Grammaticalization of the Complex Sentence: A Case Study in Chadic (Studies in Language Companion Series)

GRAMMATICALIZATION OF THE COMPLEX SENTENCE

STUDIES IN LANGUAGE COMPANION SERIES (SLCS) The SLCS series has been established as a companion series to STUDIES IN LANGUAGE, International Journal, sponsored by the Foundation "Foundations of language". Series Editors Werner Abraham University of Groningen The Netherlands

Michael Noonan University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee USA Editorial Board

Joan Bybee (University of New Mexico) Ulrike Claudi (University of Cologne) Bernard Comrie (University of Southern California) William Croft (University of Manchester) Östen Dahl (University of Stockholm) Gerrit Dimmendaal (University of Leiden) Martin Haspelmath (Free University of Berlin) Ekkehard König (Free University of Berlin) Christian Lehmann (University of Bielefeld) Robert Longacre (University of Texas, Arlington) Brian MacWhinney (Carnegie-Mellon University) Marianne Mithun (University of California, Santa Barbara) Edith Moravcsik (University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee) Masayoshi Shibatani (Kobe University) Russell Tomiin (University of Oregon) John Verhaar (The Hague)

Volume 32

Zygmunt Frajzyngier Grammaticalization of the Complex Sentence

GRAMMATICALIZATION OF THE COMPLEX SENTENCE A CASE STUDY IN CHADIC

ZYGMUNT FRAJZYNGIER University of Colorado

JOHN BENJAMINS PUBLISHING COMPANY AMSTERDAM/PHILADELPHIA

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. Grammaticalization of the complex sentence : a case study in Chadic I Zygmunt Frajzyngier. p. cm. — (Studies in language companion series, ISSN 0165-7763 ; v. 32) Includes bibliographical references and indexes. 1. Chadic languages—Grammar. 2. Chadic languages—Sentences. I. Title. II. Series. PL8026.C53F7 1996 493',7--dc20 96-12358 ISBN 90 272 3035 8 (Eur.) / 1-55619-843-4 (US) (alk. paper) CIP © Copyright 1996 - John Benjamins B.V. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher. John Benjamins Publishing Co. · P.O.Box 75577 · 1070 AN Amsterdam · The Netherlands John Benjamins North America · P.O.Box 27519 · Philadelphia, PA 19118 · USA

CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

xiii

ABBREVIATIONS

xvii

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Aim and scope of the work 1.2 Linguistic framework of the present study 1.2.1 The notion of form 1.2.1.1 Types of lexical categories 1.2.1.2 Phrasal categories 1.2.1.3 Configuration 1.2.1.4 Inflectional coding 1.2.1.5 Adpositions 1.2.1.6 Coding on the verb and other agreement 1.2.1.7 Serial verb constructions 1.2.1.8 Intonation and other prosodic means 1.2.2 The notion of function 1.2.3 The relationship between the form and function 1.2.4 The coding principle 1.2.5 Methodology of reconstruction 1.3 The range of issues with respect to grammaticalization Motivation 1.3.1 1.3.2 Grammatical morphemes versus constructions 1.3.3 Processes of grammaticalization 1.3.4 Unidirectionality of grammaticalization 1.4 Chadic branch 1.5 A synopsis of simple sentence structure in Chadic 1.6 State of the art with respect to complex sentence in Chadic 1.7 A synopsis of complex sentence structure in Chadic 1.8 Sources and form of data

1 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 8 9 10 10 10 11 13 13 14 16 17 20

vi

COMPLEX SENTENCE

2 PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CONSTRUCTIONS 2.1 The issues and the scope of the chapter 2.2 Hypotheses 2.3 Was there a sentential coordinating conjunction in PC? 2.4 Sources of sentential coordinating conjunctions 2.4.1 From nominal to sentential conjunction 2.4.2 Functions of the sentential coordinating conjunction 2.4.3 From coordinated conjunction to contrastive focus 2.4.4 From locative preposition to coordinating conjunction 2.4.5 From adverb 'also' to coordinating conjunction 2.4.6 Borrowing 2.5 Functions of sequential and coordinate structures 2.5.1 Introduction 2.5.2 Functions of sequential clauses 2.6 Functions of paratactic clauses 2.6.1 Comparison between two types of structures 2.6.2 Paratactic and conjoined constructions: Conclusions 2.7 Sources and reconstruction of the P-C sequential marker 2.7.1 Associative: Cibak, Lele, and Gidar 2.7.2 Nominal conjunction: Bidiya 2.7.3 From preposition to sequential: Margi 2.7.4 From verb 'to sit' to sequential marker: Kanakuru 2.8 Sequential marker as a discourse conjunction 2.8.1 Sequential marker at the discourse level 2.8.2 An explanation of the discourse-level function 2.8.3 Direction of grammaticalization 2.9 From sequential to inflectional aspect marker 2.10 From 'God' to conjunction 2.10.1 The problem 2.10.2 The hypothesis and argumentation 2.11 Conclusions 3 FUNCTIONS OF COMPLEMENTIZERS 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Modal function 3.2.1 Epistemic function of complementizers 3.2.2 Deontic function of complementizers 3.3 Complementizer and the coding of grammatical relations 3.3.1 The problems and a hypothesis

.

23 24 26 29 29 32 34 37 37 38 38 39 40 42 43 58 59 61 64 65 65 66 66 70 77 78 81 81 83 84

87 89 90 92 93 93

INTRODUCTION 3.3.2 Coding devices for the semantic role of arguments 3.4 Identifìcation and grammaticalization of complementizers 3.5 The complementizers in Masa 3.6 Conclusions 4 COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS OF SAYING 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Verbs of saying 4.3 Clausal structure of sentences with verbs of saying 4.3.1 Clausal order 4.3.2 Clausal order embedded-matrix 4.3.3 Word order in the matrix clause 4.4 Omission of verbs of saying 4.4.1 The phenomenon 4.4.2 Absence of the verb and case assignment 4.4.3 Verb omission and problems of reconstruction 4.4.4 An explanation of verb omission 4.4.5 Verb omission and verb replacement 4.5 De dicto complementizers 4.5.1 Issues and questions 4.5.2 Position of complementizers 4.6 Origin of de dicto complementizers 4.6.1 Complementizers from verbs of saying 4.6.1.1 Syntactic evidence 4.6.1.2 Phonological evidence 4.6.1.3 The mechanics of grammaticalization of complementizers from verbs of saying 4.6.2 Complementizers and previous reference markers 4.6.3 Complementizers and sequential markers 4.7 Absence of complementizer: deletion or omission 4.8 Argument marking 4.9 Direct versus indirect speech 4.9.1 Use of complementizer in the two types of discourse 4.9.2 Two Chadic solutions 4.10 Doubt-in-truth modality 4.10.1 Doubt in truth through tonal means 4.10.2 Doubt in truth through complementizers 4.10.3 Doubt in truth through adverbial expressions 4.11 Deontic modalities

vii 94 98 100 103

105 106 113 114 115 121 125 125 127 136 137 141 141 141 142 146 146 147 151 155 157 161 163 165 173 174 178 180 181 181 186 188

viii

COMPLEX SENTENCE

4.11.1 Means of encoding obligation 4.11.2 Inflectional means 4.11.3 De dicto complementizers and inflectional means 4.11.4 Mood of obligation through a deontic complementizer 4.12 Cross-reference disjoint-reference coding. Logophoricity 4.13 Conclusions

188 189 191 194 200 203

5 EMBEDDED INTERIROGATIVES 5.1 Introduction 5.2 The interrogative verbs 5.3 Interrogative complements in de dicto domain 5.3.1 De dicto complementizers , 5.3.2 Order of clauses as evidence of de dicto domain 5.4 Interrogative complementizers 5.5 Yes/no questions and interrogative particles 5.6 Specific (WH) questions 5.7 Deontic complements after verbs of asking 5.8 Conclusions

207 208 211 211 215 216 220 221 224 225

6 COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS 6.1 Issues and scope of the chapter 6.2 The problem of the infinitival complements 6.3 De dicto complementizer. 6.4 Subjunctive mood 6.5 Deontic complementizers 6.6 Same-subject coding 6.6.1 Types of constructions 6.6.2 Hypothesis: Typesof volitional predicates and overt same subject 6.7 Volitional predicates 6.7.1 No overt coding of the same subject 6.7.2 Type ΠΙ lexicalization (two verbs, two meanings) 6.7.3 Type Π lexicalization (one verb, two meanings) 6.7.4 Overt coding of the subject of the complement clause: Type 6.8 Complements of the verb 'please' 6.9 Different subject 6.9.1 Role of complementizer 6.9.2 Deontic modality 6.10 Third person subject inclusion and exclusion

227 228 230 231 231 233 233

I

234 235 239 239 242 246 251 252 252 253 259

INTRODUCTION 6.10.1 Subject inclusion in Lele 6.10.2 Subject inclusion 6.11 Problem of 'raising' 6.11.1 'Raising' or embedded subject coding in the matrix clause 6.11.2 Raising 6.12 Conclusions

ix 260 260 261 262 267 271

7 COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS OF PERCEPTION 7.1 Verbs of perception and complementation: state of the art 273 7.2 Theoretical claims: 'Raising to object' 274 7.3 De dicto and de re complementizers and subject raising: Lele 276 7.3.1 Coding of the subject of embedded clause in the matrix clause.... 276 7.3.2 The de re complementizer gō 279 7.3.3 The de dicto complementizer 280 7.4 Subject raising 281 7.5 Conclusions 287 8 COMPLEMENTS OF COGNITIVE VERBS 8.1 Introduction 8.2 The origin of verbs of knowing 8.3 Coding of the modality of knowing 8.4 Undifferentiated complementation 8.5 Conclusions

289 290 292 299 302

9 TEMPORAL CLAUSES 9.1 Issues to be discussed 303 9.2 The order of clauses 305 9.3 Temporal clauses through juxtaposition 309 9.4 The relative position of temporal markers 310 9.5 Sources of the general protasis markers 311 9.5.1 The synchronic picture 311 9.5.2 Time' 313 9.5.2.1 Two type of constructions involving 'time' 313 9.5.2.2 The marker *dV 319 9.5.3 From verb 'go' ...321 9.5.4 From conditional 322 9.5.4.1 Temporal protasis marker *ma 323 9.5.4.2 Conclusions regarding the temporal function of ma 327 9.5.4.3 The marker ə in Mina 329

χ

9.6

9.7 9.8

9.9

COMPLEX SENTENCE

9.5.5 From sequential marker to general protasis marker 9.5.6 Copula 9.5.7 Demonstratives/definite marker as temporal markers 9.5.7.1 Evidence 9.5.7.2 Constituent status of demonstratives 9.5.7.3 From relative clause to demonstrative to temporal protasis marker 9.5.7.3.1 Hypothesis 9.5.7.3.2 Evidence 9.5.8 From locative preposition to temporal markers 9.5.9 De dicto complementizer 9.5.10 Unknown lexical sources The specific temporal clauses ('before', 'after') 9.6.1 General marker plus specific marker 9.6.2 Specific coding through prepositions and adverbs 9.6.3 Specific temporal coding through interplay of tenses Functions of apodosis markers Sources of apodosis markers 9.8.1 An attempt of reconstruction 9.8.2 From demonstrative to apodosis marker: 9.8.3 From protasis to apodosis markers 9.8.4 De dicto complementizer Conclusions

10 CONDITIONAL CLAUSES 10.1 Issues to be discussed 10.2 Origin of the protasis markers 10.2.1 Temporal markers as conditionals 10.2.2 The marker ma..... 10.2.3 Sources of conditional ma 10.2.4 'Interrogative' markers as sources of conditionals 10.2.5 Conditional markers from locative prepositions 10.2.6 Demonstratives/definite markers as conditional markers 10.17 From'hand 10.2.8 De dicto complementizer as a protasis marker 10.2.9 Other sources of protasis markers 10.2 10 Conclusion regarding sources of protasis markers 10.3 Functions of apodosis markers 10.4 Sources of apodosis markers

330 332 333 333 335 336 337 337 342 345 350 351 352 353 356 357 362 362 366 367 368 371

373 373 376 381 386 387 389 392 396 400 402 404 404 407

INTRODUCTION

10.5

10.4.1 De dicto complementizers as a source of apodosis markers 10.4.2 Sequential markers 10.4.3 Demonstratives markers as a source of apodosis markers 10.4.4 Apodosis markers from conjunctions Conclusions

xi 408 409 410 412 412

11 RELATIVE CLAUSES 11.1 Introduction 415 11.2 Major constituents of the relative clause 416 11.3 The relative markers 418 11.3.1 The functions of the relative markers 419 11.3.2 Presence versus absence of the relative marker 419 11.4 Existential status 421 11.4.1 Existential status coding through two relative markers 422 11.4.2 Existential status coding and the use of relative markers 429 11.5 Existential status coding through postrelative markers 431 11.5.1 The relationship between the definite head and postrelatives 431 11.5.2 Functions of the postrelative markers 433 11.6 Coding the role of the head noun phrase 437 11.6.1 Coding of the role through distinction in the relative markers.... 437 11.6.2 Coding of the role through resumptive pronouns 438 11.7 Other grammatical categories of relative markers 441 11.7.1 Gender 441 11.7.2 The semantic class 444 11.8 Sources of relative markers 446 11.8.1 Demonstratives/definite markers as a source of relative markers 446 11.8.2 Indefinite pronouns 449 11.8.3 Associative markers 450 11.8.4 De dicto complementizers as a source of relative markers 453 11.9 Sources of postrelative markers 454 11.10 'Relative tenses' 454 11.11 Reconstruction of the relative clause in Proto-Chadic 455 11.11.1 The form of the relative clause 456 11.11.2 The relative markers 457 11.11.3 The relative tenses 458 11.11.4 The postrelative markers 458 11.12 Conclusions 459

xii

COMPLEX SENTENCE

12 SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS 12.1 Introduction 12.2 Implications for the study of language structure 12.2.1 Typology of complex sentences 12.2.2 Verb omission 12.2.3 Subject-to-object raising 12.2.4 Word order 12.2.5 Position of subordinating particles 12.2.6 Two types of relative clauses 12.2.7 The nature of complementizers 12.2.8 Modal functions 12.3 Implications for the study of grammaticalization 12.3.1 Methodology and unidirectionality 12.3.2 Semiotic metonymy as a source of polysemy 12.3.3 Motivation for grammaticalization 12.3.4 Origin of complementizers 12.3.5 Origin of protasis and apodosis markers 12.3.6 Origin of relative clause markers 12.4 Conclusions

461 461 461 462 463 463 464 464 464 466 466 466 468 469 470 471 472 473

REFERENCES INDEX OF TERMS INDEX OF LANGUAGES INDEX OF NAMES

475 491 495 497

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

My work on this study was supported by a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities and by several travel grants from the Graduate Committee on the Arts and Humanities, University of Colorado. I also used data gathered as part of the Simple Sentence in Chadic project, of which the National Endowment for the Humanities and the University of Colorado were also cosponsors. The present project was a collaborative effort with the Institut Français de Recherche Scientifique pour le Développement en Coopération (ORSTOM). The ORSTOM station in Maroua offered invaluable field support. To all these institutions go my profound thanks. Maria Thomas-Ruzic, William Raymond, and Erin Shay, research assistants on the project, were very helpful in sifting through various sources, providing glosses when needed, entering data into the database, and commenting on vari­ ous aspects of this work. Comparative work cannot be done without contributions of various forms from other scholars. I am fortunate that many colleagues have shared with me their knowledge of various languages and provided general comments when I was working on this project and on the Simple Sentence in Chadic. For data provided in the form of filled out questionnaires, pre-publication papers, and responses to individual queries, I would like to thank: Daniel Barreteau on Mofu-Gudur, Shmuel Bolozky on Hebrew, Jean-Pierre Caprile on Tobanga, Karen Ebert on Kera, Cheryl Fluckiger on Mandara, Beat Haller and Sylvia Hedinger on Zulgo, Carleton Hodge, Carl Hoffmann and Neil Skinner for many comments on various aspects of Chadic and Afroasiatic linguistics over a period of several years, John Hutchison for information on Kanuri, Larry Hyman on Grassfields Bantu, Elizabeth Jarvis for Podoko, Herrmann Jungraithmayr on Mokilko, Marta Giger and Ruth Lienhard on Daba, Mei-Chun Liu on Mandarin, Roxana Ma Newman on Ga'anda, Paul Newman on Tera and Kanakuru, Michka Sachnine on Zime, Russell G. Schuh on Ngizim, Theda Schumann on Masa, Margaret Skinner on Pa'a, Younous Sopoyé for data on

xiv

COMPLEX SENTENCE

East Dangla, and Erin Shay for the analyses of these data and additional data from various texts, Henry Tourneux on Munjuk including a Grammatical sum­ mary of this language, and Ekkehard Wolff on Lamang. I would like to thank my collaborators in the work on grammatical sketches of various Chadic lan­ guages: Erin Shay, for the work on Xdi, Eric Johnston for the work on Mina, Wendy Morris for the work on Mandara, and Laurie Jordan for the work on Hona. Our common investigation focused on complex sentence structures and provided some of the data for the present study. I want to thank the students in my seminar on the complex sentence in Chadic for their lively interaction. Some of their contributions were published in Jungraithmayr and Tourneux 1991. Henry Tourneux has offered his friendship, time, hospitality, knowledge of the field, and ingenuity in finding language assistants in Cameroon. Adrian Edwards from Mission Catholique de Hina and members of the Mission Catholique de Guider helped in finding language assistants for Mina and Gidar. Seiny Boukar Lamide of the Institut de la Recherche Agricole was particularly helpful in solving logistics problems in Maroua. Without the speakers of various Chadic languages, this work would not have been possible. In sharing the knowledge of their languages, not only did they provide data, but often with understanding and patience, they alerted me to fine semantic distinctions between various constructions. I am most grateful to the speakers of Hausa, Pero, Bole, Mupun, Hona, Cibak, Lele, Sibne (Somray), Mina (Hina), Mandara, Mada, Gidar, Xdi (Hide), and Masa with whom I have had the privilege of working over the last twenty years. Some results of the research on the project were presented at talks and con­ ferences in Warsaw; Frankfurt; Albuquerque, New Mexico; Zurich; Columbus, Ohio; and Boulder, Colorado. I have invariably benefited from the discussions. Immanuel Barshi, Karen Ebert, Bernd Heine, Elizabeth O'Dowd, and David Pesetsky read fragments incorporated in Chapter 3 of the present work and of­ fered valuable comments. I am grateful to Erin Shay for her critical reading of the whole manuscript and many valuable substantial and editorial comments and questions that prompted me to reanalyze some material. I am also grateful to Marian Safran for the editorial work, without which this book would have been simply unreadable. I would like to thank two anonymous readers of the present work. Their comments forced me to strengthen some argumentation and to abandon at least one hypothesis. Their comments also pointed out infelicitous formulations that

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

xv

made the reading of the text more difficult. For interpretations, errors, mis­ takes, and infelicities of all kinds I alone am responsible.

ABBREVIATIONS

Some of the abbreviations in the present work are commonly used in linguistic literature, some are used rarely, some have been used only in the sources quoted, and finally some have been used in my own studies of Chadic and gen­ eral linguistics. 1 2 3 ? or xxx ASSOC

First person Second person Third person Gloss unknown Associative

INF Infinitive INTERJ Interjection INTER Interrogative L Logophoric (includes addressee)

AUX COMP COMPL

Auxiliary Complementizer Completive

M NEG NOMIN

Masculine Negative Nominal(ized)

COND CONJ CONS DEF DEM DIST DOUBT EMPH EXCL EXT F FUT GEN H.

Conditional clause marker Conjunction Consecutive=Sequential Definite Demonstrative Distal Doubt in truth marker Emphasis Exclusive Verbal extension Feminine Future Genitive, genitive linker Hausa

 OBJ OPT PC PERF PL PREP PROG PROH PURP REL Q S SEQ

Object Object Optative Proto-Chadic Perfective Plural Preposition Progressive Prohibitive Purpose Relative Interrogative Subject Sequential

xviii HABIT IMPER IMPERF INCH INCL

COMPLEX SENTENCE Habitual Imperative Imperfective Inchoative Inclusive

SG STAT SUBJ TEMP

Singular Stative Subjunctive Time clause marker

There may be other abbreviations appearing in the text, mainly in examples culled from various published sources. Whenever the abbreviation is not obvi­ ous I tried to explain it in the text. Since there is no distinction for gender in the plural pronouns in Chadic the abbreviations 2M, 2F and 3M and 3F indicate second person singular masculine, second person singular feminine, third per­ son singular masculine and third person singular feminine respectively. The symbols 1SG, 2SG and 3SG indicate first, second and third person singular, with no distinction for gender. In some examples the grammatical role of the argument is also glossed, by means of symbols S for subject and  for object. I retained original glosses or designations for grammatical morphemes with re­ spect to aspect designations. Thus there is a gloss COMPL for completive, and a gloss PERF for perfective, even though the two glosses may refer to the same aspectual category in different languages. With respect to subordinators, con­ junctions, and complementizers I have sometimes replaced the original glosses with terms that I believe more adequately correspond to the function of the mor­ pheme.

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1

Aim and scope of the work

The general objective of the present study is a systematic examination of the processes involved in the formation and evolution of complex sentence con­ structions in a group of genetically related languages. Grammaticalization, i.e. synchronic or diachronic derivation of grammatical morphemes and construc­ tions, is one of the most interesting aspects of any comparative-diachronic work because it provides information about how language structure emerges. One of the findings of the present work is that starting from the same base, languages may develop quite different morphological and syntactic structures. The study of grammaticalization has the potential to explain the motivation and the sources of grammaticalization, as well as the processes involved, including languageinternal and cognitive factors. A reconstruction of a proto-system offers at best another grammatical system whose very existence is a result of the theoretical assumptions and methodologies available at the time of reconstruction. The scope of this study is complex sentence formation in one very large and diver­ sified group of related languages. This provides an opportunity to explain dif­ ferent outcomes of grammaticalization, all of which started from the same syn­ tactic and morphological base, as represented by a proto-language of a family. I concentrate on syntactic and morphological means that have been grammaticalized in the complex sentence in Chadic languages. The Chadic language group, at about 140 languages, constitutes the largest and the most diversified branch of the Afroasiatic family. This is the first comparative historical study of complex sentence in Chadic languages, and also the first modern comparative study of the complex sentence within the Afroasiatic family. The only other comparative work that deals to some degree with the complex sentence within the Afroasiatic family is Brockelmann's 1912 comparative study of Semitic languages, which contains a volume devoted to syntax. The study of comparative syntax and, more specifically, of the syntax of the complex sentence in the Afroasiatic family has been sorely needed, as

2

COMPLEX SENTENCE

evidenced by the paucity of information on syntax contained in Diakonoff (1988). My methodology is straightforward: I compare a large number of languages and reconstruct the major types of complex sentence structures in Proto-Chadic, i.e. the stage of the language before it split into the major groups. Since many data have never before been presented, the book offers the first information on complex sentences in several Chadic languages. The significance of the study for general Unguis tics Hes in several areas: It provides a description of complex sentence structures different from the systems described heretofore and it offers new insights into the mechanisms in­ volved in grammaticalization. It also complements recent comparative studies of complex sentence structures in Indo-European (cf. Bednarczuk 1971, 1980, 1986, Lehmann 1974, 1980), Australian (Austin 1988), Georgian and Abkhaz (Hewitt 1987), Tibeto-Burman (DeLancey 1991, Genetti 1986, 1991). The conclusions drawn in the present work indicate that although many of the phe­ nomena in complex sentence constructions involve cognitive processes, very few of the results are theoretically predictable. Even though one can explain virtually all processes of grammaticalization, no process of grammaticalization or the product of grammaticalization can be predicted.

1.2

Linguistic framework of the present study

In the present section I state explicitly some of the theoretical assumptions and approaches of the present study. The explicit statements to follow constitute the background of the analyses and explanations to be found in the study. Although some theoretical assumptions can be found in current and past theoret­ ical approaches, what follows is a coherent, principled system that combines formal and functional properties in a nonarbitrary way. The reader will un­ doubtedly find that some elements of the system derive from results obtained when different linguistic theories were used. I shall not give a history of each assumption because I am not sure that these assumptions have been formulated in exactly the same way as they are formulated here, and most important, I do not think I can do justice to other linguists without undertaking a thorough study of the history of linguistic thought; such a study would be a different en­ terprise altogether. In the present work, I take a nonaprioristic approach with respect to the concepts 'form' and 'function', and to the relationships between form and function, fundamental issues in any theory of language.

INTRODUCTION

3

1.2.1 The notion of form The notion 'form' refers to the formal means available in language. These means include but are not limited to: lexical categories; configuration; inflec­ tional means; adpositions; a vast and for the time being quite vague area of phe­ nomena often referred to as 'agreement'; intonation patterns and other prosodic means such as pause and tone; and serial verb construction. These means are most often combined, and there are even cases when two means are used to en­ code the same function within one utterance. An example of such usage of two means is the subject-auxiliary inversion in English combined with interrogative intonation to encode a question. In what follows I briefly describe the main properties of each of the means. 1.2.1.1 Types of lexical categoríes The fundamental feature of lexical categories is their inherent function in a larger functional unit. For nouns and verbs the larger unit is a proposition. Thus a noun is inherently an argument in a proposition and a verb is inherently a predi­ cate (cf. Frajzyngier 1985g for argumentation in support of this approach). This fundamental assumption is supported by and in turn explains the existence of widespread morphological and syntactic processes of nominalization whereby nominal expressions are derived from verbs, as well as different pro­ cess whereby verbs are derived from nouns. Languages may differ as to the types of lexical categories they have, e.g., some language have the category adjectives and some do not. What type of lexical categories a language has af­ fects its syntactic constructions. Thus if a language does not have a lexical cat­ egory 'adjective', we may expect a syntactic construction that allows for modi­ fying a noun by means of other nouns or verbs, depending on how 'property concepts' (cf. Thompson 1988) have been lexicalized. Chadic languages, where the category 'adjective' has rarely been lexicalized, typically have a con­ struction with a relative marker to modify a noun. 1.2.1.2 Phrasal categoríes The basis for the determination of phrasal categories is the head-modifier rela­ tionship, as resulting from the notion of endocentric construction as envisaged by Bloomfield in 1933 and widely accepted, though not always in the Bloomfieldian sense and rarely acknowledged in contemporary theories. Endocentric construction has a head, which is the element of that construction that can function like the whole construction (cf. Bloomfield 1962 (1933):194-

4

COMPLEX SENTENCE

196). In consequence of this description, one can point to a difference between noun phrases and verb phrases on the one hand, and prepositional phrases on the other. In the case of noun and verb phrases, nouns and verbs are heads of the construction; in the case of prepositional phrases, prepositions are merely characteristic features of the construction. 1.2.1.3 Configuration The configuration of a constituent with respect to some reference point may be a means to encode a function. The reference point may be another constituent, e.g. a verb, or a different element, provided it has enough identifiable features such as being the beginning or the end of a clause or sentence. Configuration may involve not only individual lexical items but also clauses. Configuration of lexical categories, or word order, as it is most often referred to, may have dif­ ferent functions in different languages. In the present work it is shown how the configuration of clauses within the complex sentence is used to encode modal function. 1.2.1.4 Inflectional coding Inflectional case marking on nouns, pronouns, demonstratives, adjectives, nu­ merals, is a coding means, and like configurational coding, it may have differ­ ent functions. The functions of case marking may vary within a language, de­ pending on the structures within which it occurs. Although, typically, case marking encodes the relationship between the verb and its arguments, it is also used for other functions, such as the relationship between two noun phrases, the coding of temporal locative adverbial functions, and the coding of modal functions through adverbial expressions (frequent in Slavic languages). Inflectional coding is not limited to the relationship between the verb and its arguments or between the arguments. Inflectional means can also be used to encode other semantic and pragmatic pragmatic functions 1.2.1.5 Adpositions Prepositions and postpositions are grammatical markers that may have a range of functions wider than that of configuration and case inflection combined. In addition they may have specific semantic and pragmatic functions. Within the model there is no a priori difference between the functions encoded by configu­ ration and the functions encoded by adpositions. In the present work preposi­ tions are considered only as markers having grammatical, semantic, or prag­ matic functions, as described below. Thus they are not heads of phrasal cate-

INTRODUCTION

5

gories because, unlike other heads, adpositions cannot occur alone. For an early argumentation with respect to the status of prepositions cf. Kurylowicz 1936 (1966:47) 1.2.1.6 Coding on the verb and other agreement phenomena At least two functions are involved in coding on the verb: identifying the role of arguments in the clause and identifying semantic and/or pragmatic features of the arguments. Thus in some Chadic languages the difference between the role of causee and the agent of a noun phrase is marked by an agreement marker on the verb. In other Chadic languages the definiteness of the object noun phrase is obligatorily encoded on the verb. Many Chadic languages encode the-spatial configuration of participants with verbs of movement and with other verbs. In some languages this configuration is encoded through a system of markers at­ tached to the verb. 1.2.1.7 Serial verb constructions In some Chadic languages serial verb constructions are used to encode the role of arguments in a clause, in others they encode semantic notions that in IE lan­ guages are encoded by adverbs, and in still other languages they encode tense, aspect, and modality. Although serial verb constructions are considered here as a separate coding device, they emerged as a result of several constraints in spe­ cific languages, more specifically, the availability of other means of coding. Languages that use serial verb constructions to encode the role of arguments typically do not have inflectional coding and have very few adpositions. The configurational coding constraint whereby a verb is allowed to have only one argument marked by position is one of the most important motivating factors for the emergence of serial verb constructions. One of the verbs in the serial verb construction serves simply as provider of one more position for coding pur­ poses. Languages that use serial verb constructions to mark adverbial functions typically have not lexicalized these adverbial functions as a separate lexical cate­ gory. In many languages, including Chadic, serial verb constructions gave rise to other grammatical categories, such as adpositions, inflectional case marking, and verbal extensions, to name just a few. The present volume contributes to the growing body of data (Sebba 1987, Joseph and Zwicky 1990, Lord 1993) pointing to the importance of serial verb constructions in the emergence of grammatical systems.

6

COMPLEX SENTENCE

1.2.1.8 Intonation and other prosodic means Tonal changes constitute an important grammatical means in Chadic languages. Within the nominal system it may mark the category of number. Within the system of demonstratives it may mark the distinction between proximate and remote. Within the verbal system it may mark the categories of aspect and mood, and quite possibly tense as well. Tonal changes are important for the formation of the complex sentence, since they may be the only markers of the mood of the embedded clause. 1.2.2 The notion of function The notion of 'function' in linguistics has acquired a very broad range of meanings, so it has become impossible to provide a unique description of the term 'function' and consequently to claim the existence of 'functional linguis­ tics' as representing some unified approach to language. Probably the most common denominator is for function to refer to 'communicative function', stemming from the assumption that language is a tool in communication. This notion of function has been repeatedly invoked in 'functionalist linguistics' to explain most linguistic phenomena including lexical categories (Givón 1984, Hopper and Thompson 1984, 1985, Thompson 1988), grammatical categories (Givón 1984) and word order. Assuming that all languages have the same communicative functions, we would expect much more similarity across lan­ guages. The notion of communicative function is much too vague to explain any of the differences among languages ('competing motivations' notwithstand­ ing). Specifically it cannot explain why the same function is coded by different means in different languages, nor can it explain why the same form encodes dif­ ferent functions in different languages. Furthermore, not all languages grammaticalize, i.e. encode in the grammatical system, the same semantic and prag­ matic functions. I propose a model that may constitute a small step toward a resolution of theoretical, methodological, and terminological confusion surrounding the no­ tion of function. More specifically I propose a distinction between grammatical function, semantic function, and pragmatic function. Grammatical function refers to the function of a morpheme or of a construction within a larger formal unit, such as a phrase, a clause, or a sentence. Thus the grammatical function of many constructions referred to as 'passive' is to indicate that the subject of the clause is not the expected agent (cf. Frajzyngier 1982d for argumentation). The function of reflexive markers in Slavic languages may be that of indicating

INTRODUCTION

7

the affectedness of the subject for some verbs. The function of 'causative' markers may in some languages indicate the role of the subject with respect to the verb and in other languages the presence of an additional argument. The semantic function of a morpheme or a construction involves its meaning outside of any larger formal unit. Most derivational morphemes have only a semantic function, albeit within the larger frame of a word. Thus plural mark­ ers in English have their function even when a word is pronounced in isolation. Some morphemes and constructions may have grammatical and semantic func­ tions at the same time, i.e., they may encode a function within a larger formal frame and a meaning outside of their functional domain. Thus some preposi­ tions in English, such as 'in', 'out', 'within', encode the following noun as a locative argument and at the same time indicate a spatial orientation. Prepositions in other languages may encode either a grammatical function, such as locative, or a spatial orientation, but not the two functions at the same time. This is a frequent case in Chadic languages. Such a distribution of functions results in two prepositions in sequence marking one noun phrase. Pragmatic function identifies the purposes for which a sentence containing a given morpheme or construction is used in actual speech. Another, but perhaps less precise, distinction would be to state that grammatical function describes the function of a morpheme or construction within the grammatical system of the language, and pragmatic function describes the use made of various types of sentences in all kinds of language production. Descriptions of individual lan­ guages and typological studies have amply shown thata pragmatic function may be realized by a variety of grammatical means. Thus a request may be realized by a sentence marked for imperative, interrogative, or even indicative mood. And it has also been amply shown that the same grammatical device can have different grammatical functions. Thus in some languages the word order en­ codes grammatical relations, but in others it encodes pragmatic relations involv­ ing the speaker's assumptions about the hearer's state of knowledge, expecta­ tions, and so on. 1.2.3 The relationship between the form and function The form of a syntactic construction is arbitrary in the sense that it does not de­ pend on the semantic or pragmatic function it performs. The main argument for this hypothesis is that the diversity of grammatical forms used for the same se­ mantic or pragmatic functions across languages indicates that the forms of the grammatical structures are not determined by their functions. As an example,

8

COMPLEX SENTENCE

consider the various means employed by languages to form interrogative sen­ tences. Moreover, two virtually identical forms in closely related languages may have different semantic functions. As an example, consider the form of the participle ending in -no in Polish and Ukrainian. In Polish, sentences with -no indicate that the agent of the clause is an unknown human. Consequently such clauses cannot have an overt agent introduced by a prepositional phrase or by any other means (cf. Frajzyngier 1982d). In Ukrainian, clauses with -no indi­ cate only the affectedness of the subject. Consequently such clauses may have an agent introduced by a preposition (Igor Mel'cuk, p.c.). Thus one can see that the changes that a structure may undergo are very much constrained by the semantic or pragmatic functions that the structure serves. 1.2.4 The coding principle I propose one fundamental principle with respect to utterances: For an utterance to be well formed, every element of it must have its function determined by ex­ isting coding means or through inherent lexical properties of the specific lan­ guage. Thus if one takes noun phrases as an example, every noun phrase has to have its role marked by one of the means available in the language. A clause that contains a noun phrase whose role is not marked is ungrammatical. This explains the ungrammaticality of clauses with three noun phrases and no prepositions in English, e.g.: (1)

*John scrubbed the floor carrot.

The requirement for each noun phrase to be marked is a functional analog of the combined Case and Theta theories of the principles and parameters grammar. As in phrasal structures consisting of nouns, in each structure the role of a noun must be transparent, i.e. properly coded by the grammatical means in the lan­ guage. A phrase where the role of one of its members cannot be established is ungrammatical. There may exist, however, nominal elements within a clause that bear no grammatical relation to the predicate but rather encode a pragmatic relationship, such as encoding the addressee (cf. Frajzyngier 1989d). Such elements are, however, also properly marked. Every language may have formal constraints that allow one and not another type of construction. These formal constraints may lie in the domain of the lexicon and pertain to the number and types of lexical categories available in the language. There may be constraints in the domain of syntax that allow some

INTRODUCTION

9

but not other orders of constituents; they may lie in the domain of language use, allowing some but not other forms to be used in any given situation. Languages may develop all kinds of strategies and constructions in reaction to formal constraints. 1.2.5 Methodology of reconstruction I attempt a reconstruction of the syntax of various types of complex sentences in Proto-Chadic. For many languages, descriptions that are available do not go beyond the syntax of the simple sentence, and many sources do not deal with syntax at all. Since the number of undescribed Chadic languages remains larger than the number of described languages, it is theoretically possible that lan­ guages for which there are no data will ultimately prove the proposed recon­ structions invalid. The time when scholars will have adequate data on all lan­ guages appears to be very remote indeed, and I hope that nobody advocates that we postpone the study of the comparative syntax of Chadic languages by two or three generations of scholars. One of the outcomes of the present study is a set of hypotheses that may give other researchers on comparative Chadic or particu­ lar Chadic languages material to check, confirm, or refute. In trying to recon­ struct a syntax of a proto-language I assume that a similar construction with a similar function in most of its descending branches is more likely a result of common retention rather than of common innovation. Although such method­ ology would not be very productive for simple issues such as word order of basic constituents, with respect to constructions having the same semantic func­ tion, some cognate morphological material, and several specific structural char­ acteristics that go beyond the question of the order of lexical categories, this methodology is as reliable as it is when applied to phonology. Note that using similar construction alone without pairing it with a specific function is not a reli­ able way to reconstruct, because similar constructions may appear in languages from different genetic families. An objection to the consideration of common retention may be raised by someone claiming that similar forms with similar functions represent independent results of grammaticalization from a similar source. Such a possibility is given serious consideration each time a recon­ struction is proposed. The reconstruction of Proto-Chadic syntax is only one of the aims of this work; the other is the study of grammaticalization, and the re­ sults of the latter are not dependent on the exhaustiveness of the potential mate­ rial.

COMPLEX SENTENCE

10

1.3

The range of issues with respect to grammaticalization

In the present section I enumerate and briefly describe the issues with respect to grammaticalization that are addressed in the present work. These issues can be divided into the following groups; the motivation for grammaticalization; the results of grammaticalization; and the nature of the processes involved, includ­ ing unidirectionality, sources, and constraints. 1.3.1 Motivation In my attempts to describe the motivations for grammaticalization I invoke the factors that are usually invoked to explain language change: vaguely defined communicative need, which includes economy, simplicity, frequency of occur­ rence (for a description cf. Hopper and Traugott 1993); multiple functions of grammatical morphemes, which lead to the reduction of functions and subse­ quent introduction of new markers (Pisarkowa 1984); and creativity, as recently proposed in Heine et al. 1991. All of these factors have been documented to exist in one way or another. These concepts are formulated in terms that are so general that they can be invoked to explain virtually any linguistic process. In the present work I add a motivation that is a consequence of the proposed prin­ ciple of well-formednes: Every element in an utterance must have its role trans­ parent to the hearer either by inherent lexical properties or by grammatical means. The proposed motivation for grammaticalization is the generation of coding means to mark the role of elements in utterances. According to the pro­ posed coding principle, the presence of means of coding in an utterance is justi­ fied by their function. The remaining elements are marked by the coding means. 1.3.2 Grammatical morphemes versus constructions A large part of the current work on grammaticalization concentrates on the de­ velopment of grammatical morphemes from lexical items. The progress made so far in the study of this development attests not only to its importance but also, in a great measure, to the fact that the sources of grammaticalization are quite transparent and the results of investigation are rewarding in the form of firmly established sources. However, it is very difficult to talk about the source of grammaticalization when it comes to the emergence of grammatical construc-

INTRODUCTION

11

tions. Studies of the grammaticalization of constructions and categories such as subject, ergativity, voice, and the functions of the word order take discourse properties to be the main source for the emergence of grammatical constructions (cf. Givón 1990 and references there to his earlier work, Du Bois 1987, and Hopper and Traugott 1993). In the present work both aspects of grammatical­ ization, viz. the emergence of grammatical constructions and the emergence of grammatical morphemes, are given equal weight. 1.3.3 Processes of grammaticalization The fundamental properties and importance of metaphor and metonymy in lan­ guage and cognition have been recognized and documented thoroughly in the literature, e.g. Kuryłowicz 1970, Lakoff and Johnson 1980, Lakoff 1987. Metaphor has also been invoked in the recent studies of grammaticalization, most notably in the works of Heine and his colleagues in Cologne. Metaphor in lexical structures and in the process of grammaticalization provides evidence for the nature of language change. Unlike the evolution of species, which proceeds without the conscious participation of the species, the change in language is af­ fected by the cognitive processes of its users, quite similarly to the change in some plants and animals that are affected by human manipulation. Metaphorical processes provide obvious evidence that speakers can and do observe language just as any other object in their surrounding reality. They are able to analyze this object, isolate various elements in it, recognize the properties of these ele­ ments, and combine these elements for all kinds of novel expressions. The speakers also observe and analyze nonlinguistic reality. The two types of ob­ servations allow the speaker to take an element of language, such as a lexical item or a construction, and use it to describe any property of reality that may have a characteristic similar to one of the features of the lexical element. I shall have nothing new to add to the existing studies of metaphor, but the evidence available indicates that semantic metaphor and metonymy are not motivations for grammaticalization but rather one of the means through which grammatical­ ization is realized. But invoking semantic metaphor and metonymy does not explain why certain morphemes acquire different grammatical structure. I shall illustrate the problem first and then present an explanation to be invoked in the present volume. When a lexical item serves as a source of a metaphor, it does so by virtue of the semantic characteristics that it has. Those semantic characteristics are not objective in the sense of a relationship between the properties of the lexical item

12

COMPLEX SENTENCE

and reality; rather, they depend on a subjective analysis of the individual speaker, culture, and circumstances. An individual speaker associates certain properties with a given object, and then uses the lexical item referring to that object in reference to some other phenomena. Let us take a hypothetical exam­ ple: The biological definition of 'dog' as a mammal belonging to the canine branch is the least important for the metaphorical use of this word. The nonbiological characteristics of the animal, different in different cultures, and often dif­ ferent for different speakers within the same culture, are what is important from the point of view of metaphor. The following characteristics may be ascribed to dogs in many cultures: fidelity, obedience, hunger, persistence, eagerness, uncleanliness, good food, dirt, hunting, lust. The word 'dog' may be used as a coding means for those various properties, e.g. Polish pics na kobiety 'dog for women', 'horny', exploits the belief that dogs do not control their sexual drives; pieskic zycie 'dog's life' exploits the bad treatment of dogs in society; psia mac 'dog's mother' (a curse) exploits, so to speak, the fact that dogs do not mate for life. Whether the word is used as a simile or as a metaphor narrowly understood is irrelevant for the time being. Consider now the grammaticalization of the demonstrative 'that'. It cannot have such a rich system of semantic associations as the word 'dog' has, and yet it is used in the grammatical system of English in a variety of functions and constructions, including remote demonstrative; complementizer; relative clause marker; anaphora; subordinate clause marker, including purpose and resultative clauses; and adverbial marker. In order to explain the multitude of functions of morphemes that have very few semantic characteristics, if any, another explanation must be invoked. In the present work I propose the existence of a semiotic metonymy, more specifically, its pars pro toto variant (Kuryłowicz 1970) whereby a part of the sign is taken to have the function of the sign. In linguistic terms, it means that a part of a construction has the same function as the whole construction rather than retaining the meaning of the part. As an illustration, consider semiotic metonymy when applied to lexical items. A two-component sign such as 'Santa Claus' may be represented by only one of its parts, as the following headline demonstrates: 'Threats frighten Santas. Clauses in Boulder still taking wishes.' (Daily Camera 23.12. 1993). Complex sentence structures in Chadic display several instances of semiotic metonymy with respect to grammatical morphemes, where the morphemes acquire the meaning from a construction and then are used because of the new meaning.

INTRODUCTION

13

1.3.4 Unidirectionality of grammaticalization Many contemporary studies of grammaticalization, language change, and uni­ versals, such as Croft (1990), Heine and al. (1991), Hopper and Traugott (1993), and Heine et al. (1993), postulate unidirectionality of grammaticaliza­ tion, which can be summarized as in Hopper and Traugott in the following way: Given two forms A and B, grammaticalization goes from A to  and not from B to A. When grammaticalization concerns the development of grammatical mor­ phemes from lexical items, unidirectionality is a fact, but it does not follow from any theoretical prerequisite. When two grammatical morphemes are in­ volved in a grammaticalization process, unidirectionality, which is not theoreti­ cally grounded, is also factually not true. To give an example, consider tempo­ ral and conditional markers. Hopper and Traugott (1993:180) and in other places state that conditional markers developed from temporal markers, not the other way around. Chadic languages provide examples of the development not only of conditionals from temporals but also of temporals from conditionals. The present work describes instances of bidirectional grammaticalization.

1.4

Chadic branch

The Chadic group at about 140 languages, constitutes the largest branch of the Afroasiatic family (phylum in Newman 1992). These languages are spoken in Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad, and Niger. For information about geographic dis­ tribution and number of speakers, see Newman (1992), Wente-Lukas (1985), and Dieu and Renaud (1983). Most of these languages are not described, and for many of them there exist only studies dealing with one or another aspect of their grammar. For some 30 languages we have one grammar each, except for Hausa, for which there exist more than a dozen pedagogical grammars written in various languages and several reference grammars in preparation or in press, and for which there are many studies of phonology, morphology, lexicon, and syntax, including two works specifically dedicated to syntax (Kraft 1963 and Tuller 1986), one study specifically dealing with complementation (Dimmendaal 1989), and one dissertation dealing with subordination (Bagari 1976). Chadic languages are divided into four branches in Newman (1977a, 1992), and Dieu and Renaud (1983), and into three branches in Jungraithmayr 1978b and Tourneux in press). The internal classification of Chadic languages in these works is based on phonological criteria, with data drawn from lexical items.

14

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Syntactic and morphological information is largely ignored in Chadic genetic classifications. For the purpose of the present work, this is quite a desirable situation because the use of a classification based on nonsyntactic criteria for the comparison of syntactic forms precludes circularity in argumentation for the re­ tention or innovation of syntactic or morphological forms. The conclusions reached in the present work have almost never been affected by the internal classification into three or four branches. Those cases where classification may affect the outcome of reconstruction are duly noted and commented upon. I will not address issues of internal classification in the present work, although I do think that the results of comparative study of morphology and syntax may and should be used in producing an internal classification within a linguistic family. Traditional historical linguistics, some of whose main tenets are synthesized in Greenberg (1955), and many scholars afterwards shunned syntactic criteria, mainly because syntax, they alleged, did not offer enough variation to be useful in genetic classification. That view can be upheld only if syntax is limited to the word order of the major constituents. But if syntax is seen as including all the syntactic constructions of a language, paired with the semantic and pragmatic functions these constructions serve, it offers an enormously rich field in which to explore common retentions and common innovations, two necessary ele­ ments for genetic classification. Owing to the fact that similar syntactic devices may develop independently in related and unrelated languages, special caution must be exercised before one uses syntactic information in the subclassification of languages.

1.5

A synopsis of simple sentence structure in Chadic

A great majority of Chadic languages have SVO word order. Some languages of the central (Biu-Mandara) branch have VSO word order. In Frajzyngier (1983b) I postulated that the word order in Proto-Chadic was VSO. Williams (1989a) and (1989b) has proposed that the word order was SV for intransitive verbs and VSO for transitive verbs. I will explore in the present work whether the syntax of the complex sentence has a bearing on the reconstruction of the word order in Proto-Chadic. No Chadic language has an inflectional system on nouns marking the core (subject, object, dative for three-argument verbs) argu­ ments of the clause. The only exception is the locative case, recorded and de­ scribed as such in some languages (cf. Ebert 1979 and Pawlak 1989). Only languages that have VSO order use a preposition to mark an argument as direct

INTRODUCTION

15

object. In some languages verba sentiendi, more specifically, equivalents of 'love' and 'pain', have argument structures without a subject. The word order in the simple sentence in some languages is sensitive to aspectual distinctions (e.g. Hona, Ga'anda), and in other languages some verbs require a different word order than the norm (e.g. Mandara). Focusing of an argument in most Chadic languages is encoded by moving it either to the beginning of the clause (focusing of direct object) or to the end of the clause, usually accompanied by a preposition (focusing of subject). The voice system in the nonstative aspect of Proto-Chadic and of most if not of all contemporary Chadic languages is as follows: If the verb has only one argument, such an argument is coded as the subject, i.e., it occurs before the verb in SVO languages or after the verb in VSO languages, and it is not marked in any additional way. If a second argument is added, then the more control­ ling, agentive, argument is coded as subject and the less controlling as object. In some contemporary languages, verbs of loving and aching, i.e. verbs that inherently do not have either a controlling or an undergoing argument, have both arguments, the experiencer of love and pain and the trigger of the two feelings, encoded as oblique arguments. Such arguments are marked by a loca­ tive preposition. It appears that most Chadic languages have or had serial verb constructions. These constructions were a means to encode a number of semantic functions, such as argument marking, especially the benefactive argument coding; direc­ tion for verbs of movement; adverbial modification; and comparative construc­ tions. In time, the 'secondary' verbs in serial verb constructions became prepositions marking the argument or direction of movement. Many Chadic languages have verbal affixes called extensions (Er­ weiterungen), which encode both the direction of movement with respect to the place of speech or some other reference point, and certain semantic functions such as manner in which the action/event is accomplished, participants in the event as well as several others. Extensions are a heterogeneous group: Some derive from verbs, others derive from demonstratives and pronouns, and still others derive from directional prepositions. The mood system in the simple clause includes indicative, which is the un­ marked mood, and a mood of obligation with respect to subject, in Chadic lit­ erature referred to as subjunctive. This mood is marked by various inflectional devices including tonal changes and affixation. In some languages it is marked on the verbal stem, and in other languages, on subject pronouns. The distinc-

16

COMPLEX SENTENCE

tion of moods in the simple sentence is also important for the complex sentence since that distinction is used for the coding of moods of the embedded clause. Simple-sentence yes/no questions are coded by two devices: clause-final interrogative particles, historically derived from verbs signifying being and existence, and tone. The specific, or so-called WH-questions, in a simple sentence are coded by an interrogative marker that may be identical with the yes/no interrogative marker and by a marker that indicates the argument that the question is about. Although a comparative study of the aspect and tense systems of Chadic has yet to be done, it appears that there was a basic distinction in Proto-Chadic, as in most contemporary languages, between stative and nonstative aspects. There appears also to have been a distinction between perfective and nonperfective aspects (cf. Wolff 1979). The tense system in the simple sentence in Chadic still awaits a comparative and historical study. I am not in a position to make any cross-language general­ izations with respect to the coding of tenses. Some future tense markers devel­ oped from the verbs 'to go'(Frajzyngier 1983b) and 'to want' (Frajzyngier 1993), frequent sources of future tense markers in languages in general. Past tense markers in some languages developed from adverbs of time meaning 'long ago'. Because of the lack of comparative studies of tense in the simple sentence in Chadic, it is very difficult to reach any firm conclusions with respect to the tense system in the complex sentence. Contrastive focus is marked by two devices: the use of a copula preceding or following the argument in contrastive focus and by moving the argument into a position other than the one that it occupies in the unmarked clause. The object is moved to clause-initial position. In some languages the contrastive focus for subject is clause-final position. In many languages the use of a copula is com­ bined with movement of the argument into other than neutral position.

1.6

State of the art with respect to complex sentence in Chadic

Although many descriptions of complex sentence structure phenomena can be found in descriptions of individual Chadic languages, very little has been pub­ lished on comparative syntax of the complex sentence in Chadic. Frajzyngier's 1987c work on relative clauses was the first comparative study of a complex sentence structure phenomenon in Chadic. That was followed by a study of relative tenses in connection with relative clauses in Zima (1991).

INTRODUCTION

17

Jungraithmayr (1991) describes subordination in Bidiya and Mubi. Koops (1991) discusses purpose and reason marking, and Taylor (1991) describes sentential complementation after verbs of perception. The last two studies were produced in my seminar on the complex sentence in Chadic. In the present work the discussion of the complementation of verbs of perception and of the purpose and reason clauses is limited only to the issues not discussed in the pa­ pers by Taylor and Koops. The study of interrogative sentences in Chadic in Frajzyngier (1985f), although not intended as a study of complex sentence structure phenomena, has revealed that many interrogative sentences are in fact complex sentences; the interrogative complex often consists of a clause fol­ lowed by a copula as the marker of interrogative. The interrogative yes/no question can be conceived of as consisting of two clauses, one a proposition, and the second a clause asking about the truth of the proposition. Similarly questions about a component of the proposition (WH-questions) consist in some languages of two clauses: The first is a proposition of the sentence, and the second asks about the specific component.

1.7

A synopsis of complex sentence structure in Chadic

A complex sentence is a construction consisting of more than one clause. Formal characteristics of a complex sentence as opposed to a sequence of clauses in discourse in Chadic are discussed in Chapter 2. The following are distinguishing characteristics of the complex sentence: The possibility of omit­ ting some arguments, which cannot be omitted in a sequence of clauses; the presence of various markers of modality (complementizers) which are not pre­ sent in a sequence of clauses; presence of various markers encoding adverbial relations, again absent in the sequence of clauses. The typology of complex sentences in Chadic differs considerably from the typology of complex sen­ tences in IE languages. More specifically, I propose, in lieu of a division be­ tween coordination and subordination, a division between asyndetic coordina­ tion, sequential clauses, and subordination. Subordinate clauses are usually divided into complement clauses, i.e. those that realize one of the core argu­ ments of a sentence, and adverbial or adjunct clauses, realizing one of the ad­ juncts (cf. Palmer 1986). An interesting property of Chadic languages is the fact that some adjunct clauses share the markers of subordination with comple­ ment clauses. This poses questions about the criteria in the taxonomy of the

18

COMPLEX SENTENCE

complex sentence and, most important, about the conceptual structure of com­ plex sentences in Chadic. An important component of complementation are complementizers. I pro­ pose that complementizers in Chadic languages, as in many other languages, perform two functions, one modal and the other propositional. The modal function includes both epistemic and deontic modalities. With respect to epis­ temic modality, Chadic languages are interesting in that they may have comple­ mentizers encoding de dicto and de re modality. The comparative study indi­ cates that complements of verbs of saying in Proto-Chadic were not marked by complementizers. Over time the verbs of saying became complementizers and were used with complements of other verbs, and eventually also with verbs of saying. Complements of verbs of saying in Chadic are interesting because of the omission of the verb 'to say' from the main clause in natural discourse in most of the languages. When the verb is omitted, the complementizer, often derived from a verb of saying, is the only evidence of what has been omitted. Complements of volitional verbs in Chadic demonstrate that the form of the complement clause depends on syntactic characteristics of the verb. If the verb has inherently a nominal complement, special means must be deployed to allow a clausal complement of such verbs. If a volitional verb has inherently a clausal complement, no such means are necessary. Complements of verbs of perception encode the commonly found distinc­ tion between direct and indirect perception. The distinction is encoded through two means: absence or presence of complementizer, and the use of two different complementizers. Complements of both volitional verbs and verbs of perception provide inter­ esting insights into the phenomena often called 'subject-to-object raising'. According to the proposed analysis, subject-to-object raising is a grammatical means rather than a result of a formal constraint on language structure. In Chadic and very likely in other languages it encodes de re modality. It is shown that 'raising' is in cross-language complementary distribution with other means that function in the same semantic domain. Complements of cognitive verbs in some languages display the distinction observed in complements of verbs of perception, viz., they distinguish between knowledge obtained through personal experience and knowledge obtained through hearsay. In most languages the distinction is encoded through different complementizers. Although in most languages the coding of arguments in complement clauses does not differ from the coding in main clauses, the word order in main clauses

INTRODUCTION

19

is not always the same as in embedded clauses. Thus in Xdi, which has VSO in main clauses, with object marked by a preposition, the embedded clause has SVO, with the object still marked by a preposition. The explanation for the change in the word order in the embedded clause in Xdi and related languages is intimately linked to the process of grammaücalization as explained in Chapter 4. The coding of arguments on the verb is also different in main and embedded clauses. Thus Hona has one set of subject markers for the main clause and two other sets for embedded clauses. The explanation for the differences is linked with the existential status of head nouns, as described in the Chapter 11. Two types of adjunct clauses clauses are discussed: temporal and condi­ tional. The two types of clauses often have identical markers. These markers are significant for the theory of grammaücalization because they provide evi­ dence that grammaticalization, when its source is a grammatical marker, may be bidirectional. Thus in some language conditional markers are derived from temporal markers and in other languages temporal markers are derived from conditional markers. Relative clause formation in Chadic manifests all the issues present in com­ plex sentence formation. In many Chadic languages there are two types of rela­ tive clauses, the functional distinction between them being the information sta­ tus of the head noun: In one type the head noun has been previously mentioned in discourse, is assumed to be known, or is present and presumably visible within the environment of discourse. In the other type the head noun is intro­ duced for the first time. Thus the relative clause is the only modification of the head noun. The well-known distinction in English and other languages be­ tween restrictive and nonrestrictive relative clauses appears to be subsumed by the larger division between the two existential statuses of the head nouns. The two types of relative clauses in Chadic languages are encoded by at least three grammatical means: the interplay between relative markers, absence of markers, and postrelative definite markers. I hope that the present study contributes toward the understanding of some of the recurring phenomena in complex sentence formation and the theoretical issues that have emerged in connection with these phenomena. More important, I hope that this work contributes to the understanding of the motivations, and mechanisms involved in the particular processes of grammaticalization. By 'grammaticalization' I mean the encoding of some semantic or pragmatic func­ tion in the grammatical structure of the language. Grammaticalization so un­ derstood is not limited to the process by which lexical items become grammati­ cal morphemes but also includes the emergence of syntactic and phonological

20

COMPLEX SENTENCE

devices to encode semantic and pragmatic functions. Specifically, the research on the present project has bearing on the following issues: Is the process of grammaticalization predictable or fortuitous? What is the role of cognitive pro­ cesses in grammaticalization? What is the role of the discourse and the gram­ matical system in grammaticalization? What is the role of the metaphor? One of the best ways to discuss such questions is to examine languages that had similar structures at their starting point Sharing the same base, Chadic languages have developed different complex (and simple) sentence structure. It cannot be stressed enough that the present work does not pretend to de­ scribe all the phenomena involved in complex sentence structures. The work has, in fact, only a very limited scope, covering problems of conjoined clauses, certain issues in complementation, and some types of adverbial clauses. To in­ terpret what is found in this work as all that can be found in complex sentences in Chadic languages would be an unwarranted narrowing of the richness of syntactic structures. The present work presents just a tiny portion of semantic notions encoded in the grammatical systems of Chadic languages. The amount of data given for various languages in the present work may leave the impres­ sion that some Chadic languages have grammaticalized more semantic and/or pragmatic distinctions than others. Such an interpretation is also unwarranted because of the simple, fact that for some languages more appropriate data are available than for others. The amount of data available is mainly the function of how many linguists worked on a given language, what their aims and individual interests were, and other factors, all quite independent of the structure of a given language. Although completeness is ruled out, the present work, I hope, has captured some of the main features of the syntax of the complex sentence in Chadic and contributes toward the understanding of the processes of grammaticalization in general.

1.8

Sources and form of data

For the following languages I have used my own field notes: Gidar, Hona, Xdi, Lele, Mina, Pero, and Mupun. For Mandara I used my own field notes, and in the analysis also Mirt (1969/1970) and Whaley and Fluckiger 's (1980) Mandara Padagogical Notes. For Cibak I used my own field notes and in the analysis Hoffmann 1955. Data from Xdi are quoted from Frajzyngier and Shay Ms. Except for Xdi, the data from those languages are presented in a broad

INTRODUCTION

21

phonetic transcription. For Zaar (Sayanci) I used my own field notes as well as notes gathered by Robert Koops. In the analysis of data I have used insights from Schneeberg (1971). Zaar data are presented in a broad phonetic transcrip­ tion. For Gwandara I used field notes gathered by Robert Koops. For Masa I used my own field notes as well as Schumann (1983) and especially Caitucoli (1986). For Sibne (Sibine, Somray) I used my own field notes and Barreteau and Jungraithmayr (1982). For Bole I used Awad (1993), Schuh, MS, my own field notes, as well as field notes kindly provided by Maher Awad. Data for East Dangla are courtesy of Younous Sopoyé and Erin Shay. Erin Shay also provided the analysis of these data. Data for remaining Chadic languages were taken from standard sources listed in references and acknowledged when­ ever an example is used. When no source is given after an example, it means that the example comes from my own field notes. Whenever the material is cited from published sources, no changes are made in the quoted data. Consequently, the same phonological form may be cited in several ways, depending on how it was represented in a given source. This is particularly true for Hausa, the Chadic language with the richest scholarship. Some sources include tonal notation and vowel length and others do not, and different sources represent these two properties in different ways. The analyses, glosses, and transcriptions of the material cited from my own work in progress or from fieldnotes on Gidar, Lele, Mina, Mandara, Masa, and Sibne (Somray) are tentative, pending further work on those languages. Many of the published studies of individual Chadic languages do not contain glosses in the examples. Many glosses in the current work are therefore supplied either by me or by research assistants on the project. These glosses should be taken as a result of our attempts to understand the morphemic division in a given language rather than information supplied by scholars working on those languages and confirmed through a work with language assistants. In a few cases glosses for grammatical morphemes follow the convention accepted in the present work. Thus if in the original source the gloss is given as 'que' or 'that', in the present work it is 'COMP'. In a few cases the information about the page from which an example was taken could not be recovered. Such instances are marked with XXX.

2 PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CONSTRUCTIONS

2.1 The issues and the scope of the chapter Traditional grammars of Indo-European languages usually postulate two types of complex sentences: one in which two clauses have more or less the same status with respect to each other, conjoined clauses of various types; and the other in which one clause is a matrix clause and the other is a subordinate clause, either a complement of the verb or an adjunct clause. In current syntac­ tic theories, both formal (GB, GPSG, Relational Grammar) and functional, in­ cluding typological studies, the traditional division reflecting the Indo-European type is accepted in its main features. Functional approaches have introduced some modifications into the traditional typology of complex sentences by postu­ lating gradual rather than discrete differences between conjoining and embed­ ding (cf. Givón 1990, Longacre 1985, also Hopper and Traugott 1993). The traditional approach has been modified significantly in Lehmann 1988, Macdonald 1988, and implicitly in other papers in Haiman and Thompson 1988, where the discussion in general is not affected by the bipolar division into coordinated and subordinated clauses, but instead arichersystem of distinctions is proposed. In the present chapter I demonstrate that many Chadic languages present yet different typological characteristics with respect to clause combining because of the different set of formal devices they use and because of the distribution of functions encoded by the formal devices. The formal devices involved are parataxis, which is in fact an asydentic coordination, sequential relationship, and subordination, which as in other languages may be divided into comple­ ment and adjunct clauses. The functional loads of the first two formal devices only partially overlap with clausal coordination of IE languages. Sequential clauses encode a function that has not been grammaticalized in IE languages by a unique device.

COMPLEX SENTENCE

24

Throughout functional literature much attention has been given to the ques­ tion whether certain grammatical morphemes, specifically morphemes partici­ pating in clause combining, originated as discourse-level markers or sentencelevel markers. The present chapter addresses this question first by discussing the validity of such questions and then by providing a description of the grammaticalization history of the clause-combining markers in Chadic. 2.2

Hypotheses

The main hypothesis of the present chapter is that Proto-Chadic had the follow­ ing system with respect to the domains coded by sentential coordinating con­ junctions of IE languages: There were structures of the type S1 Ø S2 indicating an unspecified connection between propositions. The structure S1 Ø S2 dif­ fered formally from a sequence of any two sentences in discourse in that one or more arguments of the S2 could be omitted if they were identical with the argu­ ments of the S1. Similarly the verb of the S2 could be omitted if it was identical with the verb of the S1. In very few Chadic languages there eventually emerged a sentential coordinate conjunction and structures of the typeS1CONJ S2 that were functionally equivalents of the structures S1 Ø S2. This develop­ ment occurred after the split into individual languages. Proto-Chadic also had a structure of the type S1 SEQ S2 where SEQ was a sequential marker indicating temporal and possibly causal relationship between the events coded by S1 and S2. The component 'SEQ S2' was identical with the apodosis 'then clause' in temporal and conditional sentences of the type 'when/if S1 then S2'. The functional domains of the Proto-Chadic structures, S1 S2 and S1 SEQ S2, only partially overlap with the IE structure S1 CONJ S2. Proto-Chadic also had a clause-chaining construction, different from both S1 0 S2 and S1 SEQ S2 structures. Clause chaining was used mainly to en­ code one typeOftemporal relationship between propositions. It appears that Proto-Chadic did not have a counterexpectational conjunction corresponding to 'but', i.e. a conjunction indicating a consequence contrary to the one that could reasonably be expected from the preceding discourse, includ­ ing the preceding clause. The evidence for this conclusion is provided by the fact that most Chadic languages which encode this function overtly do it with the help of the conjunction a(m)ma, a word borrowed ultimately from Arabic, most often via Hausa, Fulani, Kanuri, or some other language of the area that

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

25

had direct contact with Arabic. In some languages, such as Hausa, amma may even be directly borrowed from Arabic, written or spoken. The widespread use of amma, and the absence of other markers of denying the anticipated presup­ position of the hearer, suggest that this particular semantic function was not en­ coded in the grammatical system of Proto-Chadic. For the few languages that have grammaticalized the adversative function through a device other than bor­ rowing, however, I do provide an explanation of the grammaticalization process that led to the development of the marker. The evidence for the main hypothesis of the present chapter consists of the following: ♦An attempt (unsuccessful) at reconstruction of a sentential coordinating conjunction (SCC) in Proto-Chadic and an explanation of where the con­ temporary SCCs come from. This shows that the contemporary properties of the structure S1 Ø/SCC S2 must have been coded by the structure S1 Ø S2. I will also show that the few sentential conjunctions found in contem­ porary languages represent the result of a recent grammaticalization or bor­ rowing. ♦A description of the functional differences between the structures S1 0/SCC S2 and S1 SEQ S2. The consistency of the differences across Chadic languages demonstrates that the structure S1 0/SCC S2 in Chadic, whose function does not correspond to the structure S1 0/SCC S2 in IE languages, is a retention from the Proto-Chadic stage. •An attempt at the reconstruction of sequential in PC. The existence of overt sequential markers in many contemporary Chadic languages indicates that a sequential marker with the contemporary characteristics must have already existed as a grammatical category in PC. The discussion of the sequential marker also includes a description of the grammaticalization process that led to the emergence of the sequential markers. I also describe how in one lan­ guage, Hausa, sequential markers have become aspectual markers. The final section of the present chapter is devoted to a discussion of the dis­ course functions of sequential markers, which may have contributed to the grammaticalization of the category. The importance of this section rests on its contribution to the discussions of the role of discourse in grammar.

26 2.3

COMPLEX SENTENCE Was there a sentential coordinating conjunction in PC?

Although most Chadic languages do not have a sentential coordinating conjunc­ tion, there are a few that do have such a morpheme. That fact entails a consid­ eration of the possibility that PC had a sentential coordinating conjunction. If a coordinating conjunction is reconstructed for the PC stage, it is necessary to establish under what conditions so many languages lost it. If, however, the co­ ordinating conjunction cannot be reconstructed for PC, then it is necessary to discover the sources and processes that contributed to the emergence of the few sentential coordinating conjunctions. A reconstruction of the sources of grammaticalization can serve as part of the argumentation for a reconstructed system. No description of Chadic language postulates that the absence of a coordi­ nating conjunction results from a deletion of this morpheme in a syntactic envi­ ronment or a pragmatic context. There are no processes in Chadic that would require a deletion of this morpheme. Nor is there anything in the structure of sentences without a SCC to indicate that at one time thcse structures might have had a SCC. Compare the following examples from languages from three branches: Pero (West) (1) cákkà cád-kó cáw-i cákkà tà-cú-áani 3M take-PERF corn-DEF 3M FUT-eat-NOMIN 'he1 has taken corn, he1 will eat it' Ron-Bokkos (West) (2) hon di cu ló leave porridge eat meat 'he left (the) porridge and ate (the) meat' (Jungraithmayr 1970:135) Buduma (Central) (3) go-le lúgu aabí gú-jugu hába ja! 2SG take friend NEG 2SG go person bad 'don't go to a bad person (and) take (him) for a friend' (Lukas 1939:44)

PARATACIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

27

Margi (Central): In Margi, the second verb in a sequence has a conjunctive form, characterized by low tone prefix à, e.g. (In the following example the tone on the prefix is high because of the high tone of the preceding morpheme): (4)

á-lí-r j ácfúwáná 3SG-go in-PS 3 hid 'he went in and hid (it)' (Hoffmann 1963:189)

Table 2.1 shows which languages do, and which languages do not, have SCSs. In anticipation of arguments to follow, the table also contains nominal conjunc­ tion markers and associative markers. An empty indicates that a morpheme for that grammatical label does not exist. CLASS refers to the classification of languages as per Newman 1977a. TABLE 2.1. (1) Nominal conjunction, associative and sentential conjunction Language Hausa Pero Mupun Kulere Ron-Daffo Ron-Bokkos Fyer Ngizim Pa'a Saya  Lamang

CLASS IA1 IA IA3 IA4 IA4 IA4 IA4 IB1 IB2 IB 1 4

Xdi Mofu-Gudur Daba Gude Buduma

4 5 7 8 1

CONJN dà kam k á , tu si, tá hóná nàa i/yaa ? ndə ndà

ASSOC dà kam/kan k tu ká tá hóná nàa yaa ? ndə ndà

ndá tà ègé ba'a; ta yuu

ndá ? ? ba'a; ta; ?

k

CONJS none none none not observed not observed not observed none none none none none ndà 'and', bàtà 'or' none tá none not found yuu 'as well as'

28

COMPLEX SENTENCE

TABLE 2.1. (2) Nominal conjunction, associative and sentential conjunction

Language Logone Musgu Gidar Lele Kera Bidiya Mesme

CLASS ΠΒ1 ΠΒ2  2  1 IVB1

CONJN ká, lai gm

ASSOC

dàanà;mó bà; ká

da gàa kâ

lai dnd

CONJS none lay, lai yaη or góm bà Ø; dàanà Ø,bà not observed

With respect to the two possibilities stated at the beginning of this chapter, I propose that Proto-Chadic did not have a sentential coordinating conjunction, and that indeed the few contemporary SCCs are innovations. Arguments against the existence of the SCC in Proto-Chadic are as follows: •Accepting the existence of a SCC in PC requires postulating massive paral­ lel deletions in most languages. •In contemporary Chadic languages there are no phonological, morphologi­ cal, syntactic, or semantic motivations for the deletion of coordinate con­ junctions. Note that other conjunctions, such as nominal conjunctions, which occur in similar phonological environments, have not been deleted in Chadic languages in general and are not deleted in any particular language. Nominal conjunctions are usually derived from associative markers, and those are preserved in all languages. •On the basis of the existing SCCs it is not possible to reconstruct a single form of a SCC for Proto-Chadic. A list of these forms is given below when the sources of grammaticalization of SCCs are discussed. Arguments in support of the hypothesis that PC did not have a SCC are as follows: •The simplest explanation for the absence of SCC in the great majority of languages is that these languages simply never had a SCC. •In the few languages in which the coordinated conjunction does occur, it appears to be a product of a relatively recent grammaticalization. The sources of the grammaticalization are discussed in the next section.

PARATACnC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES 2.4

29

Sources of sentential coordinating conjunctions

It is not immediately obvious from what sources the few SCCs developed, especially in view of the absence of extensive dictionaries for most languages but there are several probable sources from which the few sentential coordinated conjunctions may be derived. 2.4.1 From nominal to sentential conjunction The common phenomenon among IE languages, that nominal and sentential coordinate conjunctions are identical, finds a few parallels in Chadic languages. Although such cases are rare, they are nevertheless very important because they point to the grammaticalization process from nominal conjunction to sentential conjunction rather than the other way around, thus providing an additional ar­ gument against the existence of sentential coordinating conjunction in ProtoChadic. The main support for this direction of change stems from the fact that whereas all Chadic languages have nominal coordinating conjunctions, very few of them have sentential coordinating conjunctions. It is not very likely that conjunctions emerged first as sentential, then became nominal, and then the sentential conjunctions were lost. The following are the few cases when the SCC is identical with the nominal coordinating conjunction (NCC): In Gidar, along with the SCC yáη, for which no source could be found at the time of writing, there are occasional uses of gom, the NCC, as a sentential coordinating conjunction. Sentential coordination in Kera has an alternation between zero and dàanà. The latter is identical with the NCC in that language. According to Ebert 1979 the coordinating conjunction dàanà, usually in nonfinal position, joins both sentences and like constituents. Examples: (5)

ye kóoróη kúsrí wra dàana (ye) bàadáη 3PL brush body.PL INTENS CONJ 3PL clean kísní wra tooth.PL INTENS 'they brushed themselves (their bodies) and (they) brushed their teeth' (Ebert 1979:274)

The conjunction may be used even if the subjects of the two clauses are differ­ ent, e.g.:

30

COMPLEX SENTENCE

(6) or or

kwál vé cər dàanà hòynàvə demon He PREP CONJ devil He PREP kwálvèərdàanà hòynà kwál dàanà hòynàvər 'the demon and the devil lay with her' (Ebert 1979: 275)

Since dàanà cannot be reconstructed for Proto-Chadic as either a nominal coor­ dinating conjunction or a sentential conjunction, it is most probably an innova­ tion within Kera. Lele (East): Lele is interesting because, unlike other Chadic languages, it has grammaticalized a sentential coordinating conjunction that overlaps functionally with most IE coordinating conjunctions. The language has the temporal apodosis 'then' marker ná, used only in temporal and conditional apodosis clauses (q.v.). The coordinating conjunction bă can join clauses describing indepen­ dent events, i.e. events that do not have to be in immediate temporal succes­ sion, e.g.: (7)

jè nè-du kányà lèé bă gè HAB do-3F thing eat CONJ INDEF jè kíl cáaní kàsùgù-ni HAB trade away market-at 'she prepares the food and somebody sells it on the market'

The conjunction can also conjoin clauses that are in temporal succession, a property of sentential coordinating conjunctions in IE languages, e.g.: (8)

tòm-dú kòrmò bā sē gír hit-3F child and PERF run away 'she hit the child and ran away (either child or she)'

(9)

è-dí túgú kè-í bā sē pí l kàmà go-3M homePOSS-3M CONJ PERF wash water 'he returned home and washed'

Like coordinating conjunctions in IE languages, and unlike sequential markers in Chadic, bä may occur with negative clauses:

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

31

(10) tell-3PL BEN-lEXCL buy cow CONJ 1EXCL buy NEG 'they told us to buy a cow, but we didn't' (11) tell-3PL BEN-lEXCL buy cow NEG CONJ 1EXCL buy 'they didn't tell us to buy a cow, but we did' The origin of the conjunction bā in Lele may be sought in at least two sources. One could be a verb. The only candidate would be the verb bàá 'fall, happen, become' (cf. Weibegué and Palayer 1982), as in the following sentence: (12) run-3PL because fire happen LOC bush in 'they ran because of the bush fire' The cognitive connection between the verb bàá and the conjunction bā is far from obvious, but recall that in Kanakuru (West), a verb with the meaning 'to sit' came to be used as a sequential marker. For the time being I have no further support for the grammaticalization from verb to coordinating conjunction and I do not consider it very plausible. The following discussion points to a more plausible source of the sentential coordinating conjunction in Lele. In another East Chadic language, Bidiya, the coordinating conjunction bà has developed from a nominal conjunction bà. It is therefore very likely that the Lele sentential conjunction also comes from a nominal conjunction that is no longer attested. A further argument for this origin of the sentential coordinating conjunction comes from the fact that the marker of temporal apodosis nâ, a par­ tial equivalent of English 'then' in Lele, is similar to the preposition 'with', which comes from the nominal conjunction 'and'. Both of them have the form ná. Although one has a mid tone and the other has high tone, the segmental similarity should not be dismissed because similarity between associative prepositions and temporal apodosis markers is attested in other languages as well. The tonal difference must be a later development. The path of grammati­ calization might have been something like: associative preposition ---> nominal conjunction —> sequential marker/temporal apodosis. The evidence for the se­ quential marker is provided by the fact bà marks the sentence in temporal se­ quence, e.g.:

32

COMPLEX SENTENCE

(13) 3M DEM CONJ COMP INDEF give- chief

wife-

CONJ COMP-3M sleep CONJ 3F till place COMP day

COMP INDEF kill- reason death-3M CONJ

anger-xxx-1SG NEG The first one said that if he is given the chiefs wife to sleep with till the day break, then he can be killed, because death does not worry him'. The temporal apodosis is in between the two clauses and thus occupies the same position that a sentential coordinating conjunction might occupy, e.g.: (14) lSG-go-VENT home GEN-3M CONJ HAB rest body-3M 'when I came to him he was resting' One potential scenario in Lele is that the temporal apodosis became a sentential coordinating conjunction. Subsequently, the associative preposition was re­ placed by nā: hence the absence in contemporary Lele of the source from which the sequential marker developed. 2.4.2 Functions of the sentential coordinating conjunction Since Lele has many sentences in which one clause follows another in the structure S1 Ø S2, it is appropriate to ask what the semantic or functional dif­ ference is between the structures S1 Ø S2 and the structures S1 CONJ S2. I propose that what appears to be a sentential conjunction is actually a focus marker on the proposition, indicating an unexpected outcome, a crowning point of an event. The evidence for this function of bà is provided by two arguments. The first points to the discourse situations in which the conjunction is used. In the texts I have collected, bà is used, not for a simple concatenation of clauses, but rather to emphasize a proposition that follows some other events. Compare the following sentences from various folktales:

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

33

(15) time REL spider take.FUT-3M VENT COMP-3M go throw-3M

LOC water-DEF LOC 3M squirrel-DEF INCEPT leave

ASSOC bag hole-3M CONJ INCEPT run When the spider was about to take him to throw him into the water, the squirrel left through the hole in the bag and ran away'. (16) COMP-3M take COMP-3M eat INDEF say

then

person REL COMP eat goat COMP INDEF bury-FUT ASSOC elephant mother-3M CONJ COMP-3M HAB run He took the goat and ate it. It was said that if a person eats the goat, he will be buried together with the mother of the elephant. And that is why he is running'. (17) squirrel INCEPT say COMP COMP-3M know ANAPH

COMP-3M leave spider COMP INDEF bury-3M ASSOC

elephant mother-3M NEG CONJ COP-3M save spider health-3M CONJ spider COMP go-VENT want REL kill-3M Q The squirrel said that if he knew that, he should have left the spider to be buried together with the mother of the elephant. Here I saved him, and he wants to kill me'. Additional evidence for the emphasizing function of the conjunction bà is pro­ vided by the fact that the same marker serves as a contrastive focus marker in Lele. The fact that in elicitation I frequently obtained the conjunction bà is un­ doubtedly due to the assistants' perception of sentences of the type 'X did Y and Ζ did W' as contrasting the second proposition with the first proposition.

COMPLEX SENTENCE

34

2.4.3 From coordinated conjunction to contrastive focus In the preceding section it was shown that the coordinating conjunction in Lele has the function of emphasizing the proposition or contrasting it with some other, previous, propositions. This hypothesis is further supported by the exis­ tence of the contrastive focus marker bā, e.g.: (18) COP cànígè CONTR slaughter cow-DEF 'it was Canige that slaughtered the cow' (19) COP lion-DEF CONTR kill antelope COP leopard NEG 'the lion killed the antelope, it is not the leopard that killed it' The same marker also occurs in interrogative 'who' clauses, which in many Chadic languages are coded similarly to the contrastive focus constructions (cf. Schuh 1982). (20) who FOC cook BEN-3M thing-eat INTERR 'who cooked food for him' Given the fact that the coordinated conjunction developed from the nominal conjunction, I propose that the contrastive focus marker developed from the coordinating conjunction rather than the coordinating conjunction developing from the contrastive focus marker. The crucial argument for this direction is the exis­ tence of the nominal coordinating conjunction bà in another East Chadic lan­ guage, Bidiya. The phonological similarity between the two markers is too great to be attributed to chance. Thus the markers were probably derived from the same form at an earlier stage in the East Chadic branch. Although it is likely that the contrastive focus construction developed from a coordinating conjunc­ tion, it is less likely that the coordinating conjunction developed from a con­ trastive focus marker. But it is even less likely that the sequence of grammaticalization was contrastive focus ---> sentential coordinating conjunction —> nominal conjunction. Such a sequence of grammaticalization is unlikely be­ cause of the terminal points of the cline. Grammaticalization of the nominal conjunction is by far more widespread than grammaticalization of any of its pu-

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

35

tative predecessors in the sequence. Languages in general will have a nominal conjunction grammaticalized regardless of whether they have a contrastive focus marker or a sequential marker. In another East Chadic language, Somray), the sequential marker mé is phonologically identical with the contrastive focus marker, e.g.: (21) 3M return home SEQ xxx wash 'he returned home and washed' (22) Made-COP CONTR slaughter cow 'it is Made that slaughtered a cow' (23) 3M COMP Made CONTR slaughter cow 'h said that it is Made that slaughtered a cow' (24) FOC 1SG-SUBJ SEQ REL slaughter 'it is I who slaughtered' But the nominal conjunction, viz. déeg, is different, e.g.: (25) Made CONJ Geldirin go market Made and Geldirin went to the market' Later in this chapter I propose that the contrastive focus marker developed from the sequential marker rather than the other way around. But the facts in Somray show that the nominal conjunction did not develop from either the sequential marker or the contrastive focus construction. Bidiya (East): Bidiya has two types of sentential coordinating constructions. One is without a conjunction, e.g.:

36

COMPLEX SENTENCE (26)

nanda 'amal-ti pii-ti 3SG go out-3SG:PERF stand up:3SG-PERF tay ηàraakilo, ADV see:3SG-3SGO-PERF DEM crane 'agíi-ti àpàη stay-3SG:PERF accept-3SG:PERF ADV 'she went out, stood for a long time (and) saw that crane was there; she could only (had to) accept that' (Alio 1986:325)

Like Lele, Bidiya also has a coordinating conjunction, which happens to be bà, similar to and most probably cognate with the Lele coordinating conjunction bä. Alio and Jungraithmayr 1989 translate bà as 'et' with no further comments. The following examples illustrate the coordinating conjunction function: (27) water rain-3PL SEQ start-3PL sow therefore 'it rained and they have started to sow' (Alio 1986:330) (28) bird go down-3SG eat-3SG SEQ fly-3SG 'the bird landed, ate, and flew away' (Alio 1986:229) (29) go:2PL-IMPERF house SEQ AUX-FUT-2PL cook:VN 'you will go to the house and you will cook' (Alio 1986) (30) AUX:3SG-3PL greet:VN people SEQ stay-3SG:ACC 'he greeted the people and remained' (Alio 1986:229) Although there is no explicit statement in Alio 1986, it appears that in negative clauses bà is not used, and instead the marker gàa 'or, also, without' is used in structures S1 gàa S2: (31) come-2SG CONJ 2SG without greet-1PL DET NEG 'you came without greeting us' (Alio 1986:230)

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

37

Since Bidiya also has bà as a nominal conjunction and Lele does not, it is likely that the sentential conjunction developed from a nominal conjunction. There is no explicit information in either Alio 1986 or in Alio and Jungraithmayr 1989 with respect to the functional contrast between the absence of a conjunction and the conjunction bà. There are no texts in either of these works that would allow me to draw my own conclusions. Given the geographical proximity between Bidiya and Lele, and given the general rarity of sentential coordinating conjunc­ tions in Chadic, it is possible that the marker bà in Bidiya not only is a sentential coordinating conjunction but also carries a pragmatic function. 2.4.4 From locative preposition to coordinating conjunction In Xdi the coordinating conjunction tà is identical with the locative preposition. Whether this similarity is accidental cannot be decided a priori. One of the po­ tential paths of grammaticalization is from preposition to conjunction. I propose that grammaticalization is possible if the event of the first clause is conceived as taking place at the time of the second clause, i.e., the two events are simultane­ ous. Support for this hypothesis comes from the fact that clauses conjoined by tà are not sequential, i.e., the event, state, etc., described in each clause is not dependent on the event, state, etc., of the other clause. Tense and aspect mark­ ers may occur in both clauses. (32)

pˠíntà tá tà xwáyà tà mbádá -tà rákù Phinta REL IMPERF run CONJ walk-PERF Raku 'it is Phinta who is still running and it is Raku who already walked'

As pointed out by an anonymous reader, it is quite possible that the intermedi­ ary step in this grammaticalization was that the event happened at the same place, and hence by implication, at the same time. 2.4.5 From adverb 'also' to coordinating conjunction In Munjuk the source of the sentential coordinating conjunction is the adverb 'also', which occurs after the last clause. In (33a) one could still interpret lày as the adverb 'also', but in (33b) it can be interpreted as a conjunction only, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

38

(33a) è sìmì è sì lày 3PL:HUM:PERF eat 3PL:HUM:PERF drink also 'they have eaten and they have drank' (Henry Tourneux, p.c.) (33b) e simi, e vi lai 3PL:HUM:PERF eat 3PL:HUM:PERF became full CONJ They ate and were satisfied' (Meyer-Bahlburg 1972: 218) 2.4.6 Borrowings as sources of sentential conjunction In Mina the conjoining of two nonconsecutive clauses without any conjunction between them is the most frequent type of conjoining. (34) PERF cook food be 3SG PERF leave-OBJ-1SG room náη tum 1SG always 'she cooks and leaves the food in my room, always' But in elicited sentences occasionally there was a sentential coordinating con­ junction used. This conjunction emerged as a functional extension of the bor­ rowed counter-presuppositional marker ámá. The interesting fact about Mina is that àmá may serve both functions in the contemporary language, e.g.: (35) PERF eat food be CONJ sleep-XXX PAST 'he ate and he slept' Cf. (36) go be PREP market but 3SG not yet fail PERF arrive 'he went to the market but did not arrive there yet'

2.5

Functions of sequential and coordinate structures

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

39

2.5.1 Introduction It is often assumed that structures of the type S1 Ø S2 in languages that do not have a coordinating conjunction are identical in their function with structures of the type S1 CONJ S2 (where CONJ = SCC) found in most IE languages (cf. Payne 1985). The absence of a SCC is usually dismissed in typological studies as a minor morphological characteristic, akin to the conjunction deletion of many IE languages. That S1 Ø S2 in a conjunctionless language has the same function as S1 CONJ S2 should not be taken for granted, and instead a thor­ ough examination of functions of the two types of structures should be con­ ducted first. If the functions are identical, then indeed the absence of a con­ junction is a minor morphological problem. But if the functions do not overlap, then the absence of a SCC may be a symptomatic characteristic of a more important typological difference. I propose that the absence of the coordinating conjunction in Chadic in the structure S1 Ø S2 does not represent merely a zero variant of the coordinating conjunction but rather a type of construction whose function does not correspond in a one-to-one function with coordinated sen­ tences in IE languages. The function of the construction can be properly un­ derstood by contrasting it with other clause-combining strategies. A typical Indo-European language differs from a typical Chadic language in that the range of functions of the structure S1 CONJ S2 of the IE language does not overlap completely with the range of functions of the structure S1 Ø S2 of the Chadic language. I will illustrate the difference by contrasting English and Mupun (West Chadic). Clauses conjoined by 'and' in English imply among other semantic and pragmatic functions a general connection between the propositions of the two clauses, with the nature of the connection left for the hearer to interpret. The interpretations depend on the hearer's knowledge of the situation, circumstances, presuppositions, and other factors that may or may not be overtly coded in the sentence itself or the preceding discourse. Some of the possible interpretations of the connection are cause-effect relationship, temporal sequencing of two events, simultaneity of two events, expected and unexpected consequence. Consider the following sentence: (37) . 'She did not seek a third term, and the present County Assessor became her successor' (Daily Camera, Nov. 19, 1988). The reference for the pronoun 'she' in the first clause depends on the previous discourse, and for the pronoun 'her' in the second clause, on the first clause.

40

COMPLEX SENTENCE

The interpretation of the relationship between the two clauses is left open (intentionally or not) between a temporal relationship 'when X then Y' and a causal relationship 'because X therefore Y'. Mupun does not have a coordinating conjunction. For three of the interpre­ tations listed above for English 'and', Mupun has a different form, as illustrated by the following diagram:

S and S English

Unspecified connection

Temporal sequence

Cause-effect relationship

↕↕↕ Mupun S S

S be S

S dan S

The S S construction of Mupun indicates only some unspecified connection, and it specifically does not imply the temporal or cause-effect relationship. Those functions are realized by particles fie and dag respectively. Moreover neither fie nor dán can be interpreted as indicating some unspecified connection. One of the questions to be answered is what the functional difference is between sentences of the structure SI 0 S2 and any two sentences in succes­ sion in discourse. I propose that the role of the structure SI 0 S2 is to establish a connection between two events and to invite the hearer to provide a semantic interpretation of this connection. The nature of the semantic interpretation of the relationship holding between the propositions of SI and those of S2 is left to the hearer. 2.5.2 Functions of sequential clauses Within the pair coordinate structure and sequential structure in Chadic sequential structures is the marked component: It contains an overt marker where the other structure has zero. The sequential marker indicates a very specific temporal connection between two events. The second clause in such a structure de­ scribes an event that occurred or will occur after the event described in the first clause. The sequential marker also marks an event that results from an event described in a preceding clause. Numerous sentences with a sequential marker provide the necessary and sufficient evidence that these are indeed the functions

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

41

of sequential construction. Additional evidence is provided by two constraints: (1) The sequential marker cannot be used to describe events that occurred simul­ taneously or independently of each other, and (2) the sequential marker cannot precede a negative clause if the first clause in the sentence is affirmative. Thus a Chadic equivalent of the sentence 'He went to the store and didn't buy any­ thing' will not have a sequential marker because the event of the second clause is not a consequence of the event of the first clause. A sequential marker in Chadic cannot be used in lieu of 'and' in such a clause. The absence of the se­ quential marker in such clauses is explained by the marker's function of imply­ ing a sequence of events. A negative clause after an affirmative describes a nonevent. A typical structure used in such circumstances in Chadic languages is the coordinate structure of the type S1 S2. It should not be construed, how­ ever, that the Chadic sequential marker is the functional equivalent of the English particle 'then'. The similarities between Chadic sequential and English 'then' are as follows: Both can be used in sentences of the type: 'S1 then S2', 'when S1 then S2', 'if S1 then S2', all summarized as S1 then S2. The differ­ ences between the two markers are as follows: 'Then' can precede a negative clause after an affirmative clause, but the sequential marker cannot. The se­ quential marker in Chadic precedes a matrix clause when an adverb of time is fronted; 'then' cannot occur in such circumstances, e.g. *last May, then I went to Cameroon'. Evidence and examples for these functions of the sequential marker are provided below. Table 2.2 provides a summary of similarities and differences between the two markers: TABLE 2.2. Sequential vs. 'then' Marker 'then' SEQ

S S yes yes

S NEG S yes no

ADVT S no yes

A question may be raised whether a sentence with a clause marked by the sequential marker is not merely a sentence with a temporal clause serving as protasis and a sequential clause serving as apodosis. I propose that in fact there are two different types of sentences with sequential clauses. In the first type, one clause is temporal and the other sequential. Such sentences are described in Chapters 9 and 10 dealing with temporal and conditional clauses. In the other type of sentences with a sequential clause, the first clause is not temporal. A sentence with a sequential marker differs from a temporal sentence in that in the

COMPLEX SENTENCE

42

sequential one, the first event does not constitute temporal reference for the sec­ ond event, e.g. (Somray, East): (38) 3M eat SEQ leave son his 'he ate and left some food for his son' The evidence for a different function of the sequential marker is provided by the fact that apodosis clauses in a sentential or a conditional protasis are marked in a different way from sequential clauses. Thus in Somray neither the temporal nor the conditional apodosis is marked by the sequential marker mé, e.g.: (39) when food cook 3M eat 'when the food is ready, he will eat it' (40) if finish work 3M field FUT rest body 'if he finished his work, he can rest' In temporal sentences the first event constitutes a temporal reference for the sec­ ond event. Even if in some languages the sequential marker is identical with the temporal apodosis marker, the constructions in which the markers occur are dif­ ferent. The first clause is unmarked for its semantic function in one case and specifically temporal in the other.

2.6 Functions of paratactic clauses Paratactic structures in Chadic describe events that occurred simultaneously or independently of one another. The Chadic structure 'S1 Ø S2' should not be construed as a functional equivalent of the I. structures equivalent to English 'S1 and S2'. The similarities between the Chadic and the English structures are as follows: Both can describe simultaneous events and independently occurring events. Both can precede a negative S2. The differences are considerable. The conjunction 'and' may indicate cause effect relationship and sequential events, functions that are not coded by the SCC or the absence of the conjunction in

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

43

Chadic. The Table 2.3 gives a summary of the similarities and differences be­ tween the Chadic S1 Ø S2 and the English structure S1 and S2: TABLE 2.3. Chadic S1 Ø S2 vs. English structure S1 and S2

'and' Ø/SCC

Sequential yes no

S NEG S yes yes

Cause-Effect Simultaneity Independent yes yes yes no yes yes

The main evidence for the hypothesis that Proto-Chadic had a distinction between the structures S1 S2 and S1 SEQ S2 is the fact that various Chadic languages have the same functional distinctions between sequential construc­ tions, characterized either by the presence of a sequential marker or by an aspectual form of the verb, and coordinate structures, characterized most often by the absence of any marker between two clauses. In what follows I illustrate the functional contrast between coordinate and sequential structures in lan­ guages from different branches of Chadic. 2.6.1 Comparison between two types of'structures Pero (West): The language does not have a SCC; therefore the paratactic clauses have the form S1 S2. In the second of the paratactic clauses, an argu­ ment or a tense marker may be omitted under an identity condition, e.g.: Omission of the argument: (41) à-lí-jì tóojè-m nín-pìpéerò ántángà lí-jì NEG-keep-HAB horse-NEG SUBJ-Pero Fulani keep-HAB 'Pero do not keep horses but Fulani do' Omission of the tense marker: (42) tà-cù cnnà-ì cákkú-tò mór-í FUT-eat food-DEF rub-PL oil-DEF 'they will eat the food and rub the oil (into the body)' Paratactic constructions differ from consecutive sentences in discourse in that in paratactic constructions one can omit the arguments that cannot be omitted in sentences in discourse. Compare the following fragment of a narrative in Pero (from Frajzyngier 1989a with slightly modified glosses):

44

COMPLEX SENTENCE

(43a) later another white man SEQ-come PREP Bauci 'Later on, another European came from Bauci'. (43b) SEQ-come-VENT say-SEQ COMP 3M want-HAB select mày tí gwándúm máy bàtuurè chief PREP Gwandum chief white man He came and said that he wants to select a chief in Gwandum, a chief of a white man'. The subject of the sentences (43a and b), bàtuurè 'white man', is repeated in the next sentence: (44) white man DEM SEQ-put chieftaincy PREP head GEN Wiina nínyà bíláamè man Pilaame The white man has selected Wiina, a man of the Pilaame clan, to be the chief. The object of the preceding sentence, wíinà, is the subject of the following sentence: (45) Wiina SEQ-die-SEQ put chieftaincy on-head brother-3M Buuba Wiina died and his brother Buuba was selected the chief. The sequential marker in Pero is the prefix -, which precedes the verb and oc­ curs after the subject of the clause. The verb, if phrase final, ends in the vowel -i. The sequential marker is also used when the adverb of time is fronted, as in the first sentence of the discourse fragment above and as in the following ex­ amples, e.g.: (46) rainy season in morning -DEF idols SEQ-come-ANAPH 'on the morning of the rainy season the idols come'

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

45

Absence of sequential in the negative clause: The evidence that the main function of sequential marker is to indicate temporal or causal consequence is provided by the fact that when there is no temporal or causal consequence, the sequential marker does not occur. Such is the case when the clauses differ in the value of the affirmative modality so that one clause is not the consequence of another, e.g.: (47) come-PERF for settle-NOMIN in Filiya chief NEG-listen pùdí-m place-NEG 'they came to settle in Filiya but the chief didn't agree' Note that the sequential marker n- is used to indicate temporal or causal relation­ ship between propositions of S1 and S2 as illustrated in (45). In the sentence above there is no temporal or causal relationship involved. Mupun (West): The language does not have a SCC. The only coordinate con­ structions are paratactic, S1 S2, e.g.: (48)

wu ji 6am an ə cfak maar 3M come help 1SG PREP work farm 'he came and helped me with the farm work'

In Mupun the sequential marker be occurs in the clause-initial position, i.e. pre­ ceding the subject of the second clause. The marker indicates succession of events in time, e.g.: (49)

n-ji n-jiŋ be n-toŋ dï lSG-come PREP-Jing SEQ lSG-settie ANAPH 'I came to Jing and settled there'

The evidence for the temporal connection between two propositions marked by sequential and for the absence of such connection in the construction S1 S2 is provided by the fact that the omission of the sequential bē in the above structure would render the sentence ungrammatical, e.g.:

46

COMPLEX SENTENCE (50)

*n-ji n-jiŋ n-toŋ di lSG-come PREP-Jing lSG-settle ANAPH for Ί came to Jing and settled there'

Sequential marker after an adverb of time: The sequential marker in Mupun occurs also in a simple clause when the adverb of time is fronted. This fact is important because it provides the evidence that the primary function of the sequential marker is to indicate a succession of events in time, e.g.: (51)

ji η-toom b wur mbə kamkam n-jirj come PREP- year SEQ 3M FUT teach PREP-Jing 'next year he will be teaching in Jing'

(52)

do η-toom 6e wur kamkam n-jirj PAST PREP- year SEQ 3M teach PREP-Jing 'last year he taught in Jing'

Additional evidence for the sequential function of be is provided by the fact that if the adverb of time occurs in the clause-final position, then the sequential marker does not occur. Its absence is consistent with the proposed function of the marker as indicating temporal or causal relationship between a preceding and a succeeding event. (53)

wu kamkam n-jiŋ don-toom 3M teach PREP-Jing PAST PREP-year 'he taught in Jing last year'

(54)

wur mbə kamkam n-jiŋ ji n-toom 3M FUT teach PREP-Jing come PREP-year 'he will teach in Jing next year'

The sequential marker occurs also if a sentence begins with an adverbial clause of time. The sequential marker occurs after the adverbial clause and precedes the main clause, e.g.:

PARATACnC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES (55)

47

kat də mwes nə buur be mu wa when PAST wine DEF finish SEQ 1PL return 'when the wine was finished we returned home'

Absence of the sequential marker in negative clauses: In a negative consecutive clause or in a negative clause with a fronted adverb of time the sequential marker does not occur, in accordance with the hypothesis regarding the function of the marker. The event described in the clause simply did not occur, e.g.: (56)

mo cet lua ba mo sur kas 3PL cook meat NEG 3PL fry NEG 'they cooked meat, they did not fry it'

(57)

a-6uon əə ba wu wa ji n-mopun kas PREP-after that 3M return come PREP-Mupun NEG 'after that he did not return to Mupun'

Pa'a (West): In Pa'a there is no sentential conjunction, and the coordinate clauses may have identical predicates or identical arguments omitted, e.g.: (PRAM=Previous reference animate marker): (58)

Rya- wi tli tsIkər ĥrə PL.PRAM-certain 3PL:SUBJ slaughter cow Rya- wi tli tsIkər tori PL.PRAM-certain 3PL:SUBJ slaughter goats Rya - wi [...] gam ('ram') Rya - wi [...] tumacəka ('sheep') Rya - wi [...] dlurki ('fowl') dlibu, ana tsikəro all one:CONT slaughters:VN 'Certain ones slaughter [a] cow, some slaughter goats, some [a ram], some sheep, some fowl, all one slaughters'. (M. Skinner 1979:95)

Note that in the above example there is no temporal or causal relationship be­ tween the clauses. If there is a temporal relationship, then a marker kà, glossed

48

COMPLEX SENTENCE

as REL by Skinner, is used. The marker kà is quite similar to the sequential markers of other Chadic languages, e.g.: (59)

na tá mbo, a kà tuma rfama, 3SG FUT come-out one REL sing:REL.CONT songs a kà tafo-sin, a kà tuko-sin 3SG REL follow-3PL 3SG REL escorts-3PL 'he will come out, [then] one sings rfama songs, [and] one follows them [and] escorts them' (M. Skinner 1979:49)

Gidar (Central): In Gidar the sequential marker ná, in addition to marking the succession of events in time described in Chapter 9, also marks the clause when it follows an adverb of time, lexical or phrasal, e.g.: (60)

láŋ ná á jáabè n nání 'past SEQ PREP Djabe 1SG lSG:COP 'a long time ago I was in Djabe'

(61)

páy(nà)lúumò (ná) gìl à vl-áŋ bíyà day GEN market then women 3 sell-PL beer 'on the day of the market women sell beer'

(62)

páy nà lúumò ná à jáabè nàní day GEN market then PREP Djabe lSG:COP I was in Djabe during the market day'

Cibak (Central): In Cibak the sequential marker kà occurs between the first and second clauses of a sequential construction. If the subject of both clauses is the same, it is marked overtly only in the first clause. This is an argument for treating the two clauses as constituents of one sentence rather than as two sen­ tences in sequence. (63)

yì hánì kà hyátí 1SG slept SEQ wake Ί slept and then I woke up'

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

49

(64) 3SG slept SEQ wake 'he slept and then he woke up' (65) ?1SG go SEQ buy yam Ί will go and buy yams' The evidence for the temporal function of the sequential marker is provided by the fact that when a temporal clause containing àglà 'after' precedes the main clause, the latter is marked by the sequential marker kà, e.g.: (66) after ?3SG greeted 3PL ? ? SEQ 3SG go PREP 'after he has greeted them he will stand up and go aside' When the order of clauses is reversed, i.e. the temporal 'after' clause follows the main clause, the latter is not marked by the sequential marker kà, e.g.: (67) 3SG came after 3SG? ate 'he came after he ate' Uldémé (Central): Uldémé has a nominal conjunction ántā that is not used as a sentential conjunction. The language has several sequential markers. The marker ndè is used only to indicate sequence of events. Provoost and Koulifa (1987) consider ndé to be an initial element of the second clause in a sequence rather than an element joining two clauses, e.g.: (68) go find water SEQ 1SG-drink 'gofindme some water and then I will drink it' (Provoost and Koulifa 1987:244) The other sequential marker in Uldémé is ndàlà, whose grammatical status Provoost and Koulifa (1987) consider ambiguous, between a temporal marker and a conjunction. This marker may occur at the beginning of sentences, e.g.:

50

COMPLEX SENTENCE (69) since 2SG say 'it would have been better' 2SG die 'Since you say "it would have been better" you are dead' (a proverb, Provoost and Koulifa 1987:244)

Kapsiki (Central): Kapsiki has both a SCC marker, bá'a, and a sequential marker, pa. As predicted by the hypothesis, the SCC conjoins clauses describ­ ing events that are not dependent on each other or that are not in a cause-effect relationship, e.g. (all data from Smith 1969): (70)

geŋke sé kezha zeme wusú bá'á kezha mene tiene thing and for do work 3SG came for eat 'he came to eat something and to do some work'

Similarly to English where the conjunction 'and' and the temporal marker 'then' can occur in a sequence, the SCC ba'áand the sequential marker pa in Kapsiki can cooccur in the same clause if there is a temporal succession between two events, e.g.: (71)

pa ndeke da SEQ gave 1SG money CONJ SEQ we 'he gave me some money and then we talked'

talked

gena word

The sequential marker (but not the SCC) in Kapsiki marks the apodosis clause in temporal and conditional clauses, e.g.: (72) NEG woman there then I 'if she is not there then I . . '. Xdi (Central): Xdi has a sequential marker, kà, which occurs at the beginning of the clause, e.g.: (73) eat-eat SEQ sleep 3SG OBJ sleep 3SG 'he ate and then he slept'

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

51

(74) FUT sleep first before 3SG SEQ eat thing 'he will sleep first and then he will eat' (75) PAST IMPERF cook-POT OBJ food SEQ buy-OUT-REF tà lúúmà PREP market 'she used to cook food and sell it at the market' The evidence for the sequential function of the marker kà is provided by the fact that the sequential marker occurs in affirmative clauses but does not occur in negative clauses, e.g.: (76) go-TOT-PERF home-3SG SEQ wash-TOT OBJ wash 'he returned home and washed' Cf. a negative clause: (77) but wash-TOT NEG NEG 'but he did not wash' There are two types of coordinated constructions in Xdi, one with and one without an overt marker. The overt marker is used as a marker of simultaneous events involving different subjects. The chief formal characteristic of these clauses is conjunction tà, formally identical with the locative preposition tà. The evidence that the two events are simultaneous comes from the fact that clauses conjoined by tà are not sequential, i.e., the event, state, etc., described in each clause is not dependent on the event, state, etc., of the other clause. Tense and aspect markers may occur in both clauses. The argument in support of the sec­ ond part of the hypothesis, viz. that the clauses must have two different sub­ jects, comes from the fact that there are no sentences conjoined by tà with the same subjects. Such clauses would have to have been sequential. The absence of clauses conjoined by tà and containing the same subject supports the pro­ posed hypothesis. If the verb is nonreduplicated, the subject of the first clause occurs before the verb, and the subject of the second clause occurs after the verb, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

52

(78) Phinta FOC cook-REF beans CONJ cook-REF Xayahu tá xíyà OBJ guinea corn 'it is Phinta who cooked beans and Xayahu cooked guinea corn' Coordinated clauses may, however, share an object. The shared object is not overtly marked in the second clause, e.g.: (37) Phinta FOC cook-REF food Raku FOC buy-OUT-REF 'it is Phinta who cooked food and Raku who sold it' (80)

tà dà tá várà tà dà-tá Phinta IMPERF cook OBJ beans CONJ cook-REF tá xíyà Xayahu OBJ millet Phinta cooked beans and Xayahu cooked millet'

If the subjects of both clauses are third person pronouns, the marker tsi follows the verb and its pronominal object, if any, e.g.: (81) IMPERF cook 3SGOBJ food PREP sell-OUT-REF 3SG 'shei cooks food and shej sells it at the market' Logone (Central): Logone has paratactic constructions and constructions with the marker táa. Paratactic constructions may have more than two clauses com­ bined, and moreover, the subjects of these clauses may be different, e.g.: (82)

m'bi 3M-look CONT -run 3M-run-PERF gourd-3PL POST oil da-ká wátən dá-ggèe-yà 3F-fall ground 3F-break-PERF 'he turned around and ran away, he ran and his gourd full of oil fell to the ground and broke' (Lukas 1936:70)

PARATACIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

53

(83) CONT -run CONT 3M-run foot-POST voice POST back 'he ran and ran, he heard the voice behind him' (Lukas 1936:70) The role of the marker táa is not obvious. It may occur at the beginning of the affirmative clause describing a sequential event, e.g.: (84) 3S-buy goat so.that 3S-slaughter (... so that) sacrifice-her . . . táa á-ka ufú ne . . . ...SEQ 3S-take goat DEF 'He bought the goat in order to make it her (his mother's) sacrifice . . .'then he took the goat.. '. (Lukas 1936:57) But most important, it may also occur at the beginning of the clause in the nega­ tive, where táa appears to have the function of the counterexpectation marker, e.g.: (85) 3M-buy goat COMP 3M-prepare CONJ sacrifice-3F táa s áale ί-n'dàhe SEQ NEG DEM 3SG-not suffice 'he bought a goat so he could prepare her sacrifice, but it was not yet time (to do so)' (Lukas 1936:66) Daba: There is no SCC in Daba, e.g. (The following description of facts in Daba is based on data kindly supplied by Ruth Lienhard and Martha Giger. I, alone, am responsible for this particular analysis, however): (86) PERF catch chicken PERF cut neck his already 'he caught and slaughtered a chicken'

54

COMPLEX SENTENCE (87)

Hiddi makat yigi mbri ə gezheŋ, man three come 3PL jump ?PREP wall takan va ə gar w erti takan gar i lib jik one go PREP ?stop wife one ?stop PREP middle yard takan ba gar  gezhen. one ?also ?stop? PREP wall 'Three men came (and) jumped over the wall; one stopped at the woman, one stopped in the middle of the yard (and) one also stopped at the wall'. (Mouchet 1967:105)

The sequential marker in Daba is ázá. Under conditions that have yet to be ex­ plained, the sequential marker may lose its initial vowel and appear as a clitic or even a suffix added to the last element of the first clause. The sequential is used only when the second clause is a consequence of the first clause. Thus the marker is used in the sequence consisting of S [affirmative] S [affirmative], but it is not used in the sequence S [affirmative] S[negative], e.g.: (88)

tí bi pāy à wàtā àzá tí dá à wácāh PERF cut tree PREP there SEQ PERF bring PREP here 'he cut a tree and brought it here'

(89) 2SG go SEQ come 'leave and come back soon' Cf.: (90) 2SG go 2SG come 'leave and do not come back '

NEG

Gidar (Central): Gidar has two types of conjoined clauses: paratactic construc­ tions and constructions with a conjunction between the two clauses. The clauses with conjunctions were obtained through elicitation rather than from running texts. Paratactic constructions may encode clauses describing a sequence of events, i.e., they may have the same interpretation as clauses with sequential markers, e.g.:

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

55

(91) PRES-3M go-3PL 3M stop-3PL-PERF rest-3PL PREP under tree 'they went, they stopped, rested under a tree' (92) 3M get UP-3PL-PERF again PRES-3M go-PL 'they got up again and they went' (93) PASS-take-3M meat POSS hyena PASS-put down-3M á fùn 3M ground 'the meat of the hyena was taken and put down' (94) 3F be able COMP INF-come-3F NEG PRES-3F bath 'she cannot come, she is taking a bath' (95) PREP rainy season 3M-go PREP town NEG PRES-3M cultivate 'during the rainy season he does not come to town, he farms' Gidar has two sentential coordinating conjunctions, yáŋ and gm, each of which occurs between two clauses, resulting in the structure S1 yaŋ/gm S2. The evidence that yáŋ is a SCC is provided by the fact that this conjunction, un­ like sequential markers, also occurs in negative S2, e.g.: (96) 3M say BEN-lPL-3PL-PERF 1PL-buy SUBJ cow but 1PL-buy NEG 'they told us to buy a cow but we did not' The distinction between paratactic conjoining and conjoining with either of the two conjunctions is not obvious because all three means encode two indepen­ dent events that may or may not occur in succession, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

56

(97) Kiza find dog-DIMN CONJ Miste 3F sell-3F 'Kiza found a puppy and Miste sold it' The conjunction yáŋ may be used when the subjects of the two clauses are the same, e.g.: (98) 3F-sell-PERF goat CONJ 3F-buy cloth 'she sold a goat and bought cloth' However, if the subjects of the two clauses are different, there is a strong pref­ erence for the conjunction yáŋ, e.g.: (99) 3F-cook food CONJ another-F 3F-sell PREP market 'she cooks food and another sells it in the market' (100) háí á dá ínsé gm cff-n br-n millet 3M PROG cultivate CONJ man-DEM another-M vl-n á lúmò sell- PREP market 'he cultivates the millet and another man sells it in the market' That points to the potential function of the conjunction yáŋ as contrastive marker in the sense that it is a counterexpectation marker. The proposition of the clause marked by the conjunction yáŋ is not what naturally follows from the proposi­ tion of the preceding clause. Thus the function of the conjunction yáŋ is quite similar to the Polish and Russian 'adversative' conjunction a (cf. Frajzyngier 1985g). The contrast between a paratactic construction and a construction with the conjunction yáŋ is between a construction that indicates a connection be­ tween two propositions without specifying the kind of connection and a con­ struction indicating that the second proposition is not a natural consequence of the preceding proposition. It is entirely possible that the contrastive function of the conjunction yáŋ has become secondary and that the simple function of conjoining may be taking over as a primary function. This change is supported by the fact that the sen-

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

57

tential conjunction yáŋ may be replaced by the morpheme gm, which otherwise serves as nominal coordinate conjunction. This fact is important because it is the evidence for the development of sentential conjunctions from nominal con­ junctions, e.g.: (101) 3F-sell-PERF goat CONJ 3F-buy cloth 'she sold a goat and bought cloth' Cf.: (102) cow CONJ goat 'cow and goat' The evidence for development from nominal conjunction to sentential conjunc­ tion comes from the fact that the source for the nominal conjunction appears to be the verb 'to take'. Compare the following sentences: the first having the nominal conjunction gm, and the second, the verb gmm 'take', e.g.: (103) dog CONJ hyena

POSS-3PL 3M search-3PL something

PREP side meat POSS eat road road NEG Dog and hyena were not looking for something other than meat to eat on the road' (104) 3M take-3PL-PERF road POSS travel POSS-3PL 'they went on their road' Gidar also has a periphrastic construction whose function is to encode specifically sequential events. The marker of the construction is s dr bágáPOSS.PRO, 'afterwards', as illustrated in the following sentences: (105) 3M eat-PERF from after-3M 'he ate and then he slept'

3M-sleep

58

COMPLEX SENTENCE (106) 3M sleep-PERF from after- 'he slept and then he ate'

-eat

Although I did not conduct any specific elicitation to test the distribution of so dr bágà-TOSS.PRO, in the data I have there were no examples of its occurring in negative clauses, which indicates that the expression s dr bágà-POSS.PRO shares with sequential markers the property of not occurring in negative clause. Somray (East): The sequential marker in Somray is mé. It specifically encodes sequential action and is not used for the description of events that are not de­ pendent on each other, e.g.: (107) 3M-SUBJ return home SEQ wash ALL 'he returned home and washed' Cf.: (108) 3SG.F-SUBJ. sell goat ALL buy PREP cloth 'she sold a goat and bought herself some cloth' 2.6.2 Paratactic and conjoined constructions: Conclusions Proto-Chadic does not appear to have had a sentential coordinating conjunction. Instead, paratactic constructions marked an unspecified relationship between two or more clauses. The sentential coordinating conjunction emerged in a few languages, but its primary function is that of coding a proposition as counterexpectational, or as being in contrast with the proposition of the preceding clause. In some languages, the nominal coordinating conjunction comes to be used as a sentential coordinating conjunction, but this process, very limited in its spread, does not appear to be a direct grammaticalization; rather it has gone through the grammaticalization of some other function first. Thus in Gidar the counterexpectation conjunction was grammaticalized first and only then the nominal con­ junction came to be used, sporadically, as the sentential conjunction. Another prerequisite function is described in the next section.

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES 2.7

59

Sources and reconstruction of the P-C sequential marker

Reconstruction of the Proto-Chadic sequential marker should be divided into two parts. One is the simple question of whether such a device existed in Proto-Chadic, and the other is the reconsti action proper. An additional point of interest is a question about the sources of sequential markers. The presence of the overt marking of the sequential in most Chadic languages supports the hy­ pothesis that such a marker most likely also existed in PC. If we do not postu­ late the existence of sequential in PC we would have to postulate independent parallel innovations in all languages. Even if such markers were to emerge in­ dependently in a number of different languages, we would not expect the spe­ cific multifunctional characteristics that they have in Chadic languages, viz., markers occur in simple clauses when an adverb of time is fronted, they do not occur in negative clauses, and more often than not they also occur as discourse sequential markers. Therefore I propose that Proto-Chadic had a morpheme that had as one of its functions the coding of the sequence of events. What the form of the sequential marker was represents a quite a different and more complicated problem. In the Chapters 9 and 10, where most of the sequential markers are described, I postulate that the sequential marker in Proto-Chadic was kà. Its other functions often included a deontic function in main and complement clauses, indicating obligation with respect to the first and third, and sometimes also second person. In many languages this marker was replaced in its sequential function by other markers. The table 2.4 contains contemporary sequential markers for several languages from different groups. The phonological variation among these markers is considerable, and there are very few morphemes in languages from different branches that can be consid­ ered cognates.

60

COMPLEX SENTENCE TABLE 2.4. Contemporary sequential markers

Language Hausa Kanakuru Pero

Sequential sai dùwó n

Mupun Tera Kapsiki Xdi Margi Logone Somray Daba

bē tè pa kà gà, də tá me àzā

Potential Source 'sit'

Infinitive

Other functions APOD APOD REL_ADJ (attribut) APOD APOD APOD OPT REL FOC,Q

I propose that the various forms constitute a later innovation in particular lan­ guages. For some sequential markers there are synchronic sources within the language, which may inform us about the potential sources of the sequential marker in Proto-Chadic. The assumption behind this hypothesis is that even if a marker is replaced by another marker, the source for the new marker is often the same as the source for the old marker. Although such manner of replace­ ment cannot be taken as a the only way of replacement of grammatical mor­ phemes it is attested in many languages of the world with respect to all kinds of morphemes, both inflectional and derivational. This manner of replacement has been successfully used in the explanation of the sources of causative and benefactive markers in Chadic (cf. Frajzyngier 1985b). Two potential sources for the sequential markers could be proposed: One is associative markers and nominal conjunctions, and the other, demonstratives. The arguments in support of this hypothesis are as follows: The most frequent consonant used with sequential markers are velar k, alveolar t, and nasal alveo­ lar n. The most frequent vowel following these consonants is a. The conso­ nants k, t, and n are the ones most often used in Chadic nominal conjunctions and associative markers (Cf. Table 2.3 and also Liu 1991). An extension from associative (comitative) to conjunction has been noted by Mithun 1988 in a cross language study. The consonants k, t, and n are also the consonants most frequent in demonstratives (Cf.Schuh 1983), corresponding in many languages to the

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

61

close, middle, and remote distance. The connection between demonstratives and the sequential marker, although not immediately obvious, is nevertheless attested in other languages. In English the temporal 'then' is an old accusative form of the demonstrative 'that'. The cognitive connection between the demonstrative and the sequential could well be explained by the frequent use of devices referring to space to refer to time. Here are a few languages where the grammaticalization of the sequential marker can be traced to a source within the language. 2.7.1 Associative: Cibak, Lele, and Gidar I postulate that the sequence of functional extensions that resulted in the gram­ maticalization of sequential marker kà in Cibak, a synchronic rather than a diachronic process, was as follows: Associative marker —> nominal conjunction —> verbal conjunction —> purpose marker. The evidence for these syn­ chronic semantic/functional extensions is provided by the presence in the lan­ guage of constructions in which the morpheme kà has all of the functions listed above. The evidence for the proposed direction of functional extension is pro­ vided by semantic considerations. Cross-linguistic studies point to the associa­ tive as the source of the nominal conjunction rather than the other way around (cf. Mithun 1988). In what follows the various functions of kà are presented in the order of grammaticalization, starting with the synchronically and diachronically primary function: Associative: (109) à zrá kà blmà 2SG come ASSOC yam 'bring me the yam' Possessive clauses have the form: possessor kà possessed, e.g.: (110) yà kà kúlfà 1SG ASSOC fish 'I have a fish' Nominal conjunction:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

62 (111) kóomè kà sú tàn ten PREP ? one 'eleven'

(112) yàrà kám kwár-nà 1SG CONJ daughter-1SG Ί and my daughter' Oblique case marking and introduction and adverbial phrases: (113) yè k 6à kà cfár 1SG PERF meet ASSOC 3PL Ί met them' lit. ' I met with them' (114) y nd xbà blma rì kà sda-y 1SG divide yam ? PREP two-? 'I divided yam into two' The sequential marker: The morpheme kà as sequential marker occurs in structures Subject Verbi kà Verb 2, i.e. conjoining verb phrases rather than clauses, e.g.: (115) yè hyàti kà trà 1SG wake up CONJ go 'I woke up and went' (116) dzà hánì kà hyátì 3SG sleep CONJ get up 'he slept and woke up' From verb phrase conjunction to sequential marker there is only one step. The marker kà did not, however, grammaticalize into a full sentential conjunction. The evidence for this is provided by the fact that it cannot be used to conjoin two full clauses with different subjects, such as equivalents of He slept and she walked up'. Instead two clauses are in juxtaposition, e.g.:

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

63

(117) zr sál trá kwárì kn záy boy go away girl PERF stay 'The boy went and the girl stayed' Lele (East): In Lele the apodosis marker ná is identical with both the temporal protasis and the temporal apodosis and is also identical with the associative and the nominal conjunction. There is little doubt that the associative and NCC were sources for the apodosis marker ná: (118) ná gò túwá bá dà wàlà ni ná òdì-gé when REL fire fall LOC bush in then run away-3PL ná gàryá ASSOC running 'when the fire started they ran away' (119) ná gò èjè-di ná ή-màgli kúsi-ŋ álè when REL come- SEQ 1SG-prepare body-1SG already 'when he came I was ready' (120) gìnà gùyé kò-ró káî ná sé dímsí-dú when work POSS-3F finish SEQ PERF rest-3F 'when their work finished she rested' The marker ná in Lele is identical with the nominal coordinating conjunction in the structures N ná N: (121) lómbá ná kulbá horse CONJ cow 'a horse and a cow' (122) kámà ná sòngó water CONJ oil 'water and oil' Associative (123) è-gé ná kúlbá dà kàsùgù come-3PL CONJ cow PREP market 'they took a cow to the market'

64

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Gidar (Central): The periphrastic construction that performs the sequential function in Gidar has the form s dr bâgà. The marker s is independently at­ tested as a preposition, e.g.: (124) à-mbát-k s jàbé 3M-go-PERF PREP Jabe 'he went from Djabe' The marker dr bâgà is also independently attested as a nominal phrase because it can take possessive pronouns, e.g.: (125) dr bágà-w-ìi at-lSG-3M 'he is behind me' The interesting question is what dr is and what bâgà is. The form dr is a preposition. With respect to dr bâgà, it appears that it may be a product of syllable metathesis from dòr gba. The word gba is attested with the meaning 'back', e.g.: gba-wà 'my back', gba-nì 'his back'. Accepting this etymol­ ogy would explain the presence of the possessive suffix dòr bagà-w. 2.7.2 Nominal conjunction: Bidiya In Bidiya the sequential marker is identical with the nominal conjunction. In examples in lieu of 'accompli', glossed as ACC in Alio 1986 I use the term per­ fective, glossed as PERF. (126) koya bà páato moon CONJ sun 'moon and sun' (Alio 1986:228) (127) dèe -yìigú bora gèr) bà gòyyi aux:3SG-3PL greet:VN people SEQ stay-3SG:PERF 'he greeted the people and remained' (Alio 1986:229)

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

65

2.7.3 From preposition to sequential: Margi The sequential marker in Margi is gä. It is probably derived from the same source as the infinitive marker gà 'to, in order to', e.g.: (128) then father boy FUT come and 3SG-to son his 'then the boy's father will come and say to his son' (Hoffmann 1963:239) (129)

(?say)

də ja tsu bzer, dənyi ga mtu when 3sg still boy father SEQ die 'when he was still a boy, his father died' (Hoffmann 1963:281)

Cf.: (130) Mád agá mwáləńy Madu CONJ friend 'Madu and/with his friend' (Hoffmann 1963:238) 2.7.4 From verb 'to sit' to sequential marker: Kanakuru In Kanakuru sequential marker is derived from the verb 'to sit'. The same marker encodes habitual and sequential. The root duwo 'to sit' is used as a modal verb to indicate habitual or successive action. In all tenses it takes 'intransitive copy pronoun' suffixes, normally limited to one type of auxiliary verb. All examples from Newman 1974:55-56: (131) 'I habitually enter' (132) 'he habitually enters' Cf. the sequential usage: (133) 'we entered the room then we lay down'

66

2.8

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Sequential marker as a discourse conjunction

In recent discourse studies there have been several proposals to the effect that conjunctions make their appearance first as discourse-level units and only later become sentence-level units (cf. discussion in Heine et al. 1991 and references there). Since the sequential marker is a different category, one could simply state that the statements made with respect to conjunctions have no bearing on the grammaticalization of the sequential. But in fact, in many Chadic languages the sequential marker often functions also at discourse level, occurring at the beginning of sentences. Therefore the question that has been asked with respect to the conjunction could also be asked with respect to the sequential marker. If we could find out which function emerged first, viz. the discourse level or the sentence level, the data could contribute to the resolution of the controversy between those linguists who attribute all grammatical properties of the language to discourse requirements and constraints, and those linguists who take a more eclectic approach to the function and origin of grammatical morphemes and structures. I propose that the resolution of the question which function emerged first, viz. the discourse level or the sentence level, does not have much heuristic value; instead I offer an approach whereby a grammatical morpheme or a con­ struction acquires a certain semantic or pragmatic function and the language ex­ ploits this function when appropriate, be it at the discourse level, i.e. for rela­ tionships between sentences, or between speaker and hearer (cf. Frajzyngier and Katriel 1991) or at the level of sentences, i.e. for relationships between clauses and perhaps between arguments. In this approach the division between the discourse level and other levels is considered quite artificial, because in a way it pushes into the background the unifying role of the semantic or prag­ matic functions involved. Sequential markers similar to conjunctions are prime candidates to demonstrate the validity of the proposed approach. 2.8.1 Sequential marker at the discourse level The present section serves two purposes. The first is to demonstrate that indeed the sequential marker can occur at the beginning of sentences. The second pur­ pose is much more important, and that is to demonstrate that the function of the sequential marker is to indicate that the event described in a sentence is a tempo­ ral or causal consequence of an event or state described in a preceding sentence.

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

67

Although I do not provide the contexts in which the quoted examples have been used, it is important to remember that all of them have been taken out of con­ texts, i.e., they have all been preceded by sentences describing events that pre­ ceded the events or states described in the examples. The difference between sentences separated by a sequential marker, and clauses within a sentence sepa­ rated by a sequential marker is very slight indeed. In language for which I col­ lected data myself I know that there was a clearly longer pause in some cases that allowed me to postulate a different sentence. These pauses coincided with native speakers' indicators of where a new unit began. But the most important structural difference between sequential markers in sentence-initial position (i.e. discourse-level markers) and those in sentence-internal position (sentence-level markers) is that in the former, the subject of the clause may be different from the subject of the preceding sentence. When the sequential marker occurs in sentence-internal position, the subject of the clause preceded by the sequential is identical with the subject of the preceding clause. In Pero the same form can serve as the sequential marker, as illustrated ear­ lier in this chapter, and also as a type of discourse conjunction. The use of the sequential marker as discourse conjunction is motivated by its primary semantic function of indicating that the event or state is a temporal or causal consequence of a preceding event or state. This is illustrated in the complex sentences below, which have a sequential marker at the beginning of the sentence indicating that the event is subsequent to some other event described in discourse. There is no sequential marker between clauses within the following sentences because the clauses are not in sequential relationship: Pero (134) cìrép n- wáatò-n tì pí àn-yáalò kói women SEQ-come-ANAPH PREP back NOMIN-praisers kpáttin tà-dámbàŋ kámmà cìrép kámmà cígbè doè men FUT-celebration CONJ:PL women CONj:PL children all 'women will follow the praisers, men will celebrate with all women and children'

68

COMPLEX SENTENCE (135) n-kájà kò-púnà lé-ì cákkà jók-kò SEQ-move top-branch fruit-DEF 3M srretch:PERF cìráa-ni kijimóàa cákkà tà-dét-tù-n dúgún-i hand-3M like that 3M FUT-get-VENT-BEN fig-DEF . . . 'he moved to the top of the branch with fruit and extended his hand like that in order to get the f i g ' . . . (136) múmù n-céerò cìnnàa-nì that SEQ-talk part-3M 'and that (brother) says his own part'

In the following sentence the sequential marker occurs at the beginning of the sentence and also at the beginning of the second clause because there is a se­ quential relationship between the two clauses: (137) búlè n-kéerò kópbì n-rí lizard SEQ-look hole SEQ-enter 'lizard looked for a hole and entered it' Kanakuru (West): Texts in Newman 1974 clearly indicate that the sequential marker dùwó is used as a discourse conjunction, e.g.: (138) Gapəre Shani cfùwó-n pule cfan ciki mani dùwó-n lue da ki shìi la toro mani 'Gapəre Shani took off his shirt and put it down like he was in his own farm'. (Newman 1974:116-117) Kapsiki (Central): The sequential marker pa is also used as a discourse con­ junction. In Smith 1969 one can find many dozens of sentences that begin with pa, e.g.: (139) pa x dexwú dafa as then they ate mush that 'then they ate that mush' (Smith 1969:113) (140) pa geŋ' y saxwú then we drank 'then we drank' (Smith 1969:113)

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

69

(141) pá 'yá sáte then I came up 'Then I got up' (Smith 1969:117) In the following sentence the sequential is used at the beginning of the sentence and also at the beginning of the second clause in the sentence: (142) pa ndeke dá wusú pa dzegwa then gave 1SG something then walk ICP with running Then he gave me something and then ran away' (Smith 1969:80) Margi (Central): The sequential marker gà appears to be also a discourse con­ junction, e.g.: (143) 3SG SEQ tell 1SG REL(COMP) 'he told me what you said'. (Hoffmann 1963:90) (144) chief SEQ ask 3SG SUBJ 3SG-leave 3SG 'then the chief cried and asked it, that it should leave him' (Hoffmann 1963:203) There is also another form that can be used as a sequential discourse marker in Margi, do, which is related to the temporal marker in other Chadic languages. In Margi, however, it does not have the function of either temporal or 'then' marker. The marker do occurs sentence initially as marker do in the temporal subordinate clause (145) then girl that again sing ?song ?that 'then the girl sang again' (Hoffmann 1963:218)

COMPLEX SENTENCE

70 (146)

_ _ then chief

send

people some to

village that see

perhaps who PL on kanga drum dlmbwád'- drum 'then the chief sent some people to that village to see, who (pl) is beating the kanga-drum and the dlmbwád drum' (Hoffmann 1963:101) The marker də is derived from the relative clause marker, which according to Hoffmann 1963:90 marks relative clauses modifying arguments other than the subject. The relative marker function of do is still in evidence when do follows another temporal marker, jàŋ, e.g.: (147) 'then he took the squirrel and went away with (it)' (Hoffmann 1963:245) In Tera, sequential marked by to indicates that the action is subsequent to some prior action: (148) Alité nji dlu Ali SEQ eat meat 'And then Ali then ate meat*. (Newman 1970:20) Mandara: A sentence taken from a narrative describing a fishing expedition in which the speaker was involved: (149) then lPL.INCL-sit finally bákà klfé bákà klfé bákà klfé NEG fish NEG fish NEG fish 'we waited long time, and there were no fish at all' 2.8.2 An explanation of the discourse-level function An argument for the discourse function as the fundamental or primary function of conjunctions would involve a hypothesis that conjunctions connect discourse elements. A sentence would be such an element. This argument is not sup-

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

71

ported by empirical data. Within discourse, not all sentences have a sequential marker. Therefore, the sequential marker must encode something other than a connection between the elements of discourse. In accordance with the hypoth­ esis presented in the present chapter, I demonstrate that the sequential marker encodes the temporal relationship between a time and an event or between two events. With respect to the discourse-level, sentences that encode such relation­ ship do have a sequential marker and sentences that do not have a sequential marker do not encode this type of relationship. Although I cannot provide evi­ dence for every language in my data, I shall demonstrate this for one language, Xdi. I provide two texts. The first is a narration of events in a folk tale. As expected, one event follows another and a sequential marker occurs in almost every sentence in the narrative. The lexical sequential marker mbàdú ká or mbàdu kb may be, but does not have to be, followed by the grammatical sequential morpheme kà. The lexical adverb occurs only after adverbials of time in clause-initial position or as a marker of the temporal succession of two events. (150) PREP GEN other-GEN time then

COMP

DEM.PL hyena SEQ stay-REF ASSOC dog 'One day, Hyena and Dog lived together.' (151) then COMP hyena SEQ farm OBJ farm 'Hyena had already farmed.' (152) then COMP 3PL SEQ thresh-POT 'And they were threshing.' (153) PREP walk around-ABS-GEN-3SG dog 'Dog was taking a walk'

then COMP SEQ look-VERT-DIST OBJ CAT 'and he looked at him [Hyena]';

72

COMPLEX SENTENCE

PREP thresh-POT alone-GEN-3SG 'he was threshing alone.' (154) then COMP dog SEQ go-DOWN help-CAT-REF 'Then Dog went to help him.' (155) thresh-POT-3PL OBJ threshing DEM 'They were threshing'

then COMP hyena SEQ take-PART OBJ beans 'and Hyena took some beans'

SEQ say-POT COMP SEQ go-1SG cook-REF COMP-3SG 'and said: "I have to cook these." ' (156) OK COMP dog 'Dog said: "O.K." ' (157) then COMP dog SEQ thresh-POT 'And Dog kept threshing.' (158) go-DIST hyena COMP thus kà lá-b díngà tá mbízà yà SEQ go-OUT put on fire OBJ bean dish DEM 'Then Hyena put the bean dish on the fire.'

PARATACIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

73

(159) then

COMP SEQ collect-UP-REF children-GEN dog

SEQ put-SEP-REF together in-3SG 'And then he collected the children of Dog and put them all inside it [the beans].' (160) then COMP SEQ light-SEP-REF fire small PREP under-3SG 'Then he lit the fire under it.' (161) then COMP-3PL SEQ threshing 'They kept threshing.' (162) SEQ go-1SG push in-SEP-REF fire under bean-dish COMP hyena ' "I have to push in the fire under the bean-dish," said Hyena.' (163) INTERJ SEQ go-OUT-go-lSG2SG PREP older Q ' "Oh, I should go. Aren't you older?" '

remain.IMPER 2SG SEQ go-OUT-go-lSG COMP dog ' "You stay, I should go," said Dog.' (164) then COMP dog SEQ go-OUT-REF 'Then Dog went away.'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

74 (165) go-DIST

hyena

SEQ tell-CAT-REF dog PROH-2SG

PREP look-TOT PREP pot DEM COMP tell-ADD-REF 'Hyena told Dog, "Go, [but] do not look inside the pot," he told him.' (166) yáw ká krì yes COMP dog 'Dog agreed.' (167) lá-bá krì yà kà arrive-OUT dog DEM then COMP SEQ gúnà-ná-f-tà sígà open-ADD-UP-REF pot 'On his arrival Dog opened the pot.' (168) SEQ 3SG COMP look-VERT-REF COMP children-GEN-3SG má sígà PREP pot 'And he saw that his children were in the pot.' The following text is a description of procedures at a ceremony. No sequentiality of events is involved and therefore sentences in the text are not connected by the sequential marker. In fact the only sequential marker that occurs is in eighth sentence of the narrative, where two clauses are involved: (169) beer-GEN adult IMPERF begin (Ful.) PREP ASSOC mtátá dá-ní má mdú death father-3SG PREP man 'Beer of adulthood begins after the death of the man's father.'

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

75

(170) well

death father-3SG PREP man IMPERF want-POT

OBJ show-CAT-REF COMP leave-POT

DEM STAT grow-1SG already 'The death of the man's father would mean that I am already an adult.' (171) NORM cook-VENT-DIST-REF all friend-PL-3SG OBJ beer 'All of his friends should cook beer and bring it to him.' (172) NORM call-REF PREP today STAT grow-2SG From that day on he should be called an adult person.' (173) NORM eat-REF-3SG OBJ year two 'He should wait two years.' (174) PREP back-GEN year two NORM pour-POT-3SG OBJ libation 'After two years he should pour a libation' (175) Ubation DEF DEM FUT show-CAT-REF know-CAT-REF-3SG

OBJ father-PL-3SG STAT dead PREP father-3SG

father-3SG PREP father-3SG father-3SG PREP father-3SG

PREP also Ubation will make him know his dead parents, and also all his forefathers.'

76

COMPLEX SENTENCE (176) day initiation FUT get up-UP-get up woman SEQ go-TOT-REF PREP woman's parent-3SG 'On the day of the initiation the wife will get up and go to her parents.' (177) IMPERF dance IMPERF dance night They [the men who stay with the husband] dance all night.' (178) PREP back-GEN dance FUT come-DIST-come màràkw grsdik ndá làdá-nì woman morning ASSOC woman's parent-3SG 'After the dance the woman will come in the morning, together with her parents.' (179) FUT come-DIST-come-3PL ASSOC big pot ASSOC small pot 'They will come with a wúdà and siga of beer.' (180) NORM enter-IN-GEN-3SG ASSOC PREP back entrance 'She should enter through the back of the compound.' (181) enter-IN-GEN-3SG ASSOC PREP back entrance NORM go-IN-GEN-3SG search-ADD-DIST-REF husband-GEN-3PL Having entered through the back of the compound, she should find her husband.' (182) NORM go-OUT DEM man DEM outdoors ASSOC cloth black PREP body-3SG The man should come out wearing black clothes.'

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

77

(183) NORMrun-POT-3SG ASSOC curved knife 'He should run around with a curved knife.' (184) NORM go-OUT man-PL catch-VENT-DIST-REF 'People should go out, catch him, and bring him back.' 2.8.3 Direction ofgrammaticalization The issue about the level at which a given function emerged first cannot be re­ solved by counting instances of the occurrence at each level and then comparing the outcoming results. A more reliable method is to find out which direction of grammaticalization is more likely and which is less likely. It appears that in Chadic languages the sequential marker emerged first as a marker at the clausal level and was subsequently extended to serve at the discourse level. The evidence for this hypothesis is provided by the fact that the sequential marker occurs only when either of two types of relationship are involved, tem­ poral or causal. Sequential markers may occur only before affirmative clauses, i.e. in the environment where the apodosis clause is the result of some event in the protasis clause. Such a constraint would not be justified if the sequential had \developed from a discourse conjunction connecting two clauses in a se­ quence. In all Chadic languages for which we have data, the sequential marker occurs if any adverb of time occurs at the beginning of the clause. The devel­ opment of such a narrow temporal function from a sentential conjunction is also unlikely. A functional extension from temporal sequencing to a discourse func­ tion is an extension from a more concrete to more abstract, a more likely direc­ tion, than the direction from more abstract to more concrete. Thus the data in Chadic indicate that the sequential marker emerged first as a sentential category, and was subsequently extended to become a discourse category, i.e. a category conjoining sentences within discourse.

78 2.9

COMPLEX SENTENCE From sequential to inflectional aspect marker

Data from Hausa have not been considered thus far because I would like to pro­ pose a new analysis that has to be defended first. Here is my proposal for new analysis of relevant data in Hausa. Hausa does not have an overt sentential coordinating conjunction. Sentences with an unspecified relationship between two clauses have the form S1 S2, e.g.: (185) Kwabòo yaa faacdì. sai na gan shì, na cfaukàa. kobo 3SG:PERF fell then 1SG see 3SG, 1SG pick up 'The kobo fell. Then I saw it and picked (it) up'. (Kraft and Kirk-Greene 1973:87) Hausa has several morphemes that can be analyzed as sequential markers. One of them is sai 'then', another is kaanà 'then', and there is also a periphrastic construction saa'àn nan (Cf. Ma Newman 1990:275). The marker sai also serves as a discourse conjunction, as illustrated in the sentences given earlier in this chapter. In sequential clauses, sai must be followed by a relative form of the verb. I will show that in addition to sai, Hausa has another sequential marker that has undergone further grammaticalization and become an inflec­ tional marker added to pronouns to encode a category analyzed as aspect in all contemporary studies. Hausa has two aspects, perfective and continuous, and each of them has a variant occurring, among other environments, in relative clauses, and presum­ ably because of this, the variants are often called 'relative aspects'. The relative aspects are marked by kà for the perfective and kè for the continuous in second person feminine and in all persons plural. Newman and Schuh 1974 interpret kà as being a reflex of the hypothetical Proto-Chadic perfective aspect, and they interpret kè as being also linked to the same perfective aspect, although they are unable to account for the vowel e in the continuous. This explanation, plausible for the perfective, is implausible for the continuous, because it postulates in ef­ fect that one marker encodes two opposite values for the same functional cate­ gory. In lieu of this hypothesis, I would like to propose that the so-called relative aspects in Hausa, viz. the relative perfective and relative continuous, are in fact stages in the development of a sequential marker. There are phonological and syntactic arguments in support of this hypothesis.

PARATACnC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

79

The phonological argument is that both aspectual forms are marked by suf­ fixes kà and kè. Recall that kV was a potential candidate for the reconstruction of the Proto-Chadic sequential marker. Postulating the sequential marker as a source for both aspectual forms avoids the need to postulate that the same marker encodes two different values for aspect. If we accept that the sequential is marked by k V, then the differences in vowels between relative perfective and relative continuous could be taken as encoding aspectual differences. The syntactic and functional arguments are much more compelling. The markers occur after the subject pronouns; thus they have not only the same dis­ tribution as some other aspectual marker in Hausa but also, and more important, the same distribution as the sequential marker in some other West Chadic lan­ guages, e.g. Pero. The relative aspect in Hausa is used 'in narrative sentences, i.e. when the speaker is narrating events that have taken place (probably in a set sequence)' (Bagari 1976:104). As noted by many scholars (cf. Newman and Schuh 1974:19, Bagari 1976:103), the relative aspects in Hausa are used when 'a question word or emphasized constituent is to the left of the verbs'. The relative aspects are also used when the adverb of time is moved in front of the verb. If the adverb of time is in clause-final position, then the nonrelative aspects are used, e.g.: (186) Mun daawoo baayan kwaanaa biyu 1PL:PERF return after day two 'we returned two days later' (187) baayan kwaanaa biyu mu-kà daawoo after days two 1PL-REL:PERF return 'it was two days later when we arrived' (Hodge and Umani 1963:199). Now the property of occurring after adverbs of time is the property of sequen­ tial markers in other Chadic languages. Sequential markers occur after adverbs of time, and they occur in various contrastive focus construction. Another property of sequential markers in Chadic languages is that they do not occur in negative clauses. Gouffé 1968 states explicitly that in negative clauses in Hausa the distinction between what is usually called relative aspects and nonrelative aspects is neutralized, and only nonrelative aspects may occur in negative clauses. I did not find examples of relative aspects in negative clauses in the descriptions consulted (Hodge and Umaru 1963, Kraft 1963, Kraft and Kirk-

80

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Greene 1973, Newman and Schuh 1974, Bagari 1976, Cowan and Schuh 1976, Pawlak 1989). The relative aspects are not used in a syntactic frame when preceding a negative clause, even when there is an adverb of time in clause-initial position, e.g.: (188) *baayan kwaanaa biyu ba mukà daawoo ba after days two 1PL-REL.PERF return for 'after two days we did not return' The constraint on the occurrence of the relative aspect in a negative clause is not formal, but functional. If the negative clause actually has an affirmative mean­ ing, the relative marker may be used, as in the following sarcastic use in the sentence: (189) su-kà bi mak'ìiyam-mù, bà sai su-kà 3PL-REL follow enemy- 1PL, NEG then 3PL-REL.PERF yàak'ee mù bà? fight 1PL NEG 'then they went over to our enemies and made war on us' lit. and didn't they fight us' (Abraham 1962:762) If the above sentence were to be understood as a true negative sentence, then the relative perfective would have to be replaced by negative perfective form, as the following sentence obtained from a Hausa speaker: (190) sukà bi mak'ìiyammù, bà sai su NEG then 3PL 3PL-REL follow enemy-1PL yàak'ee mù bà? fight 1PL NEG 'then they went over to our enemies and did not fight with us' The explanation of the constraints on the occurrence of the relative perfective and continuous aspects must be sought in their origin. These markers still pre­ serve the property of sequential markers from which they are derived. Assuming that the sequential marker was kà, the form attested in the per­ fective aspect, we may explain the imperfective aspect marker kè as deriving from kà + i. The phonological process a + i --->  in Hausa is independently attested. Thus -i alone could be taken as an aspectual marker.

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

2.10

81

From 'God' to counterexpectation: A reanalysis

2.10.1 The problem All current work on grammaticalization acknowledges the importance of reanal­ ysis as a mechanism contributing to the emergence of grammatical morphemes (cf. Hopper and Traugott 1993, Heine et al. 1991). The motivation for reanal­ ysis, however, remains somewhat nebulous. The following section provides evidence for the role of abduction as originally proposed by Peirce 1931 cf. Hopper and Traugott 1993:39-41 in linguistic reanalysis. Abduction is most often taken to be responsible for language change in first language acquisition. This section shows that abduction also pertains to adult speakers and, most im­ portant, it may be involved in acquisition of a individual grammatical forms, without language acquisition. But abduction alone could not be the only factor in reanalysis. If it were, the grammar obtained through the process of abduction could vary unpredictably from the grammar of the surrounding language. At least two other factors must be involved in reanalysis: a commu­ nicative motivation and the presence of other data in the surrounding language that confirms or disconfirms the product of reanalysis, thus ultimately contribut­ ing to its establishment or rejection. The present section will also address the two factors. In most Chadic languages there is no indigenous word for counterexpectational conjunction corresponding to English 'but'. In most languages the counterexpectational function is performed by am(m)a , with various tones, a morpheme borrowed ultimately from Arabic. This borrowing was motivated by communicative need. Since Chadic languages did not have a counterexpec­ tational conjunction, discovering such a morpheme in other languages created a need for it, a process well known from many other areas of human activity. The simplest way of dealing with it was borrowing it directly from Arabic or, for most languages, from languages that had borrowed it from Arabic. In at least one language, Lele (East Chadic), the counterexpectational marker is álà, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

82 (191)

3M buy-3M LOC brother in but be absent 3SG 'he(l) bought it from your brother(2) but he(2) is away'

3F buy-3F

LOC brother hand-3SG in

but be absent 3SG she(l) bought it from your brother(2) but he(2) is away' (192) buy-3M LOC brother in but be absent 3SG 'he(l) bought it from your brother(2) but he(l) is away' (193) go-come-3M but be absent 3SG 'he(l) came but he(l) is away' (194) 3M go-come-3M but be absent 3SG 'he(l) came but he(l) is away' (195) 1SG-HAB like milk but make-lSG sick Ί like milk but it makes me sick' (196)

hómyà 1SG-HAB like milk but make-lSG-3M sick Ί like milk but it makes me sick'

(197) lSG-see Kiya but 1SG-? talk-3M word NEG Ί saw Kiya but I did not talk to him' (198) lSG-see Giltirin but 1SG-? talk-3F word NEG Ί saw Giltirin but I did not talk to her'

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

83

The speakers of the language are unable to give other meanings of álà. Since there was no counterexpectational marker in Proto-Chadic, the automatic con­ clusion is that the morpheme must be a product of grammaticalization, and therefore its source should be sought. 2.10.2 The hypothesis and argumentation I hypothesize that the conjunction álà comes from an exclamation of surprise, al(l)a. The exclamation in turn comes from Arabic Allah 'God'. In what fol­ lows I give evidence for the most immediate path of grammaticalization, i.e. from the exclamation of surprise to counterexpectation, and then argue for the earlier path, i.e. from 'God' to exclamation. The evidence for álà as the marker of an unexpected proposition, a surprise, is provided by the following sentence: (199)

álà sē hāb jè kùnà-ì kàō dà kìrè nī CONJ INCEPT find-VENT uncle-3M squirrel LOC road LOC Unexpectedly he encountered his uncle, the squirrel, on the road.'

Here, álà cannot be a conjunction. It is the only potential carrier of the meaning 'unexpectedly'; All other components of the sentence have a clearly identified meaning. In the following sentence, the marker âlà occurs between clauses: (200) è-gé dà túgú kóŋ nī álà kùrmbàlò gòl go-3PL LOC village certain LOC then chief see kāmdā-ì sùbù né gō láy wà tú wives- three COP REL beautiful xxx all (Fr) When they arrived to a certain village, the chief saw that the three wives of the man were all beautiful.' It is in contexts like the one above that reanalysis can take place. The marker of surprise has been reinterpreted as the marker of unexpected, and the clause that follows such a marker is interpreted as the unexpected consequence, or out­ come, of the preceding clause.

84 2.11

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Conclusions

There are several implication of the analyses and reconstructions proposed in the present study. The first concerns the typology of clause combining. In lieu of the traditional division into conjoined and embedded clauses, with a possibil­ ity of a gradual rather than a discrete difference between the two types, Chadic languages present a tripartite division between conjoined, sequential, and em­ bedded clauses. There is a significant functional difference between the con­ joined and sequential clauses. Sequential clauses are formally and functionally similar to the temporal and conditional apodosis clauses. Reconstruction of the Proto-Chadic system of clause combining indicates that the conjoined clauses were unmarked and that the sequential clauses were overtly marked by a sequential marker. The comparison between the sequential marker and the associative or NCC indicates that the two markers are related. The change from associative to coordinate was already discussed in Mithun 1988, who did not distinguish between coordinate and sequential. It appears that in her study, the coordinate conjunction is clearly NCC with respect to nouns, but it could be either a SCC or sequential with respect to clauses. The general direction from associative to SCC or sequential seems to be the only reasonable possibility for grammaticalization. The sequential markers in Chadic are, however, derived from several other sources as well, including de dicto complementizers and prepositions. There are also sequential markers whose sources have not been identified. Sequential markers in Chadic were further grammaticalized into discourse-level sequential markers. In at least one lan­ guage, the sequential marker was grammaticalized and became an aspectual marker. Its sequential function was subsequently taken over by another marker. If we take into consideration the relationship between the associative marker and the nominal conjunction, and then between the nominal conjunction and the sequential marker, we have two possibilities with respect to grammaticalization: one in which the associative becomes a conjunction and then a sequential marker, viz. associative ---> nominal coordinate conjunction ---> sequential; and the other in which the associative becomes sequential, bypassing the coor­ dinate stage. Chadic data indicate that the sentential conjunction developed very late, and that it was always preceded by the development of sequential. The few sentential conjunctions in Chadic developed from the same source from which the sequential developed. But their development was not functionally as

PARATACTIC AND SEQUENTIAL CLAUSES

85

motivated as the development of sequential because the function of the coordi­ native conjunction was carried out by paratactic structures.

3 FUNCTIONS OF COMPLEMENTIZERS

3.1

Introduction

The nonlexical category COMP, first introduced in Bresnan (1970), plays an important role in several contemporary syntactic theories. Within GB theory COMP interacts with the theory of Government, Case theory, and Binding the­ ory and is an important element with respect to movement rules (cf. Chomsky 1986a, 1986b, 1982, Rizzi 1990). COMP may be empty or may be filled by such elements as the English 'that', 'for', etc. These elements are called com­ plementizers in some theories. COMP may also be filled by WH-words as a re­ sult of WH-movement, but the WH-words are not considered complementizers. In English there cannot be both a complementizer and a WH-word (i.e., the COMP position cannot be filled by two words). There are, however, languages in which there may be two or more complementizers in a sequence, as is the case in Dutch (cf. Koster 1987:206ff). Within GB theory such cases are treated as resulting from movement rules, usually involving WH-movement (Bouchard 1984, Wachowicz 1974, Cichocki 1983, Rudin 1986, and Rizzi 1990). In other theoretical approaches two complementizers in a sequence are either ex­ plicitly allowed (Kac 1978:76) or implicitly allowed (Givón 1980, 1991). Although there is some consensus among linguists when it comes to identi­ fying a morpheme as a complementizer, there is considerable divergence as to which morphemes should be included in the set of complementizers. This di­ vergence is due to the fact that the term itself is rather poorly defined. The term 'complementizer' covers the range of the old term 'subordinating particle' that 'marks' sentential subjects and objects, but it also includes some morphemes, such as interrogative markers occurring in the matrix clause. Often the identity of this category is taken for granted (e.g. Lefevbre 1980, Bickerton 1981, Dasgupta 1983, Borsley 1985, Joseph 1985, Lawal 1986, Dimmendaal 1989, Heine et al. 1991). In many works, an example or a list of examples is given in lieu of a precise definition. Chomsky (1986a: 161), for example, states that in

88

COMPLEX SENTENCE

English COMP may be 'that, for or null'. The complementizer may also be de­ fined by analogy, e.g. as the morpheme that corresponds to the English 'that' (Lefevbre 1980). It is through the examples of complementizers that we may be able to detect what the underlying and largely tacit assumptions are with respect to this category. Complementizers are most often treated as morphemes signaling that the following clause is a complement. Thus Noonan (1985:44-45) states that 'complement types often have associated with them a word, particle, clitic, or affix whose function is to identify the entity as a complement. Such forms are known as complementizers'. He further (p. 47) lists among English comple­ mentizers 'that', 'if, and 'to'. Palmer (1986) uses the term 'conjunction' for what other linguists call 'complementizers'. Although he does not define the term, in discussing conjunctions in various languages he ascribes to them modal functions. Ransom (1986:87-88) defines complementizers as 'semi-lexical forms that occur within the complement, setting it off from the main clause and, at the same time, signaling its modality'. She lists among English complemen­ tizers 'that', 'whether', 'for-to', and 'whether-to'. Givón (1991:552ff) refers to the morphemes in question as 'subordinating—"separating"~morphemes', but also uses the term 'complementizer' (p. 554) and describes its function as participating 'in the coding of the event-integration scale'. The underlying principle in these studies appears to be that for a morpheme to be classified as complementizer, it has to occur in a specific syntactic position, viz. before the embedded clause (cf. Bickerton 1981:109), regardless of the relative order of the two clauses. Hopper and Traugott consider complementizers to be clause linkers and characterize the latter as 'initially [serving] as to signal the functional relationship of the combined clauses to each other [ ], and to mark syntactic boundaries (which may be obscured by later syntactic interlacing processes)' (Hopper and Traugott 1993:178). Hopper and Traugott, as linguists before them, do not explain what the motivation and significance of marking 'syntactic boundaries' are and do not make use of this notion in their discussion of clause linkage. In Frajzyngier (1995) I proposed a functional theory of complementizers. Within this theory, complementizers are free-standing morphemes that have the function of encoding modality. As such, they may mark either the main or the embedded clause. Consequently, in the rest of this work I use the term 'complementizer' for morphemes that meet this criterion. In the present chapter I summarize and illustrate the main arguments in support of the modal functions of complementizers. In the discussion of the modal functions my aim is not to

FUNCTIONS OF COMPLEMENTIZERS

89

defend the hypotheses, since I have done that elsewhere, but rather to introduce the terms and sketch some of the support for the hypotheses. The subsequent discussion of the complementation in the remaining chapters provides ample evidence for the hypotheses proposed in Frajzyngier (1995) and briefly outlined here. But I also extend the functional theory of complementizers by postulating another function, viz. that of 'marking of syntactic boundary' for complemen­ tizers, similar to the proposal in Hopper and Traugott 1993. This extension will provide functional motivation for the until now largely intuitive notion of 'marking syntactic boundary'. The importance of the two functions for Chadic languages and languages in general is explained in each section. Because of their double function and the previously assumed lack of se­ mantic content, complementizers are a particularly interesting vehicle for study­ ing the process of grammaticalization. The third section of this chapter deals with the theoretical issue of how a phonological form, such as a word, acquires a grammatical function, and how this function changes. Processes of grammat­ icalization also allow one to explain why in some languages complementizers do not occur with certain types of embedded clauses.

3.2

Modal function

The term 'modality' is understood in the present work as it has been in the past thirty years (cf. Palmer 1986), viz. as the speaker's attitude toward the proposi­ tion, but it also includes the agent-oriented and the speaker-oriented distinction of modalities (see Kurylowicz 1964, Bybee et al. 1995). The hypothesis that complementizers have modal functions is supported in Frajzyngier (1995) by the following arguments: In many languages comple­ mentizers are in complementary distribution with other devices coding modality. Thus if there are other devices such as inflectional markers on verbs, e.g. opta­ tive, subjunctive, and imperative, and intonational patterns, e.g. interrogative intonation, the complementizers do not encode the modal function encoded by those other devices. If the complementizers encode any of the modal functions, these functions are not coded by other devices. Additional support for the hypothesis about the modal function of comple­ mentizers comes from its ability to explain a number of cross-language syntactic phenomena, including: (1) Absence of complementizers in indicative sentences of many languages; (2) presence of two complementizers associated with one

90

COMPLEX SENTENCE

clause, main or embedded; (3) presence of one complementizer in certain types of embedded clauses; (4) relationship between complementizers and inversion in English (discussed extensively in Frajzyngier (1995) and not discussed in the present work). 3.2.1 Epistemic function of complementizers I explain the absence of complementizers in simple sentences by the fact that indicative sentences convey what the speaker intends to be taken as his belief. In other words, indicative sentences have an inherently defined epistemic modality. I have argued extensively for such meaning of indicative sentences elsewhere (Frajzyngier 1985 and 1987; but cf. Palmer 1987). An interesting and hitherto unexplained phenomenon is the presence of so called affirmative markers in indicative clauses in some languages, e.g. Dahalo (cf. Tosco 1991, Frajzyngier 1994), and in some Niger-Congo languages. The presence of such markers is, however, not counterevidence for the proposed hypothesis, since the markers are related to the distinction between affirmative modality on the one hand and negative and interrogative modalities on the other. In embedded clauses the epistemic function of complementizers consists mainly of encoding the clause as being in the de dicto domain or in the de re domain (cf. Frajzyngier 1991a, and with respect to English complementation, Frajzyngier and Jasperson 1991). The de dicto domain, i.e. the domain of speech, pertains to information obtained from speech, either by the same speaker or by other speakers. Languages may or may not encode the distinction between the two domains in their grammatical systems, and moreover, among those that do, the boundaries between the two domains differ. As with most semantic functions encoded in language, one cannot predict what a language will encode from observation of the extralinguistic universe. The distinction between the domains de dicto and de re cuts across various grammatical cate­ gories. Typically the domain de dicto encodes fewer semantic features than the domain de re. Thus in interrogative WH-clauses, some languages make a dis­ tinction between a question about a referent in the domain of reality and a hypo­ thetical referent. In Polish WH-questions the de re domain encodes features of gender and number, which are not encoded in the domain de dicto, e.g.:

FUNCTIONS OF COMPLEMENTIZERS (1)

kto to zrobil who DEM make:PERF:3M 'who did it?'

(2)

który to zrobił who:M.SG:REL DEM make:PERF:3M 'which one did it?'

(3)

która to zrobiła who:F.SG:REL DEM make:PERF:3F 'which one did it?'

(4)

którzy to zrobil-i who:M.PL:REL DEM make:PERF:3PL.M 'which ones did it?'

(5)

które to zrobily who:F.PL:REL DEM make:PERF:3PL.F 'which ones did it?'

91

In relative clauses in many languages a similar distinction is made between the head of a clause that is a participant in a hypothetical event and the head of the clause that is a participant in a real event (cf. Chapter 11). One of the areas where the distinction between the de dicto and de re domain is encoded across languages is in complementation, especially in complementation of verbs of perception and cognitive verbs. With respect to verbs of saying, the de dicto-de re distinction is equivalent to the distinction between direct and indirect percep­ tion of a state, event, etc. With respect to cognitive verbs, the distinction corre­ sponds to knowledge through personal experience versus knowledge through hearsay. I use the term 'de dicto complementizers' for those markers that encode a clause as being in the domain de dicto. The markers of the domain of speech have been extended in many languages to serve also as markers of indirect per­ ception, even if the perception did not necessarily have speech as its source. One of the best example of such an extension is the use of the de dicto comple­ mentizers with complements of verbs of perception, in which case the comple­ mentizer indicates that the proposition is not a result of direct but rather of indi­ rect perception, as in English:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

92

(6)

I saw that she was here

Chadic languages are interesting in that, along with complementizers marking the de dicto domain, they also have complementizers marking the de re domain. This is particularly important in connection with complements of verbs of per­ ception and cognitive verbs in some East Chadic languages such as Bidiya, Lele, and Dangla, where one complementizer is used to encode the domain de dicto and another to encode the domain de re. I consider the whole domain of interrogative to be also a part of epistemic modality, as it is an inquiry about the truth of the proposition ('yes/no ques­ tions'), an inquiry about a specific element of the proposition ('WH-questions'), or an inquiry about the truth of an assumption about the proposition ('tag questions'). The presence or absence of complementizers is closely linked with the way interrogative sentences are coded in a language. In some Chadic languages the presence of two complementizers in a sequence is explained by the fact that one complementizer marks the domain de dicto and the other com­ plementizer marks interrogative modality. Constraints on the occurrence of specifically interrogative complementizers between the main and the embedded clauses are very much linked with the structure of the interrogative clause. More specifically the interrogative complementizers in Chadic languages occur between the main and the embedded clause when the embedded interrogative has no other markers of interrogative modality. If the embedded clause has other markers of interrogative modality, such as clause-final interrogative mark­ ers, whether specific or general, there is no interrogative complementizer be­ tween the main and the embedded clause. But there may be a de dicto comple­ mentizer between the two clauses. The presence of the de dicto complementizer in embedded interrogatives is motivated by two functions: (1) a modal function to encode that the following clause is in the de dicto domain (rather than being a request), and (2) argument separation function discussed in the next section. 3.2.2 Deontic function o f complementizers With respect to deontic modality, I propose that the indicative clause is the un­ marked case, i.e., it indicates neither obligation nor wish. The main support for this analysis comes from the fact that obligation, wish, and all other types of deontic modalities have to be marked by inflectional markers, modal verbs, modal adverbs, or other devices available in a language. Deontic complemen-

FUNCTIONS OF COMPLEMENTIZERS

93

tizers encode a wish or prohibition with respect to the subject of the clause. In many Chadic languages, as in some Slavic languages (cf. Frajzyngier 1991a), deontic complementizers occur in both main and embedded clauses. Unlike in Slavic languages, deontic complementizers in embedded clauses may occur even in same-subject clauses. In some Chadic languages deontic complemen­ tizers occur at the beginning of the clause, but there are also languages, such as Gidar, where the deontic complementizer occurs at the end of the clause. Where the complementizer occurs depends to large extend on the source from which the complementizer was grammaticalized.

3.3

Complementizer and the coding of grammatical relations

In Frajzyngier (1995) I acknowledged the possibility that in some languages the complementizer may also have a 'separating' function. In the present section I shall make precise the notion of 'separation' and show that when this notion is understood in its specific function we can predict occurrence constraints on complementizers, more precisely, when the complementizers may and when they may not be deleted, and also when we may expect a complementizer to oc­ cur even though no modal functions are involved. 3.3.1 The problems and a hypothesis Many linguists state that the function of complementizers is to 'introduce' a complement clause, 'mark' the clause as complement, etc.but they do not state what the metaphor 'introduce' and 'mark' stand for. Those linguists that use the notion of separation do not explain the nature or the motivation for 'separation'. In contemporary linguistics there are no studies addressing the question why some clauses in complex sentences need an 'introduction' and other clauses do not. A related question of why the complementizers may be omitted in some languages but not in others has not been raised and therefore never answered. Compare the following sentence in English and its translation into Polish: (7)

She said the council lost one strong neighborhood advocate in Steve Pomerance,. . (Colorado Daily, Nov., 4, 1993)

94

COMPLEX SENTENCE

The sentence above could have the complementizer 'that' inserted after the verb 'said' without any change in the meaning of the whole sentence or of its com­ ponents.1 Any translation of this sentence into Polish must have a complemen­ tizer, viz.: (8)

Powiedziała ze Rada straciła w say:PERF:3F.SG COMP council lost:PERF:3F.SG PREP osobie S.P. mocnego obronce person:LOC S.P. strong:M.SG:ACC advocate.ACC spraw dzielnicowych2 matter.PL:GEN neighborhood

Omission of complementizer te from the above clause would result in an ungrammatical sentence. The answer to the question why the complementizer may be omitted in English but not in Polish is not language specific but rather bears on linguistic theory and language typology. Hypothesis: I propose that the second function of complementizers is to sepa­ rate the propositions of one clause from the proposition of another clause so as to enable the assignment of arguments to proper verbs. Understanding of this function should allow one to explain why the complementizer may be omitted in one language but not in another and also why complementizers may be omitted in some clauses but not in others in the same language. The hypothesis can also explain why in some languages the same complementizer may occur twice in the same clause in two different positions. The proposed hypothesis provides jus­ tification for those largely intuitive descriptions of complementizers that labeled complementizers as 'introducing', 'marking' and 'separating' morphemes. In order to argue for the hypothesis I first must briefly outline of a nonaprioristic approach to the coding devices in language, specifically referring to the coding of semantic role of arguments within a proposition. 3.3.2 Coding devices for the semantic role of arguments Some of the devices for the coding of grammatical relations are configuration, inflectional case marking, adpositions, and coding on the verb. In most cases only one device is used for one grammatical relation, but it is possible that in certain cases two devices may be used at the same time. Configuration in the present work is not understood in traditional terms of word order only but also, and more important, in terms of position with respect

FUNCTIONS OF COMPLEMENTIZERS

95

to a specific reference element to which the marked argument must be adjacent. In English the position of the argument after the verb is a coding device. This specific fact in English and possibly in some other languages acquired an undue metatheoretical status when in GB theory and its latest Minimalist version (cf. Chomsky 1992) configuration was taken to be the means of representation of object in linguistic theory. Thus, in that theory, the NP governed by the verb is a theoretical rather than language-specific convention of representing object. Another coding means is inflectional marking on nouns or noun phrases. When this device is used to encode the relationship between the verb and the ar­ guments, configuration within the clause is available to encode pragmatic func­ tions and possibly some other semantic relationships, such as mood. Adpositional coding has virtually the same functional properties as inflectional coding. And, finally, the coding of arguments on the verb may replace the other types of coding provided. Thus in most Bantu languages the fact that an argu­ ment is old information is marked by coding this argument on the verb. Several arguments may be marked at the same time, and if there are any NPs in the clause, the roles of NPs are not marked in other way but by the coding on the verb. Each of the systems of coding implies certain syntactic properties of the lan­ guage. If the coding is through configuration, then there is relatively little free­ dom for arguments to have different positions in the clause. If the coding is through inflectional devices and marking on the verb, then the arguments have relatively great freedom to occur in different positions in the clause. The vari­ ous positions in the clause carry pragmatic functions, modal functions, and possibly other functions, but not the functions of coding the semantic role of the argument in a proposition. Thus in Slavic languages (inflectional coding), Japanese and Korean (adpositional coding), and most Bantu languages (coding on the verb), the position of the argument in the clause carries only a pragmatic function, if any. Now we can explain the syntactic function of complementizers: Complementizers separate one clause from another so that the parsing of each clause is possible, viz. so that noun phrases in the sentence are properly as­ signed to the different verbs that a sentence may have. In English, where the coding of core arguments is realized by position with respect to the verb or by adpositions, the complementizer does not play a crucial role because the assignment of arguments to the verb usually is not ambiguous. The argument that precedes the verb is the subject and the argument that follows

96

COMPLEX SENTENCE

the verb is the object. These general principles of coding combined with subcategorization properties of individual verbs leave little doubt as to what verb a given noun phrase is an argument of. Thus if in the sentence given earlier: (9)

She said the council lost one strong neighborhood advocate in Steve Pomerance,. . (Colorado Daily, Nov. 4, 1993)

'the council' cannot be interpreted as an argument of the verb 'said' without a special device indicating direct speech, e.g., pause or a graphic device, as in 'She said: "The council. . ."' In Polish, where the arguments are marked by inflectional devices, noun phrases do not have a fixed position with respect to the verb. In the absence of a device separating two clauses, there are no grammatical means to establish to what verb a given argument belongs and often it is impossible to establish the role of the given argument even if it is inflectionally marked. Thus in the sen­ tence that was translation of (1), with the complementizer omitted, the word rada could be interpreted as the subject of the verb powiedziała 'say:PERF:3F.SG' or of the verb straciła 'lost:PERF:3F.SG'. Whichever in­ terpretation is chosen, the sentence is ungrammatical because the interpretation is never unambiguous and one of the verbs in the sentence is going to lack an identifiable subject. (10)

*Powiedziała Rada straciła w say-PERF:3F.SG council lost-:PERF:3F.SG PREP osobie S.P. mocnego obrońce person-LOC S.P. strong.M.SG.ACC advocate.ACC spraw dzielnicowych matter.PL-GEN neighborhood for 'she said that the Council lost.. .' or for 'the Council said it lost

I propose that complementizers with syntactic functions occur: (1) when the coding device for grammatical relations allows relatively great freedom with re­ spect to the position the arguments may have in a clause; (2) in languages where the clausal order may be such as to produce ambiguity with respect to argument assignment. In the chapters to follow I support the arguments for the syntactic function of complementizers with examples from various Chadic languages. Now let me illustrate the arguments on non-Chadic languages.

FUNCTIONS OF COMPLEMENTIZERS

97

In Japanese and Korean the embedded clause with its arguments precedes the verb of the main clause, which is always clause final, and in complex sen­ tences also sentence final, which is consistent with the assumption that the complement clause is a clausal realization of one of the arguments. The role of arguments in Japanese and Korean is marked by postposition. The pragmatic function of topicalization is marked by postposition wa in Japanese and by clause-initial position in Korean (for this analysis I am grateful to Wonho Kim). In both Japanese and Korean, an argument with its accompanying postposition may have any position in the clause, provided it is before the verb. The com­ plementizer in both Japanese and Korean occurs at the end of the embedded clause and before the verb of the main clause. Moreover, the complementizer is obligatory in both languages. (I am grateful to Yoshiteru Asano for the exam­ ples from Japanese): (11)

Taroo ga [Hanako ga sono hon o kaita] Taroo AGT Hanako AGT that book PAT wrote to omotteiru COMP thinking Taro thinks that Hanako wrote that book' (Shibatani 1990:260)

The assignment of arguments coded by postposition ga, viz. Taroo and Hanako, is based on their distance from the verbs in the sentence. The leftmost argument is assigned to the last verb, and the second argument is assigned to the first verb in the sentence. The following sentence with the reversed posi­ tions of Taroo and Hanako has a different reading, e.g.: (12)

Hanakoga [Taroo ga sono hon  kaita] Hanako AGT Taroo AGT that book PAT wrote to omotteiru COMP thinking 'Hanako thinks that Taro wrote that book'

The subject of the main clause may be moved after the complementizer, i.e. into the position preceding the main verb, e.g.:

98

COMPLEX SENTENCE (13)

Taroo ga sono hon o kaita to Hanako Taroo AGT that book PAT wrote COMP Hanako ga omotteiru AGT thinking 'Hanako thinks that Taro wrote that book'

If the main clause has more than one NP argument, all of its arguments may oc­ cur either before the embedded clause or after the complementizer, e.g.: (14)

Taroo ga Kumiko ni Hanako ga Emiko ni tegami  Taroo AGT Kumiko DAT Hanako AGT Emiko DAT letter PAT kaita to itta wrote COMP say 'Taro told Kumiko that Hanako wrote a letter to Emiko'

(15)

Hanako ga Emiko ni tegami  kaita to Taroo ga Hanako AGT Emiko DAT letter PAT wrote COMP Taroo AGT Kumiko ni itta Kumiko DAT say Taro told Kumiko that Hanako wrote a letter to Emiko'

In the speech of some speakers the complementizer to may be omitted. The evidence that it has an argument-separation function is provided by the fact that if the argument of the main clause occurs before the verb of the main clause, the complementizer may not be omitted. The 'argument separation' function explains why in some Chadic lan­ guages, such as Xdi, an embedded clause has the de dicto complementizer in clause-final· position. In certain moods, the embedded clause in Xdi precedes the main clause, hence the need for the complementizer. The deontic comple­ mentizer in Xdi does not have an argument separation function and always pre­ cedes the embedded clause.

3.4

Identification and grammaticalization of complementizers

In Chapter 4 I describe sources for specific complementizers in various lan­ guages. The selection of a form as complementizer follows the criteria listed earlier: If a separate form has a function of coding modality and/or serving an

FUNCTIONS OF COMPLEMENTIZERS

99

argument-separation function that, that form is considered to be a complemen­ tizer. What the sources of complementizers were has been a subject of several studies, and the issue is not controversial. One of the most common sources for de dicto complementizers are verbs of saying, confirmed time and again in many languages of the world (cf. Lord 1976, 1993, Frajzyngier 1984b, 1991a, Saxena 1988, Heine et al. 1991, additional examples in Heine et al. 1993). The explanation of why a verb of saying becomes a complementizer was suggested in Frajzyngier 1991a. I shall make it now more precise, in line of the grammaticalization scheme presented in the introduction. The scenario of the change is as follows: A verb of saying is followed by a complement that consists of a speech fragment by some speaker. Consequently, by metonymic process (pars pro toto), the verb of saying becomes the marker of a proposition that is a speech fragment. In Frajzyngier 1991a I showed that the hypothetical and indi­ rect evidence are natural semantic extensions of the de dicto domain. This se­ mantic extension takes place through a metaphorical process of the following form: The information conveyed/obtained through speech has several proper­ ties, one of them being that the hearer is not the witness to reported event, pro­ cess, etc. Hence the form can be used to convey indirect perception. In a num­ ber of languages the introduction of a hypothetical situation is done with the help of the verb of saying, e.g. in English: (16) Polish: (17)

Russian: (18)

Say you didn't have to follow her

Powiedzmy, że się nie zgadza say:lPL COMP REF NEG agree:3SG let's say she/he does not agree' Skazh-em pojed'-em say-1PL travel-1PL 'let's say we go'

This second property of the verb of saying, viz. that whatever is said is not in the domain of reality has made it a handy means to mark the hypothetical, and as we will see in Chapter 10 also conditional marker. Grammaticalization of demonstratives as de de dicto markers and eventually de dicto complementizers has taken a different route. First, as shown in

100

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Frajzyngier MS a number of demonstratives derive from verbs of saying. This process had essentially the following scenario. A verb of saying refers to something that was previously mentioned in discourse, such as contemporary expressions in various IE languages, e.g. English, legalese 'the said docu­ ment', French 'le dit journal', Polish 'rzeczony dokument' 'the said document'. Through a metonymic process the verb of saying component becomes the only marker of something that has been said. Such a marker implies among other things a distance in time. By a metaphorical process a distance in time becomes the marker of distance in space, a demonstrative in the strict sense of the word. In many contemporary Chadic languages, de dicto complementizers that are similar to demonstratives are in fact derived ultimately from verbs of saying. But there are also complementizers for which no verb of saying could postulated, more specifically, de re complementizers occurring in some East Chadic languages. Some of these are derived from deictic markers, which ultimately may be derived from verbs of direct perception such as 'see'. There are some de dicto complementizers that appear to be derived from demonstratives for which no verb of saying can be shown as the source, such as English 'that'. There is one approach favored by Lockwood 1968, repeated in Heine et al. 1991 (cf. also Frajzyngier 1991a), according to which the com­ plementizer derives from a structure of the type: 'She said that. S', i.e. a structure in which the demonstrative refers cataphorically to a following proposition. This grammaticalization process appears, however, to be false, since in English the demonstrative does not refer cataphorically but rather anaphorically. In Frajzyngier 1991a, I postulated that the demonstrative 'that' in English and other languages comes to serve first as an anaphora referring to something that was previously mentioned in speech. Once it is a marker of the domain of speech, it can serve as a complementizer.

3.5

The complementizers in Masa: An open problem

Most Chadic languages have the alternation between no complementizer and the presence of de dicto complementizer whenever the complement clause is in the indicative mood. Masa differs from other languages for which we have data in that it has several de dicto complementizers nō, nā, a, lō, la, and ala. I assume that the last three represent variants of the same morpheme, most certainly linked to the verb and noun law 'talk'. These are also the most frequent com­ plementizers in texts edited by Caitucoli 1986 except for lō which occurs rarely.

FUNCTIONS OF COMPLEMENTIZERS

101

There are only very few examples with complementizers nō, nā, and a. Some de dicto complementizers may occur in a sequence. So together with the ab­ sence of complementizer, which is an option in this language as well, there are at least five possibilities for coding the complement clause. The available data do not allow to assign a distinctive function to any of the complementizers, since they all may occur in exactly the same discourse environments and they all have the same de dicto function. I illustrate their function by showing first that they can precede direct and indirect speech. I then demonstrate that they have the same function with respect to the modality of the embedded and the main clause. In Masa the verb 'to say' may not be omitted if there is an overt ad­ dressee in the clause. Since examples without the complementizer were given earlier I provide here only examples with complementizers. (INCH stands for inchoative): (19)

tū? ká dǎ nō nígí nǎ rigé walk INCH say COMP 2PL go where 'She came forward and said: where are you going?' (Caitucoli 1986:63)

Indirect speech: (20)

cōlā nă kālāf káy-ñ nà?ā nō kūlūm-nā get up go interior DEM-GEN 3F COMP horse-GEN v-ă zòw bùr gúlō kālāf gúÎ-ā ley bùř PREP-3F standing sleep up inside behind-3F thus sleep v-àlām dī PREP-3M NEG Entering her hut, she said that her horse will sleep inside with her, that he will not sleep alone' (Caitucoli 1986:107)

Direct speech: (21) nă lō káy-n lāẁ nàm-mā và márā māy dī 3F COMP DEM-GEN quarrel 3M-GEN thing other really NEG 'She said: Is it really like that? Isn't there another quarrel involved' (Caitucoli 1986:101)

COMPLEX SENTENCE

102 (22)

Ғ COMP INTERJ sheep-DET PREP-1SG 'She said: Yay ya, my sheep' (Caitucoli 1986:307) (23)  COMP 2Ғ say here truth or well lie Q He said: are you telling the truth or a lie?' (Caitucoli 1986:119) (24) 3F Purkum child-PL-GEN PREP-3F INCH say-3F COMP mother-1SG 2F sleep on bed-GEN PREP-2F NEG 'She Purkum, her children told her: Mother, you are not going to sleep in your bed* (Caitucoli 1986:169-171) (25) 3PL COMP DEM-GEN close-1PL mouth-GEN gourd-GEN 'Then they said: let's close the gourds' (Caitucoli 1986:231) Example of two complementizers in a sequence, first of which is translated by Caitucoli as á dit (I provide Caitucoli's glosses first, followed by mine in the next line): (26)

nàm á lā nā zū il a dit que ainsi int.  COMP COMP thus INTERR 'He said 'is it really so'? (Caitucoli 1986:89)

Caitucoli's data were gathered from speakers in Chad. In my own question­ naire collected from a speaker from Yagoua, Cameroon, I did not record any complementizers after verb 'to say'. But I have recorded de dicto complemen­ tizer ālā used with verbs of perception (q.v.). Interestingly, in the data I col­ lected the verb 'to say' di is not omitted, while it is frequently omitted in folk­ tales published by Caitucoli. The explanation for this correlation is as follows. Given the fact that the complementizers la, ala, and lo derive from the verb 'to say', the deployment of the complementizer alone is enough to encode the main clause as containing the predicate of saying. In the material from Yagoua, the complementizer is not used but the verb 'to say' is not omitted. In Masa spoken

FUNCTIONS OF COMPLEMENTIZERS

103

in Chad, the verb 'to say' is very often omitted, and hence a complementizer is used. One or the other means of encoding the type of predicate of the main clause is used in both dialects.

3.6

Conclusions

The two functions of complementizers allow us to understand several phenom­ ena that remained unexplained so far. One of them is the presence of comple­ mentizers in main clauses. This is explained without exception by the modal function of complementizers. Another unexplained phenomenon is the absence of complementizers either in the main or the embedded clause. The modality of the clause is encoded by other devices, such as coding on the verb (e.g. sub­ junctive mood, or irreahs mood), or mainly because of the inherent modal value of indicative clause: Without any additional markers such devices encode the speaker's belief in the truth of the proposition. The third is the presence of two complementizers in a sequence. This is also explained by the modal function of complementizers, where each of the complementizers performs a different func­ tion. Usually one complementizer has an epistemic function, such as indicating the domain de dicto, and the other has a deontic function, encoding mood of obligation. The syntactic function of complementizers allows one to explain the follow­ ing phenomena: the possibility of omitting a complementizer in some languages but not in others. We can predict when the omission is allowed and when it is not by knowing what type of coding devices the language has for marking grammatical relations. The syntactic function of complementizers allows us to understand why in some languages complementizers occur at the beginning of the embedded clause and in others at the end of the embedded clause. The condition here is that the syntactic function of complementizers is expressed at the clause boundary. In languages where the embedded clause precedes the main clause, the clause boundary is the end of the embedded clause. In lan­ guages in which the main clause precedes the embedded clause, the clausal boundary is the beginning of the embedded clause. Both functions of comple­ mentizers allow us to understand why the same complementizer occurs twice in the same clause: once at the beginning of the clause and the other at the end: At the beginning of the clause it encodes the modal function of the clause; at the end of the clause it separates the embedded clause from the main clause.

104

1

COMPLEX SENTENCE

The presence or absence of complementizer 'that' in English has been subject of many studies. It appears also to have been exploited for the coding of other modal distinctions; cf. Thompson and Mulac 1991 and References there for other studies of the alternation of 'that' and the absence of 'that'. 2 There is no equivalent in Polish of the contemporary meaning of the word 'neighborhood'. I choose to translate it by 'dzielnica', being fully aware that the scope of the Polish word does not overlap with the current usage of 'neighborhood' in American urban politics.

4 COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS OF SAYING

4.1

Introduction

An understanding of the clausal complements of verbs of saying (simply 'complements' later in this chapter) is crucial for the understanding of many is­ sues of complementation in general. Complements of verbs of saying are inter­ esting in that, unlike complements of other verbs those of verbs of saying have a wide range of modality values, including deontic and epistemic modalities. They thus constitute an excellent area for the study of modality coding. Complements of verbs of saying also offer an excellent opportunity for the study of cross and disjoint reference coding, including, but not limited to, the phenomena of logophoricity. If there is a logophoric system in a language, it is more likely to occur in complements of verbs of saying than in complements of other verbs. In many languages the same complementizers are used with verbs of saying and with verbs of knowing and thinking (cf. Frajzyngier 1991a, 1995), as well as with volitional verbs and verbs of perception. It appears that in the process of grammaticalization certain grammatical means emerged first in connection with complements of verbs of saying and later were used with complements of other verbs, such as verbs of thinking and knowing. The de dicto complementizers and logophoric pronouns are two types of morphemes that were most probably grammaticalized first in connection with verbs of saying. In Chadic, as in many other languages, de dicto complementizers often derive from verbs of saying. The present chapter is organized as follows: I first dis­ cuss the types of verbs of saying and what is known about their reconstruction. This information is necessary for the discussion of both clausal complementa­ tion and the origin of complementizers. Next I discuss the potential function of clausal order, since some Chadic languages display two clausal orders in con­ nection with complements of verbs of saying. Chadic languages share a charac­ teristic: The verb of saying is often omitted. Constraints and implications of

COMPLEX SENTENCE

106

verb omission constitute the topic of next section. Issues related to comple­ mentizers, such as position of the complementizers, their origin, and constraints on their omission are the subjects of the next section. Some languages use dif­ ferent means of coding arguments in the embedded clause from those used in the matrix clause. This is the topic of the next section. The distinction between direct and indirect speech is discussed in the next section. The next three sec­ tions deal with issues of modality coding in complement clauses. I first address the epistemic modality of coding doubt in truth. I then deal with deontic modalities. The next section deals with interaction between complementizers and other means of coding modality. The next section deals with the issues of logophoricity, cross-and disjoint reference coding between arguments of the matrix clause and arguments of the embedded clause. The last section, conclu­ sions summarizes the findings laid out in this chapter and their implications for the theory of language and for the theory of grammaticalization.

4.2

Verbs of saying

In the present work, verbs of saying include semantic equivalents of English 'say' and 'tell' as well as other verbs involving talking, such as 'call', 'inform'. As will be shown later in the present work, Chadic equivalents of the verb 'to ask' behave in most Chadic languages like verbs of saying. For reconstruction of the syntax of the complex sentence, it is important to know what verbs of saying can be reconstructed for the proto-language. Such reconstruction is im­ portant for two reasons. First, different verbs of saying may have different syntactic properties, as the syntax of any better known IE language clearly demonstrates. In English the syntactic properties of the verb 'say' differ from those of the verb 'tell' and also from those of the verbs 'answer', 'remind', 'discuss', 'ask', etc. Similarly in Russian the verb govorit' has different syn­ tactic properties from skazať and rasskazať. The second reason to know what the verbs of saying in the proto-language were is that verbs of saying have often served as a source for the de dicto complementizers in many languages of the world, including Chadic (cf. Lord 1976, Frajzyngier 1991a). Available lexical reconstructions do not inform us about the number and form of the verbs of saying. Newman 1977a postulates or *p-rə as PC forms for the verb 'say', with the evidence consisting of data from three lan­ guages from the West Chadic branch and two languages from the Central Chadic branch. He also reconstructs a verb 'accept, answer' as *hləwə, with

107

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING

evidence from the West, Central, and Masa branches. Jungraithmayr and Shimizu 1981 do not reconstruct a single verb of saying. In what follows, I present a list of verbs of saying, with the first three en­ tries based mainly on Kraft's word lists.1 The remaining glosses, viz. 'say' and 'call', are taken from various sources, mainly from published information on particular languages as listed in references, but also from my own field notes. For most Chadic languages the ideal source, viz. a dictionary with en­ tries in some European language followed by lexical items in the target language does not exist. The are some notable exceptions, such as Ma Newman 1990 for Hausa, and much smaller indexes in dictionaries of Mafa by Barreteau and Le Bléis 1990, Bidiya by Alio and Jungraithmayr 1989, Mokilko by Jungraithmayr 1990, Tangale, by Jungraithmayr 1991, Migama by Jungraithmayr and Adams 1992. The list of languages is arranged according to the classification in Newman 1990a. Not too much attention should be given to the distinction between entries for 'say' and 'speak', because for most languages I have no information as to the contexts from which these verbs were culled. Besides, there is no assurance that lexical items within one column share the same syntactic properties with re­ spect to subcategorization, coding of arguments, constraints on cooccurrence with various aspects, etc. In most cases the information is additionally ob­ scured by the language of the description, German, French, and English, where a linguist may select a gloss without stating explicitly the syntactic differences between the verbs in the language described and in the language of description.

TABLE 4.1. (1) Verbs of saying Language Hausa Bole Kanakuru Ngamo Pero Tangale Kirfi

speak (373)

ask (374)

dɔl řεluγ

answer (375) amsàa kumawo'i lùwi lap lιgunug

majugò

lekkò

tàmbayàa puwo'i ?aŋ yγù var? káa, sεεrε 3 , səbə bàatì 'speaking'

say

pór-

kápú, céetò2

kàccú-wò

call

108

COMPLEX SENTENCE

T ABIE 4.1. (2) Verbs of saying Language

speak (373)

Galambu

mbasa 'speaking'

ask (374)

answer (375)

say

call

luw

Karekare

tama

tedi

t~lfusu

Gera

kirlmi

swemml

Mwaghavul

sat

till

ta1imi lap

sat

tal out

lak nil

liil liil

Cip

sa

Ankwe

kut

kir

(Sura) Mupun Fyer Bokkos DaffoButura Sha

sat lak

yal

ma

ni

nuit1ly

nii,lak

lal, lay laal

tOn

hill

wolo, wulu

lay,loyo

Ngizim

r.:m1Jl.

yil hlIl till till jayu

Bade

z~nan

~bden

t)gUman

Miya

oing~su

tsi

gfsi9.l

Diri

yari

t}mbe

numl

Burma

ne, nwe

~e

Geji Buli

!emi yam

lire kumgizl ILrOOra

Zaar

kw:ln

alt

Dwot

wu1

dwt

P::llci Pi5imdi

wuhl

Hwona

!ik

dzuml zanu tsake

Ga?anda

~mbu?i

icuhai*

ilQgmll

Gaoin

c~xi

ngirrii

saxaoa

lJgUmad'a

Bura

mba?i mbwi?i kuJ:i, pila

kiliQkuf

Cibak

'Y

yuwa yuwce

WestMargi

nuway, nuwf:

Kulere

Boka

IXlla

a

yuway, je?we

l~

lap ram

ndeld ndaru w0lda

wutu

JF1I1 IJamin !~wa gum~lJ

gundirce ridi' r, mwe+

mbu

109

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING

TABLE 4.1. (3) Verbs of saying Language

speak (373)

ask (374)

answer

say

call

!375l Ngwaxi KiIba HiIdi Wamdiu

kinkir+a

Margi

nnu gure

Higi Nkafa Higi Baza HigiKamale Higi Ghye Higi Futu Kapsiki Fali Kiria Fali Gili Fali Jilbu Fali Mueella Fali Bwagira Njanye MwuIyen Mandara Podoko Gisiga Mafa Lamang Xdi Baeama

ana nil

nna

guu::>

gizte rude dzito geze num? gruku nyu gwaae illamo ba,ndanda

kiyuwa ayti yuwa yiwan ja?o yuwe+t~

,

giunwa awUm suwa ?iwa amsa

d, na

~ainuti:

wi (yed'::» YLWUte yuwe skadzinjO

(gi) wey we vwe

YLWUtu? cfuti kwaMw cfuxwi

way !5ubati way,mwiJ mU ?wi moho Uluapa lJwatulJwe

nde

~atnHo

ke

dixi Uefo . nd~lVandava

1, kiI ng~

I'>e, I'>i gacf, tsa hazIaw

tsfocf, cfucf dzahacf-

mbicf

mna

cfawa diyo

cfawa mwa

Iugwie dUhau ndavyana ndavga ndiy?a(ya) ndidiganil davandava

mwf.c wlim IJgwa IJgwa

I'>e

kag (7)

Gude Gudu GaIavda

humaya bwoyo bie mawlicfu: rnga taga

ZaOvana Gava Nakatsa

kwaraya kwar(gana awata

IJgaruwe lJgawgana awi2xwi~a

wal'>i

zal, zil

110

COMPLEX SENTENCE

TABLE 4.1. (4) Verbs of saying Language

speak (373)

ask (374)

answer (375)

Matakam Musgu Buduma

ged'E

jihedeIE

mooana

na,na kanju

silba cega,ji

kalima (?)

say

mod'a cee,ca

N. 'answer' Logone Daba Mina Jaku Jara Bankala Yingilum Bidiya Dangla Mukulu Ngam Mobu Somrai Gabri Nancere Kera Dormo Kaba Modgel Bori Kulung Mubi Migama Sokoro Masa Banana Banana (Mouseye)

kaha ceed'u lu naIJ fyre SiOim kLlyatE ba kaawe 'arbe gal suwa

zama, zfun nexu

call

ti MwUla

ka, wa ngarkini

dab

gza

ransgIJ umayribre

ad'aIJ sLb

mis banotE

yay;,) m gWOSHE

fe, fe-ge, fede vale

soy inde llinde k;Sna, medi

teIke

ane, za mote, mute

se:g£

are

m6d'e urge

sege

lfune

woio

kfga beneyya

gage wage

kema

gual waate

kale wiiaku

galde

mini

b6kio dele

'lnno, 1611ika deogo j:lpi

h:lt dira

diye l)akIja

coblimu j:lpi

mtdira

'eeso, 'oyyo, nlla

ka taaso

geba mante gfrtege dibangia mus6 ngisfn banam bea wa

yegi,oti

huma

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING

111

TABLE 4.1. (5) Verbs of saying Language

speak (373)

Lame

Lame (Peve) in Mesme in

ask (374)

answer (375)

say

nàíní

call namadé

wávúnà à?ínmású ci vun tchàb la

kòr tan

'ín

Notice the considerable variation in the form of verbs of saying. This variation becomes more striking and significant when compared with other verbs, which are comparatively stable. Thus Jungraithmayr and Shimizu 1981 report that the verb 'to die', which they reconstruct as *mwt, is attested in all subgroups of all three branches of Chadic. Similarly with the verb 'to drink', which they re­ construct as *s2w?/h. I propose that the variation in the verbs of saying in Chadic is not accidental but rather results from the fact that these verbs served as a source of grammatical morphemes. Some of the verbs were bleached as a result of grammaticalization and were subsequently replaced by other verbs. The discussion in the present chapter provides support for the above explana­ tion of the wide variation of the forms of the verbs of saying. The Table 4.1 above contains several items that can be reconstructed for Proto-Chadic. The method in the reconstruction is as follows: If one finds a similar phonological shape with the same meaning in all three groups and bor­ rowing is ruled out, it is more likely that the words in question are reflexes of some proto-word with a similar meaning than that they are innovations. In the reconstructions to follow a much greater weight is given to the reconstruction of consonants than of vowels. The reasoning behind this approach is as follows: Word-final vowels in verbs are more probably reflexes of various grammatical morphemes than of the underlying form of the verb in Chadic (cf. Frajzyngier 1982c). In nonpausal position within a clause, word-final vowels other than grammatical morphemes are often deleted. Word-internal underlying vowels are often affected by processes of vowel raising and vowel lowering (cf. Frajzyngier 1981, 1982a, 1986c). The vowels could be affected by a number of changes, and although the reconstruction of the vowel for a proto-form is not impossible, it is a considerably more difficult task. I therefore reconstruct only such features for vowels as high or low, and back or front. This reconstruction may be closer to the three-vowel system, the likely system of Proto-Chadic.4

COMPLEX SENTENCE

112

For the purpose of the present work, the words from the columns 'speak' and 'say' are taken to be synonymous because we do not know from what contexts these words were taken. Even in contemporary languages, two different lexical items may be used with virtually the same meaning 'say', as the following ex­ amples from Mandara illustrate: (1)

tá 1 váng yà wá 3PL 1SG COMP 'they told me to go'

zlá là go

(2)

wá zlá là tell-3SG-tell COMP go 'tell him to go!'

In some languages the meanings of the verbs of saying have been extended, so that they are used for other verbs involving speech. One of these verbs is 'answer', also included in the table, because it may be derived from a verb meaning 'say' or 'tell'. Therefore, I also include an item from the column 'answer' if it appears to be cognate with the words 'say' or 'speak' in other languages. I postulate that the following verbs with the meaning related to 'say' and 'speak' existed in Proto-Chadic: *1V[+high] West: Angas lə, Galambu lùw, Kanakuru lùwi 'answer'; Central: Hona Mina lu, Mandara 1; I have no cognates from the Eastern and Masa branches. *(V)nV I do not reconstruct vowels here for the following reason: In many languages the initial vowel of the sequence occurs only if there is no final vowel. Thus are many VNs or NVs but seldom VNVs. It would appear therefore that the initial vowel is epenthetic (cf. Frajzyngier and Koops 1989). The final vowels in these verbs are high and low, and front and back, with various combinations and modifications of these features, e.g.: West: Ngamo ?aŋ (glottal stop ? is also epenthetic), Burma ne, Margi nnù, nә, Kilba ánà, Hildi nna; Central: Musgu na; no evidence for the Eastern branch; Masa: Lame in, Mesme in. *gVt I do not reconstruct the vowel because it could be either high or low, and front or back. In many languages the initial voiced stop became voice­ less, a rule independently attested in other lexical items (cf. Newman and Ma 1966). The final alveolar stop has become a liquid, r or l, in some lan-

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING

113

guages. This change is independently attested in many Chadic languages. In some languages the conditioning factor is the intervocalic position; in other languages it is the syllable- final position. There are also languages in which the final stop has been deleted, and the verb consists only of the ini­ tial velar consonant and a vowel. West: Tangale káa, Pero kpúmò, Ankwe kut, Gera kír, Geruma kàráa; Central: Bura Higi Nkafa gutε, Higi Baza Higi Kamale Cibak ka, Logone ká, Mafa Mubi ka; East: Bidiya káàwè. There appear to be no cognates in the Masa branch. * V[-back]1 West: Kanakuru Central: Gisiga Pidlimdi More evidence for the reconstruction of * V[-back]1 is provided in the discussion of the origin of complementizers. The Mbara form may be explained by postulating first a change from V[-back] to schwa, then schwa becoming a [+round] vowel after the labial, i.e. [+round] consonant. It is not clear whether Mandara ba (nonglottalized labial) should be included as a cognate word. * wV[+back]t Support is provided from languages of the West, Central, and East branches. West: Kulere wolo, wulu, Zaar wutu, Pəlci wulǔ ; Nakatsa awata, East: Kera wate, Somray woio. I postulate the second consonant of this verb t rather than 1 on the assumption that the change from t to 1 in intervocalic position is more likely than the change from 1 to t. In addition, changes from alveolar stops to liquids are independently attested in many Chadic languages. The available data do not allow the postulation of any semantic or syntactic properties of these verbs in Proto-Chadic because there are no descriptions of the relevant properties of these verbs in individual languages.

4.3

Clausal structure of sentences with verbs of saying

The following are the basic components of the complex sentence: the matrix clause, i.e. the clause containing the verb of saying; the embedded clause that is the complement of the verb of saying, and a complementizer, which may or may not occur in the sentence. The questions to be discussed in the present section are the following: What clausal order can be found in contemporary Chadic languages, i.e., does the matrix clause precede the embedded clause (Μ­ Ε), or does the embedded clause precede the matrix clause (-M)? What is the position of the complementizer with respect to the two clauses? What structures

COMPLEX SENTENCE

114

can be reconstructed for PC? What functions, if any, are carried by the clausal order? 4.3.1 Clausal order matrix-embedded Most Chadic languages have the order matrix clause-embedded clause, with the complementizer, if any, coming between the two clauses. This order can be found in languages from all branches of Chadic, e.g.: Hausa (West) (3) 'àku ya cê sùrutù bàa 'abin renaàwa ba nè parrot 3 say chatter NEG thing criticize:NOMIN NEG COP Parrot said, "chatter is not a thing to criticize'" (Kraft 1963:96 after Imam 1962) Angas (West) (4) Musa lə tene Botrus met Musa say COMP Bitrus go 'Musa said that Bitrus went' (Burquest 1973:148) Fyer (West) (5) tí lak-is ne m-èl ti yaŋŋò 3SG say-3SG COMP 3SG-come.IMP PREP evening 'she said he could come in the evening' (Jungraithmayr 1970:80) Lele (East): The complementizer in Lele is ná. The pronominal subject of the embedded clause is suffixed to the complementizer: (6)

kìrbí-dí ná-ì né báy gō ségré think-3 -3COPperson DEM hunter 'he thinks that he is a hunter'

Mesme (Masa branch) (7) mi tà 'ìn fá bàknì he, mi v ì. . . 3SG go say ADV elephant COMP 3SG catch 'he went and said to the elephant, hecaught... (Fischer 1980:98)

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING

115

Masa (Masa branch) (8) 3SG INCH say COMP 3SG come tomorrow He says that he will come tomorrow' (Carrucoli 1986:44) Because of its frequency among languages from all branches, I take the clausal order M- to be the unmarked case. The order M- does not encode any semantic or pragmatic function. Its use does not require an explanation or any further evidence for its existence. Therefore I take the M- order to be the unmarked, or default, clausal order in Proto-Chadic. 4.3.2 Clausal order embedded-matrix Since the order embedded clause - matrix clause is marked, its origin requires an explanation. In particular the following questions have to be answered: Is the order embedded-matrix the result of pragmatic or semantic considerations, such as emphasis, focusing, or discourse requirements, or is it result of formal constraints on the structure of sentences, clauses, or some other category in the language? An important observation with respect to languages with the -M clausal order is that this order is never the only one allowed. Languages that have it also have the clausal order M-. The following are some languages in which both orders occur: Buduma (Central) is one of the languages with the most consistent order -M. The order -M occurs when the embedded clause is a complement of the verb of saying or of certain other verbs, e.g. verbs of per­ ception: (9)

lúgu járe-a kindaatoo móómeno man 3SG-be right now 1PL:see:FUT 'whether the man is right we will now see' (Lukas 1939:79)

Note that when a verb of saying has a de re rather than a de dicto complement, i.e. when the complement is a noun such as 'word', the complement follows the verb, e.g.: (10)

doomo waaji keaari mána kóten ask elder word one 1SG Ί asked the elder (with) one word' (Lukas 1939:74)

116

COMPLEX SENTENCE

The order M-Ε is also allowed, even with verbs of saying. But all examples contain instances of direct speech, similar to the example above when the com­ plement was a lexical item: (11)

na-ma ga na-fene wuli-ane ŋena na-fene: 3SG-get up TEMP 3SG-call child-3SG small 3SG-call 'ma ge-jigu tembal yu ga-ru!' get up 2SG-get drum PREP? 2SG-bring 'when he got up, he called to his son and said: "Get up and get the drum and bring it!'" (Lukas 1939: 83)

(12)

na-ca gé woli-ane genaa ma ga: "ma!" 3SG-say to son-3SG.POSS small DEM COMP stand (up) 'he said to his young son: "stand up!'" (Lukas 1939:83)

One of the languages that has the two clausal orders is Xdi, a Central Chadic language from the Mandara group. I believe that the explanation of the embed­ ded-matrix order in Xdi may be applied to other languages that have this order. The syntax of complementation in Xdi makes a distinction between de dicto and de re complements. This distinction is encoded by the de dicto comple­ ments being placed before the matrix clause, and the de re complements after the matrix clause. The order of clauses in a sentence containing a de dicto comple­ ment of a verb of saying is Complement-Complementizer-S, i.e., the comple­ ment clause is first, followed by a complementizer, followed by the matrix clause. The hypothesis about modal function of the order of clauses in Xdi may be argued for as follows: With the verb mná 'say' in the matrix clause, most sentential complements are de dicto, e.g.: (13)

mdáráyá-yà kà mbítsà mná-tà hunter-DEM COMP Mbitsa say-REF Mbitsai said that he j is a hunter'

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING (14)

117

zà-ná-b-z-íyù tá pìtsákw-á-dà forget-ADD-OUT-forget-1SG OBJ hoe-GEN-1SG ká mbítsà mná-ná-tà bákà COMP Mbitsa tell-ADD-REF Baka Mbitsa i told Baka that he i forgot his i hoe' or Mbitsa told Baka that I forgot my hoe'

The verb 'to say' may also have a de re complement such as 'word', and in such a case the verb mná is followed by rather than preceded by its complement: (15)

mná-ŋ -mnà mbítsà ndá bákà tá gwàdá tell-EXT-PERF Mbitsa ASSOC Baka OBJ word 'Mbitsa said a word to Baka'

An additional argument for the de dicto and de re coding by clausal order is provided by complements of the verb grá 'think, calculate'. This verb behaves like the verb mná 'say' with respect to de dicto complements. The complement clause is fronted if the object of belief is a proposition whose truth may be in doubt. The complementizer occurs at the end of the complement clause, i.e. between the complement and the matrix clause, e.g.: (16)

mdáráyá-yú ká mbíts tà grá-i hunter-1SG COMP Mbitsa IMPERF think-POT Mbitsa i thinks that he i is a hunter' or Mbitsa thinks that I am a hunter'

If, however, the sentential complement is in the domain de re, it is not fronted and it does not end in a complementizer. Rather, the verb is nominalized, its subject appears as a possessive suffix, and it is preceded by the progressive marker tà, e.g.: (17)

grá-f-ndá-grá mbítsà tá realize-UP-ASSOC-realize Mbitsa OBJ zà-ná-b-t-á-nì tá pìtsákw-á-nì forget-ADD-OUT-REF-GEN-3SG OBJ hoe-GEN-3SG Mbitsa realized that he had forgotten his hoe'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

118

A very strong argument for the modal function of the order of clauses is provided by the complements of the verb 'ask'. This verb can take two types of complements. One is de dicto, where the complement clause is a ques­ tion to which an answer is expected, and the other is a de re, where the com­ plement clause is a request for an action. All embedded interrogative clauses in Xdi precede the matrix clause, e.g.: (18)

zwán-á má-mú rà ká child-GEN mother-1PL.INCL Q COMP 3PL ndá ámù ask-CAT-REF ASSOC 1PL.INCL 'they asked us whether he is our brother'

When the complement of the verb 'ask' is a request rather than a ques­ tion, the sentential complement follows the main verb: (19) ask-CAT-ask-1SG OBJ help-1SG PREP 3PL Ί asked them for help' Xdi is a VSO language, and it might be conjectured that the -M clausal order is somehow related to the VSO word order in the matrix clause. This conjecture is false, because in Xdi sentential complements of other verbs, and de re complements of the verbs of saying, have the clausal order M-. There is also a comparative argument against linking the -M clausal order with the VSO word order. Giziga is a SVO language for both nominal and pronominal argu­ ments, e.g.: (20)

pəlis fən-a zuŋgo horse passup donkey 'The horse passed up the donkey' (Lukas 1970:72)

(21)

'і rá dì 'ìshè 1SG PROG cook meat 'I am cooking meat' (Lukas 1970:63)

And yet the language has clausal order -M (Lukas gives embedded clauses after verb 'to know'):

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING

(22)

119

'à sóo lè n tá 3SG come PERF COMP lSG-know-3SG NEG Ί do not know that he has come' (Lukas 1970:79)

In Gude (Central), which is also a VSO language, the clausal order is M-E, e.g.: (23)

kə ci (tə uu'inə) oo'ya nga'a nә zәm COMPL speak 3SG COMP COMP good SUBJ food 'He spoke (saying) that the food is good' (Hoskison 1983:114)

Since the phenomenon of coding the dicto domain through the order E-M has been observed only in some languages of the Mandara branch, it must be considered an innovation rather than a retention from the Proto-Chadic stage. It would be interesting to know how the clausal order came to be exploited for semantic purposes, and how the particular semantic function of the de dicto domain came to be encoded by the clausal order embedded-main. The grammaticalization of the clausal order for modal function is a challenging problem because we are not dealing with relatively simple problem of a lexical item be­ coming a grammatical marker. In such cases a simple semantic extension, through a metaphor or metonymy or through a syntactic or situational context, is a sufficient explanation of the mechanism of grammaticalization. In the case of clausal order, which in and of itself has no inherent meaning, grammatical­ ization must involve a more abstract categories. I propose the following expla­ nation of the phenomenon. In Chadic languages the fronting of a noun is a frequent device exploited for various pragmatic functions, most often to encode contrastive focus (cf. Frajzyngier 1983b). Contrastive focus always conveys information that the hearer is not expected to know. Thus the fronting may be interpreted as a de­ vice to mark the information as new for the hearer. This change, from con­ trastive focus to 'new information', may be understood in terms of Kurylowicz's 'secondary function' of a grammatical morpheme. A morpheme (and by analogy a grammatical construction) is reinterpreted in a given context, and one of its meanings in the context becomes one of the functions of the con­ struction. Virtually the same explanation for grammaticalization through 'contextualization' is postulated in Heine et al. 1991 and in Heine 1992. In complements of verbs of saying, the reported speech is also a piece of informa-

120

COMPLEX SENTENCE

tion that the hearer is not expected to know. Hence, the device that a language already has for encoding new information is used to encode new information even if it is encoded in a clausal rather than a nominal form. Note that in dis­ course as well as in contemporary Western prose in many languages, the source of a reported speech is often omitted if it can be deduced from a preceding dis­ course. In contrast, the content of a complement clause of a verb of saying in principle can never be deduced from the preceding discourse. The effect of the fronting combined with the properties of the complement clause might have been a factor strong enough that in some languages it led to the fronting of the embedded clause. The use of the order -M to encode the category of de dicto follows from the above discussion. It was not grammaticalized in all languages because of the nondeterministic nature of grammaticalization processes. Although we can explain why grammaticalization takes place we cannot predict whether it will take place. Grammaticalization is essentially a product of the application of a means to encode a semantic or pragmatic function. Languages do not necessarily encode in their grammars the same semantic and pragmatic functions. In at least one other Chadic language, East Dangla, clausal order is used to a much lesser degree to encode the domain de dicto. The order M- is used to encode both direct quotation (direct speech) and indirect speech (all examples from Shay, MS), e.g.: (24)

tyas aa COMP yes 'she said, "Yes."'

(25)

ŋas du kar kaŋko ay COMP but SEQ 2F xxx begin 'he said, "But you start first.'"

The order embedded-matrix can be used to encode direct speech, e.g.: (26)

noon laagì-ty èp di, 1SG measure-3F thus only kaa koor-kik, àn-dyi-dyì PREP millet-DEM say-3M-3M '"That is the only reason I am measuring it, the millet," he told him'

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING

121

But it appears that the main condition for the use of the order -M is for the em­ bedded clause to be an interrogative complement of the verb to ask', e.g.: (27)

'sàdíig, kí gídáy kóorò iŋ minàw?' friend 2SG trade millet CONJ how much -dyi-ga ask-3M-3M "'Friend, how much are you selling millet for?" he asked him'

(28)

ki gas-gu buw-ak min mon di? 2  find-3PL milk-DEM LOC where just indarf-giti-ga ask-Ғ- "Just where did you find this milk?" she asked him'

As in Xdi, when the complement of the verb 'to ask' in East Dangla is a request (the domain de re), then the embedded clause follows the matrix clause, e.g.: (29)

nù té ŋùs ní-i káté 3PL ask-1PL PAST COMP 1PL-FUT go 'they asked us to go'

Since East Dangla is an East Chadic language and Xdi is Central Chadic, and the two languages are not in geographic or cultural contact with each other, it is possible that Proto-Chadic occasionally exploited clausal order for prag­ matic purposes. Later on, some languages exploited clausal order also for se­ mantic purposes. 4.3.3 Word order in the matríx clause The question about word order in the matrix clause of the complex sentence does not usually arise because in most languages the order in the matrix clause is the same, regardless of whether it is a simple sentence or part of a complex sentence. Most Chadic languages also have the same order in the matrix clause of the complex sentence as in any simple sentence. There are, however at least two languages, in which the word order in the matrix clause of the complex

COMPLEX SENTENCE

122

sentence differs from the word order of the simple sentence. Here is a descrip­ tion of the relevant facts and their explanation. Mandara (Central) has SVO word order, with no adpositions involved in marking the role of arguments, e.g.: (30)

éycàn téw án wàšé Nali slaughter 3PL PREP knife 'Nali slaughters them with a knife'

(31)

á kr án zàdé 3SG hit dog PREP stick 'he hit a dog with a stick'

In complex sentences with verbs of saying, SVO order can also be obtained in the matrix clause in elicited sentences (the third person pronominal subject oc­ curs before the verb), e.g.: (32) nálì á bà ŋánè mátsámè (elicited) Nali 3SG say 3SG hunter 'Nali said that he is a hunter' In spontaneous speech, however, the independent pronominal and nominal subject of the matrix clause occurs after the verb 'to say'. In Mandara, even if there is a nominal subject, the clause must have a third person pronoun, one form for singular and another for plural, preceding the verb. When the nominal subject occurs in the postverbal position, the verb is still preceded by the third person pronominal subject, as in the following form given spontaneously, VSO order) (33)

à bá nálì ŋánè màtsàmé 3SG say Nali 3SG hunter 'Nali said that he is a hunter'

It appears that Mandara demotes, as it were, the subject of the verb of saying into postverbal position. In simple sentences containing a verb of saying, but no other verbs, the word order is either SVO or VSO. The only evidence for the VSO word order in the simple clause unfortunately contains only indepen­ dent pronominal plural subjects. The example is nevertheless valid. In

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING

123

Mandara, as in many Chadic languages, there are two types of pronominal subjects: pronouns that behave as clitics and independent pronouns that behave as free nouns. In Mandara, subject markers precede the verb or are infixed in the verb, e.g.: (34)

tà-1-vá-nguré wá zlò zlá là 3PL-say-EXT-1PL COMP go-PL-go 'they told us to go'

Independent pronominal subjects behave like nominal subjects in that they may occur in different places in the clause, and moreover, the verb has to have a clitic pronoun when the subjects are realized by independent pronouns. With verbs other than a verb of saying, independent pronouns precede the verb, e.g.: (35) tà dá zédè 3PL carry stick 'they carried the stick there' (36) tà támà tà màtsàmá hà 3PL think 3PL hunter PL 'they think that they are hunters' The third person plural subject may, however, follow or precede the verb of saying. When the pronouns follows the verb, the suffixed form differs from the form that precedes the verb, e.g.: (37)

à b-í-trè yá matsámè 3SG say-1SG-3PL 1SG hunter 'they told me that I am a hunter'

(38)

tà bá-nts-wà yà màtsàmè 3PL say-COMP-COMP 1SG hunter 'they say that I am a hunter (but I have my doubts)'

39)

ŋà bà málà-há ŋgré 1PL.EXCL tell 1PL.EXCL PREP parent-PL 1PL.EXCL 'we told our parents'

124

COMPLEX SENTENCE (40)

ázàrà à bé térè what 3 say 3PL 'what did they say'

Thus the verb 'to say' has syntactic properties different from those of other verbs. These properties are reflected also when the clause with the verb 'to say' is a matrix clause of the complex sentence. I have no explanation for the demo­ tion of subject of verb of saying. But the conditions involved may be the same that occur in some poetic styles in English when subject of the verbs of saying may occur after the verbs, especially when the sentence-initial clause is a quote, e.g.: (41)

"Bottenfield was disappointed," said Rockies pitching coach Larry Bearnarth,... (Daily Camera March 26, 1994, D1)

An interesting case with respect to word order in the matrix clause is pro­ vided by Pero (West). In that language the third person pronominal subject is unmarked unless it is in focus. When this is the case, the third person subject occurs at the end of the clause, preceded by the subject focus marker nín-. In complements of the verb of saying, the subject of the matrix clause does not oc­ cur at the end of the matrix clause but rather at the end of the sentence, i.e. after the embedded clause. The position of the matrix clause subject is an excellent illustration of language categorizing the complement clause as just another ar­ gument. The embedded clause is considered to be the object of the matrix clause, and the subject of the matrix clause occurs after the last argument of the matrix clause. (42)

káp-kò cà mìnù bínè cígí-mù nín- cínù tell-COMPL COMP 1PL wash body-1PL SUBJ-3PL 'they told us to wash'

The word order in the matrix clause in Pero is essentially the same as in the simple sentence, and it is only the embedding of the complement clause between the arguments of the matrix clause that makes the matrix clause look different from the simple sentence.

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING 4.4

125

Omission of verbs of saying

4.4.1 The phenomenon An interesting property of many Chadic languages is that sentences with sen­ tential complements of verbs of saying have no verb in the matrix clause, or, the most frequent verb of saying does not occur in the matrix clause. Whenever the verb of saying is missing, the complementizer or an auxiliary associated with the verb of saying or both the auxiliary and the complementizer are present. The optional absence of the verb of saying can be seen in languages from all four branches, but there are no languages in which the deletion of the verb of saying is obligatory. In languages that do allow the verb of saying to be absent from the matrix clause, such as Mupun, in natural discourse the verb of saying is in fact used very rarely. In elicited sentences, which are usually much more deliberate, the verb of saying is present. Although quite a few Chadic lan­ guages where verbs of saying may be missing have been described, the de­ scriptions have not discussed the syntactic processes involved and have not de­ scribed the theoretical ramifications of the omission of the verb in the matrix clause. The following examples illustrate just how widespread the omission is: Mupun (West) (43) wu sat nə i 3M say COMP yes 'he said yes', 'he agreed' Cf. (44) wur nə i 3M COMP yes 'he said yes', 'he agreed' (45)

wu sat nə n-nas mo 3M say COMP 1SG-beat3PL 'he said that I beat them'

Cf. (46) wu nə n-nas mo 3M COMP 1SG-beat 3PL 'he said that I beat them'

126

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Ngizim (West): In the following example the first verb 'to say' does occur in the matrix clause, but the verb of saying does not occur in the quoted speech: (47)

dà ram ii-ci maa, "Manga, baaba maa kà yi." say to-3SM COMP Manga father COMP 2S go 'he said to him, "friend, father (says) that you should come (sic)."' (Schuh 1972:317)

Kera (East): In Kera the verb 'to say' is wə and the complementizer is minti, e.g.: (48)

Wə míntí tó kóoré say COMP 3SG leave 'hei said hei was leaving' (Ebert 1979:260)

The verb 'to say' may be omitted, e.g.: (49)

Murú míntí gìidù àblàw wife:3M COMP 'his wife said that his stomach hurt him greatly' (Ebert 1979:141)

Mesme (Masa) (50)

Té'érá he, mi cí hàna 'acòm chameleon COMP 3SG kill ? grasshopper 'Chameleon said he might kill it for a grasshopper' (Fischer 1980:98)

Masa: In Masa the verb 'to say' is da. There appear to be several complemen­ tizers; one of them is lō, another is no, and there is also complementizer ā. The verb 'to say' may be omitted from the matrix clause, e.g.: (51) 3F COMP DEM-GEN quarrel 3M-GEN thing other really NEG 'She said: Is it really like that? Isn't there another quarrel involved' (Caitucoli 1986:101)

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING (52)

127

nă? ā và-nà 3F COMP thing-GEN follow- 1SG 'She responded: The thing is following me' (Caitucoli 1986:195)

4.4.2 Absence of the verb and case assignment In several syntactic theories, such as principles and parameters grammar, lexi­ cal-functional grammar, and relational grammar, verb plays a central role in clause structure. In GB theory the verb assigns thematic roles to positions and participates in the system of government in Case assignment. A similar role is played by prepositions, which are considered to be lexical categories, assigning Case under government but not assigning thematic roles. Within GB theory, the presence of prepositions like the presence of verbs and nouns is not pre­ dictable. The verb-omission phenomena in Chadic bear on the theoretical issues of the levels of linguistic structure, Case assignment, and predictability of adpositions. If the verb is absent, then the arguments that would have Case and thematic role assigned by position with respect to the verb and by the verb itself are left without the Case and thematic role assigner. The relevant questions are whether the Case is assigned at all and by what and whether the arguments have the thematic roles assigned. The omission phenomena of the verb of saying in Chadic provide evidence for the hypothesis that the semantic role of argument in a clause in Chadic is marked by several means, including position with respect to the verb and use of adpositions. If one of these means is not available then another is used. The discussion is based on analyses of Xdi (Central Chadic) and Mupun (West Chadic). Xdi (Central): Xdi is a VSO language. The direct object may immediately fol­ low the verb if the subject is third person and is not realized by a noun. The nominal direct object in postverbal position, with or without an intervening subject, is marked by the preposition tá: (53)

ndzà á xnè-ì mbítsà tá hlà FUT cut-POT Mbitsa OBJ cow 'Mbitsa will slaughter the cow'

(54)

gítà dzàwá-b-dzàwá tá úà dímdím today sell-OUT-sell OBJ milk all 'today she sold all the milk'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

128

The direct pronominal objects are affixed to the verb. If both subject and object are affixed, the object pronoun precedes the subject pronoun, giving the order of affixes Verb-Object-Subject, e.g.: (55)

kát-íxà-kátáhelp-lSG-help-3PL 'they helped me'

(56)

hlá-γ-íyù find-2SG-1SG Ί found you'

But interestingly, the pronominal direct object may also be coded by the preposition tá: (57) γùnà -γá-γùná tá íi send-DIST-send OBJ 1SG 'he sent me away' The verb 'say' mná may have nominal or clausal complements. If it has nominal complements, then the direct object is coded by the preposition tá and the addressee is coded by the preposition ndá. The order of constituents is: Verb-Addressee-Object, e.g.: (58)

mná-ŋ-mnà mbítsà ndá bákà tá tell-CAT-tell Mbitsa ASSOC Baka OBJ word Mbitsa told Baka the word (that was not supposed to be said)'

The order of prepositional phrases may not be reversed, e.g.: (59)

*mná-ŋ-mnà mbítsà tá ndá bákà tell-CAT-tell Mbitsa OBJ word ASSOC Baka for 'Mbitsa told Baka the word'

The preposition ndá performs many functions within the clause. It is the asso­ ciative marker and the nominal conjunction. It also encodes oblique case, e.g.:

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS

SAYING

(60)

ká mbítsà tà grá-i hunter-DEM COMP Mbitsa IMPERF think-POT ndá báká ASSOC Baka Mbitsa thinks that Baka is a hunter'

(61)

ndá bá xgà help-lPL.EXCL-help-3PL ASSOC build house 'they helped us with house-building'

(62)

má ndá xíyà tà nγ-íyù tá káyà PREP ASSOC guinea corn IMPERF see-1SG OBJ 2SG 'I love you very much'

129

The preposition ndá also encodes the agentive and instrumental role in stative constructions, when the subject of the clause is patient (cf. Frajzyngier and Shay MS), e.g.: (63)

ndá xná hlà dà mbítsà ndá mángá STAT slaughter cattle PREP Mbitsa ASSOC knife 'the cattle are slaughtered by Mbitsa with a knife'

When the verb has a clausal complement, the de dicto complementizer ká occurs at the end of the complement clause. If the complement clause has a de dicto modality, the clausal order is -M. The complementizer thus occurs be­ tween the embedded and the matrix clause. Although Xdi is a VSO language, it has SVO order in the second clause of the sentence, regardless of whether the second clause is main or embedded. The nominal addressee in the matrix clause of complex sentence, unlike in a simple sentence, follows the verb and is not preceded by the preposition ndá. This can be explained by the fact that the role of this argument is determined by the immediately preceding verb, i.e. that the position immediately after the verb of saying codes the argument as the ad­ dressee, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

130 (64)

zà-ná-b-z-íyù tá forget-ADD-OUT-forget-1SG OBJ hoe-GEN-1SG ká mbítsà mná-ná-tà bákà COMP Mbitsa tell-ADD-REF Baka Mbitsa i told Baka that hei forgot hisi hoe' or Mbitsa told Baka that I forgot my hoe'

If the addressee is realized by pronouns, such pronouns are affixed to the verb. This is identical with the coding of the addressee in a simple sentence, e.g.: (65)

kà hl-ìá mù mà lùá ká SEQ leave 1PL.INCL PREP town COMP 3PL tell-1PL.INCL-REF 'they told us to leave the town'

(66)

là ká go.IMPER COMP 3PL tell-1SG-REF 'they told me to go'

(67)

là ká go.IMPER COMP 3PL tell-3SG-REF 'they told him to go'

(68)

yàγ-ká dá nγ-ú dà sígà yà PROH-2SG PREP look-TOT PREP pot DEM COMP-3SG tell-3SG-REF ' "you should not look inside the pot", he told him'

If the verb mná is omitted, the nominal subject of the embedded clause occurs after the complementizer. This position is also the normal position in the em­ bedded clause, as evidenced by its position relative to the verb, e.g.: (15) break-SEP-break-1SG OBJ hoe-GEN-1SG COMP mbítsà (mná-tà) Mbitsa say-REF Mbitsa i said that hei broke hisi hoe' or 'Mbitsa said that I broke my hoe'

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING

131

Despite the omission of the verb of saying, the hearer has no problem figur­ ing out what verb was omitted because of two factors: (1) only verbs of saying may be omitted in Xdi, and (2) the first clause ends in a complementizer, which is the mark of an embedded clause. Since this clause precedes the matrix clause, it is in the domain de dicto, as discussed earlier in this chapter. The evidence that the verb of saying was omitted in the production of this sentence, rather than deleted after the surface structure was formed, is provided by the coding of the addressee of the matrix clause. If and when the verb is present, the grammatical role of the addressee is marked by its position imme­ diately following the verb. In principles and parameters grammar (cf. Chomsky 1992) one could say that the noun phrase has the Case and thematic role as­ signed by the verb. If the verb mná is omitted, the pronominal addressee of the matrix clause has no verb to which it could be affixed. If speakers choose not to use the verb 'to say', then they also have to choose a different coding for the addressee. Instead of affixation to the verb, an option that is not available, the pronominal addressee is marked by the associative preposition ndá, in much the same way that the nominal addressee is marked when it is separated from the verb. Here are a few examples: (70)

mà ká tá skwì ká á nd-íí PROH eat-2SG OBJ thing COMP 3SG PREP-1SG 'she forbade me to eat'

(71)

là-wà-là ká íyù ndá go.IMPER-PL-go COMP 1SG ASSOC 3PL 'I told them to go'

(72)

kà hlìá kúnì ká ndá á ŋnì SEQ leave 2PL COMP 3PL ASSOC PREP 1PL.EXCL 'they told us to leave'

(73)

kà skwà-tà-kà tá hlà ndá káγà  buy-REF-2SG OBJ cow COMP ASSOC 2SG tsáw skwá á ká wà but trade NEG 2SG NEG 'he told you to buy a cow but you did not'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

132

The choice of the preposition ndá to mark the addressee in the verb-omission cases is justified by the fact that this preposition marks the addressee when the addressee is separated from the verb by some other material, such as the subject of the clause, e.g.: (74)

sí zà-ná-b-zá-ká PAST forget-ADD-OUT-forget-2SG OBJ hoe-GEN-1SG ká mbítsà ndá bákà COMP Mbitsa ASSOC Baka Mbitsai told Bakaj that he j forgot hisį hoe' or 'Mbitsa told Baka you forgot my hoe'

(75)

là ká mbítsà ndá tsí goiMPER COMP Mbitsa ASSOC 3SG 'Mbitsa told him to go'

The preposition ndá is therefore the natural choice to mark the addressee in the complex sentence when the verb is omitted. Mupun (West): The verb 'to say' sát is used in equivalents of the English 'say' and 'tell', i.e., it can be followed by nominal complements or by clausal complements if the complementizer is used. The verb sát may also be followed by the argument coding the addressee. The de dicto complementizer is no. The complementizer occurs even when the verb sát is missing in the surface struc­ ture. The evidence that the absence of the verb from the surface structure is not a result of a deletion rule at the surface-structure level is provided by the selec­ tion of subject pronouns. The verb sát, like all other verbs, takes a special set of subject pronouns that precede the verb. For the third person singular mascu­ line, the subject pronoun is wu when a verb is present, e.g.: (76)

wu sat nә 'і 3M say COMP yes 'he said yes', 'he agreed'

Verbless clauses, such as equational and existential clauses select their subject from another set of pronouns, independent pronouns, for which third person masculine and feminine forms are wur and war. When no verb is present, in­ stead of the third person subject marker wu, the clause has the third person in­ dependent pronoun wur, e.g.:

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING

(77)

133

wur nә і 3 COMP yes 'he said yes', 'h agreed'

Similar distinction between subject pronoun and independent pronoun exists for the first person singular. Instead of the first person singular subject prefix -, the clause with omitted verb 'to say' has the first person independent pronoun an, illustrated in examples to follow. The hearer knows that a verb of saying was omitted because of two factors: the presence of the de dicto complementizer ә and the selection of pronouns re­ ferring to the addressee in the embedded clause. Mupun has three sets of pro­ nouns interacting in the complex sentence. One set, the logophoric pronouns, is used to mark the subject and the possessor, if any, of the embedded clause as identical with the subject of the matrix clause. The second set marks the subject and the possessor, if any, of the embedded clause as identical with the ad­ dressee of the matrix clause. And finally, the third set of pronouns marks the participants in the embedded clause as different from the participants in the ma­ trix clause (cf. Frajzyngier 1985a, 1989c, 1993). Pronouns of the first two sets occur only in complements of a verb of saying. Thus, if there is no verb of saying in the surface structure, and the pronouns in the embedded clause belong to the logophoric or the addressee set, the sentence has a verb of saying in the semantic structure, which determines the choice of pronouns. With respect to the coding of the addressee of the matrix clause with the omitted verb of saying, Mupun uses a different strategy from the one used in Xdi. Recall that in Xdi, the addressee is marked by the preposition ndá when the verb of saying is absent. In Mupun, the addressee is not marked by a preposition; in fact, there is no addressee encoded in the matrix clause. Because the language has the special set of pronouns coding the addressee in the embed­ ded clause, there is no need to have a pronoun coding the addressee in the ma­ trix clause. The only indication of the presence of the addressee in the sentence is provided in an ingenious way, by the choice of subject pronouns in the em­ bedded clause, because the form of the subject pronoun in the complement clause encodes its grammatical role in the matrix clause.

COMPLEX SENTENCE

134 (78)

an nә nuwa maŋ caan nuwa 1SG COMP 3PL.ADDR take hoe 3PL ji n-mun baa come PREP-1PL arrive 'I told them to take a hoe and come to us'

(79)

an nә gwar taŋ meme mbi n-an 1SG COMP 3M.ADDR find QUANT thing PREP-1SG Ί told him that he should find something for me'

There is not enough relevant information in other Chadic languages to pro­ vide a systematic description of the coding of the addressee when the verb of saying is deleted. The two options described in Xdi and in Mupun are certainly not the only ones available. In Masa (Masa branch) the omission of the verb of saying is at least as frequent as in Mupun and Xdi. The only way to encode the addressee in Masa is by making it immediately follow a verb of saying. There are no instances of an addressee in the clause in which the verb of saying is omitted. Put differently, Masa does not allow verb omission if the addressee is present in the clause. (80) DEM 3M say-3F 3F go hide PREP far Then he told her to go and hide further away' (Caitucoli 1986: 131) All texts in Caitucoli 1986 support the addressee constraint on the deletion of verbs of saying. Data from Bidiya (East) provide additional support for the hypothesis that the absence of the verb 'to say' could be interpreted as resulting from the omis­ sion rather than the deletion of the verb. Alio and Jungraithmayr 1989 state that in Bidiya ďóoka is a complementizer ('subordinating conjunction' in their ter­ minology). If this is the case, then the following sentence would represent a case of the absence of the verb 'to say': (81)

ŋáa ŋu ŋunda báa 'ásàaga 3SG COMP 3PL 3PL NEG come NEG 'he told them not to come' (Alio and Jungraithmayr 1989:49, all glosses Z.F.)

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS

SAYING

135

The third singular form ŋáa is not listed as such in either the pronominal paradigms in the grammatical introduction or in the dictionary, nor is it listed in Alio 1986. Its closest form is ŋ, which is the third person masculine indepen­ dent form; Alio 1986:190-191 describes independent forms as those occurring with categories other than the verb. The forms with a lengthened vowel, viz. ŋáa and náa, are glossed as he said and she said' without any attempt to sepa­ rate the Bidiya forms into components. The analysis proposed by Alio is con­ sistent with traditional analyses in many grammars of Chadic languages (cf. also Wolff 1983), where it was inconceivable to have a clause without a verb; therefore complementizers were glossed as verbs despite the fact that they did not display characteristics of verbal morphology. I propose that ŋáa and náa are simply forms of independent pronouns. Since the independent rather than the subject forms of pronouns are used, the Bidiya example above provides evi­ dence for the omission of the verb 'to say'. Bidiya can also have the comple­ mentizer omitted, leaving only the subject pronoun in the matrix clause, e.g.: (82)

ŋáa ni 'ás bà nì goydù tí kídí 3SG 1PL come CONJ 1PL sit PREP earth 'he told us to come and sit down' (Alio and Jungraithmayr 1989:48, all glosses Z.F.)

Note that the first person plural pronoun ni in the first clause above is the sub­ ject form of the pronoun rather than dative or accusative form. Thus there is no addressee encoded by a separate form in the sentence above. Thus we have seen that in languages from all four groups (Mupun and Ngizim [West], Lamang, Xdi [Central], Bidiya and Kera [East] and Masa [Masa]), the verb of saying may be omitted. This omission takes place at a level different from the surface structure, as evidenced by the fact that the pronominal subjects are drawn from the independent rather than the clitic set. When the omission of the verb takes place, a preposition is used to encode the addressee in languages that have the addressee in the matrix clause. No preposition is used when the verb is not omitted. The verb-omission phenomenon has serious implications for the Case as­ signment hypothesis of grammatical theories that accepted Case theory. In lieu of the hypothesis that the verb assigns the case to a position, the verb-omission phenomenon provides support for the hypothesis proposed in the introductory chapter to this book, that the verb may serve as a reference point in configura-

136

COMPLEX SENTENCE

tional marking. In such languages omission of the verb requires deployment of other coding means, such as prepositions. But in languages where configura­ tion does not function as a role-coding means, the omission of the verb of say­ ing has no impact on the coding of arguments. Thus in Polish, where the role of arguments is coded by inflection rather than by configuration, the arguments retain their inflectional marking when the verb is omitted, e.g.: (83)

Na to ja mu że PREP DEM 1SG:NOMIN 3SG.M:DAT COMP nie wierze NEG believe:1SG.PRES 'then I [told/replied etc.] him that I don't believe [it]'

4.4.3 Verb omission and problems of reconstruction Since the phenomenon of omission of the verb of saying is so widespread among Chadic languages, one can ask whether the verb of saying might also have been omitted in Proto-Chadic, or whether omission is an innovation. And if it is an innovation, one should try to explain why this innovation took place in such a wide range of languages. The verb omission could also be an areal fea­ ture, considerably complicating historical reconstruction. Whether it is an areal feature could be checked on non-Chadic languages of the area, especially Fula (West Atlantic), Cross-River, and Kwa languages of the Niger-Congo family and Kanuri and other Nilo-Saharan languages. The following are results of my inquiries on various Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan languages spoken in the same geographical areas in which Chadic languages are spoken. In Fula, the vehicular language in Northern Cameroon, the omission of the verb 'to say' has not been observed (David Arnott, p.c.). In Kanuri, spoken in North-Eastern Nigeria and Northern Cameroon, the verb of saying cannot be omitted (John Hutchison, p.c.). Larry Hyman reports (p.c.) that this phenomenon does occur in the Grassfields Bantu languages (Niger-Congo). When the verb of saying is omit­ ted, a particle remains behind that serves the function of the verb of saying. Thus in the same geographical area some languages have verb omission and others do not. Since the omission of the verb of saying with the properties virtually the same as described for Chadic languages occurs in other languages, e.g. in Polish as

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS SAYING

137

illustrated earlier, it would appear, that it is a cross-linguistic phenomenon, which might have been already present in the PC stage. 4.4.4 An explanation of verb omission I propose that there are two factors that contribute to the omission of verb of saying in the surface structure of the sentence. One factor is pragmatic in nature and the other is synchronic, semantic, and historical simultaneously. The pragmatic factor involves the communicative role of the matrix clause containing a verb of saying in narratives and conversations. In those two and in many other types of language use, the content of the complement clause is new information. The matrix clause serves merely as an indicator of the source of the complement clause. In most Western cultures a conversation of the type Ί said . . . ' and 'He said . . .' and Ί said . . .' is frowned upon and often ridiculed as representing lack of conversational skills, poor education, and per­ haps lack of intelligence. In written literary prose, matrix clauses whose con­ tent consists of just a subject, nominal or pronominal, the verb 'to say', and a complementizer are omitted altogether, and instead graphic means such as in­ dentations, dashes, inverted commas are used to mark clauses as spoken by a character in the prose. It appears that in Chadic languages also, a matrix clause with a verb of saying merely serves as an indication of the source of the proposition. And as in the preferred styles of Western cultures, the matrix clause tends to be reduced. There are unfortunately not too many collections of Chadic texts with glosses and translations, and there are virtually no studies of these texts that would allow easy access to the required information. I exam­ ined all the texts in the Caitucoli 1986 collection of Masa folktales. The results fully support the hypothesis about the role of the matrix clause and about its form in the narrative. If we assume that the matrix clause consists of a subject, a verb of saying, and a complementizer, such a clause can be reduced first by the omission of the verb, next, by the omission of the complementizer, and fi­ nally, it may also be reduced by the omission of the subject, assuming thus the form of the quoted proposition in contemporary Western prose. I found no cases of the omission of the complementizer and the retention of the verb, ex­ cept when the verb was followed by an object and thus served as a reference point in configurational coding. There are no cases of the omission of the sub­ ­­ct with simultaneous retention of the verb and/or complementizer. Thus the hierarchy of omissions is as follows: Subject gizre

c~xi

saxaaa yuwa yuwre yuway, j8?W8 kiyuwa liyii yuwa yiwari ja?o YUW8 (tE) wi (yea::» YLwut8

209

210

COMPLEX SENTENCE

TABLE 5.1.(3) The verbs 'to say' and 'to ask' Language Higi Ghye HigiFutu Kapsiki FaH Kiria Fali Gili FaH Jilbu Fali Mucella Njanye Mwulyen Mandara Gisiga Mafa Xdi Bacama Gude Gudu Gal;wda Za5vana

ask (374)

speak, say (373) zilde dzito

yuwe skadzinjo

geze nute?

YLWUru?

gzUku

d'uti kwa5aw

nyu

d'uxwi dixi

gwaae @uno

hie

Uefo ndavandava tsfod', cfud' dzahad'd'awa diyo lugwic

Gava

mawlid'u: t1l.ga taga kw1l.raya kwargana

dUhau ndavyima ndavga ndly?a(ya) ncfidigana

Nakatsa Matakam

awata ged'e

davandava jlhede?e

Buduma Musgu Logone Daba

kanju na,na

cega,ji silba zama, zam nexu d'a!)

Mina Jaku Jara Bankala Yingilum Bidiya Dangla Mukulu Ngam Mobu

bi'i,ndanda re, I)i gad', tsa, hazlaw

mna humay a bwoyo

kaha ced'u lu naIJ fyre

ransaIJ umayribre

~aif>im

mis

ki,ly6te

banote

ba k1l.1l.we 'orM

lnde runde

gal kana suwa

mM! moo6

EMBEDDED INTERROGATIVES

211

TABLE 5.1. (4) The verbs 'to say' and 'to ask'

In many languages, instead of the verb 'to ask', the main clause may have the verb 'to say'. Thus instead of 'He asked whether . . . ' Chadic languages often have structures 'He said whether . . . '. The alternation between verbs 'ask' and 'say' is not astonishing given the fact that if the complement clause is encoded as interrogative, it does not make much difference what the verb of the main clause is, as long as there is no semantic conflict between the main clause verb and the complement. Such semantic conflict would, for instance, not al­ low for the main clause verb 'order' and the interrogative complements.

5.3

Interrogative complements in de dicto domain

In many Chadic languages the interrogative complements are encoded in the same way as indicative complements of verbs of saying. This indicates that the interrogative complements are in the de dicto domain. The specific means of encoding consists of the use of de dicto complementizers and/or order of clauses. 5.3.1 De dicto complementizers The use of de dicto complementizers with interrogative complements in Chadic is a frequent phenomenon in direct quotes, as in the following examples from Hausa (West) and Mesme (Masa):

COMPLEX SENTENCE

212

(1)

Sai ya tàmbàyenì cêwa, "an gyarà ne?" then 3M ask lSG COMP INDEF.HUMAN repair COP 'then he asked me saying, "have they fixed it?"' (Kraft 1963, 1:242-243)

(2)

Mi 'ìnnàhe: 'té'é, dáŋ hùm sú?' 3SG said COMP chameleon 2SG hear Q 'he said to him, "Chameleon, did you hear?"' (Fischer 1980:21)

The use of complementizers in indirect speech will be illustrated later for many Chadic languages. The presence of de dicto complementizers with direct or indirect speech is not a trivial matter. Note that in IE languages such a use would produce ungrammatical sentences, e.g.: (3)

*They asked that I ever was in Paris for 'They asked whether I ever was in Paris'

(4)

*Spytali ze byiem kiedys w Paryzu ask:3PL:PERF COMP be:lSG.M:PERF ever PREP Paris for 'They asked whether I ever was in Paris' (Polish)

Instead of de dicto complementizers, IE languages require in such a situation an interrogative complementizer, as in the following example from Polish and its English translation: (5)

Spytali czy bylem kiedys w Paryzu ask:3PL:PERF COMP be:lSG.M:PERF ever PREP Paris 'They asked whether I ever was in Paris'

An explanation of the use of de dicto complementizers in Chadic interroga­ tive complements involves one structural/functional constraint. The constraint consists of the fact that in many Chadic languages the interrogative marker comes in clause-final position and therefore it cannot serve the function of sepa­ rating the arguments of the two clauses. The de dicto complementizer, along with its inherent semantic properties, has the function of delimiting the scope of the interrogative and by the same token allowing the assignment of arguments to

213

EMBEDDED INTERROGATIVES

appropriate verbs. In the following sentence from Pero (West), there is no complementizer, and the sentence-final interrogative marker has as its scope the whole sentence rather than the embedded clause only: (6)

ka-a-men-ji-mu minu-n-cu dugun-i-m-a 2M-NEG-want-habit-lPL lPL-CONSEC-eat fig-DEF-NEG-Q 'don't you want us to eat the fig?' (Frajzyngier 1989a:258)

In the following sentence the scope of the sentence-final interrogative yákà 'how' is delimited by the complementizer cà: (7) said head-GEN turbulence COMP turn-HABIT how 'said the head of the turbulence: How does it turn?' (Frajzyngier 1989a:260) In Ngizim, the de dicto complementizer maa occurs after interrogative verbs, e.g.: (8)

nàa jaaya-gəri maa â nci bəji 1SG ask COMP 3SG want bran I ask him whether he wants any bran' (Schuh 1981b:316)

In Munjuk (Musgu dialect) an embedded yes/no question has the same form as a simple WH-question and is introduced by the complementizer buri or ba, e.g.: (10)

a silba -ŋ 6a a tala wala katai 3SG ask-PREV.REF COMP 3SG see thing one 'he asked him if he saw something' (lit. 'a thing') (Meyer-Bahlburg 1972: 226)

(11)

hancfa muta di DEM 1SG Q 'is it I?' (Meyer-Bahlburg 1972:164)

Cf.

di Q

COMPLEX SENTENCE

214

When the embedded interrogative is in the form of direct speech, ba does not appear in the complement In the example below, sentence-initial ba marks the conditional main clause, q.v.: (12)

6a dif a midi-ki, ki zi da a ma da COND man 3SG say-2PL 2PL do ? ? what Q 'if someone asks you, what are you doing?' (Meyer-Bahlburg 1972:227)

In Kera complements of verbs of asking, like those of verbs of saying, are marked by the complementizer míntí. The verb wáaté 'say' may take an inter­ rogative complement, as may other verbs, e.g., wonder, ask oneself, e.g.: (13)

Wə 3SG say COMP wife 3SG where Q 'hei asked where hisi wife was' (Ebert 1979: 239)

(14) people ask-3PL call COMP how then Q 'the people wondered (asked themselves) how that was then possible' (Ebert 1979: 239) In East Dangla, the main clause verb may be omitted, as in the case of verbs of saying, and only the complementizer structure remains, e.g.: (15) chief 3SG-say 2SG go where 'the chief said: "Where are you going?"' (Ebobissé 1979: 117) The verb of asking in Mesme is identical with the verb în 'say'. An interroga­ tive complement of în is preceded by the complementizer he and is marked, like a simple interrogative, by the clause-final particle sú, e.g.:

EMBEDDED INTERROGATIVES

(16)

Gmt-mUm jaa Pew-tf-Pew 'inim h~na he friend-3SG uncle Pew-ti-Pew say there COMP num ta h~na ka-tam su 2SG go there PREP-all Q 'his friend, Uncle Pew-ti-Pew, asked him there, if he should go with him' (Fischer 1980:94)

(17)

Mi 'inna he "Tt% dfuJ hUm su 3SG say COMP chameleon 2SG hear Q 'he asked: "Chameleon, have you heard?'" (Fisc her 1980:94)

215

Cf.

There are two possibilities with respect to the complementizer with interrogative embedded clauses. There may be no de dicto complementizer, preceding or following the embedded interrogative clause, or there may be one or more complementizers before (or after) the embedded interrogative. 5.3.2 Order of clauses as evidence of de dicto domain

In at least one language, Xdi (Central), the distinction between the domains de dicto and de re is encoded inter alia by the clausal order. The order embeddedmatrix encodes the domain de dicto and the order matrix-embedded encodes the domain de re. All interrogatives are semantically in the domain de dicto. Accordingly, embedded interrogative clauses should precede the main clause. And this is indeed the case, as seen in the following examples: (18)

zwan-a

ma-mu

x~n

ra ka

child-GEN mother-1PL.INCL Q COMP 3PL aawa-n-ta

amu

nda

ask-CAT-REF ASSOC IPL.INCL 'they asked us whether he is our brother' (19)

nda

s~na-ka

ta

gwaaa

xdf

ra ka

STAT know-2SG OBJ language Xdi Q COMP

a

nd-fi

3SG ASSOC-lSG 'he asked me whether you know Xdi'

216

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Noninterrogative complements, such as requests, follow the main clause, even if it is the same verb, e.g.: (20) ask-CAT-ask-lSG OBJ help-lSG PREP 3PL 'I asked them for help' In the following sentence, the meaning may appear to be that of an embedded interrogative. But the speech act is actually the one of request, and that is what is coded by the order main-embedded, e.g.: (21) ask-CAT-ask- 1SG SEQ FUT be able-SEP-be able-3PL IMPERFhelp-lSG-REF 'I asked whether they will be able to help me'

5.4

Interrogative complementizers

In some Chadic languages, in lieu of or in addition to the dicto complementizer there is another complementizer, which I will call interrogative complementizer. As illustrated before, the function of interrogative complementizer in English and Polish is to mark the clause that follows as interrogative: (22)

He asked me whether I had eaten

In some Chadic languages interrogative complementizers perform the same function as in IE languages, viz., they encode the interrogative modality of the clause. This function of the complementizer is motivated by the absence of other means of coding interrogative modality. Such is the case in Zaar (Sayanci, West), in which the main verb cot 'to ask' may be followed by the interrogative complementizer kó. In my field notes, such clauses do not have a clause-final interrogative marker:

EMBEDDED INTERROGATIVES (23)

217

. . 3SG ask 1SG Q 1SG see son 3SG 'he asked me whether I saw his son' (field notes)

An interrogative complementizer occurs also in Giziga (Central). Note that in the following sentence there is the interrogative complementizer då, but there is no clause-final interrogative marker: (24) lSG try-3SGif good NEG 1 am trying (to find out) whether it is good or bad' (Lukas 1970:79) Mina is a language on which I can illustrate the interrelationship between the interrogative complementizers and the other means of encoding interrogative modality. Matrix clause interrogatives are marked by the clause-final interrogative particle VÙ, e.g.: (25) 2SG Hina:SG Q 'are you a Hina man?' The embedded interrogative clause is marked by the sequence me-nä, which is glossed in Frajzyngier and Johnston (MS) as COMP, since it occurs in the complementizer position. I divide the sequence me-na into two morphemes be­ cause its first component me- occurs also in matrix interrogative WH-questions in this language. I consider me-na as a specifically interrogative complemen­ tizer marking the following clause as interrogative. And that is so because un­ like the matrix clause yes/no question, the embedded yes/no question does not have the clause-final interrogative vù, e.g.: (26) 3PL-ask-OBJ-lPL.EXC COMP COMP man son mother POSS: 1PL.EXCL 'they asked us if he is our brother'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

218 (27)

'lSG-ask3PL COMP COMP 3SG-help-OBJ-lSG be 1 asked them if they would help me' (28) 3SG-ask-OBJ-lSGCOMP COMP lSG-knowMina 'they asked me if I know Mina' The presence of interrogative complementizers in other Chadic languages cannot be explained by the same motivation, since in many of them the inter­ rogative clause, whether matrix or embedded, ends with an interrogative marker. The motivation for the presence of the interrogative complementizer may be different for different languages. Thus if a language can have a de dicto complementizer or an interrogative complementizer with an interrogative complement clause, the explanation must involve contrasting the two complementizers. In at least one language, Hausa, the interrogative complementizer encodes indirect speech as opposed to the de dicto complementizer, which encodes direct speech, e.g.: (29)

Kuma, yatàmbàyi jàma'a ko dà can, also 3M ask people whether past DEM lokàcìn dà yakè Sardauna-n Sakkwato, time when 3SG Sardauna-of Sokoto ya ta6a yi musù wani lâifi nè? 3SG ever do 3PL some wrong COP 'Further, he asked people whether in the past, when he was Sardauna of Sokoto, he did them any wrong' (Kraft 1963:238-239)

I propose that yet another function of interrogative complementizers is to delimit the scope of the interrogative. Given the fact that in most Chadic lan­ guages the interrogative marker occurs at the end of an interrogative clause, and that in many languages the complement clause is the second clause of the sen­ tence, the interrogative particle may, in the absence of other devices, be inter­ preted as having in its scope the whole sentence rather than the embedded clause only. Margi, a Central Chadic language, provides an interesting illustration. According to Hoffmann 1963, in Margi embedded questions are frequently introduced by tâdâ 'perhaps'. The question then follows as if it were a direct interrogative, but the interrogative particle at the end is omitted. Hoffmann does

EMBEDDED INTERROGATIVES

219

not provide an analysis of the omission or retention of tádá, instead giving ex­ amples, e.g.: (30) ask PREP daughter 2SG COMP like boy DEM '. . . ask your daughter whether she like this boy . . .' (Hoffmann 1963:101) There are, however, sentences in Margi in which both clause-final interrogative particles and the interrogative complementizer are present. I propose that in such cases their functions are quite distinct. Thus in the following sentence the clause-final interrogative particle has as its scope the main clause, while the in­ terrogative complementizer has as its scope the complement clause only: (31) know you COMP come he Q 'do you know whether he has come?' (Hoffmann 1963:101) Thus in Margi the occurrence of the interrogative complementizer is motivated by its function delimiting the scope of the interrogative. As described earlier in Chapter 3, in some languages two complementizers may occur in a sequence. One of these may be an interrogative complementizer. Such is the situation in Mupun, where the de dicto complementizer no is fol­ lowed by the interrogative complementizer ket, e.g.: (32)

n-tal pə wur a nə ket gwar kat lSG-ask PREP 3M COP COMP COMP 3M meet kə nalep-e PREP Nalep-Q 'I asked him whether he met Nalep'

(33)

mo tal pə war nə ket pa man an-a PL ask PREP 3F COMP COMP 3FL know 1SG-Q 'they asked her1 whether she1 knows me'

220 5.5

COMPLEX SENTENCE Yes/no questions and interrogative particles

In addition to properties already described, viz. the presence of complementiz­ ers and the clausal order, there remains only one component to be discussed with respect to yes/no questions, the interrogative markers that occur at the end of the embedded clause. As described in Frajzyngier 1985f such markers are different for yes/no and specific interrogatives. In Buduma, where embedded clauses precede the main clause, the interrogative marker occurs in sentence-internal position, e.g.: (34)

lúgu jâree-a kindaatoo moo-me-no man be right-Q now lPL-see-lPL 'whether the man is right we will now see ' (Lukas 1939:79)

(35)

gáunau a 2PL come Q 'have you come?' (Lukas 1939:78)

(36)

mána yomaa-ro ba gécuei ? word this- for Q 2SG cry '(because of) these words you cry?' (Lukas 1939:79)

(37)

gehámai ba 2SG hear Q 'do you hear?' (Lukas 1939:78)

Cf.

Cf.

In East Dangla embedded yes/no questions have the verb of asking in the main clause, followed by the complementizer, i.e. pronoun-s, followed by the com­ plement clause having a verb or verbs in the future tense, just like complement clauses of verbs of obligation. The interrogative complement has a clause-final interrogative particle gá, (all examples analyzed by Erin Shay, p.c., from data provided by Younous Sopoyé), e.g.: (38)

no ìndad-gu no-s ŋu-u gèdìre 1SG asked-3PL lSG-say that:3PL-FUT be able ŋú-no gàaye gà 3PL-1SG help Q I asked them if they could help me'

EMBEDDED INTERROGATIVES

221

(39) 3SG asked-lSG 3SG-COMP 1SG know-IMPF-3SG.F word REL X-DEM Q 'they asked me if I knew the language of X' (language of such-and-such a place') (40) 3PL asked-1PL 3PL-COMP 3SG brother-1PLQ 'they asked us if he was our brother'

5.6

Specific (WH) questions

Embedded interrogative clauses with WH-questions appear to have the same form as matrix clause WH-questions. More specifically, the WH-word occurs in situ, i.e. in the place the argument occupies in the noninterrogative clause. The complement clause has a clause-final interrogative marker if the corresponding interrogative matrix clause has a clause-final interrogative marker. The WH-interrogative complements have the same clausal properties as yes/no complements with respect to clausal order. There is, however, one important difference with respect to the presence or absence of complementizers. If the yes/no complements have the de dicto complementizer, then the WH-complements will also have the de dicto complementizer. But the WH-questions do not have the specific interrogative complementizer. Mupun (West) is a good language to illustrate both of the properties with re­ spect to complementizers. In many yes/no complements it has two or even three complementizers. In WH-questions it may have only the de dicto com­ plementizer no. The specific interrogative markers occur in clause-final and sentence-final position: (41)

war tal a wi pa na komtak dəsə yi 3F ask COP who woman F-such-and-such this 'she asked, "who would be this woman?'"

COMPLEX SENTENCE

222 (42)

n-tal pə wur a nə gwar sin a lSG-ask PREP 3M COP COMP 3M give COP mi n-nalep-i what PREP-Nalep-Q 'I asked him1 what did he1 give to Nalep'

(43)

n-tal pə wur a nə gwar kaat kə lSG-ask PREP 3M COP COMP 3M meet PREP nalep a ni Nalep COP where I asked him where did he meet Nalep'

In Mina (Central) the WH-word occupies the clause-final position, the posi­ tion it has in the matrix interrogative clause. The question about human partici­ pants in the event in the matrix and in the complement clause is marked by clause-final vi, e.g.: (44) mbí ví child who 'who's he?' / 'who's she?' (Frajzyngier and Johnston, MS) In the complex sentence the de dicto and the interrogative complementizers both occur, giving the sequence síme-ná. (45) lSG-ask COMP COMP INF-help-OBJ-lSG who T asked who would help me' (Frajzyngier and Johnston, Ms) In East Dangla the WH-questions have the matrix verb inde 'ask' followed by the complementizer, viz. the pronoun-s form. The verb is in the future tense. The WH-word occurs in the same sentence position as the sentence ele­ ment it replaces and is followed by the interrogativegà, e.g.: (46) 1SG asked 1SG-COMP who IMPER Q FUT-1SG help 'I asked who could help me'

EMBEDDED INTERROGATIVES (47)

223

no tee maa ga 3SG asked-1SG 3SG.M-COMP 1SG ate what Q 'he asked me what I ate'

(48) 3SG.F asked- 1SG 3SG.F-COMP 1SG slept where Q 'she asked me where I slept' The order of clauses is illustrated on data from Xdi. In Xdi, the interroga­ tive WH-complement precedes the matrix clause, whereas noninterrogative complement, with virtually the same clausal structure minus the clause final in­ terrogative particle nå, follows the matrix clause, e.g.: (49) what thing PAST IMPERF eat-2SG Q COMP ask-CAT-REFPREP 1SG 'he asked me what I ate' Cf. (50) ask-CAT-ask ASSOC 1SG OBJ thing PAST IMPERF eat-lSG 'they asked what I was eating' (lit. 'they asked the thing I ate') In many languages the de dicto complementizer occurs with WH-questions as it does with the yes/no questions. In Kera (51) 3SG say COMP: woman-1SG where Q 'he asked: where is my wife?' (Ebert 1979:260) (52) 3SG say COMP woman 3SG where Q 'hei asked where hisi wife was' (Ebert 1979:260) In other languages the de dicto complementizer does not occur in sentences with WH-interrogatives, e.g.:

224

COMPLEX SENTENCE

In Daba (Central): (53) neighbor 1PL there 3SG say what do-3SG what 'Our neighbor said: What did it do?' (Lienhard and Giger 1975: 97) An interesting exception in the formation of specific interrogative comple­ ment clauses is provided by Buduma. Most simple questions have a sentencefinal interrogative particle ba, a, or wa, e.g.: (54)

ge-hâmai ba? 2SG-hear Q 'do you hear?' (Lukas 1939:78)

Lukas states that indirect questions that are introduced with an interrogative pronoun are handled in the same way. His examples, however, do not contain interrogative particles, e.g.: (55)

5.7

ci nandu-mu oni hógei mo-meno this day- 1PL who man see- 1PL 'we will see who this man is' (Lukas 1939:79)

Deontic complements after verbs of asking

Recall that in the dialect of Munjuk (Musgu) as described by Meyer-Bahlburg 1972, the same complementizer bo, ba is used after the verb 'say' (direct and indirect speech) and 'ask' if the latter has a de dicto complement, e.g.: (56)

ni a moda ba muta mu pai-di Yudeakai 3SG say COMP 1SG chief 'He said, "I am the king of the Jews'" (Meyer-Bahlburg 1972:225)

EMBEDDED INTERROGATIVES (57)

225

. lion 3S ask-3SF COMP . . . 'The lion asked her . . . ' (Meyer-Bahlburg 1972:225)

If, however, the complement is de re rather than de dicto, such as when asking for an action, a different complementizer, buri, is used, e.g.: (58)

5.8

a midi-ni buri a ka si homok-ni 3S ask/tell-3S COMP 3S bring 3S? head-3S.POSS 'He asked him to bring him his head' (Meyer-Bahlburg 1972:220)

Conclusions

Embedded interrogative clauses in Chadic are considered to be in the de dicto domain. The evidence for this conclusion is provided by the fact that in lan­ guages from all branches the de dicto complementizer may mark the interroga­ tive complement. The interrogative modality of the embedded clauses in some languages is encoded in the same way as in the matrix clauses, viz. through clause-final interrogative markers. The presence of the de dicto complementizer is motivated also by another function, viz. by the need to separate arguments so that they are appropriately assigned either to the verb of the main clause or to the verb of the embedded clause. In some languages in lieu of or along with the de dicto complementizer there may also occur an interrogative complementizer. The presence of the interroga­ tive complementizer correlates with the absence of clause-final interrogative markers. The complementary distribution of the two devices supports the hy­ pothesis about the modal function of complementizers. The de dicto comple­ mentizer can occur with either yes/no questions or specific questions. But the interrogative complementizer cannot occur with specific questions. Once again, the absence of the interrogative complementizer in specific questions correlates with the presence of specific interrogative markers in the complement clause.

6 COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

6.1

Issues and scope of the chapter

Some of the standard issues in the discussion of the complements of volitional verbs are the form of the complement clause, the use of complementizers, the modality of the complement clause, and the identity of the subjects of the main and the embedded clauses. Complements of volitional predicates in Chadic are interesting because of the diversity of syntactic structures they present. Two main variables within Chadic that are not present in IE languages are (1) For same-subject complements, i.e. complements whose subjects are identical with the subject of the matrix clause, there are structures with and structures without overt coding of the subject in the embedded clause, sometimes within the same language; (2) Unlike in IE languages, the de dicto complementizers may occur even with same-subject complement clauses, i.e. structures corresponding to example (1), which are ungrammatical in English, are grammatical in several Chadic languages: (1)

*He wants that he go(es)

The third point of interest is that there are structures that display phenomena usually associated with subject-to-object raising. These structures appear to have a different motivation than do the raising structures of IE languages. The explanation of raising phenomena in Chadic languages may shed light on rais­ ing phenomena in IE. (4) The last point of difference is the coding of the mood of obligation in the complement clauses, often referred to as 'subjunctive': whereas one expects this mood in embedded clauses with a subject different from that of the matrix clause, in Chadic languages it can also be found in samesubject clauses. I believe that finding an explanation for these variables is a more important task than reconstructing the complementation of volitional verbs in Proto-

COMPLEX SENTENCE

228

Chadic, because such an explanation would shed light on more general issues concerning grammaticalization and language structure. The syntax of volitional verbs in Proto-Chadic would have to follow one or more of the patterns to be discussed below. I will attempt to find out whether there is a connection among these variables, more specifically, whether one can find a cause and effect rela­ tionship among them. The rest of the chapter is organized as follows: I discuss the means available in Chadic languages, first lexical, i.e. the types of volitional verbs, and then grammatical, including the nonfinite form of the verb, overt marking of same-subject complement, complementizers, deontic markers, and 'subject-to-object raising'. After this presentation of the formal means, I show how they interact in the coding of modality and embedded clause-subject cod­ ing.

6.2

The problem of the infinitival complements

The infinitive form plays an important role in complement clauses of volitional verbs in IE languages. The infinitive is the most frequent form of the verb in the same-subject embedded clauses, as in the following examples from Polish and English (translation): (2)

Jan chce iść Jan want:3SG:PRES go:INF 'Jan wants to go'

If the subjects are different, some languages do not allow the infinitive form and others do, as in the following example in Polish, which does not allow the in­ finitival form and in its English translation in which the infinitival form is the only one allowed: (3)

Jan chce ze-by Piotr poszedl Jan want:3SG:PRES COMP-COMP Peter go:3SG:PERF 'Jan wants Peter to go'

The two examples indicate that even in IE languages infinitive forms are not used in the same functions across languages. The infinitive form of the verb could be defined on morphological grounds as the form that does not code a person or number of the subject and does not

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

229

code tense. Such a definition does not distinguish between various forms of the verb in English, that are similar in not encoding features mentioned above but that differ in other respects. Such a definition is not particularly useful for Chadic languages either because many, if not most verbal forms in those lan­ guages do not encode person, gender, or tense, the first two variables being en­ coded in pronominal forms and/or as far as tense is concerned by separate morphemes altogether. As to number, most Chadic languages encode the num­ ber of an intransitive subject and a transitive object and the plurality of action (cf. Frajzyngier 1965, 1985c, Newman 1990b). The only Chadic languages that may be said to code the person and number of the subject of an intransitive and the agent of a transitive on the verb are those in which the category subject is marked by verbal suffixes. A functional equivalent in Chadic of the IE nonfinite forms are verbs without an accompanying nominal or pronominal subject clitic within the same clause. One could of course abandon the morphological definition of the category and try to arrive at a syntactic definition of the infinitive form that would be valid cross-inguistically, such as defining the form by the constructions in which it occurs. Such a definition cannot be valid because different forms may be used in the same syntactic constructions, as illustrated by examples with dif­ ferent subjects in complement clauses in Polish and English. One could also attempt to provide a definition that fuses morphological, syntactic, and semantic criteria, such as 'the nominal form of the verb whose main function is to ex­ press in a pure form the process expressed by the verb' (Marouzeau 1951). Such a definition is not particularly useful either because of the inherent ambi­ guity of the term 'pure form'. The category 'infinitive' has been postulated in some Chadic languages. My own experience even with speakers with little education points to the exis­ tence, in some languages, of a lexical form whose semantic function is to name the process without at the same time naming the participants in the process. When one asks the naive question, 'How do you say "to eat'", a speaker with­ out any formal education in and about his own language is faced with two problems. One is to understand the semantic or syntactic function of the English or French infinitive form. The other is to choose among the varieties of forms available in his language the best equivalent of what he understands to be the meaning of infinitive. Some speakers may choose a form with a subject, some may choose an imperative. I have also heard speakers choose a form without any subject or object. Although such a form would qualify as infinitive in one semantic interpretation, this form does not necessarily share the syntactic

230

COMPLEX SENTENCE

properties of IE infinitives, i.e., it does not occur in the same types of construc­ tions as IE infinitives. In addition, some Chadic languages have other nominal forms derived from verbs, and the use of these forms may partially overlap with the use of IE infinitives. In the ensuing discussion I use the term 'nonfinite' to refer to a variety of verbal forms used in clauses without any tense or aspect coding.

6.3

De dicto complementizer with volitional verbs

The occurrence of the de dicto complementizer after volitional verbs is a fact that requires an explanation. In English the de dicto complementizer 'that' cannot occur after volitional verbs. In French it can occur, but it is followed by the subjunctive mood in the complement clause. In Polish the de dicto complemen­ tizer ze can occur, but it must be immediately followed by a deontic comple­ mentizer by. For most Chadic languages the descriptions available do not con­ tain an analysis of when the complementizers do occur and when they do not. Hence the analysis that follows should be considered very tentative. If the complement of the matrix verb is propositional, the occurrence of the de dicto complementizers can be motivated by several factors, some semantic and some syntactic. The semantic factors have their locus in the nature of the complement clause. The complement clause of a volitional verb is always in the irrealis domain, the domain that shares semantic and coding devices with the de dicto domain (cf. Frajzyngier 1991a). Hence the grammatical system encodes the complement of volitional verbs in the same way that it encodes the comple­ ments of verbs of saying. There are potentially several syntactic motivations for the occurrence of de dicto complementizers. One involves the lexical properties of the volitional verbs. I propose that if the verb is inherently of the 'like' type, i.e., its un­ marked argument is nominal, then the complementizer is more likely to occur with a sentential complement than if the verb is of the type 'want', i.e., its in­ herent unmarked argument is propositional. The second motivation may result from a process of grammaticalization whereby the de dicto complementizer has become an argument separation marker. Its presence is therefore not motivated by the embedded clause modality. Within one language there may be some sentences in which the complement clause is preceded by a complementizer and others without a complementizer. I propose that the function of the de dicto complementizer can be explained if one

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

231

takes into consideration other means available in language for the encoding of epistemic and deontic modalities and also the means of encoding the role of ar­ guments. The de dicto complementizer may thus have different functions in dif­ ferent languages. 6.4 Subjunctive mood in the embedded clause Many Chadic languages have inflectional devices for the coding of the mood of obligation. In some languages, e.g. Hausa, these devices are overtly marked on obligatory pronominal forms; in other languages they are marked on verbs. There are also languages in which the mood of obligation is marked by free morphemes, and I discuss these below under the heading 'Deontic complemen­ tizers'. All means whose primary function is to mark the mood of obligation occur in either simple sentences or complex sentences. The coding of a different-subject in an embedded clause in IE languages often involves the mood of obligation in the complement clause, coded by in­ flectional devices or by a complementizer. If the subjects of the main and the complement clauses are the same, the mood of the complement clause is indica­ tive. In some Chadic languages the subjunctive mood is used even with samesubject clauses. That means that in Chadic languages the coding of the mood of the embedded clause is not a means to indicate different subjects but, rather, has some other function. The question is whether subjunctive forms in Chadic have a different func­ tion/meaning from subjunctive forms in IE languages, or whether Chadic lan­ guages have encoded more semantic distinctions with respect to same-subject complements of volitional verbs. In view of the fact that descriptions of indi­ vidual Chadic languages do not provide a synchronic answer to this question for the realm of one language, any generalizing hypothesis would have to be very tentative.

6.5

Deontic complementizers

Deontic complementizers in Chadic, unlike de dicto complementizers, may oc­ cur in the simple sentence or in the complex sentence. Some languages that have deontic complementizers are Mupun, Sura, Angas (West), Ga'anda, and Gidar (Central). These complementizers may occur either in clause-initial posi­ tion, e.g. in the Angas subgroup and in Ga'anda, or in clause-final position, as in Gidar.

232

COMPLEX SENTENCE

If a language has two complementizers that may follow a volitional verb, then their modal functions are different. The distribution of functions between the de dicto complementizer and the deontic complementizer or other devices marking the mood of obligation in the embedded clause is as follows: The de dicto complementizer does not carry the implication that the subject of the clause wants an event of the embedded clause to happen. The de dicto complementizer indicates simply the de dicto domain, whereas the deontic complementizer indi­ cates the actual wish of the subject for the event of the embedded clause to oc­ cur. Thus in Mupun when the complementizer ne occurs after a volitional verb, it has the property of converting the clause to the meaning it would have if it actually had a verb of saying. Thus a verb dém 'to want' when followed by the complementizer no means 'agree', e.g.: (4)

n-cfem nə wa cet mbise n-darap lSG-want COMP 3F cook food PREP-Darap 'I agree that she cook for Darap'

Cf. a sentence with the deontic complementizer, which is a discontinuous marker in Mupun, ke. . . di: (5)

n-dem  n-war cet mbise di n-darap lSG-want COMP PREP-3F cook food ANAPH PREP-Darap 'I want her to cook for Darap'

In Kanakuru (West) same-subject or different-subject complement clauses after volitional verbs are preceded by the marker bəla, which Newman 1974 calls a 'subjunctive marker'. This marker is also a deontic marker marking the mood of obligation, and it occurs in several types of complex sentences, includ­ ing adverbial clauses, marking the purpose clause. I propose that the most compelling reason for the presence of the subjunctive marker is the fact that the volitional verb jindài has as the primary meaning 'desire, love'. The verb has not yet acquired the meaning of 'wishing for an event to happen'. It is this meaning that is encoded by the use of the subjunctive marker and the subjunc­ tive mood in the verb of the complement clause. (6)

Ngójèshìi jindài bàia wúm penti Ngoje 3M love COMP rub on paint 'Ngoje wants to paint it' (Newman 1974:49)

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

233

Similarly in Ga'anda (Central). The language has three variants for the samesubject complements of volitional verbs, with no overt coding of the subject of the embedded clause. The first type does not have a complementizer, and the verb in the embedded clause is in the indicative mood (all data from Ma Newman 1971): (7)

yax-incə xur mbaala like-1SG brew beer Ί like beer-brewing'

I interpret this sentence as having the same meaning as its English translation, i.e., the sentence does not imply a wish on the part of the subject for the event to occur. The second type has a complementizer but no overt marking of the subject in the embedded clause: (8)

-ə sə ə xur mbaala like-lSG COMP7/EXT? SUBJ brew beer Ί like brewing beer'

This sentence has a clausal rather than a nominalized complement, but again it does not indicate a wish on the part of the subject for the event to happen. The third type has a complementizer and the subjunctive mood in the embedded clause. Such sentences express the wish of the subject for the event of the em­ bedded clause to occur, e.g.: (9)

6.6

yax- ince sə ə xur-i mbaala like-lSG COMP? SUBJ brew-SUBJ beer Ί like that I brew beer'

Same-subject coding

6.6.1 Types of constructions When the subjects of the main and the embedded clauses are the same, the most economic way of coding same-subject in the embedded clause is by not coding it overtly. This is the norm in IE languages and also the case in many Chadic

234

COMPLEX SENTENCE

languages. But there are Chadic languages in which the subject of the embed­ ded clause is overtly marked even when it is identical with the subject of the matrix clause. There exist in fact five different means involved in same-subject complements of volitional predicates in Chadic languages: (1) no overt coding of subject; (2) nominalization of the verb of the complement clause, with overt coding of subject of the complement clause; (3) subjunctive coding of the em­ bedded clause, with overt coding of the subject of the embedded clause; (4) de dicto complementizer, with overt coding of subject of the complement clause; (5) deontic complementizer, with overt coding of subject of the complement clause. The deontic complementizer and the inflectional subjunctive coding do not cooccur in a sentence, such a possibility being excluded by their functional properties, viz. encoding of the same modal values. In some languages the de dicto and deontic complementizers may cooccur in a sentence. 6.6,2 Hypothesis: Types of volitional predicates and overt same subject The presence of different types of complement clauses for the same-subject re­ quires an explanation. The main question is whether the occurrence of one type rather than the other is fortuitous? I will show that the two types are in fact conditioned by language-internal factors. More specifically, I propose that the fundamental factor affecting overt marking of the same-subject is a lexical prop­ erty of the volitional predicate. Let us call the the verbs that inherently take nominal arguments 'like' verbs and verbs that take propositional arguments 'want' verbs. The 'like' verbs may be said to share a characteristic of not im­ plying any subsequent action or event. If the volitional predicate is of the 'like' type, then the same-subject is more likely to be overtly marked. If the volitional predicate is of the 'want' type, i.e., it expresses wishes and desires for some­ body to do something or to be in a certain state, then the same-subject is not overtly marked. This group of verbs usually implies subsequent action or event, even when followed by a nominal argument. Thus in English, 'I like Black Forest cake' does not imply a wish for a subsequent action. The clause 'What are you going to do about it?' is not felicitous follow-up in a conversa­ tion. On the other hand 'I want Black Forest cake' can be felicitously followed up by 'What are you going to do about it?' The meaning 'want' in the sense described appears to be a later development across languages (cf. IE *eu in Watkins 1976b). The two types of verbs have the following subcategorization properties: Uke [Subject, NP]

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

235

want [Subject, S] The use or nonuse of the overt subject markers and/or complementizer can be explained by the subcategorization properties of volitional verbs.

6.7

Volitional predicates in Chadic

Jungraithmayr and Shimizu 1981:315 postulate the following roots for the verb 'want': * n d1, dm, kd. Some of these roots also have other meanings that may indicate the various sources from which the lexical meaning 'want' developed, e.g. *ndl 'thirst', dm 'desire', kd 'lack'. No other volitional verbs are recon­ structed in that work. It would be important to have the reconstructions of other desiderative verbs. In particular, reconstructions of the verbs 'like', 'love', 'desire', often realized by the same verbal form in Chadic, would have been extremely useful for the study of the complementation of volitional verbs. In addition verbs of saying are used in many languages as matrix verbs in voli­ tional expressions. The syntax of the latter type is discussed in the section dealing with deontic complementation of verbs of saying. In at least one lan­ guage, Gidar (Central), in lieu of a volitional verb, one may use a periphrastic construction. Along with the verb 'want' in that language, there is a construc­ tion whose literal meaning is 'to have the mouth on' and that also expresses wish, desire, etc. I propose that contemporary Chadic languages display three types of voli­ tional predicates. (1) There is only one verb whose primary meaning is the equivalent of 'like'. Part of the meaning of such a predicate is that it does not imply any subsequent action or event. The inherent syntactic property of such a verb is to have a nominal complement. When such a verb is to be followed by propositional rather than nominal complements, some means must be used to override the inherent syntactic properties of the matrix verb. There are two possibilities in making possible a propositional complement to follow such a verb: Nominalization of the complement clause, thus making the clause to comply with the syntactic property of the verb, and overt coding of subject, re­ gardless of whether the subject is the same or different.

236

COMPLEX SENTENCE DIAGRAM 6.1. One verb one meaning VERB

LIKE The other possibility attested in some languages is that there is one verb with two subcategorization properties, one nominal and the other propositional. It has two meanings, 'like' and 'want'. Most probably, the option of having a clausal complement (the meaning 'want') is historically secondary, i.e., it is a semantic and syntactic extension of the meaning 'like'. This is illustrated in the following diagram: DIAGRAM 6.2. One verb two meaning

In such languages the same-subject of the complement clause is not overtly coded. And finally in some languages there are at least two different verbs, one of which subcategorizes for nominal complements (like) and the other for proposi­ tional complements (want), as illustrated in the following diagram. The verb 'want' is not expected to have an overt same subject, but the verb 'like' may have an overt same-subject if followed by a clausal complement.

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

237

DIAGRAM 6.3. Two verbs two meanings VERB

VERB

LIKE

WANT

Table 6.1 lists the forms for various meanings. Note that in all languages like' and 'love' either have the same form or only one verb is given in the sources consulted, e.g. 'like' or love', but not both. Given these data, we may assume that Proto-Chadic did not lexicalize the frequent distinctions in IE languages between equivalents of love' and like'. The last column indicates whether same-subject is overtly coded. TABLE 6.1. (1) 'want', like', and love' Language Hausa Pero Bole

'want' so menndol-

'like' so menndol

'love' so menndol

S subject overt yes no yes/no

COMPLEX SENTENCE

238

TABLE 6.1. (2) 'want', 'like', and 'love' LanS!!age Munjuk Gidar Logone Buduma Gisiga E. Dangla Sokoro CL) Somrai CL) Mubi CL) Mukulu (L)

'want'

'like'

diri kay

fu]la,

Kera Lele Kwang Mesme

rele rob deleke

'love' firiyi g~la

~m,wa

li

wad',wud' eJle garago ur 'jem de'-u, di'-e

S subject overt yes no bra 'not want'

li

tUre

wad', wud' tUre garago ur

ese 'not want' geyy-is6, giyy-e

rele rob

be

(Abbreviations in the table: (H) -Hoffmann, (L)-Lukas) The table shows that in the great majority of languages the verbs 'like' and 'want' are identical. Moreover, when these verbs are different, the verb 'want' is identical with some other verb in the language, such as 'search'. The verb 'like, love' is identical also with some other verbs, such as 'having sexual intercourse' (Mukulu [Mokilko], Jungraithmayr 1990). Based on these data we may assume that Proto-Chadic did not lexicalize the distinction between 'like' and 'want', i.e. between a desiderative verb that takes nominal arguments and a desiderative verb that takes propositional arguments. I propose that the primary syntactic property of the verb 'like, love' was to be followed by nominal rather than clausal arguments. The subcategorization for propositional complements represents a secondary development in these verbs. The presence of overt subjects in clausal complements of volitional verbs provides the support for this hypothesis.

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

239

6.7.1 Evidence for the hypothesis: No overt coding of the same subject To prove the hypotheses stated we must look at type III lexicalization-s (two verbs, two meanings), where we would not expect the same subject overtly coded with the verb meaning 'want', i.e., the inherent meaning of the verb in­ cludes having a propositional complement. In such circumstances I take the ab­ sence of overt coding of the same subject to be the unmarked, or default, case, not requiring additional explanation. In type I lexicalization the same subject may be overt or the verb is nominalized. Therefore we cannot use type I lexicalization as evidence. Type II lexical­ ization, showing that same-subject is not overtly coded, would be explained by the hypothesis, thus providing a support for it, but it will not be the evidence for hypothesis. The limited data available support the hypothesis. 6.7.2 Type III lexicalization (two verbs, two meanings) Type III lexicalization represents a stage in evolution in which each of the meanings 'like' and 'want' is coded by separate lexical items. For like' only the nominal complement is expected, and for 'want', only the propositional complement is expected. Accordingly, the complement of 'want' does not have to occur in its full clausal form because the hearer expects that what follows the matrix verb is a proposition rather than a noun. Mupun (West) has two desiderative verbs. The complement of the verb 'want' has no overt same-subject coding. The verb of the complement clause is preceded by a preposition: (3)

n-dem η-man ar də mo cin di lSG-want PREP-know way REL 3PL do 'I want to know how they do it'

(4)

wa də dem n-cet gwom 3SG PAST like PREP-cook food 'she liked to cook'

Mandara (Central) has at least two desiderative verbs, viz. hàya 'like' and kátà 'want'. The verb haya takes nominal complements, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

240 (5)

like-EXT-like food DEF 3SG cook DEM DEF 'he liked the food that she cooked' The verb kátà takes only verbal complements, and same-subject is not overtly coded. (6) 1SG want eat food T want to eat' Different subject is overtly coded by a nominal or pronominal form, but there are no other markings, e.g.: (7) 3SG want 1SG go 'he wants me to go' Gidar (Central) has several desiderative expressions. The verb káy 'search' has been extended to mean 'want'. According to the hypothesis, the embedded clause has no overt subject. The verb of the embedded clause occurs in nonfinite form in Gidar, characterized by the verb-initial e and verb-final à, e.g.: (8) cow 3M PROG search buy 'he wants to buy a cow' The evidence for the primary meaning of the verb káy is provided by clauses where it is the only verb, e.g.: (9) cow 3M PROG search 'he is looking for a cow [to buy]' The periphrastic desiderative expression in Gidar 'to have the mouth on' may also take nonfinite clausal complements, e.g.:

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

241

(10) mouth-1SG PREP on eat I wanted to eat'

past

(11) mouth-3M PREP on 'he wanted to eat'

eat past

There are some sentences in Gidar that appear to have same-subject coding in the embedded clause, e.g.: (12) mouth-1PL PREP PREP go-lPL 'we want to go' Such sentences may be analyzed as having same-subject coded in the embedded clause. Such an analysis is, however, not correct in view of the fact that the presence of Intransitive Copy Pronouns, i.e. pronouns having the same referent as the subject (if any) and usually marking the inceptive aspect, is not condi­ tioned by the type of clause in which they occur but rather by the nature of the verb and function of the Intransitive Copy Pronouns. Some verbs in Gidar take Intransitive Copy Pronouns either in both the matrix and the embedded, e.g.: (13) mouth 3PL PREP go-3PL 'they want to go'

mouth 3M on go-3M 'he wants to go' Here is an example of an Intransitive Copy Pronoun occurring in a simple clause:

from Djabe 3M PROG come-3M 'he is coming from Diabe'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

242

Thus the occurrence of same-subject suffixes in embedded clauses in Gidar is unrelated to the overt same-subject coding in other languages. But the occurrence of the same-subject coding in the embedded clause is re­ lated to the syntactic properties of the desiderative verb. 6.7.3 Type II lexicalization (one verb, two meanings) Type Π lexicalization has volitional verbs that can take either the nominal or the propositional complement. When the propositional complement is involved, its same-subject is not overtly marked. The verb of the complement clause most often has the nominalized form, i.e. the form that can take possessive suffixes and can occur as an argument of the verb, e.g. subject, object, and perhaps other arguments as well. I cannot ascertain, however, whether all verbal forms used without subjects in complement clauses are in fact nominalized or not. For some forms given below, I have evidence that they indeed are nominalized. But it is possible that the unmarked form of the verb is also used in same-subject complement clauses. For Pero (West) I have recorded only one desiderative verb mén- that can take either nominal or propositional complements. (15)

èlénkò cì mén-ji dígà mée-tù mínà because REL want-ΗΑΒIT marriage return-VENT home 'because he wanted to marry, he returned home'

(16)

dóojè kà-cégèt nì-mén-jì tomorrow PREP-morning lSG-want-HABIT kà -n-wát-tù yí káarì û mìnáa-nò 2M-CONS-come-VENT make test PREP house-I SG Ί want you to come tomorrow morning to perform a test at my house'

The nominalization in this language consists of adding a suffix -aanì to the verb, if the verb alone is the complement of the verb 'to want', e.g.: (17)

nì-mén-jì cò- áanì lSG-want-HABIT drink-NOMIN Ί want to drink' (Frajzyngier 1989a:255)

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

243

Bole, which belongs to the same subgroup of West Chadic as Pero, presents an interesting variation with respect to same-subject coding. The same-subject of the embedded clause is not overtly marked for the third person, but it is overtly coded for the first person, e.g.: (18)

isin ndolu ndeyi 3M want go:NOMIN 'He wants to go'

(19)

ita ndolu te-yyi 3F want eat-NOMIN 'She wants to eat' First person subject: (20) η ndolu η te-yyi lSG want 1SG eat-NOMIN 'I want to eat' The only desiderative verb found in Burquest's 1973 grammar of Angas is rot The evidence that the predicate of the complement clause is nominalized in Angas is provided by the possessive construction in which one element is the verb and the other is its object linked to the verb with a possessive marker. (21)

Musa rot dyip ke-shwe Musa want harvest POSS-corn 'Musa wants to harvest corn' (lit. 'Musa wants harvesting of the corn') (Burquest 1973:80)

In Gude (Central) the verb uucfe is glossed by Hoskison 1983:286 as 'want, like, love'. There is also another desiderative verb, maa'u 'want, desire, need' (Hoskison 1983:233), but I did not find examples of its use. Nominalization is marked by the suffix nə: (22)

pooshi ki ka uucfe  - nə ka ci 3SG NEG 3F POT want see-VN ? 'she did not want to see him' (Hoskison 1983:140)

Gidar (Central) has two different predicates. The verb 'like' ŋgel takes nominal complements, e.g.:

244

COMPLEX SENTENCE

(23) FUT:1SG need I need clothes'

cloth-PL

(24) lSG-like-PERF zizzay 'I like sauce zizzay' (25) lSG-like-PERFfood 3F-cook-3M-PERF 'I like the food she cooked' In propositional complements, the main predicate is a periphrastic expres­ sion consisting of the noun må 'mouth', followed by a possessive pronoun or a noun, followed by the preposition kà 'on'. The literal meaning of the expres­ sion is '(have) mouth on'. As expected, this expression has no overt coding of same-subject in the complement clause. The nominalized form consists of the prefix ə and the final vowel -a suffixed to the verbal root. Both of these vowels are most often dropped in the nonpausal position. When the subjects of the main and the embedded clauses are identical, the nominalized verb is used in the embedded clause, e.g.: (26) mouth-lSG PREP on eating 'I want to eat' (27) mouth-1SG PREP on T want to eat meat'

eating meat

(28) mouth-2PL PREP on eat past Q 'did you want to eat' If the verb in the embedded clause is a verb of movement of the type that takes intransitive subject suffixes, such suffixes occur also in the embedded clause even if the subject of the matrix clause is the same, e.g.:

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

245

(29) mouth 3M on go-3M 'he wants to go' (30) mouth 1PL PREP PREP go-lPL 'we want to go' (31) mouth 3PL PREP go-3PL 'they want to go' The presence of the subject of the complement clause is conditioned here by the nature of the verbs rather than by the status of the embedded clause. Intransitive verbs in Gidar, as in many Chadic languages, may take subject pro­ nouns, which have been referred to as Intransitive Copy Pronouns (ICPs). The role of these pronouns is most often to encode inception of an action or an event. And that is why they are retained in the embedded clause in Gidar. In Kapsiki (Central) in complement clauses of the volitional predicate do 'wish, want, like, love' (Smith 1969:130), the verb of the complement clause is not followed by the possessive suffix. Instead it is preceded by the preposition ka, marking purpose: (32)

ka de nde ka-lí. . . IMPERF want she PREP-go 'she wants to go . . . ' (Smith 1969:130)

(33) 1SG wish PREP-eat 'I wanted to eat' (Smith 1969:102) In some languages there may be more than one verb of type II, i.e. a verb meaning both 'like' and 'want'. Xdi (Central) has verbs kuma and dva, both having the two meanings 'like' and 'want' and occurring in the same syntactic environments. It appears that kuma expresses a more hypothetical meaning.

COMPLEX SENTENCE

246

(34) SEQ IMPERF want-POT-2SG OBJ stay-ABS PREP Tourou 'if you want to live in Tourou . . .' (35) DEM woman REL want-1SG OBJ choose-UP-REF for take-POT lSG DEM COP woman REL Xdi SEQ 3SG 'the woman whom I choose for marriage should be Xdi' (36) PAST IMPERF want-POT-3PL OBJ leave-POT-GEN-1P1.INCL 'they wanted us to leave' (lit. 'they wanted our leaving') 6.7.4 Overt coding of the subject of the complement clause: Type I According to the hypothesis proposed earlier, the same-subject of the comple­ ment clause is overtly coded when the verb of the matrix clause is inherently of the 'like' type, i.e., its unmarked frame involves a nominal rather than a propositional complement. The propositional complement is not expected after this verb, and therefore whenever a proposition has to be included, it takes the form of a full clause. The verb of the complement clause may have the same form as the verb of the matrix clause or be in subjunctive mood, as described later in the present chapter. In Hausa, the verb so, so (verbal noun) like, want' can take both nominal and propositional complements. The primary meaning of this verb is 'like'. When the verb takes propositional complements, same-subject is overtly marked, e.g.: Nominal complement: (37)

'ita, kuma, ta 'amsâ ta-nâ so-n-ka 3F also 3F answer 3F-PROG love-GEN-2M 'She, for her part, she answers she loves you.' (Kraft 1963:238-239)

Propositional complement:

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

247

(38) but after that 1SG want 1SG:SUBJ strengthen friendship nan DEM REL IMPERF between-GEN-lPL 'But, after this, I want to strengthen friendship this that is between-us' (Kraft 1963:238-239) In Daffo-Butura (West) the verb in the complement clause has the same form as in the matrix clause, e.g.: (39)

cuh 2SG want 2SG eat 'you want to eat/will eat/are going to eat' (Jungraithmayr 1970:201)

In Ngizim there are two related verbs ncí and ntuutu, both meaning like, want'. The second of these verbs has a nonstative meaning, such as 'come to like' (Schuh 198lb: 129). The verb ncí can take nominal or propositional com­ plements. Same-subject propositional complements may have a nominalized verb without overt subject coding, e.g.: (40) 1SG want shoot I want to shoot' (Schuh 198lb: 123) (41)

wunya-gaanai, nà nci dlam-dii-wa daughter-lSG lSG want do-? to-lPL.INCL bii-k rama something-GEN speech 'my daughter, I want to have a word with you (i.e. do to us something of speech).' (Schuh 1972: 295)

In another option, same-subject is overtly coded, and the predicate of the com­ plement clause is in the subjunctive mood, e.g.: (42) 1SG want 1SG show PREP-3SG plan 'I want to show him a plan' (Schuh 1981b:123)

248

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Schuh does not explain the difference in meaning between the two options. But since the two options exist, we must assume that they have different functions. In Cibak there are several types of structures used for equivalents of voli­ tional predicates. One of them involves the progressive/future tense marker, which is cognate with the form of the 'to go' in many West Chadic languages. In such a sentence the complement clause has no overt subject marker, e.g.: (43) 1SG PROG go PREP Kano again I want to go to Kano again/I will go to Kano again' (field notes) There are also several volitional verbs, e.g. bara, tukur/tukwar, and yidu, but I have no information about the differences between them. Same subject is overtly marked in the embedded clause. The complement clause has the same coding for mood and aspect as the matrix clause, e.g.: (44)

ya ka tukur ya ka tira aka ya 3SG PERF want 3SG PERF go PREP 1SG? 'he wanted to go with me' (Hoffmann 1955:146)

In East Dangla which does have a distinction between 'like' and 'want', same-subject after the verb 'want' may be overtly marked, but according to a language assistant, this option is not preferred, e.g.: (45) 3PL want 3PL-FUT leave 'they want to leave' (Sopoyé, p.c.) (46)

Even if ä language may appear to have two different volitional verbs, com­ plements of such verbs may still have same-subject overtly coded. I assume that the reason fof this must lie in some inherent properties of the verbs. This is the case in Mukulu (East). The verb dé'é is translated by Jungraithmayr 1990:79 as 'chercher, vouloir, avoir besoin, préférer'. The verb 'óssé is trans­ lated as 'insister pour obtenir qqch; vouloir toujours plus; manger glouton-

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

249

nement' (Jungraithmayr 1990:158). Thus the difference between the two verbs is not one between a verb having inherently both a nominal argument ('like') and a propositional argument ('want') but rather between two different verbs having inherently a nominal argument like'. (47) 1SG lSG-want:PERF lSG-finish-PERF work 'I want to finish the work' (Lukas 1977:194) (48) 1SG lSG-want:PERF lSG-kill -3SG?-FUT 'I want to kill him' (Lukas 1977:200) The same-subject clauses as given above do not differ from different-subject clauses in which the subject of the matrix clause is not coded as the object of the matrix clause, e.g.: (49) 1SG lSG-want:PERF 2SG.M/F/3SG.M /F-finish-PERF work 'I want you(m.)(f.)/him/her to finish the work' (Lukas 1977:194) In at least one language, Lele (East), same-subject may or may not be overtly coded with the same verb. The conditions on the coding of the samesubject are linked with the type of complementizer used in the clause. Lele has two complementizers, the de re complementizer gō and the de dicto comple­ mentizer nā. The verb in the embedded clause occurs in the impera­ tive/subjunctive form. If there is only one, the de re complementizer gō, the same-subject is not overtly coded, e.g.: (50) 1SG-HAB want COMP go 'I want to go' If the sentence has two complementizers, the de re complementizer gō and the de dicto complementizer nā, the same-subject is overtly coded. Here are some examples: First person subject:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

250 (51)

1SG-HAB want COMP COMP 1SG- go 'I want to go' (52) 1PL-EXCL FUT want COMP COMP lPL.INCL go-lPL 'we would like us to go' Second person subject: (53) 2M-HAB want COMP go-Q 'do you want to go?' (54) 2M-HAB want COMP COMP2M-goQ 'do you want to go?' Third person subject: (55) want-3M/3F COMP COMP-3M/3F go 'he/she wants to go' Cf. (56) want-3M/3F COMP go 'he/she wants to go' The presence of the de re complementizer go does not require the presence of the full clause as a complement. The presence of the de dicto complementizer nā requires the presence of the full clause as a complement, including the overt subject in the embedded clause. All sentences with same-subject overtly marked confirm the hypothesis. Additional evidence is provided by sentences with different subjects, where the subject of the embedded clause must be overtly marked.

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS 6.8

251

Complements of the verb 'please'

In at least one language, Buduma (Central), there is one more type of volitional predicate that requires overt coding of same-subject of the embedded clause. These are predicates of the type 'please', i.e. verbs in which the experiencer is not coded as the subject but rather as the direct or indirect object. In such sen­ tences, if the experiencer of the matrix clause is also the subject of the embed­ ded clause, the experiencer must be overtly marked in the embedded clause. With respect to Buduma, Lukas says (1939:68) that the phrase li ga- 'be pleas­ ant to' replaces the verbs 'want' and 'like', e.g.: (57)

domo a-li ga-u o-to 1SG ?-be pleasant to-lSG lSG-buy 'I want to buy' (Lukas 1939:68)

(58)

dánemoa-li ge-η ja 3SG ?-be pleasant to-3SG NEG 'he doesn't want to' (Lukas 1939:68)

The syntax of the verb 'please' in Buduma differs from the syntax of similar verbs in other Chadic languages and in IE languages where the subject of the embedded clause is not overtly marked. In Mupun (West) the experiencer is marked by the locative preposition η 'to', and the complement clause is marked by the purpose marker mbə. Same subject of the embedded clause is not overtly coded, e.g.: (59)

də dien η-war mbə cet gwom n-yak sə PAST like PREP-3F PREP cook food PREP-now ba wa dem kas NEG 3F like NEG 'she used to like to cook, now she does not'

Similarly in French same-subject is not overtly coded, and the verb of the em­ bedded clause must be in the infinitive, e.g.: (60)

ça me plairait de partir en vacance DEM 1SG please PREP depart.INF PREP vacation 'I would like to go on vacation'

252

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Overt coding of subject with the subjunctive mood produces an unacceptable sentence: (61)

me plairait que je partes DEM 1SG please COMP 1SG depart-SUBJ en vacance PREP vacation for I would like to go on vacation'

As with the other volitional verbs, I attribute the differences between the syntax of Buduma 'please' and its counterparts in other languages, such as those illus­ trated in Mupun and French, to the lexical properties of the verb. The verb li in Buduma differs from its counterparts in other languages in that the experiencer is coded not only as dative/benefactive but also as subject, as the two examples above illustrate. Its syntactic properties are therefore similar to what came to be called 'middle' voice in IE languages, i.e. the voice in which the subject is af­ fected.

6.9

Different subject

6.9.1 Role of complementizer Coding of different-subject implies overt coding of the subject of the comple­ ment clause. In type I lexicalization (like'), coding of different-subject does not differ from coding of same subject because both types of subject must be overtly coded. Munjuk is an example of such a language. Note, however, that the de dicto complementizer plays a role in the distinction between same-subject and different-subject sentences. If the subjects are the same, the complemen­ tizer may be omitted, e.g.: (62) 1SG.IMPERF want COMP 1SG take book 'I want to take this book' (Tourneux, MS)

DEM

If the subjects are different, the complementizer cannot be omitted, e.g.:

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

253

(63) 1SG.IMPERF want COMP 2SG.IMPERF eat 'I want you to eat' (Tourneux, Ms) The presence or absence of the complementizer in Munjuk is not linked to deontic modality coding. The language has two moods, imperative and indica­ tive. In matrix clauses with deontic modality, the imperfective indicative form of the verb is used, e.g.: (64) 2SG.IMPERF stop 'stop' (65) 3F.IMPERF stop 'let her stop' Since coding of different subjects requires an overt subject in the embedded clause, the only interesting issue remaining is how the modality of the embed­ ded clause is coded. 6.9.2 Deontic modality and different subjects With same subject, deontic modality, even if theoretically possible, is a marked case. With different subjects, deontic modality is, however, not necessarily automatically implied. Thus in English the subject of the embedded clause may be the patient or affected argument, as in : (66)

I want the dog to be treated humanely

Since the semantic role of the subject of the embedded clause is not predictable in Chadic or other languages, the deontic modality of the embedded clause must be marked by some means, such as the subjunctive mood or by a deontic com­ plementizer. Chadic languages use the deontic modality markers in most in­ stances of different-subject complements of volitional verbs. The following are some examples of the use of deontic modality markers with different subjects of the complements of volitional verbs.

254

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Pero (West) the complement clause is preceded by the deontic complemen­ tizer mú, which also occurs in simple clauses. (16) want-HABIT SUBJECT-3F COMP-eat SUBJECT-3PL 'she wants them to eat' (17) 1SG-want-HABIT COMP-CONS-make thick 'I like it thick' The following sentences illustrate the use of mú in the simple sentence: (14) OPT-3F-come-VENT 'let her come' (67) oh, 2 REP OPT speech stop 'oh, you let the talk stop' (2REP =2 person reported speech) In Kanakuru (West) deontic modality is marked by the subjunctive form of the verb, e.g.: (68) Ngoje 3M love COMP 3M rub on paint 'Ngoje wants him to paint it' (Newman 1974:49) Cf. the example given earlier: (69) Ngoje 3M love COMP rub on paint 'Ngoje wants to paint it' (Newman 1974:49) (70) woman PERF pay money because COMP 3F help 3F 'the woman1 paid money in order that she2 help her' (Newman 1974:49)

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

255

.(71) woman PERF pay money because COMP help 3F 'the woman l paid money in order to help her' (Newman 1974:49) In Mupun (West) the complement of the embedded clause with a different-sub­ ject must be preceded by the optative (subjunctive) marker ke and the locative preposition n, e.g.: (72)

n-dem kə n-mo cin cfi lSG-want OPTPREP-3PL do OPT 'I want them to do it'

Pa'a is one of the languages in which there is no complementizer, and the verb in the embedded clause is in the subjunctive mood, e.g.: (73) 1SG.CONT want 3PL.SUBJ split wood I want them to split firewood' (74)

shikwo-nin na na-ka hwo ka sitting:VN-lPLPOSS EMPH 3SG-REL. CONT want:VN REL 'he wants use to sit' lit. 'our sitting he is wanting.'

In Tera (Central) there is no complementizer between the main and the em­ bedded clause, but the embedded clause is in the subjunctive mood, e.g.: (75)

tem â ndola Ali kə don kəba 1PL PROG want AH SUB J build room 'we want Ali to build a room' (Newman 1970:68)

In Daba the complementizer ká is used for the same and different subjects. When the subject is the same, the complementizer precedes the verb of the em­ bedded clause, and the subject of the embedded clause is not overtly marked, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

256 (76)

1PL want (COMP ka + va 'go')go 1PL 'we want to go' (the first plural kwăŋ is an ICP pronoun rather than subject) (Mouchet 1967:77) Coding of different subjects in Gidar (Central) is achieved through two means. As expected, the subject of the embedded clause is overtly marked. But in addition, there is the clause-final marker of obligation g6nl, which also codes obligation in the simple clause. Recall that Gidar has two predicates ex­ pressing wish, one periphrastic and the other lexical. When the matrix clause has a periphrastic predicate 'to have the mouth on', there is no de dicto com­ plementizer, e.g.: (77) mouth-1SG 3 come-PLSUBJ 'I want them to come' In East Dangla the de dicto complementizer may but does not have to occur with different subjects, which indicates that it may carry a semantic or pragmatic function. Recall that with same-subject complements in which the same-subject is also overtly coded, no complementizer occurs. According to Ebobissé 1979, but not confirmed by our data from Sopoyé, simple sentences predicates ex­ pressing an obligation, a wish, an intention, or a command have a final -u or -a, depending on verb class and are preceded by subject prefixes, e.g.: (78) 3PLdie:SUBJ 'They should die' (Ebobissé 1979:65) (79) 3SG go:SUBJ 'He should go' (Ebobissé 1979:65) (80) 3SG swea:SUBJ 'He should swear' (Ebobissé 1979:67)

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

257

According to Ebobissé 1979, the mood of obligation in the embedded clause is marked by the subjunctive form of the verb as well, e.g.: (81) 2SG want 2SG-COMP 3PL come:SUBJ 'You want them to come' (Ebobissé 1979:118) Data from Sopoyé, p.c., as analyzed by Erin Shay, point to the use of the future tense and the infinitive form of the verb in the embedded clause as a means of coding obligation, e.g.: (82) 3M want 3M-COMP 3M-FUT 'he wants me to leave'

leave

(83) 3F want 3F-COMP 1PL-FUT leave 'she wants us to leave' (84) 3F want 3F-COMP 1PL-FUT leave 'she wants me to leave' It appears that the two means of realizing mood of obligation, viz. (COMP) SUBJECT :FUTURE VERB (INF) and (COMP) SUBJECT VERB (SUBJUNCTIVE) are a result of two different grammaticalization processes. The use of the subjunctive marker in the embedded clause does not require any explanation because it is consistent with the primary function of the subjunctive marker as evidenced by its use in simple sentences. The use of the future marker to encode the mood of obligation results from the common properties of the deontic mood and the future, both of which indicate an event that has not yet happened, a hypothetical event. The mechanism for this usage of the future is a metaphorical process, made possible by the secondary semantic feature the two categories have in common. In Bidiya (East): The de dicto complementizer precedes the embedded clause, but the marker of obligation du is added to the verb of the embedded clause, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

258 (85)

noo 1SG want COMP come-SUBJ I want him to come' (Alio 1986:295)

Recall that Lele (East) has two complementizers, the de re complementizer go and the de dicto complementizer nă, and both of them can precede the com­ plements of a volitional verb. In deontic complements the verb is marked by the subjunctive/imperative form, which also occurs in simple sentences. (86) lSG-hear COMP want-3M COMP COMP lSG-go.IMPER 'I heard that he wants me to go' (87) lSG-want COMP COMP go.EVIPER 'I want him to go' Recall that the presence of the de dicto complementizer nā requires overt coding of the subject of the embedded clause, e.g.: (88) lSG-want COMP come-3M I wanted him to come' Gude is a VSO language in several aspects, including perfective, e.g.: (89)

kə nee nyi ka dəgəla PERF see I to pig 'I saw the pig'

(90)

kə kii Musa kada PERF throw Musa stick 'Musa threw/has thrown a stick'

In complements of volitional verbs as well as in consecutive and other types of second clauses in the sentence, the order is SVO, e.g.:

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

259

(91)

ka uudənə nə nyi ka Musa a shi ASPECT want SM ISO COMP Musa NEUTRAL come Ί want Musa to come' (Hoskison 1983:89) (SM= subject marker, ka is a potential aspect and purpose marker) Cf. purpose clauses: (92) ə gi Musa ci a a b ma'inə PERF go M. 3SG NEUTRAL find water Musa went (in order to) find water' ( Hoskison 1983:89) (93)

6.10

ə hwiipaa mahəra acii ga tii a PERF ran away thief PURPOSE NEG they NEUTRAL əsətə tə ci catch DO him 'the thief ran away so that they wouldn't catch him' (Hoskison 1983:134)

Third person subject inclusion and exclusion

The notion of same-subject should be divided into two subclasses, one where the third person singular subject of the matrix clause is included in the third per­ son plural subject of the embedded clause, and the other where the subject of the matrix clause is not included in the subject of the embedded clause. In English this distinction has not been grammaticalized, that is, whether the sub­ ject of the matrix clause is or is not included in the subject of the embedded clause is not coded in the grammatical system. Thus the following sentence is ambiguous with respect to the subject inclusion: (94)

He wants them to go

In some Chadic languages this distinction has been grammaticalized. As in the case of complements of verbs of saying, languages use different devices to en­ code inclusion and exclusion of the third person subject of the matrix clause in the group of the third person plural subject of the embedded clause. In the pre­ sent section I discuss two languages: Lele ( East) and Mina (Central).

COMPLEX SENTENCE

260 6.10.1 Subject inclusion in Lele

For the first and second person, the subject of the embedded clause is marked in the same way as the subject of the matrix clause, viz., the subject occurs before the verb, e.g.: (95) 1PL.EXCL FUT want COMP COMP lPL.INCLgo-lPL 'we would like us to go' (Note that the order of first person plural inclusive in the matrix clause and the first person plural exclusive in the embedded clause is logically impossible.) If the third person subjects are the same or constitute a group where one subject is included in the group represented by another, then the third person subject in the embedded clause occurs before the verb (the normal order of the matrix clause is for the third person subject to be suffixed to the verb), e.g.: (96) want-3F COMP 3PL go 'she wanted them to go' (she is a part of them) (97) want-3F COMP 3PL go 'he wanted them to go' (he is part of them) Compare third person subject exclusion, marked by the position of the third person subject following the verb of the embedded clause: (98) want-3F COMP go-3PL 'she wants them to go' (she is not part of them) 6.10.2 Subject inclusion in Mina In Mina the information on whether the third person singular subject of the ma­ trix clause is a part of the group represented by the third person plural subject of the embedded clause is encoded in the grammatical system. To encode the ex-

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

261

clusion Mina uses the third person plural independent pronoun in addition to the subject pronoun of the embedded clause, e.g.: (99) 3SG-want 3PL 3PL-REL-go 3PL(ICP) 'she1 wants them2 to go' (she is not one of 'them') To encode the inclusion of the third person singular subject in the group of the plural subject of the embedded clause, only the subject pronoun of the embed­ ded clause is used, no third person independent pronoun, e.g.: (100) 3SG-want 3PL-REL-go 3PL(ICP) 'shel wants them to go' (she is one of 'them') The marking of exclusion in Mina by the overt marking of the pronoun has been recorded in other languages and can also be seen in English with respect to the third person plural. The sentence with the overt pronoun indicates different subjects; the form without the overt marking of the pronoun indicates identical subjects, e.g.: (101) They wanted them to go (102) They wanted to go

6.11

Problem of 'raising'

In some languages, including English, one can observe the phenomenon that used to be called subject-to-object raising in earlier versions of the GB theory, whereby the subject of the complement clause is coded as the object of the ma­ trix clause, e.g.: (103) I want him to mail this letter today I believe him to be a good hunter Earlier GB analyses explained the phenomenon by the Case filter requirements that all overt NPs to have an abstract Case assigned; by the property of nonfinite form of the verb, which does not assign Case; and by the Case-assigning prop-

262

COMPLEX SENTENCE

erty of the matrix clause verb, by which the subject of nonfinite verb of the em­ bedded clause has a Case assigned by the verb of the matrix clause. The subject of the embedded clause is 'raised', as it were, to become the object of the matrix clause. Contemporary GB theory has abandoned the subject-to-object raising part of the explanation for such sentences and instead postulates Exceptional Case Marking, whereby the verb that does not normally assign Case across some syntactic barriers does it with respect to subjects of nonfinite clauses (for a discussion of the problems involved cf. Haegeman 1991, Ch. 3 and Ch. 10). The distinctive characteristic of the phenomenon, namely, the presence in the matrix clause of a direct object coreferential with the subject of the embed­ ded clause, can be found in some Chadic languages. Data from Chadic lan­ guages that do have 'raising' provide interesting insight into the nature of this process, which puts in doubt the earlier GB analyses of raising and provides a nonarbitrary motivation for the contemporary analyses. The following issues merit an investigation: Why do some Chadic languages display 'raising' and others do not? Why within the same language for the complements of the same verb is 'raising' sometimes present and sometimes not? Both of these questions can be answered if a proper answer is found for the fundamental question about the nature of the 'raising' phenomenon, viz. the question about its motivation. An additional question, whether the motivation across languages is the same or whether different languages have different motivations for the same phe­ nomenon, will not be explored in detail, but I do attempt to extend the analysis to English, an unrelated language that has figured prominently in discussions about raising. Volitional verbs and verbs of perception in Chadic, more than any other types of verbs, display raising phenomena, and they therefore provide a useful source of examples for the discussion of the problem. 6.11.1 'Raising ' or embedded subject coding in the matrix clause In what follows I address the syntactic nature of the raising, viz. whether in­ deed the subject of the embedded clause is encoded only once, as an object of the embedded clause, or whether the object of the embedded clause is simply coreferential with the subject of the embedded clause but is represented by a dif­ ferent morpheme. Data in most Chadic languages provide evidence for the latter analysis, although there are languages for which the former analysis is valid. First I deal with languages that support the analysis of two coreferential mor­ phemes.

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

263

Mupun (West) presents counterevidence to raising and evidence for independent encoding of the embedded clause subject. Deontic complements expressing wish are coded by a complementizer consisting of a sequence of markers ko n followed by a pronoun. The marker is otherwise an associative marker in Mupun, and n is a locative preposition. The structure of the whole sentence is: The symbol N1 stands for noun, which repre­ sents the subject of the embedded clause. The embedded clause retains its own subject, hence there is no raising, and the presence of the subject pronoun fol­ lowing the complementizer is not a result of raising but rather of a phrase structure rule that requires the subject of the complement clause to be encoded in the matrix clause as well. (104) an mbə dem kə n-ha a ji (cfi) 1SG FUT want COMP PREP-2M 2M come OPT n-jiŋ PREP-Jing 'I want you to come to Jing' (105) an mbə dem kə n-yi 1SG FUT want COMPPREP-2F cfi n-an OPT PREP-1SG I want you to cook for me'

yicet mbise 2F cook food

In Bole, the complements of volitional verbs have different form for differ­ ent persons. In the first and third person, the subject of the embedded clause is encoded only once, as a suffix to the matrix clause verb, hence analogous to raising in English, (all Bole data from Maher Awad, p.c.), e.g.: (106) n-ndol-ta te-yyi lSG-want-3F eat-NOMIN I want her to eat' (107) itandol-na te-yyi 3F want-lSG eat-NOMIN 'she wants me to eat'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

264

(108) n ndol-ta mon-i 1SG want-3F know-NOMIN 'I want her to know' (109) n ndol-ta mon-i mose ye 1SG want-3F know-NOMIN story 'I want her to know the story' (110) n ndol-ta mon-i-no 1SG want-3F know-NOMIN-1SG 'I want her to know me' (111) n ndol-ni mon-i 1SG want-3M know-NOMIN 'I want him to know (it)' If the subject of the embedded clause is second person, then such a subject oc­ curs as object of the matrix clause and also as the subject of the embedded clause, e.g.: (112) n-dol-ka ka te lo lSG-want-2SG 2SG eat meat I want you to eat meat' I do not have enough data to state what the function of the 'raised' subject is in Bole, but the important fact is that the conditions for raising are not syntactic, such as the absence of the case assigner for the subject. If the conditions were syntactic, one would expect the same form conditions for all person. Since the conditions are different, one must look for other factors. In Mukulu (East) the subject of the embedded clause is encoded as the ob­ ject of the matrix clause but also as the subject of the embedded clause. The verb in the complement clause is in the perfective aspect. It would appear that the marker that otherwise serves as aspectual marker in embedded clauses ac­ quires a modal function, namely, obligation, e.g.: (113) lSG-want.IMPERF 2SG 2SG-worship-PERF Ra (God) I want you to worship God' (Lukas 1977:194)

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

265

(114) lSG-want.IMPERF 3SG 3SG-EPENTH-flee-PERF 'I want him to flee' (Lukas 1977:195) In Daba the raising phenomenon is similar to the IE pattern in that the sub­ ject of the embedded clause is coded only once as the object of the matrix clause. But Daba presents even more interesting counterevidence to the raising analysis. When the subjects of the main and the embedded clauses are differ­ ent, the complementizer occurs after the raised subject of the embedded clause. The evidence for the raised subject is provided by the fact that pronominal sub­ jects of the embedded clause occur in their object rather than the subject form, e.g.: (115) ta may ho ka sa 1SG want 2SG COMP drink I want you to drink* (Mouchet 1967:77) (116) ha may siŋ ka va 2SG want 3SG COMP go 'you want him to go' (Mouchet 1967:77) (117) ta may tini ki fidi ksəm tân, amma, 1SG want 3PL COMP greet body 3PL.POSS but ta may hin ku wuzh I want 2PLOPT hit 'I want them to greet each other, but I don't want you to hit' (Mouchet 1967:82) In closely related Mina, there is no raising with volitional verbs. The com­ plementizer used with different subjects is si (the same-subject clauses have the infinitive marker ke preceding the embedded verb), but its use is optional and in fact the complementizer is not used in most sentences, e.g.: (118) 3SG-want COMP lSG-sell cattle-1SG 'he wants me to sell my cattle'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

266 (119)

3SG-want lSG-go 1SG(ICP) 'he wants me to go' The verb 'want, try' cannot have a nominal object in Mina, i.e., it subcategorizes only for the propositional complement. That explains why the comple­ mentizer is not an obligatory component of the complement of this verb. (120) 3SG-want lPL.INCL-go lPL.INCL.(ICP) 'he wanted us to go' (121) lPL.EXCL-want 2PL-go 2PL(ICP) 'we wanted you to go' (122) 3SG-want lSG-go-DIST VENT 'he wanted me to come' (123) lSG-wantREL-go-DIST VENT I wanted him to come' (124) 3SG-want 2SG-go-DIST VENT 'he wanted you to come' Lele (East) provides evidence that the raising of the subject of the embedded clause does not correlate with the presence or the absence of the complemen­ tizer. Recall that the language has two complementizers. If the subject of the embedded clause is nominal rather than pronominal, it always occurs after the de re complementizer gō. The occurrence of the nominal subject after the de re complemntizer gō but before the de dicto complementizer nā should be analyzed as an instance of raising, e.g.:

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

267

(125) lSG-want COMP COMP Canige go:IMPER 'I want Canige to go' The occurrence of the nominal subject after the complementizer nā should be considered an instance when the subject of the embedded clause remains in its position, e.g.: (126) lSG-want COMP Canige COMP go:IMPER 'I want Canige to go' 6.11.2 Raising—a means or a result Whereas older GB analyses explicitly stated that raising is a result of the need to satisfy Case assignment, more recent analyses only imply this. An alternative analysis of the phenomenon would be to state that raising is not a result of re­ quirements of one or the other module of grammar but rather is a grammaticalized device to encode a semantic, pragmatic, or perhaps some other function. If raising is a result of some syntactic constraints imposed by a module of gram­ mar, one would expect to find it whenever the proper syntactic conditions are met. If raising is a grammatical device with a specific semantic or pragmatic function, then its occurrence cannot be predicted. In what follows I show that in a number of languages the occurrence of the embedded subject as the object of the matrix clause cannot be predicted from syntactic conditions. I also pro­ pose that the function of encoding of the embedded subject as the object of the matrix clause is to mark realis, and the absence of such coding indicates hypo­ thetical mood. In Pero (West) subject raising occurs in some but not in other sentences, e.g.: Raising: (127) lSG-want-HABIT-PRE.PRO-OBJ-3MCOMP-CONS-eat 1 want him to eat' (PRE.PRO refers to the vowel marker -ee preceding some object pronouns, cf. Frajzyngier 1989a)

268

COMPLEX SENTENCE (128) ka-a-men-ji-mu minu-n-cu dugun-i-m-a 2M-NEG-want-habit-lPL lPL-CONS-eat fig-DEF-NEG-Q 'don't you want us to eat the fig?' (129) lSG-want-HABIT-2F 2F-CONS-cook-VENT NEG-3F-NEG 'I want you to cook, not her'

The evidence for the raising rule is the presence of the third person pronominal object -ni following the verb mén-. Absence of raising can be seen in a hypo­ thetical clause, where the hypothetical mood has as its scope the subject of the embedded clause, e.g.: (130) lSG-want-HABIT OPT-CONS-eat food much OPT-CONS-grow 'I want him to eat a lot of food so that he grows' Hence, in exactly the same syntactic and semantic conditions, viz. the same verb in the matrix clause and the same deontic modality of the embedded clause, the raising construction is optional rather than obligatory. Thus in Pero, raising is not a result of some syntactic constraints but rather is a grammatical means to encode the modality of the subject of the embedded clause. The object of an embedded clause cannot be raised in Pero. (131) lSG-want-HABITREL-CONS-cook-VENT fish NEG-meat-NEG T want fish to be cooked, not meat' The second question is whether the raising phenomenon in Pero is the same as the raising phenomenon in some IE languages, viz. whether indeed the subject of the embedded clause becomes the object of the matrix clause through raising or perhaps through some other process. With respect to the process of raising, I propose an alternative analysis, viz. that the matrix clause encodes indepen­ dently the subject of the embedded clause without accompanying raising. The argument in support of independent coding is provided by sentences in which the subject of the embedded clause is coded as the object of the matrix clause but also is overtly coded as the subject of the embedded clause. Both of the sentences above provide examples of the double coding of an argument, once as

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

269

an object of the matrix clause and the second time as a subject of the embedded clause. In Mandara (Central) raising phenomena are observed with some subjects of embedded clauses but not others. This fact alone indicates that raising is not a result of some syntactic constraints, such as Case filter, but rather is a coding device with a semantic or pragmatic function. Only first person singular sub­ jects of the embedded clause are coded as objects of the matrix clause, e.g.: No raising: (132) 3SG want 3PL go 'she(l) wants them(l/2) to go' (133) 1PL want 2PL go 'we want you to go' (134) 3PL want 1PL go 'they wanted us to go' (135) want-lPL-PERF 2PL go 'we wanted you to go' (136) want-lSG-PERF 3SG come I wanted him to come' (137) want-PERF 2SG come 'he wanted you to come' Raising: (138) want-PERF-lSG lSG go 'he wanted me to go' Cf.

270

COMPLEX SENTENCE (139) 1SG want eat food I want to eat'

An additional evidence for a functional load of raising is provided by the fact that even with the first person singular, raising is not obligatory, as shown by the following example: (140) 3SG want 1SG go 'he wants me to go' I had no chance to conduct a separate study of the raising phenomenon in Mandara. Since the sentence with raising is in the past tense and the sentence without raising is in the present, it is possible that the raising phenomenon in Mandara may also be linked to the realis (raising) versus irrealis (absence of raising) distinction. Mukulu (East) is another language that provides evidence for the functional load of raising. The same verb with the same person may have the object op­ tionally coded in the matrix clause, e.g.: Raising: (141) lSG-want 2SG 2SG-marry INTENSIVE T want you to marry' (Lukas 1977:200) (142) 1SG want 3SG 3SG-3SG(OBJ) ask PERF T want him to ask him' (Lukas 1977:194) Cf. the following sentence where the subject of the embedded clause is not coded as the object of the matrix clause: (143) 1SG lSG-want 2M /2F /3M/3F-finish-PERF work I want you(m.)/you(f.)/him/her to finish the work' (Lukas 1977:194)

COMPLEMENTS OF VOLITIONAL VERBS

271

Lukas does not offer any explanation for the differences in meaning or function (if any) between the two types of constructions. Note, however, that the last sentence, the one without raising, is an elicited sentence, hence a sentence about some hypothetical participants, a sentence in a hypothetical mood. The connection between English 'raising' after the verb 'want' and Chadic coding of the subject of the embedded clause is now quite transparent. The English verb 'want' is used only for realis wishes and cannot be used for hypo­ thetical wishes, hence the grammaticality and ungrammaticality of the following sentences: (144) I want you to have more pudding *I want you to have three hands (145) I want to be an engineer *I want to be the Emperor of China (146) I want the Emperor of China to visit my class *I want the deceased Emperor of China to visit my class Thus coding through raising in English and coding through raising in Chadic languages perform exactly the same function, that of coding realis. The differ­ ence between Chadic languages and English is that in English the verb 'want' is inherently realis, but in Chadic languages volitional verbs are not inherently realis. Raising encodes realis; absence of raising encodes hypothetical and most probably also polite forms.

6.12

Conclusions

Complements of volitional verbs in Chadic languages are interesting mainly be­ cause of the following phenomena: the presence of a complementizer when they appear with same-subject complement clause; the presence of two com­ plementizers when with same or with different subjects; the presence of the object in the matrix clause that is coreferential with the subject of the embedded clause. With respect to same-subject coding, I proposed that it may be linked with the inherent properties of volitional verbs, viz. that same-subject coding reflects the subcategorization property of the verb, whereby its unmarked, i.e. default, complement is nominal rather than clausal. In order to indicate that the

272

COMPLEX SENTENCE

complement is clausal, the embedded clause has overt subject marking. The complementizer with the same verb marking is a direct result of the encoding of the subject in the embedded clause. Once the subject is encoded, the comple­ mentizer is present. If the modality of the embedded clause is marked by in­ flectional devices such as the subjunctive or imperative form of the verb, the complementizer is de dicto. If the modality is not marked in the embedded clause, a deontic complementizer is used. In some languages both a de dicto and a deontic complementizer may be used in a sequence. The overt coding of the embedded subject and a pronoun referring to it as object of the matrix clause is a device in Chadic to encode realis modality with volitional verbs. Absence of raising encodes irrealis modality. Hence a phe­ nomenon for which an explanation in English was sought in the requirements of the Case theory turns out to be a coding means for realis modality.

7 COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS OF PERCEPTION

7.1 Verbs of perception and complementation: state of the art Jungraithmayr and Shimizu 1981 reconstruct ten roots whose reflexes mean 'see' and nine roots whose reflexes mean 'hear' in contemporary Chadic lan­ guages. In some languages the verb 'to hear' is identical with the verb 'feel' and also, by semantic extension with the verb 'understand', especially 'understand a language'. In some Chadic languages the verb 'to hear' is also identical with the verb 'to know'. In most descriptions there is no explicit in­ formation about the existence of a lexical distinction between 'look' and 'see' or between 'listen' and 'hear'. In some languages this distinction is encoded by morphological means that distinguish an active from a nonactive paradigm, e.g. in Migama, cf. Jungraithmayr and Adams 1992, Frajzyngier and Ross, in press. In other languages, such as Lele, both 'see' and look' are realized by the same lexical item. There are two main semantic domains with respect to complementation after verbs of perception. One domain is direct evidence, when the subject of the main verb has seen or heard the event described in the embedded clause. The other is indirect evidence, when the subject of the matrix clause only concludes about the event described in the embedded clause. Taylor 1991 dealt with two issues regarding clausal complementation of verbs of perception: the use or nonuse of complementizers and aspectual status of the embedded clause, more specifically, the coding of completion versus noncompletion of the action. With respect to coding of modality, Taylor 1991 states that the use of complementizers with verbs of perception indicates indirect perception. This observation is in accord with similar phenomena observed in other languages of the world (cf. Kirsner and Thompson 1976, Frajzyngier 1991a, 1991b). This statement needs to be made more precise in view of the existence of different types of complementizers. De re complementizers, de­ scribed later in this chapter, indicate direct perception. The absence versus the

274

COMPLEX SENTENCE

presence of de dicto complementizers is just one of the means of encoding the distinction between direct and indirect perception. Since this means of coding the distinction has been adequately described in the literature cited, here are a few examples illustrating the contrast: Angas (West) (the de dicto complementizer in Angas is tene) (1)

Musa fot tene Bətrus po-met Musa hear COMP Bitrus at-go 'Musa heard that Bitrus was going' (Burquest 1973:150)

(2)

Musa fot Bətrus po-met Musa hear Bitrus at-go 'Musa heard Bitrus going' (Burquest 1973:150)

Cf.

Ngizim (West) (3) ná ə maa gwamna áa bonta gusku lSG hear COMP governor pass by today 'I heard that the governor will pass by today' (Schuh 1971:316)

7.2

Theoretical claims:

'Raising to object' as a coding device

The formal characteristics of the phenomenon called subject-to-object raising were the presence in the matrix clause of an object that was coreferential with the subject of the embedded clause. In Latin those constructions were called 'accusativus-cum-infinitivo' and were described as being confined to certain classes of verbs, such as volitional verbs and verbs of perception (Gildersleeve and Lodge 1971:335, Ernout and Thomas 1972:320ff). Examples in English: (4)

I saw him come I heard him slaughter a cow I saw him play chess I believe him to be a soldier

The subject of the embedded clause may be its 'agent' or its 'patient', e.g.:

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS OF PERCEPTION

(5)

275

I saw John/him ride this horse I saw this horse being ridden by John/him

In early transformational theory such sentences were analyzed as a result of 'raising-to-object' transformation, with the most ample argumentation provided in Postal 1974, which was subsequently rejected (Riemsdijk and Williams 1986:31). Contemporary formal explanations of the phenomenon in English assume that the subject of the embedded clause is assigned accusative case be­ cause the embedded clause is in the infinitive and therefore there is no case as­ signer in the embedded clause (cf. Haegeman 1991). In the following sentence: (6)

John believes Bill to be sick

'"Bill" is not an argument of "believes," even though "believes' gives "Bill" its case' (van Riemsdijk and Williams 1986:242). This case assignment is con­ sidered exceptional, because the case is assigned across a barrier. As was done much earlier for Latin, from the very beginning of transformational grammar it was observed that in English there is class of 'raising' verbs and 'nonraising' verbs, or as they have been more recently called, Exceptional Case Marking verbs (cf. Baker 1988:180). There were no attempts, however, within the GB approach to associate the raising phenomena with the properties of verbs. Such an attempt was made by Givón 1990, but he did not come to any conclusion that would have allowed him to find a cause-effect relationship between some properties of verbs and the raising phenomenon. He defines raising as 'a pro­ cess of analogical extension, where the verb-sense that takes a propositional object adjusts its structure to resemble the structure of the verb-sense that takes a nominal object' (Givón 1990:777). In the analyses of data in some Chadic languages I demonstrate that (1) the 'raising-to-object' phenomenon is not motivated by case assignment require­ ments; (2) the coding of an object coreferential with the subject is a means to encode some modality whose exact formulation may await further investigation. These analyses will constitute a challenge to the GB analyses of the phe­ nomenon, but most important, they will raise new questions regarding the properties of grammatical systems. Data that became available since Taylor wrote her paper point to a more complex system in which the coding of direct perception versus indirect percep­ tion is achieved in Chadic languages through three rather than one means: (1)

276

COMPLEX SENTENCE

the presence and absence of complementizers, as described in Taylor 1991, (2) encoding of the subject of the embedded clause as an argument of the matrix clause ('Exceptional Case Marking' in the GB tradition), and (3) contrast be­ tween several complementizers. In some languages all three means are used. The rest of this chapter is devoted to the discussion of the two means not dis­ cussed in Taylor 1991. Instead of providing a systematic review of the com­ plementation of verbs of perception in Chadic languages, I shall describe the two means of coding modality in selected languages for which the available data make such discussion possible. Consequently, I first describe the means of coding in Lele (East) and Mandara (Central) and then provide fragmentary evi­ dence from other languages.

7.3 De dicto and de re complementizers and subject raising: Lele There are several types of complement clauses with verbs of perception. One type displays the phenomena usually described as subject raising, whereby the underlying subject of the embedded clause becomes the object of the matrix clause. The other type consists of the use of different complementizers to en­ code the modality of the embedded clause. And finally the third type involves the contrast between the use and nonuse of the de dicto complementizer. 7.3.1 Coding of the subject of embedded clause in the matrix clause The evidence from Lele puts in doubt the very notion of subject raising as well as the notion of Exceptional Case Marking. For the third person singular mas­ culine and feminine, the phenomenon does not differ from subject-to-object raising phenomena in English. That the third feminine and masculine subject pronouns of the embedded clause become the direct objects of the matrix clauses is provided by syntactic and morphological data. Syntactic evidence is as follows:. The third person subject pronouns are suffixed to the verb. In the complex sentence, they are not suffixed to the verb of the embedded clause, but instead corresponding object pronouns are suffixed to the main verb. Morphological evidence is provided by the choice of pronouns. The third per­ son masculine subject is di, suffixed to the verb. The direct objectpronoun for the third person masculine is i, e.g.:

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS OF PERCEPTION

277

(7) lSG-see-3M go 'I saw him go' For the third person feminine, the subject and object pronouns have the same segmental structure, but the subject has high tone and the object pronoun has low tone. In the complement of the verb of perception, the subject is not coded on the embedded verb, but rather a corresponding object pronoun is suffixed to the main verb, e.g.: (8) lSG-see-3F go 'I saw her go' The evidence against raising and Exceptional Case Marking as the motivation for the occurrence of object pronouns in the matrix clause is provided by com­ plement clauses with first and second person subject and with third person plu­ ral subject. For these categories, the subject of the embedded clause remains suffixed or prefixed to the verb of the embedded clause, and at the same time the verb of the matrix clause has the corresponding object pronoun suffixed, e.g.: (9) lSG-see-3PL go-3PL 'I saw them go' (10) lSG-see-lSG-3M lSG-go 'he saw me go' (11) see-2M-3M 2M-go 'he saw you go' (12)

_ see-2F-3M 2F-go 'he saw you go'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

278

The structures above indicate that rather than subject raising, Lele has a rule whereby the verb of the matrix clause receives the object suffix that encodes the features of gender, person, and number of the subject of the embedded clause. The subject of the embedded clause remains in situ. Additional evidence for this hypothesis is provided by the behavior of the nominal subject of the embedded clause. Such subjects remain in their position preceding the verb of the embedded clause, but the pronominal subject markers also remain in their place after the verb of the embedded clause. Third person pronouns 'agreeing' with the subject of the embedded clause may not be added to the main verb, e.g.: (13) 1SG see-3M Canige go-3M T saw Canige go' (14) 1SG see-3F Gilkinin go-3F 'I saw Gilkinin go' (15) 1SG see-3PL Gilkinin 3PL CONJ Canige go-3PL T saw Gilkinin and Canige go' The complementation of transitive verbs is similar. The third person singular pronominal subject is encoded only with the main verb. The first person sub­ ject is encoded both with the embedded verb and with the main verb, e.g.: (16) lSG see-3M slaughter goat I saw him slaughter a goat' (17) lSG-see-3F slaughter goat I saw her slaughter a goat' (18) see-lSG-3M lSG-slaughter goat 'he saw me slaughter a goat'

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS OF PERCEPTION

279

The translations of the sentences above point out that the subject of the matrix clause had a direct perception of the event of the embedded clause. Direct per­ ception may also be encoded by another devices, viz. by the use of the comple­ mentizer go. 7.3.2 The de re complementizer go The structure involving complementizer gō differs from the structure involving the complementizer nā in that in the former but not in the latter the matrix clause verb must have an object pronoun, coreferential with the subject of the embed­ ded clause suffixed to the matrix clause verb. The complementizer go indicates direct perception on the part of the subject of the matrix clause, e.g.: (19) lSG-see-3M COMP PROGR slaughter-3M cow T saw him slaughtering a cow' (20) lSG-see-3M COMP PROGR slaughter-3M cow T saw her slaughtering a cow' The functional difference between the coding of the subject of the embedded clause on the main verb, on the one hand, and the use of the same device with the complementizer go on the other hand, is that the former encodes the perfec­ tive aspect and the latter, the progressive aspect of the embedded clause. If the embedded clause is equational, then no complementizer is used, and the subject of the embedded clause is not coded on the verb of the matrix clause, e.g.: (21) go-3PL LOC village certain LOC then chief

see

wives-3M three COP REL beautiful xxx all (French) 'when they arrived at a certain village, the chief saw that the three wives of the man were all beautiful'

280

COMPLEX SENTENCE

7.3.3 The de dicto complementizer nā The de dicto complementizer nă encodes indirect perception on the part of the subject of the matrix clause. The complementizer nā may have a variant gl nă. The function of the marker gl is not transparent. Weibegué and Palayer 1982 give gi as verb 'remain', which probably is unrelated to the marker gl. But there is in the language the verb gil 'to show, to teach'. This verb appears to be the active or causative form of the verb gòl 'see', the change from back vowel to high front vowel being a regular means of deriving active-causative forms of the verb in Lele. The de re complementizer gō could be derived from the verb 'to see', the deletion of the final consonant of the verb being a result of phono­ logical reduction stemming from grammaticalization. Analogically, the form gl could derive from the verb gil 'to show'. Thus the marker gl may in fact be another complementizer, and this is the working hypothesis that I accept in the present chapter. The complementizer nă may occur alone, but the complemen­ tizer gl may not. The structure of such a sentence is Subject Verb (gl) nă S. The verb of the embedded clause has its pronominal subjects suffixed, just as in any simple sentence. (22)

_ _ lSG-see COMP COMP slaughter-3M cow 'I saw that he slaughtered a cow'

(23)

. . _ . . Canigehear COMP forget-3F PERF hoe POSS-3F 'Canige heard that she forgot her hoe'

(24) lSG-seeCOMP COMP forget-3F PERF hoe POSS-3F I saw that she forgot her hoe' Sentences containing a verb of perception followed by the complementizer nă or gi nă indicate indirect perception of an action. The following are some of the pieces of evidence for this claim: One cannot combine the complementizers nă and gō with a verb of perception. Thus the following sentences are ungrammatical:

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS OF PERCEPTION

281

(25) lSG-see-3M COMP COMP slaughter-3M cow for 'I saw him slaughter a cow' (26)

. lSG-see-3M COMP COMP slaughter-3M cow for I saw him slaughter a cow'

Additional evidence concerning the modal functions of go and nā can be found in Chapter 8, on complementation of cognitive verbs.

7.4

Subject raising and the role of complementizer in Mandara

In Mandara, the distinction between direct perception and indirect perception may be encoded through two means: through the contrast between the absence and the presence of the de dicto complementizer or through embedded-subject coding on the main verb. Data from Mandara provide further evidence for the modal function of embedded-subject coding on the main verb. Before I proceed with argumentation, a few remarks about argument coding in Mandara are in order. In Mandara, object pronouns are inserted in the reduplicated form of the verb, as illustrated in the following examples: (27) 2SG see-lSG-see 'did you see me?' (28) 1SG see-2SG-see 'I saw you' The third person singular object pronoun is -n-, and third person plural is ton (29) 2SG see-3SG-see 'did you see it?'

282

COMPLEX SENTENCE (30) 2SG see-3PL-see 'did you see them?'

In nonreduplicated form, object pronouns behave just like object nouns in that they occur after the verb, e.g.: (31) 1SG see Nah PREP market I saw Nali at the market' (32) 1SG see 3SG PREP market 'I saw him/her at the market' (33) X 1SG see 3PL PREP 'I saw them in my room'

room 1SG

The marking of the subject of the embedded clause on the main verb serves to mark direct evidence, as illustrated by the following examples: (34) 1SG hear-3SG-PERF break-EXT hoe-3SG 'I heard him break his hoe' In the following example, a, the subject of the embedded clause, is the first element of the embedded clause. Note that it does not have the form of the ob­ ject of the matrix clause; that would have been n rather than a: (35) 1SG hear 3SG break-EXT hoe-3SG T heard that he broke his hoe' The two previous examples not only illustrate the function of the coding on the verb but also, and most important, the fact that the 'raising' phenomenon is not motivated by the need of case assignment. The following example provides an even stronger argument against both raising and Exceptional Case Marking mo-

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS OF PERCEPTION

283

tivation, because, as in Lele, the subject of the embedded clause is encoded twice, once as an argument of the matrix clause and the second time as an ar­ gument of the embedded clause, e.g.: (36) 1SG hear-3SG-PERF 3SG break-EXT hoe-3SG Ί heard him break his hoe' (37) 1SG hear-3SG-hear 3SG PROG slaughter cow Ί heard him slaughtering a cow' Cf. (38) 1SG hear-3SG-hear slaughter cow Ί heard him slaughter a cow' The de dicto complementizer is used only to encode hearsay or some other indi­ rect evidence as the source of information, e.g.: (39) 1SG hear hear COMP come-EXT-EXT Ί heard that he was coming' Even if the embedded subject is marked on the main verb (subject-to-object raising), and if there is a de dicto complementizer, that complementizer forces the indirect evidence interpretation, e.g.: (40) 1SG see-3SG-PERF COMP break-EXT hoe-3SG Ί saw that he broke his hoe' Cf. (41) 1SG see-3SG-PERF 3SGbreak-EXT hoe-3SG Ί saw him break his hoe' The complementation of verbs of perception in Mina (Central) is interesting for two reasons: (1) The embedded clause does not behave like a complement of the verb. (2) The language displays a split system of embedded-subject encod-

284

COMPLEX SENTENCE

ing on the main verb. I do not think that the two phenomena are linked in a cause-effect relationship, but each of them is interesting enough in its own right to merit a brief description. In a simple sentence in Mina the role of the arguments is marked by config­ uration with respect to the verb, viz. SVO. The are two past tense markers, zà, derived from a verb 'to be', and ká, which indicates that the subject has been adversely affected by the action. Both of these markers occur after the direct object, e.g.: (42) lSG-PERF-eat food be Ί ate food' (43) PERF-buy-DIST cow be 'he bought a cow' (44) INF-catch-OBJ-lSG be 'he caught me' (45) PERF break leg 'he broke his leg'

3SG

AFF

PERF hurt body 'he hurt himself

3SG AFF

(46)

Embedded clauses do not behave syntactically as objects because they occur after rather than before the marker zà. (47) lSG-PERF-hear be 3SG-cut neck GEN cow PROG 'I heard him slaughtering a cow' That indicates that the complement clause has a different syntactic status than the nominal objects.

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS OF PERCEPTION

285

The direct perception for the third person subject of the embedded clause is encoded by the progressive aspect of the embedded clause, as in the following examples (note that the matrix clause-final zà is a tense marker of the matrix clause): (48) lSG-PERF-hearbe 3SG-go-DIST PROG Ί heard him coming' (49) lSG-PERF-see be 3SG֊go 3SG PROG Ί saw him going' (50)

sí lím á nd-á r í zàmáy zà ÍSG see 3SG go-DIST PROG from Zamay be 'I saw him coming from Zamay' (zà in the embedded clause is also a marker of the ventive, i.e. movement towards the deictic center)

Cf. the absence of the progressive in the embedded clause and the subsequent de dicto interpretation: (51) 1SG see 3SG go-DIST from Zamay be 'I saw that he came from Zamay' (52) Bitsi 3SG-hear PERF-forget-DIST hoe-3SG 'Bitsi heard that she had forgotten her hoe'

AFF

If the subject of the embedded clause is first person, it is encoded twice, once as the object of the matrix clause, and the second time as the subject of the embedded clause, e.g.: (53) PERF-see-OBJ_1SG be 'he saw me going'

lSG-go 1SG PROG

286

COMPLEX SENTENCE

The double encoding of the subject of the embedded clause argues against rais­ ing for syntactic reasons, because the subject is retained in the embedded clause, and it also argues against Exceptional Case Marking interpretation. At best we can talk about subject copying in the matrix clause. In East Dangla the subject of the embedded clause occurs as the object of the matrix clause and also as the subject of the embedded clause, (all data from Sopoyé, p.c., as analyzed by Erin Shay), e.g.: (54) 1SG heard-3M come-3M Ί heard him come' (55) 1SG saw-3F leave-3F Ί heard her go' (56) 1SG heard-3M slaughter-IMPERF-3SG cow Ί heard him slaughter a cow' The de dicto complementizer in East Dangla consists of the pronoun followed by the particle -s. Such a complementizer encodes indirect perception, e.g.: (57) X heard 3PL-COMP 3Fforgot-3F 'X heard that Y had forgotten Y's hoe'

hoe-3F

East Dangla also has another means to encode indirect perception. After the verb 'to see' indirect perception is encoded by the de re complementizer kàdàr, which with other verbs encodes direct perception: (58) X saw 'the fact that' (that) 3F forgot-3F hoe-3F 'X saw that Y had forgotten Y's hoe' (Sopoyé, p.c., ) (59) X see COMP (REL) 3F forget -Ғ һ-Ғ ' saw that she (Y) had forgotten her (Y's) hoe'

COMPLEMENTS OF VERBS OF PERCEPTION

(60)

7.5

287

gàm pàkir kàdàr tyà rawàt-tya àtúm-tí X realized 'the fact that' 3F forgot-Ғ һ-Ғ ' saw that Y had forgotten Y's hoe' (Sopoyé, p.c.)

Conclusions

The coding of modality with complements of verbs of perception in Chadic lan­ guages is achieved through several devices: absence versus presence of com­ plementizers; different complementizers, one for direct perception and the other for indirect perception; progressive aspect marking on the embedded clause; and, finally, through embedded subject-coding on the verb of the matrix clause. The last device has been observed in English and was analyzed as subject-toobject raising in early transformational grammars and as Exceptional Case Marking in contemporary GB theory. Data from Chadic languages are impor­ tant in that they display the same structure that has been observed in English, but they also display other characteristics, such as the presence of the subject of the embedded clause in the embedded clause, which have not been observed in English. One could, of course, accept the notion that virtually the same con­ struction (embedded-subject marking on the matrix verb) could occur through different syntactic processes, and that it also encodes different semantic or pragmatic functions. Such an assumption, while reasonable, does not advance our knowledge of language beyond the uninteresting statement that languages could be different. But given similar language structures, one should at least try to find one explanation for the phenomena in Chadic and English. Only if all attempts at one explanation fail should one accept the hypothesis that similar structures arose because of unrelated syntactic constraints, and that they per­ form unrelated semantic or pragmatic functions. In what follows I attempt to provide such an explanation. In the worst case it will have the advantage that one can falsify it, which is not shared by the hypothesis of the unrelated simi­ larity of structures. I propose the following syntactic and semantic explanation of the similarities involved. In some Chadic languages, in English, and in other languages that have similar structures, e.g. Latin, one of the devices to encode direct percep­ tion, or de re modality, from the point of view of the subject of the matrix clause is to integrate the embedded clause with the matrix clause. One of the means of integration is making the subject of the embedded clause an argument

288

COMPLEX SENTENCE

of the matrix clause, by necessity its object, because this is the only function that is not realized by a noun phrase. It is quite possible that the modalities coded by marking of the embedded subject of the matrix clause have different values with different verbs, and it is also possible that in some languages marking of the embedded subject might have evolved into a means of combin­ ing two propositions in one sentence. An important argument for the modality function of raising is provided by languages that do not allow subject-to-object raising. In such languages there exist other syntactic means to encode the modality of direct perception and/or realis mood with respect to volitional verbs. Thus is Polish the equivalents of 'raised subjects' have a preposition jak mark­ ing the embedded clause, e.g.: (61)

Widzia-ł-em jak przyszedł see-PERF:PAST-lSG how come-PERF-3SG:M Ί saw him come'

(62)

słysza-ł-em jak przyszedł hear-PERF:PAST-lSG how come-PERF-3SG:M Ί heard him come'

Indirect perception with these verbs is marked by the de dicto complementizer że, e.g.: (63)

Widzia-ł-em że przyszedł see-PERF:PAST-lSG COMP come-PERF-3SG:M 'I saw that he came'

(64)

słysza-ł-em że przyszedł hear-PERF:PAST-lSG COMP come-PERF-3SG:M 'I heard that he came'

The discussion above has shown that (1) the raising to object does not in­ volve movement out of the embedded clause but rather an independent coding in the matrix clause; (2) The coding of an argument of the embedded clause in the matrix clause is a means of encoding modality that has slightly different values for different verbs. For verbs of perception this coding indicates direct percep­ tion. For volitional verbs, described in Chapter 6 it indicates that the wish may be realized, or has the potential of being realized.

8 COMPLEMENTS OF COGNITIVE VERBS

8.1

Introduction

The most interesting issue in the complementation of the verb 'to know' in Chadic languages is the encoding of the speaker's relationship to the truth of the proposition of the embedded clause. Some languages encode the distinction between knowledge beyond any doubt and less than certain knowledge. Other languages encode the difference between knowledge acquired through direct experience and knowledge acquired through hearsay. Although the two dis­ tinctions overlap semantically, it is not clear that one distinction derives from the other. The means involved in coding the distinctions are (1) the absence versus the presence of complementizers in some languages and (2) the use of two dis­ tinct complementizers in other languages. The use of different complementizers with cognitive verbs strongly correlates with the use of two complementizers after verbs of perception. If the language encodes the distinction between direct and indirect perception with two different complementizers, then it also encodes the distinction between two modes of knowing. The term 'cognitive verbs' refers to verbs that correspond to IE equivalents of 'know'. In many Indo-European languages, e.g. French and Spanish and the Slavic languages, lexicalization has distinguished various kinds of knowl­ edge with respect to the types of complements: Thus in French different verbs encode the ability to perform an action (savoir) and knowledge of an event or thing (connaître). In Polish there is one verb that has lexicalized knowledge of an object, znač; ability to perform an action, umiec; and knowledge of an event, wiedzieć. There is not enough data to ascertain what kinds of 'knowledge' have been lexicalized by different cognitive verbs in Chadic languages. Some insight into the lexical meanings of these verbs could be gained from the study of complementation, but as it turns out, no relevant information is available even in the complementation data.

290

COMPLEX SENTENCE

The verb 'to know' in English and its equivalents in other IE languages have an interesting property. With the first person subject of the matrix clause 'to know' is used only when the speaker believes in the truth of the proposition. With the non-first person subject of the matrix clause, it is also used only when the speaker shares belief in the same proposition. So it is perfectly normal to say 'he knows that a whale is a big fish', 'he knows that two and two is five', 'he knows that the Bills will win' if these propositions are what the speaker wants to convey as also his/her own belief. This property of the verb 'to know' does not appear, however, to be shared by all verbs glossed as 'know' in Chadic languages. The evidence for the different semantic properties of the cognitive verbs in IE and Chadic languages is provided by the existence of vari­ ous types of complementation in Chadic. In the rest of the chapter I deal with the following topics: origin of verbs of knowing; complementation in the majority of languages where there appears to be no difference in the coding of modes of knowing; the languages without an apparent distinction with respect to the kinds of knowledge; and Conclusions.

8.2

The origin of verbs of knowing

Jungraithmayr and Shimizu 1981 reconstruct *s(w)n and *n as the most fre­ quent roots for the verb to 'know' and add two 'minor' roots, cámà and leyè. The consonantal root *sVn, with a high vowel in between, can be seen in a number of languages from three branches of Chadic. In some languages from the Central branch the root *sn for 'know' is identical with the root 'hear'. This brings up the question of whether this similarity is accidental. If we assume that the similarity is not accidental, then the question is whether the direction of grammaticalization was from 'know' to 'hear' or from 'hear' to 'know'. Jungraithmayr and Shimizu 1981, under the verb 'know', suggest relationships with other verbs such as 'smell', 'hear', 'see', 'teach'. Jungraithmayr and Shimizu 1981 reconstruct the *sm, * n dk, *s1, *s'n and several other roots for the verb 'to hear'. The standard assumption about lexicalization is that the di­ rection is from concrete meaning to abstract meaning (cf. Hopper and Traugott 1993, Heine et al. 1991). This assumption would dictate the direction from 'hear' to 'know' because 'hear' is more physical, and is external, whereas 'know' is less physical and is internal. But such an assumption has an obvious weakness in that the notions 'more abstract' and 'less abstract' are difficult to define and even more difficult to quantify. Another approach is therefore

COMPLEMENTS OF COGNITIVE VERBS

291

needed. One of the possible methodologies is to determine how many lan­ guages preserve one meaning and how many preserve another meaning for the same phonological form. In our case the question is, for the same root *sn how many languages preserved the meaning 'know' and how many preserved the meaning 'hear'. In Table 8.1 below I have included information on the verbs 'know' and 'hear' and also complementizers occurring with each verb. TABLE 8.1. 'know', 'hear', and their complementizers Language

know

COMP

hear

COMP

Hausa Pero Bole Kanakuru Angas Mupun Ron-Bokkos Ron-Sya Fyer Ngizim Pa'a Tera Ga'anda Hona Margi Kapsiki Mandara Giziga Mina Gude Munjuk Gidar Buduma Xdi Somray

sani péno, yìw mono bánì

cewa none na, ii

ji kum konna

none none ii, none

tene nә

fot kláŋ hal

tene

du

әm nduku tәk

maa (de dicto)

tíndarà

tsúk áŋár

tindàrà

gə

dnà

Lele Dangla

sèn ìban

man syen sum zәga sine

nē

za (de dicto)

sәn

sìn

rfepu dyé son sén mashiimə slina sən híne sna òcín

ú-, si tə

sí

ná none

ná (de dicto) none

darà dárà tyéndì ná, gō kàdàr

haŋgé sna dúè ďēŋlí dòre

táandì 'say' gõ, ná de dicto

292

COMPLEX SENTENCE

The root *sn with the meaning 'know' is represented in all branches of Chadic, whereas the the meaning 'hear' is represented only in some languages of the Central branch. Assuming the direction from 'hear' to 'know' would imply that after this lexicalization took place, the meaning 'hear' for the root *sn was lost, and subsequently another verb for the meaning 'hear' was introduced into the language. But if we assume that *sn originated with the meaning 'know', the only implication would be that in some languages of the Central branch there was a lexicalization from 'know' to 'hear'. Given so many reflexes of the same form in languages from the three branches, it appears certain that Proto-Chadic had lexicalized a verb 'to know'. The retention of one root for 'to know' is much more common than the reten­ tion of other roots, such as volitional verbs, or even verbs of perception. The widespread retention of the verb 'to know' can be compared to the retention of other stable verbs such as 'to eat' and 'to drink'. The exact meanings and the degree to which the meanings of Chadic *sVn or *  roots overlap with various IE cognitive verbs can only be deduced from the syntax of the verbs, including, but not limited to, the syntax of complementation.

8.3

Coding of the modality of knowing

The coding of different modes of knowing is realized in Chadic languages through the use of different complementizers. Thus the coding itself differs from the coding of direct versus indirect perception, which in some languages involves nonuse versus use of complementizers, and in others involves the use of different complementizers. The discussion is organized as follows: First there is a description of the use of two complementizers in Lele and Bidiya, East Chadic languages where the two complementizers also function in encoding di­ rect versus indirect perception. Then I discuss Mina, which appears to be the only language that has developed a complementizer to be used only in cognitive verbs. Lele: Verbs of perception in Lele may be followed by the de re complementizer go or by the de dicto complementizer nā. Both of these complementizers may also be used after the verb sèn 'to know'. The complementizer gō alone may follow the verb sèn, e.g.:

COMPLEMENTS OF COGNITIVE VERBS (1)

293

q-sèn go ngú gírbí kòjòku-qgù lSG-know COMP 2PL forget hoe POSS-2PL Ί know that you forgot your hoes'

The verb sèn may also be followed by two complementizers in a sequence whose order is invariably gō ná, e.g.: (2)

q-sèn gõ ná gírbí-gè kòjò kè-gè lSG-know COMP COMP forget-3PL hoe POSS -3PL Ί know that they forgot their hoes'

When gõ is the only complementizer, it indicates that the source of knowledge is the speaker's personal experience. The evidence for this hypothesis is pro­ vided by the fact that a sentence with gõ as the only complementizer may be followed by a clause corresponding to 'because I have seen it' and may not be followed by a clause corresponding to 'because I was told so', e.g.: (3)

q-sèn gõ gì gírbí jè kòjò kò-m bè lSG-know COMP 2M forget PERF hoe 2M-POSS give kóló η-gól cause lSG-see Ί know that you forgot your hoe, because I have seen [you forgetting the hoe]'

(4)

q-sèn gõ mé gírbí kòjò kè-rè *bè kóló lSG-know COMP 2F forget hoe 2F-POSS give cause gé yá-q INDEFtell-lSG for 'I know that you forgot your hoe, because I was told so'

If the verb sèn is followed by the two complementizers gõ and ná, then the sentence means that the source of knowledge is hearsay. The evidence for this function is provided by the fact that a sentence with the two complementizers may be followed by a clause corresponding to 'because I have been told so' and may not be followed by a clause corresponding to 'because I have seen it', e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

294 (5)

η-sèn gō ná gì gírbí jè kòjò kò-m lSG-know COMP COMP 2  forget PERF hoe 2M-POSS bè kóló gé yá-η) give cause INDEF tell-lSG Ί know that you forgot your hoe, because I was told so'

(6)

*r)-sèn gō ná gì gírbí jè kòjò kò-m lSG-know COMP COMP 2  forget PERF hoe 2M-POSS bè kóló ŋ-gòl give cause lSG-see Ί know that you forgot your hoe, because I saw it'

Another piece of evidence that the function of ná is to indicate hearsay as the source of knowledge is provided by the fact that in an imperative sentence with the verb 'know', i.e. in a sentence where the complement is obligatorily a frag­ ment of speech rather than a fragment of reality, the complementizer is ná rather than gō, e.g.: (7)

sínà ná . . . know COMP 'know that

The last evidence I present here for the functions of ná and gõ is the fact that one cannot use both complementizers after a verb of perception. Thus the fol­ lowing sentences are ungrammatical: (8)

*q-gòl-í gõ ná wàl-dí kúlbà lSG-see-3M COMP COMP slaughter- cow for Ί saw him slaughter a cow'

(9)

*ŋ-gòl-í ná gõ wàl-dí kúlbà lSG-see-3M COMP COMP slaughter- cow for Ί saw him slaughter a cow'

The ungrammatically stems from the fact that the main verb of perception is followed by the direct perception marker go and also by the indirect perception marker ná, creating an internal functional contradiction within the clause.

COMPLEMENTS OF COGNITIVE VERBS

295

East Dangla: In East Dangla the verb ìban 'know' may be followed by one of two complementizers. One is kàdàr, which is a de re complementizer (cf. complements of verbs of perception), and when it follows the verb ìban, it indi­ cates that the information is certain, that the knowledge is without a doubt, e.g.: (10)

mín gòóltàk às -tí-t mín amày-ìk, PREP moment VENT-3F -PASTPREP water-DEM ìban -tí-t ďáko kàdàr bàllili -tyò know-3F-PAST immediately COMP basket-3PL gàas kó Rák di find already one only 'as soon as she had returned from the water, she knew immediately that there was only one grain left in the basket'

(11)

no ìban kàdàr ŋà rawàt-tya 1SG know COMP  forget-Ғ Ί know that he forgot our hoe'

àtum-tè hoe-lPL.EXCL

The other is a de dicto complementizer consisting of a pronoun and a morpheme -s, which is the distinctive characteristic of the complementizer. Thus the com­ plementizer for each person has a different form, e.g. ŋa-s for the third person singular. The presence of the de dicto complementizer PRO-s and the presence of the pause (represented by a comma) separating the matrix from the embedded clause indicate that the subject's evidence for what he knows is not direct: (12)

iban-dyi-te, qa-s booRi di de-tya know -3M-PAST COMP hyena only -Ғ 'he knew that it was Hyena who had killed her' i.e., 'it could only be Hyena who had killed her'

The de dicto complementizer is also used when ìban is used in the sense of 'know how', e.g.: (13)

ŋà ìndid-n -tè ŋàs no ìban-gìty  ask-1SG-PAST COMP 1SG know-Ғ kàaw ti kεdε-εt ga speak REL such-and-such a place-DEM Q 'he asked me if I knew the language of such-and-such a place'

296

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Mina: In order to describe the complementation of the verb of knowing in Mina I will first demonstrate that a certain marker is a complementizer in that language and then discuss the function of this marker with respect to the verb 'to know'. Whenever the matrix verb 'know' is used, it is followed by suffix ú. I propose that this suffix is in fact a complementizer, and accordingly I shall gloss it is COMP: (14) lSG-know-COMP forget-DIST hoe-lPL(inc) be Ί know that he forgot our hoe' The suffix ú is identical with the third person singular object clitic. The evi­ dence that the marker ú is indeed identical with the third person singular object is provided by the following examples where it is in contrast with object mark­ ers for other persons: (15) lSG-know-3SG Ί know him' (16) 3SG-know-lSG 'he knows me' (17) lSG-know 3PL 'I know them' The evidence that after the verb 'to know' ú does not encode the third person but rather is a grammatical marker with some other function is provided by the fact that it may occur with different-person subjects of the embedded clause. The complementizer is thus unrelated to either the subject or the object of the embedded clause or to the subject of the matrix clause, e.g.: (18) lSG-know-COMP 3PL-HAB-sell beer Ί know that they sell beer'

COMPLEMENTS OF COGNITIVE VERBS

297

(19) lSG-know-COMP 2SG-PERF-forget-DIST hoe- 2SG be Ί know that you forgot your hoe' (20) lSG-know-COMP 2PL2PL-PERF-forget-DIST hoe-2PL Ί knew that you had forgotten your hoe'

be

Since the marker does not encode a participant in the events, it must have some other function. Since it occurs between the matrix and the embedded clause, a natural assumption is that it is a complementizer. I propose that it is a comple­ mentizer encoding direct rather than indirect knowledge. The argument in sup­ port of this hypothesis is provided by the fact that ú may not occur when the matrix clause is negative, i.e., it may not occur in clauses of the type Ί did not know that S'. It may, however, occur in sentences where the embedded clause is negative, e.g. in sentences Ί know that not S', e.g.: (21) lSG-know-COMP 2SG-Hina NEG Ί know that you are not a Hina' (22) lSG-know 2SG-Hina NEG Ί didn't know that you are a Hina' The reason for this constraint is that if we do not have knowledge of an event, state, etc., then obviously we do not have direct knowledge of it. The most interesting aspect of the complementizer ú is that it does not occur in this function after other verbs that take propositional complements. Recall that direct perception in Mina is encoded through the use of the progressive aspect in the embedded clause. The marker ú does not occur in such sentences, even if the subject of the embedded clause is the third person singular, e.g.: (23) lSG-PERF-hearbe 3SG-go-DIST PROG Ί heard him coming'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

298 (24)

lSG-PERF-see be 3SG-go 3SG PROG Ί saw him going' The marker ú does not occur in sentences encoding indirect perception either, e.g.: (25) 1SG see 3SG go-DIST from Zamay be Ί saw that he came from Zamay' (26) Bitsi 3SG-hear COMP lSG-PERF-forget-DIST hoe-lSG.POSS AFF 'Bitsi heard that I forgot my hoe' In order to express less-than-direct knowledge, the de dicto complementizer sí is used, e.g.: (27) lSG-know֊3SG COMP 3PL-PERF-do workPREP PREP field 'as far as I know, they will work in the field' This complementizer is interesting because /s/ is not palatalized before [i], although it is palatalized before [i] in other words in Mina. It occurs in all inter­ rogative embedded clauses, e.g.: (28)

. . 3SG ask-OBMSG COMP 1SG-PERF see-DIST Hina be Q 'he asked me whether I visited Hina'

This complementizer occurs also in other constructions, suchas resultative sen­ tences, e.g.:

COMPLEMENTS OF COGNITIVE VERBS

299

(29) if

INҒ

blacksmith COND NEG COMP 3SG want

INF live here NEG 'if he is not a black smith, he should not live here' Thus two complementizers are used in Mina with verbs of knowing. One complementizer encodes direct knowledge, and the other complementizer en­ codes less-than-direct knowledge.

8.4

Undifferentiated complementation

Most Chadic languages do not distinguish among various modalities of know­ ing. Thus the verb 'to know' is followed by one complementizer, very much as in most IE languages. Even if a language does not use a complementizer after verbs of saying, it does use a complementizer after verbs of knowing. Compare Table 8.1 with the complementizers of verbs of saying in Chapter 4. Thus in many languages the complements of verbs of knowing are treated as indirect perception complements of verbs 'see' and 'hear'. Here are a few ex­ amples: Gidar: The structure after verbs of knowing does not differ from the structure after verbs of saying. The main clause is followed by a complementizer ná and then by the complement clause. Examples: (30) 1SG know-PERF COMP 3-forget-3M-PERF hoe Ί know that he forgot our hoe'

POSS-1PL

(31) 1SG know-PERF COMP 2-forget-PL-3M-PERF hoe 'I know that you (PL) forgot your hoes'

POSS-2PL

Giziga: In Giziga the clausal order is -M when the main clause has a verb of knowing. The de dicto complementizer ná occurs at the end of the subordinated clause, hence between the embedded and the matrix clause:

300

COMPLEX SENTENCE (32) 3SG come PERF COMP 2SG know-3SG NEG Q 'do you not know that he has come?' (Lukas 1970:79) (33) 3SG come PERF COMP lSG-know-3SG NEG Ί do not know that he has come' (Lukas 1970:79)

In Buduma there is no complementizer after the verb 'to know' (the overt nomi­ nal subject occurs after the verb), e.g.: (34)

-hine bórbu ja miigo yaa-mene dan 3SG-know thief NEG people 3PL֊see 3SG 'the thief doesn't know that people see him' (Lukas 1939:76)

There is no complementizer even if the main verb is sentence final, e.g.: (35)

lugu búrba bórbu nau faato ŋgane nahine man rich thief 3SG-come house his 3SG know 'the rich man knew that the thief had come into his house' (Lukas 1939:76)

In Bole there are two complementizers used after verbs of saying, na and ii Both of them can be used after the verb mono 'know' (all data from Maher Awad, p.c.), e.g.: (36)

n mono na kare ki muntutu jaraa-si 1SG know COMP 2SF forget hoe-2F Ί know that you forgot your hoe'

The complementizer may be omitted without any change of meaning, e.g.: (37)

n mono mate karan kom 1SG know 3PL slaughter cow 'I know they slaughtered a cow'

The following sentences demonstrate that one or both complementizers are used even if the knowledge is acquired through personal experience:

COMPLEMENTS OF COGNITIVE VERBS

(38)

n monona isinkaruu kom, inko ISG know COMP  slaughter cow because n-innaa-wo ii lSG-see-PERF ANAPH Ί know that he slaughtered a cow, because I saw it'

(39)

n mono na mate karan kom, inko ISG know COMP 3PL slaughter cow because ո innaa-wo ii lSG-see-PERF ANAPH Ί know they slaughtered a cow, because I saw it'

(40)

ո mono ii mate karan kom, inko ISG know COMP 3PL slaughter cow because n-innaa-wo ii lSG-see-PERF ANAPH Ί know they slaughtered a cow, because I saw it'

(41)

n mono ii na mate karan kom, ISG know COMPCOMP 3PL slaughter cow inko n-tanaa because lSG-be there Ί know they slaughtered a cow, because I was there'

(42)

n mono na isin karuu kom, inko ISG know COMP  slaughter cow because ո konnaa-wo ii ISG hear-PERF ANAPH Ί know that he slaughtered a cow, because I heard it'

301

The following sentences demonstrate that complement clause is marked by a complementizer even if the knowledge is acquired through hearsay: (43)

n mono na isin karuu kom, inko isin porna-wo ISG know COMP  slaughter cow because 3SG say-PERF Ί know he slaughtered a cow, because he told me so'

302

COMPLEX SENTENCE (44)

n mono na isin karuu kom, inko isin porna: ii 1SG know COMP  slaughter cow because 3SG say-ANAPH Ί know he slaughtered a cow, because he told me so'

If the complement is interrogative, in lieu of the de dicto complementizer, an interrogative complementizer is used, e.g.: (45)

n mono sa imba ita ndingo 1SG know NEG INTERR 3F come Ί don't know whether she came'

For many languages available data do not allow us to make a hypothesis, much less to provide evidence with respect to the distinctions encoded in complements after verbs of knowing. Therefore, until more data become available, I include these languages in the group that does not make a distinction.

8.5

Conclusions

While some languages have only one modality value for the complements of the verb 'to know', similar to the modality in English, a few Chadic languages grammaticalized different modalities of the complements of the verb 'to know'. Some languages encode the distinction between direct and indirect knowledge, and the coding means are the same that code direct and indirect perception. Other languages encode the difference between certainty and lack of certainty in the truth of the proposition of the embedded clause. Both types of distinctions are marked by the same two complementizers. The use of two different com­ plementizers indicates that the semantic properties of the verb glossed 'know' in some Chadic languages are different from the verb 'know' in English or other IE languages. It would appear that the Chadic equivalents may be closer to the meaning 'believe' than 'know'.

9 TEMPORAL CLAUSES

9.1

Issues to be discussed

A division between the matrix and the subordinate clause for adverbial temporal clauses can be justified on functional grounds: The adverbial time clause pro­ vides temporal reference for the apodosis in a way similar to the adverb of time. The temporal reference can be general, i.e. indicating that the event described in the apodosis occurred at some unspecified time indicated by the subordinate clause. Such clauses are marked by 'when' in English. They do not specify the type of temporal relationship that holds between the event of the subordinate clause and the event of the apodosis but, rather, indicate that the protasis is a general time reference for the apodosis. In the following English sentences 'when' does not indicate any specific relationship with respect to time, such re­ lationships being encoded by other elements in the sentences. (1) (2) (3)

When she was working on her degree, he took care of their chil dren. When she got her degree, he started graduate school. When she starts working, they will be able to afford a house.

In all of the above sentences 'when' may be replaced by other subordinators, such as 'while' in (1), 'after' in (2) and (3), and 'once' in (3), without altering the truth value or temporal relationship of the clauses, but changing the temporal specification by narrowing it. It follows, therefore, that 'when' has a quite dif­ ferent meaning and function from the other, more specific, subordinators. In Chadic, as in other languages, the general time reference may also be encoded by means other than the use of subordinators. Temporal clauses may indicate that some event, state, etc., occurred before, after, or simultaneously with another event. Thus we can expect adverbial clauses corresponding to 'before S', 'after S', 'while S', and possibly a few

304

COMPLEX SENTENCE

others. Such clauses functionally correspond to lexical or phrasal adverbs of time in the language. The specific subordinators 'while', 'after', and 'once' include the temporal function of 'when' and carry additionally the function of a more narrow description of temporal relations. In the ensuing discussion I de­ scribe the grammaticalization of both general and specific temporal clauses. The protasis may also indicate the proximity of the time of the apodosis with respect to the protasis, corresponding to the English periphrastic expression 'as soon as'. In Chadic languages this function has been grammaticalized and in­ volves the use, among other means, of apodosis markers. The relative order of clauses in Chadic may be adverbial-matrix, or matrixadverbial, and the events described in the two clauses may also have varied temporal relationships, i.e., the apodosis may contain an event that preceded or followed the event of protasis. In the first part of this chapter I attempt to find out the regularities of and the constraints on the order of clauses. The second part of the present chapter is devoted to a discussion of the tem­ poral markers of the subordinate clause. My main focus here is to describe the process of grammaticalization that resulted in the emergence of temporal mark­ ers. Main clauses in Chadic present an interesting issue of their own because formally both clauses, viz. main and subordinate, may be marked by special morphemes. In some languages it may even be the case that the marker of the subordinate clause is identical with the marker of the apodosis. Consider the English sentences discussed earlier. If we insert the time adverbial 'then' be­ fore the apodosis, the meaning of the sentences is considerably narrowed. Sentences with 'then' in the apodosis carry specific semantic and pragmatic functions. The semantic function could probably be captured by the formula 'when S, then and only then S', a temporal equivalent of conditional 'if and only if clauses. What it means is that the event of the protasis occurs only during the time described by the event of the protasis: (4) (5) (6)

When she was working on her degree, then he took care of their children. When she got her degree, then he started graduate school. When she starts working, then they will be able to afford a house.

The pragmatic function of 'then' may be linked to the speaker's belief about the hearer's state of knowledge or to some statements produced in the preceding discourse. Thus all three sentences could be produced to correct a previous

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

305

statement that the speaker believes to be wrong. The marker 'then' does not specify the time of the event as preceding, following, or simultaneous with the time of the event of the protasis but, rather, excludes all other times from the scope of the apodosis. In what follows I show that the use of apodosis markers in Chadic languages is not necessarily motivated by the same semantic and pragmatic considerations that govern the use of 'then' in English. I also de­ scribe the grammaticalization process that led to the emergence of the apodosis markers. There are two additional issues in the discussion of temporal clauses. They are the position of the subordinate clause temporal marker and the connection between the position of the marker and the history of its grammaticalization. Present linguistic knowledge allows us to explain the motivation for every process of grammaticalization, including the source from which a grammatical morpheme emerged. As with the science of evolution, which cannot predict what form a given organ will assume after a certain time, we are unable to pre­ dict what functions will be assumed by a given lexical or grammatical form. In contrast to the science of evolution, we cannot predict what sources will serve the process of grammaticalization of a specific category in a specific language. The study of the origin of subordinators in any language family enriches the knowledge of the development of its grammatical system.

9.2

The order of clauses

Recall that the order of clauses is exploited in some Chadic languages as a de­ vice coding the modality of the sentence when the apodosis has a verb of say­ ing. Two issues are important with respect to clausal order: (1) whether the order is predictable from any components of the language structure or discourse structure? (2) whether the order of clauses has an impact on any other compo­ nents of language structure, more specifically, on the presence or absence of subordinators and consecutive markers, and their relative order with respect to embedded or main clauses. The discussion of the order of clauses is also im­ portant in view of the potential iconicity of the order of clauses whereby the clause describing an earlier event should, as a default case, precede the clause describing a later event (cf. Greenberg 1966). Some Chadic languages have only the order embedded-matrix, and others have two orders, embedded-matrix and matrix-embedded. There appear to be no languages that have only the order matrix-embedded. Available data do not

306

COMPLEX SENTENCE

allow one to predict the order of clauses from other characteristics of the lan­ guage. Thus word order, a potentially important characteristic, has no impact on clause order. Both clausal orders, adverbial-matrix and matrix-adverbial, are present in both SVO and VSO languages. In lieu of evidence consisting of data from all languages with the two word orders, I provide examples of the two clausal orders in only two languages, Xdi, a VSO language, and Hausa, a SVO language. Xdi (VSO) Matrix-adverbial: (7) ďgá-ì dà tá dgú yà kà sà-γà tsì thresh-POT 1SG OBJ threshing DEM SEQ comeDIST 3SG Ί was threshing when he came' Adverbial-matrix : (8)

lá-m-á-nì ndá tà γláŋódàk enter-IN-GEN-3SG ASSOC PREP back entrance ngá lá-m-á-nì hlà-ná-γá-tà NORM go-IN-GEN-3SG search-ADD-DIST-REF zàál-á-tán husband-GEN-3PL Having entered through the back of the compound, she should find her husband.'

Hausa (SVO): Matrix-adverbial: (9) . Yara-η sun fita baya-η da children-DEF 3PL.PERF go out after-GEN REL suka ci abinci 3PL.PERF.REL eat food 'The kids went out after they had eaten' Bagari as quoted in Thompson and Longacre 1985:181) Adverbial-matrix:

TEMPORALCLAUSES (10)

307

dà ďa-n ya tàfi, kàfìn ya dawo, ya 'iskè 'ùbâ-n when boy-DEF  go before  return  find father-DEF yà ràsu  miss 'when the boy went out, before he returned, he found that the father died' (Kraft 1963:153-154)

The order adverbial-matrix is the only order available when neither the tem­ poral clause nor the apodosis is marked by any temporal markers, a phe­ nomenon quite frequent in many Chadic languages. It follows that in such sit­ uations the order of the clauses is the only indicator of the temporal relationship whereby the time of the first clause is the point of reference for the time of the main (second) clause in the sentence, e.g.: () woman 3F.PERF come VENT man 3M.PERF get up up 'when the woman arrived the man got up' (Munjuk, Tourneux MS) The reverse order of clauses would produce a reverse relative order of the events. There are other, periphrastic, devices to code protasis in Munjuk, and they are described in the section on the origin of subordinators. If the protasis is not marked by a temporal marker but the apodosis is marked by the marker 'then', the subordinate clause must precede the apodosis, e.g., in Hausa: (12)

ya-nà jefa-d dà 'ita, sai mijì-n 3M-PROG throw-CAUS PREP 3F SEQ man-DEF ya farkà 3M wake up 'He was throwing it away when the man woke up' (Kraft 1963:244)

(13)

ya-nà tàfiyà, sai 'àkwiyà ta gan shì 3M-PROG travel SEQ goat 3F see  'He was in transit when the goat saw him' (Kraft 1963:243-244)

308

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Some of the languages in which both orders are present are Hausa, Kanakuru (West), Xdi and Gidar (Central), and Bidiya (East). (In Table 9.1 a blank indicates the absence of explicit information rather than the absence of the given order.) TABLE 9.1. Clausal order Language Hausa Kanakuru Pero Mupun Ngizim Tera Hona Margi Kapsiki Mandara Xdi Lamang Giziga Mina Buduma Munjuk Gidar Lele Bidiya

Matrix-embedded yes yes yes yes

Embedded-matrix yes yes

yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes general yes general

yes yes

specific specific

In some languages the order of clauses appears to be linked to the distinc­ tion between the general protasis and the specific protasis. Thus in Gidar the general temporal protasis precedes the apodosis, e.g.: (14) when 3F-arrive then lSGprepare-PERF body-lSG 'when she arrived I was ready' The specific protasis 'after' is marked only by the order matrix-embedded. Both sentence have the same temporal marker dágà marking realis:

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

309

(15) Ғ-buy cloth after 3F sell goat 'she bought herself cloth after she sold a goat' Since in the same language the order may be either embedded-matrix or ma­ trix-embedded, there must some factors that favor one choice over the other. I suspect that these must be mainly pragmatic factors such as the speaker's as­ sumption about which clause represents old and which clause represents new information for the hearer, the saliency of the individual propositions, and other factors involved in the interaction of the situation, the speaker's assumptions about the hearer's knowledge of the events, theflowof the conversation or nar­ rative, the type of language use, e.g. proverb, language game, or song. At pre­ sent, there are very few Chadic languages for which appropriate texts have been collected and none in which texts have been analyzed from the point of view of the order of clauses. The overwhelming number of languages in which the em­ bedded clause precedes the apodosis indicates that this must also have been the order of clauses in Proto-Chadic.

9.3

Temporal clauses through juxtaposition

A simple juxtaposition of clauses may receive temporal interpretation. In such an unmarked construction the protasis precedes the apodosis. Pa'a (West) has temporal clauses marked by a borrowed marker derived from the lexeme 'time' as well as clauses marked only by juxtaposition, e.g.: (16)

u tu dapaa, u ndər mishii na 2SG.SUBJ went bush, 2SG.SUBJ did what Q '(when) you went to the bush, what did you do?' (M. Skinner 1979:87)

In Ga'anda (Central) neither the temporal 'when' clause nor the apodosis is marked by a particle. Instead it appears that sequencing of clauses, tenses, and/or aspectual markers encodes the temporal relationship between two events, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

310 (17)

ø $ә ďә-ki ә 1ә ø $ә na-ki AOR HAB go-lSG PREP market AOR HAB see-lSG nafcə kaan people 'when I go to market, I see many people' (Ma Newman 1971:144, $ = lateral alveolar fricative)

(18)

0 na-ki rakata ә ә-ki xa AOR MOD-SQT run-lSGPERF fall-SQT '(As) I was running, (then) I fell' (Ma Newman 1971:146)

Since in some languages this way of coding exists alongside coding through a borrowed overt marker of protasis, such as the word lokaci, which is a loan word in many Chadic languages, it is possible that in Proto-Chadic the protasis was not overtly marked.

9.4

The relative position of temporal markers

In the majority of Chadic languages the general temporal protasis marker pre­ cedes the embedded clause, but in a few languages it follows the protasis. In Table 9.21 have included the relative orders of 'when' and protasis. TABLE 9.2. (1) The position of temporal markers Language

When-embedded

Hausa Kanakuru Pero Mupun Daffo-Butura Fyer Tera Hona Margi Kapsiki Mandara Xdi

yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

Embedded-when

yes yes yes yes yes

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

311

TABLE 9.2. (2) The position of temporal markers Language Giziga Mina Buduma Munjuk Gidar Lele Bidiya Mesme

When-embedded yes yes

Embedded-when

yes yes yes yes periphrastic

yes yes

I will show in the next section that, with the exception of Buduma, whenever the general protasis marker follows rather than precedes the protasis, it is identi­ cal with or derived from a demonstrative and/or a definite marker. Demonstratives and definite markers in Chadic always follow the phrase they modify. Hence the position of the general protasis markers after the protasis can be explained by the source from which the temporal markers have been grammaticalized.

9.5

Sources of the general protasis markers

9.5.1 The synchronic picture In many IE languages the general protasis markers ('when' markers) are identi­ cal with or derived from the interrogative particle inquiring about time, e.g. English 'when', Polish kiedy, French quand. One of the interesting features of the 'when' markers in Chadic is that there are several sources from which they were grammaticalized but, hardly ever the interrogative. The only language for which one may postulate the development of the temporal marker from the inter­ rogative marker is Gidar. The temporal irrealis marker in Gidar is án, e.g.: (19)

án á gidér nàná cateshist nà-ní when PREP Guider 1SG catechizer 1SG-COP 'when I am in Guider I am a catechizer'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

(20) when PREP Guider 3F then 3F cook beer 'when she is in Guider she cooks beer (the heavy variety)' The marker án is also specific interrogative word for 'what', e.g.: (21) Tizi 3M ask-PERF what 2SG buy 'Tizi asked what you bought' (he asked the question) Some of the less obvious and therefore more intriguing sources of protasis markers are complementizers and sequential markers. But there are also mark­ ers for which I did not find a potential source. It is interesting that even two closely related languages, i.e. languages belonging to the same smallest unit in current classifications, may have quite different structures with respect to time and conditional adverbial clauses and they may have unrelated markers of the matrix clause and the protasis. This fact points to a relative chronology of grammaticalization; more specifically, it shows that the present temporal mark­ ers developed independently in the languages involved. TABLE 9.3. (1) The temporal markers Language Hausa

When dà, ko dà,

Kanakuru Pero Bole Angas Mupun Daffo-Butura Fyer Ngizim Pa'a Tera Ga'anda Hona Cibak Margi

shákám ma

boi, lokasi ko kat

Then sai, periphr. shák n, ø

If 'in,  (dà)

Lexical source Preposition 'time'

ma 'time'

b

kadar) kat

rfak ne ģaafa lokaci

à ma dә

ée

get gaafa, -n

tè

mә ma a ma ma

'time'

mbә kà,0 dә

preposition

313

TEMPORAL CLAUSES TABLE 9.3. (2) The temporal markers Language Kapsiki Mandara Xdi Giziga Mina Gude Buduma Munjuk Gidar Lele Dangla Bidiya Masa Mesme

When ma, nda tawa, mbaďu Periphrastic ma ga, ma 0 periphrastic dágà, na ná gò, gínà min koo periphrastic ma, kà

Then ni ma (Cond) kà ná

If ma ma

Lexical source

dà, dà ánza

ŋe, gema na ná

va, an má bánà, na ba kaa

dana

kà

preposition

In Table 9.3 I included conditional markers because in a number of languages they are related to the temporal markers. 'Time marker' is the marker used in interrogative clauses inquiring about the time. In the ensuing sections I discuss the origin of most of the markers listed in the table. 9.5.2 'Time' as source of general protasis markers 9.5.2.1 Two type of constructions involving 'time' A source of 'when' expressions in Chadic that one of the easiest to identify is the word for 'time'. Some temporal clauses have a structure consisting of a preposition, the lexeme for 'time', and S, quite similar to English 'at the time when'. In Chadic languages such constructions optionally have the adverbial marker corresponding to 'when'. When the lexeme for 'time' has not been grammaticalized to mean 'when', a relative clause is used to modify 'time', as in the following example: (22)

kūir gō tùwà ánýdéná sé kīníin-gé time REL fire take then INCEPT run.PL֊3PL 'when the fire started, they ran away' (Lele [East])

COMPLEX SENTENCE

314

The importance of the use of the relative clause will become apparent shortly, in the discussion of demonstratives as sources for general protasis markers. When the word for 'time' has been grammaticalized and assumes the func­ tion of the grammatical marker 'when', no relative clause markers are used and the morpheme derived from the lexeme 'time' is the main marker of the prota­ sis. I present a few examples from several languages that have such construc­ tions. In Kanakuru temporal clauses are formed with word shákâm 'when' fol­ lowed by the protasis: (23)

shakam náa birfa ya à - boi when 1SG ask 3M 3M show-lSG place 'when [time that] I asked him he showed me the place' (Newman 1974:106)

This marker is obviously related to the morpheme shák glossed as 'then' in Newman 1974. Newman 1974:106 provides a plausible explanation of shakam as deriving from a free noun *shaka 'time' (not in Newman's KanakuruEnglish Vocabulary) and demonstrative ә/ 'that'. I can support this expla­ nation by adding the fact that in specific temporal clauses the adverbial expres­ sion for 'after' is formed by the word bí' 'back/behind/after' optionally fol­ lowed by mə/m 'that'. In Mupun the subordinate clause is sentence initial, and it is preceded by the marker kat The apodosis is preceded by the sequential marker be, e.g.: (24)

kat də mwes nə cfuur 6e mu wa when PAST wine DEF finish SEQ 1PL return 'when the wine was finished we returned home' (Frajzyngier 1993)

The word kat in contemporary Mupun is also a conditional marker, but it does not have the meaning 'time'. But there is language-internal and comparative evidence that the marker is derived from a lexeme meaning 'time'. The remote past tense marker, or lexeme indicating 'remote time in the past', in Mupun is get In Fyer (Ron subgroup) the conditional marker is get Assuming that the three morphemes are related, there are therefore the following possibilities for the grammaticalization processes, one starting with a lexical item, and the other resulting in a lexicalization of grammatical marker: 'past' —> past tense marker —> temporal —> conditional, or conditional —> temporal —> past tense

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

315

marker —> 'past'. The first of these processes has been independently attested in other Chadic languages. The second process has only the first stage inde­ pendently attested, viz. conditional —> temporal. The second stage, ending with lexicalization, viz. temporal —> past tense marker —> 'past', is not in­ dependently attested and is not a very plausible one. It would involve a lexical­ ization whose source is a grammatical marker (the temporal 'when'). Therefore the only two grammaticalization sequences available are from the lexeme mean­ ing 'past' —> temporal —> conditional, or 'past' —> conditional —> tempo­ ral. There is also phonological support for the proposed sequences of grammat­ icalization. I take the voiced form of the velar in the word get to be the older form. The processes of devoicing of initial consonants are widely attested in Chadic, and there are no processes of initial voicing attested. Moreover, it is also attested in Chadic (and in other languages) that once a form becomes grammaticalized it undergoes phonological changes, including reduction. The voiced form get in Mupun represents the least grammaticalized function, 'past time', which came to be grammaticalized as 'past tense'. The voiceless form kat represents a more grammaticalized forms, 'when' and 'if. Therefore, the source for the grammaticalization of the marker of temporal and conditional clauses in Mupun and Fyer was the lexeme for 'past time'. Once we know the lexical source we can establish the order of grammaticalization, which for the temporal and conditional markers in Mupun and Fyer is 'past time' —> tempo­ ral —> conditional. In Giziga the temporal complement may be marked or unmarked. Clausefinal ná may or may not appear. The unmarked protasis does not differ from a matrix clause, e.g.: (25)

'à s-ám yàrn lè ná 'à r-ám gòd-tàŋ 3PL drínk-3PL water PERF DEM 3PL go-3PL thing-3PL 'when they had drunk the water, they went on their way' (Lukas 1970:66)

The temporal markers are clause-initial phrases such as tap(a)s 'daylight', 'sunlight', 'daytime', 'when', which come from the preposition ta 'with' and pas 'day', or sarta ŋga 'time'. (26)

tapas ye m-ro Dlabu 'i pur dərleŋge le when 1SG ?-go Dogba 1SG see leopard PERF 'When I went to Dogba, I saw a leopard' (Lukas 1970:80)

316

COMPLEX SENTENCE

(27) sartà ŋga zèďék 'á sáwá ná 'á zùm -à dlíl -dek lè time son 3SG come DEM 3SG eat-3SG property-2SG PERF 'when your son came, he ate up your property' (Lukas 1970:79) In Xdi there is a periphrastic expression mà ñtík à 'at the time of, consist­ ing of preposition mà, the word ñtík 'time' and the genitive marker à, which connects the expression with whatever follows it. A similar expression exists in closely related Lamang (cf. Wolff 1983a). In Mina the lexeme díkà 'past' is used as the marker in clauses correspond­ ing to both the specific protasis marker 'after' and the general protasis marker 'when', e.g.: (28)

díkà bíg kà-wú-tsà ná-ŋdà bì-ší past house PERF-start-burn lPL.EXCL-go ASSOC -run 'when the house burned, we fled' (Frajzyngier and Johnston, MS)

(29)

díkà hléhlé sà-hlàngàm mínà rá long ago once lSG-talk Mina PROG àmá mìnjé wìhìŋ sə-hlàngàm rə skə bà CONJ now DEM lSG-talk PROG NEG any more 'once I spoke Mina, but now I don't speak it' (Frajzyngier and Johnston, MS)

Cf.

It is possible that díkà in Mina is a loan word from Fula diga 'since', which in turn may well be a borrowing from Hausa daga (cf. Noye 1989). The possi­ bility that díkà is a borrowing reinforces the cognitive motivation for the use of the lexeme corresponding to 'time' as a temporal marker. Mina also has a tem­ poral marker mə (q.v.) used at the beginning of the protasis. In Bidiya if the protasis refers to a specific or real time, it is marked by an adverbial phrase having the lexeme 'time' as its head. The word for time wîkînne is optional:

TEMPORAL CLAUSES (30)

317

wîkînne kà tàl-tîi - gá, kaat-tí 'àpàŋ time that see-3SG-3SG.O.PERF go-3SG.PERF EMPH dèe-tîi-ga bita begin֊3SG-3SG.O knock.VN 'when/after she saw him, she went immediately to hit him' (Alio 1986:325)

In some languages there is one general term to refer to unspecified place and time. This is the case in Masa. The temporal expression in Masa consists of the spatial marker hày 'belly, interior', which functions as a preposition, fol­ lowed by the lexeme líi 'place', followed by the relative clause marker má, e.g.: (31)

hay li má fúnà hépé wà nái mà tíè PREP place REL food ready 1PL go eat 'when the food is ready we will eat'

In a number of languages, the temporal marker 'when' is borrowed from the lexeme meaning 'time' in other languages. Bole (West), Pa'a (West), and Tera (Central) are some of the languages that have borrowed Hausa lokaci 'time' as the temporal marker. Recall that in Pa'a temporal clauses may be marked by juxtaposition. But the protasis may also be marked by the overt bor­ rowed marker, e.g.: (32)

lokacita mi ka ħwocu time-when 1PL REL. CONT travel (suppletive VN of 'go') ka bItangwil ná mba REL hyena 3SG.COMPL came out 'when we were going, a hyena came out' (M. Skinner 1979:126)

In Tera (Central) the general marker of the protasis is a relative expression consisting of a word for time, lokaci (Hausa), followed by the relative marker, e.g.: (33)

Ali á tləna lokaci naŋ naki nda Ali PROG work time REL 1SG see 3SG.M 'Ali was working when I saw him' (Newman 1970:30)

318

COMPLEX SENTENCE

In Munjuk (Central) the construction is perhaps more elaborate than in other languages. Temporal subordinators in Munjuk consist of an adverbial coding spatio/temporal orientation, a genitive marker, a lexeme meaning place/time, and the relative clause marker. The following are the markers involved (recall that the general protasis in Munjuk may be coded only by position before the apodosis): (34)

wà-n halay nâ belly- moment/place REL 'when' (Tourneux MS)

(The lexeme 'belly, stomach' often acquires in languages of the world the func­ tion of encoding spatial relationship such as 'inside' and 'in' and is further grammaticalized into a general locative marker, adpositional and eventually in­ flectional. The assertion about the adpositional use is illustrated by the example above.) (35)

wùzà-n háláy nǎ front- moment/place REL 'before' (Tourneux MS) àsàkâl nǎ after REL 'after' (Tourneux MS)

Tourneux (MS) proposes that àsàkâl consists of a locative preposition à fol­ lowed by sàkâl 'a posterior moment' (not independently listed in the lexicon of the dialect of Pouss, cf. Tourneux and Patan 1991). Note that since the adver­ bial expression here consists of a locative preposition, there is no genitive linker. These subordinators precede the protasis, e.g.: (36)

wà-n háláy nä m əníy tə so sî belly- moment/place REL woman 3F.PERF comeVENT ďíf à fàká àmáy man 3M.PERF get up up 'when the woman arrived the man got up' (Tourneux MS)

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

319

It is not clear whether the construction wà-n háláy has acquired the function of the general temporal marker 'when'. 9.5.2.2 The marker *dV If we were to take into consideration phonological similarity and function alone, then the principle of arbitrariness of the association between form and function would favor reconstructing a marker *dV as meaning 'when' in Proto-Chadic. The marker dV occurs in two out of the three (or four branches) of Chadic, viz. in Hausa (West), Margi, Kapsiki, and Mandara (Central). The prenasalized forms ndV found in some languages could also be considered variants of the marker da, since in many Chadic languages prenasalized voiced stops corre­ spond to simple voiced stops in other languages. It is, however, possible that the *dV with the function of temporal protasis marker is not a retention from the Proto-Chadic marker but rather an independent innovation in Hausa (West), Mupun (West), and in one group of the Central (Biu-Mandara) branch. The in­ novation could consist of grammaticalization from the same source or from dif­ ferent sources that happen to have similar phonological forms. I shall consider two potential sources of the marker in Hausa, one source of the marker in Mupun, and the potential source of the marker in Margi. The methodological advantages of this approach will become obvious. In Hausa the general temporal marker dà may occur alone or may be pre­ ceded by the particle ko. When the marker is dà alone, it appears to indicate general time, e.g.: (37)

dà gàri ya wayè, sai ya rubùtà takàrda zuwà when town 3M got-light then 3M write letter to wajen sarkin Sìnarì certain chief Sinari 'at dawn he wrote a letter to a chief of Sinari' (Kraft 1963:247)

(38)

dà ta komo, sai 'akà kira tsohuwa when3F return then 3.INDEF.REL call old woman 'when she returned, then they called an old woman' (Kraft 1963:247)

One potential source for the dà as a temporal protasis marker in Hausa is the ad­ verb dáà 'formerly, of old' (Abraham 1962:155). The grammaticalization would proceed from the lexical meaning 'past time' to simply 'time' and then to prota-

320

COMPLEX SENTENCE

sis marker, more or less following the path of other protasis markers derived from the lexeme 'time'. But there is a problem of vowel length. The lexeme 'formerly' has a long vowel; Bargery 1951:172 describes it as a 'very long vowel', and the protasis marker has a short vowel. One could postulate vowel shortening as a phonological effect of grammaticalizaüon, which often involves phonological reduction. But there is in Hausa another potential source of the temporal marker, the associative preposition dà, which also functions as a rela­ tive clause marker and as the marker of affected argument in causative construc­ tions. The derivation of the protasis marker from the preposition dà would not involve any vocalic changes. What needs to be explained, however, is the kind of construction that gave rise to the preposition dà as the marker of temporal protasis. There are two possibilities: One is the relative clause construction, which might have had the form 'time which' where the equivalent of 'which' is dà. Such a construction is reduced and only the relative clause marker remains as an indicator of the type of construction that is involved. Such a grammatical­ izaüon process is independently attested in Chadic when another component of the relative clause, clause-final demonstrative, remains as a remnant of the rela­ tive clause. The other possibility is that the preposition dà with the meaning 'with' came to serve as a marker of temporal protasis. I favor the latter analy­ sis, mainly because there exist adverbial clauses, including time adverbs, which are formed by the preposition dà followed by a noun, e.g.: dà saafee 'in the morning', dà sassafee 'during the time from dawn to sunrise' (Bargery 1951:880). The protasis clause in Hausa is therefore an adverbial clause of time formed with the preposition dà. In Margi (Central) the general marker of temporal clauses is də, e.g.: (39)

do ja tsu bzer, dənyi ga mtu CONJ 3SG still boy father die 'when he was still a boy, his father died' (Hoffmann 1963:281)

The marker is identical with both the relative clause marker and the associative marker. Hoffmann (1963:244) draws attention to the fact that the marker in Margi has the same functions as the marker dà in Hausa. Once again, the problem of whether the temporal protasis marker derives from the relative clause marker or the associative preposition must be resolved in favor of the latter because, like Hausa dà, Margi dà can form adverbial phrases including adverbs of time, e.g.: dò bòcì 'in the daytime', dò vò'ì 'in the night' (Hoffmann 1963:244-245).

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

321

9.5.3 From verb 'go' to protasis marker? In Mandara (Central) there are several means of coding general protasis. One is with the marker də occurring between the subject and the verb, e.g.: (40) then lSG when pull 1SG pull one fish 'then when I pulled it out, I pulled out one fish' (41) like that 3SG when go out-EXT 3SG catch-EXT snake EXT 'like that, when he was pulling out, he caught a snake' Although it could be claimed that the Mandara marker də is related to temporal markers *dV found in other languages, in my notes on Mandara I do not have the word 'time' recorded with *dV. Instead I have a word with the component *lokat, which is most probably a borrowing. Therefore I would like to con­ sider another possibility that, admittedly speculative, is not implausible. Mandara has a directional verb dəm 'to go', which may be used as the only verb in a clause, e.g.: (42) afterwards 1PL.INCL go market 'afterwards we will go to the market' The verb dəm may occur as a second verb in a clause in a serial verb construc­ tion, e.g.: (43) come PL PERF 'they went home'

go

house 3PL

When the verb dóm occurs as a quasi-auxiliary verb corresponding to English 'go to verb', the verb dəm is reduced to də, e.g.:

322

COMPLEX SENTENCE (44)

à dó zá rfáfà 3SG go eat food 'he went to eat food'

(45)

ŋà də hlúwà kàlfé ám dórvó (úmlè) 1PL.EXCL go catch fish PREP river another žìrá rà tàpàsákò name 3SG Toposako 'we went fishing in another river that is called Toposako'

Note that in sentences with də translated as 'when' it precedes the verb. In addition to the two examples at the beginning of this section, compare also the following sentence: (46)

à dó tórs-hè à-bórbá záhé àt kònjàrá-ráà zágádè 3SG when pull-EXT 3M-realize snake at һ-  flee 'when he pulled out, he realized it was a snake on his hook, and he fled'

If indeed the verb 'to go' became a temporal protasis marker, this grammatical­ ization process did not happen through a metaphorical extension of some feature of the verb but rather via a temporal function of the verb. Note that all examples given above have the protasis in the past tense. I propose that the verb 'to go' came to encode a past tense, and then the temporal protasis marker interpretation came because of the temporal relationship between two clauses. Thus the structure Past-S-S came to be interpreted as 'when S S'. The unifying element between the three grammaticalization processes is the notion of time, which may be realized by different lexical sources, but which grammaticalized to become the marker of the temporal protasis. 9.5.4 From conditional to temporal protasis marker In this section I will show that in several Chadic languages the general temporal protasis marker is derived from a conditional marker. Such grammaticalization has not been observed in the literature thus far (cf. Lehmann 1985, Heine et al. 1991) and is specifically ruled out in Hopper and Traugott 1993:180. The im­ portance of this grammaticalization process lies in its being part of the evidence that when there are two grammatical forms A and ,  could be derived from A

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

323

or A could be derived from B. The challenge for grammaticalization study is to show which direction the grammaticalization process actually proceeded and the challenge for grammaticalization theory is to discover the constraints, if any, that would favor one direction over the other. I believe that this section answers both of those challenges. 9.5.4.1 Temporal protasis marker *ma The marker *ma with the function 'when' has been attested in three out of four branches of Chadic, viz. in Pero (West), Kapsiki, Mandara, Mina, and Buduma (Central), and Mesme (Masa). Thus *ma is an excellent candidate for recon­ struction as a Proto-Chadic 'when' marker. Although the marker with previous functions occurs in many languages from the three branches of Chadic, I will argue that the marker *ma originated not as a temporal but rather as a condi­ tional marker. I will discuss the problem of reconstruction and potential sources of *ma after the presentation of the relevant data. The sources of *ma as a conditional marker are discussed in Chapter 10. In Pero the marker of time and the marker of conditional clauses is the same, ma. The marker follows the subject and precedes the verb. The protasis usually precedes the apodosis. The apodosis has the sequential marker n- if it has no other tense markers. If other tense markers occur, there is no sequential marker, e.g.: (47)

cúrj-i mà-yí-kò n-búgò dò píijì evening-DEF COND-make-COMPL CONS-strike face drum 'when the evening comes they will strike the drum' (Frajzyngier 1989a:269)

(48)

mà-káppújò-kò-n n-púndò ló-ì COND-tell.PL-COMPL-BEN SEQ-cook meat-DEF mà-púndútò-kò ló-ì doe cárfďó-kò COND-cook.PL-COMPL meat-DEF all take-COMPL kò-róccò-ì n-béccíj-ínà cò gbonoŋ piece-liver-DEF SEQ-sacrifice time three 'when they have told him (about it), they will cook the meat; when they have cooked all the meat, they will take a piece of liver and sacrifice three times' (Frajzyngier 1989a:269)

COMPLEX SENTENCE

324 (49)

mà-yí-kò dàmbáŋ-mò 6áló-kò COND-make-COMPL damban-DEM tire-COMPL 'when they have performed the damban they became tired' (Frajzyngier 1989a:271)

Kapsiki (Central) has two general markers, nda and ma. The following ex­ ample with ma refers to the events in the future tense, but there also examples where ma codes events in the past tense (see specific time coding later in this chapter): (50)

má kédziyí genaks Y e ŋ ú . . . when go over (there) tell John . . . 'when you are there tell John . . . ' (Smith 1969:122)

The marker ma is also the conditional marker in Kapsiki and it may cooccur with the temporal marker ndá: (51)

má nda 'a na késé nda ka-te-zeme mú when when you came ICP IMP eat we 'If you had come we would have eaten' (Smith 1969:123)

In Xdi (Central) the subordinator always occurs at the beginning of the protasis, which may follow or precede the apodosis. One of the markers is ma­ nda 'when/after, since', which seems to be a combination of má and nda, the two markers that we have already seen in other languages. (52)

manda ldrá-f-tá xgá tá drá -kù when start-UP-REF house OBJ fire-AFF mbàďúká xàŋ kà lá-γύ-ì ndá xwáyà then 3PL SEQ go-DIST-POT ASSOC run 'when the fire started they went running' (lit. 'the house having started fire, they went running')

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

(53)

skwá-skwá tá buy-buy tà

lgút-á-nì

mándakəda-k-á-nì

OBJ dress-GEN-3SG after skwá-b-tà

325

finish-ABS-GEN-3SG

gù

IMPERF buy-OUT-REF goat 'she bought herself a dress after having sold a goat' In Buduma all markers of temporal clauses occur in clause-final position. Hence the marker ma, mare, which in other languages occurs in clause-initial position, occurs in clause-final position in Buduma, e.g.: (54) dende migo aanái jaamái mare mbé hànái once people PL olden days TEMP grandfather PL a kol a jai-ni gére daará-n kakó PREP be PREP sit-NOMIN while under-3SG toad naa- qgwái nai gó naa-qgwái na-háŋgé 3SG-scream hippopotamus OBJ? 3SG-scream 3SG-hear 'when our grandfather was living, at the time of our ancestors, un der him a toad and a hippo screamed, he heard' (Lukas 1939:83) The specific temporal marker mare (maare) 'as, when, afterwards', seems to be a combination of the general marker ma and are, e.g.: (55)

yamáá are aamái nau 3PL:get up when/after water came 'when they got up, the water came' (Lukas 1939:79)

(56)

na-cagé mare 3SG-say after 'after he had spoken' (Lukas 1939:79)

But in Buduma the conditional marker is also ma; hence the data in Buduma indicate a connection between the two markers and do not provide evidence for the particular direction of grammaticalization. In Gude the marker of time mə, with a variant ma, may be followed by a clause, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

326 (57)

ma ә mbu'i Musa asii, waatsə minaakii when PERF arrive M. home there was wife usə dfafəna ka CONT cook mush 'when Musa arrived home, there was his wife cooking mush' (Hoskison 1983:130)

(58)

әә әһә ci, ca 'wa tə ki when came-near he ?SUBJ DO-marker IO-marker ka toya dzə tuu s a t i i ahakii her go QUOTE place-his 'when he came here he called to her (saying) that they should go to his place' (Hoskison 1983:140)

(59)

әә nee ci ә iibәerә minaa-kii, ca when see he -marker deserted wife-his ? nә'u to ki aha shandata DO-marker her ? lover 'when he saw his wife had deserted, he followed her to that lover' (Hoskison 1983:140)

The temporal ma may also be followed by specific time markers, such as da ba'a 'after', e.g.: (60)

ma da ba'a-kii-a, nwanwu a shi when after that chief NEUTRAL come 'after that, the chief came' (Hoskison 1983:133)

(61)

ma no dәsәnәtii ka nәngә-nә, makә manjeevinaakii when father think-VN ?three children:his ca tsebәgi lәwuta. eat up meat 'what their father would be thinking, (it was as if) his children were eating up that meat' (Hoskison 1983:136)

In Mesme (Masa) there are two temporal markers, ma and ka, and only one conditional marker, ka. Hence the data in Mesme would appear to support ma as the Proto-Chadic temporal marker.

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

(62)

327

ká bìsin ma Darsòmò gò tá gòbòmbà, PREP morning when Darsomo PROG go bush té'érá càr tà ká -dam chameleon get up.PERF go.PERF PREP-3SG 'the next day, when Darsomo went into the bush, the chameleon went with him' (Fischer 1980:18)

Because of its relatively wide distribution in temporal clauses, the marker ma is an excellent candidate for reconstruction as the Proto-Chadic temporal marker. I propose, however, that it should not be reconstructed as the temporal marker in Proto-Chadic. The justification follows. 9.5.4.2 Conclusions regarding the temporal function of ma There are several lexical items and grammatical markers that could serve as sources for the temporal marker ma in Chadic languages. In addition to the markers that are considered sources for the conditional marker, the conditional marker itself is a potential source for the temporal marker. In fact it appears that most probably the temporal marker ma derives from the conditional ma. The reasoning behind this conclusion is as follows: Most languages that have tem­ poral marker ma also have a conditional ma. There are languages that have a conditional ma but do not have a temporal ma, including Tera, Ga'anda, Margi, Mandara (Central), Lele (East). There appears to be only one language, Mesme (Masa), that has the temporal *mV but no conditional ma. Since ma is much more widespread as the marker of conditional clauses than of the temporal clauses, its occurrence in temporal clauses represents a semantic-functional ex­ tension from a conditional to a temporal meaning. The cognitive process behind this grammaticalization is based on the semantic properties of conditional and temporal clauses. A conditional clause encodes a hypothetical event, i.e. an event that did not take place. Thus the semantic domain of the event is not the domain of reality but rather the domain of speech. The general protasis also sit­ uates the time with reference to a proposition rather than to a deictic (i.e. de re) point in time. Representing Chadic structure in English glosses, a phrase 'on Thursday' is de re, but a construction 'when he went to the market' is de dicto because the time is determined by a proposition. Thus temporal adverbial clauses are inherently de dicto rather than de re. The expression 'when S' is also in the domain de dicto because the content of the clause (S) serves as refer­ ence point for the time represent by 'when'. Thus the grammaticalization from

328

COMPLEX SENTENCE

conditional· to temporal is a natural extension of the meaning of the morpheme within the same semantic domain. As a final piece of evidence for the direction from conditional to temporal, consider the facts in Mandara. The language has several temporal protasis markers, including mà, which is also the conditional marker in Mandara. The evidence for the derivation from conditional to tempo­ ral is provided by the fact that in its temporal function mà is used when the pro­ tasis describes irrealis events, including events in the future, e.g.: (63)

á mà sóm hè mà ya màgà ngá rwà 3SG TEMP come EXT TEMP 1SG prepare body 1SG 'when he came, I should have been getting ready'

(64)

mà γlό-γlί ďàfá mì-də-zà when finish-finish food lPL.INCL-INTENT-eat 'when the food is ready, we will eat'

The explanation of derivation from conditional marker to temporal marker does not preclude, and in fact makes possible, grammaticalization from temporal to conditional markers, for exactly the same reasons. Further support for the se­ mantic factors involved in grammaticalization within the de dicto domain is provided in the next section. Lest it be interpreted that the change from conditional to temporal protasis marker is linked to the properties of the marker ma, I provide here data from Mina (Central), where the same grammaticalization involved a conditional marker unrelated to ma. In Mina there are several means of encoding the tem­ poral protasis. One of them involves the use of the marker 6ngə, probably cog­ nate with the third person possessive form ngə. As a temporal marker it is not very frequent, but the instances when it occurs have unambiguously temporal interpretation, e.g.: (65) əngə kə-nd-á wìhŋ sà-mə-nj-í mbé when PERF-go-DIST DEM lSG-REL-be-STAT close 'when he came, I was close' The marker occurs, however, much more frequently as a conditional marker. Compare the following sentence where the temporal interpretation of the prota­ sis is ruled out, because (1) the protasis clause does not have the perfective-past tense marker nkə, which rules out the reading 'when she was your wife, she

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

329

cooked food', and (2) neither the protasis clause nor the apodosis clause has a future tense marker, and in addition the apodosis clause has the perfective marker, which rules out the reading 'when she will be your wife, she will cook food'. (66)

óngó wál té kón á nkó dà wúdà if woman GEN 2SG 3SG PERF cook food 'if she is your wife, she should cook food'

The importance of the data from Mina lies in the fact that they demonstrate that the change from conditional to temporal or from temporal to conditional in Chadic is not linked to a specific marker but rather to semantic properties of mood and time. 9.5.4.3 The marker mə in Mina Additional evidence for a conditional protasis marker becoming a temporal pro­ tasis marker is provided by Mina (Central). The general protasis marker is a sequence of morphemes mə nä. The apodosis clause has no overt morphologi­ cal marker. (67)

mó nà ín-kó tók kə zəg za əno lay STAT TEMP 3PL-PERF finish INF work PAST PREP field ín-kó nd-á tàtáŋ á wtə tətáŋ 3PL-INF go-DIST 3PL PREP home 3PL 'when they finished their work in the field, they returned home'

(68)

mó nà wədə mbé nók zàm zá STAT TEMP food ready 1PL eat FUT 'when the food is ready, we will eat'

The first component of this sequence, mə is a stative marker, a component of one series of demonstratives. It is also a relative clause marker, e.g.: (69)

hídómó-dà-há-k ká wíhíŋ ngámb-náŋ man REL-bring-VENT-1SG hereDEM friend-lSG 'the man who brought me here is my friend'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

330

The marker mə has several other functions, including a nominalizing function. The second component ná appears to be a temporal preposition, a component of some temporal adverbs: nà-wânà last year', nà-kàhà 'today'.e.g.: (70) lSG-PERF-see elephant be last year Ί saw an elephant last year' The sequence mó-nà is also used in conditional clauses, e.g.: (71) REL TEMP PERF finish work-3SG be can INF rest DEM 'if she finished her work, she can rest' The argument for direction from conditional to a temporal interpretation is pro­ vided by those clauses where the sequence mó-nà may not have a temporal in­ terpretation, as in the following sentence where the sequence mó-nà encodes only the hypothetical: (72) 3SG-ask-OBJ-lSG COMP if lSG-know/understand?Mina 'he ask me as if I know Mina' Thus the function of the marker is to encode conditional and hypotheti­ cal, and the marker came to be used also as the temporal protasis marker. 9.5.5 From sequential marker to general protasis marker The connection between the markers of the apodosis and the markers of the protasis in conditional clauses was briefly pointed out in Traugott 1985. There are data in Chadic that also display the connection between protasis and apo­ dosis markers when the protasis is a temporal rather than a conditional clause. In Pero the sequential marker preceding the apodosis is n. (73) when-eat.PL-PERF SEQ-take gruel SUB-3PL SEQ-drink 'when they have eaten, they take the wine and drink'

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

331

There are also sentences in which the sequential marker occurring in clause-ini­ tial position is interpreted as a protasis marker, e.g.: (74)

n- túrà púró-ì nín- cínù cíkà cá kpó múmmò SEQ-climb tree-DEF SUBJ-3PL jackal say oh this kù- púŋà-nò ?-branch֊lSG 'when they climbed up the tree, the jackal said, "oh, this is my branch'"

Despite the formal similarity between the protasis marker and the sequential apodosis marker as illustrated by the preceding example, I propose that the 'when' function does not represent an extension of the apodosis marker but rather the extension of the discourse function of the sequential marker. Recall from Chapter 2 that sequential markers in Pero as in other Chadic languages are used to mark sentences describing events in succession. In Gidar (Central) the apodosis marker in temporal (and conditional) clauses is ná. The same marker is used in one type of protasis, e.g.: (75)

á nà gàp-ək nà án zá5án zú-wà 3SG when arrive-PERF then 1SG.FUTprepare body-1SG 'when he will arrive, I will be ready'

(76) á nà gàp-ək nà ә zábán gən zú-wà 3SGwhen arrive-PERF then 1SG prepare SUBJ body-1SG 'when he will arrive, I should be ready' The explanation for the change from apodosis to protasis marker in temporal clauses involves the notion of de dicto domain. The apodosis is in the domain de dicto in that it refers to the time specified in the preceding clause rather than in some real time. The protasis clauses as in examples from Gidar above de­ scribe events that may happen, the hypothetical events. The de dicto domain is also hypothetical. Hence the use of the same marker to code the hypothetical event in the protasis clause.

332

COMPLEX SENTENCE

9.5.6 Copula as a general protasis marker Traugott 1985 states that equational clauses may function as conditional clauses. In at least one Chadic language, Hona, there is evidence that equational clause copulas may function as temporal rather than conditional protasis markers. The following examples are taken from Frajzyngier and Jordan MS where nì occurs at the end of the protasis, but its presence is not required. It would appear therefore that nì, which occurs rarely as the marker of the protasis, has some additional semantic or pragmatic function. At present I have no explanation for the functional load of the copula in temporal clauses in Hona. (77)

kəs-an-ә ciyá-ya tléŋg-d ùra-ndàn catch-ANAPH-3SG chicken-PL cut-3SG neck 3PL 'when he caught chickens, he slaughtered them'

(78)

kəs-ənda dìyá-yí nì tlə-nda ùra-ndàn catch-3PL chicken-PL COP cut-3PL neck-3PL 'when they caught chickens, they slaughtered them'

(79)

kəs-à-nda cfíyà-rá tlé-ndà ùra-ndàn catch-PL- 3PL chicken-INDEF cut-3PL neck 3PL 'when they caught the chickens, they slaughtered them'

Cf.

Cf. kàsə-nən ďiyá-ra nì tlén-gon urá-ndàn catch-3SG chicken-INDEF COP cut-3SG neck 3PL 'when he caught chickens, he slaughtered them' The temporal marker in Hona is identical with the copula, which not only has the same phonological form but also occurs in predicate-final position, e.g.: (80)

fətìr-yaa ni kádà Hona-PL COP 3PL 'they are Hona'

(81)

wánmà-nà ní ďá-γà brother-1SG COP run away 'it is my brother who ran away'

TEMPORAL CLAUSES (82)

náfì rfa-γà xəs-yà-nì nàfí tsó-ka persons run-3REL man-PL-COP persons stay-3.REL nìsí-ya-nì women-PL-COP 'those who ran away were men; those who stayed were women'

(83)

nù dia tè woman DEM ASSOC 'this woman is Hona'

333

fàtìr-eé nì Hona COP

Recall that in closely related Ga'anda neither the temporal protasis nor the apo­ dosis clause is marked by a particle. Since equational copulas functioning as protasis markers were not observed in other languages, I assume that the facts illustrated by the examples in Hona constitute an innovation in that language. 9.5.7 Demonstratives/definite marker as temporal markers In some languages the temporal markers occur at the end rather than at the be­ ginning of the protasis. Clause-final temporal markers differ in most languages from clause-initial markers phonologically, which suggests that the source from which they were grammaticalized may be different from that of the clause-initial markers. Anticipating the discussion to follow, I propose that in most lan­ guages clause-final temporal markers are identical with demonstratives and/or definite markers, and that these clause-final general protasis markers derive from demonstratives and/or definite markers. I represent clause-final protasis markers by the gloss DEM. The following questions need to be resolved: To what constituent do these markers belong, to the protasis, viz. S-DEM, to the apodosis, viz. DEM-S, or possibly to neither, functioning as a constituent of their own in constructions S DEM S? The challenge for the theory of grammaticalization is to explain how a demonstrative or a definite marker becomes a marker of protasis. After presenting the evidence that demonstratives indeed function as protasis markers, I will discuss several alternative explanations of the processes of grammaticalization and argue in favor of one of the alterna­ tives. 9.5.7.1 Evidence that some protasis markers are demonstratives The evidence that some temporal markers are indeed identical with demonstra­ tives or definite markers is mainly phonological. The clause-final markers are

334

COMPLEX SENTENCE

phonologically similar to the demonstratives and/or definite markers present in the same or closely related languages. Here are a few examples: Buduma has two protasis markers, ma and ga. With respect to ma, Lukas 1939 states that it means 'this, aforementioned'. The evidence that the ga marker derives from demonstratives is provided by the fact that Buduma has the demonstrative go 'this, that', e.g. nai gó 'this, that hippopotamus', and the ve­ lar voiced stop is a component of other demonstratives, e.g.: yu-go 'this', cf. yu-má 'this'. In Bidiya there are two means of encoding protasis. One of them is a marker koo (and sometimes kaa), identical with the proximate demonstrative, e.g.: (84)

miidòkoò man this 'this man'

'àwso koò 'this grass'

According to Ebert 1979, in Kera temporal clauses occur before the apodosis and, like other adverbial clauses, are marked definite. Usually temporal sentences are not marked as such, but the presence of the definite morpheme ŋ makes it clear that one is dealing with a complement clause. The particle kay or kəyáŋ 'now' (probably originally a verb) or anə kay 'now', 'so' may occur at the end of a protasis, before the definite morpheme. Examples: (85)

kəcəŋ ďéŋ á vè әmpíri  vora-ŋa, cattle TEMPPREP put feet now lake-DEF Gùbùsíyar) láaté dà ŋ ' faďi Gubusians hit PREP people immediately 'just as the cows put their feet in the lake, the Gubusians began to fight with the people' (Ebert 1979:267)

(86) bә minti wә hàldáq kuntíŋ wəera-ή, wo hàràŋ CONJ 3SG lick flour INTEN-DEF 3SG return dər kóna faďi in water immediately 'when he had licked up the flour, he immediately got back in the water' (Ebert 1979:267)

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

335

9.5.7.2 Constituent status of demonstratives The question whether the demonstratives/definite markers are part of the prota­ sis or of the apodosis or are a constituent of their own, belonging to neither clause, can be resolved by applying several tests. One is a phonological test that examines the intonational patterns within the sentence and measures pauses. If a pause comes before the demonstrative, it most probably does not belong with the first clause; if the pause comes after the demonstrative, it most proba­ bly does not belong with the second clause. Although I was unable to conduct such a test myself, the way data are reported by various Hnguists is indicative of the individual linguist's perception of the constituency status. If a linguist quotes the protasis with the demonstrative as its last element (usually separated by a comma from the rest of the sentence), that may point to the demonstrative's being a constituent of the protasis. If a linguist puts the comma before the demonstrative, it may indicate that the demonstrative was perceived as a con­ stituent of the apodosis. An illustration of such data is the following example from Bidiya, important because the linguist is a native speaker of the language: (87) 'alcaŋ ŋa gáa 'uceŋ mìn ďyoloŋ kaa, páato kàti if only  AUX get up. VN PREP morning DEM son only gàa báa gàa-gá 'erìďeŋ ďo also NEG AUX-3M burn.VN NEG 'had he got up early in the morning the son would not have burned him' (Alio 1986:322) While such examples may be indicative of a linguist's perception of con­ stituency of a marker, they cannot be taken as evidence, because no explicit cri­ teria are stated with respect to constituency or the placement of the comma. Another indication of constituent status is the place of demonstra­ tives/definite markers in particular languages. In most Chadic languages demonstratives occur after the nouns they modify. This is the unmarked case, and all things being equal, there is no reason why in temporal clauses demon­ stratives should occur before the phrase they modify or why they should be in­ dependent constituents. Later in this chapter, I will in fact postulate exactly this scenario, viz. that demonstratives become constituents of the second clause, most probably via the status of independent markers. But the position after the clause should be taken as the initial position in the processes of grammaticalization. What remains to be explained is why demonstratives/definite markers came to be markers of protasis.

336

COMPLEX SENTENCE

9.5.7.3 From relativo clause to demonstrative to temporal protasis marker There are at least two ways to explain how a demonstrative becomes a temporal protasis marker. One is to look for syntactic reasons for the occurrence of a given marker in a given position and then try to explain how it changed seman­ tic function. Another way is to invoke a core or prototypical meaning of a form and then argue for grammaticalization through a metaphoric process. Thus one could claim that demonstratives and/or definite markers establish some fact as men­ tioned previously in the speech and therefore as given and known. The exten­ sion from 'given' to temporal could have occurred along the same line, viz., when the event is given it has already occurred, or in most temporal construc­ tions the events in the protasis precede the events in the apodosis. Thus 'given X, Y', becomes grammaticalized to 'when X, Y'. This type of explanation is often found in contemporary studies of grammaticalization (cf. Traugott 1985, specifically with respect to conditional clauses), but it has a major methodologi­ cal problem. Although plausible, this type of explanations is much too power­ ful, because it can be invoked to explain virtually any functional extension and is impossible to falsify. If such an explanation for grammaticalization were a true description of motivations and constraints, we would expect the process to occur in all languages, unless there were specific constraints preventing the pro­ cess from occurring. With respect to temporal markers derived from demon­ stratives, we would have to postulate that in Chadic languages the demonstra­ tives or definite markers acquired an independent status and could be used in any syntactic environment, after either nominal or verbal expressions. Thus we postulate two changes with respect to the source of grammaticalization: a change in syntactic properties and a change in semantics and or function of the source. Although such explanations are also possible, if one can find an expla­ nation that does not invoke the speaker's completely unrestrained manipulations of grammatical morphemes, that explanation is preferable. In what follows I shall offer an explanation that does not involve a violation of syntactic con­ straints on the occurrence of demonstratives/definite markers, and that postu­ lates only functional change. Moreover, this functional change does not involve metaphorical change. It does, however, involve metonymicai change, as de­ fined in Kuryłowicz 1970, viz. as 'pars pro toto'. The type of metonymy in­ voked is not semantic, as in Heine et al. 1991, but rather structural metonymy: A part of the sign stands for the whole sign.

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

337

9.5.7.3.1 Hypothesis The protasis markers identical with the demonstratives derive from demonstra­ tives that used to be components of the relative clause. The relative clause with the head meaning 'time' was a means to encode protasis. The explanation pro­ vided is consistent with 'time' as a source of the grammaticalization of protasis markers, as described earlier in this chapter. 9.5.7.3.2 Evidence Recall that in the discussion of 'time' as a source of the grammaticalization of protasis markers I stated that the word 'time' alone or 'time' modified by a rela­ tive clause could be the marker of the protasis clause. Bagari postulated that time adverbial clauses in Hausa are 'non-deictic time nouns that are modified by restrictive relative clauses' (Bagari 1976:41). In many other Chadic languages the protasis has the form of a relative clause, more or less corresponding to 'at the time that', e.g. in Lele (East): (88)

kūr gō tùwà any dé-ná sé kīníirī-gé time REL fire take then INCEPT run.PL-3PL 'when the fire started they ran away'

But the word 'time' does not have to be used; the relative marker alone is a suf­ ficient coding device to mark the protasis, as in the following example from Pero, where the protasis is the second rather than the first clause in the sentence: (89)

nì-píl-nà kéekè cì-cakkà lSG-buy-PERF.VENT bicycle REL-3M mún-n-ée-nò kúrbè give-PERF.VENT .OBJ-1SG money 'I bought a bicycle when he gave me money'

In many Chadic languages relative clauses are often followed by a demon­ strative or definite marker (cf. Frajzyngier 1987c and also Chapter 11, this vol­ ume), i.e., they may have a form NP Sentence Demonstrative. The following examples illustrate the use of the relative clause in the protasis in several lan­ guages from three branches. Notice the demonstrative occurring after the pro­ tasis clause. In order to prove that the demonstrative is a component of the relative clause rather than of the temporal protasis, I also give examples of the

338

COMPLEX SENTENCE

relative clause structure in particular languages. The relative may modify the word 'time', e.g.: In Giziga the protasis may end with the marker ná, e.g.: (90) sartà ŋgá zèďék 'á sáwá ná 'á zùm-à time son 3SG come DEM 3SG eat-3SG dlíl-dèk lè property-2SG PERF 'when your son came, he ate up your property' (Lukas 1970:79) In Giziga the entire relative clause is separated from the remainder of the sen­ tence by the subordinating marker ná. The verb in a relative clause is a partici­ ple (prefix -). (91)

mbùr[mú-sawà vrà 'à Dlàagò ŋgá dàambó ná] man [PART-come out PREP Dogba PREP yesterday DEM] 'á r lè 'à Kòzà 3SG go PERF PREP Koza 'The man who came from Dogba yesterday has gone to Koza.' (Lukas 1970:82)

The marker ná is the remote demonstrative marker, e.g.: (92)

*uu ha-na goat DEM-distant 'that goat' (Lukas 1970:44)

The (reduplicated) morpheme nana can have a demonstrative or determinative meaning: (93)

mbur nana man DEM 'this man' (Lukas 1970:44)

I propose that some demonstratives as markers of protasis represent a rem­ nant of a relative clause construction that had the lexeme 'time' as its head. The demonstrative could be either the relative clause marker or the post-relative clause marker. In time, the demonstrative was the only element of the relative

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

339

clause that remained. The evidence for this hypothesis is provided by examples from various languages where (1) the relative clause is still used as a frame to encode protasis, and (2) by the fact that relative clauses in some languages have either relative clause markers or post-relative clause markers identical with the markers used in temporal clauses. The importance of the last piece of evidence rests on the fact that every Chadic language has several series of demonstra­ tives, usually encoding different distances from the speaker and/or hearer, as well as gender and number. Thus if the same marker occurs in two environ­ ments that are unrelated, we would have to ascribe it to chance. If it happens in several languages, the explanation of chance is not tenable. Here is a chart of a few languages that have the protasis marked by a demonstrative. For each of these languages (1) the relative clause has a demonstrative at the end, and (2) this demonstrative is the same as the protasis marker. TABLE 9.4. Protasis markers and relative markers Language

Protasis marker

Buduma (Central) Bidiya (East) Kera (East)

ma koo, kaa ŋ

Post-relative demonstrative ma kà relative -ŋ,

-ŋà

The fact that a demonstrative assumes the function of being the sole marker of protasis is explainable by invoking a semiotic interpretation of metonymy whereby a part of the sign stands for the whole sign. Semiotic metonymy is to be understood here as meaning that part of a sign performs the function of the sign and therefore assumes the property of the sign. As an illustration, think of an old-fashioned road sign consisting of a pole and a plank in the shape of an arrow with the name of a town written on it, per­ haps with a mention of distance to complete the information. Over time the road sign is damaged. The plank falls down; the lettering becomes illegible. The pole alone or the plank alone pointing in any direction will serve as the sign. When a traveler asks for directions, he may be told to turn right or left at the road sign, but the road sign itself is different from what it used to be. The sec­ ondary attributes of the original sign, such as the pole on which the sign was fastened or the material on which the name of the town and the distance were written, become the new signs. Similar replacements of signs can be seen in language.

COMPLEX SENTENCE

340

The following is the proposed development of polysemy of grammatical morphemes in language. A form A with a function X is used with some other form to encode a function Y. For the speakers of the language, every part of the construction that has the function Y may be taken as a marker of this func­ tion. Therefore, the form A, rather than just having the function X, may be taken to be a marker of the function Y. Later, the form A, because of its newly acquired function Y, may be used in other constructions to convey a function Z, not because of the function X that it originally had, but because of the newly acquired function Y. Once A becomes part of the construction to signify Z, it may be taken to have the function Z and will start to be used in the new func­ tion. Since more than one new meaning may be acquired at any stage in the de­ velopment of language, one finds numerous instances of polysemy with mean­ ings that are not obviously related and that approach the status of homonymy. The following diagram illustrates just one change of function. First cycle: Grammatical morpheme/lexical item A + lexical itemb —>functionX Metonymic extension 1: Grammatical morpheme/lexical item A —> func tionX Second cycle: The marker A with meaning/function X + lexical item  —> mean ing/function Y Metonymie extension 2: A —> function Y As an example of semiotic metonymy, consider the development of the French marker pas. It was first used as a reinforcing element in negative clauses in­ volving movement. Then its use was extended to all negative clauses (cf. Hopper and Traugott 1993 and references there). At this point it was no longer considered as a reinforcing particle but rather a component of the negative clause. Then it became a negative clause marker because it acquired the mean­ ing of the whole construction. Subsequently, the original marker of the nega­ tive construction ne could be omitted. The original marker of protasis was a relative clause of which the demon­ strative was the last element. The head of the relative clause, the lexeme 'time', was omitted in usage. The only element of the relative clause construction that remains is the demonstrative, which assumes the same function as the whole construction.

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

341

In Buduma the relative clause most often ends with the demonstrative ma, e.g.: (94)

yiiróu di wukáá ma time thing lSG:say DEM 'the time of the thing (that) I'm talking about' (Lukas 1939:78)

(95)

r)g(u) re digeram gaacege ma mbólau ! town POSS girl 2SG֊speak DEM lPL:go '(to the) town of the girl, which you spoke about, we want to go!' (Lukas 1939:78)

Cf. the temporal protasis marker: (96)

yulúú má 3PL:go there while 'while they were going there' (Lukas 1939:79)

Examples of the temporal protasis and relative clauses in Bidiya: (97)

'ira tà dàa-yáŋ bìrkì koo 'a dùwén-co day RELkill-1PL.INCL cow DEM COPput.VN-3PL semee-y name-3SG.POSS 'the day that we slaughtered a cow was his baptism' (lit: 'the putting of his name') (Alio 1986:325)

The form koo is masculine demonstrative; its feminine and plural counterparts are too and kuu respectively (cf. Alio and Jungraithmayr 1989:91). There are two types of relative clauses in Bidiya. In one type the relative markers are kà (m.), tà (f.), and kù (pl.), e.g.: (98)

mico kà garfga gàli chüd DET run.IMPERF fall 'the child who was running fell' (Alio 1986:223)

Under certain conditions, not described by Alio 1986, the relative clause ends in a demonstrative, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

342

(99)

kinda kà báa gíŋ ďo gàŋ koo, gawaŋ 2SG REL NEG have ? field DEM cultivate ti-ŋa tic-uŋ ASSOC-3M father֊2SG 'you who do not have a field should cultivate with your father' (Alio 1986:223)

The importance of this fact lies in its providing the necessary evidence that the clause-final protasis marker identical with a demonstrative is derived from the post-relative clause demonstrative. Hence what appears to be a marker of tem­ poral protasis originated as a component of the relative clause. 9.5.8 From locative preposition to temporal markers At least two prepositions, 'from' and 'in, at', came to serve as general temporal markers in Chadic languages. Consistent with the position of prepositions in nominal and temporal constructions, the temporal markers occur before embed­ ded clauses regardless of the position of the clause itself. Here are some of the languages in which the grammaticalization preposition —> 'when' took place. In Daffo-Butura the subordinate clause may occur either as the first or the second clause of the sentence. The general temporal marker dak 'when' occurs at the beginning of the protasis, e.g.: (100) ďak 'à wàl sisal lá, tá ni-ét-e táhún when 3SG stop laugh PREP 3SG.SUBJ say-her tomorrow 'á 6wây gabúúr tì má mawet ti má 3SG open granary DEM REL hiding place REL cíf mm-is mà ti, tá tòkay ti gold POSS GEN ?GEN and? ?then/?he drive off with that lèli lá poverty PREP When he had stopped laughing, he told her (that) on the next day he would open the granary which was his hiding place for his gold, and then he would in this way drive away poverty' (Jungraithmayr 1970:206)

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

343

Although I do not have synchronic evidence that dak in Daffo-Butura means 'from', there is comparative evidence for this meaning, as evinced further by the examples from Gidar and Hausa that follow. Gidar (Central) is interesting in that it has two markers of adverbial time clauses, one for realis and the other for irreális. The marker daga 'when' intro­ duces clauses that indicate an action that has been completed or that could have been completed in the past. The apodosis may be marked by the particle ná, identical with the complementizer introducing verba dicendi. The perfective aspect may occur in both clauses, e.g.: (101) dágà tə grá-k wuzá nà-t ná tì fét-kè when 3F finish-PERF work POSS-Ғ then 3F rest-PERF 'when she finished her work, she rested' (102) dágà à grák-nə-n wùzá na gùlíyà à mbát-áŋ íngìlí when 3 finish-PL-PL work POSS field 3 go-PL home 'when they finished the work in the field, they returned home' The other type of subordinate time clause is introduced by ná, which may be reduced to . This type marks irrealis, viz. events to take place in the future. The apodosis is marked by ná in this type of sentence as well. (103) á nà gàp-ək nà án zá&án zú-wà 3SG when arrive-PERF then 1SG-FUT prepare body-1SG 'when he will arrive I will be ready' (104) an wáy va-n à gàp-àk nà á mə-zəmà when food DEM-3M 3M ready-PERF then FUT IPL-eat 'when the food is ready we will eat' Note that another Chadic language, Hausa, has the preposition daga 'from'. The Gidar marker daga and the Daffo-Butura marker dak may be related to the Hausa form. In Mandara the preposition ám 'at' serves as the marker of protasis to en­ code simultaneity of the time of the protasis and the time of the apodosis, e.g.:

344

COMPLEX SENTENCE (105) ám ì škwá ízè áwàyà when 1SG buy salt yesterday 'while I was buying salt yesterday' (106) ám à səm-hè án màgà nyá rùwà when 3SG come-EXT prepare body 1SG 'when he came, I was ready' (107) ám à γlύ wà hlrá rá à pwánsə(h) when 3SG finish work 3SG 3SG rest 'when she finished working, she rested'

The following sentence provides evidence for the preposition ám having a loca­ tive meaning: (108)

ŋà də hlúwà kəlfé ám dərvə (úmlè) 1PL.EXCL go catch fish PREP river another žírá rà tàpàsákò name 3SG Toposako 'we went fishing in another river, which is called Toposako'

In East Dangla the temporal marker is mín. All examples are from Ebobisé, as glossed and analyzed by Erin Shay: (109) mín tòmod-tí-tyà riy-tí, kar dyàmmay-tí-té when finished-Ғ-Ғ work- SEQ rest-3F-PAST 'when she had finished her work, she rested' The marker mín is in all probability a preposition, borrowed from Arabic min 'from'. In Arabic, mín has both a locative and a temporal meaning (I am grate­ ful to Maher Awäd for confirming this). In East Dangla, mín is a common preposition encoding spatial relationships, e.g.: (110)

(111)

ŋu dòs mín sugin-e 3PL return PREP market-LOC 'they came back from the market' ŋà

dòs

mín gεεgεr ki pìlàaniyyè

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

345

 return PREP town PREP  'he went back to such-and-such a place' In Lele there are two markers of general protasis. The first is the de dicto complementizer (q.v.). The second marker gìnà, 'when', is similar to the preposition gína 'like' in clause-initial position. The apodosis is marked by ná in clause-initial position, e.g.: (112) gìnà gùyé ké-gè kaì ná sé è-gé tùgù when work POSS-3PL finish then PERF go-3PL home 'when their work was finished, they returned home' I have no information about a possible difference in function between the two markers of temporal clauses. The development of general temporal protasis markers from prepositions is not problematic. Prepositions that code spatial relationships very often also code temporal relationships. This is, for instance, the case with most preposi­ tions in English. The grammaticalization into the protasis marker is a direct, but by no means an automatic, extension of the temporal function of prepositions. This grammaticalization was made possible because of the coding of time. Recall that the lexeme 'time' is one of the devices to code the protasis. I pro­ pose that the grammaticalization had the following path: locative preposition — > time preposition —> temporal marker. The notion of time here is not of a lexical item but rather of the semantic content that is shared by both prepositions and temporal markers. 9.5.9 De dicto complementizer as general protasis marker One of the most interesting correlations in Chadic is the identity of de dicto complementizers and temporal 'when' markers. The evidence for the connec­ tion between temporal markers and de dicto complementizers is provided by phonological similarity between the two morphemes in particular languages even though there is no similarity between the same morphemes across lan­ guages.

346

COMPLEX SENTENCE TABLE 9.5. Temporal markers and de dicto complementizers

Language

Temporal marker

Fyer (West) Pa'a (West) Logone (Central) Lele (East) Kera (East)

ne ka ká na go _ (bә) minti՜

De dicto comple­ mentizer ne ka kí na minti

Here is the illustration of the similarities between de dicto complementizers and temporal markers in the above languages. In Fyer the marker that encodes temporal protasis clause is the same as the one that serves as complementizer after verbs of saying. The following sen­ tence contains examples of both uses of the same morpheme. Note also that the apodosis is marked by clause-initial marker 'é, most probably related to the Mupun and Mwaghavul apodosis marker . (113) ne mel ti yaŋŋo, 'é tí lak-is when evening 3F then 3F said-him ne fées hóna bátís sú munî COMP father CONJ mother agree 'when evening came, then she told him that her father and mother agreed' (Jungraithmayr 1970:80) The following sentence in Pa'a illustrates both the protasis marker and the complementizer encoded by ka. The grammaticalization in this case, however, did not necessarily go from de dicto complementizer to marker of protasis, but might have been from demonstrative to protasis marker in one environment and from de dicto complementizer to protasis marker in another syntactic environ­ ment. (114) nda і belii hara ka, sei a nguna na Ғ ? return-AOR home REL then PRAM* Spider 3M munda ka . . . said REL (*PRAM = Previous Reference Animate Marker 'when she returned home, Spider said . . . ' (Skinner 1979:45)

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

347

In Lele (East) the marker of a temporal 'when' clause' is the de dicto com­ plementizer nä followed by the relative marker gō. The marker of apodosis is also identical with the complementizer nā, e.g.: (115)

nā gõ tùwà bà dà wàlà nīnā òdì-gé COMP REL fire fall LOC chunk in then run away-3PL gàrnyá ná ASSOC running 'when the chunk of bush took fire, they ran away'

(116)

nā gõ èjè-dí ná ŋ-màglí COMP REL go-VENT-3M COMP lSG-prepare kúsì-η álè body-lSG already 'when he came, I was ready'

Cf. the use of nä as complementizer: (117) kìrbí-dí nā-ì né bay gõ ségré think- - COP person REL hunter 'he thinks that he is a hunter' In Kera (East) temporal clauses may be introduced by what Ebert 1979 calls conjunction bò minti. Among other functions, the first part of the construction bə 'masculine attributive particle' is used in modifying constructions. In many Chadic languages modifying constructions, such as possessive or constructions with property concept words make use of demonstratives. The second part, minti, Ebert calls a subordinating conjunction. Ebert also states that bò minti appears to be a recent construction, since it is observed only among younger speakers. All temporal (and other adverbial clauses) end with the definite marker. What is important for us is that min ti is also the de dicto complemen­ tizer; hence the apparently new development in Kera follows the pattern that can be seen in other Chadic languages. The evidence for the de dicto origin of the marker minti is provided by its similarity to the verb mánté 'call, demand'. Here is an example of a protasis marked by bò minti and the obligatory clausefinal definite marker:

348

COMPLEX SENTENCE (118)

bәminti wə túugúŋ giŕ-dú әŋ, CONJ 3SG arrive consciousness-3SG TEMP wә ráawáq bә manté murú-ŋa 3SG continue ATTR call wife-DEF 'when he arrived home, he called to his wife' (Ebert 1979:267)

According to Ebert, clauses that modify a temporal adverb are introduced by minti, e.g.: (119) adàmádәya minti kaŋ ye á haŋ әәŋ hà'a-η, morning COMP people 3PL PREP bring cattle TEMP-DEF ye hàq tóŋ warná 3PL bring DEM there 'on that morning, when the people had taken the cattle away, they took this (corpse) away' (Ebert 1979:268) The similarities between complementizers and temporary markers in several languages cannot be accidental because the morphemes involved have different phonological shape across languages. The following questions need to be an­ swered: Was the process of grammaticalization from de dicto complementizer to temporal marker, or was it from temporal marker to de dicto complementizer? There is also a third possibility, viz. that the two markers were derived inde­ pendently from a common source. I propose that the process of grammaticalization went from de dicto com­ plementizer to temporal marker. The evidence for this, rather than the opposite, direction or from a third source is as follows. De dicto complementizers that are similar to temporal markers are also similar to and derived from verbs of say­ ing. The morphemes that show similarity are: verbs of saying, de dicto com­ plementizers, temporal 'when' markers. I propose that the order of grammati­ calization was verbs of saying —> de dicto complementizers —> temporal 'when' markers. An opposite direction of grammaticalization, viz. from tempo­ ral markers to the de dicto complementizers would also involve a change into verbs of saying, a highly unlikely development. The protasis marker in Logone represents a special problem. The temporal (and conditional) protasis marker is clause-final ká, e.g.:

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

349

(120) á-mti á-һә-ni kalgá-ni ká 3SG-dead 3SG-pour-3SG mouth-3SG when 'when he was dead and (water) had been poured into his mouth' (Lukas 1936:58) Although ká occupies the same place as protasis markers derived from demon­ stratives in other Chadic languages, there are no demonstratives or definite markers of the form ká in Logone. One could of course assume that the prota­ sis marker ká is an old demonstrative and that the demonstrative does not occur anymore in the language. But if one could find a synchronic source for the marker, the grammaticalization from such a source would be considered more likely because it would not involve an unrelated process of the loss of demon­ strative. One possible source for the protasis marker is an associative preposi­ tion and nominal conjunction ká 'and', e.g.: (121)

γalíi zove káa γalíi gwaaklé boy strong and girl 'the strong boy and the girl' (Lukas 1936:57)

Thus the example with ká following the protasis above could derive diachronically from a construction of the type S ká S. Since it was shown in Chapter 2 that Proto-Chadic never had a sentential conjunction and contemporary Logone does not have a sentential conjunction either, ká could be considered an apo­ dosis rather than protasis marker. But the consecutive (apodosis) marker in Logone is táa, not ká, e.g.: (122) áa-tuwàufú kía a-yál lé adúwa-ndá'i. 3S-buy goat so.that 3S-slaughter (... so that) sacrifice-her He bought the goat in order to make it her (his mother's) sacrifice á-ka ufúne . . . . . . táa . . . CONJ 3S-take g o a t . . . 'then he took the goat...' (Lukas 1936:57) There is another potential source for the general protasis marker. Logone has a de dicto complementizer kí, which marks indirect speech and purpose clauses (the latter illustrated by the sentence above). An example of its use in indirect speech follows:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

350

(123) a-wáa kí: ahá 3SG-say thus: yes 'He said yes' (Lukas 1936:57) (124) yá-gər kíi izí γulrγúla 3PL-go COMP take girl 'They went to marry a young girl' (Lukas 1936:58) What remains to be explained is the difference between the vowel of the com­ plementizer, i, and the vowel of the protasis marker, a. Although I do not have an explanation at this time, the connection between the two is reinforced by the fact that the conditional protasis in Logone may also be marked by kí. A con­ nection between the temporal and the conditional protasis has been shown to exist in many languages; it also exists in Chadic languages, as shown in the present Chapter and in Chapter 10. 9.5.10 Unknown lexical sources There are certain temporal markers whose phonological shape indicates that they might be derived from lexical sources, but I was unable to identify the sources. Here are some of these markers with examples of their usage. In Ngizim there is a seldom used (according to Schuh 1972) marker gaafa 'when, if, e.g.: ( 125) gaafa dwá yka-naa і-n, kwáa ndəm aci if 3S 2P greet 3SM 'if you see him, greet him' (Schuh 1972:329) Xdi, the temporal marker ma, has two other markers, viz. mbàdú- 'when, after' and táwá 'when', which appear to be innovations within within the lan­ guage, e.g.: (126) táwá kď-ín-tà-tán

tá

hlә

mà

vwax

when finish-SEP-REF-3PL OBJ work PREP field kà

vrá-γá-tà



SEQ return-DIST-REF 3PL

dzáγà-tán home-3PL

'when they finished working in the field, they returned home'

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

351

(127) mbàdu ndùsá tá dàfá dzà à zá-i-mù tá skwì when near OBJ food FUT eat-POT-lPL.INCLOBJ thing 'when the food is ready, we will eat' In Kapsiki (Central) there are several markers involved in the encoding of the general protasis. One marker, nda, may serve as the marker of both a tem­ poral protasis and a temporal apodosis, e.g. (protasis examples only): (128) nda sé 'ya ni ka-nege da nde when come I PTE IMP-wait 1SG he 'when I came, he was waiting for me' (Smith 1969:126) (129) mentišε 'yá nda sé nde seated I when come he Ί was seated when he came ' (Smith 1969:137) Although Smith does not state explicitly what the source of nda is, it is not very likely to be related to Margi də. The associative marker and the relative clause marker each have different forms unrelated to nda. But there is in Kapsiki an­ other preposition, nda 'for', and this may be related, e.g.: (130) pa χέ ν iyi kweté wundú ka-pá nda ke χέ then they put EXT a certain person sell for them 'then they put a certain person to sell (it) for them' (Smith 1969:60) Although it is possible that the temporal marker nda derives from the preposi­ tion nda, I do not see what cognitive or syntactic process might have led to this semantic change, and therefore I prefer to keep the origin of temporal nda among the problems that need to be solved.

9.6

The specific temporal clauses ('before', 'after')

In some Chadic languages specific temporal clauses are coded only by the spe­ cific temporal marker, but in others, the specific marker is added to the general temporal marker corresponding to 'when' in English. Although English does not allow a combination of a specific temporal marker and a general temporal

352

COMPLEX SENTENCE

marker, thus *'before when' and *'after when' are disallowed, other IE lan­ guages do allow such patterns, albeit in constructions involving relative clauses, e.g. French avant que 'before when'. Russian and Polish do not allow an unin­ terrupted sequence of two markers and instead have a demonstrative in between them, e.g. Polish: po-tym kiedy/gdy 'after when'; Russian: posle togo kogda 'after that when', do togo kogda 'before that when'. There are several means of coding specific temporal clauses in Chadic. 9.6.1 General marker plus specific marker Some specific temporal markers in Chadic are built on the general temporal markers. Thus in Hausa, the particle ko, when it precedes the general temporal marker dà, indicates immediate temporal relationship between the apodosis clause and the protasis. The marker indicates that the event in the apodosis happened as soon as the event of the protasis (my translation differs slightly from Kraft's), e.g.: (131) kodà Musa ya ji hakà, sai duk râ-n-sa ko when Moses  here that then all life-GEN-3M ya і  spoil 'As soon as Moses heard this, then his life was spoiled' (Kraft 1963:247-248) (132) ko dà na tàfi, sai ya kiranı ko when 1SG go, then 3M call 1SG 'as soon as I left, he called me' (Kraft 1963:247-248) The specific temporal markers may derive from adverbs or prepositions indicating temporal relations (for a description cf.  agari 1976, chapters 1, 2, and 5). In Margi the marker dzùgwà indicates that the action is done immediately after the previous action. The marker can mean 'afterwards' or 'and then'. Used initially, it means 'just' or 'to begin'. It s original meaning was probably, 'to enter, to go in' (gwà 'to enter', which in the combination of gwà rà seems to be used like dzùgwà rà, and in the combination gwà dć + INF seems to mean 'to begin to . . . ' (Hoffmann 1963:219).

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

353

(133) k y àpər, m â-dzùgwà 1 ú skú ! SUBJ PR then go market 'let me take a bath, and then let us go to the market!' (Hoffmann 1963:219) 9.6.2 Specific coding through prepositions and adverbs Coding through prepositions and adverbs is commonly found in languages from many families. Time adverbs are often derived from a construction con­ sisting of an adposition and a noun. Such a historical path is nicely illustrated by the following sentence in Mandara, where 'after' is coded by preposition ám 'in, at' followed by ígà 'back': (134) à saw ám ígà ra 3SG came at back 3SG 'he came after him' In Kanakuru adverbial time clauses may occur before or after the apodosis. 'before' clauses are formed by a conjunction plus full clause; the most common construction has kàpín 'before' followed by a clause in the subjunctive: (135) kapin nà do-no, à pore-ni before 1SG come-lSG.ICP 3SG go out-3SG.ICP 'before I came, he went out' (Newman 1974:106) 'After' clauses are formed with bí 'back/behind/after' plus an embedded clause. The marker bí may be optionally followed by the relative demonstrative mè/m: (136) bi m náa kaya showi nà tile ane after DEM 1SG cut tree 1SG burn ANAPH 'after I cut down the tree, I burned it up' (Newman 1974:106) In Mwaghavul (Sura) the specific temporal marker 'after' consists of a preposition followed by spatial specifier and then by a relative clause marker, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

354 (137) PREP after

REL 3PL PERF eat land DEF

COMP 3PL take woman-PL ASSOC chüdren-PL 'after they had conquered ('eaten') the town, they took the women and children away' (Jungraithmayr 1963/64:46) In Daffo-Butura the specific protasis may occur as either the first or the sec­ ond clause of the sentence. Regardless of the position of the protasis, the spe­ cific temporal markers occur at the beginning of the second clause of the sen­ tence. The temporal markers may even be said to belong to the second clause of the sentence, as they are flanked on the left and right by the subject of the sec­ ond clause, e.g.: (138) yesterday 3PL end hunt 3PL before/then 3PL turn PREP 'yesterday, after they ended their hunt, they turned back' (Jungraithmayr 1970:200) (139) ?today 1SG come-1ICP? 2SG before 2SG ask-lSG 'I had come before you asked me' (Jungraithmayr 1970:206) The situation in Daffo-Butura is interesting in view of the fact that the general temporal protasis marker occurs at the beginning of the subordinate clause. In Margi the time clause may be further specified by the addition of specific markers such as käbí 'before' to the clause with the 'when' marker, e.g.: (140) before when 3SG hospital father 'before he reached the hospital, his father had died' (Hoffmann 1963:282)

died

In Kapsiki the general protasis occurs in sentence-initial position. The tem­ poral specific clause indicating simultaneity of events occurs second in the sen­ tence. In the following example the marker 'a is an 'active marker' (Smith 1969). The marker ka- indicates simultaneous action in the past :

355

TEMPORAL CLAUSES (141) 'a ké-gezeé rfá 'a nde ka-tlí PERF-say 1SG he PS-leave 'he spoke to me as he was leaving' (Smith 1969:121)

The 'after' clause occurs before the apodosis. It is marked by the general temporal marker má followed by kwa- 'completive sequential indicator' to indi­ cate the completion of one action before the commencement of another. (142) má kwa-sé nde náxé 'yá ké-dexwú when came ICP? finish 1SG PERF-eat 'when he came, I had eaten' (Smith 1969:126) In Giziga the subordinate time clause precedes the apodosis. The marker for 'after' is 'a doba (ŋga). The morpheme 'a is most probably a locative preposition: (143) 'à dàbà Pəlátà hì mà-ts : m'à Màrvá Marvà hày 'á dzàd-əm after Fulani Pl come in to Mania Marua PI ? climb-? 'à mùwà to hills 'After the Fulani came, the Giziga went to the hills.' (Lukas 1970:80) In Xdi the temporal marker agə 'before' takes personal suffixes that encode the subject of the protasis. That indicates that ágə is a verbal element, but it has not been recorded as a verb in other environments in Frajzyngier and Shay, MS. Unlike other time markers, which occur at the beginning of the protasis, agə occurs at the end of the protasis (all examples from Frajzyngier and Shay, MS.), e.g.: (144) xwáyà xwáyá-b-tsí run

àgə-tsí

kà

sá

ìmí

run-OUT-3SG before-3SG SEQ drink water

'he ran and then he drank water' (145) xàná-ni xàná-b-tsí àgə-tsí kà za skwì sleep-1SG sleep-OUT-lSG before-1SG PREP eat thing 'he slept before eating'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

356

In Bidiya (East) a temporal 'before' clause occurs as the second clause in a sentence and is marked by a specific preposition, e.g.: (146)

gèŋ daagîyò gèq déenò ŋu people kill.IMPERF:3PL people before SUBJ:3PL 'aad-rfù 'àmay drink-SUBJ water 'here theyį kill peoplej before theyį drink water' (Alio 1986:295)

Recall that in Bidiya general temporal clauses are the first clauses in the sen­ tence. 9.6.3 Specific temporal coding through interplay of tenses Lukas 1970 states for Giziga that the future form of the verb of the complement clause, or a future form of the verb be 'say', may be used with or without clause-final ná (protasis marker) to show that the event described by the apodosis clause occurred before the event described by the protasis. In the follow­ ing example, duk 'arrive' is in the future tense: (147) 'à sá dùk-òk-òwà 'à Dlàabò ná 'á mts-ám lè 3SG come arrive-EXT-EXT PREP Dogba DEM 3SG die-PL PERF 'before they arrived in Dogba, they died' (Lukas 1970:80) In the following sentence, the verb be 'say' is in the future. It cannot have its lexical meaning. I propose that the function of ôè is to mark modality, irrealis, hypothetical, or just posteriority with respect to another event of the sentence. (148) 'à sá 6è 'à ts-ám ná 'á vàl-àm 'àvò 'ì tlátlà 3SG come say 3SG enter-PL DEM 3SG give-PL fire PREP town 'before they entered, they set fire to the town' (Lukas 1970:80) Giziga thus has morphological (future tense) and syntactic (use of the verb ôè 'say') devices to indicate that the protasis clause represents a posterior rather than an anterior event with respect to the event of the apodosis clause.

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

357

It is very likely that other languages use similar devices as well, but I have no data for comparative analysis of the coding of the revers temporal relation­ ships between protasis and apodosis through the interplay of tenses.

9.7

Functions of apodosis markers vs. sequential markers

In both IE languages and Chadic languages the use of apodosis markers is dis­ tinctive, i.e., their presence contrasts with their absence. In many Chadic lan­ guages equivalents of 'then' are much more frequent components of the apo­ dosis than in English and other IE languages. The main theoretical question with respect to the temporal apodosis markers is why they occur. In many Chadic languages the apodosis markers are identical with sequential markers, discussed in Chapter 2. Although all sequential markers also occur as apodosis markers, not all apodosis markers also occur as sequential markers. That fact clearly indicates that for those markers that are identical, the direction of grammaticalization is from apodosis marker to sequential marker. This grammaticalization is justified by the function of the apodosis marker as indicating a subse­ quent event. Even the absence of negative clauses following a sequential marker is consistent with the function of the apodosis marker, which indicates what has occurred rather than what has not occurred. In what follows I will merely provide evidence for the identity in some languages of the sequential markers and the apodosis markers. In Kapsiki (Central) the marker pa may occur at the beginning of the sen­ tence in a narrative when the sentence describes a successive event or it may precede the apodosis when the preceding embedded clause sets the time of ref­ erence. The following sentence illustrates pa in sentence-initial position in clauses in a narrative: (149) pa geŋ'yέ saxwu then we drank 'then we drank' (Smith 1969:113) The following sentence illustrates both uses of this marker: (150) pa wuze a miyi da késevé ksmé pa xkakέ ŋ'yέ then son or mother me caught duiker then called us 'my brother killed a duiker and then called us' (Smith 1969:101)

358

COMPLEX SENTENCE

When the apodosis is the first clause in a sentence and does not describe an event as succeeding some other event previously mentioned in the discourse, it is not preceded by a sequential marker, e.g.: ( 151 ) mettete geq'yέ nda dzembé nde stand we when go he 'We were standing when he went in' (Smith 1969:101) For the few languages for which I have at least some information, the functions of apodosis markers seem to differ from language to language. I propose, however, that the apodosis markers share one function, viz. that of narrowing the nature of the temporal relation between the protasis and the apodosis. The idea that markers of apodosis narrow the time relationship between the events of the apodosis and the events of the protasis is supported by the fact that the apo­ dosis markers occur only when the apodosis follows the protasis. Additional evidence for this hypothesis is provided by analyses of the functions of the apodosis markers in a few languages for which data are available. In the best-known Chadic language, Hausa, matrix clauses may occur with or without sai 'then'. A comparison of five sentences (out of a sample of 34) with sai and of five sentences without sai (out of a sample of 26) in Kraft 1963 points to the function of sai as not very different from the function of 'then' in English. In all the sentences containing sai, the event of the apodosis takes place in the immediate temporal vicinity of the event of the protasis. Here I quote a few sentences in each group, first, examples with sai, all from Kraft 1963:247: (152) dà ciwòn 'ajàli ya kamà wani mùtûm, sai ya kira when sickness last 3M catch certain man then 3M call ďa-n-sà son-GEN-3M 'when the last sickness caught a certain man, then he called his son' (153) dà, dai, tsuntsûn nan yaga hakà, sai ya kada fiffikè when therefore bird DEM 3M see this then 3M flap wings 'when the bird saw this, he flapped wings'

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

359

(154) dà 'ìsa-r-sù, sai sù yi wà wurîn zobè when arrival-GEN-3PL then 3PL make PREP place circle 'upon their arrival, they made a circle around the place' Matrix clauses without sai, all taken from Kraft 1963:251-252, do not imply an immediate temporal connection between the matrix clauses and the protasis. The events described in the matrix clauses could take place at any time after the event of the protasis, e.g.: (155) dà haya'ki ya murtùke, ďan zakì ya kasá numfashi when smoke 3M arise son lion 3M could not breathe 'when the smoke arose, young lion couldn't breathe' (156) dà mukà bar waje-n 'ya-n shadi, when 1PL leave area-GEN children-GEN shaďi ina mukà nùfa? where lPL go 'when we left the area of those performing shaďi ceremony, where did we go?' (157) dà ya nunà kuďi, shi kènan when  show money that is DEM 'when he shows [his] money, that is that' (158) dà kun gan shì, kù kamàshi, kù rufè bàkî-n, kù when 2PL see , 2PL catch , 2PL close mouth-DEF 2PL turà shi cikin bùhû-n, kù ďaure, kù je dà shi kògi, push  inside bag-DEF 2PL tie 2PL go ASSOC 3M river kù jefà 2PL throw 'when you see him, you catch him, you close his mouth, you push him into this bag, you tie it, you take him to the river and throw him in'

360

COMPLEX SENTENCE (159) dà shigôwa ta-sà, ya yi gaisuwa, ya mi'kè when entry GEN-3M 3M do greeting 3M hand ma-sà takàrda PREP-3M letter 'at his entry he made greetings and handed him a letter'

In Pero (West), all complex sentences containing a consecutive marker en­ code an explicit sequence of events: The event of the clause following the con­ secutive marker follows another event represented by a preceding clause. The clause following the consecutive marker is the apodosis. In addition to marking the sequence of events, the consecutive also has the function of narrowing the time of the event of the apodosis, a meaning that could be summarized by the expression 'then and only then', as in the following sentence: (160) nì-mà-cí-kò nì-n-kém-ì nì-n-mún-mà lSG-TEMP-eat-PERF lSG-SEQ-füT-SEQ lSG-SEQ-give-2PL dicci remains 'when I eat and am satisfied I will give you the remains' (Frajzyngier 1989a:271) In Daffo-Butura the use of the apodosis marker implies that the event of the apodosis took place within a relatively short time after the event of the protasis (R =retroflex), e.g.: (161) 'an sí wàl faaR si kun sí tik lá yesterday 3PL end hunt ?3PL before/then 3PL turn PREP 'yesterday after they ended the hunt, they turned back' (Jungraithmayr 1970:200) Cf. (162) 'an sí faaR sí tik lá yesterday 3PL hunt 3PL turn PREP 'yesterday they hunted (and then) turned around' (Jungraithmayr 1970:200) In Hona (Central) the apodosis marker mbə appears to mark the final activ­ ity in a sequence of events describing one episode. In the following sentence, which begins with a general temporal marker à, the marker mbə occurs before

361

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

the last clause of the episode. Verbs in sequential clauses have different subject markers (in the sentence below for third person) from subject markers in non­ sequential clauses. (163) à tsàb-áŋ-do tlu-dà-du grán-gən when wash-ANAPH-3SG meat-DEM-ALL turn-3SG bərə-də-su hù wá sə mbə nàn-gen tlú-dì sáy tòtál tətál pot-DEF-up in fire up then put-3SG meat-DEF down one one 'when she washed the meat and turned the pot again on the fire, then she put the meat in one by one' Xdi (Central) provides the evidence for yet another function of the sequen­ tial marker. If the apodosis follows the protasis and describes an event that ac­ tually occurred, the sequential marker kà precedes the apodosis, with or without additional temporal markers, e.g.: (164)

sá-b-s-íyù jíbil kà sná-n-t-íyù tá yáwì go-OUT-go-lSG outdoors SEQ hear-CAT-REF-lSG OBJ noise 'when I left home I heard the noise of people talking'

The specific temporal marker mbàdú may precede the sequential marker ká, e.g.: (165) manda kda-kú-á-nì tá krf-ín-tà since finish-ABS-GEN-3SG OBJ finish-SEP-REF hlàn-á-nì mbàcfú ká mbíyà-kú-á-nì work-GEN-3SG then COMP rest-ABS-GEN-3SG 'since she finished her work, she rested' If the event described in the apodosis is potential only, as in the future tense, then there is no sequential marker ká, even if the apodosis follows the protasis, e.g.: (166) mbàdu ndùsà tá dàfá dzà à when

nearOBJfood FUT

zá-i-mu

tá skwì

eat-POT-lPL.INCLOBJ thing

'when the food is ready, we will eat'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

362

If the apodosis is sentence-initial, it is not preceded by the sequential marker, e.g.: (167) skwá-skwá tá buy-buy tà

lgút-á-nì

mánda kəďá-k-á-nì

OBJ dress-GEN-3SG after skwá-b-tà

finish-ABS-GEN-3SG

gù

IMPERF buy-OUT-REF goat 'she bought herself a dress after having sold a goat' I will concentrate in the next section on the grammaticalization of apodosis markers, i.e. on their sources and an explanation of the processes involved.

9.8

Sources of apodosis markers

9.8.1 An attempt of reconstruction In what follows I first attempt (unsuccessfully) to reconstruct the apodosis marker for Proto-Chadic and then propose sources from which contemporary apodosis markers grammaticalized. I explain the processes of grammaticaliza­ tion by stating the necessary syntactic environment and semantic conditions for grammaticalization to take place. In selecting candidates for the reconstruction, one should choose a form that occurs in at least two but preferably three branches of Chadic and shares spe­ cific semantic or functional characteristics. In order to prove that this form is a retention of a grammatical marker, one would have to show that its func­ tion/meaning is a retention of the function/meaning already present in the protolanguage rather than a result of grammaticalization from the same source at the time after the proto-language split into branches, and those into contemporary languages. One of the candidates for a Proto-Chadic apodosis marker is the form *kV, possibly *ká. Several languages from the West and Central branches have the forms, which either are apodosis markers or carry, among other functions, the function of encoding one event as following another event. In West Chadic the marker kà occurs in Hausa in the form of relative perfective and imperfective aspects, as described in Chapter 2. In Mupun the contemporary apodosis

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

363

marker is bé. But there is a deontic ('subjunctive') complementizer ko. The form is used to code obligation with respect to first and third person. While I was working on Mupun I came across a phenomenon that I was unable to ex­ plain at that time. Certain sentences that had the deontic complementizer were routinely translated by language assistants with a temporal component, such as 'after X does something he/she should do Y', e.g.: (168) η-sat n-yi ә kә n-yi cet mbise lSG-tellPREP-2FCOMP COMP PREP-2F cook food di n-an COMP PREP-1SG 'I told you that [after a while] you should cook for me' (169) n-sat η-war ә ә η-paa cet mbise lSG-say PREP-3F COMP COMP PREP-3F.L cook food ďi n-miskoom COMP PREP-chief 'I told her that [after she is done with whatever she is doing] she should cook for the chief (170) ә n-yi cet mbise ďi n-Napus COMP PREP-2F cook food ANAPH PREP-Napus '[after some other action] cook food for Napus' (Frajzyngier 1993) The problem is that the sentences in question do not have an overt temporal component. The translations provided were not an accidental rendering of the Mupun meaning, because all of my attempts to eliminate the temporal compo­ nent of the meaning were rejected without any hesitation. But there is also lan­ guage-internal evidence for the temporal component of the function of the sub­ junctive marker. The function of marking the time after must be an inherent property of the deontic complementizer because a clause with the synonymous adverb ā buon 'after' and a deontic complementizer is ungrammatical in Mupun, e.g.:

364

COMPLEX SENTENCE (171) *a buon ďe yi naa la ә ә η-yі cet mbise after REL 2F see child DEF COMP PREP-2F cook food ďi n-Napus COMP PREP-Napus for 'after you take care of the child, cook the food for Napus'

The ungrammaticality may be explained by the speaker's perception that the subjunctive marker carries exactly the same function as the adverb ä buon 'after'. The diachronic explanation for the two functions of the complementizer kə is that it must have had a temporal component, which is also part of the meaning of apodosis. But the temporal component in itself is not evidence that coding the apodosis was the primary function of ko. Tera (Central) has the subjunctive marker kә, e.g.: (172) li kә nji dlu Ali SUBJ eat meat 'Ali should eat meat.' (Newman 1970:20) Given the existence of subjunctive markers with *kə in other languages, we may consider the marker in Tera as an instance of retention, more likely of subjunctive rather than of apodosis marker. Newman 1970 does not indicate that the subjunctive marker has a temporal component similar to the temporal component in Mupun. Margi also has a subjunctive marker kV, but it does not appear to have a temporal component (_ indicates phonetic unity between morphemes), e.g.: (173) k_y àpər, m_a-dzùgwà 1 ú skú! SUBJ-1SG bathe lPL then go market 'let me take a bath, and then let us go to the market!' (Hoffmann 1963:219) Xdi (Central) is interesting in that the same marker kà serves as subjunctiveoptative marker, the marker of apodosis, and also the sequential marker. We can say that it has three primary functions. The next two examples illustrate the function of kà as the marker of apodosis:

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

365

(174) xàná-b-tá-tfà tá xàn-á-da kà dá zá skwi sleep-OUT-REF-lSG OBJ sleep-POSS-1SG SEQ PREP eat thing Ί slept before I ate' The evidence that sequential marking is a primary function of kà in Xdi is pro­ vided by the fact that if the event described in the main clause is potential only, as in the future tense, then there is no sequential marker kà, e.g.: (175) mbàcfú ndùsa tá ďàfá dzà à za-i-mù tá skwì when near OBJ food FUT eat-POT-lPL.INCL OBJ thing 'when the food is ready, we will eat' The optative-subjunctive function is another primary function of kà in Xdi, in both simple and complex sentences, e.g.: (176)

kà zà tsí tá skwì OPTeat 3SG OBJ food 'let him eať

(177)

kà dzà á kà ká mbítsà SEQ go PREP 2SG COMP Mbitsa 'Mbitsa told him that you should go'

ndá tsí ASSOC 3SG

Recall that the marker *kV was earlier described as being a marker of pro­ tasis. Recall also that in Chapter 4 (complements of verbs of saying) *k V was described as a frequent complementizer and was actually claimed to have been derived from a verb of saying. Given the fact that the connection between the apodosis marker and the subjunctive mood cannot be explained as a result of a semantic shift from one function to another, I propose that both forms, viz. the subjunctive marker and the apodosis marker, may be derived from a de dicto complementizer or from a verb of saying. The evidence for this hypothesis is provided by the fact that in all languages in which the apodosis marker and/or subjunctive marker is *kV, the de dicto complementizer is also *kV, and in some of these languages the verb of saying is also *KV. The grammaticalization process from de dicto complementizer to apodosis marker must be sought in the fact that both markers encode the domain de dicto. The connection between the de dicto complementizer *KV and the apodosis marker is provided by apodosis

366

COMPLEX SENTENCE

markers that have different phonological form but are also derived from corre­ sponding de dicto complementizers. 9.8.2 From demonstrative to apodosis marker: Hausa In Hausa the apodosis marker is sai, which is also a preposition 'only', 'except', 'unless' and has a host of other related meanings, including 'nevertheless' (for a description of the functions of this marker cf. Bagari 1976 and references there). It is also a sequential marker that may occur in sentenceinitial position in discourse. The marker has no cognates among apodosis markers or protasis markers in other Chadic languages. That would indicate that it is an innovation within Hausa. There is no available synchronic source for this marker within Hausa. The phonetically closest items are not likely candidates for the source of the temporal or the consecutive markers: sàa 'put', sàa 'bull', sai 'urine', sàyaa 'buy'. One form used in the Katsina dialect, sàu although glossed as 'time' has no temporal meaning. It is used in expressions quantifying the number of events, such as 'three times', 'two times'. Hausa has also the lexeme saa 'à 'time'. This noun is most probably borrowed from Arabic. The plural form of this word in Hausa is saa'oo'i. Moreover, in some expressions saa'à can be replaced by saal, e.g.: (178) à wà-cè saa'à sukà zòo PREP what-F time 3PL come 'at what time did they come?' (179) à wà-nè saa'ì sukà zòo PREP what-PL time 3PL come 'at what time did they come?' (Abraham 1962:754) Neither Abraham 1962 nor Bargery 1951(1934) connects sǎi to saa'à 'time'. The derivation of săì from saa is not plausible on two accounts. First the vowel reduction within the lexeme is not independently motivated if the final vowel is retained. If the final vowel is reduced to a glide, then the shortening of a could be explained by a constraint on the vowel length in a closed syllable, viz. that no long vowel may occur in a closed syllable in Hausa. But the tonal change from high-low for the lexeme 'time' to rising for the grammatical mor­ pheme is not independently attested.

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

367

Comparative evidence favors, however, deriving the apodosis marker from a demonstrative rather than from the lexeme for 'time'. Hausa has the third per­ son singular masculine pronoun sa, which occurs in several variants in a num­ ber of functions, including a possessive form and a direct object form. In other West Chadic languages there exists a demonstrative cognate with the Hausa pronoun. In Daffo-Butura there is a remote demonstrative sǎy / sàyí 'that', e.g. say masút-i 'that kind'. The connection between demonstratives and pro­ nouns is independently attested in many languages of the world. Thus the most likely source of the apodosis marker in Hausa is a demonstrative. Although the demonstrative has not survived in the contemporary language, its reflexes in the form of the third person masculine pronoun and the apodosis marker did. Additional comparative evidence for this hypothesis is provided further on in the discussion of the origin of the apodosis markers in conditional sentences. 9.8.3 From protasis to apodosis markers In languages in which the apodosis marker is identical with the protasis marker, there are two types of sentences where the identity obtains. In one, the protasis marker occurs at the end of the protasis clause and is simply reanalyzed as a marker of the apodosis. This grammaticalization is described in connection with protasis markers derived from demonstratives. But there is also another type, where the clause-initial protasis marker is grammaticalized to become the clause-initial apodosis marker. Such cases are interesting because there are no syntactic factors facilitating grammaticalization. I propose that the reason why grammaticalization is possible is that the protasis and the apodosis are consid­ ered to share some semantic property or function, and the marker becomes re­ analyzed as a marker of that particular semantic property and used whenever that property is present, even if it is not the primary function of the construc­ tion. This is the case in Mandara (Central): (180) à mà sóm hè mà ya màgà ngá rwà 3SG TEMP come EXT TEMP 1SG prepare body 1SG 'if he had come, I should have been getting ready' The function that the two clauses have in common is the hypothetical. Only those clauses that contain irrealis have the temporal apodosis marked by ma. The marker ma in Mandara also occurs in the apodosis of conditional clauses (q.v.) when the apodosis encodes irrealis. The sequence of grammaticalization

368

COMPLEX SENTENCE

here is from conditional to temporal protasis and from temporal protasis to apo­ dosis. The argumentation for this sequence of grammaticalization is provided by the origin of temporal protasis markers as described in the section 5.4. 9.8.4 De dicto complementizer as a source of the apodosis marker In some languages the apodosis markers derive either directly from verbs of saying or from the de dicto complementizers. I will first show that the same morpheme may be a de dicto complementizer and an apodosis marker, and then I will provide an explanation for the connection between the two functions and the direction of derivation. In Mupun (West) the apodosis marker is . There is no de dicto comple­ mentizer with such a form in Mupun, nor is there a verb of saying with such a form. Recall, however, that bV(l) is one of the Proto-Chadic roots for a verb of saying, reflexes of which are to be found in West and Central branches. In addition, some of the Ron languages, including Bokkos and Daffo-Butura, have ba as the de dicto complementizer, e.g.: (181) tí ni bą-i wà(h) 3F say that-lSG go:SUBJ 'she said that I should go' (Bokkos, Jungraithmayr 1970:128) Assuming that the grammaticalization process started with the verb of say­ ing, we have in Mupun the following sequence of grammaticalization: 'say' —> de dicto complementizer —> temporal apodosis marker —> time phrase marker. The last stage in the development in Mupun is for the complementizer to mark the time phrase in addition to the protasis. As in a number of other Chadic languages, the initial adverb of time is followed by a marker that hap­ pens to be identical with the complementizer, e.g.: (182) ji n-toom 6e wur mbә kamkamn-jiŋ next year CONS 3M FUT teach PREP-Jing 'next year he will be teaching in Jing' (Frajzyngier 1993:478) (183) do n-toom be wur kamkamn-jiŋ last year CONS 3M teach PREP-Jing 'last year he taught in Jing' (Frajzyngier 1993:478)

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

369

The marking of the time phrase in Mupun is linked with the coding of the hypo­ thetical. The marker be also occurs after modal adverbials, e.g.: (184) mee sә be wu se kaa zuul bә cin kum perhaps CONS 3M depart ascend mountain DEF PURP ritual 'perhaps he went to the top of the mountain to perform a ritual' (Frajzyngier 1993:479) In Kapsiki (Central) the marker ni, which Smith 1969 glosses as [PTE] = 'phrase terminator expletive', occurs in the place where other languages have a sequential marker, and I propose that this is the function of ni. The de dicto complementizer in Kapsiki is also ni, e.g.: (185) nda se 'ya ni ka-nege ďa nde when come I PTE IMP-wait 1SG.O he 'when I came, he was waiting for me' Cf. ni as complementizer: (186) ma

ke χε šs ní say they to COMP 'they said to him "quote" ' (Smith 1969:77)

In Giziga the apodosis marker is na and the dicto complementizer is also na, e.g.: (187) 'à sá dùk-òk-òwà 'à Dlàabò ná 'á 3SG come arrive-EXT-EXT PREP Dogba DEM 3SG mts-ám lè die-PL PERF 'before they arrived in Dogba, they died' (Lukas 1970:80) Cf. ná as a complementizer: (188) 'à soo lè ná  sàn-tá tá kwå 3S come PERF COMP 2S know-3S NEG Q 'Didn't you know that he has come?' (Lukas 1970:79) In Gidar the apodosis is marked by the particle ná, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

370

(189) when food 3M ready-PERF then 3-eat-PL- PERF 'when the food was ready they ate' The particle ná may, however, be absent from the apodosis, e.g.: (190) when fire 3M started 3-go-PL running 'when the fire started, they left running' The marker ná is also the de dicto complementizer in Gidar. The evidence that the grammaticalization went from de dicto complementizer to apodosis marker is provided by the fact that the de dicto complementizer is derived from an almost identical verb 'to say', as illustrated in the following example where both the verb 'to say' and the complementizer occur in the same sentence: (191) Vondu 3Msay COMP hunter-3M 'Vondu(l) said that he(l) is a hunter' Postulating that the grammaticalization went from apodosis marker to comple­ mentizer would require also postulating that the complementizer became the verb 'to say', a highly improbable case. In Lele (East), the apodosis marker is ná and the dicto complementizer is also ná, e.g.: (192) say-3PLBEN֊lSG COMP lSG-go 'they told me to go' The following is a possible semantic explanation of the process. The time of the apodosis is relative to the time of the protasis rather than to some deictic indication of time. Thus the time of the apodosis refers to the time specified by a proposition, and it is in the de dicto domain. An alternative would have been a deictic coding of time, which would have been in the de re domain. The de dicto complementizers or the verbs of saying from which the apodosis markers are derived also encode the domain de dicto. Hence one marker of the de dicto

TEMPORAL CLAUSES

371

domain has several functions in which that domain is involved. The evidence for the hypothesis that the de dicto complementizers/verbs of saying came to serve as apodosis markers is provided by the similarity between the apodosis markers and complementizers/verbs of saying even though apodosis markers do not display similarity among themselves.

9.9

Conclusions

The simple juxtaposition of two clauses may receive a temporal interpretation, as has been illustrated for Pa'a and Ga'anda. Temporal interpretations of juxta­ posed clauses can no doubt be easily found in other languages as well. But simple juxtaposition may also have many other interpretations, hence the com­ municative need to encode a temporal relationship between two clauses. It is this need that is the prime motivation for grammaticalization. In the coding of temporal relationships two basic means are employed in Chadic, coding of the protasis and coding of the apodosis clause. In some languages the two means are used at the same time. Coding of the protasis includes the general temporal relationship and the specific temporal relationship. The general relationship indicates that the time of the event of apodosis is described with relationship to the time of protasis but without specifying whether it occurred before, after, or during the time of the event of protasis. Coding of the apodosis is independent of coding of protasis clause. Moreover, coding of the apodosis has the specific function of narrowing the temporal relationship between the events of apodosis and protasis. In several languages the markers of the apodosis have the semantic function of marking 'then and only then' time relationship. Morphemes marking temporal protasis in Chadic languages have emerged from a number of lexical and grammatical sources. The main lexical source is, not unexpectedly, the word for 'time'. The grammaticalization process most probably involved at its earliest stages a relative clause construction or an adposition by which the word 'time' was marked. Later, the head of the relative clause, i.e. the word 'time', and the relative clause marker were often omitted as the construction became more grammaticalized. In a number of languages only the postrelative demonstrative remains as the sole marker of the protasis clause. This process is of special interest because grammaticalization from the relative clause resulted in temporal protasis markers occurring at the end rather than at

372

COMPLEX SENTENCE

the beginning of the protasis. The other sources of temporal protasis markers are sequential markers, locative prepositions, de dicto complementizers, and conditional protasis markers. Apodosis markers derive from three sources: sequential markers, de dicto complementizers, and demonstratives and definite markers. This last process of grammaticalization involved a reanalysis of the constituency status of demon­ stratives, from being the components of the protasis clause to being components of the apodosis.

10 CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

10.1

Issues to be discussed

The present Chapter I investigate the origin of the devices marking the condi­ tional protasis clause, as well as markers of the conditional apodosis. The ex­ planation of the origin of the two types of markers can shed light on the cogni­ tive and grammatical processes in language. In addition I shall discuss, when data allow, a variety of devices used to encode both real and unreal conditions. In all Chadic languages conditional clauses may precede the apodosis, a sit­ uation that is true for a majority of languages (cf. Greenberg 1966). But there are also instances in Chadic languages when an apodosis clause precedes a protasis clause. In the ensuing discussion I will describe the coding for each language for which I have data, discussing first the real condition and then the unreal condition. In most of these languages, the unreal condition is derived from the construction marking the real condition and is coded by additional morphemes. But in some of them, the unreal condition is not related to the real condition marking. I will first discuss the protasis 'if-clause and then the apo­ dosis.

10.2

Origin of the protasis markers

In searching for the sources of individual grammatical markers, one can look at language-internal data, at data from other languages within the family, or even at unrelated languages, which may provide typological information on possible sources. In Table 10.11 show the products of grammaticalization, i.e. the pro­ tasis and apodosis markers and their potential sources. The connection between interrogatives and conditional markers was noticed as early as Jespersen 1940 (as pointed in Heine et al. 1991). Further support for this connection can be found in Haiman 1978, Traugott 1985, Heine et al. 1991:191. The interroga-

COMPLEX SENTENCE

374

tives that these scholars claim to be related to conditional markers are general interrogatives, i.e. those corresponding to yes/no questions. Some Chadic lan­ guages provide further support for this connection. But there appears to exist also a connection between what is usually called specific interrogative markers and conditionals. In order to explore this connection I include, in Table 10.1 information on both specific and general interrogative markers when they ap­ pear to be similar to a conditional marker within the same language or in other languages. Among the yes/no markers I include only the ones that may occur in clause-initial position because only these bear any resemblance to conditional markers. A table containing a full set of interrogative markers can be found in Chapter 5 (embedded interrogatives). The clause-initial interrogative markers are the same as interrogative complementizers described in the chapter on em­ bedded interrogatives. These are marked in the Table 10.1 as COMP. The re­ maining interrogatives correspond to the specific interrogative 'what'. I also include in the table information on conditional apodosis markers for considera­ tion later in the chapter. The information on de dicto complementizers is in­ cluded because of their potential role in the grammaticalization of both protasis and apodosis markers. TABLE 10.1. (1) Conditional protasis and apodosis markers Language

When

If

Then

Hausa

dà, ko dà,

sai

Kanakuru

shakam

'in, ko, ko dà bò

Pero Bole Angas Mupun

ma ba, imba ka-daŋ kat

n, ø

Daffo-

ma lokasi shiko-daŋ kat ďak

Butura Fyer Ngizim

ne gaafa

get gaafa -n (nán)

'

Pa'a

lokacita

ø

ø b

Interrogative COMP  (COMP) cewa mondai 'what' ni eme me ket (COMP)

ďaá tàm (what) -gà-mòo misii

ca, na na, ii tene nә laal, ni ne maa ka

375

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES TABLE 10.1. (2) Conditional protasis and apodosis markers Language Tera

When lokaci

Ga'anda Hona Margi Kapsiki Mandara Podoko Xdi

ni mà, də ma, nda də ba, ba nda manda, tawa, mbaďu Lamang ŋ,ndà Mofu-Gudur -niy, -ná Giziga taps ә-nà, əngə Mina Gude Buduma Logone Munjuk

ma ma -ká periphrastic

Gidar Lele Kera Dangla Bidiya Masa Mesme

dágà, na ná gò, gínà mín koo ma

Jf

Then

ә, toga

ma à (=PREP) mà, majá

mbә

ma ba, ma kà

ni ma ma mbaďu ká ká

mà...mà da . . ná/níy dà ná əngə, kíď (əngə) ma ka ŋe, gema -ká na -bo, nǎ ba va, an na má báná, na báa kaa là

COMP

Interrogative ә (what) mu (yes/no, f.) mә ma mi wa wa (what) taw (what) ή, ná

wà ndndə, àbər ni, ne na, wa na, ngə ka

ma me -mi

ná si

za

mi mi-ni xwani ma

tə uu'inə

ә me ma me

na ná, gò minti -s, àn(à) ďóoka no, la hē

mige

' bo

It can be seen from the Table 10.1 that conditional markers can be grouped ac­ cording to their phonological makeup. There is a pervasive marker ma that oc­ curs in two out of four branches and in many languages from both branches. One can also classify conditional markers according to the potential sources

376

COMPLEX SENTENCE

from which they are derived. In what follows I attempt to find sources for various groups. The groupings below are not organized according to the phonological shape of markers but rather according to the postulated sources from which they were grammaticalized. In only one case does the grouping by phonological shape coincide with the grouping by the source of grammaticalization. 10.2.1 Temporal markers as conditionals The change from the temporal 'when' to the conditional 'if is quite natural and frequent in many languages. In English the temporal 'when' clause when combined with the future tense gives either a temporal or a conditional interpre­ tation, e.g.: (1)

When she comes, I will go

The extension from temporal markers to conditional markers has also occurred in Chadic languages. The relative chronology of this semantic extension may differ for different languages. There is little doubt as to the possible direction of grammaticalization because the ultimate source is also known, viz. the lexeme 'time'. Although the change from 'time' to 'when' and eventually to the condi­ tional marker 'if is quite natural, the opposite direction, which would result in a lexical word 'time', is very unlikely. I shall illustrate by presenting examples of languages where the conditional protasis marker is derived from the temporal protasis marker. The marker *dV is used as a conditional marker in at least two languages, Hausa and Giziga. In Hausa the conditional function of da is an extension of the temporal function of this marker, which has been shown in Chapter 9 to derive from the associative preposition. In Giziga conditional complements preceding the âpodosis are introduced by dà, e.g.: (2)

dà ku vàl-ì dà lè CÖND 2SG give-lSG CAUS? PERF ná 'i vàl-ù skát dlòm DEM lSG give-2SG five hundred 'if you give it to me, I will give you five hundred' (Lukas 1970: 81)

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES (3)

377

dà kə só lè ná COND 2SG come PERF DEM 'í sà vl-ù dlílê 1SG ? give-2SG money 'if you come, I will give you money' (Lukas 1970:81)

Conditional irreális complements in Giziga are introduced by dà and have the morpheme 'anza 'before' preceding the verb. (4)

dà ànzà kə só lè COND before 2SG come PERF dlilé lè ná 'í vàl -ù DEM 1SG give-2SG money PERF 'if you had come, I would have given you money' (Lukas 1970:81)

In some cases 'anza is the sole marker of the conditional clause: (5)

'anz í (< 'ànzá 'i) sən-á lè before 1SG know-3SG PERF níir tâ (< ná 'í r tâ) DEM:lSG go NEG 'if I had known it, I would not have gone' (Lukas 1970:81)

The conditional marker dà in Giziga cannot be derived from the contemporary temporal marker tap(a)s 'day'. Note, however, that in other languages of the area, such as Mandara, də is still a temporal marker. Hence it is quite possible that dà in Giziga used to have a temporal function, but now has only the condi­ tional function. In Lamang the conditional marker is the temporal vitá 'if/when', which ac­ cording to Wolff 1983:247 may be derived from fiti 'sun, day'. In Xdi (Central Chadic) the temporal and conditional protasis markers are identical: (6)

kà sà-γà-sà-tsì SEQ come-DIST-PERF-3SG ndá máyà ká νγ-á-ďà STAT arrange SEQ body-POSS-lSG 'if he comes I should be ready'

378

COMPLEX SENTENCE

(7)

Cf. (8)

kà tà dvá-i ká tà zá skwí SEQ IMPERF want-POS 2SG OBJ eat thing dáwà-ŋ-ďáwà tá dáfà ask-CAT-ask OBJ food 'if you want to eat, ask for food' mà zo tsí kə á íyu lùma-f-tà PROH eat.IMPER 3SG COMP 1SG forbid-UP-REF Ί forbade him to eat'

In Logone temporal and conditional protasis markers are identical, and both occur after the protasis clause. Here is an example of a conditional sentence: (9)

am ále bola á -mtìi na ŋgúl se arba'iin water DEM person 3SG-die PREP PREP day forty yá-hə-ní kalgáa-ni ká 3SG-pour-3SG mouth-3SG CONJ á-sá áa-zu wátən á-se ŋgá 3SG֊raise oneself 3SG-sit 3SG-find life 'if one poured this water into the mouth of a corpse within forty days, he would raise himself, sit up and come to life' (Lukas 1936:71)

In Hausa the temporal marker da may be used as a conditional marker, e.g.: (10)

dàa, ma, kà-nà ganè-wa, if EMPH 2M-PROG see-NOMIN kâ sakè shin tun dà wuri 2M begin preparation immediately 'if you are sensible, you will begin preparations right away' (Kraft 1963:252)

In Mupun, the conditional clause has the same marker as the temporal pro­ tasis. The temporal marker kat appears to be related to the lexeme gét 'past time', which was grammaticalized as a remote past tense marker. The apodosis in conditional clauses has the same form as the apodosis that follows the tempo­ ral protasis, e.g.:

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

(11)

379

ama kat gurum ә ďem la rep nə but if young man PREP like girl DEF wur pe lap war kəsə be CONS 3M FUT marry 3F like that 'but if a young man loves the girl, he will marry her like that (viz. as she is)'

The counterfactual condition in Mupun is coded by an interplay of tenses. The conditional clause, the apodosis, or both have the marker of the recent past tense yò or yì (depending on the dialect), or the remote past dƏ. In a conditional clause yò follows the temporal marker kàt, e.g.: (12)

kat wur ә siwol yo mbә seet if PAST  PREP money PAST FUT buy 'if he had money he would have bought a car'

moto car

When the past tense marker yò cooccurs with the perfective marker ko, it indicates a counterfactual condition, e.g.: (13)

kat də wur ә jep mo vol kas if PAST 3M PREP children PL two NEG 6e yo wur ә put lu se ka panksin CONS PAST 3M PERF leave home go ascend Pankshin 'if he didn't have two children he would have left home and gone up to Pankshin'

The past tense marker also has the function of indicating a counterfactual condition, but then it has to occur in both the protasis clause and the apodosis clauses, e.g.: (14)

kat də an ә siwol if PAST 1SG PREP money 6e do kə siam n-jiņ CONS PAST PERF descend PREP-Jing 'if I had had money I would have gone down to Jing' (Now it is too late. I have the money but I cannot go)

380

COMPLEX SENTENCE

In closely related Mwaghavul (Sura) the expression 'although . . . then' has a structure similar to that of conditional clauses in Mupun, e.g.: (15) cc dí wan ә sát ń wùri ή ηέε Scr sə although 1SG PERF say PREP 3SG PROG ? go DEM 6ε bàa wurí sár kás COMP NEG 3SG go NEG 'although I told him he could go there, he did not go' (Jungraithmayr 1963/64:46) In Fyer the conditional protasis is marked by get. The marker get is related to the conditional and temporal marker kat in Mupun, but, more important it is identical with the remote past tense marker. The apodosis is marked in the same way as the apodosis in sentences with adverbial time clauses, viz. by the marker '. (16)

yis mí laki-t ne: gèt ti munì-t nàat, 3SG 3SG say-Ғ COMP COND 3F agree-3F NEG  '  yis mi jám mi gwèe-t SEQ 3SG 3SG be able 3SG drive away-3F 'ée són su tòos hóna yit shá SEQ 3PL 3PL house CONJ 3SG(f.) DEM 'he told herį that ('he said to her:') if shej did not accept herį, he would be prepared to drive herj out and then sheį could live with him' (Jungraithmayr 1970:80)

(17)

yít tí lak-is ne: tóò, gèt ma-át tüt a yıt, 3F 3F 3F say-him COMP O.K. if ' é mors-ìs 6á-shèèk-aá ti mún-it 'a yít -tà ? then wife-his the first 3Flove-3F 'she said to him: well, good,- if he took her, would his first wife accept her?' (Jungraithmayr 1970:81)

In Logone the conditional clause is marked by clause-final particle ká, the same particle that marks temporal clauses:

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES (18)

ә gə'bə wahánne ká 2SG tie up wood CONJ 'if/when you tie up the wood' (Lukas 1936:58)

(19)

xεr-na-ku šεn sá ká goodness-POSS-2SG NEG NEG CONJ 'if/when your goodness is not available(?)' (Lukas 1936:58)

381

In Gidar (Central) the condition that has not yet been met, or could not have been met at the time of speech, has the protasis clause marked by the particle án. The marker is identical with the iirealis protasis marker and in turn derives from the interrogative marker. (20)

án mó-k á ká zum wày ná if mouth-2M PREP on eat food then á ngèl mèptékè só vá-nì IMPER ask mush from DEF-3M 'if you want to eat ask him for some mush'

In Mesme (Masa) conditional clauses are framed by kà . . . dana, similar to temporal 'when/then' clauses, e.g.: (21)

tó ma na bùk hàn néènna, kà cì turuŋ dana, ? NEG body :2SG ? thing REL1SG sprinkle 2SG DEM té'é ma dàŋ, ńni ma sìcfìndà mi he ńni it is chameleon REL other it is REL saved me NEG ? 'if that which I have sprinkled on you is no longer on your body, then it was another chameleon who saved me' (Fischer 1980:21)

10.2.2 The marker ma Recall that in discussion of temporal clauses in Chapter 9 I claimed that the marker ma in temporal clauses derives from the conditional marker. The widespread use of ma as a conditional marker in Chadic languages from all branches is supported by the fact that out of thirty five languages listed in Table 10.1 eight have ma as conditional marker, and only five have it as temporal marker. In what follows I illustrate the use of the conditional marker ma in various languages and provide additional evidence for the direction of grammat-

COMPLEX SENTENCE

382

icalization from conditional to temporal. The important components of this evi­ dence are the end points in the grammaticalization processes. Thus if a there is a lexical item at one point, it is most likely a starting point in grammaticalization. But if there is no lexical item that can be postulated for the form, then the end point form will indicate what semantic or functional feature was involved and may sometimes indicate what potential features were not involved. In Pero (West) there is no distinction between conditional and time protases, both of them having the same marker, ma, e.g.: (22)

kú-mà póoj-ínà 6áq mínú-ndut- ì 2PL-if push-COMPL hard lPL-CONS-unload-CONS 'if/when you push it hard we will unload' (Frajzyngier 1989a:269)

Sentences with conditional embedded clauses differ from sentences with temporal clauses in that the consecutive marker ո is absent when the sentence has a conditional interpretation only, but present when the sentence has a tem­ poral or a temporal and a conditional interpretation. (23)

cà péemò mà-à-pékótò cígbè-mò baŋ-m said 2REP COND-NEG-warn children-DEM strongly-NEG péemò mínà-ma tà-tókò 2REP house-2PL FUT-collapse 'said, if you do not warn these children strongly, your house will collapse' (Frajzyngier 1989a:271, REP= reported speech )

(24)

mà-tà-wíccò jùrá íccò-n-kà tà-kéeŋ COND-FUT-roast peanuts dry-TRANS-ASSOC PREP-first 'if you roast the peanuts, you should dry them first' (Frajzyngier 1989a:272)

(25)

nì-mà- tákkúló-kò kóngó-cì tà-kpàl-áani 1SG- COND-rub -COMPL stomach-2F FUT-burst-NOMIN 'if I rub your stomach, it will burst' (Frajzyngier 1989a:272)

The order of the clauses may be reversed and the temporal-conditional protasis may be second rather than first:

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

(26)

383

tà-wáat-tù má kàm kúrbè FUT-come-VENT COND CONJ money 'they will come if they have money' (Frajzyngier 1989a:271)

The counterfactual condition in Pero is marked by the modal adverb mángárá 'perhaps'. In a counterfactual condition the apodosis clause precedes the protasis clause. The morpheme mángárà precedes the predicate of the pro­ tasis clause. The length of the marker indicates that it may actually consist of at least two and perhaps three morphemes, má-ngá(-)rà. (27)

tàwáat-nà mángàrá kám kúrbè FUT-come-COMPL.VENT if CONJ money 'they would have come if they had money' (Frajzyngier 1989a:272)

In Ga'anda (Central) the conditional clause is followed by the apodosis and is marked by the marker ma. The temporal protasis in Ga'anda is not marked by a subordinator, as was shown in Chapter 9. (28)

ma ə n-inə ə ləxodata, na-i səmnda xa if PERF COP-lSG SUBJ farmer ASP-lSGeat well 'when I am (become) a farmer, I'll eat well' (Ma Newman 1971:202)

The evidence that ma in Ga'anda is primarily a hypothetical marker is provided by sentences that are only hypothetical and not conditional, e.g.: (29)

' ə na wandəbət i-an [ss] wa BEN-3M LOC NEG perhaps SBJ NEG money Perhaps he might not have any money' (Ma Newman 1971:203)

(30)

' kə na-anda (ə) ə perhaps they are at where Where might they be (at)?' (Ma Newman 1971:204)

In Tera (Central) the temporal protasis is marked by a periphrastic construction involving the word lokaci 'time', borrowed from Hausa. The conditional clause marker is mə, e.g.:

384

COMPLEX SENTENCE (31) mə aà ŋa ká tla©a nda if 3M come lSG FUT kill 3M 'If he comes I will kill him.' (Newman 1970:29)

In Mandara (Central) the conditional clause precedes the apodosis. The conditional marker is má (the temporal markers are do and ma). The marker ma is used with both real and unreal conditions. (32)

má sà-m-sá yá zlá lá if come lSG go 'if he comes I will go'

(33) má kì ká kátà zá d'afà dàvà-núu-davè if 2SG want eat food ask-3SG-ask 'if you want to eat, ask her about the food' With an unreal condition the apodosis is also marked by the conditional marker ma, the same marker that codes irrealis with a temporal apodosis, e.g.: (34)

má i mama má í sún làviō if lSG chief Maroua COND lSG buy airplane 'if I were the chief of Maroua, I would buy an airplane'

One of the conditional markers in Lamang is mà . . . ma 'if. . . then' - if the conditional complement represents an absolutely necessary prerequisite. (Wolff 1983:247). There is also the marker bàtà 'even if (Wolff 1983:249). In Mina there are two types of conditional markers. One is a composite structure consisting of mə-nà, which precedes the conditional (and the tempo­ ral) protasis, e.g. (all examples from Frajzyngier and Johnston, MS): (35)

há mbál wudá wùdá COND 2SG want INF eat food ask food 3PL 'if you want to eat, ask them for food'

(36)

tók zá yíp COND PERF finish work-3SG PAST 3SG-PERF rest 'if he finished his work, he will rest'

385

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

The marker occurs also in temporal clauses, as described in Chapter 9. The evidence that the direction of grammaticalization was from conditional to temporal protasis marker is provided by the fact that the same marker is used in hypothetical clauses, which do not involve a conditional or temporal function, e.g.: (37)

í-d'əb-á-nà sí 3PL-ask-OBJ-lPL.EXCL COMP would t-îní mbә man son mother POSS-1PL.EXCL 'they ask us as if he was our brother'

(38)

sí 3SG-ask-OBJ-1SGCOMP if 'he ask me as if I know Mina'

(39)

1SG-know

mínà Mina

sí í-wàll-a-k zà 1SG-ask 3PL COMP if 3SG-help (FUL)-OBJ-ISG be Ί ask them if they would help me'

The conditional and the hypothetical share the same function in the sense that they are both hypothetical. A time marker does not have to be hypothetical. Hence the development of the hypothetical, as in the sentence above, from the conditional is much more likely than a development from a time marker. In Bole (West) the conditional imba also has the hypothetical function in nonconditional clauses, e.g.: (40)

n ndoluimba ita ndingo 1SG want COND 3F come 'I wish she came'. (I prefer/hope/like if she comes.) (Maher Awad, p.c.)

In Gude the conditional clause is marked by the particle ma and precedes the apodosis, e.g.: (41)

 ә upaa əda luutsa, ka tsebəna nә ci if/when COMPL find dog meat:that, POT eat it 'if/when the dog finds that meat, he will eat (it)'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

386 (Hoskison 1983:130)

Hoskison states that the conditional clause structurally (i.e., ma + conditional clause + S) 'seems to be nothing more than a topicalized sentence' (Hoskison 1983:129). Counterfactuals in Gude are marked by maci + preposed sentence (ma 'when, if + ci (of unknown meaning/origin): (42)

maci gana ə ci, ka if here SUBJ he POTENTIAL valanə nə ci tə hə help SUBJ he OBJ you 'if he were here he would help you' (Hoskison 1983:130)

Hoskison is correct in stating that the protasis clause in Gude does not differ from topicalized clauses. This statement provides support for Haiman's 1978 claim that conditional clauses are topics. But is this true for conditional clauses marked by *mV in other Chadic languages? The answer is negative. In other Chadic languages that code the protasis with *m V, this marker is not used as a topicalization marker. Hence a different explanation must be sought for the origin of ma as the protasis marker. 10.2.3 Sources of conditional ma The widespread use of ma as a conditional marker in various Chadic languages makes it an excellent candidate for being a Proto-Chadic conditional marker. In fact, the application of standard historical reconstruction could justify postulat­ ing *m Vas a Proto-Chadic conditional marker and treating all other markers as instances of innovation. In order to prove that the contemporary conditional marker *ma is a retention of a Proto-Chadic *ma, it is necessary to show that the contemporary markers cannot be instances of independent grammaticalizations. Even if *ma is shown to be a reflex of the Proto-Chadic marker, the question about its origin remains intrinsically interesting. One potential source of the conditional marker ma is the locative preposi­ tion. Locative prepositions with initial labial nasal are attested in Hausa (West) with the meaning 'to, for', essentially with dative benefactive meaning, and in Xdi (Central) with the meaning 'from'. The grammaticalization from locative preposition to conditional marker could be accepted only if one assumes that the structure that gave rise to conditional sentences had the form: 'at S, then S'..

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

387

Such a possibility cannot be ruled out, especially in view of the fact that tempo­ ral protases in many languages derive from exactly this type of structure. Therefore I leave it as a possibility for grammaticalization, and I shall return to the preposition as a source in the discussion of other conditional markers. The other potential source is a verb of saying. In some languages there are indeed verbs of saying that are phonologically similar, e.g. in Gidar: (43)

à má ká  say on 1SG-PERF 'he lied to me'

This possibility cannot be very realistic owing to the fact that verbs of saying with the form ma are relatively rare and the conditional marker ma is relatively frequent. The third potential source is the relative marker, e.g. in Gidar: (44)

mà man REL other-3M 'other man'

Since most relative markers in Chadic derive from demonstratives or associative prepositions, I shall return to this potential source in discussing the role of demonstratives in the grammaticalization of conditional markers. I shall now describe what I believe to be the most reliable source for the conditional protasis markers ma. 10.2.4 'Interrogative ' markers as sources of conditionals Haiman 1978 and Traugott 1985 claim that conditional clauses have interroga­ tives as one of their sources. The interrogatives that Haiman 1978 and Traugott 1985 have in mind, as evidenced by examples they give, are general interroga­ tives, i.e. questions asking about the truth of the proposition, rather than spe­ cific interrogatives. In Table 10.1 there are general interrogatives as sources of conditional markers, the Hausa interrogative particle ko and the Mupun com­ plementizer ket The grammaticalization of ket as a conditional marker is not problematic, since it serves as a complementizer marking an embedded inter­ rogative clause. The interrogative clause, especially the yes/no question, is in­ herently hypothetical. The conditional has the property of hypothetical, some-

388

COMPLEX SENTENCE

thing that may, but does not have to, happen, as one of its main semantic prop­ erties. Hence we have the simple extension from the hypothetical of the inter­ rogative clause to the hypothetical of the conditional clause. More or less the same motivation applies to the grammaticalization of ko in Hausa. Unlike ket in Mupun, ko has a much wider function, serving as an interrogative particle and a hypothetical particle even in simple sentences. Table 10.1, however, also points to another source of the conditional mark­ ers, viz. marker *mV corresponding to 'what' in English. In Frajzyngier 1985f I postulate that the specific interrogative sentences in Proto-Chadic, as in most contemporary Chadic languages, had the interrogative modality marked by clause-final markers, and the function of 'WH-words' in Proto-Chadic is re­ constructed as indicating the scope of the interrogative rather than of interroga­ tive modality. The scope of interrogative modality was determined by 'interrogative words' which in fact did not carry interrogative modality but rather indicated the role of the scope of the interrogative in the clause. The se­ mantic scope of the interrogative was narrowed between categories 'human', 'nonhuman', place, manner, and so on. Thus the words corresponding to 'who' really meant 'someone' and the words corresponding to 'what' meant 'something', essentially indicating some hypothetical human or hypothetical nonhuman entity. I propose that the marker of hypothetical non-human became a marker of the conditional in Proto-Chadic. The most important piece of evi­ dence for this hypothesis is provided by the uniformity of the hypothetical nonhuman words in Chadic languages, as illustrated in Table 10.1. The second piece of evidence is provided by the fact that most, though not all, languages that have the conditional *ma also have the hypothetical nonhuman *ma. The third piece of evidence is provided by the fact that in some cases, even if the hypothetical nonhuman has a phonological form unrelated to *ma, the temporal marker has the same form as the hypothetical nonhuman marker. The first two pieces of evidence can be readily seen from the Table 10.1. I will therefore concentrate on the third. In some languages markers identical with interrogatives but not similar to *ma are components of conditional constructions. This is the case in Gidar, where interrogative 'what' and relative clause marker an is followed by the de dicto complementizer ná in one type of conditional clause, e.g.:

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

(45)

án mó-k á ká zúm wày ná á if mouth-2M PREP on eat food then IMPER ask va-nì mush from DEF-3M 'if you want to eat, ask him for some mush'

(46)

áfú-t vá-n á m ná án father-Ғ DEF-M 3Msay COMP man REL ná COND take-3F 'The father said that if a man wants to take her he . . . '

389

Another piece of evidence is provided by the marker ta wo 'what' in Podoko and the temporal marker tawa in Xdi, both Central Chadic languages spoken in the extreme northern province of Cameroon. Although the change from hypo­ thetical nonhuman to conditional and by further extension to temporal is possi­ ble, the change from conditional marker to hypothetical nonhuman is not moti­ vated. The discussion above provided the evidence that some conditional mark­ ers derive from the hypothetical nonhuman markers in Chadic. 10.2.5 Conditional markers from locative prepositions The reason locative prepositions are taken into consideration is that in some lan­ guages the conditional marker is phonologically identical with a locative preposition. In addition, prepositions precede the noun phrase and therefore their occurrence before the clause they mark would not require a change in syn­ tactic properties. In what follows I provide data from some languages in which prepositions and conditional markers are similar. In Hona (Central) the conditional marker is à, e.g.: (47)

à hí nù néfà tlúwà if buy woman meat VENT 'if woman has bought meat'

(48)

à nú if come-2SG-VENT ASSOC it 'if you didn't bring it'

wà NEG

COMPLEX SENTENCE

390 (49)

dá if come  VENT 'if he came'

The marker à may also indicate temporal clauses but only in hypothetical events, e.g.: (50)

à Üé-q-dà hay    if/when cut-ANAPH-3SG down pour-3SG into water 'if she cut it, she puts it in the water'

The potential source for this marker is the general locative preposition à, e.g.: (51)

à yéngi xí-nà díyà PREP where buy-2SG yam DEM 'where did you buy the yam?'

(52)

njáhù-rfá ŋgì à nà strike-3SGlSG PREP back 1SG 'It struck me on the back'

In order to explain how a locative preposition might have become a condi­ tional marker I propose the following hypothesis: In most languages the loca­ tive preposition serves in both locative and temporal expressions. It is the tem­ poral function of the preposition that is extended to code conditional clauses. Support for this hypothesis is provided by data from East Dangla (Erin Shay, p.c.): In East Dangla the conditional marker is báa. It precedes the conditional clause, e.g.: (53)

báa kí éléi -lú di, when 2SG want-NEG only injure-2SG 'If you don't want it, too bad for you!'

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES (54)

(55)

391

ŋà an-tyo ŋàs: 'báa gem ki iy-du àwkò  say-3PL COMP if person REL bring-1SG goat ti wàlá metà wàlá no-dyì bèr-íntí REL NEG male NEG female-only 1SG-3M give-Ғ ròm-òr' daughter-1SG 'He said to them: "If a person brings me a goat who is neither male nor female, Iwill give him my daughter'" kòkìr-or guma, báa no wak-tyà ďúu gi, hen-1SG brood COND 1SG move-3F NEG COUNTEREXPECT tya mat ak wér-tí-èk di 3F kill PREP place-3-DEM only 'my hen broods, but if I don't move her, she kills (them) on the spot'

The East Dangla marker is identical with a potential hypothetical and irrealis marker in matrix clauses. Irrealis includes events that have yet to take place, e.g.: (56)

ni-i ròope báa aandiràa IPL-FUT meet COND tomorrow 'will we meet tomorrow?'

(57)

no-o gìdiye màràl báa aandirà salt COND tomorrow 1PL-FUT trade Ί will buy salt tomorrow'

(58)

báa aandir tya- gídíy -íntí kóo òok -íntí COND tomorrow 3F-FUT trade -3F millet all -3F 'tomorrow, she will sell all the millet'

The marker báa is also a temporal marker preceding nouns referring to time but only in the de dicto domain, e.g.: (59)

báa ďyirìy ta suginerì, tyà sùugay when day PREP market 3F sell beer 'on the day of the market, she sells beer'

COMPLEX SENTENCE

392

The source of the marker báa in all of these constructions is báa as a temporal preposition 'on', e.g.: (60)

nii ròope báa aandiràa 1PL.FUT meet PREP tomorrow 'will we meet tomorrow?'

(61)

báa ta suginerì, tyà sùugay PREP day PREP market 3F sell beer 'on the day of the market, she sells beer'

The source of báa as a temporal preposition is another matter, to be resolved through comparative studies within East Chadic languages and perhaps compar­ ison with non-Chadic languages as well. 10.2.6 Demonstratives/definite markers as conditional markers In a number of languages conditional markers are similar to demonstratives or definite markers both phonologically and syntactically in that they occur after rather than before the the constituent of which they are a part. Both of these factors may suggest that clause-final conditional markers derive from demon­ stratives. I propose the following sequence of grammaticalization: Demonstrative —> Definite —> Protasis —> Apodosis. The first change is unproblematic and widely attested elsewhere (cf. Frajzyngier 1991a). The change from definite to protasis needs an explanation. Recall that with respect to the temporal protasis, the occurrence of demonstratives/definite markers after the protasis was explained as a remnant of a relative clause structure with the word 'time' as its head. One could invoke the same explanation for the condi­ tional protasis, but in fact there is no evidence that relative clauses with 'time' as their head are used as markers of the conditional protasis. Two other explana­ tions are also possible. One is that the demonstrative/definite marker was grammaticalized äs the temporal protasis marker and subsequently its function was extended to be also a conditional protasis marker. Such an explanation is entirely possible in view of the fact that other markers of temporal protasis also had their functions extended to be markers of conditional protasis. Such an explanation is not problematic.

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

393

The other explanation invokes the properties of the protasis. As Traugott 1985 and others have pointed out, the protasis clause indicates a given proposi­ tion. Functional extension from demonstratives to markers of definiteness is well attested in many languages of the world (cf. Frajzyngier 1991a). Hence the definite marker is used after a clause to mark it as given, known, et cetera. This explanation, despite its semantic plausibility, attributes to the definite marker a syntactic freedom that needs to be explained. Recall that in Chadic, demonstratives and definite markers occur after nominal expressions. They also occur after relative clauses. To postulate that definite markers may occur after clauses it would mean that definite markers have become independent markers of 'known', 'given', or whatever else one may call the semantic prop­ erty involved, and can be freely used whenever speakers want to encode this property. The crucial evidence for what is actually the source of demonstratives used in conditional protases is provided by comparison of temporal and conditional protases. If the temporal protasis is not marked by a demonstrative, and the conditional is, then the demonstrative/definite marker as a conditional protasis marker represents a grammaticalization of the demonstrative motivated by its semantic properties. If the language that has the demonstrative as a conditional marker also has the demonstrative as a temporal marker, then the conditional protasis marker is simply a functional extension of the temporal protasis marker. The language-internal evidence points to the demonstrative/definite markers of conditional protasis coming from analogical markers of temporal protasis. In all languages in which the conditional protasis is marked by the definite, the temporal protasis is also so marked. Discussion of the change from protasis to apodosis marker is provided later in this chapter. The following is a description of a few cases where conditional markers derive from demonstratives via the temporal protasis. In Ngizim the previous reference markers all contain an alveolar nasal fol­ lowed by the vowel à in the singular and ú in the plural for deictic and pronomi­ nal elements, e.g.: Deictic previous reference

SG PL

Pronominal

Adjectival (Schuh 1972:171)

Hence the alveolar nasal is the marker of previous reference. The alveolar nasal occurs also as the marker of the protasis in a conditional clause, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

394

(62)

ká -naa aci bii-n, dà kii'yi-naa tluwii-gu 2S 3SM NEG-COND 'if you don't stop him, he'll eat up the meat.' (Schuh 1972:330)

One way of encoding the conditional in Munjuk is by using a definite marker after the first clause in the sentence, e.g.: (63)

hàlá sì  2SG.PERF go VENT ACC DEF 1SG.IMPERF su-kú hílíf give-2SG fish 'if you come I will give you a fish' (Tourneux, MS).

In Buduma the protasis markers ŋe and gema come at the end of the condi­ tional clause, which precedes the apodosis. Recall that in Buduma many, but not all, embedded clauses precede the apodosis. The marker ŋe seems to en­ code a real condition, and the marker gema seems to encode a hypothetical one: (64)

 -k'e -goi ŋe ge -hèŋge-nau a? lSG-say-2PL COND 2PL-hear -2PL PREP? 'if I say (it) to you, will you hear (it)?' (Lukas 1939:81)

(65)

geheŋgénau ŋe walóu ! 2PL hear COND go 'If you have heard, go!' (Lukas 1939:81)

(66)

gaamo babé-i gema dánemo gi nicegu kaber 2SG father-1SG COND 2SG see 3SG probably 3SG:tell news 'if you seen my father, he'll probably (surely) tell you the news' (Lukas 1939:81)

The conditional marker ŋé may be identical with the marker written ŋgé by Lukas, which has a number of related functions. It is a relative marker and a demonstrative. To a general demonstrative yu (yo, yoo) 'this', e.g. ŋgírim yoo 'this woman' one can add the marker ŋgé, e.g. yu-ŋgé 'this', which produces an emphatic 'verstarkt' form of demonstrative. The evidence that  is a demonstrative in origin is provided further by the fact that it can be replaced by

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

395

another marker ago, which most probably also contains a demonstrative gó 'this, that', e.g.: (67)

Cf. (68)

(69)

lugu bukor anê ŋé man horse have COND 'if a man has a horse' (Lukas 1939:81) lugu bukor anê ago man horse have COND 'if a man has a horse' (Lukas 1939:82) lúgu ŋgé gaahin oojin abaale gecege person REL 2SG:fear there is not 2SG:say ga mbólau komaani dau ŋgeregu ! when lPL:go 2SG show 1SG home:2POSS 'when you say that there is no one whom you fear, let us go and show me your home!' (Lukas 1939:80).

There are three types of conditional clauses in Kera. In each type the condi­ tional clause precedes the apodosis. The first type does not differ from tempo­ ral clauses in that it is marked by a clause-final definite marker. Ebert 1979 states that in a 'simple' (i.e. realis) conditional sentence the apodosis is in the basic aspect or the optative and the complement is in the perfect. The protasis is marked by the definite marker at the end of the protasis clause, e.g.: (70) wə kooroŋ-ne guud-u 3SF return-PERF home-DEF go-IMP behind-3SG 'when/if he goes home, follow him' (Ebert 1979:271) (71)

a gàn gùud-ń wəra bà! wasp come-PERF-DEF betray -1SG INTENS NEG 'if the wasp comes, don't betray me!' (Ebert 1979:271)

Compare the definite marker at the end of the relative clause:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

396 (72)

kaa míntí ye áďómpón people ATT foresight REL 3PL prepare.PERF ko neeté-η dìdìdà-ỷ ye ráawé, place 3PL-DEF EXT earlier-DEF 3PL go ye jè'é farfi 3PL sow immediately 'the people who had foresight, who had already prepared their place, they went and sowed right away' (Ebert 1979:257)

I would like to consider here the very unlikely possibility that the clause-ini­ tial (not clause-final) protasis marker *ma is derived from a demonstrative ma. The reason for even considering this possibility is that in several languages there are demonstratives with an initial labial nasal. In Buduma there is a demonstrative marker ma 'this' ('so-called', 'previously mentioned'?) already discussed in connection with temporal protasis: (73)

lugu má person DEM 'this person' (Lukas 1939:44) woli-ane genaa ma boy:POSS little DEM 'this his little boy' / 'this little boy of his' (Lukas 1939:44)

Yet the protasis marker in Buduma is clause-initial rather than clause-final. The conditional protasis marker in Buduma has most probably the same origin as other clause-initial markers *ma, viz. the 'hypothetical-nonhuman' markers. There is, however, at least one clause-initial protasis marker derived from a demonstrative. This is the case of one marker in Gidar described in the follow­ ing section. 10.2.7 From 'hand'toconditional marker In the present section I show a development from the lexeme 'hand' to a condi­ tional marker. Although I have data for this development in one language only, such a development presents enough linguistic interest to merit a brief descrip­ tion. Gidar (Central) has two types of temporal clauses, encoding realis and irrealis, and three types of conditional clauses. One type of conditional clause

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

397

indicates a condition that was met or could have been met at the time of speech. It is marked by the particle và. The apodosis clause is marked by the marker ná, identical with the complementizer, e.g.: (74)

và wùzá ná-n ná wà-fétì if 3M-finish-PERF work POSS- COMPFUT-3M rest 'if he finished his work he will rest'

(75)

way na-t ná wà-tì fètì if 3M-finish-PERF cook food POSS-3F COMP FUT-3F rest 'if she finished preparing her food she can rest'

The marker và does not have cognates among conditional protasis markers in other Chadic languages, including the most closely related Daba (cf. Mouchet 1967). But it has several similar or identical morphemes within Gidar. In the following description I present the other forms of và in the order of grammaticalization that I propose took place. Essentially we will follow the development of the grammatical morpheme from the beginning to the present stage. At each step I propose the motivation and circumstances that might have facilitated the grammaticalization process. Step 1. There is a lexeme và 'hand', as illustrated by the following examples: (76)

và-wà hand-1SG 'my hand'

(77)

và-tà hand-3F 'her hand'

Step 2. The lexeme 'hand' becomes definite marker The form và followed by aan appropriate gender or number marker is used as a definite marker. I propose that the development from 'hand' to definite marker must have gone through a step where 'hand' became a demonstrative. The demonstrative construction must have been identical with the present definite construction, i.e., it consisted of the head noun followed by và followed by a

398

COMPLEX SENTENCE

possessive pronoun encoding the number and gender (in the singular) of the head noun, e.g.: (78)

way và-n à-gáp-kà food DEF-M 3M-ready-PERF 'the food is ready' (the food that we talked about) (cannot be used while pointing at an object.

(79)

wàhlì và-nì tìzí tàwá cow DEF-M Tizi  slaughter 'the cow, it is Tizi that slaughtered it'

(80)

wàhlì và-tì cow black-PL DEF-3PL POSS-1SG-COP:3PL 'the black cows are mine'

The putative change from 'hand' to definite is an interesting problem that requires a description of its own. The grammaticalization involves a conceptual shift from the device used in many cultures to accompany a language expres­ sion, a hand pointing at objects at a distance, to the lexeme 'hand' to indicate the distance itself. (81)

gùlù và-t woman DEF-F 3F die-PERF 'the woman died'

(82)

gùl và-ti à-mt-án-kà women DEF-PL 3-die-PL-PERF 'the women died'

The grammaticalization from demonstrative to definite is widely attested in lan­ guages of the world (cf. Frajzyngier 1991a) and there is no need to provide a separate explanation for this process. Step 3 From bound to a free morpheme The definite marker acquires the status of a free morpheme in the sense that it is no longer linked to the head noun. Here are a few examples:

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

(83)

á á và-nì IMPER ask PREP DEF-3M 'ask him for it'(it does not refer to a question)

(84)

zà PREP side hyena

399

và-s kà -hear that-ANAPH xxx

3M-cook-PERF stomach When the hyena heard that it became angry.' The evidence that the demonstrative with the appropriate possessive pronoun is used as an anaphor is provided by examples where the deictic usage is ruled out This is illustrated by the following sentence, where the demonstrative is a resumptive pronoun in a relative clause construction: (85)

hlù mùkrókòn kákkám-ì animal wild REL IPL-see DEM-M rat-COP 'the animal that we saw is a rat'

Step 4 The marker và followed by various demonstratives becomes a temporal marker: (86)

và-s ná tà-ì á wálán-glá once COMP man be- PREP center-compound né-t mìmée dà POSS-3PL thing-3PL LOC 'There was a man who lived in the village of animals'

Step 5 From demonstrative to doubt-in-truth marker The marker vä in the apodosis clause-initial position combined with the hypo­ thetical marker kətà in the protasis clause-final position conveys a doubt-in-truth modality: (87)

và à-dáw nə ná apparently 3-IMPERF say COMP hunter-3M-COP HYP 'he said that he is a hunter, but I doubt it'

400

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Step 6 From doubt-in-truth marker to conditional The modal function encoding doubt-in-truth is extended to encode de dicto, hy­ pothetical, modality, essentially the modality that is present in conditional clauses. So the change from hypothetical to conditional is not a very radical change. If the condition could not have been met at the time of speech, the hypothet­ ical particle kətà is inserted after the marker ná of the apodosis clause, e.g.: (88)

và kd-án táyà zà ná kətà wá agrá wùzàgó if PL then HYP FUT:3 finish work early 'if they were stronger, they would have finished their work earlier'

(89)

vàmátà-k à-dà wúzánà if together-PERF 3-IMPERF do work then HYP wá agra-k go FUT:3 finish-PERF ? early 'if they worked together, they would have finished the work earlier'

The use of the demonstrative và in conditional clauses is part of the general use of demonstratives in hypothetical conditional clauses in Gidar, e.g.: (90)

yà-s mà-zànlákàn à-wá ná if-DEM man REL-masculine 3M-give birth NEG COMP 'if a man cannot give birth then . . .'

10.2.8 De dicto complementizer as a protasis marker In some languages the de dicto complementizers came to serve as markers of protasis in conditional clauses. I propose the following hypotheses: (1) The markers introducing conditional protasis and the sequential markers, including those introducing an apodosis clause, have been grammaticalized from the de dicto complementizers. (2) The grammaticalization from de dicto complemen­ tizer to marker of the apodosis clause consists of the functional extension of the source, but this time it took a somewhat different path. The derivation of the protasis markers from de dicto complementizers was motivated by a conceptual analysis of conditional clauses, which were conceived as indicating a hypotheti­ cal event, a natural extension of the de dicto domain (cf. Frajzyngier 1991a). This semantic extension of the function is quite natural in view of the fact that

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

401

the de dicto domain is hypothetical, and therefore the markers of the de dicto domain can be used as markers of the hypothetical. The grammaticalization of the apodosis markers can be explained as follows: The whole sequence 'if. . . then' is conceived as being in the de dicto domain, and the proposition marked by the equivalent of 'then' is conceived as taking place in the de dicto domain. The evidence for hypothesis (1) is provided by a comparison of the de dicto complementizers and the 'if markers. The evidence for hypothesis (2) is pro­ vided by a comparison of the 'then' markers and the de dicto complementizers. Here is the evidence for the grammaticalization of the protasis markers from de dicto complementizers. In Munjuk there are two means of encoding a conditional clause, one through a marker that precedes the conditional clause, and the other through a marker that follows the conditional clause. The conditional clause always pre­ cedes the apodosis. For our hypothesis now I am interested in the marker that precedes the conditional protasis, na-bó or its variant. This marker con­ sists of the verb of saying nǎ and the complementizer bo, which itself derives from a verb of saying (cf. the reconstructed form for a verb of saying in Chapter 4). Thus not one but two forms derived from verbs of saying are used as markers of conditional protasis, e.g.: (91)

hàlá lìy COND 2SG.PERF go VENT PERF 1SG.IMPERF hílíf give-2SG fish 'if you come I will give you fish' (Tourneux, MS)

In Lele (East) the conditional is either má báná or ná. The latter marker is identical with the de dicto complementizer. The apodosis is marked by the complementizer ná just as temporal 'then' clauses are marked: (92) ná éjé-dí ná η-jé mágl-è kusì-ŋ mbóbè-ì if come-3M then 1SG-PROG prepare-NOMIN body-1SG wait- 'if he comes I should prepare myself to wait for him' In Masa (Masa) the conditional marker is là, occurring after the subject of the protasis clause and before the verb, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

402 (93)

nag là mín tìe job-óm fúnà 2SG COND want eat ask3SG food 'if you want to eat ask her for food' (Z.F., field notes)

Recall that là is one of the de dicto complementizers as described in Chapter 4 (cf. also Caitucoli 1983:105). Kera has several types of conditional sentences. One type, realis, is marked by clause-final definite markers (q.v.). The second type Ebert calls hypotheti­ cal. It is marked by (from the verb jì 'go'), followed by a com­ plement in the preterit. Note that this type contains the marker minti, which also serves as de dicto complementizer. (94)

minti kooroŋ-né gùud-ú COND 3SG return-PERF home-DEF go-IMP behind-3SG 'if it is so that he goes home, follow him' (Ebert 1979:272)

10.2.9 Other sources of protasis markers In the present section I discuss the protasis markers for which I was unable to find sources. In so doing, I would like to facilitate the work of others who want to continue this quest. In Kanakuru the marker of conditional is bò 'if. In the vocabulary in Newman 1974 there is no lexical item or grammatical morpheme whose phonological form and meaning resemble the protasis marker. The verb 'to say' is bale, i.e., it has a glottalized rather than a simple stop; hence it is not a likely source for bo. The conditional clause occurs before the apodosis, which has no overt morphological markers. (All examples are from Newman 1974:113-11-5): (95)

[bo w do-wu] ànò ta la kashuku if 3PL come-L.I 1SG FUT go market 'if they come, I will go to the market'

(96)

Musa bàa aye ne, ànò do-mu Musa COND help 1SG 1SG come-NOMIN? 'If Musa helps me, I will come'

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

(97)

403

bo Musa à aye ne ànò do-ma COND Musa 3M help 1SG 1SG come-NOMIN? 'If Musa helps me, I will come'

The counterfactual condition is marked by the particle jé inserted before the apodosis in the perfective. The important fact about counterfactual is that it is added to the conditional clause marked by bò, e.g.: (98)

jé á COND 2M leave COND 3M -.I 'if you had left it, it would have cooked'

In Daba there are several conditional markers. The markers tu and kam Mouchet 1967:94 considers to be borrowed from Fula and the marker si to be borrowed from French. The markers kam and si may cooccur with the marker tu, e.g.: (99)

ha tu y a kam 2SG COND come COND (Ful) 'if you come' (Mouchet 1967:94)

(100) si ha tu ya if 2SG COND come 'if you come' (Mouchet 1967:94) With respect to conditional si in Daba, recall that in Mina, spoken in the same area as Daba, si is a de dicto complementizer but not a conditional marker. In Èidiya the difference between a real and an unreal condition is coded by the different conditional markers. The real condition is coded by the marker kaa, which occurs at the end of the protasis clause. Subject pronouns occur in a form that Alio labels 'conditional' characterized by the vowel -i. Unlike Alio 1986 I gloss kaa as COND, for conditional marker: (101)

kaa ki minnò 3M.COND come:PERF COND 2M warn SUBJ: 1SGO 'if he has come, let me know' (Alio 1986:307)

COMPLEX SENTENCE

404

The unreal condition is marked by clause-initial marker 'alcàŋ (not in the dictionary by Alio and Jungraithmayr 1989) and by the protasis clause-final marker kaa (glosses only partially follow those of Alio 1986): (102) 'aleaŋ ku gàa-róŋ 'òseŋ déenò kaa, COND 2PL AUX-2PL show-VN before COND gàa -nó 'ásèŋ AUX-1SG come-VN AUX 1SG 'if you had shown me well ahead, I would have come a long time ago' (Alio 1986:XXX) 10.2 10 Conclusion regarding sources of protasis markers The conditional protasis markers overlap only partially with the temporal prota­ sis markers. One conditional marker, clause-initial ma is attested in many lan­ guages and is an excellent candidate for reconstruction at the stage of ProtoChadic. The marker ma appears to be derived from a hypothetical nonhuman marker identical with specific interrogative 'what'. The other clause-initial pro­ tasis markers have been grammaticalized from a variety of sources including specific interrogative 'what', locative prepositions and temporal protasis mark­ ers. Clause-final protasis markers have been grammaticalized from demonstra­ tives and temporal protasis markers. There are also some protasis markers whose origin remains unknown.

10.3

Functions of apodosis markers

The apodosis clause in many Chadic languages may be morphologically marked or unmarked, m no language, however, the marking of the apodosis clause is obligatory. Hence the markers of apodosis must carry some semantic or prag­ matic function. There is virtually no explicit information about the function of apodosis markers in descriptions of various Chadic languages; therefore, the analyses that follow are my own hypotheses, which should be corroborated by future investigations. The apodosis following conditional clauses in Hausa is not different from the apodosis following temporal clauses. In both types of sentences, the apo­ dosis may be morphologically marked. The apodosis marker sai is the same as the one that encodes the apodosis in temporal sentences. I propose that the

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

405

marker sai occurs when the apodosis is a consequence of the protasis. The consequence could either be temporal or be in a cause-effect relationship to the protasis. Support for this hypothesis comes mainly from the types of sentences in which sai occurs and those in which it does not. All sentences below come from narratives; hence none of them was produced to support the hypothesis. All sentences contain sai, and in all of them the apodosis is a direct consequence of the protasis: (103) 'in, ma, mùtûm ya cê, zâi tsayà, yà if EMPH person 3M say FUT:3M stand up 3M-SUBJ bayyàna 'arzìkin sarki 'àbdùramanì gà wadandà bà sù explain wealth chief Abduraman PREP whoever NEG 3PL san 'àbîn dà 'a-kè kirà duniyà ba, know thing REL 3.INDEF-REL call world NEG sai sù yi tsàmmanì sharà 'karya yakè yī then 3PL think sweeping lies 3M-REL do 'if then a person says that he will stand up and explain the wealth of chief Abduraman to anyone who does not understand a thing about this world, then they will say that is telling lies' (Kraft 1963:249) (104) 'in na yi 'à yâmma, sai īn komà kudù if 1SG make PREP west then 1SG return south 'if I do it in the west I will return south' (Kraft 1963:246) (105) 'in 'uba ya ce sàdakì-n 'yar-sà if father 3M say bride-price-GEN daughter-3 sulè ne, sai kà ba dà sulè, 'à shilling COP then 2M give ASSOC shilling 3.INDEF daurà ma-kù 'aure tie PREP-2PL marriage 'if the father says that the bride-price is one shilling, then you give one shilling, and then they will marry you' (Kraft 1963:246)

406

COMPLEX SENTENCE (106) 'idan rana ta fadì sòsai, kuma, sai ta fìta wajen if Sun 3F fall completely though then 3F come out nema-η 'abinci seek-GEN food 'if the Sun goes down completely, then it comes out to seek food' (Kraft 1963:246) (107) 'in ka ga yaddà Fiti kè 'àlewà dà dòkì, if 2M see how Fiti be play ASSOC horse yà ba kà 'àl'ajàbi sai 'àbî-n then thing-DEF 3M give 2M surprise 'if you see how Fiti is able to play with a horse, then this will sur prise you' (Kraft 1963:246)

In the following sentences there is no apodosis marker sai, and in none of these sentences is the apodosis a consequence of the protasis: (108) 'in sun 'karà girma, 'à yi bìki if 3PL finish grow 3.INDEF make feast 'if they grow bigger, let's arrange a feast' (Kraft 1963:250-51) (109) 'in ka-nà dà hikimà, gàya minì, if 2SG-be ASSOC wisdom tell 1SG 'yâu shèkàru-n Musa nawà today years-GEN Moses how many 'if you are so wise, tell me how old is Moses today?' (Kraft 1963:250-51) (110) 'in ke, kinà dà 'karfin tasam ma-sà, if 2F 2F-be ASSOC strength attach PREP-3PL mu, munà dà shi né? 1PL 1PL-be ASSOC3SG COP 'if you have the strength to attack them, we, don't we have it?' (Kraft 1963:250-51)

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

407

(111) 'in 'uwa ta-nà sô-n-kà, wani lokàci if mother 3F-PROG like-GEN-2SG QUANT time 'ùba ba yà sô-n-kà father NEG  like-GEN-2 SG 'if the mother likes you, sometimes father does not like you' (Kraft 1963:250-51) The data from Hausa are quite unambiguous and leave no doubt as to the environments in which sai occurs and in which it does not. I have no equally abundant data concerning apodosis marking in other languages. I do assume, however, on the basis of data from Hausa, that the function of the apodosis markers in other languages is not too different from the function of the marker sai in Hausa. Here is an example from Margi. In Margi the protasis clause is marked by mà 'if. The apodosis clause is marked by də, the same marker that encodes consecutive clauses in narrative. But the apodosis marker occurs only when the conditional is realis, e.g.: (112)

mà nì mì g rá ? if 1SG PR-show-2SG what then 2SG PR-give-1SG Q 'if I show you (it), what will you give me? (Hoffmann 1963:XXX)

To the general conditional marker other markers may be added to further specify the type of condition. Thus mà-já 'if, is used to express doubt whether the condition is or might be fulfilled. It is essentially a counterfactual, or irrealis, conditional. In such sentences the consecutive də does not occur, e.g.: (113) mà-já nì 'Yáulà, nì àrá if 1SG chief Yola 1SG FUT burn cá village this whole 'if I were the Emir of Yola, I would burn this whole village' (Hoffmann 1963:284)

10.4

Sources of apodosis markers

There are at least three sources from which apodosis markers were grammaticalized: the de dicto complementizers, the sequential temporal markers, and the

408

COMPLEX SENTENCE

demonstrative and definite markers. The three emerged as sources through quite different grammaticalization processes. 10.4.1 De dicto complementizers as a source of apodosis markers In several languages from the Central branch the apodosis markers derive from de dicto complementizers, In Gidar in all types of conditional clauses, the apo­ dosis is marked by the particle ná, identical with the complementizer after verba dicendi and with the temporal apodosis marker occurring after adverbial clauses of time, e.g.: (114)

wuzá na-n ná wà-fétì if 3M-finishPERF work POSS-3M then FUT:3M rest 'if he finished his work he will rest'

Cf. the temporal apodosis: (115)

grá-k wùzà nà-t ná tì fét-kè when 3F finish-PERF work POSS-3F then 3F rest-PERF 'when she finished work she rested'

The evidence that the conditional and the temporal apodosis marker derives from the de dicto complementizer rather than the other way around is provided by the similarity between the de dicto complementizers and the verbs of saying, as illustrated in the following sentence: (116) vóndù à ná ná gáwí-ì voŋdu 3M say COMP hunter- 'Vondu(l) said that he(l) is a hunter' In Giziga the conditional apodosis marker and the de dicto complementizer are both ná, e.g;: (117)

só lè ná 'í sà vl-ù if 2SG come PERF then 1SG FUT give-2SG money 'if you come, I will give you money' (Lukas 1970:81)

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

409

(118) 'à soo lè ná k tá 3S come PERF then 2SG know-3SG NEG Q 'didn't you know that he has come?' (Lukas 1970:79) The evidence that the conditional apodosis marker comes from the de dicto complementizer rather than from the sequential marker or the temporal apodosis marker in Giziga is provided by the fact that the temporal apodosis is not marked by ná, as examples of the temporal apodosis quoted in Chapter 9 show: (119) taps yem-ro 'i pur dərleŋge le when lSG?-go Dogba 1SG see leopard PERF 'When I went to Dogba, I saw a leopard' (Lukas 1970:80) (120) 'à hì 'à Màrvá after Fulani PL come in to Marua Màrvà hày 'à mùwà ruaPL ? climb- ? to hills 'After the Fulani came, the Giziga went to the hills' (Lukas 1970:80) An explanation for the grammaticalization from the de dicto complementizer to the conditional apodosis marker must be sought in semantic features shared by both structures as well as in the position between two clauses occupied by the marker. The semantic feature shared is the hypothetical nature of the proposi­ tion; both the conditional apodosis and complements of verbs of saying are in the de dicto domain. The position of the marker between the two clauses facili­ tates this grammaticalization. 10.4.2 Sequential markers as a source of apodosis markers The development of apodosis markers in conditional sentences from sequential markers is a well-known phenomenon occurring in languages from various families. The semantic motivation for such development is also nonproblematic. A clause that follows a conditional clause is its consequence in the same way that the clause that follows a temporal protasis is its consequence. In sec­ tion 4 I illustrated conditional clauses in Hausa with the apodosis marker sai. The evidence for the direction from sequential to apodosis marker is straightforward. The sequential sai occurs in sentence-initial position in narratives, such clauses are in a way temporal apodoses when compared with preceding

410

COMPLEX SENTENCE

sentences. Similarly in Margi, the marker of conditional apodosis is the se­ quential marker in temporal sentences. In Hona the apodosis marker is mbé or e.g.: (121) à mbé nà-ngí-ә if come-3SG-VENT then see-lSG-3SG 'if he comes he should see me' The apodosis marker is identical with the sequential marker, which precedes se­ quential clauses in narratives, e.g.: (122) à tsàb áŋ tlú dà ďú when wash ANAPH 3SG meat DEM put-3SG nà bərən hù wá inside pot XXX EXT then IMPERF throw-ANAPH tlú dì sáy meat DEM just (H.?) one one 'when she washed the meat and turned the pot again on the fire then she put the meat in one by one' The grammaticalization from sequential to conditional apodosis is similar to the grammaticalization from temporal protasis to conditional protasis. Both pro­ cesses are well attested in languages. 10.4.3 Demonstratives/definite markers as a source of apodosis markers The other source of apodosis marker is demonstratives, the frequent source of such markers in IE languages, cf. English 'then', Polish to. The grammatical­ ization of apodosis markers in IE languages has yet to be described. I propose that in Chadic languages the apodosis markers that are identical with demonstratives developed from protasis markers. What probably hap­ pened was a constituent status reanalysis, whereby S-DEM/DEF S was reana­ lyzed as S DEM/DEF-S, i.e., the demonstrative marker at the end of the prota­ sis clause was reanalyzed as the initial marker of the apodosis clause. The jus­ tification for this hypothesis is that this is most likely motivation for the demonstratives/definite marker to occur between the two clauses. Demonstratives/definite markers in Chadic follow rather than precede the phrase they modify. Here are a few examples:

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

411

In Giziga the apodosis marker in both realis and irrealis conditions is ná, which Lukas 1970 describes as a demonstrative. Note that ná is not a sequen­ tial marker because it can mark the apodosis even when it describes events that preceded the events described in the protasis. (123)

lè ná sà vl-ù dlílê if 2SG come COMPL SUB 1SG FUT give-2SG money 'If you come, I will give you money.' (Lukas 1970:81)

(124) d(à)ànzà só lè if IRREALIS 2SG FUT COMPL nà dlíé lè SUB lSG give-2SG money COMPL 'If you had come, I would have given you money' (Lukas 1970:81) The marker ná also precedes the apodosis when the order is embedded-ma­ trix: (125)

soo lè ná k tá 3s come PERF SUB 2SG know-3S NEG Q 'Didn't you know that he has come?' (Lukas 1970:79)

In Munjuk the marker that follows the conditional clause but precedes the apodosis clause is identical with the definite marker dà, e.g.: (126)

hàlá By dà 2SG.PERF go VENT PERF DEF hílíf 1SG.1MPERF give-2SG fish 'if you come I will give you fish' (Tourneux, MS)

Thus the apodosis markers derive mainly from clause-final protasis markers through a process of syntactic reanalysis whereby a marker is a reanalyzed from being a clause-final protasis marker to being clause-initial apodosis marker.

412

COMPLEX SENTENCE

10.4.4 Apodosis markers from conjunctions Mina has two conditional markers. One is the protasis marker ná, described earlier in this chapter. The other is the marker am, which occurs between the protasis and apodosis clause in conjunction with mə nã, e.g.: (127) á hlà dèfé mùzá gómbòk 1SG say buffalo call 2PL mouth frog am hi hltí hté òhók CONJ answer yes 'he said: if the buffalo calls you frog, you answer yes' (128)

nàgómbòk ám í r skú if frog if 3PL eat PROG NEG 'if it is a frog, one does not eat it'

I propose that this marker comes from a conjunction ama 'but, and', which was borrowed into Mina from some languages, but which ultimately comes from Arabic. Mina is one of the few Chadic languages that have developed a senten­ tial coordinating conjunction, albeit from a borrowed word. This sentential conjunction came to be used as apodosis marker.

10.5

Conclusions

The grammaticalization of temporal and conditional clauses in Chadic points to a bi-directionality of the process when the semantic and syntactic conditions are favorable. Given two functions A and B, the marker of A can become the marker of B, or the marker of  can become the marker of A, if A and  share one semantic feature in common, and if the coding properties of the marker are compatible with the coding constraints of A and B. We have seen that the marker of the temporal clause may become the marker of the conditional clause, and that the marker of conditional clause may become the marker of the tempo­ ral clause. When there are two grammatical, nonlexical morphemes A and B, one cannot know a priori which is the source and which is the target of gram­ maticalization, and the reconstruction of the process of grammaticalization must reach a stage that would allow a reconstruction of the nongrammatical source for one of the morphemes. Thus if one can show that for the two functions X

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES

413

and Y marked by the same or similar morphemes, one can establish the lexical source of the morpheme, and if the source shares the semantic feature with X, the direction of grammaticalization is X —> Y, but if the source shares the se­ mantic feature with Y, the direction of grammaticalization is Y —> X. The grammaticalization of the temporal and conditional markers also indi­ cates that the form of the construction depends very much on the sources from which the components of the construction originate. Thus the temporal and conditional markers occur clause initially if they originate from prepositions, but clause finally if they originate from demonstrative and definite markers. The Chapters 9 and 10 have also pointed to the importance of syntactic reanalysis whereby a final component of one clause is reanalyzed as the initial component of the following clause. The clause-initial temporal and conditional apodosis markers can be derived from clause-final protasis markers. This derivation is important in view of the fact that in many languages of the world the meanings of 'when' and 'then' are not synonymous. Yet, given the proper syntactic conditions, the same morpheme can carry both meanings in Chadic. Note that the clause-initial protasis markers never become apodosis markers in Chadic, which shows that rather than semantic properties, it is syntactic proper­ ties that are crucial for the process of grammaticalization.

11 THE RELATIVE CLAUSE

11.1

Introduction

The study of formation of the relative clause in Chadic languages reveals evi­ dence of the pragmatic/semantic function of several components of the relative clause. In the present Chapter I shall raise questions about relative clauses that have heretofore not been addressed in Chadic language research nor in formal or functional approaches, including typological studies directed at the discovery of language universals. Some of the issues that have not been dealt with in the numerous studies of relative clauses follow: What is the role of relative mark­ ers, or relative pronouns, as they are often called? The question here is why these markers occur. What is the role in relative clauses of determiners, mark­ ers that sometimes occur before and sometimes after the head noun, and some­ times at the end of the relative clause (cf. Keenan 1985)? What is the role of relative tenses, a phenomenon widely observed in Chadic languages, but cer­ tainly not limited to that family? Although I cannot provide a definite answer to all of these questions, I think I do show the main areas where the answers can be found. In the present work I use the notion of the relative clause as it is commonly used in the current typological literature, viz. a clause that modifies a noun phrase. For similar definitions see Downing 1978, Comrie 1981, Keenan 1985, Palmer 1986, Lehmann 1992. In the following discussion in formulaic representations I refer to the modified noun phrase as 'head (NP)' and to rela­ tive clause as S. The above notion of the relative clause differs slightly from the implicit notion that a relative clause is any clause that has a relative marker, as evidenced by occasional usage in various descriptions of Chadic languages. There are constructions in Chadic languages that may have relative markers: fo­ cusing constructions, some interrogative sentences, attributive constructions, various types of emphatic sentences, and even conditional clauses. Compare the following sentences from Mupun (West): The first sentence contains a rela-

416

COMPLEX SENTENCE

tive clause construction and second is an attributive construction making use of the relative clause marker ďə. (1)

gwar wu su seet ba wur a wat kas man REL  run go away NEG 3M COP thief NEG 'the man who ran away is not a thief

(2)

surep yak sƏ mo hay daa women REL time DEM PL NEG fellow 'contemporary women, no way, man'

In the present chapter I shall be concerned mainly with relative clauses proper. This chapter is organized around the functional and formal categories manifested by relative clauses. I first describe the form and the major con­ stituents of sentences containing relative clauses. Several constituents of the relative clause participate in the encoding of the same semantic or pragmatic cat­ egories. Consequently, I describe next the categories of existential status and the categories of grammatical role of the head noun phrase, both of which may be encoded by different elements of the relative clause. Relative markers in some Chadic languages also encode certain semantic features of the head nouns, as described in the next section. I then describe the source of grammaticalization of relative markers. Finally, the last component of the relative clause, socalled relative tenses, is discussed briefly. The rest of the chapter is devoted to the problems of reconstruction of the relative clause in Proto-Chadic.

11.2

Major constituents of the relative clause

All relative clauses in Chadic languages are postnominal, i.e., the attributive clause occurs after the head noun. The major constituents of the relative con­ structions in Chadic languages are the head noun phrase, which may be fol­ lowed by a definite/demonstrative marker, the relative clause marker, the at­ tributive clause, which is the defining component of the relative construction (cf. Keenan 1985, Lehmann 1992), and a postrelative marker, i.e. a marker oc­ curring at the end of the relative clause. The obligatory elements in all Chadic languages are the head noun phrase and the attributive clause. The following is the range of possibilities in the order of components of the relative clauses in the majority of Chadic languages:

RELATIVE CLAUSE

(3)

417

Head NP-(Definite) (Rel) S-(Postrelative)

In some languages the relative marker may occur within the syntactic bound­ aries of the attributive clause. Although there are at least two neutral word orders reported in Chadic lan­ guages, viz. SVO and VSO, there is only one relative word order for the head and the attributive clause, viz., the attributive clause always follows the head noun phrase. Compare the following sentences from Ngizim (West), an SVO language, and Xdi(Central), a VSO language: (4)

maayim waařa ø/aci dee-naa sənaasən REL 0/3SM brought fried cakes boy 'the boy who brought the fried cakes' (Schuh 1972:120)

(3)

ndá sn-íyù tá tsá mdú STAT know-1SG OBJ DEF man tá yà dá xàd nà FOC take-2SG-VENT-REF DEM PREP here DEM Ί know the man who brought you here'

The absence of differentiation in the relative clause that would depend on the word order in the matrix clause is consistent with the findings concerning word order in relative clauses for both SVO and VSO languages (cf. Downing 1978). The order in the relative clause in Chadic is also consistent with the order of constituents in attributive constructions in Chadic languages, in which the mod­ ifier most often follows the modified constituent. Some positions of the relative marker may, however, be affected by the word order of major components of the clause. The general hypothesis with respect to functional domains encoded in rela­ tive clauses is that they are limited to the following: (1) coding of the construc­ tion in which a noun is modified by a clause; (2) existential status of the head noun; (3) semantic properties of the head noun; (4) the relationship between the head noun and the verb of the relative clause. The coding means available in relative constructions have a limited number of functional domains within which they interact. The relative position of the head and the attributive clause is prob­ ably the only device to mark the relative clause as such. It appears that relative markers and 'relative tenses' may also be involved in coding the type of con-

COMPLEX SENTENCE

418

struction. The means involved in coding of the existential status of the head noun are relative markers, postrelative markers, and determiners. The means involved in the encoding of the semantic properties of the head nouns are rela­ tive markers and determiners. The means involved in the coding of the relation­ ship between the head noun and the verb of the attributive clause are relative markers, resumptive pronouns, and subject markers on the verb of the attribu­ tive clause. Thus one cannot state that a given means performs a given func­ tion. One has rather to look at the interaction among the coding means function­ ing within the same semantic domain. What emerges provides an excellent il­ lustration of the functional motivation of grammaticalization of various means but also begs a question about what was first: the motivation that brought about the means, or the presence of the means, that made the realizations of various semantic and pragmatic functions possible. In what follows I describe each of the functional domains and the means involved in its coding.

11.3

The relative markers

The term relative marker, 'R marker' further in this chapter, corresponds to what in some other studies has been called relative pronoun. The term 'R marker' is preferred to the term 'relative pronoun' because many of the relative markers in Chadic are not pronominal in any sense of the word 'pronoun'. The traditional notion of the function of relative markers as morphemes connecting a relative clause with the preceding noun (cf. Marouzeau 1951) has been tacitly accepted in most contemporary approaches, although the formulation may differ slightly. Lehmann 1992 does not address the issue directly and instead states that relative markers are one of the means of 'signaling' the subordination of the relative clause (p. 334). This approach is inadequate for several reasons: (1) There are languages, especially verb-final languages, that do not have relative markers; (2) There are languages that have a choice between several relative markers; (3) There are languages, that have relative markers in some types of relative clauses but not in others. These facts, parallel to the facts described with respect to complementizers in Frajzyngier 1995, show that the description of the function of relative markers as a linking means is inadequate. A new look at the functions of relative markers is therefore necessary.

RELATIVE CLAUSE

419

11.3.1 The functions of the relative markers In the present work the term 'R marker' is reserved for the morphemes that oc­ cur between the head and the attributive clause, or in some instances within the attributive clause, but whose functional domain is either the whole construction or the head noun phrase, but not the attributive clause. In what follows I de­ scribe the functions of relative markers in Chadic only. Any wider generaliza­ tions about relative markers would have to await studies of relative markers in other families. The role of the relative marker with respect to the head noun phrase is described in subsequent sections on the existential status of the head noun, semantic properties of the head noun phrases, and the grammatical role of the head noun phrases. The argument for the whole construction as the functional domain of the relative marker is as follows: If the clause were not marked as an attribute of the preceding noun phrase, the construction could be interpreted as marking topicalization or contrastive focus, both of which routinely in Chadic are marked by the fronting of the argument (cf. Junaidu 1987 for a study of topical­ ization in Hausa). The support for this hypothesis is provided by tests where the relative marker is eliminated. The resulting construction could then be inter­ preted as contrastive focus, or topicalized construction, in many languages. Having proposed this function of relative markers and the method to test it, I realize that it could be challenged by the frequent cases across Chadic languages of the omission of relative markers. Note, however, that Chadic languages have two other means that also participate in relative constructions, postrelative markers and 'relative' tenses. Even if one means is omitted, there are more often than not other means available that still identify the relative construction as such. 11.3.2 Presence versus absence of the relative marker The question about the presence or the absence of the relative marker should be considered only within a particular system of coding, more specifically, it should be linked to the functions coded by relative markers. Generally, as with all other grammatical markers, the lighter the functional load of the relative marker, the more likely it may be omitted. Omission of the relative marker is not a frequent phenomenon in Pero, but nevertheless several instances of the relative clause without relative marker have been found.

COMPLEX SENTENCE

420

(6)

péemò páró-mò cákkà yé-kò à-wálá-nì-à 2REP speech-DEM 3M make-PERF NEG-good-Q-Q 'you, this speech that he made, isn't it good?' (Frajzyngier 1989:281)

The evidence that the sentence above contains a relative clause is provided by two characteristics: (1) the occurrence of the third person masculine subject be­ fore the verb, a property restricted to embedded or consecutive clauses only, and (2) by the position of the object in front of the verb instead of after the verb, where it occurs in nonrelative constructions. In one group of languages the absence of the relative marker between the head and the relative clause should not be considered an instance of either dele­ tion or omission. These are languages that have a postrelative marker instead of a relative marker between the head and the relative clause. A fairly typical ex­ ample is Giziga, where the head noun and relative clause are juxtaposed, but the entire relative clause is separated from the remainder of the sentence by what Lukas 1970 calls the subordinating marker ná. There is no resumptive pronoun in the relative clause in place of the head noun, and the word order is not changed. The form of the verb in a relative clause is a participle (prefix -). Relativized Subject: (7) mbùr mú-sawà vrà 'à Dlàagò ŋgá dàambó ná man PART-come out PREP Dogba POSS yesterday SUB 'á r lè 'à Kòzà 3S go PERF PREP Koza The man who came from Dogba yesterday has gone to Koza' (Lukas 1970:82) Relativized Object: (8) mbur yà mú-prâŋ ŋgá dàambô 'á man 1S PART-see of yesterday 3S dead PERF 'The man (whom) I saw yesterday is dead' (Lukas 1970:82) Other languages having such constructions are discussed in the section on postrelative markers below. In languages in which the relative marker occurs between the head noun and the relative clause, the omission of the relative marker depends on the function it performs.

RELATIVE CLAUSE

11.4

421

Existential status of the head noun

I use the term existential status of the head noun to describe the semantic status in which the object is taken to exist. The exact ranges of the existential status encoded in the relative clause is yet to be specified for individual languages, but in very general terms two types of semantic status are coded in Chadic: In one type the head has been previously mentioned in discourse, is assumed to be an element of general knowledge, or is present in the environment of speech. In other words, the existence of the head noun has been established prior to its modification by the relative clause, or its existence is marked by means other than the relative clause. In the other type the head noun is modified only by the relative clause, i.e., it has not been mentioned previously in discourse, and its existence in the environment of speech is not asserted. Since the existence of the head noun in the latter type is asserted only by the relative clause, it may be said to exist in the de dicto domain. The type whose existence has been previ­ ously established or is marked in the environment of speech may be said to exist in the domain de re. I will use the two terms 'de re (existence)' and 'de dicto (existence)' as useful mnemonic devices that capture some of the properties of the two types of head nouns. The distinction between the two existential statuses overlaps to a certain degree the distinction between restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses invoked in English and other languages (cf. Keenan 1985, Lehmann 1992). I propose, however, that the distinction between restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses in English is not as well defined as the distinction between de re and de dicto existence. And it is likely that the distinction between de re and de dicto status of the head noun as explained above accounts also for the distinction between a restrictive and a nonrestrictive relative clauses in EngUsh. The distinction between the two existential statuses is encoded in Chadic languages by two different devices: relative markers and postrelative markers. The evidence that the category involved is that of an existential status is pro­ vided in the discussion of individual languages. The evidence that both of the means, viz. relative markers and postrelative markers, encode the same existen­ tial status is provided by the hitherto unnoticed fact that the two means are in complementary distribution across languages, viz. that if the existential status is coded by relative markers occurring between the head noun phrase and the rela­ tive clause, it is not coded by postrelative markers, and if it is coded by

422

COMPLEX SENTENCE

postrelative markers, it is not coded by relative markers occurring between the head noun phrase and the relative clause. It is entirely possible that there are languages that do not encode the existen­ tial status of the head NPs, but the evidence for such languages has yet to be provided. Data with respect to existential status are so scant that no conclusion stemming from the absence of data documenting the coding of the distinction should be drawn unless the specific issue has been tested. Hypothesis: An existential status with respect to the head noun is coded in Chadic languages by one of the following devices: (1) contrast between two types of relative markers; (2) use of postrelative markers versus absence of postrelative markers; (3) contrast between the use and nonuse of a relative marker. The situation is to a certain degree analogical with the functions of complementizers, where the use of a complementizer is contrasted with its ab­ sence, or where two complementizers are used in a sequence (cf. Frajzyngier 1995). The argumentation for the proposed hypothesis is based on an analysis of the form and function of these coding devices. The most important argument for the hypothesis is provided by the fact that three different means of coding are in complementary distribution across languages. 11.4.1 Existential status coding through two relative markers Many Chadic languages display two types of relative markers. The functional identity of the two types across languages and the distinction between these two types are far from clear, as evidenced by a variety of explanations to be found in various descriptions. Some scholars did attempt to provide a characterization of the two types of relative markers, e.g. Rufa'i 1983 for the two types of relative markers in Hausa. Hausa: Hausa has two types of relative markers. One marker is identical with the associative particle dà and used with definite heads. When this marker is used, no gender of the head noun is encoded, e.g.: (9)

alkalami-n da ka ba-ni kyauta ya pen-DEF REL 2M give-1SG present 3M miss 'The pen which you gave me is missing' (Rufa'i 1983:421, glosses Z.F.)

According to Rufa'i the use of the relative marker dà encodes knowledge shared between the speaker and the hearer. The other marker is derived from

RELATIVE CLAUSE

423

indefinite pronoun wa, to which forms encoding gender and number are added, resulting in the following relative markers: wanda 'who, which, (M)', wadda/wacce 'who, which, (F)' and waďanda 'who, which, (PL)' (Rufa'i 1983:420). The relative marker derived from the indefinite wa may not be used with the definite form of the head noun, e.g.: (10)

*alkalami-n wanda ka ba-ni kyauta ya REL 2M give-1SG present 3M miss pen-DEF 'The pen which you gave me is missing'

According to Rufa'i, 'the use of wanda [relative marker, masculine, feminine and plural equivalents] reflects the absence of shared knowledge between the speaker and the listener about the [head] NP' (Rufa'i 1983:423). (11)

Wasu yara wadanda su-ka kwanta INDEF:PL boy:PLREL:PL 3PL-REL.PERF stay a asibilti sun rasu PREP hospital 3PL:PERF be lost 'some boys who were hospitalized have died' (Rufa'i 1983:421)

If the head noun is followed by a demonstrative nan, either type of relative marker can be used, e.g.: (12)

Yaro-n nan da/wandaya kwanta a asibiti ya rasu boy-DEF DEM REL 3M sleep PREP hospital 3M be lost 'the boy who was hospitalized has died' (Rufa'i 1983:422)

Rufa'i does not offer an explanation of why either relative marker can occur after a noun modified by the demonstrative nan. Although Rufa'i describes the distinction between the two complementizers by stating that 'the selection of da or wanda is dependent upon whether the noun is referential, i.e. definite or indefinite', he further states that the distinc­ tion between the two types of complementizers is one between defining and nondefining. The defining relative clause is one that defines or gives more in­ formation or emphasis about the noun it modifies. A nondefining relative clause does not define and is less emphatic' (Rufa'i 1983:424). This descrip­ tion begs the question about the ways to define the quantity of information pro­ vided and also about the nature of emphasis. The notion of referential, how-

424

COMPLEX SENTENCE

ever, is the one that can be defined. 'Referential' means a noun that has been mentioned before, has been selected from a set of other objects, or is identified by some means other than the relative clause. Hence, the data in Hausa lend themselves to a description within the two existential status domains. In Pero (West) there are also two types of relative markers, analyzed incor­ rectly in Frajzyngier 1989a as sensitive to the relationship between the head noun phrase and the matrix clause. Since my current analysis of Pero differs from the one in Frajzyngier 1989a, I provide here the argumentation necessary to support the new analysis. There are two relative markers of singular head noun phrases, mù and cì, as illustrated by the following sentence: (13)

ci-cún-kò nìncínù-ì skin goat-this REL-remove-PERF SUBJ-3PL-DEF n-múnú-n tì nínyà FUT-take-STAT CONJ-give-ANAPH PREP man REL-take-PERF kúndùl-ì kundul-DEF 'the skin of the goat which they have removed, they will take it and give it to the man who has acquired a kundul (a deity)' (Frajzyngier 1989:277)

Both markers can be used in the same syntactic environments and within the domain of the sentence, within the same semantic environment. Here is an ex­ ample of two markers used with the head noun phrase, which has a demonstra­ tive modifier: (14)

míjè cákkà cì-ní-wé-nà DEM  REL-1SG-see-PERF:VENT 'that is the man whom I saw'

(15)

míjè cákkà mù-wé-k-ée-nò DEM  REL-see-PERF-OBJ-1SG 'that is the man who saw me'

Here is än example in which different markers are used with the noun phrases that are subject of the relative clause:

RELATIVE CLAUSE (16)

425

míngbúdínà ànkúndúl-ì cì-mà kán kúndúl-cù adults owner -DEF REL-COND CONJ kundul-3PL tà-ye-tù múmmò mù-mén-jì kúndúl-ì FUT-call-VENT DEM REL-want-HABIT take kundul-DEF 'the adults who already have a kundul will call the person who would like to acquire one' (Frajzyngier 1989:278)

Here are examples in which the marker cì is used with the head noun phrase, which serves as the object of relative clause: (17)

(18)

cá rníjbà mà póonà anjíkkò kà mwé-nì cí say stranger COND come rich man ASSOC thing-3M REL tà múnò-m míjbà-ì FUT give-ANAPH stranger-DEF 'he said: if a stranger comes, a rich man has things which he will give to the stranger' tà-káppujò-n tí-tè wé cì jérè yíi-jì FUT-tell:PL-BEN PREP-3F thing REL young woman do-HABIT 'they will tell her things which young women do'

In order to understand the functions of the two relative markers in Pero it is necessary to look at the domain larger than the sentence, the domain that would include pre­ vious knowledge, previous discourse, and also presuppositions that a speaker may have about the hearer's knowledge. When all of those factors are taken into consideration, a pattern of the use of the two relative markers begins to emerge. When a noun phrase is first mentioned in discourse and is modified by a relative clause, the relative marker used is cì, as in the following example, which is the first sentence of a narrative: (19)

kínnímàa cì né tà kàpáanì kà tóom kundùl idol REL 1SG FUT talk:NOMIN PREP first kundu 'The idol about which I am going to talk first is kundul'

According to the proposed hypothesis, the relative clause here is the only modi­ fier of the noun phrase. Similarly in the following sentence, when the author

426

COMPLEX SENTENCE

adds a relative clause as an afterthought to modify a noun phrase that would have been completely opaque in the discourse, this is marked by the relative marker cì In the same sentence, there is another noun phrase that has already been mentioned in discourse, i.e. whose existence and identity has already been established; a relative clause attributive of such a noun phrase is marked by relative marker mù, e.g.: (20)

mín-gbú'inàn kúndúl-ì, cì mà kán kúndùl-cù PL-adult kundul-DEL REL COND ASSOC kundul-3PL tà yír-rù múmmò mù mén-jì jado kundùl-ì FUT call-VENT DEM REL want-HABIT take kundul-DEF 'the owners of kundul, i.e. those who have their own kunduls, they will call the person who wants to acquire the kundul' (Frajzyngier 1989:278)

An examination of texts fully supports the pattern illustrated above: The marker cì is used when the noun phrase has not been established before and when the relative clause is the only modifier of the head noun. The marker mù is used when the existence of the noun phrase has been established before. The pattern is also supported by the way relative markers have been further grammaticalized in Pero, to be described later in this chapter. For illustrating the functions of two relative markers in a Central Chadic language I have chosen Gidar. Gidar has two relative markers. One of them, məs, is much more frequent, used with a variety of tenses and aspects; the other is an, identical with the interrogative marker 'what'. (21)

ánkà lSG-know-3M-PERF man REL 3M-bring-2SG here 'I know the man who brought you here'

(22)

glúk ánkà lSG-know-3F-PERF woman REL 3F-bring-2SG here 'I know the woman who brought you here'

(23)

ánkà lSG-know-3PL-PERF people REL 3M-bring-PL-3SG here 'I know the people who brought him here'

RELATIVE CLAUSE

427

I propose that indicates that the head noun phrase has not been mentioned before, is not known, is not present in the environment of speech, i.e. has the de dicto status, and án indicates that the head noun phrase has been mentioned before, is known, or is present in the environment of speech, i.e. has the de re status. If the existence of the head noun has not been established before, the marker mòs is used, e.g.: (24)

á 3M take-PERF REL 3M-remain 'he took the rest'

The evidence for this hypothesis is provided by the fact that an may not occur in a negative clauses, while mòs can, e.g.: (25)

tá-ì dáw káí-t man be-3M REL 3M HAB want-Ғ NEG 'she has no suitors' (lit. 'there is no man who wants her')

In an affirmative clause, an may be used, e.g.: (26)

án dáw káí-tá man REL 3M HAB want-Ғ 'The man who courts her'

In certain environments either an or mòs can be used. In the following sen­ tence the narrator has used án. He tells the story of a protagonist living in a town of animals and addressing potential suitors, hence the head noun phrase is present in the environment of speech: (27)

áfú-t vá-n á m ná án ná father-Ғ DEF 3Msay COMP man REL COND take-3F 'The father said that if a man wants to take her . . . '

The language assistant also accepted mòs instead of án. This replacement is possible because a hypothetical situation has been created when the speaker talks about a potential suitor:

428

COMPLEX SENTENCE (28)

áfú-t vá-n á m ná ná father-Ғ DEF  say COMP man REL COND take-Ғ 'The father said that if a man wants to take her . . .'

Consider also the following example: (29)

tímé tá-ì sheep CONJ goat POSS-3PL PRES-3M eat -PL wətə-n gònyòm məs à-káy-án fruit- acacia REL 3M-search-3PL 'The sheep and the goat eat the fruits of acacia which they were looking for' (mos can be replaced by án in the above sentence)

The fruits of acacia were mentioned in the narrative four sentences before the above sentence. I propose that this explains why it was possible to replace məs with án. The marker like other de dicto relative markers in Chadic languages, is also used to mark attributive constructions with nominal or adjectival modi­ fiers. The marker án is not used in such constructions. In Lele (East) the relative markers are identical with the complementizers oc­ curring with verbs of perception and cognitive verbs and have virtually identical functions. The marker gõ, which is the de re complementizer after verbs of perception and cognitive verbs, functions as de re relative marker, e.g.: (30) dàdū gō sùbù dàdū bá bōr-ì gèylè t 3F REL two 3F CONTR save- health time (Fr) gō màgàyndí yìir-ì REL viper bite- 'The third one, it was she who saved his life when the viper bit him.' The sequence of markersgōn,which encodes indirect perception and less than certain evidence with cognitive verbs, functions as the de dicto relative marker:

RELATIVE CLAUSE (31)

429

bāyndí gō nã äýn tū káŋ nã lèé nā person REL COMP take goat DEM COMP eat COMP làmdá yé-ì nā mŋ déená nã-gé elephant mother- COMP die then COMP-3PL làmdá yé-í agè-ì ímmè-ì ná take.FUT-3M bury-FUT ASSOC elephant mother- If anybody takes this goat and eats it, and if the mother of elephant dies, then they will bury him together with the mother of elephant'

The evidence that the relative marker in the sentence above has de dicto status is provided by the fact that the relative clause modifies a noun phrase in a hypo­ thetical event rather than in an event that takes place or already has taken place. The head noun phrase refers to a potential participant in a hypothetical event, a participant that has not been identified yet, and that is not present in the envi­ ronment of speech. 11.4.2 Existential status coding and the use of relative markers The system that I describe in the present section consists of two formal devices: the absence of the relative marker, which indicates the de re status of the head noun, and the use of the relative marker, which indicates the de dicto status of the head noun. The data comes from Hona (Central). Hona has VSO word order in the perfective aspect and SVO in the imperfective aspect. The relative marker in the language is nà. The head noun must be followed by the definite marker dì. In certain types of relative clauses the relative marker cannot be used. I propose that the relative marker is not used when the head noun is known to the hearer, has been mentioned in previous conversation, was present in some previous event, or is present during the conversation. In the following sentence the head noun phrase is known to the hearer, having participated in a previous event in which the hearer also participated, e.g.: (32)

nú-di hi-aŋ-wà tlú-dì à á sà woman DET sold-ANAPH-2SG meat-DEM PROG call 2SG The woman who sold you meat is calling you'

As predicted by the hypothesis, the relative marker cannot be used in such a sentence, e.g.:

430

COMPLEX SENTENCE (33)

*nú-dì nà hi-aŋ-wà tlú-dì à á sà woman-DET REL sold-ANAPH-2SG meat-DEF PROG call 2SG for The woman who sold you meat is calling you'

If one modifies the relative clause in such a way that the hearer is no longer a participant in the event, and the relative clause is the only information about the head noun phrase, the relative marker must be used, e.g.: (34)

nú-di nà һ-ə tlúwà-ď à á sà sell-ANAPH meat-ALL PROG call 2SG woman-DEM REL 'the woman who sold meat is calling you'

The sentence above is ungrammatical without the relative marker, e.g.: (35)

*nú-dì hi-án tlúwà-rf à á sà woman DET sell-ANAPH meat-ALL PROG call 2SG for The woman who sold meat is calling you'

The following example illustrates the absence of the relative marker when the existence of the object to which the head noun phrase refers has been estab­ lished by a preceding event, e.g.: (36)

nif-di 6a-xa-6à tə ìγmuda nì man-DEF come-3SG-Vent ASSOC tailor COP The man who came is a tailor'

Following the hypothesis, the relative marker is used with relative clauses in the future tenses because the identity of the head noun has not been established yet, e.g.: (37)

nif-di na kyád-ò kwámánà wá-nà ní man-DEM REL show-2SG road son-1SG COP 'The man who will show you the road is my son'

Finally, an interesting piece of evidence is provided by the following pair of ex­ amples involving the head noun phrase cìwá 'elephant', which is borrowed from Hausa. In the following sentence the relative marker is used when the

RELATIVE CLAUSE

431

head noun is indefinite. It is, exceptionally, not followed by the definite marker: (38)

cìwá nà nándà see-1SG elephant REL kill 3PL Ί saw an elephant that was killed'

In the following example, the word elephant has two definite markers. One is Hausa -, and the other is Hona dì. Thus the definiteness is established by two independent means. As predicted by the hypothesis, no relative marker is used: (39)

cìwa-n dì ándà see 1SG elephant -DEF (.) DEM kill-ANAPH 3PL Ί saw the elephant that was killed'

Thus in Hona, the relative marker serves as a means to modify the head noun phrase by the relative clause only. When the existence of the head noun phrase has been previously established, there is no relative marker preceding the rela­ tive clause.

11.5

Existential status coding through postrelative markers

Postrelative markers occur at the end of the relative clause. They are optional in some languages; obligatory in at least one language, Pa'anci (West); and com­ pletely absent in still other languages. In what follows I provide a detailed de­ scription of the functions of postrelative markers and demonstrate the comple­ mentarity between the system of postrelative markers and the system of two relative markers. 11.5.1 The relationship between the definite head and postrelatives Keenan 1985 claims that determiners may occur before the head noun phrase, as in English, after the head noun phrase, or after the relative clause. Thus he implies that the function of postrelative markers is identical with the function of markers that occur in the immediate vicinity of the head noun phrase. Data in Chadic present interesting distributional facts with respect to determiners. In some West Chadic languages, such as Bole, Pero, Mupun, and Ngizim, the

432

COMPLEX SENTENCE

definite marker can not be attached to the head noun phrase, and if the head noun phrase is known, has been mentioned in discourse, the definite marker must occur after the relative clause. In some Central Chadic languages there is simply no way to indicate 'defmiteness' of the head noun phrase other than by adding a postrelative to the relative clause. The only possible structures are the following: Head NP Rel S-Postrelative Head NP Rel S Compare the following examples from Tera: (40) woy nə ke á masa r  boy REL AUX buy donkey DEF 'A boy who is buying the donkey' or 'The boy who is buying a donkey' (41)

zlu ə k a nde meat REL AUX LOC 'Meat which is there' (Newman 1970:81)

Newman 1970 states explicitly that the function of the definite article at the end of the relative clause is to modify the head noun. Hence Keenan's observation about the complementarity of functions between definite markers following the head and definite markers following a relative clause is supported in some Chadic languages. In other languages there are determiners occurring after the head noun, but not after the relative clause; hence Keenan's observation is again supported. But there are also languages in which the determiners occur both after the head noun and after the relative clause, which contradicts Keenan's ob­ servation of the complementarity of functions of the definite markers in the two positions. Compare the following facts from Kanakuru (West). In Kanakuru the postrelative marker occurs only when the head noun is definite or is followed by the demonstrative me or ji. This indicates that the function of postrelative markers should not be identified with the function of definite markers that follow the head noun phrase. The tendency in Kanakuru seems to be toward the decrease of the functional load of the postrelative marker, with a possible elimination of the form itself.

RELATIVE CLAUSE

433

The postrelative in Kanakuru labeled by Newman 1974 as 'definite demonstra­ tive spread' consists of demonstrative pronouns, e.g.: (42)

zobe-i [mè] la ara arnna (mè) 1SG want ring-DEF. REL xxx DEM 'I want this ring on the chiefs hand'

(43)

noi tamno-i [jè] ga-ta la ә [she] 1PL wait woman-DEF REL XXX house DEM 'we are waiting for that woman who entered the house'

I propose that the facts in Kanakuru, combined with the functions of relative markers as described earlier, indicate the following: The function(s) of the postrelative markers may, but do not have to be, identical with the function of definite markers that modify the head noun. The postrelative markers appear to be in complementary distribution with the system of coding of relative markers, whereas the definite markers attributive of the head noun phrase appear to be­ long to a different system. Although the postrelative markers are also markers of the properties of the head noun phrase, the definite markers that accompany the head noun phrase are not necessarily the markers of their property. The evidence for the second part of the hypothesis is provided by the fact that in many Chadic languages, e.g. Kanakuru (West), Hona (Central), Kera (East), the head noun must be followed by a definite marker. If the presence of the definite marker is obligatory, obviously it cannot have a functional load. 11.5.2 Functions of the postrelative markers According to the proposed hypothesis the postrelative markers indicate that the head noun phrase is known either to the speaker and hearer, to the speaker alone, or is/was present at the time of conversation or some other time. The evidence for the de re existential status function of postrelative markers is pro­ vided by languages in which there is an option of having the postrelative mark­ ers, and by languages in which more than one postrelative marker is available. Languages from all four branches, West, Central, East Chadic, and Masa, pro­ vide evidence for the hypothesis. Consider first the data from Mupun (West). The language has only one relative marker, or dé. The head noun phrase cannot have a definite or demonstrative marker following it. As predicted in Keenan 1985, definite

434

COMPLEX SENTENCE

markers, if any, will occur in some other position, e.g. at the end of the relative clause. A relative clause does not have to end with a postrelative marker, as in the following sentences from narratives. In the first the head of the relative clause, mwel 'relative', has not been mentioned before in the narrative and was not present in the environment of the conversation; hence there is no postrelative marker. The relative clauses in the sentence are the only modification of the head noun: (44)

siam n-toŋ ә me mwel fen di dә wur go down 1SG-stay PREP QUANT relative 1SG there REL 3M a teyla db wu get seet j arida mo COP tailor REL  PAST HAB sell PREP paper PL I went down and stayed with my uncle who was a tailor and who was selling newspapers' (Frajzyngier 1993:500)

In the following sentence the heads of relative clauses, dalili 'reason' and lek 'war', are mentioned for the first time in the discourse: (45)

to,  ә a dalili ә le mo well COP it COP reason (H.) REL ANAPH cause COMP 3PL ji n-Mupun a lek ә c nen nan fun come PREP-M. COP war REL it drive away people old 1PL 'well, the reason why they came to Mupun was because of war, which drove our fathers away' (Frajzyngier 1993:501)

Most elicited relative clauses do not have postrelative markers for quite obvious reasons: The head nouns have not been mentioned before and they are seldom within the environment of the conversation. The language may have any one of three different postrelative markers, no 'definite', sə 'proximate demonstrative', or sé 'remote demonstrative'. The definite postrelative marker is used if the head noun's existence has been estab­ lished in a previous conversation, e.g.:

RELATIVE CLAUSE (46)

435

bisagaa labari nen nan mo sat  mu toŋ a according to story REL elders PL say DEF 1PL live COP gabas mu ji n-kwaŋ maiduguri η-borno n-kwaŋ PREP-side east lPL come PREP-side M. PREP-B. 'according to the story that the elders tell, we came from the East, from the vicinity of Maiduguri in Borno' (Frajzyngier 1993:503)

Compare the following two sentences. In the first the relative clause is fol­ lowed by the definite marker, since the head noun has been mentioned before in discourse. The second sentence is ungrammatical with the definite marker, be­ cause the head noun phrase has not been mentioned in discourse: (47)

kuma naat get wu mar) an ә som wur a F. also boss REL PAST 3M take 1SG DEF name 3M COP F. 'the boss who employed me was called F.' (Frajzyngier 1993:507)

(48)

*naat wu mbә maŋ an ә boss REL 3M FUT take 1SG DEF for 'the boss who will employ me'

(49)

naat wu mbә maŋ an boss REL 3M FUT take 1SG 'the boss who will employ me'

Cf.

The postrelative demonstratives occur when the head noun is present in the en­ vironment of speech, e.g.: (1)

kat an mbә raq puo mun ә sat nә sә when 1SG FUT write words REL 1PL PREP say ANAPH here 'when I write the words that we are saying here (Frajzyngier 1993:503)

A completely different situation obtains in Pa'anci, where the postrelative is an obligatory constituent of every relative clause. Since it occurs in every rela­ tive clause, its function cannot be linked to any of the possible categories lying within the relative clause. From the data listed in Skinner 1979, it appears that the difference between the definite and indefinite head noun phrase is realized through the use of the indefinite marker preceding the head noun phrase.

COMPLEX SENTENCE

436

Whenever there is no indefinite marker in that position, Skinner translates the head noun phrase as definite, e.g.: (50)

waci dla abi-ta na ka і harcә INDEF boy REL 3 REL CONT with cow 'A boy who has a cow'

ka POST-REL

(51)

ngwina-ngwina abi-ta na ka rei-su ka REL BEL CONT neck-her POST-REL spider 'the spider that is on her neck'

In East Dangla the postrelative marker is kϵ or ku. The head noun phrase may not be followed by the definite marker. The language has only one relative marker, which, however, encodes the number of the head noun phrase. Many masculine demonstratives have also initial consonant k. (52)

ŋà diŋ-in-tè biy ka  ask-1SG-PAST mouth PREP máakít ki tal-nin-té kϵ thing REL see-lPL.EXCL-PAST DEM 'he asked me about the thing that we saw'

(53)

no rawàt-gu gam ku bèr-iny-dyi ku 1SG forget -3PL thing REL give -2SG -3M DEM Ί forgot the things that you gave him' (Erin Shay, p.c.)

In Hausa there exists a postrelative marker din. The functional load corre­ sponding to that carried by the postrelative markers in other languages is carried in Hausa not only by the definite markers that occur after the head noun phrase, but also by a de re relative marker dà. The form with the definite head noun phrase corresponds to the clause with the postrelative marker in other lan­ guages, and the forms with wa- correspond to the forms without the postrela­ tive marker, e.g.: (54)

Cf.

Yaro-n da ya kwanta a asibiü ya rasu boy-DEF REL 3SG stay PREP hospital 3SG be lost 'The boy who was hospitalized has died' (Rufa'i 1983:421)

RELATIVE CLAUSE

437

*Yaro-n wanda ya kwanta a asibiti ya rasu PREP hospital 3SG be lost boy-DEF REL:M 3SG stay for The boy who was hospitalized has died' (Rufa'i 1983:421) (55)

Wani yaro wanda ya kwanta a asibiti ya rasu Certain boy REL 3SG stay PREP hospital 3SG be lost 'A boy who was hospitalized has died' (Rufa'i 1983:421)

Summary: We have seen thus two devices used to encode the existential status of the clause: one is through different relative markers and the other through postrelative markers. The two means are in complementary distribu­ tion. But it should not be construed that all languages do encode existential status. The fact that there are languages in which no existential status of the head noun phrase is encoded could be explained in one of the following ways: Either these languages did not develop existential status coding yet, or they lost the coding system that was once available in the language. I attempt an answer to this question in the section devoted to the reconstruction of the relative clause in Proto-Chadic.

11.6

Coding the role of the head noun phrase

The notion of role in Chadic involves the relations of subject and object and of other arguments, which are most often marked by prepositions. Thus rolexxx does not refer to the semantic notions such as agent or patient or pragmatic no­ tions such as topic or comment. There are at least two means of encoding the role of the head noun phrase. One is through the distinction in the form of the relative marker. Another is through the system of resumptive pronouns occurring within the relative clause. 11.6.1 Coding of the role through distinction in the relative markers Among the languages in which the role of head noun phrase is encoded in the relative marker are the Central Chadic languages Cibak, Margi, Daba, and Buduma. I shall illustrate this coding in Daba. The relative markers in Daba are ama (vowel variable) for subject and lay for objects and obliques (Mouchet 1967:94).

COMPLEX SENTENCE

438 Relativized subject (56)

galmay ma nja tu mbluk brother-my REL leave trip 'my brother who was on a trip' (Mouchet 1967:95)

Object (57)

hiddi lay kat ŋgo dəm man REL 1SG PRFT meet 'the man whom I met.' (Mouchet 1967:95)

A resumptive pronoun may be used if the head noun phrase is the object of the relative clause. Mouchet does not state the conditions for the use of the re­ sumptive pronoun. (58)

plis lay kat tu skəm tik 1SG leave buy 3SGO horse REL 'the horse which I bought (him)' (Mouchet 1967:95)

The form ama is also used in 'emphatic' forms: (59)

kata hi ami di tik DISJUNCTIVE 1SG DEM REL do 3SGO 'it's I who did it.'/ 'I'm the one who did it.' (Mouchet 1967:95)

11.6.2 Coding of the role through resumptive pronouns Encoding of the role of the argument through resumptive pronouns can be seen in Mupun (West), where if the head noun phrase is the subject of the relative clause, the relative clause has to have an appropriate subject pronoun, and if the head noun phrase is the object, the relative clause has anaphora ә in the posi­ tion of object, e.g.: (60)

gwar wu su seet ba wur a wat kas man REL  run go away NEG 3M COP thief NEG 'the man who ran away is not a thief (Frajzyngier 1993:500)

RELATIVE CLAUSE (61)

439

nen mo ji ba mo a nen Mupun kas people REL 3PL come here NEG 3PL COP people Mupun NEG 'people who came here are not Mupun' (Frajzyngier 1993:501)

If the head noun phrase in the function of object is [+ human], the object pro­ noun encodes the gender and number, e.g.: (62)

mat η-man war η-jos wa woman REL lSG-know 3F PREP-Jos 3F HABIT yak sə toŋ n-Mupun live PREP-Mumpun time DEM 'the woman I knew in Jos now lives in the Mupun area' (Frajzyngier 1993:502)

But I also have examples in which in the same situation there is no anaphoric (resumptive) pronoun in the relative clause (marked by 0 in the ap­ propriate position), e.g.: (63)

mat miskoom cen Ø sə war wa ba ji wife REL chief chase DEM 3F return come back come 'the wife whom the chief chased away returned' (Frajzyngier 1993:501)

(64)

as n-sin Ø n-nacya su dog REL 1SG-give PREP-N. it PERF run away 'a dog I gave to Nacya ran away' (Frajzyngier 1993:501)

(65)

ndəmuk mo cen Ø sə nә wa ba ji hyena REL 3PL chase DEM ANAPH return come back come 'the hyena that they chased away returned' (Frajzyngier 1993:501)

(66)

brәn n-sin Ø n-Audu ә su horse REL 1SG-give PREP-A. it PERF run 'a horse that I gave to Audu ran away' (Frajzyngier 1993:501)

When the head of the relative clause is a locative, the resumptive pronoun is dì, and it occurs without any prepositions, e.g.:

440

COMPLEX SENTENCE (67)

to, mo teŋ sat η-mun nә pe well 3PL PERF already tell PREP-1PL COMP place REL n-sie a n-S. mu 1PL FUT-go there PREP-first COP PREP-S. 'well, they already told us that the place where we will go first is S.' (Frajzyngier 1993:504)

A characteristic feature of the relativization of a nonlocative argument marked by a preposition is the fact that there must be a resumptive pronoun following the preposition in the relative clause, e.g.: (68)

gwar n-seet ə n-wur man REL 1SG-sell PREP horse DEF PREP-3M HABIT n-bii wur n-kaat 1SG-follow 3MP PREP-payment 'man to whom I sold the horse owes me money' (lit.: Ί follow him for the payment') (Frajzyngier 1993:505)

Resumptive pronouns in Hona (Central) are interesting in that the subject pronouns in relative clause are different from subject pronouns occurring in a simple clause. Resumptive object pronouns are identical with object pronouns in a simple clause. The language has VSO order in the perfective. Recall that Hona has a distinction between de dicto and de re status of the head noun, en­ coded through the presence or absence of the relative marker. The discussion that follows applies to the de re status, which does not involve the relative marker. In Hona the system of coding the role of the head noun phrase is as follows: If the head noun phrase is the subject of the relative clause and is in the de re domain, then the verb of the relative clause has the suffix ha, [ya] e.g.: (69)

níf-dì á-hà kándà tci-na nì man-DEM call-3SG 3PL father-1SG COP 'the man who calls them is my father'

(70)

wúdì-di dog-DEMbite-3SG-ANAPH 3SG leg-3SG 'the dog which bit him on the leg was caught'

catch-ANAPH-3SG

RELATIVE CLAUSE

441

If the head of the relative clause is not the subject, then the third person subject of the verb of the relative clause is non, rather than ha. If the head noun phrase is the object, it is not marked as such; if it is an oblique, it is marked by a re­ sumptive pronoun following an appropriate preposition, e.g.: (71)

tetar hi-nen nən guccit hat DEF buy 3SG 3SG small 'the hat which he bought was small'

(72)

iya fwo nén búngén food DEF cook 3SG 'the food that she cooks is good'

(73)

tala so car-DEF come-3SG PREP up go-3SG 'the car that he traveled with has gone'

11.7

Other grammatical categories of relative markers

One function of the relative markers in Chadic languages has already been de­ scribed, that of indicating that the following clause modifies the preceding noun. But as in other languages, there are other categories that may be encoded by relative markers. If we look at IE languages, we notice a variety of cate­ gories, such as gender, number, and grammatical role in Slavic; human, nonhuman, and place in English, with additional marking for role for human nouns; and coding for role in French. The range of variations in Chadic languages in­ cludes the semantic categories of gender, number, grammatical role, humannonhuman distinctions. In what follows I describe some of the functional do­ mains most frequently encoded. 11.7.1 Gender and number Not all Chadic languages have the category 'gender'. The existence of the grammatical category gender is manifested in pronominal systems, argument coding systems on the verb, possessive markers, and gender-marking affixes added to nouns. Gender distinction, if any, in Chadic languages applies only to

442

COMPLEX SENTENCE

the singular across all grammatical categories. There are two genders, 'masculine' and 'feminine', and there is no gender distinction in the plural. When a language does not have a gender distinction in pronominal systems, demonstratives, or possessive markers, it has no gender distinction in relative markers either. When a language has a gender distinction, it may be reflected also in relative markers. Compare the following examples from Kanakuru, where there is one marker for masculine singular and plural head nouns, and another marker for feminine singular head nouns (all examples from Newman 1974): (74)

shal mə na tui worom mono eat beans 1SG monkey REL 'a monkey that was eating my beans'

(75)

dikilini m wùn ryiki ho-PL REL 3PL farm xxx 'the hoes that they were farming with'

(76)

gunyo ji wo-shée waa wonduwoi u girl REL xxx 'a girl who didn't get anything'

Even when a language has gender distinction in pronouns, possessives, et cetera, it does not necesserily have gender distinction in relative markers. Hausa (West) is a language with a very elaborate system of gender marking across categories. Recall that Hausa has two types of relative markers. When the marker dà is used no, gender of the head noun is encoded. Note that in the following examples pronominal forms following the relative marker are subject pronouns and aspect markers of the following verb rather than gender markers of the relative. (77a) Yaro-n da ya kwanta a asibiti ya rasu boy-DEF REL 3M stay PREP hospital 3M be lost 'The boy who was hospitalized has died' (Rufa'i 1983:421) (77b) Yarinya-r da ta kawo wainata tafi girl-DEF REL 3F bring cake 3F go 'The girl who brought cake has gone' (Rufa'i 1983:421)

RELATIVE CLAUSE

443

Hausa also has a very elaborate system of number marking across categories and, just as in the case of gender, does not have number distinction when the relative marker is the associative dà, e.g.: (78)

Yara-η da su-ka kwanta a asibiti boy:PL-DEF REL 3PL-REL:PERF stay PREP hospital rasu sun 3PL:PERF be lost 'The boys who were hospitalized have died' (Rufa'i 1983:421)

Gidar (Central), which also has number and gender distinction across many cat­ egories, does not distinguish either gender or number in relative markers in fu­ ture clauses, e.g.: (79)

an ná man REL FUT take-Ғ 'man who will choose her'

(80)

án ná woman REL FUT take- 'woman who will choose him

(81)

an ná men REL FUT take-Ғ 'men who will choose her. . . '

Pero has the category of gender in its pronominal system, but the category is not encoded in the relative markers, e.g.: (82)

kpáttmcí-tà ti kánò man REL marry-STAT PREP Kano 'man whom she will marry is in Kano'

(83)

kpéemùncí-tà barn tì woman REL still PREP Filia 'the woman whom he will marry is still in Filia'

444

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Thus the presence or absence of the gender distinction in relative markers is not an automatic result of language's having the gender distinction in its grammati­ cal system. Whether the relative marker encodes or does not encode the gender distinction in a language that has gender does not appear to be the result of functional distinctions involved in the encoding but rather of the source from which the relative markers were grammaticalized. My hypothesis with respect to gender distinctions in relative markers is as follows: If a language has gender distinction in the demonstrative system, and if the relative markers are derived from demonstratives, then gender distinction is also encoded in the relative markers. In addition to the examples from Kanakuru above, consider the situa­ tion in Hausa: The relative marker that is derived synchronic ally from the as­ sociative preposition does not encode gender distinction. The category number is independent of the category gender; that is, lan­ guages that do not have the category gender may have the category number. The category number is manifested in the pronominal system, affixes added to nouns, verbs, adjectives (if any), and possessive markers. There are three numbers, singular, plural, and dual. The category dual, encountered in a few Chadic languages only (e.g. Mina, cf. Frajzyngier and Johnston, MS), is lim­ ited only to pronominal systems, and even more narrowly, to the first person pronouns. When it occurs, it is in contrast to the first person plural inclusive and the first person plural exclusive. In some languages number is also distin­ guished in the relative markers. 11.7.2 The semantic class The term 'semantic class' refers to a division of referents which, quite often is not reflected by any other markers in the languages apart from relative clause markers and demonstratives. In Chadic languages we can see a division into three semantic classes, viz. [+human], [+locative], and [-human, -locative]. The first two classes are quite transparent; the third class comprises nonhuman objects. Some of these distinctions may be encoded in the relative markers in Buduma. The relative marker ŋge, derived from an indentical word for 'place', is used with human head of the relative clause, e.g.: (84) lúgu ŋgé a-cal kamaaŋge aa ge re gá ibo dánemo kérdi person REL 3SG-hold grudge to heart 3SG POSS? heathen 'a person who holds a grudge close to his heart is a heathen.' (Lukas 1939:77)

RELATIVE CLAUSE

(85)

445

lúgu ŋge gaahin oojin a-baale person REL 2SG fear -not exist 'the man you fear does not exist' (Lukas 1939:77)

The relative marker ne indicates locative head of the relative clause: (86)

phu ne Felaata phohó najaalei dadelmo yaale place REL Fulani earlier 3SG disturb 3PL go PS 'they went to the city that the Fulani had earlier disturbed' (Lukas 1939:77)

The relative marker hyo, derived most probably from two demonstratives h V and yo (Erin Shay, p.c.); indicates a masculine but also nonhuman and nonlocative head of the relative clause: (87)

di hyo ábadá wáámene jaa ábadá wahaŋge jaa thing REL never lSG:see NEG never lSG:hear NEG ci nándu waamene day this lSG:see 'a thing which I never saw or heard before I saw today' (Lukas 1939:77)

The relative marker re, ru most probably indicates stative locative. Shay sug­ gests (p.c.) that it may derive from the preposition re 'to, for' or the verb ru 'bring': (88)

qg(u) re digeram naatemahi a-kerane girl 3SG:hide 3SG-look for town REL 'he looked for the town where the girl hid/was hidden/hiding' (Lukas 1939:77)

(89)

ŋg re daagel aa-woja na-u place REL monkey 3PL.PRET-play 3M.PRET-come 'he came to the place where the monkeys played' (Lukas 1939:77)

According to Lukas 1939:77 relative particles can also (as in Kanuri) come at the end of the relative clause, e.g.:

COMPLEX SENTENCE

446

(90)

miigo bórbu kihi lúku ŋgáu yajugu ru kumbergu people thief two garment 1SG.POSS 3PL:take REL word kóte yaa-cege ja one 3:speak NEG 'the two thieves who took my garment didn't speak a word' (Lukas 1939:77)

There is also relative marker iima. According to Shay, p.c. it may be derived from DEM yu 'this' + DEM ma 'the aforesaid', e.g.: (91)

11.8

lúgu iima naama aa-li gen a-u naa-ce ge dau person REL 2SG 3SGlove 3SG-come 3SG-say to 1SG 'the person who loves you came and said (it) to me' (Lukas 1939:77)

Sources of relative markers

Chadic languages display considerable variation in the form of relative markers, which I attribute both to the sources from which they grammaticalized and the functions they perform. Relative clause markers differ from other grammatical markers in that their grammatical function does not appear to be product of a simple semantic extension from some other function. Thus the grammaticalization of an item into a relative clause marker could not have occurred through a semantic metaphorical extension from some other item. There are at least five source of relative markers in Chadic languages. In what follows I discuss the following as sources: demonstratives and definite markers; indefinite pronouns; associative markers; de dicto complementizers. 11.8.1 Demonstratives and definite markers as a source of relative markers In Kanakuru (West) the relative markers me and ji are also demonstratives, and so are the Mupun and Mwaghavul (Sura) relative markers di and the Pa'anci ta. The Pero mu may be etymologically related to the demonstrative mo. In the Central branch virtually the same situation obtains. In Kapsiki the relative markers nya 'singular' and nyi 'plural' are identical with demonstratives nya 'this' and nyi 'these', e.g.:

RELATIVE CLAUSE

(92)

wundú nya nya na person REL saw REL 2SG(EMPH) 3SG(EMPH) 3SG 'the person who you saw, that's him' (Smith 1969:78)

(93)

tla nyi geze 'yá náŋsé te-ké χέ cow REL.PL speak 1SG before here 3PL 'the cows about which I spoke are here' (Smith 1969:79)

Cf. demonstratives: (94) і-nya [є + nya] house this 'this house'

447

dzevi-nyi [dzeve + nyi] hand-these 'these hands'

The evidence that the demostrative has been grammaticalized as relative marker is provided by constructions where the marker cannot be interpreted as demon­ strative, e.g. when a verb is a modifier of a noun, e.g.: (95)

nya water DEM cold 'cold water' (Smith 1969:70)

In Tera, the relative marker is ә, e.g.: (96)

woy [ә masa ki r]  boy [REL buy REL.PERF donkey] DET 'the boy who bought a donkey' (Newman 1970:80)

(97)

woy [ә k tlugu a xa nda] a boy [REL STABILIZER? knife PROG have 3SG] DET 'the boy who has a knife' (Newman 1970:81)

The marker no otherwise marks something that has been previously mentioned in discourse, and it is related to other demonstratives in the language such as ná 'this' and nå-da. 'that', e.g.: (98)

ruf-a-nә 'the baboon (we have already referred to)/this baboon'

448

COMPLEX SENTENCE (Newman 1970:36)

Margi Recall that the relative markers in Margi encode the role of the head noun. The are used when the head noun is the subject of the rela­ markers kə, na, and tive clause, e.g.: (99)

nàjà gà  save man REL fall PREP river 'he saved the man who fell into the river' (Hoffmann 1963:90)

The markers kə and na are identical with the proximate demonstrative kə and the demonstrative na encoding a known referent, e.g.: (100) man DEM 'this man' (101) man DEM 'that man' (Hoffmann 1963:85) As shown earlier most of relative markers in  uduma derive from demon­ stratives. In East Dangla (East) relative markers іє (masculine), tits (feminine) and kuku (plural), whose surface forms are usually ki, ti and ku, are clearly related to the demonstratives or ék (masculine), or (feminine), ák or àku (plural) (Erin Shay, p.c.). On the basis of these data one can postulate that some relative markers in Chadic languages derive from either the demonstrative markers or the definite markers, which themselves can ultimately be derived from demonstratives. The fact that some relative markers derive from demonstratives allows the recon­ struction of a construction from which the above type of relative construction emerged. The type of construction where the relative marker is a demonstrative or definite marker emerged from a construction that consisted of N-DEM/DEF S, i.e. a construction in which the head noun was already definite or identified with a demonstrative, followed by a clause. The demonstrative eventually be­ came a relative clause marker. Thus one type of relative clause emerged as an

RELATIVE CLAUSE

449

attempt to produce an attributive construction for a noun phrase that had already been mentioned in discourse or was present in the environment of speech. 11.8.2 Indefinite pronouns as a source of relative markers I use the term 'indefinite' for pronouns that refer to an unspecified, often hypo­ thetical, referent. Such pronouns may narrow the class of referent, and accord­ ingly we may have various semantic classes encoded in the forms of indefinite pronouns. Thus in some languages the pronouns may further distinguish be­ tween [human], [locative], [time], [feminine], etc. Examples of English indef­ inite pronouns are 'who', 'what', and 'where' in such sentences as: (102) 'What is known of these matters has been adequately treated in the works of other authors.' (Eiseley 1961:4) (103) 'Where men of today feed upon an ever growing technology and delight in space fiction, people of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries fed upon a literary diet of extraordinary voyages-real, Utopian, and imaginary.' (Eiseley 1961:28) (104) '... and which would have proved unnecessary had he known what was said on that winter evening of 1865 in Briinn.' (Eiseley 1961:206) (105) I suppose I ought to go down there, anyway? And look over what there is.(Agatha Christie, After the funeral, 1956:61) In English and in many other languages indefinite pronouns are often identical with interrogative pronouns, and they are mostly referred to as interrogatives. I argued in Frajzyngier 1985f that in Chadic languages the primary function of these pronouns is indefinite rather than interrogative. Here I will use only one argument based on grammaticalization processes. It is possible to derive the interrogative function from the indefinite function through the addition of an in­ terrogative device already existing in the language such as an intonation or a stress pattern. Derivation of indefinite from interrogative, on the other hand, would have to proceed through a suppression of an interrogative intonation or a stress pattern.

450

COMPLEX SENTENCE

In Frajzyngier 1985f the indefinite markers for PC are reconstructed as * wV for referents that are [+human] and *mV for referents that are [-human]. The indefinite pronoun *wVserved as a base on which one class of relative markers was built in Hausa, viz. wa-n-da masculine, wa~d~da feminine, and waďanda plural. These markers in Hausa indicate that the head noun is in the de dicto status. In Gidar one of the two relative markers, an, is identical with the interroga­ tive pronoun an 'what', e.g.: (106)

an ә Tizi 3M ask-PERF what lSG buy Tizi asked what I bought' (he asked the question)

(107)

án na man REL FUT take-Ғ 'man who will choose her'

Cf.

Indefinite pronouns are used as relative markers in a number of unrelated lan­ guages, including, of course, English. In Chadic indefinite pronouns have dis­ tinct phonological characteristics that set them apart from other pronouns. The process of grammaticalization from indefinite pronouns to relative markers may have the following motivation: The relative clause is used to modify a noun whose existence is hypothetical or whose existence is introduced for the first time, essentially a new element in discourse. The relative clause in such a sit­ uation serves as an attribute of the head noun phrase by giving it an identity. 11.8.3 Associative markers as a source of relative markers In several Chadic languages the relative marker is identical with the associative marker. This phenomenon, already noted by Hoffmann 1963, has not been ad­ equately described from the point of view of the process of grammaticalization. In what follows I describe scenarios for the grammaticalization of the associa­ tive into the relative marker in two languages, Hausa (West) and Margi (Central). Hausa: Recall that one of the relative markers in Hausa is dà, e.g.:

RELATIVE CLAUSE

451

(108) yaarò-n dà Audù ya aikàa boy-DEF REL Audu  send 'the boy that Audu sent' (Kraft and Kirk-Greene 1973:107) The same marker is also used as associative marker, as shown by the following examples: (109) yaa tàfi dà shii 3M:PERF go ASSOC 3SG 'he has gone away with it/him' or 'he has taken it/him away' (Kraft and Kirk-Greene 1973:85) (110) mun ci àbinci tàare dà shii 1PL:PERF eat food together ASSOC 3SG 'we ate food with him' (Kraft and Kirk-Greene 1973:85) The grammaticalization of the associative into the relative marker in Hausa pro­ ceeded as follows: The motivation for grammaticalization was for the speaker to build an attributive construction in which a clause modifies a noun phrase. The language already has grammaticalized means of building attributive con­ structions. One of these means is the use of the associative marker dà to mark an attribute of either a verb or a noun, e.g.: (111) yaa gudù dà saurii 3M:PERF run ASSOC speed 'he ran fast' (Kraft and Kirk-Greene 1973:85) (112)

ya nàa dà kuďii dà yawàa  PROG ASSOC money ASSOC much 'he has a lot of money' (Kraft and Kirk-Greene 1973:131)

The same marker is therefore used to indicate that a clause is an attribute of a noun phrase. The use of the associative to mark a relative clause is therefore an extension of a function that the marker already has in the clause. Margi: Recall that the relative markers kə, na, and ŋə, which are used when the head noun is the subject of the relative clause, are derived from demonstra­ tives. The marker do is used when the head noun is not the subject of the rela-

COMPLEX SENTENCE

452

tive clause. It may be used with a preceding relative marker from the subject set, e.g.: (113) doctor see boy REL REL break leg 'the doctor saw the boy who his [whose] leg was broken' (Hoffmann 1963:90) The marker də is identical with the preposition 'with', which encodes a number of functions, including instrumental, e.g.: (114) with gun 'with a gun' (115) fish with basket 'to fish with a basket' (Hoffmann 1963:244) Like the associative marker in Hausa, the preposition də in Margi is also used to mark attributes of nouns and verbs (all examples from Hoffmann 1963:245), e.g.: (116) 'as a present, for nothing' (117) 'with difficulty' (118) 'at night' In Cibak tàrá, the associative marker, is also the relative clause marker for subject heads. Grammaticalization from associative marker to relative clause marker most probably had the following path. Associative markers are used throughout the Chadic group in attributive constructions, the equivalents of constructions with adjectives in an attributive function in IE languages. The construction in Chadic

RELATIVE CLAUSE

453

languages typically has the form: N ASSOC Property Concept. Since the rela­ tive clause is an attributive element for the head noun, it is quite natural for the speakers of the language to use with it the device that is already used to mark a property concept as an attributive element. Thus the associative marker is used because of its functional properties. 11.8.4 De dicto complementizers as a source of relative markers One of the languages where a de dicto complementizer is involved in relative clause construction is Kera. relative markers (relativizing conjunctions in Ebert's terminology) consist of a particle of attribution (bə masculine, db femi­ nine, gə collective.) followed by the subordinating particle minti. The relative clause also has resumptive pronouns coreferential with the relativized main clause argument, and their function is to indicate the grammatical role of the head noun. Only a definite noun phrase may be relativized; thus there is no equivalent of 'he is looking for a woman who . . . '. The definitenes s of the noun phrase is marked by the definite particle ŋá or ή at the end of the relative clause, e.g.: (119) kul minti hùlùm meehouse REL man ATT die-DEF be.PERF ye spend the night.ITER in.3SG-DEF 3PL tear down.3SG EXT 'the house in which the dead man used to sleep, they tore (it) down' (Ebert 1979:257) There is a locative pro-form

e.g.:

(120) haá ko minti ye kéeré ádà DEM place REL 3PL sacrifice LOC-DEF 'that is the place in which they perform sacrifices' (Ebert 1979:258) The identity of relative markers and complementizers, which obtains also in other languages, e.g. Lele, does not stem from a situation in which one mor­ pheme is a source for another but rather from the fact that both markers derive from the same source, such as a demonstrative or a verb of saying.

COMPLEX SENTENCE

454 11.9

Sources of postrelative markers

All postrelative markers are identical with the forms of the definite markers, demonstratives, or pronouns. Here are a few sentences from Mandara that contain both the definite marker and the postrelative marker; the two are identi­ cal, e.g.: (121) yè Z-Ú nà kà gyá ká nà 1SG eat food DEF 2SG cook 2SG DEF Ί ate the food that you prepared' (122)

nà kà gyá kà nà, zà-nú-zè food DEF 2SG cook 2SG DEF eat-1SG-eat 'the food that you prepared, I ate'

(123) yà nów nà à sá nà nà 1SG see goat DEF 3SG buy PREP Nali DEF 'I saw the goat brought by Nali' In Mupun (West) and closely related Mwaghavul the postrelative markers could be identical with either definite no or demonstratives sə and só, which when not attributive to a noun have the locative meaning 'here' and 'there'. In Pa'anci (West) the postrelative marker ka does not have an exact equivalent among the definite or pronominal markers. But it has the same form as a deictic locative demonstrative, 'there'. The identity of postrelative markers with demonstrative and definite markers stems from the fact that in many Chadic languages the demonstrative or definite markers occur after the noun phrase rather than after the head noun. Thus the form of postrelative markers is consistent with the general properties of noun phrases in Chadic languages.

11.10 'Relative tenses' It is a frequent phenomenon in Chadic languages that verbal forms in relative clauses have different tense markers from forms in indicative simple sentences. Such is the case in Hausa, Kanakuru, Pa'a (West); Tera, Hona, and Giziga (Central); Dangla and Mukulu (East) where certain tenses have alternative

RELATIVE CLAUSE

455

forms, which are often called 'relative tenses'. Since they occur in three out of four branches, the existence of the two variants of some tense or aspectual forms must be reconstructed for Proto-Chadic. This type of phenomenon is not a feature that one can expect to develop independently in unrelated languages. I will illustrate the phenomenon with examples from Hausa, where it is probably as extensive as in most Chadic languages: (124) Yara-η sun kwanta a asibiti boys-DEF 3PL:PERF stay inhospital 'The boys were hospitalized' (125) Yara-η da su-ka kwanta a asibiti boys-DEF REL 3PL-REL.PERF stay in hospital 'The boys who were hospitalized' (Rufa'i 1983:421) Because of the frequent presence of so-called relative tenses in relative clauses one could postulate that the relative tenses are one more characteristic of the relative clause. As stated in Frajzyngier 1987c, such a conclusion would be only partially true. The so-called relative tenses, although they do occur in rela­ tive clauses, also occur in other types of embedded clauses, and they appear to be a general characteristic of embedding in Chadic. But being a part of the means of embedding does not in itself explain why a different type of tense marker occurs in the relative clause. Zima (1991), who deals specifically with 'relative tenses', does not offer an explanation. In what follows I provide a functional explanation based on the total system of coding available in various languages.

11.11

Reconstruction of the relative clause in Proto-Chadic

Although the reader may draw some conclusions concerning the reconstruction of the relative clause structure and the categories encoded in its components from the preceding discussion, I think it may be useful to make explicit the ar­ gumentation in favor of and against reconstruction of the structure and the com­ ponents. 2

COMPLEX SENTENCE

456

11.11.1 The form of the relative clause I propose that there were several patterns when a clause was to be used in an attributive function. One of these patterns had the form NP DEM S. The role of a nonsubject argument was marked by resumptive pronouns. This pattern is illustrated by the relative clauses in contemporary East Dangla (all data and analysis from Shay, MS), e.g.: (126)

ki iy-intyè no ìban-gìgà man REL lead-2SG here -DEM 1SG know-3M Ί know the man who brought you here' (lit. 'the man, he brought you here, I know him')

(127)

gem ki iy-ga rawàt-dyi ko person REL bring- here-DEM forget- already 'he forgot who brought him here'

From such a pattern relative markers that are identical with or similar to demon­ strative markers developed. This reconstruction implies that in PC some rela­ tive clauses modified the head nouns that were already somehow identified, previously mentioned, or present in the environment of speech. The head noun phrases were in the domain de re. This is the most frequent pattern to be found in all four branches of Chadic languages. In three branches of Chadic there ex­ ist languages in which the head noun of the relative clause must be followed by a definite marker. The relative markers in many languages are derived from the definite markers, which indicates that the development of definite markers pre­ ceded the development of relative markers. A second pattern involved the used of indefinite markers in a way similar to the use of demonstrative markers. It appears that this pattern was used for a head noun phrase that had a de dicto existential status. Another pattern had the attributive clause attached with the help of the asso­ ciative markers. This pattern was grounded in the means, which already existed in the language, of marking attributive elements of nouns and verbs with asso­ ciative markers. The pattern is therefore a mere functional extension of the as­ sociative marker.

RELATIVE CLAUSE

457

11.11.2 The relativo markers In some languages the relative marker simply developed from defi­ nite/demonstrative markers. When this development took place, the function of the definite as indicating a known or existent head noun was lost. This prompted one or two developments: (1) the emergence of new relative markers and/or (2) the emergence of postrelative markers. Once the number of means available for coding increases, new functions encoded in the relative clause emerge, viz. the information status of the head noun. The relative clause can now mark head nouns as being either in the domain de dicto or in the domain de re. Table 11.1 illustrates the encoding of gender and number in relative markers in languages from four branches of Chadic: TABLE 11.1. Gender and number coding in relative markers

Hausa Kanakuru Pero Fyer Ga'anda Margi Lele Kera Dangla Masa

Masc wanda me mu a dì ku go bə na ma

Fem wadda ji ά

P1 wacfanda me mi

η

η

na na do d­ ta ta

da nu ge

gənuu sa

Two genders in the singular, and a plural that does not distinguish gender, are encoded by relative markers in all four groups of Chadic. These facts alone could argue for reconstruction of the Proto-Chadic relative marker as encoding the categories of gender and number. There are, however, important factors that would dictate caution in such a reconstruction. Gender and number are salient structural or semantic categories and are grammaticalized in languages belonging to various types and families. Grammaticalization of gender and number distinctions in relative markers is therefore possible as an independent development in many related or unrelated languages. The fact that we do have

458

COMPLEX SENTENCE

gender distinction in all four branches may indicate that it is a retention, but it may very well indicate an independent innovation in four branches. Much more important evidence of whether gender distinction in the relative is a retention or innovation would be an indication of whether the gender mark­ ers are cognates. Thus if they are cognates, one can claim a common retention; if they are not cognates, one can claim an innovation. A look at the feminine marker in West Chadic, Central, and East Chadic clearly points to the presence of an initial alveolar stop that was palatalized when followed by a high front vowel as in Kanakuru and Pero, a phonological process independently attested in these and other Chadic languages. Therefore the phonological evidence would point to the presence of gender distinction in the relative marker. There is, however, a possible counterargument to this evidence. The gen­ der encoding relative markers are demonstratives in Pero, Kanakuru, Masa, Kera, and Dangla. The fact that gender markers in the relative are cognates would merely reflect the fact that demonstrative pronouns or some other deictic categories from which the relative markers were derived are cognates. On the basis of the above facts, I do not see absolute proof of the existence of gender distinction in the Proto-Chadic relative marker. I do not see, how­ ever, any evidence that such a distinction did not exist. 11.11.3 The relative tenses The function of so-called relative tenses is quite independent of the relative clause. These 'tenses' are a feature of clauses that are part of another sentence or that are in a sequential relationship with another sentence. Grammaticalization of these tenses has not been dealt with in the present work, but their distribution over three out of four branches of Chadic is a strong indication that a similar feature might have existed already at the PC stage. In anumber of languages the two sets of tense and aspectual markers function as a distinguishing characteristics of two types of clauses: matrix, affirmative clauses constitute one type, and negative, interrogative, and consecutive and relative clauses constitute another type. Thus the class of 'relative tenses' as a property of relative clauses only does not exist. 11.11.4 The postrelative markers Postrelative markers have modal and pragmatic functions linked to such factors as shared knowledge, conversational situation, and relationship between the

RELATIVE CLAUSE

459

participants. The presence of postrelative markers in at least three branches of Chadic would justify postulating that postrelative markers were already avail­ able as a coding means in the formation of relative clauses in Proto-Chadic. The fact that they are in complementary distribution across languages with the two relative markers-coding systems indicates that postrelative markers are a product of independent innovation, facilitated by the fact that (1) the relative clause is a nominal category, and (2) in Chadic definite markers follow the nominal categories. This conclusion is additionally supported by the uniformity of sources from which the postrelatives derive. In all languages examined, postrelatives are identical with demonstratives/definite markers. The reconstruction of the function of postrelatives in PC cannot be stated in all confidence because the de­ scriptions of the function of postrelatives in individual languages are scanty at best. But the general domain encoded by postrelatives was that of the pragmatic status of the head noun phrase, more specifically whether the noun phrase is known to the hearer, present in the environment of speech. The general uni­ formity of functions of postrelatives is an additional argument for reconstructing postrelatives as a means available at the PC stage.

11.12

Conclusions

Relative clauses in Chadic represent a rich system of encoding, which, in addi­ tion to commonly found means to indicate the semantic characteristics and grammatical role of the relativized noun phrase, also indicates the existential status of the head noun phrase. The grammaticalization of the relative clause in Chadic shows that various solutions to the problem of adding an attributive clause to a noun were used in Chadic languages, sometimes within the same language. The data in Chadic show that the functional roles of each of the cod­ ing means depend on what other means are deployed in the construction, and on what functions these other means have. One cannot a priori assume a function of any of the markers involved in relative clause constructions.

1. I would like to thank Karen Ebert, Herrmann Jungraithmayr, Neil Skinner, and Ekkehard Wolff for comments on an earlier version of a paper on relative clauses presented in Marburg and published as Frajzyngier 1987c. The present chapter bears

460

COMPLEX SENTENCE

little resemblance to Frajzyngier 1987c. Some examples and one or two analyses appear in both papers. 2. For an alternative analysis of the development of relative clauses in Chadic cf. Schuh 1990.

12 SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS

12.1

Introduction

The present study has resulted in a number of findings and implications with re­ spect to language structure and theory and methodology of grammaticalization. As predicted, certain findings with respect to grammaticalization make it possi­ ble to explain why a language has some structures rather than others, an aspect of language variation that is usually attributed to chance. The variations among Chadic languages and the variations between Chadic and other languages are not due to chance at all but may be explained in terms of the types of coding devices available in the language and the sources of the grammatical morphemes used in the language. Following is a summary of those findings and their im­ plications for the study of language structure and variation and of grammatical­ ization.

12.2 Implications for the study of language structure 12.2.1 Typology of complex sentences Complex sentences in Chadic languages may be divided into three types: asyn­ detic conjoining, sequential, and subordinated. The difference between the three types and the two types traditionally assumed by most theories, viz. con­ joined and subordinated, is mainly in the distribution of functional types. WhereasIIIclauses conjoined by a coordinating conjunction include clauses that describe events in temporal sequence as well as in many other types of relation­ ships between clauses, Chadic asyndetic conjoining does not encode temporal sequence of events or cause-effect relationship. Moreover, sequential clauses often have the same form as clauses following an adverb of time and as tempo­ ral and conditional protases. The availability of three types of sentence combin-

462

COMPLEX SENTENCE

ing in Chadic languages, as opposed to the two types available in IE languages, may be explained by an examination of the sources of the grammatical mor­ phemes that mark the various types. 12.2.2 Verb omission and argument marking Omission of the verb of saying in the matrix clause has been observed in lan­ guages from all four groups of Chadic. When the verb is omitted pronominal subjects are drawn from the independent rather than the clitic sets ('subject pro­ nouns'). The choice of pronouns is the evidence that there is no verb in the matrix clause. Absence of the verb poses a challenge for Case theory, which in one form or another postulates Case assignment by the verb. If there is no verb, then one of the major Case assigners is absent. In languages where position with respect to the verb is a coding means, omission of the verb requires deployment of other coding means, such as prepositions. But in languages where configuration does not function as a rolecoding means, the omission of the verb of saying has no impact on the coding of arguments. Thus, in Polish, where the role of arguments is coded by inflec­ tion rather than by configuration, the arguments retain their inflectional marking when the verb is omitted. Since in Chadic languages position after the verb is a coding device, some other means of coding must be used when the verb is omitted. In several Chadic languages a preposition is used to encode the ad­ dressee in the matrix clause. This preposition is not used if the verb is present and no other argument interferes between the verb and the addressee. The pro­ cesses involved in verb omission provide support for the hypothesis proposed in the Introduction, namely, that position with respect to the verb is but one of the means of encoding the role of the arguments. The investigation of the verb-omission phenomena in Chapter 4 indicates that pragmatic factors that would favor omission are not a sufficient motivation for the phenomenon to take place. Whether the verb is omitted or not depends crucially on the coding means available in the specific structure. If the verb is the only marker of the role of an argument, as is the case in Masa with respect to the addressee, the verb of saying may not be omitted. If the verb is the only marker of the role of the following clause, i.e. if there is no complementizer, as is the case in Hausa, the verb of saying may not be omitted either.

SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS

463

12.2.3 Subject-to-object raising Recall that I used the term 'subject-to-object raising' as mnemonic device for a syntactic phenomenon that has received numerous explanations within formal theories and at least one explanation within the functional approach. The anal­ ysis of the relevant facts in Chadic languages indicates that rather than being an outcome of various formal constraints, as predicted by Case theory, subject-toobject-raising is a grammatical means of encoding a semantic function, a means that lies within the domain of epistemic modality. More specifically, with verbs of perception, 'subject-to-object raising' indicates direct perception, as opposed to indirect perception or hearsay information, which may be encoded by the use of de dicto complementizers. With volitional verbs, 'subject-to-object raising' indicates that the speaker believes that the wish may be realized. An unrealistic wish is encoded mainly by complementizers. The fact that in English and per­ haps in other languages, 'subject-to-object raising' is obligatory can be ex­ plained by the properties of the verb 'to want', which is used only with realis wishes. Irrealis wishes are coded by other volitional verbs and volitional ex­ pressions, such as 'wish'. 12.2.4 Word order in matrix and embedded clauses Different word orders in main and embedded clauses received a number of ex­ planations, including diachronic ones whereby word order in embedded clauses was said to be more archaic than word order in matrix clauses. The discussion in the present work has demonstrated that different word orders may be a result of relatively recent grammaticalization processes. Moreover, the distinction is not necessarily between the matrix and the embedded clause but may be be­ tween the first and the subsequent clause in the sentence, regardless of whether they are matrix or embedded clauses. In the present work, word order is not considered as a separate object of study but rather is examined from the point of view of whether it is a coding means, and if it is, what functions are encoded by configuration with respect to the verb. In all Chadic languages coding devices for arguments are the same in the matrix and the embedded clause. In the Chadic verb-initial languages, position after the verb, the position of the subject, is unmarked. Objects are marked either by a preposition (Xdi) or by cross-reference coding on the verb (Hona). In Xdi, the SVO word order in the second clause of some complex sentences resulted from grammaticalization of the old verb 'to say' and subsequent introduction of the new verb 'to say' into

464

COMPLEX SENTENCE

the position following the subject of the matrix clause, giving the apparent SVO order. But the object of the second or embedded clause in Xdi is still marked by a preposition, as it is in the matrix clause. 12.2.5 Position of subordinating particles In some Chadic languages temporal and conditional protasis markers occur at the beginning of the clause and in other languages at the end of the clause. This structural variation is explained by the sources from which the markers grammaticalized. Temporal and conditional markers occur clause initially if they originate from prepositions, and clause finally if they originate from demonstra­ tive and definite markers. 12.2.6 Two types of relative clauses The present volume offers a new explanation for the two types of relative clauses in Chadic, a phenomenon known in many other languages as well. In one type the relative clause is the only information about the head noun, and in another type the head noun has already been mentioned previously in discourse or is present in the deictic environment of the clause. The proposed theory is a better explanation for the common distinction between restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses used in English and other languages. The markers of the two types of clauses in Chadic derive from different sources, as summarized later in the discussion of grammaticalization of relative markers. 12.2.7 The nature of complementizers The present work provides further support for the modal function of comple­ mentizers, as proposed in Frajzyngier 1995. But the analyses proposed in the present work also point to another function of complementizers, that of sep­ arating arguments in a sentence so that proper arguments are assigned to proper verbs. This function is particularly important in languages in which the role of arguments is marked by means other than configuration. In such languages ar­ guments can move relatively freely within an utterance, and there is a need to identify which arguments belong to which verb. Several Chadic languages distinguish between two complementizers, one encoding de dicto modality and the other, de re modality, as proposed in Frajzyngier 1991a. The presence of two complementizers in Lele and in several

SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS

465

other languages from the East branch not only provides evidence of grammaticalization of different semantic domains but also has implications for the lan­ guage structure and for the theory of language. Recall that in Lele both com­ plementizers can occur after volitional verbs. When the de re complementizer occurs alone, the complement does not have the overt subject marked. When the de re and de dicto complementizers occur together, the complement clause must have its subject overtly marked, regardless of whether the subject is the same as or different from the subject of the main clause. Within linguistic theo­ ries that do not distinguish between various types of complementizers, presence of a complementizer automatically implies a full sentence. Complements of volitional verbs in Lele show that it is not the presence of a complementizer as a formal category that has those properties but rather the presence of the de dicto complementizer that is associated with the full sentence. The de re complemen­ tizer alone does not have these properties. In some languages, in lieu of or along with the de dicto complementizer there may also occur an interrogative complementizer. The presence of the in­ terrogative complementizer correlates with the absence of clause-final interroga­ tive markers. The complementary distribution of the two devices supports the hypothesis about the modal function of complementizers. The de dicto com­ plementizer can occur with either yes/no questions or specific questions. But the interrogative complementizer cannot occur with specific questions. Once again, the absence of the interrogative complementizer in specific questions cor­ relates with the presence of specific interrogative markers in the complement clause. Same-subject overt coding in complements of volitional verbs has not until now received a theoretical explanation. In the present work it was shown that in at least one group of languages same-subject overt coding is conditioned by the subcategorization properties of the verb. If the verb subcategorizes for nominal complement, but the complement is actually propositional, the samesubject is overtly coded. If the verb subcategorizes for propositional comple­ ment, the same-subject is not overtly coded. The coding of indirect evidence is done in Chadic languages through three means: the use of a de dicto complementizer as opposed to the absence of a complementizer (East Dangla, East); the use of the de dicto as opposed to the de re complementizer (Lele); and finally, the use of the progressive aspect in the embedded clause as opposed to the past tense/perfective marker (Mina, Central).

466

COMPLEX SENTENCE

12.2.8 Modal functions of the clausal order In at least two languages, Xdi and East Dangla, clausal order has been exploited to carry modal functions. In Xdi the order embedded-matrix clause indicates that the proposition of the embedded clause is in the domain de dicto. Thus re­ ported speech in Xdi (and also in East Dangla) is included in the clause preced­ ing the matrix clause. Requests and other clauses encoding the domain de re follow the matrix clause. The grammaticalization process that led to the ex­ ploitation of clausal order for modal functions is similar to the process that re­ sulted in contrastive-focus information's being presented as the first element in the sentence.

12.3

Implications for the study of grammaticalization

12.3.1 Methodology and unidirectionality Grammaticalization from a lexical item to a grammatical morpheme is noncontroversial, and the methodology of finding a source of grammaticalization is well known: a perusal of a dictionary of the language in question or dictionaries of related languages will most often reveal the potential lexical sources. What remains then is to find evidence that one of the lexical items is indeed the source of the grammatical morpheme being studied. The present volume has shown that many grammaticalization processes involve functional changes from one grammatical function to another rather than from a lexical item to a grammatical morpheme. The common approach in current grammaticalization research is that a less grammatical morpheme becomes more grammatical or that less ab­ stract becomes more abstract. This approach is linked with the unidirectionality hypothesis, which states that if there are two related forms, A and B, the gram­ maticalization may go only in one direction, from A to  or from  to A, but never from A to  in one language and from B to A in another. This approach is inadequate as a methodology because the concepts of grammaticalization and abstractness are not formulated in such a way that an objective investigation would produce the same results for all languages. In lieu of the current approach I propose a nonsubjective methodology to examine the direction of a grammaticalization process. To discover the source and the product of grammaticalization (I prefer this term to the term 'target' used in Heine et al. 1991 and Heine et al. 1993) requires a methodology that would

SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS

467

resolve the question in an unambiguous way. The following are some of the elements of such a methodology. The unidirectionality hypothesis holds, with a very few exceptions, for changes from lexical items to grammatical morphemes. Given two grammatical functions performed by one form, we can establish which function is a source and which is a product if we find an earlier source for one of the functions. Thus, if we take a form that serves the function of temporal marker and conditional marker, and we find that the form originated from the lexeme 'time', than grammaticalization went from temporal marker to conditional marker. But if we find that the form developed from a verb of say­ ing, which typically produce hypothetical mood, then the grammaticalization went from conditional to temporal. Another example is the connection between contrastive-focus marker and sentential conjunction. Theoretically either direc­ tion is possible, from conjunction to contrastive focus, or from contrastive fo­ cus to conjunction. Contrastive focus and the sentential conjunction are marked by the same form in Lele. The issue is decided by the fact that the sentential conjunction has a cognate in another East Chadic language, Bidiya, where the cognate is the nominal conjunction. Thus the development of the functions of the form was from nominal conjunction to sentential conjunction, and from sentential conjunction to contrastive-focus marker. The crucial element in the methodology in deciding the direction of change between two grammatical functions is therefore to find the lexical source for the form. Thus the unidirec­ tionality hypothesis with respect to grammaticalization from one grammatical morpheme to another is shown to be factually incorrect and certainly should not be used as a tool in grammaticalization research. In fact, bidirectionality appears to be the most likely possibility for those grammaticalization processes that involve metaphor and metonymic extensions. If we have two functions, X and Y, and a form A that encodes both of these functions, the explanation for the polysemy of A is that the functions X and Y must have some element in common. Thus A might have started as the marker of the function X or as the marker of function Y, and the functional extension of A is possible in both directions. Bidirectionality is shown several times in the course of the present work. Thus some conditional markers are derived from temporal markers, and some temporal markers are derived from conditional markers. The development of complementizers into sequential markers, even for clauses occurring after an adverb of time, is evidence that grammaticalization may proceed from the more abstract to more concrete, contradicting the unidi­ rectionality hypothesis which assumes only change from more concrete to more

468

COMPLEX SENTENCE

abstract. The direction of grammaticalization is decided by examining the lexical source from which one of the markers is derived. 12.3.2 Semiotic metonymy as a source of polysemy One of the most interesting aspects of the grammaticalization of the complex (and the simple) sentence in Chadic and most probably other languages is the fact that a very large number of grammatical morphemes have developed from a very small set of morphemes whose diachronically primary function was that of demonstrative or anaphora. The majority of demonstratives have an extremely limited semantic content. At most they may encode number, gender, or class of referent and various distances from proximate to remote and to out of sight. Anaphors have even narrower range in that no degrees of distance are involved, just previous mention in discourse, plus gender and number. But the range of grammatical constructions in which demonstratives and anaphors participate is extremely wide in every language, and those constructions do not have an obvious connection with the semantic properties of demonstratives. The metaphor as the main force in grammaticalization, as proposed in Heine et al. 1991:48, just does not explain the polysemy of demonstratives. If a demonstrative can be a complementizer, a conditional clause marker, a posses­ sive marker, a temporal and conditional apodosis marker, a relative clause marker, to mention just a few functions, then surely none of these functions can be taken to be a characteristic of a demonstrative 'that' or 'this' in the way in which fidelity, friendliness, or uncleanness may be taken by some people to be characteristic of dog. In order to explain the polysemy of markers whose pri­ mary function for the purpose of grammaticalization is already grammatical, a new theoretical approach is needed. In the present volume I have proposed an approach whereby semantic metaphor or semantic metonymy does not play a role, but whereby semiotic metonymy has to be invoked at some stage. The present volume provides numerous pieces of evidence for this type of polysemy of grammatical markers. I shall name just a few: demonstrative pronouns' serving as definite markers, conditional markers, temporal markers, relative clause markers, possessive markers, and de dicto and de re complementizers; associative markers' serving as conjunctions, relative clause markers, object markers in causative constructions, and conditional markers. Syntactic reanalysis, or 'rebracketing', has been often invoked as a mecha­ nism responsible for grammaticalization of verbs of saying into complementiz­ ers (cf. Lord 1976, 1993, Heine et al. 1991, Hopper and Traugott 1993). The

SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS

469

analysis presented in this book indicates a different mechanism of grammatical­ ization. When the erstwhile verb of saying subcategorizes for propositional (clausal) complements, that means that it takes propositional complements with­ out any additional markers. That property explains two syntactic phenomena involved in complementation that have not been explained elsewhere in the lit­ erature: the absence of complementizers when the erstwhile verb of saying oc­ curs in the matrix clause; the presence of the verb of saying as a complementizer when the matrix clause is any other verb. When the verb of the matrix clause is anything but the verb of saying and the complement is propositional, then the verb of saying is used as a grammatical device to mark the proposition. Thus from the very beginning, the verb of saying is used because of its syntactic subcategorization properties. This is not to deny that syntactic reanalysis plays a role in grammaticaliza­ tion. Chapters 9 and 10 have also pointed to the importance of syntactic reanal­ ysis whereby a final component of one clause is reanalyzed as the initial com­ ponent of the following clause. The clause-initial temporal and conditional apo­ dosis markers can be derived from clause-final protasis markers. This deriva­ tion is important in view of the fact that in many languages of the world the meanings of 'when' and 'then' are not synonymous. Yet, given the proper syntactic conditions, the same morpheme can carry both meanings in Chadic. Note that clause-initial protasis markers never become apodosis markers in Chadic, which shows that rather than semantic properties, it is syntactic prop­ erties that are crucial for the process of grammaticalization. The proposed hypothesis about the origin and mechanisms involved in the grammaticalization of complementizers allows one to explain the absence of complementizers, not as instances of the complementizer deletion, but rather as instances of the non-use of complementizers, because the verbs of saying subcategorize for a propositional complement. 12.3.3 Motivation for grammaticalization: the need and opportunity Hopper and Traugott 1993 (Chapter 4) give a brief summary of proposed moti­ vations, including various aspects of speaker-hearer relations, economy, sim­ plification, communicative need, routinization, conventionalization of implicatures, and many others. Heine et al. 1991 attribute one of the main motivations of grammaticalization to human creativity. The principle of communicative need in itself is not a sufficient factor for the emergence of specific grammatical con­ structions or morphemes. In particular the communicative need does not ac-

470

COMPLEX SENTENCE

count for the existence of different grammatical constructions and of different functions encoded by constructions. Communicative need may be useful for explaining similarities between languages, but it is not a viable factor in explain­ ing differences among languages. To the motivations that have been proposed so far, I added one motivation that was shown to play an important role. That motivation is entailed by the principle that every item in the utterance must have its function transparent to the hearer. The transparency of the func­ tion may be inherent in the lexical form itself, e.g. the function of a verb as a predicate or of 'and' as a conjunction. But in most cases some additional means of marking are required. The need to code every element of an utterance is the main motivation in the development of grammatical systems. It is not teleological in the sense that it not motivated by the language's tendency to achieve some stage in its development. It is also not as arbitrary and as hard to define as the principles of economy or simplification. It is also functional. The need to mark every element of the utterance has been shown to be a motivation for most grammatical morphemes involved in complex sentence structures. Here are some specific examples. In most Chadic languages there is only one verb of saying that subcategorizes for a clausal complement, and the addition of a clausal complement to such a verb does not involve any additional markers. All other verbs of saying do not subcategorize for a clausal complement, and the addition of a clausal com­ plement requires additional marking to encode the role of the clause within an­ other clause. Hence the grammaticalization of complementizers. 12.3.4 Origin of complementizers De dicto complementizers in Chadic languages, as in many other languages, derive from verbs of saying. The present work offers a novel explanation for the grammaticalization of verbs of saying into complementizers, based on the syntactic' properties of these verbs. It has been shown that the erstwhile verb of saying takes propositional rather than nominal complements, which makes it suitable for use in serial verb construction as a marker of proposition. The development of verbs of saying into complementizers resulted in the bleaching of the lexical content of these verbs. As a result, new verbs of saying were introduced in many Chadic languages. This explains the large number of lexical innovations in the verbs of saying as compared with the large number of retentions for those verbs that have not served systematically as sources of grammatical morphemes.

SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS

471

Somewhat more obscure is the source of de re complementizers. In at least one language, Lele, the de re complementizers appear to be derived from the verb 'to see', a semantically naturally process since the verb 'to see' denotes the most direct perception. 12.3.5 Origin of protasis and apodosis markers The need to mark both protasis and apodosis clauses also follows from the principle of encoding the role of every element in the utterance. Unlike the rela­ tionship between the matrix and the embedded clause, where the matrix clause can essentially be an independent sentence, neither the protasis nor the apodosis clause in temporal and conditional sentences can occur as an independent clause. Hence, in many languages both protasis and apodosis clauses are marked by special means. Morphemes marking temporal protasis in Chadic languages have emerged from a number of lexical and grammatical sources. The main lexical source is, not unexpectedly, the word for 'time'. The grammaticalization process most probably involved at its earliest stages a relative clause construction or an adposition by which the word 'time' was marked. Later, the head of the relative clause, i.e. the word 'time', and the relative clause marker were often omitted as the construction became more grammaticalized. In a number of languages only the postrelative demonstrative remains as the marker of the protasis clause. This process is of special interest because grammaticalization from the relative clause resulted in temporal protasis markers' occurring at the end rather than at the beginning of the protasis. The other sources of temporal protasis markers are sequential markers, locative prepositions, de dicto complementizers, and conditional protasis markers. Apodosis markers derive from three sources: sequential markers, de dicto complementizers, and demonstratives and definite markers. The development from de dicto complementizers to temporal apodosis and eventually to the apo­ dosis following the adverb time is particularly interesting in view of the fact that it contradicts the assumptions about less abstract becoming more abstract. If we assume that the marking of succession in time is less abstract than the marking of the dicto domain, we can say that Chadic languages provide evidence for grammaticalization from the more abstract to the less abstract. The process of grammaticalization of demonstratives into markers of the apodosis in Chadic involved a reanalysis of the constituency status of demon­ stratives, from being components of the protasis clause to being components of

472

COMPLEX SENTENCE

the apodosis. But it also has much more important implications for the theory of complex sentence structure. In many IE languages, the demonstrative func­ tions in a way similar to demonstratives in Chadic. Thus in English and Polish the contemporary and conditional apodosis may be marked by morphemes identical with or derived from demonstratives, 'then' in English and to in Polish. Since virtually the same semantic and syntactic factors are involved in unrelated languages, there may be a common factor responsible for the similar­ ity. It is important to observe the following functional polysemy of the forms involved. In many unrelated languages the following functions are marked by demonstratives: de dicto complementizers, e.g. English 'that'; relative clauses, English 'that'; temporal and conditional apodosis, English 'then', derived from 'that'; and many others that cannot be illustrated in English but that have been illustrated in a number of Chadic languages. In lieu of explanation of this poly­ semy, there have been observations that the morphemes involved are remote demonstratives rather than proximate. This is not even factually correct, as the Polish form to sharing many functions of English 'that' is the proximate demonstrative, the remote form being tamto. I propose that only those demon­ stratives that are used anaphorically, i.e. that are used to refer to elements of speech, can be markers of the functions of clauses within a sentence. This conclusion is fully supported by the analyses of complex sentence structures in Chadic. 12.3.6 Orìgin of relative clause markers Relative clause markers are derived from several sources. One of the most im­ portant sources is definite markers. If relative clauses distinguish the existential status of the head noun, the relative markers derived from definite markers en­ code the previous identification, the existence of the head noun. This grammat­ icalizatíon is perhaps the clearest example of the syntactic rebracketing whereby the definite marker of the noun becomes a marker of the relative clause. In several languages relative clause markers derive from associative mark­ ers. This grammaticalizatíon follows a general pattern in those languages of marking the modifying element of a noun phrase. The nouns modified by rela­ tive clauses of this type have not been previously mentioned in discourse, i.e., the relative clause is their only modification. The remaining markers of relative clauses are indefinite/interrogative pronouns, often found in IE languages, and de dicto complementizers.

SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS

12.4

473

Conclusions

Looking at forms in language as means of coding is a methodology that enables one to identify the form and functions of coding devices. The nonaprioristic approach to grammaticalization allows the identification of the sources of grammatical morphemes. Therefore, the implications of the present study for the study of language variation is inextricably linked with its implications for the study of grammaticalization. With respect to the same semantic or pragmatic function in different languages, many similarities and differences in the way the function is encoded can be explained by grammaticalization processes. These, in turn, depend on the general coding means already in place in the language and on semantic and syntactic properties of lexical items. The methodology in the present work allows the explanation of the widespread use of demonstra­ tives as a coding means for apparently unrelated semantic and pragmatic func­ tions. The work has concentrated on the common functional categories encoded in the languages under study. But each language may encode in its grammatical system a semantic or pragmatic function not encoded in other languages. These await a future study.

REFERENCES Abraham, R.C. 1962. Dictionary of the Hausa language. London: London University Press. Alio, Khalil. 1986. Essai de description de la langue bidiya du Guéra (Tchad). Phonologie-Grammaire. Marburger Studien zur Afrika- und Asienkunde, Serie A: Afrika, vol. 45. Berlin: Reimer. Alio, Khalil, & Herrmann Jungraithmayr. 1989. Lexique Bidiya. Une langue centre-africaine (République du Tchad). Frankfurt: Klostermann. Attouman, Mahaman Bachir. 1985. Les emplois du curseur koo en hawsa. Studies in African Linguistics 16.2.135-160. Austin, Peter. 1988. Complex sentence constructions in Australian languages. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Awad, Maher. 1993. Two Bolanci complementizers: ii and na. Colorado Research in Linguistics 12.66-75. Bagari, Dauda Muhammad. 1976. 'Subordinate adverbial clauses in Hausa.' University of California, Los Angeles, Ph.D. Dissertation. Baker, Mark C. 1988. Incorporation. A theory of grammatical function change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Bargery, G.P. 1951 (1934). A Hausa-English dictionary and English-Hausa vocabulary. London: Oxford University Press. Barreteau, Daniel. 1988. Description du Mofu-Gudur. vols.l & 2. Paris: ORSTOM. Barreteau, Daniel, & Robert Hedinger, eds. 1989. Descriptions de langues Camerounaises. Paris: Agence de coopération culturelle et technique and ORSTOM. Barreteau, Daniel, & Herrmann Jungraithmayr. 1982. Le verbe en sibine. Jungraithmayr 1982, 192-229. Barreteau, Daniel, & Paul Newman. 1978. Les langues tchadiques. Inventaire des études linguistiques sur les pays d'Afrique noire d'expression française et sur Madagascar. Ed. by Daniel Barreteau, 291-330. Paris: CDLF

476

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Barreteau, Daniel, & Yves Le Bléis. 1990. Lexique Mafa. Langue de la famille tchadique parlée au Cameroun. Paris: Geuthner-ORSTOM. ednarczuk, Leszek. 1971. Indo-European parataxis. Kraków: Wyzsza Szkola Pedagogiczna. Bednarczuk, Leszek. 1980. Origin of Indo-European parataxis. Ramat 1980, 145154. Bednarczuk, Leszek, ed. 1986. Jzyki indoeuropejskie. Warszawa: PWN. Bickerton, Derek. 1981. Roots of language. Ann Arbor: Karoma. Bloomfield, Leonard. 1962(1933). Language. London: Allen & Unwin. Borsley, Robert D. 1986. Prepositional complementizers in Welsh. Journal of Linguistics 22.67-84. Bouchard, Dennis. 1984. On the Content of Empty Categories. Dordrecht: Foris. Bresnan, Joan. 1970. On complementizers: Toward a syntactic theory of complement types. Foundations of Language 6.3.297-321. Bright, William, ed. 1992. Encyclopedia of linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Brockelmann, Carl. 1912. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der Semitischen Sprachen. Berlin: Reuther & Reichard. Burquest, Donald. 1973. 'A Grammar of Angas.' Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. Bybee, Joan, with Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1995. The grammaticization of tense, aspect and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Bynon, James, ed. 1984. Current progress in Afro-Asiatic linguistics. Papers from the Third Hamito-Semitic Congress. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Caitucoli, Claude. 1983. Lexique masa. Paris: ACCT/CERDOTOLA. Caitucoli, Claude. 1986. Douze contes masa. Marburger Studien zur Afrika- und Asienkunde, Serie A: Afrika, vol. 40. Berlin: Reimer. Caron, Bernard. 1989. The verbal system of Ader Hausa. Frajzyngier 1989e, 131169. Chafe, Wallace. 1986. Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. Chafe & Nichols 1986, 261-272. Chafe, Wallace, & Johanna Nichols, eds. 1986. Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Advances in discourse processes, vol. 20. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Chomsky, Noam. 1986a. Barriers. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam. 1986b. Knowledge of language. New York: Praeger.

REFERENCES

477

Chomsky, Noam. 1992. A minimalist program for linguistic theory. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 1. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Christie, Agatha. 1956. After the funeral. Fontana-Collins. Cichocki, W. 1983. Multiple Wh-Questions in Polish: A two COMP analysis. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 4.53-71. Comrie, Bernard. 1981. Language universals and linguistic theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Cowan, J. Ronayne, & Russell G. Schuh. 1976. Spoken Hausa. Ithaca, N.Y.: Spoken Language Services, Inc. Croft, William. 1990. Typology and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dasgupta, Probai. 1983. Bangla equatives, complementizers, final foci, and root. Linguistic Analysis 11.2.103-137. DeLancey, Scott. 1991. The origins of verb serialization in Modern Tibetan. Studies in Language 15.1.1-23. Diakonoff, Igor M. 1988. Afrasian languages. Moscow: Nauka. Dieu, Michel, & Patrick Renaud, eds. 1983. Atlas linguistique de l'Α frique Centrale. Le Cameroun. Paris & Yaoundé: Agence de coopération Culturelle et Technique, CERDOTOLA, Délégation générale à la Recherche Scientifique et Technique. Dimmendaal, Gerrit F. 1989. Complementizers in Hausa. Frajzyngier 1989b, 87110. Downing, Bruce. 1978. Some universals of relative clauses. Universals of human language, ed. by Joseph Greenberg. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 375418. Du Bois, John W. 1987. The discourse basis of ergativity. Language 63.4.805-855. Ebert, Karen H. 1979. Sprache und Tradition der Kera (Tschad). Teil 3: Grammatik. Marburger Studien zur Afrika- und Asienkunde, Serie A: Afrika, vol. 15. Berlin: Reimer. Ebert, Karen H. 1991. Vom verbum dicendi zur Konjunktion — Ein Kapitel universaler Grammatikentwicklung. Arbeiten des Seminars für allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft der Universitat Zürich, Nr. 11. Gedenkschrift für Meinrad Scheller, 77-95. Ebobissé, Carl. 1979. Die Morphologie des Verbs im Ost-Dangaleat. Marburger Studien zur Afrika- und Asienkunde, Serie A: Afrika, vol.21. Berlin: Reimer. Ebobissé, Carl. 1987. Les verbaux du dangaléat de Test (Guera, Tchad). Lexiques français-dangaléat et allemand-dangaléat. Marburger Studien zur Afrika- und Asienkunde, vol. 22. Berlin: Reimer.

478

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Eiseley, Loren. 1961. Darwin's century. Evolution and the men who discovered it. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & C. Ernout, Alfred, et François Thomas. 1972. Syntaxe latine. Paris: Klincksiek. Fédry, Jacques, avec la collaboration de Jonas Khamis et Moussa o/Nedjei. 1971. Dictionnaire Dangaléat (Tchad). Thèse de 3ème cycle. Institut National des Langues et Civilisations Orientales. Lyon: Afrique et Langage. Fischer, P. R. 1980. 'Untersuchungen zur Sprache der Mesme'. M.A. Diss., Marburg. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1965 An analysis of intensive forms in Hausa verbs. Rocznik Orientalistyczny 29.2.31-51. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1977a. On the Intransitive Copy Pronouns in Chadic. Studies in African Linguistics. Supplement 7.73-84. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1977b. The plural in Chadic. Papers in Chadic Linguistics. ed. by Paul Newman & Roxana Ma Newman. Leiden: Afrika-Studiecentrum, 3756. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1981. Some rules concerning vowels in Chadic. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 44.2.334-348. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1982a. Another look at West-Chadic verb classes. Africana Marburgensia 15.1.25-43. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1982b. On the form and function of pre-pronominal markers in Chadic. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 45.2.323-342. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1982c. Underlying form of the verb in Proto-Chadic. Jungraithmayr 1982, 123-143. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1982d. Indefinite agent, impersonal and passive: A functional approach. Lingua 58.261-290. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1983. Marking syntactic relations in Proto-Chadic. Wolff & Meyer-Bahlburg 1983, 115-138. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1984a. On the Proto-Chadic syntactic pattern. Current Progress in Afro-Asiatic Linguistics: Papers of the International Hamito-Semitic Congress, ed. by John Bynon. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 139-160. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1984b. On the origin of say and se as complementizers in Black English and English Based Creoles. American Speech 59.3.207-210. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1984c. Ergative and nominative accusative features in Mandara. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 6.35-45. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1985a. Logophoric systems in Chadic. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 7:23-37. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1985b. 'Causative' and 'benefactive' in Chadic. Afrika und Übersee 68.23-42.

REFERENCES

479

Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1985c. Ergativity, number, and agreement. Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society., ed. by Mary Niepokuj, Mary VanClay, Vassiliki Nikiforidou, & Deborah Feder, 96-106. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1985d. On two problems regarding stativity. Relational Typology, ed. by Frans Plank. Berlin: Mouton, 61-88. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1985e. Truth and the indicative sentence. Studies in Language 9.2.243-254. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1985f. Interrogative sentences in Chadic. Journal of West African Languages 15.1.57-72. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1985g. Propositional characterization of categories. Papers from the First Pacific Linguistic Conference, ed. by Scott DeLancey & Russell Tomlin, 108-119. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1986a. From preposition to copula. Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. by Vassiliki Nikiforidou, Mary VanClay, Mary Niepokuj, & Deborah Feder, 371-386. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1986b. Lowering rules in Chadic. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 49.2.384-385. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1986c. Grammaticization through analysis. A case of switch reference. Papers from the Second Pacific Linguistics Conference, ed. by Scott DeLancey & Russell Tomlin, 125-140. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1987a. Theory and method of syntactic reconstruction: Implications of Chadic for diachronic syntax. Linguistische Berichte 109.184202. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1987b. Truth and the compositionality principle: A reply to Palmer. Studies in Language 11.1.211-217. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1987c. Relative clause in Proto-Chadic. Jungraithmayr & Müller 1987, 425-450. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1987d. Encoding locative in Chadic. Journal of West African Languages 17.1.81..81-97.. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1987e. Ventive and centrifugal in Chadic. Afrika und Übersee 70.1.31-47. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1987f. From verb to anaphora. Lingua 72.15-28. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1988. Semantic determinants of syntactic frames. Jungraithmayr & Tourneux 1988, 97-116. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1989a. A grammar of Pero. Sprache und Oralitat in Afrika. Frankfurter Studien zur Afrikanistik, vol. 4. Berlin: Reimer. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt, (ed). 1989b. Current progress in Chadic linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

480

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1989c. Three types of anaphora. Current Progress in African Linguistics, ed. by Isabelle Haik & Laurice Tuller. Amsterdam: Foris, 194-216. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1989d. Non-propositional addressees. Chicago Linguistic Society_25.2.41-49. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1991a. The de dicto domain in language. Traugott & Heine 1991, v. 1,219-251. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1991b. Typology of the complex sentence in Mupun. Jungraithmayr & Tourneux 1991, 27-72. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1993. A grammar of Mupun. Sprache und Oralitat in Afrika. Frankfurter Studien zur Afrikanistik, vol. 14. Berlin: Reimer. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1994. Review of: Tosco 1991. Sprachtypologie und Universalien forschung (STUF), 234-236. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 1995. Functional theory of complementizers. Modality in grammar and dscourse. Ed. by Joan Bybee & Suzanne Fleischman. Amsterdam & Philadelphia:. John Benjamins, 473-502. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. In press. On sources of demonstratives and anaphoras. Studies in Anaphora. Ed. by Barbara Fox. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt, & Robert Jasperson. 1991. That clauses and other complements. Lingua. 83.133-153. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt, & Eric Johnston. MS: A grammatical sketch of Mina. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt, & Tamar Katriel. 1991. Functions of propositional relators. Semitic studies in honor of Wolf Leslau.. ed. by Alan Kaye. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 449-461. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt, & Robert Koops. 1989. Double epenthesis and N-class in Chadic, Frajzyngier 1989e, 233-250. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt, & Wendy Ross. 1991. Methodological issues in applying linguistics to the study of pre-history. Unwritten testimonies of the African Past, Orientalia Varsoviensia 2. ed. by Stanislaw Pilaszewicz & Eugeniusz Rzewuski, 21-44. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt, & Wendy Ross. In press. The structure of the Migaama verbal stem. Studies on Near Eastern Languages and Literatures, ed. by Petr Zemanek. Prague: Enigma. Frajzyngier, Zygmunt, & Erin Shay. MS: A grammar of Xdi. Frick, Esther. 1978. The verbal system of cfghwede. Linguistics 212.5-43. Genetti, Carol. 1986. The development of subordinators from postpositions in Bodic languages. Berkeley Linguistic Society 12.387-400.

REFERENCES

481

Genetti, Carol. 1991. From postpositions to subordinators in Newari. Traugott & Heine 1991, vol. 2, 227-256. Gildersleeve, B.L., & Gonzalez Lodge. 1971 (1895). Gildersleeve's Latin grammar. London: Macmillan; New York: St Martin's Press. Givón, Talmy. 1979. On understanding grammar. New York: Academic Press. Givón, Talmy. 1980. The binding hierarchy and the typology of complements. Studies in Language 4.3.333-377. Givón, Talmy. 1984. Syntax. A functional-typological introduction. Vol. 1. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Givón, Talmy. 1990. Syntax. A functional-typological introduction. Vol. 2. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Givón, Talmy. 1991. The evolution of dependent clause morpho-syntax in Biblical Hebrew. Traugott & Heine 1991, vol. 2, 257-310. Gouffé, Claude. 1966. Les problèmes de l'aspect en haoussa. Compte Rendus du Groupe Linguistique d'Études Chamito-Semitiques, GLECS 10.151-165. Gouffé, Claude. 1967. Les problèmes de l'aspect en haoussa. Compte Rendus du Groupe Linguistique d'Études Chamito-Semitiques, GLECS 11.29-67. Gouffé, Claude. 1968. Les problèmes de l'aspect en haoussa. Compte Rendus du Groupe Linguistique d'Études Chamito-Semitiques, GLECS 12.27-51. Gouffé, Claude. 1971. Sur les emplois grammaticalisés du verbe 'dire' en haoussa. Compte Rendus du Groupe Linguistique d'Études Chamito-Semitiques, GLECS 15.77-90. Greenberg, Joseph H. 1957. Essays in linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Greenberg, Joseph H. 1966 (1963). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. Universals of language, ed. by Joseph H. Greenberg. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press, 73-113. Grevisse, Maurice. 1949. Le bon usage. Cours de grammaire française et de langage français. Gembloux: Duculot; Paris: Geuthner. Haegeman, Liliane. 1991. Introduction to government and binding theory. Oxford: Blackwell. Haiman, John. 1978. Conditionals are topics. Language 54.564-589. Haiman, John, ed. 1985. Iconicity in syntax. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Haiman, John. 1986. Constraints on the form and meaning of protasis. On conditionals, ed. by Elizabeth Closs Traugott, Alice ter Meulen, Judy Snitzer Reilly, & Charles A. Ferguson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 215227.

482

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Haiman, John, & Sandra A. Thompson, eds. 1988. Clause combining in grammar and discourse. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Haller, Beat. 1989. La relative en Zulgo. Barreteau &Hedinger 1989, 3-38. Haller, Beat, S. Hedinger, & Ursula Wiesemann. 1981. The verbal complex in Zulgo. Africana Marburgensia, Special Issue 5, Chadic Language Studies in Northern Cameroon, 17-54. Heine, Bernd. 1992. Grammaticalization chains. Studies in Language 16.2.335-368. Heine, Bernd, & Ulrike Claudi. 1986. On the rise of grammatical categories. Some examples from Maa. Berlin: Reimer. Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi, & Friederike Hünnemeyer. 1991. Grammaticalization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Heine, Bernd, Tom Güldemann, Christa Kilian-Hatz, Donald A. Lessau, Heinz Roberg, Mathias Schladt, & Thomas Stolz. 1993. Conceptual shift. A lexicon of grammaticalization processes in African languages. Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere 34/35. Heine, Bernd, & Mechthild Reh. 1984. Grammaticalization and reanalysis in African languages. Hamburg: Buske. Hewitt, Brian G. 1987. The typology of subordination in Georgian and Abkhaz. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Hodge, Carleton, & Ibrahim Umani. 1963. Hausa. Basic course. Washington, D.C.: Foreign Service Institute. Hoffmann, Carl. 1955. Zur Sprache der Cibak. Afrikanistische Studien, ed. by Johannes Lukas. Berlin. 146-178. Hoffmann, Carl. 1963. A grammar of the Margi language. London: Oxford University Press. Hopper, Paul J., & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hopper, Paul J., & Sandra A. Thompson. 1984. The discourse basis for lexical categories in universal grammar. Language 60.4. 703-752. Hopper, Paul J. & Sandra A. Thompson. 1985. The iconicity of the universal categories 'noun' and Verb. 'Haiman 1985, 151-183. Hoskison, James Taylor. 1983. 'A grammar and dictionary of the Gude language.' Ph.D. Dissertation. Ohio State University. Imam, Alhaji Abubakar. 1962. Magana Jari Ce. 3 vols. Zaria: Gaskiya. Jaggar, Philip J. & Malami Buba, in press. The space and time adverbials NAN/CAN in Hausa: cracking the deictic code. Language Sciences 16. Jarvis, Elizabeth. 1983. Podoko Verbal Directionals. Wolff & Meyer-Bahlburg 1983,317-328.

REFERENCES

483

Jarvis, Elizabeth. 1989. Esquisse grammaticale du podoko. Barreteau & Hedinger 1989, 39-127. Jespersen, Otto. 1940. A modern English grammar on historical principles, vol. 5. London: George Allen & Unwin. Joseph, Brian D. 1985. Complementizers, particles, and finiteness in Greek and the Balkans. Folia Slavica 7.3.390-411. Joseph, Brian D., & Arnold M. Zwicky, eds. 1990. When verbs collide: papers from the 1990 Ohio State mini-conference on serial verbs. Working Papers in Linguistics 39. Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University. Junaidu, Ismail. 1987. 'Topicalization in Hausa.' Ph.D. Dissertation. Indiana University. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann. 1963/64. Die Sprache der Sura (Maghavul) in Nordnigerien. Afrika und Übersee 47.8-89, 204-220. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann. 1970. Die Ron-Sprachen. Glückstadt: Augustin. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann. 1978a. A tentative four-stage model for the development of the Chadic languages. Atti del Secundo Congresso Internazionale di Linguistica Camito-Semitica. Florence. 381-388. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann. 1978b. Les langues tchadique et le proto-tchadique: documentation, analyse et problèmes. Préalables à la reconstruction du prototchadique. Paris: SELAF, 17-30. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann, (ed). 1982. The Chad languages in the HamitosemiticNigritic border area. Marburger Studien zur Afrika- und Asienkunde, Serie A: Afrika, vol. 27. Berlin: Reimer. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann, ed. 1990. Lexique Mokilko. Mokilko-français et franҫaisMokilko. Sprache und Oralitat in Afrika. Frankfurter Studien zur Afrikanistik, vol. 6. Berlin: Reimer. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann. 1991. A dictionary of the Tangale language. Sprache und Oralitat in Afrika. Frankfurter Studien zur Afrikanistik. Vol.12. Berlin: Reimer. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann, & Abakar Adams. 1992. Lexique Migama. Sprache und Oralitat in Afrika. Frankfurter Studien zur Afrikanistik, vol. 7. Berlin: Reimer. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann, & Kiyoshi Shimizu. 1981. Chadic lexical roots, vol. 2. Marburger Studien zur Afrika- und Asienkunde, Serie A: Afrika, vol. 26. Berlin: Reimer. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann, & Henry Tourneux, eds. 1987. Ẻtudes tchadiques. Classes et extension verbales. Paris: Geuthner. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann, & Henry Tourneux, eds. 1988. Etudes tchadiques. Transitivité et diathèse. Paris: Geuthner.

484

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Jungraithmayr, Herrmann, & Henry Tourneux, eds. 1991. Études tchadiques. La phrase complex. Paris: Geuthner. Jungraithmayr, Herrmann, & Walter W.Müller, eds. 1987. Proceedings o f the fourth International Hamito-Semitic Congress. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Kac, Michael. 1978. Corepresentation of grammatical structures. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Keenan, Edward L. 1985. Relative clauses. Shopen 1985, vol. 2, 141-170. Kirsner, Robert, & Sandra A. Thompson. 1976. The role of pragmatic inference in semantics: A study of sensory verb complements in English. Glossa 10.2. 200240. Koops, Robert. 1991. Purpose/reason marking in Chadic. Jungraithmayr & Tourneux 1991, 103-125. Koster, Jan. 1987. Domains and dynasties. Dordrecht: Foris. Kraft, Charles H. 1963. A study of Hausa syntax. Hartford, Conn: Hartford Seminary Foundation. Kraft, Charles H. 1981. Chadic Word-Lists, vols. 1-3. Berlin: Reimer. Kraft, Charles H., & A.H.M. Kirk-Greene. 1973. Hausa. London: English Universities Press. Kurylowicz, Jerzy. 1936. Dérivation lexical et dérivation syntaxique. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de París 37.79-92. Reprinted in Readings in linguistics 2. ed. by Eric P. Hamp, Fred W. Householder, & Robert Austerlitz. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 42-50. Kurylowicz, Jerzy. 1964. The inflectional categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg: Winter. Kurylowicz, Jerzy. 1970. Metaphor and metonymy in linguistics. Sign. Language. Culture, ed. by A. J. Greimas, R. Jakobson, M.R. Mayenova, S.K. Saumjan, W. Steinitz, & S. Zólkiewski. The Hague: Mouton. Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, George, & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lawal, Nike S. 1986. A note on Yoruba subordinator 'ti'. Journal of West African Languages 16.2. 27-33. Leben, William. 1989. Intonation in Chadic: An overview. Frajzyngier 1989, 199217. Lefevbre, Claire. 1980. Cases of lexical complementizers in Cuzco Quechua and the theory of COMP. Journal of Linguistic Research 1.2.91.-112.

REFERENCES

485

Lehmann, Christian. 1985 (1982). Thoughts on grammaticalization. Arbeiten des Kolner Universalien-Projekts Nr. 48. Lehmann, Christian. 1988. Towards typology of clause linkage. Haiman & Thompson 1988, 181-225. Lehmann, Christian. 1992. Relativization. Bright 1992, 333-335. Lehmann, Winfred P. 1974. Proto-Indoeuropean syntax. Austin: University of Texas Press. Lehmann, Winfred P. 1980. The reconstruction of non-simple sentences in ProtoIndo-European. Ramat 1980, 113-144. Lenssen, Tilman. 1984. Studien zum Verb im Kwang (Tschad). Africana Marburgensia Special Issue 8. Leslau, Wolf. 1968. Amharic textbook. Los Angeles: University of California Press. Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 1991. On the gradualness of change in syntactic category. Traugott & Heine 1991, vol. 1, 37-80. Lienhard, Ruth, & Martha Giger. 1975. Daba (parierde Pologozom). Description phonologique. Yaoundé: Société Internationale de Linguistique. Liu, Mei-Chun. 1991. Nominal conjunction and associative marker in Chadic languages. Jungraithmayr & Tourneux 1991, 85-102. Lockwood, W. . 1968. Historical German syntax. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. Longacre, Robert E. 1985. Sentences as combinations of clauses. Shopen 1985, 235-286. Loprieno, Antonio. 1980. The sequential forms in Late Egyptian and Biblical Hebrew: A parallel development of verbal systems. Afroasiatic Linguistics 7.5. Lord, Carol. 1976. Evidence for syntactic reanalysis: from verb to complementizer in Kwa. Papers from the Parasession on Diachronic Syntax. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 179-191. Lord, Carol. 1993. Historical change in serial verb constructions. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Lukas, Johannes. 1936. Die Logone-Sprache im Zentralen Sudan. Leipzig: DMG. Lukas, Johannes. 1939. Die Sprache der Buduma im Zentralen Sudan.. Leipzig. Lukas, Johannes. 1970. Studien zur Sprache der Gisiga. Glückstadt: Augustin. Lukas, Johannes. 1971. Über das erweiterte Verb im Bolanci (Nordnigerien). Journal of African Languages 10.1-14. Lukas, Johannes. 1977. Beitrage zur Kenntnis des Mukulu. Afrika und Übersee 61.1-2: 1-58 and 192-229. Ma Newman, Roxana. 1971. 'A Case Grammar of Ga'anda.' Ph.D. Dissertation, UCLA.

486

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Ma Newman, Roxana. 1978. MS: Ga'anda Vocabulary and Notes to the Ga'anda Vocabulary. Ma Newman, Roxana. 1990. An English-Hausa Dictionary. New Haven: Yale University Press. Macdonald, Lorna. 1988. Subordination in Tauya. Haiman & Thompson 1988, 227246. Marouzeau, Jean. 1951. Lexique de la terminologie linguistique. 3d ed. Paris: Geuthner. Meyer-Bahlburg, Hilke. 1972. Studien zur Morphologie und Syntax des Musgu. Hamburg: Buske. Meyers, Laura F. 1974a. The particles sai and har: 'only', 'even' and 'until' in Hausa. Proceedings of the 4th Conference on African Linguistics, ed. by Erhard Voltz. Bloomington, In.: Indiana University Press. Meyers, Laura F. 1974'b. The Hausa particle koo: An uncertainty modality. Studies in African Linguistics 5.3, 247-264. Mirt, Heide. 1969/1970. Zur Morphologie des Verbalcomplexes im Mandara. Afrika und Übersee 54.1-76. Mithun, Marianne. 1988. The grammaticization of coordination. Haiman & Thompson 1988, 331-360. Montgolfier, P. de, & Bada Adoum Zaid Djibrine. 1973. Vocabulaire dangaleat, kaawo dangla (Dictionnaire dangaleat-francais, parler de l'est). Sarh, Chad: C.E.L. Mouchet, Jean. 1967. Le parler daba. Esquisse grammaticale précédée d'une note sur l'ethnie daba, suivie de lexiques daba-français et français-daba. Yaoundé: Recherches et Études Camerounaises 10. Newman, Paul. 1970. A Grammar of Tera. Berkeley: University of California Press. Newman, Paul. 1974. The Kanakuru Language. Leeds: Institute of Modern English Studies & West African Linguistic Society. Newman, Paul. 1977a. Chadic classification and reconstructions. A froasiatic Linguistics 5.1.1-42. Newman, Paul. 1977b. The formation of imperfective stem in Chadic. Afrika und Übersee 60.178-192. Newman, Paul. 1990. Nominal and verbal plurality in Chadic. Dordrecht: Foris.. Newman, Paul. 1992. Biu-Mandara Languages. Chadic languages. East Chadic languages. Bright 1992. Newman, Paul, & Roxana Ma. 1966. Comparative Chadic: phonology and lexicon. Journal of African Languages 5.3.218-251.

REFERENCES

487

Newman, Paul, & Roxana Ma Newman, eds. 1977. Papers in Chadic linguistics. Leiden: Afrika-Studiecentrum. Newman, Paul, & Roxana Ma Newman. 1981. The q morpheme in Hausa. Afrika und Übersee 64.35-46. Newman, Paul, & Russell G. Schuh. 1974. The Hausa aspect system. A froasiatic Linguistics 1/1. 1-39. Noonan, Michael. 1985. Complementation. Shopen 1985, vol. 2, 42-140. Noye, Dominique. 1974. Cours de foulfouldé. Maroua & Paris: Mission Catholique & Geuthner. Noye, Dominique. 1989. Dictionnaire foulfouldé-français. Paris: Geuthner. Nseme, Clédor, & Besban Tong-Pa. 1992. Les referents en Kera. Linguistique Africaine 8.91-107. Palmer, F. R. 1986. Mood and modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Palmer, F.R. 1987. Truth indicative? Studies in Language 11.1.206-210. Pawlak, Nina. 1989. Gramatyka jezyka Hausa. Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego. Payne, John R. 1985. Complex phrases and complex sentences. Shopen 1985, vol. 2, 1-41. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1931. Collected papers, ed. by Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pisarkowa, Krystyna. 1984. Historia sktadni jezyka polskiego. Wroclaw: Zaklad Narodowy im. Ossolińskich. Platiel, Suzanne. 1972. Esquisse d'une étude du Musey. Bulletin de la SELAF 6. Postal, Paul. 1974. On raising: One rule of English grammar and its theoretical implications. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Provoost, D. Pierre, & S. Pierre Koulifa. 1987. Essai sur la langue uldeme. Archives d'Anthropologie 30. Tervuren: Musée Royal de l'Afrique Centrale. Ramat, Paolo, ed. 1980. Linguistic reconstruction and the Indo-European syntax. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Ransom, Evelyn N. 1986. Complementation: Its meanings and forms. Typological Studies in Language, 10. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Riemsdijk, Henk van, & Edwin Williams. 1986. Introduction to the theory of grammar. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Rizzi, Luigi. 1990. Relativized minimality. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Rudin, Catherine. 1986. Aspects of Bulgarian syntax: Complementizers and WHconstructions. Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers.

488

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Ruelland, Susanne, & Jean-Pierre Caprile. 1993. Contes et récits du Tchad. La femme dans la littérature africaine. 2nd ed. Collection Fleuve et Flamme. Paris: Conseil international de la langue française. Rufa'i, A. 1983. Defining and non-defining relative clauses in Hausa. Wolff & Meyer-Bahlburg 1983, 419-427. Saxena, Anju. 1988. On syntactic convergence: the case of the verb 'say' in TibetoBurman. Berkeley Linguistic Society 14:375-388. Schneeberg, Nan. 1971. Sayanci verb tonology. Journal of African Languages 10.1.87-100. Schuh, Russell G. 1972. 'Aspects of Ngizim Syntax'. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. Schuh, Russell G. 1976. The Chadic verbal system and its Afroasiatic nature. Afroasiatic Linguistics 3/1. Schuh, Russell G. 1978. Bole-Tangale languages of the Bauchi area (Northern Nigeria). Marburger Studien zur Afrika- und Asienkunde. Serie A: Afrika, vol. 13. Berlin: Reimer. Schuh, Russell G. 1981a. Types of genitive constructions in Chadic. Studies in African Linguistics. Supplement 8, ed. by William R. Leben, 117-120. Schuh, Russell G. 1981b. A dictionary of Ngizim. University of California Publications. Linguistics, vol. 99. Berkeley: University of California Press. Schuh, Russell G. 1982. Questioned and focussed subject and objects. Jungraithmayr 1982, 160-174. Schuh, Russell.G. 1983. The evolution of determiners in Chadic. Wolff & MeyerBahlburg 1983, 157-210. Schuh, Russell.G. 1984. West Chadic vowel correspondences. Bynon 1984, 167224. Schuh, Russell.G. 1990. Re-employment of grammatical morphemes in Chadic: Implications for language history. Linguistic change and reconstruction methodology, ed. by Philip Baldi. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 599618. Schuh, Russell G. MS. The Bolanci verbal system. Schumann, Theda. 1983. Gender markers in Masa. Wolff & Meyer-Bahlburg 1983, 429-439. Sebba, Mark. 1987. The syntax of serial verbs. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1990. The languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

REFERENCES

489

Shopen, Timothy, ed. 1985. Language typology and syntactic description. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 3 vols. Simons, Pamela. 1982. nè . . . ba marking in Lele. Studies in African Linguistics 13.3.217-229. Skinner, Margaret Gardner. 1979. 'Aspects of Paanci Grammar'. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin. Smith, David Martin. 1969. 'The Kapsiki Language'. Ph.D. Dissertation. Michigan State University. Taylor, Karen. 1991. Proto-Chadic sentential complementation after verbs of perception. Jungraithmayr & Tourneux 1991,73-84. Thompson, Sandra A. 1988. A discourse approach to the cross-linguistic category "adjective". Explanations for language universals, ed. by John Hawkins, 167185. London: Blackwell. Thompson, Sandra A. & Robert E. Longacre. 1985. Adverbial Clauses. Shopen V.2, 171-234. Thompson, Sandra Α., & Anthony Mulac. 1991. A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization of epistemic parenthetical s in English. Traugott & Heine 1991, 314-329. Tosco, Mauro. 1991. A grammatical sketch of Dahaio. Hamburg: Buske. Tourneux, Henry. 1978. Le mulwi ou vulum de Mogroum. Paris: SELAF. Tourneux, Henry. 1989. Review of: Carl Ebobissé. Les verbaux de dangaleat de l'est. Afrika und Übersee 72.126-128. Tourneux, Henry, in press. Le place du Masa dans la groupe tchadique. Papers from the 5th Hamito-Semitic Congress. Tourneux, Henry. MS. Grammatical summary of Munjuk. Tourneux, Henry avec la collaboration de Hamat Patan. 1991. Lexique pratique de munjuk des rizières. Dialecte de Pouss. Paris: Geuthner. Tourneux, Henry, Christian Seignobos, & Francine Lafarge. 1986. Les mbara et leur langue. Paris: SELAF. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1982. From propositional to textual and expressive meanings: Some semantic-pragmatic aspects of grammaticalisation. Perspectives on historical linguistics, ed. by Winfred P. Lehmann & Yakov Malkiel. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 245-271. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1985. Conditional markers. Haiman 1985, 289-307. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs, & Bernd Heine, eds. 1991. Grammaticalization. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Tuller, Laurice. 1986. 'The bijection principle and Hausa syntax'. Ph.D. dis­ sertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

490

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Vincent, Nigel. 1980. Iconic and symbolic aspects of syntax: Prospects for re­ construction. Ramat 1980, 47-68. Wachowicz, Krystyna A. 1974. Against the universality of a single WH-question movement. Foundations of Language 11.155-166. Watkins, Calvert. 1976a. Towards Proto-Indo-European Syntax: Problems and pseudo-Problems. Papers from the parasession on Diachronic Syntax, ed. by Sanford B. Steever, Carol A. Walker, & Salikoko S. Mufwene. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 305-326. Watkins, Calvert. 1976b (1969). Indo-European roots. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English language, ed. by William Morris. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Weibegué, Christophe, & Pierre Palayer. 1982. Lexique lele-français. Sarh, Tchad: Centre d'études linguistiques. Wente-Lukas, Renate. 1985. Handbook of ethnic units in Nigeria. Stuttgart: SteinerVerlag Wiesbaden. Whaley, Anne & Cheryl Ruckiger. 1980. MS. Mandara Pedagogical Notes 1, 3, 7. Williams, Charles Kinston. 1989a. An alternative model of word order in ProtoChadic, Frajzyngier 1989b, 111-120. Williams, Charles Kinston. 1989b. 'Chadic historical syntax: Reconstructing word order in Proto-Chadic.' Ph.D. Dissertation. Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana. Wolff, Ekkehard. 1979. Grammatical categories of verb stems and the marking of mood, aktionsart, and aspect in Chadic. A froasiatic Linguistics 6/5.161-208. Wolff, Ekkehard. 1983a. A grammar of the Lamang language. Glückstadt: Augustin. Wolff, Ekkehard. 1983b. Reconstructing vowels in Central Chadic. Wolff & MeyerBahlburg 1983, 211-232. Wolff, Ekkehard. 1987. Consonant-tone interference and current theories on verbal aspect system in Chadic languages. Jungraithmayr & Müller 1987, 475-496. Wolff, Ekkehard& Hilke Meyer-Bahlburg, (eds.). 1983. Studies in Chadic and Afroasiatic Linguistics. Hamburg: Buske. Zima, Petr. 1991. Le context syntaxique de forms relatives en Hausa. Jungraithmayr &Tourneux 1991, 15-26.

INDEX OF TERMS

addressee 462 adjunct clauses 19 adpositional coding 4, 95 agreement 5 anaphor 160, 468 apodosis 371 apodosis markers 362, 409, 469 apodosis markers, functions of 357, 404 apodosis markers, sources of argument marking 165 aspect 16 associative markers 450 asydentic coordination 23, 461 bidirectionality of grammaticalization 412, 467 Binding theory 87 borrowing 38 Case theory 87, 462, 463 Case assignment 127 change in semantics 336 change in syntactic properties 336 clausal order 114, 203, 466 clause-chaining 24 coding principle 8 cognitive verbs 289 COMP 87

complementizers 18 complementizers, absence of 469 complementizers, function of 464 omplementizers, origin of 470 complementizers, position of 142 complements of verbs of perception 18 complements of verbs of saying 18 complements of volitional verbs 18, 465 conditional 322, 327, 467 conditional markers from locative prepositions 389 configuration 4, 94, 463 contextualization 119 contrastive focus 16, 467 coordinate conjunctions 28 copula 332 counterexpectational conjunction 24 counterfactual condition 379 cross-reference 193 de dicto complementizer 91, 105, 141, 211, 230,280, 345, 368, 463 de dicto complementizer as a protasis marker 400 de dicto complementizers, origin of 146

492

COMPLEX SENTENCE

de dicto modality 327, 464 de re modality 287, 327, 464 definite markers 393 demonstratives 333 demonstratives as a source of apodosis marker 366 demonstratives as conditional markers 392 deontic function of complementizers 92,231 deontic modality 18, 188, 195, 253 direct perception 287, 463 direct speech 173 direction of a grammaticalization 466 discourse level 66 disjoint-reference 193 doubt-in-truth modality 180 epistemic modality 18 Exceptional Case Marking 276 existential status and relative clause 421, 422 extensions 15 focus 15 form, (notion of) 3 function (notion of ) 6 gender 441, 444 government 87 indefinite pronouns 449 indirect evidence 465 indirect perception 463 indirect speech 173, 205 infinitival complements 228

inflectional coding 4 interrogatives 373 interrogative complementizer 225, 465 interrogative verbs 208 Intransitive Copy Pronouns 241 irrealis wishes 463 juxtaposition 309 lexical categories 3 lexical sources of grammaticalization 'also' as a source of coordinating conjunction 37 'go' 321 'God' 81 'hand' 396, 397 'past' 314 'take' 57 'time' 313, 314, 340, 371, 471 locative preposition as a source of coordinating conjunction 37 logophoric pronouns 105 metaphor 11, 468 methodology of reconstruction 9, 111 metonymicai change 336 metonymy 468 modal function 89, 466 modality 272 modes of knowing 289 mood 15 motivation for grammaticalization 10, 469 nominal conjunctions 28

INDEX OF TERMS

493

nonrestrictive clauses 464 number 441, 444

resumptive pronoun 440 role of arguments 462

omission of the verb of saying 203, 125 order of clauses 305

same-subject coding 233 semiotic metonymy 339, 468 sentential conjunction 467 sentential coordinate conjunction 24 sentential coordinating conjunctions, sources 29 sequential 23, 163, 461, 467 sequential and coordinate structures, functions of 38, 40 sequential clauses 23 sequential marker 24, 45, 409 sequential marker as a source of inflectional aspect marker 78 serial verb constructions 5 subcategorization 469 subject-to-object raising 273, 281, 448, 463 subjunctive 227, 231 subordinating particles 464 subordinattion 461

paratactic clauses, functions of 42 parataxis 23 pars pro toto 336 phrasal categories 3 polysemy 467 position of complementizers 136 postrelative markers 458 postrelative markers, functions of 433 postrelative markers, sources of 454 preposition 345 protasis and apodosis markers, origin of 407, 471 protasis clause 333, 371 protasis markers as a source of apodosis markers 367 protasis markers, origin of 373, 469 raising to object 261, 267, 274 realis wishes 463 reanalysis 468 rebracketing 468, 472 reconstruction of the P-C sequential marker 59 relative clause 19, 464 relative markers 418, 457 relative markers, functions 419 relative markers, sources, 446 relative tenses 454, 458

tag questions 92 temporal and conditional protases 393 temporal clauses 327, 336, 467 temporal markers 322, 379 temporal markers as conditionals 376 temporal sequence 461 tense 15 unidirectionality of grammaticalization 13, 466 verb omission 462

494 verbs of perception 463 verbs of saying 106, 469 voice 15 volitional predicates 235, 463 wh-movement 87 wh-questions 16, 221 word order 15, 463 word order in embedded clauses 165 word order in matrix clauses 121 word-final vowels in verbs 111 yes/no questions 16

COMPLEX SENTENCE

INDEX OF LANGUAGES

Angas 114, 192,201,231,274 Arabic 81, 344, 412 Bantu 95 Bidiya 17, 31, 34, 35, 64, 92, 107, 134, 161, 199, 257, 316, 335, 341, 356 Bokkos (Ron-Bokkos) 196, 368 Bole 159, 191, 243, 263, 300, 317, 385 Buduma 26, 115, 220, 224, 251, 300, 323, 325, 334, 341, 394, 396, 437, 444, 448 Cibak 48, 61, 197, 437, 452 Daba 53, 177, 224, 255, 265, 397, 403, 437 Daffo-Butura 195, 367, 196, 247, 342, 343, 354, 360, 367, 368 Danaio 90 Dangla 92, 454, 458 Dutch 87 East Dangla 120, 147, 151, 170, 180, 193, 222, 248, 286, 295, 344, 390, 391, 448, 465, 466 English 7, 39, 87, 88, 91, 100, 124, 189, 216, 227, 228, 230, 261, 274, 290, 303, 304, 305, 311,376,449,472 Ewe 155 French 100, 230, 289, 311, 352

Fula 136,316 Fyer 114, 314, 315, 346, 380 Ga'anda 231, 233, 309, 327, 333, 383 Gidar 29, 48, 54, 64, 186,231, 235, 240, 243, 256, 299, 308, 311,343,369,381, 387, 388, 396, 397, 426, 443, 450 Giziga 143, 188, 217, 315, 338, 355, 356, 369, 376, 377, 408, 411, 420, 454 Grassfields Bantu 136 Gude 119, 243, 325, 385, 386 Hausa 78, 107, 114, 139, 155, 181,211,218,231,246,306, 307,316,317,319, 320, 343, 352, 358, 366, 376, 378, 386, 387, 407, 409, 422, 424, 430, 444, 450, 452, 454, 462 Hona 332, 360, 389, 429, 431, 440, 454 Japanese 95, 97 Kanakuru 31, 65, 68, 175, 232, 254, 314, 353, 402, 432, 442, 446, 454, 458 Kanuri 136, 445 Kapsiki50, 68, 245, 319, 323, 324, 351, 354, 357, 369, 446

496

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Kera 29, 126, 162, 188, 194, 202, 214, 223, 334, 347, 395, 402, 453, 458 Korean 95, 97 Lamang 143, 316, 377 Latin 287 Lele 30, 32, 34, 63, 81, 92, 114, 168, 193, 258, 260, 266, 273, 276, 292, 327, 337, 345, 347, 313, 370, 401, 428, 464, 465, 471 Logone 52, 188, 191, 348, 349, 380 Mafa 107, 185 Mandara 70, 112, 116, 122, 185, 239, 269, 276, 281, 319, 321, 323, 327, 328, 367, 377, 384, 454 Margi 27, 65, 69, 183, 218, 319, 320,327,351,352,364,407, 410, 437, 448, 450 Masa 100, 126, 134, 137, 163, 177, 185, 317, 401, 458, 462 Mesme 114, 126, 214, 323, 326, 327, 381 Migama 107, 273 Mina 38, 176, 217, 222, 260, 266, 283, 316, 323, 328, 384, 412, 465 Mofu-Gudur 193 Mokilko 107 Mubi 17 Mukulu 238, 248, 270, 454 Munjuk 37, 186, 192, 213, 224, 252,307,318,394,401,411 Mupun 40, 45, 125, 127, 132, 182, 194, 221, 231, 239, 255, 263, 314, 315, 319, 362, 364,

368, 378, 388, 415, 433, 438, 446, 454 Mwaghavul (Sura) 353, 380, 446, 454 Ngizim 126, 175, 247, 274, 350, 393, 417 Pa'a (Pa'anci) 47, 160, 189, 255, 309, 317, 346, 431, 454 Pero 26, 43, 44, 67, 124, 166, 174, 178, 213, 242, 267, 323, 330, 360, 382, 424, 458 Podoko 143, 147, 389 Polish 8, 56, 90, 99, 136,212, 228,230,288,289,311,352, 462, 472 Ron 368 Ron-Bokkos 26 Russian 56, 99, 106, 352 Sibne (Somray) 21, 35 Slavic 95 Somray (Sibne) 42, 58 Sura (Mwaghavul) 231 Tangale 107 Tera 70, 153, 168, 255, 317, 327, 364, 383, 432, 447, 454 Uldémé 49 West Dangla 151 Xdi 19,50,71,98, 116, 127, 143, 172, 193, 215, 245, 306, 316, 324,350,355,361,364,377, 386, 389, 417, 466 Zaar 160, 164, 181,216

INDEX OF NAMES

Abraham, R.C. 80, 182, 319, 366, 475 Adams, Abakar 107, 273, 483 Alio, Khalil 36, 64, 107, 135, 161, 199, 258, 317, 335, 341, 356, 403, 475 Arnott, David 136 Asano, Yoshiteru 97 Attouman, Mahaman Bachir 475 Austin, Peter 2,475 Awad, Maher 21, 159, 263, 300, 344, 385, 475 Bagari, Dauda Muhammad 13, 79, 80, 306, 337, 352, 475 Baker, Mark  275, 475 Baldi, Philip 488 Bargery, G.P 320, 366, 475 Barreteau, Daniel xiii, 21, 107, 193, 475, 476, 483 Barshi, Immanuel xiv Bednarczuk, Leszek 2, 476 Besban Tong-Pa 472 Bickerton, Derek 87, 88, 476 Bloomfield, Leonard 3, 476 Bolozky, Shmuel xiii Borsley, Robert D 87, 476 Bouchard, Dennis 87, 476 Boukar, Seiny, Lamide xiv Bresnan, Joan 87, 476

Bright, William 476 Brockelmann, Carl 1, 476 Burquest, Donald 114, 192, 243, 274, 476 Bybee, Joan 480 Bynon, James 476, 478, 488 Caitucoli, Claude 21, 100, 101, 115, 126, 134, 137, 138, 163, 177, 402, 476 Caprile, Jean-Pierre xiii, 488 Caron, Bernard 476 Chafe, Wallace 180, 185, 476 Chomsky, Noam 87, 95, 476, 477 Christie, Agatha 449, 477 Cichocki, W. 87, 477 Claudi, Ulrike 482 Comrie, Bernard 415, 477 Cowan, J. Ronayne 80, 477 Croft, William 13, 477 Dasgupta, Probai 87, 477 DeLancey, Scott 2, 479 Diakonoff, Igor M. 2, 477 Dieu, Michel 13, 477 Dimmendaal, Gerrit F 13, 87, 139, 182, 477 Djibrine, Bada Adoum Zaid 486 Downing, Bruce 415, 417, 477 Du Bois, John W. 11, 477

498

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Ebert, Karen H. xiii, xiv, 14, 29, 126, 162, 194, 200, 202, 214, 223, 334, 347, 348, 395, 402, 453, 459, 477 Ebobissé, Carl 148, 149, 214, 256, 257, 477 Edwards, Adrian xiv Eiseley, Loren 449, 478 Ernout, Alfred 274, 478 Feder, Deborah 479 Fédry, Jacques, 149, 150, 478 Fischer, P. R. 114, 126, 177, 194, 212, 215, 327, 478 Fleischman, Suzanne 480 Fluckiger, Cheryl 20 Fox, Barbara 480 Frick, Esther 480 Genetti, Carol 2, 480 Giger, Martha xiii, 53, 178, 224, 485 Gildersleeve, B.L. 274, 481 Givón, Talmy 6, 11, 23, 87, 88, 165,205,275,481 Gouffé, Claude 79, 156, 481 Greenberg, Joseph H. 14, 305, 373, 477, 481 Greimas, A. J. 484 Grevisse, Maurice 481 Güldemann, Tom 482 Haegeman, Liliane 262, 275, 481 Haik, Isabelle 480 Haiman, John 23, 373, 386, 387, 481,485,486 Haller, Beat xiii, 482 Hamp, Eric P. 484 Hawkins, John 489 Hedinger, Robert 475, 483 Hedinger, Sylvia xiii, 482

Heine, Bernd xiv, 10, 11, 13, 66, 81, 87,99, 100, 119, 140, 155, 157, 203, 204, 290, 322, 336, 373, 466, 468, 469, 482, 485, 489 Hewitt, Brian G. 2, 482 Hodge, Carleton xiii, 79, 482 Hoffmann, Carl xiii, 20, 27, 65, 69, 153, 183, 218, 219, 248, 320, 352, 354, 364, 448, 450, 452, 482 Hopper, Paul J. 6, 10, 11, 13, 23, 81, 88, 89, 155, 204, 290, 322, 340, 468, 469, 482 Hoskison, James Taylor 243, 259, 326, 386, 482 Householder, Fred W. 484 Hutchison, John xiii, 136 Hünnemeyer, Friederike 482 man, Larry xiii, 136 Imam, Alhaji Abubakar 114, 139, 482 Jaggar, Philip J 482 Jakobson, R. 484 Jarvis, Elizabeth xiii, 144, 147, 482 Jasperson, Robert 90, 480 Jespersen, Otto 373 Johnson, Mark 11, 484 Johnston, Eric xiv, 217, 222, 316, 384, 480 Jordan, Laurie xiv, 332 Joseph, Brian D. 87, 483 Junaidu, Ismail 419, 483

INDEX OF NAMES

Jungraithmayr, Herrmann xiv, 13, 17,21,26,36, 107, 111, 114, 134, 135, 161, 195, 196, 208, 235, 238, 247, 248, 273, 290, 341, 342, 346, 354, 360, 368, 380, 404, 459, 475, 478, 479, 480, 483, 485, 488, 489, 490 Kac, Michael 87, 470 Katriel, Tamar 66, 480 Kaye, Alan 480 Keenan, Edward L. 415, 416, 421, 431, 484 Khamis, Jonas 478 Kilian-Hatz, Christa 482 Kirk-Greene, A. H. M. 78, 79, 451, 484 Kirsner, Robert 273, 484 Koops, Robert 17, 21, 112, 480, 484 Koster, Jan 87, 484 Koulifa, Pierre 49, 487 Kraft, Charles H. 13, 78, 79, 107, 114, 139,208,212,218,246, 307,319,352,358,359,378, 405, 451, 484 Kuryiowicz, Jerzy 11, 12, 89, 119, 336, 484 Lafarge, Francine 489 Lakoff, George 11,484 Lawal, Nike S. 87, 484 Le Bléis, Yves 107, 476 Leben, William R. 207, 484, 488 Lefevbre, Claire 87, 88, 484 Lehmann, Christian 2, 23, 204, 322, 415, 416, 418, 421, 485 Lehmann, Winfred P. 485, 489 Lenssen, Tilman 485 Leslau, Wolf 485

499

Lessau, Donald A. 482 Lichtenberk, Frantisek 485 Lienhard, Ruth xiii, 53, 178, 224, 485 Liu, Mei-Chun xiii, 60, 485 Lockwood, W. B. 100, 485 Lodge, Gonzalez , 274, 481 Longacre, Robert E. 23, 306, 485, 489 Loprieno, Antonio 485 Lord, Carol 99, 106, 146, 155, 468, 485 Lukas, Johannes 26, 53, 115, 118, 188, 190, 191, 217, 220, 224, 249,251,270,300,315, 325, 334, 338, 341, 349, 350, 355, 356,369, 376,377, 378, 381, 394,396,408,411,420,444, 445, 446, 485 Ma Newman, Roxana xiii,78, 107, 233,310,383,478,485,487 Macdonald, Lorna 23, 486 Malami, Buba 482 Malkiel, Yakov 489 Marouzeau, Jean 229, 418, 486 Mayenova, M. R. 484 Mel'cuk, Igor 8 Meyer-Bahlburg, Hilke 38, 213, 224, 225, 482, 488, 486, 490 Meyers, Laura F. 486 Mirt, Heide 20, 486 Mithun, Marianne 60, 61, 84, 486 Montgolfier, P. de 148, 149, 486 Morris, Wendy xiv Morris, William 490 Mouchet, Jean 54, 256, 265, 397, 403, 437, 438, 486 Mufwene, Salikoko S. 490

500

COMPLEX SENTENCE

Mulac, Anthony 164, 489. Müller, Walter W. 479, 484, 490 Newman, Paul xiii, 13, 27, 65, 68, 70, 78, 106, 107, 153, 168, 175, 229, 232, 254, 255, 314, 317, 353, 364, 384, 402, 432, 442, 447, 448, 475, 478, 486 Nichols, Johanna 180, 185, 476 Niepokuj, Mary 479 Nikiforidou, Vassiliki 479 Noonan, Michael 88, 487 Noye, Dominique 316, 487 Nseme, Clédor 200, 487 O'Dowd, Elizabeth xiv o/Nedjei, Moussa 478 Pagliuca, William 476 Palayer, Pierre 280, 490 Palmer, F. R. 17, 88, 89, 90, 415, 487 Patan,Hamat 318, 489 Pawlak, Nina 14, 80, 487 Payne, John R. 39, 487 Peirce, Charles Sanders 81, 487 Perkins, Revere 476 Pesetsky, David xiv Pisarkowa, Krystyna 10, 487 Pilaszewicz, Stanislaw 480 Plank, Frans 479 Platiel, Suzanne 487 Postal, Paul 275, 487 Provoost, D. Pierre 49, 487 Ramat, Paolo 485, 487, 490 Ransom, Evelyn N. 88, 487 Raymond, William xiii Reh, Mechthild 482 Renaud, Patrick 13, 477 Riemsdijk, Henk van 275, 487 Rizzi, Luigi 87,487

Roberg, Heinz 482 Ross, Wendy 141,273,480 Rudin, Catherine 87, 487 Ruelland, Susanne 488 Rufa'i, A. 422, 423, 436, 442, 455, 488 Rzewuski, Eugeniusz 480 Saumjan, S.K. 484 Sachnine, Michka xiii Safran, Marian xiv Saxena, Anju 88, 499 Schladt, Mathias 482 Schneeberg, Nan 488 Schuh, Russell G. xiii, 21, 34, 60, 78, 80, 213, 247, 274, 350, 393, 417, 460, 477, 487, 488 Schumann, Theda xiii, 21, 488 Sebba, Mark 488 Seignobos, Christian 489 Shay, Erin xiii, xiv, 20, 21, 120, 129, 170, 220, 257, 286, 355, 390, 445, 448, 456, 480 Shibatani, Masayoshi 97, 488 Shimizu, Kiyoshi 107, 111, 208, 235, 273, 290, 483 Shopen, Timothy 485, 489 Simons, Pamela 489 Skinner, Margaret Gardner xiii, 48, 309,317,346,489 Skinner, Neil xiii, 459 Smith, David Martin 50, 68, 245, 324, 351, 355, 357, 369, 447, 489 Sopoyé, Younous xiii, 220, 248, 256, 257 Steever, Sanford B. 490 Steinitz, W. 484 Stolz, Thomas 482

INDEX OF NAMES Taylor, Karen 17, 273, 276, 489 Thomas, François 274, 478 Thomas-Ruzic, Maria xiii Thompson, Sandra A. 3, 6, 23, 164, 273, 306, 485, 482, 484, 486, 489 Tomlin, Russell 479 Tong-Pa, Besban 200 Tosco, Mauro 90, 489 Tourneux, Henry xiv, 13, 38, 148, 186, 192, 252, 307, 318, 394, 401,411,480,484,485,489 Traugott, Elizabeth Closs 10, 11, 13, 23, 81, 88, 89, 155, 204, 290, 322, 330, 332, 336, 340, 373, 387, 393, 468, 469, 482, 485, 489 Tuller, Laurice 13, 480, 489 Umani, Ibrahim , 79, 482 VanClay, Mary 479 Vincent, Nigel 490 Wachowicz, Krystyna A. 87, 490 Walker, Carol A. 490 Watkins, Calvert 234, 490 Weibegué, Christophe 280, 490 Wente-Lukas, Renate 13, 490 Whaley, Anne 20, 490 Wiesemann, Ursula 482 Williams, Charles Kinston 205, 275, 490 Williams, Edwin 487 Wolff, Ekkehard xiv, 16, 135, 316, 377, 384, 482, 488, 490 Zima, Petr 16, 455, 490 Zólkiewski, S. 484 Zwicky, Arnold M. 483

501