1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics
  4. Volume 26, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 26, Issue 3
  • ISSN 1384-6655
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9811
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article employs a 4-million-word diachronic corpus to examine how the expression of possibility has evolved in Luganda since the 1890s to the present, by focusing on the language’s three main potential markers and , and their historical interaction. It is shown that while the auxiliary originally covered the whole modal subdomain of possibility, the auxiliary has steadily taken over the more objective categories of dynamic possibility. Currently, first and foremost conveys deontic and epistemic possibility. It still prevails in these more subjective modal categories even though the prefix , a conditional marker in origin, has started to express epistemic possibility since the 1940s, and deontic possibility since the 1970s. More generally, this article demonstrates the potential of corpus linguistics for the study of diachronic semantics beyond language comparison. This is an important achievement in Bantu linguistics, where written language data tend to be young.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.19119.kaw
2021-08-04
2023-09-30

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.19119.kaw
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Anderson, G. D. S.
    (2006) Auxiliary Verb Constructions. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199280315.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199280315.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  2. Ashton, E. O., Mulira, E. M. K., Ndawula, E. G. M., & Tucker, A. N.
    (1954) A Luganda Grammar. Longmans, Green and Co.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bastin, Y.
    (1985) Les relations sémantiques dans les langues bantoues [Semantic Relations in the Bantu Languages]. Académie royale des sciences d’outre-mer.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bastin, Y., Coupez, A., & de Halleux, B.
    (1983) Classification lexicostatistique des langues bantoues (214 relevés) [Lexicostatistical classification of the Bantu languages (214 records)]. Bulletin des séances de l’Académie royale des sciences d’outre-mer, 27(2), 173–199.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bostoen, K.
    (2008) Bantu spirantization: Morphologization, lexicalization and historical classification. Diachronica, 25(3), 299–356. 10.1075/dia.25.3.02bos
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.25.3.02bos [Google Scholar]
  6. Bostoen, K., & Bastin, Y.
    (2016) Bantu lexical reconstruction. InOxford Handbooks Online. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bostoen, K., Mberamihigo, F., & de Schryver, G.-M.
    (2012) Grammaticalization and subjectification in the semantic domain of possibility in Kirundi (Bantu, JD62). Africana Linguistica, 18, 5–40. 10.3406/aflin.2012.1005
     https://doi.org/10.3406/aflin.2012.1005 [Google Scholar]
  8. Chesswas, J. D.
    (1963) The Essentials of Luganda (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Cole, D. T.
    (1967) Some Features of Ganda Linguistic Structure. Witwatersrand University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. De Pauw, G., de Schryver, G.-M., & van de Loo, J.
    (2012) Resource-light Bantu part-of-speech tagging. InG. De Pauw, G.-M. de Schryver, M. L. Forcada, K. Sarasola, F. M. Tyers, & P. W. Wagacha (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Language Technology for Normalisation of Less-Resourced Languages (SaLTMiL 8 – AfLaT 2012) (pp.85–92). European Language Resources Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. de Schryver, G.-M., & Nabirye, M.
    (2010) A quantitative analysis of the morphology, morphophonology and semantic import of the Lusoga noun. Africana Linguistica, 16, 97–153. 10.3406/aflin.2010.989
     https://doi.org/10.3406/aflin.2010.989 [Google Scholar]
  12. Devos, M.
    (2008) The expression of modality in Shangaci. Africana Linguistica, 14, 3–35. 10.3406/aflin.2008.1048
     https://doi.org/10.3406/aflin.2008.1048 [Google Scholar]
  13. Fleisch, A.
    (2008) The reconstruction of lexical semantics in Bantu. Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika, 19, 67–106.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Kawalya, D., Bostoen, K., & de Schryver, G.-M.
    (2014) Diachronic semantics of the modal verb -sóból- in Luganda: A corpus-driven approach. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 19(1), 60–93. 10.1075/ijcl.19.1.03kaw
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.19.1.03kaw [Google Scholar]
  15. Kawalya, D., de Schryver, G.-M., & Bostoen, K.
    (2018a) From conditionality to modality in Luganda (Bantu, JE15): A synchronic and diachronic corpus analysis of the verbal prefix -andi-. Journal of Pragmatics, 127, 84–106. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.01.011
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.01.011 [Google Scholar]
  16. (2018b) Reconstructing the origins of the Luganda (JE15) modal auxiliaries -sóból- and -yînz-: A historical-comparative study across the West Nyanza Bantu cluster. South African Journal of African Languages, 38(1), 13–25.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. (2019) A corpus-driven study of the expression of necessity in Luganda (Bantu, JE15). Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 37(4), 361–381. 10.2989/16073614.2019.1697624
     https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2019.1697624 [Google Scholar]
  18. Le Veux, H.
    (1917) Premier essai de vocabulaire luganda–français d’après l’ordre étymologique [First attempt of a Luganda – French vocabulary following an etymological order]. Imprimerie des Missionnaires d’Afrique (Pères Blancs).
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Mberamihigo, F.
    (2014) L’expression de la modalité en kirundi: Exploitation d’un corpus électronique [The Expression of Modality in Kirundi: Exploitation of an Electronic Corpus]. Unpublished PhD, Université libre de Bruxelles / Ghent University.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Mberamihigo, F., de Schryver, G.-M., & Bostoen, K.
    (2016) Entre verbe et adverbe: Grammaticalisation et dégrammaticalisation du marqueur épistémique umeengo/umeenga en kirundi (bantou, JD62) [Between verb and adverb: Grammaticalisation and degrammaticalisation of the epistemic marker umeengo/umeenga in Kirundi (Bantu, JD62)]. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics, 37(2), 247–286. 10.1515/jall‑2016‑0011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/jall-2016-0011 [Google Scholar]
  21. Mulira, E. M. K., & Ndawula, E. G. M.
    (1952) A Luganda–English and English–Luganda Dictionary (2nd revised editionof the dictionary compiled by Kitching & Blackledge in 1925). Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Murphy, J. D.
    (1972) Luganda–English Dictionary. The Catholic University of America Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Nuyts, J.
    (2006) Modality: Overview and linguistic issues. InW. Frawley, E. Eschenroeder, S. Mills, & T. Nguyen (Eds.), The Expression of Modality (pp.1–26). Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Schadeberg, T. C.
    (2002) Progress in Bantu lexical reconstruction. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics, 23(2), 183–195. 10.1515/jall.2002.011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/jall.2002.011 [Google Scholar]
  25. Scott, M.
    (2019) WordSmith Tools (Version 7) [Computer software]. Lexical Analaysis Software. https://lexically.net/wordsmith/downloads/
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Snoxall, R. A.
    (1967) Luganda–English Dictionary. Clarendon Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Tognini-Bonelli, E.
    (2001) Corpus Linguistics at Work. John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.6
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.6 [Google Scholar]
  28. Tramutoli, R.
    (2015) ‘Love’ encoding in Swahili: A semantic description through a corpus-based analysis. Swahili Forum, 22, 72–103.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Traugott, E. C.
    (1989) On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language, 65(1), 31–55. 10.2307/414841
     https://doi.org/10.2307/414841 [Google Scholar]
  30. van der Auwera, J., & Diewald, G.
    (2012) Methods for modalities. InA. Ender, A. Leemann, & B. Wälchli (Eds.), Methods in Contemporary Linguistics (pp.121–142). De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110275681.121
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110275681.121 [Google Scholar]
  31. van der Auwera, J., & Plungian, V. A.
    (1998) Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology, 2(1), 79–124. 10.1515/lity.1998.2.1.79
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1998.2.1.79 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.19119.kaw
Loading
A diachronic corpus-driven study of the expression of possibility in Luganda (Bantu, JE15)
International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 26, 336 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.19119.kaw
/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.19119.kaw
/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.19119.kaw
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): diachronic semantics; Luganda; possibility; subjectification

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error