Handout OCP 7Nice - Structures formelles du langage

OCP 7
Nice, 30/01/2010
Template structure in Berber: constraints on derivations
Mohamed Lahrouchi
CNRS – University Paris 8
UMR 7023
[email protected]
I. Templates
(1) McCarthy 1979, 1981
Verbal templates:
Classical Arabic
√ktb ‘write’
Form I
a.
CVCVC
b.
katab
Form II
CVCCVC
kattab
Form III
CVVCVC
kaatab
Form IV
CVCCVC
/aktab
Form VII
CCVCVC
nkatab
(2) Guerssel & Lowenstamm 1990
One template:
The various forms the verb displays in Classical Arabic are derived by means of a unique
template composed of CV units, some of which play a grammatical role.
Heads
C VAff C V C VDS C V C V
The italicized syllables are morphological heads (CVAff = affixal syllable; CVDS =
derivational syllable). The boxed syllables constitute the complement of the head. The
identification of one of the head positions by some lexical material amounts to derivation.
(3) kattab ‘he made write’/ kaatab ‘he corresponded’ / nkasar ‘it broke’
a.
k
t
|
|
C V C V C V C
b
|
V C V
b.
|
a
c.
k
t
b
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V C V
|
a
n
k
s
r
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V C V
|
a
1
(4) Only one head position is identified in each form. The identification of both head positions
leads to ill-formedness.
e.g.
kasar ‘he broke’ / kassar ‘he shattered’ (intensive)
nkasar ‘it broke’ / *nkassar ‘it shattered’
*nkassar is ill-formed because headed twice (both morphological heads are identified in a
single form).
(5) Strict CV approach to syllable structure
- “[…] the syllable structure of all languages reduces to CV.” (Lowenstamm 1996: 419)
- The skeletal level of phonological representations consists of strict alternations of onset
and nucleus positions, i.e. C and V positions.
- The differences in the surface syllable types lie in the lateral relations that segments
share. Proper Government is one such relation which allows a vocalic position to remain
empty when followed by a vowel.
(See Scheer 2004 for details and discussion)
II. Templatic constraints
(6) Goal
- Show that the structure of the template proposed by Guerssel & Lowenstamm 1990 not
only accounts for a range of non-concatenative morphological operations but also captures
the distributional restrictions these operations obey.
- Account for co-occurrence restrictions that a number of nominal and verbal affixes obey
in Tashlhiyt Berber.
II.1. State, gender, number1
(7)
FS
CS
MS
FM
PL
FM
PL
SG
PL
‘cat’
amuSS
imuSSa
tamuSSut timuSSa
umuSS
imuSSa
tmuSSut tmuSSa
‘boy, girl’
afrux
‘pigeon’
ifrxan
tafruxt
tifrxin
ufrux
ifrxan
tfruxt
tfrxin
atbir
‘reed, fishing rod’
itbirn
tatbirt
titbirin
utbir
itbirn
ttbirt
ttbirin
a“alim i“alimn ta“alimt
ti“alimin u“alim i“alimn t“alimt
t“alimin
‘ox, cow’
afunas
tifunasin
tfunasin
ifunasn
SG
MS
SG
tafunast
1
ufunas
ifunasn
SG
tfunast
Abbreviations: FS = free state, CS = construct state, MS= masculine, FM = feminine, SG = singular, PL =
plural, NOM = nominative, ACC = accusative.
2
PL
(8) Distribution of markers
Gender: t prefixed and suffixed to the stem
Number: a- (SG) alternates with i- (PL)
-n (PL) suffixed to the stem
States:
Free State vs. Construct State (Bound state)
FS
MS
FM
MS
FM
SG
a-
t-a-
u-
t-
PL
i-
t-i-
i-
t-
(9) State alternation
ufrux
a.
iSSa
eat:3MS
CS
a“rum
boy.CS-NOM
bread.FS-ACC
‘The boy ate bread’
b.
afrux
iSSa
a“rum
boy.CS-NOM
eat:3MS
bread.FS-ACC
‘The boy ate bread’
c.
ittSa
u“rum
eat-passive:3MS
bread.CS
‘Bread was eaten’
d.
a“rum
/n
ufrux/ → [uufrux]
bread-FS
of
boy-CS
‘The bread of the boy’
‘The boy’s bread’
e.
iSSa
tijmi
s
u“rum
eat:3MS SG
sauce-FS
with
bread-CS
‘He ate sauce with bread’
f.
tlla
tammnt
“
u“rum
be:3FM SG
honey-FS
in
bread-CS
‘There is honey in the bread’
g.
tammnt
d
u“rum
honey-FS
and
bread-CS
‘Honey and bread’
h.
sin
ifrxan
two
boy-CS, MS, PL
‘Two boys’
/
snat
tfrxin
two
girl-CS, FM, PL
‘two girls’
3
CS:
FS:
- Subject NPs in VSO sentences
- NPs complements of light prepositions, d ‘and’, s ‘with, by’, “ ‘in’
- NPs complements of quantifiers jan ‘one’, sin ‘two’, etc.
Elsewhere
Several works on state alternation: see, among others, Achab 2003; Bader & Kenstowicz
1987; Bendjaballah & Haiden 2005; Dell & Jebbour 1991; El Moujahid 1997; Ennaji 2001;
Guerssel 1992b, 1995; Ouhalla 1988, 1996.
(10) Distribution of state markers
- Why the FM marker t- never co-occurs with the CS marker u-?
- Why afrux vs. ufrux, but tafruxt vs. tfruxt (not *tufruxt)?
(11) State / Case
Guerssel 1992b: 175 “[…] the concept of State has no validity as a theoretical
notion, […] what has been labeled a Construct State form is either a Determiner Phrase,
or a Kase Phrase where the head K is not realized”.
a- is a kind of “porte-manteau” morpheme
See also Ouhalla 1988.
(12) Prosodic deficiency of the CS (Bendjaballah & Haiden 2005)
axxam vs w´xxam ‘house’
a.
CV
FS: axxam
CV CV CV CV
CV
a
x
a
b.
CV
m
CS: w´xxam
CV CV CV CV CV
w
x
FS a- identifies the first two CV units of the template (12a)
CS w- is associated to only one CV unit, resulting in a prosodic deficiency (12b)
4
a
m
(13) When complement to light prepositions, the empty CV in the template of CS hosts light
prepositions.
/g w´xxam/ → ggw´xxam ‘in the house’
P
D
P
(14)
a.
D
|
CV
|
CV
g
w
N
CV
CV
x
C V CV
a
m
El Moujahid (1997:163)
“en théorie, il est difficilement soutenable de conférer à une même catégorie
plusieurs fonctions.”
a-frux ‘boy’
/
ta-fruxt
‘girl’
ta
u-frux
Case markers
Det
Gender
b.
/
t-frux-t
Det
Gender
Nouns with non-alternating vowels (see Dell & Jebbour 1991)
e.g.
FS
CS
ajjis
wajjis ‘horse’
adgal
wadgal ‘widower’
akal
wakal
‘earth, ground’
ajdi
wajdi
‘dog’
- Where is the Det? Where is the Case marker?
- Where is deficiency? In the CS, in the FS, or in both?
c.
- Why is it that u- (or w-) never co-occurs with t-? Why CS tfruxt and not tufruxt?
(15) Proposal:
The co-occurrence restrictions that the CS, Gender and Number
markers exhibit follow directly from the structure of the template.
5
t- and w- compete for the same position in the template.2
(16)
a.
w
b.
f
r
x
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V
|
u
t
c.
d.
f
r
x
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V
|
|
a
u
t
t
f
r
x
|
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V C V
|
u
f
r
x
t
|
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V C V
|
|
a
u
-
CVDS is omitted since unidentified
CS ufrux and tfruxt appear in (16a) and (16b)
-
FS afrux and tafruxt appear in (16c) and (16d)
-
Only one affixal C is available in template-initial position. Gender t- takes
precedence over CS w- (16b and 16d). When t- is absent, w- appears (16a).
-
Parallel is drawn: in the CS between t- and w-, and in the FS between a- and ta(see also Achab (2003: 8).
Given (16c) and (16d), the parallel should also be drawn between wa- and ta-,
since the empty initial C in (16c) can host w-, leading to *wafrux.
In Tashlhiyt Berber, many words do exhibit the prefix wa-:
e.g. wabiba ‘mosquito’, wabʒir ‘mallow’, waʃʃ ‘awful’, wafud ‘knee’, wakuz
‘weevil’, wamsa ‘anise’, wazzwit ‘afternoon tea’. Some of them coexist with
variants without glide: afud, akuz (further examples are provided in Brugnatelli
1998).3
The plural marker i- appears in the FS feminine form tifrxin, but not in the corresponding
CS feminine form tfrxin, whereas in the masculine, FS and CS are identical.
If we assume that t- and i- compete for the same position in the template, leading to the
CS form tfrxin, we should explain why these morphemes coexist in the FS form tifrxin.
This is illustrated in (17).
w surfaces as [u], when followed by a consonant. In Tashlhiyt Berber, any word-initial glide (w, j) surfaces as a
high vowel ([u], [i]) when followed by a consonant, and remains unchanged when followed by a vowel (e.g. ifta
‘he went’ / jufa ‘he found’). This is also true in word-final position, a glide surfaces as a high vowel when
preceded by a consonant (e.g. kmi ‘smoke’, xlu ‘destroy’); it remains unchanged when preceded by a vowel (e.g.
akmmaj ‘smoker’, amxlaw ‘mad’).
3
Vychil 1957, and Brugnatelli 1997 and 1998 reconstruct wa- as a determiner/demonstrative. Currently, wa- is
2
used as a vocative.
6
(17)
a.
I
f
r
b.
x
t
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V
|
f
r
x
n
|
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V C V
|
i
a
c.
t
f
r
x
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V
|
|
i
i
FS and CS ifrxan is represented in (17a), CS tfrxin in (17b), FS tifrxin in (17c).
CS plurals use the same morpheme as CS singulars: w-. There is no need to posit different
CS markers in the singular and plural forms, masculine and feminine.
To the FS masculine plural ifrxan corresponds the CS /wifrxan/. Surface homophony
results from the loss of w- and the association of the following I to the initial C, leading to
/jfrxan/ which surfaces as [ifrxan].
(18) illustrates the opposition ifrxan vs. tfrxin.
(18)
a.
jfrxan
b.
f
r
x
n
|
|
|
|
t
C V C V C V C V C V
(19)
f
r
x
n
|
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V C V
|
|
a
I
tfrxin
I
i
tafruxt (SG) vs. (PL) tifrxin (not *tifrxtin)
II.2 Geminated Imperfective
Gemination in the Imperfective concerns verbs containing no more than three consonants and
no full vowels, as well as verbs with the following shapes: CCU, CCI.
(20)
Aorist
Imperfective
a.
lkm
lkkm
‘arrive’
kSm
kSSm
‘enter’
gwmr
gwmmr
‘hunt’
7
b.
krz
kkrz
‘plough’
xrb
xxrb
‘scratch’
xwmʒ
xxwmʒ
‘scrape’
Previous accounts of Geminated Imperfective: Dell & Elmedlaoui (1988, 2002); Bensoukas
(2001), Jebbour (1996, 1999), Lahrouchi (2008), among others.
(21) Within template morphology, gemination results from the identification of CVDS by
means of C-spreading. Medial consonant gemination obtains as illustrated below.
l
k
|
|
C V C V C
m
|
V C V
-
CVAff is omitted since unidentified.
-
Segments are associated to the template from the edges-inward (Yip 1988),
resulting in the gemination of the medial consonant.
(22) Sonority effect: No segment can geminate in the imperfective if it is the most sonorous
segment in the root. (See Lahrouchi 2008: 35 for discussion)
Aorist
Imperfective
C
|
k
V
C
|
r
V
C
|
z
V
a.
C
|
k
V
C
V
C
|
r
V
C
|
z
V
b.
C
|
k
V
C
V
//
C
|
r
V
C
|
z
V
c.
C
|
k
V
C
V
C
|
r
[kkrz]
V
C
|
z
V
(23) Action nouns
Certain action nouns display a uniform pattern: aCCaC, where the medial consonant is
either simple or geminated depending on its sonority.
a.
b.
Verb
Action Noun
‘lend’
rd≥l
artt≥al
‘swell up’
bzg
abzzag
‘hide’
ntl
anttal
‘tighten’
frg
afrag
8
‘be ashamed’ mrg
amrag
‘sort out’
afran
frn
In the first group of verbs the medial consonant is an obstruent, while in the other
group it is a sonorant surrounded by less sonorous segments. In the corresponding
action nouns, the first group geminates the medial consonant, but not the second
group.
II.3 Causative Imperfective
- Causative verbs are built by means of a monoconsonantal prefix s- attached to the stem.
Depending on the properties of the stem, the prefix is realized as a single or geminated
segment. It is argued in Lahrouchi (2003) that an initial templatic site is responsible for
the size variation of the prefix.
- The initial templatic site coincides with CVAff in (2).
- In the Imperfective, Causative forms all use vowel insertion, while their bases use
gemination or affixation (see examples in (24).
(24)
Verb
Causative
Aorist
Imperfective
Aorist
Imperfective
lkm
lkkm
sslkm
sslkam
*sslkkm
‘stand up’
nkr
nkkr
ssnkr
ssnkar
*ssnkkr
‘hide’
ntl
nttl
ssntl
ssntal
*ssnttl
mun
ttmuna
smun
smuna
*ttsmuna
‘sit down’
gawr
ttgawar
sgawr
sgawar
*ttsgawar
‘change’
badl
ttbadal
sbadl
sbadal
*ttsbadal
a. ‘arrive’
b. ‘pick up’
The ungrammatical forms in the rightmost column are of two types:
-
Forms in (24b), where imperfective and causative prefixes compete for the same
position in the template, i.e. CVAff.
-
Forms in (24a), which involve the identification of both head positions (CVAff and
CVDS) at the same time, leading to an undesired multi-headed structure.
9
(25)
sslkm
a.
s
l
|
|
C V C V C V C
sbadal
b.
k
|
V C
m
|
V C V
s
b
d
l
|
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V C V
|
|
a
a
II.4 Inchoatives
Inchoative verbs show a geminated consonant that degeminates when preceded by a
derivational morpheme, such as causative s- and imperfective tt-.
(26)
Inchoative
Causative
‘sit down’
ggawr
sgawr
‘be a friend’
ddukkl
sdukkl
‘be disgused’
mmuktu
smuktu
‘be rotten’
llugmu
slugmu
‘stand up’
mmatti
smatti
Prefix s- prevents initial consonant form geminating, as shown in (27). See also Guerssel
1992a.
ggawr
(27)
a.
g
sgawr
w
|
|
C V C V C V C
|
a
b.
r
|
V C V
s
g
w
r
|
|
|
|
C V C V C V C V C V
|
a
III. Conclusion
The template captures the distributional restrictions that certain nominal and verbal
morphemes undergo. The structure assigned to the template defines the way forms are
derived: (i) each form must be headed (i.e. one of the derivational head positions in the
template must be identified), (ii) multi-headed forms are prohibited (two derivational heads
cannot be identified in a single form).
References
Achab, Karim. 2003. Alternation of State in Berber. In Research in Afroasiatic Grammar II,
Jacqueline Lecarme (ed.), pp. 1-20. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bader, Yousef & Michael Kenstowicz. 1987. Syllables and Case in Kabyle Berber. Lingua 73. pp.
279-299.
Bendjaballah, Sabrina & Martin Haiden. 2005. The Grammar of Prepositions in Berber (Taqbaylit).
Ms. CNRS & University Lille 3. lingBuzz/000261.
Bensoukas, Karim. 2001. Stem Forms in the Nontemplatic Morphology of Berber. Mohamed 5
University, Doctorat d’Etat Thesis.
10
Brugnatelli, Vermondo. 1997. L'état d'annexion en diachronie. In A. Bausi, M. Tosco (éd.),
Afroasiatica Neapolitana. Incontro di Linguistica Afroasiatica (Camito-Semitica). Université
de Naples – L’orientale. pp. 139-150.
Brugnatelli, Vermondo. 1998. La morphologie des noms berbères en w-. Considérations
diachroniques. In Mohamed Elmedlaoui, Saâd Gafaiti & Fouad Saa (eds), Actes du Premier
Congrès Chamito Sémitique de Fès (12-13 mars 1997). Saïs-Fès : publications de la faculté des
lettres et des sciences humaines. pp. 51-67.
Dell, François & Mohamed Elmedlaoui. 1985. Syllabic Consonants and Syllabification in Imdlawn
Tashlhiyt Berber. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 7. pp. 105-130.
Dell, François & Mohamed Elmedlaoui. 1988. Syllabic Consonants in Berber: Some New Evidence.
Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 10. pp. 1-17.
Dell, François & Mohamed Elmedlaoui. 2002. Syllables in Tashlhiyt Berber and in Moroccan Arabic.
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.
Dell, François & Abdelkrim Jebbour. 1991. Phonotactique des noms à voyelle initiale en berbère
(chleuh de Tiznit, Maroc). Linguistic Analysis 21. pp. 119-147.
El Moujahid, El Houssaïn. 1997. Grammaire générative du berbère, morphologie et syntaxe du nom
en tachelhit. Rabat : publications de la faculté des lettres et des sciences humaines.
Ennaji, Moha. 2001. The Construct State in Berber. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 31/2. pp. 55-72.
Guerssel, Mohand. 1992a. The Phonology of Berber Derivational Morphology by Affixation.
Linguistic Analysis 22. pp. 3-60.
Guerssel, Mohand. 1992b. On the Case System of Berber. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 37/2. pp.
175-195.
Guerssel, Mohand. 1995. Berber Clitic Doubling and Syntactic extraction. Revue québécoise de
linguistique 24/1: 111-133.
Guerssel, Mohand & Jean Lowenstamm. Classical Arabic Apophony. Ms UQAM & Université Paris
7.
Iazzi, Elmehdi. 1991. Morphologie du verbe en tamazight (parler des Aït Attab Haut-Atlas Central) :
approche prosodique. Rabat : Mohamed 5 University, D.E.S Thesis.
Jebbour, Abdelkrim. 1996. Morphologie et contraintes prosodiques en berbère (tachelhit de Tiznit) :
analyse linguistique et traitement automatique. Rabat : Mohamed 5 University, Doctorat d’Etat
Thesis.
Jebbour, Abdelkrim. 1999. Syllable Weight and Syllable Nuclei in Tashlhiyt Berber of Tiznit. Cahiers
de Grammaire 24. pp. 95-116.
Lahrouchi, Mohamed. 2003. Manifestations gabaritiques dans la morphologie verbale du berbère
(parler chleuh d’Agadir). Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 32. pp. 61-82.
Lahrouchi, Mohamed. 2008. A Templatic Approach to Gemination in the Imperfective Stem of
Tashlhiyt Berber. Studies in African Linguistics 37/1. pp. 21-60.
Lowenstamm, Jean. 1996. CV as the Only Syllable Type. In Jacques Durand & Bernard Laks (eds),
Current Trends in Phonology: Models and Methods, volume 2. Salford: European Studies
Research Institute, University of Salford. pp. 419-441.
Lowenstamm, Jean. 1999. The Beginning of the Word. In John Rennison & Klaus Kühnhammer (eds),
Phonologica. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics. pp. 153-167.
McCarthy, John. 1979. Formal Problems in Semitic Phonology and Morphology. Massachusetts, MIT:
PhD. dissertation.
McCarthy, John. 1981. A Prosodic Theory of Nonconcatenative Morphology. Linguistic Inquiry 12.
pp. 373-418.
Ouhalla, Jamal. 1988. The Syntax of Head Movement: a Study of Berber. London: University College,
PhD. dissertation.
Ouhalla, Jamal. 1996. The Construct State in Berber. In Jacqueline Lecarme, Jean Lowenstamm & Ur
Shlonsky (eds.), Studies in Afroasiatic Grammar. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.
Scheer. Tobias. 2004. A Lateral Theory of Phonology. Vol. 1: What is CVCV, and why should it be?
Studies in Generative Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Vycichl, Werner.1957. L'article défini du berbère. Mémorial André Basset, Paris. pp. 139-146.
Yip, Moira. 1988. “Template morphology and the direction of association”. Natural Language and
Linguistic Theory 6: 551-577.
11