Search

Northern Mao, an Omotic-Mao language of Ethiopia, exhibits three partially overlapping but distinct subject-marking paradigms in its verbal system: subject prefixes on realis verbs which correspond closely to free pronouns, subject suffixes on irrealis negative non-future verbs which exhibit regular changes from the realis prefixes, and a third, more divergent, subject suffix system on irrealis future verbs which exhibits an [m] form not attested as a person marker elsewhere in the language or extended family. It is argued (from internal evidence) that the irrealis future verbs developed from a periphrastic subordinate + final verb complexes and that the intrusive [m] was, at an earlier stage, part of a subordinating morpheme.(ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.)1. IntroductionNorthern Mao is an endangered Omotic-Mao language of western Ethiopia (Bender 2003; Ahland 2012). The language is also known by the toponyms Bambassi and Didessa and the autonym Mawes Aats'e?. There are at least four distinct languages within the Mao group of Omotic: Hozo, Seze, Ganza, and Northern Mao. While the exact position of Mao languages within the Omotic family has been a matter of some debate in the past (cf. Bender 1975, 1985, 1990, 2000, for summaries of the issues), both Bender and Hayward came to the conclusion that the Mao group is an independent branch of Omotic (Bender 2003:1; Hayward 2000:242). Bender noted that part of the problem with classification is that the Mao languages are the least documented within Omotic (Bender 2000:180), and Omotic itself is the least documented of the Afroasiatic groups (Hayward 2000). This study seeks to document and describe multiple subject marking paradigms found today in the Northern Mao verbal system; it also explores how the different paradigms may have developed.Northern Mao is a rigidly OV-type language where subordinate clauses and medial/non-final verbs in clause chains precede finite final verbs (Ahland 2012:48); these final verbs carry obligatory bound pronominal marking which indicates the person and number of the subject. There are three different bound pronominal subject marking systems on Northern Mao final verbs. Of these three paradigmatic systems, two show widespread correspondence with one another: the first, involving prefixes on realis verbs, and the second, suffixes on irrealis negative non-future verbs. The other system, found on irrealis future verbs, lias undergone changes where four of the nine person-number markers involve an [m] which is not reconstructable as part of the bound pronominal system. This paper offers a historical account as to how this [m] may have entered the paradigm and interrupted subject marking distinctions on the irrealis future verbs.The study begins with an overview of the relevant data (section 2): an exploration of final verbs and their item-arrangements, their subject marking patterns and the correspondences between the subject markers and the free pronouns. Section 3 explores a possible historical account for how these systems could have developed through an examination of internal evidence. Section 4 demonstrates that the apparently innovated paradigm has been extended today into new territory, and section 5 offers some concluding remarks.2. Preliminary Concerns: An Overview of Relevant DataBefore discussing possible historical developments, I must first examine certain relevant data to establish the subject marking patterns. These include the morphological make-up and functions of the realis and irrealis verb forms and their subject marking patterns (section 2.1), and the correspondences between these verbal subject markers and the free pronouns (section 2.2).2.1 Realis and Irrealis Verbal Forms and Subject Marking. The most basic opposition in the Northern Mao verbal system is realis vs. irrealis. The distribution and function of the realis and irrealis verb forms in Northern Mao fits within Mithun's description of realis and irrealis (1999):. …