Reverse Complex Predicates in Hindi

Shakthi Poornima
Department of Linguistics
SUNY University at Buffalo
poornima@buffalo.edu
September 22, 2008

Abstract
Hindi, like other South Asian languages, has a rich set of complex predicates
that are formed when nouns, verbs or adjectives combine with a light verb.
This paper focuses on verb-verb complex predicates and illustrates that the
order of verbs in the complex predicate construction can be reversed. I discuss the two types of complex predicate constructions and show that they
differ not only in terms of linear order but also in terms of which verb is
the constructions head. I argue that Hindi complex predicate constructions
support the claim that case assignment constraints are lexical rather than
phrasal; in fact, the same case assignment constraints that are operative for
other verbal constructions can model the facts for both types of constructions. In both cases, the constraints apply to the argument-structure of the
head. Working within Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar, I propose
that the light verb inherits its argument-structure from the main verb in the
standard, but not in the reverse complex predicate construction.

Contents
1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Light Verbs Semantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Syntactic Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10

3.1

Constituency Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10

3.2

Auxiliaries

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16

3.3

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22

Case Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

24

An HPSG Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

37

5.1

Case Assignment Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

37

5.2

Clause Union Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

44

Conclusion

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

50

Appendix: List of Light Verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

52

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

55

1. INTRODUCTION

Introduction

In a complex predicate construction, two or more verbs form a monoclausal

syntactic structure and share a single array of grammatical relations. Each
predicate composing the construction contributes part of the information
that is ordinarily associated with a head. In the generative literature, such
structures were first described for Romance languages (Aissen and Perlmutter (1976) for Spanish, Emonds (1978) for French, Rizzi (1978) for Italian). Additionally, complex predicates have been noted to occur extensively
in South Asian languages (Masica, 1991; Abbi and Gopalakrishnan, 1991;
Hook, 2001; Butt, 2005).
For Hindi, an extensive descriptive study of compound verbs was first
undertaken by Hook (1974). Hindi aspectual complex predicates are formed
when a verb bearing the main predication (i.e., the main verb) combines
with a semantically-bleached light verb which modifies the main verbs
semantics by expressing subtle semantic notions. Light verbs are homophonous with form-identical full lexical verbs and the term light is used to
suggest that their meaning is more abstract in comparison to their full counterpart (Hook, 1977). A list of the twelve most common Hindi light verbs
and their semantics is presented in Section 2. The following examples illustrate a single predicate and a complex predicate respectively.1
1

The gloss used for a light verb refers to its meaning as a full verb. Abbreviations
are as follows: MV = main verb, LV = light verb, F = feminine, M = masculine; Erg
= ergative, Nom = nominative, Gen = genitive, Dat = dative, Acc = accusative, Inst =
instrumental, Loc = locative; Inf = infinitive; Perfv = perfective, Impfv = imperfective;
Pres = present; Pron = pronoun; Sg = singular, Pl = plural. The marker - indicates
a morpheme boundary, = separates a clitic from a lexical item. Following : is listed
whether a verb is main or light. Most examples in this paper were created by the author
and cross-verified by 3 native speakers from northern India.

1. INTRODUCTION

Single Predicate Construction

(1)

Shyam
Leela=se
lad-aa
Shyam.M Leela.F=Inst fight-Perfv.M.Sg
Shyam fought with Leela.
Complex Predicate Construction

(2)

Shyam
Leela=se
lad
baith-aa
Shyam.M Leela.F=Inst fight:MV sit-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
Shyam fought with Leela unwillingly.
In both examples, the subject Shyam has a fight with Leela and their

translation is near-equivalent. However, the light verb in the complex predicate in (2) creates the interpretation that the fight between the two people
was not deliberate on the part of the subject and was an unwilling act.
Although the semantics of (2) suggests that light verbs function like an
adverbial modifier, the light verb assigns case to the subject in one type
of complex predicate construction, thereby indicating its status as a verb
(see Section 4 for details). A list of Hindi aspectual light verbs and their
meanings is listed in Section 2.
A typical analysis for complex predicates is to consider the light verb
a verb that subcategorizes for the main verb (or the VP that is headed by
the main verb) as shown, for instance, for auxiliaries in French (Abeille and
Godard, 2002) or Spanish (Abeille and Godard, 2007). (An early analysis
of this kind was provided by Grimshaw and Mester (1988) for Japanese
complex predicates with the verb suru (do).) In a head-final language such
as Hindi, a standard complex predicate involves a finite light verb followed a

1. INTRODUCTION

non-finite main verb.2 This was illustrated in (2), and similarly in (3) where
the finite light verb de (give) follows the non-finite main verb maar (hit).
But, surprisingly, the order of the main and light verbs can be reversed.
This is shown in (4); the light verb is now non-finite and precedes the main
verb, which is finite.
Standard Complex Predicate Construction
(3)

Shyam=ne mujhe tamaachaa maar

di-yaa
Shyam=Erg me
slap.M.Sg hit:MV give-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
Shyam slapped me (hit me with a slap).
Reverse Complex Predicate Construction

(4)

Shyam=ne mujhe tamaachaa de

maar-aa
Shyam=Erg me
slap.M.Sg give:LV hit-Perfv.M.Sg:MV
Shyam slapped me (hit me with a slap).
The inflection is carried by the light verb in the standard construction

and by the main verb in the reverse construction. The semantics of examples (3) and (4) differ only in that the latter carries an indication of
suddenness. The two constructions differ in more than just linear ordering.
The two constructions also differ in terms of which verb is the constructions
head. The prime evidence for this claim is that in the two constructions,
different verbs govern whether the subject is marked ergative or not. Case
assignment is governed by the second verb of the complex predicate, i.e.
2

Finite verbs in Hindi are inflected for number and gender, with a -aa/-ii ending (if the
verb root ends in a vowel, a glide precedes e.g. -yaa). The exception is the verb ho (be),
which also inflects for number. Nonfinite verbs in Hindi can either be a base infinitive,
which consists only of the stem, or the so called to-infinitive, consisting of the stem +
suffix -naa/nii for masculine and feminine gender respectively.

1. INTRODUCTION

by the light verb in the standard construction and the main verb in the
reverse construction. In other words, case assignment is positional and is
not always determined by the light verb. I suggest that the same case assignment constraints that are operative for other verbal constructions can
model the case assignment in both standard and reverse constructions, if one
assumes that the constraints apply to the argument-structure of the head.
Hindi complex predicate constructions provide evidence for the claim that
case assignment constraints are lexical rather than phrasal. Working within
Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar, I show that the light verb inherits
its argument-structure from the main verb in the standard but not in the
reverse construction.

2. LIGHT VERBS SEMANTICS

Light Verbs Semantics

This section describes the semantics of light verbs and the kind of the main
verbs that they select. Light verbs that function as aspectual markers and
express subtle semantic notions form aspectual complex predicates (Butt,
1994).Native speakers will insist that the action seems incomplete or unsituated when only a [single] verb is used (Butt, 1994, p84, original emphasis).
As an aspectual complex predicate, the standard construction can express
either perfective or imperfective aspect, whereas the reverse construction
can only express perfective aspect. Other subtle semantic notions such as
suddenness, benefaction, regret, violence, are also expressed.3 A list of Hindi
aspectual light verbs and their semantics is shown in Table 2.
In addition to the semantics listed in Table 2, the light verb in the
reverse construction also adds the meaning of extreme suddenness or nonvolitionality of the action. The following examples contrast the standard
and reverse constructions with respect to suddenness.
(5)

a. us=ne
jhatke=se
lagaam
khiich
Pron.3.Sg=Erg forceful=Inst rein.F.Sg pull:MV
di-i
give-Perfv.F.Sg:LV
He pulled the reins forcefully.

Butt (1994) also shows that aspectual complex predicates contribute information in
terms of inception and completion; I have not examined this claim in this paper.

2. LIGHT VERBS SEMANTICS

Light verbsa
baith (sit)
dal (put)
de (give)
le (take)
maar (hit)
nikaal (remove)
aa (come)
jaa (go)
pad (fall)
nikal (leave)
uth (rise)

Semanticsb
Transitive verbs
regret
thoroughness, violence
benefaction (self)
benfaction (others), contempt
suddenness, violence
contempt, violence
Intransitive verbs
completion
completion
suddenness
suddenness
regret, suddenness

Reversec

N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y

Details on how the list was created can be found in Appendix A.

Abbi and Gopalakrishnan (1991); Hook (1974)
c
N indicates that there were no examples either in the literature or in the EMILLE
corpus, and the native speakers could not construct a grammatical sentence that involved
a reverse construction. EMILLE corpus: www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/corplang/emille/ Available
from ELRA. The corpus totals approximately 12,390,000 words and consists of articles
from news web sites, 20th century Hindi literature, and other miscellaneous documents.
b

Table 1: Aspectual Light Verbs

b. us=ne
aahiste=se lagaam
khiich
Pron.3.Sg=Erg slow=Inst rein.F.Sg pull:MV
di-i
give-Perfv.F.Sg:LV
He pulled the reins slowly.
(6)

jhatke=se
lagaam
de
a. us=ne
Pron.3.Sg=Erg forceful=Inst rein.F.Sg give:LV
khiich-ii
pull-Perfv.F.Sg:MV
He pulled the reins forcefully.

2. LIGHT VERBS SEMANTICS

b. *us=ne
aahiste=se lagaam
de
Pron.3.Sg=Erg slow=Inst rein.F.Sg give:LV
khiich-ii
pull-Perfv.F.Sg:MV
*He pulled the reins slowly.
While the standard construction is compatible with both forcefully (5a)
and slowly (5b), the reverse construction is compatible only with the adverb
forcefully (6a). It is not possible to use a reverse construction to say that the
reins were pulled slowly. Thus, the reverse construction has certain semantic
restrictions that are not present in the standard construction.
Similar restrictions are seen with respect to the types of verbs that can
appear in the reverse construction. As the table suggests, fewer light verbs
can appear in the reverse construction than in the standard construction.
And with respect to main verbs, Hook (1974) notes that typically verbs
of running, throwing, hitting and breaking are all able to form a reverse
complex predicate and verbs that do not fall into these categories do not
form a reverse construction. For instance, it is possible to say that the glass
was broken by using both standard (7a) and reverse (7b) complex predicate
constructions, but to say that the glass was made, we can only use a standard
(8a) but not a reverse construction (8b).
(7)

a. us=ne
gilaas
toR
di-yaa
Pron.3.Sg=Erg glass.M.Sg break:MV give-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
He broke the glass.
b. us=ne
gilaas
de
tor-aa
Pron.3.Sg=Erg glass.M.Sg give:LV break-Perfv.M.Sg:MV
He broke the glass.

2. LIGHT VERBS SEMANTICS

(8)

a. us=ne
gilaas
banaa
di-yaa
Pron.3.Sg=Erg glass.M.Sg make:MV give-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
He made the glass.
b. *us=ne
gilaas
de
banaa-yaa
Pron.3.Sg=Erg glass.M.Sg give:LV make-Perfv.M.Sg:MV
He made the glass.
Although a complete analysis of the semantics of the reverse construc-

tion is beyond the scope of this paper, the above data indicates that the
semantics of the light verb in the reverse construction differs from the standard construction and expresses something akin to enhanced suddenness.
The reverse construction is also more restricted with respect to the range of
main verbs and light verbs that can appear in it. I will henceforth focus on
the syntactic structure of the standard and reverse construction.

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

Syntactic Structure of the Complex Predicate

In this section, I examine the syntactic structure of the complex predicates

in the standard and reverse construction and show that the two verbs in
both constructions form a single constituent. They do differ, however, in
the placement of the focus particle, which can appear between the two verbs
in the standard construction but not in the reverse construction. The reverse construction is also more restricted in comparison to the standard
construction with respect to combination with auxiliaries. In spite of the
more restricted nature of the reverse construction, the two constructions
involve the same phrase-structure configuration.

3.1

Constituency Tests

In this section, I show that Hindi complex predicate constructions are monoclausal and the two verbs in it form a single constituent, by using tests
such as movement, coordination, modification, and the insertion of clitics.
3.1.1

Movement

Although Hindi has a relatively free word order, the main verb and the light
verb in an aspectual complex predicate move together; this is demonstrated
for the reverse construction in (9).

10

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

(9)

a. [Leela=ne]
[Shyam=ko]
[citthii]
[maar
[Leela.F=Erg] [Shyam.M=Dat] [letter.F.Sg] [hit:LV
likh-ii]
write-Perfv.F.Sg:MV]
Leela wrote a letter to Shyam.
b. [Shyam=ko] [Leela=ne] [citthii] [maar likhii]
c. [Leela=ne] [maar likhii] [citthii] [Shyam=ko]
d. [maar likhii] [Leela=ne] [Shyam=ko] [citthii]
e. [maar likhii] [citthii] [Shyam=ko] [Leela=ne]
f. [citthii] [maar likhii] [Leela=ne] [Shyam=ko]
g. [citthii] [maar likhii] [Shyam=ko] [Leela=ne]
h. *[citthii] [likhii] [Shyam=ko] [Leela=ne] [maar]
i. *[citthii] [likhii] [Shyam=ko] [maar] [Leela=ne]
The scrambling possibilities in (9a)-(9g) demonstrate that the light verb

and the main verb can move as a unit. However, the light verb maar (hit)
that precedes the main verb likh (write) cannot be moved away, as shown in
(9h) and (9i). Similar evidence can be presented for the standard construction as well. This indicates that the main verb and the light verb in a Hindi
complex predicate construction move together as a unit.
3.1.2

Coordination

The main verb and the light verb in a standard or reverse complex predicate
construction cannot be a coordinated structure in either the standard or
reverse construction, as shown in (10a) and (10b) respectively.

11

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

(10)

a. *Leela=ne
Shyam=ko
citthii
likh
aur
Leela.F=Erg Shyam.M=Dat letter.F.Sg write:MV and
de
maar-ii
give:MV hit-Perfv.F.Sg:LV
*Leela wrote and gave a letter to Mohan.
b. *Leela=ne
Shyam=ko
citthii
maar
Leela.F=Erg Shyam.M=Dat letter.F.Sg hit:LV
likh-ii
aur di-i
write.Perfv-F.Sg:MV and give.Perfv.F.Sg:MV
*Leela wrote and gave a letter to Mohan.

Again, this indicates that the main verb and the light verb form a unit.
3.1.3

Modification

Adverbial modifiers can only take scope over the elements to their left.
For instance, kal (yesterday/tomorrow) can appear in various positions to
the left of the reverse complex predicate, as indicated in (11a) and (11b).
However, it cannot appear between the main verb and the light verb (11c),
since it cannot modify only the light verb.
(11)

a. Leela=ne
kal
saaraa din
gapp
o
mein
Leela.F=Erg yesterday all
day.M chats.M.Pl in
[maar bitaay-aa]
hit:LV spend-Perfv.M.Sg:MV
Leela spent all day yesterday chatting.
b. Leela=ne saaraa din gapp
o mein kal [maar bitaay-aa]
c. *Leela=ne saaraa din gapp
o mein [maar kal bitaay-aa]

The above examples show that an adverbial modifier cannot appear

within the reverse complex predicate construction itself because syntactically it cannot intrude between the two verbs; Butt (1994)[p. 99] illustrates
12

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

the same for the standard construction.This shows that there are restrictions
on the modification of the complex predicate construction.
3.1.4

Insertion of discourse clitics

The previous three tests (movement, coordination, and modification) suggest a strong degree of cohesion or bondedness between the light verb and
the main verb. In spite of this fact, Butt (1994) argues that the (standard)
complex predicate construction cannot be analyzed as a single morphological unit because discourse clitics such as hii (exclusive contrastive focus
only) and bhii (inclusive contrastive focus also) can be inserted between
the verbs in a standard complex predicate construction (pp. 91-93). I show
that while these discourse clitics can be used as evidence for the standard
construction not being a morphological unit, they cannot be used as a test
for the reverse construction on distributional grounds.
Hindi discourse markers are syntactic clitics and not morphological affixes, and they can take scope only over the constituents to their left (Sharma,
1999). The arrow below represents the scope of the focus clitic.
(12)

a. [S] [O bhii] [V1 (V2 )]

b. [S] [O] [ [V1 bhii] (V2 )]

In (12a), the clitic bhii can only take scope on the object but not the
verbs; in (12b), the scope can only be on the first verb. This is illustrated
in the single predicate construction below. The can appear anywhere after
the unmarked argument (13a) or to the immediate right of the verb that it
is modifying (13b).
13

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

(13)

a. us=ne
citthii
bhii bhej-ii
Pron.3.Sg=Erg letter.F.Sg also send-Perfv.F.Sg:MV
He sent a letter also (along with other things).
b. us=ne
citthii
bhej-ii
bhii par
Pron.3.Sg=Erg letter.F.Sg send-Perfv.F.Sg:MV also but
mujhe parvaah nahii
I
care
NEG
He sent a letter (in addition to doing other things) but I dont
care (about the letter).

Note that the semantics of (13a) and (13b) differ. A similar distinction
is seen with a standard complex predicate construction. In the following
examples, the focus is on the unmarked object citthii (letter) or the main
verb bhej (send) depending on the placement of bhii. Since bhii can appear
between the two verbs in (14b), it suggests that the two verbs in the standard
complex predicate construction are separate lexical items that combine in
the syntax. As focus particles do not appear at the end of the clause, when
the focus particle appears after the light verb in the standard construction,
example (14c) is rendered ungrammatical. This indicates that only when
bhii appears between the two verbs in the standard construction can it
modify the main verb.
(14)

a. us=ne
citthii
bhii bhej
Pron.3.Sg=Erg letter.F.Sg also send:MV
di-yaa
give-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
He sent a letter also (along with other things).
b. us=ne
citthii
bhej
bhii
Pron.3.Sg=Erg letter.F.Sg send:MV also
di-yaa
give-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
14

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

He sent a letter (in addition to doing other things).

c. *us=ne citthii bhej di-yaa bhii
The restriction on focus particles in the reverse complex predicate is different. Here, bhii can only precede the complex predicate (15a) but cannot
be inserted between the two verbs (15b) or, as indicated previously, appear
at the end of the clause.
(15)

a. us=ne
citthii
bhii de
Pron.3.Sg=Erg letter.F.Sg also give:LV
bhej-aa
send-Perfv.M.Sg:MV
He also sent off a letter (in addition to doing other things).
b. *us=ne citthii de bhii bhej-aa

The semantics of (14a) and (15a) are essentially the same. As shown in
(14a), the clitic bhii modifies the main verb only when it appears between
the two verbs in the standard construction. Since the first predicate in
the reverse construction is a light verb, it cannot be modified. As shown
in (14c), the focus clitic can also not appear at the end of the complex
predicate construction. Therefore, the fact that a discourse clitic cannot
appear between the two verbs in the reverse construction is neither evidence
for nor against its syntactic structure being different from the standard
construction. In what follows, I show that the only syntactic difference
between the two constructions concerns their combination with auxiliaries.

15

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

3.2

Auxiliaries

Hindi auxiliaries place no restrictions on the kind of verb they combine

with. They concatenate with either the verb root or its different inflected
forms to yield distinctions of tense, aspect, mood, and voice. In spite of
the relatively free word order in Hindi, the language has a tendency to have
verbal constructions in sentence-final positions in the presence of auxiliaries.
Auxiliaries can only appear after both the main verb and the light verb.
(16)
(17) Main Verb (Light Verb) (Passive) (Progressive) (Be Auxiliary)
Butt and Lahiri (2002)[pp. 11-12] show that auxiliaries and light verbs
show distinct syntactic behaviors with regard to case marking, word order, reduplication, and topicalization. Further, Hindi auxiliaries are aspect
markers that also distinguish themselves from light verbs by not making any
other semantic contributions (like volitionality, etc.) to the argument structure. This section looks at the combinatorial possibilities of the standard
and reverse complex predicate construction and shows the the reverse construction is restricted with respect to the auxiliaries that can appear with
it.
3.2.1

Tense Auxiliary

Hindi auxiliaries can co-occur but the tense auxiliary ho (be) must appear
after all other verbs. The auxiliary ho also inflects for gender and number
in the past (th-aa and th-ii) and number and person in the present (hai)
16

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

and future (ho-g-aa and ho-g-ii).4 An auxiliary cannot appear within (18b)
or before (18c) the complex predicate. Thus, we have the order [MV LV
(Auxbe )] as shown in (18a).
(18)

a. vo
aa
ga-yii
th-ii
Pron.3.sg come:MV go-Perfv.F.Sg:LV be.Past-F.3.Sg
She came.
b. *vo
aa
th-ii
ga-yii
Pron.3.sg come:MV be.Past-F.3.Sg go-Perfv.F.Sg:LV
*She came.
c. *vo
th-ii
aa
ga-yii
Pron.3.sg be.Past-F.3.Sg come:MV go-Perfv.F.Sg:LV
*She came.

The above examples show that the tense auxiliary must always appear
after the MV-(LV) combination. I show below that this holds true for the
reverse complex predicate construction as well. As shown below, it is only
obligatory in the presence of the progressive auxiliary.
3.2.2

Progressive Auxiliary

The verb rah (stay), which can function as a main verb, also serves as the
progressive. An example of the progressive auxiliary is shown in (19)5 .
(19) Shyam
ghar
beech
rah-aa
hai
Shyam.Sg house.M.Sg sell:MV stay-Imperfv.M.Sg be.Pres.3.Sg
Shyam is selling a house.
4
Butt and Lahiri (2002) explain that the mixed paradigm of the tense auxiliary is due
to the fact that th- is derived from a former past participle and the ho form is based on
an old Sanskrit verbal inflectional form.
5
Modal verbs sak (able), caah (want) and paa (able) can also appear in the same
position as the auxiliary rah (stay).

17

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

In the above example, the main verb beech (sell) combines with the progressive auxiliary. The tense auxiliary is obligatory with the progressive.
However, the combination of the progressive auxiliary with a standard complex predicate construction has been claimed to be pragmatically odd in
most contexts (Butt, 1994, p. 97). While this is true, I show below that a
combination of the progressive with the passive to form a passive progressive
is frequent with the standard construction.
3.2.3

Passive Auxiliary

In Hindi, a sentence is passivized by adding the verb jaa, which is formidentical to the light verb jaa (go). The passive auxiliary can follow a single
predicate as the following example indicates.
(20) Shyam=ka
ghar
beech-aa ga-yaa
Shyam.M=Gen house.M.Sg sell-M.Sg go-Perfv.M.Sg
(th-aa)
(be.Past-Masc.3.Sg)
Shyams house has been sold.
In the above single predicate construction, the main verb beech (sell) is
inflected for person and gender -aa. In a complex predicate construction as
in (21), the main verb beech (sell) is uninflected and it is the light verb de
(give) and the passive auxiliary jaa that carry the inflection.
(21) Shyam=ka
ghar
beech
di-yaa
Shyam.M=Gen house.M.Sg sell:MV give-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
gay-aa
(th-aa)
go-Perfv.M.Sg (be.Past-Masc.3.Sg)
Shyams house has been sold off.
18

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

As mentioned above, the progressive is pragmatically odd with complex

predicate constructions but in contrast, the passive progressive occurs frequently in the EMILLE corpus. In example (22), the inflected progressive
rah (stay) follows the auxiliary jaa to contribute a progressive reading.
(22) Shyam=ka
ghar
beech
di-yaa
jaa
Shyam.M=Gen house.M.Sg sell:MV give-M.Sg:LV go
rah-aa
hai
stay-Imperfv.M.Sg be.Pres.3.Sg
Shyams house is being sold off.
Additionally, in a passive progressive construction, the passive auxiliary
must be non-finite. As shown below, it cannot be inflected.
ghar
beech
di-yaa
ga-yaa
(23) *Shyam=ka
Shyam.M=Gen house.M.Sg sell:MV give-M.Sg:LV go-M.Sg
rah-aa
hai
stay-Imperfv.M.Sg be.Pres.3.Sg
*Shyams house is being sold off.
The fact that jaa (go) cannot be finite in (23) is a test for whether jaa
in this case is a light verb or an auxiliary since, as noted in Section 1, the
light verb in a standard construction must be finite. No other verb (except
perhaps aa (come)) can occur in the position of jaa as a non-finite verb
preceding the progressive rah (stay). This indicates that jaa in this position
can only be a passive and not a light verb. If the non-finite jaa in (22)
were to be replaced by a light verb such as de (give), the sentence would be
ungrammatical.

19

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

(24) *Shyam=ka
ghar
beech
de
rah-aa
Shyam.M=gen house.Sg sell:MV give stay-Imperfv.M.Sg
hai
be.Pres.3.Sg
*Intended reading: Shyams house is being sold off.
While the passive auxiliary jaa can be non-finite following the main verb
in (22), the light verb de in (24) cannot be.
Auxiliaries also adhere to a specific order; they must always follow the
complex predicate construction. The passive auxiliary precedes the progressive auxiliary and the tense auxiliary is obligatory with the progressive.
The tense auxiliary must be last. Any attempt to reorder the auxiliaries
produces an ill-formed result; this is shown in (25).
(25)

a. Shyam=ka
ghar
beech
di-yaa
jaa
Shyam.M=Gen house.M.Sg sell:MV give-M.Sg:LV go
rah-aa
hai
stay-Imperfv.M.Sg be.Pres.3.Sg
Shyams house is being sold off.
b. *Shyam=ko aspataal jaa pahuunchaa diy-aa rah-aa hai
c. *Shyam=ko aspataal rah-aa pahuunchaa diy-aa jaa hai
d. *Shyam=ko aspataal hai pahuunchaa diy-aa jaa rah-aa
e. *Shyam=ko aspataal jaa rah-aa pahuunchaa diy-aa hai
f. *Shyam=ko aspataal jaa rah-aa hai pahuunchaa diy-aa

To summarize, the standard construction can appear with the full range
of Hindi auxiliaries and they must occur in a strict order. In contrast,
the reverse construction is more restricted. In a reverse complex predicate
20

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

construction, the tense auxiliary ho (be) can optionally follow the two verbs,
just like in the standard construction. I illustrate this below in (26).
(26)

a. Shyam=ne
kitaab
jor=se
de
Shyam.M=Erg book.M.Sg force=Inst give:LV
phekh-aa
th-aa
throw-Perfv.M.Sg:MV be.Past-M.3.Sg
Shyam threw the book forcefully.
b. *Shyam=ne kitaab jor=se th-aa de phekh-aa
c. *Shyam=ne kitaab jor=se de th-aa phekh-aa

While the tense auxiliary can follow the reverse construction (26a), it
can neither precede (26b) nor appear within the reverse construction. The
above examples show, once again, that the auxiliary must appear last. With
respect to other auxiliaries, neither the progressive nor the passive auxiliary
can appear in a reverse construction. This is shown in (27a) and (27b)
respectively.
(27)

a. *Shyam
kitaab
jor=se
de
phekh
Shyam.M book.M.Sg force=Inst give:LV throw:MV
rah-aa
th-aa
stay-Imperfv.M.Sg be.Past-M.3.Sg
*Shyam threw the book forcefully.
b. *Kitaab
jor=se
de
phekh-aa ga-yaa
book.M.Sg force=Inst give:LV throw:MV go-M.Sg
th-aa
be.Past-M.3.Sg
*The book was thrown forcefully.

In (27a), the progressive rah (stay) cannot appear with the reverse construction, and in (27b), the passive jaa cannot appear with the reverse
21

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

construction. One possible explanation as to why the progressive cannot

appear with a reverse complex predicate is that the reverse construction can
only be perfective and therefore cannot occur with the progressive or other
verbs in its position. Additionally, a reverse complex construction cannot
include the passive auxiliary jaa (go) as shown in (27b). I presently have
no explanation for this restriction. Nonetheless, the above data shows that
unlike the standard construction, the reverse construction appears with a
restricted set of auxiliaries.

3.3

Summary

The constituency tests show that the two verbs in the standard and the
reverse construction form a single constitent. The two differ in that the
reverse construction does not allow the insertion of any element between
the two verbs. However, as discussed above, there is a possible semantic
explanation for this fact and therefore it is insufficient to demonstrate that
the two constructions are phrase-structurally different. Despite being more
restricted internally (which main verbs and light verbs can combine) and
externally (which auxiliaries can take as argument the reverse construction),
the standard and reverse constructions involve the same phrase-structure
configuration. The main verb and the light verb in the standard and reverse
constructions have the following structure:6

Butt (1994) and Mohanan (1994) suggest that Hindi has no VP (but a V and a flat
structure i.e., NPs and V s are direct daughters of S; I do not dispute this analysis.

22

3. SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

(28)
a.

V
MV

b.
LV

V
LV

MV

As shown above, the standard construction in (28a) and the reverse

construction in (28b) have the same constituent structure. In the following
section, I present facts on case assignment to demonstrate that the two
constructions differ functionally.

23

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

Case Assignment

The previous section has shown that the standard and the reverse complex
predicate constructions involve the same phrase structure configuration. I
now present data from case assignment to show that the two constructions
differ functionally.7 Case assignment on the subject is governed by the
light verb in the standard construction and by the main verb in the reverse
construction. I will also show that the same case assignment constraints
that are operative for other verbal constructions can model case assignment
facts for the standard and the reverse construction as well; case is assigned
by the last verb of the construction irrespective of its lightness.
Within the paradigm of Ergative-Absolutive and Nominative-Accusative
systems, Hindi is considered a split-ergative system; the ergative case is aspectually driven (Dixon, 1994).8 In addition to aspect, current research has
also shown that grammatical relations in Hindi can be marked with a number of different cases depending on the desired semantic interpretation of
the clause (Butt and Lahiri, 2002; de Hoop and Narasimhan, 2008). An inventory of Hindi case clitics is provided in Table 4 (Kachru, 1980; Mohanan,
1994). I use the term clitic instead of suffix because Hindi case markers exhibit phrasal scope. When two nominals are co-ordinated, which is possible
7

The two constructions also differ functionally with respect to agreement. In a single
predicate construction in Hindi, the verb agrees with the highest unmarked argument.
In a complex predicate construction, the second verb agrees with the highest unmarked
argument: the light verb in the standard construction and the main verb in the reverse
construction cf. (Butt, 1994; Mohanan, 1994).
8
As the reader will see below, within the perfective, Hindi is split-intransitive, not
ergative. However, since the number of intransitive verbs that can take ergative case is
very small, and therefore I stick with the current categorization of Hindi as a split-ergative
language.

24

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

only when they are identically case marked, the scope of a case marking
may extend over both nominals as in [madraas aur haiderabad]=se from
Madras and Hyderabad (Mohanan, 1994, p. 60, brackets mine).
Case Clitic

ne
ko
se
kaa/kii/ke
me
par
tak

Function
Unmarked/Nominative
Ergative
Dative
Instrumental
Genitive
Locative
Locative (in, at)
Locative (toward)

Table 2: Hindi case clitics

In this paper, I focus on the alternation between the unmarked and the
ergative case on the subject.9 My analysis of the ergative case in Hindi
follows closely the analysis outlined in Butt and Lahiri (2002). Where my
own analysis diverges from theirs, I will call attention to it. In this section,
I will show that the assignment of these two cases to the subject can be
captured by the following rules:
Rule 1: By default, the subject is unmarked.
Rule 2: If the verb is transitive and perfective, then the subject is
assigned ergative (erg) case.
Rule 3: If the verb is intransitive and perfective, denotes a bodily/sound emission event, and the action is purposeful on the actors
9
The unmarked case in Hindi is phonologically null and has been labeled as Nominative by some scholars (Kachru, 1980; Mohanan, 1994; Butt, 1994; Butt and Lahiri, 2002;
de Hoop and Narasimhan, 2008). However, both proto-agent and proto-patient roles can
be unmarked for case and we therefore call it unmarked.

25

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

part, then the subject is assigned erg case.

Perfective
Imperfective

Subj Case
ERG

Example
29
30

Table 3: Hindi case assignment: Transitive in Finite Clauses

The object case assignment in Hindi is straightforward. By default, the
object is unmarked for case but when the direct object of a transitive or
ditransitive verb is definite, the dative case is assigned.10 The pattern for
subject case assignment in transitive verbs is illustrated in Table 3. As previously stated, the selection of ergative case in Hindi is aspectually-driven.
The ergative case is restricted to subjects of transitive verbs in the perfective aspect (marked by adding the -(y)aa/ii suffix to the stem), making it
finite.11 The ergative subject is shown in example (29). In contrast, when
the clause is imperfective i.e. either in the habitual (30a) or the future (30b),
the subject cannot be ergative and is unmarked.
(29) Shyam=ne ghar=ko
banaa-yaa
Shyam=Erg house=Dat make-Perfv.M.Sg
Shyam made the house.
(30)

a. Shyam ghar=ko
banaa-taa
hai
Shyam house=Dat make-Impfv be
Shyam makes the house.

10

Butt and Lahiri (2002) for why the clitic ko- is labeled dative instead of accusative.
In infinitive clauses, the subject is typically assigned dative case. Butt and Lahiri
(2002) present data from the Lahori dialect of Urdu where the subject of infinitive clauses
alternates between the ergative and dative case. As Butt admits, such an alternation is
generally not found in dialects of Urdu/Hindi. Further, native Hindi speakers that I polled
associate it this phenomenon with Punjabi rather than Hindi. I therefore do not account
for this alternation in this paper and assume the subject of infinitive clauses to be marked
only with the dative case.
11

26

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

b. Shyam ghar=ko
banaa-yeg-aa
Shyam house=Dat make-Fut-M.Sg
Shyam will make the house.
As the examples in (30) show, transitive verbs do not select for an ergative subject in the imperfective. This pattern for transitives is mirrored by
ditransitives as well. As the following examples show, the subject is assigned
ergative case in the perfective (31a) and is unmarked in the imperfective
(31b).
(31)

a. Shyam=ne
Lee=ko
kitaab di-yaa
hai
Shyam=Erg Lee=Dat book give-Perfv.M.Sg be
Shyam gave Lee a book.
b. Shyam Lee=ko
kitaab de-taa
hai
Shyam Lee=Dat book give-Impfv be
Shyam gives Lee a book.

As Kachru (1980)[p. 52] points out, transitive verbs in Hindi can be either volitional or non-volitional. Non-volitional verbs such as bhool (forget),
kho (lose), or jaan (know) also select for ergative subjects. Subject case
assignment in transitive verbs is thus purely aspect-driven. The pattern
in intransitive verbs, however, is motivated not only by aspect but also by
the semantics of the verb itself. The subject of most intransitive verbs are
unmarked for case, as shown by the verb fisal (slip).
(32)

a. Shyam
fisl-aa
Shyam.M slip-M.Sg
Shyam slipped.
b. *Shyam=ne
fisl-aa
Shyam.M=Erg slip-M.Sg
*Shyam slipped.
27

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

Even verbs like bhaag (run), uchal (jump) or baith (sit), where the agent
must employ volition, take only an unmarked and not an ergative subject
as suggested below.
(33)

a. Shyam
bhaag-aa
Shyam.M run-Perfv.M.Sg
Shyam ran.
b. *Shyam=ne bhaag-aa
Shyam=Erg run-Perfv.M.Sg
*Shyam ran.

In addition to the intransitive verbs that take only an unmarked subject,

there are also some (called intransitive unergative verbs by Butt and Lahiri
(2002)) that can select either an ergative or an unmarked subject. Such
verbs are primarily bodily/sound emission verbs such as khaas (cough),
chiikh (sneeze), bhauk (bark), ciik (scream), cillaa (yell), muut (urinate),
and thuuk (spit) (de Hoop and Narasimhan, 2008). One such alternation is
shown below.
(34)

a. Shyam khaans-aa
Shyam cough-Perfv.M.Sg
Shyam coughed (without meaning to).
b. Shyam=ne
khaans-aa
Shyam=Erg cough-Perfv.M.Sg
Shyam coughed (purposefully).

The default subject for the verb khaans (cough) is (34a), which simply
states that the agent coughed. However, if the action was intentional, as
if to obtain attention, the subject is marked as ergative. This intention
28

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

cannot be called volitionality, since, as shown in (33), verbs like bhaag (run)
that require a volitional agent selects only for an unmarked subject. In
fact, the ergative-unmarked alternation has previously been explained as
the conscious control that an agent is interpreted to have over the action
(Mohanan, 1994, p. 71). This notion has also been termed conscious choice
(Butt, 1994, p. 102). Both these analyses suggest that if the action was
performed under the control of the agent, the subject is assigned ergative
case and otherwise, it is unmarked. I argue that the subject case alternation
is based on an even narrower constraint and has to do with a kind of purpose
with which the agent performs the act. This can be illustrated with the
examples in (35).
(35)

a. Shyam
Ram=par thuuk
di-yaa
Shyam.M Ram=Loc spit:MV give-Perfv.M.Sg
Shyam spit on Ram.
b. Shyam=ne Ram=par thuuk di-yaa
Shyam.M Ram=Loc spit
give-Perfv.M.Sg
Shyam spit on Ram (on purpose e.g. with the intention of
insulting him).

In both (35a) and (35b), Shyam spits on Ram. However, the subject is
assigned ergative case in (35b) to indicate that the act of spitting was done
purposefully by Shyam in order to insult Ram. Moreover, the contexts in
which the bodily/sound-emission verbs select for an ergative subject tend
to be negative as shown by (36).
(36)

a. vo
chillaa-yaa
aag
Pron.3.Sg yell-Perfv.M.Sg fire
He yelled fire!
29

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

b. #us=ne
chillaa-yaa
aag
Pron.3.Sg=Erg yell-Perfv.M.Sg fire
#He yelled fire!
c. us=ne
jaanbooj=kar chillaa-yaa
aag
Pron.3.Sg=Erg purpose=do yell-Perfv.M.Sg fire
He yelled on purpose fire!
In (36), if the actor yelled that there is a fire, then the subject by default
must be unmarked (36a). Without any context, (36b) is infelicitous. If
the intention was to perform the act purposefully, for instance, if the actor
intended to frighten people on purpose or pretended that there was a fire
when there wasnt one, an adverbial modifier to that effect could be used
and then the subject would be assigned ergative case (36c).
The use of an adverbial modifier has no effect on transitive constructions.
In a transitive perfective example as the following (taken from the EMILLE
corpus), the transitive verb maar (kill, in this context) assigns ergative case
to the subject even though the act was unintentional.

(37) Sri Lanka sena=ne

bhool=se
machuar-
oo
=ko
Sri Lanka army=Erg mistake=Inst fisherman-Pl=Dat
maar-aa
kill-Perfv.M.Sg
The Sri Lankan army killed the fishermen by mistake.
The above example demonstrates that while the ergative case expresses
the on purpose notion of the agent in the intransitive examples, the on
purpose notion is not entailed by the ergative case.12 A summary of case
12
(de Hoop and Narasimhan, 2008, p. 69) make the same argument with respect to
ergativity and volitionality.

30

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

alternation on the subject of bodily emission verb depending on whether

or not the act was committed on purpose is shown in Table 4. If the act
performed by the agent was on purpose, then the subject is assigned ergative
case and otherwise it is unmarked.
Subj Case

erg

On purpose
yes

Example
34a, 36a
34b, 36c

Table 4: Hindi case assignment: Either (Bodily emission verbs)

In what follows, I show that the same case assignment rules apply for
complex predicate constructions as well.

Case Assignment in Complex Predicates

Previous research has shown that in the standard complex predicate construction, irrespective of the (in)transitivity of the main verb, the light verb
assigns case to the subject (Butt, 1994). In this section, I show that while
this pattern holds true for the standard construction, it does not apply to
the reverse construction. In the reverse construction, it is the main verb
that assigns case to the subject.
In the standard construction, if the light verb is transitive, then the
subject must be ergative, if the light verb is intransitive, then the subject
must be unmarked. The transitive verb gaa (sing) can only take an ergative subject in the perfective, similar to single predicate construction shown
previously in (29). However, in a complex predicate construction with main
verb gaa (sing), if the light verb is transitive e.g., daal (put), then the subject is assigned ergative case (38a) and if the light verb is intransitive e.g.,
31

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

pad (fall), then the subject is unmarked (38b).

(38)

a. Shyam=ne
gaanaa gaa
daal-aa
Shyam.M=Erg song
sing:MV put-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
Shyam sang a song (because he had to).
b. Shyam
gaanaa gaa
pad-aa
Shyam.M song
sing:MV fall-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
Shyam sang a song (without wanting to).

Any intransitive main verb can co-occur with an intransitive light verb,
but what has not been noticed before is that within intransitive main verbs,
only bodily/sound emission verbs can co-occur with a transitive light verb.
The intransitive verb daud (run) can co-occur with an intransitive light verb
such as pad (fall) and take an unmarked subject, as in (39a). However, it
cannot co-occur with a transitive light verb such as daal (put).
(39)

a. Shyam
daud
pad-aa
Shyam.M run:MV fall-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
Shyam ran.
b. *Shyam=ne
daud
daal-aa
Shyam.M=Erg run:MV put-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
*Shyam ran.

In fact, only bodily/sound emission verbs can select for transitive light
verbs as the following examples illustrate. The subject of bodily/sound
emission verbs can be either unmarked (40a) or ergative (40b) depending
on the (in)transitivity of the light verb.
(40)

a. Shyam
ciikh
pad-aa
Shyam.M scream:MV fall-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
Shyam screamed suddenly.
32

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

b. Shyam=ne
ciikh
daal-aa
Shyam.M=Erg scream:MV put-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
Shyam screamed violently.
The subject is unmarked if the light verb is intransitive (40a) and is
assigned ergative case if the light verb is transitive (40b), as posited by Rule
2 (if the verb is transitive and perfective, then the subject is assigned erg
case). Note that bodily/sound emission verbs do not appear in the reverse
construction.
As can be seen from examples (38-40), in the standard construction, case
assignment on the subject depends on the (in)transitivity of the light verb.
That is, case is assigned by Rule 2. As the following examples indicate,
irrespective of the transitivity of the main verb and whether or not the
action was performed on purpose, the subject is always assigned ergative
case if the light verb is transitive and perfective.
(41)

a. us=ne
galti=se
chiink di-yaa
Pron.3.Sg=Erg mistake=Inst sneeze give-Perfv.M.Sg
He sneezed by mistake.
b. us=ne
galti=se
paani pii
li-yaa
Pron.3.Sg=Erg mistake=Inst water drink give-Perfv.M.Sg
He drank water by mistake.

In (41a), the main verb chiink (sneeze) is intransitive and the light
verb de (give) is transitive. Even though the action was performed nonvolitionally, the subject bears the ergative case. Similarly, with a transitive
main verb and a transitive light verb in (41b), the subject remains ergative. Thus, similar to the single predicate construction in (37), the subject
33

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

in the complex predicate construction is assigned ergative case if the last

verb is transitive, irrespective of whether or not the action was performed
on purpose. The above examples solidify the argument that when a subject
is marked with ergative case, it does not entail volitionality.
I have thus shown that case assignment in the standard complex predicate construction is always governed by Rule 1 and Rule 2 and it is the
transitivity/intransitivity of the light verb rather than its volitionality that
determines the subjects case. In what follows, I show that case assignment
in the reverse construction is governed by the main verb.
Recall that in the reverse construction, the light verb precedes the main
verb. Even though the light verb de (give) is transitive, the subject in the
following example is unmarked for case. This is because the main verb bhaag
(run) is intransitive.
(42) Shyam
de
bhaag-aa
Shyam.M give:LV run-Perfv.M.Sg:MV
Shyam ran (rapidly).
On the other hand, when the transitive light verb de (give) forms a
reverse complex predicate with a transitive main verb like maar (hit), the
subject is ergative.
(43) Shyam=ne
Leela=par kiitaab de
maar-ii
Shyam.M=Erg Leela=Loc book
give:LV hit-Perfv.F.Sg:MV
Shyam threw the book on Leela (forcefully).
Similarly, even with an intransitive light verb jaa (go), the transitive
main verb beech (sell) selects for an ergative subject.
34

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

First verb

TransM V
gaa sing
IntransM V
chiik scream
TransLV
de give
IntransLV
jaa go

Second verb
(Case-assigning verb)
Standard
IntransLV pad fall
TransLV dal put
IntransLV pad fall
TransLV dal put
Reverse
IntransM V bhaag run
TransM V maar hit
IntransM V baith sit
TransM V beech sell

Subject case

Erg

Erg

Erg

Erg

Table 5: Subject case assignment in the standard and reverse complex predicate constructions

(44) Shyam=ne
apnaa makaan jaa
beech-aa
Shyam.M=Erg self
house
go:LV sell-Perfv.M.Sg:MV
Shyam sold his house.
As expected, when both verbs in the reverse construction are intransitive, the case on the subject is unmarked. This is shown in (45) with the
intransitive main verb bhaag (run) and the light verb nikal (leave).
(45) Shyam
kamre=se nikal
bhaag-aa
Shyam.M.Nom room=Inst leave:LV run-Perfv.M.Sg:MV
He ran from the room.
A summary of the case assignment pattern in the two constructions is
shown in Table 4. While the light verb assigns case to the subject in the
standard construction, it is the main verb that assigns case to the subject
in the reverse construction. Case assignment in complex predicate constructions is therefore positional i.e. assigned by the last verb of the complex
35

4. CASE ASSIGNMENT

predicate. Crucially, the same rules model the assignment of subject case in
single as well as (standard and reverse) complex predicate constructions. In
the next section, I show that to model that generalization, case assignment
in Hindi must be done at the lexical level rather than at the phrasal level.

36

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

An HPSG Analysis

The previous section has shown that the subjects case is assigned by the
last verb, which is the light verb in the standard construction and the main
verb in the reverse construction. In the standard construction (46a), the
light verb is the semantic head i.e., the aspectual functor, as well as the
syntactic head, since it assigns case to the subject. In contrast, in the
reverse construction (46b), while the light verb is the semantic head, the
main verb is the syntactic head of the construction.
(46)
a.

b.

V
MV

LV
semantic head

LV

MV

semantic head

syntactic head

syntactic head
In this section, I model Hindi case assignment rules in Head-driven
Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG) and suggest that case assignment in
Hindi must be done at the lexical level rather than at the phrasal level.
I also propose that the light verb inherits its argument-structure from the
main verb in the standard, but not in the reverse complex predicate construction.

5.1

Case Assignment Rules

HPSG is a constraint-based formalism with one level of representation,

where the different aspects of words or phrases, called signs (phonology,
37

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

morphology, syntax, sematics, information structure) are described in parallel. The signs are assigned types organized in a hierarchy. Each type is
associated with certain constraints and inherits the constraints of its supertype(s), with the possibility of multiple inheritance i.e., a type can inherit
from more than one supertype. Every feature or constraint specified as
appropriate for the supertypes is also appropriate for the subtypes.
The Hindi case values are organized as shown in Figure 1. Case in Hindi
is either marked or unmarked; if it is marked, it can be assigned one of the
various cases such as ergative (erg), dative (dat), etc.
case

unmarked

marked
erg

dat

gen

loc

inst

Figure 1: Hindi Case Ontology

I model the following three rules/constraints for ergative and unmarked
case on the subject, repeated below from Section 4, within HPSG.
Rule 1: By default, the subject is unmarked.
Rule 2: If the verb is transitive and perfective, then the subject is
assigned ergative (erg) case.
Rule 3: If the verb is intransitive and perfective, denotes a bodily/sound emission event, and the action is purposeful on the actors
part, then the subject is assigned erg case.13
13

Recall from Section 4 that this rule only applies to the single predicate constructions.

38

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

The feature case is specified as having a default value of unmarked

(Rule 1) as shown in (47).
(47) Rule 1


case

/unmarked

The symbol / indicates the default value of the feature; this value is
defeasible and can be overriden. In other words, if there is no case specification, then the NP is unmarked. The default in (47) is overriden by the other
two case assignment constraints. Importantly, case assignment constraints
must apply to a projections lexical head in Hindi. This is because any informational difference between the standard and the reverse complex predicate
constructions disappears at the constructions mother node, as illustrated
by the following two examples where the standard versus the reverse construction have the same main and light verb. The subject in (48a) bears
ergative case because the second verb (light) is transitive; in contrast, the
subject in (48b) is unmarked because the second verb (main) is intransitive.
(48)

a. Shyam=ne
bhaagIntrans di-yaaTrans
Shyam.M=Erg run:MV
give-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
Shyam ran.
b. Shyam
deTrans bhaag-aaIntrans
Shyam.M give:LV run-Perfv.M.Sg:MV
Shyam ran (rapidly).

The simplified trees for the standard and the reverse construction in (48)
is shown in (49a) and (49b) respectively.
(49)
39

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

S
1 NP

Shyam=ne

b.
1 NP

phrase D E

arg-st 1
bhaag

Shyam

phrase D E

arg-st 1
de

di-yaa

bhaag-aa

A comparison between the standard (49a) and the reverse (49b) constructions respective trees suggests that any informational difference between the
two constructions, such as argument-structure (and similarly, for other syntactic features which are not shown above for space reasons) will disappear
at the phrasal level. That is, the mother nodes syntactic properties are
identical, and it is therefore not clear how one would model differences in
the constraints on the subjects case in the two constructions. But the syntactic information associated with the right daughter will not be the same
if it is either the light verb or the main verb. By having case assignment
constraints apply at the lexical level, we can capitalize on these differences.
Rule 2 is modeled in (50). The left hand side of the rule preceding
the arrow lists the constraints that must be fulfilled in order for the right
hand side to be true of a structure. Note that these feature structures are
simplified and only show the attributes relevant to the present analysis.
(50) Rule 2

tv-lxm

head

"

asp

perf

#
arg-st

np case

+
erg , ...


The rule in (50) reads: If a verb is of type tv-lxm i.e., transitive, and its
aspectual value (asp) is perfective (perf), then the subject (the first NP
40

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

in the argument structure) is assigned ergative case. The aspectual value

of the verb is treated as a head feature since it affects verbal morphology.
The value of arg-st is a list of synsems, which are the syntactic arguments.
The following set of examples illustrate how the above rule is applied.
(51)

a. Shyam=ne ghar=ko
banaa-yaa
Shyam=Erg house=DAT make-Perfv.M.Sg
Shyam made the house.
b. Shyam ghar=ko
banaa-taa
hai
Shyam house=DAT make-Impfv be
Shyam makes the house.
c. *Shyam=ne ghar=ko
banaa-taa
hai
Shyam
house=Dat make-Impfv be
*Shyam makes the house.

The examples in (51) are single predicate constructions repeated from

(29-30). In (51a), the transitive verb banaa (make) is perfective and the
subject Shyam is assigned ergative case. When the transitive verb is imperfective, the subject is unmarked (51b) and cannot be assigned ergative case
(51c). Similarly, in complex predicate constructions, the (in)transitivity of
the second verb determines case assignment to the subject.
(52) Shyam=ne
ciikhIntrans daal-aaTrans
Shyam.M=Erg scream:MV put-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
Shyam screamed violently.
In (52), the intransitive main verb ciikh (scream) is non-finite and it
is the light verb daal (put) that is transitive and perfective. Therefore,
as predicted by (50), the subject is assigned ergative case. This example
41

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

also clarifies the motivation for selecting tv-lxm instead of simply using the
argument structure list to determine if the verb is transitive (2 arguments in
arg-st) or intransitive (only one argument in arg-st). Although we have a
transitive light verb (52), the arg-st list has only one NP because the main
verb is intransitive. Therefore, using the arg-st list on the left hand side
will not help determine the (in)transitivity of the light verb in the standard
complex predicate construction. I surmise that the types tv-lxm and iv-lxm
of light verbs are a synchronically arbitrary leftover of their main verb uses.
While the assignment of ergative case on transitive perfective verbs is
straightforward, recall that the assignment of ergative case to the subject
of an intransitive verb (Rule 3) is more constrained. According to Rule 3,
if the verb is intransitive and perfective, denotes a bodily/sound event, and
the action is purposeful on the actors part, then the subject is assigned
erg case. The relevant lexical constraint is shown in (53) using Minimal
Recursion Semantics (MRS) following Copestake et al. (2005).
The sem value encodes the central predication of a phrase as its key
and a list of relevant semantic relations rels. The general MRS approach
is neutral about what the inventory of relation features consists of, being
equally compatible with the use of generalized semantic (thematic) roles
such as actor and undergoer (e.g., Davis (2001)) or a semantically-bleached
nomenclature, such as arg1, arg2. In this paper, I use the latter.

42

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

(53) Rule 3
iv-lxm

head

sem

asp

key

rels

perf

i

bodily/sound-emission-rel

3event

arg

on-purpose-rel

event

arg1

arg2

"

2 arg-st

np 1 case

The intransitivity of the verb is shown by iv-lxm and its aspectual value
(asp) is indicated as perfective (perf). Tag identity of tags is used to
indicate that information is shared between parts of the structure; for example, that the agent argument for both the bodily/sound-event-rel and
on-purpose-rel is the same. Semantically, (53) introduces a key relation of
type bodily/sound-emission-rel (supplying an event variable

2)

with only

one additioanl argument. This argument is identified with the index of the
subject NP

1.

The semantic contribution of purposefulness is integrated in

the rels list of the semantics sem as an additional on-purpose-rel where

the two arguments are the subject

and the event

2 .14

The application of

(53) can be shown by comparing the following examples.

14

Although technically what is on purpose here is the action and not the event, I do not
discuss this issue here.

43

erg

#
i

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

(54)

a. Shyam khaans-aa
Shyam cough-Perfv.M.Sg
Shyam coughed.
b. Shyam=ne khaans-aa
Shyam=Erg cough-Perfv.M.Sg
Shyam coughed purposefully.

In both examples, we have an intransitive bodily emission verb. However,

when there is no purposefulness to the action, then by default (Rule 1),
the subject is unmarked for case (54a). When the action is committed on
purpose, as in (54b), the subject is assigned erg case by Rule 3.
I have thus implemented the relevant lexical case assignment constraints
in HPSG. As discussed previously, the functional difference between the
standard and the reverse construction impacts which verb is the head. In the
following section, I propose an analysis for both constructions that involves
argument composition in the standard but not the reverse construction.

5.2

Clause Union Analysis

The two verbs in the standard and the reverse complex predicate constructions form a clause-union (Aissen and Perlmutter, 1976, 1983), i.e., the two
verbs do not function as heads of independent clauses but form a complex
predicate of a single clause. Within HPSG, such constructions have been
analyzed as involving an operation of argument composition wherein the
light verb is considered an operator that subcategorizes for the main verb
and includes in its argument structure what its complement verb subcategorizes for. Such analysis has been undertaken for various Romance complex

44

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

predicates (Abeille and Godard, 2002, 2007; Monachesi, 1993). An argument composition analysis is appropriate for the standard construction; as
both the syntactic and the semantic head of the standard construction, the
light verb in the standard construction subcategorizes for the main verb and
inherits its argument structure. This is shown in (55) with an abbreviated
phrase structure tree.
(55) Standard Construction (Argument composition)


head

LVhead

MVcomp
"

arg-st

...

#

head

arg-st

 +

In (55), the light verb is the head of the construction as indicated by the
matched tag

at the lexical and phrasal level.15 The argument structure

of the light verb includes the main verb ( 2 ), indicating that the light verb
subcategorizes for it. The entire argument structure of the main verb i.e.,
the subject and its complements ( 3 ) is inherited by the light verb. This
is illustrated using (56), (repeated from (52)) whose simplified structure is
shown in (57).
(56) Shyam=ne
ciikh
daal-aa
Shyam.M=Erg scream:MV put-Perfv.M.Sg:LV
Shyam screamed violently.
15
The labels MV (main verb) and LV (light verb) are purely mnemonic and provided
to ease the readers understanding.

45

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

(57)

phrase
head
spr
comps

phrase
spr

3
comps
head

hi
hi

case

Shyam=ne

hi
hi

phrase
head
1 
spr
3
comps hi

erg

word


3
spr

2
comps hi

arg-st 4 3
ciikh

word


1 verb
head
spr

hi

comps hi


2 4
arg-st
daal-aa

The tree representation in (57) only outlines the syntactic and the argument structure component of example (56).16 As shown in (50), ergative
case assignment on the subject in (57) is constrained by Rule 2. The subject ( 3 ) of the intransitive main verb ciikh (scream) ( 2 ) is placed on the
specifier list as well as the argument structure list of the main verb. The
light verb daal (put) subcategorizes for the main verb as indicated by

in

its arg-st. The argument structure ( 4 ) of the main verb, consisting in this
case of only the subject, is also inherited by the light verb. Therefore, the
arg-st list of the light verb daal (fall) is a concatenation of
the main verb) and

(arg-st of

(main verb). Since the verb daal is transitive, the

lexical constraint in (50) applies.

16

The phrasal level of the concatenation of the two verbs is not saturated (i.e., the spec
list is non-empty). As indicated previously, NPs are considered direct daughters of the S
in Hindi.

46

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

A typical argument composition analysis in line with complex predicates

in other languages such as Romance can account for the standard complex
predicate construction in Hindi. In the standard construction, the aspectual
operator (light verb) can combine with its argument (main verb) through an
a head-complement structure in HPSG. However, in the reverse construction, the main verb (which assigns case) is the syntactic head and the light
verb is the semantic head; the reverse construction thus shows a dissociation
between lightness and headedness. Additionally, the standard construction
shows that the argument selection in Hindi takes place from right to left
i.e., the light verb is expected to follow the main verb, but the reverse construction violates this expectation. We therefore need another mechanism
to capture both these facts.
I analyze the light verb in the reverse construction as modifiers that take
what they modify as arguments. Modifiers in Hindi typically precede the
expressions that they modify. For instance, adjectives precede nouns and
adverbs precede verbs (Kachru, 1980). The modifier status of the light verb
in the reverse construction can be modeled using the mod feature in HPSG,
as outlined in (58).
(58) Reverse Construction (No argument composition)


head

LVmod

"

head mod

asp

MVhead

#
perf

47

head

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

Crucially, the non-null value of the mod feature indicates that the light
verb cannot be the head of the construction. The light verb in the reverse
construction modifies the main verb but does not inherit its argument structure. Thus, unlike the standard construction, there is no argument composition in the reverse construction. The light verb selects for the main verb
2

which is always marked perf (perfective) for its aspectual (asp) value.

This is needed to account for the fact that complex predicate constructions
in the reverse construction are always perfective. The reverse construction
is illustrated using the following example, repeated from (42).
(59) Shyam
de
bhaag-aa
Shyam.M give:LV run-Perfv.M.Sg:MV
Shyam ran (rapidly).

(60)

phrase
1
head
spr
hi
comps hi

phrase
spr

3
comps
head

hi
hi

case

Shyam

unmarked

phrase
head
1 
spr
3
comps hi

word

head

spr

mod

hi
comps hi
arg-st hi

48

de

asp

i
perf

word
head
1 

3
2 spr

comps hi


3
arg-st
bhaag-aa

5. AN HPSG ANALYSIS

In (60), the light verb de (give) modifies the main verb and the head of
the phrase is the main verb bhaag (run). Notice that the subject Shyam ( 3 )
appears only on the specifier and argument-structure list of the main verb.
There is thus no argument composition in the reverse construction.
The Hindi complex predicate construction provides evidence for the
claim that syntactic and semantic structures are not mapped uniformly onto
each other. As we have seen, aspect operators in Hindi can combine with
their argument via either a head(operator)-complement(argument) structure i.e., through argument composition, or a modifier(operator)-modified
(argument) structure. A similar analysis has been presented for Thai by
Koenig and Muansuwan (2005), illustrating the structural and functional
differences between the various aspect markers in Thai. A framework like
HPSG that treats the various aspects of linguistic signs as independent levels
of representation can easily model such constructions.

49

6. CONCLUSION

Conclusion

This paper has looked at the standard and the reverse complex predicate
constructions in Hindi. The two verbs in both constructions form a single
unit and have the same phrase structure configuration. However, they differ
with respect to linear ordering. The standard construction shows that the
argument selection in Hindi takes place from right to left i.e., the light verb
is expected to follow the main verb, but the reverse construction violates
this expectation. The two constructions also differ functionally; the last
verb in the complex predicate construction, whether it is light or reverse,
assigns case to the subject.
The two constructions differ also in terms of which verb is the head: it is
the light verb in the standard and the main verb in the reverse. Furthermore,
the Hindi reverse construction shows a dissociation between semantic and
syntactic headedness: while the main verb assigns case, the light verb is the
aspectual functor. This distinction suggests that the mapping between
aspectual semantics and syntactic structure need not be uniform within
a language. A framework such as HPSG which uses independent levels of
representation, can easily account for such data. The Hindi data presented in
this paper also supports a more general claim, which is that case assignment
constraints, rather than being phrasal, are lexical.
Finally, with respect to restrictions on main verb-light verb selection,
this paper has noted that transitive light verbs can select only for those
intransitive main verbs whose semantics represent bodily/sound emission.
Further research is needed to determine the range of main verbs and light

50

6. CONCLUSION

verbs that can appear in the reverse construction. The particular semantics
of the reverse construction also remains to be investigated.

51

7. APPENDIX: LIST OF LIGHT VERBS

Appendix: List of Light Verbs

This section discusses how the light verbs discussed in this paper were selected. A survey of previous works conducted by Hook (1974) indicates that
the list of verbs that were considered light ranges between eight to sixty.
Of course, both the terminology and the definition for what was considered
a light verb varies. All of these verbs are listed in Table 6.17 On closer
inspection of the cited examples, many of the verbs that were only cited by
one or two authors were actually examples of the reverse complex predicate
construction. For instance, as we can tell from the semantics of the sentence
(61a) below, the main verb is nikal (leave) and not aa (come) since the sentence describes an event of leaving and not of arriving. Another example is
(61b) where the main verb is bhaag (run) and the light verb is nikaal (leave).
(61)

a. us=ki
aankh-
oo
mein aasuu
aa
pron.3.Sg=Gen eyes-F.Pl in
tears.F.Sg come:LV
niklee
leave-F.Pl:MV
Tears left her eyes.
b. Merii changul=se kiisii tarah
nikal
bhaag-aa
mine control=Inst some manner leave:LV run-M.Sg:MV
(He) somehow ran away from my control.

The list in Table 6 was narrowed down in Hook (1977) to a more conservative list of twenty-two light verbs, listed in Table 7. For the purposes of
this paper, I selected only monomorphic verbs so as to limit issues related to
compounding. This eliminated khara ho (stand up), chor de (leave), rakh de
17

Hook used Devanagari alphabetical order in his papers and I have retained that order
for the first two tables.

52

7. APPENDIX: LIST OF LIGHT VERBS

(keep), le aa (bring) and le jaa (take away). I also eliminated the modal verb
cuk (already) and the verbs chal (walk) and dhar (hold). For the remaining
verbs, I downloaded a random set of hundred sentences from the EMILLE
corpus. If they occurred in at least one sentence as either noun-light verb
or main verb-light verb, they were included in this study. Of the list presented in the table below, the only verb that was not found to be a light
verb in the random set of sentences extracted from the EMILLE corpus was
mar (die).
aa (come), 21a
uth (rise), 23
uR (fly), 1
khaRa ho (stand up), 2
khap (be expended), 1
khaa (eat), 2
gir (fall), 1
giraa (drop), 1
guzar (pass by), 1
gher (surround), 1
ghus (enter), 1
cal (walk), 5
cuk (be used up), 1
chor (leave), 9
chor de (leave give), 1
jaa (go), 23
jhapat (grab), 1
tapak (drop), 1
tuut (break), 1
thahr (stop), 1

dat (be firm), 1

daal (put), 23
duub (sink), 1
de (give), 23
dikhaa (show), 1
dekh (see), 1
daur (run), 2
dhamak (scare), 4
dhar (hold), 2
dhaa (run), 2
nikal (leave), 9
nikaal (remove), 2
pakar (catch), 1
par (fall), 23
pahunch (reach), 5
paa (find), 9
phas (stuck), 1
phek (throw), 1
ban (become), 1
bas (inhabit), 1

baahar kar (turn out), 1

baith (sit), 23
bhaag (run), 1
bhir (attack), 1
bhej (send), 1
mang (order), 1
mar (hit), 4
maar (die), 8
mit (be obliterated), 1
mil (find), 2
rakh (keep), 16
rakh de (keep give i.e, place), 1
rah (stay) , 13
lag (touch), 1
lipat (cling), 1
le (take), 23
le aa (take come i.e., bring), 1
le jaa (take go i.e., take away), 1
sak (able), 4
sunaa (listen), 1

Table 6: All light verbs in the literature, compiled by Hook (1974)

a
All numbers indicate the total number of works prior to Hook (1974) that considered
the relevant verb light.

53

7. APPENDIX: LIST OF LIGHT VERBS

aa (come)
uth (rise)
khara ho (stand be i.e., stand)
cal (walk)
cuk (able)
chor (leave)
chor de (leave give i.e., leave)

jaa (go)
dal (put)
de (give)
dhar (hold)
nikal (leave)
nikaal (remove)
par (fall)

baith (sit)
mar (die)
maar (hit)
rakh de (keep give i.e., put)
rah (stay)
le (take)
le aa (take come i.e., bring)
le jaa (take go i.e., take away)

Table 7: H indi light verbs from Hook (1977)

54

Bibliography
Abbi, A. and D. Gopalakrishnan (1991). Semantics of Explicator Compound
Verbs in South Asian Languages. Language Sciences 13 (2), 161180.
Abeille, A. and D. Godard (2002). The Syntactic Structure of French Auxiliaries. Language 78 (3), 404452.
Abeille, A. and D. Godard (2007). Complex Predicates in the Romance
Languages. In Fundamental Issues in Romance Languages, pp. 107171.
CSLI Publications.
Aissen, J. and D. Perlmutter (1976). Clause Reduction in Spanish. In Papers
from the Second Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, pp.
130.
Aissen, J. and D. Perlmutter (1983). Clause Reduction in Spanish. In
D. Perlmutter (Ed.), Studies in Relational Grammar. Chicago University
Press.
Butt, M. (2005). Light Verb Jungle. In Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics, Volume 19, pp. 149.
Butt, M. and A. Lahiri (2002). Historical Stability vs. Historical Change.
Available at http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/butt/stability.pdf.
Butt, M. J. (1994, June). The Structure of Complex Predicates in Urdu. Ph.
D. thesis, Stanford University.
Copestake, A., D. Flickinger, C. Pollard, and I. Sag (2005). Minimal Recursion Semantics: An Introduction. Research on Language and Computation 3, 281332.
Davis, A. (2001). Linking by Types in the Hierarchical Lexicon (First ed.).
Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
55

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

de Hoop, H. and B. Narasimhan (2008). Ergative case-marking in Hindi.

In H. de Hoop and P. de Swart (Eds.), Differential subject marking, pp.
6378. Springer.
Dixon, R. (1994). Ergativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Emonds, J. (1978). The Verbal Complex V-V in French. Linguistic Inquiry 9, 151175.
Grimshaw, J. and A. Mester (1988). Light verbs and Theta marking. Linguistic Inquiry 19, 205232.
Hook, P. (1974). Compound Verbs in Hindi. Ph. D. thesis, University of
Michigan.
Hook, P. (1977). The Hindi Compound Verb: What it is and What it does.
In Readings in Hindi-Urdu Linguistics, pp. 129154. National Publishing
House, New Delhi.
Hook, P. (2001). Where Do Compound Verbs Come From? (And Where
Are They Going?). In Yearbook of South Asian Languages and Linguistics,
pp. 101130. Sage Publications, New Delhi.
Kachru, Y. (1980). Aspects of Hindi Grammar. Manohar Publishers and
Distributors.
Koenig, J.-P. and N. Muansuwan (May 2005). The Syntax of Aspect in
Thai. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23, 335380(46).
Masica, C. P. (1991). The Indo-Aryan Languages (First ed.). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Mohanan, T. (1994). Argument Structure in Hindi (First ed.). Stanford,
CA: CSLI Publications.
Monachesi, P. (1993). Restructuring verbs in Italian HPSG Grammar. In
Papers from the 29th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society,
Volume 1, pp. 281295. Chicago Linguistics Society.
Rizzi, L. (1978). A Restructuring Rule in Italian Syntax. In Recent Transformational Studies in European Languages, pp. 115158. MIT Press.
Sharma, D. (1999). Nominal Clitics and Constructive Morphology in Hindi.
In Proceedings of the LFG99 Conference. CSLI Publications: Stanford,
CA.
56