# Pinag- -an



## Change1031

I vaguely understand the affixes pinag-. I read from another post that pinag- is pag + the objective affex -in-. Then you add -an making those affixes to mean "to do something in the (physical or psychological) direction of."

For example:
pinagtawanan
pinagsabihan
pinaghigantihan

Anyway, so one of my friend texted me this: pinag-alala mo ang ate mo.

Why in this case, I don't add the affix -an to alala? I know alala means worry. And I think pinag-alala mean to worry about. I've tried to ask my friend, but she can't explain it well to me.


----------



## DotterKat

The question is about grammatical mood and the different meanings of the word _*alala*_.

First, Tagalog sentences can be in the indicative, causative or aptative moods and each mood has a corresponding affix. For instance, the indicative mood affix is mag-, the causative affix is pa- and the aptative affix is maka-.  All of these affixes have variants and each one will be inflected differently depending on aspect (completed, imperfective or contemplated, the equivalents of past, present or future tenses in English).

Second, depending on context the root word alala can have separate but related meanings.  As in your sentence, alala can mean _to worry or be bothered by something_.

Thus:

The indicative affix mag- + alala produces mag-alala, which is the actor-focus infinitive form of the verb alala meaning to worry or be bothered by something.

Nag-alala ang ate mo sa iyo (Your sister was worried about you). Nag-alala is the actor-focus, indicative mood and completed aspect of the verb alala (to worry).

The causative affix pa- + alala produces paalalahanin or the more common variant pag-alalahanin, which is the object-focus, causative mood, infinitive form of the verb meaning to worry or be bothered by something.

Thus, your sentence:

Pinag-alala mo ang ate mo (You made your sister worry about you OR You _caused_ your sister to be worried about you). Pinag-alala is the oject-focus, _causative mood_ and completed aspect of the verb alala (to worry).

Alala can also mean _to remember something_ and the corresponding inflections as to focus, mood and aspect will be different.  Alalahanin is the object-focus, indicative mood, infinitive form of the verb meaning to remember something.

For example:

Inaalala niya ang mga nakalipas na panahon (She is remembering OR reminiscing about past times).  Inaalala is the object-focus, indicative mood, imperfective aspect of alala (to remember).

Finally, your question about pina-alalahanan. This is the object-focus, _causative mood,_ perfective aspect of alala (to remember).

Thus:

Pina-alalahanan mo siya na magkikita kayo bukas (You reminded her [OR _caused her to remember_] that you are meeting each other tomorrow.

The complication rests mainly on the fact that alala has different, albeit seemingly related meanings depending on context.  They are inflected and pronounced differently but in colloquial speech the two separate meanings can sometimes merge.

Below is a rather complex sentence solely for illustrative purposes.  Alala is used with different meanings and inflections.

Nag-aalala ang ate mo sa iyo dahil ipinaaalala mo sa kaniya sa pamamagitan ng iyong kawalang-bahala na hindi mo pa kayang mag-isa at na kailangan pa niyang paalalahanan ka na mag-ingat at na may mga taong nakakaalala sa iyong kabutihan noong bata ka pa at na sila ay pinapag-aalala mo rin.


----------



## Change1031

Thanks for the explanation!

My question was the exclusion of the suffix -an in the completed form. I just found out that there is pag- -an and pag- -in. For the pag- -in, there is no suffix in the forms. Therefore, it is pinag-alala (for completed and causative).

Lastly, from what I have gathered, shouldn't pag- -an and pag- -in be object-focused? But, you said it is actor-focused.


----------



## DotterKat

Yes, the -an and - in suffixes should apply to object-focus verbs.


----------

