A Grammar of Miya - UCLA Department of Linguistics

xvi Contents
2. Conditional Clauses
2.1. Simple conditionals
2.1.1. kwda ... kd 'when, if'
2.1.1.1. Form of kwda ... kd clauses
2.1. I .2. Functions of kwda ... kd clauses
2.1.2. td(n) ... [kd] 'if'
2.1.2.1. Form of td(n) ... [kd] clauses
2.1.2.2. Functions of td(n) ... [kd] clauses
2.2. Concessive conditionals
2.3. Generic conditionals: "WH ... ever", "no matter WH ... "
2.4. Counterfactual and hypothetical conditionals: hi; ... [kd]
3. Cohesion and Sequence Marking
3.1. Cohesive clauses: daga/dag-ee vs. kwda
3.2. Sequence marking
3.2.1. Subjunctive
3.2.2. fiy,j-ee in perfective discourse
3.2.3. Sequence closing events: suw + nominalization + -dy
4. 'Before' Clauses
5. 'After' Clauses
6. Temporal Clauses: 'when .. .', 'at the time that .. .'
7. 'Until' and 'not until' clauses: hdr, kwdpa
8. Circumstantial Clauses
9. Reason and Purpose Clauses and Phrases
9.1. Reason clauses
9.2. Purpose clauses and phrases: 'so that', 'in order to'
Appendix l. Pronouns, 401
Appendix II. Verb Classes, 404
References, 411
372
372
372
372
373
375
375
376
378
380
384
385
385
387
387
387
389
390
391
392
393
395
397
398
398
Preface
What is an optimal descriptive grammar? Ideally, it should state and illustrate every
generalization and idiosyncrasy of every structure that exists in the language being
described. This ideal has never been fully met m even the best grammars of the bestdescribed
languages, nor will it ever be-language is too vast and complex and life is too
short. This should not deter the compiler of a descriptive grammar from trying to come as
close to the ideal as available data and time permit. But even a grammar that attained the
ideal in descriptive thoroughness would be of little value if the description could not be
interpreted by all its potential users. The grammar should thus be organized in such a
fashion and the description couched in such terminology that anyone with basic training in
any tradition of linguistic theory and description could find the structures of interest and
learn how they work without going beyond the description provided in the grammar itself.
The grammar should be equally useful to the European structuralist working in the tradition
of Andre Martinet or the American formal theorist working in the tradition of Noam
Chomsky, to the semiotician concerned with the interrelations of signs or the typologist
interested in cross-linguistic patterns, to the language area specialist or the general linguist.
Finally, the grammar should be as comprehensible and valid in 100 years as it is today
(which is not to say that the grammar might not be emended and expanded to incorporate
facts unavailable to the compiler).
My immodest goal has been to write the most thorough descriptive grammar of Miya
possible based on the data I was able to collect during several weeks of elicitation work in
Nigeria during 1982-83. Throughout the process of writing this book, I have continually
kept in mind the objectives stated in the previous paragraph-only you can say whether I
have come close. I have had two paramount models, viz. R. C. Abraham's The Language
of the Hausa People (1959) and Randolph Quirk et a1.' s Comprehensive Grammar of the
English Language (1985). Abraham's Hausa grammar is, by most of the criteria set forth
above, hardly an archetype of good descriptive work. In particular, about 100 of the total
236 pages of the book are in a section called "Part II, More Advanced Grammar". This
section is a random collection of snippets about Hausa vaguely related to sections in the
more organized "Part I, Basic Grammar". Yet for those of us who have studied Hausa
over a long period, "Part II" is the more interesting part of the grammar. Abraham had an
incredible nose for interesting bits of data which he felt were worth putting down in writing
somewhere, but he either did not know how to fit them coherently into a larger framework
or did not have the time or energy to do so. In working on Miya, especially the natural
texts, I have tried to let no tidbit that struck me as "interesting" get by without being
incorporated somewhere in this grammar, in a context in which its inclusion makes sense.
The result may be a grammar which seems rococo to the non-specialist, but the big picture
should still be present, and as the ranks of Miya language specialists swell, they will thank
me for not skipping over the details. Quirk et aI.' s grammar has been a less direct influence
on my thinking, but I view this as a model descriptive grammar, meeting essentially all the
xvii