Plural addressee marker and grammaticalization in Barayin

Abstract

This article describes two distinct but related grammaticalization paths in Barayin, an East Chadic language. One path is from a first-person plural pronoun to a first-person dual pronoun. Synchronically, the pronominal forms in Barayin with first-person dual number must now be combined with a plural addressee enclitic, nà, to create a first-person plural pronoun. This path is identical to what has been documented in Philippine-type languages. The other path is from a first-person dative suffix to a suffix dedicated to first-person hortative. This path of grammaticalization has not been discussed in the literature. It occurred in several related languages, and each case results in a hortative form with a dual subject. Hortative forms with a plural subject are created by adding a plural addressee marker to the dual form. The plural addressee marker in Chadic languages is derived from a second-person pronominal.

Grammaticalization, Language Contact, and the Emergence of a Hortative in Guaraché, a New Mixed Language in Paraguay

“…10-13). Lovestrand (2018) discusses the grammaticalization of a first-person dative suffix to a suffix dedicated to first-person hortative in the East Chadic language Barayin. I am not aware of any case of grammaticalization of a personal pronoun into a hortative marker.…”

We Shall Fight: Speaker-Exclusive We as a Grammatical Metaphor

“…Moreover, in many languages there is one single form of first person plural pronoun, and therefore it is not possible to distinguish between inclusive we (which includes in the syntactic function both speaker and receiver/s) and exclusive we (which marks the absence of the receiver/s in the syntactic function) (Prieto 1977). This opposition has been analysed in a more comprehensive perspective (including the possibility of applying it also to the second person), with reference to a wide choice of typologically different languages (Filimova 2005;Lim 2018;Lovestrand 2018). ISSN 1948-5425 2020 In media and political contexts, it is possible to exploit this vagueness and ambiguity of pronominal reference for persuasive aims.…”