diff --git a/_vendor/git.sandpoints.org/Drawwell/SandpointsTheme/layouts/_default/_markup/render-link.html b/_vendor/git.sandpoints.org/Drawwell/SandpointsTheme/layouts/_default/_markup/render-link.html index 76f84b9..e886866 100644 --- a/_vendor/git.sandpoints.org/Drawwell/SandpointsTheme/layouts/_default/_markup/render-link.html +++ b/_vendor/git.sandpoints.org/Drawwell/SandpointsTheme/layouts/_default/_markup/render-link.html @@ -1 +1 @@ -{{- .Page.Scratch.Add "urls" (slice .Destination) -}}{{- $t := .Text -}}{{- if and (strings.HasPrefix .Destination "{") (.Destination | strings.Count "}") -}}{{- range first 1 (split .Destination "}") -}}{{- range $frmt := (split (substr . 1) ",") -}}{{- if eq $frmt "sc" -}}{{- $t -}}{{- end -}}{{- end -}}{{- end -}}{{- else -}}www⁄{{ .Text | safeHTML }}{{- end -}} +{{- .Page.Scratch.Add "urls" (slice .Destination) -}}{{- $t := .Text -}}{{- $sup := "" -}}{{- if and (strings.HasPrefix .Destination "{") (.Destination | strings.Count "}") -}}{{- range first 1 (split .Destination "}") -}}{{- range $frmt := (split (substr . 1) ",") -}}{{- if eq $frmt "sc" -}}{{- $t -}}{{- end -}}{{- end -}}{{- end -}}{{- else }}{{- if strings.HasPrefix .Destination "http" -}}{{- $sup = "www" -}}{{- end -}}{{- if strings.HasPrefix .Destination "#" -}}{{- $sup = "§" -}}{{- end -}}{{- $sup -}}⁄{{ .Text | safeHTML }}{{- end -}} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/_vendor/modules.txt b/_vendor/modules.txt index 4023cd5..9824dfc 100644 --- a/_vendor/modules.txt +++ b/_vendor/modules.txt @@ -1 +1 @@ -# git.sandpoints.org/Drawwell/SandpointsTheme v0.0.0-20201206171507-901ea1aeeb8c +# git.sandpoints.org/Drawwell/SandpointsTheme v0.0.0-20201207020317-60aec2a7d78b diff --git a/content/article/jakobi.md b/content/article/jakobi.md index c16e08c..5ef0c06 100644 --- a/content/article/jakobi.md +++ b/content/article/jakobi.md @@ -100,11 +100,11 @@ According to Dimmendaal, “[v]erbal derivation in the Nilo-Saharan languages co [^31]: Dimmendaal, “Nilo-Saharan,” p. 52. -The present paper will show in detail that Proto-Nubian had seven verbal derivational devices: two causative suffixes ([§2.1](#21) and [§2.2](#22)), two applicatives ([§3.3](#33) and [§3.4](#34)), two verbal number suffixes ([§4.1](#41) and [§4.2](#42)), and a causative prefix ([§5](#5)). The section on the applicatives ([§3](#3)) is extensive because it will show that the two “give” verbs can be used as independent lexical verbs and also as valency increasing devices. I will argue that applicatives in the Nile Nubian languages are realized as converb constructions rather than as derivational suffixes, as attested in the western branch of the Nubian family. +The present paper will show in detail that Proto-Nubian had seven verbal derivational devices: two causative suffixes ([2.1](#21) and [2.2](#22)), two applicatives ([3.3](#33) and [3.4](#34)), two verbal number suffixes ([4.1](#41) and [4.2](#42)), and a causative prefix ([5](#5)). The section on the applicatives ([3](#3)) is extensive because it will show that the two “give” verbs can be used as independent lexical verbs and also as valency increasing devices. I will argue that applicatives in the Nile Nubian languages are realized as converb constructions rather than as derivational suffixes, as attested in the western branch of the Nubian family. -Whereas the derivational devices which are found in both branches of the Nubian language group can be reconstructed for Proto-Nubian, there are further verb extensions with a more limited distribution. The Nile Nubian languages, for instance, have passive extensions ([§6.1](#61)); Mattokki and Andaandi exhibit a plural object extension ([§6.2](#62)); and a plural stem extension is attested in Kordofan Nubian and Midob ([§6.3](#63)). A reciprocal suffix ([§6.4](#64)) as well as some plural stem extensions occur in Kordofan Nubian ([§6.5](#65)). Kordofan Nubian and Midob, meanwhile, exhibit a valency-decreasing suffix ([§6.6](#66)). Moreover, in Midob a distinct pluractional extension is found ([§6.7](#67)). +Whereas the derivational devices which are found in both branches of the Nubian language group can be reconstructed for Proto-Nubian, there are further verb extensions with a more limited distribution. The Nile Nubian languages, for instance, have passive extensions ([6.1](#61)); Mattokki and Andaandi exhibit a plural object extension ([6.2](#62)); and a plural stem extension is attested in Kordofan Nubian and Midob ([6.3](#63)). A reciprocal suffix ([6.4](#64)) as well as some plural stem extensions occur in Kordofan Nubian ([6.5](#65)). Kordofan Nubian and Midob, meanwhile, exhibit a valency-decreasing suffix ([6.6](#66)). Moreover, in Midob a distinct pluractional extension is found ([6.7](#67)). -Ama, too, has a rather rich inventory of derivational extensions.[^32] It has suffixes for passive, ventive, directional/causative ([§5.2](#52)), mediocausative, reciprocal, distributive ([§6.3](#63)), pluractional, and dual ([§6.4](#64)). In addition, Ama has a causative prefix ([§5.2](#52)). The range of Afitti verb extensions, however, is still little known. +Ama, too, has a rather rich inventory of derivational extensions.[^32] It has suffixes for passive, ventive, directional/causative ([5.2](#52)), mediocausative, reciprocal, distributive ([6.3](#63)), pluractional, and dual ([6.4](#64)). In addition, Ama has a causative prefix ([5.2](#52)). The range of Afitti verb extensions, however, is still little known. [^32]: Stevenson, “A Survey of the Phonetics and Grammatical Structure of the Nuba Mountain Languages” and ![Norton, this issue](article:norton.md). @@ -296,15 +296,15 @@ The corresponding Tagle extension is realized as [ir] after [+ATR] root vowel(s) (42) -Second, Tagle *‑(i)r ~ ‑(ɪ)r* is attested on some transitive verbs, but not as a causative suffix. Rather, it appears to have gained a new function in interacting with singular objects. Because of this function it contrasts with the *‑er ~ ‑ɛr*-extension, which is sensitive to plural objects (see [§6.3](#63)). +Second, Tagle *‑(i)r ~ ‑(ɪ)r* is attested on some transitive verbs, but not as a causative suffix. Rather, it appears to have gained a new function in interacting with singular objects. Because of this function it contrasts with the *‑er ~ ‑ɛr*-extension, which is sensitive to plural objects (see [6.3](#63)). (43) (44) -This contrast of *‑(i)r ~ ‑(ɪ)r* versus *‑er ~ ‑ɛr* is attested by a few Tagle verbs only. It is more common in combination with *‑ig,* forming the valency-increasing extensions *‑ɪg-ɪr ~ ‑ɪg-ɛr,* as shown in [§2.2](#22). +This contrast of *‑(i)r ~ ‑(ɪ)r* versus *‑er ~ ‑ɛr* is attested by a few Tagle verbs only. It is more common in combination with *‑ig,* forming the valency-increasing extensions *‑ɪg-ɪr ~ ‑ɪg-ɛr,* as shown in [2.2](#22). -The Karko reflex of the causative *\*‑(i)r*-extension has an unspecified vowel *V* which adopts the quality of the root vowel, as is common in Karko suffixes having a short vowel. The causative extension can therefore be represented as *‑(V)r.* It has the same segmental structure as the plural stem extension *‑(V)r* discussed in [§6.3](#63) which precedes the causative suffix. In the following examples the object noun phrase *ɕə̄kə̄l* “gazelle” has the role of patient, it occurs in singular form. Because of the generic reading of *ɕə̄kə̄l,* the verb requires to be realized by a plural stem. +The Karko reflex of the causative *\*‑(i)r*-extension has an unspecified vowel *V* which adopts the quality of the root vowel, as is common in Karko suffixes having a short vowel. The causative extension can therefore be represented as *‑(V)r.* It has the same segmental structure as the plural stem extension *‑(V)r* discussed in [6.3](#63) which precedes the causative suffix. In the following examples the object noun phrase *ɕə̄kə̄l* “gazelle” has the role of patient, it occurs in singular form. Because of the generic reading of *ɕə̄kə̄l,* the verb requires to be realized by a plural stem. (45) @@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ In addition to deriving transitive from intransitive verbs, Midob *‑(i)r* can {r} “s/he made him deviate from the road” {{< /gloss >}} -In terms of its valency-increasing function, Midob *‑(i)r* is comparable to the extension *‑ée-k ~ -èe-k* ([§2.2](#22)). +In terms of its valency-increasing function, Midob *‑(i)r* is comparable to the extension *‑ée-k ~ -èe-k* ([2.2](#22)). ## The Causative *\*‑(i)gir* Extension {#22} @@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ Browne points out that -(ⲁ)ⲣ (see §2.1) and -ⲅ-(ⲁ)ⲣ may occasionally (54) -In Nobiin, particularly in the Fadicca dialect, *kir* “make” is still used as an independent verb, as Reinisch points out.[^68] In addition, *kir* has undergone a grammaticalization process which has resulted in a causative construction comprising an uninflected lexical verb marked by the converb suffix *‑a* followed by *kir* serving as an auxiliary (for converb constructions see [§3.2](#32)). This biverbal causative construction is very similar to the applicative construction in the Nile Nubian languages. The following examples are drawn from Reinisch.[^69] +In Nobiin, particularly in the Fadicca dialect, *kir* “make” is still used as an independent verb, as Reinisch points out.[^68] In addition, *kir* has undergone a grammaticalization process which has resulted in a causative construction comprising an uninflected lexical verb marked by the converb suffix *‑a* followed by *kir* serving as an auxiliary (for converb constructions see [3.2](#32)). This biverbal causative construction is very similar to the applicative construction in the Nile Nubian languages. The following examples are drawn from Reinisch.[^69] [^68]: Reinisch, *Die sprachliche Stellung des Nuba,* p. 37. [^69]: Ibid. @@ -404,11 +404,11 @@ Here is a Mattokki example of *kuur* “learn” in a causative construction wit (62) -The Andaandi causative suffix *‑(i)gir* is, as Armbruster argues,[^78] morphologically composed of two morphemes, accusative marker *‑g* (i.e., the “objective suffix” in Armbruster’s terms) and causative suffix *‑ir* discussed in [§2.1](#21). +The Andaandi causative suffix *‑(i)gir* is, as Armbruster argues,[^78] morphologically composed of two morphemes, accusative marker *‑g* (i.e., the “objective suffix” in Armbruster’s terms) and causative suffix *‑ir* discussed in [2.1](#21). [^78]: Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §§3665ff. -However, the fact that the velar stop [g] appears even in the non-Nubian Ama causative suffixes *‑ɪg* and *‑ɛg* (see [§5.2](#52)) indicates that this stop should be identified with the causative, rather than with the accusative morpheme. +However, the fact that the velar stop [g] appears even in the non-Nubian Ama causative suffixes *‑ɪg* and *‑ɛg* (see [5.2](#52)) indicates that this stop should be identified with the causative, rather than with the accusative morpheme. The *‑(i)gir*-extension occurs on intransitive and transitive verb stems. It is also used on borrowings from Arabic, such as *jammɛ* in the examples below.[^79] This indicates that *‑(i)gir* is highly productive. @@ -472,7 +472,7 @@ The Karko extension *‑ɛɛr* is only found on transitive verbs. It originates (82) -Midob, too, has – besides the *‑(i)r*-extension discussed in [§2.1](#21) – another valency-increasing extension. With some verb bases it is realized as high tone *‑éek,* with others as low tone *‑èek.* Werner’s examples illustrate that *‑éek ~ ‑èek* derives causative from transitive verb bases.[^86] The question whether it also derives transitive from intransitive bases has yet to be answered. +Midob, too, has – besides the *‑(i)r*-extension discussed in [2.1](#21) – another valency-increasing extension. With some verb bases it is realized as high tone *‑éek,* with others as low tone *‑èek.* Werner’s examples illustrate that *‑éek ~ ‑èek* derives causative from transitive verb bases.[^86] The question whether it also derives transitive from intransitive bases has yet to be answered. [^86]: Examples from Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* pp. 54, 89. @@ -502,7 +502,7 @@ The applicative – more precisely, the benefactive applicative – is a valency Applicative constructions in the Nubian languages are based on a grammaticalized “give” verb. In the Nile Nubian languages, the grammaticalization path has led to a periphrastic applicative construction, comprising a nonfinite lexical verb and a finite “give” verb. In the western branch, by contrast, the grammaticalization process has gone further, because “give” has adopted the status of a derivational applicative extension. Both the Nile Nubian and the western Nubian applicative constructions are highly productive. -Before exploring these applicative constructions in more detail, we show in [§3.1](#31) that most Nubian languages have two “give” verbs serving as independent lexical verbs. In [§3.2](#32) we introduce the concept of “converb,” as applicatives in the Nile Nubian languages can be identified as converb constructions [§3.3](#33) and [§3.5](#35). +Before exploring these applicative constructions in more detail, we show in [3.1](#31) that most Nubian languages have two “give” verbs serving as independent lexical verbs. In [3.2](#32) we introduce the concept of “converb,” as applicatives in the Nile Nubian languages can be identified as converb constructions [3.3](#33) and [3.5](#35). ## Two Verbs for "give" {#31} @@ -510,7 +510,7 @@ It is assumed that originally each of the Nubian languages considered in this pa [^91]: Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 443. -This distinction is still reflected in Nile Nubian. In the languages of the western branch, however, the system is more complex because of the morphological blending of the two donative verbs. The resulting new donative verb is employed in non-imperative applicative forms ([§3.4](#34)). In imperative applicative forms, by contrast, at least in Karko and Dilling, two distinct donative verbs are used (see [§3.5](#35)). +This distinction is still reflected in Nile Nubian. In the languages of the western branch, however, the system is more complex because of the morphological blending of the two donative verbs. The resulting new donative verb is employed in non-imperative applicative forms ([3.4](#34)). In imperative applicative forms, by contrast, at least in Karko and Dilling, two distinct donative verbs are used (see [3.5](#35)). **Table 6** shows that the Kordofan Nubian languages exhibit some unexpected reflexes of *\*tir* and *\*deen*. Tagle *tí* and Karko *tìì* and *tèn* exhibit an initial alveolar stop. The realization of the initial consonant of Dilling *tir* and *tin* is not known, because the Dilling data are drawn from Kauczor’s grammar which fails to distinguish between dental and alveolar stops – although the phonemic opposition between the dental and alveolar place of articulation is a characteristic of the Kordofan Nubian languages. For this reason, we can only assume that two donative verbs in Dilling have an initial alveolar stop *t,* just like the Karko items and the single Tagle “give” shown in **Table 6**.[^93] @@ -551,7 +551,7 @@ The following Andaandi clause exhibits the plural object extension *‑ir* being (94) -Dilling and Karko distinguish two donative verbs. As pointed out in the beginning of this section, Kauczor’s Dilling data do not account for the phonemic contrast between *t̪* and *t,* therefore *tir* and *tin* are spelled with the same initial character. We assume, that – similar to Tagle and Karko – the initial segment in both verbs is an alveolar *t.* The final *‑en* on the uninflected donative verbs can be identified as a purposive converb marker (see [§3.2](#32)).[^100] +Dilling and Karko distinguish two donative verbs. As pointed out in the beginning of this section, Kauczor’s Dilling data do not account for the phonemic contrast between *t̪* and *t,* therefore *tir* and *tin* are spelled with the same initial character. We assume, that – similar to Tagle and Karko – the initial segment in both verbs is an alveolar *t.* The final *‑en* on the uninflected donative verbs can be identified as a purposive converb marker (see [3.2](#32)).[^100] [^100]: Examples from Kauczor, *Die bergnubische Sprache,* p. 346. @@ -571,7 +571,7 @@ Like Dilling but unlike Tagle, Karko exhibits two donative verbs, *tìì* (wit (100) -In Midob, the original distinction between the two donative verbs is retained as well, *\*tir* being reflected by the low tone verb stem *tìr* “give to you/him/them” and *\*deen* by the high tone verb stem *téen* “give to me/us.”[^101] Apparently, these stems undergo some alternations in their imperative forms, *tìr* being realized as *tìd* and *téen* as *téèm.* When they refer to a plural recipient, they require the plural stem extension *-èr ~ -àr* ([§6.3](#63)). +In Midob, the original distinction between the two donative verbs is retained as well, *\*tir* being reflected by the low tone verb stem *tìr* “give to you/him/them” and *\*deen* by the high tone verb stem *téen* “give to me/us.”[^101] Apparently, these stems undergo some alternations in their imperative forms, *tìr* being realized as *tìd* and *téen* as *téèm.* When they refer to a plural recipient, they require the plural stem extension *-èr ~ -àr* ([6.3](#63)). [^101]: Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* pp. 56, 130, 132. @@ -583,7 +583,7 @@ Parallel to their continuous use as independent verbs, the two Nubian donative v ## Converb Constructions {#32} -Before embarking on a more detailed account of these applicative constructions in [§3.3](#33) and [§3.4](#34), the present rather extensive section aims at shedding more light on the properties of the nonfinite dependent verbs. Due to their restricted occurrence and specific functions, these verbs are identified as converbs. Whereas converbs in Andaandi and Mattokki are morphologically unmarked, Old Nubian and Nobiin exhibit an *‑a*-suffix as converb marker. We claim that this suffix differs from the homophone “predicate marker” *‑a* which is attested as a clitic in Old Nubian and Nobiin. According to Van Gerven Oei, the Old Nubian *‑a* can cliticize to various hosts, including i) nominal and verbal predicates in main clauses; ii) final clauses; iii) the element preceding a universal quantifier; and iv) names and kinship terms where *‑a* is used as a vocative marker.[^102] A remnant of the Old Nubian predicate marker is attested in Nobiin, where it serves as a copula.[^103] +Before embarking on a more detailed account of these applicative constructions in [3.3](#33) and [3.4](#34), the present rather extensive section aims at shedding more light on the properties of the nonfinite dependent verbs. Due to their restricted occurrence and specific functions, these verbs are identified as converbs. Whereas converbs in Andaandi and Mattokki are morphologically unmarked, Old Nubian and Nobiin exhibit an *‑a*-suffix as converb marker. We claim that this suffix differs from the homophone “predicate marker” *‑a* which is attested as a clitic in Old Nubian and Nobiin. According to Van Gerven Oei, the Old Nubian *‑a* can cliticize to various hosts, including i) nominal and verbal predicates in main clauses; ii) final clauses; iii) the element preceding a universal quantifier; and iv) names and kinship terms where *‑a* is used as a vocative marker.[^102] A remnant of the Old Nubian predicate marker is attested in Nobiin, where it serves as a copula.[^103] [^102]:Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian.* chap. 7. [^103]:Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* pp. 167-170. @@ -749,9 +749,9 @@ Now, after having described the morphological, syntactic, and semantic propertie ## The Applicative Based on *\*tir* {#33} -While Nile Nubian languages and Midob employ reflexes of *\*tir* in their applicative constructions, the Kordofan Nubian languages employ a new donative verb. As this verb is not a regular reflex of *\*tir,* it is not accounted for in this section but rather in [§3.4](#34). +While Nile Nubian languages and Midob employ reflexes of *\*tir* in their applicative constructions, the Kordofan Nubian languages employ a new donative verb. As this verb is not a regular reflex of *\*tir,* it is not accounted for in this section but rather in [3.4](#34). -Nile Nubian applicatives are encoded by bipartite converb constructions, including a converb, which contributes to the lexical expression of the event, and an inflected donative verb as a marker of increased valence. In the western Nubian languages, however, the donative verb is a derivational extension which attaches to the stem of the lexical verb by means of the linker *-(i)n,* see Midob in **Table 7** and examples of Kordofan Nubian in [§3.4](#34). Whereas the Midob applicative extension *-(i)n-tir* can license a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd person beneficiary, the Nile Nubian applicative based on *tir is restricted to 2nd and 3rd person beneficiaries, thus retaining the original system. +Nile Nubian applicatives are encoded by bipartite converb constructions, including a converb, which contributes to the lexical expression of the event, and an inflected donative verb as a marker of increased valence. In the western Nubian languages, however, the donative verb is a derivational extension which attaches to the stem of the lexical verb by means of the linker *-(i)n,* see Midob in **Table 7** and examples of Kordofan Nubian in [3.4](#34). Whereas the Midob applicative extension *-(i)n-tir* can license a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd person beneficiary, the Nile Nubian applicative based on *tir is restricted to 2nd and 3rd person beneficiaries, thus retaining the original system. | PN | ON | No | Ma | An | Dil | Ta | Ka | Mi | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | @@ -789,7 +789,7 @@ Massenbach, Armbruster, Werner, and Abdel-Hafiz represent the biverbal applicati (134) -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.* +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.* Although *\*tir* originally only referred to 3rd or 2nd person recipients/beneficiaries, as still attested in the applicative constructions of the Nile Nubian languages, this restriction does no longer hold for Midob *tir.* It can serve in applicative constructions, no matter whether the applied object has a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd person referent. Examples (135) and (136) show the directed transfer verb *əək* “send” assigning the role of recipient to a 2nd person singular and a 1st person singular object pronoun.[^162] @@ -801,7 +801,7 @@ Although *\*tir* originally only referred to 3rd or 2nd person recipients/benefi ## The Applicative in the Kordofan Nubian Languages {#34} -Unlike the Nile Nubian applicatives where a donative verb operates in an asymmetric converb construction, applicatives in the languages of the western branch employ a donative verb as an applicative suffix attached to the lexical verb stem by means of the linker *‑(i)n.* In the introduction to [§3](#3) we have already pointed out that – except for their imperative forms – Kordofan Nubian applicative constructions exhibit a single donative verb, which is neither a regular reflex of *\*tir* nor of *\*deen.* Moreover, like *‑(i)n-tir* in Midob, the applicative extension in the Kordofan Nubian languages can refer to a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd person beneficiary. This means that languages of the western branch have lost the original distinction of two donative verbs. +Unlike the Nile Nubian applicatives where a donative verb operates in an asymmetric converb construction, applicatives in the languages of the western branch employ a donative verb as an applicative suffix attached to the lexical verb stem by means of the linker *‑(i)n.* In the introduction to [3](#3) we have already pointed out that – except for their imperative forms – Kordofan Nubian applicative constructions exhibit a single donative verb, which is neither a regular reflex of *\*tir* nor of *\*deen.* Moreover, like *‑(i)n-tir* in Midob, the applicative extension in the Kordofan Nubian languages can refer to a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd person beneficiary. This means that languages of the western branch have lost the original distinction of two donative verbs. | Dil | Ta | Ka | | :--- | :--- | :--- | @@ -828,7 +828,7 @@ In Tagle, too, the linker *‑(i)n* connects the applicative extension *-tì* wi 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). +[^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) @@ -836,7 +836,7 @@ Applicative extentions may attach to an intransitive or transitive verb stem, as (143) -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)). +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)). ## The Applicative Based on *\*deen* @@ -848,7 +848,7 @@ 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. (144) @@ -868,7 +868,7 @@ Studies of the modern Nile Nubian languages mostly represent the periphrastic ap (148) -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.* +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.* | Dil | Ta | Ka | @@ -897,7 +897,7 @@ Interestingly, in Kordofan Nubian applicative constructions the morphosyntactic (153) -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. +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. # Verbal Number {#4} @@ -905,7 +905,7 @@ Verbal number is a grammatical category which “can reflect the number of times [^178]: Veselinova, “Verbal Number and Suppletion.” -The Nubian languages exhibit several verbal number marking extensions. Two of them, *\*-(i)j* ([§4.1](#41)) and *\*-(i)k* ([§4.2](#42)) are reconstructable because they are attested in both branches of the Nubian family. Other extensions have a more restricted distribution. This is true for the plural object extension *‑ir* and *‑(i)r-ir* in Mattokki and Andaandi ([§6.2](#62)), the plural stem extension *‑er* attested in the Kordofan Nubian languages and Midob, and also for further plural stem suffixes in the Kordofan Nubian languages ([§6.5](#65)). +The Nubian languages exhibit several verbal number marking extensions. Two of them, *\*-(i)j* ([4.1](#41)) and *\*-(i)k* ([4.2](#42)) are reconstructable because they are attested in both branches of the Nubian family. Other extensions have a more restricted distribution. This is true for the plural object extension *‑ir* and *‑(i)r-ir* in Mattokki and Andaandi ([6.2](#62)), the plural stem extension *‑er* attested in the Kordofan Nubian languages and Midob, and also for further plural stem suffixes in the Kordofan Nubian languages ([6.5](#65)). ## Pluractional *\*‑(i)j* @@ -1002,7 +1002,7 @@ In Karko, the *\*‑(i)j*-extension is realized as voiced palatal plosive [ɟ] a | (174) | kìl | “jump over!” [oj sg]({sc}) | kìɕ | “jump over!” [oj pl]({sc}) | | (175) | t̪ōl-ór | “swallow!” [oj sg]({sc})[^190] | t̪òɕ | “swallow!” [oj pl]({sc}) | -[^190]: The singular stem *tōl-ór* is extended by the plural stem marker *-Vr* (see [§6.3](#63)). +[^190]: The singular stem *tōl-ór* is extended by the plural stem marker *-Vr* (see [6.3](#63)). (176) @@ -1085,7 +1085,7 @@ As for Old Nubian, there is no evidence of the stem extension *‑k,* not even i [^200]: Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* §18.2. -The *‑k*-extension in the Nile Nubian languages is assumed to be cognate to *‑k* in Dilling, *‑(i)k* in Tagle and *‑(V)k* in Karko. As it is often combined with other plural stem extensions, it is also considered in [§6.5](#65). Here a few examples may suffice. They suggest that *‑(V)k* is often associated with repetitive events but the examples also show that, due to semantic extension, *‑(V)k* can also reflect the number of participants in the action. Both properties are typical of verbal number markers. +The *‑k*-extension in the Nile Nubian languages is assumed to be cognate to *‑k* in Dilling, *‑(i)k* in Tagle and *‑(V)k* in Karko. As it is often combined with other plural stem extensions, it is also considered in [6.5](#65). Here a few examples may suffice. They suggest that *‑(V)k* is often associated with repetitive events but the examples also show that, due to semantic extension, *‑(V)k* can also reflect the number of participants in the action. Both properties are typical of verbal number markers. | Dilling[^201] | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | @@ -1121,7 +1121,7 @@ According to Dimmendaal’s typological study, the archaic causative *\*i*-prefi ## The Causative Prefix in the Nubian Languages {#51} -Me’en, Majang, Kipsigiis, and Ma’di have retained reflexes of the causative prefix with the original high front vowel *i ~ ɪ.* This *V*-shaped prefix is recognized both in Nubian and Ama although it has undergone vowel shifts. In the Nubian languages, this shift has resulted in the emergence of an *\*u- ~ o-* prefix, in Ama the shift has led to the prefix *a-* (see [§5.2](#52)). The reconstructed Nubian vowels *\*u ~ o* can be identified as prefixes because they are all associated with transitive verb stems which contrast with the phonologically and semantically similar intransitive verb stems that do not exhibit an initial vowel. The small number of these derived transitive verbs and the lack of productivity of the vowel prefix suggest that they are a remnant of the archaic causative *\*i*-prefix. +Me’en, Majang, Kipsigiis, and Ma’di have retained reflexes of the causative prefix with the original high front vowel *i ~ ɪ.* This *V*-shaped prefix is recognized both in Nubian and Ama although it has undergone vowel shifts. In the Nubian languages, this shift has resulted in the emergence of an *\*u- ~ o-* prefix, in Ama the shift has led to the prefix *a-* (see [5.2](#52)). The reconstructed Nubian vowels *\*u ~ o* can be identified as prefixes because they are all associated with transitive verb stems which contrast with the phonologically and semantically similar intransitive verb stems that do not exhibit an initial vowel. The small number of these derived transitive verbs and the lack of productivity of the vowel prefix suggest that they are a remnant of the archaic causative *\*i*-prefix. Prefixes are rare in the Nubian languages. Another instance of a petrified prefix is the verbal negation marker *\*m-,*[^203] which is attested in all Nubian languages: e.g., Old Nubian ⲙ-ⲟⲛ, ⲙ-ⲟⲩⲛ “hate, reject, be reluctant” vs. ⲟⲛ, ⲟⲩⲛ “love,” Nobiin *m-éskìr* “be unable” vs. *éské* “be able.” In Dilling, *\*m-* has regularly shifted to /b/: *b-or-di* “barren” vs. *ir* “give birth.” In Midob, *\*m-* has regularly shifted to /p/: *p-óon-hèm* “I hated, refused, rejected” vs. *óo-hêm* (← *óonhèm*) “I loved.” As the prefixing pattern strongly deviates from the predominantly suffixing pattern, which is now typical of all Nubian languages, it suggests that a restructuring process has taken place. @@ -1146,7 +1146,7 @@ In Old Nubian,[^205] for instance, there is evidence of an ⲟⲩ-prefix on tran | (200) | ⲧⲟⲣ, ⲧⲟⲩⲣ, ⲧⲟ(ⲣ)ⲁⲣ | “enter” [itr]({sc}) | | | ⲟⲩ-ⲧⲣ̄, ⲟⲩ-ⲧⲟⲩⲣ, ⲟⲩ-ⲧⲁⲣ | “lay, put, hold, deposit” [tr]({sc}) | -Another intransitive verb root, ⲥⲟⲩⲕⲕ “descend,” attests two derived stems with increased valency: one stem is derived by the ⲟⲩ-prefix plus the causative ‑(ⲁ)ⲣ- ~ -ⲟⲩⲣ-suffix; the other stem is extended by the causative ‑ⲕⲣ̄-suffix but without the ⲟⲩ-prefix. Presumably the absence, i.e., loss of the ⲟⲩ-prefix and the suffixation of the productive ‑ⲕⲣ̄-suffix (see [§2.2](#22)) was triggered by the semantic fading of the causative function of the ⲟⲩ-prefix. +Another intransitive verb root, ⲥⲟⲩⲕⲕ “descend,” attests two derived stems with increased valency: one stem is derived by the ⲟⲩ-prefix plus the causative ‑(ⲁ)ⲣ- ~ -ⲟⲩⲣ-suffix; the other stem is extended by the causative ‑ⲕⲣ̄-suffix but without the ⲟⲩ-prefix. Presumably the absence, i.e., loss of the ⲟⲩ-prefix and the suffixation of the productive ‑ⲕⲣ̄-suffix (see [2.2](#22)) was triggered by the semantic fading of the causative function of the ⲟⲩ-prefix. | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | @@ -1154,7 +1154,7 @@ Another intransitive verb root, ⲥⲟⲩⲕⲕ “descend,” attests two deriv | | ⲟⲩ-ⲥⲕ-(ⲁ)ⲣ, ⲟⲩ-ⲥⲕ-ⲟⲩⲣ | “place” [tr]({sc}) | | | ⲥⲟⲩⲕ-ⲕⲣ̄ | “cause to descend” [tr]({sc}) | -The *u*-prefix attested in Old Nubian is also found on cognate verbs in the modern Nile Nubian languages: e.g., *u-dir* (Nobiin); *u-ndur* (Mattokki and Andaandi); and *u-skir* (Nobiin, Mattokki, Andaandi). Lepsius recognizes that Andaandi *u-ndire, u-ndure* is a cognate of Nobiin *u-dire.*[^206] The addition of the nasal attested in *u-ndir(e)* and *u-ndur(e)* is due to epenthesis.[^208] It is conceivable that the derived unattested stem *u-toor* underwent a number of phonological and morphological changes, including vowel assimilation, the insertion of the epenthetic *n,* which has triggered the voicing of the following original root-initial *t,* and the re-analysis of the root-final *Vr* sequence as the causative *‑ir*-suffix (see [§2.1](#21)). Two distinct developments are assumed: *utoor → utor → utur → untur → undur,* as attested in Mattokki and Andaandi, and *utoor → utur → udur → udir* in Nobiin. +The *u*-prefix attested in Old Nubian is also found on cognate verbs in the modern Nile Nubian languages: e.g., *u-dir* (Nobiin); *u-ndur* (Mattokki and Andaandi); and *u-skir* (Nobiin, Mattokki, Andaandi). Lepsius recognizes that Andaandi *u-ndire, u-ndure* is a cognate of Nobiin *u-dire.*[^206] The addition of the nasal attested in *u-ndir(e)* and *u-ndur(e)* is due to epenthesis.[^208] It is conceivable that the derived unattested stem *u-toor* underwent a number of phonological and morphological changes, including vowel assimilation, the insertion of the epenthetic *n,* which has triggered the voicing of the following original root-initial *t,* and the re-analysis of the root-final *Vr* sequence as the causative *‑ir*-suffix (see [2.1](#21)). Two distinct developments are assumed: *utoor → utor → utur → untur → undur,* as attested in Mattokki and Andaandi, and *utoor → utur → udur → udir* in Nobiin. [^206]: Lepsius, Nubische Grammatik, pp. 405, 141f. Lepsius regards the verb-final *-e* on *undire, undure, udire, sukke, uskire* as the infinitive suffix. [^208]: Epenthesis involving a consonant is specifically known as excrescence. The insertion of a nasal before another consonant, as attested by *undur,* has also occurred in English *messenger* and *passenger,* which are loanwords originating from the French nouns *messager* and *passager.* @@ -1200,7 +1200,7 @@ These two verb pairs have cognates in Tagle. A native speaker, however, would no [^212] The initial /e/ vowel in Tagle *ètírì* regularly corresponds to /o/ in other Kordofan Nubian cognates (Ali Ibrahim, p.c.). -Cognates of the Tagle intransitive/transitive verb pairs “lie down”/“put down” and “enter”/“insert” exist in Karko awe well. The archaic Nilo-Saharan *\*i*-prefix is reflected by the initial vowel of the transitive items, which is associated with a particular form of vowel harmony in which the quality of the root vowel is adopted by the short suffix vowel due to lag assimilation: e.g., *òk-ót̪* “bean” [sg]({sc}); *ūk-ūnd̪* “fire” [pl]({sc}); *ɕə̀t-ə̀d* “closed” [ptc sg]({sc}). The imperative forms *ə̄-t̪ə́r, ɔ̄-t̪ɔ́r, ū-júr* suggest that the initial vowels of these verbs are re-analyzed as root vowels and that the verb-final *Vr* sequence is conceived of as a *‑Vr*-suffix (see [§2.1](#21)). Karko imperatives are marked by a low tone when the verb stems are underived: e.g., *t̪òr* and *jɛ̀r*. The imperative forms of verbs derived by *‑Vr,* however, can have different tone patterns depending on the tone class to which the verbs belong. The contrast between singular and plural imperative forms is unmarked by dedicated suffixes but often expressed by vowel alternation, as (208) *ə̄-t̪ə́r* vs. *ɔ̄-t̪ɔ́r* illustrate. +Cognates of the Tagle intransitive/transitive verb pairs “lie down”/“put down” and “enter”/“insert” exist in Karko awe well. The archaic Nilo-Saharan *\*i*-prefix is reflected by the initial vowel of the transitive items, which is associated with a particular form of vowel harmony in which the quality of the root vowel is adopted by the short suffix vowel due to lag assimilation: e.g., *òk-ót̪* “bean” [sg]({sc}); *ūk-ūnd̪* “fire” [pl]({sc}); *ɕə̀t-ə̀d* “closed” [ptc sg]({sc}). The imperative forms *ə̄-t̪ə́r, ɔ̄-t̪ɔ́r, ū-júr* suggest that the initial vowels of these verbs are re-analyzed as root vowels and that the verb-final *Vr* sequence is conceived of as a *‑Vr*-suffix (see [2.1](#21)). Karko imperatives are marked by a low tone when the verb stems are underived: e.g., *t̪òr* and *jɛ̀r*. The imperative forms of verbs derived by *‑Vr,* however, can have different tone patterns depending on the tone class to which the verbs belong. The contrast between singular and plural imperative forms is unmarked by dedicated suffixes but often expressed by vowel alternation, as (208) *ə̄-t̪ə́r* vs. *ɔ̄-t̪ɔ́r* illustrate. | Karko | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | @@ -1241,7 +1241,7 @@ As in the Nubian languages, verbal derivational extensions in Ama are usually su | (213) | a-t̪os/a-kwos | “suckle” | t̪os/kwos | “suck” | | (214) | a-mɔ | “raise” | mɔ | “rise” | -Stevenson points out that the a-marked causative may “also be combined with the ɪg form,”[^218] which apparently has a causative function as well. Tucker & Bryan, too, note that the causative *a*-prefix is sometimes combined with the *‑ɪg*- and *‑ɛg*-extensions and that, in addition to the causative function, these suffixes express the meaning of “action directed towards.”[^219] For this reason, Norton uses the term “directional” rather than causative.[^220] For the *‑ɪd*-suffix on tam see [§6.7](#67). +Stevenson points out that the a-marked causative may “also be combined with the ɪg form,”[^218] which apparently has a causative function as well. Tucker & Bryan, too, note that the causative *a*-prefix is sometimes combined with the *‑ɪg*- and *‑ɛg*-extensions and that, in addition to the causative function, these suffixes express the meaning of “action directed towards.”[^219] For this reason, Norton uses the term “directional” rather than causative.[^220] For the *‑ɪd*-suffix on tam see [6.7](#67). [^218]: Stevenson, “A Survey of the Phonetics and Grammatical Structure of the Nuba Mountain Languages,” 41: 179. [^219]: Tucker & Bryan, *Linguistic Analyses,* p. 245. @@ -1268,9 +1268,9 @@ Thus, in Ama there are three alternative patterns of causative marking: It is quite conceivable that the three patterns reflect three stages in the historical development from a prefixing pattern to a suffixing pattern. The coincidence of the causative being marked by both the *a*-prefix and the *‑ɪg*- or *‑ɛg*-suffix, as found in *a-t̪al-ɪg* and *a-tam-ɪd-ɛg,* represents an intermediate step in that restructuring process. -The velar consonant of the Ama suffix *‑ɪg* or *‑ɛg* is strongly reminiscent of the velar consonant that is part of the Nubian causative suffixes, Nobiin *‑kìr,* Mattokki *‑igir,* Andaandi *‑(i)gir,* Dilling *‑eg-ir* and *‑ig-er,* and Midob *‑éek* and *‑èek* (see [§2.2](#22)). Since bound morphemes are not easily borrowed, these Nubian causative suffixes are considered to be cognates of the Ama *‑ɪg* and *‑ɛg* causative suffixes. At present, this assumption cannot be corroborated by data from Afitti, since the Afitti verb stems documented so far do not show any evidence of an *‑ɪg*- or *‑ɛg*-suffix. +The velar consonant of the Ama suffix *‑ɪg* or *‑ɛg* is strongly reminiscent of the velar consonant that is part of the Nubian causative suffixes, Nobiin *‑kìr,* Mattokki *‑igir,* Andaandi *‑(i)gir,* Dilling *‑eg-ir* and *‑ig-er,* and Midob *‑éek* and *‑èek* (see [2.2](#22)). Since bound morphemes are not easily borrowed, these Nubian causative suffixes are considered to be cognates of the Ama *‑ɪg* and *‑ɛg* causative suffixes. At present, this assumption cannot be corroborated by data from Afitti, since the Afitti verb stems documented so far do not show any evidence of an *‑ɪg*- or *‑ɛg*-suffix. -Concluding this section, we recognize that both Nubian and Ama exhibit a petrified causative prefix. Since remnants of this prefix are also found in Central Sudanic and several branches of East Sudanic, they provide comparative evidence of the genetic relationships between these languages. Along with the prefixed Nubian negation marker *\*m-* (see [§5.1](#51)), the causative prefixes in Nubian and Ama suggest that these languages have undergone a typological change from prefixing to suffixing languages. These prefixes in Nubian and Ama corroborate Dimmendaal’s hypothesis, which assumes “that the common ancestor of Central Sudanic and Northeastern Nilo-Saharan was typologically more similar to the Moru-Madi languages within the Central Sudanic branch than to any other Nilo-Saharan subgroup found today.”[^222] +Concluding this section, we recognize that both Nubian and Ama exhibit a petrified causative prefix. Since remnants of this prefix are also found in Central Sudanic and several branches of East Sudanic, they provide comparative evidence of the genetic relationships between these languages. Along with the prefixed Nubian negation marker *\*m-* (see [5.1](#51)), the causative prefixes in Nubian and Ama suggest that these languages have undergone a typological change from prefixing to suffixing languages. These prefixes in Nubian and Ama corroborate Dimmendaal’s hypothesis, which assumes “that the common ancestor of Central Sudanic and Northeastern Nilo-Saharan was typologically more similar to the Moru-Madi languages within the Central Sudanic branch than to any other Nilo-Saharan subgroup found today.”[^222] [^222]: Dimmendaal, “On Stable and Unstable Features in Nilo-Saharan,” p. 19. @@ -1344,7 +1344,7 @@ Reinisch’s second hypothesis is supported by Armbruster, who suggests, too, th [^238]: Smagina, *The Old Nubian Language,* p. 43. [^239]: Van Gerven Oei, p.c., September 2020. -Given the fact that Nobiin *‑daŋ* and Old Nubian -ⲧⲁⲕ have a CVC-shape suggests that they originate from a verb root, similar to the CVC-shaped causative and applicative extensions, *\*-(i)gir* and *\*-tir,* which stem from the verbs *gir* “make” and *tir* “give to 2nd or 3rd person.” The Nobiin and Mattokki extensions *‑dakk ~ ‑takk* may owe their final geminated *kk* and their CVCC-shape to a lexical CVC-shaped root incremented by a velar stop. Perhaps this stop can be identified as the plural stem extension *–k.* Its function in this context is, however, unclear ([§4.2](#42)). +Given the fact that Nobiin *‑daŋ* and Old Nubian -ⲧⲁⲕ have a CVC-shape suggests that they originate from a verb root, similar to the CVC-shaped causative and applicative extensions, *\*-(i)gir* and *\*-tir,* which stem from the verbs *gir* “make” and *tir* “give to 2nd or 3rd person.” The Nobiin and Mattokki extensions *‑dakk ~ ‑takk* may owe their final geminated *kk* and their CVCC-shape to a lexical CVC-shaped root incremented by a velar stop. Perhaps this stop can be identified as the plural stem extension *–k.* Its function in this context is, however, unclear ([4.2](#42)). Passive markers often have a verbal origin, as shown by the English *be-* and *get*-passives and the German *werden*-passive. Therefore, we follow Reinisch’s and Armbruster’s suggestions assuming that the passive extensions originate from two semantically related verbs, “wrap, wind” and “be covered.” It is conceivable that Andaandi *-katt* originates from *kant* “wrap, wind,” a verb attested both in Nobiin and Andaandi,[^240] particularly because the gemination of *tt* resulting from the regressive assimilation of *n* to *t* is also attested in the lexical variants *sunti* and *sutti* “hoof, fingernail.”[^241] @@ -1356,7 +1356,7 @@ It is also possible that Nobiin *‑daŋ* and *‑dakk ~ ‑takk* as well as Mat Of course, we cannot exclude that Andaandi *‑katt* does not originate from *kant* but rather from the metathesis of *‑takk → -katt* (even though the motivation for this phonotactic change is as yet unclear). That suggestion has the advantage of conceiving the passive extensions in the Nile Nubian languages to have a common origin in a single verb, *tag* “get covered.” The semantic notions of this intransitive verb fit well with its grammaticalization as a passive marker. -Unlike the Nile Nubian languages, the Kordofan Nubian languages do not have a dedicated passive extension. Rather, as Comfort and Jakobi have shown,[^243] the passive and other non-basic intransitive constructions are based on verbal plural stems (see [§6.5](#65)). +Unlike the Nile Nubian languages, the Kordofan Nubian languages do not have a dedicated passive extension. Rather, as Comfort and Jakobi have shown,[^243] the passive and other non-basic intransitive constructions are based on verbal plural stems (see [6.5](#65)). [^243]: Comfort, “Verbal Number in the Uncu Language"; Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko (Kordofan Nubian).” @@ -1369,7 +1369,7 @@ As for Midob, Werner denies that there is “a real passive.”[^245] He points ## The Mattokki and Andaandi Plural Object *‑ir*- and *‑(i)r-ir*-Extensions {#62} -The plural object extensions *‑ir* and *‑(i)r-ir* are restricted to Mattokki and Andaandi. Unlike the pluractional *\*-(i)j* ([§4.1](#41)) and the *‑er*-extension [§6.3](#63), these extensions have a strongly restricted function because they are only selected when the referent of the transitive object is plural. That is, they do not interact with plural subjects of intransitive clauses. Both Massenbach and Armbruster account for this productive suffix, but Abdel-Hafiz does not mention it in his Mattokki grammar.[^250] +The plural object extensions *‑ir* and *‑(i)r-ir* are restricted to Mattokki and Andaandi. Unlike the pluractional *\*-(i)j* ([4.1](#41)) and the *‑er*-extension [6.3](#63), these extensions have a strongly restricted function because they are only selected when the referent of the transitive object is plural. That is, they do not interact with plural subjects of intransitive clauses. Both Massenbach and Armbruster account for this productive suffix, but Abdel-Hafiz does not mention it in his Mattokki grammar.[^250] [^250]: Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §3031ff. Examples from Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” pp. 127–128. @@ -1386,7 +1386,7 @@ Armbruster observes that Andaandi *‑ir,* which is sometimes reduplicated and r [^253]: Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §5456. [^254]: El-Guzuuli, p.c., September 2020. -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] +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. @@ -1401,7 +1401,7 @@ Another verbal number marking device is represented by the highly productive ext * when a transitive verb is used without a syntactic object; and * when a transitive verb has passive meaning. -The first two contexts indicate that the interaction of *‑er* with an intransitive plural subject and a transitive plural object represents an ergative alignment pattern. In this respect, the plural stem extension *‑er* is comparable to the pluractional *\*‑(i)j* ([§4.1](#41)), which is associated with the same pattern of grammatical relations. The last two contexts suggest that *‑er* is associated with a low degree of transitivity (in the sense of Hopper & Thompson’s concept of transitivity as a scalar value[^257]). +The first two contexts indicate that the interaction of *‑er* with an intransitive plural subject and a transitive plural object represents an ergative alignment pattern. In this respect, the plural stem extension *‑er* is comparable to the pluractional *\*‑(i)j* ([4.1](#41)), which is associated with the same pattern of grammatical relations. The last two contexts suggest that *‑er* is associated with a low degree of transitivity (in the sense of Hopper & Thompson’s concept of transitivity as a scalar value[^257]). [^257]: Hopper & Thompson, “Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse.” @@ -1442,7 +1442,7 @@ Some transitive and intransitive verbs expressing inherently repetitive events a | (242) | bóg-ér-ì [sg]({sc})/bóg-ér-è [pl]({sc}) | “bark!” | | (243) | ùr-ér-ì [sg]({sc})/ùr-ér-è [pl]({sc}) | “light a fire!” | -The morphologically unmarked imperative examples from Karko show that the *‑er*-extension is realized with an unspecified vowel which adopts the quality of the root vowel. Segmentally, it resembles the causative extension *‑Vr* (see [§2.1](#21)). +The morphologically unmarked imperative examples from Karko show that the *‑er*-extension is realized with an unspecified vowel which adopts the quality of the root vowel. Segmentally, it resembles the causative extension *‑Vr* (see [2.1](#21)). | Karko | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | @@ -1466,7 +1466,7 @@ The *‑er*-extension is often found combined with other verbal number marking d Midob *‑er* is obviously a cognate of the Kordofan Nubian *‑er*-extension. Werner claims that it is “no longer operative and can neither be clearly identified with plurality of object only.”[^265] The examples below show that *‑er* is, in fact, sensitive to the plural subject of an intransitive verb, as shown by “sit” and “stop,” and to the plural indirect object (i.e., the recipient) of the ditransitive “give” verb.[^266] [^265]: Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* p. 52. -[^266]: Werner’s grammar lacks explicit information on the marking of imperative forms. However, from the glossing of the examples ending in *-ec ~ -ic,* such as *òtt-éc* “enter!” [pl]({sc}) (ibid., p. 111) and *péesir-íc* “leave, go out!” [pl]({sc}) (p. 115), one can conclude that *-ec ~ -ic* is the [2pl]({sc}) imperative marker. It is assumed to be a reflex of the pluractional *\*‑(i)j*-extension (see [§4.1](#41)). +[^266]: Werner’s grammar lacks explicit information on the marking of imperative forms. However, from the glossing of the examples ending in *-ec ~ -ic,* such as *òtt-éc* “enter!” [pl]({sc}) (ibid., p. 111) and *péesir-íc* “leave, go out!” [pl]({sc}) (p. 115), one can conclude that *-ec ~ -ic* is the [2pl]({sc}) imperative marker. It is assumed to be a reflex of the pluractional *\*‑(i)j*-extension (see [4.1](#41)). | Midob | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | @@ -1475,7 +1475,7 @@ Midob *‑er* is obviously a cognate of the Kordofan Nubian *‑er*-extension. W | (253) |tìr-îc | “give to him!" [imp 2pl]({sc})| | (254) | tìr-èr-îc| “give to them!" [imp 2pl]({sc}) | -Interestingly, the Kordofan Nubian and Midob *‑er*-extension is phonetically and semantically comparable to the Ama *‑r*-suffix, which, according to Norton, has distributive connotations, i.e., it distributes the event either over several object referents or over a series of sub-events.[^267] It is always preceded by another distributive suffix, *‑Vd̪,* and the theme vowel *a.* The resulting complex *‑Vd̪-a-r*-suffix in Ama corresponds to the Afitti verbal plural suffix *(-tə)-r.* As distributivity is closely associated with plurality, it is quite conceivable that the Kordofan Nubian and Midob plural stem extension *‑er* is a cognate of Ama *(-Vd̪-a)-r* and Afitti *(-tə)-r*. Moreover, these extensions may be related to the Mattokki and Andaandi extensions *‑ir* and *‑(i)r-ir,* which are sensitive to plural objects and distributive events (see [§6.2](#62)). The different but semantically related functions of these extensions – verbal plural, distributive, plural object – indicate that this extension is of considerable age. +Interestingly, the Kordofan Nubian and Midob *‑er*-extension is phonetically and semantically comparable to the Ama *‑r*-suffix, which, according to Norton, has distributive connotations, i.e., it distributes the event either over several object referents or over a series of sub-events.[^267] It is always preceded by another distributive suffix, *‑Vd̪,* and the theme vowel *a.* The resulting complex *‑Vd̪-a-r*-suffix in Ama corresponds to the Afitti verbal plural suffix *(-tə)-r.* As distributivity is closely associated with plurality, it is quite conceivable that the Kordofan Nubian and Midob plural stem extension *‑er* is a cognate of Ama *(-Vd̪-a)-r* and Afitti *(-tə)-r*. Moreover, these extensions may be related to the Mattokki and Andaandi extensions *‑ir* and *‑(i)r-ir,* which are sensitive to plural objects and distributive events (see [6.2](#62)). The different but semantically related functions of these extensions – verbal plural, distributive, plural object – indicate that this extension is of considerable age. [^267]: ![Norton, this issue](article:norton.md). @@ -1525,7 +1525,7 @@ Karko, too, uses various plural stem extensions, including *‑tVg, ‑kVn,* and | (266) | dìí-r | “sink!” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | dìì-kìn | id., [sj pl]({sc}) | dīī-dìì-k | id., [rpt]({sc}) | | (267) | nwàá-r | “run!” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | nwàà-kàn | id., [sj pl]({sc}) | dòɕ | id., [rpt]({sc}) | -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). +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) @@ -1565,7 +1565,7 @@ Similar to Tagle, Karko participles are characterized by a low tone pattern. The | (277) | kàm-àd̪/kàm-àn | “eaten” | | (278) | t̪ɔ̀f-ɔ̀d̪/t̪ɔ̀f-ɔ̀n | “killed” | -Interestingly, most of the participles illustrated here exhibit a marked plural stem: e.g., Dilling *bar-k-ad/bar-k-e* “tired,” *beʃ-ig-ad/bej-ig-e* “damaged”; Tagle *èt̪-ìŋk-àd̪-ù/èt̪‑ìŋk-àn-ì* “closed.” The corresponding singular stems are Dilling *bar, beʃ-ir* and Tagle *èt̪-ír,* respectively. The Karko examples *kàm-àd̪/kàm-àn* “eaten” and *tɔ̀f-ɔ̀d̪/tɔ̀f-ɔ̀n* “killed,” however, exhibit suppletive plural stems, the corresponding singular stems being *kə̀l* and *fúr,* respectively. The plural verb stems are selected because they are associated with low transitivity (which is also addressed in [§6.3](#63)). +Interestingly, most of the participles illustrated here exhibit a marked plural stem: e.g., Dilling *bar-k-ad/bar-k-e* “tired,” *beʃ-ig-ad/bej-ig-e* “damaged”; Tagle *èt̪-ìŋk-àd̪-ù/èt̪‑ìŋk-àn-ì* “closed.” The corresponding singular stems are Dilling *bar, beʃ-ir* and Tagle *èt̪-ír,* respectively. The Karko examples *kàm-àd̪/kàm-àn* “eaten” and *tɔ̀f-ɔ̀d̪/tɔ̀f-ɔ̀n* “killed,” however, exhibit suppletive plural stems, the corresponding singular stems being *kə̀l* and *fúr,* respectively. The plural verb stems are selected because they are associated with low transitivity (which is also addressed in [6.3](#63)). As for the Midob *‑át*-extension, we suggest an analysis different from Werner’s. On first sight, (279)–(281) support his claim that *‑(r)ati* derives reflexive verbs.[^277] @@ -1656,7 +1656,7 @@ Verbal number marking in the Kordofan Nubian languages is far more complex than [^288]: Dimmendaal, “Pluractionality and the Distribution of Number Marking across Categories,” p. 130. -In addition to reconstructing several Proto-Nubian verb extensions, the present paper also shows striking phonetic and semantic resemblances between several Nubian and Nyima (mostly Ama) verb extensions. The Nubian causative suffix *\*‑(i)gir,* for instance, exhibits a velar stop. A velar [g] is also found in the Ama directional/causative extensions *‑ɪg* and *‑ɛg.* The Ama causative verbs “feed” and “suckle” addressed in [§5.2](#52) suggest that the *‑ɪg*- and *‑ɛg*-extensions have come to replace the now defunct causative *a*-prefix, the latter being a cognate of the Proto-Nubian *\*u- ~ o*-prefix. +In addition to reconstructing several Proto-Nubian verb extensions, the present paper also shows striking phonetic and semantic resemblances between several Nubian and Nyima (mostly Ama) verb extensions. The Nubian causative suffix *\*‑(i)gir,* for instance, exhibits a velar stop. A velar [g] is also found in the Ama directional/causative extensions *‑ɪg* and *‑ɛg.* The Ama causative verbs “feed” and “suckle” addressed in [5.2](#52) suggest that the *‑ɪg*- and *‑ɛg*-extensions have come to replace the now defunct causative *a*-prefix, the latter being a cognate of the Proto-Nubian *\*u- ~ o*-prefix. The Kordofan Nubian reciprocal extension *‑in* is comparable to the Ama dual *‑ɪn,* which, according to Norton, originates from a reciprocal extension.[^289]