Sammendrag
The book looks at the question of objects and complements in Kiswahili clauses. It begins by reviewing the work of Hopper and Thompson (1980) and draws attention to the fact that in Kiswahili, cognate objects are very common because deverbatives or nouns derived from verbs are a central part of the creation of new nouns in the Bantu languages for all categories of subject, object and complements. As a result, cognate objects are valid objects in Bantu languages. They generate object markers in verbs and can undergo passive and ergative syntax, where appropriate, operations which only objects and complement can perform in Bantu clauses. In addition, deverbatives undergo object relative operations and entailment syntax just like many other nouns do in the noun class systems of Bantu. Next, the book focuses on what objects and complements are in Kiswahili and points out that translational equivalents are often used to dismiss legitimate objects their status as objects or complements in the language. This is particularly true of so-called verb-NP complexes or phrasal verb constructions or idiomatic VPs that are often described as 'idiomatically' intransitive. Linguists and grammarians carry out few tests of object status in Kiswahili to support their claims about VPs that become intransitive phrasal verbs. The book suggests ways of testing the object status of such NPs. Attention is also drawn to the fact that several verbs described as intransitives in other languages have dual transitivity - transitive and intransitive - in Kiswahili and take object markers of their complements. The complements also undergo object relativize operations. The study also looks at subject-object inversion/transposition and points out that the pattern extends beyond locative inversion syntax and is widespread in Kiswahili and Bantu. The book argues that only objects/complements can undergo transposition. It also points to the paradox of the demoted NP which becomes an object, as an
erstwhile object becomes the subject of the verb. Without this, transposition will create ungrammatical intransitive clauses in the language, a result no linguist wants. A special study of the verb -enda 'go' is made, confirming that it is both transitive and intransitive in function and has idiomatic uses, too. Next, attention focuses on passivization. The book presents evidence of demoted subjects in so-called 'agent phrases' that undergo object relative operations, thus refuting the popular claim that demoted subjects are or become adjuncts. New proposals are then made for dealing with passivization in double or multiple object constructions, namely passivization occurs once only and is not repeated in the same clause. After that all other movements of complements to become subject follow a path of entailment operation. In this way, linguistics avoids claiming that multiple objects cease to be objects when one of them passivizes, as is the case in current theories. The study points out that there are adverbial complements in Kiswahili as in other languages, but they cannot undergo object relativization, inversion or generate object markers in verbs. Finally, the study draws attention to the existence of PP arguments that function as objects and subjects just like NPs do. The study looks at the paradox of ditransitivity in Kiswahili in which PPs function as indirect objects, direct objects and oblique objects. They contrast with NP dative objects, NP direct objects and NP oblique objects. The book, therefore, argues that the distinction between indirect object and oblique object is difficult to maintain in Kiswahili. One of the terms is redundant. The evidence also means that it is meaningless to speak of direct object versus indirect objects versus oblique objects when all can be represented by PPs and these PPs function as core argument categories in the language. The book concludes that given the weight of evidence, transitivity theory will never be the same again.
Vis fullstendig beskrivelse
