Applicative, Reciprocal and Causative (A+R+C)

The pattern of applicative, reciprocal and causative (A+R+C) has different functions: when applicative and causative introduce a new argument the reciprocal reduces one argument. In Kuria the (A+R+C) pattern sometimes makes the sentence to have a scope ambiguity with regard to some verbs such as ghoota ‘catch’, ha ‘give’ kebha ‘cut’ etc. This pattern (i.e. A+R+C) contains a verb or verbs that show simultaneity of action. Consider the verb hoocha ‘bring back’.

85. Mwita a-ra-hooch-a a-bha-ana Mwita 3SG- PRES-bring back- FV AUG-CL2-child Mwita brings back the children.

127 86. Mwita a-ra- hooch-er- a Chacha a-bha-ana

Mwita 3SG- PRES-bring back-APPL-FV Chacha AUG-CL2-child Mwita brings back the children on behalf of Chacha.

87. Mwita na Chacha bha-ra-hooch-er-an-a a-bha-ana Mwita and Chacha 3PL-PRES- bring back-APPL-REC-FV AUG-CL2-child Mwita and Chacha bring back the children on behalf of each other.

88. Nyangi a-ra-hooch-er-an-i-a Mwita na Chacha Nyangi 3SG-PRES-bring back-APPL-REC-CAUS-FV Mwita and Chacha a-bha-ana

AUG-CL2-child

Nyangi brings back her children and the children of Mwita and Chacha.

The verb hoocha ‘bring back’ requires two arguments in (85), but due to the presence of two valency increasers, applicative and causative, and one valency decreaser, reciprocal, the sentence/verb has remained with three arguments in (88). The applicative introduces one argument in (86), then the reciprocal supresses one argument and in (87) making the sentence to have a coordinated NP subject, ‘Mwita and Chacha’. The affixation of the causative introduces one extra argument Nyangi to the verb in (88). In Kuria the combination of ARC has a special meaning which refers to the simultaneity of actions. Mwita explains:

When they occur together they express simultaneity of the action expressed by the core meaning of the root and some other action or event. The combination of morphemes has idiosyncratic, non-compositional meaning (2008, p. 56).

As can be seen in example (88), there is causative suffix but there is no causation at all in the sentence rather than that it introduces the new action which goes together with the core meaning of the verb (‘simultaneity’ of action). Consider the verb kebha ‘cut/slice’ with the same pattern to see the manifestation of A+R+C in (89) to (92).

89. Marwa a-ra-kɛbh-a i-nyama Marwa 3SG-PRES-cut-FV AUG-CL9-meat Marwa is slicing meat.

128 90. Marwa a-ra-kɛbh-er-a Mokami i-nyama

Marwa 3SG-PRES-cut-APPL-FV Mokami AUG-CL9-meat Marwa is slicing the meat for Mokami.

91. Marwa na Mokami bha-ra-kɛbh-er-an-a i-nyama Marwa and Mokami 3PL-PRES-cut-APPL-REC-FV AUG-CL9-meat Marwa and Mokami are slicing the meat for each other.

92. O-mo-ona a-ra-kɛbh-er -an-i-a Marwa na Mokami i-nyama

AUG-CL1-child 3SG-PRES-cut-APPL-REC-CAUS-FV Marwa and Mokami AUG-CL9-meat The child is slicing meat for her/himself and on behalf of/or for Marwa and Mokami.

The verb “slice” in (92) is a transitive verb that requires two arguments. In (90) the applicative introduces one extra argument but it has been suppressed by the reciprocal in (91). The introduction of the causative in (92) adds one extra argument omoona, ‘the child’. But due to the special meaning of this pattern of three extensions (ARC) in Kuria there is no meaning of causation in the sentence. The causative meaning - ‘causes someone to do something’ - is overlapped by the applicative meaning, as one can see in (92). What is presented is someone doing something for her/himself and for someone else. On the other hand, the sentence can be interpreted in another way whereby the verb ‘slice’ will be taken as the extra action/sub-action (which someone does on the way as he/she is performing the main action) and not the main verb of the agent. The order is grammatically acceptable but the semantic representation is difficult to identify, especially the causative extension in example (92). Let us consider another verb ghoota ‘catch’ with the (A+R+C) pattern before shifting the focus to ditransitive verb.

93. Mokami a-ra-ghoot-a Mwita Mokami 3SG-PRES-catch-FV Mwita Mokami is catching Mwita.

94. Mokami a-ra-ghoot-er-a Mwita i-chi-nswi Mokami 3SG-PRES-catch-APPL-FV Mwita AUG-CL10-fish Mokami is catching fish for Mwita.

129 95. Mokami na Mwita bha-ra-ghoot-er-an-a i-chi-nswi

Mokami and Mwita 3PL-PRES-catch-APPL-REC-FV AUG-CL10-fish Mokami and Mwita catch fish for each other.

96. Nyangi a-ra-ghoot-er-an-i-a Mokami na Mwita i-chi-nswi Nyangi 3SG-PRES-catch-APPL-REC-CAUS-FV Mokami and Mwita AUG-CL10-fish

Nyangi is catching fish for herself and for Mokami and Mwita.

Examples (93) to (96) reveal the same scenario as in (89) to (92) above. The data analysis depicts that the same pattern (A+R+C) behaves the same as in examples (85) to (88). Then, next is the ditransitive verb ha ‘give’ which requires three arguments at the basic level²⁶, semantically known as agent, recipient and theme. Consider the verb ha ‘give’ with the same pattern before we engage in the analysis of the reversed order.

97. Mokami a-ra-h-a a-bha-ana i-mi-bhiira Mokami 3SG-PRES-give- FV AUG-CL2-child AUG-CL4-ball Mokami gives the balls to the children.

98. Mokami a-ra -h-e-er-a Mwita a-bha-ana i-mi-bhiira

Mokami 3SG-PRES-give-add.v-APPL-FV Mwita AUG-CL2-child AUG-CL4-ball Mokami gives the balls to the children on behalf of Mwita.

99. Mokami na Mwita bha-ra-h-e-er -an-a a-bha-ana Mokami and Mwita 3PL-PRES-give-ADD.V-APPL-REC-FV AUG-CL2-child i-mi-bhiira

AUG-CL4-ball

Mokami and Mwita give the balls to the children on behalf of each other.

100. Nyangi a-ra-h-e-er-an-i-a Mokami na Mwita Nyangi 3SG-PRES-give-add.v-APPL-REC-CAUS-FV Mokami and Mwita

a-bha-ana i-mi-bhiira

AUG-CL2-child AUG-CL4-ball

Nyangi gives the balls to the children on behalf of Mokami and Mwita (in the course of performing a simultaneous activity).

26 The basic level refers to a verb form without any derivational elements (in this context).

130 In (98) the results of the verb root with affixed applicative extension add a new argument (Mwita) which is beneficiary, then the reciprocal reciprocalised applicative in (99) by suppressing the argument Mwita, taking it to subject position to obtain a coordinated NP subject Mokami na Mwita

‘Mokami and Mwita’. The reciprocal has scope over the applicative, and because it is affixed after the applicative, the argument introduced by applicative is suppressed by the reciprocal. But when the causative extension is added to the verb root in (100) it brings simultaneity of action to it. It should be noted that it can be the same action done to another person or it might be two different actions that go together as seen in the meaning in (100). When Nyangi was doing something, she was asked by someone/people, let us assume that she was asked by Mokami and Mwita, to give the balls to the children on their (Mokami and Mwita’s) behalf. However, this was not the main task of Nyangi (simultaneity of action).

Although in the order of (A+R+C) the causative has higher semantic scope over the applicative and reciprocal, the function of causative extension is overlapped by applicative, given that the explicit meaning is the applied meaning ‘on behalf of/for/to’.

The verb ha ‘give’ requires three arguments and due to the presence of two valency increaser extensions in (100) one could expect to see two extra arguments. On the contrary, the scenario did not occur due to the presence of reciprocal extension whose main function is to reduce one argument from the verb. Therefore, the sentence remains with four arguments.