NOUN DERIVATION IN LUTIRIKI

A MORPHOPHONOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION

ii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS

ADJ DIMIN FV GP IPA LOC LOC N PR MDT MP-RULES MS N NCM NGP NOC NOM P N-SG Pr P PL P-RULES RT SG ST TGC V Adjective Diminutive Final Vowel Generative Phonology International Phonetic Alphabet Location Locative Noun Prefix Morphological Doubling Theory Morphophonemic Rules Morpho Semantic Noun Noun Class Marker Natural Generative Phonology No Ordering Condition Nominalization Prefix Number Singular Pre Prefix Plural Phonetically Conditioned Rules Root Singular Stem True Generalization Condition Verb Zero Morph/Null

iii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Phonetic inventory of Lutiriki consonants Table 2: Standard orthography and IPA representation of Lutiriki consonants Table 3: Phonetic inventory of Lutiriki pure vowels Table 4: Phonetic inventory of Lutiriki long vowels Table 5: Standard orthography and IPA representation of Lutiriki vowels

iv

ABSTRACT
This is a study on derivational noun morphology of Lutiriki. Noun derivation in Lutiriki is both morphologically and phonologically conditioned hence a morphophonological description has to be undertaken to make insightful analysis of the derivational processes. Noun derivation is indeed a morphophonological process that leads to the formation of new lexemes that bear new meaning. The study elicited data from native speakers of Lutiriki using five informants who have competence in the language. The data collected has been analyzed using an eclectic approach of Natural Generative Phonology and Morphological Doubling Theory. Derivational noun morphology in Lutiriki is achieved through morphological processes of affixation, compounding and reduplication. Bound morphemes derive nouns through a process of affixation, while free morphemes are joined to each other through a process of compounding to derive compound nouns. Reduplication requires a double occurrence of a morphological constituent that shares a semantic and phonological generalization. The process of reduplication fuses a base lexeme and a reduplicant to derive a reduplicated word form. Chapter one introduces the topic under study, the statement of the problem, the objectives of the study, the hypotheses, the rationale, the theoretical framework, the scope and limitations, the literature review and methodology that guided this study. Chapter two gives an introduction to the phonology and morphology of Lutiriki. This precipitates the need to undertake a morphophonological description into the derivation of Lutiriki nominals. Chapter three, four and five expound on affixation, compounding and reduplication as the three morphological processes in the derivation of Lutiriki nouns.

The study comes to a conclusion in chapter six. The investigation reveals that a morphophonological description within the theoretical framework of Natural Generative Phonology and Morphological Doubling Theory is adequate in the analysis of Lutiriki noun derivation.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS..................................................................iii LIST OF TABLES..................................................................................................................iv ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................................v CHAPTER ONE......................................................................................................................1 1.0. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................1 1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE LANGUAGE OF STUDY ..................................................1 1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM...............................................................................2 1.3 OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................3 1.4 HYPOTHESES .................................................................................................................3 1.5 RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY ...................................................................................3 1.6 SCOPE AND LIMITATION ...........................................................................................4 1.7 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ..................................................................................4 1.7.1 Natural Generative Phonology......................................................................................4 The True Generalization condition (TGC)............................................................................5 The NO ordering condition ....................................................................................................6 Phonetically conditioned rules (P-rules) .............................................................................6 Morphophonemic rules (MP-Rules) ......................................................................................7 Sandhi Rules.............................................................................................................................7 Word-formation rules..............................................................................................................7 1.7.2 Morphological Doubling Theory (MDT) .....................................................................8 The morphology of reduplication...........................................................................................8 Essential morphological insights of MDT ...........................................................................10 1.8.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................................11 1.9 METHODOLOGY .........................................................................................................13 1.9.1 Data collection ..............................................................................................................13 1.9.2 Data analysis .................................................................................................................14 CHAPTER TWO...................................................................................................................15 2.0 INTRODUCTION TO PHONOLOGY AND MORPHOLOGY ...............................15 2.1 LUTIRIKI PHONOLOGY ............................................................................................15 2.1.1 Phonetic Inventory of Consonants .............................................................................15

vii

2.1.2 Phonetic Inventory of Vowels .....................................................................................17 2.2 PHONOLOGICAL PROCESSES INVOLVING VOWELS......................................18 2.2.1 Glide formation ............................................................................................................18 2.2.2 Vowel lengthening ........................................................................................................20 2.2.3 Vowel deletion ..............................................................................................................22 2.2.4 Compensatory lengthening .........................................................................................23 2.3 LUTIRIKI MORPHOLOGY ........................................................................................23 2.3.1 Bound vs Free morphemes ..........................................................................................23 2.3.2 Noun-class morphology ...............................................................................................24 Noun-class system of Lutiriki ..............................................................................................25 2.4 SUMMARY......................................................................................................................35 CHAPTER THREE...............................................................................................................36 NON DERIVATION IN LUTIRIKI THROUGH AFFIXATION....................................36 3.0 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................36 3.1 AFFIXATION BY CHANGING THE WORD CATEGORY. ...................................36 3.1.1 Verb to noun derivation ..............................................................................................36 [+animate] nouns ..................................................................................................................37 (27)...........................................................................................................................................37 (28) .........................................................................................................................................38 [-animate] nouns ..................................................................................................................39 (30) ..........................................................................................................................................40 (31) ..........................................................................................................................................40 3.1.2 Adjective to Noun derivation ......................................................................................41 (32)...........................................................................................................................................41 3.2 Affixation by maintaining the word category. .............................................................42 3.2.1 Prefixation and Glide formation .................................................................................42 3.2.2 Prefixation and Noun class ........................................................................................43 (34) ..........................................................................................................................................44 3.3 SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................45 CHAPTER FOUR..................................................................................................................46 NON DERIVATION IN LUTIRIKI THROUGH COMPOUNDING..............................46 4.0 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................46 4.1 Endocentric compounds. ................................................................................................48

viii

4.2 Exocentric compounds.....................................................................................................48 4.3 Copulative compounds. ..................................................................................................50 4.4 SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................51 CHAPTER FIVE...................................................................................................................52 NOUN DERIVATION IN LUTIRIKI THROUGH REDUPLICATION.........................52 5.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................52 5.1 Morphological reduplication in Lutiriki ......................................................................52 5.1.1 Total reduplication .......................................................................................................53 5.1.2 Addition of a linker morph Khu .............................................................................54 Semantic value of Face off ................................................................................................55 Semantic value of distributiveness. .....................................................................................56 5.2 Forms of morphological reduplication. .............................................................................57 5.2.1 Class maintaining reduplication. ................................................................................58 5.3 PHONOLOGICAL REDUPLICATION IN LUTIRIKI .............................................59 5.4 SUMMARY......................................................................................................................60 CHAPTER SIX......................................................................................................................61 6.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ...............................................................................61 6.1 RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................62 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................64

ix

CHAPTER ONE
1.0. INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE LANGUAGE OF STUDY The language under study is Lutiriki spoken by Tiriki speech community. Lutiriki is a Bantu language under the category of Western Bantu of Kenya. Lutiriki is an agglutinating language just like all other Bantu languages. Lutiriki in itself is one of the 17 dialects that comprise the Luyia speech community. According to Were, G (1967), Luyia dialects are classified into two major groups based on shared boundaries and mutual intelligibility. Lutiriki falls under the Idakho, Maragoli cluster of dialects. The Batiriki people are believed to have come from Misri in Egypt led by a man called Mudiriki from whom the name Tiriki was coined. It is also believed that the Tiriki people the Abatirichi joined the Terik of the Nandi and through intermingling, the Tiriki adopted the Kalenjin name Terik and bantuised it Abatirichi and became a united people. Were G. (1967:74). The most evident proof of this belief is the circumcision rites performed by Tiriki people which were borrowed from the Kalenjin. Any member of the other Luyia dialect who undergoes this circumcision rite is regarded to be Mutirichi. According to Osogo, J. (1966), the Tiriki people comprise of different clans dialects put together. The Idakho, Maragoli, Banyole and Bisukha have found their people become Batiriki because of their proximity to the Tiriki people. They have been assimilated into Tiriki by undergoing the circumcision rites. In the present day, the Tiriki people are found in Vihiga district of Western Kenya. They have their chief centre at Hamisi and Kaimosi where the latter was recognized due to increased missionary activities in that place. It is also believed that these two chief centres represent the two emerging dialects of Lutiriki. The Batirichi inhabiting the larger Kaimosi area are referred to as bagwi and are believed to speak the pure Lutiriki. They cover the

Eastern Tiriki region (ibugwi). The other group inhabiting the Western region (imadioli), is believed to speak adulterated Lutiriki with a lot of influence from Lulogooli. The Batirichi inhabiting this region are labeled baduneni. Due to migrations and intermarriages, a considerable number of Tiriki people are found in settlement schemes notably Nandi, Kitale and Lugari in Rift valley.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Derivation is a morphological process that results in the creation of new lexemes. As a morphological process, derivation is a word formation process that entails creating a new form of a word that bears a new meaning. Noun derivation is a regular and productive morphophonological process. However, not much has been done on this field. Njoroge (1978) has done a study on Kikuyu deverbatives and other nominalizations. His study focused on Kikuyu deverbatives and analyses nominalization in Kikuyu in passing. Njoroge admits that nominalization has been given very little attention. To the best of my knowledge, there exists a big linguistic gap on derivational noun morphology. Apart from the study done by Njoroge (1978) on Kikuyu deverbatives and nominalizations, there is nothing much that has been studied with regard to Bantu languages. Of my interest is the linguistic gap that is prevalent in Luyia dialects. This study examines how nominals are derived morphologically in Lutiriki and the extent to which Natural Generative Phonology and Morphological Doubling Theory account for these derivations. The investigation is governed by the following research questions: i) What is the noun class morphology of Lutiriki? ii) What are the main morphological processes of deriving nouns in Lutiriki? iii) What are the morphophonological processes of noun derivation in Lutiriki? iv) Do Natural Generative Phonology and Morphological Doubling Theory competently handle the morphological and phonological processes of noun derivation in Lutiriki?

There is thus the need to undertake a morphophonological description of the processes that are involved in the derivation of Lutiriki nominals.

1.3 OBJECTIVES In view of the Statement of the Problem, the study examined derivational noun morphology in Lutiriki with the following objectives: i) ii) iii) iv) To analyze the morphological features of Lutiriki nominals. To investigate how derivational bound morphemes are attached to the root morpheme to create new lexemes. To investigate how derivational free morphemes are attached to each other to derive compound nouns. To analyze the linguistic units that are affected by morphological reduplication.

1.4 HYPOTHESES In relation to the Statement of the Problem and the Objectives stated above, this study set out to test the following Hypotheses: i) ii) iii) iv) Morphological and phonological processes are fundamental in noun derivation in Lutiriki. Consonants that occur in Lutiriki dictate the morphology of the derived noun. Vowels that occur in Lutiriki dictate the morphology of the derived noun. Morphological Doubling Theory can account for morphological reduplication in Lutiriki.

1.5 RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY

Nominals and verbals are pre-requisite linguistic elements of any language. Performance is achieved first by understanding the basic elements of a language. There is therefore the need to study the noun morphology of Lutiriki in order to understand the language. The study is

significant in the sense that nouns are derivations of different types and these derivations are realized through morphological and phonological processes. To the best of my knowledge, there is no study that has been done on Lutiriki noun morphology. This study will therefore provide literature for future studies on other linguistic elements of Lutiriki.

1.6 SCOPE AND LIMITATION

This is a synchronic study of Lutiriki aimed at analyzing the Lutiriki noun morphology and the phonological and morphological processes involved in the derivation of Lutiriki nominals. The study will be focused on Lutiriki dialect of Luyia but will only make reference to the other dialects in the event of reinforcing a concept which needs comparison.

1.7 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK This study adopts an eclectic approach. This approach is necessitated by the fact that the study is a morphophonological description of noun derivation in Lutiriki. The conceptual approach therefore, will not competently handle the morphophonological processes that derive noun forms.

1.7.1 Natural Generative Phonology

This study partly adopts Natural Generative Phonology approach. Natural Generative Phonology is a theory propagated by Hooper (1976), Vennemann (1971) Hudson (1975) and Rudes (1976). Natural Generative Phonology (NGP) is a component of generative grammar that assigns the correct phonetic representations to utterances in such a way as to reflect a native speakers internalized grammar. According to Hooper (1976), the major claim of NGP is that Speakers construct only generalizations that are surface true and transparent. If this does not happen the generalizations that will be constructed will be artificial. These surface true and transparent generalizations are the key to formulating universal substantive principles of phonology and morphology. Natural surface true and transparent

generalizations are derived using rules which form an interface between phonological and phonetic representation of a word. NGP as an improvement of GP has developed a constraint to the theory to avoid over generation. Hooper states that the long range goal of theoretical linguists is to formulate a theory that is just powerful enough to describe correctly all the facts of a natural language; but at the same time is not so powerful that it describes systems or predicts phenomenon that never occur in natural language (1976:4-5) Transformational Generative Phonology was to powerful for a natural language and has to be constrained. According to Abdulmajid (2000), the constraints placed on possible underlying forms are meant to limit abstractness such that surface forms can be mapped onto the underlying forms in a systematic and predictive manner. Hooper (1976) came up with two general conditions on phonological analyses which will help speakers to decode a multiplicity of different speech sound. These conditions are

The True Generalization condition (TGC)

TGC states that phonological generalization will be regarded as true only if it is true at the level of phonetic representations. This means that generalizations and phonological rules must be true of all the surface forms. TGC therefore states that in a language, the speakers will only internalize the phonological elements presented to them during the learning and acquisition process but avoid the mental representations that are not in line with the acquired phonological elements. True Generalization Condition also demands a relationship between surface forms and other surface forms. This is realized in the rules that native speakers formulate in their natural language. This relationship is geared towards eliminating abstract forms.

The NO ordering condition

According to Abdulmajid (2000), NOC ordering condition states that rules may contract intrinsic ordering relations but they may not be extrinsically ordered. Rules therefore can apply several times to a form and not in a specified order as long as that form meets that structural description. Natural Generative Phonology raises issues of abstractness in addition to naturalness. It proposes that abstractness of underlying representations be constrained by proposing that all underlying and surface forms have a direct relationship. Abdulmajid (2000:12). This means that there is a direct relationship between the phonological features that appear in the lexical representation of a morpheme and those that occur in the surface representation of that morpheme. This is referred to as the Strong Naturalness Condition. Natural Generative Phonology limits its approach to formulations of constraints and principles whose effect is to limit the generative power. This puts limit on the distance permitted between abstract underlying representations and surface representations. These constraints of morphological and phonological grammar however, must represent true generalization about the surface structure of the language. Hooper has tried to illustrate how NGP is the best suited approach for the study of substantive principles by highlighting rule types in NGP and morphology in a Natural Generative Grammar. NGP is concerned with constraints that represent true generalization about the surface representations. These surface generalizations are further divided into types.

Phonetically conditioned rules (P-rules)

P-rules work within the confines of phonetically motivated processes. The environments in which the alternations for these rules occur are purely phonetic terms. They relate to the way vocal tract is constituted physically in the production of sound segments. Since P-rules are phonetically motivated, they are natural and are found in all the languages of the world. These rules are said to be productive, regular and universal.

Morphophonemic rules (MP-Rules)

MP- rules result in changes in phonological features occasioned by morpho-syntactic or lexical environment. The syntax, morphology, phonology and lexical information of a language are basic in MP-rules. MP-rules take into consideration the morphological, lexical and syntactic information. This information includes word boundaries and lexical categories. Unlike P-rules, MP-rules are language specific because the rules are as a result of sound meaning correspondences of individual languages.

Sandhi Rules
Sandhi rules take a structural analysis dealing with word boundaries. These rules fall between P-rules and MP-rules. On one hand, Sandhi rules operate like MP-rules by taking into consideration word boundaries that are determined by morphosyntactic information. On the other hand, Sandhi rules operate like P-rules for the simple reason that they are determined by word boundaries bearing phonetic information. According to Abdulmajid (2000:16) The word boundary that functions in a Sandhi rule must be considered a syntactic boundary because it is determined arbitrarily by the syntax and semantics and not by the phonology. On the other hand the word boundary resembles a phonological boundary because it can coincide with a syllable boundary Just like P- rules, Sandhi rules are also productive and regular.

Word-formation rules
Word-formation rules account for derivations which are morphologically and phonologically conditioned. These rules specify the morphophonological processes that result in formation of new lexemes. Word-formation rules describe morphological elements which can either be combined together to form compound words, those which can form independent meaning bearing lexemes and those that double a morphological element to derive a base and reduplicant combined. Word-formation rules determine the morphological constituents of a word and how these constituents are arranged in a word.

1.7.2 Morphological Doubling Theory (MDT)

This study also adopts Morphological Doubling Theory (MDT) in the description of Lutirirki morphological reduplication. This theory was put forward by Sharon Inkelas and Cheryl Zoll in 2005. The essential claim of this theory is that reduplication results when the morphology calls twice for a constituent of a given semantic description, with possible phonological modification of either or both constituents. Inkelas and Zoll (2005). In general there are two approaches to duplication namely: the phonological copying and morpho-semantic feature duplication. MDT however finds its ground on the morpho-semantic (MS) feature duplication approach which provides for multiple instantiation of identical features. On the other hand, MDT does not rule out phonological copying approach per se, but reserves it for analysis of purely phonologically driven duplication. In MDT, the reduplicant and the base are both generated by the morphology as part of a construction which also embodies semantic and phonological generalization.

The morphology of reduplication

MDT assumes the following basic structure for morphological reduplication. [Output] [F +some added meaning]

/Input/ [F] Adapted from Inkelas & Zoll (2005:6)

/Input / [F] where [F] = semantic feature bundle.

A reduplicated stem has two daughters that are featurally identical in that, they mean the same thing. The notion of having two sisters being identical semantically makes MDT approach differ from phonological copying theories. Zoll and Inkelas (2005) state that By

requiring the two sisters to be identical only semantically, MDT makes a prediction which sets it apart from all phonological copying theories: other kinds of deviation, whether morphotactic or phonological, between the two copies are expected to be possible. Using the MDT basic structure, we can analyze reduplication in Lutiriki as follows: Henza (verb) Mhenza (noun) Mhenza-henzi to look one who looks around one who likes looking around [ Mhenzi-henzi ] [F +some added meaning]

/Mhenzi/ [F]

/henzi/ [F]

In this example, /mhenza/ is the base while /henzi/ is the reduplicant both sharing the same semantic description of one who looks around but differ phonologically. This is realized by morphology calling twice the stem whereby the reduplicant has an empty morph. On this account, morphological reduplication under MDT is double (insertion) of a morphological constituent such as stem or root. There is no inherent morphological asymmetry between the daughters. Inkelas and Zoll (2005:11) MDT also employs the use of morphological constructions to account for reduplication. A construction refers to any morphological rule or pattern that combines sisters into a single constituent. Each individual affix or reduplication process is a unique morphological construction. Syntax = N Semantics = watery/light in texture Phonology = [maatsi maatsi]

Syntax = N Semantics = water Phonology = [maatsi]

Syntax = N Semantics = water Phonology = [maatsi]

The two morphological elements should agree in their semantic (and syntactic) specification but not necessarily phonologically. A morphological construction is achieved by having two identical morphological constituents in terms of semantics and syntax. One of the daughters in a reduplication construction should be the stem.

Essential morphological insights of MDT

i) Thesis of Semantic Identity The identity between copies is semantic rather than phonological in that the two can differ phonologically as a result of: a) Copies being identical in input but differ in output because of special or normal reduplicative phonology.

e.g.

[a - b] a x b x

identical copies in morphological input. unidentical phonological outputs. identical inputs.

b) Copies are different in input

10

e.g.

[a - b] a x b y

identical copies in M-input. different phonological outputs. different inputs.

The scenario in (a) is common to all reduplication theories. However scenario (b) is unique to MDT in that the base and the reduplicant have different inputs, although the aggregate semantics of the inputs is identical. (ii) Thesis of Morphological Targets A reduplication construction targets morphological constituents like affixes, root, stem or word and not phonological constituents like syllable.

1.8.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

This section sets out to review written work done on Luyia dialects and their relevance to the topic under study. The study also reviews studies done on derivational noun morphology in general. The study further reviews written studies on other related Bantu and non-Bantu languages which give insights into noun derivation. According to Fromkin (2003), Derivation is a term used in morphology to refer to the morphological processes that result in creation of new words. Derivation is concerned with word formation by changing the word categories to come up with a new form of a word which has new meaning. Derivational morphemes are added to a root morpheme to create a new lexeme which has new meaning. These derivational morphemes are bound morphemes in form of affixes, that are added before a root word, or added inside a word by breaking into a root word or may be added after a root word. Derivational morphemes are bound morphemes because they must be attached to the host morpheme. Bound morphemes on themselves are meaningless and are regarded as parts of words. Fromkin (2003) states that the form that results from the addition of a derivational morpheme is called a derived word.

11

Inkelas and Zoll (2005) give this study a framework of Morphological Doubling Theory to work with. They make references to earlier theory of phonological copying with a revision of incorporating morphology and semantics in the process of reduplication. Our study finds this theory of great importance in accounting for the morphological process of reduplication in Lutiriki and the linguistic elements that are affected by this process. Njoroge (1978) examines Kikuyu deverbatives and other nominalizations. This study deals with Kikuyu language which is a Bantu language just like Lutiriki. He observes that nominalization is done by use of affixes. These affixes can either be prefixes or suffixes. The process of deriving nouns from verbs by use of prefixes or suffixes is what he refers to derivational morphology. He presents the essential parts in the formulation of nominals from verbs as: the invariable verbal stem, the variable nominal prefix and the terminal vowel. Derivational morphology can derive different types of nominals ranging from agentive nouns, abstract nouns and instrumental nouns. The study done by Njoroge posses a knowledge gap of morphological and phonological processes that derive nominals. Our study will strive to build on the morphological process of affixation as highlighted by Njoroge giving other forms of affixation in the derivation of nominals. Appleby (1947) is one of the first scholars of Luyia language. She looks at the structure of Luyia language developing a noun-class morphology of Luyia language and the phonological processes involved. Her main focus however, is on the orthography, pronunciation, parts of speech and tense. This study therefore will find Applebys analysis of the structure of Luyia language as a primary source. Appleby has developed general noun-class morphology of Luyia. Our study will review this class in analysis of noun-class morphology that is specific to Lutiriki. Abdulmajid (2000) has studied Luwanga morphophonemics using an NGP approach which gives insights into the morphophonological processes in word-formation. This study is important to our study because it uses the same approach as the one we have adopted and more so Luwanga is one of the 17 dialects of Luyia.

12

Kanyoro (1983) has done a study on the syntax of the Luyia dialects. He has looked into the syntactic, morphological and phonological aspects of Luyia dialects. His linguistic survey of Luyia dialects is important in the study of derivational noun morphology. Also important to our study is Mberia (1993) in his discussion of Kitharaka segmental morphophonology. Mberia looks into the phonological and morphological aspect of the nominals and verbs of Kitharaka. Kitharaka being a Bantu language offers credence to our study especially in the analysis of Lutiriki noun morphology and the morphophonological processes involved in deriving nominals. Sumba (1992) studies the phonological processes of Luloogoli, Luwanga and Lubukusu. These are Luyia dialects and their findings are of great importance to the study of derivational noun morphology of Lutiriki. Luloogoli in particular falls under the same cluster with Lutiriki hence reference to Luloogoli phonology is important to our study. Downing (2003) study on Lubukusu reduplication offers valuable information to this study. Lubukusu is a dialect of Luyia language hence its findings has a direct bearing to our study. Okombo (1982) study on morphophonemic alternations in Dholuo is also important to our study. This is because Okombo has used generative phonology in the analysis of Dholuo morphophonemic alternations, an approach which yielded the theory our study has adopted. Atieno (2007) has done a study on Morphological reduplication in Dholuo. This is a study on non-Bantu language that has also adopted MDT. Atienos study is valuable to our study because it has adopted the theory that we are also using. 1.9 METHODOLOGY

1.9.1 Data collection

In this study, we used introspection in collecting the primary data. Being native speakers of Lutiriki, we used the native competence we have in the language to come up with the data. 13

The data we came up with was subjected to a test by cross-checking it with other native speakers of Lutiriki. This was done by presenting structured questions and grammatical tests to our informants to ascertain the validity of our data and to eliminate subjectivity. We incorporated five informants for this study. The informants were native speakers of Lutiriki with competence in the language. The informants ranged from forty years to sixty years of age who have spent their life time in Lutiriki speech community. These informants came from the village to avoid external influence on the data to be collected. We elicited data from these informants by asking structured questions and giving them grammatical tests in form of questionnaires . The data collection process took a duration of approximately one month. We also used natural observation technique in collecting our data. This technique entailed listening to native speakers of Lutiriki in their natural conversations without soliciting information from them. We then did note-take the relevant information from them. Library research was also of great help to this study in reviewing related literature to our study.

1.9.2 Data analysis

Data collected was cross-checked with findings on other related studies. The data was then transcribed phonemically giving the orthography and the gloss.

14

CHAPTER TWO
2.0 INTRODUCTION TO PHONOLOGY AND MORPHOLOGY
The primary aim of this chapter is to give a morphophonological description of Lutiriki noun derivation. The description relies on the knowledge of Lutiriki phonology and morphology with special reference to phonological and morphological processes that are significant in the derivation of Lutiriki nominals.

2.1 LUTIRIKI PHONOLOGY 2.1.1 Phonetic Inventory of Consonants

Lutiriki has a total of 28 consonants. These consonants are classified according to their manner of articulation, place of articulation and state of the glottis. The state of glottis of phonemes that appear in minimal pairs have been differentiated by placing the voiceless phonemes on the left while the voiced segments have been placed on the right. Table 1: Phonetic inventory of Lutiriki consonants Place manner Stops Fricatives Nasals Affricates Laterals Trills Glides Prenasalised Stops Bilabials Labiodentals p b m f t s d n l r mb nd j nj w g Alveolars Palatals Vela r k x g h Glottal PostLabioalveolar velar

15

Below is a table with the standard orthography and International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) symbols representing Lutiriki consonants together with examples of words bearing these phonemes. Table 2: Standard orthography and IPA representation of Lutiriki consonants Orthographic representation p b t d k g b/v f s kh h sh m n ny ng' ch j l r y w mb nd nj ng ts nz IPA symbol /p/ /b/ /t/ /d/ /k/ /g/ // /f/ /s/ /x/ /h/ // /m/ /n/ // // // // /l/ /r/ /j/ /w/ /mb/ /nd/ /nf/ /g/ /ts/ /nz/ Word Examples Transcription /ipiipii/ /ibusi/ /matohi/ /lidala/ /mwikulu/ /lugaga/ /andu/ /ifa:la/ /isako/ /muxana/ /masa:hi/ /uuma/ /maxua/ /imoni/ /ia:mbu/ /iaa/ /luina/ /iama:o/ /malwa/ /imbiri/ /ja:nza/ /liswi/ /isi:mbwa/ /indama/ /injira/ /igoi/ /ma:tsi/ /inzala/ Gloss Motorbike cat mud home Heaven fence People To dress Chair Girl Blood Ugali Information Eye Chameleon Beast Grinding mill squirrel Brew hyena Like Hair Dog tobacco path leopard water hunger

Shipichipichi shibusi Matohi lidala mwikulu lugaga bandu ifaala shisako mukhana masaahi bushuma makhuba imoni inyaambu shinganga luchina shijamaanyo malwa imbiri yaanza liswi isiimbwa Indama Injira Ingoi Maatsi Inzala

16

2.1.2 Phonetic Inventory of Vowels

Lutiriki has a total of five pure vowels. These vowels are classified in terms of front and back vowels. Front vowels are articulated at the front part of the tongue while the back vowels are articulated at the back of the tongue. In addition to the five pure vowels, Lutiriki has five more long vowels which are a product of vowel lengthening. The tables below show the phonetic inventory of Lutiriki pure vowels and long vowels. Table 3: Phonetic inventory of Lutiriki pure vowels i e a Table 4: Phonetic inventory of Lutiriki long (double) vowels i: e: a: Table 5: Standard orthography and IPA representation of Lutiriki vowels Orthographic representation a e i o u aa ee IPA Symbol /a/ /e/ /i/ /o/ /u/ /a:/ /e:/ Word Mawaa Shilenje Lirohi linyonyi Mulimi Maawa maree Examples Transcription /mawa:/ /ilenje/ /lirohi/ /lioi/ /mulimi/ /ma:wa/ /mare:/ Gloss thorns Leg ear Bird land Flowers saliva o: u: o u

17

ii oo uu

/i:/ /o:/ /u:/

bushiindu miroo buluu

/ui:ndu/ /miro:/ /ulu:/

cold Traditional vegetable Pain

2.2 PHONOLOGICAL PROCESSES INVOLVING VOWELS 2.2.1 Glide formation

Glides are regarded as semi-vowels because they are produced when the body of the tongue is raised to take the position of producing high vowels. More so glides are semi-vowels since the palatal glide /j/ corresponds with the front-high vowel /i/ while the bilabial glide /w/ corresponds with the back-high vowels /u/. Glide formation takes two forms, namely: a) Glides formed on the stem This type of glide formation occurs at the boundary of the prefix and the root. Glides formed on the root occur in the environment where the prefix has the back high vowel /u/ followed by front vowels /i/, /e/ or /a/, or an unidentical vowel /o/ According to Abdulmajid (2000), such a form of glide formation entails that the noun root vowel as well as the prefix vowel assimilate to give rise to a glide /w/ which is bilabial without any change in the meaning of the word. This process can be summarized in the following rule and examples. U (1) Gloss. a) Mu-ana c) Mu-imani d) Mu-eyi /mu-ana/ /mu-imani/ / mu-eji/ mwana mwejisti mwimani mweyi mwikho /mwana/ /mweitsi/ /mwimani/ / mweji/ /mwixo/ child teacher miser sweeper relative b) Mu-ejitsi /mu-eitsi W / ____ V

e) Mu-ikho /mu-ixo/

18

It is important to note that glides formed on the stem takes place with singular nouns. b) Glides formed on the root This type of glide formation occurs inside the root. The glide is formed morpheme internally either at morpheme medial position or morpheme final position. Bilabial glide /w/ is formed when the back high vowel /u/ is immediately followed by front-high vowels and front-low vowels. The same rule that accounted for glides formed on the stem also accounts for glides formed on the root. U w/ ________v (2) Gloss a) Lisui b) Lusua c) Muikulu d) Murui e) Ibugui /lisui/ /lusua/ /muikulu/ /murui/ /iBugui/ liswi luswaa mwikulu murwi ibugwi /liswi/ /luswa/ /mwikulu /murwi/ /iugwi/ hair curse heaven head east

In summary, glide formation occurs in Lutiriki when a high vowel [+high], either back or front, precedes another vowel which is not identical with it. A high-back vowel /u/ will form a bilabial glide /w/ if followed by an unidentical vowel. A second person singular prefix /u-/, for instance, becomes a glide when it occurs in front of another unidentical vowel.

19

(3) a) u-ononi b) u-ambakhane c) u-elekhi d) u-ojitsi /u-ononi/ / u-elexi/ / u-oitsi/ woononi weelekhi woojitsi /wo:noni/ / we:lexi/ / wo:itsi/ /u-ambaxane/

Gloss You have spoilt You have escorted You have washed waambakhane /wa:mbaxane/ You have refused

2.2.2 Vowel lengthening

Vowel lengthening is a phonological process of enhancing vocalic length by reduplicating the vowel sound. Lutiriki employs the doubling of the vowel in a predictable manner. The presence of a prenasalised consonant (nasal cluster) being preceded by a vowel, calls for vowel lengthening. The prenasalised consonants in Lutiriki - /nd, nz, mb, g, nj/ - predetermine the doubling of vowels that come before them. The syllable structure of vowel lengthening process can be captured by the following rule: CVNCV CVVNCV

V VV/ _____NC

20

(4) bushiindu baanga shaanje seenje masaambu /ui:ndu/ /a: ga/ /a:nje/ /se:nje/ /masa:mbu/

Gloss Cold How many Mine Aunt leaves

According to Kanyoro (1983:55), Doubling the vowel as written seems to be the most practical way of representing this [process of lengthening] Vowel lengthening is also productive in exclamatory remarks. Words used as interjections double the vowel realizing a non-phonemic length. Kanyoro (1983) (5) a) Baane ! b) Maako ! c) Ngaako ! d) Shikuu ! e) Shakhabulaa! /a:ne/ /ma:ko/ /gaako:/ /ikuu/ /axaula:/ Gloss Surely! Surprise! Trouble! What! Trouble!

This type of vowel lengthening is occasioned by the emotions that are drawn in the utterances due to surprise, annoyance or excitement. Vowel lengthening is used to show emphasis on a particular thing such as distance. This form of vowel lengthening may be done by doubling the vowel or by using more than two vowels consecutively. However, this representation of multi vowels can only be manifested in the orthography. The transcription of both forms will follow the standard form of representing long vowels accounting for the variation brought about by the degree of emphasis. For example: ( 6) Gloss a) Ihare Ihaare Ihaaaare /ihare/ /iha:re/ /iha:re/ 21 Far Quite far Far away

b) Ikulu Ikuulu ikuuulu c) Musilo Musiilo Musiiiilo /musilo/ /musi:lo/ /musi:lo/ stupid rather stupid very stupid /ikulu/ /iku:lu/ /iku:lu/ high high up higher up

Vowel lengthening is further significant in differentiating grammatical meaning of lexical items. This entails that the phonemic distinction of words can be marked by vowel length. Consider the following data: (7) Gloss a) mawaa maawa b) mala maala c) nyola nyoola /mawa:/ /ma:wa/ /mala/ /ma:la/ /ola/ /o:la/ thorns Flowers intestines finish pluck get

2.2.3 Vowel deletion

Vowel deletion is a phonological process of vowel loss. Vowel deletion takes place when two unidentical vowels occur side by side in a word. One of the unidentical vowels is deleted and the retained vowel is lengthened. In other instances, vowel deletion leads to vowel coalescence in that the two sound segments vowels are deleted and replaced with an entirely new sound. The gap left behind by the process of vowel deletion is taken care of by lengthening the retained, or sometimes the introduced vowel. For example: (8) Gloss 22

a) ifuala b) mauwa c) shieyo

/ifuala/ /mauwa/ /iejo/

ifaala maawa sheeyo

/ifa:la/ /ma:wa/ /e:jo/

To dress Flowers broom

2.2.4 Compensatory lengthening

Compensatory lengthening is a phonological process of doubling a vowel that has been retained after the process of deletion. Compensatory lengthening is therefore a process of vowel lengthening motivated by loss of a segment. Atieno (2007: 31) (9) Vowel deletion a)Ifuala /ifuala/ compensatory lengthening ifala /ifala/ ifala /ifala/ ifaala /ifa:la/ Gloss to dress

b) Mauwa /mauwa/ mawa/mawa/mawa /mawa/

maawa /ma:wa/ flowers

2.3 LUTIRIKI MORPHOLOGY

Morphology deals with word formation in general. A single word in Lutiriki may be composed of one or more morphemes. A word with one morpheme may stand out as a root. This type of a word is a lexical content morpheme that cannot be analysed into smaller parts. A word with more than one morpheme is regarded as the stem in that the word is the root combined with an affix or affixes.

2.3.1 Bound vs Free morphemes

A morpheme is the basic word structure of Lutiriki morphology. A morpheme can either be free morpheme or bound morpheme. A single meaning -bearing morpheme in Lutiriki is classified as a free morpheme and constitutes the root word. On the contrary, meaningless morphemes which must be attached to a host morpheme are classified as bound morphemes, and which constitute the stem word. Bound morphemes in Lutiriki are affixes which are attached to host morphemes for them to convey meaning. 23

Affixes used in Lutiriki are classified into two groups namely: prefixes and suffixes. Prefixes are bound morphemes which are attached to the left of the host morpheme while suffixes are bound morphemes that are attached to the right of the host morpheme.

2.3.2 Noun-class morphology

According to Appleby (1961:8) there are twelve classes of nouns in Luyia distinguished by their prefixes. Eight of the 12 have singular and plural forms again distinguished by prefixes. Kanyoro (1983:91) presents nominal system of Luyia in paired classes numbering one to twenty four. Lutiriki, alongside other central and southern dialects of Luyia have with time dropped the pre-prefix o- (singular) and a (plural) only retaining the root and the class prefix as highlighted in the following example. (10) Gloss mubandu ndu person people zero P Pr NCM RT zero P Pr NCM RT Noun class system of Luyia dialects (adapted form Appleby (1961). Class 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Prefix (sg) omu omu li eshi i(n) olu Akha Obu a) Abstract b) singularia tantum Okhu Verbal nouns Prefix (pl) aba emi ama ebi tsi(n) tsin Oru (diminutive)

24

10 11 11a 12

haLocative nouns (place, or at ) MuLocative nouns (in) huLocative nouns (on) Oku

omi (augmentative)

Noun-class system of Lutiriki

Class 1/2 mu- / ba-

This class primarily refers to human beings. The prefix /mu-/ is attached to the root to depict singularity while prefix /a-/ is attached to the root to depict plurality.

(11) 1. SG PL 2. SG PL 3. SG PL 4 .SG PL MuNCM Bandu /mundu/ /andu/ /muere/ /aere/ /musaxuru/ Gloss Person People Old woman Old women Old man Old men Grown up Grown ups

RT FV ndu

NCM RT FV Mu- sher- e NCM RT FV Basher- e NCM RT FV Mu- sakhur- u

NCM RT FV Basakhur- u /asaxuru/ NCM RT FV Mu- hindir- a Muhindira/

NCM RT FV Ba- hindir- a /ahindira/ NCM RT FV

25

5. SG PL

Mu-

khan- a

/muxa:na/ /axana/

Girl Girls

NCM RT FV Ba- khan- a NCM RT FV

It is important to note that there are lexical items that belong to this class but have undergone a process of glide formation. A relative number of such words retain the prefix /a-/ while majority of them alter the vowel that comes after the bilabial fricative to either /e-/ or /i-/. Consider the following data: (12) Gloss 1. muan- a /muana/ baNCM 2. muleader NCM RT FV NCM baNCM 3. muNCM ejits- i /muedzitsi/ RT FV NCM BeNCM 4. muNCM ikhRT FV o /muixo/ NCM BiNCM Class 3 / 4 mu- / miRT FV mi PL /ami/ SG /mweitsi/ PL /eitsi/ SG /mwixo/ leaders teacher teachers relative relatives RT FV RT FV jitsi RT FV RT FV kho PL /ixo/ RT FV ami /muami/ mwnmwana a SG /mwana/ child NCM RT FV NCM RT FV PL /ana/ amchildren RT FV i SG /mwami/

mw- ejits- i

mw- ikh- o

26

This class makes reference to non-animate things notably things to do with agriculture such as plants, trees and land. It also refers to some body parts. The prefix /mu-/ marks singularity while the prefix /mi-/marks plurality. For example: (13) Gloss 1 Muliru /muliru / /miliru/ /mulimi/ /milimi/ /munwa/ /minwa/ /musala/ /misala/ SG PL SG PL SG PL SG PL forest forests parcel of land parcels of land mouth mouths tree trees NCM RT FV Milir- u 2 NCM RT FV Mulim- i NCM RT FV Milim- i 3 NCM RT FV Munw- a NCM RT FV Minw- a 4 NCM RT FV Musal- a NCM RT FV Misal- a NCM RT FV The prefix /mi-/ that marks plural forms in this class is also used with a few substances which are in liquid form such as: (14) minyali / miali/ NCM RT FV Class 5 / 6 Li- / maGloss urine

This class refers to non-animate things. It makes reference to natural things found in the environment such as stones and parts of plants. This class also refers to some of the borrowed words form other languages. For example:

27

(15) Gloss 1 Lichin- a /litina/ /matina/ /Lisambu/ /masambu/ /lisanda/ /Masanda/ /lirohi/ /marohi/ /lia:ti/ /maa:ti/ SG PL SG PL SG PL SG PL SG PL stone stones leaf leaves nail nails ear ears shirt shirts NCM RT FV Machin- a 2 NCM RT FV Li- samb- u NCM RT FV Ma- samb- u 3 NCM RT FV Li- sand- a NCM RT FV Ma- sand- a 4 NCM RT FV Liroh- i NCM RT FV Ma- roh- i 5 NCM RT FV Lishaat- i NCM RT FV Ma- shaat- i NCM RT FV The prefix /ma-/ that marks plurality in this class is also used in uncountable nouns. All substances in liquid form use the prefix as in the examples below: (16) Gloss 1 2 3 4 5 Masaah- i /masahi/ /malwa/ /mare:/ /mahira/ /makura/ Blood Brew Saliva Pus Jelly/oil/fuel 28 NCM RT FV Ma- lw- a NCM RT FV Mare- e NCM RT FV Ma- hir- a NCM RT FV Ma- kur- a

NCM RT FV Class 7/8 shi- /bi-

This class refers mostly to man-made things and some body parts. The prefix /i-/ marks singularity while the prefix /i-/marks plurality. Kanyoro (1983) labels this class as the thing class. Consider the following data: (17) Gloss Shirub- i /irui/ /irui/ /isako/ /isako/ /ilenje/ /ilenje/ /imoli/ /imoli/ SG PL SG PL SG PL SG PL basket baskets chair chairs leg legs calf calves NCM RT FV Bi- rub- i NCM RT FV Shi- sak- o NCM RT FV Bisak- o NCM RT FV Shi-lenj-e NCM RT FV Bi-lenj-e NCM RT FV Shi-mol-i NCM RT FV Bi-mol-i NCM RT FV Class 9 /10 i(n) / tsiThis class primarily refers to names of animals. It also makes reference to some man-made things and parts of the body. The prefix /i-/ or /in-/ mark singularity while the prefix /tsi-/ marks plurality. For example: (18) Gloss Ingokh- o /igoxo/ SG Chicken

29

NCM RT FV Tsi- ngokh- o NCM RT FV I- nyamb- u NCM RT FV Tsi- nyaamb- u NCM RT FV Ingo- i NCM RT FV Tsi- ngoi NCM RT FV Itay- a NCM RT FV Tsi- tay- a NCM RT FV Imon- i NCM RT FV Tsi- mon- i NCM RT FV Class 11/12 Kha- / ru-

/tsigoxo/ /ia:mbu/ /tsia:mbu/ igoi/ tsigoi/ /itaja/ /tsitaja/ /imoni/ /tsimoni/

PL SG PL SG PL SG PL SG PL

Chickens Chameleon Chameleons Leopard Leopards Lantern /lamp Lanterns /lamps Eye Eyes

This is a diminutive class. It denotes the smallness of things especially living things. It also refers to non- animate things. This class is used in a derogatory manner. (19) 1 Khandu /xandu/ /rundu/ /xaxana/ /ruxana/ /xasaxuru/ SG PL SG PL SG Gloss Small thing/ small person Small things/ small people Small girl Small girls Small old man

NCM RT FV Ru- ndu 2 NCM RT FV Kha- khan- a NCM RT FV Ru3 khan- a NCM RT FV Kha- sakhur- u NCM RT FV

30

Ru4

sakhur- u

/rusaxuru/ /xaa:ti/ /rua:ti/ /xasa:suli/ /rusa:suli/

PL SG PL SG PL

Small old men Small shirt Small shirts Small piece of firewood Small pieces of firewood.

NCM RT FV Kha- shaat- i NCM RT FV Ru- shaat- i NCM RT FV Kha- saasul- i NCM RT FV Ru- saasul- i NCM RT FV

Class 13.14

ku- / mi-

This is an augmentative class. It denotes the bigness of things. This class refers to living things especially those with supernatural powers. In some instances, this class may be used in a derogatory manner.

(20) Gloss KuMiKumind- u ndyayau i i / kundu / /mindu/ /kujai/ /mijai/ SG PL SG PL a big thing or a monster big things or monsters a big boy big boys NCM RT FV NCM RT FV NCM RT FV NCM RT FV

Class 15

bu-

31

This class refers to uncountable nouns. Appleby (1963) has divided this class into two groups: a) Abstract nouns b) Singularia tantum Abstract nouns. Abstract nouns are nominals which are not measurable. This type of nouns is not concrete. The prefix /u-/ is significant in deriving nouns from verbs, adjectives and other nouns. (21) Lok- a RT Verb Bewitch Mucheli FV / loka / mu- loch- i NCM RT Witch /mueli / bu- chelNCM i / ueli/ FV Concrete Noun / muloi/ buloch- i FV / uloi/ NCM RT

Abstract Noun Witchcraft

NCM RT FV Adjective Intelligent person Musilo /musilo /

RT FV

Abstract Noun Intelligence. busilo /usilo/

NCM RT FV Adjective Stupid person Singularia tantum

NCM RT FV Abstract noun stupidity

These are nouns which exist in singular forms only. Number cannot be inflected in the root in any way. This type of nouns is analogous with English examples such as equipment, bedding, water and money.

32

(22) Gloss Bush- i RT RT RT RT FV / uuma/ /usera/ /uasi/ Ugali Porridge grass FV FV FV Bushum- a Buser- a Bunyas- i / ui/ Honey

It is also important to note that nouns that exist in singular form which have already undergone glide formation have underlying forms typical of this class. For example: (23) Gloss Buoy- a RT FV /uogo/ /uoja/ bwooy- a RT Glide formation Buong- o RT FV habwoongRT Glide formation Class 16 is at. (24) Gloss HasRT i FV /hasi/ down This class refers to location. The prefix /ha-/ is used to indicate the location where something o FV /wo:go/ brain FV /wo:ja/ pubic hair

33

hanje- e RT FV Class 17 of another thing. ( 25)

/hanje:/ Khu-

my place

This class also refers to location. /xu-/ is a locative prefix denoting something being on top

Gloss Khu- lugagLOC LOC LOC RT RT RT a FV /xulwa:i/ /xulwa:xo/ on the compound on the edge /boundary FV FV mu/xulugaga/ on the fence

Khu- lwaany- i Khu- lwaakh- o

Class 18

This class refers to location. The locative prefix /mu-/ refers to something that is inside. (26) Gloss Muunz- u FV i FV i FV i /mudisi/ inside the boys cottage /muuli:/ inside the bedroom /mugari/ inside /mu:nzu/ inside the house LOC RT Mugar-

LOC RT Mu- buliLOC MuRT dis-

34

LOC

RT

FV

2.3.3 Noun derivation Lutiriki nouns are derived through morphophonological processes. Affixation, compounding and reduplication processes are the key instruments that derive these nouns. Lutiriki nouns are derived from different grammatical classes. In some cases, these nouns may be derived from the same grammatical class

2.4 SUMMARY
Chapter two was aimed at giving a description of Lutiriki phonology and morphology; and the morphophonological processes that are fundamental in the derivation of Lutiriki nominals. The inventory of Lutiriki phonemes has shown that there are a couple of phonemes that are used predominantly with borrowed lexical items. These phonemes include /b/, /p/ and /g/. Noun-class system of Lutiriki is synchronized in the derivation of Lutiriki nouns. This makes it imperative for the description of noun derivation in Lutiriki to be morphophonological.

35

CHAPTER THREE NON DERIVATION IN LUTIRIKI THROUGH AFFIXATION 3.0 INTRODUCTION

Affixation is a process of attaching affixes to a root word or a stem to derive a new word. Affixation is the most productive means of marking derivation in Lutiriki. Lutiriki nominals are derived mainly through a process of prefixation, a sub-class of affixation, whereby lexical information is added to the left of the stem. Affixation derives nouns in Lutiriki in two main ways, namely by: i) ii) Changing the word category. Maintaining the word category.

3.1 AFFIXATION BY CHANGING THE WORD CATEGORY.

This is a form of noun derivation in which the addition of an affix to a root or stem changes the grammatical category of the base lexeme to a different grammatical category .Affixation by changing the word category is predominant in the derivation of Lutiriki nominals. According to Bauer (2003: 32), a derivation affix is one which produces a new lexeme from a base. The addition of a prefix to a lexeme in Lutiriki, changes the class of the lexeme to a new grammatical class. Lutiriki derives nominals from verbal and adjectival grammatical classes. However, the process of deriving nouns from verbs is the most productive compared to adjectivals.

3.1.1 Verb to noun derivation

A noun can easily be derived from a verb in Lutiriki through the process of prefixation. There are different types of prefixes which are attached to the root or the stem to derive a noun. The type of prefix which is added to the base lexeme depends on the noun-class of the

36

base lexeme together with the phonological features of the word to be derived. For instance, [+ animate] word-forms take a different prefix as compared to [-animate] word forms.

[+animate] nouns
These nouns belong to class 1 / 2 in the Noun-class system of Lutiriki. The prefix /mu-/ for singular nouns and /a-/ for plural nouns is attached to verb roots to derive [+animate] nouns. As mentioned in Section 3.1.1, the type of prefix to be used also depends on the phonological features of the base lexeme. Verb roots that begin with vowels entail that the phonological process of glide formation will take place hence changing this type of the class 1/2 prefix /mu-/ to /mw-/ in the derivation of this type of Lutiriki noun. In addition, the final vowel changes from /a/ to /i/ to show the derived noun is an agent, the doer of an action. Consider the following examples:

(27) Verb a) ey RT sweep b) ayits RT graze c) ejitst RT teach d) ony RT -a FV /oa/ Mw Nom P 37 a FV /eitsa/ mw Nom P a FV /ajitsa:/ mw Nom P a FV /eja/ Noun Mw Nom P eyRT sweeper ayits- i RT herdsman ejits RT teacher ony root -i FV /mwoi/ - i FV /mweitsi/ FV /mwajitsi/ i FV /mweji/

heal/save

saviour/healer

Verb roots that begin with consonants attach class 1 /2 prefix /mu-/ to the base lexeme to derive [+ animate nouns]. Likewise, the final vowel /a/ changes to /i/ to indicate that the derived noun is an agent. Consider the following examples:

(28) Verb a) bay RT Play b) Lok RT bewitch c) Sheb a / ea/ RT FV circumcise Mu Nom P circumciser a FV /loka/ a FV /aja/ mu Nom P Player Muwitch sheb RT i FV / muei/ loch - i /muloi/ bayRT Noun i FV /muaji/

Nom P - RT FV

[+ animate] nouns which show the doer of the action are marked by the change of the final vowel from /a/ in the verbal root to /i/ in the nominal stem. This process can be captured by the following rule. a i /___________#[+animate noun]

38

[-animate] nouns
Non animate nouns in Lutiriki can be derived from verbs by attaching different types of prefixes to the root. [-animate] nouns belong to different noun-classes of Lutiriki notably Class 3 / 4 and Class 7/8. The form of the prefix also depends on the phonological features of the base lexeme. [-animate] nominals formed from verbs change the final vowel /a/ of the verb root to /o/ in the derived noun stem. Verbal roots that begin with vowels undergo a phonological process of vowel deletion and vowel lengthening to account for the two vowels that come in succession.For examples: (29) Verb a) ey RT a FV /eja/ shi Nom P broom mu bay o / muajo / Nom P RT game FV -ey -o RT FV Noun /e:jo/

sweep b) bay a /aja / RT FV play

From example 29 above, the noun shi-ey-o has been derived from the verb ey-a. The prefix /shi/- has been attached to the verb to derive the noun. However, this derivational process does not stop there. Phonological processes of vowel deletion and vowel lengthening also have to take place. The vowel in the prefix /shi/- is deleted and the gap left behind filled in by lengthening the initial vowel of the root. The lengthening process comes in to fill in the gap that was left behind by the process of deletion. In addition, the final vowel of the verb also changes from /a/ to /o/ to account for the derivation of [animate] nouns.

39

Abstract nouns can also be derived from verbs in Lutiriki by prefixation. This process also involves changing the final vowel from /a/ to /o/ in the derived word form. (30)

Verb a) Jend- a RT FV Walk b) Sheb- a RT FV Circumcise /ea/ /enda/

Abstract Noun Lu jend o FV / lu.endo/ Nom P RT

journey shisheb - o FV / ieo

Nom P RT

circumcision

Example 30 above shows a process of deriving abstract nouns from verbs. For instance, the abstract noun lu-jend-o has been derived from the verb jend-a by attaching the prefix /lu/- to the verb. This has then been followed by changing the final vowel of the verb from /a/ to /o/ to depict the derived noun. Singularia tantum nouns are also derived from verbs in Lutiriki by attaching the prefix /bu-/ to the base lexeme and changing the final vowel from /a/ to /o/. For example: (31) Verb a) kon a RT FV sleep /kona/ Singular tantum noun bukon - o / ukono/ Nom P RT FV bedding

Example 31 above shows the noun b-ukon-o, which exists in a singular form being derived from the verb kon-a by attaching the prefix /bu-/ to the verb and changing the final vowel from /a/ to /o/.

40

3.1.2 Adjective to Noun derivation

Lutiriki derives nouns from adjectives by adding prefixes to the base lexeme. Unlike verb to noun derivation, adjective to noun derivations in Lutiriki do not affect the final vowel. Majority of nouns derived from adjectives are abstract nouns hence the prefix /bu-/ comes into play. Consider the following examples:

(32) Adjective a) mu NCM black b) mu NCM stupid c) mu lwal e NCM RT sick d) mu jel i NCM RT FV clever/wise e) mwiloli FV / mwiloli/ / mueli/ FV / mulwale/ - sil o RT FV / musilo/ mwam u / mumwamu / RT FV Abstract noun bu mwam u Nom P RT blackness bu sil o Nom P RT FV stupidity bulwale / ulwale/ FV / usilo/ FV /umwamu/

Nom P RT sickness bujel i

Nom P RT FV wisdom bw -ilol -i /wiloli/

NCM RT Proud

Nom P RT FV pride

41

Example 32 above cites instances where abstract nouns have been derived from adjectives. The prefix /mu-/ has been attached to the root of the adjectives to depict the human attributes borne by the given adjectives. To derive the abstract nouns above, the prefix /u-/ is attached to the root of the adjective but on this occasion without changing the final vowel. Example 32(e) on the other hand, presents a case of prefixation and glide formation. This process will be discussed in full length in Section 3.2.1

3.2 Affixation by maintaining the word category.

This is a form of derivational process that involves the addition of an affix to a root word or stem without changing the class of the word. In Lutiriki, prefixation is used to differentiate concrete nouns from abstract nouns. The form of the prefix to be attached to the base lexeme depends on the nounclass of the base lexeme and the phonological form of the base lexeme.

3.2.1 Prefixation and Glide formation

Base lexemes that have undergone a phonological process of glide formation derive abstract nouns by prefixation.. This is done by attaching the prefix /u-/ to the root word. However, due to the final vowel in the prefix /u/- having to precede the initial vowel in the root, a process of glide formation has to take place in the derived abstract noun, hence changing the prefix from /u-/ to /w-/. Besides, the final vowel of the derived abstract noun will not be affected in any way. Consider the data below: (33) Concrete noun a) mwNCM ilwats-i RT FV /mwilwatsi/ Abstract noun bw ilwats i Nom P RT /wilwatsi/ FV

Priest / preacher b) mwam i / mwami/ bw42

Priesthood ami /wami/

NCM RT FV leader c) mwikh- o /mwixo/

Nom P

RT

FV

leadership bw ikh o FV /wixo/

NCM RT FV relative d) mw iman i / mwimani/ NCM RT miser e) mwana /mwana/ FV

Nom P RT

kinship. bw Nom P iman i RT Fv meanness lw Nom P an a RT FV /lwana/ /wimani/

NCM RT FV Child

childishness.

The data in 33 above shows a case of nouns derived from the same grammatical class. The underlying difference is the concreteness of the noun and the abstractness of the derived noun. The abstract noun bw-ilwats-i for instance, has been derived from a concrete noun mwilwats-i. As highlighted in Section 3.1.2, abstract nouns are derived by attaching the prefix /u-/ to the stem. However in this case, the base lexeme has already undergone a process of glide formation. This entails that the prefix /u/- which marks abstractness will also undergo the process of glide formation to become /w-/ before substituting the noun class marker mw- to derive the abstract now bw-ilwats-.i

3.2.2 Prefixation and Noun class

Lutiriki also derives abstract nouns from concrete nouns through attaching prefixes of Noun class 1 /2 and 3 /4 to the root word. This type of prefixation concludes the continuum of verb to concrete noun then finally to abstract noun derivation. This process is captured by the figure below
VERB CONCRETE ABSTRACT

43

NOUN Derivation process Derivation process

NOUN

This process is further highlighted in the following examples:

(34) Verb a) lok a / loka / RT FV bewitch b) Sheb a /ea/ RT FV circumcise c) bay a / aja/ RT FV play Concrete Noun NCM RT FV witch Musheb -i / muei/ shiAbstract Noun bulochi- i / uloi/ Nom P RT FV witchcraft sheb- o /ieo/

mu loch i / muloi/

NCM RT FV circumciser mu bay i / muaji/ NCM RT FV player

Nom P RT FV circumcision mu game bay o RT FV /muajo/

Nom P

Example 34 above captures the derivation process that operates in a continuum. A concrete noun is first derived from a noun and on using that concrete noun as the base, an abstract noun is derived. The word sheb-a for instance, is a verb that acts as a base for deriving the concrete noun mu-sheb-i. This is done by attaching the agentive prefix mu- to the root word and changing the final vowel from /a/ to /i/. Along the continuum, the derived agentive noun mu-sheb-i is operationalised to derive an abstract noun shi-sheb-o. This abstract noun is realized by attaching the prefix shi- to the root word and changing the final vowel of the base from /i/ to /o/ to depict the abstractness of the derived noun

44

3.3 SUMMARY
Affixation is a very productive morphological process in the derivation of Lutiriki nominals. In particular, prefixation accounts for the majority of the nouns derived from other grammatical classes. The nouns derived from verbs, for instance appear to be distinctive, based on the phonological features they bear and the noun-class type they originate from. The distinctiveness of these derived nouns is further captured by the type of prefix that is attached to the base lexeme which in turn dictates the form of the final vowel of the derived word.

45

CHAPTER FOUR NON DERIVATION IN LUTIRIKI THROUGH COMPOUNDING 4.0 INTRODUCTION

Compounding is a morphological process which involves joining two or more free morphemes to derive a new word. According to Matthews (1993:82) compounding is a process by which a compound lexeme is derived from two or more lexemes. Lutiriki employs compounding as a process of deriving compound nouns by adjoining two or more word-forms to derive nouns. The free morphemes may belong to different grammatical classes but once adjoined they merge to a single grammatical category a noun. Compounding in Lutiriki takes the following basic structure. + [ y ] N x + y N

[ x] N

Adapted from Matthews (1993:82) Using the basic structure of compounding given above, we can analyze compounding in Lutiriki as follows: (35) [ lind a ] RT FV /linda/ watch + [mu liang -o ] N-SG RT FV /muliango/ door [muNOM P linda- muliang- o ] FV RT FV N-SG RT

/mulindamuljango/ compound word watchman

Free morpheme + Free morpheme

From the above example, the compound noun mulindamuliango which is a noun, has been derived from linda a verb and muliango which is a noun. Both the verb and the noun have been merged to derive a compound noun. The nominalization prefix mu has to be attached to the compound noun to indicate the noun belongs to the noun class 1 / 2 and also show the agent in the noun.

46

Compounds (derived lexemes) used in Lutiriki portray idiosyncratic meanings Matthews (1993:83), in that the meaning of the compound word is inferred from the two lexemes juxtaposed and not in isolation. Therefore, the meaning of a compound word depends on the featural semantic relationship between the constituting lexemes and the context as highlighted in the following example. ( 36 ) [ inz - u RT /inzu/ house big FV ] + [ ingal- i RT FV /ingali/ ] [ inz- u- ingal- i ] RT FV RT FV /inzuingali/ compound word main house

Free morpheme + Free morpheme

From the above example, a compound noun inzuingali has been derived from a noun inzu and an adjective ingali. To infer the meaning main house, the relationship between house and big has to be established within the confines of relevance and context. Putting house and big side by side outside these parameters will imply any big house in the homestead which may be a garage, a gallery or a cow shade; which in real sense might be even bigger than the main house. The context and relevance in Lutiriki culture denotes that there are two sometimes three -important houses in a home: the main house, the kitchen (and) the boys cottage. Of the three, the main house can only be one, the living house; never mind if the other structures are bigger than the main house. According to Bauer (2003), there are three main types of compounds. i) ii) iii) Endocentric compounds Exocentric compounds Dvandva compounds /copulative compounds.

47

4.1 Endocentric compounds.

Endocentric compounds are compound lexemes which have the head of the compounds denoting the meaning of the compound. Endocentric compounds are most productive in Lutiriki in that one element in the constituting lexemes bears the meaning of the compound. Such compounds denote a sub-class of the items denoted by one of their elements and function as hyponyms of the head element. Bauer (2003: 42). Example 35 and 36 discussed in Section 4.0 are examples of endocentric compounds. This is explained as follows: As for example 35, the lexeme linda with the nominalizing prefix mu- that depicts the agent, is adjoined to the lexeme muliango to derive a compound noun mulindamuliango. The lexeme linda stands out as the head lexeme whereby the overall meaning of this compound is dependent on it. On the other hand, example 36, has the two lexemes inzu and ingali deriving a compound noun inzuingali with the head of that compound being inzu. The meaning of the derived compound is in overall dependent on the head lexeme.

4.2 Exocentric compounds

Exocentric compound denote something which is not a sub-class of either of the elements in the compound. That is they are not hyponyms of either of their elements. Bauer (2003:42). Lutiriki uses compounds to express hidden messages or to be indirect. Exocentric compounds feature mainly in narrations where the speaker is left to deduce the meaning of the compound within the parameters of context and relevance. Generally, Lutiriki exocentric compounds featurally acquire new meanings distinctive from the lexemes that constitute them. Consider the following data: (37) (a) [ mu -khon -o ] + [mu -ramb -i ] [ mu.khono-murambi ]

48

NCM hand (b) [shiNCM /irimi/

RT

FV

NCM RT FV /murambi/ long

N+ADJ /muxonomurambi/ thief [shi-rim-i-randa] N+N /irimiranda/ lazy person/glutton [shi-kon-a-buluu] N+ADJ /ikonauluhu/ an ignorant person

/muxono/

rimRT

i] FV

[randa] ST /randa/ stomach + [buluhu] RT /uluhu/ thirsty

one who digs (c) [shiNCM /ikona/ one who sleeps kon- a] RT FV

From the example 37(a) above, the meaning of the derived compound mukhonomurambi thief is expressed overtly from the two lexemes. This is because, a long hand does not mean a thief but within particular contexts, mukhonomurambi will automatically mean one who stretches his hand all over picking other peoples possessions without their consent. The meaning of exocentric compound is overtly expressed by the constituting lexemes. Example 37(b) is also an instance of exocentric compound that has acquired a new meaning relative to the lexemes that constitute it. The joining of the lexeme shirimi and randa derives a compound noun shirimiranda which has a distinct meaning from the constituting lexemes. The lexeme shi-rim-i has been derived from lima to dig. The NCM prefix shi- is then attached to the root word before changing the final vowel from /a/ to /i/ to derive the agentive noun shirimi. This agentive noun is further adjoined to the noun randa ,a DIM form of the noun inda for stomach. This process of compounding finally derives a compound noun shirimiranda which bears a new meaning of a person whose only reason for living is food for the stomach. Such an individual only toils with a mission of filling his stomach. Exocentric compounds are also referred to as bahuvrihi compounds Bauer,(2003: 43), a word which in itself is an exocentric compound in the Sanskrit, meaning having much rice.

49

4.3 Copulative compounds.

Copulative compounds are a type of compounds which express the combined meanings of the constituting lexemes. The semantic interpretation of each lexeme in a copulative compound is distinct and the overall meaning of the compound is expressed by the lexemes in play. Lutiriki has a relative number of copulative compounds. The most common copulative compounds in Lutiriki are the objects that perform multi-tasks. Due to lack of a specific name for such objects in Lutirikis lexicography, each independent lexeme, together with its independent meaning is put side by side to other independent lexemes, again with their own independent meanings. This will realize a copulative compound with both functions, but the underlying objects as one. For example: (38) (a) [mwNCM teacher (b) [mwNCM /mwii/ thief (c) [mu/mulimi/ farmer (d) [mw- lwats- i] NCM RT FV + lim- i] + [muibi] + ejits- i] RT FV + [mu- sheb- i] NCM RT FV /muei/ Circumciser [mwiri] [mw- ejits- iNCM RT mu- sheb- i] FV NCM RT FV

/mweitsi/

/mweitsimuei/ teacher cum circumciser [mwib- imwiri]

RT FV

NCM RT FV /mwiri/ murderer lonj- i]

NCM RT FV NCM RT FV /mwiimwiri/ thief cum murderer [mu- lim- imulonj- i]

NCM RT FV

NCM RT FV /mulonji/ potter [muNCM ndereb- a] RT FV

NCM RT FV NCM RT FV /mulimimulonji/ farmer cum potter [mw- lwats- imu- ndereb-a]

NCM RT FV NCM RT FV

50

/mwilwatsi/ preacher

/munderea/ driver

/mwilwatsimunderea/ preacher cum driver

From example 38 above, there is no lexical term for an individual who performs the two tasks. This dilemma is underscored by incorporating the two lexemes together with their individual meanings to derive a copulative compound. The compound mushebimwejitsi for instance, has the semantic description of one who circumcises and also teaches

4.4 SUMMARY
This chapter has looked into the morphological process of compounding aimed at deriving compound nouns. The compound nouns derived in Lutiriki take the form of endocentric compounds, exocentric compounds and copulative compounds. It has been observed that compound nouns are interpreted within the confines of relevance and context. Exocentric compounds for instance have been used as idioms in conveying hidden messages.

51

CHAPTER FIVE NOUN DERIVATION IN LUTIRIKI THROUGH REDUPLICATION 5.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter makes an analysis of noun derivation in Lutiriki within the theoretical framework of Morphological Doubling Theory. Consequently, the analysis of reduplication in Lutiriki will be biased towards the morphological reduplication parameters only making reference to phonological reduplication in passing. According to Crystal (2003: 391), reduplication is a term in morphology for a process of repetition whereby the form of a prefix /suffix reflects certain morphological characteristics of the root. Reduplication is a morphophonological process of deriving Lutiriki nominals. This is done by repeating the root or the stem to form a new word with an added meaning. Reduplicated word-forms in Lutiriki are composed of the base lexeme and the reduplicant, both of which share the same semantic description.

5.1 Morphological reduplication in Lutiriki

Morphological reduplication is a process which initiates a double (or multiple) occurrence of a morphological constituent meeting a particular morpho semantic description. Atieno (2007:10). This means that the root or the steam is called twice to derive a reduplicated word form that takes into account the morphological elements of both the base lexeme and the reduplicant plus an additional meaning. Morphological reduplication in Lutiriki can be achieved through two main ways, namely: 1. Total reduplication 2. Addition of a linker morph Khu.

52

5.1.1 Total reduplication

Total reduplication is a morphological process that calls twice for identical morphological inputs resulting to a reduplicated word-form. The base lexeme and the reduplicant are regarded as identical constituents inputs of the reduplicated word. Majority of Lutiriki reduplicated word-forms are derived through total reduplication. This process is also referred to as full reduplication. Using the MDT basic structure in Chapter One, we can analyse total reduplication in Lutiriki as follows: (39) a) Henz a RT MuMuNCM FV henz- a FV RT FV /muhenza/ N One who looks around /henza/ V to look

NCM RT

henz- a + henz- i /muhenzahenzi/One who likes looking around RT FV

[Mu-henzihenzi] [F+Emphasis ]

[mu-henzi] [F] Base

[henzi][F] Reduplicant

Example 39 above illustrates the added meaning that is borne by the reduplicated noun. The doubling of (mu-) henza manifests a semantic description of emphasis. The base lexeme in this example contains a Noun class Marker /mu-/, from the Noun-class 1 /2, /mu-/ /a/. When the base lexeme is repeated to form a reduplicant, the NCM /mu-/ is

53

dropped only attaching the root to the base lexeme to derive a reduplicated noun. This can be further captured by the following examples: (39) a) Mu-henza + ST /muhenza/ one who looks around b) mu-jenda + ST /muenda/ walking person c) mu-loma ST /muloma/ speaker + zero morph lomi RT /lomi/ jendi RT /endi/ zero morph henzi RT /henzi/ muhenzahenzi reduplicated noun /muhenzahenzi / one who likes looking around mujendajendi reduplicated noun /muendaendi/ prostitute mulomalomi reduplicated noun /mulomalomi/ talkative person zero morph

As noted in the examples in 39 above, the reduplicants bear zero morphs. This is a tenet of MDT whereby as the base lexeme is doubled, only the pre-requisite morphological elements of the base lexeme are repeated in the reduplicant. At a glance, this may seem to break the noun-class concord. However, if concordance was to be adhered to, then such reduplicated forms would be meaningless.

5.1.2 Addition of a linker morph Khu

The addition of the linker morph Khu is a morphological process that involves joining two nouns together with a linker morph. Lutiriki uses the linker morph khu /xu/ to form reduplicated word-forms. The linker morph khu when used in isolation, has no semantic value. It only obtains meaning when it is placed between a base lexeme and a reduplicant. In addition, the linker morph will further spread its acquired meaning to the reduplicated wordform.

54

The linker morph khu in Lutiriki adds two main semantic descriptions to the base lexeme and the reduplicant. These semantic values are: i) ii) Face off Distributiveness

Semantic value of Face off

The additional meaning of Face off which may be a show of might or exchange of a favour for a favour, or an item for an item is brought about in a reduplicated word-form by adding the linker morph khu between the base lexeme and the reduplicant. The base in this form of reduplication is always a noun. This is captured in the following examples below. (40) (a) mundu khu mundu / mundu- xu -mundu / mundu khu / mundu / / xu / a show of might between two people. a person for [mundu-xu-mundu] [F+face off]

/mundu / [F]

/ xu/

/ mundu/ [F] Where F= a person

(b) buruchi khu- buruchi / urui Xu urui / buruchi khu / urui / / xu /

battle of wealth between two people wealth for

[urui xu-urui] [F+face off]

[urui/ [F]

/xu/

/urui/ [F]

55

Where F= wealth. (c) ingubu khu ingubu ingubu khu / iguu xu iguu/ / iguu/ /xu/ a cloth for a cloth cloth for

[Iguu- xu- iguu] [F+ an item for an item]

/iguu/ [F]

/xu/

/iguu/ [F] Where F = cloth

The semantic value of face off is expressed in the examples given in (40) above. These examples express the show of might between two opposing sides. The use of the linker morph khu between the base lexeme mundu and its reduplicant, for instance, depicts a situation whereby two competitors are up for each others jugular. Besides, the argument in this case is only centered on the two warring factions without the inclusion of a third party.

Semantic value of distributiveness.

The addition of the linker morph khu adds a new meaning in the reduplicated word. The notion of distributiveness is realized in accounting for every element of the items being mentioned. The linker morph khu brings out the meaning of inclusion of each of the base lexeme that constitutes the reduplicated word. Just like the semantic value of face off, the base lexeme that shows distributiveness is mandatory a noun.

(41) a) inzu khu inzu inzu khu /inzu xu-inzu/ /inzu/ / xu/ Each house house each

56

[inzu xu-inzu] [F+distributiveness]

/ Inzu / [ F] /xu/

/inzu / [F] Where F = house.

b)

lingondo khu longondo / liondo- xu-liondo/ lingondo khu /liondo/ /xu/

each penny penny each

[liondo-xu-liondo] [F+distributiveness]

/liondo/ [F] /xu/

/liondo/ [F] Where F = penny

The examples given above highlight the notion of distributiveness in Lutiriki by use of a linker morph. The linker morph khu in this case stands out to account for each element mentioned in the reduplicated word-form. inzu khu inzu for instance entails that, every house mentioned is accounted for. In the event where a census was to be done from one house to the other without excluding a single one, then the semantic description of distributiveness being propagated by inzu khu inzu will be ultimate.

5.2 Forms of morphological reduplication. Morphological reduplication is a process that involves placing free morphemes side by side to derive a reduplicated word-form. Lutiriki uses free morphemes from different grammatical categories in the process of reduplication. These derivations can be from morphemes that are un identical in word class or those that share the same word class.

57

5.2.1 Class maintaining reduplication. This form of reduplication takes place when a reduplicated noun is derived from morphemes that share the same word class. This entails that, the base lexeme belongs to the same grammatical class like the reduplicant in the derivation of a reduplicated noun. Reduplicated word-forms occasioned by the addition of a linker morph are examples of class maintaining reduplication. Consider the following data: (42) a) Lingana -khu-lingana / liana-xu-liana/ each word

[liana-xu-liana] [F+distributiveness]

[liana/ [F]

/xu /

/liana/ [F] Where F= word

liNCM

ngan RT

-a FV

khu + LMOR + each

li- ngan- a NCM RT FV Noun (reduplicant) word

li- ngan- a-khu-li-ngan-a Reduplicated noun each word

Noun (Base) word

b) lisambu khu lisambu

/ lisambu xu lisambu /

- each leaf

[lisambu xu- lisambu ] [ F+distributiveness ]

58

/lisambu/[ F]

/xu/

/ lisambu /[ F} Where F = leaf

li-

samb-

u FV

+ khu + LMOR + each

li-

samb- u FV

li- samb- u- khu- li- samb- u Reduplicated noun each leaf

NCM RT Noun (Base) leaf

NCM RT leaf

Noun (Reduplicant)

5.3 PHONOLOGICAL REDUPLICATION IN LUTIRIKI

Unlike morphological reduplication, phonological reduplication in Lutiriki involves a segment or entire base being duplicated into a reduplicated word-form without having an additional meaning. In phonological reduplication, there is phonological copying of morphemes which dont share the same semantic description. phonological copying cannot explain the different morphotactics of the two copies or their morphological complexity .phonological constituents copying is restricted to cases motivated by phonological necessity. Atieno (2007:14).

(43) shigala + gala /igalagala/

From the example given above, the derived Lutiriki reduplicated word-forms cannot be subjected to a morphological description because the reduplicant is part of the meaning bearing morpheme. This means that the meaning of the word-forms is not altered in any way but rather a mere phonological copy of the base.

59

5.4 SUMMARY
A substantive number of Lutiriki nominals are derived through a process of reduplication. Morphological reduplication accounts for most of reduplicated word forms in Lutiriki. These reduplicated nouns are derived within the parameters of MDT by means of adding a linker morph khu in between the base and the reduplicant, and in some cases by doubling the base lexeme.

60

CHAPTER SIX
6.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

This study has made an attempt to describe the morphophonological processes that are imperative in the derivation of Lutiriki nominals. This description was done within the theoretical framework of Natural Generative Phonology and Morphological Doubling Theory. In this investigation, we made an inventory of Lutiriki consonants and vowels, highlighting phonemes which are predominantly used with borrowed words. Our primary focus was to make an analysis of the phonological processes that aid in the derivation of Lutiriki nouns. The processes discussed include glide formation, vowel deletion, vowel lengthening and compensatory lengthening. Phonological processes involving vowels in Lutiriki proved to be working in a complementary manner. In the event of vowel deletion, the process of vowel lengthening, in some cases vowel coalescence; would be initiated to account for the lost vowel. Glide formation on the other hand, meant that two unidentical vowels could not occur together especially when a front-high vowel or a back-high vowel proceeded the other vowel. To solve this anomaly (ungrammaticality), the palatal glide /j/ would be formed to correspond with the front-high vowel /i/ while the bilabial glide /w/ would also be formed, again to correspond to the back-high vowel /u/. The nucleus of this study was the morphological processes that derive nouns in Lutiriki. The study indeed demonstrated that morphological processes of affixation, compounding and reduplication are pre-requites for deriving new words with new meaning. Affixation under the theoretical framework of NGP proved to be the most productive process of deriving nouns in Lutiriki. This was done by attaching prefixes to the root word to derive a new lexeme with a new meaning. Within the confines of Word-formation rules, prefixation accounted for new lexemes formed from different grammatical classes and those that were formed from the same grammatical class.

61

The study further confirmed that compounding, though not as productive as affixation is a process of deriving Lutiriki nouns. The compound nouns derived in Lutiriki are in the form of endocentric compounds, exocentric compounds and copulative compounds. These compound nouns take the form of two free morphemes being put together to derive a new lexeme with a new meaning. Of great interest to this investigation was to test if MDT could account for reduplication as a process of deriving Lutiriki nouns. This was proved as morphological reduplication in Lutiriki could be achieved through the addition of a linker morph khu and through total reduplication. The study therefore established that derivation of Lutiriki nominals is a morphophonological process that involves both bound morphemes and free morphemes. Furthermore, NGP proved to be an adequate descriptive tool for the analysis of affixation and compounding. MDT on the other hand, satisfactorily accounted for reduplication in Lutiriki.

6.1 RECOMMENDATIONS
Our study set out to investigate the morphophological processes that are fundamental in the derivation of Lutiriki nouns. To this extent our objectives were achieved and our hypotheses proven. The findings of this study will make a basis for a morpho-syntatic analysis of Lutiriki. This study further established that there may be existence of two dialects of Lutiriki. However, due to time constraint and the scope and limitation of the study, we did not delve into that. Therefore, this study leaves room for historical and comparative linguistic study of the dialects and the morpho-syntatic differences that may exist. We therefore recommend that the linguistic elements that have not been exhaustively handled in this study be covered in studies to come.

62

63

REFERENCES Abdulmajid, M.A. (2000). Luwanga Morphophonemics. Unpublished M.A. Dissertation, University of Nairobi. Appleby (1947). A first Luyia Grammar. Nairobi: EALB. Atieno, J.O.(2007). Reduplication in Dholuo. Unpublished M.A Dissertation, University of Nairobi. Bauer, L.(1963).English Word Formation. Great Britain: CUP. _______.(2003). 2nd Edition. Introducing Linguistic Morphology. Edinburgh: EUP. Bybee,J.L. (1985). Morphology. A Study of the Relation Between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Carstain-McCarthy, A. (1992). Current Morphology. London: Routledge Crystal, D. (2003). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. London: Blackwell. Downing, L.J. (2003). Bukusu Reduplication.Berlin: Z.A.S. Fromkin, V., Rodman, R. and Hymans N. (2003). An Introduction to Language. Boston: Wadsworth Thomson. Hooper, J.B. (1976). An Introduction to Natural Generative Phonology. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston. Inkelas, S. and Zoll, C. (2005). Reduplication Doubling in Morphology.UK: CUP.

64

Kanyoro, R. (1983). Unity in University. A Linguistic Survey of the Abaluhya of Western Kenya. Wien: B.Z.A. Matthews, P.H. (1974). Morphology. An Introduction to the Theory of Word Structure. Oxford: Blackwell. ______________ (1991). 2nd Edition .Morphology. London:CUP. Mberia, K. (1993). Kitharaka Segmental Morphology with special reference to the Noun and the verb. Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation, University of Nairobi. Njoroge, N. J. (1978). Kikuyu Deverbatives and Other Nominalizations. Unpublished M.A. Dissertation, University of Nairobi. Okombo, D. (1982). Dholuo Morpho-phonemics in a Generative Framework. Berlin: Reimer. Osogo, H.J. (1966). A History of the Baluyia. London: Oxford. Schane, A.S. (1973). Generative Phonology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Spencer, A. (1991). Morphological Theory. Oxford: Blackwell. Sumba, Z.K. (1992). Logooli, wanga and Lubukusu Dialects of Luhya: A study of the major phonological processes. Unpublished M.A. Dissertation, University of Nairobi. Were, G. S. (1967). A History of the Abaluyia of Western Kenya. Nairobi: EPH.

65