Multiple Voices

From the perspective of linguistic typology, one of the special characteristics of Squliq Atayal is its multiple voice system, also a characteristic observed in many Austronesian languages.54 In previous research on Atayal, there is a terminological inconsistency.55 Some works, such as Egerod (1965, 1966, 1980, 1999), L. Huang (1991, 1993, 1995a) and Rau (1992), call these verbal derivations “voices”, while other works, such as L. Huang (1995b, 1996a, 2000b), L. Huang & Hayung (2016), Mei (1994), Zeitoun (2001), call them “foci/focuses”. In order not to arouse confusion, the present thesis adopts “voices” for the verbal derivations agreeing with subjects in their semantic roles and keeps the term “focus” for information-related discussion. This language has four voices: actor voice (AV), patient voice (PV), locative voice (LV) and circumstantial voice (CV).56 The last three voices are grouped as non-actor voice (NAV) or undergoer voice because their subject cannot be an actor. The agreement between voice marking and the semantic roles of subject is illustrated in the following examples from Liu (2004b:27):

54 _{In addition to Austronesian languages, multiple voice system is also observed in Western Nilotic} languages, like Dinka and Kurmuk (Andersen 1991, 2015). Grammatical subjects in these languages are also grammaticalized topics, so the agreement between verbs and their subjects is termed “orientation” in literature. There are subject-orientation, object-orientation and adjunct-orientation, whereby subject and object refer to agent and patient respectively.

55 _{This terminological inconsistency exists in Austronesian linguistics as a whole, not merely in the study} on Atayal or Formosan languages. The term “focus” came from Healey (1958) and Healey (1960), and it was adopted to emphasize the difference between Austronesian languages and European ones. Blust (2002) compiled an appendix of the use of different terms in previous works: 25 sources used “focus” while 28 sources used “voice”.

56 _{Following S. Huang (2005), Rackowski & Richards (2005), Ross (2006), and Wu (2007), S. Chen} (2007) analyzed LV and CV in Atayal as applicatives. Whether LV and CV are applicatives is beyond the scope of the discussion here. Thus, the present thesis just follows the convention in previous studies on Squliq Atayal. Besides, following L. Huang (1993, 1995a), the present thesis adopts the term “circumstantial voice” to replace instrumental/beneficiary voice. Blust (2002) suggested a typological distinction inside Austronesian languages: four-term languages with at least four morphologically distinguished voices, three-term languages with three voices, two-term languages with a portmanteau infix –in-, and two-term languages without a portmanteau infix –in-. Squliq Atayal belongs to the first type of Austronesian languages owing to its four-voice system.

(52) m-aniq qulih qu’ tali’. AV-eat fish Nom Tali ‘Tali eats fish.’ <E>

(53) niq-un na’ tali’ qu’ qulih qasa. eat-PV Obl Tali Nom fish that ‘That fish is eaten by Tali.’ <E>

(54) niq-an na’ tali’ qulih qu’ ngasal qasa. eat-LV Obl Tali fish Nom house that ‘That house is the place where Tali eats fish.’ <E>

(55) s-qaniq na’ tali’ qulih qu’ qway. CV-eat Obl Tali fish Nom chopsticks ‘The chopsticks were used by Tali to eat fish.’ <E>

(56) s-qaniq na’ tali’ qulih qu’ sayun. CV-eat Obl Tali fish Nom Sayun ‘Sayun is the person for whom Tali ate fish.’ <E>

As shown in (52), when the verb maniq ‘eat’ is prefixed with the AV marker m-, the subject tali’ is the actor of the whole event. When the patient of the whole event is a subject, like qulih qasa ‘that fish’ in (53), the verb is suffixed with the PV marker -un. What is more, if the verb is derived with the LV marker -an, like niqan in (54), the subject is the location of the event. In the same vein, when the verb is marked with the CV marker s-, like sqaniq in (55) or (56), the subject can be an instrument in (55) or a beneficiary in (56).

What is presented in the above examples is merely an ideal agreement between voice marking and semantic roles. As a matter of fact, since the number of semantic roles is above four, the mapping between voice derivations and semantic roles cannot be one-to-one; instead, it is always one-to-many, as illustrated in Figure 3-1, which is modified from S. Chen (2007:26) with the addition of AV. S. Chen’s classification of

semantic roles is based on that of L. Huang’s (2001) work on Mayrinax Atayal.

PV and LV are termed after the typical semantic role of subject with which they agree. AV and CV are termed after the general terms covering these roles: actor for agent, executor and experiencer, and circumstantial for beneficiary, instrument, reason and theme.57

57 _{Following the semantic map connectivity hypothesis of Croft (2003), S. Huang (2005) proposed that} instrument and beneficiary in CV clauses were derived from (transported) theme, which explained why some Formosan languages had lost CV after the loss of the mapping between subject and (transported)

Figure 3-1 Mapping between Voices and Semantic Roles

Patient PV -un Beneficiary Reason Theme Instrument CV s- Recipient Source Goal Location LV -an Experiencer AV m- Executor Agent

Furthermore, voice markers are always portmanteaux, conveying not only multiple voices but also the distinction in polarity, illocutionary force, tense, aspect and mood (TAM). The verb paradigm of Squliq Atayal is sketched in Table 3-3, wherein C stands for consonant and dots for stem. It can be instantiated with qaniq ‘eat’ in Table 3-4, wherein affixes are highlighted in italics and the stem qaniq as well as its variants are in boldface.

Table 3-3 Verb Paradigm of Squliq Atayal

Polarity Affirmative Negative

Illocutionary Force

Declarative Imperative Declarative Imperative TAM

Voice

Realis Irrealis

Imperfective Perfective Future Projective Atemporal

AV m-/-m-/Ø m-(i)n- p- m-/-m-…-ay Ø

PV -un -(i)n-/-un C-…-un -aw Ø -i

LV -an -(i)n-…-an C-…-an -ay -i

CV s- C- -anay -ani

Table 3-4 Paradigm of qaniq ‘eat’

qaniq ‘eat’

Polarity Affirmative Negative

Illocutionary Force

Declarative Imperative Declarative Imperative TAM

Voice

Realis Irrealis

Imperfective Perfective Future Projective Atemporal

AV maniq mnaniq pqaniq mniqay qaniq

PV niqun qnaniq nniqun niqaw qaniq niqi

LV niqan qniqan nniqan niqay niqi

CV sqaniq qqaniq nqanay nqani

theme.