Detail #189: Non-subject Imperatives

Let us consider the imperative:

you read the book → [_] read the book!

Usually, if you want to imperativize some other constituent, you need to go by way of voices and moods and so on, and this might be a universal.

I.e. "let me see you", "show yourself". There's no way of going

I see you → I see(objective imperative) [_]

 We could of course distinguish or conflate indirect objects in such a system as well. However, we could do something even more interesting: some verbs, in their imperative form, have the same morpheme for subject and for indirect object imperatives, and a distinct one for direct objects:

you read it.acc → read.IMP_1 it.acc = read it
I read it to you → I read.IMP_1 it.acc = let me read it to you / listen as I read

The thing that distinguishes these two is of course the presence or absence of an overt subject. The second person goes into the "highest" ranking open slot - subject > object, etc.

I read you  → I read.IMP_2 = let me read you (in case the language uses read also for various soothsaying practices, or in case reading some bodily decorations or whatever is a thing in the culture)

Other verbs conflate the  direct and indirect objects, but distinguish the subject:

I build you it → I build.IMP_1 it ≃ let me build it for you
I build you it → I build.IMP_1 ≃ let me build for you
*you build it → build.IMP_1
you build it → build.IMP_2 it = build it!

This is of course a bit like a passive, but differs in not having a patient or recipient as its subject - the agent remains as the subject.