Mande languages Person-number agreement on complementizers in Mande Dmitry Idiatov University of Antwerp Center for Grammar, Cognition and Typology Dmitry.Idiatov@ua.ac.be 2 Tura personal pronominals (Nao dialect) Some relevant grammatical properties rigid SVX, SOVX, NA, GN, NAdp (sometimes, with one or two AdpN) S and, for transitive verbs, O are obligatorily present RS : obligatory auxiliary-like morphemes PRED EDICA ICATIVE IVE MARK ARKERS with sentence constituting function ( S PM with sentence constituting function ( S PM PM OVX ) PM OVX ) In South-Eastern Mande and parts of Western Mande, pronominal subjects tend to fuse with PMs 3 4 Agreement Tura personal pronominals: base forms Agreement is rare (unlike most of Niger-Congo) No gender (except in Jowulu with pronominal genders) Table 1. Jowulu personal pronominals (Carlson 1993:23) Usually, only trivial number agreement on personal pronominal targets (often reserved to controllers on the higher end of the animacy hierarchy) 5 6 1
Number agreement: Tura Number agreement: Tura (1) ... ké i ̋ na na ̋ o ̏ le ̀ e ̀ -i ̏ i ́ ke ́ i ̋ a ̏ŋ̏ ɓɛ́ bo bo ̏ k ɛ́ɛ̀ -i ̏ í, k ɛ̋ Human nominals are regularly marked for plural (except in certain CNJ 2 SG .I b child child: PL PL call- PROG CNJ 2 SG .I b 3 PL PL .V .V woun ound PL do- PROG but PL contexts) ke ́ ɓɛ́ la ̋ a ̏ è ɓ a ́ȁɛ̏ n ni ̏ a ̏ wo ́ zi ̏ i ̏ =a ́ f ɔ́ɔ́ ... woun ound that 3 SG SG .I .I b person impairment cause: HAB old= PP formerly Human controllers normally trigger agreement in number on pronominal CNJ targets (even when they are not overtly marked as plural) ‘...that (now) you call children and heal their wounds, whereas in the old days these wounds caused severe impairments’ (Bearth 1971:162) (2) È t ȍ - ȍ w ű n n bo ̏ b la ̋ȁ a ̏ lè pé- ȁ ... Non human nominals are often not marked for plural even when they Non-human nominals are often not marked for plural even when they 3 SG .I b stay\ AOR . FOC - AOR . FOC thing thing that 3 SG SG .V .V FOC say- DEP PL PL could have been ‘He kept on thinking about these things [until the day broke]’ (CO) Non-human controllers trigger agreement on pronominal targets less (3) À lè m ȁȉ ke ̋ kp ʊ̋ í p ɔ̋ n m ɛ̏ɛ̏ bo bo ̏ la ̋ȁ a ̏ŋ̏ frequently (even when they are overtly marked for plural). 3 SG .V FOC truth\ IZF PM giant.pouched.rat dig.up ma man\ IZF that 3 PL PL .V .V IZF PL ní-í lead.astray\ AOR - AOR ‘This surprised these giant pouched rat hunters’ (CO) 7 8 Ma Mandinka ka Jow Jowulu South Southern Sa San n of of Yaba ba Agreement on complementizers Several Mande languages have person-number agreement on complementizers with a controller in the main clause Jula of Samatiguila (West, Southwest-Central, Central, Great Manding; Braconnier 1987-88) (some dialects of) Mandinka (West, Southwest-Central, Central, Great Manding; Creissels 1983) Jowulu (West, Northeast, Samogo; Carlson 1993) Southern San of Yaba (Southeast, East; Pare 1998) Tura (Southeast, South; Bearth 1971 & own data) Jula of la of Samati matiguila ila Tur Tura 9 10 Jula of Samatiguila Jowulu n- 1 vs. Ø NON ‹1› ( COMP is kò n- kò ) n- 1&2 ( SG ?) vs. Ø 3 (and 1&2 PL ?) ( COMP is tú n- tú ) (1) a. Ń / Ǎ n yè á f ɛ́ n-kò n-kò S ě kù yè tàgà (Braconn (Brac nnier 1987-8 1987-88:48-51 51) 1 SG /1 PL COP 3 SG at 1- 1- CO PROP SUBJ go COMP ‘I/We want that Seku goes away’ b. Mùsà yè á f ɛ́ kò kò S ě kù yè tàgà COP 3 SG at [NON‹ [ NON‹1› 1›] CO ] SUBJ go g PROP COMP PROP ‘Musa wants that Seku goes away’ (2) a. Ń / Ǎ n náà á f ɔ̀ -rà n-kò n-kò S ě kù t ɛ̀ sh ɔ́ n 1 SG /1 PL PFV 3 SG say- PFV 1- 1- CO PROP IPFV . NEG agree COMP ‘I/We said that Seku will not agree’ b. Mùsà náà á f ɔ̀ -rà kò kò S ě kù t ɛ̀ sh ɔ́ n PFV 3 SG say- PFV [NON‹ NON‹1›] 1›] CO PROP IPFV . NEG agree PROP COMP ‘Musa said that Seku will not agree’ 11 12 2
Southern San of Yaba Tura after utterance predicates (especially manipulative) and desiderative after utterance predicates, propositional attitude & epistemic modality predicates predicates and desiderative predicates (sometimes also after predicates of knowledge and acquisition of knowledge) no agreement after other complement taking predicates (e.g., ma ̰́ ‘hear’) → the complementizer is mà mà elsewhere the complementizer ké ké is used or the constructions that do not require a complementizer 13 14 Tura Tura As a complementizer (but not as a quotative predicator), 3 SG yè can be used instead of all other forms (1) Ka ́ w ɩ̏ɩ̏ - ɩ́ yé yé / ká ká k ő ȁ pé w ɛ̀ɛ̀ n 3 SG yè has replaced the original 2 SG forms * ɓ é/yé 2 PL .I d say\ COND - COND 3 SG SG . CO 2 PL PL . CO 1 PL .I c 3 SG .V say Tura COMP COMP w ʊ̏ʊ̏ g i ̋ ... 2 SG forms ɓ é/yé have been preserved: 2 SG forms * ɓ é/yé have been preserved: language\ IZF PP 2 SG .II b ( PROSP ) forms ɓ e ̋ȅ /ye ̋ȅ (< * ɓ é/yé + ke ̋ ‘this’ + i ̏ 2 SG .I x ) ‘If you say that we should speak in Tura...’ (DG) conjunction/preposition yé ‘as, like’ Bamana í kó [2 SG say] ‘as, like, as if’ (litt.: ‘you say’) Bamana í n’à f ɔ́ [2 SG FUT :3 SG say] ‘as, like, as if’ (litt.: ‘you will say’) 15 16 Agreement on complementizers Jula of Samatiguila Remarkably, the controller is not always the subject n- 1 vs. Ø NON ‹1› ( COMP is kò n- kò ) (Braconnier 1987-88:49, 55) (1) Á yè ǹ nyà nà n-kò n-kò S ě kù t ɛ̀ sh ɔ́ n Jula of Samatiguila (West, Southwest-Central, Central, Great 3 SG SG COP 1 SG SG eye at 1- 1- CO IPFV . NEG agree COMP PROP Manding; Braconnier 1987-88) ‘I have the feeling / I think that Seku will not agree’ (some dialects of) Mandinka (West, Southwest-Central, Central, (2) Wô Wô lé tén f ɔ̀ -nìn ǎ n bòrò n-kò n-kò by ɛ̀ yè ná bí Great Manding; Creissels 1983) DEM FOC PST say- PTCP . PFV 1 PL y by y 1- CO 1- COMP all IPFV come today y DEM PL Tura (Southeast, South; Bearth 1971 & own data) ‘It was asked by us that everbody comes today’ The controller is always the source (the speaker) of the reported discourse 17 18 3
Recommend
More recommend