Language Circle October 2010.pdf APPLICATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS IN JAVANESE Ahmad Sofwan Semarang State University ABSTRACT Applicative constructions refer to those in which an underlying indirect object or oblique is realised as a core argument. The applied argument replaces P and in most languages becomes the direct object. In most instances, the verb usually bears a distinctive inflection expressing the semantic relation borne by the direct object. In Javanese applicative constructions could be intransitive-based and transitive-based, and they involve oblique to 2 advancement or 3-2 advancement. The N- prefix on the verb, the deletion of preposition, and the suffix –i/ni or –ake mark the advancement to direct object. The suffix –i/ni is used to mark locative, recipient and destination advancement, whereas the suffix –ake is used to mark benefactive and instrumental advancement. It is also possible that advancement to direct object is not marked with any suffix. Key words: applicative, locatives, instruments, benefactives, recipients, and destination INTRODUCTION An intransitive construction or clause is typically monovalent because it typically consists of an intransitive predicate and a single core argument which is in S (intransitive subject) function. A transitive clause, on the other hand, can be bivalent where two core arguments are in A (transitive subject) and P (transitive object) functions, or trivalent, where in addition to A and P, there is one additional argument (which can be called ‘extension to core’). The trivalent transitive clause typically refers to giving, telling and showing (Dixon and Aikhenvald 2000). Most languages have verbal derivations that affect predicate arguments. They may reduce or increase the number of core arguments. Valency- reducing derivation includes passive, antipassive, reflexive and reciprocal, whereas valency- increasing derivation includes applicative and causative. Javanese has both intransitive and transitive constructions and the valency changing mechanism in Javanese can be described in its applicative construction. Therefore, the applicative construction is presented here to describe valency reducing or increasing derivation in Javanese. The article begins with a brief overview of Javanese basic constructions: intransitive and transitive, then later describes various applicative constructions, including. locatives, instruments, benefactives, recipients, and destination. JAVANESE BASIC SENTENCE CONSTRUCTIONS In Javanese the predicate of an intransitive construction can be verbal or non-verbal. The non- verbal predicate, such as a noun phrase, an adjective phrase, an adverb phrase, etc. is illustrated in (1). (1) a. Dheweke guru-ku 3SG teacher-1SG.POSS ‘S/he is my teacher’ b. Omah-e apik banget house-3SG.POSS good very ‘Her/his house is very good’ c. Ibu-mu ing Jakarta mother-2SG. POSS in Jakarta ‘Your mother is in Jakarta’ In (1) dheweke ‘s/he’, omahe ‘her/his house’ and ibumu ‘your mother’ are the sole arguments of the clauses and guruku ‘my teacher’, apik banget ‘very good’, and ing Jakarta ‘in Jakarta’ are their respective non-verbal predicates. The verbal predicates in intransitive constructions can take one of the several forms: base words (i.e. without affixes) (2a), suffixed with –an/en (2b), affixed with m- (2c), partial or complete doubling of the base words (2d), and prefixed with a nasal (2e). Note that the intransitive nasal prefix is homophonous with a prefix that occurs on most of the transitive predicates (see example (3b) below). This indicates that the presence of a nasal prefix is not in itself sufficient to indicate the grammatical transitivity of the clause that the verb occurs in (Ewing 1999). (2) a. Marni lunga menyang pasar Marni go to market ‘Marni went to the market’ b. Bocah-bocah dolan-an ing kali children play-AN in river ‘The children played in the river’ c. Ali m-layu cepet banget Ali M-run quick very ‘Ali ran very quickly’ d. Marni lagi umbah-umbah Marni PROG do washing ‘Marni is doing the washing’ e. Dheweke n-(t)angis 3SG N-cry ‘S/he cried’ Most verbal predicates in the transitive constructions occur with the nasal prefix, whose morphophonemic properties are the same as those in the intransitive constructions. Only a few verbs occur without a N-prefix, for example entuk ‘get’, duwe ‘have’ and tuku ‘buy’. In addition, nasalised transitive verbs can be without suffix (3a), with the suffix –i/ni (3b), and with the suffix –ake (3c). (3) a. Toto tuku montor Toto buy car ‘Toto bought a car’ b. Kucing iku m-(p)angan-i iwak cat DEF N-eat-I fish ‘The cat ate fish again and again’ c. Aku n-(t)ukok-ake simbah kakung klambi anyar 1SG N-buy-AKE grandfather shirt new ‘I bought my grandfather a new shirt’ This N-prefix is especially important with applicative constructions because the N-prefix always marks applied verbs in addition to the –i/ni or –ake suffix. In addition, it is important to describe here the properties of a Javanese subject relation. The grammatical subject in Javanese is characterised by a number of properties. First, it is pre-verbal in the normal word order of Javanese of SV (O). This is the subject’s normal, unmarked position. The preverbal NPs of the examples in (2a-e) are the subjects of their corresponding intransitive clauses and those of the examples in (3a-c) are the subjects of their corresponding transitive clauses. In an alternative order, V(O)S, the subject is inverted with respect to the verb, exemplified in (4). This order is marked by an intonational break, indicated by a comma. Verhaar (1983) calls this postponed subject an ‘afterthought topic’, which still retains its subject relation in the clause. (4) a. Lunga menyang pasar, Marni go to market, Marni ‘Marni went to the market’ b. Tuku montor, Toto buy car Toto ‘Toto bought a car’ Second, only grammatical subjects can be questioned by a clefted question word, as in (5a) whereas direct objects cannot, as in (5b). (4) a. Sapa sing arep teka? who COMP will come ‘Who will come?’ b. *Apa sing Ani ngedol? what COMP Ani N-sell ‘What did Ani sell?’ Third, grammatical subjects and no other relation can be relativised, as illustrated in (6). Attempts to relalivise direct objects results in ungrammaticality, as illustrated in (7). (6) Bocah sing nembe teko iku putri-ku child COMP just arrive DEF girl-1SG.POSS ‘The child who just arrived is my daughter’ (7) *Bocah sing asu iku ny-(c)okot wis bali child COMP dog DEF N-bite already go home ‘The child that the dog bit already went home Fourth, only grammatical subjects can be the clefted elements in a cleft construction, as illustrated in (8). Direct objects do not allow clefting, as in (9). (8) Dheweke sing menang 3SG COMP win ‘It is she/he that won’ (9) *Omah iku sing aku wis n-dandani house DEF COMP 1SG already N-fix ‘It is the house that I already fixed’ Fifth, the subject relation can be controlled, for example, as an equi target of certain verbs, as in (10). Direct objects cannot be the equi target, as in (11). (10) Aku kepingin (Ø) m-(w)aca buku itu 1SG want N-read book DEF ‘I want to read the book’ (11) *Amir kepingin ibu-ne ng-goleki (Ø) Amir want mother-3SG.POSS N-look for ‘Amir wants his mother look for (him)’ Finally, subjects can also be gapped in controlled adverbial clauses. The subjects which must be coreferential with the matrix nominal is obligatorily deleted, as in (12). Direct objects cannot be deleted, as in (13). (12) Dhewekei teka saperlu (Øi) ng-omong karo Ali 3SG come for N- talk with Ali ‘She/he came to talk with Ali’ (13) *Aku ng-goleki Alij saperlu aku ng-(k)andhani (Øj) 1SG N-look for Ali for 1SG N-tell ‘I looked for Ali to tell (him)’ Applicative Constructions The term applicative refers to a construction in some languages where an underlying indirect object or oblique is realised as a core argument. The applied argument replaces P and in most languages becomes the direct object. In some languages, P may be a subject. In most instances, the verb usually bears a distinctive inflection expressing the semantic relation borne by the direct object. In Relational Grammar, an applicative is referred to as an advancement of obliques, such as locative, benefactive, instrument, etc., to 2, or an advancement of 3 to 2 where 3 is an indirect object and 2 is a direct object. The following examples are taken from Indonesian. (14) a. Batu itu jatuh di genting stone DEF fall on roof tiles ‘The stone fell on the roof tiles’ b. Batu itu men-jatuh-i genting stone DEF meN-fall-I roof tiles ‘The stone fell on the roof tiles’ (15) a. Ali mem-beli bunga untuk Ani Ali meN-buy flower for Ani ‘Ali bought flowers for Ani’ b. Ali mem-beli-kan Ani bunga Ali meN-buy-KAN Ani flower ‘Ali bought flowers for Ani’ The example in (14a) is an intransitive construction with a locative NP genting itu ‘the roof tile’ functioning as an oblique, marked by the preposition di ‘on’. In (14b), there is an advancement of a locative to 2, marked by the presence of the suffix –i, the deleted preposition, and the meN- prefix which regularly marks the subject of a transitive verb. The resultant sentence in (14b) is no longer intransitive but transitive. In other words, with an intransitive base, applicativisation can turn it to a transitive construction. The stratal diagram for the example in (14) is illustrated in (16a). The example in (15a) is already a transitive construction with bunga as 2 and Ani as a benefactive, as indicated by the preposition untuk ‘for’. The benefactive is advanced to 2 and the initial 2 is demoted to a chômeur. The advancement is registered on the verb by the prefix meN-, the suffix –kan, and the deletion of the preposition untuk ‘for’. The stratal diagram in (16b) shows this advancement. (16) a. b. jatuh batu genting 1 Loc P P 1 2 P P 1 Cho beli Ali bunga Ani 1 2 Ben 2 Based on these examples, we can distinguish two kinds of applicative constructions: intransitive-based applicatives and transitive- based applicatives. The former is exemplified in (14) and the latter is exemplified in (15). In addition to a N-prefix, there are two applicative suffixes, -i/ni and –ake. In most cases they are in complementary distribution, that is, a verb can only take either one of the affixes. However, some applied verbs are not marked at all. Below are examples of non-applicative verbs and their applicative counterparts. Non-applicative Applicative N- + Ø N- + -i/ni N- + -ake lungguh (ing) *ng-lungguh ng-lungguh-i *ng-lungguh-ake ‘sit in’ ng-gawa *ng-gawa *ng-gawan-i ng-gawak-ake ‘take’ m-(p)acul m-(p)acul *m-(p)acul-i *m-(p)acul-ake ‘hue’ A number of applicative constructions, i.e. locatives, instruments, benefactives, recipients, and destination, are discussed in this chapter. Locatives In Javanese, the locative prepositions like ing, ning, ana ‘in/on/at’ or menyang ‘to’ mark a locative. The applied are marked by the N-prefix plus with or without the suffix –i/ni. Note that the suffix –i is used when the verb ends in consonant whereas the suffix –ni is used when the verb ends in vowel. The N-prefix is also used to mark an applicative verb formed from an intransitive base that has no N-prefix. The following examples illustrate applicativisation of intransitive constructions. (17) a. Dheweke lungguh ing dipan iku 3SG sit on bed DEF ‘S/he sat on the bed’ b. Dheweke ng-lungguh-i dipan iku 3SG N-sit-I bed DEF ‘S/he sat on the bed’ (18) a. Dheweke m-(p)anggon ing omah iki 3SG N-stay to house this ‘S/he stayed in this house’ b. Dheweke m-(p)anggon-i omah iki 3SG N-stay-I house this ‘S/he stayed in this house’ The examples in (17) and (18) show applicativisation of intransitive constructions. In (17) the NP dipan iku ‘the bed’ bears the same semantic role of locative, but it has a different grammatical relation, oblique, marked by the locative preposition ing ‘in’ in (17a) and direct object in (17b). The oblique relation in (17a) is promoted to produce the sentence in (17b). The promotion is registered on the verb with a morphological suffix –i and the deletion of its preposition. The result of this process is a transitive construction in which the locative NP is now in direct object relation. A similar situation occurs with the sentence in (18) where the locative oblique is promoted to direct object, indicated by the suffix –i and the deletion of the preposition ing ‘in’. One piece of evidence that the advanced oblique is a new 2 is its ability to be further promoted to 1 via passivisation. In the example below, dipan iku ‘the bed’ is advanced to 1. (19) Dipan iku di-lungguh-i dheweke bed DEF DI-sit-I 3SG ‘The bed was sat on by her/him’ The promotion of locative to 2 and then further to 1 can be illustrated by following an RG analysis as follows. (20) Dheweke lungguh dipan 1 P Loc 1 P 2 Cho P 1 In the first stratum in which the verb is intransitive, dheweke ‘s/he’ is designated as 1, the verb lungguh ‘sit’ as Predicate and the locative phrase ing dipan iku ‘on the bed’ as Loc(ative). In the second stratum, dheweke ‘s/he’ remains as 1, the locative phrase is advanced to 2 and the verb is suffixed with –i. There is another change with the verb. The advancement of locative creates a new 2 and hence the verb is transitive, and this is registered with the N-prefix. In the last stratum, the new 2 is advanced further to 1 via passivisation, demoting the initial 1, dheweke, to a chômeur. Some intransitive verbs in Javanese are affixed with m- from precategorial bases because precategorial bases cannot be used syntactically before being affixed. In other words, the prefix is used here to form verbs. The locative obliques following these prefixed intransitives are promoted to direct object through applicativisation by a morphological marker of the N-prefix in place of m- as well as the –i/ni suffix on the verb. The locative preposition is then dropped, as illustrated in (21) and (22). (21) a. Aku m-unggah ing boncengan 1SG M-climb in back seat ‘I climbed onto the back seat’ b. Aku ng-unggah-i boncengan 1SG N-climb-I back seat ‘I climbed onto the back seat’ (22) a. Ningsih m-lebu ing senthong Ningsih M-enter in bedroom ‘Ningsih entered the bedroom’ b. Ningsih ng-lebo-ni senthong Ningsih N-enter-I bedroom ‘Ningsih entered the bedroom’ In addition, there are some other intransitive verbs in Javanese that already have the N-prefix. Like the ones prefixed with m-, these intransitive verbs are formed from precategorials. Applicativisation normally involves adding a N- prefix on the verb of the non-applicative construction. However, due to the presence of the N- prefix, these nasalised intransitive verbs do not require an additional prefix. They do not require the suffix –i/ni either. The examples in (23) and (24) illustrate this. (23) a. Ali m-(p)acul ing sawah Ali N-hoe in ricefield ‘Ali hoed in the ricefield’ b. Ali m-(p)acul sawah Ali N-hoe ricefield ‘Ali hoed the ricefield’ (24) a. Ali ng-luku ing sawah Ali N-plough in ricefield ‘Ali ploughed in the ricefield’ b. Ali ng-luku sawah Ali N-plough ricefield ‘Ali ploughed the ricefield’ The intransitive verbs in the above examples are nasalised from noun bases, pacul ‘a hoe’ in (23a) and luku ‘a plough’ in (24a). The grammatical relations which exist here are subject (Ali in both examples) and locative obliques sawah in both examples. When applicativisation is involved, the verbs remain the same. No additional affixation occurs, but like in the previous applicativisation, the preposition is dropped because the oblique now bears the direct object relation. The discussion so far involves applicativisation of intransitive constructions. A locative within a transitive construction can also undergo applicativisation. The advancement which occurs within a transitive construction not only promotes a locative oblique to direct object but also demotes the initial direct object to a chômeur. Consider the following examples. (25) a. Dheweke ng-isi banyu ning botol 3SG N-fill water in bottle ‘S/he filled water into a bottle’ b. Dheweke ng-ise-ni botol banyu 3SG N-fill-I bottle water ‘S/he filled a bottle with water’ (26) a. Pak Hardi n-(t)andur kembang in kebon Mr Hardi N-plant flower in garden ‘Mr Hardi planted flowers in the garden’ b. Pak Hardi n-(t)andur-i kebon kembang Mr Hardi N-plant-I garden flower ‘Mr Hardi planted the garden with flowers’ The examples in (25) are transitive with dheweke ‘s/he’ as subject. However, the postverbal arguments banyu ‘water’ and botol ‘bottle’ do not bear the same grammatical relation because in (25a) banyu ‘water’ is a direct object but becomes a chômeur in (25b) due to the advancement of locative botol ‘bottle’ to direct object. So, in (25b) botol ‘bottle’ is a new direct object demoting the initial direct object banyu to a chômeur. The advancement of locative to direct object is registered by the suffix –i/ni on the verb ng-ise-ni. The N-prefix is not required because the transitive verb in (25a) is already nasalised. A similar process applies to (26) where the locative kebon ‘garden’ is advanced to direct object and the initial direct object kembang ‘flower’ is demoted to a chômeur. The advancement is marked by the suffix –i on the verb n-(t)andur-i ‘plant’. The relational network of the advancement of locative into direct object within transitive constructions can be seen below. (27) Dheweke ng-isi banyu botol 1 P 2 Loc 1 P Cho 2 In the initial stratum, banyu ‘water’ is 2 and botol ‘bottle’ is Loc(ative), but in the final stratum, botol ‘bottle’ is advanced to 2, which then demotes the initial 2 to a chômeur. The advancement is registered on the verb by the suffix –i/ni. The evidence for claiming the initial 2, banyu ‘water’, is demoted to chômeur is that it can no longer be advanced to subject via the passive (28b) whereas (28a) shows that botol ‘bottle’, the final 2, can be promoted to 1. (28) a. Botol di-ise-ni banyu dening dheweke bottle DI-fill-I water by 3SG ‘The bottle was filled with water by her/him’ b. *Banyu di-ise-ni botol dening dheweke water DI-fill-I bottle by 3SG *‘The water was filled with bottle by her/him’ Instruments Javanese encodes instrumental NPs with the preposition nganggo ‘with’. The examples are given below. (29) a. Ratna m-balang omah nganggo watu iku Ratna N-throw house with stone DEF ‘Ratna threw the house with the stone’ b. Dheweke n-(t)embak manuk nganggo bedil 3SG N-shoot bird with gun ‘S/he shot the bird with a gun’ The instrumental NPs are watu ‘stone’ in (29a) and bedil ‘gun’ in (29b) and they bear the instrumental oblique relation. These obliques can be promoted to direct object with the demotion of the initial objects into chômeurs marked with the preposition marang ‘to’. The promotion or advancement of an instrumental oblique into a direct object is registered on the verb by the suffix –ake. The result of this process can be illustrated in the following sentences. (30) a. Ratna m-balang-ake watu iku marang omah Ratna N-throw-AKE stone DEF to house ‘Ratna threw the stone at the house’ b. Dheweke n-(t)embak-ake bedil marang manuk 3SG N-shoot-AKE gun to bird ‘S/he fired the gun at the bird’ (30a) corresponds with (29a) and (30b) corresponds with (29b). However, the post-verbal arguments of (30a) and (30b) are different from their counterparts in (29a) and (29b) respectively. In (30a) the instrumental oblique watu has been advanced to direct object and this is marked with –ake on the verb and the preposition nganggo ‘with’ is deleted. In addition, the former object has been demoted to a chômeur marked by the preposition marang ‘to/at’. A similar process occurs with (30b) from (29b) where the instrumental oblique has been advanced to a direct object and the initial direct object has been demoted to a chômeur, indicated by the suffix – ake on the verb and the preposition marang ‘to/at’ on the demoted object. To show that the advancee holds the new 2 relation, it can further be advanced to 1 via passivisation, as illustrated in (31a) for (30a) and (31b) for (30b). (31) a. Watu iku di-balang-ake Ratna marang omah stone DEF DI- throw-AKE Ratna to house ‘The stone was thrown by Ratna at the house’ b. Bedil di-tembak-ake dheweke marang manuk gun DI-shoot-AKE 3SG to bird ‘The gun was fired by her/him at the bird’ The grammatical relations of this process are illustrated in (32). (32) a. Ratna m-balang omah watu 1 P 2 Instr 1 P Cho 2 Cho P Cho 1 b. Dheweke n-(t)embak manuk bedil 1 P 2 Instr 1 P Cho 2 Cho P Cho 1 In the initial stratum, Ratna ‘Ratna’ and dheweke ‘s/he’ are 1, omah ‘house’ and manuk ‘bird’ are 2, and watu ‘stone’ and bedil ‘gun’ are instrumental obliques. In the second stratum, the instrumental obliques are advanced to 2 demoting the initial 2 to chômeur. The advancement is registered on the verbs by the suffix –ake and the preposition marang ‘to’ on the chômeurs. In the final stratum, passives, the advanced instrumental obliques are further advanced to 1. Benefactives Beneficiary is typologically identified as a prototypical animate entity that benefits from the action of the verb (Palmer 1994: 31). In English, beneficiary is marked by the preposition for, as illustrated in (33). (33) He bought a car for his wife Although it is restricted in English, this benefactive construction can be paraphrased by advancing the beneficiary to direct object, as illustrated in (34). (34) a. He bought his wife a car b. *He bought a car his wife The advancement is marked by the position of the new direct object his wife immediately after the verb and the deletion of the preposition for, as shown in (34a). If the position of the former direct object and the beneficiary is not reversed, the sentence will be unacceptable, as shown in (34b). In Javanese the presence of a benefactive argument is marked by the preposition kanggo ‘for’. The benefactive applicatives can be intransitive-based or transitive based. The following examples are intransitive-based benefactives in Javanese. (35) a. Dheweke blanja kanggo Anna 3SG shop for Anna ‘S/he shopped for Anna’ b. Dheweke m-blanjak-ake Anna 3SG N-shop-AKE Anna ‘S/he shopped for Anna’ (36) a. Ali n-donga kanggo bapak-e Ali N-pray for father-3SG.POSS ‘Ali prayed for his father’ b. Ali n-dongak-ake bapak-e Ali N-pray-AKE father-3SG.POSS ‘Ali prayed for his father’ Both sentences in (35a) and (36a) are intransitive constructions with non-nasalised and nasalised verbs respectively. Anna ‘Anna’ and bapak-e ‘his father’ are beneficiaries for the respective sentences and are preceded by the preposition kanggo ‘for’. The advancement of the beneficiary to direct object is registered on the verb by the suffix –ake, forming these verbs into transitive, and the deletion of the preposition kanggo ‘for’. In addition, the verb blanja ‘shop’ is now nasalised. As demonstrated in (35b) and (36b) Anna ‘Anna’ and bapak-e ‘his father’ are now the direct objects of the newly transitivised verbs m- blanjak-ake ‘shop for’ and n-dongak-ake ‘pray for’. The grammatical relation for the advancement of benefactives to direct objects is given as follows. (37) a. Dheweke blanja Ana 1 P Ben 1 P 2 b. Ali donga bapak-e 1 P Ben 1 P 2 In the initial stratum, dheweke ‘s/he’ and Ali ‘Ali’ are 1, blanja ‘shop’ and donga ‘pray’ are P and Anna ‘Anna’ and bapak-e ‘his father’ are Ben(efactives), which are preceded by the preposition kanggo ‘for’. The verb in (35a) is non-nasal whereas the one in (36a) is nasalised. In the final stratum, the benefactives are advanced to 2 and the verbs are transitivised by the suffix –ake. Benefactive constructions in Javanese are also found with transitive constructions. The examples are illustrated below. (38) a. Ali n-jupuk buku kanggo Mary Ali N-take book for Mary ‘Ali took a book for Mary’ b. Ali n-jupuk-ake Mary buku Ali N-take-AKE Mary book ‘Ali took a book for Mary’ (39) a. Dheweke ng-gawa hadiah kanggo anak-e 3SG N-bring present for child-3SG.POSS ‘S/he brought a present for her/his child’ b. Dheweke ng-gawak-ake anak-e hadiah 3SG N-bring-AKE child-3SG.POSS present ‘S/he brought her/his child a present’ (40) a. Amin ng-gawe dolanan kanggo kanca-ne Amin N-make toy for friend-3SG.POSS ‘Amin made a toy for his friend’ b. Amin ng-gawek-ake kanca-ne dolanan Amin N-make-AKE friend-3SG.POSS toy ‘Amin made his friend a toy’ The above examples show the advancement of benefactive to direct object. In (38a), (39a), and (40a) the verbs are transitive and nasalised. Ali ‘Ali’, dheweke ‘s/he’ and Amin ‘Amin’ are subjects, buku ‘book’, hadiah ‘present’ and dolanan ‘toy’ are direct objects and Mary ‘Mary’, anake ‘her/his child’ and kancane ‘his friend’ are beneficiaries marked by the preposition kanggo ‘for’. The corresponding sentences in (38b), (39b) and (40b) are those which have undergone advancement of benefactives to direct objects. In (38b) the benefactive Mary ‘Mary’ is advanced to direct object. This is registered on the verb with the suffix –ake and the preposition kanggo ‘for’ is deleted, and the former direct object is demoted to a chômeur (see section 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 for inability of the demoted direct object for passivisation). A similar process occurs for (39b) and (40b). It is necessary to note that prior to advancement, the direct object immediately follows the verbs, as in (38a), (39a) and (40a). Putting the benefactives immediately after the verbs is unacceptable as illustrated below. Note that (41a) corresponds with (38a), (41b) with (39a) and (41c) with (40a). (41) a. *Ali n-jupuk kanggo Mary buku Ali N-take for Mary book ‘Ali took a book for Mary’ b. *Dheweke ng-gawa kanggo anak-e hadiah 3SG N-bring for child-3SG.POSS present ‘S/he brought a present for her/his child’ c. *Amin ng-gawe kanggo kanca-ne dolanan Amin N-make for friend-3SG.POSS toy ‘Amin made a toy for his friend’ After the advancement of a benefactive in a transitive clause, the new object and the demoted object can occur in either order. The examples in (42) illustrate this. (42) a. Pak Hardi m-(p)undhut montor kanggo wong iku Mr. Hardi N-buy car for person DEF ‘Mr. Hardi bought a car for that person’ b. Pak Hardi m-(p)undhut-ake wong iku montor Mr. Hardi N-buy-AKE person DEF car ‘Mr. Hardi bought that person a car’ c. Pak Hardi m-(p)undhut-ake montor wong iku Mr. Hardi N-buy-AKE car person DEF ‘Mr. Hardi bought that person a car’ The example in (42a) is a transitive construction with the benefactive encoded with the preposition kanggo ‘for’ and no advancement to direct object has taken place. The direct object comes immediately after the verb and the verb is not suffixed. After the advancement took place, the benefactive demotes the initial direct object to a chômeur. The verb is marked with the suffix –ake and the preposition is dropped. This is illustrated in (42b). In (42c) the advancement of benefactive to direct object has taken place, marked with the suffix –ake and the deletion of the preposition. However, the initial direct object and the benefactive remain in their original position. In English, as in (34) and the following example (43) advancement without changing position is unacceptable. (43) a. Mr. Hardi poured a cup of tea for that person. b. Mr. Hardi poured that person a cup of tea. c. *Mr. Hardi poured a cup of tea that person. In (43a), there is no advancement of benefactive to direct object and the preposition for is used. In (43b) the advancement has taken place, marked by the order of the benefactive immediately after the verb and the deletion of the preposition for. In (43c) the advancement has taken place but the order of benefactive and the initial direct object is retained, and it is unacceptable in English. After the benefactive advancement, the initial direct object is a chômeur. This is evidenced by the fact that the advanced benefactive, not the chômeur, can be advanced to 1 to form passive, as shown in the following. (44) a. *Montor di-pundhut-ake dening Pak Hardi wong iku car DI-buy-AKE by Mr. Hardi person DEF ‘The car was bought that person by Mr. Hardi’ b. Wong iku di-(p)undhut-ake montor dening Pak Hardi person DEF DI-buy-AKE car by Mr. Hardi ‘That person was bought a car by Mr. Hardi’ When the chômeur montor ‘car’ is advanced to 1, the sentence is ungrammatical (44a), but when the advanced benefactive wong iku ‘that person’ holding a new 2 is advanced to 1, the sentence in grammatical (44b). In addition, there are some sentences that are worth discussing with regard to the advancement of a beneficiary to a direct object. Examples are given below. (45) a. Jana n-jupuk-ake buku kanggo Petrus Jana N-take-AKE book for Petrus ‘Jana took a book for Petrus’ (Sudaryanto 1976: 129) b. Aku n-(t)ulis-ake layang kanggo bapak-e 1SG N-write-AKE letter for father-3SG.POSS ‘I wrote a letter for her/his father’ (Arifin et al. 1987: 46) c. Ali n-jupuk-ake buku kanggo Aminah Ali N-take-AKE book for Aminah ‘Ali took a book for Aminah’ (Bintoro 1980: 107) These examples are clearly benefactive constructions indicated by the preposition kanggo ‘for’ which precedes the benefactive NPs Petrus ‘Petrus’ (45a), bapak-e ‘her/his father’ (45b), and Aminah ‘Aminah’ (45c). However, the verbs in these examples are marked with the suffix –ake which is also the marker of advancement of the benefactive NP to direct object, as shown in the previous discussion. How do we account for this phenomenon? One possible explanation might be that there is some confusion among speakers between a construction with and without advancement of benefactive to direct object (Badib 1980). Consider the following examples. (46) a. Jana n-jupuk buku kanggo Petrus Jana N-take book for Petrus ‘Jana took a book for Petrus’ b. Jana n-jupuk-ake Petrus buku Jana N-take-AKE Petrus book ‘Jana took a book for Petrus’ c. Jana n-jupuk-ake buku Petrus Jana N-take-AKE book Petrus ‘Jana took a book for Petrus’ d. Jana n-jupuk-ake buku kanggo Petrus Jana N-take-AKE book for Petrus ‘Jana took a book for Petrus’ (47) a. Aku n-(t)ulis layang kanggo bapak-e 1SG N-write letter for father-3SG.POSS ‘I wrote a letter for her/his father’ b. Aku n-(t)ulis-ake bapak-e layang 1SG N-write-AKE father-3SG.POSS letter ‘I wrote a letter for her/his father’ c. Aku n-(t)ulis-ake layang bapak-e 1SG N-write-AKE letter father-3SG.POSS ‘I wrote a letter for her/his father’ d. Aku n-(t)ulis-ake layang kanggo bapak-e 1SG N-write-AKE letter for father-3SG.POSS ‘I wrote a letter for her/his father’ (48) a. Ali n-jupuk buku kanggo Aminah Ali N-take book for Aminah ‘Ali took a book for Aminah’ b. Ali n-jupuk-ake Aminah buku Ali N-take-AKE Aminah book ‘Ali took a book for Aminah’ c. Ali n-jupuk-ake buku Aminah Ali N-take-AKE book Aminah ‘Ali took a book for Aminah’ d.. Ali n-jupuk-ake buku kanggo Aminah Ali N-take-AKE book for Aminah ‘Ali took a book for Aminah’ Examples (46), (47) and (48) show that there is a transitional change from the construction without the advancement in (46a), (47a) and (48a) to full advancement in (46b), (47b) and (48b). In the (a) examples the verbs are not suffixed with –ake and the beneficiaries are preceded by the preposition kanggo ‘for’. In the (b) examples advancement has taken place indicated by the registration of –ake on the verbs, the deletion of the preposition and the order change where the beneficiary in its new role as a direct object comes immediately after the verb demoting the old direct object to a chômeur. As Javanese allows the advanced benefactive retains its position, sentences in ( 46c), (47c) and (48c) emerge where both the demoted direct object and the advanced beneficiary remain in their original position. Some confusion arises whether to use the original benefactive construction or the one with the advanced benefactive, as a result, as shown in (46d), (47d) and (48d), the preposition kanggo ‘for’ reappears preceding the beneficiary. Here, the suffix –ake marks the advancement which demotes the initial direct object to a chômeur, but the beneficiary retains its preposition so it cannot take over the direct objecthood, consequently, both the postverbal arguments cannot bear direct object relations, and passivisation cannot be produced. Consider the passivisation of (46). (49) a. Buku di-jupuk kanggo Petrus dening Jana book DI-take for Petrus by Jana ‘The book was taken for Petrus by Jana’ b. Petrus di-jupuk-ake buku dening Jana Petrus DI-take-AKE book by Jana ‘The book was taken for Petrus by Jana’ c. * Buku di-jupuk-ake kanggo Petrus dening Jana book DI-take-AKE for Petrus by Jana ‘The book was taken for Petrus by Jana’ d. *Petrus di-jupuk-ake buku kanggo dening Jana book DI-take-AKE book for by Jana ‘Petrus was taken the book for by Jana’ The passive in (49a) corresponds with (46a). The one in (49b) corresponds with both (46b) and (46c) in which passivisation can only occur with Petrus ‘Petrus’ as the final direct object to be the subject of the corresponding passive. The example in (46d) cannot undergo passivisation. Neither of the postverbal arguments can be promoted to the subject of the passive, as demonstrated by the unacceptability of promoting buku ‘book’ (49c) and Petrus ‘Petrus’ (49d) as the subject of the corresponding passives. The syntactic problem of (46d) can be represented with the relational network as follows. (50) Jana jupuk buku Petrus 1 P 2 Ben 1 P Cho Ben As shown above that in the initial stratum, Jana ‘Jana’ is 1, jupuk ‘take’ is P, buku ‘book’ is 2 and Petrus ‘Petrus’ is Ben(efactive). In the applicative construction, buku has been demoted to Cho but its position is not taken over by the Petrus which still bears the benefactive oblique. Because no argument fills the direct objecthood on the second stratum, no passivisation is possible. Recipients This sub-section explores recipient advancement. Recipients usually involve verbs of giving. In English the verb give may have two different constructions, as follows. (51) a. Fred gave the book to Tom b. Fred gave Tom the book In (51a) Fred functions as subject, the book as direct object and Tom indirect object. Tom is marked by the preposition to and comes after the direct object. In (51b) Fred is subject and Tom holds the direct object relation, indicated by the position immediately after the verb and the deletion of the preposition to and the former direct object is pushed to a chômeur. According to Relational Grammar, there is a 3-2 advancement, implying that the example in (51a) is basic and the example in (51b) derives from (51a). The indirect object Tom is advanced to direct object and the book is demoted into a chômeur. The grammatical relations of sentence (51) are shown below. (52) Fred gave Tom the book 1 P 3 2 1 P 2 Cho Sentence (51a) is represented in the initial stratum where the book is 2 and Tom is 3 whereas sentence (51b) is represented in the final stratum where Tom is advanced to 2 and the book is demoted to chômeur. The principal evidence that advancement has taken place is passivisation. Before advancement takes place the book as the initial 2 can be passivised as shown in (53a), but after the advancement (53) a. The book was given to Tom by Fred b. *The book was given Tom by Fred c. Tom was given the book by Fred There is a controversy over the analysis of the double object construction in English. Hudson (1992) casts doubt on the RG analysis given above. He claims that in an English double object construction, the second object should be taken as the direct object because he claims that the second object shares the most characteristics with the direct object in a monotransitive construction. Hudson uses the following terms: OO to refer to a direct object in a monotransitive construction, O1 to refer to a recipient and O2 to refer to a patient/theme in the double object construction. The examples are given below (Hudson 1992: 257). (54) a. Fred met [Mary] OO b. Anne gave [the children] [ those sweets] O1 O2 So, in (43a) Mary is OO, and in (43b) the children is O1 and those sweets is O2. Hudson examines the properties of OO, O1, and O2. For example, OO and O2, but not O1, can extract easily, can follow a particle, and can be moved by Heavy NP Shift. He suggests that many of the properties are shared more between OO and O2 than between OO and O1. While Hudson examines the properties of objects in both constructions, Dryer (1986) questions whether one construction derives from the other. He claims that there is no revaluation in the double object construction. It should be, therefore, taken as monostratal. Dryer defends this interpretation on the grounds that this construction is the preferred alternative across languages and therefore should be analysed as having a single stratum. In defending his argument, Dryer proposes the grammatical relations of primary object (PO) and secondary object (SO) to refer to the way in which some languages operate. These relations are held simultaneously with direct object and indirect object in the same way as that ergative and absolutive are held at the same time as subject and direct object. Where the Universal Alignment Hypothesis treats the recipient in a giving sentence as the initial IO and the patient the initial DO, Dryer’s proposal on the double object construction is illustrated as follows (Dryer 1986: 821). (55) Jae sent the minister a letter IO(PO) DO(SO) Dryer (1986: 814) points out that a nominal is a PO if it is an IO in a ditransitive clause, or a DO in a monotransitive clause. It is a SO if it is a DO in a ditransitive clause. Based on this assumption, in this clause the minister is analysed as PO because it holds the IO relation and a letter is analysed as SO because it holds the DO relation. Dryer’s proposal of PO and SO terms seems to align with Bresnan and Kanerva’s (1989) categories of grammatical relation of the construction below where Mary is analysed as OBJ and the book as OBJ2. (56) John gave Mary the book Contrary to the RG analysis where the double object construction is derived, Dryer suggests the opposite. He takes the alternative to the double object construction where the recipient appears as an oblique to be marked and he analyses as involving a demotion of the IO to chômeur. He calls this Antidative Analysis (1986: 821). The following example illustrates this. (57) a. John gave Mary the book IO(PO) DO(SO) b. John gave the book to Mary Initial DO(SO) IO(PO) Final DO(PO) Chômeur The sentence in (57a) is treated as basic and by following traditional descriptive approaches the NP immediately after the verb in such sentences is described as the IO and the second NP after the verb as the DO. In the above ditransitive clause, Mary is a PO because it is an IO and the book is as SO because it is a DO. According to the Antidative Analysis the sentence in (57b) involves the rule of Antidative whereby the SO the book advances to become the PO. The original PO becomes the chômeur as a result of the advancement. While Dryer’s analysis where the double object construction is basic and the alternative to- phrase construction is derived and marked is the opposite of the RG’s, Shibatani (1996: 174) claims that these two constructions are both basic. He suggests that the recipient in constructions with giving verbs seem to follow one of the two different patterns: (58) 1st pattern: NP1= subject, NP2 = primary object, NP3= secondary object 2nd pattern: NP1= subject, NP2= indirect object, NP3= direct object The first pattern is similar to the double object construction where the recipient is encoded as NP2 (primary object) and the patient as NP3 (secondary object) whereas the second pattern is similar to the to-phrase construction where the patient is encoded as NP3 (direct object) and the recipient as NP2 (indirect object). Some languages may have both patterns in their constructions with giving verbs, some others may only have one pattern, either the first pattern or the second pattern. English has both patterns as illustrated at the beginning of this section. In Indonesian, the constructions with giving verbs behave in the same way as the ones in English. The following are Indonesian examples. (59) a. Ali mem-beri Anna buah itu Ali meN-give-I Anna fruit DEF ‘Ali gave Anna the fruit ‘ b. Ali mem-beri-kan buah itu kepada Anna Ali meN-give-KAN fruit DEF to Anna ‘Ali gave the fruit to Anna’ The example in (59a) follows Shibatani’s 1st pattern where the NP2 Anna ‘Anna’ is expressed as the primary object and the NP3 buah itu ‘the fruit’ is expressed as the secondary object. Example (59b) follows his 2nd pattern where the NP3 buah itu ‘the fruit’ is expressed as direct object and the NP2 Anna ‘Anna’ is expressed as indirect object preceded by the preposition kepada ‘to’. Note that the verb in (59a) is suffixed with –i whereas the one in (59b) is suffixed with – kan. The absence of the –i/ni suffix on the verb mem-beri (59a) is due to a simple phonological process in verbs whose stem ends in /i/. This is clear from consonant-final verbs below. (60) menyerah-i menyerah-kan ‘hand’ menawar-i menawar-kan ‘offer’ menghadiah-i menghadiah-kan ‘give a present’ The use of the -i or –kan suffix determines what argument come immediately after the verb. With –kan, it is the theme whereas with –i, it is the recipient that comes immediately after the verb. Other languages, such as Japanese and German, employ Shibatani’s second pattern. The example in (61a) is Japanese and the one in (61b) is German (from Shibatani 1996: 174). (61) a. Taroo ga Hanako ni hon o yatta Taroo NOM Hanako DAT book ACC gave ‘Taroo gave a book to Hanako’ b. Otto gibt dem Kind Brötchen Otto give the.DAT child small.bread ‘Otto gave the child rolls of bread’ The Japanese example follows the second pattern where the NP2 Hanako (recipient) is expressed as indirect object indicated by the dative marker ni and the NP3 hon ‘a book’ is expressed as direct object indicated by the accusative marker o. Similarly in German, NP2 Kind (recipient) is expressed as indirect object indicated by the dative marker dem and the NP3 Brötchen ‘pieces of roll bread’ is expressed as direct object. Shibatani further points out that the basic syntax of benefactives is the same as that of giving constructions. So, English and Indonesian benefactive constructions, for instance, can have two forms: one in which the beneficiary is expressed as primary object in a double object construction and the other as indirect object because English and Indonesian use both patterns with the giving constructions. On the other hand, in Japanese and German, the benefactives follow the second pattern because they use the second pattern in their giving constructions. Javanese giving constructions behave like the ones in English and Indonesian. There is verb morphology to mark the distinction of two types of giving constructions: one suffixed with – ake and another suffixed with –i/ni. The choice of the suffix determines which of the two postverbal arguments function as direct object. Consider the following sentences. (62) a. Ali m-(w)eneh-ake dolanan iku marang Zahra Ali N-give-AKE toy DEF to Zahra ‘Ali gave the toy to Zahra’ b. Ali m-(w)eneh-i Zahra dolanan iku Ali N-give-I Zahra toy DEF ‘Ali gave the toy to Zahra’ (62) a. Kepala Sekolah m-(p)asrah-ake tugas iku marang Ali principal N-assign-AKE job DEF to Ali ‘The principal assigned the job to Ali’ b. Kepala Sekolah m-(p)asrah-i Ali tugas iku principal N-assign-I Ali job DEF ‘The principal assigned Ali the job’ The verbs in (62a) and (63a) are suffixed with – ake whereas those in (62b) and (63b) are suffixed with –i. The suffixes indicate different marking on the NPs following the verbs. In (62a) and (64a) the NPs dolanan iku ‘the toy’ and tugas iku ‘the job’ function as direct objects whereas NPs Ali ‘Ali’ and Zahra ‘Zahra’ functions as recipients preceded by the preposition marang ‘to’. In the (62b) and (63b), on the other hand, alternation has taken place where the NPs Zahra ‘Zahra’ and Ali ‘Ali’, which function as recipients in (62a) and (63a), are direct objects whereas the former direct objects dolanan ‘toy’ and tugas ‘job’ are pushed into chômage. With respect to passivisation, there is no controversy with the examples in (62a) and (63a) because there is only one candidate for promotion, that is the direct objects dolanan ‘toy’ and tugas ‘job’, as illustrated in (64). (64) a. Dolanan iku di-weneh-ake Ali marang Zahra toy DEF DI-give-AKE Ali to Zahra ‘The toy was given by Ali to Zahra’ b. *Zahra di-weneh-ake Ali dolanan iku marang Zahra DI-give-AKE Ali toy DEF to ‘Zahra as given the toy by Ali to’ (65) a. Tugas iku di-pasrah-ake Kepala Sekolah marang Ali job DEF DI-assign-AKE principal to Ali ‘The job was assigned by the principal to Ali’ b. *Ali di-pasrah-ake Kepala Sekolah tugas iku marang Ali DI-assign-AKE principal job DEF to ‘Ali was assigned the job by the principal to The above examples show that with the giving verbs suffixed with –ake the patient NPs can be passivised whereas the non-patient NPs cannot be passivised. The contrary occurs with the giving verbs suffixed with –i/ni, as illustrated in the following. (66) a. *Dolanan iku di-weneh-i Ali Zahra toy DEF DI-give-I Ali Zahra ‘The toy was given by Ali to Zahra’ b. Zahra di-weneh-i Ali dolanan iku Zahra DI-give-I Ali toy DEF ‘Zahra was given the toy by Ali’ (67) a. *Tugas iku di-pasrah-i Kepala Sekolah Ali job DEF DI-assign-I principal Ali ‘The job was assigned by the principal to Ali’ b. Ali di-pasrah-i Kepala Sekolah tugas iku Ali DI-assign-I principal job DEF ‘Ali was assigned the job by the principal’ With the giving verbs suffixed with –i, it is the recipient which can be promoted to subject. This indicates that the recipient is the new direct object. The patient NPs which in the previous examples can be promoted to subjects can no longer be able to be promoted to subject because they are now chômeurs. This is the reason why the examples in (66a) and (67a) are ungrammatical whereas those in (66b) and (57b) are grammatical. The suffix –ake with the giving verbs is then different from the suffix –ake used to mark the advancement of benefactive to direct object in the previous section because the benefactive obliques come with monotransitive verbs as shown by the following. (68)a. Pak Hardi m-(p)undhut montor kanggo wong iku Mr. Hardi N-buy car for person DEF ‘Mr. Hardi bought a car for the person’ b. Pak Hardi m-(p)undhut montor Mr. Hardi N-buy car ‘Mr. Hardi bought a car’ (69) a. Pak Hardi m-(p)undhut-ake wong iku montor Mr. Hardi N-buy-AKE person DEF car ‘Mr. Hardi bought the person a car’ b. *Pak Hardi m-(p)undhut-ake wong iku Mr. Hardi N-buy-AKE person DEF ‘Mr. Hardi bought the person’ The verb in (68a) has no suffix followed by a direct object montor ‘car’ and a benefactive wong iku ‘the person’. The deletion of benefactive in (68b) does not affect the grammaticality of the sentence because the verb is monotransitive. The verb in (69a) is suffixed with –ake with the benefactive functions as the new direct object whereas the former direct object is demoted to a chômeur. The verb m-(p)undhut-ake is ditransitive because the absence of the former direct object causes the sentence to be ungrammatical. The situation is different with the give-like verbs. The give-like verbs either suffixed with – ake or –i/ni are ditransitive. No NPs following the verb can be deleted. Consider the following examples. (70) a. Ali m-(w)eneh-ake dolanan iku marang Zahra Ali N-give-AKE toy DEF to Zahra ‘Ali gave the toy to Zahra’ b. *Ali m-(w)eneh-ake dolanan iku Ali N-give-AKE toy DEF ‘Ali gave the toy to Zahra’ c. *Ali m-(w)eneh-ake marang Zahra Ali N-give-AKE to Zahra ‘Ali gave to Zahra’ (71) a. Ali m-(w)eneh-i Zahra dolanan iku Ali N-give-I Zahra toy DEF ‘Ali gave the toy to Zahra’ b. *Ali m-(w)eneh-i Zahra Ali N-give-I Zahra ‘Ali gave to Zahra’ c. *Ali m-(w)eneh-i dolanan iku Ali N-give-I toy DEF ‘Ali gave the toy’ The verbs m-(w)neh-ake in (70) and m-(w)eneh-i in (71) are ditransitive verbs and require the presence of both postverbal arguments. Therefore, the absence of either postverbal argument results in the ungrammaticality of the sentence, as demonstrated in (70b), (70c), (71b) and (71c). Other verbs that behave like menehake-menehi are given below. (72) nawakake – nawani ‘offer’ ngirimake – ngirimi ‘send’ masrahake –masrahi ‘entrust’ nakokake – nakoni ‘ask’ nyritakake –nyritani ‘tell (a story)’ nuduhake – nuduhi ‘show’ nyilihake–nyilihi ‘lend’ nyuguhake – nyuguhi ‘serve’ In addition, there are some verbs which do not consistently follow the above pattern. The verbs like sumbang ‘contribute’ and balang ‘throw’ are not suffixed with –i for the double object construction, as shown in the following example. (73) a. Dheweke ny-(s)umbang-ake dhuwit marang kowe 3SG N-contribute-AKE money to 2SG ‘S/he contributed money to you’ b. Dheweke ny-(s)umbang kowe dhuwit 3SG N-support 2SG money ‘S/he supported you with money’ There are also some verb in the double object construction with or without suffix –i/ni, for example, wulang, ajar ‘teach’. This is illustrated in (74). (74) a. Pak Harso m-(w)ulang-ake Geografi marang murid-murid Mr. Harso N-teach-AKE Geography to students ‘Mr. Harso taught Geography to the students’ b. Pak Harso m-(w)ulang-i murid-murid Geografi Mr. Harso N-teach-I students Geography ‘Mr. Harso taught the students Geography’ c. Pak Harso m-(w)ulang-Ø murid-murid Geografi Mr. Harso N-teach students Geography ‘Mr. Harso taught the students Geography’ In short, in Javanese the to-phrase constructions always seems to be marked with the suffix –ake on the verbs, however, when the advancement of recipient to direct object has taken place, there are three ways to encode this advancement: (i) the verbs, such as weneh ‘give’, tawa ‘offer’ are marked by the suffix –i/ni, (ii) the verbs such as sumbang ‘contribute’ are not marked by the suffix –i/ni, and (iii) the verbs such as wulang, ajar ‘teach’ are optionally marked by the suffix –i/ni. Destination The destination is expressed by the preposition (me)nyang ‘to’, as illustrated below. (75)a. Dheweke teka menyang kantor iku 3SG come to office DEF ‘S/he came to the office’ b. Dheweke n-(t)eka-ni kantor iku 3SG N-come-I office DEF ‘S/he visited the office’ The example in (75a) is an intransitive construction with an oblique introduced by menyang ‘to’. The advancement of the oblique expressing destination in an intransitive construction to direct object is marked by the N- prefix and the suffix –i/ni on the verb, and the preposition menyang ‘to’ is deleted, as shown in (75b). The new direct object can further be advanced to subject via passivisation, as in (76a). (76) Kantor iku di-teka-ni dheweke office DEF DI-come-I 3SG ‘The office was visited by her/him’ The relational structure for this advancement is given in (77). (77) Dheweke teka kantor 1 P Destination 1 P 2 Cho P 1 In the first stratum kantor ‘office’ is an oblique expressing destination. This oblique is then promoted to 2 in the second stratum and finally it is further advanced to 1. CONCLUSION This article addresses applicative constructions in Javanese. There are two types of applicative constructions: intransitive-based and transitive- based, and they involve oblique to 2 advancement or 3-2 advancement. In addition to N- prefix added to the verb, and the deletion of preposition, the suffix –i/ni or –ake marks the advancement to direct object. The suffix –i/ni is used to mark locative, recipient and destination advancement, whereas the suffix –ake is used to mark benefactive and instrumental advancement. It is also possible that advancement to direct object is not marked with any suffix. REFERENCES Badib, A. A. 1980. Some major constructions in Javanese: a lexicase approach. PhD dissertation, Monash University, Melbourne. Blake, B. J. 1990. Relational grammar. London: Routledge. Bresnan, J., and J. M. Kanerva. 1989. Locative inversion in Chichewa: a case study of factorization in grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 1: 1-50. Davies, W. D. 1990b. Javanese evidence for subject-to-object raising. In K. Dziwirek, P. Farrell, and E. Mejias-Bikandi (eds.), Grammatical relations: a cross-theoretical perspective, 95-108. Stanford: CSLI-Stanford University. Davies, W. D. 1995. Javanese adversatives, passives and Mapping Theory. Journal of Linguistics 31: 15-31. Dixon, R. M. W., and A. Y. Aikhenvald. 2000. Changing valency: case studies in transitivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Dryer, M. 1986. Primary objects, secondary objects, and antidative. Language 62: 808- 845. Ewing, M. 1999. The clause in Cirebon Javanese conversation. PhD dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara. Hudson, R. 1992. So-called ‘double objects’ and grammatical relations. Language 68: 1: 251- 276. Palmer, F. R. 1994. Grammatical roles and relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Poedjosoedarmo, S. et al. 1979. Morfologi bahasa Jawa. Jakarta: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa, Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Shibatani, M. 1996. Applicatives and benefactives: a cognitive account. In M. Shibatani and S. A. Thompson (eds.), Grammatical constructions. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Uhlenbeck, E. M. 1978. Studies in Javanese morphology. The Hague: Martinus Nihoff. Verhaar, J. W. M. 1983. The syntax of ‘yang’ in Indonesian. In A. Halim, L. Carrington, and S. A. Wurm (eds.), Papers from the third international conference on Austronesian Linguistics, vol. 4: thematic variation. Pacific Linguistics C-77, 43-70.