance based on 125 pages of text material. The concordance was produced by an IESM 14 10 computer at the University of Oklahoma. Its preparation was part of the Linguistic Information Retrieval Project of the Summer Institute of Linguistics and the University of Ok’lahoma Research Institute and sponsored by Grant ES-270 of the National Science Foundation. Appreciation is due Robert E. Longacre for his guidance in matters of tagmemic theory and for his editorial help.

R. E. ELKINS

220

fiuence of the sentence level upon certain clause types?) Those sentence types which are a result of this restructuring bear a high degree of resemblance to clauses. ‘rl?eve& theless, these are described as sentences rather than as clauses in order to avoid the setting up of highly irregular clause and phv;ase level tagmemes. Where it is obvious that the sentence leve? has been superimposed upon the clause level, the resultant structure is described as a portmanteau manifestation of both clause and sentence levels. Because of the already voluminous nature of this analysis, detailed descriptions are given only of those sentence types which, structurally, appear to be most idiosyncratic or which display the restructuring influence mentioned above. In the course of the paper examples are given of the other sentence types, and brief versions of the nil tvn~c saw dicnlawd in tnhloc _-__fnrmnlzap ~..-------vnf v-_-'J~.#"_" ""~'~J'""'x.uY*v".

1. SENTENCE

9 UIIU anil ln **.""Y.*vIl in cortinn 7 .w Y,

I~UPIIERY

Sentence in LVestern Bukidnon Manobo consists of an optional periphery and an obligatory nucleus. Periphery and nucleus are not tagmemes but rather groupings of sentence level tagmemes. The sentence periphery is further subdivided into an outer periphery followed by an inner periphery. This distinction is based on the fact that the sentence nu-leus along with the inner periphery may be nested as a sentence base within the nucleus of another sentence type. ThP outer periphery is never included in a nesting structure except ‘G quoted speech in a direct quotation sentence. 1.1. Cuter $erij&my

Tlie structure in
of the outer periphery

is indicated

in the apparatus

1 . I. 1. Conjunction

The conjunction tagmeme (Conj) is a sentence nntroducer conjunction which loos3y ties a sentence to a previous sentence or paragraph. Conjunction is expounded by ne 3) ‘conjunction’, as&r!or iyan ‘but’, su ‘because’ or ‘for’, and wey ‘and’. 2) Richard E. Elkins, ‘Major grammatical patterns of Western Bukidnon -Manobo’, unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii, 1967, 59. 3) The phonemes of Western Bukidnon Manobo are: p, t, k, b, d, g, v, z, gJ nt, ~2,ng, Y, I, s, h, ’ (glottal stop), w, y, a, i, zc,e. v is a voiced bilabial fricative, z is a retroflexed voiced alveolar fricative’ g is a voiced velar fricative’ e is a mid central vowel.

hengkey ve is ‘so then’ ikezuwa zindam ‘secondly’ iyan is ‘proposal’ ‘great Scott’ a ‘ah’

es ‘wow’ elzcwey

VocP:

1

--

& he $- n?me c kmship term of address 3

EmphNP

not a clause level tagmeme juncture or a sentence level tagmeme juncture at / Pred

Rules : (1) If + Excl then - (he of Vcxl (2) If + Conj :iyan +hen - FM; iya+z is. (3) Voc may permute to any clause level tagmeme juncture Or sentence level tagmeme juncture within the sentence which is

ne ‘conjunction* wsal ‘but’ iyan ‘but’ szc ‘because’ wey ‘and’ umba ‘therefore’

TABLE

FL E. ELKINS

222 Examples

:

(1) (Ne)

conj

emun

nejwsad

when

finished

din he

keini, this

ed-2613 return

dan diyi te valey. they there the house ‘And when he finished this, they return to the house.’ (2) (A&) but

hehi this

is the

zcval monkey

ne conj

iyan indeed

deketi big

he . . .

lig ‘But this monkey now he is the

. . .’

(3) (Szc) Jzeuzb Ize tim@ zekellit hs v&l. big lig famine that lig time for ‘For at that time there was a severe famine.’ 1.1.2. Flow marker The flow marker tagmeme (FlM) marks discourse flow. Although it occurs as part of the sentence, its function is significant only with reference to the higher levels, i.e. paragraph and discourse. Flow marker ir; expounded by what appear to be clause fragments. (a) Hertgkey ve is is a fragment of an interrogative clause (which is a transform of a nonverbal identificational clause)?) An unfragmented interrogative clause o;Cthis type would be: (Hengkey ve is) qu TM what ‘What is hipname?’

ngazan name

din? his

Hengkey ve is occurs only in a narrative context and seems to have ‘:he function of marking the resumption of narrative flow. Xt may be understood as a kind of rhetorical question which gives the sense ‘so then’.sj The symbolization of glottal stop follows that employed in the Philippine national language: it is represented by grave accent (‘) when it is syllable final, by hyphen (-) when it follows a consonant, and by its absence when it occurs between vowels or following juncture. . 4) Elkins, 57. 6) Hcngky ve is may be a fragment of the question formula (QuF) of the question-answer sentence (see section 2.5.2). The fact that the question of

WESTERN

BUKIDNON

223

MANOBO

(b) Ikezuwa zin daan ‘secondly’ may be analyzed as a classificational clause with the topic deleted. Ikezuwa zin daan occurs introducing a proposal or a point in an explanatory or a hortatory discourse. (c) The flow marker iyan is ‘proposal’ consists of the emphatic marker iyan followed ?~y the topic case marker is. An unfragmented clause in which z’yan is occurs is the following : aney first

Ne

conj

he lig

neumahan reached

d&t ne he conj

(iyan emph

is) TM

te senge leyuzan he vaka. P astur lig cows herder NT&I one herd ‘The first one he came to was the herder of a herd of cows.’ When iya?z is expounds flow marker it introduces a proposal. It most often occurs introducing a sentence which expounds a proposal tagmeme in a dialogue paragraph. Examples

:

(1)

A excl

(hmgkey what

ve qu

is) TM

neikaman matted

sikandan they

0

ne mibfiinuu zan. sat they conj ‘So then, a mat was prepared for them and they sat down.’ ed-iutsaan ku Ne (ikezuwa zin daan) ne I secondly conj ask conj tutuu he kinehanglan sikew ke hetigkey is need TM true lig y0.u if what ta.

our ‘And secondly, I ask you what is our real need.’ is) TM

(3) VYan indeed a me

iya*

really

edhangyh beg

a I

kmiyu You

he lig

kemi not

edekepa. arrest

QuF is thetorical and idiomatic in nature ellipsis.

mayt have contributed to its partial

R. E. ELKINS

224

‘(proposal) 1 beg you do not really arrest me.’ 1.1.3. Exclamation The e,xclamation tagmeme (Excl) is expounded by the ex&mations es ‘mild surprise’, ettiwey ‘great surprise’, and a ‘ah’. Examples : imy (1) (‘Es,‘) egkapi is said TM mother excl “ ‘Oh !” said his mother, “that’s (2) (Et xwey) F maan

is

xin, ‘kent? eyan his not that not a fish.’ ”

pait.’

fish

wazd

me&ins& ? excl why TM not asked ‘Great Scott! why didn’t he a& ?’

1.1 4. Vocative The vocative tagmeme (Voc) is expounded by a vocative phrase (VNP) which consists of an optional attention tagmeme plus a head tagmemc. The attention tagmeme is expounded by the particle Ibeor an emphatic case second person pronoun. The head tagmeme is expounded by a proper name or a kinship term used in direct address. E

samples

:

( i ) (He

Anggam) , egkeisip Ku is ed-uZ$ Oh Uncle think I TM go-home ‘Oh Uncle, I think I’ll go home now.’

(2) (Sikew,

Lend),

iyast

he

zh

ad.

I-now

egkeserigan.

Lena emph you only trusted ‘You, Lena, are the only one who is trustworthy.’ YOU

I _1.5. Paragraph

or di:;course to pit

The final tagmeme of the outer periphery is the paragraph (or &scourse) topic (PT) . ?‘he paragraph topic is expounded by an thmphatrc noun phrase (EmphNP), and it contrasts with sentence topic of the inner periphery in that it is not reiterated or referred to in the sentence in which rt occurs but, rather, later in the paragraph 1.~di:caurse. Paragraph topic may cooccur with sentence topic in the :;a-$” *.Il\.rsentence. The following is an example of paragraph topic:

WESTERN

BWKIDNON

PT (H eini this wey

is TM

and what ST reiterated

ST

nekagi

4s

inumen)

called

lig

drink

hengkey

225

MANOBO

(minsan

even

he

kelasi

te

menge

etew),

lig

kind

the

plural

person

(pudu)

ed-inum.

Kes

etew

wey

minsan

all

drink

TM

person

and

even

langgam,

asal

egegehinawa,

animal

as-long-as

breathes

hentei

who

kinehaqlan

he

must

lig

ed-inum

te

wahig.

Asal

(heini

is

egkegiyen

drink

the

water

however

this

TM

called

PT reiterated kayi

72e inumen),

ktm?

wahig

KekenB

here

lig

not

water

but-rather

drink

inumen

he

vaal

te

etew.

drink

lig

work

the

person

PT

ST

‘ (This

thing called drink), (everyone and every kind ST reiterated of person), (all drink). Man and even beasts, everything that breathes, have to drink water. PT reiterated (However this which is called drink here is not water but rathe.r it is 2 drink which people make.)’ 1.2. Inner

fleriphery

The structure of the inner periphery and the order relative to the sentence nucleus1 is indiczt_ed in the apparatus in table 2. The inner periphery follows the outer periphery. 1.2.1. Sentence topic A sentence topic (ST) is expounded by a topic case or an empLatic case noun phrase. 6’I ‘Pw_ element represented by sentencrrt topic is 0) Elkins, i21-3,

226

.

R. E. ELKINS TABLE 2

TempM& CondM +

f

&ST EmphNP

RASl IndepCL k-nomC1 RACl TIP

RASa

Nucleus

any sentence nucleus type

& ConcM -&PurpM -& CauM RASa

RAS4

RASa CauRefP

Rules: (1) When RASl expounds TempM it may optionally permute to a position immediately following the nucleus. (2) CondM, Nucleus, ConcM, and PurpM may occur in any position relative to each other with the restriction that CondM may not be separated from the nucleus by a PurpM. --. (3) When CauM is expounded by RAS5 and the relator of IinS6 is expounded by a cause relator complex minus w, CauM obligatorily permutes to a position immediately following the nucleus or to a prenucleus position. (4) The conjunction nc?may optionally occur preceding and/or followiug ST and/or immediately preceding the sentence nucleus.

reiterated in the nucleus of the se,rtence by a pronoun which must agree with the sentence topic as tot person and number, or by a verb if the sentence topic represents a process. Examples

ST

:

is

ta tafiey), this TM the yeast ST reiterated kinehanglan he sikan is (ebaal) tie lumfiiyu. necessary lig that TM make corj clean “As for this making of yeast, io is necessary that the one who makes it is clean.’ ST (2) Ne (is irifbg kayi) mezmzn en is conj TM like this strong compl TM ST reiterated keb$ekdavtgut (I1 in 1. ability-to-intoxicate its ‘Thatt like this, already strong is its ability to intoxicate.’ ( 1)

(He&i

kebaal making

kayi here

WESTERN

BUKIDNON

MANOBO

227

ST is menge vadtek) , iyan ngman this TM plural bamboo emph name ST reiterated tiwk. (dia 1 ne its conj usuk ‘As for these pieces of bamboo, they are calleld usz&.’

(3) W eini

1l2.2. The margin system Sentence margins occur in the inner periphery and are subordinate to the sentence nucleus. They are: temporal margin, conditional margin, circumstantial margin, concessive margin, purpose margin, and cause margin. Only the temporal margin and the cause margin may have an exponent which is not a relator axis sentence. Relator axis sentences carry much of the funCtiona load of the margin system. A relator axis sentence (RAS) consists of a rG& .sr tagmeme followed by an axis tagmeme. Examples of the various relators which expound such a relator tagmeme are ke ‘if’, hein ‘when, vninslan ‘even though’, su ‘because’, etc. The axis of one of the relator axis sentence types (RAS5) includes among its exponents another relator axis sentence type (see section 1.2.2.5), and the simple sentence. Although the latter, like most embedded sentences (see section 1) may not have an outer periphery, it may have a preposed or postposed inner periphery. All other relator axis sentence types have as exponents of their axis a restricted sentence. A restricted sentence consists of a sentence nucleus which not only has no outer periphery but has only p3sif).>sed inner periphery (sentence margin). The nucleus of the sentence that expounc 5 axis may be of any sentence type except the question-answer sentence, condition contrary to fact sentence, and the antithetical sentence. A simple sentence which expounds the axis of a relator axis sentence is still clearly a sentence rather than a clause whenever it includes any element of the inner periphery of the sentence. For this reason the entire construction including the relator i:i termed a relator axis sentence instead of a relator axis clause. I similarly consider to be a relator au& sentence any relator axis construction whose relator is a typical sentence level relator and whose ;:wris is expounded b; a simple sentence nucleus without any periphery - provided that a

Et. E,

228

ELKINS

periphery may be added. Such a simple sentence nucleus is, of course, also a clause so that we may say that a given relator sentence is expounded by independent clause, if we so desire. There are five relator axis sentence types which are in one to one correspoirdence with the five sentence margin tagmemcs. Each of these relator axis sentence types is described along wi,th the margin which it expounds. I.ZZI. Tentporal margin. A 1emporal margin (TempM) correlates the time of the event of the sertence nucleus with that of an additional event. There are two subtypes of the temporal margin. Class 1 temporal margin. Class 1 temporal margin (TempM~) functions on the paragraph level as narrative linkage between :hc sentences in a narrative paragraph?) Temporal margin i is expounded by a ciass 1 reia.tor axis sentence, an independent verbal clause marked for past time aspect and for involuntary mode, a k- nominalized transform of the aforementioned verba. clause type, or a relator axis clause (RACl) which is an unactualized time aspect dependent verbal clause introduced by the relator WY. The structure of a class 1 relator axis sentence (RASr) is formalized in the apparatus in table 3. 1.2.2.1.1.

TABLE 3 + Relator(temp)

+ Axis

Rules : (1) A restricted sentence (ResS) consists of a sentence nucleus without preposed margins. (2) A restricted sentence may consist of any of the sentence types except the question-answer sentence, the condition ccntrary to fact sentence, and the antithetical sentence.

7) Narrative linkage consists in repeating, paraphrasing or referring in some manner in the onset of a succeeding sentence to the whole or part of the preceding sentence. Thus : ‘John went downtown. When he go .” there, a

WESTEKN

Temporal

BUKIDNON

ma:rgin 1 expounded

229

MANOB

by relator

axis sentence

1:

ebmegurang ka) egkeleyaman m heyan. when grow-older you accustom-to you that ‘When you grow older, you will get used to that.’

VI 6 ‘e

parey), edsewiteul. when rice ripens the ceremonied ‘When the rice ripens, they hold a thanksgiving

(2) (E In2tn (4 (13ein when

erEsebpet

is

key

erd-uli

go-home

W,

Bi3G there

WC compl

mibayh tc tiyenggiyac passed-by the market ‘When we were going home we passed Examples sentence 1: ( 1)

Ne

of a restricted hein

sentence

(tmdzi

conj

when somewhat rjteqe se@& en plural ten compl kegwwag din) . . .

ceremony.

key we

by the market.’

e>rpound%ng axis of relator

axis

szt dekelh big because compl is vuwa wey k:lima :live perhaps TM and en

his ‘Now when he was somewhat a&F

fifteen (2) Emun when en

grown

because

he was perhays

years old . . . ’

(diyd

$a

there incompl idhifianew

te NT&I SZC

vaiey Si% ( me ll aan soon house because idlemzg en)) . . .

compl take-it-out because will- ry-it compl ‘When (the body) is still in the house because thev(I will soon take it out because they will bury it . . .’ Example 2 contains a restricted sentence (a simple sentence nucleus with a postposed cause margin) embedded in the axis of a relator axis senten.ce 5 which expounds the cause margin of another parade was in progress down Main Street’. Here, ‘when he got there’ refers to sentence one its background for sentence two. Cf. R. @. Longacre, Discowse, @avagraph, aped sentence structwe ix s4ected Philippine

kangwges. 1. Discourse and paragra$!h structure 56-67.

230

R. E. ELKJNS

::estricted sentence which expounds the axis of relator axis sentence 1 which in turn expounds a temporal margin to another sentence. Temporal margin i expounded by a past time independent verb,al clause marked for involuntary mode: A excl

(nekeeangkus IV-finished

smidlilingey turned

ne conj

dci just

ed-ehaart saw

ne conj

egkagi) speaking

is TM din he

iyan emph

he lig

baley. nepasad en is finished compl TM house ‘Ah, just when the one speaking had finished, he turned and saw that the house was done.’ Temporal indepndent s

(NE conj

margin 1 expounded by a k- nominal transform verbal cIause marked for involuntary mode:

kebpekeul3 nom-IV-return

dirt), his

ne conj

imbegey gave

of an

zin he

zivz heini is pa& dilyJ te ilney his this the fish there the rlother ‘When he returned home, he gave his mother the fish.’ Temporal margin 1 expounded (N e conj

wey

mebpelelaptiy) UA-ran

by a relator axis clause:

92936 nekeuma arrived conj

uval. zutun ne ed-ehaan din he&i is there conj see this the monkey he ‘And when he ran, e reached there and looked at the monkey,’ Temporal ma.rgin 2 (Temp1.2.2.1.2. Class 2 temporal margin. 2) marks cons.ecutive time horizons in a sequence of events in a discourse but does not mark narrative linkage. Temporal margin 2 is a portmanteau manifestation of clause level time tagmeme and sentence level time margin. It is expounded by a time phrase. A time phrase (TIP) consists of a time classificational clause 8) nominalized “) Elkins, 47.

WESTERN

BUKIDNON

231

MANOBO

by topic deletion Q) followed by an optional nontopic common nominal noun phrase. The axis of the nontopic common nominal noun phrase is either a time word or an embedded clause.10) Examples :

(1) (Dengan) long-ago

wad not

Ku

pelendunga

he

I

dream

lig

ebfiekeahli

a

te

menge

suled

ku

?zr!?

able-to-see

I

the

plural

brother

my

lig

diyk te meziyzi he inged. there the distant lig place ‘Long ago I never dreamed that I would be al.ble to see my broth :rs from distant places.’

(2) (Mehapuvt afternoon

te

on

ma;wR kandan again they

Sebedu) Saturday

mid-uwit

key

en

took

us

compl

diyB

te

migngeizanan

te

there

the

called

the

Meda sac. Manila zoo ‘Qn Saturday d afternoon the Manila zoo.’

again they took us to a place called

margin (CondM) margin. A conditional imposes a condition upon the event or state indicated by the sentence nucleus. A conditional margin is expounded by a class 2 relator axis sentsnce (RASz). The relator tag eme of a relator axis sentence 2 is expounded by one of the conditional relators, Ka, emtiN, and basta, all of which may be translated ‘if’. The axis of a relator axis sentence 2 is expounded by an independent clause or a restricted serrterrce (ResS). The structure of a conditional margin is indicated in the zpparatus in table 4. The relator a:tis sentence 2 of the conditional margin contrasts with the relattor axis sentence 1 of the temporal margin in that, ( 1) the set of relators of the relator axis sentence 2 does not include rbei;it I .2.2.2.Conditional

‘) E&in*, 455. 10) E&ins, 24.

R. En ELKPNS 4

TABLE

+ Relator(cond) ke ‘if’ emua ‘if’ hasta ‘if’

_-

-/- Axis IndepCl ResS

I__

Rule : Cf. rules 1 and 2 in table 3.

‘when (past time)’ and does include b&a ‘if’, and (2) the event or state of the relator axis sentence 1 in a temporal margin is in the speaker’s view expected or inevitable, whereas the event or state of the relator axis sentence 2 in a conditional margin is tentative and is one of tin-o or more alternatire eventualities. This contrast is _-_-----i!lWtrated in the fOl0Wiirig exampies. Relator axis sentence 2 as conditional margin: (Emun if dey We

kenb

hew

not

you

gtintaalp edtavak)

now

answer

edrenawan lake

sikiyu. yol.l

‘If you don’t answer us now, we’ll turn your village into a lake.’ Relator axis sentence 1 as time margin: (Emun edsebfiet e% is pafey) edsewiten. when ripens compl TM rice hold-a-thanksgiving-ceremony ‘When the rice ripens, they hold a thanksgiving ceremony.’ Further examples of conditional

(1) Edhinzetayan kill egketzcmnn

margins are:

ki

te

menge

stindaru

(ke

us

the

plural

soldier

if

heini) .

is-know:n this ‘The soldiers will kill us if anyone learns about this.’

(2) (E mzcn

man

had*)

ne

eb#eker?sawa te

if indeed king then must-marry ‘If he is a king, he has to marr:,’ a queen.’

xin)

l&i

ka.

if helps you he ‘If he helps vou, YOUare free.’

free

you

(3) (Basta

edtevangz’

ke

a

bai.

queen

WESTERN

BUKIDNON

233

MANOB

An example of restricted sentence (sentence nucleus with a postposed cause margin) expounding axis of relator axis sentence 2: relator Ke (ebelesan if pay-black vetasan

kti sikew I you

m-4

custom ne conj

axis : ResS

Sit

your

gentaugan

he

mezaat

he

NTM

bad

lig

iring

dz3en

lik?

there

becat;c

+a1% emph

te

te

pentangm)

NT&I

ganta-measure

kzc

man

iga&.zng

kenikew

is

I

also

measure

to-you

TM

ingantang

m

kediey.

meact$ure lig measured you to-me ‘If I pay you back for your wickedness because it is like a ganta measure, I will measure out to you the measure you mezsured to me.’ 1.2.2.3. Corecessive t~rgin,. A concessive margin relates a concession to the event or state indicated by the sentence nucleus. A concessive margin is expounded by a class 3 relator axis :;entence (RASa). The relator tagmeme of relator axis sentence 3 is expounded by the relator minsati ‘even’ or ‘even though’ optioilally followed by the relator ke ‘if’. T.he axis tagmeme is expounded by an independent cllause or a restricted sentence (ResS). Relator axis sente nc:? 3 is formalized in the apparatus irr table 5. TABLE 5

+ Relator(conc)

~_

+ Axis .ndepC1 ResS

(mirrsarr & ke)

Ruies : (I) The adjunct cluster (AD JCL) 11) of a clause which expounds the a:ris may be permuted to a posijion immediately following the relator minsan. (2) Cf. rules 1 and 2 in table 3.

Examples (1)

:

(lkhsan even-though

11) Elkins, 34.

meuget long-time

kiyu

mekeztma

xiy8

we

arrive

there

234

R. E. ELKINS te

lhbew),

kenk

ne

e

xed

egkeveiey.

not I still get-tired conj Davao though we take a long time reac%ng Davao, I won’t get tired.’

to

‘Even

(2) Ne conj

(mhasan

even

ed-engkexa

i5n con@ kzcd

N

ke

ke&

if

not

memakz‘c),

stink

heeyan.

get-rid-of I-compi that ‘And even if she didn’t stink, I would still get rid of her.’ (minsaut sebsweha z&s)* very noisyihe) even only-one he ‘He was very noisy even thougjh he was all by himselfi’

(3) Utew

mepsh

(4) Nee?ak ku saw I

he

utew

zekeld

is

galfew

lig

very big the regard nu kediey (minsan meked- ah&). wd ki we seen-eacl -0t her your to-me even-though not ‘I have seen that you have great regard for me even though we have never seen each other.’

An example of a restricted sentence expounding 3:

the axis of relator

axis sentence

relator M&sun

even-though mehelini

axis : ResS (midsivey separated tc?

zan

they

zap&)

WeY

in-order-that

midhelinan

xan

kenk

they

neg

sikandca,n giha@n.

caught-by lNTM sickness caught they same ‘Even though they went to live apart so that they wouldn’t be affected by the d&ase, it got them just the same.’ r.2.2.q.Ptirpose margin.

A purpose margin (PurpM) relates a purpose to the event or action of the sentence nucleus. A purpose margin is expounded by a class 4 relator axis sentence (RAS4). The relator tagmeme of relator axis sentence 4 is expounded by either of the relators wey or rpara:, both of which may be translated as ‘in order to’. The axis tagmeme is expounded by an independent clause (IndepCl) or a restricte+d sentence (ResS). Relator axis sentence 4 is represented in the apparatus in table 6.

WESTERN

BUKIDNON

235

MANOBO

TABLE 6 + Relatorlpurp)

+ Axis

wcy ‘in order to’ puvu ‘in order to‘

IndepCl ResS

Rules : ( 1) When axis is expounded by a nonverbal IndepCl, the relator is fwa. (2) When WY expounds ReEator(purp), nucleus position. (3) Cf. rules 1 and 2 in table 3.

P’wpM must permute to a post-

Exam bles: P

I#ehendini send-here

nu you

si

Rosito

(wey

Ku

TM

Rosito

so-that

I

metueni ke heqkey is r&&a). might-know if what the result ‘Send Rosito here so that I might know what the result is.’ Ed-artdam k-i laytin (para wazt ta samuk) prepare we always so-that not we trouble ‘Let us always be prepared so that we won’t have trtiuble.’ .

EdlepaaH ku (wey ku mekaan) . butcher(it) I so-that I can-eat(it) ‘I’ll butcher it so that I can eat it.’ Examples of restricted sentence expounding axis of relator axis; sentence 4 :

(1) Ebfiemasa

ki we

te NM

supas bread

wq

(ki

s bUY mekekaan wey ki mehantey). may-eat so-that we may-be-filled-up ‘Let’s buy some bread so that we can eat so that wz may be filled up.’

(2) Edsuwilduwan

ku I

sikew wey you so-that

(a I

kenikew

YOU Pay eb$ekezrma kes bapaugban%g) . edtevaucgati ke arrives the airplane help when ‘I’ll pay you so that you will help me when the airplane arrives.’

Ii. E.

226 1.2.2.5.

Cause margin.

ELKINS

A cause margin (CauM) relates a cause to

the event or state indica?ed by the sentence nucleus. .I cause margin is expoundt2d by a class 5 relator axis sentence (RAS5) or by a cause referent phrase (CauKefP). The relator tagmeme of a relator axis sentence 5 is expounded by a cause-relator compiex &kh consists of the relator szt ‘because’ optionally followed by a (renged; class relator and the particle te or of a (tengsd> class relator and the particle te without thle preceding relator SU. The (tzng&> relators ,&re: lenged, tuus, geina, and tegaad, all of which may be transkted ‘because’ or ‘since’. The axis tagmeme of a relator axis sentence 5 is expounded by an independent clause (IndepC:), a simple sentence (SimpS), or a class 4 relator axis sentence (RAS*j. Relator axis sentence 5 is represented by the apparatus in table 7. TABLE 7

+ Axis

+ Relatcr(cause)

(ule: If + su then CauM may not occur preposed to the sentence nucleus.

-4 cause referent phrase ’ gecause’ followed bv a relate; tagmeme of that t us. The structure of a apparatus in table 8.

(CauRefP) consists of the cause relator su referent phrase (RefP)?) The referent referent phrase must be either tanged or cause referent phrase is indicated in the ‘i-ABLE8

---

-c- Relator (l-ause) sat ‘because’

---

Examples -

+ Axis Ref: +

tuus

‘because’

I tenged ‘because”

of cause margin expounded

lz) Elkins, 23.

1 J

+

NTComNomNP

by relator axis sentence 5:

WESTERN

(1)

si

Ne conj

BUKIDNON

ebfmagufh vomits

ne

Lend

name

conj

ebfwkehazek

te

9agazeg

te

237

MANO:

(su

because menge

zuma

winsan

hengkey

xin) . the plural companion his smells odor the ‘Len& vomited because he smelled the odor of his companions.’ edred&

(2) Wazk

speak-at-the-same-

neg

ke l.ig

T+vhat

even

rime

tagbis

(tuus

te

midtahud

he

h.ad t

fe

bird

because

of

respect&

iig

king

of

langun

he

wenge

tagbis).

lig plural bird all ‘No bird talks at the same time he does because hc is the respected king of all the birds.’ (3) Dekelk

. . lxeG2,

mm

daan

he

vitil

(su

really

also

lig

famine

because

txus

zfe

tuwas

en

ebitilen

hani

he

because

the

exceedingly

compl

famined

that

lig

inged) . village ‘It was really a severe famine because of the fact that that village was hit hard by hunger.

(4’I

AfaZu

somewhat ziyt there

en

meziy&

heini

is

fsval

compl

far

this

TM

monkey

te

veyvey

the

shore

tenged

(su

te

nen igudu

persc~~cred

bccausc

en daaa sikandin). he camp1 also ‘The monkey was far from the shore because he also.’ (5) (Tegaad

te

because midtugutan

kzt

weupiya

good

ka

he

vahi))

you

lig

woman

sikew.

permit I You ‘Since you are a good woman, I will allow you.’

kept

right , on

238

R. E.

(6) (Geing

niy4

te Ixcause

Kes

anak

ran-away

compl

TM

child

iyan

dey

en

conj

emph

we

compl

edeke#xzn heini this arrest

zin.

amey

iS

efl

pivy

mibjda

ne

9

your

ELKINS

TM father his ‘Recanse your son ran away we will just arrest his father here.’ An example

nargin

of a simple sentence with a preposed expounding axis of relator &S sentence 5:

Eb pekeeles-eles

dh

hnh-to-stay-hidden

only

ne

egkea hh

sikandin

SW

(emu??

because

he

conditional

if

edkiw&ayan).

is-seen (he) conj will-be-killed ‘ He has to stay hidden because if he is seen he will be killed.’ Examples of cause margin expounded by relator axis sentence 5 ir:: which the axis tagmeme is cxpoundtd b_y a relator axis sentence 4 are the following: (1) zyan IW

is

edlikztan

JUI

!S%f

return

I

because

ke hengkey

fnetueni

as

kft

WeY so-that

I

nehith J bL;.

what TM happened may-know ‘Well, I’ll go back bccausc so that I might find out what happened, ’ :2j NE conj

i,pan _

kzcd

kan

Izeyan

idtt-lvak

elnph

I-compl

later

that

answer

ke&

mefiatey) .

(SU

WeY

key

because so-that we not kill ‘And that is what I will answer so that ~63won’t be killed.’ Examples oi’ cause margin expounded 1)

JVeuget long-time

cut compl

ne conj

bital

(sad tuus

te

famine

because

of

by a cause referent phrase:

med-agi

ke

$a

is

passed

you

still

TM

mehgayad

he

long

lig

gzclavting) . dry-season

WESTERN

BUKIDNON

MANOB

239

‘After a iong time then you, famine, appeqrcd because of the long dry season.’

(2) Ne con j

segzcgzcnci immediately

ziwata

he

iyan

egkepasad

(su

finish

tanged

because

ed-utin

kandin)

te

of

.

emph empower him isod ‘And imrlediately it was finished because of the god which was empowering him. ’ lig

TABLE 9 Submatrix 1. Quasiclausal --_ Simple

l-Concatenated Coordinate

Paraphrase

Rs(simp)

Bs + Lk(coor) + Bs

Bs(thesis) & Lk(para) + Bs(para)

Merged Bs( merged)

Sequence Bs(ante) + Lk(seq) + Bs(cons)

Antithetical Bs(thesis) + Lkjanti) + Bs(antithesis)

Loose

Tight

Parallel

1

L

I

Condition

-Condition Contrary To Fact Bs(protasis) + Bs (apodosis I .--

Specific Condi t iona 1 Bs(apodosis) + Bs(protasis)

TABLE 10 Submatrix 2.

Loose

Tight

Entailment

Implication

Reason-Action

Alternative

Direct Quote

RF + Bs(act) -t- MkR + Bs(R)

AltF + Ml&t + Bs(Wl 3~ (Lk(coor) & Mkalt + Bs(alt2))

DQFl + DQF2 + DQM + DQ

Questi(: Answer

Inference

QuF +

Bs(Ans)

InfF -/- PnfM + Bs(Inf)

I

Quotation

Quasiquotation _8fental Indrect Quote MIDQF + MIDQM -L. MTDQ

-p.-

-

Mistaken Impression Quote IDQF + MImpQF + IDQFM + IDQ MImpQM $- I:DQ Indirect Quote

240

R. E. ELKINS

2. SENTENCETYPES .isystem of sixteen independent

sentence types has been posited. The system is presented as a matrix in tables 9 and 10. The matrix is composed of two submatrices. This devision is based on the fact that the sentences in submatrix 2 contain a formula tagmeme whereas those in submatrix 1 do not. ‘.Yhevertical parameter which classifies sentence types as loose or tig% reflects relative compactness of the bond.s between the sentence level tagmemes which compose a sentence type. This may be measured in terms of permutation and/or deletion possibility. Some of rhe sentence types have been defined as loose relative to their tighter counterparts even though their tagmemes are nonpermutable and nondelettible. Their ‘looseness’ consists in the fact that the trancfnrmntinnnl B,m -L-Y*-- L*_v__v--__

nnmstinnc ‘~.d’--_v__I

which . . -s__-_

acrnllnt --iY---W

fnr _Y_

their W__Y__ rPlQtinn * .a-YI*v**

tn bv

more basic structures are less complex than those required for the ‘tighter’ types. The values of the horizontal parameter are formal semantic features which further define sentence types. Portmanteau manifestation of sentence and clause level structures does not occur in quasiclausal, concatenated, paralkl, or conditional sentences, i.e. in the sentence types of submatrix 1. This feature will not concern us until later in the paper. In the following description only the nuclei of the various sentence types are described. Each sentence type may also have a periphery as previously described. 2.

I. Quasichrusal

sentences

The quasiclausal sentences are simple or merged. Of the quasiclausal types, only merged sentences are here described in detail. 2.1 . 1. Simple sentences ‘I he nucleus of a simple sentence is a simple sentence base which is expounded by an independent clause. The following is an example of a simple sentence: ne

naamin

dan

is

kerut

he

se veal

conj

consumed

they

TM

food-name

lig

nsngeek? Found

dan.

A’ekepJtu

they

WESTERN

BUKIDNON

MANOBO

24 1

‘On the seventh day they ate the last of the kerut which they had found.’ 2.12.

Merged sentences

A merged sentence nucleus consists of a derived independent verbal clause which is a transform from two kernel verbal clauses?) In a merged sentence nucleus the action of one verb qualifies as to manner the action of the other. The apparatus in table 11 indicates the structure of merged sentences. TABLE 11 Ifi (Peri)

+ Bs (merged) IndepCl : Pred: (Verb1 + Verbg) + Topic

(2)

Verb1 =

Examples (1)

(2)

(3)

L

-manner verb main verb

1

in /

main verb manner verb _I

Ver’Sz:

:

mibfwunga~

ku

is-isi

pa

hseyan.

past-was-careful I UA-think ‘I carefully thought about that.’

that

edtuhng sdshegew nonpast-continues nonpast-weep ‘Bayi continually weeps.’

si

Mebpwung

ka

UA-be-careful you ‘Cook carefully.’

Bayi.

name

medsuba.

UA-cook

_-_13) One of the derived clause types resembles margled sentences. The predicate of that clause is expounded by a derived verb phrase which consists of two verbs lir-_k4! by the ligature hi, e.g. Kent? neg

key we

Ggkesutzt desire

‘We do not want to cat.’

he lig

egkaan eat

R.

242 2.2.

Coticatenat6d

E. ELKINS

sentences

Concatenated sentences consist of two or more sentence bases loosely joined in a coordinate or sequential relationship. They are open ended; that is, there are no grammatical restrictions as to the number of bases which may be concatenated in such a sentence. The two types of concatenated sentences are coordinate and sequential. Coordinate sentences are loose. The bases may be permuted since no chronological sequence is involved. Sequence sentence bases are ordered chronologically and are therefore nonper-mutable. They are classified as tight. Concatenated sentences are not here described in detail. The following are examples of concatenated sentences : ( 1) Coordinate

:

Nzkegezam

heini

is

felt

this

TM

wey

nekeahb

te

me&it

seLaxang deer fl

te

hafiuy.

fire he the and saw the heat ‘The deer felt the heat and saw the fire.’ (2) Sequence

:

Mid-umpak

en.

0

ne

jumped

compl

he

Lk(seq)

en

0

he

mibah y

turned-into

kedi.

compl he lig eel ‘He jtl.mped in and turned into an eel.’ 2 3.

Para&!

sentences

A para!lell sentence

nucleus consists of an initial sentence base followed by a second base lvhich presents information which is parailel to the information of the initial base. There are two types of parallel sentences, the paraphrase sentence and the antithetical sentence. The paraphrase sentence displays positive parallelism. The antithetical sentence displays negative parallelism. Parallel sentences are not here described in detail. The following are examples of parallel sentences : I ) Paraphrase

sentence

:

Neztimegatan

en

is

kebpekesavuk

lowlandered

conapl

TM

situation

ne

kuwinta

Lk(para)

WE§TERN

BUKIDNON

NANOBO

243

velaud en @4ntaan is edllzczda. civil-law compl now TM rule ‘Our way of life has been influenced by lowlanders; civil law is what rules now.’

(2) Antithetical

sentence

subtype

Egezam

a:

:

a I

try

asal

iyaP

Lk( anti)

erni>h

egkesuatan

ku

rte

langun

te

sikiyu

want

I

conj

all

of

You

kew

.

fienlipexeng

that is,

ne

con j

shut-eyes you ‘I’ll try, however I want all of you to shut your eyes,’ b:

subtype

Ne

kenti

kediey

z&

duen

he

conj

not

mine

only

that

lig

ketau

keken&

egenat

diy&

he

Paagi

heini

power

Lk(anti)

goes

there

lig

means

this

te kezenan. NTM god ‘It is not my power alone but rather God.’ 2.4. Conditional

this way comes from

sentences

A conditional sentence nucleus consists of a protasis defining a condition and an apodosis which defines an eventuality based on that condition. There are two types of conditional sentences, i.e. the condition contrary to fact sentence and the specific conditional $ontence. The following are examples of ccrditional sentenccb$. (1) condition

contrary

to fact sentence:

Ke

wazt

e

man

geine

eozgkezi

te

esawa

if

neg

me

emph

past

divorced

the

spouse

Ku

ne

pudu

key

en

geine

eb.pekekaan

te

my

conj

all

us

compl

past

able-to-eat

the

nevatufi brought-home

& the

esawa

spouse

nni BUYi, of Daughter

i

D

1

umba‘therefore’

LiYUti

iyan ke&zengan he 5 emph ‘reason’ lig

+ RF

(maan is)‘why’

(MkR) (Bs(R}) (RF) (Bs(act)) = (I%(R)) (RF) (Bs(act)).

(RF) (Bs(act)) ww (Bs(R)) = 1; or (MkR) (Bs(R)) (RF) (Bs(act)).

type2

type

_

~~~~ketezengan ke mrcan is ! I Entailment sentences do not occur as exponents of Bs(R).

If (J%(R)) (RF) (Bs(act)), then (RF) =

D

p

Rules :

GPeri)

TABLE 12

--

+ Bs(act)

-

ntYPe

IndepCl S type

+ Bs(RH

‘because’

SU

ii iS

I_

SU

& MkR

!z m

s 7;:

.M

td .

WESTERN

BUMIDNON

245

MANOBO

‘If my husband hadn’t. divorced me, all of us would have been able to eat of what Da,ughter’s husband brought home,’ (2) specific cor,ditional a. specific time : WeY

relator

sentence.

en

zey

WE compl

heini

edttiluya

ke

this

stop-by-for

when

ed-a& Cey. go-home t ve ‘We will st . p by for this when we go home.’ b.

specifi

Wey

:

condition

:

121I

zti

kenk

edtuktuki

ke

I

only

not

peck-on-him

if

relator sA:dadan

a

kenikew

te

veritan

NTM whetstone Pay me You “I won’t peck on him only if you pay me a whetstone.’ We turn now to sentence types of submatrix 2 (see section 2). These sentence types contrast with those of submatrix 1 in that they consist of formula plus base rather than simply base or base plus base. Also in the sentences of sublmatrix 2 we encounter the restructuring influence of the sentence level upon certain cl?luse types. 1.5. Entailme&

sentemes

The entailment

question-answer 2.5.1.

sentences are the reason-action sentence.

Reason-action

A reason-action

sentence and the

sentences

sentence consists of a rra;ison formula (RF) followed by an action base (Bs(act)) followed by a reason base (BS(R)). The apparatus in table 12 indicates the structure of reason.I action sentences. Portmanteau manifestation of clause and sentence structure occurs in subtype 1. When reason marker is the topic case marking particle is, the reason-action sentence may be analyzed as having the same tagrL;emes as an emphatic topic derived classlflcational clause?4) A4n emphatic derived classificational clause has the structure shown in table 13. 14) Elkins; 62-4.

Ii. E.

246

ELKINS

TABLE

+ emphatic marker @a-?2

timph

13

+ classXcationa1 predicate

+ topic

any ?oun phrase not marked for case any nominalized clause

topic case noun phrase containing is

An analyzed example of ,z reason-action structure is shown in table 14. TABLE

RF

Bs (aci)

Yyan emph

string

as a sentence

14

MBR

inhendini reason-came-here (i-NomCl)

Bs(R)

’ l$

ku

I

ebzcyu

a

te

ask

T-l

. vucc’wz

&TM medicine

‘The reason I came here is I will ask for medicine.’

The same reason-action shown in table 15.

string analyzed TABLE

+ emphatic marker -ij Ian emph

+ classifi cationa t predicate -_ inhendini

+ topic

._ ku

reason-came-here (i-NomCl)

lutzi

tew

emph lunch our ‘Our lunch is rice.’

is

15

1

is

is

begas

TM

rice

ebuyu

a

te

vawi

TM ask T-I NTM medicine (Topic NY wit4 a clause embedded in the head slot.)

Compare table 15 vl:ith the following topic derived classificational clause : iyan

as a clause structure

example

of an emphatic

Although subtype 1 of the reason-action sentence exhibits features which are reminiscent of clause structure, it seems preferable not to regard it exclusively as ciause structure. Subtype 1 is here defined as a portmanteau manifestation of both clause and sentence structure for the following reasons:

WESTERN

BUKIDNON

MANOBO

247

(a) Mar*k;r is here expounded by either su ‘because’ or zs ‘topic marker’; =:heformer has no clause level function, On the other hand, the alternate topic markers kes and Ke which are commutable for is in topic phrases which occur on the clause level do not occur as reason marker on the sentence level. Because of these facts it seems evident that reason marker plus base reason cannot be regarded here as a straightfor$varJ u equivalent to a topic marker plus noun phrase on the clause level. (b) Viewed as a clause structure, base reason manifests the head slot of a topic noun phrase. The exponents of base reason (independent clause, any sentence type, and paragraph) involve too great a degree of backlooping to be reasonable on the phrase level. It appears, rather, that the >entence level has here superimposed its particular structure over the clause string distorting it to such a degree that description as ;i clause necessitates the definition of a structure too abberrant and idiosyncratic to be plausibie. Examnles A.

:

ib@ekehiphipanew

(1) Iyan emph

reason-am-traveling-around

ku

heini

I

this

IS

wad

en

iney

kzc

ute

wad

en

IMkR

not

corny1

mother

my

conj

not

compl

homey Ku. faoher my ‘The reason I am traveling around like this is that I have no mother and I have no father.’

(4

Iyan

idhimetayz

kaxtj

emph

reason-for-killing

that

su MkR

midlaguy

he

xuuen

warned

lig

there-is

le

VId nu k

the

(Sicken

egkehitavic

will-happen

he

lig

mezaat .

bad ‘The reason for killing that chicken is because he warned that something bad will happen.

(3) Iyan emph

keteraqpn

he

maan

is

wazk

key

reason

lig

why

TM

not

we

IX. E. ELKXNS

248

SlJ

meket&

mid-mm.

rained able-to-go-home MkR ‘The reason why we were not able to come home is because it rained.’ Umba

iyan

maan

edsembayan

ku

is

that&why

emph

again

borrow

I

T3I

(4

gentangava

gan ta-measure Ku

maan

egentangen is TM I again measure ‘That’s why I want to borrow because I am going to measure

sela@

idlibriya

emph

reason-fflr-setting-free

emph

din.

silver his your ganta meaSure for silver his silver.’

An example of base reason expounded graph : lycsn

iyan

te selafd SU for silver MkR

nu your

by an antithetical

Ku

te

meemaiian

I

the

brcther

kzf

su

ke

ebptztey

is

anak

ku

wy

is

my

MkR

if

(lies

TM

child

my

and

TM

esawa

ku,

egkeesawa

a

giha@n,

ne

spouse

my

marry

I

again

CO11 j

ed-an ak

e

zed

daan.

Ne

ke

iyan

ave-children

I

still

also

conj

if

emph

ebpatey

is

meemahan

Ku,

wazk

en

maan

died

TM

brother

my

neg

compl

again

meemahan

Ku

taman

te

para-

kemetayen.

brother my until the death ‘The reason I want to set my brother free is because if my c!-lilcl and my husband die I can get married again and have children. However if my brother is the one who dies I’ll have no brothtir anymore until I die.’ The antithetical paragraph expounding base reason in the preceding example consists of a section and a counter section. Section I begins with the words; ke ebpatey is anak ku . II .

WESTEHN

The counter meemehan

2.52.

BUKIDNON

249

MANOBO

ke

section begins with the INords:

iyan

ebpatey

is

ku . . .

Question-answer

sentences

A question-answer sentence nucleus consists of a question formula followed by an answer base. The question formula consists of the exclamation a followed by an i.dcntificational common pronominal interrogative clause?) The answer base consists of an independent clause or a sentence nucleus. The formula and base are phonologically linked by a single intonation contour which consists of rising pitch on the question formula and falling pitch on the answer base. The apparatus in table I6 indicates the structure Gf ;L questionanswer sentence nucleus.

& (Peri) ’

+ &(ans)

+ QuF

IndepCl

a + IdComPronInterrCl ‘excl’ ‘what . ..’

Examples (1)

:

A

lzengkey

is

wtid-ulaula

z in ;

midtulung

excl

what

TM

did

sh::

continued

en medsinegew . compl wept ‘Oh what did she do; she continuously

(2) A excl

hengkey

is

intavak

te

what

TN

answer

the

sikandan

te

migkagi

heini

wept.’ kezekehr ,

people te

mid-ztyw

agreed

vahi.

the woman the said this they ‘Ah what did the people answer; they agreed to this which the woman said.’ 2.6. Implication sentences Implication 15) Elkins, 57.

sentence nuclei are fither a’rternative or inference.

R. E. ELKINS

250 2.6.1.

L41ternative sentence

An alternative sentence nucleus consists of an alternative formula followed by two bases which are semantically alternate to each other. The apparatus in table 17 indkates the structure of an alternative sentence nucleus. TAFCE 17

+ AltF

XL

+ Mkalt

(Peri) Clause containing : verb + Subj ke ‘whether’ ‘see’

( ah&

+ Hs(altl)

If: (Lk(coor)

IndepCl S type

WeY

‘or’

ku

ke

I

whether

see

mid-a&

went-home

+ Bs(alta))

ke

IndepCl S type

‘whether’

Rule:
Examples : Ed-ehaan

& Mkalt

‘look out to see’,

wey

or

midlcm.

ke

whether continued(he) ‘II1 see whether he returned

(2) Ebpemantew

a

ke

look-old-to-see

I

whether

home or -whether he went on.’ zuen there-is

meginged

inhabitant

uvey ta. near our ‘ I will look out to see whether there is someone living near us (or not).’

he lig

(3) Wey so-that

ta we

egketueni

ke

egkevahy

might-know

whether

can-bring-about

I’,ew. F'(lU

J

‘So that we might know whether not) .’ 2.6.2.

you can be successful

(or

Inference! senteiices

The inference sentence

nucleus consists of an inference

formula

WESTEHN

BUKIDSON

251

MANOBO

plus an inference marker plus the inference base. The structure inference sentences is formalized in the apparatus in table IS.

of

TABLE 18 & (Peri)

+ InfF Clause containing

(tt6tuu) ‘true’

&

-- -

+ InfM

+ Bs(Inf)

he lig

s type

: IndCl

(iyan) emph

Rules : (1) cegicaahh) = ti t?erb marked for object focus and involuntary mode and 1.1:‘ccln’ inchdes verb stems siic1E; as ihL4 JL.L,, luen ‘know’, edxk ‘guess’, ermgan ‘have an opinion’, etc. 12) jiwluu ) = descriptives such as tutuu ‘true’, keladu ‘clear’, tavk ‘false’, etc. (3) S type which expounds Bs(Inf) mav* not be a question-answer sentence (QW

l

The inference sentence also demonstrates the tendency of the sentence level to sunerimnose its structure upon that of the clause. Following is an exat&Ae of an unaltered objeit focus verb clause: Egkeehb

Ku

OF verb predicate see ‘I see the house.’

nontopic subject I

is baley topic-as-object house

The predicate and subject of an inference sentence are grammatically identical with those of the object focus ver 3 clause above. The inference sentence contrasts, however, with an object focus verb clause in that the former does not contain a topic object marked with is. The inference marker (InfM) he with the inference base (Bs(Inf)) cannot be grammatically unambiguously identified as the grammatical object of the verb, in that the string may not be transformed to an object focus verb clause. Examples

:

he zekelci is hi.w big TM pity saw I InfM ‘I saw that your pity for me is great.’

(1) NeehtB kzc

nu

kedi.

you

me

252

R. E. ELKINS

(2) Netwenan

Ku

he

WdZd

know I InfM there-is-none ‘I know that you have no lunch.’ (3) Neenhk

dun

he

kenk

?ZU

zutzi.

your

lunch

eb@ke&.

kew

guessed they InfM neg you able-to-go-home ‘They guessed that you weren’t able to come home.’ (41

keerangan have-an-opinion Eg

cgkepasad

kti

he

kayi

te

1

InfM

this

NTM

dan

en

ke

J!hYSU

March

valey.

will-finish they compl TM house ‘It is my opinion that they will finish the house in March.’ (5) Tzduu trade ‘It

iynn LlmT-lh c111y11

he

merasey

is

KmCM JLllIiVI

A:ff;,,Tl+ UlLLlLUlL

TM

is really true that their situation

(6) Tar& false

iyan

he

mibayazan

emph InfM paid( it) ‘It is false that he paid it already.’

(7) Keladu

utew

he

wazk

kan:dan. +trn;rr LllClL 3

is difficult.’ din

en.

he

compl

din

isip.

clear very InfM neg his thinking ‘It is clear that he just can’t think.’ 2.7. Quotation sentences Quotation quotation. 2.7.1.

sentences

Direct quotation

are either

direct

quotation

or indirect

sentences

The structure of a direct quotation sentence nucleus is formalized in the apparatus in table 19. The apparatus in table 19 presents the direct quotation sentence as a sentence level string composed of sentence level tagmemes, i.e. periphery, direct quote formula 1, direct quote formula 2, direct quote marker, and direct quote. The structure of this string is also reminiscent of clause level structure since it can be viewed as containing the major dramatis personae elements which have tagmemic status on the clause level. When the direct quotation sentence contains a verb predicate, it may also contain a subject, a

& NTDir - Topic as identity -

& ne + ke siak

0

0

1

D

ll

(7)

(6)

(5)

1

any emphatic

(siak)

=

insd'ask'.

(insd)=

kagi ‘speak’, kagi ‘speak’, Ealag ‘word’

1 siak ‘I’, sikaw ‘YOU’, sikandin

c 1

case personal pronoun:

isip ‘think’ isip ‘think’,

‘he’, ‘she’, etc.

when: (a) DQFl :Verb Pred permutes to a position within or ft&llowing DQ. (b) DQFl is absent and DQFz permutes to a position wij:hin or following DQ. (Ragi > eqonnds the stem of the verb or head of the SgCentNP in DQF1. in / DQFl where (insd)

(4) D DQM

Dir within Cl which is exponent of DQF1). (2) P (DQFl) (DQF2) = 1; or (DQF2 at Subj --_._ (3) P (DQFl:Verb Pred) (DQF2) (DQ) = 1; or (DQF1) (DQF2) at a sentence level tagmeme juncture or at a clause level Subj BrPron 1 1cx PQ) ( PQW tagmeme juncture within DQ, whit h is not a clause level tagmeme juncture at / Pred pQF2) i i ST Pron I

(1)If+ DQM,then+ (DQFl/DQh).

Rules: (subject to the above cooccurrence restrictions).

+ ClasID Pred:

TABLETS

R. E.

254

ELKINS

direction, and what appears to be an object or instrument goal with the object or instrument slot filled by a noun phrase whose head is the direct quotation. Although these features suggest that the string may be analyzed as a kind of clause level string, the resulting analysis involves the setting up of a highly specialized clause type with characteristics not found elsewhere ,:n clauses. One of these characteristics is an implausible degree of backlooping and recursion in the head slot of the noun phrase whi& expounds an object or instrument. A whole discourse may occur in that slot. Moreover, it seems counterintuitive that a discourse length segment of speech could retain grammatical status as the object or instrument of a verb. Other characteristics which are not found in other clauses are : (1) thn LA&b

ZrnnAnm IZbbU”IIL

4th . . ALI&

rwhiph V.11AU1L

thncn CILLSGU

tQcrmnmnc &c&~lLIabsIsb3

rnqxl auwy

ha Vb

narmrrtnrl basI*UCbU*

Rs~lnc ALLLAb

3 *

and 5 in table 19 are not permissible in any other clause type. (2) The direct quote formula 2 is unique in direct quotation sentences and has no counterpart on th e clause level. (3) The optional particles which fill direct quote marker in the sentence level array in table 19 are obligatory rather than optional noun phrase relators when they introduce phrases which expound clause level tagmemes elsewhere. (4) Only two focus types, subject focus and direction focus, are found in a verbi predicate of direct quote formula 1. This means that the quotation as object goal or instrument goal. is never in focus. Thus, if ;Neinsist upon a clause level analysis for direct quotation strings in which we identify the direct quotation as an object or instrument tagmeme, we have no grammatical criterion for such identificafion because the clause may nrJt be transformed so that the object or instrument is in focus. In all other verbal clauses when one of the major dramatis personae tagmem.es, i.e. subject, object, instrument, or direction, occurs out of focus, the clause may always be transformed so that that tagmeme is in focus. This transform possibility is, for certain verb stem classes, the only means of determining the grammatical identity of the object, instrument, and direction in clauses where they occur. Thus, because of the difficulties involved in viewing direct quotation strings as only clause level, it seems preferable to regard the direct quotation strings as a portmanteau manifestation of both clause and sentence level structures.

WESTERN

Examples

BUKIDNON

255

MANOBO

:

Ne

migkagi

and

said

‘He&i

si

Mungan,

ke

Mungan

is

mibeelan

sikandin,

she-said

ku

kenikew

. . .’

this TM made I for-you ‘And Mungan said, she said, “This which I made for you Egkagi

en

si

Betecy

xiyE

tt?

says

compl

TM

nanre

there

the

si

Anak,

te,

en

maan

kayi

te

hadi

D&aid

compl

again

this

NTM

king

is

UVd

‘Heini

te,

ke

sikandin,

‘ed-anak

‘ “Oh.”

Mid-insd

he&i

is

pastur

very egkagi

. . .”

’

'

‘Hengkey

DQM

what

is . . .’

TM

’ ’

kes

Ku

en

egkee+si

I

compl

disgust-with

is

e9tugang

heini

'

teJ

t hi-s TM herder asked ‘This herder asked, “What . . .’ ‘Utew

’

a.’

she said give-birth I she said, “I’m giving birth.’

excl

. . .”

zed . . . ’

this TM monkey DQM here still ‘The king said again to the monkey, “Here is still ‘A,’

J

spouse

Migkegiyan heini

JJ

esawa

‘Emun kt nzc . . .’ her TM name DQM if not ~‘0-U ‘Beteey said to her husband, Anak, “If you don’t zin

. .

hadi,’

king

din. this TM mother-in-law his says ’ ’ ‘1 am really disgusted with ihe king,” said his mother-in-law.’ ‘A

utew

en

nei

meziy:i,’

excl

very

compl

this

far

ke

&and&,

he said

‘iyan

but

egkemetan Ku.’ ebpen-ahd te is kayi e zd I cut TM here I only look-for the ‘ “Ah, this is very far,” he said, “but I will only look here for a Dlace to cut.” ’

R. E.

ELKINS

te the

hadi king

uce conj

niyu

. ..’

256 (8) Ne conj

lalag saying

te,

‘Km!

ke

sikandin he said

DQM

*e&z You ‘So word of the king, he said, “Don’t you . . . ’ ’ ’

lalag te ehw , (9) Iyart emph word the person ‘The person said, “Yes.” ’ (10)

Iyan emph iS

ins2 question m.id-

daula

din his

is, TM

’

Uya.’ Yes ‘Heuzgkey man what emph

nu?’

TMd-id You ‘His question was, “‘What did you do?” 2.7.2. Ind.irect quotation

’

sentences

An indirect quotation sentence nucleus consists of an indirect quote formula (IDQF) plus an indirect quote marker (IDQM) and an indirect quotation (IDQ). The indirect quotation nucleus contrasts with that of the direct quotation sentence in that (1) the quote formula tagrneme and the quote marker tagmeme of the indirect quote sentence are obligatory whereas those of the direct quote sentence are optional ; and (2) there is no additional indrrect quotation formula tagmeme which corresponds to direct quote formula 2 of the direct quotation sentence; (3) the exponent of indirect quote may be no more extensive than a sentence while the exponent of direct quote may be a paragraph or discourse. Also the indirect quotation is characterized by a shift in pronouns which is determined by the pronominal identity of the person quoting, the person spoken to by the one quoting, and that of the person spoken of in the quotation. The apparatus in table 20 indicates the str rcture of an indirect quotation sentence. Examples : (1) D&tin there

Jz’zuman Ku kegiya then I say

he IDQM

azeuyag a alive I

WESTERN

BUKIDNON

257

MANOBO

TABLE 20 &- (Peri)

i_ IDQF Clause containing : + Verb Pred

--

& Subj

+ IDQM

+ IDQ

(he >

sentence

-& Dir

Rules : (1)

(he!) =

he in / (kagi ) -_ ke in / (insd ) te in / (kagi ) -

where the verb in the Ikemel I [ direct quotation was a command.16) I

I

(2) IDQ

_

(3) A pronoun in the quotation of a DQS which is transformed t 3 an I-First person speaker ] IDQ = Second person in the IDQ if it refers to the spoken to spoken of 1 Third person _ of the IDQ sentence. (4)
1

L

te

keb$ekedunggzi

dey.

the landing our ‘Then when we landed I said that I was alive.’ (2) Migkagi told-OF en

kti

kenikew

he

mid-enkezan

Ku:

You

IDQM

stopped-DF

I

I

neveley

SU

tired compl because ‘I told you that I ditorced (3) Migkegiyan

told-DF

a

me

pi

ad.

I-compl her because I was tired.’

Mr. Elkins

Mr. Elkins

he

ed-uwiten

IDQM

take

Men&. zin diyk it me he there the Manila ‘Mr. Elkins told me that he would take me to Manila.’ e

16) This is based on only one example, (4).

258

R. E.

(4) Ne conj

hein when

ELKINS

migkegiyan told-DF

nepawd

morning

en

compl

ni

Agyu

Agyu

ebpenggenat dan en. sakup din te they compl leave TM plural follower his IDQM ‘Next morning Agyu told his followers that they (should) leave. iS

mange

zin ke e,gkelenew (5) Mid-insaan e dizzy me he if asked-DF ‘He asked me if I were dizzy.’ (6)

a.

I

Geli,

id-i&

ku

kenikew

ke

hengkey

friend

ask,JF

I

you

if

what

iS

egkeu iada.

TZ happening ‘Friend, I ask you also what (7) Nenginginsd asked-SF is

hipanew

is happening.’

heini

is

hadi

ke

hengkey

this

TM

king

if

what

wey

hendei

z&r. ebfieva yd .

and where he go T3l journey ‘This king asked what was (the reason foF) the 2ourney and where he was going.’ 2.8.

Quasipot(

.tim sentences

A quasiquotation sentence refers to thought rather than actual speech. Quasiquotation sentences are the mental indirect quotation sentence and the mistaken impression quotation sentence. 2.8.1.

Mental

indirect

quotation

sentences

The structure of a mental indirect quotation sentence is indicated by the apparatus in table 21. The mental indirect quotation sentence also exhibits structure which is reminiscent of clause structure. The analysis here regards the mental indirect quote sentence as a portmanteau manifestation of both clause and sentence structure because of (1) the implausible degree of backlooping which would be postulated if the quotation ta&aeme were regarded to be embedded in the head slot of a topic noun phrase expounding the object of the verb on the clause level;

WESTERN

BUKIDNON TABLE

& (Peri)

259

MANOBO

21

+ MIDQF

+ MIDQM

+ MIDQ

{E}

Stype

Clause containing : OFVerb: (isip) + Subj:

STwe Rules : OFVerb is marked for involuntary mode?‘) (2) (iSiP> = verb stems such as isip ‘think’, pelandung tegeinep ‘dream’, etc. (1)

‘have an inkling’,

(2) mental indirect quote marker rnay or may not be expounded by the ?opic case marker is which on the c1au.w level obligatorily marks . a 4OpiC TiG'iiii phia%; it may also be expounded by the ligature ize which signals a transformational relationship (in this case, a combining transformation). The free alternatior between is and he as mental indirect quote marker weakens the possibility that mental in direct quote marker plus mental indirect quote can be identified as thtz Claus? level object tagneme, here expounded by a topic noun phrase the head slot of which ic elT.pounded by a sentence or a paragraph. Exam&s : 1.

Ku

(1) Egkeisip

(2) Neis$

ad.

ed-24Zi

is

think I MIDQM go-home ‘I think I’ll go home now.’

I-compl

dh

is

edlikd

sikandin

he

MIDQM

return

he

thought

924

because

wahig. titew sikandin nehartdek te he afraid the water very-much ‘He thought that he would go back because he is very much afraid of the water.’ ktid

mei+

he

egkesuat

a

I-compl

think

MIDQM

like

I

(‘3)Guntaan 6

now he

egkaan.

lig eat ‘Now I think I’d like to eat.’ m-e-

17) Elkins, 1034

260

R. E. ELKINS

2.8.2. Mistaken impression

quotation

sentence

The mistaken impression quoltation sentence nucleus consists of a quotation formula (MImpQF), a quotation marker (MImpQM) and an indirect quotation @Qj. The structure of the mistaken impression quotation sentence is formalized in the apparatus in table 22. TABLE 22

Clausecontting

: ke

Examples

(1)

(2)

S

:

ku ke egkeulug Kurtaan fall mistaken impression 1 QM ‘I thought we were going to fall.’

Munaan mistaken impression

nu

ke

ken8

you

QM

not

key

en.

we

camp1

medmexagwey

very-handsome

ke kenakan ? lig young-man ‘So you thought he wasn’t a very handsome (3)

type

Kunaan

n&taken sikandin

impression te

te

uval

ke

NTM

monkey

QM

zuma

young man?’ mid-ewaan left

. ZZ%.

he NTM companion his ‘The monkey thought that his companion

had left him.’

3. CONCLUSION

Tn summary, clause and sentence are fundamentally different s ;ructures involving different relations. Clause structure is a domain which involves units such as topic, predicate, actor, goal, instrument, and direction in relations such as predication, focus, classification, transitivity, etc. The function of sentence structure, however, is more similar to the combination of propositions in the statement

WESTERN

BUkIDNON

MANOBO

261

calculus of formal logic, e.g. conjunction, alternation2 and implication.18) Although sentences and clauses are simi1a.r in that both may be embedded within sentences, they differ in the restrictions imposed upon thei; relative length and complexity when thus embedded. As described in this paper, there are two degrees of restriction imposed upon sentences which are embedded within other sentences. A restricted sentence, which expounds the axis of all relator axis sentences except RAS5 is limited to its nucleus and postposed inner periphery. All other embedded c?:ltences except those which are embedded as quoted speech within a direct quotation sentence, may not contain an outer periphery, but may contain both preposed and postposed inner periphery. Thus the part of the sentence which most -_a clearly__outrtris clause struct*ure (the o*;ter peii~~~ery : sentence conjunction, flow marker, exclamation, vocative, and paragraph topic) is rarely found in embedded sentences. Nevertheless, the inner periphery of the sentence (sentence topic and the margin system) is difficult to accommodate within the framework of the clause, 4and yet occurs, in embedded simple sentences. Furthermore, sentences of other types involving nuclei which combine, balance, oppose, and logically relate clauses, also embed as axes of relator axis sentences and as bases in sentence types. On the other hand, a simple sentence without any periphery may both expound the axis of a relator axis sentence and embed within another sentence. In that ultimately the sentence must be regarded as composed of clauses (as well as lower level strings and morphemes), it is hierarchically strategic to consider that a simple sentence without periphery and which functions within another sentence is simply a clause. It is not, however, incorrect to regard it as a simple sentence which by definition has such a minimal structure?) It would be a gross and confusing error to merge clause and sentence into one level and thu.s mix very different functions and 18) Robert E. Longacre, ‘The notion of sentence’. In: Edward L. Blansitt, Jr., (ed.), The report of the eighteenth annual vound table meet&g on linguistics aud language studies, Georgetown University Press, Washington D.C., 1567, 15-25. 18) Thus in the apparatus of most sentence types we list both independent clause and simple sentence as exponents of bases.

H. E. ELKINS

262

viewpoints. Simplicity requires that we describe separately the structxrc of clauses and the combinations of clauses into larger structures. It would, however, be equally misleading if we failed to recognize certain areas of ambiguity between sentence and clause. Thus, a few sentence patterns of Western Bukidnon Manobo bear a resemblance to certain clause structures, while at the same time these sentence patterns seem to combine clauses in a fashion characteristic of sentences. In such pases, sentence structure is not only a result of the combination of lower level units, but it has restructured and reinterpreted those units for its own purposes. Summer

institute

of Linguistics,

_!f&a.ybala> , Btihidno:n, Philippines.

NasuLi