Merge branch 'master' of https://git.sandpoints.org/UnionForNubianStudies/Dotawo

content/article/jakobi.md

@@ -690,7 +690,7 @@ Like Dilling but unlike Tagle, Karko exhibits two donative verbs, *tìì* (wit
 
 {{< gloss "(100)" >}}
 {r} **Karko**
-{g} *íǐ(g)*,[1in.acc]({sc})|*t̪ēē*,cow|*tèn*,give>1|
+{g} *íǐ(g)*,[1pl.incl.acc]({sc})|*t̪ēē*,cow|*tèn*,give>1|
 {r} “give us a cow!”
 {{< /gloss >}}
 
@@ -984,15 +984,20 @@ Unlike Old Nubian and Nobiin converbs, which are marked by *‑a,* Mattokki and
 {{< /gloss >}}
 
 {{< gloss "(133)" >}}
-{g} *ai*,[1sg]({sc})|*ek=k*,[2sg=acc]({sc})({sc})|*aa-wee-tir-rin*,[prog]({sc})-say-[appl>2/3-neut.1sg]({sc})|
+{g} *ai*,[1sg]({sc})|*ek=k*,[2sg=acc]({sc})|*aa-wee-tir-rin*,[prog]({sc})-say-[appl>2/3-neut.1sg]({sc})|
 {r} “I am telling you”
 {{< /gloss >}}
 
-Massenbach, Armbruster, Werner, and Abdel-Hafiz represent the biverbal applicative constructions as single words.[^157] At least in Andaandi, however, the question clitic te can be inserted between the converb and the finite donative verb. This indicates that the converb and the donative verb are separable free forms. The question of whether the two verbs in the corresponding Nobiin and Mattokki applicative constructions can be separated as well has yet to be investigated.
+Massenbach, Armbruster, Werner, and Abdel-Hafiz represent the biverbal applicative constructions as single words.[^157] At least in Andaandi, however, the question clitic te can be inserted between the converb and the finite donative verb. This indicates that the converb and the donative verb are separable free forms. The question of whether the two verbs in the corresponding Nobiin and Mattokki applicative constructions can be separated as well has yet to be investigated.[^161]
 
 [^157]: Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes”; Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §3998; Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 272; Abdel-Hafiz, *A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian.*
+[^161]: Example provided by El-Guzuuli, p.c., November 2013.
 
-(134)
+{{< gloss "(134)" >}}
+{r} **Andaandi**
+{g} *kus=te*,open=[q]({sc})|*tir-kon*,appl>2/3-[pt-3]({sc})|
+{r} “did he open [it] for him/her?”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 In Midob, the applicative construction is associated with a reflex of *\*tir* realized as *tir.* As in Kordofan Nubian (see [3.4](#34)) it is a bound morpheme tied to the lexical verb stem by the linker *‑(i)n.* After a consonant-final lexical verb such as *əək,* the linker is realized by the allomorph *‑Vn.* Apparently, due to lag assimilation, *V* adopts the quality of the stem vowel *ə.*
 
@@ -1000,9 +1005,16 @@ Although *\*tir* originally only referred to 3rd or 2nd person recipients/benefi
 
 [^162]:  Examples provided by Ishaag Hassan, p.c., January 2019.
 
-(135)
+{{< gloss "(135)" >}}
+{r} **Midob**
+{g} *əj*,[1sg]({sc})|*náj=je*,[2sg=acc]({sc})|*an*,that|*jawaab=e*,letter=[acc]({sc})|*əək-ən-tir-hem*,send-[lk-appl-prf.1sg]({sc})|
+{r} “I have sent that letter to you”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(136)
+{{< gloss "(136)" >}}
+{g} *on*,[3sg]({sc})|*əj=je*,[1sg=acc]({sc})|*an*,that|*jawaab=e*,letter=[acc]({sc})|*əək-ən-tir-hum*,send-[lk-appl-prf.3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “s/he has sent that letter to me”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 ## The Applicative in the Kordofan Nubian Languages {#34}
 
@@ -1019,27 +1031,51 @@ Dilling *ti* is referred to by Kauczor as “verbum dativum.”[^163] When attac
 [^163]: Kauczor, *Die bergnubische Sprache,* §§374–377.
 [^164]: Examples from ibid., §380f.
 
-(137)
+{{< gloss "(137)" >}}
+{r} **Dilling**
+{g} *fe-n-di-re*,say-[lk-appl-prs.1sg]({sc})|
+{r} “I tell him”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(138)
+{{< gloss "(138)" >}}
+{g} *or=gi*,head=[acc]({sc})|*o=bod-n-di-m* [oboːnum],[1sg.acc]({sc})=hit-[lk-appl-pst.3]({sc})|
+{r} “he hit me (on my) head”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 In Tagle, too, the linker *‑(i)n* connects the applicative extension *-tì* with the lexical verb stem. The *‑tì*-extension is realized as [dì] after adopting the [+voice] feature of the nasal in *‑(i).* Although Tagle suffixes mostly take the same ATR value as the root vowel, the applicative suffix retains the [+ATR] value of the donative verb *tì.* This suggests that the applicative extension *‑n-dì* has not yet acquired the phonological properties of "regular" bound morphemes, whose vowels commonly harmonize with the root vowel. As applicative extension, Tagle *tì* has a low tone. When used as independent verb, it has a high tone, as seen in (97) and (98). Examples (139) and (140) show the applicative extension referring to a 3rd person and a 1st person beneficiary.[^166]
 
 [^166]: Tagle examples provided by Ali Ibrahim, p.c.
 
-(139)
+{{< gloss "(139)" >}}
+{r} **Tagle**
+{g} *t̪ɛ́nd̪ʊ̀*,girl.[sg]({sc})|*ɪ́d̪ʊ́=gɪ́*,woman=[acc]({sc})|*kᴧ̀t̪ʊ̀=ʊ̀*,field=[acc]({sc})|*ʃʊ́-n-dì-m*,weed-[lk-appl-pst.3]({sc})|
+{r} “the girl weeded the field for the woman”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(140)
+{{< gloss "(140)" >}}
+{g} *t̪ɛ́nd̪ʊ̀*,girl.[sg]({sc})|*kᴧ̀t̪ʊ̀=g*,field=[acc]({sc})|*ɔ̀=ʃʊ́-n-dì-m*,[1sg.acc]({sc})=weed-[lk-appl-pst.3]({sc})|
+{r} “the girl weeded the field for me”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Applicative extentions may attach to an intransitive or transitive verb stem, as illustrated by the Karko verbs *ɕīj* “descend ([itr]({sc}))" and kɛɛ “make sth. good ([tr]({sc}))," respectively, shown in (141)–(143). The applicative extension *‑n-dìì* is a realization of *-n-tìì.* It licenses both a 3rd person, a 1st person, and a 2nd person beneficiary. The pronominal 3rd person singular beneficiary *t̪éě* is not required to be overtly expressed. The position of the locative‑marked adjunct is variable, preceding or following the verb phrase.[^167]
 
 [^167]: Karko examples provided by Ahmed Hamdan, p.c. For the plural stem extension *‑(V)k* on *ɕīj‑īk-n-dìì* see [4.2](#42) and [6.5](#65).
 
-(141)
+{{< gloss "(141)" >}}
+{r} **Karko**
+{g} *t̪óóɲē*,child.[dim.pl]({sc})|(*t̪éě*),[3sg.acc]({sc})|*kóld*,well.[loc]({sc})|*ɕīj-īk-n-dìì*,descend-[plr-lk-appl]({sc})|
+{r} “the children go down for him into the well”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(142)
+{{< gloss "(142)" >}}
+{g} *t̪óóɲē*,child.[dim.pl]({sc})|*ɔ̀=ɕīj-īk-n-dìì*,[1sg.acc]({sc})=descend-[plr-lk-appl]({sc})|*kóld*,well.[loc]({sc})|
+{r} “the children go down for me into the well”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(143)
+{{< gloss "(143)" >}}
+{g} *ɕwàr*,existence|*ɔ̀=nàà*,[1sg=gen]({sc})|*ûúg*,[2pl.acc]({sc})|*t̪ɔ́ɔ́*,place|*kɛ̀ɛ̀-ŋgàl-dìì*,make.good-[tr.pst-appl]({sc})|
+{r} “my existence made your life good.”/ lit. “… made the place good for you” (This is said to children to remind them that they are dependent of their parents and that they have to pay them respect.)
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 As shown in this section, applicative constructions in the Kordofan Nubian languages use a single “give” verb, which adds an object argument whose referent may be a 1st, 2nd or 3rd person beneficiary. This simplification of the original system is also attested in Midob ([3.3](#33)).
 
@@ -1053,25 +1089,55 @@ Reflexes of *\*deen* “give to 1st person” are attested in all Nile Nubian ap
 
 **Table 9. Nile Nubian applicative marker *\*deen***
 
-When Old Nubian ⲇⲉⲛ “give to 1st person” is employed as a valence operator, the resulting applicative is a bipartite construction composed of V1 – a lexical verb stem marked by the converb marker ‑ⲁ – plus the finite ⲇⲉⲛ as V2. The plural number of a 1st person beneficiary is reflected by the pluractional extension ‑ⳝ (see [4.1](#41)). Example (141) also shows that the values of the inflectional suffixes on the main verb – with ‑ⲉ-ⲥⲟ marking the imperative form in a command – have scope over the preceding converb, which means that it is also conceived as an imperative form, even though it does not show the corresponding inflectional suffixes.
+When Old Nubian ⲇⲉⲛ “give to 1st person” is employed as a valence operator, the resulting applicative is a bipartite construction composed of V1 – a lexical verb stem marked by the converb marker ‑ⲁ – plus the finite ⲇⲉⲛ as V2. The plural number of a 1st person beneficiary is reflected by the pluractional extension ‑ⳝ (see [4.1](#41)). Example (141) also shows that the values of the inflectional suffixes on the main verb – with ‑ⲉ-ⲥⲟ marking the imperative form in a command – have scope over the preceding converb, which means that it is also conceived as an imperative form, even though it does not show the corresponding inflectional suffixes.[^170]
 
-(144)
+[^170] Example from Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* [CHECK]. Old Nubian ⲇⲉⲛ is here written with a final ⳡ rather than ⲛ, thus mirroring its realization as palatal [ɲ] when followed by the palatal stop [ɟ] (i.e., Old Nubian ⳝ).
 
-The position of the pronominal beneficiary appears to be variable. In (141) the pronominal beneficiary ⲟⲩⲕⲁ immediately precedes the converb, whereas in Nobiin example (145) the theme precedes the converb, the pronominal beneficiary occupying clause-initial position.
+{{< gloss "(144)" >}}
+{r} **Old Nubian**
+{r} ⲙⲩⲥⲧⲏⲣⲟⲩ ⲉⲕ̄ⲕⲁ ⲉ̄ⲅⲓⲇⲣⲟⲩⲕⲁ ⲟⲩⲕⲁ ⲡⲗ̄ⲗⲓ̈ⲅⲣⲁ̄ ⲇⲉⳡⳝⲉⲥⲟ
+{g} *mustērou*,mystery|*eik=ka*,[2sg=acc]({sc})|*eigid-r-ou=ka*,ask-[prs-1/2pl=acc]({sc})|*ou=ka*,[1pl.excl=acc]({sc})|*pill-igr-a*,shine-[caus-cnv]({sc})|*deñ-j-e-so*,appl>1-[plact-imp.2/3sg.pred-comm]({sc})|
+{r} “reveal to us the mystery which we ask you” (St 5.3–7)
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(145)
+The position of the pronominal beneficiary appears to be variable. In (141) the pronominal beneficiary ⲟⲩⲕⲁ immediately precedes the converb, whereas in Nobiin example (145) the theme precedes the converb, the pronominal beneficiary occupying clause-initial position.[^172]
 
-Most commonly, applicative constructions assign a beneficiary role to the applied object, as seen in (144) and (145). However, when interacting with an utterance verb like “say, tell,” the applied object is assigned the role of addressee.
+[^172]: Example from Abel, *Eine Erzählung im Dialekt von Ermenne,* ex. 69.
 
-(146)
+{{< gloss "(145)" >}}
+{r} **Nobiin**
+{g} ,*ay=ga*,[1sg=acc]({sc})|,*an-gi*,[1sg.gen]({sc})-uncle|,*gelabije*,jellabiya|,*uwo=ga*,two=[acc]({sc})|V1,*jan-a*,buy-[cnv]({sc})|V2,*deen-on*,[appl>1-pt.3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “my uncle bought me two jellabiyas”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-Unlike Old Nubian and Nobiin, which employ the converb marker *‑a,* the converbs in Mattokki and Andaandi are unmarked.
+Most commonly, applicative constructions assign a beneficiary role to the applied object, as seen in (144) and (145). However, when interacting with an utterance verb like “say, tell,” the applied object is assigned the role of addressee.[^173]
 
-(147)
+[^173]: Example from  Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 188. Werner’s glossing of *‑a* as “a(-Form)” is here replaced by the glossing [cnv]({sc}). Note that we would expect the vowel of *-dèn* to be long rather than short.
 
-Studies of the modern Nile Nubian languages mostly represent the periphrastic applicative constructions as a single word. This may be due to the realization of these biverbal forms as a single prosodic phrase. However, at least in Andaandi, the question clitic *te* can be inserted between the dependent verb and the finite donative verb, thus providing clear evidence of the bipartite character of the applicative constructions.
+{{< gloss "(146)" >}}
+{g} *ànn-ùu*,[1sg.gen]({sc})-grandfather|*ày=g*,[1sg=acc]({sc})|*íig-a-dèn-ô*,tell-[cnv-appl>1-pt.3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “my grandfather told me”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(148)
+Unlike Old Nubian and Nobiin, which employ the converb marker *‑a,* the converbs in Mattokki and Andaandi are unmarked.[^175]
+
+[^175]: Example from Abdel-Hafiz, *A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian,* p. 114.
+
+{{< gloss "(147)" >}}
+{r} **Mattokki**
+{g} *een*,woman|*kadee=g*,dress=[acc]({sc})|*sukki-deen-s-u*,wash-[appl>1-pt2-3]({sc})|
+{r} “the woman washed the dress for me”
+{{< /gloss >}}
+
+Studies of the modern Nile Nubian languages mostly represent the periphrastic applicative constructions as a single word. This may be due to the realization of these biverbal forms as a single prosodic phrase. However, at least in Andaandi, the question clitic *te* can be inserted between the dependent verb and the finite donative verb, thus providing clear evidence of the bipartite character of the applicative constructions.[^176]
+
+[^176]: Example provided by  Example provided by El-Shafie El-Guzuuli, p.c.. The [3sg]({sc}) pronominal direct object is unexpressed.
+
+{{< gloss "(148)" >}}
+{r} **Andaandi**
+{g} *er*,[2sg]({sc})|*ay=gi*,[1sg=acc]({sc})|*iʃin=te*,send=[q]({sc})|*deen-ko-n*,[appl>1-pt-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “did you send it to me?”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 As for Kordofan Nubian, only Dilling and Karko have retained reflexes of *\*deen.* They appear in two grammatical contextsL i) when employed as lexical transfer verbs, as shown in [3.1](#31); and ii) when used as applicative extensions in imperative forms. Tagle, by contrast, has preserved no reflex of *\*deen.*
 
@@ -1088,19 +1154,36 @@ The directed transfer verbs *kuʃ* “take to” and *kwata* “bring” assign
 
 [^177]: Examples from Kauczor, *Die bergnubische Sprache,* §375 and §378.
 
-(149)
+{{< gloss "(149)" >}}
+{r} **Dilling**
+{g} *kuʃ-in-di*,take.to-[lk-appl>2/3.imp.2sg]({sc})|
+{r} “take it to him!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(150)
+{{< gloss "(150)" >}}
+{g} *oti*,water|*o=kwata-n(i)n-(i)*,[1sg.acc]({sc})=bring-[appl>1-imp.2sg]({sc})|
+{r} “bring me water!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Similar to Dilling *-nin,* Karko exhibits with *-nVn* a realization of the linker *-(i)n* fused with *tèn* “give to 1st person,” which is a regular reflex of *\*deen.* The applicative extension *-nVn* contrasts with *-n-dìì* (after *b* realized as the allomorph *‑m-bìì*) which originates from the linker plus the irregular donative verb *tìì* and refers to a 3rd person beneficiary.
 
 Interestingly, in Kordofan Nubian applicative constructions the morphosyntactic behavior of the two objects differs from the behavior of the corresponding objects in the Nile Nubian languages. In the Kordofan Nubian languages, it is the number of the theme argument that triggers the selection of a singular or plural verb stem. In Karko, for instance, a singular theme selects the singular verb stem *ɕùù* (151), while a plural theme selects the plural stem *ɕùb* (152). In the Nile Nubian languages, by contrast, it is the number of the beneficiary which interacts with the verb stem, as seen in (144), where the 1st person plural beneficiary selects the *‑(i)j*-marked plural verb stem.  
 
-(151)
+{{< gloss "(151)" >}}
+{r} **Karko**
+{g} *kèt̪=èg*,cloth.[sg=acc]|*ɕùù-m-bìì*,wash.[sng-lk-appl>2/3]({sc})|
+{r} “wash the cloth for him/them!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(152)
+{{< gloss "(152)" >}}
+{g} *kèn=ég*,cloth.[pl=acc]({sc})|*ɕùb-n-dìì*,wash.[plr-lk-appl>2/3]({sc})|
+{r} “wash the clothes for him!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(153)
+{{< gloss "(153)" >}}
+{g} *áǎ*,[1pl.excl.acc]({sc})|*kèn=ég*,cloth.[pl=acc]({sc})|*ɕùb-nùn*,wash.[plr-lk.appl>1]({sc})|
+{r} “wash the clothes for us!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Summarizing [3](#3), we recognize that the reflexes of the donative verbs *\*tir* and *\*deen* continue to be employed as lexical verbs of transfer. Parallel to this use and bleached of their original semantic content, they have come to serve as valency-increasing grammatical elements in applicative constructions – at least in the Nile Nubian languages. In Kordofan Nubian, however, a simplification process has begun which is associated with the emergence of a new verb *ti* which is replacing the original donative verbs and is considered to result from a morphological blending of both. The initial consonant of *ti* appears to be a reflex of the initial of *\*deen,* while the high front vowel of *ti*  stems from the vowel of *\*tir.* In Karko, such *CV*-shaped lexical items are realized with a long vowel, as confirmed by Karko *tìì* “give,” in Tagle with a short vowel, *tí.* This contrast is also attested by Karko *dìì* “drink” corresponding to Tagle *dì,* and Karko *tìì* “die” corresponding to Tagle *tì.* Note that Karko *tìì* “die” and *tìì* “give” are homophones.
 
@@ -1128,9 +1211,18 @@ Browne points out that Old Nubian ‑ⳝ “refers to a plural object (either di
 
 [^179]:  Browne, *Old Nubian Grammar,* p. 49.
 
-(154)
+{{< gloss "(154)" >}}
+{r} **Old Nubian**
+{r} ⲕⲁⲡⲟⲡⲓⲅⲟⲩⲕⲁ ⲇⲟⲗⲓⳝⲛⲓⲁ̄
+{g} *kapop-igou=ka*,pearl-[pl=acc]({sc})|*dol-ij-ni-a*,gather-[plact-purp-quot]({sc})|
+{r} “in order to gather pearls” (SC 4.19)
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(155)
+{{< gloss "(155)" >}}
+{r} ⲇⲓⳝⲟⲗⲅⲟⲩⲛⲁ
+{g} *di-j-ol-gou=na*,die-[plact-pst1-pl=gen]({sc})|
+{r} “of those who are dead” (SC 8.12–13)
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 While Lepsius refers to the -(i)j-extension in Nobiin as “verbum plurale,”[^181] Werner uses the term “Pluralobjekt-Erweiterung” (plural object extension).[^182] This latter designation is, however, not quite adequate, because *‑(i)j* is not confined to interacting with plural objects; it can also be triggered by an intransitive plural subject and by event plurality.[^183]
 
@@ -1138,7 +1230,7 @@ While Lepsius refers to the -(i)j-extension in Nobiin as “verbum plurale,”[^
 [^182]: Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 173.
 [^183]: Examples from Werner, p.c., October 2020.
 
-|       |            |                       | |
+| Nobiin      |            |                       | |
 | :---  | :---       | :---                  | :--- |
 | (156) | ày kàb-ìr  | “I eat” [oj sg]({sc}) | ày kàb-j-ir | “I eat (a lot or several times)” [oj pl]({sc})
 | (157) | ày nèer-ìr | “I sleep”             | ày nèer-j-ìr | “I sleep (several times)” |
@@ -1149,21 +1241,37 @@ Because of the wide range of functions covered by *‑(i)j,* Khalil uses the ter
 
 As for *‑(i)j* in Mattokki, Massenbach highlights the fact that it expresses the intensity of an action.[^185]
 
-[^185]:  Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” p. 132.
+[^185]: Examples from Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” p. 132.
 
-(158)
+{{< gloss "(158)" >}}
+{r} **Mattokki**
+{g} *man*,that|*ʃibir*,basket|*urub-buu-n*,have.hole-[stat-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “that basket has a hole”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(159)
+{{< gloss "(159)" >}}
+{g} *man*,that|*ʃibir*,basket|*urub-ij-buu-n*,have.hole-[plact-stat-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “that basket is thoroughly perforated”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(160)
+{{< gloss "(160)" >}}
+{g} ter,[3sg]({sc})|*gulud=ki*,jar=[acc]({sc})|*aa-toog-ij-mun-um*,[prog]({sc})-break-[plact-neg-neut.3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “he does not smash the jar”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Abdel-Hafiz, in turn, chooses the term “distributive” to refer to the Mattokki *‑(i)j*-extension because it “has the effect of spreading the action over time and space.” He also points out that the *‑(i)j*-suffix “can indicate the intensity with which an action is performed,”[^186] as illustrated in (162).
 
 [^186]: Abdel-Hafiz, *A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian,* p. 117f.
 
-(161)
+{{< gloss "(161)" >}}
+{g} *duguu=g*,money=[acc]({sc})|*gull-ij-os-s-u*,throw-[plact-pfv-pt2-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “s/he threw the money here and there”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(162)
+{{< gloss "(162)" >}}
+{g} *gur*,bull|*baab=ki*,door=[acc]({sc})|*toog-is-s-u*,break-[plact-pt2-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “the bull broke the door”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 In (162) the *‑(i)j*-extension is realized as [is], due to regressive assimilation when followed by the preterite suffix *‑s.*
 
@@ -1171,37 +1279,46 @@ As for the Andaandi suffix *‑(i)j,* Armbruster notes that it “usually has an
 
 [^187]:  Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §2881. Examples from ibid, §2883f.
 
-|       |          |            |          | |
+|  Andaandi     |          |            |          | |
 | :---  | :---     | :---       | :---     | :--- |
 | (163) | war      | “jump”     | war-ij   | “jump continually” |
 | (164) | or       | “tear”     | or-ij    | “tear to pieces” |
 | (165) | aaw      | “do”       | aw-ij    | “do repetitively” |
 
-(166)
+{{< gloss "(166)" >}}
+{g} *tinn-ɛssi=n*,her-sister=[gen]({sc})|*dilti=g*,hair=[acc]({sc})|*aw-ij-in*,do-[plact-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “s/he plaits her sister’s hair”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 The Dilling reflex of *\*‑(i)j* is *‑j.* Kauczor’s examples suggest that it can refer to a plural object but it can also express the intensity or frequency of an event.[^189]
 
 [^189]:  Kauczor, *Die bergnubische Sprache,* §262.
 
-|       |          |            |          | |
+| Dilling      |          |            |          | |
 | :---  | :---     | :---       | :---     | :--- |
 | (167) | mon      | "dislike"    | mon-j-i  | “hate (intensely)” |
 | (168) | bel-er   | "throw [oj sg]({sc}) to the ground (in wrestling)" | bel-j-i   | “throw to the ground [oj pl]({sc}) or frequently” |
 
 The Tagle reflex of *\*‑(i)j* is realized as the voiced palatal stop [ɟ] or after /l/ as the voiceless palatal stop [c]. It expresses repetitive or multiple events. The examples are provided in the 2nd singular imperative form.
 
-|       |                         | |
+|  Tagle     |                         | |
 | :---  | :---                    | :--- |
 | (169) | áŋ-ɪ́r-ɪ̀ / áŋ-c-ɪ́ [áɲcɪ́] | “catch, seize!” [oj sg/rpt]({sc}) |
 | (170) | kɪ̀ŋ-ɪ́r-ɪ̀ / kɪ́ŋ-c-ɪ́ [kɪ́ɲcɪ́] | “repair!” [oj sg/rpt]({sc}) |
 
-(171)
+{{< gloss "(171)" >}}
+{g} *kòn-ú-nù=gì*,bird-[sg-dim.sg=acc]({sc})|*kákár=kɔ̀*,stone=[ins]({sc})|*jɪ̀l-ɪ̀*,throw-[imp.2sg]({sc})|
+{r} “throw a stone at the bird!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(172)
+{{< gloss "(172)" >}}
+{g} *kòn-ú-nù=gì*,bird-[sg-dim.sg=acc]({sc})|*kákár-í=kɔ̀*,stone-[pl=ins]({sc})|*jɪ́l-c-ɪ́*,throw-[plact-imp.2sg]({sc})|
+{r} “continue to throw stones at the bird!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 In Karko, the *\*‑(i)j*-extension is realized as voiced palatal plosive [ɟ] after a vowel, and as *Vɟ* after a consonant (except for /n/ and /l/). Following these consonants, *\*‑(i)j* is realized as voiceless alveopalatal fricative [ɕ]. In this case, [ɕ] is difficult to identify as a suffix because the preceding /l/ and /n/ are deleted. The following (unmarked) imperative forms refer to a singular or plural object.
 
-|       |        |                            |      | |
+|  Karko     |        |                            |      | |
 | :---  | :---   | :---                       | :--- | :--- |
 | (173) | ɕàn    | “buy/sell!” [oj sg]({sc})  | ɕàɕ  | “buy/sell!” [oj pl]({sc}) |
 | (174) | kìl    | “jump over!” [oj sg]({sc}) | kìɕ  | “jump over!” [oj pl]({sc}) |
@@ -1209,33 +1326,58 @@ In Karko, the *\*‑(i)j*-extension is realized as voiced palatal plosive [ɟ] a
 
 [^190]:  The singular stem *tōl-ór* is extended by the plural stem marker *-Vr* (see [6.3](#63)).
 
-(176)
+{{< gloss "(176)" >}}
+{g} *kwàt̪*,pebble.[sg]({sc})|*t̪ōl-ór*,swallow-[plr]({sc})|
+{r} “swallow the pebble!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(177)
+{{< gloss "(177)" >}}
+{g} kwǎr,pebble.[pl.acc]({sc})|t̪òɕ,swallow.[plact]({sc})|
+{r} “swallow the pebbles!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 In the Kordofan Nubian languages like Karko, the pluractional extension is selected by the plural object (patient) in a transitive clause like (177) and also by the plural direct object (theme) in a ditransitive clause, as shown in (179). This patterning of the transitive patient with the ditransitive theme – but not with the indirect object, the beneficiary – is known as the indirect-object construction.[^191]
 
 [^191]:  Haspelmath, “Ditransitive Constructions.”
 
-(178)
+{{< gloss "(178)" >}}
+{g} *kə̄k-ə̄nd̪=ə́g*,stone-[sg=acc]({sc})|*ɔ̀g=ɛ̄g-nɛ̀n*,[1sg.acc]({sc})=roll-[lk.appl>1]({sc})|
+{r} “roll the stone for me!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(179)
+{{< gloss "(179)" >}}
+{g} *kə̄k-ə̄r=ə́g*,stone-[pl=acc]({sc})|*ɔ̀g=ɛ̄g-ɛ̄j-nɛ̂n*,[1sg.acc]({sc})=roll-[plact-lk.appl>1]({sc})|
+{r} “roll the stones for me!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Proto-Nubian *\*‑(i)j* is reflected by Midob *‑c* (allomorph *‑j*). According to Werner, this extension marks participant and event plurality, the latter expressing “repetitivity, intensity.”[^192] However, he provides only two pairs of contrastive examples. Examples (180) and (181) show that *‑c* is sensitive to the plural number of the intransitive subject.
 
 [^192]: Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* pp. 50, 52.
 
-(180)
+{{< gloss "(180)" >}}
+{r} **Midob**
+{g} *ìi-hêm*,come-[ind.prf.1sg]({sc})|
+{r} “I came”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(181)
+{{< gloss "(181)" >}}
+{g} *ìi-c-áhàm*,come-[plact-ind.prf.3pl]({sc})|
+{r} “they came”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 The other pair of examples raises the question whether the *‑j*-extension is required by an unexpressed pronominal plural object or even by event plurality.[^194]
 
 [^194]:  Examples from ibid., pp. 49 and 86. Werner erroneously translates them as “I answered” and “we answered.” However, as the Midob *-wa*-suffix marks the 1st person singular and plural of the “continuous indicative,” they should be rendered by “I answer” and “we answer.”
 
-(182)
+{{< gloss "(182)" >}}
+{g} *éeg-ìr-wà*,answer-[tr-ind.cont.1sg]({sc})|
+{r} “I answer”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(183)
+{{< gloss "(183)" >}}
+{g} *éeg-ìr-j-wà*,answer-[tr-plact-ind.cont.1pl]({sc})|
+{r} “we answer”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 In addition to its event plurality and participant plurality marking function, Midob *-c* has come to serve as the marker of the 2nd person imperative plural form. The corresponding singular form is morphologically unmarked.[^195]
 
@@ -1262,7 +1404,7 @@ As Armbruster was the first to provide evidence of the *‑(i)k*-extension, this
 
 [^196]:  Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §§2852-2855.
 
-|       |      |         |         | |
+|  Andaandi     |      |         |         | |
 | :---  | :--- | :---    | :---    | :--- |
 | (186) | jaag | "knead" | jak-k-i | “compress” |
 | (187) | joog | "grind" | jok-k-i | "chew (food)" |
@@ -1272,9 +1414,15 @@ Armbruster provides a list of some twenty Andaandi verbs exhibiting *‑k.* Most
 
 [^197]: El-Shafie El-Guzuuli, p.c., October 2020.
 
-(189)
+{{< gloss "(189)" >}}
+{g} *loori*,lorry|*weer*,[idf]({sc})|*udud-k-in*,rumble-[plr-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “a lorry rumbles”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(190)
+{{< gloss "(190)" >}}
+{g} *iiɡ*,fire|*aaɡ*,[prog]({sc})|*habab-k-in*,blaze-[plr-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “the fire is blazing”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Although Massenbach does not address the ‑k-extension in her Mattokki grammar sketch, her dictionary contains some verbs which exhibit *-k,* e.g., *jok-k(i)* “chew”; *kil-ik(i)* “chirp”; *tos-k(i)* “cough”; and *wak-k(i)* “yelp (fox).” The fact that *‑k* often occurs on verbs depicting inherently repetitive events like rumble, blaze, chew, chirp, cough, and yelp indicates that it reflects event plurality.
 
@@ -1282,9 +1430,16 @@ This is also true for Nobiin. Werner’s compilation of Nobiin ideophones contai
 
 [^199]: Werner, “Ideophones in Nobiin.”
 
-(191)
+{{< gloss "(191)" >}}
+{r} **Nobiin**
+{g} *áadíi*,hyena|*ùu-k-ín*,howl-[plr-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “the hyena howls”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(192)
+{{< gloss "(192)" >}}
+{g} *kùglúul*,rooster|*kìik-k-ín*,crow-[plr-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “the rooster crows”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 As for Old Nubian, there is no evidence of the stem extension *‑k,* not even in combination with the reduplicated stems of apparently onomatopoeic or ideophonic verbs,[^200] to which *‑k* is often attached in the modern Nile Nubian languages.
 
@@ -1415,9 +1570,15 @@ Cognates of the Tagle intransitive/transitive verb pairs “lie down”/“put d
 | (209) | jɛ̀r               | “lie down, go to sleep!” [itr, imp 2sg]({sc}) |
 |       | ū-júr             | “put down!” [tr, imp 2sg]({sc}) |
 
-(210)
+{{< gloss "(210)" >}}
+{g} *kám-m-bíl*,eat.[plr-lk]({sc})-first|*jɛ̀r*,lie.down.[sng]({sc})|
+{r} “eat first then go to sleep!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(211)
+{{< gloss "(211)" >}}
+{g} *ɕǎnt̪àà=g*,bag=[acc]({sc})|*kúrɕī=ét̪*,chair=[loc]({sc})|*ū-júr*,caus-put.down|
+{r} “put the bag on the chair!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Because of their phonological and semantic similarities, the Midob verb stems *súkk* “descend” and *ú-kk* “give birth” can be identified are cognates of Nile Nubian *sukk-* “descend” and *u-skir-* “put down, lay down, give birth;” see examples (201) and (203) above.
 
@@ -1487,7 +1648,12 @@ Some verbal extensions have a restricted distribution because they occur only in
 
 Unlike the languages of the western branch, the Nile Nubian languages have dedicated passive extensions. They comprise Old Nubian ‑(ⲓ)ⲧⲁⲕ, Nobiin *‑dakk ~ ‑takk ~ ‑daŋ,* Mattokki *‑takk,* and Andaandi *‑katt.* Nobiin and Matokki *‑dakk ~ ‑takk* suggest that Old Nubian ‑ⲧⲁⲕ (although spelled with a single ⲕ), used to be realized with a geminate *kk,* too.
 
-(218)
+{{< gloss "(218)" >}}
+{r} **Old Nubian**
+{r} ⲁ̇ⲉⲧ︥ⲧⲁⲕⲁⲧⲁⲙⲏ
+{g} *aeit-tak-a-ta-mē*,insult-[pass-pred-neg-jus.sg]({sc})|
+{r} “don’t you be insulted!” (M 6.11)
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Apart from *‑dakk ~ ‑takk,* Nobiin has another passive extension, *-daŋ,* which, according to Reinisch, is restricted to the Fadicca variety.[^224] As far as we know today, it is unattested in Old Nubian.[^225] Both Reinisch and Lepsius provide examples of *‑daŋ* being attached to original Nobiin items and even to borrowings from Arabic as in (220),[^226] which attest the productivity of the extension. Due to the phonetic similarities of *‑daŋ* and the inchoative *‑aŋ,* Reinisch and Lepsius conceive of *‑daŋ* as being composed of a *d*-prefix plus *-aŋ.* According to Reinisch, *d*- has a “reflexive-passive” function.[^227]
 
@@ -1505,21 +1671,35 @@ However, this hypothesis is not convincing unless we can corroborate the existen
 
 [^228]: Example from  Werner, p.c., October 2020.
 
-(221)
+{{< gloss "(221)" >}}
+{g} *santee-l*,sabbat-[det]({sc})|*aadem=in=doorro*,man=[gen]({sc})=because.of|*aaw-dakk-on*,do-[pass-pt.3sg]({sc})|*aadem*,man|*santee=n=doorro*,sabbat=[gen]({sc})=because.of|*aaw-daŋ-kum-mun*,do-[pass-pt-neg]({sc})|
+{r} “the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 As for Mattokki, Massenbach points out that the passive extension is realized as [takk] or, more rarely, as [katt].[^229]
 
 [^229]:  Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” p. 134.
 
-(222)
+{{< gloss "(222)" >}}
+{r} **Mattokki**
+{g} *buuwe-tákk-imn-um*,call-[pass-neg-prs.3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “he is not called”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Abdel-Hafiz only mentions the *-takk* variant and its allomorph *-cakk* which is used after *c.* It can be used with transitive verbs, but also with intransitive verbs such as neer “sleep.”[^230]
 
 [^230]:  Abdel-Hafiz, *A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian,* p. 111f.
 
-(223)
+{{< gloss "(223)" >}}
+{g} *indo*,here|*neer-takk-is-u*,sleep-[pass-pt-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “it was slept here”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(224)
+{{< gloss "(224)" >}}
+{r} **Andaandi**
+{g} *goraan*,Qur’an|*kuur-katt-in*,learn-[pass-3sg]({sc})|
+{r} “the Qur’an is learnt / the Qur’an can be learnt”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Both Matokki *‑takk* and Andaandi *‑katt* are productive extensions, as shown by their use with Arabic loanwords.[^233]
 
@@ -1578,19 +1758,43 @@ The plural object extensions *‑ir* and *‑(i)r-ir* are restricted to Mattokki
 
 [^250]:  Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §3031ff. Examples from Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” pp. 127–128.
 
-(227)
+{{< gloss "(227)" >}}
+{r} **Mattokki**
+{g} *ai*,[1sg]({sc})|*toog-s-im*,break-[pt2-1sg]({sc})|
+{r} “I smashed it”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(228)
+{{< gloss "(228)" >}}
+{g} *ai*,[1sg]({sc})|*toog-ir-s-im*,break-[ploj-pt2-1sg]({sc})|
+{r} “I smashed them”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(229)
+{{< gloss "(229)" >}}
+{g} *ar*,[1pl]({sc})|*el-r-un* [ellun],find-[neut-1pl]({sc})|
+{r} “we find it”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(230)
+{{< gloss "(230)" >}}
+{g} *ar*,[1pl]({sc})|*el-ir-r-un*,find-[ploj-neut-1pl]({sc})|
+{r} “we find them"
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Armbruster observes that Andaandi *‑ir,* which is sometimes reduplicated and realized as [irir], additionally has distributive connotations since it is “used when the verb’s object is a plural that is regarded as a series of singulars.”[^253] But when discussing (231) and (232), mother tongue speaker El-Shafie El-Guzuuli pointed out that he does not perceive a semantic difference between them.[^254]
 
 [^253]: Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §5456.
 [^254]:  El-Guzuuli, p.c., September 2020.
 
+{{< gloss "(231)" >}}
+{r} **Andaandi**
+{g} *in-gu-gi*,this-[pl=acc]({sc})|*sokke-rir*,take-[ploj]({sc})|
+{r} “take each of these away!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
+
+{{< gloss "(232)" >}}
+{g} *in-gu-gi*,this-[pl=acc]({sc})|*sokke*,take|
+{r} “take each of these away!”
+{{< /gloss >}}
+
 Unlike the reduplicated causative *‑ir-ir*-extension, which is realized as [iddi], the reduplicated plural object extension *‑(i)r-ir* is never pronounced as [iddi]. This finding supports Armbruster’s assumption that the plural object extension is not identical in origin with the causative *\*-(i)r*-extension (see [2.1](#21)).[^255]
 
 [^255]:  Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §3668.
@@ -1615,29 +1819,54 @@ Kauczor also points out that some verbs are always extended by *‑er.* This fin
 [^258]:  Comfort, “Verbal Number in the Uncu Language”;  Jakobi & Ibrahim, “Labile Verbs in Tagle”; Pointner, “Verbal Number in Tabaq.”
 [^261]:  In Tagle, the extension is realized as [er] or [ɛr], depending on the ATR feature of the stem vowel.
 
-(233)
+{{< gloss "(233)" >}}
+{r} **Tagle**
+{g} *ɪ̀yɪ̀*,[1sg]({sc})|*ékk-é*,urinate-[pst.1sg]({sc})|
+{r} “I urinated”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(234)
+{{< gloss "(234)" >}}
+{g} *àyì*,[1pl]({sc})|*ékk-ér-ó*,urinate-[plr-pst.1pl]({sc})|
+{r} “we urinated”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 In a transitive clause, *‑er* refers to the plural object.
 
-(235)
+{{< gloss "(235)" >}}
+{g} *àyì*,[1pl]({sc})|*kér=gì*,fence.[sg=acc]({sc})|*kíl-ó*,jump-[pst.1pl]({sc})|
+{r} “we jumped the fence”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(236)
+{{< gloss "(236)" >}}
+{g} *àyì*,[1pl]({sc})|*kér-nd̪ú=gí*,fence-[pl=acc]({sc})|*kíl-ér-ó*,jump-[plr-pst.1pl]({sc})|
+{r} “we jumped the fences”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 The *‑er*-extension also occurs in transitivity alternations. Compare the transitive clause in (237) to the agent-preserving clause in (238) and to the patient-preserving non-basic intransitive clause in (239).
 
-(237)
+{{< gloss "(237)" >}}
+{g} *íyé-t̪ù*,shepherd-[sg]({sc})|*ēg-ī=gī*,goat-[pl=acc]({sc})|*túy-é-n*,milk-[plr-3]({sc})|
+{r} “the shepherd milks the goats” / “the shepherd milks goats”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(238)
+{{< gloss "(238)" >}}
+{g} *íyé-t̪ù*,shepherd-[sg]({sc})|*túy-é-n*,milk-[plr-3]({sc})|
+{r} “the shepherd milks”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(239)
+{{< gloss "(239)" >}}
+{g} *ōd̪-d̪ū*,goat-[sg]({sc})|*túy-é-n*,milk-[plr-3]({sc})|
+{r} “the goat milks, i.e. produces milk” / “a goat milks, i.e. produces milk”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Depending on the semantics of the verb and the semantic properties of its arguments, non-basic intransitivity constructions may even have a facilitative or passive reading.[^262]
 
 [^262]: Jakobi & Ibrahim, “Labile Verbs in Tagle.”
 
-(240)
+{{< gloss "(240)" >}}
+{g} *ɪ̀-t̪ʊ̀*,baobab-[sg]({sc})|*dʌ̄ɲɲ-ɛ̄-n*,climb-[plr-3]({sc})|
+{r} “the baobab is easy to climb” / “the baobab gets climbed”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Some transitive and intransitive verbs expressing inherently repetitive events are always marked by the *‑er*-extension, as shown by the following [2sg/2pl]({sc}) imperative forms of Tagle. On these verbs the *‑er*-extension has become lexicalized.
 
@@ -1688,13 +1917,24 @@ Interestingly, the Kordofan Nubian and Midob *‑er*-extension is phonetically a
 
 Whereas the Nile Nubian languages and Midob express reciprocal notions lexically, the Kordofan Nubian languages exhibit a productive reciprocal extension which is attached to plural verb stems. Reciprocal constructions are intransitive; for this reason, in Tagle the intransitive past marker is required, *‑(ì)bɛ̀l,* which contrasts with the transitive past marker *‑(í)nàl.*
 
-(255)
+{{< gloss "(255)" >}}
+{r} **Tagle**
+{g} *ínì*,people|*kòn‑nú‑nù=gì*,bird-[sg-dim.sg=acc]({sc})|*ìcí=kɔ̀*,hand=[ins]({sc})|*áŋ‑ínàl‑à-m* [áŋàlàm],seize-[tr.pst-pl-pst.3]({sc})|
+{r} “the people seized the bird by hand”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(256)
+{{< gloss "(256)" >}}
+{g} *ínì*,people|*àɲ-c-ìn-ìbɛ̀l-ʌ̀-m*,seize-[plr-rcp-itr.pst-pl-pst.3]({sc})|
+{r} “the people seized each other”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 In Karko the reciprocal extension has several allomorphs. Because of its underspecified vowel the extension *‑Vn* adopts the quality of the stem vowel. As in Tagle, the reciprocal is attached to the plural verb stem. In the past it requires the intransitive past marker *-ɲj.*
 
-(257)
+{{< gloss "(257)" >}}
+{r} **Karko**
+{g} *ín*,people|*kwɛ̌ɛ̀=g*,spear.[pl=acc]({sc})|*fɛ́t̪-ɛ́n-ɲj-ɛ̀ɛ̀*,throw.[plr-rcp-itr.pst-3pl]({sc})|
+{r} “the people threw spears at each other”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 The Kordofan Nubian reciprocal *‑in*-suffix looks strikingly similar to the Ama dual suffixes *‑ɪ̄n* and *‑ɛ̄n.* According to Norton’s internal reconstruction, Ama *‑ɪ̄n* is the older form, which originates from an old reciprocal suffix.[^269] He also points out that similar reciprocal extensions are attested in several East Sudanic languages. For these reasons, Kordofan Nubian *‑in* and Ama *‑ɪ̄n* can be considered cognates, providing another piece of evidence for the genetic relationship between these languages. So far, we do not know whether Afitti exhibits a comparable extension.[^270]
 
@@ -1732,13 +1972,25 @@ Karko, too, uses various plural stem extensions, including *‑tVg, ‑kVn,* and
 
 Like the *‑er*-extension ([6.3](#63)), the suffixes introduced in the present section can mark plural verb stems which are required in transitivity alternations. For this reason, they are glossed just like *‑er* by [plr]({sc}). Here are two pairs of Karko examples contrasting transitive and non-basic intransitive clauses. The latter are illustrated by the agent-preserving clause (269) and the patient-preserving clause (271).
 
-(268)
+{{< gloss "(268)" >}}
+{g} *ín*,people|*wèè=g*,sorghum=[acc]({sc})|*díg-t-ìg*,gather-[plr-plr]({sc})|
+{r} “the people gather the sorghum (ears)”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(269)
+{{< gloss "(269)" >}}
+{g} *ín*,people|*kùld=ūt*,mountain=[loc]({sc})|*díg-t-ìg*,gather-[plr-plr]({sc})|
+{r} “the people gather on the mountain”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(270)
+{{< gloss "(270)" >}}
+{g} *íīd̪*,man|*t̪óóɲéè=g*,children=[acc]({sc})|*fɛ̀j-ɛ́k*,wake.up-[plr]({sc})|
+{r} “the man wakes the children up”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(271)
+{{< gloss "(271)" >}}
+{g} *t̪óóɲē*,children|*fɛ̀j-ɛ́k*,wake.up-[plr]({sc})|
+{r} “the children wake up”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 ## The Kordofan Nubian *‑ad̪-* and Midob *‑át*-Extensions {#66}
 
@@ -1759,9 +2011,26 @@ The *‑ad̪*-extension is a portmanteau morpheme since it cumulatively expresse
 
 The Tagle participles are regularly associated with a low tone pattern. The singular forms are marked by complex suffixes composed of the participle marker plus a vowel suffix marking number, *‑ad̪-u ~ -ʌd̪-ʊ* and the plural forms by *‑an-i ~ -ʌn-ɪ.* This means that Tagle participles are double marked for number. The participles can serve as attributive adjectives modifying a noun phrase or as predicative adjectives in copula clauses.
 
-(275)
+{{< gloss "(275a)" >}}
+{r} **Tagle**
+{g} *kɪ́-t̪ʊ́*,door-[sg]({sc})|*èt̪-ìŋk-àd̪-ù*,enter-[plr-ptc.sg-sg]({sc})|
+{r} “the closed door”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(276)
+{{< gloss "(275b)" >}}
+{g} *kɪ́-nɪ́*,door-[pl]({sc})|*èt̪-ìŋk-àn-ì*,enter-[plr-ptc.pl-pl]({sc})|
+{r} “the closed doors”
+{{< /gloss >}}
+
+{{< gloss "(276a)" >}}
+{g} *kɪ̀-t̪ʊ̀*,cloth-[sg]({sc})|*dùy-àd̪-ù-ní* [dùyàdùní],sew-[ptc.sg-sg-cop]({sc})|
+{r} “the cloth is sewn”
+{{< /gloss >}}
+
+{{< gloss "(276b)" >}}
+{g} *kɪ̀-nɪ̀*,cloth-[pl]({sc})|*dùy-àn-ì-ní*,sew-[ptc.pl-pl-cop]({sc})|
+{r} “the clothes are sewn”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Similar to Tagle, Karko participles are characterized by a low tone pattern. They are inflected for singular by *‑Vd̪* and for plural by *‑Vn,* the vowel *V* adopting the quality of the stem vowel.
 
@@ -1823,13 +2092,27 @@ A phonetically and semantically similar *VC*-shaped extension is attested in Ama
 [^283]:  Norton, “Number in Ama Verbs.”
 [^284]: ![Norton, this issue](article:norton.md). Examples from Norton, “Number in Ama Verbs,” pp. 77 and 78.
 
-(288)
+{{< gloss "(288)" >}}
+{r} **Ama**
+{g} *ə̀ŋí*,[1pl]({sc})|*bā*,[ver]({sc})|*wùd̪ēŋ*,child|*dɛ̄ɛ́ɪ́*,hit|
+{r} “we hit the child”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(289)
+{{< gloss "(289)" >}}
+{g} *ə̀ŋí*,[1pl]({sc})|*bā*,[ver]({sc})|*dɔ̄rɛŋ*,children|*dɛ̄-ɪ́d̪-ɪ́*,hit-[dstr-th]({sc})|
+{r} “we hit the children”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(290)
+{{< gloss "(290)" >}}
+{g} *ə̀ŋí*,[1pl]({sc})|*bā*,[ver]({sc})|*tūɽ-íd-è*,cry-[dstr-th]({sc})|
+{r} “we (three or more) each cried”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
-(291)
+{{< gloss "(291)" >}}
+{g} *ə̀ŋí*,[1pl]({sc})|
+*bā*,[ver]({sc})|*dɔ̄rɛŋ*,children|*mʊ̄l*,five|*dɛ̄-ɪ́d̪-ɪ́*,hit-[dstr-th]({sc})|
+{r} “we hit until we had hit five children”
+{{< /gloss >}}
 
 Midob is spoken in Darfur and Ama in the Nuba Mountains. In view of the geographical distance between these languages today, (recent) direct borrowing is unlikely. Considering that the non-initial dental *d̪* and the non-initial alveolar *d* may correspond to each other,[^327] the striking semantic and phonetic resemblances between Ama *‑ɪ́d̪* and Midob *‑íd* suggest that these suffixes are cognates. They represent another piece of evidence for the common genetic origins of Ama and the Nubian languages. Unfortunately, as in the case of the causative *‑ɪg*- or *‑ɛg*-suffix and the reciprocal/dual suffix *‑ɪn,* corroborating evidence from Afitti is (still) missing.
 
@@ -1994,7 +2277,6 @@ Kauczor, P. Daniel. *Die bergnubische Sprache (Dialekt von Gebel Deleṅ).* Vien
 * [gen]({sc}) – genitive;
 * [excl]({sc}) – exclusive;
 * [imp]({sc}) – imperative;
-* [in]({sc}) – inclusive;
 * [incl]({sc}) – inclusive;
 * [ind]({sc}) – indicative;
 * [inten]({sc}) – intentional;