ern Yucatec (e.g., V. Bricker 1979b). Some examples of their use with imperfective transitive stems appear
below:1
(45a) máaš k-aw-il-ik-Ø
who incompletive-2sg-see-impf-3sg
‘whom do you see?’ (V. Bricker 1979b:122)
(45b) le b’áʔaš k-u-šot-ik-Ø h-wàan-oʔ
det what incompletive-3sg-cut-impf-3sg masc-John-dist
‘that thing that John cuts’ (V. Bricker 1979b:124)
Independent pronouns can also serve as patients in patient-focus constructions:
(45c) letíʔ k-in-haȼ’-ik-Ø
he incompletive-1sg-hit-impf-3sg
‘it is he whom I hit’ (elicitation notes 1979)
The same pronouns appear as patients in patient-focus constructions based on transitive stems that co-oc-
cur with b’íin and are inflected with -eh or -Ø:
(46a) máaš b’íin aw-il-eh-Ø
who future 2sg-see-subj-3sg
‘whom will you see?’ (V. Bricker 1979b:122)
(46b) le b’áʔaš bíin u-šot-Ø-Ø h-wàan-oʔ
det what future 3sg-cut-subj-3sg masc-John-dist
‘that thing that John will cut’ (V. Bricker 1979b:124)
SYNTAX AND DISCOURSE
437
(46c) letíʔ b’íin in-haȼ’-eh-Ø
he future 1sg-hit-subj-3sg
‘it is he whom I will hit’ (elicitation notes 1979)
And, as in Colonial Yucatec, transitive stems inflected for perfective aspect with -ah follow pronouns in
patient-focus expressions:
(47a) máaš t-aw-il-ah-Ø
who completive-2sg-see-perf-3sg
‘whom did you see?’ (V. Bricker 1979b:122)
(47b) le b’áʔaš t-u-šot-ah-Ø h-wàan-oʔ
det what completive-3sg-cut-perf-3sg masc-John-dist
‘that thing that John cut’ (V. Bricker 1979b:124)
(47c) letíʔ t-in-haȼ’-ah-Ø
he completive-1sg-hit-perf-3sg
‘it is he whom I hit’ (elicitation notes 1979)
(47d) téʔe čéen miš=máak t-inw-il-ah-Ø
there just no=one completive-1sg-see-perf-3sg
‘just no one did I see there’ (V. Bricker 1981a:235, line 480)
2.3. SUBJECT FOCUS. The inflection of an intransitive verb does not change when its subject is moved into
the focus position before the verb, and in this respect it resembles the inflection of the transitive verb with
a focused patient. For example, the intransitive verb, mal ‘to pass,’ whose imperfective suffix was -Ø in the
Basic Word Order of Colonial Yucatec, was marked by the same suffix in subject-focus constructions:
(48a) ma-ix bal c-u-mal-Ø ti y-ol-ob xan
not-and thing incompletive-3sg-pass-impf prep 3sg-heart-3pl also
‘and nothing passes in their hearts also’ (MID567:fol. 366, line 50)
The intransitive verb, tal ‘to come,’ whose imperfective stem suffix was -el, behaved in the same way in
subject-focus constructions:
(48b) u-tħan ku lic-u-tal-el
3sg-word God incompletive-3sg-come-impf
‘it is the word of God that comes’ (Tizimin n.d.: fol. 17r)
(48c) lai u-tħan katun c-u-tal-el-e
det 3sg-word 20-year period incompletive-3sg-come-impf-encl
‘this is the word of the katun that comes’ (Tizimin n.d.: fol. 15v)
Intransitive verbs that co-occurred with bin in subject-focus constructions were marked by the subjunctive
suffix, -Vc (V echoes the vowel in the intransitive root), in Colonial Yucatec:
438
SYNTAX AND DISCOURSE
(49a) ma=mac bin tħan-ac-Ø t-uy-ok(o)l-al
no=person future speak-subj-3sg prep-3sg-because-nom
‘no one will speak because of it’ (TK789A-012)
(49b) t-u-men num=ya bin tal-ac-ob
prep-3sg-deed misfortune future come-subj-3pl
‘because misfortunes will come’ (Tizimin n.d.: fol. 21v)
(49c) lay-ix bin em-ec-Ø ti noh muyal
det-and future descend-subj-3sg prep great cloud
‘and he will descend on a great cloud’ (Gordon 1913:48)
And intransitive verbs that referred to the past were marked by the perfective suffix, -i, when they occurred
in subject-focus contexts in Colonial Yucatec:
(50a) nicte katun _ kuch-i-Ø
flower 20-year period _ arrive-perf-3sg
‘the flower katun arrived’ (Tizimin n.d.: fol. 7v)
(50b) mac ti-man-i-Ø vay-la-e
who completive-pass-perf-3sg here-prox-encl
‘who passed here?’ (Gordon 1913:60)
(50c) mac ti-çih-i-Ø ca em-i-Ø yum
who completive-be born-perf-3sg when descend-perf-3sg father
‘who was born when father descended?’ (Gordon 1913:53)
The example in (50c) contains two intransitive stems (çih-i ‘he was born’ and em-i ‘he descended’), the first
following a focused subject (mac ‘who?’) and the second followed by a non-focused subject (yum ‘father’).
The perfective suffix is -i in both cases.
The same inflectional patterns characterize subject-focus intransitives in Modern Yucatec. The follow-
ing examples are based on the imperfective stem of b’in ‘to go’:
(51a) le kóʔolel k-u-b’in-Ø-oʔ hač š-č’ùup
det woman incompletive-3sg-go-impf-dist very fem-woman
‘that woman who goes is very industrious’ (V. Bricker et al. 1998:88)
(51b) máaš k-u-b’in-Ø k’íiwik
who incompletive-3sg-go-impf plaza
‘who goes to the plaza?’ (elicitation notes 1979)
(51c) le máaš k-u-b’in-Ø k’íiwik-oʔ
det who incompletive-3sg-go-impf plaza-dist
‘that person who goes to the plaza’ (elicitation notes 1979)
SYNTAX AND DISCOURSE
439
In (52), b’in is replaced by its suppletive form, šíʔik, that serves as its subjunctive stem after the aspectual
head word, b’íin:
(52) máaš
b’íin šíʔik-Ø k’íiwik
who future go-subj-3sg plaza
‘who will go to the plaza?’ (V. Bricker 1979b:133)
The examples in (53a–c) are based on the perfective stems of tàal ‘to come’ and b’in ‘to go’:
(53a) máaš máʔ _ tàal-Ø-Ø-eʔ in-sukúʔun
who not _ come-perf-3sg-top 1sg-older brother
‘the person who did not come is my older brother’ (V. Bricker et al. 1998:181)
(53b) máaš h-b’in-Ø-Ø k’íiwik
who completive-go-perf-3sg plaza
‘who went to the plaza?’ (elicitation notes 1979)
(53c) le máaš _ b’in-Ø-Ø k’íiwik-oʔ
det who _ go-perf-3sg plaza-dist
‘that person who went to the plaza’ (elicitation notes 1979)
The perfective suffix is -Ø, not -ih, in these examples because the intransitive verbs do not occur at the end
of phrases.
2.4. ADVERBIAL FOCUS. When manner, temporal, and locative adverbial particles or phrases are moved
from their normal position at the end of clauses and sentences to the beginning, they govern changes in
the aspectual suffixes of the transitive and intransitive verbs that follow them (Table 16-3) and in the type
of ergative split associated with intransitives. Not all of these characteristics are still evident in Modern
Yucatec.
2.4.1. MANNER ADVERBIAL FOCUS. Manner adverbials refer to how an action is performed. They include
particles like bix ‘how?,’ bay ‘thus,’ xan ‘slowly,’ and çeb ‘quickly,’ as well as adjectives like tibil ‘nice’ and
numeral classifier compounds like hun= taɔ ‘rapidly’ and hun=cet ‘together.’
Their use in focused construc-
tions is described for transitive and intransitive verbs below.
2.4.1.1. FOCUSED MANNER ADVERBIALS WITH TRANSITIVE STEMS. Focused manner adverbials replaced
the aspectual head word or clitic particle with imperfective transitive stems, but did not change the aspec-
tual suffix on the verb, which remained -ic in Colonial Yucatec:
(54a) hach tibil-ix v-tzec-t-ic-on-ob cuchi
very nice-and 3sg-sermon-trans-impf-1pl-3pl then
‘and it was very good for them to preach to us then’ (MID567:fol. 365, lines 18–19)
(54b) bic-x uil a-tħan-ic-Ø ahau ca a nupp-Ø-Ø ti be
how-interrog dubit 2sg-speak-impf-3sg king if 2sg-meet-subj-3sg prep road
‘how would you speak to the king if you met him on the road?’ (Ciudad Real 1600?: fol. 51v)
440
SYNTAX AND DISCOURSE
Table 16-3. Aspectual suffixes that co-occur with
transitive and intransitive verbs in the Basic Word
Order compared with those governed by focused
adverbials
Basic
Focused
Transitives
Imperfective
-ic
-ic
Perfective
Immediate
-ah
-ah
Historical
-ah
-(i)ci
-il
Remote Future
-e/-Ø
-ic
Intransitives
Imperfective
-Vl/-Ø
-Vl/-Ø
Perfective
Immediate
-i/-Ø
-ic
Historical
-i/-Ø
-(i)ci
Remote Future
-Vc
-ebal
Focused adverbials, like focused agents, marked the subjunctive stems of transitives with -ic instead
of -e/-Ø, thereby neutralizing the distinction between the imperfective and subjunctive stems of transitive
verbs:
(55a) utz-cin-Ø
bay bin au-al-ic-Ø-e
good-caus-3sg thus future 2sg-say-impf-3sg-encl
‘do as you will say!’ (Ciudad Real 1600?: fol. 41v)
(55b) ti
he-bix bin y-ol-t-ic-Ø-e
prep however future 3sg-heart-trans-impf-3sg-encl
‘however he will desire it’ (HB783A-039B)
(55c) bic-x bin av-utz-cin-ic-Ø-lo
how-interrog future 2sg-good-caus-impf-3sg-dist
‘how will you improve that?’ (Ciudad Real 1600?: fol. 437r)
The changes in word order had no effect on the immediate past of transitive stems, which retained the
-ah suffix of the Basic Word Order:
SYNTAX AND DISCOURSE
441
(56)
pah=çubul-tzil y-al-ah-Ø ten
sour=shame-aj 3sg-say-perf-3sg to-me
‘he insulted me’ (Ciudad Real 1600?: fol. 359v)
However, it did have an effect on the historical past of transitive stems, marking them with -ici, instead
of -ah:
(57a) ocol-bil _ v-cin-s-ici-Ø v-lak
steal-aj _ 3sg-die-caus-perf-3sg 3sg-companion
‘treacherously, he killed his companion’ (Ciudad Real 1600?: fol. 343r)
(57b) hi-bic-il t-u-can-t-ici-ob
det-how-nom completive-3sg-conversation-trans-perf-3sg-3pl
‘however they related it’ (TK590A-007A)
or with -il:
(58a) bay y-ohel-il-Ø t-u-lac-al u-nuc-il uinic-ob
thus 3sg-know-perf-3sg prep-3sg-all-nom 3sg-big-nom person-3pl
‘thus, all the senior men knew it’ (KNX784A)
The only other example in my Colonial database of -il marking the historical past on a transitive stem fol-
lowed a focused adverbial phrase that denoted reason or cause (cf. Yasugi 2005:69–70):
(58b) lay
v-chun v-nup-il-en-lo-e
det 3sg-reason 3sg-oppose-perf-1sg-dist-encl
‘that is the reason why he opposed me’ (DZ587A-071)
On the other hand, -il did follow -ma in transitive stems inflected for the present perfect aspect after man-
ner adverbials in Colonial Yucatec:
(59)
bai y-ohel-ma-il-Ø ca-yum-il ti Dios
thus 3sg-know-pperf-nom-3sg 1pl-father-nom prep God
‘thus our father who is God has known
yan-il yn-tok-yah tħan
exist-nom 1sg-testament-nom word
of the existence of my last will and testament’ (TK775B-025A-B)
I mention these uses of -il here because it has become a much more common suffix on transitive stems
after focused adverbial particles and phrases in Modern Yucatec (see below).
The transition from Colonial to Modern Yucatec did not affect the inflection of imperfective transitive
stems after manner adverbials:
(60a) máʔalob’ a-t’an-ik-Ø màayah
well 2sg-speak-impf-3sg Maya
‘you speak Maya well [literally, well you speak Maya]’ (V. Bricker 1978:17)
442
SYNTAX AND DISCOURSE
(60b) b’ey inw-il-ik-Ø-oʔ
thus 1sg-see-impf-3sg-dist
‘thus I see it’ (elicitation notes 1979)
(60c) b’ey a-haȼ’-ik-en-oʔ
thus 2sg-hit-impf-1sg-dist
‘thus you hit me’ (V. Bricker 1981b:119)
Now, as in Colonial Yucatec, the imperfective stem suffix remains the same as in the Basic Word Order,
and the manner adverbial particle or phrase replaces the incompletive aspectual particle (compare [60b–c]
with [54a–b]).
On the other hand, the distinction between the stem suffixes of transitive verbs that co-occurred with
the remote future in the two word orders in Colonial Yucatec has been neutralized in Modern Yucatec.
Today, transitive stems employ the subjunctive suffixes, -eh/-Ø, in both word orders, rather than only in
the Basic Word Order:
(61a) b’iš b’íin in-haȼ’-Ø-eč
how future 1sg-hit-subj-2sg
‘how will I hit you?’ (elicitation notes 1979)
(61b) b’ey b’íin in-haȼ’-Ø-eč-oʔ
thus future 1sg-hit-subj-2sg-dist
‘thus I will hit you’ (elicitation notes 1979)
As explained in 6. in Chapter 5, the distinction between the immediate past and the historical past no
longer exists in Modern Yucatec, and the principal suffix that marked the historical past in transitive stems
preceded by manner adverbial particles and phrases (-ici) has disappeared. What is left are the -ah suffix of
the immediate past and the -il suffix of the less common historical past that now co-occur on the transitive
stem:
(62a) máʔalob’ t-inw-il-ah-il-Ø
well completive-1sg-see-perf-nom-3sg
‘I saw it well [literally, well I saw it]’ (elicitation notes 1979)
(62b) b’ey t-inw-il-ah-il-Ø-oʔ
thus completive-1sg-see-perf-nom-3sg-dist
‘thus I saw it’ (elicitation notes 1979)
(62c) b’ey t-a-hàan-t-ah-il-Ø
thus completive-2sg-food-trans-perf-nom-3sg
‘thus you ate it’ (Blair 1964:114)
However, the -ah suffix often disappears in Modern Yucatec, leaving -il as the only marker of the perfective
aspect in such focused constructions:
SYNTAX AND DISCOURSE
443
(62d) b’iš t-a-haȼ’-il-en
how completive-2sg-hit-nom-1sg
‘how did you hit me?’ (V. Bricker 1981b:118)
As in Colonial Yucatec, -il follows -mah in transitive stems inflected for the present perfect aspect after
ma
nner adverbials in Modern Yucatec:
(63a) b’ey inw-il-mah-il-Ø-oʔ
thus 1sg-see-pperf-nom-3sg-dist
‘thus I have seen him’ (V. Bricker 1981b:121)
(63b) b’ey a-haȼ’-mah-il-en-oʔ
thus 2sg-hit-pperf-nom-1sg-dist
‘thus you have hit me’ (V. Bricker 1981b:121)
There is, in addition, one other kind of transitive stem in Modern Yucatec that is marked by -il when it fol-
lows a manner adverbial:
(64a) b’ey k-a-n a-haȼ’-il-en-oʔ
thus defut-2sg 2sg-hit-nom-1sg-dist
‘thus you are going to hit me’ (V. Bricker 1981b:119)
(64b) b’ey k-in inw-áʔal-il-Ø tíʔ in-sukúʔun
thus defut-1sg 1sg-say-nom-3sg prep 1sg-older brother
‘thus I am going to say it to my older brother’ (elicitation notes 1979)
They are examples of the definite future, for which I have found no counterpart in my Colonial database
(see [94d] in 3. In Chapter 5 for examples of the agent-focus future in Modern Yucatec).2
2.4.1.2. FOCUSED MANNER ADVERBIALS WITH INTRANSITIVE STEMS. When intransitive stems were pre-
ceded by manner adverbial particles and compounds in Colonial Yucatec, they were characterized by two
kinds of split ergativity. In the most common type, the subject of an imperfective intransitive was identified
with the agent of a transitive verb, and the subject of a perfective or subjunctive intransitive verb was iden-
tified with the object of a transitive verb. The “split” was based on a contrast in aspects, with imperfective
stems manifesting a nominative-accusative pattern of pronominal inflection and perfective and subjunc-
tive stems an ergative-absolutive pattern of pronominal inflection. This type of split ergativity character-
ized the Basic Word Order in Colonial Yucatec and is still in use today.
The second type of split ergativity in Colonial Yucatec was based on a person hierarchy, with first- and
second-person subjects of intransitive verbs following a nominative-accusative pattern and third-person
subjects of such verbs governed by an ergative-absolutive pattern. It is no longer in use today (cf. 5.1. in
Chapter 5).
The focusing of a manner adverbial had no effect on the morphology of imperfective intransitive stems,
which retained the nominative-accusative pattern of pronominal inflection associated with the Basic Word
Order. Thus, in the following examples based on ben ‘to go,’ the imperfective suffix is -el, and the subject
is represented by one of the clitic pronouns:
A Historical Grammar of the Maya Language of Yucatan (1557-2000) Page 70