3 NORMAS PROCEDIMENTALES RELACIONADAS CON EL ARRENDAMIENTO DE BIENES RAÍCES URBANOS.

It is commonly assumed that in participial relative clauses the modified noun is usually not represented in any way, and therefore, they are all instances of gap relativization strategy, see, for instance, Lehmann (1984). However, as it has already become clear in earlier sections, the modified noun is in many cases represented in the relative clause by various resumptive pronominal elements. In this section, I will provide a brief overview of the use of these elements in participial relative clauses.

First of all, resumptive elements vary considerably in their form. For example, they can be third-person pronouns, cf. (107), reflexive pronouns, cf. (108), indefinite pronouns, cf. (109), or pronominal possessive affixes, cf. (110):

Tümpisa Shoshone (Uto-Aztecan > Numic; United States; Dayley 1989: 369) [U tukkwa nümmin nuunaahappüha] ukkwa samapitta u punikka nüü

it under our.EX sit.PL.SUB.O that.O cedar.O it see I

‘I see the cedar under which we were sitting.’

Tanti Dargwa (Nakh-Daghestanian > Dargwa, Russia; Sumbatova & Lander 2014: 191)

[dali (sun-ni-ž) þXWX E Lþ-ib] GXUƫDҷ

I.ERG REFL-OBL-DAT chudu N=give.PFV-PRET boy

‘the boy whom I gave chudu’ (193)

Coahuilteco (Coahuiltecan; United States; Troike 2010: 4) pi·nwakta· [Dios pil’ta a-pa-ta·nko] WXþHÂ-m things God something 3-SUB-command DEM-CONC.2

‘the things which God commands’

Meadow Mari (Uralic > Mari; Russia; Brykina & Aralova 2012: 483)

[Oza-ž-ϷP saj-ϷQ pal-ϷPH] pört vokte-þ¶

owner-POSS.3SG-ACC good-ADV know-NMZ house near-ELA

tudo þ¶þ¶NϷGϷQ ert-a.

he often go.by-PRS.3SG

‘He often walks by the house whose owner he knows well.’

Secondly and more importantly, resumptive pronouns and other resumptive elements differ in their obligatoriness in participial relative clauses. As I have shown in Section 3.6.2, for some languages they serve as regular means of allowing both inherently and contextually oriented participles to relativize certain lower positions of the Accessibility Hierarchy (predominantly obliques for inherently oriented forms, and possessors for contextually oriented forms). Since this topic has already been discussed earlier, in this section I will chiefly focus on the resumptive pronouns that are not obligatory, but can optionally occur in specific contexts.

In Savosavo, the obligatoriness of overt reference to the modified noun within the relative clause increases down the Accessibility Hierarchy. When the subject is relativized, no overt cross-referencing material is present in the relative clause, cf. (111a). When the direct object is relativized, no overt object noun phrase can be used in the relative clause, although the object agreement on the transitive verb remains, cf. (111b). For locative-marked adjuncts, a co-referential locative-marked pronoun often occurs in the corresponding place in the relative clause, but its use is optional, compare (111c) and (111d). Finally, when a possessor is relativized, the genitive-marked pronoun denoting the possessor is obligatorily present in the relative clause, cf. (111e).

Savosavo (Savosavo; Solomon Islands; Wegener 2012: 253–257)

a. [lo Ø kabu ba-tu] lo mapa=gha

DET.PL move.away come-REL det.PL person=PL

‘the people who came running away’

b. [Ze-va Ø bo k-au-tu] ko adaki=e

3PL-GEN.M go 3SG.F.O-take-REL DET.SG.F woman=EMP

ko=na 3SG.F=NOM

‘She (was) the woman whom they had gone (to and) taken.’

c. [lo no tone lo lo=la vasikaka-tu]

DET.SG.M 2PL.GENbrother 3SG.M.GEN 3.SG.M=LOC.M be.ungenerous-REL

lo ghau

DET.SG.M fishing.bamboo

‘that fishing bamboo your brother is so ungenerous about’

d. [lo ko-va Ø bo tei-tu] lo peleni

DET.SG.M 3SG.F-GEN.M go want.to.do-REL DET.SG.M plane

‘the plane she will go with’

e. [to no-va to-ma mama k-aka savu-li-tu]

DET.DU 2SG-GEN.M 3DU-GEN.SG.Fmother 3SG.F-to tell-3SG.M.O-REL

to gnuba=lo

DET.DU child=DU

‘those (two) boys whose mother you told it to’

A very similar situation is observed in Kambaata (Afro-Asiatic > Highland East Cushitic; Ethiopia; Treis 2008) and Sheko (North Omotic, Ethiopia; Hellenthal 2010), although in these two languages the use of resumptive elements is already possible for the position of the direct object, as well as for other positions down the Accessibility Hierarchy. In Tümpisa Shoshone (Uto-Aztecan > Numic; Unites States; Dayley 1989), where both the past participle in -ppüh and the infinitive in -nna allow the relativization of direct objects, indirect objects, and objects of postpositions, the use of resumptive pronouns is possible in all the contexts, but obligatory only in the last case. Judging by the data provided in Jeanne (1978), in Hopi the use of a resumptive pronoun is possible already in the context of subject relativization, cf. (112a). It is also optional when a direct object is relativized, cf. (112b), but obligatory for the relativization of objects of postposition, cf. (112c):

Hopi (Uto-Aztecan > Hopi; United States; Jeanne 1978: 193, 196) a. nѠҶ WL\RҶ\D-t [(pam) pakmѠmѠy-qa-t] hoona

I boy-OBL he cry-REL-OBL sent:home ‘I sent home the boy that is crying.’

b. nѠҶ WL\RҶ\D-t [Ҷita-ƾѠ (pѠ-t) naawakna-qa-t] tѠZLҶ\WD I boy-OBL our-mother him-OBL like-REL-OBL know

c. nѠҶ WL\RҶ\D-t [Ҷita-na (pѠ-t) Ҷa-mѠm tѠPDODҶ\WD-qa-t] tѠZLҶ\WD I boy-OBL our-father him-OBLhim-with work-REL-OBL know

‘I know the boy who my father works with.’

Finally, another type of resumptive pronoun use is reported for three Nakh- Daghestanian languages, Lezgian, Hinuq and Tanti Dargwa. In these languages, resumptive pronominal elements are available irrespective of the syntactic role being relativized. Their actual use is regulated by pragmatics: a speaker is more likely to use a resumptive pronoun if the relativized participant is not easily recoverable from the context. The following examples illustrate the structural possibility of resumptive pronoun use in Tanti Dargwa when the roles relativized are intransitive subject, cf. (113a), transitive subject, cf. (113b), direct object, cf. (113c), indirect object, cf. (113d), instrument, cf. (113e), and location, cf. (113f):

Tanti Dargwa (Nakh-Daghestanian > Dargwa; Russia; Sumbatova & Lander 2014: 192–194)

a. [(sa<r>i) dam-š:u U Dþ¶-ib] rurs:i

REFL<F> I.OBL-AD(LAT) F=come.PFV-PRET girl

‘the girl who came to me’

b. [(sun-ni) þXWX b=erk:-un] umra

REFL-ERG chudu N=eat.PFV-PRET neighbour

‘the neighbor who ate chudu’

c. [(sa<b>i) umra-li b=erk:-un] þXWX

REFL<N> neighbour-ERG N=eat.PFV-PRET chudu ‘the chudu that the neighbour ate’

d. [dali þX-ž žuž E Lþ-ib-se]

I.ERG REFL.OBL.PL-DAT book N=give.PFV-PRET-ATTR

GXUƫ-n-a-li sa<b>i b=it-aq-aq-ib

boy-PL-OBL.PL-ERG REFL<N> N=thither-get.lost.PFV-CAUS-PRET

‘The boys whom I had given the book lost it.’

e. [dali (sun-ni-c:ele) ҙDҷPO-e NDҷ-G DҷT-ib-se] q’iq’ I.ERG REFL-OBL-COM nail-PL down-NPL=hit.PFV-PRET-ATTR hammer ‘the hammer with which I hammered the nails’

f. [du (sun-ni-š:u) T¶ࡂ-DҷQ-se] qali I REFL-OBL-AD(LAT) go.IPFV-PRS-ATTR house

‘the house that I am walking to’

Naturally, the probability of occurrence of resumptive pronouns in these languages is higher when a participant from the lower part of the Accessibility Hierarchy is relativized, since it is exactly in these contexts that the recoverability might be hindered, see Sumbatova & Lander (2014: 195). However, these cases are still typologically remarkable since they contradict both aformentioned typological generalizations concerning resumptive pronouns. First, they are instances of resumptive pronoun use in prenominal relative clauses, compare the expectations in Keenan (1985: 148) or Givón (1990: 656). Second, at least in some cases they do allow the use of resumptive elements even when the

highest positions of the Accessibility Hierarchy are relativized, such as subjects and direct objects, compare Keenan & Comrie (1977: 92).

Optional resumptive pronouns can combine with inherently oriented participles as well. For instance, in Ma’di, participial relative clauses introduced by the instrumental participle in -dҊэ̗ can optionally contain the word dr҂թ ‘with it’ referring to the relativized participant, cf. (114):

Ma’di (Central Sudanic > Moru-Ma’di; Sudan, Uganda; Blackings & Fabb 2003: 206)

àdҊú [má-à _{̖ѐÕթ̖-dҊэ̗ (dr҂թ)] r࠴̖} Ҍ࠴թ ƝљZè dì spear 1SG-POSS NPST-kill-SR with.it DEF FOC lose COMPL

‘The spear with which I killed it is lost.’

This situation, however, is extremely rare due to a combination of reasons. First, as I have shown above, resumptive pronouns are not very common in participial relative clauses in general. Second, even if they do occur, they tend to be used only when some lower positions of the Accessibility Hierarchy are relativized, and participles inherently oriented towards a peripheral participant are only attested in a handful of languages in my sample (see Section 3.4). In addition, the main function of resumptive pronouns is to point at the relativized participant in the cases where it is not totally clear which participant is relativized, while for the participles inherently oriented towards one particular participant this problem does not appear to be relevant. Therefore, the combination of an instrumental participle with a resumptive pronoun attested in Ma’di should rather be considered an exception.

MӁbengokre provides an illustration of another cross-linguistically unusual phenomenon, namely it features what can be classified as resumptive pronouns in internally headed relative clauses. In regular relative clauses in MӁbengokre, the modified noun occupies the place that it is supposed to occupy due to its role in the relative clause, cf. (115a), where the relativized recipient ‘the relative of mine’ occurs after the ergative subject. However, according to Salanova (2011), the relativized participant can sometimes be left-dislocated within the relative clause (possible reasons for left-dislocation in relative clauses are unclear from the available description). Consequently, there appears a resumptive third-person pronoun in place of the dislocated constituent, cf. (115b), where the pronoun kum refers to the white man:

0ӁEHQJRNUHNuclear-Macro-Ge > Ge-Kaingang, Brazil; Salanova 2011: 58, 66)

a. [i-je i-nhõ bikwa mã idji jarͅnh] nͅ bôx mã

1-ERG 1-POSS relative to 3.name say.NMZ NFUTarrive about.to ‘The relative of mine to whom I gave a name is about to arrive.’

b. [kubͅ i-je ku-m katõk nhãr] nͅ jã

barbarian 1-ERG 3-DAT gun give.NMZ NFUTthis

‘This is the white man to whome I gave the gun.’

The overall use of resumptive pronouns in the languages of the sample is summarized in Table 11 and Figure 14:

Table 11. Resumptive pronouns in participial relative clauses

Language Form(s) SU DO IO OBL POSS

Contextually oriented participles

Korean All Participles no no no no poss

Even All Participles no no no no obl

Nanai All Participles no no no no obl

Sakha All Participles no no no no obl

Apsheron Tat Participle no no no no obl

Motuna Participle no no no no obl

Meadow Mari Future Participle, Negative Participle

no no no no obl

Meadow Mari Passive Participle – no no no obl

Northern Khanty Non-Past Participle, Past Participle

no no no no obl

Kolyma Yukaghir Active Attributive Form, Action Nominal

no no no no obl

Kalmyk Habitual, Perfective, and Future Participles

no no no poss/obl obl

Coahuilteco Subordinated Form no no poss poss –

Savosavo Relative Form no no poss/obl poss/obl obl

Kambaata Affirmative and Negative Relative Forms

no poss poss poss obl

Sheko Relative Verb Form no poss poss/obl obl/poss obl

Hopi Nominalization poss poss poss poss/obl ?

Tümpisa Shoshone Infinitive, Past Participle

– poss poss obl –

Hinuq General, Past,

Habitual, and

Resultative Participles

poss poss poss poss poss

Tanti Dargwa All Participles poss poss poss poss poss

Lezgian Participle poss poss poss poss poss

MӁbengokre Nominalization ? poss poss poss poss

Ronghong Qiang Agent Nominalization ? ? poss ? ?

Inherently oriented participles

Japhug rGyalrong S/A Participle no – – – obl

Japhug rGyalrong P Participle – no – – obl

Kamaiurá All Participles (no) (no) (no) (no) obl

Krongo Participle no obl obl obl ?

Middle Egyptian Passive Participle – no obl obl ?

Ma’di All Participles no no no (poss) obl

Figure 14. Resumptive elements in participial relative clauses

Resumptive elements with z contextually oriented participles S inherently oriented participles

In document Separata Maturana Incidentes y Juicios Especiales (página 83-86)