Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
~(~ 2~
~ o r t h - l l o | b n ~ Puhlis~fir~g Cump~ny
R¢,;¢i'¢¢d D ~ w b c r 191;[
i~e ~entu,ac~ ffn~ an ~,~[~fi~it~ human a~cnt. This is not a funuLkm ill IhL, pa.~si,,'c
~'olrm of ~r~nsitLvLr~'L':E~. which nol only do nol imply any scmelnlic ~'L:Alllr:~or the
~uhje,:t. bul vcxy s.]f'[Cil09 nol imply cx[[lCl]~:c oF" th',." ~ubj¢ct L[|to~=lllcr,
The i~lp~r .-ltan pro[~t'~ a~ ~phmmi~n for xhe facu TllaL in marLY Itlngu~t~e,~.
c~lLalJ:~ ClClll¢.q[~-elthe pa.%i~: ~0t-ln wc~-u,itiliz.~d 1o i~:,JiuaL,:m; :~lld¢finlt.CIllm.iLtliagc~.
i. Imr~Im:~ion
'.rh.~ wiJTk ml ibis p p e r was partially SUpl~rled by a Gram from the Cotinc~l on Research
and Cr~r~tr~¢ I~'~l'k, UnLvcrsily c)f Cotori~h3. [ ~,o~ lil~ Io Ihsnk David P~rlmur.zer tbr
c'rg~ltlJ~lg~ll~ II1~ tO tmdcrlake a d~rip~Lon cf th= ~unt~,Rc~ ~ndin8 ia -m~ and -re in Polish.
[ ',~uld a l ~ ffk~ la thank Giu[i~ Lep,mby~ W.B Lockw~mL nnd Scot! Delan~y, wilh ~hom
l have di~a~s~d languaEe dala anck lheorefica] i~sucs inwil~ex:l in the .~per. The f o l ] ~ i n g
p~pIw have Ilell:~l a ~ wJ~ LIL¢l a n $ ~ 8 ¢ da~a: Mc;hura~nad AlL Joseph de I-[~, Ham~a
Kh~3h~i[aty, ~ e ~ a t KiLruc~ghL Ahdelelah Kulbl. Gr~ziana Lnzzarinu, Maria Richmond, Hugh
Sr.hrnidt.and ]'i~mas tlol[w~J~, Noa¢ oflh¢ ~o~,'c is in any w,~y respoasii~l~/ur th~ ~n~l~nl
of this paper~
1,2~L d~'e 1~a.l',~'/le.i c:/' tr~ulx{tiv¢' r~,Jb,~ ~i~ld impelw¢mcll pa,~-,#ves 111¢ sat~w
This is the question to ~hich holh Perlmutter and Comric give .'in
allirmal['¢¢ answer {el. Perlmvtter 1078: 167). The pro01em ~ith ~his qaes-
lion is in determining what Conslilute.~ "1he same ph~nt~raenon'. Aprrarcntly,
tbr hol]'l aulhors, it is enough LO show tha~ there arc characteristiea thai
the t,,va cOl'islrtIe[iunS hLl'Ve in common la Ihi~ case, the~ characteristics
are the derivationa[ historie~ of r ~ v e s ol'ir~nsitive verbs (herealh_w referred
to as simply 'ice.ire'),
In lhe preserit paper it will be shown the, the only lhing that passive
arid impersonal p~lssives ha','e in cemmon is the f u r l of the pnssive marker,
he il a ferm blithe verb or tile, refleaive pronoun, It will he shown, however,
Ihal the Iwo eoi]structiorl,~ diff'e.: iiz bath their fuJlCtioas and syntactic
preperties. Thus. an:dygin$ them as 'the aame phenomenon' lor the sake
of one or anvther syntactic theo~ ob~ures the facL thet languages LINgthe
small cliffcrences in form te express differ:n| mc~nings
2 [, PolLth -~
There zrc two reasons ['or which the impersonals in Polish are considered
in the.'present pnper despite the fact that they do not reflect the contempt~rary
passive form of the x,erb in Polish. The lirst reason is that artaiysi.s oi" da~.u
from Polish cons|ilutes part of Cotnrie's evidence for his hypothesis. Tlne
other reason is to show how the passiVE form Evolved in ~he history of
lan~gaage l o hecodqe a a aelive f o r t ~ indicating o n l y indefinite h u m a n agelll,
TI~c following sentences in Polish are ~liven by Comrie (1977) as evidence
lbr the spontaneous demotion rule, i.e., the rule of demoting the sabject:
In the pre6en~hon of the dala. senlenoes zakan iron Comrie, Per]multer, or some otlz~
pu~Ihh=~ som¢¢s ar~ quoted ~'~azim, withou~ eorpec~ions o r word.for, wo£d rra~sl~zion~
New ~ala are i~rev~deg[ v.'it.h Ihe ~rd-for.werd tran~miou whenever this ¢ann~4 be dedug~ed
from ~he ~ranslatiGn of the whol~ s~k*aee.
phrp+e a.q +howrt in the eg+mplcs above, All other passi'v¢ sentences in
Polish, with Ihe e+~.ception d" the non-slalive formed wilh sit. ztdmit an
agonlivc phrase; for example:
Other evideJ,+e is the rant zh+Jt ti}e leorm.~ ending it+ -no zmd -~+~ cannol
he u~ed with verbs dcno+.irt~ nomht=rmm ~,:rivities. TbJas, if one were to
say in Polish
Zaszczek+'mo de dr--wi
bark ;tl duP~r
'it h~.,i been bllrk+:d ++]~tim d~,~r"
the implication is ttmt there was somebody barking ;at the door, rather than
"There is a d~g harking ai the door'. Similarly. one c~ln] ~ay
S t ~ zoJia~ p i t . t y r i a n 3 ,
'The table h-'~ been ruiRed."
if, however, one says Pr-egr.;'.-iono •z•L the implication is that ~omeh0dy.
a htJmal~, ha~; nliJlM ~he t=abPe by bitirlg through it.
One more piece of ¢+idene¢ that the forms ending in -no and -to are not
passive in Modern Polish is Ihe differeluee in their abilily !o hm'e t-ert~in
adverbs or manner added. Thus, in the passive sentences above, ~ne ¢..aflnol
udd an ad,+erb hldical~eg the altitude of the agent ioward the ucti(jn, e.g, :
T.~iz forms ending with -trf~ and -to cannot occur in sentences implying
a sl.atlvc meaning. Tt~ put it in other words, use of the forms ending in
-no and -~o implies a non-~tative meaning, a w,lled action, even when used
v,,ith inherentL), stfitivc verbs. T h a i the senlencc Wisimto na ilptach does 11o/
i~ply a sinister "One ~as hanged on the ropes + bat. rat~er, "One wnu]d
haog on lhq ropes" ~ in a sports demon~;t[adon or compctil~Qn.
C~mrie's claim that these sentences in Polish do not have subjects is
tn,v only in |hut, indeed, Ihere i~ nt~ avert nominal ow pronominal subject
present. It is, however, false tar the semantic struclure: there is a subject
present and the sub)ect is human. The fur~ction of these syntactic cvnstruc-
tions, theref,~:e, is to indicate tt, at the )ndefinite human agent is overtly
marked hy syr~r-'telie struclz~re.
la the passive constructions, on the other han,d, lr the su~;ect is not
overtly marked it canno~ be predioed. Thus. in the sentence
Zburz0no dorn
passives, In the oldest tegt~, the impersom|] p~)~ves ~r¢ the pa,,,si~,cs of
intransitive verbs. Historically, lherefoc'e, Ihc primary functicm of impe~'sc,nal
passiv¢~ was to indicate the indefinite human ~ub.,/cct. Laler o n , when thi~
construction c c a . ~ to be percei~.'ed as r)assive, il was possible Io u ~ il
in the same function wi~h transitive verbs.
K bpck~en kaolmaz
dol~ fl"Oll] lull ~¢~ Fg~):/iv¢
F r n m the thl~, it i,; II~L rL,l! ~¢.':]y'
whidl may indicate I~-Opl¢ (sad= as guards) running from 1he dog kennel,
but certainly not dogs. The above sentence has the .~ame subject as
Bin h = p i ~ h a ~ t l kaCnl,r
prls~, from
'l~ro~ thi~, pri~o~ i~ is mn away ~
The agenl that eals ~hc black ants is understood to be a haman = not cvcn
an anteater. Similarly,
I~ ur:ld;~ ko'~Ltlur
"Flcre it is r . n '
M~Mlya hitirildi
T h ~ (utniture i =, ~r~=~,'ed"
bat
'i+urada ~itirila~r
"I~ i,',i ~lT, LIW,,;:,iJ, h¢l-~"
2,3. Lati~
]n th~ traditional discussions of' the function o f i~L~ivcs, one o f the most
importanl • if nol lhe most imporl~nl - argmncnts against claiming thai
the function o f tSe pa~iv~ k to indicate that the only argument o f the
sentence is patient rather than ~rt expected agenL ~ a claim that in Latitl
there arc passive forms o f intransitive verbs, such as itur 'one goes'.
Th= onty way Io determine IJ~ function o f thmse forms is to check the
q~i~ting ~xts in Latin and find o m whether any o f d'm passives o f intransitive
v e r b s c:~n c,~er o c c t i r with a n o t ~ d ~ u m a n agent, or t o r e l y ot~ g f a t n t n ~ r i a n s
who wcrc c0,~cious o f the cxistiafi distinctions. In the two standard texts
on Latir~ syJ~tax, we find the folluwing descriptions: Ernout and Thomas
(1972L who make a vet7 clear distinction Ixtwccn impersonal (i.e., a form
without an urtderiyJng subject) an,~ ittdefinite suMs+eL translate itur as 'on
~ . . ~ ? . j : j . g i c r ; /~aX*'h'c --,t #,/a.rs.m:! i~.s.~/n ' ~7;
va'. Ihus by the acuve, mdefinitc tbrra in French (p. 20.% [[ofmana and
Szantyr (19~5: 418) sly.t(: that one of the means fur expressing ;l~e indefi.~ite
agent ("die 'man'-Bedeutung") is the impersonal passix,~ wJ'deh, in laler
L+lin. w.~ replaced h } r Jit.l~ll'.J plus . ~,erb in the active form
[n gapporl of these two m~st aulhoritali~c goure¢~, ! woatd like ~o poi~st
out ~hat a random cheek mto some of the ¢oncard~nees !o the Lafi.
,.~dlers did nol turn up any passiees of i[~lran~ilive verbs .ged ~ilh aon-
htlnlall scrlnHllti¢ s.,bjee~, The c×arnp]es quoted in ".'~lrio~s sour¢c~ have
always been human suhjectg: e.~. iexamples flora Olr?b_~k] and Snfarcccicz
1937. quoled after Brajer~ki IoTP: 941:
2.4. .S!m.i.sh
and
The fael l h u i o~*e cam'tot ibrm th~ indefinite age,it sejltences with a verb
i t : d i ~ i n g an aet,v~t~,, restnct~'d to animols does not nleall that one e~r|not
form the passive , ~ L e l l C e ' ; with such a verb. Compare the following senlet~ces:
bLJt
2.J, Italiatr
Although the data from [talian were not considered by ,,ither Comrie
([077) or Perlmuttcr (1978L the 7 writ be considered here, For in [t~lliun
]inguislics there are forms labeled qmperson~' (of. l~.l~chy 1974), but
which, in faG. i n d i ~ t e the indefinite hmnan agent.
I will not r e . a t th~ same type of ~,~amplcs as in Spanish; th~ following
two should suffice:
Semo the ~i p ~ l a
"1 hear gc,me,~n¢ talkio~"
Z Fr~f//'__l',~,~h';" . Pre+_tqrr ,'1~1~/hlq:er~rala[ lJ..ra+f'tv/ "r'fl)
FILtLnot
AftuaIly. the last sentence o0uId be produced, but the impl]¢uti0n wo=ld
be that hmnu.l~s are harking. Some of my Italian ilfformanls could accept
the sentence Qnf st cvr?'e =11 is run here', in reference to animals, s~y,
produced in a ~roo, but they wotdd explain Ihal it i~ ai~,ays produced i+a
jocular I]ll]r]]|1~F.
As in SDaaJsh. no stafive impermmal passives occur in Italian,
2,6. Amh~c
P'-,ssiv¢ comstructior~ in Arabic does not a]low for the agent to occur in
I~e ~amo se~tteJ]ce~ eg.
The fact that no agent can occur in the sentenc~ camai],n~ a pa~ive
form of the verb indicat~ that tim passi'~ construction is not derivcct t'rnm
the active construction through a transformation, lr|trdn.~itivc v;rbs may
alsa h~,.,~ a passive I~rm. Ag, in. as in the case a f Irans[tive verbs, there
i.s no translbrmational relationship Eetweet| the active and rite passive
term, The subject uFih¢ ~¢~ive intransitive ~;¢rb may not also be ~he subject
o f the passive int~+~m~itiveverb, e.g.
The best evidence for Ib¢ hypothesis that tl'~ pa-~sive form oF a . ip!r~n~iti,.'¢
2g{I 7 FretL~.av~gi,~, i Pa~"~iv,~ eme/ ~t~tpt,e~tuu,~ petrsivt"
r[~]C data broughl Ibrth by Comri¢ {1977) and Perlmuttcr (J978) lot
Dutch .lid German differ in one major resl~ct from that brought in for
other languages. Some of the sentences which Comri¢ ~nd Perlmuttcr label
"im~rsaaal" may have aa agct~t addLnl to them and. therefore, they are as
umdl "~rson~F us any other s c n t c , ~ with ~1 p~rsonal subject. Compare
th,: followtn~ ,~entenc~s:
Tile F.~ct Ihnl the 0as~i,~c ~r~l¢llCes ,~'ith ¢,~' in German or er in Dutch ,'is ~l
~urfn¢¢ subjcel c~tn ,dmit lhe ugeqti~',: phrase puts into doubt Ibc hylx~thc.si~
~,,~tneed and pra,,'ed for Tud:ish. Ar-ahic, L~fin. Spanish.. und h~tlian al~ou~
the indefinite agorot function oF the pazsivc o~ intra~|sitivc yetis. For, ii' the
hypt~,lhesi~ ~,~re la be Itlle ill ~ e n ] l ; t / ~ ~lld I')ulch. sentcn¢~.~ ~vitl~ age~itive
phrases ,~hould ~ot be grammatical. TEe t~¢t th~tt the "~bo,,,¢ ~entence~ ure
grahal'nal[cal, hOWg%'Cl', t]og'~ I l a [ nec¢~.~arily imply l_h:it the hypothesis is
f~l~e. Thcr¢ [s n strong possibility thul d~e above sentences have a difft'r~'~I
function f'rom their format co~_tnterparts ~la Romance lan~uzg,,s, And whilc
I am net prepared ~o cow,duct a synchronic analysis o1" eithcr Dotcl~ er
Ge'rlrlltn, Jl appears that the fmlelion or senllences with asentJve phrases
may be Ih¢ ~am¢ as the existential ~lhcr¢' scmcnce~ i~ English. vi~: ~tut]ng
t]mt '~uch arld such t2~cl, evcnL prnce~, etc., o~:ctirred'. Cc:tainly the
lr~:a~l~[Jons irtto English o1" the sentences with e~ and er surface 5lJbjec'l'~
~tapport the ~l'opo~ed intcrpret:~ion. Thus, Curme (1922: 33~) give~ tl~e
Ib]lo~'irtg Ir~ndations:
~i rd l,'cbu f~n
'Th-re i~ runni.ng L~t~ing ~n'
F:$ 'd,'LIl'de il'nl'lL~r vie] ~ptaltltllell'l~ ~d~ehe~i~t. trod get;icl~:
' / a c r e v,~ ~la, ay~ .~ .~,ot,d dc-al c f ,;h~fllis~g. j~,ki~g and [auphit~"
f.)l~n wird ~t:laflzl
"Th.ere is d.',r~cing going on up_~airs"
Apart from .~nt~nces ~s'ith =~gcnti~w t0hra.~es, the re~t (~f the ir~p~sonal
l~i~;es in Oerman and DuLch do not differ J'rom Iheir c o l z u [ e r p u H ~ in
Romance languages and clearly indicaie t h e pre.scac¢, o f ~ ~ttb,ju~'! which.,
~s in o~her languages exunnined zo far, ha~i to be human.
This senh~ncL" ap]~.~rs in Har:.llu]li~ (1965l, b,Jt I| 11~.$~,~.cn c~rlego:i¢'ally rejecqed b> the nrrqive
.~pcak¢~ ! have ¢o'~alled /,Itho~gh I do ~ol want to rule o,,t lhe po~ib,l,t~. ~.hat in ~ome
particular context Lhis r~ttlcn~c ;ould ~ a~;l~Zblc. I thi~k ill should he described only
,~ilhin such a ¢o~lleXl f~L~er ih~Ln he- taken ns a neuLr.~I u.~ample tbr Lhc passive COl~.lrtzcti~n.
~-lli,~ c=mgru~i~rl ca. oo1~ bL" used v.ilh mtra~sili~.,s wlfigh e~pres~ an aciivil:~- gr ~=u,ldititm
Lhai ~ta~d~ in a relation :o ,', fre~" moral a~,e~t : F_~ wirzl~,'ge.~.vr~, g~,.~,qgcz.Je,i"They (;riddle.the)
;.Lie ealilqz. ~l'-'~:pi,$." hLL[ n<wl~.E,', ~'.','i'g g~:f.~imke."l, ffebth:l'..~t'r,a'l~'a-~qrff '~[llere is a sp.~k[illl~, it
is li~hln[~,~, lhc~' i.~ ru~h,inl~ at ~,,ater.'-~
[~ is difficu[| n~w Io interprel the term "free moral a~ent', but all the
examples ~ha~ C.rm¢ ~ransl~tes inv01"~¢ u human subj¢cl, e.g,.
b~t no!
*Er ~ M geknaag, d
[nl~r~ling evidence for the fat1; that Ihe impersonal ¢onslrll¢~ion arlually
:cpresents art indefinite human subject is provid~ by the ['act that |be
~ntences wiLh er... w~re spontaneously paraphrased with a men construc-
tion; for example, along with Er wurdr your de ko~ing gebogel= was provided
Men 3lligl Four de l~oma~., bulb meanin$ 'One kneels before the king'.
Virtually the sarrm holds for German. Thus. the impersonal sentences
denote only a human suhjecL and the following are ungrammatical in
C_mrman :
2~4 Z, Fraj:?wgw# i P.,~,~h'e wut imjqrr.~l~ui/ p~,~,~iri,
2,,~. WvAh
irll~eclet~
i:~fl~¢:cA -ninfle~tc~l
1"lie irrq~rsonal pas~i~,~ h~ls the l~tssiw form oF the verb that would have
occurred in the active. This verb, how'ever, does not agree with Ih¢ following
" Spe~lccr~ of German [~y r=u m e , h i =LEO'O"id +e+p¢<:l to the ~ ; ¢ p ~ l ~ l i t y of mttC+,i aentcm'cs.
All t)[ the umJic ~?-uakcr+ uP Germau I tiave com, ullP+d [ejected such +ont~¢¢.~. There is.
ho'.,,'c'.~er, a I'~s~ihilhy l'~hilcd O~Lt m me I~y Theo Yc'nnemann t h e stmh ~ntmces could be
~:ccpt=Elc in =p~.~;ia] ~;ir~ulzlslav;~=, ! I ~ l i c l l dial Ih~ ~li~lt~llces v f opinion ;n re+w-el to
tl~me ,~tcncc~ is alread2~ a ~Jgnill~al fact i~icming tlml they dJ[Ter From pu~ive m.~luu,~us
I~ith tr'ansllJvc v~.rL~ in ~hwh thuF¢ i~ ~o ~tl~h d~lTcr=ll~ of ulli~iioil~,
pro~ou~ in number or gen(ler. The pronoun, eherefore, i~ ¢~nsidered Io he
ohiect rather than subject. There is no ¢Icmen~ in this form of the pa~ivc
~,hieh does agree with the verb and, ~herefore~ Awher3, considers that ti|ere
is no sttrlkce ~trueuare subject, k is presumably because or" Ibis proper~y,
~.e., the L~m¢l~o1 the sL~rface strz,cture st, hject, lhat A~,,bery ~mlls this ~ype
of passive the impersonal ~ i v e ~ She, her~]f, h(~,~:ver~ maint,'tins on
purely formal @round~ that thes type of sentence has ~ eornplctely unspecified
subject, which cannot be deduced from the surface structure save for the
specific t'eature~ li~l nnay he required by tile sennanlic properties ~f the
verb. T:]'L¢ following is the form of abe impersonal i~tssive (w~th the corr¢~-
poncling ttctive form) (Awi_~ry IgTfi: 14B):
i,llt'etic~lls
The short review of data in the preceding section has ~hown that [n
atany Indo-Earopea~ languages and in Turkish, the l~-~sive form of the
inttanshive verb is used to express ~h¢ indefinite subject. This fact alone
may be taker, by some as an indieatiolt of cerlaiJi char'~cterislics of the
passive and, in fact, this is ~,hal actually happened Jn the qu¢|ed stodie~
of Comrie and P~rh~utlerJ
The semantic category o f the indefinite subject seems to have been
grnmmuticalized in h~do~Europe~m k'mguases by the use of already existing
devices, such as:3 p. plural, qrg., Russian; tt'3e oFlhe texeme indic~mtingll/al),
e.g.. Late Latin and man~ Gm-n~uuic iungu;~ges, including E,~glis~, at a
c~'rtain stage; and s+vcral languages" ~s~ of the passive constructiQn. Since
the lattm- a¢+tirr~:l in many unrelated dallguages, ane sh+uld rule out the
possibility of borrowir.g and, rather. Ior~k into the condilions which made
this cllat]ge of funelion p,~ssib[e.
In order to do this, it is necessary to start with the function of the
passiv,: con:z~.~etion. Following Kur),iowicz ( ] 946), ~nd sligh|ly ref~rmulatint;
his stateJneftts, I take Ills p;imary f~tnetlon o f the prssix,e construclion It+
ir~dicalClhat I/1¢ only N P that oo~ur~ with a transitive verb i.J 11OI the expected
agenl.
There are several ,.~onsequenees 1o this assumption. The firs~ one i~ Lhe
fact th;=t the ag~rtt, s i n ~ it is not mentiort~d, remains unknown - at least
on ;he basis ol" t]~¢ anforraatic~n provided by the sentence. -[rhc second eon.
seqllence is the fhet thal~ since the construction is used to indicate the rote
of the N P witli !Jar transitive verb. ~! is available, as it were, to be treed in
sora¢ other function with intransitive verbs. Since the implication a f the
passive co;lstruclion with transitive verbs was Ihal the agent :e=nain~ u~,-
known, Ibis implication, or s¢c'ondary f'tmction, becomes t]i¢ primary func-
tion when used wilh the i,~J.ransil_ive verbs. Thus the change of function of
the pus@co ¢onstru~.'ttou is a well-motivated process,
In Polish,-'~ecording I~ K]eiruensiewiez (191~1), the forms t~lt'~ll, riolTEl~ ¥tTl?fflt~ltJ;
etc. ~on¢ spoke'. ~on¢ made', etc., derive from the forms m6u,ioJro if,st
•spoken is', robi,s~e~.je.vt 'made is', at:. They have be~r further extended to
irtclurle transitive verbs, e.g., budoa~tno dora)' "houses were built', rohiotto
plany "pla0s were re'ado', ¢1¢,
The changes in Romance languages involved at least three step~. Fir.~t~
the im~--rsoaai Forms in Latin. i.e.. ~he form used in subjectless senten¢¢~
came to indicate pa~sL~¢. Then, passive with intransitive senten~s came to
iudjcale indefinite agent Laler, in Latin itself, and most of its descendents,
the lexeme h~ntu was ta,~ed to indicate the indefinite a ~ n t . This rt+rm wa,~
abandoned in the Middle Ales in most of the Romar, o: langL=ages, e~¢ept
for French and Calta~an~ =rod was replat~d once again by the non-~tative
passive, ix., by th¢ forms using the retie×ire pronouns s u ~ as se c~tre,
se hahta, et¢~ (for a pal'lial e~planation, s,~=~Nyrop 1925: 368).
A similar p r o e e ~ took place in English, which u;ed ~ realize the indefinite
agent by the pronoun 'man', whi,,h later was replaced by a number o f
grammatical devices, sttch as 'people', "one'. 'they °, 'y~u', and by a passive
construction (Visor 1¢/63 : 511.
In Old Irish, the l~SSiV¢ of intransitive verbs ~rves to express the
ZL ,~?~4i=.lwga+: P,w~ire g, td imperxt,md ptt.~'~ilv 2.',7
in~definile human agenl, e g , t~.6gm" 'let people_ snmeone go" lit. "lel it he
gone', re'hoti~ 'people have Ix:ca', ¢~¢. (Thurn~sen 1946: 328),
Th~ semantic ~tteg~ry of inde~nite ;~geJlt can be an ~ndcp~ndent gram-
nautical ¢,tlegory. i.¢.. realized by its own means r"a:her tha~ by mearts which
ha,,~ some other primary f~mt:tion, as is the case i~) Indo-European lan-
guages, Thus, in Hausa, a Chadic language, the indefinite agent is realized
by a speCiu[ p r o n o u n a and its appropriale v~riznts in diffexnt aspeclua[
and cea~ forms, Thus one can say.
The l ~ t senlerlq¢' can be ttsed only whejt Ihe agent who did Ihc running
is human.
As in I,do-Euroix'aa I~.Jlg0tage~, ~he gramr, adcal lorm o f iadefinJtq agenl
cannot h~ used with verbs proper to animat behax, itw only; I hUS the sentence
is uagrammari,'=l in Hausa~
An ]rttereSlil]g question is whcLhe/ m~c t~u'J claim thai it k a universal
property ol" impersonal passives ~hul they lndi¢~.te an indefinite human
subject. A definite ansx~:r to such a question may ~ obtained only through
an exar~in~lioa of ~ll the languages that hav~ a ~ s i v e laura and thal h a v e
~n innpersona[ passive, There are several factors that have In be t~ken into
co~xsideration ia a study of universal proGcrly. The first is the fact thai
*.here are othe~ de,ices ir~ languages thtlt can b~ tJsed to i,di~lte an indefinite
h a m a n subject angL thc~for¢, even if there were a passive ~onstruction, an
impersonal imssive does not h~ve to nectar. But it is als0 likely that in the
~amc situation an impersonal p:~ssi,.'e would occur, but its function wJ]] be
differ~t. This apl~ar~ to I:~ the ¢~se with passives oF intransilive verbs in
Saltskrit wlxich appear to take the human subject in the form of instrumcmal.
e. 8, (l:h'ajerski 1979 : ~.M-}:
"il is m~ne t~ me'_ '1 ~o"
,~up~,"~tc ; v.'=}.-;t ",t ~s slcpi b)' ~otr. "you ,=iccp"
~il ~-dIg a l i ¢ l i a "it ~.~ ,~¢nl b.~" I]im'. "h= ~.¢l~I"
4. Conc[minm
It has been ~h~'a,~ tha! the ~:;~lcgorJ,' which Comfit 11977) ~tnd Pcrlmuttcr
~1978) de~'Jbe a.~ impcr,sonal passive is p~ssive onl~ in form. While its
Tah],: ]
.~ltl~'rlC'~ s l r u e t u r c characicrisries
f=,tlicng Function
Refermees
Am'~zy. O.M.. ~Q7~. "l'he ~|IL~ eft Welsh. Londar=: C.rnbrkJ~e |)niv. Pres,~
C'omrie. l~.. I977. |~l del'cn~' ,af ~.'ffgtLI./l~'~u~ ,~ICJliOI~AJ-II~"IhC imper~om~l passive. 2n: Pc'ter
C¢~t¢. J;rr~)ld M. S~d~'k [¢d.~,)~ Syn(~ an~[ ~¢mantics, ~ 1 . 3 . 4 7 5~ N~;w York : A~:adcmic
iI~FL~5.
Curn~.GO,< 1~22. A 7.ra~rl~r of I~¢ G¢~ma~ Jal~$u;ql~. N~- Y~rE'. Mucmilla~.
Kraou|, A.. F. l-[Iol:ia~, 1972. S~,rnl~l~Cel'llinc Paris : Krinck~eek
Fr~jzyng~cr.Z., 1978 An an~lysb er k-.pa~iv;~, kingu~ 46, I J) 156,
Fr~.~V==~e[. Z,. TJ [,Z.alr[el, mbL Prhnary arid ~ecn~dary £|mclJOn in lancua~e ,;h,,~.
Harznung, W_. I'J6~. [lie Pu~sivlran.-~rm~tienc.~ im [.~tscl-cn_ Studlu Gra~nm,tJca ~, 9(i
114,
Halmann, ] B.. A. ~r~nlyr~ ]gE-'i k~t.-l-nis;'b~ SynlHx lind ~l~';~;tJk Mihtchen : ~eL'k
I ~ i r ~ r , l~ ~, 1976 On lhe ~ubjeerrleSs "pseu~0-pa~iv¢' in slpndard Dutch. In; Charles Li
(¢'lJ.~. Subjcd ;llIl~ topJCl N¢~ York; At:ade~' Press.
Klcmen~k'~vk'z. 7~,. 19~,t. Histeria jCzyka poHk~eb,o, '='oJi I. WaI~W.
K,ofl¢l,%qcla. H.. 1 9 ~ . U bU,i;Ivwi¢ ~a]~[~ j~.C[)gfflU paskow%~ ~4,3~' kilEuI/t,. Porad,ik ~ykowy.
Z e ~ t 90, 38:~-.391.
[q,46. ~.r'galivno~[' ] stadisJ'n~K ~ v jazyl~e, |zvc.~tm Akadcmii Nauk SSSR.
~l~.~'~.rl'lO'd~i~,~),,
vO] :;, rlr, ~I ~.77-393.
i,epschyr~ G-, 197d, A~eLnne Cl~lrIjzioni c~n si. [n: ~t,di Lingtlisfiei ~ri .oitor'e di Tr'i~tano
l~fdli~ Pica; P'=¢inL
Ma~i~,~_]wic~ } . V , r,~g. o d~,.~ sir~tuk~J.~-skixfi(mslrukciiax ~ovremenneg<>pal%koge jazyka.
[d; "~le~o'v~qija I:~ p~l'~,k~mu jez.Xku, J[4-13.:1. M~:'~ow Naug~.
Nyrop, K., 1925. ~r[arnm:]Jrc hi_~torLque de lu langue rr~.n~'aise. Copmhagt'.z,_
Perlmmlcr, 13. M.~ [973. Iml~rS0~al passi,,es and the irnaccusntJve hypnlhesis_ Proccec~infs
9r the I:@tlrlll A,rmal Mccti~t$ .of ~,h¢:Bcyk¢loy LJngui:.li~; $~.[¢t~, J57-18~.
$1a','iamkaj-', fi]~-L~lBia~. 267 2 ~
SuV,er. M.. ]974. Where does imper.~nal .~e ~ome ~ m ? In'. R../. Campbell M . G Ge,ldin,
M~ ~.layr~l~ WaJq~ (ed~.). LJJ~guLr~rJ¢s~u<~i~s in Rolnan¢¢ laap,a~s. 146 1~7. Waslfin~t~m.
DE: (~ecrge~w,n Univ P~ess.
Tl,,ro:y~-a, R., 1~46. :~ ;~ramma~ eF Old Irish. D.uh,lia,
Vi~scr. V.T., 19~,3. ,*,n hislorical .~yrxla~ of lhe English lan~l,al~', pan I. Leiden: Brill.