12

Spanish Causatives with Hacer: Economy and Heaviness Effect

NUNGHATAI RANGPONSUMRIT

Introduction

Unlike in other Romance languages, two-verb causative constructions in Spanish with hacer make/do as the causative verb come in two different patterns: with infinitive complements as shown in (1) and with subjunctive complements as shown in (2).
(1) Mara hizo salir a Pedro. Maria made go.out.INF PREP Pedro Maria made Pedro leave. Mara hizo que Pedro Maria made that Pedro Maria made Pedro leave. saliera. went.out.SUB

(2)

Paris (1999) and Garca-Miguel & Pascual (2001) give similar explanations for the differences between the two constructions. They suggest that in the hacer-infinitive construction, the causee is conceptualized as more af I wish to thank Masayoshi Shibatani for his insightful comments on an earlier version of this paper and the audience at CSDL2004 for their helpful suggestions. I sincerely thank Kingkarn Thepkanjana for discussing with me the topic of causative constructions on numerous occasions. I am also grateful to the anonymous reviewers whose comments have helped me to improve this paper significantly. Any remaining failings are, of course, my own responsibility. Empirical and Experimental Methods in Cognitive/Functional Research. Sally Rice and John Newman (eds.). Copyright 2010, CSLI Publications.

207

208 / NUNGHATAI RANGPONSUMRIT

fected by the action of the causer than in the hacer-subjunctive construction, since the causee is the object of the causative verb in the hacer-infinitive construction. By contrast, in the hacer-subjunctive construction, the causee is the subject of the embedded clause which itself functions as the object of the causative verb. This account is quite simplistic, directly relating the argument structure of the matrix verb with conceptualization or meaning interpretation. The concept of affectedness of the causee is not well defined nor has it been empirically attested and measured. Moreover, if the two constructions only differ in terms of conceptualized affectedness of the causee, which is, in Garca-Miguel and Pascuals terms, a difference in construal rather than in [referential] meaning, they should be readily interchangeable. However, in many cases if we replace the infinitive structure with a subjunctive structure, as in (3), or vice versa, as in (4), the results in the (b) sentences are much less preferred or unacceptable. I will show in Section 3 that although sentences like (3b) are perfectly acceptable to native speakers, they rarely occur in natural speech.
(3) a. Hgala circular. make.IMPR.it circulate.INF (El coronel no tiene quien le escriba by Garca Marquez) Haga que circule. make.IMPR that circulates.SUB Pass it on. Tienes you.have que hacer to make.INF que el that the conservatorio conservatory horas hours profesores teachers todo. everything (CORLEC)

b.

(4)

a.

funcione functions.SUB lectivas teaching

bien, que se well that IMP

den todas las give all the

que hay that have.IMP

que dar, to give.INF clase, o class or

que los that the sea, is.SUB bien el well the

vengan a come.SUB to b. *Tienes you.have

sus horas de their hours of

que hacer to make.INF

funcionar function.INF todas las all the a to

conservatorio, conservatory hay have.IMP

darse give.INF.IMP

horas lectivas hours teaching sus horas their hours todo. everything.

que that de of

que dar, to give.INF

venir come.INF

clase a los class PREP the

profesores, o teachers or

sea, is.SUB

You have to have the conservatory functioning, have all the teaching hours given as they should be, have the teachers come to their class hours, or in other words, [you have to do] everything.

SPANISH CAUSATIVES WITH HACER / 209

Many linguists, including Haiman (1983), Comrie (1985), and Shibatani & Pardeshi (2002), point to direct/indirect causation or the spatio-temporal configuration of the causing event and the caused event as the dominant factor which determines the form of causative constructions. Curnow (1994) applies this principle to the analytic causatives in Spanish and concludes that in causatives with infinitival complements, the relation between the causing event and the caused event is more direct whereas causatives with subjunctive complements often depict mediated causation. He compares the hacer-infinitive construction in (5) and the hacer-subjunctive construction in (6) and argues that the construction in (5) tends to denote a situation in which Jose physically forced Juan to eat meat while the construction in (6) tends to involve an indirect action such as Jose telling a cook to add meat to Juans food without Juan knowing it.
(5) Jos le hizo comer Jos him made eat.INF Jos made Juan eat meat Jos hizo que Juan Jos made that Juan Jos made Juan eat meat carne meat a
PREP

Juan. Juan

(6)

comiera ate.SUB

carne. meat

However, as noted by Curnow (1994) himself, the directness of causation is not a criterial factor since in many instances the infinitive construction is used for cases where the relation between the causing and caused events is clearly indirect, as in (7). Moreover, a subjunctive construction such as in (8) can be used for cases where the causer acts directly upon the causee.
(7) La democracia en Espaa no lo hizo The democracy in Spain not him made The [coming of] democracy in Spain didnt make him return. Mara hizo que Javier llorara. Mara made that Javier cried.SUB Mara made Javier cry [on purpose]. regresar. return.INF

(8)

In addition, Curnow argues that the main difference between the two constructions is the intentionality of the causer. The subjunctive construction is used when the causer acts intentionally. If an acceptable hacersubjunctive construction as in (9) is modified by sin querer without wanting (it to happen)/unintentionally, as in (10), the result is an unacceptable sentence.

210 / NUNGHATAI RANGPONSUMRIT (9) Jos hizo a propsito que Juan comiera Jos made at purpose that Juan ate.SUB Jos made Juan eat meat on purpose. carne. meat carne. meat

(10) *Jos hizo sin querer que Juan comiera Jos made without want.INF that Juan ate.SUB Jos made Juan eat meat without meaning to.

The infinitive construction, on the other hand, can be used to denote situations where the causer either acts intentionally or not, as shown in (11)-(12).
(11) Jos le hizo comer carne Jos him made eat.INF meat Jos made Juan eat meat on purpose. a to Juan a Juan on propsito. purpose querer. want.INF

(12) Jos le hizo comer carne a Juan sin Jos him made eat.INF meat to Juan without Jos made Juan eat meat without meaning to.

Curnow concludes that the reason why the form used to denote intentional action (subjunctive causatives) tends to express indirect causation is that, if an event is indirectly caused as in the situation underlying (6), the causation must involve some plotting, which is intentional. However, he admits that this account is limited to situations which have animate causers. Table 1 summarizes the main semantic attributes of the two types of Spanish hacer-causatives, according to claims in the literature.
Hacer-infinitives Curnow (1994) more direct causation may be intentionally caused or not Hacer-subjunctives mediated causation intentionally caused causee less affected

Paris (1999), Garca causee more affected Miguel & Pascual (2001)

Table 1. Summary of previous approaches to Spanish analytical causatives We have seen that previous accounts based on semantic properties still have shortcomings in explaining the functional difference between these two types of analytic causative constructions in Spanish. The factor of intentionality of the causer has limited validity. On the other hand, directness of causation is not a robust factor either for determining the speakers choice between Spanish analytic causatives. There have been no empirical studies as to how pervasively the hacer-infinitive and the hacer-subjunctive

SPANISH CAUSATIVES WITH HACER / 211

are used in expressions of direct and indirect causation or to determine the strength of the correlation between a particular form and a particular causative meaning. Such studies are not easy to conduct. Since causative constructions with infinitive complements like (5) can be used to denote either types of direct or indirect causation, one may not be able to tell what type of causation is expressed in a particular instance if the context does not help disambiguate and the speaker does not know or care whether the event is caused directly or indirectly. In this paper, I will examine the issue with empirical methods from a functional perspective rather than from a purely semantic view. I will show that the principle of economy of effort (see Zipf 1935 and Haiman 1983) plays an important role in the speakers choice between two possible forms, hence the general preference for the hacer-infinitive construction, which requires no complementizer or verb conjugation. However, the heaviness effect is a competing motivation: When the clause is too heavy, the economical form may not be usable and the speaker may have to resort to the construction which is less economical but has the advantage of being more transparent.

Methodology

Previous analyses of analytic causatives in Spanish tend to lack empirical evidence to support the claims made. Thus, a corpus-based approach has been adopted in this study. The data sources used include:
Corpus Oral de Referencia de la Lengua Espaola Contempornea (CORLEC). This is a spoken corpus built at the Laboratory of Computational Linguistics, Universidad Autnoma de Madrid (Marcos-Marn et al 1992). It consists of approximately 1,100,000 words of transcribed speech in different genres such as daily conversation, sports, education, politics, science, news, debates, religion, etc. The language of the data can be characterized as highly interactive as most of the transcripts are based on authentic, multiparty conversations. Habla Culta de Caracas. This is a spoken Venezuelan Spanish corpus consisting of approximately 270,000 words. It contains transcripts of directed conversations, interviews, and spontaneous informal conversations. A written corpus of the novel genre created by the author, consisting of approximately 200,000 words. Concordancer for Windows (1996), programmed by Zdenek Martinek.

As none of the corpora are grammatically tagged, hacer causative constructions were extracted by using all inflected forms of hacer as keywords for the Concordancer. Irrelevant search results were discarded. Then the

212 / NUNGHATAI RANGPONSUMRIT

hacer-infinitive constructions were separated from the hacer-subjunctive constructions. My hypothesis is that heaviness of the clause denoting the caused event is also a factor affecting the choice between the infinitive construction and the subjunctive construction. Heaviness not only involves length (number of syntactic units rather than syllables) but also significance of the units, such that a direct object makes a sentence heavier than an adverb does. It also has to do with newness of information, such that a lexical NP adds more heaviness than a pronoun does. Thus, sentences were categorized and quantified according to (i) the transitivity of the verb in the embedded clause, (ii) the number of modifiers of the verb in the embedded clause, and (iii) whether the subject NP of the embedded clause, which denotes the causee, is realized as a full (lexical) NP or is in a reduced form (pronoun or dropped). For simplicity of counting, the category modifier included all components of the clause other than the subject and the direct object.

Results

The variation in frequency of the infinitive construction and the subjunctive construction used in expressing causative events confirms the hypothesis. Figure 1 shows the usage of the infinitive and subjunctive constructions classified by transitivity of the embedded verb. If the embedded verb was intransitive, the infinitive construction was more likely to be used: 73 tokens (83%) involved the infinitive construction compared with 15 tokens (17%) involving the subjunctive construction. In the event that the embedded verb was transitive, the proportion of infinitive and subjunctive usage was 36 (47%) to 41 (53%). This suggests that when the embedded clause is heavier in terms of number of arguments, the subjunctive construction is preferable.
100% 15
Token Frequency

80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Intransitive Verb 73

41 Subjunctive Infinitive 36

Transitive Verb

Transitivity of Embedded Verb

Figure 1. Infinitive vs. subjunctive sorted by transitivity of embedded verb

SPANISH CAUSATIVES WITH HACER / 213

Figure 2 shows the usage of the infinitive and subjunctive constructions sorted by the number of modifiers (in the sense stated in Section 2) of the embedded clause. The more modifiers the embedded clause has, the higher the tendency for speakers to opt for the subjunctive construction.
100% 18

Token Frequency

80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0 58

27

10 4 Subjunctive Infinitive

30

10 1

Number of Modifiers

Figure 2. Infinitive vs. subjunctive sorted by number of modifiers Results obtained for the last factor, realization of the causee, also support the hypothesis that heaviness plays an important role in deciding between the use of the infinitive construction or the subjunctive construction. As shown in Figure 3, when the causee is a pronoun or is omitted, the infinitive construction predominates over the subjunctive by nearly a 6-to-1 margin: 82 vs. 14 (or 85% vs. 15%). By contrast, the subjunctive construction predominates when the causee is realized by a full NP, but by a far smaller margin: 49 subjunctive to 32 infinitive (or 60% to 40%).
100% 14 49 60% 40% 20% 0% Reduced NP Full NP Causee Realized as 82 32 Subjunctive Infinitive

Figure 3. Infinitive vs. subjunctive sorted by realization of causee It can be observed that none of the results for each of the factors discussed above are criterial. However, when considered together, some combinations of these factors yield the hypothesized results. Table 2 shows fre-

Token Frequency

80%

214 / NUNGHATAI RANGPONSUMRIT

quency of causative constructions sorted by combination of the three factors previously discussed: transitivity of the embedded verb, number of modifiers of the embedded verb, and realization of the causee. (See examples of each embedded clause type in the Appendix.) When the embedded clause is least heavy, i.e. with no object, no modifier, and no lexical subject, as is the case in Item 1 in Table 2, the infinitive construction is almost always used (24 in infinitive vs. 1 in subjunctive). This shows that hacer-subjunctive constructions whose embedded clause consists of an intransitive verb, dropped subject, and no modifiers as in (3b), though perfectly grammatical, are rarely used in natural speech. As the embedded clause becomes heavier, i.e. with modifiers, a direct object, and/or a lexical subject, the tendency to use the subjunctive construction increases. The results of this corpus study suggest that the embedded clause is definitively heavy when its subject is a full NP and it contains a transitive verb. All embedded clauses with these attributes, with the exception of intransitive verbs which take noun clause objects, appear in the subjunctive construction regardless of the number of modifiers, as seen in Items 6 and 8 in Table 2.
Components of the Embedded Clause Transitivity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Intransitive Intransitive Intransitive Intransitive Transitive Transitive Transitive Transitive # of Modifier 0 0 1 or more 1 or more 0 0 1 or more 1 or more Total Subject NP Reduced Full Reduced Full Reduced Full Reduced Full Frequency INF 24 20 20 9 14 0 10 0 97 SUB 1 3 2 9 5 9 5 21 55

Table 2. Infinitive vs. Subjunctive: Combination of the three factors Table 3 shows the frequency of causative constructions sorted by other factors which have not been identified earlier. The case of embedded clauses which contain transitive verbs with noun clause objects, corresponding to Items 1 and 2 in Table 3, is quite distinct from other embedded clauses with transitive verbs in Table 2. While the latter has a stronger tendency towards the use of the subjunctive pattern, the former prefers the infinitive construction. Highly predictable preference is found where the sub-

SPANISH CAUSATIVES WITH HACER / 215

ject of the clause is a reduced form (10 of infinitive vs. 0 of subjunctive in Item 1 in Table 3).
Components of the Embedded Clause 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Transitive verb with clausal object/ Reduced NP Transitive verb with clausal object/ Full NP 2 Predicates or more of same causee / Reduced NP 2 Predicates or more of same causee / Full NP 2 Predicates or more of different causees / Full NP Verb periphrasis/ Reduced NP Verb periphrasis/ Full NP Verb with negative adverb Total Frequency INF SUB 10 2 4 1 0 1 0 0 18 0 1 1 3 3 4 2 5 19

Table 3. Infinitive vs. Subjunctive: Other factors Items 3-7 in Table 3 involve complement clauses with compound or complex predicates. The clauses that fall into these categories contain more than one predicate or have predicates that are composed of an auxiliary, modal, or aspectual verb and a main verb (called verb periphrasis in the table). Although the factor of complexity of the predicate has not been incorporated earlier and the tokens in these categories have not been included in the comparison charts in Figures 1-3, the results of this factor in Table 3 are similar to those of other previously discussed factors. Complex predicates seem to make the clause heavier, hence the observed preference for the subjunctive complement. It is only when the subject is in a reduced form (Item 3 in Table 3) that the infinitive construction seems to recover some ground. Item 8 in Table 3 is not quite on a par with the other items as it is not based on heaviness. While heaviness is a scalar property determining a tendency on a continuum, negation is a categorical determinant of the type of complement clause to be used in Spanish analytic causatives. When the embedded clause is negated, the only choice of complement type is the subjunctive construction; otherwise the sentence would be ungrammatical, as shown in (13).
(13) a. el the el the elevado high precio price de of la the droga drug a to hace makes la the que that

toxicmano no drug.addict not

pueda can.SUB

acceder access

droga drug (CORLEC)

216 / NUNGHATAI RANGPONSUMRIT b. *el the elevado high precio price poder can.INF de of la the droga-le drug-3SG a to la the hace makes droga drug al to.the

toxicmano no drug.addict not

acceder access

the high price of the drug makes the drug addict not be able to access the drug

The sentences that feature negative adverbs are thus excluded from the comparisons of usage of the infinitive and the subjunctive shown in Figures 1-3 since the option for the subjunctive form in this case follows a different principle than heaviness. In summary, the infinitive construction is used more frequently than the subjunctive construction (115 vs. 74 tokens in the spoken data and 99 vs. 2 tokens in the written data). It can be further observed that the heavier the clause, the stronger the tendency for the hacer-infinitive construction to lose ground to the hacer-subjunctive construction. The strongest correlate of heaviness in this case is realization of the subject of the embedded cause (the causee). When the subject is realized in a reduced form, it yields the highest tendency towards the use of the infinitive construction over the subjunctive construction (85%). The second strongest factor of heaviness is transitivity of the embedded verb with 83% tendency towards the use of the infinitive construction when the embedded verb is intransitive. The number of modifiers plays the weakest role with 76% tendency towards the use of the infinitive construction when the embedded clause has no modifiers. As for the written data, there was overwhelming preference for the hacer-infinitive construction. Out of the 101 instances of analytic causatives with hacer in the written corpus, 99 involve the infinitive construction and only 2 the subjunctive. In those two hacer-subjunctive constructions, the caused event was realized with a transitive verb, no modifier, full NP subject (Item 6 in Table 2) in one instance and with two predicates of the same reduced-form subject (Item 3 in Table 3) in the other. A striking difference between spoken and written modalities across the corpora is noted. While in the spoken language the hacer-subjunctive construction is quite pervasive (39% frequency of occurrence), it is rarely used in the written language (2% frequency of occurrence). I will attempt to explain why it is so in the next section.

Discussion

The fact that the realization of the subject of the embedded verb is the strongest factor contributing to heaviness can be attributed to the notion of given and new information. If the subject of the embedded verb is a pro-

SPANISH CAUSATIVES WITH HACER / 217

noun or is omitted, it suggests that the entity filling the subject slot is predictable or already given in the discourse. This given information serves as a point of reference for the hearer, making the sentence easier to process psycholinguistically. If we assume that heaviness is linked to difficulty of processing, then the embedded clause with a reduced subject is the least heavy and can combine well with the infinitive construction. The transitivity of the embedded verb is not as important a factor as the question whether the clause has the slot of internal argument. If it does, the clause is a unit longer, in addition to the fact that this internal argument is a significant, core unit. The number of modifiers is the weakest factor among the three since modifiers are not as significant as core arguments. However, since they add length to the clause, they surely contribute to newness and heaviness. The heaviness effect yields highly predictable results for the least and the most heavy cases. In my previous study with a smaller corpus, the least heavy casesreduced subject, no object, no modifierscorresponding to Item 1 in Table 2, all appeared in the hacer-infinitive construction. Although in this study there is one exception, shown in (14), it is quite a special exception which cannot be explained based on direct/indirect causation. An account along the lines of directness of causation would predict that a direct causation, such as a situation in which someone does not lower his own leg, would be encoded with the infinitive construction rather than the subjunctive construction, which is not the case here.
(14) (Said by a doctor instructing his patient to do an exercise) deja que la pierna caiga de golpe sobre la let.IMPR that the leg falls.SUB of blow on the superficie, no surface not hagas t que baje, make.IMPR you that it.goes.down (CORLEC)

let your leg fall suddenly on the floor, dont make it go down

A plausible explanation for this example is the idea of degree of familiarity. According to Shibatani (2003)s Principle of Functional Transparency, Less familiar or unusual situations require semantically/functionally more explicit coding. The event in which someone does not make his leg go down (that is, let it drop suddenly rather than placing it carefully on the ground) is quite unusual and hence requires an explicit coding, which is in this case the subjunctive form. It may also be explained in terms of intentionality of the causer. The subjunctive construction is used here to stress that the causer is particularly conscious of his action.

218 / NUNGHATAI RANGPONSUMRIT

The infinitive construction differs from the subjunctive construction in at least three aspects. First, in the infinitive construction, the clause which denotes the caused event is incorporated into the main clause without any conjunction, while the subjunctive complement is introduced into the matrix clause through the complementizer que. Second, the verb in the infinitive form is the more basic form, while the verb in the subjunctive form requires conjugation for tense, mood, and agreement with the subject. In this sense, the hacer-infinitive construction is shorter and simpler than the hacersubjunctive construction, and the general preference for the hacer-infinitive construction may be economically motivated (See Haiman 1983 and Zipf 1935). The third aspect where the infinitive construction differs from the subjunctive is the degree of clause integration. Kemmer & Verhagen (1994: 118) point out that analytic causative constructions with infinitival complements behave like single clauses in many respects. As for the hacersubjunctive construction, the use of a subordinating morpheme which neatly separates the main clause from its complement clause is a coding acknowledgement that the two clauses are semantically still independent of each other, at least to some extent (Givn 1980: 371). Since infinitive complements are tightly integrated to the matrix clause, if the complement clause carries several components, the whole causative construction may be too heavy and may be difficult to process. Therefore, in such cases the subjunctive complement is preferable since the caused event is neatly separated from the causing event, which facilitates both the encoding and decoding processes. The claim that heaviness poses difficulty for psycholinguistic processing is supported, though indirectly, by the striking difference between the frequency of the hacer-subjunctive construction in the written and the spoken data. The reason for this stylistic difference may be that in the written mode the writer and the reader have more processing time and do not have limitation of short-term memory as the speaker and the hearer do in the spoken mode. Therefore, the infinitive construction is overwhelmingly preferred as the principle of economy takes precedence in the written modality, where the heaviness effect is weaker. Although the relation between heaviness and difficulty in language processing is yet to be empirically proven with psycholinguistic experiments, the results here clearly indicate the effect of heaviness of the embedded clause on the choice of degree of integration into a single proposition.

Conclusions

This study used corpus data to account for the differences between two constructions of analytic causatives in Spanish, namely the hacer-infinitive

SPANISH CAUSATIVES WITH HACER / 219

construction and the hacer-subjunctive construction. The main finding is that the principle of economy of effort and the heaviness effect play an important role in determining the choice between the two constructions. The principle of economy of effort explains why the shorter form, in this case the hacer-infinitive construction, is preferable. The heaviness effect makes certain clauses unsuitable to be incorporated in certain types of construction. These two functional factors can explain why one construction is preferred over the other in cases like (3) and (4). However, one has to resort to other semantic explanations such as intentionality of the causer and the principle of functional transparency to account for sentences such as (14). This paper, nevertheless, gives a broader picture of analytic causatives in Spanish from a functional perspective, supplementing previous syntactic and semantic analyses with actual examples from spoken and written sources. As a construction does not just encode syntactic and semantic aspects of language, but discourse and pragmatic factors as well, studies of any clausal phenomenon need broad-based analyses that take into account all relevant factors.

List of Abbreviations
IMP IMPR INF

Impersonal Imperative Infinitive

PREP REF SUB

Preposition Reflexive Subjunctive

References
Comrie, B. 1985. Causative Verb Formation and Other Verb Deriving Morphology. Language Typology and Syntactic Description Vol. 3, ed. T. Shopen, 309-348. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Curnow, T. J. 1994. Semantics of Spanish Causatives Involving Hacer. Australian Journal of Linguistics 13: 165-184. Garca-Miguel, J. M. & A. Pascual. 2001. Conceptual Integration in Spanish Reflexive Causatives. 7th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, UCSB, Santa Barbara, July 22-27, 2001. Givn, T. 1980. The Binding Hierarchy and the Typology of Complements. Studies in Language 4: 3.333-377. Haiman, J. 1983. Iconic and Economic Motivation. Language 59: 781-819. Kemmer, S. & A. Verhagen. 1994. The Grammar of Causatives and the Conceptual Structure of Events. Cognitive Linguistics 5: 115-156. Paris, L.A. 1999. The Spanish Causative Construction Hacer Infinitive: A Role and Reference Grammar Description. Qualifying paper, University of New York at Buffalo.

220 / NUNGHATAI RANGPONSUMRIT Shibatani, M. 2003. Iconicity of Functional Transparency? Second Seoul International Conference on Discourse and Cognitive Linguistics, Korea University, Seoul, Korea, June 8, 2003. Shibatani, M. & P. Pardeshi. 2002. The Causative Continuum. The Grammar of Causation and Interpersonal Manipulation, ed. M. Shibatani, 85-126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Zipf, G. K. 1935. The Psychology of Language. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Data
Marcos Marn, F. A. et al. 1992. Corpus Oral de Referencia de la Lengua Espaola Contempornea. Downloadable from ftp://ftp.lllf.uam.es/pub/. Garca Mrquez, G. 1993. El coronel no tiene quien le escriba. Madrid: Alianza. Allende, I. 1982. La casa de los espritus. Barcelona: Plaza & Jans. Rovira Celma, A. and F. Tras de Bes Mingot. 2004. La buena suerte. Barcelona: Empresa Activa.

SPANISH CAUSATIVES WITH HACER / 221

Appendix: Examples of Each Embedded Clause Type

Table 2 1. Intransitive verb/No Modifier/Reduced NP Subject El peso los puede hacer hundir. the weight them can make.INF sink.INF The weight can make them sink Intransitive verb/No Modifier/Full NP Subject Han hecho desaparecer la they.have made disappear.INF the They have made the merchandise disappear. mercanca. merchandise

2.

3.

Intransitive verb/1 Modifier or more/Reduced NP Es muy fcil hacer cambiar de opinin. it.is very easy make.INF change.INF of opinion It is very easy to make people change their mind. Intransitive verb/1 Modifier or more/Full NP ...hacer que funcionen mejor make.INF that function.SUB better to make things work better. las the cosas things

4.

5.

Transitive verb/No Modifier/Reduced NP No me haga perder ms tiempo no me make.IMPR lose.INF more time Dont waste more of my time. Transitive verb/No Modifier/Full NP hace que Juancho pida it.makes that Juancho asks.for.SUB It causes Juancho ask people to calm down Transitive verb/1 Modifier or more/Reduced NP hace llevar a Hansen al it.makes take.INF PREP Hansen to.the It causes Hansen to be taken to the bench Transitive verb/1 Modifier or more/Full NP hace que los ciudadanos consideren it.makes that the citizens consider.SUB familia family ejemplar a esas personas exemplary PREP those persons calma calm

6.

7.

banquillo bench

8.

como una as a

It makes the citizens consider those people as an exemplary family.

222 / NUNGHATAI RANGPONSUMRIT Table 3 1. Transitive verb with clausal object/Reduced NP nos hace creer que va a us he.makes believe that he.goes to He makes us believe that he is going to do it. Transitive verb with clausal object/Full NP hacer saber a los padres make.INF know.INF PREP the parents consultar consult 3. al to.the mdico doctor hacerlo. do.INF.it

2.

que deben that they.should

to let the parents know that they should consult a doctor. Two predicates or more of same causee/Reduced NP Nos ha hecho hacer mapas, recoger informacin us he.has made make.INF maps collect.INF information He made us make maps, gather information Two predicates or more of same causee/Full NP Qu hace que un hombre se detenga what makes that a man REF stops.SUB camino, way 5. y diga:` and says.SUB "Este es this is un a en in su his

4.

sitio apropiado..."? place appropriate

What makes a man stop on his way and say This is a suitable place? Two predicates or more of different causees/Full NP Tienes que hacer que el conservatorio you.have to make.INF that the conservatory bien, que se well that IMP que to de of dar, give.INF clase, o class or den todas las give all the que los that the sea, is.SUB horas lectivas hours teaching funcione function.SUB

que hay that have.IMP sus horas their hours

profesores vengan a teachers come.SUB to todo. everything

You have to have the conservatory functioning, have all the teaching hours given as they should be, have the teachers come to their class hours, or in other words, [you have to do] everything. 6. Verb periphrasis/Reduced NP hacer que podamos retener esa belleza make.INF that we.can.SUB retain that beauty to make us to be able to retain that beauty of flowers. Verb periphrasis/Full NP hacer que la gente make.INF that the people empiece a starts.SUB to de of las the flores flowers

7.

pensar think

en in

la the

SPANISH CAUSATIVES WITH HACER / 223 publicidad. advertisement to make people start thinking of the advertisement. 8. Verb with negative adverb Hacemos que otras personas no vean we.make that other persons not see.SUB We make other people think badly of the religion. bien la well the religin. religion