Chapter in:
Antipassive: Typology, diachrony, and related constructions
Edited by Katarzyna Janic and Alena Witzlack-Makarevich
[Typological Studies in Language 130] 2021

The profile and development of the Maa (Eastern Nilotic) antipassive

| University of Oregon | SIL International
Maa (Eastern Nilotic) language varieties have nominative/accusative syntactic patterns, but also an antipassive construction marked by the verb suffix -ɪshɔ(r). This suffix turns an otherwise transitive construction into an intransitive one that can no longer express the P. Semantically the -ɪshɔ(r) construction focuses on the action of the verb or profiles long-term characteristics or ability of the agent. It is not required in imperfective situations, but most commonly does correlate with them. Interestingly, -ɪshɔ(r) may occur on some intransitive roots where it appears to highlight imperfectivity. The -ɪshɔ(r) antipassive construction does not appear to reconstruct to proto-Eastern Nilotic, though a verb root cognate with Maa ɪshɔ(r) ‘give’ does go back to a Proto-Maa-Lotuko-Lopit genetic node (though non-Maa languages within this group may lack the antipassive function). Given similarities between ɪshɔ(r) ‘give’ and the suffix -ɪshɔ(r), the possibility of an antipassive developing from ‘give’ is explored. Potential “drift” or borrowing under Kalenjin (Southern Nilotic) influence is also noted.
Keywords: valence, aspect, nominative alignment, diachrony, contact
References

References

Allam, Massimino & Hughell, Martha
n.d. Otuho dictionary database. Unpublished.
Baković, Eric
2001 Vowel harmony and cyclicity in Eastern Nilotic. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, General Session and Parasession on Language and Gesture, Charles Chang, Michael J. Hauser, YuniKim, David Mortensen, Mischa Park-Doob & Maziat Toosarnvandani (eds), 1–12. Berkeley CA: BLS.Google Scholar
Barasa, David
2016 Ateso Grammar: A Descriptive Account of an Eastern Nilotic Language. PhD dissertation, University of Cape Town.Google Scholar
Bird, Brian
2006 Tajik Persian complex predicates. Ms, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Brecht, Richard & Levine, James
1985 Conditions on voice marking in Russian. In Issues in Russian Morphosyntax, Michael Flier & Richard Brecht (eds), 118–137. Columbus OH: Slavica.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard, Forker, Diana & Khalilova, Zaira
2021 Antipassives in Nakh-Daghestanian Languages: Exploring the margins of a construction. In Antipassive: Typology, Diachrony, and Related Constructions [Typological Studies in Language 130], Katarzyna Janic & Alena Witzlack-Makarevich (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (This volume).Google Scholar
Cooreman, Ann
1994 A functional typology of antipassives. In Voice: Form and Function [Typological Studies in Language 27], Barbara A. Fox & Paul Hopper (eds), 49–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Creider, Chet A. & Tapsubei Creider, Jane
1989 A Grammar of Nandi. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Creissels, Denis
2012 The origin of antipassive markers in West Mande languages. Paper presented at the 45th Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Stockholm, August 29-September 1. http://​www​.deniscreissels​.fr​/public​/Creissels​-West​_Mande​_antipassives​.pdf (10 August 2020).
Creissels, Denis & Diagne, Anna Marie
2013 Transitivity in Bakel Soninke. Mandenkan 50: 5–38.Google Scholar
Dimmendaal, Gerrit
1983a The two morphological verb classes in Nilotic. In Nilotic Studies: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Languages and History of the Nilotic Peoples, Rainer Vossen & Marianne Bechhous-Gerst (eds), 269–309. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.Google Scholar
1983b The Turkana Language. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
1987 Drift and selective mechanisms in morphological changes: The Eastern Nilotic case. In Papers from the 7th International Conference on Historical Change [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 48], Anna Giacalone Ramat, Onofrio Carruba & Giuliano Bernini (eds), 193–210. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1988 The lexical reconstruction of Proto-Nilotic: A first reconnaissance. Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere 16: 5–67.Google Scholar
2006 Head marking, dependent marking, and constituent order in the Nilotic area. In Studies in African Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language 64], F. K. Erhard Voeltz (ed.), 71–92. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 Datives in Nilotic in a typological perspective. Afrikanistik-Aegyptologie-Online. http://​www​.afrikanistik​-aegyptologie​-online​.de​/archiv​/2009​/2355/ (10 August 2020).
2011 Historical Linguistics and the Comparative Study of African Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W.
1979 Ergativity. Language 55(1): 59–138.Google Scholar
1994 Ergativity. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Ehret, Christopher
1971 Southern Nilotic History. Evanston IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
2001 A Historical-Comparative Reconstruction of Nilo-Saharan. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Fortescue, Michael
1996 West Greenlandic half-transitive affixes in a diachronic perspective. In Cultural and Social Research in Greenland 95/96: Essays in Honour of Robert Petersen, Brigitte Jacobsen & Claus Andreasen (eds), 34–44. Nuuk: Lisimatusarfik, Atuakkiorfik.Google Scholar
Fortescue, Michael, Jacobson, Stephen & Kaplan, Lawrence
2010 Comparative Eskimo Dictionary, with Aleut Cognates. Fairbanks AK: Alaska Native Language Center.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy
(ed.) 1983 Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-language Study [Typological Studies in Language 3]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph
1959 The origin of the Masai passive. Africa 29: 171–176.Google Scholar
Hamaya, Mitsuyo
1993 Maasai Auxiliaries and Infinitival Constructions. MA Thesis, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey
1976 Antipassivization: A functional typology. In Proceedings of the Second Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, Henry Thompson, Kenneth Whistler, Vicki Edge, Jeri J. Jaeger, Ronya Javkin, Miriam Petruck, Christopher Smeall & Robert D. Van Valin Jr. (eds), 202–211. Berkeley CA: BLS.Google Scholar
Israeli, Alina
1997 Semantics and Pragmatics of the “Reflexive” Verbs in Russian. Munich: Otto Sagner.Google Scholar
Jacques, Guillaume
2014 Denominal affixes as sources of antipassive markers in Japhug Rgyalrong. Lingua 138: 1–22.Google Scholar
Janic, Katarzyna
2013 L’antipassif dans les langues accusatives. PhD dissertation, Lumière University Lyon 2.Google Scholar
2016b On the reflexive-antipassive polysemy: Typological convergence from unrelated languages. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Sixth Annual Meetings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Nicholas Rolle, Jeremy Steffman & John Sylak-Glassman (eds), 158–173. Berkeley CA: BLS.Google Scholar
Janic, Katarzyna & Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena
2021 The multifaceted nature of antipassive constructions. In Antipassive: Typology, Diachrony, and Related Constructions [Typological Studies in Language 130], Katarzyna Janic & Alena Witzlack-Makarevich (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (This volume).Google Scholar
Jerono, Prisca
2016 Passive and antipassive in Tugen. Paper presented at the Syntax of the World’s Languages 7 conference, Mexico City.
Kemmer, Suzanne
1993 The Middle Voice [Typological Studies in Language 23]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
König, Christa
2006 Marked nominative in Africa. Studies in Language 30(4): 655–732.Google Scholar
Levin, Beth
1993 English Verb Classes and Alternations: A Preliminary Investigation. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej
2017 Markedness effects in applicative formation. In Verb Valency Changes: Theoretical and Typological Perspectives [Typological Studies in Language 120], Albert Álvarez Gonzáles & Ía Navarro (eds), 3–29. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne
2000 Valency-changing derivation in Central Alaskan Yup’ik. In Changing Valency, Case Studies in Transitivity, Robert M. W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds), 84–114. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Mol, Frans
1996 Maasai Language & Culture Dictionary. Limuru, Kenya: Maasai Centre Lemek.Google Scholar
Muratori, Carlo
1948 English Bari-Lotuxo-Acoli Vocabulary. Okaru: Catholic Mission Printing Press.Google Scholar
Nedjalkov, Vladimir
2007 Polysemy of reciprocal markers. In Reciprocal Constructions [Typological Studies in Language 71], Vladimir Nedjalkov (ed.), 231–334. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Noonan, Michael
1992 A Grammar of Lango. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank R.
1994 Grammatical Roles and Relations. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Payne, Doris L.
1997 Argument structure and locus of affect in the Maasai External Possession construction. In Proceedings of the 23rd Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Special Volume on Syntax in African Languages (23S), Ashlee C. Bailey, Kevin E. Moore & Jeri L. Moxley (eds), 98–115. Berkeley CA: BLS.Google Scholar
2001 The explanation of argument structure: Lexicalization or discourse use? Proceedings of the Seoul International Conference on Discourse and Cognitive Linguistics, 532–556. Seoul: Korean Society of Discourse and Cognition.Google Scholar
2011 The Maa (Eastern Nilotic) Impersonal Construction. In Impersonal Constructions. A Cross-Linguistic Perspective [Studies in Language Companion Series 124], Anna Siewierska & Andrej Malchukov (eds), 257–284. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Payne, Doris L., Hamaya, Mitsuyo & Jacobs, Peter
1994 Active, passive, and inverse in Maasai. In Voice and Inversion [Typological Studies in Language 28], Talmy Givón (ed.), 283–315. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Polinsky, Maria
2013 Antipassive constructions. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://​wals​.info​/chapter​/108 (10 August 2020).
2017 Antipassive. In The Oxford Handbook of Ergativity, Jessica Coon, Diane Massam & Lisa Travis (eds), 308–331. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Rasmussen, Kent
2002 Verb Tone in Il-Keekonyokie Maa. MA thesis, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Rottland, Franz
1982 Die südnilotischen Sprachen: Beschreibung, Vergleichung und Rekonstruktion [Kölner Beitrage zur Afrikanistik 7]. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.Google Scholar
Sansò, Andrea
2017 Where do antipassive constructions come from? A study in diachronic typology. Diachronica 34(2): 175–218.Google Scholar
Schroeder, Martin
1999 Dictionary Toposa-English, English-Toposa, 1st edn. Nairobi: SIL International.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael
1972a Chinook Jargon: Language contact and the problem of multi-level generative systems, I. Language 48(2): 378–406.Google Scholar
1972b Chinook Jargon: Language contact and the problem of multi-level generative systems, II. Language 48(3): 596–625.Google Scholar
Spagnolo, Fr. L. M.
1933 Bari Grammar. Verona: Missione Africane.Google Scholar
Tatevosov, Sergei
2011 Detelicization and argument suppression: Evidence from Godoberi. Linguistics 49(1): 135–174. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Chad
1989 Voice and Obviation in Athabaskan and Other Languages. PhD dissertation, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
Tucker, Archibald N. & Mpaayei, John T.
1955 Maasai Grammar, with Vocabulary. London: Longman, Greens.Google Scholar
Vossen, Rainer
1982 The Eastern Nilotes: Linguistic and Historical Reconstructions. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.Google Scholar
Yap, Foong Ha & Iwasaki, Shoichi
2003 From causatives to passives: A passage in East and Southeast Asian languages. In Cognitive Linguistics and Non-Indo-European Languages, Eugene Casad & Gary Palmer (eds), 419–445. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2007 The emergence of GIVE passives in East and Southeast Asian languages. In SEALS VIII: Papers from the 8th meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society (1998), Mark Alves, Paul Sidwell & David Gil (eds), 193–208. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.Google Scholar