Krishnamurti Bhadriraju. The Dravidian Languages

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

7.9 Non-ﬁnite

verbs: the in

ﬁnitive 341

7.8.4 North Dravidian

In Ku

rux the present participle is formed by adding -n¯u/-num to the verb stem, e.g. es-

‘to break’: es-n¯u ‘breaking’, es-n¯u/es-num ‘breaking’; a particle -ti(m) may be added

optionally. Another construction meaning ‘on V-ing’ is formed by adding -¯a, followed

by -xane(m), e.g. es

-¯a xane(m) ‘on breaking, in the act of breaking’. Another participle

meaning ‘till, up to’ is formed by adding -t

¯a/-t

aa, e.g. bij- ‘to dawn’: bij-t

¯a/-t

aa ‘till

day-break’. The non-past adjective is formed by adding -¯u/-¯o, e.g. es- ‘to break’: is-¯u

‘that breaks/will break’; before biri ‘time’, it is -¯o, e.g. ¯on- ‘to eat’: ¯on-¯o biri ‘eating

time’. In Malto the present participial sufﬁx is -e ∼ -i/-ne,-le whose distribution is not

clear, e.g. band- ‘to draw’: band-ne/-le/-e/-i ‘drawing’. The sufﬁx -no is added to the

verb stem to mean ‘while V-ing’, e.g. agr- ‘to mount’: agr-no ‘while mounting’. The

present adjective is formed by adding -u, e.g. baj- ‘to strike’: baj-u ‘that which strikes’.

In Brahui, the present participle formative is -(i)sa, e.g. bis- ‘to bake’: bis-isa ‘baking’,

kar- ‘to do’: kar-isa ‘doing’. The present adjective is formed by adding -ok, e.g. bin- ‘to

hear’: bin-ok ‘one who hears’, p¯ar- ‘to say’: p¯ar-ok ‘one who says’.

7.8.5 Summary

There is great diversity in the formation of non-past non-ﬁnite verbs, but one can see

the underlying non-past stem (with

∗

-pp- ∼ -w-/

∗

-kk/

∗

-t ∼ [-d- ∼ -r-]), which is recon-

structable for most of the languages. It appears that there is a phonological thread con-

necting OTa. -ci

n-, Te. -cun,Ko

da -c-in- and Kolami -san. Again the adjectival sufﬁxes

-¯un/-¯on of Ku

rux derive from PD

∗

-um, the aorist marker (section 7.4.2.3). It appears

that different subgroups and languages have innovated constructions based mostly on

the native stock of morphs marking the non-past. The verbal adjective is formed by

adding to the tensed stem the adjectival sufﬁx

∗

-a/

∗

-i in different subgroups.

7.9 Non-ﬁnite verbs: the inﬁnitive

The inﬁnitive occupies a special status among the non-ﬁnite verbs, since it is recon-

structable for Proto-Dravidian as

∗

¯an. It has many syntactic functions, most of which

are shared irrespective of its morphological makeup. It is clearly built on the non-past

stem formed with

∗

-pp/

∗

-kk at least in some classes of verbs. Anne David (1999: 31)

gives the following as the functions of the Dravidian inﬁnitive:

(1) as complements to verbs that convey a desiderative, modal, aspectual

or manipulative sense; (2) as complements to NPs; (3) in adverbial clauses

Data for the uses of the inﬁnitive for many of the Dravidian languages is taken from Anne

David’s excellent unpublished PhD dissertation ‘A Comparative Study of Dravidian Inﬁnitives’

(Department of Linguistics, Chicago University 1999). I am indebted to her for sending me

a complimentary copy of the dissertation. To distinguish the inﬁnitive meaning from the root

meaning, glosses for the roots are given without ‘to’ in the following examples.

342 The verb

of purpose, causation or simultaneity; (4) as ﬁnite verbs with a modal sense

of imperative, optative or obligative; and (5) in periphrastic constructions

to convey negation or future tense...These are all uses that occur in at

least three or four subgroups; within the individual languages not all of

them may be found, and there are other uses not mentioned here that are

peculiar to a very few or even to only one language.

7.9.1 South Dravidian I

In Old Tamil the inﬁnitive is formed by adding -a to the weak verbs or -pp-a/-kk-a to the

strong verbs; -pp- is more common than -kk-. Apparently the consonantal element is a

marker of the non-past tense, e.g. cey- ‘do’: ceyy-a ‘to do’, k¯a- ‘protect’: k¯a-pp-a/k¯a-kk-a

‘to protect’. The sufﬁxes -p¯a

n/-v¯an occur as inﬁnitive markers in later Ca˙nkam classics,

k¯a

n- ‘see’: k¯a

n-p¯a

n ‘to see’, ko

l- ‘take’: ko

l-v¯an ‘to take’. Here -¯an is the inﬁnitive marker

with - p/-v signalling non-past. Derived nouns in -al are sometimes used in the same

way as inﬁnitives but as purposive nominals, e.g. cey- ‘to do’: cey-a

r-ku ‘for doing’. In

Modern Tamil the inﬁnitive sufﬁxes -a/-kk-a occur in complementary verb classes, e.g.

var- ‘come’: var-av¯e

tum ‘(one) must come’, pa

ti- ‘to read’: pa

tikk-a ¯arampi-tt-¯an ‘he

started to read’. Here, -kk is historically

the non-past marker, which appears only in the

strong verb class. But the inﬁnitive co-occurs with the main verb in any tense and is

synchronically treated as neutral in tense.

In Old Malay¯a

lam the inﬁnitive is formed by adding -¯an to the non-past stem in -m/

-pp/-uv-/-v corresponding to Old Tamil -p¯a

n/-v¯an, e.g. k¯a

n-m-¯an ‘to see’, ko

tu-pp-¯an ‘to

give’, cey-v-¯an ‘to do’. Modern Malay¯a

lam -¯an as an inﬁnitive sufﬁx preceded by -kk in

the case of strong verbs, e.g. avan

var-¯an

para

‘he

was asked

to come

’, n¯an

n-¯an

vannu

‘I

came

to eat

’ (David 1999: 64–5).

Iru

la inﬁnitive markers are -a/-ka/-ga in complementary verb classes, p¯o- ‘go’: p¯o-

ga ‘to go’, e

du- ‘take’: e

du-kka ‘to take’. Toda has no inﬁnitive by the addition of a

derivative of

∗

-an/-¯an. Subrahmanyam (1971: 426) says that Kota inﬁnitives are formed

by -l or -lk;-l is a marker of a verbal noun and -k the dative sufﬁx ‘for verb-ing’, e.g.

n¯o

r- ‘to see’: n¯o

r-lk il¯a ‘(subject) will not see’.

Old Kanna

da inﬁnitive in -al is clearly a verbal noun which has an overlapping usage

with the

true in

ﬁnitive

in -

a, e.g. nu

di-al-ke

bandam

‘he came

to speak/for speaking

’.

Compare this with upadravam

m¯a

d-a

b¯e

‘do not

make

trouble

’.

7.9.2 South Dravidian II

In Old as well as Modern Telugu, the inﬁnitive sufﬁx is -an, added to the basic verb

stem, the main meaning carrier; it can also occur as a ﬁnite verb without any (g)np

marker in the optative mood; as a non-ﬁnite verb, it can be followed either by modal

7.9 Non-ﬁnite

verbs: the in

ﬁnitive 343

auxiliaries or by voice modiﬁers (see section 7.15.2); or, it can function as a verbal

noun, particularly in Old Telugu as a complement to the ﬁnite verb, before the latter

got converted to a grammaticalized modal auxiliary. Some of these will be discussed in

chapter 9; e.g. (inscr) ¯e

l- ‘to rule’: Dhana˜njayu

r¯en¯a

¯e

l-an

‘as

Dhananjaya

ruled over

R¯en¯a

’, n¯ı

v¯anccha

p¯a

dug¯anu

‘may

your

desire

perish

!’; k¯ac ‘to

protect’; k¯av-an-gala adj [protect-inf-able-adj] ‘one who can protect’, c¯eyu- ‘to do’:

c¯ey-an un-n-a [do-inf-be-past-adj] ‘one about to do’, c¯ey-a(n)-b¯owu [do-inf-go-adj]

‘that about to do’, c¯ey-a(n)waccu [do-inf-come-Ø (g)np] ‘one may do’, c¯ey-a(n) walayu

[do-inf-need-Ø(g)np] ‘one needs to do’; in these the inﬁnitive is a complement to the main

verb expressed by walayu, waccu, etc. Later, these elements have become the auxiliaries,

meaning ‘one must go’, ‘one may do’, etc. These usages continue into Modern Telugu

as modal auxiliaries

(see Krishnamurti and Gwynn

1985: 212ff.). -

k¯an, the inﬁnitive of

aw- ‘to be, become’, can be optionally added to the inﬁnitive in -an, e.g. c¯ey-an ‘to do’:

c¯ey-a(n)-g¯an ‘as one does/did’. As a nominal the -an form occurred in Old Telugu in

such constructions as c¯ey-an

¯arambhincenu

‘he/she started

doing

(it)’. In Modern

Telugu, here the inﬁnitive is replaced by an action nominal in -a

tam/-a

dam, ceyy-a

dam

¯arambhinc-

du [do-nominal suff. begin-past-he] ‘he started doing (it)’.

The Gondi inﬁnitive marker is -¯an¯a taken from Indo-Aryan. The inﬁnitive is used as

an imperative in the obligative mode, as in Hindi, e.g. kharal

wadk-¯an¯a

‘(one) must

speak

truth

’. In the Adilabad dialect -¯a is the inﬁnitive formative, e.g.

tind-¯a

par-¯o-n

[eat-inf be-able-neg-1sg]

‘I cannot

eat

’

In the Koya dialect the inﬁnitive is -a as in Telugu, ¯u

d- ‘see’: ¯u

d-a ‘to see’; the Abhuj

ria dialect has -¯a or -¯ı in complementary environments. It appears that these do not

contrast with their corresponding short vowels (David 1999: 117), e.g. k¯ıy- ‘do’: k¯ıy-¯a

‘to do’, targ- ‘climb’: targ-¯ı ‘to climb’. There are also verbs with -¯an¯a (borrowed from

Hindi) functioning both verbally and nominally, e.g.

n¯ak hand-¯an¯a¯ayint¯a

we (dat) go-noml become

‘we have to go’

In Kui the inﬁnitive is formed adding -a to a non-past stem ending in -Ø/- p/-b/-v,

which Winﬁeld calls semi-formatives (David 1999: 120), e.g. i

t-a ‘to place’, v¯e-pa ‘to

strike’, k¯as-pa ‘to heat’, ¯a-va ‘to become’, s¯ı-va ‘to give’, in-ba ‘to say’, s¯ol-ba ‘to enter’.

-a occurs with ‘strong’ verbs and the other markers with ‘weak’ verbs. Kuvi has two

groups of sufﬁxes {-ali,-sali,-cali,-hali,-jali}. The ﬁrst consonant seems to be a marker

344 The verb

of the past. In the dialect that Joy Reddy (1979) has analysed , the inﬁnitive markers are

similar but for a change in the vowel quality{-eli,-ali,-heli,-jeli}, e.g. ko

d- ‘to buy’:

¯evasi

h¯eru

d-ali

v¯a-t-esi

‘he

came

to buy

a pair of oxen

’ (Israel 1979: 204).

There is another set of markers -ayi/-nayi which are considered action noun formatives

(David 1999: 127), e.g. han- ‘to go’: han-n-ayi ‘going’ (-n- non-past marker), ha-c-ayi

‘the act of having gone’. The sufﬁx -al of Kuvi can be compared with South Dravidian

I nominal -al (cf. Kanna

da above).

da, Pengo and

Man

da have a dif

ferent way of forming the in

ﬁnitive of a

verb

which is not traceab

le to Proto-Dravidian. In

da (Krishnamur

ti 1969a: 279

–83)

the inﬁnitive markers are {-e

∼ -te

∼ -de

∼ -

∼ -re

} all in complementary

distribution, generall

y phonologically, but par

tially also morphologicall

y. The in

ﬁnitive

is used as a ﬁnite verb in the obligative mode (perhaps under the inﬂuence of Indo-Aryan),

or as a non-ﬁnite verb or as a nominal derived from the verb. Examples:

dzi

ris-te

‘(he) should put it (the book) down

and leave it

’ (as obliga-

tive ﬁnite verb)

ibe

manre

¯a

‘staying

here

is not possible

’ (nominal subject)

anasi

bastan

‘the elder brother

sat

to eat

’ (ﬁnite verb comple-

ment)

There are other kinds of uses, which will be discussed under syntax.

Pengo has -e

/-te

/-de

(also -ce

/-je

in some types

of sandhi) as the in

ﬁnitive

markers with partly phonological and partly morphological complementation, e.g. ki-

‘do’: ki-de

‘to do’, ah- ‘seize’: as-te

‘to seize’, u

n- ‘to drink’: u

, vanj- ‘cook’:

vanj-e

‘to cook’, uj- ‘suck’: uj-je

‘to suck’. The uses of the inﬁnitive are comparable

to those of Ko

da. Man

da forms the inﬁnitive of a verb by adding -teg/-deg to the verb

stem, e.g. ki-deg ‘to do’, un-jeg ‘to eat’. Clearly we can see that -teg is derived from

∗

teng- by the loss of nasal. Note that the inﬁnitive sufﬁx occurs seemingly after another

inﬁnitive sufﬁx -ka/-ga (cf. Kui) added to the verb stem (David 1999: 136–7), e.g.

rah-ka-deg

hac-un

‘he went

to defecate

’

¯an

k¯uli

v¯ıd-ga-deg

hal-i-ba

‘I

am going

to sow

rice

’

Only Telugu, Kui, Kuvi and to some extent Man

da show a formative element signalling

non-past before the inﬁnitive sufﬁx. Pengo and Man

da use -pa, corresponding to K

-pu as a marker of simultaneous action, e.g. Pe. kos k

re-pa ‘as the cock crows’, Man

kuy ¯ar-pa ‘as the cock crows’, Ko

da koRku kere-pu ‘as the cocks crow’. These seem

to be relic uses of an inherited inﬁnitive analysable as non-past -p plus inﬁnitive -a/-u

(see section 7.8.1).

7.9.3 Central Dravidian

Kolami has -e

/-e

k/-e

g as inﬁnitive markers in mutual complementation (in some

contexts in free variation), e.g. kor- ‘bring’: kor-e

‘to bring’, ser- ‘go’: ser-e

‘to go’,

7.9 Non-ﬁnite

verbs: the in

ﬁnitive 345

tin- ‘eat’: tin-e

kt¯od ‘do not eat’, s¯ı- ‘give’: s¯ı-e

g ‘to give’. In Naiki of Chanda, the

inﬁnitive sufﬁx is -en, tin-en ‘to eat’, kicc-en ‘to pinch’; Naik

ri also has -e

as the

inﬁnitive marker.

In Parji the inﬁnitive sufﬁx is -r-an followed by the dative case sufﬁx, -ug in the

Northwest dialect, e.g. cum- ‘seize’: cum-ran-ug ‘for seizing’, ver- ‘to come’: ver-ran-

ug ‘to come’. In the case of stems with an alternating - p/-t, the inﬁnitive is formed by

replacing the alternating formatives by -Vk, e.g. nil-p-/nil-t- ‘stand’: nil-uk ‘to stand’,

et-ip-/-et-it- ‘lift’: et-ik ‘to lift up’. In the Southern dialect, the inﬁnitive is marked by

-ay-u

in the general class of verbs and only two examples are given; in the case of

stems with ﬁnal - p/-t, the inﬁnitive -u

is added to the stem in ﬁnal - p non-past stem,

e.g. eti- p-u

‘to raise’; -u/-u

are widely used inﬁnitive sufﬁxes, e.g. ¯od

verci-l

koy-u

cend-ed

‘he

went

to harvest (cut)

rice

’. The inﬁnitive is also used as a nominal, e.g.

cay-u

erko

p¯ıy-u

erko

‘(either) dying

living

’ (‘Let there be dying

or living’).

Ollari inﬁnitive markers are -i

/-u

, e.g. ¯end-i

s¯u

r-u

se-y-a

‘she (? went) will

to see

the dance

’, ¯an

vari

mey-en

‘I

forgot

to come

’. The Kon

dekor Gadaba

has, correspondingly, -in/-un (the vowel is predictable by the quality of the vowel of the

verb stem) to form the inﬁnitive, kuy- ‘cut’: kuy-un ‘to cut’, in- ‘to say’: in-in ‘to say’:

unn-un

¯o

d-en

‘I was able

to eat

’.

7.9.4 North Dravidian

In Ku

rux, besides -n¯a, which is borrowed from Hindi, there is also -¯a added to the verb

root, according to Hahn, e.g. er- ‘break’: er-¯a ‘to break’; es-n¯a ‘to break’ is more normal.

Vesper gives -a as the marker, e.g. nan- ‘do’: nan-a ‘to do’ (cited by David 1999: 158–9).

The Malto inﬁnitive marker is -e, e.g. bar- ‘come’: bar-e ‘to come’. It appears that -ot(i)

is the more common inﬁnitive sufﬁx (-e and -po are said to be nominalizing sufﬁxes),

rs- ‘reach’: a

rs-oti ‘to reach’.

Brahui adds -ing to form the verbal noun and also the inﬁnitive, e.g. bin-ing ‘to

hear’, tix-ing ‘to place’, sill-ing ‘to wash’, etc. When compared to the other Dravidian

languages they also seem to function like inﬁnitives (David 1999: 165–8).

7.9.5 Summary

There is diversity in the formation of the inﬁnitives. Anne David set up twenty-three

different sufﬁx groups on the basis of what she calls ‘virtual similarity’. I am comparing

below only those which lead to reconstruction either at the Proto-Dravidian level or

at the level of subgroups. There are two elements for comparison: (a) the formative

Thomasiah (1986: 134) writes -¯e

, e.g. tin-¯e

‘to eat’, but there is no contrast between short

and long vowels in non-radical syllables.

346 The verb

able 7.19a.

Inﬁnitive

markers

in South Dravidian

Language Inﬁnitive marker Formative preceding

Old Tamil -a -(k)k-/-(p)p-/Ø

-¯a

n,-¯akku (<

∗

¯an-kk-) -p-/-v-, -p-

Old Malay¯a

lam -a -kk-/ø

-e/-¯e

-¯an -m/-pp/-v

Iru

la -¯akku -k/-g

dagu -¨e (+k¨ı )-v/-p

Kota -l,-lk

Old Kanna

da -al (+ke)

lu -alka/-akka

Table 7.19b. Inﬁnitive markers in South Dravidian II

Old Telugu -aN Ø, -w, -mp

Modern Telugu -a(n)-w/Ø

Gondi -a/-¯a, ¯ı,-l¯e (dial)

da -te

/-de

/-re

/-e

;

Kui -a(n)-Ø/-p/-v/-b

Kuvi -ali ∼ -eli -s/-c/- j /-h

Pengo -te

/-de

;-u

Man

da -teg/-deg

preceding the inﬁnitive; (b) the inﬁnitive marker. The formative, wherever it occurs,

is clearly a non-past marker. We can isolate the inﬁnitive sufﬁxes with and without

preceding non-past markers (also see David 1999: ch. VI), as in table 7.19a, b.

Tamil, Malay¯a

lam and Iru

la treat -a and -¯an as inﬁnitive markers added to a non-past

stem in ﬁnal -pp/-kk. Subrahmanyam considers -pp/-kk as mere formatives of strong

verbs and not as non-past markers (1971: 440). The ﬁnal -kk following -¯an (¯akk- <

∗

¯an-

kk-) seems to be the dative marker following the nominal use of the inﬁnitive. It is

not clear if -a and -¯an are related in these three languages. There is some phonological

difﬁculty in this assumption. The inﬁnitive -a geminates a following stop across a morph

boundary, e.g. OTa. ni

r-ka pp¯a

t-in-¯an ‘he sang (of you) so it (your fame) would stay’

(David 1999: 190). This would not happen if the morph were -an.

dagu, Kota, Kanna

da and Tu

lu have -al as the inﬁnitive and nominal marker, which

is followed by the dative -kk. At this point, I do not think that -an and -al are variants. For

South Dravidian I we reconstruct

∗

-¯an and

∗

-al as inﬁnitive–nominal markers. Besides

we have also to

set up

∗

-a as an inﬁnitive marker.

7.9 Non-ﬁnite

verbs: the in

ﬁnitive 347

able 7.19c.

Inﬁnitive

markers

in Central Dr

avidian

Kolami -e

(g)

Naik

ri -e

Naiki (Chanda) -en

Parji -u

-p

-u/-ug/-(u)k (NW)

Ollari -u/-u

/-i

Gadaba -un/-in

Te. -aN and Kui -a(n) are probably related to SD I -¯an, found in a subgroup. In Kui

-an occurs before the emphatic particle -e, elsewhere -a. It is likely that SD I -¯an >SD II

-an in the unaccented position. Note that the inﬁnitive follows a non-past stem in Telugu

and Kui as in the case of -¯an in South Dravidian I. A comparison of forms in the three

languages is revealing (see DVM: 438–9), e.g. Kui ¯ar-p-a ‘to call’, OTa. ¯ar-pp-a,OTe.

¯ar-w-a,Kuinil-p-a ‘to stand’, OTa. ni

r-p-a,OTe.nil-(u)w-a. Here Kui -p-/ OTa. -pp-

and OTe. -w- historically represent a non-past morph.

In Modern Telugu, dialectally, -an tends to be replaced by -a, e.g. ceyy-an-¯el¯edu/ceyy-

(a)-¯el¯edu ‘(one) did not do’. In complex

verb formation, we need to posit

an underlying

-an as the inﬁnitive marker in Modern Telugu: (a) /kctp/become /g j d b/ following

inﬁnitive -n; (b) the inﬁnitive -n is lost before a consonant (Krishnamurti and Gwynn

1985: 211–12).

Kuvi -ali/-eli is traceable to the noun formative -al of the other subgroup of South

Dravidian I. The third group of sufﬁxes is -en/-en-g preceded presumably by the non-

past

∗

-t; evidence for these is found in Ko

da–Pengo–Man

da. Again the velar element

-g could be treated as the dative sufﬁx which got generalized throughout. The basis for

separating

∗

-t as the non-past marker is based on the use of -en/en-g in Central Dravidian

and Brahui.

Parji (Northwestern dialect) -k in the inﬁnitive is also a non-past marker, but it takes

over the function of the inﬁnitive also, e.g. paru-k ‘to spread’: OTa. para-kk-a; the other

dialects have

p instead.

These languages support a reconstruction

∗

-Vn-g, where the V has three qualities

-e/-u/-i followed by apparently the dative marker

∗

-k(k). We can go to a further level

of abstraction and

set up

∗

-Vn as the inﬁnitive marker with -

∗

V getting realized as -a

in South Dravidian I and in a subgroup of South Dravidian II and becoming a high

or mid vowel in another subgroup of South Dravidian II, Central Dravidian and North

Dravidian.

rux -¯a supports an underlying

∗

-¯an/-an; Brahui -ing again falls in line with the PD

∗

-Vn followed by the velar sufﬁx denoting dative and the V being realized as a front

348 The verb

able 7.19d.

Inﬁnitive

markers

in North Dravidian

rux -¯a

Malto -oti

Brahui -ing

high vowel, since short -e (probably the underlying one) had to become either a high

voweloralowvowel-a.

For Proto-Dravidian we can set up

∗

-Vn as the inﬁnitive marker, with the value of V

changing from one set of languages to another, which do not clearly correspond to the

present subgrouping. The weakest part of the argument is our inability to explain a wide

variation in the quality of the sufﬁx vowel, except that it occurred in the unaccented

(non-radical) syllable. An alternative solution is to set up two different morphs for PD,

i.e.

∗

-¯an and

∗

-en, which presumably occurred in complementation (perhaps lexical) and

one of these got generalized in one group of languages and the other in the other group.

Note that both allomorphs overlap in South Dravidian II and North Dravidian.

7.10 Negation in ﬁnite and non-ﬁnite verbs

In Dravidian there is a negative conjugation of the verb mainly in the non-past or with

zero time reference. Here, there is no tense marker co-occurring with the negative sufﬁx

in the non-past and the negative marker

∗

-aH- ﬁlls the slot of a tense marker, i.e. Stem +

negative marker + person. The negative allomorphs occurring in inﬂected verbs have

abnormal phonology and are, therefore, of uncertain origin. The notion of a zero negative

in Dravidian is a myth.

7.10.1 South Dravidian I

All languages have markers in the third neuter in negative ﬁnite verbs (tenseless) and

certain non-ﬁnite verbs like the adjectival (relative participles) and adverbial (gerund)

forms. In several languages the negative is signalled by a zero, when followed by per-

sonal sufﬁxes beginning with vowels. The list of allomorphs is -¯a-/ -¯ay-/-ay-/-a-/-Ø-. I

tried to derive all these from PD

∗

-¯aH-/

∗

-aH-aH- (Krishnamurti 1997b/2001a: 337–40)

involving one or two laryngeals with the following developments. Straightforwardly we

get -¯a- through contraction,

∗∗

aHaH- >

∗

-¯aH > -¯ay. In Malay¯a

lam and Kota -¯ay and in

lu -ay occur as clear negative markers, and nobody has explained the source of -y in

these allomorphs, so far. When followed by a consonant, -¯ay- > -¯a, or it loses the ﬁnal

-y, which is phonologically normal in Dravidian; hence, -¯a-tu in the 3neu sg in Tamil,

Malay¯a

lam, Kota and Toda. In unaccented position a long -¯a- can become short -a-, as

7.10

Negation in

ﬁnite

and non-

ﬁnite

verbs

349

is found in Kanna

da and Tu

lu. The origin of -Ø- is explained below. First let us look at

the conjugations in different languages.

In Old Tamil-Ø- and -¯a- functioned as negative allomorphs in non-past conjugation

in complementary environments, -Ø- before personal sufﬁxes beginning with a vowel

and -¯a- before a consonant or zero; e.g. k¯a

n- ‘to see:

1sg k¯a

n-Ø-¯e

n ‘I do not see’

1pl k¯a

n-Ø-¯em/-¯om ‘we do not see’

2sg k¯a

n-Ø-¯ay ‘you (sg) do not see’

2pl k¯a

n-Ø-¯ırka

l ‘you (pl) do not see’

3m sg k¯a

n-Ø-¯a

n ‘he does not see’

3f sg k¯a

n-Ø-¯a

l ‘she does not see’

3h pl k¯a

n-Ø-¯ar(ka

l) ‘they (h) do not see’

3neu sg k¯a

n-¯a-tu ‘it does not see’

3n pl k¯a

n-¯a-Ø ‘they (n-h) do not see’

I have reconstructed the negative morpheme as

∗

aH (for some languages

∗

aH-aH) for

Proto-South Dravidian. Phonologically this would account for the above developments

in Old Tamil:

∗

H [h] being non-phonemic in South Dravidian at some stage, it was

lost, leaving a short -a- which was also lost before another vowel (of personal sufﬁx) in

sandhi resulting in -Ø- as the negative marker. Before a consonant or in the ﬁnal position

-aH- contracted to long -¯a-. In Modern Tamil the negative sufﬁx overtly survives only

in the third neuter

singular, e.g.

ceyy-¯a-tu ‘it will not do’, teriy-¯a-tu ‘it is not known’. In

Old Tamil the negative of a perfective participle or gerund is formed by adding -¯a/-¯a-tu/

-¯a-mal to the verb stem, e.g. cey- ‘to do’: ceyy-¯a/ceyy-¯atu/ceyy-¯amal ‘without doing’,

t¯ır- ‘to end’: t¯ır-¯a/t¯ır-¯atu/t¯ır-¯amal ‘without ending’. The negative adjective is formed by

simply adding the negative marker -¯a to the verb base, e.g. mu

rai

ceyy-

mannavan

‘the king

who does not do

justice

’. Alternatively, the adjectival sufﬁx -a is added to the

negative participle in -¯a-tu (negative + 3neu sg) as -¯at-a, e.g. ceyy-¯at-a ‘that does/did

not do’. The negative abstract noun is formed by adding the nominalizing formative

-mai to the negative stem, e.g. ceyy-¯a-mai ‘not doing’, a

ri- ‘to know’: ariy-¯a-mai ‘not

knowing’.

Old Malay¯a

lam texts have a f

ew forms similar to Tamil with -

Ø- negative ﬁlling

the tense slot in non-past conjugations, e.g. o

ziy-Ø-¯en ‘I will not exclude myself’.

However, these are few and are generally considered remnants of a period when Tamil and

Malay¯a

lam were the dialects of the same language. Literary Malay¯a

lam has independent

negative verbs in different tenses, present, past and future. For instance, a past negative

construction was like var-¯a-˜n˜n-u (< var-¯ay-˜nju < var-¯ay-ntu, root + neg -¯ay- + past

-ntu, with no personal sufﬁx) ‘(subject) did not come’, ko

t-¯a-˜n˜n-¯an (< ko

t-¯ay-nt-¯an with

a personal sufﬁx) ‘he did not give’; future negative, e.g. var-¯ay-um ‘subj will not come’,

p¯ar-¯ay-um ‘they will not see’. There are also negative adjectives of the type, k¯a

n-¯a-

n-a

350 The verb

past neg adj, with -a as adj sufﬁx (<

∗

k¯a

n-¯ay-

nj-a <

∗

k¯a

n-¯ay-nd-a) ‘that did not see’.

Note that the ﬁnal -y of the negative allomorph is lost before a consonant. The other

negative non-ﬁnite forms include k¯a

n-¯ate adv ‘without seeing’, k¯a

n-¯ay-ka neg (verbal

noun) ‘not seeing’. The negative verbal noun was formed by adding -ka to the negative

stem, e.g. ceyy-¯ay-ka ‘not doing’. It is important to notice -¯ay- as the negative marker

here with -¯a- as a variant, after the loss of the ﬁnal -y. This is independently derivable

from

∗∗

aH-aH >

∗∗

¯aH > -¯ay.

Kota also has both zero forms (Stem + Øneg+ person) and those with -¯ay-asnegative

markers, e.g. tin- ‘to eat’: 1sg tin-Ø-¯e(n) ‘I do not eat’, 1pl (excl) tin-Ø-¯em, (incl) tin-Ø-

¯om, 2sg tin-Ø-¯ı, 2pl tin-Ø-¯ım, 3sg/pl tin-Ø-k¯o. Another construction has Stem + ¯ay +

tense + person similar to Malay¯a

lam, e.g. v¯ar-¯ay-p-¯en ‘I was not coming’, v¯ar-¯ay-kv-¯en

‘I do/will not come’.

Here - p- is used as past marker (an innovation in Kota) and

-kv- (OTa. -kkuv-) as the non-past marker. The independent attestation of -¯ay-intwo

languages supports the reconstruction

∗∗

aH-aH as the Pre-Tamil negative marker, beside

∗

aH which is adequate to explain Tamil data; -¯ay- also occurs in negative verbal nouns

formed with the sufﬁx -vd, tin-¯ay-vd ‘not eating’.

Toda tin-¯oθ ‘without eating’ corresponds to Ta. tin-¯atu adv. In ﬁnite verbs, the sufﬁx

is -Ø-, e.g. k¨ıy-Ø-ini ‘I do/did not do’.

dagu keyy-a-Ø ‘(subject) will not do’, cu

d-at-¨e neg adj ‘that not burn (all tenses)’,

keyy-ate adv ‘without working’.

Kanna

da n¯o

d-Ø-e(nu) ‘I do not see’, n¯o

d-a-du ‘it does not see’, n¯o

d-ad-a adj

‘that...not see (all tenses)’, n¯o

d-ade adv ‘without seeing’. The inscriptional forms

of an earlier era had -¯ade (DVM: 347–8). The shortening of -¯ad to -ad is possible in the

unaccented position.

lu has -ay-/-a- as negative markers in which the ﬁnal -y has apparently developed

out of an older laryngeal

∗

H in

∗

aH/

∗

¯aH, e.g. k¯e

n- ‘to hear’: 1sg k¯e

n-ay-ε ‘I do not hear’,

1pl k¯e

n-ay-

a, 2sg k¯e

n-ay-a, 2pl k¯e

n-ay-ar¨ı,3msgk¯e

n-ay-e,3fsgk¯e

n-ay-a

l¨ı, 3hum pl k¯e

ay-er¨ı, 3neu sg k¯e

n-a-n

d¨ı/-

n¨ı, 3neu pl k¯e

n-ay-a. The negative adjective and adverb are

compound constructions involving the auxiliary -ji/-ri which seem to be related to SD

∗

il <

∗

cil. The negative adverb is formed by adding -antε/-ande, e.g. bar-antε/bar-ande

‘without coming’. The negative adjective is formed by replacing the ﬁnal vowel by -i,

e.g. p¯o- ‘to go’: p¯ov-ant-i/p¯oc-and-i ‘that which...notgo’(all tenses).

Emeneau (1944: 28, cited in DVM: 342, fn.4), Andronov (1976c) and Steever (1993: 127–8)

consider Kota ¯a-y- here as the past stem (Emeneau’s S

) of ¯ag- ‘to be, become’, used as an

auxiliary. The past stem (S

) is said to be the base for forming the tenses, past and present–

future. Hence, v¯ar-¯ay-p-¯e(n) ‘I was not coming’ with the past - p- and v¯ar-¯ay-kv-¯e(n) ‘I do/will

not come’ with present–future -kv-. In that case there would be no negative marker (also see

DVM: 342–3 and fn.4). Andronov (1976c) says that the inﬂected ¯ay- verb is added to the negative

adjective v¯ar-¯a. It appears to me that -¯ay- is the negative marker here and is comparable to the

one in Malay¯a

lam.