Hdt GLOW09 vf - Mohamed Lahrouchi

Consonantal root extraction in two secret languages
in Tashlhiyt Berber
Mohamed Lahrouchi & Philippe Ségéral
(CNRS-Université Paris 8)
(Université Paris 7-CNRS)
(1) Root in Afroasiatic, a controversial object
a. From linguists of the Middle Ages (Sibawayh) to McCarthy (1979, 1981), Frost et
al. 2000, Prunet et al. 2000, Prunet 2006, Idrissi et al. 2008, etc.:
The root is a grammatical morpheme entirely made of consonants
Words are built on consonantal roots
b. Ratcliffe 1987, Hammond 1988, Dell & Elmedlaoui 1992, Bat-El 1994, Ussishkin
1999, etc.:
No need of such an abstract morpheme, words are derived from other words
(2) Data to be studied: two secret languages used by women in Tashlhiyt Berber (TShl):
a. Taqjmit (TQJM) (original data, Lahrouchi & Ségéral in press), Isouktane south-west
Morocco
b. Tagnawt (TGNW) (data from Douchaïna 1996, 1998), Tiznit south-west Morocco
(3) Our claim: the root is a grammatical morpheme to which speakers have access. TQJM and
TGNW formations show that speakers are able to
a. extract the root-morpheme from any Tashlhiyt form
b. build root-morphemes of a definite shape (triconsonantal)
I. Extracting the root-morpheme = (3a)
(4) Triconsonantal forms
TShl forms
Disguised forms
TQJM
TGNW
“be afraid” iksud ÷ tikkasd ÷ jusd ÷ ajkkasd ÷ wasd ÷
“be the first” izwir tizzawrjuwr ajzzawrwawr
“dream” wwarg tiwwargjurg ajwwargwarg
“girl” tafruxt tiffarxjurx tiffarxwarx
“speak” sawl tissawljuwl ajssawlwawl
(5) Derivation TShl → TQJM, TGNW
a. Morphological operations (survey):
prefix geminate infix reduplicate
ti- aj- R 1 -a- -ju- -wa- R 2 R 3
(after R 1) (after R 3) (after R 3)
TQJM
TGNW
b. Uniform pattern: TQJM ti R 1 R 1 a R 2 R 3 ju R 2 R 3
TGNW aj R 1 R 1 a R 2 R 3 wa R 2 R 3
c. Uniform vocalization 1 : TQJM i-a-u
TGNW a
1 For an interpretation of vocalization in TQJM, see Lahrouchi & Ségéral (in press).
1

d. Repetition: each root-consonant is repeated twice
two operations: gemination and reduplication
TQJM / TGNW R 1 R 2 R 3
i. gemination always never never
ii. reduplication never always always
(6) Template
a. TQJM
t
R 1 R 2 R 3 R 2 R 3
I
C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v
b. TGNW
I A U
I
R 1 R 2 R 3 R 2 R 3
U
C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v
A
The template is the same, encoding the various operations observed in the disguised
forms as well as the principle of repetition (the additional Cv in TGNW hosts the vocalic
material of the prefix).
Note: in (6a-b), peripheral vowels are assumed to be underlyingly long, associated to two
vocalic slots (cf. Lowentamm 1991 and Bendjaballah 2001, 2004). Evidence for this
assumption will come at the close of the analysis of TGNW.
(7) Only root consonants are kept
a. Any vocalic material of the input (TShl) is deleted in the disguised form. Whatever
the original vocalism is, the disguised form vocalizes uniformly as in (5c).
TShl
TQJM
tafruxt a u tiffarxjurx “girl”
agudi a u i tiggadjudi “a lot”
i a u
isliw i tissalwjulw “be soft”
argaz a tirragzjugz
“man”
TShl
TGNW
t-afrux-t a u ajffarxwarx “girl”
md≥uru u ajmmad≥rwad≥r “feel better”
a
iz≥duj i u ajzz≥adwaddi “be heavy”
imz≥ij i ajmmaz≥wazz≥i
“be small”
2

. Any affixal material of the input is deleted in the disguised form (e.g. i- 3ms
marker, t-…-t feminine marker, n- reciprocal marker, l- definite article and m- participial
marker in Arabic).
TShl
TQJM
t-afrux-t tiffarxjurx “girl”
t-amƒar-t timmaƒrjuƒr “woman”
l-axbar tixxabrjubr “news”
m-bark tibbarkjurk Proper noun
TShl
TGNW
t-aknari-t ajkkanrwanr “prickly pear”
t-afrux-t ajffarxwarx “girl”
n-s≥br ajss≥abrwabr “we wait, endure”
l-ħml ajħħamlwaml “load”
(8) The same holds for bi- and monoconsonantals as well. See examples below, part II.
II. Building the root-morpheme = (3b)
(9) Triliterality condition and its consequences:
a. all items in TQJM and TGNW contain three radical consonants. The "lexicon" of
TQJM and TGNW is entirely composed of triconsonantal roots.
b. the root material inherited from Tshl is variable : Tshl roots are mono-, bi-, tri- and
quadriconsonantal. Hence, repair strategies:
• First case: TShl input has three radicals
→ all three are kept in TQJM and TGNW, see examples in (4) and (7)
• Second case: TShl input has more than three radicals (4 R’s)
→ the number of consonants is reduced to three 2
• Third case: TShl input has less than three radicals
→ TGNW: epenthesis provides the missing radicals
→ TQJM: vocalic and affixal I / U are redeployed as radical material
(10) Quadriconsonantals: one consonant is dropped in the disguised form, always R 2 or R 4 :
TShl
TQJM
brahim b r h m tibbarhjurh b r h m proper noun
kltum k l t m tikkatmjutm k l t m id.
TShl
TGNW
gʒdr g ʒ d r ajggaʒdwaʒd g ʒ d r “moan”
aglzim g l z m ajggazmwazm g l z m “pickaxe”
asrdun s r d n ajssadnwadn s r d n “mule”
asngar s n g r ajssagrwagr s n g r “corn”
2 In TGNW, not all TShl quadriconsonantal words loose one root consonant. Some keep all their radical consonants, but one
of these consonants, namely R 2 , is not repeated, and the melody obtained in this case, and only in this case, contains ə after
the geminated R 1 : e.g. ggrml / ajggərmlwaml “be crusty”, agnfur / ajggənfrwafr “face”, iħnbl / ajħħənblwabl “blanket”. The
systematic appearance of ə instead of a in these forms is explained in Lahrouchi & Ségéral (submitted) as the result of the
association of four radicals to a template that offers only three radical positions, and the necessary association of peripheral
vowels to two V positions. Once the whole material is associated to the template, the vowel A preceding R 2 does no longer
surface as [a] since it has access to only one V position. Depending on phonotactic conditions, the remaining V position
surfaces as [ə].
3

(11) Bi- and monoconsonantals
TShl TQJM
bi- gn tigganjuni “sleep”
ƒr tiƒƒarjuri “read”
igr tiggarjuri “field”
ils tillasjusi “tongue”
mono- af tiffawiwi “find”
asi tissawiwi “take”
ini tinnawiwi “say”
immi timmawiwi “my mother”
TShl TGNW
bi- ad≥n ajttad≥nwad≥n “be sick”
i-fl ajffalwalli “he let”
sala ajssalwalli “be involved”
kl ajkkalwalli “spend the day”
mono- i-zz≥a ajzz≥atwatti “he chases after”
kk ajkkatwatti “pass by”
t-ʒʒi-t ajʒʒatwatti “you recovered”
is ajssatwatti interrogative “do...?”
a. TQJM: the affixal material I and U (which surface as ju in tri- and quadriconsonantals)
compensate for the missing radicals: I compensates for the missing R 3 in
biconsonantal inputs. U and I compensate for the missing R 2 and R 3 in monoconsonantal
inputs.
b. TGNW: t or I compensate for the missing radical in biconsonantal inputs (t- replaces
R 1 ; I replaces R 3 ) t and I compensate for the missing R 2 and R 3 in monoconsonantal inputs.
(12) TQJM
a. biconsonantal gn → tigganjuni
g n n
t I I
C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v
I A U
4

. monoconsonantal g → tiggawiwi
g
t U I U I
C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v
I
A
(13) TGNW
a. biconsonantal adɭn → ajttadɭnwadɭn
I
t dɭ n dɭ n
U
C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v
b. monoconsonantal is → ajssatwatti
A
s t t
I I U I
C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v C v
A
Note: in (13b), the epenthetic I does surface in the position normally identified by the first
instance of R 3. The same happens in triconsonantal forms such as ajzz≥adwaddi ← iz≥duj
“be heavy” and ajmmaz≥wazz≥i ← imz≥ij “be small”, where the final I surfacing as [j] is
lexical. is does not lead to *ajssatjwati just as iz≥duj does not lead to *ajzz≥adjwadi.
However, in both cases the copy of R 2 is geminated. This is analysed as a compensation of
the non-appearance of I in the first instance of R 3 .
(14) How do word-based models can account for these phenomena?
5

References
Bat-El, O. 1994. Stem modification and cluster transfer in Modern Hebrew. Natural
Language and Linguistic Theory 12: 571-596.
Dell, F. & Elmedlaoui, M. 1992. Quantitative transfer in the nonconcatenative morphology of
Imdlawn Tashlhiyt Berber. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 3: 89-125.
Douchaïna, R. 1996. Tagnawt, un parler secret des femmes berbères de Tiznit (sud-ouest marocain).
PhD, Paris: INALCO.
Douchaïna, R. 1998. La morphologie du verbe en tagnawt. Etudes et Documents Berbères
15/16: 197-209.
Frost, R., Deutsch, A., & Forster, K. 2000. Decomposing morphologically complex words in
nonlinear morphology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition 26: 751-765.
Idrissi, A., Prunet, J-F. & Béland, R. 2008. On the mental representation of Arabic roots.
Linguistic Inquiry 39/2: 221-259.
Hammond, M. 1988. Templatic transfer in Arabic broken plurals. Natural Language and
Linguistic Theory 6: 247-270.
Lahrouchi, M & P. Ségéral. In press. Morphologie gabaritique et apophonie dans un langage
secret féminin (Taqjmit) en berbère tachelhit. Revue canadienne de Linguistique /
Canadian Journal of Linguistics 54.2 (37 pp.).
Lahrouchi, M & P. Ségéral. Submitted. Peripheral vowels in Tashlhiyt Berber are
phonologically long: evidence from Tagnawt, a secret language used by women. Brill’s
Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics.
McCarthy, J. 1979. Formal Problems in Semitic Phonology and Morphology. PhD, MIT.
McCarthy, J. 1981. A prosodic Theory of Nonconcatenative Morphology. Linguistic Inquiry
12: 373-418.
Prunet, J-F. 2006. External evidence and the Semitic root. Morphology 16: 41-67.
Prunet, J-F., Béland, R. & Idrissi, A. 2000. The mental representation of Semitic words.
Linguistic Inquiry 31/4: 609-648.
Ratcliffe, R. 1987. Prosodic templates in a word-based morphological analysis of Arabic. In.
M. Eid & R. Ratcliffe (eds) Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics X, Current Issues in
Linguistic Theory 153: 147-171, Amsterdam / Philadephia: John Benjamins.
Ussishkin, A. 1999. The inadequacy of the consonantal root: Modern Hebrew denominal
verbs and output-output correspondence. Phonology 16: 401-442.
6