Vowel insertion + /t-/ prefixation - Mohamed Lahrouchi

IGG XXXI, February 24th-26th 05
University of Roma
Regular and Irregular Imperfective conjugations
in Berber languages
Mohamed Lahrouchi
UMR7023-CNRS-Université Paris8
mlahrouchi@univ-paris8.fr
I. Imperfective formation
Processes to form Imperfective in Berber:
i. prefixation of the augment /t-/ 1 to the basic stem,
ii. gemination of a segment in the stem,
iii. insertion of a vowel, mostly /a/, in the stem
iv. accent on first vowel (Tamashek variety)
(1)
Aorist Imperfective
Tamazight 2
“stamp” ak´l ttak´l
“get cold” kr´m k´rr´m
“speak” siw´l sawal
Kabyle
“play” urar tt s urar
“plough” kr´z k´rr´z
“camp” sd2´r sd2ar
Tashlhiyt
“go back” ruħ ttruħ
“stand up” nkr nkkr
“do” skr skar
Tamashek 3
“bray” ´$ru ti@ru
1 /t-/ quantity variation is not examined in this paper.
2 Tamazight, Tamashek, Kabyle and Tashlhiyt are spoken in the Middle Atlas range in Morocco, Mali,
Northeast Algeria and Southwest Morocco, respectively.
3 Acute and grave accents stand for Imperfective and default accents, respectively. /´/ and /Q/ are
analysed as being shorter than other vowels in Tamashek (cf. Heath 2004).
“enter” ´$ZZ´S tA@ZZQS
“fight” ´$kn´s kA@nnQs
- Vowel insertion + /t-/ prefixation (e.g.. xdm ⇒ ttxdam
“work”, Tashlhiyt)
- Vowel insertion + gemination (e.g. ´$kn´s ⇒ kA@nnQs “fight”,
Tamashek).
- Prefixation never combines with gemination, except for a few
mono-consonantal verbs (e.g. g ⇒ ttgga “be”, Tashlhiyt).
(2) Geminated Imperfective
Focus will be made on gemination at the Imperfective stem in
Tamazight, Kabyle, Tamashek and Tashlhiyt Berber varieties.
Regular verbs merely geminate a stem consonant.
Irregular verbs involve both gemination and affixation, e.g. gn ⇒
ggan “sleep”; g ⇒ ttgga “be” (Tashlhiyt)
(3) Aims
a. Imperfective gemination is a templatic-based mechanism.
b. Regular and irregular verbs behave templatically similar: they
use the same template to form their Imperfective.
c. Surface irregularity follows from templatic constraints.
II. Template Morphology
(4) Classical Arabic Verb conjugation (McCarthy 1979, 1981)
√f÷l √ktb
I CVCVC fa÷al katab
II CVCCVC fa÷÷al kattab
III CVVCVC faa÷al kaatab
Iv CVCCVC /af÷al /aktab
v CVCVCCVC tafa÷÷al takattab
vI CVCVVCVC tafaa÷al takaatab
vII CCVCVC nfa÷al nkatab

IGG XXXI, February 24th-26th 05
University of Roma
(5) Guerssel & Lowenstamm (1993)
- The number of templates listed in (4) are reduced by
suggesting that CA verbal forms use a unique template as
given in (6):
(6) CV[CV]CVCV
(7) forms II, III, IV and VII of the root √ktb “write”:
a. Form II b. Form III
k t b k t b
| | | | | |
C V C V C V C V C V C V C V C V
| |
a a
[kattab]
[kaatab]
c. Form IV d. Form VII
/ k t b n k t b
| | | | | | | |
C V C V C V C V C V C V C V C V C V C V
| | |
a a a
[/aktab] [nkatab]
Internal (greyed) and external (italicised) sites act as the head of
the formation; the identification of one of them leads to the derivation one
verbal form.
(8) Classical Arabic internal plurals
sg pl
“sword” rum rimaa
“mountain” Zabal Zibaal
“sea” bar biaar
“star” naZm nuZuum
Asfour (2001) and Kihm (2003) suggest that CA internal plurals
use an empty derivational site located in the template between C 2 and C 3 .
(9) Berber internal plurals (Idrissi 2001):
Berber plurals such as: awtul (sg) ⇒ iwtal (pl) “hare”, asrdun
(sg) ⇒ isrdan (pl) “mule”, asyrs (sg) ⇒ isyras “bag”, asƒun (sg) ⇒
isƒwan (pl) “rope”, are analysed in the same way.
(10) Kabyle Negative Preterit (Bendjaballah 1999)
Aorist Negative Preterit
“work” xD´m xDim
“dive” bb´“ bbi“
“go down” aD´r uDir
“quote” BD´r BDir
The Negative Preterit marker /i/ results from the activation of the
empty site between C 2 and C 3 .
III. Data
The Geminated Imperfective involves verbs that contain:
- no more than three consonants, none of which is a geminate.
- If a verb contains a full vowel it should be in the final position.
Regular verbs (triconsonantal) follow under (11):
(11) Aorist Imperfective
a) Tamazight
“get cold” kr´m k´rr´m
“plough” kr´z k´rr´z
“burn” k w m´d k w´mm´d
“stand up” nk´r n´kk´r
“grill” kn´f k´nn´f
b) Tashlhiyt
“hunt” g w mr g w mmr
“enter” kSm kSSm
“itch” frd ffrd
“plough” krz kkrz

IGG XXXI, February 24th-26th 05
University of Roma
“rent” kru krru
c) Kabyle
“crush” br´c b´rr´c
“cross” zg´r z´gg´r
“work” xD´m x´dd´m
“forbidden” gD´l g´dd´l
“make swell” bz´g b´zz´g
d) Tamashek
“fight” ´$kn´s kA@nnQs
“learn” ´$lm´d lA@mmQd
“follow” ´$lk´m hA@kkQm
“destroy” ´$hl´k hA@llQk
“walk” ´$rg´h rA@ggQh
These verbs all geminate one stem consonant at the Imperfective.
By contrast, verbs under (12) use both gemination and affixation to form
their Imperfective:
(12)
a) Tamazight
“fall” d1r t1t1ar
“overnight” n´s n´ssa
“be” g t´gga / tt´g
“wash” ´gW t´ggWa
“come from” ´kk t´kka
b) Tashlhiyt
“kill” nƒ nqqa
“spend the day” kl klla
“be, become” g ttgga
“eat” SS Stta
“hit” ut kkat
“put out” d1i t1t1ay
c) Kabyle
“stick” g´r ggar
“give” ´fk tt s ak
“fall, go down” ´rs t s rus
“suppurate” fi t s fay
“sleep” ´d`s` t`tàs`
d) Tamashek
“give” Q$kf hA@kk
“do” Q$j tA@jj(a)
“hit” ´$w´t t´wwA@t
“say” Q$nn jA@nn
“kill” Q$NF nA@qq
Different kinds of verbs are distinguished in (12):
i. verbs using both gemination and vowel insertion (e.g.
Tamashek: nA@qq; Tamazight: n´ssa, t1t1ar; Tashlhiyt: ggan,
nqqa; t1t1ay; Kabyle: ggar, t`tàs`),
ii. verbs using /t-/ affixation and vowel insertion (e.g. Tamazight:
tt´g; Tashlhiyt: Stta; Kabyle: tt s ak, t s fay, t s rus),
iii. verbs using /t-/ affixation, vowel insertion and gemination (e.g.
Tamazight: t´gga, t´ggWa, t´kka; Tamashek: t´wwA@t, tA@jj(a);
Tashlhiyt: ttgga),
iv. some verbs change completely (e.g. Tashlhiyt: ut ⇒ kkat,
Tamashek: Q$kf ⇒ hA@kk),
v. other verbs use unusual affixes (e.g. Tamashek: Q$nn ⇒ jA@nn,
Tashlhiyt: SS ⇒ Stta)
IV. Phonological account
Tashlhiyt Berber unfixed gemination:
- Dell & Elmedlaoui’s (1988) syllable-based analysis:
“The segment which is geminated in the Imperfective stem is that segment which is
syllabified as an onset by Core Syllabification in the basic stem.” (p. 11)
However, this analysis:
- Does not involve irregular verbs as given in (12).
- Is limited to Tashlhiyt Berber where gemination is unfixed.
- Seems unnecessary in the case the geminated consonant is
invariably C 2 .

IGG XXXI, February 24th-26th 05
University of Roma
- Jebbour (1996):
Prosodic account: for any verb to undergo gemination the output
should contain two light syllables.
V. Templatic account
Tri-consonantal verbs
(13) CVCV Model (Lowestamm 1996),
Within CVCV model templates consist of a strict alternation of CV units.
(14) Berber peripheral vowels
Following Kabbaj (1990), Lowenstamm (1991), Bendjaballah (1999,
2000) and Idrissi (2000), Berber peripheral vowels are analysed as being
phonologically long; they are associated with two V slots:
This parameter is limited to the skeletal tier. It has no effect on the
phonetic lengthening of the vowels.
(15) - Why does C 3 never geminate at the Imperfective stem?
[16] Imperfective Template
C 1 V [C V] C 2 V C 3 V
(17) Tamazight
(a)
C 1 V C V C 2 V C 3 V
| | | | |
n ´ k ´ r
[n´kk´r]
(b)
C 1 V C V C 2 V C 3 V
| | | |
n k ´ r
*[nk´rr]
(18) Sonority effect
Verbs that geminate C 1 instead of C 2 in Tashlhiyt all contain
sonorants (liquids or nasals) in C2 position.
(19)
“Any segment is prohibited to geminate at the Imperfective stem in Tashlhiyt Berber if it is
the most sonorous segment in the basic stem.”
C 1 germination: a “subsidiary” operation that overcomes
prohibited C 2 gemination. Cf. Tiberian Hebrew “compensatory
lengthening” (nominal derivation: naggar “carpenter”, sippuur “story”
opposed to paaraaS “horseman” and baaheret “white spots on the skin”;
verbal derivation: kitteb “write” vs. beerak “bless”).
VI. Mono- and bi-consonantal verbs
The so-called irregular verbs derive their Imperfective with a
combination of different operations. Their Imperfective size depends on
their aorist form. That is to say:
“the shorter the aorist form is, the more numerous the operations used to
transform the verb are.”
Minimality Word Constraint in Prosodic Morphology (cf. McCarthy &
Prince 1986 et seq.): each word contains at least one foot (or two moras).

IGG XXXI, February 24th-26th 05
University of Roma
(20) mono-and bi-consonantal representations:
a) Tamazight
C V ⇒ C V C V C V C V
| | |
g t ´ g a
[g] [t´gga]
C V C V ⇒ C V C V C V C V
| | | | |
n ´ s n ´ s a
[n´s] [n´ssa]
b) Kabyle
C V C V ⇒ C V C V C V C V
| | | |
f i t s f a y
[fi] [t s fay]
C V C V ⇒ C V C V C V C V
| | | |
g ´ r g a r
[fi] [ggar]
c) Tamashek
C V C V ⇒ C V C V C V C V
| | |
Q Z t A Z
[Q$Z] [tA@ZZ]
C V C V C V ⇒ C V C V C V C V
| | | |
Q N F n A q
[Q$NF] [nA@qq]
d) Tashlhiyt
.
Aorist Imperfective
C V C V ⇒ C V C V C V C V
|
SS S t a
[SS] [Stta]
C V C V ⇒ C V C V C V C V
| | |
k l k l a
[kl] [klla]
VII. Tamashek triconsonantal verbs
Triconsonantal Imperfective forms given in (11c) use both C 2
gemination and vowel insertion (vowel lengthening according to Heath
2004). They need one slot more in their template:
(21) Tamashek
C 1 V C V C 2 V C 3 V
| | | | |
* l A m Q d
(23) Classical Arabic plurals
“habitant” saakin sukkaan
“student” taalib tullaab
“reader” qaari÷ qurraa÷
“worker” /aamil /ummaal

IGG XXXI, February 24th-26th 05
University of Roma
(22) C 1 V C V C 2 V C V C 3 V
Questions:
- Why don’t all triconsonantal verbs in Berber use both sites?
- Under what conditions are both sites activated?
- Which site stands for the head of the formation?
Conclusion
- Mono- and bi-consonantal verbs are templatically constrained
at the Imperfective stem.
- Gemination, affixation and vowel insertion are used to fill the
Imperfective template.
References:
Asfour, F-M. 2001. Theoretische Aspekte der internen Pluralbildung im Klassischen
Arabisch. Diplomarbeit zur Erlangung des Magistergrades, Universität Wien.
Basset, A. 1929. Le verbe berbère: étude de thèmes. Ernest Leroux. Paris.
Bendjaballah, S. 2001. The « Negative Preterit » in Kabyle Berber. Folia Linguistica
XXXIV/3-4 :185-220.
Cortade, J-M. 1969. Essai de grammaire touareg (dialecte de l’Ahaggar). PhD.
Université d’Alger.
Dallet, J-M. 1982. Dictionnaire kabyle-français. Selaf. Paris.
Dell, F. & Elmedlaoui, M. 1988. Syllabic Consonants in Berber: Some New Evidence.
Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 10, 1-17.
Guerssel, M. & Lowenstamm, J. 1993. The Derivational Morphology of the Classical Arabic
Verbal System. ms. UQAM & Université Paris 7.
Heath, J. Grammar of Tamashek (Tuareg of Mali). Ms. University of Michigan.
Idrissi, A., 2000. On Berber plurals. In J. Lecarme, J. Lowenstamm & U. Shlonsky
(Eds.), Research in Afroasiatic Grammar, Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Kabbaj, O. 1990. La structure syllabique de l’arabe marocain. MA Thesis. UQAM :
Montréal.
Kihm, A. 2003. Les pluriels internes de l’arabe : système et conséquences pour
l’architecture de la grammaire. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes, n° 32 : 109-156.
Louali, N. & Philippson, G. 2003. Le thème de l’aoriste intensif : formes multiples,
contenu unique. Collection d’articles 2 ème Bayreuth Frankfurter Kolloquium zur
Berberologie (9-13 juillet 2002), Berber Studies, Rüdiger Köppe Verlag.
Lowenstamm, J. 1991. Vocalic Length and Centralization in Two Branches of Semitic
(Ethiopic and Arabic). In. A.S. Kaye (ed.), Semitic Studies in honor of Wolf Leslau on
the occasion of his eighty-fifth birthday. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 949-965.
Lowenstamm, J., 1996. CV as the only syllable type. In. J. Durand & B. Laks (Eds.),
Current Trends in Phonology : Models and Methods: 419-441. CNRS, ESRI, Paris X.
McCarthy, J., 1979. Formal problems in Semitic phonology and morphology. PhD dissertation,
MIT, distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club, Garland Press. New
York.
McCarthy, J. and A. Prince. 1986. Prosodic Morphology, ms. University of Massachusetts,
Amherst and Brandeis University
Taïfi, M. 1991. Dictionnaire tamazight-français. L’Harmattan-Awal. Paris.