The phenomenonThe following example of serialization comes from Nupe: (1) Musa bé lá èbi. In the English translation, the verb "came" takes an infinitival complement headed by the infinitive "to take". In the Nupe original, however, the two verbs are in the same clause, forming a sole predicate. Serial verb constructions exhibit the following recurrent properties: (i) Strings of serial verbs share the same subject. (ii) Subject Agreement is often cross-referenced on the two verbs. (2) nu-takasã nu-dúmaka (Bare) In other cases, there is only a subject marker, but it is shared by the two verbs, as in the following example from Yoruba. (3) ó mú ìwé wá Both verbs are understood as third person singular. (iii) The only constituent that can intervene between the two verbs is the object of one of them, and only in a subset of serial verb languages - cf. example (3). (iv) There is only one negation marker for the whole construction. (4) hena nihiwawaka nu-tšereka nu-yaka-u abi (Bare) (v) Serial verbs cannot be marked independently for tense/aspect/mood categories. Either the relevant (identical) markers appear on both verbs, or a sole marker is shared by them (as they can share a subject marker, cf. example 3).6 NotesDespite the frequency of the phenomenon, it should be noted that there is no standard view on the proper analysis of serial verb constructions. This is a current subject of debate among syntacticians. As Tallerman (1998) points out, the serial verb construction is not totally unfamiliar to speakers of English, and can be found in some expressions surviving from Early Modern English, such as Let's go eat.7 References
External linksAkan.org Teleteaching course, serial verbs subsection
| |