300 Chapter 10 Modifications to argument structure
(75) a. Marlena ngeba kothak kaangguy Siti.
Marlena AV.carry box for Siti
‘Marlena carried the box for Siti.’
b. Marlena ngeba'-agi Siti kothak.
Marlena AV.carry-AGI Siti box
‘Marlena carried Siti the box.’
In both (74a) and (75a), the beneficiary, na'-kana' ‘children’ and Siti, occurs as
the object of the preposition kaangguy ‘for’. In the b-sentences, the beneficiary
is a bare NP and occurs immediately after the verb and before the theme argu-
ment. This parallels the structure of -e with ditransitive verbs such as kerem
‘send’ and saba' ‘put’. The facts help account for comparisons with Bantu ap-
plicatives, which frequently target benefactive arguments. There is a systematic
ambiguity to the benefactive constructions.
The beneficiary can refer to the entity that either benefits from the action
by physically possessing the result or benefits because the action is performed
by another in the beneficiary’s stead. Thus, while for pragmatic reasons the
preferred interpretation of (75b) is that Sa'diyah bought the candy for the child-
ren to have (and eat), the sentence can also be interpreted as meaning that the
children were supposed to buy candy but for some reason could not and Sa'di-
yah bought it instead. A less marked example would be the pair in (76).
(76) a. Bibbi' ngerra' rote kaangguy Ebu'.
aunt AV.slice read for mother
‘Auntie sliced bread for Mother.’
b. Bibbi' ngerra'-agi Ebu' rote.
aunt AV.slice-AGI mother bread
‘Auntie sliced bread for Mother.’
The sentences in (76) are systematically ambiguous between an interpretation
that Mother will eat the bread and one that Auntie is helping Mother prepare
food. Thus, it is conceivable for a sentence to include two beneficiaries, as in
(77).
(77) Siti maca’-agi Marlena careta kaangguy na’-kana’.
Siti AV.read-AGI Marlena story for RED-child
‘Siti read a story for the children for Marlena.’
The most natural interpretation here is that Siti read the story to the children as a
favor to Marlena.