From e1fae4072c9679ded28d4563359a0f52a4bc6e5c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: 4nubianstudies Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 12:11:24 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] italics jakobi --- content/article/jakobi.md | 368 +++++++++++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 184 insertions(+), 184 deletions(-) diff --git a/content/article/jakobi.md b/content/article/jakobi.md index 374ba9b..11877d6 100644 --- a/content/article/jakobi.md +++ b/content/article/jakobi.md @@ -45,9 +45,9 @@ Probably due to frequent contact between speakers of Nyima and speakers of Kordo | Ama | Mandal | PKN | NN | Gloss | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| *burgɔ̀l* “thief” | *borgòl* “thief” | \*borg- | maag- (An), mark- (No) | steal | -| *kwɔrʃè, kɔrʃè* | *kwarʃè* | \*korʃu | gorij (An), gorjo (No) | six | -| *tājò* | tāj | \*tɛj(j)ɛ | dessi (An, No) | green, unripe | +| *burgɔ̀l* “thief” | *borgòl* “thief” | *\*borg-* | *maag-* (An), *mark-* (No) | steal | +| *kwɔrʃè, kɔrʃè* | *kwarʃè* | *\*korʃu* | *gorij* (An), *gorjo* (No) | six | +| *tājò* | *tāj* | *\*tɛj(j)ɛ* | *dessi* (An, No) | green, unripe | **~~Table 1. Ama – Mandal – PKN correspondences[^16]~~** @@ -57,9 +57,9 @@ Examples of the close sound and meaning correspondences between Afitti and Proto | Afitti | PKN | NN | Gloss | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| tɔ̀rɛ | \*toaɽa | norɛ (An), noree (No) | termite | -| fàrsɛˑn, fàrsɛ | \*farʃ- | barsi (An, No) | twin | -| t̪ɔndɔˑ | \*tondo | dungur (An), dungir (No) | blind | +| *tɔ̀rɛ* | *\*toaɽa* | *norɛ* (An), *noree* (No) | termite | +| *fàrsɛˑn, fàrsɛ* | *\*farʃ-* | *barsi* (An, No) | twin | +| *t̪ɔndɔˑ* | *\*tondo* | *dungur* (An), *dungir* (No) | blind | **~~Table 2. Afitti–PKN correspondences~~** @@ -69,10 +69,10 @@ However, the correspondences between the verb extensions in Nubian and Ama (**Ta | Nubian | | Ama | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| causative prefix | PN \*u- ~ o- | causative prefix | a- | -| causative | PN \*-(i)g-ir | directional, causative | -ɪg, -ɛg | -| reciprocal | KN -in | dual | -ɪn | -| pluractional | Mi -íd | distributive, pluractional | -ɪ́d̪ | +| causative prefix | PN *\*u- ~ o-* | causative prefix | *a- | +| causative | PN *\*-(i)g-ir* | directional, causative | *-ɪg, -ɛg* | +| reciprocal | KN *-in* | dual | *-ɪn* | +| pluractional | Mi *-íd* | distributive, pluractional | *-ɪ́d̪* | **~~Table 3. Comparable Nubian and Ama verb extensions~~** @@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ The initial segment of the *\*-(i)r*-extension is an epenthetic vowel, which is | PN | ON | No | Ma | An | Dil | Ta | Ka | Mi | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| \*-(i)r | -(ⲁ)ⲣ, -ⲣ̄, -(ⲟⲩ)ⲣ | -ir | -ir, -ur | -ir, -ur | -ir | -ir | -(V)r | -(i)r | +| \*-(i)r | -(ⲁ)ⲣ, -ⲣ̄, -(ⲟⲩ)ⲣ | *-ir* | *-ir, -ur* | *-ir, -ur* | *-ir* | *-ir* | *-(V)r* | *-(i)r* | **~~Table 4. The causative extension *\*-(i)r*~~** @@ -176,9 +176,9 @@ The Nobiin *-(i)r*-extension can derive transitive and ditransitive stems when i | | Nobiin | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (8) | karj-e | “ripen” [itr]({sc}) | karj-ir-e | “cook” [tr]({sc}) | -| (9) | naaf-e | “be hidden” [itr]({sc}) | naaf-ir-e | “hide” [tr]({sc}) | -| (10) | jad-e | “suck” [tr]({sc}) | jad-ir-e | “suckle” [ditr]({sc}) | +| (8) | *karj-e* | “ripen” [itr]({sc}) | *karj-ir-e* | “cook” [tr]({sc}) | +| (9) | *naaf-e* | “be hidden” [itr]({sc}) | *naaf-ir-e* | “hide” [tr]({sc}) | +| (10) | *jad-e* | “suck” [tr]({sc}) | *jad-ir-e* | “suckle” [ditr]({sc}) | Werner does not comment on Lepsius’s data, nor does he provide evidence in his Nobiin grammar of such derived transitive and ditransitive verbs. However, his verb paradigms indicate that – unlike transitive verbs – intransitive verbs never take the *-(i)r*-extension in their unmarked [2sg]({sc}) imperative forms.[^45] The absence of *-(i)r* is, no doubt, due to the original restriction of *-(i)r* to transitive and ditransitive verbs. @@ -187,25 +187,25 @@ Werner does not comment on Lepsius’s data, nor does he provide evidence in his | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (11) | nèer | “sleep!” | -| (12) | àag | “sit!” | -| (13) | kîr | “come!” | -| (14) | júù | “go!” | -| (15) | fîyy | “lie (down)!” | +| (11) | *nèer* | “sleep!” | +| (12) | *àag* | “sit!” | +| (13) | *kîr* | “come!” | +| (14) | *júù* | “go!” | +| (15) | *fîyy* | “lie (down)!” | [2sg]({sc}) imperative forms of transitive verbs, by contrast, can be assigned to two groups, a group characterized by the *-(i)r*-extension and another group which does not exhibit this extension. | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (16) | tìg-ìr | “cover!” | -| (17) | fáay-ìr | “kill!” | -| (18) | úkk-îr | “listen!” | -| (19) | dèg-îr | “tie!” | -| (20) | kàb | “eat!” | -| (21) | dòllì | “love!” | -| (22) | nàl | “see!” | -| (23) | êd | “take!” | +| (16) | *tìg-ìr* | “cover!” | +| (17) | *fáay-ìr* | “kill!” | +| (18) | *úkk-îr* | “listen!” | +| (19) | *dèg-îr* | “tie!” | +| (20) | *kàb* | “eat!” | +| (21) | *dòllì* | “love!” | +| (22) | *nàl* | “see!” | +| (23) | *êd* | “take!” | Apparently, having ceased to be a productive derivational morpheme, Nobiin *-(i)r* has become a morphological residue of the originally causative *\*-(i)r*-extension. This process in which “a morpheme loses its grammatical-semantic contribution to a word but retains some remnant of its original form and thus becomes an indistinguishable part of a word’s phonological construction” can be described by Hopper’s term “demorphologization.”[^46] @@ -217,9 +217,9 @@ Unlike the Old Nubian and Nobiin *-(i)r*-extension, which can be attached to int | | Mattokki | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (24) | arub | “be folded up” [itr]({sc}) | arb-ir | “fold up” [tr]({sc}) | -| (25) | urub | “have a hole” [itr]({sc}) | urb-ur | “make a hole” [tr]({sc}) | -| (26) | tag | “be covered” [itr]({sc}) | tag-ir | “cover, protect” [tr]({sc}) | +| (24) | *arub* | “be folded up” [itr]({sc}) | *arb-ir* | “fold up” [tr]({sc}) | +| (25) | *urub* | “have a hole” [itr]({sc}) | *urb-ur* | “make a hole” [tr]({sc}) | +| (26) | *tag* | “be covered” [itr]({sc}) | *tag-ir* | “cover, protect” [tr]({sc}) | Abdel-Hafiz claims that Mattokki *-(i)r* is a “transitivizing suffix.”[^48] However, he overlooks the fact that it also occurs on some intransitive verbs such as “move down” and “fall,”[^49] without, however, turning them into transitive verbs. These examples suggest that the functional weight of the *-(i)r*-extension is low. @@ -229,8 +229,8 @@ Abdel-Hafiz claims that Mattokki *-(i)r* is a “transitivizing suffix.”[^48] | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (27) | dig-ir | “fall” | -| (28) | ʃug-ur | “move down, descend” | +| (27) | *dig-ir* | “fall” | +| (28) | *ʃug-ur* | “move down, descend” | It is conceivable that the loss of morphological meaning observed with *-(i)r* has triggered the emergence of a reduplicated causative extension which exhibits more phonological material and more functional weight than *-(i)r.* The resulting (unattested) *-ir-ir*-suffix has presumbably undergone a phonotactic change affecting the second component of this suffix. After the metathesis of the last two segments, the resulting suffix *-ir-ri* (allomorph *-ur-ri*) has come to be realized as [iddi] or [uddi]. Massenbach accounts for this reduplicated causative suffix in her Mattokki study (29)–(30), but in Abdel-Hafiz’s grammar it is not mentioned.[^50] @@ -252,9 +252,9 @@ As in Mattokki, Andaandi *‑(i)r ~ ‑(u)r* is attached to intransitive verb ba | | Andaandi | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (31) | kuɲ | “sink, get buried” [itr]({sc}) | kuɲ-ur | “bury” [tr]({sc}) | -| (32) | aag | “squat, sit” [itr]({sc}) | ag-iddi | “cause to sit, seat” [tr]({sc}) | -| (33) | dab | “disappear” [itr]({sc}) | dab-ir | “cause to disappear” [tr]({sc})| +| (31) | *kuɲ* | “sink, get buried” [itr]({sc}) | *kuɲ-ur* | “bury” [tr]({sc}) | +| (32) | *aag* | “squat, sit” [itr]({sc}) | *ag-iddi* | “cause to sit, seat” [tr]({sc}) | +| (33) | *dab* | “disappear” [itr]({sc}) | *dab-ir* | “cause to disappear” [tr]({sc})| {{< gloss "(34)" >}} {g} *tɛn*,[3sg.gen]({sc})|*dungi*,money|*dab-os-ko-n*,disappear-[pfv-pt-3sg]({sc})| @@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ As in Mattokki, Andaandi *‑(i)r ~ ‑(u)r* is attached to intransitive verb ba {r} “don’t lose the money” {{< /gloss >}} -Regarding the *‑iddi ~ ‑uddi*-extension, Armbruster claims that it is composed of *‑(i)r* plus *‑d(i),* the latter allegedly having a causative or intensive function.[^55] However, it is difficult to corroborate his assertion, since *‑d(i)* is only found after consonants where [d] may originate from [r] assimilated to a preceding consonant. Moreover, the *‑(i)r*-extension may trigger the same morphophonemic changes when it is followed by *‑r-i* marking the neutral[^56] [1sg]({sc}) form. This morpheme sequence is realized as [iddi], too, e.g., *boog-ir-ri* is realized as [bogiddi] “I pour.”[^57] This evidence supports the analysis of the causative *‑iddi*-extension as originating from *‑ir-ir > -ir-ri > ‑iddi,* that is, as a sequence of two *‑(i)r* morphemes. Here are two Andaandi examples attesting the causative *‑iddi ~ ‑uddi*-extension. +Regarding the *‑iddi ~ ‑uddi*-extension, Armbruster claims that it is composed of *‑(i)r* plus *‑d(i),* the latter allegedly having a causative or intensive function.[^55] However, it is difficult to corroborate his assertion, since *‑d(i)* is only found after consonants where [d] may originate from [r] assimilated to a preceding consonant. Moreover, the *‑(i)r*-extension may trigger the same morphophonemic changes when it is followed by *‑r-i* marking the neutral[^56] [1sg]({sc}) form. Also this morpheme sequence is realized as [iddi], e.g., *boog-ir-ri* is realized as [bogiddi] “I pour.”[^57] This evidence supports the analysis of the causative *‑iddi*-extension as originating from *‑ir-ir > -ir-ri > ‑iddi,* that is, as a sequence of two *‑(i)r* morphemes. Here are two Andaandi examples attesting the causative *‑iddi ~ ‑uddi*-extension. [^55]: Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §2865 and §3718. [^56]: “Neutral” is a tentative term for a (non-preterite, non-negative) suffix which in previous studies has been called “present tense.” The term “imperfective” is probably more appropriate. @@ -274,8 +274,8 @@ Regarding the *‑iddi ~ ‑uddi*-extension, Armbruster claims that it is compos | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (36) | ʃug-ur | “move down, descend” | ʃug-uddi | “cause to descend”| -| (37) | bowwi | “bathe” | boww-iddi | “cause to bathe”| +| (36) | *ʃug-ur* | “move down, descend” | *ʃug-uddi* | “cause to descend”| +| (37) | *bowwi* | “bathe” | *boww-iddi* | “cause to bathe”| In Kordofan Nubian, the *‑(i)r*-extension has gained and lost functions. In Dilling, for instance, the *‑(i)r*-suffix has – apart from its causative function – adopted the function of an intransitivizer, thus both changing the valency of a verb from intransitive to transitive and, vice versa, from transitive to intransitive.[^58] @@ -283,8 +283,8 @@ In Kordofan Nubian, the *‑(i)r*-extension has gained and lost functions. In Di | | Dilling | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (38) | dwaj | “spoil something” [tr]({sc}) | dwej-ir | “spoil” [itr]({sc}) | -| (39) | kuj | “hang” [itr]({sc}) | kuj-ir | “hang up” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | +| (38) | *dwaj* | “spoil something” [tr]({sc}) | *dwej-ir* | “spoil” [itr]({sc}) | +| (39) | *kuj* | “hang” [itr]({sc}) | *kuj-ir* | “hang up” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | Some transitive and intransitive verbs are always extended by the *‑(i)r*-extension, thus suggesting that it has lost its valency-changing function. Noticing this loss, Kauczor refers to this extension by the German term “Stammverstärkung” – literally, “strengthening of the stem.”[^59] @@ -297,17 +297,17 @@ The corresponding Tagle extension is realized as [ir] after [+ATR] root vowel(s) | | Tagle | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (40) | ʃɔ̀k-ɪ̀ ~ ʃɔ̀k-ɪ̀r-ɪ̀ | “rise!” | -| (41) | dùʃ-ì ~ dùʃ-ìr-ì | “come out (of the ground)!” | -| (42) | ɛ̀ʃ-ɪ̀ ~ ɛ̀ʃ-ɪ́r-ɪ̀ | “wake up!” | +| (40) | *ʃɔ̀k-ɪ̀ ~ ʃɔ̀k-ɪ̀r-ɪ̀* | “rise!” | +| (41) | *dùʃ-ì ~ dùʃ-ìr-ì* | “come out (of the ground)!” | +| (42) | *ɛ̀ʃ-ɪ̀ ~ ɛ̀ʃ-ɪ́r-ɪ̀* | “wake up!” | 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) | ūlt-ír-ì | “breastfeed!” [oj sg]({sc}) | ūlt-ér-ì | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | -| (44) | ùj-ír-ì | “put down, lay down!” [oj sg]({sc}) | ùj-èr-í | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | +| (43) | *ūlt-ír-ì* | “breastfeed!” [oj sg]({sc}) | *ūlt-ér-ì* | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | +| (44) | *ùj-ír-ì* | “put down, lay down!” [oj sg]({sc}) | *ùj-èr-í* | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | 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). @@ -331,8 +331,8 @@ The causative *\*‑(i)r* is reflected by the Midob *‑(i)r*-extension. Werner | | Midob | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (47) | tìmm-íhàm | “we gathered” [itr]({sc}) | tìmm-ír-hàm | “we gathered” [tr]({sc}) | -| (48) | pècc-ìhêm | “I got up” [itr]({sc}) | pècc-ír-hèm | “I woke (somebody) up” [tr]({sc})| +| (47) | *tìmm-íhàm* | “we gathered” [itr]({sc}) | *tìmm-ír-hàm* | “we gathered” [tr]({sc}) | +| (48) | *pècc-ìhêm* | “I got up” [itr]({sc}) | *pècc-ír-hèm* | “I woke (somebody) up” [tr]({sc})| In addition to deriving transitive from intransitive verbs, Midob *‑(i)r* can derive ditransitive from transitive verbs. The extension *‑(i)r* adds an additional argument with the role of causer and assigns the role of causee to the previous transitive subject. The patient role of the previous transitive object remains unchanged in the derived ditransitive clause. Note that the object arguments in the following two examples do not require to be overtly accusative-marked.[^63] This observation confirms Werner, who points out that syntactic objects in Midob are commonly unmarked for case.[^64] @@ -359,7 +359,7 @@ As suggested by the voiced or voiceless velar stop, [g] or [k] and the close pho | PN | ON | No | Ma | An | Dil | Ta | Ka | Mi | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| *‑(i)gir | -ⲅ(ⲁ)ⲣ | -kir, -in-kir | -igir, -gid-di | ‑(i)gir, -(i)n-gir | -iir < -eg-ir [oj.sg]({sc}), -eer < -ig-er [oj.pl]({sc}) | -ɪg-ɪr [oj.sg]({sc}), -ɪg-ɛr [oj.pl]({sc}) | -ɛɛr < -ɛg-ɪr | -ée-k, -èe-k | +| *\*‑(i)gir* | -ⲅ(ⲁ)ⲣ | *-kir, -in-kir* | *-igir, -gid-di* | *‑(i)gir, -(i)n-gir* | *-iir < -eg-ir* [oj.sg]({sc}), -*eer < -ig-er* [oj.pl]({sc}) | *-ɪg-ɪr* [oj.sg]({sc}), *-ɪg-ɛr* [oj.pl]({sc}) | *-ɛɛr < -ɛg-ɪr* | *-ée-k, -èe-k* | **~~Table 5. The causative extension *\*-(i)gir*~~** @@ -394,8 +394,8 @@ In Nobiin, particularly in the Fadicca dialect, *kir* “make” is still used a | | Nobiin | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (55) | kab | “eat” | kab-a kir | “feed” | -| (56) | junti | “pregnant” | junt-a kir | “impregnate” | +| (55) | *kab* | “eat” | *kab-a kir* | “feed” | +| (56) | *junti* | “pregnant” | *junt-a kir* | “impregnate” | In the Nobiin variety documented by Werner, however, *kìr* is no longer part of a biverbal converb construction but rather a derivational suffix of the lexical verb root.[^70] The suffix *‑kèer* results from *‑kir-ir,* i.e., the fusion of the causative suffix *‑kir* with the [1sg]({sc}) present tense[^71] suffix *‑ir.* @@ -424,9 +424,9 @@ The Mattokki causative extensions *‑(i)gir, ‑kir, ‑giddi* (< *‑gir-ri < | | Mattokki | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (59) | boor | “be destroyed” | boor-kiddi | “destroy” | -| (60) | soll | “hang” | soll-igir | “hang up” | -| (61) | kuur | “learn” | kuur-kiddi | “teach” | +| (59) | *boor* | “be destroyed” | *boor-kiddi* | “destroy” | +| (60) | *soll* | “hang” | *soll-igir* | “hang up” | +| (61) | *kuur* | “learn” | *kuur-kiddi* | “teach” | Here is a Mattokki example of *kuur* “learn” in a causative construction with two arguments, a [1sg]({sc}) causee and an assumed unexpressed pronominal patient.[^77] @@ -449,9 +449,9 @@ The *‑(i)gir*-extension occurs on intransitive and transitive verb stems. It i | | Andaandi | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (63) | ɛɛʃ=ɛ[^80] | “belch” | ɛɛʃ=ɛ-gir |“cause or allow to belch, play with food and drink” | -| (64) | ulli | “kindle” | ull-igir | “cause or allow to kindle” | -| (65) | jamm=ɛ | “come together, assemble” | |jamm=ɛ-gir | “cause or allow to come together, assemble” | +| (63) | *ɛɛʃ=ɛ*[^80] | “belch” | *ɛɛʃ=ɛ-gir* |“cause or allow to belch, play with food and drink” | +| (64) | *ulli* | “kindle” | *ull-igir* | “cause or allow to kindle” | +| (65) | *jamm=ɛ* | “come together, assemble” | |*jamm=ɛ-gir* | “cause or allow to come together, assemble” | [^80]: *ɛɛʃ* belongs to the class of onomatopoeia or ideophones. They are not used as free forms but are turned into verbs by means of the clitic verb *ɛ* “say,” cf. Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar*, §§2870–2877. @@ -459,9 +459,9 @@ Besides attaching to verbal bases, Andaandi *‑(i)gir* can attach to nominal ba | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (66) | fɛkka | “change, small coin” (Arabic loan) | fekka-gir | “convert into change” | -| (67) | dolli | “deep” | doll-igir | “cause or allow to be or become deep, deepen” | -| (68) | owwi | “two” | oww-igir | “cause or allow to be or become two, double” | +| (66) | *fɛkka* | “change, small coin” (Arabic loan) | *fekka-gir* | “convert into change” | +| (67) | *dolli* | “deep” | *doll-igir* | “cause or allow to be or become deep, deepen” | +| (68) | *owwi* | “two” | *oww-igir* | “cause or allow to be or become two, double” | In addition to the *‑(i)gir*-extension, Andaandi exhibits the complex causative extension *‑(i)n-gir,* realized after a vowel as [ŋgir], after a consonant as [iŋgir]. It strongly resembles the Nobiin causative *‑in-kir.* Armbruster proposes to parse *‑ŋ-gir* into three morphemes *‑n-g-ir,* comprising the 3rd person suffix *‑n* of the subjunctive present tense, the accusative marker *‑g,* and the causative suffix *‑ir.*[^81] However, this morphological analysis is not convincing, particularly when the subject of the verb is a 2nd person addressee, as seen in the prohibitive and imperative examples below. Two alternative interpretations should be considered. Is *‑(i)n-* to be identified with the linker tying the causative extension *‑(i)gir* to the verb root? Or, as Werner has suggested for the Nobiin causative extension *‑in-kir,*[^82] should we interpret *‑in* as a cognate of the Old Nubian copula ⲉⲓⲛ (*in*)? In the latter case the causative *‑in-gir* may be rendered by “let be, let happen.” This interpretation is supported by the notion of (negated) permission which is particularly apparent in (69).[^83] @@ -485,20 +485,20 @@ The Kordofan Nubian language Dilling has two causative extensions, *‑iir* and | | Dilling | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (71) | ʃwak-ir | "rise" [itr]({sc}) | ʃwak-iir | “raise” | -| (72) | duk-ir | "bow" [itr]({sc}) | duk-iir | “bend” [oj sg]({sc})| -| | | | duk-eer | “bend” [oj pl]({sc})| -| (73) | kok-er | "split" [itr]({sc}) | kok-eer | "split" [tr]({sc}) | -| (74) | | | ʃah-eer | "mend" [tr]({sc}) | +| (71) | *ʃwak-ir* | "rise" [itr]({sc}) | *ʃwak-iir* | “raise” | +| (72) | *duk-ir* | "bow" [itr]({sc}) | *duk-iir* | “bend” [oj sg]({sc})| +| | | | *duk-eer* | “bend” [oj pl]({sc})| +| (73) | *kok-er* | "split" [itr]({sc}) | *kok-eer* | "split" [tr]({sc}) | +| (74) | | | *ʃah-eer* | "mend" [tr]({sc}) | Similar to Dilling, Tagle uses the causative extensions *‑ɪg-ɪr* and *‑ɪg-ɛr,* when referring to a singular and a plural object, respectively. | | Tagle | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (75) | ɛ̀ʃ-ɪ̀ ~ ɛ̀ʃ-ɪ̀r-ɪ̀ | “wake up” [itr, imp 2sg]({sc}) | -| (76) | ɛ́ʃ-ɪ́g-ɪ́r-ɪ̀ | “wake up” [tr, oj sg, imp 2sg]({sc}) | -| (77) | ɛ́ʃ-ɪ́g-ɛ́r-ɪ̀ | “wake up” [tr, oj pl, imp 2sg]({sc}) | +| (75) | *ɛ̀ʃ-ɪ̀ ~ ɛ̀ʃ-ɪ̀r-ɪ̀* | “wake up” [itr, imp 2sg]({sc}) | +| (76) | *ɛ́ʃ-ɪ́g-ɪ́r-ɪ̀* | “wake up” [tr, oj sg, imp 2sg]({sc}) | +| (77) | *ɛ́ʃ-ɪ́g-ɛ́r-ɪ̀* | “wake up” [tr, oj pl, imp 2sg]({sc}) | The causative function of Tagle *‑ɪ́g-ɪ́r* and *‑ɪ́g-ɛ́r* can be demonstrated by the following examples. Note that the abbreviations [sg]({sc}) and [pl]({sc}) are used for glossing the number of nominal elements (e.g., nouns, agreement markers on verbs), when glossing verbal number, however, the singular and plural stems are glossed by [sng]({sc}) and [plr]({sc}).[^85] @@ -538,9 +538,9 @@ Midob, too, has – besides the *‑(i)r*-extension discussed in [2.1](#21) – | | Midob | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (83) | ètt-ìhèm | “I crossed” | ètt-èek-ìhèm | “I caused to cross” | -| (84) | tèey-áhèm | “I carried” | tèey-éek-ìhêm | “I caused to carry” | -| (85) | ètt-áhèm | “I bought” [oj pl]({sc}) | ètt-éek-ìhêm | “I sold” [oj pl]({sc}) | +| (83) | *ètt-ìhèm* | “I crossed” | *ètt-èek-ìhèm* | “I caused to cross” | +| (84) | *tèey-áhèm* | “I carried” | *tèey-éek-ìhêm* | “I caused to carry” | +| (85) | *ètt-áhèm* | “I bought” [oj pl]({sc}) | *ètt-éek-ìhêm* | “I sold” [oj pl]({sc}) | Midob *ètt* represents the plural stem of “buy,” it contrasts with the singular stem *èed.*[^87] As Midob nouns are not required to be marked for number,[^88] the plurality of the object is solely expressed by the plural stem *ètt.* Literally, the following example can be rendered as “I made him/her buy my goats,” that is, with an unexpressed pronominal causee.[^89] @@ -587,8 +587,8 @@ In **Table 6,** the lexical items which are not regarded as reflexes of Proto-Nu | PN | ON | No | Ma | An | Dil | Ta | Ka | Mi | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| *tir | ⲧⲣ, ⲧⲣ̄ |tìr | tir | tir | (tir)? | (tí) | (tìì) | tìr | -| *deen | ⲇⲉⲛ, ⲇⲓⲛ | dèen |deen | deen | tin | (tí) | tèn | téen | +| *\*tir* | ⲧⲣ, ⲧⲣ̄ |*tìr* | *tir* | *tir* | (*tir*)? | (*tí*) | (*tìì*) | *tìr* | +| *\*deen* | ⲇⲉⲛ, ⲇⲓⲛ | *dèen* |*deen* | *deen* | *tin* | (*tí*) | *tèn* | *téen* | **~~Table 6. The two verbs for "give"~~** @@ -697,8 +697,8 @@ In Midob, the original distinction between the two donative verbs is retained as | | Midob | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (101) | tìd | “give him!” | téèm | “give me!” | -| (102) | tìr-èr | “give them!” [2sg]({sc}) | téén-àr | “give us!” | +| (101) | *tìd* | “give him!” | *téèm* | “give me!” | +| (102) | *tìr-èr* | “give them!” [2sg]({sc}) | *téén-àr* | “give us!” | Parallel to their continuous use as independent verbs, the two Nubian donative verbs have undergone grammaticalization associated with applicative constructions. In the course of this process they have lost their status as lexical verbs. Due to reanalysis they have gained the status of valency-increasing elements, either as derivational suffixes or as a kind of auxiliary in a biverbal converb construction. @@ -818,12 +818,12 @@ Andaandi, too, exhibits similar converb constructions expressing directed transf | | Andaandi | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (111) | sukk undur | “insert it!, squeeze it in!,” lit. “insert it and enter it!” | -| (112) | kall undur | “push it in!,” lit. “push it and enter it!” | -| (113) | kall oos | “push it out!,” lit. “push it and cause it to issue!” | -| (114) | toll oos | “pull it out!,” lit. “pull it and cause it to issue!”| -| (115) | tolle dukki | “pull it out!,” lit. “pull it and pull it out!” | -| (116) | nog ju ind etta |“go and bring it,” lit. “go and move along and take it up and bring it!” | +| (111) | *sukk undur* | “insert it!, squeeze it in!,” lit. “insert it and enter it!” | +| (112) | *kall undur* | “push it in!,” lit. “push it and enter it!” | +| (113) | *kall oos* | “push it out!,” lit. “push it and cause it to issue!” | +| (114) | *toll oos* | “pull it out!,” lit. “pull it and cause it to issue!”| +| (115) | *tolle dukki* | “pull it out!,” lit. “pull it and pull it out!” | +| (116) | *nog ju ind etta* |“go and bring it,” lit. “go and move along and take it up and bring it!” | In Mattokki, too, such transfer events are often expressed by more than one verb. When the derived transitive verb *ʃuguddi* “bring down,” for instance, is preceded by the converb *uski* “bear, give birth,” the resulting construction *uski ʃuguddi* expresses the single transfer event “give birth.”[^133] Abdel-Hafiz considers such biverbal converb constructions as compounds and consequently writes them as one word.[^134] @@ -857,8 +857,8 @@ Asymmetrical converb constructions can also become fixed collocations expressing | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (119) | dukk-undur | “spread rumors!,” lit. “pull out and enter!” | -| (120) | tull-undur | “spread lies!,” lit. “blow (smoke) and enter!”| +| (119) | *dukk-undur* | “spread rumors!,” lit. “pull out and enter!” | +| (120) | *tull-undur* | “spread lies!,” lit. “blow (smoke) and enter!”| Such collocations and the grammaticalization of adjacent verbs are also manifested in asymmetric serial verb constructions, as Aikhenvald points out.[^140] For this reason, these features cannot be regarded as defining properties of converbs. @@ -931,7 +931,7 @@ Nile Nubian applicatives are encoded by bipartite converb constructions, includi | PN | ON | No | Ma | An | Dil | Ta | Ka | Mi | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| *tir | ⲧⲣ, ⲧⲣ̄ | tìr |tir |tir | - | - | - | -(i)n-tir | +| *\*tir* | ⲧⲣ, ⲧⲣ̄ | *tìr* | *tir* | *tir* | - | - | - | *-(i)n-tir* | **~~Table 7. Applicative marker *\*tir*~~** @@ -1019,7 +1019,7 @@ Unlike the Nile Nubian applicatives where a donative verb operates in an asymmet | Dil | Ta | Ka | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| -n-di < -n-ti | -n-dì < -n-tì | -n-dìì < -n-tìì | +| *-n-di < -n-ti* | *-n-dì < -n-tì* | *-n-dìì < -n-tìì* | **~~Table 8. The applicative extension in the Kordofan Nubian languages~~** @@ -1082,7 +1082,7 @@ Reflexes of *\*deen* “give to 1st person” are attested in all Nile Nubian ap | PN | ON | No | Ma | An | |:--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| *deen | ⲇⲉⲛ | dèen | deen | deen | +| *\*deen* | ⲇⲉⲛ | *dèen* | *deen* | *deen* | **~~Table 9. Nile Nubian applicative marker *\*deen*~~** @@ -1141,7 +1141,7 @@ As for Kordofan Nubian, only Dilling and Karko have retained reflexes of *\*deen | Dil | Ta | Ka | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| -nin < -n-tin [imp]({sc}) | – | -nVn < -n-tèn [imp]({sc}) | +| *-nin < -n-tin* [imp]({sc}) | – | *-nVn < -n-tèn* [imp]({sc}) | **~~Table 10. Kordofan Nubian applicative markers in imperatives based on *\*deen*~~** @@ -1200,7 +1200,7 @@ While the western Nubian languages reflect the *\*‑(i)j*-extension by *-j, -c, | PN | ON | No | Ma | An | Dil | Ta | Ka | Mi | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -|*‑(i)j | -(ⲓ)ⳝ | -(i)j | -(i)j | -(i)j | -j ~ ‑c | -c | -ɕ ~ ‑j | -j ~ -c | +| *\*‑(i)j* | -(ⲓ)ⳝ | *-(i)j* | *-(i)j* | *-(i)j* | *-j ~ ‑c* | *-c* | *-ɕ ~ ‑j* | *-j ~ -c* | **~~Table 11. The pluractional extension *\*‑(i)j*~~** @@ -1229,8 +1229,8 @@ While Lepsius refers to the *-(i)j*-extension in Nobiin as “verbum plurale,” | | 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)” | +| (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)” | Because of the wide range of functions covered by *‑(i)j,* Khalil uses the term “verbal plural marker.”[^184] Apart from interacting with plural participants and event plurality, the *‑(i)j*-extension is also used to signal respect when addressing a person, as Khalil shows. @@ -1278,9 +1278,9 @@ As for the Andaandi suffix *‑(i)j,* Armbruster notes that it “usually has an | | Andaandi | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (163) | war | “jump” | war-ij | “jump continually” | -| (164) | or | “tear” | or-ij | “tear to pieces” | -| (165) | aaw | “do” | aw-ij | “do repetitively” | +| (163) | *war* | “jump” | *war-ij* | “jump continually” | +| (164) | *or* | “tear” | *or-ij* | “tear to pieces” | +| (165) | *aaw* | “do” | *aw-ij* | “do repetitively” | {{< gloss "(166)" >}} {g} *tinn-ɛssi=n*,her-sister=[gen]({sc})|*dilti=g*,hair=[acc]({sc})|*aw-ij-in*,do-[plact-3sg]({sc})| @@ -1293,15 +1293,15 @@ The Dilling reflex of *\*‑(i)j* is *‑j.* Kauczor’s examples suggest that i | | 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” | +| (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 | “catch, seize!” [oj sg]({sc}) | áŋ-c-ɪ́ [áɲcɪ́] | id. [rpt]({sc}) | -| (170) | kɪ̀ŋ-ɪ́r-ɪ̀ | “repair!” [oj sg]({sc}) | kɪ́ŋ-c-ɪ́ [kɪ́ɲcɪ́] | id. [rpt]({sc}) | +| (169) | *áŋ-ɪ́r-ɪ̀* | “catch, seize!” [oj sg]({sc}) | *áŋ-c-ɪ́* [áɲcɪ́] | id. [rpt]({sc}) | +| (170) | *kɪ̀ŋ-ɪ́r-ɪ̀* | “repair!” [oj sg]({sc}) | *kɪ́ŋ-c-ɪ́* [kɪ́ɲcɪ́] | id. [rpt]({sc}) | {{< gloss "(171)" >}} {g} *kòn-ú-nù=gì*,bird-[sg-dim.sg=acc]({sc})|*kákár=kɔ̀*,stone=[ins]({sc})|*jɪ̀l-ɪ̀*,throw-[imp.2sg]({sc})| @@ -1317,9 +1317,9 @@ In Karko, the *\*‑(i)j*-extension is realized as voiced palatal plosive [ɟ] a | | Karko | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (173) | ɕàn | “buy/sell!” [oj sg]({sc}) | ɕàɕ | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | -| (174) | kìl | “jump over!” [oj sg]({sc}) | kìɕ | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | -| (175) | t̪ōl-ór | “swallow!” [oj sg]({sc})[^190] | t̪òɕ | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | +| (173) | *ɕàn* | “buy/sell!” [oj sg]({sc}) | *ɕàɕ* | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | +| (174) | *kìl* | “jump over!” [oj sg]({sc}) | *kìɕ* | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | +| (175) | *t̪ōl-ór* | “swallow!” [oj sg]({sc})[^190] | *t̪òɕ* | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | [^190]: The singular stem *tōl-ór* is extended by the plural stem marker *-Vr* (see [6.3](#63)). @@ -1382,8 +1382,8 @@ In addition to its event plurality and participant plurality marking function, M | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (184) | kóod | “see” [imp 2sg]({sc}) | kóod-íc | “see” [imp 2pl]({sc}) | -| (185) | sô | “go” [imp 2sg]({sc}) | sóo-íc [sówíc] | “go” [imp 2pl]({sc}) | +| (184) | *kóod* | “see” [imp 2sg]({sc}) | *kóod-íc* | “see” [imp 2pl]({sc}) | +| (185) | *sô* | “go” [imp 2sg]({sc}) | *sóo-íc* [sówíc] | “go” [imp 2pl]({sc}) | This development of the pluractional extension adopting the additional function of a [2pl]({sc}) imperative marker is an innovation which is unattested in the other Nubian languages. @@ -1393,7 +1393,7 @@ Probably because the *\*‑(i)k* extension is mainly attested on ideophonic verb | PN | ON | No | Ma | An | Dil | Ta | Ka | Mi | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| \*‑(i)k | – | -k | -k | -k | -k | -(i)k | -(V)k | – | +| *\*‑(i)k* | – | *-k* | *-k* | *-k* | *-k* | *-(i)k* | *-(V)k* | – | **~~Table 12. The plural stem extension *\*‑(i)k*~~** @@ -1403,9 +1403,9 @@ As Armbruster was the first to provide evidence of the *‑(i)k*-extension, this | | Andaandi | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (186) | jaag | "knead" | jak-k-i | “compress” | -| (187) | joog | "grind" | jok-k-i | "chew (food)" | -| (188) | uuw | "call" | uuk-k-i | “bark” | +| (186) | *jaag* | "knead" | *jak-k-i* | “compress” | +| (187) | *joog* | "grind" | *jok-k-i* | "chew (food)" | +| (188) | *uuw* | "call" | *uuk-k-i* | “bark” | Armbruster provides a list of some twenty Andaandi verbs exhibiting *‑k.* Most of them do not have an underived counterpart, though. This suggests that *‑k* is no longer a productive morpheme and that it has become lexicalized. In addition to Armbruster, El-Guzuuli has compiled many Andaandi ideophonic verbs, several of them exhibiting the *‑k*-extension.[^197] @@ -1446,20 +1446,20 @@ The *‑k*-extension in the Nile Nubian languages is assumed to be cognate to * | | Dilling[^201] | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (193) | ir | “bear child” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | ir-k | id. [oj pl, rpt]({sc}) | -| | be | “get lost” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | be-k | id. [sj sg, rpt]({sc}) | +| (193) | *ir* | “bear child” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | *ir-k* | id. [oj pl, rpt]({sc}) | +| | *be* | “get lost” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | *be-k* | id. [sj sg, rpt]({sc}) | [^201]: Examples from Kauczor, *Die bergnubische Sprache,* p. 128. | | Tagle | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (194) | ònd̪ | “sip, absorb” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | ónd̪-ík | id. [oj sg, rpt]({sc}) | -| | d̪ád̪d̪ | “cross, pass” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | d̪ád̪d̪-ík | id. [sj sg, rpt]({sc}) | +| (194) | *ònd̪* | “sip, absorb” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | *ónd̪-ík* | id. [oj sg, rpt]({sc}) | +| |*d̪ád̪d̪* | “cross, pass” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | *d̪ád̪d̪-ík* | id. [sj sg, rpt]({sc}) | | | Karko | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (195) | kúʃ-ɛ́ɛ́r | “hang up” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | kùj-ùk | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | -| | ʃíl-ɛ̀ɛ́r | “kindle” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | ʃìl-ìk | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | +| (195) | *kúʃ-ɛ́ɛ́r* | “hang up” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | *kùj-ùk* | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | +| | *ʃíl-ɛ̀ɛ́r* | “kindle” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | *ʃìl-ìk* | id. [oj pl]({sc}) | As Midob is still comparatively poorly documented, there is presently no clear evidence of the *\*-(i)k*-extension. @@ -1471,10 +1471,10 @@ According to Dimmendaal’s typological study, the archaic causative *\*i*-prefi | | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (196) | Me’en | -dibis | “be full” | -i-dibis | “fill” | -| (197) | Majang | -paak | “be hot” | -ɪ-paak | “heat” | -| (198) | Kipsigiis | -nɛ́r | “be fat” | -ɪ̀-nɛ́ɛ̂r | “fatten” | -| (199) | Ma’di | tū | “climb up” | ī-tú | “make climb up, promote” | +| (196) | Me’en | *-dibis* | “be full” | *-i-dibis* | “fill” | +| (197) | Majang | *-paak* | “be hot” | *-ɪ-paak* | “heat” | +| (198) | Kipsigiis | *-nɛ́r* | “be fat” |*-ɪ̀-nɛ́ɛ̂r* | “fatten” | +| (199) | Ma’di | *tū* | “climb up” | *ī-tú* | “make climb up, promote” | ## The Causative Prefix in the Nubian Languages {#51} @@ -1490,7 +1490,7 @@ A closer look at the examples below reveals that when the causative prefix is at | PN | ON | No | Ma | An | Dil | Ta | Ka | Mi | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| \*u- ~ o- |ⲟⲩ- |u- |u- |u- |u-, o- |u-, e- |ə-, ɔ-, u- |u- | +| *\*u- ~ o-* |ⲟⲩ- |*u-* |*u-* |*u-* |*u-, o-* |*u-, e-* |*ə-, ɔ-, u-* |*u-* | **~~Table 13. The archaic causative prefix *\*u- ~ o-*~~** @@ -1519,10 +1519,10 @@ The *u*-prefix attested in Old Nubian is also found on cognate verbs in the mode | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | (202) | **An**, **Ma** | too(r)[^209] | "enter" [itr]({sc}) | -| | **No** | toor-e | "enter" [itr]({sc}) | -| | **No** | u-dir-e | “take to, lay down, put into, insert” [tr]({sc}) | -| | **Ma** | u-ndur-e | “put in, name, dress” [tr]({sc}) | -| | **An** | u-ndur-e | “put in, introduce, insert” [tr]({sc}) | +| | **No** | *toor-e* | "enter" [itr]({sc}) | +| | **No** | *u-dir-e* | “take to, lay down, put into, insert” [tr]({sc}) | +| | **Ma** | *u-ndur-e* | “put in, name, dress” [tr]({sc}) | +| | **An** | *u-ndur-e* | “put in, introduce, insert” [tr]({sc}) | [^209]: In Mattokki and Andaandi, some lexical items with a root-final *r* delete this *r* in the citation form. However, when followed by a suffix, the *r* shows up again, e.g., *toor-os-ko-r-an* “they have entered”; *toor-iid* “entrance.” @@ -1530,9 +1530,9 @@ The extension of the verb stem *u-sk* with the causative *‑ir* results from a | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (203) | **No** | sukk-e | "descend" [itr]({sc}) | -| | **No**, **Ma**, **An** | u-sk-ir-e | “put down, lay down” [tr]({sc}) | -| | **Ma**, **An** | u-sk-ir-e | “give birth” [tr]({sc}) | +| (203) | **No** | *sukk-e* | "descend" [itr]({sc}) | +| | **No**, **Ma**, **An** | *u-sk-ir-e* | “put down, lay down” [tr]({sc}) | +| | **Ma**, **An** | *u-sk-ir-e* | “give birth” [tr]({sc}) | As for Kordofan Nubian, Kauczor was the first to recognize the extension of verb stems by means of prefixes (“Stammbildung durch Präfixe”).[^210] As they introduce a causer, the Dilling *u*- and *o*-prefixes are assumed to be reflexes of the archaic *\*i*-causative. @@ -1540,8 +1540,8 @@ As for Kordofan Nubian, Kauczor was the first to recognize the extension of verb | | Dilling | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (204) | jir | “lie down” [itr]({sc}) | u-jir | “lay down” [tr]({sc}) | -| (205) | tor | “enter” [itr]({sc}) | o-tir | “insert, put into” [tr]({sc}) | +| (204) | *jir* | “lie down” [itr]({sc}) | *u-jir* | “lay down” [tr]({sc}) | +| (205) | *tor* | “enter” [itr]({sc}) | *o-tir* | “insert, put into” [tr]({sc}) | These two verb pairs have cognates in Tagle. A native speaker, however, would not perceive the verb root *jèr* to be the base of *ù-jír* or *ù-jèr,* nor *t̪ʊ́r* to be the base of *è-t̪ír,* since the initial vowel no longer operates as a productive prefix.[^211] Tagle examples (206) and (207) are given in the [2sg]({sc}) imperative form, marked by an *‑i*-suffix. @@ -1549,11 +1549,11 @@ These two verb pairs have cognates in Tagle. A native speaker, however, would no | |Tagle | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (206) | jèr-í | “lie down!” [itr]({sc}) | -| | ù-jír-ì | “put down, lay down!” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | -| | ù-jèr-í | “put down, lay down!” [tr, oj pl]({sc}) | -| (207) | t̪ʊ́r-ɪ́ | “enter, begin!” [itr]({sc}) | -| | è-t̪ír-ì[^212] | “insert, put in, start!” [tr]({sc}) | +| (206) | *jèr-í* | “lie down!” [itr]({sc}) | +| | *ù-jír-ì* | “put down, lay down!” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | +| | *ù-jèr-í* | “put down, lay down!” [tr, oj pl]({sc}) | +| (207) | *t̪ʊ́r-ɪ́* | “enter, begin!” [itr]({sc}) | +| | *è-t̪ír-ì*[^212] | “insert, put in, start!” [tr]({sc}) | [^212]: The initial /e/ vowel in Tagle *ètírì* regularly corresponds to /o/ in other Kordofan Nubian cognates (Ali Ibrahim, p.c.). @@ -1561,11 +1561,11 @@ Cognates of the Tagle intransitive/transitive verb pairs “lie down”/“put d | | Karko | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (208) | t̪òr | “enter!” [itr, imp 2sg]({sc}) | -| | ə̄-t̪ə́r | “enter, insert, start, cause!” [tr, imp 2sg]({sc}) | -| | ɔ̄-t̪ɔ́r | “enter, insert, start, cause!” [tr, imp 2pl]({sc}) | -| (209) | jɛ̀r | “lie down, go to sleep!” [itr, imp 2sg]({sc}) | -| | ū-júr | “put down!” [tr, imp 2sg]({sc}) | +| (208) | *t̪òr* | “enter!” [itr, imp 2sg]({sc}) | +| | *ə̄-t̪ə́r* | “enter, insert, start, cause!” [tr, imp 2sg]({sc}) | +| | *ɔ̄-t̪ɔ́r* | “enter, insert, start, cause!” [tr, imp 2pl]({sc}) | +| (209) | *jɛ̀r* | “lie down, go to sleep!” [itr, imp 2sg]({sc}) | +| | *ū-júr* | “put down!” [tr, imp 2sg]({sc}) | {{< gloss "(210)" >}} {g} *kám-m-bíl*,eat.[plr-lk]({sc})-first|*jɛ̀r*,lie.down.[sng]({sc})| @@ -1581,8 +1581,8 @@ Because of their phonological and semantic similarities, the Midob verb stems *s | | Midob | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (212) | súkk-ihèm | “I descended” | -| | ú-kk-áhèm | “I gave birth” | +| (212) | *súkk-ihèm* | “I descended” | +| | *ú-kk-áhèm* | “I gave birth” | The initial vowel of the Midob verb stem *ú-kk* is assumed to reflect the archaic causative prefix. It is conceivable that due to this prefix and the preferred monosyllabic structure of lexical roots, the unattested bisyllabic verb stem *ú-súkk* has undergone some changes involving the deletion of the second vowel and the fricative /s/. The deletion of /s/ before /k/ is also observed in other Midob lexical items: e.g., *ùkúdí* “dust, sand” < PN *\*Vskidi*; and *úfúdí ~ úkúdí* < PN *\*VskVdi.*[^213] The fact that the geminated velar of *súkk* is retained in *ú-kk* corroborates the assumed derivational relationship between these two stems. @@ -1601,8 +1601,8 @@ As in the Nubian languages, verbal derivational extensions in Ama are usually su | | Ama | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (213) | a-t̪os/a-kwos | “suckle” | t̪os/kwos | “suck” | -| (214) | a-mɔ | “raise” | mɔ | “rise” | +| (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). @@ -1612,8 +1612,8 @@ Stevenson points out that the *a*-marked causative may “also be combined with | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (215) | a-t̪al-ɪg | "feed" | t̪al | "eat" | -| (216) | a-tam-ɪd-ɛg | "feed" | tam | "eat" | +| (215) | *a-t̪al-ɪg* | "feed" | *t̪al* | "eat" | +| (216) | *a-tam-ɪd-ɛg* | "feed" | *tam* | "eat" | Interestingly, Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi have documented another form of the causative verb “suckle” in Ama.[^221] Its two causative stems do not exhibit the *a*-prefix but only the causative *‑ìg*-suffix. @@ -1621,7 +1621,7 @@ Interestingly, Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi have documented another form of the | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (217) | t̪ɔʃ-ìg/kwɔʃ-ìg | “suckle” | t̪os-o/kwoʃ-ì | “suck” | +| (217) | *t̪ɔʃ-ìg/kwɔʃ-ìg* | “suckle” | *t̪os-o/kwoʃ-ì* | “suck” | Thus, in Ama there are three alternative patterns of causative marking: @@ -1661,8 +1661,8 @@ Apart from *‑dakk ~ ‑takk,* Nobiin has another passive extension, *-daŋ,* w | | Nobiin | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (219) | nuluu-aŋ | “become white” | nuluu-d-aŋ | “be whitened” | -| (220) | nadiif-aŋ | “become clean” | nadiif-d-aŋ | “be cleaned” | +| (219) | *nuluu-aŋ* | “become white” | *nuluu-d-aŋ* | “be whitened” | +| (220) | *nadiif-aŋ* | “become clean” | *nadiif-d-aŋ* | “be cleaned” | However, this hypothesis is not convincing unless we can corroborate the existence of a *d-* prefix. Moreover, (221), a translation of Mark 2:27, suggests that *-dakk* and *-daŋ* are simply variants of the same extension. A more literal translation of this example should read: “The Sabbath was made because of man, man was not made because of Sabbath.”[^228] @@ -1705,11 +1705,11 @@ Both Matokki *‑takk* and Andaandi *‑katt* are productive extensions, as show | | Mattokki | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (225) | gaffir-takk | “be forgiven” | +| (225) | *gaffir-takk* | “be forgiven” | | | Andaandi | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (226) | hamd=ee-katt[^234] | “be praised” | +| (226) | *hamd=ee-katt*[^234] | “be praised” | [^234]: The clitic *-ee* can be identified as the verb “say.” Here it is used as a finite “light verb” following a coverb represented by a lexical item borrowed from Arabic. Such coverb plus light verb constructions are widely attested in the languages of northeastern Africa, as Dimmendaal (“Eastern Sudanic and the Wadi Howar and Wadi El Milk Diaspora”) has shown. In Ama they are common, too (![Norton, this issue](article:norton.md)). @@ -1869,18 +1869,18 @@ Some transitive and intransitive verbs expressing inherently repetitive events a | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (241) | t̪ʊ́m-ɛ́r-ɪ́ [sg]({sc})/t̪ʊ́m-ɛ́r-ɛ́ [pl]({sc}) | “stutter!” | -| (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!” | +| (241) | *t̪ʊ́m-ɛ́r-ɪ́* [sg]({sc})/*t̪ʊ́m-ɛ́r-ɛ́* [pl]({sc}) | “stutter!” | +| (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)). | | Karko | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (244) | hə̄ɲ-ə́r | “greet!” | -| (245) | ūl-úr | “breastfeed!” | -| (246) | ɕàb-àr | “wipe off!” | -| (247) |ɛ̀b-ɛ̀r |“wash (hands, body)!” | +| (244) | *hə̄ɲ-ə́r* | “greet!” | +| (245) | *ūl-úr* | “breastfeed!” | +| (246) | *ɕàb-àr* | “wipe off!” | +| (247) |*ɛ̀b-ɛ̀r* |“wash (hands, body)!” | The *‑er*-extension is often found combined with other verbal number marking devices, most frequently with the alternation of the root vowel. Tabaq examples (248)–(250) also show that *‑er* may occur in paradigmatic contrast with the singular stem extension *‑ɪr ~ ‑ʊr.* This indicates that extensions which mark verbal number are not exclusively employed to express plurality; they can also refer to single participants and events.[^264] Extensions marking singular verb stems have exclusively been documented in the Kordofan Nubian branch.[^263] @@ -1891,9 +1891,9 @@ The *‑er*-extension is often found combined with other verbal number marking d | | Tabaq | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | **[sng]({sc})** | **[plr]({sc})** | **Gloss** | -| (248) | dʊ́t̪-ʊ̀r | dʷát̪-ɛ̀r- | “cut across” | -| (249) | ʃɔ́ɲk-ɪ́r | ʃʷáɲk-ɛ́r | “dry” | -| (250) | kʷɔ́ɔ́k-ɪ́r ~ kʷɔɔk-ʊ́r | kʷáák-ɛ́r | “hide” | +| (248) | *dʊ́t̪-ʊ̀r* | *dʷát̪-ɛ̀r-* | “cut across” | +| (249) | *ʃɔ́ɲk-ɪ́r* | *ʃʷáɲk-ɛ́r* | “dry” | +| (250) | *kʷɔ́ɔ́k-ɪ́r ~ kʷɔɔk-ʊ́r* | *kʷáák-ɛ́r* | “hide” | 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] @@ -1902,10 +1902,10 @@ Midob *‑er* is obviously a cognate of the Kordofan Nubian *‑er*-extension. W | | Midob | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (251) | tèl-ér-hàm |“they sat down” (several people) | -| (252) |tèkk-ér-íc | “stop!” [itr imp 2pl]({sc}) | -| (253) |tìr-îc | “give to him!” [imp 2pl]({sc})| -| (254) | tìr-èr-îc| “give to them!” [imp 2pl]({sc}) | +| (251) | *tèl-ér-hàm* |“they sat down” (several people) | +| (252) |*tèkk-ér-íc* | “stop!” [itr imp 2pl]({sc}) | +| (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. @@ -1945,18 +1945,18 @@ The Kordofan Nubian languages are rich in verbal number marking devices. In addi | | Dilling | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (258) | bur | “get solid” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | bur-k-iɲ | id. [sj pl]({sc}) | -| (259) | ʃoɲ | “get dry” [itr, sj sg ]({sc}) | ʃwaɲ-c-iŋ | id. [sj pl]({sc}) | -| (260) | dil | “gather” [itr, sj pl]({sc}) | dil-t-ig | id. [sj pl, rpt]({sc}) | +| (258) | *bur* | “get solid” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | *bur-k-iɲ* | id. [sj pl]({sc}) | +| (259) | *ʃoɲ* | “get dry” [itr, sj sg ]({sc}) | *ʃwaɲ-c-iŋ* | id. [sj pl]({sc}) | +| (260) | *dil* | “gather” [itr, sj pl]({sc}) | *dil-t-ig* | id. [sj pl, rpt]({sc}) | The stacking of plural stem extensions (i.e., the use of more than one suffix) is a common phenomenon in the Kordofan Nubian languages, as attested by Dilling (258) *bur-k-iɲ,* (259) *ʃwaɲ-c-iŋ,* and (260) *dil-t-ig,* as well as Tagle (261) *èl-t-ìg-ì,* (262) *ét̪-íŋ-k-í,* and (264) *dɛ́-k-ɛ́r-ɛ́*. While (261) and (262) display [2sg]({sc}) imperative forms marked by a final *‑i,* (263) and (264) represent the [2sg/2pl]({sc}) imperative forms, marked by *‑i/ ‑e ~ ‑ɛ*. | | Tagle | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (261) | él-ír-ì | “reach!” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | èl-t-ìg-ì | id. [oj sg, rpt]({sc}) | -| (262) | èt̪-ír-ì | “enter!” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | ét̪-íŋ-k-í | id. [oj pl, rpt]({sc}) | -| (263) | nòm-èr-í | “run!” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | nòm-k-é | id. [sj pl, rpt]({sc}) | -| (264) | dí | “stand up, get up!” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | dɛ́-k-ɛ́r-ɛ́ | id. [sj pl, rpt]({sc}) | +| (261) | *él-ír-ì* | “reach!” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | *èl-t-ìg-ì* | id. [oj sg, rpt]({sc}) | +| (262) | *èt̪-ír-ì* | “enter!” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | *ét̪-íŋ-k-í* | id. [oj pl, rpt]({sc}) | +| (263) | *nòm-èr-í* | “run!” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | *nòm-k-é* | id. [sj pl, rpt]({sc}) | +| (264) | *dí* | “stand up, get up!” [itr, sj sg]({sc}) | *dɛ́-k-ɛ́r-ɛ́* | id. [sj pl, rpt]({sc}) | Karko, too, uses various plural stem extensions, including *‑t-Vg, ‑kVn,* and *‑(V)k,* which are often combined with other formal devices such as tonal alternation and the reduplication of the verb root. The examples also illustrate that some verbs exhibit more than one plural stem, one stem interacting with participant number and the other with event number. The “fact that there is usually more than one formal strategy” for marking verbal number suggests “that this grammatical domain is subject to a high degree of communicative dynamism.”[^272] @@ -1964,9 +1964,9 @@ Karko, too, uses various plural stem extensions, including *‑t-Vg, ‑kVn,* an | | Karko | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (265) | kūg-úr | “fix, connect!” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | kùg-t-ùg | id. [oj pl, rpt]({sc}) | | | -| (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}) | +| (265) | *kūg-úr* | “fix, connect!” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) | *kùg-t-ùg* | id. [oj pl, rpt]({sc}) | | | +| (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). @@ -2003,9 +2003,9 @@ The *‑ad̪*-extension is a portmanteau morpheme since it cumulatively expresse | | Dilling | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (272) | bar/bar-k-iɲ | “be tired” | bar-k-ad/bar-k-e | “tired” | -| (273) | beʃ-ir/bej | “damage” | beʃ-ig-ad/bej-ig-e | “damaged”| -| (274) | em | “wash” | em-ad/em-e | “washed” | +| (272) | *bar/bar-k-iɲ* | “be tired” | *bar-k-ad/bar-k-e* | “tired” | +| (273) | *beʃ-ir/bej* | “damage” | *beʃ-ig-ad/bej-ig-e* | “damaged”| +| (274) | *em* | “wash” | *em-ad/em-e* | “washed” | 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. @@ -2034,8 +2034,8 @@ Similar to Tagle, Karko participles are characterized by a low tone pattern. The | | Karko | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (277) | kàm-àd̪/kàm-àn | “eaten” | -| (278) | t̪ɔ̀f-ɔ̀d̪/t̪ɔ̀f-ɔ̀n | “killed” | +| (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)). @@ -2045,9 +2045,9 @@ As for the Midob *‑át*-extension, we suggest an analysis different from Werne | | Midob | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (279) | èeb-àh-êm | “I washed” [tr]({sc}) | èeb-árát-ìh-èm | “I washed myself” [refl]({sc}) | -| (280) |tə̀g-ə̀n-dóo-h-èm | “I covered” [tr]({sc}) | tə̀g-rát-ìh-èm | “I covered myself” [refl]({sc}) | -| (281) | pìss-ìr-h-êm | “I have sprinkled” [tr]({sc}) |pìss-ìrát-íh-èm | “I sprinkled myself” [refl]({sc}) | +| (279) | *èeb-àh-êm* | “I washed” [tr]({sc}) | *èeb-árát-ìh-èm* | “I washed myself” [refl]({sc}) | +| (280) | *tə̀g-ə̀n-dóo-h-èm* | “I covered” [tr]({sc}) | *tə̀g-rát-ìh-èm* | “I covered myself” [refl]({sc}) | +| (281) | *pìss-ìr-h-êm* | “I have sprinkled” [tr]({sc}) | *pìss-ìrát-íh-èm* | “I sprinkled myself” [refl]({sc}) | However, his Midob grammar also contains a few counter examples which do not express reflexive notions.[^278] They suggest that *‑r-at* is a complex morpheme composed of *‑(i)r ~ ‑(a)r* plus *‑át.* Whereas the first component looks like a reflex of the causative *\*-(i)r,* the second component *‑át* can be identified as a valency-decreasing device deriving intransitive from transitive verbs. @@ -2055,8 +2055,8 @@ However, his Midob grammar also contains a few counter examples which do not exp | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (282) | òss-ír-hèm | “I soaked” [tr]({sc}) | òss-ìr-át-ùm | “it is soaking” | -| (283) | tə̀g-ə̀r-hèm | “I closed, covered” [tr]({sc}) | tə̀g-r-át-òn-ûm |“it was covered”[^279] | +| (282) | *òss-ír-hèm* | “I soaked” [tr]({sc}) | *òss-ìr-át-ùm* | “it is soaking” | +| (283) | *tə̀g-ə̀r-hèm* | “I closed, covered” [tr]({sc}) | *tə̀g-r-át-òn-ûm* |“it was covered”[^279] | [^279]: Ibid., p. 136 renders this example by “it is covered.” However, the presence of the past marker *‑òn* suggests that the example should be rendered by “it was covered.” @@ -2072,9 +2072,9 @@ Tucker & Bryan identify a *‑Vda*-suffix which expresses “plural action.”[^ | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (284) | ʊkk-a |“bear” | ʊkk-ʊda | “bear often” | -| (285) | ökk-a | “bear twins” | ökk-ʊda | “bear twins often” | -| (286) | acc-a | “bite” | acc-ida |“bite often” | +| (284) | *ʊkk-a* |“bear” | *ʊkk-ʊda* | “bear often” | +| (285) | *ökk-a* | “bear twins” | *ökk-ʊda* | “bear twins often” | +| (286) | *acc-a* | “bite” | *acc-ida* |“bite often” | Werner, in turn, recognizes this suffix as *‑íd,* ending in an alveolar [d].[^281] His examples suggest that the final *‑a* on *‑Vda* is not part of this suffix. Similarly to Tucker & Bryan, he describes this suffix as expressing “plurality of action.”[^282] @@ -2083,7 +2083,7 @@ Werner, in turn, recognizes this suffix as *‑íd,* ending in an alveolar [d].[ | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | -| (287) | úkk-ánònùm |“she has given birth” | úkk-íd-ánònùm | “she has given birth (to many children)” | +| (287) | *úkk-ánònùm* |“she has given birth” | *úkk-íd-ánònùm* | “she has given birth (to many children)” | A phonetically and semantically similar VC-shaped extension is attested in Ama by *‑ɪ́d̪.* According to Norton, the Ama extension *‑ɪ́d̪* has a distributive function.[^283] It is sensitive to a plural object participant, as shown in (289) or to a plural subject participant as in (290). Moreover, it can express an event distributed in time over a series of sub-events, as in (291). Norton considers *‑ɪ́d̪,* with these distributional functions, as a type of pluractional.[^284]