Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ONUORA, JUSTINA EJIUWANAKAPG/Ph.D/11/58458
VERB SERIALISATION AND CONSECUTIVISATION IN IGBO
FACULTY OF ARTS
DEPARTMENT OF LINGUISTICS, IGBO AND OTHERNIGERIAN LANGUAGES
Ebere omeje Digitally Signed by
DN : CN = Webmaster’s name
O= University of Nigeri
OU = Innovation Centre
i
RA, JUSTINA EJIUWANAKA
VERB SERIALISATION AND CONSECUTIVISATION IN
DEPARTMENT OF LINGUISTICS, IGBO AND OTHER NIGERIAN LANGUAGES
Digitally Signed by: Content manager’s Name
Webmaster’s name
O= University of Nigeria, Nsukka
OU = Innovation Centre
ii
UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA DEPARTMENT OF LINGUISTICS, IGBO AND OTHER
NIGERIAN LANGUAGES
VERB SERIALISATION AND CONSECUTIVISATION IN IGBO
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Ph.D) DEGREE IN LINGUISTICS
BY
ONUORA, JUSTINA EJIUWANAKA PG/Ph.D/11/58458
SUPERVISOR: DR. B. M. MBAH, Esq.
DECEMBER 2014
iii
APPROVAL
This thesis has been approved for the Department of linguistics, Igbo and Other Nigerian
Languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
By
……………………………... ……………………………
Dr. B. M. Mbah Prof. O. M. Ndimele
Supervisor External Examiner
………………………….. ………………………………
Dr. C. U. Agbedo Prof. R. I. Okorji
Internal Examiner Head of Department
…………………………………..
Prof. Pat U. Okpoko
Dean of Faculty
iv
CERTIFICATION
This is to certify that the work embodied in this thesis is original and has not been
submitted in part or full for any degree of this or any other university
…………………………….. ………………………
Onuora, Justina Ejiuwanaka Dr. B. M. Mbah, Esq.
Candidate Supervisor
v
DEDICATION
To the Trinity:
God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit
And to my husband:
Dr. Cosmas Onwudiwe Onuora.
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study would not be possible without the assistance of many individuals. I am
particularly indebted to my supervisor Dr. B. M. Mbah, for his understanding, assistance
and concern for my success generally. I have benefited so much from his vast knowledge
and experience in the field of linguistics. I owe the speed of the study to his innovative
‘Thesis Timetable’, which set targets for me to accomplish over a limited period of time.
I do sincerely hope that other supervisees of his have not been and will not be as much
bother to him as I have been. He provided me with relevant materials, unrestricted time to
phone calls and text messages and unlimited access to his office, sometimes at
unscheduled times. It was my supervisor who first acquainted me with the term
consecutivisation. I would know next to nothing about this concept in Igbo if not for my
supervisor. I am very grateful to him for his patience, his encouragement and his thought
provoking questions and comments, which have enormously contributed to my thesis.
Without his careful guidance, time-consuming going over different versions of my drafts,
and very useful discussions, I would never have completed this work.
My special gratitude goes to all the members of the Postgraduate Committee of
the Department of Linguistics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, particularly, my various
seminar resource persons, Professor (Mrs.) G. I. Nwozuzu, Dr. (Mrs.) E. E. Mbah and Dr.
(Mrs.) M. I. Iloene. I owe much to their criticism of my seminar papers, which helped
reshape my research ability. I am also grateful to Dr. C. U. Agbedo, who put me through
on my first seminar in sociolinguistics. My special gratitude also goes to Professor C. N.
Okebalama, the immediate past Head of the Department, Professor R. I. Okorji, the
present Head of the Department, Professor I. U. Nwadike and Dr. E. S. Ikeokwu for their
vii
encouragement. I am also indebted to Mr. C. Okeke, who received the soft copies of my
first and second seminar papers, printed, photocopied and submitted to the Postgraduate
Coordinator of the Department on my behalf. I thank him so much for being there for me
throughout this study. The non-academic members of staff of the Department also helped
a lot in one way or the other. I appreciate all of them.
I also would like to thank my senior colleagues at the University of Lagos,
especially: Dr. O. J. Ajiboye, the immediate past Head of the Department of Linguistics,
who provided me with materials on verb serialisation and supported all my ‘permission to
be away’ from University of Lagos. Dr. Ajiboye’s useful suggestions helped me a lot,
especially at the incipient stage of this work; Dr. B. C. Nnabuihe, who took responsibility
for my duties whenever I travelled to University of Nigeria, Nsukka for this programme
and my ‘brother’ Mr. F. D. Medubi, for his words of encouragement. Others are
Professor I.O. Alaba, Maazi Uba-Mgbemena, Dr. O. C. Orimoogunje, Dr. I. Ikwubuzo,
Dr. A. Yusuff, Mrs. B. O. Ayankogbe, Dr. K. O. Oladeji, Dr. (Mrs.) T. Ojo, Dr. O.
Nwagbo and all the non-academic members of staff, particularly, Mrs. Owoade. I
appreciate all their cooperation throughout the period of this study. My appreciation also
goes to my students in the Department, whose names are too many to be listed here. They
were ever ready for my interviews when I was collecting data for this study. I thank them
all for their numerous contributions from the eight dialect clusters of Igbo.
This acknowledgement cannot be complete without special mention of my
wonderful senior academic friends: Professor A. B. Bodomo of University of Hong
Kong, Professor A. Chebanne of South Africa and Dr. K. Olasope, the present Head of
Department of Classics, University of Ibadan. I thank them all for their professional
viii
advice and encouragement. Also, I am grateful for the support of my wonderful ‘brother’,
Air Commodre B.C. Ugwueke and my friends and fellow Ph.D students, especially, Miss
Nonye Edeoga, Mr Benjamin Igbeaku and Mrs. Ifeanyi Maria Obada. My many thanks
go to Rev. Fr. George Anibuike, the former Chaplain, St. Augustine Catholic Chaplaincy,
Akoka, Lagos and to my ‘uncle’, Pastor Francis Ndubuisi and family for their spiritual
supports throughout the period of this study.
My appreciation also goes to Dr. and Dr (Mrs.) F. Ekere and family. They made
their residence in University of Nigeria, Nsukka a second home for me whenever I came
to the University for this study from my base, University of Lagos. I am also appreciative
of other members of the Ekere family, particularly, Miss Beatrice Chijioke and Miss
Nneka Eze. When I finished typing this thesis, Beatrice helped me to format it to
University of Nigeria, Nsukka’s standard while Nneka helped me with some domestic
chores throughout the period of this study.
My ultimate gratefulness goes to my darling husband, Dr. C. O. Onuora, who
assisted me financially, emotionally and spiritually. My husband paid the three years
school fees of this study and also paid me my five months salaries, from August 2014,
when my leave of absence in University of Lagos commenced to December 2014, when I
completed the study. I am very grateful to him. Words cannot express his manner of
person, his love, patience, moral, emotional and spiritual supports to ensure the timely
completion of this thesis. I thank him for all he means to me.
ix
For the successful completion of this study, I express my profound gratitude to
God Almighty for His immeasurable love and goodness in my life, for journey mercies
throughout the three years of this study and for seeing me through the entire programme.
x
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title page i
Approval ii
Certification iii
Dedication iv
Acknowledgements v
Table of contents ix
List of Abbreviations xiii
Abstract xvi
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the study 1
1.2 Statement of the problem 3
1.3 Purpose of the study 4
1.4 Scope of the study 5
1.5 Research questions 6
1.6 Significance of the study 6
1.7 Limitations of the study 7
1.8 Methods of data collection 8
1.9 Tone marking convention 9
xi
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical studies 10
2.1.1 Transformational generative framework 10
2.1.2 Non- transformational generative framework 28
2.2 Empirical studies 39
2.3 Theoretical framework 61
2.3.1 Standard theory (ST) 62
2.3.1.1 Limitation of standard theory 63
2.3.2 Extended standard theory (EST) 64
2.3.3 Revised extended standard theory (REST) 65
2.4 Justification of the choice of REST 69
2.5 Summary of the literature review 70
CHAPTER THREE: SEMANTIC CLASSIFICATION OF VERB
SERIALISATION AND CONSECUTIVISATION IN IGBO
3.1 Re-visitation of verb serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo 72
3.1.1 Defining features of verb serialisation in Igbo 73
3.1.2 Defining features of consecutivisation in Igbo 77
3.2 Semantic classification of verb serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo 81
3.2.1 Instrumental verb serialisation and consecutivisation 81
3.2.2 Accompaniment/comitative verb serialisation and consecutivisation 83
3.2.3 Directional verb serialisation and consecutivisation 86
3.2.4 Manner verb serialisation and consecutivisation 88
xii
3.2.5 Purpose verb serialisation and consecutivisation 92
3.2.6 Comparative verb serialisation and consecutivisation 94
3.2.7 Resultative verb serialisation and consecutivisation 96
3.2.8 Benefactive verb serialisation and consecutivisation 99
3.2.9 Simultaneous verb serialisation and consecutivisation 101
3.3. Verb sequence in verb serialisation and consecutivisation 103
3.4 Summary 105
CHAPTER FOUR: SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE OF VERB SERIALISATION
4.1 Argument sharing in verb serialisation 106
4.1.1 Subject sharing 106
4.1.2 Object sharing 109
4.2 Tense and aspect marking in verb serialisation 113
4.2.1 Tense marking in verb serialisation 113
4.2.2.1 Simple past tense marker 113
4.2.2.2 Simple future tense marker 115
4.2.2 Aspect marking in verb serialisation 118
4.2.2.1 Progressive aspect marker 118
4.2.2.2 Perfective aspect marker 120
4.3 Negation marking in verb serialisation 122
4.4 Derivation of verb serialisation 125
4.5 Summary 133
xiii
CHAPTER FIVE: SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE OF CONSECUTIVISATION
5.1 Argument sharing in consecutivisation 134
5.1.1 Subject sharing 134
5.1.2 Object sharing 135
5.2 Tense and aspect markings in consecutivisation 138
5.2.1 Tense marking in consecutivisation 138
5.2.2.1 Simple past tense marker 139
5.2.2.2 Simple future tense marker 141
5.2.2 Aspect marking in consecutivisation 143
5.2.2.1 Progressive aspect marker 143
5.2.2.2 Perfective aspect marker 145
5.3 Negation marking in consecutivisation 146
5.4 Derivation of consecutivisation 149
5.5 Summary 156
CHAPTER SIX: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONs
6.1 Summary of findings 158
6.2 Conclusion 167
6.3 Recommendations 169
REFERENCES 170
xiv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ASP Aspect
AUX Auxiliary
Caus Causative
CL Classifier
CONJ Conjunction
COR Co-occurrence rule
Ct Context
def Definite article
D-Structure Deep structure
Equi-NP-Deletion Equivalent noun phrase deletion
Equi-TNS-Deletion Equivalent tense deletion
EST Extended standard theory
FE Factative enclitic
Foc Focus marker
FutAUX Future tense auxiliary
Gen Genitive
GB Government and binding theory
-ghI Harmonising negation marker
IM Inherent semantic marker
INF Infinitive
INFL Inflection
MP Minimalist program
xv
NEG Negation
NP Noun phrase
NPE Nigerian Pidgin English
OVS Open vowel suffix
PAST Past tense
PE Perfective enclitic
PERF Perfective
PL Plural
PREP Preposition
ProgAUX Progressive aspect auxiliary
PRS Phrase structure rule
PRT Participle
REST Revised extended standard theory
-rV(PAST) Suffix that indicates past tense
SC Semantic component
SG Singular
SgSCL Singular subject clitic
S-Structure Surface structure
ST Standard theory
SUB Subordinator
SV Semantic value
SV1 First semantic value
SVC Serial verb construction
xvi
ti Trace
UAUX Unfulfilled auxiliary
V Verb
V1 Initial verb
V2 Second verb
V3 Third verb
VLA Harmonising perfective aspect marker
Vpre Verbal prefix
V-V compound Verb-verb compound
V-V convergence Verb-verb convergence
ABSTRACT
xvii
The research investigates verb serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo. The objectives
of the study are to: (i) determine the semantic types of verb serialisation and
consecutivisation in Igbo, (ii) establish the syntactic structures of verb serialisation and
consecutivisation in Igbo within Revised Extended Standard Theory (REST) and (iii) find
the differences and similarities between verb serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo.
The study adopts descriptive-analytical design. It collects data from primary and
secondary sources. The primary sources comprise researcher’s intuition and personal
interviews from the eight major dialect clusters of Igbo while the secondary source is
library materials. The study identifies nine types of verb serialisation and five types of
consecutivisation using semantic criteria. The syntactic structures of verb serialisation
and consecutivisation identified are argument sharing, tense-aspect marking, negation
marking and auxiliary marking on the verb sequences. The analysis of verb serialisation
and consecutivisation within the framework of REST and Semantic Component Rule
shows that verb serialisation and consecutivisation are derived from two or more
underlying sentences via some transformational rules. The study finds out seven
differences between verb serialisation and consecutivisation based on intervening
variable, forming V-V compound, semantic notions present, object sharing, occurrence
with –rV past tense suffix, progressive and continuous actions and sources of derivation.
The study also reveals five similarities between verb serialisation and consecutivisation
based on subject sharing, symmetry in tense and aspect, behaviour of subject NPs in
perfective aspect constructions, placement of auxiliary and negation markers. The study
recommends further research on the verbal categories involved in verb serialisation and
consecutivisation and the functions they perform, and also on the explanations of what
main and subordinate verbs are in verb serialisation and consecutivisation.
CHAPTER ONE
xviii
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the study
The term verb serialisation has been called by various names such as
“combination of verbs” (Christaller, 1875), “verbs in series” (Westermann, 1930), “serial
verb construction (SVC)” (Stewart, 1963), “strings of verbs” (Ansre, 1966), “compressed
sentence construction” (Awobuluyi, 1967) and “serial verbs” (Stahlke, 1970). Verb
serialisation is “essentially a surface sentence containing a row of two or more verbs or
verb phrases without any overt connective word between them” (George, 1975:1). It is a
complex structure, and Stahlke (1970: 60) describes it as “a very perplexing type of
surface structure”. This type of construction was first identified by Christaller (1875) in
Twi, a Ghanaian language and later reported by Westermann (1930) in Ewe, another
Ghanaian language. The phenomenon of verb serialisation is widely found in the
languages of West Africa, Southeast Asia, Amazonia, Oceania, New Guinea, as well as in
many pidgins and creoles (Aikhenvald, 2006). According to Dixon (2006:338), verb
serialisation is not restricted to a particular linguistic typology. It is widespread, clearly
recognisable robust grammatical construction found in perhaps one-third of the languages
of the world. However, there appears to be none in Europe, north or central Asia, and
rather few in North America or Australia.
A historical account of the studies on verb serialisation from 1875 when it was
identified by Christaller in Twi till date would reveal a period of about one hundred and
thirty nine (139) years of continued relevance and sustained interest in this aspect of
grammar of language. The question is, why the sustained interest in verb serialisation?
Interest in verb serialisation persists because of the intricacies and the multi-dimensional
xix
nature of the issues surrounding the phenomenon in languages as well as the cross-
linguistic variations identified with such constructions. Lord (1993:1), Creissels
(2000:240) and Ameka (2005:1) claim that the following four situations encouraged a
blossoming of claims and counterclaims about verb serialisation. First, there are some
spurious serial verb constructions in some languages. Secondly, there are various types of
verb serialisation in a single language. Thirdly, there is cross-linguistic variation such that
the properties of verb serialisation in one language may not map wholly unto those of
another language, and finally, most of the times, there is no obvious distinction between
verb serialisation proper and other verb sequence constructions (such as consecutive
constructions) even in one language. Based on these problems, the question concerning
the nature of serial verb constructions in languages arises again and again for over a
century.
It is not surprising, however, that a linguistic phenomenon, attested in nearly one-
third of the languages of the world has no universally applicable defining features.
Defining verb serialisation cross-linguistically is a rather complex enterprise. As Sebba
(1987:1) observes, “there are a lot of profound disagreements about the nature of verb
serialisation, and even about what range of constructions that are entitled to be called
serial verb constructions”. Nevertheless, there are some basic diagnostic features of
languages with verb serialisation as we shall see in Bodomo (1998) and Ndimele (1996)
in sections (2.1. 2) and (2.2) respectively.
1.2 Statement of the problem
There is disagreement among scholars on whether Igbo is a serialising language or
non-serialising language. Hyman (1971), Lord (1975) and Stewart (1998) claim that Igbo
xx
is unlike other members of the West Africa Kwa (Benue Congo) group of languages in
that Igbo does not serialise. Conversely, Welmers (1973) and Déchaine (1993) argue that
Igbo indeed is a serialising language. Welmers (1973) claims that Igbo has two basic
types of serialisation. According to him, in the type one, “verbs after the first are in the
verbal noun forms” while “the second type of serial verb construction uses the
consecutive form for verbs after the first” (Welmers 1973:368); Déchaine (1993), on the
contrary, states that Igbo has four types of SVCs: instrumental, manner, comitative and
multi-event types. Déchaine also claims, “there are no dative/benefactive and resultative
serial constructions in Igbo. Instead, these semantic types can only surface as V-V
compounds” (Déchaine, 1993:809). The problem of this study, therefore, is to determine
the semantic types of SVCs found in Igbo.
Furthermore, another controversial aspect of Igbo syntax is whether the verb
sequences found in Igbo sentences constitute instances of serialisation or
consecutivisation. This problem is not peculiar to Igbo. According to Ameka (2005:1),
“one of the problems that have exercised the minds of many analysts concerns the
distinction between SVCs proper and other verb sequence constructions even in one
language”. Put differently, in the words of Creissels (2000:240), “there is most of the
time no obvious distinction between serial verbs and verb sequences in which each verb
constitutes a distinct predicate, in particular consecutive constructions.” According to
Uwalaka (1982: 63), “the difficulty is evidently the reliance on semantic criteria to define
consecutivisation, while serialisation is for some scholars a residual category with partly
semantic, partly structural features”. In other words, the problem emanates from the bases
of the definitions of these phenomena. Welmers (1973) and Uwalaka (1982) attempt to
xxi
distinguish between Igbo verb serialisation and consecutivisation, and claim that perhaps
a more satisfactory approach would be in terms of the subject or subjects involved. Based
on this, they conclude in their respective studies that serialisation may ultimately be
preferable for all verb combinations, in which a single subject is obligatory, while the
term consecutivisation would be reserved for cases in which a new subject could
optionally be introduced after the first verb. The present study determines if the number
of subjects involved in all verb combinations is actually the only satisfactory
distinguishing factor between verb serialisation and consecutivisation or whether there
are other factors apart from the number of subjects. In addition to determining the type of
SVCs in Igbo and the distinguishing factors between verb serialisation and
consecutivisation, this study uses revised extended standard theory of transformational
generative grammar to analyse the syntactic structures of verb serialisation and
consecutivisation in Igbo with the support of Semantic Component Rule since no one has
used these theoretical frameworks to analyse these verb combinations.
1.3 Purpose of the study
The main purpose of this research is to analyse the syntax of Igbo serialisation and
consecutivisation. Serialising typology varies from language to language; hence, the
study proposes defining features of verb serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo and
establishes the exact number of types found in Igbo. Subsequently, the study focuses on
the verb sequences in Igbo sentences with a view to establish their status as either
serialisation or consecutivisation. The syntactic analysis examines the mechanisms of
xxii
argument sharing, tense and aspect marking, negation marking and derivation of the verb
sequences. The specific objectives of the study are to:
i. determine the semantic types of verb serialisation and consecutivisation in
Igbo.
ii. establish the syntactic structures of verb serialisation and consecutivisation in
Igbo within Revised Extended Standard Theory (REST).
iii. find the differences and similarities between verb serialisation and
consecutivisation in Igbo.
1.4 Scope of the study
A study of this kind cannot exhaustively cover all the issues surrounding verb
serialisation and consecutivisation, particularly the verbal categories that is involved and
the functions they perform such as adverbial or prepositional functions. The explanation
of what a main verb and a subordinate verb are also not covered by the study. The above
mention areas are excluded from the study for an in-depth investigation to be carried out
on the topic. The scope of the study, therefore, is to determine types of serialisation and
consecutivisation in the language. It also establishes the syntactic structures of verb
serialisation and consecutivisation, therefore, the elicited data are to be examined
according to the syntactic categories under investigation such as argument sharing, tense
and aspect marking and negation marking. The analysis of how serialisation and
consecutivisation are derived within Revised Extended Standard Theory (REST) is also
part of the scope of the study.
1.5 Research questions
xxiii
To actualise the objectives of this study, the following research questions are
formulated to guide the research:
i. How many types of verb serialisation and consecutivisation does Igbo
have?
ii. What are the syntactic structures of verb serialisation and
consecutivisation in Igbo?
iii. What are the differences and similarities between verb serialisation and
consecutivisation in Igbo?
1.6 Significance of the study
The analysis of verb serialisation and consecutivisation has not been given adequate
attention in Igbo syntax. Many of the few works that exist are incidental comments on the
phenomena. They are Hyman (1971), Welmers (1973), Déchaine (1993), Stewart (1998)
and Emenanjo (2010). Some of these scholars are of the view that verb serialisation and
consecutivisation are not in the language (Hyman, 1971, Lord, 1975, and Stewarts, 1998).
Welmers (1973), Déchaine (1993), Stewart (1998) and Emenanjo (2010) provide non-
detailed works on how the phenomena operate in Igbo syntax. Welmers (1973), Déchaine
(1993) and Emananjo (2010) in their respective studies present a few number of the kinds
of these constructions while Welmers (1973) and Uwalaka (1982) give one factor as a
more satisfactory distinguishing feature of these phenomena. In the same vein, none of
these linguists carried out a study of the syntactic structures of verb serialisation and
consecutivisation in Igbo within the Revised Extended Standard Theory. Therefore, this
xxiv
research fills the gap and presents a clear picture of verb serialisation and
consecutivisation in Igbo syntax in addition to the distinction between them.
As an area that has not been adequately investigated in Igbo, this work is an open way
for more research on verb sequences in Igbo syntax. Specifically, the study determines
the types of serialisation and consecutivisation in the language; it establishes the syntactic
structures of verb serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo; it provides how serialisation
and consecutivisation are derived within the Revised Extended Standard Theory and
finds out the differences and similarities between verb serialisation and consecutivisation.
The above mentioned objectives address the research questions formulated for the study
in section (1.5) above. It is therefore hoped that the present work will contribute to our
knowledge of Igbo verbs in general and verb sequences in particular; and understanding
the verb sequences will go a long way to facilitate our understanding of Igbo grammar.
Similarly, researchers in syntax and comparative linguistics will find this work a useful
contribution to the status of verb sequences in Igbo syntax.
Hopefully, the present work provokes further research that will point to its
limitations as well as proffer new methods and theoretical frameworks for discussing
verb sequences, their nature and development in Igbo and other languages, especially in
languages of West Africa where serialisation and consecutivisation are prominent.
1.7 Limitations of the study
The researcher was constrained by some factors during her preliminary search for
data collection. Some of the constraints encountered in the study have to do with the
controversial nature of the topic under investigation. As stated in the statement of the
xxv
problem in section (1.2) above, only a few scholars admit that there are SVCs in Igbo;
there is no consensus on the number of types of SVCs in Igbo and most especially, there
is no clear distinction between verb serialisation and consecutivisation. Based on these
unresolved issues, there is paucity of materials on the topic under investigation. The
additional fact that is no in-depth study of the syntactic structure of verb sequences and
specific works in relation to the present topic was also a constraint for the study.
1.8 Methods of data collection
The design of the study is descriptive-analytical. The data were collected from
primary and secondary sources. The primary sources comprise personal experiences as a
native speaker of Igbo. As a native speaker of Igbo, principles which native speakers
intuitively employ in speech are adopted. However, the study does not rely solely on this
method in order to avert being subjective (rather than objective), which is a major
disadvantage of sole reliance on intuition, hence, the additional personal interviews from
the eight major dialect clusters of Igbo. Eight respondents from each of the clusters were
purposively selected and engaged in informal narrative discussions. Relevant syntactic
structures were elicited from the discourse and compared with similar structures derived
intuitively.
Secondary sources were drawn from books and materials from the internet.
Library and internet were consulted severely in search of useful materials that are related
to the research topic. Books, journals, seminar and conference papers, which are relevant
to the study constitute the source of secondary data collection that were juxtaposed with
data generated from the primary sources.
xxvi
1.9 Tone marking convention
The tone marking convention adopted in this study is the convention used in
Emenanjo (1978) and Williamson (1979). This convention recommends the following:
1 a. leave all syllables with high tones unmarked
b. mark all syllables with low tones
c. mark all syllables with step tones
The following are examples of the recommendation of the tone marking convention in (1)
above:
2 a. élé → ele ‘antelope’
áká → aka ‘hand’
b. àkwà → àkwà ‘be/bridge’
àlà → àlà ‘land’
c. ézē → ezē ‘teeth’
égō → egō ‘money’
xxvii
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter includes the theoretical studies, empirical studies and theoretical
framework.
2.1 Theoretical studies
Some studies have been carried out on verb serialisation within transformational
generative framework while some are carried out with non-transformational generative
framework.
2.1.1 Transformational generative framework
The study of verb serialisation within the transformational generative framework
began with Stewart (1963). He studies the Twi language spoken by the Asante and Fante
in Ghana. This study concerns accounting for the fact that there are missing subjects and
objects when two transitive verbs occur in series as in example (3) below:
.de no fεmm me כ .3
he take it lend(PAST) me.
Stewart (1963) analyses this SVC in terms of obligatory transformation which combines
the sentences in (4a) and (b) and deletes the second occurrence of the subject:
4 a. כ de no.
he take it.
b. כ femm me.
he lend(PAST) me.
xxviii
Here, transformations delete recoverable parts of the structure such as the subject in (b).
Stewart (1963) also claims that the derivation of SVCs is from conjoined sentences. He
proposes that sentences like (5b) are derived from structures like (5a):
5a. כ faa ne pכnkכ no כ femm me ne pכnkכ nό.
he took his horse that; he lend me his horse that.
b. כ dee ne pכnkכ nό fεmm me.
he took his horse that lent me.
‘He lent me his horse’.
According to Stewart (1963), a certain group of rules would replace fa ‘take’ in the past
tense with de ‘take’ in the continuative to yield *כ de ne pכnkכ nό, while another set of
rules would delete the subject and direct object of the second sentence, leaving fεmm me.
The two sentences are then combined to realise the structure in (5b).
Ansre (1966) is of the view that the question of what allows two or more verbs to
appear in a clause is left unanswered by Stewart (1963). He therefore adds a ‘caveat’ to
‘serial verbs’ by observing that in Ewe and Twi, some verb-like elements do not have a
full set of verbal properties even though they occupy the positions which verbs normally
occupy. This is because they do not show the type of morphological agreement (tense,
aspect and mood) which verbs in such position show. Ansre (1966) uses the term
“verbid” for such elements. His main point is that while Stewart’s (1963) accounts for
verb serialisation in terms of two sentences combined transformationally, this could not
be done if one of the verbs was a “verbid” and so could not function as a main verb in its
conjunct. This launched a new trend in the analyses of verb serialisation phenomenon in
which the main objective was to establish the different kinds of verb serialisation based
xxix
on the functional status of the verbs as well as the relations between them. Instances of
studies with this new trend are Awobuluyi (1967) and Bamgbose (1974).
Awobuluyi’s (1967) study of SVCs which he calls “the compressed sentence
constructions” also claims that the structures are derived from conjoined sentences in
Yoruba. He postulates multiple sentences as the source of compressed constructions, and
sub-classifies the construction into two, namely, ‘double-based and multi-based
compressions’. The double-based compressions are said to be traceable to two underlying
conjoined sentences while the multi-based types are derived from more than two
underlying conjoined sentences. The term ‘compressed sentence construction’ includes
sentences that are derived from the following three types of sentence listed in (6) below:
6 a. sentences conjoined by sì ‘and’,
b. sentences in which títí...fi ‘until’ occurs, and
c. sentences in which láti ‘in order to’ occurs.
According to Awobuluyi (1967) sentences of the (6a) type are conjoined structures; (6b)
types contain a limited clause while the (6c) types are interpreted as having a purpose
clause. Examples are (7a-c) below:
7. a. Bόόlá mú Sìkágò ό sì wá.
Bola took Chicago he and come.
‘Bola brought Chicago’
b. Ó tόό Ójό títí Ójό fi di àgbà.
‘She looked after Ojo until Ojo became grown up’
c. Ó lọ láti rà asόọ.
‘He went in order to buy clothes’.
xxx
8. a Bόόlá mú Sìkágò wá.
Bola took Chicago came.
‘Bola brought Chicago’.
b. Ó tόό Ójό di àgbà.
she looked after Ojo became grown up
‘She looked after Ojo until Ojo became grown up’.
c. Ó lọ rà asόọ.
he went bought clothes
‘He went in order to buy clothes’.
According to Awobuluyi (1967), the sentences of (8) are the compressed forms of
(7).This research is important in the study of the derivation of Yoruba SVCs that are
derived from conjoined sentences because it takes the connectives into consideration.
Subsequently, an additional era commenced by those opposed to the syntactic
analyses, and serial verbs were analysed in terms of generative semantics. Stahlke (1970)
sees verb serialisation as a complex structure, and describes it as “a very perplexing type
of surface structure” (Stahlke, 1970: 60). Stahlke (1970) attempts a semantic and
syntactic analysis of verb serialisation within the theory of generative semantics. The
issue was the question of whether SVCs were instances of coordination or subordination.
The study, using Yoruba language, rejects coordinate structures as a possible source for
SVCs for the following reasons: conjunction reduction in Yoruba is restricted to deleting
identical VPs; wh- fronting can apply to the object NPs of serial verbs; verbs in series
must show agreement in tense and aspect; verbs in series must all agree to auxiliaries,
xxxi
negation, interrogative and mood. The negator occurs only once after the last verb and it
is not possible to negate just one of the verbs in series.
Bamgbose (1974) defines verb serialisation as a construction “where all the verbs
share a common subject in the surface structure (Bamgbose, 1974:17). He claims that
Yoruba serial verbs are of two types: the linking types and the modifying type. In reply to
Stahlke (1970), who doubts the possibility of deriving serial verbs from conjoined
sentences, Bamgbose (1974) argues that the linking types of SVC must come from
conjoined sources because of the following five important facts: reference, case,
sequence and consequence, tense and aspect and negation. These five facts are explained
as follows: by reference, which is the first fact, he means that in a serial verb
construction, it is necessary that the analysis should reveal which NP a verb refers to, as
this is essential to the meaning of the construction. The argument of case which is the
second fact, deals with the identification of the cases of NPs in serial verb constructions,
which rests on the fact that in certain serial structures one NP may appear to be playing a
double role: objective and instrumental roles. Concerning the third fact, sequence and
consequence, he is of the view that in a SVC, the verbs in the string form a sequence
which realised a change in meaning when reversed. The study points out that although
verbs in series must agree in tense and aspect, there are cases when there is asymmetry in
tense between serialised verbs. He cites example (9) from Izhii (a dialect of Igbo) as
presented by Bendor-Samuel (1968:121), where the sequence of aspects for the three
verbs in the serial construction is according to him: Past-Present Progressive-Present
Progressive.
xxxii
9. Ò shia ji àtsụ èri
she cooked yam is pounding eating.
‘She cooked yam and is pounding and eating it’. (Bamgbose, 1994: 27)
For the final fact which is negation, Bamgbose (1974) claims that in Yoruba, either S1 or
S2 (or both) can be negated at the underlying structure.
In addition to the fact that some serial verbs can be derived from conjoined
sentences as Stewart (1963), Awobuluyi (1967) and Bamgbose (1974) claim, Williams
(1971) suggests that there are some serial verb constructions in Freetown Krio that
originate from embedded structures. He gives an account of serial verbs in Freetown Krio
as a recursive verb phrase. In his analysis, he proposes that the rules in (10) below
account for serial verbs in Krio:
10. S → NP Aux VP
VP → V (NP) (PP) (VP)
NP → (Det) N
According to Williams (1971), these rules generate in part (11) from which (12) is
derived:
xxxiii
11. S
a de kכl di dכkta kam
I am send the doctor come
12. a de kכl di dכkta kam
‘I am sending for the doctor’
He claims that the rules in (10) adequately generate serial verbs in Krio but he rejects
their derivation from conjoined sentences. We are of the view that under the X1-theory,
which accounts for the notion of the ‘head of a phrase’, the diagram in (11) is ill-formed.
This is because in subject NP, Williams (1971) fails to account for the head of the NP,
which is N (a ‘I’) as represented in (13) below:
S
13.
N
de kכl di dכkta kam
I send the doctor come
NP
VP
Det
NP
VP
Aux
V
N
V
VP
NP
a
am
Det
V
N
VPPPP
Aux
NP
V
xxxiv
The foregoing arguments on the issue of whether SVCs are instances of
coordination or subordination, confirms Ameka (2005) and Creissels (2000) claims that
there are various types of verb serialisation even in a single language and that there is
cross-linguistic variation such that the properties of SVC in one language may not map
wholly onto those of another. In view of this claim, Stewart (1963) opines that SVCs are
derived from conjoined sentences in Twi language; Awobuluyi (1967) also claim that
SVCs are derived from conjoined sentences in Yoruba while Bamgbose (1974) argues
that some Yoruba SVCs are derived from conjoined sentences while some are derived
from embedded sentences. On the other hand, Stahlke (1970) claims that Yoruba SVCs
are derived from embedded sentences, while Williams (1971) implies that serial verbs in
Freetown Krio are derived from both conjoined and embedded structures. The present
study finds out if Igbo verb serialisation and consecutivisation are instances of
coordination or subordination.
The more recent transformational analyses of SVCs, for instance, Thepkanjana
(1986), Agbedor (1994) and Stewart (1998) apply the principle and parameter approach
(Government and Binding theory) in their works. Thepkanjana (1986) broadly defines
SVC in Thai as a surface form in which more than one verb phrase is strung together. She
considers SVC as a kind of multi-verb construction while the other kinds of multi-verb
constructions are compound verbs and consecutive constructions. She classifies serial
verbs in Thai into seven types: causatives, complements of modality verbs, resultatives,
passives, directional and aspectual, and simultaneous serial verbs. In her analysis of
xxxv
simultaneous SVC, which she further classifies into two types: purposive simultaneous
serial verb in (14), and simultaneous action serial verb in (15):
14. Sùri: ma: khùy kàp chǎn
Suri come talk with I
‘Suri came to talk to me’.
15. Suri: yɨ:n r כ:ŋple:ŋ
Suri stand sing
‘Suri stood singing’.
The SVCs in (14) and (15) represent two actions and the second action is subsequent in
time to the other. The action of the non-initial verb khùy ‘talk’ in (14) is the goal of
carrying out the first action. Since the notion of the purpose is inherent in this type of
SVC, the verbs in the series must be activity verbs and require an agent as their subject.
Also verbs in the purposive simultaneous SVCs must assign the same thematic role to
their subject, that is, the subject which they share.
Thepkanjana (1986) indicates that the initial verb in simultaneous SVCs must
indicate posture of the body such as sitting, standing, or walking. Such verbs of body
posture indicate actions, which presumably last for a while, and during the time the
agent’s body is in a particular position, the agent carries out an action. She claims that the
simultaneous actions SVCs have many of the same properties as the purposive
simultaneous SVCs, for example, verbs in the series share the same subject bearing the
same semantic role. She, therefore, proposes that both kinds of simultaneous SVCs have
the same syntactic representation, that is, verbs in the string of simultaneous SVCs
constitute the VP node in the underlying structure. The SVCs consist of verb phrases
xxxvi
strung together, which contributes the highest VP immediately dominated by the S node.
The syntactic representation of purposive simultaneous SVCs in Thai is shown in (16)
and the syntactic representation of simultaneous action SVCs is shown in (17).
16. S
NP VP1
Sùri: VP2 VP3
‘Suri’
ma: khùy kàp chǎn
‘come’ ‘talk with me.
17. S
NP VP1
Sùri: VP2 VP3
‘Suri’
yɨ:n rכ:ŋple:ŋ
‘stand’ ‘sing’
In our view, the tree diagrams in (16) and (17) are ill-formed. In the subject NPs,
Thepkanjana (1986) fails to account for the head of the subject NP, which is N. The
internal structures of VP1, VP2 and VP3 are not represented in both diagrams. As a
matter of fact, there are only two verbs in the simultaneous action SVCs, hence, the
notion of VP3 is out of place. The proper syntactic representation of (16), which is the
xxxvii
purposive simultaneous SVCs in Thai and (17), which is the simultaneous action type are
(18) and (19) below:
18. S
NP VP1
V VP2
Sùri: ma: V PP
‘Suri’ ‘come’
khùy Pre
‘talk’
kàp N
‘with’ Pro
chǎn
‘me’
19. S
Sùri: yɨ:n
‘Suri’ ‘stand’
rכ:ŋple:ŋ
‘sing’
NP
N
V
VP2
NP
VP1
N
V
xxxviii
Agbedor (1994) examines verb serialisation in Ewe in the light of the principles
of Government and Binding Theory (GB). He cites the definition of one of the early
linguists, Westermann (1930) who hints about the notion of verb serialisation in Ewe in
his study of the grammar of the language. According to Agbedor (1994), Westermann
(1930:126) describes the phenomenon of verb serialisation where he writes:
A peculiarity of Ewe is that we often find a row of verbs
one after the other. The chief features of this are that all
the verbs stand next to each other without being
connected, that all have the same tense or mood, and in
the event of their having a common subject and object,
these stand with the first,the others remaining bare.
Agbedor (1994) also cites Baker (1989), who describes verb serialisation “as a
construction in which a sequence of verbs appears in what seems to be a single clause,
and there is usually one tense/aspect specification for the whole chain of the verbs. The
verbs in SVC are also believed to have a single structural subject and they share logical
argument” (Baker, 1989:513). For example in Ewe:
20. Kofi đa nu đu
Kofi cook thing eat
‘Kofi cooked and ate’
Agbedor (1994) specifically examines the framework, which Baker (1989)
suggests for SVCs in Yoruba. Agbedor (1994) argues that the object sharing
phenomenon, which Baker (1989) claims is obligatory in SVC, is not found in all cases in
Ewe. According to Agbedor (1994:118), Baker (1989) “proposes that the NP that comes
between the two verbs in the SVC is literally shared object, in that it occupies a position
xxxix
which is theta-marked by both verbs (or their projections)”. Thus, under Baker’s analysis,
the SVC in (21) will be assigned the structure in (22) below:
21. Kofi fo Ama wu
Kofi beat Ama kill
‘Kofi beat Ama to death’
22. S
NP VP
Kofi V1
V1
V NP V1
V
fo Ama wu
(Agbedor 1994: 118)
In our view, the diagram in (22) is ill-formed because Agbedor (1994) fails to
account for the head of the subject NP, which is N, and GB theory allows only binary
projections. The proper diagram of (22) in GB is represented in (23) below:
23. S
NP VP1
N V1 NP
Kofi fo N VP2
devia V2
wu
xl
According to Agbedor (1994), Baker assumes that SVCs are dual-headed, that
serial verbs jointly constitute a complex predicate. In the above structure, therefore, the
VP is double-headed and the NP it contains is governed by both verbs. From the structure
in (22) above, the theta-marking of the NP within the VP by V1 is straightforward, but
the notion of V2 also theta-marking the same NP might be doubtful. To account for this,
Baker involves the standard conditions on theta role assignment from Chomsky (1986),
which are stated as follows:
24. α may theta-mark β iff:
a. α and β are structural sisters;
b. a projection of α is a structural sister of β
Clause (a) in the above conditions allows for theta-marking of the NP by V1 while
condition (b) allows for the theta-marking of the NP by V2, whose projection is a
structural sister to the NP. Under Bakers analysis, according to Agbedor, theta-marking
of the external (argument) role of the verb percolates to its maximal projection. Since VP
in the structure in (24) is the maximal projection of both V1 and V2, the external theta
role of both verbs percolates up to it, where they are assigned to the subject by clause
(24b). So, the lexical theta role assignment properties of both verbs are satisfied and the
projection principle is obeyed.
Agbedor (1994) claims that Baker’s model can adequately account for SVCs in
Ewe which involve transitive verbs because the V1 takes only one argument, but that in
SVCs where the V1 takes an additional (PP) argument, the V2 cannot theta-mark the
additional PP thereby violating the projection principle under Baker’s proposal. He
proposes that in SVCs involving object-sharing, there should be a null object for V2 co-
xli
indexed with the NP object of V1; hence, instead of Baker’s (1989) structure in (22)
above, the object sharing phenomenon should be projected in a different way than Baker
suggested. A typical example is (25a), which gives the structure in (25b):
25a. Kofi fo devia wu
Kofi beat child kill
‘Kofi beat the child to death’
25b. S
Kofi VP
V1 V1
V1 NP1 V2 NP2
fo devia wu e
(Agbedor 1994:128)
However, under Government and Binding theory, this diagram is ill-formed. First, it fails
to account for the subject NP, which projects to Kofi. Secondly, to account for the null
object “e”, the second sentence where the null object is extracted from, needs to be
represented at the D-structure. In so doing, the V1 and V2 cannot be structural grand-
children of VP since the SVC in (25a): Kofi fo devia wu, is derived from the two
sentences in (26a) and (b):
26 a. Kofi fo devia
Kofi beat child
b. Kofi wu devia
Kofi kill child.
xlii
Therefore, the appropriate representation of the diagram in (25b) is (26c) below:
26c. S
NP VP
N V NP
Kofi fo N S
devia
NP VP
N V NP
N
Kofi wu e (devia)
Stewart (1998), on the other hand, investigates SVCs where two or more finite
verbs along with their complements occur in a single clause without any form of
coordination or subordination. He addresses the following two basic questions: (a) What
types of SVCs are there, and how are they distinguished from other similar constructions?
(b) What is the parameter that allows language like Edo to have SVCs, and not English or
French? Stewart (1998) claims that true SVCs are those in which the verbs share internal
as well as external arguments. He, therefore, proposes that there are two types of SVCs
with distinct syntactic structures. They are resultative and consequential SVCs. He asserts
that resultative SVCs are constrained to two verbs, the second of which is typically
unaccusative, and they assign their internal theta roles to a single object in true internal
argument sharing. Consequential SVCs on the other hand are less constrained, and
xliii
involve sequences of transitive verbs, with internal argument sharing realised via an
empty category, pro, as the object of the second verb.
Stewart (1998) claims that SVCs can occur in languages where Tense (or other
Infl categories) does not need to be checked. According to him, the parameter that allows
some languages to have SVCs and some not to have SVCs is as follows: non-SVC
languages are those in which Infl must check features with the verb, for example English,
French, Igbo and Chinese. On the other hand, SVC languages are languages where Infl
must not check features with the verb, for example Edo, Yoruba, Ewe and Akan. Stewart
(1998) adds that “true SVCs have a single tense projection while clausal coordinations
have two (Stewart, 1998:328). Concerning Igbo, he further states:
Based on certain facts of verbal inflection, it has been
claimed that Igbo (which shares the same boundary with
Edo) lacks SVCs altogether (cf. Lord 1975), however
Déchaine (1992, 1993), Ihionu (1992), Manfredi (1991),
etc, use the same property of verbal inflection to argue
that Igbo does indeed have two kinds of SVCs: single
event (instrument) to multi-event SVCs.
(Stewart, 1998:181)
Stewart (1998) argues the following three points: that Edo resultative SVCs correspond
to Igbo resultative V-V compounds; that Igbo lacks consequential SVCs, and that the so-
called multi-events SVCs in Igbo may either be cases of covert coordinations or involved
clausal complementation because the second verb always bears the open vowel suffix
(OVS) inflection while the first verb obligatorily bears the –rV inflection. For example:
xliv
27. O kwù-rù okwu khwa-a akhwa (Stewart, 1998:190)
3s speak-rV word cry-A tears-Gen
‘S/he spoke and cried’
Reversals of these morphemes with OVS on the first verb and –rV on the second verb
are unattested in the language and are ungrammatical as in (28) below:
28. *O kwù-A okwu khwa-ru akhwa (Stewart, 1998:191)
3s speak-A word cry-rV tears-Gen
In our view, in the first point, there are many parameters used to determine SVC
in languages. For example, Bodomo (1998) in section (2.1.2) below uses the following
constraints: subject sameness, tense-aspect polarity, connector and object sharing to
identify SVCs in Dagaare. Therefore, Stewart’s (1998) classifying Igbo as a non-
serialising language based on only one constraint does not seem right. Our view is in line
with Ameka (2005) and Creissels (2000) claim as mentioned in section (1.1) above that
there are various types of verb serialisation even in a single language and that there is
cross-linguistic variation such that the properties of SVC in one language may not map
wholly onto those of another. By implication, that Igbo belongs to languages in which
tense (or other Infl categories) needs to be checked is not enough to classify it as a non-
serialising language. In the second point, Edo resultative SVCs may correspond to Igbo
resultative V-V compounds; however, Igbo may not lack resultative and consequential
SVCs as Stewart (1998) opines. In the third point, where he argues that the “so called
multi-events SVCs in Igbo” such as (29) involve clausal complementation, hence they are
not SVCs.
xlv
29. Ogu go-ro ọkụkọ gbu-o si-e ri-e (Stewart 1998:190)
Ogu buy-rV chicken kill-A cook-A eat-A
‘Ogu bought [a] chicken, killed [it], cooked [it], and ate [it]’
The present study does not supports his view that (29) is not a serial verb construction
because it is multi-clausal construction. Our view is in line with the definition of verb
serialisation in section (3.1.1) below, which defines SVC in Igbo as a construction where
two or more verbs occur in series without an overt connective morpheme between the
verbs but with intervening variable between the first two verbs (V1 and V2), and V1 and
V2 cannot form verb-verb (V-V) compound in the language. In example (29), there is an
object NP ọkụkọ ‘chicken’ between the V1 goro ‘bought’ and gbuo ‘killed’; and V1 and
V2 cannot form V-V compound. Hence, the construction in (29) is verb serialisation in
Igbo.
2.1.2 Non-transformational generative framework
Some studies of verb serialisation carried out within non-transformational
generative frameworks are done with Lexical Functional Grammar. They are Bodomo,
(1998) and Bodomo, Lam and Yu (2003). However, there are other works on the verb
serialisation and consecutivisation that are carried out within non-transformational
generative frameworks, which are mere incidental comments about the phenomena in a
few pages of studies. Examples are Welmers (1973), Dèchaine (1993) and Emenanjo
(2010). Let us examine them.
xlvi
Bodomo (1998) defines an SVC as a construction in which two or more different
verbs share identical arguments within a single clause. He gives (30) as a prototypical
example of SVC in Dagaare:
30. Bayuo da ngmε-φ la Ayuo lɔɔ-φ
Bayuo past beat-perf fact. Ayuo caus+fall-perf
‘Bayuo knocked Ayuo down’ [Bayuo knocks Ayuo, Bayuo ‘falls’ Ayuo]
This example satisfies all the constraints in (31) which he provides on Dagaare SVCs.
31. Constraints on serialisation in Dagaare:
a. The subject sameness constraint:
All the verbs in an SVC share a single structure or functional subject.
b. The tense-aspect-polarity (TAP) constraint:
In an SVC, there is only a single TAP (tense-aspect-polarity) node.
c. The connector constraint:
There is an absence of conjunction or complementiser within the string or verbs.
d. The object sharing constraint:
Besides the case of instrumental serialisation, dyadic verbs must share direct
internal argument.
Bodomo (1998) analyses SVCs in Dagaare as complex predicates. He defines
complex predicate as a construction in which two or more predicates share a common
subject within the same clause. He argues that SVCs should be analysed as complex
predicates because the verbs in an SVC in Dagaare behave as a single unit to lexicalise
one event. In order to provide a substantive evidence for this, he subjects a particular type
of verb serialisation in Dagaare to two tests. They are negation test and questioning test.
xlvii
This particular type of verb serialisation, called serial verb causativisation, bears a
causative reading of which (30) above is an example.
For the negation test, Bodomo (1998) illustrates his point with the following data:
32 a. Bayuo da ba ngmε Ayuo
Bayuo past NEG knock Ayuo
‘Bayuo did not knock Ayuo’
b. Bayuo da ba lɔɔ-φ Ayuo
Bayuo past NEG caus+fall Ayuo
‘Bayuo did not cause Ayuo to fall’
c. Bayuo da ngmε-φ la Ayuo lɔɔ-φ
Bayuo past beat-perf fact. Ayuo caus+fall-perf
‘Bayuo knocked Ayuo down’ [Bayuo knocks Ayuo, Bayuo ‘falls’ Ayuo]
d. Bayuo da ba ngmε-φ Ayuo lɔɔ-φ
Bayuo past NEG beat-perf Ayuo caus+fall-perf
‘Bayuo did not knock Ayuo down’
e. *Bayuo da ngmε-φ la Ayuo ba lɔɔ-φ
Bayuo past beat-perf fact. Ayuo NEG caus+fall-perf
The SVC in (32c) is derived from the sentences in (32a) and (b). To negate the verb
serialisation in (32c), Bodomo (1998) argues that both verbs must be within the scope of
a particular negative marker for the construction to be acceptable. This is shown in (32d).
None of the verbs in (32c) can be negated on their own without the others participating.
That is why (32e) is ungrammatical in Dagaare. Bodomo (1998) therefore, concludes that
the two verbs in a serial verb construction are complex predicates and not separate
xlviii
predicates as one would find in, for instance, coordinate constructions in which each verb
can be negated.
For the questioning test, Bodomo (1998) illustrates his argument with the data in
(33) below:
33 a. Ayuo da za-φ la a bie lɔɔ-φ
Ayuo past throw-perf fact. def. child cause+fall-perf
‘Ayuo threw the child down’
b. *Bong la ka Ayuo e-φ a bie lɔɔ-φ?
What fact. that Ayuo def-perf. def. child cause+fall-perf
c. *Bong la ka Ayuo za-φ a bie e-φ?
What fact.that Ayuo throw-perf def.child do-perf
d. Bong la ka Ayuo e a bie?
What fact. that Ayuo do def. child
What did Ayuo do to the child?’
As the ungrammaticality of (33b) and (c) testifies, Bodomo (1998) states that in SVCs in
Dagaare, one cannot question one of the verbs to the exclusion of the others. But, it is
possible to question each of the verbs in a coordinate construction in the language. In
SVC, it is only when both or all of the verbs are questioned that a grammatical sentence
is formed. He adds that this is clear evidence that the two verbs in SVC in (33a) above do
indeed form one cohesive unit, albeit a complex unit or a complex predicate.
Bodomo (1998) presents SVCs in the framework of Lexical Functional Grammar
(LFG), which he considers to be more constrained formally and more adapted
linguistically to the expression of language universals than generative-transformational
xlix
grammar. There are three levels of grammatical representation in LFG: a(rgument),
f(unctional) and c(ategorical) structures, modeling respectively in the dimension of
ROLE, FUNCTION and CATEGORY of grammatical structure. Bodomo, in his studies,
presents a distinction between complex and non complex predicates at the level of f-
structure: while complex predicates such as SVCs could be represented with flat f-
structure, non-complex predicates such as coordination could not be represented with a
flat f-structure.
Bododmo, Lam and Yu (2003) examine a specific kind of syntactic alternation in
Hong Kong Chinese (Cantonese), involving a single benefactive construction, as shown
in (34) and a serial verb benefactive construction, as shown in (35):
34. Ngo bei-zo bun syu keoi
1.SG give-PERF CL book 3.SG
‘I have given him/her a book’
35. Ngo lo-zo bun syl bei keoi
1.SG take CL book give 3.SG
‘I have taken a book for him/her’
Examples (34) and (35) are two ways of expressing benefactive in Cantonese. Example
(34) according to these scholars is a ditransitive construction with a single predicate and
two contiguous objects, which they call double object construction (DOC), while
example (35) is a verbal complex of two transitive predicates with non-contiguous
objects, which is called serial verb construction or monoclausal construction.
l
According to Bododmo, Lam and Yu (2003:61), while expressing the same notion
of transfer of ownership, speakers also note the following two interesting nuances in the
meaning of the expressions, as shown in (36):
36 a. The book in (34) may belong to the giver but in (35) the book may belong to
someone else (the giver may not be the ultimate source).
b. In addition to just expressing the benefactive, the choice of the construction
in (35) may emphasis more on the effort or insistence of the giver.
The study therefore proposes that, in expressing the benefactive, the Cantonese speaker
makes a choice between double object constructions and serial verb constructions. The
choice, however, depends on what secondary lexical conceptual semantic nuance the
speaker intends. Two of these conceptual nuances are the ultimate source and the effort of
action. The study is more concerned with the notion of ultimate source, and finds that
though the two constructions accomplish the same function of expressing the benefactive,
the serial verb construction, being a complex predicate, expresses various nuances in
meaning (conceptual semantic nuances) which the double object construction, being a
single predicate, could not express. The objective of these scholars is to propose a
conceptual semantic level of the LFG framework in order to handle the conceptual
semantic nuances expressed by the complex predicates.
The incidental comments on verb serialisation and consecutivisation are
observations about verb serialisation and consecutivisation, which appear in a few pages
of books, for example, Welmers (1973), Dèchaine (1993) and Emenanjo (2010).
Welmers (1973) in his study entitled African Language Structures differentiates between
verb serialisation and consecutivisation. He claims that “a great many languages have a
li
special verbal construction used to refer to actions after the first in a sequential series.
Such a construction according to him may be labelled “consecutive” (Welmers,
1973:364). He asserts that consecutivisation has the following two features. First, that in
Kpelle and Swahili, a subject pronoun is required with the consecutive even if two or
more actions are performed by the same subject. For instance in the following Kpelle
example:
37. è lì ŋɔ kpalaŋ ŋa e tii kε ‘he went to his farm and worked/to work’
(cf.: è tii kε ‘he worked’)
(Welmers, 1973:355)
In this Kpelle example, the subject pronoun e ‘he’ is repeated in the second clause, which
Welmers (1973) calls the consecutive. However, in Igbo, according to Welmers (1973),
the consecutive requires no subject pronoun. For example:
38. ό bàrà n’ ụlò mecie ụzò ‘he went into the house and shut the door’
(cf.: ό meciri ụzò ‘he shut the door’)
(Welmers, 1973:365)
Secondly, “the consecutive may be used with the auxiliary verb ‘na’ and a verbal noun to
express simultaneous actions with an incompletive reference. For example:
39. mmụ nà àkwadebe nri, Okoyè àna èwepùta efere
‘I am getting ready for food, Okoye is getting out dishes’
(cf.: Okoye nà èwepùta efere Okoye is getting out dishes)
(Welmers, 1973:366)
On the other hand, he says that “serialisation seems to involve actions that can be
associated with each other only if they are performed by the same subject” (Welmers,
lii
1973:367). He identifies two basic types of serialisation in Igbo. According to him, in the
first, verbs after the first are in the verbal noun form. Normally, if the first is in the
stative, the reference is to present time and if the first verb is in the incompletive, the
reference is to customary action. For example:
40 a. ha nọ na oce àkpa nkata ‘they’re sitting and chatting’
(they sit on chairs holding conversation)
b. o jì ncà àsa aka ‘he’s washing his hands with soap’
(he has soap washing hands)
c. ọ nà anyà igwè agà ugbo ya ‘he rides a bicycle to his farm’
(he propels iron going to his farm)
(Welmers, 1973:368)
The second type of serial of serial construction according to Welmers, uses the
consecutive form for verbs after the first. For example:
41 a. ha nọ na oce kpaa nkata ‘they sat and chatted’
(they sit on chairs holding conversation)
b. o bù ibù gaa ahya ‘he carried a load to market’
(he has on head load and goes to market’
c. ha sò anyị gaa Aba ‘they went to Aba with us’
( they accompany us and go to Aba)
(Welmers, 1973:369)
In our view, a sentence not requiring a subject pronoun and the use of the
auxiliary verb ‘na’ to express simultaneous actions seems superficial features of Igbo
consecutive structures. In the same way, verbal noun forms indicating present or past for
liii
instance, ‘àkpa’ for present time and ‘kpaa’ for past time also seems shallow for
classifying verb serialisation in Igbo, moreover Igbo serialisation also uses these verbal
noun forms. Furthermore, the verb form (kpaa), which he refers to as consecutive form
(because of the open vowel suffix ‘–a’) is not peculiar to consecutive structures in Igbo.
Serialised structures also use such suffix.
Dèchaine (1993) in her study entitled Syntax is of the view that in Igbo,
serialisation and V-V compounding are intimately connected. She classifies serial verb
constructions in Igbo into four: instrumental, manner, comitative and multi-event.
Examples 42-45 are from Dèchaine (1993:809):
42. O wè-re ụkwụ gà-a ahya.
3sg take-∅Asp leg go-Asp market.Gen
‘S/he went to [the] market on foot’.
43. O ji-ri ọhụhụ ri-e ihe.
3sg use-∅Asp hurry eat-Asp thing.Gen
‘S/he hurriedly ate’
44. O wè-re ite bya.
3sg take-∅Asp pot come.Asp
‘S/he came with [a] pot’.
45. Ogù go-ro ọkụkọ gbu-o si-e ri-e
Ogu buy-∅Asp chicken kill-Asp cook-Asp eat-Asp
‘Ogu bought [a] chicken, killed [it], cooked [it] and ate [it]’
liv
Dèchaine (1993:809) claims that there are no dative/benefactive and resultative serial
constructions in Igbo. Instead, these semantic types can only surface as V-V compounds
as in example (46) below:
46. O bi-nye-re Adha akwà.
3sg borrow-give-∅Asp cloth
‘S/he lent Adha [some] cloth’
This study is related to the present study in providing types of verb serialisation in Igbo,
but while Dechaine (1993) determines only four types of verb serialisation, the present
study determines not only additional types of verb serialisation in the language but also
types of consecutivisation in the language.
Emenanjo (2010) in his study entitled “The Expression of Prepositional Notions
in Igbo”, examines adposition as a process used for expressing prepositional ideas in
Igbo. According to Emenanjo (2010), adposition can be marked by lexicalisation or
grammaticalisation or by both. When lexicalised, adposition uses a number of strategies
which are language specific. When grammaticalised, adposition may be marked by either
postposition or preposition. Following Emenanjo (2010), English and Romance
languages, among others use prepositions while Igbo uses grammaticalisation. He
identifies the following as strategies for expressing prepositional notion in Igbo: external
suffixes, complex verbs and serial verbs. He defines serial verb as, “a very complex verb
form in which two or more otherwise independent verb forms are linked in special ways”
(Emenanjo, 2010:8). He states that serial verb is used for expressing enormously wide
range of semantic notions including prepositional ones. Below are examples of SVCs use
in expressing prepositional notions (Emenanjo, 2010:8-9):
lv
47. Instrument:
a. E jì azịzà azà ụlò. ‘People sweep the house with a broom’.
b. E jì efere à èku mmīri. ‘People use this plate for swapping out water’.
c. Ọ nà-èji mmà àbacha jī. ‘He peels yams with a knife’.
48. Manner:
a. E jì uchè àzụ ahịa. ‘People use intelligence in trading’.
b. O jì uchè kpata ego yā. ‘He amassed his wealth cleverly’
c. A nà-èji ūchu àga n’ihu’. ‘People use hard work to progress’.
49. Accompaniment:
a. O sò enyì ya àga. ‘He is going in the company of his friends’.
b. Àda sò Uόzòό èje akwukwo. ‘Ada goes with Uόzọ to school’
c. Ọ nà-esō ha ème yā. ‘He does it in their company’.
50. Direction:
a. Ọ gbàrà ọsọ gawa ụlò. ‘He went home running’.
b. O jì ụkwụ bịa ebe a. ‘He came here on foot’.
c. A nà-àgba motò àga Legòόs. ‘People go to Lagos by road’.
lvi
51. Dative:
a. Ọ zùtàrà akwụkwọ nye m. ‘He bought a book and gave me (for me)’
b. Ọ nàtààra yà egō nye Ada. ‘He got money from him and gave it to Ada’
c. Anātala mmadụ ihe nye onye òόzọ. ‘Don’t take something from someone
and
give to another’.
52. Purpose:
a. E jì egō àchọ mmā. ‘People use money to look for beauty’.
b. A nà- èri nrī ebù ibù. ‘People eat food to be fat’.
This study is a good attempt in identifying some semantic notions (instrument, manner,
accompaniment, direction and purpose) expressed with SVCs. However, apart from these
semantic notions, the SVC examples and their interpretations as represented above, there
is no explanation of how these serial verbs express the prepositional notions, which is the
intention of the paper.
2.2 Empirical studies
Some of the empirical studies on verb serialisation are Uwalaka (1982), Ndimele
(1996), Kari (2003), Okorji and Mbagwu (2008) and Ahaotu (2012). Ndimele (1996) and
Kari (2003) are studies on Nigerian Pidgin English and Degema respectively while
Uwalaka (1982), Okorji and Mbagwu (2008) and Ahaotu (2012) are studies on Igbo
language. Let us examine Ndimele (1996) and Kari (2003), which are studies on other
Nigerian languages before the studies on Igbo.
lvii
Ndimele (1996) examines the ‘Kwaness’ of Nigerian Pidgin from the perspective
of verb serialisation. He outlines seven basic diagnostic features of a serial verb language.
They are summarised as follows:
53. a. In a typical serial verb language, there must be a type of construction in which
two or more verbs are strung together without an overt connective morpheme;
b. The action or state denoted by the second verb (or non-initial) verb phrase is
an outgrowth of the action denoted by the first verb phrase;
c. All verbs which are juxtaposed in an SVC without a connective morpheme
share a common surface subject and one or more common aspectual/tense
polarity markers;
d. There is a propensity for the verbs in series (non-initial verbs) not to take
inflections or polarity affixes;
e. Regardless of the number of verb phrases present in an SVC, there is only one
INFL or AUX node present in that sentence;
f. It is an established fact that in an SVC that certain verbs tend to lose their
semantic content due to a linguistic process known as ‘bleaching’ or
‘desemanticisation’; and
g. In an SVC, verbs denoting ‘carry’ and/or ‘take’ tend to occur as the first
member in the series, while other verbs denoting ‘pass’, ‘throw’ or ‘position
away from’ tend to occur in non-initial position.
Ndimele (1996) opines that a thorough investigation into the structure of Nigerian
Pidgin English (NPE) reveals quite a number of typological similarities as well as
common phonological and syntactic patterns between it and a great majority of local
lviii
languages. He adds that one of the syntactic similarities between NPE and its substrate is
in the SVC. The study shows that NPE is a serial verb language, and this feature of verb
serialisation in NPE is a carryover from indigenous Nigerian languages and not English,
which has been claimed to be the superstrate for NPE. Some examples of verb
serialisation in the study are as follows:
54. De ston brek dọọ enta haus.
the stone break door enter house
‘The stone broke the door and entered the house’
55. Pita kari sansan pak ful mai dọmọt.
Peter carry sand pack full my door mouth
‘Peter covered the entrance to my house with sand’
Examples (54) and (55) are sentences containing multiple verb phrases where the
phrases are not overtly linked by any conjunctions. According to Ndimele (1996), in
sentence (54), the verb phrases brek dọọ ‘break door’ and enta haus ‘enter house’ are
juxtaposed without a connective morpheme. In (55) also there are three verbs occurring
in series without an overt linker. He adds that the absence of a connective morpheme in
the juxtaposed verb phrases in the above examples shows that the sentences are truly
SVCs.
Ndimele (1996) demonstrates how the issue of sharing in verb serialisation is
executed in NPE with negative sharing, auxiliary sharing and argument sharing. On the
negative sharing, he observes that only one negative particle no can be found in an SVC
irrespective of the number of verbs present. Examples are as follows:
lix
56 a. Pita no kari naif kọt am
Peter NEG carry knife cut it
‘Peter did not cut it with a knife’.
b. *Pita no kari naif no kọt am
Peter NEG carry knife NEG cut it
57 a. Pita no gri kọm kuk am chọp
Peter NEG agree come cook it eat
‘Peter does not want to come and cook it and eat’.
b. *Pita no gri no kọm no kuk am no chọp
Peter NEG agree NEG come NEG cook it NEG eat
In examples (56a) and (57a), the negative notions expressed by the particle no affect the
polarity value of all the verbs in each of the sentences. In other words, the notion of
negation embodied in the particle no is shared by all the verbs in the sentences. On the
other hand, the sentences in examples (56b) and (57b) are ungrammatical. This is because
each of the verbs in these sentences is independently negated, that is, in each of these
sentences, the negative particle no occurs immediately before every verb in the series
instead of occurring only immediately before the first verb in the series.
On the auxiliary sharing, Ndimele (1996) observes that it is common for all the
verbs present in an SVC to share one auxiliary verb. Examples are as follows:
58 a. Pita (bin) tek naif kọt mit
Peter AUX take knife cut meat
‘Peter cut the meat with a knife’
lx
b. Pita go kari maut slip
Peter AUX carry mouth sleep
‘Peter will sleep without eating any food’
c. Pita dọn kari am hid
Peter AUX carry it hide
‘Peter has hidden it.
According to Ndimele (1996:130) “tense/aspect distinctions are often expressed by
auxiliary verbs in NPE rather than by bound inflectional morphemes”. Hence, the marker
of the simple past in NPE is the auxiliary verb bin as seen in example (58a). He adds that
bin, like every other auxiliary verb in NPE, occurs immediately before the initial verb in
the series. However, its presence is optional in a sentence which expresses the simple past
as seen in example (58a) above. The marker of the simple future is go ‘will’. It precedes
the first lexical verb as seen in example (58b). The auxiliary verb which marks the simple
perfect is dọn, and the simple perfect notion expressed by dọn is shared by all the verbs in
series as seen in example (58c). This auxiliary verb (dọn), like every other auxiliary verb
in NPE precedes the first verb in the series.
On the argument sharing, Ndimele (1996) observes that in an SVC in which there
is object sharing, all the verbs present are always transitive. Consider the following
sentences:
59 a. Pita kari sup haid
Peter carry soup hide
‘Peter hid the soup’.
lxi
b. Pita kari sup go
Peter carry soup go
‘Peter carried the soup away’.
c. Pita kari sup pọ dọg
Peter carry soup pour dog
Peter poured the soup on the dog’.
60 a. Pita kari una naif torowe
Peter carry your(PL) knife throw away
‘Peter threw away you people’s knife’.
b. Pita kari una naif waka kọmọt
Peter carry your(PL) knife walk come out
‘Peter walked away with you people’s knife’.
c. Pita kari una naif kil rat
Peter carry your(PL) knife kill rat
‘Peter killed a rat with you people’s knife’.
Ndimele (1996) observes that in each of the above sentences, all the verbs share one
subject, which is Pita ‘Peter’. In (59a), the object NP sup ‘soup’ is shared by kari ‘carry’
and haid ‘hide’, just as the object naif ‘knife’ in (60a) is shared by the verbs kari ‘carry’
and torowe ‘ throw away’. However, the object in either (59b) or (60b) is not shared by
the verbs. The object in each of the sentences is more related to the V1 than the V2. The
verb that follows the object in any of the (b) examples is intransitive, and therefore
cannot be associated with any object.
lxii
Ndimele (1996) further observes that although all the verbs in either (59c) or
(60c) are transitive, there is no object sharing. What obtains rather is that every verb has
its own object. The implication of this observation according to him is that transitivity is
not the only factor that determines object sharing. In his view, it appears that there are
some other semantic properties of the verbs that make object sharing possible in an SVC.
“In fact, object sharing seems to be determined by the collocational or selectional
restriction existing between the verb and the object NP” (Ndimele, 1996:132). It is
selectional restriction that makes (61a) rather than (61b) a possible serial verb
construction in NPE.
61 a. Pita carry dem pọt brek
Peter carry their pot break
‘Peter broke their pot’.
b. ? Pita carry dem pọt kil
Peter carry their pot kill.
According to Ndimele (1996), the oddity of (61b) is due to the fact that the verb kil ‘kill’
naturally selects an animate object. The object pọt ‘pot’ is inanimate, and therefore
cannot be killed; this explains why it cannot enter into any case relationship with the verb
kil ‘kill’. He adds that (61b) can only be acceptable if the object pọt ‘pot’ is conceived as
an instrument with which the action of killing was carried out. In such a case, it is not pọt
‘pot’ that was killed but Peter did the killing using the ‘pot’ as a tool.
Ndimele (1996) concludes that NPE is a full-fledged serial verb language, and
that it resembles most of the local languages in this regard. By implication, NPE may
have copied this feature from the indigenous languages rather than English which lacks
lxiii
the feature of verb serialisation. Ndimele (1996) is related to the present study in that
both of them are examining verb serialisation and the notion of sharing in verb
serialisation. However, while Ndimele (1996) examines only verb serialisation in
Nigerian Pidgin, the present study analyses the syntactic structures of verb serialisation
and consecutivisation in Igbo.
Kari (2003) examines the characteristics of SVCs in Degema with emphasis on
types, derivation and position of tense-aspect- polarity markers in relation to the verbs.
He defines SVC in Degema as “a verb construction where two or more verbs occur in
series with one or more subject clitics co-referencing the substantive subject” (Kari 2003:
272). Kari (2003) claims that Degema belongs to a type of SVC called “concordial” SVC,
a type where each verb refers back to the subject by means of a concordial marker or
pronoun. On the basis of the concordial subject attached to verbs in the concordial SVC
in Degema, he distinguishes between the concordial SVC with only one subject clitic and
that with more than one subject clitic.
Concordial SVC with one subject clitic according to Kari (2003: 272) is “a type of
SVC where the only subject clitic in the serial verb construction precedes the initial
verb”. Example (62) illustrates this type of SVC. It is pertinent to note that Kari (2003)
separates clitics from their hosts with ‘=’ and only high and downstepped high tones are
marked.
62. Ohoso ọ=tá dόéό=n isen
Ohoso 3SgSCL=go buy=FE fish
‘Ohoso went and bought fish’.
lxiv
In (62), there are two verbs tá ‘go’ and dé ‘buy’ in series and one subject clitic that
concords with the subject NP (Ohoso) in person and number. The subject clitic precedes
the initial verb ta ‘go’. According to Kari (2003), in the concordial type of SVC with one
subject clitic, tense and aspect markers are attached to the last verb in past constructions
such as positive factative and perfect construction as in (63a) and (64a), but none on the
same verb in the negative counterpart of these constructions, as in (63b) and (64b):
63 a. Ohoso o=yí kótú=n óόyi (Positive Factative)
Ohoso 3SgSCL=come call=FE him
‘Ohoso came and called him’.
b. Ohoso ó=yi kótú óόyi (Negative Factative)
Ohoso 3SgSCL.NEG=come call him
‘Ohoso did not come and called him’.
64 a. Ohoso o=yí kótú=té óόyi (Positive Perfect)
Ohoso 3SgSCL=come call=PE him
‘Ohoso has come and called him’.
b. Ohoso óό=ma yi kótú óόyi (Negative
Perfect)
Ohoso 3SgSCL.NEG=UAUX come call him
‘Ohoso has not come and called him’.
Kari (2003) adds that in non-past constructions, such as (65a) and (65b), the last verb is
bare in contrast to (63a) and (64a) above.
65 a. Tatane mó=tá dόēό ísén (Positive)
Tatane 3SgSCL=go buy fish
lxv
‘Tatane will go and buy fish’.
b. Tatane óό=tá dόeό ísén (Negative)
Tatane 3SgSCL.NEG=go buy fish
‘Tatane will not go and buy fish’.
Concordial SVC with more than one subject clitic on the other hand, has one
subject and a concordial subject clitic that precedes each of the verbs, initial and non-
initial in series as in example (66):
66. Ohoso ọ=gbíyé=n ēόnám ọ=gbíyé=n óόyi
Ohoso 3SGsCL=kill=FE animal 3SgSCL=give=FE him
‘Ohoso killed an animal for him’
In (66), the factative enclitic attaches to the initial and non-initial verbs in series. It is
interesting to note, according to Kari (2003) that there are some concordial SVCs with
more than one subject clitic where the factative enclitic is optionally present after the
initial verb. Such SVCs are those that have initial verbs followed by a pronoun object
complement that begins with a consonant. Compare (67) and (68) with (66), (69) and
(70):
67. Ivioso o=kótú mé=ēn ọ=kpérí=n īnúm
Ivoso 3SgSCL=call me=FE 3Sg SCL=tell=FE something
‘Ivoso called me and told (me) something’.
68. Ivioso o=kótú wó=ōn ọ=kpérí=n īnúm
Ivoso 3SgSCL=call you=FE 3Sg SCL=tell=FE something
‘Ivoso called you and told (you) something’.
lxvi
69. Ivioso o=kótú=n óόyi ọ=kpérí=n īnúm
Ivoso 3SgSCL=cal=FE him 3SgSCL=tell=FE something
‘Ivoso called him and told (him) something’.
70. Ivioso o=kótú=n éni ọ=kpérí=n īnúm
Ivoso 3SgSCL=call=FE us=FE 3SgSCL=tell=FE something
‘Ivoso called us and told (us) something’.
In (67) and (68), there are two occurrences of the factitive enclitic. The first is after the
object pronoun, which begins with a consonant, instead of after the initial verb, while the
second is after the non-initial verb. In (69) and (70), also with double occurrence of the
factitive enclitic, however, the first after the initial verb, while the second is after the non-
initial verb. According to Kari (2003), the reason for the occurrence of the enclitic after
the initial verb in (69) and (70) instead of after the object pronoun is that the object
pronoun begins with a vowel. In other words the phonological structure of the object
pronoun in (69) and (70) prohibits encliticisation to the initial verb. The behaviour of the
factative enclitic in example (66) is the same as that in (69) and (70) because the object
NPs begin with vowels.
On the derivation of SVC in Degema, Kari (2003) claims that SVC is derived
from two or more underlying sentences by deleting all but the first subject NP in the
serial construction. He considers example (62) repeated below as (73), as deriving from
(71) and (72):
71. Ohoso ọ=tá=ān
Ohoso 3SgSCL=go=FE
lxvii
‘Ohoso went’
72. Ohoso ọ=dόéό=n īsén
Ohoso 3SgSCL=buy=FE fish
‘Ohoso bought fish’.
73. Ohoso ọ=tá dόéό=n isen
Ohoso 3SgSCL=go buy=FE fish
‘Ohoso went and bought fish’.
To derive the SVC in (73), according to Kari (2003), a deletion transformation applies to
delete the substantive subject Ohoso along with its associated subject clitic in (72). After
that, another deletion transformation applies to delete the factitive enclitic in (71).
Following these deletions, the SVC in (73) is left with only one substantive subject and
one subject clitic co-referencing it. The sentence is also left with only one manifestation
of the factitive marker.
On the issue of the position of tense and aspect polarity markers in verb
serialisation, some scholars (Williamson, 1965, Agbedor, 1994, Ndimele, 1996 and
Bodomo, 1998) claim that verbs in a serial verb construction must agree in tense and
aspect. But, Bamgbose (1974) debunks this claim based on Bendor-Samuel’s (1968)
finding on Izhii, a dialect of Igbo, where it is not mandatory that there will be symmetry
in tense and aspect between the verbs in serial verb construction (see section 2.1.1,
example 9). Kari’s (2003) investigation on Degema also shows that same temporal frame
need not hold for all SVCs in Degema. Consider the following examples:
74 a. Tatane o=kótú=n óόyi
Tatane 3SgSCL=call=FE him
lxviii
‘Tatane called him’
b. Tatane móό=kpérí óόyi inum
Tatane 3SgSCL=tell him something
‘Tatane is telling him something’.
c. Tatane o=kótú=n óόyi móό=kpérí inum
Tatane 3SgSCL=call=FE him 3SgSCL=tell something
‘Tatane called him and is telling him something’.
Example (74c) reveals that the underlying sentences (74a) and (74b), from which (74c) is
derived have different tenses. The tense of sentence (74a) is past whereas that of (74b) is
non-past. This asymmetry in tense is reflected in the serial verbs in (74c). Degema,
according Kari (2003), therefore, provides further support that there need not be same
temporal frame between verbs in SVCs.
In conclusion, the study finds, first, that serial verb constructions in Degema
belong to the type called concordial serial verbs. Secondly, that the SVC in Degema is
derived from two or more underlying sentences. Thirdly, that tense and aspect markers
occur after the verb or after an object pronoun that begins with a consonant. But in some
cases, tense-aspect marking on the initial verb is repeated after non-initial verbs.
Fourthly, that there need not be agreement in tense between verbs in series, contrary to
what has been claimed in the literature on verb serialisation. Kari (2003) suggests
therefore that agreement in tense-aspect-polarity should not be a universal defining
feature of verb serialisation. This study is related to the present study in that both of them
are examining verb serialisation, based on types, derivation and position of tense-aspect
polarity markers in relation to the verbs. However, while Kari (2003) examines these
lxix
aspects of verb serialisation in Degema, the present study examines them in Igbo verb
serialisation and consecutivisation.
Uwalaka (1982) re-examines Igbo consecutivisation and serialisation based on the
studies carried out by Hyman (1971), Welmers (1973), Lord (1975), Nwachukwu (1975)
and Bamgbose (1980). According to her, “one of the controversial aspects of Igbo syntax
is whether strings of verbs constitute instances of serialisation or consecutivisation”
(Uwalaka 1982: 63). She claims that the major difficulty so far has been in clearly
defining and distinguishing the construction types theoretically. Based on this, she re-
examines other studies on the subject matter and finds that the definition of
consecutivisation based on temporal sequence of actions fails to exclude clearly SVCs in
which relations of sequence and consequence play a part. In her view, many SVCs are
also in relations of consequence, a feature of many Igbo consecutives such as (75) below:
75. Ànyị gàrà ahịa zụọ ji
we go-rV(PAST) market buy-A yam ‘We went to the market and bought
yam’.
(Uwalaka 1982: 64)
Another finding is that employing the “criterion of certain morphemes is also inadequate
to define consecutive” (Uwalaka 1982: 70). This is because serialisation also employs the
device of deleting tense/aspect marking from all but one of the verbs in the string. She
conclusively states that the term serialisation may be preferable to all verb combinations
in which a single subject is obligatory in the constructions, as with the modifying SVC in
(76) below:
lxx
76. Àdha gbàrà ọsọ laa
Adha run-rV(PAST) race go-away-A ‘Adha went away running’.
On the other hand, the term consecutivisation would be reserved for cases in which a new
subject could optionally be introduced after the first verb. For example:
77. Ànyi rùrù ahịa Adha àzụọ ūwe
we reach-rV(PAST) market Adha E-buy-A dress ‘We the reached market
Adha bought a dress’
We agree with Uwalaka (1982) that relation of sequence and consequence and the
deletion of tense/aspect markers from the verbs except the first verb are applicable to
both serialisation and consecutivisation. However, we do not agree that the difference
between serialisation and consecutivisation lies in the number of subjects involved in
their constructions. We do not equally accept examples (75) and (77) as instances of
consecutivisation. In our view, example (75) is an instance of verb serialisation because
ọsọ ‘race’ is an intervening variable between the V1 gbàrà ‘ran’and V2 laa ‘went’ and
V1 and V2 cannot form V-V compound in Igbo. On the other hand, example (77) is
neither verb serialisation nor consecutivisation because verbs in series in both
serialisation and consecutivisation share an obligatory single syntactic subject except in
resultative types of verb serialisation and consecutivisation. But example (77) is not
resultative type of verb serialisation; hence, it cannot be acceptable as an instance of verb
serialisation.
Okorji and Mbagwu (2008) address the assumption that certain constructions
exemplify verb serialisation in Igbo. Some of the constructions Okorji and Mbagwu
(2008:388-389) present as the “so-called” SVCs in Igbo are as follows:
lxxi
78. Òbi sì-rì nri ri-e
Obi cook-PAST food eat-OVS
‘Obi cooked and ate’.
79. Àda gàrà ahia zụ-ọ uwe
Ada go-PAST market buy-OVS dress
‘Ada went to the market and bought dresses.
80. Èmeka jì azịza za-a ụlò
Emeka hold broom sweep-OVS house
‘Emeka swept the house with a broom’.
Okorji and Mbagwu (2008) apply argument sharing principle to test the status of
examples (78-80) as SVCs. Obviously, according to these scholars, the initial verb (V1)
and the non-initial verb (V2) in each of the sentences in (78-80) share the same subject
NP argument, but this seems inapplicable to the object NP argument. In their view, only
example (78) satisfies completely the argument sharing hypothesis. They claim that if
examples (79) and (80) violate the argument sharing principle, it implies that they are not
monoclausal and that they constitute coordinate structures. They argue that examples (78-
80) above are coordinate structures with covert coordinatives, which according to them
are represented, as follows:
81. Òbi sì-rì nri ma ri-e
Obi cook-PAST food and eat-OVS
‘Obi cooked and ate’.
lxxii
82. Àda gàrà ahia ma zụ-ọ uwe
Ada go-PAST market and buy-OVS dress
‘Ada went to the market and bought dresses.
83. Èmeka jì azịza ma za-a ụlò
Emeka hold broom and sweep-OVS house
‘Emeka swept the house with a broom’.
These scholars conclude that Igbo may hardly be said to have SVCs. According to them,
if examples (78-80) may still be regarded as SVCs, then their definitions must be
different from what the true SVCs are defined as. They, therefore, propose a definition of
Igbo SVC as “a structure in which the serialising verbs belong to different clauses joined
by a conjunction” (Okorji and Mbagwu, 2008: 392).
Okorji and Mbagwu’s (2008) study presents a good observation on argument
sharing, which is one of the criteria for determining ‘true SVC’ language. However, if
according to these scholars, examples (78-80) obey the subject sharing principle; and
only (78) obeys the object sharing while (79) and (80) violate it, it implies that object
sharing is not found in all cases of Igbo SVC just like other serialising languages, for
instance, in section (2.1.1), Agbedor (1994) argues that the object sharing phenomenon,
which Baker (1989) claims is obligatory in SVC, is not found in all cases in Ewe
language. Also in section (2.2), Ndimele (1996) also observes that object sharing
phenomenon is not found in all cases in Nigerian Pidgin. Chapter four of this thesis,
where argument sharing is examined, addresses the issue of object sharing in Igbo.
lxxiii
We do not also agree with Okorji and Mbagwu’s (2008) assertion that Igbo may
hardly be said to have SVCs simply because Igbo SVCs do not fit into the structure of
Edo and Yoruba SVCs, which they claim are true serialising languages, and because
examples (78-80) are derived from coordinate structures. This is because some scholars
also observe in some serialising languages that SVCs are derived from coordinate
structures. Examples are discussed in section (2.1.1.) where Stewart (1963) opines that
SVCs are derived from coordinate structures in Twi language, and Awobuluyi (1967) and
Bamgbose (1994) also argue that SVCs are derived from coordinate structures in Yoruba.
Therefore that the examples in (78-80) are derived from coordinate structures is not
enough to disqualify Igbo as a serialising language. In the same way, Okorji and
Mbagwu’s (2008) definition of Igbo SVC is inappropriate because Igbo SVCs like SVCs
in other serialising languages, are realised without the conjunction ma ‘and’ at the surface
level. The present study proposes some improved defining features of Igbo SVC in
chapter three of this thesis.
Ahaotu (2012) compares SVC in Igbo and Yoruba. The study was based on
Chuwicha’s (1993) classification of SVC in Thai, which comprises two verbs or verb
phrases. The framework adopted in the study involves the application of Langacker’s
(1987) notion of valence relation and correspondences. According to the study, Chuwicha
(1993) classifies SVC into four types and describes them in terms of the syntax and
semantics of the verb types. The four types are as follows:
lxxiv
84 a. primary action verbs + non-primary action verbs.
b. primary action verbs + primary action verbs.
c. primary action verbs + physical process verbs.
d. posture verbs + action verbs.
Following Chuwicha (1993), in the first type, the first verbs which are the primary action
verbs denote events which express the exact physical means and the manner, while the
non-primary action verbs act upon the action, which is expressed by the primary action
verbs. Put differently, the primary action verbs are the main verbs which cause the
resultant occurrence of the second verbs, which are the non-primary action verbs. For
example in Thai:
85. Kăw takoon tככp (Chuwicha, 1993:141)
He shout answer
‘He answered by shouting’
In this example, the first verb takoon ‘shout’ expresses the exact physical means and
manner of carrying out the action expressed by the second verb tככp ‘answer’, which is
the non-primary action.
The primary action verbs plus the primary action verbs, which is the second type
of SVC in Thai expresses two physical actions that are performed by the same agent. The
second action is typically interpreted as the purpose of carrying out the first action. For
example:
86. Kăw tsכt plaa kin (Chuwicha, 1993:141)
He fry fish eat
‘He fried fish to eat’
lxxv
In example (86), two physical actions, tsכt ‘fry’ and kin ‘eat’ are performed by the same
agent, and the second action is indicated as the purpose of carrying out the first action.
According to Chuwicha (1993), in the third type, which is the primary action
verbs plus the physical process verbs, the first events are actions whereas the second
events can be interpreted as either the processes or the resulting states of entities
indicated by the direct arguments of the first verbs. For example:
87. Kăw sak sŵa sa?aat (Chuwicha, 1993:148)
He wash short clean
‘He washed a short and it became clean’
In this example, the first event sak ‘wash’ is an action while the second event sa?aat
‘clean’ can be interpreted as the resulting state of the entity sŵa “short’, which was the
direct object of the first verb.
The posture verbs plus action verbs, which is the fourth and final type expresses
the means /manner by which the subject marker or agent performs an action denoted by
the second verb while being in a particular posture denoted by the first verb at the same
time and place. For example:
88. Kăw nâŋ àan nàŋsŵw (Chuwicha, 1993:151)
He sit read book
‘He sat reading a book’
In example (88), the agent performs an action àan ‘read’ while being in a particular
posture nâŋ ‘sit’, at the same time and place. Ahaotu (2012) cites some examples of
these four patterns of SVC types in Igbo and Yoruba, but we re-assessed only Igbo
lxxvi
examples here since they are more relevant to the present study. Igbo example of the
primary action verbs and non-primary action verbs, which is type (a) is as follows:
89. Èmeka jì azịza za-a ụlòό
Emeka hold broom sweep-OVS house
‘Emeka swept the house with a broom’.
Example (89) illustrates primary action verb and non-primary verb in the sense that the
first verb, ji ‘hold’ expresses the exact physical means and manner of carrying out the
action zaa ‘swept’ expressed in the second verb, which is the non-primary action verb.
An example of the primary action verbs and physical process verbs is as follows:
90. Ada ga-ra ahịa zụ-ọ uwe
Ada go-PAST market buy-OVS dress
‘Ada went to the market and bought dresses’.
In example (90), two physical actions, gara ‘went’ and zụọ‘bought’ are performed by the
same agent, and the second action is indicated as the purpose of carrying out the first
action.
Ahaotu’s (2012) result of the comparison of the above SVC types shows that Igbo
and Yoruba do not conform to all the classifications. Type (a) and (b) are found in these
languages but they do not have example that can illustrate type (c). In type (d), there is no
example that can express the pattern in Igbo but there is one example found in Yoruba. In
order to find examples in these languages as a make up for type (c) which is absent in
Igbo and Yoruba, Ahaotu (2012) applies Langacker’s (1987) valence relation, which
exists between two component structures that combine to form a composite structure. She
lxxvii
comes up with the composite structure in (91), which was formed from the component
structures of (91a) and (b):
91. Obi dòόròό úwé yá, ò wéé dọkà (sic) (Ahaotu 2012: 80)
Obi draw (PAST) cloth his and then tear
Obi drew his cloth and it was turn’.
a. Obi dòόròό ùwè yà (sic) (Ahaotu, 2012: 80)
Obi draw (PAST) cloth his
‘Obi drew his cloth’
b. Obi dọkàrá úwè yá (sic) (Ahaotu, 2012: 80)
Obi tear (PAST) cloth he
‘Obi tore his cloth’
We are in support of Ahaotu’s (2012) Igbo examples of type (a) and (b).
However, we do not see the composite structure in (91) as an example of SVC because it
has two subjects. A single subject is obligatory in serial verb construction. We are not
comfortable with Ahanotu’s (2012) tone marking and glossing. The tones and the
glossing are not well represented. In the same vein, type (d) which expresses the
means/manner by which the subject marker or agent performs an action denoted by the
second verb while being in a particular posture denoted by the first verb, which Ahaotu
(2012) claims is absent in Igbo but present in Yoruba is also found in Igbo by this present
study. According to Ahaotu (2012: 51-52), Thai examples are translated as “he sat
reading a book” and “he stood singing” while the Yoruba version is glossed as “I sat
down to read” (Ahaotu, 2012: 67). We are, therefore, of the view that the Igbo version
will be represented as (92):
lxxviii
92. Ọ nòόròό àlà nà-àgụ akwụkwọ
S/he sit-rV(PAST) ground AUX-read book
‘S/he sat down reading a book’
In this example, Igbo expresses a typical illustration of type (d) in that the subject ‘S/he’
performs an action ‘read’ denoted by the second verb while being in a posture denoted by
the first verb ‘sit’.
2.3 Theoretical framework
This study is carried out within the framework of transformational generative
grammar. It aims at not only to classify and describe utterances but to also capture
regularities that underlie them, thereby making predictions of what may be expected and
what may not be expected. This linguistic theory (transformational generative grammar)
which was propounded by Noam Chomsky has undergone series of changes since its
inception in 1957. This syntactic theory, made popular in Syntactic Structures (Chomsky,
1957) is widely seen as the heart of modern theoretical linguistics (Newmeyer, 1980).
However, since the introduction of Standard Theory, a model published in the Aspects of
the Theory of Syntax (Chomsky, 1965), “generative grammar has worn entirely different
outlook such that the whole enterprise has become so hydra-headed and highly
polyvalent. No single volume can successfully chart the path of its development”
(Ndimele, 1992:2). In a nutshell, however, since the early 1970, Standard Theory has
undergone four major modifications: the Extended Standard Theory (EST), the Revised
Extended Standard Theory (REST), the Government and Binding Theory (GB) and
currently to the Minimalist Program (MP). The essence of the different versions of the
lxxix
theory is to find a simple tool for describing adequately man’s natural languages. Each of
the above mentioned versions of the theory is a model in the quest for an appropriate
linguistic theory in the transformational generative theoretical framework. The thesis is
carried out within the Revised Extended Standard Theory version.
2.3.1 Standard theory (ST)
The Standard Theory came up as an attempt to improve on the limitations of
Phrase Structure Grammar. According to Radford (1988) and Mbah (1999), some
limitations of Phrase Structure Grammar are as follows: the inability to account for
structures other than declarative sentences; inability to handle ambiguous sentences;
inability to accurately integrate constituents which are lesser than phrase but larger than
word into its rules and having too many rules applying to the same structure. As
mentioned in section (2.3) above, Standard Theory was published in Chomsky’s (1965)
Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. It was in this theory that the generative part of the
transformational theory was introduced. This generative element in Chomsky’s (1965)
view is to account for the ability of languages to generate infinite sentences from finite
set of rules. The model consists of the base component which has the phrase rules and the
lexical insertion rules. From the base component, there is the underlying structure of the
sentence known as the deep structure. This deep structure serves as input to the
transformational component and to the semantic component. The transformational
component contains transformational rules which apply to give the surface structure. The
deep structure is interpreted by the projection rules of the semantic component. These
rules combine the semantic representation of the various parts of the sentence to construct
lxxx
a semantic representation for the whole sentence. In this model, all the semantic
information relevant to semantic interpretation was provided at the level of the deep
structure. In other words, the deep structure is said to determine meaning. Therefore,
when transformational rules apply to a structure, the meaning still remains the same. For
example, the active and passive sentences in (93) below:
93. Active: Obi beats Ada
Passive: Ada was beaten by Obi
In the application of the passive transformation in (93), the meanings of both the active
and the passive sentences remain the same. But, this is not always the case as Riemsdijk
and Williams (1986) show in section (2. 3.1.1) below.
2.3.1.1 Limitation of the standard theory
In the Standard Theory, the deep structure determines meaning, so when
transformational rules apply to a structure, the meaning still remains the same, thus the
general consensus that transformations were meaning preserving. This hypothesis was
formulated by Katz and Postal (1964), as a result, it was called the Katz-Postal
Hypothesis. However, Riemsdijk and Williams (1986) and Cowper (1992) prove this
hypothesis wrong by citing some examples whereby active sentence and its passive
transformation have different meaning and where positive sentence and its transformation
do not have the same meaning. Consider examples (94a) and (b) below:
94 a. Active: Every student in this room knows two languages.
Passive: Two languages are known by every student in this room.
(Riemsdijk and Williams, 1986:83)
lxxxi
The active sentence implies that every student in the room is bilingual in any two
languages, while the passive counterpart implies that every student in the room knows the
same two languages. If transformations are truly meaning preserving, the two sentences
in (94b) should not have two meanings, but they do.
94 b. Positive: My brother is a student.
Negative: My brother is not a student.
A comparison of the two sentences in (94b) shows that they are not identical in meaning.
While the positive sentence affirms my brother’s studentship, the negative sentence does
not. Due to the flaw of Standard Theory, linguists revised the theory and this revision is
contained in the Extended Standard Theory model.
2.3.2 Extended standard theory (EST)
The Extended Standard Theory (EST) was the first modification of Standard
Theory and it is marked by the inclusion of X1-Theory of phrase structure rules into the
model. X1-Theory arose out of the need to seek remedies to the inadequacies of Phrase
Structure Grammar, which recognises only lexical and phrasal categories. But X1-
convention recognises the existence of ‘intermediate’ categories which are larger than the
lexical categories but smaller than the phrasal categories. EST also recognises the fact
that in addition to the deep structure, the surface structure also contributes to meaning
interpretation.
lxxxii
2.3.3 Revised extended standard theory (REST)
REST was the second modification of the ST and it is the model that will be
adopted in this study for the reasons justified in section (2.4) below. In this version, a
distinction is made between the deep structure and surface structures. In ST, meaning is
said to be realised at the deep structure. However, as example (92) above shows, meaning
can be realised at the surface structure in that the passive sentence will have a deep
structure that is realised fully at the surface structure though such meaning is recoverable
at the deep structure.
Cowper (1992) observes that in REST model, the large number of construction-
specific rules like the passive, negative and relative transformation rules have been
conflated into one rule. This transformational rule is called Move-Alpha (Move-α) rule.
This rule performs all the functions which those construction-specific rules used to
perform in the ST. When an element is moved according to her, the extracted phrase
leaves a trace of movement and both the trace and the moved element are coindexed
(coreferential). For example in the sentences below, ti indicates the trace of the moved NP
in the passive constructions.
95. a. Johni was arrested ti
b. Jamesi was flogged ti
c. Maryi was expected ti to come
The traces (ti) in (95a-c) serve as the complements of the verbs (arrested, flogged, and
expected) after the movement of John, James and Mary. Therefore, when transformation
moves any element, what replaces it is an empty element called ‘trace’, and trace will
occupy the element’s original site.
lxxxiii
This brings a new way of looking at the surface structure which is now S-
structure. There has been confusion in the terminologies: deep structure and surface
structure. Deep structure is associated with the more basic and profound while the surface
structure is associated with peripheral and the less important. Based on this, the deep and
surface structures in the previous models were renamed D-Structure and S-Structure
respectively in REST (Riemsdijk and Williams 1986). According Riemsdijk and
Williams (1986), the S-Structure is more abstract than the surface structure of the ST
since meaning can be realised at the S-Structure level. The D-Structure also differs from
the deep structure in that the former no longer solely determines meaning. Rather, the
meaning realised at the S-Structure is recoverable at the D-structure.
The S-Structure is now enriched such that it is able to preserve many of the
properties of the deep structure now known as D-Structure. In this period also, the rules
of thematic structure applied to the S-structure configurations as a way to simplify the
task of the semantic component. Hence, all meanings are now determined at the S-
Structure. In other words, all semantic interpretation is to be unified by making it
dependent upon an S-Structure that is enriched with traces (Riemsdijk and Williams
1986). The Extended Standard Theory Model of Grammar is represented in (96a) below:
lxxxiv
96 a. X-Theory of PSR Lexicon
D-Structure
Transformations
S-Structure
Phonological Rules Semantic Rules
Phonetic Representation Semantic Representation
This model starts from the lexicon and generates the D-Structure of the sentence upon
which transformation applies to derive the S-Structure. However, the S-Structure may or
may not represent the semantic interpretation, hence, the additional possible semantic
representations as formulated by Katz and Fodor (1964) in (96b) below:
lxxxv
96 b.
1 Ct(null) = SVzero
Input output Ct(normal) = SV1
(SC)
Ct(specific)> SV1
Where (i) SC is the semantic component
(ii) IM is the inherent semantic marker
(iii) IM is the constitutents of SC
(iv) COR 1 is the co-occurrence rules
2
3
(v) Ct is the context
(vi) SV is the semantic value
1
2
Any of the co-occurrence rules 3 acting on the constitutents of SC
.
.
n
IM (1,2,…N)COR
1
2
3
.
.
. n
lxxxvi
Following Katz and Fodor (1964), the Inherent Semantic Marker (IM) is the constituents
of the Semantic Component (SC). The SC aims at constructing rules that underlie the
speaker’s competence in differentiating such semantic categories as anomalies,
ambiguities, etc. In other words, the S-Structure may violate the grammatical
requirements of the language, thereby making the sentence ill-formed and of no semantic
value (SV). This semantic category is known as anomaly. The semantic representation
may also be well-formed in accordance with the co-occurrence rule (Oluikpe, 1979) or
what Katz and Fodor (1964) call projection rule of the language, thereby making the
sentence grammatical and acceptable. The surface representation may also have more
than one Semantic Value (SV). In this case the S-Structure is ambiguous. It is this type
of structure that a fluent speaker of a language has to interprete an utterance immediately
and at times before the utterance is completed (Katz and Fodor, 1964).
2.4 Justifications of the choice of REST
The reasons for our choice of REST as the model of analysis are as follows: in the
first place, in REST meaning is determined fully at the S-Structure though such meaning
is recoverable at the D-structure. Verb serialisation is a surface sentence containing a row
of two or more verbs without an overt connective morpheme (cf Ndimele, 1996).
Therefore, in the analysis of verb serialisation and consecutivisation, which are complex
predicates woven together at surface levels, REST is the only version that can
conveniently account for the syntactic and semantic interpretations of these surface
structures. Put differently, REST is adequate in accounting for the syntactic and semantic
representations of the intuitive knowledge of the speaker-hearer of a language. However,
lxxxvii
the S-Structure may be anomalous, wellformedness or ambiguous, the semantic
representations formulated by Katz and Fodor (1964), therefore supports REST to
account for all types of semantic categories in the S-Structure. In the course of the
analysis, where movement is involved, REST will also help to show vividly both the
trace of movement and the landing site of the element. Secondly, as seen in the
theoretical studies (sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2) above, researches on verb serialisation are
carried out within the following theoretical frameworks: transformational generative
grammar (Stewart, 1963; Awobuluyi, 1963; Bamgbose, 1974); generative semantics
(Stahlke, 1970); principle and parameter (Stewart, 1998) and lexical grammar (Bodomo,
1998; Bodomo, Lam and Yu, (2003). To the best of our knowledge, no research on either
verb serialisation or consecutivisation has been done within the framework of REST;
hence, this research fills in the gap.
2.5 Summary of the literature review
It is evident from the preceding review about works on verb serialisation and
consecutivisation that huge amount of data on serial verb constructions in many West
African languages has not guaranteed the same for Igbo. Unlike comprehensive studies in
Twi (Stewart 1963, Ansre 1966,) Yoruba (Awobuluyi 1967, Stahlke 1970, Bamgbose
1974), Ewe (Agbedor, 1994), Nigerian Pigin (Ndimele, 1996), Dagaare (Bodomo, 1998),
Edo (Stewart, 1998) and Degema (Kari, 2003), only a few non-comprehensive works
exist in Igbo. Apart from Uwalaka’s (1982) and Okorji and Mbagwu’s (2008) conference
papers and Ahaotu (2012) undergraduate project, scholars such as Welmers (1963),
Dechaine (1993) and Emenenjo (2010) are observations about serialisation and
lxxxviii
consecutivation, which appear in a few pages of their works. In other words, there are
mere incidental comments on these phenomena. By this token, it becomes necessary to
advance the frontiers of knowledge by carrying out a comprehensive comparative
analysis of Igbo verb serialisation and consecutivisation.
On the theoretical dimension, only Stewart (1998) and Ahaotu (2012) use
principle and parameter approach and cognitive grammar respectively to study Igbo
SVCs. A critical appraisal of the review clearly shows that no scholar has attempted to
analyse and classify Igbo serialisation and consecutivisation within the framework of
Revised Extended Standard Theory (REST) of the transformational generative grammar
and Semantic Component (SC) Rule, hence the relevance of the present study.
lxxxix
CHAPTER THREE
SEMANTIC CLASSIFICATION OF VERB SERIALISATION AND
CONSECUTIVISATION IN IGBO
This chapter re-visits verb serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo. It carries out a
semantic classification of these verb sequence constructions in the language. It is the
belief of the researcher that through the re-visitation of verb serialisation and
consecutivisation, these terms are clarified. In addition, the improved semantic
classification of verb serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo may resolve the
disagreement among scholars concerning the types of verb serialisation and
consecutivisation found in the language. It also reveals the type of serial events that are
semantically involved in Igbo verb serialisation and consecutivisation.
3.1 Re-visitation of verb serialisation and consecutivisation
Verb serialisation is one of the linguistic structures that have been described and
analysed in most West African languages. Despite the fact that there is similarity in verb
serialisation, there appear to be some differences across languages, even in languages that
belong to the same family (cf. Creissels, 2000 and Ameka 2005). However, in the
definition of verb serialisation, some scholars try to unify the formal and semantic criteria
in order to identify this type of clause in languages. As seen in the literature review,
Bodomo (1998) presents four defining features of verb serialisation in Dagaare (see
section 2.1.2) while Ndimele (1996) incorporates more properties and proposes seven
basic diagnostic features of languages with verb serialisation (see section 2.2). On the
other hand, following Uwalaka (1982), the only defining feature for consecutivisation is
xc
the number of subjects in the construction (see section 2.2). Let us examine the defining
features of these phenomena in Igbo.
3.1.1 Defining features of verb serialisation in Igbo
a. Verb serialisation in Igbo is a construction where two or more verbs occur in
series without an overt connective morpheme between the verbs but with
intervening variable between the first two verbs (V1 and V2), and V1 and V2
cannot form verb-verb (V-V) compound in the language. It is pertinent to note
that intervening variable is used in this work to mean any grammatical feature.
Examples are as follows:
97 a. Ngọzị sìrì edè rie.
Ngọzị cook-rV(PAST) cocoyam eat-OVS
‘Ngọzị cooked cocoyam and ate (it)’.
b. Àda zùrù akpụ sie sụọ loo.
Ada buy-rV(PAST) fufu cook-OVS pound-OVS swallow-OVS
‘Ada bought fufu cooked it, pounded it and ate’.
In example (97a), for instance, two verbs: sìrì ‘cooked’ and rie ‘ate’ occur in series with
the inherent verb complement (direct object) of V1, edè ‘cocoyam’ as the intervening
variable between the initial verb (V1) and the second verb (V2). In the same vein, in
example (97b), four verbs zùrù ‘bought’, sie ‘cooked’, sụọ ‘pounded’ and rie ‘ate’ are
succession of events that sequentially follow one another in the sentence with the
inherent verb complement (direct object) of V1 akpụ ‘fufu’ as the intervening variable
between V1 and V2. The strings of verbs in (97a) and (b) cannot form verb-verb (V-V)
xci
compound in the language. Some serial verb constructions consist of two events as seen
in (97a) while some consist of four multi-events as seen in (97b).
b. The verbs in series share an obligatory single syntactic subject which is expressed
before the V1, except in resultative verb serialisation where the object of the V1 is
understood to be the subject of the V2. Consider the following examples:
98 a. Ngọzị sìrì edè rie.
Ngọzị cook-rV(PAST) cocoyam eat-OVS
‘Ngọzị cooked cocoyam and ate (it)’.
b. Ngọzị mèrè Chikē zụọ ụgbọ àlà.
Ngọzị cause-rV(PAST) Chike buy-OVS vehicle land
‘Ngozi made Chike to buy a motor car’.
In example (98a), the syntactic subject Ngozi, which is expressed before V1 is the subject
of V1 siri ‘cooked’ as well as the subject of V2 rie ‘ate’; and the direct object of V1 ede
‘cocoyam’ is also the direct object of the V2, therefore, internal argument sharing, which
Baker (1989) claims is a necessary property of SVCs is present in Igbo verb serialisation.
In example (98b), the verbs in series do not share the same subject. This is because the
object of V1 Chikē is the subject of V2 zụọ ‘bought’, hence, (98b) is an example of
resultative verb serialisation. There is subject-object juxtaposition in this type of verb
serialisation, which made it impossible for V1 and V2 to have identical subject.
Argument sharing in verb serialisation will be treated in details in Chapter four.
xcii
c. The verbs in series may or may not be construed as occurring within the same
temporal frame. That is, the verbs may or may not be interpreted as having the
same tense or the same aspect. For example, V1 and V2 can be interpreted as past
tense or V1 can be interpreted as past tense while V2 is interpreted as progressive
aspect. However, some V1 appear with or without the –rV suffix that indicates
past tense while the V2 may take the serialising open vowel suffix (OVS) but the
sentence obligatorily receives a past tense interpretation. Examples are in (99a-c)
below:
99 a. Èmeka jìrì mmà bèe anū.
Emeka hold-rV(PAST) knife cut-OVS meat
‘Emeka used a knife to cut meat’.
b. Èmeka jì mmà bèe anū.
Emeka hold knife cut-OVS meat
‘Emeka used a knife to cut meat’.
c. Èmeka bèrè anū na-àta
Emeka cut-rV(PAST) meat AUX-Vpre-eat
‘Emeka is eating meat he cut’.
In example (99a), V1 appears with the -rV suffix while V2 takes the serialising open
vowel suffix (OVS) but in example (99b), the V1 appears without the -rV suffix while the
V2 takes the OVS, but the two sentences in (99a) and (b) receive past tense
interpretations in the language. In (99c), the V1 is interpreted as past tense while V2 is
interpreted as progressive aspect.
xciii
d. The negation marker –ghI (-ghi/-ghị) is attached only to the initial verb (V1) of
the sentence while the non-initial verbs appear with the open vowel suffix (OVS).
Examples are as follows:
100 a. Ò jighī nchà saa ahụ.
3SG hold-NEG soap wash-OVS body
‘He/She did not bathe with soup’.
b. *Ò jighī nchà saghīό ahụ.
3SG hold-NEG soap wash-NEG body
In example (100a), the negation marker, ‘-ghi’ is attached only to the V1 of the sentence
while the non-initial verb appears with the OVS. The negation marker on the V1 negates
only the object of V1, which is nchà ‘soap’. In sentence (100b), the negation marker is
attached to all the verbs in the sentence thereby marking the serial verb construction
ungrammatical and unacceptable in Igbo.
e. The auxiliary marker may be attached to only the initial verb (V1) in the sentence
or to both V1 and other verbs in the sentence. Consider examples (101a) and (b)
below:
101 a. Èmeka nà-èbu jī àga Kanò.
Emeka AUX-Vpre-carry yam Vpre-go Kano
‘Emeka carries yam to Kano’.
b. Èmeka nà-èbu jī na-àga Kanò.
Emeka AUX-Vpre-carry yam AUX-Vpre-go Kano
‘Emeka carries yam to Kano’.
xciv
In example (101a), the auxiliary marker, ‘nà-’ is attached to only the V1 while in (101b),
it is attached to both V1 and V2, and the two examples are acceptable in the language.
Observe that when the auxiliary marker is attached to only the V1, it retains its inherent
low tone but when it is attached to the V2, the low tone changes to high tone. Tense and
aspect marking in verb serialisation as well as negation and auxiliary markings are
discussed in details in chapter four.
3.1.2 Defining features of consecutivisation in Igbo
a. Consecutivisation in Igbo is a construction where two or more verbs occur in
series without either an overt connective morpheme between the verbs or
intervening variable between the first two verbs (V1 and V2), but V1 and V2 can
form verb-verb (V-V) compound in the language. Consider the following
examples:
102 a. Nnụnụ ahù fèrè pùọ.
bird that fly-rV(PAST) leave-OVS
‘That bird flew and left/that bird flew away’.
b. Àda jèrè bàta tie mkpū
Ada walk-rV(PAST) enter-toward shout-OVS shout
‘Ada walked in and shouted’
In example (102a), two verbs, fèrè ‘flew’ and pùọ ‘left’follow each other without any
intervening variable between the verbs. The two verbs: fè ‘fly’ and pùό ‘leave can form
the compound verb, fepùό ‘fly away’. In the consecutive construction in (102b), more
than two verbs: jè ‘walk’, bà ‘enter’ and ti ‘shout’ occur in sequence without any
xcv
intervening variable between the verbs, and V1 jè ‘walk’ and bàta ‘enter’ can be merged
to realise the compound verb jebàta ‘walk enter’. The constraints of not having
intervening variables between the verbs and the first two verbs forming V-V compound
make consecutivisation narrower in scope than serialisation. Hence, there is limit to the
number of verbs that can constitute consecutivisation. As seen in examples (102a) and
(b), the actions of verbs in consecutivisation, for instance, fere pùọ ‘flew and left’and
jere bàta ‘walked in’ are usually progressive and continous but as seen in the verb
serialisation examples in section (3.1.1) above, this feature is immaterial.
b. The verbs in series share an obligatory single syntactic subject which is
expressed before the V1, except in resultative consecutive construction
where the object of the V1 is understood to be the subject of the V2.
103 a. Òbi gàrà fùo
Obi go-rV(PAST) lose-OVS
‘Obi went and got missing’.
b. Òbi tìwàrà efere
Obi hit-break- rV(PAST) plate
‘Obi broke a plate’.
In example (103), the V1, gàrà ‘went’ and the V2, fùo ‘missed’ share the same syntactic
subject Obi, which is expressed before the V1. However, in the resultative consecutive
construction in (103b), the V1 and V2 do not share the same subject. This is because the
object of V1 efere ‘plate’ is the subject of V2 wàrà ‘broke’. There is subject-object
juxtaposition in this type of consecutivisation, which made it impossible for the V1 and
xcvi
the V2 to have identical subject. Argument sharing in consecutivisation is examined in
details in Chapter five.
c. The verbs in series may or may not be construed as occurring within the same
temporal frame. That is, they may or may not be interpreted as having the same
tense or the same aspect. For example, V1 can be interpreted as past tense while
the V2 is progressive. The V1 appears with the –rV suffix that indicates past tense
while the other verbs take the open vowel suffix (OVS) but the sentence
obligatorily receives a past tense interpretation.
104 a. Chimà rìόrìό dàa gbàjie ụkwūό
Chima crawl-rV(PAST) fall-OVS kick-break leg
‘Chima climbed, fell and broke his leg’.
b. Chiọma jèrè pùόọ na-àtamù.
Chiọma walk-rV(PAST) leave-OVS AUX-Vpre-murmur
‘Chiọma walked away and she is mumuring’.
In example (104a), there are three verbs. V1 rìrìό ‘climbed’ appears with the past tense
-rV suffix while the V2 daa ‘fell’ and V3 gbajie ‘broke’ take the open vowel suffix
(OVS) but the sentence receives past tense interpretations in the language. Therefore,
there is agreement in tense between the verbs in sentence (104a). However, in (104b), the
V1 and the V2 are interpreted as past tenses and V3 as progressive aspect. Hence, there is
no agreement in tense between the verbs in (104b).
xcvii
d. The negation marker –ghI (-ghi/-ghị) is attached to the initial verb (V1) of the
sentence while the non-initial verbs appear with the open vowel suffix (OVS).
Consider the following examples:
105 a. Nnụnụ ahù efeghī pùọ.
bird that Vpre-fly-NEG leave-OVS
‘That bird did not fly away’.
b. *Nnụnụ ahù efeghī apùghīό.
bird that Vpre-fly-NEG Vpre-leave-NEG
‘That bird neither fly nor left’
In example (105a), the negation marker ‘-ghị’ is affixed only to the V1 while the non-
initial verb appear with the OVS. The negative marker on the V1 negates only the V1,
which is the action of flying. In sentence (105b), the negation marker is attached to all
the verbs in the sentence thereby marking the consecutive construction ungrammatical
and unacceptable in Igbo.
e. The auxiliary marker may be attached to only the V1 of the sentence or to
all the verbs in the construction.
106 a. Ha nà-èje abàta
3PL AUX-walk Vpre-enter-toward
‘They are going and coming’.
b. Ha nà-èje na-abàta
3PL AUX-walk AUX-Vpre-enter-toward
‘They are going and coming’.
xcviii
In example (106a), the auxiliary marker ‘nà-’ is attached to only the V1 but in sentence
(106b) the auxiliary ‘nà-’ is affixed to the both the V1 and the V2 and both constructions
in (106a) and (b) are grammatical in the language. Observe that when the auxiliary
marker is attached to only the V1, it retains its inherent low tone (nà-), but when it is
attached to the V2, the low tone changes to high tone (na-). Tense and aspect marking,
and negation are discussed in details in chapter five.
3.2 Semantic classification of verb serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo
Verb serialisation and consecutivisation exhibit different types of semantic
notions in Igbo. These notions are derived from the nature of the verbs and the
relationships that exist between the verbs and the Noun Phrases (NPs) in the
constructions. These relationships depend on how a speaker perceives an event or
situation and the verbs the speaker chooses to express the event or situation. In what
follows, the major semantic types of verb serialisation and consecutivisation that feature
in Igbo, which include instrumental, accompaniment, directional, manner, purpose,
comparative, resultative, benefactive and simultaneous verb serialisation and
consecutivisation are examined.
3.2.1 Instrumental verb serialisation and consecutivisation
In instrumental verb serialisation, the subject NP of the initial verb (V1) brings
about some change in the physical state of the object NP of the non-initial verb (V2) with
the aid of an instrument. Examples are as follows:
xcix
107 a. Ike jì mmà bèe anū.
Ike hold knife cut-OVS meat
‘Ike used a knife to cut meat’.
b. Nnekà jì azịzà zàa ùlọ.
Nneka hold broom sweep-OVS house
‘Nneka swept the house with a broom’.
c. Chidì wèrè osisi kụọ Obi.
Chidi take-rV(PAST) stick hit-OVS Obi
‘Chidi hit Obi with a stick’
d. Dintā bùrù egbè gbaa elē.
Hunter carry-rV(PAST) gun shoot-OVS antelope
‘The hunter shot an antelope with a gun’.
In examples (107a-d), the subject NPs of the initial verbs: Ike, Nnekà, Chidì and Dintā
bring about some changes in the physical states of the object NPs of the non-initial verbs:
anụ ‘meat’, ụlò ‘house’, Obi ‘personal name’ and ele ‘antelope’ with the aid of the
instruments: mmà ‘knife’, azịzà ‘broom’, osisi ‘stick’ and egbè ‘gun’ respectively. This
type of verb serialisation is characterised by an instance where the object NP of the initial
verb is different from the object NP of the non-initial verb, which is actually the recipient
of the action of the subject NP of the initial verb. It is observed from the data for this
investigation that there is no instance of instrumental consecutive construction in Igbo.
c
3.2.2 Accompaniment/comitative verb serialisation and consecutivisation
Accompaniment notion in verb sequence constructions has two meanings: the
meanings of ‘take along with’ and the meaning of ‘go/come together with’. In the
meaning of ‘take along with’, the subject NP of the initial verb takes an object NP to
some location. This type of accompaniment is known as comitative verb sequence
construction. The study reveals that instances of this type of verb sequence exist in both
verb serialisation and consecutivisation. Consider the following examples:
108 a. Ezè wèrè egō bịa.
Eze take-rV(PAST) money come
‘Eze brought some money along’.
b. Chiọma bùrù ìgbe bịa.
Chiọma carry-rV(PAST) box come
Chioma came along with box’.
c. Chimà chìόjèrè Chinèdu akpụkpọ ụkwū .
Chima take-go-rV(PAST) Chinedu leather leg
‘Chima went along with shoes for Chinedu’.
d. Chikà bùjèrè ha ìgbe.
Chika carry-go-rV(PAST) 3PL come
Chika came along with box for them’.
Examples (108a) and (b) are instances of verb serialisation while (108c) and (d) are
examples of consecutive constructions. In (108a) and (b), the subject NPs of the initial
verbs: Ezè and Chiọma take some object NPs: egō ‘money’ and ìgbe ‘box’ to some
unspecified locations. In (108c) and (d), the subject NPs of the initial verbs: Chimà and
ci
Chikà take some objects, akpụkpọ ụkwū ‘shoes’ and ìgbe ‘box’ to some unspecified
locations but for specified people.
In comitative verb serialisation and consecutivisation, the object NP, which the
subject NP ‘takes along with’ to an unspecified location is mainly alienable possession,
that is, a possessed item that is seen as having only a temporary or non-essential
dependency (Crystal, 2008). Therefore, this possessed item is different from inalienable
possession (parts of the body). This is because the relationship between the object NP and
the possessor is a permanent one. Consider the following examples:
109 a. Ezè jì/were aka kụọ yā
Eze hold(PAST)/ take-rV(PAST) hand hit-OVS 3SG
‘Eze hit him/her with his hand’.
b. Chimà chìrì ume n’aka jee
Chima take-rV(PAST) breath PREP-hand go-OVS
‘Chima went in apprehension’.
c. Chiọma bùrù afọ imē bịa
Chiọma carry-rV(PAST) stomach inside come
‘Chioma came with pregnancy’.
The sentences in examples (109 a-c) do not have the meaning of ‘take along with’
because the object NPs: aka ‘hand’, ume ‘breath’ and afọ ime ‘pregnancy’ are inalienable
possessions. Hence, though the examples (109a-c) are serial verb constructions, they are
not instances of comitative verb serialisation or consecutivisation.
Comitative verb serialisation and consecutiviosation in Igbo slightly differ from
the second meaning of ‘go/come together with’. This could be said to be the typical
cii
accompaniment. This type of verb sequence construction expresses the meaning of
‘go/come together with’ instead of ‘take along with’. In other words, the subject NP of
the initial verb goes with its object NP to some destination or participates with the object
NP in an event. There seems to be no accompaniment consecutivisation in Igbo.
Examples of accompaniment verb serialisation are as follows:
110 a. Àdaèzè sò Ọnwụdìwe gaa Amaọjì.
Adaeze follow(PAST) Ọnwụdiwe go-OVS Amaọjì
‘Adaeze accompanied Onwudiwe to Amaọjì’.
b. O sò m taa ụkwà
3SG follow(PAST) 1SG eat-OVS breadfruit
‘He/she ate some breadfruit with me’.
c. *Nònye nà Chumà yìό/kwùό gaa Enugu
Nonye CONJ Chuma follow go-OVS Enugu
‘Nonye and Chuma went to Enugu together’
The accompaniment notion in Igbo is expressed with the positional verb sò ‘follow’, as
seen in examples (110a) and (b). In example (110a), Adaeze, the subject NP of the initial
verb goes with Ọnwụdiwe, which is the object NP of the same verb to Amaọjì while in
example (110b), O ‘he/she’ participated in eating of breadfruit with the object NP of the
same verb m ‘me’. In other words, the primary actors in examples (110a) and (b) are the
object NPs of the initial verbs. The subject NPs of the initial verbs are merely
companions. Hence, in accompaniment verb serialisation, the primary actor is specified
as seen in examples (110a) and (b).
ciii
The verb yì/kwùό is another Igbo verb that means ‘follow’, but this verb does
not allow the primary actor and its companion to be specified in syntactic constructions,
hence, the unacceptability of (110c) as either accompaniment verb serialisation in
particular or verb serialisation in general. This is because it has more than one subject.
The only verb serialisation that allows two subjects in its construction is the resultative
type of verb serialisation. The difference between the verb so ‘follow’ and yì/kwù
‘follow’ is also reflected in the structure of their syntactic configurations. The structure of
the construction with the verb so ‘follow’ as seen in (110a) and (b) is Subject NP + V1 +
Object NP + V2 + Object NP, while that of yì/kwùό “follow’ is Subject NP1 + Subject
NP2 + V1 +V2 + Object NP. The difference in structure emanates from the fact that the
nature of the verb yìό/kwù ‘follow’ does not permit it to fit into the structure of (110a)
and (b), hence the ill-formedeness of (111a-b) below:
111 a. *Àdaèzè yìό/kwùό Ọnwụdìwe gaa Amaọjì.
b. *O yìό/kwùό m taa ụkwà.
3.2.3 Directional verb serialisation and consecutivisation
Directional verb serialisation or consecutivisation includes a verb which specifies
motion that precedes an action or describes a direction in which the action occurs. The
directional verb which characterised this type of construction does not occur at the initial
position. Put differently, the non-initial verb (V2) indicates direction while the initial
verb (V1) expresses the manner of movement. The direction indicated by V2 may be
towards or away from the speaker. For example:
civ
112 a. O jì motò bịa ebe a.
3SG take(PAST) motor come (PAST) here
He/she came here with a car’.
b. O jì ụkwụ gaa Aba.
3SG take leg go(PAST) Aba
‘He/she treeked to Aba’.
c. O bùgàrà nne yā ụlò ọgwù.
3SG carry-go-rV(PAST) mother 3SG house medicine
‘He/she carried his mother to hospital’.
d. Ọ gbàjèrè ụlò akwụkwọ.
3SG run- go-rV(PAST) house book
‘He/she ran to school’.
Sentences (112a) and (b) are examples of serial verb constructions while sentences (112c)
and (d) are instances of consecutivie constructions. These examples share a common
characteristic, which is that one of the two verbs in each of the sentences is a directional
verb. The non-initial verbs (V2): bịa ‘came’ and gaa ‘went’ in (112a) and (b)
respecvtively, and gara ‘went’ and jere ‘went’ in (112c) and (d) respectively indicate
directions while the initial verbs (V1): jì ‘take’ in (112a) and (b) and bu ‘carry’ and gba
‘run’ in (112c) and (d) express the manner of movement. The V1, which is the verb of the
main event, is usually a verb of action. Directional constructions differ according to the
direction indicated. The direction indicated by the V2 in (112a) is towards the speaker
while the directions indicated by the V2 in (112b-c) are away from the speaker.
cv
It is important to note that in comitative verb serialisation and consecutivisation,
because the subject NP of the initial verb takes its object NP to an unspecified location as
discussed in section (3.2.2) above, the V2 does not indicate the direction in which the
action occurs; hence there is usually no complement of V2. However, in directional verb
serialisation and consecutivisation, the location is specified, hence the V2 has its
complement. In a nutshell, V2 in comitative verb sequence constructions plays the role of
intransitive sense of the verb while in directional verb sequence constructions, the V2
plays the role of transitive sense of the verb.
3.2.4 Manner verb serialisation and consecutivisation
In manner verb serialisation, the sentence expresses the manner in which an
action or process is carried out or perceived. The initial verb (V1) usually describes the
manner while the non-initial verb (V2) indicates the action. The following are examples:
113 a. Ọ kwù ọtọ kèlee ezè.
3SG stand(PAST) erect greet-OVS king
He/she stood and greeted the king’.
b. O sèkpù àlà kpee ekpere.
3SG kneel(PAST) ground pray-OVS prayer
‘He/she knelt down and prayed’.
c. O jì ọsọ rie nrī.
3SG hold(PAST) race eat-OVS food
‘He/she ate quickly’.
cvi
d. O jì nwayòόòό mechie ụzọ.
3SG hold(PAST) slow close-OVS door
‘He/she closed the door slowly’
All the sentences in (113a-d) are examples of verb serialisation. There seems is no
manner type of consecutive construction in Igbo. In these examples, the initial verbs with
their inherent complements describe in full the manner in which an action is carried out
while the non-initial verbs indicate the actions. For instance, in (113a), the V1 kwù ọtọ
‘stood’ describes the mode of greeting; in (113b), sèkpù àlà ‘knelt’ describes the nature
of praying because one can pray without kneeling down; in (113c), jì ọsọ ‘quickly’
describes the manner with which the food was eaten while in (113d), jì nwayọọ ‘slowly’
describes the manner with which the door was closed. According to Emenanjo (1978:
130), “the inherent semantic nature of Igbo verb is that it obligatorily co-exists with a
nominal element which always complements it”. Nwachukwu (1987) and Anyanwu
(2003) assume that inherent complements are not the same as direct objects of transitive
verbs. This is because “there is only a semantic bond between inherent complement verbs
and their inherent complements. The bond is not necessarily syntactic but semantic”
(Anyanwu, 2003:797). As a result of this semantic bond, in manner verb serialisation, the
inherent complement of V1 must be taken into consideration in determining the exact
manner; without which the semantics of the exact mode of the action may not be fully
realised. For instance in (113a), if the complement of V1 is withdrawn, Ọ kwù ____ kèlee
ezè is realised. Though this is acceptable in the language, the construction lacks the full
semantic interpretation of the manner with which the main action kèlee ‘greeted’ was
performed. This is owing to the fact that the verb, kwùό, can take other inherent
cvii
complements such as the following prepositional phrases: kwù n’azụ ‘stand behind’;
kwù n’ụzòό ‘stand on the road’, etc. This is why Langacker (1987) claims that
grammatical structure is based on conventional imagery, which arises from the mental
process connected with the given object of interaction and the communicative intention.
Such mental processes are termed conceptualisation processes or construal operations,
which human beings employ in language (Croft and Cruse, 2004). Such construal
operations involve what Langacker (1987) calls “alternate construals”, which he explains
as the ability of language users to make “adjustments by transforming one
conceptualisation into another that is roughly equivalent in terms of content but differs in
how this content is construed” (Langacker, 1987:138). As seen above, the verb kwù has
different construal operations it is used to encode.
The main distinguishing feature of manner verb serialisation is that the sentence
can be questioned by substituting one of the verbs with manner interrogative word
kèdu/òleē ‘how’. Hence, only manner verb serialisation can serve as natural answers to
manner interrogative sentences. The normal interrogative sentences that would elicit
sentences (113a-d) are (114a-d):
114 a. Kèdu kà o sì kèlee ezè?
how FOC he/she PRT greet-OVS king
‘How did he/she greet the king?’
b. Kèdu kà o sì kpee ēkpere?
how FOC he/she PRT pray-OVS prayer
‘How did he/she pray?’
cviii
c. Kèdu kà o sì rie nrī?
how FOC he/she PRT eat-OVS food
‘He/she ate quickly’.
d. Kèdu kà o sì mechie ụzọ?
how FOC he/she PRT close-OVS door
‘How did he/she close the door?’
The sentences in (113a-d) become questions by substituting the initial verb (V1) with the
manner interrogative kèdu ‘how’ yielding (114a-d) respectively. As a matter of fact, none
of the verbs in (113a-d) can be replaced with any other interrogative word apart from
kèdu/ òleē ‘how’. This is illustrated in the ungrammatical sentences below where the
interrogative word, gịnīό ‘what’ is used instead of kèdu ‘how’:
115 a. *Gịnīό kà o sì kèlee ezè?
what FOC he/she PRT greet-OVS king
b. *Gịnīό kà o sì kpee ekpere?
what FOC he/she PRT pray-OVS prayer
c. *Gịnīό kà o sì rie nrī?
what FOC he/she PRT eat-OVS food
d. *Gịnīό kà o sì mechie ụzọ?
what FOC he/she PRT close-OVS door
In the same vein, if V2 is substituted with kèdu ‘how’, though the construction
will be acceptable in the language, it is regarded as unnatural question in relation to
sentences (113a-d), perhaps, because they do not provide a natural answer. Consider the
following structures:
cix
116 a. Kèdu kà o sì kwụ ọtọ?
how FOC he/she PRT stand erect
‘How did he/she stand?’
b. Kèdu kà o sì sekpù àlà?
how FOC he/she PRT kneel ground
‘How did he/she kneel?’
c. Kèdu kà o sì ji ọsọ?
how FOC he/she PRT hold race
‘How did he/she run?’
d. Kèdu kà o sì ji nwayòόòό?
how FOC he/she PRT hold slow
‘why is he/she slow?’
From the above illustrations, it is clear that it is the V1 in these constructions that
expresses the manner. In other words, V1 expresses the manner in which an activity was
carried out while V2 describes the main event.
3.2.5 Purpose verb serialisation and consecutivisation
Purpose verb serialisation as its name implies is used to denote purpose. The non-
initial verb (V2) denotes the purpose while the initial verb (V1) indicates the action.
There are various instances of verb serialisation that fall into this group, but the study
could not find any instance of purpose kind of consecutive construction in Igbo. Consider
the following verb serialisation examples:
cx
117 a. O bìlìrì ọtọ pùόọ.
3SG stand-rV(PAST) erect leave-OVS
‘He/she stood up and left’.
b. Ọ zùόrùό nri rie.
3SG buy-rV(PAST) food eat-OVS
‘He/she bought food and ate’.
c. Òbi bịàrà ikèlè ànyị.
Obi come-rV(PAST) INF-greet 1PL
‘Obi came to greet us’.
d. Ha lòόtàrà ịgbā nkwụ.
3PL return-rV(PAST) INF-pour palm wine
‘They came for traditional wine carrying ceremony’.
In examples (117a), the V2, pùọ ‘ left’ was the purpose of his/her standing up while in
(117b), rie ‘ate’ was his/her purpose of buying food. Purpose verb serialisation also uses
infinitive form of verbs as V2 to reflect purpose as seen in examples (117c) and (d). In
(117c), ikèlè ‘to greet’ was Obi’s purpose of coming while in (117d), ịgbā (nkwụ) ‘to
pour’ (wine) was their purpose of returning. Hence, the second verbs in the above
examples signify purpose while the first verbs specify the action.
Purpose verb serialisation differs from instrument, accompaniment and manner
verb serialisations but resembles directional verb serialisation. In instrumental verb
serialisation, the subject of V1 brings about some changes in the physical state of the
object of V2 with the help of an instrument; in accompaniment type, the subject of V1
cxi
takes its object to some location and in manner verb serialisation, the V1 describes the
manner while the V2 indicates the action. However, in directional verb serialisation, the
V2 indicates direction while the V1 expresses the mode of direction. Similarly, in
purpose verb serialisation, the V2 denotes purpose while the V1 indicates the action. The
difference is that while the V2 in the former indicates direction, the V2 in the later
denotes purpose.
3.2.6 Comparative verb serialisation and consecutivisation
In comparative verb serialisation, two NPs are compared to determine which of
them has more or less of certain attributes than the other. The subject NP of the initial
verb has more or less attribute than the second NP. The second verb in this type of verb
serialisation is always a stative verb. This type of verb serialisation in Igbo is
characterised by the presence of the comparative verb karịa ‘surpass’, which is always the
V3 of the sentence. Consider the following examples:
118 a. Nwatā à nwèrè ọgụgụ isi, dìό aghùόghòό karịa mbè.
Child this have-rV count head, be deceit surpass tortoise
‘This child is wiser and more deceitful than tortoise’.
b. Àda pèrè mpe, dị òji karịa Chiọma.
Ada short short, be black surpass Chioma
‘Ada is shorter and darker in complexion than Chiọma’.
c. Oche à sàrà mbasara, dị elū karịa ǹkè ahùό.
Chair this wide wide, be high surpass which that
‘This chair is wider and higher than that one’.
cxii
d. Òbi bùrù ibù, dị ogologo karịa Ike.
Obi fat fat, be tall surpass Ike
‘Obi is fatter and taller than Ike’.
In (118a), the two NPs that are compared are nwata ‘child’ and mbè ‘tortoise’ to
determine which of them is wiser and cleverer, and the subject NP of the initial verb,
nwata has more attribute of wisdom and cleverness than mbe ‘tortoise’, which is the
second NP. In (118b), the two NPs that are compared are Ada and Chiọma to determine
which of them is shorter and darker, and the subject NP of the initial verb, Ada has more
attribute of shortness and darnkess than Chioma, which is the second NP. In (118c), the
two NPs that are compared are the same type of NP, which is oche ‘chair’, to determine
which of the two chairs is wider and higher than the other, and the subject NP of the
initial verb (the first chair) has more attribute of wideness and highness than the second
chair. In (118d), the two NPs that are compared are Obi and Ike, to determine who is
fatter and taller, and the subject NP of the initial verb, Obi has more attribute of tallness
and fatness than Ike, which is the second NP. In this type of verb serialisation, the V1 and
the V2 occur before the comparative verb karịa ‘surpass’, which is the V3 of the
sentence. This investigation could not find any example of such comparative consecutive
construction in Igbo.
Comparative verb serialisations in many serialising languages are similar to those
of non-serialising languages. The only difference is that the comparative forms in
serialising languages are verbs while non-serialising languages employ adjectives with
suffixes or affixes. For instance, in Nigerian Pidgin English and English, according to
Ndimele (1996:134), “it is interesting to note that full-fledged adjectives in Standard
cxiii
English are often grammaticalised in NPE, i.e. they undergo some kind of bleaching
process from adjectives to verbs”. For examples:
119 a. Pita im pikin tọl pas am
Peter his child tall surpass him
‘Peter’s child is taller than him’.
b. Pita fat pas everi pesin fọ im klas
Peter fatten surpass every person in him class
‘Peter is the tallest in his class’.
In (119a) and (b), the word tọl and fat are adjectives in Standard English, but in these
NPE examples, they are verbs. According to Ndimele (1996), these types of verbs which
originate from adjectives always occur before the comparative verb pas ‘surpass’.
3.2.7 Resultative verb serialisation and consecutivisation
In a resultative verb serialisation or consecutivisation, the non-initial verb denotes
the result or consequence of the action of the initial verb. In other words, the action
expressed in V1 leads to the situation or result in V2. As mentioned in the statement of
the problem in section (1.2) above, Déchaine (1993) and Stewart (1998) claim that there
is no resultative verb construction in Igbo. They claim that this semantic type can only
surface as V-V compound as in example (46), in section (2.1.2) above. By implication,
these scholars claim that there is only resultative consecutivisation in the language.
However, below are some constructions where resultative verb serialisation does not
surface as V-V compounds in Igbo:
cxiv
120 a. Ngọzị mèrè Chikē zụọ ụgbọ àlà.
Ngọzị cause-rV(PAST) Chike buy-OVS vehicle ground
‘Ngozi made Chike bought a motor car’.
b. Àda mèrè Òbi kwụọ ùόdòό
Ada cause-rV(PAST) Obi hang-OVS rope
‘Ada made Obi to committed suicide by hanging’.
c. O mèrè ànyị taa ahụhụ.
He/she cause-rV(PAST) 1PL eat-OVS suffering
‘He/she made us to suffer’.
These serial verb constructions are some examples of resultative verb serialisation in the
language that do not appear as V-V compounds. An interesting fact about this type of
verb serialisation in Igbo is that it clearly employs resultative verb me, which could mean
cause, do, make, etc, depending on the context. This resultative verb me is the V1 in all
the examples above. The action expressed by this V1 leads to situation or result in V2
such as zụọ ụgbọ àlà ‘bought a motor car’ in (120a), kwụọ ùdòό ‘committed suicide’ in
(120b) and taa ahụhụ ‘suffered’ in (120c).
On the other hand, this study finds out that according to Déchaine (1993) and
Stewart (1998), there are numerous examples of resultative constructions that appear as
V-V compounds, that is, consecutivisation. Below are examples:
121 a. Òbi tụfùrù mmà
Obi throw-lose-rV(PAST) knife
‘Obi threw away a knife/Obi lost a knife’.
cxv
b. Okocha gbàwàrà bọlùό ha
Okocha kick-break-rV(PAST) 3PL
‘Okocha broke their football’.
c. Àda tùόwàrà ìtè ànyị
Ada throw-break-rV(PAST) pot 1PL
‘Ada broke our pot’.
In each of these resultative consecutive constructions, the action expressed in V1 leads to
the result in V2. In example (121a), tụ ‘throw’, which is the action expressed in V1 leads
to fùrù ‘lost’, which is the result in V2. In (121b), gba ‘kick’, which is the action of V1,
causes the result in V2, which is wàrà ‘broke’, and in (121c) the action expressed in V1,
tụ ‘throw’ leads to wàrà ‘broke’, which is the result in V2.
In the sense of the action expressed by V1 leading to the result in V2, resultative
verb construction differs from directional purpose and manner verb serialisation. This is
because none of them can be interpreted in the same way as the resultative type. For
instance, consider the purpose verb serialisation below:
122 Ọ zùόrùό nri rie.
3SG buy-rV(PAST) food eat-OVS
‘He/she bought food and ate’.
In this example, the result of the V1, zùrù ‘bought’, is not V2, rie ‘ate’, rather it is the
purpose. The kind of semantic interpretation where the V2 denotes the result of the action
of V1 is only applicable to resultative verb serialisation or consecutivisation, and not to
all verb serialisation types as has been implied (Lord, 1974).
cxvi
3.2.8 Benefactive verb serialisation and consecutivisation
This type of verb sequence construction expresses a notion of something being
done ‘for the benefit of’ someone. The initial verb (V1) states the action, the non-initial
verb (V2) expresses the mode of presentation of the action or gift while the object NP of
the V2 is the recipient of the action or gift given by the subject NP of the construction.
Déchaine (1993) asserts that benefactive verb serialisation does not exist in Igbo. She
claims that this semantic type can only surface as V-V compound in Igbo. In other words,
she claims that it is only benefactive consecutivisation that exists in the language.
However, the present study identifies some examples of benefactive verb serialisation in
the language. Below are some examples:
123 a. Chukwumà zùόtàràό motò bunye m
Chukwuma buy-rV(PAST) motor carry-give 1SG
‘Chukwuma bought a motor car and gave me’.
b. Nne m vùόtàrà edè bunye m
mother 1SG uproot-rV(PAST) cocoyam carry-give ISG
‘My mother harvested cocoyams and gave me’.
c. Okocha kpàtàrà bọlùό kpanye Kanūό
Okocha dribble-rV(PAST) football dribble-give Kanu
‘Okocha dribbled a football and passed it to Kanu’.
The serial verb constructions in (123a-c) do not appear as V-V compounds. As a matter
of fact, the initial verbs and the non-initial verbs cannot form V-V compounds either. In
example (123a), the V1 states the action, zùtàrà ‘bought’, the V2 expresses the mode of
giving, bunye ‘carry-give’ while the object NP of V2 m ‘me’ is the recipient. In example
cxvii
(123b), the V1 vùtàrà ‘uprooted’ is the action, the V2 bunye ‘ carry-give’ is the mode
of giving the gift, while the benefactive of the cocoyam, m ‘me’, is the object NP of V2.
Hence, (123a) and (b) indicate that the speaker is the intended recipient of the ‘motor car’
and the ‘cocoyams’. In (123c), the V1 kpàtàrà ‘dribbled’ is the action, the V2 kpanye
‘dribble-give’ is the mode of passing the action to the recipient, Kanū, who is the object
NP of V2. It is observed that the verb, nye ‘give’ is usually the V2 in a benefactive verb
serialisation, and the nature or the weight of the object of V1, determines other verb roots
that may be prefixed to the V2, nye ‘give’, to convert the V2 to V-V compound such as
bunye ‘carry-give’ and kpanye ‘dribble-give’ as seen in (114a-c), but the semantic
interpretation still remains ‘give’. However, the initial verbs and the non-initial verbs in
the benefactive serial verb construtions can never form V-V compounds.
The investigation also observes that benefactive consecutivisation is
preponderance in Igbo. Below are some examples:
124 a Òbi zùόnyèrè Àda ūwe
Obi buy-give-rV(PAST) Ada dress
‘Obi bought a dress for Ada’.
b. Chikà ghènyèrè Àmàrà ògèdè
Chika fry-give- rV(PAST) Amara plaintain
‘Chika fried plantain for Amara’.
c. Ụzòό rùόnyèrè Chikē akpụkpọ ụkwūό
Uzo build-give-rV(PAST) Chike leather leg
‘Uzo made a pair of shoe for Chike’.
cxviii
In these benefactive consecutive constructions, the V1 also states the action, and the V2
that expresses the mode of presentation is also nye ‘give’, but in serial verb construction,
nye as the V2, can co-occur with other verbs depending on the nature or weight of the V1
but in consecutivisation, it does not need to co-occur with any other verb root except the
V1, which it combines with to form the benefactive construction. In example (124a), Obi
bought ùwe ‘a dress’ for the benefit of Àda, hence, the recipient or the benefactive is Àda.
In example (124b), Chika fried plantain for the benefit of Amàrà while in (124c), Ụzò
made a pair of shoes for the benefit of Chikē.
3.2.9. Simultaneous verb serialisation and consecutivisation
In simultaneous verb serialisation or consecutivisation, the verbs express the
notion that the actions depicted by the initial and non-initial verbs either takes place at
different times or at the same time. If these actions take place at different times, the
construction is serialisation but if the actions take place at different times, the
construction is consecutivisation. The actions are mainly carried out by the same subject
NP. The following examples illustrate how simultaneous constructions may be
represented in Igbo:
125 a. Àda nà-èri nri na-àrụ ọrụ
Ada AUX-Vpre-eat food AUX-Vpre-work work
‘Ada is eating and working’.
b. Àda nà-èri na-àrụ
Ada AUX-Vpre-eat AUX-Vpre-work
‘Ada is eating while working’.
cxix
126 a. Nnekà nà-abùό abùό na-àgba egwū
Nneka AUX-Vpre-sing song AUX-Vpre-dance dance
‘Nneka is singing and dancing’.
b. Nnekà nà-abùό na-àgba.
Nneka AUX-Vpre-sing AUX-Vpre-dance
‘Nneka is singing while dancing’.
These constructions are ambiguous in that the actions portrayed by both V1 and V2 may
be interpreted as either taking place at different times or taking place at the same time.
However, because there is an intervening variable between verbs at the S-Structure in
serialisation and no intervening variable in consecutivisation, the study considers (125a)
and (126a) as serial verb constructions while (125b) and (126b) are consecutive
constructions. This is why the (a) examples indicate that the actions take place at
different times; hence, the interpretations as ‘read eating and working’ and ‘singing and
dancing’ while the (b) examples indicate that the actions take place at the same time,
hence the interpretations as ‘eating while working’ and ‘singing while dancing’. In
(125a), the investigation assumes that the subject NP, Ada, is working after eating, while
in (125b), she is eating and working at the same time. In (125a), the subject NP, Nnekà,
the study assumes is dancing after singing while in (126b), the actions of the verbs run
concurrently, that is, Nnekà is singing and dancing at the same time.
cxx
3.3 Verb sequence in verb serialisation and consecutivisation
The sequence in which verbs occur in verb serialisation or consecutivisation is a
reflection of what the speakers of the language consider as an inseparable coherent unit
(Durie, 1997). In other words, verb sequence constructions occur in a natural order of
events in the language. Let us illustrate this statement with instrumental, purpose and
resultative verb serialisation.
In instrumental verb serialisation as discussed in section (3.2.1) above, the
instrument is the first object that follows V1 immediately. Consider the following
examples:
127 a. O wèrè mmà baa ji.
He/she take-rV(PAST) knife peel-OVS yam
‘He/she took a knife and peel yam’.
b. *Ọ bàrà ji wère mmà.
He/she peel-rV(PAST) yam take-rV(PAST) knife
‘He/she peeled yam and took a knife’.
Sentence (127a) is a grammatical verb serialisation. When ji ‘yam’ is to be peeled, the
sub-event, wèrè mma ‘took knife’ normally precedes the second sub-event, baa ji ‘peeled
yam’. Sentence (127b) is ungrammatical because the peeling of the yam comes before the
instrument used in peeling the yam, which is not a natural order of events in the language.
Though the example could also mean that he/she peeled yam but the instrument used is
not specified but after peeling the yam, he/she took a knife. This interpretation could
make (127b) grammatical but in the context of instrumental verb serialisation, where the
instrument must be mentioned, and must be the V1, the construction is ill-formed.
cxxi
In purpose verb serialisation as discussed in section (3.2.5), the V2 which
indicates the purpose of an action cannot come to the position of V1 because one cannot
perform an action before the reason for such action. In sentence (128), the sequence of
the verbs cannot be changed to (128a) because the intended meaning of the construction
will not be realised, hence the ungrammaticality of (128a).
128 Ọ zùόrùό nri rie.
3SG buy-rV(PAST) food eat-OVS
‘He/she bought food and ate’.
128 a. *Ọ rìrì nri zụọ
3SG eat-rV(PAST) food buy-OVS
‘He/she ate food and bought’.
In resultative verb serialisation as discussed in section (3.2.7) above, the action
expressed in V1 leads to the situation or result in V2; therefore, the sequence of verbs
cannot be changed without altering the intended meaning of the construction. Consider
examples (129) and (129a):
129 O mèrè ànyị taa ahụhụ.
He/she cause-rV(PAST) 1PL eat-OVS suffering
‘He/she made us to suffer’.
129 a. *Ànyị tàrà ahụhụ Ò mee.
1PL eat-OVS suffering He/she cause-OVS
‘We suffered he/she made’.
The sequence of verbs in sentence (129) cannot be changed to that in (129a). This is
because the action of V1 results in V2, and since V2 denotes a natural endpoint of the
cxxii
larger event or a result of the action of V1, the V2 cannot be brought to V1 position,
hence the unacceptability of (129a).
3.4 Summary
In this chapter, the defining features of verb serialisation and consecutivisation in
Igbo are re-visited with illustrative examples. The chapter further examines the semantic
classification of verb serialisation and consecutivisation in the language. It is observed
that nine types of verb serialisation exist in Igbo. They are instrumental,
accompaniment/comitative, directional, manner, purpose, comparative, resultative,
benefactive and simultaneous verb serialisation, while only five types of
consecutivisation exist in the language. They are comitative, directional, resultative,
benefactive and simultaneous consecutivisation. By implication, there seems to be no
instrumental, accompaniment, manner, purpose and comparative consecutivisation. The
examined verb sequence in these constructions shows that verb sequence constructions
occur in a natural order of events in the language.
cxxiii
CHAPTER FOUR
SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE OF VERB SERIALISATION
One of the claims made with respect to verb serialisation, which is often used in its
definition is that verbs in a serial verb construction share one surface subject, one or more
common tense and aspect polarity marker, one or more common negation marker and one or
more common auxiliary marker (Williamson, 1989; Ndimele, 1996; Bodomo, 1998; Kari,
2003; Ameka, 2005). This chapter, therefore, demonstrates how the issue of sharing is
carried out in Igbo. Hence, the syntactic structure of verb serialisation examines the
following: argument sharing in verb serialisation, tense and aspect marking in verb
serialisation, negation marking in verb serialisation and the derivation of verb serialisation in
Igbo within the Revised Extended Standard Theory (REST).
4.1 Argument sharing in verb serialisation
An important characteristic of verb serialisation is the ability of the verbs in series to
share one syntactic subject and sometimes one direct object. This section, therefore, explores
subject and object sharing in Igbo in verb serialisation.
4.1.1 Subject sharing
A very common characteristic of verb serialisation in Igbo is the subject sharing
phenomenon. Verbs in this type of construction share the same subject. The shared subject
always occurs before the first verb (V1) in the series. Bodomo (1998) refers to subject
sharing as the subject sameness constraint. He further argues that this constraint is not a
cxxiv
distinguishing factor between SVCs and other constructions. But, rather, what it does is to
distinguish SVCs from constructions such as canonical coordination and subordination
where different arguments can act as the subject. Examples of subject sharing phenomenon
in Igbo are hereby illustrated with the following examples:
130 a. Ike jì mmà bèe anū.
Ike hold knife cut-OVS meat
‘Ike used a knife to cut meat’.
b. Ike wèrè egō bịa.
Ike take-rV(PAST) money come
‘Ike brought some money along’.
c. Ike zùrù akpụ, sie, sụọ, loo.
Ike buy-rV(PAST) fufu cook-OVS pound-OVS swallow-OVS
‘Ike bought fufu, cooked it, pounded it and ate’.
d. Ike mèrè Ifeọma taa ahụhụ.
Ike cause-rV(PAST) Ifeoma eat-OVS suffering
‘Ike made Ifeoma to suffer’.
It is observed that in examples (130a-c), all the verbs in series in each of the above serial
verb constructions share an obligatory single syntactic subject Ike, which is expressed
before the V1. In example (130a), the syntactic subject Ike, which is expressed before V1
is the subject of V1, ji ‘hold’ as well as the subject of the second verb (V2) bee ‘cut’.
The same thing is applicable to the serial verb construction in example (130b) where Ike
is the subject of the V1, wèrè ‘took’ and that of the V2, bịa ‘came’ as well as in example
(130c), where Ike is the subject of all the verb in that multi-verb serialisation.
cxxv
As mentioned earlier in section (4.1) above, verbs in serial verb constructions
have the characteristic of sharing the same subject. While this is true in Igbo ( as seen
above) as in so many other serialising languages such as Ewe (Agbedor, 1994; Ameka,
2006) and Dagaare (Bodomo, 1998) in Ghana; Nigerian Pidgin English (Ndimele, 1996)
and Degema (Kari, 2003) in Nigeria, example (130d) shows that this rule does not apply
to all types of serial verb construction in Igbo. In example (130d), the object of V1,
Ifeọma is the subject of V2, taa (ahụhụ) ‘suffer’, hence, (130d) is an example of
resultative verb serialisation. In this type of verb serialisation, there is subject-object
juxtaposition or what some scholars referred to as “syntactic function switch” (Ameka,
2006), “switch-function serialisation” (Matthews, 2006) or “switch-function serial verbs”
(Francois, 2006). Hence, the underlying structure of sentence (130d) is sentences (131a)
and (b) below:
131 a. Ike mèrè Ifeọma
Ike cause-rV(PAST) Ifeọma
‘Ike caused Ifeoma’.
b. Ifeọma tàrà ahụhụ
Ifeoma chew-rV(PAST) suffering
‘Ifeoma suffered’.
Following Gruber (1995) and Mbah (1999), transformations operate on sentences (131a)
and (b) to derive sentence (130d) as the surface resultative serial verb construction. The
object of V1 (Ifeọma) of sentence (131a) and the subject of V2 (Ifeọma) in sentence
(131b) are identical as seen above. Hence, Equi-NP-Deletion applies to delete the subject
NP of sentence (131b). Furthermore, the –rV past tense suffix in sentence (131b)
cxxvi
transformed to serialising open vowel suffix (OVS), thereby changing the verb tàrà
‘chewed’ in (131b) to taa in the S-Structure as seen in (130d) above. This derivational
explanation reveals clearly that the V1 and the V2 in the resultative serial verb
construction in (130d) does not share the same subject, since the object of V1 is the
subject of V2. Ameka (2006) observes the same phenomenon in Ewe, a Ghanaian
language, Matthews (2006) notes it in Cantonese, a Chinese language while Francois
(2006) detects the same phenomenon in Mwotlap, an Austronesian language.
4.1.2 Object sharing
Another important feature of verb serialisation is object sharing. Object sharing is
described by Baker (1989) as a necessary occurrence in verb serialisation. Consider the
following examples:
132 a. Àda bùrù mmirī zoo
Ada carry-rV(PAST) water hide-OVS
‘Ada hid the water’
b. Àda sìrì ihe rie
Ada cook-rV(PAST) thing ate-OVS
‘Ada cooked food and ate’.
In sentence (132a), the object noun phrase (NP) mmirī ‘water’ is the direct object of both
the initial verb (V1) bùrù ‘carry’ and the second verb (V2) zoo ‘hide’, hence, the object
NP mmirī ‘water’ is shared by bùrù ‘carry’ and zoo ‘hide’. In other words, according to
Gruber (1995), the V1 bùrù ‘carried’ assigns its internal theta-role to mmirī ‘water’ as
does zoo ‘hide’, meaning Ada ‘carried water and hid’ that is, ‘Ada hid the water’.
cxxvii
Similarly, in sentence (132b), the V1 sìrì ‘cooked’ assigns its internal theta-role to ihe
‘thing’ as does rie ‘ate’, meaning ‘Ada cooked food and ate’. According to Baker (1989),
given the syntactic configuration in sentences (132a) and (b) above, the object NPs are
under verb phrases (VP) projected by both verbs in each of the construction. The
projection principle (Chomsky, 1986) demands that each object NP receives a theta-role
from both V1 and V2. Therefore, the serial verb constructions in (132a) and (b) manifest
object sharing. It is pertinent to note that the verbs in series in both sentences (132a) and
(b) have transitive uses at the D-Structures of these constructions. By implication, verbs
in these constructions comply with transitivity feature, which Baker (1989) opines is the
factor that determines object sharing. D-Structures of the S-Structures in examples (132a)
and (b) are examples (133a) and (b), and (134a) and (b) respectively:
133 a. Àda bùrù mmirī
Ada carry-rV(PAST) water
‘Ada carried the water’.
b. Àda zòrò mmirī
Ada hide-rV(PAST) water
‘Ada hid the water’.
134 a. Àda sìrì ihe
Ada cook-rV(PAST) thing
‘Ada cooked thing’.
b. Àda rìrì ihe
Ada eat-rV(PAST) thing
‘Ada ate thing’.
cxxviii
The D-Structures in examples (133a) and (b) confirm that mmirī ‘water’ is the direct
object of both V1 and V2 in the verb serialisation in (132a). The D-Structures in
examples (134a) and (b) confirm that ihe ‘thing’ is the direct object of both V1 and V2 in
the verb serialisation in (132b). Therefore, internal argument sharing, which Baker (1989)
claims is a necessary property of SVCs is present in Igbo verb serialisation. However, it
is also possible in Igbo to have verb serialisation in which verbs in series do not share
object. Examples are as follows:
136. Àda bùrù ochē laa
Ada carry-rV(PAST) chair go
‘Ada carried the chair away’.
The object NP, ochē ‘chair’ in sentence (136) is not shared by the V1, bùrù ‘carried’ and
the V2, laa ‘went’. In other words, the V1, bùrù ‘carried’ assigns its internal theta-role to
oche ‘chair’ but the V2, laa ‘went’ does not because oche ‘chair’ is not the direct object
of the V2. It is observed that in Igbo, object is shared between the initial and non-initial
verbs in serial verb constructions only when the direct object of V1 is also the direct
object of the non-initial verbs at the D-structure. The underlying structures of the surface
sentence in example (136) above are (137a) and (b) below:
137 a. Àda bùrù ochē
Ada carry-rV(PAST) chair
‘Ada carried the chair’.
b. Àda làrà
Ada go-rV(PAST)
‘Ada went’.
cxxix
Here, at the underlying structures, the direct object of V1 is not the direct object of V2.
From these D-structures, that is, examples (137a) and (b), it is observed that the object
NP of the serial verb construction in example (136), which is ochē ‘chair’, is more related
to V1 than V2; and the verb that follows the object NP, which is làrà ‘went’ is
intransitive and therefore cannot be associated with any object. In other words, V1 does
not occur in any case relationship with any object. Hence, V1 and V2 do not share the
object, ochē ‘chair’.
Consider also the following verb serialisation in (138) below, where object is not
shared between verbs in series even when the verbs are transitive in the construction.
138. Àda bùrù ofe kwàa tòlotòlo
Ada carry-rV(PAST) soup pour turkey
‘Ada poured the soup on the turkey
In example (138), the verbs in series are transitive, but there is no object sharing, rather
every verb has its own object. The initial verb, bùrù ‘carry’ has ofe ‘soup’ as its object
while tòlotòlo ‘turkey’ is the object of the non-initial verb kwàa ‘poured’. By implication,
transitivity seems not to be the only factor that determines object sharing in Igbo. As
mentioned earlier, object is only shared between verbs in series, if the object of V1 is also
the object of V2 at the D-Structure level. From the foregoing illustrations, examples
(136) and (138) show that object sharing which Baker (1989) suggests is obligatory in
SVCs is not found in all cases in Igbo. This observation is in line with Agbedor’s (1994)
and Ndimele’s (1996) findings in Ewe and Nigerian Pidgin respectively that object
sharing is not found in all types of SVCs.
cxxx
4.2 Tense and aspect marking in verb serialisation
Verbs in serial verb construction are often said to have a single tense-aspect-polarity
(TAP) node/value (Ndimele, 1996; Bodomo, 1998; Aikhenvald, 2006; Dorvlo, 2007). The VPs
in sequence are also construed as occurring within the same temporal frame. In other words,
the verbs in series are often said to agree in tense and aspect (Williamson, 1965; Uwalaka
1982; Ndimele, 1996). This section demonstrates how tense and aspect marking is executed in
Igbo in order to find out if there is agreement in tense between the verbs in series and if the
verbs in series have the same aspect polarity marker.
4.2.1 Tense marking in verb serialisation
As mentioned in section (3.1.1) above, verbs in series in Igbo may or may not be
construed as occurring within the same temporal frame. In other words, the verbs may or may
not be interpreted as having the same tense. There are serial verb constructions in Igbo where
the tense of the second verb is different from that of the first verb. The following tenses can be
distinguished in Igbo verb serialisation: past tense and future tense. Let us examine them.
4.2.1.1 Simple past tense marker
The marker of the simple past in Igbo is the –rV past tense suffix, which may be
marked only once on the initial verb (V1) or may be marked on both the V1 and the
second verb (V2). This suffix is called the –rV past tense suffix because it reduplicates
the vowel of the preceding syllable (Green and Igwe, 1963). In some serial verb
constructions, the initial verb may appear with or without this –rV suffix that indicates
past tense, and the V2 either takes the serialising open vowel suffix (OVS) with other
cxxxi
non-initial verbs or appears with the –rV past tense suffix but the sentence obligatorily
receives a past tense interpretation. Examples are as follows:
139 a. Chimà bịàrà, kwọọ akā, rie nrī.
Chima come-rV(PAST) wash-OVS hand eat-OVS food
‘Chima came, washed his hands and ate’.
b. Chimà jìrì mmà, bère anū taa.
Chima hold-rV(PAST) knife cut-rV(PAST) meat eat-OVS
‘Chima used a knife to cut some meat and ate’.
c. Chimà jì mmà bère anū taa.
Chima hold knife cut-rV(PAST) meat eat-OVS
‘Chima used a knife to cut meat and ate’
In example (139a), the V1, bịàrà ‘came’ appears with the -rV past tense suffix while the
V2, kwọọ ‘washed’ and the V3, rie ‘ate’ take the open vowel suffix (OVS). In example
(139b), the V1, jìrì ‘held’ and V2, bère ‘cut’ appear with the –rV past tense suffix while
the V3 takes the OVS, but in (139c), the V1 jì ‘held’ appears without the –rV suffix,
while the V2 bère ‘cut’ appears with the suffix, and the V3, taa ‘ate’ takes the OVS but
the constructions in (139b) and (c) receive past tense interpretations in the language.
Hence, the serial verb constructions in (139a-c) conform to same temporal frame between
the verbs in series. Observe that the –rV past tense suffix that is attached to the initial
verbs assimilate the low tone of the preceding syllable while the non-initial verbs and the
subject NPs retain their inherent tones.
cxxxii
The investigation also reveals that there are SVCs in Igbo where the tense of the
non-initial verbs are different from that of the initial verb. Consider sentences (140a) and
(b) below:
140 a. Àda bàrà ji na-èsi
Ada peel-rV(PAST) yam AUX-Vpre-cook
‘Ada is cooking yam she peeled’.
b. Chimà jìrì mmà, bère anū na-ata.
Chima hold-rV(PAST) knife cut-rV(PAST) meat AUX-Vpre-eat
‘Chima is eating some meat he cut with a knife’.
Sentences (140a) and (b) are examples of SVCs with temporal shifts. The tense in
sentence (140a) progressed from past to present tense, whereas example (140b)
progressed from past to past, and from past to present. These asymmetry in tense as
reflected in these serial verb constructions, provide further support to Bendor-Samuel
(1968) and Bamgbose (1974) in section (2.1.1) above as well as Kari (2003) in section
(2.2) above that symmetry in tense between verbs in serial verb constructions is not found
in all cases in Igbo and Degema respectively.
4.1.1.2 Simple future tense marker
The simple future tense in Igbo is marked by the auxiliary verb gà- ‘will’, which
can either co-occur only with the initial verb (V1) or with the initial verb and the non-
initial verbs. When this auxiliary co-occurs with the V1, the V1 takes the verbal prefix E-
(e-/a-), which could be realised as ‘e-/a-’ depending on the vowel harmony. This prefix is
attached to the verb root, to realise the participle form of verb in Igbo, while the non-
cxxxiii
initial verbs may or may not occur with the open vowel suffix (OVS). Where the
auxiliary verb ‘gà-‘ co-occurs with only the V1, the constraint requires that the auxiliary
particle precedes only the V1 but has its scope spread across the entire verbs in series.
Consider examples (130a) and (b) below:
141 a. Òbi gà-èbu ọnūό rahụ
Obi FutAUX-Vpre-carry mouth sleep
‘Obi will sleep without eating any food’
b. Òbi gà-èbu ụnùό bịa
Obi FutAUX-Vpre-carry 2PL come
‘Obi will come along with you people’
c. Àda gà-àga ahịā, zụọ ùde, tee.
Ada FutAUX-Vpre-go market buy-OVS cream rub-OVS
‘Ada will go to the market to buy cream and apply (it)’
d. Òbi gà-àzụ ewū, gbuo, sie, taa
Obi FutAUX-Vpre-buy goat kill-OVS cook-OVS eat-OVS
‘Obi will buy a goat, kill it, cook and eat’
As seen in examples (141a) and (b), the auxiliary verb gà- ‘will’ co-occurs with and
precedes only the initial verbs: gà-èbu ‘will carry’ in these sentences, which are in their
participle forms, but its scope spreads across the non-initial verbs: rahụ ‘sleep’and bịa
‘come’, these non-initial verbs occur in their basic forms. Similarly, in examples (141c)
and (d), the auxiliary verb gà- ‘will’ co-occurs with and precedes only the initial verbs:
gà-àga ‘will go’ and gà-àzụ ‘will buy’ respectively. These initial verbs are also in their
participle forms, while all the non-initial verbs take the serialising OVS, but the meaning
cxxxiv
of the auxiliary (simple future tense) spreads across all these non-initial verbs in the
sentences. The simple future tense has the following tonal characteristics: the auxiliary
verb gà- ‘will’ has a low tone and the verbal prefix E- assimilates the low tone of this
preceding auxiliary. The basic forms of the initial verbs, the non-initial verbs and the
subject NPs retain their inherent tones.
The future tense marker (gà-) can also co-occur with V1 and other verbs in the
series, and the sentences will also be acceptable in the language. Examples are as follows:
142 a. Òbi gà-èbu ọnūό ga-arahụ
Obi FutAUX-Vpre-carry mouth FutAUX-Vpre-sleep.
‘Obi will sleep without eating any food.
b. Òbi gà-èbu ụnùό ga-abịa
Obi FutAUX-Vpre-carry 2PL FutAUX-Vpre-come
‘Obi will come along with you people’.
c. Àda gà-àga ahịā, gà-àzụ ùde, gà-ète.
Ada FutAUX-Vpre-go market FutAUX-Vpre-buy cream FutAUX-Vpre-rub.
‘Ada will go to the market to buy cream and apply (it)’
d. Òbi gà-àzụ ewū, gà-ègbu, gà-èsi, gà-àta
Obi FutAUX-Vpre-buy goat FutAUX-V-pre-kill FutAUX-Vpre-cook FutAUX-Vpre-eat
‘Obi will buy a goat, kill it, cook and eat’
In examples (142a-d), the auxiliary verb gà- ‘will’, which is the future tense marker, co-
occurs with both the initial and the non-initial verbs, and the sentences are acceptable in
the language. Therefore, deleting the future tense marker (gà-) in the non-initial verbs in
cxxxv
some constructions thereby allowing it to co-occur only with the initial verb is optional
and for convenience sake.
4.2.2 Aspect marking in verb serialisation
Whereas tense in Igbo specifies the temporal status of an event, aspect gives added
information as to the duration of an event. In Igbo, aspect is marked by auxiliary and affixes.
The following aspects can be distinguished in Igbo verb serialisation: progressive and
perfective aspects. Let us examine them.
4.2.2.1 Progressive aspect marker
The marker of the progressive aspect in Igbo is the auxiliary verb nà- ‘be’, which
co-occurs with the verbs. Just like in the future tense construction, the verbs in
progressive aspect construction take the verbal prefix E-(e-/a-), which could be realised
as ‘e-/a-’ depending on the vowel harmony. This prefix is attached to the verb root to
realise the participle form of verb in Igbo. The constraint regarding the progressive
aspectual marker requires the auxiliary (nà-), just like the future tense marker (gà-), to
either co-occur only with the initial verb (V1) or with all the verbs in the construction.
Examples (143a) and (b) are illustrations of possible ways of expressing progressive
aspectual events in Igbo SVCs:
143 a. Ha nà-àba ji, èsi èri.
3PL ProgAUX-peel yam Vpre-cook Vpre eat
‘They are peeling yam, cooking and eating it’.
cxxxvi
b. Ha nà-àba ji, nà-èsi nà-èri.
3PL ProgAUX-Vpre-peel yam ProgAUX-Vpre-cook ProgAUX-Vpre-eat
‘They are peeling yam, cooking and eating it’.
In examples (143a), the progressive aspect marker, ‘nà-’ is attached only to the
initial verb (V1), to realise nà-àba ‘is peeling’, while the V2 and V3 take the verbal
prefix E-(e-/a-) to produce the participle forms: èsi ‘is cooking’ and èri ‘is eating’
respectively. However, in (143b), the progressive aspect marker, ‘nà-’ is attached to all
the verbs in series and both sentences in (143a) and (b) are acceptable in the language. In
each of these examples, there is agreement in aspect. Deleting the progressive aspect
auxiliary verb nà- in the non-initial verbs in some constructions by allowing it to co-
occur only with the initial verb is optional and for convenience sake. The tonal behaviour
of the progressive aspect marker, when it occurs only with the V1 is that the low tone of
the progressive aspect auxiliary nà- spreads to the verbal prefix E- that precedes the
auxiliary and also to the verbal prefix E- in V2 and V3, which do not co-occur with this
auxiliary as seen in (143a). The basic forms of the initial verbs, the non-initial verbs and
the subject NPs retain their inherent high tones.
It is observed from the data of the study that in some serial verb constructions,
there are temporal shift from progressive aspect to future tense. Such examples are as
follows:
144 a. Ọ nà-èsi ihe ga-eje ahịa
3SG ProgAUX-Vpre-cook thing FutAUX-Vpre-go market
‘He/she is cooking and will go to the market’.
cxxxvii
b. Ọ nà-àsa akwà ga-eri nrī
3SG ProgAUX-Vpre-wash cloth FutAUX-Vpre-eat food
‘He/she is washing and will eat food’.
c. Ọ nà-àgụ akwụkwọ ga-ele ule
3SG ProgAUX-Vpre-wash cloth FutAUX-Vpre-look examination
‘He/she is reading and will write an examination’.
In these serial verb constructions, there is temporal shift from progressive aspect, as
indicated with the progressive aspect auxiliary marker (ProgAUX) nà- to future tense, as
indicated with the future tense auxiliary marker (FutAUX) gà-. This implies that in this
type of verb serialisation, there is no agreement in aspect between the verbs in series.
This observation is in line with Samuel-Bendor’s (1968) claims in Igbo and Kari (2003)
finding in Degema that agreement in tense and aspect between verbs in serial verb
constructions is not found in all cases in these languages.
4.2.2.2 Perfective aspect marker
The perfective aspect marker in Igbo is the suffix –VlA (-Vla/-Vle), which is attached
to the participle form of the verb. V is the harmonising vowel of the preceding syllable (Green
and Igwe, 1963; Emenanjo 1978), which is followed by the suffix -la. Emananjo (1978) calls
the perfective verb the LA-form of the verb because of the suffix –lA. The suffix –VlA is
attached only to the initial verb (V1) while the non-initial verbs bear a harmonising high tone
vowel called the open vowel suffix (OVS) (Emenanjo, 1978, Uwalaka, 1982, Dechaine, 1993).
Below are examples:
cxxxviii
145 a. Àda àgwọōόla àbàchà taa
Ada Vpre-mix-Vla tapioca eat-OVS
‘Ada has prepared tapioca and eat’.
b. Ha àlụōόla nwaànyị mụọ ụmù
3PL Vpre-marry-Vla woman bear-OVS children
‘They have gotten married and bear children’.
c. Ọ àsaāla efere zàa ụlò
3SG wash-Vla plate sweep-OVS house
‘He/she has washed plates and swept the house’
d. O siēla osikapa bèe azù
3SG cook-Vla rice cut-OVS fish
‘He/she has cooked rice and cut fish’.
In these sentences (145a-d), the perfective aspect suffix –VlA is attached only to the
initial verbs, hence the sentences respectively have àgwọō la ‘has prepared’, àlụō la
‘has married’, àsaāla ‘has washed’ and siēla ‘has cooked’ as the initial verbs. However,
all the second verbs appear with the open vowel suffix (OVS), hence, the sentences
respectively have taa, zàa and bèe as the non-initial verbs.
Worthy of observation is the behaviour of the subject NPs and the initial verbs in
this kind of construction. If the sentence has a noun or a plural pronoun as its subject NP,
the initial verb takes a verbal prefix (Vpre-) together with the perfective aspect suffix (–
VlA) as seen in àgwọō la ‘has prepared’ and àlụō la ‘has married’ in sentences (145a)
and (b), but if the sentence has a singular pronoun as its subject NP, the initial verb does
not take the verbal prefix (Vpre-). It appears only with the perfective aspect suffix (–VlA)
cxxxix
as seen in: saāla ‘have washed’ and siēla ‘has cooked’ in sentences (145c) and (d).
Observe also that the subject NPs, the pronouns and the initial verbs retain their inherent
tones, while the perfective aspect suffix (–VlA) always bears a high tone irrespective of
the tonal classes of the verbs with which the suffix collocates.
4.3 Negation marking in verb serialisation
The behaviour of verb serialisation under negation is one of the major diagnostic tests
often employed by scholars to demonstrate its unity as a syntactic construction (Ndimele,
1996). In Igbo, only one negative (NEG) suffix, -ghI (-ghi/-ghị) can be found in a serial verb
construction (SVC) irrespective of the number of verbs present in the construction. In some
Igbo verb serialisation, despite the presence of only one NEG suffix, all the verbs in such
constructions are notionally negative. This implies that the semantic load of one negative
particle in the verb serialisation covers all the verbs in the serial verb construction.
The NEG marker -ghI (-ghi/-ghị) is attached to the initial verb of the sentence while the
other verbs appear with the open vowel suffix (OVS). Let us demonstrate NEG marking with
the past and future tense forms of the verbs, as follows:
146 a. Ha jìrì mmà baa jī. (Past Affirmative)
3PL hold-rV(PAST) knife peel-OVS yam
‘They used a knife to peel yam’.
b. Ha ejighī mmà baa jī. (Past Negative)
3PL Vpre-hold-NEG knife peel-OVS yam
‘They did not use a knife to peel yam’.
cxl
c. *Ha ejighī mmà abāghīό jī. (Past Negative)
3PL Vpre-hold-NEG knife Vpre-peel-NEG yam.
Example (146a) is a past affirmative sentence. The introduction of the negative marker –
ghI in sentence (146b) changes the meaning from affirmative to negative sentence. The
negative marker is attached only to the initial verb (V1), and the V1 takes a verbal prefix
with the negative suffix. The non-initial verb takes the open vowel suffix (OVS). In this
construction, the NEG marker negates only the object of the V1, mmà ‘knife’, which is
the instrument used in peeling the yam. It does not negate the action of peeling the yam
because they may peel the yam with another instrument that is not knife. Observe that the
present tense suffix (-rì) of the V1 is deleted in (146b) before attaching the negative
marker in the sentence. This implies that the negative marker cannot co-occur with this
suffix. Hence, the negative marker can only be attached to the basic form of the verb in
past negative sentence. Example (146c), on the other hand, is ungrammatical in Igbo.
This is because the verbs in the construction are independently negated, that is, the
negative marker –ghI is attached to all the verbs in the sentence. The data for this
research show that the negative suffix can only be attached to the V1 in the construction.
Let us examine the following future affirmative serial verb construction:
147 a. Òbi gà-àzụ ewū, gbuo, sie, taa (Future Affirmative)
Obi AUX-Vpre-buy goat kill-OVS cook-OVS eat-OVS
‘Obi will buy a goat, kill (it), cook (it) and eat’.
b.Òbi agaghīό àzụ ewū, gbuo, sie, taa (Future
Negative)
Obi Vpre-AUX-NEG Vpre-buy goat kill-OVS cook-OVS eat-OVS
cxli
‘Obi will not buy a goat, kill (it), cook (it) and eat’.
c.*Òbi agaghīό àzụ ewū, àgaghīό ègbu, àgaghīό èsi, àgaghīό àta (Future
Negative)
Obi Vpre-AUX-NEG Vpre-buy goat Vpre-AUX-NEG Vpre-kill Vpre-AUX-cook
Vpre-eat
Example (147a) is an affirmative sentence. The introduction of the negative marker –ghI
in (147b) changes the meaning from affirmative to negative sentence. In this verb
serialisation (147b), the negative marker–ghI is attached only to the future tense auxiliary
verb (gà-), which takes a verbal prefix with the negative suffix while the non-initial verbs
appear with the open vowel suffix (OVS). In this example, the negative notion expressed
by the NEG marker in the initial verb affects the polarity value of all the verbs in series in
the sentence. In other words, the notion of negation embodied in the negative marker –
ghI is shared by all the verbs in this serial verb construction. This observation is in line
with the behaviour of NEG marker in other languages. For instance, Nigerian Pidgin
English (Ndimele, 1996), Dagaare (Bodomo, 1998) and Degema (Kari, 2003) where the
NEG marker is found only on the initial verb (V1) and despite the presence of only one
NEG marker in constructions in these languages, all the verbs in such constructions are
notionally negative. This implies that the semantic load of one negative particle covers all
the verbs in series in these languages. Example (147c), on the other hand, is
ungrammatical because the verbs in the construction are independently negated. To
negate future tense verb serialisation, the negative marker is attached to the auxiliary
cxlii
(AUX) verb marker and not to the main verb. This makes example (147c) odd because of
the introduction of the auxiliary verb to the non-initial verbs in order to negate them.
4.4 Derivation of verb serialisation
The derivation of serial verb constructions provoked a great deal of controversy on the
syntactic sources of these interesting phenomena. Some scholars are of the view that verb
serialisations are derived from two or more different underlying structures (Stewarts, 1963;
Awobuluyi, 1967; Stahlke, 1970; Williams, 1971; Bamgbose, 1974; Kari, 2003) while
Schachter (1974) claims that SVCs are derived from single underlying structure in that they
behave, to a large extent, like idiomatic expressions whose meanings do not depend only on the
composition of the words in the expressions.
Verb serialisations in Igbo are derived from two or more underlying sentences via some
transformational rules, such as Equi-NP-Deletion rule, which deletes all but the first subject NP
in the constructions. In constructions with the same object NP at the D-Structure, the second
object NP is also deleted by transformation. Consider the following example already discussed
under object sharing in section (4.1.2):
148 Àda bùrù mmirī zoo
Ada carry-rV(PAST) water hide-OVS
‘Ada hid the water’.
149 a. Àda bùrù mmirī
Ada carry-rV(PAST) water
‘Ada carried the water’.
b. Àda zòrò mmirī
cxliii
Ada hide-rV(PAST) water
‘Ada hid the water’.
The SVC in example (148) is derived from the sentences in (149a) and (b). To derive the
verb serialisation in (148), a deletion transformation (Equi-NP-Deletion) applies to delete
the subject NP, Àda in (149b), and because the construction has the same object NP
mmirī ‘water’at the D-Structure, the second object NP in sentence (149b) is also deleted.
Then, there is Equi-TNS-Deletion, which deletes the second occurrence of the –rV suffix
in (149b). Through the rule of affix hopping, the –rV suffix is attached to the V1, bù to
form bùrù ‘carried’. Then the –rV past tense suffix in (149b) is transformed to serialising
open vowel suffix (OVS), thereby changing the non-initial verb (V2), zòrò to zoo, by
replacing the -rV past tense suffix (-rò) with OVS (–o). Following these relevant
deletions in sentences (149a) and (b), the SVC realised in (148) is left with only one
subject NP, Àda and one object NP, mmirī ‘water’; and the V2 zòrò transformed to zoo,
but retains its past tense notion. These transformation operations in the sentences: Àda
bùrù mmirī, Àda zòrò mmirī in (149a) and (b) respectively from where sentence: Àda
bùrù mmirī zoo in (148) is derived can be summarised in (150) within the framework of
REST as follows:
150.
D-Structure: Àda –rV bu mmirī Àda –rV zo mmirī
T-Rules: Equi-NP-Deletion (subject): Àdai –rV bu mmirī ti –rV zo mmirī
: Equi-TNS-Deletion: Àdai –rVx bu mmirī ti tx zo mmirī
: Equi-NP-Deletion (object): Àdai –rVx bu mmirīy ti tx zo ty
: Affix hopping: Àda bu-rV mmirī zo
cxliv
: Serialising OVS: Àda bu-rV mmirī zoo
S-Structure: Àda bùrù mmirī zoo.
The traces in this summary, which coindexed with the deleted identical subject, tense
marker and object, show the extraction sites of these deleted items in the D-Structure
before the S-Structure in (148) is derived. The D-Structure and the S-Structure of this
serial verb construction can be represented in the tree diagrams in (153a) and (b)
respectively:
153 a. D-Structures: Àda –rV bu mmirī Àda –rV zo mmirī
S
S S
NP Aux VP NP Aux VP
N Tense V NP N Tense V NP
Past N N Past N
Àda -rù bù mmirī Àda -rò zò mmirī
cxlv
153 b. S-Structure: Àda bùrù mmirī zoo
S
NP VP
N V NP V
N
Terminal: Àda bùrù mmirī zoo
The analysis of Àda bùrù mmirī zoo is an instance of serial verb construction where there
is internal argument sharing, that is, where the verbs in series share the same subject and
object NPs. Below is an example of verb serialisation in which verbs in series share the
same subject but they do not share object:
154 Àda bùrù ochē laa
Ada carry-rV(PAST) chair go
‘Ada carried the chair away’
155 a Àda bùrù ochē
Ada carry-rV(PAST) chair
‘Ada carried the chair’
b. Àda làrà
cxlvi
Ada go-rV(PAST)
‘Ada went’.
The SVC in example (154) is derived from the sentences in (155a) and (b). To derive the
verb serialisation in (154), a deletion transformation (Equi-NP-Deletion) applies to delete
the subject NP, Àda in (155b). Then, there is Equi-TNS-Deletion, which deletes the
second occurrence of the –rV suffix in (155b). Through the rule of affix hopping, the –rV
suffix is attached to the V1, bù to form bùrù ‘carried’. Then the –rV past tense suffix in
(155b) is transformed to serialising open vowel suffix (OVS), thereby changing the non-
initial verb (V2), làrà to laa, by replacing the -rV past tense suffix (-rà) with OVS (–a).
Following these relevant deletions in sentences (155a) and (b), the SVC realised in (154)
is left with only one subject NP, Àda and the V2 làrà transformed to laa, but retains its
past tense notion. These transformation operations in the sentences: Àda bùrù ochē, Àda
làrà in (155a) and (b) from where the SVC: Àda bùrù ochē laa in (154) is derived can be
summarised in (156) within the framework of REST as follows:
156.
D-Structure: Àda –rV bu ochē Àda –rV la
T-Rules: Equi-NP-Deletion (subject): Àdai –rV bu ochē ti –rV la
: Equi-TNS-Deletion: Àdai –rVx bu ochē ti tx la
: Affix hopping: Àda bu-rV ochē la
: Serialising OVS: Àda bu-rV ochē laa
S-Structure: Àda bùrù ochē laa.
The D-Structures and the S-Structure of this serial verb construction can be graphically in
(157a) and (b) respectively:
cxlvii
157 a. D-Structure: Àda –rV bu ochē Àda –rV la
S
S S
NP Aux VP NP Aux VP
N Tense V NP N Tense V
Past N N Past
Àda -rù bù ochē Àda -rà là
157 b. S-Structure: Àda bùrù ochē la
S
NP VP
N V NP V
N
cxlviii
Terminal: Àda bùrù ochē laa
Based on the observations from the analysis of the SVC in (148) where the object is
shared between verbs in series, and the SVC in (154) where the object is not shared
between the sequence of verbs, this thesis proposes that object is shared between verbs in
verb serialisation only if the verbs have the same direct object at the D-Structure. The
SVCs in (148) and (154) are derived from the conjoined sentences in (158) and (159)
below:
158. Àda bùrù mmirī ma zoo (yā)
Ada carry-rV(PAST) water CONJ hide-OVS 3SG
‘Ada carried the water and hid (it)’.
159. Àda bùrù ochē ma laa
Ada carry-rV(PAST) chair CONJ go
‘Ada carried the chair away’.
The sentences in (158) and (159) contain two equivalent sentences, which the coordinator
or the conjunction (CONJ) ma ‘and’ joined together. The pronoun ya ‘it’ in (158) is
optional at the S-Structure level. When the structures transform to SVCs, the
conjunctions are deleted as seen in (148) and (154) above. This is because the only overt
connective morpheme, which Igbo SVCs occur with, is comma.
The data for this research also reveal that there are some verb serialisations that
are derived from embedded structures. These types of constructions are observed in the
cxlix
purpose verb serialisation (section, 3.2.5) that uses the infinitive form of verb as V2.
Below is illustrative example:
160. Òbi bịàrà ikèlè ànyị.
Obi come-rV(PAST) INF-greet 1PL
‘Obi came to greet us’.
The SVCs in (160) derives from the subordinate structure in (161), which has the D-
structures in examples (162a) and (b) below:
161. Òbi bịàrà màkà ikèlè ànyị.
Obi come-rV(PAST) CONJ INF-greet 1PL
‘Obi came in order to greet us’.
162 a. Òbi bịàrà (Dependent Structure)
Obi come-rV(PAST).
‘Obi came’.
b. màkà ikèlè ànyị (Independent Structure)
because INF-greet 1PL
‘in order to greet us’.
The D-structures of sentence (161) contain one dependent structure (162a) and one
independent/embedded structure (162b), which the subordinating conjunction, màkà
‘because’ joined together. When the two structures transformed to SVC, the subordinator,
màkà, is deleted because Igbo SVCs are realised without any overt subordinating word.
The discussion on the derivation of verb serialisation in Igbo shows that SVCs in the
cl
language are derived from both conjoined and embedded structures. This observation is
in line with Williams’ (1971) and Bamgbose’s (1974) findings in Freetown Krio and
Yoruba language respectively that some SVCs are derived from conjoined structures
while some are derived from embedded structures.
4.5 Summary
This chapter demonstrates how the issue of sharing is carried out in the syntactic
structures of Igbo verb serialisation. The syntactic structure examined are argument
sharing, tense and aspect marking, negation marking and the derivation of verb
serialisation within the Revised Extended Standard Theory (REST). It is observed in the
argument sharing that verbs in series share an obligatory single syntactic subject which is
expressed before the V1, except in resultative verb serialisation where there is subject-
object juxtaposition. The study also shows that object sharing is not found in all cases in
Igbo verb serialisation, and that object is shared between the initial and non-initial verbs
only when the direct object of the initial verb is also the direct object of the non-initial
verbs at the D-Structure. The study distinguishes past and future tenses as well as
progressive and perfective aspects in Igbo verb serialisation. An examination of these
features reveals that symmetry in tense and aspect between verbs in SVCs is not found in
all cases in Igbo. The study notes that the notion of negation embodied in the negative
marker –ghI that is attached only to the initial verb may or may not be shared by all the
verbs in serial verb construction in Igbo. The analysis of the derivation of verb
serialisation within the framework of REST shows that different transformational rules,
such as Equi-NP-Deletion, Equi-TNS-Deletion and affix hopping apply before an SVC
cli
can be derived and that SVCs in Igbo are derived from both conjoined and embedded
structures.
CHAPTER FIVE
SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE OF CONSECUTIVISATION
Having seen how the issue of sharing is executed in verb serialisation in chapter
four, this chapter explores how the phenomenon of sharing is carried out in the syntactic
structures of consecutivisation. The syntactic structures are argument sharing, tense and
aspect marking, negation marking and the derivation of consecutivisation within the
Revised Extended Standard Theory (REST).
5.1 Argument sharing in consecutivisation
Argument sharing in consecutivisation has to do with the ability of the verbs in
series to share one syntactic subject and sometimes one direct object. This section,
therefore, examines subject and object sharing in Igbo consecutive constructions.
5.1.1 Subject sharing
Verbs in series in Igbo consecutivisation share the same syntactic subject which is
expressed before the initial verb (V1), except in resultative consecutive construction
where the object NP of the V1 is the subject NP of the V2. Examples of subject sharing
phenomenon in Igbo consecutive constructions are as follows:
clii
163 a. Òbi gàrà fùo
Obi go-rV(PAST) lose-OVS
‘Obi went and got missing’.
b. Òbi jèrè bàta tie mkpū
Ada walk-rV(PAST) enter-toward shout-OVS shout
‘Ada walked in and shouted’
c. Òbi tìwàrà efere
Obi hit-break- rV(PAST) plate
‘Obi broke a plate’.
In example (103a) and (b), all the verbs in series share an obligatory single syntactic
subject Àda, which is expressed before the V1 in each of the sentences. In example
(103a), the syntactic subject Ada, which is expressed before V1, is the subject of the V1,
jèrè ‘went’as well as the subjects of the other two verbs: bàta ‘enter’and tie ‘shouted’.
However, in example (103c), the V1, ti ‘hit’ and the V2, wàrà ‘broke’ do not share the
same subject. This is because the object NP of V1, efere ‘plate’ is the subject of V2, wàrà
‘broke’. There is subject-object juxtaposition in this type of consecutivisation, which
made it impossible for the V1 and the V2 to have identical subject.
5.1.2 Object sharing
As discussed in section (4.1.2) above, verbs in series in verb serialisation have the
characteristic of sharing the same object but verbs in series in consecutivisation seem not
to comply with object sharing phenomenon, which Baker (1989) describes as a necessary
cliii
occurrence in a serial verb construction. This follows from the nature of verbs and the
syntactic configuration or incorporation of the underlying events and sub-events, which
occurs covertly as consecutive construction. This syntactic configuration prompted Lord
(1975) and Mbah (1994) to describe Igbo compound verbs, which is synonymous with
consecutivisation, as action-result and pied-piped actions respectively. Consider the
following example:
164 Chideràa tụfùrù egō
Chideraa throw-lose-rV(PAST) money
‘Chideraa threw away some money/Chideràa lost some money’.
In example (164), the object NP, egō ‘money’ is not shared by the V1, tụ ‘throw’ and the
V2, fù ‘lose’. In other words, the V1, tụ ‘throw’ assigns its internal theta-role to egō
‘money’ but the V2 fù ‘lose’ does not because egō ‘money is not the direct object of the
V2. It is observed that in Igbo, object is shared between the initial and non-initial verbs in
serial verb constructions only when the direct object of V1 is also the direct object of the
non-initial verbs at the D-structure. The underlying structures of the surface sentence in
example (164) above are (165a) and (b) below:
165 a. Chideràa tùόrùό egō
Chideraa throw-rV(PAST) money
‘Chideraa threw some money’.
b. Egō fùrù
money lose-rV(PAST)
‘Money got lost’.
cliv
These underlying structures of sentence (164) show that the direct object of V1 is not the
direct object of V2. From these D-Structures, it is observed that the object NP of the
consecutive construction in example (164), which is, egō ‘money’, is more related to V1
than V2; and the V2, fùrù ‘lost’ is intransitive in the construction and therefore cannot be
associated with any object. In other words, V1 does not occur in any case relationship
with any object. Hence, V1 and V2 do not share the object, egō ‘money’.
Consider another type of consecutive construction where the object is not shared
between V1 and V2.
166. Ike gafère Nenwe
Ike go- pass-rV(PAST) Nenwe
‘Ike passed across Nenwe’.
In example (166), the object NP, Nenwe is not shared by the V1, ga ‘go’ and the V2, fè
‘pass’. Unlike in example (164) where the V1 assigns its internal theta role to the object
NP, in example (166), the V2, fè ‘pass’ assigns its internal theta-role to the object NP
Nenwe because Nenwe is the direct object of the V2. The underlying structures of the
surface sentence in example (166) above are (167a) and (b) below:
167 a. Ike gàrà
Ike go-rV(PAST)
‘Ike passed’.
b. Ike fèrè Nenwe
Ike pass-rV(PAST) Nenwe
‘Ike passed Nenwe’.
clv
These underlying structures of example (166) reveal that the V1 ga ‘go’ is intransitive in
the construction, therefore, it cannot be associated with any object. Put differently, the V1
does not occur in any case relationship with any object, rather the object NP is more
related to the V2 than the V1. In other words, the object NP, Nenwe, is the direct object
of the V2, fè ‘pass’. As mentioned in the analysis of example (164) above, object is only
shared between verbs in series, if the object of V1 is also the object of V2 at the D-
Structure level. From the foregoing illustrations, it is observed that the “action-result”
(Lord, 1975) or “pied-piped actions” (Mbah, 1994) nature of consecutive constructions
prohibits them from sharing object. Examples (164) and (166) prove that object sharing
which Baker (1989) suggests is obligatory in SVCs is not found in Igbo
consecutivisation. Therefore, object sharing should not be a universal defining feature of
verb serialisation. This is because all consecutive structures are verb serialisation, though
not all verb serialisations are consecutive structures.
5.2 Tense and aspect marking in consecutivisation
This section examines how tense and aspect markings are carried out in Igbo. The
section investigates if there is agreement in tense between the verbs in series and if the verbs in
series have the same aspect polarity marker.
5.2.1 Tense marking in consecutivisation
Verbs in series in consecutivisation may or may not be construed as occurring within
the same temporal frame. Put differently, the verbs may or may not be interpreted as having the
same tense. There are consecutive constructions in Igbo where the tense of the non-initial verb
clvi
is different from that of the initial verb. The following tenses can be distinguished in Igbo
consecutivisation: past tense and future tense. Let us examine them.
5.2.1.1 Simple past tense marker
As explained in (4.2.1.1), the marker of the simple past in Igbo is the –rV past
tense suffix, which is marked only once on the initial verb (V1), unlike in verb
serialisation where it can be marked on both the V1 and the V2 in serial verb
construction. This suffix is called the –rV past tense suffix because it reduplicates the
vowel of the preceding syllable (Green and Igwe, 1963). In consecutive constructions, the
V1 obligatorily appears with the –rV suffix that indicates past tense while the other verbs
take the open vowel suffix (OVS) but the sentence receives a past tense interpretation.
Examples in (168a-c) below are cited in section (3.1.2) but their detailed illustrations are
as follows:
168 a. Uόgbọ elū anyị fèrè pùọ ugbu a.
vehicle sky 1PL fly-rV(PAST) leave-OVS now
‘ Our airplane flew and left now/our airplane flew away now’.
b. Àda jèbàtàrà kpọọ Ifeọma
Ada walk-enter-toward-rV(PAST) call-OVS Ifeoma
‘Ada walked in and called Ifeọma’.
c. Chimà rìόrìό dàa gbàjie ụkwūό
Chima crawl-rV(PAST) fall-OVS kick-break leg
clvii
‘Chima climbed, fell and broke his leg’.
In example (168a), the V1, fèrè ‘flew’ appears with the -rV past tense suffix that
indicates past tense while the V2, pùọ ‘left’ takes the open vowel suffix (OVS). In
(168b), the V1, jè ‘walk’ and the V2, bàta ‘enter’ jointly take the -rV past tense suffix
that indicates past tense while the V3, kpọọ ‘called’ takes the open vowel suffix (OVS).
In example (168c), the V1 rìόrìό ‘climbed’ appears with the -rV past tense suffix while
the V2 daa ‘fell’ and V3 gbajie ‘broke’ take the open vowel suffix (OVS). All the
sentences in (167a-c) receive past tense interpretations in the language. There is
symmetry in tense between the verbs in series in sentences (168a-c). Observe that the –rV
past tense suffix that are attached to the verbs assimilates the low tone of the preceding
syllable while the non-initial verbs retain their inherent tones.
It is also found that there are consecutive constructions in Igbo where the tense of
the non-initial verbs are different from that of the initial verb. Consider sentences (169a-
d), already cited in section (3.1.2):
169 a. Chiọma jèrè
Chiọma walk-rV(PAST)
‘Chiọma walked’.
b. Chiọma pùόrùό
Chiọma leave-rV(PAST)
‘Chiọma left’.
c. Chiọma na-àtamù.
Chiọma ProgAUX-Vpre-murmur
‘Chiọma is mumuring’.
clviii
d. Chiọma jèrè pùόọ na-àtamù.
Chiọma walk-rV(PAST) leave-OVS AUX-Vpre-murmur
‘Chiọma walked away and she is mumuring’.
Example (169d) reveals that the underlying sentences in (169a-c) from where (169d)
emerged have different tenses. In examples (169a) and (b), the verbs: jère ‘walked’,
pùόrùό ‘left’ respectively take the -rV past tense suffix that indicates past tense, hence,
examples (169a) and (b) are past, whereas in example (169c), there is temporal shift. The
third verb occurs with progressive aspect auxiliary na-, to produce na-àtamù ‘is
murmuring’, which signifies action in progress. The temporal progression in sentence
(168d) is from past tense to past tense, and from past tense to progressive aspect (past-
past-progressive). Hence, the consecutive construction does not conform to symmetry in
tense between the verbs in series. This section, therefore, provides further support to
Bendor-Samuel (1968) and Bamgbose (1974) in section (2.1.1) above; Kari (2003) in
section (2.2); as well as the earlier observation of the present study about the past tense
behaviour in verb serialisation in section (4.2.1.1) that same temporal frame between
verbs in series is not found in all cases in Igbo consecutive constructions.
5.2.1.2 Simple future tense marker
The simple future tense in Igbo as examined in section (4.2.1.2) is marked by the
auxiliary (AUX) verb gà- ‘will’, which can co-occur with the initial verb (V1) or with the
V1 and second verb (V2) or occur together with the merged V1 and V2. When the
auxiliary co-occurs with the V1, the V1 takes the verbal prefix E-(e-/a-), which could be
realised as ‘e-/a-’ depending on the vowel harmony. This prefix is attached to the verb
clix
root of the V1 to realise the participle form of verb, while the non-initial verbs retain their
basic forms unlike in verb serialisation where it may take the open vowel suffix (OVS).
Where the auxiliary verb ‘gà-‘ co-occurs with only the V1, the constraint requires that the
auxiliary particle precedes only the V1 but has its scope spread across the entire verbs in
series. Consider examples (170a-c) below:
170 a. Ọ gà-èje bàta kịtaà
3SG FutAUX-Vpre-walk enter-toward now
‘He/she will go and come in now’
b. Ọ gà-èje ga-abàta kịtaà
3SG FutAUX-Vpre-walk enter-toward now
‘He/she will go and come in now’.
c. Ọ gà-àkụwa ìtè ahùό
3SG FutAUX-Vpre-knock-break pot that
‘He/she will knock and break that pot’.
As seen in example (170a), the future tense auxiliary verb gà- ‘will’ co-occurs with and
precedes only the initial verb, gà-èje ‘will walk’ while the non-initial verb (V2) retains its
basic form bàta ‘enter’, but the semantic load of the future tense on this V1 spreads to the
V2 as well. In example (170b), the auxiliary co-occurs with and precedes both the initial
(V1) and the non-initial (V2), and both structures in (170a) and (b) are grammatical in
Igbo. Allowing the future tense marker to occur only with the V1 is by choice and for
convenience sake. Example (170c) is a different structure of consecutive construction
where the V1 and V2 are syntactically incorporated as V-V compound. In this example,
the auxiliary verb gà- ‘will’ co-occurs with and precedes the merged V1, kụ ‘knock’ and
clx
V2 wa ‘break’ to realise the S-Structure gà-àkụwa ‘will knock and break’, which at the
D-Structure is represented as gà-àkụ ‘will knock’ and gà-àwa ‘will break’. The simple
future tense consecutive construction has the following tonal characteristics: the auxiliary
verb gà- ‘will’ has a low tone and the verbal prefix E- assimilates the low tone of this
preceding auxiliary, but, when an auxiliary occurs with the V2, the inherent low tone of
the auxiliary changes to a high tone, as seen in (170b). The basic forms of the initial
verbs and the non-initial verbs retain their inherent tones, which are high tones.
5.2.2 Aspect marking in verb serialisation
Aspect in Igbo is marked by auxiliary and affixes. The following aspects can be
distinguished in Igbo consecutivisation: progressive and perfective aspects. Let us examine
them.
5.2.2.1 Progressive aspect marker
The marker of the progressive aspect as seen in section (4.2.2.1) is the auxiliary
verb nà- ‘be’, which co-occurs with the verbs. Just like the future tense marker, the
progressive marker takes the verbal prefix E-(e-/a-), which could be realised as ‘e-/a-’
depending on the vowel harmony. This prefix is attached to the verb root to realise the
participle form of the verb in Igbo. The constraint regarding the progressive aspect
marker requires the auxiliary (na-) to either co-occur with all the verbs in series or to co-
occur with only the initial verb. Examples (171a) and (b) are illustrative examples:
171 a. Ụmụakā nà-èri na-ènye nsògbu
children AUX-Vpre-eat AUX-Vpre-give trouble
clxi
‘The children are eating and disturbing’.
b. Ògbònnà nà-èje na-abàta Nsuόkka
Ogbonna AUX-Vpre-walk AUX-Vpre-enter Nsukka
‘Ogbonna is going and coming to Nsukka’.
In examples (170a) and (b), the progressive aspectual marker, ‘nà-’ co-occurs with all the
verbs in the consecutive constructions. These verbs appear in their participle forms. In
sentence (171a) for instance, the initial verb (V1) co-occurs with the auxiliary to realise
nà-èri ‘be eating’ as well as the non-initial verb (V2) to produce na-ènye ‘be giving’. The
same thing is applicable to sentences (171b), where the V1 is nà-èje ‘be walking’ and the
V2 is na-abàta ‘be entering’. The tonal characteristics of the progressive aspect
construction are similar to that of the simple future tense construction. The auxiliary verb
nà- has a low tone and the verbal prefix E- assimilates the low tone of this preceding
auxiliary, but with the non-initial verb, the auxiliary nà- changes its low tone to high tone.
The basic forms of the initial verbs and the non-initial verbs as well as the subject and
object NPs retain their inherent tones.
However, the progressive aspectual marker can also co-occur with only the initial
verbs as in sentences (171a) and (b), repeated here as (172) and (b), but the sentences are
well-formed in Igbo.
172 a. Ụmụakā nà-èri ènye nsògbu
children AUX-Vpre-eat Vpre-give trouble
‘The children are eating and disturbing’.
b. Ògbònnà nà-èje abàta Nsuόkka
Ogbonna AUX-Vpre-walk Vpre-enter Nsukka
clxii
‘Ogbonna is going and coming to Nsukka’.
Here, the progressive aspectual marker, ‘nà-’ co-occurs with only the initial verbs while
the basic forms of the non-initial verbs take only the verbal prefix E-(e-/a-), that is, they
appear without the progressive aspectual marker, but the progressive meaning spreads
across the non-initial verbs.
5.2.2.2 Perfective aspect marker
As seen in section (4.2.2.2) above, the perfective aspect marker in Igbo is the suffix -
VlA (-Vla/-Vle). This suffix is attached to the verb to form the participle form of the verb. V is
the harmonising vowel of the preceding syllable, which is followed by the suffix -lA. The
perfective verb form is called the LA-form of the verb because of the suffix –la (Emenanjo,
1978). The suffix –VlA is attached only to the initial verb (V1) while the single non-initial
verbs bears the open vowel suffix (OVS). Below are examples:
173 a. Ngọzị àgbaraala laa
Ngọzị Vpre-run-rV(PAST)-Vla go-OVS
‘ Ngọzị has ran and gone’.
b. Ha èbugaala ụmụ ha ụlọ akwụkwọ
3PL Vpre-carry-go-Vla children 3PL house book
‘They have taken their children to school’.
c. Ọ pìόwaala ụdarà a.
3SG press-break-Vla cherry this
‘He/she has pressed and broken this cherry’.
clxiii
In sentences (173a), the perfective aspect suffix –VlA is attached only to the initial verbs
while the single non-initial verb bears the open vowel suffix (OVS). Hence, (173a) has
àgbaraala ‘has ran’ as its V1 while the non-initial verb is laa but both the initial and the
non-initial verbs are translated as perfective. In example (173b), the perfective aspect
marker is attached to the merged V1 and V2, hence, the sentence has èbugaala ‘have
carried and left’ as its V1 and V2. The same thing is applicable to example (173c), hence
the sentence has pìwaala ‘has squeezed and broken’ as its V1 and V2.
The behaviour of the subject NPs and the verbs in consecutive constructions is similar
to the observation of the behaviour of subject NPs and the initial verbs in verb
serialisation in perfective aspectual constructions in section (4.2.2.2). If the construction
has a noun or a plural pronoun as its subject NP, the initial verb takes a verbal prefix
(Vpre-) with the perfective aspect suffix (–VlA) as seen in àgbaraala ‘has ran’ and
èbugaala ‘have carried and left’ in (172a) and (b); but if the sentence has a singular
pronoun as its subject NP, the verb does not take the verbal prefix, it appears in its basic
form with the perfective aspect suffix (–VlA) as seen in: pìwaala ‘has pressed and
broken’ in (173c). Observe also that the subject NP, the pronoun NPs, the initial and the
non-initial verbs retain their inherent high tones. Also, the perfective aspect suffix (–VlA)
bears a high tone.
5.3 Negation marking in consecutivisation
In Igbo consecutive construction, just like in serial verb construction, only one negative
(NEG) suffix, -ghI (-ghi/-ghị) can be found in a consecutive construction. This negative marker
is attached only to the initial verb while the non-initial verbs take the open vowel suffix (OVS).
clxiv
In Igbo consecutive constructions, despite the presence of only one NEG suffix, all the verbs in
such constructions are notionally negative. This implies that the notion of negation embodied
in the negative marker –ghI that is attached only to the initial verb may or may not be shared
by all the verbs in Igbo consecutivisation. Let us exemplify with the past and future forms of
the verb. Consider the following sentences:
174 a. Egbe ahùό fèrè pùόọ (Past
Affirmative)
kite that fly-rV (PAST) leave-OVS
‘That kite flew and left/that kite flew away’.
b. Egbe ahùό èfeghī pùόọ (Past
Negative)
kite that Vpre-fly-NEG leave-OVS
‘That kite did not fly and leave/that kite did not fly away’.
c. *Egbe ahùό èfeghī àpụghìό (Past Negative)
kite that Vpre-fly-NEG Vpre-leave-NEG
‘That kite flew and left/that kite flew away’
Example (174a) is a past affirmative sentence. The introduction of the negative marker –
ghI in (174b) changes the meaning from an affirmative to a negative sentence. In
example (174b), the negative marker is attached only to the initial verb (V1). The V1
takes a verbal prefix with the negative suffix while the non-initial verb takes the open
vowel suffix (OVS). The negative marker attached to the V1 in example (174b) negates
only the V1, which is the action of flying, but it does not negate the V2, which is the
action of leaving because the kite may leave without flying. Observe that the present
clxv
tense suffix (-rè) of the V1 in (174a) is deleted in (174b) before attaching the negative
marker in the sentence. In other words, the negative marker cannot co-occur with this
suffix. Hence, the negative marker can only be attached to the basic forms of the verbs in
past negative sentence. Example (174c) is ungrammatical in Igbo because each verb in
the construction is independently negated, that is, the negative marker –ghI is attached to
all the verbs in the sentence, but the data for this research show that the negative suffix
can only be attached to the V1 in the construction. Let us examine future affirmative
consecutive construction:
175 a. Àda gà-èje bàta echi (Future Affirmative)
Ada FutAUX-Vpre-walk enter-toward tomorrow
‘Ada will go and come back tomorrow’.
b. Àda àgaghīό èje bàta echī (Future
Negative)
Ada VPre-FutAUX-NEG Vpre-walk enter-toward tomorrow
‘Ada will not go and come back tomorrow’.
c. *Àda àgaghīό èje àgaghīό abàta echī (Future
Negative)
AdaVPre-FutAUX-NEG Vpre-walk Vpre-FutAUX-NEG Vpr-enter-towards tomorrow
Example (175a) is a future affirmative sentence. The introduction of the negative marker
–ghI in sentence (175b) changes the meaning from affirmative to negative sentence. In
example (175b), the negative marker –ghI is attached only to the future tense auxiliary
verb, gà-. In this sentence, it negates both the V1, which is the action of going as well as
the non-initial verb (V2), which is the action of returning. This is because, there is no
clxvi
way Àda will return without first of all embarking on the journey. In future negative
consecutive construction, the negative marker is attached not to the basic form of the V1,
but to the auxiliary verb (ga-) of the verb, which is the future tense marker. In this
example (175b), the negative notion expressed by the NEG marker in the initial verb
(V1) affects the polarity value of the non-initial verb (V2) in the sentence. In other words,
the notion of negation embodied in the negative marker –ghI is shared by all the verbs in
the sentence. This observation is in line with the behaviour of NEG marker in Igbo verb
serialisation and other languages. For instance, Nigerian Pidgin English (Ndimele, 1996),
Dagaare (Bodomo, 1998) and Degema (Kari, 2003) where the NEG marker found on the
V1 affects all the verbs in the construction. On the other hand, example (175c) is
ungrammatical and unacceptable in Igbo because the verbs in the construction are
independently negated. To negate future tense consecutive construction, the negative
marker is attached to the auxiliary (AUX) verb marker and not to the main verb. This
makes example (175c) anomalous because of the introduction of the auxiliary verb to the
non-initial verbs in order to negate them.
5.4 Derivation of consecutivisation
In Igbo, consecutive constructions are derived from two or more underlying sentences
through some transformational rules, such as Equi-NP-Deletion rule, which deletes all but the
first subject NP in the constructions; Equi-TNS-Deletion rule, which deletes identical tenses,
V-V convergence, which merges the compound verbs together and affix hopping rule that
allows past tense suffix to merge with the basic form of the verb. Consider the following
example already examined under object sharing in section (5.1.2):
clxvii
176 Chideràa tụfùrù egō
Chideraa throw-lose-rV(PAST) money
‘Chideraa threw away some money/Chideràa lost some money’.
Observe that the compound verb that constitutes this consecutive construction looks
lexical in forms. However, according to Mbah (1999:141), “despite the fact that
compound verbs are lexical in form, the arguments of the sentence obey all the
subcategorisational and control principles in a sentence-projection”. He adds that through
transformational processes, the compound verbs can be decomposed and lexicalised to
recover the simple sentence structure comprising the compound structure. In line with
Mbah (1999), let us analyse the derivation of the consecutive construction in (176). This
sentence as mentioned in (5.1.2) is derived from (177a) and (b) below:
177 a. Chideràa tùόrùό egō
Chideraa throw-rV(PAST) money
‘Chideraa threw some money’.
b. Egō fùrù
money lose-rV(PAST)
‘Money got lost’
Transformations operate on (177a) and (b) to derive the surface consecutive structure in
(176): Chideràa tụfùrù egō, meaning ‘Chideraa threw away some money’, that is,
‘Chideraa lost some money’. To derive the consecutive construction in (176), there are
transformation rules involved. The object NP of V1, egō ‘money’ in (177a) and the
subject NP of V2, egō ‘money’ in (177b) are identical. Therefore, the second occurrence
of egō ‘money’ is deleted via the transformational rule called Equi-NP-Deletion.
clxviii
Furthermore, the tense of (177a) and (b) are also identical, hence, the second –rV past
tense suffix is deleted through the rule of Equi-TNS-Deletion. Deletion under identity
escapes the constraint of syntactic islands. In addition, there is affix hopping that joins the
past tense suffix together with the basic forms of the verbs. These transformational
processes left the surface structure in (176) with one subject, one object, the V-V
compound and the temporal frame of the verbs. These transformation operations in the
sentences: Chideràa tùrù egō, Egō fùrù in (177a) and (b) respectively from where the
consecutive construction: Chideràa tụfùrù egō in (176) is derived can be can be
summarised in (178) within the framework of REST as follows:
178.
D-Structure: Chideràa –rV tùό egō Egō –rV fù
T-Rules: Equi-NP-Deletion (object): Chideràa –rV tùό egōi ti –rV fù
: Equi-TNS-Deletion: Chideràa –rVx tùό egōi ti tx fù
: V-V convergence: Chideràa –rV tùόfù egō
: Affix hopping: Chideràa tùfùό -rV egō
S-Structure: Chideràa tụfùrù egō.
The traces in this summary, which, coindexed with the deleted identical object and tense
marker, show the extraction sites of these deleted items in the D-Structure before the S-
Structure is derived. The D-Structure and the S-Structure of this consecutive construction
can be represented in the tree diagrams in (179a) and (b) respectively:
179 a. D-Structures: Chideràa –rV tùό egō Egō –rV fù
S
clxix
S S
NP Aux VP NP Aux VP
N Tense V NP N Tense V
Past N Past
179 b. S-Structure: Chideràa tụfùrù egō
S
NP VP
N V NP
N
Terminal: Chideràa tụfùrù egō
The analysis of Chideràa tụfùrù egō is an instance of consecutive construction where the
V1, tụ ‘throw’ assigns its internal theta-role to egō ‘money’ but the V2 fù ‘lose’ does not
because egō ‘money is not the direct object of the V2. The following example, already
examined under object sharing in (5.1.2) is an example of consecutive construction where
the V2 and not the V1, assigns its internal theta-role to the object in the construction:
180 Ike gafère Nenwe
Ike go- pass-rV(PAST) Nenwe
clxx
Ike passed across Nenwe’.
181 a. Ike gàrà
Ike go-rV(PAST)
‘Ike passed’.
b. Ike fèrè Nenwe
Ike pass-rV(PAST) Nenwe
Ike passed Nenwe’.
Transformational rules operate on sentences (181a) and (b) to produce (180): Ike gafèrè
Nenwe, translated as ‘Ike passed across Nenwe’. To derive the consecutive construction
in (180), there are transformation rules involved. The subject NP of V1, Ike in (181a) and
the subject NP of V1, Ike in (181b) are identical, therefore, the second occurrence is
deleted through Equi-NP-Deletion. In addition, the tense of (181a) and (b) are also
identical, hence, the second –rV past tense suffix is deleted through the rule of Equi-
TNS-Deletion. Deletion under identity escapes the constraint of syntactic islands. In
addition, there is V-V convergence, which merges the two verbs into a compound verb
and affix hopping that joins the past tense suffix together with the basic forms of the
verbs. These transformational processes left the surface structure in (180) with one
subject, one object, the V-V compound and the temporal frame of the verbs. These
transformation operations in the sentences: Ike gàrà, Ike fèrè Nenwe in (181a) and (b)
respectively from where the consecutive construction, Ike gafèrè Nenwe in (180) is
derived can be can be summarised in (182) within the framework of REST as follows:
182.
D-Structure: Ike –rV ga Ike –rV fè Nenwe
clxxi
T-Rules: Equi-NP-Deletion (subject): Ikei–rV ga ti –rV fè Nenwe
: Equi-TNS-Deletion: Ikei –rVx ga ti tx fè Nenwe
: V-V convergence: Ike –rV gafè Nenwe
: Affix hopping: Ike gafè-rV Nenwe
S-Structure: Ike gafèrè Nenwe.
The traces in this summary, which, coindexed with the deleted identical subject and tense
marker, show the extraction sites of these deleted items in the D-Structure before the S-
Structure is derived. The D-Structure and the S-Structure of this consecutive construction
can be represented in the tree diagrams in (183a) and (b) respectively:
183a. D-Structures: Ike –rV ga Ike –rV fè Nenwe
S
S S
NP Aux VP NP Aux VP
N Tense V N Tense V NP
Past Past N
Terminal: Ike -rà ga Ike -rè fè Nenwe
183 b. S-Structure: Ike gafèrè Nenwe
S
clxxii
NP VP
N V NP
N
Terminal: Ike gafèrè Nenwe
The analysis of Ike gafèrè Nenwe is an instance of consecutive construction where the
V2, fè ‘pass’ assigns its internal theta-role to the object Nenwe but the V1 ga ‘go’ does
not because Nenwe is not the direct object of the V1. From the observation on the
analysis of consecutive construction where the V1 assigns its internal theta role to the
object in the construction as seen in example (176) and where the V2 assigns its internal
theta role as seen in example (180), this thesis observes that there is no object sharing
between verbs in series in consecutive constructions in Igbo.
The study also observes that consecutive constructions in Igbo are derived from
conjoined sentences since the constructions contain two equivalent sentences at the D-
Structure. Take for instance example (184), previously analysed as example (176):
184 Chideràa tụfùrù egō
Chideraa throw-lose-rV(PAST) money
‘Chideraa threw away some money/Chideràa lost some money’.
This consecutive construction has been decomposed in (177a) and (b) as: Chideràa
tùrù egō and Egō fùrù respectively. Though, the structures contain two equivalent
sentences, the two structures are not joined with the conjunction (CONJ), ma at the D-
clxxiii
Structure as observed in the analysis of verb serialisation. This is why the D-Structure in
(185) is ungrammatical in Igbo.
185 *Chideràa tùόrùό egō ma egō fùo
Chideraa throw-rV(PAST) money CONJ money lose-OVS
This observation supports Mbah’s (1999) claim that adopting transformation approach in
analysing V-V compound (consecutivisation) “dispenses with the conjunction speculated
to exist at the underlying structure between the action-result or the pied-piped structures’
(Mbah, 1999:143). The data for this research also reveal that consecutive constructions in
Igbo seem not to be derived from embedded structures.
5.5 Summary
This chapter shows how the issue of sharing is carried out in the syntactic structures of
consecutive constructions in Igbo. The syntactic structures examined are argument
sharing, tense and aspect marking, negation marking and the derivation of verb
serialisation within the Revised Extended Standard Theory (REST). It is observed on the
argument sharing that the verbs in series share an obligatory single syntactic subject
which is expressed before the V1, except in resultative consecutive construction where
there is subject-object juxtaposition. The study also observes that there is no object
sharing between verbs in series in consecutivisation. The study, therefore, suggests that
object sharing should not be a universal defining feature of verb serialisation, since all
consecutuive structures are verb serialisation though not all verb serialisations are
consecutive structures. The study distinguishes past and future tenses as well as
progressive and perfective aspects in Igbo consecutivisation. An examination of these
clxxiv
features reveals that symmetry in tense and aspect between verbs in consecutive
constructions is not found in all cases in Igbo. The study observes that the notion of
negation embodied in the negative marker –ghI that is attached only to the initial verb
may or may not be shared by all the verbs in Igbo consecutive constructions. The analysis
of the derivation of consecutivisation within the framework of REST shows that different
transformational rules, such as Equi-NP-Deletion, Equi-TNS-Deletion V-V convergence
and affix hopping apply before a consecutive structure can be derived. The study finds
out that consecutive constructions in Igbo are derived from conjoined sentences, though
without the conjunction, ma at the D-structure as observed in the derivation of verb
serialisation. It is also observed that there seems to be no instances of derivation of
consecutivisation from embedded sentences.
clxxv
CHAPTER SIX
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
This chapter presents the major observations that are made in this research. The
chapter further concludes the study and recommends areas of further directions in the
investigation of verb serialisation and consecutivisation.
6.1 Summary of findings
This thesis analyses the syntactic structures of verb serialisation and
consecutivisation in Igbo. It re-visits verb serialisation and consecutivisation in the
language, and proposes the following defining features for verb serialisation in Igbo:
a. A construction where two or more verbs occur in series without an overt connective
morpheme between the verbs but with intervening variable between the first two
verbs (V1 and V2), and V1 and V2 cannot form verb-verb (V-V) compound in the
language.
clxxvi
b. The verbs in series may share an obligatory single syntactic subject, which is
expressed before the V1, except in resultative verb serialisation where the object of
the V1 is understood to be the subject of the V2.
c. The verbs in series may or may not be construed as occurring within the same
temporal frame.
d. The negation marker –ghI is attached only to the initial verb (V1) of the sentence
while the non-initial verbs appear with the open vowel suffix (OVS).
e. The auxiliary may be attached to only the V1 in the sentence or to both V1 and other
verbs in the sentence.
In contrast, the study proposes the following defining features for consecutivisation in
Igbo:
a. A construction where two or more verbs occur in series without either an overt
connective morpheme between the verbs or intervening variable between the first
two verbs (V1 and V2), but V1 and V2 can form verb-verb (V-V) compound in
the language.
b. The verbs in series share an obligatory single syntactic subject which is
subcategorised before the V1, except in resultative consecutive construction
where the object of the V1 is the subject of the V2.
c. The verbs in series may or may not be construed as occurring within the same
temporal frame.
d. The negation marker –ghI is attached only to the initial verb (V1) of the sentence
while the non-initial verbs appear with the open vowel suffix (OVS)
clxxvii
e. The auxiliary marker may be attached to only the V1 of the sentence or to all the
verbs in the construction.
The thesis identifies nine types of verb serialisation in Igbo using semantic criteria.
They are instrumental, accompaniment/comitative, directional, manner, purpose,
comparative, resultative, benefactive and simultaneous verb serialisations. These types
include resultative and benefactive verb serialisation, which Dechaine (1993) and Stewart
(1998) claim do not exist in Igbo. The study also identifies five types of consecutivisation
in the language. They are comitative, directional, resultative, benefactive and
simultaneous consecutive constructions. It is observed that these notions are derived from
the nature of the verbs and the relationship that exists between the verbs and the Noun
Phrases (NPs) in the construction. This relationship depends on how a speaker perceives
an event or situation and the verbs the speaker chooses to express the event or situation.
The analysis also reveals that the sequence in which verbs occur in verb serialisation is a
reflection of what the speakers of the language consider as an inseparable coherent unit.
In other words, verb sequence in verb serialisation occurs in a natural order of events in
the language.
The syntactic structures of verb serialisation and consecutivisation analysed are
argument sharing, tense marking, aspect marking and negation marking on these verb
sequences as well as the derivation of these verb sequences within the Revised Extended
Standard Theory (REST). In arguments sharing, the study finds out that verbs in series in
verb serialisation share an obligatory single syntactic subject, which is expressed before
the V1 and sometimes one direct object, except in resultative verb serialisation where
there is subject-object juxtaposition. On the other hand, verbs in series in
clxxviii
consecutivisation share an obligatory single syntactic subject, which is expressed before
the V1, except in resultative consecutivisation where there is subject-object juxtaposition,
but there is no object sharing in consecutive construction. This implies that the subject
and object sameness constraints are not found in all cases in both serialisation and
consecutivisation. In addition, it is observed that transitivity, which Baker (1989) claims
is the only factor that determines object sharing in verb serialisation is not found in all
cases in Igbo. The present study, therefore, proposes that transitivity seems not to be the
only factor that determines object sharing in Igbo; rather, object is shared between verbs
in series, if the direct object of V1 is also the direct object of all the other verbs in series
at the D-Structure.
The study reveals that verbs in series may or may not be construed as occurring
within the same temporal frame. This is because there are SVCs and consecutive
constructions where the tenses of the non-initial verbs are different from that of the initial
verbs. The study finds out that in verb serialisation, the simple past tense marker (–rV
past tense suffix), may be marked only once on the initial verb (V1) or may be marked on
both the V1 and the second verb (V2) but in consecutive constructions, past tense marker
is marked only on the V1. It also notes that in verb serialisation, though the initial verbs
may appear with or without the –rV suffix that indicates past tense while the non-initial
verbs may appear with either the –rV suffix or take the open vowel suffix (OVS), the
constructions receive past tense interpretation. But in consecutivisation, the initial verb
must appear with the –rV past tense suffix while the other verbs in the construction take
the OVS. In addition, there are SVCs and consecutive constructions where the tense of
the non-initial verbs are different from that of the initial verb. By implication, tense in
clxxix
serialisation and consecutivisation does not in all cases conform to symmetry in tense
between the verbs. The asymmetry in tense as reflected in some serial verb constructions
and consecutive constructions support Bendor-Samuel (1968), Bamgbose (1974) and
Kari (2003) that agreement in tense between verbs in serial verb constructions is not
found in all cases in Igbo and Degema respectively. On the tonal behaviour in this kind of
construction, the –rV past tense suffix that is attached to the initial verbs assimilate the
low tone of the preceding syllable while the non-initial verbs and the subject NPs retain
their inherent tones. The investigation shows that the simple future tense in serialisation
and consecutivisation is marked by the auxiliary (AUX) verb gà- ‘will’, which can either
co-occur only with the initial verb (V1) or with all the verbs in the construction.
Therefore, deleting the progressive aspect auxiliary verb nà- in the non-initial verbs in
some constructions by allowing it to co-occur only with the initial verb is optional and for
convenience sake. The tonal characteristics show that the auxiliary verb gà- ‘will’ has a
low tone and the verbal prefix E- assimilates the low tone of this preceding auxiliary. The
basic forms of the initial verbs and the non-initial verbs retain their inherent tones.
On the progressive and perfective aspect markings on verb serialisation and
consecutivation, it is observed just like the future tense marker (ga-) that the progressive
aspect marker nà- ‘be’, can co-occur with only the initial verb or with all the verbs in
series. The tonal behaviour of the progressive aspect marker when it occurs only with the
V1 is that the low tone of the auxiliary verb (nà-) spreads to the verbal prefix E- that
precedes the auxiliary and also to the verbal prefix E- in the non-initial verbs, which do
not co-occur with this auxiliary. The basic forms of the initial verbs and the non-initial
verbs as well as the subject and object NPs retain their inherent high tones. It is stated
clxxx
that the perfective aspect marker (–VlA) is attached only to the initial verb (V1) while the
non-initial verbs bear the open vowel suffix (OVS). Also noted is the interesting
behaviour of the subject NP and the initial verb in these constructions. If the construction
has a noun or a plural pronoun as its subject NP, the initial verb takes a verbal prefix E-
(Vpre-) with the perfective aspect suffix (–VlA), but if the sentence has a singular
pronoun as its subject NP, the initial verb does not take the verbal prefix, it appears in its
basic form with the perfective aspectual suffix. The tonal characteristic observed is that
the perfective aspect suffix (–VlA) bears a high tone, and the subject NP, the pronoun
NPs, the initial and the non-initial verbs all retain their inherent lexical tones.
The thesis finds out that in verb serialisation and consecutivisation, the negation
marker –ghI is attached only to the initial verb (V1) of the sentence while the non-initial
verbs appear with the open vowel suffix (OVS). Considering how the NEG is marked on
past and future forms of the verbs, the investigation further shows that there is
transformational operation on the verb before the attachment of the negative marker. The
past tense suffix in the verb is deleted before the NEG marker is attached because the
negative marker cannot co-occur with this suffix. It can only be attached to the basic form
of the verb in the past negative sentences. But, in future tense negative construction, the
negative marker is attached not to the basic form of the verb but to the auxiliary verb (ga-
) of the verb, which is the future tense marker. The study also observes that the negative
suffix on the initial verb (V1) may or may not affect the polarity value of other verbs in
the sentence. In other words, the notion of negation embodied in the negative (NEG)
marker in V1 may or may not be shared by all the verbs in the construction. This
observation is contrary to the behaviour of the NEG marker in some languages. For
clxxxi
instance Nigerian Pidgin English (Ndimele, 1996), Dagaare (Bodomo, 1998), Degema
(Kari, 2003) and Ewe (Ameka, 2006) where the NEG marker that is found only in the V1
makes all the verbs in such constructions notionally negative.
The analysis of verb serialisation and consecutivisation within the framework of
Revised Extended Standard Theory (REST) shows that serial verb construction and
consecutive construction are derived from two or more underlying sentences via some
transformational rules such as Equi-NP-Deletion rule, which deletes all but the first
subject NP in the constructions; Equi-TNS-Deletion, which deletes the second occurrence
of the –rV suffix; affix hopping, which merges the –rV suffix with the basic form of the
verb and transformation rule that changes –rV past tense suffix to serialising open vowel
suffix (OVS). These transformational rules leave traces, which coindexed with the
deleted identical items. These traces show the extraction sites of these deleted items at the
D-Structure before the S-Structure is derived. Furthermore, the analysis shows that serial
verb construction is derived from both conjoined and embedded structures while
consecutive construction is derived from conjoined structures, though without the
conjunction, ma at the D-Structure. There seem to be no instances of derivation of
consecutivisation from embedded structures.
From the foregoing summary of the observation made in this research, seven
differences between verb serialisation and consecutivisation drawn from the research are
as follows:
a. Verb serialisation in Igbo is a construction where two or more verbs occur in
series without an overt connective morpheme between the verbs but with
intervening variable between the first two verbs (V1 and V2) while
clxxxii
consecutivisation is a construction where two or more verbs occur in series
without either an overt connective morpheme between the verbs or intervening
variable between the first two verbs (V1 and V2).
b. In verb serialisation, the first two verbs (V1 and V2) cannot form verb-verb (V-V)
compound but in consecutive construction, the first two verbs (V1 and V2) can
form verb-verb (V-V) compound.
c. Verbs in serial verb construction exhibit the semantic notions of instrumental,
accompaniment, manner, purpose and comparative types of verb serialisation but
consecutivisation lacks these semantic notions.
d. Verbs in series may share an object NP in serialisation but there seems to be no
object sharing phenomenon in consecutivisation.
e. In verb serialisation, the initial verb (V1) may appear with or without the –rV
suffix that indicates past tense but in consecutivisation, the V1 obligatorily
appears with the –rV suffix that indicates past tense.
f. In verb serialisation, whether the actions of the verbs are progressive and
continuous is immaterial but in consecutivisation, the actions of the verbs must be
progressive and continuous.
g. Analysis within the revised extended standard theory (REST) reveals that verb
serialisation is derived from both conjoined and embedded structures while
sentences in consecutivisation are derived from conjoined structures, though
without the conjunction, ma at the D-Structure. There seem to be no instance of
derivation of consecutivisation from embedded structures.
clxxxiii
Five similarities between verb serialisation and consecutivisation drawn from the
research are as follows:
a. Verbs in series in verb serialisation and consecutivisation share an obligatory
single syntactic subject, which is expressed before the V1, except in resultative
verb serialisation and consecutivisation where there is subject-object
juxtaposition.
b. It is not obligatory that there is symmetry in tense and aspect between the verbs in
series in verb serialisation and consecutivisation.
c. The behaviour of the subject NPs and the initial verbs in perfective aspect
constructions in verb serialisation and consecutivisation is homogeneous. If the
sentence has a noun or a plural pronoun as its subject NP, the initial verb takes a
verbal prefix (Vpre-) together with the perfective aspect suffix (–VlA), but if the
sentence has a singular pronoun as its subject NP, the initial verb does not take the
verbal prefix (Vpre-). It appears only with the perfective aspect suffix.
d. In verb serialisation and consecutivisation, auxiliaries may be attached to only the
V1 of the sentence or to both V1 and the other verbs in series.
e. In verb serialisation and consecutivisation, the negation marker (ghI) is attached
to only the initial verb (V1) while the non-initial verbs appear with the OVS.
From the analysis of verb serialisation and consecutivisation, their differences and
similarities could be summarised and tabulated as follows:
clxxxiv
TABLE 1: Differences and similarities between verb serialisation and consecutivisation
in Igbo :
Features Verb Serialisation
Consecutive Construction
a. V1 and V2 have intervening variable between them Yes No
b. V1 and V2 can form V-V compound No Yes
c. Exhibit the semantic notions of instrumental,
accompaniment, manner, purpose and comparative types
Yes No
d. Same subject for the VPs in the construction, except in
resultative construction
Yes Yes
e. Display object sharing phenomenon Yes No
f. Symmetry t in tense and aspect in all cases No No
g. V1 may appear with or without past tense –rV suffix Yes No
h. V1 takes verbal prefix in perfective aspect if the subject NP
is a noun or a plural pronoun but does not if the subject NP
is a singular pronoun
Yes Yes
i. Auxiliaries attached to only the V1 or to all the verbs in the
construction
Yes Yes
j. Each verb is independently negated No No
clxxxv
k. Actions of the verbs must be progressive and continous No Yes
l. Sentences derived from conjoined and embedded structures Yes No
6.2 Conclusion
This descriptive-analytical research attempts the analysis of verb serialisation and
consecutivisation in Igbo within the revised extended standard theory (REST) and the
Semantic Component Rule. The study re-visits the terms verb serialisation and
consecutivisation in the language, and proposes five defining features each for verb
serialisation and consecutivisation. These defining features are based on intervening
variable, argument sharing, temporal frame, placement of auxiliary and negation markers.
Contrary to a few numbers of types of verb serialisation in the language identified by
previous studies, the thesis identifies nine types of verb serialisation and five types of
consecutivisation based on semantic notions. The nine types of verb serialisation include
benefactive and resultative verb serialisation which Dechaine (1993) and Stewart (1998)
claim do not exist in Igbo. It is also observed that the sequence in which verbs occur in
verb serialisation is a reflection of what the speakers of the language consider as an
inseparable coherent unit. The study also analyses the syntactic structures of verb
serialisation and consecutivisation in Igbo. It demonstrates how the issue of sharing is
carried out in Igbo verb serialisation and consecutivisation. Hence, the syntactic structure
of these verb sequences examined are argument sharing, tense marking, aspect marking,
negation marking and the derivation of verb serialisation and consecutivisation. In the
course of the analysis, it is observed that transitivity which Baker (1989) claims is the
only factor that determines object sharing is not found in all cases in both verb
serialisation and consecutivisation. The study, therefore, proposes that object is shared
clxxxvi
between verbs in series in Igbo if the direct object of V1 is also the direct object of all the
other verbs in series at the D-Structure.
The analysis of verb serialisation and consecutivisation within the revised
extended standard theory (REST) show that different transformational rules, such as
Equi-NP-Deletion, Equi-TNS-Deletion, V-V convergence and affix hopping apply before
serial a verb construction or a consecutive construction can be derived; and that verb
serialisation is derived from both conjoined and embedded structures while
consecutivisation is derived from only conjoined structures.
From the analyses of the syntactic structures, the derivation and the identified
seven differences and five similarities between verb serialisation and consecutivisation
generalisation is made deductively. The seven differences identified by the study
contradict the claim of Welmers (1973) and Uwalaka (1982) that the only difference
between verb serialisation and consecutivisation is the number of subjects involved in the
construction. Therefore, having successfully analysed verb serialisation and
consecutivisation using the Reversed Extended Standard Theory (REST), the study
concludes that Igbo is a serialising and/or consecutivising language.
6.3 Recommendation
The study recommends further studies on the following two aspects of verb
serialisation and consecutivisation, which were excluded from the presented study for an
in-depth investigation to be carried out on the topic. The first one is the verbal categories
that are involved in verb serialisation and consecutivisation, and the functions they
clxxxvii
perform such as adverbial or prepositional functions. The second one is the explanations
of what main and subordinate verbs are in verb serialisation and consecutivisation.
REFERENCES Agbedor, P. (1994). Verb serialisation in Ewe. The Nordic Journal of African Studies, 3,
21-42. www.njas.helsinki.fi/pdf-files/vol3num1/agbedor.pdf. Retrieved: June 5, 2013.
Ahaotu, N. (2012). A comparison of serial verb construction in Igbo and Yoruba: A
cognitive grammar approach. B. A. Project, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka. Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2006). Serial verb constructions in typological perspective. In A.Y.
Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (Eds.), Serial verb constructions: A cross-linguistic typology (pp. 1-68). Oxford: Oxford University Press. www.mohamedrabeea.com/books/ book1_105929.pdf. Retrieved: March 1, 2014.
Ameka, F. K. (2005). Multiverb constructions in a West African areal typological
perspective.www.edvard.hf.ntun.no/ling/tross/ameka_TROSS03P_paper.pdf. Retrieved: May 5,2013.
Ameka, F. K. (2006). Ewe serial verb constructions in their grammatical context. In A.Y.
Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (Eds.), Serial verb constructions: A cross-linguistic typology (pp. 124-143). Oxford: Oxford University Press. www.mohamedrabeea.com/books/book1_105929.pdf. Retrieved: March 1, 2014.
Ansre, G. (1966). The verbid: A caveat to serial verbs. Journal of West African
clxxxviii
Languages, 3,29-32 www.journalofafricanlanguages.org/file.pdf. Retrieved: March 1, 2014.
Anyanwu, O. N. (2003). On inherent complement verbs in Igbo. In O. M. Ndimele (Ed.),
Four decades in the study of languages and linguistics in Nigeria: A festschrift for Kay Williamson (pp.797-809). Aba: National Institute for Nigeria Languages.
Awobuluyi, O. (1967). Studies in the syntax of the standard Yoruba. Ph.D. Dissertation, Columbia University. Baker, M. C. (1989). Object sharing and projecting in serial verb constructions. Linguistic Inquiry, 20, 513-553 Bamgbose, A. (1974). On serial verbs and verbal status. Journal of West African
Languages, 4(2),17-48. Bamgbose, A. (1980). Issues in the analysis of serial verb constructions. Paper presented
at the 14th West African Languages Congress, Cotonou, Republic of Benin. Bendor-Samuel, J.T. (1968). Verb clausters in Izi. Journal of West African Languages, 5, 119-129. www.journalofafricanlanguages.org/file.pdf. Retrieved: March 1, 2014. Bododmo, A. B. (1998). Serial verbs as complex predicate in Dagaare and Akan. In I.
Maddieson & T. J. Hinnesbusch (Eds.), Language history and linguistic description in Africa: Trends (pp. 195-204). Trenton: Africa World Press.
Bododmo, A. B., Lam, S.C. & Yu, N. (2003). Double object and serial verb benefactive
constructions in Cantonese. In M. Butt & T. H. King (Eds.), Proceedings of the LFG03 conference (pp. 61-74). New York: State University of New York.
Christaller, J. G. (1875). A grammar of the Asante and Fante languages called Twi.
Basel:Evangelical Mission Society. Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. Mouton: The Hague. Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Mouton: The Hague. Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin and use. New York:
Praeger. Chuwicha, Y. (1993). Clausehood in serial verb construction in Thai. Ph.D Dissertation, Chualongkorn University, Bangkok. Cowper, E. (1992). A concise introduction to syntactic theory. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
clxxxix
Creissels, D. (2000). Typology. In B. Heine & N. Derek (Eds.), African languages: An introduction (pp. 231-258). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Croft, W. & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Crystal, D. (2008). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics (6th ed.), U.S.A: Blackwell Publishing. Dèchaine, R. M. (1992). Inflection in Igbo and Yoruba. MIT working papers in Lingusitics, 17:95-120. Dèchaine, R. M. (1993). Syntax. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter. Dixon, R. M. W. (2006). Serial verb constructions: Conspectus and coda. In
A.Y.Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (Eds.), Serial verb constructions: A cross-linguistic typology (pp. 338-350). Oxford: Oxford University Press. www.mohamedrabeea.com/books/book1_105929.pdf. Retrieved: March 1, 2014.
Dorvlo, K. (2007). Serial verb constructions in Logba. In P. Hendriks, F. Rau, K.
Souckova & J. V. D. Wal (Eds.), Leiden papers in Linguistics (pp. 1-16). www.let.leidenuniv.nl/pdf/lwpl/4.2/dorlvo.pdf. Retrieved: March 1, 2014.
Durie, M. (1997). Grammatical structure in verb serialisation. In A. Alex, J. Bresnan & P.
Sells (Eds.). Complex predicates (pp. 289-354). Stanford: CLSI. Emenanjo, E. N. (1978). Elements of modern Igbo grammar: A descriptive approach.
Ibadan University Press Limited. Emenanjo, E. N. (2010). The expression of prepositional notions in Igbo. In
C.Uchechukwu & B. M. Mbah (Eds.), The preposition in Igbo (pp. 5-13). Onitsha: Edumail Publications imited.
Francois, A. (2006). Serial verb constructions in Mwotlap. In A.Y. Aikhenvald & R.M.W
Dixon (Eds.), Serial verb constructions: A cross-linguistic typology (pp. 223-238). Oxford: Oxford University Press.www.mohamedrabeea.com/books/bookl_105929. pdf. Retrieved: March, 2014
George, I. (1975). A grammar of Kwa-type verb serialisation: Its nature and significance
in current generative theory. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Carlifonia. Green, M. M. & Igwe, G.E. (1963). A descriptive grammar of Igbo. Berlin: Akademie. Gruber, J. S. (1995). Thematic configurationality and serial verb constructions. In E. N. E menanjo & O. Ndimele (Eds.), Issues in African languages and linguistics: Essay in honour of Kay Williamson (pp.216-228). Aba: National institute for Languages.
cxc
Hyman, L.M. (1971). Consecutivisation in Fe?fe. Journal of African Languages, 10, 29-43.
Ihionu, P. (1992). Verb compounding in Igbo: An overview. MIT working papers in Linguistics, 17: 165-182. Kari, E. K. (2003). Serial verb constructions in Degma. African Study Monographs,
24(4), 271-289. Katz, J. J. & Postal, P. (1964). An intergrated theory of linguistic descriptions. Cambridge: MIT Press. Katz, J. J. & Fodor, J. J. (1964). The structure of language: Readings in the philosophy of language. Englewood, N. J: Prentice Hall Inc. Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundation of cognitive grammar. Vol I. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Lord, C. (1974). Causative constructions in Yoruba. Studies in African Linguistics, 5,
199-204.
Lord, C. (1975). Igbo verb compounds and the lexicon. Studies in African Linguistics, 6, 23-48.
Lord, C. (1993). Historical change in serial verb constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Manfredi, V. (1991). Agbo and Ehugbo: Igbo linguistic consciousness, its origins and limits. Ph.D dissertation. Harvard University. Matthews, S. (2006). On serial verb constructions in Cantonese. In A.Y. Aikhenvald &R.
M. W. Dixon (Eds.), Serial verb constructions: A cross-linguistic typology (pp. 69- 87) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mbah, B. M. (1994). Causation: Implementation for trace government and binding in
Igbo.A paper presented in PG/staff seminar series, Department of linguistics and Nigerian languages.
Mbah, B. M. (1999). Studies in syntax: Igbo phrase structure. Nsukka: Prize publishers. Newmeyer, F. J. (1980). Linguistic theory in America. London & New York: A.P.I. Ndimele, O, M. (1992). The parameter of universal grammar: A GB approach. Owerri:
Africa Educational Services. Ndimele, O, M. (1996). On the ‘Kwaness’ of Nigerian pidgin: Insight from verb
cxci
serialisation. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 52,125-136. Nwachukwu, P. A. (1975). Noun phrase sentential complementation in Igbo. Ph.D
dissertation, University of London. Nwachukwu, P. A. (1987). Argument structure of Igbo verbs. Lexicon project. Cognitive
Science Centre: MIT. Okorji, I. & Mbagwu, D.U. (2008). On serial verb construction (SVC) in Igbo. Anambra:
The Nigerian Linguists Festschrift Series, 7,385-396. Oluikpe, B. O. (1979). Igbo transformational syntax. Onitsha: Africana Educational Publishers. Radford, A. (1988). Transformational grammar: A first course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Riemsdijk, H. & Williams, E. (1986). Introduction to the theory of grammar. Cambridge:
MIT Press. Schachter, P. (1974). A non-transformational account of serial verbs. Studies in African Linguistics, 5, 253-270. Sebba, M. (1987). The syntax of serial verb constructions: An investigation into serialisation in Sranan and other languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Stahlke, H. (1970). Serial verbs. Studies in African Linguistics, 1, 60-99. www.elanguage.net/journals/sal/article/view929/814. Retrieved: March 1, 2014. Stewart, J. (1963). Some restrictions on object in Twi. Journal of African Languages, 2, 145-149. Stewart, O. T. (1998). The serial verb construction parameter. Ph.D. Dissertation, McGill University, Montreal. Thepkanjana, K. (1986). Serial verb construction in Thai. Ph.D. Dissertation, University
of Michigan. Uwalaka, M. A. (1982). Igbo consecutivisation re-examined. Journal of the Linguistic Association, 1, 63-72. Welmers, W. E. (1973). African language structure. Berkeley: University of California
Press. Westermann, D. (1930). A study of the Ewe language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
cxcii
Williams, W. (1971). Serial verb constructions in Krio. Studies in African Linguistics, 2,
47-65. Williamson, K. (1965). A grammar of the Kolokuma Dialect of Ijo. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. Williamson, K. (1979). Practical orthography in Nigeria: A guide to principle and
practice. Mimeograph. Williamson, K. (1989). The Niger-Congo overview. In J. Bendor-Samuel (Ed.), The
Niger- Congo languages (pp. 3-46). Lanham: University Press of America.
![CHAPTER 2linguistics.byu.edu/classes/Ling654dl/ch2ch18.pdf• Unaccusative verb: __ [VP V NP] • Argument is thematic • Verb can’t assign accusative case (so “object” argument](https://img.pdfslide.net/doc/110x75/5e605d1faf19190855410dc6/chapter-a-unaccusative-verb-vp-v-np-a-argument-is-thematic-a-verb-canat.jpg)
![Lesson 1 @ (S : Subject)J • (V : Verb)] (0 : (M : Modifier](https://img.pdfslide.net/doc/110x75/61bd208c61276e740b0fa194/lesson-1-s-subjectj-v-verb-0-m-modifier-.jpg)