UnionForNubianStudies/Dotawo
4
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 9 Pull requests Releases Wiki Activity

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

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Marcell Mars 2020-12-13 02:31:58 +01:00
commit b729a6f66a
8 changed files with 307 additions and 292 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

BIN
content/.DS_Store vendored
View file

Binary file not shown.

98
content/article/blench.md
View file

@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
---
title: "Morphological Evidence for the Coherence of East Sudanic"
authors: ["rogermblench.md"]
abstract: "East Sudanic is the largest and most complex branch of Nilo-Saharan. First mooted by Greenberg in 1950, who included seven branches, it was expanded in his 1963 publication to include Ama [=Nyimang] and Temein and also Kuliak, not now considered part of East Sudanic. However, demonstrating the coherence of East Sudanic and justifying an internal structure for it have remained problematic. The only significant monograph on this topic is Bender1 which uses largely lexical evidence. Bender proposed a subdivision into Ek and En languages, based on pronouns. Most subsequent scholars have accepted his Ek cluster, consisting of Nubian, Nara, Ama, and Taman, but the En cluster (Surmic, E. Jebel, Temein, Daju, Nilotic) is harder to substantiate. Rilly2 has put forward strong arguments for the inclusion of the extinct Meroitic language as coordinate with Nubian. In the light of these difficulties, the paper explores the potential for morphology to provide evidence for the coherence of East Sudanic. The paper reviews its characteristic tripartite number-marking system, consisting of singulative, plurative, and an unmarked middle term. These are associated with specific segments, the singulative in *t-* and plurative in *k-* as well as a small set of other segments, characterized by complex allomorphy. These are well preserved in some branches, fragmentary in others, and seem to have vanished completely in the Ama group, leaving only traces now fossilized in Dinik stems. The paper concludes that East Sudanic does have a common morphological system, despite its internal lexical diversity. However, this data does not provide any evidence for the unity of the En languages, and it is therefore suggested that East Sudanic be analyzed as consisting of a core of four demonstrably related languages, and five parallel branches which have no internal hierarchy."
abstract: "East Sudanic is the largest and most complex branch of Nilo-Saharan. First mooted by Greenberg in 1950, who included seven branches, it was expanded in his 1963 publication to include Ama (Nyimang) and Temein and also Kuliak, not now considered part of East Sudanic. However, demonstrating the coherence of East Sudanic and justifying an internal structure for it have remained problematic. The only significant monograph on this topic is Bender1 which uses largely lexical evidence. Bender proposed a subdivision into Ek and En languages, based on pronouns. Most subsequent scholars have accepted his Ek cluster, consisting of Nubian, Nara, Ama, and Taman, but the En cluster (Surmic, E. Jebel, Temein, Daju, Nilotic) is harder to substantiate. Rilly has put forward strong arguments for the inclusion of the extinct Meroitic language as coordinate with Nubian. In the light of these difficulties, the paper explores the potential for morphology to provide evidence for the coherence of East Sudanic. The paper reviews its characteristic tripartite number-marking system, consisting of singulative, plurative, and an unmarked middle term. These are associated with specific segments, the singulative in *t-* and plurative in *k-* as well as a small set of other segments, characterized by complex allomorphy. These are well preserved in some branches, fragmentary in others, and seem to have vanished completely in the Ama group, leaving only traces now fossilized in Dinik stems. The paper concludes that East Sudanic does have a common morphological system, despite its internal lexical diversity. However, this data does not provide any evidence for the unity of the En languages, and it is therefore suggested that East Sudanic be analyzed as consisting of a core of four demonstrably related languages, and five parallel branches which have no internal hierarchy."
keywords: ["East Sudanic", "Nilo-Saharan", "comparative linguistics"]
---
@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ East Sudanic languages are by far the most well-known branch of Nilo-Saharan, wi
![The East Sudanic languages](../static/images/east-sudanic.jpg "The East Sudanic languages")
**Map 1. The East Sudanic languages**
**~~Map 1. The East Sudanic languages~~**
The nine branches remain the accepted listing with some relatively minor reassignments. There have been few attempts to synthesise data on East Sudanic, the unpublished MSc thesis of Ross,[^12] who was a student of Bender, and Bender’s own studies and monograph.[^13] The study by Starostin of Nubian–Nara–Tama is part of a project to re-evaluate East Sudanic as a whole from the point of view of lexicostatistics.[^14] Bender gives basic phonologies representative of each branch, as well as an argument for the coherence of East Sudanic based principally on lexical evidence. This latter was locally printed in Carbondale and is best described as problematic to read for those who are not strongly motivated to penetrate its forest of acronyms and compressed citations. It has therefore had a very limited impact on Nilo-Saharan studies. However, it is full of interesting suggestions for isoglosses and presents an elaborate table of sound correspondences, so it undoubtedly merits close study. Unlike Bender’s Omotic compendium,[^15] it does not include original lexical forms systematically, and hence each entry needs to be rechecked against original and more current source data. It is safe to say Bender’s publications did not have a resounding impact on the scholarly community.
@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ The paper considers each branch of East Sudanic in turn, and briefly lays out th
Nubian demonstrates strong evidence for tripartite number marking in nouns. Jakobi & Hamdan describe Karko, which has a restricted system of suffixed singulatives, where *-Vt* and *-ɖ* are allomorphs (**Table 9**).
| Gloss | Sg. | Pl. |
| Gloss | [sg]({sc}) | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| sorghum | wèê-t | wèè |
| hair | ʈēɽ-ét | tèèl |
@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ Nubian demonstrates strong evidence for tripartite number marking in nouns. Jako
However, the majority of suffixes denote plurals (**Table 10**). The majority seem to be allomorphs of the singulative suffix, thus *ɖ ~ Vl ~ Vr,* with a distinct second set *Vɲ ~ Vŋ*. The suffix *-Vnd* may be a composite of the nasal and alveo-dental suffixes.
| Gloss | Sg. | Pl. |
| Gloss | [sg]({sc}) | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| body | íìl | īl-ɖ |
| heart | áàl | āl-ɖ |
@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ However, the majority of suffixes denote plurals (**Table 10**). The majority se
Proto-Nubian may have had a fully functional tripartite system, which has now eroded leaving both singulatives and plurals, but not simultaneously. Once allomorphy is taken into account, the available affixes are very restricted. A language such as Midob has a still more reduced system, with only the alveo-dental *t ~ di* (**Table 11**).
| Gloss | Sg. | Pl. |
| Gloss | [sg]({sc}) | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| thing | sáar | sàartì |
| house | ə̀d | ə̀ttì |
@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ The restricted corpus for Meroitic and the absence of reliable grammatical infor
Nominal plurals in Nara are created through suffixing and sporadic gemination of the final consonant. The six plural classes are shown in **Table 13**. There are weak correlations with semantics and these are given only as indicative:
| Suffix | | Gloss | Sg. | Pl. | Semantics |
| Suffix | | Gloss | [sg]({sc}) | [pl]({sc}) | Semantics |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| -ka | -K | fox | kerfe | kerefka | animals |
| | | animal | oof | oofka | |
@ -283,17 +283,17 @@ Nominal plurals in Nara are created through suffixing and sporadic gemination of
| -ʤʤa | -S | gland | foʤi | foʤʤaa | internal secretions |
| | | milk course | ngiʤi | ngiʤʤaa | |
The plurals in last three classes which involve consonant doubling and change the final vowel to *-a* may simply be allomorphs of an underlying *-a* suffix. These may derive from a single rule and thus not exemplify the characteristic East Sudanic suffixes.
**~~Table 13. Nara number marking in nouns[^404]~~**
The plurals in last three classes which involve consonant doubling and change the final vowel to *-a* may simply be allomorphs of an underlying *-a* suffix. These may derive from a single rule and thus not exemplify the characteristic East Sudanic suffixes.
[^404]: Data from Dawd & Hayward, "Nara."
## Nyima
Nyima covers two related languages, Nyimang and Afitti, now usually known as Ama and Dinik respectively. Both languages have retained only traces of the complex noun morphology characteristic of other East Sudanic branches. Ama nouns have a single plural-marking suffix, *-ŋi* (or *-gi* after a liquid). Even this is dropped when number can be inferred from either a numeral or a quantifier. There are a small number of suppletives for persons:
| Gloss | Sg. | Pl. |
| Gloss | [sg]({sc}) | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| person, pl. people | wodáŋ | wàá |
| child | wodéŋ | ɖúriŋ |
@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ This shift from the nominal to the verbal system suggests that Nyima need no lon
Descriptions of the morphology of Taman languages are very limited. Kellermann provides a summary of number marking in nouns, based on the manuscript material of Stevenson (**Table 17**):
| Affix | Sg. | Affix | Pl. | Gloss |
| Affix | [sg]({sc}) | Affix | [pl]({sc}) | Gloss |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| -t | mèya-t | -k | mèya-k | blacksmith |
| -t | wɪ̀gɪ-t | -ɛ | wɪ̀gɪ-ɛ | bird |
@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ As with other East Sudanic languages, once allomorphy is taken into account, num
Surmic displays abundant evidence for three-term number marking. **Table 18** shows its operation in Laarim:
| Gloss | Sg. | Generic | Pl. |
| Gloss | [sg]({sc}) | Generic | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| gazelle | boronit | boron- | boronua |
| nail | gurmaloʧ | gurmal- | gurmaleeta |
@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ Surmic displays abundant evidence for three-term number marking. **Table 18** sh
Yigezu & Dimmendaal focus on Baale and **Table 19** shows its number marking system and identifiable affixes. The variability in Baale is extremely high with many minor differences, so the analysis is not always certain. For example, "stomach” might represent an original *-NV* affix, eroded by the subsequent addition of the *-TV.*
| Gloss | Affix | Sg. | Affix | Pl. |
| Gloss | Affix | [sg]({sc}) | Affix | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| arm, hand | -∅ | ayí | -NV | ayinná |
| moon | -∅ | ɲʊlʊ́ | -KV | ɲɔlɔgɛ́ |
@ -404,7 +404,7 @@ To judge by the data in Bender,[^410] Aka has a richer system of number marking
[^410]: Bender, “The Eastern Jebel Languages of Sudan I”; Bender,"The Eastern Jebel Languages of Sudan II."
| Gloss | Affix | Sg. | Affix | Pl. |
| Gloss | Affix | [sg]({sc}) | Affix | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| tongue | -∅ | kala | -A, -T | kala.ati |
| knee | -∅ | kʊsu | -N | kʊsuu.ŋi |
@ -430,7 +430,7 @@ Temein consists of three languages, Temein, Keiga Jirru, and These.[^412] Surfac
[^412]: Blench, “Introduction to the Temein Languages.”
[^413]: See, e.g., Dimmendaal, “Number Marking and Noun Categorization in Nilo-Saharan Languages," or Blench, “Introduction to the Temein Languages.”
Language | Gloss | Sg. | Unmarked | Pl. |
Language | Gloss | [sg]({sc}) | Unmarked | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
Temein | dura | mórɪŋɪnʈɛʈ (one grain) | mórɪŋɪs (head of grain) | mórɪŋ (dura plant) |
Keiga Jirru | meat | bɪlanḑàk (one piece) | ɪnɖàk | kɪnɖaɖɪ̀k |
@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ Number marking in Temein displays typical Nilo-Saharan characteristics, although
In the Temein cluster *k-* is strongly associated with plurals and can occur before, after, and at both ends of a word. The underspecified vowel often results in a copy of the stem vowel, though not in every case. The vowel can disappear when the stem begins with an approximant. *Table 22* shows surface forms in Temein:
| Gloss | Unmarked | Pl. |
| Gloss | Unmarked | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| belly | óòm | kómɪk |
| big | ḿbù | kɪmbɪk |
@ -464,7 +464,7 @@ In the Temein cluster *k-* is strongly associated with plurals and can occur bef
This affix has an allomorph *–Vk* that can mark singulative as in These (**Table 23**):
| Gloss | Sg. | Unmarked |
| Gloss | [sg]({sc}) | Unmarked |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| firewood | márɛnyɪk | márɛŋ |
| ear | ŋwánɪk | kwɛɛŋ |
@ -479,7 +479,7 @@ In the case of the singulative for “fish,” it appears that it has already be
Less common is *–NI* or *-IN* in final position. Temein examples are shown in **Table 24**:
| Gloss | Unmarked | Pl. |
| Gloss | Unmarked | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| friend | wórɪnyà | kórɪnyànɪ̀ |
| hanging frame | sɛsɪlàŋ | sɛsɪlàŋì |
@ -499,7 +499,7 @@ Daju languages also show evidence for the characteristic three-way number-markin
This is shown for two glosses in **Table 25**:
| Gloss | Sg. | Unmarked | Pl. (countable) |
| Gloss | [sg]({sc}) | Unmarked | [pl]({sc}) (countable) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| egg | gilis-ic | gilis | gilis-u
| worm | ox-uic | ox | ox-uij-iny |
@ -508,20 +508,20 @@ Shatt and Laggori at least have considerable diversity of surface affixes markin
[^415]: Boyeldieu, *La qualification dans les langues africaines*; Alamin Mubarak, “An Initial Description of Laggori Noun Morphology and Noun Phrase.”
| Category | Sg. | Pl. |
| Category | [sg]({sc}) | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Sg./pl. alternation | -V | -u |
| [sg]({sc})/pl. alternation | -V | -u |
| | -x | -ɲ |
| | -c | -ɲ, or -ic / -iɲ, or -d(d)ic / -d(d)iɲ |
| | -ic | -u |
| | -(ɨ)c | -ta/-d(d)a |
| Pl. only | | -iɲ |
| [pl]({sc}) only | | -iɲ |
| | | -u |
| | | -ta/-d(d)a |
| | | -ti/-d(d)i |
| | | -tiɲ |
| | | -dɨk |
| Sg. only | -ic | |
| [sg]({sc}) only | -ic | |
| | -tic/-d(d)ic | |
| | -c | |
| | -sɨnic/-zɨnɨc | |
@ -534,7 +534,7 @@ Boyeldieu also lists a significant number of irregular forms. There are three cl
The alternating nominal suffixes of Dar Daju described by Aviles present a far simpler set.[^417] Every noun has one of four singular suffixes. Aviles calls these “classificatory” although they have no obvious semantic association. These alternate with four plural suffixes, although these all appear to be allomorphs of *-ge* (**Table 27**).
| Class | Gloss | Sg. |
| Class | Gloss | [sg]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| 1 | elder | ɉam-ne |
| 2 | liver | cacaw-ce |
@ -579,7 +579,7 @@ The only survey of East Nilotic lexicon reamins Vossen's,[^419] and this can pro
[^419]: Vossen, *The Eastern Nilotes.*
| Gloss | Affix | Sg. | Affix | Pl. |
| Gloss | Affix | [sg]({sc}) | Affix | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| cattle tick | -T(T) | mɨ́sɨ́r.ɨtɨ́t | -∅ | másɛ̂r |
| black ant | -T | múkúɲ.êt | -∅ | múkûn |
@ -604,7 +604,7 @@ There are two published reconstructions of South Nilotic.[^421] Rottland include
[^421]: Ehret, *Southern Nilotic History*; Rottland, *Die südnilotischen Sprachen.*
| Gloss | Affix | Sg. | Affix | Pl. |
| Gloss | Affix | [sg]({sc}) | Affix | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| the calf | -Tv | mɔ̀ɔ̀ɣ.tâ | -V | mòóɣ.eeʔ |
| the duiker | -Tv | cèptǐrkìc.tä́ | -kV | cèptǐrkìc.kä̂ |
@ -621,7 +621,7 @@ Pokot shows evidence for an original singulative *-V(V)N,* which has been resuff
The number system of Endo, another language of the Markweeta (Marakwet) group, is described by Zwarts. Endo has a wide range of singulative suffixes shown in **Table 31**, although once allomorphy is considered, they can probably be reduced to a rather simpler set. Zwarts argues that plurals constitute the unmarked set.
| Gloss | Affix | Sg. | Pl. |
| Gloss | Affix | [sg]({sc}) | [pl]({sc}) |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| cloud | -tV | pool.ta | pool |
| woman | -ka | kāār.kā | kāār |
@ -680,7 +680,7 @@ The evidence presented points to a common inheritance in East Sudanic number mar
![Proposed internal structure of East Sudanic](../static/images/classification2.png "Proposed internal structure of East Sudanic")
**Figure 1. Proposed internal structure of East Sudanic[^fig1]**
**~~Figure 1. Proposed internal structure of East Sudanic[^fig1]~~**
[^fig1]: Cf. Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* 208.
@ -704,15 +704,17 @@ In conclusion, East Sudanic is characterized by a series of affixes, which have
# Abbreviations
* A: any central vowel ±ATR
* C: any consonant
* I: any high front vowel ±ATR
* K: velar consonant
* N: any nasal consonant
* S: any fricative consonant
* T: any dental consonant
* V: any vowel
* X: any phoneme
* A: any central vowel ±ATR;
* C: any consonant;
* I: any high front vowel ±ATR;
* K: velar consonant;
* N: any nasal consonant;
* [pl]({sc}): plural;
* S: any fricative consonant;
* [sg]({sc}): singular;
* T: any dental consonant;
* V: any vowel;
* X: any phoneme.
# Bibliography
@ -722,13 +724,13 @@ Aviles, Arthur J. *The Phonology and Morphology of the Dar Daju Daju Language.*
Bell, Herman. "Documentary Evidence on the Ḥarāza Nubian." *Sudan Notes and Records* 7 (1975): pp. 1–36.
Bender, Lionel M. *Comparative Omotic Lexicon.* Carbondale: SIU, 2003. Unpublished manuscript. [BIB]
Bender, Lionel M. *Comparative Omotic Lexicon.* Unpublished manuscript. Carbondale: SIU, 2003.
Bender, Lionel M. “Genetic Subgrouping of East Sudanic.” *Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere* 45 (1996): pp. 139-150. [BIB]
Bender, Lionel M. “Genetic Subgrouping of East Sudanic.” *Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere* 45 (1996): pp. 139-150.
Bender, Lionel M. “Proto-Koman Phonology and Lexicon.” *Africa and Ubersee* 66, no. 2 (1983): pp. 259-297.
Bender, Lionel M. “Roland Stevenson’s Nyimang and Dinik Lexicon.” *Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere* 63 (2000): pp. 103-120. [BIB]
Bender, Lionel M. “Roland Stevenson’s Nyimang and Dinik Lexicon.” *Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere* 63 (2000): pp. 103-120.
Bender, Lionel M. “The Genetic Position of Nilotic *i*: Independent Pronouns.” In *"Mehr als nur Worte…": Afrikanistische Beiträge zum 65. Geburtstag von Franz Rottland,* edited by R. Voßen, A. Mietzner, and A. Meißner. Cologne: Rudiger Köppe, 2000: pp. 89-119.
@ -786,7 +788,7 @@ Hayward, Richard J. “Observations on Tone in the Higir Dialect of Nara.” In
Heine, Bernd. *The Kuliak Languages of Eastern Uganda.* Nairobi: East African Publishing House, 1976.
Jakobi, Angelika, and Ahmed Hamdan. "Number Marking on Karko Nouns." *Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies* 2 (2015): pp. 271–289. [doi]({sc}): [10.5070/D62110017](https://doi.org/10.5070/D62110017).
Jakobi, Angelika & Ahmed Hamdan. "Number Marking on Karko Nouns." *Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies* 2 (2015): pp. 271–289. [doi]({sc}): [10.5070/D62110017](https://doi.org/10.5070/D62110017).
Joseph, C.L. et al. *Laarim Grammar Book.* Juba: SIL-Sudan, 2012.
@ -800,9 +802,9 @@ Norton, Russell. “Number in Ama Verbs.” *Occasional Papers in the Study of S
Rilly, Claude. *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique.* Leuven: Peeters, 2009.
Rilly, Claude, and Alex de Voogt. *The Meroitic Language and Writing System.* Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Rilly, Claude & Alex de Voogt. *The Meroitic Language and Writing System.* Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Ross, James S. *A Preliminary Attempt at the Reconstruction of Proto-East Sudanic Phonology and Lexicon.* MA Thesis, Southern Illinois University, 1990. [BIB]
Ross, James S. *A Preliminary Attempt at the Reconstruction of Proto-East Sudanic Phonology and Lexicon.* MA Thesis, Southern Illinois University, 1990.
Rottland, Franz. *Die südnilotischen Sprachen: Beschriebung, Vergleichung und Rekonstruktion.* Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, 1982.
@ -820,22 +822,22 @@ Storch, Anne. *The Noun Morphology of Western Nilotic.* Cologne: Rudiger Köppe,
Thelwall, R.A. “Birgid Vocabulary List and Its Links with Daju.” In *Gedenkschrift Gustav Nachtigal 1874–1974,* edited by E. Ganslmayr and H. Jungraithmayr, pp. 197-210. Bremen: Übersee Museum, 1977.
Trigger, B.G. “Meroitic and Eastern Sudanic: A Linguistic Relationship.” *Kush* 12 (1964): 188-194. [BIB]
Trigger, B.G. “Meroitic and Eastern Sudanic: A Linguistic Relationship.” *Kush* 12 (1964): 188-194.
Tucker, Archibald N. *The Eastern Sudanic Languages, Vol. I.* Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1940.
Tucker, Archibald N., and Margaret A. Bryan. *Linguistic Analyses: The Non-Bantu Languages of North-Eastern Africa.* London: Oxford University Press.
Tucker, Archibald N. & Margaret A. Bryan. *Linguistic Analyses: The Non-Bantu Languages of North-Eastern Africa.* London: Oxford University Press.
Tucker, Archibald N., and Margaret A. Bryan. *Noun Classification in Kalenjin: Nandi-Kipsigis.* London: School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1964. [BIB]
Tucker, Archibald N. & Margaret A. Bryan. *Noun Classification in Kalenjin: Nandi-Kipsigis.* London: School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1964.
Tucker, Archibald N., and Margaret A. Bryan. *Noun Classification in Kalenjin: Päkot.* London: School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1962. [BIB]
Tucker, Archibald N. & Margaret A. Bryan. *Noun Classification in Kalenjin: Päkot.* London: School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1962.
Tucker, Archibald N., and Margaret A. Bryan. *The Non-Bantu Languages of North-Eastern Africa* London: Oxford University Press, 1956.
Tucker, Archibald N. & Margaret A. Bryan. *The Non-Bantu Languages of North-Eastern Africa* London: Oxford University Press, 1956.
Voßen, Rainer. *The Eastern Nilotes: Linguistic and Historical Reconstructions.* Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, 1982.
Werner, Roland. *Tìdn-áal: A Study of Midob (Darfur-Nubian).* Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, 1993.
Yigezu, Moges, and Gerrit J. Dimmendaal “Notes on Baale.” In *Surmic Languages and Cultures,* edited by Gerrit J. Dimmendaal and Marco Last. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 1998: pp. 273-317.
Yigezu, Moges & Gerrit J. Dimmendaal “Notes on Baale.” In *Surmic Languages and Cultures,* edited by Gerrit J. Dimmendaal and Marco Last. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 1998: pp. 273-317.
Zwarts, Joost “Number in Endo-Marakwet.” In *Advances in Nilo-Saharan Linguistics: Proceedings of the 8th Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium, University of Hamburg, August 22-25, 2001,* edited by Mechthild Reh and Doris L. Payne. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2007: pp. 281–294.

168
content/article/jakobi.md
View file

@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ According to Rilly, the Nubian language family has two main branches, Nile Nubia
![Family tree model of the Nubian languages](../static/images/jakobi1.jpg "Family tree model of the Nubian languages")
**Figure 1. Family tree model of the Nubian languages[^fig1]**
**~~Figure 1. Family tree model of the Nubian languages[^fig1]~~**
[^fig1]: Adapted from Rilly, “The Linguistic Position of Meroitic.”
@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ According to Rilly, the Nubian language family has two main branches, Nile Nubia
![The northern Nuba Mountains](../static/images/jakobi2.png "The northern Nuba Mountains")
**Map. 1. The northern Nuba Mountains[^13]**
**~~Map 1. The northern Nuba Mountains[^13]~~**
[^13]: I would like to thank the cartographer at the Institute of African Studies and Egyptology, University of Cologne, Monika Feinen, for designing the map.
@ -72,11 +72,11 @@ However, the correspondences between the verb extensions in Nubian and Ama (**Ta
| causative prefix | PN \*u- ~ o- | causative prefix | a- |
| causative | PN \*-(i)g-ir | directional, causative | -ɪg, -ɛg |
| reciprocal | KN -in | dual | -ɪn |
| pluractional | Midob -íd | distributive, pluractional | -ɪ́d̪ |
| pluractional | Mi -íd | distributive, pluractional | -ɪ́d̪ |
**~~Table 3. Comparable Nubian and Ama verb extensions~~**
Presumably, the Ama inceptive *-ɪŋ*[^17] is cognate with the Nubian inchoative morphemes which comprise Old Nubian -ⲁⳟ,[^18] Nobiin *-aŋ,*[^19], Mattokki and Andaandi *-an,*[^20] as well as Dilling *-ŋ.*[^21] The inchoative *-an* of the Nilotic languages Bari and Lotuko is obviously related, as well.[^22] As these suffixes mainly derive verbs from qualifiers and nouns, rather than from verbal bases, they are excluded from further consideration in the present paper.
Presumably, the Ama inceptive *-ɪŋ*[^17] is cognate with the Nubian inchoative morphemes which comprise Old Nubian -ⲁⳟ,[^18] Nobiin *-aŋ,*[^19] Mattokki and Andaandi *-an,*[^20] as well as Dilling *-ŋ.*[^21] The inchoative *-an* of the Nilotic languages Bari and Lotuko is obviously related, as well.[^22] As these suffixes mainly derive verbs from qualifiers and nouns, rather than from verbal bases, they are excluded from further consideration in the present paper.
[^17]: Tucker & Bryan, *Linguistic Analyses,* p. 245.
[^18]: Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* §14.1.3.
@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ Presumably, the Ama inceptive *-ɪŋ*[^17] is cognate with the Nubian inchoative
[^21]: According to Kauczor (*Die bergnubische Sprache,* §§445–448), the inchoative is realized by the complex singular suffix *-n-er* and the plural suffix *-ŋ.* It is the plural suffix which looks like a cognate of the corresponding Nile Nubian inchoative suffixes.
[^22]: Greenberg, *The Languages of Africa,* p. 93.
Reconstructable lexical and grammatical items are indicators of a normal generational transmission.[^23] They are often conceived of indicators of a continuous divergent development from the assumed proto-language to its daughter languages, the gradual divergence being depicted with a family tree model. However, such tree diagrams can account neither for diffusion or convergence between genetically related languages, nor for language contact that may have induced changes such as borrowings and other instances of interference. Evidence of contact-induced changes calls for a historical interpretation and for the identification of the donor language,[^24] as illustrated by the Ama and Afitti lexical items adopted from Kordofan Nubian (**Table 1 and 2**). Another case in point is the so-called pre-Nile Nubian substrate. It comprises several basic lexical items in Old Nubian and Nobiin which do not have cognates in the other Nubian languages. Rilly supposes that they originate from other northern East Sudanic languages.[^25]
Reconstructable lexical and grammatical items are indicators of a normal generational transmission.[^23] They are often conceived of indicators of a continuous divergent development from the assumed proto-language to its daughter languages, the gradual divergence being depicted with a family tree model. However, such tree diagrams can account neither for diffusion or convergence between genetically related languages, nor for language contact that may have induced changes such as borrowings and other instances of interference. Evidence of contact-induced changes calls for a historical interpretation and for the identification of the donor language,[^24] as illustrated by the Ama and Afitti lexical items adopted from Kordofan Nubian (**Tables 1 and 2**). Another case in point is the so-called pre-Nile Nubian substrate. It comprises several basic lexical items in Old Nubian and Nobiin which do not have cognates in the other Nubian languages. Rilly supposes that they originate from other northern East Sudanic languages.[^25]
[^23]: Noonan, “Genetic Classification and Language Contact.”
[^24]: Dimmendaal, “Comparative African Linguistics.”
@ -161,7 +161,6 @@ The ditransitive construction derived by the causative *-(i)r*-extension on the
[^ex7]: Example from Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* ex. ??? (gr 2.4).
{{< gloss "(7)" >}}
{r} **Old Nubian**
{r} ⲁⲓ̈ⲕⲟⲛⲱ ϣⲟⲕⲕⲁ ⲕⲟⲩⲗⲗⲓⲣⲉⲥⲟ
{g} *ai-k-onō*,[1sg-acc-refl]({sc})|*šok-ka*,book-[acc]({sc})|*koull-ir-e-so*,learn-[caus-imp.2/3sg.pred-comm]({sc})|
{r} “Teach me the book”
@ -175,7 +174,7 @@ The Nobiin *-(i)r*-extension can derive transitive and ditransitive stems when i
[^44]: Lepsius, *Nubische Grammatik,* p. 152.
| Nobiin | | | | |
| | 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}) |
@ -216,7 +215,7 @@ Unlike the Old Nubian and Nobiin *-(i)r*-extension, which can be attached to int
[^47]: Examples drawn from Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” pp. 132–133, 215.
| Mattokki | | | | |
| | 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}) |
@ -238,7 +237,6 @@ It is conceivable that the loss of morphological meaning observed with *-(i)r* h
[^50]: Examples from Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” p. 132.
{{< gloss "(29)" >}}
{r} **Mattokki**
{g} *essi*,water|*aa-was-in*,[prog]({sc})-boil-[neut.3sg]({sc})|
{r} “the water is boiling”
{{< /gloss >}}
@ -252,14 +250,13 @@ As in Mattokki, Andaandi *‑(i)r ~ ‑(u)r* is attached to intransitive verb ba
[^52]: Examples from Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §§3670–76 and §3722; Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian. A Lexicon,* p. 44.
| Andaandi | | | | |
| | 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})|
{{< gloss "(34)" >}}
{r} **Andaandi**
{g} *tɛn*,[3sg.gen]({sc})|*dungi*,money|*dab-os-ko-n*,disappear-[pfv-pt-3sg]({sc})|
{r} “his/her money has disappeared”
{{< /gloss >}}
@ -269,7 +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] form of the 1st person singular. 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. 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.
[^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.
@ -284,7 +281,7 @@ In Kordofan Nubian, the *‑(i)r*-extension has gained and lost functions. In Di
[^58]: Examples drawn from Kauczor, *Die bergnubische Sprache,* §253.
| Dilling | | | | |
| | 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}) |
@ -294,11 +291,11 @@ Some transitive and intransitive verbs are always extended by the *‑(i)r*-exte
[^59]: Ibid.
The corresponding Tagle extension is realized as [ir] after [+ATR] root vowel(s), and as [ɪr] after [–ATR] vowels. It appears to have lost its valency-changing function, too. This is indicated by two facts. First, on some intransitive verbs, *‑(i)r ~ ‑(ɪ)r* may or may not be present, as shown by the following verbs in 2nd person singular imperative form (marked by the final *‑i ~ ‑ɪ*).[^60]
The corresponding Tagle extension is realized as [ir] after [+ATR] root vowel(s), and as [ɪr] after [–ATR] vowels. It appears to have lost its valency-changing function, too. This is indicated by two facts. First, on some intransitive verbs, *‑(i)r ~ ‑(ɪ)r* may or may not be present, as shown by the following verbs in [2sg]({sc}) imperative form (marked by the final *‑i ~ ‑ɪ*).[^60]
[^60]: All Tagle examples are provided by Ali Ibrahim (p.c.).
| Tagle | | |
| | Tagle | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (40) | ʃɔ̀k-ɪ̀ ~ ʃɔ̀k-ɪ̀r-ɪ̀ | “rise!” |
| (41) | dùʃ-ì ~ dùʃ-ìr-ì | “come out (of the ground)!” |
@ -332,7 +329,7 @@ The causative *\*‑(i)r* is reflected by the Midob *‑(i)r*-extension. Werner
[^61]: Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* p. 53. Werner translates (48) with English infinitives, “to get up” and “to get/wake (somebody) up.” He does not provide morpheme glossing. Due to the inflectional suffix -*(i)hem,* they can be identified as 1st person perfect indicative forms.
| Midob | | | | |
| | 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})|
@ -372,7 +369,7 @@ The following examples from Browne’s dictionary show that it derives transitiv
[^66]: Browne, *Old Nubian Dictionary,* pp. 81, 124, 152.
| Old Nubian | | | | |
| | ON | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (51) | ⲟⲕ, ⲱⲕ, ⲟⲅ | “stand, be (over)” [itr]({sc}) |ⲟⲕ-ⲕⲁⲣ, ⲟⲕ-ⲕⲣ̄ | “place over, attend” [tr]({sc}) |
| (52) | ⲡⲗ̄ⲗ | “shine” [itr]({sc}) | ⲡⲗ̄ⲗ-ⲓⲅⲣ̄ | “reveal, illumine” [tr]({sc}) |
@ -392,18 +389,17 @@ In Nobiin, particularly in the Fadicca dialect, *kir* “make” is still used a
[^68]: Reinisch, *Die sprachliche Stellung des Nuba,* p. 37.
[^69]: Ibid.
| Nobiin | | | | |
| | Nobiin | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (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 1st person singular present tense[^71] suffix *‑ir.*
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.*
[^70]: Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 178.
[^71]: “Present tense” is a preliminary term for a category that is probably more adequately described as imperfective aspect.
{{< gloss "(57)" >}}
{r} **Nobiin**
{g} *ày*,[1sg]({sc})|*tàk=kà*,[3sg=acc]({sc})|*kàb-kèer*,eat-[caus.ind.prs.1sg]({sc})|
{r} “I feed him,” lit. “I make him eat”
{{< /gloss >}}
@ -414,7 +410,7 @@ In addition to *‑kìr,* Nobiin exhibits the complex causative extension *‑in
[^74]: Werner, p.c., October 2020.
[^75]: Isaameddiin Hasan, p.c., 2017.
In the following example the inflectional suffix *‑kiss* is due to anticipatory assimilation of the final consonant of *‑kir* to the 1st person singular preterite suffix *‑s.*
In the following example the inflectional suffix *‑kiss* is due to anticipatory assimilation of the final consonant of *‑kir* to the [1sg]({sc}) preterite suffix *‑s.*
{{< gloss "(58)" >}}
{g} *ày*,[1sg]({sc})|*tàk=kà*,[3sg=acc]({sc})|*nàl-ìnkìss*,see-[caus.ind.pt.1sg]({sc})|
@ -423,18 +419,17 @@ In the following example the inflectional suffix *‑kiss* is due to anticipator
The Mattokki causative extensions *‑(i)gir, ‑kir, ‑giddi* (← *‑gir-ri ← ‑gir-ir*), and *‑kiddi* (← *‑kir-ri ← ‑kir-ir*) derive transitive stems from intransitive bases and ditransitive stems from transitive bases.
| Mattokki | | | | |
| | Mattokki | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (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 first person singular causee and an assumed unexpressed pronominal patient.[^77]
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]
[^77]: Ibid.
{{< gloss "(62)" >}}
{r} **Mattokki**
{g} ter,[3sg]({sc})|ai=g,[1sg=acc]({sc})|aa-kuur-kiddi-mun-um,[prog]({sc})-learn-[caus-neg-ind.pt.3sg]({sc})|
{r} “he did not teach [it] to me,” lit. “he did not make me learn [it]”
{{< /gloss >}}
@ -449,7 +444,7 @@ The *‑(i)gir*-extension occurs on intransitive and transitive verb stems. It i
[^79]: Borrowed Arabic verbs are integrated into the Andaandi verbal system by means of the clitic verb *ɛ* which is more frequently realized with a long vowel as *ɛɛ* “say,” cf. Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §2879 and §§3602–3607.
| Andaandi | | | | |
| | 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” |
@ -472,7 +467,6 @@ In addition to the *‑(i)gir*-extension, Andaandi exhibits the complex causativ
[^83]: Examples provided by E. El-Guzuuli, p.c. June 2019.
{{< gloss "(69)" >}}
{r} **Andaandi**
{g} *tokkon*,[proh]({sc})|*dab-iŋgir-men*,get.lost-[caus-neg]({sc})|
{r} “don’t let it get lost!”
{{< /gloss >}}
@ -486,7 +480,7 @@ The Kordofan Nubian language Dilling has two causative extensions, *‑iir* and
[^84]: Examples from Kauczor, *Die bergnubische Sprache,* §269 and §270.
| Dilling | | | | |
| | Dilling | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (71) | ʃwak-ir | "rise" [itr]({sc}) | ʃwak-iir | “raise” |
| (72) | duk-ir | "bow" [itr]({sc}) | duk-iir | “bend” [oj sg]({sc})|
@ -497,7 +491,7 @@ The Kordofan Nubian language Dilling has two causative extensions, *‑iir* and
Similar to Dilling, Tagle uses the causative extensions *‑ɪg-ɪr* and *‑ɪg-ɛr,* when referring to a singular and a plural object, respectively.
| Tagle | | |
| | 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}) |
@ -508,7 +502,6 @@ The causative function of Tagle *‑ɪ́g-ɪ́r* and *‑ɪ́g-ɛ́r* can be dem
[^85]: In (78) *ʃɔ̀k-ɪ̀r-ɪ̀* can be replaced by *ʃɔ̀k-ɪ̀*.
{{< gloss "(78)" >}}
{r} **Tagle**
{g} *tɔ́ɔ́*,up|*ʃɔ̀k-ɪ̀r-ɪ̀*,rise-[sng-imp.2sg]({sc})|
{r} “rise!”
{{< /gloss >}}
@ -540,7 +533,7 @@ Midob, too, has – besides the *‑(i)r*-extension discussed in [2.1](#21) –
[^86]: Examples from Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* pp. 54, 89.
| Midob | | | | |
| | 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” |
@ -585,6 +578,8 @@ This distinction is still reflected in Nile Nubian. In the languages of the west
Proto-Nubian word-initial *\*t* (as, for instance, in *\*toor* “enter,” *\*tar* “he, she,” *\*tossi-gu* “three”[^94]) is regularly reflected by a dental *t̪* in the Kordofan Nubian languages. However, *\*tir* “give” is unexpectedly reflected by Karko *tìì,* i.e., with an initial alveolar, rather than with the expected dental stop *t̪.* On the other hand, the shift of initial *\*d* (as in *\*deen*) to the Kordofan Nubian alveolar *t* is quite regular. It is also attested in reflexes of *\*duŋ(-ur)* “blind,” *\*diji* “five,” and *\*dii* “die.” The fact that Karko *tìì* and *tèn* both exhibit an initial alveolar stop indicates the beginning of a morphological blending of the originally distinct donative verbs. This process of simplification is already completed in Tagle *tí,* suggesting the loss of the lexical and semantic contrast originally associated with the two verbs. As Tagle *tí* can neither be shown to be a reflex of *\*tir* nor of *\*deen,* it is considered to be the unpredictable outcome of that blending and simplification process.
[^94]: See the sets of cognates in the appendix of Rilly’s *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 518, no. 182.
In **Table 6,** the lexical items which are not regarded as reflexes of Proto-Nubian *\*tir* are put in parentheses.
| PN | ON | No | Ma | An | Dil | Ta | Ka | Mi |
@ -667,7 +662,7 @@ Dilling and Karko distinguish two donative verbs. As pointed out in the beginnin
{r} “will you give it also to me so that I eat it?”
{{< /gloss >}}
Tagle has lost the distinction between the two donative verbs, leaving a single donative verb, *tí.* In the following examples, *tí* refers to a 3rd person and a 1st person singular recipient. When exchanging the [1sg]({sc}) accusative clitic *ò* for [2sg]({sc}) *à,* the verb *tí* can be shown to refer to a 2nd person recipient, as well.
Tagle has lost the distinction between the two donative verbs, leaving a single donative verb, *tí.* In the following examples, *tí* refers to a 3rd person and a [1sg]({sc}) recipient. When exchanging the [1sg]({sc}) accusative clitic *ò* for [2sg]({sc}) *à,* the verb *tí* can be shown to refer to a 2nd person recipient, as well.
{{< gloss "(97)" >}}
{r} **Tagle**
@ -698,7 +693,7 @@ In Midob, the original distinction between the two donative verbs is retained as
[^101]: Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* pp. 56, 130, 132.
| Midob | | | | |
| | Midob | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (101) | tìd | “give him!” | téèm | “give me!” |
| (102) | tìr-èr | “give them!” [2sg]({sc}) | téén-àr | “give us!” |
@ -819,7 +814,7 @@ Andaandi, too, exhibits similar converb constructions expressing directed transf
[^132]: Examples provided by El-Shafie El-Guzuuli, p.c.
| Andaandi | | |
| | 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!” |
@ -1001,7 +996,7 @@ Massenbach, Armbruster, Werner, and Abdel-Hafiz represent the biverbal applicati
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]
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 [2sg]({sc}) and a [1sg]({sc}) object pronoun.[^162]
[^162]: Examples provided by Ishaag Hassan, p.c., January 2019.
@ -1057,7 +1052,7 @@ In Tagle, too, the linker *‑(i)n* connects the applicative extension *-tì* wi
{r} “the girl weeded the field for me”
{{< /gloss >}}
Applicative extentions may attach to an intransitive or transitive verb stem, as illustrated by the Karko verbs *ɕīj* “descend ([itr]({sc}))" and kɛɛ “make sth. good ([tr]({sc}))," respectively, shown in (141)–(143). The applicative extension *‑n-dìì* is a realization of *-n-tìì.* It licenses both a 3rd person, a 1st person, and a 2nd person beneficiary. The pronominal 3rd person singular beneficiary *t̪éě* is not required to be overtly expressed. The position of the locative‑marked adjunct is variable, preceding or following the verb phrase.[^167]
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 [3sg]({sc}) 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).
@ -1091,7 +1086,7 @@ Reflexes of *\*deen* “give to 1st person” are attested in all Nile Nubian ap
When Old Nubian ⲇⲉⲛ “give to 1st person” is employed as a valence operator, the resulting applicative is a bipartite construction composed of V1 – a lexical verb stem marked by the converb marker ‑ⲁ – plus the finite ⲇⲉⲛ as V2. The plural number of a 1st person beneficiary is reflected by the pluractional extension ‑ⳝ (see [4.1](#41)). Example (141) also shows that the values of the inflectional suffixes on the main verb – with ‑ⲉ-ⲥⲟ marking the imperative form in a command – have scope over the preceding converb, which means that it is also conceived as an imperative form, even though it does not show the corresponding inflectional suffixes.[^170]
[^170] Example from Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* [CHECK]. Old Nubian ⲇⲉⲛ is here written with a final ⳡ rather than ⲛ, thus mirroring its realization as palatal [ɲ] when followed by the palatal stop [ɟ] (i.e., Old Nubian ⳝ).
[^170]: Example from Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* [CHECK]. Old Nubian ⲇⲉⲛ is here written with a final ⳡ rather than ⲛ, thus mirroring its realization as palatal [ɲ] when followed by the palatal stop [ɟ] (i.e., Old Nubian ⳝ).
{{< gloss "(144)" >}}
{r} **Old Nubian**
@ -1230,7 +1225,7 @@ While Lepsius refers to the -(i)j-extension in Nobiin as “verbum plurale,”[^
[^182]: Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 173.
[^183]: Examples from Werner, p.c., October 2020.
| Nobiin | | | |
| | 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)” |
@ -1279,7 +1274,7 @@ As for the Andaandi suffix *‑(i)j,* Armbruster notes that it “usually has an
[^187]: Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §2881. Examples from ibid, §2883f.
| Andaandi | | | | |
| | Andaandi | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (163) | war | “jump” | war-ij | “jump continually” |
| (164) | or | “tear” | or-ij | “tear to pieces” |
@ -1294,14 +1289,14 @@ The Dilling reflex of *\*‑(i)j* is *‑j.* Kauczor’s examples suggest that i
[^189]: Kauczor, *Die bergnubische Sprache,* §262.
| Dilling | | | | |
| | Dilling | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (167) | mon | "dislike" | mon-j-i | “hate (intensely)” |
| (168) | bel-er | "throw [oj sg]({sc}) to the ground (in wrestling)" | bel-j-i | “throw to the ground [oj pl]({sc}) or frequently” |
The Tagle reflex of *\*‑(i)j* is realized as the voiced palatal stop [ɟ] or after /l/ as the voiceless palatal stop [c]. It expresses repetitive or multiple events. The examples are provided in the 2nd singular imperative form.
| Tagle | | |
| | Tagle | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (169) | áŋ-ɪ́r-ɪ̀ / áŋ-c-ɪ́ [áɲcɪ́] | “catch, seize!” [oj sg/rpt]({sc}) |
| (170) | kɪ̀ŋ-ɪ́r-ɪ̀ / kɪ́ŋ-c-ɪ́ [kɪ́ɲcɪ́] | “repair!” [oj sg/rpt]({sc}) |
@ -1318,7 +1313,7 @@ The Tagle reflex of *\*‑(i)j* is realized as the voiced palatal stop [ɟ] or a
In Karko, the *\*‑(i)j*-extension is realized as voiced palatal plosive [ɟ] after a vowel, and as *Vɟ* after a consonant (except for /n/ and /l/). Following these consonants, *\*‑(i)j* is realized as voiceless alveopalatal fricative [ɕ]. In this case, [ɕ] is difficult to identify as a suffix because the preceding /l/ and /n/ are deleted. The following (unmarked) imperative forms refer to a singular or plural object.
| Karko | | | | |
| | Karko | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (173) | ɕàn | “buy/sell!” [oj sg]({sc}) | ɕàɕ | “buy/sell!” [oj pl]({sc}) |
| (174) | kìl | “jump over!” [oj sg]({sc}) | kìɕ | “jump over!” [oj pl]({sc}) |
@ -1367,7 +1362,7 @@ Proto-Nubian *\*‑(i)j* is reflected by Midob *‑c* (allomorph *‑j*). Accord
The other pair of examples raises the question whether the *‑j*-extension is required by an unexpressed pronominal plural object or even by event plurality.[^194]
[^194]: Examples from ibid., pp. 49 and 86. Werner erroneously translates them as “I answered” and “we answered.” However, as the Midob *-wa*-suffix marks the 1st person singular and plural of the “continuous indicative,” they should be rendered by “I answer” and “we answer.”
[^194]: Examples from ibid., pp. 49 and 86. Werner erroneously translates them as “I answered” and “we answered.” However, as the Midob *-wa*-suffix marks the [1sg]({sc}) and [1pl]({sc}) of the “continuous indicative,” they should be rendered by “I answer” and “we answer.”
{{< gloss "(182)" >}}
{g} *éeg-ìr-wà*,answer-[tr-ind.cont.1sg]({sc})|
@ -1404,7 +1399,7 @@ As Armbruster was the first to provide evidence of the *‑(i)k*-extension, this
[^196]: Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §§2852-2855.
| Andaandi | | | | |
| | Andaandi | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (186) | jaag | "knead" | jak-k-i | “compress” |
| (187) | joog | "grind" | jok-k-i | "chew (food)" |
@ -1447,19 +1442,19 @@ As for Old Nubian, there is no evidence of the stem extension *‑k,* not even i
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] | | | | |
| | 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}) |
[^201]: Examples from Kauczor, *Die bergnubische Sprache,* p. 128.
| Tagle | | | | |
| | 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}) |
| Karko | | | | |
| | 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}) |
@ -1521,11 +1516,11 @@ 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}) |
| (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}) |
[^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.”
@ -1533,24 +1528,24 @@ 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.
[^210]: Kauczor, *Die bergnubische Sprache,* p. 137.
| Dilling | | | | |
| | 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}) |
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 2nd person singular imperative form, marked by an *‑i*-suffix.
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.
[^211]: Ali Ibrahim, a native speaker of Tagle, rejects the proposed analysis: “this is not the transitive verb opposite to ‘lie down,’ it just means to ‘put down.’ […] Also the two verbs, ‘enter’ and ‘insert,’ are different roots in Tagle.”
| Tagle | | |
| |Tagle | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (206) | jèr-í | “lie down!” [itr]({sc}) |
| | ù-jír-ì | “put down, lay down!” [tr, oj sg]({sc}) |
@ -1558,11 +1553,11 @@ These two verb pairs have cognates in Tagle. A native speaker, however, would no
| (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.).
[^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.
| Karko | | |
| | Karko | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (208) | t̪òr | “enter!” [itr, imp 2sg]({sc}) |
| | ə̄-t̪ə́r | “enter, insert, start, cause!” [tr, imp 2sg]({sc}) |
@ -1582,7 +1577,7 @@ Cognates of the Tagle intransitive/transitive verb pairs “lie down”/“put d
Because of their phonological and semantic similarities, the Midob verb stems *súkk* “descend” and *ú-kk* “give birth” can be identified are cognates of Nile Nubian *sukk-* “descend” and *u-skir-* “put down, lay down, give birth;” see examples (201) and (203) above.
| Midob | | |
| | Midob | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (212) | súkk-ihèm | “I descended” |
| | ú-kk-áhèm | “I gave birth” |
@ -1602,7 +1597,7 @@ As in the Nubian languages, verbal derivational extensions in Ama are usually su
[^217]: Apart from Stevenson and Tucker & Bryan, the causative prefix is also identified by Norton (“Number in Ama Verbs,” p. 84), as suggested by his morpheme glossing of the verb form *á-cɪ̀-ɛ̄n* as [caus]({sc})-happen-[du]({sc}). Examples from Stevenson, “A Survey of the Phonetics and Grammatical Structure of the Nuba Mountain Languages,” 41: 179.
| Ama | | | | |
| | Ama | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (213) | a-t̪os/a-kwos | “suckle” | t̪os/kwos | “suck” |
| (214) | a-mɔ | “raise” | mɔ | “rise” |
@ -1613,7 +1608,7 @@ Stevenson points out that the a-marked causative may “also be combined with th
[^219]: Tucker & Bryan, *Linguistic Analyses,* p. 245.
[^220]: ![Norton, this issue](article:norton.md).
| Ama | | | | |
| | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (215) | a-t̪al-ɪg | "feed" | t̪al | "eat" |
| (216) | a-tam-ɪd-ɛg | "feed" | tam | "eat" |
@ -1622,15 +1617,15 @@ Interestingly, Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi have documented another form of the
[^221]: Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi, “The Verb in Nyimang and Dinik,” p. 16. The corresponding Afitti stems *tòsù/kosìl* “suck” and “suckle” lack an overtly marked distinction between the transitive and the causative stems.
| Ama | | | | |
| | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (217) | t̪ɔʃ-ìg/kwɔʃ-ìg | “suckle” | t̪os-o/kwoʃ-ì | “suck” |
Thus, in Ama there are three alternative patterns of causative marking:
* i) the causative stems are solely marked by the *a*-prefix, as attested by (213) *a-t̪os/a-kwos* and (214) *a-mɔ*;
* ii) the causative is simultaneously marked by the *a*-prefix and the *‑ɪg*- or *‑(ɪd-)ɛg*-suffix, as in (215) *a-t̪al-ɪg* and (216) *a-tam-ɪd-ɛg*; and
* iii) the causative is only marked by the *‑ìg*-suffix, as (217) *t̪ɔʃ-ìg/kwɔʃ-ìg* show.
* the causative stems are solely marked by the *a*-prefix, as attested by (213) *a-t̪os/a-kwos* and (214) *a-mɔ*;
* the causative is simultaneously marked by the *a*-prefix and the *‑ɪg*- or *‑(ɪd-)ɛg*-suffix, as in (215) *a-t̪al-ɪg* and (216) *a-tam-ɪd-ɛg*; and
* the causative is only marked by the *‑ìg*-suffix, as (217) *t̪ɔʃ-ìg/kwɔʃ-ìg* show.
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.
@ -1662,7 +1657,7 @@ Apart from *‑dakk ~ ‑takk,* Nobiin has another passive extension, *-daŋ,* w
[^226]: Lepsius, *Nubische Grammatik,* p. 100f.
[^227]: Reinisch, *Die sprachliche Stellung des Nuba,* p. 41, fn. 1.
| Nobiin | | | | |
| | Nobiin | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (219) | nuluu-aŋ | “become white” | nuluu-d-aŋ | “be whitened” |
| (220) | nadiif-aŋ | “become clean” | nadiif-d-aŋ | “be cleaned” |
@ -1706,11 +1701,11 @@ Both Matokki *‑takk* and Andaandi *‑katt* are productive extensions, as show
[^233]: Examples from Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” p. 122; Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §4099.
| Mattokki | | |
| | Mattokki | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (225) | gaffir-takk | “be forgiven” |
| Andaandi | | |
| | Andaandi | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (226) | hamd=ee-katt[^234] | “be praised” |
@ -1870,7 +1865,7 @@ Depending on the semantics of the verb and the semantic properties of its argume
Some transitive and intransitive verbs expressing inherently repetitive events are always marked by the *‑er*-extension, as shown by the following [2sg/2pl]({sc}) imperative forms of Tagle. On these verbs the *‑er*-extension has become lexicalized.
| Tagle | | |
| | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (241) | t̪ʊ́m-ɛ́r-ɪ́ [sg]({sc})/t̪ʊ́m-ɛ́r-ɛ́ [pl]({sc}) | “stutter!” |
| (242) | bóg-ér-ì [sg]({sc})/bóg-ér-è [pl]({sc}) | “bark!” |
@ -1878,7 +1873,7 @@ Some transitive and intransitive verbs expressing inherently repetitive events a
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 | | |
| | Karko | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (244) | hə̄ɲ-ə́r | “greet!” |
| (245) | ūl-úr | “breastfeed!” |
@ -1891,8 +1886,9 @@ The *‑er*-extension is often found combined with other verbal number marking d
[^263]: Examples from Pointner, “Verbal Number in Tabaq,” p. 83.
| Tabaq | [sng]({sc}) | [plr]({sc}) | Gloss |
| | 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” |
@ -1902,7 +1898,7 @@ Midob *‑er* is obviously a cognate of the Kordofan Nubian *‑er*-extension. W
[^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)).
| Midob | | |
| | Midob | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (251) | tèl-ér-hàm |“they sat down” (several people) |
| (252) |tèkk-ér-íc | “stop!" [itr imp 2pl]({sc}) |
@ -1945,7 +1941,7 @@ The Kordofan Nubian reciprocal *‑in*-suffix looks strikingly similar to the Am
The Kordofan Nubian languages are rich in verbal number marking devices. In addition to the reflexes of the productive pluractional *\*-(i)j* and plural stem marker *‑er* there are several further less productive extensions as well as alternations of the root vowel, tonal alternations, and reduplication of the root. Some verbs have a single marked plural stem which is sensitive both to repetitive events and plural objects, other verbs have two distinct plural stems, one interacting with event number, the other one interacting with the intransitive plural subject or transitive plural object.
| Dilling | | | | |
| | 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-i | id., [sj pl]({sc}) |
@ -1953,7 +1949,7 @@ The Kordofan Nubian languages are rich in verbal number marking devices. In addi
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 (263) *dɛ́-k-ɛ́r-ɛ́*. While (261) and (262) display [2sg]({sc}) imperative forms marked by a final *‑i,* (263) and (264) illustrate the [2sg/2pl]({sc}) imperative forms, marked by *‑i/ ‑e ~ ‑ɛ*.
| Tagle | | | | |
| | 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}) |
@ -1964,7 +1960,7 @@ Karko, too, uses various plural stem extensions, including *‑tVg, ‑kVn,* and
[^272]: Dimmendaal, “Pluractionality and the Distribution of Number Marking across Categories,” p. 73.
| Karko | | | | | | |
| | 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}) |
@ -2003,7 +1999,7 @@ The *‑ad̪*-extension is a portmanteau morpheme since it cumulatively expresse
[^275]: Examples from Kauczor, *Die bergnubische Sprache,* §462f.
| Dilling | | | | |
| | 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”|
@ -2034,7 +2030,7 @@ The Tagle participles are regularly associated with a low tone pattern. The sing
Similar to Tagle, Karko participles are characterized by a low tone pattern. They are inflected for singular by *‑Vd̪* and for plural by *‑Vn,* the vowel *V* adopting the quality of the stem vowel.
| Karko | | |
| | Karko | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (277) | kàm-àd̪/kàm-àn | “eaten” |
| (278) | t̪ɔ̀f-ɔ̀d̪/t̪ɔ̀f-ɔ̀n | “killed” |
@ -2045,7 +2041,7 @@ As for the Midob *‑át*-extension, we suggest an analysis different from Werne
[^277]: Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* p. 53. This suffix is *‑r-at,* rather than *-rati,* because the final *-i* is an epenthetic vowel which is part of the following morpheme. The vowel prevents the unadmitted consonant sequences of *‑h* preceded by a consonant.
| Midob | | | | |
| | 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}) |
@ -2055,7 +2051,7 @@ However, his Midob grammar also contains a few counter examples which do not exp
[^278]: Ibid., pp. 110 and 136.
| Midob | | | | |
| | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (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] |
@ -2072,7 +2068,7 @@ Tucker & Bryan identify a *‑Vda*-suffix which expresses “plural action.”[^
[^280]: Tucker & Bryan, *Linguistic Analyses,* p. 317.
| Midob | | | | |
| | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (284) | ʊkk-a |“bear” | ʊkk-ʊda | “bear often” |
| (285) | ökk-a | “bear twins” | ökk-ʊda | “bear twins often” |
@ -2080,10 +2076,10 @@ Tucker & Bryan identify a *‑Vda*-suffix which expresses “plural action.”[^
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]
[^281]: Thewall, “Midob Nubian,” p. 100, asserts that “t, d, n are alveolar.”
[^281]: Thelwall, “Meidob Nubian,” p. 100, asserts that “t, d, n are alveolar.”
[^282]: Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* p. 52.
| Midob | | | | |
| | | | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (287) | úkk-ánònùm |“she has given birth” | ukk-íd-ánònùm | “she has given birth (to many children)” |
@ -2286,7 +2282,7 @@ Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. *Historical Linguistics and the Comparative Study of Afric
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. “Nilo-Saharan.” In *The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology,* edited by Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014: pp. 591–607.
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. “On Stable and Unstable Features in Nilo-Saharan.” In *Nilo-Saharan Issues and Perspectives,* edited by H. Schröder & P. Jerono. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2018: pp. 9-23. [SCAN]
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. “On Stable and Unstable Features in Nilo-Saharan.” In *Nilo-Saharan Issues and Perspectives,* edited by H. Schröder & P. Jerono. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2018: pp. 9-23.
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. “Pluractionality and the Distribution of Number Marking across Categories.” In *Number – Constructions and Semantics: Case Studies from Africa, Amazonia, India and Oceania,* edited by Anne Storch & Gerrit J. Dimmendaal. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2014: pp. 57–75.
@ -2350,7 +2346,7 @@ Noonan, Michael. “Genetic Classification and Language Contact.” In *Handbook
Pointner, Lena. “Verbal Number in Tabaq.” In *Nuba Mountain Language Studies: New Insights,* edited by Gertrud Schneider-Blum, Birgit Hellwig & Gerrit J. Dimmendaal. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2018: pp. 77–97.
Rapold, C.J. “Defining Converbs Ten Years On – A Hitchhikers’ Guide.” In *Converbs, Medial Verbs, Clause chaining, and Related Issues,* edited by S. Völlmin, A. Amha, C.J. Rapold & S. Zaugg-Coretti. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag: pp. 7-30. [SCAN]
Rapold, Christian J. “Defining Converbs Ten Years On – A Hitchhikers’ Guide.” In *Converbs, Medial Verbs, Clause Chaining and Related Issues,* edited by S. Völlmin, A. Amha, C.J. Rapold & S. Zaugg-Coretti. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag: pp. 7-30.
Reinisch, Leo. *Die Nuba-Sprache*. 2 vols. Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller, 1879.
@ -2376,7 +2372,7 @@ Stevenson, Roland, Franz Rottland & Angelika Jakobi. “The Verb in Nyimang and
Thelwall, Robin. “Lexicostatistical Relations between Nubian, Daju and Dinka.” In *Etudes Nubiennes, Colloque de Chantilly, 2-6 Juillet 1975,* edited by Jean Leclant and Jean Vercouttier. Cairo: IFAO, 1978: pp. 265-286.
Thelwall, Robin. “Midob Nubian: Phonology, Grammatical Notes, and Basic Vocabulary.” In *Nilo-Saharan Language Studies,* edited by M. Lionel Bender. East Lansing: African Studies Center, Michigan State University, 1983: pp. 97–113. [SCAN]
Thelwall, Robin. “Meidob Nubian: Phonology, Grammatical Notes and Basic Vocabulary.” In *Nilo-Saharan Language Studies,* edited by M. Lionel Bender. East Lansing: African Studies Center, Michigan State University, 1983: pp. 97–113.
Tucker, A.N. & M.A. Bryan. *Linguistic Analyses: The Non-Bantu Languages of North-Eastern Africa.* London: Oxford University Press, 1966.

54
content/article/norton.md
View file

@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ Ama is a North Eastern Sudanic language spoken in villages to the west and north
[^1]: Stevenson, *Grammar of the Nyimang Language* and “A survey of the phonetics and grammatical structure of the Nuba Mountain languages with particular reference to Otoro, Katcha and Nyimaŋ,” 40: p. 107.
[^2]: Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* §4.
Ama examples unless otherwise stated are from the author’s fieldwork verified with leading Ama writers who oversee literacy in the language. For vowels, I distinguish five –ATR brassy vowels ɪɛaɔʊ and five +ATR breathy vowels *ieəou,* as represented fluently by Ama writers using five vowel letters {aeiou} and a saltillo {ꞌ} in breathy words. For tone, Ama’s nearest relative Afitti has been described as having two contrastive tone levels,[^3] but Ama has three levels, which play a role in the verb system as well as the wider lexicon as shown in **table 1**.
Ama examples unless otherwise stated are from the author’s fieldwork verified with leading Ama writers who oversee literacy in the language. For vowels, I distinguish five –ATR brassy vowels ɪɛaɔʊ and five +ATR breathy vowels *ieəou,* as represented fluently by Ama writers using five vowel letters {aeiou} and a saltillo {ꞌ} in breathy words. For tone, Ama’s nearest relative Afitti has been described as having two contrastive tone levels,[^3] but Ama has three levels, which play a role in the verb system as well as the wider lexicon as shown in **Table 1**.
[^3]: de Voogt, “A Sketch of Afitti Phonology,” p. 47.
@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ An alternation between *t̪-* and *k-* cuts into the characteristic CVC shape in
**~~Table 7. T/K marking on Ama verbs~~**
A longer list of examples of this alternation shown in table 8 was documented by Stevenson, Rottland, and Jakobi, albeit with a different standard of transcription; they also detected the alternation in Afitti (*tosù/kosìl* “suckle,” *tòsù/kosìl* “light fire”).[^20]
A longer list of examples of this alternation shown in **Table 8** was documented by Stevenson, Rottland, and Jakobi, albeit with a different standard of transcription; they also detected the alternation in Afitti (*tosù/kosìl* “suckle,” *tòsù/kosìl* “light fire”).[^20]
[^20]: Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi, “The Verb in Nyimang and Dinik,” p. 16. By convention, *t* is dental and mid tone is left unmarked in their data. Pertinent to the present alternation, I question the phonemic status of the *w* in *t/kw* alternations before rounded vowels.
@ -224,11 +224,11 @@ T and K are well-known markers of singular and plural in Nilo-Saharan languages,
[^21]: Greenberg, *The Languages of Africa,* pp. 115, 132; Bryan, “The T/K Languages"; Gilley, “Katcha Noun Morphology,” §2.5, §3, §4.
[^22]: Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 299.
Both steps in this proposed chain are indeed plausible cross-linguistically. As to the first step, the possibility of nominal plural markers being extended to verbal pluractionals is familiar from Chadic languages, where the same formal strategies such as first-syllable reduplication or *a*-infixation may be found in plural nouns and pluractional verbs.[^23] In the Nyima languages, the productive innovation at this step appears to have been the extension of singulative T to a verbal singulactional marker. This is seen in the fact that *t̪-* alternates with other consonants as well as *k* in Ama (*t̪ān-ɛ̄/wɛ̄n* “talk,” *t̪ɛ̀l-ɛ̄/wɛ̄ɛ́n* “see,” *t̪àl/tām* “eat”), or is prefixed in front of the root (*t̪ʊ́-wár-ɔ̄/wār* “want,” *t̪ī-ŋīl-ē/ŋɪ̄l* “laugh,” *t̪ì-fìl-è/fɪ̄l* “dance,” *t̪ū-mūs-ò/mús-èɡ* “run,” *t̪ʊ̄-máɪ́/máɪ́* “know,” *t̪-īlm-ò/ɪ́lɪ́m* “milk”). There is also external evidence from Nubian and Nara cited in **table 6** above that *\*k* is the original initial consonant in *\*kal* “eat” replaced by *t̪-* in Ama and Afitti.
Both steps in this proposed chain are indeed plausible cross-linguistically. As to the first step, the possibility of nominal plural markers being extended to verbal pluractionals is familiar from Chadic languages, where the same formal strategies such as first-syllable reduplication or *a*-infixation may be found in plural nouns and pluractional verbs.[^23] In the Nyima languages, the productive innovation at this step appears to have been the extension of singulative T to a verbal singulactional marker. This is seen in the fact that *t̪-* alternates with other consonants as well as *k* in Ama (*t̪ān-ɛ̄/wɛ̄n* “talk,” *t̪ɛ̀l-ɛ̄/wɛ̄ɛ́n* “see,” *t̪àl/tām* “eat”), or is prefixed in front of the root (*t̪ʊ́-wár-ɔ̄/wār* “want,” *t̪ī-ŋīl-ē/ŋɪ̄l* “laugh,” *t̪ì-fìl-è/fɪ̄l* “dance,” *t̪ū-mūs-ò/mús-èɡ* “run,” *t̪ʊ̄-máɪ́/máɪ́* “know,” *t̪-īlm-ò/ɪ́lɪ́m* “milk”). There is also external evidence from Nubian and Nara cited in **Table 6** above that *\*k* is the original initial consonant in *\*kal* “eat” replaced by *t̪-* in Ama and Afitti.
[^23]: Frajzyngier, “The Plural in Chadic"; Wolff, “Patterns in Chadic (and Afroasiatic?) Verb Base Formations.”
As to the second step, the prospect of verbal number shifting to verbal aspect is supported by semantic affinity between pluractional and progressive. Progressive aspect often entails that a process that is iterated ("is coughing," "is milking") over the interval concerned.[^24] In Leggbo,[^25] a Niger-Congo language, the progressive form can have a pluractional reading in some verbs, and conversely, verbs that fail to form the regular progressive *C# → CC-i* because they already end in *CCi* can use the pluractional suffix *-azi* instead to express progressive aspect. In Spanish,[^26] a Romance language, there is a periphrastic paradigm between progressive (*estar* “be” + gerund), frequentative pluractional (*andar* “walk” + gerund), and incremental pluractional (*ir* “go” + gerund). The two Spanish pluractionals have been called “pseudo-progressives,” but conversely one could think of progressive aspect as pseudo-pluractional. What is somewhat surprising in Ama is that progressive stems, being morphologically more basic (see **table 5**), lack any devoted progressive affixes that would have formerly served as pluractional markers.[^27] However, some progressive marking is found in irregular alternations that reveal former pluractional stems.
As to the second step, the prospect of verbal number shifting to verbal aspect is supported by semantic affinity between pluractional and progressive. Progressive aspect often entails that a process that is iterated ("is coughing," "is milking") over the interval concerned.[^24] In Leggbo,[^25] a Niger-Congo language, the progressive form can have a pluractional reading in some verbs, and conversely, verbs that fail to form the regular progressive *C# → CC-i* because they already end in *CCi* can use the pluractional suffix *-azi* instead to express progressive aspect. In Spanish,[^26] a Romance language, there is a periphrastic paradigm between progressive (*estar* “be” + gerund), frequentative pluractional (*andar* “walk” + gerund), and incremental pluractional (*ir* “go” + gerund). The two Spanish pluractionals have been called “pseudo-progressives,” but conversely one could think of progressive aspect as pseudo-pluractional. What is somewhat surprising in Ama is that progressive stems, being morphologically more basic (see **Table 5**), lack any devoted progressive affixes that would have formerly served as pluractional markers.[^27] However, some progressive marking is found in irregular alternations that reveal former pluractional stems.
[^24]: Newman, “Pluractional Verbs” notes a separate affinity between pluractional and habitual aspect found in Niger-Congo and Chadic languages. Smits, *A Grammar of Lumun,* §13, identifies habitual pluractionals in a Niger-Congo language of the Nuba Mountains.
[^25]: Hyman & Udoh, “Progressive Formation in Leggbo.”
@ -355,17 +355,17 @@ The origin of this affix order variation is revealed by further evidence. Passiv
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| **gloss** | throw | throw to [du]({sc}) | elicit [du]({sc}) |
| **[fact]({sc})** | dɪ̀ɟ-ɛ̄-ɡ | dɪ̀ɟ-ɪ́-n-ɪ̄ɡ | kɪ́l-ɛ̄n-ɔ̀ |
| | throw-th-dir | throw-ven-du-dir | hear-du-medcaus |
| | throw-[th-dir]({sc}) | throw-[ven-du-dir]({sc}) | hear-[du-medcaus]({sc}) |
| **[fact imp]({sc})** | dɪ̀ɟ-ɛ̀ɡ-ɛ̄-ɪ̀ | dɪ̀ɟ-ɪ́-ɡ-ɛ̄n-ɪ̀ | kɪ́l-àw-ɛ̄n-ɪ̀ |
| | throw-dir-th-imp | throw-ven-dir-du-imp | hear-medcaus-du-imp |
| | throw-[dir-th-imp]({sc}) | throw-[ven-dir-du-imp]({sc}) | hear-[medcaus-du-imp]({sc}) |
| **[fact pst]({sc})** | dɪ̀ɟ-ɛ̀ɡ-ɔ̄-ɔ̀n | dɪ̀ɟ-ɪ́-ɡ-ɛ̄n-ʊ̀n | kɪ́l-àw-ɛ̄n-ʊ̀n |
| | throw-dir-th-pst | throw-ven-dir-du-pst | hear-medcaus-du-pst |
| | throw-[dir-th-pst]({sc}) | throw-[ven-dir-du-pst]({sc}) | hear-[medcaus-du-pst]({sc}) |
**~~Table 12. Inward displacement of suffixes by an imperative or past suffix~~**
Both types of affix alternation in tables 11 and 12 involve low-tone suffixes in the final slot. Therefore, the development of all affix order alternations can be attributed to a single historical shift of all low-tone suffixes to the final slot. However, this shift is not realized in verbs containing two low-tone suffixes, because only one of them can go in the final slot. The only final-slot suffix that does not alternate is the imperative *-ɪ̀,* which leaves imperative as original to the final slot. Other suffixes originate from more internal slots to the left of the dual.
Both types of affix alternation in **Tables 11 and 12** involve low-tone suffixes in the final slot. Therefore, the development of all affix order alternations can be attributed to a single historical shift of all low-tone suffixes to the final slot. However, this shift is not realized in verbs containing two low-tone suffixes, because only one of them can go in the final slot. The only final-slot suffix that does not alternate is the imperative *-ɪ̀,* which leaves imperative as original to the final slot. Other suffixes originate from more internal slots to the left of the dual.
As for the origin of affix selection according to aspect, this presumably arose as an extension of the systematic stem selection that occurs for every verb in Nyima languages. This question remains complex, however, because each of the categories affected (past, passive, directional, ventive) will have its own history as to how alternating affixes were acquired in these conditions. One modest proposal is that the NES plural copula *\*aɡ* shown earlier in **table 6** is the likely source of the progressive passive suffix *-àɡ* in Ama,[^33] via the shift from pluractional to progressive \([3.3](#tk)\), and by a plausible assumption of a transition in passive marking strategy from use of a copula to morphological marking on the verb. This sourcing does not extend to the other passive suffix in factative aspect *-áɪ́,* however, which does not resemble the singular copula *\*an*. Some similar proposals that other progressive suffixes have pluractional origins are made in the course of §4.2 below.
As for the origin of affix selection according to aspect, this presumably arose as an extension of the systematic stem selection that occurs for every verb in Nyima languages. This question remains complex, however, because each of the categories affected (past, passive, directional, ventive) will have its own history as to how alternating affixes were acquired in these conditions. One modest proposal is that the NES plural copula *\*aɡ* shown earlier in **Table 6** is the likely source of the progressive passive suffix *-àɡ* in Ama,[^33] via the shift from pluractional to progressive \([3.3](#tk)\), and by a plausible assumption of a transition in passive marking strategy from use of a copula to morphological marking on the verb. This sourcing does not extend to the other passive suffix in factative aspect *-áɪ́,* however, which does not resemble the singular copula *\*an*. Some similar proposals that other progressive suffixes have pluractional origins are made in the course of §4.2 below.
[^33]: The Tama plural copula *àɡ* is likewise listed with low tone in Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 451.
@ -398,30 +398,30 @@ Distributive pluractionals are characterized by optionality with a plural partic
| 1 | gloss | 2 | gloss | 3 | gloss |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| ɡə́-ɡaɲal | I milk | é-ɡaɲal | you (sg.) milk | kaɲál | he/she milks |
| kó-ɡaɲal | we (du.) milk | ó-ɡaɲál | you (du.) milk | ɡaɲál-i | they (du.) milk |
| kó-ɡaɲa-tr̀ | we (pl.) milk | ó-ɡaɲa-tr̀ | you (pl.) milk | ɡaɲá-tər-i | they (pl.) milk |
| ɡə́-ɡaɲal | I milk | é-ɡaɲal | you [sg]({sc} milk | kaɲál | he/she milks |
| kó-ɡaɲal | we (du.) milk | ó-ɡaɲál | you [du]({sc} milk | ɡaɲál-i | they [du]({sc} milk |
| kó-ɡaɲa-tr̀ | we (pl.) milk | ó-ɡaɲa-tr̀ | you [pl]({sc} milk | ɡaɲá-tər-i | they [pl]({sc} milk |
**~~Table 13. Afitti pluractional *-t(ə)r* not used with dual subjects~~**
Beyond the Nyima branch, the Temein “plural action” suffix *-(ɨ)t̪* shares the first property of optionality as it “is by no means always added with plural objects.”[^48] It actually marks a distributive effect of the verb on the object (*ŋɔŋɔt-ɨt̪-ɛ dʉk* "I break the stick into pieces"), as also found with the Kunuz Nubian distributive suffix *-ij* (*duɡuːɡ ɡull-ij-ossu* ‘She threw the money here and there’).[^49] Information on non-occurrence with dual subjects is not reported in these languages, but it appears that this is because non-duality is a feature of incremental-distributive marking as found in Nyima, and not distributive-effect marking as found in Temein and Kunuz which can even occur with a singular object, as in the Temein example.
[^48]: Stevenson, “A Survey of the Phonetics and Grammatical Structure of the Nuba Mountain Languages,” 41: p.
[^48]: Stevenson, “A Survey of the Phonetics and Grammatical Structure of the Nuba Mountain Languages,” 41: p. 187.
[^49]: Abdel-Hafiz, *A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian,* p. 118.
The confirmation of distributive markers across Nubian, Nyima, and Temein implies that a distributive pluractional was present in Eastern Sudanic from an early stage, with a form like *\*-id.* In Nubian the consonant is palatal,[^50] and although palatals are a difficult area for establishing wider sound correspondences,[^51] the palatal arises in the plausible conditioning environment of a high front vowel.
[^50]: ![Jakobi, this issue](article:jakobi.md) Jakobi points that the other very similar suffix *-íd* in Midob cannot be reconstructed to proto-Nubian from just one Nubian language, so appears to be an innovation, and her observation of its similarity to the Ama suffix clearly suggests borrowing into Midob from Ama’s ancestor or another related language. Hence, the reconstructable pluractional **[i]ɟ* is more viable as the historic cognate of the Ama suffix.
[^50]: ![Jakobi, this issue](article:jakobi.md). Jakobi points that the other very similar suffix *-íd* in Midob cannot be reconstructed to proto-Nubian from just one Nubian language, so appears to be an innovation, and her observation of its similarity to the Ama suffix clearly suggests borrowing into Midob from Ama’s ancestor or another related language. Hence, the reconstructable pluractional **[i]ɟ* is more viable as the historic cognate of the Ama suffix.
[^51]: Rilly, ![*Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,*](bib:e70fd04a-b57d-4d00-9051-ab1f3473334d) pp. 303-304.
### Second Historic Pluractionals
Ama’s second distributive suffix *-r* corresponds to the Nubian plural object marker *\*-er,*[^52] and since this suffix is much less productive in Ama, it may well have been bleached of its original meaning. In the Kordofan Nubian language Uncu, the cognate extension *-er* has the same function as the irregular pluractional stem *(kol/)kom* “eat,” as both occur with plural objects.[^53] Similarly in Ama, some trills shown below occur in the same category as the irregular progressive stem *(t̪àl/)tām* “eat,” providing evidence that the trill originally marked the second Nyima pluractional that is now progressive.
[^52]: ![Jakobi, this issue](article:jakobi.md)
[^52]: ![Jakobi, this issue](article:jakobi.md).
[^53]: Comfort, “Verbal Number in the Uncu Language.”
The Ama suffix *-ar* can be added to a progressive verb as a mirative that marks unexpected events (*swāy-ɔ́* “was cultivating” → *swāy-ɔ̄r-ɔ́* “was unexpectedly cultivating”, where the vowel has harmonized to the following vowel). However, this suffix is also used to disambiguate progressive verb forms from otherwise indistinguishable factatives (*sāŋ-ɛ̄n/sāŋ-ɛ̄n, sāŋ-ār-ɛ̄n* “search (du.)”),[^54] providing what looks like an alternate progressive stem to take the dual suffix. Similarly, the negative imperative construction in Ama requires a progressive stem with *-ar* after the negative particle *fá* as shown in **table 14** below. Inflections occurring in this construction are a plural subject marker *à-* on the particle, and dual or distributive marking on the verb. Only the dual suffix can occur without *-ar*, where in my data the dual suffix adds to the longer stem with *-ar* unless the short stem is suppletive (*t̪ī-ə̀/túŋ* “sleep,” t̪àl/*tām* “eat”) and can take the dual suffix without ambiguity with factative aspect.
The Ama suffix *-ar* can be added to a progressive verb as a mirative that marks unexpected events (*swāy-ɔ́* “was cultivating” → *swāy-ɔ̄r-ɔ́* “was unexpectedly cultivating”, where the vowel has harmonized to the following vowel). However, this suffix is also used to disambiguate progressive verb forms from otherwise indistinguishable factatives (*sāŋ-ɛ̄n/sāŋ-ɛ̄n, sāŋ-ār-ɛ̄n* “search (du.)”),[^54] providing what looks like an alternate progressive stem to take the dual suffix. Similarly, the negative imperative construction in Ama requires a progressive stem with *-ar* after the negative particle *fá* as shown in **Table 14** below. Inflections occurring in this construction are a plural subject marker *à-* on the particle, and dual or distributive marking on the verb. Only the dual suffix can occur without *-ar*, where in my data the dual suffix adds to the longer stem with *-ar* unless the short stem is suppletive (*t̪ī-ə̀/túŋ* “sleep,” t̪àl/*tām* “eat”) and can take the dual suffix without ambiguity with factative aspect.
[^54]: Norton, “Number in Ama Verbs,” p. 40.
@ -434,7 +434,7 @@ The Ama suffix *-ar* can be added to a progressive verb as a mirative that marks
**~~Table 14. Ama negative imperative paradigms~~**
Another trilled suffix *-ir* marks motion in progress.[^55] It can be added to a progressive verb (*dɪ̄ɟɪ̄* “is throwing” → *dīɟ-ír* “is throwing (motion in progress)”), but on several motion verbs it is documented as part of the progressive stem, as in the examples in **table 15** below from Stevenson, Rottland, and Jakobi.[^56] The motion meaning of *-ir* simply agrees with the semantics of the roots, all of which define motion along some schematic scale, so that the aspectual meaning of *-ir* assumes greater significance. Hence, *-ir* approximates a progressive stem formative for this class of verbs. The final example in **table 15**, due to Kingston,[^57] shows still another trilled suffix *-or* in the progressive stem of a caused motion verb.
Another trilled suffix *-ir* marks motion in progress.[^55] It can be added to a progressive verb (*dɪ̄ɟɪ̄* “is throwing” → *dīɟ-ír* “is throwing (motion in progress)”), but on several motion verbs it is documented as part of the progressive stem, as in the examples in **Table 15** below from Stevenson, Rottland, and Jakobi.[^56] The motion meaning of *-ir* simply agrees with the semantics of the roots, all of which define motion along some schematic scale, so that the aspectual meaning of *-ir* assumes greater significance. Hence, *-ir* approximates a progressive stem formative for this class of verbs. The final example in **Table 15**, due to Kingston,[^57] shows still another trilled suffix *-or* in the progressive stem of a caused motion verb.
[^55]: I defer description of tone on this affix to another time.
[^56]: Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi, “The Verb in Nyimang and Dinik.”
@ -454,7 +454,7 @@ The trill thus fuses with certain vowels that behave like theme vowels for creat
### Innovative Dual-Participant Pluractional
A late addition to Ama’s pluractional portfolio is its unique dual suffix *-ɛ̄n*.[^58] The older form of the Ama dual suffix is *-ɪn,*[^59] which has been noted to resemble reciprocal suffixes in other Eastern Sudanic languages, such as Kordofan Nubian *-in*, Daju *-din*, Temein *-ɛ*, and also Ik *-in* of the Kuliak group.[^60] In Ama, its function has evolved to dual reciprocal and other dual participant readings, so for example *wʊ̀s-ɛ̄n* “greet (du.)” can refer to when two people greeted each other, or someone greeted two people, or two people greeted someone.[^61] The dual suffix is regularly used in Ama folktales to link two primary characters.[^62] Although such dual participant marking is extremely rare globally, it becomes possible in Nyima languages in particular where the incremental-distributive pluractional leaves a paradigmatic gap for dual subjects, as still seen in Afitti in **table 13** above, which Ama has filled in.
A late addition to Ama’s pluractional portfolio is its unique dual suffix *-ɛ̄n*.[^58] The older form of the Ama dual suffix is *-ɪn,*[^59] which has been noted to resemble reciprocal suffixes in other Eastern Sudanic languages, such as Kordofan Nubian *-in*, Daju *-din*, Temein *-ɛ*, and also Ik *-in* of the Kuliak group.[^60] In Ama, its function has evolved to dual reciprocal and other dual participant readings, so for example *wʊ̀s-ɛ̄n* “greet (du.)” can refer to when two people greeted each other, or someone greeted two people, or two people greeted someone.[^61] The dual suffix is regularly used in Ama folktales to link two primary characters.[^62] Although such dual participant marking is extremely rare globally, it becomes possible in Nyima languages in particular where the incremental-distributive pluractional leaves a paradigmatic gap for dual subjects, as still seen in Afitti in **Table 13** above, which Ama has filled in.
[^58]: Norton, “Number in Ama Verbs,” §3.
[^59]: Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi, “The Verb in Nyimang and Dinik,” p. 28.
@ -482,11 +482,11 @@ Some time after the contact with Heiban, Rottland and Jakobi note the likelihood
[^67]: Rottland & Jakobi, “Loan Word Evidence from the Nuba Mountains.”
This period nevertheless also reveals one significant example of simplification in Ama verbs that supports the idea that language contact occurred. Afitti has pronominal subject markers on the verb, seen earlier in **table 13**, which are absent in Ama. The pronominal prefixes are not the same in form as personal pronoun words in Afitti ([1sg]({sc}) *oi* but [1sg]({sc}) prefix *kə-*),[^68] therefore they are not incorporated versions of the current pronoun words, but rather predate them. Some of the Afitti pronoun words ([1sg]({sc}) *oi,* [2sg]({sc}) *i*)[^69] are similar to Ama ([1sg]({sc}) *àɪ̀,* [2sg]({sc}) *ī*) and must be retentions from proto-Nyima, hence the older pronominal prefixes must also be retentions in Afitti, but lost in Ama. Their loss in Ama is remarkable against the larger trend of growth in complexity of Ama verbs that we have examined in this paper. The predicted cause of this surprising reversal is pidginization under contact. That is, their loss is evidence that the Ama language was used for inter-group communication, presumably with the Kordofan Nubians, during which (and for which) Ama SOV sentences were simplified by dropping verbal subject marking. If Kordofan Nubians spoke Ama, then borrowing from Ama into Kordofan Nubian is also likely. In verbs, the obvious candidate for borrowing into Kordofan Nubian is the reciprocal suffix *-in*, as this is not attested elsewhere in Nubian.[^70] The following two-step scenario would then account for the facts: Ama was learned and used by Kordofan Nubians, during which Ama dropped verbal subject marking and its reciprocal suffix was borrowed into Kordofan Nubian; next, Ama returned to isolation in which the reciprocal suffix developed its dual function that is unique to Ama today.
This period nevertheless also reveals one significant example of simplification in Ama verbs that supports the idea that language contact occurred. Afitti has pronominal subject markers on the verb, seen earlier in **Table 13**, which are absent in Ama. The pronominal prefixes are not the same in form as personal pronoun words in Afitti ([1sg]({sc}) *oi* but [1sg]({sc}) prefix *kə-*),[^68] therefore they are not incorporated versions of the current pronoun words, but rather predate them. Some of the Afitti pronoun words ([1sg]({sc}) *oi,* [2sg]({sc}) *i*)[^69] are similar to Ama ([1sg]({sc}) *àɪ̀,* [2sg]({sc}) *ī*) and must be retentions from proto-Nyima, hence the older pronominal prefixes must also be retentions in Afitti, but lost in Ama. Their loss in Ama is remarkable against the larger trend of growth in complexity of Ama verbs that we have examined in this paper. The predicted cause of this surprising reversal is pidginization under contact. That is, their loss is evidence that the Ama language was used for inter-group communication, presumably with the Kordofan Nubians, during which (and for which) Ama SOV sentences were simplified by dropping verbal subject marking. If Kordofan Nubians spoke Ama, then borrowing from Ama into Kordofan Nubian is also likely. In verbs, the obvious candidate for borrowing into Kordofan Nubian is the reciprocal suffix *-in*, as this is not attested elsewhere in Nubian.[^70] The following two-step scenario would then account for the facts: Ama was learned and used by Kordofan Nubians, during which Ama dropped verbal subject marking and its reciprocal suffix was borrowed into Kordofan Nubian; next, Ama returned to isolation in which the reciprocal suffix developed its dual function that is unique to Ama today.
[^68]: Stevenson, Rottland & Jakobi, “The Verb in Nyimang and Dinik,” pp. 34-38.
[^69]: Stevenson, “A Survey of the Phonetics and Grammatical Structure of the Nuba Mountain Languages,” 41: p. 177.
[^70]: ![Jakobi, this issue](article:jakobi.md)
[^70]: ![Jakobi, this issue](article:jakobi.md).
# Abbreviations
@ -539,19 +539,19 @@ Everett, Daniel. “Cultural Constraints on Grammar and Cognition in Pirahã: An
Everett, Daniel. “Pirahã Culture and Grammar: A Response to Some Criticisms.” *Language* 85, no. 2 (2009): pp. 405–442.
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. “The Plural in Chadic.” In *Papers in Chadic Linguistics,* edited by Paul Newman & Roxana Ma Newman. Leiden: Afrika-Studiecentrum, 1977: pp. 37–56. [SCAN]
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. “The Plural in Chadic.” In *Papers in Chadic Linguistics,* edited by Paul Newman & Roxana Ma Newman. Leiden: Afrika-Studiecentrum, 1977: pp. 37–56.
Gilley, Leoma. “Katcha Noun Morphology.” In *Nuba Mountain Language Studies,* edited by Thilo Schadeberg and Roger Blench. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2013: pp. 501-522.
Greenberg, Joseph. *The Languages of Africa.* Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1963.
Heine, Bernd & Rainer Voßen. “Sprachtypologie.” In *Die Sprachen Afrikas,* edited by Bernd Heine, Thilo Schadeberg, and Ekkehard Wolff. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 1981: pp. 407–444. [BIB]
Heine, Bernd & Rainer Voßen. “Sprachtypologie.” In *Die Sprachen Afrikas,* edited by Bernd Heine, Thilo Schadeberg, and Ekkehard Wolff. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 1981: pp. 407–444.
Hyman, Larry, and Imelda Udoh. “Progressive Formation in Leggbo.” In *Globalization and the Study of Languages in Africa,* edited by Ozo-mekuri Ndimele. Port Harcourt: Grand Orbit Communications and Emhai Press, 2005: pp. 297-304.
Jakobi, Angelika. *Kordofan Nubian: A Synchronic and Diachronic Study.* Unpublished manuscript, 2013.
Kröger, Oliver. “Typology Put to Practical Use: A Participatory Approach to Initial Grammar Research.” In *Proceedings of the 6th World Congress of African Linguistics, Cologne 17-21 August 2009,* edited by Matthias Brenzinger and Anne-Marie Fehn. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2012. [SCAN]
Kröger, Oliver. “Typology Put to Practical Use: A Participatory Approach to Initial Grammar Research.” In *Proceedings of the 6th World Congress of African Linguistics, Cologne 17-21 August 2009,* edited by Matthias Brenzinger and Anne-Marie Fehn. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2012: pp. 155–168.
Laca, Brenda. “Progressives, Pluractionals and the Domains of Aspect.” In *Domaines, Journées d’Études linguistiques.* Nantes: Université de Nantes, 2004: pp. 87-92.
@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ Norton, Russell. “The Ama Dual Suffix: An Internal Reconstruction.” In *Nilo
Rilly, Claude. *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique.* Louvain: Peeters, 2010.
Rottland, Franz, and Angelika Jakobi. “Loan Word Evidence from the Nuba Mountains: Kordofan Nubian and the Nyimang Group.” *Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere,* Sondernummer (1991): pp. 249–269. [BIB]
Rottland, Franz, and Angelika Jakobi. “Loan Word Evidence from the Nuba Mountains: Kordofan Nubian and the Nyimang Group.” *Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere,* Sondernummer (1991): pp. 249–269.
Smits, Heleen. *A Grammar of Lumun: A Kordofanian Language of Sudan.* 2 vols. Utrecht: LOT, 2017.
@ -583,16 +583,16 @@ Stevenson, Roland, Franz Rottland & Angelika Jakobi. “The Verb in Nyimang and
Stirtz, Timothy. *A Grammar of Gaahmg: A Nilo-Saharan Language of Sudan.* Utrecht: LOT, 2011.
Trudgill, Peter. *Sociolinguistic Typology: Social Determinants of Linguistic Complexity.* Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. [SCAN]
Trudgill, Peter. *Sociolinguistic Typology: Social Determinants of Linguistic Complexity.* Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Voogt, Alex de. “A Sketch of Afitti Phonology.” *Studies in African Linguistics* 38, no. 1 (2009): pp. 35–52.
Voogt, Alex de. “Dual Marking and Kinship Terms in Afitti.” *Studies in Language* 35, no. 4 (2011): pp. 898–911.
Waag, Christine. *The Fur Verb and Its Context.* Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2010. [SCAN]
Waag, Christine. *The Fur Verb and Its Context.* Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe, 2010.
Welmers, William. *African Language Structures.* Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973.
Werner, Roland. *Tìdn-áal: A Study of Midob (Darfur Nubian).* Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, 1993.
Wolff, Ekkehard. “Patterns in Chadic (and Afroasiatic?) Verb Base Formations.” In *Papers in Chadic Linguistics,* edited by Paul Newman & Roxana Ma Newman. Leiden: Afrika-Studiecentrum, 1977: pp. 199–233. [SCAN]
Wolff, Ekkehard. “Patterns in Chadic (and Afroasiatic?) Verb Base Formations.” In *Papers in Chadic Linguistics,* edited by Paul Newman & Roxana Ma Newman. Leiden: Afrika-Studiecentrum, 1977: pp. 199–233.

198
content/article/rilly.md
View file

@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
title: "Personal Markers in Meroitic"
authors: ["clauderilly.md"]
abstract: "please provide an abstract"
keywords: ["Meroitic", "Meroe", "Kush", Napata", "pronouns", "Egyptian", "decipherment", "verbal morphology", "pronominal morphology", "person", "comparative linguistics", "Old Nubian", "Nobiin", "Andaandi", "Ama", "Nara", "Taman", "Mattokki", "Karko"]
keywords: ["Meroitic", "Meroe", "Kush", "Napata", "pronouns", "Egyptian", "decipherment", "verbal morphology", "pronominal morphology", "person", "comparative linguistics", "Old Nubian", "Nobiin", "Andaandi", "Ama", "Nara", "Taman", "Mattokki", "Karko"]
---
# Introduction {#intro}
@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ Internal methods have been used since 1911 to investigate the meaning of the tex
Nubian and Nara are closest to Meroitic, yet unfortunately neither is close enough to allow for a quick and straightforward comparison of vocabulary and morphology. The split between the different branches of NES is supposed to have occurred in early third millennium BCE,[^x3] so that the chronological depth between the NES sister-languages is comparable to the time gap that separates Indo-European languages. For that reason, the comparative method must not be used alone, but in combination with internal methods.
[^x3]: Rilly, "The Wadi Howar Diaspora and Its Role in the Spread of East Sudanic Languages from the Fourth to the First Millenia BCE."
[^x3]: Rilly, "The Wadi Howar Diaspora and Its Role in the Spread of East Sudanic Languages from the Fourth to the First Millenia BCE.”
The present paper deals with personal markers that can be identified in Meroitic inscriptions. This topic was never investigated until now, mainly because the Meroitic morphology was – and mostly remains – a *terra incognita.* The texts that have been found so far rarely offer a situation of uttering[^1] in which the subject can be easily identified. For example, the royal chronicles include reports of military campaigns where the verb *ked* “cut in pieces, kill” frequently occurs. However, in most cases, the verbal form is simply *ked,* without any pronoun or affix that could indicate which person is the subject.
@ -40,13 +40,13 @@ Morphological issues in Meroitic cannot be addressed without taking into account
[^3]: This distinctive feature of the Meroitic writing-system was first evidenced in Hintze 1973. For an extensive study of the rules of Meroitic script, see Rilly, *La langue du Royaume de Méroé,* pp. 277-314.
The script includes nineteen syllabic signs. Fifteen of them have the value “consonant + /a/”. The default vowel /a/ can be modified by adding one of the three vocalic signs *e, i,* and *o.* Like in English, the sign e has three values: /e/, /ə/ (schwa), and zero. The zero value is used to write consonant clusters or final consonants, for instance *qore* "ruler," pronounced /kʷur/. The sign *o* is used for /u/ and /o/. Four additional syllabic signs have a fixed vocalic value: three of them represent “consonant + *e*” (*ne, se, te,* with the three values of *e*), one represents “consonant + *o*” (*to*). For initial vowels, there is a single sign transliterated a, which represents /a/, /u/, and probably /o/ and /ə/. Initial /e/ and /i/ were written *e* and *i* until the first century CE. In later times, they were written *ye* and *yi* with a dummy *y,* which was not pronounced. Finally, the texts include a word-divider, made of two dots like our modern colon, which is used (more or less regularly) between words or more commonly between the different clauses of a sentence.
The script includes nineteen syllabic signs. Fifteen of them have the value “consonant + /a/”. The default vowel /a/ can be modified by adding one of the three vocalic signs *e, i,* and *o.* Like in English, the sign e has three values: /e/, /ə/ (schwa), and zero. The zero value is used to write consonant clusters or final consonants, for instance *qore* "ruler,” pronounced /kʷur/. The sign *o* is used for /u/ and /o/. Four additional syllabic signs have a fixed vocalic value: three of them represent “consonant + *e*” (*ne, se, te,* with the three values of *e*), one represents “consonant + *o*” (*to*). For initial vowels, there is a single sign transliterated a, which represents /a/, /u/, and probably /o/ and /ə/. Initial /e/ and /i/ were written *e* and *i* until the first century CE. In later times, they were written *ye* and *yi* with a dummy *y,* which was not pronounced. Finally, the texts include a word-divider, made of two dots like our modern colon, which is used (more or less regularly) between words or more commonly between the different clauses of a sentence.
The sound values of the Meroitic signs are generally known,[^x4] but there remains a few unclear points. Until recently, it was supposed that the sign 𐦭, transliterated formerly *ḫ,* and *x* according to the revised conventions,[^4] had only the value [χ], a velar fricative like Egyptian *ḫ.* A second sign, which can replace *x* in several variant spellings, is 𐦮, presently transliterated *h,* formerly *ẖ*. I suggested that *h* was a labialized version of *x,* in IPA [χʷ], because it mainly occurs before or after labiovelar vowels [o] or [u]. These two values [χ] and [χʷ] are evidenced by the use of *x* and *h* in Meroitic transcriptions of Egyptian words. The same distribution can be observed between *k* and *q,* the latter being a labialized velar consonant [kʷ]. However, in the Old Nubian alphabet, the Meroitic sign 𐦭 *x* was borrowed, not for the velar fricative consonant [χ], for which the Coptic sign ϩ was used, but for the velar nasal consonant /ŋ/, written ⳟ. Furthermore, in several Egyptian transcriptions of Meroitic royal names that include *x* or *h,* the scribes used a digraph *nḫ.*[^5] My impression is therefore that the signs *x* and *h* had a double set of values: [χ] and [χʷ] in loanwords from Egyptian and [ŋ], and [ŋʷ] in native words. This assumption is supported by strong arguments but still needs to be checked word by word.
[^x4]: Rilly, *La langue du Royaume de Méroé,* pp. 359-407.
[^4]: See Rilly \& Francigny, “Excavations of the French Archaeological Mission in Sedeinga, Campaign 2011,” p. 67, no. 10.
[^5]: For further details, see Rilly, “Upon Hintze's Shoulders," pp. 28-29.
[^5]: For further details, see Rilly, “Upon Hintze's Shoulders,” pp. 28-29.
A last peculiarity, pertaining rather to phonetic changes than to spelling conventions, needs to be mentioned here because it will be found in some of the following quotations from Meroitic texts. From the first century CE onwards, the sequence /s/ + /l/ (written *se* + *l*), which was frequent in Meroitic due to the use of the article *-l* at the end of noun phrases, merged into /t/. For example, the sentence written *kdise-l-o* “she is the daughter” became *kdit-o*. This phonetic development is known as “Griffith’s law”.[^6]
@ -56,8 +56,9 @@ A last peculiarity, pertaining rather to phonetic changes than to spelling conve
Among the possible markers of the third person, only pronouns are known so far, namely *qo/qe* and variants for singular and *qoleb* for plural. No verbal ending that could be connected with the third person, such as Latin *-t/-nt* or Egyptian *=f/=sn,* has been spotted in the texts. The case of the “verbal dative” will be later investigated, but this morpheme is probably to be classified as a clitic pronoun.
In the paradigm of personal pronouns, the 3rd person has a special place. Whereas the 1st and 2nd persons refer to the protagonists of the uttering situation (see n. 1 [CHECK]), the 3rd person refers to people and things that are outside this situation. According to the relevant categorization of Arab grammarians, the 3rd person is “the absentee."[^7] From this perspective, 3rd person pronouns are close to demonstratives. This is particularly obvious when it comes to morphology. In many languages, these pronouns are derived from demonstratives. In Romance languages for example, they stem from the Latin distal demonstrative *ille* “that”, for instance French *il* “he”, Spanish *él,* Romanian *el.* Some languages even use the same word for the demonstrative and the 3rd person pronoun.[^8] In Latin, the proximal demonstrative *is, ea, id* “this” was used as a 3rd person pronoun. In Turkish, a language that display a full range of typological similarities with Meroitic,[^9] the same demonstrative *o* is used as a demonstrative adjective, a demonstrative pronoun and a 3rd person pronoun (Creissels 2006: 91). This seems also to be the case in Meroitic, which has apparently the same word, *qo/qe,* for “this” (adjective), “this” (pronoun), and “he”, “she”, “it.”[^ex2]
In the paradigm of personal pronouns, the 3rd person has a special place. Whereas the 1st and 2nd persons refer to the protagonists of the uttering situation (see n. 1 [CHECK]), the 3rd person refers to people and things that are outside this situation. According to the relevant categorization of Arab grammarians, the 3rd person is “the absentee.”[^7] From this perspective, 3rd person pronouns are close to demonstratives. This is particularly obvious when it comes to morphology. In many languages, these pronouns are derived from demonstratives. In Romance languages for example, they stem from the Latin distal demonstrative *ille* “that”, for instance French *il* “he”, Spanish *él,* Romanian *el.* Some languages even use the same word for the demonstrative and the 3rd person pronoun.[^8] In Latin, the proximal demonstrative *is, ea, id* “this” was used as a 3rd person pronoun. In Turkish, a language that displays a full range of typological similarities with Meroitic,[^9] the same demonstrative *o* is used as a demonstrative adjective, a demonstrative pronoun and a 3rd person pronoun.[^y3] This seems also to be the case in Meroitic, which has apparently the same word, *qo/qe,* for “this” (adjective), “this” (pronoun), and “he”, “she”, “it.”[^ex2]
[^y3]: Creissels, *Syntaxe générale 1,* 2006: p. 91.
[^7]: In Arabic *ghâ‘ib,* cf. Cotte, *Langage et linéarité,* p. 130.
[^8]: In addition to Latin, this feature can be found in Korean, Hindi, Panjabi, Marathi, Mongolian, etc. See Jacquesson, *Les personnes,* pp. 103-105.
[^9]: These similarities are due to common typological features and do not originate from a common genealogical origin. Turkish is, like Meroitic or Nubian, an agglutinative language, with no grammatical gender and an SOV word-order, cf. Rilly, *La langue du Royaume de Méroé,* pp. 497-502.
@ -151,7 +152,7 @@ The possessive of the 3rd person singular includes the pronoun *qo/qe,* followed
{{< gloss "(10)" >}}
{g} *perite :*,agent|*Wos-se-leb :*,Isis-[gen-det.pl]({sc})|*qorene*,royal.scribe|*Wos-se-leb :*,Isis-[gen-det.pl]({sc})|*yetmde*,nephew|***qebese***-*l-o-wi :*,[3pl.gen-det-cop-emp]({sc})|
{r} “He was the nephew of agents of Isis and royal scribes (?) of Isis." (GA. 04, epitaph)
{r} “He was the nephew of agents of Isis and royal scribes (?) of Isis.” (GA. 04, epitaph)
{{< /gloss >}}
The possessive *qebe-se* includes *qebe-,* a plural form of *qo* that is more conservative than *qoleb,* but is, unlike the latter, never attested in isolation. It includes the plural suffix *-b* that can also be found on the plural determiner:[^x10]
@ -161,7 +162,7 @@ The possessive *qebe-se* includes *qebe-,* a plural form of *qo* that is more co
* Determiner: singular *-l* → plural *-le****b***
* Pronoun: singular *-qo/-qe* → plural *qe****b****e-*
*Qebese* has several variants, *aqebese,* *aqobese* (see n. 20 [CHECK]) *eqebese,* and especially *bese,* which is frequent. This last form, in all likelihood, is not an abbreviated variant but is based on a still earlier form of the 3rd person pronoun, *-b,* which will be considered below [ADD REF].
*Qebese* has several variants, *aqebese,* *aqobese* (see n. 32) *eqebese,* and especially *bese,* which is frequent. This last form, in all likelihood, is not an abbreviated variant but is based on a still earlier form of the 3rd person pronoun, *-b,* which will be considered below [3.3.6]{#ii36}.
## The “Verbal Dative” as Possible Enclitic Pronoun or Verbal Number Marker {#ii3}
@ -230,8 +231,8 @@ The same wording occurs in the prayers to the gods that were engraved near their
In an early analysis of these sentences,[^x11] I interpreted this “dative infix” as an applicative suffix, with reference to Kanuri, a Saharan language. Applicatives are used to encode a beneficiary of the action in the verb, instead of adding an adposition or a case ending to the noun. They are quite common among African languages and are for example found in Nubian.[^27] However, this can hardly apply to the Meroitic construction. The applicative is a voice, such as passive and causative, and the affixes it uses cannot convey the notions of singular or plural. Example (19) from a Bantu language, Tswana, shows that the same applicative suffix *-el* is used regardless of the beneficiaries’ number.[^28]
[^x11]: Rilly, *La langue du Royaume de Méroé,* pp. 553-554.
[^27]: Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko," pp. 121-122 and n. 3. Nile Nubian (Nobiin and Mattokki/Andaandi) uses applicative suffixes that are nothing but a grammaticalized forms of the two verbs “to give,” *deen* and *tir.* In other languages, they may result from the incorporation of adpositions in the verbal compound, as is the case in Amharic (Creissels, *Syntaxe générale 1,* p. 79).
[^28]: Adapted from Creissels, *Syntaxe générale 1,* pp. 74, 76. In (19c), the added gloss “3:1.s” means “subject 3rd person, Bantu nominal class 1.”
[^27]: Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko,” pp. 121-122 and n. 3. Nile Nubian (Nobiin and Mattokki/Andaandi) uses applicative suffixes that are nothing but a grammaticalized forms of the two verbs “to give,” *deen* and *tir.* In other languages, they may result from the incorporation of adpositions in the verbal compound, as is the case in Amharic (Creissels, *Syntaxe générale 2,* p. 39).
[^28]: Adapted from Creissels, *Syntaxe générale 2,* pp. 74, 76. In (19c), the added gloss “3:1.s” means “subject 3rd person, Bantu nominal class 1.”
{{< gloss "(19a)" >}}
{r} **Tswana**
@ -253,7 +254,7 @@ In (19b), the beneficiary is plural (*bana* “children”, sg. *ngwana*), where
In addition, this morpheme was first identified as a beneficiary marker from the instances found in the benedictions of the epitaphs, hence its name “dative infix.” However, in royal chronicles and biographical passages of several funerary texts – which have been little studied to date – the suffix obviously refers to a direct object, as can be seen in (20) drawn from the funerary stela of viceroy of Nubia Abratoye.[^x12]
[^x12]: Carrier, "La stèle méroïtique d’Abratoye."
[^x12]: Carrier, "La stèle méroïtique d’Abratoye.”
{{< gloss "(20)" >}}
{r} **Meroitic**
@ -270,9 +271,9 @@ This analysis, however, does not account for the location of these so-called cli
### Verbal Number Markers in Northern East Sudanic {#ii32}
The unexpected location of *-x(e)* and *-bx(e)* in the verbal complex can be compared with that of the verbal number marker in two groups of the NES linguistic family, Nyima and Nubian. In these languages, the plurality of the subject in intransitive constructions and of the object in transitive constructions (“ergative pattern”) is realized by the same verbal suffix which is added directly to the verbal stem, before the TAM suffixes. The clearest instances of this construction are found in the Nyima language Ama and involve an ergative-pattern verbal plural marker[^29] *-(ì)d̪ì* as shown in (21)-(22).
The unexpected location of *-x(e)* and *-bx(e)* in the verbal complex can be compared with that of the verbal number marker in two groups of the NES linguistic family, Nyima and Nubian. In these languages, the plurality of the subject in intransitive constructions and of the object in transitive constructions (“ergative pattern”) is realized by the same verbal suffix which is added directly to the verbal stem, before the TAM suffixes. The clearest instances of this construction are found in the Nyima language Ama and involve an ergative-pattern verbal plural marker[^29] *-(ì)d̪ì* as shown in (21)–(22).
[^29]: An in-depth analysis of this construction in Ama can be found in Norton, "Number in Ama Verbs." This author prefers to speak of “distributive” rather than “plural” (ibid., 78). His stance is supported by a series of five examples, which can be nonetheless analysed as a particular case of plural construction. In her study of verbal plural in Nubian, Jakobi states that “verbal number – realized by distinct singular and plural verb stems – can have both aspectual and morphosyntactic functions. On the one hand these stems may encode habitual, progressive, iterative, repetitive, distributive, or even single events, on the other hand these stems may encode the participants affected by these events” (Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko," p. 117).
[^29]: An in-depth analysis of this construction in Ama can be found in Norton, "Number in Ama Verbs.” This author prefers to speak of “distributive” rather than “plural” (ibid., 78). His stance is supported by a series of five examples, which can be nonetheless analysed as a particular case of plural construction. In her study of verbal plural in Nubian, Jakobi states that “verbal number – realized by distinct singular and plural verb stems – can have both aspectual and morphosyntactic functions. On the one hand these stems may encode habitual, progressive, iterative, repetitive, distributive, or even single events, on the other hand these stems may encode the participants affected by these events” (Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko,” p. 117).
{{< gloss "(21a)" >}}
{r} **Ama**
@ -295,10 +296,11 @@ The unexpected location of *-x(e)* and *-bx(e)* in the verbal complex can be com
{r} “I am eating an egg.”
{{< /gloss >}}
In Old Nubian and Nobiin, this suffix is *-(i)j.* A related marker *-j-* is found in Midob (Werner 1993: 49). In Kordofan Nubian, a similar suffix *-c* is attested along with others suffixes, such as *-Vr,* which is much more frequent. Recent publications showed that the Nubian suffixes function according to the same ergative pattern as the Ama suffix.[^31] Example (23) illustrates the use of the suffix to mark subject plurality with intransitive verbs, whereas examples (24)–(25) (id.: 64) show the suffix marking object plurality with transitive verbs.[^ex23]
In Old Nubian and Nobiin, this suffix is *-(i)j.* A related marker *-j-* is found in Midob.[^y2] In Kordofan Nubian, a similar suffix *-c* is attested along with others suffixes, such as *-Vr,* which is much more frequent. Recent publications showed that the Nubian suffixes function according to the same ergative pattern as the Ama suffix.[^31] Example (23) illustrates the use of the suffix to mark subject plurality with intransitive verbs, whereas examples (24)–(25) show the suffix marking object plurality with transitive verbs.[^ex23]
[^30]: *-V* stands here for “vowel”. See Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko," pp. 117-122 for Old Nubian, Nobiin, and Mattokki–Andaandi. In the latter group, *-(i)j* is only a pluractional marker whereas the plural marker (only for objects) is *-ir.* For *-c* as a verbal number marker in Tagle, a Kordofan Nubian language, see Jakobi, Ibrahim \& Ibrahim Gulfan, “Verbal Number and Grammatical Relations in Tagle,” exx. 5-6, 19, 20.
[^31]: The suffix *-(i)j* is mentioned in Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* §13.1 who calls it "pluractional" and in Werner 1989: 173-175, who speaks of “plural object extension” but not of plural subject marking. Recent and more explicit studies are Khalil, “The Verbal Plural Marker in Nobiin," Jakobi 2017, and Jakobi et al., forthcoming.
[^y2]: Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* 49.
[^30]: *-V* stands here for “vowel”. See Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko,” pp. 117-122 for Old Nubian, Nobiin, and Mattokki–Andaandi. In the latter group, *-(i)j* is only a pluractional marker whereas the plural marker (only for objects) is *-ir.* For *-c* as a verbal number marker in Tagle, a Kordofan Nubian language, see Jakobi, Ibrahim \& Ibrahim Gulfan, “Verbal Number and Grammatical Relations in Tagle,” exx. 5-6, 19, 20.
[^31]: The suffix *-(i)j* is mentioned in Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* §13.1 who calls it "pluractional" and in Werner 1989: 173-175, who speaks of “plural object extension” but not of plural subject marking. Recent and more explicit studies are Khalil, “The Verbal Plural Marker in Nobiin,” Jakobi 2017, and Jakobi et al., forthcoming.
[^ex23]: Examples from Khalil, “The Verbal Plural Marker in Nobiin,” p. 65, ex. 9; p. 64, exx. 3, 4.
{{< gloss "(23)" >}}
@ -317,9 +319,9 @@ In Old Nubian and Nobiin, this suffix is *-(i)j.* A related marker *-j-* is foun
{r} “I am milking the cows.”
{{< /gloss >}}
It is noteworthy that, unlike in the Ama examples above, the plural marking operated by the suffix *-(i)j* is redundant, since plurality is already marked by the subject pronoun *ter* “they” in (23) and the plural nominal suffix *-guu* in (25). In Ama, apart from rare instances of replacive patterns such as *wīd̪ɛ́ŋ* “child”/*dŕīŋ* “children," and a plural suffix *-gí/-ŋì* which can be attached to kinship terms, plurality in unmarked in nouns. This makes it necessary, either to mark it by determiners (“several,” “many”, etc.) or to encode it in the verb by a specific marker, as showed in (20b) and (21b) above.
It is noteworthy that, unlike in the Ama examples above, the plural marking operated by the suffix *-(i)j* is redundant, since plurality is already marked by the subject pronoun *ter* “they” in (23) and the plural nominal suffix *-guu* in (25). In Ama, apart from rare instances of replacive patterns such as *wīd̪ɛ́ŋ* “child”/*dŕīŋ* “children,” and a plural suffix *-gí/-ŋì* which can be attached to kinship terms, plurality in unmarked in nouns. This makes it necessary, either to mark it by determiners (“several,” “many”, etc.) or to encode it in the verb by a specific marker, as showed in (20b) and (21b) above.
Considering that the nominal plural suffixes that can be found in the NES languages are so diverse that no protoform can be reconstructed, it is plausible that Proto-NES had no plural nominal markers, but only a few replacive patterns and collective nouns with singulatives forms marked by a suffix *\*-tV*.[^x15] It was therefore necessary to mark the plurals of the participants in the verbal compound. Proto-Nubian seems to have been in this regard close to its ancestor Proto-NES.[^x16] Later on, for unknown reasons – but areal influence probably played a major role in it – each Nubian group worked out its own plural markers for all the nouns. This novelty of course competed with the earlier plural marking by verbal suffixes. However, both of them survived to this day, but they often follow economy principles. Khalil notes that “the *j*-suffix appears sporadically in the intransitive clause” and that “In the transitive clause […], when the object noun phrase is modified by a numeral or a quantifier such as *mallee* [many] or *minkellee* [how many], the plural marker on the object noun phrase becomes optional and subsequently the suffixation of *-j* becomes optional, too."[^x17]
Considering that the nominal plural suffixes that can be found in the NES languages are so diverse that no protoform can be reconstructed, it is plausible that Proto-NES had no plural nominal markers, but only a few replacive patterns and collective nouns with singulatives forms marked by a suffix *\*-tV*.[^x15] It was therefore necessary to mark the plurals of the participants in the verbal compound. Proto-Nubian seems to have been in this regard close to its ancestor Proto-NES.[^x16] Later on, for unknown reasons – but areal influence probably played a major role in it – each Nubian group worked out its own plural markers for all the nouns. This novelty of course competed with the earlier plural marking by verbal suffixes. However, both of them survived to this day, but they often follow economy principles. Khalil notes that “the *j*-suffix appears sporadically in the intransitive clause” and that “In the transitive clause […], when the object noun phrase is modified by a numeral or a quantifier such as *mallee* [many] or *minkellee* [how many], the plural marker on the object noun phrase becomes optional and subsequently the suffixation of *-j* becomes optional, too.”[^x17]
[^x15]: Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 350.
[^x16]: Ibid., 272.
@ -328,8 +330,8 @@ Considering that the nominal plural suffixes that can be found in the NES langua
A third use of verbal plural markers in NES languages is to encode in ditransitive verbs the plurality of the indirect object, i.e., the beneficiary or recipient of the action. In this construction, the plural verbal suffix refers to the indirect object and not to the object in Old Nubian[^x50] and Nobiin[^32] and probably in Ama. For the latter language, I have unfortunately no clear example of this point in my limited fieldwork data, but an example provided by Norton illustrates this point for dual, which operates exactly like plural, but with the suffix *-ɛ̄n/-ēn* (the macron stands for middle tone here).[^x51]
[^x50]: Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* §13.1.3.
[^32]: In Kordofan Nubian language Karko, unlike in Nobiin, the verbal number marker refers to the direct object even in ditransitive construction (Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko," pp. 164-165). The example she gives (“Dry the pots for the woman”), compared with the Nobiin example (28) above, shows that at least in this language, the participant hierarchy is not connected with the degree of animacy of the two objects, direct and indirect. See, however, n. 35 below.
[^x51]: Example from Norton, "Number in Ama Verbs," p. 86, ex. 35.
[^32]: In Kordofan Nubian language Karko, unlike in Nobiin, the verbal number marker refers to the direct object even in ditransitive construction (Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko,” pp. 164-165). The example she gives (“Dry the pots for the woman”), compared with the Nobiin example (28) above, shows that at least in this language, the participant hierarchy is not connected with the degree of animacy of the two objects, direct and indirect. See, however, n. 35 below.
[^x51]: Example from Norton, "Number in Ama Verbs,” p. 86, ex. 35.
{{< gloss "(26)" >}}
{r} **Ama**
@ -378,9 +380,9 @@ Examples (29) and (30) are prayers to Amun, said by a fictive enunciator, in fav
{r} “O Amun (…), to Natakamani, the descendant of Amun, to Amanitore, the descendant of (the) Aritene, to Arakakhataror, the descendant of the Great God, may you give the north entirely!”
{{< /gloss >}}
In (29), the singular suffix *-x* is added to the stem *l-* “give”. It refers to a single beneficiary, king Amanakhareqerema. Admittedly, the object, namely *pwrite* “life, vital strength,” is also singular, so that evidence of the agreement with the beneficiary is to be sought in examples (30) and (31). In (30), the object is plural, *pwrite ntke* “life and strength,” since there is no dual in Meroitic. However, the suffix remains in the singular. In (31), the object is again singular, *hrl alose* "the north entirely," but the beneficiary is now a plural, namely the three members of the royal family. In this case, the plural form *-bx* of the suffix is used,[^34] just as we have seen in Ama and Nobiin.
In (29), the singular suffix *-x* is added to the stem *l-* “give”. It refers to a single beneficiary, king Amanakhareqerema. Admittedly, the object, namely *pwrite* “life, vital strength,” is also singular, so that evidence of the agreement with the beneficiary is to be sought in examples (30) and (31). In (30), the object is plural, *pwrite ntke* “life and strength,” since there is no dual in Meroitic. However, the suffix remains in the singular. In (31), the object is again singular, *hrl alose* "the north entirely,” but the beneficiary is now a plural, namely the three members of the royal family. In this case, the plural form *-bx* of the suffix is used,[^34] just as we have seen in Ama and Nobiin.
[^34]: Example (8) above, which is two centuries earlier than (29)–(31), is apparently a counterexample. Admittedly, the contextual elements are much clearer and the meaning of the verb is better established in examples (29)-(31) than in (8). However, it may be that the marking of the direct/indirect object is governed by the degree of animacy/definiteness, as it is in Old Nubian (Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* §13.1.3). According to Dimmendaal, "Tama," p. 324, this hierarchy is the following:
[^34]: Example (8) above, which is two centuries earlier than (29)–(31), is apparently a counterexample. Admittedly, the contextual elements are much clearer and the meaning of the verb is better established in examples (29)-(31) than in (8). However, it may be that the marking of the direct/indirect object is governed by the degree of animacy/definiteness, as it is in Old Nubian (Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* §13.1.3). According to Dimmendaal, "Tama,” p. 324, this hierarchy is the following:
- Animacy: Human > animate > inanimate:
@ -390,7 +392,7 @@ In (29), the singular suffix *-x* is added to the stem *l-* “give”. It refer
### The Verbal Plural Marker in NES Languages and in Meroitic {#ii34}
The Meroitic plural suffix *-bx(e)* shares three significant features with the verbal number markers in Ama and Nobiin: its direct adjunction to the stem within the verbal compound; its function as a plural marker of direct/indirect object; and its dependency on the hierarchy between participants of the action (cf. n. 34 [CHECK]). Nonetheless, some important divergences can be observed. First of all, the Meroitic plural suffix is not a single morpheme like Ama *-(ī)d̪ì* and Nobiin *-(i)j* (where /i/ is a epenthetic vowel) but the plural form of a singular suffix *-x(e).* In languages where verbal number is an operative category, the most frequent situation contrasts unmarked singular and marked plural. Nonetheless, the growing literature on verbal number/pluractionality records some languages where there is an opposition between marked verbal singular and marked verbal plural. In her study of verbal number in Karko, a Kordofan Nubian language, Jakobi gives some instances of such verbs (**Table 1**).
The Meroitic plural suffix *-bx(e)* shares three significant features with the verbal number markers in Ama and Nobiin: its direct adjunction to the stem within the verbal compound; its function as a plural marker of direct/indirect object; and its dependency on the hierarchy between participants of the action (cf. n. 57). Nonetheless, some important divergences can be observed. First of all, the Meroitic plural suffix is not a single morpheme like Ama *-(ī)d̪ì* and Nobiin *-(i)j* (where /i/ is a epenthetic vowel) but the plural form of a singular suffix *-x(e).* In languages where verbal number is an operative category, the most frequent situation contrasts unmarked singular and marked plural. Nonetheless, the growing literature on verbal number/pluractionality records some languages where there is an opposition between marked verbal singular and marked verbal plural. In her study of verbal number in Karko, a Kordofan Nubian language, Jakobi gives some instances of such verbs (**Table 1**).
| Gloss | Sg. Object | Pl. Object |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
@ -402,7 +404,7 @@ The Meroitic plural suffix *-bx(e)* shares three significant features with the v
**~~Table 1. Transitive verbs in Karko, singular stems marked by *-ɛɛr,* plural stems either unmarked or extended by *-Vk.*[^35]~~**
[^35]: Data from Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko," p. 126, t. 6. Only three of these verbs have specific markers both in singular and plural (“hang up,” “kindle,” “wake up”). In Karko, most of the verbs operate according to a pattern “unmarked singular/marked plural.” As in many languages where verbal number is present, the plural form can be a different verb (ibid., pp. 128-129). Several cases of replacive verbal forms for plural object marking are attested in Ama, see Norton, “Number in Ama Verbs,” p. 77.
[^35]: Data from Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko,” p. 126, t. 6. Only three of these verbs have specific markers both in singular and plural (“hang up,” “kindle,” “wake up”). In Karko, most of the verbs operate according to a pattern “unmarked singular/marked plural.” As in many languages where verbal number is present, the plural form can be a different verb (ibid., pp. 128-129). Several cases of replacive verbal forms for plural object marking are attested in Ama, see Norton, “Number in Ama Verbs,” p. 77.
In Maba, a language of Ouaddai (Eastern Chad) belonging to the Nilo-Saharan phylum, Weiss recorded instances of singular verbal suffix *-n* versus plural verbal suffix *-k.*[^36]
@ -427,7 +429,7 @@ The second discrepancy between the Meroitic plural suffix and “canonical” nu
The Meroitic suffix *-bx(e)* is therefore located in the right place, but, contrary to its Nubian counterparts, its use, as much as we can judge in the limited corpus available, seems restricted to plural object marking and does not extend to the plurality of events. The following examples of frequentative forms are attested in Nobiin (33) and Karko (34).[^37]
[^37]: Examples from Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 173; Jakobi,“Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko," p. 130, ex. 16. The original gloss [plr]({sc}) “verbal plural stem” has been replaced by [vnm]({sc}) “verbal number marker” in accordance with the conventions of the present article.
[^37]: Examples from Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 173; Jakobi,“Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko,” p. 130, ex. 16. The original gloss [plr]({sc}) “verbal plural stem” has been replaced by [vnm]({sc}) “verbal number marker” in accordance with the conventions of the present article.
{{< gloss "(33)" >}}
{r} **Nobiin**
@ -441,22 +443,24 @@ The Meroitic suffix *-bx(e)* is therefore located in the right place, but, contr
{r} “Go [pl]({sc}) to the market frequently!”
{{< /gloss >}}
It may, however, be mentioned that in Nubian languages, few instances of the use of the same morpheme for the frequentative (plurality of events) and the verbal number (plurality of participants) are attested. Nobiin and Old Nubian are the only Nubian languages where *-(i)j* is attested as both a plural event and participant marker, as shown in (33).[^x20] Still, it is uncertain whether this was also the case in Proto-Nubian. In (34) from Karko, the plurality of participants is indicated by the vowel *ɛ̀* in the verbal stem *ʃɛ̀-* (the singular stem is *ʃù-*), whereas the plurality of events is marked independently by the suffix *-tɛ̀g.* It may happen that a verb exhibits three different stems in Karko: one for a singular participant, one for a plural participant, and one for plurality of action.[^x21] A conspicuous instance is the verb “call,” which is *òg-* with singular object, *ògór* for plural object, and *òʃór* for plural action, i.e., a distributive meaning “call one by one." The suffix *-(V)ʃ* is a frequent number marker in Karko (Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko," 128) and other Kordofan Nubian languages, and is doubtlessly a reflex of Proto-Nubian suffix *\*-(i)j*. Another verbal number marker, the most frequent, is *-Vr,* with a vowel that is subject to vowel harmony. It is obvious that *òʃór* is an assimilated compound derived from *\*og-ʃ-Vr.* The two verbal plural suffixes *-(V)ʃ* and *-Vr* are used successively in the same stem to express plurality of object and plurality of events respectively. A similar distribution of these two verbal extensions is paralleled in Andaandi, where *-(i)j* is used for frequentatives, whereas the suffix *-ir* is used to mark the plurality of participants (only objects in this language).[^38] The markers *-(i)j* and *-ir* are clearly the Mattokki–Andaandi cognates of Kordofan Nubian *-(V)j* and *-Vr,* so that their use as specialized verbal plural markers might go back to Proto-Nubian.
It may, however, be mentioned that in Nubian languages, few instances of the use of the same morpheme for the frequentative (plurality of events) and the verbal number (plurality of participants) are attested. Nobiin and Old Nubian are the only Nubian languages where *-(i)j* is attested as both a plural event and participant marker, as shown in (33).[^x20] Still, it is uncertain whether this was also the case in Proto-Nubian. In (34) from Karko, the plurality of participants is indicated by the vowel *ɛ̀* in the verbal stem *ʃɛ̀-* (the singular stem is *ʃù-*), whereas the plurality of events is marked independently by the suffix *-tɛ̀g.* It may happen that a verb exhibits three different stems in Karko: one for a singular participant, one for a plural participant, and one for plurality of action.[^x21] A conspicuous instance is the verb “call,” which is *òg-* with singular object, *ògór* for plural object, and *òʃór* for plural action, i.e., a distributive meaning “call one by one.” The suffix *-(V)ʃ* is a frequent number marker in Karko[^y4] and other Kordofan Nubian languages, and is doubtlessly a reflex of Proto-Nubian suffix *\*-(i)j*. Another verbal number marker, the most frequent, is *-Vr,* with a vowel that is subject to vowel harmony. It is obvious that *òʃór* is an assimilated compound derived from *\*og-ʃ-Vr.* The two verbal plural suffixes *-(V)ʃ* and *-Vr* are used successively in the same stem to express plurality of object and plurality of events respectively. A similar distribution of these two verbal extensions is paralleled in Andaandi, where *-(i)j* is used for frequentatives, whereas the suffix *-ir* is used to mark the plurality of participants (only objects in this language).[^38] The markers *-(i)j* and *-ir* are clearly the Mattokki–Andaandi cognates of Kordofan Nubian *-(V)j* and *-Vr,* so that their use as specialized verbal plural markers might go back to Proto-Nubian.
[^x20]: See also Khidir 2015: 37
[^x21]: Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko," pp. 130-132.
[^38]: See Jakobi, Ibrahim & Gulfan, “Verbal Number and Grammatical Relations in Tagle,” §2, with further references, particularly Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian: A Grammar,* §§2880f, 3031f.
[^y4]: Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko,” p. 128.
[^x20]: See also Khalil, “The Verbal Plural Marker in Nobiin,” p. 37.
[^x21]: Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko,” pp. 130-132.
A distinct marker *-k* is found in Nubian for the plurality of events,[^x22] e.g., Nobiin *jòog* “grind” → *\*jook-k* → *jókk* “chew.” This suffix dates back to Proto-NES, or at least to its eastern branch, because it is also found in Nara and Meroitic.[^39] In Nara, it differentiates verbal forms such as *ishayto* (← *\*ishag-to*) “he asked” from *ishakkito* (← *\*ishag-k-i-to*) “he asked them” or “he asked several questions,” but is rarely used.[^x23] This suffix is also attested in Meroitic,[^40] as shown in the following example:
[^x22]: Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko," p. 122 with further references.
[^x23]: Thompson, "Nera," p. 491.
[^x22]: Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko,” p. 122 with further references.
[^x23]: Thompson, "Nera,” p. 491.
[^39]: The morphology of event plurality marking in Tama seems complex (Dimmendaal 2009: 316) and needs a specific study. In the closely related language Mararit, it seems reduplication, which is cross-linguistically a very common way to form verbal plurals, is used (Elnazir Mustafa 2016: 55). In Ama, the same suffix *-īd̪ì* (see exx. 21-22) is used for plurality of participants and plurality of events.
[^40]: Several cases of “fossilized” suffix *-k* are attested in Meroitic, in which basic verb has disappeared whereas the form with *-k* has been preserved, but has lost its pluractional meaning. Examples are the verbs *erik-* “beget” and probably *tk-* “love” or “revere” in *Amni-tke-l* “beloved of Amun” (Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* pp. 90-91). The former verb is still attested in Ajang (Kordofan Nubian) in both its forms: *ír-í* “give birth,” pluractional *ír-k-í* “give birth to one child after the other” (Jakobi, *Kordofan Nubian,* p. 114). The second might be an assimilated form /takk/- of *\*tar-k-*, cf. Old Nubian ⲧⲁⲣⲟⲩ-, ⲧⲁⲣⲓ- “praise, bless,” Tama *tár-* “love.”
{{< gloss "(35)" >}}
{r} **Meroitic**
{g} *abr-se-l :*,man-each-[det]({sc})|*e-ked :*,[1sg.s]({sc})-kill|*kdi-se-l :*,woman-each-[det]({sc})|*e-(e)r-k :*,[1sg.s]({sc})-take-[plc]({sc})|
{r} “I killed each man; I (repeatedly) took each woman." (REM 1044/4–5)
{r} “I killed each man; I (repeatedly) took each woman.” (REM 1044/4–5)
{{< /gloss >}}
Although it encodes the plurality of events, it seems that this suffix cannot be used in combination with the plural object marker *-bx(e),* unlike the verbal form *òʃór* in Karko, where the plural event suffix is combined with the plural object suffix. Examples (36) and (37) are drawn from Queen Amanirenas and Prince Akinidad’s stela REM 1003 and describe military campaigns against two different tribes in nearly identical terms. The first uses the pluractional suffix *-k,* but no plural object marker is present, probably because the distributive value of *tk-k* “seize one by one” implies the plurality of the object. Conversely, in the second sentence, the verbal plural marker *-bx* is present, but not the pluractional suffix *-k.*[^ex36]
@ -477,7 +481,7 @@ The difference between Meroitic, where the pleonastic use of the two plurality m
> These typological properties suggest that such systems are subject to a considerable degree of communicative dynamism, and hence to historical change or reinterpretation. There may be a number of reasons for the relative instability of such systems, compared to some other grammatical domains in these languages, such as noun-class systems in Niger-Congo languages, or gender marking in Afroasiatic languages. One reason, as argued in the present contribution, may derive from construction-level effects of number marking across categories. As shown below, pluractional marking, as a derivational phenomenon describing event structure, interacts with plural argument marking.[^x24]
[^x24]: Dimmendaal, "Tama," p. 130.
[^x24]: Dimmendaal, "Tama,” p. 130.
### A New Hypothesis Concerning the Origin of *-bx(e)* {#ii36}
@ -495,9 +499,8 @@ It is nevertheless unclear whether the Old Nubian and Nobiin verbal plural marke
Like *-(i)j* in Old Nubian and Nobiin, the verbal plural marker *-b* was once used for plurality of events or plurality of object. The name of the Napatan king Amaninatakilebte,[^42] who ruled during the second half of the 6th century BCE, does not make sense if the suffix *-b* marks the plurality of object. It would mean “Amun, give them strength,” with no clue as to who these multiple beneficiaries could be. Actually, the suffix marked the plurality of events and emphasised the repetition of the gift: “give again and again,” “give continuously,” or “keep giving”.[^43]
[^42]: For this ruler, see *FHN* II, pp.293–296. The name is known in Egyptian transcription only (first line of (38)), since the Meroitic script was invented only three centuries later.
[^43]: In the inscriptions of the temple of Apedemak in Naga, the verbal form *lbxte* “give them” is attested in REM 0003, where the beneficiary is the sole queen and in REM 0004, where it is the king alone. In her publication of these texts, Karola Zibelius explains this plural form as an iterative.[^x29] However, at this time (mid-1st c. CE), the verbal plural suffix *-bx* was already specialized to exclusively mark the object plurality. It never occurs in benedictions involving a single person, where only *lxte* is used at least since the 2nd c. BCE (REM 1044A, REM 1151). The plural marker in REM 0003 and 0004 refers to the three members of the royal family, who constitute an indissoluble trinity, even when the queen and the king are figured alone (cf. ex. 31 above).
[^43]: In the inscriptions of the temple of Apedemak in Naga, the verbal form *lbxte* “give them” is attested in REM 0003, where the beneficiary is the sole queen and in REM 0004, where it is the king alone. In her publication of these texts, Karola Zibelius (*Die Löwentempel van Naq‘a in der Butana (Sudan) IV,* pp. 45-52) explains this plural form as an iterative. However, at this time (mid-1st c. CE), the verbal plural suffix *-bx* was already specialized to exclusively mark the object plurality. It never occurs in benedictions involving a single person, where only *lxte* is used at least since the 2nd c. BCE (REM 1044A, REM 1151). The plural marker in REM 0003 and 0004 refers to the three members of the royal family, who constitute an indissoluble trinity, even when the queen and the king are figured alone (cf. ex. 31 above).
[^x29]: Zibelius 1983: 45-52.
{{< gloss "(38)" >}}
{g} **Egyptian transcription**,**Meroitic (reconstituted)**,**Gloss**|*Jmn-*,*Amni-*,Amun|*ntk-*,*ntki-*,strength|*lbt*,*l-b-te*,give-[vnm-opt.2sg]({sc})|
@ -510,7 +513,7 @@ At first sight, the addition of the object marker *-x(e)* to the verbal plural s
{r} **Old Nubian**
{r} ⳟⲥ̄ⲥⲟⲩ ⲙⲏⲛⲁ-ⲛ ⲕⲥ̄ⲥⲉⲗⲁ ⲧ̄ⳝⳝⲁⲛⲁⲥⲁ
{g} *ŋissou*,holy|*mēna-n*,Mina-[gen]({sc})|*kisse-la*,church-[dat]({sc})|*tij-j-ana-sa*,give>2/3-[o.pl-imp.2/3pl-purp]({sc})|
{r} “So that we give it to them in the church of Saint Mina." (M 9.3–4)
{r} “So that we give it to them in the church of Saint Mina.” (M 9.3–4)
{{< /gloss >}}
In his analysis of the text, Van Gerven Oei notes that the “plural object marker -ⳝ [is] referring to the recipients of the egg, which remain unexpressed.”[^x55] Nevertheless, even if the plural object marker is not *stricto sensu* a pronoun, it operates in this sentence as an anaphoric element and is accordingly translated “to them” by the editor of the text. It is probably via a similar process that its Meroitic counterpart *-b* became a 3rd person plural enclitic pronoun. This explains the strange location of this morpheme, which is directly appended to the stem, before the TAM suffixes.
@ -540,7 +543,7 @@ The difference between the two suffixes is unclear. The previous examples are dr
This “objective case” in Nubian and in Tama undergoes some restrictions governed by economy principles. In his analysis of Tama, Dimmendaal speaks of “differential object marking.”[^48] In Meroitic, the objective case has become so rarely marked that the absence of case ending was more a rule than an exception. Example (41) is the benediction formula C’. It is the royal and princely counterpart of formula C which is used for private people. The only difference was the presence of the objective case-ending in C’, whereas it was missing in the C formula.[^x30] It probably gave the royal benediction a more formal wording, worthy of the lofty position of the deceased.
[^x30]: Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 394.
[^48]: Dimmendaal, "Tama," pp. 323-328 after Bossong, “Differential Object Marking in Romance and Beyond.”
[^48]: Dimmendaal, "Tama,” pp. 323-328 after Bossong, “Differential Object Marking in Romance and Beyond.”
Similarly, the objective case ending may be omitted, as can be seen in the second of two consecutive sentences from King Taneyidamani’s stela. In (43), the expected verbal compound, parallel to the singular form *ekedeto* in (42), should be *ekedbxto.* However, maybe because of the presence of the object pronoun *qoleb,* the objective case ending *-x* is absent.
@ -596,20 +599,20 @@ In Harsiotef’s stela, after the titles and the eulogy, where the king is refer
The first preserved royal text in Meroitic, namely the great stela of king Taneyidamani from the temple of Amun in Jebel Barkal, was inscribed a century and a half later. In the meantime, the donation stelae of king Aryamani, Kawa XIV and XV, are admittedly written in the first person, but the texts – at least what is left of them – are speeches to Amun and contain no narrative.[^55] On the other end of the Meroitic period, a century after the fall of Meroe, the wall inscription of the Nobadian ruler Silko in Kalabsha, though written in Greek, also is in the first person.[^56] It is therefore highly probable that the Meroitic royal chronicles fall in this long-lasting tradition and include events and war reports narrated by the ruler in the first person, like the late Napatan royal stelae and the post-Meroitic inscription of king Silko.
[^55]: See *FHN* II: 522-532. The stelae, which are in very bad state of preservation, are dated to the late 4th or the early 3rd c.
[^56]: *FHN* III: 1147-1153; Rilly, “Histoire du Soudan, des origines à la chute du sultanat Fung," pp. 385-388.
[^56]: *FHN* III: 1147-1153; Rilly, “Histoire du Soudan, des origines à la chute du sultanat Fung,” pp. 385-388.
## The Verbal Affix *(y)e-* in Meroitic Royal Texts {#iii2}
Although the major part of the Meroitic royal inscriptions remains untranslatable, the passages that enumerate the spoils of war are now fairly well understood.[^57] They include, on the one hand, verbs such as *ked* “kill,” are and *er* “take hold of,” *tk* “seize,” *kb* “seize, plunder,” sometimes followed by the pluractional marker *-k* (*er-k, tk-k*), and, on the other hand, nouns such as *abr* “man,” *kdi* “woman,” *ar* “boy,” *anese* “donkey,” *mreke* “horse,” and *d* “house,”[^58] all of them being parts of the booty and therefore, cited with figures or more summarily followed by *-se-l* “each.” Examples (20), (35), (36), (37), (42), and (43) above are instances of booty lists from royal inscriptions.
[^57]: Cf. Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* pp. 74-80.
[^58]: The word appears in REM 1003/14 and in graffito MS 57 from Musawwarat. Its translation is inferred from the context of these two occurrences and from the comparison with Andaandi *daa* “residence” and Nara *dà* “village.” See Rilly, “Graffiti for Gods and Kings."
[^58]: The word appears in REM 1003/14 and in graffito MS 57 from Musawwarat. Its translation is inferred from the context of these two occurrences and from the comparison with Andaandi *daa* “residence” and Nara *dà* “village.” See Rilly, “Graffiti for Gods and Kings.”
In his publication of the so-called Akinidad’s stela from Hamadab (REM 1003), Griffith was the first to deal with these passages. Thanks to his then recent translation of *kdi* “woman” and *abr* “man,” he correctly identified the first two clauses (*abrsel yekedi: kdisel: arseli: tkk*) as the outcome of military campaigns and tentatively translated them as “slaying men, enslaving women.”[^59] By using participles, he eluded the thorny issue of the subject of the verbs. After Griffith, few scholars addressed this particular question. In her analysis of the same passages, Inge Hofmann dealt with the meaning of the verb *ked,* but ignored the problem of its subject.[^60] As for Millet, in a first study of Kharamadoye’s royal inscription REM 0094, he suggested that *ked* was a noun meaning “slayer.”[^x31] Later, in a revised analysis of the same article, he assumed that *ked* was a verb in the third person singular,[^x32] but did not explain how this third person was morphologically expressed.
[^x31]: Millet, “The Kharamadoye Inscription,” p. 38.
[^x32]: Millet, “The Kharamadoye Inscription (MI 94) Revisited,” p. 67
[^59]: Griffith, “Meroitic Studies IV," p. 167. Note that Griffith mistook the noun phrase *ar-se-li* “all the boys” for the verbal form he translated “enslaving,” which verb was actually *tkk.*
[^59]: Griffith, “Meroitic Studies IV,” p. 167. Note that Griffith mistook the noun phrase *ar-se-li* “all the boys” for the verbal form he translated “enslaving,” which verb was actually *tkk.*
[^60]: Hofmann, *Material für eine meroitische Grammatik,* pp. 294-297. For a critical review of her translation of *ked,* see Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* pp. 76-78.
It is necessary first to summarize the different forms that the verbs “kill” and “seize” (*vel sim.*) can take in different royal, princely, and viceregal inscriptions. **Table 2** includes a list of these forms with reference to the texts which are quoted in chronological order:
@ -672,8 +675,8 @@ The second difficulty is that a homonymous prefix *ye-* is attested in verbal co
The most plausible solution would be to regard *ye-* and *p(V)s(V)-* as causative verbs, such as “make” or “have” in English. In the case of *p(V)s(V)-,* a possible cognate could be Old Nubian ⲡⲉⲥ- “tell, speak, say.” The gods of the underworld could in this case could be invited, literally, to “tell” that the deceased eat and drink, that is, to make them eat and drink. As for the alternative verb *ye-* in these passages, it could be linked with Old Nubian ⲉⲓ- and Nobiin *ií-* “say,” especially because *ye-* has a variant *yi-* which is three times more frequent in funerary texts.[^67] This solution may be semantically acceptable, but it faces a major obstacle: Meroitic, like all the NES languages, is a head-final language, in which the verb is placed at the end of sentences and the auxiliary is expected to occur after the verb. In addition, the absence of TAM markers after *p(V)s(V)-,* and *ye-/yi-* points to a serial verb construction, where only the last verb is inflected for TAM. However, this is cross-linguistically attested only for consecutive verbs that share a common subject.[^68] For all these reasons, the verbal compound of the funerary benedictions requires further study. Nevertheless, the element *ye-* in these benedictions has nothing to do with the prefix *ye-* we found in the royal texts. It is just a further instance of the many homonymous morphemes that are attested in Meroitic.
[^67]: The frequency of *yi-* is 6,2% according to Schenkel, “Zur Struktur des Verbalkomplexes in den Schlußformel der meroitischen Totentexte," p. 8. For Nobiin *ií-*, more commonly used with a causative suffix in the compound *ií-gìr,* see Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 356. Note that “say” is frequently used as a light verb (but not as a causative auxiliary) in the languages of Sudan, regardless of the linguistic family. For Andaandi, see El-Guzuuli, "The Uses and Orthography of the Verb 'Say' in Andaandi"; for Ama, see Stevenson *Grammar of the Nyimang Language,* p. 147 (my copy of the manuscript, an annotated version transmitted by Roger Blench, has the light verb *she* on pp. 146–146a and 147. Page 146a is handwritten and the page numbers on p. 147 and 148 have been corrected manually) and Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 210; for Beja, see Vanhove, *Le bedja,* 146-14.
[^68]: See Haspelmath, "The Serial Verb Construction," esp. pp. 409-411 (with possible exception in ex. 31, where two different subjects are found).
[^67]: The frequency of *yi-* is 6,2% according to Schenkel, “Zur Struktur des Verbalkomplexes in den Schlußformel der meroitischen Totentexte,” p. 8. For Nobiin *ií-*, more commonly used with a causative suffix in the compound *ií-gìr,* see Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 356. Note that “say” is frequently used as a light verb (but not as a causative auxiliary) in the languages of Sudan, regardless of the linguistic family. For Andaandi, see El-Guzuuli, "The Uses and Orthography of the Verb 'Say' in Andaandi"; for Ama, see Stevenson *Grammar of the Nyimang Language,* p. 147 (my copy of the manuscript, an annotated version transmitted by Roger Blench, has the light verb *she* on pp. 146–146a and 147. Page 146a is handwritten and the page numbers on p. 147 and 148 have been corrected manually) and Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 210; for Beja, see Vanhove, *Le bedja,* 146-14.
[^68]: See Haspelmath, "The Serial Verb Construction,” esp. pp. 409-411 (with possible exception in ex. 31, where two different subjects are found).
Finally, another element *ye-* is attested in several kinship noun phrases, also in funerary inscriptions. The “filiation” part of these texts specifies the mother and father of the deceased, who is said to be “the person born of X” and “the person begotten by Y.” In the major part of the inscriptions, these two compounds are *te-dxe-l* (or *t-dxe-l*) and *t-erike-l.* They include a prefixed element *t(e)-,* the participles *dxe* “born” and *erike* “begotten,” and the final article, which has a nominalizing role. Several texts include a variant with a first element *y(e)-,* namely *ye-dxe-l* and *y-erike-l.* The forms including *y(e)-* and *t(e)-* can even be found together in the same inscription, giving a further example of the aforementioned *varietas* sought by Meroitic scribes. Another kinship term, *yetmde* “younger in the maternal line, i.e., nephew/niece,” may provide the key to the element *ye-* in filiation clauses. It includes the word *mde* which refers to the mother’s family in this matrilineal society. The first element is *yet-* (pronounced /eta/ or /eda/), but has many variants: *yete, yed, yen* (with assimilation before ­*mde*). The elements *te-* and *ye-* in filiation are probably two eroded forms of *yet-,* which can be compared with Proto-Nubian *\*id,* Proto-Taman *\*at* “person,” and Nara *eítá* “body.”[^x33]. “The person born” and “the person begotten” are therefore accurate translations of *ye-dxe* and *y-erike*. The element *ye-* in these contexts is therefore originally a noun and has nothing to do with the homonymous prefix found in royal inscriptions.
@ -726,7 +729,7 @@ This structure seems an innovation of the Taman group within the NES languages.
## Another Person Marker in Meroitic Royal Texts? {#iii5}
Instead of *(y)e-,* an alternative prefix *w-* appears before the verbal forms of *er-k* “take, capture," *kb* “seize, and *bqo* “take control” within the royal texts REM 1044, 1003, and 0094. It never occurs with *ked* “kill,” as can be seen in the examples below.[^ex77]
Instead of *(y)e-,* an alternative prefix *w-* appears before the verbal forms of *er-k* “take, capture,” *kb* “seize, and *bqo* “take control” within the royal texts REM 1044, 1003, and 0094. It never occurs with *ked* “kill,” as can be seen in the examples below.[^ex77]
[^ex77]: In (50), the reading of the first signs was made possible thanks to excellent photos and interpretation by Gilda Ferrandino in her doctoral thesis, *Studio dei testi reali meroitici,* p. 65 and pl. 29.1. For the archaic sign conventionally transcribed *H,* see Rilly, *La langue du royaume de Méroé,* p. 353. In all likelihood, the form *kbxte* comes from *kb-bx-te* after haplography, as the object seems to be a plural and, accordingly, should marked in the verb by the suffix *bx*.
@ -789,14 +792,14 @@ Three of these sentences include the subject pronoun marker *e-* “I” in the
{r} *jr=w šn jr=j rmt-ꜥꜣ, ḥ(m)-ntr Jmn dr=w*
{r} “They made obeisance to me, (to wit) all the notables and priests of Amun
{r} *jry=w smꜣ jr=j, rꜣ nb*
{r} They blessed me, (to wit) every mouth."
{r} They blessed me, (to wit) every mouth.”
{{< /gloss >}}
If so, the tentative translation of (51) suggested above must be thoroughly corrected. A singular object is expected, because there is no plural object marker at the end of the verbal compound. Maybe the translation should be “(as for) the children of the palace (?) (and) their brother Aroqitama, they captured Tadakhesene.” If this solution is syntactically acceptable, it is less so morphologically. A plural marker would be expected, like in *qe-be-se* “of them” ([3.2](#ii2) above). In addition, an element *w-* is attested in the late text REM 0094 as a variant of the singular 3rd person pronoun *qo/qe* “he/she, this” (cf. [3.1](#ii1)). Instead of *qe-se, qo-se* "his/her” (lit. “of him/her”), a form *w-se,* with variants *we-se,* and even *w-si,* in the same text, is attested: *semle: w-si* “his wife,” *ste: wese* “his mother” (line 26). Finally, no cognate can be found in other NES-languages, all of which have for “they” at least traces of a plural element *\*-gV.* In conclusion, the prefixed element *w-* in verbal compounds remains unexplained and needs further examination.
# The Second Person Markers {#iv}
Many Meroitic texts include prayers to the gods. They are chiefly present, of course, in the funerary inscriptions, which begin with an invocation to the deities of the underworld and finish with several “benedictions," in which a fictive enunciator beseeches them to provide the deceased with water, bread, and a good meal in the afterlife. Similarly, in the temples and on a few stelae, the depictions of the kings and their family in front of the gods are accompanied by captions, most of them in Meroitic hieroglyphic script. They also include prayers, uttered by a fictive enunciator again, that invite the deities to shower their gifts (life, strength, health, etc.) upon the ruler.
Many Meroitic texts include prayers to the gods. They are chiefly present, of course, in the funerary inscriptions, which begin with an invocation to the deities of the underworld and finish with several “benedictions,” in which a fictive enunciator beseeches them to provide the deceased with water, bread, and a good meal in the afterlife. Similarly, in the temples and on a few stelae, the depictions of the kings and their family in front of the gods are accompanied by captions, most of them in Meroitic hieroglyphic script. They also include prayers, uttered by a fictive enunciator again, that invite the deities to shower their gifts (life, strength, health, etc.) upon the ruler.
In all these inscriptions, the requests to the gods use verbal moods that fit with wishes, namely imperative or optative. The forms are in the singular in the temples because there is a specific prayer for each deity. They are in the plural in funerary inscriptions because they are addressed to Isis and Osiris together. Unlike in Egyptian and Napatan texts, the gods are never answering. Such sentences as “I gave you all life and all power,” which are so common in Napatan texts and could give us details about the first and second person pronouns, are unfortunately missing from the Meroitic religious texts. However, a small stela found in 1999 has miraculously provided the genitive of the 2nd person pronouns singular and plural. Finally, recent researches on the Meroitic names of person have shown that they sometimes comprised short sentences, which in two cases include a second person singular pronoun.
@ -819,7 +822,7 @@ The final prayers of the funerary texts, which Griffith termed “benedictions,
The prefixed elements *pVsV-* or *yi-,* which obviously have a causative value but are not yet fully understood, have been studied above in [4.3](#iii3). The element *-x(e)* in the singular, *-bx(e)* in the plural, is a verbal number marker that has been analysed in section [3.3](#ii3). As the funerary benedictions are basically prayers to the gods, imperative or optative in the 2nd person plural are expected. The verbal TAM ending here is *-k-te* or *-ke-te* with a plural suffix *-k(e).* The singular TAM ending is *-te,* as seen in examples (19), (29)-(31), each of which contains a prayer to a single god. Cross-linguistically, the singular imperative is generally a simple verbal stem, e.g. English *see!,* Latin *vide!,* and Middle Egyptian *m3!* This is also true for the living NES languages: Nobiin *nàl!,* Midob *kóod!,* etc.[^84] For this reason, the verbal form with ending *-te,* which is used in the royal blessings and funerary benedictions, must be regarded as an optative rather than an imperative. However, an optional particle *-se,* which is added to the verbal compound in several funerary inscriptions,[^85] has an Old Nubian parallel in the command marker -ⲥⲟ or -ⲥⲱ.[^x35] Be it related or borrowed, this particle shows the semantic proximity of the Meroitic optative with the Old Nubian imperative.
[^x35]: Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* §4.2.
[^84]: In the Nubian group, for Nobiin: Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 145; for Andaandi: Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian,* pp. 194-195; for Midob: Werner, *Tìdn-Áal,* pp. 58-59. In the Nara group, for Higir: Thompson, "Nera," p. 467; for Mogoreeb: Elsadig, *Major Word Categories in Nara,* 66. For Tama: Palayer's unpublished grammar, §4.3; for Sungor: Lukas, “Die Sprache der Sungor in Wadai," pp. 192, 198-199; for Mararit: El-Nazir, *Major Word Categories in Mararit,* pp. 57-58. For Ama: Stevenson, *Grammar of the Nyimang Language,* pp. 106, 110 and Stevenson, Rottland \& Jakobi, “The Verb in Nyimang and Dinik,” p. 30; for Afitti, ibid., p. 33. In all these languages, the singular imperative is generally the simple stem of the verb. However, a suffix *-i* is found for some verbs in Nubian, Taman, and Nyima. Suppletive forms for basic verbs are attested in Nara, Taman, and Nyima.
[^84]: In the Nubian group, for Nobiin: Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* p. 145; for Andaandi: Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian,* pp. 194-195; for Midob: Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* pp. 58-59. In the Nara group, for Higir: Thompson, "Nera,” p. 467; for Mogoreeb: Elsadig, *Major Word Categories in Nara,* 66. For Tama: Palayer's unpublished grammar, §4.3; for Sungor: Lukas, “Die Sprache der Sungor in Wadai,” pp. 192, 198-199; for Mararit: El-Nazir, *Major Word Categories in Mararit,* pp. 57-58. For Ama: Stevenson, *Grammar of the Nyimang Language,* pp. 106, 110 and Stevenson, Rottland \& Jakobi, “The Verb in Nyimang and Dinik,” p. 30; for Afitti, ibid., p. 33. In all these languages, the singular imperative is generally the simple stem of the verb. However, a suffix *-i* is found for some verbs in Nubian, Taman, and Nyima. Suppletive forms for basic verbs are attested in Nara, Taman, and Nyima.
[^85]: The particle *-se* may have an emphatic role, such as *donc* in French *dis-moi donc!* or the use of the auxiliary *do* in the English counterpart *do tell me!.* The resulting verbal compound is *pVsV-k(e)-te-se,* often reduced to *pVsV-k(e)-se* with regressive assimilation (see (40) above); cf. Hintze, *Beiträge zur meroitischen Grammatik,* p. 75 and Rilly, *La langue du Royaume de Méroé,* p. 563.
The imperative proper, in all likelihood, is the verbal form devoid of TAM markers which is used instead of the optative in several funerary texts. As shown in the following examples, it occurs either in one or two of the three main benedictions A, B, and C (a further example of *varietas*), or in all of them. Example (58) is drawn from REM 0369, an offering table from Shablul engraved for a single deceased. Example (59) is cited from a stela found in the same cemetery, REM 0381, and engraved for two persons, hence the plural verbal marker at the end of verbal compounds.[^86]
@ -830,29 +833,29 @@ The imperative proper, in all likelihood, is the verbal form devoid of TAM marke
{r} **Meroitic**
{r} Benediction A
{g} *a*<*to*>,water|*mhe*,abundant|*pso-h :*,[caus]({sc})-drink.[imp.2]({sc})|
{r} “Make her/him drink plentiful water."
{r} “Make her/him drink plentiful water.”
{r} Benediction B
{g} *at*,bread|*mhe*,abundant|*psi-xr* [*:*],[caus]({sc})-eat.[imp.2]({sc})|
{r} “Make her/him eat plentiful bread."
{r} “Make her/him eat plentiful bread.”
{r} Benediction C
{g} *x(re)*,meal|*mlo-l*,good-[det]({sc})|*hol :*,present.[imp.2]({sc})|
{r} “Present her/him with a good meal."
{r} “Present her/him with a good meal.”
{{< /gloss >}}
{{< gloss "(59)" >}}
{r} Benediction A
{g} *a*to*,water|<*m*>*he*,abundant|*pso-he-b :*,[caus]({sc})-drink.[imp.2-vnm]({sc})|
{r} “Make her/him drink plentiful water."
{g} *ato*,water|<*m*>*he*,abundant|*pso-he-b :*,[caus]({sc})-drink.[imp.2-vnm]({sc})|
{r} “Make her/him drink plentiful water.”
{r} Benediction B
{g} *at*,bread|*mhe*,abundant|*psi-xr-b :*,[caus]({sc})-eat.[imp.2-vnm]({sc})|
{r} “Make her/him eat plentiful bread."
{r} “Make her/him eat plentiful bread.”
{{< /gloss >}}
In these imperative forms, there is virtually no plural marker. A final suffix *-k(e)* for the 2nd person plural is expected, but it is only attested in a very small number of funerary inscriptions.[^87] However, it seems that in some epitaphs, the two deities Isis and Osiris, to whom these prayers were addressed, were syntactically regarded as a single god, as shown by the use of a single vocative suffix for both, located after the second noun.[^x36] Moreover, in the final invocations that resume the initial call to the deities, Osiris is sometimes omitted.[^x37] Finally, Isis (or one the goddesses assimilated to her in the Meroitic funerary cults, namely Nephthys, Nut, or Maat), is often figured in the private offering tables and the funerary chapels, whereas Osiris is never present, at least in the non-royal contexts with with which here we are dealing.[^88] I surmise that the instances of the imperative are addressed to Isis. This would explain why the 2nd person singular, and not plural, is used.
[^x36]: Rilly, *La langue du Royaume de Méroé,* p. 297.
[^x37]: Ibid., 93.
[^87]: One clear example is REM 0380, an offering table from Shablul, where benediction B is written with final verb compound *pisixrke.* The form is complete, since it ends with a word divider, it is located in the middle of a line and followed by benediction C. Note that, in this inscription, benedictions A and C have regular optative forms in *-kete.* There may be more instances of 2nd person plural imperative in the benedictions. In particular, it cannot be ruled out that all or part of the verbal compounds ending with *-ke-se* are not assimilated optative forms deriving from *-ke-te-se,* but imperative with plural suffix *-ke* followed by the emphatic particle *-se* (see n. 85).
[^87]: One clear example is REM 0380, an offering table from Shablul, where benediction B is written with final verb compound *pisixrke.* The form is complete, since it ends with a word divider, it is located in the middle of a line and followed by benediction C. Note that, in this inscription, benedictions A and C have regular optative forms in *-kete.* There may be more instances of [2pl]({sc}) imperative in the benedictions. In particular, it cannot be ruled out that all or part of the verbal compounds ending with *-ke-se* are not assimilated optative forms deriving from *-ke-te-se,* but imperative with plural suffix *-ke* followed by the emphatic particle *-se* (see n. 124).
[^88]: In the Meroitic private funerary iconography, the male counterpart to Isis is Anubis, or more rarely Thot. The local names of these Egyptian gods are unknown.
Furthermore, a not uncommon variant of the verbal suffix *-te,* found only in the late funerary benedictions, is *-to.*[^89] It is directly appended to the verbal stem and, unlike *-te,* is never preceded by the plural marker *-ke.* In REM 0368, an offering table from Shablul, there are four benedictions, A, B, C, D. The verb in benediction A has no suffix, so that it should be an imperative in the 2nd person singular. In the subsequent three benedictions, the verbs are in the optative with the final suffix *-to.* The four verbs, most likely, are all in the singular and convey prayers to Isis.
@ -861,17 +864,17 @@ Furthermore, a not uncommon variant of the verbal suffix *-te,* found only in th
{{< gloss "(60)" >}}
{r} Benediction A
{g} *a*to*,water|*mhe*,abundant|*pso-he*,[caus]({sc})-drink.[imp.2]({sc})|
{r} “Make her/him drink plentiful water."
{g} *ato*,water|*mhe*,abundant|*pso-he*,[caus]({sc})-drink.[imp.2]({sc})|
{r} “Make her/him drink plentiful water.”
{r} Benediction B
{g} *at*,bread|*mxe :*,abundant|*psi-xr-to*,[caus]({sc})-eat.[opt.2sg]({sc})|
{r} “May you make her/him eat plentiful bread."
{r} “May you make her/him eat plentiful bread.”
{r} Benediction C
{g} *x(re)*,meal|*mlo-l :*,good-[det]({sc})|*psi-tx-to*,[caus]({sc})-present-[opt.2sg]({sc})|
{r} “May you have her/him presented with a good meal."
{r} “May you have her/him presented with a good meal.”
{r} Benediction D
{g} *x(re)*,meal|*lh-l :*,large-[det]({sc})|*psi-hol-to*,[caus]({sc})-present-[opt.2sg]({sc})|
{r} “May you have her/him presented with a large meal."
{r} “May you have her/him presented with a large meal.”
{{< /gloss >}}
From the above, it appears that the markers of the Meroitic imperative and optative moods are as follows:
@ -882,13 +885,13 @@ From the above, it appears that the markers of the Meroitic imperative and optat
**~~Table 4. Meroitic imperative and optative suffixes.~~**
The use of the suffix *-k/-g* to express the plurality of actors in the imperative (and in other moods) is widespread in Nilo-Saharan languages and particularly frequent in the NES family. Although it may have the same origin as the verbal plural marker, it must not be confused with it. The exception here is Ama, where the same morpheme *-(ì)d̪ì* is used both verbal plural marker ([3.3.2](#ii32)) and marker of the plural imperative: *kílí* “hear!,” pl. *kíld̪ì* “hear ye!”[^90] In Nara, the plural imperative is marked with a suffix *-aga.* This morpheme is attested in the two major dialects, namely in Higir *ay* “make!,” pl. *ay-aga* “make ye!”[^x40] and in Mogoreeb, *aw* “make!,” pl. *aw-aga* “make ye!”[^x41] In Mararit (Taman group), the plural imperative is marked with a morpheme *-k-,* which can be prefixed or suffixed according to the verb classes: *sîn* “eat!,” pl. *kí-síŋ-gì* “eat ye!” (prefixed); *kɛ̀dɛ̀k* “cut!,” pl. *kɛ̀d-k-ɛ̀k* “cut ye!” (suffixed).[^91] In the Nubian group, the suffix *\*-k/-g* is perhaps preserved in Midob in a palatalized form *-ic*: *kóod* “see!,” pl. *kóod-íc* “see ye!,”[^x42] but the difference with the plural verbal marker, as in Ama, is not clear. The other branches of Nubian seem to have innovated separately. In Andaandi, the 2pl imperative is marked with a suffix *-we*[^x38] and with a suffix *-an* in Old Nubian and Nobiin.[^x39] However, Old Nubian has a morpheme *-ke* “you,” which Van Gerven Oei analyzes as a subject clitic.[^92] It is not used for the “positive” imperative like in Meroitic, but is part of the jussive -ⲛⲕⲉ, vetitive -ⲧⲁⲛⲕⲉ(ⲥⲟ), and affirmative -ⲗⲕⲉ/-ⲥⲕⲉ. This morpheme is probably related to the Meroitic suffix *-k(e)* used in the plural imperative.
The use of the suffix *-k/-g* to express the plurality of actors in the imperative (and in other moods) is widespread in Nilo-Saharan languages and particularly frequent in the NES family. Although it may have the same origin as the verbal plural marker, it must not be confused with it. The exception here is Ama, where the same morpheme *-(ì)d̪ì* is used both verbal plural marker ([3.3.2](#ii32)) and marker of the plural imperative: *kílí* “hear!,” pl. *kíld̪ì* “hear ye!”[^90] In Nara, the plural imperative is marked with a suffix *-aga.* This morpheme is attested in the two major dialects, namely in Higir *ay* “make!,” pl. *ay-aga* “make ye!”[^x40] and in Mogoreeb, *aw* “make!,” pl. *aw-aga* “make ye!”[^x41] In Mararit (Taman group), the plural imperative is marked with a morpheme *-k-,* which can be prefixed or suffixed according to the verb classes: *sîn* “eat!,” pl. *kí-síŋ-gì* “eat ye!” (prefixed); *kɛ̀dɛ̀k* “cut!,” pl. *kɛ̀d-k-ɛ̀k* “cut ye!” (suffixed).[^91] In the Nubian group, the suffix *\*-k/-g* is perhaps preserved in Midob in a palatalized form *-ic*: *kóod* “see!,” pl. *kóod-íc* “see ye!,”[^x42] but the difference with the plural verbal marker, as in Ama, is not clear. The other branches of Nubian seem to have innovated separately. In Andaandi, the [2pl]({sc}) imperative is marked with a suffix *-we*[^x38] and with a suffix *-an* in Old Nubian and Nobiin.[^x39] However, Old Nubian has a morpheme *-ke* “you,” which Van Gerven Oei analyzes as a subject clitic.[^92] It is not used for the “positive” imperative like in Meroitic, but is part of the jussive -ⲛⲕⲉ, vetitive -ⲧⲁⲛⲕⲉ(ⲥⲟ), and affirmative -ⲗⲕⲉ/-ⲥⲕⲉ. This morpheme is probably related to the Meroitic suffix *-k(e)* used in the plural imperative.
[^x38]: Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian,* pp. 194-195.
[^x39]: Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* §10.1.5, Werner, *Grammatik de Nobiin,* pp. 145-146.
[^x40]: Thompson, "Nera," p. 487.
[^x40]: Thompson, "Nera,” p. 487.
[^x41]: Elsadig, *Major Word Categories in Nara,* p. 66.
[^x42]: Werner, *Tìdn-Áal,* pp. 145-146.
[^x42]: Werner, *Tìdn-áal,* pp. 145-146.
[^90]: Recall that the dental stop *d̪* is a development of Proto-NES *\*g* which is specific to the Nyima group.
[^91]: El-Nazir, *Major Word Categories in Mararit,* pp. 57-58 (version updated for tones, 2019).
[^92]: Van Gerven Oei, *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian,* §10.1.6.
@ -906,7 +909,7 @@ On the reverse of the stela, an inscription in Meroitic cursive script is engrav
{r} “O Apedemak (who are) in Daqari, to Amanishakheto, the ruler, the Candace, give the life from you [sg]({sc}), give the life from you [pl]({sc})!” (REM 1293)
{{< /gloss >}}
The god is here invited to shower his gifts upon the ruling queen, and chiefly the most precious of them, *pwrite* “life, vital strength." Similar instances of this prayer for King Amanakhareqerama have previously been quoted in (29) and (30). The royal text REM 1293 is engraved with great care and a sense of aesthetics that is missing in so many private inscriptions. The different phrases are accurately separated by word dividers. Conspicuously, the phrases *pwritrese* and *pwrite debse* do not include a word divider after *pwrite.* Furthermore, in the first group, *pwrite* and its extension are agglomerated into a single unit. Due to the conventions of the Meroitic alphasyllabary (see [2](#i)), the second element must have been *arese,* with an initial /a/ which was not explicitly written, because it occurred in internal position in this contracted phrase. The noun *pwrite* was pronounced /bawarit/ with the zero value of the grapheme *e.* So, the sequence *pwrite + arese* was pronounced /bawaritaresə/ and was accordingly spelled *pwritrese,* with default vowel /a/ after *t.* Additionally, the second term could not be *\*\*rese* because the phoneme /r/, in Meroitic as well as in all the NES languages, cannot occur in initial position.[^x43]
The god is here invited to shower his gifts upon the ruling queen, and chiefly the most precious of them, *pwrite* “life, vital strength.” Similar instances of this prayer for King Amanakhareqerama have previously been quoted in (29) and (30). The royal text REM 1293 is engraved with great care and a sense of aesthetics that is missing in so many private inscriptions. The different phrases are accurately separated by word dividers. Conspicuously, the phrases *pwritrese* and *pwrite debse* do not include a word divider after *pwrite.* Furthermore, in the first group, *pwrite* and its extension are agglomerated into a single unit. Due to the conventions of the Meroitic alphasyllabary (see [2](#i)), the second element must have been *arese,* with an initial /a/ which was not explicitly written, because it occurred in internal position in this contracted phrase. The noun *pwrite* was pronounced /bawarit/ with the zero value of the grapheme *e.* So, the sequence *pwrite + arese* was pronounced /bawaritaresə/ and was accordingly spelled *pwritrese,* with default vowel /a/ after *t.* Additionally, the second term could not be *\*\*rese* because the phoneme /r/, in Meroitic as well as in all the NES languages, cannot occur in initial position.[^x43]
[^x43]: Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 230.
@ -956,28 +959,29 @@ This wording was already used in the Egyptian texts of the royal inscriptions en
{r} [**all**] **health from him, and all joy from him**.” (Enthronement stela of Anlamani (Kawa VIII/ 27–28))
{{< /gloss >}}
In all these passages, the Egyptian preposition *ḫr* is used: *ꜥnḫ nb ḫr=j* “all life from me,” *ꜥnḫ nb ḫr=f* “all life from him.” Its primary meaning is “near,” but it can be also used with the agent of a passive verb in which it is usually translated with “by,"[^x44] a closer meaning to the sense of this proposition in examples (62)-(64). In these passages, the deity connected with the gift of life is the source of this gift, but not necessarily the one who provides it. In (63) the goddess gives to the ruler the life which is coming from her, and in (64) Amun is also the source and the giver of life. By contrast, in (62) Mut is asking her husband Amun to give Taharqo the life coming from her.[^93]
In all these passages, the Egyptian preposition *ḫr* is used: *ꜥnḫ nb ḫr=j* “all life from me,” *ꜥnḫ nb ḫr=f* “all life from him.” Its primary meaning is “near,” but it can be also used with the agent of a passive verb in which it is usually translated with “by,”[^x44] a closer meaning to the sense of this proposition in examples (62)–(64). In these passages, the deity connected with the gift of life is the source of this gift, but not necessarily the one who provides it. In (63) the goddess gives to the ruler the life which is coming from her, and in (64) Amun is also the source and the giver of life. By contrast, in (62) Mut is asking her husband Amun to give Taharqo the life coming from her.[^93]
[^x44]: Gardiner, *Egyptian Grammar,* pp. 42, 121.
[^93]: The complex distribution of roles in the last sentence, which includes the three grammatical persons together, is rare in this genre of Egyptian texts. Some mistakes in the use of the Egyptian personal suffixes are attested in late Napatan stelae written in poor Egyptian by local scribes. By contrast, the texts engraved in the temple of Mut were prepared by Egyptian scribes working for Taharqo during the heyday of the Kushite power. Consequently, the use of personal suffixes in (32) must be considered correct and deliberate.
In the Meroitic stela from Naga, the context bears similarities to the situation in (32). There are also three persons, namely the ruler, Amanishakheto, the lion-god Apedemak and his wife Amesemi, all of them figured on the obverse of the stela. The great difference between the Egyptian and the Meroitic texts is the position of the enunciator. In (32), Mut is the enunciator (1st person) and speaks to Amun (2nd person) about the king (3rd person). In REM 1293, the enunciator, as is common in the Meroitic prayers, is a fictive individual, who is never present in the text, so that there are no 1st person markers. He speaks to Apedemak and possibly to Amesemi (2nd person) about the queen (3rd person). The gift of life is presented to the ruler by Apedemak and the source of this life is expressed, first, by the phrase *are-se* and second by the phrase *deb-se.* The latter obviously includes the pronominal plural marker *-b,* cf. *qe-be-se* “their," lit. "of them, from them" ([3.2](#ii2))[^94] In conclusion, the only solution is to regard *are-se* as a 2nd person singular possessive referring here to Apedemak, and *de-b-se* as a 2nd person plural possessive referring to both Apedemak and Amesemi.
In the Meroitic stela from Naga, the context bears similarities to the situation in (32). There are also three persons, namely the ruler, Amanishakheto, the lion-god Apedemak and his wife Amesemi, all of them figured on the obverse of the stela. The great difference between the Egyptian and the Meroitic texts is the position of the enunciator. In (32), Mut is the enunciator (1st person) and speaks to Amun (2nd person) about the king (3rd person). In REM 1293, the enunciator, as is common in the Meroitic prayers, is a fictive individual, who is never present in the text, so that there are no 1st person markers. He speaks to Apedemak and possibly to Amesemi (2nd person) about the queen (3rd person). The gift of life is presented to the ruler by Apedemak and the source of this life is expressed, first, by the phrase *are-se* and second by the phrase *deb-se.* The latter obviously includes the pronominal plural marker *-b,* cf. *qe-be-se* “their,” lit. "of them, from them" ([3.2](#ii2))[^94] In conclusion, the only solution is to regard *are-se* as a 2nd person singular possessive referring here to Apedemak, and *de-b-se* as a 2nd person plural possessive referring to both Apedemak and Amesemi.
[^94]: The Meroitic postposition *-se* can be appended to the name of the giver in inscriptions found on funerary offerings. In this case, *-se* is best translated as “from”; see Rilly, “Les chouettes ont des oreilles," pp. 489-491.
[^94]: The Meroitic postposition *-se* can be appended to the name of the giver in inscriptions found on funerary offerings. In this case, *-se* is best translated as “from”; see Rilly, “Les chouettes ont des oreilles,” pp. 489-491.
### Personal Pronouns in Proto-Nubian
The two possessive pronouns discussed above suggest a basic form *are* for “you (sg.)” and *de-b* for “you (pl.)” These forms differ considerably from the pronouns I reconstructed in proto-NES, namely *\*i* for “you (sg.)" and *\*i-gi* for “you (pl.)."[^x45] For Proto-Nubian, I suggested *\*i-r/\*i-n* (sg.) and *\*i-gi* or *\*u-gi* (pl.). It is beyond the scope of this article to explain in detail on which bases these proto-forms were put forward. Suffice it to say that the pronouns attested in the Taman and Nyima groups, alongside with the most conservative dialects of Nara, are very similar to each other and provided the main basis for my reconstruction. By contrast, the personal pronouns in the Nubian family show considerable variations that are difficult to reconcile. The two proto-forms I worked out were mostly based on the genitives of these pronouns, which have a better consistency among Nubian languages and with the other branches of the NES family.
The two possessive pronouns discussed above suggest a basic form *are* for “you (sg.)” and *de-b* for “you (pl.)” These forms differ considerably from the pronouns I reconstructed in proto-NES, namely *\*i* for “you (sg.)" and *\*i-gi* for “you (pl.).”[^x45] For Proto-Nubian, I suggested *\*i-r/\*i-n* (sg.) and *\*i-gi* or *\*u-gi* (pl.). It is beyond the scope of this article to explain in detail on which bases these proto-forms were put forward. Suffice it to say that the pronouns attested in the Taman and Nyima groups, alongside with the most conservative dialects of Nara, are very similar to each other and provided the main basis for my reconstruction. By contrast, the personal pronouns in the Nubian family show considerable variations that are difficult to reconcile. The two proto-forms I worked out were mostly based on the genitives of these pronouns, which have a better consistency among Nubian languages and with the other branches of the NES family.
[^x45]: Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 519, no. 184 and p. 528, no. 200.
During the 14th Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium held in 2019 in Vienna, Angelika Jakobi, the leading expert on Nubian, delivered a paper entitled “The Nubian Subject Pronouns.” She revisited the reconstruction of these morphemes in Proto-Nubian and suggested new proto-forms. For the 1st person singular and the 3rd person singular and plural, her reconstructions are not so different from mine. However, there are significant discrepancies for the 1st person plural and the 2nd person singular and plural. For the latter, she suggests *\*ed* “you (sg.)" and *\*ud-i* “you (pl.)." These proto-forms are very close to the Birgid forms *edi* and *udi,* but quite different from the Midob counterparts *íin* and *ùŋŋú.* Of course, it is tempting to believe that Jakobi’s reconstruction is mainly based on Birgid. However, this language, in many respects, is the most conservative within the Nubian family, whereas Midob is one of the most innovative.[^95]
During the 14th Nilo-Saharan Linguistics Colloquium held in 2019 in Vienna, Angelika Jakobi, the leading expert on Nubian, delivered a paper entitled “The Nubian Subject Pronouns.” She revisited the reconstruction of these morphemes in Proto-Nubian and suggested new proto-forms. For the 1st person singular and the 3rd person singular and plural, her reconstructions are not so different from mine. However, there are significant discrepancies for the 1st person plural and the 2nd person singular and plural. For the latter, she suggests *\*ed* “you (sg.)” and *\*ud-i* “you (pl.).” These proto-forms are very close to the Birgid forms *edi* and *udi,* but quite different from the Midob counterparts *íin* and *ùŋŋú.* Of course, it is tempting to believe that Jakobi’s reconstruction is mainly based on Birgid. However, this language, in many respects, is the most conservative within the Nubian family, whereas Midob is one of the most innovative.[^95]
[^95]: For conservative aspects in Birgid, see Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* pp. 367-368.
In Old Nubian, we find ⲉⲓⲣ “you (sg.)” and ⲟⲩⲣ "you (pl.)," in Nobiin, *ìr* and *úr* respectively, and Mattokki–Andaandi *er* and *ir.* I had previously interpreted the final *-r* as an original article appended to personal pronouns in Proto-Nubian.[^x46] In Midob and in Tama, the article is actually *-r,* but it was *-l* in Meroitic and early Old Nubian, so that it must also have been *-l* in Proto-Nubian. In addition, the Midob reflexes of the Proto-Nubian liquids are often unpredictable (ibid: 254), whereas they are stable in Nile Nubian. For these reasons, I now think that at least in Proto-Nubian, the final *-r* was part of the stem of these personal pronouns.
In Old Nubian, we find ⲉⲓⲣ “you (sg.)” and ⲟⲩⲣ "you (pl.),” in Nobiin, *ìr* and *úr* respectively, and Mattokki–Andaandi *er* and *ir.* I had previously interpreted the final *-r* as an original article appended to personal pronouns in Proto-Nubian.[^x46] In Midob and in Tama, the article is actually *-r,* but it was *-l* in Meroitic and early Old Nubian, so that it must also have been *-l* in Proto-Nubian. In addition, the Midob reflexes of the Proto-Nubian liquids are often unpredictable,[^y1] whereas they are stable in Nile Nubian. For these reasons, I now think that at least in Proto-Nubian, the final *-r* was part of the stem of these personal pronouns.
[^x46]: Ibid., p. 383.
[^y1]: Ibid., p. 254.
On the other hand, Nubian languages have a propensity for intervocalic /r/ to shift to /d/. Many words for which the Proto-Nubian etymon included the sonorant *\*r* in intervocalic position, are written in Old Nubian with a delta, which later shifted back to /r/ in Nobiin, its modern descendant. As shown in **Table 5** below, Birgid and sometimes, Midob, can also have /d/ from Proto-Nubian *\*r.*
@ -998,12 +1002,12 @@ On the other hand, Nubian languages have a propensity for intervocalic /r/ to sh
[^97]: "White" is in Old Nubian ⳟⲟⲩⲗⲟⲩ, Nobiin *nùlù.* The adjective ⲁ̄ⲇⲱ is an Old Dongolawi word used in an Old Nubian letter. The modern form which is given here, *aro,* is Mattokki–Andaandi.
[^98]: The reflex /l/ in Birgid is unexpected. It could actually be a flap [ɾ], which is acoustically very close to [l] but is cross-linguistically a frequent allophone of /d/ in intervocalic position, particularly in American English. However, it was transcribed as *l* by both McMichael and Thelwall (cf. Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 425). Accordingly, the Midob form, which has an undisputable *d,* has been added here.
As this vacillation between /r/ and /d/ is shared by languages that belong to different branches of the Nubian family, it was in all likelihood present in Proto-Nubian. As a result, the proto-form *\*ed* for “you (sg.)," which is suggested by Jakobi, is certainly possible. Likewise, it is possible that already in Proto-Nubian, a variant *\*er* was present.
As this vacillation between /r/ and /d/ is shared by languages that belong to different branches of the Nubian family, it was in all likelihood present in Proto-Nubian. As a result, the proto-form *\*ed* for “you (sg.),” which is suggested by Jakobi, is certainly possible. Likewise, it is possible that already in Proto-Nubian, a variant *\*er* was present.
In my previous reconstruction of Proto-Nubian, I assumed that the plural marker of the subject pronouns “we,” “you (pl.),” and “they” was *\*-gi* and consequently suggested *\*agi* for “we” and *\*igi* ~ *\*ugi* for “you (pl.)." That assumption was based on parallels with Taman and Nyima, where this morpheme is easily reconstructable. However, I could not account for the consonant /d/ in the Birgid reflexes *adi* and *udi.*[^99] If the Proto-Nubian pronoun of the second person singular is *\*ed,* the Birgid reflexes become perfectly regular and the Proto-Nubian plural marker is definitely *\*i.* This could be a development of Proto-NES *\*-gi,* which implies that *\*g* was already lost in Proto-Nubian, like in modern English *night* and *brought.* In conclusion, if Proto-Nubian “you (sg.)” was indeed *\*ed,* a plural form *\*ud-i* is a consistent reconstruction. The initial vowel *\*u* instead of the expected *\*e* still has to be explained, but it is substantiated by the Old Nubian, Ajang,[^100] and Birgid reflexes.
In my previous reconstruction of Proto-Nubian, I assumed that the plural marker of the subject pronouns “we,” “you (pl.),” and “they” was *\*-gi* and consequently suggested *\*agi* for “we” and *\*igi* ~ *\*ugi* for “you (pl.).” That assumption was based on parallels with Taman and Nyima, where this morpheme is easily reconstructable. However, I could not account for the consonant /d/ in the Birgid reflexes *adi* and *udi.*[^99] If the Proto-Nubian pronoun of the second person singular is *\*ed,* the Birgid reflexes become perfectly regular and the Proto-Nubian plural marker is definitely *\*i.* This could be a development of Proto-NES *\*-gi,* which implies that *\*g* was already lost in Proto-Nubian, like in modern English *night* and *brought.* In conclusion, if Proto-Nubian “you (sg.)” was indeed *\*ed,* a plural form *\*ud-i* is a consistent reconstruction. The initial vowel *\*u* instead of the expected *\*e* still has to be explained, but it is substantiated by the Old Nubian, Ajang,[^100] and Birgid reflexes.
[^99]: Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* pp. 250-251 and n. 7.
[^100]: Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko," t. 5.
[^100]: Jakobi, “Verbal Number and Transitivity in Karko,” t. 5.
This alternation between /d/ and /r/ is obvious when comparing Meroitic and Nubian. Several Meroitic words related to Nubian have /d/ where Nubian has /r/. This is for instance the case for the words for “brother,” in Meroitic *wide* and in Proto-Nubian *wer-i.*[^101] In addition, the Meroitic phoneme /d/ has two different realizations: alveolar [d] in initial position and after another consonant, retroflex [ɖ] in intervocalic position.[^x47] The retroflex consonant was acoustically so close to [r] that Egyptians and Greeks transcribed this sound with the grapheme “r.” That is why the capital of the kingdom, spelled *Medewi* in Meroitic, was written *Mrw.t* by the Egyptians and Μερόη by the Greeks.
@ -1021,13 +1025,13 @@ Most Meroitic personal names, and particularly the rulers’, are complex compou
However, several royal names seem to follow a local tradition of naming an individual from physical features or temperament and can therefore be considered genuine birth-names. A stunning example of this tradition among private individuals is the name of the mother of a deceased woman from Sedeinga. She was called *Xmlowiteke,* which means “she who likes a good meal.”[^104] It can be either the birth-name of a greedy baby or a nickname given later during her lifetime. In the royal sphere, a name like Aspelta falls in the same tradition. This name was recently identified by the author among the Meroitic graffiti of the Great Enclosure in Musawwarat es-Sufra. It was written *Ispleto*.[^x48] If the first segment *Is-* is the Meroitic cognate of Old Nubian ⲉⲓⲥ- “other,”[^105] it could mean “another is given” and refer, for example, to the birth of a second son, a possible heir to the throne. This name would be appropriate for a ruler like Aspelta, who succeeded his brother Anlamani at a very young age.
[^x48]: Rilly, “Graffiti for Gods and Kings.""
[^104]: This name occurs in the inscribed lintel II T 302 d2, found in 2017: see Rilly \& Francigny, “Closer to the Ancestors,"" 70.
[^x48]: Rilly, “Graffiti for Gods and Kings.”"
[^104]: This name occurs in the inscribed lintel II T 302 d2, found in 2017: see Rilly \& Francigny, “Closer to the Ancestors,”" 70.
[^105]: Nobiin *íccí,* Andaandi *ecce-l.*
This naming tradition, in spite of the increasing influence of Islam, still exists in some parts of Sudan. In her study of the personal names among the Midob, a Nubian-speaking population of Northern Darfur, Abeer Bashir gives several examples of personal names whose meaning is connected with physical or social particularities, or with events that happened at the time these individuals were born:[^ex66]
[^ex66]: Bashir, “Address and Reference Terms in Midob," pp. 136–137.
[^ex66]: Bashir, “Address and Reference Terms in Midob,” pp. 136–137.
{{< gloss "(66)" >}}
{r} **Midob**
@ -1036,12 +1040,12 @@ This naming tradition, in spite of the increasing influence of Islam, still exis
{r} *Ábágàlò* ← *ábá* “grandmother” + *gálò* “lost” = “who has lost his/her grandmother”
{{< /gloss >}}
Interestingly, two royal names belonging to this category of “contextual” names include a first element *are* which is obviously the same as the 2nd person pronoun identified above. They are the names of Queen Amanirenas (*Amnirense*) and king Amanakhareqerema (*Amnxreqerem*).[^106] The god names *Mni* “Amun” and *Amnxe* “Amanakh” were added to their original names when they received the royal crown of Kush.[^107] Their former names were *Arense* and *Areqerem* respectively. The vowel /a/ is never written in internal position (here after *Amni-* or *Amanx-*). However, it must have been present in the pronunciation because, as addressed above in [5.2.1](#iv21) when analysing the compound *pwritrese* “the life from you”, /r/ can never be initial in Meroitic and its related languages.
Interestingly, two royal names belonging to this category of “contextual” names include a first element *are* which is obviously the same as the 2nd person pronoun identified above. They are the names of Queen Amanirenas (*Amnirense*) and king Amanakhareqerema (*Amnxreqerem*).[^106] The god names *Mni* “Amun” and *Amnxe* “Amanakh” were added to their original names when they received the royal crown of Kush.[^107] Their former names were *Arense* and *Areqerem* respectively. The vowel /a/ is never written in internal position (here after *Amni-* or *Amanx-*). However, it must have been present in the pronunciation because, as addressed above in [5.2.1](#iv21) when analysing the compound *pwritrese* “the life from you,” /r/ can never be initial in Meroitic and its related languages.
[^106]: Queen Amanirenas reigned around the end of the first c. BCE and the beginning of the first c. CE, Amanakhareqerema at the end of the first c. CE. For their reigns, see Rilly, “Histoire du Soudan, des origines à la chute du sultanat Fung,” pp. 242-252, 286-291 and Kuckertz, "Amanakhareqerema."
[^106]: Queen Amanirenas reigned around the end of the first c. BCE and the beginning of the first c. CE, Amanakhareqerema at the end of the first c. CE. For their reigns, see Rilly, “Histoire du Soudan, des origines à la chute du sultanat Fung,” pp. 242-252, 286-291 and Kuckertz, "Amanakhareqerema.”
[^107]: Amanakh, written *Amnx(e)* or *Mnx(e),* was obviously a hypostasis of Amun, but his identity remains a mystery. The name is not dubious; it appears in the names of king Amanakhabale and of many princes and queens. However, it is never independently attested and no Egyptian parallel is known so far.
The first element, *are* “you (sg.)” is followed by the sequences *-nase* (written *nse*) in the first name and *-qerema* (written qerem) in the second. They display striking resemblances with the Nubian adjectives “tall” and "black." In Old Nubian, these are ⳟⲁⲥⲥ- and ⲟⲩⲇⲙ- respectively, in Nobiin *nàssí* and *úrúm,* and in Andaandi *nosso* and *urumme*. In addition, the correspondence in initial position between Meroitic *qe/qo* /kʷu/ and Nubian /u/ is well attested, for instance between Meroitic *qore* “king” and Old Nubian ⲟⲩⲣⲟⲩ. The birth-name of the queen, namely *(A)rense* "Are-nase" would therefore mean “you are tall” and the birth-name of the king, namely *(A)reqerem* "Are-qerema" “you are black." The elision of the copula (*-o* was expected in final position) is noteworthy, but this morpheme has so far been attested only with 3rd person constructions.[^109] The names were possibly given to them soon after they were born and described the physical appearance they had at this young age. When they ascended to the throne, these names were not considered incompatible with royal status: tall stature and black skin are, for example, features that were commonly associated with Osiris, the mythical first king of Egypt. The names of Amun or his hypostasis Amanakh were just added to their birth-names, according to the custom mentioned above.
The first element, *are* “you (sg.)” is followed by the sequences *-nase* (written *nse*) in the first name and *-qerema* (written qerem) in the second. They display striking resemblances with the Nubian adjectives “tall” and "black.” In Old Nubian, these are ⳟⲁⲥⲥ- and ⲟⲩⲇⲙ- respectively, in Nobiin *nàssí* and *úrúm,* and in Andaandi *nosso* and *urumme*. In addition, the correspondence in initial position between Meroitic *qe/qo* /kʷu/ and Nubian /u/ is well attested, for instance between Meroitic *qore* “king” and Old Nubian ⲟⲩⲣⲟⲩ. The birth-name of the queen, namely *(A)rense* "Are-nase" would therefore mean “you are tall” and the birth-name of the king, namely *(A)reqerem* "Are-qerema" “you are black.” The elision of the copula (*-o* was expected in final position) is noteworthy, but this morpheme has so far been attested only with 3rd person constructions.[^109] The names were possibly given to them soon after they were born and described the physical appearance they had at this young age. When they ascended to the throne, these names were not considered incompatible with royal status: tall stature and black skin are, for example, features that were commonly associated with Osiris, the mythical first king of Egypt. The names of Amun or his hypostasis Amanakh were just added to their birth-names, according to the custom mentioned above.
[^108]: The Old Nubian word ⲟⲩⲣⲟⲩ is neither borrowed from Meroitic nor from Late Egyptian *(p-)uro.* Its stem can be found in many other words, like ⲟⲩⲣⲁⲛ “chief” and is probably the word ⲟⲩⲣ “head” (Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p, 364). In Meroitic itself, alternative forms with initial *w-* instead of *q-* can be found locally (Rilly, *La langue du Royaume de Méroé,* pp. 39-42).
[^109]: The absence of copula (final *-o* expected) or of any verb “to be” (stem ne-) is certainly puzzling, but as this is the first time a sentence with a probable second person subject pronoun is attested, one cannot expect to find the same syntactic features as in sentences where the subject is a 3rd person and not a pronoun.
@ -1049,7 +1053,7 @@ The first element, *are* “you (sg.)” is followed by the sequences *-nase* (w
## The Prefixed Second Person Singular Marker in the Verbal Complex {#iv3}
We have previously seen that there were in Meroitic two types of person markers encoding the subject of the verb. First, independent pronouns such as *qo* “he, she” or *are* “you (sg.),” attested so far only in non-verbal clauses, and second, prefixed elements which are appended to the verbal compound, such as *ye-* “I” and *w-* “he/she(?)," in verbal clauses. For the 2nd person singular, a morpheme *d-*, which has remained unexplained for twenty years, is very likely the prefixed person marker that matches the independent pronoun are “you (sg.).”
We have previously seen that there were in Meroitic two types of person markers encoding the subject of the verb. First, independent pronouns such as *qo* “he, she” or *are* “you (sg.),” attested so far only in non-verbal clauses, and second, prefixed elements which are appended to the verbal compound, such as *ye-* “I” and *w-* “he/she(?),” in verbal clauses. For the 2nd person singular, a morpheme *d-*, which has remained unexplained for twenty years, is very likely the prefixed person marker that matches the independent pronoun are “you (sg.).”
In the 2000 issue of the *Meroitic Newsletter,* I published an article to show that a small corpus of Meroitic inscriptions on papyrus, leather strips, and ostraca, which were hitherto regarded as private letters, were actually protection spells.[^110] They were purchased by pilgrims from the temples, especially the temple of Amun in Qasr Ibrim, where the major part of these texts were found by the British team of the Egypt Exploration Society. I termed them “Amuletic Oracular Decrees,” after the name of the same type of texts attested in Egypt in the early first millennium BCE. Because of the rich vocabulary they include, describing all kind of misfortunes from which their owner will be protected, the translation of these inscriptions is still in an early stage. However, the scheme of the introductive parts of the texts is clear. They are divided in two groups according the prefixes of the verbal forms, *y(i)-* or *d-*.
@ -1165,11 +1169,11 @@ Carrier, Claude. “La stèle méroïtique d’Abratoye (Caire, J.E. n° 90008).
Comrie, Bernard. *Language Universals and Linguistic Typology.* Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981.
Cotte, Pierre. *Langage et linéarité.* Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses universitaires du Septentrion, 1999. [BIB]
Cotte, Pierre. *Langage et linéarité.* Villeneuve d’Ascq: Presses universitaires du Septentrion, 1999.
Creissels, Denis. *Syntaxe générale, une introduction typologique,* vol. 1: *Catégories et construction.* Paris: Lavoisier, 2006. [SCAN]
Creissels, Denis. *Syntaxe générale, une introduction typologique,* vol. 1: *Catégories et construction.* Paris: Lavoisier, 2006.
Creissels, Denis. *Syntaxe générale, une introduction typologique,* vol. 2: *La phrase.* Paris: Lavoisier, 2006. [SCAN]
Creissels, Denis. *Syntaxe générale, une introduction typologique,* vol. 2: *La phrase.* Paris: Lavoisier, 2006.
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. “Pluractionality and the Distribution of Number Marking across Categories.” In *Number: Constructions and Semantics. Case Studies From Africa, Amazonia, India & Oceania,* edited by Anne Storch and Gerrit J. Dimmendaal. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2014: pp. 57–76.
@ -1181,7 +1185,7 @@ Eide, Tormod, Tomas Hägg, Richard Holton Pierce & László Török, eds. *Fon
Eide, Tormod, Tomas Hägg, Richard Holton Pierce & László Török, eds. *Fontes Historiae Nubiorum: Textual Sources for the History of the Middle Nile Between the 8th Century BC and the 6th AD,* vol. III: *From the First to the Sixth Century AD.* Bergen: University of Bergen, Department of Classics, 1998.
El-Guzuuli, El-Shafie. "The Uses and Orthography of the Verb 'Say' in Andaandi." *Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies* 2 (2015): pp. 91–107.
El-Guzuuli, El-Shafie. "The Uses and Orthography of the Verb 'Say' in Andaandi.” *Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies* 2 (2015): pp. 91–107.
El-Nazir Mustafa. *Major Word Categories in Mararit.* MA Thesis, University of Cologne, 2016.
@ -1193,7 +1197,7 @@ Gardiner, Alan H. *Egyptian Grammar: Being an Introduction to the Study of Hiero
Gerven Oei, Vincent W.J. van. *A Reference Grammar of Old Nubian.* Leuven: Peeters, forthcoming.
Gerven Oei, Vincent W.J. van, and El-Shafie El-Guzuuli. *The Miracle of Saint Mina*. Tirana: Uitgeverij, 2013.
Gerven Oei, Vincent W.J. van & El-Shafie El-Guzuuli. *The Miracle of Saint Mina*. Tirana: Uitgeverij, 2013.
Griffith, Francis Ll. *Karanòg: The Meroitic Inscriptions of Shablûl and Karanog.* Eckley B. Coxe Jr. Expedition to Nubia 6. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1911.
@ -1203,11 +1207,11 @@ Haspelmath, Martin. “The Serial Verb Construction: Comparative Concept and Cro
Hintze, Fritz. *Beiträge zur meroitischen Grammatik.* Meroitica 3. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1979.
Hintze, Fritz. “Some Problems of Meroitic Philology.” In *Sudan im Altertum: 1. Internationale Tagung für meroitistische Forschungen in Berlin 1971,* edited by Fritz Hintze. Meroitica 1 (1973): pp. 321-336. [SCAN]
Hintze, Fritz. “Some Problems of Meroitic Philology.” In *Sudan im Altertum: 1. Internationale Tagung für meroitistische Forschungen in Berlin 1971,* edited by Fritz Hintze. Meroitica 1 (1973): pp. 321-336.
Hofmann, Inge. *Material für eine meroitische Grammatik.* Veröffentlichungen der Institute für Afrikanistik und Ägyptologie der Universität Wien 16. Vienna: Afro-Pub, 1981.
Jacquesson, François. *Les personnes. Morphosyntaxe et sémantique.* Paris: CNRS Éditions, 2008. [SCAN]
Jacquesson, François. *Les personnes. Morphosyntaxe et sémantique.* Paris: CNRS Éditions, 2008.
Jakobi, Angelika. *Kordofan Nubian: A Synchronic and Diachronic Study.* Unpublished manuscript, 2001.
@ -1219,39 +1223,39 @@ Jakobi, Angelika, Ali Ibrahim & Gumma Ibrahim Gulfan, “Verbal Number and Gramm
Khalil, Mohamed K. “The Verbal Plural Marker in Nobiin.” *Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies* 2 (2015): pp. 59–71.
Kitchen, Kenneth A. *Ramesside Inscriptions Translated and Annotated: Notes and Comments, II.* Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 1999. [BIB]
Kitchen, Kenneth A. *Ramesside Inscriptions Translated and Annotated: Notes and Comments, II.* Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 1999.
Kuckertz, J. “Amanakhareqerema: A Meroitic King of the 1st Century AD.” *Der antike Sudan, Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin e.V* 29 (2018): pp. 119–144. [BIB]
Kuckertz, J. “Amanakhareqerema: A Meroitic King of the 1st Century AD.” *Der antike Sudan, Mitteilungen der Sudanarchäologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin e.V* 29 (2018): pp. 119–144.
Loprieno, Antonio. “The ‘King’s Novel’.” In *Ancient Egyptian Literature: History and Forms,* edited by Antonio Loprieno. Leiden: Brill, 1996: pp. 277-295. [BIB]
Loprieno, Antonio. “The ‘King’s Novel’.” In *Ancient Egyptian Literature: History and Forms,* edited by Antonio Loprieno. Leiden: Brill, 1996: pp. 277–295.
Lukas, Johannes. “Die Sprache der Sungor in Wadai (aus Nachtigal’s Nachlaß).” *Mitteilungen der Ausland-Hochschule an der Universität Berlin, dritte Abteilung. Afrikanische Studien* 41 (1938): pp. 171-246.
Lukas, Johannes. “Die Sprache der Sungor in Wadai (aus Nachtigal’s Nachlaß).” *Mitteilungen der Ausland-Hochschule an der Universität Berlin, dritte Abteilung. Afrikanische Studien* 41 (1938): pp. 171–246.
Millet, Nicholas B. “The Kharamadoye Inscription.” *Meroitic Newsletter* 13 (1973): pp. 31-49.
Millet, Nicholas B. “The Kharamadoye Inscription.” *Meroitic Newsletter* 13 (1973): pp. 31–49.
Millet, Nicholas B. “The Kharamadoye Inscription (MI 94) Revisited.” *Meroitic Newsletter* 30 (2003): pp. 57-72.
Millet, Nicholas B. “The Kharamadoye Inscription (MI 94) Revisited.” *Meroitic Newsletter* 30 (2003): pp. 57–72.
Norton, Russell. “Number in Ama Verbs.” *Occasional Papers in the Study of Sudanese Languages* 10 (2012): pp. 75-93.
Norton, Russell. “Number in Ama Verbs.” *Occasional Papers in the Study of Sudanese Languages* 10 (2012): pp. 75–93.
Peust, Carsten. *Das Napatanische. Ein Ägyptischer Dialekt aus dem Nubien des späten ersten vorchristlichen Jahrtausends. Texte, Glossar, Grammatik.* Göttingen: Peust & Gutschmid, 1999. [BIB]
Peust, Carsten. *Das Napatanische. Ein Ägyptischer Dialekt aus dem Nubien des späten ersten vorchristlichen Jahrtausends. Texte, Glossar, Grammatik.* Göttingen: Peust & Gutschmid, 1999.
Reinisch, Leo. *Die Barea-Sprache.* Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller, 1874.
Rilly, Claude. “Deux exemples de décrets amulétiques oraculaires en méroïtique: les ostraca REM 1317/1168 et REM 1319 de Shokan.” *Meroitic Newsletter* 27 (2000): pp. 99-118.
Rilly, Claude. “Deux exemples de décrets amulétiques oraculaires en méroïtique: les ostraca REM 1317/1168 et REM 1319 de Shokan.” *Meroitic Newsletter* 27 (2000): pp. 99–118.
Rilly, Claude. “Graffiti for Gods and Kings: The Meroitic Secondary Inscriptions of Musawwarat Es-Sufra: A Preliminary Study.” *Der Antike Sudan* 31 (forthcoming).
Rilly, Claude. “Histoire du Soudan, des origines à la chute du sultanat Fung.” In *Histoire et Civilisations du Soudan. De la préhistoire à nos jours,* edited by Olivier Cabon. Paris: Soleb, 2017: pp. 25-445. [BIB]
Rilly, Claude. “Histoire du Soudan, des origines à la chute du sultanat Fung.” In *Histoire et Civilisations du Soudan. De la préhistoire à nos jours,* edited by Olivier Cabon. Paris: Soleb, 2017: pp. 25–445.
Rilly, Claude. *La langue du Royaume de Méroé: Un panorama de la plus ancienne culture écrite d'Afrique subsaharienne.* Paris: Champion, 2007.
Rilly, Claude. *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique.* Leuven: Peeters, 2010.
Rilly, Claude. “‘Les chouettes ont des oreilles’. L’inscription méroïtique hiéroglyphique d’el-Hobagi REM 1222.” In *La pioche et la plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie. Hommages archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble,* edited by Vincent Rondot, Frédéric Alpi & François Villeneuve. Paris: Presses de l'université Paris-Sorbonne, 2011: pp. 481-499.
Rilly, Claude. “‘Les chouettes ont des oreilles’. L’inscription méroïtique hiéroglyphique d’el-Hobagi REM 1222.” In *La pioche et la plume. Autour du Soudan, du Liban et de la Jordanie. Hommages archéologiques à Patrice Lenoble,* edited by Vincent Rondot, Frédéric Alpi & François Villeneuve. Paris: Presses de l'université Paris-Sorbonne, 2011: pp. 481–499.
Rilly, Claude. *Répertoire d’épigraphie méroïtique. Analyse des inscriptions publiées. Tome IV. REM 0001 à REM 0073.* Habilitation Thesis, École Pratique des Hautes Études. Paris, 2018.
Rilly, Claude. “The Meroitic Inscriptions of Temple Naga 200.” In Josefine Kuckertz, *Naga: Temple 200 – Wall Decoration.* Berlin: Ugarit Verlag, forthcoming: pp. 283-328.
Rilly, Claude. “The Meroitic Inscriptions of Temple Naga 200.” In Josefine Kuckertz, *Naga: Temple 200 – Wall Decoration.* Berlin: Ugarit Verlag, forthcoming: pp. 283–328.
Rilly, Claude. “The Wadi Howar Diaspora and Its Role in the Spread of East Sudanic Languages from the Fourth to the First Millenia BCE.” In *Reconstruction et classification généalogique: tendances actuelles,* edited by Konstantin Pozdniakov. Paris: Faits de Langue, 2016: pp. 151–163.
@ -1265,7 +1269,7 @@ Schenkel, Wolfgang. “Meroitisches und Barya-Verb: Versuch einer Bestimmung der
Schenkel, Wolfgang. “Zur Struktur des Verbalkomplexes in den Schlußformel der meroitischen Totentexte.” *Meroitic Newsletter* 12 (1973): pp. 2–22.
Spalinger, Anthony. “Königsnovelle and Performance.” In *Times, Signs and Pyramids: Studies in Honour of Miroslav Verner on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday,* edited by Vivienne G. Callender et al. Prague: Faculty of Arts, Charles University of Prague, 2011: pp. 351-374. [BIB]
Spalinger, Anthony. “Königsnovelle and Performance.” In *Times, Signs and Pyramids: Studies in Honour of Miroslav Verner on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday,* edited by Vivienne G. Callender et al. Prague: Faculty of Arts, Charles University of Prague, 2011: pp. 351-374.
Stevenson, Roland. *Grammar of the Nyimang Language (Nuba Mountains).* Unpublished typescript, 1938.
@ -1281,4 +1285,4 @@ Werner, Roland. *Grammatik des Nobiin (Nilnubisch). Pho­no­logie, Tonologie un
Werner, Roland. *Tìdn-áal: A Study of Midob (Darfur-Nubian).* Berlin: Dietrich Reimer, 1993.
Zibelius-Chen, Karola. *Der Löwentempel von Naq'a in der Butana (Sudan). IV: Die Inschriften.* Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1983. [SCAN]
Zibelius, Karola. *Der Löwentempel von Naq‘a in der Butana (Sudan). IV: Die Inschriften.* Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 1983.

54
content/article/starostin.md
View file

@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ Although there has never been any serious disagreement on which languages consti
Traditionally, four main units have been recognized within Nubian[^1]:
* Nile-Nubian, consisting of the closely related Kenuzi-Dongolawi (Mattokki–Andaandi) dialect cluster and the somewhat more distant Nobiin (= Fadidja-Mahas) cluster;
* Nile-Nubian, consisting of the closely related Kenuzi–Dongolawi (Mattokki–Andaandi) dialect cluster and the somewhat more distant Nobiin (= Fadidja–Mahas) cluster;
* Kordofan Nubian, or Hill Nubian, consisting of numerous (and generally poorly studied, although the situation has significantly improved in the past decade) languages such as Dilling, Karko, Wali, Kadaru, etc.;
* Birgid (Birked, Birged), now-extinct , formerly spoken in Darfur;
* Midob (Meidob), also in Darfur.
@ -21,12 +21,12 @@ This is, for instance, the default classification model adopted in Joseph Greenb
[^1]: Bechhaus-Gerst, “Nile-Nubian Reconsidered,” p. 85.
[^2]: Greenberg, *The Languages of Africa,* p. 84.
More recently, however, an important and challenging hypothesis on a re-classification of Nubian has been advanced by Marianne Bechhaus-Gerst.[^3] Having conducted a detailed lexicostatistical study of a representative batch of Nubian lects, she made the important observation that, while the percentage of common matches between the two main components of Nile-Nubian is indeed very high (70%), Kenuzi-Dongolawi consistently shows a much higher percentage in common with the other three branches of Nubian than Nobiin (**table 1**).
More recently, however, an important and challenging hypothesis on a re-classification of Nubian has been advanced by Marianne Bechhaus-Gerst.[^3] Having conducted a detailed lexicostatistical study of a representative batch of Nubian lects, she made the important observation that, while the percentage of common matches between the two main components of Nile-Nubian is indeed very high (70%), Kenuzi-Dongolawi consistently shows a much higher percentage in common with the other three branches of Nubian than Nobiin (**Table 1**).
[^3]: Bechhaus-Gerst, “Nile-Nubian Reconsidered”; Bechhaus-Gerst, *Sprachwandel durch Sprachkontakt am Beispiel des Nubischen im Niltal*; Bechhaus-Gerst, *The (Hi)story of Nobiin*.
| | Meidob | Birgid | Kadaru | Debri | Dilling | K/D |
| | Midob | Birgid | Kadaru | Debri | Dilling | K/D |
| --- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **K/D** | 54% | 48% | 58% | 57% | 58% | |
| **Nobiin** | 40% | 37% | 43% | 41% | 43% | 70% |
@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ Bechhaus-Gerstʼs classificatory model, with its important implications not only
While in theory there is nothing impossible about the historical scenario suggested by Bechhaus-Gerst, in practice the idea that language A, rather distantly related to language B, could undergo a serious convergent development over an approximately 1,000-year long period (from the supposed migration of Kenuzi–Dongolawi into the Nile Valley and up to the attestation of the first texts in Old Nubian, which already share most of the important features of modern Nobiin), to the point where language A can easily be misclassified even by specialists as belonging to the same group as language B, seems rather far-fetched. At the very least, it would seem to make perfect sense, before adopting it wholeheartedly, to look for alternate solutions that might yield a more satisfactory explanation to the odd deviations found in the data.
Let us look again more closely (table 2) at the lexicostatistical evidence, reducing it, for the sake of simple clarity, to percentages of matches observed in a "triangle" consisting of Kenuzi–Dongolawi, Nobiin, and one other Nubian language that is universally recognized as belonging to a very distinct and specific subbranch of the family — Midob. Comparative data are given from the older study by Bechhaus-Gerst and ,my own, more recent examination of the basic lexicon evidence.[^9]
Let us look again more closely (**Table 2**) at the lexicostatistical evidence, reducing it, for the sake of simple clarity, to percentages of matches observed in a "triangle" consisting of Kenuzi–Dongolawi, Nobiin, and one other Nubian language that is universally recognized as belonging to a very distinct and specific subbranch of the family — Midob. Comparative data are given from the older study by Bechhaus-Gerst and ,my own, more recent examination of the basic lexicon evidence.[^9]
[^9]: Starostin, *Jazyki Afriki,* pp. 24–95.
[^9]: Starostin, *Языки Африки,* pp. 24–95.
| | Nobiin | Midob |
| --- | :--- | :--- |
@ -67,20 +67,9 @@ Let us look again more closely (table 2) at the lexicostatistical evidence, redu
**~~Table 2b. Lexicostatistical relations between Nile-Nubian and Midob \(Starostin\)[^t2b]~~**
[^t2a]: Bechhaus-Gerst, “Nile-Nubian Reconsidered”
[^t2b]: Storostin, *Jazyki Afriki*.
[^t2b]: Storostin, *Языки Африки*.
The significant differences in figures between two instances of lexicostatistical calculations are explained by a number of factors (slightly divergent Swadesh-type lists; different etymologizations of several items on the list; exclusion of transparent recent loans from Arabic in Starostinʼs model). Nevertheless, the obvious problem does not go away in the second model: Midob clearly shares a significantly larger number of cognates with K/D than with Nobiin — a fact that directly contradicts the K/D–Nobiin proximity on the Nubian phylogenetic tree.[^abbrev] The situation remains the same if we substitute Midob with any other non-Nile-Nubian language, such as Birgid or any of the multiple Hill Nubian idioms.
[^abbrev]: In this article, the following language abbreviations are used:
B — Birgid;
D — Dongolawi;
Dl — Dilling;
K — Kenuzi;
K/D — Kenuzi-Dongolawi;
M — Midob;
N — Nobiin;
ON — Old Nubian;
PN — Proto-Nubian.
The significant differences in figures between two instances of lexicostatistical calculations are explained by a number of factors (slightly divergent Swadesh-type lists; different etymologizations of several items on the list; exclusion of transparent recent loans from Arabic in Starostinʼs model). Nevertheless, the obvious problem does not go away in the second model: Midob clearly shares a significantly larger number of cognates with K/D than with Nobiin — a fact that directly contradicts the K/D–Nobiin proximity on the Nubian phylogenetic tree. The situation remains the same if we substitute Midob with any other non-Nile-Nubian language, such as Birgid or any of the multiple Hill Nubian idioms.
The important thing is that there are actually two possible reasons for this discrepancy in the lexicostatistical matrix. One, endorsed by Bechhaus-Gerst, is that the K/D–Nobiin number is incorrectly increased by the addition of a large number of items that have not been inherited from a common ancestor, but actually borrowed from Nobiin into K/D. An alternate scenario, however, is that the active recipient was Nobiin, except that the donor was not K/D — rather, a certain percentage of Nobiin basic lexicon could have been borrowed from a third, possibly unidentified source, over a relatively short period of time, which resulted in lowering the percentage of Nobiin matches with *all* other Nubian languages.
@ -97,11 +86,11 @@ The tricky part in investigating this situation is determining the status of tho
Indeed, we have a large share of Nobiin basic words that set it apart from every other Nubian languages (see the more than 30 items in [III](#iii) of the list below), but how can we distinguish retentions from innovations? If the word in question has no etymological cognates in any other Nubian language, then in most cases such a distinction is impossible.[^10] However, if the retention or innovation in question was not accompanied by the total elimination of the root morpheme, but rather involved a semantic shift, then investigating the situation from an etymo­logical point of view may shed some significant light on the matter. In general, the more lexico­statistical discrepancies we find between Nobiin and the rest of Nubian where the Nobiin item has a Common Nubian etymology, the better the case for the "early separation of Nobiin" hypothesis; the more "strange" words we find in Nobiin whose etymological parallels in the other Nubian languages are highly questionable or non-existent, the stronger the case for the "pre-Nobiin substrate" hypothesis.
[^10]: One possible argument in this case would be to rely on data from external comparison. Thus, if we agree that Nubian belongs to the Northern branch of the Eastern Sudanic family, with the Nara language and the Taman group as its closest relatives (Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique*; Starostin, *Jazyki Afriki*), then, in those cases where Nobiin data is opposed to the data of all other Nubian languages, it is the word that finds better etymological parallels in Nara and Tama that shouud be logically regarded as the Proto-Nubian equivalent. However, in order to avoid circularity or the additional problems that one runs into while investigating chronologically distant language relationship, I intentionally restrict the subject matter of this paper to internal Nubian data only.
[^10]: One possible argument in this case would be to rely on data from external comparison. Thus, if we agree that Nubian belongs to the Northern branch of the Eastern Sudanic family, with the Nara language and the Taman group as its closest relatives (Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique*; Starostin, *Языки Африки*), then, in those cases where Nobiin data is opposed to the data of all other Nubian languages, it is the word that finds better etymological parallels in Nara and Tama that shouud be logically regarded as the Proto-Nubian equivalent. However, in order to avoid circularity or the additional problems that one runs into while investigating chronologically distant language relationship, I intentionally restrict the subject matter of this paper to internal Nubian data only.
In order to resolve this issue, below I offer a concise and slightly condensed etymological analysis of the entire 100-item Swadesh wordlist for modern Nobiin.[^11] The lexical items are classified into three groups:
[^11]: Reasons of volume, unfortunately, do not allow to go into sufficient details on many of the more complicated cases. A subset of 50 words, representing the most stable (on average) Swadesh items, has been analyzed in detail and published (in Russian) in Starostin, *Jazyki Afriki,* pp. 224–95. A complete 100-item wordlist reconstructed for Proto-Nubian, with detailed notes on phonetics, semantics, and distribution, is scheduled to be added to the already available annotated 100-item wordlists for ten Nubian languages, published as part of [The Global Lexicostatistical Database](http://starling.rinet.ru/new100).
[^11]: Reasons of volume, unfortunately, do not allow to go into sufficient details on many of the more complicated cases. A subset of 50 words, representing the most stable (on average) Swadesh items, has been analyzed in detail and published (in Russian) in Starostin, *Языки Африки,* pp. 224–95. A complete 100-item wordlist reconstructed for Proto-Nubian, with detailed notes on phonetics, semantics, and distribution, is scheduled to be added to the already available annotated 100-item wordlists for ten Nubian languages, published as part of [The Global Lexicostatistical Database](http://starling.rinet.ru/new100).
* I. Lexicostatistical matches (i.e., cases where the exact same lexical root is preserved in the exact same Swadesh meaning, without semantic shifts) between Nobiin and K/D. These are further divided into subcategories I.1: common Nubian roots, also found in the same meaning in all or some other branches of Nubian beyond Nile-Nubian; and I.2: exclusive isoglosses between Nobiin and K/D that may be either retentions from Proto-Nubian, lost in all other branches, or Nile-Nubian innovations replacing more archaic words. In either case, these data have no bearing on the issue of Nobiinʼs uniqueness (although isoglosses in I.2 may be used to strengthen the case for Nile-Nubian).
* II. Lexicostatistical matches between Nobiin and other Nubian branches (Midob, Birgid, Hill Nubian) that exclude K/D. Upon first sight, such isoglosses might seem to weaken the Nile-Nubian connection, but in reality they are not highly significant, as the K/D equivalents of the respective meanings may simply represent recent lexical innovations that took place already after the split of Nile-Nubian.
@ -111,7 +100,7 @@ In order to resolve this issue, below I offer a concise and slightly condensed e
Data on the other languages are taken from the most comprehensive published dictionaries, vocabularies, and/or wordlists and are quoted as follows: Kenuzi (K) — Hofmann, *Nubisches Wörterverzeichnis*; Dongolawi (D) — Armbruster, *Dongolese Nubian*; Midob (M) — Werner, *Tìdn-áal*; Birgid (B) — Thelwall, "A Birgid Vocabulary List"; Dilling (Dl) — Kauczor, *Die Bergnubische Sprache*. Hill Nubian data other than Dilling are used sparingly, only when it is necessary to specify the distribution of a given item; occasional forms from such languages as Kadaru, Debri, Karko, and Wali are quoted from wordlists published in Thelwall, "Lexicostatistical Relations between Nubian, Daju and Dinka" and Krell, *Rapid Appraisal Sociolinguisyic Survey among Ama, Karko, and Wali Language Groups*.
Proto-Nubian forms are largely based on the system of correspondences that was originally laid out in Marianne Bechhaus-Gerstʼs reconstruction of Proto-Nubian phonology in "Sprachliche und his­torische Rekonstruktionen im Bereich des Nubischen unter beson­de­rer Berücksichtigung des Nilnubischen," but with a number of emendations introduced in Starostin, *Jazyki Afriki*. Since this study is more concerned with issues of cognate distribution than those of phonological reconstruction and phonetic interpretation, I will refrain from reproducing full tables of phonetic correspondences, but brief notes on peculiarities of reflexes of certain PN phonemes in certain Nubian languages will be given for those cases where etymological cognacy is not obvious or is disputable from the standard viewpoint of the neogrammarian paradigm.
Proto-Nubian forms are largely based on the system of correspondences that was originally laid out in Marianne Bechhaus-Gerstʼs reconstruction of Proto-Nubian phonology in "Sprachliche und his­torische Rekonstruktionen im Bereich des Nubischen unter beson­de­rer Berücksichtigung des Nilnubischen," but with a number of emendations introduced in Starostin, *Языки Африки*. Since this study is more concerned with issues of cognate distribution than those of phonological reconstruction and phonetic interpretation, I will refrain from reproducing full tables of phonetic correspondences, but brief notes on peculiarities of reflexes of certain PN phonemes in certain Nubian languages will be given for those cases where etymological cognacy is not obvious or is disputable from the standard viewpoint of the neogrammarian paradigm.
# 100-Item Swadesh List for Nubian: The Data
@ -168,10 +157,10 @@ In order to resolve this issue, below I offer a concise and slightly condensed e
* “who”: N *nàːy*, K *niː*, D *nɪː* (= M *kə̀ː-rén*, B *neː-ta*, Dl *de*, etc.). ◊ All forms go back to PN *\*ŋə(y)*.
[^13]: Bechhaus-Gerst, "Nile-Nubian Reconsidered," p. 94 lists this as one of two examples illustrating the alleged archaicity of Old Nubian and Nobiin in retaining original PN *\*g-*, together with ON *gouwi* "shield.” However, in both of these cases K/D also show *k-* (cf. K/D *karu* "shield"), which goes against regular correspondences for PN *\*g-* (which should yield K/D *g-*, see "red"), meaning that it is Nobiin and not the other languages that actually have an innovation here.
[^horn]: Reconstruction somewhat uncertain, but initial *\*ŋ-* is fairly clearly indicated by the correspondences; see detailed discussion in Starostin, *Jazyki Afriki,* pp. 56–57.
[^horn]: Reconstruction somewhat uncertain, but initial *\*ŋ-* is fairly clearly indicated by the correspondences; see detailed discussion in Starostin, *Языки Африки,* pp. 56–57.
[^14]: Bechhaus-Gerst, "Nile-Nubian Reconsidered," p. 93 counts this as an additional slice of evidence for early separation of N, but since this is an innovation rather than an archaism, there are no arguments to assert that the innovation did not take place recently (already after the separation of N from K/D).
[^sun]: Hofmann, *Material für eine Meroitische Gram­ma­tik,* 86.
[^tongue]: See the detailed discussion on this phonetically unusual root in Starostin, *Jazyki Afriki,* p. 80.
[^tongue]: See the detailed discussion on this phonetically unusual root in Starostin, *Языки Африки,* p. 80.
[^15]: Bell, "Documentary Evidence on the Haraza Nubian Language," p. 10.
### I.2. Exclusive Nile-Nubian Isoglosses {#i2}
@ -192,7 +181,7 @@ In order to resolve this issue, below I offer a concise and slightly condensed e
* “woman”: N *ìd-éːn*, K *eːn*, D *ɛːn*. ◊ Technically, this is not a fully exclusive Nile-Nubian isogloss — cf. B *eːn* “woman.” However, the main root for “woman” in Nubian is *\*il-* (ON *il-*, M *ìd-dì ← *il-ti*, Dl *eli*, Karko *îl*, etc.); *\*eːn* is the common Nubian word for “mother,” which has, most likely, independently shifted to “woman” in general in modern Nile-Nubian languages and in B. N is particularly innovative in that respect, since it uses a compound formation: *ìd* “person” + *éːn* “mother.”
[^feather]: Khalil, *Wörterbuch der nubischen Spra­che,* p. 124.
[^16]: In Starostin, *Jazyki Afriki,* p. 92 I suggest that, since the regular reflex of PN *\*n-* in Hill Nubian is *d-*, both Nile-Nubian *\*min* and all the *na(i)*-like forms may go back to a unique PN stem *\*nwV-*; if so, the word should be moved to [I.1](#i1), but in any case this is still a common Nile-Nubian isogloss.
[^16]: In Starostin, *Языки Африки,* p. 92 I suggest that, since the regular reflex of PN *\*n-* in Hill Nubian is *d-*, both Nile-Nubian *\*min* and all the *na(i)*-like forms may go back to a unique PN stem *\*nwV-*; if so, the word should be moved to [I.1](#i1), but in any case this is still a common Nile-Nubian isogloss.
## II. Nobiin / Non-K/D Isoglosses
@ -285,7 +274,7 @@ If the Nile-Nubian branch is to be reinstated, and the specific features of Nobi
The aspect of chronology has previously been discussed in glottochronological terms.[^22] In both of these sources the application of the glottochronological method as introduced by Morris Swadesh and later recalibrated by Sergei Starostin allowed to generate the following classification and datings (**fig. 2**):
[^22]: Starostin, *Jazyki Afriki,* pp. 34–36; Vasilyey & Starostin, "Leksikostatisticheskaja klassifikatsija nubijskikh jazykov."
[^22]: Starostin, *Языки Африки,* pp. 34–36; Vasilyey & Starostin, "Leksikostatisticheskaja klassifikatsija nubijskikh jazykov."
![Phylogenetic tree for the Nubian languages](../static/images/classification.png "Phylogenetic tree for the Nubian languages")
@ -302,7 +291,7 @@ Thus, Rilly, having analyzed lexical (sound + meaning) similarities between his
[^24]: Rilly, *Le méroïtique et sa famille linguistique,* p. 285.
[^25]: Rilly, "Language and Ethnicity in Ancient Sudan," pp. 1181–1182.
In *Jazyki Afriki,* an alternate hypothesis was put forward, expanding upon an earlier observation by Robin Thelwall,[^26] who, while conducting his own lexicostatistical comparison of Nubian languages with other potential branches of East Sudanic, had first noticed some specific correlations between Nobiin and Dinka (West Nilotic). Going through Nobiin data in [III.2](#iii2) yields at least several phonetically and semantically close matches with West Nilotic, such as:
In *Языки Африки,* an alternate hypothesis was put forward, expanding upon an earlier observation by Robin Thelwall,[^26] who, while conducting his own lexicostatistical comparison of Nubian languages with other potential branches of East Sudanic, had first noticed some specific correlations between Nobiin and Dinka (West Nilotic). Going through Nobiin data in [III.2](#iii2) yields at least several phonetically and semantically close matches with West Nilotic, such as:
* *túllí* “smoke” — cf. Nuer *toːl*, Dinka *tol* “smoke";
* *kìd* “stone” — cf. Luo *kidi*, Shilluk *kit*, etc. “stone";
@ -318,6 +307,19 @@ In any case, the main point of this paper is not so much to shed light on the or
In this particular case, I believe that the evidence speaks strongly in favor of reinstating the Nile-Nubian clade comprising both Nobiin and Kenuzi-Dongolawi, although it must be kept in mind that a common linguistic ancestor and a common ethnic ancestor are not necessarily the same thing (e.g., the linguistic conclusion does not at all exclude the possibility that early speakers of Kenuzi-Dongolawi did shift to Proto-Nile-Nubian from some other language — not necessarily Nubian in origin itself).
# Abbreviations
* B — Birgid;
* D — Dongolawi;
* Dl — Dilling;
* K — Kenuzi;
* K/D — Kenuzi-Dongolawi;
* M — Midob;
* N — Nobiin;
* ON — Old Nubian;
* PN — Proto-Nubian.
# Bibliography
Armbruster, Charles H. *Dongolese Nubian: A Lexicon.* Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965.

8
content/issue/dotawo7.md
View file

@ -16,9 +16,9 @@ With its graduation to the [Sandpoints](https://git.sandpoints.org/) platform st
Second, to improve the long-term preservation of and access to the scholarship contained and referenced in *Dotawo*, all sources mentioned in contributions to the journal will henceforth be linked, as much as possible, to records deposited in a public library using the open infrastructure of [Memory of the World](https://www.memoryoftheworld.org/).[^10] This will allow for easy storage and dissemination of both the research and research context presented in *Dotawo* to those scholars of Nubian Studies – and there are many – who are not institutionally privileged or live in the Global South. The plundering and destruction of the University of Khartoum by forces allied with the former dictator during the 2019 Sudanese Revolution[^8] should impress upon us the precarity of the research environment in which many Nubiologists operate and thus the necessity and moral obligation of creating open and resistant scholarly infrastructures.
In a recent, bleak assessment of the goals set by the [Budapest Open Access Initiative Declaration](https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read) in 2002 and the open access movement more broadly, journalist Richard Poynder states that "it now seems unlikely that the *affordability* and *equity* problems will be resolved, which will impact disproportionately negatively on those in the Global South”:[^5]
In a recent, bleak assessment of the goals set by the [Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) Declaration](https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read) in 2002 and the open access movement more broadly, journalist Richard Poynder states that "it now seems unlikely that the *affordability* and *equity* problems will be resolved, which will impact disproportionately negatively on those in the Global South”:[^5]
>OA advocates failed to anticipate – and then for too long ignored – how their advocacy was allowing legacy publishers to co-opt open access, and in ways that work as much against the goals of [boai]({sc}) as for them. And they have often downplayed the negative consequences that OA policies and initiatives developed in the Global North will have for those in the Global South.[^6]
>OA advocates failed to anticipate – and then for too long ignored – how their advocacy was allowing legacy publishers to co-opt open access, and in ways that work as much against the goals of BOAI as for them. And they have often downplayed the negative consequences that OA policies and initiatives developed in the Global North will have for those in the Global South.[^6]
Furthermore, it appears that the turn toward open access in the scholarly communications landscape is increasingly facilitating the agendas of for-profit data analytics companies. Perhaps realizing that "they've found something that is even more profitable than selling back to us academics the content that we have produced,”[^9] they venture ever further upstream from the moment of publication, with every intent to colonize and canalize the entire flow of research.[^4] This poses a severe threat to the independence of scholarly inquiry.[^7]
@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ In the light of these troubling developments, the expansion from *Dotawo* as a "
>Those with access to these resources — students, librarians, scientists — you have been given a privilege. You get to feed at this banquet of knowledge while the rest of the world is locked out. But you need not — indeed, morally, you cannot — keep this privilege for yourselves. You have a duty to share it with the world.[^3]
Swartz's is a call to action that transcends the limitations of the open access movement as construed by the [boai]({sc}) Declaration by simply affirming: "knowledge is a common good." It goes beyond open access, because it specifically targets materials that linger on a paper or silicon substrate in academic libraries and digital repositories without being accessible for "fair use." The deposition of the references from *Dotawo* contributions in a public library is a limited attempt to offer a remedy, heeding the "Code of Best Practices in Fair Use" of the [Association of Research Libraries](https://www.arl.org/resources/code-of-best-practices-in-fair-use-designing-the-public-domain/), which approvingly cites the late Supreme Court Justice Brandeis that “the noblest of human productions — knowledge, truths ascertained, conceptions, and ideas — become, after voluntary communication to others, free as the air to common use.”[^1] This approach also dovetails the interpretation of "folk law" recently propounded by [Ubuweb](https://ubu.com/) founder Kenneth Goldsmith.[^2]
Swartz's is a call to action that transcends the limitations of the open access movement as construed by the BOAI Declaration by simply affirming: "knowledge is a common good." It goes beyond open access, because it specifically targets materials that linger on a paper or silicon substrate in academic libraries and digital repositories without being accessible for "fair use." The deposition of the references from *Dotawo* contributions in a public library is a limited attempt to offer a remedy, heeding the "Code of Best Practices in Fair Use" of the [Association of Research Libraries](https://www.arl.org/resources/code-of-best-practices-in-fair-use-designing-the-public-domain/), which approvingly cites the late Supreme Court Justice Brandeis that “the noblest of human productions — knowledge, truths ascertained, conceptions, and ideas — become, after voluntary communication to others, free as the air to common use.”[^1] This approach also dovetails the interpretation of "folk law" recently propounded by [Ubuweb](https://ubu.com/) founder Kenneth Goldsmith.[^2]
We strongly believe that it is in the interest of Nubian Studies and its stakeholders, especially scholars in adjunct or para-academic positions without access to institutional repositories, and the Nubian people who are actively denied knowledge of their own culture, to enable the *widest possible* dissemination of scholarship. In this enterprise, striving for common access and and relying on open source software are just the first step.
@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ Goldsmith, Kenneth. *Duchamp Is My Lawyer: The Polemics, Pragmatics, and Poetics
Kelty, Christopher. "Recursive Publics and Open Access." In *Guerrilla Open Access,* ed. Memory of the World. Coventry: Post Office Press, Rope Press, and Memory of the World, 2018: pp. 6–15.
Mars, Marcell, Manar Zarroug, and Tomislav Medak. In "Public Library," edited by Marcell Mars, Tomislav Medak, and WHW. Zagreb: WHW/Multimedijalni Institut, 2015: pp. 75–85.
Mars, Marcell, Manar Zarroug, and Tomislav Medak. "Public Library." In *Javna knjižnica – Public Library,* edited by Marcell Mars, Tomislav Medak, and WHW. Zagreb: WHW/Multimedijalni Institut, 2015: pp. 75–85.
Moore, Samuel. "The Datafication in Transformative Agreements for Open Access Publishing." July 3, 2020. https://www.samuelmoore.org/2020/07/03/the-datafication-in-transformative-agreements-for-open-access-publishing/

15
content/journal/index.md
View file

@ -3,11 +3,22 @@ title: Dotawo - A Journal of Nubian Studies
has_issues: ["dotawo7.md"]
---
# About Dotawo
Nubian studies needs a platform in which the old meets the new, in which archaeological, historical, and philological research into Meroitic, Old Nubian, Coptic, Greek, and Arabic sources confront current investigations in modern anthropology and ethnography, Nilo-Saharan linguistics, and critical and theoretical approaches present in postcolonial and African studies.
The journal *Dotawo: A Journal of Nubian Studies* brings these disparate fields together within the same fold, opening a cross-cultural and diachronic field where divergent approaches meet on common soil. *Dotawo* gives a common home to the past, present, and future of one of the richest areas of research in African studies. It offers a crossroads where papyrus can meet internet, scribes meet critical thinkers, and the promises of growing nations meet the accomplishments of old kingdoms.
# Previous issues
# Previous Issues
From 2014 to 2019, PDF articles of *Dotawo* were hosted by [DigitalCommons@Fairfield](https://digitalcommons.fairfield.edu/djns/). Since 2019, articles are available through University of California's [eScholarship](https://escholarship.org/uc/dotawo) platform. A print version of *Dotawo* is available through [punctum books](https://punctumbooks.com/imprints/dotawo/), which also hosts the *Dotawo Monograph* series.
In this paragraph we should test [small caps letters]({sc}) and after the test some normal text.
* *Dotawo* 1, ed. Vincent W.J. van Gerven Oei, Angelika Jakobi & Giovanni Ruffini (2014). Available at [punctum books](https://punctumbooks.com/titles/dotawo-volume-1-2014/) · [eScholarship](https://escholarship.org/uc/dotawo/1/1) · [DigitalCommons@Fairfield](https://digitalcommons.fairfield.edu/djns/vol1/iss1/)
* *Dotawo* 2, ed. Vincent W.J. van Gerven Oei, Angelika Jakobi & Giovanni Ruffini (2015). Available at [punctum books](https://punctumbooks.com/titles/dotawo-volume-2-2015/) · [eScholarship](https://escholarship.org/uc/dotawo/2/1) · [DigitalCommons@Fairfield](https://digitalcommons.fairfield.edu/djns/vol2/iss1/)
* *Dotawo* 3: "Know-How and Techniques in Ancient Sudan," ed. Marc Maillot (2016). Available at [punctum books](https://punctumbooks.com/titles/dotawo-volume-3-2016/) · [eScholarship](https://escholarship.org/uc/dotawo/3/1) · [DigitalCommons@Fairfield](https://digitalcommons.fairfield.edu/djns/vol3/iss1/)
* *Dotawo* 4: "Place Names and Place Naming in Ancient Nubia," ed. Robin Seignobos & Alexandros Tsakos (2017). Available at [punctum books](https://punctumbooks.com/titles/dotawo-a-journal-of-nubian-studies-4/) · [eScholarship](https://escholarship.org/uc/dotawo/4/1) · [DigitalCommons@Fairfield](https://digitalcommons.fairfield.edu/djns/vol4/iss1/)
* *Dotawo* 5: "Nubian Women," ed. Anne Jennings (2018). Available at [punctum books](https://punctumbooks.com/titles/dotawo-a-journal-of-nubian-studies-5-nubian-women/) · [eScholarship](https://escholarship.org/uc/dotawo/5/1) · [DigitalCommons@Fairfield](https://digitalcommons.fairfield.edu/djns/vol5/iss1/)
* *Dotawo* 6: "Miscellanea Nubiana," ed. Adam Simmons (2019). Available at [punctum books](https://punctumbooks.com/titles/dotawo-a-journal-of-nubian-studies-6/) · [eScholarship](https://escholarship.org/uc/dotawo/6/1)
Read more about *Dotawo* on the website of the [Union for Nubian Studies](http://unionfornubianstudies.org/projects/dotawo/).