degree construction of gradable predicates in … · 2 1.1 scope & methodolgy the study is a...

1

DEGREE CONSTRUCTION OF GRADABLE PREDICATES IN URHOBO

By

Emuobonuvie M. Ajiboye Department of Languages And Linguistics,

Delta State University, Abraka Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

Gradability describes the presence or absence of intermediate values within a category or scale.

Degree constructions exhibit some characteristics of gradability of lexical items because they

show the extent to which these lexical items possess certain properties. In Urhobo, a minority

language spoken in the Niger-Delta region of Nigeria, gradability in degree constructions can be

found in sentences showing comparisons. Verbs, adverbs and verb phrases functioning as

prepositions are gradable in the language. In Urhobo degree constructions, gradability is

directional and binary. There are no superlatives in Urhobo. Where more taxonomy is involved

in the opposition, intensifiers are used to show to what extent an entity has a particular feature.

The standard marker used across the grammatical categories examined is a low- tone. Where the

standard of comparison is not overt, a slightly high tone is used as the standard marker. The

standard marker occurs in the sentence – final position. The degree morphemes nọ and nẹ are

used in the construction depending on the number, person and/or case of the standard of

comparison; and the ATR requirement of the vowel in the stem of the standard of comparison.

The features employed in marking gradability in degree constructions in Urhobo are thus both

inherent and contextual

Keywords: Gradability, Degree construction, Gradable predicate, Grammatical feature,

Degree marker, Standard of comparison, Feature value.

1. INTRODUCTION

Urhobo, a South Western Edoid language of the Niger-Congo family, is spoken in Delta State,

Nigeria (Aziza 2008: 273). Although the Ofoni people in Bayelsa state speak Urhobo, a larger

population of Urhobo speakers is in Delta State where they represent the largest ethnic group in

the state (Ajiboye, 2010:1). Delta State is the indigenous home of the Urhobo people. The

Urhobo spoken in Delta is the focus of our study.

mailto:[email protected]

2

1.1 SCOPE & METHODOLGY

The study is a preliminary investigation into the various patterns of grading some predicates in

Urhobo. The categories of grammatical classes under focus are gradable verbs, adverbs and

prepositions in the language as found in the regular pattern of speech of the native speakers.

Data was simulated from ordinary speech acts among speakers of the language. Analyses are

based on a simple description of what occurs when native speakers make comparisons and the

grouping pattern used by Bogal-Allbritten (2008:7-8) in analysing degree construction.

1.2 DESCRIPTION OF CONCEPTS

Feature is a phenomenon used to describe certain linguistic transformations that bring about

changes in words such that the meaning and/or function are affected. Kibort (2007:8) defines it

as “A set of values and the rules of their assignment to linguistic elements.” She describes these

transformations as inflectional. Features can be morphosyntactic, morphosemantic or just

morphological. Feature values can be inherent or contextual. Inherent feature values arise from

within the element itself while contextual values are determined by some other elements.

Contextual elements are dictated by syntax. Although inherent feature may not be required by

the syntactic context it may have syntactic relevance.

Gradability is a type of opposition found in a relationship whereby between two maximal poles a

lexeme is found to have a particular feature to a certain degree. This phenomenon describes the

presence or absence of intermediate values within the categories or scales; it is the semantic

property of a lexical item which identifies different levels or degrees of possessing given

property (Weisser, 2005:1; Kennedy 2000:4). This definition presupposes that if “a property is

gradable then there are usually a few different values present on a scale, ranging from or to an

extreme point often including comparison stages” (Weisser, 2005 :1). Since these properties exist

conceptually in a single scale the properties are relative to a specified ‘standard’ and not

absolute. An entity that is tall for instance is tall in relation to a standard towards probably a

height up (wards) ( ). Short is less tall in relation to a specific height maybe down (ward) ( ).

This standard of comparison brings to fore a cut off point for the things that have the property in

question. For example:

1(a) This book is expensive

(b) The white ones are more expensive

From the above we see that the speaker is relating an object in (b) to a set of other objects which

though not overtly stated here, shows the existence of a certain SCALE. Citing Kennedy (1997),

Bogal-Allbritten (2008:7) describes this scale as “an abstract representation … of the amount to

which an object possesses some gradable property … a dense, linearly ordered set of points, or

3

‘degrees’, where the ordering is relativized to a dimension”. Where there are no gradable

properties the properties would be described in terms of absolutes which would be expressed as

± binaries. However, non-gradable properties could be relativized using adverbs or adverbial

phrases such as half baked, slightly swollen, a little pregnant.

The above analogy seems to corroborate Constantinescu’s assertion (2011 :6) that gradability is

“based on the ordering between individuals in the set defined by the gradable predicate”. In

addition, Ejele (2003:100-101) states that a lexical item is gradable if it can be compared with

another lexical item (overtly or covertly) with respect to the presence of the property and the

degree to which it has the property. She lists four ways by which lexical items can be graded.

These methods are illustrated here with the examples that follow.

a) Grading can be explicit in comparative, superlative and equative

(i)This bulb lights brighter than the first.

(ii)Ukraine presented faster athletes than Kazakhstan in the 2012 olympics.

(iii)Jane is the most popular actress in Nollywood.

(iv)Your car is not as beautiful as mine.

b) Grading can be done using verbs like ‘differ’, ‘exceed’and ‘equal’. (i)My opinion differs from yours.

(ii)A primary school teacher’s salary exceeds yours.

(iii)Her resilience equals yours.

c) The adjectives ‘same’ and ‘ different’ can be used as in (i) My book is different from yours

(ii)Our cars are of the same make.

d) Correlatives and antonymous adverbs of degree ‘more’ and ‘less’ can be used. (i)The colour on this badge is more attractive than the old one.

(ii)A careless statement from the president is likely to resolve the present conflict.

Conversely, a lexical item is ungradable if it cannot be compared with another item with respect

to the presence of the property.

The method by which the grading of lexical items is lexicalized or grammaticalized vary across

languages. In some languages comparatives and superlatives have special words. In some others

there is only one word for both. Apart from showing degree, other forms of grading grammatical

features exist as has been shown above. The focus here however is on degree constructions in

predicates that can be graded.

A predicate is defined as the part of the sentence that says something about the subject. A

predicate can be made up of one or more words, depending on the sentence pattern. The

predicate can be in any grammatical category. A predicate is said to be gradable when the

speaker is relating this object to a set of other objects. Bogal-Allbritten (2008:6-7) identifies two

ways of differentiating between gradable and non-gradable predicates:

4

Gradable predicates are order- inducing if an order can be imposed on it to determine

whether the object possesses the relevant property to a greater or less extent than another object.

This comparison can be overtly or non-explicitly stated in the sentence. Example:

(e) The book is heavier than the file jacket

(f) The book is heavy

The proposition in (f) above is evaluative without naming the set of item/s it is being compared

with.

Gradable predicates can occur in degree constructions.

Although Ejele (2003:100) proposes that gradability applies to binary and non-binary

oppositions, Weisser (2005:1) asserts that if “we have non-gradable properties, we tend to have a

binary taxonomy”. He however, adds that the absolute values represented in non-gradable binary

oppositions can be modified or relativized using adverbs or adverbial phrases such as half dead,

slightly ill, a little pregnant, etc.

1.3 GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES OF GRADABLE LEXICAL ITEMS

Adjectives are traditionally assigned the ‘quality’ of being gradable because gradability is

conceived as the property of adjectives, i.e., the prototypical example of a gradable category (cf.

Nordquist, 2011:2). Recurrent literature however has evidences of this phenomenon being

present across grammatical categories. According to Constantinescu (2011 :7) “gradable

expressions are not necessarily adjectival. Both nouns (idiot) and verbs (to appreciate) may be

gradable”. For Kennedy (2000: 3) also, “ nouns, verbs, adverbs, as well as functional elements

like prepositions and determiners- all contain words whose meanings establish orderings on

objects based on the amount or degree to which some property holds.” (cf. Sassoon, 2007 :6-8,

and Morzycki, 2009:1). Giving examples, he explains how gradability can occur in different

grammatical categories. The adjective sturdy – objects can be sturdy to different degrees and

ordered accordingly. The verb build which depicts a process of creation could be used in such a

way as to show how far along the scale of completion of the process. The mass noun wood can

be quantified using amount phrases like two cord (of). The preposition from sets up a scale of

(temporal, spatial, etc) distance, ordering objects according to how far they are in a direction

moving away from some reference point. Thus, apart from the semantics of adjectives, aspectual

properties of verbs and events which show progress over time can be graded. The meaning of

directional prepositions and the structural properties that are often shown in noun denotations (as

in the mass/count distinction) also show instances of gradability.

1.4 METHODOLOGY

Bogal-Allbritten (2008:6-8) presents graphically some parameters by which gradability can be

described in natural languages. She explains that in a situation where claims are made about an

object involving a gradable predicate such as tall, clever, light, musty, the speaker relates the

5

object to a set of other objects. She explains further that where gradable predicates are used in

degree constructions certain morphosyntactic constructions involving degree morphemes are

used to “make reference to a degree of gradability or a degree of quantity…. In Japanese, the

standard marker is a morpheme expressing location or direction and the degree morpheme is

never overt”. Other languages she identified as utilizing directional or locative standard markers

and null degree morphology are Maasai and Lativian. Below is the schema presented and cited

from the literature.

Table 1 Comparative and equative degree constructions in English

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

DEGREE

MORPHEME

STANDARD

MARKER

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

2(a) Sally (is)tall -er than Anna

‘Sally is taller than Anna’

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

DEGREE

MORPHEME

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

STANDARD

MARKER

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

(b) Max (is) as tall as Sally

‘Max is as tall as Sally’

Table 2 Degree construction in Hindu-Urdu

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

STANDARD

MARKER

DEGREE

MORPHEME

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

3. John Bill -se zyaadaa lambaa hai

J. B. than more tall is

‘John is taller than Bill’

(Examples in Tables 1&2 were cited by Bogal-Allbritten 2008:8 from Bhatt & Takahashi

2007:2)

Table 3 Degree construction in Japanese

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

STANDARD

MARKER

DEGREE

MORPHEME

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

4. Sotowa kawa yori Ø chikashi

Village river from near

‘The village is nearer than the river’

(Cited by Bogal-Allbritten 2008:8 from Klein 1991:676)

Primary sources also show directionality in standard marker in Yorùbá as in table 4 below.

6

Table 4 Degree constructions in Yorùbá

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

DEGREE

MORPHEME

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

STANDARD

MARKER

5. Omodé yen pupa jù okùrin yen lo

Child that fair more man that surpass

‘That child is fairer (in complexion) than that man’

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

GRADABLE PREDICATE

DEGREE MORPHEME

STANDARD OF COMPARISON

STANDARD MARKER

6. Eleyi pupa jù àwon méjèjì lo

‘This one fair more they two surpass

From the above presentations the parameters can be defined as follows:

(i) Topic of comparison = the topic of discussion; (ii) Standard of comparison= the (set of) object(s) the gradable predicate is compared with,

“the ‘cut off point’ for things that definitely have the property in question…”

(Kennedy and Irene 2002:8) ; (iii) Degree morpheme = morphosyntactic construction used to make reference to a degree of

gradability/quantity (iv) Standard marker= specific position/place/point the gradable predicate has attained. (v) Gradable predicate = predicate that can undergo comparative and superlative

modifications.

This approach is adopted here in describing degree construction of gradable predicates in

Urhobo.

2.1 URHOBO PHONOLOGY

The phonology of Urhobo can be summarized as follows (Aziza & Mebitaghan, 2011: 6-8):

1. Consonants – Urhobo has twenty eight consonant segments, namely :

Stops : / р, ƅ, t , d , c, ɟ , k, g, kp , gb /

Fricatives : / ɸ , f , v , s , z , ʃ , ʒ , ɣ , h /

Nasals : / m , n , ɲ , ŋm /

Trill/Tap : / r , ɾ /

Approximants : / ʋ , j , w /

7

Each of these consonants has one allophone except for /h/ and /n/. /h/ has two allophones [x, h]

while /n/ has two allophones [ Ɩ , n] . These allophones occur regularly in free variation. [h, ɾ , ʋ ,

j, w ] can be nasalized in the environment of a nasal vowel.

2. Vowels – Urhobo has both oral and nasal vowels. The oral vowels can be nasalized in the

environment of a nasal consonant. The vowel system has seven phonetic vowels : [i,e,ɛ,a,

ɔ,o,u , with a nasal counterpart , , ɛ , , ɔ , , ]. All Urhobo oral vowels can be

nasalized in the environment of nasal consonants. Only vowels bear tones.

3. Phonological Processes

Vowel elision, glide formation, vowel lengthening as we have already seen above and

vowel harmony are very productive in Urhobo. Vowel harmony in Urhobo is controlled

by the vowel of the verb root. This is evident in the way the verb selects its affixes,

subjects and object pronouns to agree with the ATR harmony requirements of the verb.

Urhobo operates a partial vowel harmony system because there are instances where the

vowels of one set mix with the vowels of the other set. Urhobo vowels can be divided

into two sets.

Table 5 Vowel Harmony in Urhobo

Set 1 [+ATR] Set 2 [-ATR] HIGH i u e o MID e o ɛ ɔ LOW a Source : (Aziza 2007: 277)

The table above shows that [e] and [o] occur as low vowels in Set -1, i.e., [+ATR] and as high

vowels in Set -2, i.e., [-ATR]. Urhobo operates a partial vowel harmony system hence there is a

mixing of one set with another, where the vowels in one set can be found in another set as can be

observed in table 5 above. (see Ajiboye, 2012: 8-9; Aziza 2008: 1-19 discusses these issues in

details)

8

3.0 GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES OF GRADABLE LEXICAL ITEMS IN URHOBO

3.1 VERBS

Verbs in Urhobo can be graded. In the positive degree there is no overt comparison with any

other element in the sentence. The predicate is evaluative and the verb is in the participle hence

the - /- /- /-rọ which goes with the verb. These morphemes are simple past tense markers in

Urhobo. The choice of which depends on the ATR requirements of the stem of the verb. (see

Ajiboye, 2012:34). These verbs can become graded by showing the degree or extent to which an

entity possesses the qualities being expressed. Examples are as follows:

Table 6 Degree Construction of verbs in the positive degree in Urhobo

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

DEGREE

MORPHEME

STANDARD

MARKER

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

7. vw n ghw - r Ø Ø Ø Kolanut the mature is

‘ The kolanut is mature’

8. y n kr - r Ø Ø Ø woman the short is ‘The woman is short’

9. t w nvw n gb -r Ø Ø Ø

Floor the dirty is ‘The floor is dirty’

3.2 Degree construction of verbs in the comparative degree in Urhobo

In the comparative degree the vowel on the verb takes on a high tone and the comparison is done

by introducing a degree marker nọ and a slightly high tone . The variant of nọ, vrẹn is not

commonly used by the younger generation of speakers in degree constructions. The high tone

points the comparison towards a direction which is not overtly stated. In actual sense the third

person singular pronoun /ọ/ is supposed to be in the column for ‘standard of comparison’. In

normal speech however such constructions do not exist. Consequently the ọ is fused to the -ọ in

nọ which raises the tone from a mid to a slightly high tone. The voice is raised on the degree

marker as signified by the high tone in order to accommodate the reference point which is

semantically fused to the degree marker. In this case the standard of comparison is not overt.

9

The slightly high tone thus signals a reference point, a standard of comparison. For the purpose

of the ongoing analyses, these tones are treated as segments of utterances hence they are

indicated in the columns for standard of comparison. There is however an exception to the rule

when a standard of comparison is introduced. (See table 8 below)

Table 7 Degree construction of verbs in the comparative degree in Urhobo

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

DEGREE

MORPHEME

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

STANDARD

MARKER

10. ọ - n n ghw nọ Ø

One this be mature pass (more than)

‘This one is older’

1. y i v na kr nọ Ø

woman second the be short pass (more than) ‘The second woman is shorter’

12. ọ - n n gb nọ Ø

one this be dirty pass (more than)

‘This one is dirtier’

Where the standard of comparison expressed is in the first, second, third person plural noun or a

proper noun, the degree morpheme used is nẹ and the standard marker maintains a low tone .

The vowel on the verb takes on a low tone.

Table 8 Degree construction of verbs in the comparative degree in Urhobo showing

exceptions to the rule

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

DEGREE

MORPHEME

STANDARD

MARKER

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

13. (a) m r rh n pọ l

Mary be big pass (more than) 3SG (N)

‘Mary is bigger than Paul’

(b) m r rh n vw nr

Mary be big pass (more than) 1PL

‘Mary is bigger than we’

(c) m r rh n w w n

Mary be big pass (more than) 2PL

‘Mary is bigger than you (PL)’

(d) m r rh n mọ n

10

Mary be big pass (more than) 3PL (N) DET

Mary be big pass (more than) children the (NP)

‘Mary is bigger than the children’

(e) m r rh nọ vw

Mary be big pass (more than) 1SG

‘Mary is bigger

(f) m r rh nọ w

Mary be big pass (more than) 2SG

‘Mary is bigger

(g) m r rh nọ

Mary be big pass (more than)

‘Mary is bigger’

Where the standard of comparison expressed is in the first or second person singular the degree

morpheme used is nọ. The standard marker is a low tone. The vowel on the verb also maintains a

low tone. However, where the standard of comparison is not expressed the degree morpheme is a

high-toned nọ. Just as with the other cases in table 7 above, the standard marker is a slightly

high tone. In normal writing these tones will be marked on the degree morpheme. As a matter of

fact tone heights in these expressions have both syntactic and semantic functions.

3.3 ADVERBS IN URHOBO

Adverbs are called orhuoba in Urhobo; “orhuoba, ọy n ọghọn r ejaje r o vw odjegba vwọ k

otairuo, orhuọnba ọfa, ojedia ey orhuon” meaning, “the adverb is the part of speech that adds

(sth) to (i.e modifies) a verb, another adverb, an adjective [sic] or a conjunction” (Ege 1985:43).

He identifies four types: adverb of time, place, degree and manner. Some adverbs of manner in

the language can be graded.

Table 9 Degree Constructions of Urhobo adverbs in the positive degree

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

DEGREE

MORPHEME

STANDARD

MARKER

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

14. I pi ta - a dj ga n Ø Ø Ø

Peter - ASP run fast

‘Peter runs fast’

15. Ọ ne ki w - n dje emu -u gha ra Ø Ø Ø

Customer your - ASP shade goods- ASP costly

11

‘Your customer shades goods costly’

The pattern of marking comparatives in adverbs is the same as for verbs as shown above. The

only difference is that it is obligatory to express the standard of comparison in adverbs. Just as

was also observed with verbs, a low tone with nọ is used when the object is overt. The low tone

is conditioned by the presence of an overt standard of comparison. The person and number of the

standard of comparison also determine whether the adverb will take nẹ or nọ. nọ goes with the

second and first person singular and plural while nẹ occurs elsewhere. The table below illustrates

how adverbs are graded in Urhobo:

Table 10 Degree Constructions of Urhobo adverbs in the comparative degree

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

DEGREE

MORPHEME

STANDARD

MARKER

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

16. (a) kp s r dj g n n y m

Akpesiri run fast pass (more than) 3SG

‘Akpesiri ran faster than Oyoma’

(b) kp s r dj g n n w w n

Akpesiri run fast pass (more than) 2PL

‘Akpesiri ran faster than you’

(c) kp s r dj g n nọ w n

Akpesiri run fast pass (more than) 2SG


(d) kp s r dj g n n vw nr


‘Akpesiri ran faster than us (PL)’

(e) kp s r dj g n n y n


‘Akpesiri ran faster than them ’

(f) kp s r dj g n nọ m

kp s r run fast pass (more than) 1SG

12

‘ kp s r ran faster than me’

3.4 PREPOSITIONS IN URHOBO

Prepositions are called dj di in Urhobo. dj di means something that shows position. By this

definition, any word that shows position in the language qualif ies to be classified as preposition.

Some Urhobo nouns for body parts show positions, e.g. (‘belly’), (‘back’); some

other nouns also show position, e.g. (‘up’), ọ (‘down’). In some other cases compounds

function as prepositions. The second vowel in the locative morpheme is deleted and the resultant

morpheme prefixed to the noun to form a compound which also functions as a preposition.

17 a) b( ) v n b v n

LOC belly(N) ‘inside’ b) b( ) t f b t f

LOC outside(N) outside‘

c) b( ) + ꜝtọ b tọ LOC ground ground‘

d) b( ) r b r LOC front ‘front’

Some other prepositions are compounded from a combination of a verb with a positional

morpheme (POS) and sometimes place morphemes (PL). Examples are

18 a) s + k r = s k r

V POS close move near

b) kp n = kp n

V PL go up go up

c) kp ꜝtọ kp tọ

V ground

go down

Unlike the first type of prepositions this second type can be graded because they show a

relationship between two points in a continuum or a scale – an inceptive point and a specified

destination. In the positive degree however the end point is not obligatorily overt. Although no

standard of comparison is expressed the utterance is understood as referring to a specific

direction though obscure.

13

Table 11 Degree construction of Urhobo prepositions in the positive degree

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

DEGREE

MORPHEME

STANDARD

MARKER

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

19. s b t m kp n Ø Ø Ø

Shoe my go up

‘My shoe is high’

20 . s s k r Ø Ø Ø Ese move near ‘Ese is close (to sb/sth)’

In the comparative the pattern where the standard of comparison is in the genitive (possessive)

case, the standard marker is a low-toned nẹ . This is occasioned by the ATR requirement of the

initial vowel of the standard of comparison. However, where the standard of comparison is in the

nominative case, a low-toned nọ is used as the standard marker for the first and second person

singular (see sentences 21 (a) and (b) below) while a low-toned nẹ is used for other grammatical

persons. Table 12 Degree construction of Urhobo prepositions in the comparative degree

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

DEGREE

MORPHEME

STANDARD

MARKER

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

21 (a) s b t m kp n n ọw n

Shoe my go up pass(more than) POSS1PL

‘My shoe is higher than yours’

(b) s b t w n kp n n ọm

Shoe yours go up pass(more than) POSS1SG

‘Your shoe is higher than mine’

(c) s b t m kp n n ọ r y n

Shoe my go up pass(more than) POSS 3PL

‘My shoe is higher than theirs’ (d) s b t m kp n n ọ r w w n


‘My shoe is higher than yours (PL)’ (e) s b t w n kp n n ọ r vw nr


‘Your shoe is higher than ours’

(f) s b t m kp n n ọ r m s s Shoe my go up pass(more than) POSS 3SG

‘My shoe is higher than Moses’

22 (a) s s k r nọ m Ese move near pass(more than) 1SG

‘Ese is close (to sb/sth) more than I am’ (b) s s k r nọ w n

14

Ese move near pass(more than) 2SG ‘Ese is close (to sb/sth) more than you are’

(c) s s k r n y n

Ese move near pass(more than) 3PL

‘Ese is close (to sb/sth) more than they are’ (d) s s k r n w w n

Ese move near pass(more than) 2PL

‘Ese is close (to sb/sth) more than you are ’ (e) s s k r n vw nr

Ese move near pass(more than) 1SG ‘Ese is close (to sb/sth) more than we are ’ (f) s s k r n m s s

Ese move near pass(more than) 3SG ‘Ese is close (to sb/sth) more than Moses is ’

3.5 DEGREE CONSTRUCTION OF GRADABLE PREDICATES WITH MULTIPLE

TAXONOMY

In some languages of the world like English degree constructions are in the positive, comparative

and superlative. In Urhobo there are no superlatives. Degree constructions with multiple

taxonomies take on intensifiers to show how much of the feature being graded is present in the

topic of comparison, compared to the standard of comparison. The choice of intensifier – m /

m , depends on the ATR requirement of the vowel in the verb stem. In some cases, the degree

morpheme and standard of comparison are not stated. The table below illustrates these.

Table 13 Degree construction of gradable predicates with multiple taxonomy

TOPIC OF COMPARISON

GRADABLE

PREDICATE

DEGREE

MORPHEME

STANDARD

MARKER

STANDARD OF

COMPARISON

23(a) s b t w n y méè kp n n ọ r b b n v ọ r f f

n Shoe yours be INT go up pass(more than) black the and

white the

‘Your shoe is higher than the black one and the white one’

(b) vwe n nà á ye máà ghw (n ayen eje)

Kolanut this -ASP be –INT mature (pass/ more than them all)

‘This kolanut is the most mature of them all’

(c) y n n y m kr Ø Ø kp r bọ

woman this be INT short above all ‘This woman is the shortest’

15

(d) t w nvw n n méè gb Ø Ø

House this -INT dirty

‘This house is the dirtiest’

(e) kp s r m dj g n n y m

Akpesiri - ASP INT run fast pass Oyoma

‘Akpesiri runs faster than Oyoma’

(f) bọ y i m mwa d fu n Ø Ø

Iboyi –ASP INT knead banga clean

‘Iboyi kneads (oil from) banga best/cleanest’

Observe that the standard marker is a low tone where the standard of comparison is stated.

The above sentences also show that there are two variants of the intensifier – [mâ] and [m ]. The

following analyses show the ATR patterning in the sentences.

24 a) Mâ ghwo[ mâ wò] – ATR [a] goes with – ATR [o]

b) Mâ kre [mâ krε] – ATR [a] goes with – ATR ε

c) Mê gbe [mê gbè ] +ATR [e] goes with + ATR [e]

d) Mâ dj gan [Mâ ɟ gã] – ATR[a] goes with - ATR ε and – ATR [a]

e) Mâ mwa fuan [ Mâ ŋw fw ] – ATR [a] goes with – ATR [a] and – ATR [u]

4. CONCLUSION

The foregoing shows how Urhobo verbs, adverbs and some prepositions can be graded. Unlike in

other languages, Urhobo adjectives do not seem to be gradable, probably because they are

derived from verbs. It can also be observed that gradability in Urhobo is mainly binary. Where

more taxonomy is involved in the opposition, intensifiers are used to show how much an entity

has a particular feature.

The degree morpheme is directional as can be seen from the glosses (pass meaning more than).

The variant of this morpheme is vrẹn, also means pass. It is used mostly by older speakers of

Urhobo. Both morphemes indicate direction just as with Yorùbá in the data presented in Table 4

and the other non-African languages presented in Tables 2 and 3 above. The locative function

presents the degree marker as a type of preposition – ‘odjedia’. It is also a part of the VP slot and

functions as an adverb as well. Thus the morpheme fuses several functions in one as is

16

characteristic of fusional languages like Greenlandic Eskimo and Russian (See O’Grady,

Archibald, Aronoff & Rees-Miller 2001: 356-7; Katamba, 1993: 58). This phenomenon could

have typological implications for the classification of Urhobo. Note also that in all the Urhobo

degree constructions analysed the standard of comparison occur in the sentence final position.

REFERENCES

Ajiboye, Emuobonuvie M . 2010. A Morphosyntactic analysis of verb forms in Urhobo.

Unpublished manuscript.

Ajiboye, Emuobonuvie .M. 2012. Inflectional morphology of Urhobo verbs. Unpublished

Master’s Thesis. University of Port Harcourt.

Aziza, Rose O. and Rita O. Mebitaghan . 2011. Issues in transcribing and translating Urhobo

proverbs into English. Unpublished manuscript

Aziza, Rose O. 2008. Neutralization of contrast in the vowel system in Urhobo. Studies in

African Linguistics. Volume 37, Number 1, 2008. Pp1-19

Aziza, Rose 2007. Urhobo Phonology. In Ore Yusuf (ed) Basic Linguistics for

Nigerian Languages Teachers. Port Harcourt: M&J Grand Orbit Communications

Limited. Pp 273-289

Bogal-Allbritten, Elizabeth. 2008. Gradability and degree constructions in Navajo. Honors

Thesis, Linguistics Department, Swathmore College.

www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/Linguistics/.../Bogal-Allbritten.thesis.pdf. Assessed

June 2011

Constantinescu, Camelia .2011. Representation of gradability. LINGUIST List . Issue

22.2083 http://humleidon.edu/lud/gradability/ Assessed June 2011.

http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/Linguistics/.../Bogal-Allbritten.thesis.pdf

http://humleidon.edu/lud/gradability/

17

Ege, E.O. 1985. Obe re Odjegba re Urhobo re a to si (First Urhobo Grammar Book)

Lagos: A.E International Company.

Ejele, P.E .2003. Semantics, lexical structure & lexical relations. Aba: National Institute

for Nigerian Langauges.

Katamba , Francis.1993. Morphology. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.

Kennedy, Christopher. 2000. NSF CAREER BCS- 0094263: SCALAR

REPRESENTATIONS IN NATURAL LANGUAGE SEMANTICS.

Kennedy, Christopher & Irene Heim 24.979. Topics in Semantics, Fall 2002.

(Massachusetts Institute of Technology: MIT OpenCourseWare),

http://ocw.mit.edu(Assessed 08June, 2011). License: Creative Commons BY-NC-

SA

Kibort , Anna. 2007. Inventory of morphosyntactic features. In Morphosyntactic Features. 1

November 2007. http://www.Surrey.ac.uk/lis/smg/morohosyntacticfeatures.html. pp 11-24. Assessed March 2009.

Morzycki, Marcin .2009. Degree modification of gradable nouns; size adjectives and

adnominal degree morphemes. http://linguistlist.org/issues/22/22-2083 Assessed

June 2011.

Nordquist, Richard .2011. Gradability. About.com Guide 2011. The New York

Times Company. Assessed June 2011.

O’Grady, William, John Archibald, Mark Aronoff, Janie Rees-Miller (eds).

2001.Contemporary linguistics: An Introduction to word structure in

generative grammar. Fourth Edition. Boston: Bedford St Martins’s.

Sasson, Galitt .2007. Vagueness, gradability and typicality: A Comprehensive Semantic

analysis. http://weidmans.info/sasson- Galit/index.html.Assessed June 2011

Weisser, Martin. 2005. Gradability. http://linguistlist.org/issues..... Assessed June 2011

http://ocw.mit.edu/

http://www.surrey.ac.uk/lis/smg/morohosyntacticfeatures.html.%20%20pp%2011-24

http://www.surrey.ac.uk/lis/smg/morohosyntacticfeatures.html.%20%20pp%2011-24

http://linguistlist.org/issues/22/22-2083%20Assessed%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20June%202011

http://linguistlist.org/issues/22/22-2083%20Assessed%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20June%202011

http://weidmans.info/sasson-%20%20Galit/index.html.Assessed%20June%202011

http://linguistlist.org/issues

ANSU Journal of Arts and Social Sciences

Degree Construction ofGradable Predicatesin Urhobo

Ajiboye, Emuobonuvie M.Department of Languages and Linguistics,Delta State University, AbrakaEmail: [email protected]

AbstractGradability describes the presence or absence of intermediate values within a category or scale.Degree constructions exhibit some characteristics of gradability of lexical items because they showthe extent to which these lexical items possess certain properties. In Urhobo, a minority languagespoken in the Niger-Delta region of Nigeria, gradability in degree constructions can be found insentences showing comparisons. Verbs, adverbs and verb phrases functioning as prepositions aregradable in the language. In Urhobo degree constructions, gradability is directional and binary.There are no superlatives in Urhobo. Where more taxonomy is involved in the opposition,intensifiers are used to show to what extent an entity has a particular feature. The standard markerused across the grammatical categories examined is a low- tone. Where the standard of comparisonis not overt, a slightly high tone is used as the standard marker. The standard marker occurs in thesentence – final position. The degree morphemes nọ and nẹ are used in the construction dependingon the number, person and/or case of the standard of comparison; and the ATR requirement of thevowel in the stem of the standard of comparison. The features employed in marking gradability indegree constructions in Urhobo are thus both inherent and contextual

Keywords: Gradability, Degree construction, Gradable predicate, Grammatical feature,Degree marker, Standard of comparison, Feature value.

80

mailto:[email protected]

Emuobonuvie, M. A.(2014); Degree Construction of Gradable Predicates in Urhobo, ANSU Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 2 (2):80-90

IntroductionUrhobo, a South Western Edoid language of theNiger-Congo family, is spoken in Delta State,Nigeria (Aziza 2008: 273). Although the Ofonipeople in Bayelsa state speak Urhobo, a largerpopulation of Urhobo speakers is in Delta Statewhere they represent the largest ethnic group inthe state (Ajiboye, 2010:1). Delta State is theindigenous home of the Urhobo people. TheUrhobo spoken in Delta is the focus of ourstudy.

Scope and MethodologyThe study is a preliminary investigation intothe various patterns of grading some predicatesin Urhobo. The categories of grammaticalclasses under focus are gradable verbs, adverbsand prepositions in the language as found in theregular pattern of speech of the native speakers.Data was simulated from ordinary speech actsamong speakers of the language. Analyses arebased on a simple description of what occurswhen native speakers make comparisons andthe grouping pattern used by Bogal-Allbritten(2008:7-8) in analysing degree construction.

Description of ConceptsFeature is a phenomenon used to describecertain linguistic transformations that bringabout changes in words such that the meaningand/or function are affected. Kibort (2007:8)defines it as “A set of values and the rules oftheir assignment to linguistic elements.” Shedescribes these transformations as inflectional.Features can be morphosyntactic,morphosemantic or just morphological. Featurevalues can be inherent or contextual. Inherentfeature values arise from within the elementitself while contextual values are determinedby some other elements. Contextual elementsare dictated by syntax. Although inherentfeature may not be required by the syntacticcontext it may have syntactic relevance.

Gradability is a type of oppositionfound in a relationship whereby between two

maximal poles a lexeme is found to have aparticular feature to a certain degree. Thisphenomenon describes the presence or absenceof intermediate values within the categories orscales; it is the semantic property of a lexicalitem which identifies different levels or degreesof possessing given property (Weisser, 2005:1;Kennedy 2000:4). This definition presupposesthat if “a property is gradable then there areusually a few different values present on ascale, ranging from or to an extreme point oftenincluding comparison stages” (Weisser,2005:1). Since these properties existconceptually in a single scale the properties arerelative to a specified ‘standard’ and notabsolute. An entity that is tall for instance is tallin relation to a standard towards probably aheight up (wards) ( ). Short is less tall inrelation to a specific height maybe down(ward) ( ). This standard of comparison bringsto fore a cut off point for the things that havethe property in question. For example: 1(a) This book is expensive (b) The white ones are more expensive

From the above we see that the speaker isrelating an object in (b) to a set of other objectswhich though not overtly stated here, shows theexistence of a certain SCALE. Citing Kennedy(1997), Bogal-Allbritten (2008:7) describes thisscale as “an abstract representation … of theamount to which an object possesses somegradable property … a dense, linearly orderedset of points, or ‘degrees’, where the orderingis relativized to a dimension”. Where there areno gradable properties the properties would bedescribed in terms of absolutes which would beexpressed as ± binaries. However, non-gradableproperties could be relativized using adverbs oradverbial phrases such as half baked, slightlyswollen, a little pregnant.

The above analogy seems to corroborateConstantinescu’s assertion (2011:6) thatgradability is “based on the ordering betweenindividuals in the set defined by the gradable

81


predicate”. In addition, Ejele (2003:100-101)states that a lexical item is gradable if it can becompared with another lexical item (overtly orcovertly) with respect to the presence of theproperty and the degree to which it has theproperty. She lists four ways by which lexicalitems can be graded. These methods areillustrated here with the examples that follow. a. Grading can be explicit in comparative,

superlative and equative i. This bulb lights brighter than the

first.ii. Ukraine presented faster athletes

than Kazakhstan in the 2012olympics.

iii. Jane is the most popular actressin Nollywood.

iv. Your car is not as beautiful asmine.

b. Grading can be done using verbs like‘differ’, ‘exceed’ and ‘equal’.i. My opinion differs from yours.ii. A primary school teacher’s

salary exceeds yours.iii. Her resilience equals yours.

c. The adjectives ‘same’ and ‘different’can be used as in i. My book is different from yoursii. Our cars are of the same make.

d. Correlatives and antonymous adverbs ofdegree ‘more’ and ‘less’ can be used.i. The colour on this badge is more

attractive than the old one.ii. A careless statement from the

president is likely to resolve thepresent conflict.

Conversely, a lexical item is ungradable if itcannot be compared with another item withrespect to the presence of the property. The method by which the grading of lexicalitems is lexicalized or grammaticalized varyacross languages. In some languagescomparatives and superlatives have specialwords. In some others there is only one wordfor both. Apart from showing degree, other

forms of grading grammatical features exist ashas been shown above. The focus here howeveris on degree constructions in predicates that canbe graded.

A predicate is defined as the part of thesentence that says something about the subject.A predicate can be made up of one or morewords, depending on the sentence pattern. Thepredicate can be in any grammatical category.A predicate is said to be gradable when thespeaker is relating this object to a set of otherobjects. Bogal-Allbritten (2008:6-7) identifiestwo ways of differentiating between gradableand non-gradable predicates:

Gradable predicates are order- inducingif an order can be imposed on it todetermine whether the object possessesthe relevant property to a greater or lessextent than another object.

This comparison can be overtly or non-explicitly stated in the sentence. Example:

e. The book is heavier than the file jacketf. The book is heavy

The proposition in (f) above is evaluativewithout naming the set of item/s it isbeing compared with. Gradable predicates can occur in

degree constructions.

Although Ejele (2003:100) proposes thatgradability applies to binary and non-binaryoppositions, Weisser (2005:1) asserts that if“we have non-gradable properties, we tend tohave a binary taxonomy”. He however, addsthat the absolute values represented in non-gradable binary oppositions can be modified orrelativized using adverbs or adverbial phrasessuch as half dead, slightly ill, a little pregnant,etc.

Grammatical Categories Of GradableLexical ItemsAdjectives are traditionally assigned the‘quality’ of being gradable because gradability

82


is conceived as the property of adjectives, i.e.,the prototypical example of a gradable category(cf. Nordquist, 2011:2). Recurrent literaturehowever has evidences of this phenomenonbeing present across grammatical categories.According to Constantinescu (2011:7)“gradable expressions are not necessarilyadjectival. Both nouns (idiot) and verbs (toappreciate) may be gradable”. For Kennedy(2000: 3) also, “ nouns, verbs, adverbs, as wellas functional elements like prepositions anddeterminers- all contain words whose meaningsestablish orderings on objects based on theamount or degree to which some propertyholds.” (cf. Sassoon, 2007:6-8, and Morzycki,2009:1). Giving examples, he explains howgradability can occur in different grammaticalcategories. The adjective sturdy – objects canbe sturdy to different degrees and orderedaccordingly. The verb build which depicts aprocess of creation could be used in such a wayas to show how far along the scale ofcompletion of the process. The mass nounwood can be quantified using amount phraseslike two cord (of). The preposition from sets upa scale of (temporal, spatial, etc) distance,ordering objects according to how far they arein a direction moving away from somereference point. Thus, apart from the semanticsof adjectives, aspectual properties of verbs andevents which show progress over time can begraded. The meaning of directionalprepositions and the structural properties thatare often shown in noun denotations (as in themass/count distinction) also show instances ofgradability.

MethodologyBogal-Allbritten (2008:6-8) presentsgraphically some parameters by whichgradability can be described in naturallanguages. She explains that in a situationwhere claims are made about an objectinvolving a gradable predicate such as tall,clever, light, musty, the speaker relates theobject to a set of other objects. She explains

further that where gradable predicates are usedin degree constructions certainmorphosyntactic constructions involvingdegree morphemes are used to “make referenceto a degree of gradability or a degree ofquantity…. In Japanese, the standard marker isa morpheme expressing location or directionand the degree morpheme is never overt”.Other languages she identified as utilizingdirectional or locative standard markers andnull degree morphology are Maasai andLativian. Below is the schema presented andcited from the literature.

Table 1: Comparative and equativedegree constructions in English

Topic of comparison

Gradablepredicate

Degreemorpheme

Standardmarker

Standard ofcomparison

2(a) Sally (is)tall -er than Anna

‘Sally is taller than Anna’Topic of comparison

Degreemorpheme

Gradablepredicate

Standardmarker


(b) Max (is) as tall as Sally

‘Max is as tall as Sally’

Table 2: Degree construction in Hindu-Urdu

Topic ofcomparison


Standardmarker

Degreemorpheme

Gradablepredicate

3. John Bill -se zyaadaa lambaa hai

J. B. than more tall is

‘John is taller than Bill’

(Examples in Tables 1&2 were cited by Bogal-Allbritten2008:8 from Bhatt & Takahashi 2007:2)

Table 3: Degree construction in Japanese

Topic ofComparison

Standard ofComparison

StandardMarker

DegreeMorpheme

GradablePredicate

4. Sotowa kawa yori Ø chikashi

Village river from near

‘The village is nearer than the river’

(Cited by Bogal-Allbritten 2008:8 from Klein 1991:676)

Primary sources also show directionality instandard marker in Yorùbá as in table 4 below.

83


Table 4: Degree constructions in Yorùbá Topic ofComparison

GradablePredicate

DegreeMorpheme


Standard Marker

5. Omodé yen pupa jù okùrin yen lo

Child that fair more man that surpass

‘That child is fairer (in complexion) than that man’

Topic ofComparison

GradablePredicate

DegreeMorpheme


Standard Marker

6. Eleyi pupa jù àwon méjèjì lo

‘This one fair more they two surpass

From the above presentations the parameterscan be defined as follows:(i) Topic of comparison = the topic of

discussion;(ii) Standard of comparison= the (set of)

object(s) the gradable predicate iscompared with, “the ‘cut off point’ forthings that definitely have the propertyin question…” (Kennedy and Irene2002:8);

(iii) Degree morpheme = morphosyntacticconstruction used to make reference to adegree of gradability/quantity

(iv) Standard marker = specificposition/place/point the gradablepredicate has attained.

(v) Gradable predicate = predicate that canundergo comparative and superlativemodifications.

This approach is adopted here in describingdegree construction of gradable predicates inUrhobo.

Urhobo PhonologyThe phonology of Urhobo can be summarizedas follows (Aziza & Mebitaghan, 2011: 6-8):1. Consonants – Urhobo has twenty eight

consonant segments, namely :Stops : / р, , t , d , c, , k, g, kp , gb /ƅ ɟFricatives : / , f , v , s , z , , , , h / ɸ ʃ ʒ ɣNasals : / m , n , , ŋm /ɲTrill/Tap : / r , /ɾ

Approximants : / , j , w /ʋ

Each of these consonants has oneallophone except for /h/ and /n/. /h/ hastwo allophones [x, h] while /n/ has twoallophones [ , n] . These allophonesƖoccur regularly in free variation. [h, ,ɾ, j, w ] can be nasalized in theʋ

environment of a nasal vowel.2. Vowels – Urhobo has both oral and

nasal vowels. The oral vowels can benasalized in the environment of a nasalconsonant. The vowel system has sevenphonetic vowels : [i,e, ,a, ,o,u] , with aɛ ɔnasal counterpart [i , e , , a , , o, u].ɛɛ ɔɛAll Urhobo oral vowels can benasalized in the environment of nasalconsonants. Only vowels bear tones.

3. Phonological ProcessesVowel elision, glide formation, vowellengthening as we have already seenabove and vowel harmony are veryproductive in Urhobo. Vowel harmonyin Urhobo is controlled by the vowel ofthe verb root. This is evident in the waythe verb selects its affixes, subjects andobject pronouns to agree with the ATRharmony requirements of the verb. Urhobo operates a partial vowelharmony system because there areinstances where the vowels of one setmix with the vowels of the other set.Urhobo vowels can be divided into twosets.

Table 5 Vowel Harmony in UrhoboSet 1 [+ATR] Set 2 [-ATR]

HIGH i u e oMID e o ɛ ɔLOW a

Source : (Aziza 2007: 277)

The table above shows that [e] and [o] occur aslow vowels in Set -1, i.e., [+ATR] and as high

84


vowels in Set -2, i.e., [-ATR]. Urhobo operatesa partial vowel harmony system hence there isa mixing of one set with another, where thevowels in one set can be found in another set ascan be observed in table 5 above. (see Ajiboye,2012: 8-9; Aziza 2008: 1-19 discusses theseissues in details)

Grammatical Categories of GradableLexical Items In Urhobo

VERBSVerbs in Urhobo can be graded. In the positivedegree there is no overt comparison with anyother element in the sentence. The predicate isevaluative and the verb is in the participlehence the -ri /-re /-ro/-rọ which goes with theverb. These morphemes are simple past tensemarkers in Urhobo. The choice of whichdepends on the ATR requirements of the stemof the verb. (see Ajiboye, 2012:34). Theseverbs can become graded by showing thedegree or extent to which an entity possessesthe qualities being expressed. Examples are asfollows:

Table 6 Degree Construction of verbs in thepositive degree in UrhoboTopic ofcomparison

Gradablepredicate

Degreemorpheme

Standardmarker


7. ẸẸ vwè nà ghwo - ro Ø Ø Ø Kolanut the mature is ‘ The kolanut is mature’

8. Ayè nà krẹẸ - rè Ø Ø Ø woman the short is ‘The woman is short’

9. Utuwènvwì nà gbè -rì Ø Ø Ø Floor the dirty is ‘The floor is dirty’

Degree construction of verbs in thecomparative degree in UrhoboIn the comparative degree the vowel on theverb takes on a high tone and the comparison isdone by introducing a degree marker nọ and aslightly high tone . The variant of nọ, vrẹn isnot commonly used by the younger generationof speakers in degree constructions. The high

tone points the comparison towards a directionwhich is not overtly stated. In actual sense thethird person singular pronoun /ọ/ is supposed tobe in the column for ‘standard of comparison’.In normal speech however such constructionsdo not exist. Consequently the ọ is fused to the-ọ in nọ which raises the tone from a mid to aslightly high tone. The voice is raised on thedegree marker as signified by the high tone inorder to accommodate the reference pointwhich is semantically fused to the degreemarker. In this case the standard of comparisonis not overt. The slightly high tone thus signalsa reference point, a standard of comparison.For the purpose of the ongoing analyses, thesetones are treated as segments of utteranceshence they are indicated in the columns forstandard of comparison. There is however anexception to the rule when a standard ofcomparison is introduced. (See table 8 below)

Table 7 Degree construction of verbs in thecomparative degree in Urhobo

Topic ofComparison

Gradable Predicate

DegreeMorpheme


StandardMarker

10. ọẸ- nànà ghwo nọ Ø One this be mature pass (more than) ‘This one is older’

11. Ayè ivẹ ná krẹ nọ Ø

woman second the be short pass (more than) ‘The second woman is shorter’ 12. ọẸ- nànà gbé nọ Ø one this be dirty pass (more than) ‘This one is dirtier’

Where the standard of comparison expressed isin the first, second, third person plural noun ora proper noun, the degree morpheme used is nẹand the standard marker maintains a low tonè.The vowel on the verb takes on a low tone.

85


Table 8: Degree construction of verbs in thecomparative degree in Urhobo showingexceptions to the rule

Where the standard of comparison expressed isin the first or second person singular the degreemorpheme used is nọ. The standard marker is alow tone. The vowel on the verb also maintainsa low tone. However, where the standard ofcomparison is not expressed the degreemorpheme is a high-toned nọ. Just as with theother cases in table 7 above, the standardmarker is a slightly high tone. In normalwriting these tones will be marked on thedegree morpheme. As a matter of fact toneheights in these expressions have both syntacticand semantic functions.

Adverbs in UrhoboAdverbs are called orhuoba in Urhobo;“orhuoba, ọyẹn ọghọn rẹ ejaje rẹ o vwẹodjegba vwọ kẹ otairuo, orhuọnba ọfa, ojediaeyẹ orhuon” meaning, “the adverb is the part ofspeech that adds (sth) to (i.e modifies) a verb,another adverb, an adjective [sic] or aconjunction” (Ege 1985:43). He identifies fourtypes: adverb of time, place, degree andmanner. Some adverbs of manner in thelanguage can be graded.

Table 9: Degree Constructions of Urhoboadverbs in the positive degreeTopic ofComparison

GradablePredicate

DegreeMorpheme

StandardMarker


14. Ipità - á djẹ gàn Ø Ø Ø Peter - ASP run fast ‘Peter runs fast’

15. ỌẸ nékì wẹẸ -ẹ n djé emù-u Ø Ø Ø ghàrà

Customer your - ASP shade goods- ASP costly ‘Your customer shades goods costly’

The pattern of marking comparatives inadverbs is the same as for verbs as shownabove. The only difference is that it isobligatory to express the standard ofcomparison in adverbs. Just as was alsoobserved with verbs, a low tone with nọ is usedwhen the object is overt. The low tone isconditioned by the presence of an overtstandard of comparison. The person and

Topic ofComparison

GradablePredicate

DegreeMorpheme

StandardMarker


13. (a) Imèri rho nẹ Ẹ IpọẸ lo

Mary be big pass (morethan)

3SG (N)

‘Mary is bigger than Paul’

(b) Imèri rho nẹ Ẹ àvwánrè


1PL

‘Mary is bigger than we’

(c) Imèri rho nẹ Ẹ owàwàn


2PL

‘Mary is bigger than you (PL)’

(d) Imèri rho nẹ Ẹ èmọẸ ná


3PL (N) DET


children the (NP)

‘Mary is bigger than the children’ (e) Imèri rho nọ Ẹ vwẹ


1SG

‘Mary is bigger’ (f) Imèri rho nọ Ẹ wẹ


2SG

‘Mary is bigger’ (g) Imèri rho nọ Ẹ


‘Mary is bigger’

86


number of the standard of comparison alsodetermine whether the adverb will take nẹ ornọ. nọ goes with the second and first personsingular and plural while nẹ occurs elsewhere.The table below illustrates how adverbs aregraded in Urhobo:Table 10: Degree Constructions of Urhoboadverbs in the comparative degree

Prepositions in UrhoboPrepositions are called odjẹẸdià in Urhobo.OdjẹẸdià means something that shows position.By this definition, any word that showsposition in the language qualifies to beclassified as preposition. Some Urhobo nounsfor body parts show positions, e.g. evun(‘belly’), obuko (‘back’); some other nounsalso show position, e.g. enu (‘up’), otọ(‘down’). In some other cases compoundsfunction as prepositions. The second vowel inthe locative morpheme is deleted and theresultant morpheme prefixed to the noun toform a compound which also functions as apreposition.

17. a) ob(ẹ) + èvùn = obévùn LOC belly(N) ‘inside’

b) ob(ẹ) otáfè = obotáfè LOC outside(N) outside‘

c) ob(ẹ) + o tọ = obotꜝ ọọ LOC ground ground‘

d) ob(ẹ) + àro = obáro LOC front ‘front’

Some other prepositions are compounded froma combination of a verb with a positionalmorpheme (POS) and sometimes placemorphemes (PL). Examples are

18. a) sì + kẹẸrè = sìkẹẸrè V POS close

move nearb) kpo + ènu = kpénu

V PL go up go up

c) kpo + o tọ ꜝ = kpotọ V ground

go down

Unlike the first type of prepositions this secondtype can be graded because they show arelationship between two points in a continuumor a scale – an inceptive point and a specifieddestination. In the positive degree however theend point is not obligatorily overt. Although nostandard of comparison is expressed theutterance is understood as referring to aspecific direction though obscure.

Topic ofComparison

GradablePredicate

DegreeMorpheme

StandardMarker


16. (a) Akpésìrì

djẹ gàn nẹ Ẹ Oyomà

Akpesiri run fast pass (morethan)

3SG

‘Akpesiri ran faster than Oyoma’

(b) Akpésìrì

djẹ gàn nẹ Ẹ owàwàn


2PL


(c) Akpésìrì

djẹ gàn nọ Ẹ wẹ n


2SG


(d) Akpésìrì

djẹ gàn nẹ Ẹ àvwánrè


1PL

‘Akpesiri ran faster than us (PL)’

(e)Akpésìrì

djẹ gàn nẹ Ẹ àyèn


3PL

‘Akpesiri ran faster than them’

(f)Akpésìrì

djẹ gàn nọ Ẹ mẹ


1SG

‘Akpesiri ran faster than me’ 87


Table 11: Degree construction of Urhoboprepositions in the positive degree

19. Isábáto mẹẸ kpénu Ø Ø Ø Shoe my go up ‘My shoe is high’

20. Ẹ sè sìkẹẸrẹ Ø Ø Ø Ese move near ‘Ese is close (to sb/sth)’

In the comparative the pattern where the standardof comparison is in the genitive (possessive)case, the standard marker is a low-toned nẹ . Thisis occasioned by the ATR requirement of theinitial vowel of the standard of comparison.However, where the standard of comparison is inthe nominative case, a low-toned nọ is used asthe standard marker for the first and secondperson singular (see sentences 21 (a) and (b)below) while a low-toned nẹ is used for othergrammatical persons.

Table 12: Degree construction of Urhoboprepositions in the comparative degree

DEGREE CONSTRUCTION OFGRADABLE PREDICATES WITHMULTIPLE TAXONOMY

In some languages of the world like Englishdegree constructions are in the positive,comparative and superlative. In Urhobo thereare no superlatives. Degree constructions withmultiple taxonomies take on intensifiers toshow how much of the feature being graded ispresent in the topic of comparison, compared tothe standard of comparison. The choice ofintensifier – màá/ mèé, depends on the ATRrequirement of the vowel in the verb stem. Insome cases, the degree morpheme and standardof comparison are not stated. The table belowillustrates these.

Table 13 Degree construction of gradablepredicates with multiple taxonomy

Observe that the standard marker is a low tonewhere the standard of comparison is stated.

88


The above sentences also show thatthere are two variants of the intensifier – [mâ]and [me]. The following analyses show theATR patterning in the sentences.

24 a) Mâ ghwo[ mâ wo] –

ATR [a] goes with – ATR [o] b) Mâ kre [mâ krε] –

ATR [a] goes with – ATR [ε] c) Me gbe [me gbè ]

+ATR [e] goes with + ATR [e]d) Mâ djẹ gan [Mâ ẹ ga]ɟ

– ATR[a] goes with - ATR [ε] and – ATR [a]

e) Mâ mwa fuan [ Mâ ŋwà fwa] – ATR [a] goes with – ATR [a] and – ATR [u]

ConclusionThe foregoing shows how Urhobo verbs,adverbs and some prepositions can be graded.Unlike in other languages, Urhobo adjectivesdo not seem to be gradable, probably becausethey are derived from verbs. It can also beobserved that gradability in Urhobo is mainlybinary. Where more taxonomy is involved inthe opposition, intensifiers are used to showhow much an entity has a particular feature.

The degree morpheme is directional ascan be seen from the glosses (pass meaningmore than). The variant of this morpheme isvrẹn, also means pass. It is used mostly byolder speakers of Urhobo. Both morphemesindicate direction just as with Yorùbá in thedata presented in Table 4 and the other non-African languages presented in Tables 2 and 3above. The locative function presents thedegree marker as a type of preposition –‘odjedia’. It is also a part of the VP slot andfunctions as an adverb as well. Thus themorpheme fuses several functions in one as ischaracteristic of fusional languages likeGreenlandic Eskimo and Russian (SeeO’Grady, Archibald, Aronoff & Rees-Miller2001: 356-7; Katamba, 1993: 58). Thisphenomenon could have typological

implications for the classification of Urhobo.Note also that in all the Urhobo degreeconstructions analysed the standard ofcomparison occur in the sentence final position.

ReferencesAjiboye, Emuobonuvie M. (2010). A

Morphosyntactic analysis of verb formsin Urhobo. Unpublished manuscript.

Ajiboye, Emuobonuvie. M. (2012). Inflectionalmorphology of Urhobo verbs.Unpublished

Master’s Thesis. University of Port Harcourt.Aziza, Rose O. and Rita O. Mebitaghan .

(2011). Issues in transcribing andtranslating Urhobo proverbs intoEnglish. Unpublished manuscript

Aziza, Rose O. (2008). Neutralization ofcontrast in the vowel system in Urhobo.Studies in African Linguistics. Volume37, Number 1, 2008. Pp1-19

Aziza, Rose (2007). Urhobo Phonology. In OreYusuf (ed) Basic Linguistics forNigerian Languages Teachers. PortHarcourt: M&J Grand OrbitCommunications Limited. Pp 273-289

Bogal-Allbritten, Elizabeth. (2008). Gradabilityand degree constructions in Navajo.Honors

Thesis, Linguistics Department, SwathmoreCollege.www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/Linguistics/.../Bogal-Allbritten.thesis.pdf.Assessed June 2011

Constantinescu, Camelia. (2011).Representation of gradability.LINGUIST List . Issue 22.2083http://humleidon.edu/lud/gradability/Assessed June 2011.

Ege, E.O. (1985). Obe re Odjegba re Urhobore a to si (First Urhobo GrammarBook) Lagos: A.E InternationalCompany.

Ejele, P.E (2003). Semantics, lexical structure& lexical relations. Aba: NationalInstitute for Nigerian Languages.

89

http://humleidon.edu/lud/gradability/




Katamba, Francis. (1993). Morphology.London: Macmillan Press Ltd.

Kennedy, Christopher. (2000). NSF CAREERBCS-0094263:SCALARRepresentations in Natural LanguageSemantics.

Kennedy, Christopher & Irene Heim 24.979.Topics in Semantics, Fall 2002.(Massachusetts Institute of Technology:MITOpenCourseWare),http://ocw.mit.edu(Assessed 08June, 2011). License:Creative Commons BY-NC-SA

Kibort, Anna. (2007). Inventory ofmorphosyntactic features. InMorphosyntactic Features. 1 November2007.http://www.Surrey.ac.uk/lis/smg/morohosyntacticfeatures.html. pp 11-24.Assessed March 2009.

Morzycki, Marcin (2009). Degree modificationof gradable nouns; size adjectives andadnominal degree

morphemes.http://linguistlist.org/issues/22/22-2083 Assessed June 2011.

Nordquist, Richard (2011). Gradability.About.com Guide 2011. The New YorkTimes Company. Assessed June 2011.

O’Grady, William, John Archibald, MarkAronoff, Janie Rees-Miller (eds).(2001). Contemporary linguistics: AnIntroduction to word structure ingenerative grammar. Fourth Edition.Boston: Bedford St Martins’s.

Sasson, Galitt (2007). Vagueness, gradabilityand typicality: A ComprehensiveSemantic analysis.http://weidmans.info/sasson-Galit/index.html.Assessed June 2011

Weisser, Martin. (2005). Gradability.http://linguistlist.org/issues..... AssessedJune 2011

90

http://linguistlist.org/issues



http://linguistlist.org/issues/22/22-2083%20Assessed%20June%202011

http://linguistlist.org/issues/22/22-2083%20Assessed%20June%202011

http://www.Surrey.ac.uk/lis/smg/morohosyntacticfeatures.html.%20%20pp%2011-24

http://www.Surrey.ac.uk/lis/smg/morohosyntacticfeatures.html.%20%20pp%2011-24

http://ocw.mit.edu/


91


92

degree construction of gradable predicates in … · 2 1.1 scope & methodolgy the study is a...

Documents