Aspect and negation in mọ̀bà (a yorùbá dialect)
2 likes721 views
This document analyzes tense, aspect, and negation in the Mọ̀bà dialect of the Yorùbá language. It finds that Mọ̀bà has one future tense marker, éè, similar to Standard Yorùbá, but with some phonological variations. Mọ̀bà also uses a high tone syllable, é, to mark both present and past tense, and has the same progressive, habitual, and perfective aspect markers as Standard Yorùbá. Finally, the study identifies four negation markers in Mọ̀bà and suggests one of these markers, ọ̀kọ́, may be the
Aspect and negation in mọ̀bà (a yorùbá dialect)
- 1. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1719 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2863 (Online) Vol.3, No.1, 2013 Tense/Aspect and Negation in Mọ̀bà (A Yorùbá Dialect) Tèmítọ́pẹ́ Olúmúyìwá (PhD) Department of Linguistics & Languages Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko, Nigeria *drtemitopeolumuyiwa@yahoo.com Abstract The main thrust of this study is to shed light on the grammatical rules and system that are typical of Mọ̀bà dialect with reference to tense/aspect and negation. The study shows that Mọ̀bà has one future tense marker and the occurrence of tense/aspect markers in the dialect and standard Yorùbá resembles each other. The study identifies four negation markers in Mọ̀bà and posit that ọ̀kọ́, one of the negation markers in the dialect is probably the origin of negation marker kọ́ in standard Yorùbá. The use of the negation marker rì in the dialect require that àì be analyzed as non-unitary morphemes in standard Yorùbá. Keywords: aspect, dialect, Mọ̀bà, negation, tense, Yorùbá 1. Introduction Various aspects of the phonology and syntax of the Yorùbá language have been examined in many studies such as Adéwọlé (1988), Akinlabí (1985), Awóbùlúyì (1967, 1978, 2008), Bámgbóṣé (1966, 1990), Ìlọ̀rí (2010), Ọdúntan (2000), Ọla (1990), Owólabí (1976, 1989) and Oyèláran (1971) among others. These studies have thrown more light on what is permitted or prohibited in Standard Yoruba. However, very few scholarly works exists on Yorùbá dialects, which are numerous and structurally diverse. These works include Bámiṣilẹ̀ (1986), Ajíbóyè (1990), Sàláwù (1998) and Madeleire (2004). Most of these works focus more on phonology than other areas of linguistics like morphology, syntax and semantics. The inadequate attention paid to the study of these dialects probably informs Awobuluyi’s (1992, 1998) appeal to Yorùbá linguistics to research into Yorùbá dialects. Such study, according to him, will provide some grammatical expositions that may teach us new things that will help in reappraising the grammar of Yorùbá language. Olúmúyìwá (2006) and the present study respond to that call as we are also of the view that such study of the Yorùbá dialects has immediate and long term benefits for Yorùbá language studies. The main thrust of this study is to show the grammatical rules and systems that are typical of the dialect with reference to tense/aspect and negation. The approach in this analysis, which is basically descriptive, affords us the opportunity to identify and describe the forms and functions of these items in Mọ̀bà. 2. Mọ̀ba Linguistic Area Mọ̀bà is spoken in all the towns and villages of Mọ̀bà Local Government Areas and some towns in ̀ ̀ Ilejemeje Local Government area of Èkìtì State. These towns include Ọtùn, Igógo, Osùn-ún,Ẹ̀ pẹ̀, Ọsàn,Ìkùn, Ìsáòyè, Iṣàn and Iyè. Mọ̀bà is also spoken in the following towns in Kwara State of Nigeria: Osí, Ìlọfà, Ayédùn, Ẹ̀ kàn and Ìlálẹ̀. Each of these towns speak a variant of Mọ̀bà. Mọ̀bà belongs to the Central Yorùba (CY) dialect group. Other dialects in this group are Èkìtì, Ìjẹ̀ṣà and Ifẹ̀. 3. Tense and Aspect Markers in Mọ̀bà 3.1 Tense Like Yorùbá language, tense in Mọ̀bà polarizes future and non-future: being present and past. Future tense covers only future tense. Unlike Yorùbá which have three future tense markers: yóò, máa and á, the only phonetically visible element that mark future tense in Mọ̀bà is éè, as it occurs in the following expressions: 1. ̀ Ọtún i. Olú ẹ́ẹ̀ kọ́lé Olú will build-house “Olu will build house” ii. Ayọ̀ ẹ́ẹ̀ lọ Ayọ̀ will go “Ayọ̀ will go” iii. Ayọ̀ éè gbe 118
- 2. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1719 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2863 (Online) Vol.3, No.1, 2013 Ayọ̀ will carry (it) “Ayọ̀ will carry it” iv. Olú éè momi Olú will drink-water “Olu will drink water” As shown in (1) above, the future tense marker in Mọ̀bà occurs between the subject noun phrase and the verb (phrase). However, the future tense marker changes form when it occurs with short pronouns as exemplified below in (2). 2. Ọtuǹ i. àá ẹ́ẹ̀ lọ → À ẹ̀ lọ We will go ‘We will go.’ ii. àá éè gbe → À è gbe We will carry (it) ‘We will carry it’ iii. mìí éè dìde → Me è dìde I will stand (up) ‘I will stand up.’ iv. ọ̀ọ́ ẹ́ẹ̀ á → ọ̀ ẹ̀ á you will come ‘You will come.’ As observed in (2) above, the form of the future tense marker is changed due to phonological processes of deletion in (2:i-ii,iv) and deletion/assimilation in (2:iii). The choice of either éè or ẹ́ẹ̀ in (1) and (2) above is dependent on the advanced tongue root (ATR) feature of the vowel of the verb that follows it. The non-future tense is marked only by high tone syllable é, which also manifest itself between the noun phrase and the verb as shown in (3): 3. ̀ Ọsàn 1. Ayọ̀ é ga → Ayọ̀ ọ́ ga Ayọ̀ HTS tall Ayọ̀ HTS tall ‘Ayọ̀ is tall’ ii. Dadá é gbe → Dàda á gbe Dada HTS carry (it) Dàda HTS carry it ‘Dada carried it’ iii. Ayọ̀ é lọ → Ayọ̀ ọ́ lọ Ayọ̀ HTS go Ayọ̀ HTS go ‘Ayọ̀ went’ iv. Alẹ̀ é gbe → Alẹ̀ ẹ́ gbe ground HTS dry ground HTS dry ‘The ground is dry’ v. mìí é lọ → mìí í lọ 1sg HTS go I HTS go ‘I went’ vi. àá é gbe → àá á gbe 3pl HTS carry we HTS carry ‘we carried it’ As shown in (3) above, the HTS noticeably and regularly assimilates the properties of the vowel of the preceding subject NP. Utterances in (3) with HTS are exclusively interpreted as either present or past in Mọ̀bà. 3.2 Aspect Aspect is one of the most studied functional item in Yorùbá due to its prominence in Yorùbá sentences, Ọdúntan (2000:134-135). Aspect denotes the duration of event described by the verb in a given clause to show whether such an event is on going (progressive) or have been completed (perfective), Ìlọ̀rí (2010:150). Like Yorùbá, there are three different types of aspects which are functionally lexicalized in Mọ̀bà. These are í (progressive), mọ́ọ í (habitual) and ti (perfective). These are exemplified below in (4) 4(a) Igógo i. À í sọ̀ràn 3pl prog talk ‘We are talking’ ii. Ayọ̀ í juṣu …. Prog eat-yam ‘Ayo is eating yam’ iii. Olú í lọ …. prog go ‘Olu is going’ 4(b) Ìlọfà i. Olú mọ́ọ í gbẹ̀bùn …. dur prog receive-gift ‘Olu habitually receives gift’ ii. Ayọ̀ mọ́ọ́ í yúnbẹ̀ …. dur. Prog the-place ‘Ayọ̀ habitually goes there.’ 119
- 3. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1719 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2863 (Online) Vol.3, No.1, 2013 iii. Ìọn ẹyẹ mọ́ọ í pario 3pl bird dur prog make-noise ‘The birds habitually make noise.’ (c) Ìkùn i. Délé ti rí a …. perf see 3pl ‘Dele has seen us.’ ii. Ṣé ọ̀ọ́ ti gbọ́? Have 2sg perf hear ‘Have you heard?’ iii. Bàbá ọ̀hún ti kú father the perf die ‘The father is dead.’ The progressive marker í in 4 (a) refers to action or state in progress at the time of speech/utterance or at a time in the past which serves as a kind of reference point for the speech/utterance. Structures containing progressive markers are factive in Mọ̀bà. The habitual marker in 4(b) shows that the action in such types of utterances in Mọ̀bà is marked as being in progress and incomplete. However, the action in 4(c) has been performed / completed at the time of reference. The perfective aspect marker ti in Mọ̀bà, shows that the action or state as shown in 4(c) above is the same with ti (perfective marker) in Standard Yorùbá. Like Yorùbá, two or more aspect markers may occur in a cluster in Mọ̀bà. This can be seen in (5) (5) Osùn-ún i. Ìhan akọrin tí í kọrin 3pl chorister perf prog sing-song ‘The choristers have started singing’ ii. Olú ti í ṣusẹ́ … perf prog do-work ‘Olú has started working’ Thus far, we have investigated tense and aspect situation in Mọ̀bà. We have shown that: (i) tense markers are very few in the dialect and (ii) the occurrence of aspect markers in syntactic constructions in the dialect resembles that of Yorùbá. 4.0 Negation Negation is a construction in grammatical and semantic analysis that typically exposes the contradiction of some or all of the sentence meaning, Crystal (1980). (6) Declarative: Olú gbe Negative: Olú kè gbe Scholars such as Jackendoff (1972) and Klima (1964) have differentiated two types of negation, namely, constituent negation and sentence negation. As the name implies, when some or part of a sentence is negated, we talk of constituent negation. But when the whole sentence rather than its part is negated, the reference is sentence negation. In his attempt to explain vowel harmony in Mọ̀bà dialects, Bámiṣilẹ̀ (1986:153-174) identified kè ‘not’ as the negation marker in the dialect. Ever since, no Yorùbá linguist has made any effort to investigate further on the occurrence of this and other negation markers in the syntax of Mọ̀bà. In light of this development, we shall examine in this section, the concept of negation together with its structural representation in Mọ̀bà. 4.1 Negation formatives in Mọ̀bà There are four negation markers in Mọ̀bà. These are kè, mọ́ọ̀, ọ̀kọ́ and rì. These items are free morphemes and they occur immediately after the subject NP in the dialect. 4.1.1 The Negative Marker kè ‘not’ This negation marker is similar to kò/kì ‘not’ in standard Yoruba. While standard Yorùbá optionally permits the full form of this negation marker kò/ki, Mọ̀bà obligatorily permits the full form of the negation marker. The negation marker kè is used to negate the verb or verb phrase in grammatical formation as shown in (7) 7. Ẹ̀ kàn 1. Olú kè gbe …. neg. carry ‘Olú did not carry it.’ ii. Olú kẹ̀ lọ …. neg go ‘Olú did not go.’ iii. Olè kè í rìn lọ́sọ̀n-ọ́n 120
- 4. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1719 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2863 (Online) Vol.3, No.1, 2013 thief neg prog walk afternoon ‘The thief would not walk in the afternoon’ iv. Kè í ṣe rírà ni Olú rà á neg prog do buying foc. Olú buy it ‘It is not that Olú bought it.’ v. Kẹ̀ páàsì bẹ́ẹ̀ ni kè féèlì neg pass yet foc not fail ‘s/he neither pass nor fail.’ Examples 7 (i-iii) show that no element can intervene between the subject NP and the negation marker in Mọ̀bà. So also, example 7 (iii-iv) show that the negation marker kè, can occur before progressive aspect marker í in the dialect. The choice of either kè/kẹ̀ depends on the advanced tongue root feature of the vowel of the verb that follows it. 4.1.2 The Negation marker mọ́ọ̀ ‘not’. Like máà ‘not’ in standard Yorùba and mọ́ọ̀ ‘not’ in Èkìtì dialects, this negation marker is used mostly to negate imperatives in Mọ̀bà as evident in the following constructions. 8.Osí i. mọ́ọ̀ jà neg fight ‘Don’t fight’ ii. mọ́ọ̀ gbe neg carry ‘Don’t carry it.’ iii. mọ́ọ̀ ké mọ́ neg cry stop ‘Don’t cry’ iv. mọ́ọ̀ jẹ́ dùn mi neg let pain leg ‘Don’t let it pain me’ In contrast to Èkìtì dialects where mọ́ọ̀ has móò as a variant and the choice between the two variants depend on the tongue height of the following vowel, i.e. when the vowel of the verb that follow it is half close, móò is used. The alternant mọ́ọ̀ is used when the vowel of the verb that follows it is open or half open as in (9) below. 9. Adó móò gbe móò ki mọ́ọ̀ lọ mọ́ọ̀ jà In Mọ̀bà, mọ́ọ̀ has no variant, hence its occurrence does not depend on the tongue height of the verb that follows it. This explains why the form remains constant in (8) despite being followed by verbs with different advanced tongue root features. This brings to question the claim made in Bámiṣilẹ̀ (1986) that Mọ̀bà exhibits full vowel harmony system in negative constructions in Mọ̀bà. Another important thing to note about kè and mọ́ọ̀ in Mọ̀bà is that only the negation marker kè, can precede and negate a modal while mọ́ọ̀ follows it as shown in (10) below: 10. Olú kẹ̀ yọ́ọ̀ mọ́ọ̀ á …. Neg model neg come ‘Olú may not come’ Kè yọ́ọ̀ mọ́ọ̀ gbe Neg model neg carry-it ‘H/She may not carry it.’ ̀ 4.1.3 The Negation Marker Ọkọ́ ‘not’ Mọ̀bà uses the negation marker ọ̀kọ́ to negate a constituent, namely, nouns/noun phrases only. The negation marker regularly follows the noun it negates in the dialect as shown in (11) 11.Ìlọfà i. Èmi ọ̀kọ́ Isg neg ‘I wasn’t the one.’ ii. Olú àti Ayọ̀ ọ̀kọ́ Olú and Ayọ neg ‘It is not Olú and Ayọ̀’ iii. Olú ọ̀kọ́ e gbe Olú neg that carry ‘It is not Olu that carried it.’ 121
- 5. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1719 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2863 (Online) Vol.3, No.1, 2013 Like Mọ̀bà, which uses ọ̀kọ́, the standard Yoruba uses kọ́ ‘not’ to negate noun/noun phrases. We want to posit here that ọ̀kọ́ is probably the origin of kọ́ in standard Yorùbá as no other Yorùbá dialects is known to use ọ̀kọ́ to negate nouns/noun phrases. 4.1.4 The Negation Marker rì/ì ‘not’ The negation marker rì/ì is used to negate verb phrase in nominalizations in Mọ̀bà and other Central Yorùbá dialects. The example of its usage is shown in (12) below: 12. Ẹ̀ pẹ̀ i. À-jẹ-rì-jẹ-tán prefix eat neg eat-finish ‘eating without finishing.’ ii. À –bù- rì- bù- tán prefix cut neg cut-finish ‘cutting without finishing.’ iii. A- rì - lọ prefix neg go ‘failure to go.’ iv. À-rì-gbe prefix neg carry ‘failure to carry it.’ Sàláwù (1998:43; 2001:112) believes that this negation marker has the form àrì in Èkìtí dialects. According to him, àrì is a unitary morpheme used to negate verbs. His reasoning is based on the premise that rì is not found in Èkìtì lexemes. Our findings show, however, that rì is actually in the lexicon of Èkìtì as shown below in (13). 13. Ọyẹ́/Ìkọ̀lé rì ‘sink’ ulé rì ‘The house sank’ rì ‘spoil’ kòkó rì ‘Cocoa has spoilt’ rì ‘negator’ ká ṣé e kọ̀ ọ rì jẹ́ tín ‘Why is it that you did not finish eating it.’ The negator marker rì as used in (12) above shows that (a) àrì is not a unitary morpheme in Mọ̀bà. Therefore, it should be analyzed as à-prefix and rì negation marker; (b) the so-called negative prefix àì, which some Yorùbá scholars believe to be a single morpheme in Yorùbá (Bámgbóṣé (1990:106), Owólabí (1995:92, 108) and Táíwò (2006)) is actually the nominalizing prefix à- followed by the negation marker ì as shown in (14) below: 14. Yorùbá à - jẹ - ì - jẹ - tán prefix eat neg eat finish ‘eating without finishing’ à - ì - gbe prefix neg carry ‘failure to carry it.’ 5. Conclusion According to Trudgill (1994), the common focus of dialectologist is to expose the grammatical rules and systems that are ‘typical’ of a particular dialect. Attempt has been made in this paper to give a grammatical exposition with reference to tense/aspect and negation in Mọ̀bà dialect of Yorùbá. We have been able to explore the functions and structural occurrence of these grammatical items in the dialect. We observed that the occurrence of tense and aspect markers in the dialect and standard Yorùbá resemble each other. Also, we identified four negation markers in Mọ̀bà dialect. These are kè, mọ́ọ̀, ọ̀kọ́ and rì. The negation system in the dialect differs slightly from standard Yorùbá. For instance, where standard Yorùbá optionally deletes the consonant of the negation kò, Mọ̀bà dialect permits the full form of kè. The use of negation marker rì in Mọ̀bà dialect require that àì which some Yorùbá linguists believe is a unitary morpheme be analyzed as two distinct morphemes. References Adéwọlé, L.O (1988), “The Categorical Status of the Functions of the Yorùbá Auxiliary Verbs with some Structural Analyses in GPSG”. PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh. Ajíbóyè, O. (1990), Àtúnyẹ̀wò Fonọ́lọ́jì Mọ̀bà” M.A Thesis, University of Ìlọrin. Akinlabi, A.M. (1985), “Tonal Under specification of Yorùbá Tone.” PhD Thesis, University of Ibadan. 122
- 6. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1719 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2863 (Online) Vol.3, No.1, 2013 Awóbùlúyì, O. (1967), “Studies in the Syntax of the Standard Yorùbá Verb.” PhD Thesis, Columbia University, New York. Awóbùlùyí, O. (1978), Essentials of Yorùbá Grammar Ìbàdàn: Oxford University Press. Awóbùlúyì, O. (1992) “Aspect of Contemporary Standard Yorùbá in Dialectological Perspective” in Akínwùmi Ishola (ed.) New Findings In Yorùbá Studies J.F Ọdúnjọ Memorial Lectures Organizing Committee. Awóbùlúyì, O. (1998), “Àwọn Ẹ̀ ka-èdè Yorùbá” Paper read at Yorùbá Studies Association of Nigeria, Pastoral Institute, Bodija, Ibadan. Awóbùlúyì, O. (2008), Ẹ̀ kọ́ Ìṣẹ̀dá-Ọ̀ rọ̀ Yorùbá Àkúrẹ́: Montem Paerbacks. Bámgbóṣé, A. (1966), A Grammar of Yorùbá Cambridge University. Bámgbóṣé, A. (1990), Fonọ́lọ́jì àti Gírámà Yorùbá Ibàdàn: University Press. Bámisilẹ, O. (1986), “Fonọ́lọ́jì Yorùbá Mọ̀bà.” M.A Thesis, University of Ìlọrin. Crystal, D. (1980), A First Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics Adre Deutsch Limited. Ìlọ̀rí, J.F. (2010), “Nominal Constructions in Igala and Yorùbá” PhD Thesis, Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba- Akoko. Jakendoff, R.S. (1972), Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar Cambridge: M.I.T Press. Klima, E.S. (1964), ‘Negation in English’ in Fordor J.A And J.J Kate (eds.) The Structure of Language. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc;218-323. Ọdúntan, G.B. (2000), “Yoruba Clause Structure” PhD Thesis, The University of Iowa. Law, O. (1990), “Ìpàrójẹ Nínú Èdè Yorùbá” M.A Thesis, University of Ìlọrin. Olúmúyìwá, O.T (2006), “Àwọn Wúnrẹ̀n Onítumọ̀ Gírámà Nínú Àwọn Ẹ̀ ka-Èdè Àárín Gbùngbùn Yorùbá.” PhD Thesis, Adékúnlé Ajasin University, Akungba- Akoko. Owólabi, K. (1976), “Noun-Noun Constructions in Yorùbá: A Syntactic and Semantic Analysis, PhD Dissertation, University of Baden. Owólabí, K. (1989), Ijìnlẹ̀ Itúpalẹ̀ Èdè Yorùbá (1): Fonẹtíìkì àti Fonọ́lọ́jì Ibadan: Oníbọnòjẹ Press & Books Nig. Ltd. Owólabí, K. (1995), “More on Yorùbá Prefixing Morphology” in Owólabí, K. (ed) Language in Nigeria: Essays in Honour of Ayọ̀ Bámgboṣé Ìbàdàn” Group Publishers, 92-112. Oyèláràn, O.O. (1971), “Yoruba Phonology” PhD Thesis, Stanford University, California. Sàláwù, A.S. (1998), “Ìyísódì Nínú Ẹ̀ ka-Èdè Èkìtì” M.A Thesis, Ọbafẹmi Awólọwọ University, Ile-Ifẹ. Salawu, A.S. (2001), “Negation in Èkìtì” in Yorùbá: Journal of the Yorùbá Studies Association of Nigeria 2(1), 102-109. Taiwo, O. (2006), “Negative Markers in ÀO and Standard Yorùbá”. The Journal of West African Languages XXX III (1), 53-70. Trudgill, P. (1994), Dialects London: Routledge. 123
- 7. This academic article was published by The International Institute for Science, Technology and Education (IISTE). The IISTE is a pioneer in the Open Access Publishing service based in the U.S. and Europe. The aim of the institute is Accelerating Global Knowledge Sharing. More information about the publisher can be found in the IISTE’s homepage: http://www.iiste.org CALL FOR PAPERS The IISTE is currently hosting more than 30 peer-reviewed academic journals and collaborating with academic institutions around the world. There’s no deadline for submission. Prospective authors of IISTE journals can find the submission instruction on the following page: http://www.iiste.org/Journals/ The IISTE editorial team promises to the review and publish all the qualified submissions in a fast manner. All the journals articles are available online to the readers all over the world without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Printed version of the journals is also available upon request of readers and authors. IISTE Knowledge Sharing Partners EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP Open Archives Harvester, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate, OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial Library , NewJour, Google Scholar