LINGUIST List 5.1188

Fri 28 Oct 1994

Qs: have/hold, Double passive, Syntax, Motion verb passives

Editor for this issue: <>

Directory

1. gor05, "TO HAVE AND TO HOLD
2. Sharona Levy, Double Passive in English
3. , Q:X' move
4. Martin Haspelmath, motion verb passives

In many IE languages, a verb which originally meant 'to hold' has come to
mean 'to have'. This has then often come to be used for perfect aspect/past
tense and also sometimes for existence and compulsion.
A prime example is Portuguese:
lat. habeo 'to hold' -> haver : used with the perfect (hei falado,
'I have spoken'), existence (ha alguem aqui, 'there is someone here').
As with Spanish, lat. teneo 'to hold' came to mean 'to have (something)'
and in addition, in Portuguese, in the form 'ter' it took on all three of
these functions, at least in spoken Brazilian Portuguese. It is also used
for compulsion, tenho que ir = I have to go. There are also
parallels from Germanic and Celtic langauges and many others.
I was wondering if anyone knows of other, NON-IE languages where there is
a connection between 'to hold' and 'to have', in any of the four meanings
listed, or just a connection between 'to have (something)' and 'perfect
aspect/past tense', or 'existence' as in Mandarin.
In addition, a construction with the owner in the genitive/dative, etc.,
for 'to have (something)' coming to be used for the past tense,
creating a kind of ergative construction, would be of interest.
I'd be glad to post a summary, if there's any interest. Thanx!

john peterson, kiel, germany,
e-mail: gor05rz.uni-kiel.d400.de

I am posting this for a friend in London who does not have internet
access.
Please send any comments to me and I will summarize to the list.
Thanks.

Consider the following four sentences:

 a. Their budget was expected to be reduced.
 b. Their budget was hoped to be reduced.
 c. Their budget was threatened to be reduced.
 d. Their budget was attempted to be reduced.

None of these are particularly elegant, but sentence a is at least
grammatically standard; the grammar of the remaining three is
incorrect--the "double passive" is faulty in each of these cases. The
test is this: is there an acceptable underlying version in which the
main verb is couched in the active while the infinitive remains in the
passive?

 a. i. They expected their budget to be reduced.
 x b. i. They hoped their budget to be reduced.
 x c. i. They threatened their budget to be reduced.
 x d. i. They attempted their budget to be reduced.

If that underlying "single passive" is acceptable, the "double
passive" generated from it is acceptable too (with the exception of
the verbs like, desire, wish and want); and if not, not. Alongside
hope, threaten, and attempt, the following verbs too tempt speakers
and writers occasionally into the faulty double passive: endeavour,
propose, promise, begin, strive, undertake, forget, omit, and neglect.

Not that such verbs always rule out the passive in other constructions
 --or even a different kind of double passive:

 They promised that the budget would be reduced.
 It was hoped that the budget would be reduced.

It's not even easy to word the problem clearly. Fowler in _Modern
English Usage_ (p. 138f) calls it the "double passive." The other
books I've looked at either don't address the problem (ACGEL, LGEU) or
offer a deficient if not defective answer to it (Fowler, _The Right
Word_).

Fowler compared the (grammatically correct) sentence
 The man was ordered to be shot

with the (grammatically incorrect) sentence
 * The point is sought to be evaded.

His explanation is fuzzy and probably, to the extent that I can follow
it, incorrect.

I have tried various alternatives, sometimes invoking Quirk et al, _A
Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language_ 16.64 (p. 1216), but
they too generate exceptions.

I think I can suggest a better test now--one that does seem to exclude
want, desire, etc--but it doesn't lead to a better EXPLANATION. The
new test is roughly the reverse of the current one:

 Would the sentence be acceptable if only the main verb
 were in the passive, with the infinitive now being active?

 a. i. Their budget was expected to decrease.
 b. i. Their budget was hoped to decrease.
 x c. i. Their budget was threatened to decrease.
 x d. i. Their budget was attempted to decrease.

That would disqualify want, desire, etc, but the question remains:
what are the underlying grammatical criteria here?

(By the way, I noted an instance of the double passive recently in
Vikram Seth's epic novel _Suitable Boy_; a lawyer there addresses the
Court: "My Lords, the entire way of life of this state is sought to be
altered by the executive of this state ...")

Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Sharona A. Levy levysharbklyn

Usually syntacticians working in a generative theory accept that whole
phrases (XP) or just heads (X) can be moved, but not the intermediate
category X' (head plus its complement). Has anyone suggested that
movement of X' is acceptable? Does anyone know of a language in which
this is thought to occur? Please reply to me directly.

Sheila Dooley Collberg
University of Auckland, New Zealand
scollbergwaipapa.auckland.ac.nz

A friend of mine who is not on e-mail is working on passives using motion
verbs as auxiliaries in Romance languages. The best-known cases are the
Italian venire ('come')- and andare ('go')-passives, e.g.

La porta non puo venire aperta.
'The door cannot be opened.'

I rifiuti vanno messi negli appositi recipienti.
'The garbage must be put in the garbage containers.'

'Go'-passives are also attested in several modern Indo-Aryan languages
(e.g. Hindi/Urdu). Does anybody know about other cases? Is anybody
working on such constructions at the moment?

I'll post a summary if there is sufficient interest.

Martin Haspelmath