Phrase Structure and Grammatical Relations

in Tagalog

Paul R. Kroeger

Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Linguistics

Stanford University

August, 1991

(Note: some corrections and other minor editorial changes are included in this version, but the

list of references has unfortunately been lost.)

Kroeger Phrase Structure and Grammatical Relations in Tagalog

Abstract

This dissertation presents an analysis of Tagalog within the framework of Lexical-Functional

Grammar. Tagalog is a non-configurational language in which the grammatical subject does not

occupy a unique structural position. Nevertheless, the grammar of Tagalog makes crucial

reference to the notion of grammatical subjecthood. This fact shows that grammatical

subjecthood cannot be defined in terms of a specified position in surface phrase structure. More

generally, the Tagalog data shows that grammatical relations must be defined independently of

phrase structure, semantic structure and pragmatic functions, strongly supporting a conception of

linguistic structure in which these various kinds of information are modeled as independent

subsystems of the grammar.

A large number of syntactic tests are presented which uniquely identify the nominative

argument as the grammatical subject. It is argued that the apparent ambiguity of subjecthood

properties in Tagalog is due to the Actors semantic and pragmatic prominence, together with the

fact that non-subject Actors are always terms (non-oblique arguments) in Tagalog, unlike passive

agents in English. Evidence is presented which shows that the nominative argument does not

have the properties of a topic, as it is frequently analyzed, whether this concept is defined in

terms of discourse continuity or pragmatic function.

Crucial evidence for the non-configurationality of Tagalog comes from rules governing the

co-reference of personal pronouns and the position of clitic elements. An analysis of Tagalog

phrase structure is developed using a modified version of the X-bar theory of Chomsky (1986).

The analysis is shown to provide an account for the structural properties of Clause Reduction, a

construction similar in many ways to restructuring in Romance languages, in which two verbs

appear in a single monoclausal structure. Finally, it is argued that long-distance dependencies

(Wh-movement) in Tagalog are best described in terms of grammatical relations, rather than

phrase structure configuration.

Kroeger Phrase Structure and Grammatical Relations in Tagalog

Unless the Lord builds the house, its builders labor in vain.

Unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchmen stand guard in vain.

In vain you rise early and stay up late, toiling for food to eat

for he grants sleep to those he loves.

(Psalm 127:1-2)

Kroeger Phrase Structure and Grammatical Relations in Tagalog

Table of Contents

Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1

1. Overview .................................................................................................................................... 1

2. Theoretical framework ................................................................................................................ 4

2.1 Phrase structure ..................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Functional structure ............................................................................................................... 9

3. Some essential aspects of Tagalog morphology ...................................................................... 13

3.1 Modifiers, linkers etc........................................................................................................... 13

3.2 Voice and case-marking ...................................................................................................... 14

3.3 Aspect and mood ................................................................................................................. 15

Chapter 2. Subjecthood .............................................................................................................. 19

1. The history of the problem ....................................................................................................... 19

2. Nominative properties .............................................................................................................. 22

2.1 Quantifier Float .................................................................................................................. 22

2.2 Relativization ..................................................................................................................... 23

2.3 Number agreement ............................................................................................................. 24

2.4 Raising ................................................................................................................................ 25

2.5 Control of secondary predicates ......................................................................................... 29

2.6 Subject obviation ................................................................................................................ 30

2.7 Possessor ascension ............................................................................................................ 31

2.8 Conjunction reduction ........................................................................................................ 32

3 Actor properties ......................................................................................................................... 35

3.1 Reflexive binding ............................................................................................................... 35

3.2 Equi .................................................................................................................................... 36

4. Termhood ................................................................................................................................. 38

4.1 Non-obliqueness of Actors ................................................................................................. 38

4.1.1 Participial complements .............................................................................................. 39

4.1.2 Participial adjuncts ...................................................................................................... 40

4.1.3 Adjunct Fronting ......................................................................................................... 41

4.2 On the termhood of genitive patients: evidence against the ergative analysis .................. 44

5. Subjectless sentences ............................................................................................................ 45

5.1 Subjectless sentence patterns ............................................................................................. 46

Kroeger Phrase Structure and Grammatical Relations in Tagalog

Existential: ............................................................................................................................. 46

Meteorological: ..................................................................................................................... 46

Exclamatory: ......................................................................................................................... 47

Recent-perfective aspect: ...................................................................................................... 47

Experiencer verbs with indefinite objects: ............................................................................ 48

5.2 Implications ........................................................................................................................ 48

6. Typological considerations ...................................................................................................... 52

Chapter 3. Topic and Focus ....................................................................................................... 55

1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 55

2. Continuity of discourse topic .................................................................................................... 56

3. Pragmatic Topic and Focus ...................................................................................................... 59

3.1 WH- question-answer pairs ................................................................................................ 60

3.2 Selective contrast................................................................................................................ 65

3.3 The pragmatic functions of ay-Inversion ........................................................................... 66

4 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 68

Chapter 4. Control ......................................................................................................................