298 Chapter 10 Modifications to argument structure
(66) Alwi e-(ka-)busen-ne bi' Nabun.
Alwi OV-KA-bored-LOC by Nabun
‘Nabun is bored with Alwi.’
(67) Salak e-(ka-)senneng-nge Romlah.
salak OV-KA-happy-LOC Romlah
‘Romlah likes salak (fruit).’
As usual, the object voice and base forms are synonymous. However,
when these verbs occur in the transitive construction (i.e. actor voice morpholo-
gy and locative suffix) the forms are no longer synonymous. Instead the inter-
pretation is causative. Thus, while Sinap peggel dha' Lukman means ‘Sinap is
angry at Lukman’, the form with actor voice and -e is causative, (68).
(68) Sinap meggel-li Lukman.
Sinap AV.angry-LOC Lukman
‘Sinap makes Lukman angry.’
While it is not entirely clear that the -e suffix in (68) should be considered the
same suffix as the locative, the two forms are in complementary distribution,
indicating that they could well be. The actor voice counterpart of (63), Hosen
tako' ka lar-olar, has a decidedly odd meaning given the generic quality of the
goal/stimulus lar-olar ‘snakes’.
(69) ?Hosen nako'-e lar-olar.
Hosen AV.afraid-LOC RED-snake
‘Hosen scares snakes.’
In the context of scaring snakes being a common activity of Hosen’s (69) is
completely acceptable, and the oddness disappears if the object is not generic
but specific, as in (70).
(70) Hosen nako'-e olar rowa.
Hosen AV.afraid-LOC snake that
‘Hosen scared that snake.’
For a general fear of snakes, (71), in which lar-olar is subject, is completely
natural.
(71) Lar-olar nako'-e Hosen.
RED-snake AV.afraid-LOC Hosen
‘Snakes scare Hosen.’