Abstract
This paper presents an analysis of the verbal negation of declarative main clauses in Dawurotsuwa. This study aims to describe verbal negation in Dawurotsuwa, a language that is scarcely described. Having prepared phrases and sentences for elicitation, which are appropriate and purposefully fitting to the verbal predication negation in English and Amharic, the data were collected from native speakers of Dawurotsuwa. The finding shows that the language suffixes negative markers to the root. Verbal negation in main clauses is formed by suffixing the morphemes -kk-/-nn- to the verb along with other inflectional suffixes, such as person, number, and aspect. The negative morpheme -kk- is used for all persons except 3SG.M. The morpheme -nn- is used for 3SG.M and infinite verb forms. Negation in Dawurotsuwa is asymmetric, in which the structural difference between affirmative and corresponding negative goes beyond the mere existence of the negative marker. The negative and perfective aspect marker co-occur together though the perfective aspect marker is substituted by another marker in the negative. The imperfective aspect is not marked in the language. The language emphasizes negation by attaching -ttenne to the verb following the person and number marker. In ellipsis, the morpheme -kka is suffixed to the pronouns or nominal elements for representing all other elements of the antecedent clause omitted in both affirmatives and negatives.
1. Introduction
This article describes the negation of the verbal declarative main clause in Dawurotsuwa. Dawurotsuwa belongs to the North Omotic branch of the Omotic language family, a member of the Afroasiatic phylum (Bender, Citation1976; Fleming, Citation1976). The self-referent name of the language is Dawurotsuwa in Latin Orthography. The speakers of the language live in the southwest of Ethiopia.
Negation is a necessary element in all world languages. It does not exist in non-human means of exchanging information, which has complicated communication means (Horn, Citation1998, Citation2010). Languages mark negation in a certain way. No language has been found to lack a negative marker, but the way it is expressed varies across languages (Miestamo, Citation2017; Zeijlstra, Citation2020).
Different languages employ different means of expressing negation. ‘In very general terms, the negative marker can be a non-inflecting element, bound or free (i.e. a particle, a clitic or an affix), or it can be an inflecting element – a negative verb’ (Miestamo, Citation2005, pp. 5, 18). Morphological negative markers can be affixes (prefixes, suffixes, and circumfixes), rhythmic and intonational aspects of a language, and repeating the negative markers. Payne (Citation1985) also presents the four types of negative markers, focusing on the status of negative markers. The use of particles is the most common strategy for negation marking among the world languages, according to cross-linguistic studies, but it is not the only type (Dixon, Citation1997).
This article is structured as follows: Section 1.1 gives a general overview of Dawurotsuwa. The following Section 1.2 provides brief verb morphology. Section 2 discusses methodology. Sections 3.1 and 3.2 deal with the interaction of negation with imperfective and perfective aspects, respectively. Sections 4 and 5 express negations in nominalized relative verbs and ellipses, respectively. The last section gives the conclusion.
1.1. The language
There are a few studies in Dawurotuswa. Some of them, such as Alebachew (Citation2019), Allan (Citation1976), and Hanserud (Citation2018), focus on morphology. Although these studies do not segment and identify specific negative markers from other markers, they briefly treat negation. They segment lexical verb roots from grammatical suffixes. They lack further segmentation of grammatical morphemes, but Hirut (Citation2007) does better in segmenting grammatical suffixes than the above.
The name ‘Kullo’ served as a name of the language, and it is mutually intelligible with Konta and Wolaita. The word ‘Kullo’ seriously irritates the people; hence, they do not want to be called by it (Fleming, Citation1976).
Dawurotsuwa has contacts with nearby languages, such as Wolaita, Gamo, Gofa, and Konta, which are mutually intelligible (Hirut, Citation2004). The language also displays regional variations, such as Gene, Waka, and Jimma. Apart from a few pronunciation differences, it is not difficult for people to understand each other from these three locations (Allan, Citation1976). On the other hand, Hirut (Citation2007) mentioned only Mes’a and Gok’a as regional variations, and the dialects show lexical variations too. A majority of the people speak Mes’a. Similarly, Tariku (Citation2010) identified two regional variations by naming the dialect spoken by Highlanders and the dialect of Lowlanders. For this article, I collected and elicited from Mes’a. They live in the Marak’a district. Mes’a speakers live in lowland areas, such as Essara and Tocha (Dawit, Citation2017).
It seems that the variation of Dawurotsuwa needs extensive study. The above studies do not mention some other variations. We find a mixed variety of Mes’a and Gok’a, which I label as Mes’agok’a, to show a mixture of the two. Even there is variation within Mes’a, such as Gurs’atso, Gadatso, and Daletso. I collected data from Gurs’atso for this study. The majority are this variant speaker within Mes’a.
The classification of Bender (Citation2000) divides the Omotic language family into TNDA and Mao. Dawurotsuwa has been classified under the TNDA branch and within the Northwest Ometic cluster, as can be seen in the family tree below ():
Figure 1. Omotic family overview, based on Bender (Citation2000).
In Dawurotsuwa, a verb comes at the end of a sentence, as in (1a); it is one of the languages whose verbs occupy the end position of a clause. The subject occurs at the beginning of the sentence, while the object follows it and precedes the verb, i.e. Subject-Object-Verb order. The language also marks cases. The subject and object carry the nominative and the absolutive cases, respectively. Clauses have freedom of order of components, mainly in speaking, subject, and object. The verb marks a person and number; a single verb can transfer a complete message. For example, in (1b), the subject does not occur in the sentence, but the verb expresses it.
Dawurotsuwa has a systematic, predictable pitch with the following two levels: high and low, and they are not contrastive (Allan, Citation1976). Alebachew (Citation2010) states it is contrastive in Dawurotsuwa and considers the language as tonal. We can see more examples to show that it is contrastive, as in (2). So, this issue needs more in-depth study, as Alebachew (Citation2010) suggests.
1.2. Dawurotsuwa verb morphology
In Dawurotsuwa, any verb form has two parts: a lexical root and a grammatical ending. For example, m- and y- are lexeme roots, as shown in (3a and b), whereas -áá-dd-i and -éé-dd-a are grammatical endings. The grammatical part expresses numbers, persons, aspects, and declarative. The morpheme -dd- expresses the perfective aspect, and -ai describes imperfective along with other functions, such as a person and number. This discussion of aspects will help to discuss the interaction of tense and aspect.
2. Methodology
This article provides a qualitative analysis of verbal predication negation in Dawurotsuwa. Various activities were undertaken to conduct this study. First, Studies related to the present contribution, which are descriptive and conceptual, were consulted. Then, appropriate phrases and sentences were prepared in English and Amharic for elicitation. Third, the data were collected from native speakers of Dawurotsuwa. In this process of data collection, paradigmatic approach, and grammaticality judgments were used as data collection techniques (Vaux & Cooper, Citation2003, pp. 104, 115). Then, the data obtained were transcribed phonemically, analyzed, and explained.
3. Morphosyntax of negation
Negation changes the truth value of a sentence, and if an affirmative is ‘true’, the negative will be immediately ‘false’. Conversely, if the negative is ‘true’, the affirmative will be ‘false’. When it occurs with other items, such as aspect, tense, etc., they influence one another (Miestamo, Citation2007, p.552).
‘Negation is the marked member of the pair < affirmation, negation>’ (de Swart, Citation2010, p. 2). Moeschler (Citation2020) also adds that morph-syntactic items are the principal prevalent means for making negation across natural languages. Many negation markers have been identified, such as adverbs, verbs, copulas, quantifiers, and affixes (Horn, Citation2010). Payne (Citation1985) presents the four types of negative construction, focusing on the status of negative markers. The first one is morphological (affixal) negatives. In this type of negation, a suffix or prefix is attached to a verb or an auxiliary (Dahl, Citation2010). The second negative marker type is particles; these show two characteristics: (i) they are independent words rather than affixes, and (ii) they are uninflected (Dahl, Citation2010). The third is negative verbs (negative auxiliaries and higher negative verbs). These can be inflected for numbers, persons, and gender depending on the language (Dahl, Citation2010). The fourth is negative nouns. These are stated as rare by Payne. But we can find languages with such expressions. This negative noun inflects for a case, number, and possession. This negative noun is not a one-word negative reply; there is another form for the negative reply (Nedyalkov, Citation1994).
According to Dahl (Citation1979), if a negative is expressed morphologically, then the negation is classified under the inflectional category of the verb; inflectional items can be a prefix, suffix, circumfixal, prosodic modification, or null modification. Although Dahl is uncertain and not found in the sample languages, he points out that languages might express negation by a change of word order. In addition, there can be languages with double or discontinuous negative markers, both in morphological circumfixal and syntactic negation (Miestamo, Citation2017). He describes discontinuous negative strategies as negative constructions where negation is expressed by (at least) two negative markers appearing on opposite sides of the verb.
Dawurotsuwa uses negative suffixes to express negation in the verbal predicate. The negative marker is suffixed to the verb stem before the person marker -a as in (4b). Look at the paradigm in below for an overview.
Table 1. Perfective declarative for the verb b- ‘to go’.
Example (4a) is a declarative main clause formed by the verbal predicate b-éé-dd-a. Its negative counterpart in (4b) is formed by the negation marker -nn- along with other elements, such as number, person, and aspect markers attached to the root b-. Example (5a) shows the same construction in the 1st person singular. The negation marker in Dawurotsuwa is -kk- for all persons except for the third person masculine, which is marked by -nn-.
In the negative paradigm in below, the root is b- which is followed by: number and person marker-perfective marker-negative marker-person and number marker. The affirmative drops the negative marker.
The last morphemes, such as -i,-u,-a,-o,-ite,-ino,-ita, and –e continuation of the person and number markers. Perfective and negative morphemes discontinuous the person and number markers; for example, áá-i morpheme is the marker of 1SG.AFF where -dd- comes in between, áá-dd-i. So, the last vowels are the continuation of the person and number markers. Each person has their respective person number and person marker.
Regarding the position of these negative markers, the negative suffixes are preceded by the aspect and person markers, and they are followed by the person and affirmative markers. Dawurotsuwa’s affirmative and negative sentences show structural differences. The negative verb in (6b) differs from their affirmative counterparts in (6a) in that they use different sets of markers: the perfective marker is -dd- in the affirmative paradigm and -béi- in the negative form; similarly, the person marker is -áá…i in the affirmative paradigm, and change to -á…e in the negative verb form. The final marker also changes in the affirmative and negative paradigms; see above for an overview. Languages like Dawuro which show structural differences beyond the presence of a negative marker, are referred to as ‘asymmetric’ languages in Miestamo’s typology of verbal negation (Miestamo, Citation2005). Thus, since the difference between affirmative and negative verb paradigms in main clauses consists of morphological changes involving TAM markers and verbal inflections, Dawurotsuwa is categorized as a language with an asymmetric type of standard negation.
As in above, the morphemes in the affirmative form, b-áá-dd-i, are not transferred to the corresponding negative by keeping their shape. For instance, the affirmative b-áá-dd-i becomes b-á-béí-kk-e. The root b- remains the same in both affirmatives and negatives. The person marker -áá-i changes to á-e. The perfective morphemes -dd- changes to -béí-. All functions in the affirmative are transferred to the corresponding negative, although the expressing morphemes are not identical. So, there is one-to-correspondence between the affirmative and negative in the functions of the morphemes. This phenomenon puts Dawurotsuwa in the class A/category under the asymmetry class.
In Dawurotsuwa, the emphasis marker is the same for both affirmative and negative, but there is a change in other functions, as in (7). The emphasis marker -ttenne in (7a) remains the same in (13b), but the subjective morpheme disappears.
3.1. Imperfective aspect and negation
This section examines the interaction between the aspect markers and the negative markers. The term ‘interaction’ refers to an effect because of the co-occurrence of the negative and the aspect markers. In describing the interactions between the negative markers and an aspect marker, the terms ‘compatible’ and ‘incompatible’ are used. The term ‘compatible’ is used when affirmative and negative aspectual sentences use the same aspect marker. When the perfective negative clause selects a marker different from the one used in the corresponding affirmative clause, the term ‘incompatible’ is used. The perfective aspect marker is morphological and occurs in a fixed position. Thus, ‘interaction’ refers to changes of aspect markers in affirmative and negative aspectual sentences.
Dawurotsuwa does not mark imperfective aspects morphologically. For instance, the 3 M declarative perfective in (8b) is suffixed with -ee-dd-a, while the corresponding 3 M declarative imperfective marks with -ee. The non-existing element in the 3 M declarative affirmative imperfective aspect appears in the corresponding perfective form, i.e. -dd-. Thus, we do not see any morpheme which solely belongs to the imperfective. The absence of the perfective marker represents the imperfective aspect. The remaining morpheme stands for number, gender, and person, as in the paradigm below. Azeb (Citation2012) calls such a phenomenon reductive morphology and stats as ‘in which a paradigmatic relation between two structures is (partly or fully) indicated by omitting from one structure a morphological element that is obligatory in the other structure’.
When a verb marked for imperfective aspect changes into a negative verb, the negative marker -kk- or -nn- is inserted between the vowels as in (9b) -á-kk-a (). But in 1SG, 2PL, 3SG.M, and 3SG.F, there is also a change in the vowels before and after the negative markers. The same imperfective morpheme in affirmative clauses appears in the corresponding negative imperfectives with a negative morpheme in the middle, as the paradigm shows below.
Table 2. Affirmative.
Affirmative declarative imperfective morphemes appear in fused form in the above paradigm, but the negative imperfective morpheme is segmented. All person in this declarative imperfective have their respective morphemes for their affirmatives; although they are fused morphemes, the negative morphemes in the imperfective affirmative are segmented.
Why is -kk- used for all persons except 3SG.M? As the paradigm shows above (), the two markers can occur in the same environment. Thus, the phonological condition cannot be the reason to explain the difference between the two. The variation is not phonologically motivated; instead, it is a lexical choice or suppletive, according to Burquest (Citation1993). I consider -kk- as the underlying representation because it occurs in larger environments than -nn-.
Table 3. Negative imperfective paradigm.
presents the imperfective aspect and their corresponding imperfective negative for all persons. As mentioned above, the absence of a perfective marker marks an imperfective in both negative and positive imperfective. Some morphemes change in the presence of the negative morpheme.
3.2. Perfective aspect and negation
Unlike the imperfective, the perfective aspect has markers in both affirmative and negative clauses. The negative and perfective aspect markers are incompatible, but the perfective morpheme for the affirmative and the perfective morpheme for the negative are different.
The perfective aspect is marked by -dd- as in (10a). In negative clauses, -béí-/-béé- expresses the perfective aspect. Thus, the Dawurotsuwa perfective aspect does not show compatibility, i.e. it is not the same marker that appears in the negatives, but it changes the morphemes that express perfective in a negative clause. The negative and perfective aspect markers co-occur. Using affirmative aspect marker -dd- in place of -béí- in negative perfective clauses is unacceptable and ungrammatical. There is also a change in the person and number markers, as illustrated in (10a) and (10b).
The above data shows that the perfective marker in the negative clause replaces the perfective morpheme in the affirmative. This replacement is an interaction between the negative and perfective aspect markers, which happens with the change of number and person markers in imperfective and perfective verb forms. The following table summarizes imperfective and perfective paradigms for negative and interrogative ().
Table 4. Imperfective and perfective markers.
4. Negation of nominalized relative verbs
Some elements follow negative suffixes like nominalizers, ablative, declarative morphemes, and interrogative markers, as in (11). In this type of nominalized relative verb, the negative morpheme -nn- serves all persons.
For instance, the morpheme -nn- serves in the nominalized verb as in (11c). The vowels/-é-/and/-aa-/before and after this negative morpheme -nn- do not indicate only the third singular masculine, but they stand for all remaining persons. When a verb loses its finiteness, the negative morpheme -nn- expresses negation.
5. Negation in ellipsis
Ellipsis is a process of omitting the elements of a sentence, which can be predictable from a context. Antecedent substitution and ellipsis have certain similarities in that they both help to avoid the repetition of words (Quirk et al., Citation1985). Ellipsis attaches the morpheme -kka to the pronouns or nominal elements in Dawurotsuwa for representing all other elements of the antecedent clause omitted as in (12 and 13) below. For instance, (12b) omits the bracketed verb phrase, and this omission is represented by suffixing this morpheme to the pronoun. The clause in (12a) is affirmative, and the ellipsis is táání-kka. This same ellipsis táání-kka serves in the negative clause as in (12b). Thus, the morpheme -kka is not an inherently negative marker.
In each of these examples, there are two clauses. The first clauses in (12a and 13a) are complete, free-standing clauses that can occur in isolation. The second clauses (12b and 13b) are deficient in some way where some elements are missing (notably a predicate and a complement), but the meaning is complete. The reply táání-kka is an equivalent to the clause reply táání-kka laas’aa m-ááddi in which no structure is missing.
6. Conclusion
This article described negation in the verbal main clause in Dawurotsuwa. The verb has two parts in Dawurotsuwa: lexical and grammatical. The verb stem suffixes the grammatical part. The negative marker is one of these grammatical parts, and the verb stem suffixes it with other items. The negative morphemes for 3SG.M and others are -nn- and -kk-, respectively. These morphemes serve for the past, present, and future. The tense is marked syntactically in Duwurotsuwa. In both imperfective and perfective aspects, these morphemes express negation. The negative marker and perfective morpheme co-occur in the clause, but the perfective marker changes in the form. The morpheme -ttenne emphasizes a negative statement. Morpheme -kka is attached to the subject for sharing the same situation in ellipsis for negative clauses.
The affirmative verbal main clause and its corresponding negative are asymmetric. This asymmetry means the difference between the affirmative and negative clauses is more than the existence of the negative marker. That may be a change of perfective morpheme, person, or number, which does not appear in affirmative ones. The asymmetry exists in other North Ometo languages, such as Gofa, Gaamo, and Wolaita (Belaywork, Citation2015; Sellassie, Citation2004, Citation2015).
| AbbreviationsFootnote1 | ||
| 1 | = | first person |
| 2 | = | second person |
| 3 | = | third person |
| ACC | = | accusative |
| AGR | = | agreement |
| COMPL | = | completive |
| CVB | = | converb |
| DECL | = | declarative |
| EMP | = | emphatic |
| F | = | feminine |
| FUT | = | future |
| GEN | = | genitive |
| IMP | = | imperative |
| INDF | = | indefinite |
| IPFV | = | imperfective |
| LOC | = | locative |
| NEG | = | negative |
| NMZ | = | nominalizer |
| PAS | = | past |
| PASS | = | passive |
| PFV | = | perfective |
| PL | = | plural |
| PROG | = | progressive |
| PRS | = | present |
| Q | = | question |
| RELZ | = | relativizer |
| SBJV | = | subjunctive |
| SFS | = | scalar focus suffix |
| SG | = | singular |
| SNM | = | sentential negation marker |
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Aklilu Abera Naba
Aklilu Abera Naba is a lecturer at Wolaita Sodo University. He is conducting his PhD in Theoretical and Descriptive Linguistics at Addis Ababa University. He is offering linguistics courses and conducting research in Omotic languages. He has interests in phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, sociolinguistics, and discourse. He is also interested in investigating early-grade reading, literacy, and language curriculum development related to linguistics.
Notes
1 Based on Leipzig rules.
References
- Alebachew, B. (2019). Morphology of Dawuro [Unpublished PhD dissertation]. Addis Ababa University.
- Alebachew B. (2010). Verb complement of Dawuro: A descriptive approach [Unpublished MA theis]. Addis Ababa University.
- Allan, J. E. (1976). Kullo. In M. L. Bender (Ed.), The non-semitic languages of Ethiopia (pp. 1–10). Michigan State University.
- Azeb, A. (2012). Omotic. In Z. Frajzyngier & E. Shay (Eds.), The Afroasiatic languages (pp. 423–504). Cambridge University Press.
- Belaywork, F. (2015). Documentation and description of Gaamo verb morphology [Unpublished MA thesis]. Addis Ababa University.
- Bender, M. L. (1976). The non-semitic languages of Ethiopia. Michigan.
- Bender, M. L. (2000). Comparative morphology of the Omotic languages. In Studies in African linguistics (p. 19). Lincom Europa.
- Burquest, D. A. (1993). Phonological analysis: A functional approach. SIL International.
- Dahl, Ö. (1979). Typology of sentential negation. Linguistics, 17(1–2), 79–106. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1979.17.1-2.79
- Dahl, Ö. (2010). Typology of negation. In L. R. Horn (Ed.), The expression of negation (pp. 9–38). De Gruyter Mouton.
- Dawit, B. (2017). Lexical study of Dawuro. LINCOM GmbH.
- de Swart, H. D. (2010). Expression and interpretation of negation: Anoptimality theory. Utrecht University.
- Dixon, R. M. W. (1997). The rise and fall of languages. Cambridge University Press.
- Fleming, H. C. (1976). Omotic overview. In M. L. Bender (Ed.), The non-semitic language of Ethiopia (pp. 299–323). African Studies Center, Michigan State University.
- Hanserud, S. (2018). Dawro verb morphology and syntax: A description. Retrieved June 10, 2023, from https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/66712/Dawro-verb-morphology-and-syntax-A-description.pdf
- Hirut, W. (2004). Notes on the North Ometo dialects: Mutual intelligibility tests and structural variations. In Y. Tsuge (Ed.), Cushitic-Omotic studies (pp.79–112). Kanazawa University.
- Hirut, W. (2007). Some aspects of the phonology and morphology of Dawuro. Follia Orientalia, 42(43), 71–122.
- Horn, L. R. (1998). Polarity sensitivity as (non)veridical dependency. John Benjamins.
- Horn, L. R. (2010). The expression of negation. Mouton de Gruyter.
- Miestamo, M. (2005). Standard negation: The negation of declarative verbal main clauses in a typological perspective. Mouton de Gruyter.
- Miestamo, M. (2007). Negation-an overview of typological research. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1(5), 552–570. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00026.x
- Miestamo, M. (2017). Negation. In Aikhenvald & Dixon (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic typology (pp. 405–439). Cambridge University Press.
- Moeschler, J. (2020). Negative predicates: Incorporated negation. In R. Vossen & G. J. Dimmendaal (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of African languages (pp. 331–340). Oxford University Press.
- Nedyalkov, I. (1994). Evenki. In P. Kahrel & R. V. Berg (Eds.), Typological studies in negation (Vol. 29, pp. 1–35). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
- Payne, J. R. (1985). Negation. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Clause structure. Cambridge University Press.
- Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Longman.
- Sellassie, C. (2004). Morphology of Gofa [Unpublished MA thesis]. Addis Ababa University.
- Sellassie, C. (2015). Documentation and Grammatical description of Gofa [Doctoral dissertation]. Addis Ababa University.
- Tariku, N. (2010). Aspects of Dawuro phonology [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Addis Ababa University.
- Vaux, B., & Cooper, J. (2003). Introduction to linguistic field methods. LINCOM Europa.
- Zeijlstra, H. (2020). Negative quantifier. In Déprez & M. T. Espinal (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of negation (pp. 407–425). Oxford University Press.