Werner does not comment on Lepsius’s data, nor does he provide evidence in his Nobiin grammar of such derived transitive and ditransitive verbs. However, his verb paradigms indicate that – unlike transitive verbs – intransitive verbs never take the *-(i)r*-extension in their unmarked 2sg imperative forms.[^45] The absence of *-(i)r* is, no doubt, due to the original restriction of *-(i)r* to transitive and ditransitive verbs.
Werner does not comment on Lepsius’s data, nor does he provide evidence in his Nobiin grammar of such derived transitive and ditransitive verbs. However, his verb paradigms indicate that – unlike transitive verbs – intransitive verbs never take the *-(i)r*-extension in their unmarked [2sg]({sc}) imperative forms.[^45] The absence of *-(i)r* is, no doubt, due to the original restriction of *-(i)r* to transitive and ditransitive verbs.
[^45]: Werner, *Grammatik des Nobiin,* pp. 220-273.
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
2sg imperative forms of transitive verbs, by contrast, can be assigned to two groups, a group characterized by the *-(i)r*-extension and another group which does not exhibit this extension.
(16)
(17)
| | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (11) | nèer | “sleep!” |
| (12) | àag | “sit!” |
| (13) | kîr | “come!” |
| (14) | júù | “go!” |
| (15) | fîyy | “lie (down)!” |
(18)
(19)
[2sg]({sc}) imperative forms of transitive verbs, by contrast, can be assigned to two groups, a group characterized by the *-(i)r*-extension and another group which does not exhibit this extension.
(20)
(21)
(22)
(23)
| | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (16) | tìg-ìr | “cover!” |
| (17) | fáay-ìr | “kill!” |
| (18) | úkk-îr | “listen!” |
| (19) | dèg-îr | “tie!” |
| (20) | kàb | “eat!” |
| (21) | dòllì | “love!” |
| (22) | nàl | “see!” |
| (23) | êd | “take!” |
Apparently, having ceased to be a productive derivational morpheme, Nobiin *-(i)r* has become a morphological residue of the originally causative *\*-(i)r*-extension. This process in which “a morpheme loses its grammatical-semantic contribution to a word but retains some remnant of its original form and thus becomes an indistinguishable part of a word’s phonological construction” can be described by Hopper’s term “demorphologization.”[^46]
@ -221,28 +216,37 @@ Unlike the Old Nubian and Nobiin *-(i)r*-extension, which can be attached to int
[^47]: Examples drawn from Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” pp. 132–133, 215.
Abdel-Hafiz claims that Mattokki *-(i)r* is a “transitivizing suffix.”[^48] However, he overlooks the fact that it also occurs on some intransitive verbs such as “move down” and “fall,”[^49] without, however, turning them into transitive verbs. These examples suggest that the functional weight of the *-(i)r*-extension is low.
[^48]: Abdel-Hafiz, *A Reference Grammar of Kunuz Nubian,* pp. 105–106.
[^49]: Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” pp. 157, 214.
(27)
| | | |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| (27) | dig-ir | “fall” |
| (28) | ʃug-ur | “move down, descend” |
(28)
It is conceivable that the loss of morphological meaning observed with *-(i)r* has triggered the emergence of a reduplicated causative extension which exhibits more phonological material and more functional weight than *-(i)r.* The resulting (unattested) *-ir-ir*-suffix has presumbably undergone a phonotactic change affecting the second component of this suffix. After the metathesis of the last two segments, the resulting suffix *-ir-ri* (allomorph *-ur-ri*) has come to be realized as [iddi] or [uddi]. Massenbach accounts for this reduplicated causative suffix in her Mattokki study (29)–(30), but in Abdel-Hafiz’s grammar it is not mentioned.[^50]
It is conceivable that the loss of morphological meaning observed with *-(i)r* has triggered the emergence of a reduplicated causative extension which exhibits more phonological material and more functional weight than *-(i)r.* The resulting (unattested) *-ir-ir*-suffix has presumbably undergone a phonotactic change affecting the second component of this suffix. After the metathesis of the last two segments, the resulting suffix *-ir-ri* (allomorph *-ur-ri*) has come to be realized as [iddi] or [uddi]. Massenbach accounts for this reduplicated causative suffix in her Mattokki study, as seen in the following examples,[^50] but in Abdel-Hafiz’s grammar it is not mentioned.
[^50]: Examples from Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” p. 132.
[^50]: Massenbach, “Wörterbuch des nubischen Kunûzi-Dialektes,” p. 132.
As in Mattokki, Andaandi *‑(i)r ~ ‑(u)r* is attached to intransitive verb bases deriving transitive stems.[^52] Both the simple *‑(i)r ~ ‑(u)r* and the reduplicated extension *‑iddi ~ ‑uddi* are attested on these bases.
@ -616,11 +620,9 @@ The converb in (104) indicates an event prior to the event designated by the mai
[^117]: Lepsius’s German translation reads: “angekommen gingen sie zu ihm.”
In (105) the converb expresses an event which is simultaneous with the event designated by the main verb. In this latter case the converb can be interpreted as an adverbial modifier of the main verb.[^118]
[^118]: Example from Lepsius, *Nubische Grammatik,* p. 364.
