A modern grammar of Acehnese: some critical observations

Abstract

The influence of the latter is more evident than that of the former author. Since a detailed discussion of these problems demands a more extensive knowledge than that of the present reviewer and in addition many more data than Durie provides, I have selected for comment only some points which are of particular interest for the description of Austronesian languages. 3.1. According to Durie, transitive verbs are those which take both A and U: z.g.ji = kap' = keuh, 3 bite you'it bites you', while intransitive verbs occur with: (1) only A, e.g., ln jak 'I go'; (2) only' U (which is optional), e.g., sakt (= geuh) 'he is ill'; or (3) either A or U, but not both simultaneously, e.g.Ji = galak, galak' =jih 3(A)like like 3(U) 'he likes' (no information is provided about whether in the lattr case the enclitic is optional or obligatory). [...]it is the central element of the situations/events or states of affairs which are the appropriate referents of the meaning as expressed by the pertinent (co-occurring) predicate. In his approach, the term subject is meaningless, being a mere cover term for a set of different concepts (initial 1, final 1, first 1, etc), which are based on different types of agreement (rules), as attested in various languages. [...]for Acehnese, verb agreement is stated in terms of initial subjecthood: 'the verb of a clause b agrees with the initial 1 of the clause' (Perlmutter 1982:293), where 'initial V stands for the subject of bivalent verbs. 19 Cases of intransitive verbs having simultaneously a corresponding proclitic and enclitic are also attested in Durie's book, viz.:(3-2) kn=geu=jak'=seuh 'He has gone' IN 3 go 3 6 (5-62) bah geu=meuwakn'=geuh ,. , . ,, let!