Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros10(2)Koalib imperatives and semantical...

Koalib imperatives and semantically related forms

Nicolas Quint

Résumés

Le koalib est une langue kordofanienne traditionnellement pratiquée au Soudan, dans la province du Sud-Kordofan. Cet article, dont le contenu repose sur des données de première main, constitue la première étude approfondie de la morphologie de l’impératif dans cette langue. La première partie présente la langue koalibe et fait le point sur la structure de l’article. La deuxième partie fournit des notions élémentaires de grammaire koalibe afin de rendre plus accessible la suite de l’exposé. La troisième partie aborde les principales caractéristiques de la morphologie de l’impératif prototypique en koalib, et prend en compte les polarités positive et négative. La quatrième partie traite de différentes catégories d’impératifs : (i) paradigmes utilisés en discours rapporté, (ii) atténuatifs, (iii) intensifs et (iv) verbes irréguliers. La cinquième partie porte sur deux types morphologiques sémantiquement apparentés à l’impératif proprement dit, à savoir les constructions jussives et les ordres adressés à des animaux. La conclusion souligne l’intérêt typologique tout particulier de la flexion impérative en koalib.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

1. Introduction

  • 1 I would like to dedicate this chapter to my informant and friend Radouan Shanga from Tèmnàŋ, who (...)

1Koalib1 is a Niger-Congo language (Kordofanian branch, Heibanian family), spoken by around 100,000 people living in or originating from the towns of Abri, Delami, Dere, Tongole, Umm Heitan and Umm Berembeita, and their surroundings, in the Sudanese Province of South Kordofan (Quint 2006: 3; 2009: 1). Koalib verbal morphology has hitherto not been described in any depth. In this paper, I focus on the imperative, detailing the morphological means the language uses to convey this grammatical category. The structure of this paper is as follows: in Section 2, I give some basic facts about Koalib grammar so that the reader can more easily follow what comes next. Then, in Section 3, I give and comment on the full paradigm of the positive and negative imperative, including the various subject-object combinations morphologically encoded by the language. In Section 4, I deal with other parameters that are relevant for the analysis of this category, namely imperatives in reported speech, attenuated, intensive and irregular imperatives. In Section 5, in order to give a broader picture of the domain of command in Koalib, I deal with jussive constructions, used to express a wish, and I also address non-verbal imperatives, in particular the interjections used to give commands to different animal species. In Section 6, I conclude this article by stressing the typological interest of the Koalib data for a more general understanding of the expression of commands and prohibitions in the world’s languages.

2. Some basic facts about Koalib grammar

2All paradigms and examples presented in this paper come from the central variety of Koalib (autonym ŋèrɛ́ɛɽɛ̀, anglicized as “Rere”), which is the basis of present-day standard written Koalib, and the mother tongue of Siddig Ali Karmal Kokko, my main informant.

2.1 Phonology

3The vowel system obeys strict harmony rules (Quint 2006: 39–42; 2009: 33–40). The vowels are divided into two sets, a low set, comprising five vowels /e, ɛ, a, ɔ, o/ and a high set, comprising three vowels /i, ɐ, u/. A given word can only contain vowels belonging to one and the same set (i.e., either all vowels are low, or all vowels are high). Due to these harmonic rules, most affixes containing a vowel exist in two forms: low and high. By convention, the vowels of these affixes are therefore represented as archiphonemes, namely E (standing mostly for /i, e/), A (= /a, ɐ/) and O (standing mostly for /u, o/).

4The consonant system (Quint 2006: 51–143; 2009: 49–128) is characterized by the absence of any phonological distinction between stops and fricatives, and a significant number of allophones, e.g., /p/ is realized [f] in word-initial position, [v] in intervocalic position and [p] in word-final position.

5Koalib has two phonological tones (Quint 2006: 145–165; 2009: 129–148), namely high (H, see (1)), and low (L, see (2)). It also has several contour tones, the most frequent being a falling tone (F, see (3)), which can ultimately be analyzed as a succession of a high and a low tone, i.e., F=HL.

  • 2 Most of the audio versions of the Koalib examples can be accessed through the following link: https (...)

(1)

lɔ́ny (H) ‘droplet of saliva’2

(2)

lɔ̀ny (L) ‘egg’

(3)

ŋâo (L) ‘water’

6The orthography used throughout this paper is phonologically-based and explained in detail in Quint (2006: 189–210; 2009: 169–187). The tone conventions are provided at the end of the paper. Due to the existence of various allophones for several consonantal phonemes, when deemed necessary, some orthographic forms are followed by phonetic transcriptions in order to better represent the phonetic realization of these forms.

2.2 Noun morphology

7Koalib noun morphology displays two salient characteristics: (i) the existence of a noun class system and (ii) a two-case declension.

8All nouns are necessarily associated with one or two (singular/plural pairings, see Quint 2022) of the 13 noun classes attested in the language. The noun triggers class agreement on different targets, in particular (i) various dependents of the noun (adjectives, demonstratives, genitive connector, instrumental suffix, lower numerals, and possessives (4)) inside the noun phrase, and (ii) the verb (see Section 2.3). In most nouns, the noun-class marker is also prefixed to the noun itself (4).

(4a)

kw-ór

kw-ínyí

clkw-man

clkw-poss1sg

‘my husband (lit. my man)’

(4b)

l-ɐ̀pɐ́ntì

l-ínyí

cll-teacher

cll-poss1sg

‘my teacher’

9The two-case declension of Koalib constitutes a typological rarity in Niger-Congo: it is only attested in the Heibanian family of Kordofanian. Koalib contrasts a subject and object case. The subject is unmarked (5), whereas the object is marked by means of a suffix and/or a tonal change of the subject stem (6) (Quint & Allassonnière-Tang 2022).

(5)

káaŋàl

ŋ-k-ó

kè-pèetò

sheep.s

dem-clk-prox

clk-be.white.pfv

‘This sheep is white.’

  • 3 Kwókkò is the name of the first born male in a family.

(6)

Kwókkò

kwè-m-ɛ̀εcέ

kàaŋálè

ŋ-k-ó

Kwokko

clkw-prf-see.ipfv.cfg

sheep.o

dem-clk-prox

‘Kwokko3 has seen this sheep.’

2.3 A brief overview of the verbal system

10Koalib verbal morphology is a complex, highly synthetic system, which codes principally movement, aspect and person by means of a variety of formal devices, including both affixal and tonal marking as well as vowel harmony. In this subsection, I provide a minimal amount of information about verbal morphology in order to enable the reader to understand the way imperative inflections fit into this system.

2.3.1 Indicative vs. conjunctive distinction

  • 4 The term “configuration” encompasses two main parameters, namely the argument structure (or valency (...)

11Koalib verbs comprise two main types of inflected forms: indicative and conjunctive. Indicative verbs are used in most main clauses as well as several types of subordinate clauses (e.g., relative and utterance complement clauses). Indicative verbs index the noun class of either the subject (7) or the object (8) depending on the argument configuration4 of the verb.

  • 5 Delami (South Kordofan, Sudan) is one of the main towns of the Koalib country.

(7)

nyí

kw-ɛ̀ɛlɛ́

Kálkè

s1sg

clkw-move.ipfv.cfg

Delami

‘I will go to Delami.’5

12In (7), the class marker kw- indexes the subject – human singular – of the sentence.

(8)

l-èecà-ŋ-cè

cll-see.pfv-s2sg-o3pl

‘You (sg) saw them.’

13In (8), the class marker l- indexes the object – human plural – of the sentence.

14Conjunctive verbs are used in most adverbial clauses (9) as well as some complement (10) and main clauses (9), in which case they are always introduced by a conjunction (e.g., nè- in (9)). However, conjunctive verbs can usually not be employed in isolated, nuclear main clauses such as (7)-(8) (but see Section 5.1). Furthermore, apart from a few exceptions, conjunctive verbs generally do not combine with class markers.

  • 6 When a dot is used in a Koalib sequence, it expresses that this example is sentence-final, which ha (...)

[adverbial clause]

main clause

(9)

[Mé-ny-ɛ́ɛlɛ́

Kálkè]

nè-ny-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

Kwókkò-ŋwò.6

when-s1sg-move.ipfv.cfg

Delami

then-s1sg-see.ipfv.cfg

Kwokko-o

conjunctive

conjunctive

‘When I went to Delami, I saw Kwokko.’

main clause

[complement clause]

(10)

Nyí

kwé-náŋná

[èt’

ɛ̀ɛlɛ́

Kálkè].

s1sg

clkw-want.pfv

conn

move.ipfv.cfg

Delami

indicative

conjunctive

‘I want to go to Delami.’

2.3.2 The three basic aspect-motion stems

15Nearly all verbs can appear under three different aspect-motion stems: (i) the centrifugal imperfective, (ii) the centripetal imperfective and (iii) the perfective.

16The centrifugal imperfective (or itive) is the basic form of the verb. In particular, it is the only aspect-motion stem to be lexically specified for tone (Quint 2010: 296–297, fn. 2). It implies that the action (11) or the motion (12) expressed by the verb originates from the speaker (Ferlita & Quint 2024).

(11)

Nyí

kw-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

Kwókkò-ŋwò.

s1sg

clkw-see.ipfv.cfg

Kwokko-o

‘I will see Kwokko [from the place where I am speaking].’

(12)

Nyí

kw-ɛ̀ɛlɛ́

Kálkè.

s1sg

clkw-move.ipfv.cfg

Delami

‘I will go to Delami (lit. I will move [from here] towards Delami).’

17Throughout this paper, the centrifugal imperfective is used as the citation form of verbs.

18The centripetal imperfective (or ventive) implies that the action (13) or the motion (14) expressed by the verb is oriented towards the speaker (Ferlita & Quint 2024).

(13)

Nyí

kw-èecà

Kwókkò-ŋwò.

s1sg

clkw-see.ipfv.ctp

Kwokko-o

‘I will see Kwokko [when I am there and as if looking towards the place where I am speaking now].’

(14)

Nyí

kw-èelà

kènòŋ.

s1sg

clkw-move.ipfv.ctp

here

‘I will come here (lit. I will move [from there] towards here).’

19The centripetal imperfective always has an ‑A ending, which can be considered as a centripetal (or ventive) suffix.

20The perfective is not sensitive to the direction or origin of an action (15) or a motion (16). It is also used in progressive constructions, frequently in association with a demonstrative-based copula (17).

(15)

Nyí

kw-éecá

Kwókkò-ŋwò.

s1sg

clkw-see.pfv

Kwokko-o

‘I saw Kwokko [anywhere].’

(16)

(…)

nòŋw-éecàccé

ţ-òoró

ţ-ìntù

then.s3sg‑check.ipfv.cfg

cl‑child.o

cl-move.pfv

èt’

ɐ̀rrí

áatà-ŋw.

conn

do.ipfv.cfg

what-o

‘(…) and he checked what his child intended to study (lit. then he checked his child moved (= was going) to do what).’

  • 7 Although this form displays exactly the same segmental and tonal characteristics as the centripetal (...)

(17)

Nyí

ŋ-kw-ó

kw-èecà7

Kwókkò-ŋwò.

s1sg

dem-clkw-prox

clkw-see.pfv

Kwokko-o

‘I am looking at (lit. seeing) Kwokko.’

21In most cases, the perfective is characterized by one of the following two endings: -A (69% of verbs, see (15)) or -O (29% of verbs, see ţìnt in (16)).

  • 8 Stevenson also distinguishes three basic forms of the verb in Tira (2009: 59–61) and Otoro (2009: 2 (...)

22As seen above, nearly all centripetal imperfective and perfective aspect-motion stems are marked by a specific suffix and can ultimately be broken down into a lexical root followed by an aspect-motion marker. However, the vowels of the lexical root interact with these perfective and centripetal markers and these interactions are not always easy to predict (see Table 1). Therefore, for the sake of clarity, I will henceforward consider each aspect-motion stem as a whole, without trying to separate its lexical and affixal components.8

23In Table 1, I have chosen to display the aspect-motion stems in the following order:

  1. centrifugal imperfective;
  2. (ii) perfective;
  3. (iii) centripetal imperfective.

24This order reflects a gradient of increasing morphological regularity, from centrifugal imperfective (lexical tones, many final vowels = maximum irregularity) to imperfective centripetal (no lexical tones, same final vowel = maximum regularity).

25Note also that tone is not indicated for perfective and centripetal imperfective, as these aspect-motion stems are not lexically specified for tone (contrary to centrifugal imperfective, see above). In other words, the tonal profile of both perfective and centripetal imperfective can always be explained by morphological rules.

Table 1 — Aspect-motion stems of selected verbs

  • 9 It can be shown by internal reconstruction (Quint 2006: 111–112; 2009: 100–102) that intu is a regu (...)

Aspect-motion stem

Centrifugal imperfective

Perfective

Centripetal imperfective

Meaning

àllá

ɐllu

alla

‘remove’

àpré

apro

apra

‘run’

èené ~ òoné

eena ~ oono

eena ~ oona

‘wash oneself’

èmné

emno

emna

‘eat (soft food)’

ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

eeca

eeca

‘see, look’

ɛ̀ɛlɛ́

intu9

eela

‘move’

ɛ́lŋɛ̀

ilŋitu

elŋeta

‘know’

ɛ̀lŋɛ́

elŋa

elŋa

‘sing’

íklì

iklɐ

iklitɐ

‘be green/wet’

káttò

kɐttu

katta

‘throw’

ònté

onto

onta

‘be dry’

ɔ̀ɔpɛ́

uuputu

oopeta

‘knock, crash’

úŋnì

uŋnɐ

uŋnitɐ

‘be black’

26Two other important points must be mentioned regarding aspect-motion stems: first, all three aspect-motion stems are attested both in indicative and conjunctive contexts. Second, from a morphosyntactic point of view, subject and object indices always precede imperfective stems (both centripetal and centrifugal (18)), whereas they always follow perfective stems (19).

(18)

lè-ny-c-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

cll-s1sg-o3pl-see.ipfv.cfg

‘I will see them.’

(19)

l-èecà-ny-cè

cll-see.pfv-s1pl-o3pl

‘I saw them.’

2.3.3 Derived and basic verbs

27Koalib, like many Niger-Congo languages, has a profuse system of verb extensions, each of which is illustrated by one or two typical examples in Table 2. Actually, the derived verbs make up over 80% of all verbal items attested, namely 1 991 derived verbs out of a total of 2 397 verbs in Quint & Ali Karmal Kokko (forthcoming a), i.e., 83%. Some of these extensions are characterized by specific lexical tones (Quint 2010).

Table 2 — Main verb extensions (Quint 2020: 250)

  • 10 n = number of syllables with n ≥ 1.
  • 11 For the archiphonemic notation of the vowels of affixes, see Section 2.1.
  • 12 HVHS = High Vowel Harmony Set. The causative extension generally triggers the use of vowels belongi (...)
Verb extension Form of the extension (centrifugal imperfective) Example
(basic verb > derived verb)
Segmental Tonal10

Applicative 1

(benefactive)

-ccE11 H(L)nH àé ‘die’ > ɐ́ìccí ‘die for s.o.’

Applicative 2

(malefactive)

-(A)tA H(L)n nyìimí ‘steal s.th.’ > nyíimɐ̀tɐ̀ ‘steal s.th. from s.o.’
Associative -VtE (L)nH àppé ‘carry’ > àppàté ‘carry together’
Causative -i + HVHS12 (L)nH ájlè ‘be weak’ > ɐ̀jlí ‘weaken’
Excessive -AttE (L)nH ɔ́blɛ̀ ‘be short’ > òblàtté ‘be too short’
Immediate -(t)AnnE (L)nH

ìiɗí ‘fall’ > ìiɗɐ̀nní ‘fall suddenly’;

ţùú ‘go out’ > ţùutɐ̀nní ‘go out at once’

Locative -AcE (L)nH ɽùuní ‘bring s.o. up’ > ɽùunɐ̀cí ‘bring s.o. up somewhere’
Passive -(tV)nnE (L)nH

ìppí ‘beat (tr.)’ > ìppìnní ‘be beaten’;

yɛ̀ɛ́ ‘eat (tr.)’ > yɛ̀ɛtènnɛ́ ‘be eaten’

Reciprocal -AtEcE (L)nH ɛ̀ɽnyɛ́ ‘kill’ > èɽnyàtècé ‘kill each other’

Reflexive/

middle

-VnnE/

-VtnE

(L)nH

ìppí ‘beat’ > ìppɐ̀nní ‘beat oneself’;

yɛ̀ɛ́ ‘eat (tr.)’ > ɛ̀tnɛ́ ‘eat (intr.)’

3. Standard imperative paradigm

28This section first deals with the positive imperative of intransitive, transitive and motion verbs. It then takes stock of the negative imperative.

3.1 Positive imperative

3.1.1 Intransitive verbs

  • 13 Actually, the verb èené ‘wash oneself’ is compulsorily followed by the postposition -náanà ‘ove (...)

29The complete positive imperative paradigm of the intransitive verb èené13 ‘wash oneself’ is shown in Table 3.

Table 3 — Positive imperative paradigm of the intransitive verb èené ‘wash oneself’

Speech
Participants

s.sg

Meaning

s.pl

Meaning

s2

òonò-Ø

[òonò]

LL

‘wash yourself!’

òonò-r

[òonòr]

LL

‘wash yourselves!’

s.du

s.pl

s1incl

-éené

[nḑéené]

HH

‘let’s (du) wash ourselves!’

àr-èené

[àrèené]

LLH

‘let’s (pl) wash ourselves!’

30From a morphosyntactic viewpoint, the following observations can be made: first, the Koalib imperative stands somewhat outside (or midway between) the indicative vs. conjunctive distinction. Syntactically, Koalib imperatives are indicatives in that they can be used in nuclear, isolated main clauses. However, contrary to other indicative verbs, they do not combine with noun class markers.

31Second, most Koalib verbs resort to two different aspect-motion stems (see Section 2.3.2) to produce their imperative:

  • perfective for second person imperatives (basic form òonò, see cell s2 X s.sg in Table 3 and Table 114), followed by person indices, as is the rule with the perfective stem
  • centrifugal imperfective for first person inclusive imperatives (basic form èené, see cell s1incl X s.pl in Table 3 and Table 1), preceded by person indices, as is the rule with imperfective stems

32Third, four imperative subject indices are attested in Table 3, coding four different subjects:

  • zero or Ø (s2sg)
  • -r [ɾ] (s2pl)
  • nţ(É)- + H+ (s1incl.du), whose high tone spreads onto the next low syllable(s) situated on the right of the s1incl.du index (20)
  • àr- (s1incl.pl)

33For the s1incl.du form, (20a) details all morphological components at stake (see the segmentation in the first line and the glosses in the third line) as well as their associated tone (in the second line). In (20b), we can see that the high tone H+ of the s1incl.du index nţÉ- spreads onto the first syllable of the ipfv.cfg aspect-motion stem èené, which becomes éené. The high-toned vowel of nţÉ‑ is then merged with the high-toned vowel ée of the first syllable of éené, resulting in the HH tonal scheme actually observed for the s1incl.du imperative (20c).

(20a)

nţÉ-èené

H+-LH

s1incl.du-wash.oneself.ipfv.cfg.imp

(20b)

> nţÉ-éené

H-HH

(20c)

> -éené

HH

‘Let’s (du) wash ourselves!’

34Fourth, although there is an obvious morphological split between second person and first person imperatives (also called “hortatives”; see van der Auwera et al. 2004: 49–52; van der Auwera et al. 2013), I have chosen to consider that all these forms belong to the imperative paradigm, both for semantic and morphological reasons, as outlined in the following.

  • 15 Note that this distinction is not found for object indices (see Section 3.1.2), where there is only (...)

35First, Koalib may distinguish up to three different subject markers for first person non-singular, namely dual inclusive (21), plural inclusive (22) and exclusive (23).15

(21)

kwé--Ø-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

clkw-s1incl.du-o3sg-see.ipfv.cfg

‘We (= you (sg) and me) will see him/her/it.’

(22)

kwè-r-Ø-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

clkw-s1incl.pl-o3sg-see.ipfv.cfg

‘We (= you (pl) and me) will see him/her/it.’

(23)

kwé-ny-Ø-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

clkw-s1excl-o3sg-see.ipfv.cfg

‘We (= s/he ~ they and me) will see him/her/it.’

36Nevertheless, only two of these possibilities are attested in the imperative paradigm, namely the inclusive forms, because they include a second person:

  • inclusive dual = ‘you (sg) and me’, i.e., |s1sg + s2sg|
  • inclusive plural = ‘you (all) (pl) and me’, i.e., |s1sg + s2pl|
  • 16 For the general tendency of many of the world’s languages to have only inclusive first person non-s (...)

37In other words, as Koalib (and other languages that distinguish inclusive from exclusive first person non-singular) shows, a command given to a first person plural is finally a command given to a second person (associated with the speaker). This is why the exclusive imperative does not exist in Koalib: the notion of command is not compatible with the exclusion of the second person.16

38Second, from a strictly morphological point of view, a rhotic element r [ɾ] appears in the subject indices of both the stricto sensu second person plural commands (e.g., òonòr ‘wash yourselves!’) and the inclusive plural commands, which by definition involve the speaker plus a second person plural entity (e.g., r-èené ‘let’s (pl) wash ourselves!’). This r [ɾ] is a striking commonality between the two subject indices. At least in synchrony, this element can reasonably be analyzed as a common plural marker associated with second person plural both in second person plural commands and in plural inclusive commands.

39The reasons given above justify my choice to include the following forms in the same columns:

  • s2sg (second person singular) commands and incl.du (inclusive dual) commands, which both semantically involve a second person singular entity
  • s2pl (second person plural) commands and incl.pl (inclusive plural) commands on the other hand, which both semantically involve a second person plural entity17

40Furthermore, the fact that second person and first person inclusive imperatives can be combined with the same first negator (neg1) tté~tt(è), which is not attested with any other verbal form (see Section 3.2), is a third argument in favor of considering second person and first person inclusive imperatives as belonging to a common imperative paradigm.

3.1.2 Transitive verbs

41Transitive verbs of all verbal paradigms, including the imperative, mark both the subject and the object morphologically, which results in a richer set of forms. The complete positive imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’ is shown in Table 4.

Table 4 — Positive imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’

  • 18 In Table 4, the s1incl.pl person index appears as ɛ̀r‑ (instead of àr‑ in Table 3) because the vow (...)

Speech

Participants

s.sg

Meaning

s.pl

Meaning

s2.o1sg

èec-Ø-nyé

[èeʒáɲé]

LHH

‘look (sg) at me!’

èecr‑nyé

[èeʒáɾɲé]

LHH

‘look (pl) at me!’

s2.o1pl

èec-Ø-ny-cé

[èeʒáɲɟé]

LHH

‘look (sg) at us!’

èecr‑ny‑cé

[èeʒáɾɲɟé]

LHH

‘look (pl) at us!’

s2.o3sg

èecà-Ø-Ø

[èeʒà]

LL

‘look (sg) at him/her/it/NP!’

èecà-r-Ø

[èeʒàɾ]

LL

‘look (pl) at him/her/it/NP!’

s2.o3pl

èecà-Ø-Ø-cè

[èeʒàʒè]

LL

‘look (sg) at them!’

èecà-r-Ø-cè

[èeʒàɾʒè]

LLB

‘look (pl) at them!’

s.du

s.pl

s1incl.o3sg

-Ø-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

[nḑɛ́ɛʒɛ́]

HH

‘let’s (du) look at him/her/it/NP!’

ɛ̀r18-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

[ɛ̀ɾɛ̀ɛʒɛ́]

LLH

‘let’s (pl) look at him/her/it/NP!’

s1incl.o3pl

nţé-Ø-c-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

[nḑéʒɛ́ɛʒɛ́]

HHH

‘let’s (du) look at them!’

ɛ̀r-Ø-c-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

[ɛ̀ɾʒɛ̀ɛʒɛ́]

LLH

‘let’s (pl) look at them!’

42As a comparison of Tables 3 and 4 shows, the subject indices are the same for transitive and intransitive verbs. In addition, three object indices are attested on transitive verbs:

  1. zero or Ø (o3sg)
  2. -ny(É) (o1sg) + HH+, i.e., a floating high tone h that combines with the syllable situated on the left of the o1sg index and a high tone H+, which spreads onto the low syllable(s) situated on the right of the o1sg index
  3. -c(E) (o.pl)

43These three indices encode four different objects, which always follow the subject indices. o3sg and o1sg are encoded by a simple index, as illustrated by the s2pl.o3sg (24) and s2sg.o1sg (25) imperatives respectively.

(24)

èecà-r-Ø

look.pfv.imp-s2pl-o3sg

‘Look (pl) at him/her/it/NP!’

(25a)

èecà-Ø-nyÉ

LL-Ø-HH+

look.pfv.imp-s2sg-o1sg

(25b)

> èecá-nyé

LHH

‘Look (sg) at me!’

44(25a) details all morphological components of the form at stake as well as their associated tone. In (25b), we can see that the floating high tone h of the o1sg index ‑nyÉ associates with the last syllable of the s2 imperative stem èecà, resulting in the LHH tonal scheme actually observed for this form.

  • 19 For the sake of simplicity, outside of this Section 3.1.2, when ‑c(E) codes o3pl, it is glossed as (...)

45The other two objects, o3pl and o1pl, are composite indices. o3pl is encoded by o3sg + o.pl = zero + ‑c(E) = ‑c(E),19 as illustrated by the s1incl.du.o3pl imperative in (26).

  • 20 nst = not specified for tone.

(26a)

nţÉ-Ø-cE-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H+-Ø-nst20-LH

s1incl.du-o3sg-o.pl-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

(26b)

> nţÉ-cÉ-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

H-H-HH

(26c)

> nţé-c-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

HHH

‘Let’s (du) look at them!’

46(26a) details all morphological components of the form at stake as well as their associated tone. In (26b), we can see that the high tone H+ of the s1incl.du index nţÉ‑ spreads onto the o.pl index ‑cE (which becomes ‑cÉ) and the first syllable of the ipfv.cfg aspect-motion stem ɛ̀ɛcɛ́, which becomes ɛ́ɛcɛ́. The high-toned vowel of ‑cÉ then merges with the high-toned vowel ɛ́ɛ of the first syllable of ɛ́ɛcɛ́, resulting in the HHH tonal scheme actually observed for the s1incl.du.o3pl imperative (26c).

47o1pl is coded by o1sg + o.pl = ‑ny(É) + HH+ + ‑c(E) = ‑nycÉ + HH+ (27), as illustrated by the s2pl.o1pl imperative in (27).

(27a)

èecà-r-nyÉ-cE

LL-Ø-HH+-nst

look.pfv.imp-s2pl-o1sg-o.pl

(27b)

> èecár-nyÉ-cÉ

LH-H-H

(27c)

> èec-r-ny-cé

LHH

‘Look (pl) at us!’

48(27a) details all morphological components of the form at stake as well as their associated tone. In (27b), we can see that the floating high tone h of the o1sg index ‑nyÉ associates with the last syllable of the s2 imperative stem èecà, whereas the second high tone H+ of the o1sg index ‑nyÉ spreads onto the o.pl index ‑cE, which becomes ‑cÉ. The high-toned vowel of ‑nyÉ is then dropped and its high tone merges with the high tone of ‑cÉ, resulting in the LHH tonal scheme actually observed for the s2pl.o1pl imperative (27c).

3.1.3 Motion verbs

49In the case of motion verbs, all three aspect-motion stems are involved in imperative morphology, as can be seen from the imperative of the intransitive verb ɛ̀ɛlɛ́ ‘move’ (Table 5).

Table 5 — Positive imperative paradigm of the intransitive motion verb ɛ̀ɛlɛ́ ‘move’

Speech
Participants

Oriented motion

s.sg

Meaning

s.pl

Meaning

Aspect-motion stem

s2

cfg

ntù-Ø

[ndù]

L

‘go (= move from here) (sg)!’

ntì-r

[ndìr]

LL

‘go (pl)!’

pfv

s2

ctp

èelà-Ø

[èelà]

LL

‘come (= move towards here) (sg)!’

èelà-r

[èelàɾ]

LL

‘come (pl)!’

ipfv.ctp

s.du

s.pl

s1incl

cfg

-ɛ́ɛlɛ́

[nḑɛ́ɛlɛ́]

HH

‘let’s (du) go (= move from here)!’

ɛ̀r-ɛ̀ɛlɛ́

[ɛ̀ɾɛ̀ɛlɛ́]

LLH

‘let’s (pl) go!’

ipfv.cfg

50In sum, motion verbs have second person centripetal imperatives that are not attested for other verbs. Note that the centripetal imperative is not compatible with s1incl, probably due to semantic restrictions. Indeed, as (i) Koalib s1incl imperatives necessarily include a s1sg (see above), and as (ii) a centripetal stem is associated with a motion oriented towards the speaker, i.e., s1sg, I cannot give an order to myself (plus a second person) to come to the place where I presently am.

  • 21 What I call here “oriented motion” in Koalib can reasonably be considered as a case of associated m (...)

51The special treatment of motion verbs in the Koalib imperative paradigm is a clear indication of the importance of oriented motion21 in this language.

3.2 Negative imperative (prohibitive)

  • 22 As transitive verbs, which include both subject and object indices, have a wider range of forms tha (...)
  • 23 The negative imperative forms build on their positive counterparts and the negation does not have a (...)

52The complete negative imperative paradigm of the transitive22 verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’ is shown in Table 6.23

Table 6 — Negative imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’

Speech
Participants

s.sg

Meaning

s.pl

Meaning

s2.o1sg

tt-êecányé mâj

[têeʒáɲé mâc]

FHH + F

‘don’t (sg) look at me!’

tt-êecárnyé mâj

[têeʒáɾɲé mâc]

FHH + F

‘don’t (pl) look at me!’

s2.o1pl

tt-êecánycé mâj

[têeʒáɲɟé mâc]

FHH + F

‘don’t (sg) look at us!’

tt-êecárnycé mâj

[têeʒáɾɲɟé mâc]

FHH + F

‘don’t (pl) look at us!’

s2.o3sg

tt-èecà mâj

[tèeʒà mâc]

LL + F

‘don’t (sg) look at him/her/it/NP!’

tt-êecàr mâj

[têeʒàɾ mâc]

FL + F

‘don’t (pl)
look at him/her/it/NP!’

s2.o3pl

tt-èecàcè mâj

[tèeʒàʒè mâc]

LL + F

‘don’t (sg) look at them!’

tt-êecàrcè mâj

[têeʒàɾʒè mâc]

FLL + F

‘don’t (pl) look at them!’

s.du

s.pl

s1incl.o3sg

tté nţ-ɛ́ɛcɛ́ mâj

[ténḑɛ́ɛʒɛ́ mâc]

HHH + F

‘let’s (du) not look at him/her/it/NP!’

tt-ɛ̀r-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

[tɛ̀ɾɛ̀ɛʒɛ́ mâc]

LLH + F

‘let’s (pl) not look at him/her/it/NP!’

s1incl.o3pl

tté nţéc-ɛ́ɛcɛ́ mâj

[ténḑéʒɛ́ɛʒɛ́ mâc]

HHHH + F

‘let’s (du) not look at them!’

tt-ɛ̀rc-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

[tɛ̀ɾʒɛ̀ɛʒɛ́ mâc]

LLH + F

‘let’s (pl) not look at them!’

53In the imperative paradigm (as in most other verb inflections), Koalib resorts to a double negation strategy, and complies with the following morphological formula (Figure 1).

Figure 1 — Syntactic formula of negative imperatives

Neg1 + positive imperative + neg2

54The first negator (neg1) is tté~tt(è), obviously related to the habitual marker (à)tté~(à)ttè. The use of this first negator is limited to the imperative. The second negator (neg2) in the imperative, as well as in most other clauses, is mâj. This element is clause-final, i.e., an NP (28) or other elements can be inserted between the verb and mâj.

(28)

tté

nţ-Ø-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

Kwókkò-ŋwó

mâj

neg1

s1incl.du-o3sg-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

Kwókkò-o

neg2

‘Let’s (du) not look at Kwokko!’

55From a tonal point of view, the first negator has two different realizations depending on the subject-object combination involved. First, with s2sg.o3 (29) and s1incl.pl (see shaded cells in Table 6), the first negator tt(è) is low-toned and does not interact with the tone of the positive imperative.

(29a)

ttè

èecàcè

mâj

neg1

look.pfv.imp.s2sg.o3pl

neg2

(29b)

> tt-èecàcè

mâj

‘Don’t (sg) look at them!’

56Second, with the other subject-object combinations, the first negator tt(é) is high-toned, and its high tone spreads onto the neighboring syllable, generating the falling tones (F = H+L) observed for the vowel-initial s2.o1 (30) and s2pl.o3 imperatives, whereas the consonant-initial s1incl.du forms maintain the original high tone of the positive imperative.

(30a)

tté

èecárny

mâj

H

LHH

F

neg1

look.pfv.imp.s2pl.o1sg

neg2

(30b)

> tt-êecárny

mâj

FHH

F

‘Don’t (pl) look at me!’

  • 24 Note that the link between negative imperative and habitual morphology seems to be typologically qu (...)

57I cannot account for this differential tone behavior of the first negator. However, this tonal particularity is a strong argument in favor of a link between the first imperative negator and the habitual marker, as the habitual marker displays either a low or high tone for exactly the same subject-object combinations as the negative imperative (31)-(32).24 In (31), ttè has a low tone just like in the corresponding subject-object combination of the negative imperative (see cell s2.o3pl X s.sg in Table 6). In (32), tté has a high tone just like in the corresponding subject-object combination of the negative imperative (see cell s2.o3sg X s.pl in Table 6).

(31)

lè-ttè-Ø-c-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

cll-hab-s2sg-o3pl-see.ipfv.cfg

‘You (sg) usually see them.’ [s2sg.o3pl]

(32a)

kwè-tt(é)-Ø-Ø-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

clkw-hab-s2pl-o3sg-see.ipfv.cfg

(32b)

> kwètt-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

‘You (pl) usually see him/her/it/NP.’ [s2pl.o3sg]

  • 25 As the forms of the auxiliary variant of the negative imperative differ significantly from the posi (...)

58Apart from the forms given in Table 6, another possible formation is attested for s1incl negative imperatives, as shown in Table 7.25

Table 7 — Alternative s1incl negative imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’

Speech Partici­pants

s.du

Meaning

s.pl

Meaning

s1incl.

o3sg

-Ø-ɛ́ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj [nḑɛ́ɛrɛ̀ ðɛ̀ɛʒɛ́ mâc]

‘let’s (du) not look at him/her/it/NP!’

ɛ̀r-Ø-ɛ́ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj [ɛ̀ɾɛ́ɛrɛ̀ ðɛ̀ɛʒɛ́ mâc]

‘let’s (pl) not look at him/her/it/NP!’

s1incl.

o3pl

nţé-c-ɛ́ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj [nḑéʒɛ́ɛrɛ̀ ðɛ̀ɛʒɛ́ mâc]

‘let’s (du) not
look at them!’

ɛ̀r-c-ɛ́ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj [ɛ̀ɾʒɛ́ɛrɛ̀ ðɛ̀ɛʒɛ́ mâc]

‘let’s (pl) not
look at them!’

59This second s1incl negative imperative is an auxiliary construction, based on the verb ɛ́ɛrɛ̀ ‘be missing, finish’, which is also used as a first negator in non-imperative, subordinate clauses. This negative imperative auxiliary construction complies with the following morphological formula (Figure 2).

Figure 2 — Syntactic formula of s1incl negative imperatives whose neg1 is the auxiliary ɛ́ɛrɛ̀

s-o-neg1(=aux) + conn + main.verb.ipfv.cfg + neg2

60The s1incl.du.o3pl combination is glossed in (33) to illustrate this formula.

(33)

nţé-c-ɛ́ɛrɛ̀

t’

ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

s1incl.du-o3pl-aux(=neg1).ipfv.cfg

conn

look.ipfv.cfg

neg2

‘Let’s (du) not look at them!’

4. Other types of imperatives

4.1 Reported speech

  • 26 The use of hyphens in Table 8 is orthographically based and follows the rules given in footnote 23 (...)

61Koalib marks reported speech on most verb forms, by means of a ‑Ê morpheme, which, in many cases, only surfaces as tonal changes of the verb. Koalib imperatives, when used in utterance complement clauses (Cristofaro 2003: 108–109) and introduced, for example, by nòŋw-àaré: (…) ‘and s/he said: (…)’, are regularly marked as reported imperatives. The forms of positive and negative reported imperatives are given in Tables 8-10.26

Table 8 — Reported positive imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’, compared to the non-reported imperative

s.sg

s.pl

Speech

Participants

Non-reported

Reported

Non-reported

Reported

s2.o1sg

èecányé

èecányê

èecárnyé

èecárnyê

s2.o1pl

èecánycé

èecánycê

èecárnycé

èecárnycê

s2.o3sg

èecà

èecâ

èecàr

èecàr

s2.o3pl

èecàcè

èecàcê

èecàrcè

èecàrcê

s.du

s.pl

s1incl.o3sg

nţ-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

nţ-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

ɛ̀r-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

ɛ̀r-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

s1incl.o3pl

nţéc-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

nţéc-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

ɛ̀rc-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

ɛ̀rc-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

62The formation of reported positive imperatives follows relatively clear rules. As can be easily verified in Table 8, the reported speech morpheme (rep) ‑ regularly follows the person indices. For second person (s2) imperatives, which are based on the perfective stem of the verb, ‑ is suffixed to the non-reported imperative, as person indices always follow the perfective stem (see Section 2.3.2). For first person (s1incl) imperatives, which are based on an imperfective stem, ‑ is inserted between the person indices and the verb stem, as person indices always precede imperfective stems (see Section 2.3.2).

63Tonally, the reported speech morpheme ‑ (rep) interacts in two main ways with its environment.

64Context A: When ‑Ê is preceded by a low-toned syllable (s2.o3 and s1incl.pl imperatives), the falling tone F of ‑Ê is maintained and three cases can be distinguished.

65Case 1: When ‑Ê is preceded by a vowel (s2.o3 imperatives other than s2pl.o3sg), ‑Ê merges with this vowel, which acquires a falling tone, as illustrated by the s2sg.o3pl imperative in (34).

(34a)

èecà-Ø-cE-

LL-Ø-nst-F

look.pfv.imp-s2sg-o3pl-rep

(34b)

èecà-cÈ-

LL-L-F

(34c)

> èecàc

LLF

‘(and s/he said:) Look (sg) at them!’

66Case 2: When ‑Ê is preceded by a word-final consonant (s2pl.o3sg imperative), it is directly suffixed to this consonant, as illustrated in (35).

(35a)

èecà-r-Ø-

look.pfv.imp-s2pl-o3sg-rep

(35b)

> èecàr

‘(and s/he said:) Look (pl) at him/her/it/NP!’

67Case 3: When ‑Ê is preceded by a word-medial consonant (s1incl.pl imperatives), the falling tone of ‑Ê associates with the following syllable, as illustrated by the s1incl.pl.o3pl imperative in (36).

(36a)

ɛ̀r-Ø-cE-Ê-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

L-Ø-nst-F-LH

s1incl.pl-o3sg-o.pl-rep-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

(36b)

ɛ̀r-cÈ-Ê-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

L-L-F-LH

(36c)

ɛ̀rc-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

L-FH

‘(and s/he said:) Let’s (pl) look at them!’

68Context B: When ‑Ê is preceded by a high-toned syllable (s2.o1 and s1incl.du imperatives), the falling tone of ‑ is replaced by a low tone, i.e., . The appearance of this low tone can be explained by a phonological rule whereby falling tones tend to be “squashed” (realized as low tones) when preceded by a high tone (Quint 2006: 146–147; 2009: 130–131). Then two cases can be distinguished.

69Case 1: When ‑Ê is preceded by a vowel (s2.o1 and s1incl.du.o3sg imperatives), once it is lowered to ‑ by the high tone (H) of the preceding vowel, it associates with H to produce a falling tone, as illustrated by the s2sg.o1sg and s1incl.du.o3sg imperatives in (37) and (38), respectively.

(37a)

èecà-Ø-nyÉ-

LL-HH+-F

look.pfv.imp-s2sg-o1sg-rep

(37b)

> èecányé-

LH-H+||-L

(37c)

> èecány

LHF

‘(and s/he said:) Look (sg) at me!’

  • 27 For the details of the tonal scheme of the non-reported s2sg.o1sg imperative, see (25).

70(37a) details all morphological components of the form at stake as well as their associated tone. In (37b), we can see that the falling tone of the reported speech morpheme ‑ is squashed by the high tone H+ of the preceding o1sg index ‑nyÉ and replaced by a low tone (‑).27 This low tone blocks (||) the spread of the high tone H of the o1sg index. The low-toned reported speech morpheme ‑È is then merged with the high-toned vowel of the o1sg index, resulting in the LHF (with F = H+L) tonal scheme actually observed for the reported s2sg.o1sg imperative (37c).

(38a)

nţÉ-Ø-Ê-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H+-F-LH

s1incl.du-o3sg-rep-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

(38b)

> nţÉ--ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H+-||L-LH

(38c)

> nţ-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

FH

‘(and s/he said:) Let’s (du) look at him/her/it/NP!’

71(38a) details all morphological components of the form at stake as well as their associated tone. In (38b), we can see that the falling tone of the reported speech morpheme ‑ is squashed by the high tone H+ of the s1incl.du index nţÉ‑ and replaced by a low tone (‑). This low tone blocks (||) the spread of the high tone H of the s1incl.du index, and the lexical tone LH of the ipfv.cfg aspect-motion stem ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ is retained. The low-toned reported speech morpheme ‑È is then merged with the low-toned vowel ɛ̀ɛ of the first syllable of ɛ̀ɛcɛ́, resulting in the FH (with F = H+L) tonal scheme actually observed for the reported s1incl.du.o3sg imperative (38c).

72Case 2: When ‑Ê is preceded by a consonant (s1incl.du.o3pl imperative), once it is lowered to ‑ by the high tone (H) of the preceding syllable, it remains low (39).

(39a)

nţÉ-Ø-cE-Ê-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H+-nst-F-LH

s1incl.du-o3sg-o.pl-rep-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

(39b)

> nţÉ-c--ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H+-||L-LH

(39c)

> nţéc-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H-LH

‘(and s/he said:) Let’s (du) look at them!’

73(39a) details all morphological components of the form at stake as well as their associated tone. In (39b), we can see how the falling tone of the reported speech morpheme ‑ is squashed by the high tone H+ of the s1incl.du index nţÉ‑ and replaced by a low tone (). This low tone blocks (||) the spread of the high tone H of the s1incl.du index, and the lexical tone LH of the ipfv.cfg aspect-motion stem ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ is retained. The low-toned reported speech morpheme ‑È is then merged with the low-toned vowel ɛ̀ɛ of the first syllable of ɛ̀ɛcɛ́, resulting in the HLH tonal scheme actually observed for the reported s1incl.du.o3pl imperative (39c).

Table 9 — Reported negative imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’, compared with non-reported negative imperative

s.sg

s.pl

Speech

Participants

Non-reported

Reported

Non-reported

Reported

s2.o1sg

tt-êecányé mâj

tt-êecány mâj

tt-êecárnyé mâj

tt-êecárny mâj

s2.o1pl

tt-êecánycé mâj

tt-êecányc mâj

tt-êecárnycé mâj

tt-êecárnyc mâj

s2.o3sg

tt-èecà mâj

tt-ec mâj

tt-êecàr mâj

tt-êecàr mâj

s2.o3pl

tt-èecàcè mâj

tt-ecàc mâj

tt-êecàrcè mâj

tt-êecàrc mâj

s.du

s.pl

s1incl.o3sg

tté nţ-ɛ́ɛcɛ́ mâj

tté nţ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀r-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀r-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́ mâj

s1incl.o3pl

tté nţéc-ɛ́ɛcɛ́ mâj

tté nţéc-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀rc-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀rc-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́ mâj

74Morphologically, the reported negative imperative can be characterized as follows.

75For s2sg.o3, the reported speech is marked twice, by a first and a second falling tone. The first falling tone (from an underlying reported speech morpheme ) follows the first negator tt(è). This marking of the first negator for reported speech could be due to a verbal origin of tt(è), which might be traced back to an old grammaticalized auxiliary (reminiscent of ɛ́ɛrɛ̀, see Section 3.2), whose verbal status is still perceptible in present-day Koalib. The second falling tone (from another morpheme) is suffixed to the inflected verb in exactly the same way as for the positive reported imperative (see Table 8).

76The double reported speech marking of s2sg.o3 negative imperatives is illustrated by the s2sg.o3pl imperative in (40).

(40a)

ttè-

èecàcè

mâj

L-F

LLL-F

F

neg1-rep

look.pfv.imp.s2sg.o3pl-rep

neg2

(40b)

> tt-ecàc

mâj

FLF

F

‘(and s/he said:) Don’t (sg) look at them!’

77It is quite probable, although synchronically unprovable with the available data, that the s2pl.o3 negative imperatives are also marked twice for reported speech, as illustrated by the s2pl.o3sg imperative in (41).

(41a)

tté-*

èecàr-Ê

mâj

H-F

LL-F

F

neg1-rep

look.pfv.imp.s2pl.o3pl-rep

neg2

(41b)

> tté-*

èecàr

mâj

H-L

LLF

F

(41c)

> tt-ecàr

mâj

FLF

F

‘(and s/he said:) Don’t (pl) look at him/her/it/NP!’

78The first falling contour tone of tt-êecàrê (41c) might come from a squashed reported speech morpheme ‑, which would have been lowered to ‑ by the preceding high tone of neg1 tté. However, the same contour tone is observed in the non-reported speech form (see Table 9) and the presence of an underlying ‑Ê after neg1 tté can therefore not be proven, although the fact that this morpheme does exist in s2sg.o3 reported speech negative imperatives renders the hypothesis plausible.

79For s2.o1 imperatives, the contrast between non-reported and reported speech forms is more difficult to explain. The initial modulation, which also exists in non-reported speech, could result from a squashed underlying reported speech morpheme, as hypothesized for s2pl.o3 imperatives (see (41) and the discussion thereof). But, if we consider that negative imperatives seem to be directly derived from their positive counterparts (see Section 3.2), it is quite surprising to observe a final low tone on negative forms, contrasting with a final falling tone on positive forms (42). At present, I cannot satisfactorily account for these differences between positive and negative reported imperatives.

(42a)

èecárnyê

‘(and s/he said:) Look (pl) at me!’ (positive)

(42b)

tt-êecárny

mâj

neg1-look.pfv.imp.s2pl.o1sg.rep

neg2

‘(and s/he said:) Don’t (pl) look at me!’ (negative)

80All s1incl forms have in common that they are marked only once by the reported speech morpheme ‑, which, as happens with positive reported imperatives (see Table 8), is placed between the person indices and the verb stem. The negative forms of s1incl imperatives are directly derived from their positive counterparts, in conformity with Figure 1 (see Section 3.2). The only exception is the s1pl.o3sg imperative, where there is a tonal contrast between the positive and negative reported forms (43).

(43a)

nţ-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

FH

‘(and s/he said:) Let’s (du) look at him/her/it/NP!’ (positive)

(43b)

tté

nţ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

H

LH

F

neg1

s1incl.du.o3sg.rep-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

neg2

‘(and s/he said:) Let’s (du) not look at him/her/it/NP!’ (negative)

81Two explanations may account for this contrast.

82Syllabic explanation: with an extra syllable (=neg1 tté) for the negative form, the falling F contour tone of the positive reported imperative is split into two (F > H+L) and the high tone H associates (and merges) with the preceding high tone of tté, resulting in a HLH tonal scheme of the neg1+verb complex, which mirrors the HHLH tonal scheme of the s1incl.du.o3pl reported negative imperative.

83Tonal explanation: as has been seen previously in various examples (37)-(39), the high tone of the first negator tté (43b) may have squashed the falling tone ɛ̂ɛ of the positive reported s1incl.du.o3sg imperative nţ-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́ (43a).

84Reported forms are also attested for the auxiliary negative construction of the s1incl imperatives (compare Table 7 and Table 10).

Table 10 — Reported negative imperative paradigm of the s1incl auxiliary construction of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’

s.du

s.pl

Speech

Participants

Non-reported

Reported

Non-reported

Reported

s1incl.o3sg

nţ-ɛ́ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

nţ-ɛ᷉ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

ɛ̀r-ɛ́ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

ɛ̀r-ɛ᷉ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

s1incl.o3pl

nţéc-ɛ́ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

nţéc-ɛ̌ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

ɛ̀rc-ɛ́ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

ɛ̀rc-ɛ᷉ɛrɛ̀ t’ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

85In these forms, the reported speech marker is inserted between the pronominal indices and the verb stem of the auxiliary ɛ́ɛrɛ̀ (see Table 7 in Section 3.2).

86For s1incl.du.o3sg, the falling tone of the reported speech marker ‑ is squashed by the H+ tone of the subject index (44b), and a sequence H (subject index) + L (from the squashed reported speech marker ‑) precedes the H lexical tone of the auxiliary ɛ́ɛrɛ̀, resulting in the complex contour tone h͡lh ( ᷉) observed on the first vowel ɛ᷉ɛ of the auxiliary ɛ᷉ɛrɛ̀ (44c).

(44a)

nţÉ-Ø--ɛ́ɛrɛ̀

t’

ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

H+-Ø-F-HL

LH

F

s1incl.du-o3sg-rep-aux.ipfv.cfg

conn

look.ipfv.cfg

neg2

(44b)

> nţÉ--ɛ́ɛrɛ̀

t’

ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

H-L-HL

LH

F

(44c)

> nţ-ɛ᷉ɛrɛ̀

t’

ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

h͡lhL

LH

F

‘(and s/he said:) Let’s (pl) not look at him/her/it/NP!’

87For s1incl.du.o3pl, the tone process is similar to s1incl.du.o3sg, but for the fact that the high tone H of the sequence HLH (45b) associates (and merges) with the preceding high tone of the s1incl.du person index nţÉ‑ (compare with (43) for a similar tonal behaviour), hence the rising contour tone R (=LH) observed on the first vowel ɛ̌ɛ of the auxiliary ɛ̌ɛrɛ̀ (45c).

(45a)

nţÉ-cE--ɛ́ɛrɛ̀

t’

ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

H+-nst-F-HL

LH

F

s1incl.du-o3pl-rep-aux.ipfv.cfg

conn

look.ipfv.cfg

neg2

(45b)

> nţÉ-cÉ--ɛ́ɛrɛ̀

t’

ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

H-H-L-HL

LH

F

(45c)

> nţé-cɛ̌ɛrɛ̀

t’

ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

H-R-L

LH

F

‘(and s/he said:) Let’s (du) not look at them!’

88For s1incl.pl, as illustrated by the s1incl.pl.o3sg imperative in (46), the falling tone (F = H+L) of the reported speech morpheme surfaces before the H lexical tone of the auxiliary ɛ́ɛrɛ̀ (46a), resulting in the complex contour tone h͡lh ( ᷉) (= F+H) observed on the first vowel ɛ᷉ɛ of the auxiliary ɛ᷉ɛrɛ̀ (46b).

(46a)

àr-Ø--ɛ́ɛrɛ̀

t’

ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

L-Ø-F-HL

LH

F

s1incl.pl-o3sg-rep-aux.ipfv.cfg

conn

look.ipfv.cfg

neg2

(46b)

> ɛ̀r-ɛ᷉ɛrɛ̀

t’

ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

L-h͡lhL

LH

F

‘(and s/he said:) Let’s (pl) not look at him/her/it/NP!’

4.2 Attenuated imperative

89Koalib uses a -ttÊ suffix to attenuate the force of a command (47).

(47a)

àapà

ŋâo

bring.pfv.imp.s2sg.o3sg

water.o

‘Bring water!’ (plain imperative)

(47b)

àapà-ttê

ŋâo

bring.pfv.imp.s2sg.o3sg-att

water.o

‘Please bring water!, Would you be so kind as to bring water?’ (attenuated imperative)

  • 28 The s1incl auxiliary constructions (see Tables 7 and 10) are not documented in their attenuated for (...)

90Table 11 provides the paradigm of the attenuated positive imperative.28

Table 11 — Attenuated positive imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’, compared with the plain imperative

  • 29 In Table 11, I have highlighted in bold the extra-segments of the attenuative morphology as well as (...)
  • 30 In Table 11, there is a difference regarding the vowel of the s1incl.pl index (plain ɛ̀r‑ vs. atten (...)

s.sg

s.pl

Speech

Participants

Plain

Attenuated

Plain

Attenuated

s2.o1sg

èecányé

èecányttè

èecárnyé

èecárnyéttè29

s2.o1pl

èecánycé

èecánycéttè

èecárnycé

èecárnycéttè

s2.o3sg

èecà

èecàttê

èecàr

èecàrttê

s2.o3pl

èecàcè

èecàc(è)ttê

èecàrcè

èecàrcèttê

s.du

s.pl

s1incl.o3sg

nţ-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

nţétt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

ɛ̀r-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

àrtt-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́30

s1incl.o3pl

nţéc-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

nţéc(é)tt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

ɛ̀rc-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

àrcètt-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

91As the attenuative marker begins with a consonant, one can clearly see that it is always inserted after the subject and object indices.

92Regarding tone, for s2.o3 and s1incl.pl imperatives, the falling tone of the attenuative marker /ttÊ/ is easily recognizable in the forms provided in Table 11. However, for s2.o1 and s1incl.du imperatives, the falling tone F (= H+L) of -ttÊ is squashed by the high tone of the preceding syllable of the verb and replaced by a low tone (-ttÈ). This phenomenon explains the attested forms, as illustrated by the s2pl.o1sg (48) and s1incl.du.o3pl (49) imperatives.

(48a)

èecárnyé-ttÊ

LHH-F

look.pfv.imp.s2pl.o1sg-att

(48b)

> èecárnyéttè

LHHL

‘Please look (pl) at me!’

(49a)

nţÉ-cE-ttÊ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H+-nst-F-LH

s1incl.du-o3pl-att-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

(49a)

> nţÉ-cÉ-ttÈ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H-H-L-LH

(49b)

> nţéc(é)tt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H(H)LH

‘Please let’s (du) look at them!’

93An attenuated imperative can also be inflected for reported speech (49).

(50a)

èelàttê

LLF

move.ipfv.ctp.imp.att.s2sg

‘Please come!’ (attenuated non-reported imperative)

(50b)

èeláttè

LHL

move.ipfv.ctp.imp.rep.att.s2sg

‘(and s/he said:) Please come!’ (attenuated reported imperative)

94Table 12 provides the paradigm of the reported attenuated positive imperative.

Table 12 —  Reported attenuated positive imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’, compared with the non-reported attenuated imperative

s.sg

s.pl

Speech

Participants

Non-reported

attenuated

Reported

attenuated

Non-reported

attenuated

Reported

attenuated

s2.o1sg

èecányttè

èecárnyéttè

s2.o1pl

èecánycéttè

èecárnycéttè

s2.o3sg

èecàttê

èecáttè

èecàrttê

èecàrêttê

s2.o3pl

èecàc(è)ttê

èecàcêttê

èecàrcèttê

èecàrcêttê

s.du

s.pl

s1incl.o3sg

nţétt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

àrtt-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

s1incl.o3pl

nţéc(é)tt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

àrcètt-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

  • 31 For the case of the s2sg.o3sg reported attenuated imperative, see (55).

95Distinct forms of reported attenuative positive forms are only observed for s2.o3 imperatives. These allow one to understand that the reported speech morpheme ‑ is placed between the person indices and the attenuative marker, as illustrated by the s2pl.o3pl imperative in (51)31.

(51a)

èecàrcè--ttÊ

LLL-F-F

look.pfv.imp.s2pl.o3pl-rep-att

(51b)

> èecàrcêttê

LLFF

‘(and s/he said:) Please look (pl) at them!’

96The absence of distinction between reported and plain attenuated imperatives can be explained in different ways, depending on the encoded persons.

97For s2.o1 and s1incl.du imperatives, the absence of a distinct form for the reported attenuative can probably be accounted for by the following processes: If we consider that the reported speech morpheme ‑Ê is inserted at the same place as for s2.o3 imperatives, i.e., between the person indices and the attenuative suffix, the tone of the syllable preceding the inserted ‑Ê is high. Therefore, ‑Ê is squashed and replaced by a low tone syllable ‑, which then merges with the attenuative suffix ‑ttÈ, which has itself been squashed by the same preceding high tone, see (48)-(49). This case is illustrated by the s2pl.o1sg imperative in (52).

(52a)

èecárnyé-Ê-ttÊ

LHH-F-F

look.pfv.imp.s2pl.o1sg-rep-att

(52b)

> èecárnyé--ttÈ

LHHLL

(52c)

> èecárnyéttè

LHHL

‘(and s/he said:) Please look (pl) at me!’

98This line of explanation requires the existence of the following tone rule: a high tone can squash a succession of two consecutive falling tones.

99For s1incl.pl imperatives, the absence of a distinct form for the reported attenuative may be due to the fact that, in s1incl imperatives, (a) the reported speech marker ‑Ê attaches to the right of the attenuative marker ‑ttÊ and that (b), at least in this context, a succession of two falling tones (F+F) associated with one and the same syllable can be simplified into one falling tone, i.e., F+F > F. This case is illustrated by the s1incl.pl.o3pl imperative in (53).

(53a)

àr-cE-ttÊ--ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

L-nst-F-F-LH

s1incl.pl-o3pl-att-rep-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

(53b)

> àrcètt-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

LL-FH

‘(and s/he said:) Please let’s (pl) look at them!’

100The hypothesis that the reported speech marker ‑ is inserted after the attenuative marker ‑ttÊ is supported by the fact that, if the order was the reverse (‑ + -ttÊ), one would expect the resulting s1incl.o3pl reported attenuated imperative to have the form in (54), i.e., with two consecutives falling tones F-F, as it would have the same tonal characteristics as the s2pl.o3pl form described in (51).

(54a)

*àr-cE-Ê-ttÊ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

L-nst-F-F-LH

s1incl.pl-o3pl-rep-att-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

(54b)

> *àrcêtt-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́

LF-FH

‘(and s/he said:) Please let’s (pl) look at them!’

  • 32 tt can profitably be analyzed as one consonant phoneme in Koalib, see Quint (2006: 93–109; 2009: 83 (...)

101One form still remains to be explained, namely the s2sg.o3sg reported attenuated imperative, whose tonal scheme differs not only from its plain counterpart but also from the other s2.o3 reported attenuated imperatives. In this case, one can posit that (a) the absence of a final consonant or of the -cE (o.pl) marker prevents the reported speech marker ‑ from independently expressing its tone (as happens with the other s2.o3 reported attenuated imperatives), and that (b) the actual tonal scheme observed is due to the same (or a close variant of the) rule described above for (53), whereby a succession of two falling tones can be simplified into one falling tone, i.e., F+F > F. This rule would apply even if the two falling tones are separated by one consonant, here tt.32 The resulting falling melody F is then split into its two basic constituents (F = H+L) between the last two syllables of the imperative form (55).

(55a)

èecà-Ê-ttê

LL-F-F

look.pfv.imp.s2sg.o3sg-rep-att

(55b)

> èecâ-ttê

LFF

(55c)

> èecá-ttè

LHL

‘(and s/he said:) Please look (sg) at him/her/it/NP!’

102Table 13 provides the paradigm of the attenuated negative imperative in non-reported speech, whereas Table 14 provides the paradigm of its reported attenuated negative imperative counterparts.

Table 13 — Attenuated negative imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’, compared with the corresponding plain negative imperative

  • 33 While, in positive imperatives, the attenuative suffix prevents the harmonization of the s1incl.pl (...)

s.sg

s.pl

Speech

Participants

Plain

Attenuated

Plain

Attenuated

s2.o1sg

tt‑êecányé mâj

tt-êecányttè mâj

tt-êecárnyé mâj

tt-êecárnyéttè mâj

s2.o1pl

tt‑êecánycé mâj

tt‑êecánycéttè mâj

tt‑êecárnycé mâj

tt‑êecárnycéttè mâj

s2.o3sg

tt‑èecà mâj

tt-èecàttê mâj

tt-èecàr mâj

tt-èecàrttê mâj

s2.o3pl

tt‑èecàcè mâj

tt-èecàc(è)ttê mâj

tt‑èecàrcè mâj

tt-èecàrcèttê mâj

s.du

s.pl

s1incl.o3sg

tté nţ-ɛ́ɛcɛ́ mâj

tté nţétt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀r-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt‑ɛ̀rétt‑ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj33

~ tt-ɛ̀rtt-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́ mâj

s1incl.o3pl

tté nţéc‑ɛ́ɛcɛ́ mâj

tté nţécéttɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀rc-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀rcétt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

103The vast majority of attenuated negative imperatives in non-reported speech are fully predictable from their plain negative imperative (displayed in Table 13) and their attenuated positive counterparts (see Table 11), as illustrated by the s2pl.o1pl form in (56).

(56a)

tt-êecárnycé

mâj

FHH

F

neg1-look.pfv.imp.s2pl.o1pl

neg2

‘Don’t look (pl) at us!’ (plain negative imperative)

(56b)

+ èecárnycéttè

LHHL

‘Please look (pl) at us!’ (attenuated positive imperative)

(56c)

> tt-êecárnycéttè

mâj

FHHL

F

‘Please don’t look (pl) at us!’ (attenuated negative imperative)

104The only non-predictable forms are s1incl.pl imperatives, where it seems that the presence of the negative marker ttè triggers a split (optional for s1incl.pl.o3sg) of the falling tone (F = H+L, see also (55)) of the attenuative marker ‑ttÊ, whose H component associates with the syllable preceding ‑ttÊ. This mechanism is illustrated by means of the s1incl.pl.o3pl imperative in (57).

(57a)

ttè-àr-cE-ttÊ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

L-L-nst-F-LH

F

neg1-s1incl.pl-o3pl-att-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

neg2

(57b)

tt-ɛ̀r-cÉ-ttÈ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

L-H-L-LH

F

(57c)

tt-ɛ̀rcétt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

LH-LH

F

‘Please let’s (pl) not look at them!’

Table 14 — Attenuated reported negative imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’, compared with the corresponding plain reported negative imperative

s.sg

s.pl

Speech

Participants

Reported

plain

Reported

attenuated

Reported

plain

Reported

attenuated

s2.o1sg

tt-êecányè mâj

tt-êecány()ttè mâj

tt‑êecárnyè mâj

tt-êecárnyéttè mâj

s2.o1pl

tt-êecánycè mâj

tt-êecánycéttè mâj

tt‑êecárnycè mâj

tt-êecárnycéttè mâj

s2.o3sg

tt-êecâ mâj

tt-êecáttè mâj

tt-êecàrê mâj

tt-êecàrttê mâj

s2.o3pl

tt-êecàcê mâj

tt-êecàc(è)ttê mâj

tt-êecàrcê mâj

tt-êecàrcèttê mâj

s.du

s.pl

s1pl.o3sg

tté nţ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tté nţétt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀r-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀rtt-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́ mâj

s1pl.o3pl

tté nţéc-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tté nţécétt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀rc-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀rcètt-ɛ̂ɛcɛ́ mâj

105Most attenuated reported negative imperative forms are fully predictable from their plain reported negative imperative (displayed in Table 14) and their attenuated reported positive counterparts (see Table 12), as illustrated by the s1incl.du.o3sg form in (58).

(58a)

tté

nţ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

H

LH

F

neg1

s1incl.du.o3sg-look.pfv.imp

neg2

(and s/he said:) ‘Let’s (du) not look at him/her/it/NP!’ (plain reported negative imperative)

(58b)

+ nţétt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H-LH

‘(and s/he said:) Please let’s (du) look at him/her/it/NP!’ (attenuated reported positive imperative)

(58c)

> tté

étt-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

mâj

H

H-LH

F

‘(and s/he said:) Please let’s (du) not look at him/her/it/NP!’ (attenuated reported negative imperative)

106However, s2sg.o3pl and s2pl.o3 imperatives have unpredictable forms, as the falling tone F of the reported speech marker ‑, present in both plain reported negative imperatives (on the last syllable of the verb) and attenuated reported positive imperatives (on the syllable preceding the attenuative marker) is not realized, as illustrated by the s2pl.o3sg form in (59). The suppression of the falling tone of the reported speech marker could be due to a phonological rule limiting the number of falling tones associated to one and the same verb form to two. As the first negator is also marked for reported speech in s2.o3 imperatives (see Table 9), s2sg.o3pl and s2pl.o3 attenuated reported negative imperatives would have three falling tones (60), which is not allowed by the two-falling-tone rule described above.

(59a)

tt-êecàr

mâj

FLF

F

neg1-look.pfv.imp.rep.s2pl.o3sg

neg2

‘(and s/he said:) Don’t look (pl) at him/her/it/NP!’ (plain reported negative imperative)

(59b)

+ èecàrtt

LLFF

‘(and s/he said:) Please look (pl) at him/her/it/NP!’ (attenuated reported positive imperative)

(59c)

> tt-êecàrtt

mâj

FLF

F

‘(and s/he said:) Please don’t look (pl) at him/her/it/NP!’ (attenuated reported negative imperative)

(60)

*tt-êecàrtt

mâj

FLFF

F

‘(and s/he said:) Please don’t look (pl) at him/her/it/NP!’ (three falling tones in one verb form)

107The existence of this rule may explain why the tone of the last two syllables of the attenuative reported negative s2sg.o3sg imperative is the same as its positive reported counterpart: as the positive form has no falling tone (see Table 12 and (55)), its tonal scheme is compatible with the falling tone F of the reported speech marker ‑, which is associated with the first negator of the negative form (61).

(61a)

ttè--èecáttè

mâj

L-F-LHL

F

neg1-rep-look.pfv.imp.rep.att.s2sg.o3sg

neg2

(61b)

> tt-êecáttè

mâj

FHL

F

‘(and s/he said:) Please don’t look (sg) at him/her/it/NP!’

108The attenuative marker -ttÊ also has non-imperative uses: as a general rule, it tends to increase the illocutionary force of the sentence, be it assertive (62) or interrogative (63).

  • 34 See Luke 9:9 ‘(But Herod said,) “I beheaded John. (Who, then, is this I hear such things about?” An (...)

(62)

kwè-mè-nyè-Ø-ttê-úuɽ-ɐ̀tɐ̀

nţà (…)

clkw-prf-s1sg-o3sg-att-cut-mal.ipfv.cfg

head.o

‘Indeed, I had his head cut (Herod about John the Baptist34) (lit. I did cut him head) (…).’

(63)

kw-àapà-Ø-ttê

kwɔ̂mnɛ́

ŋ-kw-ó

tâkkà?

clkw-bring.pfv.s3sg-o3sg-att

something.o

dem-clkw-prox

where?

‘Where on earth did s/he bring this thing from (lit. s/he brought on earth thing this where)?’

109Therefore -ttÊ seems to have an overall intensifying value. However, when this morpheme interacts with the imperative, the resulting meaning is one of mild command. Koalib also has an intensive imperative, which is dealt with in the next section.

4.3 Intensive imperative

110Koalib uses another suffix, namely -ḿpÀ -[ḿbÀ] with a tonal scheme HL, to increase the strength of a command (64):

(64a)

ànţècà

speak.pfv.imp.s2sg

‘Speak (sg)!’ (plain imperative)

(64b)

ànţèc-mpà

speak.pfv.imp.s2sg-int

‘But why don’t you (sg) speak?!, Just speak (sg)!’ (intensive imperative)

  • 35 The s1incl auxiliary constructions (see Tables 7 and 10) are not documented in their intensive form (...)

111Table 15 provides the paradigm of the intensive positive imperative.35

Table 15 — Intensive positive imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’, compared with the plain imperative

  • 36 In Table 15, as happens with attenuated imperatives (see footnote 30 under Table 11), the intensive (...)

s.sg

s.pl

Speech

Participants

Plain

Intensive

Plain

Intensive

s2.o1sg

èecányé

èecánympà

èecárnyé

èecárnyémpà

s2.o1pl

èecánycé

èecánycémpà

èecárnycé

èecárnycémpà

s2.o3sg

èecà

èecámpà

èecàr

èecàrémpà ~ èecrmpà

s2.o3pl

èecàcè

èecàcémpà

èecàrcè

èecàrcémpà

s.du

s.pl

s1incl.o3sg

nţ-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

émp-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

ɛ̀r-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

àrémp-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́36

s1incl.o3pl

nţéc-ɛ́ɛcɛ́

nţéc(é)mp-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

ɛ̀rc-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

àrcémp-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

112Morphologically, the intensive suffix behaves similarly to the attenuative suffix: it is always inserted after the subject and object indices. Regarding tone and the segmental realization of the suffix, the following observations can be made.

113For s2.o3 imperatives, the floating high tone H of the intensive suffix attaches to the preceding syllable of the verb (or to an epenthetic /E/ in the case of the s2pl.o3sg imperative) and replaces the low tone of the non-intensive form, as illustrated by the s2sg.o3pl imperative in (65).

(65a)

èecàcè-ḿpÀ

LLL-HL

look.pfv.imp.s2sg.o3pl-int

(65b)

> èecàcémpà

LLHL

‘Just look (sg) at them!’

114For s2.o1 imperatives, the floating high tone H of the intensive suffix merges with the high tone H of the preceding syllable of the verb, as illustrated by the s2pl.o1sg imperative in (66).

(66a)

èecárnyé-ḿpÀ

LHH-HL

look.pfv.imp.s2pl.o1sg-int

(66b)

> èecárnyémpà

LHHL

‘Just look (pl) at me!’

115For s1incl imperatives, the final vowel of the intensive suffix is dropped and its low tone merges with the low tone of the verb stem ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’. Then, as far as the s1incl.du imperatives are concerned, the floating high tone H of the intensive suffix merges with the preceding high tone of the s1incl.du index nţ(É), as illustrated by the s1incl.du.o3pl imperative in (67).

(67a)

nţÉ-cE-ḿpÀ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H+-nst-HL-LH

s1incl.du-o3pl-int-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

(67b)

> nţÉ-cÉ-ḿpÀ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H-H-HL-LH

(67c)

> nţéc(é)mp-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

H(H)-LH

‘Let’s (du) just look at them!’

116As far as the s1incl.pl imperatives are concerned, the floating high tone H of the intensive suffix attaches to an epenthetic (s1incl.pl.o3sg) or an underlying (s1incl.pl.o3pl) E, which is placed between the person indices and the intensive suffix. This case is illustrated by the s1incl.pl.o3sg imperative in (68).

(68a)

àr-Ø-ḿpÀ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

L-Ø-HL-LH

s1incl.pl-o3sg-int-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

(68b)

> àr--mpÀ-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

L-H-L-LH

s1incl.pl.o3sg-ep-int-look.ipfv.cfg.imp

(68c)

> àrémp-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

LH-LH

‘Let’s (pl) just look at him/her/it/NP!’

117An intensive imperative can be used in reported speech. However, the forms have been checked and differ neither segmentally nor tonally from their non-reported speech counterparts, as documented in Table 15. The fact that the reported speech morpheme ‑ never modifies the segmental or the tonal characteristics of the intensive imperative is probably due to the fact that the intensive suffix ‑ḿpÀ has a HL tonal scheme, i.e., a tonal melody similar to the falling tone F (= H+L) of the reported speech morpheme ‑. We have already seen in (53) that a succession of two falling tones (F+F) associated with one and the same syllable can be simplified into one falling tone, i.e., F+F > F. A comparable phenomenon may account for the fact that the falling tone of the reported speech morpheme ‑ never surfaces in reported intensive imperatives, as illustrated by the s2sg.o3pl imperative in (69).

(69a)

èecàcè--ḿpÀ

LLL-F-HL (= LLL-F-F)

look.pfv.imp.s2sg.o3pl-rep-int

(69b)

> èecàcémpà

LLHL

‘(and s/he said:) Just look (sg) at them!’

118At any rate, the actual forms of the reported intensive imperatives show that the tonal behavior (linked with the floating high tone H of ‑ḿpÀ) of the intensive marker is different from that of the attenuated suffix ‑ttÊ, which, at least in parts of the paradigm (see Table 12), allows the falling tone of the reported speech morpheme to surface, as can be shown by comparing the s2sg.o3pl reported intensive imperative (69) with its reported attenuated counterpart (70):

(70a)

èecàcè--ttÊ

LLL-F-F

look.pfv.imp.s2sg.o3pl-rep-att

(70b)

> èecàctt

LLFF

‘(and s/he said:) Please look (sg) at them!’

119Table 16 provides the paradigm of the intensive negative imperative in non-reported speech.

Table 16 — Intensive negative imperative paradigm of the transitive verb ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’, compared with the corresponding plain negative imperative

  • 37 In Table 16, the s1incl.pl person index is realized r‑, and its vowel seems to harmonize with the (...)

s.sg

s.pl

Speech

Participants

Plain

Intensive

Plain

Intensive

s2.o1sg

tt-êecányé mâj

tt-êecány(é)mpà mâj

tt-êecárnyé mâj

tt-êecárnyémpà mâj

s2.o1pl

tt-êecánycé mâj

tt-êecánycémpà mâj

tt-êecárnycé mâj

tt-êecárnycémpà mâj

s2.o3sg

tt-èecà mâj

tt-èecámpà mâj

tt-èecàr mâj

tt-èecàrémpà ~

tt-èecármpà mâj

s2.o3pl

tt-èecàcè mâj

tt-èecàcémpà mâj

tt-èecàrcè mâj

tt-èecàrcémpà mâj

s.du

s.pl

s1pl.o3sg

tté nţ-ɛ́ɛcɛ́ mâj

tté-nţémp-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀r-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-èrémp-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj37

s1pl.o3pl

tté nţéc-ɛ́ɛcɛ́ mâj

tté-nţéc(é)mp-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-ɛ̀rc-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

tt-èrcémp-ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ mâj

120In practice all intensive negative imperative forms of Table 16 are predictable from their plain negative (displayed in Table 16) and intensive positive counterparts (see Table 15), as illustrated by the s2sg.o1sg forms in (71).

  • 38 Although it has not been explicitly checked, it is very probable that the optional (é) of the s2sg (...)

(71a)

tt-êecányé

mâj

FHH

F

neg1-look.pfv.imp.s2sg.o1sg

neg2

‘Don’t look (sg) at me!’ (plain negative imperative)

(71b)

+ èecánympà

LHL

‘Just look (sg) at me!’ (intensive positive imperative)

(71c)

> tt-êecány(é)mpà38

mâj

FH(H)L

F

‘Just don’t look (sg) at me!’ (intensive negative imperative)

121Reported intensive negative imperatives have been systematically checked for all subject+object combinations. They do not show any difference to their non-reported speech counterparts. The reason for this lack of specific morphology for the reported forms has already been given above in the discussion about intensive positive imperatives following Table 15.

122The attenuative and intensive suffixes are mutually exclusive.

123The intensive suffix also has non-imperative uses. Similar to the attenuative suffix, the intensive suffix tends to increase the illocutionary force of the sentence, see the exclamation in (72).

  • 39 In this example, /p/ [b] is a shortened form of -ḿpÀ when combined with the ‑m- perfect marker.

(72)

á

m-p-ɛ́lŋɛ̀39

ŋèɽàaŋálè-nà!

s2sg

prf-int-know.ipfv.cfg

thing.o-inside

‘You know some things, you know a lot about it (lit. you’ve really known thing inside)!’

4.4 Irregular imperatives

124Some few verbs have irregular imperative forms (Table 17), the use of which is limited to s2 imperatives.

Table 17 — Irregular imperatives

  • 40 As far as person indices are concerned, there is no morphological difference between the s2sg imper (...)

Verb stem

Meaning

Imperative

Type

ipfv.cfg

pfv

s2sg.
(o3sg)
40

s2pl.
(o3sg)

ìppí

ippitu

‘beat!’

ppìtù

ppìtìr

shortened

ɛ̀ɛlɛ́

intu

‘move!’

ntù

ntìr

shortened

àaɽé

aaɽo

‘go/come back!’

àɽò

àɽèr

shortened

ɛ̀ɛcɛ́

eeca

‘see, look!’

ɛ̀ɛ́

[èecàr]

deviant

ímtɐ̀

imtu

‘catch, take!’

mɐ̀ttù

mɐ̀ttìr

deviant

(máttà (+ctp))

NA

NA

‘take care, beware!’

ɐ́ɽì

ɐ́ɽìr

orphan

NA
(*kàamé)

NA

(*kaama)

‘come this way!’

kàamà

kàamàr

orphan

NA

NA

‘no way, don’t even mention that!’

mà

màr

orphan

125As indicated in Table 17 (see column ‘type’), irregular imperatives can be divided into three types, namely (i) shortened, (ii) deviant and (iii) orphan imperatives, which will be discussed in turn.

4.4.1 Shortened imperatives.

126If we compare the irregular s2 imperative with the perfective aspect-motion stem from which it usually derives (see Table 3 and following discussion), the imperative lacks a segment found in the perfective stem (see comparable instances in Latin (Aikhenvald 2010: 19)). An initial /i/ is missing in the case of ɛ̀ɛlɛ́ ‘move’ (imp ntù vs. expected *ntù) and ìppí ‘beat’ (imp ppìtù vs. expected *ppìtù). In the case of àaɽé ‘go/come back’, a long vowel is shortened (imp àɽò vs. regular aɽò, also attested).

4.4.2 Deviant imperatives

127Deviant s2 imperatives are not (regularly) derived from the perfective aspect-motion stem.

128The imperative ɛ̀ɛ́ ‘look (sg)!’ seems to be a shortened form of ɛ̀ɛcɛ́, the centrifugal imperfective stem of ‘see, look’. However, it is not sure that this etymology is accurate, for two reasons: first, ɛ̀ɛ́ has two other attested free variants, àá and ɛ̀ɛ̂, which are even further removed from ɛ̀ɛcɛ́. Second, ɛ̀ɛ́ has no irregular s2pl counterpart. Therefore, it cannot be excluded that ɛ̀ɛ́ ~ ɛ̀ɛ̂ àá is rather an interjection than an irregular imperative.

  • 41 For more details about frequentative inflection in Koalib, see Quint & Ali Karmal Kokko (forthcomin (...)

129The imperative of ímtɐ̀ ‘catch, take’ also displays several morphological peculiarities: first, the forms mɐ̀tt (s2sg) and mɐ̀ttìr (s2pl) are obviously derived from the perfective aspect-motion stem imtu, but the initial vowel /i/ has been dropped and the medial /t/ geminated. No other imperative is produced this way. Actually, even though the doubling of a medial consonant is a morphological process attested in the verbal system, it is mostly used for the production of frequentative forms (73)-(74).41

(73)

ìití [ìiðí] ‘trap (v.)’ (basic verb)

> tt [ìttí] ‘trap often/regularly’ (frequentative)

(74)

ɛ́ɛtɛ̀ [ɛ́ɛðɛ̀] ‘get pregnant’ (basic verb)

> ɛ́ttttɛ̀ [ɛ́ttèttɛ̀] ‘get often/regularly pregnant’ (frequentative)

130Second, the form máttà (s2sg/pl) is clearly related to mɐ̀ttù and mɐ̀ttìr. However, it is only used when preceded by a centripetal imperative (75)-(76), and it is compulsorily introduced by the subordinator ‘and then [future], so that’. Semantically, máttà can be considered as a special type of imperative, as it is only used in imperative contexts. However, from a morphological point of view, it is better described as an irregular centripetal stem of ímtɐ̀ (whose regular centripetal stem is imtɐ) and a conjunctive form (see Section 2.3.1), which explains why máttà lacks the typical s2pl imperative ending ‑r (76). At any rate, the tonal scheme HL associated with máttà is clearly abnormal, even for a centripetal stem, whose tone is supposed to be LL in the syntactic context in which máttà is attested. Therefore, máttà seems to be a totally idiosyncratic form, the study of which would deserve further research.

  • 42 For (75) and (76), the examples have been presented in two lines: the upper line corresponds to the (...)

(75)

èelà

máttà

ŋèɽàaŋálè

ŋó42

èelà

máttà

ŋèɽàaŋálè

Ø-ŋ-ó

move.ctp.imp.s2sg

sub.s2sg

take.ctp.imp

thing.o

dem-clŋ-prox

‘Come and take this thing!’

  • 43 Here the subordinator is realized /é/ (instead of expected */á/). I cannnot account for this phon (...)

(76)

èelàr

é43

mǎttà

ŋèɽàaŋálè

ŋó

èelà-r

máttà

ŋèɽàaŋálè

Ø-ŋ-ó

move.ctp.imp-s2pl

sub.s2pl

take.ctp.imp

thing.o

dem-clŋ-prox

‘Come (pl) and take (pl) this thing!’

4.4.3 Orphan imperatives

131Three of the imperatives given in Table 17 are isolated inflected forms: no other form of the paradigm is attested for them. The fact that all three orphan imperatives have an -r [ɾ] ending for s2pl forms clearly shows that they morphologically behave more like verbs than interjections. In the case of kàamà/kàamàr, one can even posit an original basic (= centrifugal) verb stem *kàamé: kàamà/kàamàr would then be the regular imperative forms of *kàamé and the last remnants of this basic verb in today’s Koalib.

  • 44 For other cases of verb extensions derived from a basic verb that is not attested anymore in contem (...)

132The existence of *kàamé at an older stage of the language is rendered plausible by the fact that its reflexes are still observable in diverse verb extensions that appear to be derived from this very root,44 such as kàamàcé, a locative extension (suffix ‑AcE, see Table 2), ‘flank on both sides of (e.g., a flock in order to keep it together)’, whose spatial meaning seems plausibly related to the orphan imperative kàamà ‘come this way!’

4.4.4 The meaning of irregular imperatives

  • 45 For general considerations about the link between high frequency and morphological irregularity, se (...)

133Independent of their morphological idiosyncrasies, irregular imperatives have something in common: they are amongst the most frequent commands used in any human language (Aikhenvald 2010: 37, 45). For example, many Romance (Floricic & Molinu 2023: 149–172; Quint 2015: 199–200), Afro-Asiatic (Aikhenvald 2010: 322–323; Cohen 1979–1984) or other (Aikhenvald 2010: 33, 36) languages have irregular imperatives for ‘go’ and ‘come’, both of which correspond semantically to Koalib ɛ̀ɛlɛ́ ‘move’. Koalib and Romance or Afro-Asiatic languages are unrelated but the irregular imperatives observed for ‘go/come/move’ in these different instances of the human ability to speak can be attributed to the fact that humans frequently ask their fellow human beings to move or go to or come from another place. Ultimately, the high frequency of Koalib irregular imperatives seems to be the main reason for their coming into existence and their retention in today’s Koalib.45

5. Imperative-related forms: Other expressions of commands

134In addition to the use of a specific imperative mood, whose intricacies and peculiarities have been explained in the two previous sections, Koalib also has at its disposal other morphological devices to express notions semantically related to command. In this section, I will study two such devices, namely (i) jussive constructions and (ii) interjections expressing commands addressed to animals.

5.1 Jussive constructions

  • 46 In the same paper Dobrushina (2012: 1) defines the “nonlocutor” as “someone who is not a participan (...)

135Jussive constructions are used to express wishes, i.e., “requests that a nonlocutor46 do something” (Dobrushina 2012: 2; see also Aikhenvald 2017: 7). They comply with the following formula (Figure 3) and are exemplified in (77)-(79).

Figure 3 — Syntactic formula of jussive constructions

conn + (S/O) + Verb stem + (O)

(77)

èté-ŋá

Állà

cùuɽí-náanà!

conn-o2sg

God.s

keep.clean-over

‘May God bless you!’

(78)

ètò-ŋw

cùuɽí

nyò-ŋwó-cé-náanà!

conn-s3sg

keep.clean

o1sg-o-o.pl-over

‘May He (God) bless us!’

  • 47 This sentence has been produced using Matthew 27:42 ‘let him come down now from the cross (and we w (...)

(79)

èté

Kwókkò

ɗàppètà-lò

kkɛ́kkèrɛ̀m!

conn

Kwokko

get.down.ipfv.ctp-down

now

‘Let Kwokko come down now!’47

136Jussive constructions can be considered insubordinate clauses (Cristofaro 2016) for the following reasons:

  • The verb is conjunctive (see Section 2.3.1).
  • The subject and object indices comply with the general morphological rules of subordinate clauses introduced by a conjunction in Koalib (Quint in preparation).
  • The connector ete behaves here as a typical subordinator,48 as shown by its interactions with subject and object indices (Quint in preparation);
  • Semantically, the whole jussive construction can be conceived of as a complement clause depending on an underlying volitive/wish verb, e.g., ‘*[I wish] God blessed you’, ‘[I would be pleased] if God blessed you’.

137In sum, jussive constructions can be structurally described as subordinate clauses that are pragmatically used as independent clauses, as described for many other languages of the world, e.g., Germanic (D’Hertefelt 2017) and Romance (Sansiñena 2017). Semantically, jussive constructions are certainly not commands in the narrow meaning of this term. However, their wish content implies a special commitment of the speaker into the realization of the wish, and therefore a certain proximity to the notion of command, which can be defined as requiring someone to fulfil a given action. Syntactically, the insubordinate status of jussive constructions, which are somehow halfway between independent and subordinate clauses, also accentuates their proximity to imperatives, which were described likewise (Section 3.1.1) as being halfway between indicative verbs (typically used in independent clauses) and conjunctive verbs (typically used in subordinate clauses).

138Note that the existence of reported, attenuated or intensive jussives has not been checked.

5.2 Interjections expressing commands addressed to animals

139Koalib speakers have at their disposal a small number of interjections used to express commands addressed to different animals. All the attested forms are shown in Table 18.

Table 18 — Interjections expressing commands addressed to animals

  • 49 An Arabic origin has been certified only for jɛ́r.

Meaning of the interjection

Animal

‘go away, get out!’

‘come here!’

other

camel

ány (< ar.)

ány-ány (red.) ‘go on!/get moving!’
(encouragement to a male
to breed/service)

cat

béc (< ar. [bis])

cow

dɐ́j ~ hɐ́k

dog

cêk ~ cê ~ jɛ́r
(< ar.49)

cɔ̂ɔ (< ar.)

ák (< ar.) ‘enough!’,
ácèk (< ar.) ‘go get it!’
(after an animal, most often a rabbit)

donkey, 
sheep

ár (< ar.)

ár-ár (red.) ‘boo!, giddy up!’
(donkey only)

goat

tták (< ar.)

hen

kɐ́r (< ar.)

kúrr (< ar.)

horse

húr (< ar.) ‘boo!, giddy up!’

pig

kɐ̂c

pigeon

hám (< ar. [ham])

  • 50 For a similar sociolinguistic profile of commands addressed to animals, where many forms are borrow (...)

140Some of these Koalib interjections are shared with (or borrowed from) Sudanese Arabic (abbreviated as “ar.” in Table 14). 50The influence of Arabic is also apparent from the use of initial /h/, a phoneme normally absent from the traditional Koalib lexical stock (Quint 2006; 2009). Regarding their phonological characteristics, all but one of these interjections are monosyllabic. The fact that these words are short can be held as an indicator of a high frequency of use (see Section 4.4).

141Furthermore, in spite of the limited size and the non-exhaustive nature of the sample of interjections provided in Table 18, several semantic trends are observable: first, these interjections are only intended for domestic animals, i.e., those animals whom humans live and interact with on a daily basis. Second, most of these commands are addressed to animals to make them ‘go away’ or ‘get out’ from the place occupied by the human speaker. Third, the dog is clearly the animal favored by the humans for communication, as it is the possible recipient of at least four different types of order in Koalib.

  • 51 For instance, in Languedocien Occitan, there is also an interjection tiron!, tiron! [tiˈɾu, tiˈɾu], (...)

142Finally, it should be stressed that such a system of interjections specifically aimed at communicating with animals is commonly found in many rural cultures51 across the world.

6. Conclusion

  • 52 Other examples are attested in the literature, e.g., Zargulla (Azeb 2013: 220–222), in which “repor (...)

143In this paper, I have explored, for the first time in such detail, the expression of commands in Koalib. Regarding verbal imperatives, Koalib certainly stands out in several ways. As a matter of fact, it involves a rich morphology, involving several stems and, in the case of transitive verbs, combinations of subject and object indices, as well as the expression of associated motion (see Section 3.1.3). Furthermore, most Koalib imperatives are morphologically marked when used in reported speech, which is clearly a typological rarity.52 Lastly, the existence of specific verb markers for both attenuative and intensive imperatives also seems to be a cross-linguistic original feature.

144This overview of Koalib imperatives is a first step towards a full account of Koalib verbal morphology (Quint in preparation).

Acknowledgments

145I would like to thank here Siddig Ali Karmal Kokko, without whose patience and commitment I would never have been able to satisfactorily understand the subtleties of Koalib morphology, as well as Hilary Chappell for her suggestions in English, and Yvonne Treis for her careful, painstaking editorial work. I am solely responsible for any and all mistakes that might have made their way into this contribution.

Abbreviations

Grammatical and other abbreviations

ar.

Arabic

att

attenuative marker

cfg

centrifugal

clx

noun class marker (the variable subscript indicates the agreement marker characteristic of each noun class, as described in Quint (2022: 179-180))

conn

connector

ctp

centripetal

dem

demonstrative

du

dual

ep

epenthetic segment

excl

exclusive

hab

habitual

HVHS

High Vowel Harmony Set

imp

imperative

incl

inclusive

int

intensive

intr.

intransitive

ipfv

imperfective

mal

malefactive

neg1/2

first/second negator

NP

noun phrase

nst

not specified for tone

O/o

object

pfv

perfective

pl

plural

poss

possessive

prf

perfect

prox

proximal

red

reduplicated form

rep

reported speech morpheme

S/s

subject

sg

singular

sub

subordinator

tr.

transitive

Tone conventions

́

high tone

̀

low tone

̂

falling tone (HL)

̌

rising tone (LH)

HLH contour tone

(…)

sentence continued

+

tone spread

||

blocking of tone spread

F

falling (HL) tone

H

high tone

H

floating high tone

h͡lh

HLH contour tone

L

low tone

R

rising (LH) tone

n

number of syllables with n ≥ 1

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2010. Imperatives and commands. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2017. Imperatives and commands: A cross-linguistic view. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Imperatives and commands, 1–45. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Andrason, Alexander, Anna Luisa Daigneault, Maya Hendrix, Rebecca Pizzitola & Anusha Somu. 2024. A living database of conative animal calls (Version 1.1). SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4899510.

Azeb Amha. 2013. Directives to humans and to domestic animals: The imperative and some interjections in Zargulla. In Marie-Claude Simeone-Senelle & Martine Vanhove (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Cushitic and Omotic Languages, Paris, 16-18 April 2008, 211–229. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.

Bynon, James. 1976. Domestic animal calling in a Berber tribe. In William C. McCormack & Stephen R. Wurm (eds.), Language and man. Anthropological issues, 39–65. The Hague: Mouton.

Cohen, David. 1979–1984. “Viens !”, “Donne !”, etc. : Impératifs déictiques. Comptes rendus du Groupe Linguistique d’Études Chamito-Sémitiques (GLECS) XXIV–XXVIII(3). 521–524.

Cristofaro, Sonia. 2003. Subordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cristofaro, Sonia. 2016. Routes to insubordination: A cross-linguistic perspective. In Nick Evans & Honoré Watanabe (eds.), Insubordination, 393–422. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.115.15cri.

D’Hertefelt, Sarah. 2017. Directive conditional and complement insubordination in Germanic languages. In Daniël Olmen & Simone Heinold (eds.), Imperative and directive strategies, 209–240. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.184.07dhe.

Dobrushina, Nina. 2012. What is the jussive for? A study of third person commands in six Caucasian languages. Linguistics 50(1). 1–25.

Ferlita, Céline & Nicolas Quint. 2024. Le koalib. In Café des langues. Villejuif: CNRS-ARDIS. https://images.cnrs.fr/video/8020.

Floricic, Franck & Lucia Molinu. 2023. Romance monosyllabic imperatives and markedness. In Thomas Stolz, Nicole Nau & Cornelia Stroh (eds.), Monosyllables: From phonology to typology, 149–172. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.

Guillaume, Antoine & Harold Koch (eds.). 2021. Associated motion. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110692099.

Haspelmath, Martin & Andrea D. Sims. 2010. Understanding morphology. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.

Mihas, Elena. 2017. Imperatives in Ashaninka Satipo (Kampa Arawak) of Peru. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Commands: A cross-linguistic typology, 83–105. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198803225.003.0004.

Quint, Nicolas. 2006. Phonologie de la langue koalibe. Paris: L’Harmattan.

Quint, Nicolas. 2009. The phonology of Koalib, a Kordofanian language of the Nuba Mountains (Sudan). Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.

Quint, Nicolas. 2010. Benefactive and malefactive verb extensions in the Koalib verb system. In Seppo Kittilä & Fernando Zúñiga (eds.), Benefactives and Malefactives. Typological perspectives and case studies, 295–315. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.92.12qui.

Quint, Nicolas. 2015. Capeverdean words derived from Portuguese non-infinitive verbal forms: A descriptive and comparative study. Papia 25(2). 189–215.

Quint, Nicolas. 2020. Kordofanian. In Rainer Vossen & Gerrit J. Dimmendaal (eds.), The Oxford handbook of African languages, 239–268. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Quint, Nicolas. 2022. Classes nominales dans deux langues Niger-Congo : le baïnouck djifanghorois (atlantique) et le koalib (kordofanien). Faits de Langues 52(2). 177–202. https://doi.org/10.1163/19589514-05202010.

Quint, Nicolas. 2025. Morphologie et tonologie de l’impératif du verbe koalib (Version 1). CoCoON (Huma-Num - CNRS). https://doi.org/10.60714/COCOON.E846920A-F40F-4C69-8692-0AF40F0C69C0.

Quint, Nicolas. in preparation. Grammar of the Koalib language.

Quint, Nicolas & Siddig Ali Karmal Kokko. forthcoming a. Dictionnaire koalib-français. Berlin: Language Science Press.

Quint, Nicolas & Siddig Ali Karmal Kokko. forthcoming b. Verb extensions in Koalib: A first general overview followed by some brief comparative considerations. In Gertrud Schneider-Blum, Helene Fatima Idris & Jan Junglas (eds.), Nuba Mountain language studies: Contemporary perspectives. Cologne: USB Monographs.

Quint, Nicolas & Marc Allassonnière-Tang. 2022. Inferring case paradigms with computational classifiers. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 19(2). 237–269. https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2021-0028.

Sansiñena, María Sol. 2017. Eliciting evidence of functional differences: The imperative versus free-standing que-clauses in Spanish. In Daniël Olmen & Simone Heinold (eds.), Imperative and directive strategies, 265–290. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.184.09san.

Stevenson, Roland C. 1956. A survey of the phonetics and grammatical structure of the Nuba Mountain languages. Afrika und Übersee 40: 73-115; 41: 27-65, 117–196.

Stevenson, Roland C. 2009. Tira and Otoro: Two Kordofanian grammars. (Ed.) Thilo C. Schadeberg. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.

van der Auwera, Johan, Nina Dobrushina & Valentin Goussev. 2004. A semantic map for imperative-hortatives. In Dominique Willems, Bart Defrancq, Timothy Colleman & Dirk Noël (eds.), 44–66. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

van der Auwera, Johan, Nina Dobrushina & Valentin Goussev. 2013. Imperative-hortative systems. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), WALS online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13950591.

Haut de page

Notes

1 I would like to dedicate this chapter to my informant and friend Radouan Shanga from Tèmnàŋ, who sadly passed away recently. May this work show the respect I had for him and his knowledge of the Koalib language and traditions.

2 Most of the audio versions of the Koalib examples can be accessed through the following link: https://cocoon.huma-num.fr/exist/crdo/meta/cocoon-e846920a-f40f-4c69-8692-0af40f0c69c0 (Quint 2025).

3 Kwókkò is the name of the first born male in a family.

4 The term “configuration” encompasses two main parameters, namely the argument structure (or valency) of the verb and the syntactic type (pronoun or noun phrase) of the subject and object.

5 Delami (South Kordofan, Sudan) is one of the main towns of the Koalib country.

6 When a dot is used in a Koalib sequence, it expresses that this example is sentence-final, which has consequences for the tonal realization of the last syllables preceding the dot (Quint 2006: 144; 2009: 161). Conversely, when no dot is used at the end of a given Koalib sequence, this means that the tones provided are not sentence-final.

7 Although this form displays exactly the same segmental and tonal characteristics as the centripetal imperfective kw-èecà in (13), it can be shown beyond doubt (e.g., using verbs whose centripetal imperfective and perfective aspect-motion stems are segmentally different from each other) that the progressive construction in (17) contains the perfective aspect-motion stem.

8 Stevenson also distinguishes three basic forms of the verb in Tira (2009: 59–61) and Otoro (2009: 231–236), two other Kordofanian languages belonging to the same family – Heibanian – as Koalib. Stevenson calls these basic forms “aspects” in Tira and “stems” in Otoro. For both languages, these three different “aspects” or “stems” are labelled “definite, indefinite, and dependent” respectively. These three basic forms are also called “verb bases” by Stevenson in 1956 (1956-1957: 29-30).

9 It can be shown by internal reconstruction (Quint 2006: 111–112; 2009: 100–102) that intu is a regular realization of an underlying form *ilitu [iliðu], whose syllabic structure and perfective suffix ‑itu exactly parallel the perfective form ilŋitu of ɛ́lŋɛ̀ ‘know’. Hence intu is not a suppletive stem of ɛ̀ɛlɛ́ ‘move’, but it is built on the same root /V(V)l/-, attested in the three stems ɛ̀ɛlɛ́, intu (< *ilitu) and eela.

10 n = number of syllables with n ≥ 1.

11 For the archiphonemic notation of the vowels of affixes, see Section 2.1.

12 HVHS = High Vowel Harmony Set. The causative extension generally triggers the use of vowels belonging to the high set in the lexical root itself.

13 Actually, the verb èené ‘wash oneself’ is compulsorily followed by the postposition -náanà ‘over’. However, as ‑náanà is an invariable element that does not influence the morphology of the verb, I have not included it in Table 3.

14 As shown in Table 1, the perfective stem oono freely alternates with eena. The fact that oono was selected by my informant for the imperative paradigm of èené is almost certainly due to a lexical, not a morphological, choice.

15 Note that this distinction is not found for object indices (see Section 3.1.2), where there is only one form coding all types of non-singular first person objects.

16 For the general tendency of many of the world’s languages to have only inclusive first person non-singular imperatives, see Aikhenvald (2017: 11–12).

17 For imperative-related forms involving a third person, see Section 5.1 on jussive constructions.

18 In Table 4, the s1incl.pl person index appears as ɛ̀r‑ (instead of àr‑ in Table 3) because the vowel harmonizes with the /ɛ/ of the verb root ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’. This harmonic phenomenon is specific to the s1incl.pl marker and some few more morphemes, and is independent of the more general harmony rules based on vowel height that are described in Section 2.1.

19 For the sake of simplicity, outside of this Section 3.1.2, when ‑c(E) codes o3pl, it is glossed as o3pl (and not o3sg.o.pl) in the morphological glosses of the examples of this article.

20 nst = not specified for tone.

21 What I call here “oriented motion” in Koalib can reasonably be considered as a case of associated motion, a notion that is gaining a growing acceptance in typology and in African linguistics (Guillaume & Koch 2021).

22 As transitive verbs, which include both subject and object indices, have a wider range of forms than intransitive verbs, which only include subject indices, in this and most of the following sections, I will mainly illustrate the different types of imperatives by means of transitive paradigms.

23 The negative imperative forms build on their positive counterparts and the negation does not have any impact on the morphology of the positive base. Hence, with the exception of the negator, I have chosen not to segment the forms in this table. For details about the segmentation, see Table 4. The hyphens found in some forms of Table 6 are orthographic symbols, transcribing two types of phonological realizations: (i) the elision of a final vowel (tt- instead of tte for neg1) and (ii) the harmonic boundary in the case of s1incl forms, in which the vowels of the class marker and person indices (to the left of the hyphen) preceding the verbal stem (here ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ~ ɛ́ɛcɛ́) do not necessarily belong to the same harmonic set (see Section 2.1) as the vowels of the verbal stem itself (to the right of the hyphen).

24 Note that the link between negative imperative and habitual morphology seems to be typologically quite uncommon in the world’s languages. In the section devoted to the sources of negative imperatives (“prohibitives”), Aikhenvald (2010: 351–362) does not mention this or any similar evolutionary path.

25 As the forms of the auxiliary variant of the negative imperative differ significantly from the positive corresponding paradigms, I have segmented the morphological components in Table 7.

26 The use of hyphens in Table 8 is orthographically based and follows the rules given in footnote 23 for Table 6. The same orthographic conventions are followed in the remaining tables of this paper.

27 For the details of the tonal scheme of the non-reported s2sg.o1sg imperative, see (25).

28 The s1incl auxiliary constructions (see Tables 7 and 10) are not documented in their attenuated forms.

29 In Table 11, I have highlighted in bold the extra-segments of the attenuative morphology as well as the vowels whose associated tone has been modified by the attenuative marker. The same graphic convention applies for the following tables.

30 In Table 11, there is a difference regarding the vowel of the s1incl.pl index (plain ɛ̀r‑ vs. attenuated r‑). This difference is due to harmonic rules: the attenuative suffix prevents the harmonization of the s1incl.pl person index with the /ɛ/ of the verb stem ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’, which is observed in the plain form (see footnote 18 under Table 4).

31 For the case of the s2sg.o3sg reported attenuated imperative, see (55).

32 tt can profitably be analyzed as one consonant phoneme in Koalib, see Quint (2006: 93–109; 2009: 83–99).

33 While, in positive imperatives, the attenuative suffix prevents the harmonization of the s1incl.pl person index with the /ɛ/ of the verb stem ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’ (see footnote 30 under Table 11), this harmonization takes place in attenuated negative imperatives, where the s1incl.pl index is ɛ̀r‑. I have no explanation for this difference between the positive and negative forms.

34 See Luke 9:9 ‘(But Herod said,) “I beheaded John. (Who, then, is this I hear such things about?” And he tried to see him).’

35 The s1incl auxiliary constructions (see Tables 7 and 10) are not documented in their intensive forms.

36 In Table 15, as happens with attenuated imperatives (see footnote 30 under Table 11), the intensive suffix prevents the harmonization of the s1incl.pl person index with the /ɛ/ of the verb stem ɛ̀ɛcɛ́ ‘see, look’, and the s1incl.pl person index is therefore realized àr‑, with its original lexical vowel (see Section 3.1.1).

37 In Table 16, the s1incl.pl person index is realized r‑, and its vowel seems to harmonize with the /e/ of the first negator tt(e). I have no explanation for this phenomenon, which contrasts with both positive intensive forms on the one hand, where the s1incl.pl person index is realized as r‑ (see Table 15), and attenuated negative imperatives on the other hand, where the s1incl.pl person index is realized as ɛ̀r‑ (see Table 13 and footnote 33).

38 Although it has not been explicitly checked, it is very probable that the optional (é) of the s2sg.o1sg intensive negative imperative (see Table 16) can also appear in its positive counterpart (see Table 15).

39 In this example, /p/ [b] is a shortened form of -ḿpÀ when combined with the ‑m- perfect marker.

40 As far as person indices are concerned, there is no morphological difference between the s2sg imperative of intransitive verbs (such as ɛ̀ɛlɛ́ ‘move’) and the s2sg.o3sg imperative of transitive verbs (such as ìppí ‘beat’), as o3sg is a zero morpheme for this inflection (see Section 3.1.2), hence my choice to put the o3sg in brackets. The same line of reasoning applies to s2pl (intransitive) and s2pl.o3sg (transitive) imperatives.

41 For more details about frequentative inflection in Koalib, see Quint & Ali Karmal Kokko (forthcoming b).

42 For (75) and (76), the examples have been presented in two lines: the upper line corresponds to the actual phonological realization of the sentence, while the lower line proposes a morphological segmentation and reanalysis (in particular regarding the subordinators and the máttà form) of the upper line.

43 Here the subordinator is realized /é/ (instead of expected */á/). I cannnot account for this phonetic irregularity.

44 For other cases of verb extensions derived from a basic verb that is not attested anymore in contemporary Koalib, see Quint (2010: 301–302), and Quint & Ali Karmal Kokko (forthcoming b).

45 For general considerations about the link between high frequency and morphological irregularity, see Haspelmath & Sims (2010: 265–280).

46 In the same paper Dobrushina (2012: 1) defines the “nonlocutor” as “someone who is not a participant of the speech act”.

47 This sentence has been produced using Matthew 27:42 ‘let him come down now from the cross (and we will believe in him)’ as a model.

48 In the auxiliary construction of the s1incl negative imperative (see Table 7 and discussion thereof in Section 3.2), the connector ete can also be analyzed as a subordinator. Various other uses of ete as a subordinator are attested in Koalib, but their analysis would go beyond the scope of this paper (for more details, see Quint in preparation). Note, finally, that ete also functions as genitive marker between two NPs (Quint 2022).

49 An Arabic origin has been certified only for jɛ́r.

50 For a similar sociolinguistic profile of commands addressed to animals, where many forms are borrowed from the dominant language, see Mihas (2017: 102–103), who studies imperatives in Ashaninka Satipo, an Arawak language of Peru influenced by Spanish.

51 For instance, in Languedocien Occitan, there is also an interjection tiron!, tiron! [tiˈɾu, tiˈɾu], to call ducks (when one wants to feed them), in French, there is a interjection hue! [y], to encourage horses to speed up, just like English boo!, giddy up!, and Koalib húr!, etc. See also Aikhenvald (2010: 317) for Ndjébbana (an Australian language), Azeb (2013: 222–228) for Zargulla (Omotic) and other Ethiopian languages, and Bynon (1976) for Berber. For a cross-linguistic approach to this phenomenon, see Andrason et al. (2024).

52 Other examples are attested in the literature, e.g., Zargulla (Azeb 2013: 220–222), in which “reported imperatives” are expressed by means of segmental morphology, while Koalib mostly resorts to tonal contrasts.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Nicolas Quint, « Koalib imperatives and semantically related forms »Linguistique et langues africaines [En ligne], 10(2) | 2024, mis en ligne le 31 mars 2025, consulté le 23 juin 2025. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/lla/13837 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/13lt1

Haut de page

Auteur

Nicolas Quint

CNRS, UMR 8135 Langage, langues et cultures d’Afrique (Llacan)

Articles du même auteur

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-SA-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-SA 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) susceptibles d’être soumis à des autorisations d’usage spécifiques.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search