Lingg 166 Paper V

Vanessa P. Mak

2005 -00875

Lingg 166

FUNCTION of ANG and NG in TAGALOG and their COUNTERPARTS in CEBUANO

WHAT IS ANG? Tagalog ang has been analyzed as: (1) an article, equivalent to English the (2) a particle, because of its having an uninflectable form; (3) a noun or nominal marker, because it is used to introduce a nominal phrase; (4) a determiner, being immediately followed by a nominal head phrase; (5) a thematizer and syntactic thema marker, in that it serves more than the role of a specifier and acts as an equational syntactic grammaticalizer (Llido 2006 : 2). Other varying labels for ang are: (6) topic case marker (Yap 1971); (7) relational marker that marks the topic or focus of the sentence (Ramos 1977); (8) definite phrase introducer (Wolfenden 1971 : 47-60).

WHAT IS NG? Tagalog ng has been assumed to be: (1) relational marker, a non-focus marking particle of actor or goal complements of noun phrases (Ramos 1977); (2) attributive phrase introducer (Wolfenden 1971 : 47-60).

The Tagalog ng which is used as a topic or focus marker is not to be confused with the

ng, which is a variant of the ligature na. Ligatures are used to tie the noun phrase into the construction to which it belongs to (Reid 2002 : 296-97). Tagalog ng distinguishly marks different grammatical functions: agent/experiencer and patient/object/theme (de Guzman & Bender 2000 : 224). To differentiate them, they will be called ng-agent and ng-patient respectively. Ng also functions as a possessive and adverbial marker. Both ang and ng perform several grammatical functions and are used to indicate syntactic relations. They appear to be a combination of particles, markers, and determiners/articles, as will be seen in their usage in the sentences to follow. For now, we will use the terms PARTICLE and (relation) MARKER interchangeably in referring to ang and ng.

GRAMMATICAL and SEMANTIC RELATIONS The grammatical and semantic roles marked by ang and ng will be determined in terms of case and thematic roles. CASE pertains to how the arguments of a predicate are formally encoded to distinguish between S (SUBJECT), A (AGENT), P (PATIENT) and OBLIQUES. S, A, and P may be referred to as the core cases, while any other argument which is not an A, an S or a P is an OBLIQUE (Nolasco, 2005 : 4).

In Philippine languages, case is outwardly expressed by verbal conjugation (through the use of inflectional affixes) and separate uninflectable morphemes such as ang and ng. THETA/THEMATIC ROLES refers to the semantic relationship between verbs and their arguments (Haegeman 1991 : 41). Arguments are said to be elements or constituents which are obligatory in a sentence. The verb determines the number of arguments needed. As an example, the Tagalog verb binigay ‘to give’ requires three arguments: the doer of the action, its object, and its goal. Ergo, Binigay ko ang bayad sa kanya [bini’gaj ko Ɂaŋ ‘bajad sa kan’ja] ‘I gave the payment to him/her’. The verb binigay assigns the role of AGENT/ACTOR to the subject argument ko, the role of OBJECT to bayad, and the role of GOAL to kanya. Other

common

thematic

roles

are

PATIENT,

THEME,

EXPERIENCER,

BENEFACTIVE, SOURCE, LOCATION, etc. Some authors have combined the roles of PATIENT and THEME into one. Features such as voice, focus and aspect will not be discussed here as they are attributed mainly to verbs, in which they (voice, focus, and aspect) are morphologically realized as affixes. The verbal morphology of Tagalog and its properties are not the central topic of the paper.

SIMPLE VERBAL SENTENCES: TRANSITIVE and INTRANSITIVE SENTENCES In Philippine languages, an INTRANSITIVE CONSTRUCTION contains verbs that require a single obligatory nominal complement or argument known as the subject (Reid & Liao

2004 : 8). The subject is the source of the action and the most affected entity at the same time. It is assigned the absolutive case. Intransitive verbs are inflected with –um- or m- (Nolasco 2005 : 9). A TRANSITIVE CONSTRUCTION is one where the agent (the source of the action) is encoded in the ergative case and the patient (the most affected entity) is encoded in the absolutive case. Transitive constructions are also indicated by verbs with voice affixes such as –

in, -an, and i- in Tagalog, or their counterparts in other Philippine languages (Nolasco 2005 : 9). Neither the ERGATIVE-ABSOLUTIVE nor the NOMINATIVE-ACCUSATIVE grammatical relations system will be used here. Grammatical relations will be described in terms of agent, patient, object, etc. The same marker may differ in gloss across sentences in order to describe the function of the marker in that particular sentence.

INTRANSITIVE CONSTRUCTIONS

Ang usually occurs as the head of a nominal phrase. It usually occurs with common nouns, but it can also occur with proper nouns. Ang is used to indicate the topic of the sentence. In intransitive constructions, the focus is on the subject, i.e., the doer/source of the action. In (1a), (1b), and (1c), the doer of the action is the bata ‘child’. Ang also indicates definiteness and specificity.

(1) a.

Tayo

ang

bata.

ta’joɁ

Ɂaŋ

stand

TM

‘bataɁ 1

child

‘The child stood.’ b.

Ang

bata

ay

tmayo.

Ɂaŋ

‘bataɁ

Ɂaj

ta’joɁ

TM

child

OrdM

stand

‘As for the child, he stood.’ c.

Ang

bata,

tayo

Ɂaŋ

‘bataɁ

ta’joɁ

TM

child

stand

‘The child stood.’ (1a) is a basic intransitive construction. If the sentence is inverted, as in (1b) and (1c), the fronted ang-phrase still has the same relationship with the verb. Therefore, the function of

ang remains the same. The differences between (1a), (1b), and (1c) will not be discussed here. d. Tayo

ang

mga

bata.

ta’joɁ

Ɂaŋ

maŋa

‘bataɁ

stand

TM

PLZ

child

‘The children stood.’

Ang may also occur with the marker mga to indicate plurality, as seen in (1d). 1

Many linguists have referred to ang as indicating the topic or subject of the sentence. Hence, the label TM for topic marker will be used. This label will be used to cover the general function of ang.

(2)

Kain

ng

mangga

ang

bata.

kaɁin

naŋ

maŋ’ga

Ɂaŋ

‘bataɁ

eat

ObjM

mango

TM

child

‘The child ate a mango.’ Sentence (2) is known as an ANTIPASSIVE or PSEUDO-TRANSITIVE construction (Reid & Liao 2004 : 9). They are similar to transitive constructions in that there appears to be an agent and a patient or object. However, the form of the verb is identical to that of an intransitive. In (2a), ng marks mangga ‘mango’ as the object of the verb. Also ng indicates an unspecified phrase. The ang-phrase, on the other hand, maintains itself as the primary focus of the sentence, i.e., as agent or actor.

(3)

Putol

ng

putul naŋ cut ObjM

kahoy ang

tao

sa

pamamagitan

ng

‘kahuj Ɂaŋ

taɁu

sa

pamama’gitan naŋ

wood

man

LM

way

TM

InsM itak. Ɂi’tak knife ‘The man cut wood using the knife.’

In (3), the ng of the phrase sa pamamagitan ng itak ‘using the knife’ shows a different function. Ng marks itak as the instrument used to fulfill the action.

(4)

Kain

ng

marami

ang

bata.

kaɁin

naŋ

ma’rami

Ɂaŋ

‘bataɁ

eat

AdvM

many

TM

child

‘The child ate a lot.’ Again, ng has another usage here, different from the previously described functions. In (4), ng is used as an adverbial marker.

TRANSITIVE CONSTRUCTIONS

(5)

Kain

ng

bata

ang

mangga

kaɁin

naŋ

‘bataɁ

Ɂaŋ

maŋ’ga

eat

AM

child

TM

mango

‘The mango was eaten by the child.’

(6)

Bili

ng

bi’li

binata

naŋ

ang

bi’nataɁ

kendi

Ɂaŋ

sa

bata

‘kendi sa

‘bataɁ buy

AM

child

TM

candy LM

child

para

sa

dalaga.

‘para

sa

da’laga

BM

LM

maiden

‘The candy was brought from the boy by the man for the woman.’

(7)

I-bili

ng

binata

Ɂi-bi’li

naŋ

ang

dalaga

bi’nataɁ

Ɂaŋ

da’laga BFbuy maiden

AM

ng naŋ

ObjM

bachelor

TM

kendi.

‘kendi candy

‘It was the woman that the man bought candy for.’

(8)

I-sulat

ng

binata

ang

Ɂi-sulat

naŋ

bi’nataɁ

Ɂaŋ

OFwrite

AM

bachelor

pa'ngalan

ng

dalaga.

pa’ŋalan

naŋ

da’laga

name

PossM

maiden

TM

‘The name of the young woman was written by the young man.’ In sentences (5) to (9), despite the changing forms of the verb, the ang-phrase remains

the focus of the sentence. Ang marks the object of the action in (5) (6) and (8), while ang marks the benefactor of the action in (7). On the other hand, ng has varying functions. Ng bata ‘the child’ in (6) and ng binata ‘the young man’ in (7) to (9) are agents. This ng assigns the role of actor to the subjects in (6) to (9). Ng kendi in (8) is the object of the action. Ng assigns the role of patient to kendi. Ng dalaga ‘the young woman’ in (9) shows possession. Ang pangalan ‘the name’ in (9) is the thing owned by ng dalaga ‘of the woman’. The feature of ng is that of attribution. A ng-phrase can be seen as having the meaning, ‘to be assigned the quality or feature of’. On the other hand, ang is used to identify. An angphrase can be said to mean, ‘to be identified as’. Referring back to (1), Tumayo ang bata ‘The child stood’ would literally mean, ‘The child is identified to have stood’. As for (5) Kinain ng

bata ang mangga ‘The mango was eaten by the child’, it can be understood to mean, ‘A child is given the characteristic of having eaten the identified mango’.

OTHER SENTENCES: EQUATIONAL SENTENCES Other sentences to be discussed here are mainly those of the non-verbal predicate (marked or unmarked) + ang-phrase sentence types. Non-verbal predicates can be nominal or adjectival. Such sentences are called EQUATIONAL SENTENCES (Bunye & Yap 1971). A basic sentence in Tagalog, as well as most Philippine languages, is made up of at least two constituents, which may both be nouns, or a noun and a modifier. A minimally grammatical sentence requires that at least one of the constituents be marked by ang (Llido 2006 : 1-3).

In equational sentences, both constituents are like topics. The predicate adds additional information about the topic. Ang serves as an identificational marker that introduces the topic as in the following sentences:

(9)

Masipag

ang

dalaga.

ma’sipag

Ɂaŋ

da’laga

hard-working

TM

maiden

‘The young woman is hard-working.’

(10)Abugado

ang

kapatid

niya.

abu’gadu

Ɂaŋ

kapa’tid

n’ja

lawyer

TM

sibling

3 .SG.GEN

rd

‘His/her brother is a lawyer.’ (11)Ikaw

ang Ɂi’kaw nd

2 .SG.NOM

napakatamad. Ɂaŋ

napakata’mad

TM

very lazy

‘The one who is very lazy is you.’ (12)Ang

dalaga

ang

napakasipag.

TM

maiden

TM

very hard-working

Ɂaŋ

da’laga

Ɂaŋ

napaka’sipag

‘The young woman is the one who is very hard-working.’

In sentences (9) to (12), the predicate and topic are said to balance out each other. In (12) Ang dalaga ang napakasipag ‘The young woman is the one who is very hard-working’, both constituents consist of ang-phrases. We can think of it as two concurrent topics being introduced – topic 1, ang dalaga and topic 2, ang napakasipag.

(13)Ang

bata

ang

tayo.

Ɂaŋ

‘bataɁ

Ɂaŋ

ta’joɁ

TM

child

TM

AF.PF-stand

‘The one who stood was the child.’

(14)Mabilis

ang

takbo

ng

bata.

mabi’lis

Ɂaŋ

tak’bu

naŋ

‘bataɁ

Fast

TM

run

PossM

child

‘The running of the child is fast.’ In (15), it is shown that equational sentences can also be comprised of a noun phrase and a verb phrase. However, the verb in equational sentences does not act as a verb. In (16), the verb takbo ‘run’ has been NOMINALIZED. On the other hand, something else happen to the verb tumayo ‘stand’ in (15). The verb phrase appears to have been RELATIVIZED by ang.

Ang tumayo would therefore be, ‘the one who stood’. Same with adjectives that have ang as their head (as seen in (11) and (12)), as well as other word classes that occur with ang, they undergo RELATIVIZATION.

Ang may appear with almost any kind of word in Tagalog, such as:

(15)Ang

ang

dalaga

may

bulaklak.

Ɂaŋ

da’laga

Ɂaŋ

maj

bulak’lak

TM

maiden

TM

have

flower

‘The young woman is the one who has a flower.’

(16)Ang

bulaklak

ang

para

sa

dalaga.

Ɂaŋ

bulak’lak

Ɂaŋ

‘para

sa

da’laga

TM

flower

TM

for

LM

maiden

‘The flower is the one that is for the young woman.’

(17)Ang

hindi tatawa

ay

hindi

masaya.

Ɂaŋ

hin’diɁ ta’tawa aj

hin’diɁ

masa’jaɁ

TM

not

not

mango

laugh OrdM

‘The one who is not laughing is unhappy.’

(18)Ang

ang

lalaki

walang

pera.

Ɂaŋ

la’laki

Ɂaŋ

wa’laŋ

‘pe:ra

TM

male

TM

none

money

‘The man is the one without money.’

CEBUANO The following sentences are for comparison with Tagalog:

(19)Ni-tindog

ang

bata.

ni-‘tindug

Ɂaŋ

‘bataɁ

AF.PF-stand

TM

child

‘The child stood.’

(20)Ni’ka-on

ug

mangga

ang

bata.

ni-‘kaɁun

Ɂug

maŋga

Ɂaŋ

‘bataɁ

AF.PF-eat

AdvM

mango

TM

child

‘The child ate the mango.’

(21)Gi-kaon

sa

bata

ang

mangga.

gi-‘kaɁun

sa

‘bataɁ

Ɂaŋ

maŋga

OF.PF-eat

AM

child

TM

mango

‘The mango was eaten by the child.’

(22)Na-mutod

ug

kahoy

ang

tao

Na-mu’tud

Ɂug

‘kahuj

Ɂaŋ

‘taɁu

AF.PF-cut

ObjM

wood

TM

man

paagi

sa

sundang.

pa’Ɂagi

sa

‘sundaŋ

way

InsM

heavy knife

‘The man cut wood using the knife.’

(23)Gi-suwat

sa

ulitawo

ang

pangan

sa

daga.

gi-‘suwat

sa

Ɂuli’tawu

Ɂaŋ

pa’ŋaɁan

sa

‘daga

OF.PF-sulat

AM

bachelot

TM

name

PossM maiden

‘The name of the young woman was written by the young man.’

(24)Nikaon

ug Ni-‘ka 

AF.PF-eat



daghan 

AdvM



many





ang

bata.

ŋ

‘bata

TM

child

‘The child ate a lot.’

Ang remains ang in Cebuano. On the other hand, ng varies in form in Cebuano. Ngobject/patient in Tagalog becomes ug in Cebuano and ng-agent becomes sa. Ng-possessive, likewise, becomes sa in Cebuano. Ng-adverbial in Tagalog becomes ug in Cebuano.

COMPARISON OF TAGALOG and CEBUANO Tagalog

Cebuano

To indicate the topic/subject

Ang

Ang

Object marker (intransitive)

Ng

Ug

Agent marker (transitive)

Ng

Sa

To mark possession

Ng

Sa

To indicate function as adverb

Ng

Ug

To indicate instrument of use

Ng

Sa

Summary: What are the functions of ang and ng? ANG

NG

•

Identificational

•

Attributive

•

Common noun marker

•

Agent marker in transitive

•

Indicates specificity/definiteness

•

Individualizes constituents/elements

•

Focus/topic/subject marker: topicalization

constructions •

Object marker in intransitive constructions

•

Object in intransitive constructions

•

Nominalizer

becomes unspecific

•

Relativizer

•

Instrument marker

•

Distribution (as seen in the sentences

•

Possessive marker

included in this study): _noun,

•

Adverbial marker

_adjective, _verb, _preposition,

•

Distribution: _noun. _adjective

_existential, _negative

List of Abbreviations: AdvM – adverbial marker

NOM – nominative

AF – actor focus

ObjM – object marker

AM – agent marker

OF – object focus

BM – benefactive marker

OrdM – order marker

BF – benefactive focus

PF – perfective

GEN – genitive

PossM – possessive marker

InsM – instrumental marker

SG – singular

LM – locative marker

TM – topic marker

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bunye M.V. & Yap, E.P. (1971). Cebuano Grammar Notes. Honolulu : University of Hawaii Press. Constantino, E. (1965). The Sentence Patterns of the 26 Philippine Languages . Lingua 15 : 71124. De Guzman, V. (2000). Some Remarks on the Grammatical Functions of the Nonabsoultive Agent in Tagalog. Grammatical analysis : morphology, syntax, and semantics : studies

in honor of Stanley Starosta, 224-239. Honolulu : University of Hawaii Press. Haegeman, L. (1991). Introduction to government and binding theory. Oxford : B. Blackwell. Llido, P. (2006). Inflectional Case Assignment in Cebuano. Paper presented at Tenth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics, 17-20 January 2006. Puerto Princesas City, Palawan, Philippines. Nolasco, R. (2005). What Philippine ergativity really means. Paper presented at TaiwanJapan Joint Workshop on Austronesian Languages. 23-24 June 2005. Taipei, Taiwan. Retrieved August 4, 2007, from: http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~gilntu/data/workshop%20on%20Austronesian/11%20nolas co.pdf. th

Nolasco, R. (2006). Ano ang S, A, at O sa mga Wika ng Pilipinas? Paper presented at 9

Philippine Linguistics Congress. January 25-27, 2006. University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines, Retrieved March 2, 2008, from: http://web.kssp.upd.edu.ph/linguistics/plc2006/papers/FullPapers/II-A-4_Nolasco.pdf Pei, M.A. (1966). Glossary of linguistic terminology. New York : Columbia University Press. Pei, M. & Gaynor, F. (1954). A Dictionary of Linguistics. New York : Philosophical library. Ramos, T. (1977). Tagalog Dictionary. Honolulu : University of Hawaii Press. Reid, L. (2002). Determiners, Nouns, or What? Problems in the Analysis of Some Commonly Occuring Forms in Philippine Languages. Oceanic Linguistics, 41 (2) : 295-309. Honolulu : University of Hawaii. Reid, L. & Liao, H. (2004). A Brief Syntactic Typology of Philippine Languages. Language

and Linguistics 5 (2) : 433-490. Honolulu : University of Hawaii Press.

Schachter P. & Otanes F. (1972). Tagalog Reference Grammar. Los Angeles : University of California Press. Trask, R.L. (1997). A student’s dictionary of language and linguistics. London : Arnold. Wolfenden, E. (1971). Hiligaynon reference grammar. Honolulu : University of Hawaii Press. Yap, E.P. (1971). Cebuano-Visayan dictionary. Honolulu : University of Hawaii Press.