expression of diminutivity in Central Ring Grassfields Bantu

AFRIKA UND ÜBERSEE Trilingual Journal of African Languages and Cultures Revue trilingue des langues et cultures africaines Dreisprachige Zeitschrift für afrikanische Sprachen und Kulturen Volume 93 The expression of diminutivity in Central Ring Grassfields Bantu Pius W. Akumbua & Roland Kießlingb Universität Hamburgab [email protected] [email protected] DOI: 10.15460/auue.2021.93.1.203 Peer-reviewed article Submitted: 28.1.2020 Accepted: 26.3.2020 Published: 31.12.2020 Recommended citation: Akumbu, Pius W. & Roland Kießling. 2020. The expression of diminutivity in Central Ring Grassfields Bantu. Afrika und Übersee 93. 257–280. Licence: © Pius W. Akumbu and Roland Kießling. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Published by Hamburg University Press A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity The expression of diminutivity in Central Ring Grassfields Bantu 1 Pius W. Akumbua & Roland Kießlingb Universität Hamburgab [email protected] [email protected] Abstract: Studies on the expression of diminutivity in Bantoid languages of the Cameroonian Grassfields have tended to focus on the role that noun class derivation plays within the familiar Bantu paradigm. A closer look at individual branches of Bantoid, however, reveals a more complex picture, which rather suggests a division of labour between derivational strategies and compounding and/or periphrasis. This contribution zooms in on the languages of the Central Ring (CR) branch of Grassfields Bantu, presenting an overview of diminutivisation strategies found here: the notorious transfer to gender 19/6a, which is at times, accompanied by the addition of a semantically bleached suffix –CV, and periphrasis in associative constructions headed by nouns with inherent diminutive meanings such as ‘child’. Keywords: Central Ring Grassfields Bantu languages, diminutivity, diminutives, noun classes, gender 1 Introduction While diminutives have been studied extensively for their forms and meanings both from a universal perspective (Jurafsky 1996, Bakema & Geeraerts 2000, Grandi & Körtvélyessy 2015) and in Bantu specifically (Gibson, Guérois & Marten 2017), they have been largely neglected in studies on Grassfields Bantu languages, beyond the general statement that gender 19/6a is employed for this purpose (Hyman 1979: 24, Hyman 1980: 234, Tamanji 2009: 31, Akumbu 1 We gratefully acknowledge the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation for a Georg Forster Research Fellowship for Experienced Researchers granted to the first author (2019–2021) and which has allowed for greater collaboration and research on this paper. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 257 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity & Chibaka 2012: 54, Möller 2012: 12, Asohsi 2015: 68, Voll 2017: 90). Diminutives are grammatical “elements which make a semantic contribution pertaining to size” (Gibson et al. 2017: 344) in that they primarily express ‘physical smallness’ (Schneider 2003: 10). Other – derived – semantic functions include young age, insignificance or incompleteness, as well as relation or descent (Jurafsky 1996). Moreover, “diminutives can also be used to convey perspectives and subjective viewpoints, as well as to encode pejorative meanings along the lines of disdain or contempt, or ameliorative meanings encoding affection and admiration” (Gibson et al. 2017: 344). This study investigates the forms and functions of diminutives in the Central Ring (CR) branch of Grassfields Bantu, drawing primarily on data from six of the seven CR languages, i.e. Babanki, Kom, Kung, Kuk, Men and Oku.2 After a brief overview of the expression of diminutives in Bantu in section 2, section 3 discusses the morphological strategies of diminutivisation in CR. Section 4 sketches a prominent alternative strategy of diminutivisation attested in CR, i.e. periphrasis by an associative construction headed by the noun ‘child’ or ‘tiny item’. A conclusion is provided in section 5. 2 Diminutives in Bantu Diminutives in Bantu are “thought to have been historically expressed as part of the noun class system, and several noun classes have been 2 Although closely related to Narrow Bantu, Grassfields Bantu languages show remarkable differences in all parts of their grammar. CR languages themselves have many features in common and a comparison of vocabularies between immediate neighbours, such as Babanki and Kom (Brye 2001) show that they share at least 70% of their vocabulary. Until recently, only five languages (Kom, Oku, Babanki, Men and Bum) have been listed as CR (Dieu & Renaud 1983, Breton & Fohtung 1991, Watters 2003). However, it has now been proposed that Kuk and Kung also belong to this subgroup (Tatang 2016, Eberhard, Simons & Fennig 2019). There are nearly 400,000 people who speak these languages, as follows: Kom 233,000, Oku 40,000, Babanki 39,000, Men 35,000, Bum 21,000, Kuk 3,000, and Kung 1,750 (Eberhard et al. 2019). Bum has been left out of this study because we were unable to obtain substantial data from the limited existing literature on the language and also because we did not have access to any Bum speaker at the time we could have collected the necessary data (2018–2019). This was due, in part, to the political crisis in the English-speaking regions of Cameroon that started in October 2016 and significantly prevented movement to the area, as well as led to the displacement of speakers into more remote areas for their safety. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 258 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity reconstructed as including diminutive meaning” (Gibson et al. 2017). In this regard, the Proto-Bantu class 12 prefix *ka- is most often associated with diminutives while the class 13 prefix *tu- acts as the corresponding diminutive plural class marker (Bleek 1862/9, Meinhof 1910[1899], Meeussen 1967, Maho 1999, Demuth 2000). Synchronic use of gender 12/13 for diminutives in Bantu is seen in Chindamba (1) and Kimbundu (2). (1) (2) Chindamba (G52, Edelsten & Lijongwa 2010: 36–38, Gibson et al. 2017: 348) li-piki ‘tree’ (class 5) ma-piki ‘trees’ (class 6) ka-piki ‘small tree’ (class 12) tu-piki ‘small trees’ (class 13) Kimbundu (H21, Quintão 1934: 18, Gibson et al. 2017: 348) di-tadi ‘stone’ (class 5) ma-tadi ‘stones’ (class 6) ka-di-tadi ‘small stone’ (class 12+class 5) tu-ma-tadi ‘small stones’ (class 13+class 6) Nevertheless, as noted by Maho (1999: 252, 262), class 12 is not evenly distributed in the whole Bantu area, as class 20 *ɣù- (3), gender 7/8 *kì-/*βì- (4) and class 19 *pì- (5) compete for diminutive meaning. (3) Venda (S53, Poulos 1986: 289, 1990: 38, Gibson et al. 2017: 375) ku-thavha ‘small mountain’ (class 20) ku-thavh-ana ‘very small mountain’ (class 20 + -ana) (4) Tsonga (S53, Poulos 1999: 206, Gibson et al. 2017: 375) muti ‘village’ (class 3) xi-mut-ana ‘small village’ (class 7 + -ana) swi-mut-ana ‘small villages’ (class 8 + -ana) (5) Nomaánde (A46, Wilkendorf 2001: 15, Gibson et al. 2017: 351) o-túmbe ‘walking cane’ (class 3) hi-túmbétumbe ‘small cane’ (class 19) In fact, Proto-Bantu *pi- might have a Proto-Benue-Congo ancestor in *pi- (de Wolf 1971: 170–1) which is assumed to have been grammaticalised from a prior independent noun pi or bi ‘child’, reflexes of Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 259 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity which are attested in other branches of Niger Congo (Kähler-Meyer 1971: 347–348). The diminutive prefix either replaces the ‘original’ noun class prefix in most languages or it is added on top of it in a few cases (Maho 1999). Diminutive classes in Bantu are typically used for secondary classification (Meeussen 1967, Maho 1999). For this purpose, “a noun typically found in a different class is used in the diminutive class for a specific semantic effect” (Gibson et al. 2017: 359). However, there are also instances where nouns are primarily members of the diminutive class without necessarily being physically small. While Bantu languages predominantly employ their noun class system for the expression of diminutivity, other strategies such as derivational suffixes and compounding processes are also used (Maho 1999, Gibson et al. 2017: 348). 3 Diminutives in Central Ring Grassfields Bantu Diminutives in Central Ring (CR) primarily express physical smallness, but can also encode an offspring relationship, young age, inferiority and/or deficiency. As in other Bantu languages, a shift from one class to the diminutive class in CR also results in an interpretation of the noun concerned as physically small, that is, as falling short of the prototypical size of the referent class member. Therefore, the entities referred to by diminutives are regarded as smaller members of the category. Thus, fə̄tsôtə̀ (19/6a) in Men refers to a brook, creek or rivulet which is smaller in size than what is perceived as standard for its derivative source noun, i.e. tsò (9/10) ‘river’.3 This is not to say that the referents of diminutive forms are small by an absolute standard. Speakers represent a referent as small for a particular communicative purpose, i.e. “smallness is not necessarily perceived, but in fact ascribed” (Schneider 2003: 11). Derived diminutives may undergo semantic specialisations, e.g. Men ēkyû (3/6a) ‘bed’ derives the diminutive fə̄kîə (19/6a) ‘stool’ and Babanki kə̀tíʔə́tíʔə́ ‘ear’ derives the diminutive fə̀tíʔə́tíʔə́ ‘mushroom (sp.)’, as motivated by similarity in form. As seen in (6) diminutive derivation of the concept vein from the concept root is recurrently observed in CR, e.g. in Men, Kom and Babanki. 3 The morphological derivation of diminutives such as this will be dealt with in sections 3.1 and 3.2 in more detail. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 260 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity (6) CR diminutive derivation of vein from root PR *-ɣàŋ ́ Babanki Kom Men gloss *5/6 ə̀-ɣáŋ ī-ɣâŋ ē-ɣâŋ (5/13) ‘root’ *19/6a fə̀-ɣáŋ fɨ ̄-ɣâŋ fə̄-ɣâŋ ‘vein, artery’ Diminutives may also entail pejorative or derogatory meanings. Thus, fə̀ŋgə̀ŋtə̂ ‘small house’ (< ə̀ŋgə̀ŋ (3~5/6) ‘house’), to a Babanki speaker, can express a negative attitude toward the referent, reflecting the view that the owner could have built a much bigger house. It could also mean that someone else will eventually build a bigger house than the diminutivised one. Linked to pejorative connotations is the notion of inability or incapability of a person or group of people and things. For example, Babanki fə̀wìʔtə̂ (< wìʔ (1/2) ‘person’) normally means ‘small person’, but can also be used to designate someone who has not achieved much, be they physically small or big. Such pejorative connotations can be adduced for the rest of CR, e.g. in Kung fə̄fûɔ ‘small and feeble thing’ (< kə̄fúɔ (7/8) ‘thing’) (Kießling 2019: 149). When used on body parts, diminutives can also be a form of insult, e.g. Babanki fə̀ʃɨ ̀lə̀ ‘small eye’ (< ə̀ʃɨ ́ (5/6) ‘eye’) does not really mean that the eye is physically small but could be a way to simply humiliate the person concerned. In the next two subsections we focus on the morphological strategies of diminutivisation in CR, i.e. the transfer to gender 19/6a (3.1), and concomitant suffixation (3.2). 3.1 Shift to gender 19/6a The most common strategy of diminutive formation in CR is derivation by which a noun is shifted to gender 19/6a, as described for Babanki (Akumbu & Chibaka 2012), Oku (Yensi 1996), Men (Möller 2012), Kuk (Kießling 2016) and Kung (Kießling 2019: 149).4 Class prefixes of gender 19/6a which are used for diminutivisation might 4 The data used in this study have mostly been taken from the following sources: Babanki (Akumbu & Chibaka 2012), Kom (Jones 2001), Oku (Yensi 1996, Blood & Davis 1999), Men (Chiatoh 1993, Mua 2015, Möller 2012, Björkestedt 2011, Bangha 2003), Kuk (Kießling 2016, Pleus 2015) and Kung (Kießling 2019: 149; Schlenker 2012). Babanki data have been supplemented by the first author. Men, Kuk and Kung data have been supplemented based on fieldnotes by the second author. Surprisingly, published sources on Kom and Oku do not seem to provide any information on diminutives and we had to collect supplementary data to fill the gap. Proto-Ring reconstructions are taken from Hyman (2007). Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 261 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity attach to nouns of class 1 or 9 which come without a class prefix as shown in (7) or they replace a pre-existent class prefix as in (8).5 Remarkably, stem alternations which characterize the base forms of gender 1/2 and 9/10, e.g. consonant alternations such as v ~ɣ and w ~ ɣ, are absent in their diminutive counterparts. (7) CR diminutive derivation in 19/6a of nouns without a class prefix Babanki Kom Kuk Base diminutive 19/6a wáin (1/2) ‘child’, pl. wɔ́indā ŋgvɨ ̄ (9/10) ‘chicken’, pl. ŋgvɨ ̄sə̄ wāe (1/2) ‘child’, pl. ʌ̄wáe byī (9/10) ‘goat’, pl. sə̄byí fɨ ̄wáintɨ ̀ ‘little child’, pl. mɨ ̄wáintɨ ̀ fɨ ̄ŋgvɨ ̄tɨ ̂ ‘small chicken’, pl. mɨ ̄ŋgvɨ ̄tɨ ̂ fə̄wáe ‘tiny feeble child’, pl. m̄ wáe fə̄byí ‘smallish goat’, pl. m̄ byí wàn (1/2) ‘child’, pl. vúnə́ gɨ ̀ (9/10) ‘voice’, pl. gɨ ́ꜜsə́ Kung wāe (1/2) ‘child’, pl. ʌ̄(ɣ)wáe ʙə̀° (9/10) ‘goat’, pl. sə̄ʙə᷇ Men váin (1/2) ‘child’, pl. ʌ̄ɣɔ́in tsò (9/10) ‘river’, pl. sētsò Oku wîl (1/2) ‘person’, pl. ɣɨ ́lɨ ̄ ŋgvə́ə (9/10) ‘chicken’, pl. ŋgvə́əsē (8) fə̀wàntə̂ ‘little child’, pl. mə̀wàntə̂ fə̀gɨ ̀tə̂ ‘tiny voice’, pl. mə̀gɨ ̀tə̂ fə̄wáe ‘tiny feeble child’, pl. m̄ wáe fə̄ʙə̂lə̀ ‘small feeble goat’, pl. m̄ ʙə̂lə̀ fēɣɔ́intə̂ ‘little child’, pl. m̄ ɣɔ́intə̂ fə̄tsôtə̀ ‘brook, small river’, pl. m̄ tsôtə̀ fə̀wîl ‘small person’, pl. mə̀wîl fēŋgvə́ətè ‘small chicken’, pl. mēŋgvə́ətè CR Diminutive derivation in 19/6a of nouns with class prefixes Babanki Base ə̀tó (5/13) ‘hut’, pl. tə̀tó kə̀wʉ́ (7/6) ‘foot’, pl. àwʉ́ diminutive 19/6a fə̀tótə̀ ‘tiny hut’, pl. mə̀tótə̀ fə̀wʉ́tə̀ ‘small foot’, pl. mə̀wʉ́tə̀ 5 All CR languages employ a noun class system of the Bantu type with either 12 (Babanki, Bum, Kuk, Kung) or 13 (Kom, Men, Oku) agreement classes (Akumbu 2019: 2). All of them distinguish class 19 marked by fV- and its corresponding plural class 6a (also the class for liquids) marked by m(V)-. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 262 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Kom Kuk Kung Men Oku Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity ātú (7/8) ‘head’, pl. ɨ ̄tú īsáŋ (5/6) ‘corn’, pl. āsáŋ īsʌ̂b (5/6) ‘maize cob’, pl. ʌ̄sʌ̂b kə̄kɔ́i (7/8) ‘chair’, pl. ūkɔ́i kə̄bê (7/4) ‘thigh’, pl. ībê kə̄fúɔ (7/8) ‘thing’, pl. ūfúɔ ētʃí (5/6~13) ‘stone’, pl. ə̄tʃí~tētʃí āfɨá (7/8) ‘thing’, pl. ēfɨá ə̄bkún (3/6a) ‘bed’, pl. ə̄mkún ɛ̄ʃáŋ (5/6) ‘corn’, pl. ɛ̄yʃáŋ fɨ ̄túnɨ ̀ ‘small head’, pl. mɨ ̄túnɨ ̀ fɨ ̄sáŋlɨ ̂ ‘small corn’, pl. mɨ ̄sáŋlɨ ̂ fə̄sʌ̂b(lə̀) ‘smallish maize cob’, pl. m̄ sʌ̂blə̀ fə̄kɔ́i ‘small chair’, pl. m̄ kɔ́i fə̄bê(lə̀) ‘tiny feeble thigh’, pl. m̄ bê(lə̀) fə̄fûɔ ‘tiny thing’, pl. m̄ fûɔ fə̄tʃílə̂ ‘small stone’, pl. m̄ tʃílə̂ fə̄fɨâ ‘small thing’, pl. m̄ fɨâ fēkúntè ‘small bed’, pl. mēkúntè fēʃáŋtè ‘small corn’, pl. mēʃáŋtè The addition of noun class prefixes of 19/6a in diminutive function on top of the original ones, establishing a secondary layer of class prefixes, seems to be restricted to instances where the original noun class prefix has started to merge with the root. A possible candidate is Men fēɣɔ́intə̂ ‘small children’ where the diminutive prefix is added onto an alleged class 2 prefix ɣ- (Möller 2012: 12).6 Nouns borrowed into CR can also be diminutivised by being shifted to gender 19/6a, as shown in (9), which proves that this strategy is indeed very productive in CR. 6 Even more remarkable is the fact that this diminutive is derived from the plural form ʌ̄ɣɔ́in, not the singular váin. From this perspective, however, it is dubious whether the segment ɣ is actually to be analysed as plural prefix, since the prefix in the plural form ʌ̄-ɣɔ́in ‘children’ is ʌ̄-, while the segment ɣ seems to belong to the root. This is probably due to the special nature of the noun ‘child’ – not only in Men, but in a number of Ring languages – in that number distinction is not only expressed by change in NPx but also by suppletion of roots or rather by two distinct forms of one and the same root whose allomorphic relation has become intransparent by idiosyncratic fusions. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 263 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 (9) Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity CR Diminutive derivation in 19/6a of borrowed words Babanki Kom Kuk Kung Oku Base bwɔ́tə̀ (1/2) ‘bottle’, pl. və̀bwɔ́tə̀ bùʃí (1/2) ‘cat’, pl. və̀bùʃí tʃɔ̂s (1/2) ‘church’, pl. və̀tʃɔ̂s lámbās (9/10) ‘orange’, pl. lámbāysɨ ̄ bés (9/10) ‘cat’, pl. béysɨ ̄ tʃɔ̄s (9/10) ‘church’, pl. tʃɔ̄ysɨ ̄ lámâs (9/10) ‘orange’, pl. sə̀lámâs bùsí (9/10) ‘cat’, pl. sə̀bùsí lámâs (9/10) ‘orange’, pl. sə̀lámâs bùsí (9/10) ‘cat’, pl. sə̀bùsí tsɔ̄s (9/10) ‘church’, pl. sə̄tsɔ̄s bwɔ́tè (1/10) ‘bottle’, pl. bwɔ́tèsè bùsé (1/10) ‘cat’, pl. bùsésé tsɔ́s (1/10) ‘church’, pl. tsɔ́sé diminutive 19/6a fə̀bwɔ́tə̀ ‘small bottle’, pl. mə̀bwɔ́tə̀ fə̀bùʃí ‘small cat’, pl. mə̀bùʃí fə̀tʃɔ̂ytə̀ ‘tiny church’, pl. mə̀tʃɔ̂ytə̀ fɨ ̄lámbās ‘small orange’, pl. mɨ ̄lámbās fɨ ̄bés ‘small cats’, pl. mɨ ̄bés fɨ ̄tʃɔ̄s ‘tiny church’, pl. mɨ ̄tʃɔ̄s fə̄lámâs ‘small orange’, pl. m̄ lámâs fə̄bùsí ‘small cats’, pl. m̄ bùsí fə̄lámâs ‘small orange’, pl. m̄ lámâs fə̄bùsí ‘small cat’, pl. m̄ bùsí fə̄tsɔ̄s ‘tiny church’, pl. m̄ tsɔ̄ fēbwɔ́tè ‘small bottle’, pl. mēbwɔ́tè fēbùsé ‘small cats’, pl. mēbùsé fētsɔ́stè ‘small church’, pl. mētsɔ́stè While 19/6a is employed for secondary diminutive classification, there are nouns that are primarily members of this gender in CR, without necessarily being physically small. Even those 19/6a nouns whose referents might be regarded as physically small in comparison to some absolute standard do not appear to be derived from any other non-diminutive class, as pointed out for other Bantu languages (Gibson et al. 2017: 359). (10) CR nouns primarily affiliated to gender 19/6a Babanki Kom Kuk Kung Men Oku fə̀kɔ̀ʔ fɨ ̄kâʔ fə̄kâʔ fə̄kâʔ fēkâʔ fēkâʔ fə̀ɲín fə̀ɲì fə̀kù fɨ ̄ɲúin fɨ ̀ɲù fɨ ̄kû fə̄ɲɨ ᷇n fə̄ɲí fə̄kûɔ Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 fə̄ɲɨ ᷇m fə̄ɲi ᷇ə fə̄kô gloss fēnʌ᷇ŋ fēnə́n ‘bird’ fēɲí fèfìak ‘knife’ fēkû fēkóo ‘tree’ ‘belt’ 264 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity Babanki Kom Kuk Kung Men Oku fə̀lɨ ́ʔ fɨ ̄léʔ [kə̄ɲɨ ́ʔ] [kə̄ɲɨ ́ʔ] fēndə́ʔ fēlík fə̀mbváŋ fə̀làm fɨ ̄ŋgwáŋ fɨ ̀làm fə̄ŋgbáŋ ? fə̄mgbáŋ fə̄wô gloss fēŋgwáŋ fēŋgwáŋ ‘salt’ fèlȁm fèlàm ‘net’ ‘smoke’ The nouns in (10) are primarily members of gender 19/6a since there is no evidence of their derivational shift from another source gender on the synchronic level. Note that the absolute size of referents of primary 19/6a nouns such as ‘bird’, ‘tree’, or ‘knife’ is, in principle, no argument against their potential historical origin in derived diminutives, since the contemporarily productive derivational process is also not guided by orientation towards any absolute standard of size, but rather depends on the size which is perceived as prototypical of a given class member. Therefore, it might be that these nouns which are today – and most probably already in proto-(C)R times – primarily affiliated to gender 19/6a actually represent historical diminutives derived at pre-Ring times from a non-diminutive root which has disappeared from (C)R. 3.2 Suffixation Shifting nouns to gender 19/6a for diminutivisation is, at times, accompanied by the addition of a -CV suffix. CR languages differ with respect to the scope of application of the -CV suffix across the lexicon (lexical coverage), the optionality of its presence in diminutives, the available forms of its (lexically conditioned) allomorphs (-t, -l, or -n) and the degree to which they undergo phonological reduction, as briefly summarized in table (11). (11) Overview of CR suffixation lexical coverage presence of suffix: number of allomorphs: full vs. reduced shape: Babanki Kom total total Oku total Men partial Kuk partial Kung partial n.a. n.a. oblig. option. option. n.a. 3 3 3 2 (tə, lə) 1 (lə) 1 (lə) full full full reduced reduced reduced Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 265 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity The suffix is obligatorily present in derived diminutives in Babanki but lexically conditioned in Kom, Kung, Kuk, Men, and Oku such that some nouns take a suffix in forming the diminutive while others do not, e.g. Kuk fə̄byí ‘smallish goat’, Oku fə̀wîl ‘small person’. In Kung there is also variation with respect to application of the suffix, e.g. kə̄bê ‘thigh’ derives the diminutive singular fə̄bê-lə̀ which varies freely with fə̄bê, whereas the diminutive plural m̄ bê-lə̀ does not allow for omission of the suffix in *m̄ bê.7 Concomitant suffixation for diminutive derivation in CR is exemplified in (12). (12) CR diminutive derivation in 19/6a and suffixation8 Babanki Kom Kung Base diminutive 19/6a wàn (1/2) ‘child’, pl. vúnə́ fə̀wàntə̂ ‘little child’, pl. mə̀wàntə̂ ə̀fwín (5/6) ‘leg’, pl. àfwín fə̀fwíntə̀ ‘small leg’, pl. mə̀fwíntə̀ kə̀ʃí (7/8) ‘piece’, pl. ə̀ʃí fə̀ʃílə̀~fə̀ʃínə̀ ‘tiny piece’, pl. mə̀ʃílə̀~mə̀ʃínə̀ wáin (1/2) ‘child’, pl. wɔ́indā īsáŋ (5/6) ‘corn’, pl. āsáŋ ātú (7/8) ‘head’, pl. ə̄tú īɣa᷇ŋ (5/10) ‘root’, pl. sə̄ɣa᷇ŋ kə̄bê (7/4) ‘thigh’, pl. ībê sʌ̀f (9/10) ‘maize’, pl. sə̀sʌ̀f fɨ ̄wáin(tɨ ̀) ‘little child’, pl. mɨ ̄wáin(tɨ ̀) fɨ ̄sáŋ(lɨ ̂) ‘small corn’, pl. mɨ ̄sáŋ(lɨ ̂) fɨ ̄tú(nɨ ̀) ‘small head’, pl. mɨ ̄tú(nɨ ̀) fə̄ɣa᷇ŋə̂ ‘small root’, pl. m̄ ɣa᷇ŋə̂ fə̄bê(lə̀) ‘tiny feeble thigh’, pl. m̄ bêlə̀ fə̄sʌ̂blə̀ ‘tiny feeble maize plant’, pl. m̄ sʌ̂blə̀ 7 The datasets on which these claims are based vary with respect to individual languages. The datasets for Kuk and Kung are quite limited comprising some 20 diminutives which have been checked with two consultants, respectively. Regarding Kom and Oku, 25 items were taken from secondary sources and checked systematically with two consultants each. The Men dataset is a bit larger including some 40 items from various sources. While the Kuk dataset stems from elicitation exclusively, Kung and Men data are based on elicitation and narrative discourse. 80 Babanki items were provided by the first author and checked by two other native speakers. In all cases diminutives have not been checked for their potential range of variation across different individuals. 8 Bracketing of the suffix indicates its optional presence. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 266 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Kuk Men Oku Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity zùɣù (9/10) ‘snake’, pl. sə́zûɣù ɲȁm (9/10) ‘animal’, pl. sə̄ɲâm īsʌ̂b (5/6) ‘maize cob’, pl. ʌ̄sʌ̂b āfɨá (7/8) ‘thing’, pl. ēfɨá váin (1/2) ‘child’, pl. ʌ̄ɣɔ́in tsə̀m (9/10) ‘dream’, pl. sētsə̀m ə̄bkún (3/6a) ‘bed’, pl. ə̄mkún kētíɛ (7/8) ‘chair’, pl. ə̄btíɛ ntɔ̀n (9/10) ‘pot’, pl. ntɔ̀nsè fə̄ʒúglə̀ ‘smallish snake’, pl. m̄ zúglə̀ fə̀ɲàmə̏ ‘small animal’, pl. m̀ ɲàmə̏ fə̄sʌ̂b(lə̀) ‘smallish maize cob’, pl. m̄ sʌ̂blə̀ fēfɨâ ‘little thing’, pl. m̄ fɨâ fēɣɔ́intə̂ ‘little child’, pl. m̄ ɣɔ́intə̂ fə̄tsə́mtə̀ ‘small dream’, pl. m̄ tsə́mtə̀ fēkún(tè) ‘small bed’, pl. mēkún(tè) fētíɛ(lé) ‘small chair’, pl. mētíɛ(lé) fèntɔ̀n(nè) ‘small pot’, pl. mèntɔ̀n(nè) In Babanki, Kom, and Oku, all three suffix allomorphs can occur in both the singular and plural and it is possible for some words to take -lə̀ or -nə̀ in Babanki without any semantic difference. In Kom and Oku, it is possible to leave out a suffix and still obtain the diminutive meaning only by transfer to gender 19/6a. In Kung and Kuk suffixation for diminutivity is more restrictive than in Babanki, Kom and Oku in two respects. First, only one suffix allomorph, i.e. -(l)ə̀ (along with various types of reduction) has been observed so far. Second, the distribution of this suffix is constrained by semantically intransparent lexical criteria, i.e. some diminutives require the suffix obligatorily, others apply it optionally, while some lack it altogether. Of all CR languages Kuk is the one with the most limited use of the suffix. In all 10 examples given in Kießling (2016), only one, fə̄ʒúglə̀ ‘smallish snake’, requires the suffix -lə. Another one, fə̀ɲàmə̏ ‘small animal’, contains the reduced form of the suffix, i.e. -ə, and in a third one, fə̄sʌ̂b(lə̀) ‘smallish maize cob’, it is optionally present. In Kung the suffix -lə seems to be reduced to schwa, as soon as it appears with a velar nasal, e.g. in fēɣa᷇ŋ-ə̀ ‘small root’ (< *fēɣa᷇ŋ-lə̀) and fə̀pfə̀ndʊ́ ŋ-ə̀ ‘small pig, piglet’ (< *fə̀pfə̀ndʊ́ ŋ-lə̀). Occasional alternations in root final consonants, as in fə̄-sʌ̂b-lə̀ ‘small maize plant’ (< sʌ̀f ‘maize cob’), suggest that suffixation of -lə must have protected a prior root final plosive *b from lenition to f (Kießling 2019: 149). Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 267 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity The surface tones of some nouns are also realized differently as compared to their derivational base, e.g. fə̄ɣɨ ̂ə ‘tiny feeble person’ (<ɣùɔ (1/2) ‘person’, pl. ʌ̄ɣɨ ᷇(ə)). Some nouns, e.g. īɣa᷇ŋ (5/10) ‘root’ derive two distinct forms in gender 19/6a in which the presence vs. absence of the suffix produces a difference in meaning, i.e. fə̄ɣa᷇ŋ-ə̂ ‘small root’ (< *fə̄ɣa᷇ŋ-lə̂) vs. fə̄ɣáŋ ‘edible root’. In Men there are instances where it looks as if the diminutive is derived exclusively by suffixation. This is the case for a few nouns which are primarily affiliated to 19/6a, e.g. fēnɨ ᷇ŋ-tə̂ ‘small bird’ (< fēnɨ ᷇ŋ ‘bird’), fēsɨ ́y-lə́ ~ fēsɨ ́y-tə̀ ‘small pepper’ (< fə̄sɨ ́s ‘pepper’), fə̄ɲí-tə̂ ‘small knife’ (< fə̄ɲí ‘knife’). Derived diminutives in this language may retain only tonal traces of prior suffixation, e.g. the final L component in fēfɨâ ‘small thing’ (< āfɨá (7/8) ‘thing’). As mentioned above, suffixation in the course of diminutive derivation triggers morphophonological effects in some root terminal consonants, though it is difficult to generalize on these, since in some cases suffixation seems to block lenition which otherwise affects terminal consonants in non-suffixed forms, e.g. Kung fēsʌ̂b-lə̀ ‘small maize plant’ (< sʌ̀f (9/10) ‘maize cob’), Kuk fə̄ʒúg-lə̀ ‘smallish snake’(< zùɣù (9/10) ‘snake’), while in other cases it is just the other way round, i.e. suffixation causing lenition, e.g. Men fēsɨ ́y-lə́ ~ fēsɨ ́y-tə́ ‘small pepper’ (< fə̄sɨ ́s (19/6a) ‘pepper’), Babanki fə̀sáy-lə̀ ~ fə̀sáy-tə̀ ‘small buttock’ (< ə̀sás (5/6) ‘buttock’). The tone in the suffix seems to be lexically determined in that some diminutives apply a low tone and others a high tone e.g. Oku fē-tú-lè ‘small head’ (< kē-tú (7/8) ‘head’) vs. fē-tíɛ-lé ‘small chair’ (< kē-tíɛ (7/8) ‘chair’).9 Falling contour tones might be a result of two tones merging to one in a single tone bearing unit, either a high root tone spreading on a low suffix tone, e.g. Kom fɨ ̄ŋgvɨ ́-tɨ ̂ ‘small chicken’ (<ŋgvɨ ́ (9/10) ‘chicken’) and Men fə̄ɲí-tə̂ ‘small knife’ (< fə̄ɲí (19/6a) ‘knife’), or a low suffix tone docking to a high root tone, e.g. Kung fə̄fûɔ ‘tiny thing’ (< kə̄fúɔ (7/8) ‘thing’). In Babanki, however, the tendency is for H tone roots to take a L tone suffix, e.g. fə̀tó-tə̀ ‘small 9 These tonal variations in the suffix might reflect a contrast of different final floating tones associated to the root as reconstructed for Proto-Grassfields (Hyman 2007). Thus, the low tone suffixes in Oku fē-tú-lè, Men fə̄-tú-ə̀, and Babanki fē-tʉ́-lə̀ ‘small head’ might reflect the final floating low tone of the Proto-Grassfields root *tʊ́ ̀ ‘head’, whereas the high tone suffix in Men fə̄-fó-lə́ ‘very small rat’ (< āfól (7/8) ‘rat’) rather reflects the terminal floating high tone of the Proto-Grassfields root *fʊ́ ĺ ‘rat’. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 268 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity hut’ (< ə̀tó (5/13) ‘hut’), fə̀mbvʉ́-lə̀ ‘small chicken’ (< mbvʉ́ (9/10) ‘chicken’), while L tone roots take a falling tone suffix, e.g. fə̀wìʔ-tə̂ ‘small person’ (< wìʔ (1/2) ‘person’), fə̀ɲàm-tə̂ ‘small animal’ (< ɲàm (9/10) ‘animal’). This suggests that the diminutive suffix in Babanki must be low-toned with a preceding floating high tone which is absorbed by final high tones in the nominal root, but creates a contour tone in the suffix when preceded by a low tone in the nominal root. Borrowed nouns do not accept suffixation of -CV along with transfer to gender 19/6a for diminutive formation, as seen in (4) above. The exceptions found so far are in Babanki and Oku where monosyllabic bases can also receive a suffix, e.g. Babanki fə̀tʃɔ̂ytə̀ ‘tiny church’ (< tʃɔ̂s ‘church’), and Oku fētsɔ́stè ‘tiny church’ (< tsɔ́s ‘church’). Remarkably, two of these suffixes, namely -tV and -lV, which accompany diminutive derivation of nouns in CR resemble the verbal extensions -tV, and -lV commonly found in Bantoid and in Grassfields (Watters 2003: 245, Hyman 2018: 180) to derive attenuative meanings in verbs (Akumbu & Chibaka 2012: 137, Tamanji & Mba 2003, Mba & Chiatoh 2003, Harro 1989, Mba 1997), i.e. a reduced degree of quality in states and intensity in actions and events. Semantically, the effect is parallel to diminutivisation with nouns. While the suffix -nV serves diminutive function, it is not attested in the attenuative. On the other hand, -kV is attested in the attenuative but has not been found in diminutives. In Babanki, for example, -tə and -kə function as attenuative suffixes often combined with a frequentative or iterative function, as shown in (13). (13) Babanki verbal diminutive suffixes -tə and -kə Base diminutive in -tə Base wyé ‘pour’ wyétə́ ‘pour a little’ sáʔ ‘scatter’ sáʔkə́ ‘scatter in bits’ dìtə̀ ‘cry a little’ bàs ‘tear’ ɲʉ́ ‘drink’ ló ‘lick’ dì ‘cry’ tʃò ‘pass’ ɲʉ́tə́ ‘drink a bit’ lótə́ ‘lick a bit’ tʃòtə̀ ‘pass a little’ pfɨ ́ ‘die’ diminutive in -kə pfɨ ́kə́ ‘die bit by bit’ káʔ ‘turn’ káʔkə́ ‘turn a bit’ fwɔ̀s ‘fart’ fwɔ̀ykə̀ ‘fart little by little’ bvù ‘grind’ bvùtə̀ ‘grind a little’ fwè ‘rot’ bàykə̀ ‘tear into pieces’ fwèkə̀ ‘rot bit by bit’ Mba and Chiatoh (2003: 94, 98) demonstrate that -tɨ and -lɨ function as diminutive suffixes in Kom (14). Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 269 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity (14) Kom verbal diminutive suffixes -tɨ and -lɨ Base diminutive in -tɨ Base diminutive in -lɨ séf ‘carry’ sébtɨ ́ ‘carry a bit’ tás ‘sharpen’ táylɨ ́ ‘sharpen a bit’ káŋ ‘fry’ káŋtɨ ́ ‘fry a bit’ káŋ ‘fry’ káŋlɨ ́ ‘fry a bit’ kàf ‘scratch’ kàbtɨ ́ ‘scratch a bit’ tàs ‘push down’ tàylɨ ́ ‘push down a bit’ nyíŋ ‘run’ nyíŋtɨ ́ ‘run a bit’ tʃéʔ ‘rob’ tʃéʔlɨ ́ ‘rob a bit’ Depending on the situation in individual CR languages, attenuation is often also linked to repetitive and frequentative notions, due to the common experience that distributive repetition and parcellation tends to entail a diminution of intensity. Thus, in Men, the cognate suffix -te has attenuative function which is often combined with a frequentative, iterative, distributive or pluractional notion, as shown in (15). (15) Men verbal diminutive suffix -te Base diminutive ḿ[ə́] ‘drink’ mə́té ‘take sips’ kɔ́ʔ ‘climb, go up’ kɔ́ʔté ‘climb up a little’ ŋgɔ́ʔ ‘give one knock’ ŋgɔ́ʔté ‘knock slightly several times’ tɨ ́m ‘shoot; dig’ tɨ ́mté ‘dig in a disorderly fashion (flinging up earth here and there)’ ndʒì ‘take’ ndʒìtè ‘take a little, take bit by bit’ In Kom some lexemes seem to distinguish frequentative and attenuative, e.g. tʃʲá ‘kick’ allows for a contrast of the frequentative tʃʲá-lɨ́ ‘kick repeatedly’ vs. the attenuative tʃʲá-tɨ ́ ‘kick a little’, whereas others derive polysemous stems with -tɨ ̀, e.g. mzì-tɨ ̀ (< mzì ‘swallow’) ‘swallow a bit; swallow repeatedly’ (Jones 2001). In Kung, the suffixes -nə and -lə are marginally attested in attenuative function: mwàe-nə̀ ‘twinkle’ (< mwàe ‘shine’), ɲɔ̀ʔ-lə̀ ‘roast a bit’ (< ɲɔ̀ʔ ‘roast’), zʊ́ ʔ-lə́ ‘make warm’ (< zʊ́ ʔ ‘heat’). In Kuk, the widespread pluractional suffix -kə is marginally attested in lɨ ́m-kə́ ‘wait for a long time’ (< lɨ ́mə́ ‘wait for’). The application of these verbal extensions to nominal bases, obviously motivated by the functional parallelism of diminution and attenuation, thus represents an instance of morphological strategies Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 270 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity crossing word class boundaries. In a diachronic perspective, this might be analysed as a spillover of verbal derivational morphology into the nominal domain which could have been triggered or promoted by nominalisation of verbs extended by the attenuative, as is suggested by examples such as the Men diminutive fə̄tsə́mtə̀ ‘small dream’ (< tsə̀m (9/10) ‘dream’) which coexists with a verb tsə̀mtè ‘dream’ obviously including the attenuative suffix -tə. Kuk presents another strand of derivational morphology where the suffix -lə̀ which occasionally accompanies diminutive derivation is also involved in other types of denominal noun derivation, e.g. in deriving īɣâʔlə̀ (5/10) ‘wing’ (pl. sə̄ɣâʔlə̀) from īɣâʔà (5/10) ‘upper arm’ (pl. sə̄ɣâʔà). 4 Associative construction for diminutive formation Diminution is also achieved in CR by periphrasis in associative constructions headed by various nouns of gender 19/6a which encode a diminutive notion either in their lexical meaning as with nouns meaning ‘tiny item’ or by a combination of their lexical meaning with a diminutive derivation as in the case of fə̀wán (Babanki), fə̄wáe (Kung) and fēwán (Oku), all meaning ‘little child’. Other nominals that can be used in head position are fə̀ndɛ́ʔ (Babanki) and fɨ ̄fúin (Kom) both meaning ‘tiny item’. In Babanki both fə̀wán ‘little child’ and fə̀ndɛ́ʔ ‘tiny item’ can be used interchangeably for the same diminutive function. While Kuk and Men also have distinct lexical items for this meaning, i.e. fə̄fwâtə̀ (Kuk) and fə̄ɲâŋ (Men), it is not clear to which extent they are also used in constructions such as the ones in (16) and which type of division of semantic labour pertains with respect to the usage of ‘child’. (16) CR diminutive derivation using associative constructions Babanki Base ə̀ɣàm (5/13) ‘mat’, pl. tə̀ɣàm kə̀ɲù (7/8) ‘thing’, pl. ə̀ɲù ʃʉ̀ (9/10) ‘fish’, pl. ʃʉ́ꜜsə́ Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 diminutive 19/6a fə̀wán ~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ ɣàm ‘small mat’ fə̀wán ~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ kə́ɲù ‘small thing’ fə̀wán ~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ ʃʉ̂ ‘tiny fish’ 271 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Kom Kung Oku Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity ŋgvɨ ̄ (9/10) ‘chicken’, pl. ŋgvɨ ̄sə̄ fɨ ̄fúin fɨ ̄ ŋgvɨ ̄ ‘tiny chicken’ īsáŋ (5/6) ‘corn’, pl. āsáŋ fɨ ̄fúin fī sáŋ ‘small corn’ ātú (7/8) ‘head’, pl. ɨ ̄tú fɨ ̄fúin fā tú ‘small head’ mbvə̄ (9/10) ‘chicken’, pl. sə̄mbvə̄ tsàʔ° (9/10) ‘trap’, pl. sə̀tsàʔ° kə̄pfə̀ndʊ́ ŋ (7/8) ‘pig’ pl. ūpfə̀ndʊ́ ŋ ə̄bkún (3/6a) ‘bed’, pl. ə̄mkún kētíɛ (7/8) ‘chair’, pl. ə̄btíɛ ntɔ̀n (9/10) ‘pot’, pl. ntɔ̀nsè wāe fə̄ mbvə̄ fə̄ ‘small feeble chicken’ wāe fə̄ tsàʔ fə̀ ‘small trap’ wāe fə̄ fə̀pfə̀ndʊ́ ŋ fə̄ ‘small feeble pig’ fēwán é ə̄bkún ‘small bed’ fēwán é kētíɛ ‘small chair’ fēwán é ntɔ̀n ‘small pot’ The syntax of the examples presented above follows the pattern of CR associative constructions, i.e. the preceding head noun (N1) is linked to the following modifier noun (N2) by an associative marker (AM) which agrees with the class of the head noun according to the formula given in (17) and illustrated by the Kung example in (18). (17) CR Formula of associative constructions [NPx – R]N1 AMN1 [NPx – R]N2 ENCLN1 (18) Kung associative construction wāe fə̄ mbvə̄ 19.little.child 19 9.chicken ‘small feeble chicken’ fə̄ 19 In some CR languages such as Kung and Kuk, the prefix of the head noun (NPx) is dropped, as soon as a modifier follows (Kießling 2016, 2019). Thus in (18), the head noun fə̄wāe ‘little child’ loses its noun class prefix fə- due to the fact that it is modified by the noun mbvə̄ ‘chicken’ which is linked to the head noun by the associative concord of class 19 fə̄. Under certain conditions, some CR languages such as Kung require an additional noun phrase terminal enclitic (ENCL) which indexes the class of the head noun and which is reminiscent of the determiner enclitic in the West Ring languages Aghem (Hyman 2010) and Isu (Kießling 2010). While the West Ring determiner enclitic largely serves to mark the non-focalised status of nouns, the morphosynactic and pragmatic conditions of its distribution in Central Ring, however, remain completely unclear so far. From a wider comparative perspective, lexical items meaning ‘child’ are quite commonly employed for diminutive functions, evenPublished by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 272 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity tually following a universal path of grammaticalisation (Heine & Kuteva 2002: 65–7). In various Bantu languages such as Cuwabo, Nzadi, Eton and Bafia (Gibson et al. 2017: 358–359), in Kikongo (Huth 1992) and in Sotho-Tswana and Nguni (Güldemann 1999), reflexes of Proto-Bantu *jánà ‘child’ seem to have been developed to diminutive markers, probably independently of each other. Beyond Bantu, the same process operates in various branches of Niger-Congo, e.g. on Susu díi ‘child’ (Anderson, Green & Obeng 2018) and on Ewe ví ‘child’ (Heine & Hünnemeyer 1988, Heine, Claudi & Hünnemeyer 1991: 79–89), reflex of a Niger-Congo root *bi ‘child’ (Kähler-Meyer 1971: 347–348) which is assumed to be the ultimate source of Proto-Benue-Congo *pi- (de Wolf 1971: 170–1), the ancestor of Proto-Bantu class 19 *pi-. A remarkable detail about the CR situation is that in none of the CR languages it is simply the noun ‘child’ which is employed for periphrastic diminution purposes in associative constructions, but rather its diminutive stem in 19/6a. Borrowed words can also be diminutivised in CR by means of the associative construction (19). (19) CR diminutive derivation of borrowed words using associative constructions Babanki Kom Kung Oku Base bwɔ́tə̀ (1/2) ‘bottle’, pl. və̀bwɔ́tə̀ bùʃí (1/2) ‘cat’, pl. və̀bùʃí diminutive 19/6a fə̀wán ~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ bwɔ́tə̀ ‘small bottle’ fə̀wán ~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ bùʃí ‘small cat’ lámâs (9/10) ‘orange’, pl. sə̀lámâs bùsí (9/10) ‘cat’, pl. sə̀bùsí wāe fə̄ lámâs fə̄ ‘small orange’ wāe fə̄ bùsí fə̄ ‘small cat’ bés (9/10) ‘cat’, pl. béysɨ ̄ fɨ ̄fúin fɨ ̄ bés ‘small cat’ tʃɔ̄s (9/10) ‘church’, pl. tʃɔ̄ysɨ ̄ fɨ ̄fúin fɨ ̄ tʃɔ̄s ‘tiny church’ tsɔ́s (1/10) ‘bed’, pl. tsɔ́sē bùsé (1/10) ‘cat’, pl. bùsésē fēwán é tsɔ́s ‘tiny church’ fēwán é bùsé ‘small cat’ Nouns primarily assigned to gender 19/6a form diminutives preferably by means of such associative constructions headed by nouns which include the diminutive notion in their lexical meaning, as illustrated in (20). Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 273 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity (20) CR diminutive derivation of 19/6a nouns using associative constructions Babanki Kom Kung Base fə̀kɔ̀ʔ (19/6a) ‘tree’, pl. ŋkɔ̀ʔ fə̀ɲín (19/6a) ‘bird’, pl. mə̀ɲín fə̀sɛ́s (19/6a) ‘pepper’, pl. mə̀sɛ́s fɨ ̄ɲúin (19/6a) ‘bird’, pl. mɨ ̄ɲúin fɨ ̄kâʔ (19/6a) ‘tree’, pl. mɨ ̄kâʔ fɨ ̀ɲù (19/6a) ‘knife’, pl. mɨ ̀ɲù fə̄ɲɨ ᷇m (19/6a) ‘bird’, pl. m̄ ɲɨ ᷇m fēkâʔ (19/6a) ‘tree’, pl. m̄ kâʔ fə̄ɲi ᷇ə (19/6a) ‘knife’, pl. m̄ ɲi ᷇ə diminutive 19/6a fə̀wán ~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ fə́kɔ̀ʔ ‘small tree’ fə̀wán ~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ fə̀ɲìn ‘small bird’ fə̀wán ~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ fə́sɛ́s ‘small pepper’ fɨ ̄fúin fɨ ̄ fɨ ̄ɲùin ‘small bird’ fɨ ̄fúin fɨ ̄ fɨ ̄kàʔ ‘small tree’ fɨ ̄fúin fɨ ̄ fɨ ̀ɲù ‘small knife’ wāe fə̄ ɲɨ ́m fə̄ ‘small bird’ wāe fə̄ káʔ fə̀ ‘small tree’ wāe fə̄ ɲíə fə̄ ‘small knife’ This preference is probably due to the fact that the ordinary diminutivisation strategy by transfer to gender 19/6a would create no visible effect in contrast to the base form which is already assigned to 19/6a. Alternatively, the simple addition of one of the diminutive suffixes -tV, -lV or -nV is not sufficient in most cases. Thus, diminutives such as *fə̀ɲín-tə̀ ‘small bird’ or *fə̀kɔ̀ʔ-tə̀ ‘small tree’ which are simply formed by adding the suffix to the basic 19/6a noun forms (as elaborated in section 3.1), are not acceptable in Babanki. However, precisely this case is attested in Men where nouns primarily affiliated to gender 19/6a such as fēnɨ ᷇ŋ ‘bird’, fə̄sɨ ́s ‘pepper’ and fə̄ɲí ‘knife’ derive their diminutives, i.e. fēnɨ ᷇ŋ-tə̂ ‘small bird’, fēsɨ ́y-lə́ ~ fēsɨ ́y-tə́ ‘small pepper’ and fə̄ɲí-tə̂ ‘small knife’, respectively, only by additional suffixation. So far, it has been assumed that every noun can be diminutivised through nominal affixation, but this is not always the case. In Babanki, for instance, the nouns in (21) can only be diminutivised by means of the associative construction with fə̀wán ‘little child’ or fə̀ndɛ́ʔ ‘tiny item’ as head noun, since a morphologically derived diminutive in gender 19/6a is not available for them. So, the associative construction appears as a compensatory strategy here. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 274 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity (21) Babanki associative constructions as compensation for absence of morphologically derived diminutives Base diminutive kə̀ntʃíʔ (7/8) ‘lid’ fə̀wán~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ kə́ntʃíʔ ‘small lid’ *fə̀ntʃíʔ kə̀tsɔ́ʔ (7/8) ‘mud’ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ kə́ꜜtsɔ́ʔ ‘small mud’ *fə̀tsɔ́ʔ kə̀tíʔə́tíʔə́ (7/8) ‘ear’ fə̀wán~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ kə́ꜜtíʔə́tíʔə́ ‘small ear’ *fə̀tíʔə́tíʔə́ kə̀ntsì (7/8) ‘cricket’ kə̀ʃí (7/8) ‘place’ ə̀kwɛ́n (5/6) ‘bean’ fə̀wán~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ kə̀ntsì ‘small cricket’ *fə̀ntsì fə̀wán~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ kə́ꜜʃí ‘small place’ fə̀wán~ fə̀ndɛ́ʔ fə́ ꜜkwɛ́n ‘small bean’ *fə̀ʃí *fə̀kwɛ́n The range of nouns that do not lend themselves to morphological diminutivisation by transfer to gender 19/6a in Babanki is varied, including, but not limited to insects, household items and body parts. While the motivations for these restrictions are still unclear, instances such as kə̀tíʔə́tíʔə́ ‘ear’ suggest that morphological diminu-tivisation might be blocked by the presence of semantic specialisations of parallel forms in gender 19/6a such as fə̀tíʔə́tíʔə́ ‘mushroom (sp.)’. While diminutives are formed by the morphological and morphosyntactic operations outlined above, it appears that augmentatives do not receive a similar treatment in CR. In Babanki, for example, augmentatives are expressed by an attributive usage of inchoative-stative verbs such as ɣɔ́ʔ ‘be(come) big’ (ɣɔ́ʔkə́ pl.) illustrated in (22). (22) Babanki augmentative periphrasis with ɣɔ́ʔ ‘be(come) big’ (ɣɔ́ʔkə́ pl.) Base Augmentative kə̀kɨ ́ (7/8) ‘chair’, pl. ə̀kɨ ́ kə̀kɨ ́ kə̄ɣɔ́ʔɔ́ kə́ ‘big chair’, pl. ə̀kɨ ́ ə̄ɣɔ́ʔkə́ və́ ʙʉ́ (9/10) ‘dog’, pl. ʙʉ́ꜜsə́ ʙʉ́ ə̄ɣɔ́ʔɔ́ ‘big dog’, pl. ʙʉ́ꜜsə́ ɣɔ́ʔkə́ sə́ ə̀lɛ́m (5/6) ‘yam’, pl. àlɛ́m ə̀lɛ́m ə̄ɣɔ́ʔɔ́ ɣə́ ‘big yam’, pl. àlɛ́m āɣɔ́ʔkə́ ɣə́ Augmentation is also achieved in Babanki by the alternative strategy of periphrasis in associative constructions headed by nouns with inherent augmentative meanings such as kə̀mpfɨ ́ ‘huge thing’, illustrated in (23) – which is parallel to the periphrastic diminutivization strategy with fə̀wán ‘little child’ and fə̀ndɛ́ʔ ‘tiny item’, exemplified above in (19–20). Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 275 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity (23) Babanki augmentative periphrasis with kə̀mpfɨ ́ ‘huge thing’ Base Augmentative ʃʉ̀ (9/10) ‘fish’, pl. ʃʉ́ꜜsə́ kə̀mpfɨ ́ kə́ ʃʉ̂ ‘big fish’ ə̀ɣàm (5/13) ‘mat’, pl. tə̀ɣàm kə̀mpfɨ ́ kə́ ɣàm ‘big mat’ 5 Conclusion Diminutivisation in Central Ring languages is generally achieved by a widely attested shift of nouns from various genders to gender 19/6a marked by prefixes fV-/m(V)- which replace the original noun class prefixes. The productivity of this strategy is manifested in its recurrent application to borrowed nouns. Sometimes, diminutivisation in gender 19/6a is accompanied by the addition of a semantically bleached suffix CV. Remarkably, some of the allomorphs of this suffix, i.e. -tV, -lV, resemble the verbal extensions -tV, and -lV commonly used in Bantoid and in Grassfields to derive attenuative meanings in verbs. From a diachronic perspective, this might be analysed as a spillover of verbal derivational morphology into the nominal domain which could have been promoted by nominalisation of verbs extended by the attenuative. Another diminutivisation strategy discussed is periphrasis in associative constructions headed by various nouns of gender 19/6a which encode a diminutive notion either in their lexical meaning as with nouns meaning ‘tiny item’ such as fə̀ndɛ́ʔ (Babanki) and fɨ ̄fúin (Kom) or by a combination of their lexical meaning with a diminutive derivation as in the case of fə̀wán (Babanki), fə̄wáe (Kung) and fēwán (Oku), all meaning ‘little child’. More finegrained generalisations about the limits of morphological diminutivisation in CR and regularities regarding its division of labour with syntactic strategies will only be possible on the basis of a much more extensive corpus of diminutives which includes data from all under-researched CR varieties, especially from Bum for which diminutive data have not been available at all so far. Abbreviations AM associative marker, CR Central Ring, ENCL enclitic, N noun, NPx noun class prefix, pl. plural, PR Proto-Ring, sg. singular. Numbers refer to noun classes/genders. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 276 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity References Akumbu, Pius W. 2019. Noun class 9/10 tone in Central Ring Grassfields Bantu: An overview. In Pius W. Akumbu & Esther P. Chie (eds.), Engagement with Africa: Linguistic essays in honor of Ngessimo M. Mutaka. Köln: Köppe. 1–13. Akumbu, Pius W. & Evelyn F. Chibaka. 2012. A pedagogical grammar of Babanki. Köln: Köppe. Anderson, Jonathan C., Christopher R. Green & Samuel G. Obeng. 2018. On the expression of diminutivity in Susu. Journal of West African Languages 45(1). 59-77. Asohsi, Melvice. 2015. Structural and typological approaches to Obang grammar. Köln: Köppe. Bakema, Peter & Dirk Geeraerts. 2000. Diminution and augmentation. In Armin Burkhardt, Hugo Steger & Herbert Ernst Wiegand (eds.), Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft – Handbook of linguistics and communication science 17.2: Morphology. Berlin & New York: de Gruyter. 1045–52. Bangha, George F. 2003. The Mmen noun phrase. Yaoundé: MA thesis. Björkestedt, Lena. 2011. Mmen-English lexicon. Yaoundé: CABTAL. Bleek, Wilhelm Heinrich I. 1862. A comparative grammar of South African languages. Part 1: phonology. Cape Town & London: J. C. Juta and Trübner & Co. Bleek, Wilhelm Heinrich I. 1862. A comparative grammar of South African languages. Part 2: the concord: Section 1: the noun. Cape Town & London: J. C. Juta and Trübner & Co. Blood, Cynthia L. & Leslie Davis. 1999. Oku-English provisional lexicon. Yaoundé: SIL. Breton, Roland & Bakia Fohtung. 1991. Atlas administratif des langues nationales du Cameroun. Yaounde & Paris: CERDOTOLA, ACCT. Brye, Ed. 2001. Rapid appraisal sociolinguistic research among the Babanki ALCAM 824. Yaoundé: SIL International. Chiatoh, Blasius A. 1993. The noun class system of Mmen. Yaoundé: University of Yaoundé MA thesis. Wolf, Paul de. 1971. The noun class system of Proto-Benue-Congo. The Hague: Mouton. Demuth, Katherine. 2000. Bantu noun class systems: Loan word and acquisition evidence of semantic productivity. In Gunter Senft (ed.), Classification systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 270–292. Dieu, Michel & Patrick Renaud. 1983. Atlas linguistique du Cameroun (ALCAM): Inventaire préliminaire. Paris & Yaoundé: ACCT/CERDOTOLA. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 277 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity Eberhard, David M., Gary F. Simons & Charles D. Fennig (eds.). 2019. Ethnologue: Languages of the World. Twenty-second edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com. Edelsten, Peter. & Chiku Lijongwa. 2010. A grammatical sketch of Chindamba: A Bantu language (G52) of Tanzania. Köln: Köppe. Gibson, Hannah, Rozenn Guérois & Lutz Marten. 2017. Patterns and developments in the marking of diminutives in Bantu. Nordic Journal of African Studies 26(4). 344–383. Grandi, Nicola & Lívia Körtvélyessy L. (eds.). 2015. Edinburgh handbook of evaluative morphology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Güldemann, Tom. 1999. Head-initial meets head-final: nominal suffixes in eastern and southern Bantu from a historical perspective. Studies in African Linguistics 28. 49–91. Harro, Gretchen. 1989. Les extensions verbales en yemba (BamilékéDschang). In Daniel Barreteau & Robert Hedinger (eds.), Description de langues camerounaises. Paris: ORSTOM. 239–269. Heine, Bernd & Friederike Hünnemeyer. 1988. On the fate of Ewe ví ‘child’ – the development of a diminutive marker. Afrikanistische Arbeitspapiere 16. 97–121. Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi & Friederike Hünnemeyer. 1991. Grammaticalization. A conceptual framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2002. World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Huth, Karin. 1992. Mwa-: a new nominal prefix in Koongo? Paper presented at the 22nd colloquium on African languages and linguistics, Leiden. Hyman, Larry M. 1979. Aghem grammatical structure. SCOPIL 7. University of Southern California. Hyman, Larry M. 1980. Babanki and the Ring group. In Larry M. Hyman & Jan Voorhoeve (eds.), Noun classes in Grassfields Bantu. Vol. 1 of Actes du Colloque ‘Expansion Bantoue’. Paris: C.N.R.S. 225–258. Hyman, Larry M. 2007. Index of Proto-Grassfields Bantu Roots. Ms. University of California, Berkeley. (Original draft 1979, retyped 1993, refonted 2007) [http://comparalex.org/index.php?page=query&w1=133]. Hyman, Larry M. 2010. Focus marking in Aghem: Syntax or semantics? In Fiedler, Ines & Anne Schwarz (eds.), The expression of information structure. A documentation of its diversity across Africa. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 95–116. Hyman, Larry M. 2018. Common Bantoid verb extensions. In John R. Watters (ed.), East Benue-Congo: Nouns, pronouns, and verbs. Berlin: Language Science Press. 173–198. Jones, Randy. 2001. Provisional Kom-English lexicon. Yaounde: SIL. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 278 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity Jurafsky, Daniel. 1996. Universal tendencies in the semantics of the diminutive. Language 72(3). 533–578. Kähler-Meyer, E. 1971. Bantu noun class 19 pi- in Benue-congo. In Actes du huitième congrès international de linguistique africaine, Abidjan 24–28 mars 1969, volume 2. Abidjan: Université d’Abidjan. 347–365. Kießling, Roland. 2010. Focalisation and defocalisation in Isu. In Fiedler, Ines & Anne Schwarz (eds.), The expression of information structure. A documentation of its diversity across Africa. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 145–163. Kießling, Roland. 2016. Kuk. Hamburg: Universität Hamburg Ms. Kießling, Roland. 2019. Salient features of the noun class system of Kung in a Ring perspective. In Pius W. Akumbu & Esther P. Chie (eds.), Engagement with Africa: Linguistic essays in honor of Ngessimo M. Mutaka. Köln: Köppe. 139–161. Maho, Jouni F. 1999. A Comparative study of Bantu noun classes. (Orientalia et Africana Gothoburgensia 13). Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Mba, Gabriel. 1997. Les extensions verbales en ghomala’. Journal of West African Languages 26(1). 77–101. Mba, Gabriel & Blasius Chiatoh. 2003. Verbal extensions in Kom. In Daniel F. Idiata & Gabriel Mba (eds.), Studies on voice through verbal extensions in nine Bantu languages spoken in Cameroon, Gabon, DRC and Rwanda. München: Lincom. 81–112. Meeussen, Achiel E. 1967. Bantu grammatical reconstructions. Africana Linguistica 3. 79–121. Meinhof, Carl. 1899. Grundriss einer Lautlehre der Bantusprachen, Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus. Revised edition, 1910. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer. Möller, Mirjam. 2012. The noun and verb in Mmen, a center Ring Grassfields Bantu language. Yaoundé: SIL. Mua, Benjamin N. 2015. Mmen language grammar sketch. MELANCO. Pleus, Martin. 2015. Das Nominalklassensystem im Kuk. Hamburg: Universität Hamburg BA thesis. Poulos, George. 1986. Instances of semantic bleaching in South-Eastern Bantu. In Gerrit J. Dimmendaal (ed.), Current approaches to African linguistics 3. Dordrecht: Foris. 281–296. Poulos, George. 1990. A linguistic analysis of Venda. Pretoria: Via Afrika Limited. Poulos, George. 1999. Grammaticalisation in South-Eastern Bantu and the linguistic ‘dynamics’ underlying this process. South African Journal of African Languages 19. 204–214. Schlenker, Rebecca. 2012. Das Nominalklassensystem des Kung (Graslandbantu). Hamburg: Universität Hamburg BA thesis. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 279 A&Ü | 93 / 2020 Akumbu & Kießling | The expression of diminutivity Schneider, Klaus P. 2003. Diminutives in English. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. Tamanji, Pius N. 2009. A descriptive grammar of Bafut. Köln: Köppe. Tamanji, Pius N. & Gabriel Mba. 2003. A morphological study of verbal extension in Bafut. In Daniel F. Idiata & Gabriel Mba (eds.), Studies on voice through verbal extensions in nine Bantu languages spoken in Cameroon, Gabon, DRC and Rwanda 15–38. München: LINCOM. Tatang, Joyce. 2016. Aspects of Kung grammar. Buea: University of Buea MA thesis. Voll, Rebecca. 2017. A grammar of Mundabli: A Bantoid (Yemne–Kimbi) language of Cameroon. LOT: Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics. Watters, John R. 2003. Grassfields Bantu. In Derek Nurse & Gerard Philippson (eds.), The Bantu languages. London: Routledge. 225–256. Wilkendorf, Patricia. 2001. Sketch grammar of Nomaánde. Yaounde: SIL Cameroon. Yensi, Agnes M. 1996. The noun class system of Oku. Yaoundé: University of Yaoundé 1 MA thesis. Published by Hamburg University Press DOI 10.15460/auue.2020.93.1.203 280