← Back

Verbs & Focus/Trigger System

Actor focus (-um-/-mag-), object focus (-in), basic aspect system
Austronesian alignment type debate
focus/trigger language vs. nominative-accusative analysis
varies
Philippine languages have unique alignment not fitting standard typological categories
Voice symmetry hypothesis in detail
all four voices as equally active transitive constructions
varies
McFarland and others argue Philippine voice is not a European-style passive system
Aspectual coercion phenomena
aspect changes interpretation of inherently telic/atelic roots
varies
Incomplete aspect on telic verbs creates habitual or progressive reading by coercion
Verb class productivity analysis
which derivational affixes are productive vs. fossilized
varies
Mag- is highly productive; some -um- verbs are frozen lexical items
Lexical aspect and Aktionsart in Tagalog
achievement, accomplishment, activity, state verb classes
varies
Tagalog grammatical aspect interacts with inherent lexical aspect of root
Voice and transitivity relationship
relationship between focus choice and transitivity degree
varies
Object-focus verbs are more transitive than actor-focus in some analyses
Nominalization and voice morphology
how voice morphology appears in nominalized verb forms
varies
Pagluto (act of cooking) neutralizes voice distinctions from the verbal form
Morphological vs. periphrastic causatives
magpa- vs. pinagawa constructions
varies
Morphological: nagpaluto siya; periphrastic: pinagawa niya siyang magluto
Historical development of the focus system
Austronesian origins of Philippine focus/trigger system
varies
Proto-Austronesian voice morphemes reconstructed from comparative linguistic data
Verb-final tendencies in embedded clauses
clause-final verbs in subordinate contexts
varies
Embedded clauses may show verb-final tendencies unlike main clause VSO order