The Causatives of Malagasy (1986) - Charles Randriamasimanana

Oceanic Linguistics Special Publication No.
21
The Causatives of
Malagasy
Charles Randriamasimanana
University of Hawaii Press

Honolulu
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Randriamasimanana, Charles.
The causatives of Malagasy.
(Oceanic linguistics special publication ; no. 21)

Bibliography: p.
1. Malagasy language—Causative. I. Title.,
II. Series.
PL5373.R36 1986 499'.35 86-16017
ISBN 0-8248-1079-1 (pbk.)
Publication of The Causatives of Malagasy has been supported

in part by grants from The University Publications Sub-Com-
mittee, the Research and Graduate Studies Committee of the
Arts Faculty, and the Research and Graduate Studies Commit-
tee of the English Department, each of the University of Mel-
bourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Camera-ready text copy was prepared using the facilities of the

English Department, University of Melbourne, under the super-
vision of the author.
In loving memory of my father,
my mother and my grandmother
CONTENTS
FOREWORD pages xiii-xiv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xv-xvi
GENERAL INTPODDCTICN 1
CHAPTER CUE: THE CAUSATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS OF MALAGASY 2-201
Introduction 2-7
Section 1: Animacy 7-28
Section 2: Control 29-74
Section 3: Entailment 75-85
Section 4: Productivity 86-128
Section 5: Fusion 129-177
Section 6: Markedness 178-194
Conclusions 195-200
Footnotes 201
CHAPTER TWO: PREVIOUS SCHOLARSHIP ON MALAGASY
CAUSATIVES 202-229
Introduction 202-203
Griffiths 203-205
Parker 205-206
Ferrand 206-208
Malzac 208-210
Dahl 210-213
Rajaona 213-221
Rabenilaina 221-222
Conclusions 222-224
Footnotes 225-229
viii
CHAPTER THREE: KEFLEXIVIZATION 230-323
The Process 231
Scope of Present Study 232
Criteria for Markedness 232-234
Mditional Criterion for Markedness 234-235
Assumption 235-236
Section Is Reflexivization and
Granmatical Relations 236-249
Section 2: Reflexivization and
non-Causative Constructions 249-264

Causative Constructions 265-274

the Cyclic Convention 274-30Ì

Pronominalization 301-320
Conclusions _ 321-323
CHAPTER FOUR: PRCNOMINALIZATIQN 324-417

Section Is The Basic Process 326-386
Human Trigger Assumption 326-343

Summary: Human Trigger and Proncminalization 344-345
Animate But Non-Human Trigger Assumption 345-365
Sunmary: Non-Human, Animate Trigger
and Pronominalization 365-367
Non-Animate Trigger Assumption 367-384

Sunmary: NOn-Animate Trigger
and Pronominalization 384-386

ix
Section 2: Other Relevant Parameters 386-404
The "Precede" Parameter 387-397
The "Command" Parameter 397-403
Forward Pronominalization 404
Backward Pronominalization 404
Section 3: The Cyclic Convention 405-414
Against Simultaneous and Free Order
Rule Applications 405-406
Against Simultaneous Rule Application 406-407
Against Free Order Rule Application 407-409
Ordering of Rules 409-414
Conclusions 414-416
Footnotes 417
CHAPTER FIVE: PASSIVIZATION 418-590
Introduction 418
Section Is The Basic Process 419-493
The Relevant Parameters 420-421
Malagasy Verb Classification 421-429
Distribution of Passive Affixes 429-446
Additional Parameters: Tense and Aspect 446-449
Ihe Semantics of Passive Affixes 450-454
Relevance of the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy 454
Order of the Different Types of Oblique 454-465
Case-marking and the Passive Voice 465-476
Relative Order of the Different Types
of Oblique 477-490
Summary: Relative Order and Properties
of the Obliques 490-493

Section 2 s The Passive and Complex Structures 493-588
Verbal Construction Types
Bgui-1 495-509
Equi-2 509-525
Raising-to-DO 525-539
Raising-to-Su 539-554
Complementizer Fa and Application of
Affixal Passive 554-567

Affixal Passive Contingent upon Underlying Fa 567-568
Causative Constructions
Predicate-Raising Causatives 568-570
Restriction on Affixal Passive 570-572
Affixal Passive and Causal Causatives 572-574
Coniplement-Causatives and Nature of
the Embedded Verb 574-576
Cbmplement-Causative and Verbal Aspect 576-578
The Causative aha and the Nature of
the Predicate in the Embedded Clause 578-580
The Causal Causative aha and Affixal
Passive 580-582
The Causal Causative ank (a) and
Affixal Passive 582-584
General Restriction on Affixal Passive
and the Dichotomy between Predicate-
Raising Causatives and Comp-Causatives 585-586
Summary: the Different Types of
Biibedded Clauses 586
Affixal Passive and the Cycle 587-588
Conclusions 588-590
xi
CHAPTER SIX: ÌHE BI-SENTENTIAL SOURCE OF ALL CAUSATIVE
CONSTRUCTIONS 591-674
Section 1: Bi-Sentential Source 592-639
Co-Occurrence Restrictions on the Verb 592-607
Transportability of Adverb and
Scope Ambiguity 607-623
Do-So Replacement 624-631
Izany-Replacement 631-637
Reflexivization to N£ Tenany and
Pronominalization 637-639
Section 2: Single S Output 640-672
Sentential Question Formation 641-644
Exclamation Formation 644-646
No-Longer Negation 647-649
Izy-Substitution 650-654
Distinction between DO and 10 655-661
Demotion of the Embedded Su to DO 661-669
Passivization 669-672
Conclusion 672-673
Footnotes 674
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 675-676
APPENDIX A: List of Abbreviations 677
APPENDIX B: Classes of Verbs 678-680
BIBLIOGRAPHY 681-683
TABLES
Table 1: The Animacy Parameter 28
Table 2: Control by Causee 74
Table 3: The Entailment Parameter 85
Table 4: The Different types of Embedded Predicates 128
Table 5: The Degree of Fusion of the Higher and
Lower Predicates 176
Table 6: Markedness 194
Table 7: Anaphoric Pronominalization: Human Trigger 344
Table 8: Anaphoric Pronominalization: Non-Human
Animate Trigger 366
Table 9: Anaphoric Pronominalization: Non-Animate
Trigger 385
Table 10: Verb Classes 427
Table 11: Distribution of the Different Verbal
Affixes 449
Table 12: The Different Types of Oblique 491
Table 13: The Order of the Different Types of Oblique 492
Table 14: Types of Clause That Can be Embedded 586
Table 15: Criteria for the Distinction between
DO and 10 661
FOREWORD
Most previous studies on Malagasy syntax have been concerned
primarily with classification of the various surface structures
that occur in Malagasy. These studies have provided a wealth of
invaluable information on Malagasy sentence structure, reflecting
both the strengths and the weaknesses, of this methodology. More
recently, developments in transformational and generative graitmar
have been applied to provide deeper insight into many aspects of
Malagasy sentence structure. Pioneering work in this area has
been carried out by Edward L. Keenan, some of whose relevant
publications are cited in the bibliography to the present work.
Charles Randriamasimanana's study of Malagasy causative con-

s'
structions is the most comprehensive application to date of this
methodology to Malagasy syntax. Charles Randriamasimanana shows
that, although Malagasy causative constructions appear to consist
of a single clause, many of their properties can only be given
insightful analysis if one assumes a level of analysis at which
the causative construction consists of two distinct clauses. In
fact, a Malagasy causative construction requires two distinct
levels of syntactic analysis: one where it is biclausal (account-
ing for the similarities to other complex sentences) and one
where it is monoclausal (accounting for the similarities to other
simple sentences).
This monograph will be Of interest as a detailed illus-
tration of the application of this methodology to an Austronesian
language and for the way in which it uses linguistic argumen-

xiv
tation to evaluate competing analyses. But even linguists whose
interests are less theoretical will find Charles Randriamasima-
nana's study an invaluable source of insight into a wide range of
syntactic phenomena and semantic distinctions in Malagasy gram-
mar.
December 19, 1985
Bernard Comrie
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to express m/ thanks and appreciation to the
following persons and institutions without whose encouragement
and help this book would have never been published in English:
Noam Chomsky and Kenneth Hale, both of MIT, who expressed in many
ways their academic interest in this little known language and
whose help made it possible for me to prepare the final manu-
script for publication; Bernard Comrie, of TJSC, who originally
took the initiative of proposing The Causatives of Malagasy as a
PhD dissertation under the title A Study of the Causative Con-
structions of Malagasy; Edward Keenan, of UCLA, who not only was
generous of his time in discussing most aspects of this study,
but who also, with Elinor Ochs, extended their hospitality to me
upon my first arrival in California and subsequently, provided
guidance and financial support in periods of need.
I would like to express my gratitude to the Publications
Sub-Committee of the University of Melbourne for its generous
publication grant. I am grateful to the Arts Faculty of the Uni-
versity of Melbourne^,for its Research Development Scheme during
1984, 1985 and 1986. I would also like to take this opportunity
to thank the English Department for the research money it granted
me as well as the constant support it gave during the preparation
of the manuscript.
The following native speakers of Malagasy, who happened to
be in the United States, provided me with their grammaticality

xvi
judgments and intuitions, absolutely crucial when iny cwn were
uncertain: B. Andriamanalimanana, L. Koziol nee Randrianarivony,
A. Rabakoarihanta, H. Rahaingoson, J. Rajaofera, R. Rakotomalala,
F-X Ramarosaona, B. Ranaivoarisoa, V. Randrianasolo and his wife,
M. Rasamimanana, H. Rasolondramanitra, V. Razafimahatratra, and
M. Razafimamonjy. It goes without saying that the final decision
was mine so that any error or mistake in the present publication
should not be attributed to any of my consultants.
Several of the sentence types used in this work originated
from personal letters written over a period of several years by
irr/ parents before their death, whereas others were inspired by
two daily newspapers, i.e. Atrika and Vaovao, published in Mada-
gascar and graciously sent to me by the Embassy of the Democratic
Republic of Madagascar in Washington, D.C., in the United States.
Many thanks to John Pater son, who helped me prepare the
final copy of the manuscript, and to Heather Bcwe whose coope-
ration with the final proof-reading was much appreciated.
Last but not least, I would like to pay a special tribute to
my father, Randriamasimanana, my rrother, Denise Rasoamanana, and
my grandnother, Gertrude Rakala, for their encouragements, love,
understanding and sacrifice.
Parkville, Victoria, Australia
January, 1986
GENERAL INTRODOCTION
The present study deals with the Causative Constru-
ctions of Malagasy, showing that all of them have to be derived
from bi-sentential sources. A number of tests will be used to
establish the validity of such a hypothesis. These will include
but will not be restricted to Reflexivization, Pronominalization,
and Passivization, each one of these processes being described in
great detail in Chapters Three, Four, and Five, respectively.
Chapter One presents all the Causative Constructions of
the language and proposes a set of six parameters to account for
all the semantic and syntactic aspects thereof in a systematic
manner: Animacy, Control, Entailment, Productivity, Degree of
Fusion, and Markedness.
Chapter Two provides a rapid review of previous works
touching upon the Malagasy Causatives and written between 1854
and 1974 by the following authors: Griffiths (1854), Parker
(1883), Ferrand (1903), Malzac (1908), Dahl (1951), Rajaona
(1972), and Rabenilaina (1974).
Finally, Chapter Six exploits the findings of all pre-
vious chapters and presents additional evidence to bear on the
issue of the bi-sentential sources of all Causative constru-
ctions.
CHAPTER ONE
THE CAUSATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS OF MALAGASY
0.1 Introduction.
The relevant parameters for an adequate description of
the Causative Constructions of Malagasy.
The purpose of Chapter One is two-fold: first, to in-
troduce all the Causative Constructions of Malagasy, and second,
to propose a set of six factors which will account for all the
semantic and syntactic aspects thereof in a systematic manner.
In fact, the following are the parameters relevant for
a description of the Causative Constructions of this language:
Animacy (Section 1),
Control (Section 2),
Entailment (Section 3),
Productivity of the different Causative predicates
(Section 4),
Degree of fusion of the higher and the lower predicates
(Section 5) ,
Markedness (Section 6).

3
Throughout the present chapter, bi-sentential sources
for all Causative Constructions will be assumed (see Chapter Six
for justification of such a hypothesis).
0.2 The Causative Constructions of Malagasy.
Malagasy has the following types of Causative Con-
structions:
(1)a. Nanao izay handehanan' i Jeanne i Paoly1.
past-do comp fut-circ-go-by Jeanne Paul
"Paul was doing so that Jeanne would leave."
b. Nanao izay hividianan' i Jeanne ny boky i Paoly.
past-do comp fut-circ-buy-by Jeanne the book Paul
"Paul was doing so that the book would be bought by
Jeanne."
(2)a. Nanery an' i Jeanne handeha i Paoly.
past-force Jeanne fut-go Paul
"Paul was forcing Jeanne to leave."
b. Nanery an' i Jeanne hividy ny boky i Paoly.
past-force Jeanne fut-buy the book Paul
"Paul was forcing Jeanne to buy the book."
(3) a. Namela an'i Jeanne handeha i Paoly.
past-let Jeanne fut-go Paul
"Paul was allowing Jeanne to leave."

4
b. Namela an'i Jeanne hividy ny boky i Paoly.
past-let Jeanne fut-buy the book Paul
"Paul was allowing Jeanne to buy the book."
(4)a. N-amp-andeha an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-go Jeanne Paul
"Paul was having Jeanne go."
b. N-aitp-ividy ny boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-buy the book Jeanne Paul
"Paul was having Jeanne buy the book."
(5)a. N-amp-iakanjo an'ilay zaza Rasoa.
past-caus-dress the child Rasoa
"Rasoa was dressing the child."
b. N-amp-idina ny saina i Paoly.
past-cause-lower the flag Paul
"Paul was causing the flag to come down," i.e.
"Paul was lowering the flag."
c. N-amp-ianjera ny latabatra/an1i Jaona i Paoly.
past-caus-fall the table/ John Paul
"Paul was causing the table/Paul to fall."
d. N - aha - sasa ny fitaratra i Paoly.
past-caus-wash the glass Paul
"Paul was causing the glass to be washed," i.e.
"Paul managed to wash the glass."

5
e. N - am -(v)aky ny fitaratra i Paoly.
past-caus-broken the glass Paul
"Paul was breaking the glass."
(6)a. N - aha - resy an'i Jaona i Paoly.
past-caus-be in defeat Jaona Paul
"Paul succeeded in causing John to be in defeat,
i.e. "Paul managed to defeat John."
b. N - aha - vaky ny fitaratra i Paoly.
"Paul caused the glass to be in the broken state
i.e. "Paul managed to break the glass."
(7)a. Ny ditra-ny no n-ampa-voa-kapoka an'i P.
the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-punish P
"It was his mischief which was the cause of P's
having been punished."
b. Ny adala-ny no n-aha-resy an'i P.
the stupidity-his part past-caus-in-defeat P
"It was his stupidity which was the cause of P's
having been defeated."
c. Ny resaka no n-an-dreraka an'i Jeanne,
the talk part past-caus-fed up Jeanne
"It was the talk which fed Jeanne up," or
"Because of the talk, Jeanne was fed up."

6
d. Ny sakafo no n-ank-arary an'i Jeanne,
the food part past-caus-sick Jeanne
"It was the food which sickened Jeanne," i.e.
"It was the food which caused Jeanne to be sick."
In ( 1 ) w e have the "persuasive" construction; in (2), the "co-
ercive"; in (3), the "permissive"; and in (4), the "neutral" Dir-
ective respectively. These first four subtypes represent what
will be referred to as Directive. In (5), we have the Manipula-
tive; in (6), the Abilitative; and in (7), the Causal constru-
ctions. With these it is usual to cleft on the Subject (hence-
forth Su) NP, as illustrated under 2.2.4 to 2.2.7 of Chapter
Five, for example; now, if Clefting does not occur, a special
intonation has to be used with a pause demarcating the non-front-
ed Su from the rest of the sentence. Finally, (7)c. with Causal

3
an(a) tends to acquire a Manipulative reading. (See 6.1.9)
The following are examples similar to those referred to
above, showing that Clefting is optional:
(8)a. N - ampa - sosotra an'i Paoly io.
past-caus-angry Paul this
"Paul was angry because of this," or
"This angered Paul."
b. Io no n - ampa - sosotra an'i Paoly.
this part past-caus-angry Paul
"It was because of this that Paul was angry," or
"Because of this, Paul was angry."

7
(9) a. N - aha - voakapoka an'i Paoly ny ditra-ny.
past-caus-passive-strike Paul the mischief-his
"Paul was punished because of his mischief."
b. Ny ditra-ny no n - aha - voa - kapoka an'i Paoly.
the mishief part past-caus-passive-strike Paul
"It was because of his mischief that Paul was
punished."
In (8)a. and (9)a., Clefting has not applied, and a special in-
tonation is needed, whereas in (8)b. and (9)b., Clefting has
applied.
Section 1
Animacy
1.0 The Animacy Parameter.
In Section 1, assuming bi-sentential sources for all
Causative Constructions and if the Su of the matrix clause is
referred to as the Causer and that of the embedded clause as the
Causee, both in the underlying sequence, the Animacy parameter
yields the following pattern:
1. if ws have a Directive or Manipulative construction,
then the Causer is Animate;
2. if we have a Causal construction, the Causer is not
Animate;
3. but if we have an Abilitative construction, the
Causer is optionally Animate.

8
Furthermore,
4. in a Directive construction, the Causee is also Animate;
5. in a Manipulative construction, the Causee is typically non-
Animate;
6. in an Abilitative construction, the Causee is optionally
Animate;
7. in a Causal construction, the Causee is typically Animate and
under aha or ampa, the latter is obligatorily deleted while the
Causer is typically non-Animate.
1.0.1 Criteria for Each Type of Construction.
As will be seen in Sections 4 and 5, the classification
into four different types of Causatives for those constructions
where fusion takes place (see Section 5) correlates with the fol-
lowing characteristics of each:
1. A Causal construction is one where the Causative
prefix, i.e. ampa, aha, ana, or anka, meets one of the following
requirements:
a. if (See Section 4) it can entoed a transitive verb,
the latter must be in the Affixal Passive form with the perfect-
ive aspect marker voa;
b. if it can embed an intransitive verb, the latter
must be in the Affixal Passive form with the perfective aspect
marker tafa, unless it is a Psychological predicate (see 1.5);
c. if it can embed a root passive or an adjective, the
latter must be a Psyctological predicate (see 1.5).
2. An Abilitative construction is one where the lower
predicate can be either a Psychological or a non-Psychological
predicate and where the sequence with the lower predicate strip-
9
ped of its higher Causative predicate has the same cognitive
meaning as the sequence without the Causative predicate (see
2.2.2.4).
3. A Manipulative construction is one where Clause-
Union can precede Affixal Passive (see 4.1.13).
4. A "neutral" Directive construction is one which is
not subject to any of the above restrictions.
1.1 Hie Causative Prefix Amp (a).
The Causative prefix amp (a) can enter into three types
of constructions:
- "neutral" Directive, when both the higher and the lower Sus are
Animate;
- Manipulative, if only the higher Su is Animate, but not the
lower Su;
- Causal, if the higher Su is not Animate.
1.1.1 The Directive Causative Amp(a).
In the following examples, amp (a) has the Directive
reading:
(10)a. N - amp - andidy ny mofo an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-cut the bread Jeanne Paul
"Paul was having Jeanne cut the bread."
b. N - anp - andidy ny mofo {an'azy/*an'ilay izy} izy.
past-caus-cut the bread him/her *it he/she
"He/she was having him/her/*it cut the bread."

10
c. ?*N - anp - andidi - n' i Paoly an'i Jeanne ny nrofo.
past-caus-cut-pass-by Paul Jeanne the bread
(intended reading)
"Paul was having the bread cut by Jeanne."
(11)a. N - anp - itsangana an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-stand-up Jeanne Paul
"Paul was having Jeanne stand up."
b. N - amp - itsangana {an'azy/*an'ilay izy} izy.
past-caus-stand-up him/her *it he/she
"He/she was having him stand up."
c. *N - anp - itsangana-n' i Paoly i Jeanne.
past-caus-stand-up-pass-by Paul Jeanne
"Paul was having Jeanne stand up."
The ungrammatically of the relevant portion of (10 )b. and (11) b.
shews that the underlying Su of the lower clause is indeed Ani-
mate since izy/azy refers to an Animate in Pronominalization (see
details in Chapter Four). (10)c. is marginally grammatical, which
suggests that we only have tendencies and not absolutes. (11)c.
could be gramnatical but with a different meaning, i.e. "Paul
stood Jeanne up."
1.1.2 The Manipulative Causative Amp (a).
In the following examples, anp (a) has the ffcnipulative
reading:
11
(12)a. N - anp -idina ny saina i Paoly.
past-oaus-go-down the flag Paul
b. N - amp - idina {an'ilay izy/*an'azy} izy.
past-caus-go-dcwn it/*prep him/her he/she
"Paul was lowering it/*him/*her."
c. N - amp - idini - n' 1 Paoly ny saina.
past-caus-go-down-pass-by Paul the flag
"The flag was being lowered by Paul."
d. N - anp - iakanjo an'ilay zaza Rasoa.
past-caus-dress that child Rasoa
"Rasoa was dressing the child."
e. N - anp - iakanjo - n -dRasoa ilay zaza.
past-caus-dress-pass-by-Rasoa that child
"the child was being dressed by Rasoa."
f. N - aitp - ianjera ny latabatra i Paoly.
past-caus-fall the table Paul
"Paul was causing the table to fall," i.e.
"Paul made the table fall."
g. *N - anp - ianjera - n'i Paoly ny latabatra.
past-caus-fall-pass-by Paul the table
(intended reading)
"The table was made to fall by Paul."

12
The lower Su is not Animate in (12)a., (12)b., and (12)c., judg-
ing from the ungrammaticality of the sequence after the substit-
ution with azy "him/her," as in (12)b. But the higher Su is in-
deed Animate since it can be replaced with izy "he/she," as shown
in (12)b. Furthermore, in (12)a., (12)b., (12)c., (12)d., and
(12)e., Affixal Passive with ...(i)n(a) can apply after Clause-
Onion in contrast to (12)d., where Affixal Passive has not ap-
plied and as a result, the sequence lends itself to an ambiguous
interpretation as either a Manipulative or a "neutral" Directive
Causative; in (12)e., where the lower verb is a non-Psychological
predicate and Affixal Passive has applied, the output is grammat-
ical and can only be assigned a Manipulative reading, while in
(12)f., which has a Psychological predicate in the lower clause,
the resulting sequence, as shown in (12)g., is ungrairmatical.
Likewise, in (12)c., the lower verb is not a Psychological pred-
icate and Affixal Passive after Clause-Union yields a grammatical
output with an unambiguous interpretation, i.e that of a Manipul-
ative Causative. Finally, in (12)a., we have a case of "control-
led" Manipulation, as opposed to the "ballistic" type of Manipul-
ation found in (12)f: in the first instance, causation remains
effective throughout the entire phase, whereas in the second,
causation provides only the initial impulse. The terminology is
borrowed from Shibatani (1973).
1.1.3 The Causal Causative Amp(a).
Amp(a) has the Causal reading in the following senten-
ces, where Fronting of Su with insertion of the particle no has
applied. Typically, the embedded predicate is one where the
Causee retains no Control.

13
(13)a. Ny eritreri-ny no n - anp - ijaly an'i Jeanne,
the mind-her part past-caus-suffer Jeanne
"It was because of her mind that Jeanne suffers."
b. {llay izy/*lzy} no n-anp-ijaly {an'azy/*an'ilay izy}.
it/*he/*she him/her/*it
"It was because of *him/*her/it that Jeanne suffers."
(14) a. Ny orana no n-anp-ianjera ny trano.
the rain part past-caus-fall the house
"It was because of the rain that the house fell."
b. {llay izy/*izy} no n-anp-ianjera {an'ilay izy/*azy}.
it *he/*she it/*him/*her
"It was because of it that it fell."
The grammaticality pattern emerging from (13) and (14) suggests
that the higher Su is always non-Animate, as evidenced by the
distribution of different forms of pronouns, whereas the lower Su
can be Animate, as in (13), or non-Animate, as in (14). As will
be seen in Section 3, there is Entailment of the lower clause in
both (13) and (14).
1.2 The Causative Prefix Aha.
Aha can show up in two types of constructions:
- Abilitative, when both the higher and the lower Sus are option-
ally Animate, i.e. both the higher and the lower Sus are Animate,
only the higher Su is, both the higher and the lower Sus are non-
Animate, and only the lower Su is Animate;

14
- Causal, when the higher Su is not Animate.
1.2.1 the Abilitative Causative Aha.
Four cases exist in the Abilitative reading of aha
depending cm the Animacy of the Causer and the Causee and given
all theoretical possibilities:
- Both the higher and the lower Sus are Animate, as in
(15)a. N - aha - zaka an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-carried Jeanne Paul
(zaka "(be) carried" is a root passive)
"Paul managed to carry Jeanne."
b. Zaka-n' i Paoly i Jeanne.
carried-by Paul Jeanne
- Only the higher Su is Animate, as in
(16)a. N - aha - loka ny varavarana i Paoly.
past-caus-with-hole the door Paul
(loka "(be) with a hole" is a root passive)
"Paul managed to make a hole in the door."
b. Loka-n' i Paoly ny varavarana.
with-hole-by Paul the door
"Paul managed to make a hole in the door."

15
V
- Both the higher and the lower Sus are not Animate, as in
(17) a. N - aha - zaka ny entana ny nozana.
past-caus-carried the luggage the scale
"The scale could lift the luggage."
b. Zaka-n1 ny mozana ny entana.
carried-by the scale the luggage
"The scale could lift the luggage."
- Only the lower Su is Animate, as in
(18)a. N - aha - zaka an'i Jeanne ny nozana.
past-caus-carried Jeanne the scale
"The scale was able to support Jeanne."
b. Zaka-n1 ny nozana i Jeanne.
carried-by the scale Jeanne
"The scale was able to support Jeanne."
In all of the above sentences, the a. and b. sequences have the

same cognitive meaning.
1.2.2 The Causal Causative Aha.
In the Causal reading, the higher Su is typically not
Animate:
- but if the lower Su is Animate, then we have a Psychological
predicate:
16
(19)a. N - aha - variana an'i Paoly ny raharaha.
past-caus-be-absorbed Paul the affair
"The affair absorbed Paul."
b. Variana i Paoly tamin' ny raharaha.
absorbed Paul because-of the affair
"Paul was absorbed because of the affair."
- If the lower Su is not Animate, then we have a non-Psycho-
logical predicate:
(20) Ny rivotra no n- aha - vaky ny fitaratra.
the wind part past-caus-broken the glass
"The glass got broken because of the wind."
- It is also possible for the lower Su to be Animate, with a non-
Psychological predicate in the perfective aspect involving voa or
tafa:
(21)a. Ny ditrany no n-aha-voa-kapoka an'i Paoly.
the mischief part past-caus-strike Paul
"It was because of his mischief that Paul was
punished."
b. Ny adalany no n-aha-tafa-janona an'i Paoly.
the stupidity-his part past-caus-stay Paul
"It was because of his stupidity that Paul was left
behind."
17
1.3 The Causative Prefix An (a).
The Causative prefix an(a) can enter into two different
types of constructions:
- Manipulative, when the higher Su is Animate; however, it is al-
so possible to marginally have the Manipulative reading even if
the lower Su is Animate, as in (23) below.
- Causal, when the higher Su is not Animate.
1.3.1 The Manipulative Causative An(a).

Typically, in the Manipulative reading of an (a), the
higher Su is Animate and the lower Su, not Animate (however, see
sentence (5)a.):
(22) N - am - (v)aky ny fitaratra i Paoly.
(vaky "(be) broken" is a root passive)
"Paul was doing so that the glass be-broken," i.e.
However, it is possible to have the higher and the lower Sus
Animate although this appears to be marginal:
(23) ?I Jeanne no n-an-dreraka an'i Paoly.
Jeanne part past-caus-fed-up Paul
(reraka "(be) fed up" is an adjective)
"It was because of Jeanne that Paul was fed up."
In its Manipulative reading, (23) is acceptable, although this-
characterizes a very familiar style.

18
1.3.2 Bie Causal Causative An (a).
When the higher Su is not Animate:

- then, if the lower Su is Animate, we have a Causal reading with
a lower Psychological predicate, as in
(24) Hay resaka no n-an-dreraka an'i Paoly.
that talk part past-caus-fed-up Paul
"It was because of the talk that Paul was fed up."
- But, if the lower Su is not Animate, then we have a Causal
reading with a lower predicate which is not Psychological, as in
(25) Ilay vato no n-am-(v)aky ny fitaratra.
that stone part past-caus-broken the glass
"It was because of the stone that the glass got
broken."
1.4 The Causative Prefix Ank(a).
The Causative prefix ank(a) can enter into three dif-
ferent types of constructions:
- Manipulative, as in (116)a. and (116)b.;
- Abilitative, when the higher Su is optionally Animate;
- Causal when the higher Su is not Animate.
1.4.1 The Abilitative/Causal Ank(a).
When the higher Su is optionally Animate, we have the
Abilitative reading, as in (26), whereas when it is not Animate,
we have the Causal reading, as in (27). Thus:

19
(26)a. N - ank - arenin-tsofina i Paoly.
past-caus-be-deaf-of-ear Paul
((h)arenina "(will be) deaf" is an adjective)
"Paul made a deafening noise."
b. I Paoly no n-ank-arenin-tsofina.
Paul part past-caus-deaf-of-ear
"It was Paul who made a deafening noise."
(27)a. Hay sakafo no n-ank-arary an'i Paoly.
that food part past-caus-sick Paul
((h)arary "(will be) sick" is an adjective)
"The food sickened Paul," i.e.
"It was because of the food that Paul got sick."
b. Ilay sakafo no n-ank-arary ny vavoni-ny.
that food part past-caus-sick the stomach-his
"It was the food which upset his stomach."
(28)a. *I Jeanne no n-ank-arary an'i Paoly.
Jeanne part past-caus-sick Paul
*"Jeanne was the cause of Paul's being sick."
b. ?*I Jeanne no n-ank-arary ny vavoni-ny.
Jeanne part past-caus-sick the stomach-his
"It was Jeanne who upset his stomach."
In (28), the higher Su is Animate, and in the Causal reading, the
sequences are of very doubtful grammaticality.

20
1.5 The Causative Constructions and Animacy.
All the Causative prefixes, i.e. amp (a), aha, an (a),
and ank(a), can have the Causal reading whose main characteristic
is that the higher Su is not Animate, as illustrated in the pre-
ceding paragraphs. Furthermore, Causal constructions share one
comn»n feature in that they comprise either a Psychological pred-
icate or an Affixal Passive with voa/tafa in the lower clause.
The following segment of this chapter will provide five
criteria for distinguishing between a Psychological and a non-
Psychological predicate. With the former:
1. the embedded predicate must take an Animate Su;
2. the eirbedded Su is not an Agent;
3. Clause-Union cannot precede Affixal Passive;
4. Clause-Union and Affixal Passive cannot co-occur;
5. a Psychological predicate cannot take an Agent in
the genitive case.
1.5.1 Psychological Predicates and Animacy.
Typically, with a Psychological predicate, the embedded
Su of the underlying representation is Animate, as opposed to the
Manipulative reading, where it is not Animate:
(29) a. N - am - (v)aky ny kitay i Paoly.
past-caus-broken the wood Paul
"Paul was chopping the wood."
b. *N - am- (v)aky an'i Jaona i Paoly.
past-caus-broken John Paul
"Paul was chopping John."

21
(30)a. N - an - (t)afitohina an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-be-upset Jeanne Paul
(tafitohina "(be) upset" is an adjective)
"Paul was causing Jeanne to be upset."
b. *N - an - (t)afitohina ny sai-n' i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-be-upset the mind-of Jeanne Paul
*"Paul was causing Jeanne's mind to be upset."
In (29), the underlying enbedded Su mist be non-Animate since the
sentence (29) b. with an Animate Su yields an irretrievably un-
granmatical sequence. This is the Manipulative reading. On the
other hand, in (30)a., the lower Su must be animate, as can be
inferred from the grammaticality pattern eiterging from the pair
(30)a. and (30)b. In (30)b., therefore, we have a Psychological
predicate in the lower clause.
1.5.2 Criteria for Agency.
With the Causal reading, the enbedded Su is not an
Agent. For an NP to be an Agent, it must satisfy the following
conditions:
1. it can be used to answer the question:
Nanao inona i NP?
past-do what deic NP
"What was NP doing ?"
2. it can enter into combination with the adverbial
expression fanahy iniana "deliberately";

22
3. its predicate must be able to form an Affixal Pas-
sive with the no...ina form (See Chapter Five on Passivization);
4. it can enter into combination with the expression
amin'izay denoting a purpose;
5. it yields a grammatical sequence with the progress-
ive aspect marker eo amp... followed by a verb in the circumstan-
tial voice; and
6. it can show up in a sequence comprising an Instru-
ment NP
Thus, in:
(31)a. Tbfoka i Jeanne.
fed-up Jeanne
"Jeanne is/was fed up."
i Jeanne is not an Agent since it does not have any of the prop-
erties listed:
b. Nanao inona i Jeanne?
past-do what Jeanne
"What was Jeanne doing ?"
*T»foka (izy).
fed-up (he/she)
"(He/she was) fed up.11
c. *Fanahy inian' i Jeanne ny tofoka.
soul willed-by Jeanne carp fed-up
*"Jeanne deliberately was fed up."

23
d. *No - tofòh - in1 i Paoly i J(eanne).
passive-fed-up-by Paul J(eanne)
*"J was caused to be fed up by Paul."
e. *Tofoka i J amin'izay voa-karakara ny enta-ny.
fed-up J in-order pass-take-care-of the luggage-her
?*"J was fed up for her luggage to be-taken care of."
f. *T-eo anp-i-tofoh-ina i J no tonga i P.
past prcgr-circ-fed-up J part arrived P
*"J was in the process of being fed up when P arrived."
g. *Tt>foka t-amin' ilay boky i J.
fed-up past-instr that book J
*"J was fed up by using the book."
By contrast, in a non-Psychological State predicate
like vaky "being in the state of having been smashed," it is
possible to have the following sequences:
(31')a. Vaky ny fitaratra.
broken the glass
"The glass is broken."
b. N - am - (v)aky ny fitaratra i Paoly.
"Paul was causing the glass to be broken," i.e.

24
c. Nanao inona i Paoly?

past-do what Paul
"What was Paul doing ?"
d. Fanahy inian' i P ny namaky
soul willed-by P comp past-caus-broken
ny fitaratra.
the glass
"Paul was deliberately smashing the glass."
e. No - vaki - n' i Paoly ny fitaratra.

pass-broken-by Paul the glass
"The glass was being smashed by Paul."
f. No - vaki - n 'i Paoly ny fitaratra

past-broken-by Paul the glass
amin'izay ho tafa-voaka izy.

in-order fut pass-exit he/she
"Paul was smashing the window so as to exit."
g. T-eo ampamakiana ny fitaratra i Paoly

past progr-cire-break the glass Paul
no tonga i Jaona.
part arrived John
"Paul was in the process of breaking the glass when
John arrived."
25
1.5.3 Distinction between Psychological and non-Psychological
Predicates: Clause-Union preceding Passivization.
With a Psychological predicate, it is not possible to
have a Clause-Union preceding Affixal Passive, whereas this is a
possibility with a non-Psychological predicate (See (12) c.):
(32)a. N - amp - isafoaka an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-angry Jeanne Paul
b. *N - amp - isafoaka-n' i Paoly i Jeanne,
past-caus-angry-passive-by Paul Jeanne
(interpretation for both a. and b.)
"Paul was causing Jeanne to get angry."
(33)a. N - anp - ieritreritra an'i Paoly ilay olona.
past-caus-think Paul the person
b. *N - amp - ieritrereti-n' ilay olona i Paoly.
past-caus-think-passive-by the person Paul
"The person was arousing suspicions in Paul's mind."
In (32), where Clause-Union precedes Affixal Passive, we have the
Manipulative reading of amp(a) in a.^, whereas the b. sentence
remains ungramraatical. Likewise, in (33)a., which does not allow
Clause-Union to precede Affixal Passive in the intended reading,
amp(a) has the Causal interpretation. Hcwever, (33)b. becomes
grammatical with the meaning "The person gave Paul a choice
between an unspecified nunfoer of alternatives," where the other
person is in a position of Control over Paul.

26
1.5.4 Distinction between Psychological and non-Psycholo-
gical: Possibility of Clause-Union and Passivization.
have Clause-Union and Affixal Passive, whereas this is possible
with a non-Psychological predicate:
(34)a. N - an - (t)afitohina an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-upset Jeanne Paul
"Paul upset Jeanne," or
"Jeanne was upset because of Paul."
b. *No - tafitohi - n'i Paoly i Jeanne,
passive-upset-by Paul Jeanne
(no interpretation whatsoever)
(35) a. N - am - (v) aky ny fitaratra i Paoly.
b. No - vaki - n ' i Paoly ny fitaratra.
pass-broken-by Paul the glass
"The glass was being deliberately broken by Paul," or
In (34)a., we have a Psychological predicate, hence the ungram-
maticality of Affixal Passive, as seen in (34)b. On the other
hand, (35)a. comprises a non-Psychological predicate and (35) b.,
where Affixal Passive has applied, is graiimatical.

27
1.5.5 Another Criterion: Possibility of Expressing the Agent.
express the Agent in the genitive case, whereas this is possible
with a non-Psychological predicate:
(36) a. Vaky ny fitaratra.
broken the glass
(same as (31')a-)
"The glass is/was in the state of having been broken."
b. Vaki-n'i Paoly ny fitaratra.
broken-by Paul the glass
"The glass is/was broken by Paul."
(37) a. Tafitohina i Paoly.
upset Paul
"Paul is/was upset."
b. *Tafitohin'i Jeanne i Paoly.
upset-by Jeanne Paul
"Paul is/was upset by Jeanne."
In (37)a., we have a Psychological predicate and therefore, it is
not possible to have the sequence in (37) b. with the Agent in the
genitive case: the latter is irretrievably ungranmatical. By con-
trast, in (36)a., the predicate is a non-Psychological m e and
the sentence in (36) b., with the Agent in the genitive case, is
perfectly grammatical. i
28
1.5.6 Summary: Animacy.
Hie first parameter dealt with in this section, i.e.
Animacy distinguishes between four types of Causative constru-
ctions whose features are reported on Table 1.
Table 1
The Animacy Parameter
Underlyingly
Higher Su Lower Su
"Neutral" Directive [+Animate] [H-Animate]
Manipulative [+Animate] [+/- Animate]
Abilitative [+/- Animate] [+/- Animate]
Causal [-Animate] [+Animate]
Note: Higher Su = CAUSER;
Lower Su = CAUSEE;
+ = Positive;
- = Negative ;
+/- = Optional.
29
Section 2
Control
2.0.1 The Control Parameter.
This Section will consider the Control parameter, which
expresses the degree of Control exercised by the Causee and which
is based on:
- the nature of the embedded predicate, i.e. Aether it refers to
an Activity or a State, as is made evident by the voice and as-
pect marker used or that can be used with the root of the lower
predicate;
- as well as the presence or absence of Intent, as shewn by the
compatibility or incompatibility with certain adverbial nodif-
ications.
The distinction drawn under 1.5 between Psychological
and non-Psychological predicates, along with the findings made in
Section 1 with respect to the Animacy parameter, will be assumed
since there are sentences like "Mati-n'i Jaona i Paoly (Dead-by
John Paul)", i.e. "Paul was dead as a result of John's doing,"
where i Jaona "John," a human, hence Animate, is assumed to be an
Agent. This contrasts with exanples like "Mati-n'ny hanoanana i
Paoly (literally "dead because of hunger Paul)," i.e. "Paul died
of hunger," where ny hanoanana "the hunger," is non-Animate, and
therefore, is not assumed to be an Agent in the genitive case.
Finally, note that although Affixal Passive in the non-
perfective aspect typically encodes Control, as opposed to Root
Passives, which usually do not, there exist a nunber of excep-
tions, of which lasa "(be) gone" is one.

30
2.0.2 Interaction of Causative Constructions with Mverbial
Modification.
All the Directive and the Manipulative constructions:
interact with the active or circumstantial voices or the Affixal
Passive forms no...ina and a-, all of which denote an Activity
and are compatible with the modifier fanahy inian'i NP (ny)
"soul-willed," i.e. "deliberately," but not with tsy satry (not
preferred) "not willingly, accidentally."
All the Causal constructions interact with a Psycho-
logical predicate, whether the latter is a root passive or an
adjective, which denotes a State. All of them are conpatible with
tsy satry "accidentally," but not with fanahy inian'i NP (ny)
"deliberately."
Falling between these two extremes, the Affixal Passive
forms voa and tafa, on the one hand, béhave as though they were
Activity predicates since initially their agent is expressed but
must be deleted under a Causal predicate; yet, en the other hand,
they behave like Stative predicates, i.e. the union of the set of
Psychological predicates with Animate Causees (for example (19) a)
and that set of predicates which can have an Animate or non-Ani-
mate Causee (for example (17)a.), which does not involve Psycho-
logical predicates or predicates which refer to, or can refer to,
an Activity. In fact, these Stative predicates are not compatible
with fanahy inian (ny) "deliberately," but are conpatible with
tsy satry "accidentally."
2.1.0 The Causative Constructions and Intent.
In this Subsection, it will be shown:

31
1. that the "persuasive," the "coercive," the "per-
missive," and the "neutral" Directive constructions with amp(a)
and an (a) allow voice and aspectual forms of the lower predicate,
i.e. active, circumstantial, and no...ina or a Affixal Passive
forms, which refer to a Deliberate Activity;
2. that the Causal constructions with aha and amp (a)
allow, in the lower clause, voice and aspectual forms, i.e. voa/-
tafa, which correlate with an Activity turned into a State but
which is not Intentional, as in the case of a Psychological pred-
icate. They also allow a root passive or an adjective in the low-
er clause in the case of a Psychological predicate;
3. falling between these two, lies an intermediate zone
represented by the Abilitative aha construction which not only
a. allows a root passive or an adjective in the enbed-
ded clause, but
b. which also allows substitution of the Abilitative
aha predicate by the Affixal Passive form no...ina and a, both of
which correlate with Deliberate Activity.
2.1.1 The "Persuasive" Directive Construction.
In the "persuasive" Directive construction, the em-
bedded predicate must be in the circumstantial voice. Further-
more, it cannot be a Stative predicate (however, see 6.2.7 to
6.2.9).
(38)a. Nanao [izay h-an-didi-an'i J(eanne) ny mofo] i P(aoly).
did oomp fut-circ-cut J(eanne) the bread P(aul)
"P(aul) was doing so that the bread would be cut by
J (eanne)."
32
b. H-andidy ny itofo i J(eanne).
fut-cut the bread J(eanne)
"J(eanne) will be cutting the bread."
c. *Nanao [izay h-andidy ny irofo (an)i J(eanne)] i P(aoly)
did camp fat-cut the bread J(eanne) P(aul)
d. No - didi - n' i J(eanne) ny irofo.
pass-cut-by J(eanne) the bread
"The bread was being cut by J(eanne)."
e. *Nanao [izay no-didi-n'i J (eanne) ny riDfo] i P(aoly).
did coup pass-cut-by J (eanne) the bread P(aul)
(only intended reading)
*"P was doing so that the bread was being cut by J."
(39)a. Nanao [izay h-an-defa-s-an'i J ny entana] i P.
did cortp fut-circ-send-by J the luggage P
"P was doing so that the luggage would be sent by J."
b. Ho a-lefa - n' i J(eanne) ny entana.
fut pass-send-by J(eanne) the luggage
"The luggage will be sent by J(eanne)."
c. *Nanao [izay ho a-lefa-n' i J ny entana] i P.
did coirp fut pass-send-by J the luggage P
(oily intended reading)
"P was doing so that the luggage would be sent by J."

33
(40)a. Voa - didi - n' i Jeanne ny iiDfo.
pass - cut - by Jeanne the bread
"The bread has been cut by Jeanne."
b. *Nanao [izay voa-didi-n'i Jeanne ny mofo] i Paoly.
did comp pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread Paul
*"Paul was doing so that the bread has been cut by
Jeanne."
(41)a. Tafa - petraka i Jeanne,
pass - sit Jeanne
"Jeanne found herself sitting."
b. *Nanao [izay tafa-petraka i Jeanne] i Paoly.
did comp pass-sit Jeanne Paul
(cnly intended reading)
"Paul was doing so that Jeanne found herself sitting."
(42)a. Lasa i Jeanne,
gone Jeanne
(lasa "(be) gone" is a root passive)
"Jeanne is/was gone."
b. *Nanao [izay lasa i Jeanne] i Paoly.
did comp gone Jeanne Paul
"Paul was doing so that Jeanne was gone."

34
(43)a. Reraka i Jeanne.
tired Jeanne
"Jeanne is/Was tired."
b. *Nanao [izay reraka i Jeanne] i Paoly.
did camp tired Jeanne Paul
(oily intended reading)
"Paul was doing so that Jeanne got tired."
The graimaticality of (38)a. and (39)a., where the enbedded verb
is in the circumstantial voice, shows that the latter can be in
the circumstantial voice. The ungranmaticality of (38) c., where
the enbedded verb is in the active voice, indicates that the
latter cannot be in the active voice; insertion of the prepos-
ition an in front of the lower Su does not improve its grammat-
icality. The ungranmaticality of (38)e. with the Affixal Passive
form no...ina in the imperfective aspect and that of (39)c. with
the Affixal Passive form a, also in the imperfective aspect, sug-
gests that the enbedded clause cannot take any Affixal Passive
form in the imperfective aspect. The ungranmaticality of (40)b.
with the perfective aspect-marker voa and that of (41)b. with the
perfective aspect-marker tafa (see Chapter Five: 1.0 for further
details) shew that the enbedded predicate cannot be an Affixal
Passive form with a perfective aspect. Finally, the ungranmat-
icality of (42)b. with a root passive and (43) b. with an adject-
ive demonstrates that a root passive or an adjective are ruled
out in the embedded clause of the "persuasive" Directive.
From (38) to (43), we have all the different possibil-
ities that can occur and since only a verb in the circumstantial
35
voice is allowed in the embedded clause, it follows that the
latter is obligatory.
2.1.2 The "Coercive" or "Permissive" Directive Constructions.

In the "coercive" or "permissive" Directive constru-
ctions, the enbedded predicate must be either in the active or in
the affixal Passive with no.. .ina or a. It cannot be a Stative
predicate.
(44)a. Nanery/Namela an'i J hanasa an' i P i K.
past-force/past-let J fut-wash P K
"K was forcing/allowing J to wash P."
b. H -an -(s)asa - n' i J an'i P ny savony.
fut-circ-wash-by J P the soap
"The soap is being used by J to wash p."
c. *Nanery / Nàmsla an'i J hanasa-ny
past-force/past-let j fut-wash-pass-by-her
an'i P ny savony i K.
P the soap K
"K was forcing/letting P be washed with the soap
by J."
d. Nanery / Namela an'i P ho-sasa-n' i J i K.
past-force/past-let P pass^wash-tay J K
"K was forcing/allowing P to be washed by J."

36
(45) a. Bo a-lefa any T(amatave) iP(aoly).
fut pass-send to T(amatave) P(aul)
"P will be sent to T."
b. Nanery/Namela an'i P ho a-lefa any T i J.
past-force/past-let P fut pass-send there T J
"J was forcing/allowing P to be sent to T," or
"J forced/let P (to) be sent to T."
(46)a. Ho voa - sasa - n' i J i P.
fut pass - wash - by J P
"P will have been washed by J."
b. *Nanery/*Namela an' i P ho voa-sasa-n' i J i K.
past-forced/past-let P fut pass^wash-by J K
*"K was forcing/allowing P to have been washed by J."
(47)a. Nanery/Namela an'i J h-ipetraka i P.
past-force/past-let J fiat-sit p
"P was forcing/allowing J to sit."
b. Tafa-petraka i J(eanne).
pass-sit J
"J found herself sitting."
c. *Nanery/Nanela an'i J ho tafa-petraka i P.
past-force/past-let J fut pass-sit P
*"P was forcing/allowing J to find herself sitting."

37
lasa
(48) a. i J(eanne).
fut gone J(eanne)
"J will be gone."
b. *Nanery/Namela an'i J ho lasa i P.
past-forced/past-let J fat gone P
?*"P was forcing/allowing J to be gone."
(49) a. Matahotra iJ(éanne).

pres-afraid J(eanne)
"J is afraid."
b. *Nanery/Nairela an'i J ho matahotra i P.
past-force/past-let J fut pres-afraid P
*"P was forcing/allowing J to be afraid."
In (44) a. and (44)d., the enbedded verb is in the active voice
and the Affixal Passive no.. .ina, respectively; both are gram-
matical. By contrast, in (44) c., where the lower clause has its
verb in the circumstantial voice, the output is ungramraatical
despite the fact that the lcwer clause on its own, as shown in
(44)b., is perfectly granmatical. (45) illustrates the case where
the enbedded predicate has the Affixal Passive form with a. When
the lower predicate has the perfective aspect marker voa or tafa,
the output is ungrammatical, as shown in (46) b. and (47)c. In
(48), we have a root passive and, in (49), an adjective: the
ungranmaticality of their b. sequences suggests that the lower
clause cannot comprise a Stative predicate. From all this, it

38
follows that the active voice or the imperfective aspect Affixal
Passive with no.«.ina or a is mandatory (see 1.1.2 for the dif-
ference between no...ina and a).
2.1.3 The "Neutral" Directive Construction.
In the "neutral" Directive construction, the embedded
predicate must be in the active voice since it transpires that
none of the other voice possibilities yield granmatical sequen-
ces. Furthermore, a Stative predicate or a root passive is ruled
out, as is made evident by the grammaticality pattern of the sen-
tences below.
(50)a. N - anp - andidy ny mofo an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
b. H-andidy ny mofo i Jeanne,
fut- cut the bread Jeanne
"Jeanne will be cutting the bread."
c. No - didi - n' i Jeanne ny mofo.
pass - cut - by Jeanne the bread
"The bread was being cut by Jeanne."
d. *N - ampa - no - didi - n' i Jeanne ny mofo i Paoly
past-caus-pass - cut - by Jeanne the bread Paul
(only intended interpretation)

39
(51) a. N - anp - andefa ny entana an'i J (eanne) i P(aoly).

past-caus-send the luggage J(eanne) P(aul)
(note that the enbedded verb is in the active voice)
"P (aul) was having J (eanne) send the luggage."
b. H-andefa ny entana i J (eanne).
fut-send the luggage J(eanne)

"J(eanne) will be sending the luggage."
c. Ho a-lefa-n' i J (eanne) ny entana.
fut pass-send-by J (eanne) the luggage
(note the embedded verb in the passive
voice with a, non-perfective aspect-marker
"ballistic" interpretation in d. below)
"The luggage will be sent by J(eanne)."
d. *N - ampa- (ho) - a-lefa-n' i J ny entana i P.
past-caus-(fut)-pass-send-by J the luggage P
"P was having the luggage sent by J."
(52)a. H - anp - anasa an'i Jaona an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
fut-caus-wash John Jeanne Paul
"Paul will be having Jeanne wash John."
b. H - anasa an'i Jaona i Jeanne.
fut-wash John Jeanne
"Jeanne will be waging John."

40
c. Voa - sasa - n'i Jeanne i Jaona.
passive-wash-by Jeanne John
"John has been washed by Jeanne."
d. *N - ampa - voa -sasa-n'i Jeanne i Jaona i Paoly.
past-caus-pass-wash-by Jeanne John Paul
*"Paul was having John have been washed by Jeanne."
53)a. N - anp - i- petraka an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-prf-sit down Jeanne
"Paul was having Jeanne sit down."
b. H - i- petraka i Jeanne,
fut-prf-sit down Jeanne
"Jeanne will sit dcwn."
c. Tafa - petraka i Jeanne,
pass-sit dcwn Jeanne
(notice absence of Control by the Su)
d. *N - anpa - tafa - petraka an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-pass-sit down Jeanne Paul
*"Paul was having Jeanne find herself having sat dcwn.

41
(54)a. N - anp - andeha an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
"Paul was having Jeanne leave." '
b. H - andeha i Jeanne,
fut-go Jeanne
"Jeanne will be going."
c. Ho lasa i Jeanne,
fut gone Jeanne.
"Jeanne will be gone."
d. *N - anpa - (ho) - lasa an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-(fut)-gone Jeanne Paul
(cnly intended interpretation)
*"Paul was having Jeanne be gone."
(55) a. H-arary i Jeanne.
fut-sick Jeanne
"Jeanne will be sick."
b. *N - anp - arary an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-sick Jeanne Paul
*"Paul was having Jeanne be sick."
All of the a. sequences, where the enbedded clause has a verb in
the active voice are grammatical, from (50) to (54). Hie ungram-
matically of (50)d., (51)d., (52)d., and (53)d. shows that the

42
lower clause cannot have its verb in the Affixal Passive, whether
it is in the perfective or imperfective aspect. Hie ungrammat-
ically of (54)d. and (55)b. indicates that the lower predicate
cannot be a root passive or an adjective respectively, which sug-
gests that the Causee must retain Control.
2.1.4.1 Hie Manipulative Amp (a) Construction.
In the Manipulative amp (a) construction, the eirbedded
predicate is either in the active or in the circumstantial voice.
The latter phenomenon has been labelled passive, i.e. Passiviz-
ation applies after Clause-Union has taken place, this is the
diagnostic test for a Manipulative construction.
(56)a. N - anp - andeha an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-walk Jeanne Paul

•I
-
'Paul was having Jeanne walk."
b. N - anp - andeha-n-an' i Paoly i Jeanne.
past-caus-circ-walk-by Paul Jeanne
'Jeanne was being made to walk by Paul.n
(57) a. No - sasa - n'i Jeanne ny lanfoa.
pass^wash-by Jeanne the linen
"The linen was being washed by Jeanne.n
b. *N - ampa - no - sasa - n'i Jeanne ny lamba Rasoa.
past-caus-pass-wash-by Jeanne the linen Rasoa
(notice passive in the lower clause exclusively)
*"Rasoa was making the linen washed by Jeanne."

43
Voa
(58) a. ~ sasa ny lantoa.
pass-wash the linen
"The linen has been washed."
b. *N - anpa - voa - sasa ny lamba i Jeanne,
past-caus-pass-wash the linen Jeanne
"Jeanne was washing the linen."
(59)a. (Tafa) - latsaka ilay taratasy.
(pass) - be-dropped the letter

ir
"The letter was dropped (accidentally)."
b. *N - anpa - tafa - latsaka an'ilay taratasy i Paoly.
past-cau s-pass-be-dropped the letter Paul
*"Paul was causing the letter to be dropped accident-
ally. "
c. *N - airpa - latsaka an' ilay taratasy i Paoly.
past-caus-be-dropped the letter Paul
*"Paul was having the letter dropped accidentally."
(60)a. Potsy ny rindrina.
white the wall
"The wall is white."
b. *N - anpa - fotsy ny rindrina i Paoly.
past-caus- white the wall Paul
"Paul was whitewashing the wall."

44
In (56)a., the enbedded predicate is in the active voice, whereas
in (56) b., it is in the circumstantial voice. In both cases the
sequences are grammatical. By contrast, in (57)b. and (59)b., in-
volving verbs in the Affixal Passive with perfective and imper-
fective aspect, the sentences are ungrammatical even though in
each case, the lower clause becomes granmatical, as shown in the
relevant a. sequences, when used in isolation. In (59)c., we have
the root passive latsaka "be in the state of having been dropped"
while in (60)b., the enbedded clause comprises an adjective. The
ungranmaticality of these two sentences suggests that Manipula-
tive amp(a) cannot embed a root passive or an adjective. However,
exanple (5)a. involving the Stative verb miankanjo "be dressed
in" shows that it is possible for the lcwer verb to be a Stativé
predicate.
2.1.4.2 Restriction on the Manipulative Causative Amp (a).
However, if the lower clause has a Stative predicate,
then it must be in the active voice since, as the following exam-
ples demonstrate, if it shows up in the passive, the output is
ungrammatical. Ihis contrasts with those cases where the lower
verb is in the active voice.
(61)a. H - ianjera ny latabatra.
fut-fall, the table
"the table will fall."
b. N - anp - ianjera ny latabatra i Paoly.
past-caus-fall the table Paul

45
c. H - i - anjera - n' ny vilia ny latabatra.
fut-circ-fall-by the plate the table
"The table is where the plate(s) fell."
d. *N - anp - i - anjera - n' ny vilia ny latabatra
past-caus-circ-fall-by the plate the table
i Paoly.
Paul
(61)b., which comprises the lower predicate shown in (61)a. and
which is in the active voice, is grammatical. (61)d. with sequen-
ce (61)c. in its lower clause is ungranmatical. The only differ-
ence between (61)b. and (61)d. is that in the latter case, the
embedded verb is in the circumstantial voice.
2.1.4.3 Prefix Substitution with the Manipulative Causative
Anp (a).
When the embedded verb is a Stative predicate, although
not a Psychological predicate (see this distinction under 2.0.2),

the Affixal Passive form corresponding to the Manipulative anp (a)
has the a prefix, which substitutes for the Causative predicate

and the verb prefix.
(62) N - a - zera - n' i Paoly ny latabatra.
past-pass-fall-by Paul the table
"The table has been made to fall by Paul"
(compare with (61) b.)

46
The Affixal Passive prefix a replaces both the higher Causative
predicate amp (a) and the prefix of the verb, in this case ian,
leaving the root zera.
2.1.5.1 Restrictions on the Manipulative Causative An(a).
In the Manipulative an(a) construction, the lower pred-
icate must be a root passive or an adjective that is Stative but
ret Psychological; furthermore, it irust be the case that the
Causee does not have any Control. Hi is excludes root passives
like lasa which attribute some Control to the Causee.
(63)a. *N - an - andidy ny mofo an" i Jeanne i Jaona.
past-caus-cut the bread Jeanne John
(compare with (50)a.)
*"John was making cut Jeanne the bread."
b. *N - an - andeha-n-an' i Paoly an' i Jeanne i Jaona.
past-caus-circ-go-by Paul Jeanne John
(oonpare with (56)b.)
*"John was making Jeanne to be walkedfayPaul."
c. *N - an - no - didi - n' i Jeanne ny mofo i Paoly.
past-caus-pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread Paul
(coitpare with (50) c.)
d. *N - an - voa - sasa - n ' i Jeanne an' i Jaona i Paoly.
past-caus-pass-wash-by Jeanne John Paul
(coitpare with (52) c.)

47
e. *n - ana - a - lefa - n' i Jeanne ny entana i Paoly.
past-caus-pass-send-by Jeanne the luggage Paul
(compare with (51)c.)
f. *N - ana - tafa - petraka an' i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-pass-sit Jeanne Paul
64)a. N - an - datsaka an' ilay taratasy i Paoly.
past-caus-be dropped the letter Paul
(see (59)a. with latsaka "(be) dropped")
(the relevant meaning entails no Control by Causee)
"Paul was dropping the letter."
b. N - am -(f)otsy ny rindrina i Paoly.
past-caus-white the wall Paul
(see (60)a. with fotsy "white")
c. *N - an - atahotra an' i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-afraid Jeanne Paul
(see (49)a. with matahotra "(be) afraid)
"Paul was frightening Jeanne."
d. *N - an - dasa an" i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-gcne Jeanne Paul
(see (54)c. with lasa "(be) gone")
"Paul was sending Jeanne away."

In (64)a., the embedded predicate is a root passive, latsaka "in
the state of having been dropped." In (64)b., it is an adjective,
fotsy "white." In both instances, the sequences are grammatical.
However, in (64)c., the embedded clause also comprises an adject-
ive, matahotra "afraid of"; yet, the sequence is ungrammatical.
The difference between (64)a., (64)b., and (64)c. lies in the
fact that the latter is a Psychological predicate. As for (64)d.,
its ungrammaticality seems to be due to the fact that, although
lasa "gene" is a root passive, the Causee still retains Control.
The ungrammatical sentences in (63) show that the embedded clause
cannot comprise an active voice verb, as seen in (63)a., a cir-
cumstantial voice verb, as seen in (63)b., or any form of Affixal
Passive, as can be inferred from (63)c. to (63) f. In all the
cases shown in (63), no interpretation whatsoever could be as-
signed to the ungrammatical sequences.
2.1.5.2 Prefix Substitution with the Manipulative Causative
An (a).
In the Manipulative an (a) construction, the active
prefix an (a) of the typically transitive verb can be replaced by
the no...ina circumfix of Affixal Passive.
(65)a. Vaky ny fitaratra.
broken the glass
"The glass is/has been/was broken."
b. N - am -(v)aky ny fitaratra i Jaona.
past-caus-broken the glass John
"John was breaking the glass."

49
c. NO - vaki - n' i Jaona ny fitaratra.
pass-broken-by John the glass
"The glass was being smashed by John."
2.1.5-3 Passive with A or Tafa Prefix.
If the verb is a Stative intransitive, then the
relevant Affixal Passive is a in the most typical case:
(66) a. N - ian - tonta ny entana.
past-act-fall the luggage
"Ohe luggage fell."
b. N - a - tonta - n' i Jaona ny entana.
past-pass-fall-by John the luggage
"ftie luggage was being dropped by John."
(67)a. Latsaka ny taratasy.
dropped the letter
(note "accidental" meaning)
"The letter has dropped."
b. N - i - latsaka ny taratasy.
past-pref-fall the letter
"The letter fell."
c. N - a - latsak' i Paoly ny taratasy.
past-pass-dropped-by Paul the letter
(note "deliberate activity" meaning)
"Hie letter was being dropped by Paul."

50
d. N - an - datsaka ny taratasy i Paoly.
past-caus-dropped the letter Paul
(68)a. Tafa - latsaka ny taratasy.
pass-dropped the letter
"Hiey/Someone managed to drop the letter."
b. Tafa-latsak' i Paoly ny taratasy.
pass-dropped-by Paul the letter
"The letter was able to be dropped by Paul," i.e.
"Paul managed to drop the letter."
m (66)a., w= have a typically intransitive verb that is also
Stative. Its imperfective passive form is obtained by substitut-
ing a for its prefix. By contrast, in (67), to the root passive
form in the a. sequence correspond an intransitive verb, as seen
in the b. sentence, or a transitive verb, as shown in the d. sen-
tence. Furthermore, the perfective aspect marker tafa acquires
the Abilitative meaning.
2.1.6.1 Restrictions on the Abilitative Aha Construction.
In the Abilitative construction involving the Causative
aha, the lower predicate is either a root passive or an adjective
provided it is not a Psychological predicate. This requirement
proves necessary since otherwise, the construction yields a Caus-
al interpretation, to the exclusion of the relevant meaning.

51
jg9ja< Zaka ny entana.
bearable the luggage
(ambiguity between perfective and non-per-
fective reading, in isolation)
"The luggage can be carried."
b. N - aha - zaka ny entana i Paoly.
past-caus-bearable the luggage Paul
(exclusively perfective reading of zaka)
"Paul managed to carry the luggage."
c. Sosotra i Jeanne,
angry Jeanne
(no tense-marker = ambiguity)
"Jeanne is/was irritated."
d. *N - aha - sosotra an' i Jeanne i Paoly.
(acceptable only in the Causal reading)
"Paul managed to irritate Jeanne."
(70)a. Fotsy ny rindrina.
white the wall
"The wall is/was white."
b. N - aha - fotsy ny rindrina i Paoly.
(exclusively past tense interpretation)
"Paul managed to whitewash the wall."

52
c. Reraka i Jeanne,
tired Jeanne
"Jeanne is/was tired."
d. *N - aha - reraka an" i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-tired Jeanne Paul
"Paul managed to exhaust Jeanne."
In the a. and c. sequences, all the predicates are either adject-
ives or root passives. Yet, the c. sentences cannot be embedded
under the Abilitative aha, all the outputs, as shown in (69)d.
and (70 )d., are ungranmatical. This ungrammaticality seems to be
due to the fact that in the c. sequences, we have Psychological
predicates,.whereas in the a. sequences, we do not.
2.1.6.2 Voice Restrictions on the lower Clause.
In the Abilitative construction with the Causative aha,
the lower predicate cannot be an active voice verb, a circumstan-
tial voice verb or a passive with the perfective aspect marker
voa or tafa:
(71)a. H - andeha i Jeanne,
fut-go Jeanne
"Jeanne will be going."
b. *N - aha - handeha an1 i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-fut-go Jeanne Paul
"Paul managed to have Jeanne go."

53
(72)a. H - an - deha - n - an' i Jeanne i Paoly.
fut-circ-go - by Jeanne Paul
"Paul is where Jeanne will go."
b. *H - aha - handehanan' i Jeanne i Paoly.
fut-caus-circ-go-by Jeanne Paul
"Paul can be where Jeanne will go." -
dropped the letter
"The letter has been dropped."
b. N - aha - latsaka ny taratasy i Paoly.
(74)a. Voa - latsaka ny taratasy.
"Hie paper has been dropped (deliberately)."
b. *N - aha - voa - latsaka ny taratasy i Paoly.
past-caus-pass-dropped the letter Paul
(75)a. Tafa - latsaka ny taratasy.
(sane as (68)a.)
"The paper was successfully dropped."

54
b. *N - aha - tafa - latsaka ny taratasy i Paoly.
"Paul managed to drop the paper."
In (71)a., we have an active voice verb. When the sentence is in
isolation, it is perfectly grammatical; but when it is embedded
under Abilitative aha, the output is ungrairmatical, as shown in
(71) b. The sane applies to (72), which involves a verb in the
circumstantial voice; to (74) and (75), which involve Affixal
Passive with voa and tafa, respectively. Hcwever, in (73)b., the
output is grammatical with a root passive which is not Psycho-
logical, as explained under 2.1.6.1.
2.1.6.3 Possibility of Prefix Substitution.
Since the lower predicate is not Psychological, one can
replace the higher Causative with the no..in(a) Affixal Passive:
(76)a. Zaka-n' i Jeanne ny fahoria-ny.
bearable-by Jeanne the grief-her
"Her grief could be borne by Jeanne."
b. N - aha - zaka ny fahoria-ny i Jeanne,
past-caus-bearable the grief-her Jeanne
"Jeanne managed to bear her grief."
c. No -zaka-in' i Jeanne sany irery ny fahoria-ny.
pass-bearable-by Jeanne by alone the grief-her
"Her grief was borne willingly by Jeanne alone," i.e.
"Jeanne stoically bore her grief alone."

55
2.1.6.4 Restrictions on the Causal Construction Aha.

In the Causal construction with aha or amp(a), the em-
bedded verb, if it is not a Psychological predicate, must be in
the perfective aspect of Affixal Passive:
(77)a. N - i - petraka i Jeanne (*tamin' izy nisolifatra).

past-pref-sit-down Jeanne because she -past-trip-up
"Jeanne sat dcwn (*due to her tripping up)."
b. Tafa - petraka i Jeanne tamin' izy nisolifatra.
pass-sit-down Jeanne because she tripped-up
"Jeanne found herself sitting due to the fact that she
tripped up."
c. Izy nisolifatra no n - aha/anpa - tafa - petraka
she past-trip-up part past- caus - pass - sit
an'i Jeanne.
Jeanne
"It was because she tripped up that Jeanne found
herself sitting."
d. *lzy nisolifatra no n - aha/anpa -(i)-petraka
she past-trip-up part past- caus - pref- sit
an' i Jeanne.
Jeanne
"It was because she tripped up that Jeanne found
herself sitting."
56
(78)a. N - i - petraha - n' i J(eanne) ilay seza (.*tamin'izy
past-circ-sit - by J(eanne) the chair when she
(the Causal reading of tamin(a) is the relevant one)
nisolifatra).
tripped-up
*"J sat dcwn on the chair (*due to her tripping up)."
b. *Izy nisolifatra no nipetraka i J an'ilay seza.
she past-trip-up part past-sit J the chair
*"Due to her tripping up, J sat on the chair."
(79)a. N - i - jery ny boky i J noho ny hatezeran'i P.
past-pref-look-for the book J due-to the anger-of P
"J was looking for the book because of P's anger."
b. No - jere - n' i J ny boky noho ny hatezeran'i P.
pass-look-for-by J the book due-to the anger-of P
"Ohe book was being looked for by J because of P's an-
ger."
c. *Ny hatezeran'i P no n - aha/anpa - no - jere- n'
the anger-of P part past-caus - pass-look-for-by
i J ny boky.
J the book
?"It was because of P's anger that the book was being
looked for by J."

57
in (77)c., the embedded predicate is in the perfective aspect
form of Affixal Passive, i.e. with tafa, and the sequence is
granmatical. By contrast, in (78)b., it is in the active voice
and the sequence is ungrammatical. Likewise, in (79)c., it is in
the imperfective form of Affixal Passive and the output is irre-
trievably ungrammatical. In all of these examples, we have non-
Psychological predicates, as opposed to Psychological predicates,
as in (8)b. and (19).
2.1.7.1 Restriction on the Causal Construction An(a); Psycho-
logical Root Passive.
In the Causal construction with an(a), the lower pred-
icate must be a Psychological predicatetáietherthe latter is a
root passive or an adjective. Hie crucial factor here seems to be
that the Causee retains no Control since a root passive which
lends itself to an ambiguity of interpretation between a Delibe-
rate Activity and an Accidental Event does not qualify. First, it
can be a root passive provided the latter is not a Psychological
predicate:
(80)a. Tafitohina i Jeanne tamin' i Paoly.
upset Jeanne because-of Paul
(notice absence of Control by Causee)
b. N - an - (t)afitdhina an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-upset Jeanne Paul

58
(81) a. Vaky ny fitaratra tamin' i Paoly.

broken the glass because-of Paul
(notice ambiguity of interpretation)

h'The
i glass was/got broken because of Paul. ii
b. *N - am -(v)aky ny fitaratra i Paoly.
"The glass got broken because of Paul.n
In (80)a., we have a Psychological predicate and the output is
grammatical, as can be seen in (80)b. On the contrary,in (81)a.,
we have a non-Psychological root passive and the result in (81)b.
does not yield the intended reading.
2.1.7.2 Restriction on the Causal Construction an(a); No ina
Passive.
Second, in the Causal construction with an (a), the low-
er predicate cannot be an affixal Passive with no...ina;
(82)a. Sahirana i Jeanne tamin'ny vola.
in-trouble Jeanne because-of the money

(notice absence of Control by Causee)
ii
'Jeanne was in trouble because of the money.it
b. No -sáhiran- in' i Paoly i Jeanne tamin' ny vola.
pass-in-trouble-by Paul Jeanne because-of the money
(notice Control exerted on Causee by Causer)

ii
"Paul was disturbing Jeanne because of the money."
59
c. Ny vola no n - an - (s)ahirana an1 i J(eanne).

the money part past-caus-in-trouble J(eanne)
"The money was the reason why J was in trouble."
d. *Ny vola no n-an-no-sahirana-in1 i P an'i J.
the money part past-caus-pass-in-trouble-by P J

"The money was the reason whyP was disturbing J.ii
2.1.7.3 Restriction on the Causal Construction an(a): Active
Voice in the Lower Clause.
Finally, it is not possible to embed an active verb
under the Causal construction with an (a), as will be shown under
4.2.14 and 4.2.15, hence the impossibility of having a circum-
stantial voice form or the Affixal Passive with a, which can only
accompany an active voice verb (See (83)b. and (84)b.).
2.1.8.1 Restrictions on the Causal Construction Ank(a).

In the Causal construction with ank(a), it is not pos-
sible to have a transitive (See (152) b.) or an intransitive (See
(151)b.) verb. In other words, the lower predicate cannot be an
active voice verb. It cannot be a circumstantial or' an Affixal
Passive in the imperfective aspect:
(83)a. N - a- leha-n' i Jeanne i Paoly noho ny hasosora-ny.
past-circ-go-by Jeanne Paul due-to the anger-her
"Paul was where Jeanne went because of her anger," i.e.

n'Jeanne was going to have a word with Paul because she
was angry.n
60
b. *Ny hasosora-ny no n-ank/an(a)-a-leha-n'i J an'i P.
the anger-her part past-cause-circ-go-by J P
"Because of her anger, J went where J was,"i.e.
"Her anger was causing J to go and have a word with P."
(84)a. Nò - sahiran - in'i P i J tamin' ny vola.
pass-in-trouble-by P J due-to the money
"P was disturbing J because of the money."
b. *Ny vola no n-anka/an(a)-no-sahiran-in' i P i J.
the money part past-caus-pass-in-trouble-by P J
"Because of the money, P was disturbing J."
2.1.8.2 Further Restriction on the Causal Construction Ank(a):
Affixal Passive.
Furthermore, the ungranmaticality of the sequences in
4.2.19 and 4.2.20 shows that the embedded predicate cannot have
the Affixal Passive forms in voa or tafa.
2.2.0 The Indispensability of the Agent.
In this Subsection, it will be shown that:
1. the active and the circumstantial voices, the no. .-
.ina and a forms of Affixal Passive correlate with Activity since
the Agent must be expressed;
2. a typical Psychological predicate, whether it is a
root passive or an adjective, correlates with State since the
notion of Agency is not relevant and an Agent cannot be intro-
duced into the clause; and

61
3. Affixal Passives with voa or tafa correlate with
either Activity with the presence of an Agent, or a State with
its absence.
The concept of indispensability of the Agent will be
used to show that (a) where an Activity predicate is involved,
the Agent cannot be dispensed with; (b) where a Psychological
predicate is involved, the concept of ..Agency., is not relevant
since it cannot be expressed in the clause; and (c) in the case
of the Abilitative aha and tafa, the Agent can be dispensed with.
2.2.1 Explicit Agent.

Hie active and the circumstantial voices as well as the
no...ina and the a forms of Affixal Passive require an Agent:
(85) a. N - an - didy ny mofo i Jeanne.
past-act-cut the bread Jeanne
"Jeanne was cutting the bread."
b. *N - an - didy ny mofo.
past-act-cut the bread
*"Cutting the bread."
c. No - didi - n ' i Jeanne ny mofo.
pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread
"The bread was being cut by Jeanne."
d. *Nb - didi - na ny nDfo.
pass-cut the bread
"The bread was being cut."

62
(86)a. N - an - didy ny mofo tamin'ny antsy i Jeanne,
past-act-cut the bread with the knife Jeanne
"Jeanne was cutting the bread with the knife."
b. N - an - didi - an'i Jeanne ny mofo ny antsy,
past-circ-cut-by Jeanne the bread the knife
"The knife was being used by Jeanne to cut the bread."
c. *N - an - didi -ana ny mofo ny antsy.
past-circ-cut the bread the knife
"The knife was being used to cut the bread."
(87) a. N - an - (ts)ipy ny rano i Jeanne.
past-act-throw the water Jeanne
"Jeanne was throwing the water out."
b. N - a -tsipi- n' i Jeanne ny rano.
past-pass-thrcw-by Jeanne the water
"The water was being thrown out by Jeanne."
c. *N - a - tsipy ny rano.
past-pass-throw the water
"The water was being thrown out."
As can be inferred from previous examples, in particular (35),
the Agent surfaces as either a Su or a genitive. In (85), the a.
and c. sequences are grammatical since the Agent is encoded as
the final Su, in the first, and in the genitive, in the second.
In the b. and d. sequences, where it is left out, the sentences

63
are ungrammatical. Are precluded situations where the b. sequen-
ces come as answers to the question "Nanao inona i Jeanne?"
(literally: past-do what Jeanne?) "What was Jeanne doing ?" In
(86)b.( the verb is in the circumstantial voice with the Agent in
the genitive. When the Agent is left out, the sentence becomes
ungrammatical, as in (86) c. Hie sane grammaticality pattern
arises in the case of the so-called "controlled" manipulation, as
in (85)d., as well as the "ballistic" verb, as in (87): the b.
sequence, where the Agent is expressed, is grammatical whereas
the c. sentence, where it has been left out, is ungrammatical.
2.2.2.1 Impossibility of Expressing the Agent.
A Psychological predicate, whether it is a root passive
or an adjective, correlates with State since the concept of Agent
cannot find its expression in the clause:
(88)a. N - atory i Jeanne tamin1 ilay fanafody.
past-sleeping Jeanne because-of the nedicine
"Jeanne slept because of the medicine."
b. *N - atori - n' ilay fanafody i Jeanne,

past-sleeping-by the medicine Jeanne
(89)a. Tafitohina i Jeanne tamin' i Paoly.
upset Jeanne because-of Paul
b. *Tafitohi-n1 i Paoly i Jeanne,
upset-by Paul Jeanne

64
In (88)a. and (89)a., i Jeanne is not an Agent. The ungrairtnat-
icality of the b. sequences shows that the Agent cannot be ex-
pressed at all. This contrasts with the following:
(90)a. Maty i Paoly.
dead Paul
(Autonomous Event requiring no Agent)
"Paul is dead."
b. Mati - n' i Jaona i Paoly.
dead -by John Paul
(result of a Deliberate Activity)
"Paul is dead as a result of John's doing," i.e.
"Paul has been killed by John."
2.2.2.2 Deletion of the Agent.
Affixal Passive in the perfective voice, with voa on a
transitive verb or tafa on an intransitive one, allows deletion
of the Agent. This is mandatory under the higher Causal Causative
predicate.
(91)a. N - ifidy an'i p(aoly) i J(eanne).
past-choose P J
"J(eanne) chose P(aul)."
b. Voa - fidi - (n' i J) i P.
pass-choose- (by J) p
"P has been chosen (by J)."

65
c. I J no n - aha/airpa - voa - fidy an'i P.
J part past-caus-pass-choose P
"It was because of J that P was chosen."
<3. *I K(oto) no n - aha/ampa - voa - fidin'i J an'i P.
K part past-caus-pass-choose-by J P
"It was because of K that P was chosen by J."
(92)a. N - amp - iditra an'i J i P.

past-caus-enter J P
"P was having J enter."
b. Taf - iditr (i P) i J.
pass-enter-by (P) J
"J was actually brought in (by P)."
c. I P no n - ampa - taf - iditra an' i J.
P part past-caus-pass-enter J
"It's because of P that J was actually brought in."
d. *I P no n - aitpa - taf- iditr 'i K i J.
P part past-caus-pass-enter-by K J
"It's because of P that J was brought in by K."
In (91) d. and (92) d., the Agent is expressed and the sequences
are ungraiunatical, •Whereas in the c. sentences, it is left out
and the output is grammatical. Hie b. sequences show that the
Agent can be expressed when the simplex sentences are in iso-

66
lation. Furthermore, in the b. examples, the Agent in the
genitive case can be left out, as indicated by the parentheses.
This represents a shift from Activity, with the Agent expressed,
to State, with no Agent.
2.2.2.3 Mechanism for Deleting or Inserting the Agent.
Affixal Passive with a contrasts with the one in tafa,
in that tafa loses its Agent obligatorily — a s shown in 2.2.2.2—
whereas a allows the introduction of an Agent into a construction
which originated as a non-Psychological Stative predicate:
(93)a. N - i - petraka teo ambony latabatra ilay boky.
past-pref-lying past-on table the book
(Autonomous Event requiring no Agent)
"The book was lying on the table."
b. N - a - petrak' i Paoly teo airbony latabatra ilay boky.
past-pass-put-by Paul past-on table the book
(Deliberate Activity requiring an Agent)
"The book was being put on the table by Paul."
2.2.2.4 Expression of the Abilitative Meaning.
The above is corroborated by the fact that the Abil-
itative construction with aha is synonymous, on the one hand,
with the corresponding, non-Psychological root passive without
the higher Causative predicate and, on the other — i n the absence
of the cor re spending root passive—, with the root of the verb
prefixed with tafa:

67
(94)a. N - aha - zaka ny entana i Paoly.
(sane cognitive meaning as the b. sequence below)
b. Zaka-n' i Paoly ny entana.
bearable-by Paul the luggage
(same cognitive meaning as a. above)
"The luggage was successfully carried by Paul," i.e.
(95)a. Tafa-petrak'i Paoly teo antoony latabatra ilay boky.
pass-lie-by Paul past-on table the book
"The book was successfully made to lie by Paul on the
table," i.e.
"Paul managed to put the book on the table."
b. TSafa-petraka teo anbony latabatra ilay boky.
pass-lie past-on table the book
"The book was successfully made to lie on the table."
In (94), there is a corresponding root passive and in such a
case, it is this root passive which is synonymous with the Abil-
itative aha construction. In (95), there is no corresponding root
passive, but rather, a non-Psychological Stative verb and there-
fore, it is the structure with tafa which carries the Abilitative
meaning. Now, in (94)b. as well as in (95)b., the Agent can be
left out.
68
2.2.2.5 The Overall System for the Insertion or Deletion of the
agent.
Thus, it appears that the imperfective affixal Passive
a allows the language to transform a State into an activity by
introducing an agent into a clause with a non-Psychological state
predicate. By contrast, the perfective markers voa and tafa allow
it to reverse the process by deleting the Agent from a clause
with an activity predicate, thus transforming it into a State. At
the two extreme poles of the continuum, we have, at one end, the
active, the circumstantial, and the no...ina Affixal Passive voi-
ces, where the Agent must be expressed, and, at the other, the
Psychological predicate, which is not compatible with an Agent.
2.3.0 Intent.
In this Subsection, it will be shown that:
1. the active voice, the circumstantial voice as well
as the imperfective aspect Affixal Passive with no...ina and a
correlate with the presence of Intent;
2. a Psychological predicate (either a root passive or
an adjective) correlates with the absence of Intent; and that
3. the perfective aspect affixal Passive with voa and
tafa as well as the abilitative tafa correlate with the absence
of Intent —like a Psychological predicate— but correlate with
the presence of an agent in the underlying sequence, which gets
deleted subsequently, as shown under 2.2.2.2.
2.3.1 Intent and Voice affixes.
The active voice, the circumstantial voice, and the
affixal Passive forms with no...ina and a are compatible with

69
fanahv iniana (ny) "deliberately", but are not compatible with
hsv satry "accidentally."
(96) a. N-andidy ny mofo i Jeanne.

past-cut the bread Jeanne
"Jeanne was cutting the bread."
b. Fanahy inian' i Jeanne ny nandidy ny irofo.
soul willed-by Jeanne comp past-cut the bread
"J(eanne) was deliberately cutting the bread," or
"It was deliberately that J was cutting the bread."
c. *Nandidy ny mofo tsy satry i Jeanne.
past-cut the bread not willingly Jeanne
"Jeanne was cutting the bread accidentally."
(97)a. N-andeha i Jeanne,
past-go Jeanne
"Jeanne was leaving."
b. Fanahy inian' i Jeanne ny nandeha.
soul willed-by Jeanne comp past-go
"J(eanne) was leaving of her own free will," or
"It was of her own free will that J was leaving."
c. *Nandeha tsy satry i Jeanne.
past-go not willingly Jeanne
"Jeanne was leaving accidentally."

70
(98)a. N-an-didi-an' i J(eanne) ny irofo.
past-circ-cut-by J(eanne) the bread
(circumstantial voice with partitive reading)
"A portion of the bread was being cutfcyJ(eanne)."
b. Fanahy inian' i CL n y nandidia-ny^^ ny mofo.
soul willed-by J comp past-circ-cut-her the bread
"It was deliberately that J was cutting the bread."
(99)a. No - didi - n' i J ny irofo.
pass-cut - by J the bread
"The bread was being cut up by J."
b. Fanahy inian' i J no - didi - na ny mofo.
soul willed-by J pass-cut the bread
*"The bread was deliberately being cut by J."
(100) a. N - an - (ts)ipy ny rano i J.
past-ac t-threw the water J
"J was throwing the water out."
b. N - a - tsipi - n' i J ny rano.
past-pass-throw-by J the water
"The water was being threwn out by J."
c. Fanahy inia-n' i J n-a-tsipy ny rano.
soul willed-by J past-pass-throw the water
"The water was deliberately being thrown out by J."

71
d. *N - a - tsipi - n' i Jeanne tsy satry ny rano.
past-pass-throw-by Jeanne not willingly the water
*"The water was being accidentally thrown away by
Jeanne."
2.3.2 Intent and Mjectival Predicates.

A Psychological predicate, whether it is a root passive
or an adjective, is corrpatible with tsy satry "accidentally", but
not with fanahy iniana...(ny) "deliberately":
(101)a. Tafitohina i Jeanne,
upset Jeanne
"Jeanne is/was upset."
b. Tafitohina tsy satry i Jeanne,
upset not deliberately Jeanne
"Jeanne was inadvertently upset."
c. *Fanahy inian' i Jeanne ny tafitohina.
soul willed-ty Jeanne comp upset
*"Jeanne was being deliberately upset."
(102)a. Lasa i Jeanne,
gone Jeanne
"Jeanne is/was gone."
b. Lasa tsy satry i Jeanne,
gone not deliberately Jeanne
"Jeanne was gone inadvertently."

72
c. *Fanahy inian' i Jeanne ny lasa.
soul willed-by Jeanne comp gone
*"Jeanne was being gone deliberately."
2.3.3 Intent and Perfective Affixal Passive.
The Affixal Passive forms voa and tafa behave like Sta-
te predicates since they are not conpatible with fanahy inian'i
NP (ny) "deliberately," but are conpatible with tsy satry "not
deliberately, accidentally":
(103)a. Voa - kapoka i Jeanne,
pass-hit Jeanne
"Jeanne was hit."
b. *Fanahy inian' i Jeanne ny voakapoka.
soul willed-by Jeanne comp pass-hit
?"Jeanne got hit deliberately."
c. Voa - kapoka tsy satry i Jeanne,
pass-hit not deliberately Jeanne
"Jeanne was hit accidentally."
(104)a. Tafa - petraka i Jeanne,
pass-sit Jeanne
b. *Fanahy inian' i Jeanne ny tafapetraka.
scul willed-by Jeanne comp pass-sit
*"Jeanne found herself deliberately sitting."

73
c. Tafa - petraka tsy satry i Jeanne,
pass-sit not deliberately Jeanne
?"Jeanne found herself accidentally sitting."
(105) a. Taf (a) - akatr' i Paoly ny entana.
pass-bring-up-by Paul the luggage
"The luggage was able to be successfully brought
upstairs by Paul," i.e.
"Paul managed to bring the luggage upstairs," or
"Paul was able to bring the luggage upstairs."
b. *Fanahy inian' i Paoly (ny) tafakatra ny entana.
soul willed-by Paul (camp) pass-up the luggage
"Paul deliberately managed to bring the luggage
upstairs."
c. *Taf(a)-akatr1 i Paoly tsy satry ny entana.
pass-bring-up-by Paul not deliberately the luggage
*"Paul accidentally managed to bring the luggage
upstairs."
As was done previously, the asterisk in front of the Malagasy
sequence entails that the sentence is irretrievably ungrammatical
and cannot receive any interpretation whatsoever. The English
translation provided oily makes explicit the intended reading.
2.3.4 Summary: the Control Parameter.
The information provided by the Control parameter is
summarized and reported on Table 2.

74
Table 2
Control by Causee
Activity State
Deliberate Not Deliberate
Causatives Prefix 1 2 3 4 5 6
CD
"persuasive" 0 * + * * * * * *
Directive "coercive" 0 + * + + * * * *
"permissive" 0 + * * * * * * *
"neutral" Amp (a) + * * * * * * *
Manipulative Amp (a) + +/* * S * * * *
Manipulative An (a) * * S S * * + +
Abilitative Aha * * s s * * + +
Causal Aha * * * * + + + +
Causal Amp (a) * * * * + + + +
Causal An (a) * * * * * * + +
Causal Ank (a) * * * * * * * ?
Note: 1 = Active voice; 7. = Root passive;
2 = Circumstantial voice; 8. = Adjective;
3 = Affixal passive no...ina; + = Grammatical
4 = Affixal passive a * = Ungrammatical;
5 = Affixal passive voa; / = Either;
6 = Affixal passive tafa; S = Substitution.

75
Section 3
Entailment
3_0 Entailment.
In Section 3, it will be shown that:
1. in a "persuasive" Directive construction, the pres-
ence or absence of Entailment, defined as the semantic correlate
of the perfective aspect of a predicate and synonymous with Re-
sultative, is dependent upon the tense of the embedded verb, whe-
ther the latter is a State predicate or not;
2. in the "coercive," the "permissive," and the "neu-
tral" Directive constructions as well as the Manipulative an (a),
there is no Entailment;
3. in the Manipulative construction with amp (a) ,if the
embedded verb is a non-Stative predicate, there is no Entailment,
whereas when it is a Stative predicate, the compound verb formed
with the higher Causative carries with it an Entailment;
4. in the Abilitative aha construction, there is En-
tailment; and
5. in all of the Causal constructions,ráietherthe em-
bedded predicate is Psychological or not, there is Entailment.
3.1 Entailment and the "Persuasive" Directive Causative.
In a "persuasive" Directive construction, the presence
of Entailment is dependent upon the tense of the embedded verb.
If the latter is in the past tense, there is Entailment, other-
wise there is none.

76
(106)a. Nanao izay h-an-deha-n-an'i Jeanne^ i paoly
past-do conp fut-circ-go-by Jeanne^ Paul
"Paul was doing so that Jeanne would leave"
b. fa tsy n-andeha izy^.
but not past-go sne^
"but she did not."
(107)a. Nanao izay n-an-deha-n-an'i Jeanne^ i Paoly
past-do comp past-circ-go-by Jeanne^ Paul
"Paul was doing so that Jeanne left"
b. *fa tsy n-andeha izy^.
but not past-go she^
(continuation in the intended reading)
"but she did not."
(108) a. Nanao izay h-i-an-jer-an1 ny latabatra^ i paoly
past-do conp fut-circ-fall-by the table^ Paul
"Paul was doing so that the table would fall"
b. fa tsy n-ianjera ilay izy^.
but not past-fall that it^
"but it did not."
(109)a. Nanao izay n-i-an-jera-n' ny latabatra^ i Paoly
past-do conp past-circ-call-by the table^ Paul
"Paul was doing so that the table fell"

77
b. *fa tsy n-ianjera ilay izy^
but not past-fall the it^
*"but it did not fall."
in (106) and (107), we have a non-Stative predicate in the embed-
ded clause, whereas in (108) and (109), we have a Stative predic-
ate.
3.2 Entailment and the "Neutral," "Coercive," and "Permis-
sive" Directive Causative Constructions.
The "neutral," the "coercive," and the "permissive"
Directive constructions correlate with the absence of Entailment:
(110)a. N - anp - andidy ny mofo an'i Jeanne^ i Paoly
past-caus-cut the bread Jeanne^ Paul
"Paul was having Jeanne^ cut the bread"
b. kanefa tsy nandidy izy^.
but not past-cut she^
"but she^ did not."
(111) a. Nanery an'i Jeanne ^^ handidy an'ilay irofo i Paoly
past-force Jeannei fut-cut the bread Paul
"Paul was forcing Jeannei to cut the bread"
"but shei did not."

78
(112)a. Namela an'i Jeanne^ handidy an'ilay mofo i Paoly.
past-let Jeanne^ fut-cut the bread Paul
"Paul was allowing Jeanne^ to cut the bread"
"but shei did not."
All of the a. sentences above are perfectly grammatical and
acceptable with their continuations in b., which substantiates
the claim made earlier.
3.3 Entailment and the Manipulative Causative Amp (a).

The Manipulative anp (a) construction, just like the
Manipulative an (a) construction, correlates with the absence of
Entailment. There is, however, with the first the proviso that if
the embedded verb is an exclusively Stative predicate, then there
is Entailment:
(113)a. N - anp - idina ny saina i Paoly
past-caus-cone-down the flag Paul
(Stative reading for embedded verb is relevant one)
"Paul was lowering the flag"
fa tsy n-aha-taf-idina.
but not past-caus-pass-cone-down
"but did not cause to be lowered," i.e.
"but did not manage."

79
b. N - airp - din - in' i Paoly ny saina

past-caus-coma-down-pass-by Paul the flag
"The flag was caused to be down by Paul," i.e.
"the flag was being lowered by Paul"
fa tsy taf-idina.
but not pass-cone-down
"but was not successfully lowered."
(114)a. N - amp - i - atonta ny latabatra^ i Paolyj

past-caus-prf-fall the table^ Paulj
(notice exclusive Stative reading of embedded verb)
"Paul made the table fall"
*fa tsy voa-tonta-nyj ilay izy^.

but not pass-fall-hinij the it^
"but did not manage."
b. N - a - tonta - n ' i Paoly^ ny latabatra

past-pass-fall-by Paulj the table
(notice use of "ballistic" passive prefix a substitut-
ing for the Stative prefix _i of the active voice)
"The table was being made to fall by Paul"
fa tsy voa-tonta-nyj.
but not pass-fall-hirrij
"but was not successfully made to fall*" ì. e
"Paul tried to make the table fall but did not manage.
80
(115)a. N - an - doka ny varavarana i Paoly
past-caus-with-hole the door deic Paul
(note ambiguity of interpretation of the embedded verb:
loka "with a hole" can refer to a Deliberate Activity)
"Paul was making a hole in the door"
fa tsy n-aha-loka.
but not past-caus-with-hole
"but did not succeed."
b. No - loha - an' i Paoly.. ny varavarana
pass-with-hole-by Paul^ the door
"The door was being put a hole in by Paulj"
fa tsy voa-loka-nyj.
but not pass-with-hole-by-hinij
"but not successfully," i.e.
"Paul tried to make a hole in the door but did not
manage."
(116)a. N - ank - adala an'i Paoly^ i Jeanne
past-caus-crazy Paul^ Jeanne
(note exclusive Stative nature of embedded predicate)
"Jeanne (tried to) make Paul^ crazy"

• •
*fa tsy adala izyi tsy akory.
but not crazy he^ not at-all
"but he^ is not crazy at all."

/
81
j-,. n - ank - adala - in1 i Jeanne i Paoly^
past-caus-pass-crazy-by Jeanne Paul^
"Paulj, was made crazy by Jeanne"
*fa tsy adala tsy akory.
but not crazy not at-all
"but he^ is not crazy at all."
m (113) and (115), the embedded clauses are not Stative pred-
icates, i.e. neither Psychological nor non-Activity predicates,
and there is no Entailment, as can be inferred from the grammat-
icality of their continuations. In (114)a., however, there is
Entailment since it is not possible to have the second part of
the sentence; in this case, we have a non-Psychological Stative
predicate. On the other hand, in (116), the embedded clause com-
prises a Psychological predicate carrying with it an Entailment
since it is not possible to have the second part of the sentence.
3.4 Entailment and the Abilitative Constructions.
The Abilitative constructions correlate with the pres-

ence of Entailments
(117) N - aha - zaka an'i Jeanne^ i Paolyj
past-caus-bearable Jeanne^ Paulj

"Paul managed to carry Jeanne"
*fa tsy zaka-ny^ izy^.
but not bearable-him. she-

j l
"Paul managed to carry Jeanne *but did not manage to."
82
(118) N - aha - loka ny varavarana^ i p (aoly) j
past-caus-with-hole the door^ P(aul) j
"P(aul) managed to perforate the door"
*fa tsy voa-loka-ny^ ilay izy^.
but not pass-with-hole-hiirij the it^
"P managed to perforate the door *but did not manage."
(119) N - alia - zaka ny entana^ ny mozanaj
past-caus-carried the luggage^ the scalej
"The scale could lift the luggage"
*fa tsy zakan' ilay izy^ ireto^.
but not carried-by the itj these^
"but it couldn't lift them (the pieces of luggage),"
i.e. "The scale could lift the luggage *but could not."
(120) N - aha - zaka an' i Jeanne^ ny nozanaj
past-caus-carried Jeanne^ the scalej
"The scalej could lift Jeanne^"
*fa tsy zaka-n' ilay izyj izy^.
but not carried-by itj she^
"but itj could not lift her^"

"The scale could lift Jeanne *but could not lift her."
Hie ungraitmaticality of the continuation of each sentence, from
(117) to (120), shows that it is not possible to cancel what is
expressed under the aha construction, in the lower clause.

83
3 5 Entailment and the Causal Causative Constructions.
Hie Causal reading correlates with the presence of En-
tailment:
(121) Ny ditrany no n-ampa/aha-voa-kapoka
the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-hit
(note perfective aspect-marker on ertfoedded verb)
an'i Paoly^ *fa tsy voa-kapoka izy^.

Paul^ but not pass-hit he^
"It was because of his mischief that Paul was punished,
*but he was not punished."
(122) Ny adala-ny no n-aha-resy an'i Paoly^
the stupidity-his part past-caus-defeated Paul^
(note exclusive Stative reading of embedded verb)
*fa tsy resy izy^.
but not defeated he.

l
"It was because of his stupidity that Paul was defeat-
ed, *but he was not defeated."
(123) Ny resaka no n-an-dreraka an' i Jeanne^
the talk part past-caus-fed-up Jeanne.
*fa tsy reraka izy^.
but not fed-up she^
"It was because of the talk that Jeanne was fed up,
*but she was not fed »5)."

84
(124) Ny sakafo no n-ank-arary an'i Jeanne

i
the food part past-caus-sick Jeanne^
(note exclusive Stative reading of embedded verb)
*fa tsy narary izy^.
but not sick she.

l
"It was because of the food that Jeanne got sick,
*but she was not sick."
The continuation of each one of the sentences from (121) to (124)
is ungrammatical. This suggests that it is not possible to cancel
what is expressed in the lower clause under a Causal prefix. Hew-
ever, there is the possibility of having a word gams. In this ca-
se, the root passive under the prefix does not have the sane
meaning as the one vhich is negated. Thus:
(125) Ilay resaka no n-an-(t)afitohina an' i Jeanne^
the talk part past-caus-fed-up Jeanne^
"Jeanne was fed up because of the talk"
fa tsy tafitohina izy^ tsy akory.
but not stumbling she^ not at-all
"but she did not stumble at all."
3.6 Summary: the Entailment Paraneter.
Table 3 gives the results found in this Subsection rel-
ative to the Entailment parameter.

85
Table 3
The Entailment Parameter
Causative Construction Prefix Stative Non-St. Entail.
"persuasive" 0 +/* + Y/N
"coercive" 0 * + N
Directive "permissive" 0 * + N
"neutral" Amp (a) * + N
Manipulative Amp(a) + + Y/N
Manipulative An (a) + * N
Abilitative Aha + + Y
Causal Aha + * Y
Causal Amp (a) + * Y
Causal An (a) + * Y
Causal Ank(a) + * Y
Note: * = Not Possible; Stative = Psychological
+ = Possible; or not 7
+/* = Either + Or i non-St. = Not Stative;
Y = Presence of Entailment; Entail. = Entailment;
N = Absence of Entailment;
Y/N = Restriction.
86
Section 4
Productivity
4.0 Productivity.
Hi is fourth Section will address the issue of the pro-
ductivity of each one of the Causative Constructions. As far as
the Unmarked constructions are concerned (see Section 6 for the
distinction between Marked vs. Unmarked):
1. "Neutral" Directive amp(a) can embed verbs from two
open classes, i.e. transitive and intransitive verbs — the only
proviso with the latter being that it be a non-Stative predicate
(see (5)c.);
2. Abilitative aha can embed predicates from one open
class, i.e. adjectives, and one closed class, i.e. root passives
with no restrictions;
3. Manipulative an (a) can also embed predicates from
one open class, i.e. adjectives, and one closed class, i.e. root
passives although in both cases, the lower verb must be a non-
Psychological Stative predicate;
4. Manipulative amp (a) can embed verbs from one open
class, i.e. intransitive verbs, with no restriction in the case
of a Stative verb, otherwise, with the proviso that Afflxal Pas-
sive can apply after Clause-Union; and
5. Manipulative ank (a) only accepts a very limited
number of adjectives in the lower clause.
As far as Marked constructions are concerned:
1. Causal aha can enibed verbs from three open classes,
i.e. transitive, intransitive, and adjectives, and one closed

87
class, i.e. root passives; but there is a restriction on the
first two, i.e. the lower verb must be passivized with the
perfective aspect voa or tafa respectively;
2. the same applies to Causal anp (a), which is diffe-
rent from aha only in terms of register: amp(a) is characteristic
of Child Speech and Colloquial Malagasy;
3. Causal an(a) accepts one open class, i.e. adject-
ives ,and one closed class, i.e. root passives, both being sub-
ject to the restriction that the lcwer verb must be a Psycho-
logical predicate; and finally
4. Causal ank(a) is restricted to a very limited set of
adjectives.
4.0.1 Definition of Productivity.
Productivity can be assessed in terms of:
1. the range of predicate types a given Causative con-
struction can embed:
(a) voa/tafa Affixal passive;
(b) a predicate derived from application of Affixal
Passive after Clause-Union;
(c) typically transitive verbs;
(d) typically intransitive verbs;
(e) root passives; and
(f) adjectives; and
2. the distinction between open vs. closed classes,
whether there are restrictions accompanying one class, i.e., for
exanple, Psychological predicates are the oily ones allowed,
otherwise, Affixal Passivization with voa/tafa is obligatory.

88
4.1.1 Productivity and the "Neutral" Directive amp(a).
With the "neutral" Directive amp(a), Affixal Passive
with voa or tafa is not possible:
(126)a. N - amp - ikarakara ny sakafo an1 i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-prepare the food Jeanne Paul
"Paul was having Jeanne prepare the food."
b. *N - ampa- voa- karakara(n'i Jeanne) ny sakafo i Paoly.
past-caus-pass-prepare(-by Jeanne) the food Paul
"Paul was having the food prepared (by Jeanne)."
c. H-i-karakara ny sakafo i Jeanne,
fut-prf-prepare the food Jeanne
"Jeanne will prepare the iteal."
d. Voa - karakara - n' i Jeanne ny sakafo.
pass- prepare - by Jeanne the food
"The meal has been prepared by Jeanne."
As shown in (126)c., the embedded verb of (126)a. has the ^pre-
fix, which receives the Deliberate Activity interpretation, to
the exclusion of the Stative meaning. And although the lower
clause, as seen in the d. sequence, yields a perfectly granmati-
cal output with the voa passive in isolation, it cannot be embed-
ded under amp(a) since this results in an irretrievably ungram-
matical sequence, as shown in b., whether the Agent is expressed
or not. Likewise with:

89
(127)a. N - amp - itsangana an'i Jaona i Paoly.
past-caus-get-up John Paul
"Paul was having John stand up."
b. *N - ampa - tafa - tsangana an' i Jaona i Paoly.

past-caus-pass - stand-up John Paul
c. H - itsangana i Jaona.
fut-stand-up John
"John will stand up."
d. Tafa - tsangana i Jaona.
pass - stand-up John
"John managed to stand up.11
Although the lower clause c. gives a perfectly grammatical sen-
tence in isolation, when passivized — a s shown in d.— it cannot
be embedded under amp(a), the output being ungrammatical.
4.1.2 The "Neutral" Directive Amp(a) and Transitive Verbs in
the Lower Clause.
With the "neutral" Directive amp (a), any transitive
verb can get embedded, as seen in (4)b.
4.1.3 The "Neutral" Directive Amp(a) and Intransitive Verbs
in the Lower Clause.
Likewise, any non-Stative (See 2.1.3) intransitive verb
can be embedded under the Directive amp (a). One such case is the
sequence (4) a.
90
4.1.4 Defining the Prototypical "Neutral" Directive Amp(a).
In a typical "neutral" Directive anp (a) construction
with the denoted Su of the lower clause overtly expressed, it is
not possible to have Affixal Passive after Clause-Union since the
Causee typically retains Control:
(128)a. N - amp - ihinana sakafo an' i Jaona i Jeanne.
past-caus-eat food John Jeanne
(Causee retains Control)
"Jeanne was having John eat his food."
b. *N - amp - ihina-n' i Jaona sakafo i Jeanne,
past-caus-eat-by Jaona food Jeanne
(Causee has no Control whatsoever)
*"Jeanne was having John eat his food."
The sentence (128)b. no longer has the intended reading since a
shift in meaning has occurred. It can oily be assigned a diffe-
rent interpretation, i.e. "Jeanne spoon-fed John" and that,
therefore, the latter will have to be either a baby or an
incapacitated adult, with a Manipulative reading.
4.1.5 Hie Prototypical "Neutral" Directive Amp(a) and Affixal
Passive After Clause-Union.
The "neutral" Directive amp(a) can embed an intransit-
ive verb and again Affixal Passive cannot apply after application
of Clause-Union (see proviso relative to the Control by Causee
under 2.1,3):
91
(129) a. N - amp - ivory ny vahoaka i P(aoly).
past-caus-gather the people P(aul)
"P(aul) was having the conmunity hold a meeting."
b. H-ivory ny vahoaka.
fut-gather the people
"The community will gather."
c. *N - amp - ivori - n' i P ny vahoaka.

past-caus-gather-pass-by P the people
*"The community was being made to hold a rreeting by P."
4.1.6 The "Neutral" Directive amp (a) and Root Passives in the
Lower Clause.
Under the "neutral" Directive amp(a), a root passive
predicate cannot be eirfoedded:
(130)a. *N - anpa - lasa an' i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus- gone Jeanne Paul
*"Paul had Jeanne gone."
b. *I Paoly no n - airpa - lasa an'i Jeanne.
Paul part past-caus-gone Jeanne
*"It was Paul who made Jeanne gone."
Whether i Paoly is fronted or not, the above sentence remains un-
graimiatical: the sentence (130) b. is ungraimatical in the Direct-
ive reading and can only be assigned the Causal interpretation
"It was because of Paul that Jeanne was gone."

92
4.1.7 Ihe "Neutral" Directive Amp (a) and Adjectival Predic-
ates in the Lower Clause.
Likewise, under the "neutral" Directive amp(a), an
adjective cannot be embedded:
(131)a. *N - ampa - sosotra an' i Jeanne i Paoly.
"Paul caused Jeanne to show anger."
b. *I Paoly no n - ampa - sosotra an' i Jeanne.
Paul part past-caus-angry Jeanne
"It was Paul who caused Jeanne to shew anger."
Both sentences are ungrammatical in the intended reading. Fur-
thermore, the b. sequence can only have a Causal interpretation,
i.e. "It was because of Paul that Jeanne was angry."
4.1.8 The Manipulative Causative Anp(a) and Affixal Passives
The Manipulative Causative airp(a) does not allow Af-
fixal Passive in the lower clause:
(132) a. N - airp - i - akatra ny seza i Paoly.
past-caus-prf-go-up the chair Paul

i
"Paul brought the chair upstairs."
b. Taf(a)—akatra ny seza.
pass-0-go-up the chair
"The chair has been brought upstairs."

93
c. *N - ampa - taf(a) - akatra ny seza i Paoly.
past-caus-pass - go-up the chair Paul
(note perfective aspect-marker tafa on embedded verb)
"Paul brought the chair upstairs."
although the lower clause is grammatical by itself, as can be
deduced from the grammatical!ty of (132)b., vtei it is embedded
under Manipulative amp (a), as in (132) c., the output becomes un-
grairmatical. This contrasts with the case of (132) a. above, where
the lower clause has not been passivized.
4.1.9 The Manipulative Causative Amp(a) and Lower Transitive
Verbs.
The Manipulative Causative anp (a) does not allow a
typically transitive verb phrase in the lower clause:
(133) a. H-i-asa tany i Jaona
fut-prf-word ground John
"John will till the ground."
b. *N - anp - iasa tany an' i Jaona i Paoly.
past-caus-^work ground John Paul
"Paul was subjecting John to tilling the ground."
c. *N - anp - iasa- in" i Paoly tany i Jaona.
past-caus-work-by Paul ground John
"John was being subjected to tilling the ground by
Paul."
94
(133)c. is irretrievably ungrammatical. This suggests that the
sentence (133)b., which contains (133)a., does not have the
Manipulative reading. (133)b. is grammatical with a totally
different interpretation, i.e. the Directive meaning.
4.1.10 The Manipulative Causative Anp (a) and lower Intransit-
ive Verbs.
The Manipulative Causative amp (a) allows an intransit-
ive verb in the embedded clause:
(134) a. H-andeha ny fiara.
fut-go/run the car
"The car will run."
b. N - anp - andeha ny fiara i Paoly.
past-caus-go the car Paul
"Paul drove the car."
c. N-airp-andehanan' i Paoly ny fiara.
past-caus-go-pass-by Paul the car
"The car was driven by Paul."
Indeed, the grammaticality of (134)b., where the siitplex sentence
(134) a. has been embedded under the Manipulative Causative amp(a)
shows that this is the case. The grammaticality of the output of
Passivization after Clause^Jnion, which constitutes a diagnostic
test for this construction, as in (138)c., supports the stated
generalization.
95
4.1.11 Ihe Manipulative Causative .Amp (a) and Root Passives in
the lower clause.
Ihe Manipulative Causative amp(a) does not allow a root
passive in the lower clause:
(135) a. *N - anpa - potika ny fitaratra i Paoly.
past-caus-smashed the glass -Paul
"Paul was smashing the glass."
b. Potika ny fitaratra.
smashed the glass
"Ihe glass has been smashed."
The root passsive potika "smashed" yields a perfectly grammatical
sentence in (135)b., yet when it gets embedded under Manipulative
amp (a) the output is ungrammatical.
4.1.12 The Manipulative Causative Amp (a) and Lower Mjectival
Predicates.
The Manipulative Causative amp (a) cannot embed an ad-
jectival clause:
(136)a. Potsy ny rindrina.
white the wall
"The wall is/was white."
b. *N - anpa - fotsy ny rindrina i Paoly.

96
4.1.13 The Manipulative Causative Amp(a) and Affixal Passive
After Clause-Union.
The Manipulative Causative amp(a) allows Affixal Pas-
sive after Clause-Union, assuming that the embedded predicate is
a non-Psychological Stative verb:
(137)a. N - anp - i - dina ny saina i Paoly.
past-caus-prf-come-down the flag Paul
b. N - anp - i - din - in1 i Paoly ny saina.
past-caus-prf-come-dcwn-by Paul the flag
"The flag was being lowered by Paul."
The relevant reading for the i^ prefix of the embedded verb in the
a. sequence is the Stative one exclusively here.
4.1.14 The Manipulative Causative An(a) and Perfective Aspect
Verbs in the Lower Clause.
The Manipulative Causative an (a) cannot embed a pred-
icate with the perfective aspect-marker voa or tafa:
(138)a. N - an - datsaka ny taratasy i Paoly.
"Paul was dropping the letter (at the post office)."
b. Latsaka ny taratasy.
dropped the letter
"The letter has been dropped (deliberately or not)."

97
c. Voa/Tafa- latsaka ny taratasy.
"The letter has been dropped (deliberately)."
<3. *n - ana - voa/tafa - latsaka ny taratasy i Paoly.
(138)a. contains (138)b., which comprises a root passive, i.e.
latsaka "in the state of having been dropped"; it is grammatical.
Haw, although the cor re spending predicate voa/tafa exists and can
yield a well-formed sentence, as seen in (138) c., when the latter
is embedded under an (a), the output is irretrievably ungrammat-
ical, as seen in (138) d.
4.1.15 Ihe Manipulative Causativeftn(a)and Transitive Verbs
Likewise, it is not possible to have a transitive verb
under the Manipulative Causative an(a);
(139) a. H-andidy ny itofo i Jeanne.
fut-cut the bread Jeanne
b. *N - an - (h)andidy ny nofo an" i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-(fut)-cut the bread Jeanne Paul
*"Paul was having cut Jeanne the bread."
tfo interpretation whatsoever can be given to the sentence (139)b.

98
4.1.16 The Manipulative Causative an(a) and Intransitive Verbs
It is impossible to eirbed an intransitive verb under
the Manipulative Causative an (a):
(140)a. H - andeha i Paoly.
fut-go Paul
"Paul will be going."
b. *N - an - (h)andeha an'i Paoly i Jaona.
past-caus-go Paul John
*"John was having go Paul."
(141)a. H - itsangana i Paoly.
fut-stand-up Paul
"Paul will stand up."
b. *N - an - (h)itsangana an'i Paoly i Jaona.
past-caus-stand-up Paul John
*"John was having stand up Paul."
(140)b. and (141)b. cannot be assigned any interpretation what-
soever .
4.1.17 The Manipulative Causativefin(a)and Adjectival Pred-
icates in the Lower Clause.
An adjective can be embedded under the Manipulative
Causative an(a):
99
(142) a. N-am-(f)otsy ny rindrina i Paoly
(compare with (136)b.)
b. *N-ana-manga ny rindrina i Paoly.
past-caus-blue the wall Paul
*"Paul was painting blue the wall."
Hie ungranmaticality of (142) b. suggests that there are sone res-
trictions although the set of adjectives that can be embedded is
still very large.
4.1.18 The Manipulative Causativefin(a) and Passive.
It is possible to have Clause-Union before Affixal Pas-
sive, i.e. the circumstantial voice:
(143)a. N-am-otsy ny rindrina tamin'ilay borosy i Paoly.
past-caus-white the wall with the brush Paul
"Paul was whitewashing the wall with the brush."
b. N-am-otsi-an' i Paoly ny rindrina ilay borosy.
past-caus-white-circ-by Paul the wall the brush
"The brush was what Paul was using to paint the wall."
ttie Instrumental-Oblique tamin'ilay borosy in (143)a. has been
promoted to Su in (143)b., with the concomittent shift from the
active to the relevant passive voice of the verb.

100
4.1.19 The Abilitative Causative Aha and Verbs in the Perfect-
ive Aspect in the Lcwer Clause.
The Abilitative Causative aha cannot embed a predicate
with the perfective aspect-marker voa or tafa despite the fact
that the corresponding clause yields a perfectly grairmatical sen-
tence in isolation:
(144)a. N - aha - loka an'ilay vato i Paoly.
past-caus-with-hole the rock Paul
"Paul managed to perforate the stone."
b. (Voa)-loka ilay vato.
passive-with-hole the rock
"The rock has been perforated."
c, *N - aha - voa - loka an'ilay vato i Paoly.
past-caus-perf^with-hole the rock Paul
"Paul managed to perforate the rock."
Although the root passive in (144) b. can take the voa prefix on
its own, only the form without the perfective aspect-marker can
be embedded under the Causative aha, as can be inferred from the
grammaticality of (144)a. and the ungrammaticality of (144)c.
4.1.20 The Abilitative Causative Aha and Intransitive Verbs in
the Lower Clause.
The Abilitative Causative aha cannot take an intransit-
ive verb in the lower clause:

101
(145) a. H-andéha i Paoly.
fut-go Paul
"Paul will be going."
b. *N - ah(a) - andeha (an'i Paoly) i Jaona.

past-caus-go Paul John
*"john managed for Paul to go."
c. Afaka n-andeha i Paoly.
can past-go Paul
"Paul was able to walk."
The sequence (145)a., which comprises an intransitive verb, is
perfectly grannatical in isolation. However, it cannot be embed-
ded under the Abilitative Causative aha, as the ungrammaticality
of (145)b. demonstrates. Leaving the Causee out does not help re-
trieve the grammaticality of the sequence, as shown in (145)b.
Instead, Malagasy resorts to Raising-to-Su modal predicates like
afaka "can", as illustrated in (145)c., to egress the intended
meaning.
4.1.21 The Abilitative Causative Aha and Adjectival Predicates
The Abilitative Causative aha can take an adjective in
the lower clause, as is evident from the grammaticality pattern
of the following sequences. In each case, the clause embedded in
the a. sentence is shown in isolation as sequence b.

102
(146)a. N - aha - tsara an'i Jeanne io fanafody io.
past-caus-good Jeanne this medecine this
"This medicine improved Jeanne's health," or
"Jeanne's health improved thanks to the medicine."
b. Tsara i Jeanne,
good Jeanne
"Jeanne is good," i.e.
"Jeanne is in good health."
(147)a. N - aha - ratsy an'i Jeanne io fanafody io.
past-caus-bad Jeanne this itedecine this
"This medicine turned Jeanne into a bad person," or
"Jeanne became a bad person because of the medicine."
b. Ratsy i Jeanne,
bad Jeanne
"Jeanne is bad," i.e.
"Jeanne is a bad person."
The meanings of (146)a. and (147)a. are dependent on the inter-
pretation of the lcwer clauses found in (146)b. and (147)b.
respectively: the first refers to Jeanne's health, whereas the
second alludes to her character.
4.1.22 The Abilitative Causative Aha and Transitive Verbs in
the Lower Clause.
It is not possible to embed a transitive verb under the
Abilitative Causative aha:

103
(148) a. H-andefa ny fiara i Paoly.
fut-drive the car Paul
"Paul will be driving the car."
b. *N - ah(a)- andefa ny fiara i Paoly.

past-caus-drive the car Paul
c. Afaka n-andefa ny fiara i Paoly.
can past-drive the car Paul
"Paul was able to drive the car."
d. vita-n'i Paoly ny n-andefa ny fiara.
done-by Paul coirp past-drive the car
"The driving the car is/can be done by Paul," i.e.
"Paul managed to drive the car."
Instead, Malagasy uses a Saising-to-Su modal predicate, here
afaka "can", as seen in (148)c., to express the Abilitative in-
terpretation and a Sentential Su construction, as shown in
(148)d., if the focus is on the perfective aspect, with the mean-
ing of the English verb "manage". As for the permission reading
of English can, this language utilizes another Raising-to-Su
modal, m-ahazo instead of afaka.
4.1.23 The Abilitative Causative Aha and Clause-Union Followed
by Affixal Passive.
It is impossible to have Clause-Union before Affixal
Passive under the Abilitative Causative aha:

104
(149)a. N - aha - resy an'i Paoly i Jaona.
past-caus-in-defeat Paul John
"John was able to cause Paul to be in defeat," i.e.
"John managed to defeat Paul."
b. *N - aha - rese -n' i Jaona i Paoly.
past-caus—in-defeat-by John Paul
*"Paul was managed to be caused to be in defeat by
John," i.e.
"John managed to defeat Paul."
c. No - rese -n' i Jaona i Paoly.
pass-in-defeat-by John Paul
"Paul was deliberately inflicted a defeat by John."
m (149)a., we have an active voice verb and the output is gram-
matical, whereas in (149)b. Affixal Passive with the suffix ina
has applied after Clause-Union, and the resulting sequence is
irretrievably ungrammatical. However, sentence (149)c. shows that
if the Affixal Passive circumfix no...ina replaces aha, then the
output becomes grammatical. In other words, a prefix substitution
has to operate.
4.1.24 The Manipulative Causative Ank(a) and Affixal Passive
The Manipulative Causative anka does not allow Affixal
Passive with the perfective aspect-marker voa for a transitive
verb or tafa for an intransitive verb in the lower clause:

105
(150)a. N - ank - adala an'i Paoly i Jeanne,
past-caus-crazy Paul Jeanne
"Jeanne made Paul lose his mind."
b. *N - anka - voa/tafa - adala an'i Paoly i Jeanne,
past-caus-perfective-crazy Paul Jeanne
No interpretation whatsoever can be assigned to (150)b.
4.1.25 The Manipulative Causative Ank(a) and a Transitive or
Intransitive Verb in the Lower Clause.
Hie Manipulative Causative anka cannot embed an in-
transitive or a transitive verb:
(151)a. H - andeha i Jeanne,
fut-go Jeanne
"Jeanne will be leaving."
b. *N - ank - andeha (an'i Jeanne) i Paoly.
(152)a. H - andidy ny mofo i Jeanne,
fut-cut the bread Jeanne
b. *N - ank - andidy ny mofo (an'i Jeanne) i Paoly.

106
Leaving out the Causee NP i Jeanne from the embedded clause does
not help improve the ungraimaticality of the sentence (151) b.,
vrtiich remains totally incomprehensible. The same holds for
(152)b. The intended meaning for (151)b. is "Paul caused Jeanne
to leave," whereas for (152)b. it is "Paul made Jeanne cut the
bread."
4.1.26 The ffenipulative Causative Ank (a) and Affixal Passive
After Clause-Union.
Affixal Passive can apply after Clause-iJnion when the
higher predicate is the ffenipulative Causative anka. In typical
cases, the compound verb acquires the meaning of the Ingressive
aspect:
(153)a. N - ank - adala - in'i Jeanne i Paoly
past-caus-crazy-by Jeanne Paul
(sane as (116)b.)
"Paul was made crazy by Jeanne," i.e.
"Jeanne tried to make Paul lose his mind."
b. N - ank - adala an'i Paoly i Jeanne
past-caus-crazy Paul Jeanne
(sane as (116)a.)
"Jeanne made Paul lose his mind," i.e.
"Jeanne tried to make Paul lose his mind."
c. Adala i Paoly.
crazy Paul
"Paul is crazy."
107
rflie simplex sentence (153)c. has been embedded under the Manipul-
ative Causative anka, as shown in (153)b. In (153)a., once
Clause-Onion has taken place, thus yielding (153)b., the latter
is passivized.
4.1.27 The Manipulative Causative Ank(a) and a Root Passive in
the Lower Clause.
The Manipulative Causative ank(a) cannot embed a root
passive, especially if the latter is one where the Causee retains
Control, like Lasa "gone":
(154) a. Lasa i Jeanne,
gone Jeanne
"Jeanne is gone," i.e.
"Jeanne has left."
b. *N - anka - lasa an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-cau s-gone Jeanne Paul
This ungranmaticality pattern suggests that the restriction is by
and large syntactic and not semantic in nature since no root pas-
sive of any kind can be embedded under the Ifcnipulative anka.
4.1.28 The Manipulative Causative Ank(a) and Mjectival Pred-
icates in the Lower Clause.
However, the ttenipulative Causative anka can take cer-
tain adjectives:
108
(155)a. H - arary i Jeanne,
fat-sick Jeanne
"Jeanne will be sick."
b. N - ank - arary an'i Jeanne ny sakafo.
past-caus-sick Jeanne the food
"The food made Jeanne sick."
(156)a. H - atanjaka i Jeanne,
fut-strong Jeanne
"Jeanne is strong."
b. *N - ank - atanjaka an'i Jeanne ny sakafo.
past-caus-strong Jeanne the food
"The food made Jeanne strong."
Thus, it accepts (h)arary "will-be-sick", but not (h) atanjaka
"will-be-strong." The predicate of (155)a. in combination with
the Manipulative Causative anka lends itself to a Gontactive
interpretation, where the time of the Causal event and that of
its result are so close as to coincide with each other, whereas
(156)a. rules this out. Furthermore, notice that neither (155)b.
nor (156)b. can undergo Affixal Passive after Clause-Union, which
suggests that a causal interpretation should also be possible for
(155)b. And this turns out to be the case. Since Affixal Passive
constitutes a diagnostic test for the Manipulative Causative in-
terpretation and since (155)b. can be assigned a Causal inter-
pretation, the latter should be considered the usual, most
natural meaning associated with this type of construction.

109
4 2.1 Itie Causal Causative Aha and Perfective Aspect Passives
Ihe Causal Causative aha allows Affixal Passive with
yea or tafa in the lower clause before Clause-Union takes place:
(157) Ny heri-ny no n-aha-taf (a)-akatra an'i Paoly.
the strength-his part past-caus-pass-go-up Paul
"It was because of his strength that Paul managed to go
upstairs."
qhe embedded clause comprises a predicate with the perfective
aspect-marker tafa since the verb is an intransitive one. We have
already seen one case where the embedded predicate is a transit-
ive verb, as in (121), and therefore the perfective aspect-marker
to be used is voa.
4.2.2 The Causal Causative Aha and Passive in the lower
Clause.
The Causal Causative aha allows a transitive verb in
the lower clause provided the latter is passivized:
(158)a. N - ikapoka an'i Paoly R noho ny ditra-ny.
past-strike Paul x because-of the mischief-his
"X punished Paul because of his mischief."
b. Voa- kapoka i Paoly noho ny ditra-ny.
pass-strike Paul because-of the mischief-his
"Paul has been punished because of his mischief."

110
c. Ny ditra-ny no n-aha-voa-kapoka an'i Paoly.
the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-strike Paul

"'Because
i of his mischief, Paul was punished.''
In (158)a., the predicate is a transitive verb whose Su is R,
short for Ranona, "x," in Malagasy, and whose object is an'i
Paoly "Paul, direct object." (158)b. represents the passivized
version with omission of the Agent, which is natural when the
aspect is perfective and the Agent unspecified. (158)c. is the
final output after Raising of ny ditrany of (158)b. to Su pos-
ition and Fronting of the sane NP separated from the rest of the
sentence by the particle no.
4.2.3 The Causal Causative Aha and Intransitive Verbs in the
Lower Clause.
The Causal Causative aha allows an intransitive verb in
the lower ^clause provided the latter is in the passive form with
the perfective aspect-marker tafa:
(159)a. N - iakatra i Paoly.
past-go-up Paul
"Paul went upstairs. it
b. Taf (a)-akatra i Paoly.
pass-go-up Paul
"Paul managed/was able to go upstairs.ii
c. *Ny heri-ny no n-ah(a)-akatra an'i Paoly.
the strength-his part past-caus-go-up Paul

Ill
(j. Ny heri-ny no n-aha-taf(a)-akatra an'i Paoly.
the strength-his part past-caus-pass-go-up Paul
"Because of his strength, Paul managed to go upstairs."
(159) a. shows the sinplex sentence with an intransitive verb in
isolation. In (159)b., the intransitive verb has been passivized
with the use of the perfective aspect-marker tafa. Ihe ungramraat-
icality of the sequence shown in (159)c., as opposed to the gram-
maticality of the one in (159)d., is due to the fact that in the
former the perfective aspect-marker tafa has been left out. This
corresponds to a non-application of Passive in the lower clause
and suggests that Passive is mandatory.
4.2.4 The Causal Causative Aha and Root Passives in the lower
Clause.
The Causal Causative aha allows a root passive in the
lower clause:
(160) a. Hay rivotra no n-aha-rendrika ny santoo.
the wind part past-caus-sunk the boat
"It was because of the wind that the boat got sunk."
b. Rendrika ny sambo.
sunk the boat
"The boat got sunk."
Topically, the predicate of the lower clause is one where the
Causee does not retain Control, as is evident in the case of
rendrika "got sunk," with a perfective aspect interpretation.

112
4.2.5 Hie Causal Causative Aha and Adjectival Predicates in
the Lower Clause.
The Causal Causative aha allows an adjective in the
embedded clause: '
(161)a. Ny asa-ny no n-aha-fptsy ny volo-n'i Paoly.
the work-his part past-caus-white the hair-of Paul
"It was because of his job that Paul's hair got white.11
b. Fotsy ny volo-n'i Paoly t-amin' ny asa-ny.
white the hair-of Paul past-because-of the job-his
"Paul's hair got white because of his job."
Here, as before, the adjective in the lower clause is one which
typically does not attribute any Control to the Causee.
4.2.6 The Causal Causative Aha and Affixal Passive After
Clause-Union.
Ihe Causal Causative aha does not allow Affixal Passive
after Clause-Uhian:
(162)a. *N - aha - fotsi-n' ny asa-ny ny volo-n'i Paoly.

past-caus-white-by the job-his the hair-of Paul
•"Paul's hair was whitened by his job."
b. *Ny volo-n'i Paoly no n-aha-fotsi-n' ny asa-ny.
the hair-of Paul part past-caus-white-by the job-his
*"It was Paul's hair that was whitened by his job."

113
Whether Fronting-of-Su applies, as in (162)b., or not, as in
(162)a., the output remains irretrievably ungrammatical.
4.2.7 The Causal Causative amp(a) and Perfective Aspect Verbs
in the lower Clause,
the Causal Causative amp(a) allows Affixal Passive with
tìie perfective aspect-marker voa on transitive verbs, as in
(158)c., and the perfective aspect-marker tafa on intransitive
verbs, as in (159) d.
4.2.8 The Causal Causative Amp (a) and Transitive Verbs in the
Lower Clause.
Hie Causal Causative amp(a) allows a transitive verb in
the lower clause provided the latter is passivized with voa, as
illustrated by the following sequences:
(163)a. Hifidy an'i Jeanne R noho ny hatsaratarehi-ny.
fut-choose Jeanne x because-of the beauty-her
"X will choose Jeanne because of her beauty."
b. Voa-fidy i Jeanne noho ny hatsaratarehi-ny.
pass-dhoose Jeanne because-of the beauty-her
"Jeanne has been chosen because of her beauty."
c. Ny hatsaratarehi-ny no n-ampa-voa-fidy an'i Jeanne,
the beauty-her part past-caus-pass-choose Jeanne
"It was because of her beauty that Jeanne has been
chosen."
114
(164) a. Hifidy an'i J(eanne) i P(aoly) noho ny hatsaratarehiny.
fut-choose Jeanne Paul due-to the beauty-her
"P(aul) will choose J(eanne) because of her beauty."
b. *Voa-fidi-n' i P i J noho ny hatsarataréhi-ny.
pass-choose-by P J due-to the beauty-her ,
"J was chosen by P because of her beauty."
c. *Ny hatsaratarehi-ny no n-ampa-voafidi-n' i P an'i J.
the beauty-her part past-caus-pass-choose-by
"It was because of her beauty that Jeanne was chosen by
Paul."
The ungrammaticality of (164)b., as opposed to the grammaticality
of (163)b., suggests that it is usually the case that the Agent
is deleted when the verb is in the perfective aspect. Now, when
such an Agent is retained and the entire clause is embedded under
the Causal Causative amp (a), the output, as shown in (164)c., is
irretrievably ungraiunatical. This contrasts with the grairmatical-
ity of (163) c., where the Agent has been deleted from the lower
clause. In both instances, Fronting-of-Su has taken place and the
only difference pertains to the deletion or retention of the
Agent.
4.2.9 The Causal Causative Anp(a) and Intransitive Verbs in
the Lower Clause.
The Causal Causative amp(a) allows an intransitive verb
in the lower clause provided that the latter is passivized with
tafa:
115
(165) a. N-ijanona i J(eanne) noho ny havizana-ny.

past-stay J(eanne) because-of the exhaustion-her
"J(eanne) stayed behind because of her exhaustion."
b. làfa-janona i J noho ny havizana-ny.
pass-stay J because-of the exhaustion-her

"J (happened to) stay behind cwing to her exhaustion."
c. Ny havizana-ny no n-ampa-tafa-janona an'i J.
the exhaustion-her part past-caus-pass-stay J
"Because of her exhaustion, J (happened to) stay
behind."
(166)a. N-itresaka ny fitaratra t-amin' ilay entana.
past-break-up the glass past-because-of the luggage
"Ihe glass broke up because of the luggage."
b. *Tafa-tresaka ny fitaratra t-amin' ilay entana.
pass-break-up the glass past-because-of the luggage
c. *Ilay entana no n-ampa-tafa-tresaka ny fitaratra.
the lugggage part past-caus-pass-break-up the glass
Although the intransitive predicate nijanona "stayed behind" in
(165)a. attributes to its Su some degree of Control, the use of
the perfective aspect-marker tafa wipes out any such Control so

116
that (165)b. now irrplies that the Su exercised no Control what-
soever over the situation, to a point of acquiring an Adversative
meaning.
4.2.10 The Causal Causative Amp (a) and Foot Passives in the
Dower Clause.
Hie Causal Causative amp (a) allows root passives in the
enfoedded clause:
(167)a. Ny rivotra no n-ampa-latsaka ny taratasy.
the wind part past-caus-dropped the letter
"It was because of the wind that the letter dropped
onto the floor," or
"Because of the wind, the letter dropped onto the
floor."
b. Latsaka ny taratasy.
dropped the letter
"The letter dropped to the floor," or
"Hie letter is on the floor."
Latsaka "in the state of having been dropped" in (167)b. belongs
to the so-called root passive class where the Su is not an Agent
but rather a Patient.
4.2.11 Hie Causal Causative Amp (a) and Adjectival Predicates.
Hie Causal Causative anp(a) allows an adjective in the
lower clause:
117
(168)a. Ny fofo-ny no n-ampa-ratsy an'io fanafody io.
the smell-its part past-caus-bad this medecine this
"It is because of its smell that this is bad medecine,"
i.e. "What makes this medicine bad is its smell."
b. Ratsy io fanafody io.
bad this medicine this
"This medicine is bad."
4.2.12 The Causal Causative Amp(a) and Affixal Passive After
Clause-union.
In the case of the Causal Causative amp (a), it is not
possible to have Affixal Passive after Clause-Union:
(169) *I Jeanne no n-anpa-voa-fidi-n' ny hatsaratarehi-ny.
Jeanne part past-caus-pass-choose-by beauty-her
(170) *I Jeanne no n-ampa-tafa-jano-n' ny havizana-ny.
Jeanne part past-caus-pass-stay-by the exhaustion-her
In (169) and (170), as is evident in the linear order of anpa and
voa for the first and tafa for the second, Clause-Union takes
place before Passive, Whose overt trace is -n' in both instances,
is made to apply.
118
4.2.13 The Causal Causative An(a) and Affixal Passive in the
Perfective Aspect in the Lower Clause.
The Causal Causative an(a) cannot embed a verb with the
perfective aspect-marker voa, as shown in (238) of the present
Chapter, or tafa, as in the following illustrative exarrple:
(171) *Ny havizana-ny no n-ana-tafa-janona an'i Jeanne.
the exhaustion-her part past-caus-per f-stay Jeanne
"It was because of her exhaustion that Jeanne stayed."
The interpretation given under the sequence is the one expected
in English, but the sentence (171) cannot be assigned any meaning
at all in Malagasy.
4.2.14 The Causal Causative An(a) and Transitive Verbs in the
Lower Clause.
The Causal Causative an(a) does not allow a transitive
verb in the lower clause even if it is passivized with the per-
fective aspect-marker voa, as seen in (238)c.
4.2.15 The Causal Causative An(a) and Intransitive Verbs in
the Lower Clause.
The Causal Causative an(a) cannot embed an intransitive
verb:
(172)a. H-ilatsaka ny orana noho ny hafanana.
fut-drop the rain because-of the heat
"The rain will drop because of the heat," i.e.
"It will rain because of the heat."

119
b. *Ny hafanana no n-an-ilatsaka ny orana.
the heat part past-caus-drop the rain
"It was because of the heat that it rained."
Hilatsaka of (172) a. is an intransitive verb and as such, cannot
be embedded under the Causal Causative an (a). Hi is holds true of
any and all intransitive verbs and suffers no exception.
4.2.16 Hie Causal Causative an(a) and Root Passives in the
Lower Clause.
Hie Causal Causative an (a) can take a root passive
provided the latter is a Psychological predicate, as in (7)c.:
(173)a. Latsaka ny taratasy tamin' ny rivotra.
dropped the letter past-because-of the wind
"Hie letter dropped because of the wind."
b. *Ny rivotra no n-an-datsaka ny taratasy.
the wind part past-caus-dropped the letter
"It was because of the wind that the letter dropped."
(174)a. N-an-datsaka an'i Paoly tamin' ilay vola i Jaona.
past-caus-dropped Paul past-with the money John
"John enrolled Paul (in a school) with the money."
b. N-an-datsaha-n' i Jaona an'i Paoly ilay vola.
past-caus-drop-by John Paul the money
"Hie noney was used by John to enroll Paul."

120
(173) b. with the Causative an (a) can only be assigned a Manipul-
ative reading and is ungramnatical in the intended interpretation
given under the sequence. As a matter of fact, as shown in
(174)b., Affixal Passive can apply after Clause-Union with this
verb to yield the Manipulative interpretation.
4.2.17 The Causal Causative An(a) and Adjectival Predicates in
the Lower Clause.
Ihe Causal Causative an (a) can take an adjective pro-
vided it is a Psychological predicate, as shown above. But even
then, some Psychological predicates cannot be embedded under
Causal an (a):
(175)a. Sahirana i Jeanne tamin' ilay resaka.
concerned Jeanne because-of the talk
"Jeanne was concerned because of the talk."
b. Ilay resaka no n-an-(s)ahirana an'i Jeanne,
the talk part past-caus-concerned Jeanne
"It was because of the talk that Jeanne was concerned."
(176)a. Sosotra i Jeanne tamin' ilay resaka.
angry Jeanne because-of the talk
"Jeanne was angry because of the talk."
b. *Ilay resaka no n-an-(s)osotra an'i Jeanne,
the talk part past-caus-angry Jeanne

121
c. Hay resaka no n-aha-sosotra an'i Jeanne,
the talk part past-caus-angry Jeanne
"It was because of the talk that Jeanne grew angry."
(177) a. *N-iha-sahirana tsikelikely i Jeanne.

past-ingr-concerned little-by-little Jeanne
"Jeanne was itore and more concerned."
b. N-iha-sosotra tsikelikely i Jeanne,
past-ingr-angry little-by-little Jeanne
"Jeanne got more and more angry."
The Psychological predicate in (175)a. poses no problem since the
output, as seen in (175)b., is perfectly grammatical. But the one
in (176)b. yields an irretrievably ungrammatical sequence. This
suggests that there exists one additional restriction, i.e. the
opposition between Punctual and non-Punctual aspect. Thus, in
(177)a., we have a Punctual predicate, as can be inferred from
the ungrammatically of the sequence, as opposed to (177)b.,
where the predicate is non-Punctual and therefore can enter into
combination with the Ingressive aspect prefix iha "to become."
Hswever, rote that, unlike (176)b., the sequence (177)a. can be
assigned a meaning with a more elaborate context of use.
4.2.18 The Causal Causative An (a) and Affixal Passive After
Clause-Union.
With the Causal Causative an(a), Affixal Passive cannot
apply after Clause-Union:

122
(178)a. Ny vola no n-ana-(s)ahirana an'i Jeanne,
the money part past-caus-concerned Jeanne
"It was because of the money that Jeanne was
concerned."
b. *l Jeanne no n-an-(s)ahirana-n' ny vola.
Jeanne part past-caus-concerned-by the money
Affixal Passive has applied after Clause-Union in (178)b. and the
output is irretrievably ungrammatical.
4.2.19 The Causal Causative Ank(a) and Affixal Passive in the
Perfective Aspect in the Icwer Clause.
Hie Causal Causative ank (a) does not allcw Affixal Pas-
sive with tafa or with voa in the lower clause:
(179)a. Tafa-tontoona i Paoly tamin' ilay horohorontany.
pass-fall Paul because-of the earthquake
"Paul fell because of the earthquake."
b. *llay horohorontany no n-anka-tafa-tombona an'i Paoly.
that earthquake part past-cau-pass-fall Paul
c. Voa-kapoka i Paoly noho ny ditra-ny.
pass-strike Paul because-of the mischief-his
"Paul was punished because of his mischief."

123
<3. *Ny ditra-ny no n-anka-voa-kapoka an'i Paoly.
the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-strike Paul
(179) a. with the intransitive verb m-i-tombona "to fall (lit-
erally: present-prefix-root)" in the perfective aspect with tafa
and (179)c. with the transitive verb m-i-kapoka "to strike (lit-
erally: present-prefix-root)" in the perfective aspect with voa
are perfectly grammatical. Now, viien these verbs get embedded
under the Causal Causative predicate anka, the outputs, as shewn
respectively in (179)b. and (179)d., are irretrievably ungrammat-
ical.
4.2.20 Ihe Causal Causative Ank(a) and Transitive Verbs in the
Lower Clause.
With the Causal Causative ank(a), a transitive verb
cannot be embedded even if the latter is passivized, as seen in
(179)d. Furthernore, rot even a predicate which optionally takes
the perfective aspect prefix voa, like latsaka "in the state of
having been dropped," can be embedded:
(180)a. (Voa-)latsaka ny taratasy noho i Paoly.
(pass-)dropped the letter due-to
"The letter has been posted thanks to Paul."
b. *I Paoly no n-ank-(voa-)latsaka ny taratasy.
Paul part past-caus-(pass)-dropped the letter

124
4.2.21 Hie Causal Causative Ank (a) and Intransitive Verbs in
the Dower Clause.
Hie Causal Causative ank (a) does not allow an intrans-
itive verb even if it is passivized with tafa, as seen in (179)d.
Not even a predicate which optionally takes the perfective aspect
prefix tafa, like latsaka, can be embedded:
(181)a. (Tafa-)latsak('i Jaona) i Paoly.
(pass)-enroll (-by John) Paul
"John managed to get Paul enrolled."
b. *I Jaona no n-anka-(tafa-)latsaka an'i Paoly.
John part past-caus-pass-dropped Paul
4.2.22 Hie Causal Causative Ank(a) and Root Passives in the
Lower Clause.
Hie Causal Causative anka does not allow a root passive
in the lower clause:
(182)a. Potika ny fitaratra tamin' ny rivotra.
broken the glass because-of the wind
"Hie glass is/was broken by the wind."
b. *Ny rivotra no n-anka-potika ny fitaratra.
the wind part past-caus-broken the glass

125
potika "to be in the state of having been broke" in (182) a. be-
longs to the finite set of so-called root passives whose main

characteristic is that the Su does not encode an Agent but rather
a patient and yet the sentence type where it shows up is basic in
the sense that Passive has not applied.
4.2.23 The Causal Causative Ank(a) and Adjectival Predicates
The Causal Causative ank (a) allows only a limited set
of adjectives:
(183)a. H-atavy i Jeanne amin' ny sakafo.
fut-fat Jeanne because-of the food
"Jeanne will get fat with the food."
b. Ny sakafo no n-ank-atavy an'i Jeanne,
the food part past-caus-fat Jeanne
"It was the food which caused Jeanne to get fat."
(184)a. Fotsy ny volo-n' i Paoly tamin' ny asa-ny.
white the hair-of Paul because-of the job-his
"Paul's hair got white because of his job."
b. *Ny asa-ny no n-anka-fotsy ny volo-n'i Paoly.
the job-his part past-caus-white the hair-of Paul
In (183)b., the predicate (h-)atavy "(fut-)fat", as shown in
(183)a., has been embedded under the Causal Causative anka and
126
the output is perfectly grammatical. However, in (184)b., where
the predicate fotsy "white", as shown in (184)a., has been em-
bedded under the same Causal Causative prefix, the resulting
sequence is irretrievably ungrammatical.
4.2.24 The Causal Causative Ank(a) and Affixal Passive After
Clause-Union.
Hie Causal Causative ank (a) typically disallows Affixal
Passive after Clause-Union:
(185) *N - anka - tavi - z - in'i Paoly i Jeanne.
past-caus-fat-epenth-by Paul Jeanne
*"Paul fattened Jeanne."
Although, as seen in (183)b., the sequence anka-tavy "to cause to
become fat" is permissible in Malagasy, it is not possible to
passivize the entire complex predicate after Clause-Union, as the
ungrammatically of (185) demonstrates: the epenthetic z breaks

i
up the sequence of two identical vowels, i.e. the first being the
end of the root tavi (conventionally written y in final position
of a word) and the second, the initial of the Passive suffix ina;
the NP i Paoly, the Agent, is attached to the Passive suffix ina
the usual way, i.e. the final vcwel of ina deletes. In this par-
ticular case, since the embedded predicate is not necessarily
perfective, the Agent is preferably expressed in the clause. How-
ever, this does not improve the grammaticality of (185) in any
way whatsoever.
127
4 2.25 Suirmary: The Nature of the Embedded Predicate.
Most of the findings made in this Section can be repor-
ted onto a table giving the different possibilities for each
Causative construction (see Table 4). As we move from the Unmar-
ked "neutral" Directive to the Abilitative and the Manipulative
anka, the type of predicate that can be embedded changes from a
typically transitive verb phrase to a root passive or an adject-
ive; then, with the Marked constructions, as the nunfoer of clas-
ses of predicates that can be embedded decreases —from two for
Causal Causatives amp (a) and aha to oily one for the Causal Caus-
ative anka and even then the set of predicates that can be embed-
ded under the latter is very restricted— the importance of the
restrictions becomes evident: thus, for the Causal Causatives aha
and amp(a), the lower verb must be passivized with the perfective
aspect voa or tafa provided it is transitive or intransitive;
otherwise, if it is neither, no restrictions apply to the classes
of root passives and adjectives. For the Causal Causative an(a),
the two classes it can embed are subject to the restriction that
the lower predicate be a Psychological predicate whereas for the
Causal Causative anka, there are very probably other factors
involved since the set of adjectives that can get embedded
appears to be very restricted.

128
Table 4
Hie Different Types of Embedded Predicates
Causative Constructions Types of Predicates
A B C D E F
"Neutral" Directive 3mp(a) * + + * * *
Unmarked Manipulative artp(a) * * + + * *
Manipulative an(a) * * * + + +
Abilitative aha * * * * + +
Causal aha + +/* +/* * + +
Marked Causal an$>(a) + +/* +/* * + +
Causal an (a) * * * * +/* +/*
Causal ank(a)
Nbte: * = Unqranmatical A = Voa/Tafa
+ = Grammatical B = Typically Transitive Verb
+/* = Restriction C = Typically Intransitive Verb

? = Very Limited Set D = Clause-Union precedes
Affixal Passive
E = Root Passive
F = Adjective.
129
Section 5
Fusion
5.0.1 The Fusion Parameter.
Hiis Section will address the issue of the Fusion of
the higher and the lower predicates as well as their degree of
fusion. It will be shown (see Table 5) that:
1. the "persuasive," the "coercive," and the "permis-
sive" Directive constructions do not show fusion;
2. the "neutral" Directive, the Manipulative, the Abil-
itative, and the Causal constructions present evidence that sug-
gests that fusion takes place;
3. the features characteristic of the first set alluded
to in 1 above cluster in an area —to be defined under 5.0.3 be-
low— whose values are negative, i.e. indicating a lack of fu-
sion;
4. those characteristics of a subset of the second set
alluded to above in 2, specifically the first three, cluster in
another area whose values are predominantly positive, i.e. sig-
nalling maximal fusion (this is the Unmarked series of Causative
prefixes defined in the next Section); and
5. the features of the subset of Causative constru-
ctions called Causal, i.e. the set of Marked Causative prefixes,
occupy an area somewhat parallel but not identical with that of
the non-fusion set, as defined above in 1, and whose values are
exclusively negative.
130
5.0.2 Criteria for Fusion.
Whether a particular construction shows fusion or not
will be assessed mainly, but not exclusively, in terms of the
stepwise denotion of the underlying Su of the lower clause down
the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy, as outlined in Comrie (1976b).
As for the degree of fusion, it will be evaluated using
the following processes on the lower predicate:
1. Negation Operator Tsy-Placerrent;
2. Affixal Passive with voa or tafa;
3. Pronominalization to an independent pronoun (see

5.6.1 of Chapter Three for further details);
4. Reflexivization to ny tenany (see 5.3 of Chapter
Three);
5. Reflexivization to tena (see 1.0 of Chapter Three);
and
6. Clause-Union preceding Affixal Passive.
It will be assumed that criteria 5 and 6 have positive
values as far as fusion is concerned and therefore indicates max-
imal fusion, whereas criteria 1, 2, and 3 suggest a negative
amount.
5.0.3 Preview.
At the end of the present Section, a table will be
drawn utilizing two axes:
1. one, horizontal from left to right, lists the pro-
cesses enumerated under 5.0.2 in the relevant order; and
2. the other, vertical, listing the different Causative
constructions with the corresponding prefixes, incorporating the

131
findings relative to the other five parameters under investig-
ation.
The areas designated under 5.0.1 refer to the clusters
of features that each construction possesses.
5.1.1 Fusion and the Directive Causative Constructions.
There is no fusion in the "persuasive*" the "coercive,"
and the "permissive" Directive constructions since:

1. in the case of the first, as shown in (l)a. or
(38)a., for example, the Causee — a s defined under 1.0— occupies
the genitive position so that stepwise demotion down the Keenan-
Comrie Hierarchy could not have taken place; and
2. as for the last two, there is no demotion either
since, as will be shown in Chapter Five, Section 2, an Equi-2
construction is involved which deletes the embedded Su.
5.1.2 Pronominalization, Negation, and Affixal Passive Tests.
In all three constructions, Pronominalization to an
independent pronoun, i.e. azy "him/her," for example, Placement
of the Negation Operator Tsy, and Affixal Passive are allowed in
the lower clause:
(186)a. Nanao (*izay)(tsy) hikarakarana azy^ i paoly^.
past-do (camp) (not) fut-cire-prepare hiiru Paul^
"Paul was doing so that he would(not)be taken care of."
b. Nanery an'i Jeanne(tsy) hikarakara azy^ i paoly^.
past-force Jeanne(not) fut-prepare him^ Paul^
"Paul was forcing Jeanne (not) to take care of him."

132
c. Name la an'i Jeanne (tsy) hikarakara azy^ i Paoly^
past-let Jeanne (not) fut-prepare him^ Paul^
"Paul was allowing Jeanne (not) to take care of him."
(187)a. Nanery an'i Jeanne ho-didi-na i Paoly.
past-force Jeanne fut-operate-on-pass Paul
"Paul was forcing Jeanne to be operated on."
b. Namela an'i Jeanne (tsy) ho-didina i Paoly
past-let Jeanne not fut-past-pass Paul
"Paul allowed Jeanne not to be operated on."
All the sentences in (186) comprise the independent pronoun azy
"him/her," coreferential with the higher Su. All of them are
grammatical. Likewise, they can all have Tsy "not" in the lower
clause without any change in their grammaticality pattern. Fur-
thermore, in (186), the oonplementizer izay is obligatory; other-
wise, the output becomes irretrievably ungrammatical. Also, the
embedded verb shows up in the circumstantial voice. Passivization
has also applied to the embedded verbs in (187) a. and (187) b.,
although there is a major difference between the two in that the
circumstantial voice is mandatory in (186) since the sentence
will be ungrammatical otherwise, whereas in the last two cases,
Passivization applies optionally (see 2.1.1 and 2.1.2).
5.1.3 Reflexivization Tests.
In a "persuasive" Directive construction, Reflexiviz-
ation to ny tenany/tena is not relevant after Clause-Union since

133
the process would have applied on a lower cycle if the conditions
0f the rule were met before Equi-1 deletes the lower Su:
(188) a. ?Nanao izay hikarakarana {ny tenanyi/tenai} i Paolyi.
past-do comp fut-cire-prepare self^ Paul^
b. Natao-n' i Paoly izay hikarakarana {ny tenany^tena^}.
pass-do-by Paul^ coup fut-c ire-prepare self^
"Paul did whatever (was needed) to take care of
himself."
c. Nanao [ s 0 izay hikarakara an'i P^ P^] i P^]/.
In (188)a., the verb manao "to do" is in the active voice in the
past tense and the sentence sounds slightly less natural than
(188)b., where the same verb, manao, is in the passive voice.
(188)c. represents the presumed underlying sequence corresponding
to either. The possibility of Reflexivization to tena shows that
at the stage the process applied, both the trigger and its victim
were clausemates, as shown in (188)c.
5.1.4 Fusion and the "Persuasive" Directive Causative.
In a "persuasive" Directive construction, there is no
fusion since the higher and the lower predicates are separated by
the obligatory conplementizer izay, as can be inferred from the
ungrairmaticality of the sequence without the conplementizer in
(186)a. Hie rule of Affixal Passive after Clause-Onion, there-
fore, is not relevant.

134
5.1.5 Reflexivization, the "Coercive" and "Permissive"
Directive Causative constructions.
With the "coercive" and the "permissive" constructions,
Reflexivization to ny tenany or tena is ruled out if the higher
Su is the trigger:
(189)a. *Nanery an'i J(eanne) hikarakara {ny tenany^/tena^}
past-force J(eanne) fut-prepare selfi
i P(aoly) i .
P(aul) .
*"P(aul) was forcing J(eanne) to take care of himself."
b. /[glNanery an'i J^ [gghikarakara an'i Pj i J^] i Pj gl ]/
(190)a. *Nairela an'i J hikarakara {ny tenanyi/tenai} i P^.
past-let Jeanne fut-prepare selfi Pi
was allowing J to take care of himself^."
b. /[glNamela an'i J^ [gghikarakara an'i Pj i Jj_] i Pj]/.
Assuming the underlying representations in (189)b. and 190)b.,
for complex sentences with either manery "force" or mamela "let"
as their main verb, on cycle SO, the requirements for Reflexiv-
ization are not net. On cycle SI, Equi-2 deletes the lower Su
under coreference with the higher DO. This is followed by Reflex-
ivization to either ny tenany or tena. Hie outputs, as shown in
(189)a. and (190)a. respectively, are irretrievably ungrammatical
although the intended neaning for each was provided.

135
s.i.6 Affixal Passive, the "Coercive" and "Permissive"
Directive Causative Constructions.
In the "coercive" and the "permissive" constructions,
there is no fusion since an entire NP separates the higher and
the lower predicates, as shown in 5.1.2. Hie rule of Affixal
passive after Clause-Union is, therefore, not relevant.
5.2.1 Fusion and the "tfeutral" Directive Causative Amp (a)
Construction.
With the "neutral1' Directive amp (a), there is fusion
between the higher and the lower predicates since the enfoedded Su
of the underlying sequence gets demoted to the next available
spot on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy. Thus:
(191)a. H-andèha i Jeanne.
fut-go Jeanne
"Jeanne will be leaving."
b. N-amp-andeha an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
"Paul was having Jeanne go."
c. *N-amp-andeha 0 i Jeanne i Paoly.
When the lower clause is on its cwn, as in (191)a., there is no
preposition preceding its Su and the sequence is grammatical, but
vtei it gets embedded under the Causative amp (a), as in (191) b.,
136
which is grammatical, as opposed to the ungrammatical (191)c
the preposition an, marking the Direct Object or DO position,
becomes mandatory. This is what has been referred to under 5.0.2
as demotion (for further details, see 2.4.0 of Chapter Six).
5.2.2 Negation-Placement in the Icwer Clause.
Tsy-Placement cannot apply in the lower clause:
(192) *N-anapa-tsi-andeha an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-not-go Jeanne Paul
"Paul was having Jeanne not go."
The Negation Operator tsy "not" is embedded between the Causative
predicate anpa and the lower verb (h-)andeha "(future-)go," and
its final vowel is conventionally written with an _i, as opposed
to y. in word-final position. This proves that Negation has appli-
ed on the lower clause. Furthermore, in Malagasy, an initial h is
optionally deleted and it tends to be deleted in ny dialect. In
most other positions, the h is preserved merely to help break up
a sequence of two or more vowels and prevents it from undergoing
dipthongization or coalescence.
5.2.3 Affixal Passive in the Dower Clause.
Affixal Passive cannot apply in the lower clause:
(193) a. N-anp-andidy ny mofo an'i Jeanne i Paoly.

137
b. *N-arapa-voa-didi-n1 (an) i Jeanne ny mofo i Paoly.
c. *N-ampa-no-didi-n' (an) i Jeanne ny irofo i Paoly.
d. *N-ampa-didi-n' (an) i Jeanne ny irofo i Paoly.
past-caus-cut-by Jeanne the bread Paul
In (193)a., the sentence in the lower clause comprising the verb
(h)andidy "(future-)cut," is in the active voice and the sequence
is perfectly grammatical. By contrast, in (193)b., in (193)c.,
and (193)d., the lower verb is in the passive voice, first with
the perfective aspect-marker voa, then with the non-perfective
aspect-marker no...ina, and finally with the non-perfective as-
pect suffix (i)na, the initial ì of this affix probably coalesc-
ing with the final vowel i^ of the verbal root didy, in isolation,
or didi in the middle of a word. The latter series of sentences
remain irretrievably ungrammatical. The English translation under
each sequence only represents the intended meaning.
5.2.4 Pronominalization.
Pronominalization to an independent pronoun is mandat-
ory in Indirect Object or 10 position, as is quite evident from
the grairmaticality pattern provided by the following sentences:

138
(194)a. /[N-amp-[andidy ny mofo ho an'i Paoly^ R] ipaoly^]/.
past-caus-cut the bread for Paul^ x Paul^
b. N-amp-andidy ny itofo ho azy^ i Paoly
past-caus-cut the bread for hiitL Paul^
"Paul^ was having x cut the bread for him^."
c. *N-anp-andidy ny nofo ho an'ny tenany^ i Paoly
past-caus-cut the bread for himself^ Paul^
*"Paul^ was having x cut the bread for himself^."
in (194)a., the underlying sequence comprises the lower Su R,
short for Ranona "x," an entity different from Paul but whose
identity is not relevant, and the Su of the higher clause. When
Clause-Union takes place, R somehow delétes, and the sentence
surfaces as (194)b., with the independent pronoun azy, coreferen-
tial with the higher Su. Now, if we substitute ny tenany for azy,
the resulting sequence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical, as
shown in (194)c. Finally, although for lack of space, no future
tense marker h is posited with the underlying embedded verb
andidy "to cut," it would be more accurate, given the absence of
entailment noted in 3.2 and associated with this particular
construction, to have (h-)andidy "(future-)cut," which is also
consistent with the treatment of initial h in the variety of
Malagasy being described.
5.2.5 Reflexivization to Ny Tenany.
However, Reflexivization to ny tenany is mandatory in
DO position:
139
(195)a. /[ N-anp-[ amono an'i Jeannei i Paoly] i Jeannei]/.

past-caus-kill Jeanne^ Paul Jeanne^
b. N-anp-amono ny tenany^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne^,

past-caus-kill selfi Paul Jeanne ^^
*"Jeanne was having Paul kill herself."
c. *N-amp-aire>no azy^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne

past-caus-kill her^ Paul Jeanne^
Assuming the underlying representation (195) a. for (195)b., the
NP occuping the DO position an'i Jeanne, ooreferential with the
higher Su i Jeanne, must go into ny tenany, as can be inferred
from the grammaticality of (194)b., but not into the independent
pronoun azy, as the ungranmaticality of (194),c. shows.
5.2.6 Reflexivization to Tena.
Reflexivization to tena is impossible under the "neu-
tral" Directive amp (a) if the trigger is the Su of the higher
clause and its victim, the DO of the embedded clause, i.e. Re-
flexivization to tena cannot follow Clause-Union:
(196) *N-amp-amono tenai an'i Paoly i Jeanne^
past-caus-kill self^ Paul Jeanne^
*"Jeanne was having Paul kill herself."
(197) N-amp-amono tenai an'i Paolyi i Jeanne,
past-caus-kill self^ Paul^ Jeanne
"Jeanne was having Paul kill himself."

140
In the irretrievably ungrantnatical (196), Reflexivization to tena
follows Clause-Union since oily then will its structural descrip-
tion be met, with the higher Su as the trigger and the embedded
clause DO as its victim. By contrast, if both the trigger and its
victim belong in the embedded clause, then Reflexivization takes
place before Clause-Union, as in the grammatical (197).'
5.2.7 Affixal Passive After Clause-Union.
Affixal Passive cannot follow Clause-Union under a
"neutral" Directive amp(a):
(198)a. /[N-aitp-[(h)ibata ny entana i Jaona] i Paoly]/.
past-caus-(fut)-carry the luggage John Paul
b. N-amp-ibata ny entana an'i Jaona i Pàoly.
past-caus-carry the luggage John Paul
"Paul was having John carry the luggage."
c. *N-amp-ibata-in' i Paoly an'i Jaona ny entana.
past-caus-carry-pass-by Paul John the luggage
(199)a. /[N-amp-[iakatra ny entana] i Paoly]/.
past-caus-go-up the luggage Paul
b. N-amp-iakatra ny entana i Paoly.
past-caus-go-up the luggage Paul
"Paul carried the luggage upstairs."

141
c. N-anp-(i)akar-in' i Paoly ny entana.
past-caus-go-up-pass-by Paul the luggage
"The luggage was being carried upstairs by Paul."
First, notice that the optional initial h for future tense is
represented on the verb of the lower clause in the underlying
sequence in (198) a. This is consistent with the absence of en-
tailment associated with a "neutral" Directive amp (a). The gram-
matically pattern found in (198)b., with the compound verb in
the active voice, as opposed to (198)c., with the sane verb in
the passive voice, shows that Affixal Passive cannot apply after
Clause-Union in such a construction. On the other hand, in (199),
we have a Manipulative anp(a) and, therefore, Affixal Passive can
apply after Clause-Union, yielding the graimaatical (199) c., where
the prefix _i of the eirbedded verb shows up optionally in the
sense that, in Colloquial Malagasy, it coalesces with a and the
root of the verb starts with an open e or, in careful speech, the
prefix _i is kept distinct from the subsequent a of akar.
5.2.8 Fusion and the Manipulative Causative Amp(a).
The Manipulative Causative amp(a) requires fusion since
demotion of the lower Su is mandatory:
(200)a. N - anp - idina an' i Paoly i Jeanne.
past-caus-go-down prep Paul Jeanne
"Jeanne was bringing Paul downstairs."
b. *N - anp -idina 0 i Paoly i Jeanne,
past-caus-go-down Paul Jeanne

142
In (200)a., the NP i Paoly, which initially was the Su of the
embedded verb idina "to go down," has been denoted to DO, as is
made evident by the presence of the preposition an in front of
it. New, if, as in (200)b., the preposition an is left out, the
sequence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical.
5.2.9 Negation-Placement in the lower Clause.
the Manipulative Causative amp (a) does not allow place-
ment of the Negation Cperator tsy on the lower clause:
(201)a. *N-anpa-tsi-(i)dina an'i Paoly i Jeanne.
past-caus-neg-go-down Paul Jeanne
b. Tsy (h)idina i Paoly.
neg (fut-)go-down Paul
"Paul will not go downstairs."
(201)a., with the Negation Cperator tsy intervening between the
Causative and the verb of the lower clause, is irretrievably un-
grammatical and cannot be assigned any interpretation whatsoever.
Yet, when the lower clause is on its cwn as an independent clau-
se, as shown in (200)b., the sentence comprising tsy is perfectly
grammatical. Notice, however, that the optional h marking the
future tense in (200)b. is absent from (201)a. altogether.
5.2.10 Affixal Passive in the lower Clause.
The Manipulative Causative arrp(a) does not allow Affix-
al Passive in the lower clause:

143
(202) a. *N - ampa - voa - idina ny saina i Jeanne.

past-caus-pass-go-down the flag
b. Voa-idina ny saina.
pass-go-dcwn the flag
'"Hie flag has been lowered."
As shown in (202) b., the lower clause on its cwn with the per-
fective aspect-marker voa of Passive is perfectly graitnatical.
jKwever, when it gets embedded under a Manipulative Causative
amp(a), as in (202)a., the resulting sequence is irretrievably
ungrammatical and cannot be assigned any interpretation what-
soever .
Under the Manipulative Causative anp (a), Pronominal-
ization to an independent pronoun is disallowed:
(203)a. /[ N-airp- [iasa ho an'i Paoly i Jaona] i Paoly^]/.
past-caus-work for Paul^ John Paul^
b. Hiasa ho an'i Paoly i Jaona.
fut-work for Paul John
"John will work for Paul."
c. Hiasa ho a.zyi i jaona j.
fut-work for him^ Jctaj
"John, will work for hiir^."

144
d. *N-anp-iasa ho azy.. an'i Jaona i Paoly^
past-caus-work for him^ John Paul^
e. *N-amp-iasa an'i Jaona ho azy^ i Paoly^.

past-caus-work John for hinu Paul^
f. N-amp-iasa an'i Jaona i Paoly.
past-caus-work John Paul
"Paul was having John work for him," or here
"Paul was profiting from John's labor."
g. N-amp-iasa-in' i Paoly i Jaona.
past-caus-work-pass-by Paul John
"Paul was profiting frcm John's labor."
If we start from an underlying sequence like (203)a., where the
embedded clause comprises an Oblique NP ho an'i Paoly coreferen-
tial with an HP in the main clause, the resulting sequence, as
shown in either (203)d. or (203)e, i.e. whether the independent
pronoun precedes or follows the DO NP, is irretrievably ungram-
matical. mwever, in (203)b. and (203) c., the lower clause in
isolation is perfectly grammatical,táietherthe Oblique NP shows
up as a full-fledged noun phrase or in pronoun form. Furthermore,
if the coreferential NP of (203)a. is taken away frcm the embed-
ded clause, then the output, as seen in (203) f., is perfectly
grammatical, with an ambiguous interpretation between a "neutral"
Directive and a Manipulative Causative. However, it is only in
the latter case that the sequence can undergo Passive, as shown
in (203)g., i.e. Affixal Passive after Clause-Union.

145

The Manipulative Causative amp(a) allows Reflexiviz-
ation to ny tenany after Clause-Union, especially when there is
gome enphasis involved:
(204) N-airp-iasa ny tenany., tokoa i Paolyi.
past-caus-work self really Pauli
"Paul was really applying himself to his work," or
"Paul was really getting the maximum out of his body."
In (204), as opposed to (205) belcw, the sequence comprising ny
tenany cannot have the reading Where the compound verb refers to
an action which is habitual, to irean something like "Paul was
really working for himself."
The Manipulative Causative amp(a) allows Reflexiviz-
ation to tena after Clause-union has taken place:
(205) N-amp-iasa tena^ (tokoa) i Paoly
past-caus-work sel^ (really) Pauli
"Paul was (really) applying himself to his work," or
"Paul was (really) working for himself."
As remarked earlier in 5.2.12, a sequence comprising ny tenany
sounds more natural with the adverb tokoa, whereas this is not
the case with tena, as seen in (205). In fact, in its habitual
aspect reading, the sentence sounds better without the adverb.

146
The Manipulative Causative anp(a) allows Affixal Pas-
sive after Clause-Union, with a slightly different meaning:
(206)a. N - amp - iasa an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-work Jeanne Paul
"Paul was having Jeanne work."
b. N - amp - iasa - in' i Paoly i Jeanne,
past-caus-work-pass-by Paul Jeanne
"Paul was exploiting Jeanne's work."
In (206)a., there is no indication as to what kind of Control the
Causer i Paoly exerts over the Causee i Jeanne, as opposed to
(206)b., where the Causee loses all Control.
5.2.15 Fusion and the Manipulative Causative An(a).
With the Manipulative Causative an(a), there is fusion
between the higher and the lower predicates since the embedded Su
gets demoted down the hierarchy:
(207)a. Potika ny fitaratra.
broken the glass
"The glass was broken."
b. N - am - (p)otika ny fitaratra i Paoly.

147
c. No - poteh - in" i Paoly ny fitaratra.
pass-broken-pass-by Paul the glass
m (207)a., the NP ny fitaratra "the glass" is a Su since the
nominative pronoun ilay izy can be substituted for it. In
(207) b., it is a DO since it can be promoted to Su through
Passivization, as in (207)c.

The Manipulative Causative an(a) does not allow Tsy-
placement in the lower clause despite the fact that the negative
sentence on its own is perfectly grammatical:
(208)a. Tsy potika ny fitaratra.
not broken the glass

"The glass is/was not broken."
b. *N-ana-tsi-potika ny fitaratra i Paoly.
past-caus-neg-broken the glass Paul
The sentence comprising the Negation Operator Tsy is perfectly
grammatical, as seen in (208)a., in isolation. However, when it
gets embedded under the Manipulative Causative an(a), it becomes
irretrievably ungrammatical, if the Negation - Operator Tsy is
maintained in the lower clause, but if the latter is left out,
then the output, as shown in (207)b. above is grammatical.

148
i
5.2.17 Affixal Passive in the Perfective Aspect in the lower
Clause.
The Manipulative Causative an(a) cannot embed a
Affixal Passive with either voa or tafa in the lower clause:
(209)a. Voa-vaky ny kitay.
pass-chopped the wood
"The wood has been chopped."
b. N - am - (v)aky ny kitay i Paoly.
past-caus-chopped the wood Paul
"Paul was chopping the wood."
c. *N-an-voa-vaky ny kitay i Paoly.
past-caus-pass-chopped the wood Paul
(210)a. Tafa-tsangana ny saina.
pass-erect the flag
"Ohe flag has been erected."
b. N - an - (ts)angana ny saina i Paoly.
past-caus-erect the flag Paul
"Paul was erecting the flag."
c. *N-an-tafa-tsangana ny saina i Paoly.
past-caus-pass-erect the flag Paul

149
in (209)a- and (210)a., we have in isolation sentences comprising
the two perfective aspect-markers of Passivization. Hie two are
perfectly grammatical. So are the outputs just in case voa or
tafa are left out, as in (209)b. and (210)b. respectively. If,
however, they are maintained, then the sequences, as in (209)c.
and (210)c., become irretrievably ungrammatical and cannot be
assigned any interpretation whatsoever. -
the Manipulative Causative an(a) does not allow Pronom-
inalization to an independent pronoun in the lower clause:
(211) a. Tsara i Jeanne.

good Jeanne
"Jeanne is good."
b. N-ana-tsara tena^ i Jeanne
past-caus-good self^ - Jeannei
"Jeanne was bragging about herself."
c. *N-ana-tsara azyi i Jeanne^.
past-caus-good her^ Jeanne^
When the independent clause shown in (211)a. is embedded under
the Manipulative Causative an(a), Clause-Union takes place and
this feeds Reflexivization to tena since (211) b. is grammatical.
Naw, substituting azy for tena makes the sentence irretrievably
ungraimnatical in the coreferential reading, as in (211) c.

150
The Manipulative Causative an(a) allows Reflexivization
in the case of a Marked structure:
(212) N-ana-tsara ny tenany^ i Jeanne^.
past-caus-good self^ Jeanne^

i
i
(212), where ny tenany has been substituted for tena of (211)b.,
is grammatical and has the sane cognitive meaning as the latter.
However, (212) is somewhat more formal than (211)b.
The Manipulative Causative an (a), as seen in (211) b.,
allows Reflexivization to tena after Clause-Onion.
Hie Manipulative Causative an(a) allows Affixal Passive
after Clause-Union:
(213) a. N-ana-tsara ny tenany.^ i Jeanne

past-caus-good self^ Jeanne
(same as (212))
ii
'Jeanne was bragging about herself n
b. N-a-tsara-in' i Jeanne^ ny tenany^
past-pass-good-by Jeanne^ self^

151
in (213)a., Clause-Union has taken place but not Affixal Passive,
in (213)b., on the other had, Affixal Passive has applied after
Clause-Union. Notice, however, that there has been a substitution
of the nonperfective aspect-marker of Passive a for the Manipul-
ative Causative prefix an (a) in (213) b. as well as suffixation
with in (a). As in many other previous examples, the final a del-
etes in front of a subsequent vcwel, in this case the deictic i
of the NP i Jeanne.
5.2.22 Fusion and the Abilitative Causative Aha.
With the Abilitative Causative aha, there is also fu-
sion between the higher and the lower predicates since the embed-
ded Su of the underlying sequence gets denoted down the hierar-
chy:
(214)a. Zaka i Jeanne.
be-able-to-be-carried Jeanne
"Jeanne can be carried."
b. N - aha - zaka an' i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-carry prep Jeanne . Paul
c. *N - aha - zaka 0 i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-carry Jeanne Paul
In (214)a., the NP i Jeanne is the Su of the clause. In (214)b.,
it has turned into a DO and as such, the preposition an has ap-

152
peared in front of it. If the preposition is left out, as in
(214)c., the sequence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical.
5.2.23 Negation-Placement in the Icwer Clause.
The Abilitative Causative aha does not allow Tsg-
Placement on the lower clause:
(215)a. Tsy zaka ny entana.
not be-able-to-be-carried the luggage
"(We) cannot carry the luggage."
b. N-aha-zaka ny entana i Paoly.
past-caus-carry the luggage Paul
c. *N-aha-tsi-zaka ny entana i Paoly.
past-caus-neg-carry the luggage Paul
The sentence (215)a., embedded under the Abilitative Causative
aha in (215 )b., yields a grammatical output just in case the
Negation Operator tsy is left out. If, as in (215) c., it is
maintained in the embedded lower clause, then the resulting
sentence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical and cannot be as-
signed any interpretation at all.
The Abilitative Causative aha does not allow Affixal
Passive in the lower clause:

153
(216)i I/oka ny varavarana.
with-a-hole the door
"Hie door has a hole in it."
b. Voa - loka ny varavarana.
pass-with-a-hole the door
"(Someone) has made a hole in the door."
c. *N-aha-voa-loka ny varavarana i Paoly.
past-caus-pass-with-a-hole the door Paul
d. *I Paoly no n-aha-voa-loka ny varavarana.
Paul part past-caus-pass-with-a-hole the door
i
Hie predicate loka "with-a-hole," as seen in (216)a. and (216)b.,
takes the perfective aspect-marker voa optionally. However, if
the version with voa gets embedded under the Abilitative Causa-
tive aha, the output, becomes irretrievably ungrammatical, as
shown in (216)c., where the Su i Paoly has not been fronted, or,
as shown in (216)d., where the Su has been fronted and demarcated
from the rest of the sentence by the particle no.
5.2.25 Pronaminalization.
Hie Abilitative Causative aha does not allow Pronom-
inalization to an independent pronoun in the lower clause:
(217) *Tsy n-aha-zaka azy-L i Paoly^
neg past-caus-carry hiiru Pauli

Paul^
"Paul did not manage to carry himself."
154
(217) with a coreferential reading between the Su i Paoly and the
derived DO azy is irretrievably ungrammatical.
5.2.26 Reflexivization bo Ny Tenany.
Reflexivization to ny tenany after Clause-Union under
the Abilitative Causative aha is possible in a Marked structure:
(218)a. Tsy n-aha-zaka ny tenany^ i Jeanne^.
neg past-caus-be-carried self^ Jeanne^
"Jeanne could not lift herself," or
"Jeanne could not tolerate her own self."
b. *N-aha-zaka ny tenanyi i Jeanne
past-caus-be-carr ied self. Jeanne^
(note absence of negation operator tsy)
c. Ny tenany^ (ihany) no zaka-n' i Paoly
self^ (only) part be-carried-by Paul^

"The only person Paul can tolerate is himself."
Ny tenany yields a grammatical sentence in (218)a., under the
Negation Operator Tsy. The sequence (218)b., where the Negation
Operator is left out, becomes somewhat ungrammatical, i.e. at
least in the absence of an elaborate context. On the other hand,
in (218)c., where the Abilitative Causative aha has been left out
and Passive has applied, as evidenced by the suffix (i)n(a) on
the root zaka, the sentence regains its grammaticality, especial-
ly with fronting of the derived Su ny tenany.

155

The Abilitative Causative aha allows Reflexivization to
tena after Clause-Union:
(219) a. /[ Tsy n - aha- [ zaka i Jeanne.^ ] i Jeanne ]/.
neg past-caus-be-carried Jeanne^ Jeannei
b. *Tsy n-aha-zaka an'i Jeanne i Jeanne-.

i
neg past-caus-be-carried Jeanne^ Jeanne^

\
c. Tsy n-aha-zaka tena^ i Jeanne^,
neg past-caus-be-carried self^ Jeanne^
"Jeanne could not carry herself around," i.e.
"Jeanne could not get around."
Assuming an underlying representation like (219)a. for (219)c.,
which is perfectly grammatical, since the structural description
for Reflexivization to tena is met after Clause-Union has taken
place, non-application of the rule yields the ungrammatical
(219)b. Furthermore, note that the clause embedded under the
higher Causative in (219)a. can stand on its own, as shown above
in (214) a.
Hie Abilitative Causative aha does not allow Affixal
Passive after Clause-Union although, as was noted in 2.1.6.3
above, it is possible to have a prefix substitution:

156
(220)a. N -aha - zaka an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-be-carried Jeanne Paul
(similar to (17)a. and (18)a.)
'Paul was able/managed to carry Jeanne. ii

II-
b. *N-aha-zaka-(i)n' i Paoly i Jeanne.
past-caus-be-carr ied-pass-by Paul Jeanne
c. Zaka-n' i Paoly i Jeanne.
be-carried-by Paul Jeanne
"Paul managed to carry Jeanne.n
In contrast to (218)c., where the Causative prefix aha has been
left out, thus yielding a grammatical sequence, in (220)b. the
sentence comprises both the Causative prefix and Affixal Passive
and the result is ungrammatical. The sentence (220)c. proves that
zaka is a root passive predicate.
5.3.1 Fusion and the Causal Causative Aha.
The Causal Causative aha requires fusion since the
demotion of the initial Su of the embedded clause is mandatory:
(221)a. Ny hatezera-ny no n-aha-lasa an'i Jeanne.
the anger-her part past-caus-gone prep Jeanne

iiIt was because of her anger that Jeanne left.it
b. *Ny hatezera-ny no n-aha-lasa 0 Jeanne
the anger-her part past-caus-gone Jeanne

157
c. Lasa i Jeanne noho ny hatezera-ny.

gone Jeanne because-of the anger-her
"Jeanne left because of her anger."
In (221) c., the NP i Jeanne is the Su since it can be replaced
with the nominative form of the independent pronoun izy "he/she."
In the relevant Causative construction, however, the DO prepos-
ition an', as seen in (221)a., must precede the NP i Jeanne,
initially a Su, otherwise, the output is irretrievably ungram-
matical, as shown in (221)b.
Ihe Causal Causative aha allows Tsy-Placement in the
lower clause:
(222)a. Ny hatezera-ny no n-aha-lasa an'i J(eanne).
the anger-her part past-caus-gone J(eanne)
(same as (221)a.)
"It was because of her anger that J(eanne) left."
b. Ny hatezera-ny no n-aha-tsi-lasa an'i J.
the anger-her part past-caus-neg-gone J
"It was because of her anger that J did not leave."
In (222)a., the embedded predicate lasa "gone" has not been
negated, which is the case in (222) b. Both are equally grammat-
ical. As seen previously, the Negation Operator tsy is written
tsi since it occupies an internal position in the word.

158
Ihe Causal Causative aha allows Affixal Passive in the
lower clause:
(223) a. Voa-fidy ij(eanne).
pass-choose J(eanne)
"J(eanne) has been chosen."
b. Ny bika-ny no n-aha-voa-fidy an'i J.
the shape-her part past-caus-pass-choose J
"It was because of her good looks that J was chosen."
(223)a. shows a sentence comprising a passive verb in the per-
fective aspect with voa. In (223)b., (223) a. has been embedded
under the Causal Causative aha, yielding a perfectly grammatical
output.
The Causal Causative aha allows Pronominalization to an
independent pronoun:
(224) a. Voa-kapoka i P (aoly) ^ noho izyj tsy nianatra.,

pass-strike P(aul)i because hei neg past-study
"P(aul) got punished because he did not study."
b. Izy^ tsy nianatra no n-aha-voa-kapoka an'i P^.

he^ neg past-study part past-caus-pass-strike P^
"It was because he did not study that P got punished."
159
rjjie complementizer noho of the embedded clause in (224) a. requi-
res a Marked word order, with the Su preceding the verb. Further-
mae, the embedded Su cannot delete even under coreference with
the main clause Su, as is the case in Malagasy Pronominalization
in this type of construction (see footnote 2 to Chapter Four for
details). In (224)b., the Causal-Oblique clause has been promoted
to Su and fronted with insertion of the particle no.
With the Causal Causative aha, Reflexivization to ny
tenany is possible:
(225)a. N - aha - sosotra an' i Jeanne.^ ny tenany^

past-caus-angry Jeanne^ selfj
"Jeanne was angry with herself."
b. Sosotra tamin' ny tenanyi i Jeanne
angry because-of self^ Jeanne^
"Jeanne was angry with herself."
Ihe two sequences (225)a. and (225)b., the first with the Causa-
tive prefix and the second without it, have the sane cognitive
meaning.
With the Causal Causative aha, Reflexivization to tena

is iiipossible, as is made quite evident by the grammaticality
pattern of the following sentences:
160
(226)a. *Ny fikiriza-ny no n-aha-tafita tena R.
the perseverance-his part past-caus-successful self x
"Because of his perseverance, x was successful."
b. Tafita R noho ny fikiriza-ny.
successful x because-of the perseverance-his
"X was successful because of his perseverance."
In (226)a., tena and R are supposed to be coreferential and the
sequence is irretrievably ungrammatical. Hie sentence (226)b.
shows the embedded predicate of (226)a. in the main clause.

Hie Causal Causative aha does not allcw Affixal Passive
after Clause-Union:
(227)a. *N-aha-lasa-nan1 ny hatezera-ny i Jeanne.
past-caus-gone-pass-by the anger-her Jeanne
b. *I Jeanne no n-aha-lasa-nan1 ny hatezera-ny.
Jeanne part past-caus-gone-pass-by the anger-her
(228)a. *N-aha-voa-fidi-n' ny bika-ny iJ(eanne).
past-caus-pass-choose-pass by the shape-her J(eanne)
b. *I J no n-aha-voa-fidi-n' ny bika-ny.
J part past-caus-pass-choose-pass-by the shape-her

161
jn all of the above sentences, Passive applies after Clause-
rjnion. All of them are irretrievably ungrammatical, whether
Clefting is made to apply, as in (227)b. or (228)b., or not, as
in (227) a. and (228) a. No interpretation whatsoever can be as-
signed to these sequences.
5.3.8 Fusion and the Causal Causative Amp (a).

The Causal Causative amp (a) triggers fusion since demo-
tion of the lower Su down the hierarchy is mandatory:
(229)a. Ny adala-ny no n-anpa-voa-dona an'i Paoly.
the stupidity-his part past-caus-pass-strike Paul
"It was because of his stupidity that Paul got hit."
b. *Ny adala-ny no n-ampa-voadona 0 i Paoly.
the stupidity-his part past-caus-pass-strike Paul
Ihe grairmaticality pattern found in (229) shows that, when the
initial Su NP i Paoly of the embedded clause surfaces with the
preposition an in front of it, the sentence is grammatical, as in
(229) a. By contrast, if the preposition an in front of the NP is
left out, the sequence becomes irretrievably ungraimiatical.
The Causal Causative amp(a) allows Tsy-Placement in the

lower clause, as can be inferred from the grammaticality of the
following pair of sentences:
162
(230)a. Ny adala-ny no n-anpa-lasa an'i Paoly.
the stupidity-his part past-caus-gone Paul
"It was because of his stupidity that Paul left."
b. Ny adala-ny no n-ampa-tsi-lasa an'i Paoly.
the stupidity-his part past-caus-neg-gone Paul
"It was because of his stupidity that Paul did not go."
m (230)a., the grammatical sequence does not comprise the Nega-
tion Operator tsy, whereas in (230)b., it does.
Hie Causal Causative amp (a) allows Affixal Passive in
the lower clause:
(231)a. Ny hakamo-ny no n-airpa-tafa-janona an'i Paoly.
the laziness-his part past-caus-pass-stay Paul
"It was because of his laziness that Paul was left
behind."
b. Tafa-janona i Paoly.
pass-stay Paul
"Paul was left behind."
Uhlike the sentence (7)a. involving the perfective aspect-marker
voa and the sequences (7)b. and (7)c. with a root passive in the
lower clause, in (231) above, we have a structure comprising the
other perfective aspect-marker, i.e. tafa.

163
5 3.11 Pronominalization.
The Causal Causative anp (a) allows Pronominalization to
an independent pronoun:
(232)a. Voa-dona i Paoly ^ noho izy^ tsy n-ety

pass-hit Paul^ because-of he^ neg past-accept
n-iala t-eo.
past-leave past-there
"Paul got hit because he did not accept to leave the
spot."
b. Izy^ tsy n-ety n-iala t-eo no
he^ neg past-accept past-leave past-there part
n-airpa-voa-dona an'i Paoly
past-caus-pass-hit Paul^
"It was because he did not accept to leave the spot
that Paul got hit."
In (232)a., there is some emphasis on the lower NP Su, i.e. izy,
whereas in (232)b., fronting of the entire Causal-Oblique clause
has taken place with insertion of the particle no.
The Causal Causative amp (a) allows Reflexivization to
ny tenany since the following sentences are quite acceptable in
Malagasy:
164
(233)a. TN-ampa-sosotra an'i Jeanne.^ ny tenany

past-caus-angry Jeanne^ self^
"Jeanne was angry because of herself."
b. Ny tenany^ ihany no n-airpa-sosotra an'i Jeanne^,

self^ only part past-caus-angry Jeanne^
"It was because of herself that Jeanne was angry."
In (233)a., the fact that the Su NP ny tenany has not been front-
ed with insertion of the particle no causes the sentence to be of
dubious grammaticality. However, if Eronting-of-Su applies and if
furthermore the adverb ihany "only" is added for the purposes of
emphasis, the sequence becomes perfectly grammatical, although it
may be characteristic of Colloquial Malagasy and, therefore, is
not considered appropriate for the standard language.
The Causal Causative anp(a) does not allow Reflexiviz-
ation to tena at all:
(234) a. *N-anpa-tafita tena^ i Jeanne^

past-caus-successful self^ Jeanne^
b. N-aha-tafita tena^ i Jeanne^,

past-caus-successful self^ Jeanne^
"Jeanne managed to be successful."
The behavior of the Causal Causative amp (a) in (234) a., which is
irretrievably ungrammatical, contrasts with that of the Causal

165
Causative aha, which allows Reflexivization to tena, as is quite
evident in (234)b.
With the Causal Causative amp(a), Affixal Passive is
ruled out after Clause-Union:
(235) a. *I P no n-airpa-voa-dona-n' ny adala-ny.

P part past-caus-pass-hit-pass-by the stupidity-his
b. *N-arrpa-voa-dona-n' ny adala-ny i Paoly.

past-caus-pass-hit-pass-by the stupidity-his Paul
In both the sequences (235)a. and (235)b., Passive has already
applied for the first tine in the lower clause, as is marked by
the presence of the Affixal Passive prefix voa, and then reap-
plies after Clause- Union has taken place, as indicated by the
suffix (i)n(a) . In both instances, the sentences are irretriev-
ably ungrammatical and have no meaning at all.
5.3.15 Fusion and the Causal Causative An(a).
The Causal Causative an(a) requires fusion since demo-
tion of the underlying Su of the lower clause is obligatory with
Clause-Union, down the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy, as illustrated by
the grammaticality pattern of the following set of sentences:

166
(236)a. Ny resaka no n-an-(t)afitohina an' i Jeanne.

the talk part past-caus-upset prep Jeanne
"It was the talk which upset Jeanne."
b. *Ny resaka no n-an-(t)afitohina 0 i Jeanne.
the talk part past-caus-upset Jeanne
c. Tafitohina i Jeanne tamin' ny resaka.

upset Jeanne because-of the talk
"Jeanne was upset because of the talk."
In (236)a., the NP i Jeanne, which was the initial Su of the low-
er clause, now has the DO preposition an in front of it and the
sentence becomes granmatical. On the other hand, in (236)b., the
same NP remains in the Su position and hence is not preceded by
the preposition. Hie resulting sequence is ungrammatical. In
(236)c., we have the lower clause embedded under the Causal Caus-
ative an(a) in the main clause position.
5.3.16 Negation-Placement in the Lower Clause.
Hie Causal Causative an (a) disallows Tsy-Placemsnt in
the lower clause:
(237)a. Ny resaka no n-an-(t)afitohina an'i Jeanne,
the talk part pas-caus-upset Jeanne
"It was because of the talk that Jeanne was upset."
b. *Ny resaka no n-ana-tsi-tafitchina an'i Jeanne,
the talk part past-caus-neg-upset Jeanne

167
in (237)awhich is the same sequence as (236)a., the lower
clause does not oonprise the negation Operator Tsy and the sen-
tence is grammatical, in (236)b., on the other hand, Tsy has been
placed on the lower clause, yielding the irretrievably ungranmat-
ical output, with no interpretation possible.
5.3.17 Affixal Passive in the Lower Clause.
The Causal Causative an(a) does not allow Affixal Pas-
sive in the lower clause:
(238)a. Ny resaka no n-an-(t)ohina an'i Jeanne.
the talk part past-caus-touch Jeanne
"It was the talk which touched Jeanne."
b. Voa - tdhina i Jeanne,
pass-touch Jeanne
"Jeanne was touched."
c. *Ny resaka no n-ana-voa-tohina an'i Jeanne.
the talk part past-caus-pass-touch Jeanne
(238)b. represents a simple sentence with the perfective aspect-
marker voa. If the latter gets embedded under the Causal Causa-
tive an(a) along with the aspect-marker, the resulting sequence,
as shown in (238)c., is irretrievably ungrammatical. However, if
the perfective aspect-marker voa is left out, as in (238)a., then
the output becomes perfectly grammatical.

168
With the Causal Causative an (a), Pronominalization to
an independent pronoun is possible:
(239)a. Ny tsy n-i-karakara-n' i Jeanne azyi
camp neg past-circ-take-care-of-by Jeanne hirru
no n-an-(t)afitohina an'i Paoly...
part past-caus-upset Paul^
"It was because of the fact that Jeanne did not take
care of hiitu that Pauli was upset."
b. Tafitohina i Paoly^ noho izy^ tsy
upset Paul^ because-of he^ neg
n-i-karakara-in' i Jeanne,
past-circ-take-care-of-by Jeanne
"Paul^ was upset because Jeanne did not take good care
of hirrL."
In both (239)a. with the Causal Causative an(a) and (239)b. with-
out the Causative, the NP i Paoly and the independent pronoun azy
"him," in the first instance, or izy "he," in the second, have
the same referent. Furthermore, this coreferential interpretation
is the more natural reading.
The Causal Causative an(a) allows Reflexivization to
tenany when there is strong emphasis:

169
(240)a. Ny tenany^ ihany no n-an-dreraka an'i Jeanne^.

self ^ only part past-caus-fed-up Jeanne^
"It was with herself that Jeanne was fed up."
b. ?*Reraka i Jeannei tamin' ny tenany.^.
fed-up Jeanne^ because-of selfi
"Jeanne was fed up with herself."
Xn (240)b., no strong emphasis is involved and the sequence is of
dubious grairmaticality, whereas in (240)a., there is emphasis, as
made evident by the insertion of the adverb ihany along with
fronting of ny tenany, and the output is perfectly grammatical.
The Causal Causative an (a) does not allow Reflexiv-
ization to tena even under a strong emphasis:
(241)a. *Tena^ ihany no n-an-dreraka an'i Jeanne^.
self^ only part past-caus-fed-up Jeanne^
b. *Reraka i Jeanne^ tamin-tena
fed-up Jeanne^ because-of-sel^

Both (241) a. and (241) b. are irretrievably ungrammatical in the
preferential interpretation of the NP i Jeanne and the reflex-
ive. However, if tena is taken to itean "you-idiot," in other

170
words, in the absence of coreference, then the two sequences be-
come perfectly grammatical and acceptable: (241)a. would be as-
signed the reading "it was with you-idiot that Jeanne was fed
up," whereas (241)b. would then mean "Jeanne was fed up with you-
idiot."
The Causal Causative an(a) does not allow Affixal Pas-
sive after Clause-Union:
(242)a. Ny resaka no n-an-(s)ahirana an'i Jeanne,
the talk part past-cause-concerned Jeanne
"It was the talk which caused Jeanne to be concerned."
b. Nò-sahiran(a)-in'i Paoly i Jeanne,
pass-concerned-by Paul Jeanne
"Paul was disturbing Jeanne."
c. Sahirana i Jeanne,
concerned Jeanne
"Jeanne is/was preoccupied,"
*I Jeanne no no-sahiran(a)-in' ny resaka.
Jeanne part pass-concerned-by the talk
(242)c. shews the simplex sentence embedded under the Causal
Causative an(a) in (242)a., where the initial Su NP i Jeanne has
been denoted to DO position, as is made evident by the presence

171
0f the DO preposition an in front of it. In (242) b., the grammat-
ical! ty of the sequence comprising Affixal Passive in the non-
perfective aspect with no...ina suggests that the predicate which
is of interest to us here can undergo Passive. Yet, if (242) a.
gets passivized, as shown in (242)d., the output is irretrievably

ungrammatical.
5.3.22 Fusion and the Causal Causative Ank (a).

The Causal Causative ank(a) requires fusion since the
enbedded Su of the underlying sequence gets demoted along the
hierarchy:
(243)a. Ny resaka no n-anka-leo an' i Paoly.
the talk part past-caus-fed-up prep Paul
"It was because of the talk that Paul got fed up."
b. *Ny resaka no n-anka-leo 0 i Paoly.
the talk part past-caus-fed-up Paul
c. Leo i Paoly tamin' ný resaka.
fed-up Paul because-of the talk
"Paul is/was fed up because of the talk."
(243) c. shows the simplex sentence comprising the Su NP i Paoly
enbedded under the Causal Causative ank(a) in (243)a., where the
initial Su NP has now been demoted to DO, hence the DO prepos-
ition an in front of it. NOw, if the DO preposition is left out
of the sequence, as in ((243)b., the output becomes irretrievably
ungrammatical, with no meaning whatsoever.

172
The Causal Causative ank (a) does not allow Tsy-Placp_
ment in the lower clause:
(244)a. Ny resaka no n-ank-arary an'i Jeanne,
the talk part past-caus-sick Jeanne
"It was because of the talk that Jeanne got sick."
b. *Ny resaka no n-anka-tsi-arary an'i Jeanne,
the talk part past-caus-neg-sick Jeanne
The grammaticality pattern found in (244) clearly indicates that
the conditioning factor is the presence or absence of the Nega-
tion Operator Tsy in the lower clause.
The Causal Causative ank (a) does not allow Affixal Pas-
sive in the lower clause, as the grairmaticality pattern of the
following pair of sequences proves:
(245)a. *Ny rivotra no n-anka-voa-latsaka ny taratasy.
the wind part past-caus-pass-dropped the letter
b. Voa-latsaka ny taratasy.
"(Someone) has dropped the letter."

173
although (245)b. with the perfective aspect-marker voa is a gram-
matical sentence in isolation, it becomes irretrievably ungram-
matical if it gets embedded under the Causal Causative predicate
ank(a), as shown in (245)a.
The Causal Causative ank (a) allows Pronominalization to
an independent pronoun when a very strong emphasis falls on tena-
rg, following the ooreferential pronoun:
(246) lzyi tenany^ no n-anka-leo an'i Paoly^.
he^ self^ part past-caus-fed-up Pauli

"It was because of himself that Paul was fed up."
The enphasis is made evident in (246) by the presence in the same
sentence of both the independent pronoun izy and tenany, the sec-
ond being coreferential with the first.
The Causal Causative ank (a) allows Reflexivization to

ny tenany when there is a strong emphasis:
(247) Ny tenanyi ihany no n-anka-leo an'i Paoly^
self^ only part past-caus-fed-up Paul^

"Indeed, it wás with himself that Paul was fed up."
®ie enphasis is marked by the insertion of the adverb ihany after

the reflexive.
174
The Causal Causative ank(a) does not allow Reflexiv-
ization to tena:
(248)a. *N-anka-leo tena^ i Paoly^.
past-caus-fed-up self^ Paul^
b. ^Tena^ no n-anka-leo i Paoly^.
self^ part past-caus-fed-up Paul^
Whether coreferential tena is fronted, as in (248)b., or not, as
in (248)a., the output remains irretrievably ungrammatical. In
fact, no interpretaticn can be assigned to either sequence. Note,
however, if tena of (248)b. takes the definite article i, the
sentence becomes granmatical and means "it is you-idiot who got
Paul fed up."
5.3.28 Summary: the Fusion Parameter.
If we now report all of the findings made in Section 5
onto Table 5, we notice among other things that — a s far as the
fusion structures are concerned— the Manipulative constructions
show maximal fusion, as opposed to the Causal constructions,
which present only minimal fusion. Falling between these two ex-
tremes, the "neutral" Directive Causative leans slightly toward
the negative pole, whereas the Abilitative Causative aha leans
slightly toward the positive pole.

175
The fact that the Manipulative constructions tend towards
maximal fusion is corroborated by the possibility of substituting
the Affixal Passive non-perfective aspect-marker a for the higher
Causative predicate amp (a) or an (a) and the verb prefix, as was
shown to be the case in 2.1.4.3 and 2.1.5.3.
As for the Abilitative Causative aha, the following exanples
appear to be crucial:
(250)a. N - i - latsaka ny taratasy.
past-pref-fallen the letter
"The letter fell."
b. N - a - latsak' i paoly ny taratasy.
past-pass-fallen-by Paul the letter
"Hie letter was being dropped by Paul."
c. N - aha - latsaka ny taratasy i Paoly.
past-caus-fallen the letter Paul
there is a substitution of a for aha in the process of Passiviz-
ation, as can be inferred from the comparison of the sequences in
(250)b. and (250)c., if we assume that (250)c. is in sone sense
more basic. Hiis confirms the view that there is also maximal
fusion with the Abilitative Causative aha.

176
Table 5
Degree of Fusion of the Higher and Lower Predicates

1
—
Fusion: Minimal Maximal
Marked ET Construction Prefix E-l E-2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
N Y/N Directive "p" 0 + 0 0 + + + 0 0 0
N N "c" 0 0 + 0 + + + * * 0
N N "l" 0 0 + 0 + + + * * 0
N N "n" Anp(a) 0 0 + * * + + * *
Y Y/fcl Manipulative Artp(a) 0 0 + * * * + + +
Y N Manipulative An (a) 0 0 + * * *
+/* + +
Y Y Abilitative Aha 0 0 + * * * +/* + *
Y Y Causal Aha 0 0 + + + + + * *
Y Y Causal Amp (a) 0 0 + + + + + * *
Y Y Causal An (a) 0 0 + * * + + * *
Y Y Causal Ank (a) 0 0 + * * + + * *
Note: ET = Entailment, E-!L = Equi-1, E-:2 = Equi-2,
0 = Demotion of the embedded Su,

1 = Negation Tsy-Placement in the lower clause,
2 = Affixal Passive in the lower clause,
3 = Pronominalization,
4 = Reflexivization to ny tenany
5 = Reflexivization to tena /
6 = Clause-Union precedes Affixal Passive

177
Table 5 (Cont'd)
N = Negative,
Y = Positive,
y/N = Either Y or N
"p" = persuasive,
"c" = coercive,
"1" = permissive, and
"n" = neutral Directive.
0 = Not Relevant,
+ = Grammatical,
* = Ungrammatical,
+/* = Either + or *.
178
Section 6
Markedness
6.0 Markedness.
In Section 6, the different types of Causative constru-
ctions presented in Section 1 will be assessed, to determine
their Markedness status.
Seven criteria will be adopted for determining whether
a given structure is Marked or not:
1. whether an Affixal Passive or Root Passive is oblig-
atory in the lower clause;
2. Whether a Psychological Predicate is mandatory;
3. the compound verb made up of the higher and the low-
er predicates —or if there is no fusion, the lower predicate—
carries with it an Entailment;
4. Emphatic Pronoun coreferential with an NP in the
matrix clause and occupying the underlying Su position is oblig-
atory in the embedded clause;
5. Clefting is obligatory;
6. the presence of Amalgamation whereby one and the
sane Causative construction can have two different readings; and
7. whether a Causative construction can be used in the
enbedded clause of the "persuasive" Directive construction with-
out any alteration whatsoever in its predicate.
A construction will be deemed Marked if it neets the
majority of the criteria listed above.

179
$ 1.0 Markedness Criteria.
This first Subsection will consider the criteria given
from 1- to 6. above. It will appear that all of the Causal con-
structions, i.e. aha, amp (a), an (a), and ank (a) are Marked;
whereas the "persuasive," the "coercive," the "permissive," and
the "neutral" Directive constructions are Unmarked. Likewise, it
will be seen that the Manipulative Causatives amp (a) and an (a)
and the Abilitative Causative aha are Unmarked.
6.1.1 Markedness and the "Persuasive" Directive Causative.

The "persuasive" Directive construction is Unmarked
since:
1. there is one criterion which is applicable, i.e. the
necessity for the circumstantial voice in the lower clause, as
was shown to be the case under 2.1.1;
2. the lower clause may comprise a non-Psychological
Predicate, as can be inferred from the grammaticality of senten-
ces like (l)a. and (l)b. with verbs of the type of mandeha "to
go" or mividy "to buy";
3. sentences like (106)a. and (106)b. suggest that with
this type of construction, the content of the embedded clause is
not necessarily entailed, as explained under 3.1;
4. sentences like (188)a., where the ooreferential Su
NP i Paoly of the embedded clause, as seen in (188)c., is delet-
ed, show that the Emphatic Pronoun criterion does not apply;
5. a sentence like (l)a., where Clefting has not ap-
plied, is grammatical: this suggests that it cannot be the case
that Clefting is obligatory with this construction; and

180
6. a sentence like (l)a. is not subject to an ambiguity

of interpretation. Therefore, there is no Amalgamation.
6.1.2 Markedness, the "Coercive" and the "Permissive" Direct-
ive Causatives.
With the "coercive" and the "permissive" Directive
Causative constructions:
1. Affixal Passive with no...ina is optional, as shown
under 2.1.2, since there is a choice between it and its active
counterpart;
2. sentences like (44)a., where the enbedded verb hana-
sa "will wash," prove that the lower predicate does not have to
be Psychological;
3. the sentences (111) and (112) with their continu-
ations prove that these two constructions do not carry an Entail-
nent of the proposition of the lower predicate;
4. these two constructions involve Equi-2 (see Chapter
Five, Section 2) and therefore, the underlying Su of the embedded
clause does not show up on the surface as an independent pronoun,
even under emphasis;
5. the grammaticality of sentences like those in (2)
and (3) involving no Clefting shows that the latter is not oblig-
atory; and
6. a sentence like (2) or (3) involving a "coercive" or
a "permissive" Directive meaning does not lend itself to a dif-
ferent interpretation. Therefore, there is no Amalgamation.
All of the above suggests that both the coercive and
the permissive constructions are Unmarked.

181
6 Markedness and the "Neutral" Directive Causative.
With the "neutral" Directive Causative amp(a):
1. the embedded verb must be in the active voice, as
shown under 2.1.3;

2. it cannot hie a Psychological Predicate (see example
(55));
3. there is no Entailment (see (110));
4. as can be inferred from the exaitple in (14)b. of
Chapter Three cm Reflexivization, there is an Unlike-Su con-
straint obtaining between the matrix Su and the embedded Su; it
follows that it is impossible to have an Emphatic Independent
Pronoun in Su position, as can be seen under 5.2.11 of the pres-
ent Chapter;
involving the "neutral" Directive anp (a) shows that it cannot be
the case that Clefting is obligatory since those sentences are
grammatical and yet, have not undergone Clefting; and
6. the structures belonging to this construction do not
lend themselves to any ambiguity of interpretation (see (4) a. and
(4)b., for exanple).
All of the above suggests that the "neutral" Directive
construction is Unmarked.
6.1.4 Markedness and the Manipulative Causative Amp(a).

With the Manipulative Causative anp (a);
1. Affixal Passive cannot apply on the lower clause, as
can be inferred from the ungrammaticality of (57)b., (58) b., and
(59)b., Wiich involve the no...ina, voa, and tafa aspectual forms
respectively;
182
2. the lower predicate cannot be a Psychological Pred-
icate since this yields an ungrammatical sequence, as in (59)c
3. however, there is Entailment when the embedded verb
is a non-Psychological Stative predicate, as in (114)a.;
4. Emphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is disallow-
ed, as shown under 5.2.11;
5. the graimiaticality of sentences like those in (5)a.,
(5)b., and (5)c., where Clefting has not applied, indicates that
it is not the case that Clefting is obligatory; and
6. a structure like (12) d. involving the Manipulative
Causative anp (a) and an Animate Causee can lend itself to an
ambiguity of interpretation. One case in point:
(251)a. N - anp - iasa an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-work Jeanne Paul
b. "Paul was having Jeanne work," or
c. "Paul was exploiting Jeanne's work."
(251)a. can mean either (251)b. or (251)c.
All of the above suggests that the Manipulative Causat-
ive amp (a) is only partially Marked.
6.1.5 Markedness and the Manipulative Causative An(a).
With the Manipulative Causative an (a):
1. Affixal Passive is not allowed in the lower clause,
as can be inferred from (138)c. and (138)d.;
2. the lower predicate cannot be a Psychological Pred-
icate, as seen in 2.1.5.1;

183
3. there is no Entailment, as shown in (115);
5. Emphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is not pos-
sible, as is evident in 5.2.18;
6. the grammaticality of sentences like (5)e. involving
the Manipulative Causative an (a), where no Clefting has taken
place, suggests that it is not the case that Clefting is oblig-
atory; and
7. a sentence like (5)a. does not lend itself to an am-
biguity of interpretation. As a consequence of this, Amalgamation
does not arise.
All of the above suggests that the Manipulative Causa-
tive an (a) is Unmarked.
6.1.6 Markedness and the Abilitative Causative Aha.

With the Abilitative Causative aha;

as shown under 2.1.6.2 and 4.1.19 and as can be inferred from the
possibility of substituting no...ina for aha, as shown explicitly
in 2.1.6.3;
2. a Psychological Predicate is not mandatory, as sug-

gested by the examples under 2.1.6.1;
3. however, there is Entailment, as shown under 3.4;
4. Enphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is not pos-

sible, as can be inferred from 5.2.25;

involving the Abilitative Causative aha but where no Clefting has
taken place suggests that it is not the case that Clefting is
obligatory; and
184
6. sentences like those in (6) do not lend themselves
to an ambiguity of interpretation. As a consequence of this
Amalgamation does not arise.
All of the above suggests that the Abilitative Causat-
ive aha is Unmarked.
6.1.7 Markedness and the Causal Causative Aha.
With the Causal Causative aha;
1. Affixal Passive with voa or tafa is obligatory when
the embedded clause comprises a non-Psychological Predicate, as
seen under 2.1.6.4 and from 4.2.1 to 4.2.3;
2. from 1 above, it follows that a Psychological Pred-
icate is not mandatory in the embedded clause;
3. there is Entailment, as shown under 3.5;
4. Errphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is possible,
as shown under 5.3.4;
5. sentences like (7)b. with Clefting are the normal
cases since those in (9) not involving Clefting necessitate a
special intonation without which they become ungrammatical;
6. sentences like (7)b. or (9) do not give rise to an
ambiguity of interpretation. Therefore there is no Amalgamation.
All of the above suggests that the Causal Causative aha
is Marked.
6.1.8 Markedness and the Causal Causative Amp(a).
With the Causal Causative amp (a);
1. Affixal Passive with voa or tafa is obligatory when
the embedded clause conprises a non-Psychological Predicate, as
seen under 2.1.6.4, 4.2.8 and 4.2.9;

185
2. from 1 above, it follows that a Psychological Pred-
icate is not mandatory in the embedded clause;
3. there is Entailment, as was shown under 3.5;
4. Emphatic Pronoun, as defined under 6.0, is possible,
aS was shown under 5.3.11;
5. sentences like (7)a. with Clefting are the normal
cases since that in (8)a. involving no Clefting necessitates a
special intonation without which it becomes ungranroatical;
6. sentences like (7)a. and (8) do not give rise to an
antoiguity of interpretation. It follows that there is no Amal-
gamation.
All of the above suggests that the Causal Causative
amp (a) is Marked.
6.1.9 Markedness and the Causal Causative An(a).

With the Causal Causative an(a):

2. a Psychological Predicate is mandatory in the lower

clause, as per 4.2.16;
3. there is Entailment, as seen under 3.5;

5. although in the overwhelming majority of cases (see

(7)c. and (176)c., for example), Clefting applies, there are in-
stances like (80)b., where it does not apply, yet the output is
grammatical.ftiissuggests that it is not the case that Clefting
is obligatory; however
186
6. in the case of the sentence (80) b. involving the
Causal Causative an(a) but where Clefting has not applied, there
is a possibility of ambiguity since (80)a. can mean not only that
"Jeanne got fed up with Paul," but also something like "Paul took
an active part in causing Jeanne to be fed up." Therefore, there
is Amalgamation.
All of the above shows that the Causal Causative an (a)
should be considered Marked.
6.1.10 Markedness and the Causal Causative Ank(a).
With the Causal Causative ank(a);
1. Affixal Passive is not allowed, as was shown under
2.1.8.1, 4.2.19, and 4.2.20;
2. a Psychological Predicate is mandatory in the lower
clause, as seen under 4.2.19 to 4.2.24;
3. there is Entailment, as seen under 3.5;
5. although in the overwhelming majority of cases (see
(7)c. and (176)c., for example), Clefting applies, there are in-
stances like (80) b., where it does not apply, yet the output is
grammatical. This suggests that it is not the case that Clefting
is obligatory; and
6. there is, at least, one case involving the Causal
Causative ank(a), i.e the sentence (116)a., where the lower pred-
icate is an adjective, adala "foolish," and which also has a
Manipulative reading, as is made evident by the grarrmaticality of
the sequence where Affixal Passive to ina applies after Clause-
Union, as shown in (116)b. This is a case of Amalgamation.

187
All of the above suggests that the Causal Causative
ankja). should be considered Marked.
6.2.0 Additional Criterion for Markedness.
This second Subsection will consider the last criter-
ion, i.e. whether the predicate or main verb in a particular
Causative construction can be used in the embedded clause of the
"persuasive" Directive construction without any change of voice.
If a construction can be used thus, its Causative prefix will be
considered Marked; if not, it will be deemed Unmarked.
This last criterion corroborates the findings made in
the first Subsection, i.e. all the Causal constructions are
Marked, whereas the remaining structures, i.e. the "persuasive,"
the "coercive," the "permissive," and the "neutral" Directive
Causatives as well as the Manipulative and the Abilitative con-
structions are Unmarked.
6.2.1 Hie "Persuasive" Directive Causative.
The "persuasive" Directive construction does not meet
the last criterion since, as was shown under 2.1.1, the lower
predicate must be in the circumstantial voice; yet, criterion "7"
requires that the main verb manao "to do" remain in its active
form.
6.2.2 The "Coercive" and the "Permissive" Directive Causative
Constructions.
The "coercive" and the "permissive" Directive constru-
ctions do not meet criterion "7" since the a. sequence belcw

188
yields an irretrievably ungrammatical sentence when it gets
embedded under the "persuasive" construction. The English trans-
lation provided makes explicit the intended reading.
(252)a. N-anery/N-arrela an'i J(eanne) h-andeha i P(aoly).
past-force/past-let J(eanne) fut-go P(aul)
"P(aul) was forcing/allowing J(eanne) to go."
b. *N-anao [izay n-anery/n-amela an'i J handeha i P] R.
past-do coirp past-force/let J fut-go P R
"P was doing so that P forced/allowed J to go."
c. Nanao [izay n-anere-n/n-amela-n' i P an'i J handeha] R.
past-do corap past-circ-force/let-by p J fut-go R
"R was doing so that J was forced/allowed by P to go."
The ungrarrmaticality of the sentence (252) b., vhere the verb
nanery "forced," or name la "allowed" is in the active voice, as
opposed to the grammaticality of the sentence (252)c., where the
same verb is in the circumstantial voice, indicates that the "co-
ercive" and the "permissive" Directive constructions do not meet
criterion "7." This confirms the view provided under 6.1.1 and
6.1.2 that both constructions be considered Unmarked.
6.2.3 The "Neutral" Directive Causative.
The compound predicate of the "neutral" Directive con-
struction with amp (a) with the lower verb in the active voice,
cannot be embedded under the matrix of the "persuasive" constru-
ction:
189
(253)a. N - anp - andidy ny mofo an'i J(eanne) i P(aoly).
past-caus-cut the bread J(eanne) P(aul)
"P(aul) was having J(eanne) cut the bread."
b. *N-anao [izay n-anp-andidy ny mofo an'i J (an'i P)] R.
past-do conp past-caus-cut the bread J P R
"R was doing so that P had J cut the bread."
ijhe grammaticality pattern found in (253) indicates that the
"neutral" Directive construction does not meet criterion "7,"
even when the Causee, between parentheses in (253)b., is left
out.
6.2.4 The Manipulative Causative Amp (a).
Hie compound predicate of the Manipulative Causative
construction with amp (a) meets criterion "7" and thus confirms
the finding made under 6.1.4:
(254)a. N - amp - an-deha - n - an' i P(aoly) i J(eanne).
past-caus-circ-walk-by P(aul) J(eanne)
"P(aul) stood J(eanne) up (and helped her) to walk."
b. N-anao [izay n-amp-an-deha-n-an1 i P an'i J] R.
past-do ocaip past-caus-circ-walk-by P J R
"R was doing so that P stood J up (and helped her) to
walk."
(254) a. shows a sentence with its verb in the circumstantial
voice, i.e. with the circumfix an... (a)n(a) surrounding the

190
verbal root. Now, such a sentence can be embedded under the
"persuasive" Directive Causative, as the grammaticality of
(254)b. indicates.
6.2.5 Hie Manipulative Causative an (a).
The compound predicate of the Manipulative Causative
with an(a) cannot show up in the embedded clause of the "per-
suasive" construction:
(255) a. N - am - (v)aky ny kitay i P(aoly).
past-caus-chopped the wood P(aul)
"P(aul) was chopping the wood."
b. *N-anao [izay n-am-(v)aky ny kitay (i P)] R.
past-do conp past-caus-chopped the wood P R
"R was doing so that P chopped the wood."
(255)a. shows a sentence comprising the Manipulative Causative
with an(a), perfectly grammatical in isolation. However, when the
sentence appears under the "persuasive" Directive, whether its
original Su NP i Paoly is maintained or left out, the output re-
mains irretrievably ungrammatical, as seen in (255) b. This con-
struction, therefore, does not meet criterion "7," confirming the
view proposed in 6.1.5 that this is an Unmarked structure.
6.2.6 The Abilitative Causative Aha.
The compound predicate of the abilitative Causative aha
construction cannot be embedded as is under the matrix of the
"persuasive" Directive structure:

191
(256)a. N - aha - zaka ny entana i Paoly.
b. *N-anao [izay n-áha-zaka ny entana] Rakoto.
past-do camp past-caus-bearable the luggage Rakoto
"Rakoto was doing so as to be successful in carrying
the luggage."
In (256)a., we have a grammatical sentence comprising the Abil-
itative Causative aha in isolation. When it is embedded under the
main predicate of the "persuasive" Directive construction, the
resulting sequence is irretrievably ungrammatical, as seen in
(256) b., where the original Su NP of (256) a. has been left out.
As we remarked about (255)b. above, this does not seem to be a
relevant factor.
6.2.7 The Causal Causative Aha/Anp(a) Constructions.
The compound predicate of the Causal aha/amp(a) con-
struction can be embedded without any change of any kind under
the matrix clause of the "persuasive" Directive structure:
(257)a. Ny ditra-ny no n-aha/anpa-voa-kapoka an'i Paoly.
the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-hit Paul
"It was because of his mischief that P was punished."
b. N-anao [izay n-aha/anpa-voa-kapoka an'i Paoly] Rakoto.
past-do ooitp past-caus-pass-hit Paul Rakoto
"Rakoto did so as to get Paul punished."

192
The sentence (257)a. comprises a Causal aha/ampa predicate. The
grammaticality of (257) b,, vhere the Causal predicate has been
embedded under the "persuasive" Directive predicate, proves that
our above claim holds. This confirms what was found under 6 . 1 . 7 ,
i.e. that Causal aha is Marked.
6.2.8 The Causal Causative An(a).
The compound predicate of the Causal Causative an (a)
construction can be embedded without any change under theroatrix
clause of the "persuasive" Directive structure:
(258)a. Ilay resaka no n-an-(t)afitohina an'i Jeanne.
the talk part past-caus-upset Jeanne
"It was because of the talk that Jeanne was upset."
b. N-anao [izay n-an-(t)afitohina an'i Jeanne] i Paoly.
past-do comp past-caus-upset Jeanne Paul
"Paul was doing so as to upset Jeanne."
As in other previous cases, (258)a. shows a grammatical sentence
comprising the relevant Causative predicate. The grammaticality
of (258)b. with the same predicate embedded under the matrix of
the "persuasive" Directive an(a) corroborates the finding made
under 6.1.9, i.e. that Causal an(a) should be considered Marked.
6.2.9 The Causal Causative Ank(a).
The compound predicate of the Causal Causative ank(a)
can be embedded without any change under the matrix clause of the
"persuasive" Directive construction:

193
(259)a. Hay sakafo no n-ank-arary an'i Jeanne.
the food part past-caus-sick Jeanne
"It was because of the food that Jeanne got sick."
b. N-anao [izay n-ank-arary an'i Jeanne] i Paoly.
past-do coup past-caus-sick Jeanne Paul
"Paul was doing so that Jeanne got sick."
Again, the grammaticality pattern found in (259) indicates that
Causal ank (a) should be considered fferked, as was predicted in
6.1.10.
6.2.10 Summary: the Markedness Parameter.
All the findings made in Subsection 6 are reported onto
Table 6.
194
Table 6
Markedness
Causative Prefix 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
"persuasive" 0 + * * * * * *
"coercive" 0 * * * * * * *
Directive "permissive" 0 * * * * * * *
"neutral" Amp (a) * * * * * * *
Manipulative Anp (a) * * * *

+/* +/* +
Manipulative An (a) * * * * * * *
Abilitative Aha * * + * * * *
Causal Aha + +/* + + + * +
Causal Anp (a) + +/* + + + * +
Causal An (a) * + + + * + +
Causal Ank (a) * + + + * + +
Note. 1 = Affixal Passive Obligatory,
2 = Psychological Predicate Obligatory,
3 = Entailment,
4 = Emphatic Pronoun,
5 = Obligatory Clefting,
6 = Amalgamation,
7 = Embedding.
* = Unmarked, + = Marked, +/* = Partially Marked

195
7^2. Conclusions.
Hie Animacy Parameter.
In conclusion, it appears that in view of examples such
as sentence (90), initially cited in 2.0.1, the Animacy parameter
is necessary. In a Directive construction, i.e. the "persuasive,"
the "coercive," the "permissive," or the "neutral" Causatives,"
both the Causer and the Causee are typically Animate, as explain-
ed under 1.0, except for the first subtype, where the Causee can
optionally be non-Animate, as can be inferred from the grammat-
icality of exanples such as (108)a. which involves a non-Animate
Causee. In a Manipulative construction, the Causer is Animate, as
in (12), vriiile the Causee is typically non-Animate, although it
does not have to be the case, as shown in (5)c. In the Abilit-
ative construction, both the Causer and the Causee are optionally
Animate, as is evident in (15) to (18). In a Causal construction,
the Causer is typically non-Animate, as in (27), but does not al-
ways have to be, judging from the quasi-grammaticality of the
example in (28)b., where it is an Animate NP.
7.2 Hie Control Parameter.
Hie notion of Control has to supplement the first para-
meter. In the case of the "persuasive," the "coercive," the "per-
missive," and the "neutral" Directive constructions, the Causee
retains Control, as illustrated in 2.1.1 to 2.1.3. Furthermore,
in the first subtype, the circumstantial voice is mandatory
(2.1.1), while in the second and the third, Affixal Passive in
the non-perfective aspect is optional (2.1.2), and with the last
one, the active voice is obligatory (2.1.3). All three forms

196
refer to a Deliberate Activity (2.0.2). As far as the Manipul-
ative constructions are concerned, there is Control, as is made
abundantly clear in 2.1.4.3 to 2.1.5.2, although it is not exer-
cised by the Causee but by the Causer. In the Abilitative con-
struction, there is a selectional restriction which allows only
non-Psychological predicates (2.1.6.1) to be embedded.
7.3 The Entailment Parameter.
The Entailment parameter defined as the semantic cor-
relate of the perfective aspect-marker of a predicate and synon-
ymous with "resultative," yields the following pattern:
A. If fusion takes place and if the embedded clause
comprises a predicate referring to a State, there is Entailment:
(1) the lower predicate is a Psychological predicate,
as in the case of Causal an(a) and ank(a);
(2) the lower verb is a non-Psychological, Stative
predicate, as in the case of the Manipulative Causative amp (a) in
(114); and
(3) the lower verb is a non-Psychological, non-Stative
predicate, but is in the perfective aspect form of Affixal Pas-
sive, with either voa or tafa, as in the case of the Causal Caus-
atives aha and amp (a) in (121) and (122); however, if there is
maximal fusion and if in the process the embedded Stative verb
(2.1.4.3) loses not only its tense but also its Stative prefix,
i.e. i, then there is no Entailment. This is the case in the
example (114)b.; this also applies to the Manipulative constru-
ction an (a) since it is possible to have the following pair of
sentences whose verbs are formed on the same radical:

197
(260)a. N - i - tsangana ny lay.

past-pref-set-up the tent
"Hie tent was in the state of having been set up."
b. N - a n - (ts)angana ny lay i Paoly.
past-pref-set-up the tent Paul
"Paul was setting up the tent."
B. If there is no fusion of the higher and the lower
predicates, there is no Entailment unless the embedded verb is in
the past tense, as explained under 3.1.
7,4 The Productivity Parameter.
Ohe Productivity parameter specifies the type of stru-
cture that can be embedded under the different Causative predic-
ates. Thus, in the "persuasive" Directive construction, the em-
bedded clause may have a typically transitive verb ((38)a.) or an
intransitive verb, whether the latter is Statiye ((108)a.) or not
((107)a.). The only restriction is that the embedded verb be in
the circumstantial voice (2.1.1).
In the "coercive" and the "permissive" Directive con-
structions, the embedded clause may have a typically transitive
verb (44) or an intransitive verb, provided the latter is not
Stative (48). Such an embedded verb may be in the active voice or
in the Affixal Passive in the non-perfective aspect with no.
•ina, as in (44) d.
In the "neutral" Directive construction, the embedded
predicate may be typically transitive (2.1.3) or an intransitive

198
verb, provided the latter is not Stative ((54)a. and (54)b,; also
4.1.3).
In the Manipulative constructions, a distinction has to
be made between amp (a) and an (a). With the first, the embedded
predicate, if it is not a Stative verb, is in the circumstantial
voice ((56)b.), while if it is a non-Psychological Stative verb,
then it must remain in the active voice (2.1.4.2). NO typically
transitive verb (4.1.9), no root passive (4.1.11), and no adject-
ive (4.1.12) is allowed in the lower clause. On the other hand,
with the Causative an(a), the embedded clause may include a root
passive (2.1.5.1) or an adjective (4.1.17), provided it is not a
Psychological predicate (2.1.5.1).
In the Abilitative construction with aha, the embedded
predicate is either a non-Psychological root passive ((69)a.) or
a non-Psychological adjective (4.1.21).
in the case of the Causal constructions, there exist
two subtypes: with aha or arnp(a), a transitive or an intransitive
verb can show up in the embedded clause, provided it is in the
perfective aspect of Affixal Passive with voa (4.2.8) or tafa
(4.2.9); with an (a) and ank (a) — t o a certain extent—' the embed-
ded clause is a Psychological predicate,táietherit is a root
passive (4.2.10) or an adjective (4.2.11). In the case of ank(a),
the set of adjectives that can be in the lower clause is very
limited (4.2.23), although from the ungrammaticality of (184)b.,
where the Causee is non-Animate, it can be inferred that they
must be Psychological predicates.
As we nDve from the "persuasive" Directive to the
Causal ank(a) construction, the range of sentence types that can

199
be embedded decreases and at the same time, the set of predicates
ât can occur in the lower clause becomes more and more res-
tricted. Thus, there is only a very limited set that can co-occur
with ank(a). This contrasts with the "persuasive" Directive con-
struction, where even a Psychological predicate can be embedded
under the main clause, provided it combines with the relevant
Causal prefix, as shown under 6.2.0.
7.5 The Fusion Parameter.
When the embedded predicate is a non-Stative verb,
there is the possibility of applying the circumstantial form of
Affixal Passive after Clause-Union in the case of the Manipul-
ative construction with amp (a). This argues for the necessity of
the Fusion parameter. m this respect, the Manipulative constru-
ctions show maximal fusion of the higher and the lower predicates
(5.2.8 to 5.2.21), whereas a Causal construction evinces minimal
fusion (5.3.1 to 5.3.27). The "neutral" Directive construction
leaning slightly toward the negative pole (5.2.1 to 5.2.7) and
the Abilitative Causative aha leaning toward the positive pole
(5.2.22 to 5.2.28) fall between those two extremes. On the other
hand, the "persuasive," the "coercive," and the "permissive"
Directive constructions do not present evidence suggesting fusion
(5.1.5 and 5.1.6).
7.6 The Markedness Parameter.
The Markedness parameter distinguishes between the ends
of a continuum represented, on the one hand, by the Causal con-
structions, i.e. with aha (6.1.7), aitp(a) (6.1.8) (also 6.2.7 for
200
both), an (a) (6.1.9 and (6.2.8), and ank (a) (6.1.10 and 6.2.9),
which are clearly Marked and, on the other hand, by the "coer-
cive" and the "permissive" Directive constructions (6.1.2 and
6.2.2), the "neutral" Directive anp (a) (6.1.3 and 6.2.3) and the
Manipulative an (a) (6.1.5 and 6.2.5), vMch are clearly Unmarked.
Falling between these two extremes:
A. the "persuasive" Directive is only slightly Marked
with respect to the obligatoriness of the circumstantial voice in
its enbedded clause (6.1.1) and when the latter has its verb in
the past tense, thus triggering Entailment (3.1);
B. the Manipulative anp (a) construction is Marked to a
greater extent since (i) vtoen its embedded clause ccaiprises a
Stative verb, there is Entailment (6.1.4(3)); (ii)táienits em-
bedded clause comprises a non-Stative verb in the active voice,
there is the possibility of an ambiguity of interpretation
(6.1.4); (iii) the compound Causative predicates can be embedded
as is under the matrix clause of the "persuasive" Directive
construction (6.2.4).
201
CHAPTER ONE FOOTNOTES
\jhen a literal translation is given first, the translation in
good English will be provided after the notation i.e.
2
References to examples in the text will be made between paren-
theses followed by a letter specification wherever necessary and
only one number will be used.
Ûnless otherwise indicated, the references given between paren-
theses refer to (a) portion(s) of the same chapter. Furthermore,
where a sequence a numbers separated by (a) period (s) is (are)
involved, the first refers to the appropriate Section, the second
to the Subsection, and the rest to the relevant paragraph or por-
tion thereof.
Sjhen no specific reference to a sentence is given, i.e. when on-
ly a letter is used —for example, (a)— the sequence being re-
ferred to is located in the same paragraph.

CHAPTER TWO
PREVIOUS SCHOLARSHIP ON MALAGASY CAUSATIVES
0.0 Introduction.
This chapter presents a rapid review of works touching
upon Malagasy Causatives. It will became apparent that:
1. Traditional grainnarians as well as modern linguists
are agreed that Malagasy has, at least, one Causative prefix
anp (a), although nearly all of them in their works provide nume-
rous examples showing that aha, an (a) and ank (a) can also serve
as Causative prefixes. The universal recognition of amp (a) as a
Causative prefix is undoubtedly due to the fact that it is the
most productive of all — i n the sense defined in Chapter Ore; It
was the only one considered to be a Causative by traditional
grammarians until Rajaona (1972) included aha into the list,
along with amp (a), but dismissed ank (a) on morphological grounds.
2. One area where native speakers' intuitions were
needed was that relative to the meaning of the Causative prefix
amp (a): it was only with Rajaona (1972) that it became relatively
clear that this morpheme could mean something like "let" or
"order someone to do something" (see Rajaona 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4).

203
3. However, due to his theoretical framework, Rajaona
(1972) could not consider all of the above prefixes as involving
Causative constructions (see his 6.9, 6.10 and 6.11). In fact, he
adopts a structuralist approach characterized by simple correla-
tions and no utilization of imiti-factor analyses: thus, if a
given linguistic item has property a, then it also has property
t). in short, if a then b. He does not utilize a multivariate ap-
proach, along the lines indicated in Keenan (1976b), vfoere the
number of conditioning factors is necessarily superior to one1.
Further more, his approach is more like an item analysis than a
process analysis as far as the voice system is concerned. Last
Sxit not least, his criteria are not always syntactic in nature.
1.1 Griffiths and the Causatives of Malagasy.
Causative constructions caught the attention of tradi-
tional grammarians as far back as Griffiths (1854), who wrote
Grammar of the Malagasy Language in the Ankova Dialect. But he
considered anpa to be the only Causative construction of the
language, which in his words was "formed by prefixing marnp to
simple verbs" (p.120). The latter could take different forms,
which the author did not analyze into their constituent parts; he
simply gave them as unanalyzed wholes with no boundaries between
the different morphemes. Thus, he presented examples like the
following:
Causative of the "reflective verb"2:
(1) manpilahatra "to cause to arrange themselves";

204
(2) Causative of the "potentative verb":
mampahalahatra "to cause to be able to arrange";
(3) Causative of the "intensive verb":
mairpihihiatra "to cause to be better, to beautify";
(4) Causative of the "transitive verb":
manpandahatra "to cause to arrange";
(5) Causative of the "reciprocative verb":
mampifandahatra "to cause to arrange reciprocally."
1.2 Griffiths' Methodology.
Griffiths (1854) relied on a combination of notional
and formal criteria. On the one hand, he used headings such as
"reflective verb," "potentative verb," or "intensive verb," which
' appear to be notionally based —although he did not provide an
elucidation as to what was meant exactly— on the other hand, he
had recourse to the presence of the an prefix as his criterion
for the transitive verb and that of ii for the reciprocative
verb.
(2) and (3) are sequences which, at least nowadays,
have no counterpart in the language and might reflect the fact
that the grammarian was not a native speaker of Malagasy. Such a
hypothesis is corroborated by a long list of alleged Causative
constructions involving the mahampamp sequence (see Griffiths,
p.121), which mast native speakers whose grammatical judgments
were available to me consider totally ungrammatical. Thus:

205
a_ Mahairpaitpalahatra "to have power to cause to be able
to arrange,"
b. Mahampampandahatra "to have power to cause to arrange,"
irretrievably ungrammatical.
Griffiths and the Semantics of Causatives.
as to the non-implicative meaning attached bo the
Causative amp (a), there was no indication of it in the grammar.
2.1 Parker and his Methodology.
Parker (1883) in his Concise Grammar of the Malagasy
Language also considers mampi to be the only Causative constru-
ction in the language, although he had examples involving ana, as
in manatsara "to render good," or aha, as in mahatsara "to
possess the power to make a thing good" (see (Parker, p.18)).
Furthermore, he segmented each complex Causative verb
into its constituent parts. Thus, he had sequences like the fol-
lowing:
(7) m - amp - i
m - airp - iha
m - amp - aha
m - amp - a
m - aitp - an
m - aitp - ana
m - anp - anka.
206
However, he did not give one single illustrative example of a
sentence involving the relevant construction, and no explanation
was provided as to the exact meaning of the Causative prefix.
2.2 Voice in Malagasy.
Unlike Griffiths, who did not distinguish between the
passive proper and the circumstantial voice, Parker had a three-
way classification:
1. the active voice;
2. the passive voice;
3. the relative voice, i.e. the circumstantial voice.
2.3 Contrast between Voa Passive and Tafa Passive.
Furthermore, Parker noticed the contrast between a pas-
sive with the prefix voa and the one with the prefix tafa: the
first usually implies an external agent, whereas the second char-
acterizes internal agency. He did not support his general state-
ment with examples, but the following pair of verbs from my data
illustrate what he meant:
(8)a. tafa - petraka
"to find oneself sitting (accidentally)";
b. voa - petraka
"to be placed (somewhere)(deliberately)."
3.1 Ferrand and the Causatives of Malagasy.
Like his predecessor, Ferrand (1903) in his Essai de
Grammaire Malgache considered mampa to be the only Causative

207
construction of the language. Nevertheless, he had examples of
words which involved all of the other Causative prefixes. Thus,
he gave:
(9) mandrava "to demolish," rava "demolished" (English)
(see (Ferrand, p. 120));
(10) manajamba "to cause to be blind," jamba "blind"
(11) mankarary "to make sick," marary "sick"
(12) mahory "to cause to be miserable," ory "miserable"
which we could segnent respectively into
(91) m - an - drava
pres-caus-denolished
(10') m - ana - jamba
pres-caus-blind
(11') m - ank (a) - (h) arary
pres-caus-(fut-)sick
(12') m - ah(a) - ory
pres-caus-miserable.
208
Ferrand, by the way, did not say anything at all about the mean-
ing of the Causative construction.
4.1 Malzac and the Causatives of Malagasy.
Although Malzac (1908) is believed to be the most com-
prehensive of all Malagasy grammars, it does not provide its
readers with an exhaustive list of all the Causative constru-
ctions of the language. Here again, ampa is considered to be the
only Causative prefix, despite the fact that, like Ferrand
(1903), the author presents examples involving all the other
constructions. Thus:
(13) Nahavoafitaka ahy ny fihatsaram-belatsihiny.
past-caus-pass-err me the hypocrisy-his
(see (Malzac, p. 58, paragraph 141))
"His hypocrisy induced roe into error." (English)
(14) Nameno vary ny kitapony izy.
past-full rice the bag-his he
"He filled his bag with rice." (English)
(15) Mankahery
pres-caus-strong
"to strengthen." (English)
We can analyze the predicate in (13) into the tense-marker n, the
Causative aha, and the passive voafitaka "to be in the state of

209
having been misled." Nameno of (14) is made up of n-an-(f)eno,
feno being an adjective meaning "full." Mankahery of (15) comp-
rises m-ank (a)-ahery, with the adjective hahery "strong" in the
future tense, as indicated by the initial h, which drops out.
4.2 Correspondence between Active Prefix and Passive.
Malzac felt that there was some connection between the
active prefix of a verb and its corresponding passive, although
it would be necessary to wait for Bajaona (1972) to have a syste-
matic study of this. Thus, Malzac wrote that "active verbs with a
prefix manka, mampa, mampan, and mapi have their participle in
ina and keep their prefix without m" (English3).
(15) Mankahery "to strengthen"; ankaherezina "who is streng-
thened" ;
Maiipatahotra "to frighten"; anpitahorina "who is frigh-
tened" ;
Mampananatra "to have someone given advice to"; aitpana-
narina "who is given advice";
Maitpivavaka "to have worship"; anpavavahina "who is
made to worship";
(see (Malzac, p. 62, paragraph 153)).
However, the connection was not systematic in lYfelzac's

nind. Although he had exaitples of root passives with the Abilit-
ative meaning, as in the following sentence directly quoted from
his book:
210
(17) Tsy tohako ny nataony ahy, ka niala ^
neg bearable-me conp past-pass-do me, so past-leave i
"I could not bear what he did to me; so, I left"
and although he realized that the prefix no and ho indicate the
tense of the passive verb (see Malzac, p. 65, paragraph 160),
i.e. the past and the future —and as such could be left out— he
did not divide the passive forms into root and affixal passives.
In fact, he had the following classification: "root passive";
"passive participle" with voa; passive participle" with tafa;
passive participle" with a suffix; passive participle" with the a
prefix."
4.4. Circumstantial Voice.
Malzac also felt that the so-called circumstantial voi-
ce —which he called relative voice— was restricted to elements
denoting time, place, and instrument, or means with which some-
thing is accomplished. He stated in his paragraph 169 that "it
always has for its subject whatever phrases expresses time, pla-
ce, or instrument."
4.5 Malzac and the Semantics of Causatives.
Like all of his predecessors, Malzac did not provide an
analysis of the exact meaning of the Causative prefix ampa.
5.1 Dahl and the Causatives of Malagasy.
Dahl (1951), in his book entitled Malgache et Manjaan,
also recognized one Causative prefix, i.e. ampa, for Malagasy,

211
although he had examples suggesting that ana, an, aha, anka could
also be used as Causatives. Thus,
(13)a. Manapaka ny tady amin'ny antsy izy.
pres-caus-cut the rope with the knife he
"He is cutting the rope with the knife" (English)
(see (Dahl, p. 222))
b. /[ M-an-[ (t)apaka ny tady] amin'ny antsy izy]/
pres-caus-cut the rope with the knife he
(19) M - aha - faly "to rejoice"; faly "joyous"
(see Dahl, p. 167)
(20) M - an - arary "to make sick"
(see (Dahl, p. 169); also see (11) and (11')).
(18)b. is the underlying representation we could assign to the
author's (18)a. Obviously, the gloss under each word as well as
the translation in English is mine.
Dahl, like Malzac, felt that the Causative construction
was part of the active voice in that "the action is envisaged in
its relationship with the agent" (see Dahl, p. 144), as opposed
to the passive, where "the action is envisaged in its relation-
ship with one of its direct objects" (see Dahl, p. 193). He de-
fined direct object in purely formal terms, i.e. the word which
212
immediately follows the verb —except a proper name, which is
preceded by an. For example, if we look at the following pair:
(21)a. Nitady ny mpianatra i Paoly
past-seek the student Paul
"Paul was looking for the student(s)"
b. Nitady an'i Jeanne i Paoly
past-seek Jeanne Paul
"Paul was looking for Jeanne"
we find that in (21)a., the NP ny mpianatra is a direct object
since it follows the verb immediately; in (21) b., on the other
hand, since the direct object is a proper name, it has to be pre-
ceded by the preposition an.
5.3 Passive Voice.
Furthermore, Dahl suggested that the passive form with
voa and that with tafa both denote Perfectivity, the only diffe-
rence being that the first indicates a Deliberate Action, whereas
the second has the Accidental meaning (see Dahl, p. 216). My
findings corroborate these observations (see Chapter Five: Pas-
sivization 1.2.2 for voa and 1.2.3 for tafa).
5.4 Dahl and the Semantics of Causatives in Malagasy.
Nevertheless, Dahl did not attempt an analysis of the
meaning of the Causative anpa and, as a consequence of this,
failed to see the correlation between Affixal Passive and the

213
Deliberate concept, on the one hand, and Boot Passive and the
Accidental meaning, on the other.
Rajaona and the Causatives of Malagasy.
Rajaona (1972) is the first native speaker of Malagasy
to look closely at the Causative constructions of the language,
gtilike all the authors mentioned above, who touched upon the
Causatives while in the process of writing a practical grammar of
Malagasy —mainly for the use of foreigners who wanted to study
the language— Rajaona, in his Structure du Malgache, presents an
integrated theory.
6.2 Rajaona and the Semantics of Malagasy Causatives.

First of all, Rajaona emphatically states, in his para-
graph 2.2.36, that a sentence like:"
(22) N - amp - (t)ao trano ny rahalahiko Rakobo
past-caus-do house the brother-my Rakoto
"Rakoto had ny brother build a house" (English)
(see (Rajaona, p. 167))
"does not tell us whether my brother has accepted to build that
house or not, nor whether the said house is being built or not.
In an utterance with a Causer, we do not witness the carrying out
of what is to be done, but rather the mere expression of the
order which is given" (English). In other words, the embedded
predicate has a non-perfective, progressive or ingressive inter-
pretation exclusively.
214
6.3 Distinction between Factitive and True Causative.
However, in his 5.5.4, Rajaona introduces a distinction
between a so-called factitive and a truly Causative meaning Qf
amp. The contrast could be illustrated with a pair of sentences
like:
(23) N - anp - iteny an-d-Rabe ny npitsara.
past-caus-speak Rabe the judge
"The judge ordered Rabe to speak."
(24) N - aitp - atory ny ankizy Rasoa.
past-caus-sleep the child(ren) Rasoa
"Rasoa put the child (ren) to sleep."
In (23), "the judge ordered Rabe to speak" and the sentence does
not allow us to infer whether the latter spoke or not —this is
the factitive amp— whereas (24), on the other hand, according to
Rajaona, implies that "the child(ren) slept" and in his terminol-
ogy, this is the true Causative. Hcwever, such an implication is
not necessary, as can be inferred from the grammaticality and
acceptability of the example (25) below.
6.4 Hie Nature of the Embedded Predicate.
There is a contradiction between his general character-
ization of the semantics of anp in Rajaona ( 2.2.38) and his re-
definition of what he terms "true causative" amp in Rajaona
(5.5.4). He fails to see that the difference between (23) and
(24) correlates with the fact that, in the first instance, the
215
embedded verb denotes an Activity, whereas, in the other, it
indicates a state.
Furthermore, mandatory in (24)" can have the Abilitative
neaning characteristic of root passives, so that the sentence
does not entail that "the child (ren) is (are) asleep" since it is
possible to have, for example:
(25) Nanpatory ny ankizy Rasoa fa tsy natory

past-caus-sleep the children Rasoa but not past-sleep
ry zareo.
they
"Rasoa had the children go to sleep, but the latter did

not sleep."
(25) suggests that the embedded State predicate can have a Per-
fective or an Xmperfective reading. This is corroborated by the
fact that in Malagasy, the predicate matory "(be) asleep" can
show up in the passive imperative form matoria "sleep!" In fact,
the phenomenon is quite widespread since even a predicate like
maty "(be) dead" possesses a passive imperative form, i.e. mate-
s-a "drop dead!"
6.5 Voice in tfelagasy.
Second, Rajaona considers the Causative phenomenon to

be one involving voice essentially. In his terminology (see (Ra-
jaona, 5.5.2)), there is a Causative voice, along with eight

other voices for the sentence types where a verb is present.
Thus, we have:
216
4
1. the agentive voice ;
2. the objective voice"5;
3. the intermediary (agissive) voice^;

4. the stative voice^;
c
5. the circumstantial voice ;
6. the instrumentive voice"';

o
7. the applicative voice ;
8. the causative voice; and
9. the reciprocal voice.
On the one hand, he defines voice as "the syntactic orientation
of the linguistic message from the vantage point of one of the
elements making up the utterance" (see (Rajaona, 2.1.3)). On the
other hand, he defines the Su as "the element —whether it be the
agent, the object, the intermediary, the instrument, the circum-
stance— necessarily present in the utterance, from the viewpoint
of which the process is presented and oriented syntactically"
(see (Rajaona, 2.1)).
Thus, in a sentence in the objective
voice, the subject will be that element
which is the Goal of the process, i.e. se-
mantically the endpoint of the action; no
agent is necessary and the verb takes the
ina suffix.
(See (Rajaona, 2.2.7))
By contrast, in a sequence in the inter-
mediary (agissive) voice, the subject will
be that element which is the Intermediary of

217
the action; no agent is necessary and the
verb takes the a passive prefix.
(See (Rajaona, 2.2.7))
g_6 The Causative Voice.
With respect to the Causative voice, however, Rajaona
notes: (a) that the agentive voice is different from the Causa-
tive voice (although the two have a number of common features)
since with the first, the verb has the an prefix and it is not
possible to introduce a Causee:
(26)a. M-an-(t)ao trano ny rahalahiko
build house the brother-icy
"My brother is building a house"
b. *M-an(t)ao trano ny rahalahiko Rakoto
build house the brother-my Rakoto
whereas, in the second, this is possible:
(27) Mr-amp-an-(t)ao trano ny rahalahiko Rakoto
caus build house the brother-iry Rakoto
"Rakoto has ny brother build a house"
(see (Rajaona 2.2.32)).
(b) that the Causative voice —which is a complex voice— implies
the Agentive or the Stative voice (Rajaona, 2.2.40), as could be
seen in (27) —with an agentive Causative—, or, as in (25) with
a Stative Causative.
218
6.7 Restrictions on Combinations of Voices.
However, later on, in Rajaona 2.3.3, while trying to
determine the distribution of the different voice prefixes he has
uncovered, he asserts that "the voice prefixes are mutually ex-
clusive. Subsequently, within one given verb form, there can csily
be one and only one prefix" (English). But, immediately after his
general statement, he gives examples of the following type:
(28) M - aitp - an - dio
pres-caus-pref-verb radical
"To have someone clean up (something),"
where amp signals the Causative voice, and an marks the agentive
voice. This contradicts the very statement he just made.
6.8 Permissible Combinations of Voices.
To solve this problem, Rajaona proposes in his 2.3.14
that "by and large, in Malagasy, a verb form can have one or more
voice morphemes." And accordingly, as it includes one, two,
three, four, or five of those, it is said to be of the first,
second, third, fourth, or fifth degree. In his words, "a degree
indicates the number of semantioo-grammatical features character-
istic of the subject" (English). This allows him to distinguish
between: on the one hand, the intermediary (agissive) voice, the
instrumentive voice, and the applicative voice, which are neces-
sarily of the first degree, since they can only have one voice-
marker on the verb; and on the other hand, voices like the Caus-
Q
ative, which are not of the first degree .
219
Thus, the intermediary, the instrumentive, and the ap-
plicative voices are necessarily of the first degree, whereas the
agentive Causative, e.g. m-amp-an-dio, and the Stative Causative,
e.g. m-amp-i-dio, are of the second degree.
However, the voices Which are said to be of the third
degree and beyond are, for the most part, difficult if not impos-
sible to use in actual sentences, and most of the sequences do
sound rather strange, if one can only ascertain their meaning.
llius:
(29) M - anp - if - an - dio
pres-caus-recip-pref-verb radical
"to cause two persons to clean each other"
nay be theoretically possible, but it is not certain at all that
it ever occurs in actual speech.
6.9 Sentence Types.
So far, the embedded clause always involved a verbal
element. But, as Rajaona points out, there exist two major types
of sentences in Malagasy, the second of which does not present a
verb and is of the equative type. Thus, in:
(30) Ny hatezerany no mahamena ny mason-d-Rakoto
the anger-his part pres-caus-red the eye-of-Rakoto
"Anger caused Rakoto's eyes to be red"
IÍS., according to Rajaona, is a "clrconstance de l'attributif"
and therefore, not a Causative prefix. Just as in

220
(31) Ny maha-eto an-d-Rakoto dia ny alakamisy
the pres-?-here Rakoto part the thursday
"Thursday is the time period when Rakoto is here,"
roaha is not a Causative but only indicates the "circumstance of
the attributive," whatever the latter may mean. Furthermore, he
considers manka, manpa, mampaha to be mere variants of this non-
Causative aha, although many of his own examples shew a Causative
meaning, as, for example, in:
(32) M-anka- (a) tavy
pres-caus-fat
"to cause (someone) to become fat" (English)
(see (Rajaona 2.4.13)).
6.10 Rajaona and the Causative Ank(a).
Finally, Rajaona dismisses the idea that anka could be
a Causative prefix for the following reasons dealing with produ-
ctivity: there are certain forms with the nank prefix which do
not have the corresponding adjective with the ma prefix, like:
(33) M-anka-loza "to cause to be furious,"
pres-caus-fur ious
the majority of the forms with a na prefix do not allow ank; thus
(34) M-aloto "(present) dirty,"
cannot combine with the Causative prefix anka.

221
6.11 Rajaona's Definition of a Causative Prefix.
Given Rajaona's assumption that the agentive voice,
i.e. with an, is essentially different from the Causative voice9,
and if aha and anka are not Causatives, it follows that there
should only be one Causative prefix, i.e. amp (a).
6.12 Rajaona's Exanples.

Yet, from his cwn exanples, it becomes evident that
there exist other Causatives, namely an(a), aha, and ank(a).
Anong others:
(35) M-am-(f)otsy; fotsy
"whiten" "white"
(see (Rajaona, p. 417)).
(36) Ianao no n-aha-mahantra anay

you part past-caus-poor us-exclusive
"You are the one who caused us to be poor."
(37) M - ank -asiaka
pres-caus-angry
"to cause (someone) to be angry"
(see (Rajaona, p. 551)).
7.1 Rabenilaina and the Causatives of a Dialect.
Rabenilaina (1974), in his Description Morphosyntaxique
du Bara. also finds that the Bara dialect of Malagasy has a Caus-
ative prefix ag, corresponding to the Merina amp(a), with the two
meanings defined by Rajaona and explained under 6.3 above.

222
Furthermore, Rabenilaina remarks that the so-called
"true causative" meaning of a£ shows up especially when it is
prefixed to an intransitive verb denoting a State or a Quality.
On the other hand, when the embedded verb is transitive, the pre-
fix has a "directive" reading (see (Rabenilaina, 2-2.4b)).
Following the model proposed by Rajaona, he also found
that the Causative prefix amp(a)/ap can combine with an affixal
passive (see (Rabenilaina, p. 212)).
7.2 The Causative Aha.
Again, there are indications that suggest that there
may be other Causative prefixes besides ajo. Thus, aha with a
Causative meaning shows up in some of the author's examples, in
particular:
(38) N'ini m-aha-sarotsy azy?
what pres-caus-difficult it
"What makes it difficult?" (English)
(see (Rabenilaina, p. 44)).
8.1 Conclusions.
Amp (a) is the most productive of all the Causative
constructions of Malagasy and, as a result, it could not go un-
noticed. Ank (a) is the least productive and none of the tradi-
tional grammar ians recognized it as a Causative prefix. Rajaona
(1972) himself could not accept it as such. Strangely enough, he
also discarded an (a) whose distribution is much wider than that
of ank (a) ; actually, as pointed out in Chapter One, an (a) can

223
gifted any root passive and most adjectives. But, he felt that
gnfa) was the voice-marker for the agentive voice, as could be
inferred from some of his general statements, for example, in
Kajaona 2.2.40. And because this was so, he could not view it as
a Causative prefix since for him, the Causative voice is to be
kept distinct from the so-called "voix agentive."
8.2 Rajaona and the Causative Aha Prefix.
As for aha, Rajaona's position is somewhat ambiguous.
On the one hand, he considers it to be a voice-marker in an
eguative sentence (see (30)); on the other, he does not view it
as a Causative prefix since that would counter his claim that
Causativization is mainly a voice phenomenon —not one involving
the perfective/imperfective aspect of the verb— as has been
claimed by grammarians like Jespersen (1963).
8.3 Earlier Grammarians.
Due to their status as non-native speakers of Malagasy,
most traditional grammarians did hot even suspect the exact mean-
ing of the Causative prefix axip(a), whereas Rajaona (1972) found
the co—existence of the "true causative" and the "factitive Caus-
ative" somewhat disconcerting. He did not realize that the so-
called "true causative" meaning is only one of two possibilities
vrtiich can occur with a State predicate in the embedded clause,
vdiereas the "factitive" meaning is obligatory when the latter
denotes an Activity, the verb being in the active voice in the
lower clause.
224
8.4.1 Rajaona's Methodology.
Rajaona (1972) adopts a so-called "functional-stru-
ctural" approach, which makes two fundamental assumptions:
1. A "linguistic item" is an unanalyzable entity, it
exists only if it can stand in opposition to another item, along
the paradigmatic axis. This prevents him from considering "a
linguistic item" as having formal properties.
2. Given the above, the linguist can obtain oppositions
which, at best, can be viewed as correlations. It is never the
case that a particular form possesses a whole range of formal
properties. As a corollary, linguistic analysis can only deal
with simple dichotomies: either a linguistic form is an A or it
is not.
8.4.2 Rajaona's Definition of Causativization.
Given 8.4.1(1) and the fact that Rajaona (1972) only
-recognized aitp(a), his dilemma was to choose between two equally
plausible definitions of Causativization as:
1. either a voice phenomenon;
2. or an aspect phenomenon;
without isolating any of the relevant properties of the linguis-
tic form.
With 8.4.1(2), the choice of one solution precludes the
other, although his data clearly suggest that aha covers the
equative sentence type and amp (a) is the Causative prefix accom-
panying all sentences conprising a verb.
A multi-factor type of analysis with its set of assum-
ptions would have allowed Rajaona to reach conclusions similar to
those made in the present study (see Chapter One, Section 7).
225
CHAPTER TWO FOOTNOTES
Igee footnote 4 for an illustration of this point.
^ e expression used by the author being referred to is retained.
3
1he original text is in French, the translation into English is
provided by the author of this study.
Sajaona (1972) opposes "agent" to "siege du proeès." See his
2.2.11, pp. 142-143. For him, an "agent" presupposes an "object"
(Goal), or an "agi" (Intermediary) in the utterance. If a Su is
"agent," then it has a verb with one of the following prefixes:
in, ira, mi, or man; more crucially, it is obligatorily accompanied
by an "object" or an "agi." On the other hand, if a Su is "siège
du proces," it also has one of the same set of prefixes but it
does not have an "object" nor an "agi." Thus, for Rajaona:
(l)a. M - an - doko ny rindrina aho
peindre le mur je
"Je peinds le mur," i.e.
"I am painting the wall," (English)
b. M - an - doko aho
"Je peinds," i.e.
"I am a painter," (English)
ato "I" of (l)a. is an "agent" since its verb is accompanied by
the "object" ny rindrina "le mur," but aho of (l)b. is not — h e

226
claims that it is a "siege du procls" —since its verb does not
have an "object." In his words, aho of (l)b. is "accidentellement
siege du proems." In (l)a., where the Su aho "I" is also an "a-
gent," Rajaona claims that we have a "voix agentive," as opposed
to (l)b., where the Su is a "siege du proeès" and where, there-
fore, we have a "voix stative."
5
Rajaona (1972) opposes "voix objective" to "voix agissive." in
his 2.2.7-, p. 139, he states that the first has the following
characteristics: (a) its passive form is the ina suffix; (b) no
agent is necessary with this form; (c) semantically, the Su is
the endpoint of the action. For the second, he has the following
features: (a) its passive verb has the a form; (b) no agent is
necessary with this form; (c) semantically, the Su is the inter-
mediary of the action.
As for his definition of "agi" vs. "objet," it is es-
sentially semantic in nature. Thus, in Rajaona 2.2.4, p. 135, he
writes:
...Appelons "agi" 1'element qui exige
cortme predicat une forme verbale à pre fixe
a, oonme ny tranony "sa maison" dans a-o-
rin'ny raiko ny tranony litt. "sa maison est
oonstruite par mon père" et "objet" 1'ele-
ment forne verbale en ana, tranony "sa mai-
son" dans loko-an(a)'ny raiko litt. "sa
maison est peinte par mon pere."

227
He goes on in Rajaona 2.25, p. 135:
..."òbjet," 1'element eonsidéré dans ce
qu'il a de purement passif et de réeeptif,
en tant que sinple ecran sur lequel se pro-
jette l'action verbale;... "agi," 1'element
transform! et modelé par 11 action verbale
transitive ou plus exactemant l1element pé-
nétre, "agi" par cette action et eonsidéré
meme, de ce fait, comme la matière dont se
nourrit cette action.
Hie following are additional examples taken directly
fran Rajaona' work:
(2) a. A-hofa ity trano ity.
"Cette maison est à louer," i.e.
"This house is to be rented." (English)
b. Ho-fa-ako ity trano ity.
"Cette maison est louee par moi," i.e.
"Hiis house is being rented by me." (English)
g
Rajaona (1972) recognizes that the circumstantial voice is a
complex one. Judging from his examples in 2.2.26-28, it encom-
passes the Oblique-Instrumental and the Oblique-Locative, at

least:
228
(3) Mi-kapoka ny zanany amin'ity firitsoka ity Rakoto.
"Rakoto frappe son enfant avec cette badine," i.e.
"Rakoto is flogging his child with this stick."
(English)
(31) I-kapoh(a)-an(a)-dRakoto ny zanany ity firitsoka ity.
"Cette badine est le moyen-avec-lequel Rakoto frappe
son enfant," i.e.
"This stick is the instrument-with-which Rakoto is
• flogging his child." (English)
(4) Mam-(p) etraka ny boky eo ambony latabatra i Koto.
"Koto pose le livre sur la table," i.e.

"Koto is patting the book on the table." (English)
(41) Am-(p)etrah(a)-an(a)'i Koto ny boky eo antoony
latabatra.
"Sur la table est-le-lieu-ou-Koto-pose le livre," i.e.
"On the table is-where-Koto-is-putting the book."
(English)
^Rajaona (1972) defines the problem in the following manner in
his 2.2.17, p. 147: "Sur le plan 'structural, un enonce dont le
sujet est un instrument, exige, sous peine d'invalidité séiman-
tique et syntaxique, la presence obligateire d'un objet-expan-
sion." Et>r him, the "voix instrumentive" has the following fea-
tures: (a) the instrument being the Su, the verb has the a
prefix; (b) the sentence has an "objet" obligatorily. Example:

229
^ A-fono ny entana io taratasy io.
"Ce papier est-11instrument-avec-lequel-est-en-train-
d'etre enveloppe le paquet," i.e.
"This paper is the instrument-with-which-is being-
wrapped-up the parcel." (English)
Apparently, this "applicative voice", as he calls it in his
2 . 1 . 1 3 , p. 128, is the same as what he terms "destinataire", in
his 2.2.21-2.2.23. When the Su is a "destinataire," the verb has
the ana suffix and the presence of two NPs, one of which is an
"agi" is obligatory. Thus, in:
(6) Mandraraka ity rano ity amin'ny afo aho.
"Je verse cette eau sur le feu," i.e.
"I am spilling this water over the fire." (English)
Q
Rajaona (1972) eliminates an (a) as à possible Causative prefix
on the grounds (see his 2.2.40, p. 168) that a "causative voice"
necessarily implies either a "voix agentive" or a "voix stative."
Therefore, one can only speak of either the "voix causative de
l'agentif" for constructions like m-amp-andidy "to have (someone)
cut (something)" or the "voix causative du statif" for structures
like m-amp-atory "to make (someone) sleep.11

CHAPTER THREE
REFLEXIVIZATION
0.1 Introduction.
The main purpose of this chapter is to show that the
following parameters are necessary for an adequate statement of
the rule for Reflexivization in Malagasy:
Grairmatical relations,
Semantic roles,
Clausematiness (initial or derived),
Valency of the verb.
Degree of fusion of the higher and lower predicates,
Cyclic convention,
Boundedness,
Command,
Unlike-Su Constraint.
231
Q 2 The Process.
Assuming identity between the referent of the trigger
and that of its victim:
Reflexivization makes crucial use of grammatical rela-
tions. Only a Su can trigger Reflexivization. However, there
exists a finite set of predicates, all involving Marked senten-
ces, where the trigger is not a Su but an Agent or an Experien-
cer. In these cases, Pronominalization is the preferred strategy.
When the trigger and its victim are clausemates ini-
tially, as in the case of non-Causative constructions, the latter
goes into tena if it is a DO; but if it is not a DO, then it sur-
faces as ny tenany.
When the trigger and its victim are not clausemates
initially, as in the case of Causative constructions, then in the
case of the "neutral" Directive construction, i.e. with the high-
er Causative predicate ampa, which does not involve maximal fu-
sion of the higher and lower predicates, or in that of the "per-
suasive" Directive construction, the victim, which is a DO, goes
into ny tenany, after Clause-Union has taken place; in the case
of a Jfenipulative construction or the Abilitative aha constru-
ction, which involves maximal fusion, the victim, which is ne-
cessarily a DO, goes into tena.
The Cyclic Convention is necessary to capture the Or-
dering Paradox resulting from the fact that, in non-Causative
constructions, Reflexivization precedes Clause-Onion, whereas in
Causative constructions, Clause-Union precedes Reflexivization.

232
0.3 Scope of Present Study.
The present study will focus on Unmarked structures, as
opposed to Marked constructions, which involve Displacement, i.e_
either Politeness or Emphasis. Thus, the sentence
(1) Tonga ny tena-ko/0 (Politeness)
arrived the body-of me
"I (my humble person) arrived"
where the personal suffix ko "of/by me" could be left out if it
is recoverable from the context of the utterance, involves
Politeness. In fact, ny tenako could be replaced by aho "I," when
the occasion is less formal.
(2) Tonga izyi tena-nyi
arrived he^/she^ body-of-his.i/hersi
"He^/she^ himself^/herself^ cane"
where the independent pronoun izy "he/she" shows up with the
reflexive form ny tenany, involves Emphasis.
0.4 Criteria for Markedness.
Marked constructions, which will be left out of consi-
deration, possess two main characteristics:
Only a victim is present within the sentence; there is
no trigger; and
such a victim can csily occupy the Su position, as can
be inferred from the ungrammaticality of the following sentences.

233
*Nahita ny tenako i Paoly.

(3)
Saw the body-of-me deictic Paul

*"paul saw itself."
(4)
*Mahita azy^ tenany.^ aho.
Saw hiitu body-of-him.^ I
*"l saw him^ himself
(5)
*Nanome boky ny tenako i Paoly.
gave book the body-of-me Paul
*"paul gave (a) book(s) to myself."
(6) *Nanome boky azy^ tenany^ aho.

gave book hiitu body-of-him.^ I
*"I gave him.^ himself (a) book(s)."
(7) *Nikaroka hevitra ho an'ny tenako i Paoly.

looked-for idea for the body-of-me Paul
*"Paul looked for ideas for myself."
(8) *Nikaroka hevitra ho azy^ tenany ^ aho.

looked-for idea for hiiru body-of-him^ I
*"I looked for ideas for him.^ himself
(9) *Nitsipaka ny hevitry ny tenako i Paoly.

rejected the idea-of the body-of-me Paul
*"Paul rejected the idea(s) of nyself."
234
(10) *Nitsipaka ny hevitr'izy^ tenany^ aho.

rejected the idea-of he^ body-of-him^ I
*"I rejected the idea(s) of hinh himself^."
In (3) and (4), the victim is a DO; in (5) and (6), it is an io;
in (7) and (8), it is an Oblique; and in (9) and (10), it is a
Genitive.
0.5 .additional Criterion for Markedness.
However, there is at least one type of structure which
is Marked and which involves both a trigger and a victim. This is
the construction with the Marked SVO word order, as opposed to
the unmarked VOS order of Malagasy.
(11)a. Namita-tenai i Paolyi/izyi.
past-lie-selfi Paul/hei
"Paul^/he^ is telling lies to himself^"
b. Namitaka ny tenany^ i Paoly^/izy^.
past-lie the body-of-hirru Paul^/he^
"Paul^/he^ is telling lies to himself^."
c. I Paoly^/izy^ ihany no namitaka ny tenany
deic Paul^/he^ only part told-lies the body-of-hin^
"It was Paul himself^ who induced himself into error."
Both sequences (11)a. and (11)b. show the Unmarked VOS order,
except that in the first, there is no enphasis of any kind with

235
tena. Ihis contrasts with the situation in (11)b., where there is
gjjne sort of emphasis in that Paul refers to his cwn body as
though it was an entity which had an independent existence. This
is what was called Displacement earlier. In (11)c., the word
order is SVO with the Su i Paoly to the left of the verb and the
UO nv tenany to its right. (Gonpare with (2) above, where both
iz^ and tenany are to the right of the verb.)
0.6 Assunption.
Furthermore, it will be assumed that structures like
(12) a. and (12) c. are derived from bi-clausal sources as repre-
sented in (13)a. and (13)b. respectively:
(12) a. M-an-(s)asa ny lamba i Jeanne.
pres-wash the linen deic Jeanne
"Jeanne is washing the linen."
b. M - i - sasa ny lamba.
stative-wash the linen
"The linen is clean (as a result of washing)."
c. *M-an-(s)asa tena^ny tenany^ i Jeanne^.
pres-wash self^/the body-of-hers.^ deic Jeanne^
"Jeanne^ i s washing herself j^."
d. *M - i - sasa i Jeanne,
stative-wash Jeanne
"Jeanne is clean (as a result of washing)."

236
(13) a. /tgi M-an- [g2~i-sasa ny laraba 32] i Jeanneg^]

pres-prf-prf-wash the linen Jeanne
b. /[ gl M-an-[s2-i-sasa *i Jeanne^ 32] i Jeanne^ s l ]

pres-prf-prf-wash Jeanne^ Jeanne^
In (12)a. and (12)c., an is a Manipulative Causative, whereas i
in (12) b. and (12) d. is a Stative verbal prefix, which typically
can be predicated of a non-human, non-animate NP. It follows from
the bi-clausal source for manasa "to wash" that it cannot take a
EO which is human, in this instance, i Jeanne, as seen in (12)c.
There is an Unlike-Su Constraint operating on the Causee of the
underlying representation (13)b. of a Manipulative Causative, as
will be seen in Section 3.2.4, whenever the embedded clause
comprises a verbal predicate of the Stative type.
Section 1
Reflexivization and Grammatical Relations
1.0 Introduction.
Section 1 will show that Reflexivization makes crucial
use of grammatical relations:
1. Only a Su can trigger Reflexivization;
2. although there is a finite set of predicates which
take a sentential Su, where the trigger is not a Su but an Agent
or an Experiences
237
^y Restrictions on Reflexivization.
Only a Su can trigger Reflexivization.
No grammatical relations other than Su can trigger
reflexivization in Malagasy.
l.l.l Potential Trigger for Reflexivization.
A Su can trigger Reflexivization.
(14)a. N-ikarakara tenai i Jeannei
past-take-care-of self ^ deic Jeanne^
"Jeanne^ took care of herself^"
b. N-ikarakara tena^ izy^.
past-take-care-of self^ she^
"She.^ took care of her selfi."
c. N-ikarakara tena^ ve/angaha izyi?
past-take-care-of selfi question shei
"Did she^ take care of herselfi?"
d. N-ikarakara tena^ anie izyi (4)!
past-take-care-of self^ excl shei
"(Did you not know) shei took care of herselfi'"
In (14) a. the NP i Jeanne is a Su, as shown by the possibility of
replacing i Jeanne with the independent Su form izy "he/she" in
(14)b., the insertion of a question particle like ve or angaha to

238
its left, as in (14)c., or by the fact that it can be surrounded
by anie•. as in (14)d.
1.1.2 Restrictions.
A non-Su cannot trigger Reflexivization:
(15)a. Naniraka an'i Petera^ hamono tena^ i Jeanne,
sent Peter^ will-kill self.^
"Jeanne ordered Peter^ to kill himself^."
b. Niandry an'i Jeanne^ hikarakara tena^'i Paoly.
expected Jeanne^ will-take-care-of self^

"Paul expected Jeanne^ to take care of herself^."
(16)a. *Nanome an'i Koto^ hevitra ho an'ny tenany^ i Paoly.
gave Koto^ idea for the body-of-him^ Paul
b. *Nanome hevitra ho an'ny tenanyi an'i Koto^ i Paoly.
gave idea for the body-of-hinu Koto^ Paul
"Paul gave Koto^ ideas for himself^."
(17)a. *Niresaka tamin'i Koto.^ momba ny tenany^ aho.

talked past-with Koto^ about self^ I
b. *Niresaka momba ny tenany^ tamin' i Koto^ aho.
talked about selfi past-with Kotoi I
"I talked with Kotoi about himself^"

239
(18)a. *Nilaza tamin'i Koto ny tantaran'i Paoly nomba

said past-to Koto the story-of Paul^ about
ny tena-nyi i jaona.
the body-hisi John
b. *Nilaza tamin'i Koto nDmba ny tenany^ ny tantaran'
said past-to Koto about self^ the story-of
i Paoly^ i jaona.
Paul^ John
"John told Koto about Paulas story about himself^."
In (15), we seem to have a trigger which occupies a DO position.
In fact, it will be shown below that Bgui-2 has applied on the
higher cycle to delete the underlying Su of the lower clause un-
der identity of referent with the non-Su NP i Petera and that
this lower clause has already triggered Reflexivization to tena
in the embedded clause before Clause-Union applies. Vfe have a
trigger in the 10 position in (16), in the Oblique in (17) and in
the Genitive in (18). In all of these sequences, where the trig-
ger is a non-Su, the resulting sentence is irretrievably ungram-
matical.
1.1.2.1 Apparent Violation of Restriction.
In sentences of the type of (15)a., where the potential
trigger apparently occupies a DO position, it can be shown that
in reality an Equi-2 rule has applied to delete the actual trig-
ger for Reflexivization:

240
(19)a. Niangavy an'i Jeanne^ hikarakara tenai i Paoly.
requested Jeanne^ will-take-care-of self^ deic Paul
"Paul requested of Jeanne^ that she^ take care of her-
selfi."
b. /[ gl Niangavy an'i Jeanne^ [ g 0 hikarakara an'i Jeanne^

requested Jeanne^ will-take-care Jeanne^
i Jeanne^] i paoly]]/
Paul
c. [qq hikarakara tena^ i Jeanne^]

will-take-care self^ Jeanne.
d. /[ gl Niangavy an'i J i [ g 0 hikarakara tenai 0^] i P]/
requested J^ will-take-care self 0i] i P]/
(19)a. is the same sequence as (19)d. and its underlying sequence
is represented in (19)b. Application of Reflexivization to tena
on the lower cycle yields (19)c. while Egui-2 deletes the lower
Su to give (19)d. In this analysis, it is assumed that Reflexiv-
ization is a cyclic rule, as will be shown in Section 4 of the
present chapter. Another assumption made here is that there exist
in this language Equi-2 constructions, where a non-Su NP in the
main clause triggers deletion of the underlying Su of the em-
bedded clause. Some justification for this will be provided in
Chapter Five.
241
1.1.2.2 Direct Feeling Representation.
Furthermore, miangavy "to request" and maniraka "to
give a verbal order to someone," as is the case with one subset
0f squi-2 verbs, are verbs of linguistic communication. Since in
Malagasy it is possible for the speaker to refer to i Jeanne in
(20) in either one of two ways shown below, it is suggested that
the deep structure corresponding to (19)a. or (15)a. should in-
volve some kind of Direct Feeling representation of the propos-
ition expressed in the lower clause, along the lines indicated in
Kuno (1975).
(20) a. ianaOj, ihany no mikarakara anao^.
Su-you^ only part take-care-of you^
"You^ are the only one who should take care of your-
self."
b. I Jeanne^ ihany no mikarakara an'i Jeanne^!
deic Jeanne^ only part take-care-of Jeanne^
"(You know) Jeanne, you^ are the only one who should
take care of yourself^!"
(21)a. /[Niangavy an'i Ji["£oka ianaoi hikarakara anaoi"]i P]/
requested J^ let you will-take-care you^ P
b. Niangavy an'i J^ ["Aoka i Ji hikarakara an'i Ji"] iP]/
requested Ji let Ji will-take-care Ji P

242
c. Niangavy an'i J\ [ 0 hikarakara an'i ^ i i p.
requested ^ will-take-care ^ p
(20) a. and (20 )b. shew the two possibilities for the speaker to
refer to i Jeanne, his interlocutor. (21)a. is the Direct Peeling
representation of (19) a. With the substitution of i Jeanne for
both ianao "Su-you" and anao "DO-you", we obtain (21)b. Deletion
of the particle aoka "let" yields (21)c., which is exactly the
same as the underlying sequence proposed in (19)b.
1.1.2.3 Wbrd Order Change.
There is evidence to support the view that the process
of enbedding the independent clause beginning with aoka "let"
involves a change in word order:
(22)a. Nanao tabataba i Jeanne.
did. noise deic Jeanne
"Jeanne did (a lot of) noise."
b. Sosotra i Jaona tamin' io zavatra io.
angry John causal-obl this thing this
"John is angry because of this thing."
c. Sosotra i Jaona tamin' i Jeanne nanao tabataba.
angry John causal-obl did noise
"John is angry because of Jeanne's noise-making."
d. *Sosotra i Jaona tamin'ny nanao tabataba i Jeanne.
angry John causal-obl did noise Jeanne

243
in (22)a., where we are dealing with an independent clause, the
word order is the Unmarked VOS, as opposed to the same clause em-
bedded under a Causal-Oblique, as in (22)c., where the order be-
comes Marked, i.e. turns into SVO; otherwise, the sequence is un-
graiimatical, as in (22)d. (For further details on the Unmarked
VOSX order, see Section 2)
1.1.2.4 Another Apparent Violation of Restriction.
Another type of conplex structure where the trigger
seerrs to be a DO is illustrated in (23), where the Su of the em-
bedded clause has been raised to DO of the matrix clause.
(23)a. Niandry an'i Jeanne.^ hikarakara tenai i Paoly.
expected Jeanne^ will-take-care-of selfi Paul
"Paul expected Jeanne.^ to take care of herself^"
b. /[Niandry [hikarakara an'i Jeannei i Jeannei] i Paoly]/.
Reflexive: hikarakara tena^ i jeannei
Raising: Niandry an'i Jeannei hikarakara tenai i Paoly.
There is some justification for such an underlying representation
(See Chapter Five, Subsection 2.1.3.0, for further details about
Raising-to-DO):
(24)a. I Jeannei hikarakara tenai-..
deic Jeanne^ will-take-care-of selfi
"For Jeanne^ to take care of herselfi..."

244
b. I J^ hikarakara tena^ no andrasan' i
deic J^ will-take-care selfi part be-expected-by deic p
*"For J^ to take care of herself^ is what P is waiting
for", i.e
"Paul is waiting for Jeanne^ to take care of herselfi."
tena
(25) a. *Niandry izay i Jeannehikarakara i i Paoly.
Paul
expected conp Jeannei will-take-care-of selfi
b. Niandry an'i Jeanne^ izay hikarakara tenai i Paoly.
waited Jeannei conp will-take-care selfi Paul
"Paul is waiting for Jeannei to take care of herself^."
As seen in (24)a., it is possible to front the Su of the embedded
clause and then Passive can apply on the matrix verb as in (24)b.
This shows that in (24) i Jeanne belongs in the ertbedded clause.
However, in (25)b., i Jeanne cannot be said to belong in the em-
bedded clause since it precedes the complementizer izay and
therefore falls outside of the clause beginning with izay and
ending with tena^, as is demonstrated by the ungrammaticality of
(25)a. and the grammaticality of (25)b. Last but not least, izay
of (25)b. cannot be construed as a relative clause to mean some-
thing like "Paul is waiting for Jeanne who will take care of her-
self."
1.2 Genitive Trigger for Reflexivization.
However, there is a set of predicates, which include
root passive verbs like tia "be liked," zaka "be bearable," atao
245
«be done," arobara "be said," aleo "be preferred," and tadidy "be
remembered," airong others, and which take a sentential Su. in
these cases, the trigger for Reflexivization is not a Su but an
agent or an Experiencer in the Genitive. Given the fact that the
set is finite, although fairly large, the phenomenon will be
considered marginal.
1.2.1 NO Corresponding Active Voice.

Notice that the finite set just alluded to cannot be
derived from active bases. First of all, the following sequence
conprising fantatra "be known" and a sentential Su does not have
the corresponding sentence with an active voice verb:
(26) Fantatr' i P^ tsara loatra ny m-ampa-hory
known-by deic P^ well too comp pres-caus-miserable
ny tenany^.
the body-of-him
"It is too well known to Pauli what causes him^ to be
miserable" i.e.
"Paul^ knows all too well what makes him^ miserable."
(27) *M-am-(f)antatra tsara loatra ny m-aitpa-hory
pres-act-known well too cotip pres-caus-be miserable
ny tenanyi i Paoly
the body-of-him. d e i c . Pauli>

246
Sequence (27) with the same predicate fantatra "be-known," as in
(26), but in the active voice with the Causative prefix an yields
an irretrievably ungrammatical sentence. No semantic interpre-
tation whatsoever can be assigned to (27).
Second, even in cases where the corresponding sentence
with an active verb is grammatical and acceptable, its meaning is
totally different from the one comprising the relevant root
passive.
(28)a. Fantatr' i Paoly ny toetra-n' i Jeanne,
be-known-by Paul the character-of Jeanne
"Jeanne's character is known to Paul"
i.e. "Paul knew/knows Jeanne's character."
b. N-am-(f)antatra ny toetra-n' i Jeanne i Paoly.
active-be-known the character-of Jeanne Paul
"Paul tried to figure out Jeanne's character."
It follows that (27) cannot be proposed as the underlying repre-
sentation for (26).
1.2.2 Non-Subject Trigger.
The trigger for Reflexivization is not a Su but an
Experiencer in the Genitive case with a predicate like fantatra
"(be) known," which takes a sentential Su.
(29)a. Fantatr'i P^ tsara loatra angaha ny m-ampa-hory
known-by P^ well too part oomp pres-caus-miserable

247
ny tenany^?
the body-of-him^
"Does Paul^ know very well what causes hira^ to be

miserable?"
b. Fantatr'i P^ tsara loatra anie ny m-ampa-hory

known-by P^ well too excl comp pres-caus-miserable
ny tenanyî
the body-of-him
" (Well) Paul^ knows all too well what causes him^ to be
miserable1"
(30)a. *Fantatr' izy^ tsara loatra ny m-anpa-hory
be-known-by hinu well too oonp pres-caus-miserable
ny tena-ny^.
the body-of-him^.
"He^ knows all too well what causes him^ to be

miserable."
b. Fanta-ny^ tsara loatra ny m-airpa-hory
known-by-hinu well too ccatp pres-caus-miserable
ny tenany^.
the body-of-him^
"It is known to hin^ all too well what causes hin^ to
be miserable."
248
(29) a. with the insertion of the question particle angaha ana
(29) b. with the insertion of the exclamation particle anie show
that the two clauses have a sentential Su. Note that these are
the sane basic structure as (26) above. The ungrammatically of
(30) a. proves that the NP i Paoly is not a Su since it cannot be
replaced with the Su form of the independent pronoun izy "he-
/she". The sentence (30)b. with the clitic form of the pronoun,
i.e. -ny "by him/her," confirms the view that it is indeed in the
Genitive case.
1.2.3 Criterion for Basicness.
Even in those cases where the corresponding sentence
with an active verb exists and is cognitively synonymous with the
sequence comprising the relevant root passive form, it can be
shown that the latter is more basic. The following sentence with
the predicate zaka "bearable" and a sentential Su does have the
corresponding sentence with an active voice verb, which is the
sane as the Causative construction, i.e. with Abilitative aha.
(31)a. Tsy zaka-n' i Paoly^ ny tsy nikarakara-n'
not bearable-by Paul^ conp not past-circ-take-care-by
i Jeanne ny tenany^.
Jeanne the body-of-him^
"The fact that Jeanne did not take care of hirtu was not
bearable to Paul^', i.e.

"Paul^ could not accept the fact that Jeanne did not
take care of hiiru."
249
b. Tsy n-aha-zaka ny tsy nikarakara-n'

not past-caus-bearable coup not past-circ-take-care-of
i Jeanne^ n y tenany^ i Paoly.
Jeanne1, the body-of-him,-

1
Paul
sj
"Paul could not accept the fact that Jeanne.^ did not
take care of herself^."
Now, as will be shown in Chapter Six, (31) b. with the Abilitative
aha construction has a bisentential source, and as such, is less
basic than its non-Causative counterpart in (31) a. In fact,
(31)b. involves three different clauses or cycles, whereas (31)a.
only involves two. In (31)a., the trigger for Beflexivization is
1 Paoly, an Experiencer in the Genitive case, since it passes all
the tests applied in (29) and (30).
1.3 The Victim of Reflexivization.
As far as the victim of Beflexivization is concerned,
it will appear in Section 2 that it too is constrained by Gram-
matical Relations since it shows up as tena if it occupies the DO
position, but as ny tenany if it is an 10 or an Oblique.
Section 2
Reflexivization and non-Causative Constructions
2• 0 introduction.
In Section 2, it will be seen that in non-Causative
Constructions
250
1. When the trigger and its victim are clausemates
initially,
2. the latter, if it is a DO, goes into tena,
3. but if it is an IO or an Oblique, then it surfaces
as ny tenany.
Justification for Equi-1, Equi-2, Raising-to-DO, and
Raising-to-Su is provided in Section 2 of Chapter Five. Ihe focus
of the second part of this section is the interaction of Reflex-
ivization with Equi-1 and Raising-to-Su.
2.1 Ihe Victim as Tena.
In a simplex sentence, the victim goes into tena if it
is a DO, or into ny tenany if it is not.
2.1.1 Restrictions on the Victim as Tena.
In a simplex sentence with the Unmarked VOS word order,
where the trigger and its victim are clausemates, the latter goes
into tena if it is a DO:
(32) a. Namono tena^ i Paoly^.
killed self ^ Paul^
b. /[ Namono an'i Paolyi i pady^/
killed Pauli pauli
(33) a. Namono an'i Jaona i Paoly.
killed John Paul
"Paul killed John."

251
b. No-vono-in' i Paoly i Jaona.

passive-kill-by Paul John
"John was being killed by Paul.it
(32)a. whose underlying representation is provided in (32)b. has

both the trigger and its victim within the sane clause. Evidence
for this is provided by (33)b., where the DO an'i Jaona of (33)a.
has been promoted to Su through Passivization. Furthermore, the
presence of the preposition an in an'i Jaona is a clear indi-
cation that this NP occupies a DO position.
2.1.2 Basic Word Order.
Indeed, the Unmarked word order is VOS, as in (32) and
(33), as opposed to the SV(O) of the following set of sentences:
(34) *I Paolyi namono tenai.

deic Paul^ killed selfi
(contrast with the word order in (32)a.)

"Paul^ killed himself
(35)a. *I Paoly namono an'i Jaona.

Paul killed John
(contrast with the order in (33)a.)

"Paul killed John. it
b. *I Jaona no-vono-in' i Paoly.
deic John passive-kill-by deic Paul
(contrast with the order in (33)b.)
"Jbhn was killed by Paul."n

252
If there is no strong pause between the Su, i.e. i Paoly or i
Jaona, and the constituents of each sentence, and if all three
sequences are not part of an exhaustive list — in the sense of
S.Kuno (1972) — where what happened to Paul is contrasted with
what happened to John, etc, in an enumeration, (34) and (35) are
ungrammatical and unacceptable.
Hiere are only three cases where the SVO order is
possible:
(36) I Paoly ^ no naraono tena^.
deic Paul^ part killed self^
"It is Paul^ who killed himself^"
(37) Nalahelo i J tamin' i P^ naircno tena^
was-afflicted deic J causal-Obi deic P^ killed self^
"J was afflicted because of P^'s killing himself^."
(38) I Paolyi namono tena^,i Jeanne nandositra ary i Jaona

Paul, killed self- Jeanne took-off and John
l i
niatonta.
fell
"As for Paul^, he^ killed himself^ whereas Jeanne took
off and John fell."
In (36) we have defting on the Su; in (37) the clause embedded
under the Causal-Oblique has the SVO order; and in (38), we have
253
an enumeration of different events which took place at the same
time. Compare this with the intended reading provided for each of
the sentences in (34) and (35).
2.1.3 ®ie Victim of Reflexivization and Marked Word Order.
When the word order is the Marked one, i.e. SVO, it is
possible for the DO to go not only into tena but also into ny
tenany. However, in the latter case, there is additional Emphasis
or indirect Causation.
(39) I Paoly ^ ihany no namono tena^.
deic Pauli only part killed selfi
"Pauli is the only one who killed himselfi."
(40) I Paoly^ ihany no namono ny tenany

Pauli only part killed selfi
*"It was Pauli himselfi who killed himselfi-" i.e.
"It was Paula's own action which killed himi" in the
sense of "Paul^ was responsible for hiSi own death."
(41) *Namono ny tenany^ i paoly
killed self. Pauli

"Paul^ killed himselfi."
The ungranmaticality of (41) with a VOS word order contrasts with
the grammaticality of (39) and (40), both with the SVO word order
and the no particle inserted after the Su. Furthermore, there are
two important differences between the meaning of (39) and that of

254
(40): on the one hand, (39) holds true of a situation where Paul
takes a knife at time T 1 and uses it to kill himself at a
slightly later time T 2; on the other hand, (40) is true of a
situation where at time T 1 he sets up a deadly mechanism to
prevent burglars from entering his hare and then at a later date,
T 2, he inadvertently steps into the trap and thus kills himself.
In this case, T 1 and T 2 can be very far apart and not oily that
but premeditation is absent since presumably Paul did not intend
to kill himself. In short, (39) has a Contactive interpretation,
whereas (40) has an Indirect Causation interpretation.
2.1.4 The Victim as Ny Tenany.
In a simplex sentence where the trigger and its victim

are clausemates, the latter goes into ny tenany if not a DO:
(42) a. Nanome enta-mavesatra ny tenany ^ i Paoly^
gave luggage-heavy self^ Pauli
"Paul^ was imposing a heavy burden upon himself^."
b. *Nanome enta-mavesatra tena^ i Paoly^.
gave luggage-heavy self^ Paul^
(43)a. Nikaroka hevitra ho an'ny tenany^ i Paoly
looked-for idea for self^ Pauli
"Paul^ was seeking ideas for himself^."
b. *Nikaroka hevitra ho (an) tena^ i Paoly

looked-for idea for self,
l Paul^
255
in (42) we have an 10, whereas in (43) we have a Beneficiary-
Oblique. In both instances, the sequences with tena are irre-
trievably ungrairmatical in the intended reading, while the ones
with ny tenany are grammatical. However, in the case of (43)b.,
if the preposition an is inserted in front of tena, the sentence
becomes grammatical in Colloquial Malagasy, but with a totally
different and unrelated interpretation:" Paul was seeking ideas
for you-idiot," you referring to the hearer.
2.1.5 Tests for 10.
That ny tenany in (42) a. is an 10 is shown by the fol-
lowing tests (For further details see Chapter Six, Section 8):
(44)a. Nanome enta-mavesatra ny mpianatra i Paoly.
gave luggage-heavy the student Paul
(same meaning as b. below)
b. Nanome enta-mavesatra an'ny mpianatra i Paoly.
gave luggage-heavy the student Paul
"Paul imposed a heavy-burden on the student(s)."
(45) Nanome enta-mavesatra ho an'ny mpianatra i Paoly.
gave luggage-heavy for the student Paul
"Paul gave a heavy burden for the student(s)."
(46) *Ny irpianatra no nanome enta-mavesatra i Paoly.
the student part gave luggage-heavy Paul
"It is on the student(s) that Paul imposed a heavy
burden."
256
The grammaticality of (44)b. shows that if we substitute rg
mpianatra "the student(s)" for ny tenany of (42)a., as in (44)a.,
it is possible to have a co-occurrence of an and The well-
formedness of (45) proves that insertion of the particle to is
also possible in front of ny mpianatra. But (46), with fronting
of ny mpianatra, is irretrievably ungrammatical. Now, this is a
pattern characteristic of an 10 (as opposed to that of a DO).
2.1.6 Tests for Beneficiary-Oblique.
That ny tenany in (43) a. is a Beneficiary-Oblique is
shown by the following tests (For further details see Chapter
Five at the end of Section 1):
(47)a. Nikaroka hevitra ho an'ny tenany^ i Paoly
sought idea for self^ Paul^
"Paul^ sought ideas for himself
b. Ny tenany^ ihany no n-i-karoh-an' i Paoly^ hevitra.
self ^ only part past-circ-seek-by Paul^ idea
"It was for himself^ Paul^ sought ideas."
c. TN-i-karoh-an' i Paolyi hevitra ny tenany^
past-circ-seek-by Paul^ idea selfi
"Paul^ was seeking ideas for himself^."
d. Ho an'ny tenany^ ihany no n-i-karoh-an'i P^ hevitra.
for self ^ only part circ-seek-by Pj_ idea
"It was only for himself^ that Pauli sought ideas."

257
First, (47)a. has the ho an' preposition, which is characteristic
of the Beneficiary-Oblique. Second, the contrast in grammatical-
l y between (47)b. with Clefting and (47)c. without Clefting,
when the verb is in the circumstantial form of Passive, suggests
that Clefting is preferred. Third, (47)d. shows that Clefting
with the preposition ho an' is possible although this appears to
be optional, judging from the grammaticality of (47)b. Hie above
pattern is characteristic of a Beneficiary-Oblique.
2.2 Complex non-Causative Sentences.
In a complex non-Causative sentence, since the trigger
and its victim are actually clausemates underlyingly, the victim
also goes into tena if it is a DO, or into ny tenany if it is
not, i.e. if it occupies the 10 slot on the Keenan-Comrie Hierar-
chy or anyone of the ten types of Oblique dealt with in Passiviz-
ation, Subsection 1.3.2.
2.2.1 Reflexivization in Equi-2 Constructions.
In 1.1.2.1 of Section 1, one illustrative example of an
Equi-2 structure was presented, where a non-Su trigger in the
matrix clause triggers the deletion of the underlying Su of the
embedded clause after Reflexivization to tena applies on the low-
er cycle. In that instance, the victim occupies a DO position.
In the following examples, the matrix clause verbs are
predicates that trigger Equi-2, mibaiko "to order (someone to do
something)" and maioela "to allow (someone to do something)" and
the victims of Reflexivization are an 10 and an Oblique respect-
ively in the embedded clause.

258
(48)a. Nibaiko an'i P^ hanome valin-kasasarana ny tenanyi
ordered P^ will-give reward self^
i J(aona).
J(ohn)
b. *Nibaiko an'i P. hanome valin-kasasarana tena^ i J.
ordered P^ will-give reward self^ J
(intended reading for both a. and b.)
"J ordered P^ to grant himself^/herself^ a reward."
(49)a. Namela an'i P i hitady trano ho an'ny tenany^ i J.
let P i will-seek house for selfi J
b. *Namela an'i P. hitady trano ho an-tenai i J.

J
let Pj will-seek house for selfi
"J let P^ look for a house for himselfi/herselfi."
Assume that Bgui-2 deleting the Su of the embedded clause applies
only after Reflexivization has taken place in the subordinate
structure. The contrast in graxmaticality between the a. and the
b. sequences in (48) and (49) shows that when the victim is an 10
or an Oblique it can only surface as ny tenany, even in the case
of a oonplex structure involving Equi-2. As was pointed out in
connection with the sentence (43)b., the sequences (48)b. and
(49)b. can only be granmatical in Colloquial Malagasy in a total-
ly different sense, i.e. "John ordered Paul to give you-idiot a
reward" and "John let Paul look for a house for you-idiot."
259
2.2.2 Reflexivization in Raising-to-DO Constructions.

In 1.1.2.4, one illustrative example of a Raising-to-DO
structure was presented where the Su of the embedded clause was
raised to DO of the matrix clause. In that instance, the victim
occupies the DO position in the lower clause and therefore ends
up as tena.
In the following exanples, the victims are an 10 and an
Oblique respectively:
(50)a. Niandry an'i J. hanòme enta-mavesatra ny tenany^ i P.
expected 0\ will-give luggage-heavy selfi P
b. *Niandry an'i X hanome enta-mavesatra tenai i P.
expected will-give luggage-heavy selfi P
"Paul expected to impose a burden upon herselfi."
(51)a. Niandry an'i J\ hitady trano ho an'ny tenanyi i P.
expected J^ will-seek house for selfi P
b. *Niandry an'i J^ hitady trano an-tenai i P.

p
expected J i will-seek house selfi
"P expected of ^ that shei would look for a house for
herselfi>"
The b. sequences, where the victim shows up as tena, are irre-
trievably ungrammatical. This contrasts with the grammaticality
of the a. sequences with ny tenany.

260
2.2.3 Reflexivization and Bqui-1 Constructions.
The following structures show the interaction between
Reflexivization and Bqui-1, where the higher Su deletes the em-
bedded Su of the underlying sequence, thus removing the actual
trigger for Reflexivization on the lower cycle (See Chapter Five,
2.1.1.0.3, for further details):
(52)a. Hamono tena^ i Paolyi.

will-kill himself^ Paul^
b. *Hamono ny tenany ^ i Paoly^.
will-kill self ^ Paul^
"Paul^ will kill himselfi."
(53)a. Nitetika ny hamono tena^ i paoly
planned comp will-kill self ^ Paul^
b. *Nitetika ny hamono ny tenany^ i Paolyi-
planned comp will-kill self^ Paul^
"Pauli planned to kill himself
(52) a. is a simplex sentence. Hie ungrairmaticality of (52)b.,
contrasted with the grammaticality of (52)a., indicates that the
victim must be tena in such a case, and this correlates with the
fact that the victim is in the same clause as its trigger. The
contrast in grammaticality between (53)a. and (53)b. suggests
that initially tena had its trigger within the same clause, i.e.
261
the one embedded under nitetika. Notice that in both (52) a. and
(53)a. the victim tena occupies the DO position.
The following sequences show cases where the victim is
an xo and an Oblique respectively:
(54)a. Nitetika ny hanome valin-kasasarana ny tenany^ i j^.
planned coup will-give reward self^
b. *Nitetika ny hanome valin-kasasarana (an-)tena^ i j^.
planned conp will-give reward self^
"John^ planned to grant himself^ a reward."
(55)a. Nitetika ny hitady trano ho an'ny tenany^ i p^.
planned conp will-seek house for himself^ p^
b. *Nitetika ny hitady trano ho (an-)tena^ i p^,
planned conp will-seek house for self^ p^
"Paul^ planned to look for a house for himself^."
Again, as in the case of Equi-2 in 2.2.1, Raising-to-DO in 2.2.2,
Equi-1 structures conform to the generalization made under 2.2

above.
2.2.4.1 Reflexivization and Raising-to-Su Constructions.
The following structures show the interaction between
Beflexivization and Raising-to-Su (See Chapter Five, 2.1.4.6, for
further details):
262
(56)a. Fantatra fa namono tena^ i Paoly

known oomp killed self^ Paul^
b. Fantatra i Paoly^ fa namono tena^.

Paul
known i coup killed selfi
"It is a known fact that Paul^ killed himself
(57)a. Fantatra fa ny tenany^ ihany no voa-vòno-n'i p^.
be-known conp self^ only part pass-hit-by p^
b. *Fantatra i P^ fa ny tenany^ ihany no voa-vonony^.
known P^ coirp self^ only part
c. *Fantatra ny tenany^ fa voa-vono-n'i P^.
known self ^ conp pass-hit-by P^
(intended reading for a., b., and c.)
*"It is a known fact that it was himself^ that was hit
by Paul/', i.e.
"It is a known fact that it was Paul^ who got himself^
hit."
In (56)a. fantatra "be known" is a Raising-to-Su predicate with a
sentential Su which conprises i Paoly. Hie grammaticality of
(57)a. indeed argues that i Paoly, in the genitive case here,
since the lower clause is in the passive voice with the perfect-
ive aspect-marker voa-, belongs in the lower predicate. Hie con-
trast in grammaticality between (56)a. and (57)b. shows that in

263
the first sequence i Paoly is still a Su at the time Raising-to-
gu applies, whereas this is not the case in the second sequence.
Furthermore, the ungranmaticality of (57)c. shows that Raising-
to-Su is restricted to an environment where the word order is Un-
marked, i.e. VOS, as that found in the lower clause of (56)a.,
which contrasts with the Marked order SVX (X being the Agent)
found in the lower clause of (57) a. Thus, the domain of appli-
cation of Raising-to-Su is the complement of that of Raising-to-
DO since in the latter case, the order in the embedded clause is
SVO, as in:
(58) a. ?I X hikarakara tena^ no andrasa-n' i P.
J^ will-take-care-of self part pass-expect-by P

"It is for Jeanne^ to take care of herself that is
expected by Paul", i.e.
"Paul is expecting Jeanne^^ to take care of herself."
b. ?Izy^ hikarakara tena^ no andrasa-n'i i P.
she^ will-take-care-of self part pass-expect-by P
"Paul is waiting for Jeanne^ to take care of herself."
Although (58)a. and (58) b. are of dubious graiimaticality, their
grammaticality is enhanced by the use of a special international
pattern, with a strong pause just before the particle no. The
matrix verb is andrasana "be-expected ," passive form of miandry
"to expect". The NP i Jeanne in (58)a. is indeed a Su since it
can be replaced with the Su form of the independent pronoun izy
"he/she."
264
2.2.4.2 Hie Victim of Reflexivization and Case-Marking.
Fran (56) through (58) above, the victim was a do. i<he
following examples provide cases where it is an 10 and an Obli-
que, respectively:
(58)a. Fantatra fa hanome valin-kasasarana ny t e n a n y j
known conp will-give reward self^
b. *Fantatra fa hanome valin-kasasarana tena. i j.

l l"
known conp will-give reward self^
"It is a known fact that Jch^ w i n grant himself a
reward."
(59)a. Fantatra fa hitady trano ho an'ny tenany^ i p^.
known conp will-seek house for self ^ p^
b. *Fantatra fa hitady trano ho (an-)tena^ i p^.
known conp will-seek house for self^ p^
"It is a known fact that Paul^ will look for a house
for himself^."
2.3 Summary.
It seems therefore that in a complex, non-Causative
sentence, the trigger of Reflexivization and its victim are al-
ways clausemates initially and that the victim goes into tena if
it is a DO, or into ny tenany if it is an 10 or an Oblique.

265
Section 3
Reflexivization and Causative Constructions
3>0 introduction.
In Section 3, the interaction of Reflexivization with
the Causative Constructions of Malagasy will be investigated.
It will be seen that:
1. the trigger of Reflexivization and its victim are
not necessarily clausemates initially. In fact, it appears that
typically, in a Causative Construction, the trigger and its vic-
tim are not clausemates.
If the trigger and its victim are clausemates initial-
ly, and if the victim is a DO, it goes into tena, but if it is
either an IO or an Oblique, then it goes into ny tenany.
NOw, there is a limit as to the number of arguments a
complex Causative predicate can take. There is evidence to sug-
gest that the maximal number is three. All of this leads one to
hypothesize that Causativization is a process which allows one to
increase the valency of the verb.
2. When the trigger and its victim are not clausemates,
-in the case of the Manipulative an (a) and ank (a) or
the Abilitative aha contructions, which involve maximal fusion,
the victim goes into tena;
-in the case of the "neutral" Directive construction,
which involves minimal fusion, the victim goes into ny tenany;
-an Unlike-Su Constraint operates on the underlying
sequence of the "neutral" Directive amp (a) and the Manipulative

266
amp (a), whereas this does not seem to be the case with the rfenj_
puLative ank(a) or the Abilitative aha. On the other hand, as f ar
as the Manipulative an is concerned, the above restriction holds
when the embedded predicate is a verb but not when it is adject-
ival, as in an equative type of construction. This rules out
Reflexivization in the first two instances, which tends to con-
firm a finding (to be presented in a publication (in preparation)
entitled "The Tense/Aspect System of Malagasy") relative to a
distinction between External vs. Internal Agent in the aspectual
system of Malagasy.
3.1 Preview.
Typically, in a Causative contruction, the trigger and
its victim do not show up as clausemates initially. However,
there is at least one case where they do, i.e. with the "neutral"
Directive Causative amp(a).
3.1.1 Clausematiness.
The trigger and its victim can be clausemates initial-
ly, as in (60)a. When they are, the victim goes into tena if it
is a DO, but if it is an IO or an Oblique, then Malagasy resorts
to an alternative strategy to avoid the accumulation of four ar-
guments, all dependent on one complex Causative predicate, as
will be shown in (61)c.
3.1.2 Clausematiness and Grammatical Relations.
tially, the victim shows up as tena if it is a DO:

267
(60)a. N-anp-airono tenai an'i Jeanne^ i Paoly.
past-caus-kill self.^ Jeanne ^^ Paul
"Paul caused Jeannei to kill herself^"n
b. H-amono tena^ i Jeanne^

i*
will-kill self^ Jeanne^
"Jeanne^ will kill herself.l ii
Ihe sequence (60) a. contains the simplex clause in (60)b., where
initially the trigger was the Su i Jeanne and the victim tena, a
IX). In (60)a., i.e. in the output, tena remains a DO.
3.1.3 Substitute Strategy.
tially, and if the latter is an 10 or an Oblique, then Malagasy
substitutes a different construction, breaking up the complex
Causative predicate accompanied by four NPs into the passive form
asaina "be-told" followed by another verb.
(61)a. H-anolotra an'ilay taratasy an'i Paoly i Jeanne.
will-hand the letter Paul Jeanne
"Jeanne will hand the letter to Paul."
b. *N-amp-anolotra an'ilay taratasy ny tenany^
past-caus-hand the letter self.
an'i Jeanne i Paoly^_
Jeanne Paul.
l
"Pauli had Jeanne hand him± the letter."
268
c. Nasain'i P^ natolotr1 i J azy^ ilay taratasy.
was-told-by P^ was-handed-by J hirn^ the letter
"Was told by Pauli that the letter be handed to hiir^ by
Jeanne", i.e.
"Pauli asked Jeanne to hand hirn^ the letter."
(62)a. H-itady trano ho an'i Paoly i Jeanne.
will-look-for house for Paul Jeanne
"Jeanne will look for a house for Paul."
b. *N-amp-itady trano ho'-an'ny tenanyi an'i Jeanne
pasty-caus-look-for house for self^ Jeanne
i Paoly^.
Paul
"Paul^ had Jeanne look for a house for him^."
c. Nasain' i Paoly^ nitady trano ho azy^ i Jeanne,
was-told-by Paul^ looked-for house for him^ Jeanne
"Was told by Paul^ looked for a house for him^ Jeanne",
i.e. "Paul^ asked Jeanne to look for a house for him^."
The simplex sentences in (61) a. and (62) a. are the lower clauses
in (61)b. and (62)b. respectively. In (61)b., it is an'i Paoly,
initially an 10, which is coreferential with the higher Su,
whereas in (62)b., it is ho an'i Paoly, initially an Oblique,
which is coreferential with the higher Su. In both cases, the
outputs are ungrammatical. However, there is an alternative stra-
tegy, which consists in using a different construction with the

269
passive form asaina "be-told". This has the effect of breaking up
the sequence of four arguments, as can be seen in (61) c. and
(62) c. The only difference is that in (61) c. passive also applies
in the lower clause since its DO is definite underlyingly and can
therefore be promoted to Su at a later stage, whereas Passive
cannot apply in (62)c. since its DO is indefinite and, as a con-
sequence, cannot be promoted to Su.
3.2.1 NOn-clausematiness and the "Neutral" Directive Causa-
tive Construction.
If the trigger and its victim are not clausemates
intially and if the higher predicate is the "neutral" Directive
Causative amp (a), then the victim goes into ny tenany.
(63)a. N-anp-amono ny tenany^^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne^
past-caus-kill self Paul Jeanne^
*"Jeannei caused Paul to kill herself."
b. /[N-anp-[amono ny tenan'i Jeanne^ i paoly] i Jeanne^]/
past-caus-kill self Jeanne. Paul Jeanne.

l i
First, it is assumed that the Causative construction has a bi-
sentential source, as shown in (63) b. (See Chapter Six for fur-
ther details). Second, it is also assumed that the victim is a
straight DO, as opposed to the demoted Su of the embedded clause,
which, as shown in Chapter Five, turns out to fall in between a
straight DO and an 10.
The grammaticality of (63) a. with only three NP argu-
ments dependent on the complex Causative predicate contrasts with

270
the ungrammatically of (61) b. and (62) b., each with four argu-
ments. Uie above, in conjunction with the finding made in 3 . 1 . 3
suggests that with Causative constructions, the victim can only
be either an initial Su or a derived DO.
3.2.2 Non-clausematiness and the Manipulative Causative an (a)
and ank(a) Constructions.
If the trigger and its victim are not clausemates ini-
tially and if the higher predicate is the Manipulative an (a) /-
ank (a) — with the proviso that the entoedded clause be of the
equative type — or the Abilitative aha construction, then the
victim goes into tena.
(64)a. Tsara i Paoly.

good deic Paul
"Paul is good."
b. N-ana-tsara tena^ i Paoly

past-caus-good self Pauf
"Pauf made himself (appear) to be good", i.e.
"Pauf boasted about himself."
c. ?N - i - sasa i Jeanne,
past-stative-wash Jeanne
"Jeanne was clean as a result of washing."
d. *N - an - (s)asa tena./ny tenanyi i Jeanne^.

past-caus-wash self Jeannei
"Jeanne^ was washing herself."
271
(65) a. Mala i Paoly.
crazy Paul
"Paul is crazy."
b. N - ank - adala tena^ i Paoly^.
past-caus-crazy self^ Paul^
"Paul^ drove himself^ crazy", i.e.
"Pauli worried himself£ to death."
(66) a. Tafita i Paoly.
successful Paul
"Paul is successful", i.e.
"Paul achieved his goal(s)."
b. N - aha - tafita tena^ i Paoly
past-caus-successful self^ Paul^
"Paul managed to be successful", i.e.
"Paul^ managed to achieve his^ goal(s)."
In (64) d. Manipulative an (a) embeds a clause which comprises a
verbal predicate, the one shown in (64)c., but without the Sta-
tive prefix _i. It is irretrievably ungrammatical. Uiis contrasts
with the grammaticality of (64)b., where the embedded predicate
is adjectival.
3.2.3 Non-clausematiness and the Manipulative Amp(a).
tially and if the higher predicate is the Manipulative ampa, then
the sequence is ill-formed if it contains a Reflexive.

272
(67) a. ?*Hiakatra ny seza.

will-go-up the chair
(intended reading)
"The chair will go up."
b. N - anp - iakatra ny seza i Paoly.

past-caus-go-up the chair Paul
"Paul will bring the chair upstairs."
c. N - amp - akari - n' i Paoly ny seza.

past-caus-go-up-passive-by Paul the chair
"The chair was brought upstairs by Paul."
(68) a. Hiakatra i Paoly.

will-go-up Paul
"Paul will go upstairs."
b. N - anp - iakatra an'i Paoly i Jaona.

past-caus- go-up Paul John
Either "John brought Paul upstairs," or
"John had Paul go upstairs."
c. *N - anp - iakatra ny tenany^ i Paoly

past-caus- go-up self Paul^
*"Pauli brought1 himself upstairs."
d. /[N - anp -[iakatra i Paoly ^ i Paoly^]/

past-caus- go-up Paul. Pauf
273
(67) b. is a typical Manipulative anp (a) construction since it is
possible to have Passive after Clause-Union, as seen in (67) c.:
the higher Su is different from the lower Su in the underlying
sequence, as is apparent in (67)b. This is also the case in
(68)b. Now, in the ungrammatical (68) c., the lower Su has the
same referent as the higher Su, as shown in (68) d. All of the
above suggests that there exists an Unlike-Su Constraint opera-
ting in the case of Manipulative amp (a) constructions.
3.2.4 Unlike-Su Constraint.
tially and if the higher predicate is the "neutral" Directive
anp (a), then the sequence is ill-formed if the embedded Su of the
underlying representation has the same referent as the higher Su.
If, on the other hand, the Causer and Causee are different, the
sequence becomes perfectly grammatical.
(69) a. Handidy mofo i Jeanne.
will-cut bread Jeanne
"Jeanne will cut some bread."
b. N - anp - andidy mofo an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-cut bread Jeanne Paul
"Paul had Jeanne cut seme bread."
/[N - anp -[andidy mofo i Jeanne] i Paoly]/
past-caus-cut bread Jeanne Paul

274
(70) a. Handidy nofo i Jeanne.
will-cut bread Jeanne
(sane as (69)a.)
"Jeanne will cut sane bread."
b. *N - anp - andidy mofo ny tenany £ i Jeanne^.
past-caus-cut bread self Jeanne^
*"Jeanne^ had herself cut some bread."
c. /[N - anp -[andidy mofo i Jeanne^] i Jeanne^]/
past-caus-cut bread Jeanne Jeanne
(69)b. is a "neutral" Directive amp(a) construction with (69)a.
in its lower clause. Likewise, (70)b. has (70)a. embedded under
amp (a). The, contrast in grammaticality between (69) b. and (70) b.
is due to the fact that, in the latter, the embedded Su of the
underlying sequence shown in (70)c. is coreferential with the
higher Su. This is not the same as the grammatical (69) b. whose
underlying representation is in (69)c. All of the above indicates
that the Unlike-Su Constraint, as explained in 3.0.(2), is oper-
ative in the case of the "neutral" Directive construction.
Section 4
Reflexivization and the Cyclic Convention
4.0 Introduction.
Section 4 will argue for the necessity of the Cyclic
Convention in view of the fact that:

275
1. Reflexivization interacts with Equi-1, Equi-2, Rais-
ing-to-DO, and Raising-to-Su in a way which makes it clear that
in a non-Causative construction, it precedes Clause-Union; and
2. yet, Reflexivization interacts with Clause-Union in
a causative construction in a manner which suggests that it must
follow Clause-Union.
Furthermore, it will be seen that Reflexivization is a'
bounded rule, i.e. clause-bounded for tena, and applies to the
next lower clause for ny tenany.
4.1 Hie Ordering of Reflexivization.
Reflexivization interacts with Equi-1, Equi-2, Raising-
to-DO, and Raising-to-Su in a way which indicates that in a non-
Causative construction, it must precede each one of these proces-
ses involved in Clause-Union.
4.1.1 Reflexivization Before Equi-1.
Reflexivization interacts with Clause-Union in a way
which shows that it must precede Equi-1:
(71) a. Nitetika ny hamono tena^ i Paoly^.
past-plan comp will-kill self^ Paul^
(same as (53)a.)
b. /[Nitetika [ny hamono an'i Paoly^] i Paoly^]/
past-plan camp will-kill Paul^ Paul^
"Pauli intended to kill himself^"

276
(72) a. [ny hamono tena^ i paoly^]
conp will-kill self^ Paul^
b. Nitetika [ny hamono tena^ Oi ] i Paoly..

past-plan ccaip will-kill self ^ Pauli
(73) a. *[ny hanono an'i Paoly^ i paoly^]
conp will-kill Paul^ Paul^
b. *Nitetika [ny hamono an'i Paoly^ Oi ] i Paoly

past-plan conp will-kill Paul^ Paul^
c. Nitetika [ny hanono tena^ Y ] i Paolyi.

past-plan conp will-kill self Pauli
The underlying sequence corresponding to (71)a. is given in
(71)b. If Reflexivization applies, as in (72)a., to the lower
clause, the output feeds Equi-1, which then yields (72)b. Now, if
Reflexivization does not apply in the lower clause, as in (73)a.,
and if Equi-1 applies first, as in (73) b., then in order to de-
rive (73)c., one must assume that Reflexivization to tena is not
a clause-bounded rule. This is an unwarranted assumption, as will
be shown in Subsection 4.4.1. Furthermore, the solution where
Equi-1 precedes Reflexivization is less desirable since it ap-
peals to two irretrievably ungrammatical sequences of the langu-
age, namely (73) a. and (73) b., although this does not appear to
be necessary. As a matter of fact, (72)a. without the complement-
izer constitutes an actual sentence of Malagasy, meaning "Paul
will kill himself." The same holds true of (72)b.

277
4 1.2 Reflexivization Before Equi-2.

which suggests that it must precede Equi-2:
(74)a. Nibaiko an'i Paoly^ hamono tena^ i Jeanne.

past-order Pauf will-kill self Jeanne
b. /[Nibaiko an'i P.^ [hamono an'i Pi i P ^ i J]/
past-order Pj^ fut-kill Pi Pj^ J
"Jeanne ordered Pauf to kill himselfi."
(75) a. Hairono tena^ i Paoly
will-kill self Pauf
b. Nibaiko an'i P. [hamono tena^ O^ ] i J.
past-order P_L fut-kill self J
(76)a. *[harrono an'i Paoly i Paolyi]

will-kill Pauf Pauf
b. *Nibaiko an'i P.^ [hanono an'i Pi 0i ] i J.
past-order fut-kill Pi 0i J
c. Nibaiko an'i P^^ [hamono tenai Oi ] i J.

past-order Pi fut-kill self 0i J
Again, in order to derive (76)c., where the trigger for Reflex-
ivization to tena is presumably an'i Paoly, outside the lower
clause, one has to assume that this subrule is not clause-bound-

278
ed. Furthermore, such a solution where Equi-2 precedes Reflexiv-
ization forces one to posit ungrammatical intermediate struc-
tures, i.e. (76)a. and (76)b., which are by no means necessary,
since (75)a. and (75)b. are possible alternatives.
4.1.3 Direct Feeling Representation and Raising-to-DO.
Raising-to-DO does not interact with Reflexivization in
exactly the sane way as Equi-1 and Equi-2 since Reflexivization
to tena is impossible. Hie following sentence comprises the Re-
flexive ny tenany, but it is not the output of the process des-
cribed so far. Rather, it results from the application of Clause-
THion to an embedded clause which already has ny tenany in its
Direct Feeling representation.
(77)a. Niandry ny tenanyi hotonpoina i Paolyi>
expected self^ ccmp be-boss-passive Paul^
"Paul^ expected himself^ to be served", i.e.
"Paul^ expects other people to be subservient to him^
and to satisfy every one of his caprices."
b. /[Niandry ["ny tenakoi ho hotonpoina"] i P^]/.
expected self ^ conp future-boss-passive P^
In (77)b., we have in the embedded clause a conplementizer ho and
a future tense marker ho. Somehow either one of them will be fil-
tered out or the two will merge. The word order in the embedded
clause is the Marked SV one. If the underlying representation
proposed in (77)b. is justified, it follows that Reflexivization
precedes Clause-Union.
279
4.1.3.1 Justification for Direct Peeling Representation.

One type of justification for a Direct Feeling repres-
entation is that many of the Raising-to-DO verbs,tàiiehshare the
gaite characteristics as miandry "expect", are verbs of mental
representation of the same type as milaza "to consider oneself as
something, as is apparent through one's verbal behavior," mihevi-
tra "to consider oneself as something, as is apparent in one's
patterns of thought," and to a certain extent manao "to consider
oneself as something, as is apparent through one's actions" — as
opposed to verbs like miangavy "to request", which involve Equi-2
and which are verbs of linguistic communication.
(78) Milaza ny tenany^/azy^ ho mahay i Paoly^
consider self /hirr^ conp intelligent Pauli
"Pauf considers himselfi intelligent."
(79) Mihevitra ny tenany .j/azyi ho mahay i Paolyi.
consider self/hin^ ccaip intelligent Pauli.
"Pauf considers himselfi intelligent."
(80) Nanao ny tenanyi tsy ho zavatra tokoa i Paolyi-

considered selfi not conp thing really Pauli
"Pauf considered his selfi not to be a thing," i.e.

"Paul showed total abnegation."
4.1.3.2 Postposition.
It is possible to paraphrase (78) and (79), but not
(80), in the following manner:

280
(81) Milaza...i Paoly^ [hoe mahay ny tenany.
say Paul^ quote intelligent self
"Pauf says that he^ is intelligent."
(82) Mihevitra...i Paolyi [hoe mahay ny tenanyi].
think Pauf quote intelligent self
"Pauf thinks that he^ is intelligent." -
(83) *Nanao...i Paoly^ [hoe tsy ho zavatra ny tenany.
did Pauf quote not coirp thing self
In (81), milaza literally neans "to say"; in (82), mihevitra
literally signifies "to think"; and in (83), manao means "to do".
The granmaticality of (81) and (82) shows that it is possible to
extrapose the embedded clause from the position indicated by ...
and substitute hoe "quote.. .unquote" for the Indirect Discourse
complementizer ho of (78) and (79). Notice the VS word order in
the embedded clause in (81) and (82), as opposed to the SV order
in (77) to (80). (83), for its part, is irretrievably ungram-
matical.
4.1.3.3 Indirect Discourse Formation.
In each of the examples in (78) and (79), the embedded
clause comprising the Reflexive form ny tenany stripped of its
complementizer, does exist in the language as an independent
clause, provided the necessary shift in person is effected. Nbte
the change in word order, from the Unmarked VS to the Marked SV.
281
(84) a. Mahay ny tena-ko.
intelligent the body-of-me
"I (my humble person) am intelligent."
b. Ny tena-ko mahay.
the body-of-me intelligent
"As for me (my humble person), I am intelligent."
c. *Mahay ny tena-ny.
intelligent the body-of-him
"He (his humble person) is intelligent."
d. *Ny tena-ny mahay.
the body-of-him intelligent
"He (his humble person) is intelligent."
The contrast in grammaticality between the sentences in a. and
b., and those in c. and d. proves that only the first person ny
tena-ko "I (ny humble person)" is possible, but not *ny tena-ny
"he (his humble person)". This suggests that an Indirect Discour-
se Formation is necessary which will shift the Direct Discourse
first person ny tena-ko into ny tena-ny in the process of embed-
ding a. under the appropriate matrix verb.
4.1.4 Reflexivization Before Raising-to-Su.
which suggests that it must precede Raising-to-Su with a matrix
predicate of the type of fantatra "(be) known."

282
(85)a. Fantatra fa namono tenai ì Paoly
known conp killed selfi Pauli
b. Fantatra i Paoly^ fa namono tenai-
known Paul^ comp killed selfi
"It is a known fact that Paul^ killed himselfi."
(86)a. Namono tenai i Paolyi.

killed self^ Pauli
b. Fantatra i Paoly^ fa namono tenai-
known Paul^ conp killed selfi
(87) a. Fantatra fa * [namono an'i Paoly ^^ i Paolyi].
known conp killed Paul^ Pauli
b. Fantatra i Paolyi fa [namono an'i Paolyi].
known Paul^ conp killed Pauli
c. Fantatra i Paolyi fa [namono tenai].
known Pauli comp killed selfi
In (85)a., Raising-to-Su has not applied yet, as opposed to the
situation in (85) b. Now, if Reflexivization to tena applies in
the embedded clause, as in (86) a., and then the embedded Su is
raised into the matrix clause, one obtains (86)b. If, on the
other hand, Reflexivization to tena does not apply in the lower
clause, one is forced to resort to an intermediate structure like
(87)a., which is ungrammatical. More importantly, in (87)c., Re-

283
flexivization to tena will have to apply across clause-boundary.
However, in Subsection 4.4 below, we will see that Clausematiness
is a crucial parameter for Reflexivization to tena in non-Causa-
tive constructions. It seems then that Reflexivization must be
jnade to precede Raising-to-Su.
4.2 Reflexivization After Clause-Union.
Yet, Reflexivization interacts with Clause-Union in
Causative Constructions in a manner which suggests that it must
follow Clause-Union.
4.2.1 Reflexivization and the "Neutral" Directive Causative
Amp(a) Construction.
Reflexivization to tena interacts with Clause-Union in
Causative Constructions of the "neutral" Directive type and sup-
ports the generalization just proposed.
(88) a. N - amp - amono tenai an'i Jeanne £ i Paoly.
past-caus-kill self^ Jeanne^ Paul
"Paul had/caused Jeanne^ to kill herself^."
b. /[N- aitp -[aiiDno an'i Jeanne^ i Jeanne^ i Paoly]/.
past-caus-kill Jeanne^ Jeanne^ Paul
c. *N - amp - amono an'i Jeanne.^ an'i Jeanne^ i Paoly.
past-caus-kill Jeanne^ Jeanne^ Paul
Reflexivization to tena applies in the embedded clause of (88) b.
since its structural description is met. In this case, therefore,

284
Reflexivization precedes Clause-Union since its non-application
on the lower cycle yields the irretrievably ungrarrmatical (88)c.:
only a Su can trigger Reflexivization and the initial trigger i
Jeanne has now been demoted from Su to DO. (See Chapter Six, Sub-
section 2.5.0 and subsequent paragraphs about Demotion).
4.2.2 Reflexivization After Clause-Union in Other Causative
Constructions.
Reflexivization to tena cannot apply before Clause-
Union in Causative Constructions of the Manipulative ana and anka
as well as the Abilitative aha type since in each one of the em-
bedded clauses in the b. sequences below, which constitutes an
actual sentence of Malagasy in isolation, the predicate is in-
transitive and, as a result, Reflexivization cannot apply.
(89)a. N - ana - tsara tena^ i Paoly ^.
past-caus-good self Paul^
"Pauf made himself (appear) to be good",

i.e. "Paul,, praised himself."
b. /[N- ana -[tsara i Paoly^ i Paoly-jJ/.
past-caus-good Pauf Paul^
(90) a. N - ank - adala tena.^ i Paoly^.
past-caus-crazy self paul^
"Pauf worries himself to death."
b. /[N- ank-[adala i Paoly^ ì Paoly jj/.
past-caus-crazy Pauf Pauli

285
(91) a. N - aha - tafita teru^ i Paoly.^

past- caus-successful self^ Paul^
"Paul managed to reach his goal(s)
b. /[N- aha - [tafita i Paoly^ i Paoly^/.

past-caus-successful Paul^ Paul^
Ihe underlying representation for each sequence is given in b.
Hach one of the embedded clauses from (89) to (91), as shown in
(64)a. to (66)a., are actual sentences of Malagasy: the structu-
ral description of Reflexivization is not yet met before Clause-
Union applies. It can only be inferred that Clause-Union mast
precede Reflexivization.
4.3 The Ordering Paradox and its Solution.
To solve the Ordering Paradox derived from, on the one
hand, the interaction between Reflexivization and Equi-1, Equi-2,
Raising-to-DO, and Raising-to-Su, and, on the other, that between
Reflexivization and Causative Constructions, the Cyclic Conven-
tion is made to apply, thus capturing both orderings.
4.3.1 The Order: Reflexivization Before Clause-Union.
Thus, to account for the ordering of Reflexivization
before Clause-Union in complex non-Causative constructions invol-
ving Equi-1 or Equi-2, as well as in the case of the "neutral"
Directive Causative, Reflexivization applies in the lower clause,
as in (72)a. for Equi-1, (75)a. for Equi-2, or (88)a. for the
relevant Causative since the structural description of the rule
will have been met at that particular stage of the derivation.

286
4.3.2 The Order: Reflexivization After Clause-Union.
Likewise, to account for the ordering Clause-Union be-
fore Reflexivization in Causative Constructions, there is the
fact, quite evident in the underlying structures shown in (89)b.
to (91)b., that the embedded clauses comprise intransitive pred-
icates and that Clause-Union is necessary to increase the valency
of the verbs, transforming them into transitives. The structural
description of Reflexivization will only be met after Clause-
Union has taken place.
4.4 Boundedness.
Reflexivization is a bounded rule in that:
1. on the one hand, in the case of the victim tena, it
is clause-bounded; and
2. on the other, in the case of the victim ny tenany,
application of this subrule is restricted to a situation where
the victim is in the next lower clause from its trigger, as in
the Causal and the "neutral" Directive Causative Constructions.
4.4.1 Evidence for Boundedness of Tena-Reflexive.
That Reflexivization to tena is a clause-bounded rule
is evident from the following data:
(92) a. Nilaza i Paoly f a hamono tena^
said Pauii that will-kill selfi
"Pauf said that hei will kill himself."
b. /[Nilaza [fa hamono an'i Paoly^ i paoly^ i Paolyi]/.
said comp will-kill Pauf Pauli Pauli

287
(93) a. *Nilaza i Paolyi f a hamono tena.^ i Jaona.
said Paul^ that will-kill seiq John
*"Pauli said that John will kill himself^"
b. /[Nilaza [fa hamono an'i Paoly^ i Jaona] i Paoly^]/.
said comp will-kill Paul^ John Paul^
(94)a. N-amp-amono tena^ an'i Paoly^ i Jeanne,
past-caus-kill self^ Paul^ Jeanne
"Jeanne caused Paul^ to kill himself^."
/[N-anp-aitDno an'i Paoly i Paolyi] i Jeanne]/,
past-caus-kill Paul^ Paul^ Jeanne
(95)a. *N-amp-anono tena.^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne^.
*"Jeanne^ caused Paul to kill herself^"
b. /[N-anp-amono an'i Jeanne^ i paoly] i Jeanne^/,
past-caus-kill Jeanne^ Paul Jeanne^
The underlying sequences are given in b. for each of the actual
sentences found in a. In (92) a Zero-Pronominalization rule (See
details in Chapter Four) has deleted the embedded Su in (92)b.
after Reflexivization has applied. The output is the grammatical
(92) a. In (93), as is evident in (93)b., the trigger for Reflex-
ivization is the higher Su, whereas its victim is the DO of the
lower clause. The resulting sentence (93)a. is irretrievably

288
ungrammatical. In (92) and (93), we had non-Causative constru-
ctions. However, the situation in Causative Constructions is not
fundanentally different: in (94)b., both the trigger and its
victim are clausemates and the output (94)a. is grammatical; this
contrasts with (95)b., where the trigger and its victim are in
different clauses, yielding the ungrammatical (95)a.
4.4.2 Evidence for the Boundedness of Ny-Tenany-Reflexive.
As far as non-Causative constructions are concerned,
Reflexivization to ny tenany is applicable if both trigger and
victim are clausemates in a Marked structure:
(96)a. I Paoly^ ihany no namono ny tenany
Paul^ only part past-active-kill self ^
"Paul^ is the onei who killed himself^", i.e. "P^ bears
the entire responsibility for his^ own death."
b. Ny tenany^ ihany no no-vono-in' i Paoly
self ^ only part pass-kill-by Paul^
"Someone was killed by Paul^ and that is himself^."
c. Ny tenany^ ihany no voa-vono-n' i Paoly^.
self^ only part pass-kill-by Paul^
"Someone has been unwittingly killed by Paul^ and that
is Paul^ himself"
(97)a. *Nataon' i P^ i 2a y nanonoan' i J ny tenany^.
was-done-by P i comp circ-kill-by J selfj^
"Pauli had Jeanne kill himself."

289
b. /[Nanao [(izay) namono ny tenan'i P. i j] i P^]/.
did (coup) killed self-of P^ j p^
(98) a. Nataon' i P izay namonoan' i ^ ny tenany^.
was-done-by P camp circ-kill-by J^ self^
"Paul caused Jeanne^ to kill herself^."
b. *Nataon1 i p izay namono ny tenany^ i j^.

was-done-by P comp past-act-kill self^
c. /[ N-anao [ izay n-amono ny tenany^ i j^] i P]/

past-do comp past-kill self^ p
(99) a. *Namono ny tenanyi i Jeanne

killed self^ Jeannei
"Jeanne^ killed herself^"
b. /[Namono ny tenan' i Jeanne^ i Jeanne^]/,
killed the body-of-her Jeanne^ Jeanne^
In (96)a., the trigger and its victim are clausemates, as could
be inferred from the possibility of promoting the DO ny tenany to
Su: in (96)b., the verb has the nonperfective aspect marker no..-
• ina, whereas in (96)c., it has the perfective aspect marker voa.
Furthermore, although it is an independent clause, the word order
in (96) a. is the Marked SVO, as opposed to the Unmarked VOS or-
der, as in (99), but which is ungrammatical. The contrast in

290
grammaticality between (97) a. and (98) a. is due to the fact that
in the first, the trigger and its victim, as shown in the under-
lying representation in (97)b., belong in different clauses, hen-
ce its ungrammaticality; whereas, in the second, both trigger and
victim are clausemates, as seen in (98)c. In addition, ny tenany
in (98) c. is itself in an embedded clause, with its verb oblig-
atorily in the circumstantial form of Passive (see Chapter Five).
Otherwise, the ungrammatical (98)b. ensues. This suggests that
the embedded clause in (98)a. is derived from (99)b. through Pas-
sivization. Since a passive is Marked, it follows that the embed-
ded clause containing ny tenany in (98)b. is Marked.
4.4.2.1 Clausematiness and Ny-Tenany-Reflexive.

In the case of structures like those in (96), it seems
that they involve clausemates so that it is to be concluded that
Reflexivization to ny tenany can be clause-bounded. The following
examples show that it does not have to be so:
(100) Sosotra tamin' ny tenany i Paoly^.
angry past-with self Pauf
"Pauf was angry with himself."
(101)a. ?Sosotra i Paolyi tamin' ny tenany^

angry Pauf because-of self
"Pauf was angry because of himself."
b. N-aha-sosotra an'i Paoly^ n y tenany^.
past-caus-angry Pauf self
"Pauf was angry because of himself."

291
(102) a. Sosotra ì Paoly^ tamin' izyi tsy tafita.
angry Paul^ because-of he^ not successful
"Paul^ was angry because of the fact that he^ was not
successful."
b. Izy^ tsy tafita no n-aha-sosotra an'i Paoly^.
he^ not successful part past-caus-angry Paul^
"Hie fact that he.^ was not successful angered Pauli."
In (100), tamina means "with," but in (101)a. it can only have a
Causal-Oblique interpretation. Now, Passivization shows that the
cut-off point for prorroting an NP to Su is precisely the Causal-
Oblique. This suggests that the latter is not part of the clause
since (101)a., although of doubtful granmaticality with a Causal
tamina, has the sane cognitive meaning as (101)b. with the cor-
responding Causative Construction. Since, as will be shown in
Chapter Six, (101)b. must be derived from a bi-sentential source,
it follows that the same may apply to (101) a. And indeed, (102),
which oonprises a sentence embedded under the Causal-Oblique
preposition, suggests that this is the case: in (102)a., the em-
bedded clause immediately follows the Causal tamina, whereas in
(102)b., it has been fronted, hence insertion of the particle rra
to separate the sentential Su from the verbal predicate.
4.4.2.2 Causal-Oblique vs. Causal Causative Source.
The following data confirm the view that a Causal-
Oblique construction is the source of the corresponding Causal
Causative and not the other way around. It is, therefore, a piece
of evidence in favor of thè bi-sentential source for (101) a.:

292
(103)a. /C sl N - aha -f s2 sosotra i P a o ^ S ] i P a o ^ S1]/.
past - caus - angry Paul^ Pauli
b. Sosotra i Paoly.
angry Paul
c. N - aha - sosotra an'i Paolyi i Paolyi-
past-caus-angry Paul^ Pauli
d. *N - aha - sosotra tena^ i Paolyi-
past-caus-angry self^ Pauli
e. *N - aha - sosotra ny tenany.^ i Paolyi-

past-caus-angry selfi Pauli
f. *I Paolyi no n-aha-sosotra ny tenanyi.

Pauli part past-caus-angry selfi
(104)a. ?Sosotra i Paolyi tamin1 ny tenanyi.
angry Paul^ Causal-Obi selfi
"Pauli is angry with himselfi."
b. ?N - aha - sosotra an'i Paoly^ ny tenanyi-
past-caus-angry Paul^ selfi
"Paul^ is angry with himselfi-"
c- Ny tenany^ no n-aha-sosotra an'i Paolyi.
self^ part past-caus-angry Pauli
"It was with himself , that Paul,- was angry."

293
If, as in (103)a., the Causal Causative is assumed to
be the underlying representation for a sentence containing a
Causal-Oblique and if Reflexivization is to apply, m e should be
able to get a granmatical sequence with tena: Clause-Union yields
(103) c. and the structural description of the rule is therefore
net. Now, (103)d. is irretrievably ungrammatical, a sharp con-
trast with (91)a. Furthermore, along the lines sketched in 4.3.2,
as illustrated in (98)a., it should be possible to have ny tenany
In the embedded clause. In fact, (103)a. is a Marked structure
from an aspectual viewpoint since the higher predicate is the
Causal aha and since the latter canrallyembed a sequence with a
predicate in the perfective aspect, as shown in Chapter One, Sec-
tion 4. But, (103)e. is ungrammatical and even fronting of the Su
in (103)f. does not help retrieve the situation — as is the case
in (104) c. with the fronting of Su on the intermediate structure
(104) b.
If, on the other hand, the sentence (104)a. containing
the Causal-Oblique is assumed to be the underlying sequence for
the corresponding Causative Construction (101)b., then Reflexiv-
ization to ny tenany is easily accounted for: the trigger is a
Su, i.e. i Paoly, and its victim occupies an Oblique position,
and therefore must shew up as ny tenany. In the process of Causa-
tivization, which involves Clause-Union, the embedded Su is de-
noted to DO and the Causal-Oblique ny tenany is raised to become
the higher Su. The grammaticality of (104)c. corroborates the
proposed derivation.
4.4.2.3 Restrictions on the Causal-Oblique Preposition.
New, there is a co-occurrence restriction between the

294
Psychological predicate and its Causal-Oblique preposition, ei-
ther tamina or noho, both meaning "because". The restriction
seems to hold particularly between the predicate and its prepos-
ition, which actually serves as a conplementizer, when the gover-
ned element is not an NP but a sentence/clause.
(105)a. *Taitra i Paoly fa niakatra i Jeanne.
surprised Paul conp went-upstairs Jeanne
b. *Taitra i Paoly satria niakatra i Jeanne.
surprised Paul conp went-upstairs Jeanne
c. *Taitra i Paoly noho i Jeanne niakatra.
surprised Paul conp Jeanne went-upstairs
d. Taitra i Paoly tamin' i Jeanne niakatra.
surprised Paul comp Jeanne went-upstairs
(intended reading for entire subset)
"Paul was surprised at Jeanne's coming upstairs."
(106)a. *Tafita i Paoly fa nikiry 0^
successful Pauli conp persevered Oi
b. *Tafita i Paoly^ satria nikiry
successful Paul^ coup perservered
Tafita i Paoly ^ noho izyi nikiry.
successful Pauli coup he.^ persevered

295
d. *Tafita i Paoly ^ tamin' izy.^ nikiry.
successful Pauli conp he.^ persevered
"Paul^ was successful because he^ was perseverant."
(107)a. Nandroaka an'i J(eanne) i K(oto) • fa tsy tia azy^ 0 -

J J
i
threw-out J (eanne) ^ Kotoj coup not love her _ he
b. *Nandroaka an'i i Kj satria tsy tia azy^ Oj.

threw-out J. K • carp neg love her,- 0 •
1 J -L J
c. *Nandroaka an'i J^ i Kj noho izyj tsy tia azy^.

threw-out J^ K^ conp hej not love her^
d. *Nandroaka an'i J. i K• tamin'izy- tsy tia azy-.

l j j J-
threw-out Kj conp hej neg love her^
"Kj threw J^ out because hej does not love her^."
(108) a. No-roah-an' i Kj i J i fa tsy tia-nyj 0i
pass-throw-out-by Kj J^ corrp not pass-love-by-him 0^
b. No-roah-an' i Kj i satria tsy tia-nyj
thrown-out-by Kj carp not loved-by-him Oi
c. *No-roah-an' i Kj i ^ noho izy^ tsy tia-nyj.
thrown-out-by Kj coitp she^ not loved-by-hinij

296
d. *tto-roah-an1 i K^ i J i tamin'izyi tsy tia-nyj.
thrown-out-by Kj J i coup she^ not loved-by-himj
"J^ was thrown out by Kj since she^ was not loved by
hinij",i.e. "Kj threw J^ out because hej does not love
her^"
Hie pattern of grammaticality and acceptability in (105) and
(106) shows that, with taitra "be awakened", the relevant
Causal-Oblique preposition is tamina, whereas with tafita "be-
successful", it is noho. Furthermore, (107) and (108) suggest
that this type of co-occurrence restriction is not limited to
typically intransitive verbs. In fact, the grammaticality and
acceptability pattern found in the last two sets of examples
indicates that typically transitive verbs co-occur with fa or
satria, both with the Causal interpretation.
4.4.2.4 Boundedness- and Selection Restriction of Preposition.
If indeed it is the case that there is a co-occurrence
restriction between the matrix verb and its preposition or comp-
lementizer , then it follows that such a verb selects the latter.
It can only be inferred that the victim of Reflexivization can
only show up in the next lower clause, in the case of the Causal-
Oblique, and hence, given the derivation proposed in 4.4.2.2, in
that of the Causal Causative as well.
4.4.2.5 Boundedness in Causative Constructions.
In Causative Constructions, Reflexivization to ny tena-
ny is restricted to the next lower clause since:

297
in Causative Constructions not involving Fusion (See
Chapter One, Section 5, for further details), if the trigger and
its victim are separated by an intermediate clause, the output is
irretrievably ungrammatical; and
in Causative Constructions involving Fusion, embedding
of another Causative predicate is not permitted, so that there is
no possibility of having Reflexivization apply beyond the next
lower clause.
4.4.2.5.1 Evidence for Boundedness from Directive Causatives.
The first two sequences below involving the "coercive"
and the "permissive" Directive constructions show that when the
trigger and its victim have an intermediate cycle separating
them, the output is irretrievably ungrammatical and cannot re-
ceive any interpretation whatsoever:
(109)a. *Navelan' i X n-anp-amono ny tenany^ an'i P Rj.
was-allcwed-by f past-caus-kill self P Rj.
b. /[ gl Namela an-dRj [ g 2 n-anp -[ g3 amono ny tenan'i f
allowed Rj past-caus-kill the body-of J^
1 P 1 J
S3] S2J i SlV-
P Rj Ji
(intended reading for a. and b.)
*"Ji allowed R to have P kill herselfi",i.e.
"Ji allowed R to have P kill heri."

298
(110)a. *Noteren' i J. n-airp-amono ny tenany^ an'i p r.

p
was-forced-by f past-caus-kill selfi R
b. /[ gl Nanery an-dRj [ g 2 n-amp-[ S 3 amono ny tenan' i
forced Rj past-caus-kill the body-of
1 P 1 J
Bj S2l i ]/ -
P Rj Ji
(intended reading for a. and b.)
*"Ji forced R to have P kill herself', i.e.
"Ji forced R to have P kill heri."
(111)a. N - anp - amono ny tenanyi an'i P i J ^
past-caus-kill the body-of-her^ p J^
b. /[ gl N - anp -[ g 2 amono ny tenan'i Ji i P g 2 ] i Ji]/
past-caus - kill the body-of J^ P Ji
(actual interpretation for a. and b.)

i,e
*"Ji had P kill herselfi", '
"Ji had P kill heri."
Yet, when the trigger and its victim are in two adjacent clauses,
as in (111), the output is grammatical. Notice that in both
(109)a. and (110)a., there is only a sequence of three NPs fol-
lowing the coiplex Causative predicate, and that the Unlike-Su
Constraint operative in "neutral" Directive Constructions is
respected in both, as is apparent in the lowest and the next-to-
lowest cycles in (109)b. and (110)b.

299
4.4.2.5.2 Evidence for Boundedness from Other Causatives.
A Causative predicate involving Fusion, as explained in
Chapter One, Section 5, does not allow embedding of another Caus-
ative predicate — however, see exceptions below in 4.4.2.5.3 and
under Section 6.2.0 of Chapter One.
(112) a. Hianatra i Paoly.

will-study Paul
"Paul will study."
b. H - amp - ianatra an'i Paoly i Jaona.
fut-caus-study Paul John
"John will cause Paul to study", i.e.
"John will teach Paul."
c. *N-amp-amp-ianatra an'i Paoly an'i Jaona Rakoto.
past-caus-caus-study Paul John Rakoto
"Rakoto had John cause Paul to study", i.e.
"Rakoto had John teach Paul."
d. Nasain-dRakoto n-amp-ianatra an'i Paoly i Jaona.
was-told-by-Rakoto past-caus-study Paul John
"John was told by Rakoto to cause Paul to study", i.e.
"Rakoto had John teach Paul."
Again, the ungrammaticality of the sentence (112)c. cannot be at-
tributed to the presence of an exceptionally heavy sequence of
four NPs since it only has three. Furthermore, the Unlike-Su Con-
straint is respected since the three NPs do not have the same
300
referent: Malagasy has recourse to the alternative strategy using
asaina "be-told-to" in the main clause, as seen in (112)d. if ^
bedding of another Causative is not possible, then there should
be no possibility of having the trigger of Reflexivization and
its victim separated by an intermediate clause. From this, it can
be inferred that in a Causative Construction, Reflexivization can
only apply into the next lower clause.
4.4.2.5.3 Apparent Counter-Examples.
Hie one exception to the general rule stated above,
relative to the possibility of embedding another Causative under
a matrix Causative predicate, involves the finite set of non-Psy-
chological root passives of the type of vaky "broken." As the
following set of examples show, such predicates can be doubly
embedded:
(113) a. Vaky ny fitaratra/* i Paoly.
broken the glass / * Paul
"The glass/*Paul is broken."
H - am- (v)aky ny fitaratra i Paoly.
fut-caus-broken the glass Paul
"Paul will cause the glass to be broken", i.e.
"Paul will break the glass."
N - anp - am - (v)aky ny fitaratra an'i Paoly i Jaona.
past-caus-caus-broken the glass Paul John
"John had Paul cause the glass to be broken", i.e.
"John had Paul break the glass."

301
(114)a. M - i - verina ny tantara.
pres-stative-repeat the history
"History is repetitive", i.e
"History repeats itself."
b. *M - am - (v) erina tenai ny tantara^

pres-caus-repeat self^ the history^
"History repeats itself."
Even the behavior of sentences like (113) c. constitutes a piece
of indirect evidence in favor of the boundedness of Reflexiviz-
ation since the root passive being non-Psychological, it will not
take an animate Su, as can be inferred from the relevant portion
of (113) a. Now, in Malagasy, the trigger of Reflexivization is
restricted to animate NPs, as can inferred from the ungranniati-
cality of (114)b. and the grammaticality of sentences of the type
of (60)b.
Section 5
Reflexivization and Pronominalization
5.0 Introduction.
Section 5 will demonstrate that Reflexivization and

Pronominalization are in complementary distribution with respect
to the clausematiness condition and the degree of fusion of the
higher and the lower predicates in the case of bi-sentential
sources.
302
1. Hie victim shows up as tena
- when both the trigger and its victim are clausemates, either
initially, as in non-Causative constructions;
-or derived, as in the Manipulative or Abilitative Causative
Constructions, both involving maximal fusion.
In both cases, there is the proviso that the victim be
a DO, but not an IO or an Oblique.
2. Hie victim ends up as ny tenany
-when both the trigger and its victim are clausemates, either
initially, as in non-Causative constructions, but the victim is
an IO or an Oblique (exclusive of Causal-Oblique, See Chapter
Five on Passivization); and
-when the trigger and its victim are not clausemates, either only
initially, as in the case of typical Raising-to-DO verbs (See
4.1.3.1) or in that of the "neutral" Directive (See Section 3),
or always so, as in the case of the Causal-Oblique Causative.
3. Hie victim shows up as 0/tena/ny tenany/izy, i.e.
optionally as a pronoun (See Chapter Four, Section 1, for further
details).
5.1 Assumptions.
In the present study about Reflexivization in Malagasy,
the following type of structure has been factored out since the
apparent victim does not fit into the prototypical case:
(115)a. Mikarakara ny tenany^ fatratra i Jeanne^.
takes-care-of the body-of-hef indeed Jeanne ^
" Jeanne^ takes good care of her^ own body."

303
b. Mikarakara tenai fatratra i Jeannei.
takes-care-of self.^ indeed Jeanne
"Jeanne takes good care of herself."
in (115)a., ny tenany refers exclusively to Jeanne's body, where-
as this is not the case in (115) b. Therefore, in the first se-
quence, there is a distinction between Jeanne as a person and her
body. This is a case of what was referred to as Displacement,
which makes the sentence under consideration Marked, therefore,
less basic.
5.2 The Form of the Victim of Reflexivization.
The victim of Reflexivization shows up as tena when
both the trigger and its victim are clausemates, either initially
in non-Causative constructions or derived in the Manipulative and
Abilitative Causatives.
5.2.1 Non-Causative Construction Environment.
The victim ends up as tena when both the trigger and
its victim are clausemates initially in non-Causative constru-
ctions :
(116) a. Namita-tena^ i paoly^.
deceived-self, Paul-
l l
"Paul, deceived himself^"
b. /[Namitaka an'i Paoly^ ^ Paolyj_]/.
deceived Paul^ Paul^

304
(117)a. Nikasa hanavo-tena^ ì P(aoly)
intended will-save-self^ p(aul)^
"P(aul) ^ intended to save himself^"
b. /tSx Nikasa [S2 hanavotra an'i P^ i P^] i P^]/.

intended will-save P^ p^ Pi
The underlying sequences corresponding to the a. sentences are
represented in b. in both instances, the trigger and its victim
show up in the same clause. The example (116)a. is a simplex sen-
tence; (117)a., a complex one. (See other exanples in Section 2).
In (116), the verb ends up with a final syllable in ka so the DO
tena undergoes Cbject-Incorporation into the verb. This process
is activated whenever the verbal predicate ends up in ka, tra, or
na. As a result, the compound turns into an intransitive verb.
5.2.2 Causative Construction Environments.
The victim goes into tena when both the trigger.and its
victim become clausemates after Clause-Union, as in the case of
the Manipulative and the Abilitative Causatives.
(118) a. N-anp-ijaly tena.j/*ny tenany^ i Jeanne^.
past-caus-suffer self^ Jeanne^
"Jeanne^ made herself suffer," i.e.
"Jeanne was a masochist."
b. /[N-airp-[ijaly an'i Ji/*ny tenan'i J i i jy i ji]/.
past-caus-suffer J^ the body-of J^ J^ Jj_

305
(119)a. N-ank-adala tena^/*ny tenany^ i Jeanne^,
past-caus-crazy self^the body-of-he^ Jeannej
"Jeanne worried about every trifle."
b. /[N-ank-[adala i J.j/*ny tenan' i J^ i J ± ] / .
past-caus-crazy J i the body-of-her J£
(120) a. N-aha-tafita tena./*ny tenanyi i Paolyj.

past-caus-successful self/ the body-of-her^ Pauf
"Pauf caused himself to be successful",
i.e. "Pauf managed to achieve his^ goal(s)."
b. /[N-aha-[tafita i Pi/*ny tenan' i Pi] i Pi]/,
past-caus-successful P^/*the body-of P^ P^
All the portions of the a. sequences comprising ny tenany are
ungrammatical in the relevant reading, and all the b. sequences
with ny tenany are simply not acceptable since, as was pointed
out in 4.1.3.3, only ny tena-ko "my humble person", in the first
person singular, is possible just in case the lower clause has a
Direct Peeling representation. This does not apply to the Manip-
ulative and the Abilitative Causatives.
5.3 Hie Victim of Reflexivization as Ny tenany.
The victim of Reflexivization goes into ny tenany in
the following cases:
- obligatorily, when the trigger and its victim are derived
clausemates, as in the "neutral" Directive Causative Constru-
ctions; and
306
- optionally, when the trigger and its victim are not clause-
mates, as in the case of typical Raising-to-DO verbs.
5.3.1 Ny-Tenany-Reflexive and the "Neutral" Directive.
Ny tenany is obligatory in the "neutral" Directive
Causative Construction:
(121)a. N - anp - amono ny tenany^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne^
"Jeanne^ caused Paul to kill herself^", i.e.
"Jeannei caused Paul to kill heri."
b. *N - anp - amono azyi an'i Paoly i Jeanne^.
past-caus-kill heri Paul Jeannei
c. *N - anp - amono 0^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne^.
past-caus-kill 0^ Paul Jeannei
d. *N - anp - amono tena^ an'i Paoly i Jeanne^.

(coreferentiality exclusively with Causee)
The ungrammaticality of (121) b. with azy coreferential with the
higher Su i Jeanne, (121)c. with a coreferential and (121)d.
with a coreferential tena, proves that only a coreferential ny
tenany is possible.
307
5.3.2 Ny-Tenany-Reflexive and Raising-to-DO Environment.
Ny tenany is optional with a typical Raising-to-DO
verb:
(122)a. Nilaza ny tenanyi ho mahay i Paolyi.
said selfi corrp intelligent Paul^
b. Nilaza azy^ ho mahay i Paoly

said him. comp intelligent Paul^
l
c. Nilaza ho mahay i Paoly-,

°i
said comp intelligent zero-pro^ paul^
d. Nilaza tenai ho mahay i Paoly^
said self^ coup intelligent Paul^
(same reading for entire subset)
"Paul^ considers himself^ intelligent."
In (122) a. and (122) b., the word order of the embedded clause is
Marked, i.e. SV(O); the retention of pronoun strategy is used,
this contrasts with (122)c., where the embedded clause has the
Unmarked V(0)S order, and therefore, the zero-pronoun. (For fur-
ther details, see Chapter Pour on Pronominalization). This sug-
gests that the embedded i Paoly was in the Su position underly-
ingly in the sentence (122)c. Last, notice (122)d., where the
victim is tena. Thus, the full range of options is possible under
a typical Raising-to-DO verb like milaza: 0, tena, ny tenany, and
azy, all of them with a coreferential reading with i Paoly.

308
5.3.3 Alternation Ny Tenany/Azy.
Ny tenany alternates with azy in the Causal-oblique
Construction, but not with 0^ nor with tena;
(123)a. Nanao izay n-aha-soa ny tenany^ i Paoly
did what past-caus-good self^ Paul^
b. Nanao izay n-aha-soa azy^ i paoly^.
did what past-caus-good him i Paul^

i
c. *Nanao izay n-aha-soa Oi i Paolyi.
did what past-caus-good zero-pro^ Pauli
d. *Nanao izay n-aha-soa tena^ i Paolyi.
did what past-caus-good self^ Pauli
(relevant meaning for entire subset)
"Paul^ did whatever caused hin^ to be good",
i.e. "Paul^ did whatever was good for himi."
5.4.1 Non-Relevance of the "Precede" Parameter.
The grammatically pattern from non-Causative con-
structions provides evidence that supports the view that the
"precede" parameter is not relevant for Reflexivization in
Malagasy.
(124) N-ikasa h-amono tena^ Oi i Paolyi.
past-intend fut-kill self^ <aeic pauli
"Pauli intended to kill himselfi-"

309
(125) N-anery an'i Paolyi h-amono tenai 0 i i Jaona.
past-force deic Pauli fut-kill selfi deic John
"John forced Pauli to kill himself^"
(126) N-anao ny tenanyi tsy ho zavatra i Paolyj.
past-do self^ not coup thing deic Paul^
"Paul^ considered himself^ not to be a thing,"
i.e. "Paul showed total abnegation."
(127) Fantatra fa n-amono tena^ i Paoly
known comp past-kill self^ deic Paul^
"It is a (well-known) fact that Pauli killed himself ..y
The sentence (124) involves Equi-1, táiereas (125), (126) and
(127) trigger Equi-2, Raising-to-DO and Raising-to-Su, respect-
ively. In all of these examples, the victim precedes its trigger,
yet all of them turn out to be perfectly grammatical.
5.4.2 Non-Relevance of the "Precede" Parameter for Causa-
tive constructions.
Ihe following data, where all of the Causative con-
structions of the language interact with Reflexivization, prove
that the "precede" parameter is not relevant either.
(128) Nanao izay nannnoan' i Paoly^ tena^ i Jaona.
past-do camp past-circ-kill-by Paul^ self^ John
"John did so that Pauli „ould kill himself^"
i.e. "John engineered Paul's death."

310
(129) N-anery an'i Paoly^ h-amono tena^ O^ i Jaona.

past-force Pau^ fut-kill selfi John
"John forced Paul. to kill himself^."
(130) N-amela an'i Paoly^ h-amono tenai 0^ i Jaona.

past-let Pauli fut-kill self^ John
"John allowed Paul^ to kill himself
(131) N-amp-amono tena^ an'i Paoly^ i Jaona.

past-caus-kill self^ Paul^ John
"John had Pauli kill himselfi."
(132) Tsy n-aha-fehy tena^ i Paoly

not past-caus-control selfi Paul^
"Paul^ did not manage to control himself^"
(133) Ny tenany^ ihany no n-ampa-sosotra an'i Paoly

self ^ only part past-caus-angry Pauli
"It was with himself^ that Pauli was angry."
(134) Ny tenany^ ihany no n-aha-tsiravina an'i Paoly

selfi only part past-caus-fed-up Paul^
"It was with himself ^ that Pauli was fed 15)."
(135) Ny tenanyi ihany no n-an-dreraka an'i Paoly^

self^ only part past-caus-tired PauL^
"It was of himself^ that Paul^ was tired,"
i.e. "Paul^ was tired of himself."
311
(136) Ny tenanyi ihany no n-anka-leo an'i Paoly.^.

self^ only part past-caus-tired Paulj_
"It was of himself^ that Pauli has had enough,"
i.e. "Pauli has had enough of himself."
All of the Causative constructions of Malagasy are represented in
the above data, where the victim precedes its trigger except in
(128); yetf all of the sentences are perfectly grammatical: from
(128) to (136), we have the "persuasive," the "coercive," the
"permissive," the "neutral" Directives as well as the Abilitative
aha, the Causal amp(a), aha, an(a) and ank(a) constructions.
5.5.1 Relevance of the "Command" Parameter in non-Causative
constructions.
The grammaticality pattern emerging from the following
minimal pairs, which involve Equi-1, Equi-2 and Raising-to-DO,
establishes the relevance of the "command" parameter in non-
Causative constructions.
(137)a. Ny tenany^ ihany no no-kasa-in' i Paoly^ ho-vono-ina.
self^ only part pass-intend-by Paul^ pass-kill-by
"It was himself^ that was intended by Pauli to be kill-
ed," i.e.
"Pauli intended to kill himself
b. *I Paoly^ ihany no no-kasa-in' ny tenany^ ho-vono-ina.
Paul^ only part pass-intend-by self^ pass-kill-by

312
(138)a. Ny tenany^ ihany no no-tere-n' i J ho-vono-in' i p._
self^ only part pass-force-by J pass-kill-by p.
"It was himself^ that was forced by J to be killed by
Pi," i.e.
"J forced P i to kill himself^"
b. *I P. ihany no no-tere-n' i J ho-vono-in' ny tenany^.
P^ only part pass-force-by J pass-kill-by self^
(139)a. Ny tenany^ ihany no n-antena-in' i J ho-vono-in'i p^.
self^ only part pass-expect-by J pass-kill-by p^
"It was himself^ that was expected by J to be killed by
P-,"
l i.e. "J expected P-
i toJ kill himself.."
b. *I P^ ihany no n-antena-in' i J ho-vono-in'ny tenany^.
P^ only part pass-expect-by J pass-kill-by self^
In (137), we know that in an Equi-1 construction, as shown in
4.1.1, the victim of Reflexivization was actually commanded by a
trigger which deleted subsequently: the normal output of such a
derivation is (137)a., whereas (137)b. represents a case where
the trigger never governed its victim. Likewise, in (138)a., the
trigger also commanded its victim, prior to the application of
Equi-2, as explained in 4.1.2; contrasting thus with (138)b.,
where the trigger never commanded its victim at any stage of the
derivation. As for (139)a., Raising-to-DO has applied on the DO
ny tenany to lift it from the lower into the main clause, the
underlying sequence being of the type argued for in 4.1.3 for

313
this type of construction; this accounts for the ungranmaticality
of (l39)b., where the trigger does not command its victim. Final-
ly, Faising-to-Su constructions are not relevant to the point at
issue here.
S.i,2 Relevance of the "Command" Parameter for Causatives.
The following data involving all of the Causative con-
structions of this language prove that the "command" parameter is
crucial for an adequate account of the Reflexivization process in
Malagasy.
(140)a. N-anao izay n-anono-an' i P^ n y tenany^ i J.
past-do comp past-circ-kill-by p^ selfi J
(Indirect Causation)
"J did so that P i would kill himselfi,"
i.e. "J engineered P's death."
b. *N-anao izay n-amono-an' ny tenany^ an'i P^ i J.
past-do comp past-circ-kill-by self^ P^ J
(141)a. N-anery an'i Pj h-airono ny tenanyi i J.
past-force P i fut-kill selfi J
"J forced P i to kill himself^"
b. *N-anery ny tenanyi h-anono an'i P i i J.
past-force self. fut-kill Pt j

314
(142)a. N-amela an'i Pi h-amono ny tenanyi i j.
past-let P A fut-kill selfi J
"J allowed P i to kill himselfi-"
b. *N-amela ny tenanyi h-amono an'i P^ i J.
past-let selfi fut-kill Pi J
(143)a. ?N-amp-amoho ny tenany^ an'i Pi i J.
past-caus-kill sel^ Pi J
"J had P t kill himself
b. *N-amp-amono an'i P^ ny tenanyi i J.
past-caus-kill Pi selfi J
(144) a. Tsy n-aha-fehy ny tenanyi i J i#
not past-caus-control self^ ^
"Ji did not manage to control himselfi."
b. *Tsy n-aha-fehy an'i J i ny tenanyi«
not past-caus-control Ji selfi
(145)a. Ny tenany^ ihany no n-ampa-sosotra an'i Pi-
selfi only part past-caus-angry Pi
"It was with himselfi that Pi was angry."

315
b. *I ihany no n-arnpa-sosotra ny tenany^.

P^ only part past-caus-angry self^
(146)a. Ny tenany^ ihany no n-aha-tsiravina an'i P^.
self^ only part past-caus-fed-up P^
"It was with himself ^ that P^ was fed up."
b. *I P^ ihany no n-aha-tsiravina ny tenany^.
P^ only part past-caus-fed-up self^

(147)a. Ny tenany^ ihany no n-an-dreraka an'i Pi-
self^ only part past-caus-tired P^
was tired of himself
(148)a. Ny tenany^ ihany no n-anka-leo an'i Pi-
self ^ only part past-caus-tired P^
"P^ has had enough of himself^."
b. *I Pj ihany no n-anka-leo ny tenany^.
P^ only part past-caus-tired self^

(no interpretatiai whatsoever)
Prom (140) to (148), we have the "persuasive," the "coercive,"
the "permissive," the "neutral" Directive Causatives, followed by
the Abilitative and the Causal amp (a), aha, an (a) and ank (a). In
all of the a. versions, the trigger commands its victim, whereas
in all of the b. sequences it does not. Thus, in all of the a.

316
constructions, the underlying trigger occupies the Su position
at the time Reflexivization applies. This supports the view that
the relevant underlying representation for a Causal construction
is a structure comprising ny tenany in a Causal-Oblique position.
A Raising rule would then turn ny tenany into the Su of the high-
er clause and the original Su would be demoted to DO position on
the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy.
5.6.1 Distribution of Independent Pronouns on Hierarchy.
The independent and clitic forms of Pronominalization
are in complementary distribution on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy.
Confining ourselves to human triggers, it transpires that an in-
dependent form can show up as a Su, a DO, an 10 and a Benefici-
ary-Oblique, whereas a clitic is mandatory when the victim occu-
pies a Source-Oblique, a Comitative-Oblique or a Genitive posi-
tion.
(149)a. N-itsangana i Paoly.
past-stand deic Paul
"Paul was standing."
b. N-itsangana izy.
past-stand he
"He was standing."
c. *N-itsangana-ny.
past-stand-clitic

317
(150)a. N-itady an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-search deic Jeanne deic Paul
"Paul was looking for Jeanne."
b. N-itady azy i Paoly.
past-search her deic Paul
"Paul was looking for her."
c. *N-itadi-ny i Paoly.
past-search-clitic deic Paul
(151)a. N-anome boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-give book deic Jeanne deic Paul
"Paul gave (a) book(s) to Jeanne."
b. N-anome boky azy i Paoly.
past-give book her deic Paul
"Paul gave her (a) book(s)."
c. *N-anome boki-ny i Paoly.
past-give book-clitic deic Paul
(152)a. N-anomana sakafo ho an'i Paoly i Jeanne.
past-prepare food for deic Paul deic Jeanne
"Jeanne was preparing food for Paul."

318
b. N-anomana sakafo ho azy i Jeanne,
past-prepare food for him deic Jeanne
"Jeanne was preparing food for him,i.e. Paul ."
c. *N-anomana sakafo.(ho)-ny i Jeanne.
past-prepare food for-clitic deic Jeanne
In (149), the relevant position is a Su and substitution of an
independent pronoun for the NP i Paoly in the a. sequence yields
the grammatical sentence (149)b., as opposed to (149)c., where a
clitic pronoun has shown up and which results in an ungramnatical
structure. In (150) and (151), the relevant positions are a DO
and an 10 respectively while in (152), we have an NP in the Ben-
eficiary Oblique. Two positions, i.e. Instrument and Directional-
Oblique, which typically involve non-animate NPs, have been left
out of consideration. Finally, whether we keep the ho particle in
(152)c. or not, the output remains irretrievably ungrammatical
and lacks interpretation.
5.6.2 Distribution of Clitics on Hierarchy.
Still assuming the different types of Oblique and the
ordering proposed in Passivization, Subsection 1.3.2, we note
that Manner-Oblique, locative-Oblique and Temporal-Oblique have
to do with non-animate NPs and therefore do not fall under the
scope of our present investigations. As for Source-Oblique,
Comitative-Oblique and Genitive, the following set of sentences
provides all relevant data.

319
(153)a. Avy t-any amin'i Paoly ilay hevitra.
came past-from prep deic Paul the idea
"Hie previously-mentioned idea came from Paul."
b. *Avy t-any amin' azy ilay hevitra.
came past-from prep him the idea
c. Avy t-any ami-ny ilay hevitra.
came past-from prep-clitic thè idea
"The previously-mentioned idea came fran him."
(154)a. N-andeha n-iaraka t-amin' i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-go past-accompany past-with deic Jeanne deic Paul
"Paul went with Jeanne."
b. *N-andeha n-iaraka t-amin' azy i Paoly.
past-go past-accompany past-with her deic Paul
c. N-andeha n-iaraka t-ami-ny i Paoly.
past-go past-acconpany past-with-clitic deic Paul
"Paul went with her."
(155)a. N-anasa ny akanjon' i Paoly i Jeanne,
past-wash the clothes-of deic Paul deic Jeanne
"Jeanne was washing Paul's clothes."
b. *N-anasa ny akanjon' azy i Jeanne,
past-wash the clothes-of him deic Jeanne

320
c. N-anasa ny akanjo-ny i Jeanne,
past-wash the clothes-clitic deic Jeanne
"Jeanne was washing his clothes."
Hie grairmaticality pattern emerging from these sets of examples
indicates that when the victim is a Source-Oblique, as in (153),
a Oomitative-Oblique, as in (154), or a Genitive, as in (155),
then it must show up as a clitic. The b. sequences comprising the
independent form remain ungramraatical; however, there are region-
al dialects of Malagasy where the latter sentences would be ac-
ceptable, especially in their Colloquial variety.
5.6.3 Relationship between Clitics and the Tena/Ny Tenany
Alternation.
As was pointed out in 2.1.3 above, in connection with
the minimal pair made up of the sentences (39) and (40), the use
of the definite article in ny tenany carries with it the im-
plication of Indirect Causation as opposed to the simple use of
tena with its Contactive interpretation. This correlates with the
fact that tena occupies the DO/IO position exclusively on the
Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy, whereas in ny tena-ny, the clitic ny
"of-his/hers" is in the Genitive case.
This dichotomy between Indirect vs. Contactive Caus-
ation parallels the aspectual problem uncovered in 1.1.2 of Chap-
ter One: Hie Causative1 Constructions of Malagasy, relative to
"ballistic" vs. "controlled" Manipulation: in the first instance,
the Agent only provides the initial impulse while in the second,
he has to follow through every single phase of the action.

321
Conclusions: Granmatical Relations.
It appears that the nine parameters presented in the
introduction to the present chapter are indispensable for an
adequate account of Reflexivization in Malagasy.
Grammatical Relations have proven necessary since in
this language, oily a Su can trigger Reflexivization. However,
there exist a limited set of verbs like fantatra "be-known," with
no corresponding active voice structures, where the trigger is
either anftgentor an Experience! in the genitive.
Furthermore, vdien the victim fills up the DO slot, it
shows up as tena, but whenever it occupies an 10 or an Oblique
position, then it surfaces as ny tenany.
6.2 Clausematiness and Fusion.
In non-Causative structures, the trigger and its victim
are always clausemates, whereas in Causative constructions,
Clause-Union can turn the two items into derived clausemates, and
depending on the degree of fusion between the higher and the low-
er clauses, the output contains either tena with maximal fusion,
or ny tenany with minimal fusion.
6.3 Valency of the Compound Verb.
Now, the valency of the compound verb resulting from
Clause-Union seems to be limited since whenever an embedded verb
takes three NP arguments on its own, the native speaker naturally
resorts to an alternative strategy, which enables him/her to
break -up the sequence of four consecutive arguments, substituting
a non-Causative structure for the Causative construction and
replacing the Ny-Tenany-Reflexive with an independent pronoun.

322
6.4 The Cyclic Convention.
The Cyclic Convention, as put forth in Ross (1967) and
Baker (1978), provides a simple solution to the Ordering Paradox
which results from the interaction of Reflexivization an^
Clause-Union in non-Causative constructions, on the one hand;
that of Reflexivization in Causative constructions and Clause-
Union, on the other.
6.5 Boundedness and Unlike-Su Constraint.
Reflexivization is a bounded rule since in the case of
tena, the trigger and its victim show up in the same clause,
whereas in that of ny tenany, the victim must belong in the next
lower clause, otherwise an ungrairmatical sentence ensues. In this
connection and relative to the "neutral" Directive Causative, the
Causee cannot have the same referent as the Causer, although the
lower clause cm its own forms a fully grammatical simplex senten-
ce and despite the fact that the "neutral" Directive amp (a) can
embed any predicate, transitive or intransitive.
this Unlike-Su Constraint, first proposed in Perlmutter
(1968), pertains to the "neutral" Directive construction amp(a)
and the Manipulative amp (a), but does not apply to Causal aha,
an (a), and ank (a), judging from the grammatically pattern found
in 4.2.2. The ill-formedness of a sequence containing a Reflexive
in the lower clause of a Manipulative Causative can be attri-
buted, in part, to the1 fact that typically in such a constru-
ction, the initial Su of the embedded clause is non-animate. Now,
the data presented in (114) indicates that the trigger for
Reflexivization in Malagasy has to be animate.

323
g.6 Hie "Command" parameter.
Hie "command" parameter appears crucial in both Caus-
ative and non-Causative constructions, while the "precede" para-
meter turns out to be irrelevant. Hie same situation prevails
with Pronominalization in this language. Hius, in a Causal Caus-
ative, it transpires that the Causer originates in the Causal-
Oblique position before it ascends to the Su position of the com-
plex sentence. Vfe know from Passivization in Malagasy that the
cut-off point for promotion to Su on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy
is the Source-Oblique, which immediately precedes the Causal-
Oblique. Hiis suggests that the latter does not belong in the
same clause as the DO or the 10, for example.
6.7 Distribution of Independent and Clitic Forms.
Hie view that the Causal-Oblique and consequently,
whatever is to its right on the hierarchy do not belong in the
same simplex sentence as the other, higher positions explains the
distribution of independent pronouns and clitics in Malagasy. In
fact, an independent pronoun can show up as a Su, a DO, an 10 or
a Beneficiary-Oblique, whereas a clitic is the only form possible
for an NP occupying the following positions: a Source-Oblique, a
Comitative-Oblique, a Causal-Oblique and a Genitive.

CHAPTER ECUR
PRONCMXNALIZATIQN
0.1 Introduction.
The main purpose of this chapter is to describe how
anaphoric pronominalization works in Malagasy, assuming that the
trigger is referential1 and singular. More specifically:
1. There are four forms the victim can take:
Zero-pronoun,
Hay + pronoun,
pronoun, and
Demonstrative,
these forms being in complementary distribution with respect to
the syntactic positions occupied by both the trigger and its
victim on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy and according to whether
the latter is human, non-animate or non-human but animate.
2. Only the "command" parameter is relevant to the
exclusion of the "precede" parameter.
3. Pronominalization is a cyclic rule.
0.2 Assumptions.
It will be assumed that the trigger of anaphoric pro-
nominalization and its victim are in different clauses2. This

325
will have the effect of discarding constructions with an emphatic

pronoun in both simplex and complex sentences:
(1)a. IzYj no Rakotoi.

he^ part Rakoto^
"He^ is the one^ who-^ is Rakoto^."
b. *Rakotoi izyi.
Rakotoi he^
"Hei is Bakotoi."
(2)a. Ny m-aha-Rakotoi azyi dia izao.
the pres-caus-Rakoto^ hirn^ part this
"This is the reason why (I am saying) he^ is Rakoto^."
b. /[gQ izao ny [ g 2 m-aha [g-j izyi no Rakotoi]]]/.

this the pres-caus he^ part Rakotoi
The sentence (l)a. is a simplex one although the word order is
Marked and the pronoun izy and Rakoto are coreferential. The se-
quence in (l)b. is also a simplex one but the vrord order is Un-
marked and the sentence is irretrievably ungraicmatical. Now, the
sentence in (2) a. is a complex one and the underlying represen-
tation proposed for it in (2)b. makes this explicit: there has
been a demotion of the emphatic Su of S3 to DO along with Subject
Shifting during the process of Clause-Union of S2 and S3, giving
the sequence m-aha-Rakoto azy, then the portion ny m-aha-Rakoto
azy is fronted with insertion of the particle dia.

326
Section 1
The Basic Process
1.0 Introduction.
In Section 1, it will be shown that the four forms of
the victim enumerated in 0.1 above are in complementary distri-
bution. Specifically:
a. when both the trigger and its victim occupy the
Subject position, the latter goes into Zero-pronoun obligatorily
if the trigger is human, otherwise this is only a strong ten-
dency;
b. when both the trigger and its victim occupy the DO
position, the latter goes into a Zero-pronoun or optionally a
Pronoun if the trigger is human; now, if the trigger is animate
but not human, the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun, a Pronoun, or
Hay + Pronoun; but if the trigger is not animate, then the
victim goes into either a Zero-pronoun or Ilay + Pronoun;
c. when both the trigger and its victim do not occupy
the Su or the DO position, and if the trigger is human, then the
victim goes into a Pronoun obligatorily, although this is only a
strong tendency if the trigger is animate but not human; whereas
when the trigger is not animate, the victim goes into Ilay +
Pronoun or optionally into a Demonstrative like io "this" if the
trigger is either an Oblique or a Genitive.
1.1.0 Human Trigger Assumption.
Assuming that the trigger is referential, human and
singular and furthermore

327
a. if both the trigger and its victim occupy the Su
position, then the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun obligatorily;
b. if both the trigger and its victim occupy the DO
position, then the victim goes into either a Zero-pronoun or a
Pronoun optionally; and
c. if both the trigger and its victim do not occupy the
Su or the DO position, then the victim must surface into a
pronoun.
1.1.1 Both Trigger and Victim Are Sus.
When both the trigger and its victim occupy the Su
position, then the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun obligatorily:
(3) a. N-andeha n-ianatra CK i Paoly
past-go past-study CK Paul^
"Paul went to study."
b. *N-andeha n-ianatra izy^ i paoly^.
past-go past-study he^ Paul^
"Paul went to study."
(4) a. N-anomboka n-ianatra CK i paoly
past-begin past-study (L Paul^
"Paul began to study."
b. *N-anomboka n-ianatra izy^ i paoly^.
past-begin past-study he^ Paul^
"Paul began to study."

328
(5)a. N-ikasa (ny) h-andeha O i i Paolyi-
past-intend (conp) fut-go (L Pauli
"Paul intended to go."
b. *N-ikasa (ny) h-andeha izyi i Paolyi.
past-intend (conp) fut-go hei Pauli
"Paul intended to go."
(6)a. N-aniry (ny) h-andeha O^ i Paolyi-
past-wish (conp) fut-go Pauli
"Paul wished to go."
b. *N-aniry (ny) h-andeha izy^ i Paolyi-
past-wish (conp) fut-go he^ Pauli
"Paul wished to go."
(7)a. H-iakatra eo i Paoly^ rehefa tonga Oi-
fut-go-up there Paul^ when arrived Oi

arrives
"Paul^ will come up here when hei *"
b. *H-iakatra eo i Paoly^ rehefa tonga izyi-
fut-go-up there Paul^ when arrived hei
"Pauli wiii come up here when hei arrives."
(8)a. N-ilaza i Paolyi f a h-andeha Oi-
past-say Pauli that fut-go Oi
"Paul^ gaid that hei would go."

329
b. *N-ilaza i Paolyi f a h-andeha izy^
past-say Pauli that fut-go hej

would
"Pauli said that hei
(9)a. N-isotro taoka i Paoly^^ ka mamo Oi.
past-drink booze Paul^ therefore drunk Oi

"Paul drank (sane) booze and, as a result, is drunk."
b. *N-isotro taoka i Paolyi ka mamo izyi.
past-drink booze Pau^ therefore drunk hei

"Paul drank (sane) booze and, as a result, is drunk."
(10)a. N-ino i Paoly^ fa ho afaka h-andeha Oi.
past-believe Paul^ that fut can fut-go Oi
"Paul^ believed that hei would be able to go."
b. *N-ino i Paoly^ f a ho afaka h-andeha izyi.
past-believe Pau^ that fut can fut-go hei
"Paul^ believed that hei would be able to go."
(11)a. Sosotra i Paoly^ f a tsy afaka Oi.
angry Paul^ since neg successful Oi

"Paul^ is/was angry because hei is/was not successful."
b. *Sosotra i Paoly fa tsy afaka izyi.
angry Paul^ since neg successful hei
"Paul^ is/was angry because hei is/was not successful."

330
(12) a. T-any i Paolyi f a tsy t-eto 0.^.

past-there Pauli but neg past-here Oi
"Paul was there but not here."
b. *T-any i Paoly^ fa tsy t-eto izy^.

past-there Paul^ but neg past-here he^
"Paul was there but not here."
In all of the sentences from (3) to (12), the trigger and its
victim are Sus. When the victim surfaces as a Zero-pronoun, as in
all of the a. sequences, the outputs are perfectly grammatical;
táiereas when the victim shows up as a coreferential independent
pronoun, as in the b. sequences, the sentences are irretrievably
ungrammatical from (3) to (7), while from (8) to (12) the b. ver-
sions would be possible in either Child Speech or Foreigner Talk.
1.1.2 Both Trigger and Victim Are DOs.
When both the trigger and its victim occupy the IX)
position, the latter can optionally go into either a Zero-pronoun
or a Pronoun:
(13)a. H-anampy an'i J. i P fa tsy h-ijery 0^ fotsiny.

fut-help P but nèg fut-look 0^ oily
"P will not c«ily look at J. but will also help 0^"
b. H-anampy an'i J^ i P fa tsy h-ijery azy^ fotsiny.

fut-help J^ P but neg fut-look her^ only
"P will not only look at J i but will also help her^"
331
(14)a. N-itady an'ilay olonai i paoly fa tsy n-ahita 0i.
past-seek the personi p au i but neg past-see 0 i
"Paul looked for the person.^ but did not see him^."
b. N-itady an'ilay olonai i Paoly fa tsy n-ahita azy^
past-seek the person Paul but neg past-see hinu
"Paul looked for the person^ but did not see hiir^."
In both (13) and (14), the trigger and its victim are simul-
taneously DOs. Both the a. version with the Zero-pronoun and the
b. sequence with the Pronoun form are perfectly grammatical.
1.1.3.0 Both Trigger and Victim Are Neither Sus Nor DOs.
When both the trigger and its victim do not occupy the
Su or the DO position, then the victim must go into a Pronoun.
First, we will consider the cases where oily the trigger is a Su
or a DO; then, we will look at those where only the victim is a
Su or a DO; last, we will take up those where the trigger and its
victim do not occupy the Su or the DO position simultaneously.
1.1.3.1 Only the Trigger Is a Su.
The victim must surface into a Pronoun if only the
trigger occupies the Su position:
(15)a. *N-ilaza i Paoly^ f a h-itory 0 i ny fokonolona.
past-say Pauli that fut-complain 0 i the community
"Paul^ said that the community will file a complaint
against him^."
332
b. N-ilaza i Paoly f a h-itory azy£ ny fokonolona.
past-say Paul^ that fut-oomplain him^ the community
against hiiiu."
(16)a. *N-ilaza i Paoly^ fa h-anome trano ny fokonolona.
past-say Paul^ that fut-give house the community
b. N-ilaza i Paoly^ fa h-anome trano azy^ ny fokonolona.
past-say Paul^ that fut-give house him^ the community
"Paul^ said that the community will give him^ a house."
(17)a. *N-ilaza i P^ fa h-iaraka ny fokonolona.
past-say P^ that fut-accompany the community
b. N-ilaza i P^ fa h-iaraka ami-ny^ ny olona.
past-say P^ that fut-accompany with-him^ the people
"P^ said that the people will go with him^."
(18) a. *N-ilaza i P^ fa h-amonjy ny tanana-CK ny olona.
past-say P^ that fut-help the village-his^ the people
b. N-ilaza i P^ fa h-amonjy ny tanana-ny^ ny olona.
past-say P^ that fut-help the village-his^ the people
"Pi said that the people will help his^ village."
From (15) to (18), the trigger is a Su but not the victim. As a
result, the a. sequences, where the victim shows up as a Zero-

333
pronoun, are ungrammatical in the intended reading, i.e. where
the Su NP of the matrix clause is ooreferential with the Zero-
pronoun of the embedded clause. Now, if the victim surfaces as a
pronoun, as in the b. versions, the outputs are perfectly gram-
matical.
1.1.3.2 Only the Trigger Is a DO. _

The victim must surface into a Pronoun if only the
trigger occupies the DO position:
(19)a. *Hoe h-anampy an'i J. i p kanefa tsy nety t^.

said fut-help X p but neg accepted
b. Hoe h-anampy an'i J^ i p kanefa tsy nety izy^.
said fut-help p but neg accepted she^
"It is said that P would help J^ but she.^ did not
accept."
(20)a. *Hoe h-anampy an'i J. i P fa tsy h-anome vola 0^.
said fut-help J^ P but neg fut-give money
b. Hoe h-anampy an'i X i p fa tsy h-anome vola azy^.
said fut-help J^ p but neg fut-give money her^
"It is said that P would help J^ but not give her^
money."
(21) a. *N-anampy an'i J^ i p na dia efa n-anome vola aza.
past-help J^ p although already gave money part

334
b. N-anampy an'i J^ i p na dia efa n-anome vola azy^ a z a
past-help J^ p although al. gave money her^
"P helped X although he had already given her^ itDney.n
(22) a. *N-anampy an'i J^ i p n a tsy nahavonjy ny trano-Oi aza.
past-help J^ p al.neg managed-to-save the house
b. N-anampy an'i J. i P na tsy nahavonjy ny trano-ny^ aza.

past-help J^ P al.neg m.-to-s. the house-her^
"P helped J^ although he did not manage to save her^
house."
In the sentences from (19) to (22), the trigger is in the DO po-
sition, whereas the victim is a Su in (19), an 10 in (20), an
Oblique in (21), and a Genitive in (22). Now, if the victim shows
up as a Zero-pronoun, as in the a. versions, the sentence is ir-
retrievably ungrammatical. By contrast, if the victim surfaces
into an independent pronoun, as in the b. versions, the sequences
become perfectly grammatical, this suggests that the pronoun is
obligatory.
1.1.3.3 Only the Victim Is a Su.

The victim must go into a Pronoun if only the victim
occupies the Su position:
(23)a. *N-anome boky an'i Jeanne^ i paoly kanefa mbola

past-give book Jeanne^ Paul but not-yet
335
tsy faly foana CL.

neg happy at-all CL
b. N-anome boky an'i Jeannei i paoly kanefa mbola

past-give book Jeannei paui but not-yet
tsy faly foana izy^.

neg happy at-all she^
"Paul gave Jeanne^^ (a) book(s) but shej was not yet
happy."
(24) a. *Hoe h-anampy an'i J^ i P kanefa tsy nety 0j_.

said fut-help J^ P but neg accepted
b. Hoe h-anampy an'i J^ i P kanefa tsy nety izy^.

said fut-help J^ P but neg accepted she^
"It is said that P will help J^ but she^ did not
accept."
*N-andefa entana t-any amin'i Jeanne^ i Paoly

(25) a.
past-send parcel past-to Jeanne^ Paul
kanefa mbola tsy faly foana (L.

but not-yet neg happy at-all (K
N-andefa entana t-any amin'i Jeanne^ i Paoly

b.
past-send parcel past-to Jeanne. paul
336
kanefa mbola tsy faly foana izy^.
but not-yet neg happy at-all she^
"Paul sent Jeannei a parcel but the latter^ was not
yet happy."
(26)a. *N-andefa ny enta-n' i Jeanne i Paoly na dia
past-send the luggage-of Jeanne.^ Paoly although
tsy n-arisika loatra aza (L.
neg past-eager too-much neg
b. N-andefa ny enta-n' i Jeanne^ i Paoly na dia
past-send the luggage-of Jeanne^ Paul although
tsy n-arisika loatra aza ìzy^.
neg past-eager too-much neg she^
"Paul sent Jeanne^s parcel although the latter ^ was
not very eager."
In (24) the trigger is a DO, in (23) it is an 10, in (25) it is
an Oblique, and in (26) it is a Genitive. On the other hand, the
victim is invariably a Su. In the a. versions, the victim shows
up as a Zero-pronoun and the outputs are ungrammatical; whereas
in the b. sequences, the victim surfaces as a pronoun and the
sentences are perfectly grammatical. This grammaticality pattern
shows that Pronoun is obligatory.
1.1.3.4 Only the Victim Is a DO.
The victim must go into a Pronoun if only the victim

337
occupies the DO position:
(27)a. *N-ilaza i Paoly^ fa h-itory 0 i ny fokonolona.

past-say Paul^ that fut-corrplain the community
b. N-ilaza i Paoly^ f a h-itory azy^ ny fokonolona.
past-say Paul^ that fut-complain him^ the c.
against hiitK
(28)a. *N-anome boky an'i Jeannei i paoly na dia tsy

past-give book(s) Jeanne.^ paul although neg
n-aha-fantatra CK tsara aza.
past-caus-known (K well neg
b. N-anome boky an'i Jeanne^ i paoly na dia tsy
past-give book(s) Jeannei paul although neg
n-aha-fantatra azy^ tsara aza.
past-caus-known her^ well neg
"Paul gave Jeanne.^ (a) book(s) although he did not know
heri very well."
(29)a. *N-andefa entana t-any amin'i Jeanne^ i paoly
past-send parcel past-there Jeanne^ paul
na dia tsy tia CL aza.
although neg like (h ne g

338
b. N-andefa entana t-any amin'i Jeanne^ i paoly
past-send parcel past-there Jeanne^ Paul
na dia tsy tia azy^ aza.
although neg like her^ neg
"Paul sent Jeanne ( a ) parcel(s) although he does/did
not like heri very nruch."
(30)a. *N-andefa ny enta-n' i Jeannei i paoly na dia

past-send the parcel-of Jeanne^ p au i although
tsy tia 0^ loatra aza.
neg like 0^ too-much neg
b. N-andefa ny enta-n' i Jeanne^ i Paoly na dia
past-send the parcel-of Jeanne^ Paul although
tsy tia azy^ loatra aza.
neg like her^ too-much neg
"Paul sent Jeanne^'s parcel although he does/did not
like her^ too much."
In (27) the trigger is a Su; in (28), an 10; in (29), an Oblique;
and in (30), a Genitive. The victim is invariably a DO. In all of
the a. versions, the victim shows up as a Zero-pronoun and the
outputs are ungrammatical. This contrasts with the b. sequences,
where the victim surfaces as a coreferential independent pronoun.

339
1.1.3.5 Trigger and Victim Other Than Su or DO.
When neither the trigger nor its victim is a Su or a
CO, then the victim must be a Pronoun:
(31) a. *N-anolotra boky an'i J (eanne) i i p(aoly)

past-hand book(s) J (eanne) ^ p(aul)
nony avy n-anolotra CK harona.
after done past-hand (L basket
b. N-anolotra boky an'i J (eanne) ^ i p(aoly)
past-hand book(s) J (eanne) ^ p(aul)
nony avy n-anolotra azy^ harona.
after done past-hand her^ basket(s)
"P handed J^ a book after handing her^ a basket."
(32)a. *N-anolotra ny boky an'i J. i p

past-hand the book(s) J^ P
fa tsy afaka n-andefa an'ilay izy CK.

but neg can past-send it CK
b. N-anolotra ny boky an'i ip
past-hand the book(s) J^ p
fa tsy afaka n-andefa an'ilay izy t-any ami-ny^.
but neg can past-send it past-to her^
"P gave ^ the book for he could not send it to heri-"

340
(33)a. *N-anolotra boky an'i i p fa tsy

past-hand book(s) p but neg
n-ahita an'ilay boky-CK.
past-see the book-CK
b. N-anolotra boky an'i i p fa tsy
past-hand book(s) J\ p but neg
n-ahita an'ilay boki-ny^.
past-see the book-her^
"P handed J\ a book since he did not see her^ book."
(34)a. *N-andefa entana t-any amin' i J. i p
past-send parcel past-to J^ P
na dia efa n-anome (h boky aza.
although already past-give (h book(s) neg
b. N-andefa entana t-any amin'i J. i p
past-send parcel past-there J^ P
na dia efa n-anome azy^ boky aza.
although already past-give her^ book(s) neg
"P sent J\ a parcel although he had already given her
a book."
(35)a. *N-andefa entana t-any amin'i J. i p
past-send parcel past-there J. p

341
na dia efa n-andefa boky 0 t aza.

although already past-send book(s) Oj neg
b. N-andefa entana t-any amin'i J. i p
past-send parcel past-there J^ p
na dia efa n-andefa boky t-any ami-ny^ aza.
although already past-send book past-there her^ neg
"P sent J^ a parcel although he had already sent her^
a book."
(36)a. *N-andefa ny entana t-any amin'i J. i p
past-send the parcel past-there p
raha vao nahazo ny adiresy-(L.
as-soon-as past-receive the address-0^
b. N-andefa ny entana t-any amin'i J. ì p
past-send the parcel past-there J^ p
raha vao nahazo ny adiresi-ny^.
as-soon-as past-reeèive the address-her^
"P sent the parcel as soon as he received her^ ad-
dress."
(37)a. *N-anaiky ny h-andefa ny enta-n'i J. i p
past-accept comp fut-send the parcel-of J. p

342
na dia efa n-anome fahafahampo Ch tamin' ny asa aza
although al. gave satisfaction with the work neg
b. N-anaiky ny h-andefa ny enta-n' i J. i p
past-accept conp fut-send the parcel-of J^ p
na dia efa n—anome fahafahampo azy^ tamin1ny asa aza.
although al. gave satisfaction her^ with the work neg
"P accepted to send J^'s parcel although he had álready
given her^ satisfaction with the work."
(38)a. *N-andefa ny enta-n' i J. i p
past-send the parcel-of J^ p
raha vao avy n-iresaka CK.
as-soon-as past-talk (h
b. N-andefa ny enta-n' i J. i p
past-send the parcel-of J\ p
raha vao avy n-iresaka tami-ny^.

as-soon-as past-talk with-her^
"P sent J^'s parcel as soon as he had talked to her^."
(39) a. *N-andefa ny enta-n' iJ.jp
nony avy n-andefa ny taratasy-(h.
after past-send the letter-her^

343
b. N-andefa ny enta-n1 i J. i p
nony avy n-andefa ny taratasi-ny^.
after past-send the letter-her^
"P sent J ^ s parcel after he had sent heri letter."
From (31) to (33) the trigger is an 10, from (34) to (36) it is
an Oblique, whereas from (37) to (39) it is a Genitive. In each
set of sentences, the victim is an 10, as in (31), (32) and
(33), or an Oblique, as in (34), (35), and (36), or a Genitive,
as in (37), (38) and (39). When the victim shows up as a Zero-
pronoun, as in the a. sequences, the outputs are ungrammatical,
whereas when the victim surfaces as a Pronoun in its clitic form,
as in all of the b. sentences, the outputs become perfectly gram-
matical.
344
1.1.4 Summary: Human Trigger and Pronominalization.
All of the above information can be summarized in the
following manner on Table 7.
Table 7
Anaphoric Pronominalization:
Human Trigger
Trigger Victim
SO DO 10 OBL GEN
SO 0; *Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro
DO *0; Pro 0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro
10 *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro
OBL *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro
GEN *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro
Note; SU = Subject, DO = Direct Object, 10 = Indirect Object,
OBL = Oblique, GEN = Genitive;
0 = Zero-pronoun, Pro = Pronoun, either independent or
clitic;
* = ungramraatical;
Absence of * = Grammatical.
See summary next page.

345
Assumptions: 1. Trigger = Referential;
2. Trigger = Human;
3. Trigger = Singular.
Summary (see symbols p 367):
a. When trigger = Su and victim = Su,
victim => 0 obligatorily;
b. when trigger = DO and victim = DO,
victim => O/Pro optionally;
c. when both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO,
then victim Pro obligatorily, i.e.
if only trigger = Su, victim => Pro obligatorily,
if only trigger = DO, victim Pro obligatorily,
if only victim = Su, victim Pro obligatorily,
if only victim = DO, victim => Pro obligatorily;
if both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO, then
victim =» Pro obligatorily.
1.2.0 Animate But Non-Human Trigger Assumption.
Assuming that the trigger is referential, singular and
animate but not human, and furthermore:
position, then the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun although Hay
+ pronoun can also be marginally acceptable;
position, then the victim can optionally go into a Zero-pronoun,
a Pronoun, or Ilay + Pronoun; and
Su or the DO position, then the victim tends to go into a
Pronoun, except:
346
- when the victim occupies the Su position, in which case, it
goes into Hay + Pronoun;
- or when oily the trigger or only the victim is a DO
- or both the trigger and its victim are neither Su nor DO,
then, the victim can optionally surface into Ilay + Pronoun.
position, then the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun although ilay
+ Pronoun can sometimes also be marginally acceptable:
(40)a. N-ivovo ny alikai fa latsaka t-ao anaty lavaka 0^.
past-bark the dog^ since fallen into hole hei
"The dog^ was barking because iti fell into a hole."
b. *N-ivovo ny alika^ fa latsaka t-ao anaty lavaka izy^.
past-bark the dog^ since fallen into hole hei
c. Nivovo ny alika^ fa latsaka tao anaty lavaka ilay izy^.
barked the dog^ since fallen into hole it^
"The dog^ was barking because iti f e l 1 ìnto a

hole."
(41)a. N-anomboka n-ivovo 0^ ny alikai.

past-begin past-bark the dogi
"The dog began to bark."
b. *N-anomboka n-ivovo izy^ n y alikai-
past-begin past-bark he^ the dogi

347
C. *N-ancmboka n-ivovo ilay izyi ny alika^.
past-begin past-bark it., the dog^
"The dog began to bark."
(42) a. N-itady h-ihinam-bary (L ny alika^.

past-seek fut-eat-rice (h the dog^
"The dog wanted to eat rice."
b. *N-itady h-ihinam-bary izyi n y alikai.

past-seek fut-eat-rice he^ the dog^
"The dog wanted to eat rice."
c. *N-itady h-ihinam-bary ilay izy,,n y alika^

past-seek fut-eat-rice it^ the dog^
"Hie dog wanted to eat rice."
(43) a. T-any ny alikai fa tsy t-eto

past-there the dog^^ but neg past-here
"The dog was there but not here."
b. *T-any ny alika^ fa tsy t-eto izy^.

past-there the dog^ but neg past-here hei
c. *T-any , ny alikai f a tsy t-eto ilay izy

past-there the dog^ but neg past-here iti
348
(44)a. N-andeha n-ikarenjy (h ny alikai.
past-go past-roam CK the dogi
"The dog went roaming around."
b. *N-andeha n-ikarenjy izy^^n y alikai-
past-go past-roam he^ the dogi
c. *N-andeha n-ikarenjy ilay izyi ny alikai-

past-go past-roam it^ the dogi
(45)a. N-itetika h-isambotra akoho ny alika^
past-plan fut-catch chicken the dog^
ka n-andrasa-ko tsara (L.
so pass-wait-for-by-me well
"Hie dog^ wanted to catch (some) chickens so I watched
iti carefully."
b. *N-itetika h-isambotra akoho ny alikai
past-plan fut-catch chicken the dog^
ka n-andrasa-ko tsara izy^
so pass-wait-for-by-me well he^
c. N-itetika h-isambotra akoho ny alika,
past-plan fut-catch chicken the dog
ka n andrasa-ko tsara ilay izy^
so past-wait-for-by well he.

l
349
"The dog^ wanted to catch (some) chickens so I watched
it^ carefully."
in all of the above sentences, both the trigger and its victim
occupy the Su position. NCw, when the victim surfaces as a Zero-
pronoun, as in the a. versions, the outputs are grammatical; but
when it goes into the preferential independent pronoun izy, the
sentences become ungrammatical. Hcwever, as seen in (40) c. and
again in (45) c., it is also possible to have the victim go into
Hay + Pronoun when there is some emphasis on the victim. Notice
that in the last two sentences, the victim is in a clause which
is not embedded within the matrix, as is the case with (41) and
(42). The grammatically pattern above shows that the sequence
with a Zero-pronoun is always grammatical when both trigger and
victim are Sus, but that it can sometimes go into Ilay + Pronoun
since native speakers' judgments vary.
When both the trigger and its victim occupy the DO
a Pronoun, or Ilay + Pronoun:
(46)a. Tokony h-androaka ny alika^ i paolyj
should fut-chase the dog^ Paulj
kanefa m-atahotra 0^ 0j.
but pres-afraid 0^ 0j
"Paul should chase the dogi, but is afraid of( hin^)."

350
b. Tokony h-androaka ny alika^ i paolyj

should fut-chase the dogi Paulj
kanefa m-atahotra azy^ Oj.

but pres-afraid-of hiiru Oj
"Paul should chase the dog^ but is afraid of him^.'
c. Tokony h-androaka ny alìka^ i paolyj

should fut-chase the dogi paulj
kanefa nt-atahotra ilay izyi Oj.

but pres-afraid-of iti Oj
"Paul should chase the dog^, but is afraid of iti-"
(47)a. Tsy n-ikarakara ny alika^ i Paolyj

neg past-take-care-of the dog Paulj
fa tena tsy n-iraharaha 0 i Oj.-

but really neg past-care 0 i Oj
"Paul did not feed the dog^, and did not care about
(hirr^)."
b. Tsy n-ikarakara ny alika^ i paoly Oj

neg past-take-care-of the dog Paul Oj
fa tena tsy n-iraharaha azy.^ Oj.

but really neg past-care hinu Oj
"Paul did not feed the dog^ and did not care about
him.."
351
c. Tsy n-ikarakara ny alika^ i p(aoly) j
neg past-take-care-of the dog^ p(aul)j
fa tena tsy n-iraharaha ilay izy^ Oj.
but really neg past-care it^ Oj
"P did not feed the dogi and did not care about it^"
(48)a. Hoe h-anampy ny soavaly^ i Pj

said fut-help the horse^ Pj
fa tsy hoe h-ijery 0.^ fotsiny tsy akory Oj.
but neg said fut-look 0 i only neg at-all Oj
"P was supposed to help the horse^ and not just look at
(him^)."
b. Hoe h-anampy ny soavaly^ i Pj
said fut-help the horse Pj
fa tsy hoe h-ijery azy^ fotsiny tsy akory Oj.
but neg said fut-look-at hirn^ only neg at-all Oj
"P was supposed to help the horse^ and not just look at
him^."
c. Hoe h-anampy ny soavaly^ i Pj fa tsy
said fut-help the horse Pj but neg
hoe h-ijery ilay i2yi fotsiny tsy akory Oj.
said fut-look-at iti only neg at-all Oj

352
"P was supposed to help the horse and not just look at
it. "
In the sentences from (46) to (48), the trigger is a DO and the
victim is also a DO. The three versions, a. with Zero-pronoun, b.
with azy, and c. with ilay + izy, yield grammatical sequences, it
can be concluded that the choice is free between these three
forms. However, the c. version appears to be the most natural,
whereas the b. sentence sounds somewhat unnatural without a more
elaborate context and the a. version is ambiguous between one
interpretation where the Zero-pronoun refers to an antecedent in
the sentence and another where the Zero-pronoun refers to the
overall situation and not just to a specific antecedent.
1.2.3.1 Only the Trigger Is a Su.
When cnly the trigger occupies the Su position, the
victim goes into Ilay + Pronoun obligatorily:
(49)a. *N-anome vary ny alika^ i Paoly fa naona CK.
past-give rice the dog^ Paul since hungry CK
"Paul gave the dogi some rice since he^ was hungry."
b. *N-anome vary ny alika^ i Paoly fa naona izy^.
past-give rice the dog^ Paul since hungry he^
"Paul gave the dog^ some rice since he^ was hungry."
c. N-anome vary ny alika^ i Paoly fa naona ilay izy^.

past-give rice the dogi Paul since hungry ìt^
"Paul gave the dog. s o m r i c e s i n c e it . ^ hungry .«
353
(50)a. *N-iafina tamin'ny alika_L i paoly fa masiaka 0i.
past-hide from the dogi Paul since ferocious 0 i
"Paul was hiding from the dogi for hei was ferocious."
b. *N-iafina tamin'ny alikai i Paoly fa masiaka izy^
past-hide from the dogi Paul since ferocious he^
"Paul was hiding from the dog. for he^ was ferocious."
c. N-iafina tamin'ny alika., i Paoly fa masiaka ilay izy^
past-hide from the dog^ Paul since f. it^
"Paul was hiding from the dog^ for it^ was ferocious."
(51)a. *N-itsaha-n' i Paoly ny rambo-n'ny alika^ ka nivovo 0^
past-tread-by Paul the tail-of the dog^ so barked
"Paul was walking on the doge's tail, so he^ barked."
b. *N-itsaha-n'i Paoly ny rambo-n'ny alika^ ka nivovo izy^
past-tread-by Paul the tail-of the dog^ so barked he^
"Paul was walking on the doge's tail, so he^ barked."
c. Nitsahan'i P ny rambon' ny alika^ ka nivovo ilay izy^
tread-by P the tail-of the dog^ so barked it^

"P was walking on the dog^s tail, so it£ barked."
The sentences from (49) to (51) have their trigger occupying
non-Su position: an 10 in (49), an Oblique in (50), and a Geni
tive in (51). Hie a. sentences, where the victim goes into
Zero-pronoun, are irretrievably ungrammatical and, in fact, can

354
not be interpreted (only the intended meaning provided); likewise
for the b. sequences, which however are conceivable in Child
Speech or Foreigner Talk. By contrast, the c. sequences with the
victim showing up as ilay + Pronoun are perfectly granmatical.
1.2.3.2 Only the Trigger Is a DO.
When only the trigger is a DO, the victim can optional-
ly surface into Ilay + Pronoun except when the latter is a Su, in
which case it is obligatory:
(52)a. *Nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa tsy nety nandeha 0^.
chased the dog. p but neg accepted went 0-

\
"p chased the dog^ but the latterdid not yield."
?*Nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa tsy nety nandeha izy^.
chased the dog^ p but neg acc. went he^
"p chased the dogif but the latter^ did not yield."
c. Nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa tsy nety nandeha ilay izy^
chased the dog^ P but neg acc. went ifc

i
"P chased the dog , but the latterdid not yield."
i
(53)a. Tia handroaka ny alika^ i p kanefa matahotra 0^.
want will-chase the dog^ p but afraid
"P wants to chase the dogit but is afraid of hirn^."
Tia handroaka ny alika^ i p kanefa matahotra azy^.
want will-chase the dog^ p but afraid him^
"P wants to chase the dog^ but is afraid of hin^."

355
C. Tia handroaka ny alikai i p kanefa matahotra ilay izy.
w. will-chase the dogi p but afraid it^
"P wants to chase the dogi, but is afraid of iti."
(54)a. *Tsy nandroaka ny alikai i p fa nanome vary

neg chased the dogi p but gave rice
"P did not chase the dog^, but gave him^ rice."
b. Tsy nandroaka ny alika.^ i p fa nanome vary azy^
neg chased the dog^ p but gave rice him^
"P did not chase the dog^, but gave hinii rice."
c. Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa nanome vary ilay izy^.
neg chased the dog^ p but gave rice it^
"P did not chase the dog^, but gave it^ rice."
(55)a. *Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa niafina 0.^.
neg chased the dog.^ p but hid 0.^
"P did not chase the dog^, but hid from hirn^."
b. Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i P fa niafina tami-ny^.
neg chased the dog^ p but hid from-him^
"P did not chase the dog^, but hid from him^."
c. Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa niafina tamin'ilay izy
neg chased the dog^ p but hid from it^
"P did not chase the dog^ but hid from iti."
356
(56)a. *Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa nikitika ny rambo-0..
neg chased the dog^ p but touched the tail-his.
"P did not chase the dog^ but touched hisi tail."
b. Tsy nandroaka ny alikai i p fa nikitika ny rainbo-ny^.
neg chased the dog^ p but touched the tail-his^
"P did not chase the dog.,, but touched his.^ tail."
c. Tsy nandroaka ny alika^ i p fa nikitika
neg chased the dog^ p but touched
ny rambon' ilay izy^.
the tail-of it
i
"P did not chase the dog , but touched its^ tail."
i
Except for (53), in the sentences from (52) to (56), oily the
trigger is a DO. Furthermore, in (52), the victim is a Su, and
only the sequence (52) c. with Ilay + Pronoun is perfectly gram-
matical. In (54), the victim is an 10 and, as a result, both
(54)b. and (54)c. are grammatical. Likewise, in (55), where the
victim is an Oblique, both (55)b. and (55)c., are grammatical. In
(56), with the victim in the Genitive case, both (56)b. and
(56)c. are grammatical. This subset of sentences contrast with
(53), which has its victim in the DO position with the predicate
matahotra "be-afraid-of (something)" and which allows the coref-
erential Zero-pronoun, as in (53)a., along with the other two
options in (53)b. and (53)c.

357
1.2.3.3 Only the Victim Is a DO.

When only the victim is a DO, then it can optionally
surface into Ilay + Pronoun, except when the trigger is a Su, in
which case it is obligatorily a Pronoun:
(57)a. *Nivovo ny alika^ f a nitoraka Oi ny ankizy.

barked the dogi since threw-stone Oi the child(ren)
"The dogi barked since the child threw stones at himi."
b. Nivovo ny alikai f a nitoraka azyi ny ankizy.

barked the dogi since threw-stone hirrii the child (ren)
"The dogi barked since the child threw stones at himi."
c. ?Nivovo ny alika^ fa nitoraka (an')ilay izyi ny ankizy.

barked the dogi s. threw-st. iti the child
"The dog^ barked since the child threw stones at iti-"
(58)a. *Nanome vary ny alìkaj^ i p rehefa avy namaha Oi-

gave rice the dog^ p after done untied Oi
"P gave the dogi rice after untying himi."
b. Nanome vary ny alikai i p rehefa avy namaha azyi.

gave rice the dog.^ p after done untied himi
"P gave the dogi rice after untying himi."
c. Nanome vary ny alikai i p rehefa avy namaha ilay izyi-

gave rice the dogi p after done untied iti
"P gave the dogi rice after untying it^"

358
(59) a. *Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i p rehefa avy nitoraka 0 ^
hid from the dog.^ p after done threw-st C^
"P hid from the dog^ after throwing stones at him
b. . Niafina tamin'ny alika.^ i p rehefa avy nitoraka azy^.
hid from the dog^ p after done threw-st himi
"P hid fran the dog^ after throwing stones at himi."
c. Niafina tamin'ny alìka^ i p rehefa avy
hid from the dog^ p after done
nitoraka (an') ilay izy^
threw-stone it,
"P hid from the dogi after throwing stones at iti-"
(60)a. *Nanitsaka ny rambo-n'ny alikai i P no sady nandaka Oi.
trod the tail-of the dog.^ p also kicked Oi
"p stepped on the dog^s tail and kicked himi-"
b. Nanitsaka ny rambon'ny alika^ i P no sady nandaka azy^.
trod the tail-of the dogi P also kicked hinii
"P stepped oi the dog^s tail and kicked himi-"
c. Nanitsaka ny rambon'ny alika^ i p no sady nandaka
trod the tail-of the dog.^ p also kicked
(an') ilay izyi.
ifc
i
"P stepped on the doge's tail and kicked iti-"
359
In (57), the trigger is a Su, and as the gramraaticality pattern
of this subset shows, oily a Pronoun is possible: (57)b. is per-
fectly grammatical, whereas (57)c. is marginally so. In (58), the
trigger is an 10 while in (59) and (60), it is respectively an
Oblique and a Genitive. In all three subsets, the sequences in b.
and c., with either a Pronoun or Ilay + Pronoun are perfectly
grammatical.
1.2.3.4 Both Trigger and Victim Other Than Su or DO.
Both the trigger and its victim do not occupy the Su or
the DO position, then the victim can optionally surface into Ilay
+ pronoun:
(61)a. *Nanome vary ny alikai i p rehefa avy nanome rano 0 i .
gave rice the dog^ p after done gave water
"P gave the dog^ rice after giving him^ water."
b. Nanome vary ny alikai i p rehefa avy nanome rano azy^.
gave rice the dog^ p after done gave water him^
"P gave the d c ^ rice after giving hiir^ water."
c. Nanome vary ny alikai i p rehefa avy nanome rano
gave rice the dogi p after done gave water
(an1) ilay izy^.
it.
l
"P gave rice to the dogi after giving iti water."
360
(62) a. *Nanome vary ny alika^ i p rehefa avy niaraka o^
gave rice the dog^ p after done accompanied
"P gave rice to the dog^ after accompanying himi."
b. Nanome vary ny alika^ i p rehefa avy niaraka tami-ny^.
gave rice the dog^ P after done accomp-with-hiitii
"P gave rice to the dog^ after accompanying himi."
c. TNancme vary ny alika i P rehefa avy niaraka
gave rice the dog^ p after done accompanied
tamin'ilay izy^.
with it^
"P gave rice to the dogi after accompanying iti-"
(63)a. *Nanone vary ny alika., i P rehefa nahita ny vilia-0^.
gave rice the dog^ p after saw the plate-0i
"P gave rice to the dog^ after seeing hiSi plate."
b. Nanome vary ny alikai i P rehefa nahita ny viUa-ny^
gave rice the dogi P after saw the plate-hiSi
"P gave rice to the dog^ after seeing hiSi plate."
c. ?*Nanome vary ny alika^ i p rehefa nahita
gave rice the dog^ p after saw
ny vilia-n'ilay izy^.
the plate-of iti
"P gave rice to the dog^ after seeing itSi plate."

361
(64)a. *Niafina tamin'ny alikai i p f a tsy nanome sakafo 0 ^

hid from the dogi p but neg gave food himi
food
"P hid from the dogi but did not give himi -"
b. Niafina tamin'ny alika^^ i p f a tsy nanome sakafo azyi
hid from the dogi p but neg gave food himi
"P hid from the dogi but did not give himi food."
c. Niafina tamin'ny alika^^ i p fa tsy nanome sakafo
hid from the dcg.^ p but neg gave food
(an') ilay izy^.
ifc
i
"P hid from the dogi but did not give iti food."
(65)a. *Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i P fa tsy niaraka Oi.
hid from the dogi p but neg accompanied Oi
"P hid from the d c ^ but did not go with himi."
b. Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i P fa tsy niaraka tami-nyi.
hid frcmi the dogi P but neg aceomp with-himi
"P hid from the dogi but did not go with himi."
c. Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i p fa tsy niaraka
hid from the dog^ p but neg accompanied
tamin'ilay izy^.
with it.^
"P hid from the dogj^ but did not go with iti."
362
(66)a. *Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i p ary nanitsaka ny rarabo-O^.
hid from the dog^ p and trod the tail-o^
"P hid from the dog.

1
and stepped on his tail."
i
b. Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i p ary nanitsaka ny rambo-ny.
hid from the dog^ P and trod the tail-his^
"P hid from the dogi and stepped on his^ tail."
c. Niafina tamin'ny alika^ i p ary nanitsaka
hid from the dog^ p and trod
ny rambo-n'ilay izyi.
the tail-of i^
"P hid from the dog^ and stepped on its^ tail."
(67) a. *Nanitsaka ny ranibo-n'ny alika^ i P raha handeha
trod the tail-of the dog^ p when fut-go
hanome vary Oi.
fut-give rice Oi
b. Nanitsaka ny ranibo-n'ny alika^ i p raha handeha
trod the tail-of the dog^ p when fut-go
hanome vary azy^.
fut-give rice hinu
"P stepped cxi the dog^s tail when he/she was about
to give him. rice."

363
c. Nanitsaka ny ranibo-n'ny alika^ i p raha handeha
trod the tail-of the dogi p when fut-go
hanome vary (an') ilay izy^.
fut-give rice it^
"P stepped Cxi the doge's tail when he/she was about
to give itj rice."
68)a. *Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' ny alika^ i p ka nandeha
angry with the barking-of the dog^ p so went
niafina tamy-(h.
hid from-Oj
b. ?Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' ny alika^ i P ka nandeha
niafina tami-ny^.
hid from-hiitij
"P was angered by the barking of the dog^ and so, went
hiding from him^."
c. Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' ny alika^ i p ka nandeha
niafina tamin'ilay izy^.
hid from itj
"P was angered by the barking of the dog^ and so, went
hiding from itj."

364
(69)a. *Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' ny alika^ i p ka

angry with the barking-of the dog^ p so
n-itsaha-ny ny rambcMK.
pass-tread-by-him/her the tail-CK
"p was angered by the barking of the dog^ and so, step-
ped cxi his^ tail."
b. Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' ny alika^ i p ka
n-itsaha-ny ny rambo-ny^.
pass-tread-by-him/her the tail-his^
"P was angered by the barking of the dog^ and so, step-
ped cm hisj^ tail."
c. Sosotra tamin'ny vovo-n' ny alika^ i p ka
n-itsaha-ny ny rambo-n'ilay izy^.
pass-tread-by-him/her the tail-of it^
"P was angered by the barking of the dog^ and so, step-
ped on hiSj tail."
In (61), both the trigger and its victim occupy the 10 position
and the a. version with a Zero-pronoun is ungrammatical, but both
(61)b. and (61) c. with a Pronoun and Ilay + Pronoun respectively
are perfectly grammatical. In (62), the trigger is an 10, but the

365
victim is an Oblique: (62)b. with a Pronoun in its clitic form is
ê most natural although some native speakers sometimes find
(62)c. not totally acceptable. In (63), the trigger is an 10,
whereas its victim is a Genitive: here again, (63)b. with a
clitic Pronoun appears preferable to (63)c. which comprises Ilay
+ pronoun although the latter is not ungrammatical. The sentences
in (64) have their trigger in the Oblique and their victim in the
XO position: the grammatically pattern makes it quite evident
that there exists a choice between a Pronoun, as in (64)b., and
Tlav + Pronoun, as in (64) c. In (65), both the trigger and its
victim are Obliques and the choice between a Pronoun, as in
(65)b., and Ilay + Pronoun, as in (65)c., subsists. However, when
the victim is a Genitive, as in (66), while the trigger remains
an Oblique, there seems to be a strong preference for a Pronoun,
as is evident in (66) b. compared with (66) c. comprising Ilay +
Pronoun. New, when the trigger is a Genitive and its victim, an
10, as in (67), both the b. sequence with a Pronoun and the c.
version with Ilay + Pronoun are grammatical. In (68), the trigger
is a Genitive but its victim, an Oblique: the preference seems to
go towards the c. sequence with Ilay + Pronoun although the one
in (68)b. is not totally ungrammatical. Finally, in (69), both
the trigger and its victim are Genitives: both a Pronoun, as in
(69)b., and Ilay + Pronoun, as in (69)c., are grammatical al-
though the latter sounds more natural.
1.2.4 Summary: Non-Human, Animate Trigger and Pronominaliz-
ation.
All of the above, from 1.2.0 to 1.2.3.4, can be sum-

marized on Table 8.
366
Table 8
Anaphoric Pronorainalization:
Non-human Animate Trigger
Trigger/' Victim
SO DO 10 OBL GEN
SU 0;*Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro
?Ilay+Pro *llay+Pro *Ilay+Pro *Ilay+Pro ?*Ilay+Pro
DO *0;*Pro 0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro
Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro ?Ilay+Pro ?Ilay+Pro
10 *0;*Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro
Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro
OBL *0;*Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro
Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro ?Ilay+Pro
GEN *0;?*Pro *0; Pro *0; Pro *0;?Pro *0; Pro
Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro Ilay+Pro
Note: 0 = Zero-pronoun; Pro = Pronoun; Ilay+Pro = Ilay + Pro-

noun;* = Ungrammatical ; ? or ?* = Doubtful Grammaticality.
See summary next page.

,
367
Assumptions 1. Trigger = Referential, 2. Trigger = Animate but
not human, 3. Trigger = Singular,
guirmary: a. When both trigger and victim = Su,
then victim Zero-pronoun;
b. when both trigger and victim = DO,
then victim Zero-pronoun/Pronoun/Ilay+Pronoun;
c. when both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO,
-if oily trigger = Su, victim => Pro;
-if oily trigger = DO, victim Pro/Ilay+Pro;
-if oily victim = Su, victim =s> Ilay+Pro;
-if only victim = DO, victim Pro/Ilay+Pro,
except when victim = Su;
-if both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO,
then victim Pro/Ilay+Pro
except when victim = Genitive;
Mote: = Is; =/= Is Not; / = Either Or; = show(s) up as.
1.3.0 Non-Animate Trigger Assumption.
Assuming that the trigger is referential, singular and

non-animate and furthermore:
position, then the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun preferably
although Ilay + Pronoun is sometimes possible;

Ilay + Pronoun or sometimes a Pronoun, although sequences with a
Pronoun are generally not very good; but
368
Su or the DO position, then the victim goes into Ilay + Prononn
except when the trigger is either an Oblique or a Genitive, in
which case the victim can optionally surface into a Demonstrative
—here Io "this."
position, then the latter preferably goes into a Zero-pronoun
although Ilay + Pro is sometimes a definite possibility:
(70)a. Nirodana ny trano^ f a efa be simba loatra 0^.
fell the house^ since already big damage too it^
"The house^ fell since it^ had too much damage."
b. *Nirodana ny trarex fa efa be simba loatra izy^.
fell the house^ since al. big damage too he^
c. Nirodana ny trano^ f a efa be simba loatra ilay izy^.
fell the house^ s. al.big damage too it^
"Hie house^ fell since it^ had too much damage."
d. *Nirodana ny trano^ fa efa be simba loatra io^.
fell the house^ s. al. big damage too this^
(71)a. Nilatsahan' ny varatra ny trano^ ka niatonta 0^.
fallen-on-by the thunder the house^ so fell
"Thunder fell on the housesubsequently, it^ fell."

369
b. *Nilatsahan'ny varatra ny trance ka niatonta ìzy^.
fallen-by the thunder the house^ so fell it^
c. ?*Nilatsahan'ny varatra ny tranoi ka niatonta ilay izy^.
fallen-by the thunder the house^ so fell it^
"Thunder fell on the house^; subsequently, it^ fell."
d. *Nilatsahan1 ny varatra ny trano.^ ka niatonta io^.

fallen-by the thunder the house^ so fell this^
In (70) and (71), both the trigger and its victim are Sus and the
grammatically pattern found in the above sentences suggests that
the victim goes into a Zero-pronoun: all of the a. sequences are
perfectly grammatical, whereas the ones in the c. versions with
Ilay + Pronoun are sometimes grammatical, as in (70)c., and some-
times of doubtful grammatically, as in (71) c.
When both the trigger and its victim occupy the DO
Ilay + Pronoun, or even into a Pronoun sometimes:
(72)a. Nanandrana nandrodana ny trano^ ry Paoly
tried tore-down the housei p au l and associates
fa tsy naharodana
but neg managed-to-tear-down
"Paul and Associates tried to tear down the house, but
did not manage."

370
!
b. TNanandrana nandrodana ny trano^ ry Paoly
tried tore-down the house^ Paul and associates
fa tsy naharodana azy^.
but neg managed-to-tear-down
did not manage."
c. Nanandrana nandrodana ny trano^ ry Paoly
fa tsy naharodana (an') ilay izyj.
but neg managed-to-tear-down itj

did not manage."
d. *Nanandrana nandrodana ny trano^ ry Paoly
fa tsy naharodana (an') io^.
but neg managed-to-tear-dcwn this^
(73)a. Nitady ny fiara^ i p fa tsy nahita Oj.
sought the ear^ p but neg saw Oj
"P was looking for the car^, but did not find itj."
b. *Nitady ny fiara^ i p fa tsy nahita azy^.
sought the ear^ p but neg saw itj

371
c. Nitady ny fiarai i p f a tsy nahita (an1) ilay izyi.
sought the e a ^ p but neg saw i^
"P was looking for the carif but did not find it^"
d. *Nitady ny fiara^^ i P fa tsy nahita (an') ioj.
sought the car p but neg saw it.^
"P was looking for the car v, but did not find itj."
In (72) and (73), both the trigger and its victim are DOs and as
a result, there is a choice between three possibilities although
the zero-pronoun appears to be the nost natural. The sentences
(72)a., (72)c., (73)a. and (73)c. with either a Zero-pronoun or
Ilay + Izy are perfectly grairmatical; those in (72)d. and (73)d.
with the demonstrative Io "this," ungrammatical; and those with
the Pronoun azy sometimes, as in (72)b., of dubious grairmatical-
ity, if not totally ungrammatical, as in (73)d.
1.3.3.1 Only the Trigger Is Either a Su Or a DO.
When cxily the trigger is either a Su or a DO, then the
victim goes into Ilay + Pronoun obligatorily:
(74) a. *Nirodana ny trano^^ f a tsy tia handany vola
fell the house^ but neg want fut-spend money
anty-(h intsony ny tompo-ny^.
on-it^ longer the owner-its^
"Hie house ^ crumbled down since its cwner no longer
wanted to spend any money on it.."

372
b. ?*Nirodana ny trance fa tsy tia handany vola
fell the housej but neg want fut-spend money
ami-nyj intsony ny tompo-nyj.
on-itj longer the cwner-itsj
"The housej crumbled down since itsj owner no longer
wanted to spend any money on itj."
c. Nirodana ny tranoj fa tsy tia handany vola
amin'ilay izyj intsony ny tompo-nyj.
on it longer the owner-itSj

i
"The housej crumbled down since itSj owner no longer
wanted to spend any money an itj."
d. ?*Nirodana ny trano j fa tsy tia handany vola
amin'ioj intsony ny tompo-nyj.
on thiSj longer the owner-itSj
(75)a. *Nirodana ny tranOj fa tsy tia hanarina
fell the housej but neg want fut-erect
ny vatana-Oj intsony ny tompo-nyj.
the body-of-Oj longer the owner-its^
"Ihe housej fell but itSj owner no longer wanted to
erect itSj body."

373
b. *Nìrodana ny tranOj fa tsy tia hanarina

ny vata-ny^ intsony ny tompo-nyj.

the body-of-itj longer the owner-itSj
c. Nirodana ny tranoj fa tsy tia hanarina

ny vata-n'ilay izyj intsony ny tompo-nyj.

the body-of itj longer the owner-itSj
"The housej fell but itSj owner no longer wanted to
erect itSj body."
d. *Nirodana ny tranOj fa tsy tia hanarina

ny vata-n' iOj intsony ny tompo-nyj.

the body-of thiSj longer the owner-itSj
(76)a. *Nandrodana ny tranOj ry Paoly

tore-down the housej Paul and associates
fa tsy tia handany vola amy-Oj intsony.

but neg want fut-spend money on-Oj longer
"Paul and Associates tore the housej down since they
no longer wished to spend money on it.."
374
b. *Nandrodana ny tranOj ry Paoly
tore-dcwn the house^ Paul and associates
fa tsy tia handany vola ami-nyj intsony.
but neg want fut-spend money on-itj longer
c. Nandrodana ny tranOj r y Paoly
tore-down the house^ Paul and associates
fa tsy tia handany vola amin'ilay izyj intsony.
but neg want fut-spend money cm itj longer
"Paul and Associates tore the housej down since they
no longer wished to spend money on itj."
d. *Nandrodana ny tranOj ry Paoly

tore-dcwn the housej Paul and associates
fa tsy tia handany vola amin'iOj intsony.
but neg want fut-spend money on thiSj longer
(77)a. *Nandrodana ny tranOj ry Paoly

tore-down the house Paul and associates
fa tsy tia hanarina ny rindrina-Oj intsony.
but neg want fut-erect the wall-Oj longer
b. *Nandrodana ny tranOj ry Paoly

375
fa tsy tia hanarina ny rindri-ny^ intsony.

but neg want fut-erect the wall-its^ longer
c. Nandrodana ny trano^ r y paoly

fa tsy tia hanarina ny rindri-n'ilay izy^ intsony.
but neg want fut-erect the wall-of it^ longer
"Paul and Associates tore the house^ down since they
no longer wished to erect its^ walls."
d. *Nandrodana ny trano^ r y Paoly

tore-down the housei paul and associates
fa tsy tia hanarina ny rindri-n'io^ intsony.
but neg want fut-erect the wall-of it^ longer
In (74) and (75), only the trigger is a Su, whereas in (76) and
(77) only the trigger is a DO. Only the c. sequences with Ilay +
Pronoun are perfectly grammatical in the intended readings.
1.3.3.2 Only the Victim Is Either a Su Or a DO.
When only the victim is either a Su or a DO, then it
goes into Ilay + Pronoun although when the trigger is either an
Oblique or a Genitive, the victim can optionally show up as a
Demonstrative —here Io "this":
(78)a. *Nipetraka tao amin'ilay trano^ r y Paoly
dwelt in the housei P a u l m á associates

376
na dia malemy aza Oj.
although shaky neg (h
b. *Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj ry Paoly

dwelt in the house^ Paul and associates
na dia malemy aza izyj.
although shaky neg itj
c. Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj ry Paoly

dwelt in the housej Paul and associates
na dia malemy aza ilay izyj.
although shaky neg itj
"Paul and Associates lived in the housej although itj
was shaky."
d. Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj ry Paoly
na dia malemy aza iOj.
although shaky neg thisj
"Paul and Associates lived in the housej although it.
was shaky."
(79)a. *Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj r y Paoly
dwelt in the house. Paul and associates

377
na dia tsy tia (h aza.
although neg like (K neg
"Paul and Associates lived in the house^ although they
did not like itj."
b. *Nipetraka tao amin'ilay trano^ ry Paoly

na dia tsy tia azyj aza.
although neg like itj neg
c. Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj ry Paoly

na dia tsy tia an'ilay izyj aza.
although neg like itj neg
"Paul and Associates lived in the house^ although they
did not like itj."
d. Nipetraka tao amin'ilay tranOj ry Paoly

na dia tsy tia an'iOj aza.
although neg like this, neg
"Paul and Associates lived in the housej although they
did not like itj."
(80)a. *Nahita ny sari-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly
saw the picture-of the housej p a u l m d associates

378
na dia tsy mazava tsara aza (h.
although neg clear well neg CL
b. *Nahita ny sari-n' ny tranOj r y Paoly
saw the picture-of the house^ Paul and associates
na dia tsy mazava tsara aza izyj.
although neg clear well neg itj
(compare with (80)a. above)
c. Nahita ny sari-n' ny tranOj r y Paoly
saw the picture-of the house^ p au l and associates
na dia tsy mazava tsara aza ilay izyj.
although neg clear well neg itj
"Paul and Associates saw the picture of the housej al-
though itj was not quite visible."
d. Nahita ny sari-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly
saw the picture-of the housej Paul and associates
na dia tsy mazava tsara aza iOj.
although neg clear well neg thiSj
"Paul and Associates saw the picture of the housej al-
though itj was not quite visible."
(81)a. *Nahita ny toera-n' ny tranOj r y paoly
saw the site-of the house. Paul and associates

379
rehefa nitady O^.
when sought CK
b. *Nahita ny toera-n1 ny trano^ ry Paoly

saw the site-of the house^ Paul and associates
rehefa nitady azy^.
when sought it^
c. Nahita ny toera-n1 ny tranoi ry Paoly

rehefa nitady an'ilay izy^.
when sought it^
"Paul and Associates saw the site of the house^ when
they looked for it^."
d. Nahita ny toera-n' ny trano^ ry Paoly
rehefa nitady an'io^.

when sought this^
"Paul and Associates saw the site of the house^ when
they looked for it^."
In (78) and (79), the trigger is an Oblique, whereas in (80) and
(81) it is in the Genitive. In each pair of sentences, the victim
shows up as a Su in the first and as a DO in the second.

380
1.3.3.3 Both Trigger and Victim Other Than Su or DO.
When both the trigger and its victim are neither a Su
nor a DO, then the victim goes into Ilay + Pronoun although when
the trigger is an Oblique or a Genitive, the victim can optional-
ly go into a Demonstrative —here Io "this":
(82)a. *Nipetraka tao amin'ny trano^ ry Paoly
kanefa tsy nandany vola tamy-CK.
although neg spent money on-it^
b. ?Nipetraka tao amin'ny trano^ ry Paoly

kanefa tsy nandany vola tami-ny^.
although neg spent money on-it^
"Paul and his associates lived in the house. although
they did not spend noney on it^."
c. Nipetraka tao amin'ny trano^ ry Paoly

dwelt in the house paul and associates
kanefa tsy nandany vola tamin'ilay izy^.
although neg spent money on it^
"Paul and his associates lived in the house^ although
they did not spend noney on it..»

381
d, Nipetraka tao amin'ny trano^ ry Paoly
kanefa tsy nandany vola tamin'iOj.
although neg spent money on thiSj
"Paul and his associates lived in the housej although
they did not spend money on itj."
33)a. *Nipetraka tao amin'ny tranOj ry Paoly
kanefa tsy nety nanome ny hofa-Oj.
although neg accepted gave the rent-Oj
b. ?Nipetraka tao amin'ny tranOj ry Paoly
kanefa tsy nety nanome ny hofa-nyj.
although neg accepted gave the rent-itsj
they did not accept to give itSj rent."
c. Nipetraka tao amin'ny tranOj ry Paoly
dwelt in the housej Paul and his associates
kanefa tsy nety nanome ny hofa-n'ilay izyj.
although neg accepted gave the rent-of itj
they did not accept to give itSj rent."

382
d. Nipetraka tao amin'ny trano^ ry Paoly
kanefa tsy nety nanome ny hofan-'io.
although neg accepted gave the rent-of thiSj
they did not accept to give rent for itj."
[84)a. *Tsy nety nanome ny hofa-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly
, neg accepted gave the rent-of the housej Paul & assoc.
fa tsy tia hovoarohirchy tamy Oj.
but neg want will-be-involved with Oj
b. *Tsy nety nanome ny hofa-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly
neg accepted gave the rent—of the house. Paul & assoc.
fa tsy tia hovoarohirohy tami-nyj.

but neg want will-be-involved with-itj
c. Tsy nety nanome ny hofa-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly

neg accepted gave the rent-of the housej Paul & assoc.
fa tsy tia hovoarohirohy tamin'ilay izyj.
but neg want will-be-involved with itj
"Paul and his associates did not accept to give the
rent for the housej since they did not want to be in-
volved with itj."

383
d. Tsy nety nanome ny hofa-n" ny trano^ ry Paoly

neg accepted gave the rent-of the house^ Paul & assoc.
fa tsy tia hovoarohirohy tamin' iOj.
but neg want will-be-involved with thiSj
"Paul and his associates did not accept to give the
rent for the housej since they did not want to be in-
volved with itj."
(85)a. *Nijanona tany ivela-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly

remained there outside-of the housej Paul & assoc.
fa tsy tia hiditra tao anaty Oj.
but neg want will-enter in inside Oj
b. Nijanona tany ivela-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly
fa tsy tia hiditra tao anati-nyj.

but neg want will-enter there inside-of-itj
"Paul and his associates stayed outside the housej
since they did not want to enter itj."
c. Nijanona tany ivela-n' ny tranOj ry Paoly

fa tsy tia hiditra tao anati-n' ilay izyj.
but neg want will-enter there inside-of it.

384
"Paul and his associates stayed outside the house^
since they did not want to enter it^."
d. Nijanona tany ivela-n' ny trano ry Paoly
remained there outside-of the house^ Paul and
associates
fa tsy tia hiditra tao anati-n' io^.
but neg wan will-enter there inside-of this^
"Paul and associates stayed outside the house^ since
they did not want to enter it^."
In (82) and (83), the trigger is an Oblique, whereas in (84) and
(85), it is a Genitive. The grammaticality pattern in the first
pair suggests that there is a choice between Ilay + Pronoun, as
in (82)c. and (83)c., and the demonstrative j£ "this," as in
(82)d. and (83)d. Furthermore, a ooreferential clitic pronoun
seems marginally possible, as in (82)b. and (83)b. As for the
second pair, the choice subsists between Ilay + Pronoun, as in
(84)c. and (85)c., and the demonstrative io "this," as in (84)d.
and (85)d. Last but not least, notice that when both the trigger
and its victim, as in (85)b., occupy the Genitive position, the
sequence with the coreferential clitic pronoun becomes fully
granmatical.
1.3.4 Summary: NOn-Animate Trigger and Pronominalization.
All of the above information from 1.3.1 to 1.3.3.3 can
be summarized in the following manner on Table 9.

385
Table 9
Anaphoric Pronominalization:
Non-Animate Trigger
Trigger
/
/ SU DO
Victim
10 OBL GEN
SU 0; *Pro ?0; *Pro *0; *Pro *0; *Pro
?ilay + pro ilay + pro ilay + pro ilay + pro
*io *io *io *io
DO *0; *Pro 0; *Pro *0; *Pro *0; *Pro
ilay + pro ilay + pro ilay + pro ilay + pro
*io *io *io *io
10
QBL *0; *Pro *0; ?*Pro *0; ?Pro *0; *PrO
ilay + pro ilay + pro ilay + pro ilay + pro
io io io io
GEN *0; *Pro *0; ?*Pro *0; ?Pro *0; Pro
ilay + pro ?ilay + pro ilay + pro ilay + pro
io io io io
Mote: 0 = Zero-pronoun; * = Ungrammatical; Pro, Ilay + Pro, or
io = Alternate forms. Absence of * = Grammatical.
See summary overleaf.

386
Assumptions: 1. Trigger = Referential; 2. Trigger =/= Animate;
3. Trigger = Singular.
Sunmary: a. When both trigger and victim = Su,
then, victim Zero-pronoun
although Ilay + Pronoun also possible sometimes;
b. When both trigger and victim = DO,
then, victim => Zero-pronoun/ilay + pronoun
sometimes also a Pronoun;
c. When both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO, then
-when only trigger = Su or DO, victim =» ilay + pronoun;
-when oily victim = Su or DO, victim => ilay + pronoun;
-when both trigger and victim =/= Su or DO,
then, victim => Ilay + Pronoun
although when trigger = Obi or Gen,
victim Denonstrative optionally.
Section 2
Other Relevant Parameters
2.0 Introduction.
Section 2 will show that:
1. the "precede" parameter is not relevant;
2. only the "command" parameter is relevant;
3. Forward Pronominalization is possible whether the
trigger conmands its victim or not; and

387
4. Backward Pronominalization is possible only when the
trigger commands its victim.
2.1.1 The "Precede" Parameter.

The "precede" parameter is not relevant since in each
one of the following sentences, the trigger may precede or follow
its victim — i n these instances a Zero-pronoun— yet, all the
sequences are perfectly granmatical:
(86)a. Tsy fantatr'i P na handeha i J\ n a tsy handeha 0^.
neg known-by P if will-go J i Q r neg will-go
"It is not known to P whether J will go or not," i.e.
"P does not know whether J will go or not."
b. Tsy fantatr'i P na handeha (h na tsy handeha i J^.
neg known-by P if will-go Ch or neg will-go J^
"P does not know whether J will go or not."
(87)a. Nitsangana i P^ dia nandray ny boki-ny CK.
stood-up P^ and took the book-his
"P stood up and took his book."
b. Nitsangana dia nandray ny boki-ny (L i p^.
stood and took the book-his (L p^
"P stood up and took his book."
(88)a. Nitsangatsangana i P i f a tsy nahalala 0^.
took-a-walk but neg knew
"P^ took a walk since hej did not know."

388
b. Nitsangatsangana fa tsy nahalala Oj i Pj.
took-a-walk but neg knew Oj Pj
"Pj took a walk since hej did not know."
(89)a. Nianatra i Pj sy namaky kitay Oj.
studied Pj and chopped wood Oj
"P did some studying and chopped wood."
b. Nianatra sy namaky kitay Oj i Pj.

studied and chopped wood Oj Pj
"P did seme studying and seme wood-chopping."
(90)a. Nianatra i Pj dia namaky kitay Oj.

studied Pj and chopped wood Oj
"P did some studying and chopped wood."
b. Nianatra dia namaky kitay Oj i Pj.
studied and chopped wood Oj Pj
"P did some studying and seme wood-chopping."
(91)a. Nianatra i Pj ary koa namaky kitay Oj.

studied Pj and also chopped wood Oj
"P did seme studying and cut wood."
b. Nianatra ary koa namaky kitay Oj i Pj.

studied and also chopped wood Oj Pj
"P did some studying and some wood-chopping."
389
(92)a. T-any i Pj fa tsy t-eto Oj.

past-there Pj but neg past-here Oj
"P was there but not here."
b. T-any fa tsy t-eto Oj i Pj.
past-there but neg past-here Oj Pj
"P was there but (certainly) hot here."
(93)a. Nalahelo i Pj f a tsy afaka Oj.
was-sad Pj because neg successful Oj
"Pj was sad because hej did not succeed."
b. Nalahelo fa tsy afaka Oj i Pj.
was-sad because neg successful Oj i Pj
"Pj was sad because hej did not succeed."
(94)a. Raha vao tonga i Pj dia hiakatra any Oj.
as soon as arrived Pj then will-go-up there Oj
"As soon as Pj comes, hej will go up there."
b. Raha vao tonga dia hiakatra any Oj i Pj.
as soon as arrived then will-go-up there Oj Pj
"As soon as hej comes, Pj will go up there."
(95)a. Rahatrizay any i Pj dia hikarakara an'io Oj.
whenever there Pj then will-take-care-of this Oj
"Whenever Pj gets there, hej will take care of this."

390
b. Rahatrizay any dia hikarakara an'io Ch i Pj.
whenever there then will-take-care-of this Oj Pj
"Whenever he^ gets there, Pj will take care of this."
(96)a. Mianatra i Pj no sady mampianatra Oj.
studies Pj at same time teaches Oj

"P studies and at the same time teaches."
b. Mianatra no sady manpianatra Ch i Pj.
studies at same time teaches (h Pj
"P is both a student and a teacher."
(97)a. Nilaza i Pj fa handeha Oj.
said Pj that will-go Oj
"Pj said that hej will go."
b. Nilaza fa handeha Oj i Pj.
said that will-go Oj Pj
"Pj said that hej will go."
(98)a. Nanantena i Pj fa ho-afaka Oj.
hoped Pj that will-be-successful Oj
"Pj was hoping that hej would be successful."
b. Nanantena fa ho-afaka Oj i Pj.
hoped that will-be-successful Oj Pj
"Pj was hoping that hej would be successful."

391
(99) a. Nisotro taoka i ka mano 0i.
drank booze P i go drunk Oi

"P drank and subsequently got drunk."
b. Nisotro taoka ka mamo (h i p^.
drank book so drunk CL p^
"P drank and got drunk."
(100) a. Nikasa (ny) handeha 0 i i p^^ kan jo tsy lasa

intended (carp) will-go 0 i but neg gone 0 i
"P wanted to go, but did not leave."
b. Nikasa (ny) handeha kanjo tsy lasa (h i p^.

intended (camp) will-go but neg gone CK p^
"P wanted to, but did not leave."
In all of the a. sentences from (86) to (100), the trigger pre-
cedes the victim with the possible exception of the relevant
portion of (100)a., whereas in the b. sequences it is the victim
which precedes the trigger.
2.1.2 Evidence Against the "Precede" Parameter.
The "precede" parameter is not relevant since in each

one of the following sentences, the trigger may precede or follcw
its victim—in each of the following instances, a Pronoun— yet,
nearly all the sequences are grammatical. Hie two cases which
seem to be exceptional will be dealt with below.
392
(101)a. Niresaka tamin'i ^ i p dia nanatitra azyj.
talked to 0\ p and escorted her^
"P talked to J^ and then, after the talk, escorted

her j.11
b. Niresaka tami-nyj i p dia nanatitra an'i Jj.
talked to-her^ p and escorted Jj
"P talked to Jj and then, escorted herj."
c. Niresaka tami-nyj sy nanatitra an'i ^ i P.
talked to-herj and escorted Jj P
"P talked to Jj and then, escorted her^."
(102)a. Nananatra an'i Jj i p no sady nibedy azy^.
advised ON P and also reprimanded her^
"P gave ON some advice and at the same time reprimanded
herj."
b. Nananatra azy^ i p no sady nibedy an'i Jj.
advised her^ p and also reprimanded Jj
"P gave her^ some advice and at the same time repri-
manded Jj."
c. Nananatra azyj n o sady nibedy an'i Jj i P.
advised herj a t also reprimanded Jj P
"P gave herj some advice and at the same time repri-
manded J.."
393
(103)a. Nilaza tamin'i J. i p fa hanome azy^ vola.
said to p that will-give her^ noney
"P told Jj that he will give herj noney."
b. Nilaza tami-ny^ i p fa hanome an'i Jj vola.
said to-her ^ p that will-give Jj money
"P told herj that he will give jv money."
c. Nilaza tami-nyj fa hanome an'i Jj vola i P.
said to-herj that will-give Jj money P
"P told herj that he will give Jj money."
(104)a. Nanantena ny fahatongava-n'i J. i P
hoped the coming-of X p
kanefa tsy tonga izyj.
but neg arrived she^
"P was hoping that Jj would come, but shej did not."
b. Nanantena ny fahatongava-ny^ i p
hoped the coming-of-hiSj p
kanefa tsy tonga i Jj.
but neg arrived
"P was hoping that Jj would come, but shej did not."
c. *Nanantena ny fahatongava-ny^ i p
hoped the ocaning-of-his. p

394
kanefa tsy tonga i J. i P.
but neg arrived X p
"P was hoping that Jj would come, but shej did not.
(105)a. T-any amin'i J. i P taloha fa tsy any
past-there with X P previously but neg there
ami-ny^ intsony izao.
with herj no-more now
"P used to be at Jj's, but not any longer."
b. T-any ami-ny^ taloha fa tsy any
past-there with-her^ previously but neg there
ami-n'i X intsony izao i P.
with X no-longer now P
c. T-any ami-ny^ taloha fa tsy any
past-there with-her^ previously but neg there
ami-n'i X intsony izao i P.
with Jj no-longer now P
(106)a. Niaraka tami-n'i X i p taloha

accompanied with X P previously
395
kanefa tsy mahita azyj intsony.
but neg see her^ no-longer
"p used to go out with X although he no longer sees
herj."
b. Niaraka tami-nyi i p taloha

accompanied with-her^ P previously
kanefa tsy mahita an'i J^ intsony.
but neg see 0\ no-longer
"p used to go out with J^ although he no longer sees
her^"
c. Niaraka tami-ny^ taloha kanefa tsy mahita
aaxscpanied with-hsr^ previously but neg see
an'i J. intsony i P.
J^ no-longer P
"p used to go out with CT although he no longer sees
her.,."
(107)a. Nalahelo an'i J. i p fa tsy nahita azy^ intsony.
missed J^ p but neg saw her^ no-longer
"p missed J^ since he no longer saw her^."
b. Nalahelo azyi i p fa tsy nahita an'i Jj intsony.
missed heri p but neg saw J\j_ no-longer
"p missed her^ since he no longer saw J^."

396
c. Nalahelo azy^ f a tsy nahita an'i J^ intsony i P.
missed her^ but neg saw J^ no-longer P
"P missed her^ since he no longer saw J^."
(108)a. Raha mikotaba amin'i J. i p dia manome azy^ rariny.
if make-fuss with J^ P so give her^ right
"If P makes a fuss with , he will make her^ cause
sound right."
b. Raha mikotaba ami-ny^ i p dia manome an'i J^ rariny.
if make-fuss with-her^ P so give J^ right
"If P makes a fuss with her^, he will make the cause of
J^ sound right."
c. Raha mikotaba ami-ny^ dia manome an'i J^ rariny i P.
if make-fuss with-her^ so give J^ right P
"If P makes a fuss with her^, he will make the cause of
J^ sound right."
Rahatrizay manome boky an'i J^ i P

whenever give book J^ p
(109)a.
dia hampahatsiahy azy^ ilay resaka.
so will-remind her^ the talk
"Whenever P gives (a) book(s), he will remind her^
of the talk."
Rahatrizay manome boky azy^ i p
whenever give book her^ p
b.
397
dia hampahatsiahy an'i X ilay resaka.
so will-remind J^ the talk
"Whenever P gives J i ( a ) book(s), he will remind heri

of the talk."
c. Rahatrizay manane boky azy^ dia hampahatsiahy
whenever give book her^ so will-remind
an'i J. ilay resaka i P.
^ the talk P
"Whenever P gives heri (a) book(s), he will remind ^
of the talk."
The sentence (104)c. is ungrammatical since the sequence has two
Sus; this obviously does not relate to the issue under consider-
ation. On the other hand, (103)b. poses problems that will be
taken up under 2.2.3.1 and 2.2.3.2. Otherwise, the grammatically
of the b. and c. sequences, from (101) to (109), suggests that
the "precede" parameter is not relevant since in each one of them
the victim precedes its trigger.
2.2.1 The "Command" Parameter.
The "command" parameter, as proposed in Langacker
(1969), is relevant since the following sequences show that
whenever the trigger commands the victim —here, a Zero-pronoun—
the sentence is grammatical, whereas whenever the trigger does
not command the victim, the sentence becomes ungrammatical:

398
(110)a. Nandeha i P^ [{fa sao/fandrao/andrao} maninona o^].
went P^ for fear that do-something
"Pi left for fear that something should befall him^."
b. *Nandeha 0 i [{fa sao/fandrao/andrao} maninona i pi].
went CK for fear that do-something Pj^
"Pi left for fear that something should befall him^."
(111) a. Nilaza [fa nandeha 0^] i Paoly^.

said that went CK Paul^
left
"Pauli said that hei -"
b. *Nilaza Ch [fa nandeha i Paoly^].

said 0 i that went Pau^
"Pauli said that hei left."
(112) a. Nanantena [fa hoafaka i Paolyi.
hoped that will-be-successful 0i Pauli
(same as (98)b.)
"Pauli was hoping that he^ would be successful."
b. *Nanantena (h [fa hoafaka i Paolyi].
hoped 0i that will-be-successful Pauli
"Pauli was hoping that hei ^ successful."
(113)a. Nisotro taoka [ka mamo 0i] i paoly^.

drank booze so drunk (h Pauli
(same as (99)b.)
"Paul drank and got drunk."
399
b. *Nisotro taoka 0 i [ka mamo i Paolyj].
drank booze (L so drunk Paulj
"Paul drank and got drunk."
(114)a. Naláhelo [fa tsy afaka (L] i paolyj.
was-sad since neg successful CK paulj
(same as (93)b.) —
"Paul^ was sad because hej did not succeed."
b. *Nalahelo 0 i [fa tsy afaka i Paolyj].
was-sad (L since neg successful Paulj
"Paul^ was sad because hej did not succeed."
(115)a. Raha vao tonga [dia hiakatra any Ch] i paolyj.
as soon as arrived so will-go-up there Oj Paulj
(same as (94)b.)
"As soon as Paulj comes, hej will go up there."
b. Raha vao tonga Oj [dia hiakatra any i Paolyj].
as soon as arrived Oj so will-go-up there Paulj
"As soon as he .J comes, Paulj will go up there."
In (111)a., (112)a., (113)a., and (114)a., there is a pause just
before the main clause Su, toward the end of each sentence. All
of these sequences are grammatical, the subordinate clause being
embedded under each matrix in the absence of Postposition. In all
of the ungrammatical sentences, i.e. as seen in (110)b., (lll)b.,
(112)b., (113)b., and (114)b., such a pause comes right after the
400
main clause verb, suggesting that the explicit Su belongs in the
lower clause: in the relevant reading, where the Zero-pronoun is
coreferential with the Su of the embedded clause, all of these
sentences are ungrammatical. However, there exists a totally dif-
ferent, non-coreferential interpretation where this second set of
sentences are grammatical. This describes a situation where (Hi)
b., for example, would come as the second of a pair of utterances
and, more specifically, would constitute a reply to a question
relative to what a previously mentioned person did. The same
holds true of (112)b., (113) b., and (114) b. But again, this is
the non-coreferential reading and therefore, is not relevant. As
far as (115)b. is concerned, it is grammatical since, as will be
seen in 3.4.2 of Section 3, Adverb Preposing applies after pro-
nominalization.
2.2.2 Relevance of the "Command" Parameter.
The following sentences also show that the "command"
parameter is relevant since whenever the trigger commands the
victim —rhere, a Pronoun— the sentence is grammatical, whereas
whenever the trigger does not command the victim, the sentence is
ungrammatical:
(116) a. Nilaza i P a o ^ [fa tsy noraharahi-nyj^
said Paul^ that neg was-oonsidered-by-him^
ny olona [(izay) nanafitohina azy^]].

the people who irritated hinu
"Paul^ said that he^ ignored the people who irritated
him. "
401
*Nilaza izy^ [fa tsy noraharahi-nyj
said he^ that neg was-consider ed-by-h imj
ny olona [(izay) nanafitohina an'i Paoly/]].
the people who irritated Paul^
*Nilaza izyj [fa tsy noraharahi-n' i Paolyj
said he^ that neg was-considered-by Paulj
ny olona [(izay) nanafitohina azy^] ].
the people who irritated hiith
"He^ said that hej ignored those who irritated Paulj.
Tsy fantatr'i Paolyj [na handeha izyj na tsia 0j].
neg known-by Paulj if will-go hej or neg
"It is not known to Paul^ whether hej will go or not,
i.e. "Paulj does not know whether hej will go or not.
*Tsy fanta-nyj [na handeha i Paolyj na tsia Oj].
neg known-by-himj if will-go Paulj or neg
"Hej does not know whether Paulj will go or not."
Nankany amin'i Jeanne^ i Paoly
went to Jeanne. paul
[fa sao naninona izy^].
for fear did-something she^
"Paul went to see Jeannei for fear that something
should happen to her. ••

402
b. *Nankany ami-ny^ i paoly
went to-her^ Paul
[fa sao naninona i Jeanne^].
for fear did-something Jeanne^
"Paul went to see her^ for fear that soirething should
happen to Jeanne^."
In all of the a. sentences, from (116) to (118), the trigger be-
longs in the matrix clause and, as such, commands the victim. By
contrast, in all of the b. sequences, the trigger belongs in the
lower clause and, therefore, does not command the victim. All of
the a. sentences are perfectly granmatical, whereas none of the
b. sequences are, at least, in the relevant, ooreferential
reading.
2.2.3.1 One Apparently Anomalous Case.
Hie sentence (103)b. presents not a coordinate but a
subordinate structure since, like a typical subordinate, it al-
lows a n^ complementizer, Passive, and DO-Fronting. Hius, the
following is a typical subordinate structure and allows:
Ny-complementizer:
(119) Nikasa ny handeha (h i paoly
intended camp will-go CK Paul^
"Paul was planning to leave."

403
Passive and DO-Fronting:
(120) [Ny handeha 0^ no nokasai-n' i Paolyj.
oomp will-go Oj part was-intended-by Paulj
"It was hisj leaving which was intended by Paulj,"
i.e. "To leave, that was what Paul was planning."
Uie sentence (103) allows both of the above:
(121) Nolaza-in'i P^ tami-ny fa hanome an'i J vola izyj.
was-said-by Pj to-her that will-give J money hej
"Pj told her that hej will give her money."
Ny complementizer and DO-Fronting:
(122) Ny hanome an'i Jj vola no nolaza-in'i P tami-nyj.
camp will-give Jj money part was-said-by P to-herj
"It was the giving JN money which was told herj by P,"
i.e. "What P told herj was that he would give Jj
money."
2.2.3.2 De Dicto vs. De Re Interpretation.
Furthermore, there is a systematic difference of per-
spective between (103)a., on the one hand, and (103)b. and (103)
c., on the other; the first has a "de re" interpretation, whereas
the last two have a "de dicto" reading. Since the latter is ac-
companied by some kind of emphasis, (103)b. and (103)c. can be
considered Marked. If that is indeed the case, then the command
parameter still remains relevant for all Unmarked structures.

404
2.3.1 Forward Pronominalization.
Forward Pronominalization is possible, whether the
trigger commands its victim or not:
1. In the examples given above, the following involve
Forward Pronominalization, where the trigger commands its victim:
(86)a., (87)a., (88)a., (89)a., (90)a., (91)a., (92)a., (93)a.,
(96)a., (97)a., (98)a., (99)a., (100)a., (101)a., (103)a., (104)
a., (105)a., (106)a., (107)a., (116)a., and finally (117)a. All
of these sentences are granmatical.
2. In the examples previously given, the following in-
volve Forward Pronominalization, where the trigger does not com-
mand its victim: (94)a., (95)a., (108)a., and (109)a. All of
these sentences are granmatical.
2.3.2 Backward Pronominalization.
Backward Pronominalization is possible only when the
trigger commands its victim:
1. In our previous examples above, the following in-
volve Backward Pronominalization: (86)b., (87)b., (88)b., (89)b.,
(90) b., (91)b., (92)b., (93)b., (94)b., (95)b., (97)b., (99)b.,
(100) b., (101)b., (101)c., (102)b., (102)c., (104)b., (105)b.,
(105) c., (106)b., (106)c., (107)b., (107)c., (108)b., (108)c.,
(109)b., and (109)c. All of these are grammatical sentences.
2. In the examples already provided, the following in-
volve Backward Pronominalization, where the trigger does not com-
mand its victim: (110)b., (lll)b., (112)b., (113)b., (114)b.,
(116)b., (117)b., and (118)b. All of these sentences are ungram-
matical.
405
Section 3
The Cyclic Convention
3.0 Introduction.
r
Section 3 will attempt to shew that:
1. The interaction of Pronominalization and Reflexiv-
ization provides some evidence in favor .of Rule Ordering and
against Simultaneous or Free Order Rule Application.
2. The interaction of Backward Pronominalization and
Adverb preposing argues against Simultaneous Rule Application.
3. The application of Zero-pronominalization and Rais-
ing-to-DO argues against Free Order Rule Application.
4. Given the above, the rules must be ordered; further-
more, Pronominalization is a Cyclic Rule — i n the sense of Ross
(1967) and Baker (1978)— since in one case Adverb Preposing
precedes Pronominalization, whereas in another Pronominalization
precedes Adverb Preposing, thus presenting an Ordering Paradox.
3.1 ftjainst Simultaneous and Free Order Rule Applications.
Clause-Union feeds Reflexivization, but bleeds Pronom-
inalization since we have the following pair of sentences:
(123)a. /[ N-ank- [adala i Jeanne^ i Jeanne^]/
past-caus[crazy Jeannei Jeanne^
b. N-ank-adala tena^ i Jeanne^,
past-caus-crazy selfi jeannej
"Jeanne^ d r Q v e herselfi crazy."

406
c. *N-ank-adala i jeannei.
past-caus-crazy O i Jeanne^
Both (123)b. and (123)c. derive from the same underlying repres-
entation shown in (123)a., where the environment for Pronominal-
ization is met: the trigger is the Su of the matrix clause and
its victim, the underlying Su of the embedded clause. Yet, the
sentence (123)c., where Pronominalization has applied, is ungram-
matical in the relevant reading. If a Simultaneous or Free Order
Rule Application were possible, we should have evolved a grairmat-
ical sequence, which is not the case at all. The other interpre-
tation, which is not relevant for present purposes, is the one
where the Zero-pronoun and the NP _i Jeanne of (123) c. are not co-
referential. In this case, the Zero-pronoun refers to an arbi-
trary set of individuals necessarily comprising the speaker, the
hearer or both.
3.2 Against Simultaneous Rule Application.
If we are to apply Backward Pronominalization and
Adverb Preposing simultaneously to:
(124)a. /[Atao-ko [ fa h-ikarakara an'io i Paoly^
done-by-me that will-take-care-of this Paul^
[rahatrizay tonga any i Paoly ^j]/
whenever arrived there Paul^
b. [Rahatrizay tonga any i Paoly^j aia ataoko
whenever arrived there Paul^ part done-by-me

407
[fa hikarakara an'io 0^]].
that will-take-care-of this 0.

l
"Whenever PaoL arrives, it is believed by me that
(he^ w i u take care of this," i.e.

"Whenever Pauli shows up, I think he^ will take care of
this."
c. * [Rahatrizay tonga any 0^ dia ataoko

whenever arrived there 0^ part done-by-me
[fa hikarakara an'io i Paoly^j.
that will-take-care-of this Paul^
Barring the "de dicto" interpretation for (124)c., the sequence
is ungrammatical for the same reason as (103)b. above, as ex-
plained in 2.2.3.2. If that is so, then a Simultaneous Rule Ap-
plication has an undesirable effect: the constraint on Backward
Pronominalization whereby it can take place only when the trigger
commands its victim will have to be abandoned, although such a
constraint is needed on independent grounds.
3.3 Against Free Order Rule Application.
The following data argues against free ordering of
rules:
(125) /M-ihevitra ["Mahay aho^»] i Paolyj/
pres-thing intelligent Paul^

408
(126) *M-ihevitra ho mahay izy^ i Paolyi
pres-think corap intelligent he^ Paul^
"Paul considers him to be intelligent,"

i i
(127) *M-ihevitra ho mahay 0 i i Paolyi

pres-think comp intelligent Ch Paul^
"Paul^ considers to be intelligent,"
(127') /[N-ilaza ["Handeha aho^] i Paoly^/
past-say will-go Paul^
(128) *N-ilaza [fa handeha izy^ i paolyj

past-say that will-go he^ Paul^
"Pauli said that he^ would go,"
(129) N-ilaza [fa handeha 0.^] i Paolyi
past-say that will-go 0^ Paul^
"Pauli said that hei would go."
Given an underlying representation of the type of (125) and as-

suming an Indirect Discourse Formation Rule, which shifts aho "I"
into the third person singular pronoun izy along with the inser-
tion of the ho complementizer, as shown in (126), we should be
able to obtain a grammatical sequence after application of Zero-
pronoun since both the trigger and its victim are Sus underlying-
ly in (125) and the potential trigger commands its victim. In-
stead, the output, as seen in (127), is irretrievably ungranmat-
ical. This output must be blocked. There exist two possibilities:
409
1. ordering Raising-to-DO before Zero-pronoun; or
2. positing a Global Rule which would state that no
pronoun derived from a first person as a result of Indirect Dis-
course Formation can delete under Zero-pronominalization.
- Now, given an underlying sequence of the type of
(127'), with Indirect Discourse Formation, we get (128), which is
ungrammatical; but with Zero-pronoun, the sentence becomes per-
fectly grammatical, as in (129). However, our hypothesis number 2
above predicted that (129) should be ungrammatical. Since (129)
is definitely grammatical and since hypothesis 2 makes the wrong
prediction, it can only be inferred that it is defective and must
be abandoned. We are thus left with hypothesis number 1, which
involves Rule Ordering.
3.4.1 Ordering of Rules.
Given the above, we may assume at this stage that rules
such as Pronominalization are ordered. But then, the following
sequences involving Pronominalization and Adverb Preposing show
that in one case Adverb Preposing precedes Pronominalization,
whereas in another, Pronominalization precedes Adverb Preposing:
(130) [Rahatrizay tonga any i Paoly^] dia atao-ko

[fa h-ikarakara an'io 0^].
that will-take-care-of this
(same as (124)b.)
"Whenever Pau^ shows up, I think will take care of
this."
410
(131) [Rahatrizay tonga any 0^ dia atao-ko
whenever arrived there 0^ part done-by-me
[fa h-ikarakara an'io i Paolyj.
that will-take-care-of this Pauli
(same as (124)c. except for Rule Ordering)
"Whenever he^ shows up, I think Paulj will take care of
this."
(132) [Rahatrizay m-anome boky an'i Jeanne^ i Paolyj]
whenever pres-give book Jeanne^ Paulj
dia [h-ampahatsiahy azy^ ilay resaka Oj].
part will-remind her^ the talk Oj
(same as (109)a.)
"Whenever Paulj gives Jeannej (a) book(s), hej will re-
mind herj of the talk."
(133) [Rahatrizay m-anome boky azyj i Paolyj]
whenever pres-give book her^ Paulj
dia [h-ampahatsiahy an'i Jeanne^ ilay resaka Oj].
part will-remind Jeannej the talk Oj
(same as (109)b.)
"Whenever Paulj gives herj (a) book(s), hej will re-
mind Jeannej of the talk."
In (130) and (132), Adverb Preposing applies to the adverbial
clause before Pronominalization; the reverse is true of (131)r

411
where Zero-pronominalization has applied first, and (133), where
pronominalization to the independent ooreferential pronoun azy
has already taken place.
3.4.2 Derivations.
Here are the derivations for (130) and (131):
(130')a. /Atao-ko [ fa h-ikarakara an'io i Paoly^
[rahatrizay tonga any i Paoly^]]/.
b. [Rahatrizay tonga any i P a o l y d i a ataoko
[fa h-ikarakara an'io i Paoly.
that will-take-care-of this Paul.

l
c. [Rahatrizay tonga any i Paoly^] dia ataoko
[fa h-ikarakara an'io 0^].
that will-take-care-of this 0^
(131')a. /Atao-ko [ fa h-ikarakara an'io i Paoly^
done-by-me that will-take-care-of this Paul.

412
[rahatrizay tonga any i Paoly^]]/.
b. Ataoko [fa h-ikarakara an'io i Paoly^
[rahatrizay tonga any (h ] ].
whenever arrived there
c. [Rahatrizay tonga any (h] dia ataoko
whenever arrived there part done-by-me
[fa h-ikarakara an'io i Paoly^].

that will-take-care-of this Paul.
l
In the derivation of (130), Adverb Preposing applies first,
yielding (130')b., followed by Pronominalization, as seen in
(130')c. On the other hand, that of (131) requires the appli-
cation of Forward Pronominalization, as in (1311)b., followed by
Adverb Preposing, as shown in (131')c.
3.4.3 More Derivations.

Here are the derivations for (132) and (133):
(132')a. /[H-ampahatsiahy an'i Jeanne^ iiay resaka i Paolyj
will-remind Jeanne^ the talk Paulj
[rahatrizay m-anome boky an'i Jeanne^ i paolyj]]/.
whenever pres-give book Jeanne^ paulj

413
b. [Rahatrizay m-anome boky an'i Jeanne^ i Paolyj]

dia [h-anpahatsiahy an'i Jeanne^ ilay resaka i Paolyj].

part will-remind Jeanne the talk Paulj
c. [Rahatrizay m-anome boky an'i Jeanne^ i Paolyj]

dia [h-anpahatsiahy azy^ ilay resaka Oj].

part will-remind her^ the talk Oj
)a. /[H-anpahatsiahy an'i Jeanne^ ilay resaka i Paolyj

will-remind Jeanne.^ the talk Paulj
[rahatrizay m-anome boky an'i Jeanne^ i Paolyj]]/.

b. [H-ampahatsiahy an'i Jeanne^ ilay resaka i Paolyj

will-remind Jeanne^ the talk Paulj
[rahatrizay m-anome boky azyi Oj]].

whenever pres-give book her^ Oj
c. [Rahatrizay m-anome boky azy^ Oj]

whenever pres-give book her^ Oj
dia [h-anpahatsiahy an'i Jeanne.^ ilay resaka i Paolyj].
part will-remind Jeannei the talk Paulj

414
In the derivation of (132), Adverb Preposing applies first, as
seen in (132')b., followed by Pronominalization, as shown in
(132')c. On the other hand, that of (133) involves Forward Pro-
nominalization, as in (133')b., before Adverb Preposing, as in
(133')c.
4.0 Conclusions.
In conclusion, it seems that in order to be able to
describe Pronominalization in Malagasy, we have to factor out
Marked structures, not only of the type presented under 0.2 but
also that explained under 2.2.3.2. Furthermore, it has been
necessary to assume throughout this chapter that a Zero-pronoun,
a Pronoun, Ilay + Pronoun, or a Demonstrative as a victim of Pro-
nominalization always has a trigger within the sentence. This has
enabled us to discard a sequence of the type:
(134) Tonga 0?
perf-arrived 0
"He/she or you has/have arrived?"
whose main characteristics are (a) that it only has a victim, but
no explicit trigger, and (b) that the Zero-pronoun here can be
used to refer to a third person toward whom sane deference is due
or to the hearer with whom the speaker does not wish to have a
confrontation situation. In other words, (134) can be used for
the sake of Politeness and is therefore Marked.
Last but not least, structures like (134) are inherent-
ly ambiguous and we have confined ourselves to the transparent
reading in the case of sequences which do lend themselves to the

415
same type of ambiguity. Thus, in quite a few cases —like (27),
where the victim occupies the DO position, or (31), where it is
an jo, and (64), where it is an Oblique— there is a reading on
which Zero-pronoun can refer to a trigger whose referent encom-
passes the speaker, in which case the sequence would be grammat-
ical. We have held this assumption constant throughout all of the
examples given.
4.1 Distribution of the Different Forms.
Given the two assumptions made under 0.1 relative to
the nature of the trigger (referential and singular), it appears
that the four possible forms (0.1 above) of the victim under Pro-
nominalization are in complementary distribution with respect to
the syntactic/semantic positions occupied by the trigger and its
victim on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy, and according to whether
the latter is human, non-animate or non-human, but animate. In
this connection, it is interesting to note that:
1. Zero-pronominalization is heavily syntactically con-
ditioned since it can only occur if both the trigger and its vic-
tim are jointly Sus;
2. at the other end of the scale, when the trigger is
low on the Keenan-Comrie Hierachy and if it refers to a non-an-
imate thing, a Demonstrative can replace a Pronoun;
3. when the trigger is human, the form of the victim is
the least Marked, whereas this is not the case when it has either
a non-animate or an animate but non-human referent. This also
justifies the decision taken to leave the plural forms out of
consideration since for example izy ireo "he/she these" involve

416
the simple Pronoun izy in combination with the plural Demon-
strative ireo.
4. We have a tripartite division, where when both the
trigger and its victim are Sus, then Zero-pronoun is obligatory,
as opposed to when both the trigger and its victim do not occupy
the Su or the DO positions; falling in between, we have a situ-
ation where both trigger and victim are DOs, in which case we can
optionally have either one of two forms belonging to the outer
positions. And furthermore,
5. only the "conmand," but not the "precede" parameter
is relevant, and Pronominalization is a Cyclic Rule, as shown in
the last section of this chapter.
Finally, in Chapter Uiree on Reflexivization in its
Subsection 5.6.1, it is shown that the form —independent or
clitic— the victim, i.e. Pro of Pronominalization, could take,
is heavily conditioned by its syntactic/semantic position.

417
CHAPTER POOR FOOTNOTES
Icoreferentiality between the victim and its trigger is assumed.

2
I will also set aside those cases where a clause is embedded
under noho/tamina "because of" Causal-Oblique (see Passive):
Sosotra i Jeanne^ noho izy^ tsy nahita an'i Paoly.
angry Jeanne^ because she^ neg saw Paul
"Jeanne^ was angry due to her^ not seeing Paul."
*Sosotra i Jeannei noho/tamina Oi tsy nahita an'i Paoly.
angry Jeannei because Oi neg saw Paul
*Sosotra i Jeannei noho/tamina tsy nahita an'i Paoly ìzy^
angry Jeannei because neg saw Paul shei
*Sosotra i Jeannei noho/tamina tsy nahita an'i Paoly Oi.
angry Jeannei because neg saw Paul Oi
The word order in the embedded clause is marked since instead of
the usual VOS, we have SVO. Likewise, I am discarding complex
cases where the pronoun is accompanied by modifiers, as in:
Niaraka tamin'izy roa i Paoly.
accompanied with they two Paul
"Paul went with the two of them."
3
In all of the b. sequences in 2.2.1, there is a strong pause
after the zero-pronoun, just like in the a. sentences.

CHAPTER FIVE
PASSIVE ZATION
0.0 Introduction.
The purpose of this chapter is to describe how the pro-
cess of Passivization operates: first, in Section 1, at the level
of the simplex sentence; then, in Section 2, in its interaction
with other processes such as Equi-1, Equi-2, Raising-to-DO, and
Raising-to-Su, the last two being defined as in Postal (1974).
Furthermore, Section 1 comprises three divisions:
1. Subsection 1 deals with the classification of Mala-
gasy verbs;
2. Subsection 2, with the cline between a typically
transitive and a typically intransitive verb and the connection
between the two; and
3. Subsection 3 addresses the issue of the order of the
different types of Oblique.
Section 2 explores the behavior of Passive, first in
non-Causative constructions in Subsection 1, then in Causative
Constructions in Subsection 2.
419
Section 1
The Basic Process
0.1 Introduction.
The purpose of Section 1 is to show that:
1. Malagasy has five different passive affixes:
a. (no)...(ina), both elements of which are optional,
depending on the type of predicate dealt with and on the tense of
the verb (see 1.2.5);
b. voa;
c. a;
d. tafa; and
e. an/i...i/ana — the so-called "circumstantial form"-
- the alternation an/i depending on the prefix of the verb, as
will be explained under 1.1.7, whereas that between i/a of the
suffix does not seem to be predictable;
2. that the distribution of the above affixes is con-
strained by the following factors:
a. the class to which a given verb belongs;
b. whether the verb is transitive or intransitive;
c. whether it is in the imperfective/perfective aspect;
d. as well as the syntactic/semantic position occupied
by the NP to be promoted to Su position on the Keenan-Comrie
Hierarchy (1977).
0.2 Scope of Present Study.
The description of Passivization in Malagasy will be
confined to the process at work with verbs of Classes 1 and 2, as

420
defined under 1.1.1 and 1.1.2 below, since:
1. only these two represent open classes; and
2. with the exception of Class 5 comprising two verbs
and which, therefore, could be considered marginal, Class 2 pre-
sents the relevant features of Classes 3 and 4, as can be seen on
Table 10.
1.0 Hie Relevant Parameters.
It will be shown that:
1. Verbs in Malagasy subdivide into five different
classes, the first two of which are open, all the others being
closed. Classes 1 and 2 are the cries which give verbs that take
the above-mentioned passive affixes.
2. The distribution of the different passive affixes
are, in part, constrained by a combination of two factors, i.e.
transitivity and aspect:
a. if the verb is typically transitive and in the im-
perfective aspect (see 1.1.8(1)), no...ina is used, although when
an Cfcject-Incorporation has taken place within the VP, only the a
form can show up —for illustrative examples of Object-Incor-
poration in other languages, see Mardirussian (1975) and Sugita
(1974)— ; however, if the verb is in the perfective aspect, then
we have voa instead of no...ina and tafa instead of a;
b. if the verb is optionally transitive, there is a
choice (see 1.1.8(2)) between no...ina and a in the imperfective
aspect, and between voa and tafa in the perfective aspect; and
c. if the verb is typically intransitive and does not
have the corresponding transitive verb with the an(a) prefix, it
can only take the circumstantial form an/i...i/an in the imper-

421
fective aspect; however, if a typically intransitive verb has the
corresponding transitive verb with the an (a) prefix, and if the
latter is a root (this holds for class 2.M), it can take no...ina
in the imperfective aspect, and voa in the perfective aspect, but
if the latter is an intransitive verb with an _i prefix, the a
form is to be used in the imper fective aspect and tafa in the
perfective aspect (see 1.1.8(3)).
3. Furthermore, it is possible to promote to Su an NP
occupying a syntactic/semantic position between Su and Comit-
ative-Oblique on the hierarchy:
a. if the NP to be promoted is a DO or an 10 and if the
verb is in the imperfective aspect, it takes the no...ina circum-
fix;
b. if the NP to be promoted is an Oblique-Intermediary
(or, henceforth, Intermediary, for short) or an Instrumental and
if the verb is in the imperfective aspect, the latter takes the a
prefix;
c. however, if in (a) and (b) above, the verb is in the
perfective aspect, then the latter takes the voa prefix; and
d. if the NP to be promoted is an Instrumental, a Bene-
ficiary, a Manner, a Locative, or a Temporal, then the verb takes
the an/i...i/ana circumfix, depending on its subclass.
1.1.0 Malagasy Verb Classification.
Verbs in Malagasy subdivide into five different classes
according to:
1. whether the root corresponding to a given verb is
used in isolation or not.

422
2. If the root is used, it will have to be determined
whether it is used in an active or passive construction;
3. whether a given verb has an affixal form or not.
4. And if so, whether such a derivative form is used in
an active or passive construction.
Only sample illustrations will be provided in the text
although more verbs belonging to different classes will be given
in the appendices.
1.1.1 Class 1 Verbs.
In Class 1, the root corresponding to a given verb can-
not be used in isolation but only with an affix, thus yielding
both an active and a passive derivative verb. Thus, with a root
like loto "dirt":
(l)a. *Loto ny trano ny ankizy.
dirt the house the child(ren)
b. N - an - doto ny trano ny ankizy.
past-pref-dirt the house the child(ren)
"The children were dirtying the house."
c. No - loto -in' ny ankizy ny trano.
pass-dirt-by the child(ren) the house
"The children were dirtying the house."
d. Voa - loto - n' ny ankizy ny trano.
pass-dirt-by the child(ren) the house
"Hie house has been dirtied by the children."

423
In Class 2, the root corresponding to a given verb can
be used in isolation as a passive, although it also yields both
an active and passive derivatives, both in the non-perfective and
the perfective aspects . Thus, latsaka "be in the state of having
been dropped" gives:
dropped the letter
"The letter is in the state of having been dropped."
b. N - an - datsaka ny taratasy i Paoly.
past-pref-dropped the letter Paul
"Paul wàs dropping the letter."
c. N - a - latsak' i Paoly ny taratasy.
"The letter was being dropped by Paul."
d. Voa - latsak' i Paoly ny taratasy.
"Paul has managed to drop the letter."
In Class 3, the verb is only used as a root passive and
does not present an active or a passive derivative. Thus, lasa
"be gone" gives:

424
(3)a. Lasa ny entana.
gone the luggage
"The luggage is gone."
b. *N - an - dasa ny entana i Paoly.
past-pref-gone the luggage Paul
(intended meaning provided belcw)
"Paul was taking the luggage."
c. *N - a - lasa - n' i Paoly ny entana.
past-pass-gone-by Paul the luggage
"The luggage was being taken by Paul."
d. *No - lasa - n' i Paoly ny entana.
pass-gone-by Paul the lugage
"The luggage was being taken by Paul."
Although (3) a. with the root passive lasa is perfectly grammat-
ical, if it is combined with the active prefix an, as in (3)b.,
or the nonperfective aspect affixes a, as in (3)c., and no...ina,
as in (3)d., the sequence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical.
The verbs belonging to Class 3 are limited in number
and comprise the following: afaka "can," tokony "should," aleo
"had rather," tonga "be in the state of having arrived," and avy
"in the process of coming."
In Class 4, the verb is also used as a root passive and
it has an active derivative:

425
(4) a. Re ny vaovao.
heard the news
"Hie news has been/was heard."
b. N - an - dre ny vaovao i Paoly.
past-pref-heard the news Paul
"Paul was hearing the news."—
c. *N - a - re ny vaovao i Paoly.
past-pass-heard the news Paul
?*No - re - nes - in' i Paoly ny vaovao.
pass-heard-by Paul the news
"The news has been/was being heard by Paul."
In (4) a. and (4)b., the root re is used as a passive and in the
active voice in combination with the prefix an, respectively, and
the sentences are grammatical, whereas in (4)c., it is combined
with the Affixal Passives a, and the resulting sequence is irre-
trievably ungrammatical. The sequence (4)d. is only marginally
acceptable and is characteristic of Foreigner Talk.
Class 4 has a limited set of verbs which comprise: hita
"be seen," very "be lost," lafo "be expensive," and afaka "be
liberated."
1.1.5 Class 5 Verbs. '
In Class 5, the root is used as an active, although it
also has a passive derivative. With mila "need," we get:

426
(5)a. M - ila ny boky i Paoly.
pres-need the book Paul
"Paul needs the book(s)."
b. *N - an - ila ny boky i Paoly.
past-pref-need the book Paul
c. *N - a - ila - n' i Paoly ny boky.
past-pass-need-by Paul the book
1
d. N - ila - in i Paoly ny boky.
past-need-by Paul the book
"The book was needed by Paul."
In (5) a., the root mi la is used as an active and it can also be
used, as in (4)d., with the Affixal Passive n(o) ...in(a) since
the latter is a perfectly grammatical sentence. Hcwever, it can-
not be combined with the active prefix an, as can be inferred
from the ungrammaticality of (4)b., or with the Affixal Passive
prefix a.
Class 5 has oily two members: mi la "need," and sahy
"dare."
1.1.6 Sunmary: Hie Verb Classes of Malagasy.
All of the information provided in the paragraphs from
1.1.1 to 1.1.5, which pertain to the different verb classes of
Malagasy, can be summarized on Table 10, according to whether a
verb is a root or a derivative and hew it is used.

427
Table 10
Verb Classes
Cl.l CI.2 CI.3 CI. 4 CI. 5
as Active * * * * OK
Root Used
as Passive * OK OK OK *
Active Derivative OK OK * OK *
Passive Derivative OK OK * * OK
Note: CI. = Class; * = NOt Used; OK = Used.
1.1.7 Transitivity.
Furthermore, the verbs in Classes 1 and 2 can be sub-
divided according to whether:
1. their DO must occur, in which case we have a typi-
cally transitive verb;
2. it can optionally be left out; and
3. it can never take a DO, in which case we have a
typically intransitive verb.
For purposes of illustration, we will confine ourselves
to Class 1 —except for Subclass 2.M under 1.1.8— which can be
subdivided into the following three categories, depending on whe-
ther the verb must take a DO, can optionally take one or cannot:
428
1. Typically transitive verbs, i.e. those that must
have a DO:
a. l.A, the TVP or transitive verb phrase has the an
prefix and does not have the corresponding intransitive verb with
the jL prefix (see (6)d.);
b. l.A1, the TVP has the i prefix but not the corres-
ponding intransitive verb with the _i prefix (see (7)d.); and
c. l.B, the TVP has the an prefix and has the corres-
ponding intransitive verb with the i. prefix, but the latter can-
not co-occur with an Instrumental or with a Causal (see(8)a.).
With a verb from one of the above subclasses, Object
Incorporation cannot take place, as opposed to the last two:
d. l.C, the TVP has the an prefix (see (9)a.);
e. l.C', the TVP has the ^prefix (see (10)a.); and
where Object Incorporation can take place, as in (10)f. and g.
2. Optionally transitive verbs, i.e. those whose DO can
be left out:
a. l.D, the TVP has the an prefix and has the corres-
ponding intransitive verb with i, which can take an Instrumental
but not a Causal (see (11)d. and (11) e.);
b. l.E, the TVP has the an prefix and has the corres-
ponding transitive verb with _i, which cannot take an Instrumental
(see (12) e.), or a Causal (see (12) f.);
c. l.F, the TVP has the an prefix and the corresponding
intransitive verb with i, which cannot take an Instrumental (see
(13)e.), or a Causal (see (13)f.); however, with this Subclass,
there is a possibility of Object Incorporation (compare (13)h and
(13) i.);
429
d. l.G, the TVP with an has the corresponding intrans-
itive with i., which can take a Causal, but not an Instrumental
(see (14)d.);
e. l.H, the TVP with an has no corresponding intrans-
itive with i (see (15) d.).
With a verb from Subclass l.D to l.H, Object Incorpor-
ation cannot take place, as opposed to the next two:
f. 1.1, the intransitive verb has the an prefix (see
(16)); and
g. I.J., the intransitive verb has the i prefix (see
(17));
which result frcm Object incorporation.
3. Typically intransitive verbs, i.e. those which can-
not take a DO at all:
a. l.K, the intransitive verb has the an prefix, but
there exists no corresponding TVP (see (18));
b. l.L, the intransitive verb has the i^ prefix, but
there is no corresponding TVP (see (19));
c. 2.M, the intransitive verb is a root denoting a
State (see (20)); and
d. 2.M', the intransitive predicate is an adjective
(see (20') and (21)).
1.1.8 Distribution of Passive Affixes.
Hie distribution of the different passive affixes is as
follows:
430
1. With typically transitive verbs, as defined above,
and in the imperfective aspect:
a. with Subclasses l.A, l.A', and l.B, only no...ina
can be used (see (6) to (8)); however
b. with Subclasses l.C and l.C', which originally have
an Intermediary, but which undergo Object Incorporation, oily the
a form is possible (see (9) and (10)).
2. With optionally transitive verbs in the imperfective
aspect:
a. with Subclass l.D, no...ina is the passive form used
(see (11));
b. with Subclass l.E, there is a choice between no. .-
• ina and a (see (12)b. & (12)g.); and
c. with Subclass l.F, l.G, l.H, 1.1, and l.J, only the
a form of passive is used (see (13) to (17)).
3. With typically intransitive verbs in the imperfect-
ive aspect:
a. with Subclasses l.K and l.L, there is no possibility
of using no...ina nor a; only the circumstantial form an/i..-
.i/ana can be used (see (18) and (19));
b. with Subclass 2.M, if the corresponding intransitive
verb with the prefix exists, then it is possible to use the a
form to introduce the Agent (see (20)c.); otherwise, no...ina has
to be used (see (20')d. and (21) d.); and
c. with Subclasses 2.M and 2.M1, if the corresponding
active derivative with an exists, but not the intransitive verb
with i, then the no...ina affix can be used.

431
1.1.8.1 Illustrative Examples of Verbs in l.A to l.C*.

In this Section, Subclasses l.A to l.C', as defined
above, will be illustrated:
(6)a. N - an - dodona an'i Jeanne i Paoly. [l.A]
past-pref-hurry Jeanne Paul
"Paul was hurrying Jeanne."
b. No-dodona-n' i Paoly i Jeanne,
pass-hurry-by Paul Jeanne
"Jeanne was being hurried by Paul."
c. Voa-dodo-n' i Paoly i Jeanne,
pass-hurry-by Paul Jeanne
"Jeanne has been hurried by Paul."
d. *N-i-dodona i Jeanne.
past-pref-hurry Jeanne
"Jeanne hurried."
e. *N-a-dodona i Jeanne.
past-pass-hurry Jeanne
"Jeanne was being hurried."
(7)a. N-i-kendry ny varavarana i Paoly. [l.A']
past-pref-aim-at the window Paul
"Paul was aiming at the windcw."

432
b. NO-kendre-n' i Paoly ny varavarana.

pass-aim-at-by Paul the window
"The window was being aimed at by Paul."
c. Voa-kendr-in1 i Paoly ny varavarana.

pass-aim-at-by Paul the window
"The window has been aimed at by Paul."
a. *N-i-kendry i Paoly.
past-pref-aim-at Paul
*"Paul was aiming at."
e. *N-a-kendr-in' i Paoly ny varavarana.

past-pass-aim-at-by Paul the window
"The window was being aimed at by Paul."
(8) a. N-ana-pasaka ny ovy i Jeanne. [l.B]

past-pref-smash the potato Jeanne
"Jeanne was smashing the potatoes."
b. NO-pasah-an' i Jeanne ny ovy.

pass-smash-by Jeanne the potato
"The potatoes were being smashed by Jeanne."
c. Voa-pasak' i Jeanne ny ovy.

pass-smash-by Jeanne the potato
"The potatoes have been smashed by Jeanne."
433
d. N-i-pasaka ny ovy.
past-pref-smash the potato
"Hie potatoes burst open."
e. *N-a-pasak1 i Jeanne ny ovy.
past-pass-sraash-by Jeanne the potato
f. *N-i-pasaka tamin' ny sotro ny ovy.
past-pref-smash past-with the spoon the potato
g. *"Hie potatoes burst open with the spoon."
*N-i-pasaka ny òvy tamin' i Paoly.
past-pref-smash the potato because-of Paul
"Hie potatoes burst open because of Paul."
(9) a. N - an - doa ny vola i Paoly. [l.C]
past-pref-pay the noney Paul
"Paul was paying the money."
b. *No - loa- v-in' i Paoly ny vola.
pass-pay-by Paul the money
c. Voa-loa-n' i Paoly ny vola.
pass-pay-by Paul the money
"Hie money has been paid by Paul."
d. *N - i - loa ny vola.
past-pref-pay the money

434
e. N-a-loa-n' i Paoly ny vola.
past-pass-pay-by Paul the money
"Hie money was being paid by Paul."
f. N-an-doa vola i Paoly.
past-pref-pay money Paul

g.
"Paul was paying money."
N-anao loa vola i Paoly.
past-do payment money Paul
"Paul made a money payment."
(10) a. N - i - telina ny fanafody ny marary. [l.C1]
past-pref-swallow the medicine the patient
"Hie patient was swallowing the medicine."
b. *NO-telo-m-in' ny marary ny fanafody.
pass-swallcw-by the patient the medicine
c. Voa-teli-n' ny marary ny fanafody.
pass-swallcw-by the patient the medicine
"The medicine has been swallowed by the patient."
a. *N - i -telina ny marary.
past-pref-swallow the patient
*"Hie patient swallowed."

435
e. N-a-tel'i-n' ny marary ny fanafody.
past-pass-swallow-by the patient the medicine
"Hie medicine was being swallowed by the patient."
f. N-i-telina fanafody ny marary.
past-pref-swallcw medicine the patient
"Hie patient swallowed (some) medicine."
g. Nanao teli-noka ny marary.
past-do swallcwing-of-insect the patient
"Hie patient was gulping down (something)."
Hie grammatically pattern in (6), (7), and (8) suggests that
with Subclasses l.A, l.A', and l.B, only no...ina can be used, as
opposed to that found in (9), (10), and (11), where only the a
form of Affixal Passive is possible.
1.1.8.2 Illustrative Examples of Verbs in l.D to l.J.
Hie following sentences illustrate Subclasses l.D, l.E,
l.F, l.G, l.H, 1.1, and l.J:
(11)a. N-an-dalotra ny trano i Paoly. [l.D]
past-act-plaster the house Paul
"Paul was plastering the house."
b. No-lalor-in' i Paoly ny trano.
pass-plaster-by Paul the house
"Hie house was being plastered by Paul."

436
c. Voa-lalotr' i Paoly ny trano.

pass-plaster-by Paul the house
"The house has been plastered by Paul."
d. N-i-lalotra t-amin' ny loko ny trano.

past-pref-plaster past-with the paint the house
"The house was plastered with the paint."
e. *N-i-lalotra ny trano t-amin' i Paoly.

past-pref-plaster the house past-with Paul
*N-a-lalotr' i Paoly ny trano.

f. past-pref-plaster-by Paul the house
"Hie house was being plastered by Paul."
N-ana-tono ny hena i Jeanne. [l.E]

(12) a. past-pre f-barbecue the neat Jeanne
"Jeanne was barbecuing the meat."
No-tono-in' i Jeanne ny hena.

b. pass-barbecue-by Jeanne the meat
"The meat was being barbecued by Jeanne."
Voa-tono-n' i Jeanne ny hena.

c. pass-barbecue-by Jeanne the meat
"The neat has been barbecued by Jeanne."
437
d. N-i-tono ny hena.
past-pref-barbecue the meat
"The meat was in the state of having been barbecued."
e. *N-i-tono taraina vy ny hena.
past-pref-barbecue past-with iron the meat
"The meat was in the state of having been barbecued
with iron."
f. *N-i-tono ny hena tamin' i Jeanne,
past-pref-barbecue the meat past-with Jeanne
"Hie meat was in the state of having been barbecued

g-
because of Jeanne."
N-a-tono-n' i Jeanne ny hena.
past-pass-barbecue-by Jeanne the meat
"Hie meat was being barbecued by Jeanne."
(13) a. N-am-(p)etraka ny vola tao amin'ny banky Paoly.[l.F]
past-pref-put the money in the bank Paul
"Paul was putting the money into the bank."
b. *No-petraha-n' i Paoly tao amin'ny banky ny vola.
pass-put-by Paul in the bank the money
c. Voa-petrak' i Paoly tao amin'ny banky ny vola.
pass-put-by Paul into the bank the rroney
"Hie money has been deposited by Paul at the bank."

438
a. N-i-petraka tao amin'ny banky ny vola.
past-pref-put in the bank the money
"The noney was in deposit at the bank."
e. *N-i-petraka tao amin'ny banky tamin'ny lakile ny vola.
past-pref-put in the bank with the key the money
*"The money was in deposit at the bank with the key."
f. *N-i-petraka tao amin'ny banky ny vola tamin' i Paoly.
past-pref-put in the bank the money because-of Paul
"Hie noney was in deposit at the bank because of Paul."
g. N-a-petrak' i Paoly tao amin'ny banky ny vola.

past-pass-put-by Paul in the bank the money
"The money was being put into the bank by Paul."
h. N-am-(p)etraka vola tao amin'ny banky i Paoly.
past-pref-put money in the bank Paul
"Paul was putting (seme) money into the bank."
(same as (13)a.)
i. N-anao petra-bola tao amin'ny banky i Paoly.
past-do deposit-noney in the bank Paul
"Paul made a money deposit at the bank."
(14) a. N-an-dahatra ny mpianatra i Paoly. [1.6]
past-pref-line-up the pupils Paul
"Paul lined 15» the pupils."

439
b. *No-láhara-n1 i Paoly ny mpianatra.

pass-line-up-by Paul the pupils
"The pupils were being lined up by Paul."
c. Voa-lahatr' i Paoly ny mpianatra.
pass-line-up-by Paul the pupils
"The pupils have been lined up by Paul."
d. N-i-lahatra ny mpianatra noho i Paoly
past-pref-line-up the pupils because-of Paul
"The pupils lined up because of Paul"
/*tamin'ny tady.
with the rope
"with the rope."
e. N-a-lahatr' i Paoly ny mpianatra.
past-pass-line-up-by Paul the pupils
"The pupils were being lined up by Paul."
(15)a. N-an-dripaka ny fahavalo ny tafika. [l.H]
past-pref-destroy the enemy the array
"The array was destroying the enemy."
b. *No-ripah-an' ny tafika ny fahavalo.
pass-destroy-by the army the enemy

440
c. Voa-ripaky ny tafika ny fahavalo.

pass-destroy-by the array the enemy
"The enemy has been destroyed by the army."
d. *N-i-ripaka ny fahavalo.
past-pref-destroy the enemy
e. N-a-ripaky ny tafika ny fahavalo.

past-pass-destroy-by the army the enemy
"The enemy was being destroyed by the army."
f. Ripaky ny tafika ny fahavalo.

destroyed-by the ariny the enemy
"The enemy has been destroyed by the army."
(16)a. N-an-dainga i Paoly. [1.1]

past-pref-lie Paul
"Paul was lying."
b. N-anao lainga i Paoly.

past-do lie Paul
"Paul was making up (a) lie (s)."
c. N-anao lainga be i Paoly.

past-do lie big Paul
"Paul was making up (a) big lie(s)."
441
d. N-anao an'ilaý lainga be i Paoly.
past-do the lie big Paul
"Paul was making up the said lie(s)."
e. N-atao-n' i Paoly ilay lainga be.
past-pass-do-by Paul the lie big
"The big lie was being made up by Paul."
f. *No-tao-n' i Paoly ilay lainga be.
pass-do-by Paul the lie big
"The big lie was being made by Paul."
(17)a. N-i-fofofofo ny rivotra. [l.J]
past-blcw-violently the wind
"The wind was blowing violently."
b. N-anao f ofofofo ny rivotra.
past-do violence the wind
"There was (were) (a) violent gust(s) of wind."
c. N-a-fofofofo-n' i Paoly ny rivotra.
past-pass-violence-by Paul the wind
"The wind was made to blow violently by Paul," i.e.
"Paul was letting the wind blow violently."
d. *No-fofofofo-n' i Paoly ny rivotra.
pass-violence-by Paul the wind

442
Hie grammatically pattern shows that the generalization made un-
der 1.1.8 holds. The sentence (13)i. suggests that the apparent
DO vola "(some) noney" originates in some other case, here Geni-
tive, since we literally have "deposit of money," whereas if it
had the definite article n^, the underlying representation would
have been something like Nanao petraka tamin'ny vola i Paoly.
literally "Did deposit with the money Paul," i.e. "Paul made a
deposit with the money." Furthermore, the oily difference between
(12)b. with no...ina and (12)g. with a is that in the first case,
"Jeanne is actively engaged in the process of barbecuing the
meat," whereas in the second, "she just put it on the fire and
let it take care of itself," so to speak. Finally, in the a. ver-
sions of (16) and (17), we have intransitive verbs with an and jl
prefixes respectively, whereas in the b. versions, their unin-
corporated DOs show up; if the DOs are definite and get promoted
to Su position, as in (16) e. and (17) c., the a form of Affixal
Passive is used.
(
I,
1.1.8.3 Illustrative Examples of Verbs in l.K to 2.M'.
The following sentences illustrate Subclasses l.K, l.L,
2.M and 2.M':
(18)a. N-an-javona i Paoly. [l.K]
past-pref-disappear Paul
"Paul disappeared."
b. *N-an-javona ny mpianatra i Paoly.
past-pref-disappear the pupils Paul

443
c. *No-zavona-n1 i paoly ny mpianatra.

pass-disappear-by Paul the pupils
d. *N-a-zavona-n' i Paoly ny npianatra.

past-pass-disappear-by Paul the pupils
e. Omaly no n-an-javona-n1 i Paoly.

yesterday part past-circ-disappear-by Paul
"It was yesterday that Paul disappeared."
(19) a. N-i-lomano i Paoly. [l.L]

past-pref-swim Paul
"Paul was swiircning."
b. *N-i-lomano ny ranoniasina i Paoly.

past-pref-swim the sea Paul
*"Paul was swimming the sea."
c. *No-lomano-s-an' i Paoly ny ranomasina.

pass-swim-by Paul the sea
d. *N-a-lcmano-s-an' i Paoly ny rananasina.

past-pass-swim-by Paul the sea
e. Ny ranomasina no n-i-lomano-s-an' i Paoly.

the sea part past-circ-swim-by Paul
"It was in the sea that Paul was swimming."
444
(20) a. Latsaka ny taratasy. [2.M]
dropped the letter
"The letter is in the state of having been dropped.
a'. *Latsaka ny taratasy NP.
dropped the lètter NP
"Someone dropped the letter."
b. N-i-latsaka ny taratasy.
past-pref-dropped the letter
"The letter dropped."
c. N-a-latsak' i Paoly ny taratasy.
"The letter was being dropped by Paul," i.e.
a. *No-latsaha-n1 i Paoly ny taratasy.
(20")a. Rovitra ny taratasy. [2.M]
torn-up the letter
"Ihe letter is in the state of having been torn up.
*Rovitra ny taratasy NP.

a'.
torn-up the letter NP
"Someone tore up the letter."

445
b. *N-i-rovitra ny taratasy.
past-pref-torn-up the letter
c. *N-a-rovitr' i Paoly ny taratasy.
past-pass-torn-up-by Paul the letter
d. No-rovit-in' i Paoly ny taratasy.
pass-torn-up-by Paul the letter
"Hie letter was being torn up by Paul," i.e.
"Paul was tearing up the letter."
>l)a. Mainty ny volo. [2.M']
black the hair
"The hair is black."
a'. *Mainty ny volo NP.
black the hair NP
"Someone blackened the hair."
b. *N-i-mainty ny volo.
past-pref-black the hair
c. *N-a-mainti-n' i Paoly ny volo.
past-pass-black-by Paul the hair
d. NO-mainti-s-in' i Paoly ny volo.
pass-black-by Paul the hair
"Paul was dyeing the hair black."

446
The contrast in gramraticality between the a. and the b. versions
in (18) and (19) and that between the a. and the b. versions in
(20), (20'), and (21) suggests that these are typically intrans-
itive predicates, with Subclasses l.K and l.L, the granmaticaiity
pattern shows that only the circumstantial voice with an/i. .^j/-
ana is possible since only the e. versions of (18) and (19) are
granmatical. As for Subclass 2.M, the Affixal Passive with a is
possible only if the intransitive verb with the _i prefix corres-
ponding to the root passive, as in (20)b. but not in (20')b.,
exists. This is in conformity with what was stated under 1.1.8(2)
above.
1.2.1 Additional Parameters: Tense and Aspect.
As the tripartite division seen under 1.1.7 above sug-
gests, the cline between a typically transitive and a typically
intransitive verb is important. However, it is not the only
factor involved in the selection of the different passive forms.
It appears that the distribution of the affixes listed under 0.1
is also constrained by:
1. the perfective or imperfective aspect of the verb,
the latter being defined as in Comrie (1976a); and
2. the tense of the verb.
1.2.2 Prototypical Transitivity and Aspect.
If a verb is typically transitive —whether it has an
an or an i prefix— and furthermore, if it is in the imperfective
aspect, then it will take the no...i/ana circumfix:

447
(22)a. N-an-didy ny mofo i Jeanne.

past-pref-cut the bread Jeanne
"Jeanne was catting the bread."
b. Nò-didi-n' i Jeanne ny nofo
fa tsy voa-didi-ny.
but neg pass-cut-by-her
"The bread was being cut by Jeanne, but was not
successfully cut by her," i.e.
"Jeanne was trying to cut the bread, but in vain."
(23)a. N-i-jery ny mpianatra i Jeanne.
past-pref-seek the pupils Jeanne
"Jeanne was looking for the pupils."
b. Nò-jere-n' i Jeanne ny mpianatra
pass-seek-by Jeanne the pupils
fa tsy hita-ny.
but neg seen-by-her
"The pupils were being sought by Jeanne but not suc-
cessfully," i.e.
"Jeanne was trying to look for the pupils, but in
vain."
However, if a verb is transitive but in the perfective aspect/
then it will take the voa passive prefix:

448
(24) Voa-didi-n' i Jeanne ny mofo
"The bread has been cut by Jeanne,"
*fa tsy voa-didi-ny.
but neg pass-cut-by-her
"but in vain."
"The bread has been cut by Jeanne,*but has not been
cut."
1.2.3 Optional Transitivity and Aspect.
Now, if a verb is optionally transitive and is in the
imperfective aspect, then it will take the a passive prefix:
(25)a. N-i-janona i Jeanne,
past-pref-stop Jeanne
"Jeanne stopped (on her own)."
b. N-a-janon-n' i Paoly i Jeanne
past-pass-stop-by Paul Jeanne
fa tsy voa-jano-ny.
but neg pass-stop-by-him
"but in vain."
"Paul tried to leave Jeanne behind, but in vain."
However, if the optionally intransitive verb is in the perfective
aspect, then the relevant passive prefix is tafa;

449
(26) Tafa-janona (*i Paoly) i Jeanne
pass-stop (by Paul) Jeanne
"Jeanne was left behind,"
*fa tsy voa-jano-ny.
but neg pass-stop-by-him
"but in vain."
"Jeanne was left behind, *but was not left behind."
In (26), the Agent cannot be expressed at all since the sequence
comprising the genitive NP i Paoly is ungrammatical (also see
Chapter One, Section 2.2.2.2).
1.2.4 Suirmary: Distribution of the Passive Affixes.
The above information in 1.2.2 and 1.2.3 is summarized
on Table 11:
Table 11
Distribution of the Different Verbal Affixes
Transitive Verb Intransitive Verb
Active Imperfective -an-/-i- -i-
Passive Imperfective no. ..i/ana -a-
Perfective voa- tafa-

450
1.2.5 The Semantics of Passive Affixes.
As was stated under 0.1(1.a.), both elements in the
circumfix no...ina can be left out altogether or cxily ina shows
up. this yields the following situation:
1. On the one hand (see 1.2.6):
a. when the verb is a root, i.e. the bare form with no
affix, it denotes a State or Autonomous Event, i.e. without an
Agent, or is Abilitative with one;
b. when the verb is a root which can take the tafa pre-
fix, it acquires the meaning of Abilitative or Accidental; and
c. when other affixes go on the verb, then it denotes a
Deliberate Activity.
2. On the other hand (see 1.2.7):
a. when the verb only has the ina suffix, it refers to
a Habitual Activity or Event if there is no Agent, but if there
is one, then it refers to an ongoing Activity or Event or even
something imminent; and
b. when the verb has no...ina, it refers to the equi-
valent of the English past tense or even the immediate past, as
opposed to ho...ina, which refers to the future.
1.2.6 Illustrative Examples for Case 1.
The following examples illustrate case 1 made under
1.2.5 above:
(27)a. Loka ny biriky. [State]
with-hole the brick
"The brick has a hole in it."

451
b. Efa loka ny biriky fa tsy nisy n-an-doka.

already with-hole the brick but neg there past-hole
"The brick already had a hole in it/ but no one made
it."
c. *Fanahy inian' i Paoly loka ny biriky.

deliberately-by Paul with-hole the brick
"Paul deliberately made a hole in the brick."
(28)a. N-i-tombona i Paoly (noho i Jaona).

past-pref-fall Paul (because-of John)
"Paul fell (because of John)."
b. Tafa-tombona (tsy satry) i Paoly. [Accidental]

pass-fall (neg deliberately) Paul
"Paul fell (inadvertently)."
c. *Fanahy inian' i Paoly ny tafa-tonibona.

deliberately-by Paul camp pass-fall
*"Paul fell inadvertently and deliberately."
(29) a. Loka-n' i Paoly ny biriky. [Abilitative]

with-hole-by Paul the brick
"Paul made a hole in the brick," or
"Paul managed to make a hole in the brick."
b. N-aha-loka ny biriky i Paoly.

past-caus-with-hole the brick Paul
"Paul managed to make a hole in the brick."
452
(30)a. Zaka-n' i Paoly ny entana. [Abilitative]
bearable-by Paul the luggage
"Paul oould carry the luggage," or
(31) a. No-lQh(a)-an' i Paoly ny biriky. [Activity]
pass-with-hole-by Paul the brick
"Paul was making a hole in the brick."
b. Fanahy inian' i Paoly no-loh(a)-ana ny biriky.
deliberately-by Paul pass-^with-hole the brick
"Paul was deliberately making a hole in the brick."
The sentence (27) does not have an Agent, therefore, the bare
form denotes a State/Autonomous Event, as opposed to (29) a. and
(30)a., which do have an Agent and which have the Abilitative
interpretation; the sequence (28)b. shows the Accidental meaning,
although tafa in tafa-tsangana, for example, translates into
"managed to stand up." In (31), with both no and an (a), the verb
denotes a Deliberate Activity.
1.2.7 Illustrative Exarrples for Case 2.
The following examples illustrate case 2 under 1.2.5:
(32)a. (Tokony) ho-kapch-ina ny zaza maditra.
should fut-pass-strike the child unruly
"Unruly children (must) receive corporal punishment."

453
b. (Tokony) no-kapdh-ina ny zaza maditra.
should past-pass-strike the child unruly
"Hie unruly children (should) have received corporal
punishment."
(33)a. Kapoh-in'i Paoly amin'ny fehikibo ny zaza maditra.
strike-by Paul with the belt the child unruly
"Paul is in the process of administering corporal
punishment to the unruly children," or
"Paul is about to administer corporal punishment to
the unruly children."
b. No-kapch-in' i Paoly tamin'ny fehikibo ny zaza maditra.
past-strike-by Paul with the belt the child unruly
"Paul was administering corporal punishment to the un-
ruly children."
c. Ho-kapoh-in' i Paoly amin'ny fehikibo ny zaza maditra.
fut-strike-by Paul with the belt the child unruly
"Paul will be administering corporal punishment to the
unruly children."
First, the examples (32) and (33) contrast with (l)a. under 1.1.1
above in that the latter is ungraiimatical, whereas the first two
are perfectly grammatical. However, all three share the same
characteristic in that they are not root verbs and, as a result
of this, the passive affixes are mandatory, as opposed to the
case seen in (29)a. and (31)a., where the affixes are optional
454
since we have a root passive to start with . Furthermore, the
prefix no encodes the past tense, as can be seen in (33)b., and
differs from ho, which can replace it, in that the latter refers
to the future, as is quite apparent in (33)c.
1.3.1 Relevance of the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy.
As explained above under 1.0(3), it is possible to
promote any NP occupying anyone of the semantic/syntactic pos-
itions from DO down to Source-Oblique to Su. In the process, the
NP loses its preposition, but the equivalent information is en-
coded oi the verb itself. First, it will be shown that the Obli-
que encompasses a number of positions, then the order of these
different types of Oblique will be investigated.
1.3.2 Order of the Different 'types of Oblique.
Assuming the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy and leaving aside
the Goal-Oblique, we have the following types of Oblique in Mala-
gasy:
1. Intermediary
2. Instrument
3. Directional
4. Beneficiary
5. Manner
6. Locative
7. Temporal
8. Source
9. Ccmitative
10. Causal
455
in the order just stated.
1.3.2.1 Case-Marking and the Active Voice.
In the active voice, the following prepositions mark
the different cases on the noun. When the Intermediary is a com-
iron NP, whether it is definite or not, there is no preposition
accompanying it, as can be seen in (13)a. and (13)h. above. Fur-
thermore, we have:
(34) N-an-(t)ohana ny fiara tamin'ny vato i Paoly.
past-act-block the car Instr the stone Paul
"Paul was blocking the car with the stone."
(35) N-an-daka ny baolina tamin'ny loha-ny
past-act-kick the ball with the head-his
"(Paul) was kicking the ball with his head"
ho ao amin'ny but i Paoly.
Direct the goal Paul
"into the goal."
(36) N-an-ome an'ilay mofo tamin-kafaliana/
past-act-give the bread Manner joy/
"(Jeanne) was giving the bread with joy/"
0 haingana ho an'ny mpiasa i Jeanne.
Manner quick Benef the worker Jeanne
"quickly for the worker(s)."

456
(37) N-i-asa tsara i Paoly tany Antsirabe.
past-act-work well Paul Loc Antsirabe
"Paul was working well at Antsirabe."
(38) N-i-anatra tao Antsirabe 0 taloha/
past-act-study Loc Antsirabe Temp previously
"(Paul) was studying at Antsirabe previously/
tamin'io fotoana io i Paoly.
Terrp this time this Paul
"at that time."
(39) N-an-dre an'ity vaovao ity avy
past-act-heard this news this coming from
"(Paul) heard this news from "
tany Toamasina omaly i Paoly.
Loc Tamatave yesterday Paul
"Tamatave yesterday."
(40) N-i-ainga avy tao Antsirabe
past-act-leave coming from Loc Antsirabe
" (Jeanne) departed from Antsirabe"
n-iaraka tamin' i Paoly i Jeanne.
past-accompany Comit Paul Jeanne
"with Paul."
457
(41) N-i-ainga n-iaraka tamin' i Bozy i Paoly
past-leave past-accompany Comit Bozy Paul

"Paul left with Bozy'•n
noho i Jeanne.
because-of Jeanne
"because of Jeanne.ii
In (34), the underlined NP represents an Instrument-Oblique; in
(35), it is a Directional; in (36), the preposition tamina is
optional with a Manner-Oblique, but obligatory with a Benefici-
ary. The underlined NP in (37) is a Locative, and in (38), it is
a Terrporal-Oblique; in (39), we have a root verb avy "coming"
combining with an ordinary Locative tany for Source-Oblique; in
(40), we have the verb miaraka "to accompany" in the past tense
with the general preposition (t)amin(a), also in the past tense,
as marked by the presence of the tense-prefix Jt. Finally, in
(41), noho "because of" signals a Causal-Oblique.
The following sentences show that indeed verbs are used
instead of prepositions for Source and Comitative Obliques:
(39') Avy t-any Toamasina i Paoly.
coming past-there Tamatave Paul
(portion of (39))
"Paul came from Tamatave.ii

458
(40') N-i-araka t-amin' i Paoly i Jeanne.
past-go past-with Paul Jeanne
(portion of (40))
ii
'Jeanne accompanied Paul."
1.3.2.2 Criteria for Setting up Different Types of Oblique.
In the active voice, the position of the Oblique NP
relative to Su —whether to its left or to its right— (in con-
junction with the preposition used as well as the possibility of
Clefting) allows us to differentiate ten types of Oblique. Thus:
(42)a. N-an-defa an' i Jaona i Paoly.
past-send John Paul
"Paul was sending John."
b. *N-an-defa i Jaona i Paoly.
past-send John Paul
"Paul was sending John.ii
(43)a. N-an-(t)ohana ny fiara tamin'ny vato i Paoly.
past-block the car with the stone Paul
(same as (34))
"Paul was blocking the car with the stone.n
b. *N-an-(t)ohana ny fiara i Paoly tamin'ny vato.
past-block the car Paul with the stone
"Paul was blocking the car...with the stone."

459
(44) a. H-an-deha ho any Toamasina i Paoly.

fut-go to Tamatave Paul
"Paul will be going to Tamatave."
b. H-an-deha i Paoly ho any Toamasina.

fut-go Paul to Tamatave
"Paul will go to Tamatave."
(45) a. N-i-tondra mofo ho an'ny npiasa i Jeanne,

past-bring bread for the worker Jeanne
"Jeanne was bringing bread for the worker(s)."
b. N-i-tondra nofo i Jeanne ho an'ny mpiasa.

past-bring bread Jeanne for the worker
"Jeanne was bringing bread for the worker(s)."
(46) a. N-i-laza ny vaovao tamin'alahelo lehibe i Paoly.

past-tell the news with grief big Paul
"Paul was announcing the news with great sorrow."
b. N-i-laza ny vaovao i Paoly tamin'alahelo lehibe.

past-tell the news Paul with grief big
"It was with great sorrow that Paul was announcing
the news."
(47) a. N-ana-tono ny hena tao amin'ny lakozy i Jeanne,

past-barbecue the meat in the kitchen Jeanne
"Jeanne was barbecuing the meat in the kitchen."
460
b. N-ana-tono ny hena i Jeanne tao amin'ny lakozy.

past-barbecue the meat Jeanne in the kitchen
"Jeanne was barbecuing the meat in the kitchen
(emphasis)."
(48) a. N-an-ohatra ny akanjo tamin'ny alakamisy i Jeanne,

past-try-on the robe on the thursday Jeanne
"Jeanne was trying the robes on on Thursday."
b. N-an-ohatra ny akanjo i Jeanne tamin'ny alakamisy.

past-try-on the robe Jeanne on the thursday
"On Thursday, Jeanne was trying the robes on."
(49) a. N-i-ainga avy tany Toamasina tamin'ny fito i Paoly.

past-leave from Tamatave at the seven Paul
"Paul departed from Tamatave at seven."
b. N-i-ainga tamin'ny fito i Paoly avy tany Toamasina.

past-leave at the seven Paul from Tamatave
"Paul left at seven from Tamatave."
(50) a. N-an-deha niaraka tamin'i Paoly i Jeanne,

past-go with Paul Jeanne
"Jeanne was leaving with Paul."
b. ?*N-an-deha i Jeanne niaraka tamin'i Paoly.

past-go Jeanne with Paul
"Jeanne was leaving with Paul."
461
(51) a. N-an-defa ny entana i Jeanne noho i Paoly.
past-send the luggage Jeanne because-of Paul
"Paul was sending the luggage because of Paul."
b. *N-an-defa ny entana noho i Paoly i Jeanne,
past-send the luggage because-of Paul Jeanne
"Jeanne was sending the luggage off because of Paul."
If the Oblique NP is an Intermediary, as in (42)b., or an Instru-
ment, as in (43)b., then it cannot be moved to the right of Su.
But, if it is a Directional, as in (44), or a Beneficiary, as in
(45), then it can be noved to the right of Su. Now, if it is a
Manner-Oblique, as in (46), or a Locative, as in (47), then it
can be moved to the right of Su, although in the latter position,
it carries with it some emphasis; therefore, this is the Marked
position. If the Oblique NP is Temporal, as in (48), its Unmarked
position is after the Su, although it can be reordered in front
of Su, in which case, there is a pause after the DO ny akanjo;
this, therefore, is the Marked position. In the case of Source-
Oblique, as in (49), or a Comitative-Oblique, as in (50), the
marker is a verb and the Oblique NP can always show up after the
Su, either as an afterthought or for the purposes of emphasis:
there must be a pause after the Su, for the utterance to be ac-
ceptable, but even then, as can be seen in (50) b., native speak-
ers'judgments vary. Finally, if the Oblique NP is a Causal, then
it can oily occur after Su, as can be deduced from the grammati-
cality pattern emerging from (51).

462
1.3.2.3 additional Tests.
The above distinction is corroborated by the possibi-
lity or impossibility of Clefting, with or without retention of
the preposition:
(52)a. Nanolotra an' i Jaona an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-hand John Jeanne Paul
"Paul was handing John to Jeanne."
b. *(*An) i Jaona no nanolotra an'i Jeanne i Paoly.

John part past-hand Jeanne Paul
(53)a. Nandoto ny ankanjony tamin'ny fotaka ny ankizy.

past-dirty the clothes-their with the mud the child
"The children were dirtying their clothes with mud."
b. (Tamin')ny fotaka no nandoto ny akanjony ny ankizy.
with the mud part past-dirty the cl.-their the ch.
"It is with the mud the children were dirtying their
clothes."
(54)a. Nandefa vola ho any amin'ny ankizy i Jeanne,
past-send money to the child Jeanne
"Jeanne was sending money to the children."
b. *(*Ho any amin')ny ankizy no nandefa vola i Jeanne.
to the child part past-send money Jeanne
"It is to the children that Jeanne was sending money."

463
(55) a. Nandoko ny trano ho an'ny namany i Paoly.

past-paint the house for the friend-his Paul
"Paul was painting the house for his friend."
b. *(*Ho an')ny namany no nandoko ny trano i Paoly.

for the friend-his part past-paint the house Paul
"It was for his friend Paul was painting the house."
(56)a. Nandeha tamim-pilaminana ny mpianatra.

past-go with-quiet the student(s)
"The students were leaving quietly."
b. ?*(Tamim-)pilaminana no nandeha ny mpianatra.

with quiet part past-go the student(s)
"It was with calm that the students were leaving."
(57) a. Nanindrona ny ankizy tao amin'ny efitra i Paoly.

past-give-shots the child in the room Paul
"Paul was giving shots to the children in the roan."
b. *(Tao amin')ny efitra no nanindrona ny ankizy i Paoly.

in the room part past-give-shot the child Paul
"It was in the room that Paul was giving shots to the
children."
(58)a. Nanohatra ny akanjo i Jeanne tamin'io andro io.

past-try-on the robe Jeanne on this day this
"Jeanne was trying the robes on that day."
464
:
b. (Tamin')io andro io no nanohatra ny akanjo i Jeanne
on this day this part past-try-on the robe Jeanne
"It was that day Jeanne was trying the robes on."
(59)a. Niainga avy tany Toamasina i Paoly.
past-leave from Tamatave Paul
"Paul was departing frcni Tamatave."
r
b. (Avy tany) Toamasina no niainga i Paoly.
from Tamatave part past-leave Paul
"It was from Tamatave that Paul was leaving."
(60)a. Nandeha niaraka tamin'i Paoly i Jeanne,

past-go with Paul Jeanne
"Jeanne was accompanying Paul."
b. t(*Niaraka tamin') i Paoly no nandeha i Jeanne.

with Paul part past-go Jeanne
"It was Paul that Jeanne was accompanying."
(61) a. Nandefa ny entana i Jeanne noho i Paoly.
past-send the luggage Jeanne because-of Paul
"Jeanne was sending the luggage because of Paul."
b. *(*Noho) i Paoly no nandefa ny entana i Jeanne,
because-of Paul part past-send the luggage Jeanne
"It was because of Paul that Jeanne was sending the
luggage."
465
in (52) t we have an Intermediary an'i Jaona which cannot be
clefted, whether the preposition is retained or deleted; in (53),
the Instrument tamin'ny fotaka "with the mud" can be optionally
clefted and if clefted, the preposition can be dropped or retain-
ed optionally; in (54), the Directional ho any amin'ny ankizy
cannot be clefted at all; likewise for the Beneficiary ho an'ny
namany in (55); cleftlng on a Manner-Oblique does not yield a
very good sentence, as can be seen in (56), even when the prepo-
sition is retained; from (57) to (59), we respectively have a
locative, a Temporal, and a Source, and Clefting is Optional
although retention of the relevant preposition is obligatory;
finally, (60) and (61) show that it is impossible to cleft on a
Comitative or on a Causal Oblique.
1.4.1 Case-Marking and the Passive Voice.
In the case of passive structures, the information
which was available with the noun is encoded in the verb so that
the distribution of the different passive affixes along with
Clefting should also allow us to distinguish between the ten
types of Oblique. That indeed seems to be the case since each
syntactic/semantic position has its own features with the pos-
sible exception of Manner and Causal.
1.4.2 The Relevant Examples.
The following set of sentences provide all the relevant
features needed to determine whether our distinction between the
ten different types of Oblique holds in passive structures, as
was shown to be the case for their active counterparts:

466
(62) a. N-a-tolotr' i Paoly an'i Jeanne i Jaona.

past-pass-hand-by Paul Jeanne John
"John was being handed to Jeanne by Paul."
b. (*An) i Jaona no n-a-tolotr' i Paoly an'i Jeanne.

John part past-pass-hand-by Paul Jeanne
"It was John that was being handed to Jeanne by Paul."
(63)a. N-an-doto-an' ny ankizy ny akanjo-ny ny fotaka.

past-circ-dirt-by the child the clothes-their the mud
"The mud was being used by the children to dirty their
clothes."
b. (Tamin') ny fotaka no n-an-doto-an' ny ankizy

with the mud part past-circ-dirt-by the child
ny akanjo-ny.
the clothes-their
"It was with the mud that the children were dirtying
their clothes."
(64) a. N-an-defa-s-an' i Jeanne vola ny ankizy.

past-circ-send-by Jeanne money the child
"Hie children were being sent money by Jeanne."
b. (*Ho any amin') ny ankizy no n-an-defa-s-an'

to the child part past-circ-send-by
467
i Jeanne vola.
Jeanne money
"It was to the children that money was being sent by

Jeanne."
(65)a. 7?*N-an-doko-an' i Paoly ny trano ny nama-ny.
past-circ-paint-by Paul the house the friend-his
"Paul was painting for his friend(s)."
b. (Ho an1) ny namany ho n-andoko-an'
for the friend-his part past-circ-paint-by
i Paoly ny trano.
Paul the house
"It was for his friend that Paul was painting the
house."
(66)a. *tf-an-ome-z-an1 i Jeanne mofo ho an'ny mpiasa
past-circ-give-by Jeanne bread for the worker
ny hafalia-ny.
the joy-her
"Jeanne was giving bread for the workers out of joy."
b. *(Tamin-)kafaliana no n-an-ome-z-an' i Jeanne
with joy part past-circ-give-by Jeanne
nofo ho an'ny mpiasa.
bread for the worker

468
"It was with joy that Jeanne was giving bread for
the workers."
(67) a. ?*N-an-indro-n-an' i Paoly ny ankizy ny efitra.

past-circ-give-shot-by Paul the child the room
"The room was where the children were being given
shots by Paul."
b. *(Tao amin1) ny efitra no n-an-indro-n-an1

in the room part past-circ-give-shot-fcy
i Paoly ny ankizy.
Paul the children
"It was in the room that the children were being
given shots by Paul."
(68) a. N-an-ohar-an' i Jeanne ny akanjo io andro io.

past-circ-try-on-by Jeanne the robe this day this
"that was the day when Jeanne was trying the robes
an."
b. (Tamin')io andro io no n-an-ohar-an'

on this day this part past-circ-try-on-by
i Jeanne ny akanjo.
Jeanne the robe
"It was on that day that Jeanne was trying on the
robes."
469
(69) a. *N-i-aing(a)-anI i Paoly Toamasina.
past-circ-depart-by Paul Tamatave
"Tamatave was where Paul departed from."
b. (Avy tany) Toamasina no n-i-aing(a)-an' i Paoly.
from Tamatave part past-circ-depart-by Paul
"It was from Tamatave that Paul departed."
(70)a. *N-i-araka tamin' i P no n-an-deha-n-an' i J.

past-act-go with P part past-circ-go-by J
"J left with P."
b. *(*N-i-araka tamin') i P no n-an-deha-n-an'i J.
past-act-go with P part past-circ-go-by J
"It was with P that J left."
(71)a. *N-an-defa-s-an' i Jeanne ny entana i Paoly.
past-circ-send-by Jeanne the luggage Paul
"Paul was being sent the luggage by Jeanne."
b. *(Noho) i Paoly no n-an-defa-s-an'i Jeanne ny entana.
because Paul part past-circ-send-by J. the luggage
luggage."
in (62), the verb has the a form of Affixal Passive and the no.-
-•-•ina form would yield an ungrammatical sequence (this holds true
°f all the sentences from (62) to (71)); the grarrmaticality pat-

470
tern in (62) suggests that Clefting is optional since (62)a. with
no Clefting and the version of (62) b. not comprising the prepo-
sition an are perfectly grammatical. For (63), Clefting is op-
tional since both (63) a. without Clefting and (63) b. with Cleft-
ing are grammatical; the preposition tamin' can be retained
optionally, as indicated by the graitmaticality of both sequences
in (63). In (64), Clefting is optional, as is apparent in the
graitmaticality pattern, although the sequence in (64)b. compris-
ing the prepositional phrase ho any amin is ruled out, which
shows that the preposition cannot be retained. In (65), Clefting
is preferred, judging from the awkwardness of (65)a., whereas the
possibility of both sequences in (65)b., i.e. with or without the
relevant prepositional phrase, indicates that the latter is
optional. In (66), Clefting with preposition retention is oblig-
atory. In (67), Clefting is preferred, and the preposition,
obligatory. In (68), Clefting is optional, and the preposition,
optional. As for (69), Clefting is obligatory, but the prepo-
sition, optional. Hie granmaticality pattern emerging from (70)
indicates that Clefting is impossible, whether the preposition is
retained or not. Finally, for (71), Clefting is obligatory, and
the preposition must be retained. Note that the different types
of Oblique show up in the sentences from (62) to (71) in the
order given under 1.3.2 above.
1.4.3 Promotion to Su and Distribution of Passive Affixes.
Hie following data show the correlation between the
type of Oblique which is promoted to Su and the Affix which can
go on the verb:
471
(72) a. *No-tolor-an' i Paoly an' i Jeanne i Jaona.
pass-hand-by Paul Jeanne John
(compare with (52))
"John was being handed by Paul to Jeanne."
b. N-a-tolotr' i Paoly an'i Jeanne i Jaona.
past-pass-hand-by Paul Jeanne John
(same as (62)a.)
"John was being handed by Paul to Jeanne."
c. *(*fln) i Jaona no n-an-(t)olor-an' i Paoly an'i Jeanne.
John part past-circ-hand-by Paul Jeanne
"It was Paul who was being handed by Paul to Jeanne."
*No-toha-n-an' i Paoly ny fiara ny vato.

(73) a.
pass-block-by Paul the car the stone
"the stone was being used by Paul to block the car."
b. N-a-toha-n' i Paoly ny fiara ny vato.
past-pass-block-by Paul the car the stone
(compare with (43))
"The stone was used by Paul to block the car."
c. N-an-(t)oh(a)-an' i Paoly ny fiara ny vato.
past-circ-block-by Paul the car the stone
(compare with (34))
"The stone was used by Paul to block the car."

472
(74)a. *No-lefa-s-an'i Jeanne vola ny ankizy.
pass-send-by Jeanne money the child
"The children were being sent money by Jeanne."
b. *N-a-lefa-n' i Jeanne vola ny ankizy.
past-pass-send-by Jeanne money the child
"The children were sent money by Jeanne."
c. N-an-defa-s-an' i Jeanne vola ny ankizy.
past-circ-send-by Jeanne money the child
(same as (64)a.)
"The children were being sent money by Jeanne."
(75) a. *Nb-loko-in' i Paoly ny trano ny nama-ny.
pass-paint-by Paul the house the friend-his
"Paul was painting the house for his friend(s)."
b. *N-a-loko-n' i Paoly ny trano ny nama-ny.
past-pass-paint-by Paul the house the friend-his
"Paul painted the house for his friend(s)."
c. (Ho an') ny nama-ny no n-an-doko-an1
for the friend-his part past-circ-paint-by
i Paoly ny trano.
Paul the house
(same as (65) b.)
"It was for his friend(s) that Paul was painting
the house."
473
(76) a. *Tamin-kafaliana no n(o)-cme-n' i Jeanne mofo
with joy part past-give-by Jeanne bread
ho an'ny itpiasa.
for the worker
the workers."
b. *Tamin-kafaliana no n-a-(o)me-n' i Jeanne mofo
with joy part past-pass-give-by Jeanne bread
ho an'ny mpiasa.
for the worker.
the workers."
c. Tamin-kafaliana no n-an-ome-z-an' i Jeanne mofo
with joy part past-circ-give-by Jeanne bread
ho an'ny mpiasa.
for the worker
the workers."
(77)a. •**Nò-tsindrom-in' i Paoly ny ankizy ny efitra.
pass-<jive-shot-by Paul the child the room
"The room was where the children were being given shots
by Paul."
474
b. **N-a-tsindro-n' i Paoly ny ankizy ny efitra.
past-pass-give-shot-by Paul the child the room
"The room was where the children were being given shots
by Paul."
c. ?*N-an-(ts-)indron-an' i Paoly ny ankizy ny efitra.
past-circ-give-shot-by Paul the child the room
(see (67)a.)
"It was in the room that the children were being given
shots by Paul."
(78)a. *NO-har-in' i Jeanne ny akanjo io andro io.
pass-try-on-by Jeanne the robe this day this
(see (68)a.)
"That was the day when Jeanne was trying the robes on."
b. *N-a-ohatr1 i Jeanne ny akanjo io andro io.
past-pass-try-on-by Jeanne the robe this day this
c. N-an-ohar-an' i Jeanne ny akanjo io andro io.

past-circ-try-on-by Jeanne the robe this day this
(79)a. *Avy tany Toamasina no no-aing-an' i Paoly.
from Tamatave part pass-leave-by Paul

475
b. *Avy tany Toamasina no n-a-(a)ing-an' i Paoly.
from Tamatave part past-pass-leave-by Paul
c. Avy tany Toamasina no n-i-aing-an' i Paoly.
from Tamatave part past-circ-leave-by Paul
(see (69)b.)
(80)a. *Niaraka tamin'i Paoly no no-leha-n'i Jeanne,
with Paul part pass-go-by Jeanne
(see (70)a.)
"It was with Paul that Jeanne departed."
b. *Niaraka tamin'i Paoly no n-a-leha-n' i Jeanne.
with Paul part past-pass-go-by Jeanne
c. *Niaraka tamin'i Paoly no n-an-deha-n-an'i Jeanne.
with Paul part past-circ-go-by Jeanne
(see (70)b.)
(81) a. *Noho i Paoly no no-lefa-s-an1 i Jeanne ny entana.
because-of Paul part pass-send-by Jeanne the luggage
(see (71)a.)
luggage."
476
b. *Noho i Paoly no n-a-lefa-s-an' i Jeanne ny entana
because-of P. part past-pass-send-by J. the luggage
luggage."
c. Noho i Paoly no n-an-defa-s-an' i Jeanne ny entana.
because-of P. part past-circ-send-by J. the luggage
(see (71) b.)
luggage."
In (72), an Intermediary-Oblique NP has been promoted to Su posi-
tion and the verb can take the a form of Affixal Passive, as is
indicated tsy the grammaticality of the sentence (72) b. The un-
granmaticality with the sequence (72) c. with the circumstantial
form of Passive, i.e. with the circumfix an...an, shows the cor-
relation between promotion of an Intermediary-Oblique to Su and
the occurrence of the a form of Passive on the verb. In (73), it
is an Instrument-Oblique which occupies the Su position and the
verb can optionally take either the a form, as in (73)b., or the
an...an circumstantial form of Affixal Passive, as in (73)c. In
all of the remaining sentences, except for the Garnitative, as
shown in (80)c., which is irretrievably ungranniatical, the cir-
cumstantical form of Affixal Passive is mandatory, judging from
the grammaticality patterns found in (74), with a Directional NP
as Su; in (76), with a Manner NP as Su; in (77), with a locative
as Su; in (78), with a Temporal as Su; in (79), with a Source as
Su; and finally, in (81), with a Causal as Su.

477
1.5.1 Relative Order of the Different Types of Oblique.
Hie following data show that the different types of
Oblique have the order made explicit under 1.3.2:
(82)a. N-an-(t)ohana ny fiara tamina vato i Paoly.
past-pref-block the car with stone Paul
Intermediary Instrument
"Paul was blocking the car with a stone."
b. *N-an-(t)dhana tamina vato ny fiara i Paoly.
past-pref-block Instrument Intermediate
"Paul was blocking with a stone the car."
(83)a. N-an-daka ny baolina tamin'ny loha-ny
past-pref-kick the ball with the head-his
Instrument
"(Paul) was "kicking" the ball with his head"
ho ao amin'ny but i Paoly.
into the goal Paul
Directional
(same as (35))
"Paul was "kicking" the ball with his head into the
goal."
b. *N-an-daka ny baolina ho tao amin'ny but
past-pref-kick the ball into the goal
Directional
478
tamin'ny loha-ny i Paoly.

with the head-his Paul
Instrumental
"Paul was "kicking" the ball into the goal with his
head."
(84)a. N-an-defa mofo ho any Toamasina ho an'ny npiasa

past-pref-send bread to Tamatave for the worker
Directional Beneficiary
i Jeanne.
Jeanne
"Jeanne was sending bread to Tamatave for the workers.
b. *N-an-defa mofo ho an'ny mpiasa ho any Toamasina

past-pref-send bread for the worker to Tamatave
I
Beneficiary Directional
i Jeanne.
Jeanne
"Jeanne was sending bread for the workers to Tamatave.
(85)a. *N-an-ome an'ilay mofo tamin-kafaliana

past-pref-give the bread with-joy
Manner
ho an'ny mpiasa i Jeanne.
for the worker Jeanne
Beneficiary
"Jeanne was giving the bread with joy for the workers
479
b. N-an-ome an'ilay mofo ho an'ny mpiasa
past-pref-give the bread for the worker

Beneficiary
tamin-kafaliana i Jeanne,
with-joy Jeanne
Manner
"Jeanne was giving bread for the workers with joy.
(86) a. N-i-asa tsara i Paoly tany Antsirabe.
past-pref-work well Paul at Antsirabe
Manner locative
"Paul was working well at Antsirabe."
b. *N-i-asa tany Antsirabe tsara i Paoly.
past-pref-work at Antsirabe well Paul
Locative Manner
"Paul was working at Antsirabe well."
(87) a. N-i-anatra tao Antsirabe taloha i Paoly.

past-pref-study at Antsirabe previously Paul
Locative Temporal
"Paul was studying at Antsirabe previously."
b. *N-i-anatra taloha tao Antsirabe i Paoly.

past-pref-study previously at Antsirabe Paul
Temporal Locative
"Paul was studying previously at Antsirabe."
480
(88)a. Nandre ny vaovao avy tany Toamasina omaly i Paoly.

heard the news front Tamatave yesterday p.
Source Temporal
"Paul heard the news from Tamatave yesterday."
b. *Nandre ny vaovao omaly avy tany Toamasina i Paoly.
heard the news yesterday from Tamatave P.
Temporal Source
"Paul heard the news yesterday front Tamatave."
(89)a. Niainga avy tany Toamasina niaraka tamin'i Jaona
departed from Tamatave with J.
Source Comitative
i Paoly noho i Jeanne.
Paul because-of Jeanne
Causal
"Paul departed from Tamatave with John because of
Jeanne."
b. Niainga niaraka tamin'i Jaona avy tany Toamasina
departed with John from Tamatave
Comitative Souce
i Paoly noho i Jeanne.
Paul because-of Jeanne
Causal
"Paul departed with John from Tamatave because of
Jeanne."
481
c. *Niainga noho i Jeanne avy tany Toamasina
departed because-of Jeanne from Tamatave
Causal Source
niaraka tamin' i Jaona i Paoly.
with John Paul
Comitative
"Paul departed because of Jeanne from Tamatave with
John."
d. *Niainga noho i Jeanne niaraka tamin'i Jaona
departed because-of Jeanne with John
Causal Comitative
avy tany Toamasina i Paoly.
from Tamatave Paul
Source
"Paul departed because of Jeanne with John from

Tamatave."
Hie grammatically pattern in (82) shows that Intermediary pre-
cedes Instrument; that in (83) suggests that the latter precedes
Directional, which in turn precedes Beneficiary since we have a
minimal pair in (84) in the relevant interpretation of the b. se-
quence. The sentences from (85) to (87) prove that a Beneficiary
precedes Manner, that Manner precedes Locative, and that Locative
precedes Temporal. In (88), since the a. sequence is grammatical
and the b. sentence ungrammatical, it can only be inferred that

482
Source precedes Temporal. The grammaticality pattern found in
(89) shows that Source precedes Comitative since (89)a. is the
Unmarked structure: oily two pauses are necessary, one after
Comitative, and another after the Su, as opposed to (89)b., where
a total of four pauses are indispensable, i.e. one after niainga,
another after Comitative, a third after Source, and a fourth
after the Su. Finally, (89) c. and (89)d. prove that it is not
possible for a Causal to precede a Comitative or a Source, it
can, therefore, be concluded that a Comitative precedes a Causal.
1.5.2 Relative Order of Obliques in the Passive Voice.
In all the exairples from (82) to (89), the verbs were

in the active voice. The following data demonstrate that even if
the verbs were in the passive voice, the order of the different
types of Oblique would remain the same:
(90)a. No-daka-n' i Paoly tamin'ny loha-ny ho ao amin'ny but
pass-kick-by Paul with the head-his into the goal
Instrument Directional
ny baolina.
the ball
(compare with (83))
"The ball was being "kicked" by Paul with his head into
the goal."
b. No-daka-n' i Paoly ho ao amin'ny but tamin'ny loha-ny
pass-kick-by Paul into the goal with the head-his
Directional Instrument
483
ny baolina.
the ball
"Hie ball was being "kicked" by Paul into the goal with
his head."
(91) a. N-a-lefa-n' i Jeanne ho any Toamasina
past-pass-send-by Jeanne for Tamatave
Directional
ho an'ny mpiasa ny mofo.
for the worker the bread
Beneficiary
(compare with (84))
"Hie bread was sent by Jeanne to Tamatave for the wor-
kers."
b. ?*N-a-lefa-n1 i Jeanne ho an'ny mpiasa
past-pass-send-by Jeanne for the worker
Beneficiary
ho any Toamasina ny mofo.
for Tamatave the bread
Directional
"The bread was sent by Jeanne for the workers to Tama-
tave."
(92) a. N-ome-n' i Jeanne tamin-kafaliana ho an'ny mpiasa
past-give-by Jeanne with-joy for the worker
Manner Beneficiary
484
ny nofo.
the bread
(see (85))
"Hie bread was being given by Jeanne with joy for the
workers."
b. N-ome-n' i Jeanne ho an'ny mpiasa tamin-kafaliana
past-give-by Jeanne for the worker with-joy
Beneficiary Manner
ny nofo.
/ the bread
/
"The bread was being given by Jeanne for the workers
with joy."
Voa-hafatra tsara tany an-trano ny ankizy.

(93)a.
pass-message well at home the child
Manner Locative
"The children were well instructed at hone."
*Voa-hafatra tany an-trano tsara ny ankizy.

b.
pass-message at home well the child
Locative Manner
"The children were at home well instructed."
(94) a. Tany Antsirabe no n-i-anar-an' i Paoly taloha.
at Antsirabe part past-circ-study-by Paul before
Locative Temporal
"It was at Antsirabe that Paul was studying before."

485
b. Taloha tao Antsirabe no n-i-anar-an' i Paoly.
previously at Antsirabe part past-circ-study-by Paul
Temporal Locative
(compare with (87))
"It was previously at Antsirabe that Paul was
studying."
(95) a. Re omaly avy tany T(oamasina) ny vaovao.
heard yesterday from T(amatave) the news
Teitporal Source
"The news was heard yesterday from T(amatave)."
b. ?*Re avy tany T omaly ny vaovao.
heard from T yesterday the news
Source Temporal
"The news was heard from T yesterday."
c. Avy tany T no n-an-dre-n-e-s-ana ny vaovao omaly.
from T part past-circ-heard the news yesterday
Source
"It was from T that the news was heard yesterday."
(96) a. Lasa avy tany Antsirabe niaraka tamin' i Paoly
gone from Antsirabe with Paul
Source Comitative
i Jeanne.
Jeanne
"Jeanne left Antsirabe with Paul."

486
b. *Lasa niaraka tamin'i Paoly avy tany Antsirabe
gone with Paul from Antsirabe
Comitative Source
i Jeanne.
Jeanne
"Jeanne left with Paul Antsirabe."
(97)a. Tsy lasa niaraka tamin'i Jaona i Paoly noho i Jeanne,
neg gone with John Paul because-of J.
Comitative Causal
"Paul did not leave with John because of Jeanne."
b. *Tsy lasa i Paoly noho i Jeanne niaraka tamin'i Jaona.
neg gone Paul because-of J. with John
Causal Comitative
"Paul did not leave because of Jeanne with John."
c. *Tsy lasa noho i Jeanne niaraka tamin'i Jaona i Paoly.
neg gone because-of J. with John Paul
Causal Comitative
"Paul did not leave because of Jeanne with John."
The sentence (90)a. is the Unmarked structure since it can be ut-
tered without any pause between the two obliques, whereas in (90)
b., such a pause is mandatory otherwise the sentence becomes un-
granmatical; furthermore, in the latter case, the Instrument is
either an afterthought or carries with it seme emphasis; there-

487
fore, Instrument precedes Directional. The graitmaticality pattern
in (91) suggests that Directional precedes Beneficiary, at least,
in the relevant interpretation of the b. sequence. As for (92)a.,
it requires a special intonation and a pause between the two Ob-
liques, whereas (92)b. does not; so, it can be inferred that the
latter is the Unmarked structure and if so, then Beneficiary pre-
cedes Manner. On the other hand, the sentence (93) presents a
clear case where Manner must precede Locative, otherwise the se-
quence is ungrammatical. Again, in (94), the a. version, where
Locative precedes Temporal is the Unmarked structure while the
other is definitely more emphatic. In (95), the b. sequence is
granmatical —with a special intonation— and carries with it
some emphasis, just like the c. version, which is clearly Marked.
In the intended reading, only the a. version of (96) is grammat-
ical, otherwise the sentence would mean something like "Jeanne
accompanied Paul who is from Antsirabe." Finally, with (97), only
the a. version, where the Causal-Oblique occupies the position to
the right of the Su, is grammatical. Therefore, the last three
sets of examples show that Temporal should precede Source, that
Source should precede Comitative, and that Comitative should pre-
cede Causal, respectively.
1.5.3 Additional Data.
That the order of the different types of Oblique is the
one given under 1.3.2 is corroborated by the following sets of
sentences with a high concentration of Obliques in each one of
them, the first set having a verb in the active voice, whereas
the second has its verb in the passive:

488
(98) N-an-didy ny nofo tamin'ny antsy ho an'ny mpiasa

past-act-cut the bread with the knife for the worker
haingana tao an-dakozy i Jeanne cmaly.

quick in kitchen Jeanne yesterday
"Yesterday, Jeanne was quickly cutting the bread for

the worker(s) in the kitchen."
(99) N-an-doko ny latabatra tamin'ny loko-ny haingana

past-act-paint the table with the paint-his quick
tao an-dakozy i Paoly omaly.

in kitchen Paul yesterday
"Yesterday, Paul was quickly painting the table with

his paint in the kitchen."
(100) N-i-karoka ny . fanjaitra tamin'ny andreby

past-act-search the needle with the magnet
ho an'ny reni-ny haingana teo am-pandriana i Paoly

for the mother-his quick in bed Paul,
omaly.
yesterday
"Yesterday, Paul was quickly looking for the needle

with the magnet for his mother on the bed."
489
(101) N-ana-tono ny hena tamin'ny antsy ho an'ny
past-act-barbecue the meat with the knife for the
nama-ny haingana tao an-dakozy i Jeanne omaly.
friend-his quick in kitchen Jeanne yesterday
"Yesterday, Jeanne was quickly barbecuing the meat
with the knife for her friend in the kitchen."
(102) NO-didi-n'i Jeanne tamin'ny antsy ho an'ny mpiasa
pass-cut-by Jeanne with the knife for the worker
haingana tao an-dakozy ny nofo omaly.
quickly in kitchen the bread yesterday
(same meaning as (98) above)
(103) NO-loko-in' i Paoly tamin'ny loko-ny haingana tao an-
pass-paint-by Paul with the paint-his quick in
dakozy ny latabatra omaly.
kitchen the table yesterday
(104) No-karoh-in' i Paoly tamin'ny andreby ho an'ny
pass-search-by Paul with the magnet for the
reni-ny haingana teo am-pandriana ny fanjaitra omaly.
mother-his quick in bed the needle yesterday

490
(105) No-tono-in' i Jeanne tamin'ny antsy ho an'ny
pass-barbecue-by Jeanne with the knife for the
nama-ny haingana tao an-dakozy ny hena omaly.
friend-her quick in kitchen the meat yesterday
Both in (98) and its passive counterpart (102), the Instrumental
precedes the Beneficiary, the Beneficiary acmes before the Man-
ner, the Manner before the Locative, and the latter before the
Temporal-Oblique; however, in the active voice structure, there
is a slight preference for some speakers to have the Manner be-
fore the Beneficiary-Oblique. This also holds true of all the
other sentences presented above. In (99) and (100), the Instru-
mental precedes the Manner-Oblique, the Manner-Oblique before the
Locative-Oblique, and the latter before the Temporal-Oblique. The
same applies to (104) and (105), which have verbs belonging to
different subclasses.
1.6.1 Summary: Relative Order and Properties of the Obliques.
A list of the different types of Oblique in the rele-
vant order, along with a number of their properties with respect
to (a) the preposition(s) used; (b) their position, i.e. to the
left or to the right, relative to the Su; (c) Clefting; (d)
Clefting with a preposition; (e) Clefting without a preposition
for structures with active voice verbs; and with respect to (f)
the affix taken by the verb, i.e. no...i/ana, a, or i/an...ana in
combination with (c), (d), and (e) above for structures with
passivized verbs, is provided in Table 12.

491
Table 12
The Different Types of Oblique
Active Passive
l.Interm. an/0 (ny) OK * * * * * Obi * Opt * Obl
2.lnstr. (t)amin(a) OK * Opt Opt Opt * Cpt Opt Opt Opt Opt
3.Direct. ho ao amin OK OK * * * * * Obl Cpt * Obl
4.Benef. ho an'i/ny OK OK * * * * * Obl Prf Opt Opt
5.Manner (t) amin (a) OK M ?* Obi * * * Obl Obl Obl *
6.Loc. (t)ao amin OK M Opt Obi * * * Obl Prf Obl *
7.Temp. (t) amin (a) M OK Opt Obi * * * Obl Opt Opt Opt
8.Source avy (t)any OK M Opt Obi * * * Obl Obl Opt Opt
9.Comit miaraka amin OK ?* * * * * * * * * *
10.Causal noho/tamin * OK * * * * * Obl Obl Obl *
Properties: a b e d e f g h i j k
Note; * = Ungrammatical;OK = Grammatical;Opt = Optional;Obl =
Obligatory; Prf = Preferable; ?* = Doubtful;M = Marked; (...)=
Optional item; .../... = Choice, a = Left of Su; b = Right of
Su; c = Clefting; d = Clefting And Preposition; e = Clefting
Without Preposition; f = NO...ina Passive; g = A Passive; h =
An...an Circumstantial Form of Passive; i = Clefting And Pas-
sive; j = Clefting With Preposition And Passive; k = Clefting
Without A Preposition And Passive. See other symbols overleaf.

492
1.6.2 Summary: Hie Voice System of Malagasy.
A diagram showing all the relevant syntactic/semantic
positions an NP can occupy, along with affix(es) the passivized
verb can take, is given on Table 13.
Table 13
The Order of the Different Types of Oblique
Note: Su = Subject; DO = Direct Object; 10 = Indirect Object;
Obi. = Oblique; Gen = Genitive; Interm. = Intermediary; Instr.=
Instrument; Benef. = Beneficiary; Loc. = Locative; Temp. = Tem-
poral; Comit. = Comitative; Caus. = Causal; - Perf = Non-Per-
fective; + Perf = Perfective. ] = Before, On Hierarchy; whereas
< > = Domain of Passive Affix(es) below the line, dotted
lines indicating the cut-off point on either side.

493
addendum:
Note that Directional and Manner Obliques have been emitted
from the diagram in Table 13 oily for lack of space.
Section 2
The Passive and Complex Structures
2.0 Introduction.
Section 2 deals with Passive in complex sentences in-
volving subordination: first, in non-Causative, then in Causative
constructions.
In the first Subsection, it will be seen:
1. that Malagasy possesses two other rules involving
preferential deletions besides Zero-Pronominalization, as was
shown to be the case in Chapter Pour, Pronominalization: Equi-1
and Equi-2;
2. that it also has two types of Raising: Raising-to-DO
and Raising-to-Su;
3. that Affixal Passive interacts with each one of the
above rules in a way which shows that it follows the Cyclic Con-
vention; and
4. that the application of Affixal Passive is contin-
gent upon the presence of the general complementizer fa "that."
In the second Subsection, it will be shown:
1. that a typical Predicate-Raising Causative, i.e.
an (a) can oily take a root passive or an adjective; with this

494
type of construction Affixal Passive can always apply after
Clause-Union;
2. but that the Complement-Causative amp (a) can also
take the Affixal Passive; however, with this type of constru-
ction, Affixal Passive can cxily apply if the embedded clause
comprises a typically intransitive predicate; and
3. that Affixal Passive interacts with the different
types of Causative constructions of Malagasy in a way which
suggests that it follows the Cyclic Convention.
2.1.0 Verbal Construction Types.
In this Subsection, a characterization of and justi-
fication for:
1. Equi-1;
2. Equi-2;
3. Raising-to-DO; and
4. Raising-to-Su
will be proposed.
A summary of the criteria used for distinguishing each
one of the above constructions will be given at the beginning of
each subsection. A sample list of verbs involving each will be
offered. It will be seen that each process interacts with Affixal
Passive in a way which suggests that this rule follows the Cyclic
Convention. Finally, it will be shown that the application of Af-
fixal Passive on the lcwer clause is contingent upon the presence
of the complementizer fa since other full-fledged complementizers
rule out this process, as will become evident from the grammat-
icality patterns of the illustrative sequences presented belcw .

495
2.1.1.0 Equi-1.
In the process of Equi-1, the Su of the main clause
triggers deletion of the embedded Su of the underlying sequence.
Thus in
(106)a. N-i-tetika h-i-vidy ny trano 0^ i Jeanne^,

past-pref-plan fut-pref-buy the house Jeanne
"Jeanne was making plans to buy the house."
to be derived from:
b. /[S1 N-i-tetika [SQ h-i-vidy ny trano i J^] i J^]/,
on cycle SI, Equi-1 deletes the embedded Su i Jeanne, coreferen-
tial with the higher Su:
c. [S1 N-i-tetika [Sg h-i-vidy ny trano 0^] i J^].
Likewise in
(107)a. N-i-tetika ho any 0^ i Jeanne^,

past-pref-plan ccnp there Jeanne
"Jeanne was making plans to be there."
to be derived from
b. /[S1 N-i-tetika [SQ ho any i Jj_] i J ± ] / ,

496
on cycle SI,, the Su i Jeanne in the embedded clause of the under-
lying sequence, gets deleted since it is ooreferential with the
higher Su.
Furthermore, note that in (106), for example, the em-
bedded verb carries a tense-marker; whereas in (107), the comple-
mentizer ho is homophonous with the future tense-marker ho, which
shows up in an equative type of sentence, i.e without a verbal
predicate, as in the sentence (155)a. of Chapter One.
2.1.1.0.1 Complexity of Construction.
The sentences (106)a. and (107)a. are complex, not
sinplex structures since it is possible to place the negation
operator tsy between the two predicates in each:
(108) Nitetika tsy hividy ny trano i jeannej.
past-plan neg fut-buy the house Jeanne
"Jeanne was making plans not to buy the house."
(109) Nitetika tsy ho any i Jeannej.
past-plan neg ccmp there Jeanne
"Jeanne was planning on not going there."
2.1.1.0.2 Criteria for Subjecthood.
In structures like (106)a., the NP i Jeanne is the Su
of the higher clause. First, the fact that it is a Su is
confirmed by the possibility of substituting the Su pronoun form
izy for the NP:

497
(110) Nitetika hividy ny trano O^ izy^.
past-plan fut-buy the house he/she
"He/she was making plans to buy the house."
Second, the ungrairmaticality of the following sentence suggests
that the NP i Jeanne is the Su of the higher and not the lower
clause:
(111) *Nitetika ho-vidi-n' i Jeanne ny trano.
past-plan pass-buy-by Jeanne the house
The sequence (111), where the embedded verb has been passivized,
is irretrievably ungrammatical and cannot be assigned any inter-
pretation at all.
2.1.1.0.3 Justification for Posited Underlying Structure.
The existence of sentences involving Reflexivization to
tena in the lower clause argues in favor of underlying represen-
tations of the type posited in (106)b.:
(112) Nitetika hanono tena^ i Jeanne^,
past-plan fut-kill self Jeanne
"Jeanne^ was making plans to kill herself^,"
where tena is coreferential with the higher Su i Jeanne. The ma-
jor constraints on this type of Reflexivization (see Chapter
Three: 1.1 and 3.1.1) are that: 1. both the trigger and its vie-
498
tim are in the same clause; and 2. that the trigger is necessari-
ly a Su.
Ndw, in (112), the NP i Jeanne is the Su of the higher
clause, and if it was assumed to be the trigger of Reflexiviz-
ation to tena, this would violate the clausematerestriction,it
follows that a coreferential NP has to be posited in the underly-
ing representation of the lower clause and it will have to be as-
sumed that Reflexivization is a cyclic rule (see Chapter Three:
Section 4). Furthermore, since only a Su can trigger Reflexiviz-
ation, such a coreferential NP must occupy the Su position at one
stage of the derivation.
2.1.1.0.4 The Raising Hypothesis.
New, it is also possible that the NP i Jeanne in (112)
originated in the lower clause but has been lifted into the Su
position of the main clause. This is not the case since the main
verb is mitetika "to plan on doing something," which belongs in
the Equi-1 subcategory. In fact, the following tests distinguish
between Equi-1 and Raising-to-Su verbs:
1. an Equi-1 verb takes ny for its oornplementizer,
whereas a Raising-to-Su verb takes fa for its complementizer (see
the examples proposed in 2.1.4.3); and
2. with a double passive construction with an Equi-1
verb, the complementizer has to be deleted, whereas with a
double passive construction involving a Raising-to-Su verb, the
oornplementizer fa cannot be deleted since when it is left out,
the sequence becomes irretrievably ungrammatical:

499
(113)a. N-itetika ny h-ividy ny trano i Jeanne,
past-plan coup fut-buy the house Jeanne
"Jeanne was planning to buy the house."
b. No-teteh-in1 i Jeanne (*ny) ho-vidi-ana ny trano.
pass-plan-by Jeanne (*conp) pass-buy-by the house
"The house was being planned to be bought by Jeanne,"
i.e. "Jeanne was planning to buy the house."
(114)a. Fantatra fa h-andidy ny mofo i Jeanne,
known comp fut-cut the bread Jeanne
"It is known that Jeanne will be cutting the bread."
b. Fantatra *(fa) ho-didi-n' i Jeanne ny mofo.
known *(carp) pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread
"It is known that the bread will be cut by Jeanne."
3. Postposition of a clause embedded under an Equi-1
verb yields an ungrammatical sequence (see 2.1.1.4), whereas this
is always possible under a Raising-to-Su verb (see 2.1.4.4);
4. Passivization under an Equi-1 verb yields an ungram-
matical output (see 2.1.1.5), while it can apply freely under a
Raising-to-Su verb (see 2.1.4.5);
5. an Equi-1 verb allows a negation in the main clause
either on its own or with another negation, whereas a Raising-to-
Su verb does not allow a negation in the main clause at all.
Compare 2.1.4.2 with the following:

500
(115) Tsy n-itetika (tsy) h-ividy ny trano i Jeanne.
neg past-plan (neg) fut-buy the house Jeanne
"Jeanne was not planning on (not) buying the house."
6. There is truth-functional equivalence between two
structures involving a Raising-to-Su verb, the first of which has
an embedded verb in the active, whereas the other has a passive
(see 2.1.4.7). This is not the case with an Equi-1 verb since the
presence of the complement!zer n£ blocks the application of Af-
fixal Passive; therefore, the issue of truth-functional equi-
valence is irrelevant.
7. Under a Raising-to-Su verb, symmetrical predicates
yield the same cognitive meaning, although their arguments are
rearranged (see 2.1.4.8). With an Equi-1 predicate, this does not
hold since such a rearrangement yields an ungraitmatical output:
(116)a. N-itetika (ny) h-ividy ny trano i Paoly.
past-plan (comp) fut-buy the house Paul
"Paul was planning on buying the house."
b. *N-itetika (ny) h-ividy an'i Paoly ny trano.
past-plan (comp) fut-buy Paul the house
(not interpretable)
8. Under a Raising-to-Su verb, there is no tense-
restriction on the embedded verb (see 2.1.4.9), whereas under an
Equi-1 verb, the future tense-marker h(o) is mandatory.

501
2.1.1.1 Properties of an Equi-1 Construction.
to Equi-1 verb has the following characteristics:
1. it can take ny or zero for its complementizer; in
the latter case, the embedded verb retains its active form;
2. complement i zer deletion is obligatory in double pas-
sive constructions involving an Equi-1 verb in the matrix clause;
3. Postposition of the embedded clause yields an un-
grammatical sequence;
4. Passivization of the embedded verb typically yields
an ungrammatical output;
5. in double passives involving an Equi-1 verb, a zero-
pronoun in the embedded clause always refers to the Su of the
main verb in the active voice; and
6. the presence of a ooreferential pronoun within the
same clause yields an ungrammatical sequence;
7. it is not possible for a clause embedded under an
Equi-1 verb to have in the active voice a pronoun Su ooreferen-
tial with the main clause Su, even in a Marked structure with hoe
"quote...unquote" complementizer.
2.1.1.2 Distribution of Complementizers.
Main verbs triggering Equi-1 can take either a zero, as
can be seen in the sentence (106) above or the sequence (117) a.
below, or rr£ for their complementizer, as in (117)b., but not the
general complementizer fa "that" since (117)c. is irretrivably
ungrammatical, or mba "so that, please" since (117)d. is ungram-
matical:
502
(117)a. N-itetika 0 h-ividy ny trano (K i Jeanne^,
past-plan conp fut-buy the house Jeanne
b. N-itetika ny h-ividy ny trano Ch i Jeannej.
past-plan conp fut-buy the house Jeanne
c. *N-itetika fa h-ividy ny trano CK i Jeanne^.
past-plan ccnp fut-buy the house Jeanne
d. *N-itetika mba h-ividy ny trano (K i Jeanne^.
past-plan carp fut-buy the house Jeanne
2.1.1.3 Equi-1 and Double Passive.
In a double passive construction involving an Equi-1
verb, deletion of the complementizer ny is obligatory:
(118)a. *No-teteh-in'i Jeannej ny ho-vidi-ana Oj ny trano.

pass-plan-by Jeanne conp pass-buy-by the house
b. NO-teteh-in'i Jeanne^ o ho-vidi-ana Oj ny trano.
pass-plan-by Jeanne conp pass-buy-by the house
"The house was being planned to be bought by Jeanne,"
i.e. "Jeanne was planning on buying the house."

503
The sentence (118)a. is irretrievably ungrammatical, whereas its
counterpart in (118)b. is perfectly grammatical. "Che one differ-
ence between the two is that the first comprises the complemen-
tizer ny while the second does not. If, for the moment, it is as-
sumed that the complementizer is present in the underlying se-
quence, then, it can only be inferred that it has been deleted at
a certain stage of its derivation.
2.1.1.4 Equi-1 and Postposition.
Typically, it is not possible to postpose the embedded
clause under an Equi-1 verb:
(119) *N-itetika...i Jeannei h-ividy ny trano Oj,
past-plan Jeanne fut-buy the house
(in the absence of a special intonation and context)
(120) *N-itetika...i Jeanne^ ho any °j[/
past-plan... Jeanne carp there
(in the absence of a special intonation and context)
where the three dots represent the position vacated by the sen-
tential DO.
Hcwever, when there is emphasis, Postposition yields
grammatical sequences:
(121) N-itetika...tokoa i Jeanne^ n y h-ividy ny trano Oj.
past-plan really Jeanne camp fut-buy the house
"Jeanne did make plans to buy the house."

504
(122) N-itetika...tokoa i Jeanne ny ho any 0•.

i
past-plan really Jeanne conp fut there
"Jeanne did make plans to be there."
2.1.1.5 Equi-1 and Passivization.
Passivization of the embedded clause without a matrix
passive yields ungrammatical sentences with Equi-1 verbs:
(123)a. *N-itetika ny ho-didina O^ i Jeannej,
past-plan cornp pass-cut Jeanne
"Jeanne was making plans to be operated on,"
to be derived from
b. /[S1 N-itetika [SQ ny h-andidy an'i Jj R] i Jj]/

past-plan oomp fut-cut J^ r j^
viiere J refers to Jeanne and R, short for Ranona "x", is an un-
specified Agent; whereas,
(124) N-itetika ny h-andidy ny mofo 0^ i Jeanne^,
past-plan conp fut-cut the bread Jeanne
"Jeanne was making plans to cut the bread,"
has the verb of the embedded clause in the active voice and is
perfectly grammatical.
505
2.1.1.6 Equi-1 and Pronominalization.
verb, the embedded clause has a zero-pronoun coreferential with
the main clause Su of the active verb, as can be inferred from
(112) and (116). It is not possible at all to have the cliticized
pronoun form -ny "by him/her" in place of the zero-pronoun:
(125) *NO-tetehi-n' i Jeanne ho-vidi-nyi ny trano.
pass-plan-by Jeanne pass-buy-by-her the house
(intended reading provided belcw)
2.1.1.7 Equi-1 and Coreferential Pronoun in the Same Clause.
Unlike a Raising-to-DO verb (see 2.1.3.7), a typical
Equi-1 verb cannot have a coreferential pronoun within the same
clause:
(126) a. *N-itetika azy.. h-andidy ny nofo i Jeanne^
past-plan her fut-cut the bread Jeanne
(compare with (171))
"Jeanne was planning on cutting the bread."
b. *N-itetika azy.^ ho any i Jeanne
past-plan her comp there Jeanne
"Jeanne was planning on being there."
The independent pronoun form azy "him/her" is the DO of the main

506
verb and it is also coreferential with the NP i Jeanne. The se-
quences with this pronoun are irretrievably ungrammatical, as
shown in (126). Now, if the said pronoun is left out, as in
(124) above, for example, the output becomes perfectly grammat-
ical. This holds of both (126)a. and (126)b.
2.1.1.8 Equi-1 and Restriction on Coreferentiality of Pronouns.
Unlike a Raising-to-DO verb, an Equi-1 verb cannot have
a pronoun coreferential with the main verb Su in the active voice
in the embedded clause under the complementizer hoe "quote...un-
quote" in a Marked structure:
(127) *N-itetika...tokoa i Jeannei hoe h-ividy ny trano izy^.
past-plan really Jeanne.^ cotrp fut-buy the house she^
(see (121))
(no interpretation whatsoever; intended meaning given)
"Jeanne did make plans to buy the house."
In (127), the independent pronoun izy "he/she" is coreferential
with the NP i Jeanne. The sequence is ungrammatical. Now, if the
pronoun izy is left out of the sentence, (127) becomes perfectly
grammatical, exactly like (121).
2.1.1.9 Sanple List of Typical Equi-1 Verbs.
The following is a sample list of typical Equi-1 verbs:
mitetika "to make plans," manandrana "to try," milofo "to stri-
ve," mikatsaka "to aim at," mikely aina "to take great pains in
doing something," mihezaka "to make efforts," mikendry "to aim at

507
doing something," misahirana "to belabor," and misafidy "to choo-
se."
Two verbs —roaniry "to wish, to desire," and milaza "to
declare, to say"— represent a marginal subclass in that both
allow passivization in the embedded clause:
(128) M-ilaza ho-didi-na 0.^ i Jeanne^
pres-say pass-cut-by Jeanne
" Jeanne^ says that she^ will be operated on."
(129) M-aniry ho-didi-na CL i Jeanne^,
pres-wish pass-cut-by Jeanne
"Jeanne wishes to be operated on."
2.1.1.10 Equi-1 and the Cycle.
Ihe following sentence type shows that Equi-1 interacts
with Affixal Passive in a way which suggests that the latter is a
cyclical rule:
(130)a. Ny n-ilatsaka ho-fidi-na no n-andram-an'i Paoly.
ocmp past-compete pass-choose-by part past-try-by Paul
"It was to get his name on the ballot that Paul tried
to do."
to be derived from
b. /[g2 N-anandrana ny n-ilatsaka [sg h-ifidy

past-try ocmp past-compete fut-choose
508
an'i Paoly. R g 0 ] i Paolyj g l ] i Paolyi Q2\/.
Pauli x Pauli Pauli
c. On cycle S Q : Passive yields, with deletion of R, the

unspecified Agent of the embedded clause:
[ e ho-fidi-na i Paoly G ].
s
0 0
pass-choose Paul
d. On cycle Equi-1 applies
[g ny n-ilatsaka [ g ho-fidi-na i P^ S Q ] i P i sl]
comp past-conpete pass-choose P. P.
[g ny n-ilatsaka [ g ho-fidi-na 0 i S Q ] i Pj^ sl ].
e. On cycle S2: Equi-1 applying before Passive gives
[g2 N-anandrana ny n-ilatsaka [ g Q ho-fidi-na g0]
i Paoly. g l ] i Paoly. g2]
N-anandrana ny n-ilatsaka ho-fidi-na
0i i Paoly
N-anandrana ny n-ilatsaka 0 i ho-fidi-na O^ i Paoly^.

past-try coup past-cenp pass-choose Paul
Fronting of the sentential Su ny n-ilatsaka ho-fidi-na and inser-
tion of the particle no yields (130) a. This is a sandwich-type

509
argument in favor of the cycle: first, on cycle SO, Passive ap-
plies, followed by two subsequent applications of Equi-1; finally
passive reapplies on cycle S2.
2.1.2.0 Equi-2.
Equi-2 deletes the Su of a lower clause under identity
with a non-Su NP of the main clause. Thus:
(131)a. N-ibaiko an'i Jeanne^ h-ividy ny trano 0.^ i Paoly,
past-order Jeanne fut-buy the house Paul
"Paul ordered Jeanne to buy the house,"
to be derived from
b. /[S N-ibaiko an'i J^ [ h-ividy ny trano i J ^ i Paoly]/
past-order Ji fut-buy the house J^ Paul
where the NP i Jeanne, the Su of the embedded clause, is coref-
erential with the DO an'i Jeanne of the higher clause.
(132)a. N-ibaiko an'i Jeanne^ [ ho any 0^] i Paoly,
past-order Jeanne coup there Paul
"Paul ordered Jeanne to get there,"
to be derived from
b. /[ N-ibaiko an'i J i [ ho any i Jj^ ] i Paoly ]/.
past-order J^ coup there J^ Paul

510
2.1.2.0.1 Complexity of Construction.
Structures like (131)a. and (132)a. are complex, not
simplex since it is possible to place the negation operator ts^
in front of the lower verb:
(133) N-ibaiko an'i Jeannetsy h-ividy ny trano Oj i Paoly.
past-order Jeanne neg fut-buy the house Paul

"Paul ordered Jeanne not to buy the house."
2.1.2.0.2 The Underlying Structure.
The possibility of Reflexivization to tena in the lower
clause suggests that it had a Su at the time this rule applied:
(134) N-ibaiko an'i Jeannei h-amono tena^ 0^ Paoly,
past-order Jeanne.^ fut-kill selfj Paul
"Paul ordered Jeanne^ to kill herselfj,"
where the zero represents the deleted Su NP of the embedded
clause.
2.1.2.0.3 Granmatical Relations.
In (132), the NP i Jeanne is not a Su since it has the
preposition an in front of it and since it can be replaced with
the DO form of the independent pronoun, i.e. azy:
(135) N-ibaiko azy^ tsy h-ividy ny trano Oj i Paoly.

past-order him/her neg fut-buy the house Paul
"Paul ordered her not to buy the house."
511
The NP i Paoly, cxi the other hand, is a Su since it can be
replaced with the Su form of the independent pronoun, i.e. izy:
(136) N-ibaiko an'i Jeannei tsy h-ividy ny trano 0 i izy.
past-order Jeanne neg fut—buy the house he/she
"He ordered Jeanne not to buy the house."
2.1.2.0.4 Equi-2 and Coreferentiality.
Hie embedded Zero-pronoun can only be ooreferential
with the DO, but not with the Su of the higher clause, as can be
inferred from the grammaticality pattern emerging from the fol-
lowing pair of sentences:
(137) *N-ibaiko an'i Jeanne tsy h-ividy ny trano O^ i Paoly^.
(coreferential network absolutely impossible)
(138) N-ibaiko an'i Jeannei tsy h-ividy ny trano 0j_ i Paoly.
"Paul ordered Jeanne not to buy the house."
In (137), the Zero-pronoun refers to the higher Su and the sen-
tence is irretrievably ungrammatical. In (138), on the other
hand, it refers to the DO i Jeanne, i.e. a non-Su, and, as a
result, the sequence is perfectly grammatical.
2.1.2.0.5 Deletion vs. Raising.
A deletion rather than a Raising process is involved in
structures of the type of (131)a. since the relevant NP i Jeanne

512
can oily appear in the higher clause. If a Raising process was
involved, it should be the case that in a parallel construction
involving nominalization, the relevant NP shows up in the lower
clause. This is not the case since:
(139) *N-ibaiko ny h-i-vidi-anan' i Jeanne ny trano i Paoly,
past-order coup fut-circ-buy-by J. the house Paul
is irretrievably ungrammatical, where the NP i Jeanne shows up
only in the embedded clause.
2.1.2.1 Properties of Equi-2.
An Equi-2 construction has the following properties:
1. it typically takes zero for its complementizer;
2. deletion of the particle mba is optional in a double
passive construction with the subset of Equi-2 verbs which can
co-occur with it;
3. Postposition of the embedded clause yields sequences
of doubtful grammaticality;
4. unlike with an Equi-1 verb, Passivization of the em-
bedded clause yields a grammatical output;
5. in double passive constructions, the embedded clause
cannot have a Zero-pronoun coreferential with the main clause Su
of the active voice;
6. the presence within the main clause of a pronoun co-
referential with its Su yields an ungrammatical sequence;
7. the presence within a clause embedded under an
Equi-2 verb of a Su pronoun, coreferential with the relevant
non-Su of the matrix clause, makes the output ungrammatical;

513
8. Reflexivization to tena shows that the embedded Su
has been deleted;
9. there is a selectional restriction on the DO taken
by an Equi-2 verb; this is also apparent in the restriction on
the Su of a double passive construction involving an Equi-2 verb;
and
10. there is no truth-functional equivalence between an
active construction involving an Equi-2 and its passive counter-
part.
2.1.2.2 Complementizers.
Main verbs triggering Equi-2 typically take Zero for
its complementizer, but never n^ nor fa:
(140)a. N-anery an'i Jeanne^ 0 h-anasa an'i Jaona Oj i Paoly.
past-force Jeanne camp fut-wash John Paul
b. *N-anery an'i Jeanne ny h-anasa an'i Jaona 0^ i Paoly.
past-force Jeanne comp fut-wash John Paul
(no interpretation possible)
c. *N-anery an'i Jeanne fa h-anasa an'i Jaona 0^ i paoly.
past-force Jeanne comp fut-wash John Paul
(intended reading provided)
"Paul was forcing Jeanne to wash John."
However, there is a subset of verbs belonging to this subcategory
which allows the particle mba, a hedgeword meaning "Please":

514
(142)a. M-ianara!
pres-study
"Study!"
b. Mba m-ianara (e)!
please pres-study excl.
"Please, study!"
(143) a. Vaki-o io taratasy io.
read-pass-imperative this letter this
"Let this letter be read by you," i.e.
"Read this letter."
b. Mba vaki-o io taratasy io.
please read-pass-imperative this letter this
"Please, read this letter."
Note that, as a general rule, it is possible to have the particle
mba with linguistic communication verbs such as manambitamby "to
cajole (someone) into doing something," miangavy "to implore," or
manantena "to exhort":
(144)a. N-anambitaniby an'i J (mba) h-anasa an'i P R.
past-persuade J part fut-wash P X
"X was gently persuading J to (please) wash P."
b. N-iangavy an'i J (mba) h-anasa an'i P R.
past-request J part fut-wash P X
"X requested of J that he/she (please) wash P."

515
2.1.2.3 Deletion of Complementizer Mba.
Deletion of niba is always possible with the subset of
Equi-2 verbs that can co-occur with it:
(145) No-tambatambaza-n'i P (mba) ho-sasa-n'i J R.
pass-cajole-by P part fut-wash-fcy J X
"X was being gently persuaded by P to (please) get

washed by J."
Whether mba is in the sequence or not, the sentence remains gram-
matical.
Postposition of the lower clause often yields sequences
of doubtful grammaticality:
(146)a. N-anambitamby an'i J mba h-anasa an'i P R.
past-cajole J part fut-wash P X
"X was persuading J to please wash P."
b. ?*N-anambitamby an'i J ...R mba h-anasa an'i P.

past-cajole J X part fut-wash P
(more context needed)

"X was persuading J to please wash P."
(147)a. N-anambitamby an'i J mba ho ao i P.
past-cajole J part comp there P
"P was persuading J to please be there."

516
b. ?*N-anambitamby an'i J...i P mba ho ao.
past-cajole J P part comp there
In both (146)a. and (147)a., which are perfectly grammatical, the
sentential Object has not been postposed yet. By contrast, in
(146)b. and (147)b., Postposition of the sentential Object has
taken place, with the position vacated by the embedded clause in-
dicated by three dots in each case, and the results are sequences
of doubtful granmaticality.
2.1.2.5 Equi-2 and Passive.
Unlike with an Equi-1 verb, application of Affixal Pas-
sive on the lower cycle yields grammatical sentences:
(148)a. N-anery an'i P ho-sasa-n'i J R,
past-force P pass-wash-by J X
"X forced P to be washed by J,"
to be derived from
b. /[ gl N-anery an'i P [ s 0 h-anasa an'i P i J ] R ]/.

past-force P fut-wash P J X
On cycle SO, Affixal Passive applies since the embedded clause
does not have a complementizer, which in the case of an Equi-1
verb, for example, in the matrix prevents Passivization in the
lower clause.
517
(149)a- N-anambitamby an'i P ho-sasa-n'i J R,
past-cajole P pass-wash-by J X
"X was gently persuading P to get washed by J,"
to be derived from
b. /[ sl N-anambitamby an'i Pj [ g Q h-anasa an'i Pj J] R]/.
past-cajole Pj fut-wash Pj J X
On cycle SO, Affixal Passive applies to give:
c. [gg ho-sasa-n' i J i P ].
pass-wash-by J P
This feeds Equi-2 on cycle SI:
d. [ g l N-anambitamby an'i Pj [ g 0 ho-sasa-n'i J i Pj] R].
past-cajole Pj pass-wash-by J Pj X
[ g l N-anambitaniby an'i Pj [ g Q ho-sasa-n'i J 0^] R].
past-cajole Pj pass-wash-by J Oj X
2.1.2.6 Equi-2 and Coreferentiality.
verb, it is possible to have a Zero-pronoun in the embedded
clause. But, the latter can only refer to the DO of the main verb
in the active voice, and never to its Su:

518
(150) a. No-tambatamba-z-an-dR iriba ho-sasa-na (h i p^.
pass-cajole-by-X part pass-wash-by (K i ,pi
"P was being persuaded by X to get washed."
b. *No-tambatainba-zan-dRi mba ho-sasa-na 0 i i P.
pass-cajole-by-X^ part pass-wash-by i P

(coreferentiality absolutely impossible)
In (150)a., the Zero-pronoun refers to the Su of the main verb,
which is in the passive voice. This means that initially the
Zero-pronoun referred to the DO of the matrix verb in the active
voice and the output is perfectly grammatical. By contrast, in
(150)b., the Zero-pronoun refers to the Agent R "x" in the geni-
tive case. This Agent R was initially the Su of the main verb in
the active voice and the resulting sequence, as seen in (150)b.
is irretrievably ungrammatical.
2.1.2.7 Equi-2 and (Preferential Pronoun in the Same Clause.
Unlike a Raising to DO verb, it is not possible to have
within the same clause, i.e. the main clause, a pronoun prefe-
rential with the Su of the active verb; likewise, Reflexivization
to tena is not possible:
(151)a. *N-anery azy./tenai ho tony i Jeanne
past-force her^/self^ comp calm Jeanne^
(intended reading provided belcw)
"Jeanne^ forced herself^ to remain calm."

519
b. M-ihevitra azyi ho mahay i Jeanne^
pres-consider her.^ comp intelligent Jeanne
"Jeanne^ considers herself^ intelligent."
c. M-ihevi-tena^ ho mahay i Jeanne^,
pres-consider-self^ comp intelligent Jeanne^^
There exists a sharp contrast between the behavior of an Equi-2
verb, as seen in (151)a., with respect to Pronominalization and
Reflexivization, and that of a Raising-to-DO verb, as illustrated
in (151)b. and (151) c. The sentences in (151) a. with the DO azy
"him/her" or tena "self" coreferential with the main Su are ir-
retrievably ungrammatical. On the other hand, (151)b. with azy
and (151)c. with tena coreferential with the main Su are perfect-
ly grammatical sequences. The only difference between these two
sets of sentences has to do with the nature of the main verb,
i.e. in the first instance, one of the Equi-2 type and in the
second, one of the Raising-to-DO type.
2.1.2.8 Postposition and Coreferentiality.
As seen under 2.1.2.4, Postposition gives sentences of
doubtful grammaticality if there is no coreferential pronoun on
the surface in the embedded clause, as in (146) and (147). New,
if a pronoun Su shows up in the lower clause, which is coreferen-
tial with the main clause DO, the output becomes irretrievably
ungrammatical:
520
(152) *N-anambitaniby an'i J^.. .R mba h-anasa ani P izyi.
past-cajole J^ X part fut-wash P he^/she^

(catipare with (146))
(intended meaning represented below)
"X was persuading J^ for himj/her^ to please wash P."
(153) *N-anambitamby an'i J^...R mba ho any izy^.

past-cajole J^ x part comp there he^/she^
"X was persuading J^ for him^/her^ to please be there."
2.1.2.9 Equi-2 and Reflexivization.
From what we know of Reflexivization to tena in Mala-
gasy, the trigger must be a Su (see Chapter Three: 1.1) and be-
longs in the same clause as its victim (see Chapter Three:
Subsection 2.0.(1) and (3). Now, there exist sentences of the
following type:
(154) N-anambitamby an'i ON (mba) h-ikarakara tena^ R,
past-cajole J^ part fut-take-care self^ X
"X was gently persuading G\ to (please) take care of
himselfi/herselfif"
where tena seems to lack a trigger. The grairmaticality of (154)
argues that indeed there is a Su coreferential with the higher
clause DO an'i Jeanne underlyingly since only a Su can trigger
Reflexivization to tena and it must belong in the same clause as
its victim.
521
2.1.2.10 Selectional Restrictions on the DO of an Equi—2 Verb,
There is a selectional restriction on the DO an Equi-2
verb can take:
(155)a. N-anery an'i h-andeha Oj R.
past-force X fut-go Oj X
"X was forcing J to leave."
b. H-andeha i J.
fut-go J
"J was leaving."
(156)a. *N-anery ny raharaha^ h-andeha 0^ R.
past-force the affair^ fut-go O^ X
(intended meaning)
"X was forcing the affair to go," i.e.
"X was forcing the affair to work out fine."
b. H-andeha ny raharaha.
fut-go the affair
"Things will work out fine."
In (155)a., the DO is a human and, as a result, the sentence is
grammatical, whereas in (156)a., it is an inanimate and this
yields an ungrammatical sentence despite the fact that the lower
clause on its own is perfectly grammatical, as seen in (156)b.
However, this restriction is sometimes less apparent in
double passives:
522
(157)a. TNo-tere-n' i P ho-didi-n' i J ny mofo,
pass-force-by P pass-cut-by J the bread
"Hie bread was being forced by P to be cut by J,"
to be derived from the intermediate structure:
b. /[sl N-anery ny mofo^ [gg h-andidy ny mofo^ i J] i p]/.

past-force the bread fut-cut the bread J p
2.1.2.11 Equi-2 and Truth-Functional Equivalence.
There is no truth—functional equivalence between an
active sentence with an Equi-2 verb and its double passive coun-
terpart:
(158)a. N-anery an'i J h-anasa an'i P R.
past-force J fut-wash P X
"X was forcing J to wash P."
b. No-tere-n-dR ho-sasa-in' i J i P.
pass-force-by-R pass-wash-by J P
"P was being forced by X to be washed by J."
In (158)a., it is J who is the object of coercion, whereas in
(158)b., it is P who is subjected to such a coercion.
2.1.2.12 Sample List of Typical Equi-2 Verbs.
The following is a sample list of typical Equi-2 verbs:

523
manery "to force," manome alalana "to grant permission," manam-
bitamby "to cajole, to persuade gently," mibaiko "to order," man-
dodona "to press (someone)," manentana "to exhort," and maniraka
"to send on an errand."
2.1.2.13 Equi-2 and the Cycle.
The existence of structures of the following type sug-
gests that Affixal Passive interacts with Equi-2 in a way which
supports the cycle:
(159)a. No-tere-n1 i p h-ilatsaka ho-fidi-na i J,
pass-force-by P fut-compete pass-elect-by J
"J was being forced to enter the competition to get
elected," i.e.
"J was forced to enter the competition for the
election,"
to be derived frcm
b. /[ g2 N-anery an'i J. h-ilatsaka [ gQ h-ifidy an i J.
past-force Ji fut-compete fut-elect
R 1 J 1 p
S0Í iSll
c. On cycle SO, Passive followed by unspecified Agent
Deletion yields
[go ho-fidi-na i J^]

pass-elect-by J
524
d. On cycle SI, Equi-1 applies
[gj h-ilatsaka [SO ho-fidi-na i Jj gg] i Jj g^]

fut-conpete pass-elect-by X
h-ilatsaka ho-fidi-na O^ i
e. On cycle S2, Equi-2 applies before Passive
[g2 N-anery an'i J^ [g^ h-ilatsaka [gg ho-fidi-na Oj]
past-force X fut-conpete pass-elect-by
1 J
i Sl] 1 p
S2Í'
J p
i
[g2 N-anery an'i Jj [ g l h-ilatsaka [ g 0 ho-fidi-na Oj]
past-force X fut-conpete pass-elect-by
°i SO) 1 P
S2Í •
f. Only then, after Equi-2, can Passive apply
[ g 2 No-tere-n'i P [ g l h-ilatsaka [ g 0 ho-fidi-na Oj]

pass-force-by P fut-conpete pass-elect-by
°i Sl] 1 J
i S2^'
°i Ji
On cycle SO, as in (159)c., Passive applies. This is followed by
one application of Equi-1 on cycle SI, as shown in (159)d., and

525
one of Equi-2 on cycle S2, as illustrated in (159)e. Finally,
passive reapplies on cycle S2, as in (159)f.
2.1.3.0 Kaising-to-DO.
Raising-to-DO lifts the Su of an embedded clause to the
DO position within the matrix clause. Thus:
(160) a. M-ihevitra azyi ho mahay i Jeanneif
pres-consider h e ^ comp intelligent Jeanne £
"Jeanne considers herself intelligent,"
is to be derived from the intermediate structure
b. /[ M-ihevitra [ ho mahay izy^] i Jeanne^]/
pres-consider comp intelligent she^ Jeanne^
where the embedded izy^ coreferential with the NP i Jeanne is
marked for emphasis. In fact, (160)a. could be paraphrased as:
c. M-ihevitra...i Jeanne^ fa mahay izy^.
pres-consider Jeanne^ comp intelligent she^
"Jeannei thinks that she^ is intelligent."
In (160)c., the sentential Object, initially in the position in-
dicated by the three dots, has been postposed after the matrix
Su. This is accompanied by the use of the complementizer fa in-
stead of ho and the appearance of the coreferential independent
pronoun izy in the lower clause.

526
2.1.3.0.1 Raising-to-DO and Reflexivization to Ny Tenany.
That it is the process of lifting the embedded Su to DO
position which is involved here is confirmed by the existence of
structures with Reflexivization to ny tenany:
(161)a. M-ihevitra ny tenanyi [ ho mahay ] i Jeanne
pres-consider self^ coup intelligent Jeanne^
b. /[ M-ihevitra ["mahay ny tenako^"] i Jeanne^]/,
pres-consider intelligent myself^ Jeanne^
The sequence represented in (161)b. is the underlying structure
for (161)a.: the reflexive form ny tenany originates in the lower
clause with its Direct Feeling representation ny tena-ko "myself"
which shifts to the third person during Indirect Discourse For-
mation. As remarked in the beginning of Chapter Three on Reflexi-
vization, the embedded clause in (161)b. is a Marked structure,
i.e. marked for either Emphasis or Politeness. The complementizer
ho surfaces in the process of Indirect Discourse Formation since
the embedded clause is of the equative type. Hie grammaticality
of (161)a. suggests that the trigger i Jeanne and its victim ny
tenany are not clausemates in deep structure.
2.1.3.1 Properties of Raising-to-DO.
A Raising-to-DO verb has the following properties:
1. it can take the zero complementizer, the ho comple-
mentizer, as seen in (160), or the nominalizer ny —with the em-
bedded verb in the circumstantial voice—; however, its comple-

527
mentizer is typically fa "that" if Postposition is made to apply
to the sentential Object;
2. deletion of the general complementizer fa is option-
al in a double passive construction;
3. Postposition is possible;
4. Affixal Passive in a clause embedded under a
Raising-to-DO verb is allowed if the complementizer fa is
present;
5. an embedded Su pronoun can be coreferential with the
Su of a main verb in the active voice in a Marked structure;
6. with many verbs, it is possible to have a coreferen-
tial pronoun within the same clause;
7. a Zero-pronoun in the clause embedded under a typic-
al Raising-to-DO verb can refer to either the main clause if the
complementizer is fa or to a non-Su in the main clause if the
complementizer is mba;
8. Reflexivization to ny tenany is allowed in the main
clause;
9. there is no selectional restriction between the main
verb and the lifted DO; likewise, there is no selectional restri-
ction on the Su of a double passive construction; and
10. native speakers have a strong preference for Pas-
sivization of the main verb when the embedded clause is not an
equative sentence.
2.1.3.2.1 Complementizers.
A Raising-to-DO verb can have no conplementizer, as can
be seen in sentences such as:

528
(162) N-ihevitra [ h-andeha ho any ] i Jeanne,
past-think fut-go dir. there Jeanne
"Jeanne was thinking of going there."
However, a Raising-to-DO verb can be followed by the nominalizer
ny (see (210)a.), with the embedded verb in the circumstantial
voice. Also see distinction between nominalizer rgr and comple-
mentizer n^ under (2.1.5.1):
(163)a. N-anantena an'i Jeanne [h-andidy ny mofo] i Paoly.
past-expect J fut-cut the bread P
"Paul was expecting Jeanne to cut the bread."
b. N-anantena [ny h-an-didi-an'i Jeanne ny mofo] i Paoly.
past-expect nam. fut-circ-cut-by J the bread P
"Paul was expecting Jeanne's cutting of the bread."
c. *N-anantena [ny h-andidy ny mofo i Jeanne] i Paoly.
past-expect nam. fut-cut the bread J P
Note that with an Equi-2 verb, nominalization with n£ is out:
(164)a. N-anery an'i Jeanne.^ [h-andidy ny mofo 0 i ] i Paoly.
past-force J fut-cut the bread P
"Paul was forcing Jeanne to cut the bread."
b. *N-anery [ny h-an-didi-an'i Jeanne ny mofo] i Paoly.
past-force nom. fut-circ-cut-by J the bread P

529
2.1.3.2.2 Raising-to-DO and Complementizer Fa.
Typically, a Raising-to-DO verb can take the complemen-
tizer fa when the sentential object has been postposed, without
there being a necessity for a special intonation:
(165) N-ihevitra ... i ^ [fa tokony h-andeha 0i].
past-think J comp should-fut-go J
"J^ thought that he^/she^ should go."
(166) N-anantena an'i J. [fa h-andidy ny rrofo i P.
past-expect J^ oomp fut-cut the bread 0 i P
"P expected J to cut the bread."
(167) N-anantena an'i J^ [(mba) h-andidy ny rrofo 0^] i P.
past-expect J i comp fut-cut the bread P
"P expected of J i that he.j/shej^ would cut the bread."
The sentence (167) has the sane cognitive meaning as (166) al-
though if it comprises the complementizer mba "please," it sig-
nals the fact that P's expectation is more distant.
2.1.3.2.3 Fa as the General Complementizer.
Fa "that" is the general complementizer since:
1. n£, as in (117) for an Equi-1 verb, signals oorefe-
rence between the embedded Su, deleted in the course of the deri-
vation, and the main clause Su:

530
2. mba, as in (145) for an Equi-2 verb, signals ooref-
erence between the embedded Su, deleted in the course of the de-
rivation, and a non-Su NP in the main clause; and
3. fa, cxi the other hand, can signal either, as in
(165), that the ooreference is between the embedded Su and the
main clause Su, or in (166), that it holds between a non-Su of
the main clause and the embedded Su.
2.1.3.3 Optional Complementizer Fa Deletion.
Deletion of fa is optional even in a double passive
construction involving a Raising-to-DO verb:
(168) N-antena-in' i P [(fa) ho-didi-n'i J] ny nrafo].

past-expect-pass-by P camp pass-cut-by J the bread
"It was expected by P that J would cut the bread."
It was already seen in (162) and (165) that the complementizer fa
is optional when both the main and embedded verbs are in the
active voice. Here, in (168), we have a case where both the high-
er and the lcwer verbs have been passivized.
Postposition is permissible with typical Raising-to-DO
verbs:
(169)a. N-anantena an'i Ji#..i p [h-andidy ny itofo Oil.
past-expect J P fut-cut the bread
"P was expecting of J\ that hei/shei would cut the
bread."
531
b. N-anantena... i P [ny n-an-didi-an1 i J ny mofo].
past-expect P nom. past-circ-cut-by J the bread
"P was expecting J's cutting of the bread."
2.1.3.5 Raising-to-DO and Affixal Passive.
Affixal Passive is allowed in the lower clause if the
complementizer fa is present:
(170)a. N-anantena i P [fa ho-didi-n' i J ny mofo].
past-expect P comp pass-cut-by J the bread
"P was expecting that the bread will be cut by J."
b. *N-anantena i P [0 ho-didi-n' i J ny mofo].
past-expect P comp pass-cut-by J the bread
In (170)a., the complementizer fa is present and the sequence is
perfectly grammatical. This contrasts with (170)b., which is al-
most exactly the same as (170) a. except for the absence of the
complementizer fa : (170)b. is irretrievably ungranmatical.
2.1.3.6 Raising-to-DO and Coreferential Pronoun in the Same
Clause.
As seen in (160)c. under 2.1.3.0, it is possible to
have a Su pronoun, here izy, ooreferential with the Su of the
main clause if Postposition applies and if there is emphasis on
the identity of the referent involved.
By contrast, it was seen under 2.1.2.8 that it is im-
possible to have the above phenomenon with an Equi-2 verb.

532
2.1.3.7 Coreferential Pronoun in the Same Clause.
The example (160)a. shows that with a typical Raising-
to-DO, a pronoun coreferential with the main Su can show up in
the same clause. The strongest piece of evidence in support of
such a claim cones from placement of the negation operator tsy
"not" between azy and the complementizer ho, to yield:
(171) N-ihevitra azyi [tsy ho mahay] i Jeannej.
past-consider her^ n eg coup intelligent Jeannej
"Jeanne^ considered herj not to be intelligent."
Note that the ooreference reading between the pronoun azy and the
NP i Jeanne no longer obtains, as indicated by the different sub-
scripts. It follows that azy must belong in the matrix clause.
2.1.3.8 Selection of Complementizer and Control.
Depending on the choice of complementizer, a Zero-
pronoun in the lower clause under a typical Raising-to-DO verb
like manantena "to expect" can refer back to the main clause Su,
as seen in (166) with the complementizer fa, or to a non-Su in
the matrix clause, as in (167) with the oonplementizer mba. In
this respect, a Raising-to-DO verb behaves in a manner which is
half-way between that of an Equi-1 verb and that of an Equi-2
construction.
2.1.3.9 Raising-to-DO and Reflexivization to Ny Tenany.
A typical Raising-to-DO verb allows Reflexivization to
ny tenany:
533
(172) a. N-ihevitra ny tenany.^ [ho mahay] i Jeannei.
past-consider self^ comp intelligent Jeanne
"Jeanne^ considered herself^ intelligent."
b. No-hever-in' i Jeannei [ho mahay] ny tenany
pass-consider-by J.^ comp intelligent selfi
"Herself^ was thought by Jeanne^ to be intelligent."
The sentence (172)a. has its verb in the active voice, as opposed
to that of (172)b., which has its verb in the passive. The pos-
sibility of promotion of the DO ny tenany of (172)a. to Su posi-
tion through Passivization, as in (172)b., suggests that ny tena-
ny belongs in the same clause as its apparent trigger i Jeanne.
This confirms the view that ny tenany really occupies the DO
position in the main clause in (172)a. Therefore, the victim and
its alleged trigger are clausemates and, according to what is
known of Reflexivization in Malagasy (see Chapter Three: 2.1.1),
the victim should be tena. This suggests that ny tenany origina-
ted as the Su of the embedded clause, without any trigger present
in the sentence since the embedded structure is marked for Em-
phasis, as shown above in (161)b.
2.1.3.10 Absence of Selectional Restriction on DO of Raising.
There is no selectional restriction on the Su of a
double passive construction involving a Raising-to-DO verb:
(173) No-hever-in1 i Paoly ho-entina Rasoa/ny fiara.
pass-think-by Paul pass-bring Rasoa/the car
"Paul was thinking of taking Rasoa/the car."

534
(174) N-ihevitra ny raharaha h-andeha i Paoly.
past-think the affair fut-go Paul
"Paul was thinking that things would work out fine."
2.1.3.11 Raising-to-DO and Truth-Functional Equivalence.
The passive voice structure and the corresponding
active construction involving a Raising-to-DO verb are truth-
functionally equivalent. Thus:
(175)a. N-anantena i Paoly [fa h-ah(a)-azo h-itondra
past-expect Paul comp fut-caus-be-allcwed fut-take
an-Rasoa/ny fiara].
Rasoa/the car
"Paul^ was hoping that he^ would be allowed to take
Rasoa/the car."
b. N-antena-in' i Paoly [ny h-ah(a)-azo h-itondra
pass-expect-by P coup fut-caus-be-allcwed fut-take
an-dRasoa/ny fiara].
Rasoa/the car
"Paul was hoping to be allowed to take Rasoa/the car."
The verb in (175)a. is in the active voice, whereas that found in
(175)b. is in the passive voice. The two are truth-functionally
equivalent.
535
2.1.3.12 Preference for Passive in the Main Clause with Raising.
There is a very strong preference for Passive in the
main clause with a typical Raising-to-DO verb when the embedded
clause is non-equative:
(176)a. ?N-ihevitra an'i J [h-andidy ny mofo] i P.
past-think J fut-cut the- bread P
"P was thinking that J would cut the bread."
b. Nd-hever-in' i P [h-andidy ny mofo] i J.
pass-think-by P fut-cut the bread J
?"J was believed by P to be about to cut the bread."
(177) a. *N-anao an'i J [h-andidy ny nofo] i P.
past-do J fut-cut the bread P
"P was thinking that J would cut the bread."
b. N-atao-n' i P [h-andidy ny nofo] i J.
pass-do-by P fut-cut the bread J
?"J was believed by P to be about to cut the bread."
In both (176)a. and (177)a., the verbs are in the active voice,
and at best, as in (176)a., the sequence is of doubtful gramma-
ticality, whereas in (177)a., the sentence is irretrievably un-
granmatical. By contrast, in (176)b. and (177)b., the verbs are
in the passive voice and both sequences are perfectly grammatical
and sound quite natural.

536
2.1.3.13.1 Sample List of Typical Raising-to-DO Verbs.
The following is a sample list of Raising-to-DO verbs:
1. on the one hand, mihevitra "to think, to consider,"
manao "to consider," mahita "to find," manantena "to expect,"
manaiky "to accept," mitady "to seek," and milaza "to consider,
to declare," take fa or ho for complementizer;
2. on the other hand, mangataka "to request," miangavy
"to beseech," can optionally take mba for its complementizer or
take the nominalizer ny.
Members of the second set are less typical of Raising-
to-DO verbs in so far as they do not have seme of the properties
enumerated under 2.1.3.1. For example, they do not allow a coref-
erential pronoun within the sane clause or Reflexivization to
tenany:
(178)a. N-angataka (*azyi) [ho entina] i Jeanne^.
past-request her^ comp brought Jeanne^
(compare with (160) a.)
"Jeanne was requesting to be taken away."
b. N-angataka (*ny tenany^ [ho entina] i Jeanne^,
past-request self^ comp brought Jeanne^
"Jeanne was requesting to be taken away."
Hie portion of (178)a. which does not comprise the coreferential
pronoun azy is perfectly gramnatical, but if azy is inserted into
the sequence it becomes irretrievably ungraircnatical. Likewise,

537
the portion of (178) b. which does not include the reflexive ny
tenany is perfectly grammatical, but if the latter shows up, the
sentence becomes irretrievably ungrairmatical.
2.1.3.13.2 Additional Criteria for Raising-to-DO.
Hcwever, members of the second list belong in the
Raising-to-DO subclass since: ~
1. they take the nominalizer ng; with the verb in the
circumstantial voice:
(179)a. N-angataka an'i ^ (mba) h-andidy ny nofo 0i i P,
past-request J i part fut-cut the bread P
(see (163)a.)
"P was requesting of J^ that hej/st^ cut the bread,"
b. N-angataha-n' i P ny h-an-didi-an' i J ny nofo,
pass-request-by P nan fut-circ-cut-by J the bread
(see (163)b.)
?"Was requested by P J's cutting of the bread,"
c. N-angataka an'i J. (mba) h-andeha any 0 i i P,
past-request J part fut-go there P
"P was requesting that J go there,"
d. N-angatah-in' i P ny h-an-deha-n-an'i J any,
pass-request-by P nom fut-circ-go-by J there
?"Was requested by P J's going there,"

538
2. there is no restriction on the DO of such verbs, as
seen in (179)b.; the active and its passive counterpart are
truth-functionally equivalent since (179)b. with its verb in the
passive has the same cognitive meaning as (179) a. with its verb
in the active voice.
2.1.3.14 Raising-to-DO and the Cycle.
The grammaticality of the following type of structure
involving a Raising-to-DO verb indicates that it interacts with
Affixal Passive in a way which is consistent with the Cyclic
Convention:
(180)a. [ g 2 Voa-laza-n'i J [ g l fa n-anantena ny raharaha

pass-say-by J ccrap past-expect the affair
[
S0 h o voa
-karakara °i S0] Sl] 1 P
S2]'
comp pass-take-care-of-by P
"It is said by J that P was expecting the affair to
be (well) taken care of,"
to be derived from
b. /[g2 N-ilaza fa n-anantena [gg n-ikarakara

past-say comp past-expect past-take-care-of
ny raharaha R g Q ] i p g l ] i j g2]/,
the affair X P J
where R, short for "Ranona", represents an unspecified Agent x.

539
On cycle SO: Passive with ho complementizer insertion yields
c. [gQ ho voa-karakara-ndR ny raharaha gQ]
[g0 ho voa-karakara ny raharaha SQ ].
camp pass-take-care-of(-by x) the affair
On cycle SI: Raising-to-DO gives
<3- fa n-anantena ny raharaha [ g 0 ho voa-karakara] i P]

conp past-expect the affair comp pass-take-care P.
On cycle S2: Passive applies
e. [gj Voa-laza-n'i J fa n-anantena ny raharaha

pass-say-by J camp past-expect the affair
[gQ ho voa-karakara s q] iP .
camp pass-take-care-of P ]
On cycle SO, as in (180)c., Passive applies, allowing deletion of
the unspecified Agent since the relevant form here is the per-
fective aspect. This is followed by application of Raising-to-DO,
as in (180)d. Then, on the highest cycle, Passive reapplies, as
in (180)e., yielding the relevant surface sequence (180)a.
2.1.4.0 Raising-to-Su.
Raising-to-Su is the process which consists in lifting
the Su of the embedded clause and making it into the Su of the
higher clause. Thus:

540
(181)a. Fantatra [fa h-andidy ny nofo i Jeanne],
known camp fut-cut the bread Jeanne
b. Fantatra i Jeanne [fa h-andidy ny nofo],
known Jeanne coup fut-cut the bread
"It is (a) known (fact) that Jeanne cut the bread,"
where fantatra "be known" is a root passive;
(182)a. Fantatra [fa h-andeha i Jeanne],
known coup fut-go Jeanne
b. Fantatra i Jeanne [fa h-andeha].
known Jeanne comp fut-go
"It is (a) known (fact) that Jeanne will be leaving."
(183)a. Fantatra [fa ho avy ny mpianatra].
known camp fut come the student(s)
b. Fantatra ny mpianatra [fa ho avy].

known the student oonp fut come
"It is (a) known (fact) that the students will be
coning."
In (182)a. and (183)a., the Su NP is in the lower clause, as
shown by the parentheses, whereas in (182)b. and (183)b., the

541
same Su NP shows up in the lower clause, as is evident from the

fact that it new precedes the complementizer fa.
2.1.4.0.1 Grammatical Relations.
In (181)a., the NP i Jeanne is the Su of the embedded
clause. First, it is possible to replace it with the Su pronoun
form izy:
(184) Fantatra [fa h-andidy ny mofo izy].
known coup fut-cut the bread he/she
"It is (a) known (fact) that he/she will be cutting
bread."
Second, Passivization of the lewer clause of (181)a. yields:
(185) Fantatra [ fa ho-didi-n' i Jeanne ny mofo].
known conp pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread
"It is (a) known (fact) that the bread will be cut by
Jeanne."
The sentence (184) shows that the NP i Jeanne occupies the Su

position, while (185) proves that the said NP belongs in the
lower clause since it shows up in the genitive case attached to
the lower predicate.
2.1.4.0.2 Raising.
Yet, in (181) b., the NP i Jeanne is the Su of the
higher clause. First, it is still a Su since it can be replaced
with the Su pronoun form izy:

542
(186) Fantatra izy [fa h-andidy ny mofo].
known he/she comp fut-cut the bread
"It is (a) known (fact) that he/she will be cutting
the bread."
Second, the NP i Jeanne belongs in the higher clause since it is
possible to apply Postposition on the embedded clause:
(187)a. Fantatra [fa h-andidy ny mofo] i Jeanne,
known carp fut-cut the bread Jeanne
b. Fantatra... i Jeanne [fa h-andidy ny mofo],
known Jeanne comp fut-cut the bread
"It is (a) known (fact) that Jeanne will be cutting
the bread,"
where the three dots represent the position vacated by the embed-
ded clause. In (187)a., the Su NP occupies the final position,
whereas in (187)b., with the application of Postposition, it is
the sentential complement which occupies the final position.
2.1.4.1 Properties of Raising-to-Su.
Typical Raising-to-Su verbs share the following proper-
ties:
1. they do not allow a negation in the main clause,
whether it is on its own or with another negation in the lower
clause;
543
2. deletion of the complementizer fa yields an ungram-
matical sequence;
3. Postposition of the embedded clause is possible;
4. Affixal Passive can apply freely on the embedded VP;
5. Reflexivization to tena is possible in the lower
clause, which suggests that a predicate triggering Raising-to-Su
must be able to take a sentential Su;
6. truth-functional equivalence of two structures, the
first of which has an embedded verb in the active and the second,
an embedded verb in the passive;
7. symmetrical predicates yield the same cognitive
meaning under this type of predicate although their arguments are
rearranged;
8. there is no tense-restriction on the embedded verb;
9. this type of predicate is characterized by its se-
lectional transparency in that it does not impose any selectional
restriction on the argument with which it can combine in Su posi-
tion.
2.1.4.2 Raising-tp-Su and Negation.
Topical Raising-to-Su verbs do not allow the Negation
Operator tsy in the lcwer clause, whether on its own or with
another negation:
(188) a. *Tsy fantatra fa (tsy) h-andidy ny irofo i Jeanne.
neg known ccmp (neg) fut-cut the bread Jeanne
(contrast with (181)a.)
"It is not (a) known (fact) that Jeanne will (not)
be cutting the bread."

544
b. *Tsy fantatra fa (tsy) h-andeha i Jeanne.
neg known ccmp (neg) fut-go Jeanne
(contrast with (182)b.)
"It is not (a) known (fact) that Jeanne will not be
leaving."
c. *Tsy fantatra fa (tsy) ho any ny mpianatra.
neg known comp (neg) fut there the student(s)
"It is not (a) known (fact) that the students will
not be coming."
2.1.4.3 Complementizer Deletion.
Deletion of the complementizer fa yields an irretrie-
vably ungramnatical and uninterpretable sequence:
"(189)a. *Fantatra 0 h-andidy ny mofo i Jeanne,
known conp fut-cut the bread Jeanne
"It is (a) known (fact) Jeanne will be cutting the
bread,"
b. *Fantatra 0 ho-didi-n' i Jeanne ny mofo.
known conp pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread
"It is (a) known (fact) the bread has been cut,"
where the complementizer fa has been deleted and where the higher
verb fantatra "be-known" is a root passive.

545
Otie above holds with an adjective as the main predicate:
(190) a. Marina fa h-andidy ny irofo i Jeanne.
true comp fut-cut the bread Jeanne
"It is true that Jeanne will be cutting the bread."
b. Marina fa ho-didi-n'i Jeanne ny nofo.
true camp pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread
"It is true that the bread will be cut by Jeanne."
c. *Marina 0 h-andidy ny nofo i Jeanne.
true comp fut-cut the bread Jeanne
d. *Marina 0 ho-didi-n'i Jeanne ny mofo.
true ocanp fut-cut-by Jeanne the bread
The only difference between (190)a. and (190)b., on the one hand,
and (190)c. and (190)d., on the other, is that the first pair has
the fa complementizer, whereas the second does not. This accounts
for the difference in grammaticality between those two sets of
sentences.
Postposition of the embedded clause is always possible,
whether the main predicate is a verb, as in (181) b., or an ad-
jective, as in:
546
(191)a. Marina [fa ho-didi-n' i Jeanne] ny mofo.
true coup pass-cut-by Jeanne the bread
b. Marina ...ny mofo [fa ho-didi-n' i Jeanne].
true ... the bread ccmp pass-cut-by Jeanne
(meaning for both a. and b. above)
"It is true that the bread will be cut by Jeanne."
In (191)a., the sentential subject is in median position, whereas
in (191) b., it has been postposed, the three dots representing
the vacated position.
2.1.4.5 Affixal Passive in the Lower Clause.
Affixal Passive applies freely on the embedded clause,
whether the main predicate is a verb, as in (185), or an adjec-
tive, as in (191)a.
2.1.4.6 Reflexivization to Tena.

Reflexivization to tena in the lower clause yields a
grammatical sequence:
(192)a. Fantatra [fa h-amono tena^ i Jeanne^].
known comp fut-kill self^ Jeanne^
b. Fantatra i Jeanne^ [fa h-amono tena^.
known Jeannei coup fut-kill selfi
"It is (a) known (fact) that Jeanne.^ killed herself^"

547
(193)a. Marina [fa h-amono tena^ i Jeanne.
true comp fut-kill self^ Jeanne^
b. Marina i Jeannei [fa h-amono tena.^.
true Jeannei comp fut-kill self.^
"It is true that Jeanne.^ killed herself^."
The possibility of Reflexivization to tena suggests at the time
the process applies, the higher Su NP i Jeanne is still in the
same clause as its victim. It can be inferred that a main predi-
cate that triggers Raising-to-Su must be able to take a senten-
tial Su. Thus, in:
(194) a. Hita i Jeanne^ [fa n-amono tena^ ,
seen Jeanne^ comp past-kill selfi
b. Hita [fa n-amono tena^ i Jeanne^],
seen conp past-kill self^ Jeanne^
"It is/was evident that Jeanne^ killed herself^,"
the root verb hita "seen" is a Raising-to-Su predicate since the
grammaticality of (194)b. shows that it can take a sentential Su.
This contrasts with the situation in:
(195) a. Tezitra i Paolyi [fa tsy n-ikarakara tena^ ,
angry Paoly^ conp neg past-take-care-of self^

548
b. *Tezitra [fa tsy n-ikarakara tena^ i Paoly^],
angry comp neg past-take-care-of self^ Paul^
(meaning for both a. and b.)
"PauIL is angry for not taking care of himself
where tezitra "angry" is not a Raising-to-Su predicate since the
ungrammaticality of (195)b. shows that it cannot take a senten-
tial Su. The reading in which we are interested is the one where
the predicate tezitra "angry" is attributed to Paul, and not the
interpretation where tezitra is attributed to the speaker, in
which case (195)b. would be a reply to a question like "What is
the matter with you?" to which the interlocutor would use (195)b.
to say "(X am) angry because Paul did not take care of himself."
2.1.4.7 Raising-to-Su and Truth-Functional Equivalence.
There is truth-functional equivalence between a stru-
cture like (181)a., where the embedded clause has its verb in the
active voice, and its counterpart, as in (185), where the verb is
in the passive voice. This shows that the truth-functional equi-
valence of the two types of embedded clauses is not affected un-
der a Raising-to-Su predicate.
2.1.4.8 Symmetrical Predicates.
Symmetrical predicates yield the same cognitive meaning
under a Raising-to-Su verb, with their arguments rearranged:
(196)a. Fantatra [fa h-ilalao amin'i Jeanne i Paoly].
known coup fut-play with Jeanne Paul
"It is known that Paul will play with Jeanne."

549
b. Fantatra [fa h-ilalao amin'i Paoly i Jeanne],
known coup fut-play with Paul Jeanne
"It is known that Jeanne will play with Paul."
(197)a. Marina [fa h-ilalao amin'i Jeanne i Paoly].
true oornp fut-play with Jeanne Paul
"It is true that Paul will play with Jeanne."
b. Marina [fa h-ilalao amin'i Paoly i Jeanne],
true comp fut-play with Paul Jeanne
"It is true that Jeanne will play with Paul."
In (196)a. and (197)a., the NP i Paoly is the Su of the embedded
clause, whereas in (196)b. and (197)b., the Su NP of the embedded
clause is i Jeanne. Yet, this rearrangement does not affect the
cognitive meaning of the sequences. This property contrasts with
that of Egui-2 verbs, as seen under 2.1.2.11.
2.1.4.9 Tense Restrictions in the Embedded Clause.

There is no tense restriction whatsoever on the verb
embedded under a Raising-to-Su predicate:
(198)a. Fantatra [fa n-ilalao t-amin' i J i P].
known coup past-play past-with J P
"It is (a) known (fact) that P was playing with J."
b. Fantatra [fa m-ilalao 0-amin' i J i P].
known comp pres-play pres-with J P
"It is (well) known that P plays with J."

550
Hie above contrasts with the following situation,
1. where the embedding verb is an Equi-1 predicate, as
in:
(199)a. *N-itetika n-ividy ny trano i Jeanne,
past-plan past-buy the house Jeanne
b. *N-itetika m-ividy ny trano i Jeanne,
past-plan pres-buy the house Jeanne
c. N-itetika h-ividy ny trano i Jeanne,
past-plan fut-buy the house Jeanne
(see (117))
Only the future tense is allowed in the embedded clause: (199)a.,
where the embedded verb is in the past tense, is ungrammatical;
the same holds of (199)b., where the embedded verb is in the
present tense. By contrast, (199)c., where the embedded verb is
in the future, is perfectly grammatical.
2. Where the embedding verb is an Equi-2 predicate:
(200)a. N-anery an'i Jeanne n-andeha i Paoly,
past-force Jeanne past-go Paul
"Paul forced Jeanne to leave,"
b. *N-anery an'i Jeanne m-andeha i Paoly,
past-force Jeanne pres-go Paul

551
c. N-anery an'i Jeanne h-andeha i Paoly,
"Paul was forcing Jeanne to go,"
the embedded verb cannot take the present tense, as is made
evident by the ungrammaticality of (200)b. But, both the past
tense, as in (200)a., and the future tense, as in (200)c., yield
perfectly grammatical sequences.
3. Where the embedding verb is a Raising-to-DO pred-
icate:
(201)a. N-anantena an'i J fa n-andicfy ny mofo i P,
past-expect J coup past-cut the bread P
"P expected J to have cut the bread,"
b. *N-anantena an'i J fa m-andidy ny itpfo i P,
past-expect J comp pres-cut the bread P
N-anantena an'i J fa h-andidy ny mofo i P,

past-expect J coup fut-cut the bread P
"P was expecting J to cut the bread,"
the present tense, as shown in (201)b., is ruled out since the
sentence comprising it in its lower clause is irretrievably un-
grammatical. By contrast, the past tense, as in (201)a., and the
future tense, as shown in (201)c., are permissible.

552
2.1.4.10 Selectional Restrictions.
A Raising-to-Su predicate does not impose any selec-
tional restriction on the argument with which it can combine in
Su position:
(202) a. Fantatra ny rrpianatra [fa ho avy].
known the student(s) comp fut come
(see (183))
"It is a (well) known fact that the student(s) will
come."
b. Fantatra ny orana [fa ho avy].
known the rain carp fut ccroe
"It is known that the rain will come," i.e.
"It is a (well) known fact that it will rain."
Whether the embedded Su is an animate NP, as in (202)a., or an
inanimate NP, as in (202)b., the output is perfectly grammatical.
This contrasts with the situation involving an Equi-2 verb, where
there is selectional restriction between the DO and the main
predicate, as seen under 2.1.2.10.
2.1.4.11 Sanple List of Typical Raising-to-Su Verbs.
The tests listed under 2.1.4.1 are applicable to:
1. verbs like fantatra "known" and re "heard," belong-
ing to Class 2 (see 1.1.6);
2. verbs like aleo "preferable," of Class 3;
3. verbs like hita "see", of Class 4; and

553
4. verbs like mety "possible/likely," of class 5.
However, it should be emphasized that not all the tests are
jointly applicable to each subtype.
2.1.4.12 Raising-to-Su and the Cycle.
Raising-to-Su interacts with Affixal Passive in a way
which suggests that the latter is a cyclic rule:
(203)a. [ g 2 Voa-laza-n'i P [ g l fa hita [ gQ fa voa-karakara-n1
pass-say-by P comp seen ccaip pass-take-care
i J tsara ny ankizy. S Q ] g l ] g2 ],
J well the child
"It has been said by P that it can be seen that the
children were taken good care of by J,"
to be derived from:
b. /[ g2 N-ilaza [ g l "Hita [ g 0 fa n-ikarakara ny ankizy
past-say seen camp past-take-care the child
1 J 1 p
sol" Sl3 S2l/-
J P
c. [gQ fa no-karakara-in1 i J tsara ny ankizy

SO1'
conp pass-take-care-by J well the child
"That the children were taken good care of by J."

554
d. [g^ Hita ny ankizy^ [gg fa no-karakara-in'i J tsara]]

seen the child comp pass-take-care-by J well
"It was evident that the children were taken good care
of by J."
e. [ g 2 voa-laza-n'i P [ g l fa hita...(same as in d. above)
pass-say-by P comp seen...
On cycle SO- in (203)c., Affixal Passive applies; then, on the
next higher cycle, Raising-to-Su takes place, as shown above in
(203)d., and finally, Affixal Passive reapplies on cycle S2, as
indicated in (203)e. Again, we have a sandwich-type argument in
favor of the cycle.
2.1.5.0 Complementizer Fa and Application of Affixal Passive.
In this Subsection, it will be shown that the appli-
cation of Affixal Passive is contingent upon the presence of the
complementizer fa underlyingly.
First, a series of tests will be proposed for the dis-
tinction between the complementizer and the nominalizer ny.
Second, it will be seen that Affixal Passive can apply
under the complementizer fa, but not under the complementizer ny.
Third, it will be shown that the complementizer n£ and
the complementizer ho are in complementary distribution with res-
pect to the type of structure they can co-occur with, i.e. equa-
tive vs. non-equative; since ho only takes the equative type, it
will not be relevant for the rule of Affixal Passive and will be
set aside.
555
Fourth, since the particle mba will be shown not to
have the status of a full-fledged complementizer (see 2.1.2.2)
and, in any case, since it characterizes a structure marked for
politeness, mba could be regarded as a complementizer which is
not typical of the Equi-2 construction.
Fifth, the complementizers ny, ho, and fa are present
in the underlying representation.
2.1.5.1 Complementizer N£ vs. Nominalizer Ny.
There is a distinction between the complementizer n£
and the nominalizer ny;:
1. With the complementizer n£, it is possible to have a
double passive involving the two subsequent verbs and deletion of
the n£ —the two structures, one with two active verbs and the
other with two passives, having the same cognitive meaning, as in
(204). This is not possible with the nominalizer n^, as shown in
(205) below.
(204)a. N-itetika ny h-ividy ny fiara 0^ i Jeanne^,
past-plan carp fut-buy the car Jeanne
b. Nò-teteh-in'i Jeanne ho-vidi-na 0^ ny fiara^.

pass-plan-by Jeanne pass-buy-by the car
"Jeanne was making plans to buy the car."
(205)a. N-ahita ny f-i-vidi-an-an1i J ny fiara i P.
past-see the nom-circ-buy-by J the car

556
b. *Hita-n'i P no-vidi-n'i J ny fiara.
seen-by P pass-buy-by J the car
"P saw the place where J usually b u y s / b o u g h t c a r s . "
Hie sentence (205) b. can be grammatical, but with a totally dif-
ferent interpretation than (205)a., i.e. "P saw J buying the
car (s)."
2. With the nominalizer ny, it is not possible to have
a double passive on the two verbs with deletion of ny.
(206)a. Fantatra ny n-an-defa-s-an' i J ilay taratasy.
known nam past-circ-send-by J the letter
b. *Fantatra 0 n-andefa-s-an1 i J ilay taratasy.
known comp past-circ-send-by J the letter
c. *Fantatra 0 n-a-lefa-n' i J ilay taratasy.
known oomp past-pass-send-by J the letter
"The place is known where the letter was sent by J."
3. Under the complementizer ny, Affixal Passive is not
possible, whereas under the nominalizer n£, it is obligatory.
(207)a. Tsy tia-n' i P ny f-iresak' i J,
neg loved-by P camp asp-talk J
b. *Tsy tia-n' i P ny f-i-resah-an' i J,
neg loved-by P camp asp-circ-talk-by J
"P does not like J's way of talking,"

557
to be derived from
c. /[ gl Tsy tia [go ny [f-iresaka i J] sg] i P gl ]/
neg love comp asp-talk J P
(208)a. Tsy tia-n' i P^^ ny f-i-resah-ana azyif
neg loved-by P^ nom asp-circ-talk him^
b. *Tsy tia-n' i P i ny f-iresak' azyif
neg loved-by P i nom asp-talk hirn^
"P^ does not like (people's) talking about him^,"
to be derived from
c. /[ gl Tsy tia [gg [f-iresaka an'i P^ R] g 0 ] i P^ sl ]/
neg love asp-talk P X P
where _f represents the habitual aspect and X is an unspecified
Agent, who will ultimately get deleted.
4. When ny is a complementizer, izay cannot be
substituted for it; but, vtfien ny is a nominalizer, this is
possible, especially under negation:
(209) a. N-itetika [ny h-andeha i pi
past-plan conp fut-go P
b. *N-itetika [izay h-andeha O^j i p^
past-plan fut-go P
"P was making plans to leave."

558
(210)a. Tsy m-aniry [ny h-an-deha-n-an'ny raharaha] i P.
neg pres-wish nam fut-circ-go-by the affair P
b. Tsy m-aniry [izay h-an-deha-n-an'ny raharaha] i P.
neg pres-wish fut-circ-go-by the affair P
"P does not want things to go (smoothly)
5. With the complementizer ny, the embedded verb is
restricted to the future tense, as can be seen in (199), whereas
with the nominalizer ny, there is no such restriction:
(211)a. Tsara ny h-an-deha-n-an' i Jeanne,
good nom fut-circ-go-by Jeanne
"It is a good thing for Jeanne to go."
b. Tsara ny O-an-deha-n-an' i Jeanne,
good nom pres-circ-go-by Jeanne
"It is a good thing that Jeanne takes the habit of
going."
c. Tsara ny n-an-deha-n-an' i Jeanne,

good ncm past-circ-go-by Jeanne
"It is a good thing that Jeanne went there."
6. With the complementizer ny, there is necessarily
ooreference between the referent of the main Su and that of the
embedded Su NP underlyingly:
(219)a. N-itetika [ny h-andeha 0/] i paolyif
past-plan camp fut-go Paul
"Paul was planning to leave,"

559
b. *N-itetika [ny h-andeha (h] i Paolyj,
past-plan conp fut-go Paul
"Paul was planning for someone else to leave,"
where the referent of the NP with the subcript i is different
from that of the NP with the subscript j, and which is to be
derived respectively from
a1. /[N-itetika [ny h-andeha i Paoly^] i Paoly^].
past-plan comp fut-go Paul^ Paul^
b'. /[N-itetika [ny h-andeha Ch ] i Paolyj].
past-plan comp fut-go CK Paulj
(213)a. N-ahita [ny n-an-deha-n-an'i Jeanne] i Paoly,
past-see nom past-circ-go-by Jeanne Paul
"Paul saw Jeanne's departure,"
b. N-ahita [ny n-an-deha-n-ana tany Ch] i Paolyj,
past-see nom past-circ-go-by there Paul
"Paul saw our/someone else's going there,"
to be derived respectively from
a'- /[ gl N-ahita [ g 0 ny [n-andeha i Jeanne] ] i Paoly]/

past-see nan past-go Jeanne Paul
b'. /[ gl N-ahita [ g 0 ny [n-andeha R^] i Paolyj]/,

past-see nam past-go X Paul
560
where the referent of the NP with the subscript i is different
from that of the NP with the subscript j and where R, short for
Ranona "X" is an unspecified Agent, ultimately deleted.
7. The nominalizer rr£ can be replaced with the comple-
mentizer fa, whereas this is never the case with the complemen-
tizer ny:
(214)a. Tsara [ny h-an-deha-n-an' i Jeanne].
good nom fut-circ-go-by Jeanne
b. Tsara [fa h-andeha i Jeanne].
good coup fut-go Jeanne
"It is a good thing that Jeanne is going (there)."
(215)a. N-itetika [ny h-andeha 0^] i Paoly^.
past-plan comp fut-go 0^ Paul^
(see (212)a.)
"Paul was planning to leave."
b. *N-itetika [fa h-andeha O^ i Paoly.^.
past-plan comp fut-go 0^ Paul^
c. *N-itetika...i Paoly^ [fa h-andeha 0t].
past-plan Pau^ comp fut-go Oj^
In (214), we have the nominalizer n£ since in this case n£, as in
(214)a., can be replaced by the general complementizer fa, yiel-
ding the grammatical sequence (214) b. This contrasts with the
situation in (215), where the n£ of (215)a. cannot be replaced

561
with the complementizer fa, as shown in (215) b. Even when Post-
position is made to apply, as in (215) c.', the output remains ir-
retrievably ungrammatical.
2.1.5.2 Restriction on Affixal Passive.
Affixal Passive can apply under the complementizer fa
but not under the nominalizer ny;
(216)a. Tsara [fa n-andefa ny npianatra i Jeanne].
good comp past-send the student Jeanne
"It is a good thing that Jeanne sent the student(s)."
b. Tsara [fa n-a-lefa-n' i Jeanne ny npianatra].
good comp pass-send-by Jeanne the student(s)
"It is a good thing that the student(s) was (were)
sent by Jeanne."
(217)a. Tsara [ny n/m-andefa ny npianatra].
good ccatp past/pres-send the student (s)
"It is a good thing (for us/you) to have sent/to send
the student(s)."
b. *Tsara [ny n/0-a-lefa ny npianatra].
good comp past/pres-pass-send the student
In (216)a., the complementizer is fa and, as shown in (216)b., it
is possible to passivize the embedded verb since the output is

562
perfectly grammatical; whereas, in (217)a., the complementizer is
ny and although the embedded predicate is a typical transitive
verb, if Passive is to apply, the resulting sequence is the irre-
trievably ungranmatical (217)b. Whether the embedded verb is in
the past tense with n or in the present tense with the zero pre-
fix does not matter at all.
2.1.5.3 Distribution of Complementizers and Ho.

The complementizer n£ and the complementizer ho are in
oonplementary distribution with respect to the type of structure
that can be embedded under them. N£ typically takes non-equative
structures while ho combines with equative structures:
(218)a. N-ikasa [ny h-ividy trano] i Paoly.
past-intend conp fut-buy house Paul
"Paul was planning to buy a house."
b. *N-ikasa [ho h-ividy trano] i Paoly.
past-intend conp fut-buy house Paul
c. N-ikasa [ho any] i Paoly.
past-intend comp there Paul
"Paul intended to be there."
(219)a. N-ihevitra azyi [ho mahay] i Paoly^
past-consider hinu comp intelligent Pauli
"Paul considered himself intelligent."

563
b. *N-ihevitra azyi [ny mahay] i Paoly^
past-consider hinL comp intelligent Pauli

"Paul considered himself intelligent."
c. N-ihevitra [ny h-ividy trano] i Paoly.
past-plan coup fut-buy house Paul
In (218)a., the embedded clause comprises a typically transitive
verb under the complementizer n£ and the sequence is perfectly
granmatical. However, if the oonplementizer ho is substituted for
ny, the output is the ungrammatical (218)b. Hie only situation
where (218)b. may be considered marginally acceptable by a native
speaker of Malagasy is when there is hesitation as to what the
continuation of the sentence should be after the oonplementizer
ho. In such a case, the choice is between a typically transitive
verb, as in (218)a., or a typically intransitive predicate, as in
(218)c. On the other hand, in (219)a., the complementizer is ho
and the embedded predicate is an equative type of structure and
the sentence is grammatical, as opposed to (219)b., with the
complementizer ny, which is irretrievably ungranmatical. Further-
more, when the same verb mihevitra "to think, to consider" takes
the rr£ oonplementizer, as in (219)c., an embedded clause with a
typically transitive verb yields a perfectly granmatical
sequence.
2.1.5.4 Complementizer Mba and a Sanple List of Equi-2 Verbs.
The following verbs have the properties of Equi-2:

564
manery "to force," mibaiko "to order, to give an order," manome
alalana "to give permission to," and manampy "to help." Yet, they
never occur with the particle mba. Thus, for example:
(220)a. N-anery an'i Jeanne h-andeha i Paoly.
"Paul was ordering Jeanne to leave."
b. *N-anery an'i Jeanne mba h-andeha i Paoly.
past-force Jeanne part fut-go Paul
"Paul was ordering Jeanne to please leave."
This contrasts with the behavior of verbs of linguistic communi-
cation like miangavy "to request," manentana "to exhort," mita-
laho "to beseech," mananibitamby "to cajole (someone) into doing
something," and mandodona "to press":
(221)a. N-iangavy an'i Jeanne h-andeha i Paoly.
past-request Jeanne fut-go Paul
"Paul was requesting that Jeanne leave."
b. N-iangavy an'i Jeanne mba h-andeha i Paoly.
past-request Jeanne part fut-go Paul
"Paul requesting of Jeanne that she leave."
Since the verbs in both (220) and (221) belong in the Equi-2 sub-
category and since the insertion of the particle mba in (220) b.
yields an ungranmatical sentence, it follows that niba cannot be

565
posited under lying ly for the entire set of verbs of this sub-
class. In fact, in view of examples such as (142) and (143), the
structures involving mba must be considered Marked.
2.1.5.5 Full-fledged Complementizers.

In contrast to mba, the complementizers ny, ho, and fa
are obligatorily present underlyingly since their omission leads
to ungrammatical sentences:
(222)a. M-itetika ny h-andeha i Paoly.
pres-plan comp fut-go Paul
"Paul intends to leave."
b. *M-itetika 0 h-andeha i Paoly.
pres-plan conp fut-go Paul
"Paul intends to leave."
(223)a. Tsara fa lasa i Paoly.
good ccrop gone Paul

"It is a good thing that Paul has left."
b. *Tsara 0 lasa i Paoly.
good conp gone Paul
(224)a. N-ihevitra ho any i Paoly.
past-think comp there Paul
"Paul was thinking of getting there."

566
b. *N-ihevitra 0 any i Paoly.
past-think carp there Paul
The sentence (222) b. from which the oonplementizer n£ has been
emitted is ungrammatical and seems to be characteristic of
Foreigner Talk, whereas (223)b. without the complementizer fa is
simply not interpretable. Likewise, (224)b. without the comple-
mentizer ho cannot be assigned any interpretation whatsoever.
2.1.5.6 Optional Conplementizer and Deletion.
In cases like (117), where the oonplementizer n^ is
optionally present, a oonplementizer deletion rule deletes ny.
Thus:
(225) a. N-andrama-n'i Pj^ n-enti-na ny fiara,
pass-try-by P_L pass-bring-by C^ the car
"The car was tried by P to be driven," i.e.
"P was trying to drive the car,"
to be derived from
b. /[ gl N-anandrana [gg ny n-itondra ny fiara i P^} i Pj_]/

past-try conp past-drive the car P^ p^
If Affixal Passive is not made to apply on the lower cycle, bloc-
ked as it is by the presence of the oonplementizer n£, we get
after Equi-1:
567
c. N-anandrana [ny n-itondra ny fiara CL ] i
past-try comp past-drive the car Ch p^
"P was trying to drive the car,"
and if on cycle SO, the complementizer is deleted, we obtain:
d. N-anandrana [0 n-itondra ny fiara 0v-] i- pv.
past-try comp past-drive the car O^ p^
Reapplication of Affixal Passive on cycle S« yields:
e. *N-anandrana [0 n-enti-na 0^ ny fiara] i P^,
past-try comp pass-drive-by 0^ the car P^
which is ungrammatical unless Affixal Passive also applies in the
matrix:
f. N-andrama-n'i P^^ n-enti-na 0^^ ny fiara.
pass-try-by P_L pass-drive-by 0 i the car
"P tried to drive the car."
2.1.6 Affixal Passive Contingent Upon Underlying Fa.
Since ny, ho, fa, and mba are the only words in the
language which can serve as complementizers in Indirect Discourse
when Postposition of the sentential complement does not apply;
since ho can oily take an equative structure (see 2.1.5.3); since
mba cannot co-occur with the entire set of verbs belonging in the
Bqui-2 subclass; and since even in the latter case, we have a

568
Marked structure, the only two relevant complementizers are ny
and fa.
Now, if we factor out all the cases where rr£ is not a
complementizer but a nominalizer we are left with cases such as
those under 2.1.5.1 and 2.1.5.2, where application of Affixal
Passive always yields ungrammatical sequences, as opposed to
those where application of Affixal Passive is possible under fa.
Furthermore, there are instances like those cited above under
2.1.5.5, where the presence of the complementizer n£ and the com-
plementizer fa is mandatory. This suggests that they are present
underlyingly.
Frcm all of the above facts, it follows that the ap-
plication of Affixal Passive is contingent upon the underlying
presence of the complementizer fa.
2.2.0 Causative Constructions.
In the following Subsection, it will be shown, on the
one hand, that a typical Predicate-Raising Causative, i.e. an(a),
can rally embed an equative type of clause with either a Root
Passive or an Adjective for its predicate, but that the Conple-
ment-Causative amp (a) can also take the Affixal Passive in its
lower clause; and, on the other hand, that Affixal Passive inter-
acts with Clause-Onion in a way which suggests that the latter is
a cyclic rule.
2.2.1 Predicate-Raising Causatives.
The Causative an(a), which is a Predicate-Raising Caus-
ative in its Manipulative reading, can embed a clause conprising

569
a root passive, typically one which attributes no Control whatso-
ever to the Causee. One of the consequences of such a situation
is that the Causer exerts complete Control over the Causee,
either throughout the entire duration of the Action being des-
cribed or oily during the initial phase(s) of the said Action in
the case of a semi-autonomous Causee. Affixal Passive either with
no...ina or a is always possible:
(226)a. Tapaka ny tady,
cut the rope
"The rope has been cut,"
b. N-an-[(t)apaka ny tady] i Paoly,

past-caus-cut the rope Paul
"Paul was cutting the rope,"
c. NO-tapah-in' i Paoly ny tady,
pass-cut-by Paul the rope
"The rope was being cut by Paul,"
to be evolved from:
d. /t sl N-an-[s0 tapaka ny tady SQ ] i Paoly sl ]/

past-caus cut the rope Paul
(224)a. Latsaka ny taratasy,
dropped the letter
"The letter has been dropped,"

570
b. N-an-[datsaka ny taratasy] i Paoly,
"Paul was dropping the letter,"
c. N-a-latsak'i Paoly ny taratasy,
"The letter was being dropped by Paul,"
to be derived from:
d. N-an-[latsaka ny taratasy s q] i Paoly

past-dropped the letter Paul
The simplex sentences in (226)a. and (227)a., which are embedded
under a higher Causative clause, as shown in (226)d. and (227)d.
respectively, each comprise a root passive: tapaka "cut," in the
first sequence and latsaka "dropped," in the second. The diffe-
rence in distribution between no...ina and a seems to be attribu-
table to an aspectual distinction, in that, in (226)b., we have
an inherently Durative verb, hence no...ina in (226)c.; as op-
posed to (227)b., where an inherently Ingressive type of verb
appears, hence a for the imperfective passive, as shown in
(227)c.
2.2.2 Restriction on Affixal Passive.
The Causative an(a) in both its Causal and Manipulative
interpretations can embed a clause comprising an adjective, but
Affixal Passive is possible only with the Manipulative reading to
the exclusion of the Causal meaning:

571
(228)a. Mainty ny volo-ny,
black the hair-his/her
"His/her hair is black,"
b. TN-ana-mainty ny volo-ny^ i Jeannej,
past-caus-black the hair-her^ Jeannej
"Jeanne^ was dyeing herj hair black,"
c. No-mainti-s-in' i Jeanne^ ny volo-ny^,
pass-black-by Jeanne^ the hair-her^
"Her^ hair was being dyed black by Jeanne^,"
underlyingly
d. /[ ^ N-ana-[ SQ mainty ny volo-ny^] i Jeanne^]/.
past-caus-black the hair-her^ Jeannej
(229)a. Reraka i Paoly,
tired Paul
"Paul is/was tired,"
b. N-an-dreraka an'i Paoly ny dia.
past-caus-tired Paul the trip
"Paul is/was tired because of the trip." or
"The trip exhausted Paul."
*No-rerah(a)-an' ny dia i Paoly.
pass-tired-by the trip Paul

572
to be derived from
d. /[31 N-an-[s0 reraka i Paoly] ny dia]/.

past-caus tired Paul the trip
In both (228)b. and (229)b., the simplex sentence shown in
(228)a. and (229)a. respectively has been embedded under the
Causative predicate an(a), as is made explicit in the underlying
sequences proposed in (228)d. and (229)d. Hie sentence (228)b.
can cxily be assigned a Manipulative reading and, as a corollary,
Affixal Passive with no...ina is possible, as is made evident by
the grammaticality of the sequence (228)c. On the other hand,
(229)b. can oily have a Causal interpretation and Affixal Passive
with no... ina is impossible, as can be inferred from the fact
that (229)c. is irretrievably ungrammatical.
2.2.3 " Affixal Passive and Causal Causatives.
However, the Causative an(a) even in its Causal reading
cannot embed a predicate in the Affixal Passive with no...ina,
voa, or tafa;
(230)a. No-tapah (a)-ina ny tady,
pass-cut-by the rope
"Hie rope was being cut,"
b. *N-an-no-tapah(a)-ina ny tady i Paoly,
past-caus-pass-cut-by the rope Paul

573
to be derived from the intermediate structure
c. /[ gl N-an-[s0 no-tapah-ina ny tady] i Paoly]/.

past-caus pass-cut-by the rope Paul
(231)a. Voa-tapaka ny tady,
pass-cut the rope
"The rope has been cut,"
b. *N-an-voa-tapaka ny tady i Paoly,
past-caus-pass-cut the rope Paul
to be evolved from
c. /[ sl N-an-[s0 voa-tapaka ny tady] i Paoly]/.
past-caus pass-cut the rope Paul
(232)a. Tafa-latsak' i Paoly ny taratasy,
"The letter has been posted,"
b. *N-an-tafa-latsaka ny taratasy i Paoly,
to be derived respectively from the intermediate structures
c. /[ [ggTafa-[g-|_latsak' i Paoly ny taratasy]/

574
d. /[g^ N-an-[gg tafa-latsaka ny taratasy] i Paoly]/.

past-caus pass-dropped the letter Paul
The sentence (230)a. has a verb which has undergone Affixal Pas-
sive. By itself, the sequence is perfectly grammatical. However,
when it is embedded under the higher Predicate-Raising Causative
an (a), as in (230 )b., the output becomes irretrievably ungrarma-
tical. Hie same holds for (231) and (232). Therefore, it can be
inferred that the Causative predicate an(a) cannot embed an Af-
fixal Passive.
2.2.4 Complement-Causatives and Nature of the Embedded Verb.
The Causative amp(a), which is a Complement-Causative,
can embed an equative type of clause with a root passive or an
adjective, especially in its Causal interpretation:
(233)a. Latsaka ny taratasy noho i Paoly,
dropped the letter because-of Paul
"The letter has fallen onto the ground because of
Paul,"
b. I Paoly no n-ampa-latsaka ny taratasy,
Paul part past-caus-dropped the letter
"It is Paul who was the cause of the dropping of the
letter,"
from the following intermediate sequences respectively

575
c
" /"SO kanaka n Y taratasy] noho i Paoly]]/
d. /[gjL N-aitpa-[g0 latsaka ny taratasy] i Paoly]/.

past-caus dropped the letter Paul
(234) a. Mainty ny volo-ny tamin' ny fanafody,
black the hair-his/her because-of the medicine
"Her hair is black because of the medicine,"
b. Ny fanafody no n-ampa-mainty ny volo-ny,
the medecine part past-caus-black the hair-his/her

"It is the medicine which caused her hair to be black,"
to be evolved respectively from
c. /[[g0 Mainty ny volo-ny] [g-jtamin' ny fanafody]]/

black the hair-his because-of the medicine
d. /[gl N-ampa-[g0 mainty ny volo-ny] ny fanafody]/

past-caus black the hair-his/her the medecine
In (233)a., the predicate is a root passive, whereas in (234)a.,
it is an adjective. In (233)b. and (234)b., Clefting has fronted
the Su NP. Hie grammaticality of both sequences where the lower
clause is (233)a. and (234)a. respectively, shows that the Caus-
ative predicate amp (a) can indeed embed a root passive or an ad-
576
jective. Incidentally, Causal Causatives like (233)a. have inter-
mediate structures of the type shown in (233)c. since, as was
demonstrated in 1.3.2, a Causal-Oblique is lower on the hierarchy
than a Source-Oblique, the cut-off point for premotion to Su.
This entails that a Causal-Oblique does not belong in the same
simplex sentence as a Source-Oblique.
2.2.5 Complement-Causative and Verbal Aspect.
The Complement-Causative anp(a) can embed an Affixal
Passive with the perfective aspect voa or tafa, but not one with
the imperfective circumfix no... ina, which implies that it can
also embed a non-equative type of clause:
(235)a. Voa-sazy i Paoly noho ny ditra-ny,
pass-punish Paul because-of the mischief-his
"Paul has been punished because of his mischief,"
b. Ny ditra-ny no n-ampa-voa-sazy an'i Paoly,
the mischief-his part past-caus-pass-punish Paul
"It was because of his mischief that Paul was punish-
ed,"
to be derived from the intermediate structures, respectively
c. /[[g0Voa-savy i Paoly][glncho ny ditra-ny]]/

perf-punish Paul because-of the mischief-his
d. /[ sl N-ampa[SQ voa-sazy i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/.

past-caus pass-punish Paul the mischief-his
577
(236)a. Tafa-janona i Paoly noho ny torimaso-ny,
pass-remain Paul because-of the sleep-his
"Paul was left behind because he was asleep,"
b. Ny toriinaso-ny no n-ampa-tafa-janona an'i Paoly,
the sleep-his part past-caus-pass-remain Paul
"It was because he was asleep, Paul was left behind,"
from the intermediate structures
c. /[[g0Tafa-janona i Paoly][slnoho ny torimaso-ny]]/

perf-remain Paul because-of the sleep-his
d. /[gi N-ampa[gg tafa-janona i Paoly] ny torimaso-ny]/.
past-caus pass-remain Paul the sleep-his
(237)a. NO-saz(i)-ina i Paoly noho ny ditra-ny,
pass-punish-by Paul because-of the mischief-his
"Paul was being punished because of his mischief,"
b. *Ny ditra-ny no n-ampa-no-saz-ina an'i Paoly,

(no interpretation Whatsoever)
c
- /ttgoNb-saz-ina i Paoly][slnoho ny ditra-ny]]/
578
<3. /[gl N-ampa [sg no-saz-ina i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/.

In (235)b., an Affixal Passive with voa, as shown in (235)a., has
been embedded under the higher Causative arrp(a) and the output is
grammatical. Likewise, in (236)b., an Affixal Passive with tafa,
as seen in (236)a., has been embedded under the Complement-Caus-
ative and the resulting sequence is grammatical. But, when the
Affixal Passive involves the imperfective aspect circumfix no..-
• ina, as seen in (237) a., and if this is embedded under amp (a),
as in (237)b., then the sentence is irretrievably ungranmatical.
2.2.6 The Causative Aha and the Nature of the Predicate in
the Embedded Clause.
the Causative aha in its Causal reading can embed a
root passive or an adjective, like the Predicate-Raising an(a),
although it will be shown in 2.2.7 below that, like the Comple-
ment-Causative amp (a), it also allows non-equative types of
structures in the lower clause:
(same as (233)a.)
"The letter fell because of Paul,"
b. I Paoly no n-aha-latsaka ny taratasy,
Paul part past-caus-dropped the letter
"It was because of Paul that the letter fell,"

579
to be evolved respectively from the intermediate structures
c
- /[[ggLatsaka ny taratasy][g^noho i Paoly]]/
d. /[ gl N-aha-[gg latsaka ny taratasy] i Paoly]/.
(239)a. FOtsy ny volo-n'i Jeanne noho ny aretina,
white the hair-of Jeanne because-of the illness
"Jeanne's hair is white because of the illness,"
b. Ny aretina no n-aha-fotsy ny volo-n'i Jeanne,
the illness part past-caus-white the hair-of Jeanne
"It was the illness Which caused Jeanne's hair to be
white,"
to be derived from the intermediate structures
c. /[[ggPotsy ny volo-n'i Jeanne][glnoho ny aretina]]/
white the hair-of Jeanne because-of the illness
<3. /[ gl N-aha-[g 0 fotsy ny volo-n'i Jeanne] ny aretina]/.

past-caus white the hair-of Jeanne the illness
In the sentence (238)b., the embedded clause, as in (238)a., com-
prises a root passive, whereas in (239)b., it has an adjective,
as can be seen in (239)a. In both cases, Clefting has fronted

580
the Su NP: i Paoly in (238)b. and ny aretina in (239)b. The
grammaticality of (238)b. and (239)b. shows that the Causative
predicate aha can embed an equative type of clause.
2.2.7 The Causal Causative Aha and Affixal Passive.
The Causative predicate aha can also embed an Affixal
Passive with voa or tafa, but not one with no...ina. Frcm this,
it can be inferred that a non-equative type of clause can be
embedded under this predicate.
(240)a. Voa-sazy i Paoly noho ny ditrany,
b. Ny ditra-ny no n-aha-voa-sazy an'i Paoly,
to be derived respectively frcm the intermediate structures
c. /[[ggVoa-savy i Paoly] [glnoho ny ditra-ny]]/
/[
S1 N-aha-[g0 voa-sazy i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/.
(241)a. Tafa-janona i Paoly noho ny torimaso-ny,
(same as (236) a)
"Paul was left behind because he was asleep,"

581
b. Ny torimaso-ny no n-aha-tafa-janona an'i Paoly,

the sleep-his part past-caus-pass-remain Paul
"It was because he was sleeping that Paul was left
behind,"
originating respectively from the underlying structures
c. /[ [g0Tafa-janona i Paoly][g^noho ny torimaso-ny]]/

d. /[gj N-aha-[GQ tafa-janona i Paoly] ny torimaso-ny]/.

past-caus pass-remain Paul the sleep-his
(242)a. No-saz-ina i Paoly noho ny ditra-ny,
b. *Ny ditra-ny no n-aha-no-saz-ina an' i Paoly,
respectively, from the intermediate structures
c. /[[g0No-saz-ina i Paoly][glnoho ny ditra-ny]]/

d. /fg]_ N-aha-[gQ no-saz-ina i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/.

582
the grammaticality pattern emerging from (240)a., (241)b., and
(242)b., confirms the view that the Causative aha can indeed
embed a non-eguative type of structure, i.e. an Affixal Passive
with voa or tafa, but not one with no...ina.
2.2.8 The Causal Causative Ank(a) and Affixal Passive.
The Causative predicate anka can only embed an adject-
ival predicate, but never a root passive or an Affixal Passive,
which suggests that it can only take an equative type of clause.
However, since Passivization after Clause-Union is only a trend,
as presented in Chapter Six, Subsection 2.6, it cannot be consi-
dered a Predicate-Raising Causative. Thus,
(243)a. H-arary i Paoly amin' ny sakafo,
fut-sick Paul because-of the food
"Paul will be sick because of the food,"
b. N-ank-arary an'i Paoly ny sakafo,
past-caus-sick Paul the food
"the food caused Paul to be sick,"
c
- /[[gQH-arary ì Paoly] [S]_amin' ny sakafo]]/
fut-sick Paul because-of the food
d. /[ sl N-anka-[So arary i Paoly] ny sakafo]/.

past-caus sick Paul the food
583
(same as (238)a.)
'"Hie letter fell because of Paul,"
b. *N-anka-latsaka ny taratasy i Paoly,
respectively, frcrn the underlying sequences
/[[gQLatsaka ny taratasy][glnoho i Paoly]]/

d. /[gl N-anka-[g0 latsaka ny taratasy] i Paoly]/.

(245)a. Voa-sazy i Paoly noho ny ditra-ny,
b. *N-anka-voa-sazy an'i Paoly ny ditra-ny,
past-caus-pass-punish Paul the mischief-his
respectively, from the underlying structures
/[[g0Voa-sazy i Paoly][slnoho ny ditra-ny]]/

pass-punish Paul because the mischief-his
584
<3. /[ gl N-anka-[gg voa-sazy i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/.
(246)a. NO-saz-ina i Paoly noho ny ditra-ny,
b. *N-anka-no-saz-ina an'i Paoly ny ditra-ny,
past-caus-pass-punish Paul the mischief-his
respectively, from the intermediate sequences
c. /[[gpNo-saz-ina i Paoly][g^noho ny ditra-ny]]/
d. /[ gl N-anka-[g0 no-saz-ina i Paoly] ny ditra-ny]/.
In the sentence (243)b., the embedded clause comprises an adj-
ectival predicate, as seen in the sequence (243)a., and the
output is perfectly grammatical. However, in the sentences
(244)b., (245)b., (246)b., Affixal Passive with voa, as in
(245)a., or Affixal Passive with no...ina, as in (246)b., has
applied, and the outputs are irretrievably ungraiimatical and, as
indicated, cannot receive any interpretation of any kind.

585
2.2.9 General Restriction on Affixal Passive and the Dicho-
tomy between Predicate-Raising-Causatives and Comp-
Causatives.
The distinction just established between a so-called
Predicate-Raising Causative, which can oily embed an equative
type of clause, and a Complement-Causative, which can also embed
a non-equative type of clause, allows us to capture the relevant
generalization that accounts for the impossibility of Passive
when the embedded clause comprises a typically transitive verb:
(248)a. N-anp-ividy ny trano an'i Paoly i Jaona,
past-caus-buy the house Paul John
"John was having Paul buy the house,"
b. *N-amp-ivid(i)-in'i Jaona an'i Paoly ny trano.
pass-caus-buy-by John Paul the house
Passive cannot apply after Clause-Union, as indicated by the un-
grammatically of (248)b., when the embedded clause has a typi-
cally transitive verb. This contrasts with the case where the em-
bedded clause comprises a typically intransitive verb, as in
(249) a. N-arrp-idina ny entana i Paoly,
past-caus-go-down the luggage Paul
"Paul brought the luggage downstairs,"
b. N-anp-idin-in' i Paoly ny entana.
pass-caus-go-dcwn-by Paul the luggage
"The luggage was brought downstairs by Paul."

586
The applicability of Passive is, therefore, dependent upon the
nature, i.e. equative vs. non-equative, of the embedded clause
and, within the non-equative subdivision, a distinction has to be
maintained between a clause comprising a transitive and one with
an intransitive verb. Only the latter will allcw Affixal Passive
after Clause-Union has taken place. As for the situation where
the embedded clause is of the equative type, Affixal Passive is
always possible after Clause-Union. One of the basic assumptions
made here is that Passive is a cyclic rule in that one of its
conditioning factors is the nature of the embedded clause.
2.2.10 Summary: Hie Different Types of Embedded Clauses.
Hie different types of clauses that can be embedded
under the Causative predicates are summarized on Table 14.
Table 14
Types of Clause That Can be Embedded
Equative Non-Equative
Causatives: Adjective Root Passive Affixal Passive
Anp(a) OK OK OK
Aha OK OK OK
An (a) OK OK *
Ank(a) OK * *
Note: OK = grammatical output; * = unqrammatical output.

587
2.2.11 Affixal Passive and the Cycle.
Affixal Passive interacts with Clause-Union in a way
which suggests that Passive is a cyclic rule. On the one hand,
there are structures like:
(250)a. N-amp-isondrotra an'i Jeanne i Paoly,
past-caus-get-prorootion Jeanne Paul
"Paul caused Jeanne to get a promotion," i.e.
"Paul gave Jeanne a promotion,"
b. N-anpa-tafa-sondrotra an'i Jeanne i Paoly,
past-caus-pass-get-promotion Jeanne Paul
"Paul caused Jeanne to get a promotion," i.e.
"Paul was the indirect cause of Jeanne's promotion,"
c. *I Paoly no tafa-n-ampa-sondrotra an'i Jeanne,
Paul part pass-past-caus-get-promotion Jeanne
which suggests that Affixal Passive must precede Clause-Union. In
(250)a., the verb is in the active voice and the sentence is per-
fectly granmatical; likewise in (250)b., where Affixal Passive
with the perfective aspect-marker tafa has applied on the embed-
ded verb, i.e. Affixal Passive precedes Clause-Union. If, as in
(250)c., Affixal Passive with tafa is made to apply after Clause-
Union, the output is ungrammatical. On the other hand, we have:
(251) a. N-amp-iditra ny mpianatra i Paoly,
past-caus-enter the student(s) Paul
"Paul had the student(s) go in,"

588
b. Voa-(a)mp-iditr' i Paoly ny mpianatra,
pass-caus-enter-by Paul the student(s)
"Paul managed to have the student(s) go in,"
c. *N-ampa-voa-iditr' i Paoly ny mpianatra,
past-caus-pass-enter-by Paul the student(s)
where Clause-Union must apply before Affixal Passive. In (251)a.,
the verb is in the active voice and the sentence is perfectly
grammatical; likewise for (251)b., where Clause-Union has applied
before Affixal Passive. New, if Affixal Passive with voa were to
apply before Clause-Union, as in (251)c., the ensuing sequence
becomes totally ungrammatical and cannot be assigned any inter-
pretation whatsoever.
3.1.1 Conclusions.
In conclusion, it appears that:
1. Malagasy has three types of passive verbs:
a. root passives;
b. root passives which can optionally take an affix, as
in (27) and (31); and
c. affixal passives.
2. The choice between a root passive and an affixal
passive, when the option is available, depends on Aether the VP
refers to a State or Autonomous Event, for the first, or a Deli-
berate Activity, for the second.

589
3. Hie distribution of the different passive affixes is
indeed constrained by a combination of factors which comprise:
a. the class of the verb;
b. its degree of transitivity since, as we saw above in
1.1.7, there is a cline; and
c. its perfective or imperfective aspect;
d. the syntactic/semantic position occupied by the NP
to be promoted to Su on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy.
4. Hie possibility of passivization in a complex stru-
cture involving a Causative predicate depends on the nature of
the embedded clause, whether it has a transitive or an intransit-
ive predicate.
3.1.2 Verb classes and Obliques.
Furthermore, it was shown:
1. that Malagasy has two open classes of verbs, i.e.
Classes 1 and 2, which undergo Affixal Passive;
2. that the different types of Oblique are in a fixed
order, relative to each other and that it is possible to promote
to Su any NP all the way down to Source-Oblique, the cut-off
point.
3.2.1 Parallelism in the Behavior of Affixal Passive in non-
Causative and Causative Constructions.
Hiere is a striking parallelism between the behavior of
Affixal Passive in non-Causative and Causative constructions:
1. In a non-Causative construction, Raising-to-Su can
operate only when the main verb is a root passive or an adjec-

590
tive, Whereas the Causative an (a) can only embed a root passive
or an adjective.
2. in a non-Causative construction, Raising-to-DO can
operate
a. whether the embedded clause comprises a root passive
or an adjective, with verbs like mihevitra "to consider"; or
b. it comprises an affixal passive, with verbs like
manantena "to expect." By contrast, under the Causative amp(a),
the embedded clause can be an equative sentence with either a
root passive or an adjective, or can comprise an affixal passive.
3. In a non-Causative construction, Affixal Passive is
contingent upon the presence in the underlying sequence of the
general complementizer fa "that," whereas in Causative constru-
ctions, Affixal Passive is possible only under the Complement-
Causative amp (a) and aha, to the exclusion of the Predicate-
Raising Causative an(a).
4. Affixal Passive behaves in non-Causative as well as
Causative constructions in a way which indicates that it is a
cyclic rule:
a. in non-Causative constructions, it interacts with
Equi-1, Equi-2, Raising-to-DO, and Raising-to-Su, in a way which
provides a sandwich-type argument in favor of the Cyclic Conven-
tion; and
b. in Causative constructions, it interacts with Clau-
se-Union in two contradictory ways: in one case, Affixal Passive
must precede Clause-Union; in the other, Clause-Union must prece-
de Affixal Passive. This Ordering Paradox receives a simple solu-
tion with the adoption of the Cyclic Convention.

CHAPTER SIX
THE BI-SENTENTIAL SCXJSCE OF ALL
CAUSATIVE CX3NSTR0CTIONS
0.1 Introduction.
The purpose of Chapter Six is to show that all Causa-
tive Constructions of Malagasy have to be derived from bi-senten-
tial sources.
In Section 1, six tests will be used to establish the
validity of such a hypothesis involving:
Co-occurrence Restrictions,
Scope Ambiguity,
Transportability of Adverbs,
Do-So Replacement, and
Reflexivization.
In Section 2, it will be shown that there is only one
sinple sentence output since each Causative sequence contains on-
ly one subject, as is made evident by the following four tests:
Sentential Question Formation,
Exclamation Formation,
Ifo-Longer Negation, and
Izy-Substitution.
592
Ihis view is also confirmed by the possibility of ap-
plying Affixal Passive after Clause-Union, although the latter is
confined to those Causative constructions, i.e. Manipulative am-
p(a), Manipulative an (a), and Abilitative aha, which, as was
shown in Chapter One, Section 5, evince maximal fusion.
Section 1
Bi-Sentential Source
1.0 Go-Occurrence Restrictions.
There are co-occurrence restrictions in a simplex sen-
tence between:
1. the tense-marker on the place adverb and that on the
verb;
2. the place adverb and the time adverb;
3. the tense-marker on the verb and that on the time
adverb.
Yet, in structures involving Causative constructions,
these co-occurrence restrictions do not hold. It follows, there-
fore, that such Causative constructions must have complex, not
simplex sources and since in each case we can have only two dif-
ferent tense-markers, it is reasonable to assume that only two
clauses are involved. Given then that Causative constructions
have complex sentence sources and that they have two clauses
each, it can be deduced that they must actually have bi-senten-
tial sources.
593
1.1.1 Co-Occurrence Restrictions On The Verb.

In Malagasy, a place adverb takes a tense-marker. Thus:
(1)a. jfl-ato i Paoly.
pres-here Paul
"Paul is here."
b. jí-any i Paoly.
pres-there Paul
"Paul is there."
(2)a. T-ato i Paoly.
past-here Paul
"Paul was here."
b. T-any i Paoly.
past-there Paul
"Paul was there."
There is a co-occurrence restriction between the tense-marker
that can appear on such a place adverb and that of the verb in
the same clause1:
(3) *N-ianatra -0"-ato i Paoly omaly.
past-study pres-here Paul yesterday
(4) N-ianatra t-ato i Paoly cmaly.
past-study past-here Paul yesterday
"Paul was studying here yesterday."

594
1.1.2 The Restriction on Place Mverbs and Causatives.
Now/ Causative constructions with a place adverb
typically involve different tense-markers on the place adverb and
the verb, respectively:
(5) N-anao izay h-andehanan' i M XS-ao an-trano i J.
past-do comp fut-circ-go-by M pres-there in-home J
"J did so that M would go into the house."
(6) H-anao izay n-andehanan' i M t-ao an-trano i J.
fut-do comp past-circ-go-by M past-there in-home J
"J was about to induce M to go into the house."
(7) N-anery an'i M n-andeha t-ao i P.
past-force M past-go past-there P
"P just forced M to go there."
(8) H-anery an'i M h-andeha t-ao i P.
fut-force M fut-go past-there P
"P was about to force M to go there."
(9) N-amp-iditra an'i M ho ao an-trano i J.
past-caus-enter M fut there in-home J
"J was having M enter the house."
(10) H-amp-iditra an'i M t-ao an-trano i J.
fut-caus-enter M past-there in-home J
"J was about to have M enter the house."

595
(11) N-anp-ilatsaka ny kanety ho arý i P.
past-caus-drop the marbles fut there P
"P was letting the marbles drop over there."
(12) H-anp-ilatsaka ny kanety t-ary i P.
fut-caus-drop the marbles past-there P
"P was about to let the marbles drop over there."
(13) N-an-defa an'i M ho any an-trano i J.
fut-caus-flee M fut there in-home J
"J was having M go to the house."
(14) H-an-defa an'i M t-any an-trano i J.
fut-caus-flee M past-there in-home J
"J was about to send M to the house."
(15) Tsy n-aha-zaka ny entana 0-any A i P.
neg past-caus-carry the luggage pres-there A P
"P did not manage to carry the luggage which is
at A(ntsirabe)."
(16) Tsy h-aha-zaka ny entana t-any A i P.
neg fut-caus-carry the luggage past-there A P
"P will not manage to carry the luggage which was
at A(ntsirabe)."
(17) N-aha-lasa an'i J ho any am-ponja io.
past-caus-gone J fut there in-prison this
"This was the reason why J was being sent to prison.

596
(18) H-aha-lasa an'i J t-any am-ponja io.
fut-caus-gone J past-there in-prison this
"This was why J was about to be sent to jail."
(19) Hay resaka no n-an-(t)afitohina an'i J 8-any.
the talk part past-caus-upset J pres-there
"It was the talk which upset J who is over there."
(20) Ilay sakafo no n-ank-arary ny ankizy t-any.
the food part past-caus-sick the child past-there
"It was the food which caused the child(ren) who was/
were there to be sick."
(21) Ilay sakafo no n-ank-arary ny ankizy any.
the food part past-caus-sick the child pres-there
"It was the food which caused the child(ren) who is/
are there to be sick."
In (5) and (6), we have the "persuasive" Directive construction
with two different verbs in two different tenses. Judging from
the ungrammatically of sentences like (3), the place adverb ao
"there" in (6) must belong in the lower clause. The same holds
true with the "coercive" (or also "permissive") Directive con-
struction since it is not possible to have the sequence n-andeha
"past-go" .ff-ao "present-there" in either (7) or (8). As far as
the Causative constructions involving Fusion are concerned (see
Chapter One, Section 5 for further details), from (9) to (21),
apparently we only have one verb and yet, in (9) and (10), which
illustrate the "neutral" Directive type, the tense on the verb is

597
different from that on the place adverb. The same remark applies
to the following sequences, (11) and (12) with the Manipulative
amp (a), (13) and (14) with the Manipulative an (a), (15) and (16)
with the Abilitative aha, (17) and (18) with the Causal aha, (19)
with the Causal an (a), (20) and (21) with the Causal ank(a). in
each of the Causative constructions from (5) to (21), we have a
co-occurrence of two different tense-markers on the verb and the
place adverb. Such a co-occurrence in a simple sentence would
have resulted in an ungrammatical sequence, as shown in (3). It
can only be inferred from the grammaticality of the sentences
fran (5) to (21) that complex structures are involved.
1.1.3 Tense Restrictions and Fusion Causatives.
Furthermore, the following data show that the fusion
constructions can have no more than two different tense-markers.
It is possible to repeat the verb of the lower clause —or sub-
stitute a synonymous verb for it, as in (28) below— to yield:
(22)a. N-anao izay h-idira-n' i M -0-any an-trano i J.
past-do comp fut-circ-enter M pres-there in-home J
"J just did so that M would go into the house."
b. *N-anao izay O-idira-n' i M ho ao an-trano i J.
past-do camp pres-circ-enter M fut there in-hane J
c. N-anao izay n-idira-n' i M ho ao an-trano i J.
past-do comp past-circ-enter M fut there in-home J
"J persuaded M to go into the house."

598
(23) a. N-anery an'i M h-iditra tf-ao i J.
past-force M fut-enter pres-there J
"J was forcing M to go there."
b. *N-anery an'i M m-iditra JS-ao i J.
past-force M pres-enter pres-there J
c. H-anery an'i M n-iditra t-ao i J.
fut-force M past-enter past-there J
"J was about to force M to go in there."
(24)a. N-amela an'i M h-iditra -ff-ao i J.

past-allcw M fut-enter pres-there J
"J allowed M to go there."
b. *N-amela an'i M m-iditra Z-ao i J.
past-allow M pres-enter pres-there J
c. *H-amela an'i M n-iditra JS-ao i J.
fut-allow M past-enter pres-there J
(25) a. N-amp-iditra an'i M h-iditra ho ao an-trano i J.

past-caus-enter M fut-enter fut there in-home J
"J was having M enter the house."
b. *N-amp-iditra an'i M m-iditra ho ao an-trano i J.
past-caus-enter M pres-enter fut there in-hcme J

599
c. *N-airp-iditra an'i M n-iditra ho ao an-trano i J.
past-caus-enter M past-enter fut there in-hcroe j
(26)a. H-amp-iditra an'i M h-iditra t-ao an-trano i J.
fut-caus-enter M fut-enter past-there in-home J
"J was about to have M enter the house."
b. *H-amp-iditra an'i M m-iditra t-ao an-trano i J.
fut-caus-enter M pres-enter past-there in-home J
c. *H-amp-iditra an'i M n-iditra t-ao an-trano i J.
fut-caus-enter M past-enter past-there in-home J
(27)a. N-amp-ilatsaka ny kanety h-ilatsaka ho ary i P.
past-caus-drop the marbles fut-drop fut there P
"P was trying to get the marbles to drop over there."
b. *N-airp-ilatsaka ny kanety m-ilatsaka ho ary i P.
past-caus-drop the marbles pres-drop fut there P
c. *H-anp-ilatsaka ny kanety n-ilatsaka t-ary i P.
fut-caus-drop the marbles past-drop past-there P
(28)a. N-an-defa an'i M h-andeha ho any an-trano i J.
past-caus-flee M fut-go fut there in-home J
"J was sending M to the house."
b. *N-an-defa an'i M m-andeha ho any an-trano i J.
past-caus-flee M pres-go fut there in-home J

600
c. *H-an-defa an'i M n-andeha ho any an-trano i J.
fut-caus-flee M past-go fut there in-home J
(29)a. H-an-defa an'i M h-andeha t-any an-trano i J.
fut-caus-flee M fut-go past-there in-home J
"J was about to send M to the house."
b. *H-an-defa an'i M m-andeha t-any an-trano i J.
fut-caus-flee M pres-go past-there in-hcme J
c. *H-an-defa an'i M n-andeha t-any an-trano i J.
fut-caus-flee M past-go past-there in-home J
(30) a. Tsy n-aha-bata ny entana ho-bata-ina ho ary i P.
neg past-caus-carry the lugg. fut-pass-c. fut there P
"P did not manage to carry the luggage over there."
b. *Tsy n-aha-bata ny entana B'-bata-ina ho ary i P.
neg past-caus-carry the lugg. pres-pass-c. fut there P
c. *Tsy h-aha-bata ny entana no-bata-ina ho ary i P.
neg fut-caus-carry the lugg. past-pass-c. fut there P
(31)a. Io no n-aha-lasa an'i J ho lasa ho any am-ponja.
this part past-caus-gone J fut gene fut there prison
"This was why J was being sent to prison."
b. *Io no n-aha-lasa an'i J ,0" lasa ho any am-ponja.
this part past-caus-gone J pres gone fut there prison

601
c. *Io no n-aha-lasa an'i J ho lasa if-any am-ponja2.
this part past-caus-gone J fut gone pres-there prison
(in the intended reading given under a. above)
(32)a. Io no n-aha-lasa an'i J ho lasa t-any am-ponja.
this part past-caus-gone J fut gone past-there prison
"Hiis is be why J will have been sent to prison."
b. *Io no h-aha-lasa an'i J ,0-lasa t-any am-ponja.
this part fut-caus-gone J pres-gone past-there prison
c. *Io no h-aha-lasa an'i J lasa t-any am-ponja.
this part fut-caus-gone J gone past-there prison
(33)a. Ilay resaka no n-ank-arary an'i J^-any.
the talk part past-caus-sick J pres-there
"It was because of the talk that J was sick."
b. *Ilay resaka no n-ank-arary an'i J ho any.
the talk part past-caus-sick J fut there
c. *Ilay resaka no h-ank-arary an'i J t-any.
the talk part fut-caus-sick J past-there
All the fusion sequences in a., from (25) to (33), show only two
different tense-markers, all of them, grammatical. All of the b.
sentences, by contrast, comprise three different tenses and all
of them are ungrammatical, with the possible exception of (31)c.
Assuming that a simplex sentence can only have one tense-marker,

602
it would appear that since a Causative construction must have a
complex sentence source, as shown in 1.1.2 above, such a source
has to be bi-sentential. Furthermore, the ungrammaticality of all
the sequences in c. suggests that the embedded clause cannot take
a past tense or a perfective aspect.
1.1.4 Violation of Restrictions and the Causatives.
It is possible to have the co-occurrence of a tense-
marker on the place adverb, which does not normally co-occur with
a different time adverb, in a Causative construction:
(34)a. N-aitp-andeha -0"-any an'i P i J t-eo.
past-caus-go pres-there P J past-here
"A moment ago, J had P go there."
b. N-anp-anome boky an'i J Z-any i P t-eo.
past-caus-give book J pres-there P past-here
"A moment ago, P had J given (a) book(s) (by someone)
there," i.e.
"A moment ago, P had someone give (a) book(s) to J."
Uie above yields ungrammatical results in a simplex sentence:
(35) *0-any i Paoly t-eo.

pres-there Paul past-here
(36) a. *N-andeha-flf-any i Paoly t-eo.
past-go pres-there Paul past-here

603
b. *N-ancme boky .Cf-any an'i J i P t-eo.
past-give book- pres-there J P past-here
Since the place adverb XS-any "present-there" and the time adverb
t-eo "past-here" cannot co-occur in a simplex sentence and since
(34)a. and (34)b. containing them are grammatical, it can only be
inferred that this Causative construction must be derived from a
complex source. And since (34)a. and (34)b. involve only two dif-
ferent ténse-markers, it can be deduced that such a source must
in fact be bi-sentential. Further support for the bi-sentential
nature of the source comes from the possibility of repeating the
embedded predicate:
(37)a. N-amp-andeha an'i J (h)-andeha if-any i P t-eo.
past-caus-go J (fut)-go pres-there P past-here
"A moment ago, P had J go there."
b. *N-amp-andeha an'i J m-andeha 0-any i P t-eo.
past-caus-go J pres-go pres-there P past-here
In (37)a., we have two different tense nodes, the (h) being op-
tional, and the sequence is grammatical, as opposed to (37)b.,
with three different tense nodes instead, yielding an ungram-
matical sentence. Hie zero-morpheme, which up to now has sinply
been glossed as "present," will be taken up in 1.1.5 below.
1.1.5 Restrictions on Occurrences of Tense and Aspect in
Sinple Clauses.
There is a co-occurrence restriction between the tense/

604
aspect-marker on the verb and that on the same time adverb in the
same simplex sentence:
(38)a. *M-ividy boky i P t-aloha.
pres-buy book P past-before
b. *H-ividy boky i P t-aloha.
fut-buy book P past-before
c. N-ividy boky i P t-aloha.
past-buy book P past-before
"Before, P used to buy books."
Yet, the following Causative constructions allow co-occurrence of
such different tense-markers:
(39) N-anao izay h-ividianan' i P boky taloha i J.
past-do comp fut-circ-buy-by P book pres-before J
"J persuaded P to buy books first."
(40) N-anery an'i P h-ividy boky iT-aloha i J.

past-force P fut-buy book pres-before J
"J forced P to buy books first."
(41) N-amela an'i P h-ividy boky -0"-aloha i J.

past-let P fut-buy book pres-before J
"J allowed P to buy books first."

605
(42) N-amp-ividy boky an'i P /6"-aloha i J.
past-caus-buy book P pres-before J
"Beforehand, J had P buy books."
(43) N-amp-andehanan' i P i J^-aloha.
past-caus-go-pass-by P J pres-before
"Beforehand, P helped J to walk."
(44) a. Ny ditra-ny no m-aha-voa-kapoka
the mischief-his part pres-caus-perf-strike
an'i P/tf-any am-pianarana.
P pres-there at-school
"Because of his mischief, P is punished at school."
b. *Voa-kapoka i P -CT-any am-pianarana.
perf-strike P pres-there at-school
c. Voa-kapoka i P t-any am-pianarana.
perf-strike P past-there at-school
"P has been punished at school."
(45) N-aha-zaka enta-mavesatra i P#-aloha.
past-caus-caried burden-heavy P pres-before
"P already managed to carry a heavy burden."
(46) N-an-(t)afitdhina an'i J io -fT-aloha ka h-ajanony.
past-caus-upset J this pres-before so be-stopped
"J is already upset with this and so, stop it."

606
(47) N-ank-arary an'i J io tf-alòha ka h-ajanony.
past-caus-s ick J this pres-before so be-stopped
"J is already sick because of this and so, stop it."
In the Causative constructions not involving fusion, i.e in (39),
(40) and (41), the time adverb .tF-aloha "present-before" has a
narrow scope and belongs in the same clause as the embedded verb
since, as was made evident by the possibility of Pronominali-
zation to an independent pronoun, Negation Operator Tsy-Placement
and Passivization of the lower verb (see Chapter One, Subsection
5.1.2 for the relevant examples), the sequence has two clauses.
From (42) to (47), we have Causative constructions involving
fusion, but even in these cases 0-aloha "present-before" can co-
occur with a verb in the past tense, as can be seen in each of
the examples mentioned: for example, in (42), the time adverb has
the present tense morpheme Z on it, whereas the Causative verb
n-amp-ividy "past-caus-buy" has the past tense-marker n. Yet, the
grammaticality pattern in (38) clearly shows that in a simplex
sentence, the past tense t on the adverb' triggers the past tense-
marker n on the verb. The sequences from (39) to (47) comprise
verbs in the past tense, but it is -ff-aloha "present- before"
which shows up and, as will be seen in (50) below, this should
yield an ungrammatical sentence. However, all of the relevant
sentences are perfectly grammatical. It can only be inferred that
complex not simplex sentences are involved.
Now, it should be noticed that a zero tense-marker can
correspond to either of two tenses, as can be seen in the follow-
ing exairples:
607
(48) M-ividy boky i Paoly -0"-aloha.
pres-buy book Paul zero-before
"First of all, Paul buys books."
(49) H-ividy boky i Paoly #-aloha.
fut-buy book Paul zero-before
"First of all, Paul will buy books."
(50) *N-ividy boky i Paoly tf-aldha.
past-buy book Paul zero-before
"Before, Paul used to buy books."
The grammatically of (48) and (49) suggests that a zero tense-
marker can represent either a present — a s in (48)— or a future
tense-marker — a s in (49)—, whereas the ungramnaticality of (50)
in the relevant interpretation shows that it cannot be a past
tense-marker. It follows, therefore, that in the sentences from
(39) to (47), we have the co-occurrence of two different tense-
markers. In turn, this in conjunction with the data in (38)
indicates that indeed the Causative sequences from (39) to (47)
must be evolved from complex sources. Furthermore, since each of
these sentences contains oily two different tense-markers and
since the zero tense-marker can only have the value "present" or
"future" it can be deduced from the grammaticality pattern found
in (39) to (47) that such a source will have to be bi-sentential.
1.2.1 Transportability of Adverb and Scope Ambiguity.
In a simplex sentence, a manner adverb can only occupy
the position immediately to the right of the predicate and have a

608
narrow scope reading. Likewise, such an adverb in a Causative
construction can occupy the same position, i.e. immediately to
the right of the complex verbal predicate, and have a narrcw
scope interpretation. However, it is also possible for such an
adverb to be transported to a position immediately to the left of
the Su NP of the higher clause, thus giving rise to a scope am-
biguity: on one reading, it only modifies the lower predicate; on
the other, it modifies the higher predicate. It becomes apparent
then that in the wide scope interpretation, the manner adverb has
been lifted into the higher clause.
In a simplex sentence, a time adverb typically occupies
the final position in the sequence with only a wide scope reading
possible. Likewise, such an adverb in a Causative construction
can occupy the same final position, in which case it also has a
wide scope interpretation since it modifies the higher Causative
predicate. However, it is possible to transport such an adverb to
a position immediately to the left of the Su NP of the higher
clause. This gives rise to a scope ambiguity. It seems, then,
that in the narrow scope interpretation, the time adverb has been
lowered into the embedded clause.
The possibility for a manner or time adverb to acquire
either a wide or a narrow scope reading in a Causative constru-
ction, as opposed to the uniqueness of interpretation of such ad-
verbs in a sinplex sentence, suggests that indeed a Causative
construction must be derived from a bi-sentential source.
1.2.2 Position of Manner Mverb in a Simplex Sentence.
In a sinplex sentence, a manner adverb can only occupy
the position immediately to the right of the unique predicate, to

609
the exclusion of the sentence final position^:
(51)a. Niditra moramora i Mary,
entered slowly Mary
"Mary came in slowly."
b. *Niditra i Mary moramora.
entered Mary slowly
(52)a. Nancme boky haingana an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
gave book quickly Jeanne Paul
"Paul quickly gave books to Jeanne."
b. *Nanome boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly haingana.
gave book Jeanne Paul quickly
(53)a. Narary tokoa i Paoly.
was-sick really Paul
"Paul was really sick."
b. *Narary i Paoly tokoa.
was-sick Paul really
(54)a. Tsara tokoa i Paoly.
good really Paul
"Paul (is/was) really good."
b. *Tsara i Paoly tokoa.
good Paul really

610
(55) a. Laginina tairpoka i Jaona.
fed-up suddenly John
"John suddenly (got) fed up."
b. *Laginina i Jaona tairpoka.
fed-up John suddenly
Hie manner adverb in the a. sequences from (51) to (55) can only
have a narrow scope reading. Hie ungrammaticality of the b. sen-
tences shows that this position of the manner adverb in the a.
sequences is the basic one.
1.2.3 Position of Manner Adverb and Causatives.

In a Causative construction, such a manner adverb can
also occupy the same position as above in the sequence with the
same narrow scope reading, i.e. the adverb ranges oily over the
lower predicate:
(56) N-anao izay n-i-dira-n' i M morairora i J,
past-do camp past-circ-go-by M slowly J
"J did so that M entered slowly,"
(57) N-anery an'i M h-iditra morairora i J,
past-force M fut-enter slowly J
"J forced M to enter slowly,"
(58) N-amela an'i M h-iditra moramora i J,
past-allow M fut-enter slowly J
"J allowed M to enter slowly,"

611
(59) N-amp-iditra moramora an'i M i J,
pas t-caus-enter slowly M J
"J had M enter slowly,"
where moramora "slowly" modifies "enter."
(60) ?N-amp-anome boky haingana an'i J an'i P Kakoto.
past-caus-give book quickly J P Rakoto
"Kakoto had P quickly give books to J."
(61) N-amp-idina moramora ny saina i J.
past-caus-go-down slowly the flag J
"J caused the flag to come down slowly," i.e.
"J lowered the flag slowly."
(62) N-ana-tsara tokoa an'i P i J.
past-caus-good really P J
"J made P (appear to be) really good," i.e.
"J really praised P."
(63) N-aha-zaka tokoa ny entana i J.
past-caus-carried really the luggage J
"J managed to really carry the luggage."
(64) N-aha-sosotra tokoa an'i J ilay resaka.
past-caus-angry really J the talk
"J is/was really angry because of the talk."

612
(65) N-an-(t)afitohina tokoa an'i J ilay resaka.
past-caus-upset really J the talk
"J really got upset because of the talk."
(66) N-ank-arary tokoa an'i P io.
past-caus-sick really P this
"P really got sick because of this."
1.2.4 Mverb Transportation.
Now, in the case of the fusion constructions, it is
also possible to transport the manner adverb, which basically
shows up between the compound verb and its DO, to the position
immediately to the left of the Su NP of the entire Causative
construction:
(67) N-amp-iditra ... an'i M moramora i J.
past-caus-enter ... M slowly J
"J had M enter slowly (both senses)."
(68) 7N-amp-anome boky ... an'i J an'i P haingana Rakoto.
past-caus-give book ... J P quickly Rakoto
Either "Rakoto quickly had P give books to J," or
"Rakoto had P quickly give books to J."
(116) N-amp-idina ... ny saina moramora i J.
past-caus-go-dcwn ... the flag slcwly J
"J lowered the flag slowly."

613
(70) N-ana-tsára ... an'i P tokoa i J.
past-caus-good ... P really J
Either "J really made P (appear to be) good," or
"J made P (appear to be) really good," i.e.
"J was praising P."
(71) N-aha-zaka ... entana tokoa i J.
past-caus-carried ... luggage really J
Either "J really managed to carry the luggage," or
"J managed to really carry the luggage."
(72) N-aha-sosotra ... an'i J tokoa ilay resaka.
past-caus-angry ... J really the talk
Either "It was really the talk which made J angry,"
or "J was really angry because of the talk."
(73) N-an-(t)afitohina ... an'i J tokoa ilay resaka.
past-caus-upset J really the talk
Either "It was really the talk which upset J," or
"J was really upset because of the talk."
(74) N-ank-arary ... an'i P tokoa io.

past-caus-sick ... P really this
Either "It was really this which caused P to be sick,"
or "P was really sick because of this."
In each case, the three dots to the left represent the vacated
position. In its transported position, the manner adverb from

614
(67) to (74) is ambiguous between a wide and a narrow scope
reading. Thus, in (67), to take just one illustrative example,
inoramora "slowly" can range over the higher Causative predicate
with a wide scope interpretation or over the lower predicate with
a narrow scope reading. This shows that transportation of the
manner adverb has the effect of lifting the latter from the lower
to the higher clause, at least, in one of the two possible read-
ings. As for the non-fusion constructions, frcm (56) to (58), the
manner adverb is already immediately to the left of the Su NP.
1.2.5 Position of Time Adverb in a Simplex Sentence.
In a simplex sentence a time adverb typically occupies
the absolute final position:
(75) a. H-iditra ao i Mary rahatrizay.
fut-enter there Mary in-future
"Mary will eventually go in there."
b. H-iditra ao rahatrizay i Mary,
fut-enter there in-future Mary

"Mary will eventually go in there."
(76)a. H-anome boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly rahatrizay.
fut-give book Jeanne Paul in-future
"Paul will eventually give books to Jeanne."
b. H-anome boky an'i Jeanne rahatrizay i Paoly.
fut-give book Jeanne in-future Paul
"Paul will eventually give books to Jeanne."

615
(77)a. Ho finaritra i Jeanne rahatrizay.
fut happy Jeanne in-future
"Jeanne will eventually be happy."
b. *Ho finaritra rahatrizay i Jeanne,
fut happy in-future Jeanne
Barring a special intonation on (77)b., which might slightly les-
sen the ungrammatically of the sequence, the pattern emerging
from the above sentences suggests that the absolute final posi-
tion is more basic.
1.2.6 Position of Time Mverb and Causatives.
In a Causative construction, such a time adverb can al-
so occupy the same final position in the sequence with the same
wide scope reading, i.e. the adverb ranges over the higher pred-
icate:
(78) H-anao izay h-i-dira-n' i M i P rahatrizay.
fut-do cotrp fut-circ-enter-by M P in-future
"In future, P will do so that M will go in."
(79) H-anery an'i M h-iditra i J rahatrizay.
fut-force M fut-enter J in-future
"In future, J will force M to go in."
(80) H-amela an'i M h-iditra i J rahatrizay.

c
fut-let M fut-enter J in-future
"In future, J will allow M to go in."

616
(81) H-amp-iditra an'i M i P rahatrizay.
fut-caus-enter M P in-future
"In future, P will have M go in."
(82) H-airp-idina ny seza i P rahatrizay.
fut-caus-go-down the chair P in-future
"P will eventually bring the chair downstairs."
(83) H-an-datsaka ny taratasy i P rahatrizay.
fut-caus-dropped the letter P in-future
"P will eventually drop the letter."
(84) Mbola h-aha-tatitra an'io i p rahatrizay.
still fut-caus-carry this p in-future
"P will eventually manage to carry this."
(85) Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i P io rahatrizay.
still fut-caus-happy P this in-future
"P will eventually be happy with this."
(86) Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i P io rahatrizay.
still fut-caus-tired P this in-future
"P will eventually get tired of this."
(87) Mbola h-anka-leo an'i P io rahatrizay.
still fut-caus-fed-up P this in-future
"P will eventually get fed up with this."

617
1.2.7 Mverb Transportation.
Now, the time adverb can be transported to the position
immediately to the left of the Su NP of the entire Causative:
(88) H-anao izay h-idira-n' i M rahatrizay i P ...
fut-do camp fut-circ-enter-by M in-future P
Either "Eventually, P will do so that M will come in,"
or "P will do so that M will eventually come in."
(89) H-anery/H-amela an'i M h-iditra rahatrizay i J ...
fut-force/fut-let M fut-enter in-future J
Either "Eventually, J will force/let (to) M cone in,"
or "J will force/let M (to) eventually core in."
(90) H-amp-iditra an'i M rahatrizay i P ...
fut-caus-enter M in-future P
Either "In future, P will have M go in,"
or "P will have M go in in future."
(91) H-amp-idina ny seza rahatrizay i P ...
fut-caus-go-down the chair in-future P
Either "Eventually, P will bring the chair down,"
or "P will eventually bring the chair downstairs."
(92) H-an-datsaka ny taratasy rahatrizay i P
fut-caus-dropped the letter in-future P
Either "Eventually, P will drop the letter,"
or "P will eventually drop the letter."

618
(93) Mbola h-aha-tatitra an'io rahatrizay i P ...
still fut-caus-carry this in-future P
Either "P will eventually manage to carry this,"
or "P will manage to eventually carry this."
(94) Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i P rahatrizay io ...
still fut-caus-happy P in-future this
Either "Eventually, P will be happy with this,"
or "P will eventually be happy with this."
(95) Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i P rahatrizay io ...
still fut-caus-tired P in-future this
Either "Eventually, P will get tired of this,"
or "P will eventually get tired of this."
(96) Mbola h-anka-leo an'i P rahatrizay io ...
still fut-caus-fed-up P in-future this
Either "Eventually, P will get fed up with this,"
or "P will eventually get fed up with this."
The transported adverb frcm (88) to (96) new gives rise to a
scope ambiguity. It has the effect of lowering the adverb from
the higher clause into the lower clause, at least, in one of the
two possible readings.
1.2.8 Ambiguity of Mverbial Modification.
The possibility of a choice between continuation a. or
b. below indicates that every single one of the following senten-

619
ces containing a time adverb positioned immediately to the left
of the Su NP is indeed ambiguous:
(97) H-anao izay h-idira-n' i M rahatrizay i P
fut-do comp fut-circ-enter-by M in-future P
(same as (88))
"P will do so that M will go in eventually,"
a. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no h-anao izany.
but neg known if when P part fut-do that
"although it is not known when P will do that."
b. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i M no h-anao izany.
but neg known if when M part fut-do that
"although it is not known when M will do that."
(98) H-anery/H-amela an'i M h-iditra rahatrizay i J
fut-force/fut-let M fut-enter in-future J
(same as (89))
"J will force/let (to) M go in eventually,"
a. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i J no h-anao izany.
but neg knewn if when J part fut-do that
"although it is not known when J will do that."
kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i M no h-anao izany.
"although it is not known when M will go in."

620
(99) H-amp-iditra an'i M rahatrizay i P
fut-caus-enter M in-future P
(same as (90))
"P will have M go in eventually,"
but neg known if when P part fut-do that
b. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i M no h-anao izany.
"although it is not known when M will do that."
(100) H-amp-idina ny seza rahatrizay i P
fut-caus-go-down the chair in-future P
(same as (91))
"P will bring the chair down eventually,"

but neg kncwn if when P part fut-do that
b. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana no ho taf-idina io.

but neg known if when part fut perf-dcwn it
"although it is not known when the chair will (actual-
ly) be down there."
621
(101) H-an-datsaka ny taratasy rahatrizay i P
fut-caus-dropped the letter in-future P
(same as (92))
"P will drop the letter eventually,"
but neg kncwn if when- P part fut-do that
b. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana ny taratasy no ho
but neg known if when the letter part fut
tafa-latsaka.
perf-dropped
"although it is not known When the letter will (actual-
ly) be posted."
(102) Mbola h-aha-tatitra an'io rahatrizay i P
still fut-caus-carry this in-future P
(same as (93))
"P will manage to carry this eventually,"
a. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no
but neg known if when P part
h-aha-vita (an') izany.
fut-caus-done that
"although it is not known when P will manage."

622
b. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana io no ho
but neg known if when this part fut
voa-tatitr'i P.
perf-carry P
"although it is not known when this will (actually)
have been carried."
(103) Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i P rahatrizay io
still fut-caus-happy P in-future this
(same as (94))
"P will be happy with this eventually,"
a. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana io no
but neg known if when this part
h-aha-finaritra an'i P.
fut-caus-happy P
"although it is not known when this will cause P to be
happy."
b. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no ho finaritra.
but neg known if when P part fut happy
"although it is not known when P will be happy."
(104) Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i P rahatrizay io
still fut-caus-tired P in-future this
(same as (95))
"P will get tired of this eventually,"

623
a. kanefa tsy fantatra io na rahaoviana no h-an-dreraka
but neg known this if when part fut-caus-tired
an'i P.
tired."
b. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no ho reraka.
but neg known if when P part fut tired
"although it is not known when P will get tired."
(105) Mbola h-anka-leo an'i P rahatrizay io
still fut-caus-fed-up P in-future this
(same as (96))
"P will get fed up with this eventually,"
a. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana io no
but neg known if when this part
h-anka-leo an'i P.
fut-caus-fed-up P
fed up."
b. kanefa tsy fantatra na rahaoviana i P no ho leo.
but neg known if when P part fut fed-up
"although it is not known when P will get fed up."

624
1.3 Do-So Replacement.

One equivalent of the English phrase "do so" is toraka
izany koa in Malagasy, where toraka means "like, such as," izany
"that," and koa "also," with the same type of ambiguity:
(106) H-anao izay h-idira-n' i Mary i Paoly;
fut-do coirp fut-circ-enter-by Mary Paul
"Paul will do so that Mary will go in there;"
toraka izany koa i Jaona.
same that also John
"same with John."
a. H-anao izay h-idira-n' i Mary i Jaona.
fut-do conp fut-circ-enter-by Mary John
"John will do so that Mary will go in there."
b. H-anao izay h-idira-n' i Jaona i Paoly.
fut-do carp fut-circ-enter-by John Paul
"Paul will do so that John will go in there."
(107) H-anery/H-amela an'i Mary h-iditra i Jaona;
fut-force/fut-let Mary fut-enter John
"John will force/allow Mary to go in there;"
toraka izany koa i Paoly.
same that also Paul
"same with Paul."

625
a. H-anery/H-amela an'i Mary h-iditra i Paoly.

fut-force/fut-let Mary fut-enter Paul
"Paul will force/allow Mary to go in there."
b. H-anery/H-amela an'i Paoly h-iditra i Jaona.

fut-force/fut-let Paul fut-enter John
"John will force/allow Paul to go in there."
(108) H-amp-iditra an'i Mary i Paoly;

fut-caus-enter Mary Paul
"Paul will have Mary go in there;"

same that also John
"same with John."
a. H-anp-iditra an'i Mary i Jaona.

fut-caus-enter Mary John
"John will have Mary go in there."
b. H-amp-iditra an'i Jaona i Paoly.

fut-caus-enter John Paul
"Paul will have John go in there."
(109) H-amp-idina ny zazakely i Jaona;

fut-caus-go-down the child John
"John will bring the child downstairs;"
626
toraka izany koa i Mary,

same that also Mary
"same with Mary."
a. H-amp-idina ny zazakely i Mary,

fut-caus-go-down the child Mary
"Mary will bring the child downstairs."
b. H-amp-idina an'i Mary i Jaona.

fut-caus-go-down Mary John
"John will bring Mary downstairs."
(110) H-an-datsaka an'i Koto i Paoly;

fut-caus-enrolled Koto Paul
"Paul will enroll Koto (at a school);"

same that also John
"same with John."
a. H-an-datsaka an'i Koto i Jaona.

fut-caus-enrolled Koto John
"John will enroll Koto."
b. H-an-datsaka an' i Jaona i Paoly.

fut-caus-enrolled John Paul
"Paul will enroll John."
627
(111) Mbola h-aha-zaka an'i Jeanne i Paoly;
still fut-caus-carried Jeanne Paul
"Paul will be able to carry Jeanne;"
same that also John
"same with John."
a. Mbola h-aha-zaka an'i Jeanne i Jaona.
still fut-caus-carried Jeanne John
"John will eventually be able to carry Jeanne."
b. Mbola h-aha-zaka an'i Jaona i Paoly.
still fut-caus-carried John Paul
"Paul will eventually be able to carry John."
(112) Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i Paoly io;
still fut-caus-happy Paul this
"Paul will eventually be happy with this;"
toraka izany koa i Jeanne,
same that also Jeanne
"same with Jeanne."
a. Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i Paoly i Jeanne,
still fut-caus-happy Paul Jeanne
"Paul will be happy with Jeanne."

628
b. Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i Jeanne io.

still fut-caus-happy Jeanne this
"Jeanne will be happy with this."
(113) Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i Paoly i Jeanne;
still fut-caus-tired Paul Jeanne
"Paul will eventually get tired of Jeanne;"
same that also Mary
"same with Mary."
a. Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i Paoly i Mary,

still fut-caus-tired Paul Mary
"Paul will eventually be tired of Mary."
b. Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i Mary i Jeanne,
still fut-caus-tired Mary Jeanne
"Mary will eventually get tired of Jeanne."
(114) Mbola h-anka-leo an'i Paoly i Jeanne;
still fut-caus-fed-up Paul Jeanne
"Paul will eventually get fed up with Jeanne;"

same that also Mary
"same with Mary."
629
a. Mbola h-anka-leo an'i Paoly i Mary,

still fut-caus-fed-up Paul Mary
"Paul will eventually get fed up with Mary."
b. Mbola h-anka-leo an'i Mary i Jeanne,
still fut-caus-fed-up Mary Jeanne
"Mary will eventually get fed up with Jeanne."
In the a. interpretation of the above sentences, the NP to the
right of the phrase "do so" occupies the Su slot, as opposed to
the b. version, where it fills the DO position. In the first
instance, the phrase refers to the higher Causative clause; in
the second, it refers to the lower predicate. Thus, for example,
in (108)a., toraka izany koa replaces nampiditra an'i Mary,
whereas in (108)b. it substitutes for hiditra only. Once again,
this type of ambiguity points to a bi-sentential source for the
Causative constructions since, by contrast, there is no such
ambiguity in simplex sentences, as is quite evident from the
following examples.
(115) N-andeha i Paoly; toraka izany koa i Jeanne.
past-go Paul ; same that also Jeanne
"Paul left; so did Jeanne."
(116) N-idina i Paoly; toraka izany koa i Jeanne,

past-go-down Paul; same that also Jeanne
"Paul came downstairs; so did Jeanne."
630
(117) N-andidy mofo i Paoly; toraka izany koa i Jeanne,
past-cut bread Paul; same that also Jeanne
"Paul was cutting bread; so was Jeanne."
(118) N-itady an'i Jeanne i Paoly; toraka izany koa i Mary,
past-seek Jeanne Paul; same that also Mary
"Paul was looking for Jeanne; so was Mary."
Furthermore, the following exairples indicate that only a Su can
trigger the Malagasy equivalent of "do so":
(119) N-ikapoka an'i P i J.. toraka izany koa izyj,
past-hit P Jj same that also hej
"J hit P j ; so did hej," where i =/= j -
(120) N-anome boky an'i J ^ j i P;*toraka izany koa azy^y .
past-give book J ^ p same that also him-jy.
"P gave books to J so did (he) him/herjy.."
(121) N-andefa taratasy t-any amin'i J i P;*toraka izany
past-send letter past-there to J P; same that
koa t-any amin'i M.
also past-there to M
"P sent a letter to J; *so did (he) to M."
The second portion of the sentence (119) is grammatical only in
the reading where the pronoun is not interpreted as coreferential

631
with the NP i P; both NPs are Sus and we know from Pronominali-
zation that when both the trigger and its victim occupy the Su
position, the victim must surface as a Zero-pronoun, ihe gram-
maticality of (119) proves that indeed a Su can trigger the Mala-
gasy equivalent of "do so." As for (120), whether the pronoun in
the second part of the sentence is or is not coreferential with
the IO of the first portion, the sequence remains irretrievably
ungrammatical; notice that azy "him" is a DO/IO form of the inde-
pendent pronoun. In (121), the second portion makes use of an
Oblique NP and the sentence is ungramnatical.
1.4 Izany-Replacement.
In Malagasy, the pronoun izany "that, far from the
speaker" can, among other things, refer to an entire sentence:
(122)a. N-anome boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly. Marina ve izany?
past-give book Jeanne Paul true quest that
"Paul gave (a) book(s) to Jeanne. Is that so?"
b. Lasa i Paoly. Marina ve izany?
gene Paul true quest that
"Paul left. Is that so?"
Izany "that" refers back to the previous sentence and is sepa-
rated from its predicate by the question particle ve, which in-
dicates that it occupies the Su position. In the following sen-
tences, izany refers either to the entire Causative sequence or
just to the lower clause:

632
(123) H-anao izay h-idira-n' i M i P; toraka izany koa i J.
fut-do carp circ-enter-by M P same that also J
(same as (106))
"P will do so that M will go in there; same with J."
a. H-anao (an1) izany i J.
fut-do that J
"J will do that."
b. H-anao (an1) izany an'i J i P.
fut-do that J P
"P will do that to J."
(124) H-anery an'i M h-iditra i J; toraka izany koa i P.
fut-force M fut-enter J same that also P
"J will force M to go in there; same with P."
a. *H-anery/H-amela an'izany i P.
fut-force/fut-let that P
"P will *force/allow this."
b. H-anery/H-amela an'i P h-anao izany i J.
fut-force/fut-let P fut-do that J
"J will force/allcw P to do that."

633
(125) H-amp-iditra an'i M i P; toraka izany koa i J.
fut-caus-enter M P; same that also J
(same as (108))
"P will have M go in there; same with J."
a. H-amp-anao (an') izany i J.
fut-caus-do that J
((123)a. embedded under the Causative)
"J will have (someone) do that."
b. H-amp-anao (an') izany an'i J i P.
fut-caus-do that J P
"P will have J do that.n
(126) H-amp-idina ny zazakely i J; toraka izany koa i M.
fut-caus-go-down the child J; same that also M
(same as (109))
"J will make the baby go downstairs; same with M," or
"J will bring the baby downstairs; same with M."
a. H-anao (an') izany i M.
fut-do that M
"M will do that."
b. H-amp-anao an'izany ny zazakely i M.
fut-caus-do that the child M
((126)a. embedded under the Causative)
"M will have the baby do that."

634
(127) H-an-datsaka an'i K i P; toraka izany koa i J.
fut-caus-enroll. K P same that also J
(same as (110))
"P will get K enrolled; same with J."
a. H-anao (an') izany i J.
fut-do that J
"J will do that."
b. H-anao (an1) izany an'i J i P.
fut-do that J P
(one additional argument, compared to (127)a.)
"P will do that to J."
(128) Mbola h-aha-zaka an'i J i P; toraka izany koa i K.
still fut-caus-carry J P same that also K
"P will be able to carry J; same with K."
a. Mbola h-aha-vita an'izany i J.
still fut-caus-done that J
(vita is a root passive meaning "(be) done")
"J will be able to do that."
b. Mbola h-aha-vita an'izany an'i J i K.
still fut-caus-done that J K
"P will be able to do that to K."

635
(129) Mbola h-aha-finaritra an'i P io; na tsy mino
still fut-caus-happy P this; even neg believe
an'izany aza i P.
that neg P
(compare with (112)
"P will he happy because of this; although P does not
believe this."
a. Tsy mino i Pi fa h-aha-finaritra (an") azyi io.
neg believe P i that fut-caus-happy hirr^ this
"Pi does not believe that he^ will be happy with his."
b. Tsy mino i P^ fa ho finaritra izy^ amin'io.
neg believe P i that fut happy hei with this
"P^ does not believe that he^ will be happy with this."
(130) Mbola h-an-dreraka an'i P i J; na tsy mino izany
still fut-caus-tired P J even neg believe that
aza i J.
neg J
"P will eventually get tired of J; although J does not
believe that."
a. Tsy mino i Ji fa h-an-dreraka an'i P 0 i .
neg believe J i that fut-caus-tired P
"Ji does not believe that P will get tired of heri."

636
b. Tsy mino i 0\ f a ho reraka ami-nyj_ i P.
neg believe J i that fut tired with-heri P
does not believe that P will get tired of her^."
(131) Mbola h-anka-leo an'i P i J; na tsy mino izany
still fut-caus-fed-up P J; even neg believe that
aza i J.
neg J
"P will eventually get fed up with J; although J does
not believe that."
a. Tsy mino i Ji fa h-anka-leo an'i P izy^.
neg believe that fut-caus-fed-up P she^
"J^ does not believe that P will get fed up with her^."
"(Strong emphasis on izy "she," just as in (129)b.)
b. Tsy mino iJjfa ho leo i P.
neg believe 0\ that fut fed-up heri P
"J^ does not believe that P will get fed up with heri."
In the a. sequences of the sentences from (123) to (131), the in-
dependent pronoun izany "that" replaces the entire Causative con-
struction, whereas in the b. sentences it only substitutes for
the lower clause, as is made apparent by the use of the lower
predicate of the Causative in the embedded clause. The ambiguity
of the above sentences provides additional evidence for the bi-

637
sentential source of the Causative constructions. The ungramma-
tically of the sequence in (124)a. with the verb manery "to for-
ce" is due to a selectional restriction between the verb and its
DO, as was shown to be the case in Chapter Five, Section 2.1.2.10
above. Furthermore, in (124) the option h-amela "future-allcw"
was left out for lack of space exclusively.
1.5 Reflexivization to Ny Tenany and Pronominalization.
In Malagasy, it is possible to reflexivize to ny tena-
ny, in which case the trigger and its victim are not in the same
clause, as shown in (132).
(132) Tia-n' i P i h-ikarakara ny tena-nyj^ i J.
liked-by P i fut-take-care-of the body-his^^ j

ii- wants J to take care of him^."
(133)a. ?*Tia ny tena-nyi i Ji

i-
liked the body-her^
ft
likes herselfi."
b. *N-anome voninahitra ny tena-ny^ i
past-give honor the body-her^

n
"J^ showed respect towards herself^."
c. **N-ividy trano ho an'ný tena-ny^ i .
past-buy house for the body-her^

it
"J^ bought (a) house(s) for herself^."
638
d.***N-andefa entana ho an'ny tena-ny.^ i j.,
past-send parcel for the body-her^
"J^ mailed a parcel to herself^."
e.***N-andefa ny enta-n' ny tena-ny^ i j i#
past-send the parcel-of the body-he^ Ji
"J^ sent her^ own parcel."
The sentences in (133) show that Reflexivization to ny tenany is
at the very best marginal when the target is a DO while their de-
gree of grammaticality diminishes as the target occupies a lower
position on the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy: in (133)b. it is an 10,
in (133)c. and (133)d. it is an Oblique, and in (133)e. it is a
Genitive. Likewise, Pronominalization to an independent pronoun
occurs when the trigger and its victim are not clausemates (see
Chapter Pour for details):
(134) N-itady an'i Paoly ^ i Jeanne fa tsy n-ahita azy^.
past-seek Paul^ Jeanne but neg past-see him^
"Jeanne was looking for Paul^ but did not find him^."
(135) a. N-itady ny nama-ny^ i Jeanne^,
past-seek the friend-her^ Jeanne^
"Jeanne^ vras looking for her^ friend."
b. *N-itady ny nama-n'azy.^ i Jeanne^,
past-seek the friend-her^ Jeanne^
"Jeanne^ w a s looking for her^ friend."

639
In (134), the trigger and its victim belong in different clauses
and the output is grammatical with the application of Pronomina-
lization to an independent pronoun. In (135)b., the trigger and
its victim are clausemates and the output is irretrievably un-
grammatical in both the author's dialect and Standard Malagasy,
as opposed to the use of the clitic, as can be seen in (135)a.
However, in certain dialects of Malagasy, especially in their
Colloquial version, (135)b. may sound quite acceptable in ordi-
nary conversations.
Fran the above, it follows that if a structure allows
either Reflexivization to ny tenany or Pronominalization to an
independent pronoun, this will constitute a piece of evidence in
favor of its bi-sentential source. Now, with all of the Causative
constructions, it is possible to do, if not both, at least one or
the other.
If we refer back to the general picture provided by
Table 5 —and, in particular, to Section 5 of Chapter One, deal-
ing with the Fusion parameter and its interaction with the Caus-
atives— we will see that the "persuasive," the "coercive," and
the "permissive" Directive constructions allow Pronominalization
as defined above, but not Reflexivization to ny tenany; that the
"neutral" Directive construction allows both; that all the Mani-
pulative constructions allow Reflexivization to ny tenany; that
the Abilitative construction also allows the latter; that all the
Causal Causatives allow both. Otiis being the case, it can only be
inferred that all the Causative constructions must be derived
from bi-sentential sources.

640
Section 2
Single S Output
2.0 Introduction.
In Subsection 1.2.1 above, we saw that a manner or
place adverb could be transported to the position immediately to
the left of the Su NP of the entire Causative sequence, thus
giving rise to a scope ambiguity. It follows then that whatever
is situated immediately to the right of the ambiguous adverb must
be a Su. Now, it is quite apparent from all the exanples in 1.2.4
that there is, in fact, only one such Su NP. In this section, it
will be shown that in all Causative constructions, there is only
one Su NP in the output sequence and that the Su of the embedded
clause in the underlying representation gets denoted stepwise
down the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy in all constructions involving
Fusion (see Chapter One, Section 5). The assumption here is that
in a simplex sentence there is only one single Su, as the un-
grammaticality of the following sentence demonstrates:
(136) *N-amono an'i Petera i Paoly i Jaona.
past-kill Peter Paul John
"John, Paul killed Peter."
The following tests show that a sequence containing a Causative
construction can only have one Su NP:
1. Sentential Question Formation;
2. Exclamation Formation; and
3. No-Longer Negation supplemented by Izy-Substitution.

641
2.1 Sentential Question Formation.
In order to question a statement, a particle angaha "is
it the case that...?" has to be posited immediately to the left
of the Su NP, as indicated in Keenan (1976a). It follows that
whatever is situated to the right of angaha must be a Su NP. the
following sentences shew that there can only be one Su NP:
(137)a. N-anao izay h-idira-n' i Jeanne angaha i Jaona?
fut-do comp circ-enter-by Jeanne quest John
"Did John do so that Jeanne would go in there?"
b. *N-anao izay h-idira-na angaha i Jeanne i Jaona?
past-do comp circ-enter-fcy quest Jeanne John
(138)a. N-anery/N-amela an'i Mary h-iditra angaha i Jaona?
past-force/past-let Mary fut-enter quest John
"Did John force/allow Mary to go in there?"
b. *N-anery/N-amsla an'i Mary h-iditra angaha i Jaona?
past-force/past-let Mary fut-enter quest John
(139)a. N-amp-iditra an'i Mary angaha i Paoly?
past-caus-enter Mary quest Paul
"Did Paul have Mary go in there?"
b. *N-amp-iditra angaha an'i Mary Paoly?
past-caus-enter quest Mary Paul

642
(140)a. N-amp-idina ny zazakely angaha i Jeanne?

past-caus-go-down the child quest Jeanne
"Did Jeanne bring the baby downstairs?"
b. *N-amp-idina angaha ny zazakely i Jeanne?
past-caus-go-down quest the child Jeanne
N-an-datsaka an'i Koto angaha i Paoly?

(141)a. past-caus-enrolled Koto quest Paul
"Did Paul enroll Koto?"
*N-andatsaka angaha an'i Koto i Paoly?

b. past-caus-enrolled quest Koto Paul
N-aha-zaka an'i Jeanne angaha i Paoly?

past-caus-carried Jeanne quest Paul
(142) a. "Did Paul manage to carry Jeanne?"
*N-ahazaka angaha an'i Jeanne i Paoly?

past-caus-carried quest Jeanne Paul
b.
N-aha-finaritra an'i Paoly angaha io?
past-caus-happy Paul quest this
"Was Paul happy with this?"
(143)a.
*N-aha-finaritra angaha an'i Paoly io?
past-caus-happy quest Paul this
b.
643
(144)a. N-an-dreraka an'i Paoly angaha i Jeanne?
past-caus-tired Paul quest Jeanne
"Was Paul tired of Jeanne?"
b. *N-an-dreraka angaha an'i Paoly i Jeanne?
past-caus-tired quest Paul Jeanne
(145)a. N-anka-leo an'i Paoly angaha i Jeanne?
past-caus-fed-up Paul quest Jeanne
"Was Paul fed up with Jeanne?"
*N-anka-leo angaha an'i Paoly i Jeanne?
past-caus-fed-up quest Paul Jeanne
Doubling on the Su is not allowed, as is made evident by the un-
gramnaticality of the b. sentences from (137) to (145). Nor is it
possible to place angaha immediately to the left of the Su NP in
either the higher or the lower clause, as in
(146)a. N-anontany i Paoly fa h-andeha angaha i Mary.
past-ask Paul comp fut-go quest Mary
"Paul asked whether Mary will/would go."
b. N-anontany angaha i Paoly fa h-andeha i Mary?
past-ask quest Paul carp fut-go Mary
"Did Paul ask Aether Mary will/would go?"
Ohe grammatically of (146) a. and (146) b. shows that indeed the
question particle angaha must be placed in front of the Su NP. In

644
(146)b., a Heavy NP Shift rule applies to position the sentential
object fa handeha i Mary beyond the Su NP i Paoly. The ungrairmat-
icality of the b. sequences from (137) to (145) suggests that
there is only one final Su NP in a Causative construction.
2.2 Exclamation Formation.
A particle anie is placed immediately to the left of
the Su NP and a particle e optionally positioned after the Su NP.
Again, there cannot be two Su NPs:
(147)a. N-anao izay h-idira-n' i Jeanne anie i Jaona (è)!
past-do comp circ-enter-by Jeanne part Jchn (part)
"Well, (didn't you know) John did so that Jeanne would
go in thereI"
b. *N-anao izay h-idira-na anie i Jeanne i Jaona (è)!
past-do comp circ-enter part Jeanne John (part)
(148)a. N-anery/U-amela an'i Mary h-iditra anie i Jaona (è)!
past-force/past-let Mary fut-enter part John (part)
"Well, (didn't you know) John forced/allowed Mary to go
in there!"
(149)a. N-amp-iditra an'i Mary anie i Paoly (è) I
past-caus-enter Mary part Paul (part)
"Well, (didn't you know) Paul had Mary go in there!"
b. *N-amp-iditra anie an'i Mary i Paoly (é)!
past-caus-enter part Mary Paul (part)

645
(150)a. N-amp-idina ny zazakely anie i Jeanne (e)!
past-caus-go-down the child part Jeanne (part)
"Well, (didn't you know) Jeanne brought the baby down-
stairs."
b. *Nbamp-idina anie ny zazakely i Jeanne (e)!
past-caus-go-down part the child Jeanne (part)
N-an-datsaka an'i Koto anie i Paoly (è)!
(151)a. past-caus-enrolled Koto part Paul (part)
"Well, (didn't you know) Paul enrolled Koto."
*N-an-datsaka anie an'i Koto i Paoly (e)!
b. past-caus-enrolled part Koto Paul (part)
N-aha-zaka an'i Jeanne anie i Paoly (§)!
past-caus-carried Jeanne part Paul (part)
(152) a. "Well, (didn't you know) Paul managed to carry Jeanne!"
*N-aha-zaha anie an'i Jeanne i Paoly (é)!

past-caus-carried part Jeanne Paul (part)
b.
N-aha-finaritra an'i Paoly anie io (§)!
past-caus-happy Paul part this (part)
"Well, (didn't you know) Paul was happy with this!"
(153)a.
*N-aha-finaritra anie an'i Paoly io (e)!
past-caus-happy part Paul this (part)
b.
646
(154)a. N-an-dreraka an'i Paoly anie i Jeanne (è)!
past-caus-tired Paul part Jeanne (part)
"Well, (didn't you know) Paul was tired of Jeanne!"
b. *N-an-dreraka anie an'i Paoly i Jeanne (è)!
past-caus-tired part Paul Jeanne (part)
(155)a. N-anka-leo an'i Paoly anie i Jeanne (è)!

past-caus-fed-up Paul part Jeanne (part)
"Vfell, (didn't you) Paul was fed up with Jeanne!"
b. *N-anka-leo anie an'i Paoly i Jeanne (I)!
past-caus-fed-up part Paul Jeanne (part)
The graimnaticality of the a. sentences can be accounted for on

the grounds that they only have one Su NP each. Hie ungramma-
tically of the b. sequences stems from the fact that they have
two Su NPs each. Here, as in the case of the Question particle
angaha, it is to be noted that it is quite possible to position
anie inmediately to the left of the Su NP in either the higher or
the lower clause, as in:
(156)a. N-ilaza anie i Paoly fa h-andeha i Mary (é).
past-say part Paul comp fut-go Mary (part)
"Well, Paul said that Mary will/would leave!"
b. N-ilaza i Paoly fa h-andeha anie i Mary (è).
past-say Paul camp fut-go part Mary (part)
"Well, Paul said that Mary will/would leave."

647
2.3.1 No-Longer Negation.
The Negation Operator Tsy "not" is placed at the begin-
ning of the sentence and a particle intsony "no longer," in front
of the Su NP:
(157)a. Tsy n-anao izay h-idira-n' i Jeanne intsony i Jaona.
neg past-do carp circ-enter-by Jeanne neg Jchn
"John no longer did so that Jeanne would go in."
b. *Tsy n-anao izay h-idirana intsony i Jeanne i Jaona.
neg past-do conp circ-enter neg Jeanne John
(158)a. Tsy n-anery/n-amela an'i Mary h-iditra intsony i Jaona
neg forced/allowed Mary fut-enter neg John
"John no longer forced/allowed Mary to go in."
b. Tsy n-anery/n-amela intsony an'i Mary h-iditra i Jaona.
neg forced/allowed neg Mary fut-enter Jchn
"John no longer forced/allcwed Mary to go in."
(159)a. Tsy n-anp-iditra an'i Mary intsony i Paoly.
neg past-caus-enter Mary neg Paul
"Paul no longer had Mary go in."
b. Tsy n-anp-iditra intsony an'i Mary i Paoly.
neg past-caus-enter neg Mary Paul
"Paul no longer had Mary go in."

648
(160) a. Tsy n-amp-idina ny zazakely intsony i Paoly.
neg past-caus-go-down the child neg Paul
"Paul no longer brought the baby downstairs."
b. Tsy n-amp-idina intsony ny zazakely i Paoly.
neg past-caus-go-down neg the child Paul
"Paul no longer brought the baby downstairs."
(161)a. Tsy n-an-datsaka an'i Koto intsony i Paoly.
neg past-caus-enrolled Koto neg Paul
"Paul no longer enrolled Koto."
b. Tsy n-an-datsaka intsony an'i Koto i Paoly.
neg past-caus-enrolled neg Koto Paul
"Paul no longer enrolled Koto."
(162) a^ Tsy n-aha-zaka an' i Jeanne intsony i Paoly.
neg past-caus-carried Jeanne neg Paul
"Paul no longer managed to carry Jeanne."
b. Tsy n-aha-zaka intsony an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
neg past-caus-carried neg Jeanne Paul
"Paul no longer managed to carry Jeanne."
(163) a. Tsy n-aha-finaritra an'i Paoly intsony io.
neg past-caus-happy Paul neg this
"Paul was no longer happy with this."

649
b. Tsy n-aha-finaritra intsony an'i Paoly io.
neg past-caus-happy neg Paul this
"Paul was no longer happy with this."
(164)a. Tsy n-an-dreraka an' i Paoly intsony i Jeanne.
neg past-caus-tired Paul neg Jeanne
"Paul was no longer tired of Jeanne."
b. Tsy n-an-dreraka intsony an'i Paoly i Jeanne,
neg past-caus-tired neg Paul Jeanne
"Paul was no longer tired of Jeanne."
In (157), with the "persuasive" Directive construction, Placement
of intsony to the left of the NP i Jeanne yields an ungramnatical
sequence, suggesting that the latter could not be considered a
potential Su NP. This seems to be the only exception to the gen-
eral rule evinced by the data. The grammaticality of the senten-
ces in b. suggests that apparently we havetoropotential Su NPs
since intsony precedes two NPs. The b. sentences illustrate one
stage of the derivation where the embedded Su has just been deno-
ted to a DO position, as is made clear by the presence of the
particle an. Hcwever, such a position is not a straight DO yet
since it is still immediately to the right of intsony. At this
stage, then, we seem to have two Su NPs; the first being that of
the higher clause; the second, that of the embedded clause. In
fact, in light of what will be shown in 2.3.2 below, the second
NP from the right falls between a Su and a straight DO.

650
2.3.2 Izy-Substitution.
The a. sentences frail (158) to (164) suggest that it
might be possible to have a Doubling on the Su position, in fact,
Izy-Substitution clearly demonstrates that this is not the case
and that there is only one Su. Given that izy is Su for "he, she"
and azy the DO "him, her," such a substitution yields:
(165)a. *Tsy n-anao izay h-idira-n' izy intsony izy.
neg past-do coup circ-enter-by she neg lie
b. *Tsy n-anao izay h-dira-n' izy intsony izy.
neg past-do carp circ-enter-by she neg he
c. Tsy n-anao izay h-idira-ny intsony izy.
neg past-do comp circ-enter-by-her neg he
"He did not do so that she will go in."
d. *Tsy n-anao izay h-idira-na intsony azy izy.
neg past-do coip circ-enter neg her he
e. *Tsy n-anao izay h-idira-na intsony izy izy.
neg past-do carp circ-enter neg she he
(166)a. *Tsy n-anery/n-amela izy h-iditra intsony izy.
neg past-forced/past-let she fut-enter neg he
b. Tsy n-anery/n-amela azy h-iditra intsony izy.
neg past-force/past-let her fut-enter neg he
"He no longer forced/allowed her to go in."

651
c. *Tsy n-anery/n-amela intsony izy h-iditra izy
neg past-force/past-let neg she fut-enter he
d. Tsy n-anery/n-amela intsony azy h-iditra izy
neg past-force/past-let neg her fut-enter he
"He no longer forced/allowed her to go in."
(167)a. *Tsy n-anp-iditra izy intsony izy.
neg past-caus-enter she neg lie
b. Tsy n-anp-iditra azy intsony izy.
neg past-caus-enter her neg he
"He no longer had her go in."
c. *Tsy n-anp-iditra intsony izy izy.
neg past-caus-enter neg she he
d. Tsy n-anp-iditra intsony azy izy.
neg past-caus-enter neg her he
"He no longer had her go in."
(168)a. *Tsy n-amp-idina izy intsony izy.
neg past-caus-go-down she neg he
b. Tsy n-anp-idina azy intsony izy.
neg past-caus-go-down her neg he
"He no longer brought her downstairs."

652
c. *Tsy n-anp-idina intsony i2y izy.

neg past-caus-go-down neg she he
d. Tsy n-airp-idina intsony azy izy.
neg past-caus-go-down neg her he
"He no longer brought her downstairs."
(169)a. *Tsy n-an-datsaka izy intsony izy.
neg past-caus-enrolled he neg he
b. Tsy n-an-datsaka azy intsony izy.
neg past-caus-enrolled him neg he
"He no longer enrolled him."
c. *Tsy n-an-datsaka intsony izy izy.

neg past-caus-enrolled neg he he
d. Tsy n-an-datsaka intsony azy izy.
neg past-caus-enrolled neg him he
"He no longer enrolled him."
(170)a. *Tsy n-aha-zaka izy intsony izy.
neg past-caus-carried she neg he
b. Tsy n-aha-zaka azy intsony izy.
neg past-caus-carried her neg he
"He no longer managed to carry her."

653
c. *Tsy n-aha-zaka intsony izy izy
neg past-caus-carried neg she he
d. Tsy n-aha-zaka intsony azy izy
neg past-caus-carried neg her he
"He no longer managed to carry her."
(171)a. *Tsy n-aha-finaritra izy intsony io.
neg past-caus-happy he neg this
b. Tsy n-aha-finaritra azy intsony io.
neg past-caus-happy him neg this
"He was no longer happy with this."
c. *Tsy n-áha-finaritra intsony izy io.

neg past-caus-happy neg he this
d. Tsy n-aha-finaritra intsony azy io.

neg past-caus-happy neg him this
"He was no longer happy with this."
(172) a. *Tsy n-an-dreraka izy intsony izy.
neg past-caus-tired he neg she
b. Tsy n-an-dreraka azy intsony izy.
neg past-caus-tired him neg she
"He was no longer tired of her."

654
c. *Tsy n-an-dreraka intsony izy izy.
neg past-caus-tired neg he she
d. Tsy n-an-dreraka intsony azy izy.
neg past-caus-tired neg him she
"He was no longer tired with her."
The above are the same sentences as those used in 2.3.1, except
that substitutions have been made to determine whether it is pos-
sible to have a grammatical output with two Su pronouns izy "he-
/she." All of our examples from (166) to (172) clearly prove that
Doubling on Su is not possible since all the sequences where izy
izy occur are irretrievably ungranmatical. Furthermore, the un-
grammaticality of all the possibilities in (165) indicates that
in the "persuasive" Directive Causative, the embedded Su of the
underlying sequence is not denoted stepwise on the Keenan-Comrie
Hierarchy. The possibility of the clitic form of the pronoun njr,
as seen in (165)c., shows that the underlying Su now occupies the
Genitive position.
2.4.0 Preview.
In this subsection, it will be shown that in a Causa-
tive construction involving Fusion, the embedded Su has been
demoted to DO, whether its predicate is intransitive or transi-
tive, thus causing a Doubling on DO. Such a Doubling is also
possible in a simplex sentence.
First, it will be shown that the distinction between DO
and IO is relevant in Malagasy and that there exist four tests to
help distinguish them:

655
1. Pronoun Substitution and Coreferentiality;
2. Co-Occurrence Restriction between the particle an
and the definite article ny;
3. Bo-Placement in front of the IO is possible;
4. Possibility of Fronting of the DO.
Subsequently, the problem of the demotion of the embed-
ded Su to DO will be tackled.
2.4.1 Distinction between DO and IO.
Word Order plays a role in determining which NP occu-
pies the DO or IO position in a Causative construction4:
(173)a. ?N-amp-anome boky an'i Jeanne an'i Jaona i Paoly.
past-caus-give book Jeanne John Paul
"Paul had Jchn give books to Jeanne."
b. TN-anp-anome boky an'i Jacna an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-give book John Jeanne Paul
"Paul had Jeanne give books to John."
(173)b. cannot be assigned the same reading as (173) a. In the a.
sentence, the NP an'i Jeanne precedes the NP an'i Jaona and as
such can only be interpreted as an 10 and not a DO; whereas in
the b. sequence, the NP an'i Jeanne follows the NP an'i Jaona and
can only be interpreted as a DO. The importance of Word Order
becomes apparent when one substitutes the pronoun azy "him/her"
for both ny taratasy and ny zanany in the following sentence:

656
(174) N-anp-anoratra ny taratasy ny zana-ny i Paoly.
past-caus-write the letter the son-his Paul
"Paul had his son write the letter."
(175) N-amp-anoratra azy io an'azy i Paoly.
past-caus-write it him Paul
"Paul had him write it."
(176) *N-amp-anoratra azy an'azy io i Paoly.
past-caus-write him it Paul
(177) *N-anp-anoratra an'azy an'azy io i Paoly.
past-caus-write him it Paul
The first pronoun azy io in (175) can only refer to the NP ny ta-
ratasy and the second, azy, to ny zanany, as is made apparent by
the* ungrammatically of (176), where the first pronoun azy now
refers to the NP ny zanany and the second, to the NP ny taratasy.
Now, inverting the order of the two pronouns of (175) does not
improve the grammaticality of the sentence, as in (176), without
the DO/IO preposition an in front of azy or, as in (177), with an
in front of the sane pronoun. The ungraimiaticality of (176) and
(177), as opposed to the grammaticality of (174) and (175), in-
dicates that the DO precedes the 10 in this Causative constru-
ction and that the distinction between the twD is relevant in
Malagasy: the first NP following a complex Causative predicate is
a DO and the second, an 10, as in (174).

657
2.4.2 Co-Occurrence of An and Ny.
tfcw, tile preposition an, since it surfaces in both in-
stances in (173), does not enable us to make a clear-cut distin-
ction between a DO and an 10. Nevertheless, the following data
show that each has a pattern of its own since a DO comprising the
definite article n£ cannot co-occur with an, but an 10 can:
(178)a. N-ahita an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-see Jeanne Paul
"Paul saw Jeanne."
b. *N-ahita an'ny zandri-ny i Paoly.
past-see the brother-his Paul
"Paul saw his brother."
(179)a. N-anome ny boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-give the book Jeanne Paul
"Paul gave the book(s) to Jeanne."
b. N-anome ny boky an'ny zandri-ny i Paoly.
past-give the book the brother-his Paul
"Paul gave the book(s) to his brother."
The sentence (178)b. is ungrammatical since it violates a co-oc-
currence restriction between an and the DO containing the defi-
nite article n£. Cn the other hand, the sequence (179)b. is gram-
matical since the NP ny zandriny "the brother-his" is not a DO
but an 10, therefore, there is no violation of the restriction

658
just mentioned. Note that the grammaticality judgments provided
here reflect Colloquial Malagasy since (179)b. will be considered
ungrammatical by normative grammarians.
2.4.3 Bo-Placement.
When an NP fills the DO position, it is not possible to
insert a particle ho (apparently the same morpheme as the future
tense-marker, but more probably a Distance marker) immediately to
its left, but when it occupies the 10 slot, then the result is
grammatical:
(180)a. N-ahita an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-see Jeanne Paul
"Paul saw Jeanne."
b. *N-ahita ho an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-see part Jeanne Paul
(181)a. N-anoroe boky an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-give book Jeanne Paul
"Paul gave (a) book(s) to Jeanne."
b. N-anome boky ho an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-give book part Jeanne Paul
"Paul gave (a) book(s) for Jeanne."
The sentences (181)a. and (181)b. are different to the extent
that in the second, the implication is that "Paul and Jeanne were
659
not interacting directly at the scene of the utterance." ohe un-
grammaticality of (180)b. shows that the NP an'i Jeanne is a DO
in this sequence, whereas the grammaticality of (181)b. suggests
that it is an IO in this other sentence.
2.4.4 Fronting of the DO.
It is possible to front the DO and insert a particle no
inmediately to its right, whereas this is impossible with the IO.
Thus, we get:
(182) Ny boky no n-ancme an'i Paoly i Jeanne omaly.
the book part past-give Paul Jeanne yesterday
"As for the books, Jeanne gave Paul some yesterday."
(183) *An'i Paoly no n-ancme ny boky i Jeanne cmaly.
Paul part past-give the book Jeanne yesterday
(184) N-ancme ny boky an'i Paoly i Jeanne omaly.
past-give the book Paul Jeanne yesterday
"Yesterday, Jeanne gave the books to Paul."
(185) I Jeanne no n-anome ny boky an'i Paoly omaly.
Jeanne part past-give the book Paul yesterday
"It was Jeanne who gave the books to Paul yesterday."
(186) *Azy ireo no n-anome an'i Paoly i Jeanne omaly.
them part past-give Paul Jeanne yesterday

660
(187) Izy no n-ancme ny boky an'i Paoly omaly.
she part past-give the book Paul yesterday
"It was she who gave the books to Paul yesterday."
(188)a. N-iatonta io trano io omaly.
past-fall this house this yesterday
"This house fell yesterday."
b. N-iatonta izy io omaly.
past-fall it yesterday
"It fell yesterday."
c. Izy io no n-iatonta omaly.
it part past-fall yesterday
"It was it which fell yesterday."
(184) is the basic sentence from which all the others are deri-
ved. In (182), the definite DO ny boky "the books" has been fron-
ted, yielding a partitive reading. In (183), the 10 an'i Paoly
has been fronted in exactly the same manner as the DO, but the
output is irretrievably ungrammatical. As for (185), it results
from the application of Fronting to the Su NP i Jeanne. New, as
is apparent in (185), it is possible to front the Su NP. The dis-
tinction between the Su and the DO is that only the first can
have a prcnoun substitute, not the second, and yield a grammati-
cal sequence (see (186)). It appears then that oily the DO can be
fronted when it is an NP while the 10 cannot be fronted at all.
Furthermore, the grammaticality of the sequences in (188) proves
the non-relevance of Animacy.

661
2.4.5 Table of Criteria for Distinction between DO and 10.
The information uncovered from 2.4.1. to 2.4.4 can be
summarized on Table 15.
Table 15
Criteria for the Distinction Between DO and 10
DO 10
-Word Order 1st position 2nd position

-Prcnoun-Substitution
and Co-Referentiality 1st 2nd
-Co-Occurrence of an S ny not possible possible

-Hp-Placement not possible possible
-Fronting with no possible not possible
2.5.0 Demotion of the Embedded Su to DO.
In the process of Clause-Union, the embedded Su of the
underlying sequence goes down stepwise on the Keenan-Comrie Hier-
archy, and from the Su position goes to the DO position.
2.5.1 The Case of the Embedded Intransitive Predicate.
In all of the following examples, the embedded stru-
cture comprises an intransitive predicate and the former Su is
demoted to DO. Application of the Co-Occurrence, Ho-Placement and
Fronting tests yields the following sequences:

662
(189)a. N-amp-iditra ny npianatra i Jaona.
past-caus-enter the student John
"John had the student(s) go in."
b. *N-amp-iditra an' ny npianatra i Jaona.
past-caus-enter part the student Jchn
c. *N-amp-iditra ho an' ny mpianatra i Jaona.
past-caus-enter part part the student John
d. Ny npianatra no n-amp-iditra i Jaona.
the students part past-caus-enter Jchn
"As for the students, John had seme go in."
(190)a. N-ank-adala ny npianatra i Jeanne,
past-caus-crazy the student Jeanne
"Jeanne drove the student(s) crazy."
b. *N-ank-adala an' ny npianatra i Jeanne,
past-caus-crazy part the student Jeanne
c. *N-ank-adala ho an' ny npianatra i Jeanne,
past-caus-crazy part part the student Jeanne
d. Ny npianatra no n-ank-adala i Jeanne.
the student part past-caus-crazy Jeanne
"As for the students, Jeanne drove sane of them crazy.

663
(191) a. N-ana-tsara ny mpianatra i Jaona.
past-caus-good the student John
"John praised the student(s)
b. *N-ana-tsara an' ny mpianatra i Jacna.
past-caus-good part the student John
c. *N-ana-tsara ho an' ny mpianatra i Jaona.
past-caus-good part part the student John
d. Ny mpianatra no n-ana-tsara i Jaona.
the student part past-caus-good John
"As for the students, John praised some of them."
(192)a. N-aha-laginina ny npianatra i Jeanne,

pas t-caus-fed-up the student Jeanne
"Jeanne managed to irritate the student(s)."
b. *N-aha-laginina an' ny npianatra i Jeanne,

past-caus-fed-up part the student Jeanne
c. *N-aha-laginina ho an' ny npianatra i Jeanne,
past-caus-fed-up part part the student Jeanne
d. Ny npianatra no n-aha-laginina i Jeanne.
the students part past-caus-fed-up Jeanne
"Ss for the students, Jeanne managed to irritate some
of them."
664
(193) a. N-an-daginina ny mpianatra i Jeanne,
past-caus-fed-up the student Jeanne
"Jeanne irritated the students."
b. *N-an-daginina an' ny mpianatra i Jeanne,
past-caus-fed-up part the student Jeanne
c. *N-an-daginina ho an' ny npianatra i Jeanne,
past-caus-fed-up part part the student Jeanne
Ny mpianatra no n-an-àaginina i Jeanne,
the students part past-caus-fed-up Jeanne
"As for the students, Jeanne irritated seme of them."
Without any exception, all three diagnostic tests prove that the
embedded Su has been demoted to a DO but not to an 10 position
since in the b. sentences, the NP comprising the definite article
ny cannot co-occur with the particle an, as is made evident by
the ungrammatically of all the relevant sentences above; like-
wise, the ungrammatical c. sentences show that ho cannot co-occur
with the particle an; finally, in the d. sequences, Fronting of
DO is possible and yields the expected partitive reading.
2.5.2 The Case of the Embedded Transitive Predicate.
Even when the embedded predicate is transitive, the em-
bedded Su gets demoted to DO although it does not appear to be a
straight DO. The possibility of passivizing by promoting either
the original or the derived DO suggests that we may indeed have a

665
case of Doubling on the 1X3, as will be seen in 2.5.3 below. A
sentence with a transitive predicate like:
(194) H-anoratra ny taratasy ny zana-ny,
fut-write the letter the son-his
"His son will write the letter,"
(195) N-amp-anoratra ny taratasy ny zana-ny i Paoly,
past-caus-write the letter the son-his Paul
"Paul had his son write the letter,"
(196) ?*N-anp-anoratra ny taratasy an ny zana-ny i Paoly,
past-caus-write the letter part the son-his Paul
"Paul had his son write the letter,"
(197) N-amp-anoratra ny taratasy ho an' ny zana-ny i Paoly,
past-caus-write the letter part the son-his Paul
"Paul had someone write the letter for his son,"
(198) *Ny zana-ny no n-amp-anoratra ny taratasy i Paoly,
the son-his part past-caus-write the letter Paul
(194) can be embedded under a Causative predicate and yield
(195). New, with the co-occurrence of an and n£ test, we obtain
the marginally grammatical sentence (196), ungrammatical from a
normative grammarian's viewpoint although certainly a possibi-
lity. With the application of the Ho-Placeroent and the Fronting
tests, we get the grammatical sequence (197) and the ungranma-

666
tical sentence (198). Hie grammaticality pattern in (197) and
(198) suggests that we are dealing here with an 10, but the semi-
granmaticality of (196) shows that it is basically a DO. Thus,
there seems to be a current tendency for the embedded Su demoted
to DO to gradually go down the hierarchy so that here we have an
item falling between a straight DO and a straight 10. The ungram-
maticality of (198) demonstrates that it is not a straight DO.
2.5.3 Demotion to DO.
However, since it is possible to passivize by promoting
either ny taratasy or ny zanany in (194), we can assume that the
embedded Su has been denoted to DO:
(199) N-amp-anorata-n' i Paoly ny taratasy ny zana-ny.
pass-caus-wr ite-by Paul the letter the son-his
"His son was made by Paul to write the letter," i.e.
"Paul made his son write the letter."
(200) ?N-amp-anorata-n1 i Paoly ny zana-ny ny taratasy.
pass-caus-write-by Paul the son-his the letter
"Paul made his son write the letter."
(201) N-amp-anoratra ny taratasy an'i Jeanne i Paoly.
past-caus-write the letter Jeanne Paul
"Paul had Jeanne write the letter."
(202) N-amp-anorata-n1 i Paoly ny taratasy i Jeanne,
pass-caus-write-by Paul the letter Jeanne
"Paul had Jeanne write the letter."

667
(203) N-amp-anorata-n' i Paoly an'i Jeanne ny taratasy.
pass-caus-write-by Paul Jeanne the letter
"Paul had the letter written by Jeanne."
When we substitute an'i Jeanne for ny zanany of (200), we get
(201). In (202), the particle an has been dropped in the process
of promoting an'i Jeanne to Su. Further support for considering
the denoted Su a DO and not an 10 comes from the fact that it is
not possible to passivize by promoting an IO to Su:
(204) ?N-amp-anome ny boky an' J an'i P i Petera4.
past-caus-give the book J P Peter
"Peter had P give the book(s) to J."
(205) ?N-amp-anome-z-an1 i Petera an'i J an'i P ny boky.
pass-caus-give-by Peter J P the book
"Peter had the books given by P to J."
(206) ?*N-amp-anome-z-an1 i Petera an'i J ny boky i P.
pass-caus-give-by Peter J the book P
"Peter had the books given by P to J."
(207) *N-airp-anome-z-an1 i Petera ny boky an'i P i J.
pass-caus-give-by Peter the book P J
The ungranmaticality of (207) indicates that the NP i J(eanne),
which has been promoted to Su, was originally an 10 and not a DO.
This is made evident by the An-ny, the Bo-Placement and the
Fronting tests:
668
(208) ?N-airp-anome ny boky an' ny npianatra an'i P^ i Pj.
past-caus-give the book part the student P^ Pj
"Pj had Pi give the book(s) to the student(s)."
(209) ?N-amp-aname ny boky ho an'ny npianatra an'i P i i Pj.
past-caus-give the book part the student Pi Pj
"Pj had Pi give the book(s) to the student(s)."
(210) *(An') i J no n-anp-anome ny boky an'i P i i Pj.
(part) J part past-caus-give the book Pi Pj
The pattern of grairmaticality found in the sentences from (199)
to (203) shows that Malagasy has Doubling on the DO position in a
Causative construction, just like in a sinplex sentence:
(211) N-anome ny taratasy ny zana-ny i Paoly.
past-give the letter the son-his Paul
"Paul gave his son the letter."
(212) *N-anome ny taratasy an' ny zanany i Paoly.
past-give the letter part the letter Paul
(213) *N-anome ny taratasy ho an'ny zana-ny i Paoly.
past-give the letter part the son-his Paul
(214) *Ny zana-ny no n-anome ny taratasy i Paoly.
the son-his part past-give the letter Paul

669
Again, the ungranrnaticality of (214) suggests that it is not a
straight DO.
2.6 Passivization.
Given that a Causative construction, as we have just
shown, has one Su and at least one DO, we new have to demonstrate
that there is only one verbal predicate, the lower predicate be-
ing lifted into the matrix clause during Clause-Union. If the
entire verbal complex can be passivized, then we will have a good
indication that one single S output is involved at this stage.
That indeed seems to be the case:
(215)a. ?N-anp-anome ny boky an'i Jeanne an'i Paoly i Petera.
past-caus-give the book Jeanne Paul Peter
(grammaticality depends on intcnation and context, at
least, partially)
"Peter had "Paul give the book to Jeanne."
b. TN-amp-anome-z-an'i Petera an'i J an'i P ny boky.
pass-caus-give-by Peter J P the book
(grammaticality depends on intonation and context, at
least, partially)
"Peter had the book given to Jeanne by Paul."
c. TN-anp-ancroe-z-an'i Petera an'i J ny boky i P.
pass-caus-give-by Peter J the book P
"Peter had P give the book to Jeanne."

670
(216) a. N-amp-andeha an'i Mary i Jaona.

past-caus-go Mary John
"John had Mary leave," in the sense of
"John told Mary to leave."
b. N-amp-andeha-n-an'i Jaona i Mary,

pass-caus-go-by John Mary
"John made Mary leave (somewhat ooercively)," or
"John dragged Mary away."
(217) a. N-ank-adala an'i Jaona i Jeanne,

past-caus-crazy John Jeanne
"Jeanne drove John crazy (intentionally or n o t ) o r
"John was crazy because of Jeanne."
b. N-ank-adala-in' i Jeanne i Jaona.

pass-caus-crazy-by Jeanne John
"Jeanne drove John crazy (only intentionally)."
J
N-ana-tsara an'i Paoly i Jaona.
(218)a. past-caus-good Paul John
"Jbhn caused Paul (to appear to be) good."
"John praised Paul."
N-a-tsara-in' i Jaona i Paoly.

b. pass-good-by Jchn Paul
"Paul was praised by John (lavishly)," in that the
latter exaggerated quite a bit.
671
(219)a. N-aha-laginina an'i Jaona i Jeanne,
past-caus-fed-up John Jeanne
"Jchn was fed up with Jeanne."
b. *N-áha-lagin-in' i Jeanne i Jaona.
pass-caus-fed-up-by Jeanne Jchn
(220)a. N-an-daginina an'i Jaona i Jeanne,
past-caus-fed-up John Jeanne
"Jeanne was trying to cause John to get angry."
b. N-an-dagin-an' i Jeanne i Jaona.
pass-caus-fed-up-by Jeanne John
"Jeanne made a fuss with John."
First, it is to be noticed that all of the above sentences with
the exception of (216)b. and (218) are characteristic of Collo-
quial Malagasy and are not accepted by normative grammarians.
Therefore, the application of Affixal Passive after Clause-Union
should only be regarded as a tendency. Despite a limited number
of cases like (217) and (220), it still remains true, as was
shown to be the case in Chapter One, Section 5, that generally in
a Causal construction, Affixal Passive cannot apply after Clause-
Union, as can be inferred frcm the ungrammaticality of (219) b.
Second, as was pointed out in Chapter One, Section 2.1.3, and as
can be seen in (215)a. and (216)a., the "neutral" Directive con-
struction requires that the embedded verb be in the active voice.

672
If this is not the case, then we have a Manipulative reading.
Uius, the difference between (215)a. and (215)b. is that in the
a. version, the Causer simply asks the Causee to do something,
whereas in the b. version the Causer has Control over the Causee.
Likewise, in (216) in the a. version, the Causer has no Control
over the Causee, whereas in the b. version, he does have Control
over the latter. In fact, Control is the denominator ccannon to
(217)b., (218)b., and (220)b. (see Chapter One, Section 2).
Finally, one piece of evidence in favor of the view that the
above data shows only a tendency is provided by Reflexivization
to tena. As was seen in Chapter One, Section 5, this process is
possible oily with the Manipulative amp (a) (see 5.2.13 of that
chapter), the Manipulative an (a) (see 5.2.20 of the same chap-
ter) , and Abilitative aha (5.2.27 of the same chapter).
3 Conclusion.
It appears, that:
1. All Causative constructions in Malagasy have bi-
sentential sources since:
a. there exist Co-Occurrence Restrictions involving the
tense-marker on the place adverb and the verb (1.1.1 and 1.1.2),
the place adverb and the time adverb (1.1.4), and the tensemarker
on the verb and that on the time adverb (1.1.5) which hold in a
simplex sentence but which do not hold in Causative Constru-
ctions;
b. a manner (1.2.2, 1.2.3) or a time (1.2.6 and 1.2.7)
adverb can occupy a position in the sentence which gives rise

673
to an ambiguity of interpretation in a Causative Construction
involving Fusion;
c. the Malagasy equivalent of Do-So (Subsection 1.3)
can refer either to the higher Causative clause or to the lower
one;
d. likewise, Izany-Replaceroent (1.4) can refer to
either the higher Causative clause or to the lower one; and
e. either Reflexivization to ny tenany or Proncminal-
ization to an independent pronoun (1.5) or even both can apply in
a Causative construction involving Fusion. Nfcw, in both instan-
ces, the trigger and its victim cannot be clausemates. It follows
that a construction which meets this requirement for these two
phenomena necessarily involve a complex not simplex sentence.
2. Clause-Onion takes place and yields a single senten-
ce output, as is made evident by
a. the fact that the output sequence is a sequence with
only one Su, as is shown by Sentential Question Formation (2.1),
Exclamation Formation (2.2), and No-Donger Negation (2.3.1) sup-
plemented by Izy-Substitution (2.3.2);
b. the stepwise demotion (2.4.0) down the Keenan-Comrie
Hierarchy of the embedded Su of the underlying sequence in a
Causative construction involving Fusion of the higher and the
lower predicates, as was explained in Chapter One, Section 5; and
c. the tendency to apply Affixal Passive after Clause-
Union although, in general, the latter is restricted to the
Manipulative constructions amp (a) and an (a), as was shown to be
the case in Chapter One, Section 5.

674
CHAPTER SIX FOOTNOTES
1
I am precluding situations where Paul just began studying and,
therefore, is still assumed by the speaker to be in the locality
being referred to. In such a case, it is possible to have:
N-ianatra -ff-ao i Paoly.
past-study pres-there Paul
"Paul studied there," i.e.
"Paul just went there to study (and is still there now
at the time of the utterance)."
2
See explanations relative to (48), (49), and (50) for the
relevant values of the zero-tense morpheme on the time/place
adverb.
3
The construction type where the manner adverb cranes as an
afterthought, with a pause between it and the subject, will be
factored out.
4
These constructions comprising four arguments are rare. Native
speakers prefer to resort to an alternative strategy, breaking up
a cluster of four NPs with the use of the passive verb asaina
"be-told." See Chapter Three: Reflexivization, Substitute
Strategy, Subsection 3.1.3.

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
The main purpose of this work was to show that all the
Causative Constructions of Malagasy have to be derived from bi-
sentential sources.
First, such a hypothesis allows one to account for all
the Causative Constructions of the language in a systematic man-
ner, utilizing oily a set of six parameters: Animacy, Control,
Entailment, Productivity, Degree of Fusion, and Markedness.
Second, all the Causative Constructions —even those
undergoing fusion of the higher and the lower predicates— inter-
act with the following processes in a way which indicates that a
complex not simplex structure is involved: Negation Operator
Tsy-Placement, Affixal Passive before Clause-Union, Pronominaliz-
ation and Reflexivization to ny tenany. Additional evidence to
support the Bi-Sentential Source Hypothesis is provided by
Co-Occurrence Restrictions, Scope Ambiguity, Transportability of
Adverbs, Do-So Replacement, and It-Replacement.
Third, the output is a single sentence, as made evident
by Sentential Question Formation, Exclamation Formation, and
No-Longer Negation supplemented by Izy-Substitution, all of which
indicate that there is only one Subject Noun Phrase in the final
sequence.
676
Fourth, it appears that there exist different degrees
of strength in the process of Clause-Union:
1. In the case of the Unmarked constructions which do
not present any evidence of Fusion, i.e. the "persuasive," the
"coercive," and the "permissive" Causatives, the strength is
minimal since they all allow Negation Operator Tsy-Placement,
Affixal Passive, and Pronominalization in the lower clause.
2. Of those which undergo Fusion, i.e. the "neutral"
Directive, the Manipulative, the Abilitative, and the Causal
constructions, only the Manipulative amp(a) and an(a) show
maximal Fusion, as can be inferred from the possibility of
application of Affixal Passive after Clause-Union and that of
Reflexivization to tena: the "neutral" Directive construction
leans slightly toward the negative pole of the continuum and the
Abilitative toward the positive end.
3. All of the Causal constructions evince minimal
Fusion since with all of them, Pronominalization and Reflexiv-
ization to ny tenany are permissible in the embedded clause; and
if the finite set of root passives characteristic of the language
is set aside, this type of construction also allows Tsy-Placement
and Affixal Passive before Clause-Union.
Since it is not only possible but necessary to derive
all Causative Constructions of this language from bi-sentential
structures, it is to be concluded that all of them must have bi-
sentential sources.
APPENDIX A
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Besides the specific symbols provided for each table:
VP = Verb Phrase
V = Verb
Act. = Active Voice
Pass. = Passive Voice
Circ. = Circumstantial Voice
Fut. = Future Tense
Pst. = Past Tense
Pres. = Present Tense
Caus. = Causative
Ingr. = Ingressive Aspect
Part. = Particle
NP = Noun Phrase
Art. = Article
Su = Subject
ED = Direct Object
10 = Indirect Object
OBL = Oblique
GEN = Genitive
C-U = Clause Union
e.g. = Exempli Gratia
Pref./prf = Prefix
Prep. = Preposition
APPENDIX B
CLASSES OF VERBS
Verbs like mitondra "to bring, to carry" and roanka "to take,"
which have suppletive forms in the Affixal Passive, have been
excluded from the Classifications of verbs proposed in Chapter
Five; the first is replaced by entina "be brought" and the
second, by alaina "be taken."
Here is a sample list of verbs belonging in the
different classes:
Class 1: anatra "advice," mananatra "to advise;" avotra "deliver-
ance," manavotra "to deliver;" dotra "fire," mandotra "to put on
fire;" eso "irony," maneso "to make fun of;" fafa "sweeping," ma-
mafa "to sweep;" faritra "limit," mamaritra "to limit;" halatra
"theft," mangalatra "to rob;" hety "scissors," manety "to cut
with scissors;" karama "wage," manarama "to pay a wage;" lalotra
"painting," mandalotra "to paint;" loto "dirt," mandoto "to mess
up;" lova "heritage," mandova "to inherit;" mosavy "poisoning,"
mamosavy "to poison;" ohatra "example," manòhatra "to try on;"
ompa "insult," manornpa "to insult;" onitra "compensation," mano-
nitra "to compensate;" ratra "injury," mandratra "to injure;"
sasa "washing," manasa "to wash;" solo "replacement," manolo "to
replace;" tafika "army," manafika "to storm;" tahaka "copy," ma-
nahaka "to resemble;" tambitamby "cajoling," manambitamby "to

679
cajole;" voly "agriculture," mamboly "to grow (a plant);" zanaka
"child," manjanaka "to colonize."
Class 2; araka "which can be followed," manaraka "to follow," a-
rahina "be followed;" foy "which can be given up," manoy "to give
up," foina/afoy "be given up;" lany "exhausted," mandany "to
exhaust," (no)-laniana "be exhausted;" latsaka "been dropped,"
mandatsaka "to drop," nalatsaka "was dropped;" levona "been ab-
sorbed," mandevona "to absorb," nolevonina "was absorbed;" lavo
"lying on the ground," mandavo "to throw onto the ground," nola-
voina "was thrown onto the ground;" loka "with a hole," mandoka
"to put a hole in,™ noldhaana "was put a hole in;" pepo "with a
buirp," manapepo "to make a bunp in," nopepohina "was made a bunp
in;" poritra "crushed," manaporitra "to crush," noporetina "was
crushed;" potika "smashed," mamotika "to smash," nopotehina "was
smashed;" ripaka "eliminated," mandripaka "to eliminate," noripa-
hana "was eliminated;" rovitra "torn," mandrovitra "to tear up,"
norovitina "was torn up;" tery "tight," manery "to tighten," no-
terena "was tightened;" tratra "which can be reached," manatratra
"to try to reach," notratrarina "was tried to be reached;" tadidy
"which can be remembered," mitadidy "to remember," notadidina
"was remembered;" zaka "which can be carried," mizaka "to carry,"
nozakaina "was carried;" and ambara "been declared," manambara
"to declare," nambara "was declared."
Class 3: afaka "can," aleo "had rather," avy "coming," azo
"taken," lasa "gone," tokony "must," and tonga "arrived."

680
Class _4: hita "seen," mahita "to see;" lafo "expensive, been
bought," mandafo "to sell;" re "been heard," mandre "to hear;"
and very "been lost," mam(v)ery "to lose."
Class 5: mila "to need," ilaina "is needed;" sahy "to dare,"
sàhina "be dared."
Furthermore, it is to be noticed that many verbs from
both class 1 and class 2 can take the Stative prefix i-:
Class 1: fafa "sweeping," mamafa "to sweep," mifafa "to be in the
(habitual) state of having been swept;" faritra "limit," mama-
ritra "to limit," mifaritra "to have its limits clearly delineat-
ed;" lalotra "painting," mandalotra "to paint," milalotra "to be
in a state of having been painted;" sasa "washing," manasa "to
wash," misasa "to be in the state of having been washed" or "to
be engaged in the action of washing oneself;" tohana "block,"
manohana "to block," mitohana "to be in the state of having some-
thing to block it."
Class 2: latsaka "been dropped," mandatsaka "to drop (some-
thing)," milatsaka "to fall;" lavo "laying on the ground,"
mandavo "to throw someone or something onto the ground," milavo
"to be lying;" loka "with a hole," mandoka "to make a hole in
something," miloka "to be with a hole;" pepo "with a bump,"
manapepo "to make a bump in something," mipepo "to be with a
bump."
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BAKER, C.L. (1978) Introduction to Generative-Transfor-
mational Syntax. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
OOMRIE, B. (1976a) Aspect. Cambridge University Press.
COMRIE, B. (1976b) "The Syntax of Causative Constru-
ctions: Cross-Language Similarities and
Divergences," in Shibatani, ed., The Grammar
of Causative Constructions, vol. 6, Academic
Press.
DAHL, O.C. (1951) Malgache et Maanjan. Egede Instituttet,
Oslo, Norway.
FERRAND, G. (1903) Essai de Grammaire Malgache, in Leroux,
editor, 28, rue Bonaparte, Paris VI@, France.
GRIFFITHS, D. (1854) Grammar of the Malagasy Language in the
Ankova Dialect, Wfcodbridge, E. Pite, London,
England.
JESPERSEN, 0. (1860-1943) The Philosophy of Grammar. G.
Allen & Unwin, London, England, 1963.
KEENAN, E.L. (1976a) "Remarkable Subjects in Malagasy,"
in C.N. Li, editor, Subject and Topic. New
York: Academic Press, pp 303-334.

682
KEENAN, E.L. (1976b) "Toward a Universal Definition of Sub-
ject," in C.N. Li, ed., Subject and Topic. New
York: Academic Press, 303-334.
KEENAN, E.L. and B. Comrie (1977) "Noun Phrase Accessibility
and Universal Grammar," Linguistic Inquiry
VIII (1): 63-100.
KUNO, S. (1972) "Pronominalization, Reflexivization
and Direct Discourse," Linguistic Inquiry 3,
161-196.
KUNO, S. (1975) "Three Perspectives in the Functional

Approach to Syntax," Papers in the Parasession
on Functionalism, April 17, 1975, Chicago
Linguistic Society, 276-336.
IANGACKER, R.L.(1969) "On Pronominalization and the Chain of
Command," in D.A. Reibel and S.A. Schane, eds,
Modern Studies in English: Readings in Trans-
formational Grammar. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall.
MALZAC, A. (1908) Graramaire Malgache, Mission Catholique
Tananarive, Madagascar.
MARDIRDSSIAN, G.(1975) "Noun Incorporation in Universal Gram-
mar," Chicago Linguistic Society 11: 383-9.

683
PARKER,G. (1883) Concise Grammar of the Malagasy Language,
Trubner and Company, 57 and 59, Ludgate Hill,
London, England.
PERIMmER, D. (1968) Deep and Surface Constraints in Syntax.
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT doctoral dissertation.
POSTAL, M.P. (1974) On Raising. Hie MIT Press.
RABENILAINA, R. (1974) Description Morphosyntaxique du Bara,
vol. 1, unpublished Doctorat du 3lme Cycle,
Tananarive-Bordeaux, Madagascar-France.
RAJAONA, S. (1972) Structure du Malgache, Ambozontany,
Fianarantsoa, Madagascar.
ROSS, J.R. (1967) "On the Cyclic Nature of English Pro-
nominalization," in To Honor Roman Jakobson,
Mouton, The Hague, The Netherlands, 1669-82.
SHIBAIANI, M. (1973) A Linguistic Study of Causative Con-
structions, unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of California, Berkeley.
SUGITA, H. (1974) "Comparison of Verb Object Relation-
ships in Micronesian Languages," Working
Papers in Linguistics, vol. 5, Number 9,
October 1973, Department of Linguistics,
University of Hawaii.
CHARLES RANDRIAMASIMANANA received his Ph.D.
from the University of Southern California in
1981 for the study of the syntax of Malagasy, his
native tongue. He is now assistant professor of
linguistics at the University of Melbourne, Park-
ville, Victoria, Australia.

The Causatives of Malagasy (1986) - Charles Randriamasimanana

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

The Causatives of Malagasy (1986) - Charles Randriamasimanana

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Oceanic Linguistics Special Publication No.

University of Hawaii Press

(Oceanic linguistics special publication ; no. 21)

Publication of The Causatives of Malagasy has been supported

Camera-ready text copy was prepared using the facilities of the

FOREWORD pages xiii-xiv

CHAPTER CUE: THE CAUSATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS OF MALAGASY 2-201

Section 1: Animacy 7-28

Section 2: Control 29-74

Section 3: Entailment 75-85

Section 4: Productivity 86-128

Section 5: Fusion 129-177

Section 6: Markedness 178-194

CHAPTER TWO: PREVIOUS SCHOLARSHIP ON MALAGASY

CHAPTER THREE: KEFLEXIVIZATION 230-323

The Process 231

Scope of Present Study 232

Criteria for Markedness 232-234

Mditional Criterion for Markedness 234-235

non-Causative Constructions 249-264

Causative Constructions 265-274

the Cyclic Convention 274-30Ì

CHAPTER FOUR: PRCNOMINALIZATIQN 324-417

Human Trigger Assumption 326-343

Non-Animate Trigger Assumption 367-384

and Pronominalization 384-386

Section 2: Other Relevant Parameters 386-404

The "Precede" Parameter 387-397

The "Command" Parameter 397-403

Forward Pronominalization 404

Backward Pronominalization 404

Section 3: The Cyclic Convention 405-414

Against Simultaneous and Free Order

Rule Applications 405-406

Against Simultaneous Rule Application 406-407

Against Free Order Rule Application 407-409

Ordering of Rules 409-414

CHAPTER FIVE: PASSIVIZATION 418-590

Section Is The Basic Process 419-493

The Relevant Parameters 420-421

Malagasy Verb Classification 421-429

Distribution of Passive Affixes 429-446

Additional Parameters: Tense and Aspect 446-449

Ihe Semantics of Passive Affixes 450-454

Relevance of the Keenan-Comrie Hierarchy 454

Order of the Different Types of Oblique 454-465

Case-marking and the Passive Voice 465-476

Relative Order of the Different Types

Summary: Relative Order and Properties

of the Obliques 490-493

Verbal Construction Types

Complementizer Fa and Application of

Affixal Passive 554-567

Predicate-Raising Causatives 568-570

Restriction on Affixal Passive 570-572

Affixal Passive and Causal Causatives 572-574

Coniplement-Causatives and Nature of

the Embedded Verb 574-576

Cbmplement-Causative and Verbal Aspect 576-578

The Causative aha and the Nature of

the Predicate in the Embedded Clause 578-580

The Causal Causative aha and Affixal

The Causal Causative ank (a) and