The Ethnology of the Khezhas & The Khezha Grammar
|
| Part 2: Language |
Morphology
Linguists who had worked in different Naga languages
classified morphology in these languages into two broad divisions: noun and
verb. Adjectives have been treated as a closed class of word and labeled under
noun morphology. While at the same time claiming that the adjectives in the
respective languages they had worked share the base of verb, if not a sub-class
of verb. The cardinal question is, what are the constraints that restricted
them in their morphological expansions so that they could not be considered as
open class of words? It would have been more proper and explicit, if the
adjectives are truly a sub-class of verb, they could have been analyzed as part
of verb and examine in what context they are alike with verb in their semantic,
morphological and syntactic domains.
The
present work is a major departure from the generally locepted view about the
characteristics of adjectives as a sub-class of verb or noun. The main emphasis
here would be that the adjectives in Khezha have their own morphological base
and they are pontential in morphological extension, though may share the
grammatical properties with both noun and verb in some instances. This does not mean however that they have
lost their identity as open class of word since even nouns and verbs also in
return share the properties of adjectives in many instances, in their
morphological operations. Thus, they are simply reciprocal and supplementary to
one another since one cannot exist without the other. On this ground, the present
work classified Khezha morphology into three broad divisions: noun, adjective
and verb.
3.1. NOUN
3.1.1. Classification of Noun
Nouns in Khezha may be broadly classified into two
groups: animate and inanimate. Although there is no particular marker to
indicate the difference between animate and inanimate nouns, their differences
can be observed in the semantic context.
For example, Khezha has two allomorphs for adjective ‘old’ such as keshé
and ketre, where the former occurs as modifier to the animate nouns,
while the latter to those of the inanimate nouns, eg.,
èmi keshé
‘old man’ : èmi keshé dah ‘The
man is old’
èvo keshé ‘old pig’ : èvo keshé dah ‘The
pig is old’
razhu ketre ‘old shirt’ : razhu ketre dah ‘The shirt is old’
èkie ketre ‘old house’ : èkie ketre dah ‘The house is old’
The animate nouns may be further divided into human and
non-human. The difference between them
may be distinguished by the occurrence or nonoccurrence of genitive marker –we. All the human nouns can take it, whereas
non-human nouns cannot, eg.,
áwe ‘mine’
ìwe ‘yours’
pùwe ‘his/hers’
lǘmiwè ‘girl’s’
meriwè ‘Mary’s’
but not,
*èvowè (pig’s)
*ròcǘwè (bird’s)
*tshübówè (tree’s)
The human nouns may be further sub-classified into
professional and non-professional, where the professional nouns show gender
distinction. Similarly, the non-human
nouns may be sub-classified into three groups:
animal, bird and insect. Both the
animals and birds show such a distinction. They may be demonstrated by tree diagram:
NOUN
Animate
Inanimate
Human Non-human
Professional Non-Professional Animal
Bird Insect
Neuter Masculine
Feminine Neuter Male
Female Neuter Male Female
3.1.2. Gender
Gender
distinction plays a very limited role in Khezha. Pronouns never show any gender
distinction. Thus, the word, pù,
for instance, is used for both ‘he’ and ‘she’.
Even in case of nouns, the grammatical category of gender is applicable
only to a few classes of nouns. Nouns
that take gender marker show a three-way opposition such as neuter, masculine
and feminine. While the base form itself
indicates the neuter gender, the masculine and feminine genders are overtly marked
wherever applicable. The gender of these types of nouns, however, never shows
any gender agreement with any other grammatical class in a sentence. Below are the nouns that show gender
distinction:
3.1.2.1. Human Gender:
Human gender in Khezha may be classified into two
categories, viz., personal name and name of profession.
(i) Personal
Names : While personal names
referring to the male beings are not marked, all the names referring to female
are marked with the feminine gender suffix –è. The following are some of the Khezha personal
names :
Male Name Female Names
Diló Dilóè
Wete Weteè
Throtsò Throtsoè
Lhikhah Lhikhahè
Nìkhahló Nìkhahlóè
(ii) Names of
Profession : A few names referring to certain professions
show a three-way opposition in gender:
neuter, masculine and feminine.
The neuter gender denotes both male and female engaged in the profession
where nouns are optionally marked with a suffix –mi. The masculine
gender is marked with the suffix –pfü, while the feminine gender with –pì.
Neuter Masculine
Feminine
kìetshünö (mí)
‘neighbour’ kìetshünöpfü kìetshünöpì
kiekète (mi) ‘servant’ kiekètepfü kyekètepì
trüta (mi) ‘leader’ trütapfü trütapì
sekepú (mí) ‘speaker’ sekepúpfü sekepúpì
kezü (mí) ‘friend’ kezüpfü kezüpì
seta (mi) ‘lawyer/judge’ sètapfü sètapì
kahkepú (mi) ‘teacher’ kahkepúpfü kahkepúpì
3.1.2.2. Animal Gender :
As
in the case of human nouns, animals and birds too, have a three-way opposition
in gender, viz., neuter, male and female, where the neuter gender is unmarked.
Animals are distinguished by the presence and absence of
horns, while birds are distinguished by colour.
Poultry and majority of female animals show a distinction between the
ones tha are already bred and the ones, which are unbred; while some other
animals and birds do not show such a distinction. The unbred female animals are further
distinguished between unbred female animals with horns and unbred female animals
without horns. Also, some animals like
elephant, for instance, do not show gender distinction.
èlü ‘male
animals without horn’
medó ‘male
animals with horn’
ènie ‘unbred
female animals without horn’
elǘ ‘unbred
female animals with horn’
‘unbred female poultry’
ètrǜ ‘bred
female animals and poultry, also both bred and unbred
female birds’
köjǘ ‘male
birds’
Examples :
Animals Male Female
With
horn without bred unbred
èvo ‘pig’ - voolü votrǘ vonie
ètshü ‘dog’ - tshüǜlü tshütrǘ tshünie
köthö `cat’
- köthö èlü köthötrǜ köthö enie
èzhú ‘rat’ - zhú
èlü zhútrǜ zhú ènie
kélè ‘squirrel’ - kélè
èlü kélètrǜ kélè ènie
èkhù ‘tiger’ - khù
èlü khùtrǘ khúnie
ètsè ‘cattle’ tsè medó - tsètrǘ tsèlǘ
èthe ‘deer’ the medó - thetrǘ thelǘ
èthra ‘reindeer’ thra
medó - thratrǘ thra thelǘ
èzhü ‘sambar’ zhü medó - zhütrǘ zhü thelü
eli ‘buffalo’ li medó
- litrǜ -
èprù ‘elephant’ - - - -
èmǜ ‘goat’
mǜ medó - mütrǘ -
èkwè ‘shee’ kwè medó
- kwètrǘ -
lóhéle
`rhiroceros’ -- - -- -
Birds Male Female
bred unbred
èfü ‘poultry’ fǘjǘ fütrǜ fülü
èrí ‘pheasant’ ri
kojü ritrǜ -
kodò ‘bulbul’ - kodu ètrǜ -
tèthricü ‘sparrow’ - - -
refü ‘jungle fowl’ re
fǘjǘ re
fǘtrǜ -
pikok ‘peacock’ pikik köjǘ pikiktrǜ -
As we have discussed in the Chapter of Khezha phonology,
noun class of words in this language always prefer a minimum of two syllable
length of words. Therefore, when the base consists of single syllable, it must
be preceded by a vowel prefix e- when uttered alone. However, when they
are uttered together with other words in phrasal or sentential construction the
prefix is often silent in normal flow of speech. Presumably, this is only to
establish phonological weight to syllable.
In the case of male animal without horn we may observe
two ways of morphological operation. For domesticated animals such as pig and
dog, the morpheme èlü is conjoined with its head noun, and thereafter its vowel
prefix is assimilated to its adjacent vowels. In other cases, the masculine
gender marker functions as attributive to the head. A complexity arises here
for the case of cat, because it behaves like a non-domesticated animal. No
plausible answer is immediately available at present. The more satisfactory
answer could be that, cats are never treated as valuable domesticated animals
by the Khezhas as discussed in the Chapter-1. As such, its owner hardly bothers
whether male or female except that providing them some food so that they may
not permanently stray away.
In the case of reideer and sambar, they are identified as
the same family of deer, hence their gender identity. Rare animals such as rhinoceros and elephant
are rarely called by gender. Similarly, in the case of sheep and goat, the
identity between bred and unbred females is rarely distinguished, because
traditionally, Khezhas never reared these animals. Similar case is the birds
except domesticated fowls.
3.1.3. Pronoun
Pronouns
in Khezha may be classified into six categories, viz., personal pronoun,
demonstrative pronoun, interrogative pronoun, relative pronoun, reflexive
pronoun, possessive pronoun and adjective pronoun.
3.1.3.1. Personal Pronoun :
Khezha has three personal pronouns, viz., 1st
person, 2nd person and 3rd person. All the personal pronouns have a four-way
opposition in numbers such as singular (Sg), dual (Dl), plural (Pl) and
unspecific human (Uh). The exclusive, although, does not specify the
number of referee, yet it always implies more than one. Except singular number, no other number has
nominative(Nom)-accusative(acc) opposition.
Person Sg Dl Pl Uh
Nom Acc
1st person Nye ahwe ánhi aro ami
2nd person nò ìwe nònhi noro nomi
3rd person pù pùwe pùùnhi pùuro pùmi ‘he/she’
As illustrated above,
first person singular has two allomorphs such as nie and a. The former is nominative form, while the
latter is accusative, which is suppletive allomorph of the former to which are
added various suffixes to give respective forms. Similarly, 2nd personal pronoun
singular has two allomorphs no and i, where the former is
nominative form, while the latter is used as accusative. As in the case of 3rd personal
pronoun pu, it has single allomorph for all the cases.
The morphemes a and i are also used as
possessive, eg., ahwe ‘mine’, ìwe ‘yours’, a eli ‘my
buffalo’, i eli ‘your buffalo’, a
kezü ‘my friend’, i kezü ‘your friend’ and so on. The morpheme –we is bound morpheme used as
genitive marker, used predicatively; the detail of which is discussed later.
2.1.3.2. Demonstrative Pronouns :
The demonstrative pronouns in Khezha may be
sub-classified into three groups: (1) nominal demonstrative, (2) spatial
demonstrative and (3) demonstrative determiner. There are four demonstrative
roots that give anaphoristic expression and have listener-speaker proximate and
remote references and also deictic and non-deictic relations.
hy- ‘speaker-proximate’
tsü- ‘listener-proximate’
whö- ‘deictic’
shü- ‘non-deictic’
2.1.3.2.1. Nominal Demonstrative Pronoun:
The nominal
demonstrative pronouns are suffixed by the number inflections such as –no,
-nhi, -ro and –mi.
speaker-proximate : hyno ‘this’
heenhi ‘these (Dl)’
hyro ‘these (Pl)’
hymí ‘these (Uh)’
listener-proximate : tsüno ‘that’
tsünhi ‘those’
tsüro ‘those’
tsümi ‘those’
deictic : whöno ‘that’
whönhi ‘those’
whöro ‘those’
whömi ‘those’
non-deictic : shüno ‘that’
shüénhi ‘those’
shüro ‘those’
shümi ‘those’
2.1.3.2.2. Spatial Demonstrative Pronoun:
The spatial
demonstrative pronouns take spatial adverbs such as ba `implies
proximity’, pah `implies side of the dissection, boè `implies
point of location’, eg.,
speaker-proximate : hybá ‘this side’
hypah ‘this part of dissection’
hyboè ‘this point of location’
listener-proximate : tsübá ‘that side’
tsüpah ‘that part of dissection’
tsüboè ‘that poin of location’
deictic : whöbá ‘that
side’
whöpah ‘that part of
dissection’
whöboè ‘that poin of
location’
non-deictic : shübá ‘that
side’
shüpah ‘that part of dissection’
shüboè ‘that point of location
2.1.3.2.3 Demonstrative
Determiner:
Khezha has
demonstrative determiners such as hi, zü and shü, which are complimentary
distribution with reference to the time and space,
hi implies
deictic reference of the speaker,
zü’ implies
the referee is either with the listener, or that the speaker refers some past
experience,
shü implies
non-deictic reference, or that the speaker is repeating the referee which had
been referred earlier by the listener.
Examples:
1. Leshida hi
book det.
‘This book’ (book
with the speaker)
2. I tele hi
your-manner det.
‘Your behavious’ (I can’t stand this of your manner)
3. I sepu
zü’
your-word det.
‘Your word’
(The speaker refers the
utterance uttered by the hearer earlier, and the speaker presumes that the
addressee is still conscious of it)
4. Meri
zü’
axe det.
‘The axe’
(The axe is either with
the addressee or the speaker refers the one they had experienced with it
earlier)
5. Meri
shü
‘The axe.’
(The speaker either
refers the axe, which the addressee had mentioned before, or that something had
had happened to the axe).
6. I sepu
shü
‘Your word’
(The speaker refers the
utterance of the addressee)
3.1.3.3. Interrogative Pronoun:
Khezha has three types of interrogative pronoun roots
such as thú, di- and dá-. While di- and dá- are bound
morphemes, which need a number to compound with. However, the root thú is a
free morpheme implying the meaning ‘who’: thú nhíe `to whom?’
Furthermore, it has selectional restriction,
that is, it cannot take singular –no or plural –ro other than
dual number –nhi:
*thuno `who (Sg)’
*thuro `who(Pl)’
thunhi `who(Dl)’
There are various ways
of expressing interrogation by using varied interrogative pronoun.
thú ‘who’
thúmi ‘who’
dibyketshüro `who(Pl)’
dibydátshüro ‘how’,
‘in what way’
disüro ‘why
(use as single word interrogation)’
disürö ‘why
(when used with sentece as in, disürö ahwe è ko ah dii? `why
calling me?)’
diby ‘what’
dibyketshünhie or
diysünhie ‘when’
dizhe ‘how
many’
dicy ‘how’
dábá ‘where’
dázhe ‘how
much’
dáno ‘which
(Sg)’
dánhi ‘which
(Dl)’
dáro ‘which
(Pl)’
dámi ~ dábámi (Uh) ‘who
(belong to what village)’
dáby ‘what
(type)
dácy ‘what
(way)’
dápah ‘what
(part of dissection)’
dáboè ‘where
(asks specific point of location)’
Interrogative pronouns
denoting human noun can also take genitive –wè:
thúwè ‘whose’
thúnhiwè ‘whose’
thúmiwè ‘whose’
dibyketshürowè
`whose(Pl)’
3.1.3.4. Relative Pronoun :
The relative pronoun (Rpr) root zü needs a number suffix
–no ~ -Ø, -nhi, –ro and -mi to indicate the relative pronoun as züno (Sg),
zünhi (DL), züro (Pl) and zümi {Excl), the relative clause is then closed by a
demonstrative determiner.
7. I
kezü iwe eh zü rö
leshi phrü ah züno zü’
or
I kezü iwe eh
zü rö leshi phrü ah züØ zü’
Your friend you loc with conj book read
part Rpr-Sg det
‘Your friend who studyed with you.’
8. I
kezü iwe eh zü
rö leshi phrü ah zünhi zü’
Your friend you loc with book
read Rpr-Dl that
‘Those two of our friends who studyed with you.’
9. I
kezü iwe eh
zü rö leshi phrü ah züro
zü’
Your friend you loc with conj book read part Rpr-Pl that
‘Those of your friend who studyed with you.’
10 Leshida tsadzü ah züno zü’
Book fall part
Rpr-Sg that
`The book that fell down’
11 Leshida tsadzü ah zünhi zü’
Book fall part
Rpr(Dl) that
The books that fell down
12 Leshida tsadzü ah züro zü’
Book fall part
Rpr(Pl) that
Those of the book tha fell down
13 Nò nü afé puh ah züno zü’
you
nom before tell part Rpr(Sg). That
`The one, which you mentioned before’
14 Nò nü afé puh ah zünhi zü’
you
nom before tell paret Rpr(Dl). That
`Those (two), which you mentioned before’
15 Nò nü afé puh ah züno zü’
you
nom before tell part Rpr(PL) that
`Those, which you mentioned before’
(The determiner zü
can be replaced by another determiner hi or shü depending on the situation and
event of discourse.}
3.1.3.5. Reflexive Pronoun :
In Khezha, the reflexive èlé
is used for all the persons in referring back to the subject of the sentence,
eg.,
Sg Dl Pl Uh
1st Nyeèlé ánhièlé aroèlè amièlé
I-self we-self we-self we-self
‘myself’ ‘ourselves’ ‘ourselves’ ‘ourselves’
2nd nòèlé nónhièlé noroèlé nomièlé
you-self you-self you-self you-self
‘yourself’ ‘yourselves’ ‘yourselves’ ‘yourselves’
3rd pùèlé pùúnhièlé púuroèlé púmièlé
he/she-self they-self they-self they-self
‘him/herself’ ‘themselves’ ‘themselves’ ‘themselves’
3.1.3.6. Possessive Pronoun :
All the possessive pronouns in Khezha are suffixed by
possessive inflection –we.
Person Sg Dl Pl Hn
1st person áwe ahnhiwè arowè amiwè
possessive ‘mine’ ‘ours’ ‘ours’ ‘ours’
2nd person iwe nónhiwè norowè nomiwè
possessive ‘yours’ ‘yours’ ‘yours’ ‘yours’
3rd person pùwe pùúnhiwè pùurowè pùmiwè
possessive ‘his/hers’ ‘theirs’ ‘theirs’ ‘theirs’
The possessive pronoun of 1st person ahwe
‘mine’, 2nd person iwe ‘yours and 3rd person pùwe
‘his/hers’ are homophones of the personal pronoun accusative ahwe ‘me’, iwe
‘you’ and pùwe ‘him/her’, respectively.
All the possessive pronouns can be interpolated by the
morpheme kwé ‘together’ to indicate as ‘possess together’. In some cases, kwéwè (together possess) is
also used as an independent word of possessive pronoun without specifying the
person. This is used in the cases when
there is no necessity to particularize the possessor, otherwise it is used in
the following ways :
ánhikwéwè (we-Dl-together-possessor)
arokwéwè (we-Pl-together-possessor)
amikwéwè (we-together-possessor)
nónhikwéwè (you-Dl-together-possessor)
norokwéwè (you-Pl-together-possessor)
nomikwéwè (you-together-possessor)
pùúnhikwéwè (they-Dl-together-possessor)
pùurokwéwè (they-Pl-together-possessor)
pùmikwéwè (they-together-possessor)
3.1.3.7 Adjective Pronoun :
The following words may be categorised as adjective pronoun
in Khezha. The adjective pronoun occurs in place of noun and provides
indefinite number of participants. Thus, whenever adjective pronoun occurs it
implies a minimum number of two participants. In other cases they can also
occur immediately after the noun they modify.
keme ‘some
(out of many)’
medö ‘all/everyone’
ketòh ‘any/whatever/whoever/whichever’
kelele ‘each’
(reduplication of kele ‘one’)
kedzü ‘other’
katrö ‘many’
ketseh ‘few’
cína ‘little
(less than few)’
cínapörí `tiny’
One special
charateristic of adjective pronoun in Khezha is that, whether it occurs alone
in place of noun or after the noun it modifies, it never allows number marker
to occur in the noun phrase,
keme `some’: leshidah
keme `some books’
*kemeno;
*kemenhi; *kemero
: *leshida kemeno; *leshidah kemenhi;
*leshidah kemero.
ketseh `few’ : leshida ketseh `few books’
*ketsèno; *ketsènhi; *ketsèro
: *leshida ketseno; *leshida ketsenhi;
*leshida ketsèro.
3.1.4. Number
There are four number markers in Khezha, viz., singular –no,
dual –nhi, plural –ro and unspecific human -mi. However,
as discussed earlier, not all the noun classes take singular suffix or
unspecific human. Only the roots of demonstrative pronouns hi, tsü, shü, whö
and relative pronoun root zü can take any number marker. Other nouns are unmarked morphologically for
singular number. Similarly, unspecific
human –mi, which is derived from the morpheme èmi `person/people’ can
occur with only human noun. The dual suffix –nhi is derived from the
numeral kènhi ‘two’ and can occur only when number specification is
required.
Sg Dl Pl Uh
hyno ‘this’ hèénhi hyro hymi
tsüno ‘that’ tsünhi tsüro tsümi
shüno `that’ shüenhi shüro shümi
whöno `that’ whönhi whöro whömi
züno `that, who, which’ zünhi züro zümi
Concrete nouns do not
take singular suffix:
mekhi ‘seat’ mekhinhi mekhiro
lèchè ‘fruit’ lèchènhi lèchèro
tshübó ‘tree’ tshübónhi tshübóro
ròcü ‘bird’ ròcünhi ròcüro
lümi ‘girl’ lüminhi lǘmyro
leshi `book’ leshinhi leshiro
Abstract nouns do not
take number suffix
lido `idea’ *lidonhi *lidoro
sepu `word, expression’ *sepunhi *sepuro
sètsa `agreement’ *sètsanhi *setsaro
lizhe `sadness’ *lizhenhi *lizhero
kenü `hapiness’ *kenünhi *kenüro
mèku `lie (falsehood)’ *mèkunhi *mèkuro
Unlike in English, for
instance, a noun consisting of two or more elements do not give number
expression even though that its existence is significant, eg.,
tsübu ‘scissors’ *tsübunhi, *tsǜburo
menie ‘trousers’ *menienhi, *meniero
lashe ‘stairs’ *lashenhi, *lashero
tetróbó ‘upstairs’ *tetróbónhi, *tetróbθro
tomhí ‘flies’ *tomhínhi,
If numbers are added to
the noun, it gives different meaning as,
tsübunhi ‘two pairs of scissors’
tomhini ‘two
files’
tsüburo `three or more pairs of scissors
tomhíro ‘three or
more flies’.
In the cases where numeral classifiers occur with nouns,
the number suffixes are deleted, eg.,
katrö ‘many’ : tsübu katrö ‘many
pairs of scissors’
pedi ‘four’ : menie pedi ‘four
pairs of trousers’
keme ‘some’ : menie keme ‘some
pairs of trousers’
leshída ‘book’ : leshída pedi ‘four books’
leshída katrö ‘many
books’, etc.
However, when three or
more objects are perceived as single entity, say they are bundled or piled up
together, occurrence of plural number is possible after numeral
16. Leshída pedíro zü’
book fours
det
`those
of the four books’
17. Leshída pangöro hi
book fives det
`these
of the five books’
Similar deletion
applies in the sentential constructions, eg.,
18. Pùuro
lümi kewe
they-Pl girl good
‘They are good girls’
19. Lümínhi
hi zòwe a
girl-Dl det.
beautiful part
‘These two girls are beautiful’
20. Leshida
hyro hi ahwe a
book
these-Pl det mine
‘These books are mine’
21. Lümí whónhi hi a tèpí a
girl that-Dl
det.my sister
‘Those two girls are my sisters’
When adjective is used, the number suffix is attached to
the adjective rather than two the noun, eg.,
22. Lümí
zòkewero
girl beautiful-Pl
‘beautiful girls’
23. Mekhi
kecynhi
seat small-Dl
‘small seats’
26. Leshída kewero
book good-Pl
‘good books’
Whereas in the cases
when both the adjective and demonstrative pronoun occur together, the latter
takes the number suffix, eg.,
25. Lümí
zòkewe whóro
girl beautiful
that-Pl
‘those beautiful girls’
26. Mekhi
kecy hyro
seat small
this-Pl
‘these small seats’
27. Leshídah
kewe tsüro
book good that-Pl
‘those good books’
This indicates that
number marker must always be attached to the final component of noun phrase.
3.1.5. Numeral
:
Khezha numeral system is decimal based. The numerals in this language may be defined
as that of grammatical class which form a sub-class of nominal capable of
taking case markers and number markers.
In many cases, the numeral itself form the nucleus of a noun phrase,
eg.,
28. Kelero
zü pfo kehrhü de
one-Pl det take mix
imp.
‘Add together those ones.’
29. Keleèro
nü chuti dah
one-Pl nom leave
‘The 1st (standard students) are on vacation.’
Khezha numerals may be classified into four categories,
namely: ordinal, cardinal, fraction and
numeral adverb.
Ordinals:
There is no
morphological form for ordinal numbers in Khezha. They are realized at the
syntactic level only as in,
Kele eh (one
in) ‘first’
Kènhi eh (two in) ‘second’
Ketshü eh (three in) ‘third’
Pedi eh (four in) ‘fourth’
Pangö eh (five in) ‘fifth’
When specifying first
or last, it is expressed as,
Keri kelé (front last) `top’
Kenö kelé (back last) `buttom’
In natural expression,
they are expressed as,
Keri kelé tshü a (front last do part) `N does top most’
Keri kelé eh beh a (front last in exist pasrt) `In the top most’
Kenö kelé tshü a (back last do part) (N does buttom most’
Kenö kelé eh beh a (back last exist part) `In the buttom
most.’
3.1.5.2. Cardinals:
Cardinal numerals in Khezha may be classified into
two: (i) those consisting of absolute
form, i.e., single morpheme and (ii) those consisting of two or more
morphemes. The former may be designated
as primary numerals and the latter as secondary numerals.
(a) Primary Numerals :
There are fourteen
primary numerals available in this language,
kele ‘one’
kenhi ‘two’
ketshü ‘three’
pedi ‘four’
pangö ‘five’
sahrü ‘six’
seni ‘seven’
tecie ‘eight’
takö ‘nine’
cirü ‘ten’
meki ‘twenty’
cherü ‘thirty’
etri ‘hundred’
enye ‘thousand’
(b) Secondary Numerals :
All the numerals in
Khezha except the ones listed above under the primary numerals are secondary
numerals. The constituents of a
secondary numeral may have different types of relationship with the other
constituents. Depending upon this
relationship the secondary numerals in Khezha can be further sub-group into
four. These sub-groups along with their
relationships among the constituents are described below :
(i)
the constituents showing the relationship of summation as in,
círü
kele ‘eleven’
círü
kenhi ‘twelve’
Likewise, all the
numerals from eleven to nineteen are formed.
(ii)
the constituents showing the relationship of multiplication with decimal
notation lha ‘ten’ and ètri ‘hundred
lha x pedí > lhapedí ‘fourty’
lha x pangö > lhapangö ‘fifty’
etri x kenhi > etri kenhi ‘two hundred’
etri x ketshü > etri ketshü ‘three hundred’
The multiples of ten
from fourty to ninety, and the multiples of hundred show this type of
relationship between their constituents.
(iii)
The first two constituents showing the relationship of multiplication
and the resultant form showing the relationship of summation with the third
one. In such a case, the multiplication
requires the conjunction rö ‘and’ to allow the summation to occur after it,
eg., Nu x Nu rö Nu,
30. Lhapedí rö kele
ten x four and one
‘fourty one’
31. Lhapedi rö takö
ten x four and
nine
‘fourty nine’
32. Lhatecie rö tecie
ten x eight and eight
‘eighty eight’
(iv)
The hundred and thousand usually introduce a morpheme pu ‘seed’
which acts as additive marker. But after nine, it becomes unnatural if the
additive pu is used, eg.,
33. Etri rö
pu kele
100 and seed 1
‘hundred one’
34. Etri rö
lhatakö rö takö
100-and 10 x 9-and
9
‘hundred and ninety nine’
35. Etri tecie rö pu pedi
x 8-and seed 4
‘eight hundred and
four’
36. Etri tecie rö mekí rö
pedi
100 x 8-and 20
and 4
‘eight hundred twenty four’
37. Enye kele rö etri
1000-1-and 100
‘one thousand one hundred’
38. Enye kele rö pu takö
1000 1 and seed
nine
One thousand nine.
39. Enye kele rö etri tecie rö lhatecie rö tecie
1000 x 1 and 100 x
8 and 10 x 8 and 8
‘one thousand eight hundred eighty eight’
40. enye lhapedi rö pedi rö
etri seni rö lhaseni rö tecie
1000 x 10 x 4 and 4 and 100 x 7 and 10 x 7 and 8
‘fourty four thousand seven hundred seventy eight’
3.1.5.3. Fraction
:
Fractions are not extensively used by the Khezhas in doing
calculations. The word parha
‘half’ and theze `share’ are fractions available in this language, eg.,
parha kele ‘one half (½)’
parha knhi ‘two
out of three parts of division (2/3)’
The phrase parha
kele is used when there is more quantity of numbers, which are divided into
two parts. But, in the case of single quantity or one measure, one basketful
for example, to be divided into two parts it is expressed as, kele parha.
The word medzüde is also used in the sense of multiples by preceding the
numeral, eg.,
medzüde pedi ‘four times higher’
medzüde tecie ‘eight
times higher’
The smaller units of
fractions are expressed in aphoristic manner,
41 Theze
pedi tshü rö theze
kele
share four do and
share one
‘one by four ( ¼ )’
42. Theze
seni tshü rö theze
pedí
share seven do and
share four
‘four by seven (4/7)’
43. Theze
tecie rö theze pedí
èló theze kele
share
eight-and share four
from share one
‘eight and one by four (8 ¼)’
3.1.5.4. Arithmetic Numerals :
There are four basic terms used in Khezha for doing
calculation. They are: kehrhü (add) ‘addition’, meteh (cause to
go) ‘minus’, we `number of time/multiplication’ and kezé (divide)
‘division’.
Addition :
For addition or
adtogether, the word kehrhü `add’ is optionally used, that is, without
it the morpheme le [é] `and’ takes care of the communication
requirement,
44. Kele le kenhi kehrhü ketshü
one and two plus
three
‘One plus two is three’
or
Kele
le kenhi ketshü
one plus two three (1+2=3)
45. Kenhi le ketshü (kehrhü) pangö
two and three plus five
‘Two plus three is five.’
But for larger numbers, it is more preferable
to occur with kèrhü:
46. Etri kènhi le
etri ketshü kehrhü etri pangö
Hundred two and hundred
three add hundred five
200+300=500.
Subtraction:
The For
subtraction, it is used two types of expression: èló
--- mète `to let go’ and èló ---- teh deh eleh `from --- if remove’. The former
is used as imperative, especially at the time of teaching, while the latter is
used at the time of discourse or questioning. The instrumental case pfo
is optionally used:
47. Pedí
èló kele (pfò) meteh deh
four from one minus imp.
‘Minus one from four!’
48. Pedí
èló kele (pfò) tè deh eleh ketshü
by ede
four from one (take) go in case three
only will
`It will become three if one is taken away from four.’
49. Ètri pangö èló
lhapedí (pfò) meteh hí
Hundred five from 10xfour (take) let go
`Minus fourty from five hundred (and see what it will
be)!
50. Ètri pangö èló
lhapedí (pfò) teh deh éleh dazhe di
Hundred five from 10xfour (take) let go if how much imp.
`If fourty is taken away from five hundred how much will
it be?
Multiplication:
The word we or va
implies number of times. However, it cannot occur alone without expression by
zǘ (type that) which acts as connective of the two numbers as well as
supplement to the multiplication. Hence,
it can take care of the entire expression of multiplication by itself without
we:
51. Pedi
by zü’ (we) pedí
cirü sarü
four type that
time four ten
six
‘four times four is sixteen’
52. Pedí
by zü’ (we) kenhi
four that multiply
two
‘four multiply by two’
53. Pedí
by zü (we) sahrü
four that multiply
six
‘four multiply by six.’
Division:
In doing division, the
collocation of the instrumental case pfo and verb keze `divide’ is
always essential,
54. Kenhi pfo
seni keze hi!
two take seven
divide imp
‘Divide seven by two!’
55. Pedí pfo
tecie keze hi!
four take
eight divide imp
‘Divide eight by four’
3.1.7. Postposition:
All the postpositions (post) in Khezha follow the
noun. The difference between case
markers and postpositions is that, the former give expression about the
syntactic-semantic relationship of the sentence, while the latter do not give
expression of such relationship, but operate within postpositional phrase:
patö ‘above, on’
eh `in’
throe ‘under,
underneath’
lethro ‘below’
nhie ‘at/near/with’
lue ‘inside’
loe ‘in, into’
zhipfho ‘side’
phe ‘on’
chy ‘after/behind’
jü, mhöjü
`before, in front’
56. A kie
patö
my house post
‘above my house’
57. Ekie eh
house in
`in the house.’
58. Bera
phe
chair post
‘on the chair’
59. Ezü
throe
bed post
‘under the bed’
60. Etso
nhie
stone post
‘near the stone’
61. Neilo
nhie
Neilo post
‘with Neilo’
62. Keba
seni nhie
hour seven at
‘at seven o’ clock’
63. Leshikie
lethro
school below
‘below the school’
64. Labu
loe
box post
‘in the box’
65 Keri’
zhipfho
river post
‘by the side of the river’
66. Ekie
chy
house post
‘behind/after the house’
67. Kiele
lue
hole
post
‘inside the hole’
68. Kielé loè kerhü hi
hole
into insert
`Insert
into the hole.’
69. Kiele eh beh a
hole in exist
`It
is in the hole.’
70. Pu
nü a throe beh a
He
nom my post exist
‘He is under me’
71. Pu nü
a patö beh a
me
post
‘He
is above me.’
72. Pu nü
a li loe beh a
he nom me mind post exist
‘He is in my mind’
73. A kelhi
pu ba eh beh a
my life his hand
post exist
‘My life is in his hand’
or
`My fate depends on him.’
ADJECTIVE
3.2.1. General
Discussion
Various linguists had done much amount
of descriptive studyes in Naga languages. However, as far as the grammatical
status of adjectives is concerned, the opinions are not consistent. Majority of
them made observation that the adjectives in the language they have worked are
a subgroup of verb without having grammatical properties of their own. Thus,
according to them, there are only two open classes of words such as noun and
verb in these languages.
Gowda
(1975), for instance, in his Ao Grammar, observed that the adjectives in this
language do not have a marker of their own. According to Giridhar (1980), the
adjectives in Angami, like Japanese, has no morphological form class. He did
the same observation in his Mao Grammar (1994) and treated those of the
attributives as noun class of words. The rest of the adjectives that occupy
predicate position and function as predicate head are treated as stative verbs.
In the work of Sreedhar, in his Sema Grammar(1980), he has treated the
adjectives as a subclass of invariables. The other sub-classes of invariables,
according to him, are postpositions and case relations. Thus, he has treated
the adjectives in this language on par with closed classes such as
postpositions and case relations. Abraham, in his Apatani Grammar (1985),
another Tibeto-Burman language spoken in Arunachal Pradesh of North-east
India, also observed that there is no separate class of words that
are adjectives as such, but there are certain verbs, which are used as
adjectives. Similar opinion has been made by Arokianathan, in his Tangkhul Naga
Grammar (1987), a Naga language spoken in Manipur. Locording to him, the
following attributives as to be attributive verb rather than adjectives,
nawping
khüni
(pup
two) `two pups’
fu
khümatha (dog
beautiful) `beautiful dog’
in the sentence,
fu
khümatha hiwuy nawping khüni hili lüyyü.
dog
beautiful of pup two
here part
`Here
are two pups of beautiful dog.’ (p.52)
Notwithstanding some differences in
their observations, none of these scholars treat adjectives in the respective
languages they have worked significantly different from verbs. Bhat (1991),
who, while attempting to make general observations on the common
characteristics of adjectives in Tibeto-Burman languages, also arrived at
conclusion as, “unlike Dravidian languages, these do not have adjectival bases
functioning as a distinct word-class, and further, unlike Indo-Aryan languages,
these have adjectival bases functioning as a subgroup of verbs rather than that
of nouns (Bhat 1991, p.673.)
However, there are also
some scholars who had worked in some of the languages belonging to the same
family made a somewhat different observation. Acharya (1980),in his Lotha
Grammar, observed as, the adjectives in Lotha, though used predicatively,
cannot be considered as verbs since they do not take tense, aspect or mood.
Sastry, for example, in his Mishmi Grammar (1984), another Tibeto-Burman
language spoken in Arunachal Pradesh makes explicitly as, the adjectives in
Mishmi, as a class, consist of all such words whose function in the languages
is to modify nouns. The adjectives in this language, according to him, can
contain a stem or a combination of stems with various affixes such as single
stem adjectives, which are not analyzable. Similar observation is made by
Prasad, in his Mising Grammar (1991), another Tibeto-Burman language spoken in
Arunachal Pradesh, who classified the adjective in Mising into two categories:
adjective and adjectival. The adjectives can be both free and derived:
free form: aping
`all’; isi `this’; aro `truth’; bott `great.’
derived form: miglune `blink’ < amid
`eye’ + alumne `round’; aipe `good’ < ainam `virtue’ + pe `at’.
The adjectivals,
according to him, are all derived and are functionally adjectives, but
categorically refer to other grammatical classes. Kapfo, in his Descriptive
Analysis of Khezha (thesis), another Naga language of Tibeto-Burman family,
too, considers the adjective in Khezha as open class of words sharing
properties of both noun and verb in some cases, but not in all the cases.
Singh, who, while attempting to redefine the existing written system and
grammar in his Descriptive Analysis of Standard Manipuri (thesis), also made
similar opinion as, although the adjectives in Manipuri share the properties of
nouns and verbs, yet cannot be considered as taking the same kind of base structure
as nouns and verbs. While there is more elaboration of aspect markers in this
language, the tense maker is not clear (p.51), although adjectives show mood
and aspect (p.126).
The
significant difference of the characteristics between verbs and adjectives in
Khezha is that, no verb can take an intensifier a’ [á], the
property apecifically assigned for adjectives. Thus, one possible criterion in
identifying the adjectives in Khezha from verb is the intensifier á implying
the meaning as `extremely, extraordinarily, incredibly and so on.
we `good’ : We a’ `extremely good’
hah `red’ : Hah
a’ `extraordinarily red’
tshüh `painful’ : Tshüh
a’ `extremely painful.’
meku `dishonest’: Meku a’ `extremely dishonet’
meky `cold’ : Meky á `extremely cold (adj)’
reh `difficult’ : Reh
a’ `Extremely difficult’
thah `long’ : Thah a’
`extraordinarily long’
No
verb can take the morpheme in any context:
tshü
`do’ *tshü a’
nüh `laugh’ *nüh a’
meke `bite’ *meke a’
to `eat’ *to
a’
One important point to
consider is that, role players in the syntactic-sematic relations are
imperative in classifying the classes of words. Thus, the significant
difference between verb and adjective is that, in case relations, for example,
verb play central role, whereas in the case of adjective it cannot establish
case relation with another class of word.
Even in other context,
although both verb and adjective take modifier she `very’, a verb always
requires at least one grammatical morpheme, except imperative sentence, whereas
in the case of adjective, the phrase can be closed by itself. Furthermore, a
verb very often takes more than one grammatical morphemes that are, in most of
the cases conjugated, when describing about the activities of a noun, whereas
the adjectives are less potential in taking such conjugated grammatical
morphemes. Thus, the lexical items, for example, we `good’, thah
`long’ and meku `dishonest’ in the sentences 74 are adjective, and not
verb as such; while tshü `do’ in sentence 75 and nüh `laugh’ in
the sentence 76 are verb, though both can take modifier she `much’.
74a. Pu
we
he good
`He
is good.’
Pu
we she
‘He
is very good.’
75 Pu emhe tshü she ah
he thing do very
part
`He is really working (hard)’
*Pu emhe tshü she
In the sentence where the subject takes nominative nü,
both verb and adjective take confirmative particle a. In such a case,
however, the adjective cannot take modifier she, though verb do take.
76(i) John nü emi we a
nom person good conf
`John is a good person.’
*John nü emi we she a
(ii)a. John nü emhe to a
food
eat
`John ate food.’
John
nü emhe to she a
`John
ate food so much.’
Though it is very rare, certain verb can frame the phrase
without a particle. In such cases, however, the meaning conveys become more or less
adjectival, because it limits the scope of information it provides as in,
77 Pu awe eh mehla she
he
me loc insult very
`He
humiliated me (with obvious intention).’
Furthermore, though both adjective and verb can be
causativised by causative me-, they behave differently in the syntactic
paradigm. Any principal verb, whether transitive or intransitive, can freely
take modal particles, but there is certain constraint for causative derived
from the base of adjective to take modal particles:
78
a A pfü nü awe eh leshi mephrü a
my father nom me loc
book cause-read part
`My father allowed me
to study.’
Or
`My father sent me to
school.’
b. *A pfü nü awe eh mewe a
cause-good
However, 79 and 80 are
both possible,
79. A pfü nü awe eh metshü de
my
father nom me loc cause-do will
`My father will allow me to do.’
80. A pfü nü awe eh mewe de
cause-good will
`My father will make me become good.’
or
`My father will allow me to attain what is good for me.’
As we will discuss
latter in more detail, causative verbs derived from the base of adjectives are
always preceded by an action verb either tshü `do’ or bo `touch’ as in,
thah `long’ : tshümethá
`cause to become long’
trö `white’ : tshümetrö `cause to become white’
tshü `do’ : metshü `cause or allow to do’
zoh `see’ : mezo `cause or allow to see’.
3.2.2. Types of Adjectives:
In this section, I would survey a typological
description of the adjective classes in Khezha on the basis of their semantic
properties in the same vein as suggested by Dixon (1982).
Age: keshe
`old (animate)’; ketre `old (inanimate)’; ketsé `aged’; ketshé `new’; kecǜ
`young’; muh `riped’; noh `tender’; tsé `matured’, etc.
Dimension:
dye `big’; thah `long’; merüh `narrow’; cy `small’; jüh `short’; tseh
‘less’; cina `little’; shü `thick’; tshö`fat’; pfüh `thin’, etc.
Colour(basic): hah `red’,
nengo `blue’; mehjo`green’; trö `white’; tsü `black’; mezü `yellow’; züh
`dark’, etc.
Physical property: thrü
`hard’; köh`strong’; menè `soft’; meshüh `heavy’; metshah `light’; mèphrü
`smooth’; tshüh `hot’; ly `warm’; meky
`cold’; thrüh `sweet’; throh `sour’; khö `bitter’; etc.
Human Propensity: zòró `jealous’; chi `envious’; ny `happy’;
thö `cheerful’; patsü `parsimonious’; tshòwe `conceited, egoistic’; zhówe
`kind’; zhósü `cruel or rude’; mehra
`proud(behavior)’; nikhù `impolite’; táwe `generous’; mehzhi `ticklish’, tshüh
`pain’, zòwe `beautiful’ zòsü `ugly’, etc.
Also, many compound words carrying metaphorical
meanings may be grouped under this category:
thrödye (brain-big) `insensitive or indifferent
to criticism or insult’; nechühah (eye-red) `destructive minded’; bathah
(hand-long) `habitual stealing’; ketithah (mouth-long) `chatty’ or
`chatterbox’; thöba meshüh `buttock heavy) `laggard’.
Value: we `good’; sü `bad’;
tsüh `costly’; mehla `cheap’, metsheh `clean’, metshǘ `clear (water), nye
`rich’, whöh `absent’, kètowhö `poor’, etc.
Speed: tewe `fast’; tesü `slow
(walk)’; mehze `fast’ (action); mehcho `sharp, restless’; meroh `brittle’’; `
mehro `smart (jumping, esp. sport); she `slow(general)’; zá `slow (action); mheeh
`sudden, quick’; zhüüh `immediate’; thyi `slow(fly)’; etc.
A large majority of speed adjectives are
expressed with reduplicated words: mhemheh `quick’; sheshe `slow and steady’;
prypry `rapid’; praprah `brittle’; thsüthsüh `frail’; nanah `elastic’; phrüphrüh
`slippery’; sheshe `slow’; zázá `steady’, zazah, frail, prépré `hot-temper’,
etc..
Position: tetró `high/tall’; tenö
`low’; tèphe `horizontal’; tètrhe `up (road)’; tèshu `steep (road)’; thezá `plain; mesé `even’; mezhé `uneven’;
whú `curved/bend’; khù `zig-zag,’; lètsa `steep (rock)’; etc.
Other Adjective Types:
Other adjectives type which Dixon said to pose particular difficulties
for comparative studyes are: reh `difficult’; melöh `easy’; mehla `simple’; zhe
`same/similar’; ledye `different’; tsoh `complete’; ty `sure, certain’; meyíe
`famous, popular.
3.2. 3. Attributive
Most
of the adjective can function as attributive except few cases of human
propensity and position adjectives. In the cases where the adjective base is
monosyllabic word, it uniformly becomes disyllabic by derivational prefix ke-
reh `difficult’ : mhetho kereh `hard word’
cy `small’ : ekye kecy `small house’
sü `bad’ : thromi kèsü `bad boy’
muh `riped’ : leche kemú `riped fruit’
we `good’ :leshida kewe `good book’
whöh
`absent’ :èmhe kèwhöh ``poverty’
:èmhe
kèbè `richness’
tsüh
`costly’ :emhe ketsǘ `high
price’
trö
`white’ :èrah ketrö `white cloth’
hah
`red’ : èrah kehá `red cloth’
But when the base of adjective carries
two-syllable length, it does not take derivational prefix,
melöh
`easy’ : mhetho melöh
`easy task’
mehla
`simple’ : kweshün mehla
`simple question’
meyíe
`famous’ :
emi meyíe `famous person’
ledye
`different’ : pen ledye
`different pen’
tetro `high’ : èli tetro `high thinking’ (self-esteemed)
mehjo
`green’ : tshǜbó
mehjo `green tree’
nengó
`blue’ : menie nengó
`blue pant’
mezhy
`naughty’ : nöcǘ mezhy
`naughty child’
tezhy
`feeble’ : èmi tezhy
`feeble person’
kölö
`cripple’ : ephe kölö
`cripple leg’
mehra
`proud’ : lǘmí mehra
`proud girl’
In the cases when an adjective is consisted of
more than one base, the base that carries information nucleus takes derivative
ke-
zhòwe
`swift (fly)’ : röcǘ
zhokewe `fast bird’
misü
`ungentle’ : thromi mikèsü `ungentle boy’
mereh
`costly’ : ena mekereh
`costly dress’
mheche `wise’ : minö mhekeche `learned person’
zowe `beautiful’ :
lümi zokewe `beautiful girl’
lidye `stubborn’ : nocü likedye `disobedyent child’
lithah `patient’ :zöpí liketha `patient mother’
zhomo `improper’ :emhe
zhokemo `improper act’
Attributive can also be derived from both
transitive and intransitive verb:
ba `wear’ : era keba `cloth for
wearing’
khah `ask’ : emhe kekhá `asking thing’
to `eat’ : eye keto `edible
vegetable’
tshü `do’ : merö ketshü `play
toys’ or `play game’
tsǘ `give’ : prisa kètshü `money for
offering’ or `donated money’
puh `tell’ : emhe kepú `message for
conveying’
teh
`go’ : emi kète
`going person’
nüh
`laugh’ : sepu
kenǘ `laughable word’
wöh
`come’ : emhe kèwö
(coming thing) `income’
pre
`emerge’ : emhe kepre
(going thing) `expenditure’
mhah
`go(field)’ : emi kèmhá `person to go the field’
Attributive phrase can also take number marker.
In such a case, the marker is attached to the attributive rather than to the
noun. This is simply to maintain rule of attributive phrase construction so
that no element occurs between the head noun and the modifier, hence it has
nothing to do with syntactic relation.
81 Kewero
book good(Pl)
good
books’
82. Leshída
ketshéro
book
new(Pl)
`new
books’
83. Leshída
ketshé kewero
book
new good (Pl)
`good
new books’
84. Leshída
kewe ketshüro
book
good three
`three
good books’
85 . Leshída
ketrö kewe pediro
book white good four(Pl)
`four
good white books.’
86 . Kar
ketshé mezü tekewe pediro
Car new yellow fast four(Pl)
`Four
new fast yellow cars’
Attributive either
verbal or adjectival can function as nominal head and take both dual and plural
number as in,
kewero (good+pl) `good
ones’
kewenhi (good+dl) `good
(two)’
mejoro (green+pl)
`green ones’
mehjonhi (green+dl)
`green (two)’
pedíro (four+pl)
`fours’
pedínhi (four+dl)
`fours (tso)’
This is because, in the process of conversation
when the identity of noun is already established, reiteration of noun becomes
redundant. Thus, adjective itself serves the target achievement.
3.2.4. Ordering of modifiers
Like in English and predictably in most of the
Naga languages, two or more adjectives can occur together to modify a noun.
With regard to their positional variance in English, Dixon (1982)’s has
reported that most of the subjects, in his investigation, preferred the
ordering of slow old and quick new, but opinions were divided in
the case of ordering of slow new and new slow. He then suggests
as “There seems to be an implicit cultural-semantic connection between new
and quick and between slow and old” (Dixon 1982. p.25).
English and Naga languages are opposite in
ordering of word. The modifier precedes noun in the case of the former, while
it is reverse in the case of the latter.
87.(i) Kar
ketshé tekewe
car
new fast
`a
fast new car’
(ii) Kar
tekewe ketshé
car
fast new
`a
new fast car’
88.(i) Kar
ketre tekèsü
car slow old
`a
slow old car’
(ii) Kar tekesü ketre
car
slow old
`an old slow car’
89.(i) Kkar
ketshe tekewe
car
new fast
`a fast new car’
Kar
ketre tekewe
car
old fast
`a
fast old car.’
Thus,
orderings below are unnatural, though possible,
Kar
ketshe tekesü `a slow new car’
Kar
ketre tekewe `a fast old car’
Dixon (1982) speculates that
they are the case of “an implicit cultural-senmantic connection”, which
probably true in every human language. He also suggests that value adjective
qualifies not the head noun, but some other adjective in the case of English.
In Khezha, however, the value adjective appears to modify the entire stretch of
proposition as a whole rather than just a particular property of adjective.
This may be the factor that, the value adjective always occur in the final
position and close the phrase,
90. Menie
ketshe kewe
trousers
new good
`a
good new trousers’
implying the meaning as, `new trousers is good’
and not that the trousers is new therefore it is good. For, all new trousers
may not be always good. Therefore, the following construction is possible,
91. Menie
ketshé kèsü
trousers
new bad
`a
bad new trousers’
(trousers, although new, yet it is a
sub-standard one)
Thus, in Khezha, we can have the following
orderings, but the meaning does not seem to change
92. Kar
ketshe tekewe kewe
car
new fast good
`a good fast new car’
Both have the same cognitive meaning as, `a new
fast car is good’. Similarly, numeral
adjective must occur in the final position and close the phrase to quantify the
entire stretch of proposition as a whole, rather than just a particular
component.
93. Kar
ketshé tekewe kewe kenhi
car new fast
good two
(two good fast new car)
3.2.4. Adverb Derivation
Various
types of morphemes can be derived from the base of adjective to function as
modifier to various types of adjectives.
(i) Two types of intensifier such as á
and she ~ shé can be derived from a large majority of adjectives
to give certain degree of intensity. The former provides higher degree of
intensity implying the meaning as `extremely, incredibly’ while the latter
provides a lower degree of intensity implying English equivalent `very’ or
`very much’
we `good’ :
we she `very good’ : we a’ `extremely good’
tewe `fast’ :
tewe she `very fast’ :
tewe a’ `extremely fast’
towe `tasty’ :
towe she `very tasty’ :
towe a’ `incredibly tasty’
mehra `proud’ :
mèrah she `very proud’ : mehra a’
`exceedingly proud’
nikhù `impolite’ : nikhù shé` very impolite’ :
nikhù a’ `exceedingly
impolite’
In the case of she, however, it is often
followed by affirmative morpheme a implying the meaning `affirm,
confirm, attest, certain’ and so on.
we
`good’ : we she a `very good’: we
á `extremely good’
trö `white :
trö she a `very white: trö á `is very white’
zowe `beautiful’ :zòwe she a `very beautify’: zòwe á `extremely
beautiful’
wah `bright’ :
wah shé a `very bright’` : wah a’
`extremely
bright’
dye `big’ :
dye shé a `very big’ : dye
a’ `extremely big’
menie `shameful’: menie shé a `very shameful’ : menie a’ `extremely
shameful’
reh `difficult’ :
rè shé a `very difficult’ : rè a’ `very difficult’
tewe `fast’ :
tewe a `very fast’ : tewe a’ `incredibly fast’
tewö `comfortable’ : tewö shé a `very
comfortable’ :
tewö a’ `extremely comfortable beyond one can
imagine’
In a few instances, some adjectives take only
either morpheme, or in some instances do not take both. In other cases, they
take a morpheme of their own to give some intensity of meaning near to `very’;
hence difficult to generalize. They may be considered as unique,
meky `cold’ : meky
züü `totally/completely cold’
:meky a’ `extremely/very cold’
cina `little’ :
cína pörí `very little’ : *cínah pörí a’
ly `warm’ :
ly muuh `slightly warm, less than very, but feel
comfortable’
*ly muuh
a’
ly
lö `slightly warm, and less than the stage to feel comfortable’ :
ly a’ `extremely warm (climate)’
töra `stripe(color)’ : töra she `having so much
bands of color’: *töra a’
(ii) In many instances, the adjective also can
derive its own morpheme to get modified. That is, these morphemes are unique
since they can occur only in one situation. Further, in many cases, they
involve partial reduplication,
mesé `even’ :
mesé merüh `evenly level’
patsü `stingy’ :
patsü paré `minutely stingy’
kedzü `excess’ :
kedzü kedo `excessively abundant’
meyé `popular’ :
meyé melö `prominently popular’
thonhi `reluctant’ : thonhi thore `reluctantly’
However, in some other situation, they take
suffixes, which are not reduplicated form,
menie `shy’ :
menieryi `shyly’
mèlhü `hungry’ : mèlhütrí `hungrily’
trö `white’ :
trömeyí `brightly white’
mekhú `deep’ :
mekhúbù `deeply’
mehla `cheap’ :
mehlapah `cheaply’
(iii) Adjectives also derive adverb morpheme mezo
to give the expression implying the meaning in the construction as, we mezo
`too good’. In some other situation it also implies as it serves to the
satisfaction of the speaker, tthough may not be the highest degree as,
`sufficiently good, need not be better than this.’
zòwe `beautiful’ : zòwe mezo `quite beautiful (should be satisfied
with that level)’
metsheh `clean’ :
metsheh mezo `quite clean (need not worry)’
hah `red’ :
hah mezo (i)too red;(ii) sufficiently red
dye `big’ :
dye mezo (i) too big (can’t enter);
(ii) sufficiently big (may be satisfied with
that level
of size)
tetró `high’ :
tetró mezo `too high’
However, in some context when occuring after
some types of adjective, for example, dimension adjective, adjective carrying
negative meaning or metaphorical meaning, it is automatically understood as
beyond the limt as in,
trö `much quantity’ : trö mezo `too much (beyond the limit)’
cy `small’ :
cy mezo `too small (smaller than normal)’
thah `long’ :
thah mezo `too long’
tseh `less’ :
tseh mezo `too less’
thrödye `thick-skinned’ : thrödye mezo `too insensitive’
bathah `stealing’ : bathah mezo `too untrustworthy, always steals’
mehra `proud’ :
mehra mezo `too proud (exceeding the limit)’
mekú `lie’ :
mekú mezo `telling too much lies’
nikhù `impolite’ : nikhù mezo `too impolite’
The morpheme mezo can also take
affirmative particle a. Whenever the adjective take this morpheme, it
always implies the meaning as it exceeded the limit.
we `good’ :
we mezo a `too good (not necessary to be this good)’
thah
`long’ : thah mezo a `too long (not
fitting)
mehjo `green’ :
mehjo mezo a `too green (not proportionate)
reh `difficult’ :
reh mezo a `too difficult (beyond the capacity to tackle)’
melöh `easy’ :
melöh mezo a `too easy (should be more difficult)
zòwe `beautiful’: zòwe mezo a `too beautiful (not matching me)
tèci `clever’ :
tèci mezo a `too clever (can’t cope up with)’
zhówe `kind hearted’ : zhówe mezo `too kind (should have been more
strict
than that)’
The morpheme mezo can occur with any
type of verb form adjectival phrase. In such a case, however, it always
requires an adjectival particle dah to close the phrase. Semantically,
it always leaves the impression of some negative consequence.
tshü `work’ :
tshü mezo dah `done or worked too much (it may create some negarive consequence)’
khah `ask’ :
kha mezo dah `demanded repeatedly beyond once can
tolerate’
khah `cook’ :
khah mezo dah `over cooked).
nüh `laugh’ :
nüh mezo dah `laughed too much (may cry afterwards)
teh `run’ :
teh mezo dah `run too fast (may stumble and fall)’
phrüh `read’ :
phrüh mezo dah `read too much (may forget what had
been read)
puh `tell’ :
puh mezo dah (i) `spoken the same thing
too much (may irritate the listeners) ;
(ii) repeated too much, there is something vested interest in that.’
3.2.5. Classification of noun by Age
Adjectives:
The intensifiers shé and á never occur with age
adjectives. The following are not possible.
ketshe `new’ :
*ketshé shé *ketshé á
ketre `old’ :
*ketre shé *ketre á
ketsé
`old (human)’ : *ketsé she *ketsé á
muh
`riped (matured)’ : *muh shé *mù á
kecüh `young (human)’ : *kecüh shé *kecǜ á
A special characteristic of age adjectives
however is that they give classification of nouns. They show the distinction
between animate and inanimate. The aged adjective `old’ show a distinction between
human and non-human. Similarly, the aged adjective ‘young’ shows a distinction
between vegetable, stem and fruit from human, animal and bird. They may be
demonstrated as under:
Age
Animate Inanimate
young old new old
ketshé ketre
human/
stem fruit Human Non-human
animal/
bird
old
aged animal/
fruit
plant
corn
others
kecüh
enò
mehjo keshé ketsé keshé tsé
muh
The age adjective ketshé, for example,
can thus be analysed as,
ketshé -
animate
-
advanced
+,
- abstract
It functions not only as modifier, but also
assigns the head it modifies, either as concrete or abstract noun as in,
1. New, not old:
razhu ketshé `new shirt’
2. Lately produced, recent origin:
gari ketshé `new vehicle’
3. Previously existing but never or hardly
seen, encountered:
emi ketshe `new person’
4. Newly experiemced, unfamiliar, unaccustomed
earlier:
èdzé ketshé `new story’
5. Alteration (changed for the better):
kelhí ketshé `new life’
6. Entered into new position:
kam ketshé `new post’
7. Distinct from the former one:
èzhó ketshé `new habit’
8. Novel, fashionable that is different from
the existing one:
lephre ketshé `new tone’
9.Crops that are harvested premature:
alu ketshé `new potato’
10.
Additional:
nocü ketshé `newly born child’
3.2.6.
Degree of Comparison:
Khezha has various types of
expression to give different degrees of comparison (comp). The degree of comparison in Khezha may be
categorized into (i) comparative degree and (ii) superlative degree.
(i)
Comparative degree:
The
comparative degree in Khezha gives expression three different degrees with the
structure,
NP nom NP jü Adj level of degree
where
jü has English equivalent of
comparative `than’. The degree are,
Ø
which does not give degree level
(ii) phöh
~ -mehdé ~ nie
indicates slightly higher in degree,
(iii) she’
indicates higher degree `much
more than’ implying the meaning as incomparable; the difference is wide apart.
94. A leshi nü i leshi jü we a
my book nom your book comp good part
‘My book is better than your book.’
95. A leshi nü i leshi jü we phöh/nie/mehdé a
my book nom your book comp good adv part
‘My book is slightly better than
your book.’
96. A leshi nü i leshi jü we shé a
my book nom your book compgood adv
part
‘My book is much more better than
your book.’
97. Elí
nü ètseh jü
dye a
buffalo nom cattle comp big part
`Buffalo is bigger than cattle.’
98. Elí nü ètseh jü dye phö/nie/mèdé a
`Buffalo is slightly bigger than cattle.’
99. Elí nü ètseh jü dye she’ a
`Buffalo is much more bigger than cattle.’
100.
Etseh nü elí jü cy a
`Cattle is smaller than buffalo.’
101. Etseh nü elí jü cy phöh/nie/mehdé a
`Cattle is slightly smaller than
buffalo.’
102. Etseh nü elí jü cy she’ a
`Cattle is much more smaller than
buffalo.’
Sometimes
an adverb morpheme lah `still’ is added to imply the meaning as, even so
it is much more; therefore no worth comparing:
103. Etseh nü elí jü cy lah a
(Even so cattle is still smaller
than buffalo)
104. Etseh nü elí jü cy phöh/nie/mehdé a
(Even so cattle is slightly smaller
than buffalo)
105. Etseh nü elí jü cy she’ lah a
(Even so cattle is much more smaller
than buffalo)
(ii)
Superlative degree:
The
superlative degree (sup) introduces an adverb morpheme lo to precede
adjective superlative morpheme after the adjective. There are two levels of
degree of superlative with the construction as,
ló adj
mede gives English equivalent of superlative
degree implying highest degree among two or more participants, but less
emphatic
ló
adj kelé gives more emphasis of superlative implying
as the difference of degree is distinct and there is no more beyond that to
compare with.
106. Hyro
tèna ah a leshi ló we
mede
these among my book adv
good sup
‘My book is the best among
these.’
107. Hyro
tèna ah aleshi ló kewe
kelé
good
sup
‘My
book is the best among these (there is other book to `compare with by book)’
108. Leshikephrüro
tèna ah jon lo mece mede
students among
John adv. bright sup
`John is the brightest among the
students.’
109. Leshikephrüro tèna ah jon lo mece kelé
students among
John adv. bright sup
`John is the brightest among the
students (there is no one to compare with him.)’
In
normal flow of speech, the morpheme lo is often reduced to ‘o:
110. Lümiro
tèna ah pù ‘o zowe
mede
girls among
she adv beautiful sup
‘She is the most beautiful among the
girls.’
111. Lümiro
tèna ah pù ‘o zòkewe
kelé
‘She
is the most beautiful among the girls (there is no other girl who is as
beautiful as her).’
Bill
jü John ‘o thah nie lah
Bill
comp John adv long part
`John
is slightly taller than Bill.’
Diloe jü Khaloe ‘o zowe nie a
Diloe
comp Khaloe adv beautiful part
‘Khaloe
is slightly more beautiful than Diloe.’
Diloe
jü Khaloe ‘o zowe she’ a
`Khaloe
is much more beautiful than Diloe.’
3.3. VERB
3.3.1. Classification of verb:
The
main characteristic of verb in Khezha is that, like any other human
languages, it gives expression about existence, occurrence and action in the
sentences indicating their time, truth, certainty, probability, modality and so
on. Semantically therefore, verbs play role in describing about the activities of
noun as opposed to adjectives that give description about quality, quantity, or
other properties of noun it modifies.
In morphological
domain, it provides forms necessary for predication. Khezha being a
non-inflected language, its internal morphological structure is not as complex
as those of the inflected languages, English, for example. The grammatical
morphemes that play role in the verbal phrase are always isolable and their
etymology is always apparent even when they are conjugated with any other grammatical
categories. While in syntactic domain, it plays central role in establishing
semantic-syntactic relations with other class of words to give full expression
necessary for language communication.
On the basis of
morpho-syntactic characterization, Khezha verbs may be classified into five
groups: (i) principal
verb, (ii) motion verb,
(iii) causative verb, (iv) auxiliary verb and (v) modal particles.
3.3.1.1. Principal Verb:
The principal verb may be further sub-classified into intransitive
verb and transitive verb. The
transitive verb takes at least one object, whereas the intransitive verb does
not, eg.,
Intransitive verb :
115. Mary
wöh ah
Mary come part
‘Mary is coming.’
116. Mary nü
meló ah
nom moan
‘Mary is moaning.’
117. Mary ní
bera phe tetseh ah
chair on
sit
‘Mary is sitting
on the chair.’
118. Mary
tre ah
cry
‘Mary is crying.’
119. Mary
teh dah
go
‘Mary went.’
Transitive verb :
120. Lehnü nü
a phe medu dah
snake my-leg bite
part
‘The snake has bitten my leg’
121 Mary nü
pùwe eh meme a
Mary him acc
kiss
‘Mary kissed him.’
122 Mary nü
lèchè to ah
fruit eat
‘Mary is eating fruit.’
123. Mary nü
awe eh de ah
me beat
‘Mary is beating me.’
124. A pfü nü
awe eh prisà
tsü a
my-father me acc
money give
‘My father gave me money.’
125 A kezü nü
àwe eh ce ah
my-friend me acc
tease
‘My friend is teasing me.’
3.3.1.2. Motion
Verb:
The direction may be either physical or mental. All the motion verbs carry the meaning either
‘go’ or come depending on the situation, each having its own cognate direction
of location or destination. When a
motion verb expresses about mental activity, it is often preceded by an action
verb for indicating the action of the agent, eg.,
126. Mary
throh a
go (up)
‘Mary came/went up.’
127. Mary
dzü ah
go(down)
‘Mary is going/coming
down.’
128. Mary
phé ah
go(horizontal)
‘Mary is going/coming.’
129 Mary pre ah
go(out)
‘Mary is going/coming out.’
130 Mary
lu ah
go(in)
‘Mary is coming/going in.’
Motion verb can co-occur with an action
verb to give the expression of the manner of action and direction.
131. Mary
tethrò ah
walk up
‘Mary is coming/going up (walking).’
132. Mary tedzü ah
walk down
`Mary is coming down.’
133. Mary nü
mesülu ah
think-in
‘Mary is concentrating.’
(lit. Mary is
thinking deep down)
134. Mary nü
puthroh ah
tell-up
‘Mary is coming/going by speaking.’
or
‘Mary is relating up.’
135. Nye pu mehse tshüphé de
I him place
do-across will
‘I will act equally with him (challenge).’
(I will go on doing the same as he does)
3.3.1.3. Causative Verb:
Khezha is rich in causative verbs. There are various ways
in expression causative verbs and are very complex in nature, because in many
instances they cannot be decided by morphological criteria alone, but have to
be taken into account all the four angles such as phonology, morphology, syntax
and semantic considerations.
(i) The morpheme me-
can derived causative verb from both verb and adjective consisting of single
syllable length of word:
bo `touch’ : mebo `cause to touch’
thsü ‘do’ : metshü ‘cause to do’
te ‘go (as by walk)’: meteh ‘cause to go’
teh ‘run/go away’: meté ‘cause to run race’
ezhò `fly’ : mezhó `cause to fly’
to ‘eat’ : mèto ‘cause
to eat’
puh ‘tell’ : mepú ‘cause
to speak’
khah ‘ask’ : mekhá ‘cause
to ask’
de ‘beat’ : mede ‘cause
to beat’
thri ‘buy’ : methri ‘cause to buy’
nüh `laugh’ : menǘ `cause to laugh’
we `good’ :
mewe `cause to become good’
hah `red : mehá `cause to become red’
thah `long’ : methá `cause to become long’
tshüh `painful’ : metshǘ `cause to become painful’
reh `difficult’ : mere `cause to become difficult’
Causative Phrase:
In the case of causative verbs
forming with the morpheme me-, it can also be preceded by an action verb
forming phrasal construction to give information about manner of action. In
these case, the preceding morpheme plays role as causer and following morpheme
gives information about the resultant affect:
136. Tshü mèto
do cause to eat
‘prepare and cause
(patient) to eat’
Here, the word tshü
`do’ gives information about manner of action, while the following mèto
`cause to eat’ provides information about the resultant affect. The manner of
action is `perform’ and the resultant affect is `eat.’ Similarly, in the
construction 137, the manner of action is `perform’ and the resultant affect is
`free from illness.
137. Tshü terhó
do free from
illness
`cause to get well’
In this way, a
causative verb can be preceded by an action verb to give effect to manner of
action and its resultant affect.
138. Puh
menü
tell cause to laugh’
`tell (joke) and let
laugh’
In example 138, the
manner of action is `tell’ and the resultant affect is `laugh.’ In the same way, phrasal construction can be
formed for any causative verb to give the information about the manner of
action caused and its resultant affect.
139. Tshü merhí
do
cause to survive
`cause to let survive by performing
something’.
140. Thrü metrö
wash cause to become white
‘cause to become white by washing’.
141. de mètre
beat cause to cry
`Cause to cry by way of beating.’
142. Nüh mètre
laugh cause to cry
`cause to secrete tears by laughing’
Semantically, action verb bo
`touch with hand’ behaves differently from other action verbs. When it occurs
in the preceding position of another verb, it loses its etymological identity,
hence coalesced with the adjacent morpheme to give a completely different
information:
mètre ‘cause to cry’ : bomètre ‘cause to cry
by some means either by
action,
utterance or any manner’
menü
`cause to laugh’ : bomenü `cause to
laugh by some means such as
telling
jokes, tickling, absurd behavior, etc.’
tetsü
`mentally matured’: botetsü `(i) cause to recover from faint by some
means
such as by providing food, water and so on; (ii) cause to become wiser or more
prudent in perceiving things’
mèla
`cheap’ :bomèla `cause to become
cheaper or lower in public estimation by some means such as due to false
accusation, insult in public place, etc.
kesö
`waste’ : bokesö `cause to diminish in
careless way’
mezhe
`uncomfortable’ : bomezhe `cause to
become uncomfortable,
esp. creating burden’
medè
`shock’ : bomedè `cause to get nervous
shock by some act’
lèna
`disturb (work)’ : bolèna `cause to
get disturb (work)’
kebvü
`disturb (mental)’ : bokebvü `cause to get mentally disturb’, cause
to become illusion’.
tehci
`clever’ : botehci `cause to become
clever (animal)
mezhy `naughty’:
bomezhy `cause to become naughty
(esp.
parents not disciplining
children).
ketry
`error’ : boketry `cause to commit
error’, cause
to make mistake’
Action verb tshü `perform’
can also precede a causative verb to give its resultant effect, but unlike the
verb bo `touch’, it always retain its etymological meaning; hence it
builds up phrasal construction as in the case of other action verb rather than
as a word.
nengö
`blue’: tshü nengö `cause to become blue by performing’ kenhü nengö
`paint blue’
metro
`cause to become white’: tshü metro
`cause to become white by performing something’
metha
`cause to become longer’: tshü
metha `to make longer by performing
something’
merhi
`cause to survive’: tshü merhi `cause to survive by performing something
(by doctor,
for example).
There are certain verbs
with vowel prefix e-. They appear to carry some sort of causing meaning that is
without the influence of external force, but potent internally. Further
investigation however is required for conclusive evidence. They required an
action verb to replace the vowel prefix to become a full-fledged causative
verb,
èle
`fall (self)’ : bole `cause to drop by
way of touching with any other parts of
the body and not
necessarily with hand.’
cile `cause to fall by kicking’, etc.
èwa
`tear’: bowa `cause to tear by some
means’
süwa `cause to tear by pulling’, etc
èpra
`break’: bophra `cause to break by some means such as due to carelessness
in handling, by
dropping, etc.’
kedzüphra `cause to break by hitting
at, break by dropping’, etc
ela `stand’: bokela `raise’, `cause to erect’, `uplift’
pfokela
`cause to stand by way of holding’
èzhí `fall down
(human/animal)’ : bokezhí `cause to fall
down’,
pfokezhí `cause to fall when holding’
etsüh
`be lazy’: boketsüh `cause to become
lazy.’
Here,
etsüh `lazy’, for instance, is caused by internal force, while boketsüh
is caused by external force.
3.3.1.4. Auxiliary Verb:
There are no lexical elements that
function as auxiliary verbs. However, there are some composite words that play
the role of auxiliary and convey some sort of information about the attitude of
the speaker either positive or negative.
maha
`have to, must, no other alternative’:
Tshü maha `have to do’
Puh maha `have to say’
To maha `have to eat’
esü
`can’t, shouldn’:
Tshü esü a `shouldn’t do’
Puh esü a `shouldn’t say’
To esü a `shouldn’t eat’
to
esü ‘can’t eat’ (mouth is blistered)
Te esü ‘can’t walk’ ( leg is pain)
Puh esü ‘can’t say’ (tongue is pain)
Khah esü ‘can’t ask’ (feeling shy).
yiwe
(also good) ‘may’ :
To yiwe ‘may eat’
Lo yiwe ‘may own’
Puh yiwe ‘may say’
Chy deh yiwe ‘may die’, ‘could die’
sü’ ‘shouldn’t’:
Mekú sü’ ‘shouldn’t tell alie’
Mezhy sü’ ‘shouldn’t be naughty’
Mehra sü’ ‘shouldn’t be proud’
Tsü sü ‘shouldn’t be lazy’
échü ‘can’ :
Köh échu ‘can win’
We échü ‘can become good’
Dìe échü ‘can become big’
Ngö échü ‘can see’
éha ‘can’t’ :
Köh éha ‘can’t win’
Sö éha ‘can’t burn’
Dìe éha ‘can’t become big’
Tseh éha ‘can’t be short (quantity)’
ezü
pha’ ~ ezü mehse:
Keshéro eh rhuh ezü pha’ `Should
respect elders.’
No
rhí tshu rö leshí phrüh ezü pha
(or mehse) You
out-most do book read
det pot
‘You should study very hard.’
malesü
`must’:
Emhe tshü malesü (thing do must)
`must work’
Neso malesü (honest must) `One must
be honest’:
Kelele eh thro malesü (each-each acc
love must) `must love each other’
de
`will(resolute)’:
We de `it will be alright’
Tshü de `will do’
Khah de `will ask’
Puh de `will say’
do
`will (irresolute):
We
do `could be alright’
Wöh do `could possibly come’ or
`would come’
Puh do `could speak out (don’t
trust)’ or would say and see what would
be the reaction of the hearer’
The desiderative (des) ni,
implying the meaning as `desire, want, wish, and also functions as auxiliary
rather than mood particle or principal verb since it cannot occur alone without
another verb and more over its position is fixed after principal verb. It can
neither be treated as mood particle since unlike other particles, it can be
extended as in 144,
143. John nü a
mhe lo ni ah
John nom my thing get des
part
`John wants my property.’
144. John nü mhe lo ni mezo a
John nom thing get des adv part
`John is too greedy.’
145. John nü meri eh lo ni ah
John nom Mary acc get des part
`John wants to marry Mary.’
(John wants to own Marry)
146. John nü kàpuché to ni a
John nom apple eat des conf
`John likes apple.’
Desiderative ni, can also be
distinguished from other mood because it has its own lexical meaning and can be
nominalised by derivation as in,
147. Bèhú mècy yi kàpuche lo to kèni kele’
exist-much though also apple adv eat
des most
Although there are many, yet (N)
like apple most.’
148. Mhe to kèni katrö beh a
Thing eat des many exist part
`There are many things (I) want to
eat.’
149. Nye leshi phrüh kèni by ketseh beh a
I
book read des
type few have part
`I have few books I like to read.’
3.3.1.5.
Modal Particles
The terms “particle” and “marker”
have been used inconsistently by researchers due to the absence of universally
recognized classification of uninflected forms. In this work, I used the term
particle for those that are not inflected but remain free form as free morpheme. They appear to have
lexical meaning, but unlike open class or words, their lexical meanings become
transparent only when they are used in the sentence and function as role player
in the syntactic relation with other class of words. They are designated as
“modal particles” since they are non-inflected form. As for the term “marker”,
they can be either free or bound morpheme. Thus, a free morpheme can be both
particle and marker; while on the other hand, a bound morpheme cannot be
treated as particle. It is only a marker.
It appears to me that pausing factor
between two elements has been adopted as one of the criteria in the
transcriptions of earlier scholars. Because in most of the cases, pause between
function word (word like unit that has no lexical meaning) and lexical word
that occur together in the phrases and sentences can hardly be noticed in
natural flow of speech even in Khezha. And I believe this is true in most of
the unwritten languages, or recently developed orthographical system but
without fully explored grammatical patterns, or analyzed dictionary. To my
experience, the pause between two elements is not important factor in
distinguishing between inflected and uninflected form, their functional
identity is paramount important in demarcating between free and bound morpheme.
Another major problem is use of
terminology. The terminologies I used here may not be always agreeable to some
readers, because some of the elements I discovered are difficult to be assigned
to the terminologies presently I am aware with. Reportage, for example, cannot
be assigned as narrative, because the semantic value they provide is specific
and limited, emitting adjectival meaning in some way or other either negative
or positive attitude of the second speaker that reiterates rather than simple
narration. I have assigned them to the term I thought nearest and
communicatively more tangible so as to clear off the ambiguity.
There are four basic modal particles
with which varieties of meanings are expressed. These modal particles may occur
alone to achieve a specific goal, or in some other cases two elements may
coalesce together to achieve a common goal. Except, in a rare case, not more
than two elements can coalesce together. These particles are tricky and often
difficult to define lucidly, though the differences of their meanings are
apparent. Therefore, I have grouped them together under one roof for a discreet
discrimination between different particles and differentiation of various
influences in the communication.
(i)
Tense and Aspect
Irrealis:
ah, habitual, progressive;
eda, future, implying as it has
been delayed in realization affirm for the realization;
edah, non-future, implying
action or event had begun but not realized yet;
elah, non-future, implying the
action or state has been started since long and anticipate that it may be
realized soon;
Realis:
dah, action or state is realized, completed,
perfect;
Future:
Resolute
Future: de, future
implying anticipation, prediction, after the present moment.
(i) Aimminent Future: dia,
dewa, deweh.
(ii)
Recursive Future: delah
Irresolute
Future: do, future
irresolute
(ii)
Mood
Imperative:
hi! implies tentativeness, to act as testing and
see the consequent result;
ri!
implies the addressee did before and is again
requested to do the same;
eh! implies gradual activity
deh! implies no more delay further;
lo! implies as do, act and be accomplished;
ere! implies casual command or request;
ley! implies three meanings: (i) that the speaker
has no objection to the request, (ii)
that the addressee is delaying action and the speaker orders him for immediate
action, (iii) that the addressor perceives some danger and warns if the
addressee dares to do.
Optative:
leeh
, implies sincere expression of wish, it is
used only when pleading to some form of spirit or God.
Subjunctive:
(i)
Notinal
di, implies anticipation;
nie, implies hypothetical,
probability;
dimö, implies regret, but cannot
be recovered;
Conditional:
le’ implies disjunctive with English equivalent
‘because’;
maleh implies condition as ‘if it is not so’;
eleh implies as ‘in case’;
lo’ implies as ‘if it is so’ (often reduce to
‘o);
Optional:
leh gives option whether A or B. Sometimes it can
be used interrogative asking
addressee
for option. In such a case, it stresses vowel so that the acoustic duration
becomes longer. But this is only the case of intonation and not phonemic as
such as in,
Nye nü tshü de leh?
I nom do will subj
`Shall
I do? (or should you or someone else will)
mo’ implies alternative;
Confirmative:
a, implies confirm, authentic,
certain.
Potential:
lo, potential, expresses ability, possibility, obligation or
compulsion. Its basic pitch level is mid tone, but becomes high after low or
high tone (see tone section) in normal flow of speech, but the potential
particle lo is constantly unmarked so as to avoid confusion with conditional
subjunctive mood.
Concessive:
shay, the speaker concedes with
some reservation;
shyi, indicates something is
incomplete or missing;
dishy implies the speaker concedes with great
dissatisfaction;
Reportage:
díro, indicates that the speaker is the first
informer and there is truth in the statement.
The message is conveyed in the form of forewarning;
meeh, indicates that the speaker received
information from some source and transmits that information to the third
person;
shya, implies that the speaker is simply repeating
the exact statement made by someone else and whether it is true or false, he
has no concern about it;
rey, implies surprise state or that what the
addressee perceives is contradictory to the fact;
(iii) Interrogative:
State-Interrogative:
ro?
and le?, do not specify the attitude of the speaker
and can be used in
any
situation. The different being that ro?
is mostly used by adults, while le? is often used by minors or adults
talking to children,
di?
~ dia?~ dio? implies that
there are more than one proposition and the addressee is given option to select
one of them for future course of action,
dii?, indicates the speaker has
certain feeling, but unable to decide what it must be, or what it should be!
dey?, implies that there are several even
possibilities occurred prior to the present moment and the speaker wishes to
know which one out of several possibilities,
lay?, indicates that the same event had occurred
several times and the speaker wishes to know that occurred again;
ey?, implies that the speaker presumes that the
addressee is able to give information,
yo?, implies that the speaker presumes that the
addressee too, does not know the answer,
but simply making query indicating the meaning ‘who will know it’. In this case, the expected answer from the
addressee is, che ma ‘Don’t know.’
ya?,
la?, implies that the speaker is least bother to
know about the fact.
tse? implies that the speaker has forgotten and
expect that the addressee still remembers it.
Yes-No
Interrogative:
dire?, the speaker has already
proved the information as fact and anticipates addressee to say `yes’.
yaa?, nyo?, is used when the speaker has direct contact with the act
of addressee;
ya?, ni?, ny?, the speaker has
received a reliable information from some source, but unsure whether it is
factual or not.
mo?, the assumes as probable, yet doubtful.
nie?, the speaker presumes
something factual and is very near to clearing the doubt.
yow?, the speaker is in the state
of surprise to know or hear about something.
momi?, the speaker heard some
rumor or senses that something unusual
has had happened and is curious to verify the fact.
leh?, such a kind is unusual and
the speaker is rather unconvinced.
Concordial
Interrogative
you?, the speaker invites the
addressee to simply agree with the suggestion being initiated by the speaker.
denyou?, a very polite form as `will
you please?’
Echo-question:
i?, the speaker is almost sure
what the addressee had just expressed, hence simply reiterate by way of
echo-question;
tse?, the speaker failed to
recall the past experience and wants the addressee to said once again;
she?, the speaker fail to fully
comprehend, hence reiterate or rephrase the sentence by way of echo-question.
3.3.2. Tense
The concept of tense is generally
understood as providing information about notion of time sequence. The concept
of succession of points of time, each one occupying a fix position of the
linear order either preceding or following other discrete points in the
sequence. The definition of “tense”, however, is controversial and is often
difficult to demarcate explicitly from the domain of aspect since both have relation
with notion of time. The traditional grammar considers tense as part of verb
morphology for the fact that the inflected forms in the conjugation of a verb
give indication of a particular time, past, present and future; also the
continuance (imperfect) or completion (perfect), English, for example. In the
contrary, however, in Japanese, the term “tense’ is used to represent a
syntactic category (Nakau, 1976), rather than confining to verb morphology.
In recent years, many scholars who
had worked on new languages that are still under developed had discovered
varieties of morphological behavior of tense across the languages of the world.
Basing on these findings, some of the scholars brought in a view that it is
wrong to assign tense as belonging to the verb morphology since there are some
languages in which tense does not belong to the verb alone, but also to the
noun as well, Nootka for example. These scholars suggest that tense should be
regarded as a category of the whole proposition of the sentence. Another view
suggests however that the traditional grammarians assigning tense to the verb
may be correct since the verb is necessarily within the scope of tense, because
noun phrase arguments of a verb are often outside the scope of the tense
Comrie (1985) presents a convincing
suggestion for viewing the notion of tense as, it cannot be defined by looking
simply at one direction and offers defining tense in general term as “the
grammaticalisation of location in time.” According to him, the sum total of expression
for locating in time can be divided, in terms of their importance for the
structure of the language, into three classes, viz., lexically composite
expressions, lexical items and grammatical categories. The first and
predictably the largest set is that composed of lexically composite
expressions. He gave example from English as, “last year” is a lexically
composite expression, whose meaning can be calculated compositionally from the
meaning “last” and the meaning of “year”. The second set is the set of lexical
items in the language that expresses location in time, which includes such
items as now, today, yesterday. The
third set has at the most the following grammaticalised expressions of location
in time: present, past, future, pluperfect and future perfect. The precise
dividing line between the first and the second however is different from
language to language, while the third class is the least sensitive of the
three. Grammaticalisation, according to him, refers to integration into the
grammatical system of a language, while lexicalisation refers merely to
integration into the lexicon of a language, without necessary repercussion on
its grammatical structure. A given grammatical category may have more than one
meaning such as a basic meaning and a number of peripheral meanings or uses,
but the basic meaning of a lexical item may be definable in terms of a
prototype, i.e. in terms of the most characteristic instance, rather than in
terms of necessary and sufficient conditions. These three points are often
interrelated (cf. Comrie, 1985).
Strictly speaking, however, there is
no morphological marking for tense in Khezha except future tense, which is
marked with particle de `will (resolute) and do `will
(irresolute), though semantically the concept of time sequence such as past,
present and future are possible through the manifestation of lexical elements
of temporal adverbs on the axis of demonstrative determiners, zü, hi
and shü. For this matter, Comrie (ibid) advises, as it is misleading to
use collocation with time adverbials as a mechanical test for establishing the
meaning of tenses. “Although collocation of tenses with time adverbials can be
an important tool in investigating the meaning of tenses, it should again be
emphasized that this tool cannot be applied mechanically, since the
intervention of other factors many upset any simple correlation between tense
and time adverbials (Comrie 1985: 30)”
This is a very powerful forewarning
and one needs to be extraordinarily careful in using temporal adverbs as a test
tool. Nevertheless, for languages like Khezha, where temporal adverbs play
central role, using them as a tool test is not only unavoidable, but the only
option. Firstly, the temporal adverbs in this language that have
relation with past and present time can take deictic determiner zü’, hi
and shü, respectively, but future tense never takes such a
determiner. The reason may be that future tense has its own lexical marking. Secondly,
the temporal adverbs can take modifiers toh implying point of reference
and nie implying approximation of time. The future tense does not such a
modifier. Thirdly, auxiliary
future de `will’ provides information about future location in time. In
the contrary, the past and present shares confirmative a, irrealis ah
and realis dah. These particles establish relation with the temporal
adverbs to provide information about location in time either past or present. Fourthly,
the demonstrative determiners play vital role in this language: zü’
indicates deictic past; hi deictic present and shü indicates
non-deictic past as well as present. Consider the following sentences:
150. John nü afeh toh zü’ heh phe a
John nom before here come
(horizontal) part.
`John came here just before.’ (John
ate food that of before)
*John nü afeh toh hi heh phe’ a
*John nü afeh toh shü heh phe a
151. John nü afeh zü’ heh phe’ a
`John ate food before.’
*John nü afeh hi heh phe’ a
152a. Leshida atsa tsadzü eh züno hi pfo mizhü phe
khe hi eh!
book now fall part Rpr
det take table pp put imp
`Keep the book on the table that
fell down just now!’
b. Leshida afeh tsadzü eh züno zü’ pfo
mizhü phe khe hi eh!
c. *Leshi afeh tsadzü eh züno hi pfo mizhü
phe khe hi eh!
The temporal afeh `before’
and hi `deictic present’ cannot collocate in the same sentence. However,
atsa `now’ can collocate both. In such a case, zü’ is perceived
as prior to the cut-off point of the present moment, hence past; while hi is
perceived as cut-off point of the present moment, hence present.
The non-deictic shü can
collocate both temporal adverb atsa `now’ and afeh `before’, but
restrained to occur with irrealis ah, hence 153c is ill-formed sentence:
153a Leshida atsa tsadzü eh züno shü pfo mizhü
phe khe hi deh malesü diro
The book that fell down now has to
be kept on the table.’
b. Leshi afeh tsadzü eh züno shü pfo mizhü
phe khe hi sa
`Don’t keep the book that fell down
on the table.’
*Leshi
afeh tsadzü eh züno shü pfo mizhü phe khe hi ah (present)
c. Leshi afeh tsadzü eh züno zü’ pfo mizhü
phe khe hi ah (past)
`The book that fell down before is
kept on the table.’
We
may also test them with modal particles ah (irrealis) and de
(future):
154. Nye atsa toh nü mhe to ah
I food eat
`I am eating food just now.’
155 Nye atsa hi mhe to ah
`I am eating food now.’
The
future thenoh `after’ for instance, can neither collocate with the
modifiers toh and nie nor the determiners zü’ or hi.
The sentence 156b, c and d are not possible:
156. John nü thenoh emhe to de
John nom after food eat will
`John will eat food afterward.’
b. *John nü thenoh toh mhe to de
c. *John nü thenoh zü’ mhe to de
d. *John nü thenoh hi mhe to de
The tense system in Khezha therefore
does not operate within the scope of verb alone, but involves the entire
proposition of the sentence. Except future, there is no overt morphological
marking for past and present. On this basis, Khezha tense system may be
distinguished between future and non-future.
3.2.2.1.
Non-future Tense :
As
discussed above, the non-future can be distinguished between past and present
on the basis of their morpho-syntactic relation. The temporal adverbs of past
tense can be determined by deictic past is zü’ as well as non-deictic shü,
while on the other hand, the temporal adverb of present tense can only be
determined by deictic present hi as well as non-deictic shü. All
the past and present tenses can take modifiers toh and nie, which
provides information about point of reference. Basically, there are three types
of modal particles a, ah and dah that can have relation with
temporal adverbs: in different context.
These modal particles often carry two meanings: basic meaning and
“implicature” (c.f. Lyons1977; Comrie 1985). The particle a provides basic meaning is
“confirmative” (conf), rather than tense, implying the meaning as what has been
referred is over and that it is confirmed. It establishes tense relation in the
sentence only when a temporal adverb is introduced. The second ah
carries basic meaning as irrealis that implies as, the event has not been
realized; while the basic meaning of the third dah provides past
location in time. It also provides information as the action or event has been
realized.
(i)
Past Tense:
Past
tense in Khezha can be tested by sequence of past events, the information
carried by the temporal adverbs. The temporal adverbs indicating past events
may be distinguished into two categories: absolute and relative. The focal
difference between them is that the absolute past cannot take modifier nie,
whereas the relative past takes both the modifiers nie and toh
(also see p.195). Only the adverbs that can be determined by deictic (deic)
past and show tense relation are presented here:
Absolute
past: khözha `last night’, ejah `yesterday’, `jache `yesterday morning’, duzhü
`previous night’; duni `day before
yesterday’, dunichini `prior to day
before yesterday’, wökedethrü `last
month’, duníkö `last year’, kerikö `previous year’.
Relative
Past: afeh
`before’, afe’ `prior to before’
(prior to afeh), afeh nie `a short while ago’, afe’
nie `a considerable span of time ago’, duezhü
`sometime prior to previous night’, duenì
`sometime prior to yesterday’, wökedeba
`in the past’, dunhíe `in the past
(prior to wökedeba)’.
The
sentence can be extended in this way,
157. Pù nü
methíche to a
he
nom orange eat part
‘He ate orange.’
158. Pù nü
afeh methiche to a
he
nom before orange eat part
‘He ate orange before.’
159. Pù nü
afeh zü’ methíche to a
he
nom before deic orange eat part
‘He ate orange before.’ (He ate orange that of before)
Relative
past afe’ cannot take modifier toh. Hence, the sentences b in 160 and 161 are
not possible.
160a. Pu nü
afeh toh zü’ methiche to a
he
nom before deic orange eat part
‘He ate orange before.’
b. *Pu nü
afe’ toh zü’ methiche to a
161a. Pù nü afeh toh zü’ nü methíche to by a
`He ate orange just before.’
(He ate orange only just before, not
long ago)
b. *Pu nü
afe’ toh zü’ nü methiche to by a
In the sentence 161 above, the element
nü plays role as nominative, while the following one plays role as time
indicator that has agreement with adverb by `just’. What is interesting is that, the sentence 162
also can take the element by, but gives different implicature as in,
162. Pù nü
methíche to by a
he
nom orange eat part
‘He ate orange only.’
(He
did not eat any other thing, he ate only orange, do not mistake him.)
The imperfect tense provides
information about state or activity that is not yet completed, hence always
requires a temporal adverb to indicate location in time. Without a temporal adverb it is understood as
irrealis aspect rather than tense. For instance, the sentence 203 below is
irrealis and not past imperfect since it does not provide location in time.
163. Pù
nü methíche to ah
he
nom orange eat part
‘He is/was eating orange.’
Whereas
the sentences below are past imperfect,
164. Pù nü
afeh methíche to ah
he
nom before orange eat part
‘He was eating orange before.’
165. Pu nü
afeh zü’ methíche to ah
he
nom before orange eat part
‘He was eating orange before (that
reference point of time).’
The past imperfect does not take the
modifier toh. The reason for such constraint may be that the morpheme toh
carries information about point of reference in time, which is contradictory to
the information provided by the modal particle ah. The sentences below
are unnatural.
*Pu
nü afeh toh zü’ methíche to ah
*Pu
nü afeh toh zü’ heh wöh ah
But
it can take confirmative a since it does not give time reference,
Pu nü afeh toh zü’ methíche to a.
`He ate orange just before.’
Pu nü afeh toh zü’ heh wöh a. `He came here just before.’
Near
Past and Distant Past:
The
determiner zü’ and ablative lo give distinction between near past and
distant past as in,
166 John teh dah
John go part
`John went.’
167 John nü teh dah
John nom go part
`He has gone.’
168. John nü afeh zü’ teh dah
John before from go part
`John has gone (just) before.’ (near
past)
169. John nü afeh lo teh dah
he nom. before from go part
`John has gone since before (and his
presence is almost
vanishing from the memory).’ (distant past)
170 John afeh zü heh beh a
here exist conf
`John was here before (I saw him
just now).’ (near past)
171 John nü afeh lo heh beh a
`John
has been here since before (he came long before and still not leaving)’
The morpheme –toh carries
information about the immediate location of time, hence cannot collocate with
the ablative lo since the later provides information about distant location of
time. In the sentences below, the sentences in b are ill-formed,
172a. John nü afetoh zü’ teh dah.
`He has gone just before.’
*John nü afetoh lo teh dah.
173a. John nü afetoh zü’ awe eh rhaka cirü tsü a
me acc rupee ten give part
`John gave me rupees ten just
before.’
b. *John nü afetoh lo awe eh rhaka cirü
tsü a.
174. John nü afetoh zü’ awe eh rhaka
cirǘ tsü dah
“John has given me rupees ten just
before.’
b. *John nü afetoh lo awe eh rhaka cirü
tsü dah.
(ii)
Present Tense:
The present moment atsa `now’
can be dissected into two parts. For the first part, there is literal location
of present moment in time, yet conceptually crossed cut-off point of the
present moment as per the knowledge of the speaker, but unsure about its
viability, hence determined by deictic past zü’ For the second part,
there is not only literal location of the present moment in time, but also
conceptually within the range of cut off point of the present moment,
potentially viable and manifests latency to extend the span of the present
moment, which takes deictic present hi.
175. Pù nü atsa zü’ beh a
he nom now deic exist conf
`He was present.’
(He was present now and still is
present I believe)
176. Pù nü atsa hi beh a
he nom now deic exist conf
`He is now present.’
The basic meaning for the particle a
is confirmative rather than tense. Hence, perceived as it is within the range
of the present moment when temporal adverb is not used. The tense do not play
role in the sentences below:
177. Pu nü mehra a
He nom proud conf
`He is proud.
178. Pu nü mehra ah
He nom proud ir
`He is acting proud.’
179. Dil;hi nü etshü to a
Dilhi nom meat eat conf
`Dulhi ate meat.’
180. Dilhi nü etshü to ah
`Dilhi eats eat.’ Or `Dilhi is eating meat.’
181. Nò mhenye a
you rich part
`You are rich.’
182. Pu yi awe eh zürö te a
he also me acc. with go conf
`He is also coming with me.’
183. Pu beh mo a
he exist no conf
He is not present.’
184. Pu beh mo dah
`He is no more
We
may further test with temporal adverb atsa `now’ for all the categories,
185. John nü atsa hi methíche to ah
John nom now deic orange eat part
`John is eating orange now.’
*John nü atsa hi methíche to a
186. John nü atsa zü’ methíche to a
`John ate orange now.’
187. John nü atsa hi teh dah
John nom now deic go part
`John has gone now (but will be
back)’,
The
sentence 187, though the particle gives information about past perfect, the
point reference in time is neutralized by the deictic determiner hi by
sustaining its viability. Thus the cut-off point of the present moment is
latent and its viability is not ceased.
3.3.2.2.
Future Tense :
Khezha has temporal adverbs to
indicate both absolute and relative future time reference:
Absolute: atsazhü `this
evening’; theduche `tomorrow morning’, thejah
`tomorrow’,
theduzhü `tomorrow evening’; theduni `day after tomorrow’; theduni
chíni `the following day of day after tomorrow’; athínì thrü `this
month’; whöno thrü `next month’; a`thy `this year’ (short form of
atsathy); teka `next year’, chyki `the following year of
next year’.
Relative: thenoh `after’; thenoba
`tonight’; theecheba `sometime tomorrow morning’; theduniba
`sometime after tomorrow’; chykiba `sometime after next year’.
Generally, languages have opposition
between future perfect and imperfect. In Khezha, this does not work well, because
of the involvement of the attitude of the speaker. Even the semantic criteria
in distinguishing between basic meaning and implicatures failed to give
explanation in an explicit way. Khezha
future tense may be sub-grouped into two types, which I term them as (i)
resolute future, (ii) irresolute future. The difference being that the
irresolute future cannot take conjunction erö ~ shyrö. (The conjuction erö
and shyrö are synonym and can replace each other without affecting the
meaning)
188. Pu nü Delhi eh throh de erö damedzü ah
he nom Delhi loc go fut con. ready part
`He is getting ready to go to Delhi.’
(He will go to Delhi so he is making preparation)
*Pu nü Delhi eh throh de erö damedzü ah
(i) Resolute Future:
The
future perfect is marked with model particle de, implying resolute,
firm, absolute and complete.
