En relación a la problemática educativa de los docentes de bachillerato.

The VP domain represents the argument and event domain. It provides answers to the way arguments are mapped onto syntactic structures. The hypothesis that the subject of the sentence is generated within the VP and the fact that it is the lowest layer of the clause has attracted a lot of research interest. Some of the issues discussed in the works range from the structure of double object constructions (DOCs), SVCs and how case is assigned to NPs in these constructions. Some of these works are discussed below.

Uwalaka (1995) studies X⁰ movement and Ìgbò complex predicates in the framework of GB to determine the structure and derivation of complex predicates in Ìgbò causative and applicative constructions using the modified version of Baker’s (1988) theory of incorporation. For applicative constructions, she posits that prepositional incorporation (PI) is obligatory in the language and involves the incorporation of a prepositional affix into the verb. Hence, they do not have serialising counterpart. According to her, affixes have the syntactic properties of free morphemes including the capacity to assign and receive thematic roles. She concludes that prepositional function is rendered in the language using lexical prepositions, prepositional suffixes, SVCs and Igbo canonical applicative verbs. Uwalaka (1995: 168) also claims that some Igbò verbs such as zi

‘show’ and nye ‘give’ do not take overt applicative suffix. She, therefore, posits a null prepositional suffix for such constructions as shown below:

(75) a. Ezè nyèrè Àdha egho Ezè give-rV past Adha money

‘Ezè gave Adha money’

b. Ezè zìrì Adha ụzò

Ezè show-rV past Adha money

‘Ezè showed Adha the way’ (sic) (Uwalaka 1995:168) She suggests that this and other applicative construction have similar structure.

Nevertheless, the predicates above are simple ditransitives⁴¹ verbs that can take overt applicative suffix to increase the valency of the verb. Consider the examples below:

(76) a. Ezè nyè-è-rè m̀ Àda egho Ezè give-APPL-PST 1SG Ada money

‘Ezè gave Adha money for me’

b. Ezè zì-i-rì m̀ Àda ụzò

Ezè show-APPL-PST 1SG Ada money

‘Ezè showed Adha the way for me’

In (76) above, it is observable that the presence of the applicative suffix does not render the sentences ungrammatical. Rather, it increased the number of the VP internal

41 Anurudu (2010:162) identifies these group of verbs as zero extension ditransitives for the fact that they require no extensional morpheme to make them capable of subcategorizing double objects. Moreover, they are syntactically and semantically the same.

arguments by one. The implication is that there are no Ìgbò “canonical” applicative verbs, but simple ditransitives since most of the verbs can still take overt applicative thereby increasing their valency. In the present study, attention is given to applicative constructions because they form one of the interesting clause types in Ìgbò. More so, Uwalaka made use of GB approach. This study presents a minimalist account of applicative constructions using such principles as select, merge and the Split VP hypothesis. Employing these principles, this study shows that applicative is a functional category associated with the VP and TP domains.

Emerenini (2001) examines the internal structure of the Igbo VP using GB and MP frameworks. His analysis of applicative constructions does not differ significantly from that of Uwalaka (1995) in that he also adopts the verb incorporation approach, however, he does not posit dative movement as in Uwalaka. He employs the X-bar theory showing the derivational path of the Igbo VP (especially double object constructions) from D-structure to S-structure as well as theta role and case assignment. He also accounts for the structure of Igbo VP using Split-VP, Split-INFL and VP-Internal Subject Hypothesis, though he failed to account for Applicative constructions using the Split VP hypothesis. This study deviates from his approach by further employing phase theory and Agreeless projections in the analysis of applicatives

Agbo’s (2004) study of DOCs in Igbo is not quite different from Emerenini’s (2001) study discussed above. Similarly, he aligns with Uwalaka (1991), Emerenini (2001) and Mbah (1999) in claiming that it is the medial –rV that marks the applicative while the final one marks the past. He summarises the properties of DOCs into two:

(i) the indirect object precedes the direct objects (ii) the rV-(Ben) is normally present in DOCs.

These are exemplified in (81) below

(77) a. Uchè gbù-ù-rù m̀ ò kụko Uche kill-rv Ben rVPast me chicken

‘Uche killed a chicken for me’

b. Obi gba-ra agu egbe

Obi shoot-rVBen-rVpast lion gun

‘Obi shot the lion with a gun’ (Agbo 2004: 38)

(i) above is true for (77a&b) because the IO m ‘1SG’ precedes the DO ọ̀ kụkọ̣̀̄ ‘chicken’.

In contrast, (ii) is true for (77a) but not for (77b) since only one -rV suffix is morphologically present in the construction. Semantically, the sentence does not render a BEN meaning. His examples show that imperative and perfective constructions that express applicative meaning were not considered in his analysis. A close examination of applicative constructions (ACs) in other types of constructions shows that it is the final -rV that marks applicative while the medial one marks the past. This issue is discussed further in Chapter four. Other issues discussed in the work are case assignment and incorporation theory of Baker (1988) which is used to show the derivation of ACs from D-structure to S-structure

Similarly, Mmadike (2010) analyses applicative constructions in Igbò within the GB framework. His major aim is to show that the -rV applicative is a prepositional category contrary to some opinion. His analyses differ from those of Uwalaka (1995) in that he refutes Uwalaka’s Dative-Shift analysis of the applicative structure on the grounds that the structure is base generated following Nwachukwu (1987:13) and Baker (1988:370).

To prove that the ‘-rV’ applicative is a prepositional category, Mmadike (2010:21) tests its properties with those of a typical preposition that heads a PP. These properties include (a) function as the head of a phrase (b) assignment of θ-role to its complement (c) government and assignment of case and (d) pied-piping of its object as a Wh-phrase.

He observes that the rV-applicative preposition satisfies the first three and failed the fourth one because its object could not be pied-piped as a wh-phrase due to its morphological status. Nevertheless, he concludes that it is not excluded from the prepositional category because it is minimally distant from the prototype. Mmadike (p.23-24) also adopts the term ‘Applicative’ since it is neutral as to either the benefactive and malefactive interpretation. In this regard, this study adopts the neutral term ‘Applicative’ but aligns with Emenanjo (2010) who posits that applicative only expresses a prepositional notion contra Mmadike (2010). However, this study analyses applicative constructions using the V-movement approach and other Minimalist principles. It examines how the applicative suffix interacts with other functional categories such as T and Asp.

Amaechi (2013) examines case checking and the properties of Igbo SVCs within the Minimalist framework. She argues that Igbo SVCs do not pose any problem for the

theory of case checking. The DO of the first verb in a serial construction gets it original accusative Case, while the object of the second verb gets a genitive Case as checked by the Open Vowel Suffix on the verb. She uses the schema below to show the directionality of case checking in Igbo SVCs (see Amaechi 2013:163).

Contra Welmers (1973) and Bamgbose (1974), she opines that it is not all SVCs that share a single subject. Her study provides more information on Igbo SVCs. However, SVCs fall outside the scope of this study considering that they do not have significant implication for the structure of the VP domain.

Onoura (2014) similarly revisits verb serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo within the Revised Extended Standard Theory (REST) with a view to determining the semantic types, establish the syntactic structures and find the differences between serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo against the backdrop of earlier studies. Her work is very significant in that it complements existing ideas by logically explaining and classifying serialisation and consecutivisation. According to her, verb serialisation involves two or more verbs occurring in series without an overt connective morpheme

(78)

NOM GEN

Ada -re me aja ba-a m

Ada PAST CAUSE sand enter me in eye

“Ada caused sand to enter my eye”

ACC OBL

PP DP

V^I VP2

VP1

V^I T^I

TP

DP anya P

n' D

V2

DP V1

DP T

DP

between the verbs but with an intervening variable between the first two verbs (V1 and V2), and V1 and V2 cannot form verb-verb (V-V) compound in the language. This is exemplified below:

(79) a. Ngọzị sìrì edè rie.

Ngọzị cook-rV(PAST) cocoyam eat-OVS

‘Ngọzị cooked cocoyam and ate (it)’.

b. Àda zùrù akpụ sie sụọ loo.

Ada buy-rV(PAST) fufu cook-OVS pound-OVS swallow-OVS

‘Ada bought fufu cooked it, pounded it and ate’.

(Onuora 2014: 90) The examples above are instances of verb serialisation. In (79), the bolded element is an intervening variable between V1 and V2 both cannot form a V-V compound in the sentences. In contrast, V1 and V2 can form a V-V compound in verb consecutivisation and there can be no intervening variable between V1 and V2 as in the examples below (see Onuora, 2014).

(80) a. Nnụnụ ahù fèrè pùọ.

bird that fly-rV(PAST) leave-OVS

‘That bird flew and left/that bird flew away’

b. Àda jèrè bàta tie mkpū.

Ada walk-rV(PAST) enter-toward shout-OVS shout

‘Ada walked in and shouted

The data above show that there is no intervening variable between V1 and V2. V1 and V2 fe ‘fly’ and pụ̀ ‘leave’ can form a compound as in fepụ̀ ‘fly away’. In (80b), the V1 je ‘walk’ and bata ‘enter-toward’ can form a compound as in jebata ‘walk enter’. Aside these two properties, verb serialisation and consecutivisation share other properties in common such as obligatory subject sharing (except in resultative serial/consecutive constructions), negative marking on V1, occurring of events within the same or different temporal frame marking and distribution of the auxiliary marker.

Onuora (2014) identifies nine semantic types of verb serialisation in Igbo which are instrumental, accompaniment/comitative, directional, manner, purpose, comparative,

resultative, benefactive and simultaneous verb serialisation. She also identifies five types of verb consecutivisation and these include comitative, directional, resultative, benefactive and simultaneous consecutivisation. This implies that there is no instrumental, accompaniment, manner, purpose and comparative consecutivisation. The examined verb sequence in these constructions shows that verb sequence constructions occur in a natural order of events in the language. Her findings differ from those of Dechaine (1993) and Stewart (1998) who claim that the verb benefactive and resultative verb serialisation do not exist in Igbo. She concludes that verb serialisation is derived from both conjoined and embedded structures while consecutivisation is derived from conjoined structures only.

Nweya (2016a) re-examines SVCs within the MP framework. He demonstrated that SVCs can be analysed within the Split VP approach. In this regard, each verb in the series is licensed to project its own ʋP structure. The advantage of this approach is that it allows θ-roles to be assigned at the point of merge and case feature valued as appropriate, i.e. via long distance checking. Consider (81a) schematised as (81b) below:

(81a) Àmaka jì ǹcha à-sụ akwā

Amaka use soap PART-wash cloth

‘Amaka is washing with soap’

In the schema above, the verbs ji ‘use’ and su ‘wash’ assign θ-role to the DPs ncha

‘soap’ and akwa ‘cloth’ respectively. This study shall not delve into the analysis of (81b)

V^I

VP¹

DP akwa V

sụ

ʋ sụ

ʋ^I ʋP¹

DP O VP²

V jì

DP nchà

ʋ^I ʋ

jì

ʋP²

DP O

SVCs to avoid repetition but adopt Onuora’s classification and Nweya’s (2016a) analysis of SVC where the need arises.

Ugochukwu (2016) investigates the interface of syntax and semantics in Igbo ergative structures using the Standard Theory model of TGG and Theta theory of Universal Grammar. She identifies some ergative verbs such assimple verbs- ku (beat), kpù (sink) and compound verbs- gbàji (break), dọ̀ka (tear). She groups Igbo ergative verbs into two:those that manifest ergativity through the inversion of the positions of their subject and objects (Argument inversion) and those that achieve ergativity through transformation (inter-clausal ergativity). The former involves the inversion or exchange of positions of the internal and external arguments with no morphological transformation as in the example below:

(82) a. Nchara gbà-rà gbamgbam

Rust attack-rV(past) the zinc

‘Rust attacked the zinc’

b. Gbamgbam gbà-rà nchara Zinc attack-rV(past) rust

‘The zinc is attacked by rust’

(83) a. Ụtù gbà-rà ọkà

Weevil attack-rV(past) maize

‘Weevil attacked maize’

b. Ọkà gbà-rà u ̀tụ

Maize attack-rV(past) weevil

‘Maize is/was attacked by the weevil’

(Ugochukwu 2016:76-77) According to Ugochukwu, there are two elements in the data above, the theme and the goal. The action of the themes (i.e. grammatical subjects) affected the goals. However, the logical objects in (81a&82a) remain the logical object in (81b&82b) despite the inversion. Similar, examples were also cited in Uwalaka (1988) as instance of subject-object switch. On the other hand, Inter-clausal ergativity involves two simple verbs or a complex verb (i.e. verbroot + suffix) in which there is no intervening element (e.g.

affixes) between the verb components as shown below

(84) a. X gbanwè-rè àgwà yā

X change-rV(past) character 1Sg 'X changed his character'86

b. Àgwà yā nwè-rè (Nsukka dialect) Character his change-rV(past)

'His character changed'

Ugochukwu (2016:76-77) Using the examples above, Ugochukwu argues that the verb gbanwe ‘change’ is a compound verb made of two simple verbs that incorporate two events: V1 and V2, which can be decomposed into two roots gba and nwe, as to recover the simple sentences as shown in the ergative structures in (83b). The ergative structures were derived by deleting V1 and the external argument via transformation. Therefore, at the deep structure (87a) is an ergative construction where V1, gba assigns its internal θ-role to àgwà ‘habit’ but the V2 does not because àgwà is not its direct object. From analysis like this, she concludes that the argument and thematic structure are the areas of interface of syntax and semantics in the Igbo ergative structure. Although MP handles ergative structures in a different way, it falls outside the scope of this study. However, ergative structures are used as one of the arguments in support of Split VP analysis of DOCs.

Anurudu (2010) accounts for complement shift in Ìgbò as a follow up to Uwalaka (1988)⁴². Using the MP, he re-analyses Uwalaka’s subject/object switch phenomenon and discovers that contrary to Uwalaka’s observation, the objects are neither thematic objects nor arguments of the verbs, rather, they are parts of the lexical requirements of the verbs that constitute V-N complexes often called Inherent complements (IC).

Consider (85&86) below:

(85a) Ada wèrè iwe (85b) Iwe wèrè Ada

Ada be-(past) anger be-(past) Ada

‘Ada was angry’ ‘Ada was angry’

(86a) Ada tu ̀ru ̀ egwu (86b) Egwu tu ̀ru ̀ Ada Ada be-(past) fear fear be-(past) Ada

‘Ada was afraid’ ‘Ada was afraid’

(Anurudu 2010:129-130) The examples above show that the subject and the IC swapped positions. In this regard, Anurudu posits that this is possible because there is no specific cause of the experience

42 Uwalaka (1988) observes that the inherent complements of the Igbo verbs exchange positions with the subject of the sentence as is the case with argument inversion as presented by Ugochukwu (2016).

suffered by the subject. Hence, the real subject position is unfilled. In other words, it is not a case of swapping between a subject and object, rather, between a head, V and its IC; since the two elements are VP internal elements. This could be schematised as follows:

In the schema above, one can observe the positions of the VP internal arguments and the unfilled positions of the external arguments. The implication is that it is actually the OB or IC that shifts or moves to occupy the empty position in the absence of a specified volitional agent. Therefore, shifting is within the VP rather than the simple clause.

According to Anurudu (2010:133-9), the evidence in support of these claims is that when there is a specified agent, it is not possible for this kind of shift to occur. He argues that all the verbs that permit complement shift are experience verbs that assign the semantic role of Experiencer to their thematic complement. The semantic features of the Experiencer include [-intent], [-cause], [-controller]⁴³, [+affected], [+animate]

(Anurudu 1999: 136). Either of the complements can shift to occupy the empty subject position as demonstrated on the schema below:

43 Anurudu (2010: 136) notes that these first three features translate to Uwalaka’s deep semantic cases.

He then proposed the last one to capture all the features.

(86b) VP

X1 VP

V V V

wèrè NP2

[affected]

Complement iwe

Inherent Complement

VP

X1 VP

V V V tu ̀ru ̀

NP2

[affected]

Complement egwù

Inherent Complement (87a)

(Anurudu 2010: 321)

He concludes that this kind of shift is motivated by principles such as the semantic feature of non-volition and the need to satisfy EPP. In general, he identified two kinds of shift: modifier-shifting and complement shifting. Both operate within the domain of the phrase. In analysing this kind of structure, this study employs the VP shell analysis since it better accounts for VP structures like the one above.

In document “Enfoque del rol, profesionalización, actitudes y prácticas éticas de los educadores del bachillerato de la Unidad Educativa” Vicente Anda Aguirre” La Dolorosa de la provincia de Loja. (página 49-53)