Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton June 30, 2023

A corpus analysis of Swahili’s dual-complementizer system

  • Aron Finholt and John Gluckman EMAIL logo

Abstract

Tanzanian Swahili has two complementizers, kuwa and kwamba, both used to introduce finite embedded clauses. We explore whether the complementizers are in free variation, as reported in all descriptive and pedagogical work. Our study primarily relies on corpus data, which we supplement with native speaker judgments. We find that the complementizers are not in free variation, but in fact are affected by a number of factors known to affect embedded clauses cross-linguistically, including predicate class, person features of the main-clause subject, and mood in the embedded clause. We conclude that the complementizers ultimately reflect subtle, pragmatic factors concerning how the truth of the embedded clause should be evaluated. Our study expands on previous work on languages with so-called “dual-complementizer” systems.

Abstract in KiSwahili

Kiswahili cha Tanzania kina viunganishi viwili, kuwa na kwamba, ambavyo hutumika kutambulisha vifungu vilivyopachikwa. Tunajadili kama viunganishi hivi hutumika kwa njia huru kama inavyoonyeshwa kwenye tafiti zote zinazohusu matumizi na ufundishaji wake. Utafiti wetu kwa kiasi kikubwa unatumia data ya corpus ya Kiswahili na maoni ya wazungumzaji asilia wa Kiswahili kuhusu matumizi ya viunganishi hivi. Kutokana na utafiti wetu, tuligundua kuwa viunganishi havitumiki kwa njia huru ila huathiriwa na mambo kadhaa ambayo yanajulikana kuathiri vifungu pachikwa kiisimu yakiwemo aina za vitenzi, hali ya kifungu kikuu cha nafsi, na hali ya kifungu kilichopachikwa. Tunahitimisha kuwa viunganishi kwa kiasi kikubwa huonyesha mambo mwafaka kuhusu jinsi hali ya kifungu kilichopachikwa inastahili kufasiriwa. Utafiti wetu unapanua zaidi kazi za awali kuhusu lugha ambazo zina viunganishi viwili kwenye mfumo wake.


Corresponding author: John Gluckman, Department of Linguistics, University of Kansas, Blake Hall, Room 411, 1541 Lilac Lane, Lawrence, KS, 66044, USA, E-mail:

References

Anand, Pranav & Valentine Hacquard. 2014. Factivity, belief, and discourse. In Luka Crnic & Uli Sauerland (eds.), The art and craft of semantics: A festschrift for Irene Heim, 69–90. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

Ashton, Ethel O. 1944. Swahili grammar (including intonation). London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Azen, Razia & David V. Budescu. 2003. The dominance analysis approach for comparing predictors in multiple regression. Psychological Methods 2(8). 129–148. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989x.8.2.129.Search in Google Scholar

Azen, Razia & Nicole Traxel. 2009. Using dominance analysis to determine predictor importance in logistic regression. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 3(34). 319–347. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998609332754.Search in Google Scholar

Bartis, Imre & Arvi J. Hurskainen. 2016. Helsinki corpus of Swahili 2.0 (HCS 2.0) annotated version. Chicago: FIN-CLARIN-konsortio, Nykykielten laitos, Helsingin yliopist.Search in Google Scholar

Botne, Robert. 1998. The evolution of future tenses from serial ‘say’ constructions in Eastern Bantu. Diachronica 15. 207–230. https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.15.2.02bot.Search in Google Scholar

Botne, Robert. 2020. Evidentiality in African languages. In Chungmin Lee & Jinho Park (eds.), Between evidentiality and modals, 460–501. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004436701_019Search in Google Scholar

Boye, Kasper & Petar Kehayov (eds.). 2016. Complementizer semantics in European languages. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110416619Search in Google Scholar

Budescu, David V. 1993. Dominance analysis: A new approach to the problem of relative importance of predictors in multiple regression. Psychological Bulletin 3(114). 542–551. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.114.3.542.Search in Google Scholar

Diercks, Michael. 2013. Indirect agree in Lubukusu complementizer agreement. Natural Languages and Linguistic Theory 31. 357–407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-013-9187-7.Search in Google Scholar

Farkas, Donka. 1992. On the semantics of subjunctive complements. In Paul Hirschbüler & Ernst Koerner (eds.), Romance languages and modern linguistic theory, 69–104. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.91.07farSearch in Google Scholar

Giannakidou, Anastasia & Alda Mari. 2021. Truth and veridicality in grammar and thought. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226763484.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Gibson, Hannah, Rozenn Guérois & Lutz Marten. 2019. Variation in Bantu copula constructions. In María J. Arche, Antonio Fábregas & Rafael Marín (eds.), The grammar of copulas across languages, 213–242. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198829850.003.0011Search in Google Scholar

Givón, Talmy. 1994. Irrealis and subjunctive. Studies in Language 18. 265–337. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.18.2.02giv.Search in Google Scholar

Givón, Talmy & Alexandre Kimenyi. 1974. Truth, belief and doubt in Kinyarwanda. The Papers from the Fifth Annual Conference on African Linguistics 5. 95–114.Search in Google Scholar

Gluckman, John. 2021. Null expletives and embedded clauses in Logoori. Syntax 24. 334–375. https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12212.Search in Google Scholar

Gluckman, John & Margit Bowler. 2016. Expletive agreement, evidentiality, and modality in Logooli. Proceedings of semantics and linguistic theory, vol. 26, 1063–1082. Washington, DC: Linguistic Society of America.10.3765/salt.v26i0.3935Search in Google Scholar

Güldemann, Tom. 2008. Quotative indexes in African languages: A synchronic and diachronic survey. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110211450Search in Google Scholar

Hinnebusch, Thomas J. & Sarah M. Mirza. 1998. Kiswahili: Msingi wa kusema, kusoma, na kuandika [Swahili: A foundation for speaking, reading, and writing], 2nd edn. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Search in Google Scholar

Hooper, Joan B. & Sandra A. Thompson. 1973. On the applicability of root transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4(4). 465–497.Search in Google Scholar

Kimenyi, Alexandre. 1978. A relational grammar of Kinyarwanda. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kiparsky, Paul & Carol Kiparsky. 1971. Fact. In Danny Steinberg & Leon Jakobovits (eds.), Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics, and psychology, 345–377. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kuteva, Tania, Bernd Heine, Bo Hong, Haiping Long, Heiko Narrog & Seongha Rhee. 2019. World lexicon of grammaticalization, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316479704Search in Google Scholar

Ledgeway, Adam. 2000. A comparative syntax of the dialects of Southern Italy: A minimalist approach. Hoboken: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Maho, Jouni F. 2009. NUGL Online: The online version of the New Updated Guthrie List, a referential classification of the Bantu languages. Available at: https://brill.com/fileasset/downloads_products/35125_Bantu-New-updated-Guthrie-List.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Mari, Alda & Paul Portner. 2021. Mood variation with belief predicates: Modal comparison and the raising of questions. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 6. 1–51.10.16995/glossa.5726Search in Google Scholar

Massamba, David P. B. 1986. Reported speech in Swahili. In Florian Coulmas (ed.), Direct and reported speech, 99–120. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Matthewson, Lisa. 2004. On the methodology of semantic fieldwork. International Journal of American Linguistics 70(4). 369–415. https://doi.org/10.1086/429207.Search in Google Scholar

McFadden, Daniel. 1993. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In Paul Zarembka (ed.), Frontiers in econometrics, vol. 4, 104–142. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Mpiranya, Fidèle. 2015. Swahili grammar and workbook. Londan and New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315750699Search in Google Scholar

Noonan, Michael. 2007. Complementation. In Timothy A. Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, vol. II, 52–150. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511619434.002Search in Google Scholar

Portner, Paul. 2018. Mood. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199547524.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Roussou, Anna. 2000. On the left periphery. Journal of Greek Linguistics 1. 65–94. https://doi.org/10.1075/jgl.1.05rou.Search in Google Scholar

Roussou, Anna. 2010. Selecting complementizers. Lingua 120. 582–603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.08.006.Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, Katrina D. & Antonia F. Schleicher. 2006. Swahili learners’ reference grammar, 2nd edn. Madison, WI: National African Language Resource Center.Search in Google Scholar

Villalta, Elisabeth. 2008. Mood and gradability: An investigation of the subjunctive mood in Spanish. Linguistics and Philosophy 31. 467–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-008-9046-x.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2023-06-30
Published in Print: 2023-05-25

© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 28.4.2024 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/jall-2023-2005/html
Scroll to top button