O DESCARGA DE MERCANCÍAS DE CUALQUIER CLASE

The second type of copular sentences is predicational sentences. Predicational sentences predicate a property of the subject (Mikkelsen, 2011). In other words, the predicative complement describes a property of the subject (Geist, 2007). For example, see the predicational sentences in (16) below.

(16) a. kaana ʕumar-u muʕallim-a-n

be.PFV.3SG.M Omar-NOM teacher.SG.M-ACC-NN

‘Omar was a teacher’

b. ʕumar-u muʕallim-u-n

Omar-NOM teacher.SG.M-NOM-NN

‘Omar is a teacher’

Omar, in (16), is the subject, and the predicative complement, muʕallim a teacher,

describes a property of that subject, i.e. the property of being a teacher..

Semantically, the subject in predicational sentences is of type <e> (i.e., an entity), while the predicative complement is of type <e,t> (Geist, 2007). What <e,t> means is that the element is a semantic function, a function from individuals to truth values or, more precisely, a 1-place predicate (Kearns, 2011: 58-59). This predicative element takes an entity as its argument in order to produce a proposition. Note that the proposition is of type t (i.e., truth value). For example, the predicative complement a teacher in (16) takes Omar as its

argument in order to produce the proposition Omar is a teacher. As is clear from (16), the sentence has a non-verbal predicate.

Hengeveld (1992: 29) provides two criteria for non-verbal predicate constructions. The first criterion is the selection restrictions. That is, the non-verbal predicate is the element that restricts the kind of subject that it selects. For example, the non-verbal predicate a teacher in (16) above requires its subject argument to be human. Therefore, if we replace the human subject with a non-human one, the sentence will be semantically anomalous,30 as in (17) below.

(17) kaanat l-baʕuDat-u muʕallimat-a-n

be.PFV.3SG.F the-mosquito.SG.F-NOM teacher.SG.F-ACC-NN

‘The mosquito was a teacher’

That is, sentence (17) can only be accepted if it is used metaphorically.

Furthermore, if the non-verbal predicate requires the subject to be animate, as in (18), the use of an inanimate subject causes a semantically anomalous sentence, as in (18b).

(18) a. kaana r-rajul-u mariiD-a-n

be.PFV.3SG.M the-man.SG-NOM sick.SG.M-ACC-NN

‘The man was sick’

30 _{Hengeveld (1992) claims that such a sentence is ungrammatical. However, the problem here seems to be in}

the semantic level. Note that in English, for example, you can say the following: (i) It is absurd to say that the mosquito was a teacher.

b. kaana l-jidaar-u mariiD-a-n

be.PFV.3SG.M the-wall.SG.M-NOM sick.SG.M-ACC-NN

‘The wall was sick’

Although the same copula kaana ‘be.PFV’ appears in all these sentences, the non-verbal

predicate is the one that restricts the selection of the subject, not the verbal copula31.

The second criterion for non-verbal predicates is the valence of non-verbal predicates. That is, it is the non-verbal predicate that determines the number of arguments the sentence requires. For example, all non-verbal predicates mentioned so far in sentences (16)-(18) require one argument, namely the subject. However, if the non-verbal predicate requires two arguments, as in (19), the absence of the second argument causes an ungrammatical sentence, as in (19b) below.

(19) a. kaana haðaa s-sariir-u manuum-a-n ʕalay-hi

be.PFV.3SG.M this.SG.M the-bed.SG.M-NOM slept.PPR.SG.M-ACC-NN on-it

‘This bed was slept on’

b.. *kaana haðaa s-sariir-u manuum-a-n

be.PFV.3SG.M this.SG.M the-bed.SG.M-NOM slept.PPR.SG.M-ACC-NN

‘This bed was slept’

In (19b), the sentence does not tell us whether the bed is slept on or under.

31

Again, although the same copula appears in sentences (16)-(19), their grammatical/semantic status differs based on non-verbal predicate requirements. In fact, following Hengeveld (1992), (i) the selection restrictions as well as (ii) the valence of non- verbal predicates argue for the conclusion that non-verbal predicates are the main predicates in non-verbal predicate constructions.

After we defined the semantic types of elements in predicational sentences, let us now discuss the variety of subjects available in predicational sentences. The subject in predicational sentences can be a simple NP as in (16) above, a complex NP containing a relative clause as in (20) below, a free relative clause as in (21)32, or a quantificational expression as in (22).

(20) a. kaanat l-haqiibat-u llati štaraytu-haa kabiirat-a-n

be.PFV.3SG.F the-bag.SG.F-NOM that.SG.F buy.PFV.1SG--her big.SG.F-ACC-NN

‘The bag that I bought was big’

b. l-haqiibat-u llati štaraytu-haa kabiirat-u-n

the-bag.SG.F-NOM that.SG.F buy.PFV.1SG-her big.SG.F-NOM-NN

‘The bag that I bought is big’

(21) a. kaana maa ɁaʕTayta-hu ʕaliyy-a-n Θamiin-a-n

be.PFV.3SG.M what give.PFV.2SG.M-him Ali-ACC-NN valuable-ACC-NN

‘What you gave to Ali was valuable’

32 _{Mikkelsen (2011: 1806) provides English examples with similar constructions, such as the following:}

(a) The hat is big.

(b) The hat I bought for Harvey is big. (c) What I bought for Harvey is big.

b. maa ɁaʕTayta-hu ʕaiyy-a-n Θamiin-u-n

what give.PFV.2SG.M-him Ali-ACC-NN valuable-NOM-NN

‘What you gave to Ali is valuable’

(22)a. kaana kull-u šaxS-in masɁuul-an ʕan nafsihi

be.PFV.3SG.M every-NOM body-GEN responsible-ACC about himself

‘Everybody was responsible for himself’

b. kull-u šaxS-in masɁuul-un ʕan Nafsihi

every-NOM body-GEN responsible-NOM about Himself

‘Everybody is responsible for himself’

Syntactically, in predicational sentences, there are no restrictions on the predicative complement. This means that it can be an NP, an AP, an AdvP or a PP. The possibility of having NP or AP complements is illustrated in examples (16)-(22). In sentence (16), for example, the predicative complement a teacher is an NP. However, the complements in (20)- (21), big and valuable are APs. Furthermore, sentence (23) below illustrates the possibility of having an AdvP complement, whereas sentence (24) illustrates the possibility of having a PP complement.

(23) a. kaana zayd-u-n hunaa

be.PFV.3SG.M Zaid-NOM-NN here

b. zayd-u-n hunaa

Zaid-NOM-NN here

‘Zaid is here’

(24) a. kaana l-kitaab-u ʕalaa l-maktab-i

be.PFV.3SG.M the-book.SG-NOM on the-table.SG-GEN

‘The book was on the table’

b. l-kitaab-u ʕalaa l-maktabb-i

the-book.SG-NOM on the-table.SG-GEN

‘The book is on the table’

The possibility of having an NP, AP, AdvP and PP complements can be illustrated with the same subject, for example, a simple NP (i.e., a proper name), as shown in (25).

(25) a. kaana ʕaliyy-un Ɂustaað-an /fi l-jamiʕat-i /Tawiil-an /hunaa

be.PFV Ali-NOM teacher-ACC / in the-university-GEN /tall-ACC here

‘Ali was a teacher/at the university/tall/here’

b. ʕaliyy-u-n Ɂustaað-u-n /fii l-jamiʕat-i /Tawiil-u-n /hunaa

Ali-NOM-NN teacher-NOM-NN in the-university-GEN /tall-NOM-NN here

Coordination is also possible, as in (26) below.

(26) a. kaana xalid-un muʕallim-an wa ðakiyy-an

be.PFV.3SG.M Khalid-NOM teacher.SG.M-ACC and clever.SG.M-ACC

‘Khalid was a teacher and clever’

b. xalid-un muʕallim-un wa ðakiyy-un

Khalid-NOM teacher.SG.M-NOM and clever.SG.M-NOM

‘Khalid is a teacher and clever’

Ascriptive and ascriptional are also names of predicational sentences in the literature (Mikkelsen, 2011).

In sum, the subject in predicational sentences is an NP of type <e>, while the complement is predicative of type <e,t>. The complement can be indefinite NP, AP, PP or AdvP. Evidence, however, shows that the predicative complement is the main predicate in the clause.